Brad Pitt is Impervious to Poo, Snot, Urine and Vomit

# 840 an oldie @ 11/21/2008 at 1:01 am

Pardon me…I’m behind…just thought I’d share 2 posts on the subject from the mods of Awardsdaily.com…

The first post is by Sasha Stone…she’s the owner of the site…

http://www.awardsdaily.com/?p=4093#comment-32684

The New York Times has a cleverly timed piece up today by Brook Barnes which accuses Angelina Jolie of brokering a deal with People Magazine that would control how they cover her, Pitt and their family now and in the future:

According to the deal offered by Ms. Jolie, the winning magazine was obliged to offer coverage that would not reflect negatively on her or her family, according to two people with knowledge of the bidding who were granted anonymity because the talks were confidential. The deal also asked for an “editorial plan” providing a road map of the layout, these people say.

People denies it:

Through a spokeswoman, People magazine, which is owned by Time Inc., released a statement denying that any conditions were placed on coverage. “These claims are categorically false,” the statement said. “Like any news organization, People does purchase photos, but the magazine does not determine editorial content based on the demands of outside parties.”

The article continues to show Jolie manipulates the press in order to draw more attention to her charity work, which is admirable.

The thing the NY Times neglects to mention, and what will probably never be talked about in the future when they talk about the stuff around A Mighty Heart is that the press at large, for the most part, focuses almost entirely on the silly and ongoing story of the love triangle. It never ends. Not only that but take a look at all of the tabloids on any given day — what kind of nonsense do they put on their covers day in and day out. But it isn’t just the tabs. The mainstream press are all over the story too. I finally figured out why: any news about Angelina but especially the private stuff draws big numbers across the board. When I do any post about Angelina the traffic spikes. Even on my level I notice it; I can’t imagine what the big magazines make off of her. They make money off of mostly fictional stories, sometimes complete lies, on a continual basis. That leads me to conclude that Jolie treats the press the way they deserve to be treated. This is not a woman who doesn’t respect the institution of journalism; this is a woman who is smart enough to see how it has devolved into a corporate-owned mess.

She pissed off a lot of journalists during A Mighty Heart by attempting to filter how they interview her. She routinely, as do other celebrities, requests that no personal questions be asked and that if the questions are asked she won’t answer them. This frustrates her fans because all they want to know about is the personal stuff. Jolie wants people to see what she wants them to see. She has transformed herself from exhibitionist wild child to humanitarian and mother. She’s done a good job and it hasn’t been all press manipulation. Her past drags behind her like a piece of toilet paper and there isn’t much she can do about it. She is an icon, for better or worse, and to many she will always be the girl who stole Brad Pitt away from Jennifer Aniston or Billy Bob Thornton from Laura Dern.

How does a negative article in the NY Times impact Jolie’s image, especially in terms of earning a “You Like Me” Oscar nomination? Maybe that depends on how the public views the victimized press. If people feel as I do that the mainstream has mostly let the readers down in its continual coverage of stuff that doesn’t really matter, well, maybe they won’t care that much that Jolie has no regard for journalism. But if there is a whiff of a “diva” in the air it may linger for a while.

# 840 an oldie @ 11/21/2008 at 1:01 am

The second post is by Ryan Adams, a moderator at Awardsdaily.com

http://www.awardsdaily.com/?p=4093#comment-32684

1. Ryan Adams November 21st, 2008 at 9:35 am 1

“But it isn’t just the tabs. The mainstream press are all over the story too. I finally figured out why: any news about Angelina but especially the private stuff draws big numbers across the board.”

So true, Sasha. The New York Times puts this piece in their Business section, and with all the economic turmoil and financial meltdown in the news, it’s the 2nd most emailed “Business” story at the NYTimes today. They feature it above the virtual fold on the main page if the Times website. They open it to comments (73 responses, so far) — the only business article I can find on the site that’s given the open forum feedback treatment.

That’s why the Times piece seems a little self-serving and disingenuous to me. “oh look! Press manipulator! Please read our story revealing how Angelina is all about the publicity!”

It makes me respect her even more. The main stream media are vultures when it comes to certain people and sensationalist subjects. Anyone who can figure out how to effectively prevent themselves from being repeatedly victimized by the press earns my respect.

In tangentially related news: Jennifer Aniston attempts to control her publicity too today, albeit on what seems to me a much more petty level:

Jennifer Aniston Begs Fans Not To Sell Their Photos Of Her

So Angelina tries to manage her image when even the NYTimes is gossiping about her on its business page. And she does it in a way to bring attention to charitable causes. While Jennifer Aniston bristles at somebody selling a cell-phone photo so “they can dine out on me.”

Not that different on a basic privacy level, but who’s attempting to finesse the press with the most class? And who has the most noble motivation?

So where’s the NYTimes Business article about Jeniffer Aniston whining about fan snapshots?

brad you are bliah….

# 861 guli @ 11/21/2008 at 1:54 am

I actually find NYT quite funny ..but I am also amused by the fact that even they have to use JP’s to try and rise their publications!!! JP’s own them too

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

Guli -

I laughed, too. Mainly because once again Brad gets off with an “oh yeah, Brad Pitt advises her, too” while Angie gets raked over the coals. It’s just another news media making a buck off Angie. They actually opened the section to comments. I read the first few and some people are like, “So? How is this news? Everybody does it!” LOL.

BTW - here’s a post from the NYT comment section on that Angie article that cracked me up…

All Editors’ Selections » EDITORS’ SELECTIONS (what’s this?)
November 21, 2008 9:10 am

Link
As a PR professional, I find Ms. Jolie more adept at messaging and consistent use of talking points than many who have been in our industry for years. Should she decide to leave the motion picture industry, she’d surely be in high demand as the head of her own agency. Other public figures would do well to study the way she has developed her philanthropy and image - she is a total professional.

Marsha Keeffer

— Marsha, Santa Cruz, CA

Jen is going to p*ssed that more people are talking about Angelina than her article.

OH dear @ 11/21/2008 at 12:04 pm
______________________________
Oh god, are you read Man aricle in NYMag? She is boooring as hell. Still talking about Friends. Bwah..

lol —and Just Jared thought huvane is the one with power and started pimping X.

Observer2: Love this article! Thanks for posting.
————————

What should I get X for an Xmas present?
Oh yes, that Boyfriend Arm Pillow!
Only US$19.95, folks :-)
————————

Some choice paragraphs:
-Jolie’s Vogue cover line, however, was a more triumphant “Why Her Real Life is More Romantic Than Any Movie.”
The disparity continued inside: in 2007, Jolie was shown with Pitt and their numerous children; in the current issue, Aniston is pictured with her dog Norman.

-Since her divorce, America’s Sweetheart has morphed into America’s Spinster. The unmarried, childless Aniston has become the tabloids’ Miss Havisham, portrayed as lonely, needy and locked in the past.

-In a rare case of tabloids imitating life, “Poor Jen!” was knocked off her No. 1 perch this year by Jolie.

-What chance did the Girl Next Door have against the Girl From the Next Galaxy? The New Yorker film critic Anthony Lane summed up perception of Jolie’s snaring of Pitt: “She took one look at the world’s most widely desired man and scooped him up with no more ado than a Parisian grande dame tucking a chihuahua into her clutch bag.”

-Jolie’s Earth Mother status hasn’t interfered with her stellar career. Since 2005, she has made nine movies, two of which generated Oscar buzz.

-Aniston has made seven, two with cringe-inducing, too-close-to-life titles. As Fug Girls, New York magazine’s fashion blog, observed: “The Break-Up was bad enough, but He’s Just Not That Into You? Honey, no. There’s self-awareness, and then there’s masochism.”

-Aniston has… sold this image of herself and now she can’t shake it. She has become the poster girl for crying yourself to sleep at night.”

-Aniston is fated to dredge up the past. She’s photographed often with former Friends co-star Courteney Cox, reminding the public of Rachel; in a Smart Water ad, she’s surrounded by children of various ethnicities, summoning inevitable comparison to Jolie; her recent guest appearance on 30 Rock as a stalker sent up her real-life victim persona.

gaye @ 11/21/2008 at 12:30 pm

you have to look at the photos inside X’s NYT magazine.You’ll be on the floor laughing,she trying to copy Angelina’s W magazine pics.

# 918 bdj @ 11/21/2008 at 8:16 am

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/awards_festivals/awards-season/news/e3i60b39c4b57a9d775dce1308a3019c5d4

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

I found it interesting that it took 43 days to shoot the movie and they came in underbudget. The budget listed at BOM is $55MIL - so there’s now way of knowing how much it actually cost. With foreign revenue, dvd sales and rentals - Uni will more htan make their money back on this movie.

Also, JMS says he’s writing a book because he had to leave so much out of the script. That sounds like an interesting read. I’ll have to keep an eye out for it next year - if it gets published.

Eastwood was able to get the story down on film quickly, wrapping production on Dec. 14, 2007, two days shy of the full 45-day schedule with budget to spare.

For Straczynski, the Christine Collins story continues beyond the film. He’s working on a book about her and the Wineville murders, which he expects to complete in February.

“There was so much I had to leave out,” he says. “It’s a chance for me tell the full story.”

It’s open season on Angelina! Loons take cover!