- This topic has 42 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated January 25, 2008 at 7:55 pm by lilmstrixta.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 23, 2008 at 5:25 am #1043482
Just this minute seen this, How sad he was a good actor
Quote:Hollywood star Heath Ledger was found dead in New York in a possible drug-related death, police said. He was 28.Police spokesman Paul Browne said Ledger had an appointment for a massage at the Manhattan flat he was found in, believed to be his home.
The housekeeper, who went to let the actor know the masseuse was there, found him dead.
The Australian-born actor was an Oscar nominee for his role in Brokeback Mountain and has numerous other screen credits.
He met his wife, actress Michelle Williams, in 2005 while filming Brokeback Mountain.
Ledger and Williams lived in Brooklyn and had a daughter, Matilda, but they split up last year.
Ledger played the suicidal son of Billy Bob Thornton in Monster’s Ball and had starring roles in A Knight’s Tale and The Patriot.
http://www.virginmedia.com/movies/news/moviegossip/heath-ledger-dies.php
January 23, 2008 at 5:43 am #1153195god, how sad ..
January 23, 2008 at 5:43 am #1209981god, how sad ..
January 23, 2008 at 6:28 am #1153206crazy, i saw this on the news last night its mental.
January 23, 2008 at 6:28 am #1209998crazy, i saw this on the news last night its mental.
January 23, 2008 at 6:48 am #115319228 years old..
very very sad :hopeless:
January 23, 2008 at 6:48 am #120997828 years old..
very very sad :hopeless:
January 23, 2008 at 8:49 am #115319728 is very young
an the press are just gonna love the drug/suicide angle arnt they – make his family feel even worse than they do already, if thats possible
January 23, 2008 at 8:49 am #120998428 is very young
an the press are just gonna love the drug/suicide angle arnt they – make his family feel even worse than they do already, if thats possible
January 23, 2008 at 8:58 am #1153203yeah that’s one of those ‘no way’ news items. he was a good actor.
January 23, 2008 at 8:58 am #1209993yeah that’s one of those ‘no way’ news items. he was a good actor.
January 23, 2008 at 9:03 am #1153198he was just starting to get good roles, rather than just eye-candy ones
January 23, 2008 at 9:03 am #1209985he was just starting to get good roles, rather than just eye-candy ones
January 23, 2008 at 9:16 am #1153204ye ah, funny we were chatting about the Amy Winehouse thing last night. Will be interesting how the media spin it. The Sun and others would’ve feasted on the drug thing if they’d got hold of it while he was alive. Now he’s dead I’m sure the line will be ‘tragic’ loss of talent. I’m sure if Amy died tomorrow it would be the same, and those same wankers that stitched her up would get all sanctamonious about it.
January 23, 2008 at 9:16 am #1209995ye ah, funny we were chatting about the Amy Winehouse thing last night. Will be interesting how the media spin it. The Sun and others would’ve feasted on the drug thing if they’d got hold of it while he was alive. Now he’s dead I’m sure the line will be ‘tragic’ loss of talent. I’m sure if Amy died tomorrow it would be the same, and those same wankers that stitched her up would get all sanctamonious about it.
January 23, 2008 at 9:56 am #1153190wot a shame he was georgous….:weee:
wot has amy done to her hair ….o.m.g….:weee:January 23, 2008 at 9:56 am #1209975wot a shame he was georgous….:weee:
wot has amy done to her hair ….o.m.g….:weee:January 23, 2008 at 10:28 am #1153187ratty303 wrote:ye ah, funny we were chatting about the Amy Winehouse thing last night. Will be interesting how the media spin it. The Sun and others would’ve feasted on the drug thing if they’d got hold of it while he was alive. Now he’s dead I’m sure the line will be ‘tragic’ loss of talent. I’m sure if Amy died tomorrow it would be the same, and those same wankers that stitched her up would get all sanctamonious about it.I’ve noticed a real and worrying backlash against both celebrity and civillian alternative lifestyles in the last few years.
There was a time when stuff like this (barely 10-20 years ago) would have been quietly explained away as a simple medical problem (young people often suffer heart disease and fatal conditions) rather than the journalists digging deep for the drug use angle.
in the “cool brittania days” (as recent as 1997) the media didn’t really give a fuck about celebrities drug use like they did now.7
the “freedoms to bend the rules” are very recent, only from the 1980s (I can still remember how from about 1986-87 stuff like drugs, sex, rebellion suddenly started being openly discussed on telly and how young people had more access and exposure to the media)
now there is a massive and worrying backlash against this freedom, obviously journos can’t hound the ordinary person in the street (unless they are a drug dealer and they are present at a police raid) as there’s no public interest but celebrities are fair game as soon as they are perceived to step out of line.
I think it might even start at University, the sort of person who becomes a reporter may well be the kind who doesn’t socialise much at all, studies hard for 4 years, competes hard for jobs with loads of applicants and genuinely considers themselves to be superior to all others (a bit like a cop but with more brain cells and the desire to use mental rather than physical violence)
January 23, 2008 at 10:28 am #1209970ratty303 wrote:ye ah, funny we were chatting about the Amy Winehouse thing last night. Will be interesting how the media spin it. The Sun and others would’ve feasted on the drug thing if they’d got hold of it while he was alive. Now he’s dead I’m sure the line will be ‘tragic’ loss of talent. I’m sure if Amy died tomorrow it would be the same, and those same wankers that stitched her up would get all sanctamonious about it.I’ve noticed a real and worrying backlash against both celebrity and civillian alternative lifestyles in the last few years.
There was a time when stuff like this (barely 10-20 years ago) would have been quietly explained away as a simple medical problem (young people often suffer heart disease and fatal conditions) rather than the journalists digging deep for the drug use angle.
in the “cool brittania days” (as recent as 1997) the media didn’t really give a fuck about celebrities drug use like they did now.7
the “freedoms to bend the rules” are very recent, only from the 1980s (I can still remember how from about 1986-87 stuff like drugs, sex, rebellion suddenly started being openly discussed on telly and how young people had more access and exposure to the media)
now there is a massive and worrying backlash against this freedom, obviously journos can’t hound the ordinary person in the street (unless they are a drug dealer and they are present at a police raid) as there’s no public interest but celebrities are fair game as soon as they are perceived to step out of line.
I think it might even start at University, the sort of person who becomes a reporter may well be the kind who doesn’t socialise much at all, studies hard for 4 years, competes hard for jobs with loads of applicants and genuinely considers themselves to be superior to all others (a bit like a cop but with more brain cells and the desire to use mental rather than physical violence)
January 23, 2008 at 10:56 am #1153205Mate, I fully agree with you on what you’re saying here! My old man was actually a journo in the 60’s and 70’s. Thing was it was a different world back then and journalists were a diffrent breed. he was a working class boy with street smarts who worked his way up to fleet street and used the pub like a second office!!
Ok, they still raked muck, but weren’t so rabid about it. My old man used to bump into the likes of John lennon at various do’s but there was a respect thing back then. Wouldn’t have dreamed of trying to stitch him up.
New breed of journos are, like you say, mostly products of the system and desperate to whip up any storm in a teacup. Think what you’re saying also dovetails with how celebrities suddenly became ‘news’ (mid to late 90s), and the backlash all part of the pervading culture of (post 9/11) ‘fear’ that we revel in in this country.
January 23, 2008 at 10:56 am #1209997Mate, I fully agree with you on what you’re saying here! My old man was actually a journo in the 60’s and 70’s. Thing was it was a different world back then and journalists were a diffrent breed. he was a working class boy with street smarts who worked his way up to fleet street and used the pub like a second office!!
Ok, they still raked muck, but weren’t so rabid about it. My old man used to bump into the likes of John lennon at various do’s but there was a respect thing back then. Wouldn’t have dreamed of trying to stitch him up.
New breed of journos are, like you say, mostly products of the system and desperate to whip up any storm in a teacup. Think what you’re saying also dovetails with how celebrities suddenly became ‘news’ (mid to late 90s), and the backlash all part of the pervading culture of (post 9/11) ‘fear’ that we revel in in this country.
January 23, 2008 at 11:05 am #1153188ratty303 wrote:Mate, I fully agree with you on what you’re saying here! My old man was actually a journo in the 60’s and 70’s. Thing was it was a different world back then and journalists were a diffrent breed. he was a working class boy with street smarts who worked his way up to fleet street and used the pub like a second office!!thats the thing. People like that just don’t get a look in to modern media any more. Not only does someone need a University education (and often only at the better unis), most of the cub reporters apprenticeships are long gone or pay way less than other non-media jobs, so it favours people who can be subsidised by their olds whilst they do what is often unpaid or lowly paid work experience.
for the celebs they are often from families of celebrities or again have families priveliged enough to support them until they get their big break
at the same time there are 100 others barking at their heels to take their job if they fuck up.
with this intense competition its hardly surprising they all hate one another and are looking for ways to eliminate their rivals from the game..
January 23, 2008 at 11:05 am #1209972ratty303 wrote:Mate, I fully agree with you on what you’re saying here! My old man was actually a journo in the 60’s and 70’s. Thing was it was a different world back then and journalists were a diffrent breed. he was a working class boy with street smarts who worked his way up to fleet street and used the pub like a second office!!thats the thing. People like that just don’t get a look in to modern media any more. Not only does someone need a University education (and often only at the better unis), most of the cub reporters apprenticeships are long gone or pay way less than other non-media jobs, so it favours people who can be subsidised by their olds whilst they do what is often unpaid or lowly paid work experience.
for the celebs they are often from families of celebrities or again have families priveliged enough to support them until they get their big break
at the same time there are 100 others barking at their heels to take their job if they fuck up.
with this intense competition its hardly surprising they all hate one another and are looking for ways to eliminate their rivals from the game..
January 23, 2008 at 11:08 am #1153207When i was in work this morning there is a couple of girls that sit over the other side of the room talking about how god it would be to be faomus and have people follow you around all the time asked me if i would like to be famous, i said no and they looked at me like i was simple, i think its a bit sad that we live in a world were people just want to be famous for no reason. and i think thats what the media live off people will do almost anything to be famous its a nasty circle.
January 23, 2008 at 11:08 am #1210000When i was in work this morning there is a couple of girls that sit over the other side of the room talking about how god it would be to be faomus and have people follow you around all the time asked me if i would like to be famous, i said no and they looked at me like i was simple, i think its a bit sad that we live in a world were people just want to be famous for no reason. and i think thats what the media live off people will do almost anything to be famous its a nasty circle.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.