Cài đặt Steam
Đăng nhập
|
Ngôn ngữ
简体中文 (Hán giản thể)
繁體中文 (Hán phồn thể)
日本語 (Nhật)
한국어 (Hàn Quốc)
ไทย (Thái)
Български (Bungari)
Čeština (CH Séc)
Dansk (Đan Mạch)
Deutsch (Đức)
English (Anh)
Español - España (Tây Ban Nha - TBN)
Español - Latinoamérica (Tây Ban Nha cho Mỹ Latin)
Ελληνικά (Hy Lạp)
Français (Pháp)
Italiano (Ý)
Bahasa Indonesia (tiếng Indonesia)
Magyar (Hungary)
Nederlands (Hà Lan)
Norsk (Na Uy)
Polski (Ba Lan)
Português (Tiếng Bồ Đào Nha - BĐN)
Português - Brasil (Bồ Đào Nha - Brazil)
Română (Rumani)
Русский (Nga)
Suomi (Phần Lan)
Svenska (Thụy Điển)
Türkçe (Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ)
Українська (Ukraine)
Báo cáo lỗi dịch thuật
Will may be a Scientologist, but I don't think it's quite fair to say that he's crazy, like Tom Cruise, or others.
Also, there's a bit of awkward offensive statements being made in this thread, which is really disappointing.
I think it's a publicity stunt, hollywood is dying, movies are dying, oscars are dying so they try to revitalize it by making something special.
You're right in the first part.
The second is of course bizarre to ever claim.
Hollywood can't be dying, nor are movies dying. That's not ever going to be a thing.
Why you think second part is untrue? All they produce is recycled trash, Netflix is taking over with their shows.
Movies have been around since 1909 or so, if you count the first porn film as a movie. They're not going to go anywhere. Movies aren't going to die until at least 2109. :P
However, this isn't quite the "Let's discuss Hollywood as a whole." thread.
And, male pattern baldness is a very common thing. Bald men are so common that they're even sometimes thought of as attractive. Women... not so much. Hair is, in general, much more directly associated with femininity in women than its masculine attributes in men. The self-image issues with balding women, which does happen, and especially those who've lost all their hair is very much different. It runs the gamut from cancer patients to alopecia sufferers and their testimony demonstrates a marked difference in not only how they're personally effected, but how others see them as well.
It is not the same thing. Where it could be related in some individuals, it's not to the same degree, either.
Why in the world do you think that simply declaring "not so" is some kind of valid counter-argument. It's the equivalent of "nuh uh" in colloquial English.
But... that did not happen and your hypothetical statement is not an allegory related to factual events, which is what mine were. The intended subject being addressed is also completely different - Mine did not focus on the response by others, but on the inappropriateness of the commentary, itself, and how that is demonstrated using more catastrophic examples. Mine required both empathy and context to understand. Your's requires something much more mechanical and removed.
Why.... Just use your brain, k? There's no reason to believe that your brain needs to go back in the recycling bin - You should be able to functionally comprehend what I've written as demonstrated by your own use of language. If you can not, there's nothing I can do about that.
it was a bald move
Seriously.
All I know is this was more than likely staged.
That makes no sense at all. Ever.
Because there are actually bad people... being a "celebrity" doesn't make them "good" people.