Talk:Kathy Griffin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kathy Griffin article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:


Contents

[edit] Pulp Fiction cameo?

What character did Griffin portray in Pulp Fiction? If the character was unnamed, which scene?

On imdb.com (the Internet Movie Database) it says she played herself.

Well, I don't want to claim any expertise -- but I've seen the movie quite a few times, and I can't think of which scene she might have appeared in. I'm not disputing that she was in the film somewhere; but if she was, we should try to identify where and in what capacity she appeared. That's the proper nature of an informative encyclopedia article. So...does anyone know where in the film she appears? Does she appear in the diner somewhere, or during the boxing match? Does she play one of the "celebrity" waitresses? If so, please add the info.
She witnessed Bruce Willis' run over Ving Rhames just before the pawn shop sequence --Sketchee 21:05, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Yep, she helps Marcellus Wallace (Rhames) up after he gets hit by Butch (Willis), then she says,"If you need someone to go to court for you, I will be gald to help. That guy was a drunken maniac. He hit you, Then he crashed into that car." Wallace asks, "Who?" and Griffin points across the intersection and says, "Him." Wallace pulls his gun and Griffin runs off. She looks completely different i.e. before plastic surgery.--Atticus2020 07:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] D-List section

I removed this section of original anaylsis and hype -- including a laudatory quote from Kathy Griffin's mother -- as per Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Aside from constituing original research, it used wildly non-ency language ("sold-out shows"!) and was simply disallowed original research. and advocacy-- Tenebrae 00:31, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Banned from Tonight Show?

Has Kathy appeared on the Tonight Show previously? On her website, she does have a picture of her posing with Jay Leno on the set of the Tonight Show.BirdbrainedPhoenix 17:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

She claims to have been banned from the Tonight Show since that appearance. She has mentioned this in a number of promotional interviews of late. I know of no independent verification for this. -Jmh123 14:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

As the article stands now, the wording appears factual: She claims this, with the implied uncertainly of the word "claim", and there's a linked reference to her making this claim in print. -- Tenebrae 14:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiquote

There was some quotes listed here - per the directions of the person who posted them, I moved them over to Wikiquote. NickBurns 14:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Replacing Rosie on The View

I'm not too sure that Kathy Griffin is the Kathy that the cited news article (which was a celebrity rumor site) meant. After all, the headline reads "Kathy Lee Griffin" and on Kathie Lee Gifford's article, it states that she is in the running for a seat on The View. It is also admitted by Kathy Griffin that she will probably never appear on The View again since a "showdown" with Barbara Walters. So, I don't know. It just doesn't seem to fit.

She's actually appeared on the show several times since the showdown and has co-hosted the show just as often, so her consideration for the seat is legitimate. 69.138.104.214 02:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
TV Guide mentioned her, too. I've been trying to find exactly which issue, but it was within the past couple of weeks. It's worth noting that Griffin tends to exaggerate claims of being banned from different shows, to support her claim of being a D-lister. More than one talk-show host has complained about getting pressure from Griffin's fans to "let her back on the show" when, according to the host, she never had been banned. Can't put this in the article without sources to back it up, but hunt 'em up. Lawikitejana 09:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC) Update: Found the TV Guide ref and added it in; oddly, it doesn't seem to be in the newsstand version of the magazine. ?? Lawikitejana 01:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Removed the passage. It's weasel-worded, pov, and dated. We don't write speculation or rumor in encyclopedic articles. 71.127.236.82 10:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The View

I added The View because various media outlets have said that kathy griffin is a front runner to replace rose on The View.

Really? Well when you can provide those sources, please feel free to add it. Until then, do not add unsourced information to WP. Carl.bunderson 22:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

well i dont know how to source it. but just look online and youll see its all true.

Link? --FireV 20:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New source to use

Parking this here for the benefit of people with more time to cull info for the article:

-- Lawikitejana 09:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Censored Emmy Statement

While defensive types were quick to condemn the statement, others found it to be a clever skewering of those who thank God or Jesus for assisting them in trouncing opposition, making them money, and generally saying and doing things which are shallow and theologically infantile. If your particular theology can't stand up to jokes, you really need to do some reevaluation of your positions. This isn't remotely relevant to the article, of course, but the speech was quite funny. Censors, to say only a very little of Catholic censors, are apparently employed to murder free and relevant speech and do their little bit to make the world a little more bland. Also, as a final note, I say this as someone who is in the God biz, and still finds the statement hilarious. Good job, Kathy, I might even watch your show sometime. MerricMaker 02:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Say What?
"If your particular theology can't stand up to jokes, you really need to do some reevaluation of your positions."
Say pal, save your hateful attacks on religion for your next gathering of the 3rd Reich. Guess what? You don't get to decide if and when Christians are offended. Got it? Good.
Besides, You have NO IDEA what Censorship is —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.70.140 (talk • contribs)
Using the term “censorship” in this context is really a misnomer. The only institutions that are truly able to censor speech, art, writing or whatever are sovereign governing bodies. To censor something is to complete disallow its dissemination under penalty of civil or criminal recrimination, whereby making a particular vehicle of expression completely unavailable to the public in any given jurisdiction, much like Nazi material being censored by the German and Austrian GOVERNMENTS, placing a total ban on said material under penalty of law. THIS is censorship.
A private company which chooses for whatever reason, not to promulgate or carry certain speech or actions, is not engaging in censorship. If you own a newsstand and choose not to carry Soldier of Fortune and Penthouse magazine, you are not censoring those publications. You are simply exercising your right to stock your retail establishment with the merchandise of your choice and these publications are still legally available elsewhere. You have not censored them by deciding not to carry them.
Calling the decision not to air Griffin’s comments “censorship” further confuses the issue needlessly. Her comments have NOT been censored (if they were we would not be able to talk about them and/or quote them here). It was simply a decision on behalf of a PRIVATE company to freely choose what content they desired to carry.
Please be more careful in the future with your choice of words. It may seem like a trivial distinction but in reality there is a tremendous difference between true censorship and what is actually the case here.202.88.81.69 13:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
The first and most obvious thing I'd like to point out is what censorship is. Obviously, there are different levels of censorship. The fact that tens of millions of people watch the Emmys and were denied access to an accurate airing of its content makes the edit de facto censorship. That and the fact that I can not think of a single major television station that is not privately owned in the United States. Your news stand analogy is similarly flawed as in order to be analogous to the Emmy example here, the entire Emmy broadcast would have had to be canceled. Your reference to Nazi Germany makes it seem like you're really just interested in presenting the most extreme examples of censorship associated with some of the worst human consequences commonly known. In fact, in composing your response, you seem to be quite readily utilizing a method of propaganda known as Transfer as defined by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis. Maybe you should examine your own personal commonalities with the Nazis in terms of methods of communication. But so as not to behave similarly to yourself, let it be known I'm not calling you one.

Kst447 (talk) 04:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Were someone talking about the event--assuming that they didn't happen to be an attorney--and made mention of the response the Catholic representative managed to elicit from the Emmy committee or whomever has the final say with regards to the Emmy broadcast's contents, they would not say, "Ms. Griffin's statements will not be aired here as an exercise of the broadcasting authority's right not to disseminate certain material." They would say: "What Ms. Griffin said has been censored." If nothing else, this is much more expedient. To excise material from a publication or broadcast due to its content and based on pressure from some individual or body is properly identified as censorship. If an editor cuts something from a book because it talks about something that editor feels is inappropriate, it is censored. This does not prevent the author from keeping the material and finding a different editor, but the act remains one of censorship. There are degrees of censorship. Within a particular sphere of public consumption, the statements of Ms. Griffin were censored. As a side note, don't tell me to be careful as if I used language unthinkingly. What I offered was not introduced into the article nor was it intended to be; it was simply meant to point out that there are religious persons who think Jesus can take care of himself, and wouldn't mind a good joke at his expense. Oh, and use italics for pete's sake. All caps is rather gauche. MerricMaker 15:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

  • NO, MERRIC, CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL. Also, I've been searching for a video of her speech with zero luck. Can anyone give a hand? 71.53.73.90 23:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Why is this section being deleted? It is noteworthy. --Statsone 02:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Because it is already in the entry. See Kathy_Griffin#Solo_reality_show. -Jmh123 03:01, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't see it. --Statsone 03:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE Griffin Renee Zellweger feud, Feedback?

I have attempted to document on Renee Zellweger's page a brief mention of her Fued with Kathy over her "alleged" use of the term "sweaty, puffy coke whore" after Zellweger refused to allow Kathy to present her an award at some Celeb show. I wanted to include that Renee sent Roses to stop the fued (fairly classy on Renee's part) The three or four fans (fanatics) that control her page remove the informations literial SECONDS after what they see as a negative post. Dozens of other celebs, writers, politicians etc have documentations of such fueds...Thoughts?Fanofdirtydancing 00:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Can you find a reliable source verifying it? --Stlemur 01:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kathy's appearance on Oprah

I've seen an episode of Oprah in the past involving Kathy and her cosmetic surgeries. It's unfortunately not stated on your page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.72.122.97 (talk) 08:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kathy Griffin's "Coordinates"?

At the very bottom of the article page is a listing that she is at a certain latitude and longitude, saying, "Kathy Griffin is at...." Is that the location of her home (and, if so, is listing that cricket?) Or is it a piece of vandalism? 98.215.48.213 (talk) 14:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't call it vandalism because I fired up Google Earth, put in those coordinates, and the house it points to looks identical to the one they show on her TV show. So, it is her house. Whether or not it's relevant for the article, I don't know, but it doesn't really hurt anything. — AMK1211talk! 01:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Goofing on Sharon Stone

does anyone have a good way to add this information to the page?

There was a lot of talk about cosmic connections with deceased music legends at last week's AMFAR event, and not everyone was amused by it. A source who attended the event tells us that honoree Rosie O'Donnell was slightly annoyed and less than impressed by event chair Sharon Stone's at-the-podium musings about John Lennon. Stone recounted how she first heard the words to "Imagine" as a girl. Then, she continued, when she was 20 she felt John Lennon's "presence" and turned around to come face-to-face with him on the street. She then recited the last two lines of "Imagine" to the restless audience and proceeded with her speech, peppering it with quotes from the song. "Everyone thought it was really inappropriate. People were turning to each other with these bemused looks on their faces," says the source. Later in the ceremony, comedienne and event host Kathy Griffin poked fun at Stone, citing a chance encounter of her own: She felt Elvis's presence, turned around to see a glittery belt, recited lines from "Hound Dog," and proceeded to have sex with the King. O'Donnell's rep denies that Rosie was miffed by Stone's ramblings and tells us a good time was had by all.

comment added by sadchild (talk) 11:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)