Lindsay Lohan, who has had a series of high-profile run-ins with the law, problems with her family and her career, admitted in an interview recently that her abuse of various substances, including cocaine, was a means of coping with family problems. She also noted that she is now embracing life rather than resorting to drug use. Said Lohan, "I tried to mask my problems with alcohol, cocaine and mind-altering substances. Now I’m in a place where I don’t need to use anything and I can feel emotions because I choose to."
Lohan had a rough 2007, a year that saw her arrested twice for drunk driving and once for cocaine possession and three stints in rehab. Lohan noted that her father’s opening up to the media about the family’s problems is what led to her downfall. Said Lohan, "That’s when I hit rock bottom. I abused substances too much, and it wasn’t the answer to my problems. People need to know that." In early 2007, she fell asleep while running a bath after taking Ambien and woke up with the tub overflowing.
"I was so scared," noted Lohan, "I called my therapist and said, ‘Can I just go somewhere for a month? I’m around bad people and I need to take care of myself.’" At present, Lohan is attending weekly alcohol education classes – by choice – and seeing her therapist on a regular basis. Notes Lohan, "I’ve learned from my mistakes, and I’m now healthy and happier. I’ve made some dreadful mistakes but learned from them – that has probably saved my life."
You have to give Lindsay Lohan credit for being able to make fun of herself. At the very least, you have to give her people credit for choosing the appropriate forum for Lindsay to poke fun at herself and her problems with substance abuse. Not that such things are laughing matters per se, but it seemed to fit with the general absurdity of the VMAs.
Lohan appeared in a pre-taped segment with host Chelsea Handler in which Handler happens to bump into Lindsay backstage. Some jokes are made about Handler possibly drinking and Lindsay points to her ankle bracelet. Handler explains that the bracelet is simply holding her table at the Cheesecake Factory. Lindsay eventually gets rough with Handler, warning her about the dangers of alcohol and commanding her not to embarrass herself. Overall, it was probably the funniest bit of the night.
The VMAs struggled once again as a live performance. The brief delay allowed for a mostly successful bleep feature that prevented much of the gratuitous cursing that goes with the VMAs. The musical performances were very good, for the most part. But the running jokes and on-stage skits seemed to fall flat more often than not. Not that Handler wasn't well prepared. She seemed to have strong material, but the delivery was a struggle for her given the format.
There will be much "news" coming out of the VMAs over the next few days, but the Lindsay Lohan bit was hands down the funniest.
She’s known for her freckles, her red hair, her lesbian relationship with Samantha Ronson and for past troubles (oh, and she does some acting too), but now Lindsay Lohan is losing weight at a clip roughly akin to Jessica Simpson’s rate of weight gain. Lindsay assures the media, however, that "it’s not intentional." Asked about her diminishing figure, Lohan replied, "I eat. I had my Big Mac yesterday from McDonald’s. I eat just as much as I always have." Lohan went on to note that she’s been "working a lot" and that it’s "stress, and lack of sleep when I travel."
Lohan also was very forthright in saying that she never really thinks about the Hollywood-imposed mandate to stay thin and claims that she doesn’t know how much weight she’s lost (nor has she every weighed herself, she says). Responding to the media’s constant focus on her, Lohan replied, "They’ve already said everything about me that they can say. And I’ve never really cared then. I’m my own person, and people can say whatever they want. I’m still going to be the person I am."
She also went on to say that her way of life is perfect for those living under the microscope in Hollywood. "I think that’s so important for people in Hollywood. People have their ups and downs. Kids in college get DUIs. Everyone goes through something, and everyone can relate to something. I think that I don’t ever want to pretend to be something that I’m not. I’m not perfect; nobody is perfect. If you try to perfect, you’ll probably go crazy. But you should always accept yourself for who you are. And that’s what I’ve done, and I’m happy." Despite all the unusual press surrounding her, it appears as though Lindsay really does have her act together…for now at least.
Prosecutors in Riverside, California are looking deeper into allegations that Lindsay Lohan assaulted an employee of the Betty Ford Clinic after Lohan refused a breathalyzer test. Allegedly, Lohan was caught sneaking back into the facility and the staffer suspected that she had been drinking while outside of the rehab center. Lohan refuse the request for the breathalyzer and the staffer claims that Lohan then became violent. Because she revealed the name of her attacker in her discussions with police, the Betty Ford Clinic staffer was fired immediately following the incident.
Regardless of the outcome of this particular episode, Lindsay Lohan has quite a bit of legal trouble already on her plate. She was in the Betty Ford Clinic as a result of a judge's order and the fact that she was involved in some sort of altercation with a staffer doesn't bode well for her recovery prospects.
With her career in shambles and no end to her substance abuse problems in sight, it's hard to envision how Lindsay Lohan can recover. Clearly, she needs help on a level that is likely far beyond any she would be willing to accept. She is firmly in the grasp of a disease that has already caused her irreparable damage. There is still plenty of time to right the ship, but it's looking more and more like a future career highlight for Lindsay is going to be checking into Celebrity Rehab with Doctor Drew.
A committee of Islamic clerics in Iran, led by the country's new hardline president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this week banned foreign films in an effort to wipe out what they called "corrupt Western culture".
Elements that were specifically named as affronts to the government's vision of Iran's Muslim culture included alcohol and drugs, secularists, liberals, anarchists and feminists.
The ban, which follows Mr Ahmadinejad's campaign promise to promote Islamic culture and confront what he called a cultural invasion by the west, aims to distance the state from the open cultural policies undertaken by former reformist president Mohammad Khatami that encouraged cultural coexistence and dialogue among civilisations.
Many experts and officials say the ban will only cause Iranians to turn to the black market for western videotapes or to foreign satellite television broadcasts. It is understood that the ban will have little effect on cinemas where few Western films play anyway, but it could dramatically change television, where all channels are controlled by the state and overseen by religious hardliners.
State-run television has hitherto shown foreign films after censoring many scenes deemed immoral or offensive. Films considered hostile to the Islamic values preached by the ruling establishment are already banned altogether.
"This new ban appears to be part of a campaign to push Iran back to the 1980s and to impose the same restrictions that were only just eased under Khatami. But it will be impossible to take Iran back to the 80s again," said international relations professor Davoud Hermidas Bavand.
Under President Khatami, Iran's 70 million citizens, more than half of whom are under 30, enjoyed growing social and political freedoms and were exposed to western popular culture through satellite television. The dishes are officially banned but tolerated by authorities. Many residents in Tehran hide them under tarpaulins or disguise them as air-conditioning units.
Western music, films and clothing are widely available in Iran, and hip-hop tunes can be heard on Tehran's streets, blaring from car speakers and music shops. Bootleg videos and DVDs of films banned by the state are widely available on the black market.
Already, the state-run television station in the holy city of Mashhad in north-eastern Iran has reported that police closed several video clubs last week on grounds that they were offering films inconsistent with Islamic culture.
Asian film imports first hit American shores decades ago, driven by the rise of the International Film Festivals in Europe. Erstwhile agoraphobic Hollywood executives would drag themselves from their gold castles and actually find something worthwhile in the amazing epics being produced on the far side of the Pacific. The market never quite found the foothold it would need to be commercially successful though, at least not until the martial arts genre came flying in on the golden wings of Bruce Lee.
Since then, company’s like Sony and Miramax have gone out of their way to import film after film to US shores featuring some of the most amazing directors, actors, and martial artists in Asia. Unfortunately, with their eagerness to share those finds with the American public comes the dreaded cut. It’s what any foreign film fan hates to hear most – "American edit".
It’s not new to the industry. Since the 60s, foreign films have been going under the knife time and time again. It’s basically the American studio executives deciding for the American people what they will and will not understand. They take a perfectly amazing film and cut out vast quantities of the story and remake the film in a manner more suitable to the short attention spans and fickle nature of a nation that doesn’t like to read at the movies. Unfortunately, those that most appreciate and wait eagerly for theatrical releases of these films are also largely unpleased with these methods.
The results are appalling sometimes as not only do they take out vital scenes just because they contain cultural references that Americans may not understand, they dub over the original voices with English voices so as the American public won’t have to read subtitles.
It’s not new, and if you go back and watch any Kung Fu film released in America in the 70s or 80s it’s there. It’s a shame that the results are so horrible, because some of these films are truly amazing. And it’s Miramax that’s the biggest culprit in these film cutting crimes.
Take Shaolin Soccer for instance, one of my favorite films from Hong Kong in the last 15 years. The original Stephen Chow cut of the film in Hong Kong was 113 minutes long, a respectable normally cut film. The American cut released two years later was only 87 minutes long. Somewhere in the film they’d seen fit to cut almost a half hour of the comedy and/or action out. They’d essentially rewritten how the film would be shown, by taking out an entire subplot.
The same can be said of any imported film. The Protector, a Thai import released this last fall was released with 27 minutes cut from the film. The critics panned it for being nonsensical and baseless in its plot. I’ve seen the Thai cut and I can say it wasn’t astoundingly well written, but it was decent and of course it’s baseless when you’ve cut 25% of the film out for a domestic audience. The results are unfair to the filmmakers as well, whose chances at success in the massive American market are skewered by the trigger happy finger of an American censor and cultural editor.
Other genres and markets feel the same backhanded scorn of the American studio system as well. In turns, Anime, Bollywood, and scores of amazing Latin American films are torn apart piece by piece for the good of our culturally ignorant masses. Anime, which dominates our children’s programming anymore, is essentially redirected during localization to clean up the slightly more liberal approach to just about everything Japanese audiences have. Even the violent, battle filled anime such as Dragonball Z or Naruto is whitewashed at times, blue statements redubbed with goofier phrases.
When I go to see a film, I hope to see what the director wanted me to see, not what a board of stuffy American executives and censors decided would be acceptable for my less than worldly American brain. For that reason, I am more than happy to rent and purchase imported DVDs from overseas with the original cut of the film left intact and the original language track untouched. Not only am I able to see the film as it was originally meant to be seen, but I’m not directly supporting the further destruction of incredible films for Hollywood’s corporate gain.
The film industry is a crazy business. It’s been around for so many years now, it’s almost impossible to imagine it not being a part of daily life. We wake up to movie posters on our walls, turn on the TV to news about movies and movie stars and spend our evenings watching DVDs or going to the theater.
Movies are what make us a cohesive culture in this country. There is no age old folklore or historical context in which to situate our society. No, we’re stuck within the confines of the Silver Screen and the allure of Tinsel Town as our cultural signifiers, all 100 years of movie history that we’ve managed to hitch under our belts.
And it’s that visual media that has become the international face of the American way. No matter which country on earth you visit, the most recognizable American names and faces will likely be our actors and actresses, our major films and their characters. It is through our films that nations on the far side of the world form their opinions of us and discern how we live our lives. So it is more than just a simple matter of our own devotion to the Hollywood culture, but how we want the rest of the world to see us.
Our films have become something of a joke then, displaying ridiculous excess, while at the same time often reflecting the manner in which society reacts at any given time. Meaning, when things are good in America, our films are frivolous displays of excess and monetary freedom, while wartime and recession often lead to the more contemplative, deeper films that show a political and social consciousness beyond Animal House and Old School.
But, with an industry so incredibly dependent on the willingness of its audience to forget about the worries of the world and give into the selfishness and gluttony of consumerism the socially conscious films are never fully prevalent and the frat boy humor is always around. Will Ferrell will continue to release a major comedy at least once per year that relies almost completely upon the legions of fans he built through his stint on SNL and in Old School.
I’ll be honest. I’m a bit biased. I’m a fan of films like Little Miss Sunshine and Garden State. I enjoy work by Jim Jarmusch and watch Sundance and Cannes every year eagerly for the next big little film to eke its way onto the market. I enjoy good movies with well developed plots and solid writing. That’s not to say that the Will Ferrell goof-off comedies are not entertaining, but I wouldn’t put down $9.50 on opening day for one of his goof-offs and don’t necessarily respect those that do. Good late night rentals yes, but not Friday night outings.
And so it’s no wonder that countries across the world see America as an icon of gluttony and excess. We gladly shill out more money than some people make in an entire day to sit through a bad comedy with the same jokes from every other movie made in the last five years. And mostly, the result is that nations around the world watch these films, see a millionaire making a fool of himself and think that he’s a good representative of the American way.
It’s not the decently written comedies with a true slice of Americana that make it through the filter of international scrutiny, but the broken, frat boy toilet humor we export alongside our slew of explosive special effects laden machinations don’t do the country any justice.
So, looking down the pipeline, how does this year stack up? Which films will we be sending out this coming summer to display that which is America in the year 2007? They look to be a dozen or so sequels, a handful of remakes, and couple of horrible comedic outings that will no doubt rack up big numbers. It’s a summer of flashbacks and resurgences of long dead franchises in films like Transformers and TMNT and a slew of sequels with Spiderman 3, Shrek 3, and Pirates of the Carribbean 3 (does anyone notice a pattern starting here?).
We’re looking at yet another summer of record breaking receipts, attendance, and a worldwide market unlike any other, but do we see anything worth exporting these days? It’s not a matter of making better films to better display what American life is all about. It’s a matter of the American Public not becoming so enamored with the frivolous fluff that Hollywood thinks we’re in love with that they don’t give decent, explorative shots to films that could do so much better.
There are three categories of films from my childhood. There are those that I watched and loved, but probably will never watch again in adulthood, because I know how horrible they are and my childhood infatuation was born of my infatuation with something similar. Good examples include The Wizard, Rookie of the Year, and any of The Mighty Ducks trilogy. I have extremely fond memories of all these films, but I’m sure that sitting down to watch them now would result in a painful realization of just how bad an eight-year-old’s taste in film can be.
The second category is almost exactly the same thing, except these are films that I would gladly rewatch with age. They’re still horrible, but the campy, kitschy revelations of childhood return with much warmer nostalgic fanfare than other less enjoayable children’s flicks. I include the venerable Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles among others in this category.
But, it’s the third category I want to talk about today, that of the true children’s masterpieces, those few films that I watched over and over again in childhood and would gladly rewatch today, give to my children some day, and buy when released on DVD again. There were not many films that manage to live up to these standards, but the few that do tend to be universally acclaimed. Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and The Princess Bride are all films I’ve been watching annually since I was a child and will continue to watch into old age. Disney had a decent corner on this market once upon a time.
Quality films of universally acclaimed value, good for children and adults alike are almost non-existent anymore in this hyper-targeted, marketing addicted society in which we live. Instead, film makers make films for adults or they make films for children, and the middle ground is largely filled with television and garbage.
There were very few if any failed attempts on their part, and if you ignore the slight lull in masterpiece production in the years of World War II and in the early 1980s, every animated feature Disney released was a gem. It was however, only a handful of films into the mass production era (starting in 1988, after which a new animated feature was released every 12-18 months) that the quality started to dip more and more towards the dangerously low level of output we’re greeted with today.
At the same time as Disney released its first truly mediocre animated features, Pixar was getting started by releasing masterpieces of their own. It was as if the torch of creativity had been passed from the hand drawn to computer generated ages. However, there was no reason for the change. Ironically, the quality of animation dived inversely to the technology of the age. For whatever reason, there was a sharp spike in animation of inferior artistic value during the 1990s, seemingly an attempt by studios to shake things up and modernize the classics and their aging formula.
Instead of merely shaking things up though, the new Disney animation looked merely cheap, and relied almost solely upon fart jokes and shallow characters. Hercules, a story that could easily have been an epic masterpiece had Disney put the full conviction into it that other ages old epics such as Aladdin and The Lion King (Hamlet) had received, was no better than a protracted television episode. Tarzan, Lilo and Stitch, and Treasure Planet were bad, and The Emperor’s New Groove was horrendous (so much so that I’d forgotten it existed until I started looking up the list of films).
At one time considered a canon of great films, Disney’s recent release list reads more like a trainwreck of creative failure, churning out clunkers like Brother Bear and Chicken Little. In the mid 90s, when the company started releasing sequels of its more popular films, no one batted an eye. They were of lesser quality, but still entertaining in a fashion. However, by the time 2000 rolled around, Disney was releasing more than a half dozen of the direct-to-DVD clunkers every year and with each new sequel, one more life long fan lost respect for the House of Mouse.
Today, years of poor decisions and mass production has led to the complete reformation of the studio. Pixar’s head animator, John Lasseter, the genius behind a decade of masterpieces in digital animation, has been placed in charge and the studio is finally looking to reopen its hand drawn studios and get back to the core of what made Disney the leading supplier of children’s entertainment in the last 70 years, good stories for all ages.
A year ago, this article would have been a plea for the folks at Disney to return to their roots and bring back the films that I so utterly fell in love with in my childhood. Today, I’m happy to say that I’d rather write about my hopes for the future instead. While Pixar has regaled us with enough quality films to keep the entire next generation occupied with nostalgic masterpieces in their adulthood, I’m still not convinced that Disney can fully recover from the poor decisions of the past decade.
And should I ever see or hear a hair of information about Chicken Little 2, I’ll forever swear off the possibility that Disney is worth any of my time or money.
Throughout the years, California, and especially Hollywood, has become synonymous with "movies." Turns out, however, that filmmakers have been slowly leaving the state over the past several decades as Canada and other U.S. states have offered incentives to lure producers and the movie industry to their neck of the woods. Now, California is trying furiously to woo filmmakers back, offering a variety of incentives. To given an indication of how bad California has fallen, the number of feature films shot in California has dropped to less than half of what it was in 2003. Broadcast and cable television shoots have also dwindled, with 44 of 103 pilots shot outside Southern California this year.
Said Paul Audley, president of FilmLA, a non-profit organization which operates in the production industry, "In 2008 the worst numbers ever were recorded and the first six months of 2009 show a 50 percent drop from that. That can only be described as a disaster." The office of the governor of California notes that film production helps to employ roughly 250,000 people in the state, and produces $38 billion for the state’s economy. So, while other states lure filmmakers away, California is now trying to lure them back.
Some have noted that California’s incentives may not be enough. Said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the L.A. Economic Development Corp, "California’s was an incentive package for feature films where the largest budget film you could produce was $75 million, which a lot of people felt didn’t go high enough, especially if you are trying to attract tentpoles." Harvey Schwartz, owner of 20th Century, noted, "There are so many shows that have already left. ‘Ugly Betty’ was the first big one to just shut down in California, lay everybody off and move to New York for that 30 percent rebate."
From October 2008 until arrests were made last month, 18-year-olds Rachel Lee, Courtney Ames and Alexis Neiers, and Diana Tamayo, 19, are suspected to have broken into numerous celebrity homes, making off with millions in jewelry and designer clothing. Others have also been charged, including 18-year-old Nicholas Prugo and 27-year-old Ray Lopez, Jr. At this point, it is believed that the group targeted specific celebrities after researching them online.
In addition to Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, and Megan Fox, Audrina Patridge and Orlando Bloom are also believed to have been hit by the group of young thieves. Police believe that the group used celebrity websites and other gossip outlets to identify specific items of jewelry and clothing that they wanted to steal. Then they would use the Internet and paparazzi photos to research the best ways to break into the homes of individual celebrities.
They often found entry to be fairly easy, including in one instance where entry was gained through a doggy door. To make the story even more bizarre, one of the suspects, Alexis Neiers, is currently the subject of a reality television pilot episode about aspiring actresses in and around Hollywood.
At this point, most of the group has lawyers and most of the statements from those lawyers indicated that their particular clients were not the ones responsible for the heists. The only celebrity to have offered any comment at this point is Paris Hilton, whose publicist explained that Paris retrieved most, but not all, of what was stolen from her residence.
Who doesn't enjoy watching our very own secret agent 007 AKA James Bond in action. But MGM is bankrupt, and in mounting debt. The Hollywood studio is up for sale, and hence, the 23rd Bond film will have to wait, at least until 2011. Along with the sale of the studio, the lucrative Bond franchisee will also be sold.
Michael Wilson produces the Bond flicks with Barbara Broccoli. He said, "Our timeline's a little up in the air what with the situation at MGM, so we have to be flexible. We just don't know enough about the situation to comment, but we know it's uncertain. We've hired the writers and we've been working with them but it's just too early to say anything. You know, often at this stage, I find myself saying, 'Oh, we're gonna do this and that', then six months from now you'll say, 'That isn't in the film at all - you told me it was...' "I think we're at the stage where a lot of ideas are floating around that sound very good, but whether they make the final cut, who knows?"
The last Bond film was Quantum Of Solace, and pre-production of the next film starring Daniel Craig has been put on hold. As of now, the 23rd Bond film's fate hangs in balance, and whatever happens, the earliest a new film could go on the floors is the end of 2010, with a release scheduled for 2011. So it is going to be a long wait for all of the 007 fans, but Oscar-nominated screenwriter Peter Morgan promises that the wait is going to be worth it.
