>are you going to take much longer anon?
>tfw they really are as big as anons say
I think pictures like this are actually a secret plot by "the man" to sell more copies of Photoshop
Neighbors 2 could be funny.
5th Wave looks like forgettable YA bullshit.
There's that movie where the book or script says she'll be naked which I'm hopeful for but seriously doubt it'll happen.
Other than that couldn't care less
I'm always excited about any of her movies tbh.
Movie 43 being somewhat of an exception.
Some Oscar bait where she's playing someone with autism or something. Sorry can't remember the name.
I usually detest these kind of movies that are supposed to MEEEEAN SOMETHING!!! But really just come off melodramatic and forgettable. Like who gives a fuck about 12 Years A Slave now?
But if it means the actress does some debut nudity like Kirsten Wiig in Welcome To Me then I'm down for it.
>who cares about slave movies
the uniformed and politicians ie generally assholes
Like people just haven't heard about Americas history of slaves?
So that's what these films are about now? Continued lessons in white guilt?
Less than 1% of Americans owned slaves at the peak of slavery in the United States.
There are more white slaves owned by black slavers in Africa right now than there ever was blacks owned by whites. But no movies about that.
The Irish slaves that were here at the same time as Africans? Probably never heard of them have you?
But we need more Oscar bait like 12 Years a Slave (which was fan fiction) told over and over again to educate people on how they should feel guilty about something they had nothing to do with.
just another part of this Zionist game we know as life
>Less than 1% of Americans owned slaves at the peak of slavery in the United States.
This is a completely misleading statistic. You have to look at it in context and break it down by region (e.g. seperate the North, where official slavery ownership was 0% nearly everywhere, from the South and look at families and not individuals) If we act like proper historians and not slavery apologists we can see that, e.g. Mississippi had just about 50% ownership, and nearly 10% of households in the US owned slaves (again, bear in mind this includes the Northern states.)
What's your source on 1% anyway? According to the 1860 census it was 1.5%.
>But no movies about that.
So? Where are these movies being made? Why are you surprised Western and US filmmakers are making movies concering a huge part of US history?
>Probably never heard of them have you?
You've probably never considered the difference between chattel slavery and indentured servitude, have you? Or else you have, but your agenda forces you to sweep it under the rug.
This isn't the beta white male general. Go start a petition you triggered faggots.
where is your source on 50% mississippi ownership? that sounds fucking outlandish since a slave costed about the same as 100 acres of land at the time. and how can you say that 10% of all households owned slaves in one sentace and then claime 1.5% did in the next?
face it bernie cuck, only the richest motherfuckers in america owned slaves. but yea, all those boys signed up to die because of slavery. that is what the civil war was about, right?
>where is your source on 50% mississippi ownership?
The 1860 census.
>how can you say that 10% of all households owned slaves in one sentace and then claime 1.5% did in the next?
Nearly 10% of households, 1.5% of individuals, learn to read. You can't seriously be misled by your own type of misleading statistics.
I completely ignored the last sentence, which is a real juicy one.
>that is what the civil war was about
Yes, absolutely. The Civil War was primarily about slavery. Try reading some of those secession delcarations sometimes.
Ctrl + F "slavery"
But we keep getting told it was about slavery. Clearly it must be true!
Remember that part in the Simpsons where Apu is going for US citizenship and for his final all important question he's asked what was the civil war over?He starts giving off this complex answer about how there were many factors at play and the guy interrupts him and says "just say slavery".
That wasn't a joke about how simplistic people's view of the civil war was at all!!!! Apu really was getting the answer wrong and it was all about slavery!
Shut up about slavery you dumb niggers nobody cares. Or at least add pictures to your posts
>self proclaimed feminist
>being triggered by others being triggered
Yay for some OC.
kill yourself leddit cancer
this tbh fam
>afraid to imagine
thats not the case m80
your skill needs more marks of profession and less of recreation, see>>2505946
>head too large
>head too large
isnt as bad, but definitely still suffers from laziness. the body/physique is pretty good proportionately(to Chloe's), but the face isnt good enough(slighty too large, makes body look odd).
>afraid to imagine
You're at the core of the problem, but from the wrong angle. A fake is shitty attempt to combine a body type that is 99% of the cases wrong with also a face that looks completely out of situation (looking in the wrong way, the mood of the picture doesn't match the experession, etc). It's off putting and crude.
Please, leave this shit to imagination, it does a much better job.
Advertising yourself is illegal here. But whatever at least he posts pictures
didn't know there were cops on the case, duly noted
you get arrested in bongistan for making a silly joke that someone reports as racist & offensive. literally, that happened. they should not be the metric for any standard of rational judgement
neil phillips from staffordshire was literally arrested for hate speech for talking about muslims online you butthurt britbong faggot
b-but anon women dont back up their arguments with facts
thats not a proper noun, other anon
or just something rubbish...
"that is some cheapo handbag".
neither that nor your picture make any sense in reference to wat i said. help, police, im being rused
Lol and now Chlomo are the ones deleting candid photos.
Seriously that black bikini set still up? I stopped visiting a while ago as I was saddened to see a great image board go down the drain but I wouldn't be surprised if they took that whole set off the site by now.
They didn't ban candid pics, just personal photos. Any photos taken by paparazzi or fans in public, even upskirts and the like, are still allowed. The problem was that Chloë had publicly said (many times) that there were pictures obtained without her permission and that she would prefer those not be spread around anymore than they already were and for her fans to respect her privacy.
Ok I admit I got stuff wrong but that's the thing. Respecting her privacy would surely include not spreading around those bikini pictures wouldn't it?
I mean I saw the shots where you could see how many paparazzi were crowded around her to the point it seems like she gave up on swimming then covered up and came in and just sat on the beach. To me it was a pretty fucked up invasion of the poor girl's private space.
I guess it's a slippery slope fallacy maybe but I always think that when a forum or image board say "we're no longer allowing X" they're never far away from saying "we're no longer allowing Y either".
Awww, the poor baby . . .
She must have cried herself to sleep that night on her piles of fucking money.
Don't fucking feel sorry for people who could buy every house in your neighborhood, dude.
If getting her picture took hurt her damn feelings that much, she could give all her money away and go back to her old life, no questions asked, anytime she wanted.
She's precisely as famous as she pays her publicists to make her. Remember that.
Dude you don't get it.
I normally don't give a fuck about celebs and the perils of fame. Didn't shed a tear for Jennifer Lawence, she's rich, people looking at your leaked nudes is the price of fame. Especially don't care now she thinks that $20 million a movie is underpaid the greedy bitch.
But if your face is on a 50 foot poster in Times Square then if you go to a beach, gotta expect someone's taking some photos of you.
But the paparazzi crowd that was around Moretz that day was INSANE. I think it was in some slopehead country and those little gooks were out for blood.
My point was anyway that I'm sure she would consider THAT to be an invasion of her privacy as much as she would people getting her "personal" pictures off her Instagram account or wherever the fuck the ones Chlomo are deleting came from.
Was she the fuckin' Gerber baby, ya retard???
OLD LIFE, her life before fame, I don't care how fucking short-lived it was, numbnutz.
The day she gets tired of fame, she can throw it all away, all she has to do is stop doing everything her publicist tells her to do including hang out where she KNOWS there's going to be photographers.
How do you think the fucking papparazi knew she was going to be there? Because they had several days' notice. Who tipped 'em off? Chloe's fucking publicist, that's who.
Time to grow up, retards. Learn how the world works.
Actually I'm pretty sure it was during a film festival or something.
The kind that celebrities on mass go to in order to promote their films and paparazzi flock to the local beaches to try to catch any of them who show up to try to have a break.
You think Natalie Portman's publicist told her to go to a beach and take her top off so the paparazzi could spread photos of her tits worldwide?
That's because if you speak wisdom to a fool, he calls you foolish.
The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing you that you're smart enough to think for yourself.
You need to find someone like me in your real life to attach yourself to, or you're gonna be adrift in this world and get into loads of trouble trying to do your own thinking in this big, scary world. You just don't understand the place.
Nice. That from Neighbors 2?
I know we're not getting any nudity from her in that film the last biggish actress I remember getting naked in a comedy was Jessica pare in hot tub Time Machine.
But damn hopefully we'll her running around in a bra and panties or something.
>dem food bowls
Holy shit source on pic fam?
Jealousy is an ugly trait bby. I bet you have inner values
Can't wait until we can see the bikini in actual movie screencaps or stills for better quality.
I'm not sure who's worse, footfags that like smelly feet or footfags that like dirty feet.
That sounds heavenly, but to say they smell like cheese is a turn off, as it is for all normal people.
>mfw I've been subtly enlargening her hands on random pics and posting them for years and almost no ones noticed
I'm into feet just aesthetically. Like its a part of a woman you don't see as often. Plus my first sexual experience was a foot job from a girl in church.
But the actual smell? Like stinking feet? That shits nasty. It's like being a fan of asses is cool but if you only like them if she doesn't wipe properly. It's fucking rank.
Not thrilled about the tattoo. But I suppose it gives the make up artists work.
I understand what you're saying but 16, 18, 28 or 58. Don't matter to me if she's going to push retarded political views about shit she has no clue about then it speaks ill of her as a person. It makes her sound like a limousine liberal celebrity.
Thing with Chloe is that she ALWAYS struck me as an intelligent person. Even in the commentary track for the poker house which she did when she was like 10 the director is talking about how grown up and professional she was.
Even at 16 she made Jim Carey look like a fucking idiot for his views on film violence.
So idk I wouldn't hold her age against her. Especially with the guidance that she's been getting from her family her whole life I think she's smart enough to say something stupid.
It's possible for someone to be intelligent and still hold stupid opinions. Just because she is mature and professional when it comes to her job, doesn't mean she is that way with everything. Some of the worlds smartest people have said some dumb shit.
You can't be smart and believe in the wage gap, as the meaning of "average" is 4th-grade level math.
Also, she's spewing outright hate, not just limousine liberal shit. She's gone full-SJW, and you don't ever come back from that.
I'm just saying it's more difficult to get an objective view on subjects when the 10 million people surrounding you all are militant liberals.
>Even at 16 she made Jim Carey look like a fucking idiot for his views on film violence.
That's exactly my thoughts. The world is full of smart idiots.
Yeah I understand. Just makes me wonder if she ever has just stopped to think "why exactly am I supporting Hillary and do I have any reasons OTHER than cuz she's got a vag?".
As for the Jim Carey thing I'll admit I may have been overstating it but it was after Jim came out criticizing the violence in KA2 (he still took the money mind you, and didn't have a problem till Sandy Hook made movie violence the issue of the week again). In some interview Chloe was asked about it and her response was basically "it's just a movie". It was simple but it was funny that a 16 year old girl had a firmer grasp of reality vs fiction* than a 51 year old man.
Maybe Jim Carey just said that stuff to get out of needing to go around promoting the film. But it's something I don't think he'll ever live down.
*that is of course until she starts talking about the wage gap lol
Thread is kill
No he didn't that's just it. His character was actually pretty cool. Actually even though they combined 2 characters from the comic for the film he was probably the only thing that they actually adapted well for the movie (except his death which was as pussified as the rest of the film).
His whole thing was that yeah they're gonna beat the villains to a pulp but they're not going to kill them or even swear. If they're going to be the good guys they should behave like it.
It was important because in the comic at least the villains have turned shit up to 11. They're killing children and gang rape a girl just cuz they think she's Kick Ass's girlfriend (she isn't).
But the whole point of the story is Kick-Ass being the bigger man and actually becoming a hero without becoming a murderous vigilante like Hit-Girl.
Jim Carey woulda needed to be high to miss that. That's why some ppl think he was faking it just to get out of going on the promotional tour with the film.
If you mean by this, he never fired a gun, then what an irrelevant distinction.
He used it as a prop to threaten people if nothing else. And yes, that does count as "using" a gun in the context of Carrey's outspoken anti-gun rhetoric.
You'd think Jim Carrey would have learned about the loving Liberal agenda when his kid was brain damaged by a vaccine. You know what they say: "a shot in the arm, a shot in the head, either way you wind up dead."