Justine Bateman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is Justine Bateman suddenly a Trump fan girl?

Why is she acting like she had no freedom to express herself before Trump was elected?

Is she hoping to get some Elon Musk money?

Are some of these people secretly harboring some ideology that they know deep down inside the majority of people would find wrong? And Trump is signaling to them, they don't have to be ashamed of it anymore.

I think it's ridiculous that she is a hero for slamming people about how she has aged. She was paid money at one time because of her attractive qualities. She did drugs. She damaged her looks. It's not normal aging but hard drugging.

You seem woefully ignorant of cancel-culture.

[Anonymous]

Watters has such a smug, annoying face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that anyone devotes any time or brain power thinking about what an 80s sitcom actress has to say about the world… She’s entitled to think whatever she wants, but nobody has to care.

Honestly. I haven’t heard her name in thirty years- who cares?

[Anonymous]

What is her opinion that she couldn't say freely before Trump was re-elected?

[Anonymous]

I was so disappointed and disgusted when she posted the "I've been muzzled" etc. crap after the election. Out of the blue.

I'd been following her on IG for her strong and well-informed advocacy against the eventual use of AI to replace or augment actors in films and TV. That subject is pretty much 100 percent of her IG presence -- until Nov. 5. She is actually knowledgeable about the many plans in studios to use AI much more extensively as soon as possible technologically. She was, maybe still is for now, the official adviser to the actors' union, SAG-AFTRA, on AI concerns. She earned a degree in computer science and digital media management, so she has tech background for what she's talking about, which gave her even more credence.

And then, that post about being muzzled etc.

She was so right about AI and so good at reminding everyone that studios crave it, at the eventual expense of actors. But she's undone that work, I think, by this sudden focus on feeling WTF ever this is she's claiming now. It's a pity, because AI is a genuine future threat to acting, but she's not going to be listened to on that topic by her peers or studios, after this dumb self-outing. Should they still listen, and not let her now obvious political leanings affect discussion on AI? Probably, but she's tanked her credibility with a lot of people. For nothing, because I can't figure how she was held back, since she's not an active actor liable to lose roles for her politics.

[Anonymous]

You all will attack anyone for anything. It's really, really sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s really, really full of herself. Her social media proves it.

She won the lottery with her Family Ties role then couldn’t transition to movies. Satisfaction was a huge flop commercially as well as for her (proving she can’t act), yet her costars Liam Neeson and Julia Roberts springboarded to fame.

She somehow managed to marry well and is loaded. Her “projects” are vanity projects that nobody enjoys.

She has been very vocal about AI and its impact on artists. That was fine.

She has been very vocal about aging naturally. That’s fine, too…although she looks rough.

Her anti-woke/free speech rants are fine, too. She’s entitled to her opinion and it actually tracks with most Americans (remember: Trump and the Republicans won).

Where she seems pathetic imho is how insecure she must be to prompt such proactive, aggressive talking points on the regular. She feels entitled to an audience and her voice comes off like a know-it-all. Arrogant. Yet she lacks credentials, gravitas, and even sufficient celebrity status to deserve any audience.

Nonetheless, I can’t look away from the train wreck/dumpster fire that is Justine Bateman…Jason’s weird sister who played that ditzy girl on Family Ties.

Hey she did have a memorable guest spot as Lassy's ex wife on Psych - no Psych erasure here, please

As a big fan of Psych, I agree, no erasure! Bateman's few scenes were important for the show to move forward. I'll note that we also can't erase Kristy Swanson's recurring role in Psych--great character, very important in the show. But Swanson apparently wasn't yet a Trumper anti-vaxxer at the time they filmed the series and the first two movies. I note though that she's not in the third film--which was made under strict covid rules in Canada at the time....

[Anonymous]

Pathetic op pathetic. You would never have her name on your mouth ever again if it weren't for her position on trump.

Grow the F up.

[Anonymous]

I was surprised to learn she's a Trumpette. Really doesn't jive with the rest of her persona.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was surprised to learn she's a Trumpette. Really doesn't jive with the rest of her persona.

I haven’t seen her post anything about Trump. I don’t think that’s an accurate characterization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I was so disappointed and disgusted when she posted the "I've been muzzled" etc. crap after the election. Out of the blue.

I'd been following her on IG for her strong and well-informed advocacy against the eventual use of AI to replace or augment actors in films and TV. That subject is pretty much 100 percent of her IG presence -- until Nov. 5. She is actually knowledgeable about the many plans in studios to use AI much more extensively as soon as possible technologically. She was, maybe still is for now, the official adviser to the actors' union, SAG-AFTRA, on AI concerns. She earned a degree in computer science and digital media management, so she has tech background for what she's talking about, which gave her even more credence.

And then, that post about being muzzled etc.

She was so right about AI and so good at reminding everyone that studios crave it, at the eventual expense of actors. But she's undone that work, I think, by this sudden focus on feeling WTF ever this is she's claiming now. It's a pity, because AI is a genuine future threat to acting, but she's not going to be listened to on that topic by her peers or studios, after this dumb self-outing. Should they still listen, and not let her now obvious political leanings affect discussion on AI? Probably, but she's tanked her credibility with a lot of people. For nothing, because I can't figure how she was held back, since she's not an active actor liable to lose roles for her politics.

What a simpleton. You want to write her off before she even says what she wants to say? Maybe you will actually agree but you’re too close minded to even listen.

[Anonymous]

Her wonderfully talented brother must be so embarrassed.

[Anonymous]

I assume most celebrities are undercover Trump supporters, especially the ones who stayed quiet during the campaign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I was so disappointed and disgusted when she posted the "I've been muzzled" etc. crap after the election. Out of the blue.

I'd been following her on IG for her strong and well-informed advocacy against the eventual use of AI to replace or augment actors in films and TV. That subject is pretty much 100 percent of her IG presence -- until Nov. 5. She is actually knowledgeable about the many plans in studios to use AI much more extensively as soon as possible technologically. She was, maybe still is for now, the official adviser to the actors' union, SAG-AFTRA, on AI concerns. She earned a degree in computer science and digital media management, so she has tech background for what she's talking about, which gave her even more credence.

And then, that post about being muzzled etc.

She was so right about AI and so good at reminding everyone that studios crave it, at the eventual expense of actors. But she's undone that work, I think, by this sudden focus on feeling WTF ever this is she's claiming now. It's a pity, because AI is a genuine future threat to acting, but she's not going to be listened to on that topic by her peers or studios, after this dumb self-outing. Should they still listen, and not let her now obvious political leanings affect discussion on AI? Probably, but she's tanked her credibility with a lot of people. For nothing, because I can't figure how she was held back, since she's not an active actor liable to lose roles for her politics.

What a simpleton. You want to write her off before she even says what she wants to say? Maybe you will actually agree but you’re too close minded to even listen.

Have you yourself followed her social media and read her interviews over the past two years, PP? I have, because of following the AI issues I mention. If you haven't actually been reading any of her posts before now, or you know nothing about her except her post-election announcements, you really have no standing to opine on my writing her off or not. Nice try at bring performatively "open minded" on your part, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was surprised to learn she's a Trumpette. Really doesn't jive with the rest of her persona.

I haven’t seen her post anything about Trump. I don’t think that’s an accurate characterization.

She's saying she's not right or left, etc., is not political. But really read her stuff, and she is clearly saying things will be great under the new administration, freedom, etc. She's a fan.