Jump to content

Miscellaneous Celebrity News

2 hours ago, AimingforYoko said:

Oh my, and I thought that was one of the great love stories of our time.  (Joke - in case anyone thinks that I'm love-shaming.)

10

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, UYI said:

It's not shocking, but I hope Ariana is okay. Between Manchester last year and Mac Miller's death this year, she has been through A LOT. 

I also hope Davidson's support system can help him navigate this and continue to manage his illness.

7

Share Post


Link to post

It's not shocking and knowing both have had tough times, I find it sadder than I thought I would considering how silly I thought the whole thing was.  But hey, at least they split instead of rushing to the aisle (*cough*Bieber*cough)

15

Share Post


Link to post
On 10/10/2018 at 2:21 PM, UYI said:

 

 

I quoted the wrong thing. It was a joke re: Kristen bell and her husband. The star contacted them for a quote on their story, and I guess that was the first time they’d heard about how they were doing that to save their marriage. 

On 10/12/2018 at 10:41 AM, Tanichka said:

Kristen & Dax ARE jokes!

Seriously?

On 10/12/2018 at 2:50 PM, rcc said:

I have a Kristen Bell recent story. She went on her Facebook page and asked teachers for their wishlist of needed school supplies. She chose 10 submissions and the teachers received their supplies this week. I saw one of the winners on my local newscast. So Kristen does good.

I love her.  

On 10/12/2018 at 3:25 PM, Tanichka said:

Did Kristen do her good deed anonymously?  🙄

It wasn’t only Kristen bell doing this.  Rose McIver was another.  Celebrities were doing it to celebrate teachers, and to get them the supplies they need for their students.  I’m sure she does things quietly, too. 

Edited by Anela.
7

Share Post


Link to post

They could do it quietly.   But sometimes the point is to highlight what you are doing so others do it too.   Look how many people buy stupid Kardashian stuff just because their "idol" likes it.   So if a celebrity does something good, they let people know so their fans will emulate them.   Plus, okay, they get good publicity out of it.   But enlightened self-interest is not a bad thing.

21

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

They could do it quietly.   But sometimes the point is to highlight what you are doing so others do it too.   Look how many people buy stupid Kardashian stuff just because their "idol" likes it.   So if a celebrity does something good, they let people know so their fans will emulate them.   Plus, okay, they get good publicity out of it.   But enlightened self-interest is not a bad thing.

I don't disagree with you.  I just don't like Kristen & Dax (or kardashians).  Some celebrities I like, others I don't.  

4

Share Post


Link to post
12 hours ago, merylinkid said:

But sometimes the point is to highlight what you are doing so others do it too. 

Yes! I will never roll my eyes at celebrities doing charitable things publicly. Volunteering for Habitat for Humanity (Pauley Perrette), whatever Kristen Bell donated to, Social Media the crap out of it so others, both celebs and non celebs will follow suit. Very few of us are "too busy" to give a little of ourselves to help those in need.

There's even an entire site (probably one of many and looks to be a bit outdated) dedicated to celebs helping others https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity

I can't stand Justin Bieber (please, Canada, take him back!) but even he's donated https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/justin-bieber#charities

14

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, theredhead77 said:

I can't stand Justin Bieber (please, Canada, take him back!)

No.  He's yours now.

But, it's nice he donates to charities.

4

Share Post


Link to post
17 hours ago, merylinkid said:

They could do it quietly.   But sometimes the point is to highlight what you are doing so others do it too.   Look how many people buy stupid Kardashian stuff just because their "idol" likes it.   So if a celebrity does something good, they let people know so their fans will emulate them.   Plus, okay, they get good publicity out of it.   But enlightened self-interest is not a bad thing.

The Kardashians only do charity stuff so they can film it for their show.

8

Share Post


Link to post
6 hours ago, GaT said:

The Kardashians only do charity stuff so they can film it for their show.

So what? I can't stand them either but the clarity still benefits. And those who watch their show may see an organization they've never heard of before and may become interested in helping too.

12

Share Post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Snow Apple said:

So what? I can't stand them either but the clarity still benefits. And those who watch their show may see an organization they've never heard of before and may become interested in helping too.

This. Charities want public support because it raises their profile and ultimately brings in more support from others. Part of being a celebrity is using your fame to raise the profile of various projects and products. It keeps you in the public eye and helps craft your image and if the projects you support are charities or causes, it raises awareness of those issues too. Both parties are benefiting and I don't see why that's bad.

23

Share Post


Link to post
3 hours ago, vibeology said:

This. Charities want public support because it raises their profile and ultimately brings in more support from others. Part of being a celebrity is using your fame to raise the profile of various projects and products. It keeps you in the public eye and helps craft your image and if the projects you support are charities or causes, it raises awareness of those issues too. Both parties are benefiting and I don't see why that's bad.

If you hate the celebrity, does that impact the donations?  If Kim K supports something would one still contribute?

4

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Tanichka said:

If you hate the celebrity, does that impact the donations?  If Kim K supports something would one still contribute?

I'm sure it does happen but If someone won't donate to a worthy cause because they hate Kim K, that says more about that person than about Kim K.

For example, what if she visited a children's hospital (even just for publicity). One would be pretty cold hearted to pull contributions.

21

Share Post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, doodlebug said:

The Duggars of Counting On filmed the family visiting a food bank and donating groceries.  When the cameras stopped rolling, the Duggars grabbed back their 'donations', packed them in their car, and left.  Even the Kardashians aren't that selfish.

Seriously????? They took the food back? I hope somebody called them (and TLC) out on it? 

11

Share Post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Tanichka said:

If you hate the celebrity, does that impact the donations?  If Kim K supports something would one still contribute?

I think that only happens when it's political donations. 

3

Share Post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, doodlebug said:

The Duggars of Counting On filmed the family visiting a food bank and donating groceries.  When the cameras stopped rolling, the Duggars grabbed back their 'donations', packed them in their car, and left.  Even the Kardashians aren't that selfish.

I've never heard this story but I heard enough that I dislike them even more than the Kardashians. At least the K's never act like they're holier than thou.

16

Share Post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Snow Apple said:

I've never heard this story but I heard enough that I dislike them even more than the Kardashians. At least the K's never act like they're holier than thou.

And that’s why my feelings towards the Kardashians lean toward indifference and disappointment that they are as famous as they are. Sure, they do very little to justify their celebrity status, but they’re only celebrities because we make them famous. 

I’m not saying I like Kardashian/Jenner family, but I can’t recall hearing anything about them actively harmimg anyone. 

17

Share Post


Link to post

The local news just had a story about some local construction company going around and paying off unpaid student meal debt.  Did he do it for publicity? Who cares.  Hopefully others watching will see the story and decide to pay off some student meal debt so kids can succeed. 

Hell, I learned about Donors Choose after some company funded every project. I just helped find (not a brag, I didn't donate much) warm clothing and shoes for immigrant children in dire need in Oakland. 

I wish more celebrities yelled about what they support so more people will be aware and can help 

17

Share Post


Link to post
17 hours ago, doodlebug said:

The Duggars of Counting On filmed the family visiting a food bank and donating groceries.  When the cameras stopped rolling, the Duggars grabbed back their 'donations', packed them in their car, and left.  Even the Kardashians aren't that selfish.

If I was in charge of TLC, I would cancel whatever show they are doing right now.

17

Share Post


Link to post

When I saw Carroll Spinney was trending on twitter, my heart stopped.   I wish him all the best in retirement.

11

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, cpcathy said:

If I was in charge of TLC, I would cancel whatever show they are doing right now.

I think they have their fan base.  I’ve seen their show while channel flipping, but never actually watched.  I believe they have 45 kids or something.

2

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, cpcathy said:

If I was in charge of TLC, I would cancel whatever show they are doing right now.

According to an article I read when this took place, TLC set the whole thing up and was quite aware. The collecting of food was advertised as a meet the Duggars event. A handful of people were there and TLC staff asked some to pose as a “needy family”. The Duggars put a box of food in the “needy” person’s vehicle. Photo op over, the Duggars took the food with them.

3

Share Post


Link to post

TLC and that whole family are gross. That Counting On show needs to be cancelled too. The other family that's like them which is well known has a show Bringing Up Bates on the UP! network. I occasionally watch Gilmore Girls and old episodes of Fresh Off the Boat on that channel so ended up seeing commercials. I've read about them online too in regards to the Duggars. The poor daughters who get married off not long after becoming legal who think their job in life is to breed like rabbits even if they don't want to.

Edited by Jaded.
12

Share Post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Tanichka said:

 I believe they have 45 kids or something.

your-vagina-its-not-a-clown-car-lady-rap

14

Share Post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Caroll Spinney is retiring from Sesame Street

My heart broke just a little.  I mean, yeah, he's up there and 50 years is a long time to do any role.  He's definitely earned it.

But Big Bird and Oscar won't sound the same...

Yes, I'm peeling onions for the entire block.  I'll peel more tomorrow.  

I can always tell the voice difference.  

Have a Happy Retirement and Thank You, Mr. Spinney.  More onions  . . .

15

Share Post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Caroll Spinney is retiring from Sesame Street

My heart broke just a little.  I mean, yeah, he's up there and 50 years is a long time to do any role.  He's definitely earned it.

But Big Bird and Oscar won't sound the same...

Same here. Grew up watching him as them and I appreciate all that I learned from Oscar and Big Bird. Thanks Mr. Spinney and hope you have a happy retirement.

10

Share Post


Link to post

I watched "I am Big Bird" last year and cried - just something about that bird! I'm amazed Caroll Spinney was able to do the role for so long - his arm must be so tired! 

10

Share Post


Link to post

That's too bad. Understandable after working so long but too bad. Happy Retirement Mr. Spinney, you've earned it. And thank you.

8

Share Post


Link to post

Britney Spears signed up for another Vegas residency for a reported $507,000 per show. I guess Kevin will be requesting another bump in his child support payments soon.

7

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, GaT said:

Britney Spears signed up for another Vegas residency for a reported $507,000 per show. I guess Kevin will be requesting another bump in his child support payments soon.

That supposedly now passes Celine Dion as the highest paid resident headliner in Vegas.

3

Share Post


Link to post
7 hours ago, GaT said:

Britney Spears signed up for another Vegas residency for a reported $507,000 per show. I guess Kevin will be requesting another bump in his child support payments soon.

I'll bet that is what prompted this last round.   They knew it was in negotiations.   It got taken care and probably his payments are part of the contract.   Kinda like garnishment, so everyone has a paper trail.   Plus now she doesn't have to worry about a court case while preparing for this.   

4

Share Post


Link to post
10 hours ago, GaT said:

Britney Spears signed up for another Vegas residency for a reported $507,000 per show. I guess Kevin will be requesting another bump in his child support payments soon.

Craziness, given that she doesn't sing live and barely dances anymore. This probably could've been Christina Aguilera if she wasn't so problematic.

3

Share Post


Link to post

Who goes to pay to see Britney now?

Wasn’t her initial appeal partly based on being jail bait?

5

Share Post


Link to post
12 hours ago, BW Manilowe said:

That supposedly now passes Celine Dion as the highest paid resident headliner in Vegas.

Amazing!  Celine has talent, but you would have to pay ME (a lot) to watch Britney.

8

Share Post


Link to post

Never been to Vegas but I guess they've always featured old washed-up singers, like fat Elvis, Wayne Newton, Cher, etc. long after these artists were no longer making hit records.

So they couldn't even generate enough interest in a tour but people were going to Vegas to see them?  Or they were there to gamble but thought they'd see these famous has-beens in person?

Curious whether people pay to see their Vegas acts or the casinos comp some of their guests to entice them to come to Vegas and gamble, which is the main moneymaker there.  But I've heard they stopped even comping rooms now that Vegas is suppose to be a destination with other attractions besides gambling.

Or you'd have some freak show acts like Siegfried and Roy, until one of them got eaten.  

I don't know how big those venues are either.  Maybe a couple of thousand at the most?  To make $500k, you'd have to sell 2,000 tickets at $250 each.  So maybe the venues are more like 5,000, in which case the tickets would be $100.

Just can't see that many people willing to pay $100 to see Britney now.

Not to come across as some hipster but the only way might be if the casino comps me tickets and I went with friends as a lark, to snark on her or something.  That must explain one of the reasons people might see Cher in Vegas.  Sure there are probably fans who see her as some icon.  

But Britney?  Could be her teeny bopper fans from back 20-30 years ago are now middle aged women with the money to blow on seeing her.  It's amazing how impressions formed in your youth can still drive your interests decades later.

4

Share Post


Link to post
43 minutes ago, scrb said:

I don't know how big those venues are either.  Maybe a couple of thousand at the most?  

Park Theater at the MGM Grand has 5200-6400 seating capacity depending on configuration. 

0

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, scrb said:

Never been to Vegas but I guess they've always featured old washed-up singers, like fat Elvis, Wayne Newton, Cher, etc. long after these artists were no longer making hit records.

So they couldn't even generate enough interest in a tour but people were going to Vegas to see them?  Or they were there to gamble but thought they'd see these famous has-beens in person?

Curious whether people pay to see their Vegas acts or the casinos comp some of their guests to entice them to come to Vegas and gamble, which is the main moneymaker there.  But I've heard they stopped even comping rooms now that Vegas is suppose to be a destination with other attractions besides gambling.

Or you'd have some freak show acts like Siegfried and Roy, until one of them got eaten.  

I don't know how big those venues are either.  Maybe a couple of thousand at the most?  To make $500k, you'd have to sell 2,000 tickets at $250 each.  So maybe the venues are more like 5,000, in which case the tickets would be $100.

Just can't see that many people willing to pay $100 to see Britney now

Tickets for the big Vegas shows like Brittany's start at around 100 bucks and usually top out around $400.  And, of course, the casino expects to sell drinks, various CD's, T shirts and other paraphernalia as well as serve meals to a lot of those attending.  Not to mention that, in order to get to the showroom, everyone will be walking through the casino and a goodly number will drop some cash there.  Vegas has always cashed in on acts with nostalgia value.  

Casinos don't comp much of anything anymore, and tickets to these big shows are almost never freebies.  There are more than enough people willing to pay for them.

And, yes, the venues seat more like 5000, but the tickets are not 100 bucks.  

8

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Drogo said:

Park Theater at the MGM Grand has 5200-6400 seating capacity depending on configuration. 

@scrb: And some of the resorts, both on & off The Strip (South Las Vegas Boulevard, where the majority of the best-known casino resorts are all located), have actual indoor arenas as part of their facilities (such as MGM Grand’s Grand Garden Arena; Mandalay Bay’s Mandalay Bay Events Center; The Orleans Arena [this is an off-Strip casino]; & the recently opened T-Mobile Arena, where Vegas’s new NHL team,  & last season’s Stanley Cup runners-up, the Golden Knights, play—also, I think Garth Brooks either opened, or was among the first acts to play that venue, which is near the New York-New York Hotel/Casino & the Park MGM [formerly the Monte Carlo]).

And, mileage varies I’m sure, but the resident headliners at the resort showrooms aren’t “washed up”. At least not in my book, or many other people’s books. Many may not be as popular with the general public, as a whole, as they once were; but they still have sizeable fan bases who enjoy what they do. Also, I’ve been to Las Vegas many times (1 of my best friends lives there, & I like the area very much) & I had the great pleasure (yes, I said great pleasure) of seeing Siegfried & Roy, with friends, at least twice, by choice (my parents also saw them at least once), before they were forced to stop performing after Roy was attacked by Montecore, 1 of the white tigers in their show. My friends & I enjoyed every minute of the performances we saw; so did my parents when they saw the show (before I did)—even though 1 of the elephants in the show at the time they went took a dump on the stage near their table (hey, it may be gross, but at least they have an unusual story to tell about the time they saw Siegfried & Roy’s show in Las Vegas).

Edited by BW Manilowe. Reason: To fix punctuation.
17

Share Post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, BW Manilowe said:

@scrb: And some of the resorts, both on & off The Strip (South Las Vegas Boulevard, where the majority of the best-known casino resorts are all located), have actual indoor arenas as part of their facilities (such as MGM Grand’s Grand Garden Arena; Mandalay Bay’s Mandalay Bay Events Center; The Orleans Arena [this is an off-Strip casino]; & the recently opened T-Mobile Arena, where Vegas’s new NHL team,  & last season’s Stanley Cup runners-up, the Golden Knights, play—also, I think Garth Brooks either opened, or was among the first acts to play that venue, which is near the New York-New York Hotel/Casino & the Park MGM [formerly the Monte Carlo]).

And, mileage varies I’m sure, but the resident headliners at the resort showrooms aren’t “washed up”. At least not in my book, or many other people’s books. Many may not be as popular with the general public, as a whole, as they once were; but they still have sizeable fan bases who enjoy what they do. Also, I’ve been to Las Vegas many times (1 of my best friends lives there, & I like the area very much) & I had the great pleasure (yes, I said great pleasure) of seeing Siegfried & Roy, with friends, at least twice, by choice (my parents also saw them at least once), before they were forced to stop performing after Roy was attacked by Montecore, 1 of the white tigers in their show. My friends & I enjoyed every minute of the performances we saw; so did my parents when they saw the show (before I did)—even though 1 of the elephants in the show at the time they went took a dump on the stage near their table (hey, it may be gross, but at least they have an unusual story to tell about the time they saw Siegfried & Roy’s show in Las Vegas).

 

58 minutes ago, doodlebug said:

Tickets for the big Vegas shows like Brittany's start at around 100 bucks and usually top out around $400.  And, of course, the casino expects to sell drinks, various CD's, T shirts and other paraphernalia as well as serve meals to a lot of those attending.  Not to mention that, in order to get to the showroom, everyone will be walking through the casino and a goodly number will drop some cash there.  Vegas has always cashed in on acts with nostalgia value.  

Casinos don't comp much of anything anymore, and tickets to these big shows are almost never freebies.  There are more than enough people willing to pay for them.

And, yes, the venues seat more like 5000, but the tickets are not 100 bucks.  

I guessed I learned something.

A few years back, people were saying the Eagles reunion tour tickets started at like $300 and that was raising eyebrows.

Or when you see a Rolling Stones tour sponsored by big corporations, those are big money-generating ventures, even though by then, all the band members were at least in their mid 60s.

Of course the Baby Boomers who came of age with many of these artists still want to see them in person -- maybe even take their grandchildren with them.  It makes little sense since rock is about youth and multimillionaires flogging the songs of their youth is kind of lame.

Of course Vegas acts never had the cool factor but you can't tell people how to spend their money ...

3

Share Post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, scrb said:

Of course the Baby Boomers who came of age with many of these artists still want to see them in person -- maybe even take their grandchildren with them.  It makes little sense since rock is about youth and multimillionaires flogging the songs of their youth is kind of lame.

The problem with seeing performers who peaked 40 years ago, is that their voices are gone & they mostly disappoint.  The only one whom I've seen recently & still has a voice is Smokey Robinson.

4

Share Post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, scrb said:

 

I guessed I learned something.

A few years back, people were saying the Eagles reunion tour tickets started at like $300 and that was raising eyebrows.

Or when you see a Rolling Stones tour sponsored by big corporations, those are big money-generating ventures, even though by then, all the band members were at least in their mid 60s.

Of course the Baby Boomers who came of age with many of these artists still want to see them in person -- maybe even take their grandchildren with them.  It makes little sense since rock is about youth and multimillionaires flogging the songs of their youth is kind of lame.

Of course Vegas acts never had the cool factor but you can't tell people how to spend their money ...

The venues in Vegas are far more intimate than the big stadiums and arenas that the rock acts use, though.  If you get the $400 seats to Brittany, you will be able to see her clearly, up close and personal, the stages are often designed with runways and the performers come right out into the audience.  The theaters are specifically built for the individual performers and the sound and lighting are top notch. It's a very different experience than seeing the Stones or the Eagles in a 25,000 seat arena.

10

Share Post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now