|
Post by mllemass on May 26, 2018 15:24:15 GMT
Ha! I had the same thought! At first it sounded like the journalist was in the room when Benedict got out of bed. And then I thought that Benedict answered the door naked and explained his lack of pyjamas. But then we find out that he had been up early to run on the beach - what was he wearing for that? We need to know! And then we get the details about the outfit he puts on. Again, was the journalist in the room when Benedict selected his clothes for the day? Maybe he tried on different outfits to model for the journalist?
At least all the foot talk has led to Twitter gifs of Benedict twiddling his toes!
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on May 26, 2018 16:14:35 GMT
Why do you say the children weren't with Sophie and Ben when the were in California? As far as the "jammie" count ... I don't know very many people who take more than one pair of sleepwear with them when the travel, honestly. Perhaps the more appropriate question would be just HOW did his jammies get in such a state that the needed to be washed! LOL! :-)) There were no pics or mention of the kids. The US paps usually get pics. Doesn’t men they weren’t there of course. As for nightwear I don’t know anybody who doesn’t take more than one set of sleepwear if they’re going to be away for more than a weekend. Anyway it’s of no great matter, they were just my first thoughts on reading the article. I mostly wonder why he felt it necessary to tell the journalist about his sleeping attire or lack thereof! 😄 Today I went to read annashitter's blog (yes, I know) and they were saying that the article, which I didn't read thourougly, was proof that he was lying because he hadn't traveled with the kids. Except if the journo was inventing -and I don't believe so- I don't see there is any reason for BC to lie. The "proof" from the septics that the kids weren't there is this: post from annashipperThe guy, said he wasn't going to say who the celeb was till landing and his partner took BC's pic at Heathrow. The pic posted by annashipper: The real picture: As you can see the septics cropped the picture because it shows a stroller. So my guess is BC was with Sophie and children at least. The guy didn't want to intrude asking BC for a selfie and they were respectful enough to not spread the news till arriving in London.
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on May 26, 2018 16:58:01 GMT
Thanks you sgev for the hard proof that the haters are such liars who manipulate EVERYTHING to act like their lies are actual facts!
I thought at the time of the LA premiere that the children would be with him solely because he had been away from home for a bit doing the Asian press tour of A:IW and probably was really longing to be with Sophie and the kids BIG TIME! Sounds like they rented a lovely place right on the beach at Malibu! I know that BC has been really cautious lately about talking too much about his private life in the media and he seems to be going to great lengths to avoid the paps around the children so it is actually very rare that there are pix of the kids (there are occasional exceptions of course - like that photoset of BC, Sophie and Hal in the park and a couple of runs of BC, Sophie and CCC during the DS shoot in NYC).
When they were in NYC after going to the wedding in Vermont there were no pap pix of the children with them but there was that tweet from a person who overheard a woman saying she had seen him at a Children’s Museum in NYC and honestly I imagine that he would only go there if he had the children with him!
In fact after that statement from him saying that he takes his children with him as much as possible and rarely is without them, I think he and Sophie are just VERY good at getting around the paps when it comes to the kids!
:-))
|
|
|
Post by ellie on May 26, 2018 17:12:44 GMT
There were no pics or mention of the kids. The US paps usually get pics. Doesn’t men they weren’t there of course. As for nightwear I don’t know anybody who doesn’t take more than one set of sleepwear if they’re going to be away for more than a weekend. Anyway it’s of no great matter, they were just my first thoughts on reading the article. I mostly wonder why he felt it necessary to tell the journalist about his sleeping attire or lack thereof! 😄 Today I went to read annashitter's blog (yes, I know) and they were saying that the article, which I didn't read thourougly, was proof that he hadn't travel with the kids. Except if the journo was inventing -and I don't believe so- I don't see there is any reason for BC to lie. The "proof" from the septics that the kids weren't there is this: post from annashipperThe guy, said he wasn't going to say who the celeb was till landiing and his partner took BC's pic at Heathrow. The pic posted by annashipper: The real picture: As you can see the septics cropped the picture because it shows a stroller. So my guess is BC was with Sophie and children at least. The guy didn't want to intrude asking BC for a selfie and they were respectful enough to not spread the news till arriving in London. Isn’t that a luggage trolley not a Stroller?
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on May 26, 2018 17:16:21 GMT
The object that was cut out by the haters is on the far left hand side of the pix not the luggage trolley directly in front of BC. It’s the top “hood” part of a stroller.
:-))
|
|
|
Post by ellie on May 26, 2018 17:22:57 GMT
Oh right. Thanks Roverpup. I see it now. I had just thought it was baggage but, yes, it is the hood of a stroller.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on May 26, 2018 18:43:08 GMT
You’re welcome, roverpup! But it was Magda!
I don’t know too much about paparazzi but I understand there are some strategic places in which they are always present. One of them it’s undoubtedly the LA airport. I imagine they hide their kids in such places. They know he will be photographed so they don’t “arrive” with them. I remember a few occasions in which we had pap photos of just BC arriving and later it’s mentioned she and/or the kids are also there.
The same could be said about other sections in L.A.or they saw the paparazzi beforehand and took the precautions that they didn’t see BC with the boys. I remember some cynical article about paparazzi claimed it was easy hide kids if their famous parents wanted and they considered hypocritical the stars who moaned because they supposedly should know where and when they were present. (I remember they considered Halle Berry, an hypocrite and compared her to Matt Damon who apparently it’s more careful with his kids)
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on May 26, 2018 18:55:15 GMT
Oh, sooooo sorry MagdaFR!! Thanks sgev for pointing this out to me. Now that my glasses are cleaned...
Thank you MagdaFR for supplying that photo proof!!
:-))
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on May 26, 2018 19:02:30 GMT
I don't think that he and Sophie would have been away from home for that long without their children. I also think that they travelled with assistants and nannies, because why wouldn't they? It would have been quite easy to have an unrecognizable person push the stroller with the boys through the airport, away from cameras, while Benedict and Sophie walked together. And yes, it sounds like they had rented a house on the beach, and the Rolling Stone reporter went there to pick him up and drive him to the hotel for their interview.
As far as the pyjamas that needed washing - my neighbour lives in his pyjamas on weekends and other days he's not working. I've seen him taking out his garbage in the middle of the day in his pyjamas. So maybe Benedict is like that, too - he hangs out in his "jammies" at home and gets them dirty enough to need washing.
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on May 27, 2018 3:09:34 GMT
Not to waffle on about the skeptics on the wrong thread, but this is so obvious to me, and I can't understand why they think photos of BC alone on a plane or in an airport is proof that the rest of his family isn't there. I thought about BC today, seeing an article that was just a series of photos of the royal toddlers throwing tantrums. If you have babies, and the eye of the world is fixed upon you along with lots of cameras, why on earth would you subject your kids to all of that attention during one of the most difficult experiences of all for young families...a long airplane flight to visit an unfamiliar country? One benefit to keeping them out of the limelight, is that nobody will recognize or bother them without BC around.
|
|