Demi Moore denies having any plastic surgery done (yeah right..lol)

[Tacori E-ring]

Musey, an actor makes money by getting good roles right? I totally agree talent is important (though I can name a few talentless, very famous celebs). But in the end it''s all about money. Actors get hired based on popularity (as well as talent). They get popular by their fan base. A large portion will be obsessed with every detail of their favorite celeb. So in a way it is a requirement to put up with it. No fans = no stars. It''s a game.

There are some very high profile stars that seem to KNOW how to stay out of the public eye but some seem to crave it. I don''t think Demi Moore *IS* a star who purposely brings attention to herself *but* like other posters said if she didn''t deny having work done it would *not* be a story. I never hear stories about Sarah Jessica Parker, Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchet (sp?)...They obviously know how to stay under the radar.

I understand why you have such strong disagreement with stories like this. But I *DO NOT* understand how you can honestly think there will be a time where this kind of story doesn''t sell magazines and newspapers. The best you can do is NOT buy the papers/magazines and ignore the stories.

Trust me my dad carries very high malpractice insurance (he is in a field that commonly gets blames). I don''t think you can compare a lawsuit where someone dies/injured/life ruined forever with a fluff article (even if it is untrue). I really doubt Demi Moore is losing any sleep over this one.

 

[Haven]

Maisie--The pictures of that English actress are terribly sad. She was so beautiful before. Oh, my.

 

[Maisie]

Date: 12/5/2008 1:01:47 PM
Author: Haven
Maisie--The pictures of that English actress are terribly sad. She was so beautiful before. Oh, my.

I know. Its such a shame. She still doesn''t look right and that was six years ago.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/5/2008 1:55:23 PM
Author: Maisie

Date: 12/5/2008 1:01:47 PM
Author: Haven
Maisie--The pictures of that English actress are terribly sad. She was so beautiful before. Oh, my.

I know. Its such a shame. She still doesn''t look right and that was six years ago.

She looks just like poor Meg Ryan now!!

 

[Maisie]

Oh dear me. Why did Meg Ryan do that? She was so lovely and natural before.

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 12/5/2008 1:55:23 PM
Author: Maisie

Date: 12/5/2008 1:01:47 PM
Author: Haven
Maisie--The pictures of that English actress are terribly sad. She was so beautiful before. Oh, my.

I know. Its such a shame. She still doesn''t look right and that was six years ago.

Ugh. That is SO sad. She was absolutely gorgeous before, and now she looks like some kind of cartoon character!

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 12/5/2008 2:37:12 PM
Author: Maisie
Oh dear me. Why did Meg Ryan do that? She was so lovely and natural before.

What did she have done? I don''t think I''ve seen a recent picture of her . . .

 

[Maisie]

...

 

[musey]

Date: 12/5/2008 12:57:45 PM
Author: Tacori E-ring
Musey, an actor makes money by getting good roles right? I totally agree talent is important (though I can name a few talentless, very famous celebs). But in the end it's all about money. Actors get hired based on popularity (as well as talent). They get popular by their fan base. A large portion will be obsessed with every detail of their favorite celeb. So in a way it is a requirement to put up with it. No fans = no stars. It's a game.

Putting up with it a requirement, yes (but only for one's sanity). The scrutiny itself a requirement? No. That is my point.

There are some very high profile stars that seem to KNOW how to stay out of the public eye but some seem to crave it. I don't think Demi Moore *IS* a star who purposely brings attention to herself *but* like other posters said if she didn't deny having work done it would *not* be a story. I never hear stories about Sarah Jessica Parker, Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchet (sp?)...They obviously know how to stay under the radar.

I understand why you have such strong disagreement with stories like this. But I *DO NOT* understand how you can honestly think there will be a time where this kind of story doesn't sell magazines and newspapers. The best you can do is NOT buy the papers/magazines and ignore the stories.

I don't pretend to think that people will lose interest, and I never suggested that, but I can still hope (and encourage) people to at least scale back the cruelty--be as kind as they can, because what is the point of being cruel? Remind them what that kind of meanness can cause. That is "the best I can do," simply ignoring it would be a cop out. Not that this particular story is one of the worst... but to so harshly criticize someone for making decisions that are their own to make, just does not sit well with me.

Trust me my dad carries very high malpractice insurance (he is in a field that commonly gets blames). I don't think you can compare a lawsuit where someone dies/injured/life ruined forever with a fluff article (even if it is untrue). I really doubt Demi Moore is losing any sleep over this one.

I wasn't comparing the gravity of legitimate malpractice suits with the effect of a mostly harmless article on a celebrity's life. I was comparing the "necessary evils" of each profession, and trying to explain why I personally think that they are not all that necessary.

The sad truth is that in our current state, there are people filing ill-founded malpractice suits against doctors because they know they can get away with it, and this is the main reason for skyrocketing malpractice insurance costs--not the legitimate claims (relatively infrequent), but those that are simply trying to take advantage (relatively frequent). In an ideal world (which we should all strive to achieve, in my opinion, rather than saying "that's just how it is"), we would not take advantage of those who are just trying to do their job (save lives to the best of their abilities). There would be legitimate complaints against doctors who truly did mess up, but people would generally take the high road when they could otherwise go for a cash-grab based on some small legal loophole.

Likewise, in our current state, the sad truth is that people are crazed about nitpicking those who have been elevated to celebrity status (whether it's in the entertainment industry, or otherwise). In an ideal world (which we should all strive to achieve, in my opinion, rather than saying "that's just how it is"), we would appreciate (or not) what these actors/singers/etc. have to offer us (or not), and people could have their sanity back.

That was what I was trying to compare--not the effect of death/injury/life being ruined against the effect of some "fluff article" on a particular celeb's life

Demi may not be losing sleep over this particular article, but you can bet she found stress at some point (or many) in her life over the cruelty of those you might find over at TMZ, theSuperficial and the like. Some people can handle it, and stick around so that they can continue doing what they love in spite of the horrible drawbacks. Other people figure out that they can't handle it, and quit before things go too far. Still others don't get out quickly enough, and then you have people who self-medicate with drugs and adopt a false "screw you" attitude in a sad (and often backfiring) attempt to overcome the scrutiny. This happens more quickly than you might think--I lost a dear friend last year because celebrity hit her hard and fast, she absolutely could not take the intense scrutiny and false accusations, and ended up taking her own life because of the deep hurt and depression that it caused. This was a person who had no desire for celebrity, but she desperately loved her profession, so she tried her best to put up with the things that came along with it. I cannot comprehend the "eh, it is what it is" attitude when this happens all. the. time.

You would be surprised how many "accidental overdoses" and even "pneumonias" (right) were actually suicides due to exactly what people are defending on this thread as "going with the territory." There are so many "necessary evils" out there that actually are necessary, why pile on evils that we can so easily do without? Why not at least try to take a kinder approach to these people who, for the vast majority, simply want to do what they love?

 

[musey]

Moral of the story being--I would never, ever put into writing on the internet something that would hurt me if I read it about myself. EVER. Because what is the point? Only to have a few laughs and pretend that it in no way effects the person being criticized or made fun of??

Isn't this basic 12-year-old kind of behavior? Something that we were all scolded for and learned better? I know I did, I was horribly critical of many celebrities. Until I learned that that was hurtful and unkind behavior.

The truth is that as much as people in the spotlight claim not to read what's written about them, most of them do. Even those who probably 99% of the people on this board have never heard of, they're being trashed on some message board somewhere (usually IMDB) and people are justifying it by saying "well, they're a celeb, they're practically asking for it." And those people, especially, will see/hear about that stuff and it will hurt. How sad to think that people would just write them off because they "can't handle" middleschool-style cruelty.

 

[Skippy123]

hmmm, I think Perez Hilton and publications similar to that sell because people are interested in celebs and some celebs love the attention so they do outrageous things to stay in the limelight. I kind of see what Tacori is saying though. I think Hollywood needs to change in order for it all to change though. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Skippy123]

Date: 12/5/2008 1:01:47 PM
Author: Haven
Maisie--The pictures of that English actress are terribly sad. She was so beautiful before. Oh, my.

It is very sad. She was gorgeous before.