Jump to content

Recommended Posts

EDTers while Louisa was on the juice, EDFers after Louisa was on the juice.


DDL was fab in The Gang Activity of New York.



owlwise Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thanks Administrator. I was starting to get

> worried that everyone's more interested in someone

> called Louisa on this forum and not so interested

> in DDL, a major achiever/actor who's done

> something with his life, won 3 Oscars (the first

> man to do so) and was Knighted only last November,

> who was in Dulwich a couple of days ago. Seems

> like this Louisa has achieved more interesting

> things that keep the EDTers chattering... I must

> admit it's a bit disappointing that noone was

> impressed to hear that DDL was in the area. Oh

> well.

I don't totally agree edcam, if someone has chosen to pursue a career in the public eye then they have to expect a certain amount of this kind of thing (although clearly there are limits).


Although I agree with what maxxi said, it's really not particularly surprising that the odd celebrity pops up, even one as apparently high calibre as this.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Scootingover Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > He is in the area reasonably frequently as is

> Liam

> > Neeson. Friends of a resident.

>

>

Quite right Scootingover, all three are very good friends and are in the village regularly. DDL, LN and local resident. Out and about regularly. DDL slightly less so.

> Liam Neeson. Really? Funny how noone has ever

> mentioned seeing him.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't totally agree edcam, if someone has chosen

> to pursue a career in the public eye then they

> have to expect a certain amount of this kind of

> thing (although clearly there are limits).

>

> Although I agree with what maxxi said, it's really

> not particularly surprising that the odd celebrity

> pops up, even one as apparently high calibre as

> this.



Agree. Can't remember who it was now but remember an A lister saying exactly this, they just said they wanted people to leave them alone whilst they were eating, but other than that they felt posing for photos or signing autographs was part of their (VERY well paid) job.

I agree to an extent that it is to be expected but still think it's not unreasonable to be allowed to go about your business without your personal space being constantly invaded.


Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't totally agree edcam, if someone has chosen

> to pursue a career in the public eye then they

> have to expect a certain amount of this kind of

> thing (although clearly there are limits).

>

> Although I agree with what maxxi said, it's really

> not particularly surprising that the odd celebrity

> pops up, even one as apparently high calibre as

> this.

I can never understand why people you see on television or films are regarded as 'famous'. They are just doing a job they are good at - the same as a solicitor or a carpenter.

When you see one of these people sitting next to you in the doctor's waiting room or eating egg and chips in the BBC canteen you realise they are just ordinary people doing an ordinary job. They deserve not to be pointed at in the supermarket aisle.

Politicians are the only ones who deliberately put themselves in the public eye.

edcam - well there's a limit. But I would of thought that someone coming up to you and shaking your hand is surely well within that limit. It's not like he was being mobbed by selfie-stick wielding morons.


lesalden - film stars are doing an ordinary job, and haven't deliberately put themselves in the public eye? Couldn't disagree more.

"Politicians are the only ones who deliberately put themselves in the public eye."



That is utter nonsense.


I'm not suggesting that anyone should have any ownership over their private lives, but if you choose a career as an entertainer of any sort, then by definition you are choosing to put yourself in the public eye. In fact your success in your chosen career (actor / comedian / band member) depends on what the public think of your performance.

Yes but that doesn't mean you are public property.


Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "Politicians are the only ones who deliberately

> put themselves in the public eye."

>

>

> That is utter nonsense.

>

> I'm not suggesting that anyone should have any

> ownership over their private lives, but if you

> choose a career as an entertainer of any sort,

> then by definition you are choosing to put

> yourself in the public eye. In fact your success

> in your chosen career (actor / comedian / band

> member) depends on what the public think of your

> performance.

No but it's still quite creepy.


Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> edcam - well there's a limit. But I would of

> thought that someone coming up to you and shaking

> your hand is surely well within that limit. It's

> not like he was being mobbed by selfie-stick

> wielding morons.

>

> lesalden - film stars are doing an ordinary job,

> and haven't deliberately put themselves in the

> public eye? Couldn't disagree more.

edcam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes but that doesn't mean you are public

> property.


> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > "Politicians are the only ones who deliberately

> > put themselves in the public eye."

> >

> >

> > That is utter nonsense.

> >

> > I'm not suggesting that anyone should have any ownership over their private lives

edcam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I agree to an extent that it is to be expected but

> still think it's not unreasonable to be allowed to

> go about your business without your personal space

> being constantly invaded.

>

> Jeremy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------


I agree with this it is only fair to allow people some ordinary life, without people treating them differently. Happened to my husband at one time, when our children were small, and our lives were made so miserable that we eventually went out as a family but without him.

> -----

> > I don't totally agree edcam, if someone has

> chosen

> > to pursue a career in the public eye then they

> > have to expect a certain amount of this kind of

> > thing (although clearly there are limits).

> >

> > Although I agree with what maxxi said, it's

> really

> > not particularly surprising that the odd

> celebrity

> > pops up, even one as apparently high calibre as

> > this.

sandyman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The only thing that irritated me about Louisa was

> her habit of putting her name at the bottom of her

> posts!



I totally agree with you. Other people do it and that's fine, yet when she does it is particularly irritating.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I’m not a Gail’s fan but there’s no reason a business shouldn’t open on Christmas Day. However, nobody should be compelled to work the day which, given the widespread coverage of Gail’s questionable employment practices, has to be a possibility here.  The only business I ever use on the 25th is maybe a pub and that’s a rarity these days but buses running would be very welcome for visiting etc. But the swings in the park should definitely remain chained up. Are parks even open on Christmas Day?
    • To be honest, pal, it's not good being a fan of a local business and then not go there. One on hand, the barber shop literally next door to Romeo Jones started serving coffee. The Crown and Greyhound and Rocca serve coffee. Redemption Coffee opened up not far away, and then also Megan's next door to that. DVillage was serving coffee (but wasn't very popular), as was Au Ciel (which is). Maybe also Heritage Cheese, I don't know. There's also Flotsam and Jetsam doing coffee and sandwiches at Dulwich Picture Gallery in the other direction. The whole of Dulwich Village serves coffee. And yet on the other hand, there are enough punters to support all good coffee shops. With the exception of Rocca and Megan's (which are both big spaces) and C&G (which does coffee like everything else - slow and with bad service), all these places regularly get queues out the door. Gail's often has big queues and yet very few people crossed the street to Romeo Jones (which was much better)... Half the staff at Gail's are perfectly fine and efficient. The other half are pretty offhand and rude. It's certainly not welcoming or friendly service. But they're certainly hard working, and no doubt raking the money in for Luke Johnson...
    • Well according to a newspaper article, Gail’s is opening 10 shops in London,,, yup Dulwich is named 10/5 I seem to recall with others in London opening at 7 am…!, Guess that is to capture workers coming off all night shift. Offering free mince pies until they run out.. So very sad to hear about Romeo Jones… been a customer since the opening, any idea where Patrick has gone or details… please pm me.    What is going to be in its place…. Will be around in Jan…umm village is changing….
    • interesting the police said "the car was in demand at the moment" what make/model is that?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...