Comments by "Covert Puppy Two" (@covertpuppytwo3857) on "NFL star Michael Oher depicted in ‘The Blind Side’ says movie was a lie" video.

  1. NONSENSE... the mother in the movie was just as important to the story as Michael!!!
    9
  2. Missing piece of information... the movie negotiations occurred while Michael began his NFL career. According to ESPN, the Tuohy family earned $225 per family member and was promised 2.5% of net profit. Recently according to SJ (youngest son) he earned to date $50k to $60k. So, this idea that the family earned millions doesn't appear to be true. Also, according to ESPN, Michael didn't use the Tuohy's family rep to represent him in the deal with the movie studio but his own business agent at the time. So then begs the question, who is responsible for Michael not getting a good deal for the movie?
    6
  3. Are we really supposed to believe that the family thought by taking in Michael they could profit off him from a movie? Really? That's kinda far-fetched.
    5
  4.  @brandnew9834  "the fact that they’re writing books and making movies based on him and not compensating him" - Michael had his own business reps at the time of the movies who represented Michael's interests while the family used their own. If Michael's own rep didn't negotiate a good deal for Michael, how is that not Michael's own fault? And yes, the movie was far from accurate... but the family didn't write the script!!! And you're wrong, they began the conservatorship BEFORE he was 18 and it wasn't completed until after he was 18... hence the reason conservatorship over adoption. And lastly, this is a wealthy family... how much money do you actually think they made? It wasn't millions!!!
    2
  5.  @floydd4779  I said the "net profit"... Economics is not your strength, is it? LOL... get an education!
    2
  6.  @brandnew9834  But yes, you are playing dumb here... you're already making judgements without all the facts... you can't get any dumber than that! "Michael was coerced into agreeing to a conservatorship. He was a kid, he didn’t know what he signed" There are now interviews with both Sean (Father) and separately SJ (son) about the conservatorship. They clearly stated that if Michael wanted to play football at collegiate level (Ole Miss) he needed to be a member of the Tuohy family and the only way to do that was either adoption or conservatorship... adoption wasn't going to work because of his age so they chose conservatorship. They both clearly say Michael was told this. Michael in his lawsuit just says that he was misled by the Touhy's that this would make him legally family... this is the same man who claims it wasn't until he reached his 30's to look up what the word means!!!! Maybe the goalpost was over his head?!?!?!? "They’re going appearances, writing books, being paid for and they’re not cutting him in on the side stuff" - So what? In the appearances, books, etc... they represent themselves... they had a part in the story as well!!!! Michael also did appearances, wrote books, etc... and he got paid for his part! "He wants them to stop using his image, name and story to make money that they don’t share with him" - Again, they had a part in the story!!! The Tuohy's did a lot for him and they're story is just as interesting as Michaels... they have a right to tell their story as well as Michael. Suggesting otherwise is NONSENSE! Can Michael tell his story and include the Tuohy's without compensating them for mentioning it? OF COURSE, HE CAN and HE HAS! "He wants them to stop using his image" Where exactly did the family do such a thing? "He didn’t even realize that he was in a conservatorship until recently when his lawyer took at the agreement and showed him" Again, even Michael is not making that claim. He said he thought the conservatorship was just like an adoption and didn't understand the difference until 6 months ago... sure, I'll buy that for a dollar! "They can make financial decisions based off of life" - and they DID NO SUCH THING!!! "If they come from wealth, why are they taking money out of the pocket of someone who came from poverty? It’s shady." - I suggest you watch the CJ interview... search for it here in youtube. CJ clearly states that all the money the family made will be made public. He mentions what ESPN wrote, that the family each received $225K per family member. But guess what? That money didn't go to the family, it was given to the charity of their choice! CJ mentioned the residual amount promised (2.5% of the gross profit)... he said, that he made till now, between $60 and $70K... said he first received a check $14K and each year the amount of was less and less. Made NO WHERE close to a million! You need to stop making judgement calls on half facts and spin... that is dumb. CJ in the interview said something very interesting as well... Michael heard the movie made $300 million and got nothing and that bothers him. He tried to go after the movie studio but HE HIMSELF signed away the rights to his story and the case was dropped... so now he's going after the Tuohy's for money... and that is just wrong!!!! As much as you say ... without Michael there was no story... it goes both ways... with the Touhy's there would be no movie as well. The Tuohy's have a right to be compensated for the story as well. It's just a shame that Michael made a poor decision in signing away the right to the movie, BUT HE DID IT ON HIS OWN ACCORD... not on any conservatorship in his behalf!
    1
  7. Robbed? Has any evidence come out to show that the conservatorship the family on him took money from Michael? Because that was never said. Michael never claimed such a thing nor did his attorney!
    1
  8.  @WALKERthisISmyLastName  ESPN cover sports related stories... and that is sports propaganda? OK.. if you say so. The ESPN article says what Michael says... he signed onto a conservatorship... he knew it was a conservatorship but thought legally that would make him legally ... family. It does strikes me odd that it wasn't until this man was in his early thirties that he decided to look into what that actually means... but in any case, what the ESPN article was saying said... the Tuohy family used their own legal rep to make the movie deal while Michael used his own business agent. The ESPN article gives the names of the reps of both parties but I don't remember their names so I can't type it hear, you'll have to look it up yourself. But I also remind you as well, in the lawsuit, Michael himself claims he "signed away" the story of his life to the movie studio and not the Tuohy family. It also states that the Tuohy began the conservatorship when Michael was 17 and it didn't get finalized until he was 18. If the Tuohy family used the conservatorship to cheat Michael out of money, I would join along with condemning this family, but so far... I've seen NOTHING to indicate this.
    1