Jump to content

OMG. What's your reaction to the BBC's new Britney documentary?!


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, OCBoy1985 said:

I believe they used Jamie as a way to get into Britney's life.  It's really baffling that the judge just took his word and didn't get a Dr to legally make that kind of assessment.

It did not happen because it was all carefully planned. All judges, lawyers, doctors etc. I think you really need to be stupid person to believe that it was for the good of conservatorship of Britney. It was all planned in advance, which you can even read in Lynne's book.

  • Like 7
Link to post
  • Replies 264
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Got up at 8am to watch in UK. It’s obviously a mixed bag as it is an ongoing case & nowhere near resolution. However it does bring up a few questions. Overall I enjoyed it and it will de

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p5GouMqDdEAwvX6Xr71VXWocD-fVjDkx/view

Just finished watching it. It brings it to the attention of the British public which is good, however I definitely wanted more. Mobeen definitely seems to sit in the middle in terms of belie

Posted Images

6 hours ago, dfffff said:

It did not happen because it was all carefully planned. All judges, lawyers, doctors etc. I think you really need to be stupid person to believe that it was for the good of conservatorship of Britney. It was all planned in advance, which you can even read in Lynne's book.

That make sense and would explain why she's  been locked in it for so damn long.  Its crazy the amount of people that's all benefiting financially from this and its all from her sick Fathers doing too.

I read a lil bit of Lynne's book yrs ago when it 1st came out but I never read it in full detail tho.

  • Like 2
Link to post

OMG Thank you

On 5/1/2021 at 6:51 AM, Marcanthony said:

thank youuuu!!!! wow I'm already sucked in, I'm glad in the first like 10 minutes he covered the biggest issue which was that it w as filed unjustly, Britney didn't have access to hire her own counsel, and that the probate conservatorship you can make money off of when the mental health one you cannot... This has gotta get picked up by the America media outlets. 

 

and does anyone know the asian dude that was interviewed on zoom... any insta.... haha

  • Like 1
Link to post

Finally watched. I wanted to like it but I didn't. 

First of all, I don't think they had good motives for doing this. I feel like NYT did it as a piece of investigative journalism, or perhaps, even more so, a retrospective analysis of treatment of women in show biz. This one feels like it's done just for the sake of it, to stay trendy. 

Second, and this is the most important thing for me, I feel like the journalist didn't have an open heart for this. You could feel the empathy of the creators behind Framing. Here, I think he is trying to imitate the appearance of being empathetic but it's coming off as phony. I understand the desire to stay unbiased and give a balanced position, but empathy and compassion have to be the basis in cases like this. It's a human being you're investigating. Hence the inclusion of Perez - if the author came from a point of view of empathy, he would never include him. 

Finally, I don't think that this documentary actually had a point. Nothing new, nothing interesting, no conclusion, nothing - even for the general public. Framing felt like a story. Besides giving a lot of information, it also felt like it had a point and a message. This one is just a pointless grab for attention. 

I think we should appreciate any publicity we have, I don't think we should stop bringing attention to this because of "Britney's" latest posts, and this documentary is overall a good thing. But I expected more from BBC, and I can see how it might have upset her.  

Link to post
3 hours ago, FlexAroundTheWorld said:

he covered the biggest issue which was that it was filed unjustly, Britney didn't have access to hire her own counsel, and that the probate conservatorship you can make money off of when the mental health one you cannot..

Pop Tv Yes GIF by Schitt's Creek

1 hour ago, bachelorette said:

Finally watched. I wanted to like it but I didn't. 

First of all, I don't think they had good motives for doing this. I feel like NYT did it as a piece of investigative journalism, or perhaps, even more so, a retrospective analysis of treatment of women in show biz. This one feels like it's done just for the sake of it, to stay trendy. 

Can see why you'd think that- but FBS didn't air until Feb 2021 remember. The BBC doc was also filming Dec 20. So I think they were genuinely interested on jumping on the topic to deep-dive into the situation.

Link to post

Me when a lot of my non-stan friends who watched the documentary on BBC iPlayer are texting asking about Lou Taylor after i've been trying to tell them about the situation for over two years...

Channel 9 Reaction GIF by Married At First Sight Australiasassy GIF

  • Haha 4
  • Like 3
Link to post
1 hour ago, Jamiea1112 said:

Me when a lot of my non-stan friends who watched the documentary on BBC iPlayer are texting asking about Lou Taylor after i've been trying to tell them about the situation for over two years...

Channel 9 Reaction GIF by Married At First Sight Australiasassy GIF

I’m still waiting on that “text” from my friends 😭😭 although my cousin did tell me her friend/non fan designed a free Britney sign  that she hung up outside her window post watching 

Link to post

I couldn't shake out the words of paparazzi.  That's the second one, in two documentary who said that they did nothing wrong.

 "If she didn't wanted it, she could have said it"

"She asked for it"

You know who will say that? rap***. They seriously have mentality of abuser. "Let's chase this young girl shouting her name sticking camera in her face, she wants it...:beat_fighting_punching_hitting_angry:

  • Like 1
Link to post

My honest opinion of the documentary

I have just finished watching it and am very underwhelmed by the BBC. It was poorly researched on their part, and the documentary was very lazy. This was  definately the BBC jumping on the bandwagon. 

They didn't get into any specifics and jumped from quick interview segment to the next without presenting any of the facts, court documents, timeliness that are out there. Very disappointed and will not watch again, nor will I tell anyone about it. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
25 minutes ago, Saoru said:

My honest opinion of the documentary

I have just finished watching it and am very underwhelmed by the BBC. It was poorly researched on their part, and the documentary was very lazy. This was  definately the BBC jumping on the bandwagon. 

They didn't get into any specifics and jumped from quick interview segment to the next without presenting any of the facts, court documents, timeliness that are out there. Very disappointed and will not watch again, nor will I tell anyone about it. 

 

 

me too. Is he really a journalist?

  • Like 2
Link to post
3 hours ago, SkyNet said:

ou know who will say that? rap***. They seriously have mentality of abuser. "Let's chase this young girl shouting her name sticking camera in her face, she wants it..

Yeah. And then attributing her success and 'comeback' with Circus to the tabloids. LMFAOOOO get off of it. She went on a primetime interview and pleaded with the Paparazzi crying to leave her alone when she was pregnant. She didn't want it. MAYBE that strange bit of time when she was just driving around and dated Adnan, that was probably the darkest / dumbest period that he could be referencing, but that was only a few months. 

GUYS how do I find the contact info or socials for the people that he interviewed? Those 4? The 2 girls and the asian guy. Do they all work together, what's their instagram? I want to link up with Free Britney people in LA, especially for the court hearing!!!

Link to post
14 hours ago, bachelorette said:

Finally watched. I wanted to like it but I didn't. 

First of all, I don't think they had good motives for doing this. I feel like NYT did it as a piece of investigative journalism, or perhaps, even more so, a retrospective analysis of treatment of women in show biz. This one feels like it's done just for the sake of it, to stay trendy. 

Second, and this is the most important thing for me, I feel like the journalist didn't have an open heart for this. You could feel the empathy of the creators behind Framing. Here, I think he is trying to imitate the appearance of being empathetic but it's coming off as phony. I understand the desire to stay unbiased and give a balanced position, but empathy and compassion have to be the basis in cases like this. It's a human being you're investigating. Hence the inclusion of Perez - if the author came from a point of view of empathy, he would never include him. 

Finally, I don't think that this documentary actually had a point. Nothing new, nothing interesting, no conclusion, nothing - even for the general public. Framing felt like a story. Besides giving a lot of information, it also felt like it had a point and a message. This one is just a pointless grab for attention. 

I think we should appreciate any publicity we have, I don't think we should stop bringing attention to this because of "Britney's" latest posts, and this documentary is overall a good thing. But I expected more from BBC, and I can see how it might have upset her.  

Uuh... What? He was actually a good interviewer (I'm not going to say journalist, because he didn't do a lot of research before and left it to the fans to provide him with the crumbs to follow). But including Perez WAS a smart decision. Sorry, but it's immature to say he shouldn't have included Perez - you are exactly one of the people that Perez addressed. He did a lot of ****ty things but he's taken accountability, he hasn't tried to erase his past, he's tried to learn from it, grow, and move on and become a better person. That's all any of us can do in life. Do you think Britney wants to be remembered forever for shaving her head? Or how she acted that one time in a photo shoot? No. The same applies to Perez. Perez was a huge part of that entire tabloid boom so of COURSE he needed to be included, that would've been poor journalism to not include him. 

 

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

We noticed you're using an ad blocker  :badthoughts_gun_kris_genner_thinking_debating:

Thanks for visiting Exhale! Your support is greatly appreciated 💜  

Exhale survives through advertising revenue. Please, disable your ad block extension to help us and continue browsing Exhale. 🙏

I've disabled ad block