Brad & Angelina in Washington DC

48 Anonymous : 09/22/2007 at 2:36 am

God bless those four children: Maddox, Pham Quang Sang, Zahara, and Shiloh. They are being raised in a circus, with flashbulbs 24/7. Their needs are the LAST consideration of these two narcissists. Good parents? On what planet?

++++++++++++++

Pham Quang Sang? Do you mean PAX, Doofus? Get over it. The child was renamed. It happens with adoptions all the time. You’re just jealous that you’re not being raised by those tow “narcissists”. If you were, then maybe you’d have your head on your shoulders instead of up your ass.

June 18, 2005

Angelina Jolie, Condoleeza Rice and the Refugees

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador Angelina Jolie. They are launching the 5th Annual World Refugee Day celebrations at the National Geographic Society in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday. Paul Rusesabagina (whose life inspired the film Hotel Rwanda) was welcomed by thunderous applause that briefly stopped the ceremony.

Jolie eloquently and passionately reminded everyone that the United States was founded by refugees. “One of America’s most inspiring symbols is the Statue of Liberty,” she said. “She is the Mother of Exiles with her promise of refuge to the world’s tired, poor, to those huddled masses yearning to breathe free, she welcomed millions of ‘new Americans’ over the years.”

She also reminded the audience that there are millions of refugees whose futures are still uncertain: “World Refugee Day is the day we make sure they aren’t forgotten.”

Later that evening, Paul Rusesabingina, Terry George and UNHCR’s Craig Sanders chaired a question-and-answer panel following a special screening of Hotel Rwanda. One of the audience members asked Rusesabagina how he found his courage to save over 1,200 Rwandans during the genocide, to which the Rwandan replied: “I remained who I was and did not follow the majority. The majority is not always right. Whoever kills knows that killing is never right.”

Thank you Jared.:-) “God loves the Jolie-Pitts” makes me smile every time. :-)

48 Anonymous

Fans just look at how miserable these haters become.hahaha please stop crying,They didn`t mean to hurt you.

Thanks Angie and Brad to make life of this hater very sad and miserable.

It is really nice to be jp`s fan these days,we really have good laugh at these haters lately,Thanks God for bringing this two together and please God keep blessing them and their family.

ooops. My mistake. I meant “God Bless the Jolie- Pitts”. :-)

Brad and Angelina’s Miltonic moment
By Nigel Andrews

This has been an amazing fortnight for followers of Brad and Ange. Two simple September weeks have given an extra polish to a screen-biz legend already buffed to a dazzle. Brad is the one who came up via commercials, minor TV shows and a bit part in Thelma and Louise to become the cinema’s most beautiful leading male. Angelina is the one who emerged from a stormy parental chrysalis (and still won’t pick up the phone to father Jon Voight), followed by humungous fanzine exposure, to become the screen’s most beautiful - or sexiest at any rate - female.

Now, in a synchronised coup, they have both been anointed as serious actors.

Last week Brad was named Best Male Performer at the Venice Film Festival, to gasps of respectful surprise. We who had seen The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford admired Pitt’s work as the first-named outlaw but thought the prize likelier to go to the second outlaw, showily played by Casey Affleck. (His brother Ben won Venice Best Actor last year.) Either that or the gong would be bestowed, as so often, on a non-Hollywood actor no one outside Europe had heard of.

Then yesterday, in the UK and other parts of the planet, Angelina opened in A Mighty Heart, playing the seriously serious role of Marianne Pearl. Pearl was the wife, then widow, of the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel, famously slain in a jihadi execution. Jolie received praise at Cannes in Michael Winterbottom’s film for dowdying down and accenting up to impersonate an everyday-attractive French brunette with a high anguish quotient. The actress’s strong performance culminates in an ear-piercing primal scream on receiving confirmation of her husband’s murder. (I thought the scream the single false note, the one that said, “This is my Oscar bid”.)

For Mr and Mrs Pitt the moment is almost Miltonic. They are no longer babes in the Edenic backyard; they have joined the acting grown-ups. This is both good news and bad. There is something lapsarian - something a little cast-out-of-paradise - about beautiful people who risk martyring their beauty with talent. Not content with the elite status granted them by a deity who has placed them in the Garden of the Eternal Photo Opportunity, they risk all on raiding the Tree of the Knowledge of Passion, Emotion and Character Exploration.

(If you think invoking the Book of Genesis is overdoing it a bit, I would argue that Brad and Ange have already been acting out this scenario, wittingly or unwittingly. Both actors have spent an unseemly amount of recent screen time toying with snakes: Jolie in Alexander, as witchy-sexy Olympias, the hero’s mother;and Pitt, for no detectable plot reason but eye-catchingly and biblically, in Jesse James. He is even seen in one sequence wreathing his arms in a whole variety of serpents.)

The world feels ambivalent - both intrigued and apprehensive, or even a bit resentful - when beauty is joined on a single person’s mantelpiece by other trophies of accomplishment. “It isn’t fair” is part of our feeling. No one should be so blessed. In cinema the love-hate attitude to the beauty-talent linkup has been particularly keen. The paradigm is surely Marilyn Monroe. A tendency to reduce men to vaporous emanations of concupiscence, by a presence suggesting a pre-cognitive pulchritude, an unthinking animal perfection, cannot and must not, we feel, be sullied by conscious artistry. The need continues today, among many, to believe that Monroe had no intelligence, no discipline, no technique, no application. She just “was”.

In the same way, on screen, Gary Cooper, a male beauty, just “was”. So was Valentino. So, in her most iconic scenes, was Garbo (that impassive face blown by the sea breezes at the end of Queen Christina). And Marlene Dietrich so determinedly and near-totemically “was” - presenting to the glow of the production lights her impassive beauty with its sculpted cheekbones and elevated eyebrows - that she, for me, rather gave the game away. I always pictured Dietrich, at the end of a take, tearing off her air of elevated inanition and rowdying with the boys and girls behind the camera. (Pretty much true to reported fact.)

For the actuality is this. Beauty is not enough for stardom. It never has been. There has always been talent too, whether that extra gift is acting ability, charisma - and knowing how to use it - or an engaging richness of mannerism: all those things that are most simply summed up in the words, “the camera loves him/her”.

Pedants will have positioned themselves by now to point out that Pitt and Jolie have won acting acclaim before. Yes, I know. Each has been noticed by the Oscar voters. Brad won a Best Supporting Actor nomination for Twelve Monkeys, Jolie a Best Supporting Actress award for Girl, Interrupted. But I don’t count Oscars. Those handouts - especially for supporting roles - are given by the mad to the glad. Their yardsticks measure the yardage of shtick; their criterion is a showy quirkiness. Winning a performance prize at Venice and being good in the lead of a Michael Winterbottom movie are, in each case, a quite different thing.

So let’s salute Mr and Mrs Pitt. They have raised their game. At the same time let’s state once more: it is naive to be surprised. If an actor has reached the point of being a star, that actor has already made it clear that he or she is more, much more, than just a pretty face.

48 Anonymous

Pham Quang Sang was not the name given Pax by the orphanage after he was abandoned at birth in a hospital and then at the age of 30 days placed in the orphanage. In Vietnam, the name is written in reverse order so in English it would be Sang Quang Pham, Pham being the last name. Angelina’s mother picked the name Pax which means peace before she died. Angelina and Brad honored her mother by using that name. Pax’s legal name is Pax, period. That’s on his birth certificate and his passport, just like every other adopted child’s legal name.

And because you are so poorly educated almost 100% of adopted children, and 100% of younger adoptd children are given new names when they become part of their new families. It is part of their assimulation into their families.

Try doing some research before you rant, oh but you clearly lack the skills and ability to do so, that is so evident.

go back to your thread anonymous…i am posting nasty comments there so take care of your own turf instead of spewing your S_K_A_N_K_Y comments here

Nope. I mean Pham Quang Sang, the child’s actual name. No one with any decency would rename a three year old boy. Could there be any clearer example of Jolie’s narcissism that that? No adoption agency anywhere should grant either one of these two people any further adoptions of innocent children.

These two people are ACTORS. Don’t forget that little fact.

This is a public site for ALL opinions.

There are legions of people, worldwide, who believe that these two are ridiculous frauds. It’s pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain.

Is the new title of this thread the parade of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt idiotic sychophants?

67 Anonymous : 09/22/2007 at 2:58 am
These two people are ACTORS. Don’t forget that little fact.
***********************************************

I think what fascinates people so much about Brad and Angelina is that they are way more than just actors. They are vitally interested in and involved with the world around them. Unlike a lot of actors, they know the world doesn’t begin and end in Hollywood.

Contrast that to Jenzilla, who doesn’t give a damn about anything but laying around on her yoga mat, walking her mutts and blow-drying her hair, when she isn’t tagging along after the Cox/Arquettes every where they go. “Superficial” is probably too big a word for you to handle, so can you say B-O-R-I-N-G?

Brad always looked half-dead when he was with X; he had this bored gaze on his face whenever he was with her. Since being with Angelina he’s come totally alive.

“100% of younger adoptd children are given new names when they become part of their new families. It is part of their assimulation into their families.”
…………………..

100% inaccurate.