|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 20:18:45 GMT
The lovey dovey "Sheridan's been so supportive" bit. Let's not forget the fan who promptly got blocked on Twitter by Sheridan for saying Natasha was good in the role. And apart from that I suspect that SS is hugely self-absorbed and not the supportive type. You only have to look at her tweets to see it's all about her. Pure imagination, all of that is guesswork. Twitter is also not reality, it is reductive at best and a perversion of reality at worst. No wonder such cognitive dissonance. Also, what you write does mean that you think Barnes is lying. So who's next for this treatment? |
|
527 posts
|
Post by Hamilton Addict on May 18, 2016 20:35:28 GMT
So now it's time to slag off Natasha Barnes for not 'exposing the big conspiracy'? Get out while you still can Natasha, they're coming for you next!  |
|
67 posts
|
Post by orchestrator on May 18, 2016 20:36:17 GMT
The lovey dovey "Sheridan's been so supportive" bit. Let's not forget the fan who promptly got blocked on Twitter by Sheridan for saying Natasha was good in the role. And apart from that I suspect that SS is hugely self-absorbed and not the supportive type. You only have to look at her tweets to see it's all about her. Are you saying that Sheridan saw a random tweet from someone saying Natasha was good in the role and then blocked them, or that this person tweeted ss that Natasha was good in the role and was blocked? If the latter then I think that’s absolutely fair enough—can you imagine someone tweeting @you that someone else was good in the job that you’d created? If the former then it might not be so clear cut what the reason for being blocked was, unless Sheridan tweeted the reason. Can you be a bit more specific? |
|
527 posts
|
Post by Hamilton Addict on May 18, 2016 20:39:50 GMT
The lovey dovey "Sheridan's been so supportive" bit. Let's not forget the fan who promptly got blocked on Twitter by Sheridan for saying Natasha was good in the role. And apart from that I suspect that SS is hugely self-absorbed and not the supportive type. You only have to look at her tweets to see it's all about her. Are you saying that Sheridan saw a random tweet from someone saying Natasha was good in the role and then blocked them, or that this person tweeted ss that Natasha was good in the role and was blocked? If the latter then I think that’s absolutely fair enough—can you imagine someone tweeting @you that someone else was good in the job that you’d created? If the former then it might not be so clear cut what the reason for being blocked was, unless Sheridan tweeted the reason. Can you be a bit more specific? Someone had called Natasha Barnes a 'poxy understudy' and this person tweeted (including Sheridan in the tweet) that Natasha was not a 'poxy understudy'. I think Sheridan just got upset with the whole thing and blocked everyone in that convo. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 20:45:25 GMT
The lovey dovey "Sheridan's been so supportive" bit. Let's not forget the fan who promptly got blocked on Twitter by Sheridan for saying Natasha was good in the role. And apart from that I suspect that SS is hugely self-absorbed and not the supportive type. You only have to look at her tweets to see it's all about her. Are you saying that Sheridan saw a random tweet from someone saying Natasha was good in the role and then blocked them, or that this person tweeted ss that Natasha was good in the role and was blocked? If the latter then I think that’s absolutely fair enough—can you imagine someone tweeting @you that someone else was good in the job that you’d created? If the former then it might not be so clear cut what the reason for being blocked was, unless Sheridan tweeted the reason. Can you be a bit more specific? Someone called Natasha a poxy understudy and tagged Sheridan in the tweet. Another person replied to that tweet saying Natasha was great and not a poxy understudy. This same user had previously tweeted Sheridan a lot of support. It was completely unfair for Sheridan to block them. And I agree with BurleyBeaR, I don't believe Natasha when she talks about Sheridan being supportive. I'm not blaming Natasha for that though, she has every reason to try and keep up appearances. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 20:46:26 GMT
Actually a lot of leading ladies and men are supportive of their understudy so wouldn't have an issue with it. Blocking someone for that seems incredibly petty.
There definitely seems to be a media push to promote the understudy which is an obvious and sensible move on the pr front. Seen numerous articles in national and local press.
Bottom line is fans will always believe the public face (interviews, stage door etc) of an actor and nothing will change that. Some, for whatever reason, attract a real hard-core group of fans (e.g. Michael ball, kerry Ellis, Alfie boe, Sheridan smith)
|
|
4,361 posts
|
Post by shady23 on May 18, 2016 20:55:54 GMT
The lovey dovey "Sheridan's been so supportive" bit. Let's not forget the fan who promptly got blocked on Twitter by Sheridan for saying Natasha was good in the role. And apart from that I suspect that SS is hugely self-absorbed and not the supportive type. You only have to look at her tweets to see it's all about her. That 'fan' was desperate for attention and was whining to all the cast about it after wards. I wouldn't be surprised if she sold her story next. The fickle world of the fangirl... |
|
422 posts
|
Post by carmella1 on May 18, 2016 21:15:08 GMT
Saw it the other day and sorry but it was good but did not blow me away. I was procrastinating about exchanging my ticket but decided to go for it. Her "People" was all right, but I did not get the emotion. The audience, however, was ready to give her a SO the minute she came on. Ending with the powerhouse number at both the interval and the end also gave the audience in my opinion the chance to jump up. I mean it was right from the last note. All around me I could not do it. You have to earn it from me. And in my opinion it was not warranted.
|
|
58 posts
|
Post by carriesparkle on May 18, 2016 21:16:23 GMT
|
|
19,734 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 18, 2016 21:17:59 GMT
The lovey dovey "Sheridan's been so supportive" bit. Let's not forget the fan who promptly got blocked on Twitter by Sheridan for saying Natasha was good in the role. And apart from that I suspect that SS is hugely self-absorbed and not the supportive type. You only have to look at her tweets to see it's all about her. Pure imagination, all of that is guesswork. Twitter is also not reality, it is reductive at best and a perversion of reality at worst. No wonder such cognitive dissonance. Also, what you write does mean that you think Barnes is lying. So who's next for this treatment? I said a few posts ago that this was supposition, not definite, how much clearer do I have to be about it? However there's more evidence to support my theory than yours. You just don't want to believe it. Which is your perogative. |
|
527 posts
|
Post by Hamilton Addict on May 18, 2016 21:26:20 GMT
Pure imagination, all of that is guesswork. Twitter is also not reality, it is reductive at best and a perversion of reality at worst. No wonder such cognitive dissonance. Also, what you write does mean that you think Barnes is lying. So who's next for this treatment? I said a few posts ago that this was supposition, not definite, how much clearer do I have to be about it? However there's more evidence to support my theory than yours. You just don't want to believe it. Which is your perogative.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 22:09:32 GMT
Pure imagination, all of that is guesswork. Twitter is also not reality, it is reductive at best and a perversion of reality at worst. No wonder such cognitive dissonance. Also, what you write does mean that you think Barnes is lying. So who's next for this treatment? I said a few posts ago that this was supposition, not definite, how much clearer do I have to be about it? However there's more evidence to support my theory than yours. You just don't want to believe it. Which is your perogative. You have no evidence, just your imagination adding up two and two to make five. If you wouldn't treat someone like that in real life then it doesn't make it somehow laudable if you do it to a stranger on the internet. Frankly, I'm very glad I don't look at people from that cynical, judgmental perspective. You want to believe that people are nasty, bitchy, two faced but that's not my experience of people at all. Now you have started to question Barnes' motives it really is pushing this too far. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 22:17:34 GMT
I can believe that they got along and were supportive of each other in January before any of this happened.
What some people see as being as cynical, others see as being realistic. Everyone has a choice in how much they choose to be so. I personally can't imagine a scenario in which Sheridan blocked that fan for saying Natasha wasn't poxy, allegedly didn't want her understudy to go on the night of the 'technical difficulties' and yet is somehow still very supportive of her. If others can, fine.
|
|
4,361 posts
|
Post by shady23 on May 18, 2016 22:34:21 GMT
I do wonder sometimes why people cannot discuss performers on twitter with each other without needing to @ them in all the time.
I think I would go on a blocking spree too, if it were me.
It's the Twitter equivalent of all those emails we are CC'D into at work where we don't need to be and it just ends up cluttering up our in boxes and getting us annoyed as we have to endlessly sift through the nonsense to get to the relevant stuff.
|
|
7,140 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on May 18, 2016 22:40:51 GMT
I do wonder sometimes why people cannot discuss performers on twitter with each other without needing to @ them in all the time. I think I would go on a blocking spree too, if it were me. It's the Twitter equivalent of all those emails we are CC'D into at work where we don't need to be and it just ends up cluttering up our in boxes and getting us annoyed as we have to endlessly sift through the nonsense to get to the relevant stuff. Shenton is guilty of doing this a lot. I wish he wouldn't do this especially for shows he didn't like |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 22:45:43 GMT
I do wonder sometimes why people cannot discuss performers on twitter with each other without needing to @ them in all the time. I think I would go on a blocking spree too, if it were me. It's the Twitter equivalent of all those emails we are CC'D into at work where we don't need to be and it just ends up cluttering up our in boxes and getting us annoyed as we have to endlessly sift through the nonsense to get to the relevant stuff. This is difficult to explain so bear with me. If you reply to a tweet in which someone has tagged other names, those names will also be tagged in your tweet unless you specifically delete them. So when that Twitter user defended Natasha, she didn't choose to tag Sheridan, she was just replying to a tweet that already had Sheridan tagged. You can tell this because Sheridan appears last in the names tagged on the tweet, after the person she is replying to. It was not nice of Sheridan to block this lady, you would think she would take all of the support she can get at the moment and absolutely no-one in the conversation said anything negative about Sheridan. |
|
|
|
Post by d'James on May 18, 2016 22:50:07 GMT
I do wonder sometimes why people cannot discuss performers on twitter with each other without needing to @ them in all the time. I think I would go on a blocking spree too, if it were me. It's the Twitter equivalent of all those emails we are CC'D into at work where we don't need to be and it just ends up cluttering up our in boxes and getting us annoyed as we have to endlessly sift through the nonsense to get to the relevant stuff. Generally I agree, but I feel sorry for this poster as they were just replying to another tweet so the @ mentions would've come up automatically. |
|
2,051 posts
|
Post by infofreako on May 18, 2016 22:55:08 GMT
I think she probably saw that tweet and just blocked everyone tagged in it without thinking. We won't get to know what truly went on though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 22:58:55 GMT
Well unfortunately she probably should be thinking about the way she's coming across with all the negative press at the moment. She doesn't want to alienate her fan base as well.
|
|
107 posts
|
Post by littleflyer on May 18, 2016 23:08:37 GMT
Sheridan has always been very supportive of her understudies in the past so I don't see why now would be any different. She encouraged fans to go and support both Amy Lennox and Susan McFadden when they covered her in Legally Blonde and encouraged her fans to keep going to continue their support when Susan took over. She was also supportive of her cover in Midsummers and I'm sure she would have been in Hedda and Flare Path but they never went on.
The thing is if she publicly tweeted words of support to Natasha everyone would be on their high horses about the fact she's on Twitter and not at work
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 23:26:13 GMT
I don't think anyone would object to a quick tweet of support to Natasha, the problem is the overly defensive and dramatic tweets. She may very well have been supportive to understudies in the past, but this is a specific situation where some people/the press are criticizing Sheridan for not being on and praising Natasha for being just as good as Sheridan, it's reasonable for Sheridan to feel a little bit bitter but I hope she isn't showing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seriously on May 19, 2016 0:36:41 GMT
Were we expecting Natasha to do an interview where she said SS had been really unsupportive?
|
|
5,863 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on May 19, 2016 6:40:20 GMT
I'm sure that Barnes IS friends with SS and the whole company do miss her and worry about her. Anyone I know who has worked with her has never said she is horrible or hard to work with.. Only that she has her 'personal issues'... And don't we all really in some way. I guess this is a particularly tough time for her. I do think however if she is still on Twitter.. Which wouldn't help anyone's stress levels, then it's a total joke on the producers and audience and I have considerably less sympathy.
|
|
19,734 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 19, 2016 6:49:55 GMT
I said a few posts ago that this was supposition, not definite, how much clearer do I have to be about it? However there's more evidence to support my theory than yours. You just don't want to believe it. Which is your perogative. You have no evidence, just your imagination adding up two and two to make five. If you wouldn't treat someone like that in real life then it doesn't make it somehow laudable if you do it to a stranger on the internet. Frankly, I'm very glad I don't look at people from that cynical, judgmental perspective. You want to believe that people are nasty, bitchy, two faced but that's not my experience of people at all. Now you have started to question Barnes' motives it really is pushing this too far. Please yourself. But this is a discussion board which means people are going to express opinions that we don't always agree with. Trying to close those discussions down, or some how "guilt trip" the people we don't agree with into keeping quiet isn't part of the deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2016 7:11:24 GMT
Neither of them follow each other on Twitter either despite the fact that Natasha follows nearly 500 people and Sheridan over 1000. Doesn't mean that they're enemies but certainly indicates that they're not very close friends.
Anyway, either way, I don't blame Natasha for stating otherwise. At this point, the show needs to present a clean cut, polished image after all the bad press.
|
|
