So, is it beyond the capability of a star to be gracious regardless of the circumstance? That might be the case for Julia Roberts. Apparently, she purposely and publically dissed (or snubbed for you snooty readers) an entertainment report at an event because she thought he wrote a bad review regarding her Broadway performance. The thing is that the reporter who apparently likes Julia Roberts a lot did not even write bad review when everyone else was.
Roger Friedman basically put her on blast for disrespecting him in front of colleagues (I’m guessing), party guest, and other people he may or may not have to work with. She actually dissed him twice and made it known it was because of the bad reviews. Friedman, in the article, was tactful and, IMHO, actually nice about it. I do not blame him for putting it out there for his readers to know what was up and how he was treated. He could have done much worse. Was it a little measure of revenge on his part? Probably. But he was so darn nice about it.
I am sure Julia Roberts has not always received good reviews for her works. Sure this was her first little step back into the limelight but people are entitled to believe that you sucked crap. Do reviewers have to now worry about backlash when they are attempting to give their honest opinion on something? It is one thing for people to disagree with you but another thing to be punished for sharing your opinion. In this case Friedman was punished for giving good reviews.
There is such a thing as being gracious in any situation or, my favorite, killing them with kindness. Maybe Julia should have taken that route and at least talked to him instead of dissin’ him for all to see. This way she could have avoided looking foolish.
Julia Roberts' Unwelcome Return
By Roger Friedman AP Mar. 16: Julia Roberts attends the premiere of "Duplicity" at The Ziegfeld Theatre, in New York. Is it important for entertainment journalists to write nice things about movie stars?