out of pure love?
-
metalman091 — 11 years ago(December 20, 2014 12:14 AM)
Anyone who says that about James Stewart or Gregory Peck clearly doesn't know what they are talking about. Peck had affairs during his first marriage, but nothing suggests he did the same thing with his second wife.
As for Stewart, every biography- and there have been a few bad ones- have gone out of their way to show Stewart was a loyal husband. To make a statement like this without evidence is a trademark of this particular poster. Even worse is to lump all these actors in the same group.
Whatever happened between Hope and Dolores they made it work. It appears that Hope was thought of very highly by his wife, children and his peers. -
gbennett5 — 11 years ago(April 02, 2015 06:11 AM)
"THIS particular poster???" All anyone has to do is look at what you've
done to the Judy Garland board to know what a freak you are.
And, no, Stewart was not a hundred percent faithful during his marriage.
Come in out of the rain and stop confusing his "golly-gee-whiz"
characters with the actor himself.
And I did not lump everyone together. I said most stars are not
faithful, then or now. To what degree, has nothing whatsoever to
do with my point.
You're a four-door, brass-plated ass. -
!!!deleted!!! (2212087) — 10 years ago(July 10, 2015 01:53 AM)
You have piqued my interest. I have read biographies of both actors, but nothing I have read indicates that they weren't faithful husbands.5b4
I know James Stewart was a real womaniser in his early years but I have read nothing to indicate anything but his devotion to Gloria after their marriage. Same with the success of Gregory Peck's second marriage to his wife, Veronique.
I will be fascinated to read some books or articles which indicate the contrary. Could you please make some suggestions? Thanks -
-
texastreasure517 — 9 years ago(June 26, 2016 09:40 AM)
It wasn't the divorce, it was the remarriage. The Church understood that there were reasons in life that peopl5b4e must part: domestic violence for example. The reasoning was that God doesn't want people to put their lives in danger. However, remarriage was a no-no. In the eyes of God, you are still married to your first spouse forever. This is provided you were married in the church the first time, of course.
-
metalman091 — 9 years ago(September 21, 2016 12:02 AM)
It wasn't the divorce, it was the remarriage. The Church understood that there were reasons in life that people must part: domestic violence for example. The reasoning was that God doesn't want people to put their lives in danger. However, remarriage was a no-no. In the eyes of God, you are still married to your first spouse forever. This is provided you were married in the church the first time, of course.
Boy, religion sure is a joke. God sure made up a bunch of crazy rules. But the best thing he did was convince others that he actually exists. At least we know Bob Hope existed. -
cooljoebay2 — 9 years ago(January 26, 2017 11:06 AM)
First of all. Divorce papers were found that belonged to Bob Hope and another woman AFTER he was supposedly married to his wife. Meaning he was a bigamist. people can debate this stuff all day long.
But I say the bottom line is this. The life of the famous is based on lies and deception. Media entertainment is a psychological experiment designed to fool the brain. You come out feeling a certain way about a certain person you have never met. Jimmy Stewart is a GREAT example. On screen he was considered a saint. In real life he was nothing of the kind. John Wayne was the same. You can write a list a mile long full of "admirable" people who were the opposite of that. Bob Hope was nothing more than a piece of dog doo.
I spent years on a big stage, being envied and admired by many. And I did a great job at making myself appealing. But I got tired of the fakery. When I didnt perform, people turned their backs. So I quit and got married to someone who would sacrifice for anyone. And three kids later, I look back thinking about my past. And I am glad I walked away. There is nothing good to be found in such a life. My family and friends used to envy me for the life I had. And I used to tell them, my life isn't so great. All they could see was a man who got to get paid for being admired. There is NOTHING great about it. Its dysfunctional. It kills the soul. It wastes time. It prevents you from living a real life, meeting challenges to overcome. Growing spiritually with loved ones. being famous SUCKS. It stinks. And the people who embrace it STINK. They just pretend to not stink.
And people like YOU are the enablers that help ruin the lives of others. If people stopped worshiping celebs, people would stop becoming famous. And then maybe they would have a chance. I admire people who raise families and devote their lives to other people. But I despise those who devote themselves to their own selfish cause for fame and fortune. They dont get my vote. The perception of modern society is upside down. I would say the Amish are the only people today who can still see through the eyes of the common man 200 years ago. Once upon a time your ancestors would have looked upon today's society and saw the majority of all families today as failures. -
TonTon — 3 years ago(April 07, 2022 07:58 AM)
LOL at these responses. James Stewart cheated on his wife? Says who? It's easy to make a statement like that and then not offer anything to back it up with.
The last poster may have had tough times and claims to have walked away, but still sounds angry and bitter. If he couldn't take show business than that's tough, but why should he denigrate the rest of them? James Stewart was not nice in real life? Again, says who?
All this stuff about Hope not divorcing his wife because of religion or money is not always accurate. Maybe, just maybe they had an "understanding." I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that it's possible.
The last poster is wrong about the divorce papers. Hope's biographer, Richard Zoglin, didn't say that Hope was a bigamist. Here is the quote;
"Bob and Dolores always claimed that they married in February 1934 in Erie, Pennsylvania. But at that time he was secretly married to his vaudeville partner Louise Troxell, after three years together on and off. I found divorce papers for Bob and Louise dated November 1934, so either Bob Hope was a bigamist or he lied about marrying Dolores in February that year. He had actually married Louise in January 1933 in Erie when they were traveling on the vaudeville circuit. When he claimed he had married Dolores in Erie he was miles away in New York, on Broadway. More intriguing, there is no record anywhere of his marriage to Dolores, if it happened. And there are no wedding photos, either. But he never forgot Louise and quietly sent her money in her later years."