Jump to content

Aidy Bryant


bluetech

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Desdinova said:

That googly-eyed ogre Sarah Huckabee-Sanders wishes she was as beautiful, funny, sexy and smart as Aidy.  Also loved seeing her dressed as Demi Lovato!   

Exactly.  The greatest part, though, is that Huck and the other Trump-lovers will watch it and still feel genuinely insulted, despite having received an astronomical upgrade in the looks, style, talent, intellect, dignity and class departments.  Shows how deluded that camp is.

The real Huck's biggest accomplishment is that she actually made Spicey seem likeable by comparison.  :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jabba Desilijic Tiure said:

Exactly.  The greatest part, though, is that Huck and the other Trump-lovers will watch it and still feel genuinely insulted, despite having received an astronomical upgrade in the looks, style, talent, intellect, dignity and class departments.  Shows how deluded that camp is.

The real Huck's biggest accomplishment is that she actually made Spicey seem likeable by comparison.  :lol:

I honestly believe Ceciley would've made a better Sarah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
4 hours ago, thadrou90 said:

A newer one

 

Cringe.

This might be Abyss'd but, this is wrong on a number of levels.
1. How do we know his salary and why should we care how much Mark Wahlberg (or Michelle Williams for that matter) gets paid much less what they do with it? Unless they work in the public sector, this is none of our business.
2. The concept of "doing what shamers tell you" sadly invokes the ironic concept of (and I really hate having to bring this up myself) fatshaming which Aidy, rightfully, does not cower to. 
3. Mark Wahlberg has done way worse stuff. He basically beat and blinded an Asian dude back in the 1990s. Typical Boston. Even this week, he's been accused of worse than negotiating his pay. Like steroids. But hey, at least his wife's kinda chunky.

I thought the whole #MeToo stuff was about outing rapists/molesters/criminal freaks, not just some White Feminist cash-grab for even more money in an industry of inequality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hellebore
4 hours ago, OscarWinner said:

Cringe.

This might be Abyss'd but, this is wrong on a number of levels.
1. How do we know his salary and why should we care how much Mark Wahlberg (or Michelle Williams for that matter) gets paid much less what they do with it? Unless they work in the public sector, this is none of our business.
2. The concept of "doing what shamers tell you" sadly invokes the ironic concept of (and I really hate having to bring this up myself) fatshaming which Aidy, rightfully, does not cower to. 
3. Mark Wahlberg has done way worse stuff. He basically beat and blinded an Asian dude back in the 1990s. Typical Boston. Even this week, he's been accused of worse than negotiating his pay. Like steroids. But hey, at least his wife's kinda chunky.

I thought the whole #MeToo stuff was about outing rapists/molesters/criminal freaks, not just some White Feminist cash-grab for even more money in an industry of inequality.

1. I believe the director publicly discussed that the cast did the reshoots for free in solidarity with the movement against predators in Hollywood (Kevin Spacey in this case). But not Mark Wahlberg it emerged later. I can't believe anyone has to explain why this matters - she was literally paid 1% of what he was. There's been controversy in Hollywood over pay disparity the last few years with female actors struggling to be given the same financial value as their costars. This is obviously way beyond the normal pay gap, but the grossest part about it is that Michelle Willams etc agreed to take a hit on the reshoots because they believed it was important due to the nature of the situation and they wanted to make a statement as part of the Times Up movement. Mark Wahlberg (a straight, white man) essentially used this statement and by proxy the situation to benefit himself which is...part of the problem. Standing in solidarity was the classy thing to do here. Which he eventually did, but like Aidy Bryant said, after a week of shaming. 

2. It's a lot different to do the right thing from a moral standpoint than be bullied into feeling bad about yourself. Bryant isn't even advocating giving into shaning...he shouldn't have had to, he should have just naturally done it.

3. Yep, Mark Wahlberg has done some really gross things. He's not even that good an actor, but hey, at least we have his wife to objectify. -___-

...I don't disagree that the acting side of the industry is ridiculously overpaid. No one should be earning that kind of money when there's people living below the poverty line. But there should be pay equality in all fields. This isn't a "cash grab" its just leveling the playing field. If anything, Wahlbergs behaviour was the cash grabbing one. 

Also, its not a white feminist movement, there are women of colour involved equally, who ironically you seem to have forgotten. 

Nobody even labelled this particular issues as a #Metoo thing. This is just a tangential issue that is equally as important in the lives of women in and outside Hollywood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, OscarWinner said:

Cringe.

This might be Abyss'd but, this is wrong on a number of levels.
1. How do we know his salary and why should we care how much Mark Wahlberg (or Michelle Williams for that matter) gets paid much less what they do with it? Unless they work in the public sector, this is none of our business.
2. The concept of "doing what shamers tell you" sadly invokes the ironic concept of (and I really hate having to bring this up myself) fatshaming which Aidy, rightfully, does not cower to. 
3. Mark Wahlberg has done way worse stuff. He basically beat and blinded an Asian dude back in the 1990s. Typical Boston. Even this week, he's been accused of worse than negotiating his pay. Like steroids. But hey, at least his wife's kinda chunky.

I thought the whole #MeToo stuff was about outing rapists/molesters/criminal freaks, not just some White Feminist cash-grab for even more money in an industry of inequality.

4rfAKnu.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hellebore said:

1. I believe the director publicly discussed that the cast did the reshoots for free in solidarity with the movement against predators in Hollywood (Kevin Spacey in this case). But not Mark Wahlberg it emerged later. I can't believe anyone has to explain why this matters - she was literally paid 1% of what he was. There's been controversy in Hollywood over pay disparity the last few years with female actors struggling to be given the same financial value as their costars. This is obviously way beyond the normal pay gap, but the grossest part about it is that Michelle Willams etc agreed to take a hit on the reshoots because they believed it was important due to the nature of the situation and they wanted to make a statement as part of the Times Up movement. Mark Wahlberg (a straight, white man) essentially used this statement and by proxy the situation to benefit himself which is...part of the problem. Standing in solidarity was the classy thing to do here. Which he eventually did, but like Aidy Bryant said, after a week of shaming. 

2. It's a lot different to do the right thing from a moral standpoint than be bullied into feeling bad about yourself. Bryant isn't even advocating giving into shaning...he shouldn't have had to, he should have just naturally done it.

3. Yep, Mark Wahlberg has done some really gross things. He's not even that good an actor, but hey, at least we have his wife to objectify. -___-

...I don't disagree that the acting side of the industry is ridiculously overpaid. No one should be earning that kind of money when there's people living below the poverty line. But there should be pay equality in all fields. This isn't a "cash grab" its just leveling the playing field. If anything, Wahlbergs behaviour was the cash grabbing one. 

Also, its not a white feminist movement, there are women of colour involved equally, who ironically you seem to have forgotten. 

Nobody even labelled this particular issues as a #Metoo thing. This is just a tangential issue that is equally as important in the lives of women in and outside Hollywood.

"..reshoots for free", but "paid 1% of what he was". Well, which was it? Although it's a far cry from $1.5 million, $15,000 is indeed a far cry from free. And if we're talking about being classy and moral, why didn't the studio avoid casting BOTH a child molester and a guy who committed a hate crime instead of trying to buy good PR by not paying their cast after the fact?

And would any of these charitable donations be discussed among a cast/crew if they were all or mostly male? If they had to reshoot Daddy's Home 2 for any reason, would there be leaks about how much John Cena, WIll Ferrell, John Lithgow, Mel Gibson and Marky Mark were getting paid?

And trust me, I cannot unsee some of the women of color who's movement was usurped twice over: first by the mental patient who was indeed getting remunerations for helping Harvey stay undercover (a cash-grab), asking for more and still not talking about Victor Salva, then by turning Tarana Burke's movement into a concern over wages. She was there when they worked to turn the conversation into "he's making more money than me". 

And to bring things back to Aidy Bryant, I hate how they constantly use women of a certain size to be the mascots of complaint. If this was a group thing with multiple female cast members, fine. But, they know what they're doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hellebore
3 hours ago, OscarWinner said:

"..reshoots for free", but "paid 1% of what he was". Well, which was it? Although it's a far cry from $1.5 million, $15,000 is indeed a far cry from free. And if we're talking about being classy and moral, why didn't the studio avoid casting BOTH a child molester and a guy who committed a hate crime instead of trying to buy good PR by not paying their cast after the fact?

And would any of these charitable donations be discussed among a cast/crew if they were all or mostly male? If they had to reshoot Daddy's Home 2 for any reason, would there be leaks about how much John Cena, WIll Ferrell, John Lithgow, Mel Gibson and Marky Mark were getting paid?

And trust me, I cannot unsee some of the women of color who's movement was usurped twice over: first by the mental patient who was indeed getting remunerations for helping Harvey stay undercover (a cash-grab), asking for more and still not talking about Victor Salva, then by turning Tarana Burke's movement into a concern over wages. She was there when they worked to turn the conversation into "he's making more money than me". 

And to bring things back to Aidy Bryant, I hate how they constantly use women of a certain size to be the mascots of complaint. If this was a group thing with multiple female cast members, fine. But, they know what they're doing.

Oh boy. 

Okay, firstly - yeah you're not wrong on the phrasing there. It was actually the same way Ridley Scott phrased it when talking about the situtation before the whole Wahlberg thing. Williams earned $80 a day. That actually works out at less than $1K for the reshoots for her. We've already established that yes, these fees are insane but he earned ten times what she did - she willingly took a paycut due to the situation, he did not.

Why didn't they cast Wahlberg or Spacey in the first place? Because white men in Hollywood could get away with anything - Spacey hadn't been convicted yet and Wahlberg has been getting a free pass because the system is more than a little screwed. That's hardly something Im going to debate you on, but the class of morality of the studio are not the subject matter here - we know they're just going to do what earns them the most money. But I will underline again, it was the statement of doing the reshoots for free. A statement Mark Wahlberg (someone who, as we established above, is benefitting immensely from an industry that is very forgiving to white men) chose not to make. 

No, I daresay if Daddy's Home Two had to be reshot we wouldn't be discussing this because the primarily white male cast wouldn't feel obligated to do anything. Like Mark Wahlberg. They wouldn't feel any kinship with the movement and they wouldnt opt for a paycut in solidarity with this attempt at change in Hollywood because it doesn't benefit them in the slightest as white, powerful men.The reason for the discussion is because that was the point of the reshoots/ voluntary paycuts. You can take the cynical route and say its because the studio wanted to earn more money or you can believe that Michelle Williams and Ridley Scott thought they were doing the right thing. 

I don't know who you're calling a "mental patient" but unless they actually are a patient of a mental hospital let's refrain here from that kind of crap, shall we? 

Tarana Burke's movement has not been made into "he makes more money than me" - it's still about sexual assault. This is just a tangential story where #metoo is a backdrop because of the circumstances of the reshoots. Whatever about Hollywood latching onto the movement - Burke doesn't seem to have a problem with it. She went to the Golden Globes as one of the activists. It helped bring her movement to the fore and in turn her idea allowed conversations women were having behind closed doors for years to become public. 

Wage equality and rape culture go hand in hand though - they're all lovely features of a patriarchal society working to keep women in a position of lesser power. This effects women of all races, ages, backgrounds etc to different degrees (for example a woman of colour is going to experience a harder time with it in general than a wealthy white woman). Yeah, this movement in Hollywood is filtering through a bunch of privileged women but they're speaking out about a problem that impacts all of us. Whether we like it or not, what they say is noted and them bringing sexual assualt into the conversation opens that door for all of us. Trying to belittle a movement fronted by a group of women who've decided to fight against the status quo by reducing it into a cash grab reeks of someone who can't understand why it's important in the first place. Is it the ideal movement? No. Is it better than no movement at all? At present, yes. 

In relation to Aidy Bryant. Really? I generally find they cast us (fat women) as the lazy comedic side-kick. But please, as a man do tell me your experience of being a fat woman and the representations of yourself you see in Hollywood. -__-

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 5 months later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.