Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

October 22, 2008

Strauss Zelnick is having an up-and-down week in the media.

Yesterday GamePolitics reported that Mad Money host Jim Cramer named the Take-Two Interactive chairman to his Wall of Shame for failing to accept EA's highly-publicized acquisition offer. Since EA bowed out, T2's stock has been in the toilet.

But the good news for Zelnick is that he's the cover guy for the latest issue of Men's Fitness magazine. At 51, the T2 head honcho is definitely buff. Check out this video for some of Zelnick's fitness philosophies and tips.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

Frack...the guy is 51?! I wish I look like that...and I am 25....

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

probably training to go a few rounds with JT, who I am sure would claim Zelnick looks so good by feeding on the stolen innocence of the children he sells his games to

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

Oh Strauss.... mmmmm

<swoons/>

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

Can we add Men's Fitness magazine to the conspiracy?

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

51? Oh my god, Jack Thompson is only 6 years old then him, and look how old Jack looks.

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

Hey there Big Daddy! ...

 

                                        ... also that character from BioShock is there

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

Zelnick seems like a pretty relaxed guy, and look how he looks.

Thompson is a hate filled little troll, and look how he looks.

 

Hehe

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

Oh my, I'd defintiely invite him in for some hot coffee.

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

Now there's a pin-up for Jack's bedroom

Re: Take-Two's Zelnick Graces Cover of Men's Fitness

You're kidding me, he's in his 50's?

----------------

IMA FIRIN MAH LASER!!!

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 02/09/10 at 01:18pm
Valdearg: I do agree that it shouldn't be legal. That's for sure.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:14pm
Valdearg: @AE: Doubtful. Again, it's perfectly legal.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:26pm
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:25pm
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Login or register to post shouts