Dimly lit?

More like 10 minutes editing a draft generated by ChatGPT.

This article is one of the worst try-hard examples of attempting to create some sort of controversy out of absolutely nothing.

Counterpoint: I wouldn’t touch Kylie with a stolen dick. 

Does anyone besides this author honestly believe that in between the first and second date, John Krasinski wrote a memo to Emily Blunt, saying not to wear the jacket again or there wouldn’t be a second date?

Does anyone else besides this author feel fucking ridiculous for actually voicing such a thing out loud?

Here’s…

Tell us you’re a misandrist without telling us you’re a misandrist.  Jesus fucking christ, let a dumb fucking joke be a dumb fucking joke.  Outrage culture is completely off the rails. The internet was a mistake. 

Do progressives understand how dumb and ignorant they look on this topic? The article and half the commenters on here just sound ridiculous.

The practice of thin actors playing fat theoretically takes roles away from fat actors and threatens an insensitive portrayal from someone who doesn’t have the lived experience to truly understand what they are portraying.

Hunter was an adult when he experienced weight gain — he says it was a period in his early 20s.

It’s not hate to acknowledge that being 600(!) lbs is a recipe for misery. It’s scientifically proven that weighing that much is a gigantic risk, both physically and emotionally.

This is the most Jezebel thing Jezebel has ever Jezebel’d

And the complaint about the fat suit...yeah, the filmmakers should’ve just found someone who’s actually 600 pounds but has the stamina, mobility, and overall wellbeing to star in a feature film, and also has acting ability akin to Brendan Fraser. What could go wrong.

Did no one think, “Maybe a movie about a fat guy made by non-fat people needs to do a little bit more than describe fatness as prescription for misery?”

You mean to tell me that a Darren Aronofsky movie isn’t teeming with kindness and tenderness?! Whaa??

You’re using the word “rape”, but the LA Times article about this referred to it as “an unwanted kiss”. Which may indeed be considered a sexual assault, but there is a world of difference between the two.

According to Stanford (per the LA Times and other outlets), the alleged sexual assault was “an unwanted kiss.” That seems like pertinent info, particularly where the linked article never mentions “rape.”

Being subjected to a review process when you do something like pour hot coffee on another individual isn’t exactly some great unknown, low probability event.

They didn’t “wade” into the trial, they were dragged into it by one of the parties involved.

Weird take on “Known Batterer Amber Heard Caught in Yet Another Lie”.

I mean are you not profiting off something that has nothing to do with you by putting out this article? You’ve obviously picked a side as well. You’re choosing to believe they’re doing this to profit as opposed to just trying to debunk lies that do involve them. I’m sure they are profiting in some way, but lots of…