OlderBrad Pitt is Impervious to Poo, Snot, Urine and Vomit
Brad Pitt opens up to Oprah about partner Angelina Jolie and their six kids.
On how fatherhood has changed him: “[I'm] tough as nails. I’m impervious to poo, snot, urine, vomit. You can’t get me. You cannot break me down.”
On quick outings being a thing of the past: “We don’t go to the mall. It’s like a half-an-hour just to get everyone buckled in and make sure they’ve got their snacks, and Z.Z. [Zahara, 3] has got a blanket and Shiloh’s got her silky. Angie’s militant about it. She’s right on top of it. Thank God, because I’m always forgetting something.”
On 2½-year-old daughter Shiloh’s Peter Pan obsession: “She only wants to be called John. John or Peter. So it’s a Peter Pan thing. So we’ve got to call her John. ‘Shi, do you want …’ – ‘John. I’m John.’ And then I’ll say, ‘John, would you like some orange juice?’ And she goes, ‘No!’ So, you know, it’s just that kind of stuff
Watch Brad’s interview tomorrow on Oprah! The Curious Case of Benjamin Button costar Cate Blanchett will also be on the show. A preview of the show is on YouTube.
Unfortunately you can’t embed the video. Come on Oprah, be nice. Sharing is caring!!!
Share This Post:
Posted to: Brad Pitt, Oprah Winfrey
Related posts:
1,050 Comments
lulu @ 11/21/2008 at 2:39 am dean @ 11/21/2008 at 12:24 am
There is a report breaking tonight that Jolie has a ‘contractual promise’ from Time Inc. to only have positive coverage of her
——
What ’s the big deal ? Maniston and Huvane have a contractual promise from every tabloids outlet and media to only have postive coverage of his client. just take a look at every tabloids story of Maniston for the last 4 yrs. she was always written in a good light. while Angie was always the wicked witch of west., so who is manipulating the press ?
Every actors manipulate the media , so why do these publicist get a big cut from every deal they make. it’s all about the image. Believe me Maniston can not live a day without Huvane , she can not even talk or interview without her Huvane controlling the interveiwer .so who is the manipulator ?
If Actresses like Angie can put the emphasis and focus over the less fortunate peoples in this world is a media manipulation, then I wish every actors and actresses should learn from Angie. and I won’t bother by this kind of manipulation.I would prefer this kind of manipulation than the ass and cooch show of Maniston .or her regular update of her new lovelife to the press.
dean @ 11/21/2008 at 12:24 am
There is a report breaking tonight that Jolie has a ‘contractual promise’ from Time Inc. to only have positive coverage of her. Anyone still think she’s not a media manipulator?
*************************************************************************************************
Yeah, and?? That’s what publicists do, dean-o — manipulate the media. Only Angie does it better than they do and saves 10 to 15% of her income in the process. There are probably some very angry and bitter publicists out there who are sh*tting blood that she beats them at their own game.
BTW, dean-o, your reading comprehension level ain’t all that great. Angie’s agreement with the media covers only what they say about her and says nothing about what they say about Aniston. CNN, Time Mag, People Mag and TMZ portray Jen as an old desperate whining woman because she IS an old desperate whining woman. And if that’s how she is consistently portrayed in the media, it means Huvane sucks at his job, and if she had the brains of a demented donkey she would fire his ass tonight.
sb4 @ 11/21/2008 at 2:47 am
Dina- there is tons of jealousy… you are soooo right- also, there are some very angry publicity- type orgs that want her & Brad to pay them 10-20% of their income AND be able to use them as “carrots” to shove lesser stars down the public’s throats, e.g, you can’t talk to Angie and/or Brad unless you publish a great article about our other client, annoying Z lister, first…
______________
ITA. PR co is a big business in HW. I read somewhere they took 5% of every deal make by the actors. CAA or agent took 10 %.
Angie work her way to success without any PR agent, that’s rare fro A list, and big no no to the PR agent., so the constant trashing of Angie by the media was part of the game bribed or paid by this PR co. this could also be a warning to every newcomers not to follow the path of Angie . they want her to fail badly. but the more bashing they make, the mroe sympathy Angie’s get , and the more popular she is.
why am I reading duplicate posts from stupid trolls.
the breaking news one…about the gossipy angelina is her own pr piece??
uh hello - there’s no ‘breaking news,’ it’s as speculative and gossipy as the worst tabloid, and it gets the same kind of snide digs in too, lying by omission about trivial crap. Any article or ‘reporter,’ and I use the term loosely, that is quoting the horrid Bonnie Fuller from Star and lies weekly, is a joke in and of itself - this is a woman whose reporters snoop thru garbage and pay hospital orderlies for information, on top of lying on a weekly basis - the fact that it’s a gossipy nyt piece is pretty sh*tty on it’s face - but that’s where we are in pop culture.
I had thought ushering in an obama administration would make us a bit more responsible, and maybe ultimately it will….and then I remembered two words as they pertain to the nyt: Judith. Miller. A ‘reporter,’ responsible thru the nyt of regularly spreading lies about the lead-up to the war in it’s pages, and being the mouth piece for the hawks that have killed 1.6 million Iraqis and almost 5000 American military, woundling about 75,000 more, some irreparably.
That’s the nyt of present day.
They showed their stripes when they attacked Angelina after she had ventured out to the Golden Globes with Brad in early (january) 2007, simultaneously struggling with her Mom’s terminal illness.
It’s at times like this, I really want to be on a members only board, to be inncoulated from the idiots and and monkeys throwing sh*t around..
Please don’t do the work of these idiots.
…and if someone has seen fit to post some negative article, please scroll back and try to see if it’s already been posted to prevent duplication of the cra.p.
Hollywood’s Top-Earning CouplesBy Forbes
November 19, 2008, 9:30 pm PST
Thanks to a monster year filled with music, movies, fashion and endorsement deals, Jay-Z and his new bride, Beyonce Knowles, collectively raked in $162 million between June 1, 2007 and June 1, 2008. The jaw-dropping sum garners them bragging rights atop our first annual ranking of Hollywood’s Top-Earning Couples, a list that also includes A-list pairings Keith Urban and Nicole Kidman, David and Victoria Beckham, Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, and Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner, among others.
“Naturally, powerful people tend to gravitate toward other powerful people,” explains clinical psychologist and celebrity researcher Jim Houran, for reasons that range from proximity (stars hang around other stars) to familiarity (people are attracted, at least initially, to others like them) to clearer expectations (shared priorities make it easier for celebrities to relate). No matter how they get together, the results are good for the bottom line.
Take Will and Jada Pinkett Smith. They hauled in some $85 million over the past year, making them No. 2 on our list. Though Jada’s resume continues to grow, Will’s the family breadwinner. He raked in $80 million in the year ending June 2008, thanks to another set of top-performing blockbusters: “I Am Legend,” “The Pursuit of Happyness,” and this past summer’s “Hancock.” Together the flicks banked $1.2 billion at the worldwide box office, making him Hollywood’s most bankable star.
Jada pulled in $5 million during the same 12-month period, thanks to roles as an actress (”The Women”), producer (”The Human Contract”), and businesswoman (a stake in beauty line Carol’s Daughter).
Third: David and Victoria Beckham. Conquering fans on both sides of the Atlantic, the power couple brought in $58 million over the year-long period.
Becks’ share was $50 million, proving the much-covered move to America has paid off for the British soccer star. Though his Los Angeles Galaxy salary was $5.5 million, the sum more than doubled when his cut of the team’s ticket, merchandise, and sponsorship revenues were factored in. He also pulled down a cool $35 million from lucrative endorsement deals with Motorola, Adidas, Coty and PepsiCo, among others.
His wife, better known by her pop-star moniker, Posh, generated another $8 million, thanks to her cut of a $23 million Spice Girls reunion tour and a slew of product lines, including sunglasses, perfume, couture clothing, and her DVB jeans line.
Not far behind are country sweethearts Tim McGraw and Faith Hill, who collectively brought in $35 million over the course of the year.
In addition to the big loot they made on their Soul-2-Soul concert tour, he earned millions from festivals and a double-platinum album, Let It Go. Hill recorded another album, The Hits, and the NFL Sunday Night Football theme song. Every time NBC plays the catchy tune, Hill sees a check.
Live-in lovers and tabloid staples Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, who banked $34 million together, round out the top five.
Along with globe-trotting and parenting six, Jolie appeared on screen in the films “Beowulf” and “A Mighty Heart.” During the same period, Pitt spent time both in front of the camera (”Oceans 13,” “The Assassination of Jesse James”) and behind it (”The Private Lives of Pippa Lee,” “A Mighty Heart,” and “Tree of Life”).
Reporting by Lacey Rose and Lauren Streib
Yup @ 11/21/2008 at 2:42 am
___________________________
that’s not spooning ya dumbazz!
Report Abuse
# 893
Hmmm @ 11/21/2008 at 3:03 am
(Cough Cough) They ignore Brad when he says nice things about Angelina. Did you read one article about what sweet things he wrote about Angelina. NO (Cough Cough)So you can stop with you stupid comments. Angelina is unique among hollywood stars which is why they are going after her..
Yup @ 11/21/2008 at 2:42 am
As per Cate Blanchett’s great advice, this couple doesn’t spoon well which indicates that they just don’t fit.
http://i38.tinypic.com/jgl9qu.jpg
=======================================
Yup, you idiot!! They are not spooning, so of course they won’t fit. And FYI, what Cate was talking about was spooning in bed, not out in public. Everyone knows what would happen if Angie was to rest her butt on Brad, he would had to take her inside the house and finish what she started if you know what I mean.
# 897 idioooot @ 11/21/2008 at 3:22 am Yup @ 11/21/2008 at 2:42 am
___________________________
that’s not spooning ya dumbazz!
****************************************************************
That was my point. LOL!!
OT
Ashlee Simpson had a boy.
Bronx Mowgli Wentz
lol
I think that Angelina and Trevor Nielson would spoon well and hence fit better. Her hips and pelvis area gravitates naturally towards him. Just saying, the body speaks volumes.
http://i38.tinypic.com/2ic1e35.jpg
Jill @ 11/21/2008 at 2:21 am
missy @ 11/21/2008 at 2:12 am
Maybe Americans should boycott the NYT?
**************************************************************************************************
What for? Read the article again. What they are really saying is how smart Angelina is to be able to take control like that and still come out ahead of every other female celebrity. She should pay that reporter a bonus.
///
Look I don’t think the article is that bad. It basically a retread of trash US Weekly has written but I would not pay this guy a penny for this article. (He said he talk to 12 people when he could have just read all googled US Weekly). But what I really did not like is him disregarding Angelina work for the UN as mostly of PR purposes. I think the ny times should be called out about for such a one sided article while they kiss up to other stars who polish their images.
Report Abuse
# 902
Hmmm @ 11/21/2008 at 3:33 am
Please explain why Angelina is bashed weekly and Pitt is not if she’s the one with the contract saying “no negativity”.
//
There is no such contract. But it’s sad that you asked a question that the ny times should have asked themselves.
What is boring and old is your stupid theory about Brad and CAA. You trolls have yet to prove how this theory helps Brad.
Yup @ 11/21/2008 at 3:26 am
_____________________________
that was totally lost on your feeble little brain, stupid azz idiot. Since when does spooning take place while standing up? I can’t wait for jared to flip the names later today.
DECENCY @ 11/21/2008 at 3:35 am
what I really did not like is him disregarding Angelina work for the UN as mostly of PR purposes.
***********************************************************************************************
He can disregard it or do whatever he wants with it as far as I’m concerned. What he can’t disregard is the fact that she is doing damn good work for the UN and has achieved world-wide recognition for it, including being accepted into the Council on Foreign Relations.
The trolls can read whatever they want into it; they’ll do that, anyway. But if they point a finger at Angelina as a media manipulator, they’d better point three fingers back at Aniston and ask her why she’s paying Huvane 15% of her salary for making her look like an idiot.
Why are people rferring to the writer of the nyt piece as a ‘he,’ the name says brooke. Is brooke a man?
Jill @ 11/21/2008 at 4:00 am
But if they point a finger at Angelina as a media manipulator, they’d better point three fingers back at Aniston and ask her why she’s paying Huvane 15% of her salary for making her look like an idiot.
_____________________________________________
Jill i’m curious how many percent of respondents view Ms. Aniston positively? ammm….- 9%? :-D
brookes barnes IS A MAN. if people were told to write pro-angelina articles , look at this week’s people magazine. jen aniston talks about angelina, brad and her life. u think angelina even wants to be mentioned in a aniston article. NYT using bonnie fuller as a source? a known liar who said angelina and brad split up because STAR could not find angelina for a week in 2006 when angelina and kids had to be at a hotel while their house was being sorted out.
if a stars play the media, why pick out angelina? because the turkey with the biggest neck always gets shot at that’s why. if NYT says angelina image as fake, what is her ‘real’ image. ANGELINA’S IMAGE IS OF A CARING CHARITABLE PERSON AND BEHEIND CLOSED DOORS SHE IS………………….. A CARING AND CHARITABLE PERSON ASWELL. WHAT’S FAKE ABOUT THAT? DO NYT REALLY THINK ANGELINA IS STILL AS WILD AS SHE USED TO BE? i am sure that ’set-up’ photo in 2003 is now viewed as a mistake by angelina, as there is also a pap pic of angelina flipping through a copy of US weeklyi n a shop in 2003, she never reads that poison now-a-days.
if angelina can use the press to cover important world issues, then i say go for it. angelina is not a fake, she is seen as an earth mother BECAUSE SHE IS ONE. just like brad said, the tacky media always want angelina to be a femme fatale and nothing else, but brad know the real angelina, sweet, a great mom and has a big caring heart.
i also think the media has started the campaign to make sure angelina DOES NOT GET AN OSCAR NOM. i remember last year at the start of 2007 and then towards the end of 2007, the media was attacking angelina and went over the ‘a mighty heart’ press letter for months. guess who were the loudest moaning publications. yes that’s right the new york times and US WEEKLY. same thing has now started in 2008.
i can’t stand the woman, but i kinda miss sarah palin. purely because the media had a new person to target and left angelina alone for ages.
COME BACK SARAH!!!
-=–=-=-=-90p’#[n../ku @ 11/21/2008 at 6:11 am
i also think the media has started the campaign to make sure angelina DOES NOT GET AN OSCAR NOM.
__________________________________________
And you think their plan will work?
hopefully not but i think oscar voters can be swayed by things like this. oscar voters like to vote for an up-coming or a non-tabloid star, i don’t agree with or like it but i can see it coming already, i know how they think. the media will try and over-expose angelina in the months coming up to oscars, whether the coverage is positiive or negative, so the voters go for some-one less obvious. the media also want to get their digs into angelina before she ‘fades away’ for a while, so the media won’t have as many chances to get at angelina and so are doing it now.
Who are you people,lol, move on
if you can’t see what the NYT is doing, your ignorance is bliss. the only thing is they will NEVER bring angelina down so your right, i will move on, just open your eyes and laugh at the media and when they attack angelina, ask why? btw aniston appears on NYT magazine and the NYT attack angelina days later? hmmmmmmmmmmm
I can tell with the movies coming out, there is a lot at stake, for the tabloids and the serious newspapers like the NYT to launch an all out attack on Angelina. If Angelina is a media manipulator, then she fails miserably. Just take a look at the tabloids’ covers and tell me if Angelina has ever been portrayed positively, especially the last 3 years. That NYT article is a joke. I guess Team Maniston saw that Angelina has gone up in the poll of likability and they are getting nervous. Don’t worry, her dog movie will do fine, and another CAA protege (Ann Hathaway) will get an Oscar nom. Their PR teams don’t have to freak out like that. Reminds me of the mud slinging of presidential campaigns.
The reason Angelina has gone up on the likability is due to her hard work and her talent. People start to see who she really is, and they can’t miss to notice that Maniston is the total opposite: superficial, petty, and whiny.
_______________________________________
CAA is to blame again lol why brad fans always forget he is with CAA too, him and Plan B.
Pages: « 1 … 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 … 42 » Show All
Comment and Share!
E-mail to a Friend or share on Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and more!