Travis Fimmel Ousted

[Guest YFSC]

Bad news for Travis Fimmel fans…

 

(I posted this about 20 minutes ago but it seems to have gone into a black hole.

Sorry if it eventually shows up twice.)

 

http://images.zap2it.com/20030908/travisfimmel_tarzan_240_002.jpg

 

 

Vine Snaps for WB's 'Tarzan'

(Thursday, November 06 03:57 PM)

 

LOS ANGELES (Zap2it.com) - The WB isn't monkeying around with underperforming freshman drama "Tarzan." With the show's ratings in a slow, but steady decline, the network has halted production.Five episodes of "Tarzan" have aired and three more have completed shooting. The network intends to air those three remaining episodes as scheduled, but sources close to the show doubt that production will resume, even if the ratings somehow improve.Fueled by a summer of hype, promoting star Travis Fimmel as the network's latest "It" boy, "Tarzan" premiered on Sunday, Oct. 5 to a respectable audience of 5.5 million viewers. The modern vine-swinger (all mention to callow lady-love Jane was removed from the show's title before it ever aired) dropped to 4.07 million viewers in its second airing, 3.77 million in its third and 3.05 million for the fourth airing.

 

The addition of "Xena" star Lucy Lawless to the cast failed to increase the audience and this past Sunday (Nov. 2), "Tarzan" fell to an anemic low of 2.84 million viewers. Even with a reliable lead-in from "Charmed," ratings for "Tarzan" slid every weekDespite the successes of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "Smallville," The WB's strategy of aiming for franchise hits has yielded decidedly disappointing results in recent years. The network's attempt to spin a series out of "The Lone Ranger" produced only a poorly received telefilm, while "Birds of Prey" remained on the roost for only 12 episodes.The network's high concept "Fearless," from producer Jerry Bruckheimer, was supposed to launch this fall, but it was pushed to midseason when Bruckheimer determined that the show wasn't ready. "One Tree Hill," which aired in its place, has developed into a demographic hit for The WB, which recently gave the basketball drama a full season pick-up. It's unclear how the retooling for "Fearless" is going, though production on the revamped show reportedly has yet to begin..

[BewareofNick]

I am so glad One Tree Hill was picked up. it stars the ever gorgeous, ever shirtless Chad Michael Murray:

 

http://www.chadmichaelmurray.org/albums/onetreehill/full/024.jpg

[Guest YFSC]

>I am so glad One Tree Hill was picked up. it stars the ever

>gorgeous, ever shirtless Chad Michael Murray:

 

hmmmmmm..... he looks more than just shirtless here... any better pics?

[BewareofNick]

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0UADcAi8Z9hXkk*yM4Q4iNKzaT6vQ7BI7gRaOjfYcS2DglYQfyPTVdMB8fCFiS0aBxQZ45oR!Q6yzRivCE9QSyAluaFiCDgp53G76NjvQicevKfXo7yhbA3SCyBYAcMgW/Charlie.jpg?dc=4675436922803678992

[BewareofNick]

http://onetreehillonline.com/gallery/cmmurray/120.jpg

[BewareofNick]

http://allstarz.org/~cmm/P/249.jpg

[VaHawk]

And the point of this post is what? Who cares? Unless your whole point has to do with gay men finding some actor so "hot" that we should support a TV show because the actor is "that hot buffed guy" all of us "pathetic queers" aspire to be, rather than being educated, intelligent people who judge a show on it's "God forbid" artistic values?

 

I base my opinions of a movie/play/tv show upon the talents of the cast and their performance and the quality of the written script, not on how "HOT" the leading actor is!

 

x(

[BewareofNick]

Wow, are you channeling Auntie S today? heaven forbid that we should extoll the virtues of good looking naked men on a website that promotes the hiring of naked good looking men

[VaHawk]

Oh Please, I'm not channeling any one! I'm only expressing my feelings about the shallowness of those who judge a performance of art based only upon the physical attributes of the artist.

 

How in the hell does this equate me to Auntie S? Or is this guy Jewish so my questioning of the point of this thread as such, makes me anti-Jewish? Is that IT? and if that is IT, then you are so much more pathetic than axe has ever been!

[Guest YFSC]

>And the point of this post is what?

 

Hey, Hack, I think you need to go back on your meds. :+

 

The point of this post was to let readers know that Tarzan, about which there were several threads not so long ago right here in Hooville City, starring Travis Fimmel, of whom many pictures were posted on those threads, and over whom many posters were recently obsessing in these cyberhalls, has been cancelled.

 

>Who cares?

 

Probably all the aforementioned posters that were obsessing over the opportunity to ogle Mr. Fimmel on a weekly basis.

 

Where did your ranting about artistic values, talent and supporting TV shows come from? It certainly wasn't from the post.

[BewareofNick]

i take it back. You're not channeling Auntie S. You're having your period.

[Guest YFSC]

>Oh Please, I'm not channeling any one! I'm only expressing

>my feelings about the shallowness of those who judge a

>performance of art based only upon the physical attributes of

>the artist.

 

Which NOBODY on this thread did, but but despite that you misrespresent it and attack as if someone had.

Your ranting does not make it so.

 

>How in the hell does this equate me to Auntie S?

 

Well, I'll tell you how. What you both (or are you really one?) do is to distort, misrepresent, invent and/or misinterpret the facts and what was said, twisting them to suit your purpose, and then go on a loud, persistent and repeated attack. You both repeatedly assert your contrived misinformation, apparently hoping that the Big Lie technique will work: if you say it often enough people will start to believe it. You both insist that your inventions are correct in the absence of any evidence to support them and in the face of evidence to contradict them. That's how.

[axebahia]

>And the point of this post is what? Who cares?

 

Hawk, I have never seen the show, but my favorite escort of all time (until recently) was a Travis Fimmel look alike so I am sad to see that others will not have the pleasure of watching. You know, I hate disagreeing with you. Hey, if people can watch Survivor, why not Tarzan? Let's face it there is very little of any redeeming value on tv today so if you have to watch fluff, it might as well be hot, n'est ce pas?

[axebahia]

>You both repeatedly assert your contrived

>misinformation, apparently hoping that the Big Lie technique

>will work: if you say it often enough people will start to

>believe it.

 

So you believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, and that Ethan isn't Oren? Big Lie, no. Gullible fool, yes.

[Guest fukamarine]

I only watched it ONCE.... and it was so bad, I said "never again". I have never seen such bad acting as displayed by our dear Travis. It was beyond belief!

 

And as for the "hot" factor - well he didn't look half as hot as he did in the black & white CK ads. The long hair does nothing for him. I wonder what he would look like with a much shorter hair style? Bet it would make a big differance. His best feature was his hugh thighs and I bet they terminate in a glorious butt!

 

It's kind of sad really. The guy obviously had ambitions to be a movie star and it just ain't gonna happen for him.

 

I don't know if this is true or not but I heard that when he came to Toronto to shoot the series, he let his US visa expire and was having trouble gaining re-entry to the US. You'd think the CK lawyers could smooth out this little bump.

 

fukamarine

[VaHawk]

>>And the point of this post is what?

>

>Hey, Hack, I think you need to go back on your meds. :+

 

Hey YFSC (YOU FUCKING SHITHEADED CUNT) Well, maybe you should go back to your own meds, which would consist of a fat hot cock shoved down your throat? At least that would gag you enough to prevent you from posting from the brain rather than the shit brains located in your asshole.

 

>The point of this post was to let readers know that Tarzan,

>about which there were several threads not so long ago right

>here in Hooville City, starring Travis Fimmel, of whom many

>pictures were posted on those threads, and over whom many

>posters were recently obsessing in these cyberhalls, has been

>cancelled.

 

And this raving lunacy of fantasizing over some one's body, cock and looks as a validation of support of artistic performance negates what I opined in what way? Seems, it only reenforces your pathetic obsession with cock and ass to merit a supposedly artistic performance.

 

>>Who cares?

>

>Probably all the aforementioned posters that were obsessing

>over the opportunity to ogle Mr. Fimmel on a weekly basis.

 

WELL HOW FUCKING PATHETIC OF YOU AND THEM!!! If all you can do is ogle without action it speaks volumes about what a bunch of useless fucks you and your ilk are.

 

>

>Where did your ranting about artistic values, talent and

>supporting TV shows come from? It certainly wasn't from the

>post.

 

Your post, just like the useless piece of crap you are, centered all around the "almighty cock". Denying otherwise, only confirms what a dick head you are.

[marc anthony]

OK.... I have a few random thoughts in no particular order. They apply to the original post, the subsequent posts, and the off-topic posts.

 

1) Has the civility on this message board deteriorated to the point that it is impossible to quote an announcement about the cancellation of a TV show without beginning a flame war?

 

2) I admit that when I spend money for entertainment... like shows and even movies, I am more interested in plot, writing, artistic merit, and acting. But on the "boob tube" I will often flick it on to ogle at some cute person. Does that make me shallow? Maybe. But it entertains me, and that is the purpose of that invention.

 

3) Both Travis Fimmel and Chad Michael Murray are pretty damn hot. Thanks for the pics...

 

4) This post would have been more interesting to THIS board if the title was "Travis Fimmel Outed."

 

5) If Travis is indeed stuck in Toronto (though most rumors about him are false), please tell him to travel to Montreal, and I will meet him at one of their many wonderful strip clubs.

 

6) The escort mentioned that resembles Travis Fimmel is indeed a cutie, and a sweet, sweet guy. It was a sad day for all when he retired from the biz!

 

7) And when all is said and done, I must say that I am a big Travis Fimmel fan, and eagerly turned on the tube to watch the premier. And there was Travis, in all his handsome glory (with too much clothing though). And I never watched it again. It was indeed horrible.

 

The difference between me and James Joyce... I put numbers in front of my stream of consciousness creations. Hoping that pleases my English tutor Traveller! hehe

 

 

 

[+ Lucky]

Well, I am going to come out of the closet here at the risk of offending my dear friend Hawk. Of course I watch shows for the hunk factor! If I have to choose between two shows, I will certainly factor in the sex appeal of the show. It's entertainment!

Just last Saturday I watched back-to-back episodes of Resurrection Blvd. to see that cutie who plays Alex the young boxer who can't get along with women but fucks them anyway. He has the cutest nipples! And they threw in another eye-candy guy to pop the ecstacy in Alex's sister. He held it on his tongue and made her come and get it. That was so sexy.

So, has Marc Anthony asked the right question here? Has the MC turned so vile that even a post about a tv show starts a flame war? I hope not. And hawk, your language was really nasty. You don't need to belittle someone so badly to make your point. That said, I sure would shut up if a nice latin hunk slammed his dick down my throat. Talk about good medicine!

[guptasa1]

Awww - too bad. I was really enjoying that show. (Not just because of him, but I thought the series was a pretty good drama - I liked it.) I think maybe its major problem was it's hard to sell "Tarzan" as a serious drama. I was skeptical before watching the first episode, but I actually quite liked the modernization and artistic license - I think it ended up being pretty good. Oh well - WB's still got Everwood and Smallville to tide me over - be sorry to see this one go though.

[Guest fukamarine]

>Hey YFSC (YOU FUCKING SHITHEADED CUNT) Well, maybe you should

>go back to your own meds, which would consist of a fat hot

>cock shoved down your throat? At least that would gag you

>enough to prevent you from posting from the brain rather than

>the shit brains located in your asshole.

 

>WELL HOW FUCKING PATHETIC OF YOU AND THEM!!! If all you can

>do is ogle without action it speaks volumes about what a bunch

>of useless fucks you and your ilk are.

 

>Your post, just like the useless piece of crap you are,

>centered all around the "almighty cock". Denying otherwise,

>only confirms what a dick head you are.

 

I'm SO GLAD that VaHawk is a member of this site and that his posts are always couched in such sweet romantic language. Kinda makes me all kind of weak & weepy.

 

Truly the mark of a well educated, intelligent, considerate and witty man. Do you think he might, just possibly, come from a rabidly dysfunctional family?

 

fukamarine

[Guest showme43]

YUMMMMMMMMMY!!!!!!!!:9

[Guest Love Bubble Butt]

There's nothing wrong with watching a T.V. show or movie because there is someone on it you find attractive. Why do you think so many shows put attractive people on it? Why do you think there's such a high percentage of actors on daytime soaps who are hot? The casts' appearances don't reflect the average public.

 

Chastising people for watching a show for reasons other than or in addition to good acting and writing is such phony elitist bull shit. Get over yourselves.

 

Anyone see the movie "Fluffer"? I thought the movie was rather dull. But I've seen it about three times because the guy who played Mikey is FUCKING HOT, HOT, HOT!!! }(

[Guest YFSC]

Hack, you’d better go get a refill of that prescription *now*!

Don’t wait for the shipment from Canada to arrive.

 

>Well, maybe you should go back to your own meds, which would consist

>of a fat hot cock shoved down your throat? At least that would gag

>you enough to prevent you from posting from the brain

 

And BTW thank you for agreeing that I am posting from the brain (unlike what you seem to be doing). :+ But why do you want to stop me from doing that?

 

Well, there you go again. Your post simply *proves* everything that I said above, in more ways than I could have imagined. I said "distort, misrepresent, invent and/or misinterpret," also "twisting facts to suit your purpose," "loud, persistent and repeated attack" and "repeatedly assert your contrived misinformation." And I referred to it as an attempt at making use of the Big Lie technique. That is exactly what you did before and what you have now done again. Let's go to the cybertape.

 

Your response surely is a "loud, persistent and repeated attack." Rather impolite and off the wall, too, as other posters have already noted.

 

First, the actual facts. There was a previous thread (or threads) a while ago with a flurry of excitement over Travis Fimmel and the upcoming Tarzan program, complete with several pictures of TF. Contrary to your assertion that I was obsessing over him, I did not post *anything* in that thread, and I have *never* posted anything about TF except for this news item about the cancellation of Tarzan. Because I remembered that several people were excited over the prospect of the show, when I came across the article about cancellation I decided to post it *for purposes of information* for those that might be interested. The picture (a G-rated picture, no cock, no ass) was with the article so I posted that too. I did not post the article with *any* kind of expression of either sadness or joy at the cancellation, simply with the neutral informational note that it was "bad news for Travis Fimmel fans" and the post does not even say if I am one of them. But despite that, you jump to the attack. Are you against the posting of news and information here?

 

>And this raving lunacy of fantasizing over some one's body,

>cock and looks as a validation of support of artistic

>performance negates what I opined in what way? Seems, it only

>reenforces your pathetic obsession with cock and ass to merit

>a supposedly artistic performance.

 

Well, Hack, here you are, persistently repeating your assertion of false and contrived misinformation, having distorted, misrepresented, invented and/or misinterpreted what is in the original post that you were railing against, and having twisted the facts to suit your purpose. QED.

 

You continue to make and repeat the false assertions that my post in some way was fantasizing over Travis Fimmel and using his looks to validate his artistic performance, *neither* of which is true. That's *nowhere* in any of my posts, either in this thread or anywhere else. You made it up. Invented it. I *defy* you to find any such reference or suggestion by me. But the facts don't seem to bother you and you go on repeating your assertion as if it were true and based on fact. (See, that's the Big Lie technique.)

 

What you "opined" was also *irrelevant* to the posting, since nobody, not me or anyone else, was "fantasizing over some one's body, cock and looks as a validation of support of artistic performance" in this thread or anywhere else, and there was no suggestion of it to call forth the posting of your ridiculous rant. And, other than the original innocuous news item itself, the comments in the thread before your rant weren't even about Travis Fimmel. BON changed the topic to someone else right from the first response. Nevertheless, you didn't hesitate to spring to the attack. Apparently you can’t read, or if you can read, you don’t understand what you are reading.

 

And since I have *never* expressed an opinion about Travis Fimmel or about anyone's "cock and ass" or other physical attributes on this site, either connected with "artistic performance" or not, your assertion about an "obsession" on my part cannot be anything more than an totally unfounded invention on your part. But that apparently doesn't bother you, either. You just feel free to make up whatever you please.

 

From your accusatory and denigrating comments about "obsession with cock and ass" it sounds like you, on the other hand, are apparently not interested in "cock and ass," so I wonder what you are doing on this site.

 

There was certainly no mention either in this thread or in the previous Travis Fimmel thread that his looks in any way were a "validation of support of artistic performance." Sure, some people were excited by his looks. But how do you jump from that to claiming that their appreciation of his body and looks has anything to do with an evaluation of his merit as an actor? It was not suggested in any way, and there was no mention at all of anything remotely like "artistic performance." *You* introduced the aspect of artistic merit, out of nowhere. Those that were excited over TF clearly were excited by his looks, and were not commenting on his "artistic performance." *You* invented the connection between admiring his looks and "validating artistic performance." You made it up with no foundation at all. And then you continue to rant and rave and berate people for what you invented and accuse them of, but they did not do.

 

You also persistently refuse to answer questions or respond to the point. I asked you before where you got the connection between talking about Travis Fimmel and "artistic merit" in order to make your original ranting post. You still haven't cleared up that mystery.

 

>WELL HOW FUCKING PATHETIC OF YOU AND THEM!!! If all you can

>do is ogle without action it speaks volumes about what a bunch

>of useless fucks you and your ilk are.

 

See, there you go again. How do you make the jump from "ogle" to "ogle without action"? Why do you think that "ogle" has to mean "ogle and nothing else"? Of course, you *don't* think that. But you are again just distorting, misrepresenting, inventing and/or misinterpreting, and twisting facts to suit your purpose.

 

But also, in this case, I suspect that nobody on this board, or at least precious few, can truthfully claim to have been engaged in "action" with the subject of the thread. After all, he doesn't advertise as an escort. So does that mean that everybody here has to pretend that he doesn't exist, just because they can't do more than look?

 

And what about when *you* visit this site and *look at* (heavens to Betsy! or, dare I say it, "ogle"?) the pictures? Or do you just read the words and avert your eyes from the photos? What about the times when you have posted how hott! some guy was, without ever having done more than see his picture? (And please don't deny that you did that and make me go hunting through the archives to show you and everyone else here the evidence yet again.)

 

>Your post, just like the useless piece of crap you are,

>centered all around the "almighty cock".

 

See, Hack, that's another outright lie. That goes even beyond distortion. All I did was repost a G-rated news item from a mainstream, non-sexually-oriented source about the cancellation of a TV program for the information of those who might be interested. You apparently were not interested. That's fine. You don't have to be. But why do you have to explode and spew out your venom over that, and to twist, distort and misrepresent the original post in order to do it? (Well, I guess I know why. You ran out of your meds. That's why I suggested in the beginning that you refill the prescription now, without waiting for the Canadian shipment.)

 

My only words in the post were "bad news for Travis Fimmel fans." The article talks only about TV ratings, numbers of viewers and numbers of episodes. How is that a "post ... centered all around the 'almighty cock'", other than in your twisted distortion of it?

 

With every word you prove the correctness of what I said, over and over.

If you open a little wider, you can probably get both feet in at the same time. :+

[Guest YFSC]

Wow, axe, you too in the same thread proving my point for me!

 

>>You both repeatedly assert your contrived

>>misinformation, apparently hoping that the Big Lie technique

>>will work: if you say it often enough people will start to

>>believe it.

>

>So you believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, and that

>Ethan isn't Oren? Big Lie, no. Gullible fool, yes.

 

"Distort, misrepresent, invent and/or misinterpret the facts and what was said, twisting them to suit your purpose" is what I said before, and here you are doing it on cue.

 

Note that in what I said in the part that you quoted includes the words "apparently hoping that the Big Lie technique will work." That does *not* say that I believe it, or even that anyone else does, and it does *not* say that it *will* work, although you are trying to twist the meaning to make what I said sound like that, and then trying to ridicule your distorted and misrepresented version of my words. (And in so doing you are proving the point about distortion and misrepresentation of what was said.) It says that you keep trying to pull the wool over people's eyes, apparently hoping that it will work.

 

But it won't work, and it is easy enough to expose the fraud, distortion and misrepresentation that you try to perpetrate. :+

[VaHawk]

To quote Smokey the Bear "Only you can prevent forest fires!".

 

Do you fire me up? Absolutely, based on our many unpleasant exchanges in the past, and all based upon my criticism of the unsubstantiated posts of recommendations about BG by posters who had never met him, many moons ago in his propagandizing marketing campaign. Ever since then, no matter what I post, you have used my legitimate posts on that thread to attack everything I have ever posted.

 

When you start out a reply to a post with an offensive twist on someones handle (ala Hack, Hackster with me) then you are only out to put the poster on the defensive, as that is the whole point of starting it out that way. Then you get your rocks off, when the other person (such as myself) flames, as that was your intent. You light a match and toss it into the dry tinder, walking away self-satisfied and all smirky because it flamed and makes the other poster (in this case me) come across as a raving lunatic.

 

But, just like fukamarine who's posts I do not read anymore, I will not read your's anymore either. So go light your match and toss it on some other poster's hot spot. For once, I am going to go with deej on this issue and not respond to you anymore as you are just a troll trying to getoff watching other's flame because you light the match.