Re: Has George's current relationship [with Stacy Keibler] changed you view of him??

by blubelle Sun 23 Oct 2011, 21:22

Don't bite my head off - please Very Happy

but knowing what you know about G and his GF policy, if given the opportunity to become his flavor of the month.....would you????

by cindigirl Sun 23 Oct 2011, 21:27

Good grief no. That would be waaaaay too much effort for me. I'd be the one waiting in the hotel room with a pitcher of lemonchellos for him when he gets back. And then after I get him drunk, who knows....... drunken

by hathaross Sun 23 Oct 2011, 22:02

You know what is the problem? George is becoming less credible sentimental and old allegations are increasingly thinking!

Yeah... for people who don´t follow his career, have the feeling that he changes often a couple. And they're getting tired of always hearing and seeing the new news... "The new girlfriend of George Clooney"!

I'd be the one waiting in the hotel room with a pitcher of lemonchellos for him when he gets back. And then after I get him drunk, who knows.......

Can I join you? lol!

by LornaDoone Sun 23 Oct 2011, 22:46

Ello wrote:How can his character be unimportant? His personal life reveals a great deal about his character. It tells us he doesn't like to spend time with intelligent or educated women. How can that be insignificant to you? It's people like you he doesn't want to know.

There may be justifiable reasons for it - he knows he hasn't the time for a serious relationship, he doesnt want to hurt anyone, he thinks famewhores get a good deal out of him. All that may be true, I don't know, but to anyone who values their education, and mind, it can hardly be insignificant that he, on the face of it, does not

Now that was an interesting comment. I think he doesn't want "women" like that as someone he dates. Maybe as friends (but I think he gets that from his male friends i.e. intelligent, serious conversations and interactions) but I don't think he wants that from someone who he's sleeping with cause then he might get too involved and that's a place that George doesn't want to go.

Besides, an educated intelligent women wouldn't put up with his bullshit for very long.

by LornaDoone Sun 23 Oct 2011, 23:06

pattygirl wrote:Thanks Mel. I was wondering too, but didn't have guts to ask. I'm just not into texting lingo and feel sorta dumb about it.

There is never a dumb question.

I was just being lazy. :-)

Yes, I did mean Same Shit Different Gal/Girl.

Have to agree with the posters who saw Ides. George's character get's himself into a pickle with a very young woman. What I found interesting is that George (along with Grant and the author of FN) wrote the screenplay. And in it one of the characters makes the comment that people will forgive you many things but not "sleeping with the little girl."

So George understands the issue - I guess in his personal life he feels it's okay to ignore it.

But here's my question - if he makes the comment about a political candidate i.e. a person in the public eye who is expected to act with integrity and as an example to all - then why is HIS expectation okay for a political candidate but it's not necessary for him? See I believe that anyone who wants to be respected for his work needs to be the example - not the exception.

These celebrities that are in and out of rehab; who are constantly in and out of jail or in trouble with the law etc. etc. etc. - why should they expect us the buying public to continue to support their work by paying our dollars to see them in films if they can't live their lives with integrity?

George explores some interesting issues in his film - but does he live those values that he comments upon?

Ryan Gosling's disenchantment with George's character in a way reflects that of George's fans who have an expectation and belief in him and then find that he's really not what he's spouting out on the podium (or in George's case the red carpets and in his interviews).

The word integrity is used very significantly in his film - either George was trying to explore the concept - or he was just giving it lip service. Not really believing that HE needs to walk the walk himself.

And then again, maybe I'm getting too much out of the film in that respect. Maybe it's just about a politician and a reflection of what has happened over the past several years with them.

Could George really be that obtuse not to see how some of the themes he explores in the film very closely reflect his life?

Who knows - I don't know him personally so I don't know what he truly thinks. But the commentary in the film was intriguing in light of all the comments many of us have made here and in previous "fan" blogs/sites.

JMO though.

by it's me Sun 23 Oct 2011, 23:13

Besides, an educated intelligent women wouldn't put up with his bullshit for very long.

probably

-no
non obtuse
at all

by Cinderella Sun 23 Oct 2011, 23:19

I understand what you're saying LornaDoone! I hope you nailed it on the head by saying, "The word integrity is used very significantly in his film - ... George was trying to explore the concept." It seems that every once in a while he'll comment in interviews about his age and something about change. Maybe he is contemplating his own significance.

by it's me Sun 23 Oct 2011, 23:24

age + change

I know he is able to reach his goals
it's also a bit scaring

by sisieq Sun 23 Oct 2011, 23:29

Cinderella wrote:It seems that every once in a while he'll comment in interviews about his age and something about change. Maybe he is contemplating his own significance.

Good thought!

by Dexterdidit Mon 24 Oct 2011, 00:57

Maybe because the girls he dates are over thirty he doesn't see them as being little girls but if he dated someone under thirty then he would. It would interesting to hear what age George considers too young for him. Stacy is 18 years younger although she does seem even younger. George has always done the opposite then what he says as far as women go. His pals say he likes intelligent and classy women I have seen little sign of that especially the last few years.

by Katiedot Mon 24 Oct 2011, 03:35

LornaDoone wrote: if he makes the comment about a political candidate i.e. a person in the public eye who is expected to act with integrity and as an example to all - then why is HIS expectation okay for a political candidate but it's not necessary for him?

Is it possible that he has different standards for politicians who are elected officials and as such serve the people and a private person which he is?

by sisieq Mon 24 Oct 2011, 03:40

Katiedot wrote:
LornaDoone wrote: if he makes the comment about a political candidate i.e. a person in the public eye who is expected to act with integrity and as an example to all - then why is HIS expectation okay for a political candidate but it's not necessary for him?
Is it possible that he has different standards for politicians who are elected officials and as such serve the people and a private person which he is?

IMHO, he's not a private person when he campaigns for humanitarian needs. Also, why is/was it okay for people to crap all over him for his involvement with Nepresso? Doesn't that relate to LD's comment?

by LornaDoone Mon 24 Oct 2011, 04:46

Katiedot wrote:
LornaDoone wrote: if he makes the comment about a political candidate i.e. a person in the public eye who is expected to act with integrity and as an example to all - then why is HIS expectation okay for a political candidate but it's not necessary for him?
Is it possible that he has different standards for politicians who are elected officials and as such serve the people and a private person which he is?

Perhaps, Katie, but he also has an expectation that we'll continue to support his work and more importantly, RESPECT his work, despite the fact that his personal life is distasteful to many of us.

It's as if he's saying, "Look at me, I'm directing a movie about integrity. But I'm a private citizen so don't worry about the fact that I make money from commercials from a company that many throughout the world cannot stand because of their practices in third world countries."

The same holds true for me if I find that an executive of a company who's products I buy leads a sleazy life and I find out about it. Especially if that company or brand is considered wholesome or is "selling" wholesome, or upstanding, or that they have integrity, then yes, I do have issue with it and if egregious enough will stop buying the company's products.

George wants us to respect his work. But I find it difficult to respect a man's work when his personal life also colors what I think of him as a person.

When Robert Downey Jr. was having his drug issues, do you think I went to see any of his films. Nope.

And you won't catch me in a Mel Gibson movie. Sorry, but that's just how I feel.

I realize there were so many stars in the past who had much more sleazy private lives - just read about Fred Astaire preferring little boys. (Must be true or Enty Lawyer wouldn't have given it away on one of his blind item reveals) And had I known that then YES I would have stopped watching his films.

I guess some small part of me still hopes that George will live up to the image he works so hard to put out there. I don't discount his work ethic, or his humanitarian work, but he does walk a fine line between misguided choices and down right stupid choices.

by Dexterdidit Mon 24 Oct 2011, 12:18

Fred Astaire liked little boys....noooo I really liked him but then by all accounts so did Mark Twain another surprise for me.

George is basically a do what I say but not what I do kind of person. I don't think he is dumb he must be aware of what people think he just couldn't care less. Although he is showing some signs of being aware of what others think he hasn't taken Stacy to everything and he has only just started to walk the red carpet with her.

by it's me Mon 24 Oct 2011, 12:27

really slow
but it's the usual path

so to be even more upsetting

I know
no way is good
fast or slow

bec it's the whole thing
NO good

by doris day Mon 24 Oct 2011, 13:50

its me... you are cryptic
???

by cindigirl Mon 24 Oct 2011, 15:10

I don't understand why George is being labeled sleazy, obtuse, misguided and having a lack of integrity. He's being compard to married celebrities who cheated on their wives. He's a single guy who is dating a woman (not a girl) who is 18 years younger than him.

Also, because he directs and acts in a movie about a sleazy governor, why is he compared to that character? I think our expectations of him are too high and we become disillusioned when he doesn't live up to them. He is after all only a man and shouldn't have to be put on a pedastal beause when he falls from there he's going to get hurt. IMO

by MM Mon 24 Oct 2011, 15:15

cindigirl wrote:I don't understand why George is being labeled sleazy, obtuse, misguided and having a lack of integrity. He's being compard to married celebrities who cheated on their wives. He's a single guy who is dating a woman (not a girl) who is 18 years younger than him.

Also, because he directs and acts in a movie about a sleazy governor, why is he compared to that character? I think our expectations of him are too high and we become disillusioned when he doesn't live up to them. He is after all only a man and shouldn't have to be put on a pedastal beause when he falls from there he's going to get hurt. IMO

You hit the nail right on the head with that one, Cindi!!

by blubelle Mon 24 Oct 2011, 16:22

I don't think G is a private person, I think he is a public person. His career choice puts him in the public eye and asks for the support of the public by buying tickets to his films. I do think his personal life is different. It is his right to keep it private or parade whatever part of it he wants out for all to see. And yes, we have the right to separate the two if we wish. I choose to judge his body of work and since I don't know him not comment on what glimpses we get of his private life. We really don't know sh-t about what is really going on or why.

by pattygirl Mon 24 Oct 2011, 16:49

Wish everybody could see things that way, but unfortunately they don't. That's what life is all about. Everybody chooses a path. Some follow that path to the end, others divert from it, whether by their own wishes or because the allow it to happen by following the crowd. There are leaders and followers out there and then there are those who just follow their own path and ideas. Sometimes followers are convinced that the leader' opinion is "the one" right opinion.
Some come to the conclusion on their own. As long as one is happy with their opinion, I say good for them. Just don't berate someone whose opinion deviates from yours, whatever it may be.

by it's me Mon 24 Oct 2011, 17:55

it's me wrote:really slow
but it's the usual path

same old same old

so to be even more upsetting

more slow, so to be

I know
no way is good
fast or slow

anyway no matter if fast or slow motion

bec it's the whole thing
NO good

it's a total mess

by sisieq Mon 24 Oct 2011, 18:54

LornaDoone wrote:
I guess some small part of me still hopes that George will live up to the image he works so hard to put out there. I don't discount his work ethic, or his humanitarian work, but he does walk a fine line between misguided choices and down right stupid choices.

by Cinderella Mon 24 Oct 2011, 19:06

I like George and that's all I have to say right now...

by sisieq Mon 24 Oct 2011, 19:14

cindigirl wrote:Also, because he directs and acts in a movie about a sleazy governor, why is he compared to that character?

If you are talking about news articles, the ones I read some have mentioned that it parallels his private life for the women he dates.

by cindigirl Mon 24 Oct 2011, 19:28

Sis you're asking why I'm asking why is he compared to his character in Ides.

Quote from Lorne Doone yesterday:
"Could George really be that obtuse not to see how some of the themes he explores in the film very closely reflect his life?"

To me that insinuates his life closely parallels his character in Ides. I'm not trying to start trouble here and certainly don't want another negative mark, I'm just stating my opinion.

by sisieq Mon 24 Oct 2011, 20:17

cindigirl wrote:Sis you're asking why I'm asking why is he compared to his character in Ides.

Quote from Lorne Doone yesterday:
"Could George really be that obtuse not to see how some of the themes he explores in the film very closely reflect his life?"

To me that insinuates his life closely parallels his character in Ides. I'm not trying to start trouble here and certainly don't want another negative mark, I'm just stating my opinion.

Jeeze, not accusing you of starting trouble just trying to have an adult conversation! FYI, IMHO, when someone gets a + or - its an easier way for posters to agree or disagree with a comment (no matter who wrote the comment) I doubt very highly it is aimed personally at anyone. Some people take the time to make a post, others just use the + or -. So hopefully, we can all rest over that controversy!

Well, I am asking why you are asking why you asked the question. You had a ? at the end of the sentence. So I presumed you were wondering why people are comparing his personal life with his character. Putting aside that Gov Morris is married, what do you see that it doesn't parallel his own personal life? If not, what were you asking?

by Cinderella Mon 24 Oct 2011, 20:58

Sisique, are you okay? Come on and tell us why you're so upset with everyone (besides the issue about voicing your opinion). You're fighting with someone on the Eli thread and then it seems in all your posts elsewhere, you're not your happy-go lucky self. What's going on?

by cindigirl Mon 24 Oct 2011, 21:11

Hi sis, first of all we know nothing about his personal life. His personal life is private. I don't see the parallel in Gov. Morris who is advocating only good in his presidential run while cheating on his wife because George is not trying to deceive his fans by pretending to be someone he's not. He's a single guy who, because of pr exposure, poses with arm candy.

And that ? you're referring to at the end of the sentence is not my statement, I only quoted someone else.

by sisieq Mon 24 Oct 2011, 21:23

cindigirl wrote:I don't understand why George is being labeled sleazy, obtuse, misguided and having a lack of integrity. He's being compard to married celebrities who cheated on their wives. He's a single guy who is dating a woman (not a girl) who is 18 years younger than him.

Also, because he directs and acts in a movie about a sleazy governor, why is he compared to that character? I think our expectations of him are too high and we become disillusioned when he doesn't live up to them. He is after all only a man and shouldn't have to be put on a pedastal beause when he falls from there he's going to get hurt. IMO

TRULY not picking on you, but confused - is this not you talking personally? Actually the whole thing, but just pointing out the question.

by sisieq Mon 24 Oct 2011, 21:27

Cinderella wrote:Sisique, are you okay? Come on and tell us why you're so upset with everyone (besides the issue about voicing your opinion). You're fighting with someone on the Eli thread and then it seems in all your posts elsewhere, you're not your happy-go lucky self. What's going on?

The person in the EC thread accused me of purposely making posts to make EC look good and SK bad. I've been trying to explain to her that if she knew my posting history, I don't like/support alot of EC's work.

by cindigirl Mon 24 Oct 2011, 21:39

The question was not mine but quoted from another poster. The statement following it is me talking personally and disagreeing with the question. I was just stating my opinion.

by sisieq Mon 24 Oct 2011, 21:54

cindigirl wrote:The question was not mine but quoted from another poster. The statement following it is me talking personally and disagreeing with the question. I was just stating my opinion.

LOL, by not using the [ quote ] [ /quote ] it reads that it was you. Thanks for your patience and helping me get it through my head.

by sisieq Mon 24 Oct 2011, 21:55

Is everyone else seeing everything printed in red for today's comments - just this thread only? No big deal, was just wondering.

by Ello Mon 24 Oct 2011, 22:11

"I don't think he wants that from someone who he's sleeping with cause then he might get too involved and that's a place that George doesn't want to go"

Lorna, Yes, I think you are right but what does that mean? He doesnt want an intelligent conversation with his girlfriend in case what? It might require him to stop talking and listen like he does with his male friends? It is not ok that he reserves intelligent interaction for men only, and he does do that. All his close friends are male, all his creative partnerships are with men. Stacy, eli, sarah etc - these women who say nothing while he talks, these are the only women he spends significant time with. If he had other close relationships with women who were not mute subordinates then it wouldn't be so troubling but that is it.

"But here's my question - if he makes the comment about a political candidate i.e. a person in the public eye who is expected to act with integrity and as an example to all - then why is HIS expectation okay for a political candidate but it's not necessary for him? See I believe that anyone who wants to be respected for his work needs to be the example - not the exception."

I think there is a difference. Politicians are given responsibility over our lives, we trust them to spend our taxes wisely, to protect us, to educate children, to send young people to war. Their own character is likely to influence how well they do that job, although that is not always the case. Actors make movies to entertain us. That is all. But having said that, we will only be entertained if we like the actor and what we know about them obviously influences that. Their personal life cannot help but affect their professonal career just like the politician but the reason for that is different.

by it's me Mon 24 Oct 2011, 22:27

well
I only saw the red dot
then I see the bottom lines

red as?

all his assistants are/were women
and the blonde petite journalist/writer (her name is.... ) who was at his home
her little kid crawling on him?

a good friend (we hope....)

by it's me Mon 24 Oct 2011, 22:30

wait

Stacy, eli, sarah etc - these women who say nothing while he talks, these are the only women he spends significant time with.

significant what?

(forget Mrs. Nina, in the previous post)

by pattygirl Mon 24 Oct 2011, 23:01

The only post I saw red printing in was it's me's post at 12:55 pm today.

by it's me Mon 24 Oct 2011, 23:03

it was 6:55 pm
to me
anyway look at the bottom of this page

red

by Ello Mon 24 Oct 2011, 23:20

"I don't discount his work ethic, or his humanitarian work, but he does walk a fine line between misguided choices and down right stupid choices".

That is why it is so damn disappointing. He is smart and decent, he ought to be able to figure out what he's doing isn't right.

by doris day Mon 24 Oct 2011, 23:22

i do not have any red,ciao ello

by melbert Tue 25 Oct 2011, 01:06

Sisieq, after It's Me posted in red, the bottom of the thread turned red. Don't know what that means. I don't see any other posts in red.

by Cinderella Tue 25 Oct 2011, 02:19

I see the red at the bottom but thought Katie changed color???

by sisieq Tue 25 Oct 2011, 04:42

melbert wrote:Sisieq, after It's Me posted in red, the bottom of the thread turned red. Don't know what that means. I don't see any other posts in red.

Thanks for the explanation. Makes sense now.

Testing

[/color]

Testing

by Katiedot Tue 25 Oct 2011, 04:43

Nope, not changed any colours and I don't see anything in red. Perhaps the forum's having a technical thing?

by LornaDoone Tue 25 Oct 2011, 05:19

cindigirl wrote:I don't understand why George is being labeled sleazy, obtuse, misguided and having a lack of integrity. He's being compard to married celebrities who cheated on their wives. He's a single guy who is dating a woman (not a girl) who is 18 years younger than him.

Also, because he directs and acts in a movie about a sleazy governor, why is he compared to that character? I think our expectations of him are too high and we become disillusioned when he doesn't live up to them. He is after all only a man and shouldn't have to be put on a pedastal beause when he falls from there he's going to get hurt. IMO

Cindigirl I have to disagree - my point is that George can point the finger at others by the themes of his films and talks about integrity and yet doesn't have it himself.

Why do we as private citizens expect less of ourselves when it comes to integrity than those in political power?

If we have that expectation - which George has - then we should have integrity ourselves.

Too many want to give celebrities a "pass" on that and that's my point. If they get to point fingers then they should also be held to the same high standards, just as we should hold OURSELVES.

For instance, if I said that Eli showed disrespect for nuns by her choice of acting role then I myself should be able to say from a place of honesty that one - I had never done something like that and two - that I would never do something like that. So her choice did not live up to my standard and so I slammed her for it. I've been catty in my comments but I think I've been very careful to speak about people's behavior and choices - especially if those choices and their behavior is contradictory to what they given lip service to. Walk the walk, just don't talk the talk.

That's what I think about George.

As to George's private life. Yes, it could be his private life if he didn't parade it for all the world to see.

I'm just trying to make the point that my expectation of George is based on the high standards he sets for others. And if he can't live up to the standard that I have for him based on HIS commentary over the years about how and who should be held to those standards then I make my comments about it.

See I'm not out dating guys that are young enough to be my sons.

People are so quick to talk about their "rights" as private citizens but I rarely see people shouting out about their responsibilities. There's been too many disconnects between what George says - for instance when he writes about corporate corruption - and then makes money off a corporation like Nestle.

In the film that comment that HE wrote about how people will forgive you many things but not sleeping with little girls, I think is a direct response to the commentary about his personal life.

It's as if he is saying in HIS film that he shouldn't have to live up to the moral standards that us "peons" who go see his films would have of him.

So that's why I used the film as an example.

by it's me Tue 25 Oct 2011, 05:57

it worsen every day

by Pari Tue 25 Oct 2011, 15:12

I sometimes wonder if "art" = "life"? [NOT relating to the movie folks... just the issue being discussed Smile

]

I'd like to believe they are independent as much, I mean, if you really wish creativity and would want to explore as many different realms / characteristics / phenomena / etc of life... to interlock and network inside them, then there surely ought NOT to be a reason to hold onto one's own ideals, especially when an artiste wishes to contemplate / reflect / draw out an extensive, pervasive, in-depth vision / travesty / portrayal of sorts...

Just wondering out loud Lorna, although I do commend each one's take on the subject... Again, even a discussion, can bring out voices with an experience / knowledge / heresy... just in-order to maybe "throw light on the subject"... and DOES NOT have to be a reflection of how one has lived his/her life... A voice is about a flow of thought, or a bunch of them, "about" the subject... not necessarily a "testimony" Smile

Besides, I really wonder IF someone ought to be "perfect" / "perfected" in order that a "correction" takes place elsewhere / in another (OUCH!) Smile

I almost always throw the example of a traffic police officer at a signal point... How many car-drivers obeying traffic rules, really check to see if the "officer on duty" has a "clean record" of having driven cars without accidents or whatever...? The same holds true with those wanting to share principles / wisdom / whatever... Would an infant question his/her "mother" about the state of her morals or the quality content of her milk, while feeding off her bosom??

George has the right to make any kind of movie he wishes to... as with anyone scripting any kind of story... as with an actor working out any kind of role... etc etc... I guess, as onlookers / audience, we are given a chance to cultivate / nourish those "talents" of the artistes / George / Teams with our feedback / reviews / resources etc... Any kind of back to back cross-checking of work-of-art Vs work-of-life, will be completely "limiting" to the scope of the talent... besides being incomplete (how much would the audience really "know" the artiste?) is what I think Smile

Again, no offence to anyone dear people... just my humble jumble of thoughts

by cindigirl Tue 25 Oct 2011, 15:52

Pari wrote:George has the right to make any kind of movie he wishes to... as with anyone scripting any kind of story... as with an actor working out any kind of role... etc etc... I guess, as onlookers / audience, we are given a chance to cultivate / nourish those "talents" of the artistes / George / Teams with our feedback / reviews / resources etc... Any kind of back to back cross-checking of work-of-art Vs work-of-life, will be completing "limiting" to the scope of the talent... besides being incomplete (how much would the audience really "know" the artiste?) is what I think :)Again, no offence to anyone dear people... just my humble jumble of thoughts

Thank you Pari - this is the point I was trying to make, although not as eloquently as you did. IMO George is compared to the roles he plays and, I think quite unfairly. At a recent Descendents press conference someone asked how he could play a father when he never was one. He answered that he could play a drug addict but that doesn't mean he is one.

by it's me Tue 25 Oct 2011, 16:10

stubborn

by Pari Tue 25 Oct 2011, 16:20

Thank you Cindigirl, your note also made me realize that I had to correct something [the word "completely"] which I just did Smile

Yes... I understand the point about the drug addict as well... Said perfectly! Smile

I don't have to be a sex-worker to write a book about a porn industry tycoon, although I might never be able to compete with certain intricacies with just my imagination, to make some parts feel real! Very Happy

ha ha ha haa An artist's work is almost always inspired interpretation, not necessarily a personal testimonial unless specifically credited...

by Sponsored content

Has George's current love life changed your view of him?