Angelina Jolie has a full shooting schedule

We’re kind of confused about Angelina Jolie‘s shooting schedule for the rest of the year.  Last week, she said, "I will stay at home to help Pax adjust to his new life. I have fourchildren and caring for them is the most important thing for me at themoment."  It was just announced that she plans to star in the graphic novel-based Wanted with JamesMcAvoy and Morgan Freeman, which begins shooting in Eastern Europe in May.  Then she’ll shoot the Clint Eastwood-directed The Changeling in the fall.  She is also scheduled to star in Atlas Shrugged, adapted from the Ayn Rand novel. Obviously she won’t be staying at home very long.

Angelina has two films coming out this year: as Mariane Pearl in A Mighty Heart, and as Grendel’s mother in the classic Beowulf. She also voiced the character Tigress in the upcoming Kung Fu Panda.

Please note: I am not saying that Angelina should not work.  (I am all for working moms- I am one myself and my career is an important part of who I am.)  I only said that her actions contradicted her statement. However, some readers pointed out that the quote was trimmed and that something may have been lost in translation because she gave the interview in English, which was then translated into Vietnamese, and then back into English for American consumption. 

Source: Variety

Comments

That’s NOT what she said, that’s just the media and their usual Bull Crap!!!

This is what she said

“I’m not making any movies right now,” Jolie said in the interview. “I will stay at home to help Pax adjust to his new life. I have four children, and caring for them is the most important thing for me at the moment.”

I AM NOT MAKING ANY MOVIES RIGHT NOW!!!!! But that wasn’t sensational enough, so what the heck, they just left it out, so she can be accused of lying.

- Adore1 on March 20th, 2007

Wow, two whole months to help your newly adopted 3 and a half year old adapt to his new name, new country, new home, new language 3 new siblings, and paparazzi swirling around him constantly. That’s some maternity leave, Angelina. Looks like the moment where “caring for them is the most important thing” will pass soon.

- Lauren on March 20th, 2007

Adore1: Thanks for printing the full quote. It’s so unfortunate the way the media takes everything that is said out of context to try to make it more sensational. I remember when the same thing was done to Gwyneth Paltrow when she made a comment about Hollywood working mothers when she was on Oprah and the press removed the Hollywood part of the quote to make it look like she was insulting all working mothers. I’m not even a fan of Gwyneth’s and I still felt bad for her that her words were being twisted.

- Grace on March 20th, 2007

Maybe for her this means to be home two days. HOnestly is not only her G.Paltrow also keeps saying she will be a stay at home mother, but is always busy filming. This is all BS. They will never turn off a good job offer.

- Mary on March 20th, 2007

I believe that it was translated from English to Vietnamese, and then back into English for American news/tabloids….no one knows what she actually said the language conflict could create a variety of statements. I don’t understand why everyone is out to make A. Jolie look like a terrible person for adopting a child, giving him a home in which he will be loved and well taken care of. Good luck to their family.

- Nicole on March 20th, 2007

Puuuuuhlease. OK so she said that she is not making any movies right now meaning today. That is quite obvious given that if she were shooting a film right now she would not be allowed to leave the set and stop production for a few weeks to go shoot a movie. However, it is currently March and the next movie is scheduled to begin shooting in May in Eastern Europe. So in a little over a month’s time she is going to start filming again, in a foreign country presumably working a very hectic schedule. That is not staying at home with her four children as she suggested. It is going to take Pax longer than a month to adjust to his new environment so I can understand the confusion by the statement. The fault here lies with Angelina in that she shouldn’t have said anything. I am not saying she shouldn’t be working, it is her perogative to do whatever. But when you make a grandiose statement like the one she made about not working and staying at home to be with the kids and help them adjust people do not expect to them here that you are heading to Europe in a little over a month to work on a movie.

- lizzielui on March 20th, 2007

So Angelina will stay at home full time a few weeks, maybe a few months, and then go back to work. What’s the big deal? Surely people didn’t expect her to completely turn her back on acting or something, so what’s there to be discussed?

Angelina Jolie isn’t the type of woman who, when filming, turns her back on her family and disappears for weeks on end. I’m sure she will still find enough time to spend with her kids. Since Brad and Angelina never film at the same time, there is always at least one of them around to be with the children… it’s not like they are all by themselves, locked in a cupboard till mommy comes home! I’m sure Brad is perfectly capable of looking after his children for a few hours a day.

People seem to forget that, beside her family, Angelina also has to think about all the humanitarian causes she is actively supporting (and she should be admired, not condemned, for doing so). Keeping the media’s attention by starring in films is her way to ensure this.

- pink.lioness on March 20th, 2007

The original quote was translated from English to Vietnamese for a Vietnamese newspaper and then back to English for U.S. media outlets, right? I suspect she’s not being quoted accurately or that the translations are failing to capture the real meaning of what she said in context. I think the essence of her quote was her committment to be available to Pax to help him adjust to his new family and life. I’m sure she’ll do an excellent job of that.

- Fynn on March 20th, 2007

I don’t see what the big deal is with her starting to film a movie in two months. That sounds like a perfectly normal-length maternity leave (actually it’s a few weeks longer than some people get). Lots of people go back to work after having children, that doesn’t make them bad mothers. And just because a person can afford to quit work doesn’t mean they’re awful for not. This is 2007, not 1950.

And I agree with the others who think something was just lost in the translation.

- Grace on March 20th, 2007

I just knew it. I read the original quote and then saw the abridged version on the People website and on blogs and I said watch people (not the magazine lol) jump all over Angelina Jolie. It never fails. Her words are taken out of context and then used against her. Come on people this aint brain surgery for the last 2 years when she works Brad stays with the kids (and she only worked a total of 8 weeks in the last year) and when Brad is working Angie stays with the kids. And on top of that they follow each other on location.

And when she is working on the next film Brad, Pax’s soon to be legal father, is going to be bonding with his soon to be legal son. Why are people forgetting about Brad? It is just as important for him who won’t be working at all when Angie is on set to bond with his children. People are acting like she’s going to put the kids in a closet for safe keeping until the movie is over. Jeeze Louise!

- Monica on March 20th, 2007

Oh I’m sorry but how incredibly selfish of her to adopt a child and be back working fulltime within a couple of months. People I know who have adopted have made a concentrated effort to be at home fulltime to BOND with their new child. Also taking into account she now has 4 children, when she comes home from shooting her attention now has to go 4 ways. How is Pax supposed to bond with her?! Sounds more like he will be bonding more with the other kids and the nanny. This child seems to have been adopted more so to be a playmate for Madox

- Heavenly_hibiscus on March 20th, 2007

Ummm… she’s taking a month or two off to bond with Pax and then she’s going to work. What’s the big deal? No where has she said she’s quitting work – she clearly said she’s taking some time (1-2 months) off to help Pax get to know his family, etc. No big deal.

Not to mention it’s been said that she had no idea that she was going to get him so soon, so her signing on to these films happened a while back and she has no choice but to go through with them. Just because those films were announced recently does not mean she signed on that day – it takes time to cast films, set up schedules, etc.

You can bet she’s going to have Pax, Mad, Z and Shiloh all on the set with her, as she always does, so it’s not like she’s leaving for months to make films. She’s going to be with him and all her kids every day, as always.

- Erin on March 20th, 2007

HeavenlyHibiscus: Do you apply the same standards to people who have biological children? Do you consider them incredibly selfish if they have a baby and go back to work a few months later? What’s with the double standard being applied to adoptive parents.

And I know adoptive parents who have quit work to be full time moms, and I also know adoptive moms who have continued to work. One way isn’t right and the other way wrong. Every family has to find the way that works best for them.

There’s no one right way to be a mother and one wrong way. Just because a woman chooses to go back to work does not mean that she’s a bad mother or that she’s selfish.

- Grace on March 20th, 2007

I have 3 children whom are all adopted. My company gives me 6 weeks of family leave, and I couldn’t afford to take any more, neither could my husband. Angie is blessed to have 2 months off! and a husband at home to take care of the kids! The comment code of conduct says not to post nasty comments, however CBB make quite a judgement about Angie with this post. I’m quite ashamed for you.

- Callin on March 20th, 2007

Angelina usually twists the truth herself (am trying hard not to call her a liar)She said she would never illegally adopt a child yet she did with Maddox. She said she would never have biological children, never go out with a married man, shiloh was a mistake…. she tends to have her own version of the truth and yes magazines may twist her words but if am not mistaken, the same people here standing up for her lauded her decision to stay home as a mum. I am sorry but she just ri=ubs me the wrong way of recent.

- LiLa on March 20th, 2007

If Brad was the one starting a new movie would he get criticized? Let me answer that one Heck No. No one would question if he has enough time to bond with Pax or whether his other kids get enough attention. Someone already said it. Brad is with the kids when she works and vise versa. Jolie is no saint but I see no reason to criticize her for going back to work.

- Deena on March 20th, 2007

The key thing to remember is that her original interview was translated from English to Vietnamese and then back from Vietnamese to English. I’m betting that there was very little retained from her original comments.

- airavanya on March 20th, 2007

This woman is filled with contradiction. I never was a fan, but never had anything bad to say about her. But I really dont like her. Then there is another quote of her saying she feels sorry to bring media attention to her kids, specially the new one. And what a surprise a Hello Cover before even getting home !!

- Mary on March 20th, 2007

Grace,
In this case, yes, there is a difference in this case between a biological child and the adopted child. This is because this is a ‘child’ not an infant. Ask any parent who has adopted a child (not a newborn or infant, a child over the age of 2). It is VERY different. A child has ideas of their own, a child has true feelings of sadness, worry and FEAR and at that age though they aren’t old enough to fully comprehend what is going on they feel a definite loss every single time their lives are changed (just like children in foster care). It is often incredible difficult to develop that bond, a lasting bond that’s more than just that of a caretaker and child (more than the one I have with the children I babysit for). It takes a lot of work. It’s not something that can happen in just a few weeks.
Just to clarify, I have no problem with Angelina going back to work after that amount of time… what I have a problem with would be if she seriously goes out of work to another country, even if she takes Pax with her. There is no time for a child of that age to properly bond with her, with Brad or with his siblings in that sort of “hop-around” environment. He needs to be in a stable home, stable environment for a good long time before they can travel like they always have with the children they adopted as infants and their biological child. It’s a whole new ballgame.
Anyway, who’s to say that now that Pax has arrived she will actually travel out of the country. Heck, give her a chance to prove us wrong before we start ripping her :O)

- Rachel on March 20th, 2007

Checked IMDB and it does show it was annouced that she’s planning on starring in Atlas Shrugged and it shows The Changeling in pre-production. As for Wanted, it was never annouced. Just going by what imdb is saying on her site…

- Lindsay on March 20th, 2007

Rachel: I disagree. Just because he’s older does not mean that Angelina should have to quit working. I know people who have adopted older children, and they did not take time off of work to spend with their children full-time and their kids adjusted quite well.

Plus she and Brad alternate doing movies so that one parent is always free to be with the kids. So I’m unclear as to why it’s wrong for Angelina to do a movie while the kids are being taken care of by their FATHER.

- Grace on March 20th, 2007

Grace, If you reread my post you will note that I said I have absolutely no problem with her going back to work, or any other parent going back to work after adoption.

However having one parent constantly out of the country and the other taking care of the children, switching back and forth would not be considered a stable environment for an older adopted child. One of the things social workers look for when doing home visits and inspections for potential adoptive parents is stability… while this would be stable for an infant growing up in the environment from early on, again, it’s not stable for an older child who’s just been through being taken from the only home he’s known for 3 years. Serious attachment issues could develop from constantly being switched back and forth between caregivers.

And this is not just information I’m guessing at, it’s coming from my years of studies in Child Development and social work. Any professional will tell you that without structure, consistency and constant parental bonding attachment can be critically compromised. And putting a child through what he may see as essentially ‘losing’ his mother for days/weeks at a time so soon after such a traumatic experience would be looked upon negatively by most professionals.

Again, only time will tell if this actually occurs (Angelina going back to work at all). This is all just speculation at this point.

- Rachel on March 21st, 2007

I’ve read more of the interview or a different translation or something. Basically, what she said was she was going to be at home for a while while Pax was adjusting to his new home. NOT that she was going to be a stay-at-home mom. It was totally obvious to me from the quote I read, but it was blown out of proportion by tabloids announcing she was going to be a stay-at-home mom. That obviously wasn’t the case from the translation of the article I read – just that she plans to be home until Pax has adjusted a bit. That’s all.

- JR on March 21st, 2007

Rachel: Pax wouldn’t be losing his mother for days or weeks at a time. Angelina and Brad have made it quite clear that they bring the kids to the set and they see them every day while the other is primary care giver. So I see no difference between that and any other household where one parent works and the other stays home. And I am basing my opinion on years of researching into adoption, not to mention from watching people raise their adopted children (and that includes several years of working as a nanny for a family that had older adopted children). And while I agree that children need a stable environment, I don’t agree that it has to mean staying in one spot all the time and having a mother who never works. Children need consistency when it comes to love and discipline – but they don’t have to be treated like hothouse flowers – they can survive change.

- Grace on March 21st, 2007

CBB never claimed that Angelina was going to be a stay-at-home mom, because it is obvious that she never said that. They simply pointed out that she just stated that caring for her 4 children, including her newly adopted son, is most important to her, yet she will be spending the rest of the year filming and promoting movies. I would like to know how exactly she plans on caring for her 4 kids and giving them, especially Pax, the love and individual attention they need when she knows full well that movie-making and promoting involves intense concentration and time. Do people honestly believe that she is going to give motherhood her full attention with that kind of work schedule? This is what really irritates me about her-she drones on and on about how important motherhood is and how it is her top priority, yet she has no problem having or adopting a child a year and then uprooting them all for film and humanitarian projects instead of doing what many Hollywood parents do, which is to have one parent stay at home full-time with the kids while the other goes to work. And by home, I don’t mean a hotel room. She cannot have it both ways.

- Lauren on March 21st, 2007

Lauren: Angelina is not the only Hollywood parent who “uproots” as you put it their family to do a movie. Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner do it. Gwyneth Paltrow is all over the place jumping from England to New York to California with her kids. Tim McGraw and Faith Hill take their kids on tour and on location. Kate Hudson has taken her child not only on tour but also to other countries to film movies. John Travolta and Kelly Preston drag their kids all over the place. There have been tons of musicians listed on this site who take their kids on tour with them: Gwen Stefani is the first one that comes to mind . I could go on and on, but you get the point. And I don’t see those people being criticized for it. I think this is yet another case of people just looking for a reason to criticize Angelina.

I think leaving a child behind while Mom or Dad goes to Europe or who knows where else to shoot a film would be a lot more damaging to a kid than taking them along.

As for your comment about her not focusing on motherhood: Plenty of mothers go to high-pressure jobs and are still good mothers. I was under the impression that this was 2007 not 1955.

- Grace on March 21st, 2007

Oh, is it 2007 already? *rolls eyes*

I don’t recall saying that every Hollywood parent decides to leave their kids at home with one full-time parent. I am aware that other celebs take their kids with them while they work, but they aren’t the topic of this discussion, are they? It’s great that you’re trying to prove me wrong, but the fact is that just like with the post about how Angelina’s adoption wasn’t fast-tracked, you refuse to address the specific question I asked. In the former, you first insisted that Angelina got no special treatment when it came to adopting Pax, yet when I gave you numerous sources saying that unmarried couples cannot adopt, your reply was, “It doesn’t matter! Angelina is legally single, so she isn’t cheating!” Uh-huh. And I suppose Vietnamese officials accept that excuse from every other unmarried couple trying to adopt, right?
Now, you still can’t answer my question about how a movie actress who needs to be on-set for two thirds of the day for months at a time in numerous locations in addition to promoting other projects is going to have time to devote to her 4 kids, including one that is newly adopted and needs a great deal of attention. I’m all for having a discussion, but if you aren’t going to listen to what I have to say, I’m not going to waste my time.

- Lauren on March 22nd, 2007

Lauren: In the other post about the adoption being fast-tracked, I did answer your question, and so do several other posters. Adoption is legal in Vietnam to single people and Angelina is legally single. People reported that it’s more difficult for single people who are in relationships to adopt, but they did not say it was impossible. As for the other sites you mentioned, I haven’t been there to check those sites out. I have however been looking into Vietnames adoption for several months now and I have checked to see if it’s legal for someone in Angelina’s situation and the answer was that it depends on the agency you go through.

As for the question in this post: I did address that as well. I said that Brad and Angelina trade off doing movies so that one parent is always with the kids while the other is doing movies. I also pointed out that I thought it was unfair to expect just the mother to be the one who has to quit work. Let me spell out for you what I was trying to say since you didn’t understand my last post: I believe it’s important for at least one parent to be with the child if possible – I just don’t see why it matters if it’s the mother or the father. I think it’s incredibly unfair, and sexist, to assume that person should be the woman. There are plenty of other women in the world who work while their husbands/partners take care of the kids. Are those women all bad mothers? I don’t think they are, but it seems that you do.

- Grace on March 22nd, 2007

Why is everyone talking about Brad & Angie like they’re two parents struggling with four kids? They are probably more like two parents, four nannies, nine bodyguards, and her brother. I think we can all stop worrying about these fabulously wealthy white people and their kids. Those toddlers have their own employees, for heaven sake. And traveling aint so bad. I grew up in one place and was bored senseless. I would have loved to travel and so would a lot of kids. Sounds like a great life to me. The only danger I can see is that they might grow up with that obnoxious sense of entitlement that afflicts their mom & her bro, who seems to believe that his childhood was ruined by such hideous injustices as being yelled at by his dad, and not having had a car in high school.

- judee on March 26th, 2007