This is a match made in the proverbial heaven or, really, hell (whichever one sounds more exciting): David Fincher and James Ellroy.

 

The two bonded over their mutual understanding of dark obsession after Ellroy, impressed by Fincher's upcoming film (which I cannot wait to see), went to visit the director as a fan. Roman noir master Ellroy clearly has got good taste. And with "Fight Club" Fincher is just downright brilliant. So put the two together and you're going to have one hell of an LA Times interview.

 

Here's a highlight:

 

"Fincher and Ellroy know each other slightly, because at one point Fincher was going to direct the screen adaptation of Ellroy's 'Dahlia' book. He wanted to make a five-hour, $80-million miniseries with movie stars — and when that fell through, he turned to 'Zodiac,' which dealt with similar themes. They met up recently at Fincher's Modernist Hollywood office — Ellroy came along primarily because he is such a fan of Fincher's movie, which lands in theaters Friday. The conversation turns and returns to what binds the two — a mutual interest in obsession and the destruction it leaves behind. Still, given the nature of their temperaments, the author offers a distinctly more visceral take and the director a more analytical one.

"For Ellroy, who has grown to hate the helter-skelter pace of so many testosterone movies, the film vividly re-creates what he experienced when he teamed with retired Sheriff's Deputy Bill Stoner to reinvestigate his mother's death. 'It was read files, talk, engage in interviews that went nowhere. The entire year fueled by what is the great dramatic tension of this motion picture; which was two hours and 38 minutes long; it is almost entirely conversation, discussion, rediscussion, reassertion, and it's a wholly tense, kinetic filmgoing experience. I've never seen a film that so gloriously and intelligently captures their lives and what homicide work is.'

"'When you talk about obsession, you have to talk about the toll,' says Fincher. 'Toll is not something you can explain. It's something you have to feel. Can you make a movie — will you ever set out to make a movie where people's necks hurt? I will, I like that.'"

 

Read the entire piece here. And can you imagine "The Black Dahlia" mini-series directed by Fincher? I'm glad it eventually led to "Zodiac" but that is something I would like to have seen.

 

 

The LA Times looks at ten celebrities who have achieved some major successes outside of Hollywood. The list is a mixture of currently moonlighting celebs, like Jamie Lee Curtis, actress and diaper innovator, with more classic cases like the obvious--Ronald Reagan, ex-actor and President of the United States. (Did I just have to write that Ronald Reagan was once the President of the United States?). 

 

Anyway, you'll also learn that: 

 

Danica McKellar is:

 

"Actress AND Mathematician. We know her best as Winnie Cooper, the dark-haired love of Fred Savage’s life on TV’s 'The Wonder Years.' People who study physics probably know her as Winnie Cooper, but they might also know her as the coauthor of a scientific paper that proves a theorem that has come to be known as the Chayes-McKellar-Winn Theorem."

 

And...

 

Hedy Lamarr was:

 

"Actress AND Military Intelligence Whiz. On the big screen, she exploited her exotic beauty in Cecil B. DeMille's 'Samson and Delilah' and 'Ziegfield Girl,' but, with composer George Antheil, exploited her brain power to develop a communications device that thwarted an enemy’s ability to detect or jam radio-guided torpedoes. They patented the technology in 1942, but it wasn’t used by the U.S. military until 1962 during the Cuba blockade."

 

Check out the entire list at The LA Times.

 

 

 

So I wasn't the biggest fan of "Dreamgirls." And I was quite vocal about it. But here I go again, feeling sorry for the cast and their traumatic night at the Oscars. First it was Eddie Murphy, who stormed out after he lost his much favored Best Supporting Actor statue to Alan Arkin.

 

Now, it's winner Jennifer Hudson who seems to have been the victim of some catty fashion fit.

 

This is total gossip so I apologize in advance but...I believe it. I didn't think Ms. Hudson would have picked out that Gary Glitter, silver bolero jacket, brown pocketed Oscar number either:

 

"An editor of US fashion magazine Vogue is being blamed for Jennifer Hudson's widely criticized ensemble on the Oscars red carpet on Sunday. Andre Leon Talley guided the new star through the awards season, helping style her for her major appearances after the success of 'Dreamgirls.' Hudson wore a brown Oscar De La Renta gown for the Academy Awards ceremony and added a metallic gold bolero jacket to walk the red carpet. But the star was slammed for her appearance and admitted on morning show Today that she would have selected a different outfit. A source tells PageSix.com, 'Jennifer was kind of sponsored by Talley and Vogue. Andre insisted she wear that hideous Oscar De La Renta dress with the awful, awful gold python bolero. Jennifer really didn't want to, and so (celebrity stylist) Jessica Paster got her a beautiful gold Roberto Cavalli (gown) custom-made. But when Andre found out, he went ballistic. Moments before she left for the show, there was a power struggle and Jennifer ended up putting his outfit on.' Although she didn't score on the red carpet, Hudson did take home the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress."

 

It's not a tragedy, no. And as we all know, Jennifer was a winner. But if this story is true, she has to be kind of scared and insecure and still filled with an "American Idol" make-me-over mentality.  I mean, who does this Talley person think he is (other than a fashion editor at Vogue)? What gives him the right to bully an Oscar nominated actress? And you know the Roberto Cavalli gown was stunning. I was going to say someone's watched "The Devil Wears Prada" one too many times but really, someone's been watching too much "Ugly Betty"--and believing all the ludicrous plot lines.

 

 

 

 

Alright Trekkies--be prepared to flip out at warp speed.

 

Paramount has, yes, made it so:

 

"'Star Trek,' one of the most popular and successful franchises in the history of movies and television, returns to the big screen under the creative vision of J.J. Abrams, the force behind 'Lost,' 'Alias' and 'Mission: Impossible III' for Paramount Pictures. The team behind the film will include Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci ('Mission: Impossible III') who wrote the screenplay and will executive produce with Bryan Burk. J.J. Abrams and 'Lost' co-creator Damon Lindelof will produce. The film will begin shooting this fall for a Christmas Day 2008 release.

 

"One of the most popular film and television franchises of all time, 'Star Trek' has encompassed 726 total episodes for television in six different series, beginning with the original 1966-1969 series created by Gene Roddenberry. The 10 'Star Trek' films have grossed in excess of $1 billion at the worldwide box office. The original characters have been named among the 50 greatest TV characters of all time and the Enterprise has lent its name to two proposed spacecrafts.

 

"'If there's something I'm dying to see, it's the brilliance and optimism of Roddenberry's world brought back to the big screen,' said Abrams. 'Alex and Bob wrote an amazing script that embraces and respects 'Trek' canon, but charts its own course. Our goal is to make a picture for everyone -- life-long fans and the uninitiated. Needless to say, I am honored and excited to be part of this next chapter of 'Star Trek.'' Brad Grey, chairman and CEO, Paramount Pictures, said, 'We could not be more thrilled to be back in business with J.J. Abrams. The revival of the 'Star Trek' franchise is an important part of Paramount's turnaround.'"

 

I'm no Trekkie, but I do like some of the old school "Star Trek" episodes which means I'm, naturally, a fan of Shatner. If they can't find some love for Shatner here then I might not go. Oh...what am I kidding. Of course I'll be there.

 

Thanks for the news ComingSoon.

 

 

 

Looks like Leonardo DiCaprio and new Oscar winner William Monahan will be reteaming for another Hong Kong cinema re-make.

 

According to The Hollywood Reporter:

 

"[A] thriller titled 'Confessions of Pain...'follows two close friends, one a police detective and the other a private detective, who team to investigate the murder of the cop's father-in-law. As the investigation proceeds, they uncover evidence that shows that nothing is as it appears.

The original, released last year, was created by Alan Mak, Andrew Lau and Felix Chong, the team behind 'Infernal Affairs,' the Hong Kong film on which Oscar winner 'Departed' was based. MediaAsia produced and financed both movies. 'Pain' is being developed as a starring vehicle for DiCaprio, who will produce via his Appian Way banner along with Vertigo's Roy Lee and Doug Davison. Monahan, who won the Academy Award for best adapted screenplay for writing 'Departed,' will adapt 'Pain' and executive produce."

 

I don't have much to say except...I hope this trend doesn't become like the J-Horror re-make frenzy after the success of "The Ring." We don't need the action thriller equivalent to "Pulse." We just don't.

 

--posted by Kim
 

 

A lot of writers are criticizing Eddie Murphy for his reported behavour after losing out on the Best Supporting Actor Award at the Oscars but I'm not one of them.

 

From IMDB:

 

"'Dreamgirls' star Eddie Murphy was so devastated after losing the Best Supporting Actor Academy Award to Alan Arkin he stormed out of the ceremony, according to press reports in the US, including Roger Friedman of FoxNews.com. Murphy was the favorite to win the Oscar, which instead was awarded to 'Little Miss Sunshine' star Arkin. The 45-year-old tried to downplay his disappointment telling American publication Us Weekly, 'It's fine. It happens. It's OK.' But shortly thereafter, Murphy and girlfriend Tracey Edmonds left the show and didn't return. Murphy missed out on his 'Dreamgirls' cast mates Beyonce Knowles, Jennifer Hudson and Anika Noni Rose performing songs from the film, as well as Hudson's win for Best Supporting Actress."

 

I feel sorry for him. I've joked about "Norbit" ruining his chances at the Oscar but I actually thought the Academy wouldn't hold it against him. If they did, that's just unfair and wrong. And though I was happy with the belated Alan Arkin win, I do think Murphy is a major talent whose been choosing his roles unwisely for a long time. The exception was "Dreamgirls" and (for me anyway), he gave the film's best performance. 

 

So he stormed out. Maybe he just could not endure it. It probably meant a lot to him. He's human.

 

Was it just me or did Nicole Kidman look like an extra tall Christmas present at this year's Oscars? Not that an extra tall Christmas present is a bad thing necessarly but...it just wasn't working for me.

 

But I don't have the strength to go over every outfit from last night's show so, here's the AP report on red carpet fashion which claims "bold strokes" ruled the evening. And here's the tireless gals at Go Fug Yourself with their usually catty, biting report.

 

Check out their take of Anne Hathaway's frock:

 

"It is as if one of Sarah Ferguson's famed hair-bows from the late 1980s went rogue from her storage trunks and attacked Anne on the red carpet, resulting in a giant Dark Mark of Shame that's tagging her for impending doom. What's more, it's hitting her body where the dress is the least flattering to it, and all I can think of is, 'Surely SOMEONE could have loaned her a body-shaper.' Don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled she walks among the living -- the normal, flesh-carrying ladies of the world -- but, honey, there's no shame in getting a little help under your lace-curtain gown. And with a massive, angry black bow dragging your chest down to your navel, you need all the extra help you can get."

 

Read the rest (and Sally Kirkland too!) here.

 

 

 

When it came to tone, timing, presentation and theme, this year's Oscars were all over the place. A mess, really. Look at it. A gospel choir? Shadow dancers? Green power? Celine Dion singing Ennio Morricone? Jennifer Hudson anywhere within the vicinity of Peter O'Toole? The show needed one of those signs that Travis Bickle swore he was going to buy in "Taxi Driver": "One of these days I gotta get myself organizized."

 

But the jumbled feeling wasn't a bad experience entirely. In fact, there was plenty to like and downright love during this year's weirdly muddled telecast. Oscar host Ellen DeGeneres, though beginning the show with an uninspired and overly safe monologue (we get it, Academy: You didn't want another Chris Rock or Jon Stewart), somewhat redeemed herself through the rest of the affair with her casual humor and in-audience joshing. "Babel," "Pan's Labyrinth" and "The Queen" all up for major awards, gave international cinema the props it so richly deserves. Icons like Peter O'Toole, Alan Arkin, Clint Eastwood, Ennio Morricone and Martin Scorsese reminded us that, yep, these guys still know what they are doing. Still. And some long overdue wins (Arkin and Scorsese specifically) had us teary-eyed and literally cheering from our couches.

 

Sure, there was a decided lack of razzamatazz: The show's down-to-earth, de-glammed and for-the-common-people efforts deflated the sizzle and enchantment we expect from the Oscars. But there were still many memorable highs and lows. We're here to celebrate them.

 

Read what my choices are for best and worst (including Jack Nicholson's bald noggin) here.

 

 

 

Right on Marty! And I'm going to call him Marty...for now. But finally (finally!) one of my favorite directors of all time nabbed himself an Academy Award.

 

Even the Associated Press is stoked:

 

"Martin Scorsese's mob epic 'The Departed' won best picture at the Academy Awards on Sunday and earned the filmmaker the directing prize that had eluded him throughout his illustrious career. 'Could you double-check the envelope?' said Scorsese, who had been the greatest living American filmmaker without an Oscar. He also had never delivered a best-picture winner before, despite crafting such modern masterpieces as 'Raging Bull' and 'Goodfellas.'"

 

I will happily admit I cheered. Congratulations Mr. Scorsese.

 

 

In terms of Oscar, I've been predicting away. Jennifer Hudson, Eddie Murphy, Helen Mirren, Forest Whitaker etc. and so on and you know the drill.

 

But who do I want to win this Sunday night? To me, that's more important.

 

Here's my picks (from my Fandango column):

 

"Best Supporting Actress: I simply have to choose who I thought gave the greatest performance and that's the great Cate Blanchett in 'Notes on a Scandal.' She was vulnerable, just a little creepy, likable and irritating all at once—exactly how her character was written in the book. I always think those little touches are the toughest to convey.

 

"Cate's talent leads me to the Best Actress category where (sorry, 'Queen' fans!) I'd like to see Judi Dench reign victorious as Cate's friend/nemesis in 'Notes.' I've seen many actors and actresses play royalty, but bizarre, bitter spinsters who scheme and plot and whom you end up weirdly liking/pitying in the process? No, I rarely see characters as nuanced and interesting as that on screen. Dench is absolutely brilliant.

 

"Best Actor proves tough for me. First off, everyone nominated was so great that it's nearly impossible to compare their varied and intriguing performances. But I'm mostly torn between Forrest Whitaker in 'The Last King of Scotland' and Peter O' Toole in 'Venus.' Part of me feels that O'Toole could act his Venus role in his sleep, but that's the absolute beauty of him, he's so effortless and wonderful and for God's sake why hasn't he been rewarded for that yet? OK, so I'm going with O'Toole.

 

"Best Supporting Actor is easy and I've been quite vocal about him—Mark Wahlberg. I revere Alan Arkin and would love to see him amble up to the podium, but in terms of who impressed me the most (and made me laugh)—Wahlberg all the way.

 

"So gee, I wonder who I'm hoping for Best Director? Do I need to discuss Scorsese again? I'm beginning to sound like a fanatic. So conventional wisdom (what is that?) would lead me to 'The Departed' for Best Picture. It better win. It just better. Do I need to  pull out  further 'Taxi Driver' references?"

 

You can read all my thoughts regarding this matter here. And read more of my Martin Scorsese better effing win for "The Departed" obsession here.

 

And check out MSN's round-up of Oscar coverage here. Stay tuned for my coverage of the telecast.

 

And let's all put on our wishing caps to summon a Best Picture win for "The Departed."

 

OK, so Berry Gordy is fine with this but you know Diana Ross will never let it go.

 

From IMDB:

 

"Legendary record label Motown has received a public apology from the makers of Academy Award nominated musical 'Dreamgirls,' in two advertisements which stress the film is 'fictional.' Movie studio DreamWorks placed the full-page ads in trade papers Daily Variety and The Hollywood Reporter and apologized to Motown boss Berry Gordy for 'any confusion.' Motown and some of its artists, including Smokey Robinson, had complained Dreamgirls negatively misrepresented the soul label, while many saw the movie as thinly-veiled reconstruction of the career of Motown group The Supremes. The ad reads: 'Dreamgirls is a work of fiction. It is also an homage to Motown. For any confusion that has resulted from our fictional work, we apologize to Mr. Gordy and all of the incredible people who were part of that great legacy. It is vital that the public understand that the real Motown story has yet to be told.'

 

"A satisfied Gordy says, 'I applaud DreamWorks and (parent company) Paramount Pictures for doing their part to clearly differentiate the fictional movie 'Dreamgirls' from the real Motown. I wish them all the best in the forthcoming Academy Awards.' 'Dreamgirls' has been nominated for eight Oscars including Best Supporting Actor and Best Supporting Actress for Eddie Murphy and Jennifer Hudson respectively."

 

Uh, right. Diana Ross was not "confused." Miss Ross is never confused. Unless she's been driving.    

 

 

 

Generally, I can't stand it when people discuss how superior TV is to movies. I've heard it all before and it's never fair. More intricate plot lines, better developed characters, top notch tension, blah, blah, blah. I'm so sick of it that I now just shake my head and say: "You're right. You can't cover the first two seasons of 'Lost' in under 120 minutes. You don't have a week between movies to see if Desmond is actually psychic or Jack's going to operate on that head of the Others. Totally."

 

If I don't simply agree, I'll end like my Shakespeare Professor in college who gave half of our class "F's" for exceeding the three page essay limit.  Throwing the five, six and eight page essays in student's faces he hollered: "You're perverting the three page form! It's easy to yammer on and on and on! Make your damn point!"

 

Anyway, this is the first essay celebrating TV over movies that kind of (kind of) makes me not want to scream at the person writing it.

 

According to Newsweek's Devin Gordon:

 

"It's dangerous to make broad generalizations about TV versus film without sounding as though you're comparing apples and tubas, but let's do it anyway: television is running circles around the movies. The Internet age has put both industries into a state of high anxiety, with everyone scrambling to figure out how money will be made in a digital future where people watch movies on their phones and surf the Web on their TVs. But while the major film studios have responded by taking shelter beneath big-tent franchises, the TV industry has gone the opposite route, welcoming anyone with an original idea. The roster of channels has ballooned into the hundreds, creating a niche universe where shows don't need to be dumbed down in order to survive (because the dummies have their own channels)."

 

Good point. Though the essay is four pages long.

 

 

Another day another list. Here's Premiere's "15 Greatest Scary Flicks Ever Re-made." At first I was confused by their write-up on the 2005 version of "The Fog":

 

"John Carpenter's films have gotten the remake treatment before, yet never has one been so egregious as 'The Fog,' a film that can accurately described as truly terrifying, only in the sense that someone thought to finance it. What was once a creepy, atmospheric ghost story filled with a cast of grizzled character actors somehow became a teen slasher film that made Selma Blair appear as the cast's elder statesman and left one to wish that the fog over Antonio Bay would just blow away."

 

As it doesn't sound so great--and it wasn't. But then I noticed that the headline for the 15 scariest "flicks" (I hate that word. Movies, people. Movies!) ended with a question mark. Pretty sneaky Sis.

 

 

"A wise man once said, 'We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives.' (Thank you, Criswell.) And although it's impossible to harness our precognitive powers to see everything that will happen in the weeks and months to come, there are a few things we can hazard a guess or three at: who will be the next celebrity to have a public racist rant or enter rehab; what TV show or amusement-park ride will be adapted into the next big-budget blockbuster (our money is on 'The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis,' starring Freddie Prinze Jr.); and, of course, which films and actors are walking away with this year's Oscars."

 

Continue reading David Fear's Oscar predictions here. And I'll offer my predictions and hopes tomorrow.

 

 

Watch how "The Number 23" became an obsession for director Joel Schumacher and how ComingSoon's reporter Heath Nugen's boots became an obsession for her. She recently bought her boots in London and according to Nugen: "I just saw them and I just fell in love!" Her footware have nothing to do with the film (starring Jim Carrey, Danny Huston and Virginia Madsen) but they provide "fun" and as Schumacher says "seexxy" decoration to the requisite junket Q&A.

 

But it would have been so much more interesting had she purchased her boots at Payless Shoe Source or she snagged them from Saks without paying but, you know, we're not dealing with a character from a John Waters movie. Sigh. If only Dawn Davenport would show up to these things: "I told you Joel Schumacher! Cha cha heels, black ones!"

 

 

Kathleen Murphy studies why so many children (or their character's rather) in this year's Oscar nominated films are at risk.

 

Writes Murphy:

 

"Why are so many tykes abroad and at-risk in last year's best movies? Mushy wisdom comes from Brad Pitt, that much-publicized real-life daddy of a multicultural brood, whose fictional blond offspring nearly perish in 'Babel's' Mexican desert: "It must have to do with the state of the world at this time." Reality check, Mr. Pitt: When was there a time that the world hasn't happily slammed helpless little ones?

 

"'Little Miss Sunshine's' dysfunctional family has its share of black holes -- Dad (Greg Kinnear), given to 'Refuse to Lose!' rants; Mom (Toni Collette), drained by idiot hubby, and her Nietzsche-loving son and alienated teen Dwayne (Paul Dano), who's vowed not to speak until he grows up; horndog Grandpa, hooked on heroin (Alan Arkin, nominated for Best Supporting Actor); and Uncle Frank (Steve Carell), demoted and suicidal Proust scholar. Though quirky (never cutesy-poo) little Olive (Abigail Breslin, up for Best Supporting Actress Oscar) is unabashedly hot to win one of those scary beauty pageants for pre-pubescent dollies, the seven-year-old turns out to be more grounded than anyone else in this demented tribe. Except for occasional bouts of self-doubt, Olive heads single-mindedly toward apotheosis, her show-stopping, Vegas-worthy song-and-dance a healthy send-up of the pageant's ultra-sexualized acts."

 

Read how "Jesus Camp," "Children of Men," "Blood Diamond," "Pan's Labyrinth," "Little Children" and more further prove her fascinating point.

 

--posted by Kim  
 

Could Jennifer Hudson's dream be over? Could she actually not win that Best Supporting Actress Academy Award?

 

I'm thinking, no way. She's so going to win. Even with all the "Dreamgirls" hype petering out (or maybe crushed from the weight of "Norbit") my non fave is probably going to grab that golden boy. But here's some of my thoughts:

 

"And yet, voters can be set in their ways and hype can be powerful and, well, that Vogue cover certainly doesn't hurt. When it comes to Best Supporting Actress winners, the Academy likes playing Fairy Godmother to Hollywood's newest Cinderella (think Marisa Tomei, Mira Sorvino, Angelina Jolie), so Hudson makes even more sense in this regard. She's made it to the ball! And though Kinkuchi (and even ten-year-old Breslin) both qualify as ingénues, they seem almost too...substantial. I know, I know, sounds ridiculous that two young actresses might be penalized for being so talented but this is Hollywood and Hollywood likes the extra tearful, rags-to-riches success story.

 

"And yet, and yet, my Spidey senses sees Hudson quite possibly losing. Can you imagine? The camera on her face, defeated yet again (another public humiliation, after losing out on 'American Idol'). Since she's been quite vocal about her dislike of Idol (her words: 'brainwashed' and 'abused') one wonders if she'd tear into the Academy? I imagine she's a little more gracious and little smarter than that (or at least, her handlers are), so she'd probably state that she was blessed to be nominated before proceeding to trash her hotel room and fling her Golden Globe into the swimming pool (actually, those diva antics would make me almost want her to win)."

 

Read the rest here. And stop yelling at me about Jennifer Hudson! I will get Judi Dench all up in your face. Because, you know, Judi and I are like (fingers crossed) this! 

 

Remember when Scarlett Johansson was that cynical little teen in "Ghost World?" She was and is gorgeous but in that interesting, intelligent, deep voiced, cutting way. She's not a warm fuzzy. Even in "Lost in Translation" she seems like the girl who makes fun of everyone. Like the moment a man walks out of a room she'd roll her eyes and discuss what a total loser he is. Which is fine. I like her for those reasons.

 

But Scarlett as overt sex symbol? It's starting to bother me. She's sexy for sure, but in her own way. She doesn't need any va-va-voom help. Playboy, however, disagrees. She's the sexiest star of the year. As Playboy (via The Sun) states:

 

"Scarlett Johansson is the apex of beauty and sensuality - from her porcelain skin to her fully feminine figure to her mysterious charisma, which is at once palpable and indefinable."

 

Yes true. But you know she thinks Hefner is a total creepy freak. In terms of older men, she's worked with artists--like Woody Allen and Bob Dylan. But again, Hugh Hefner? She probably said what her "Ghost World" character uttered: "That guy is many things, but he's definitely not cool."

 

An interesting article at The Envelope concerning the now heated Oscar race which, according to Academy Award strategists can be just as tough as a political campaign.

 

The movies are all apparently so well received this year that longtime strategist Michelle Robertson claims, "If there were a 200-pound gorilla in the race, things would be tapering off. But this year, everyone has a ray of hope, so some are going to the bitter end."

 

So what's the secret to victory? Here's some highlights from the piece:

 

"The trick, ironically enough, is moderation, albeit the Hollywood version. Lots of publicity but not too much. Confidence but not arrogance. Being realistic can help. After the nominations are announced, strategists calculate their chances and plan their next moves accordingly. The year Julia Roberts was nominated for 'Erin Brockovich,' for example, the studios backing the other nominees (Joan Allen, Laura Linney, Juliette Binoche and Ellen Burstyn) were not about to break the bank on campaigning."

 

And yet...

 

"However, being the front-runner can also be risky. Like Helen Mirren and Forest Whitaker, who have swept the acting awards this season, the best picture favorite runs the risk of voter burnout. And although other awards shows are not accurate predictors of the Oscars, they are worth watching, if only for what doesn't happen. 'You watch to see what the reactions are," says a publicist. 'A competitor wins at the [Golden] Globes, but the room doesn't seem wildly happy about it, then you still have a chance.'

 

So if you're less popular you might be safe? And if you don't put yourself out there you might grab even more attention? Guess that means Scorsese is a shoe-in:

 

"It always helps to have a workhorse, a star who will show up for question-and-answer sessions, interviews and any and all industry parties. 'You have to have filmmakers who are really committed,' Robertson says, 'who are willing to work the campaign.' Not every star will do that; this year, Mirren has been a workhorse, Scorsese has not. The campaign for 'The Departed' has been based on understatement: Leonardo DiCaprio has done some press, but Scorsese has refused to talk — as opposed to the wall-to-wall interviews he did for 'Gangs of New York' and 'The Aviator' — and Jack Nicholson has been predictably unavailable. That has been pretty much the plan — to let the movie breathe before slapping it with an awards label."

 

Why don't we let all the movies "breathe?"

 

I mean, I understand but this is just a little bit ridiculous. Though, I have to agree with one of the interviewee's sentiments when, at the end of the article they assert that the Oscar campaign, "Wasn't started by the committee for the Nobel Peace Prize." Um, yeah.

 

 

Alright. This is getting flat out ridiculous.  Who cares if Ralph Fiennes had sex on an airplane? And who cares who initiated it? I certainly don't. Fiennes' publicist, however, does care:

 

"'She initiated the encounter," the actor's publicist Sare Keene said. 'This woman seduced him on a plane. She was the sexual aggressor. Yet she said in her official statement (to Qantas) that he had initiated it... and virtually accused him of forcing himself upon her. Of course he could have said no. The point I am making is that she initiated it. He didn't force himself upon her.'"

 

So I can understand Fiennes and Keene wanting to clear up any misconception about the actor. That perhaps maybe some people might think that "The English Patient" star was stupid enough to force a stewardess into an airplane lavatory for sexual congress and just return to his seat without any complaints. Right. No one thought that.

 

But, the story is (ooohhh!) shocking enough to garner an ABC story entitled: "Ralph Fiennes: Cheeky Or Compulsive?" The hard hitting article goes on to question if Mr. Fiennes' behavour is that of an averge randy actor or a person who is clinically insane. Huh? What is wrong with people? Are we living in the 1950's?

 

Nevertheless, Fiennes must be happy that someone exhibiting much more reckless behavour has grabbed headlines. Although, I think she looks kind of cute as a cue-ball. Wonder what Ralph thinks?