Page 20 of 182

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 29th, 2009, 2:53 pm
by klondike
Ollie wrote:I certainly wish we could have our news inundated with Gale Storm coverage instead...

HEAR, HEAR !!
:? :? :? :? :? :? :? :?

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 29th, 2009, 2:56 pm
by jdb1
Boy, the Grim Reaper is really having a storm of activity, isn't he?

Do you remember talented impressionist and voice artist Fred Travalena? Gone at 66:

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/ ... ory?page=2

No market for impressionists any more - there's no one good (or distinctive enough) left to do impressions of.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 29th, 2009, 4:21 pm
by mrsl
I was beginning to think there is something terribly wrong with me because I admit, I'm tired of hearing about the next news report, or program devoted to MJ. I'm glad Ollie and Klondike said something before I did, so in this way, I don't come off as a horrible person. I just think it's time we let the man rest in peace, no matter what our private feelings are.

Anne

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 30th, 2009, 8:21 am
by movieman1957
You're not the only one Anne. A coworker saw a newscast the other night where even the anchorman was obviously annoyed at all the coverage. He was glad to move on to something else.

I fear this will be all over the place until the final toxicology reports are done.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 30th, 2009, 12:52 pm
by charliechaplinfan
It's calmed down here, only making the end of the news. Once his funeral and the toxicology reports are released they'll calm down.

My daughter has asked so many questions, I never thought of telling her about his death, it's obviously news at school and she wants to know why he died so young, why would that happen to someone who is thin? (this worries me, at 6 she's making a link about being thin is the best thing for you, I think it is a message that has got slightly warped at school) I had to tell her that MJ was too thin and that was part of the problem.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 30th, 2009, 1:01 pm
by vallo
MJ, Gale Storm, Fred Travalena, Plane crashes... wow, I wish Death WOULD take a Holiday...

Bill

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 30th, 2009, 1:03 pm
by klondike
charliechaplinfan wrote: I had to tell her that MJ was too thin and that was part of the problem.
Ya done good with that one, Alison; given her age, and the era of unsolicited media-info-bombardment she's growing up in, a well-meaning oversimplification is perfectly OK, and even commendable.
Keep up the good work, Mom.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 30th, 2009, 1:46 pm
by Vecchiolarry
Dear Alison,

At 6 years of age, I don't think your daughter is too young to be told that Michael Jackson was abusing drugs that were not good for him.
You could explain that drugs prescribed by a physician to cure illnesses are alright but that some people take illicit drugs that often kill them. It's never to early to teach children about "Saying NO to unprescribed drugs".... And indeed, saying NO to many things their contemporaries are getting into!!!

Good luck,
Larry

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: June 30th, 2009, 2:01 pm
by charliechaplinfan
Thanks Klonny it's nice to know I did right. The only reason I didn't mention about the prescription drugs was that I wasn't sure if it was just media speculation and not certified fact. I've thought it was drugs all along but I didn't want to give her the wrong information if it was needless speculation. You're right though, if it is prescription drugs, I will explain it to her.

I was with my friend today and she brought something interesting up. I was telling her I remember Elvis passing and I remember the TV footage and the sadness even though I was 6. MJ is from my era along with Madonna but who are our kids going to grow up with, what star is going to come through that will be as talented and have such longevity? Admittedly I don't care much for popular music. The only star who's music I really like is Amy Winehouse and if she's still around when my kids are adults I'll be very surprised.

On the way home I was listening to the radio. As MJ's concerts were in London, it's being put about that it might be in bad taste to ask for a refund seeing as the man has died. Those tickets were expensive, some people will have saved very hard to see him live, why shouldn't they have a refund? The point was made that Elvis was giving a concert and on the day he died the manager of the venue gave details of how to get a refund, a week later no one had applied.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: July 1st, 2009, 11:32 am
by rudyfan
With the announcement yesterday of a public viewing for the late Michael Jackson at his Neverland Ranch in Santa Barbara, I was struck by the similarities in the circus that was the death of Valentino. I blogged about it http://strictly-vintage-hollywood.blogs ... death.html and offer it up for consideration. I suspect the Jackson thing will only become more bizarre considering all the speculation and the infighting with the family, etc. The poor man will never truly rest in peace.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: July 1st, 2009, 1:07 pm
by klondike
You know, Donna, in a way, I envy the fans who mourned the passing of Valentino; they at least could pay tribute to the passing of a great artist without the the divisive conflict of embarrassment or disgust or regret.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: July 1st, 2009, 1:58 pm
by charliechaplinfan
I think we should have created a thread about MJ. This thing is turning more bizarre, he's being taken to Neverland, a place that needs renovation, in a glass coach. His will stipulates that his mother take care of his kids and if she can't Diana Ross is going to have them. The mind boggles :roll:

Perhaps the celebrity hype was as driven about Valentino but that man had far more decorum and style.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: July 1st, 2009, 2:20 pm
by klondike
Personally, I'm still struggling to understand how the future of those children can be elements in his will at all, considering that neither he nor birth mother Debbie Rowe were/are biologically related to any of them, as all three were conceived by ex utero fertilization of a donor egg with donor sperm! :roll:
As for Diana Ross being granted custody, according to my mental yardstick, she'd be only about 5 or 6 years younger than Ma Jackson, wouldn't she?! :? :x :? :?

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: July 1st, 2009, 2:30 pm
by charliechaplinfan
I never thought of Diana Ross's age. Are the not Michael Jackson's biological children? I know he said that they were conceived the natural way but I don't think anyone believed that but I did think they were his and Deborah Rowe's genetical children via insemination.

Donna, that's a great article. I do find the lying in state for public viewing a little ghoulish. I know in Valentino's case there is speculation as to whether that was his actual body and not a dummy.

Re: Gone With or Without fanfare

Posted: July 1st, 2009, 3:04 pm
by MichiganJ
NPR just announced Karl Malden died at age 97.