Nicole Kidman criticizes Angelina Jolie

[SiennaInLondon]

But Nicole, a seasoned media player, must know what direct comments like this will become in the press.

 

[morgan38]

I completely agree. Angelina wears clothes worth thousands of dollars, lives in massive mansions, and generally lives a life more extravagent than 99.99% of the world, and yet she's still classified as a saint. I'm not saying her contributions are meaningless, but maybe people should look at it with some perspective.

 

[eternitygoddess]

I don't think Nicole is BLASTING Angelina for her charitywork. But she's just saying that it's not right for Angelina to be thought of as a saint when there's people working in 3rd world countries who don't live in mansions or lives of luxury, and are hardly getting any recognition.

 

[SiennaInLondon]

But nobody expects people doing charity work to give up their mansions and their wages, surely? Otherwise they wouldnt be in a position to be doing the charity work in the first place. I dont think people think of Angelina as a saint and I certainly dont think she thinks it either. Furthermore it would be worthwhile to look at the majority of the other people in her industry. How many of them do charity work and how many of them seem to be doing the charity work in a similar vein to kiss-the-baby politicians?

 

[bag.lover]

In addition to contributing time to causes she believes in, it's been reported that Angelina Jolie donates 1/3 of her income to charity as well. How many people can actually do that?

 

[bag.lover]

I completely agree. Angelina wears clothes worth thousands of dollars, lives in massive mansions, and generally lives a life more extravagent than 99.99% of the world, and yet she's still classified as a saint. I'm not saying her contributions are meaningless, but maybe people should look at it with some perspective.

Well, Audrey Hepburn was a UNICEF ambassador and she was one of the classiest & best dressed women ever. Can't overlook all the good works she did.

 

[fashionicon]

^ Seriously.

It's all about awarness. Even if Angelina sold all her designer clothing and sold her 6 million dollar mansion, it wouldn't even make a dent in the AIDS epidemic in Africa. It would never even come close to being enough to sufficently feed the starving children of Cambodia or Ethopia.

Some people live in boxes and don't know even know things like this are going on. Only a celebrity can get those upper-class wealthy socialites to realize this problem. I doubt Paris stays up at night watching "Feed The Children" (or could even point out Ethopia or Cambodia on a map, no less).

Sure there are millions of regular people out there who is doing what she is doing. That's not the point. I mean it's great, it's wonderful, but that's not the point. The point is, is that Angelina's a celebrity who could be spending her time making $3 million a picture. Sure she could just write a check, but that seems like the easy way out to me. For her to actually visit these places (some of them I would never dream of visting) shows a different story.

I just don't see why people are faulting the woman for doing something (regardless of her intentions behind it) that can only help the situation.

And I thought almost everyone knew that Nicole was a UN ambassador.

 

[fashionicon]

however, medicins sans frontieres get lots of credit as an organisation, and the doctors or humanitarian workers get the same publicity that angelina jolie gets, just in other relations. if some small town doctor spends two months in africa doing charity work he gets recognition among all those who know him. so it's not much difference. jolie can't change that she's known by more people in the world than others are. i don't think every doctor doing charity work regards himself as being entitled to worldwide fame for what he does.

EXACTLY!!!!

 

[fouroclock]

Nicole said what I've been saying for a long time.

And it also sucks how Angelina turned Maddox into a living handbag while John McCain gets publicly humiliated for actually caring for the Cambodian baby he adopted.

 

[Zen]

I think ALL celebrities shouldn't get recognition for their charity work, in a way I think they just use it for publicity, which is quite sad and pathetic...you dont need a celebrity to aware people that there is starving kids in third world countries...

I couldn't agree more....

 

[Uchina]

The more publicity the crisis in Africa gets, the better. If I were Angie, I would be doing the same thing.


Besides, she's fabulous at what she does. She deserves the bling.

 

[misssakura]

I couldn't agree more....

That's not fair, they are regular people like you and me, just everyone happens to know who they are. Who is to say that they should give up doing their bit for the world just because of that? I would be so insanely pissed off if people came up to me and said..you know what, people know who you are so you aren't allowed to care about the state of the world or do anything about it.

 

[Zen]

^ I should have just quoted the part where lemeray said quote:
"you don't need a celebrity to aware people that there are starving
kids in third world countries" ......

I know celebrities are human like you and I........do consider, celebrities
choose to be where they are today. You didn't push Angelina or Nicole
Kidman to become actresses, they have chosen to be in that profession
because they wanted it. And for that, they will always face criticism
from the public. I personally feel there are some celebrities who do take
advantage of their celebrity status to either embark, embody, or to
exemplify for whatever means.(good, bad) But most of the time, it's
good. Anyways, us as people shouldn't be influenced by these celebrities
to tell you or ask you of anything.....I as an individual should make my
own choices and follow through with it because I want to, and not because
Angelina Jolie says......

 

[justlooking]

I hope what Nicole Kidman was trying to say is that people like to help others but people have different skills (some are doctors and nurses who can provide life-saving treatments, some have money - from billionares to governments to people around the world who give two dollars- that help provide resources, some have fame such as Angelina Jolie who can use it to remind people that others have more basic, bigger 'problems.'

I agree with SiennaInLondon though- Nicole K is a genius at playing the media so her comments are ...strange....and unclear.

 

[justlooking]

Nicole said what I've been saying for a long time.

And it also sucks how Angelina turned Maddox into a living handbag while John McCain gets publicly humiliated for actually caring for the Cambodian baby he adopted.

who is John McCain?

I read that until recently, Nicole Kidman hadn't seen her daughter for almost a year. That "sucks."

 

[misssakura]

Well Angelina Jolie is a celebrity because she loves to act. She's a beautiful woman and managed to land a part in films. She shouldn't have to sacrifice what she believes in just because she happens to do a job that she loves. Furthermore I don't think anybody here is doing anything because Angelina Jolie told them to, I'm not even sure if that is relevant to the topic.

The point Nicole was making (as far as i'm aware) is that people need to be aware that significant work is being done by those who are relatively unknown outside their profession and that Angelina is only a small part of a greater humanitarian aid, that perhaps people need to look past her work (which she didn't condemn) once they become aware of what she is promoting, and support the greater cause, not just applaud her and sit back and watch.

I think most actors want to work with the best directors or stage producers and inevitably in today's society that means the limelight.

 

[BaroqueRockstar]

I guess this comment is a little late
but you cannot compare audrey hepburn to angelina jolie
audrey was the best dressed classiest person ever, but she pretty much gave that up to do charity work. she went from givenchy gowns to capris and turtlenecks... much less publicity and much more respectable. angelina is doing charity work in the height of her fame.

 

[kikidior]

^ and even in capris and a turtleneck, she looked impeccable. it's just her.

 

[justlooking]

^^^^I think Audrey was doing the capris/turtleneck thing throughout her career. think Funny Face. (although i don't know what style has actually got to do with it. You can look like sh*t and still help people) I don't think you can compare the publicity and whether it's more respectable or not. We live in a different time where celebrity has a whole new meaning and is treated differently, more 24/7. I'm also not sure about Audrey's charity time-line. When did she start? I was under the impression it was after her career in terms of travelling to poorer regions?

but as an earlier poster said, Nicole Kidman should have just used her time to talk about the people she is supposed to be shedding light on.

 

[fashionicon]

Anyways, us as people shouldn't be influenced by these celebrities
to tell you or ask you of anything.....I as an individual should make my
own choices and follow through with it because I want to, and not because
Angelina Jolie says......

We shouldn't, but it's defnitley the way it is. It's been like that since the 1900's and beyond. Celebrities like Jean Harlow, Greta Garbo, and the already mentioned Audrey Hepburn GREATLY influenced fashion movements during their time.

Look at commercials. Celebrities get paid millions to endorse products because if Mariah Carey (a woman with billions of fans around the world) backs Pepsi, than so do they. What was it Mary Kate, Ashley or Nicole Ritchie that jetsetted the Boho-look? The "Napoleon Look" is in because of the fashions Kristen Dunst adorned in Marie Antionette. It's just the way it works and I doubt we ever stray away from it. Celebrities have too much power.

So what's wrong with using that power to focus on something else? And really now, to anyone who is shaming Jolie for her efforts, are you doing more to help the situations in these third-countries? Have you booked your flight to Africa, yet?