Oscar Roundtable: Brad, Leo, Helen & Co.
Newsweek sat down with Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Forest Whitaker, Helen Mirren, Penelope Cruz, and Leonardo DiCaprio for their Oscar Roundtable at the Egyptian Theater in Hollywood. Watch the videos here; check out the transcript after the jump! Two excerpts below…
How strippers changed Brad Pitt’s life: “Yeah, my job was to drive them to bachelor parties and things. I’d pick them up, and at the gig I’d collect the money, play the bad Prince tapes and catch the girls’ clothes. It was not a wholesome atmosphere, and it got very depressing. After two months I went in to quit, and the guy said, “Listen, I’ve got this one last gig tonight.” So I did it, and this girl—I’d never met her before—was in an acting class taught by a man named Roy London [a famous acting coach]. I went and checked it out, and it really set me on the path to where I am now.”
When Penelope Cruz knew she was famous: “One day I came out on the street for a walk with my dad, and somebody screamed from a car, “I love you!” And a minute later, somebody else screamed, “Whore!” [Laughter] Then I knew I was famous.”
What did your parents think when you told them you wanted to be an actor?
HELEN MIRREN: My parents were very against the idea, so I trained as a teacher for three years. I was a horrible, really bad teacher. I didn’t become a professional actress until I was about 22.
FOREST WHITAKER: My parents really wanted me to go to West Point—something practical like that. Ten years into my acting career they were still trying to get me to go back to school. I wasn’t making much money, and sometimes really struggling, but I was, like, “No, Ma. This is what I want to do.” Those were difficult conversations because I had my own doubts. It took me a long time to feel comfortable thinking, “I’m an actor. I can do this.”
Cate, is it true that your first acting job was as an extra in an Arabic boxing movie?
CATE BLANCHETT: I was at university studying fine arts, and I took a year off and went traveling. I had 2,500 Australian dollars, which is nothing, and I traveled for a year on that, so I ended up in places like a bunker in Istanbul with water dripping from the ceiling. Later, I was staying in this place in Cairo. I literally had no money, and some Scottish guy who was printing money and passports in the foyer said, “Do you want to earn five Egyptian dollars?” It wasn’t to sleep with anyone. It was to be an extra in this boxing movie, so I said, “Sure.” They had free falafel.
MIRREN: We’re all in it for the free food, actually. We are all, in our hearts, out-of-work actors.
It seems every actor, no matter how successful, thinks he’ll never work again. Do you feel that way, Brad?
BRAD PITT: Not really, no. [Laughter]
You all had some surprising early jobs before you became actors. Forest was a classical tenor. Helen was a sort of carnival barker.
PITT: I had a job driving strippers around.
LEONARDO DICAPRIO: Really?
BLANCHETT: Just last month.
PITT: I love her. Yeah, my job was to drive them to bachelor parties and things. I’d pick them up, and at the gig I’d collect the money, play the bad Prince tapes and catch the girls’ clothes. It was not a wholesome atmosphere, and it got very depressing. After two months I went in to quit, and the guy said, “Listen, I’ve got this one last gig tonight.” So I did it, and this girl—I’d never met her before—was in an acting class taught by a man named Roy London [a famous acting coach]. I went and checked it out, and it really set me on the path to where I am now.
A stripper changed the course of your career.
PITT: [Nods] Strippers changed my life.
We’ll see that in the National Enquirer next week.
PITT: [Looks toward the ceiling] I just want one week off. Just one.
Leo, you made your first film, “This Boy’s Life,” at 16. What was that like?
DICAPRIO: I didn’t know how to conduct myself on a film set. The director, Michael Caton-Jones, really took me under his wing. He said things like, “When you’re rehearsing with Robert De Niro, you don’t talk about what baseball cards you’re collecting.”
MIRREN: I was like a rabbit in headlights for years on film sets, not understanding who was doing what, and how you’re supposed to behave. It is a terrifying environment, really.
Penelope, in “Jamón, Jamón” you played the daughter of a prostitute, and you became a sensation, and a sex symbol, at 17. What was that like?
PENELOPE CRUZ: One day I came out on the street for a walk with my dad, and somebody screamed from a car, “I love you!” And a minute later, somebody else screamed, “Whore!” [Laughter] Then I knew I was famous. It was unbelievable. I was 16 when I made the movie. I didn’t tell my parents, and I was hiding the script from them. Then they took my grandmother to the premiere, and I always felt bad about that. But the movie was good, and it did a lot of good things for my career. Every role I accepted after that I was covered up to here. [Raises her hand to her neck]
Leo, you became a teen idol at an early age also.
DICAPRIO: I had a brief run at that on television, being thrown on the cover of teen magazines, and I was trying to work away from that. I wanted to establish myself as an actor who put a lot of thought into his characters and did good work. And then I did a movie called “Titanic,” and there I was, right back into that position of being looked at as another piece of cute meat.
PITT: That you are. [Laughter]
DICAPRIO: It was pretty disheartening to be objectified like that. I wanted to stop acting for a little bit. It changed my life in a lot of ways, but at the same time, I can’t say that it didn’t give me opportunities. It made me, for the first time, in control of my career. But yeah, it was weird.
Brad, Hollywood wanted you to be a conventional leading man. You didn’t.
PITT: Acting is about discovery, for me, and these “leading man” scripts—Leo can testify to this—they’re all the same guy. You can plug any one of us into it and you get a variation on a theme, but anyone can do it. Where is the discovery in that?
BLANCHETT: So did you guys look to a relationship with a director to help champion the way out?
DICAPRIO: I definitely sought out the relationship with Martin Scorsese. It was important to me to find somebody I could trust. It’s a weird thing to put your performance in another person’s hands. We so often sit in rooms with directors and you hear their vision about a specific project, but there’s a huge difference between what they say and what actually shows up on screen.
PITT: Do directors want you to [play a version] of them?
DICAPRIO: Sometimes you get that feeling, yeah.
MIRREN: It doesn’t happen to women. You get to play their fantasy instead. But you know, [the industry] is always trying to put you in a box, and you’re always having to fight your way out of it. They don’t want you to grow up or grow older or change, so it’s great when a role comes up that allows you to take that next step. It happened with me on “Prime Suspect.” Suddenly I was allowed to look like a woman of the age that I was. I didn’t have to have glamorous lighting. I didn’t have to wear makeup. It was fabulously liberating, and it’s really why I’m still working, because I was allowed to step forward.
Forest, you’ve played roles that weren’t actually written for black actors.
WHITAKER: I had moments where the directors were open enough to let me do that, yeah. In “Good Morning, Vietnam,” my character was written as a nerdy Jewish guy. In “The Color of Money,” the character was originally a Yuppie.
DICAPRIO: Was it really? That character was stellar. I remember seeing you in “The Color of Money” at a very young age, going, “Who is this guy?”
WHITAKER: I was a replacement. They fired somebody, and I flew in and auditioned. That’s how it happened.
MIRREN: My husband [Taylor Hackford] directed … what was it called? Oh, God, I forgot the name of it. Famous movie with Debra Winger?
“An Officer and a Gentleman.”
MIRREN: Thank you. The Lou Gossett Jr. role was written for a white man, and Taylor forced the studio to cast Lou. Lou won an Oscar for it, in fact.
Which movie made you want to become an actor?
CRUZ: Pedro Almodóvar’s “Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down!” I was 13 when I saw that movie. I came out of the theater completely fascinated. I started to become obsessed with Pedro, and I decided then to become an actress.
BLANCHETT: The only role I wanted to play was Lucy in “You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown.” I also wanted to be Gregory Peck.
PITT: I remember sneaking into “Saturday Night Fever,” and it had a profound effect on me. [Laughter]
MIRREN: The first movie that caught my imagination was “L’Avventura,” by Antonioni. Until then I had seen only Rock Hudson/Doris Day movies, and I wasn’t into them very much.
WHITAKER: When I was a kid there weren’t a lot of black actors working in films, so acting didn’t seem like a possibility. The first actor I remember being struck by was Sidney Poitier.
DICAPRIO: I tried to get an agent when I was around 7. I was a break-dancer and had a mohawk, and I was rejected. I knew I wanted to be an actor, but it wasn’t until “This Boy’s Life,” when I was 16, that I started to research quality films. I remember watching James Dean in “East of Eden.” I said to myself, “Wow, I didn’t know it was possible to give a performance this good.”
PITT: Although you were extraordinaryon “Growing Pains.”
DICAPRIO: Thank you, buddy. As were you.
Leo, didn’t you get thrown off the set of “Romper Room”?
DICAPRIO: Yeah, when I was 3 years old. I ran up to the camera and started shaking it, saying, “Look at me!”
Dustin Hoffman famously asked Laurence Olivier once what acting was all about, and Olivier replied, “Look at me, look at me, look at me.”
MIRREN: I hate being looked at.
BLANCHETT: I think it’s probably “Look into me.” What we perceive to be naturalism or realism has been utterly eroded by so-called reality television, where people are performing themselves. But what we do, actually, is unmask and reveal what it means to be human, and allow someone in. It’s taken me a long time to allow myself to be exposed in front of a camera.
PITT: Acting is really a team sport. A lot of times one actor will become the MVP, but just like in tennis, your game is elevated if you’re playing with someone better. I mean, just look at the way Cate compensated for George Clooney in “The Good German.” [Laughter]
Are there roles that you look at and think, “I wish I could have played that”?
DICAPRIO: Tons. Burt Lancaster in “Sweet Smell of Success.” De Niro in “Taxi Driver.”
CRUZ: Either of the two women in “Terms of Endearment.” Carmen Maura in “Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown.” Shirley MacLaine in “The Apartment.”
BLANCHETT: Anything Elizabeth Taylor has ever done.
MIRREN: It’s not that you want to play the role; you’re inspired by it. It’s not as if you’re sitting there going, “Oh, I would have been better.” [Pause] Well, sometimes you are. [Laughter]
BLANCHETT: There’s a moment in “A Streetcar Named Desire,” where Vivien Leigh has just gone into the bathroom, and Marlon Brando’s banging on the door, and she opens the door and his hand flinches. It’s the most astonishing shot. This guy that Brando could have played with complete brutality, and [instead he shows] his vulnerability, in that hand.
DICAPRIO: I wanted to ask everyone something: we all talk about being “in the zone”—becoming our character—but there are so many technical things that happen when you’re making a movie, it’s impossible not to realize that there’s a camera there, and your character has to emote this specific emotion. Those moments where it all disappears, and you’re really speaking as this other person? I’m lucky if that happens more than once on a movie.
PITT: I find alcohol helps. [Laughter]
When you’re watching a movie, are you always aware of the actors’ technique, or can you get lost in it the way we do?
MIRREN: Completely lost.
BLANCHETT: Well, I didn’t get lost in “Battlefield Earth.”
Was there a role you’d wished you’d played that you didn’t?
BLANCHETT: I’ve been lucky in a way. In school I was tall and my sexuality was dubious. I was always playing men. And then my nationality has been dubious, having played Elizabeth I quite early in my film career. So I feel like I got some weird and wonderful choices.
PITT: [To DiCaprio] Our sexuality has been dubious as well. [Laughter]
Would you care to discuss that?
PITT: No, there’s been enough discussion.
BLANCHETT: We have photographs.
Was there a role that caused you more anxiety than others?
BLANCHETT: They all scare me. But I tell myself that anxiety is just misplaced excitement. You’re constantly risking failure, so I never watch the films I’m in. That way, I always feel like, “OK, that worked.” I had an experience on “Babel” which I’ve never had shooting a film. I thought, “God, that was a really great take.” And then I saw the film, and the whole scene was played on Brad. [Laughter]
Helen, do you know what Queen Elizabeth thinks of your portrayal of her?
MIRREN: Of course I don’t.
Has she seen it?
MIRREN: I’m sure. Who could resist? Someone who is very close to the queen, a great historian named Robert Lacey, said he thinks she would have said, as the credits rolled, “That wasn’t too bad, was it? I think I’ll have a gin and tonic.”
PITT: How did you start shaping her? She’s got this great fireplug walk, and your glasses were always halfway down the bridge of your nose.
MIRREN: Obviously there’s a lot of film on her, but it’s of her in her formal role—hardly anything behind closed doors. Playing a real character, you have to behave likea detective and see things that maybe no one else has. She’s unbelievably composed, but on the films I noticed that her thumb is always turning her wedding ring round and round and round. There’s this inner beat, this tension.
When you’re creating a character, do you need to find something external like that? Penelope, in “Volver”—
CRUZ: I know what you’re going to ask.
You wore a padded butt for your role.
MIRREN: I had a padded butt in “The Queen,” as well. It wasn’t just Penelope.
CRUZ: Oh, I’m so happy! Now every time someone asks me this, I’m going to say, “Helen had one, too.”
Did the butt help?
CRUZ: Completely. Pedro and I didn’t talk about it. Maybe a one-minute conversation. It just made me work in a different way, move in a different way. It was like finding the right shoes for the character.
You’ve all done some impressive accent work in your careers. Cate has done three different ones this year. Is it a hurdle to get over when you’re building a character?
WHITAKER: Accents help me figure out how to move, how to gesture. I think sometimes when an actor’s accent doesn’t work, it’s because it isn’t connected to the body.
MIRREN: Until you nail the accent it is paralyzing. You can’t act—you can’t do anything—because all you can hear is your voice making the wrong sound. What’s even more difficult is what Penelope has done. I think to act in a foreign language is the most unbelievably difficult thing. I can’t imagine it.
Penelope, your first English-language film was “The Hi-Lo Country.” Was that scary?
CRUZ: Oh, so scary. I didn’t understand a word [director] Stephen Frears was saying. He’s very sweet, but he has a very strong accent, and I only knew my dialogue for the character. I was always going to the bathroom to cry and coming back and trying to hide it.
Brad, your Irish Gypsy accent in Guy Ritchie’s “Snatch” is so great that we can’t understand a word you’re saying.
PITT: That was last-minute, night-before, full-panic mode. I kept trying to get the dialect—I probably started a little late—and it was just too stiff. I went to Guy the day before and said, “You’ve got to do this part. I can’t do it.” And he’s, like, “Yeah. Right.” But it occurred to me that the genius of what Benicio Del Toro had done in “The Usual Suspects” was that you couldn’t understand what he was saying a lot of times. So about midnight, I started walking around the North End of London, working on it and working on it, and it just kept getting more and more indecipherable. Thank God it worked.
BLANCHETT: I never think of accents as something that’s slapped on. It’s syntax and rhythm and breath. It’s about when people choose to pause, what words they emphasize. You can say it’s accent, but it’s actually thought process. It’s got to be organic. And I think the earlier you can start the better.
Brad. [He mimics being stabbed in the heart.]
MIRREN: You’re absolutely right. It’s not something that you glom on the top, as if language and accent are separate. Americans are always saying, “Oh, I love your accent.” I don’t have the bloody accent. You’ve got the accent. [Laughter] No, I never say that. I say, “Thank you so much. How sweet of you.”
Do you feel differently about your work than you did when you started acting?
PITT: When I started I had this idea that the films I did defined me, and that my life would be interesting based on the characters I’d chosen. I don’t feel that way anymore. I’m a father now. There are other things that are important to me. I was chasing something that wasn’t fulfilling. I caught myself on the phone the other day—Leo has been playing some real strong men these last few years—and I found myself saying, “I want to play more of a man.” I got off the phone and I thought, “No. Live like a man, and the movies will follow.”
WHITAKER: I had to learn to not divorce my life from my work. My work is a continual process of growth for me; it’s an expansion of myself. In the last couple of years, I’ve been taking things I learn about myself in my work and using it to be more completely there for my kids, my family, my friends. It’s flowing in a complete way. It has been a bit of an awakening.
DICAPRIO: Man, I’ve got to get some kids, huh? I only really started enjoying acting when there was a certain level of detachment from the end result. I remember being 15 and going on 160 auditions, and not getting a single role for a year and a half. I realized I was turning into one of those Hollywood kids: “Hi, I’m Leo! And I’m going to be reading today! Oh yeah, I had a great day at school! I love school!” [Laughter] I had become a product of this system where everyone is aiming to please the director, the casting director, whomever. So I started to think about the character—the work—instead of the result. You know, kids are always asking me what they should do to become actors. You give them the pat answers: “Study your lines. Work hard. Don’t give up.” But what I want to tell them is, “You have to not care what these people think about you.”
MIRREN: You were lucky to learn that at 15. Marlon Brando’s great acting advice was, “Don’t care too much.” I never understood that, because I cared so much, and still do. But what he meant was, let go of that total investment in “Are they going to love me?” “Am I going to be good?” F—- that. Maybe that’s what Brad is saying as well.
PITT: Yeah, but it took me 800 words to say what he did in four.
You’re all rich. You’re all famous. You’ve all received critical acclaim. Why work? Why keep acting?
DICAPRIO: I love it. There’s no other art form in the world that affects me more. There’s nothing that I walk away from feeling transformed by the way I do with cinema. There’s something so gratifying about being burned into celluloid and knowing that I can look back later in life and have stories about those experiences. It’s an amazing gift.
WHITAKER: It’s magic. Who wouldn’t want to be a part of that?
CRUZ: It gives me so much happiness to know that I will never know everything about acting. That fear of not knowing will always be with me, no matter what happens.
PITT: It’s the love for the story, and a respect for the business. I want to be better in it, and better for it. I’m still striving for that. And I believe in the power of films.
BLANCHETT: Krzysztof Kieslowski said that filmmaking is a conversation with an audience. When you’re connecting with other people, it’s utterly thrilling. I feel alive when I’m acting. It’s tragic, but true. I would die in a rehearsal room if I could.
Helen, what keeps you acting?
MIRREN: Money. [Laughter] And it’s incredibly good fun. Of course, there are some intense artistic reasons, but I’m not going to go into them. So, yeah, fun and money.








Older









1,036 Comments
Cliniqua,
we know that you are “in spirit” at Bradforums. ;) but since your spirit cannot post
I took your analysis of the NYT article, Hope you don’t mind.
Of course I gave you credit.
You really made me laugh. Thanks!
Maniston, here’s the email address of the letters to the editor, it’s better than the snail mail!
letters@nytimes.com
you think Huvane and Aniston can pull some kind of conspiracy on him and his girlfriend?
+++++++
You are missing the point. This whole innuedo started with Huvane and Aniston and their VF article. What we are now demanding is the truth and not mainstream news copying tabloids. There is going to be a serious blacklash if this does not stop.
I already sent an email to NYT and told them how disgusted I am with Caryn James’ article. I have been subscribing to NYT for the longest time and I told them I will not hesitate to cancel it even against my husband’s will if this woman will not stop harping on Angie.
I also left a message to Caryn James voice mail and told her she is lazy, unfair and baised to Angie and hope she’ll get fired.
I am just glad Angie is strong, honest and fearless.
I agree with this post:
First of all, I must say that Caryn James deserves an award for her intuitive investigative piece here. She, within a relatively small space, voiced the opinions of many intelligent people regarding Angelina Jolie.
And for those of you who are quick to scream, “This means nothing!” well, I would kindly beg to differ.
You see boys and girls, The New York Times is NOT, and has never been, a “fly by night” news source. Far from it. Now if this was in The Enquirer, The Star, or US Weekly, I hardly think that anyone would give it a second thought.
However, the New York Times IS an EXTREMELY reputable source and as such, it serves as a reminder to Jolie and her PR Machine what her public REALLY thinks of her, or shall I say, how little they REALLY think of her.
Furthermore that the New York Times would run this article is undeniable proof that the halo on Jolie’s head has indeed tarnished….and notice that I did not say “tarnishing” …because the damage has already been done! Too late for back-tracking!
Given Jolie’s wild and psychotic past, there was no way that intelligent people would have ever regarded her as someone to be admired, and most certainly not a “saint.”
Whenever intelligent people hear the word “saint” with the words Angelina Jolie, we can’t help but laugh because it’s like trying to combine oil and water….simply, the word “saint” should never be used with the name “Angelina Jolie” unless the sentence in its entirety is “There is no possible way that someone with a reputation like Angelina Jolie should ever be considered a saint” which is a lot more reasonable and TRUTHFUL given the person that we are really talking about here.
I also laugh when Jolie always claims in interviews that she and her live-in lover never read their own press. Is she serious? I mean, really serious? It is during moments like these that I can see this woman for a bigger liar than she already is!
If she does NOT read her press, why did her “Look at me and what I’m doing for charity!” cry become unbearably loud the minute that she was linked with a married man? Obviously, Jolie’s PR Team reads their press and I am sure that Jolie, the liar that she is, reads it herself!
Jolie’s PR people obviously gave her a “tip” on how to minimize her negative press and this was to adopt humanitarian causes that would take attention away from her psychotic and selfish nature.
What’s funny is that she and Brad’s PR people never counted on the fact that there will always be intelligent people in the world who could see through their charade.
If the entire world were their “oyster,” we would be eating this up, but unfortunate for them, the world will NEVER be their “oyster.”
Instead, what is happening?
MANY people are crying “Not only does the emperor not wearing new clothes, but the emperor is crazy, a bisexual, a liar, a hypocrite, a phony, a manipulator who deliberately got pregnant for her live-in lover, a selfish woman, a tease, a snob, a father hater, a druggie, a uber-diva, and a not too nice person to be around!”
These days, I don’t think that Jolie wants to be Jolie!
And the stress of the affair has definitely taken its toll on Brad, who has aged in 10 years since hooking up with such an unstable woman. He now looks to be in his early to mid-50’s, with deep crow’s feet and a perpetual look of worry and fear of what little public he has turning on him.
Jolie, whether or not she is aware of it, is digging her own grave. Yet, rather than just “lay low” she is proudly promoting this adulterous affair and MOST people will never forget how she and Brad got together. Sadly, regardless of what she and Brad’s PR Team cook up in terms of fake humanitarian efforts, people will NEVER forget how they got together. Never.
Interestingly, Jolie, even in the wake of doing supposed “good” is still being linked to scandal. Always scandal. Always. But then again, she has built her life, pre-Brad on scandal (e.g., making out with her brother at the 1999 Oscars, sharing with the public her sexual attraction to women, getting involved with Billy Bob when he was still with Laura Dern, admitting to trying every drug possible, etc.), so it seems rather hypocritical for her to suddenly want people not to remember the woman that she used to be, or shall I say, still is.
Jolie must realize that she can live how she wants, but sadly, she’s only drug Brad down in the mud with her.
St. John’s must be regretting their decision to hire her since they have literally lost millions since hiring Jolie. St. John’s represents class, and Jolie, in her past AND present life, has never represented that virtue.
748
SERIOUSLY Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:42 pm
***************************************
Listen up. The only reason those jealous b*tches are trying to bring Angie down is because they are jealous. There is no other reason for them to keep trashing her. Brad left Cinnifer, people were really into the plain jane getting the hot guy. But when the hot guy left the plain Jane and got with a gorgeous woman, the jealous b*tches can’t stand it. You know it has to be jealousy because they are not picking on Brad, and he is the one who was married to the plain Jane, and he is the one who left the plain Jane, NOT Angie.
‘You see boys and girls, The New York Times is NOT, and has never been, a “fly by night” news source. Far from it. Now if this was in The Enquirer, The Star, or US Weekly, I hardly think that anyone would give it a second thought.”
The whole article was a rip off of the Us weekly article and a bunch of other garbage floating online. You’re an idiot!
754
You definitely read to much tabloids.!
And don’t forget your chill-pill tonight!OK
ONE MORE THING FOR THE IDIOT!
Angelina’s St. John exposure pleases Kelly Gray
Former executive and signature model was part of the team that designed the dress worn by the actress at the Golden Globes
By HANG NGUYEN
The Orange County Register
It was a big moment for Kelly Gray when Angelina Jolie stepped onto the red carpet at the Golden Globes this week in a charcoal grey St. John gown.
That’s because Gray, the former face of St. John, a role that Jolie now holds, was part of the team that designed the dress for the Oscar-winning actress.
“It was one of my career highlights to see her in the dress on the red carpet,” Gray said by phone on Thursday.
She added that Jolie “was a pleasure to work with and has an incredible sense of style.” Gray, a former executive at Irvine-based St. John and daughter of the founders, remains a consultant to the company. She left day-to-day duties at St. John in 2005.
#
751
stranger Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Cliniqua,
we know that you are “in spirit” at Bradforums. ;) but since your spirit cannot post
I took your analysis of the NYT article, Hope you don’t mind.
Of course I gave you credit.
You really made me laugh. Thanks!
Maniston, here’s the email address of the letters to the editor, it’s better than the snail mail!
letters@nytimes.com
*********************
Thanks but I’m way ahead of you. I’ve already sent a letter to the editor, Caryn James and I have called the ***** and left a message.
753
zen Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:57 pm
**********************
GO TO HELL!!!!!!!!!!!
wow, leather you have a lot of time on your hands to write about someone you hate so much. but i’m sorry angelina has cred as a true humanitarian 5 years under the belt and way before she got with brad. maybe you would like to visit and donate some of your money http://www.UNHCR.ORG YOU’RE WELCOME!
754
Leather Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:58 pm
***********************
That rambling sh*t you posted means nothing. Nobody reads that kind of sh*t. So scoot, go on to a Chinnifer blog, where people will get their jollies from what you said.
754
Leather Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:58 pm
___________________________________________________________________
FOR ALL THE TABLOID’s READING THIS……I AGREE 100%……..
763
I Agree with Leather Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 7:09 pm
754
Leather Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:58 pm
___________________________________________________________________
FOR ALL THE TABLOID’s READING THIS……I AGREE 100%……..
############################################
I ALSO AGREE WITH THIS POST!!
763
I Agree with Leather Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Agreement. Angelina brought Brad down. I used to respect him.
748
SERIOUSLY Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:42 pm
__________________________________
It is not Angelina’s fault thats Brad fell hard for her. As people mentioned on this site, Brad was the one who was married at that time, Angie was single. Why put all the blame on Angie. Since they are happy family (with 3 beautiful children) now why some people use dirty tactics trying to break them apart which I think it is NOT going to happen. Look at this link, they are so in love. I urge people in the media to have some virtue, beware of the karma. (BTW I am foreigner, my english is limited)
http://i3.tinypic.com/2cgng9i.jpg
Wasn’t it terrible what was in the NY Times today? I mean, how dare a newspaper of this quality finally outing the media campaign to make Brangelina the Family of the Year. Don’t they know that Angie doesn’t have a publicist - it is she alone who types up all the press releases of where she will be private jetting to with her 97 pieces of luggage for that lovely 1 hour photo-op with the unfortunates. Don’t they know that she doesn’t employ any nannies - while she & Brad are scootering, at premieres, at the GGs, bar-hopping in NO, flying their planes, etc. etc. Maddox is babysitting. How wonderful those little adopted boys are!!! How dare they do this to Angie - who was so gracious and friendly on Brad’s big night at the GGs. Didn’t anybody see that 1 smile she gave when Brad’s movie won and everybody hugged her but Brad??? We need to do something about this immediately - let’s all campaign like we did for Hello magazine - in shifts, constantly bombarding all who dare to criticize our Saint Angelina. We made her win Most Beautiful, didn’t we. We can do this. We’ll get that lunatic Camryn fired - nobody messes with us Brangeloonies!!!
BTW: How come there are no press releases to People magazine when Nicole Kidman is doing her UN work?
C’mon Cliniqua - spin this one!!!!!
http://i3.tinypic.com/2cgng9i.jpg THAT IS TOO SWEET, i bet they wanted to kiss
A hater decided to use my ID, like the NYT’s tab writer how lazy, can’t even come up with your own ID.
I am sure Brad is losing sleep over the loss of your fandom, but in consolation I am sure when he looks at the faces of his little family and the gorgeous doll he sleeps next to, you are but a gnat in the dirt.
Why not respect Brad now? He’s still Brad. Did you only “respect” him because he was acting as you wanted him to act, living what he has said several times was “an unfulfulling life?” So now that he is happy (his own words) you are unhappy? What strange people some are, unhappy Brad was respected, happy brad is not respected. Well, unhappy people want everyone else to also be unhappy, because it’s a known fact that “birds of a feather flock together”. He’s living HIS life, not yours or mine, and loving it.
748
SERIOUSLY Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:42 pm
…..Aniston is a tadpole in the world of whales in Hollywood and there is no way she has the power or respect to take down or smear Angelina and Brad. Angelina’s reputation did this to them. Period.
——————–
Yeah, I agree. Maniston IS a tadpole with a whale of a chin. But Angelina’s “reputation,” has preceded her for the last 10 years in Hollywood - despite what you may think of eccentricity — she has been as professional as they come. Hell, even BEFORE Mad she was one of the most professional reliable SOLID actresses out there. The only “reputation” she had was being “different,” and “honest,” and f**KING punctual AS ALL HELL…THAT is why was a millionaire at 26.
You don’t get an Oscar, 3 GGs, 2 SAGS, 2 National Critics, 2 NY Critics Awards, enumerable Critics Circle Awards etc. - without being a reliable person when it comes down to the brass tacks of the job, and being a human being so you can shut the f**k up b*tch. You may not LIKE her, may hate her - but I’m sick of these silly ugly a ss haters revising history.
If you can’t see that Brad is being set up most likely by people who do NOT like the fact that Angelina is the one loved deathlessly by Brad, then you’re an idiot. Angelina didn’t get THIS much criticism when she DID walk down the red carpet with BBT, so that tells you something right there. Brad is the lightening rod for her criticism, and she is the lightening rod for his, namely because the WORLD is FULL of superficial homely ass buggers like yourself who want to stick it to the beautiful people for BEING beautiful inside and out.
Angelina’s “reputation,” this idiot says, “did this to them.” Why you completely hysterical MORON!! Hahahahaha! Where the f**k have you been the last 18 months???
I guess you MISSED THE PART where every one and sunder was saying that ANGELINA WAS RESPONSIBLE for BRAD’S emergence as a humanitarian RENAISSANCE man, who was FINALLY able to achieve his dream of being a father - and not only that, but that SHE was the one who made him open his eyes to the world, and that HE was copying and ‘morphing,’ into HER - because he admired her and who she was and what she did for the world. He wanted HER reputation fool!
Now, NOT, that I agree that assessment that Brad is following in Angelina’s footsteps. I believe he always had that impetus, and had already started along that journey when they came together….
But the POINT IS…you f*ckwad, for the last YEAR and A HALF, they have been saying THAT IT IS ANGELINA’S REPUTATION that BRAD IS SEEKING OUT….so don’t go REVISING HISTORY you homely embittered faniston!
You WISH Angelina, at the young age of 31 wasn’t the LEGEND she is, and you and whoever might be conducting this PAID FOR SMEAR JOB, hysterically think it’s going to make a dent. You big dummies, it’s just making her bigger. Brad finally has someone HE deserves, a beauty who’s a mother and a humanitarian who could give a f**k what US Magazine or THE STAR has to say about her, inmstead of 40 year old leather bound handbag known as Maniston (aka tv sit com HACK) who peed herself and shed snotty tears because Rod Stewarts ****** socialite daughterb called her out as being FUG. THAT is the TRUE WEAK ASS NO ACCOUNT CHARACTER of Brad’s 7 year MISERY (Maniston). The man has escaped into the LIGHT…and none of you homely embittered ******* (including Huvane, Trump and the rest of the no accounts) can handle it!
Gussie, I don’t understand the languge PLEASE give me info or or traslation so that I can help. PLEASE!! I am being honest , so send it to my email…..
OK before I go this is so funny I can’t help it…..
anonymous Says:
Angelina brought Brad down :lol: :lol: :lol:
Nope, honey Jen brought him down when he quit movies for two years because he was so depressed being with you know who……… and finally met the LOVE OF HIS LIFE!!!! And a WOMAN to give him the KIDS he wanted . POOR JEN and their FANS :lol:
lol @ the idea of ange bringing Brad down. he has more respect as an actor and man than ever before. and despite the “backlash” angie is highly respected in the WORLD as a humanitarian . all the work she has done for refugees proves her dedication and comittment to the cause. sorry for the errors in my post I am posting from my psp
754
Leather Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:58 pm
“..However, the New York Times IS an EXTREMELY reputable source and as such, it serves as a reminder to Jolie and her PR Machine what her public REALLY thinks of her, or shall I say, how little they REALLY think of her…’
NYT has long been known by its sexist claims and series, see the whole discussion on “opt-out revolution” elsewhere.
Gloating over a sexist piece does not tell much about the subject, but tells a lot about your values.
Meanwhile, since your values are titillated with sexism, see the other piece from NYT, perhaps you will find other reasons to celebrate living in the US, as hurling other kind of epithets to the “other”.
Refugees Find Hostility and Hope on Soccer Field
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/21/us/21fugees.html?em&ex=1169614800&en=0805097c438a40ab&ei=5087%0A
“…In Clarkston, soccer means something different than in most places. As many as half the residents are refugees from war-torn countries around the world. Placed by resettlement agencies in a once mostly white town, they receive 90 days of assistance from the government and then are left to fend for themselves. Soccer is their game…Caught in the middle is a boys soccer program called the Fugees — short for refugees, though most opponents guess the name refers to the hip-hop band..
The Fugees are indeed all refugees, from the most troubled corners — Afghanistan, Bosnia, Burundi, Congo, Gambia, Iraq, Kosovo, Liberia, Somalia and Sudan. Some have endured unimaginable hardship to get here: squalor in refugee camps, separation from siblings and parents. One saw his father killed in their home.
The Fugees, 9 to 17 years old, play on three teams divided by age. Their story is about children with miserable pasts trying to make good with strangers in a very different and sometimes hostile place…. and their presence seems to bring out the best in some people and the worst in others.
The Fugees’ coach exemplifies the best…
At the other extreme are some town residents, opposing players and even the parents of those players, at their worst hurling racial epithets and making it clear they resent the mostly African team. In a region where passions run high on the subject of illegal immigration, many are unaware or unconcerned that, as refugees, the Fugees are here legally….”
This also is a reminder for the UNHCR’s and its reps difficult work. Tarnish the image, indeed. In the eyes of whom?
~curly
770
CLINIQUA Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 7:26 pm
WELL SAid. always love you cliniqua !
Pages: « 1 … 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 … 42 » Show All
Comment and Share!
E-mail to a Friend or share on Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and more!