Saturday, March 10, 2007

Flaunting ones lifestyle ala Kidman

As much as some like to read about the rich and famous, there comes a point where there is difference between reading about someone and someone flaunting their lifestyle in your face. Nicole Kidman flaunts her rich life and her bought and paid for husband in your face. We can start with the flying by private jet. Kidman learned this from former husband Tom Cruise and it is s convenient when you don't want to rub shoulders with the little people, but in this day and age, with fossil fuel being a luxury and the pollution that a little plane omits, its seems a tad bit

During the “courtship” there were the private two bedroom suites in Boston and Phoenix that cost thousands per night. There were also private dinners at exclusive restaurants that go for a thousand a pop. Places you know you wouldn't go but are just so trendy for the “bought and paid for”. There are the rented cars, seems she played Keith by getting him lovely cars to drive to those quaint eateries. And in the bigger cities she used drivers and limo services.

Then there is the ring. The ring she bought herself in early October of 2005. Yes, Keith Urban did not buy her that ring; she bought it herself as part of her ploy to acquire the musical one. Then, of course, more private jets and little trips here and there and finally a Bentley. The signature car to show off your money. Of course the institutionalized wealthy have them but they do not flaunt them.

Which brings us to the wedding. The “low-key” affair cost close to a million dollars if you add up everything including Keith's pay out (the prenup/contract).

Let’s talk about the prenup…does it exist? Most say it does. Clause highlights: $35 million at the end of 1 year, plus the penthouse in Sydney, a boat, and his own private plane. All for showing up...but as we know he couldn't even do that…

And what about rehab four months after the wedding? Kidman picked out Betty Ford. Did she pay for it too?

After he was branded and was summoned to Australia it was announced that she bought some fairly exclusive beach property for her family and herself. And what about property? She does own a home near Tom Cruise’s in Los Angeles. She owns several properties in Australia. Rumors that she owns property in New York City. Keith only owns his home in Nashville - a shack in Kidman’s world and a place she does not want to live.

So we have a woman who grew up comfortable, but was by no means rich, getting rich primarily by her marriage to Tom Cruise. She bought her second husband, Keith Urban, and is flaunting that marriage and her lifestyle for all of us to envy and hold dear. Well, I for one, don't hold it dear. The spectacle of this last week with these two pretending to be all happy and content, and subsequent rumors they are all over Las Vegas and Monte Carlo and London. Jumping off of a $64,000 a week boat and flying their little jet all over makes me ill.

One is taught that having money is fine; flaunting money can be a mistake. Perhaps Mr. Kidman will be learning that soon enough.


Anonymous said...

What's wrong with you? You must have a lot of hate and anger inside you to take the time to write all of this.

Anonymous said...

there's nothing wrong with her..

it's you that needs to go back to NKU and gush about your queen...

NK flaunts it, because that is the only way she gets any kind of attention...otherwise no one wants to see her ugly ass and piss poor box office drivel..she can't act, she's clueless about clothing..she is beginning to bear a striking resemblence to Michael Jackson..and i am beginning to believed that she is just as whacked..

as usual you hit the target yet again...without her millions..and her "cabana boy"..errr i mean her once musically inclined husband(cough)she'd be known only as a has been..and barely a once bad there weren't sharks in those waters of St. Bart's

Anonymous said...

open your eyes.....kidman spends a ridiculous amount of money just attempting to stay in the media. tell me, if you know, what has she accomplished with her supposed U.N. duties????? is she doing anything to give back to the world at all? she is wealthy beyond measure. and she is pathetic, as is her lapdog.

Anonymous said...

I don't see any anger here...sorry.

The original post didn't mention NK's purported "humanitarian" efforts, but that's what frosts me...celebrities flaunt their wealth on a consistent basis and for the most part, it's accepted by us, their "audience," as part of the fame package. BUT when celebrities want everyone to think they are concerned about the poor, women's rights in undeveloped countries, starving children in Africa, etc. to the point of signing on as a spokesperson for the UN and THEN display the conspicuous consumption that NK/KU have been, well, sorry...THAT makes ME angry...she could have done a lot of good with all the money she's blown through in the past 18 months. Now, some defender will say that she could have donated $$$'s and we were just not informed...yeah, right...if you believe she has or ever WOULD do anything like that without some kind of public announcement, recognition or acknowledgement then there is some great beachfront property here in Kansas I think you'd be interested in...great price...just for you!

Anonymous said...

i can only imagine how much those 150 plus pics must have cost her..let alone the rest of it..she could have fed an entire third world country for just the cost of those alone..that may have even given her a bit of credibility in her "efforts"...the woman apparently doesn't have a brain in her botoxed head..she really needs to find some better marketing people..because all she looks like now is foolish,finished, and frozen..
however...she would first have to actually care about things and people other than herself..and let's face it..she hasn't the ability to do that...and that's been obvious long before Keith..Tom certainly did trade up..Keith on the other hand became a bottom feeder..i until the last 2 years i honestly believed he was smarter than that, and thought more of himself...he obviously had some residual effects from all that partying...and it destroyed any sense of judgement he had...

Anonymous said...

Some might also say it's her money she can do with it what she wants. Wrong. She got a huge chunk of money from her divorce along with some sizeable assets.

Wow it must be nice to be a UN Ambassador and not do anything productive with it. All those poor women she promised to help haven't seen her do anything.

She is as selfish as they come. Instead of spending thousands of dollars on lavish trips, cars, houses etc. She should try giving back to those less fortunate and not make a spectacle about doing so. Does everything need to be a photo op?

Also the longer Keith stays with her he is looking more and more pathetic. I think the comparisons between him and K-Fed are becoming right on!

Anonymous said...

I used to get a kick out of reading some of the stuff on this blog. Now all I see are a bunch of pathetic, jealous people. Time for you to grow up and move on.

Anonymous said...

if you don't like it here..there are many other blogs and boards for you to one here is making you do so...

so who needs to grow up?

Anonymous said...

I don't see any anger here either-just the facts.

Her ostentatious display of wealth blows her only charitable role. She took that U.N. position to keep up with others. I don't think she cares one bit about poor women in third world countries.

I don't begrudge her spending her money to live well-there is nothing wrong with that...but the last year has been so over the top-it's truly sickening. She should be ashamed to be pretending to work with the U.N.

Careful Keith-all that glitters is not gold!

Anonymous said...

Ms. Kidman portrays herself as a philanthropist. I guess we will never know how much money she donates to various causes. I'm sure it is substantial.

But I do think she should consider how her spending looks to the average person and recognize how much good she could do by channeling some of that cash to charity.

She is the UNIFEM ambassador, and yet the conference on the plight of women in third world countries was held while she was in St. Barts on vacation. Should she have attended? I think so. First of all, she should be there to educate herself and second of all, to lend her name to the cause and help generate more support.

The amount of money she spends on vacations, travel (private jet...come on! limos) and herself (clothing; jewelry, botox / plastic surgery,etc.) could be partly re-routed to the causes that she is supposed to be working for.

I think that for me, it's that extravagance that makes Ms Kidman look so out of touch with reality and the challenges the world's poor and down trodden are facing. I've heard her say that she is grateful for what she has and would like to "give back" ... but so far, that appears to be very much based on Ms Kidman's convenience and often, personal / professional gain.

Anonymous said...

Hey, if you've got it why not flaunt it? You all can't honestly say that things would be different if you were in her class of wealth - and don't go giving me the high road that you'd give it all away to the underprivledged because that would be complete bull! She's no different than any other extremely wealthy celebrity out there. Angelina Jolie, Oprah and Bono are not normal celebrities - they go above and beyond what the "normal celebrities" usually do when it comes to giving aid and human kindness. Look at Madonna! She made a spectacle out adopting an african child, but where do you here about any humanitarian efforts she's partaking in in Africa?

For the most part when your wealthy - you tend to want to enjoy that wealth. The plane Nicole owns was orginally the result of her divorce settlement, as I don't know if she's upgraded it for a newer model, but when you're that famous why put yourself in the midst of paps if you don't have to. Sure, all celebrities use the media to twist themselves in a better light - happens all the time.

What gets me is you people actually believing that Nicole is unique in doing so and you hate her for it. Better start making a list then, cause her behavior is the norm. So get a clue!

Anonymous said...

when you're that famous why put yourself in the midst of paps if you don't have to.

She has the paps on speed dial. Why else would they "conveniently" show up when she needs publicity?

Anonymous said...

YOU GET A CLUE IDIOT! i am dying laughing at your comment about her jet, and not wanting to be in the midst of paps! lmao

you know nothing. there are alot of other celebs besides bono, angelina giving back. NK is the most self-absorbed, media hungry celeb out there. those paps you speak of are conveniently on her speed dial.

if you're gonna contribute here, at least HAVE SOME CLUE as to what you're talking about.

Anonymous said...

As for the comment about Madonna...correct me if I'm wrong, (and I know you will;) I don't think Madonna was ever asked or volunteered to be any kind of Goodwill Ambassador for African children. Nicole Kidman was asked to be the UNIFEM Ambassador, a role she promptly accepted, went to one big gala event and then as soon as there were no cameras, she just as promptly blew off the responsbility.
Don't get me wrong, Madonna is a famewhore too, but even she's not up there with Nicole and at least Madonna's not a hypocrite in this sense as she didn't accept a role as a Goodwill Ambassador just so she could be photographed and glorified and then ignore it like Nicole did. I find it ironic that Warren Beatty once said Madonna didn't want to live off-camera. He could just have easily been talking about Nicole. After all, isn't she the one who once said something to the effect of what was the point of doing anything good if no one knows about it? She is one selfish bitch!!!

Anonymous said...

I don't disagree about Kidman living the life. She's extremely wealthy. I understand your point about many wealthy celebs living this way. If she just wanted to be a rich celeb and didn't sell her compassionate charitable side, why convince the UN to give her a title and tell everyone how she intends to represent poor and underpriviledged women all over the world? She got great publicity for this ambassadorship...but since taking on that advocacy role, she's played the bongos at a swanky dinner and visited Kosovo ONCE in the year. What ever happened to her bringing her kids with her to see how poor people look ... or even attending the recent conference on women in 3rd world countries. She should have attended rather than have her private second honeymoon in St. Barts.

It's hypocracy in its highest form. Same as the support for her children's hospital in Sydney - why didn't she just pop down there and visit some sick kids without the photographers in tow? Kidman does NOTHING without there being an ulterior motive. If she wants to be private, she can...she's been essentially under the radar for a week...but we had 200 pictures of her second honeymoon. How private for them!

She has the opportunity to do good in the world ... and she makes sure everyone knows when she does something good. And that's what I find so pretencious about her actions. It's not purely for the cause ... it's for the PR make Nicole Kidman look good. I guess in the end if the Children's Hospital gets some donations or some kids enjoy a movie, that's good. But I'd prefer it if I got the impression that she MEANT it.

The plane...well it's time for all the celebs to change their ways and try to save fossil fuels. I'm sure Ms Kidman can afford the fuel...but can the environment?

Anonymous said...

If Kidman truly cared about the people she signed up to help when she signed up to be an ambassador she would be spending her money (and some of her time as well) making a difference.

Most who have money like she has do not flaunt it in everyone's face. She does. And as such, makes the thought that she really cares about common people ridiculous.

And once upon a time her husband cared too, cared enough to give his time. It's one thing to give money .... giving time is sometimes even more important.

Anonymous said...

Kidman is a media whore, period. She is in dire need of the media attention to keep herself in the news. Her movies are box office flops and do not warrent the money she is paid for them, she knows it ! Hence enters the paid Country Singer, all of his bad boy stuff is in a strange way good PR for Nicole. Anyone see that shot of her dirty bottom up in the air, now that's funny.

southern star said...

[i]What gets me is you people actually believing that Nicole is unique in doing so and you hate her for it. Better start making a list then, cause her behavior is the norm[/i]

No I don't think her behavior is the norm. She's not alone in flaunting her money, but there are many celebrities who go the extra mile to help others WITHOUT a photo op involved.

Too many to go into, but just a couple of examples...say what you will about Angela Jolie, but I think I recall that she gives a large portion of her salary to charitable causes; something to the tune of 30%. Yes, she's wealthy, but that's still a very substantial amount.

The celebrity I admire the most BAR NONE is Paul Newman. Many years ago he saw a need for helping children and he set out to make a difference. We always buy his Newman's Own products because 1) they're good! and 2) we want to help too.

Keith once cared about doing good work...I hope he still does.

Anonymous said...

I do think Nicole is self absorbed and appears to flaunt her wealth and yeah, it's kind of ludicrous to be a goodwill ambassador for the UM when she can't even invest time with the kids she adopted, but I do agree that they're are celebrities out there like her or at least there have been. Anyone ever hear of Joan Crawford, aka Mommie Dearest? If you take a look at her life, you find many similarities with them. Joan Crawford was so obsessed with turning back the clock on her aging face and body she spent hours trying to rid herself of wrinkles and gravity, only back then they didn't have botox and facelifts weren't as prevalent. Joan Crawford was a controlling shrew and used her adopted kids as publicity pawns when in truth she really had no interest in them. It was all about being a "the star" and that's really what Nicole is all about. It's not the love of acting, but rather having your face plastered all over the media.

If they do ever do a remake of Mommie Dearest I can guarantee you I know who'd they want to cast!!

Anonymous said...

"If they do ever do a remake of Mommie Dearest I can guarantee you I know who'd they want to cast!!

March 12, 2007 5:10 AM "

Well, I can't argue with the fact that she is looking more and more like Joan Crawford every day..... padded hangers anyone???

I agree with the UNIFEM hypocrisy. I can't wait for the press release about HER release from her duties with them. "Due to NK's demanding schedule, she is unable to fulfill her duties as the UNIFEM ambassador." I don't think she will ever make a trip on their behalf.

Anonymous said...

From what I have seen Nicole only thinks about herself first, and foremost. One time the UN asked her to do something, she claimed her ribs were broke! We all know that wasn't true, because she didn't have a problem doing a little pole dance for her hubby on the boat!!!!!

Anonymous said...

I'm not surprised at all Nickers acts like this - the disappointment has come from seeing it from KU.

His DIVA attitude (no more M&Gs with the little people) started to show soon after meeting her.

The "Aussie Power Couple" (tm) may be rich to Hollyweird but if he doesn't wake up soon, he may find himself bankrupt when it comes to things that matter.

Anonymous said...

Nicole compared to Joan Crawford is extraordinary!
She's always been an Audrey Hepburn wanna be but she will never achieve that goal. She's way to selfish and self-absorbed to think of anyone but herself.
Her UN gig won't last-just like her arranged marriage. But when the UN dumps her, she'll get to play the victim once again.

Anonymous said...

I was watching E last night. They had an episode on stars getting prepared to walk the red carpet and they spent about 5 minutes totally off subject discussing how so many actresses are getting botox these days, directors won't cast them in movies because they show no emotion. Can't imgaine who I was thinking of when they said that. Especially since I think Nicole's acting abilities are so one-dimensional!!

Anonymous said...

I cringe at what i am about to say..but whoever said that Nicole Kidman pictures herself as the new Audrey Hepburn is right..that is exactly who NK is trying to pretend to be...but she so fails...of coarse she fails at everything remotely female and woman..

Audrey was the eptome of grace, beauty,humaniterism, real talent, and just plain kindness to boot..and OMG!!! the woman actually went to those third world into the "trenches" and got dirty(!!!!!)as a UN Embassador....(eeeek!!)

Audrey Hepburn is/was EVERYTHNG Nicole Kidman doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of ever order to emulate must possess a heart..and a soul..Nicole Kidman has niether....

Anonymous said...

What does philanthropy really mean to Nicole? TAX WRITE OFF!!!

She is not philanthropic, she is not a humanitarian, she is not charitable nor is she altruistic.

She is a fraud, a phony, manipulative and conceited.

And this is what Keith chose to marry? Tsk, tsk.....

Anonymous said...

yes it what Keith chose to marry..

makes you wonder what kind of human being keith himself really is,doesn't it?

i think that he had many of us fooled for a very long time...

Yvette said...

I wouldn't use the word flaunting to describe them. Hypocritical? Yes!

Here's the thing, Keith goes on about Bono..Bono this, Bono that..Hell, Bono isn't even Bono anymore. He's caught up in his own hype as well.

I'm tired of anyone who goes on and on "spreading the word " or "raising awareness" but actually do nothing past that.

We all are already aware of aides, famine, lack of womens rights, Darfur and so on. I don't want to hear another celebutard saying they are doing their part by raising awareness or because they are helping famine by going to a 500.00 a plate lobster dinner with a live national act as entertainment.

Even if they donate those proceeds, it still isn't much. And they donate from their own funds? More for a tax deduction and a pat on the back!

Us regular folks we do more than that at our own financial levels. Who here hasn't donated money to charities, campaigns, donated items etc? And we do it without calling in People magazine. But we also get off our butts and donate time and sweat equity...every time we volunteer at schools, little leagues, habitat for humanity, hospitals etc..

The key to really giving and making a difference is.... about it being a part of your life, something you do often and with consistancy and passion for that cause.

When are these people gonna get off their butts and walk the walk , put in some sweat equity?

I'm not talking the one opportunity when a disaster hits that they use as photo ops. I'm not talking these lame Live aid concerts, because they know as well as us that, that exposure is priceless and good for concert/cd sales, just as the Grammys are.

These people are only self important in their little isolated worlds. They are nothing but winded blowhard hypocrites.

I don't begrudge anyone enjoying money they've earned. But, these celebs have a sense of entitlement and unbalanced sense of reality it is hard to feel anything but disgust for many of them.

OK, well I also do really pity them too. You can have money, but it won't make you a better person. And THAT, they have to live with.

Anonymous said...

I know there are a lot of people in this country who worship celebrities, but I'm not one of them, and I think there are many, many more just like me. What I don't understand is WHY the media thinks we should, and keeps throwing this crap in our face, day after day?

Most of these celebrities were no different than the rest of us until they hit Hollywood. They make one mediocre movie and now they're a STAR, someone to be worshipped. Or they can do NOTHING like Paris Hilton and Nicole Ritchie (among many others), and we make them stars. Well, not in my book.

I wonder what it would be like if nobody cared about these "stars", especially the media. How refreshing would that be???? If the media left them alone, just think of how much privacy they they could have. The privacy they soooooo desire. I bet it wouldn't last long. These people are too self-observed for that. They need people to worship them in order to feel good about themselves. How pathetic is that?