Comments on: Explaining Russell Crowe
Add a Comment
- A similar violent act happened this past weekend in Massachusetts , where a 57 yr. old man threw a cup of scolding hot large cup of coffee on a 17 yr. server because he didn't want to pay the sales tax on the coffee. He said that she "gave him attitude", so he felt he had every right to throw a large scolding coffee into her face and chest. He fled the scene.
He was arrested at his home and they are seeking 5-7 years jailtime for assault with a deadly weapon. She has also filed a civil lawsuit against him as well for damages and pain & suffering. She was transported to the Hospital and later transferred to the Shriners Burn Unit where she is today.
Sounds like Russell Crowe's situation ? Yes it does. EXCEPT that because he was Russell Crowe , he got off with a slap on the wrist and a minor fine , although he did pay Nestor Estrada a rumored six figures to settle a civil suit.
Violence is never the answer. Losing one's temper is one thing, but to act violently is another. - Reply to this comment
- What a shame Steve Kroft had such a limited view of what his interview with Russell could be. He proclaims that Russell Crowe is one of the best working actors today and yet spends his time with him dragging over old news and old history. I rarely watch news programs and here's an excellent example of why.
- Reply to this comment
- sandycat..the fact that we are not going after the nuke countries like N Korea or Iran is because of a lack of natural resources in the area?
Iraq was not part of 911. Saudi Arabia and Afganistan (bannana stand) was...thats were the War should be. - Reply to this comment
- I CANT FIND CROWES OUT TAKES AT ALL CAN SOMEONE PLEASE HELP!
- Reply to this comment
- I whole-heartedly agree with Russell Crowe's comments about our legal system being misused. I would be interested, though disappointed, to see how many frivilous lawsuits are currently on court dockets. Used to - in the U.S. - a disagreement was handled with a handshake and an apology - not via a lawsuit. I love the U.S. - it is the best; however, there is always room for improvement.
Becky Bond
Weatherford, TX - Reply to this comment
- Mr Kroft's ending remark about not getting "slugged" was to me the lowest point of the interview!
Russell Crowe handled himself as a true gentleman and very good sport. 60 Minutes is suppose to be a news magazine, not trash TV.
"Strength and Honor" is what Mr. Crowe has and more sadly what Hollywood and the Media lack.
Lesson learned: Russell Crowe has character, and is focused to be the best actor he can be. He is box office gold and looking forward to seeing him in action. - Reply to this comment
- Russell Crowe is a gifted actor.
He was right about the legal system. We all know that.
As a man he is straight forward, honest, playful and careful of his TV surroundings. He knew what to say to keep 60 minutes happy and still keep his straight,honesty,and manhood intact. I say Bravo! Men today need to take a page from Crowe's Book.
Thank you,
RAW from Rhode Island - Reply to this comment
- Who cares? The public and the media. Although there are a few people out there who lack interest in the lives of the rich and famous, there is a good reason E! does so well with television shows based on the lives of celebrities.
I thought this was a good interview. Crowe himself stated that he feels he is somewhat misunderstood and this gave him an opportunity to give us the information straight from the horses mouth. - Reply to this comment
- The fact remains that because of the leniency in his case, it was used as precedence to damage what little shred of justice could have been had in another. Then this arrogant clod has the nerve to be proud of it. It's ok and necessary to express anger; but, your actions must be mitigated by the restraint of acknowledging the consequences of violence. Neither he or the person who is alleged to have killed the actress seemed to know that restraint.
- Reply to this comment
- I thought your Russell Crowe interview was very weak. What was the point of rehashing all of the nasty stuff--been there done that. He's a brilliant actor and the audience deserved to hear more about his acting choices, his career arc, regrets, anything but a focus on his temper. Who cares?
- Reply to this comment
