July 30, 2008

Is Katie Ready for Broadway?


Few things in life are surprising any more. Pamela Anderson's latest marriage tanks. Not surprising. The Hogan family is spoiled, self-centered and incredibly vapid. Not surprising. Kim Kardashian gets a reality show and her ass wants its own SAG card. Not surprising. Katie Holmes on Broadway? Surprising.

Let's analyze. Katie Holmes is not known as a serious thespian. Her biggest role to date has been playing the amaaaaazing wifebot of Tom Cruise and she has struggled with that role. Prior to becoming Mrs. Cruise, her biggest gig to date was playing an attorney opposite Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne/Batman in Batman Begins, most definitely the highest grossing movie she's ever appeared in. Ms. Holmes couldn't pull that off. Rather than being the tough, determined and feisty lady that Wayne/Batman deservedly pines for, Holmes' Rachel is a meek little mouse that squeaks out her lines and acts about as indignant as a petulant child who is being sent to bed early. This is the civilian public service crusader who is going to clean up Gotham City? Would Superman have fallen head over heels for Lois Lane had she been a simpering little sally who would faint at the drop of a hat? (Speaking of which, Holmes' best scenes in the film were, in fact, the scenes where she was unconscious.)

Since grasping that gold ring of being Mrs. Cruise, Holmes has only signed on to one other project - - the questionable Mad Money. For her "comeback", Holmes was criticized by Wall Street Journal reviewer Joe Morganstern as being a painfully low point in the dismal movie and who "pops her eyes, scrunches her nose and shakes her booty in lieu of acting."

Surely such talents were not what attracted the producers of All My Sons. Surely it wasn't John Lithgow's ability to pop his eyes, scrunch his nose or shake his booty that garnered him the role. Mr. Lithgow (and Dianne Wiest and Patrick Wilson) earned their roles by sheer talent and proving themselves in other stage roles, or on the screen. In other words, they have paid their dues. In spades.

What has Katie Holmes done to earn the role of Ann? She hasn't proven she can carry a secondary part in a movie, much less on stage. How is she going to carry her part on stage, if she is continually the weakest link on film, a medium where scenes can be reshot until they are right? There are no reshoots on the stage. No director to yell "Cut!" because you sound meek or aren't emoting enough.

Let's be honest. Katie Holmes has no business being on the Broadway stage. She has been miscast in films before but this is more than just miscasting. This is utter stunt casting at its finest. The producers don't want Katie Holmes the Actress. They want Katie Holmes the Sideshow. They want the tabloid equivalent of the Loch Ness Monster, the Bigfoot. Katie Holmes has become that oddity. She may never have been a particularly adept actress, but she was young and she was cute and she didn't appear as genuinely weird as she does now, with her Scientology-loving hubby at her side, dragging her to and fro, looking nearly three times her age and as if she's in desperate need of a good nap and a big sandwich.

Should Holmes actually go through with this Broadway debut, and should she not break out the big guns of acting that she has yet to demonstrate, it may signal the end of her career. I, for one, don't think she has it in her. If she can't make me believe that she really and truly loves her husband and they have a real, genuine marriage, how is she going to make me believe she is Ann or anybody else? And she's acting opposite some serious thespians, not fellow teens on a soapy melodrama. Her audience isn't going to be squealing teenage girls, but subtly nuanced appreciators of the stage who aren't going to pay good money to gawk at Tom Cruise's current wife.

So you'd better bring all you've got, Ms. Holmes. Otherwise I think that Lithgow and Wiest will be eating you for lunch.

July 29, 2008

The Harpers: Sympathy or Scorn?

Photo Source: Crazy Days and Nights

If you watch Extreme Makeover, you probably remember the Harper family. (I personally don't watch the show because it invariably turns all viewers into emotional mushpots.) They were one of the first families to be blessed with a new house on the ABC show. And not just a better, passable version of the split level they had. They were gifted with a built-from-the-ground-up 4 bedroom with decorative rock walls, four fireplaces, a solarium, music room and 3 car garage. Most definitely the largest and nicest home in their Clayton County, Georgia neighborhood.

As is the case with Extreme Makeover, all the materials and labor were donated - - roughly to the tune of about $450,000. Not exactly chump change. Further, the builders' (Beazer Homes) employees and company partners also raised $250,000 in contributions for the Harper family, including scholarships for the three Harper children and home maintenance fees.

This is where it gets sticky. Ma and Pa Harper used that gifted home as collateral on a loan to start a construction business. The business failed, they couldn't repay the loan and now the home is in foreclosure. Their neighbors, many of whom donated their time and energies to help in building the new house, are furious. The local mayor feels the Harpers squandered all the community's hard work and he's furious.

On the one hand, the community (and the show) would have every reason to be upset. These people were gifted with a mini-mansion, a much nicer house than they started with, and no mortgage payment on top of it. They were also gifted with money to help them with home maintenance and scholarships for their children. Sure, maybe Mr. Harper wanted to start his own business but did he need a loan for $450,000? And would it have been more responsible to perhaps get a job at one of the many construction companies in the Atlanta area, versus trying to start a new company from scratch? Would it have been more responsible to safeguard and protect their only asset (the house) and maybe work for others, and save up enough money to at least start small?

On the other hand, should the Harpers be faulted for trying to better themselves? Yes, Mr. Harper could have gotten a job at Wal-Mart or McDonald's but he had a dream of owning his own business. The house was theirs, to do with what they chose. They were not given any stipulations on it.

Like I said, it's a sticky situation. As much as I admire anyone wanting to start their own business and control their own destiny, so to speak, I have to feel that when the only asset you have is one given to you out of charity and donations, and it is your house - - where you live - - you really shouldn't risk it. The Harpers were given $250,000 for various expenses. Why not use that? It still would have been a large amount of money to start a business with - - nevermind $450,000. My best guess is that the Harpers didn't want a small business, they wanted an empire and wanted to play with the big boys. And I hate to say it, but when you don't work and sweat to get what you own, you don't take care of it and respect it in the same way.

Sad situation all around. Sad for the many people (1,800) who contributed in various forms to give the Harpers a better home. Sad for Extreme Makeover, who may have problems now getting people to donate when something like this leaves a bad taste in the general public's mouth. Sad for the Harper children, who I hope still have their college funds intact. Sad for Mr. and Mrs. Harper, who allowed greed and the supposed quick buck to destroy what security they had. After all, before Extreme Makeover, they may have had a rundown house, but they still had a house. Now they have nothing.
Photo Source: Crazy Days and Nights

July 24, 2008

Is Pamela Anderson Broke?

Photo Source: DListed

First, it was being some magician's assistant in Vegas. Then the bargain basement sale of her cheesy furniture. Now she claims that while she and Tommy Lee are living under one roof, they aren't "together". Hmmm, might be news to Lee, who said last month that he and Anderson were together again, for the (fill in the blank)th time.

So is Anderson living with Lee because she's broke? (Meaning Hollywood broke, not normal people broke). It would make sense -- she probably had to pay Kid Rock to get out of that marriage and we all know she must have paid Rick Solomon to end that "blink and you'll miss it" marriage. Didn't she sleep with him to get out of a $250,000 poker debt?

My guess is that Lee and Anderson are living together, sleep with each other when they are both home and have the freedom to do other people at their leisure. Shouldn't be long before we hear of their (fill in the blank)th split.

Brooke Hogan Achieves New Level of Stupidity

Photo Source: DListed

She may not be all that into voting, but apparently she's considering stripping.

Mere days after this mental genius claimed that she didn't vote because it just wasn't her thing, and she didn't feel that our country should have a female president because women are too emotional and suffer from PMS, Playboy magazine has offered Brooke big bucks to appear in their magazine.

Not that I am a Playboy patron, but I wouldn't want to see Brooke Hogan naked if I was a man. She seriously looks like she would beat the shit out of you - -and that she might have been born male. She certainly looks more manly than her brother, Cry Baby.

And if Playboy knows what's good for them, they certainly won't attempt to interview her. My head hurts just thinking of her expounding on why women shouldn't be allowed in the White House. If we women are so emotional, Brooke, why not boycott us as well in the hospitals, police stations, fire stations, military, courthouses, schools . . . heck, the list goes on and on. After all, we are so emotional, God knows we couldn't make a clear and rational decision, like . . . oh, we're just not that into voting, or whether or not to take our clothes off publicly . . . to save our lives.

Maybe it's good this twit doesn't vote.

July 18, 2008

Cruise Press Release Suggestions for Week of July 14, 2008






1. The Dark Knight is going to fail without the epic talents of Katie Holmes. Just wait and see.



2. Real men wear heels, says Tom Cruise.



3. Tommy Girl turned down Edwin Salt. He's going to have a cameo on Eli Stone instead. Wait, scratch that.

4. Coming soon to a community college near you - - "How to Sabotage Your Career in Three Years or Less", presented by international superstah and laughingstock Tom Cruise.

July 17, 2008

Stunt Casting or Runt Casting?

Photo Source: JustJared
So someone actually hired Katie Holmes and not as an incredibly lifelike department store mannequin but in a cameo spot on TV's Eli Stone. Originally it was rumored that Little Lord Tommy Boy was making the appearance, but the stories were quickly corrected to reflect that it was his beleagured-wife who was clocking in.

Anyone who thinks that Katie was hired because of her gifted acting abilities, please take two steps forward and I'll be right with you while I gather the information on the Florida swampland I'm going to sell you.

For anyone who is scratching their head over why the Stone producers would hire someone like Katie Holmes, the answer is very simple. Publicity. Sure, they knew they were getting someone who can emote about as well as Paris Hilton. But they also knew they were getting someone as PR-worthy as Ms. Hilton. Katie Holmes' appearance on their show would (hopefully) help to boost lukewarm ratings on the series and the best part for them? It's a cameo part, so her presence is only temporary.

Meaning that Little Lord Tommy Boy's presence is also temporary. You didn't know? Of course Tommy Boy was there while his bought bot recited her lines. It's not like he has much else going on and calling People magazine to report his likely "casual" and "unplanned" "dropping by" on the set was probably a better idea than calling People to let them know he is still doing reshoots for the ultimately doomed Valkyrie.

So is this Mrs. Cruise's "return to television"? If so, it's a huge statement. Katie Holmes was supposed to be the next big "It" girl in films. Katie Holmes had supposedly graduated beyond television and shows like Dawson's Creek. Katie Holmes is due to make her debut on Broadway this fall.

But critics are already panning her casting, before she has even taken the stage. Reports out of New York are that ticket sale projects are dismal.

And what about Katie's last movies? Mad Money was a flop, financially and with Katie receiving negative reviews. Before that, we have to go back at least two years - - Thank You For Smoking was well done, but Katie's role was minimal and she was obviously sorely miscast in the part. Her last "big" movie was Batman Begins and without a doubt, she was the weakest link in a strong film.

The Dark Knight opens this weekend, minus Katie (who claims to have chosen the limp Mad Money over the proven franchise). Coincidence that this week Katie is filming a guest spot on t.v.?

July 16, 2008

No Mercy

Photo: www.sharon-tate.org

Somehow I managed to miss this story when it first broke, maybe a month or so ago. In a way, I'm glad that I did because I would have just spent 4+ weeks angry at the justice system and badmouthing the California Parole Board.

Last month, Manson Family follower and coldblooded, vicious murderer Susan Atkins revealed she had brain cancer and possibly six months, at most, to live. She applied to the California Parole Board for Compassionate Release Consideration, hoping to spend her final months of life in the free world and with her family.

When I first read this, I didn't know whether to laugh, get angry or even cry. Helter Skelter was the first true crime book I ever read, at age 11, and the story has always stuck with me. I believe this case, and this case alone, led me to studying psychology and, in particular, the deviant mind. Imagining the sheer terror and torture Atkins and fellow Family members put their victims through still chills me to this day. The senselessness of the killings is as mind numbing today as it must have been in 1969.

Atkins, and her fellow murderers, really dodged a bullet back in the early 70s when California ruled the death penalty unconstitutional and commuted their sentences to life in prison. Their victims didn't get a commuted sentence.

The American public has been forced to listen to Charles Manson's insane ramblings for nearly 40 years, along with stories about upcoming parole hearings of his followers. Each of them have been denied all these years, and rightfully so. Life in prison should mean just that - - life in prison. They didn't steal money, they didn't run a red light. They snuffed out human life. That can never, never been rectified.

Now Susan Atkins, the individual who personally told the nine-months pregnant Sharon Tate "Look bitch, I have no mercy for you" after Ms. Tate begged for her unborn child's life, is asking for mercy. Atkins, the individual who personally stabbed Ms. Tate to death, is asking for mercy. Atkins, the individual who not only wrote the word "pig" in Ms. Tate's blood on her front door, but also tasted it, is asking for mercy. Atkins, the individual who claimed to actually experience a sexual orgasm upon killing Ms. Tate, is asking for mercy.

In the nearly forty years since the gruesome killings, in the nearly forty years since Atkins has been incarcerated, never once has she expressed remorse, sorrow, grief or understanding over her actions. Never once has she admitted she was wrong. Never once has she apologized to the families of her victims.

I feel a small amount of sympathy for Atkins' family. They didn't ask for this. But that tiny bit of sympathy is overshadowed by my feelings of sorrow, pain and anger for the victims. Atkins has had nearly 40 years of life they haven't had. Sharon Tate's unborn child never got to take a first breath; he died where he was conceived, in his mother's womb. Atkins' victims never got the chance to knowingly spend their last months of life with their families. They never got to say goodbye. And they never got to argue their case in a California courtroom. Atkins, among others, decided their fate with indiscriminate thrusts of a knife.

So does Atkins, an individual who has no sense of what the word "compassion" truly means, deserving of our mercy?

Absolutely not. And the California Parole Board agreed, denying Atkins' application. The Los Angeles County District Attorney, Steve Cooley, argued against it, saying, "[Atkins] has failed to demonstrate genuine remorse and lacks insight and understanding of the gravity of her crimes."

Amen to that. I don't wish pain and suffering on anyone, but if Atkins is dying, she is dying right where she should be. Behind bars.

Hopefully this will give the victims' surviving family members some peace and perhaps a bit of closure.

This is where the focus should be: on the victims, not the killer
Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/eddyroy/2316997340/

July 11, 2008

Cruise Press Release Suggestions for Week of July 7, 2008

Photo: Defamer

1. Tommy Girl to have back fat sucked out


2. Tommy Girl learning to belly dance for Davey


3. Tommy Girl saves family from firecracker tragedy before saving hiker from certain bear attack in woods


4. Katie ate a mint


5. Tommy Girl and "his" family sent Nicole a trendy and expensive gift basket



Let's see. Numbers 1 and 2 were probably deemed too personal. Number 3 is more appropriate when Valkyrie is released (it's the Hail Mary kind of PR). Number 4 isn't about Tommy Girl. That leaves Number 5.


We have a winner!

July 8, 2008

Welcome Sunday Rose Kidman Urban!

Photo Source: Celebitchy

Just in time to steal the thunder from TomKat's July Fourth outing, Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban welcomed their first child, daughter Sunday Rose Kidman Urban, born in Nashville in the early hours of Monday, July 7.


I will admit that my first thought upon hearing the newest Urban's name was "What the eff?" but Sunday has grown on me and I do think it's very pretty with Rose.


Congratulations to the Urbans and I hope we see little Sunday soon.

Like a Rhinestone Cowgirl

Photo Source: JustJared
Like clockwork, the gayest little elf in all the land came out to celebrate the birth of our nation and, ostensibly, to look for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow (sorry, Tommy, Becks wasn't in town last weekend).

I say like clockwork because the Cruiseazies have been uncomfortably absent and quiet as of late - - and last week, Tommy's bought-bot got some typical bad press. This time about tickets for "her" Broadway show not selling. Why pay $125 for theater tickets when you can rent "Galaxina" or "The Stepford Wives" for $4 at Blockbuster?

Is Tommy auditioning for "Brokeback Mountain 2"? What's with the cowboy hat? I guess he's trying to look more "of the people" (and add a good 3 inches onto his short stature) but I know he was just dying to add some sparkles, sequins and feathers to that hat. Oh well, what's a good gay to do but put on some Mom jeans and drag his beard along? (Speaking of which, Tommy, you may want to lay off the Twinkies and Ho-Hos - - you're looking a little thick around the midsection).

Suri is festive enough with the July 4th headband, but could they not wipe her mouth? And why is she showing about as much excitement as her mother does on a daily basis? Obviously Katie forgot to plug Suri in the night before and recharge her. You know what that means - - more auditing and maybe the cans for Katie.
Speaking of Katie, how bad does she look? Is Tommy trying to turn her into a man? (It's working.) Is she auditioning for the role of the horse in "Brokeback Mountain 2"? Questions, questions.

July 1, 2008

Hobag Meet Kettle

Photo: Celebitchy

I actually cracked up when reading this story. Pamela Anderson called Jessica Simpson a "whore" and a "bitch" on Australian radio, while waiting to go into that country's version of the Big Brother house.


What brought on such vitriol? Apparently the "Real Girls Eat Meat" t-shirt that Simpson was spotted wearing recently. Anderson, a fervent PETA supporter, as well as fervent leather Hermes bag lover, found the support of eating meat repulsive and rather than literately suggesting that practicing vegetarianism might be a better alternative, lashed out at her younger blond doppelganger. Pammy also added an addendum "I don't know whether she was talking about food or men."


Well, Pam would know.

Why do I find this so funny? Well, because attacking Jessica Simpson is like kicking a puppy. The girl seems utterly neurologically defenseless. Not that Anderson would be a likely MENSA member, but after being briefly married to Kid "Waffle House" Rock, I think she can hold her own.



And Anderson seems highly, highly hypocritical in crucifying Simpson for what she may consider cruelty to animals, when apparently it's perfectly okay to slaughter a cow in order to have an overpriced, high-end, fugly bag. I suppose this falls under the Celebrity Exception Rule, or the "do as I say, not as I do".



In any event, since Anderson marries men with the rapidity that most of us replace our toilet paper rolls, and since her last husband was the winner that filmed the sex tape with Paris Hilton, and assuming that she had sexual relations with said husband, it would be fairly accurate to estimate that by association, she has pretty much had sex with everyone in Hollywood. So to call Jessica Simpson, who has probably only had sex with half of the male population of Hollywood, a whore is ingenious.



I think her attack has more to do with sour grapes than any real concern for the animals. If Anderson is so concerned about the treatment of animals, why isn't she lobbying for the adorable white seals, like even that despicable Heather Mills does? I think Anderson is more concerned with staying relevant and worried that someone younger, blonder and prettier, like Simpson, is replacing her.

Psychotic Review: Hollywood Car Wash by Lori Culwell



Having just returned from a beach vacation, I needed to read something that was fun, frivolous and light. "Hollywood Car Wash" was just the ticket.

Written by Lori Culwell after living in Los Angeles and hearing a multitude of stories from her friends in the industry, "Wash" is the story of college student Amy Spencer, who is plucked out of anonymity at age 19, to helm a new WB/CW-type teen soap, as the lead "Autumn". At first thrilled at the opportunity, the money and riches, the connections and the spectacular freebies and perks she gets, she quickly begins to sour on the lifestyle when, in rapid succession, she is given a name change (Amy Spencer is too Midwestern; Star Spencer is much more Hollywood); told she needs to lose 20 pounds, as everyone who is anyone in Hollywood is a size zero; given pills to help facilitate a rapid weight loss; sent for colonic cleanses; encouraged to diet unhealthily; had her hair bleached and extended; had her teeth surgically removed so that veneers can be put in; had her nose "modified", her tummy tucked, and her cheekbones filled out. She also finds out that dating Hollywood's biggest action star, with the assistance of a contract, is not everything it's cracked up to be.

I'll admit that I only picked up this book because of the rumors last summer and fall that the lead character was loosely based on Katie Holmes, complete with an arranged hookup with a renowned major Hollywood player. And I'll also admit that I could easily mentally imagine Katie Holmes herself when reading "Wash". At least the portions of the book where it didn't discuss that character Amy/Star was actually very talented and wanted more out of her career than just fame and notoriety. Reading about Amy/Star's delight over shopping and the many perks she received, along with the celebrities she got to meet, gave me a firm mental picture of Katie Holmes, squeeing over meeting David Beckham and taking possession of Tom Cruise's black AmEx card.

That being said, "Wash" is a light and fluffy read, clocking in at 248 pages, making it neither too taxing mentally or taking up too much weight in your beach bag.

Rumored to be first in a series, I look forward to Ms. Culwell's future efforts and recommend "Wash" as the perfect beach read.

Back from Vacation!


Yes, I was off on vacay without warning. Such is life.

Now I am back and ready to get back into the down and dirty celebrity gossip.

However, I did think, while I was relaxing on the beach . . . many celebs live this way. Not like once a year, during the summer. It seems there are a handful of celebs that are always on vacation. Vacation from what, I truly have no idea. Sure, they shoot one movie, maybe two, a year. Most shooting is done anywhere between 6 and 12 weeks. Usually they take a "much needed vacation" after shooting is completed. That is, if they don't require a rehab stay during shooting. At most, many of these celebs work about 24 weeks out of the year - - compared to 49-50 weeks that most of us put in (depending on how much vacation time we get). We don't do a job for 6-12 weeks and then get a "much needed" vacation. We don't get paid obscene amounts of money for that 6-12 week job. Many of us live paycheck to paycheck. Many of us struggle with how we're going to pay that unexpected vet bill or repair the car, and spend months saving just so that we can take a vacation during the summer.

And yet some celebrities do one job, one lousy job, that doesn't even require Monday thru Friday, 49-50 weeks out of the year, and they need to relax and clear their heads?

Ugh.