+ Reply to Thread
Page 47 of 1117 FirstFirst ... 373839404142434445464748495051525354555657971475471047 ... LastLast
Results 461 to 470 of 11169
Like Tree4743Likes

Thread: Miscellaneous Celebrity News

  1. #461
    FORT Fogey Brandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,245
    From what some have said, including Paul Rodrigues who was there that night and saw it - no one even heckled Richards. There was some talking going on during Richards' set, is all. Rodrigues even said that what people were saying, was positive (excitement about seeing 'Kramer').

    PR also thought that some were disappointed that Richards was not like Kramer, and that might've frustrated him. He also wondered if he was trying out 'new material' as the Laugh Factory is a place to do that as opposed to showing a finished act. He also thought Richards may have been trying to be funny but went for shocking instead, and ending up shocking himself.

    Last night's on the spot interview with PR, he was a bit angry about it all, but this morning on some morning news show, he was being philosophical. He thinks Richards needs to do more to apologise though.

    Sinbad was also talked to and he was there to see the incident also. Sinbad said that the apology was a joke and not sincere, and Richards needs to come to the Laugh Factory on "Sunday night, chocolate city" as Sinbad put it, and apologise THEN. They also heard from "various black leaders" (as the show put it - I can't remember now, which organisations for sure), including the head of NAACP if memory serves. I recall he said Richards "needs help" and the others talked to said his apology did not seem sincere and was not sufficient.

    The show also aired some of Richards' satellite appearance on Letterman with Seinfeld (who seemed concerned). Did they air all of it though? Can anyone who saw that appearance tell me...Did Richards at any time actually say "It was wrong of me to use those words"?

    Because all I heard him say were things like "I'm sorry the audience was subjected to my rage". That isn't the same thing as saying that the word itself, or using the word, is wrong. To me, Richards still also seemed churlish, when he got huffy about the audience laughing. He has to realise by now, what "nervous laughter" is. I wonder if he is having some sort of breakdown. In the past, he always seemed like a harmless goof, to me. (I first remember him from his "Fridays" days, he was on there w/Larry David.) Although, PR also added the perceptive comment that this is just the first in a similar series - due to videophones, we will start to see more from public figures that could remain hidden before.

    did_it_again wrote:
    I haven't seen the comments by Seinfeld ,but I can imagine he was pissed .Even though Jerry had nothing to do with, Richards outburst Richards tirade reflects on Jerry and the cast. Seinfeld certainly doesn't want the stigma being that he was Richards employer.
    I also agree this will reflect somewhat on Seinfeld in the public mind, people will wonder "did Seinfeld know? did he agree?" about all those years they worked together. But I think this is something none of his co workers heard from him before, though. PR said "This is a side of Michael I did not know existed", and Seinfeld also, while on Letterman, looked pretty shocked.
    Last edited by Brandy; 11-21-2006 at 11:44 AM.

  2. #462
    Looking for a way out Bubba-Jo-Lyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Edmonton
    Age
    41
    Posts
    753
    LOS ANGELES Nov 21, 2006 (AP)— Robert Altman, the caustic and irreverent satirist behind "MASH," "Nashville" and "The Player" who made a career out of bucking Hollywood management and story conventions, died at a Los Angeles Hospital, his Sandcastle 5 Productions Company said Tuesday. He was 81.

    The director died Monday night, Joshua Astrachan, a producer at Altman's Sandcastle 5 Productions in New York City, told The Associated Press.

    The cause of death wasn't disclosed. A news release was expected later in the day, Astrachan said.

    Altman had one of the most distinctive styles among modern filmmakers. He often employed huge ensemble casts, encouraged improvisation and overlapping dialogue and filmed scenes in long tracking shots that would flit from character to character.

    Perpetually in and out of favor with audiences and critics, Altman worked ceaselessly since his anti-war black comedy "M-A-S-H" established his reputation in 1970, but he would go for years at a time directing obscure movies before roaring back with a hit.

    A five-time Academy Award nominee for best director, Altman didn't receive an Oscar until earlier this year when he was honored for lifetime achievement.

    "No other filmmaker has gotten a better shake than I have," he said in accepting the award. "I'm very fortunate in my career. I've never had to direct a film I didn't choose or develop. My love for filmmaking has given me an entree to the world and to the human condition."
    http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/...ory?id=2670334

    My favourite Altman movie was Gosford Park. Sad to see that he passed away.
    Remember: Mentioning Jesus in your speech: small government. Doing what Jesus asked: big government - Stephen Colbert

    Inside me lives a skinny woman crying to get out. But I can usually shut the b*tch up with cookies. (Unknown)

  3. #463
    Scrappy Spartan Broadway's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    18,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Leftcoaster;2150175;
    But I believe him when he says he isn't a racist.
    Why? How? People that do not have racist beliefs do not jump to making racial insults in an unprovoked attack. Sorry, but they just don't. The words flew quickly to Michael Richards' mouth.. and they spewed easily and with hatred.

    It was as apparent to them as it was to me that I simply didn't possess the requisite level of heated hatred to convincingly pull off using that particular slur or most others relating to specific race or ethnicity.
    And therein lies the difference between your experience and this current one. Michael Richards did demonstrate the level of heated hatred that you apparently lacked. I fully believe that he is apologetic today and I believe that his apology is heartfelt. But I do not believe his 100% sober tirade in an unprovoked, non-threatening environment can be overlooked.

    I find it puzzling that so many are a little quick to forgive and excuse Michael Richards (comment not directed personally at you, Leftcoaster, but the many over the internet that I've seen) but they are still holding a major labeling grudge against Mel Gibson for comments that were provoked, ingrained from upbringing, and made under the influence. People were so quick to disregard the lack of liquor's influence in Mel's comments.. saying that it simply made him say things that he truly believed. Yet when Michael Richards makes even worse comments while stone-cold sober, people believe him when he says that he isn't a racist.

    What makes Michael Richards' comments any more tolerable than Mel Gibson's? His comments were worse, the hatred spewing from his face is visible to us, the longevity of his tirade was unbelievable and negates it being an "off the cuff comment out of anger", but still people believe him over Mel Gibson??

    Brandy
    ... in reading your post I feel a bit better.
    Last edited by Broadway; 11-21-2006 at 12:10 PM.
    Never let the things you want make you forget about the things you have.

  4. #464
    Signed, Sealed, Delivered prhoshay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Right Here, Right Now
    Posts
    25,310
    While I watched a Seinfeld episode last night, I was continuously distracted by Richards' tirade last night, especially when he was on screen. Made me wonder who this person really was that he could easily spew such hate and venom. I really like(d) the show, but don't know if I'll ever be able to view it in the same way. His apology seemed like a 'non-apology' to me. If there was, indeed, sincerity in his apology, why would he be so slow in coming forth with his apology. Jerry should have never been able to beat him to the media with some kind of explanation/apology.

    Shame on Michael Richards.
    "...each affects the other, and the other affects the next, and the world is full of stories, but the stories are all one." - Mitch Albom, one helluva writer

    When you throw a rock into a pack of dogs, you know which one you hit by the one that yelps!

  5. #465
    Kao
    Kao is offline
    Donyale y Dali: OTP Kao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,375
    What really got me wasn't the repeated usage of the "N" word but his references to lynching. There is no possible way a joke about lynching would be funny. Another thing I noticed is during his apology he repeatly paused before saying "the blacks" and "afro-americans" and it was almost like he was trying to make sure the word "n" didn't fly out of his mouth. I don't buy his apology for one instant.

    Jerry's best friends since HS and college are both Black, as well as the best man at his wedding (who is also a comedian) and credit to him, he didn't pull the "My best friends are Black" card (even though in his case, it would be literally true, lol), but wanted to hear Michael Richards side of the story. You could tell he was angry though.

    Mostly, I just feel sad. I will never look at Kramer in teh same way again.

  6. #466
    Kao
    Kao is offline
    Donyale y Dali: OTP Kao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Broadway;2150461;
    I find it puzzling that so many are a little quick to forgive and excuse Michael Richards (comment not directed personally at you, Leftcoaster, but the many over the internet that I've seen) but they are still holding a major labeling grudge against Mel Gibson for comments that were provoked, ingrained from upbringing, and made under the influence.
    I wouldn't say everyone. The good folks over at ONTD are absolutely LIVID over this. Very few people think that he should be forgiven over there, or even that the apology was sincere.

  7. #467
    HBK fan nilesgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    42
    Posts
    4,764
    Quote Originally Posted by prhoshay;2150513;
    While I watched a Seinfeld episode last night, I was continuously distracted by Richards' tirade last night, especially when he was on screen. Made me wonder who this person really was that he could easily spew such hate and venom. I really like(d) the show, but don't know if I'll ever be able to view it in the same way. His apology seemed like a 'non-apology' to me. If there was, indeed, sincerity in his apology, why would he be so slow in coming forth with his apology. Jerry should have never been able to beat him to the media with some kind of explanation/apology.

    Shame on Michael Richards.
    I totally agree with you prhoshay. I will watch it tonight but every time Kramer is on screen I'm always going to hear that tirade and just watch him with shame. Tonight's episode is actually one I've been dying to see because everyone raved about it (The Junior Mint) but I, too, will never be able to watch it in the same way.
    Hurley: (holding up a Jesus statue) I don't know. I thought there might be a prowler or something.
    Mrs. Reyes: (grabbing the statue) Jesus Christ is not a weapon! - LOST "There's No Place Like Home Pt. 1

  8. #468
    Thorpedo is Love Mrs Cwebb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,215
    I was watching the Letterman video and I think some of the people laughed because Richards sounded so uncomfortable and insincere. I mean the way he said "afro-americans" sounded as if he struggled coming up with a PC way of addressing them. Then when Letterman asked him if the hecklers had been white instead, would his reaction differ, he seemed totally flustered by that question and struggled to come up with an acceptable answer.

    That whole segment just sounded so uncomfortable and forced, it was like a poorly written speech. I dunno if its a half assed insincere effort, distraught over the incident, or a combination of both.

  9. #469
    Fight Queen corprip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Roeland Park, KS
    Age
    36
    Posts
    2,211
    Was Michael Richards over-the-top and insulting with his comments? Yes.

    Were the audience members insitigating him also in the wrong, especially when one of them called him a cracker? Yes.

    To make Michael Richards the villain here is letting others off too easy. "Cracker-ass" is just as offensive as the other word, and to make this all about Richards exposes a double-standard in our society, namely African-Americans can use the word Richards used, and it's ok, and they can call white people crackers, and it's ok, but Richards is the biggest bad guy because he lost his cool and called some people a nasty name.

    The debate about whether Richards is racist or not is irrelevant; is it because he's white that he isn't allowed this personality flaw? Look at Carlos Mencia... he's not exactly the torch-bearer for racial enlightenmet, yet he has his own show on Comedy Central. The truth is AMERICA has major race problems, and it doesn't matter the skin color, everyone has their own atoning to do for the sins of our nation. Racism is a deep part of our national psyche, and that's the bigger issue to me than whether a comedian is racist.

    ETA: The difference between the Michael Richards incident and Mel Gibson's anti-semitism is that Richards problems with racism are so latent, it came out during an outburst of anger; Gibson's problems with anti-semitism is so active, he made an entire movie disparaging Jews to express his hate. So while Richards is getting blacklisted, Gibson is promoting his new movie.
    Last edited by corprip; 11-21-2006 at 08:01 PM.
    "I've got soul, but I'm not a soldier." The Killers.

  10. #470
    FORT Fogey did_it_again's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,079
    Quote Originally Posted by corprip;2150978;
    Was Michael Richards over-the-top and insulting with his comments? Yes.

    Were the audience members insitigating him also in the wrong, especially when one of them called him a cracker? Yes.

    To make Michael Richards the villain here is letting others off too easy. "Cracker-ass" is just as offensive as the other word, and to make this all about Richards exposes a double-standard in our society, namely African-Americans can use the word Richards used, and it's ok, and they can call white people crackers, and it's ok, but Richards is the biggest bad guy because he lost his cool and called some people a nasty name.
    The audience member who made that comment did so after Richards started in on his racial tirade. Had richards had not gone there...........

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.