Paparazzis and the art of provoking

[Ron_Tomkins]

Watch this short clip:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BxYHxJahzmU&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BxYHxJahzmU&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


Granting the fact that Tarantino is clearly upset from the beginning and slapped the cameraman (meaning, he "hit" first), what do you think of what the cameraman did after? Provoking the person so that he hits you and you can make a story on that on the news the next day.

Is this kind of job decent at all?
I just see that these people have a history of provocation, harassment, trespassing of property and many other things that should probably be enforced.

[Number Six]

That's it? I thought it was going to be something bad. I've seen way worse than that. QT should have just ignored him from the start.

I've seen times where they block the path or stand in front of the car so the car can't go and I think those people definitely should be cited for some kind of obstruction but the guy in that video didn't do anything wrong IMO other than be a bit of pain in the rump, which is legal and common.

[Bikewer]

When Hugh Grant was going through his little prostitution scandal a few years ago, I saw a bit of clever footage.... He exited his digs into a crowd of paparazzi, who all retreated to a very respectful distance when he brought out the German Shepherd he'd rented for the occasion, on a very long leash....

[Ron_Tomkins]

That's it? I thought it was going to be something bad. I've seen way worse than that. QT should have just ignored him from the start.

I've seen times where they block the path or stand in front of the car so the car can't go and I think those people definitely should be cited for some kind of obstruction but the guy in that video didn't do anything wrong IMO other than be a bit of pain in the rump, which is legal and common.

Yeah, this one's not so bad as others. I actually looked up on youtube trying to find more examples, and to my surprise, I couldn't find anything. I tried different keywords and nothing.

I remember one when Beau Bridges was being filmed by a Paparazzi as he walked to his car or something, and the idiot paparazzi said "So how's your father?" (His father Lloyd Bridges, had been dead for quite a while), and Beau just went like "My father?.... I'm sure he must be alright wherever he is" or something. It was really sad, and yet admiring at how respectful Beau remained.

It is possible that the Paparazzi didn't know, but when you look at that video, you really get the feeling that he did know.

[Dragoonster]

I've seen QT attack another cameraman somewhere. And that particular scene he's certainly the aggressor at the start. I don't think it's out-of-bounds for the cameraman to follow him after QT makes it known he doesn't want him to. QT can call the cops for harassement, which they should enforce. I do think the cameraman daring QT to hit him is out-of-bounds considering QT's early aggression and aggressive nature, and that QT had tried to disengage. If QT had hit him and I was on a jury for an assault trial or lawsuit I'd try to find some legal justification for not convicting him, even though I don't like him and think he's a jerk himself.

On the broader issue I guess harassement law differs by locality, but many/most paparazzi incidents it seems they should be cited for it. Certainly anyone trespassing should be cited for that. And standing in front of cars might be public nuisance or something. A lot of blame imo falls on cops for not taking care of business, or DAs for not following it up with prosection or fines. Wasn't an issue in this case as the confrontation probably couldn't be forecast, but I'd like some cops present at high-profile celebrity events/scandals to at least make sure the paparazzi are abiding by the letter of the law.

[gumboot]

I can't blame the Paparazzi; this is a supply and demand world, and they're merely supplying a product that there's high demand for. The real scum are the regular people who so eagerly lap up those pathetic gutter-scum magazines the photographers sell their photos too.

They'll snap a single picture that happens to capture a celebrity in what appears to be a particular mood, and then they'll invent an entire story around the random expression, and like stupid, sad, pathetic little mud-dwelling slugs the populace gladly lap it up.

[Puppycow]

Did anyone see James Gandolfini go after the fan kid with a camera?
http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=9013594

I guess he only wants to be famous sometimes and a regular person at other times.

[gumboot]

Did anyone see James Gandolfini go after the fan kid with a camera?
http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=9013594

I guess he only wants to be famous sometimes and a regular person at other times.


Most actors don't want to be famous, they just want to be actors.

[TragicMonkey]

Most actors don't want to be famous, they just want to be actors.

Their box office appeal depends on how much people want to see them, and for that they need to be well-known and appear in all those stupid magazines. Studios want people to see the movies, so they want to hire actors the public will want to see, and the public for some reason wants to see people they read about in some horrible rag.

If they want to just act, then they can be stage actors. Those are rarely famous in the same way as movie actors.

I don't really get any of this, because I never see movies based on who the actors are, I don't care about the private or public lives of people I don't know, and the only time I ever see magazines about famous movie actors is in the breakroom at lunch when nobody else is in there to talk to, and even then I just flip through looking to see if there are any hot guys with their shirts off. Sadly, it's usually just Matthew McConaghey, who is one of those guys who's only appealing to women of a certain age.

[Beerina]

Watch this short clip:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BxYHxJahzmU&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BxYHxJahzmU&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


Granting the fact that Tarantino is clearly upset from the beginning and slapped the cameraman (meaning, he "hit" first), what do you think of what the cameraman did after? Provoking the person so that he hits you and you can make a story on that on the news the next day.


AKA earning buttloads from selling your copyrighted video of the whole thing.

Paparazzi regularly shout at celebs to get them to look over so they can take a facial "proof" shot of someone at long distance.

I've seen at least two vids, too, of paparazzi shouting obscenities at celebs, or deliberately punching a sore wound, like a divorce-in-progress, or some minor incident or scandal, obviously in hopes of provoking a reaction.

Man, if you can get a celeb to punch you, cha-CHING! Not just suing, but the sales of your copyrighted pics and vids, which will run easily into the millions.

This kind of thing should be a crime. Looking at the paparazzi swarming around Britney's car as she tries to drive. Does anyone think some aren't thinking, "hit me! hit me! Run over my foot!" which has happened at least twice.

[gumboot]

If they want to just act, then they can be stage actors. Those are rarely famous in the same way as movie actors.


Stage and screen acting are quite different. Most actors full stop, stage or screen, are not famous.