February 27, 2003
Just grand, Nagus
From Chris over at Interesting Times:
One Word from the subject himself: "inconceiveable" (Sic?)
"Never bet against a Sicilian when death is on the line."
He was hired to start a war. It's a prestigious line of work to be expert in.
Oh no, I didn't quite realize it at first but...WALLACE SHAWN?!?!?
Oh my god...why? WHY????
"Then make your choice."
"I will, and I choose - WHAT IN THE WORLD CAN THAT BE?"
"What? Where? I don't see anything."
"I could have sworn I saw something... no matter. Heh heh heh."
"What's so funny?"
"I'll tell you in a minute! First, we drink. Me from my glass, and you, from yours."
...
"You guessed wrong."
"You only think I guessed wrong, that's what so funny! I switched glasses when your back was turned! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders..."
Is that a real pic, or is it doctored? It looked doctored to me, but the quality was a bit poor.
I 'third' the notion that the picture is pretty phony-looking!!
Hooper
The pic is definitely doctored, because the lighting on his head is not the same as the lighting for the rest of the pic. That is why you are noticing that something is amiss, but can't tell WHY you know it looks fake.
Chris
>>The pic is definitely doctored, because the lighting on his head is not the same as the lighting for the rest of the pic.<<
Yes, that, and the lettering on the placard ( which appears to be held by the woman in front of Shawn! ) is just too perfect and pops off the picture the way that the sign next to it does not!
Hooper
"I'm just glad we're all clear on what we're protesting against! Now, you hold up the Anti-Vietnam War placard...yes yes thats it...and you...weren't you in "My Dinner With Andre"? In any case just scream like someone just canceled "T.J. Hooker" and you're really pissed..."
Thats right, its fun with protestors!
Col
Hooper,
Yes, the letting is obviously too perfect, but I thought that what people thought was fake was the entire picture, not just the sign. I initially considered the possibility that Wallace Shawn was protesting, and that they just replaced the sign's lettering for the joke. I thought everyone already realized that the sign was fake. Well, you know what they say about when you *assume* something. . . Thanks for clarifying that for anyone who didn't catch that.
Chris
You guys ROCK! I tried explaining this all to a co-worker who wondered why I was chuckling at the computer screen on break. It was lost on him however, because he never saw the "Princess Bride" and had no idea who the "Grand Nagus" was...
"Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?"
"Morons"
There doesn't seem to be much doubt in my mind that this is a faked picture. The writing on the sign looks to be typed directly on to the picture, his expression seems bizarre for the setting, and he doesn't even appear to be holding the sign himself from the position of the hand shown holding it.
Funny though.
One of my favorite film quotes of all time...though I think Jenghiz Khan might have something to say on the matter...
Of course it's doctored! It's a joke. And a funny one! :)
Wow. Follow the link to "Not Fit For Human Consumption" (which comes right back here, incidentally), and then follow the link up above by the picture. There's another link, showing that this is a third-generation post of this picture, and NFFHC is the fourth. This picture (which is hysterical, incidentally) has really made the rounds this week. Kickass.
Speaking as a high school speech team member, I've used the 'Battle of Wits' scene from The Princess Bride so many times in competitions it isn't funny. Unfortunatly, I've never won with it. Probably because it isn't depressing enough. *sigh*
Good grief, I acted too soon. Yep, it does seem to be doctored.
Oh well.
By the way, anyone else read William Goldman's book? I consider it better than the movie, which is saying something. A truly incredible work, with a phony author to boot (although the Princess Bride was entirely created by Goldman, in the book he claims that it is an abridgement of some "Florinese" masterpiece by the great S. Morganstern). The latest edition includes the first chapter of the "long lost sequel," entitled "Buttercup's Baby." Though the best part is the introduction to the sequel, where Goldman explains his difficulties in obtaining the rights to "Buttercup's Baby" and how Stephen King was in talks for the rights to the sequel.
Chris
You know, even if I don't agree with it, that's Q#@$%@# hysterical. Even if it's doctored.
Finally, a thread I disagree with that is neither personally insulting nor blabberingly ignorant.
Well done.