Angelina Jolie having a press conference today!!!

[purple rain]

Originally Posted by january

I just am in disbelief at how much money they spend traveling around the world, blowing money on lavish suites and new houses, private jets, four rooms for labor...and yes, people have a point when they say "if I had the money, I would." But the bigger point is that this woman hails herself as a humanitarian, who has gone to third world countries and seen the desperately poor. Listen, I live in a third world country right now and I've seen poverty and lived among it. When it touches you, when you feel it in your heart, you DO feel guilty spending money on such trivial things. You do feel guilty not eating a whole meal and even throwing away a bite when there are people starving outside. But it hardly seems to affect her whatsoever. Thats the thing that doesn't mesh with me at all, it all seems so phony and self-serving. No one is saying she needs to live like a peasant, but if you put yourself up on a pedestal and broadcast your "acts" and call yourself a "humanitarian", I do think that you are going to be held to a different standard. I'm always shocked by their extravagant purchases and their pretentious ways of doing everything, nothing can be under the radar. And don't go there, celebs are master manipulators of the media and they can go undercover if they wish, but most celebs don't wish to, especially these two.

Great post. Everything about Angelina does seem to be so put upon. She always has to blab to the press about how she's so different and unconventional. And I've never taken her charity work seriously. It doesn't amount to much more than photo opportunities. It's mighty suspicious that she has to issue a press release everytime she donates a dime to charity. The fact that she has even put that "I donate 1/3 of my salary to charity (which I think has been proven untrue)" out there just reeks of famewhoring. Real charity is done out of altruism; it seems this woman does charity for the positive press it can bring her. She feeds the whole "Saint Angelina, worship her" storyline that her fantards buy into.

Angelina and Brad are just such sanctimonious, self-important famewhores. Her holding the press conference to announce she's in the hospital but okay is just one example.

As for her career, she played a supporting role in a comic book film and a supporting voice role in a kiddy animated film. Those films would have done well no matter who starred in them, but her fantards, like PerezHilton, give her all the credit for the successes of those films. I don't think she's ever opened a film based on her own name. She's more media star than movie star. I put others, like George Clooney, who also can't seem to open a movie, in the same category.

And the person who called Wanted a "girl power" movie must not have seen it/read the reviews. I won't see any film Angelina stars in, but the reviews I've read state that the film is misogynistic.

[sparkly]

Most, if not all, celebs are fame hungry and do the exact same thing that Brad and Angie do.

[Charlieboy]

I agree. I have more respect for celebs who conduct their philanthropy away from the cameras.

[Sasha]

Wanted is a disgrace. My friend saw it the other night and says the movie is very eager to encourage viewers to think that committing murder is empowering. She said it seemed to her like a war propaganda film.

Anyone associated with such a morally bankrupt piece of shite, and I include my man Morgan Freeman in this, needs to take a hard look in the mirror.

[GaPeach]

^^ your review is based upon what your friend said?

I saw the movie and I think when she's not on the screen the movie is boring.

She made Kung Fu Panda and Wanted and neither are bad, both have paid for themselves.

Doing charity work to get your name in the media has become almost a must do and they are all out there for a photo op - Jennifer Aniston did her St.Jude commercial and acted like she was afraid for the child to touch her. Orlando Bloom the same thing, I saw George Clooney push a childs hand away b/c the child was grabbing for him. Ben Affleck is in the Congo. They all get press for this thats why organizations ask them to be their spokes person.. such as Danny Kaye or Audrey Hepburn. Using celebrities works

[january]

I agree almost all celebs are self-serving, but at least not all are hypocrites. I actually have more respect for celebs that are self-aware, noting that they aren't making a real difference, that they love their flashy things, then others who claim otherwise and try to make themselves out as true humanitarians who care for the little people. Its all pretty much a joke to me.

As far as her giving 1/3 of her salary, that is something that has been proven untrue time and time again. Truth in fact, I have no idea who first put that out there (if it was her, she deserves even more shit for being such a blatant liar). Last year, it was proven that her and Pitt gave a combined total of 2 million to charity. Is that a lot for a common person? Absolutely. Does it make a difference? Sure. But its a drop in the hat for them and definitely not 1/3 of HER salary. Just doesn't happen. So yes, I'm happy that others are benefiting from the money of course, but I refuse to pat them on the back. I'd rather pat the back of the poor person who gives five dollars and means that they'll miss a meal so someone else can eat. This family doesn't know the meaning of sacrifice, and if you think they do, you're delusional. I don't hold it against her that she's paid well and blows her money on crazy things, I hold it against her that she tries to hold a humanitarian image at the same time, trying to promote an end to world poverty and war. Especially then when she does movies like "Wanted", which glorifies violence. She also is pitifully unaware of the issues she promotes, when she talks regarding them, its just so sad - she's so terribly ignorant.

She also gets paid for her "altruistic" works, so don't even go there. All celebs do. When Halle Berry appeared to present a check to the American Heart Association, she got paid twice as much as the numbers on the check. Angelina gets a hefty salary for her works and she also gets the added benefit of all the glory. Its a win-win. Meanwhile there are true humanitarians dying for their causes worldwide every day. Thats why I perceive it as somewhat of a joke when people hail them as such amazing people.

[sparkly]

It's wrong when celebs get paid to be involved in charities. The least they could do is not charge for it.

[cool girl]

Originally Posted by january

celebs are master manipulators of the media and they can go undercover if they wish, but most celebs don't wish to, especially these two.

January - i agree with you on this point. There are stars like Matt Damon, Christian Bale, Johnny Depp etc who you only read about when they have something to promote. This the only time that they are in the press. I respect them for it; they aren't overexposed and i know little or nothing about their kids. That's the biggest problem i have with the Jolie-Pitts is how they use their kids for publicity purposes. Angie has posed in People magazine with her children on numerous occasions. I really should know nothing about her children. I'm sure she does deals with the paparazzi. I'm not convinced they show up all the time to photograph her. Why? Because when Tom Cruise was with Nicole Kidman, he had a good image. Both he and Nicole adopted Conner and Isabel...yet they managed to keep them under the radar. Jolie-Pitts could if they wanted to; but i don't think they do.

Just wanted to add that i don't really have a problem with the press conference, but it seems alittle over the top to me.

I wouldn't want to be the Jolie-Pitts; their lives are nothing but a media circus which they have partly created.

[tragicallyflawed]

Originally Posted by january

Especially then when she does movies like "Wanted", which glorifies violence. She also is pitifully unaware of the issues she promotes, when she talks regarding them, its just so sad - she's so terribly ignorant.

I agree with this part. It's just like when Heigl complained that the movie "Knocked Up" was misogynistic. She may be right, but she looks like a hypocrite since she took the role anyway. Jolie looks like a hypocrite when she partakes in and profits from these violent movies and then goes around condemning violence.

Also, the movie "Wanted" would have money with or without her. Just like the Lara Croft movies, this one had a built in fanbase since it is based off of a comic book.

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by GaPeach

^^ your review is based upon what your friend said?

Sure, people go to or stay away from movies all the time based on word of mouth. My friend is not an idiot, I trust her judgement and her brains. She would have no reason to make up shit about the movie-she's not a person who follows gossip so she's not a 'team' this or 'team' that. She likes Angelina and her movies. Or did.

[sparkly]

Since Wanted is from a comic book, she probably only did it to cash in on the comic book/movie frenzy, not because she was trying to push an opinion about violence. If we're going to go there, then we should do the same for every single celeb.

[CherryDarling]

Originally Posted by sparkly

Most, if not all, celebs are fame hungry and do the exact same thing that Brad and Angie do.

Five!" class="inlineimg" />

[Jane Doe]

Originally Posted by Sasha

Sure, people go to or stay away from movies all the time based on word of mouth. My friend is not an idiot, I trust her judgement and her brains. She would have no reason to make up shit about the movie-she's not a person who follows gossip so she's not a 'team' this or 'team' that. She likes Angelina and her movies. Or did.

Different strokes for different folks. My friend hates violent, shoot-em-up, action-driven movies....I love them...but I abhor real-life violence.

Most actors like to act in roles completely opposite their true self. It's what acting is all about.

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by Jane Doe

Different strokes for different folks. My friend hates violent, shoot-em-up, action-driven movies....I love them...but I abhor real-life violence.

Most actors like to act in roles completely opposite their true self. It's what acting is all about.

Absolutely, but when they do a pure shit movie with no redeeming qualities they can and will get called on it, even if their performance in the movie is good.

[Jane Doe]

Originally Posted by Sasha

Absolutely, but when they do a pure shit movie with no redeeming qualities they can and will get called on it, even if their performance in the movie is good.

Actually it all depends on perception of the viewing audience of the movie in question and whether they thought the movie was pure shit. And from what I've read, many are going back to see it again. Plus, it received good reviews by 75% of the critics. That said, the critics who gave it good reviews didn't paint it as a movie with redeeming qualities but said it was a fun and exciting ride. It is what it is and nothing more was it intended to be. Angelina Jolie won't be the first actor to act in a movie that some perceive as "pure shit" nor will she be the last. And I doubt seriously if she, Morgan F. or James M. will get called on it by the majority of the viewing public.