Tucker V. Rock: Who will be president?

By A random shemp July 1, 2002 10:41 AM

Editor: The following story or article was submitted by one of our readers and may not necessarily reflect the Dtheatre.com crew's opinion. We hold no responsibility for inaccuracies or hoaxes.

Chris Tucker insists there's no reason why he and fellow funnyman Chris Rock should be feuding - because they're both outrageously rich. At the moment both Tucker, 29, and Rock, 36, are writing and preparing separate comedies about a White House occupied by a black commander-in-chief, with both listed as directors and lead actors. Tucker's project is entitled Mr. President, while Rock's is called Head Of State. But while Tucker clearly came up with the concept as early as 1999, Rock is the one who'll start shooting his flick in July, which has sparked reports of a bad blood between the pair. But Tucker refuses to accept that he and Rock could even contemplate embarking on a personal feud, because they both have very healthy wallets. He says, "I've heard all the reports that Chris and I are supposed to be feuding, but why would we do that? There's room for everybody to do what they want to do. He does his thing and I do mine. And anyway, rich people don't get mad at each other and feud. You can't get mad when you live in a mansion!"

Here's an even better idea you two dumbf*cks, Tucker and Rock. ?Make the movie together and it'll be a guaranteed hit for both of you. ?Does being filthy rich make you extra stupid or something?

| comments: 11

Reader Discussions:

Post YOUR opinion too!

'bout time!   reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 1, 2002 10:47 AM

I was about to bust a cap in yo' ass, Jack, for not posting this sooner. And what's with the disclaimer.  This is right off of the IMDB, word for freaking word--mostly.

Your turn, skullflamer.  Go for style and not substance, like our pal Jack does here.

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by Jack (jack@dtheatre.com) on July 1, 2002 1:02 PM

I just finally got home from vacation. I would have posted it sooner but I was busy.

The disclaimer is automatically put in there when some one submits a story. For our safety.

Oh, and mad props for submitting!

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 1, 2002 1:27 PM

I'm a giver, can't you tell?

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by Skullfire (hulacete@ubbi.com) on July 1, 2002 10:28 PM

Let's clear this, ARS: I won't post new threads just to fight with you. I'm not all the time in IMDB, so if I find something, it's just by chance, browsing or something like that.
The reason for me to post threads is that people here could read about movie news because they like it and then we all would make comments, some of them very funny, just like it was a few months ago, in the BC (before cackfighting) age.
I do agree with you on something: why those two guys don't make a single movie? I think it's cause they don't know which role could play the one who won't be the president. Maybe it would be good a movie about two black presidential candidates.

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 2, 2002 9:28 AM

What is ARS then?  Don't tell us if it is a stupid as "before cackfighting."

And like I said before, I'm a giver.

But here are some of the things that I don't give:

A damn, a sh*t, or a f*ck about what you want or what you think of me or most other topics, skullflamer.

Post on topics, keep that lame-ass sense of humor in check and I MIGHT stop it.

Otherwise, I agree that a movie about the candiacy and not the  actual presidency would be a funnier idea.  The presidency idea could be saved for a sequel.  Do I smell franchise?

Goddamn, now that would be something I'd pay to watch.

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 2, 2002 12:34 PM

MIGHT stop? Please don't! You're so funny!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahaha!

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 2, 2002 1:25 PM

That "hahahahahaha" is exactly half the length of my pee-nis on this 1024 X 768 monitor.

Seems you two have met, care to clue me in on who you are?

Y'know those ruffies you used on your sister also work on me too.

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by Skullfire (hulacete@ubbi.com) on July 2, 2002 5:04 PM

It is a cackfighting, that's what you've been pulling out every time. And ARS... what do you care? You're so superior that nothing affects you, so why to bother?

That MIGHT stop stuff, really funny. I'm foreigner, so I probably don't get all of your sayings, but is that a threat where you come from? Cause if it's not, you've achieved a good one.

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 3, 2002 9:48 AM

MIGHT is not a threat it is, again, a fact.

I do have the capacity for mercy even if I don't care.  I am human after all and beating on you is beginning to convert from the realm of humor to a state of down right pity for you.

Hell, everyone knows the joke gets old after awhile and you're no exception to the rule.

You are like a cancer that is unoperatable, skullflamer.  So putting you into remission is just fine by me.  At least you didn't roll over and die like mooser AKA dopey shemp did.  You did your inept best to keep me very entertained for awhile.  

So if you must be self-congratulatory try thinking of it this way: you outlasted mooser and your funnier when you write responses and not when you emulate bad south american comedians.

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by Skullfire (hulacete@ubbi.com) on July 3, 2002 6:09 PM

You're the living proof that a person can survive an abortion.

RE: 'bout time!   reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 5, 2002 9:18 AM

And your proof that women can become pregnant from using wooden dildos, skullflamer.

Your as dumb as a post, banana-nut tree.