Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×

PollyDarton

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    443

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

Posts posted by PollyDarton

  2. Posted

    On 9/21/2019 at 6:14 PM, CaptainAmazing said:

    The other thing about it that I’m surprised no one brought up: There’s a real chance that it was part of a payment to a scammer. They frequently want to be paid in gift cards, as cash and electronic payments are more traceable. If that’s the case, then either a scammer didn’t get paid/fully paid, or lost some of their ill-gotten gains. No big deal

    That's a great point. I have heard of people doing this. They ask for huge amounts in gift cards to elderly people on the phone or internet. It's pretty awful.
    I bet someone did this and then ditched one of the cards where the caller found it.

    • Like 4

  3. Posted

    Funny story. I wrote that post 13 feet in the air. I was doing a photoshoot that needed a birds-eye-view and so I had to climb this rickety scaffolding and once I was up there I was NOT coming down until the shoot was over. So while I had time to kill I wrote the Aluoette post.
    I guess it's not that funny and barely a story... but you guys get the jist.

    d89zGZB.jpg

    • Like 9

  5. Posted

    5 hours ago, The_Triple_Lindy said:

    Any court in the country would've convicted Julia in a heartbeat. 

    And I laughed out loud when the cops holding Julia said that the evidence against her was all circumstantial. Forget the sexting and panties in the car ... her abusive ex lying dead on her kitchen floor, stabbed by a knife that had Julia's prints all over it? That's "circumstantial?" 

    And then to have the cops walk in to see another person dead by stabbing while Julia's holding the knife? Sorry, Julia ... see you at the parole hearing in 10 years. 

     

    57 minutes ago, Blast Hardcheese said:

    That scene in the police station where the detective is acting all dead-to-rights is absolutely infuriating. It's 2017 and you can trace "Julia's" Facebook account access back to Tessa's IP address? Fuck you, movie!

    What I love about these 2 quotes is that it shows how incompetent the cops are in both directions of the investigation. 

    We really should talk about the interrogation scenes. I'm not going to rent it again, but there is line where the cops are like "You expect us to believe... [explains precisely what happens]" and I'm screaming "YES!"

    ALSO- the cop says "Sorry, I had to show him the file" when Julia asks where her fiance went... Is that standard detective work!?

    • Like 6

  6. Posted

    1 minute ago, Cameron H. said:

    I’m 100% on Julia’s side, but it really was goddamned irresponsible of her to lose track of child in a public area because she had to  answer a call from an “unknown” number. You don’t *have* to answer every phone call - especially coming from an unknown number or a number you don’t recognize. That call from the people informing you your car’s warranty is about to expire really isn’t worth a child’s life.

    No matter what else Tessa did, that fuck up was still on Julia.

    That's another great moral to take away from this story: Never - EVER - answer calls from blocked, unknown, or phone numbers you don't know. *

    If it is someone who legitimately is trying to talk to you they will leave a message.

    (*Of course with the exceptions of the times when you know you will be imminently receiving a phone call from a number you won't know or answering your phone is a big part of your job.)

    That being said, Julia's technology behavior reminds me a lot of my parent's.  

    • Like 5

  7. Posted

    12 hours ago, DrGuts1003 said:

    Also, are we to believe that no one else came across Julia’s Facebook account.  I’m constantly getting asked if I want to be friends with people who I barely have any connection to and yet her fake account seemingly goes unnoticed by everyone else.  Surely Whitney Cummings or another one of her ChapterPad friends had to have gotten a notification that she was now on Facebook.

    This would likely only be if Tessa had used Julia's email to set up her Facebook account, which she couldn't have because she would need to have continual access to the email to use the account. Using her actual email would have been risky because Julia could have gotten Facebook notifications on her email destroying Tessa's plan needlessly. Once she no longer had the phone she would no longer have her email, so I'm assuming she set up a doofer gmail account or something. If she had used Julia's email, then yes... she would have immediately popped up in "People you may know" to anyone who was in her contacts. Without that for Facebook to rely on, it would have only had where she was logging in from to use to suggest her as a friend. Since she moved to southern CA from northern CA she would have been out of her friend's region... HOWEVER... she possibly would have popped up in her fiance's suggestions, busting the whole con pretty early on... or anyone else living in their little community.
    On the other hand, Tessa would have been smart to not tell Facebook where "Julia" was living to avoid this.  

    My father is an attorney and he had a man set up a fake Facebook account with his picture (that he got off of the law office's website) so that he could sell people fake government bonds. The only reason we found out was because someone who had been contacted by "my dad" to be sold the fake bonds actually called my father personally on the phone to find out if it was legit... he looked him up on their website and called directly like a smart person. We had the fake profile shut down that day, but the guy popped up and did it several more times.

    The moral of the story is: everyone should search for themselves on FB sporadically.

    • Like 6

  8. Posted

    So the whole debate about whether Tessa killed herself over vanity or to do better for her daughter reminded me of a REALLY stupid debate I was following on the internet.

    On The Office (US), Jan (Michael Scott's ex-boss and ex-girlfriend) has a baby ostensibly from a sperm donor. Michael is very excited to have some role in the baby's life, and throws Jan a baby shower at the office. Meanwhile Holly, the new HR rep has joined the office. She and Michael hit it off immediately. At the end of the episode as Jan has packed her baby shower gifts and new baby into her car she turns to Michael and says "Don't date Holly." (Jan has witnessed a spark between them at some point in the episode.)
    Office fans are divided on what has happened here. Some people read this moment as Jan being her usual ugly self and doing her best to manipulate Michael into doing what she wants... afterall, one of the last things she says to him before this is in reference to Michael starting a college fund for her daughter. Other people read this as Jan suddenly having a magical change of heart and telling Michael "Don't date Holly" as an unselfish act, since she knows Michael will do the exact opposite of anything people tell him to do... therefore Jan is pushing Michael to be with Holly. Which is what he does immediately.

    My problem with both that scenario and Tessa suddenly having a magical change of heart is that there is absolutely nothing in the history of their behaviors to support this sudden act of... maturity? Jan spends the episode dominating the shit out of Michael and Tessa spends the whole movie gaslighting Julia to get her man back. Why the change of heart right at that moment?
    One of the very first thing Tessa says is "Now you're perfect... just like Mommy." Her vanity is an enormous part of her character.
    Not only that though, but I assumed that when Tessa commits harikari it was 100% to inflict one last manipulation on Julia, since Julia's hand have been all over the knife. How could any coroner prove Julie didn't drive that knife herself? Tessa wasn't thinking about her daughter... she was trying to get Julia until the bitter end.

    If it were truly an unselfish act, why not clearly commit suicide?

    • Like 5

  9. Posted

    2 hours ago, Cameron H. said:

    I’m not quite done with the movie, and therefore haven’t listened to the episode yet, but while on an intellectual/technical level I wouldn’t call it a “good” movie, I think it does work on a gut/emotional level. The main reason I turned it off last night was I was getting so upset and anxious by what was happening that I didn’t want that to be the last thing I was feeling before bed.

    Dont get me wrong, there is plenty of things not right about it, but as a piece of Art (Oh boy, where am I going with this?) meant to evoke certain feelings, I think it works pretty well.

    My biggest problem with the movie in respect to the podcast was that it lacks the “ridiculous” that we’ve come to know and love from movies like this on HDTGM. Most of the time with a glorified Lifetime movie there will be something just plain absurd... like with the mothers dating the sons in the Naomi Watts movie.

    I honestly thought while watching it that the absurd was found in the Ivanka Trump doppelgänger performance of Katherine Heigl, but then it went unmentioned. 

    • Like 7

  10. Posted

    I’d like you talk for a second about Tessa and her mother singing Alouette. 

    A jaunty French traditional tune that a lot of people recognize from French class or pop culture in general... but when translated is a fairly violent song. 

    The English translation:

    Lovely Skylark, lovely little Skylark

    lovely skylark, I’ll pluck your feathers off. 

    Each verse then describes each part of the bird that they will pluck the feathers from. 

    A telling song for 2 women who pick and pluck at each other (and Lilly) metaphorically... and then perhaps literally when Tessa angrily cuts Lilly’s hair. 

    Ultimately a smart little Easter egg for a pretty dumb movie.

     

    • Like 8

  11. Posted

    Steve Mnuchin’s role is particularly interesting since it was CLEAR to me as someone who work in costumes and wardrobe that every aspect of  Katherine Heigl’s costuming, makeup, and hair is supposed to look like Ivanka Trump. Aj9nQLm.jpg

    There is no way this wasn’t intentional. 

    • Like 11
    • huh? 1

  12. Posted

    3 hours ago, LTL said:

    Unforgettable is so awful and Katherine Heigl character is so pathetic. ...and I find it grotesque one woman would prey another woman to an abusive man as a plot point. This is the first time I'm actually offended by a movie.

    Y'all... I did not like this movie.
    I cannot wait to hear what JDR has to say.

    • Like 3

  14. Posted

    On 9/1/2019 at 7:09 PM, Cam Bert said:

    So I was confused by the character of the albino stalker. I mean if you're going to have a whole movie set outside at the beach making a character an albino seems like an odd choice. On top of that to play him as if he has some sort of disability is another weird choice. I was curious what else that actor, Scott Prendergast, had done because he looked kinda familiar. So I pulled up his IMDB and guess what? There is a The Hottie and The Nottie extended universe! Turns out years before The Hottie and The Nottie Scott Prendergast made a short filmed call Anna is Being Stalked. That short film is up on YouTube and here it is:

    He's playing the exact same character! Everything is the same. The name on the shirt, the albinism, the weird ticks, everything! This short came out years before The Hottie and The Nottie so more likely The Hottie and The Nottie is part of the Anna is Being Stalked cinematic universe. I still want to know why this guy is playing the same part. Did the director know him and threw him in as joke? Did he audition because of his past experience playing a stalker? Blake Harris get on it! 

    I worked with an actor a few years ago who had albinism. He was in school to become an actor and really hated that roles for people with albinism in films were basically reduced to evil or magical. Sometimes both. It kind of bummed me out when we saw the albino stalker.

    It's truly a very underrepresented group. I'm was trying to think of any tv/film character with Albinism that isn't one of those stereotypes... and all I could recognize was Pete White from The Venture Bros.

    ac47579f30f27077651b59691ddd13d0.jpg

     

    • Like 4

  15. Posted

    14 minutes ago, gigi-tastic said:

    giphy.gif

    How could I forget this?!  They got in because a door was unlocked and she didn't notice they were robbing her until they took about $2 million in clothes, cash, jewellery, bags and other things. I know they supposedly snorted her cocaine as well. I was fascinated by this story.

    Speaking of Alexis Neiers she's now married and she and her husband run a rehab. 

    That moment has become as famous as any of it. Netflix used to have the entirety of "Pretty Wild" if anyone wants to see it... it's TRASH.

    But, no the door wasn't unlocked, they found a key she left under the mat for her housekeeper.

     

    • Like 3

  16. Posted

    Omission:
    In reference to Arno's file on "The Every Move of the Hottie", as Jason pointed out, he also references a website that tracks Cristobel's life. Besides the abysmal quality of this shit film, I have to wonder how Paris Hilton feels about this movie and that exact moment because of this:

    In late 2008 (after the release of The Hottie & The Nottie), a group of Los Angeles teens (affectionately known as The Bling Ring) robbed Paris Hilton's multi-million dollar Beverly Hills mansion. The group was notably obsessed with famous people and chose Paris Hilton as their first robbery because they figured she was dumb. They got into Hilton's mansion by finding a key under the welcome mat and then had a duplicate made and robbed her home several more times. At first the group only took small mementos: some shoes or fashion jewelry, but by the end were tearing apart Hilton's belongings and stealing her personal nude photos. It took Hilton several months to even realize she had been robbed.

    And how did these crafty genius's figure out when would be a good time to rob Paris Hilton? That's right... you guessed it, by tracking her every move through her website (and possibly her MySpace since it was 2008 after all.) They easily found out when she would be out of town, found out her address through one of those "maps to the stars" type of website, and seized the opportunity.

    They also robbed a bunch of other celebs, but Paris seemed to be their biggest obsession.

    The true sadness is that this movie in conjunction with the Bling Ring robbery could very much be considered the end of Paris Hilton's career as an entertainment brand name.

    Sofia Coppola made a movie about it based off a very well researched book by Nancy Jo Sales.

     

    • Like 6

  19. Posted

    They were

    22 minutes ago, IMAHUGEHDTGMFAN said:

    1. Nobody mentioned how Jason could totally be cast as Hobbs Brother (or one of the many siblings at least)￟ because Cliff Curtis was sporting a beard ala Jason the only thing missing for a 100% doppelganger status was the braids... It was all I could think about when I saw the movie in theaters remember Jason has one foot in the door  because he played the TickTock Man in Jonh Wick 3 Parabellum and it shares the same direction we Hobbs and Shaw.maxresdefault.jpg

    This was going to be my next comment. I thought the same thing.

    • Like 1

  21. Posted

    @taylorannephoto @Elektra Boogaloo @tomspanks - The KVD liner is just so very annoyingly good. It's like... it's greatness is perfectly disproportionate to her garbage-person-ness. Keep me updated if anyone finds a viable competitor.

    They sort of touched on this in the podcast but Vanessa Kirby's wardrobe (and H&S for that matter) really uses some Bugs Bunny rules. She's in the brown wig when she first meets Hobbs, but her blonde beach waves are perfect in the next scene.
    Then she has the short brown wig for the airport, but it's gone again once they are on the plane.

    Just so everyone knows... This

    composite.jpg

    is a proper wig prep. Without it, your actual hair will likely be very visibly or your wig will be enormous and obvious.

    I might be able to give a pass to the huge brown bob at the airport, but the dark brown updo would require some version of above to be believable.

     

    • Like 7

  22. Posted

    On 8/16/2019 at 5:28 AM, Baron said:

    I am 99.6% sure that the Voice, the bad guys disembodied voice that we hear throughout the movie, is Ryan Reynolds.  It may not be the same character as he plays in the rest of the movie, but listen to his voice especially in the last scene as he teases the next movie.  

    I thought the exact same thing the moment I heard the rhythm of the voice.

    • Like 1

  23. Posted

    15 minutes ago, CaseyChasem said:

    I guess everyone has their own interpretation of the "Teams" here. I'm not team fred because I liked the movie. oh no. I thought it was an ineffective mess. I'm team fred because Paul and Casey's explanations of the motivations of the characters didn't sit right with me.. I found myself agreeing WAY more with what jason and june were saying about everyone overall. I find Fred to be a chaotic good in the end, (regardless of real/imagined ID status) while still at the same time finding his character annoying and overdone. Just an aside- team fred seems willing to accept all the claims of insanity coming our way. team sanity not so willing to accept the burden of the horrible mom that paul and casey offered pretty consistent defenses of... 

     

    Fully Team Sanity. Fully Team mom is a monster.

  24. Posted

    3 hours ago, questionmarks said:

    Team Sanity seems insistent on taking imagination literally. Take the little girl at the end. Now, here is where Jason’s disclaimer about not defending every move the film makes comes into play. I have to take an interpretive leap to explain what’s going on with the little girl. The interpretation flows very naturally from the characters, but the movie could’ve helped us connect these dots. In any case, recall Mickey’s obsession with Phoebe Cates. He is so smitten with her, and with his memory of her effect on him as a child, that he sees her unstable behavior and finds it charming. He’s basically treating her as a would-be Manic Pixie Dream Girl. Only—this isn’t his movie. He encounters Fred’s return to her life and vividly remembers encountering him, albeit indirectly, in their childhood. Do you really think he’s not going to mention this figure, “Drop Dead Fred,” to his daughter when they’re playing? He’s not going to say, when she’s being mischievous, “You know, I just saw an old friend of mine who reminds me of you. She had a friend,” etc., etc., all while wistfully hoping he’ll get to wind up with Phoebe Cates? There is no need to imagine that this little girl has come upon the name “Drop Dead Fred” out of nowhere, or through the intervention of some mystical being. We have a very straightforward character arc to explain the connection: childhood Mickey’s crush on Phoebe Cates and excitement about Fred, and then adult Mickey’s resurgent affection for her and encounter with Fred’s return, and his close relationship with his own daughter who he says reminds him of Phoebe. 

    But see...  You have to build an entire event to happen off screen to explain away things that are implicitly shown in the movie.

    When the little girl talks about Drop Dead Fred, we as the audience SEE Drop Dead Fred. He is there abiding by the few rules the movie gave him, that the child he is attached to is the only one who can see him. That coupled with the information that the other IFs have moved on to new kids (those kids in the waiting room weren't all 30 years old) it is laid out plain and simple. Fred got a new kid because he exists.

    Yes, I am aware that imaginary friends don't actually exist, but in the universe of this movie they do. If those two scenes did not exist then I might be able to agree with you, but they do. We of Team Sanity did not conjure them up... the shitty shitty filmmakers put them in.

    • Like 1

  25. Posted

    1 hour ago, CaseyChasem said:

    I have to say- “Team Sanity” you guys are taking sides with a mom... who drags her adult child to a pediatrician, THE DOCTOR DOESNT EVEN SEE HER. The mom goes in and meets with him ALONE (she gets to spin whatever BS narrative she wants) and comes out with PILLS that the ADULT daughter doesn’t even know what THEy are WTF drugs are they? If not illegal that’s at the very least totally unethical right? She’s totally disconnected from her mental health recovery and her mother’s insecurities are fostering it. 

    Absolutely not. The mom is a monster. She says terrible things like "I don't think I love you as much as I used to."

    I am capable of saying she is a monster and also that I feel for her when Lizzie and Fred destroy the dining room. I'm not one who gives a shit about fine china and white carpets, but anyone who has to actually clean that mess has my sympathy.

    • Like 2
×