I think I would be too awestruck to catch a ball hurtling at me from a man with such a magnificent beard. After getting knocked unconscious from the projectile I would die with a peaceful smile on my face while drifting slowly to the depths of the pool.
I don’t understand why Arnold is writing his answers in cursive via iPad, taking a screen shot of said answer, then using imgur to upload the screen shot and, finally, pasting the link in the reply box… instead of just hitting “reply” and typing his answer.
Pete is right though, I should not be questioning someone who might use time travel to kill my mother.
Redditor Alexanderr posted a link to his IMDb profile in one of his comments that received a considerable number of upvotes. This resulted in a lot of redditors visiting his profile on IMDb. Since IMDb ranks the cast based on the number of profile views he quickly rose up the ranks to number 5 on the cast list. A screenshot of the IMDb page was posted on reddit by Alexanderr resulting in even MORE profile views and now he currently stands as number 1, above Tom Cruise, on the IMDb site. Redditors have also taken it upon themselves to update the FAQ about the movie “Jack Reacher” to focus entirely on the “Suspicious Onlooker.” To me, this is the best part. I fucking love reddit.
(I wouldn’t be surprised if the FAQ was taken off of IMDB since it is ridiculously hilarious so I’ll post the current text (as of 10/2/12) here for posterity)
Why do I not see enough of Suspicious Onlooker?
The answer is that you do, but not consciously. The director added Suspicious Onlooker (S.O.) to 80% of all scenes in the movie, in some form. This enables you to absorb his character at a subconscious level, which brings up the whole acting performance of the scene.
In the trailer (seen here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK7y8Ou0VvM) Suspicious Onlooker can be seen many times.
At 0:13 during the pan over the city, he is below in one of the streets, enjoying the twilight.
At 0:18 S.O. cannot be seen but is in fact the nurse in charge at the time
At 0:27 we see a top down view of S.O. on the sidewalk. Elsewhere in the frame, a van can be seen.
At 0:30 S.O. is concealed behind the posters on the window of the shop
At 0:33 a pan just cuts short of revealing S.O.
S.O. is blatantly visible at 0:37, just behind the wheel arch of one of the squad cars
At 0:40 we see S.O.’s costar performing acts of violence on a man, what isn’t shown is the backstory, where one would learn that he learnt these moves from S.O, in a dojo owned by S.O. himself.
At 0:42 he can be seen in the crowd of people.
At 0:54 we see Jack Reacher in the car that is actually owned by S.O.
At 1:00 we see a car driving the opposing way to the film’s #2 actor, this car is driven by S.O.
At 1:03 a rendering bug was found in the original production of the trailer, where the name ‘Alexander Rhodes’ was left out. It is planned for this to be fixed on premiere night
1:08 again pans rapicly over S.O.
At 1:17 a taser is shown, this technology was actually invented by Suspicious Onlooker.
At 1:19 we see a cliff demolition. The man behind this was once again S.O.
1:22 undoubtedly shows us S.O. flying a helicopter with extreme skill
Rendering bug is once again prevalent at 1:30, as the title was later changed to be ‘Suspicious Onlooking’. The error was that they worked with an old version of the trailer, and as such the recent revisions were not rendered into the final product.
At 1:34 we see three men in the background of the shot. All 3 of these men are in fact Suspicious Onlooker.
At 1:40 we once again see the martial arts taught to the #2 character by S.O.
1:47 shows a clip of S.O. driving towards the criminals
Furthermore the subconscious efforts of the director can be seen in the opening sequence. He decided this film would be made under Paramount due to the name. Breaking it apart, we see that it is in fact p-AR-amount. The AR here would expand to Alexander Rhodes, and is out first clue to the acting significance of Suspicious Onlooker.
As is shown, we actually see a lot of Suspicious Onlooker without realizing it. Because of this we think of the film as a much higher quality. I hope this answers your question.
Why was ‘Suspicious Onlooker’ not given a larger role?
Because other members of the cast and crew felt intimidated by Alexander Rhodes’ acting talent. Not wanting to be cast into the shadows they ridiculed him into a small extra part.
When will Alexander Rhodes be receiving his Emmy for this flawless performance?
We don’t quite know yet, but we have confirmed that Obama had invited him to the White House to request an autograph and a photo session with this brilliant face.
Did Rhodes steal the show?
Yes he did.
Were there issues during the making of Jack Reacher ?
It has been rumored that during shooting producers were forced to intervene in an incident between Alexander Rhodes and Tom Cruise. Apparently ‘personality issues’ arose as a result of Alexander’s romantic involvement with a number of costars on the film (alleged to be Rosamund Pike, Nicole Forester and Kristen Dalton).
However these have been categorically denied and that Alexander’s potential Oscar winning performance will be all that people will remember about this film.
Does the Suspicious Onlooker (Probable Oscar-winner; Alexander Rhodes) have any scenes involving full frontal male nudity?
Early reports state, due to his massive genitalia and impressive physique, S.O.’s much anticipated, violent sex scenes with literally every member of the cast and crew had to be cut out of respect for his much less endowed co-stars. His ever-growing fan base will unfortunately have to wait until the release of the special edition of the Jack Reacher DVD is released entitled, Jack Reacher: Suspiciously Suspicous in early May 2013.
Also be sure to check out Rhodes in his hit adult film, “The Naked Bacon Cook”. Available as a hidden bonus in the special edition DvD set of Jack Reacher!
Is this film an accurate portrayal of Alexander Rhodes’ (Suspicious Onlooker) full power?
Probably not, no.
If the cast were pie, what type of pie would Rhodes be?
All of them.
The top post on Reddit’s frontpage this morning was a claim that 4chan was trolling a naming competition for Mountain Dew. Here’s the link to all the comments (http://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/y4sox/4chan_names_the_new_mountain_dew/). When you clicked on the link you were directed to this website (http://dubthedew.com/all-the-dew-names/) where names like “Fapple”, “Apple soda yum yum” and “Mountain Jew” were, briefly, the top names. Once this post reached the top of the front page on Reddit though something strange happened. After clicking the link the user was directed to the mountain dew website and a pop up box that said “le 9gga are leggion” appeared… I kind of panicked, thinking it was a website with a virus or something. However, after clicking “ok” an embedded Youtube video of Rick Astley singing “Never Gonna Give You Up” starts playing. There was also a marquee at the top of the page that says “Mtn Dew salutes the Israeli Mossad for demolishing 3 towers on 9/11!”
I tried to find this through Mountain Dew’s official site and thought that it was maybe fake when I found this instead (https://secure.yourmaltdew.com/MasterPage.aspx). I don’t think it’s fake after all since it can be found through this facebook page… (https://www.facebook.com/villa.fresh.italian.kitchen/posts/10151079734468567)
Either way, still pretty hilarious.