Friday, July 12, 2013

Now or Later

A little bit of a detour from the average Friday...

So why now?


If it's a Disney thing, why now? Later  maybe. But before production even starts?  Isn't that kind of a waste?

And why would you faux it up and alienate a large part of your audience when studios are clamoring for every ticket buyer they can get ?  Especially when it is part of a guaranteed audience who liked the original Broadway musical?

Why would an openly gay director make one of his stars hide?

Woods is different than PoP.  PoP was designed as a tent pole franchise to sell product and had a much younger target audience.  Like 6-16.  Who are musicals made for?  Usually older than 6 let's say.

Now could it be that this is more for something coming out, let's say in about 8 weeks?  A big movie that really hasn't had much publicity yet? One that has a lead star running " 'round the county" trying to deny something with such fervor.

 Could it be that they don't want any speculation about any other member of the cast less it draw attention to them?

Hmmmm.....


And because it wouldn't be Friday.....

You're welcome.

44 comments:

sass said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Evident said...

PR is very much threatened by Oh My Godot. That much is evident.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
the real m said...

Tied up with visiting relatives one more day but trying to catch up. Those photos of Cary and Scott remind me so much of Jake and Austin. The way Cary smiled at Scott is the smile we've seen Jake give Austin. The shoulders touching or one leaning in on the other. Very sweet.

We did take some time to watch episode 1 and 2 of Ray Donovan today. Austin was great and we all really liked it. Austin's characters hidden sexuality may also be behind Jakes sudden re-bearding. The role is pretty graphic with this weeks episode showing him giving a guy a blow job. Perhaps not the main reason but the confluence of many factors that converged requiring that Jake play up the straight man part.

As for the article claiming Maggie wants him back with Kirsten. It's actually good she said that as it shows how lacking in credibility the article is. Kirsten has been seen drinking heavily and barely able to walk just in the last week. The kind of woman every sister wants for her brother.

prairiegirl said...

Very exciting news. I think this is awesome. I wouldn't care if it was a Tide commercial, I would be excited for him. This is a big deal!!!

Anne Fleitas ‏@FleityFilm 3h

Looking for #gaffer for a short-filming tom-Wed in #austin #texas . Directed by @AUS10NICHOLS . $200/day. #indiefilm #texasfilm #austinfilm

9:28 AM - 13 Jul 13 · Details

Methodical Muser said...

Good for Austin. He loves film-making and the creative process so it's great to see him developing his directorial skills in this way. A wonderful opportunity.

destiny said...

That is indeed great news PG.

Interesting point about the timing of the bearding. Could be the upcoming film, or something we don't know about that he is trying to get.

The Jackman Effect said...

I have to say that the theory of Prisoners being the reason for Jake's bearding has merits. Into the Woods is so far off and it is a musical, I doubt that the beard has anything to do with that project. Most importantly, don't forget that Wolverine is out on July 26th. Very, very soon. Therefore, I might speculate that I think Hugh Jackman, himself, has a great deal to do with Jake's recent comedic fauxmance with another ***wink, wink*** model.

There's no doubt that Jackman is running around everywhere telling anyone who will listen that he is not gay. Channeling Adam Levine, I guess. I mean the cover of Good Housekeeping too? I almost can't believe Jackman floated this seemingly laid back attitude for the article, which is laughably entitled, "Hugh Jackman's Recipe for Romance: What Keeps His Marriage Rock Solid." Kind of in line with his yelling from the rooftops that he is straight and so in love with his wife.

“I don’t really pay attention. If someone’s going to spend their time saying, ‘You’re really not 6′ 2″; you’re 5′ 10″,’ I’ll tell them once, ‘I am 6′ 2″.’ Then, whatever you want to believe, it’s up to you. Am I going to waste energy going, ‘I’m so mad that this person says I’m 5′ 10″?’ We really only get mad when there’s an element of truth, right?”'

I guess words sometimes speak louder than actions.

sometimes the truth comes shining on through said...

I just read the comment at Daily Fail from the LA person who says they continue to see Jake with his fella on several occasions about town. I'm assuming West Hollywood because people know where to go to not be noticed there. I agree that it sure sounds like Austin because what other guy is Jake known to be closeted with for so many years like Randolph Scott and Cary Grant were? Very interesting.

sometimes the truth comes shining on through said...

I'm assuming West Hollywood because people know where to go to not be noticed there.

I meant to put quotation marks around the word "noticed" because obviously you will be seen. But, everyone knows you are not to be seen. If you know what I mean. ;-)

not very intersting said...

Lagirl=MM. Evidence: she posts there and makes sure we see it. The Grant /Randolph reference is another red flsg since she is in the age group that would mention that.

sometimes the truth comes shining on through said...

I have to say, I've been at many sites over the years, but I learned a looooong time ago, not to let crap like this go without a response. Trying to discredit a comment by accusing a regular OMG person of submitting it is all kinds of childish. You just can stand that there are many people who believe that Jake and Austin have been an item for some time. And, I believe still are.

Trying to somehow discredit my observation about Scott and Grant is so PR. We get your techniques because you apply them for every closeted performer in the entertainment industry. But, you really need to just stop because fingerprints are easily traceable to WME or someone else in the biz who makes money out of keeping gay guys in the closet.

In fact, you even have the poster's name wrong. It's - lagirlie - not Lagirl. Please try to earn your money a bit better than this. Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. You want so desperately to control Mr. Gyllenhaal's public image, but the Internet makes that all, but the wild frontier of the cyberspace makes that all, but impossible.

sometimes the truth comes shining on through said...

...but the wild frontier of the Internet makes that all but impossible.

Sorry, that I kind of repeated myself. I'm in England right now suffering from a bit of jet lag.

lagirlie my ass said...

Cut the crap. I remember the lie that Reese had her tubes tied and was gay started here and posted else where. You ain't fooling anyone.

I remember said...

You can cut the crap, you slime ball! A rumor that Reese had her tube tied is now being blamed on this blogging site? What the heck? The grunts who work for the power brokers are losing it. What the hell are you talking about? The gossip about Reese liking it with women and guys is hardly new. It goes way, way back to the 90's.

prairiegirl said...

Thank you, truth comes shining through. You are exactly right and you don't know how much I appreciate your sticking up for some of us. You not only rock, you are 100% right.


Jack, you knock it off and go home. You have your own blog over at WFT2 that you have totally ruined, play around in, and chase everyone else off at.

You know that wasn't M&M who wrote that. She and I were on the phone and she found that comment and emailed it to Special and I.

We don't go around commenting at other blogs. I have made one single comment on another blog (Just Jared) and that was way back during Reeke. So if people see my name somewhere? That's not me.

OTOH, I laugh at your accusation because this comment really struck your jealousy nerve, didn't it?

a helping hand said...

I think you meant, "tubes tied."

I remember said...

Oopsie! I guess I did mean two. Although, I have to say I'm not so sure that she didn't have a surrogate carry that baby. She's vain enough. And, I'm sure Jake could have easily hooked her up with the best!

The shining Truth said...

The gossip about Reese liking it with women and guys is hardly new. It goes way, way back to the 90's.

LOL yeah, way way back in your Head!
It kills me that knowitall persons on the (WWW) internet seem to have a built in "that rumors been out there for years" BS answer to every stars personal sexual interest.

The bottom line is: If Jake and Austin is gay, so what the f***. If they hide it it's their business and believe it or not, It's not your business. If J/A not talking about it or lying somehow "hurts" you, you need to get over it. There are many HW stars who have not come out yet and J/A may well be apart of this, but, SO What!

The gay and OUT people of the world need only look up to those stars who are brave and have already come out. Either wait patiently for you favorite star to come out (this means J/A) or find another star who is out and proud. It's really not that hard. Some really make this more than it should be.

Now if you have another agenda or ulterior motives for a star you precieve as gay and want them to come out and (or) follow the wishes that you have for them, well you're gonna be disappointed or crushed. It don't work like that, it shouldn't work like that!
It's not your life!

If you believe J/A are married and have children and banking on this coming to light, well you're gonna be upset even more. This is my opinion. Being gay and hiding is one thing and it's their choice. Hiding your marriage and children is stupid and not something rational people do and it makes no sense to anyone. Let alone a fan who follows such a troubled person.

Shining Truth said...


^^
Actually, one should question a fan who follows such a "Troubled Person" if they are hiding their Children and their Marriage.

It is what it is said...

The Reese W. rumors about three ways have been out there for years (predating the charade that was Gyllenspoon). She and Ryan P. and whoever. Common knowledge.

Catch Up said...

It always gets back to the children and possible marriage. You Mr. Troll are a homophobe. I don't find it odd at all that Jake (being gay) would fall in love with a man. That's sort of how it works.

So let me repeat. Gay. Fall in love with a man. And wanting to raise a family together. Seems quite normal to me. You are the one still living in the 19th century.

Everyone has an interest in the truth said...

It's not your business. If J/A not talking about it or lying somehow "hurts" you, you need to get over it. There are many HW stars who have not come out yet and J/A may well be apart of this, but, SO What!

It becomes everyone's business when pampered Hollywood stars actively lie about who they are (implication: it's a bad thing to be gay) and try to fool the public into thinking they are something they are not. As long as Jake and Austin lie and have their "people" present them as human beings they are not, we all have a vested interest in getting it right. Let me repeat, in case you can't hear me. Telling lies is always wrong. Denying who you are is wrong. Having children and going on the record to deny them is wrong. I don't care how you make you're living. It's everyone's business when people lie. It's everyone's business when people think rules and societal standards don't relate to them. It's everyone's business when entertainers continue to tell the public there ain't any gay here. If Jake and Austin lived quietly and didn't address the rumors, that would be different. The fact that they actively lie about who they are is where any kind of immunity is tossed out the window.

Caught Up said...

It becomes everyone's business when pampered Hollywood stars actively lie about who they are (implication: it's a bad thing to be gay) and try to fool the public into thinking they are something they are not.

Word of advice to you. Sorry, but it's all an asumption. An Assumption. Now that's the truth!

I can believe that J/A are gay, but I have no proof. Still I can believe it. You can believe it also, but you still have no proof. We both can believe rumors if we choose to. But, at the end of the day, we both have no real proof.
Now you can get mad and totally bent out of shape because you feel some connected purpose for J/A to be whatever you want them to be, but to call be homophobic simply because you choose to believe me "not believing" that J/A don't have children and are not married goes against some societal moralality is far fetch. Really far fetched and self serving for you emotional state.
Or a Distorted emotional state on your part.

I believe J/A to be either gay or bi and I don't care. I don't believe they are married or have any children. If this makes you angry you need to seek some type of help because no explaining from me will ever help you.

It seems that you see things the way you want to see them and if it's not what you want to see or hear, its wrong and you feel attacked.
And besides, when did I say that J/A were not in love? Being in love does not equal being married and having children. Are you aware of this?

simple simon said...

Jake and Austin are gay.

Special K said...

Jake and Austin's patterns of behavior since 2007 have given credit to the theory of them having a family. While trying very hard to keep a low profile of them as a couple, their patterns individually appear working in tandem with each other, just like other two career parents.

Special K said...

Great news about Austin directing a short!

Some advice from the other side said...

I believe J/A to be either gay or bi and I don't care. I don't believe they are married or have any children. If this makes you angry you need to seek some type of help because no explaining from me will ever help you.

Maybe you are the one who needs help. Because you sit around here night and day and say the same thing every single time. There are many kind of blogs on the Internet. Find one to your liking and stay there. Your type lurks here for a reason. Gay rumors have been following these two around for over a decade. As they say, "Where there is smoke, there is fire." Jake's dating life is an absolute joke. A classic closet case. Yet, you probably see true love time and time again. Like I said. Seek help. Or get glasses.

Some advice from the other side said...

I agree with Special, by the way. These two have been in sync since they made The Day After Tomorrow. And, you guys are the ones who persuaded me that even the timing of Kirsten Dunst was all about Austin. It's no coincidence that Austin ended up in her film, Wimbledon right after TDAT and then Jake suddenly wanted to make Brokeback Mountain. He tried to come out and was pushed back in. No doubt by Studio Heads and family. The consolation prize was that they could have children, and be protected. That's where we find ourselves now. Wondering if these two are ever going to do the right thing. Or, if they will continue to raise their children in secret (that is away from the public eye).

;) said...

Where are the 5 BTs? Conveniently left out of the conversation hey LOL

Methodical Muser said...

PG is correct about my finding that comment yesterday about Jake and his longtime "friend". In fact, the only reason I even came across that "pet pooch" & "daily stroll" article in the Daily Mail was because it was linked all over twitter yesterday. It's not my problem that Jake's people wanted to ship that storyline all over the Internet.

And, just for the record, I do not post on other sites because I have absolutely no interest in doing so and I certainly don't have the time to even dabble in trolling activities. OMG is the only place I call home when it comes to my blogging interests and input.

Lots of great comments today from the Hugh Jackman speculations to the subject of Kirsten Dunst and the timing of her arrival on the scene in September/October 2002.

I also agree with those who think that Jake's current bearding nonsense is not related to Into the Woods, but more than likely has to do with Jackman's paranoia related to the Wolverine opening. Jake's reputation precedes him and I'm sure H. Jackman wants to do some damage control before his summer blockbuster gets released in a couple weeks.

Family Friendly said...

The recent story of why Jake is not married with children yet (settled down) that someone brought over yesterday, supposedly in the National Enquirer, seals it for me. We all know Jake ain't broken-hearted over Reese. The very idea that he has become a man who loves shallow flings and who is not interested in a family any longer is ridiculous. Note also how they worked Maggie in as the source for his caddish behavior. Wasn't she the one who hooked him up with Kirsten and Taylor? And, didn't Jake say one time that he never dates anyone his sister doesn't approve of? This family has told so many lies they can't keep all of them straight. Never mind that Jake has mentioned, on many occasions, how much he wants kids since 2009 so, no, Reese did not ruin him for life. Jake's publicist is just trying to come up with a reason for why a guy who always wanted a family and was very domesticated throughout his 20s suddenly turned into a nightlife lovin'confirmed bachelor.

Kismet said...

Being gay and hiding is one thing and it's their choice. Hiding your marriage and children is stupid and not something rational people do and it makes no sense to anyone.

Your argument that because it is stupid and irrational it is therefore untrue holds no water. None.

Do you know what is stupid and irrational? Being gay and covering it up to the point that you put yourself into a heterosexual marriage for years, raise a family with that person, and hide your real partner on the side. That's irrational.

Know what? This happens. All the time in Hollywood, has throughout Hollywood's short history.

Tom Cruise and Hugh Jackman and Tom Cruise and Cary Grant and Spencer Tracy... but not Jake Gyllenhaal. Jake chose a different path. It's not an easy one, but he did. He's not marrying a beard and raising a family with her. Good for him. But why should he sacrifice his true love and his desire to have a family and be a father?

Would it be MORE rational for him to have kids with a beard wife??

That, my friend, is why you were called a homophobe.

Kismet said...

Didn't mean to repeat Tom Cruise, though it's kind of funny because he's bearded up enough to warrant the double mention ;)

I of course meant to include the king of stupid and irrational closeted behavior, Mr. Travolta.

destiny said...

ITA Everyone has An Interest in The Truth.

prairiegirl said...

Hey, Tim Linoleum is pitching a no-hitter! 2 outs out in the 8th inning!

prairiegirl said...

8 innings done, he has 1 more inning to get through.

Methodical Muser said...

Tim Lincecum just pitched a no hitter against the San Diego Padres. Yipppppeeeeee!

prairiegirl said...

Congrats to Tim Linoleum!!! That was pretty darn exciting to watch on ESPN2!

Hey Kismet said...

But why should he sacrifice his true love and his desire to have a family and be a father?

Would it be MORE rational for him to have kids with a beard wife??

That, my friend, is why you were called a homophobe.


My answer to your first question is no. He should not. What you fail to realize is, the difference between assumptions and reality. There is a difference even if you don't chose to deal with that fact. Although some adamantly say everything points toward J/A living together, married with children. Others seem to feel that more things point towards the two living separate with loads of time around others and on separate coast without a child in sight.
Time for marriage and raising children?? Don't see it.

2. I don't think Jake has any children with anyone. Female or Male. And at this point all things point towards that being the truth imo. I personally would not have any interest in anyone who has children then lie to the public denying the children.

3. I was called a homophobe because what you call factual is a rumor and an assumption. You want and or have to beleive it at all cost for whatever your reasons are. These are your reason based on rumors and wants! Then you get upset because this counter opinion upsets you to your core as an attack on you. I don't know if you're gay or str8 and don't care. You don't deal with rational thinking with this one.
And that's why I was called a homophobe even when you don't even know if I'm gay.
Maybe because you want everything you think about Jake to be real?
i.e. bearding, lying, married, 6 children, contracts, living with Austin, everyone working with J/A to hide the secret!
That's alot!! Some may be true. Not feeling the babies and marriage. Sorry

prairiegirl said...

Maybe because you want everything you think about Jake to be real?
i.e. bearding, lying, married, 6 children, contracts, living with Austin, everyone working with J/A to hide the secret!


You know what? I'm sick & tired of this sick & tired reason.

It's not a "want". It's a conclusion from interviews/stories, from quotes by Jake, from tweets, from Facebook posts, and yes comments on other blogs/articles like this one found in the Daily Mail. It's doing a timeline and putting together all the sightings and dates of events that we have seen and recreating events.

You have no idea the studying that has been done on this. None. So there is no understanding on my part of your claim. You come here to feed from the trough and that's what you're basing your opinion on.

Some of us are basing our conclusions on much, much more than that.

You don't believe it? You don't like what you read? Please for the love of Pete, go somewhere else with people who share your interests. This blog is not for you.

Fatherhood said...

It's very rational to believe Jake has kids with Austin. There's nothing bizarre about that statement at all. And, there is lots of evidence that he has kids. So you are wrong there too. Who cares what you think, by the way? Or what you wish. Or, are willing to tolerate. You're the one who desperately needs him to be single and childless.

And at this point all things point towards that being the truth imo

Another overstatement. Plenty of clues including the recent "niece" sighting in LA at the Ritz. Or the baby he was playing with all night at Sundance. Then there's the Paris stroller with the nanny. You refuse to see what is right in front of your eyes. That's you choice. Have YOU ever thought that you can't stand the idea of Jake being what you don't want him to be?

People said...

Cory Monteith has died today at the age of 31.



Glee star Cory Monteith was found dead at Vancouver's Fairmont Pacific Rim hotel Saturday, Vancouver police confirmed in a press conference late Saturday night. He was 31.

Born in Calgary, Monteith began his acting career in Vancouver, and was cast as Finn Hudson on the Fox musical series when it debuted in 2009.

Earlier this year, Monteith admitted himself into a facility for substance addiction, He was released in April.

According to police, the actor was out Friday night with friends and returned to his room alone in the early morning hours.

He died in his room on the 21st floor of the hotel, having checked in July 6. He was due to check out Saturday.
When he missed his scheduled checkout time at noon, hotel staff went in to check.

The cause of death was not immediately apparent. Police said there were no indications of foul play vut would not discuss what, if anything, was found in room.

My Point said...

You have no idea the studying that has been done on this.

^^ but, It's YOUR Study and it's Prejudice. Period

Rational thinking, Possibilties Probabilities, don't exist with you! Only your angle Theory and hypothesis.

Those things could never enter your mind because you're jaded...
And, you can't see it.