Wednesday, April 05, 2017

Mr. X Blind Item #2

This Tony Award winner is getting a lot of crap for her new role. She shouldn't be. That A+ list singer who had her name thrown out had it done so purely as a favor to make it look like she was wanted. Nope. The director of the movie had no idea the firestorm it would create.


10 comments:

  1. Susan Lice4:33 AM

    Tony winner Barbra Streisand

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tricia134:36 AM

    Beyoncé for the A+singer

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tricia134:41 AM

    And Audra McDonald-Tony Winner-Beauty and the Beast?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wendy5:16 AM

    Oh man new comment section? I hope this is better lol

    ReplyDelete
  5. Fossesub5:22 AM

    The Tony winner is Cynthia Erivo. She won for Color Purple. A+ list is Beyonce.

    Role is Nala in Lion King remake.

    First time commenting after years of reading and i nailed it like an old pro.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Cynthia Erivo/Beyonce/ Nala
    I saw the tweet. She WAS being shady no matter how hard she tries to deny it. Implying that if Beyonce could be considered for a role, than someone like her would be a shoo in for it.

    She wanted attention and she got it. Meh.

    ReplyDelete
  7. this "blind" doesn't even make sense. Yall are so bias/full of it when it comes to certain celebrities, its getting ridiculous. The woman is pregnant with Twins. Ms Color Purple knew what she was doing. She wanted attention, she got it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Scandi Sanskrit10:44 AM

    "She wanted attention and she got it." ♥

    ReplyDelete
  9. Scandi Sanskrit11:53 AM

    I just found the thread on that forum with a makeup name. LMAO.

    Honestly? If that is supposed to be a "PR move" or "favour", that has to be the weirdest (and dumbst) PR move/favour I've ever seen... Who in their right minds would think that was a good idea? If there's any such thing as a "backhanded favour", it's pretty much it (in my culture there's a saying, "the fence eats the plants" which means that something supposed to help/protect something used it's protectee's vulnerabilities an abused/exploited them for their own gain—kind of like promising to set your girlfriend up on a date with an acquaintance, and ending up sleeping with that very acquaintance yourself in the process).

    There is no way that looks good (for anyone involved). Imagine if you were an actress in Bey's position and some outlet wrote an article about you (being considered for a coveted role) and then some other actress publicly tweeted, "can I try?" with that 'innocent lamb' emoji (instead of privately calling her agent to ask for it like someone who genuinely wants the role—you know how you see someone get gropy with celebrities and you can tell whether it's an act of someone looking for publicity/attention versus someone genuinely attracted/looking for love? It's that difference). It makes the first actress considered look like she just got "robbed", and it makes the second actress who had to do it so publicly look crass and mannerless (I'm going to assume she does have an agent).

    This is either the dumbest PR move to have backfired, the case of a crass actress, or a "backhanded favour". The whole thing just has that "play in a play in Hamlet" vibe to it. The whole thing is off. Very sketchy event.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sunni5:17 AM

    That was my guess

    ReplyDelete