In August Tom Cruise and Paramount, so long a partnership that seemed to have been made in heaven, announced that they were to part company. A bitter and public divorce is now likely as Viacom Inc's Chairman Sumner Redstone belittled Tom Cruise by publicly evicting Cruise's production company from his company's Paramount Pictures studio.In a war of words, Cruise's team have claimed that it was they that left while Paramount executives have given 'unreasonable behaviour', 'excessive demands' and unfordable salaries as the reasons for 'their' decision.In recent months Tom has been seen bouncing on Oprah Winfrey's sofa to declare his love for a girlfriend who then it is rumoured gave birth in Scientology-demanded silence, where gossip would have it that he went on to eat the baby's placenta. Are these the actions of a 'weirdo', untrue gossip or just Tom Cruise being Tom Cruise?Will the Tom Cruise cash cow be snapped up by a rival company, will he fade away or will he threaten the major players by finding funding for new films through new channels?Were Paramount right to take a stand or will Tom Cruise go on to serve them humble pie?
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Is Community Service Suitable Punishment For Famous People?
Boy George, the androgynous eighties pop icon, who was ordered by an American court to complete five days of community service that required him to sweep the streets of Lower Manhattan.He was joined by a gaggle of news photographers, reporters and fans that together prevented him from carrying out his assigned duties forcing the sanitation department to instead find a gated parking lot for him to clean.Other stars who like Boy George have been given community service instead of custodian sentences have been George Michael, Winona Ryder and Halle Berry.Is community service a suitable punishment for people in the public eye or is it a punishment that is just not appropriate to the rich and famous?
Tuesday, August 8, 2006
Is Hizbullah a Terroist Organisation?
As the Israeli military action against Lebanon continues unabated and with no end in sight, UN proposal put forward to cease hostilities are viewed by the Lebanese government as one sided and have described one proposal 'agreed' by the UN council as simply "a recipe for more confrontation". Despite the past rhetoric from Hizbullah calling for the destruction of the Israeli state few will be prepared to argue that Israel faces a real threat of destruction or occupation from Hizbullah, Hammas or Iran. Israel is however actively engaged in the destruction of a nation, bombing Lebanon back "by 20 years", as the Israeli military put it, and is in occupation of Palestinian land. Much has been said and reported to label Hizbullah as a terrorist organisation and the root cause of Israel's military escalation but how true is that accusation? This weeks survey tests your knowledge of Hizbullah and asks if you view Hizbullah as a terrorist organisation or a legitimate resistance movement?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)