Typhoon20

Ron artest bought his own album lol

She uses some sort of special psychic skills.....I think it's called Google.

The celtics was never the same without him. One of the best ever to represent the game of basketball the way he did. The man, The legend, RIP coach.

http://userpages.umbc.edu/%7Esmyth1/movie/ Pics of the set

Peep this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KwAou9dJyw

It would have been better wıthout the will pictures lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTHUIDpzBAw

O boy, the last human on earth has a daughter, brilliant.

Anyone seen the trailer ? It got a 9.2 on imdb.com. It's getting a lot of media attention because of the kazachistan prime minister hehe his visit to bush was funny, they want this movie to be cancelled, but I doubt bush can do that, first amendment. I already love sacha bara cohen, Ali G, Borat or Bruno. He's one of the most brilliant comedian I've ever seen, he plays his character perfectly although his show may be too R rated for most of us it's nonetheless very funny, in a brilliant way. He makes fun of all the people and the american culture, it seems stupid to a lot of people but he's truly a genius. Here's the link to the theathrical trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq_fzdEk0r8

When I read ''Michael Jordan'' I instantly new it had to be max lol. I read that page, I thought I was going to read some objective and fair analyses where in fact the guy seemed like ''my way is the right way''.I find it biased, he calls people uneducated about the fact that rings don't determine how great a basketball player is and if people do they are uneducated or fanboys. That seems to me like he isn't open-minded at all, he tries to be though, to cover up his one-dimensional writing.He more then once stated that the only part where Jordan is no.1 is endorsements, commercials etc. I don't want to burst his bubbles, but this to me seems something a hater, closed-minded fanboy would write. He just should have said jordan sucks, no need to try to look objective where most of the time his writings are based on ignorance, and he makes it seem like it's quite intelligent. Jordan, the best or not. Who knows, everyone has his/her own opinion about it, I find it highly disturbing when people only think their way is the right way, as noted at the comments of that guy. In order to know who the best basketball player is, you'd have to play every player 1 on 1, since we don't have a time machine that seems a bit impossible. But, we can compare the different times of basketball and see the positive or negative aspects. In the early times basketball wasn't highly evolved, therefore it was going to be decised on physical ability mostly, so freak of natures wilt and russel had a huge advantage, I watched some games of wilt and it was insane, he could score so easily because of how poor the opponent defenders were. From what I saw he wasn't the evolved smart bball player, he was more a show-off type of person, not to forget with the countless amounts of woman he slept, gives an indication how much he loves attention. Fundamentals weren't that high back then, BBALL IQ was very low. It's like comparing the first car to todays car, with time you get faster, smarter and better. Russel was the more evolved player, he didn't try to show off, he did the little things that made them a team, his post-up game was strong, for me he was the first big man with a good Bball IQ, he had some great moves. Wilt had also a good Bball iq but not at russel's level, wilt tried to do it on his own, perhaps we could relate him to kobe.100 points or 81 doesn't matter, if you don't share it with your team, you won't become a champion, you might win single games. When basketball got evolved the more finesse players started to arise, bird was a great team-player, he had great fundamentals, he was in my eyes the 2nd coming of russell, strangely for the same team :) He wasn't that gifted physically but he had a very high BBALL iq for that era.Same as Magic, he was more physically gifted then bird and was also a great team player but his IQ was even higher, during the 80's basketball really was going upwards and these 2 people gave an emphasis on how to play the game the smart way, they were very talented and on top of that they were the more evolved players of the late 70 begin 80. Then the pistons started to rise during the mid late 80's ,not very talented as the likes of johnson or bird, but they played as a team with a very high physical ability with an emphasis on team defence. They played defence as one of the best, perhaps the best ever. who knows. Then a lot more superstarts started to rise up, the golden era of basketball reached it's peak in the 90's.With players like ewing, shaq, rodman, the whole pistons team, johnson, bird, drexler, barkley, starks,stockton, malone, hornacek,pippen, jordan and i'm still forgetting a lot of names, payton, reggie miller, divac and lots of more nba stars.kidd, hill. There was no heavy rules in the 80/90's.No 3 second violation, no hand-check fouls, no open lanes, it was defence at it's best, you couldn't drive inside the lane without getting beaten up, jordan got beaten up so many times against the pistons, knicks most of them weren't even called for a foul.In that era he dominated, even the worst teams had 1 or 2 stars on their team, Jordan had pippen, just as shaq had penny, malone had stockton, magic had worthy, divac, kobe had shaq, now has odom, which has the same stats as pippen last year.Tmac has ming. Jazz has kirilenko, okur boozer a lot more, magic has a future star howard + nelson. Every team in the NBA has approx. the same budget, some a bit more then the others but in general everyone has a fair chance. I kind of dislike the fact that whenever Jordan is mentioned the haters bring up, well he had a great team. Well since basketball is played 5 on 5 it's supposed to take a great team to win a championship in the first place. Everyone has a great team in the NBA, without Jordan the mighty bulls only made it to the playoffs.It's not a surprise that when Jordan came back with some time in the summer his full year was instant success. 3 more championships. Jordan's fault is that he should have trusted his teammates earlier, he started to trust them after 89, but if he had done that earlier who knows what might have happened, we might not be talking about the pistons that much. Most teams make the playoffs. A great team wins a championship but 1 great player above all guides them to the championship. In the 91-92-93 championships, finals,Jordan totally dominated, no other basketball player has dominated such a final like he did.It was crazy for words, putting up 40-50 points back to back, making the final second shots, not only scoring but also averaging 12 assists in the 91 finals vs. lakers, vs johnson, one of if not the best point guard.He single handedly scored 40+ and 60+ points against 1 of the best defensive teams ever, boston celtics in the playoffs.It wasn't toronto.There's a reason why players like bird, magic, dr.j, russel, jerry speak of him as the best there ever is.I think it has a lot of credibility when these opinions come from the players who have witnessed him 1 on 1.Most great teams make the nba finals, you can guide your team to the finals, your team can guide you to the finals, but in the end, responsibility lies on 1 person, he makes or breaks the team. It's unfair to say MJ had a great team, because they all have great teams. Malone had perhaps the better team, wth a great point guard, a terrific shooter in hornacek and one of the best PF's in malone. But in the end it rests on 1 player, not the team. It was Jordan who stole the ball from malone brilliantly, it was Jordan who took the ball, it was Jordan who finished off the game. Today the NBA is not going forward, the rules are killing the true spirit of basketball, they are making life a living hell for big man, every little touch is called for a foul, lane is wide open, no contact allowed, NO DEFENCE ANYMORE.Stern is trying to get more viewers, ratings, by making the game more offensive.Then kobe goes and scores 81 on toronto, wade goes to the free throw line in an NBA FINAL 25 times per game. When todays players score 30 points half of them are from FT's. This is unfair to the game, and perhaps unfair to the players. I would have loved to see todays players go for it the HARD WAY, just as in the 80/90's.But Stern is killing it, literally. In a time where it seemed as if Jordan's legacy was finally cemented and people would stop having the undying need to compare every superstar in the league to Jordan, I've found that it's almost exactly the opposite. While you'll never find a major publication going out of their way to proclaim Kobe or T-Mac greater than Jordan like SLAM once did with Grant and Penny, it seems as though the fans are more frantic than ever. As i've said time and time again, people get caught up in the nostalgia of the happenings surrounding us in the moment and tend to forget how great the past truly was in exchange for the refreshing and nostalgic moments of today and tomorrow. While I'll be the first to admit it's always great to suffice to the future and enjoy it for what it is, it's also an irrational decision-making process that fuels us to be neglecting toward what once was -- and in this case, still is. Todays generation consists mainly of a younger generation who never got to see the undeniable skill, finesse, pure athletecism, and accomplishments of Michael Jordan. I'm not talking about everything written on paper, like his 6 rings, 5 MVPS, 6 finals MVP's, or his insane stats and scoring accomplishments... I'm referring to the way he changed the game and did things every game that you might not ever see again. People forget that despite being the most dominant player of our modern era, he was also the most stylish and most exciting. Nowadays you'll see 2 or 3 amazing plays every couple games from our stars like Vince, Kobe, Mac, etc... But you never see it like you used to with Jordan, sometimes up to ten times a game. This guy, like Daily once said, was literally embarassing the leage he was that good... And with no coincidence at all involved, it just so happened to be the most competetive and hard faught era the league has seen to date. True, he never used an Allen Iverson cross or a Kobe Bryant around-one-leg dribble to ellude defenders... But then again, he never had to. What people seem to forget is that this guy was faster, smarter, and could jump higher than the previous mentioned players. Some people might remember in his 55 point return game against the Knicks, his dish off to Wennington for the win... But how many remember the fact that he almost broke Stark's ankles [one of the most skilled perimiter defenders of the 90's] in doing so? Or how many times he'd just completely erase the defense by coming in full speed (with a 4.3 second 40 yard dash time), and just stopping completely on a dime for a far-too-easy jump shot. Regarding the defensive changes, I ask everyone to pick up Lindy's 2007 NBA preview which is out now. The cover story is "The Death of Defense". In it, Rod Thorn goes into detail at how the NBA wanted to encourage wing scoring to bring up ratings - to help players be more like "MJ". The old rules were making strength and bruising defense take away from the skill of the wing players so taking away such rules (hand/body up on D) are supposed to encourage slashing and creativity. Tex Winter adds that the problem is it's too lopsided and results in too many touch FTs which is slowing the game down. Plus, rules inside to defend Big Men aren't changed so he thinks it's ridiculous to keep it hard for big men but easier for wing men. The shift is dramatic - with the huge % of shots going to wing players today. Well, we all know the main reason to make it easier for wing men to score is to replace what MJ used to do in any era. Tex goes on "All these guys can score 40 today but they need 15-20 fts to get there." Dumars adds (paraphrased), "The new rules make it hard to play different styles because you can't do anything on D. You can have different schemes but defenders can't do anything to an offensive player on the perimeter." A humble and unbiased professional, he laughs at guarding MJ today, "virtually impossible". Really, all this comes from MJ's causing the "Jordan Rules" which brought D. into the forefront (and which is why the NBA invented the 'Flagrant foul' - yes, there was no such thing as a flagrant during that time - they were just 'hard' fouls - no techs). MJ was good enough to keep his ppg regardless of what was thrown at him but scoring through the NBA plummeted due to the strong rules, young players, poor fundamentals etc. In 1989, the NBA added a rule to limit MJ even more; it was an anti-isolation rule nicknamed the "Michael Jordan Rule" which prevented players (well, him) from getting the ball with two teammates near the free throw line (MJ became the only guard to have a special rule to limit his domination (Mikan, Wilt and to a small degree Shaq also caused rule changes.) When MJ retired the first time, they took back the rule because of the ratings drop and went the OTHER way to support isolation to help AI and the like to score. When MJ came back, he also benefitted from the 'pro-iso' rules at ages 33-35 which showed barely a blip in his efficiency even though he was not as explosive as he once was. Now, it's way too much with the new 'no hands.' We all noticed how games were 15 minutes longer last year - back-to-back games on TV never started on time or you missed the first 7 minutes of the first quarter. All these trips to the FT line are the reason. That being, Kudos to guys like Parker and Wade for taking advantage of this situation by attacking the rim. Pick up Lindy's 2007 to read the whole piece. Also, the NBA was a little taller in the 80s (from 84-88 the average height was the tallest ever - the motley of great centers being obvious). However, the average weight is higher today and that is mainly due to weight training which didn't start until the late 80s. With rising strength, the bruiser D was even more killing so it's another reason why the NBA relaxed the rules to give skill more of a chance. One thing for sure is we will still see more changes because no one likes FTs every other play.

Well the movie can continue in NYC for a couple minutes then it'll just proceed to paris. I am hyped about Rush Hour, it's 1 of the funnier movies I've seen in a long time. Such a great couple, jackie and chris. Although Brett Ratner's X3 was as bad as you could have wished for, hopefully he'll make RH3 better then 2, even though 2 was also pretty good. Rush hour 1 was great, especially with Jackie saying What's up my nigga lol to the black owner in the bar, that was kinda funny, and 2 was even funnier with the chinese dude singing MJ's song, chris totally ripped that scene lol. I'm not a fan of brett ratner, because he totally destroyed X3, but to be honest he did a great job on RH 1 and 2. It's been said that Yao Ming is going to be casted too, he's going to fight chris tucker, a bruce lee vs. kareem abdul jabbar fight scene but this time the tall man is chinese instead of black and the fighter is black instead of chinese. I don't think that scene would work cause yao would eat chris alive lol. If the movie is good, and seeing the first 2, 1 was good 2 was even better, if this will be better then 2, I think it'll gross a huge amount of money, it may surpass the 600, it may do what Pirates did last summer. I think it'll rule box-office from day 1 till......

Gabrielle Union, O MY GOD lol, couldn't have been more worse of a choice. Add the director to that, and unfortunately you'll get a typical action movie. I hope those news are false, because I was looking forward to this movie.

I wish it was an official one like AJ mentioned, these are unofficial and are pictures you can find on the internet. I wish there was an official one with exclusive shots of will smith for a special calender, oh well.

And this brings up another problem... You must have a hard time watching a movie or reading a book more than once given the fact that you know how they will end. Yes. At least when it comes to new movies. In older movies there are other stuff to look at. Sure, there might be more than the ending in the movie, but it all seems very predictable, not just the ending... That is lame. You think people are watching movies because of the unpredictable x factor ? So how come the TITANIC was a blast to watch according to millions of viewers ? People watched the TITANIC more the 2nd time then they did the 1st time. Erin brokovich, John Q even movies like V for Vendetta, matrix, LOTR are bad movies ? It's going to suck because of their predictable factor ? I have watched Erin brokovich, John Q at least 10 times, and I still enjoyed it. I guess it all depends on the character and filosophy of another human being. When I go watch an action movie, I prepair to get entertained, I prepair myself to see some great action, When I go watch a comedy movie , I prepair to get a great laugh, I don't care how the movie is going to end. When I go watch a drama movie, such as john q, brokovich, pursuit of happyness, I don't go to see it because I know the ending ? I go and see it because these are movies with high meanings, philosophical standpoints, I try to learn something from the movie whilest I enjoy it, motivation is important. So saying a movie will suck sorely based on the predictability of a movie is a thing people would say with no enthusiasm and love for the cinema. You don't read a book based on the BEGIN (front) or END (back), you read it for what's between the begin and end.

I am having a hard time understanding how someone can come out of retirement when they have done more songs then beyonce.

Cocain is a helluva drug. But better late then never, hopefully she can stay clean and do what she does best, entertain, also hopefully her kid won't end up in the same direction as her mother, I feel for the kid.

That's disrespectfull to film his house and without permission putting it on the internet, if I was will I would speak to that fella and set him straight.

I like and prefer the 2nd one even more. The 2nd one just has a more ''auntie'' feeling to it then the 1st one.

Also if you know any links to topics discussing this movie, please share it with us, so we can contribute too.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Will Smith's action/comedy movies have always done well at the box-office, but with more serious roles like ALI and bagger vance he didn't do that well to be honest, so Pursuit of Happyness is in that sense a very important part of will smith's success. If somehow, that movie can be a success at the box-office, the audience will accept him and give him credit for future dramatic roles.

If FEM-INEM would fight will smith 1 on 1, not only would FEM-INEM lose the fight in 1,5 seconds, he also would lose his manhood, although some may think he never had any to begin with.

That was funny :rofl:

Easy, ratings, popularity, recognition, sales etc. Michael Jackson is at his lowest point musically. LL hasn't really been accepted by the general music audience, and his sales have been limited to other artists such as eminem, mariah, 50 etc. They think with 50 they can get that recognition they wanted for a long time, sales will go up and they can get their popularity back on track. It's sad to see the music industry being centered around sales, it used to be about quality of music and now it's just about sales. I'm just shocked at the general music audience favouring garbage music, they are killing the music industry.

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=15221 Depp Joining Smith in I Am Legend Source: BlackFilm.com June 30, 2006 BlackFilm.com reports that "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise star Johnny Depp will join Will Smith in Warner Bros.' I Am Legend, for director Francis Lawrence (Constantine): When Will Smith was cast as the lead in the long-awaited adapted film version of Richard Matheson's I AM LEGEND, it was probably the worst kept secret. After all, his name had been floating around the web for the longest time. Until certain outlets that folks feel are the bible of information put the word out to confirm our story, sources tell blackfilm.com that along with Smith, JOHNNY DEPP has been added to the cast. Depp may be playing Ben Cortman, who is Robert Neville's (Smith) neighbor in the film and the first to get infected, becoming the head vampire. In Richard Matheson's book, Neville is the last living man on Earth... but he is not alone. Every other man, woman, and child has become a vampire, and they are all hungry for Neville's blood. By day, he is the hunter, stalking the sleeping undead through the abandoned ruins of civilization. By night, he barricades himself in his home and prays for the dawn. The site says filming starts this September.

Wade better then Kobe, In regards to the fact that he could guide a team full of individual stars to a championship with shaq, zo and payton, whereas kobe couldn't do it with malone, shaq and payton. Back in your head you knew I was going to write something like this right :rofl: