Lost Girl?

Well, that's the new reality. The internet is a major part of and a major force in the world today, certainly in terms of covering celebrities and letting the public know and express their feelings about what celebrities say and do. Celebrities just need to know, accept and prepare for the fact that whatever they say…

No, I think it was a good discussion. It was a chance to clarify why this is a sensitive issue, and a big reason why this story has gotten attention. I'm glad we had it.

Again, how do you know that? How do you know that they're all just "white middle class hipsters"? And even if they are all white middle class hipsters, how do you know that none of them have been personally affected by genocide? Or that none of them are related to, or friends with, or work with, or just know someone…

And how do you know that they don't do both? The people who have reacted negatively to Eisenberg's joke, and subsequent flimsy non-apology, are probably people who are aware of, and maybe even personally affected by, genocide. That's likely why this is such a sensitive issue for them.

How is it being blown out of proportion? He said something that, in your own words, was careless and stupid. People are just saying that he said something careless and stupid. There's nothing more to it than that. If you're a famous person that says or does something dumb, careless and/or offensive, it's going to be…

Obviously he was exaggerating. That's not the issue. The issue is how he chose to exaggerate, and his lame, nonsensical explanation/excuse/non-apology for it.

Whether he truly believes it or not is beside the point. It was simply and unquestionably an offensively dumb, clueless, careless thing to say. If you're a celebrity, you're going to attract attention and draw reactions for everything you do. Saying or doing dumb and/or offensive things is no exception.

His "genocide" remark makes him look like an offensively clueless, flippant, out-of-touch, privileged, entitled celebrity. Your hypothetical Eisenberg statement would've made him look like a vulgar, ungrateful, unappreciative, career-suicidal a-hole/douchebag.

“I’m a normal person who has normal sensory experiences, so Comic-Con was very overwhelming for me."

A bunch of sci-fi and comic book fans excitedly acknowledging the guy playing Lex Luthor in the next Superman movie — yep, that's genocide alright!

Considering the sheer unfeasibility of Fox doing the "Old Man Logan" story, Jackman was probably either referring to some other meaning of "old man", or just messing big time with Wolverine fans' heads.

It's actually an anagram of his real name - R. Dik Headman.

No, probably not. But, he also had the advantage of originating the role of Han. Whoever else plays that role in the future will have to contend with being compared to Ford's portrayal. Maybe they will find a guy who's capable of adequately assuming the mantle, I just think that it's going to be tough to find such a…

You're probably right, it probably isn't more complicated than that. I guess what I really meant was that it's not something you can "just do". The original Ghostbusters is a really unique and special movie, and the idea that anyone, even 31 years after it opened, thinks they can recreate it is just pretty hard to…

Lots of things are done to make money. Just because something is done to make money doesn't mean it's beyond reproach.

My opinions are based on information the film's maker himself has put out, information that he says he's "open to and appreciative of all the feedback" for. I'm just obliging him and just commenting on what he's shown us thus far.

Yeah, it'll definitely be interesting, and maybe even entertaining. And it's probably the most brazen thing Hollywood has done so far, in terms of remakes. But will it be as good as or better than the original? Doubtful.

Yup, exactly.

I'm just saying I have absolutely no idea what they're trying to accomplish with this film, other than trying to make money.