This movie is really bad.

Lame political "discussion" consisting of shitposting. There, saved you a thread.

>>2835755
But I'm discussing the movie.

>Hogan even pulls his creative card to be the main event of some docu-film

>>2835766
They spend the entire time trashing him and making him look like an oppressor of free speech.

>>2835787
Yeah there's even a Michaels shoot on Hogan in there, just slipped in somehow.

Based no jobs all dimes Hogan working the mediaetty.

>>2835787
based Hogan working the media kikes

>>2835787
no they dont, 20 minutes in they reveal hogan was just a pawn and some gay sillicon valley bullionaire was pulling the strings to get gawker shut down.

>>2835787
Were they seriously trying to argue that Gawker were the good guys in that whole ordeal?

File: %@ACZ`1{0RG`[[YLL%[email protected] (89KB, 1011x592px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1011x592px

>>2835798
>>2835799
It's really blatant about it too. All of the Gawker guys are interviewed in these lovely open colorful rooms with gardens and bright light shining on them, but Hogan's legal team are interviewed in stuffy offices and the color grading is just pathetic. They try to desaturate anyone on Hogan's side.

File: 3L4C~_@IF4VF~ZTT46I[[email protected] (92KB, 1092x652px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1092x652px

>>2835808
See >>2835809 that's the founder of Gawker.

Pic related was Hogan's attorney.

>>2835802
A... higher power you say...

>>2835809
>>2835813
That's creationist-tier of manipulating the truth, holy shit

>>2835826
it's a valid discussion to have about freedom of speech vs right to privacy but yeah this documentary is garbage about it and make gawker look like some independent little guy newspaper that was out for truth no matter the cost instead of a tabloid dirt rag that would post click bait by the minute

File: trump_clinton_cnn.jpg (79KB, 780x438px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 780x438px

>>2835809
>>2835813
Reminds me of how the media tends to use scowling pics for politicians that they don't like, and smiling ones for the people they're trying to push.

pic related

>>2835749
>Plaster someone's private video all over the internet
>Hey, stop that
>No
>Fine, I'll sue
LITERALLY victim blaming.

>>2835749
Gawketty never drew a dime, so glad Based Hulkster destroyed those faggots

>>2835813
Holy shit, it's a wax mannequin of Woody Harrelson.

File: _{THX@EGBFYOS3FH97`~QZD.jpg (85KB, 526x780px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 526x780px

>>2835839
It's a common photography trick and it's easy as fuck to get away with as a photographer too. Placing the flashes closer to the subject casts harder shadows and makes you look like a super villain. Farther away and it makes you look soft and approachable. There's also a lot of other tricks to shooting to do shit like this, i.e. they shot Hogan's side up very close so you could see the imperfections and harsh details in their skin as well as shining the light directly in their face to make their eyes look empty/soulless and using the color grading to make them feel colder (note the blues in hogan's side and the warmer oranges and yellows and greens in the gawker side)

File: 108628_subitem_full.jpg (133KB, 846x478px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 846x478px

>>2835865
Hulk should fight back by making his own documentary and using this as the cover. I'll bet you he can even get WWE Films to distribute.

>>2835865
Now that I take a second look at the pic of Trump and Clinton. I do see much more pronounced shadows on his face versus hers.

I wonder how many other subtle tricks they use that I've never noticed?

>>2835836
But do they realise the irony of them attacking Hulk for using the "n" word then attacking him for not wanting his dick online?
Losing your whole career for a word and getting treated like a literal murderer is far worse than losing money because you leaked the naked bodies of people without asking

>>2835912
>Losing your whole career
Hogan will be at WM34 for sure.

>>2835894
His skin is also much more defined in an "old, aging" way. Hers is very "elegant" looking in its wrinkles and even his skintone is much colder and almost blue-purple compared to hers

>>2835912
Their argument is that he didn't give a shit about the sex tapes as he regularly joked and talked about his sexual exploits and penis size in public on radio shows and in interviews. The movie tries to spin it as hogan being aware he was on tape saying the n-word and didn't want to get heat for it, so he was playing the "this sextape is damaging" card as a way to censor them. It's retarded, I know, but Hogan didn't exactly help himself going into court with the fucking "Terry Bolea's penis vs Hulk Hogan's penis" defense. Just gave the biased documentary makers more fuel.

>>2835802
>20 minutes in
They don't even introduce that until the half way point, and hogan's still a focus after that as well.

>>2835959
>Terry penis or hogan penis
Even though it sounds rediculous, it was actually a brilliant defense. Where can you draw the line between a character and the person, what rights to privacy do they both have? Honestly won him the case desu

Gawker screwed Gawker

File: get out and stay out.jpg (27KB, 468x376px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 468x376px

>hey, you leaked a video of me that was taken without my knowledge/consent, take it down
>no fuck you
>I have a court order, take it down
>no fuck you
>Okay then, I'm suing you for damaging my reputation
>MUH FREE SPEECH

Amazing that the Hulk Hogan cucking Bubba the Cuck Sponge video is the hill that Gawker decided to die on.

>>2836406
It wasn't a brilliant defense. It was ridiculous. He could have simply said "in media appearances as Hulk Hogan, I'm playing a character. That is separate from my real life as Terry Bolea". He went full retard and said "I don't have a 10 inch penis, Hulk Hogan does and I don't know how to be any clearer than that".

>>2836420
From inside their echo chamber, they actually thought that the fact Hogan had uttered the dreaded "n-word" would be enough for them to get away with it.

>>2836425
Terry's still a pretty big guy, though

>>2836425
Oh. I thought you meant the idea behind is statement. Yeah lol it was rediculous that they let him carry on like that

>>2836436
Well it got him fired and unanimously shunned and relegated him from being Wrestlemania host to making cell phone commercials in denmark about how wrestling's fake

>>2836464
He'll be back.

>>2836483
so? he's already had to sit out for the last 3 and a half years

Its goes full anti Trump at the end saying how he is against free speech. makes no mention as to why he is so anti CNN, and just says that he is anti news

>>2836501
It doesn't say he's anti-news. In fact, it shows him saying himself that he's anti-mainstream news and that he supports independent media. It's just cautioning people to be weary of opening up liable laws which billionaires can use to censor unflattering truths about themselves.

That's not the narrative of the whole move, but that's pretty much the only reason Trump is brought up for the last 15-20 minutes or so.

Does this documentary show the dumbass that said it was ok to post a teens sex tape?

>>2836551
Yes and they let him explain himself
"I said no one under 4, obviously it was a joke! i dont know how they thought it was being serious!"

The same site that blasted people for looking at jlaw leaks and saying it was rape refused to take down Hogan sex tape and cry when they get sued.

>>2836558
>under oath
>DUDE IT'S JUST A PRANK!!
Fuck this documentary for letting this guy """""explain"""""
Did they at least call him a retard?

>>2836569
Not directly but he looked pretty fucking stupid trying to explain it away just after they played the clip of his indictment, and then after he tried explaining it they showed the clip of him being questioned about it in court.

>>2835755
Thank you

REEEEEEEE WHY CAN'T WE VIOLATE PEOPLE'S PRIVACY FOR A FEW DIMES

>>2835787
>Hulk Hogan defending the American constitution against the greedy kikes
30 years later, still the real American hero.

>>2835836
>valid discussion to have about freedom of speech vs right to privacy
No there isn't. Posting sex tapes online for ad clicks after being told by the court to not do so does not fall under "free speech"

>>2835749
Yeah the Hogan thing was pretty bad with them glossing over a lot of facts, the review journal part was legit though since that paper is straight garbage now.

>>2835749
Faggot kikes always targeting positive strong white men.
>say your prayers, eat your vitamins.

This scares the pervert hollywood jew. They fear the strong man because they are so far from it.

>>2835787
Ofc they do, you can understand it from the title cover. Recording someone having sex and then showing it to everybody has nothing to do with free speech.

>>2836495
He got like $70 million I'm sure cheap ass Vince was paying him $300k a year at most