india7
Guest
Nov 28, 2024 16:59:15 GMT -4
|
Post by india7 on May 17, 2006 14:30:16 GMT -4
She as the subject of the much-discussed "Adored Ava" blind item, which bamboozled everyone at FT, and subsequently here. Wait a minute..... Jane Fonda was "Adored Ava? ?" I'll be a monkey's uncle. When did that get confirmed? But didn't she admit that in some recent interview? Not that she was Ava Adored, but that when she was married to Roger Vadim, the swinging and wild sexcapades were a constant? I thought I heard that, but I could be wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 16:59:15 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2006 14:38:33 GMT -4
Nope, don't think that was her. At the time when that was printed, her book hadn't come out and she wasn't raking in anything. Jane has said recently, that her only source of income has been her book. Also, I wouldn't call Jane adored in the least. More people dislike her than like her.
|
|
Trixie
Landed Gentry
Posts: 542
Mar 11, 2005 12:16:25 GMT -4
|
Post by Trixie on May 17, 2006 14:56:17 GMT -4
Jane has said recently, that her only source of income has been her book. Really? No investments, no alimony, no property, no savings, no bonds, no assets? Nothing, no financial memento of any sort, from her marriage to a billionaire? Just the income from her most recent book? Not likely, says me.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 16:59:15 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2006 15:25:39 GMT -4
She doesn't get alimony from Ted and she has said in recent interviews that her book is her sole source of income at the moment and that is why she is flogging that book all over the globe. Ted gave her over a million dollars during their marriage, but that was solely for her charities.
|
|
|
Post by Daisy Pusher on May 17, 2006 17:11:05 GMT -4
Whew, glad I am not the only one puzzled by the Fonda/Ava idea. I agree with fangirl; Jane Fonda is hardly an American sweetheart type. Besides, even if she did swing back in the 60s when she was married to Vadim...so what? How would that revelation hurt her? Didn't everyone swing back then???
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 16:59:15 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2006 18:37:34 GMT -4
I have to disagree with the poster who thinks the ongoing distain for Jane Fonda is really about feelings on the Vietnam War itself. Most of us have come to terms with the war. In fact did so years ago. But the intense dislike of Fonda continues and will continue, I think, until she dies. Jane Fonda is a woman who profited off "the fat of the land". She had wealth and fame as her father's daughter, and that fact surely led to a more successful career than Jane Doe without a famous father would have had. Her pronouncements during the Vietnam War were much the same as her pronouncements today. She acts as if she has all the answers when in fact, I've believed for a long time that she is (1) poorly educated and (2) not very smart. She was well into her adult life when she went to Vietnam, was a successful PUBLIC person and must have been aware of the stir she would cause when she went. If she was not aware, then she was even dumber than I think. And I do think she is not very bright. Even dumb people, though, can be canny when it comes to publicity. I don't think Hollywood stars are known for their intellect.
I remember years ago seeing her on the Tonight Show right after the birth of her daughter (with Roger Vadim). She gleefully told about how she had her daughter's "cards read" and the reader told her that the baby had 2 possible futures. While I can't remember one, the other was that of a "courtesan". At the time I remember thinking that any woman who was gleeful of such a possible future for her baby daughter, and who announced such on national TV was a NITWIT. This was during the 60s, before Vietnam, but even then women were seeing more to their lives than what was available in the earlier decades. I've watched her over the years, most recently at her appearance at the National Press Club and my opinion of her remains the same.
I think she is very, very needy of approval, probably because Henry Fonda was a remote father and that need leads her from man to man where she absorbs their characteristics.
As for her book being "her only income", note that she says "income", NOT ASSETS. I hardly think she's destitute.
By the way, one additional comment. I remember reading something about the connection between Jane Fonda and John Wayne. Wayne had known Jane since she was a girl and she visited the set of "Fort Apache" when Wayne worked with Henry Fonda. Believe it or not, while they were at opposite ends of the debate on Vietnam, Wayne was always fond of her. When told of Jane's trip to North Vietnam, Wayne shook his head and said sadly "I think she's being used.". I think she probably WAS being used, but she was old enough to know better, and her actions clearly "gave aid and comfort to the enemy". She will NEVER get out front under that.
|
|
stephanie
Guest
Nov 28, 2024 16:59:15 GMT -4
|
Post by stephanie on May 17, 2006 18:48:01 GMT -4
It's one thing to protest the Vietnam war-we were totally wrong. It's quite another to side with the Viet Cong. They were brutal bastards. War isn't always black and white-one side good, the other side bad. ITA Guinastasia however, there were things that our troops did over there that weren't exactly honorable according to anybody's standards either. I'd wager that Abugrave(sp) is merely the tip of the iceberg on our part in Iraq. War is a brutal, barbaric way of settling differences that in reality are never settled merely abated to a degree that both sides end up agreeing to disagree. At the end of the day, IMHO nobody ever wins in war and both sides are usually equally brutal and wrong.
|
|
Trixie
Landed Gentry
Posts: 542
Mar 11, 2005 12:16:25 GMT -4
|
Post by Trixie on May 17, 2006 18:55:06 GMT -4
It's one thing to protest the Vietnam war-we were totally wrong. It's quite another to side with the Viet Cong. They were brutal bastards. War isn't always black and white-one side good, the other side bad. ITA Guinastasia however, there were things that our troops did over there that weren't exactly honorable according to anybody's standards either. I'd wager that Abugrave(sp) is merely the tip of the iceberg on our part in Iraq. War is a brutal, barbaric way of settling differences that in reality are never settled merely abated to a degree that both sides end up agreeing to disagree. At the end of the day, IMHO nobody ever wins in war and both sides are usually equally brutal and wrong. And though I am not a mod, I'd say this has gone beyond Fonda at this point.
|
|
|
Post by Oxynia on May 17, 2006 18:55:46 GMT -4
Let's please stick to the subject of the thread and not debate the merits of this or any other war.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 16:59:15 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2006 19:03:39 GMT -4
Miss Marple, you don't think Jane is smart at all? When did you see her at the Press club?
|
|