batfan08
Super Freak
I can't really see Singer being capable of "forcing himself" on anyone. Particularly if they're almost an adult. Do you even lift, bro?
Last edited:
I can't really see Singer being capable of "forcing himself" on anyone. Particularly if they're almost an adult. Do you even lift, bro?
Ah, I read a different one. Eh, I don't know. The whole thing just sounds awfully punctual to me. Guy has a multi-million dollar movie coming out; is part of a lawsuit for molesting a 17-year old. I'll wait for the evidence before I grab my torch and pitchfork.
Well, Singers already had money(previous X-Men, Superman, Usual Suspects) and this movie hasn't made any yet.
I don't know what to believe except that, like I said, this isn't the first time he's been accused of this kinda thing. I dunno if he's guilty or not but I can tell you, either way, it's probably going to hurt DOFP. This is like the only kinda bad publicity.
Travolta is just happy its not him this time.
seems like hollywood i pretty forgiving about this kind of thing.
Look at Bill Cosby and woody allen lately and how many people defended them.... Cosby was accused of targeting, grooming, then drugging and raping young women as early as the 1970s but seems like people dont really have a problem with that.
i also remember what Corey feldman said about Hollywood's approval of child abuse and how people went against him.
Oh, undoubtedly, but it just sounds kind of fishy to me. Some articles were reporting that this is the most FOX has sunk into a movie since Avatar, and I'm sure no small part of that was paying Singer's salary. It just seems awfully convenient that the marketing and hype is ramping up, and, suddenly, someone comes out of the woodwork with a lawsuit against the director. Maybe it's just the society we live in, but I've seen so many of these suits where it's just somebody looking to grab a piece of the pie that it's made me quite cynical about the whole thing, and, frankly, I don't know what to believe anymore, as far as Hollywood goes.
Yep, I just think 16 years is an awfully long time to wait before deciding that "justice needs to be served."
Depends on the victim/s.
Look at the Sandusky case.
Depends on the victim/s.
Look at the Sandusky case.
I've always hated the way she looked in the movies. I know they were not going to make her look the same as the comic but to me she never felt like Rogue. even from the first movie i had problems with her.
she felt too young and too immature, too childish. this whole character was just a mess, she really was a waste in the movies.
I agree with you guys. This was one of those issues I take with comic movies, where they fundamentally change the nature of a character. The Jubilee comparison to the movie version is appropriate.I agree. For me I don't mind her not flying around and with superman strength like in the comics but at least I wish they gave her a stronger personality, brave and a bit seductive. In the movie, she was very weak, sensitive and always worry about her feelings.
I thought Iceman "Bobby" will be the same but at least he developed his power in X3 the last stand.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If the guy's a victim, then, absolutely, it's horrible, but I'm just pointing out the obvious. Lucrative movie is marketed; director of lucrative movie is sued for something that allegedly happened almost two decades ago; just looking at it from that angle, if the guy's for real, he's got a real uphill battle to go through, if he wants to lend credence to his case.