Don’t Mess With Rodham

I cannot wait for Rodham to come out. In case you don’t know, Rodham¸ is the biopic of Hilary Rodham Clinton. Amazing , I know. I was so excited when I heard this was happening especially because they said it would be filled with cursing, sex, and pant suits. You can’t lose with that!

 

Now, however, I am very nervous about this. I do not want studios to screw this up and it looks like they’re going to. Four big name actresses are rumored to be vying for this role and they are: Scarlett Johansson, Resse Witherspoon, Jessica Chastian, and Amanda Seyfried.  Ahhhhh, hell no.

 

Rodham director James Ponsoldt told a newspaper, “They’re all wonderful actresses. We’re very fortunate that a lot of really great actors are interested in playing these roles. We’re in an enviable position.”  You shut up Pondsoldt! You shut up right now! Out of those four there is only one person that should be considered and that person is Jessica Chastain.

 

I’m sorry but Scarlett Johansson is a piece of crap actress and human being that should exclude her from portraying Hilary. Resse Witherspoon? You’re killing me. You are freaking killing me. No. No. NO! I cannot stand that pointy chinned stuck up snot. She cannot shine Hilary’s shoes let alone bring her to life! I’m still mad at Amanda Seyfried for Les Miserable so I cannot allow her to do this. That leaves the wonderful, talented, gorgeous, Jessica Chastian.

 

I’m not wrong on this—I’m just not. I’m pretty sure if Reese, Scarlett, or Amanda get this role our economy will drop again and the constitution will be amended to allow George W. Bush a third term. That’s how bad I feel this film would be. It will be a detriment to our world. Don’t do it studios…don’t do it.

 

Who do you think should play Hilary? Personally, I think Jennifer Lawrence would kill it.



You Might Also Like ...

Anne Hathaway is in Love

photo of anne hathaway pictures

Anne Hathaway is on the cover of Glamour gushing about her new husband. Yeah, it’s all fun and games three months in. … I’m kidding, I hope they last forever. Hathaway says, “He’s a good man. He’s beyond intelligent. He loves fearlessly. His beliefs are beautiful. He’s my best friend. I love him. I just feel that I have the greatest husband in the world for me.” That’s too much love for me so I tuned out most of it but really enjoyed that she said, “in the world for me”. Most of the time you get these celebrities spouting off about how they have the best significant other in the world and I find that pompous. They’re the best to you, for you, according to you, but let me tell you I highly doubt Andrew Garfield and I would get along, though he seems to do the deed for Emma Stone. The only woman who can say, “I have the best significant other in the world” is Eva Mendes cause she’s got Ryan Gosling, who is perfect.

Hathway goes on to say, “I would never have gotten married if it weren’t for him. You have to want to be married to someone. You have to feel that reciprocated. Marriage for marriage’s sake doesn’t make any sense to me, and I found someone with whom I could put my money where my mouth is, I guess.” Considering her last boyfriend is served 4.5 years in prison for cheating investors and falsely claiming he had connections to the Vatican (why would you brag about that?) I get it, Anne. I’m a little confused as to the “You have to want to be married to someone. You have to feel that reciprocated”. I mean, why else would you marry someone? I guess that’s her point, but I feel it’s a bit of Capitan Obvious. We get it you wanted to marry this dude and not the felon.

Later, she says, “It’s wonderful. I feel like I’ve found my other half, and I’m so excited about getting to love him for the rest of our lives.” Too much; too much love. There’s an old saying “If it’s a big show it ain’t a real go” meaning if you have to prove it and talk about it it’s probably not as good as you’re making it out to be. Only time will tell I guess. This is a celebrity marriage, but she seems to have a good head on her shoulders. I say three years….any takers?



You Might Also Like ...

Chris Brown Sucks, Another Illustration

photo of chris brown tattoo pictures
Chris Brown recently got a tattoo on his neck. And quite honestly, the tattoo looks a lot like Rihanna’s face after Chris Brown punched it several times. Brown says this is not the case and it’s a MAC cosmetics drawing associated with the Mexican celebration of the Day of the Dead. It’s a drawing of a woman’s face—the right side is lovely and well made up and the left side is a skull.

I’m not going to go into how completely ridiculous it is for a man to get a MAC cosmetics drawing tattooed on his neck, because people get ridiculous tattoos and it’s their own business—even I have one. I will, however, state that it is ridiculous for Chris Brown to tattoo anything having to do with women on his body. Furthermore, as far as my research has shown, Chris Brown is not Mexican in any way. Its one thing to respect and be interested in the culture … it’s another to tattoo a cosmetics drawing of a heritage that has nothing to do with you on your neck. What it boils down to is he saw this drawing of a woman that was half alive and half dead and tattooed it on his neck because he sucks.

He gets away with being an awful, terrible, horrible person. Remember when all of this happened and the Hollywood community rallied around Brown? Yeah, that happened. They either didn’t say anything or said crap like this:

Carrie Underwood: “I don’t think anybody actually knows what happened. I have no advice.”

Lindsay Lohan: “I have no comment on that. That’s not my relationship. I think they’re both great people.”

Nia Long: “I know both of them well. They’re young, and all we can do is pray for them at this point.”

Mary J. Blige: “They’re both young and beautiful people, and that’s it.”

When a picture of Brown on a jet ski in Miami came out, Usher said on a video, “I’m a little disappointed in this …

Continue reading



You Might Also Like ...

Feminist Protests At Cannes

photo of cannes 12 pics
Hollywood has always been a bit of a boys club. If you name the first five directors that come to your mind, odds are they won’t be female, and naturally, this male domination has upset some feminist groups and all of it came to a head this year at the 2012 Cannes Film Festival.

There are 22 films competing for the Palme D’Or prize (which is the Cannes equivalent of the Oscar), and not one of these films was directed by a woman. This fact was protested in the States where a petition was circulated and signed by almost 2,000 people, including feminist icon Gloria Steinem.

However, leave it to the French to stage a protest like never before. La Barbe, a feminist group in France which translates to The Beard, took to the Cannes red carpet in multi-color beards to show their dislike for the lack of female recognition. They stood in the rain at the premiere of Michael Haneke’s “Amour”, carrying signs that said, “Marveilleux,” `’Merci!!!” `’Splendide,” `’Incredible!” and “Le Barbe.” I’m guessing that this stance was their way of saying that the only way to get heard or get a good review was to be a male …hence the beards. La Barbe started this protest long before the red carpet, however—they previously circulated a letter complaining about the mostly male festival line-up, which was published in Le Monde and The Guardian newspapers.

The artistic director of Cannes, Thierry Fremaux, defended the woman-free line-up, saying he does not choose movies based on who has made them. The festival then issued a statement in support of Fremaux, saying films were chosen “without regard to race, color, sex, language, religion, political opinion” or any other external factor. And Fremaux isn’t the only one saying it’s “no big deal”—filmmakers like Britain’s Andrea Arnold, a member of this year’s Cannes jury, have defended the festival, saying the bigger issue is the lack of female directors making feature films, not Cannes not selecting them.

Does Arnold make a good point? Thoughts?



You Might Also Like ...