It was the worst mass shooting in U.S. history, and now we know exactly how it happened.
[Image via AP Images.]
There are so many stories coming out now following the death of Paul Walker that prove what an AH-Mazing person he was!
His love for his daughter was unparalleled…
He was BEYOND adored by his Fast & Furious co-stars…
And talk about kindness, he even bought a wedding ring for an engaged war veteran!
But some media outlets are looking past the positives of Paul's short time with us and are instead painting him and his career in a totally negative light!
The New York Times remembered the 40-year-old on Sunday for being an often critically-panned performer. They even linked back to a bad review Paul received for his role in the 2003 film Timeline!
“…a throwback to the days when imitation Tab Hunters were tapped for potential stardom simply on the basis of their dimpled smiles and vacant, sparkly eyes.”
Really?!? That’s what you choose to print about him, now that he’s gone?
Vulture.com kicked up the offensive even further with their post about Paul that described him as a sub-par actor! Ch-ch-check out a few excerpts from their obit of Walker:
"Let's face it: Walker wasn't exactly regarded as one of the finer actors of his generation. “
"An Everyman With Leading Man Looks”
"Walker may not have had a ton of range, but he could do certain things very well.”
"With Paul Walker there, everyone else could go big, brave, and a little ridiculous. To put it another way: Even the craziest sandwich needs some bread.”
We are just flabbergasted!
We’d rather remember someone for the GOOD they did in their life. Not drag him and his career through the mud!
[Image via BauerGriffinOnline.]