I trust your judgment, AMPU, to correct me if I'm wrong on this...but my understanding of most ads ...
...aside from the ones where you have an ongoing "host" type of person...Progressive & At&t ads come to mind...
...is that once the performer completes their role in doing the ad, they're done.
They get paid no more or no less than what they contracted for before the camera.
So isn't "fire" an overblown word in this case?
What? Was she some ongoing "ambassador" of the ad she previously performed?
Cruz didn't come in & yank her away from the camera.
So. If I'm wrong, please correct me. But if I'm right, I think to accuse Cruz of "firing" somebody who had already completed her active role borders on rumor-mongering & is character-demeaning.
Colofornian,
Glad to see you around here again!
“So isn’t “fire” an overblown word in this case? “
I believe she was contracted to act in 5 ads. I’ve not seen that she was paid. Just fired. If not paid, I think Cruz missed a huge opportunity to demonstrate and explain redemption and compassion.
If you have more, please post away! :-)