|
Post by Spinderella on May 23, 2020 0:30:03 GMT -4
When I started to read about the sale I was so pissed. Regardless if he had this concept in his mind for years or whatever, he absolutely took the coronavirus as a way to draw attention to the concept and where it was uplifting and was just what we needed, to sell it to CBS/Viacom for their PAID programing (CBS Access) is extreme BULLSHIT. I read where he was quoted saying, "I really thought about it and didn't want to accept any offers..." uh, but ya did. And yes, Ginger, it will not translate well on regular TV. Having it on YouTube kept the organic and home-grown vibe to it. You could share it with friends and go back to it and it was free. It was feel-good fun with videos that came from Social Media in the first place. We could all connect with it as we're home trying to connect with other on Zoom or the like and hoping to find a silver of hope in the world right now. Shit. Bad form, Krasinski. Bad form.
|
|
|
Post by ladyboy on May 23, 2020 11:16:30 GMT -4
He'll keep the money - he isn't at Clooney's level of fame/wealth and he needs to keep climbing.
(I've never liked/trusted him or his wife, based on nothing at all. Just my gut. They seem fake.)
|
|
aibohphobia
Blueblood
Posts: 1,341
Jan 29, 2006 20:23:45 GMT -4
|
Post by aibohphobia on May 23, 2020 14:49:40 GMT -4
He'll keep the money - he isn't at Clooney's level of fame/wealth and he needs to keep climbing. (I've never liked/trusted him or his wife, based on nothing at all. Just my gut. They seem fake.) Like prisma I've always thought his good guy persona always felt a little too put on like first he was trying to be the next Clooney even being picked to star in Clooney's Leatherheads that bombed, but that plan didn't work out. Then he worked with Meryl and that didn't really help his career move forward. Then he teamed up with Matt Damon to write a screenplay and worked with Gus Van Sant, the same person that directed Good Will Hunting, and that went nowhere for him too. So I'm not really surprised by this news. Disappointed, but not surprised. His wife seems nice enough, but because she's with him, I can't help but feel that she's a bit tainted too. Like they wanted to be the cool "it" couple, and while for the most part they sort of are, my feeling is that thought they'd both be bigger by now especially him. And I'm sure she'll be nominated and probably win someday, I could see her thinking that she'd at least have one Oscar nomination by now. To her credit, she's been nominated for every other major film award (Globe, SAG, and BAFTA), and won 2 out of those 3, so I could see why she might feel that way.
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on May 24, 2020 16:19:18 GMT -4
I like Emily and I find her genuine, likable, and a very good actress. Whatever his flaws are, he seems to be a devoted husband and father, and they seem like they are compatible and have fun together. That's extremely hard to come by in her industry, so I can't blame her at all for marrying him. She used to be engaged to Michael Buble, who definitely cheated on her and is suspected of abusing his current wife. I shudder to think who else she could have dated or married in her circle. Justin Theroux? Bradley Cooper? God help her. Emily's sister married a nice actor, but has to deal with the significant downsides of him being two decades older, a widower, a former adulterer, and having kids already.
The worst thing to say about Emily's husband is that he just made a very lucrative business deal that will benefit their family, and that he climbed high enough in their industry to give her a starring role in at least one but probably two hit movies. I think she's very lucky to have him as a husband. And he's lucky to have her too because I think she's cool and fun and easygoing.
|
|
greekone
Landed Gentry
Posts: 501
Apr 25, 2015 14:49:08 GMT -4
|
Post by greekone on May 31, 2020 23:04:54 GMT -4
Blind Item:
This A list dual threat actor who is married to someone equal to or higher on the list was asked if he would donate all the money he made from a recent sale and he said absolutely not. John Krasinski/Emily Blunt/"Some Good News" (John Krasinski’s 'Some Good News' was more than just a show — it was a life raft)
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Jun 1, 2020 9:31:11 GMT -4
The deal left a bad taste in the mouth anyway, but was made worse when CBS News laid off 75 news staff just days after spending what was presumed to be a lot of money to buy Krasinski's show. CBS News is going to be replacing real news with a show that monetizes free, aggregated content. I hope it flops hard.
|
|
ennazus
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 299
Jul 30, 2017 11:24:29 GMT -4
|
Post by ennazus on Jun 1, 2020 10:48:32 GMT -4
I’m of the opinion that JK is lucky to have Emily.
|
|
save lilo!
Blueblood
Posts: 1,195
Jul 25, 2007 17:38:37 GMT -4
|
Post by save lilo! on Jun 15, 2020 3:43:50 GMT -4
I can see their marriage going the way of Reese’s first one.
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Jun 15, 2020 9:54:50 GMT -4
I don't count on any Hollywood marriages lasting, but they have been together for twelve years, got married in their late 20s/early 30s, come from stable families, seem compatible, and neither one is outshining the other to such a degree that it would cause problems. That seems like about as good a recipe as there can be.
Reese had a shotgun wedding when she was barely old enough to drink to a difficult person she probably never would have married if it hadn't been for the accidental pregnancy....
|
|
|
Post by granolamom on Jun 16, 2020 12:27:22 GMT -4
The arc of Some Good News was described in Sunday's NYT. In case you are out of free views, here are a few bits: "Eventually, the homespun quarantine-relief show would become an ordinary corporate property. The sale was clearly a disappointment to the community Krasinski had fostered, or at least to the many who commented to accuse him of selling out. The actor said previous commitments, and the unsustainable cost of production, meant he had never intended to make more than a handful of episodes. Whatever the reason, Krasinski bowed out at the most opportune possible moment. It is nearly impossible to imagine how “S.G.N.” would function right now. ... [In regular news,] Iconic image replaces iconic image: journalists shot with rubber bullets and arrested on live television, peaceful protesters doused with chemicals, looters busting into stores along Fifth Avenue. What would it look like now for Krasinski to show us Brad Pitt cameos and cooped-up families playing household sports? ..." "The difficulty of imagining another “S.G.N.” exposes what was nagging about it all along. It was a well-intended distraction, but it was, as with so much else, insufficient to the circumstances. Each night’s applause for health workers was dogged by the knowledge that we could not seem to provide them with basic protections. We could improvise ceremonies for our graduates, but we could not help them with the colossal burden of their student debt." I agree that it's hard to recapture the positive feelings I had about SGN when it first started. I'm not sure if I feel queasy about the disconnect between the real world of today and the happy-fun-world of SGN then, or if I'm just bugged at him for selling out. I wonder if the project will go forward as planned.
|
|