LawTalkers - Fashion Board 1-08-04 through 02-03-04

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
The most recent spin I heard was that he was supposed to rip the leather off, revealing the lace lingerie underneath, and somehow :eyeroll: the lace ended up being ripped off too.

So she was just wearing the funky nipple "ring" for hell of it? I'm not buying it.

evenodds

02-02-2004 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Not having seen the Great Jackson Nipple Baring, I wonder whether you all think it was planned or not. From the photo I saw in the paper this a.m., she was Not Amused, but then maybe she's just a gifted thesbian. Why wear a bodice with detachable breastplates if you do not mean to detach them? This question has plagued me all morning, and if I can find an answer to anywhere, that place is here. When Justin Timberlake said in his statement that he regretted the "wardrobe malfunction," was he regretting that both both breasts weren't aired? Were the lights supposed to go off like that, or can we imagine that someone in the control booth said, "Oh my God -- kill the power!"

Check this out from lowculture comparing the Jackson baring to the same thing at Live Aid in 1985: http://www.lowculture.com/archives/000491.html

Hank Chinaski

02-02-2004 05:06 PM

I have never understood this

Quote:

Originally posted by ThrashersFan
Nope, not me. I couldn't get close to the ice that night (I think security has a photo of me). Alas, I must keep my sorry ass back in the second ring of seats -- but they front row and very decently situated. I drank quite a bit.

Isn't front row pretty limited for hockey, unless the action is directly in front of you. looking down the ice through the glass distorts everything the one time I was there.

Replaced_Texan

02-02-2004 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
So she was just wearing the funky nipple "ring" for hell of it? I'm not buying it.

Oh, that is because she is modest and there were several costume changes and she didn't want to be totally unclothed during the costume changes.

Aloha Mr. Learned Hand

02-02-2004 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
...maybe she's just a gifted thesbian.

Does that mean she's good at acting like she likes women?

greatwhitenorthchick

02-02-2004 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Oh, that is because she is modest and there were several costume changes and she didn't want to be totally unclothed during the costume changes.

Didn't she pose on the cover of rolling stone with just someone's hands on her boobies? That doesn't sound too modest.

(I'm not whiffing)

I hate half time shows, so I was not watching when the nipple incident happened. I'm pissed CBS didn't show us the streaker - fun-spoilers.

ThrashersFan

02-02-2004 05:10 PM

I have never understood this

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Isn't front row pretty limited for hockey, unless the action is directly in front of you. looking down the ice through the glass distorts everything the one time I was there.

Uh, yeah, it is certainly the glass that distorts everything, not the booze, thank you --

Actually, you are correct (ding, ding, ding). This is why I went with first row of second ring of seats -- I get a great view of the ice...all of it. When I use the company seats, they are lower down and toward a corner and the glass fucks me up (not the glass of beer, the board glass, well, that too) and I also lose the far corner -- pisses me off but you can't complain about free (yes you can, and I intend to right now).

robustpuppy

02-02-2004 05:11 PM

Quote:

I'm trying to understand how Justin Timberlake groping any woman's breast, let alone Janet Jackson's, would be considered entertainment. And while I'm not surprised he did it clumsily, I'm a bit surprised he had enough force in him even to tear the fabric.

NotFromHere

02-02-2004 05:13 PM

Jackson if you're nasty

Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc
I think the lighting was supposed to go at that point regardless; it was just too fast. The camera switch, however, was almost certainly in response, just not quite fast enough, given the 7 second delay. In fact, the seven second delay is one of the reasons why I suspect the whole thing was planned. They could have switched out to the full field shot earlier had they wanted to. Eirther they meant to show it, or someone in the booth wasn't paying enough attention.

Switching off lighting at the end is for dramatic effect. I'm sure that was planned and rehearsed to death.
So if it truly was an "accident" then why did the networks say that MTV would never produce another halftime show?

ThrashersFan

02-02-2004 05:13 PM

Damnit

So I was lazy last night and finally watched Survivor and you guys don't even mention it. Sheesh. I guess I am a couple of years behind on the trends.

Anyway, I don't get what the big deal is...I will try again Thursday but absent a big spark you will have dropped me once more from the reality TV train.

Maybe they should invite Janet's nipple to be on the show as some sort of god for the tribes to pray to? Does anyone ever die on these shows? And if so, would they show it?

ABBAKiss

02-02-2004 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by robustpuppy
I'm trying to understand how Justin Timberlake groping any woman's breast, let alone Janet Jackson's, would be considered entertainment. And while I'm not surprised he did it clumsily, I'm a bit surprised he had enough force in him even to tear the fabric.

Why?

NotFromHere

02-02-2004 05:18 PM

Damnit

Quote:

Originally posted by ThrashersFan
So I was lazy last night and finally watched Survivor and you guys don't even mention it. Sheesh. I guess I am a couple of years behind on the trends.

Anyway, I don't get what the big deal is...I will try again Thursday but absent a big spark you will have dropped me once more from the reality TV train.

Maybe they should invite Janet's nipple to be on the show as some sort of god for the tribes to pray to? Does anyone ever die on these shows? And if so, would they show it?

First of all, who needs to mention anything that has been HYPED TO DEATH. Did you not see the 10 million commercials?

Second, it would help for this one if you actually knew the cast of characters and their history with one another. There are some true bitches and assholes on this one.

No one dies, they have medics and stuff nearby. But one guy got burned pretty badly - if you're lucky, they'll show the replay.

Replaced_Texan

02-02-2004 05:21 PM

Jackson if you're nasty

Quote:

Originally posted by NotFromHere
Switching off lighting at the end is for dramatic effect. I'm sure that was planned and rehearsed to death.
So if it truly was an "accident" then why did the networks say that MTV would never produce another halftime show?

The network didn't say that MTV would never produce another halftime show. The NFL said MTV that would never produce another halftime show.

NotFromHere

02-02-2004 05:21 PM

Quote:

Slightly entertaining when you remember that he dated Janet briefly after the Brittney break-up. Him running around patting her ass, and her letting him knowing that there was at least a little bit of history (and age difference).

Did you just call me Coltrane?

02-02-2004 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ABBAKiss
Why?

B/c Justin makes

http://www.thesimpsons.com/bios/imag...ople_burns.gif

look like

http://www.dusko.net/heman/pictures/002.jpg

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:05 PM.

Page 314 of 334