Filed under: Romance, RumorMonger, Celebrities and Controversy, Remakes and Sequels

There are girls who make the waves in the media world because of their exploits (Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears), and then there are some special ones who just know how to keep gossip-fiends hooked with their strange vacation from reality. Jessica Simpson is one of those people. If you thought Blonde Ambition or Major Movie Star (as if) were laughable, get ready for this -- she wants to be the next Julia Roberts. Or, at least, follow in her footsteps a little and play a hooker.

Yes, dear Cinematical readers, Jessica Simpson wants to star in a remake of Pretty Woman. According to OK! Magazine's source, "She thinks this one's got 'hit' written all over it.' Her father Joe has been telling anyone who will listen that she's the next Julia." Yeah, so as her manager, he's got to talk her up, but there's a difference between being positive about your talent (for lack of a better word), and making ridiculous comparisons. I would ask if she's really that clueless, but after her television show, and her myriad of insane statements, I think that's clear. And, no, I'm not talking about the Heckerling sort of Clueless.

And here I thought Simpson taking on the role of Sandy for a Grease remake was bad ... but I'll hand the mic over to you. Would you like to see Miss Jessica as a Pretty Woman? Can you see her winning an Oscar one day? Have we all just somehow disregarded her amazing acting talents?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Site Announcements, Awards, Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom

I'd just like to take a moment of silence for Jamie Lynn Spears' future career in the entertainment industry ...

...

And now to the business: Today, Variety reports that the WGA will indeed picket outside the Golden Globes ceremony on January 13, assuming the strike is still going strong. SAG has not decided yet whether or not they will cross the picket lines, and are "seeking reaction from members who have been nominated before announcing its plans." There might, however, be rules as to where the WGA can picket -- meaning if they set up a few blocks from the theater, there might be another way into the theater that allows SAG members to not, technically, cross the picket lines. So it's still up in the air.

Yesterday, when the whole waiver news broke, a fellow Cinematical writer asked if Cinematical would "cross the picket lines" and live-blog the ceremony. For the past few years, we have live-blogged both the Globes and the Oscars, and have had a pretty good time doing it. The way I see it, my fat ass is at home, in front of the television, and so I'm not technically crossing any picket lines by live-blogging the Globes. I told this to our writer, and they replied: "So then we don't support the writers?" No, we support the strike coming to an end in a way where both parties are happy with the outcome. That's what we've always supported. Personally, I'm not a part of the WGA, or SAG, and so my only loyalty is to our readers. And if our readers want some delicious, humorous color commentary to go along with what will probably be another boring awards ceremony, then I have no problem providing that to them.

But I wanted to ask you folks first. Keep in mind, we're not asking whether the ceremony is worth live-blogging, because most of you will say it sucks anyway. That's a fact. I'm asking whether you think we should live-blog the ceremony considering the WGA will be picketing it? Would you be offended if we "crossed the picket lines?" (Note: Our decision will not be based solely on this poll, but I wanted to get a general opinion before making the final call.)

View Poll

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, New Releases, Celebrities and Controversy, Religious

What a surprise. Reuters has reported that The Vatican really doesn't like The Golden Compass. They're not the only ones, since this massive-budget film has been flopping around like a fish gasping for breath since it came out; however, they are the ones leading the religious charge. It's, obviously, not the film's cinematic shortcomings that are making waves, but rather, its religious commentary. This is the same content that was toned down by Chris Weitz in an attempt to make this a more palatable film to everyone -- as if they hadn't thought about the potential controversy when the project first came to be.

The Vatican newspaper, l'Osservatore Romano, has printed a long editorial ranting about the film, pretty much describing it as if it were an example of torture porn, rather than fantasy, calling it "the most anti-Christmas film possible," and that "when man tries to eliminate God from his horizon, everything is reduced, made sad, cold, and inhumane." These are the most religion-specific quotes coming out of Reuters' piece. The writer must be living one heck of a film-free life if this is not only the most anti-Christmas film made, but even possible! It's no surprise that they wouldn't be happy about the film, but statements like that just take the whole argument to a new level of ridiculous. It's one thing to comment on the aspects of a film that diverge from the church's beliefs. It's another to take exaggeration to new heights. Then again, we're in a world where one short peek at a nipple creates monumental fuss.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Casting, Celebrities and Controversy, Remakes and Sequels

By now, anyone who follows movie news on an even semi-regular basis knows about the lack of William Shatner in the next Star Trek movie. The original Captain Kirk has been all kinds of vocal about this fact, which recently led him to a spot on Cinematical's Lame in 2007 list. Now, even though production is well underway, Sci Fi Wire says that there's still a chance. It seems that Roberto Orci, the co-writer of the latest installment, says that the first Kirk could still get a spot in the film, but that it's less of a possibility. Considering the fact that it didn't sound like much of a possibility to begin with, aren't we talking about almost none from almost none?

Although Orci says that they're still trying to find a way, they've struggled with the Trek sticklers and how to deal with Kirk's death in Star Trek VII. Now things are further complicated by the writers' strike -- they can't make script changes until the whole thing is settled. To me, it seems like they're just trying to appease Shatner as much as possible, although I don't see why. The way everyone is talking, you'd think that they're trying to figure out how to write a vampire into an historic war drama or something.

If they want to have Shatner at least pop up, without being able to write it into the script, they could always have Kirk look in a mirror, or some reflective surface and see Shatner, and what Kirk will become. Back when they could still mess around with the script, it wouldn't have been hard for Spock to muse about what his life would be like had Kirk not died, or the Vulcan seeing the different crew members morphing into his once-friends. Or heck, even a daydream where he talks with an imagined Kirk about whatever his role is in the film. But the "possibility" will probably just sit there until the production is finished, and when the Enterprise zooms onto the big screen once again, it will be without Shat.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Documentary, Awards, New Releases, ThinkFilm, Celebrities and Controversy, Movie Marketing, Politics, Oscar Watch, Images

UPDATE: The Daily Variety story was incorrect; the MPAA actually rejected a trailer for Taxi to the Darkside, and not the poster. Here's the Variety clarification: "The MPAA did not approve a theatrical trailer for Alex Gibney's documentary "Taxi to the Dark Side" that contained scenes with nudity and images that the org deemed inappropriate for all audiences. ThinkFilm has not yet officially submitted the one-sheet art referenced in a Dec. 19 story, but Daily Variety failed to indicate that it was the trailer that was rejected and not the one-sheet artwork."

ThinkFilm is prepping an appeal to the MPAA, but this one doesn't concern a film's rating. It's about a poster. The poster art for Taxi to the Dark Side -- a documentary about the pattern of torture practice that is on the short list for Academy Award consideration -- is causing a stir due to its depiction of a hooded man being led by American soldiers. The original news photo was taken by photographer Shaun Schwarz, and had been censored before -- when the military erased it from Schwarz' camera. (He later retrieved it from his hard drive.) Variety is reporting that the MPAA has officially rejected the poster, and if ThinkFilm goes forward with the marketing, they could have their "R" rating revoked. Taxi to the Dark Side is due for release on January 11th.

An MPAA spokesman says "We treat all films the same. Ads will be seen by all audiences, including children. If the advertising is not suitable for all audiences it will not be approved by the advertising administration." Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room), the film's writer, producer, and director says, "Not permitting us to use an image of a hooded man that comes from a documentary photograph is censorship, pure and simple. Intentional or not, the MPAA's disapproval of the poster is a political act, undermining legitimate criticism of the Bush administration. I agree that the image is offensive; it's also real." I've got to side with Gibney on this one. This isn't horror movie imagery cooked up to sell tickets, this is really happening in the world today. And considering the explosive subject matter, I feel the poster is tastefully done. What do you guys think?

Permalink | Email this | Comments