Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Hulk Bang Portman & Johansson!! THE OTHER BOLEYN GIRL Trailer Is Now Online!!

Merrick here...
A trailer for THE OTHER BOLEYN GIRL has shown up online. This may be old news (I actually don't know how long this material has been available), but I haven't seen the trailer making the rounds too prominently so I thought I'd pass it along...just in case. THE OTHER BOLEYN GIRL stars Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson, Eric Bana, and Kristin Scott Thomas in a movie based on Philippa Gregory's novel. It's directed by Justin Chadwick (MASTERPIECE THEATER's "Bleak House"). It's about the Boleyn sisters (Portman & Johansson) making a grab for King Henry VIII (Bana). If I were Henry's bud, I'd say "Whoa...bag 'em both, dude!"


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 15, 2007, 9:34 p.m. CST

    haha both!

    by heyscot


  • Nov. 15, 2007, 9:35 p.m. CST


    by veritasses


  • Nov. 15, 2007, 9:41 p.m. CST

    I would fuck the shit out of Natalie Portman

    by Itchy

    AND Scarlett Johansson. And Kristen Scott Thomas is a little past her freshness date, but if she was good and kept quiet, I'd let her frig herself in a chair in the corner while the rest of us got it on like the extra in some kind of creepy German porno. Ich bin ein Berliner !

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 9:47 p.m. CST

    Natalie Portman can't act worth shit

    by DOGSOUP

    Peaked with The Professional. Yeah I said it. "Get me somebody who acts like a cardboard cutout of themselves!" "Someone who always looks like they'd rather be somewhere else?" "Natalie Portman! Of course!"

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 9:48 p.m. CST

    Itchy, its some ungodly hour here in the UK...

    by judge dredds fresh undies

    And you made made laugh rather loudly with that Kristen Scott Thomas bit.

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 9:53 p.m. CST

    Song/music at the end of the trailer???

    by mmmdonut001

    Starting at about 1:37 - 1:38, does anyone know what song or movie that music is from? I've heard it before. Thanks.

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10 p.m. CST

    If you were Henry's bud or...

    by Maclovin

    a surfer stereotype from California... seriously, woah? dude?

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:06 p.m. CST

    Why do you guys always refer to actors as their characters?

    by IndustryKiller!

    I just seems a bit juvenile and unsophisticated. I think Eric Bana has earned the right at this point to be refered to as something other than the Hulk, an absolutely terrible movie.

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:08 p.m. CST

    I don't like sand

    by Magma Suit

    1. I would never simply FUCK Natalie Portman. I would marry her on top of a mountain with music playing and all of our friends and family cheering. Then I would take her up to the bridal suite and FUCK her stupid. 2. My friends and I decided that "pork" is the best word to use when refering to having sex with Scarlett. In a good way I mean (cuz how is having sex with Scarlett Johanson ever a bad thing?).

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:10 p.m. CST

    Don't lose your head...

    by Rupee88

    Isn't that what happened to one of these bitches?

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:14 p.m. CST

    I'd fuck them both

    by darrenspool

    Then eat them.

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:19 p.m. CST

    Was that a Trailer or just a 3 minute version of the Movie?

    by RCFOM

    Being that it is historical you already know the basic story but all that trailer needed was a shot of Anne with her head cut off and that would be the whole movie.

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:29 p.m. CST

    The Worst Movie Title Ever

    by Lane_myers111

    seriously they cant be many worse than that..even the guy at the end sounds embarrassed reading it

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:30 p.m. CST


    by Pound Sand

    But I agree, worst title ever. TOBGINO !

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:46 p.m. CST

    Doesn't take much... does it...

    by Scorecard

    Mention Portman and Scarlett and suddenly you freaks are squirting loads on your keyboards and fawning like emo fanboys... Seriously... If all the gay fans on AICN started going on about how they'd fuck Pitt in a second in Troy or suck off Bana for a laugh you guys would be up in arms crying in your breakfast... Grow the fuck up and keep it in your pants...

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 10:52 p.m. CST


    by Series7

    looks like a dude. And acts like a fucking asshat. Johansan ain't much better, but at least she has some assets. Fuck historical dramas. Are you going to eat your pickle?

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 11:03 p.m. CST

    Portman can't act?

    by RonnieLane

    What about that sorry accent Scarlett has going on? Can we get an actual English actor in this movie perhaps?

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 11:11 p.m. CST

    Scorecard, that's because heterosexuality is proper and natural.

    by IAmJack'sUserID

    Men are supposed to fuck women in order to produce offspring and propogate the species. Men who want to fuck men have crossed wires and serve no purpose to humanity. Not condemning homosexuality, but that's the facts.

  • Nov. 15, 2007, 11:38 p.m. CST

    REMOVE IamJacksUserID's Comment's Please

    by JaPra

    Because what he says, is everything that's bigoted and wrong with this country. <br><br> By saying men who love other men serve no purpose to humanity you not only condemn homosexuals, but you condemn yourself with such language

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:05 a.m. CST

    No one told me Nat's succulent ass was on display...

    by BMacSmith

    in Darjeeling. but i gotta admit. she hasnt impressed me as an actress lately...

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:05 a.m. CST

    I don't think...

    by Tourist

    ...It counts as bigoted if its true JaPra. It's not like he wants to fire them from their jobs. But ass love is counter productive to humanities main interests. I should know, my instinct is to avoid reproduction and overcome my station in the chain of life, and I LOVE the ass play.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:42 a.m. CST

    More breeding less movies...

    by lutz

    If you think the only reason to be alive or to have sex is to reproduce and that is the only contribution anyone ever makes to the world. Stop posting on these boards. Stop watching movies. Stop working. Start making babies. That is basically what you are saying. So fuck off and breed.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1:08 a.m. CST


    by Tal111

    So that's how we deal with comments we don't like- ban them? The man is entitled to his opinion it's called free speech.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1:13 a.m. CST

    LOL. I knew you close-minded fools would respond in such a way.

    by IAmJack'sUserID

    If you don't realize non-homosexuals feel this way, wake up. I am merely vocalizing popular opinion. Of course we will say homosexuality is alright, but we will whisper to others that it is not ok. At least I am honest. I don't have a problem with homosexuality personally, its just that it isn't my thing and I find it disgusting and vile, just as I am sure that many homosexuals find heterosexuality the same. Look at Bryan Singer, whom I defend vigorously as a good director. Yet others can't look past his sexual orientation and they judge his merit on that alone. The difference is that I can seperate the two and see what I think is the true measure, that being his contribution to the arts.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1:25 a.m. CST

    Bana and Jonathan Rhys Myers

    by thevision

    "The Tudors" from Showtime with Rhys Myers as young Henry VIII is an entertaining series but there is no way young Henry looked like JRM. From the historical pictures, Eric Bana resembles Henry. According to history, Henry was an athletic young man who hunted, jousted, etc., but stopped when he injured his leg, he became sedentary and transformed into the template for Jabba the Hut.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1:37 a.m. CST

    No, I do not forgive Singer for Superman Returns.

    by IAmJack'sUserID

    Although it was writing that did that movie in, it was still Singer's discretion. He should have gone with his writer for Usual Suspects. Still, I did find SR an appealing movie in certain aspects, and I think Singer did an excellent job visualizing the movie to a certain degree, but in the end, SR is a disappointment. That may seem contradictory, but I guess I can best explain it by saying Superman Returns had great moments, but taking the movie as a whole, it was NOT a great movie by any means.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 2:39 a.m. CST

    Trailer makes it look way better than it is.

    by Bungion Boy

    I saw this a few months ago and it was sappy, stupid, and terrible. Huge disappointment considering all involved.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:43 a.m. CST

    Were all the English actors busy?

    by snappy

    ...over in Hollywood acting as bad guys? I have to admit that Bana looks right & does a decent job of the voice, but NP & SJ? While I wouldn't kick Natalie out of bed for picking at her toenails, her acting is pretty flat. As for Scarlet, she couldn't do the accent in the Prestige and she's got no better here. And I would kick the funny looking freak out of bed first chance I got.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 5:21 a.m. CST

    how to spot it's awful: dating

    by filmcoyote

    Bungion Boy's probably right. This film has awards fodder written all over it - costume drama, showy ensemble, director of excellent British TV costume drama (Bleak House), Peter Morgan script, sumptuous prduction values - and yet despite being long since locked it got shifted from a qualifying date to a February dumping ground. Why? Because the studio knew it'd get ignored at awards time because it's terrible and that'd be even worse. The trailer looks okay but the cynic in me says Bungion Boy's on the money here.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 5:41 a.m. CST

    Not to continually diverge the topic but jack'sUserID..

    by lex romero

    Yeah you're right, homosexuality is unnatural. Like cars, and the internet, and buildings and aeroplanes and films. Can't believe people still use these things. If it's not natural then it's obviously wrong.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 6:55 a.m. CST

    Not more of ScarJo's English accent! The Prestige was painful!

    by Spandau Belly

    Please, let's call a truce! Scarlett will stay away from UK accents and Ewan McGregor will accept that he can't do a Yank accent, okay?

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 7:02 a.m. CST

    it's good to be the king...

    by just pillow talk

    Huck Cheever, you dog! (that's for you IndustryKiller!

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 7:05 a.m. CST

    The problem with your argument, Jck'sID...

    by raw_bean that it applies equally well to the infertile (whether natural or through surgical procedures), or anyone who uses contraception regularly. Or anyone who smokes or has an unhealthy diet, thus lowering their sperm count. Or who abstains from sex. If the only natural or productive human behaviour is to propagate the (already heavily over-populated) human species, then I, as a 24 year-old (prime reproductive age, and yes I'm straight) man with no children but a professional job and nice house, am inherently worth less to humanity than the jobless scum in my town who churn out babies from teenage years upwards in order to live off child support (we actually *have* a welfare state in the UK, which is both a good and bad thing), producing underprivileged children who they teach nothing more than to grow up into the same kind of wasteful boil on society as themselves. I just can't agree with that, therefore your argument is total bollocks. :^)<p>Oh, and please don't speak for all straight folks again, I don't agree with the whole 'homosexuality is vile and disgusting' thing, it just doesn't appeal to me personally.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 7:25 a.m. CST

    Natalie Portman, horrible actress

    by Bruno Diaz

    Her performances since she hit puberty are pretty much all terrible. Scarlet Johansson isn't exactly Meryl Streep but she can be really good, and she's hotter than hell. Portman's all right looking, but if this thread's about who we'd rather do, I'd say Johansson hands down. Not to self: Become King Lear.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 7:31 a.m. CST

    er, I mean

    by Bruno Diaz

    King Henry VIII

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 8:27 a.m. CST

    jack's ID...

    by Gatsbys West Egg Omlet

    you say: "I don't have a problem with homosexuality" and "I find it disgusting and vile" in the same sentence. obviously, one of those is untrue. <p>as much as the whole homophobe = homo thing is played at, i bet you are just an undereducated, sheltered, christian kid who's dad/church told you to hate gay people. i feel sorry for you. go out and earn an opinion.<p>and Natale Portman is a great actress. Closer, anyone? Just because george "one take, we'll fix it in post" lucas didn't get a great performance out of her doesnt mean she sucks.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 8:35 a.m. CST

    I love gay people

    by DirkD13"

    As long as they don't try and suck my balls or anything who gives a multicoloured fuck?<p>As for the whole Portman vs Johanssen thing, I gotta go for Scarlett as she has bigger bazongas and juicier lips, nuff said.<p>This film looks shit.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 8:39 a.m. CST

    was casting dropping some good acid?

    by BigTexas42

    So these two are supposed to be sisters, right? shouldn't sisters kind of look alike? Don't get me wrong, both natalie and scarlette are on my "people who i would cheat on my wife with" list, but could they find two people who look less alike? what, were gweneth paltro and beyonce busy? "how bout we get mary-kate olsen and halle berry." Just sayin'

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 8:59 a.m. CST

    BRIAN COX!!!!!

    by spacehog

    Was that THE COX I saw for half a second? 2008 will be the year Cox is literally in every! single! movie!

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 9:37 a.m. CST


    by DirkD13"

    I can't remember the last time I saw a movie that Brian Cox wasn't in. Maybe '95?

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 10:36 a.m. CST


    by JaPra

    Good show Gatsby's & Raw_bean! You make the point I wanted to make.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 10:36 a.m. CST

    scientifically, we are only here to insure our genes survive to

    by BMacSmith

    so homosexuality could be considered a sexual disorder like impotence or infertility. Of course, i really dont give a shit if you want to be gay. Be Supergay all day if you want. I just dont get why some homosexuals are so defensive about this.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 10:39 a.m. CST

    Lucas & Natalie Portman

    by JaPra

    Star Wars was the worst thing to happen to Natalie Portman's career thanks to George Lucas choosing the absolute worst takes to showcase her talents. <br><br> Remember when George actually defended his work offering up the idea that the old serials didn't always neccessarily feature great performances? haha!

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 10:43 a.m. CST


    by JaPra

    You don't get why homosexuals are so defensive about this? We are categorized as disgusting and vile, and then compared to a sexual disorder, and then asked to just smile and accept it? <br><br><br> Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away?<br><br> Scientifically, we've yet to come up with an answer as to why we're here, or not. That's not even a theory, that's just the whys of the genes. If we are creatures of spirit and of the idea or belief or faith in a higher knowledge, then for many of us, we are hear to love. <br><br><br>Science cannot EVER prove the WHY, only the how.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 10:46 a.m. CST

    Song/music at the end of the trailer???

    by pointjoe

    Pretty sure it's from least at the very end of the trailer.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 10:47 a.m. CST

    but JaPra...

    by just pillow talk

    BMac says you can be supergay...doesn't that make everything all better?<p>What's wrong with you BMac? Are YOU saying it should be considered a sexual disorder?

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 11:02 a.m. CST

    I don't know what to respond to first.....

    by Iago31

    ...should I choose the discussion over who I would rather f*@$k, the debate over Natalie Portman's acting ability, or the discussion about sexuality in the 21st Century. Yep, it's a real Algonquin Roundtable up in here. For the record: I'd fill out both SJ and NP like an application (it's fantasy land, I can have both) Sometimes Portman had been good (Closer, The Professional, Beautiful Girls and V for Vendetta), and sometimes she hasn't (Star Wars - but look at the material) Finally, calling homosexuality unnatural is false. It occurs in nature. If you're straight, what the hell do you care about gay people? How does it affect you at all. Stop trying to put them in the back of the bus.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 11:27 a.m. CST

    dont base your whole existence on your sexual preference.

    by BMacSmith

    homosexuality isnt a lifestyle. Stop being so defensive and look at it logically. Homosexuality is naturally occuring. so are diseases, disorders, injuries, etc. the fact that its naturally occuring is irrelevent. I dont care one way or another (despite whatever assumptions you make about me). I'm just bored and hanging out on the net instead of working like i should be doing.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 11:28 a.m. CST

    oh and id fuck Scarlett first

    by BMacSmith

    i used to have a crush on Nat like every other geek but she gets skinnier and uglier ever year. tis a shame.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 11:50 a.m. CST

    Xiphos- You're right.

    by L.H.Puttgrass

    "Superman Lifts Things" is a much better title for that film. I can't wait for them to make "Superman Lifts More Things".<p> oh joy.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Scar or Nat??

    by NYC

    Hmm.. Id love to do either, but while theyre fighting to see who gets it first I would let Bana bang me in every possible positition.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 11:55 a.m. CST


    by JaPra

    I don't quite know who you're talking to BMac, but it certainly isn't me. I'll agree with you, homosexuality isn't a lifestyle, rather, it's just a part of life. I for am far more things then what man I bed down with at night, being gay is as small a part of me, as being heterosexual is a small part of you.<br><br> We definitely have the freedom of speech, to be sure, and I laud people who use that freedom. With that freedom comes accountability, making references to sexual disorders and equating them to the homosexual experience is something that I won't sit quietly by and watch. <br><br> You must face the consequences of such volatile wording.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Eric Bana.....

    by JaPra

    He could bang me 24/7, 7 days a week.....

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 11:57 a.m. CST

    "it's a real Algonquin Roundtable up in here"

    by BigTexas42


  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:03 p.m. CST

    Iago31 is right, there are too many topics...

    by BLEST

    1.) Both ladies are pretty, but Scarlett is sexier. 2.) Natalie Portman sucks. I just saw some interview clips with her for that Montgomery Wards movie and she sounds daft. Her performance at 11 in the Professional is the same one she gives now. She was great then, but hasn't developed much since. (in manny ways!) 3.) Homosexuality is nothing to hate on people for. It's what they wanna do, let 'em do it. But it's not natural for human beings. Saying that it's found in nature (like that little sermonette at the end of Chuck and Larry about the dolphins) is irrelevant.... nature also shows us that monkeys fling their poo onto trees and that spiders eat their husbands. Are we to adopt those behaviors as well and say: "It occurs in nature."?

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:28 p.m. CST

    very natural

    by JaPra

    okay, so if homosexuality is found in nature, and because poo slinging is also found in nature, that makes is natural but on the level of poo throwing? This makes sense because?<br><br> Studies have been conducted within the animal world by esteemed scientists and biologists of homosexual, lifelong, partnerships between species. Proven. Fact. It's a natural occurence, end of story. <br><br> It is as natural as the sun rising and setting every day.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:39 p.m. CST

    its just an opinion, yours is different. no biggie.

    by BMacSmith

    I came off a bit harsh. anyway, my argument is rather moot, as there is no "cure", so to speak. but if i were gay and there was a pill that would make me attracted to women, I would take it. It bugs me that many gays are completely opposed to that. I find that absurd.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:41 p.m. CST

    dude chill...

    by BLEST

    All I'm saying is that "It occurs in the animal kingdom" is a very poor defense of ANY thing, behavior, person, etc... cuz TONS of nonsense occurs in the animal kingdom that is not, nor will it ever be, "natural" for humans to do. Instead, just say that it's what you like and what you wanna do.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:49 p.m. CST


    by JaPra

    I'm quite surprised at the amount of double-talk going on at the moment.<br><br> Bmac, the only reason you would take the pill is because you would be living with a sense of self-hatred. <br><br> I'm gay and I love who I am, I love that I can walk this earth experiencing it differently then the general population.<br><br> My attraction to men doesn't boil down to what I like or what I want to do, it boils down to it being a part of me, just as much as loving women is a part of who you are.<br><br>On one hand you're saying "no it's fine, do it, but realize it's disgusting and unnatural.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:50 p.m. CST

    Well, raw bean, why do we look down on people who cannot possibl

    by IAmJack'sUserID

    It's human nature. The fat guy, the homeless person with no prospects, the ugly people? Its because they probably will be unable to continue the species. And while there are jobless scum that reproduce like rabbits, they are living up to our basic purpose in life. Your house and fancy stuff is also part of our human nature to occupy us in order to make us happy and content and therefore more likely to acquire a mate for reproduction.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:55 p.m. CST

    Oh, and I'd say it's damn accurate...

    by IAmJack'sUserID

    ...that many people DO find homosexuality to be vile and disgusting. Look at all of the homosexual slurs that are used for pure pejorative purposes. You're a fag or that TV show is so gay! Hum, why are they so hated? Can it be because they cannot reproduce? Because it is unnatural and not the way we as humans are supposed to function? Sorry, but it is human nature to despise and fear what we don't know or understand, and to condemn those that are different from us. You people are overestimating us as beings. We are simply animals that have complicated our existence, nothing more.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 12:57 p.m. CST


    by drwynninblack

    'Nuff said.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1 p.m. CST

    Occuring in Nature

    by Iago31

    Blest, when I made the comment about homosexuality occuring in nature, it was in response to those talkbackers who were saying that it is unnatural to be gay. IMO, Homosexuality is a fact. It is not a disfunction, a disease or a moral lapse. It simply is. Believing that homosexuality is any of those things is simply your opinion. For my part, I just don't care. People being gay does not affect my life one way or the other. To my mind, they deserve all the rights that any other minority is guaranteed, including marriage. Society has tried repressing them, punishing them, denying their existence, and even physically hurting them. They're still around. They always will be. They're people, like you or me. And it's your right to disagree with anyone's lifestyle as much as you like, as long as it doesn't infringe on an individual's freedom or cause them harm. So, rant away, but I personally don't see what the big deal is.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1:05 p.m. CST

    If the Sex Doesnt Involve You then Stay The Fuck Out

    by DOGSOUP

    Seriously, who gives two shits or a fuck what other people do? It's YOUR sex life you should be worrying about. My sex life doesnt involve sex with men but Gay people are just like any other people: half are awesome half are assholes. Being straight and thinking that homosexuality is vile is like being a guy and thinking that having a period sucks. IT DOESN'T FUCKING APPLY TO YOU. Get over it.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1:10 p.m. CST


    by JaPra

    Many people found black people disgusting and sub-human. <br><br>In fact, racially motivated slurs are still prevalent today... so that must mean black people are an abberation of nature....Right? <br><br>Black people were made to be slaves, look how strong they are!! RIGHT? <br><br>If all of those people in the past and so many still in the present think that way about black people then they must be ape-like creatures made to do the bidding of the white folk. Right??

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1:16 p.m. CST

    Homosexuality is both naturally occuring and a disorder IMO

    by BMacSmith

    i dont see how one cancels out the other. And JaPra, I do think its fine if you want to be that way as it doesnt really effect me at all. But I'm not gonna lie and say that i consider it normal or that two guys screwing is a very pleasant thought. Its not double talk.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 1:23 p.m. CST

    can we get back to denigrating women, please?

    by BMacSmith

    this is what the link is about after all. Who would win in a jello fight between Portman and Scarlett? Scarlett got the size on her, but I bet Portman is scrappy and more flexible.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 2:22 p.m. CST


    by Tourist

    Of course its a sexual disorder. I'll change my opinion on that matter when you manage to knock your boyfriend up. Plus, you shouldn't get so worked up. It's not like me stating the fact that homosexuality is aberration forces you to walk about with pink arm bands on or anything. I don't care who or what people like to stick their dick in, and I can't afford to, since I've munched on the man meat myself from time to time. But it's definately not useful for passing on genes. Which is cool with me, I wan't all humanity to wither and die anyway.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:03 p.m. CST

    Jack's Id (or was it his ego...)

    by Holy Hell

    Fear of difference and its subsequent hatered, prejudice, and violence, is a base element in human nature. Tempering our most animal instincts with reason and wisdom is a higher part of our nature. Human natur is terribly complex and liquid. Speaking with ravenous conviction and absurd self-confidence about how some part of our nature is unchanging is also, sorry to say, a deplorably low function of the human imagination. You seem stupid, and terribly unaware of it. Apply whatever energy is generated by the one electron in your brain crossing its one decent synapse to conjuring/discovering a genuine bit of human wisdom. Or remain stupid-it's your call, unfortunately.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:08 p.m. CST

    I seem stupid? Nice one, Holy Hell.

    by IAmJack'sUserID

    Don't mention wisdom and then call someone else stupid simply because you disagree with them. That's not to mention your terrible spelling and grammar. You can't change human nature, you can only change how you react and behave from it. Wait until you're out of 2nd grade before you feign intelligence.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:10 p.m. CST

    Tourist, et al

    by Holy Hell

    To insist on labeling homosexuality a "disorder" is very demeaning to gay people. Stop it, unless your arguments can take us to a place of wisdom and charity. And someone who wants "all humanity to whither and die", a perspective which I can identify with on some level, should try to respect those that don't enough to at least withold the empty, cynical rhetoric that will hasten the outcome. Part of me thinks there's still some hope left if we encourage our higher nature.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:12 p.m. CST

    I haven't heard "scientifically" used properly even once

    by Darwyn

    For the naive bigots who are hiding behind science, let me first give you some perspective on your beliefs, then I'll give you a counterargument: SCIENTIFICALLY, there is this thing called a paradigm. It's the equivalent of a scientific worldview; an ideology. That's what the evolutionary position that "we're here for sex" is. Ideologies ignore alternative points of view because they only see evidence that they are right, which facilitates a common base of understanding and competition. For evidence that even scientific worldviews evolve, let me remind you that we also once had paradigms that said: there is no such thing called a "mind" (behaviorism), that you could read personality through the shape of the skull (phrenology), and that you can make a more pure humanity (eugenics). Now, paradigms can change through "shifts," and they tend to get better over time, but no paradigm has yet integrated all scientific fields, including the evolutionary paradigm you speak of which can't be made to fit in with huge bodies of research in anthropology, sociology, and psychology (even evolution). There abounds explanations about human nature that cannot be reduced to sex. The fact that humans are capable of complex social organization cannot be reduced to sex. That theory you speak's simply trendy. There are some really strong theories out there that aren't being looked at simply because the sociobiology camp holds all the power right now, and even in science, it's all politics.<p> <p>If you really want the most cutting edge science and a new context for homosexuality, look at systems theory, which says that evolution pushes living systems (like humans) into complex adaptive systems (like cultures/societies) as a fundamental evolutionary law, ala how cells got pushed into forming organisms, and molecules got pushed into forming cells. In which case, homosexuality is perfectly "purposeful," as long as a homosexual can hold down a job, in which case they are fulfilling the "purpose" of nature. Homosexuality if fine - direct your hatred elsewhere.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:15 p.m. CST

    by Holy Hell

    I didn't say you were stupid, I said you seemed stupid. To me, which, certainly, is just one man's opinion. It's not that I simply disagree with an opinion. I agree with a process of opinion generation that I sense behind your opinion. It doesn't seem to serve a higher purpose, other than defending fiolence and prejudice. Don't you think we can use our nobler faculties to give our opinions some religion, so to speak? We've done it before, at least on a cultural scale. There are still some insulated/isolated individuals who fear difference, but we call THEM either ignorant fucks or second graders. And let's not start the "you have bad grammar" nonsense, please. We'd have everyone reposting corrections every eight seconds. Who cares in this setting? Perspective...

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:18 p.m. CST


    by Holy Hell

    Very succinct and useful. Thanks for your brain.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Thanks Holy -

    by Darwyn

    God, there is nothing worse than using science to justify your bullshit.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:27 p.m. CST


    by Holy Hell

    Systems theory IS a serious subject in the scientific community (into which I've married - my wife has a phd). It is based on data observed both in nature and in "artificial" communities. Why are you saying its not a theory, exactly?

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:30 p.m. CST


    by Darwyn

    It is observable. Go look at ants, bees, sea sponges, gazelle packs and stand in a city, and you'll observe more than your attention span can possibly soak in. All of those animals comes in groups that are complex adaptive systems, just like society (a sea sponge actually is a complex adaptive system, but then again so are human beings or any of those individual animals...but that's an argument for a whole other time)And let's say for argument's sake the the universe is a very complex place.</p> <p>And at a certain point, you would not expect to be able to ascertain it's workings through a handful of observations. On the otherhand, if you want to call evolution observable, it's about as observable as that. Like I said, go look at ants.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:41 p.m. CST

    stop saying anyone who disagrees with you hateful.

    by BMacSmith

    its beyond fucking stupid and negates your argument, as i hate no one. Its almost as stupid as the term Homophobia itself. Its a propaganda word. Some people with similar views may "fear gays", and some don't. You sound desperate.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 3:48 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    I sniffed her at the Apple store in Soho. If you smelled her you'd wanna fuck her. And whoever thinks she's a sucky actress hasn't seen Closer. Frackin brilliant.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 4:01 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    I think the lessons of Brokeback Mountain are still lost on some people. <p> I know a gay couple who have an adopted daughter, and they are the most loving parents you can imagine. This girl will grow up a fine human being because of their guidance, and their morals. Compared to Britney Spears and Kevin Federline, I'd say my friends serve a higher purpose to humanity than they do.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 4:04 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    I'm intrigued!

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 4:06 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    boys in the Republican Congressional page pool.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 4:09 p.m. CST


    by Darwyn

    Ahhh - I see. I went back and read your comment and had a whole new take. Yes, even a theory like evolution can have a whole lot wrong even as it has a whole lot right. Which is dangerous politically, because people can be tempted to throw out the good with the bad, or push to have the bad kept with the good. What's good about science is that there is a little less room for trend every go around the block.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 4:35 p.m. CST

    Funny you should mention it BringingSexyBack...

    by Darwyn

    I have only the best hot sponge on sponge action. I mean, I have one where like the Natalie Portman of sponges goes totally spongie-style on Scarlett Johansson...if she were a sponge.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 4:39 p.m. CST

    come on

    by jmorrison027

    Alright, I wouldn't kick either one of them out of bed. However, aside from the fact that they are American actors, and I do think they are doing completely fine accents, I think the movie looks great as a whole. I think their performances will be amazing and I can't believe all the criticism this is getting.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 4:52 p.m. CST

    tiny small tits are so 2004

    by BMacSmith

    I've decided i like big ole jubblebubblies again. sorry Nat.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 4:54 p.m. CST


    by jmorrison027

    Yes she is but regardless, i think she is a good actress.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 5:12 p.m. CST

    Region locked!

    by GrandpaUlrira

    Why?! What a stupid thing to do for a *trailer*. Had the same crap with Beowulf.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 5:43 p.m. CST

    memories-Of-Murder, again

    by jmorrison027

    Very well said I must say. One actress who I believe, and hope to be on the rise, and i may get murdered for this, is sarah michelle gellar. I pray that The Air I Breathe is a good as it looks and I hope people start looking at her as a talented actress and forget all about the scooby doo bullshit that she did just because freddie was cast as well.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 6:06 p.m. CST

    i've never

    by jmorrison027

    heard of her acting like a diva before, she seems very down to earth and educated whenever i've seen her in interviews in the past.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 7:06 p.m. CST

    Anyone who says homosexuality is a "disorder"

    by samsquanch

    Or that it serves no purpose seems to forget that we haven't been base animals for about, oh, THREE MILLION YEARS. Your argument may have had some merit back then, when we ourselves were throwing poo at eachother. Oh wait, we still are... <p> And, if you want to argue about whether or not it's 'natural', how about the simple fact that it exists? That whether or not you find it 'vile and disgusting', you have to acknowlege that it's a human phenomenon. Since we don't have another sentient life-form that organizes itself into complex social orders for a point of reference, you're left with no choice but to admit that it is natural. Sorry, assholes.

  • Nov. 16, 2007, 10:33 p.m. CST

    Homosexuality - who cares!

    by johnnyangelheart

    But do you think Scarlett boinks Woody Allen? Now that is gross!

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 12:55 a.m. CST

    Homos vs. Tits

    by blackhole4140

    I like how a talkback about the breasts of hot actresses devolved into the scientific value of homosexuality. We should just get it over with and have a massive circle jerk.

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 12:57 a.m. CST

    for the record

    by blackhole4140

    I'd suck both Natalie and Scarlet's balls, even though theirs are way inside their tummies.

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 3:32 a.m. CST

    Can't believe in 2007

    by JiveTalker

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 3:40 a.m. CST

    This movie looks like...

    by JiveTalker

    a hastily put-together adaptation of a shoddy historical romance novel. In other words, total crap. Johansson is hot as hell, old-school seductive and knows how to work it. But she's a mediocre actress at best. Kind of comes off like a smug bitch in interviews too. Portman is gorgeous but not sexy, and she has about as much charisma as a bowl of oatmeal. She's an utterly terrible actress (and yes, I've seen Closer, Garden State, V4V, My Blueberry Nights, etc etc- she bloody blew in all of them). I'll never understand the universal praise for her "talent"- or her intelligence for that matter. Despite her much-publicized Harvard degree, she always seems rather dense, juvenile, uninformed and phony to me. I don't care about either of these idjiots. Give me Maggie Gyllenhaal or Ellen Page over them any day of the week.

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 4:38 a.m. CST


    by JiveTalker

    K fine, leave Gyllenhaal and Page out of it. Portman and Johansson are still sucky actresses.

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 5:23 a.m. CST


    by Mixiboi

    There more post about homosexuality then doing Portman and Johansson at once..Seriously I love you guys...and "teenager ukrainian boy" porn is very popular....Just sayin...

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 8:36 a.m. CST

    If Portman wants to impress me...

    by DirkD13"

    ...then get Besson to make a Leon sequel (much better title than that The Professional shite), featuring Mathilda as an international butt-kicking assassin, who dies at the end. Yeah!<p>And if Johanssen wants to impress me, then come round to my house and get nekkid.<p>M-O-M, you're right, I just realised that Brian Cox is in fact in every film made in '95. As it turns out he took a two-year sabbatical from '96-'97, at which point Pete Postlethwaite (sp?) took on all his roles and, thus, was in every film made during that period. I also assume from reading your (not you're) comments you're (not your) a Brit, which is awesome (provided you're not a chav).

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 9:45 a.m. CST

    Scarlett and Natalie as sisters?

    by Abin Sur

    This would be the ONLY time I would ever approve of incest.

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 11:12 a.m. CST

    Dealing with comments we don't like, and Lucas as a director

    by McCroskey

    Tal111, of course that is how many (mostly on the Left) would like to deal with speech they don't simply banning it! That is the whole reason behind the 'anti-hate speech' laws all over Europe, where people actually face state charges for saying something that is deemed offensive by those who are in the business of being offended. And there should be no doubt that this is the same situation that many on the Left would like to have here in the United States. It's great for those who would rather not have to actually debate a topic, especially one where the majority, mainstream views of the public tend to be conservative. A great example for Europe is immigration, where individuals have actually faced charges for daring to publicly oppose and criticize the large-scale movement of Muslims into their nations. Hate crimes laws may be well intentioned by some, but it is inevitable that they will lead to an erosion of free speech rights, as far-left types use them as a weapon against the expression of mainstream views. As to Portman and Johanssen; Portman is the more beautiful. And if not for the prequels, I doubt there would be as many knocks against her acting ability. I think both she and Hayden Christensen actually did well with what little they had to work with (terrible script plus Lucas' famous non-directing directing style), but clearly they could have been better. And they would have been if Lucas had let a better director take over. I was always a bit surprised by those who both cursed Lucas as a hack, and at the same time condemned Portman and Christensen for the performances they gave under the direction of the hack.

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 1:09 p.m. CST

    Mcros- left vs right

    by samsquanch

    You sound like a thoughtful fellow, but it sounds like you've been taught that the left/right lense is the only one through which to understand politics. Every statement you've made about how right/left politics works (in the states at least) can be debated on either side, either supporting what you say or completely contradicting it. For example, claiming that limiting free speech is a liberal habit is ridiculous, as ridiculous a statement as claiming that it's a conservative one. Some people that have trouble with the idea are conservatives, some are liberals, get it? You've been indoctrinated into being Conservative Guy, who's been taught to see that everything Good is Conservative, and everything Bad is Liberal. Sorry, man, it's just not that simple. <p> Oh, and by the by, I don't identify myself as a liberal! Does that just blow your fucking mind or what?

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 1:09 p.m. CST

    Mcros- left vs right

    by samsquanch

    You sound like a thoughtful fellow, but it sounds like you've been taught that the left/right lense is the only one through which to understand politics. Every statement you've made about how right/left politics works (in the states at least) can be debated on either side, either supporting what you say or completely contradicting it. For example, claiming that limiting free speech is a liberal habit is ridiculous, as ridiculous a statement as claiming that it's a conservative one. Some people that have trouble with the idea are conservatives, some are liberals, get it? You've been indoctrinated into being Conservative Guy, who's been taught to see that everything Good is Conservative, and everything Bad is Liberal. Sorry, man, it's just not that simple. <p> Oh, and by the by, I don't identify myself as a liberal! Does that just blow your fucking mind or what?

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 1:11 p.m. CST

    woops, sorry for the double post

    by samsquanch

    it's a liberal plot.

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 9:26 p.m. CST

    Ann Boleyn

    by Digby_Higgins

    Nah...not really. Penises, or "dicks", as they're sometimes called, are not designed nor meant to go into assholes, either male or female. Therefore, how can it be natural to do so? Don't be cute and philosophical and debate the definition of "natural", as it won't help you any--dicks are not meant to go into assholes. Assholes are meant for excreting waste matter. Penises, or "dicks", are designed to go into vaginas. If they weren't, then babies wouldn't be born and we wouldn't be here trying to out-50-cent-word each other. Also, homos, or "fudge packers" as they're sometimes called, are so pissily defensive about being insulted in any way because they have guilty consciences.

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 9:28 p.m. CST

    Oh well...misspelled Anne Boleyn's name...

    by Digby_Higgins

    ...but that'll give some wordy homo some dud ammunition to use. Go get your buttholes stretched out, ya Nancy-Boys!

  • Nov. 17, 2007, 10:34 p.m. CST


    by samsquanch

    Your theory perfectly explains why your head is a perfect fit for your own asshole. Thanks for the edification. (that'll be 50 cents, please.)

  • Nov. 18, 2007, 12:38 a.m. CST

    There is no such think as "design" in nature.

    by Severus Snape

    Nothing in biology has any designed "purpose." Sex is not "designed" to produce offspring. Sex has no purpose at all. Reproduction is only an incidental by-product of sex. If sticking my cock in another person's asshole causes me to have an orgasm, then that is all the "purpose" I need. Our bodies serve whatever purpose we decide they do. Objections based on ignorant, teleological notions about the "purpose" of sex are the province of morons, fundies and closet cases (those three things are usually redundant, I know). Remember, sex is only natural if you're doing it wrong.

  • Nov. 18, 2007, 11:07 a.m. CST

    Short version: I'd bang Natalie and Scarlett at the same time!

    by MrMysteryGuest

    Three-way! 'Nuff said!

  • Nov. 18, 2007, 1:32 p.m. CST

    Sinful is sexy

    by samsquanch

    There's a whole school of thought that presents the idea that religious tendencies to feel shame about sex, and therefore write into the religious text that it is 'dirty', 'sinful' or 'wrong' (especially good old fashioned hetero married sex especially) is actually a sort of backwards way of making sex more fun. There is some truth to the idea that once it's taboo, it's sexier. Maybe the fundies are on to something here.

  • Nov. 18, 2007, 11:58 p.m. CST

    Has Anyone Banged Both Of Them In Real Life?

    by skoobyx

    Moby? Benicio Del Torro? <p> These are the things I wonder about...

  • Nov. 19, 2007, 2:07 a.m. CST

    Isaiah Washington Couldn't Have Said it Better

    by SakeDickens2006

    Hulk Smash Homo-Liberals!

  • Nov. 19, 2007, 2:17 a.m. CST

    Hey Darwyn You Can Take Your Systems Theory and

    by SakeDickens2006

    Evolution is pushing Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johanssen closer and closer together, they might even kiss. Hopefully they will do it in front of a bunch of socio-biologists for in depth study, God I love science.

  • Nov. 19, 2007, 2:31 a.m. CST

    Owen Wilson Didn't Have Sex With Natalie Portman and Scarlett Jo

    by SakeDickens2006

    That's why he tried to committ suicide.