CELEBRITY SIGHTING
Mike Tyson visits Sydney, Australia.
(Thanks to VictoriaE77)
« Previous | Main | Next »
Mike Tyson visits Sydney, Australia.
(Thanks to VictoriaE77)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
I am suddenly not hungry for dinner.
Posted by: Melody | July 18, 2005 at 01:51 PM
My guess is that the attacker was not of the opinion that the movie was too violent.
Posted by: Moe | July 18, 2005 at 01:58 PM
So anybody know where Russell Crowe was when this happened?
Posted by: philintexas | July 18, 2005 at 02:11 PM
Assailant’s opinion: movie was awesome.
Victim’s opinion: movie was okay.
You know when somebody asks you if you’ve ever seen a certain movie and when the answer is ‘no’ they take personal offense? Well this is like that on PCP.
*And congrats on the link, Victoria!*
Posted by: M.C. | July 18, 2005 at 02:18 PM
That's disgusting! I can't believe someone would refer to Sin City as a new movie, ew! You should warn people about something so grossly inaccurate.
Posted by: bilge | July 18, 2005 at 02:37 PM
First guy: What a great movie!
Second guy: Are you kidding! That movie stank! All it was was violence, violence, violence. No plot at all.
First guy: Whaddaya mean, no plot? The violence was the plot, you moron!
Second guy: You knuckle-dragging neanderthal. Is that all you go to movies for, is violence? I bet you watch auto racing just for the accidents!
First guy: Watch your mouth, buddy, or I'll really tell you what I think of you.
Second guy: I don't care about your opinion of me. It's no skin off my nose.
First guy: Oh, yeah!?!
Second guy: Hey! What are you...OUCH!!
Posted by: Aunt Nancy | July 18, 2005 at 03:09 PM
I really couldn't enjoy the article. I was distracted - is it Bat-hurst or Bath-urst?
Posted by: Zaphod | July 18, 2005 at 03:19 PM
Zaphod, given the context, let's go with Bat-thirst.
Posted by: M.C. | July 18, 2005 at 03:23 PM
Hey - I cant quite figure out this one... a true physical fight about the quality of a movie.... So may things to fight over - but to the point of nose sugery.... ahhhhhhh the pain it must have been. plus groseeee the germs and the blood. You can get too many things from people's blood - think about that before you chew someones face off... I saw the Mike Tyson fight when he bit off an ear again....... yuk -
Posted by: AquaDuckie.com | July 18, 2005 at 03:31 PM
I hear Ebert gave it two thumbs down.
And then got them bitten off.
*****
Zaphod; I was thinking the same thing.
Posted by: slyeyes | July 18, 2005 at 03:42 PM
Woo-hoo!
My life's ambition has been fulfilled.
I finally got a link posted!
*Thank you, M.C.*
I actually liked the movie. For some reason, it tickled my sense of humor, and I spent much of the time in the theater trying to muffle my giggles. The best part was when I gasped, and then said, quite loudly, "Oh my god! It's FRODO!"
Posted by: VictoriaE77 | July 18, 2005 at 05:00 PM
A new twist on the old "I got your nose" game.
Posted by: caprice | July 18, 2005 at 07:09 PM
A new twist on the old "I got your nose" game.
Posted by: caprice | July 18, 2005 at 07:13 PM
It's Bath-hurst. With 'Bath' pronounced in an American accent (i.e. not 'Barth' like Aussies would normally say). So it's like saying Bat with a lisp. A strange kind of lisp that affects your 't's...
Posted by: Jess | July 18, 2005 at 08:48 PM
Yeah... I remeber that time that Gene Siskel bit off Roger Ebert's nose....
Posted by: alanboss | July 18, 2005 at 11:45 PM
If these two are so heavily influenced by movies why not take them to a documentary about Mother Theresa, then they would go out and do some good.
Posted by: Martinishark | July 19, 2005 at 03:13 AM
but did he bite off the nose, to spite the face?
Posted by: crossgirl | July 19, 2005 at 04:35 AM
totally off thread, but ...
@ 7:29 a.m. on July 19, Jake Patrick (Grandson #6) made his initial appearance in our lives ...
8#5oz. -- 21 1/4" long
Mom and Dad doing fine ...
Even Grandpa U.O is pretty excited ...
tnx4 listening ...
Posted by: U.O | July 19, 2005 at 05:34 AM
... um ... that was 7:29 a.m. CDT, just so there's no confusion with the blog clock ...
... and then, of course, with another grandson, there's the whole penis thing ...
Posted by: U.O | July 19, 2005 at 05:37 AM
Congratulations!
Posted by: VictoriaE77 | July 19, 2005 at 05:42 AM
haaaaa, gotcher nose!! congrats UO...
Nose Bandits wbagnfarb
Posted by: queensbee | July 19, 2005 at 06:05 AM
Congratulations, Grandpa U.O.!
BTW, what do U.O.?
Posted by: Aunt Nancy | July 19, 2005 at 06:33 AM
Congratulations, U.O !
Now we can answer those telephone calls for the sighting of an apparent U.F.O. ... it was really U.O floating on a cloud.
As Mr. MOTW liked to tease about our second child, "He was so perfect that the nurses gathered 'round in a state of awe and the doctor exclaimed that he would never deliver another baby, because he had delivered the Perfect Baby of all time and any other delivery would be a let down. After getting cleaned up, the baby sat up and began a discourse on surgical techniques ..." (can you tell he was proud?)
Posted by: MOTW | July 19, 2005 at 07:13 AM
Aunt Nancy (& them others, if any newbies care to hear the story) -
U.O is the shortest version of my blog handle I can type (tho memory in my mac keeps all versions available, I prefer this one)
U.O is short for U.O. -- which someone said "looked like a wink, except for the extra nose" ... when speaking of these ( :-} ) thingies we do ... I forget the name of them ... so, I dropped the second dot, to make it look more like a face, winking ... humorously, one may only hope ... after all, it's s'posed to be fun, right?
U.O. is short for Uncle Omar ... a combination of ingredients, not unlike a doctor's prescription ... NO! Wrong Commercial!
A combo of various things from my past, college nickname, columnist handle (once), and the fact that I'm older-than-average, which (sometimes) lets me get away with being cranky, curmudgeonly and cantankerous ... not to mention cute (often, too much cute) and cuddly (HAH! Like that's ever gonna happen!) ...
It just started out that way when I began here, and it's stayed with me ...
that's my story, and I'm sticking to it ...
Posted by: U.O | July 19, 2005 at 12:37 PM
oh hey U.O!
congrats on the newbie!
so...have you sent him his first baseball/football yet?
picture to follow? (a'course i mean the baby!)
Posted by: Cyn | July 19, 2005 at 01:45 PM
Cyn -
Nah, I don't hafta ... his other grandpa will prolly beat me to that gift, and besides which, his dad works in a sporting goods store ... I'll think of something more essential, like his first car, firearm, TV clicker or internal combustion engine ...
Posted by: U.O | July 19, 2005 at 02:07 PM
... as far as a photo ... if I don't get one before this weekend, I'll try to send one later ... x-cept -- I dunno how to link a photo ... when it's not already on a website ... which I don't have ...
... last time I had that problem I begged C-bol into posting it (the 7-gallon toilet T-shirt) but I won't do that for something as mundane as a grandson ... HAR! ...
seriously, if someone can gimme a primer course in how to link a photo THAT'S NOT ON A WEBSITE, I'll give it a shot ...
otherwise, Dave (not not Barry) might get one in the e-mail ... however that'd be setting a dangerous precedent, posting a photo of a baby ... one without any newsworthiness ... yet ...
Posted by: U.O | July 19, 2005 at 02:11 PM
Aunt Nancy --
I misread your original question ... MY BAD!
I was just so excited about little Jake ... that's my story ... weak, but that's all I got ...
(The explanation still stands, but doesn't answer your question.)
To answer it: Just about everything.
Posted by: U.O | July 19, 2005 at 02:17 PM
U.O. --- me nothing. :D However, I owe a big apology for corny Iowa remarks.
*ducks to avoid incoming cobs*
BTW - you're allowed to be excited about little Jake. Have fun spoiling him rotten.
Posted by: Aunt Nancy | July 19, 2005 at 02:28 PM
A.N. -
... um ... did I mention that big brother Wyatt was already showing signs of jealousy by the time Jake was barely four hours old?
Oh, it'll be fun spoiling him, and when it gets too cranky, I'll take Wyatt and even things out by spoiling him even more ...
Ah ... the joys of grandparenting ... (if only I can catch up with them ...)
Posted by: U.O | July 19, 2005 at 04:10 PM
Congratulations, Grandad Uncle Omar! Though I wasn't quite sure what, "And then, of course, with another grandson there's the whole penis thing," meant, but I always think it best if they *are* born with the whole penis thing, or none at all. Uncommitted anatomical structures tend to lead to confusion.
Posted by: Maud | July 19, 2005 at 09:38 PM
Maud -
"and then there's the whole penis thing" is a tagline that sorta lurks in the background here in these parts ... every so often, someone gets a chance to use it -- often with some hilarity resulting, for at least a few of the other bloglits ...
I dismemeber who/which blogster coined the phrase ... seems like it was C-bol, but I could be wrong about that ...
NEway, this was my chance to work it into the conversational posting, and I tooken it ...
Posted by: U.O | July 20, 2005 at 04:22 AM
Strange ... my prior post registered as a new number on the tally counter, but the actual comment seems to be lurking in limbo somewhere ...
so ... again ...
Maud -
"There's the whole penis thing ..." is a tagline that sorta waits for an opportunity for someone to bring it back to another thread ... I think it was C-bol who coined it, but I'm not sure ... this was my chance to use it (again), and I tooken the oppornockety ... (which tunes but once -- per thread)
Posted by: U.O | July 20, 2005 at 04:59 AM
Ah HA!
Told ya ...
Posted by: U.O | July 20, 2005 at 05:02 AM