David Guercio Posted February 8 Did Kirk’s first wife/Michael Douglas’s mother die or were they divorced? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TopBilled Posted February 8 1 hour ago, David Guercio said: Did Kirk’s first wife/Michael Douglas’s mother die or were they divorced? Divorced. She had a supporting role in THE INDIAN FIGHTER (1955) which starred ex-husband Kirk. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Indian_Fighter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
txfilmfan Posted February 8 5 minutes ago, David Guercio said: Did Kirk’s first wife/Michael Douglas’s mother die or were they divorced? They were divorced in 1951. Diana Webster passed away in 2015. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_Douglas Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lavenderblue19 Posted February 8 https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jamie-lee-curtis-reveals-kirk-douglas-once-saved-her-life-in-near-drowning-incident Jamie Lee Curtis posted this about Kirk. Nice tribute to him. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethluvsfilms Posted February 8 47 minutes ago, Vautrin said: I mean that the fact that Natalie signed Kirk's personal home walk of fame is not evidence that he didn't assault her. We now know that friendly behavior between a victim and her victimizer is possible, however contradictory that seems to common sense. Tom is right.....it's time to lay off the "Did or didn't Kirk rape Natalie Wood?" scenario, at least on this thread. This thread is meant to be a tribute to Kirk, his film legacy and paying respects to his passing....if you're not interested in contributing anything but insisting "it's very possible that he is a rapist", then I suggest to start a new thread about it elsewhere. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vautrin Posted February 9 2 hours ago, Bethluvsfilms said: Tom is right.....it's time to lay off the "Did or didn't Kirk rape Natalie Wood?" scenario, at least on this thread. This thread is meant to be a tribute to Kirk, his film legacy and paying respects to his passing....if you're not interested in contributing anything but insisting "it's very possible that he is a rapist", then I suggest to start a new thread about it elsewhere. That's the dilemma of the old Hollywood stars. One side of the coin was the good pr and the other was the negative kind. When you're a public figure you have to put up with both. I don't see anything wrong with bringing up speculation on that small part of Douglas' life. It's all part of the whole and the tributes have far outweighed the topic of Natalie Wood. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomJH Posted February 9 25 minutes ago, Vautrin said: That's the dilemma of the old Hollywood stars. COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE TO DISCUSS THIS TOPIC ON A TRIBUTE THREAD IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING A MAN'S DEATH, ESPECIALLY ON A SITE FOR MOVIE FANS! If you're so eager to discuss this salacious stuff take it to Twitter or Facebook. I'm sure you'll find plenty there who like to swim in rumours and muck. Please don't do it here. Thank You. 2 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
txfilmfan Posted February 9 Agree. A good rule of thumb, IMO: If you wouldn't say it at a funeral or memorial service to the person's family and friends, don't talk about it, don't tweet it, don't blog it, and don't post it. That's not to say you ignore the person's history, good and bad. Just that there's a time and place for everything. This can wait. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TopBilled Posted February 9 There was a wonderful post Tom wrote a few years ago. Can't remember which thread it was in...but he described going to a book signing event where Kirk Douglas autographed a book for him. That's the kind of stuff we should focus on...how a classic movie star connects with his/her fans. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vautrin Posted February 9 1 hour ago, TomJH said: COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE TO DISCUSS THIS TOPIC ON A TRIBUTE THREAD IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING A MAN'S DEATH, ESPECIALLY ON A SITE FOR MOVIE FANS! If you're so eager to discuss this salacious stuff take it to Twitter or Facebook. I'm sure you'll find plenty there who like to swim in rumours and muck. Please don't do it here. Thank You. A number of movie stars have things that don't redound to their glory. You likely wouldn't have had a tribute thread to Robert Mitchum after he died without mentioning his pot bust or one to Alfred Hitchcock without mentioning some rumors about him. It's all part of the show biz merry go round. Of course the Kirk Douglas-Natalie Wood situation is only a rumor, but in the era of #MeToo it takes on a certain added interest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedracer5 Posted February 9 5 minutes ago, Vautrin said: A number of movie stars have things that don't redound to their glory. You likely wouldn't have had a tribute thread to Robert Mitchum after he died without mentioning his pot bust or one to Alfred Hitchcock without mentioning some rumors about him. It's all part of the show biz merry go round. Of course the Kirk Douglas-Natalie Wood situation is only a rumor, but in the era of #MeToo it takes on a certain added interest. A pot bust, where he was caught, tried, and served time in jail for (and fully admitted to doing btw) is hardly the same as speculating on someone being involved in a horrific crime. A brutal rape is hardly the same as smoking pot at a party. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethluvsfilms Posted February 9 3 minutes ago, Vautrin said: A number of movie stars have things that don't redound to their glory. You likely wouldn't have had a tribute thread to Robert Mitchum after he died without mentioning his pot bust or one to Alfred Hitchcock without mentioning some rumors about him. It's all part of the show biz merry go round. Of course the Kirk Douglas-Natalie Wood situation is only a rumor, but in the era of #MeToo it takes on a certain added interest. You seem to miss the point completely. It's about paying tribute to a great actor (regardless of his flaws, which no doubt he had, just like you and I do), acknowledging his contributions in cinema, NOT continually attacking the man or slandering him over a story that has nothing but unproven speculation to back it up. Mitchum never made any secret of the fact that he did pot and did jail time for it. You can't compare his 'scandal' to the one you keep insisting on bringing up with Kirk when Kirk is no longer here to defend himself. 1 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vautrin Posted February 9 1 hour ago, speedracer5 said: A pot bust, where he was caught, tried, and served time in jail for (and fully admitted to doing btw) is hardly the same as speculating on someone being involved in a horrific crime. A brutal rape is hardly the same as smoking pot at a party. I didn't mean to compare a rape to a pot bust. I was focused on comparing a fact to a rumor. Certainly a pot bust is much less serious than a rape, though to be clear in this case we are talking about the rumor of one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedracer5 Posted February 9 3 minutes ago, Vautrin said: I didn't mean to compare a rape to a pot bust. I was focused on comparing a fact to a rumor. Certainly a pot bust is much less serious than a rape, though to be clear in this case we are talking about the rumor of one. Mitchum's pot bust is a fact. It would be mentioned because it's part of his life and story. These unsubstantiated rumors about Kirk are not fact and should not be mentioned as part of someone's story. These types of rumors are meant to slander someone's legacy and reputation. 1 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lavenderblue19 Posted February 9 6 minutes ago, speedracer5 said: Mitchum's pot bust is a fact. It would be mentioned because it's part of his life and story. These unsubstantiated rumors about Kirk are not fact and should not be mentioned as part of someone's story. These types of rumors are meant to slander someone's legacy and reputation. Right On Sista. Vautrin, give it up. No one in this thread agrees with you and the reaction to your posts are NOT GOOD. Please, let it go. 2 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sukhov Posted February 9 Wow, this thread has really gone in the TMZ or Breitbart direction. Anyways, I always thought Kirk was great in this scene. Taunted but he won't loose his dignity. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vautrin Posted February 9 3 hours ago, Bethluvsfilms said: You seem to miss the point completely. It's about paying tribute to a great actor (regardless of his flaws, which no doubt he had, just like you and I do), acknowledging his contributions in cinema, NOT continually attacking the man or slandering him over a story that has nothing but unproven speculation to back it up. Mitchum never made any secret of the fact that he did pot and did jail time for it. You can't compare his 'scandal' to the one you keep insisting on bringing up with Kirk when Kirk is no longer here to defend himself. I get that it's about paying tribute to a good actor, but many actors have rumors concerning them and those rumors often become part of their bio, for better or worse. It twas ever thus in Tinsel Town. The Mitchum example was the first that came to mind. It is lacking in that it was factual, so chose whichever rumor you like. Charlie Chaplin, W.C. Fields, Bob Hope, et al. Somewhere along the line when these folks are discussed, the rumors will show up too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vautrin Posted February 9 3 hours ago, speedracer5 said: Mitchum's pot bust is a fact. It would be mentioned because it's part of his life and story. These unsubstantiated rumors about Kirk are not fact and should not be mentioned as part of someone's story. These types of rumors are meant to slander someone's legacy and reputation. As I've previously mentioned, rumors are a part of Hollywood. They are part of a star's story, which may be unfair, but that's the way it goes. Some of them are of interest to some folks. Others are not. To each their own. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vautrin Posted February 9 3 hours ago, lavenderblue19 said: Right On Sista. Vautrin, give it up. No one in this thread agrees with you and the reaction to your posts are NOT GOOD. Please, let it go. I'm gonna have to pull a little Kirk here. If somebody told the old boy to stop it, give it up, let it go, nobody agrees with you, your posts are not good, well you know how Kirk would likely react. 'Nuff said. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lavenderblue19 Posted February 9 7 hours ago, Vautrin said: I'm gonna have to pull a little Kirk here. If somebody told the old boy to stop it, give it up, let it go, nobody agrees with you, your posts are not good, well you know how Kirk would likely react. 'Nuff said. He'd walk away like a gentleman. He wouldn't waste his time on rumors like a little gossip, he'd look for more honorable battles to pursue. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethluvsfilms Posted February 9 8 hours ago, Vautrin said: I get that it's about paying tribute to a good actor, but many actors have rumors concerning them and those rumors often become part of their bio, for better or worse. It twas ever thus in Tinsel Town. The Mitchum example was the first that came to mind. It is lacking in that it was factual, so chose whichever rumor you like. Charlie Chaplin, W.C. Fields, Bob Hope, et al. Somewhere along the line when these folks are discussed, the rumors will show up too. How many times do you have to be told that a thread about the passing of a legendary actor is NOT the time nor the place to bring up such an ugly rumor? As already mentioned the Natalie Wood story is NOT part of Kirk's story because it's never been proven as 100 percent true. What part of this don't you get? 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomJH Posted February 9 It's a little difficult to make out what Kirk is saying on this video but here's a quote from the actor on another occasion when he shared the same anecdote: I went to Albuquerque, New Mexico to do Ace in the Hole with Billy Wilder. . . . Errol Flynn was shooting a picture in Albuquerque at the same time. He invited Irene and me to dine with him and Pat Wymore. I was flattered. I was a young star; he was a legend. He selected the most elegant restaurant, ordered the most expensive wines, and was extremely charming. I was quite impressed, and a little ga-ga, envious of his poise, his great savoir faire. At the end of the meal, when the check arrived, he graciously handed it to me and said, "Kirk, I wouldn't deprive you of the honour of being the host of the evening." And I, with my mouth open, just paid it. 2 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vautrin Posted February 9 10 hours ago, lavenderblue19 said: He'd walk away like a gentleman. He wouldn't waste his time on rumors like a little gossip, he'd look for more honorable battles to pursue. I don't know. The general Douglas screen persona was a guy who didn't take too much and was ready to charge ahead with fists flying. Of course he didn't play that type of character all the time, but I think that was the way many fans saw him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vautrin Posted February 9 9 hours ago, Bethluvsfilms said: How many times do you have to be told that a thread about the passing of a legendary actor is NOT the time nor the place to bring up such an ugly rumor? As already mentioned the Natalie Wood story is NOT part of Kirk's story because it's never been proven as 100 percent true. What part of this don't you get? Rumors become part of an actor or really any celebrity's life, not a major part but they trail around them. It's really another aspect of the Hollywood hype machinery, which works both ways, good and bad. And movie stars are part of the machinery, good and bad. Some folks are more interested in some rumors than other folks. I find nothing wrong with that. And while Natalie's story is a rumor, Kirk's serial adultery, which apparently was okay with his second wife, is fact and doesn't make him look very good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LawrenceA Posted February 9 1 minute ago, Vautrin said: I find nothing wrong with that. Perhaps people were hoping you'd have some consideration for what others may find appropriate. Just because you can say something doesn't mean you should. Then again, it's also possible that you were simply looking for the attention that this has given you. Stirring the pot, as they say. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
