[MARLOWE TIGER]

So Basically you think that the break up Will be effective once the promotion tour for BD-part 2 Will be done?..
Posted via Mobile Device

[pixiedust1603]

I think the daily show interview was statement enough to be honest and most media outlets took it the same way. They won't ever release a statement and it will probably only become obvious when either of them are seen with other people.

Tom got asked how it was to work with a friend like Kristen and his face says it all. http://www.entertainmentwise.com/new...eating-Scandal
Posted via Mobile Device

[kokobombon]

^I think that he was afraid the journalist was gonna ask him about the scandal... he said many times that he doesn´t like to talk about his friends.

[Marc10]

I'm still dying to see how they gonna work the Breaking Dawn promo tour. It will be most awkward event of all time.

[iluvjeisa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokobombon That´s the argument I don´t get. If it was a fake relationship then why didn´t they flaunt it? And the affair and breakup, don´t they affect the Twilight business (and in her case, in general) in a bad way?

This is one of the must talked about relationships in Hollywood, has been for two years I'd say. The romance of Twilight could be sustained and enhanced through the "are they or aren't they" tension, so much like the ubiquitous "He loves me, he loves me not" - and by being mysterious and constantly stirring the pot they were able to move millions upon millions of merchandize.

I don't know why they did break up right now. It's right on track for creating a buzz about #2 but not optimal for #3. By the look of Rob in some of the interviews, I'm guessing the two of them were just so tired of faking it they went against their publicists.

[Alvedansen]

what's #3?!

i didn't want to comment on this, but i'm sorry, the argument that everybody in Hollywood is gay and in fake relationships is just lame. they've been seen together so many times by fans, spent all the important holidays together, flew around the globe to see each other etc it's quite obvious that they were a real couple
plus, cheating with a married man with two kids is not helping her in any way. had it been a hot young actor i would understand why people could think it's just a scandal to get people interested in twilight again, but not with kids and a wife involved
also...especially now after the scandal broke i'm sure we would have gotten some famewh*re reports about people who have supposedly slept with rob or kristen, there have never been even whispers about either of them being gay, just people who think that kristen is gay because she's not super feminine and rob, well, because he's an actor in Hollywood. both not very convincing arguments

[#umero]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dajrekshn this was discussed by people from us weekly. paps avoid going directly to the celebs, but in this particular case paps were appointed by the us weekly itself cus they were tipped on kristen's cheating. hence, us weekly was the one with exclusive and holds up rights on it in the US and Canada while they sell their rights for the rest of the world. basically, 250k turns out to be next to nothing considering the "secondary" money that came out of it and the story was too big for kristen to "offer" anything in return to us weekly. it's was us weekly's game all the way. now, the interesting part would be to know who tipped them of...

Hmm, that's interesting, I didn't realize that Us Weekly had hired the photographers. Still, in this case, isn't Us Weekly essentially functioning as the stand-in mother agency? Perhaps Stewart's team couldn't have negotiated with paparazzi agency itself, but surely they could negotiate with Us Weekly to withhold certain photos. It seems that the evidence in fact points to at least some degree of this taking place. There was talk of a batch of 50 photographs being published, yet as far as I know, that never took place, and though that batch was accidentally leaked online (goodness knows how), they were immediately and mysteriously pulled from all sites on which they were published.

Even putting those facts aside, there are two considerations suspiciously incongruent to the notion that Stewart's team wasn't able to withhold certain photos. Being the highest paid actress in the world, Stewart would have offered up obscene sums of money to ensure that certain photos were never made public - surely whoever was in control (whether it be a magazine, paparazzi agency, or anything of the sort) would have taken the bait and tried to cut as large a deal as possible. More plainly though, consider being in the position of the paparazzi on the scene. Fifty photographs is hardly more than what results when a celebrity of Kristen Stewart's caliber poses on the red carpet for sixty seconds. One paparazzo, much less three, knowing that capturing the perfect shot will lead to the single largest payday of his/her life, would not simply stop at fifty and consider himself safe. In that situation, I should think that fifty would be the wrong order of magnitude.

I'm not familiar with the modus operandi though, so please feel free to correct me if that's unsubstantiated.

[hedur]

iluvjeisa, I love your comments simply because your theory is closer to the likely reality than anything else I've read here. There are really no rumors about Rob or Kristen being gay (not real ones anyway), but certainly about their bisexuality and lack of an exclusive relationship. I'm not sure why it's so hard for some to grasp that they're best friends (with benefits) simply because of how they met and what they've gone through together. No one else, except for maybe a member of an infamous boy band, would be able to relate. It makes total sense that they clung to one another.

As far as this whole "scandal" being PR...there's no way Rupert would agree to put his family through that. And even if he would, it would be an extremely bad career move for a first time director. No, the "affair" was real. But everything that came after ("i love him, i love him", Rob is "devastated" and "heartbroken") is part of a well oiled PR machine. Both Rob and Kristen's teams were warned before the pictures came out and had time to plan exactly what the response would be. As I said previously but no one seemed to get, she had to own up to the "affair" because there were pics. It would have been far more damaging to say, "i know sleeping with a married man was dumb but I didn't really cheat on Rob because we sleep with other people", rather than " I love my Edward and am eternally sorry", followed by Rob's "my Bella broke my heart and now I'm devastated". Those statements were for their delusional fans who have gotten them where they are today.

No chance in hell Rob's team confided in John Stewart that they had indeed broken up so he was "allowed" to use that phrase.

Look for the big forgive and reconciliation to happen just in time for BD2 press. After that...who knows.

[fashionmuse]

on ONTD there is a great discussion about how rob's friends are handling this versus kristen's friends.
tom sturridge just said "i don't talk about my friends behind my back"

a friend of kristen's mom (D.B. Sweeney) posted this tweet: "just saw Pattinson on #DailyShow trying to figure out what took k-stew so long to look around with this douche astride her. #holytwit"
actually his timeline is pretty embarrassing: https://de.twitter.com/actordbsweeney
and then there's that stupid jodie article which kristen's mom praised on twitter and it was also RT by shannon woodward (ex of andrew garfield who is close with rob)

they are all making her look like a victim. it's pathetic

[enkeli05]

Just more people trying to get a piece of the cake and get some attention.

I think Robert handles everything really well and classy. Kristen's hiding on the other hand is a bit stupid. Does she really think people will just forget about it by not seeing her for a few weeks?

[chickadee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fashionmuse on ONTD there is a great discussion about how rob's friends are handling this versus kristen's friends. tom sturridge just said "i don't talk about my friends behind my back" a friend of kristen's mom (D.B. Sweeney) posted this tweet: "just saw Pattinson on #DailyShow trying to figure out what took k-stew so long to look around with this douche astride her. #holytwit" actually his timeline is pretty embarrassing: https://de.twitter.com/actordbsweeney and then there's that stupid jodie article which kristen's mom praised on twitter and it was also RT by shannon woodward (ex of andrew garfield who is close with rob) they are all making her look like a victim. it's pathetic

Wait, what? Really?! That doesn't make sense, though...Shannon was friends with Rob before she was friends with Kristen. Plus--I don't know if it's TRUE--but most seem to believe that Andrew either cheated, most likely emotionally, or at the very least left Shannon for Emma Stone. Why the hell would she be defending Kristen?

[iluvjeisa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alvedansen what's #3?! i didn't want to comment on this, but i'm sorry, the argument that everybody in Hollywood is gay and in fake relationships is just lame. they've been seen together so many times by fans, spent all the important holidays together, flew around the globe to see each other etc it's quite obvious that they were a real couple plus, cheating with a married man with two kids is not helping her in any way. had it been a hot young actor i would understand why people could think it's just a scandal to get people interested in twilight again, but not with kids and a wife involved also...especially now after the scandal broke i'm sure we would have gotten some famewh*re reports about people who have supposedly slept with rob or kristen, there have never been even whispers about either of them being gay, just people who think that kristen is gay because she's not super feminine and rob, well, because he's an actor in Hollywood. both not very convincing arguments

Twilight #1, #2, #3 - the triology - but I looked it up again and it seems I was wrong...anyway...it seems to be one movie left for them from this Twilight saga, according to imdb. As for their relationship - I imagine that if the condition for two nobodies to land a star-making triology such as Twilight is that they hang around each other - that is what they will do.

About the gay thing - I agree that might just be an impression I get that could very well be wrong, especially in her case.

[iluvjeisa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hedur iluvjeisa, I love your comments simply because your theory is closer to the likely reality than anything else I've read here. There are really no rumors about Rob or Kristen being gay (not real ones anyway), but certainly about their bisexuality and lack of an exclusive relationship. I'm not sure why it's so hard for some to grasp that they're best friends (with benefits) simply because of how they met and what they've gone through together. No one else, except for maybe a member of an infamous boy band, would be able to relate. It makes total sense that they clung to one another. As far as this whole "scandal" being PR...there's no way Rupert would agree to put his family through that. And even if he would, it would be an extremely bad career move for a first time director. No, the "affair" was real. But everything that came after ("i love him, i love him", Rob is "devastated" and "heartbroken") is part of a well oiled PR machine. Both Rob and Kristen's teams were warned before the pictures came out and had time to plan exactly what the response would be. As I said previously but no one seemed to get, she had to own up to the "affair" because there were pics. It would have been far more damaging to say, "i know sleeping with a married man was dumb but I didn't really cheat on Rob because we sleep with other people", rather than " I love my Edward and am eternally sorry", followed by Rob's "my Bella broke my heart and now I'm devastated". Those statements were for their delusional fans who have gotten them where they are today. No chance in hell Rob's team confided in John Stewart that they had indeed broken up so he was "allowed" to use that phrase. Look for the big forgive and reconciliation to happen just in time for BD2 press. After that...who knows.

Yeah, I think you are pretty spot on with this...

[Alvedansen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokobombon ^I think that he was afraid the journalist was gonna ask him about the scandal... he said many times that he doesn´t like to talk about his friends.

yeah, i think the twitch was more because he was afraid of what direction the interview was gonna take, but i do think it's kind of telling that he didn't say something like "she was great to work with, she's a great actress etc", he wasn't afraid to kiss her *ss before this (as in the video below), now he just talked about the cast in general and didn't mention her at all

[dajrekshn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by #umero Hmm, that's interesting, I didn't realize that Us Weekly had hired the photographers. Still, in this case, isn't Us Weekly essentially functioning as the stand-in mother agency? Perhaps Stewart's team couldn't have negotiated with paparazzi agency itself, but surely they could negotiate with Us Weekly to withhold certain photos. It seems that the evidence in fact points to at least some degree of this taking place. There was talk of a batch of 50 photographs being published, yet as far as I know, that never took place, and though that batch was accidentally leaked online (goodness knows how), they were immediately and mysteriously pulled from all sites on which they were published. Even putting those facts aside, there are two considerations suspiciously incongruent to the notion that Stewart's team wasn't able to withhold certain photos. Being the highest paid actress in the world, Stewart would have offered up obscene sums of money to ensure that certain photos were never made public - surely whoever was in control (whether it be a magazine, paparazzi agency, or anything of the sort) would have taken the bait and tried to cut as large a deal as possible. More plainly though, consider being in the position of the paparazzi on the scene. Fifty photographs is hardly more than what results when a celebrity of Kristen Stewart's caliber poses on the red carpet for sixty seconds. One paparazzo, much less three, knowing that capturing the perfect shot will lead to the single largest payday of his/her life, would not simply stop at fifty and consider himself safe. In that situation, I should think that fifty would be the wrong order of magnitude. I'm not familiar with the modus operandi though, so please feel free to correct me if that's unsubstantiated.

those 50 other photographs were sold worldwide by us weekly (they actually appeared in australian mag which is owned by murdoch's company, so if anything they strike a deal with his company). as i said (and this is only what i could make out reading about this kind of stuff in general), when it comes to scandals, if they don't have hard evidence they go to PR teams of the celebs and make deals (one was done last year, apparently us weekly had a story without pics about a famous actor with family cheating. they contacted him and, in order to shut the story, they asked for a exclusive photo op. not only they got one with his family, but also with his famous friends and voila, the cheating story never got out - this actor couldn't afford another strong buzz story going around since he had one earlier in the year), but if they do..well..tbh, i don't know what kind of a deal could've kristen gave it to them considering the obv photos that would level it out. the only photo-ops i can think of being worth are ones with rob and considering the situation..well, it doesn't seem that possible to make. on the other hand, if you have powerful clients as a publicist, it can stop you from going full on the actress/actor you have the story on, cus it might work in your favor in the future (check out us weekly's coverage of johnny depp's separation ). this way you still have the big story and you still have some space to talk with the celeb's team in the future.

about 50 pics - the chief in that pap agency that got the pics actually explained they didn't have a clue who kristen was with in the car in the beginning. all three paps were working for the same agency. there's no way they tipped any other agency to screw their deal with us weekly. i think that the basic notion why some deals when it comes to pics couldn't be dealt with is cus this agency was hired and contracted to keep tabs on rupert and kristen the moment they were tipped by the us weekly. so, if anyone, it was us weekly who could've had contacted (and did) kristen's team as pap agency's hands were tied by the contract. that bring us back to what i mentioned in my earlier paragraph.

us weekly pretty much explained everything themselves, but there are some things that just don't fall with their "explanation":
1. if they followed both rupert and kristen where are the pics of their meetup or kristen who was supposedly that day in the gym? those have some hefty price to it.
2. if you're placed to work on an assignment than how in the world you wouldn't know whom you just caught in car with kristen, esp if the same agency was following rupert too?

overall, i think us weekly is covering the person that tipped them off and that they got a notice on it the same day they caught them. i don't think it was a scheme that lasted longer, but those are just my 2 cents.