David Schwimmer Targeted With 'Ross Is Not Cool' Graffiti Insult By East Village Neighbors
Apparently "Friends" star David Schwimmer is not being welcomed with open arms in New York City's East Village.
An unknown tagger took to the construction zone outside of Schwimmer's newly built mansion on East 6th Street to leave the actor a message, EV Grieve first reported. The message, written in white graffiti, read "Ross Is Not Cool," in reference to his geeky-yet-lovable "Friends" character, Ross Geller. An arrow was drawn beside it pointing to the 46-year-old's home.
According to EV Grieve, the note was spotted Tuesday morning and photographed by a passerby. Workers painted over it later that day.
Tension has been mounting for years between Schwimmer and his East Village neighbors, according to the New York Post. He purchased the five-story townhouse for $4.1 million in 2010 and proceeded to demolish it in order to build a 9,000-square-foot abode. Local residents were peeved because the property, built in 1852, was “one of the finest homes in the East Village" and the oldest on the block. It was even being considered for landmark status.
Other notes have been left for Schwimmer before, like “The destruction of an irreplaceable historic building for what???” and “F**k you + your uglyness [sic].”
This is not the only drama the actor has had to deal with surrounding the construction. Last year, a person was struck by falling debris at the site and taken to the hospital with an arm injury, according to DNAinfo.
A 62-year-old woman named Charlotte, who has lived on the block for 37 years, expressed her anger after the debris episode while speaking with DNAinfo.
"Mr. Bigshot made a mistake tearing down this building," she said. "He paid a pretty penny and built some shiny silver thing. He's like a wart on the block. He doesn't belong here."
|by Anonymous||reply 101||09/04/2013|
Who the fuck is this person and why the fuck should I care?
|by Anonymous||reply 1||08/30/2013|
If he has the money he belongs there. He owns the building and can do whatever he wants with it. New York evolves. People need to deal with it.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||08/30/2013|
The property he tore down wasn't particularly outstanding, but the fact that he replaced it with THIS - which looks like something they built in Berlin after the war - shows what a creep he is.
Why would someone move to the East Village if they don't like the way the buildings there look?
|by Anonymous||reply 4||08/30/2013|
Could he BE any more of a douche?
|by Anonymous||reply 5||08/30/2013|
I've seen it and it isn't that bad. There are uglier buildings on the block.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||08/30/2013|
Phoebe wouldn't have demolished the old house.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||08/30/2013|
48. I went to Northwestern with him.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||08/30/2013|
I forgot he's a Chicagoan, the new building does kind of have a sturdy Midwestern vibe.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||08/30/2013|
The old house was a dump. The new house is boringly bland. It's unremarkable
|by Anonymous||reply 11||08/30/2013|
The old house could have been fixed up. The new house is UGLY.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||08/30/2013|
The One Where Ross is Unwelcome.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||08/30/2013|
As someone who lived in a home nearly as old, my advice to anyone buying a house over one hundred years old is:
Tear it the fuck down.
No matter how much you spend on insulation and new windows, the place will always be drafty and impossible to keep warm in the winter or cool in the summer. Small, little home improvement projects become major nightmares because nothing was built to any sort of uniform code. Plumbing issues, electrical issues, HVAC issues occur on an annual basis. It's just not worth the headache.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||08/30/2013|
I hate when they tear old buildings down. Usually they're replaced with something butt ugly and with cost-cutting materials. My house is 113 years old and built out of solid redwood framing, solid as a rock.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||08/30/2013|
He could have kept the facade and gutted the interior.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||08/30/2013|
[all posts by tedious troll removed.]
|by Anonymous||reply 17||08/30/2013|
R16, yep. I cannot stand people without a respect and appreciation for historical architecture, particularly from New York City where so many old structures have been demolished for more modern shithole excretia. Newer is NOT always better. THis is why historical preservation societies exist. That, plus he was just a giant douchebag for being so disrespectful to the aesthetics of an old, historical neighborhood and basically giving the finger to his neighbors. He could have mixed the old with the new and had something wonderful. You don't have to have the community potluck dinners but at least don't fuck with the neighbors. He ruined THEIR views for his own selfish and wholly self-serving reasons.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||08/30/2013|
Is there a pic of his new place?
|by Anonymous||reply 19||08/30/2013|
R19 There is a link at R4 to a picture. Its really not that bad looking. In fact, its a lot better looking than the neighboring buildings as it doesn't have an ugly ass fire escape hanging on the front.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||08/30/2013|
R18 Nobody's view was ruined. Have you ever been to New York? The whole place is a mixture of beautiful and butt ugly, usually on the same block. He didn't tear down the Chrysler building, for christ's sake. Just some old shabby shit hole, of which there are thousands more to be worshipped by people who are afraid of change. Old doesn't always mean better.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||08/30/2013|
[all posts by right wing shit-stain # a removed.]
|by Anonymous||reply 22||08/30/2013|
He is the only Friend who has had NO career to speak of since the show left the air.
All of the other 5 have had multiple TV shows, films, etc. - but Schwimmer's post-show resume is practically non-existent.
How can he afford to demolish and totally rebuild a townhouse in the East Village?
|by Anonymous||reply 23||08/30/2013|
I live in New York, shitstain. I know the block where he lives, too. No, the row of buildings aren't glamorous Age of Innocence brownstones but his new craptastic Friends money vanity project sandwiched between the other buildings is jarring to the eye, much moreso than the balanced visual aspect of what was there before, shabby as it was. No, old isn't always better but an eye for balance and aesthetic appeal IS always better. Of which neither Schwimmer nor his architect had.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||08/30/2013|
R24, he was making 22 million a year for like 7 years. Friends is in syndication, which means he's still making tons and tons of cash every year. No one on Friends ever has to sniff a job again if they don't want to.
My favorite thing about NYC isn't the clubs or restaurants. It's the brownstones. I love them. I'm from LA, and I love our sort of mismatched chaos architecturally. But it isn't NYC. Fuck you Ross. Tear down the inside, rebuild. I get that. But keep the facade.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||08/30/2013|
New Yorkers: always so testy about other how other people spend their money. You want to preserve an old rattrap, buy one.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||08/30/2013|
R27, the resident Republican chimes in.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||08/30/2013|
A gentile would have kept the facade and done internal renovations. This Jew bastard had to knock the whole thing down with no sense of historical preservation.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||08/30/2013|
R24: He's returned to his theatre roots. I think he recently directed a play at Lookingglass in Chicago, which he co-founded with some other Northwestern grads back in the '80s. He was also in Pulitzer finalist DETROIT at Playwright's Horizons last fall.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||08/30/2013|
The facade could have been utilized, but he had talentless, lazy architects.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||08/30/2013|
[quote]David Schwimmer Targeted With 'Ross Is Not Cool
The thing is, Ross probably would have kept the old house.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||08/30/2013|
I hate it when these assholes with more money than sense tear down historic buildings. At least keep the facade. If you want something ultra-modern then buy a condo in one of Manhattan's 10,000 fucking luxury condo buildings that were built within the last 10 years.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||08/30/2013|
Whatever happened to personal freedom? He OWNED the effin' building. He can do whatever the hell he wants to with his own personal property. Where do people get off telling him what to do with his own house? It's nobody's business. And what's all this about "eye-jarring"? God forbid some priss pot has to briefly glimpse something he doesn't find aesthetically pleasing on his way to pick up Fifi from the groomers in the EAST VILLAGE of all places. It's New York, one of the dirtiest, most rat-infested places in the country. The guy just single-handedly raised the property value of every one of those crappy old buildings just by moving there. They should shut up and worry about the drunks passed out on the sidewalk and stop begrudging this man his success and wealth.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||08/30/2013|
r30 A Jew with no sense of tradition, hmmmm.... Interesting concept. You're a putz!
|by Anonymous||reply 37||08/30/2013|
R36 is a bitter, jealous flyover queen. SO transparent.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||08/30/2013|
Closeted gay too. But one would think he would have more vision.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||08/30/2013|
No R39. I'm born and raised UWS. Like most native New Yorkers, I just hate the thought of being told what to do. Especially with my own house. And I'm New Yorker enough to know it's diversity that makes this city aesthetically appealing. Not rows and rows of mediocre sameness.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||08/30/2013|
"He is the only Friend who has had NO career to speak of since the show left the air. "
He's done some directing, including the charming and funny British film "Run Fatboy Run". Judging by that film he's a much better director than an actor, but then that wouldn't be hard.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||08/30/2013|
[quote]he was making 22 million a year for like 7 years.
Actually, it was the last two seasons. And why are you calling the building ugly when it looks very similar to the buildings on both sides of it AND it's not even fucking finished yet? Idiots.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||08/30/2013|
Have we jumped back to 1997?
|by Anonymous||reply 44||08/30/2013|
[quote] And why are you calling the building ugly when it looks very similar to the buildings on both sides of it AND it's not even fucking finished yet?
People are calling it ugly because it is ugly. So what if it isn't finished. It's never going to look nice
|by Anonymous||reply 45||08/30/2013|
Yes r42, I really liked that one and I was impressed how authentically British it was from an American.
I don't know what the one with Clive Owen is like but while he may not be the next Ben Affleck, I thought he had potential as a director.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||08/30/2013|
Schwimmer could have bought a very similar building in Tribeca or Soho.
I guess these Hollywood assholes have so much money, gutting a building they paid 4 million for must make sense in their shallow overly entitled worlds.
Didn't Jennifer Aniston buy an APARTMENT for 40 million in the Village.
IIRC, she then quickly flipped it. It was, of course, huge and a duplex, it was also in the Village.
I laugh at these outrageous prices. A close friend bought a loft for $40,000 on Prince in the early 80s! Another paid $30,000 in the same area.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||08/30/2013|
The facade of the building looks like it could be at home on the fake New York set used in Friends.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||08/31/2013|
[quote]but his new craptastic Friends money vanity project sandwiched between the other buildings is jarring to the eye, much moreso than the balanced visual aspect of what was there before, shabby as it was
New buildings are always jarring to the eye. I'm in favor of preservation but the old building was unremarkable and the new one is respectful of its context.
The complaints are just resentment.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||08/31/2013|
hes the "ugly naked guy" of the East Village
|by Anonymous||reply 50||08/31/2013|
If I had that kind of money I'd live in West Village, not East Village.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||08/31/2013|
[quote]He OWNED the effin' building. He can do whatever the hell he wants to with his own personal property. Where do people get off telling him what to do with his own house?
That's not how things work in New York or most other old cities. There are laws preserving landmarks and landmark districts. However, this building was not protected and it was not protected for good reason. It's ordinary. Ugly and rundown.
And for those whining about the facade--Is the new building really so much worse than the one to its right? It's not even very different, especially when you realize the other building is also made of brick that someone painted red.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||08/31/2013|
I think he's very sexy. I wish he'd ditch his "wife" and marry me instead.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||08/31/2013|
One thing he did do is direct an amazing movie called "Trust," about a teen girl whose life is destroyed after an encounter with an online predator. Clive Owen, Maria Bello, and DL Fave Viola Davis also star.
It's a very good movie. Available on Netflix streaming. I was shocked when I found out David Schwimmer directed it.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||09/01/2013|
I don't think it looks bad at all. If I had the money I would have torn it down too.. Lord knows what was in those walls.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||09/01/2013|
People love to spend other people's money. His property, his money, he can do as he likes.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||09/01/2013|
[quote] People love to spend other people's money. His property, his money, he can do as he likes.
Actually in most of New York City's more desirable and expensive neighborhoods it does not work that way.
Strict landmark laws govern aesthetics. Try tearing down a brownstone in a landmarked area of the West Village or the Upper East Side.
He could tear down this building because that location has no laws preventing it.
But "His property, his money, he can do as he likes" does not always apply
|by Anonymous||reply 57||09/01/2013|
One kid tagged a wall and it rates an article on HorsePo? Sad. Just sad.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||09/01/2013|
He lost his looks or whatever shred he had in the first place.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||09/01/2013|
Wasn't Schwimmer rumored to be the only cast member of the show who was an asshole in real life? I remember hearing when the six did their famous "solidarity" stand with the producers for more money, he was (allegedly) the only one who had to be convinced to go along because he didn't really want to be involved (his feeling being they should each make their own separate deals).
|by Anonymous||reply 60||09/01/2013|
"No one on Friends ever has to sniff a job again if they don't want to."
And yet they keep forcing themselves on the public. Making straight to Netflix films doesn't make a prestigious directing career. Don't even get me started on Aniston's "acting career". Aside from Leblanc, none of them have been able to find much success . And Leblanc is playing a fictionalized version of himself.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||09/01/2013|
Thanks for stating the obvious, r58.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||09/01/2013|
It wouldn't be his money if it were confiscated. There should at least be massive taxes on absurd, ant-social activities like paying huge amount for real estate. If you can afford to waste $10 million for a house, you should be able to pay another $10 million tax on the transaction.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||09/01/2013|
r36 is a Republican barbarian.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||09/01/2013|
We need a poll.
Who is more ridiculous: The private property rights nutcases. The preserve our mediocre architecture nutcases.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||09/01/2013|
The happy medium would have been keeping/renovating the facade and gutting the interior. As it is, he tore down something not so great and put up something even uglier.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||09/01/2013|
Just rude dumb-asses with too much time on their hands.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||09/01/2013|
Graffiti is so immature...
Haven't those losers heard of Molotov cocktails?
|by Anonymous||reply 68||09/01/2013|
Looks fine to me. The ones on either side are nothing special. There is a reason these blah homes aren't considered landmarks. Just because something is old doesn't mean it has to remain standing forever.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||09/01/2013|
r70 Was that a crack about John McCain?
|by Anonymous||reply 70||09/01/2013|
He'd just better not fill his new house with furniture from the Pottery Barn.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||09/01/2013|
The façade of the old building was UGLY. It was a broke down building. The new building is not that bad. It's boring but it blends with other boring buildings. Oh and not everyone who disagrees with those screaming about the sanctity of old, decrepit NYC buildings, is not a republican. We do still have personal freedom to spend our money as we like. Doesn't make us evil or repugs or whatever childish names you come up with.
There was no ordinance protecting the building so STFU!
and no I'm not DS or Ross or whatever before we get the tired ole "R73=DS publicist"
|by Anonymous||reply 72||09/01/2013|
[quote]Wasn't Schwimmer rumored to be the only cast member of the show who was an asshole in real life?
I've always read that Schwimmer is a jerk who has a very high opinion of himself. Not as bad as Edward Norton, mind you.
Does he intend to live in this building now that so many are pissed off and know where is? Might not be so wise to make himself a target.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||09/01/2013|
[quote]He'd just better not fill his new house with furniture from the Pottery Barn.
Yeah, but all will be forgiven if he buys his sheets at a flea market.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||09/01/2013|
"No way is he only 46."
I was thinking the same thing. "Friends" was aeons ago, and he didn't look young even back then. Forty-six...hah!
|by Anonymous||reply 75||09/01/2013|
R62 - " Aside from Leblanc, none of them have been able to find much success"
Jennifer is more successful than Matt.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||09/01/2013|
"Aside from Leblanc, none of them have been able to find much success"
"Jennifer is more successful than Matt."
I don't think either of you follow Lisa Kudrow's career very closely.
(And I'd say Courtney Cox is doing at least as well as Matt LeBlanc.)
|by Anonymous||reply 77||09/01/2013|
Lisa is doing well - btw, she will be joining Scandal - though not as well as Jennifer. Lisa is doing better than Matt.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||09/01/2013|
None of them have come close to duplicating Friends success.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||09/01/2013|
Matt has gotten rave reviews and several Emmy nominations for his show. For playing Matt LeBlanc.
Kudrow hasn't had a hit since the show ended.
Poor Jennifer finally got a mild box office hit. But her movie career has largely been a joke.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||09/01/2013|
Ask any teenager or a 70 year old woman who Jennifer Aniston is - they would know.
They probably would not know Matt LaBlanc.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||09/01/2013|
Kudrow does have two cult shows...the Webtherapy and the Valerie Cherish show. She doesn't give up, so it's only a matter of time before she gets something that has widespread support/appeal.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||09/01/2013|
He's ugly, so why shouldnt his dwelling be ugly as well.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||09/01/2013|
[quote]not everyone who disagrees with those screaming about the sanctity of old, decrepit NYC buildings, is not a republican.
What? not everyone who disagrees is not...
I have no idea what you are trying to say, R73.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||09/01/2013|
I'm neutral on the building. But I've worked with Schwimmer and he's a good guy. In fact he is the one who PUSHED for the unified Friends deal because that was the model he was used to at Lookingglass. He also gives a boatload of money to charity. His parents and sister are very progressive (incl. pro marriage equality) lawyers.
He married an idiot, however.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||09/01/2013|
Nothing worse than these new-wealth idiots coming in and destroying vintage NY property.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||09/01/2013|
Uh, Alex, I'll take things we've known for at least a decade?
|by Anonymous||reply 88||09/01/2013|
[quote] Poor Jennifer finally got a mild box office hit. But her movie career has largely been a joke.
I bet if we lined up all the actors who wold love to have Aniston's "joke" career starting in either LA or NYC the line would extend to flyover country.
I'm not in the business - but I think her career is called "being a working actor".
|by Anonymous||reply 89||09/01/2013|
R90 - Aniston is doing better than being a working actor. Lisa Kudrow is a working actor.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||09/01/2013|
In order of post-Friends success, I would rate them as follows:
1. Jennifer Aniston--inexplicably a movie star, in spite of the fact most people find her untalented and boring
2. Matt LeBlanc--not very talented but likable and has a show on cable
3. Courtney Cox-- not talented or likable and has a show on basic cable
4. Matthew Perry-- In spite of repeated failures on tv, he's had the most chances at success post Friends. People must want to see him on tv, to give him so many chances. He probably just hasn't found the right vehicle yet. Probably the most adored character on Friends.
5. Lisa Kudrow-- Easily the most talented and respected of the cast, but she hasn't had much luck post Friends. Even The Comeback, which was hilarious and she was brilliant in, should've been a hit but was cancelled after a season.
6. David Schwimmer-- He's done nothing of note after Friends. Supposedly, he's directed some movies, but nothing anyone has heard of.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||09/01/2013|
[quote]Didn't Jennifer Aniston buy an APARTMENT for 40 million in the Village. IIRC, she then quickly flipped it. It was, of course, huge and a duplex, it was also in the Village.
Wrong. Jennifer bought two one-bedroom units, one above the other in that Bing and Bing building at 299 West 12th, with a plan to combine them into a duplex. I imagine it was to have two bedrooms upstairs, and a large open plan living area and bath downstairs. The kitchen is quite small, and it likely would have been no larger than 2,000 square feet in total, and cost between 3-4 million dollars.
Hardly huge, or anywhere near 40 million bucks. She found the building and neighborhood lacking in privacy, and sold both uncombined units very soon after her purchase.
Not at all as you described.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||09/01/2013|
Matt was really good in Studio 60. Too bad the show ran off the rails.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||09/01/2013|
"She found the building and neighborhood lacking in privacy, and sold both uncombined units very soon after her purchase."
The rest of what you say I am sure is true but the real reason is nobody gave a shit she lived there.
Sarah Jessica Parker, Hillary Swank, Meryl Streep, Susan Sarandon and many others all reside, or have resided within blocks of Jennifer Aniston and essentially have their privacy.
Jennifer Aniston, who cannot maintain that level of tabloid coverage without SOME level of willing participation would LOATHE true privacy.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||09/01/2013|
[quote]Jennifer Aniston, who cannot maintain that level of tabloid coverage without SOME level of willing participation would LOATHE true privacy.
You mean like going out in public?
|by Anonymous||reply 95||09/01/2013|
I read the title of this thread as:
David Schwimmer Targeted With 'Diana Ross Is Not Cool' Graffiti
|by Anonymous||reply 96||09/02/2013|
I thought she bought the apartments under the ruse of wanting to "live" in New York to break out of her rut and try new experiences when it was just a reason to be near Theroux and steal him away from his live-in girlfriend. Obviously, it worked.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||09/02/2013|
He's at the US open watching Serena Williams play. so is Leo. They are sitting in the same section.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||09/03/2013|
[quote]1. Jennifer Aniston--inexplicably a movie star, in spite of the fact most people find her untalented and boring
[quote]The rest of what you say I am sure is true but the real reason is nobody gave a shit she lived there.
Like it or not, Jennifer Aniston is an A-list star, which is what most people in Hollywood really want. She earns millions per movie and is the only one of the six not living in the shadow of her Friends character.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||09/04/2013|
[quote]Wasn't Schwimmer rumored to be the only cast member of the show who was an asshole in real life?
No, he was the one that came up with the solidarity approach, and it worked.
[quote]Aside from Leblanc, none of them have been able to find much success
Transaltion: the only I care about, is the one I want to fuck.
[quote]None of them have come close to duplicating Friends success.
Very few do.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||09/04/2013|