Jump to content

Bravo's The Real Housewives of....


Cheap21

Recommended Posts

  • Members

http://www.eonline.com/news/russell_armstrongs_funeral_plans/259312?cmpid=rss-000000-rssfeed-365-celebritynews&utm_source=eonline&utm_medium=rssfeeds&utm_campaign=rss_celebritynews

UPDATE...Funeral has been planned. 2 separate funerals. One for his family, one for Taylor. How sad.

Apparently Taylor has had no contact with his family since he died. Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Cheap21

    4961

  • Taoboi

    4020

  • Cat

    4011

  • NothinButAttitude

    3972

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

They dont like her? Its not surrpisign considering there was a divorce in process and she is a known gold digger with no love in that marriage. They probably blame her for his troubles. They better find a way to work with her bc she is Kennedy's mother and if they ever want to have a relationship with that little girl, Taylor is their only avenue to do so since Russell is no longer around

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

thats a great point.I guess it might fall on Bravo's decision and if they think it will be bad press to fight the family of a dead man and not respect their wishes. Whatever happens, I guarantee you, this will have done wonders for the ratings. I predict the premiere of BH, whenever it debuts will set Bravo records

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I been following this case on TV as I am a news junkie.

The reporters/anchors/attorneys are saying the no Bravo is not responsible since he had alot of things going on in his life, and it wasn't just the show that caused this. Bravo is more than likely cutting and editing as we speak. They want to get on the air as soon as possible, as though this was a tradegy, it will sky rocket the ratings. They will remove him. The family stated they will sue if he is in one episode.

Edited by My2Cents
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Hard to believe Bravo could get sued successfully. Last season Taylor came off poorly herself, so it's not like they were favoring her. Early report suggested she clashed with lots of cast members and was coming off as the villain for season two. Plus, Russell has no way of knowing how Bravo was going to portray him. He knew how season one went and decided to film the second season. He also approved of having filmed therapy sessions. That's all his choice. I don't see how Bravo did anything to him.

Other husbands have asked not to be filmed (or to keep it at a minimum) and that request has been granted. It was his choice to do the show and he had waaaaaaaaaaaay too much going on in his life to successfully argue Bravo caused this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

BRAVO didn't do anything unethically.

From listening to stories, he apparently wanted his marriage to work. So he went to work with her.

I also believe BRAVO will cut him out. There will have to be an explanation.....IMO address the situation briefly, and move on.

With or without Taylor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Agreed. Dina from NJ comes to mind. I had no idea she was even married whn she did season 1 bc they never showed her husband and that was his choice. Jeanna's husband from OC only appeared a handful of times despite her being on for about 4-5 seasons. Russell could have declined a well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Another good example is Alexis' husband Jim. He didn't like the way he was portrayed, so he reduced the amount of time he filmed during their second season. Russell was on the show because he wanted to be on the show. Whether it was for his own financial gain or for his wife, it was his choice and Bravo or us fans shouldn't be blamed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Re: Taylor, when you marry for money you earn every cent. And in her case, it's a bankrupt corpse.

Re: Russell, his family doesn't have a leg to stand on for a lawsuit, a baseless claim that won't make it past a filing.

Re: RHoBH, I want this season up on the air now dammit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
    •   Thanks for sharing these. I wonder if Charles might have been in the running for Adam. I know Preacher was a bit of a bad boy at times on EON, but Neal seemed to be a step down, and Robert Lupone had played a similar part on AMC. Given the huge cast turnover at this point I wonder who thought they had been there long enough to go.  Laura Malone/Chris Rich would get a remote within the next year. 
    • Interesting.  It seems to allude to that statement that Warren Burton made around that time about some AW actors getting special treatment.  I wonder who was resentful about not getting to go. 
    • Good morning, boys!  I figured that it was time that our Gio was introduced into the hotness thread

      Please register in order to view this content

      @ranger1rg I even included a close up of his face for ya!
    • Under all of Madonna's social media today there is this wave of negative, toxic, absurd comments by Lady Gaga fans telling her how Gaga surpassed her in concert in Copacabana. I mean... Who the hell cares? Why are these fan communities so freaking toxic??? I'm sure Madonna doesn't care... But still. Have some respect for M. Leave her social media alone. Go cheer Gaga and be happy. Why come and spew hate on M??? Crazy world.
    • FYI, again, Ruth/Letitia is not in either of these 2 episodes. So that concludes the 4 episodes I had from Nov. 1983. I don't have the October episodes.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy