• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • TV Shows: Reality
  • I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here!
Charlie ....how completely fake and OTT was she there?
<<
<
5 of 5
>>
>
Department_S
28-11-2012
Originally Posted by wonkeydonkey:
“Is this the same close friend in the crew who is interviewed in today's Mail saying that Charlie's mother gave permission for Kiki to appear in the task?”

You read the Daily Mail do you? You can get help for that.
yellowlabbie
28-11-2012
Originally Posted by Department_S:
“You read the Daily Mail do you? You can get help for that.”

I doubt it, someone on another thread posted a link.
Damanda
28-11-2012
Originally Posted by The Net:
“ I am told from a close friend in the crew that Charlie had given her express permission to involve her daughter in the show - at anytime. I

.”

Originally Posted by vald:
“BIB Sorry, but anyone can say that on a forum.”

True, and I rarely believe it
Damanda
28-11-2012
Originally Posted by Unigal07:
“I felt sorry for her but she milked it for all it was worth.

I think Charlie will win though, the Eastenders addicts will see to that. She's not brought enough to the show for me to deserve to win it.”

Milked it? How? When?

Im afraid i think that is a remark that has no basis in fact but stems from personal bias.
Damanda
28-11-2012
Originally Posted by Ms Amphipolis:
“For me, it was the inconsistancy of Charlie's reactions that made me feel rather cross with her.

1. When Eric suggested going for the blue door, Charlie seemed quite happy because "Kiki likes Chelsea blue".

2. When she found out there was pizza behind the red door, she claimed that she wanted to go for the red one, and was seemingly annoyed with herself for not insisting on that.

3. When she found out that there was a family member behind the yellow door, she was again annoyed with herself for not going yellow, saying that it's her favourite colour. Bearing in mind also, she had no idea which family member, or friend, would have been there anyway. The possibility of it being her daughter was only an assumption.

It was this sequence of events that lost any sympathy I initially had, I'm afraid.”

There was no inconsistency, absolutely none.

She made 3 separate statements. All seemed fair and true to me.

Have you never heard people discussing the horses they were going to or wish they had backed in the Grand National? Many horses, permutations, many reasons for why they did or didn't etc.

Its just ruminating and thinking aloud, born from frustration at missing the 'prize'.
Tissy
28-11-2012
Originally Posted by Damanda;62644926[B:
“]Milked it? How? When? [/b]

Im afraid i think that is a remark that has no basis in fact but stems from personal bias.”

Guess we missed her bawling her eyes out and crying for hours and hours - rumour has it she nearly flooded the camp
Teddybear99
28-11-2012
Originally Posted by marsha_Cutiepie:
“Nope I dont but it would need a parents permission which Charlie would have to have given and would have been preplanned up front.”

I assume it would have needed permission from whoever was the adult responsible for her at the time. i.e. whoever was looking after her in the hotel.
yellowlabbie
28-11-2012
Originally Posted by Teddybear99:
“I assume it would have needed permission from whoever was the adult responsible for her at the time. i.e. whoever was looking after her in the hotel.”

Apparently it was her grandma who is looking after her.
marsha_Cutiepie
29-11-2012
Originally Posted by wonkeydonkey:
“Kiki is not three. She is quite old enough to understand the concept of a game, and also that she will see her mother in a few days; in the meantime she is missing school, getting an ultra-special holiday, and will have a little tv clip to dazzle her friends with when she gets home. She didn't look devastated, did she? Just like a child who has just lost a family game of monopoly.”

Hi wonkey, i respectfully disagree on this one, I did think Kiki looked pretty devestated, I dont mind Charlie at all, in fact shes one of the celebs I quite liked this year, but this particular incident made me just go .... sigh another celeb exploiting their kid for sympathy, and in those situations where the child has absolutely no say in how they are used in an entertainment pogram I just dont like it.

Originally Posted by LynxSoldier:
“This idea that Charlie would have to have consented to her child being behind the door, ridiculously naive. Does the child not have a father? Surely someone has been appointed her guardian for the time she was away? Life is not as black and white as you would like to think.”

Charlie is the childs primary gaurdian, with a show like this anything like this would be agreed upfront, in the amout of prepped reality tv shows we are seeing in their what 10th or years, the fact you think 'tasks' like this are not preorchestrated astounds me, and to me is very naieve

Originally Posted by Unigal07:
“I felt sorry for her but she milked it for all it was worth.

I think Charlie will win though, the Eastenders addicts will see to that. She's not brought enough to the show for me to deserve to win it.”

Agree 100%
scone
29-11-2012
I think Charlie is handling being apart from her daughter quite well. Anyone remember Daniella Westbrook or Katona going on about their kids? That was a million times worse
gilliedew
29-11-2012
I think Charlie could have given permission for her daughter to be a small part of the show, re sending letters and suchlike and Charlies saying it would have definately been her daughter behind the door.

I dont think she would have agreed to the actual task as they did it, who would want their little girl to go through that and Charlie is a loving mother, no doubt about that.

No, once again, these producers are so in the wrong, Yes, the little girl would have been disappointed and quickly got over it, but it should never have happened. They cant use children like treats, these producers should be castigated and on a warning that if they do anything like this ever again, their jobs are on the line.
mr muggles
29-11-2012
Originally Posted by gilliedew:
“I think Charlie could have given permission for her daughter to be a small part of the show, re sending letters and suchlike and Charlies saying it would have definately been her daughter behind the door.

I dont think she would have agreed to the actual task as they did it, who would want their little girl to go through that and Charlie is a loving mother, no doubt about that.

No, once again, these producers are so in the wrong, Yes, the little girl would have been disappointed and quickly got over it, but it should never have happened. They cant use children like treats, these producers should be castigated and on a warning that if they do anything like this ever again, their jobs are on the line.”

I find your statement reads best.

Those of us that are familiar with Charlie Brooks are aware that shes not the typical celeb that rushes out for headlines. Shes quite understated generally in the media. Most tv appearances are generally to promote an upcoming EE storyline. Occasionally she might do a late night panel quiz. Shes not in yer face like some.

She involves her family to help look after Kiki when she cant, not nannys, and she is devoted to her child. Her mum runs or did run a stage school and she has involved Kiki in going to stage school as well. Its given Charlie opportunities in her life, and so its understandable that if Kiki likes what her mum does, she'll provide a starting point for her.

Charlie has been involved in lots of charity marathons, which are never publicised, and those of us that are fans have to dig deep ont 'tinternet, to find any photos of these! I f ind it hard to understand the amount of bile being thrown her way.

Charlie made one or two observations about camp-mates that have been construed is pure bitching, yet David Hayes was highly derogatory about campmates on his first week, and he recieved no flak online here. What a JOKE.

Eric, similarly, has stirred up sh*te for all and sundry, yet hes percieved as a 'national treasure'. How PREDICTABLE...

There are a depressing number of op's/posters that like to keep to the social 'norm', ie: let the blokes get away with their stirring and let the women be viewed as scheming harpies. Ashleys (seemingly) the golden girl, because she doesn't have an opinion (unless its to do with hygiene!).
<<
<
5 of 5
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map