Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

The Good Wife in the Media


Recommended Posts

Can someone explain to me how this 'entertainment journalism' works?  How much did JM's PR people pay Vulture to release that shit?  What the hell is going on?

 

This is how the Vulture article appears on Facebook.  Seriously.  Like some sort of fucked up delusional nursery rhyme.

 

Vulture

3 hrs ·
Those rumors about The Good Wife are not true.

No, There’s No Feud Between Julianna Margulies and Archie Panjabi in Real Life
And the split-screen final scene was totally cool.
VULT.RE|BY DEVON IVIE

 

Now they've updated the article with Archie's tweet, surprisingly.

Edited by Ms Blue Jay
  • Love 3
At this point, it's far more damaging for Margulies and the Kings to spin easily disproven untruths than it is to admit that they had two actors, one a producer and star, the other an Emmy-winning actress and the only person of color in the regular cast, who found it impossible to work with each other, and didn't want to force Panjabi off the show. Of course, that would also require admitting that they spent two and a half years crippling the show to indulge what can only be characterized as utter unprofessionalism by either Margulies or Panjabi or both — you don't like working together? try acting like you do — but that's what the words "No comment" are for. (Maybe David Chase can start fielding questions about Kalicia, and Margulies can field queries about the ending of "The Sopranos.")

 

Dear Julianna Margulies: Please Stop Gaslighting 'Good Wife' Fans

 

Well, this backfired majorly.

  • Love 12

Good lord, Marguiles isn't just a bitch.. she's apparently a dimwit too. Everybody's attention was off this story and she brought it right back (and her lies got easily exposed).


She and the Kings deserve each other. They did the same thing a few months ago (when the story ALSO seemed to be dead).


Could they all be subscribing to some extreme form of the "no press is bad press" doctrine here?

  • Love 4

Remember my suggestion a few months ago that some press people were in the Kings' (or CBS, or Marguiles' PR people's) pockets?  I see it again. Not in that gaslighting article, which was great, but in ANOTHER piece they mention IN that article:

 

That was enough for Vulture's Devon Ivie to conclude "Case closed."

That makes me roll my eyes. Wasn't the Vulture one of the outlets going on about "conspiracy theories" and launching put downs about people daring to suggest there was a reason they didn't appear in scenes together, and then really attacking when people dared suggest that scene with them was green screened?  That's CLASSIC gaslighting, and Vulture was, and apparently still IS willingly part of that.

 

I haven't seen the new episode yet, but that "replacement Kalinda" the article speaks about in it?  That's rich.  More eye rolls.

Edited by Kromm

Okay, Vulture made me laugh with this article on The Fall, the timing of the filming of which was brought into question by Margulies.  Set up as an article as to whether to watch The Fall, it takes a few jabs at TGW:

 

 

The Fall is a British-Irish crime drama that follows Gillian Anderson's DSI Stella Gibson as she hunts for a serial killer (Fifty Shades' Jamie Dornan) in Belfast. Panjabi plays professor Tanya Reed Smith, the forensic pathologist who assists Gibson in her investigation. The role is similar to Panjabi's character in The Good Wife in that she is once again playing a stylish, bisexual sidekick to a white woman from an iconic '90s television show, but it's different in that, unlike on TGW, Panjabi still appears in scenes with her co-star.

 

Tell me more about this scene-sharing. Do Panjabi and Anderson actually act opposite each, or is it more CGI trickery?
Nope! As on most shows, when characters in The Fall are in a scene together, the actors playing them are often in the same room at the same time. See for yourself in these GIFs: Gibson and Reed Smith sit down next to each other, walk down hallways together, ride a motorcycle together, the works. Sometimes they even have conversations face-to-face, not on the phone!

Edited by pennben
  • Love 7

How is it possible that the Kings and Margulies are so stupid? Guys, you can scream naked from the top of the Empire State Building that there was no beef, and no one will believe you. Everyone knows there was. Just give up the ghost. For your own sakes, let the story die, because you just look shadier and shadier (and dumber and dumber) every time you bring it up unsolicited. Good for AP for defending her own professionalism.

CBS needs to hire me as a PR person. For what their PR people make, I can guarantee I'd do a better job.

  • Love 8

In fact this has backfired SO spectacularly that this time CNN, Washington Post, and Time are reporting on this bullshit.  And not with the "Case Closed" bullshit that the Gaslighting partners were peddling (well CNN just gives facts, WashPo and Time actually have headlines about Panjabi not bending over for this.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/05/entertainment/good-wife-julianna-margulies-archie-panjabi-feud-thr-feat/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-good-wife-feud-rumors-live-on-archie-panjabi-fires-back-after-julianna-margulies-denies-any-issue/2015/10/05/fbe9123a-6b6c-11e5-9bfe-e59f5e244f92_story.html

http://time.com/4061232/good-wife-feud-julianna-margulies-archie-panjabi/

 

The Washington Post even points out...

 

 

That’s when Panjabi fired this unexpected tweet back, linking to a Vulture story of Margulies’s comments. Hey, she’s no longer on “The Good Wife,” so what does she have to lose?

 

That’s the first time anyone has given any sort of direct response to the feud rumors, which have increasingly irritated fans of the long-running series.

Edited by Kromm
  • Love 5

In fact this has backfired SO spectacularly that this time CNN, Washington Post, and Time are reporting on this bullshit.  And not with the "Case Closed" bullshit that the Gaslighting partners were peddling (well CNN just gives facts, WashPo and Time actually have headlines about Panjabi not bending over for this.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/05/entertainment/good-wife-julianna-margulies-archie-panjabi-feud-thr-feat/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-good-wife-feud-rumors-live-on-archie-panjabi-fires-back-after-julianna-margulies-denies-any-issue/2015/10/05/fbe9123a-6b6c-11e5-9bfe-e59f5e244f92_story.html

http://time.com/4061232/good-wife-feud-julianna-margulies-archie-panjabi/

 

The Washington Post even points out...

 

 

I'm having issues with both The Washington Post and Time saying that Archie added "fuel to the fire." Which, no she didn't.  Margulies did, by resurrecting the whole thing and saying that she was basically "doing her job" and it was Archie who wasn't available, and her 'innocent, sweet ole li'le' me just did what I was told by my bosses' bullshit. Archie stayed mum, while the show deflected the whole thing. But the minute Margulies opened her mouth, putting the onus and blame on Archie, I don't blame Archie for coming back with the truth, which, along with when The Fall films, made her out to be a liar.

  • Love 18

Slate has gotten in on the action, too.

 

So Margulies’ “no animosity” claim seems a bit suspect. It would be one thing if she did not want to discuss whatever (un)professional beef prevents her and Panjabi from being in physical proximity. But to accuse us of sexism when we wonder about an obvious tension is not only disingenuous—it's a disservice to the feminist cause she wants to drape over her shoulders. That is how you warm up the cold shoulders you present to your female co-stars: You wrap them in feminism.

  • Love 12

No, I wondered if she was talking in code saying Archie did that and there might be some truth to it or it was pure internet rumor or her giving an example of "sexism"..

I think it was a reference to the characters in the show. This has been her line of defense ever since the rumors started: that it wasn't natural for Alicia to remain friends with Kalinda after she found about the affair (which was a one-night stand). When people pointed out that the writing had started to point at a slow reconciliation after Kalinda 'rescued' Grace the Kings went as far as claiming that they dropped that arc because Margulies' had a better understanding of the character and asked them to do. Never mind that Alicia's decision to freeze out Kalinda yet still have sex with Peter paints the character in a not very favorable light - it's bs storytelling to just kill off an interesting character dynamic like that. But there you go.

  • Love 1

It's not unrealistic for a woman to reconcile with her husband but scorn the other woman. But, aside from all the stuff that people have already said about the fact that Kalinda and Alicia were already well on their way to repairing their friendship, Julianna's excuse is bullshit because regardless of any personal animosity Alicia might have towards Kalinda, they were still coworkers and thus should still share occasional screentime. We've all been in that situation where we've had to deal with that one coworker we really hate, but we suck it up because we're adults. Maybe not Julianna though, if her behavior towards Archie is any indication. 

  • Love 9

It's not unrealistic for a woman to reconcile with her husband but scorn the other woman. But, aside from all the stuff that people have already said about the fact that Kalinda and Alicia were already well on their way to repairing their friendship, Julianna's excuse is bullshit because regardless of any personal animosity Alicia might have towards Kalinda, they were still coworkers and thus should still share occasional screentime. We've all been in that situation where we've had to deal with that one coworker we really hate, but we suck it up because we're adults. Maybe not Julianna though, if her behavior towards Archie is any indication. 

Bingo.  We've said this a hundred times before in these forums, and its still true.  Them not being friends anymore is part of a Big Lie defense--something that really makes no sense but that if you repeat it vigorously enough and enough times people will just start to believe it (it's interesting that the producers use stuff like The Big Lie and Gaslighting in real life, just like bad guys on their show might). It never made sense that the scenes apart were because the characters were no longer friends, because it never explained then not even being in a conference room together ever, when a partner called a meeting (something that had happened a hundred times before with them). Or them never passing each other in a hallway. Or being in the same courtroom (Alicia in front and Kalinda in back). Or if the CHARACTERS themselves were avoiding each other to the extent it was interfering in their work in these ways, that a boss character never addressed this with them.  Or lets go balls to the wall here, it also never explained how in the non-fictional world of publicity appearances, award shows, speaking panels, etc. the two women suddenly stopped appearing at the same ones and avoided co-existing in those places as surely as the fictional characters did in theirs.

 

Any "it never happened" gaslighting or Big Lies are nothing but bullshit and always have been. The Kings and Marguiles really do think the rest of the world are sheep and morons clearly, because while gaslighting and Big Lies do work very often, they were way too far behind the eight-ball on this to ever make those tactics work here. Using them even STILL just shows them up as pathetic.

  • Love 11

More from the New Yorker interview: Sad when the offscreen drama is more interesting than than the actual story. Same thing's happening on the daytime soaps, as well. I really lost interest when the ensemble storytelling dissolved into the Alicia show.

http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-question-at-the-heart-of-the-good-wife

  • Love 1

The most intriguing aspect of that interview is not the stuff about Kalinda but how Margulies seems to think of Alicia in terms of a victim. Diane is a traitor and a backstabber yet Alicia who turned her back on the new firm to run for an office she's never shown any interest before is apparently blameless for ending up "sad and lonely". Okay, let's got with that.

  • Love 4

From that interview:

 

Diane withdrew her offer to take Alicia back. “She threw Alicia under the bus for Reese Dipple, who stands for everything she’s fought against her whole life,” Margulies said, with some heat. “He stands for guns, he stands for anti-abortion, he’s anti-gay-marriage—everything that Diane has stood for. She threw me under the bus to keep him!” It’s typical of “The Good Wife” that even the betrayals are Pyrrhic and double-edged: in siding with Dipple, Diane had betrayed not just Alicia but herself.

 

Were we supposed to think Diane did something wrong when she made that decision? It was business, not personal.  It sucks for Alicia that that's how it worked out, but it wasn't a betrayal. It's like when they hired Alicia over Cary back at the end of season 1.

  • Love 3

For some reason I can't copy and paste any of the article, and the last line about the "feud" is totally false (AP isn't referring to her "new show," but The Fall, from what I remember)....but what the heck, AP and JM made The National Inquirer!! The article seems to be sympathetic to AP. YAY!
Jeez, The Inquirer......wow....JM prolly isn't a happy camper....har
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/good-wife-strife-julianna-margulies-archie-panjabi-feud-rages

  • Love 1

The printed tabloids are kind of irrelevant these days. The audience they retain I think are are a small percentage of much older people who have been getting their tales of alien abduction and star feuds from grabbing them at supermarket checkout lines since their youth. TMZ, Perez Hilton, E!, etc. have taken over most of their business, other than the alien abduction stories. Or the printed mags like People and Us Weekly that have adopted big online components. 

 

Speaking of Perez Hilton, he must be in the pocket of Julianna Margulies' management/agent/PR people/handler, or whoever the power-spinner behind her image protection is. A search of his site shows he's never done even a single story about this. 

 

Actually TMZ maybe has been ducking this too (It's been smaller sites that have run with the story).  If you search their site for her name, you DO get a few damning pieces about Julianna Margulies, but they're mainly about how she screwed over her FORMER management team over their share of a deal with L'Oreal cosmetics
 

http://www.tmz.com/2012/07/09/julianna-margulies-good-wife-lawsuit?adid=TMZ_Search_Results

http://www.tmz.com/2013/06/25/julianna-margulies-the-good-wife-loreal-df-management-lawsuit-trial

  • Love 1

Kudos to Margo Martindale for getting up on that scaffolding. Not sure what the reasoning for the placement of individual characters was except that Alicia has to be front and center. I would have sent Cush Jumbo on a climbing mission (she could have swapped sensible sneakers for the neck-breaking heels to get up there and then change).

Edited by MissLucas

Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but my first thought when I saw this was how easy it would be to shoot them all separately. In last year's cast photo, JM's solo pic was clearly photoshopped in over everyone else. (Maybe all shows do that, I don't know.)

My second thought was how uncomfortable CB looks. It appears like she's slouching to fit inside her "box".

  • Love 2

I have to laugh a bit at the theme since CB was in the film version of Chicago!

As for shooting each person separately, that's pretty standard for a shoot like this. It's easier to photograph each person and choose the best picture for each of them than to stick nine people in the same shot and find one shot where they all look perfect.

Edited by ElectricBoogaloo
  • Love 2

Kudos to Margo Martindale for getting up on that scaffolding.

I don't think she (or any of them) did. I question whether the concept was even known at the time the photos were taken. I have no Photoshop knowledge, but a lot of things look weird to me. My favorite is JDM's watch being in front of the pole.

Edited by dcalley
  • Love 1

Ah, let me just live in my fantasy world where Mrs Martindale snarks at all the high-heels-wearing ladies and proves them what sensible footwear is made for!

ETA: Granted the horrible thing that must have happened to JDM's arm in order to explain the watch being where it is makes it hard to remain in my fantasy world. Stupid digital photography - ruining fantasy and maiming people.

Edited by MissLucas
  • Love 1

It's not real, although it's certainly a better computer graphics job than they did with the Alicia/Kalinda meetup scene.

All you have to do is look at Zach Grenier's pose (David Lee). There's no way that pose would be safe if he was really where he seems to be. Also note that not one, not two, but THREE of the cast on the "lower level" have their heads seem to only barely clear. That's just ludicrous. At the very least they're making it SEEM like it makes senses though with having the really tall (6 foot 2) Jeffrey Dean Morgan sit on a box. Christine Baranski is allegedly already 5 foot 10 all on her own, even without the high heels she's wearing, but Matt Czuchry is an inch shorter than her (and not wearing any obvious lifts)... so it's also clear photo editing that his head seems to clear the top JUST like Baranski's and her 5 foot 10 body and 4-5 inch heels. And that's before we even get to Cush Jumbo (Alicia's new lawyer friend) ALSO clearing the top by the same amount.

  • Love 2
×
×
  • Create New...