Lost letter reveals details of Ryan O’Neal’s ‘wart-hog’ sex with Mick Jagger’s ex-wife

[thickornotatall]

http://pagesix.com/2015/09/05/lost-letter-reveals-details-of-ryan-oneals-wild-sex-with-mick-jaggers-ex-wife/?_ga=1.44860836.1660145970.1440343779

 

[+ purplekow]

Ah those crazy heterosexuals. I usually bring a nice bottle of wine or a nice box of chocolates as a hostess gift, Mr. O'Neal seems to have preferred something a bit more personal. I guess Ms. Jagger preferred to get Satisfaction.

[+ Gar1eth]

Gosh Ryan O'Neal was handsome. I would have had an affair with him. But let it be noted that it would have been my animal tallywacker thrusting him up against the sideboard.

 

Gman

[AdamSmith]

Far off point, but: perpetually astounding, the ways Kubrick's genius expressed. Maybe never more so than plunking lumpen Ryan down in the middle of 'Barry Lyndon' and getting him to carry the thing along. How did he (Stanley) do things like that?

[+ purplekow]

Well it was not a great movie, so he needed a bit more genius or a better actor. IMHO:

[+ Gar1eth]

Far off point, but: perpetually astounding, the ways Kubrick's genius expressed. Maybe never more so than plunking lumpen Ryan down in the middle of 'Barry Lyndon' and getting him to carry the thing along. How did he (Stanley) do things like that?

 

Well it was not a great movie, so he needed a bit more genius or a better actor. IMHO:

 

Please bite y'all's collective tongues. How could you hope to get someone better than this hunk?

 

 

 

Gman

[TruHart1]

Far off point, but: perpetually astounding, the ways Kubrick's genius expressed. Maybe never more so than plunking lumpen Ryan down in the middle of 'Barry Lyndon' and getting him to carry the thing along. How did he (Stanley) do things like that?

Even "Barry Lyndon", which was much too static, verbose, and had no real drive to it's major story line, was a gorgeous but boring work of art thanks to Kubrick's way of lighting it (using only natural light) and setting up each shot so it looked more like a fine painting than a movie scene! Ryan, as an actor(?), fit right in to the lack of forward drive in that particular script, looking gorgeous himself in period costume but moving woodenly exactly as directed by Mr. Kubrick!

http://blog.ricecracker.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Picture-18.jpg

 

All in all, a gorgeously shot but boring (and sometimes tiring) long, long film!:(

 

For a much more exciting and sexy film, check out "Tom Jones", a rollicking film from British director Tony Richardson from 12 years earlier with a very young and very hot Albert Finney as the title character:

http://cdn5.movieclips.com/mgm/t/tom-jones-1963/0548377_26684_MC_Tx304.jpg

:)

 

TruHart1

[+ Gar1eth]

 

For a much more exciting and sexy film, check out "Tom Jones", a rollicking film from British director Tony Richardson from 12 years earlier with a very young and very hot Albert Finney as the title character:

http://cdn5.movieclips.com/mgm/t/tom-jones-1963/0548377_26684_MC_Tx304.jpg

:)

 

TruHart1

 

I never realized how much Albert looked like Mark-Paul Gosselaar.

 

 

Talk about wanting to lick someone!!

 

Gman

[BabyBoomer]

I never realized how much Albert looked like Mark-Paul Gosselaar.

 

 

Talk about wanting to lick someone!!

 

Gman

 

Back in the day, I fantasized about Slater fuckin' Zack.

 

~ Boomer ~

[bostonman]

Back in the day, I fantasized about Slater fuckin' Zack.

 

The other way around would have been hot too.

[AdamSmith]

See, I think K brought Thackeray's second-rate novel to life just exactly right. To be sure, I am a Kubrick whore. Nonetheless. Tom Jones was fun but will not last down the ages I think, whereas Barry will.

 

 

Btw, the dance scene at the end of that clip -- Kubrick made them perform it forty-three takes so that they wouldn't look like actors doing a dance they had just learned, but like people who had been doing that dance all their lives. I think he used the 42nd or so take.

[AdamSmith]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjOSdrS7-7U

[+ Gar1eth]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjOSdrS7-7U

 

I was only 14 when it came out. And from looking at this montage, I'm betting it didn't stay at my local cinema very long. I'm not sure how well it would have been received in the flyover country.

 

But it looks interesting. The scenes are almost like "animated" tableaux if I can be allowed that oxymoron.

 

Gman

[TruHart1]

I was only 14 when it came out. And from looking at this montage, I'm betting it didn't stay at my local cinema very long. I'm not sure how well it would have been received in the flyover country.

 

But it looks interesting. The scenes are almost like "animated" tableaux if I can be allowed that oxymoron.

 

Gman

 

Exactly Gman. Cinematic art at it's finest but boring in sheer length and static or slow in too many sections. Kubrick was a great cinematic genius but for that very reason he always had complete control of what he decided would go onscreen. I just don't believe he always made the best editing decisions, especially with this movie. If you've got the time, though, Barry Lyndon is a beautifully overindulgent film to watch.

 

TruHart1

[Lookin]

I saw Barry Lyndon when it first came out and was entertained, but not bowled over. Then, owing to a laudatory post by AdamSmith, I checked it out of the library last year.

 

It really is a visual feast, especially knowing how Kubrick did it.

 

http://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/3xmKw9OSbUrg7GCyhvpMuAXLjRh.jpg

 

http://i2.wp.com/www.actualizable.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/1920_barry-lyndon-2-actualizable.jpg

 

http://athenacinema.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/BL3.jpg

 

http://i4.ytimg.com/vi/mx2o4jEjjIs/maxresdefault.jpg

[AdamSmith]

As I said, I am a Kubrick whore. He is God to me, from having remade my mind at age 9 with '2001.'

[+ Gar1eth]

As I said, I am a Kubrick whore. He is God to me, from having remade my mind at age 9 with '2001.'

 

I was younger than you, barely, when it came out. But I never liked it.

 

Gman

[Lookin]

I am a Kubrick whore. He is God to me, from having remade my mind at age 9 with '2001.'

 

A blessing, no doubt, but not without its downside. http://www.boytoy.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif

 

[AdamSmith]

I was younger than you, barely, when it came out. But I never liked it.

 

Yes, I liked at the same time as disliked it intensely on first viewing. Then bought Clarke's novel etc. But 'liking' is a trivial category. It seared my mind open, taught me how to think. As did subsequent encounters in the academic sphere with Reynolds Price, James Applewhite, Harold Bloom, Paul de Man, Eco (Derrida not so much ) etc.

 

Liking was less interesting than falling into the intellectual argument & love affair & so on.

[+ Gar1eth]

Yes, I liked at the same time as disliked it intensely on first viewing.

 

I'm not sure I understood. For clarification did you mean you both liked and didn't like it on 1st viewing?

 

It seared my mind open, taught me how to think. As did subsequent encounters in the academic sphere with Reynolds Price, James Applewhite, Harold Bloom, Paul de Man, Eco (Derrida not so much ) etc.

 

I guess I'm just a philistine. Of course I know of Mr. Clarke, and I read science fiction (more fantasy these days). But his type of scifi was never to my taste. So I didn't read him. Of the others you mention, I'm only familiar with Umberto-and only because of his popular mystery book. But I never read it. While I've read books with witty events or dialog that I really enjoy. I don't think my mind has particularly ever been set afire by someone's writings. And I should note that I'm a big reader. I have also been known to frequently tear up and become choked up at a moving passage in a play or movie-occasionally an event in a book.

 

Gman

[Guy Fawkes]

I just watched two wart hogs mate on youtube. I wasn't impressed.

[AdamSmith]

[+ purplekow]

Prophetic computers killing people because the humans cannot be trusted to serve its needs. 2101 perhaps

[+ Gar1eth]

Prophetic computers killing people because the humans cannot be trusted to serve its needs. 2101 perhaps

 

Colossus: The Forbin Project

Theatrical release poster

Directed by Joseph Sargent

Produced by Stanley Chase

Screenplay by James Bridges

Based on the novel Colossus

by Dennis Feltham Jones

Starring

• Eric Braeden
  
• Susan Clark
  
• Gordon Pinsent
  
• William Schallert
  

Music by Michel Colombier

Cinematography Gene Polito

Edited by Folmar Blangsted

Distributed by Universal Pictures

Release dates

• April 8, 1970 (United States)
  

Running time

100 minutes

Country United States

Language English

Colossus: The Forbin Project (aka The Forbin Project) is a 1970 American science fiction thrillerfilm from Universal Pictures, produced by Stanley Chase, directed by Joseph Sargent, and starring Eric Braeden, Susan Clark, Gordon Pinsent, and William Schallert.

 

The film is based upon the 1966 science fiction novel Colossus, by Dennis Feltham Jones (as D. F. Jones), about a massive American defense computer, named Colossus, becoming sentient after being activated and deciding to assume control of the world and all human affairs for the good of mankind.[1]

 

 

Gman

[+ purplekow]

Colossus: The Forbin Project

Theatrical release poster

Directed by Joseph Sargent

Produced by Stanley Chase

Screenplay by James Bridges

Based on the novel Colossus

by Dennis Feltham Jones

Starring

• Eric Braeden
  
• Susan Clark
  
• Gordon Pinsent
  
• William Schallert
  

Music by Michel Colombier

Cinematography Gene Polito

Edited by Folmar Blangsted

Distributed by Universal Pictures

Release dates

• April 8, 1970 (United States)
  

Running time

100 minutes

Country United States

Language English

Colossus: The Forbin Project (aka The Forbin Project) is a 1970 American science fiction thrillerfilm from Universal Pictures, produced by Stanley Chase, directed by Joseph Sargent, and starring Eric Braeden, Susan Clark, Gordon Pinsent, and William Schallert.

 

The film is based upon the 1966 science fiction novel Colossus, by Dennis Feltham Jones (as D. F. Jones), about a massive American defense computer, named Colossus, becoming sentient after being activated and deciding to assume control of the world and all human affairs for the good of mankind.[1]

 

 

Gman

Person of Interest, a current TV show on BS and a favorite of mine, also has that theme. I was sorry they killed off Taraji Henson's character but she landed on her feet as Cookie on Empire.