| Author |
Message |
    
Mama Cloudy
Citizen
Username: Mamacloudy
Post Number: 30
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 3:56 pm: | 
|
OK, does this disturb anyone else? What is this baby, the second coming??? They deserve their privacy as much as any other two CELEBRITIES, but this is ridiculous.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/28/people.pinkettsmith.ap/index.html |
LilLB
Citizen
Username: Lillb
Post Number: 2165
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 4:14 pm: |
|
yeah - I see these headlines on the magazines in the checkout aisle and I'm left realizing that the tabloids are pretty desperate if they're trying to make up some kind of "mystery" about why this baby hasn't been seen yet. It's really pathetic and they're really really reaching on this one. |
Soparents
Supporter
Username: Soparents
Post Number: 2464
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 5:21 pm: |
|
Apparently TC and Nicole Kidman kept their two adopted children under wraps for a long time. Methinks that is more to do with him that the Mothers...
I think he's strange anyway, so nothing he does anymore surprises me. |
MeAndTheBoys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 4292
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 5:31 pm: |
|
My thoughts exactly, SOP. He's a freak, so it doesn't surprise me. Just more of the same. |
newone
Citizen
Username: Newone
Post Number: 425
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 5:32 pm: |
|
Do either of them having any movies opening soon? They'll probably just wait until then so they could get the extra publicity...
(Maybe there is no baby....it was all a publicity stunt for War of the Wrolds/Batman Begins ratings  ) |
Geri Fletcher
Citizen
Username: Gerif
Post Number: 56
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 9:08 pm: |
|
I'm thinking there isn't a baby! What other celeb has needed their peers (fellow actors) to prove that a baby exists AND be willing to do an interview about it? . . .
|
Aok
Citizen
Username: Aok
Post Number: 268
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 8:08 am: |
|
Its just a way to get themselves talked about MORE -- look at the publicity this is generating. If they had released photos no one would be interested in them any more. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 6761
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 8:45 am: |
|
Wow, I am no Tom Cruise fan, but all this cynicism is kind of amazing. The kid is a little over three months old and all these conspiracy theories abound.
Could it be, forgetting what a nut job the guy is, that Tom and Katie are actually protective of their own and their child's privacy?
I am more than willing to buy all the suggestions above, but I am also willing to believe that they do not want to expose their 3 month old child to the unbearable mob scene that would ensue if they "came out with their child". I think if this were almost any other couple the manager's statment would satisfy people. That when they introduce the child to the world, it will be on their terms. If this were issued by the manager of, I don't know, someone with less of a reputation for being odd, and a scientologist we would all be in their defense no?
Does the fact that he is a Scientologist taint people's general perception of him?
I only defend him as far as to say that it is a little early to speculate that there is no baby, or this is some publicity stunt. Now, if the kid is 2 years old and never been seen, then I would fall into the "what the H E double hockey sticks is going on here" (not that it really matters to me much) but she is 3 months old. Many mothers haven't gone back to work in that time, nevermind a couple of people worth 100's of millions. |
Joe
Citizen
Username: Gonets
Post Number: 1312
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 1:06 pm: |
|
Duncan,
Can't disagree with you more. This is a child of two (not one--but two) celebrities, making the child part of the public domain. Therefore, withholding pictures of the newborn is a violation of the Freedom of Information Act, on par with George Bush sealing his Texas gubernatorial records once he got out of office. In the latter case we'll let him get away with it, because he's a good guy and who wants to look at the records of a Texas governship anyway? yawn...
But in the case of the former, Tom and Katie better come clean. Inquiring minds want to know. And by withholding this vital information they're only making it more of an issue than it needs to be. So, really, it's in the child's interest that they put him/her (do we really know the gender?) before the paparazzi ASAP.
I would think you, as an aspiring celebrity, would understand that Tom and Katie are obligated to provide full-access to their private lives. Keep in mind that if you ever do make it big and a network proposed making a reality show of your day-to-day life, you would be duty bound to accept this offer. If that's too much of a burden for you, then you have no business making films, even artsy-shorts not made for mass audiences, because some of them run the risk of going from cult following to mass phenomenon. It's not fair to the masses to make us interested in you as a person only to slink into a caccoon of privacy.
Why can't more celebrity families be like the Osbornes? |
LilLB
Citizen
Username: Lillb
Post Number: 2173
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 3:47 pm: |
|
 |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page