Re: Anna Wintour to be at Wedding? Page Six report.

by Silje Sat 09 Aug 2014, 13:27

theminis wrote:Yep I hear you Missa.

For me its the selling out aspect that sticks in my gut, if indeed that will be the case.

I too would be really happy with a simple photo taken and posted from one of his many instagramming friends.

The selling out aspects is what bothers me too.

I understand why you didn't want to sell photos of your kids Theminis. I would have made the same decision . (But I bet they are extra cute if someone was offering money for their pictures. Smile

)

When it comes to George I have doubled standards. I would respect him more if he didn't sell the wedding pictures for money and I don't care what good cause he gives them to. But on the other hand I WANT to see them. So I might not be happy with just one Instragram. Actually I would prefer pap-photos taken with a long lense.Then I would see some pics and still be content that G didn't sell out his wedding.

by Joanna Sat 09 Aug 2014, 14:26

I think George has done a few very tasteful photo shoots for Vogue magazine in the past hasn't he ?

I agree with Lorna about him being "damned if he does and damned if he doesn't" and her other points too.

I for one would prefer to see some quality wedding photos in a classy magazine than some amateur ones posted on Instagram, which a lot of people wouldn't have access to.
After all, it is a Very Special Occasion.

Love3

by melbert Sat 09 Aug 2014, 14:46

In briefly looking, I couldn't find any photo spreads in Vogue for George, but he's been mentioned in a few articles.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by PigPen Sat 09 Aug 2014, 14:49

Katiedot wrote:I was kind of hoping it wouldn't show up anywhere (other than paparazzi shots which even George's security probably aren't going to be able to stop).

But I guess I can just take my high horse and ride it off into the sunset as George has already done the vulgar celebrity multiple-carat engagement ring, so why not follow it up with a show wedding full of fake friends, lovingly photographed for a ten-page spread in the highest-paying magazine?

Sorry, I'm just so disappointed in him right now.

In total agreement, Katie dot. Terribly disappointed, but not surprised, I'm afraid.

Maybe this is the real George, that's been there all along. Someone on the thread ( too lazy to scroll) said he has hidden behind charity when he makes a bit of a goof ( the coffee commercials, etc). Maybe the publicity lady of negotiable affection is part of George Timothy Clooney. Didn't get where he is by chance, luck and talent. Calculation really pays a major role in becoming and maintaining fame. The engagement esp. Don't agree it was to maintain privacy, People spread was part of keeping this under control. Never bought that concept. It was all calculated PR. Allegedly, the day it was "announced" the internet nearly crashed from people logging on.

Not saying he's a terrible person, or a Kardashian. But he's Hollywood. And can do the vulgar "it's all about me" bit as well as the best of them.

sigh

by Way2Old4Dis Sat 09 Aug 2014, 15:34

Again, we don't know that any of this is true.

If we're going to malign the guy, let's do it for something we know he's done, or know for sure he's going to do.

by PigPen Sat 09 Aug 2014, 15:42

The entertainment shows are covering the item ( E! had it on last night) Other outlets are repeating the Page Six story..ie: San Jose Mercury New.

What's making me crazy is ( besides the italic button being stuck right now) is the media calling it a license, or license"sort of"

by melbert Sat 09 Aug 2014, 15:44

I so agree W2O4D. Nearly all of this is speculation. Agreed that a lot of commenters on the rag sites are going on and on and on, but again, none of them know first hand. George has been very quiet (unless I'm deaf and blind), except for his outburst with the DM, about the dating, engagement and wedding plans. Amal has said NOTHING. SO, we don't know anything first hand. I agree that so much of this relationship has the notes of previous g/f of..., but there are some differences. He had a PR roll out of all his previous "girlfriends", same as Amal. And then he went quiet with them, same as Amal. Then another PR event, etc. What have we said a gazillion times? Wash, rinse, repeat.

Now, this one will produce a marriage. The only difference.

by PigPen Sat 09 Aug 2014, 15:52

If we're going to malign the guy, let's do it for something we know he's done, or know for sure he's going to do

Now, this one will produce a marriage. The only difference.

Eh- until I see a marriage license, this whole thing is speculation!! Seesaw of good and e

by Cece42 Sat 09 Aug 2014, 16:45

As far as the wedding photos in Vogue, they will be staged just like the engagement photo, I would prefer spontaneous photos.

by LizzyNY Sat 09 Aug 2014, 19:17

I still can't get upset over him using the media to suit his own agenda. They use him often enough, and ultimately the media is a major component of his life. If the pictures are in Vogue or on instagram doesn't matter to me. Either way they're an intrusion into his private life. Why shouldn't he get something out of it? And anything the Vogue photographers do is bound to be a lot better than pap shots from a mile away.

by LornaDoone Sat 09 Aug 2014, 21:45

LizzyNY wrote:I still can't get upset over him using the media to suit his own agenda. They use him often enough, and ultimately the media is a major component of his life. If the pictures are in Vogue or on instagram doesn't matter to me. Either way they're an intrusion into his private life. Why shouldn't he get something out of it? And anything the Vogue photographers do is bound to be a lot better than pap shots from a mile away.

Yup, if he's gonna "sell out" then damn it -- it SHOULD be for high quality, clear pictures that are worthy of his undeniable ability to take a damn good photo. I would not drool over anything less!

So I say, bring on the Vogue photos and don't take all fucking month to get them out there. Put out a special edition damn it!

And Amal better keep up! brahahahahaha

by LizzyNY Sat 09 Aug 2014, 23:57

Lorna - For all we know she may be leading the parade! Very Happy

- Maybe she wants to be on the cover of Vogue. -It may be her only chance.

by LornaDoone Sun 10 Aug 2014, 00:05

Well anything is possible now with Vogue. They put Kimya on the cover - Amal can't be far behind.

by sparkie Sun 10 Aug 2014, 10:08

Katiedot wrote:I was kind of hoping it wouldn't show up anywhere (other than paparazzi shots which even George's security probably aren't going to be able to stop).

But I guess I can just take my high horse and ride it off into the sunset as George has already done the vulgar celebrity multiple-carat engagement ring, so why not follow it up with a show wedding full of fake friends, lovingly photographed for a ten-page spread in the highest-paying magazine?

Sorry, I'm just so disappointed in him right now.

You are not alone, this has turn into a full on circus with George the ringmaster directing all, the star attraction in rehearsal all her life ready to take centre stage, the audience while in awe of the spectacular in beginning are starting to realize that the program hasn't really changed at all and it is just like any other celebrity wedding. Same horse different f. . king jockey.

by The next mrs clooney Sun 10 Aug 2014, 16:34

sparkie wrote:
Katiedot wrote:I was kind of hoping it wouldn't show up anywhere (other than paparazzi shots which even George's security probably aren't going to be able to stop).

But I guess I can just take my high horse and ride it off into the sunset as George has already done the vulgar celebrity multiple-carat engagement ring, so why not follow it up with a show wedding full of fake friends, lovingly photographed for a ten-page spread in the highest-paying magazine?

Sorry, I'm just so disappointed in him right now.
You are not alone, this has turn into a full on circus with George the ringmaster directing all, the star attraction in rehearsal all her life ready to take centre stage, the audience while in awe of the spectacular in beginning are starting to realize that the program hasn't really changed at all and it is just like any other celebrity wedding. Same horse different f. . king jockey.

If George is in charge then wouldn't that make him the jockey not the horse??

by LizzyNY Sun 10 Aug 2014, 19:25

I tried very hard not to get involved here, but I can't help it. What exactly do you guys want him to do? If there is publicity he's a sell-out and a fame-lady of negotiable affection. If there's no publicity, he's arrogant and hiding from his fans - to whom he owes photos, articles, updates because - well, just because.

Personally, I think he's doing what he's always done - managing publicity to allow himself enough coverage to satisfy the public, while protecting as much of his privacy as he can. He's had to do this his whole professional life, and I don't see why he should be expected to change now.

AS far as being controlling is concerned, it's the bride and groom's big day. They want to be in control of the decisions so that it turns out exactly the way they want it to be. Why should he be any different than any other groom? Every wedding involves some battles for control - from the choice of flowers, to the food, to the seating chart, to the choice of participants - it all can get contentious - especially if friends and relatives start putting their two cents in. Add to that the media attention they're dealing with, and I can completely understand the need for "control".

Anyone who thinks they should have snuck off somewhere and gotten married in a registrar's office or something to avoid publicity is being unfair, IMO, and denying them the kind of wedding they want just so we don't think it's tacky. If it were you, what would you do?

by Joanna Sun 10 Aug 2014, 19:37

Nice one Lizzy.....my thoughts too.....but you've expressed them far better than ever I could have done.

So if you don't mind I'll hang on your coat tails and go along for the ride with you.
I think Amal & George need to be congratulated on the discreet way that they're handling their wedding preparations. They're not bragging or showing off about their plans and can't be blamed for gossip/rumours/ lies that are being put about IMO.

by Doug Ross Sun 10 Aug 2014, 20:29

Lizzy and Joanna, amen!

by LizzyNY Sun 10 Aug 2014, 20:52

Jo & Doug Ross- Thanks for the support. I fully expected to get blasted for what I wrote - probably still will, come to that - but I don't care! Razz

This has been pissing me off for days! Some of you ladies seem to want it both ways (and that can't happen!) so make up your minds and quit blaming him for doing what he feels needs to be done!

lol!

PS - Who censored my "fame-w---e" comment? lol!

by melbert Sun 10 Aug 2014, 21:08

hahahaha! it's an automatic censorship. We can use other words without censorship, but for some reason, this Blogger doesn't like "wh ore"...

by Carolina Gal Sun 10 Aug 2014, 21:11

I have to say when I read that story about Vogue featuring the wedding I was happy. I hope it does turn out to be true. I feel it would be very well done and very classy! I feel he missed the boat with the lack of engagement PR. Then 3 months later, he goes into a tirade twice complaining about reports re: his future mother in law, Druze, etc. That could have been avoided with a bit more info on Amal given at or close to the time of the engagement. Amal doesn't seem to want any PR at all given the blank expressions she gives when the paps first approach her, then she tries to put on a smile. It just seems like she is a bit starchy. George was raised in Kentucky by parents who were not ultra rich. Amal was born with a silver spoon in her mouth. Both were raised with different views. George learned how to deal with celebrity and this is Amal's real first taste at it. I wish them happiness and hope that she learns how to cope with all that will be necessary.

by LornaDoone Sun 10 Aug 2014, 21:32

I think you can say "lady of the night" and it won't censor you.

Bitch goes through but that word that rhymes with punt surely not.

If I remember correctly, it's katie who has the issue with the lady of the night term word so she made up a different one to take it's place. I think it used to be something funnier but I can't remember.

Memory's not what it used to be!

by LizzyNY Sun 10 Aug 2014, 21:39

Thanks, Mel & Lorna for the explanation. I never noticed it before. Somehow, fame "lady of negotiable affection" doesn't have quite the same ring to it - even if it does sort of have the same meaning. lol!

by Joanna Sun 10 Aug 2014, 22:48

Personally I like the 14th Century English word....
Strumpet.

I only discovered it about 25 years ago whilst
watching Verdi's Opera Otello, with sub titles.
Otello calls his wife, Desdemona, a Strumpet
out of blind jealous rage, before he kills her.

I've loved the word ever since.
Coolio

by LornaDoone Sun 10 Aug 2014, 23:14

Ok anyone else have options to get around the censor. This page is definitely an education in itself. Even if we've all veered WAY off topic! HA!

by Joanna Sun 10 Aug 2014, 23:24

It's good to learn along life's journey.
I've certainly learned a lot of expressions
from across the pond !

by LizzyNY Sun 10 Aug 2014, 23:53

Well, I've learned a lot from you, too - and not just vocabulary.
Lorna, all the other words I can think of are even worse and would probably get me banned! Very Happy

by fava Mon 11 Aug 2014, 01:05

LizzyNY wrote:I tried very hard not to get involved here, but I can't help it. What exactly do you guys want him to do? If there is publicity he's a sell-out and a fame-lady of negotiable affection. If there's no publicity, he's arrogant and hiding from his fans - to whom he owes photos, articles, updates because - well, just because.

I think there may be different posters arguing the different sides of this. Or are there really those those who want it both ways? Obviously not logical.

by Pita428 Mon 11 Aug 2014, 01:06

Lorna, here are a few options: hustler, extremely sociable lady, tramp, escort, harlot, hooker, pro, streetwalker, call girl, fallen woman, lady of the evening and working girl.

by LizzyNY Mon 11 Aug 2014, 01:29

Pita - My, my! You have a very extensive vocabulary! Very Happy

v Unfortunately, none of those words carries quite the same meaning as "fame-wh---" - someone who will do anything for fame.

Fava - I'm just tired of hearing how "disappointed" people are with how he's handling all this and how he's selling out by trying to control the media coverage of his wedding, for Pete's sake. It's the most important thing in his life and he's trying to deal with it the best way he knows how .It may not be the way any of us would choose to do things, but we don't live under a microscope with the whole world watching. Who knows what we would do in his place? - And, by the way, we don't even know if the Vogue rumor is true!

by Cece42 Mon 11 Aug 2014, 02:09

For heavens sake George, get a nice suit, and Amal get a pretty dress, invite close relatives and close friends and get married. Forget Georgio Armani and Oscar DeLaRenta, forget the castle or private island. If this is love (?????????) keep it small and intimate. I never thought George would be the type to go to these extremes, I thought he was more down to earth as seeing that's what his family seems to be like. I'm sure he wants the best for Amal, and I'm sure this is the way her family wants it, but PLEASE.

by LornaDoone Mon 11 Aug 2014, 02:16

Big yet intimate. Gaudy but expensive. Private yet photographed and editorialized.

Ah just get it over with already. The suspense is killing us!

by theminis Mon 11 Aug 2014, 03:59

Exactly Lorna, hurry up and tie that knot already Mr Clooney, so then we can commentate/discuss/shred at will. LOL

by Katiedot Mon 11 Aug 2014, 09:50

Pita428 wrote:Lorna, here are a few options: hustler, extremely sociable lady, tramp, escort, harlot, hooker, pro, streetwalker, call girl, fallen woman, lady of the evening and working girl.

And I'd appreciate not seeing any of these on this site, Ithankyouverymuch!

LizzyNY wrote:Fava - I'm just tired of hearing how "disappointed" people are with how he's handling all this and how he's selling out by trying to control the media coverage of his wedding

I can't speak for others, but that's not my point. My point is that for all these years he's built up an image as a fairly straightforward, down-to-earth man with relatively simply, unshowy tastes. Then he gets married and suddenly it seems he has grandiose tastes with a super bling ring and following in the footsteps of tasteless reality tv celebrities by inviting famous people he barely knows to his wedding and arranging coverage of it in magazines. None of this is necessary (he can get married without selling the photos) and all of it is against his stated wishes to keep his private life private. For all these years George has really been seen as a class act, a true star in Hollywood and now his style apparently matches that of any d-list wannabe.

We KNOW that this story isn't confirmed which is why I, and others, have said things like 'If this is true, I'm so disappointed'.

by Alisonfan Mon 11 Aug 2014, 10:17

Katie, well said my feeling too.
So if this is not his style, not his MO, then it has to be Amals MO.
But he must like her MO?
If not;
Still time to call the whole thing OFF!
Not the first time a bridezilla showed her hand too early.

by annemarie Mon 11 Aug 2014, 11:58

I don't believe it at all he has no affiliation with Vogue , people or hello I could see not Vogue.

by party animal - not! Mon 11 Aug 2014, 12:01

But not denied (yet)........maybe Wintour's hoping to make Amal her new muse....

by Silje Mon 11 Aug 2014, 12:10

Why not PAN? Amal has an interesting taste in clothes. She could be seen as a model for career-women. Other people have been writing about this so why shouldn't Vogue pick up?

There are even people who compare her to Jackie O.

by Way2Old4Dis Mon 11 Aug 2014, 12:37

Amal compared to Jackie O?! HaHaHaHa!!! Oh, my God, what a visual way to kick off the George portion of the day.

Who are these people, the ones who make that comparison? I have to know. They must be a rich source of belly laughs.

by Alisonfan Mon 11 Aug 2014, 12:54

Amal is in good company, and in her comfort zone, Kim K, Posh Spice all previous Wintour muses.

by Silje Mon 11 Aug 2014, 13:18

Gosh W2O4D, I read so many articles about George and Amal in the pasts months that I can't remember where I read that, probably in the comment sections.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Silje Mon 11 Aug 2014, 13:36

Since I can't delete my previous half finished post due to tecnical problems I just continue writing instead.

The link in the previous post compares her to Jackie's daughter-in-law. Here's another one, a joke but still.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by LizzyNY Mon 11 Aug 2014, 13:59

Katiedot wrote:

I can't speak for others, but that's not my point. My point is that for all these years he's built up an image as a fairly straightforward, down-to-earth man with relatively simply, unshowy tastes. Then he gets married and suddenly it seems he has grandiose tastes with a super bling ring and following in the footsteps of tasteless reality tv celebrities by inviting famous people he barely knows to his wedding and arranging coverage of it in magazines. None of this is necessary (he can get married without selling the photos) and all of it is against his stated wishes to keep his private life private. For all these years George has really been seen as a class act, a true star in Hollywood and now his style apparently matches that of any d-list wannabe.

We KNOW that this story isn't confirmed which is why I, and others, have said things like 'If this is true, I'm so disappointed'.

Katie - The thing is, we don't know if any of this is true - other than the fact that he gave Amal an expensive ring. We don't know who they invited to the wedding. We don't know how"grandiose" it will be, let alone where or when. We don't know what kind of coverage it will get. Everything is supposition based on rumor.

Of course they can get married without selling the photos. I'm sure they considered doing just that, and probably decided it would encourage a paparazzi frenzy that could ruin their their wedding day and cause huge security problems - if the Vogue story is true. And, I'll say it again, the pictures will be out there anyway so why shouldn't he get something out of it? Maybe Amal was approached by Vogue to be on the cover (if it's true) and it's something she wants to do. Would he say no to her? IMO, better Vogue than The DM or the Enquirer. At least they'd get some good quality photos out of it.

He is a product of Hollywood. He knows he can't get married withiut publicity, so he does what he always does - tries to control what he can. I have no problem with that. And keep in mind, he's not the only one making the decisions on this one - Amal and her family are involved, too.

by party animal - not! Mon 11 Aug 2014, 14:19

Mm. And something else.

Anna Wintour is one of very few going to the wedding (we think - not to a wedding party?)

Person quoted said 'there's no way she would go, and not cover it'...

Wintour hasn't said that.

by Silje Mon 11 Aug 2014, 15:52

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

W2O4D, here is another link saying Amal has the Regal grace of Carolyne Bessette.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This link says she is a cross between Audrey Hepburn, Jackie Kennedy and Cleopatra.

by Silje Mon 11 Aug 2014, 16:09

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Another one W2O4D. This links says we could almost swear it's Jackie O.

Yep, knew I read it somewhere. Smile

by Katiedot Mon 11 Aug 2014, 16:59

LizzyNY wrote:Katie - The thing is, we don't know if any of this is true

Yes, I know. That's why I said that IF it's true I'm disappointed. I'm open to it turning out that George hasn't rented an island in Venice and isn't inviting new-found celebrity pals to his showy wedding which will be covered in a magazine. That's what I've already written I'm hoping for.

by PigPen Mon 11 Aug 2014, 17:05

Silje wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Another one W2O4D. This links says we could almost swear it's Jackie O.

Yep, knew I read it somewhere.

brought to you by the same PR team exclaiming ( ad nauseum) how brilliant she is. She's rich and more often than not, dresses well. Sooooooooo???

by Silje Mon 11 Aug 2014, 17:15

The point PP is that I proved to W2O4D that I read that people compared Amal to Jackie O. But being on a cell and having tecnical difficulties it took me half the afternoon to gatter enough evidence to prove my case.

Smile

by PigPen Mon 11 Aug 2014, 17:18

Silje wrote:The point PP is that I proved to W2O4D that I read that people compared Amal to Jackie O. But being on a cell and having tecnical difficulties it took me half the afternoon to gatter enough evidence to prove my case.

by Sponsored content