Having trouble with this one and I need your help. Please weigh in.
Page Six is reporting that Demi Moore will be filing divorce papers imminently. Ashton Kutcher already filed in December. They’re fighting over cash money. Apparently it’s taking so long because Ashton made a lot of it while they were married and doesn’t want to hand over a fair share. According to sources, pro-Demi, obviously, she had hoped to keep the situation private, but Ashton being so obstinate, she’s no choice but to threaten the prospect of a trial.
On the one hand…
Oh my God, you’re not poor, get over it. Bruce Willis will never let you go hungry.
On the other…
Ashton Kutcher was arguably only elevated to the status he holds now BECAUSE of his relationship to Demi Moore. Before that, come on, he was hanging out with Diddy and making movies with Tara Reid. His inclusion on the A List had everything to do with Demi’s profile. Which has everything to do with earning potential. So…isn’t it only fair that she sees a cut of it? Your thoughts?
I’ve been procrastinating from a lot of work lately, hiding in bed and pretending my deadlines don’t exist. Netflix is really, really great with that. Last night, on a break from House Of Cards, in the mood for some dumbness, I clicked on No Strings Attached. Because I like Natalie Portman when she’s being funny. When she motions like she’s swinging her dick around, it cracks me up every time. I wondered while watching though where Ashton was, personally, when he was making this film, a film about a single guy trying to hook up, which is what most of his movies are about. And while acting is acting, he’s most convincing in these parts because, well, that’s how we saw him/see him, even when he was a husband and stepfather, either as a result of his own presentation off camera or because we can’t separate how believable he was in those roles. Consciously or subconsciously, was there any transfer there between fact and fiction? Or a subliminal desire to make those stories almost autobiographical?