The Sponge

woot

2009-05-04T21:50:00.000-04:00

party time

everyday

Jumping off the "Grey's" Bandwagon

2008-12-10T00:14:00.004-05:00

Patrick Dempsey, call your agent and get that movie career up and running. Multiple sources are alleging that T.R. Knight, who plays George on ABC's troubled hit, Grey's Anatomy, is looking to get out of his contract early, and apparently ABC and showrunner Shonda Rimes are letting him.

That's fine I guess, after all, people leave TV shows all the time. Yet something about this seems like many in the Grey's cast have smelled the fart in the room and are heading for the door before taking the blame.

CONTINUED

Most insider's bets were on Heroes being the one to take the more drastic downward spiral, but with Knight's exit, an already problematic year for Grey's has suddenly become much worse. First there was the Katherine Heigl Emmy drama, followed by the stir caused when Brooke Smith's lesbian Dr. Hahn was written out of the show. Now Knight's imminent exit comes on the heels on a massive backlash against the show after Heigl's Izzie started sleeping with Denny. Did we mention how Denny is dead? Doesn't Rimes know that these things only work on Ghost Whisperer?

While many might consider this career suicide, Knight may just be bold enogh to take the moves that we all know Heigl has been considering probably ever since she read the script that had her boinking the undead. In all honesty too, it's been a loooooong time since Knight's George has been used in a significant storyline that didn't border on ludicrous. Actually, it's been awhile since just about anybody on the show wasn't involved in a storyline that didn't border on ludicrous. The show overall has lost its luster and is now delving into ridiculous storylines to keep itself afloat, and it isn't working. Ratings are dramatically down again this year, and there's no signs of positivity in the future. Rimes claims that the Dizzie storyline will pay off, but will it really have a payoff so fantastic as to save this show?

Even worse, Knight and Heigl aren't the only ones whose talents are being squandered. The show is full of gifted actors who could be used to their true dramatic strengths in other places. Dempsey, Sandra Oh and Chandra Wilson have all received enough exposure to have their careers flourish elsewhere. My suggestion? Take the hint, and jump off the bandwagon now. Even being on Eli Stone would be better than this (and in case you weren't aware: Eli Stone was cancelled 3 weeks ago).

Signs of the Apocalypse: A Full House Revamp? Cut. It. Out.

2008-12-09T00:01:00.003-05:00

Cue the infamous hand gesture of Joey Gladstone. Candace Cameron Bure, who has long since gone into obscurity to hide from her brother's creepo attempts at fundamentalist Christian film success (or to pop out three kids and live in Florida with her Russian hockey player hubby - you decide), has reappeared from the depths of the J-List with new of the Apocalypse.

Actually, it's news that her former uncle (and resident stud) John Stamos is planning a revamp of Full House, which would have Bure and Sweetin reprise their roles as DJ and Stephanie Tanner.

So lemme get this straight. 90210 is only a middling success. Knight Rider will be lucky to finish the season and last year's Bionic Woman was rejected by the public faster than the titular hero's machine-operated limbs. So where is everyone getting this information that remaking shows from the 80's/early 90's? First Melrose Place, and now this? In a world of TV where the most "wholesome" television one can find may be Two and a Half Men, would a mushy Full House remake really survive? Screw the family morals and take a few pages from the lives of its stars. Have Joey royally pissing off Alanis Morissette, have Michelle be an Ugg wearing, chainsmoking waif with a massive sensitivity to light or food, and only have Bob Saget tell jokes like this:

Otherwise John Stamos, scratch the remake and just go on tour with the Beach Boys already.

And here is the rest of it.

Laugh and a Half Volume 1: Incredibad

2008-12-07T17:31:00.005-05:00

UPDATE: Yes, the buggers took it down. But you can watch Andy Samberg himself posted it on Youtube under the pseudonym for his band. Watch it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4. Enjoy!! Again!!

Andy Samberg's "SNL Digital Shorts" can be pretty hit or miss. But this one is definitely a humorous hit. Parodying the melody and video style of virtually every song ever featuring Timbaland, check out "Jizz in my Pants" below, and do it before NBC boots the video off Youtube. And yes, that really is Justin Timberlake as the janitor. Enjoy!

Grammy Nominations: Blessings, Bemusements and Blasphemies

2008-12-03T23:15:00.007-05:00

So the Grammy nominations were announced last night during the 1st annual Grammy Nominations Concert (the economy may suck, but we can still pay people by the bucketload to come perform during a pointless concert!). So with the final noms announced, as per usual, Grammy voters have served up a large heaping of the usual suspects (Coldplay and Kanye), big surprises (Adele!!), and even more surprising omissions (we're not gonna spoil it just yet). Check out our recap of all the big new from the final list of noms, after the jump!

No Surprise Here: As expected, Coldplay dominated the nominations this year, leading the pack with 7 nods, including ones for Album, Record and Song of the Year, making them the odds-on favourite to sweep the awards fest this February. Grammy gave Kanye West yet another ego boost with 6 nominations, yet left him out of the Big Three categories.

Big Surprise There: Alicia Keys, a big Grammy fave ever since her debut six years ago, only scored two nominations, none of which included her mega-selling As I Am or her single "No One", which dominated the singles charts last winter. Perhaps too much time has passed since the album's release, but considering who else got nominated, the Grammy voters are still leaving us with many head-scratching moments. Similarly, while Mariah Carey's latest was considered stronger by critics than Grammy darling The Emancipation of Mimi, Mimi herself was snubbed entirely.

Best New Who?: The category with the most glaring set of omissions is certainly Best Artist. While this category is often widely contested (remember when Lauryn Hill got nominated twice, once for the Fugees and once as a solo artist?), this year's slate of nominees is both surprising and confusing. While the list deserves props for nominating both Adele and Duffy for strong album work, how did the Jonas Bros. make the list? While it's admirable that a 15 year old writes their songs, as the same time, it's glaringly obvious that a 15 year old writes their songs. Plus, where on earth are the new artists who actually garnered critical and commercial success, like Katy Perry, Leona Lewis, Jordin Sparks, and Sara Bareilles? Since all four scored multiple nods in other categories, their omission from the New Artist category is both obvious and idiotic (especially Perry's).

Where They Got It Right: Overall however, it was nice to see that Grammy voters gave nods to several artists who were rightfully deserving. While not surprising that voters didn't go head over heels for the Gnarls Barkley's less-successful follow-up album, it was great to see "Going On" get a nod. Likewise, seeing so many nods for Kings of Leon in the rock categories, as well as some for My Morning Jacket is encouraging for their futures. In the dance categories, Grammy voters handed nominations to Kylie Minogue, Cyndi Lauper, Sam Sparro, and Robyn(!) and rightfully so.

What They Still Got Wrong: This isn't just the gay in me talking, but only two nominations for Madonna? The woman consistently churns out the most critically and commercially acclaimed pop/dance records of anyone in the industry, and yet always seems to fail reaching the major categories. While her Madgesty is renowned for being ahead of the times, it seems Grammy always needs extra time to catch up.

What are your thoughts? Any glaring omissions from the list that anger you? Any inclusions that made you squeal with joy? Check out the full list of nominees at http://grammy.com/, and comment below!!

Thanks, Harvey

2008-11-27T15:41:00.004-05:00

The frenzy regarding Harvey Milk at this moment is similar to a perfect storm, with multiple elements coming together to celebrate the slain first openly gay man elected to public office. The Gus Van Sant film Milk, was released yesterday to nearly unanimous rave reviews for the film itself, as well as the performances of Sean Penn (as Milk) and James Franco (as his lover Scott Smith). Chances at a slew of awards nominations for the film now seems as solid as Oscar gold.

The second part comes from the mass protests in the wake of the passing of Proposition 8 in California. The events are eerily similar to those featured in the film regarding Milk's crusade against Proposition 6 (which would have banned gays from becoming teachers). Many critics who have seen the film have called the similar events a wake-up call to today's society.

Yet the third part of this perfect media storm comes in the form of today's date. It may be a slow day for new in North America, with the entire U.S. celebrating Thanksgiving, but it's also an important day in history. 30 years ago today, Harvey Milk was assassinated by his former coworker, Dan White. During his time as a politician, Harvey Milk was unabashedly out, something that may seem more normal in today's society, but was a cultural taboo in the 1970's. His courage to fight for the rights of the gay community gave the gay movement a face, and unfortunately, a martyr. While the movement may have started nearly a decade earlier with the Stonewall riots, it was Milk's death that acted as a catalyst for many in the LGBT community to take action. As a result, many people including myself, have civil rights that we may not have been granted otherwise, and also have to courage to fight for those we still don't have. So thanks Harvey. We may have come a long way since then, but it wouldn't have even started without you.

Signs of the Apocalypse? We Have a Winner

2008-11-24T23:05:00.004-05:00

And it wasn't even one we suggested in the first place:

We Need a New Sign of the Apocalypse

2008-11-22T12:48:00.003-05:00

While it's been streaming online for a few days new at MySpace, GunsN'Roses Chinese Democracy will be officially released tomorrow at Best Buy. After 15 years of ridiculously tedious development, false starts, and ludicrous promises being made by Axl Rose, the moment that nobody thought would come finally has.

What this means, is that we pop culture freaks need to find a new Sign of the Apocalypse. Confused? What this means is that we need a new metaphor for something that may never happen, kinda like "I'll buy silver hotpants when hell freezes over", or "I'll watch CSI: Miami when Chinese Democracy gets released". Check out some of our new Signs of the Apocalypse, after the jump!

1. When Dr. Dre finally releases Detox

2. When Eminem has a different hair colour aside from bleach blond

3. When they stop making Saw movies.

4. When NBC stops remaking bad 80's shows.

5. When Lauryn Hill gets off the crazy pills.

6. When the Olsen twins expand their diet beyond Starbucks and cigarettes.

7. When Thomas Harris stops writing novels to be made directly into Hannibal Lecter movies.

8. When a celebrity names their child "Emily", "James", or "Matthew".

9. When Jerry Bruckheimer produced an emotionally charged, independent, character driven drama.

10. Three words: Amy Winehouse Sober.

It's OK to Admit You're Excited for 'Star Trek'

2008-11-19T13:24:00.005-05:00

For those of you who have gone to see Quantum of Solace already, you probably left the theatre feeling torn. No, not about the movie itself (well maybe that too, more on that at a later date), but about the trailer you most likely saw before the film. Not Watchmen, or Harry Potter, or The Day the Earth Stood Still. No, none of those made you feel as conflicted as the way you did while you saw thre trailer for J.J. Abrams' upcoming reboot of Star Trek.

After all, aren't Trekkies the only people who get excited for Star Trek? People who worship at the feet of Levar Burton for something other than Reading Rainbow? People who dress up as Romulans every year and travel thousands of miles to attend national conventions? People who have spent their free time over the years, learning to speak Klingon, a language that isn't even real?

It's okay, you're not alone. You can admit it. Like me, you're excited for the new Star Trek.

A list of reasons why it's okay to admit it, as well as the new trailer, after the jump!

Reasons You Can Admit You're Excited For Star Trek

1. J.J. Abrams is King Shit: Everything the man touches turns to gold. Alias, Lost, and Fringe have all become large great successes largely because his name was attached to it. The last time Tom Cruise actually looked cool was because Abrams made him that way in Mission: Impossible III. Even his the stuff that isn't so amazing (Cloverfield) peaks enough interest with its unique concept ideas. If there's anyone who can take this franchise in a bold new direction and succeed, it's J.J.

2. Everything Old is New Again: With Hollywood continually going from creatively bankrupt to in overdraft, remakes and franchise reboots have become standard procedure. The Dark Knight, the second in Warner Bros.' Batman reboot, will finish as the top-grossing (and one of the best) films of the year. James Bond is currently seeing similar success, and The Day The Earth Stood Still is aiming for it in a month's time. Audiences are embracing old faves that have successfully taken on adding relevant messages about today in their films. Abrams recently noted his hope that Barack Obama would win the election, because the idea of "hope, change, and a peaceful world" is an important message of the Star Trek universe. It would be worth it to see a film with an optimistic look at the future for once.

3. Yay Cool Cast: Many Trekkies have griped about Chris Pine as the new Kirk, but the trailer left me with no complaints (and his easiness on the eyes never hurts). Furthermore, fans of Heroes know already that Zachary Quinto as Spock is dead-on. Likewise with the supporting cast. Zoe Saldana, John Cho and Simon Pegg as Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty are all inspired choices to embody iconic characters, both to fans and newbies. Plus, Eric Bana looks sufficiently creepy as the head baddie, Nero.

4. Exciting Backstory: One of the things that both Batman and the Bond franchises have succeeded at is telling the story of how the protagonists came to be. This is something that has neer been told on him in the Star Trek universe either. This will hopefully add a new element that will help embrace newbies to the characters (myself included). Plus, the trailer's opening chase sequence with a young Kirk was a riveting example of classic Abrams action to draw in non-fans.

5. Nothing To Lose: Because no matter what, it can't suck the bag harder than the new Star Wars movies.

Not swayed yet? Check out the trailer here and see for yourself. And then proceed to come out about your Star Trek excitedness.

Tyra Banks Gives Away Sex-Change On Her Talk Show

2008-11-18T22:47:00.000-05:00

Isis, the transgender model from the most recent season of America's Next Top Model, was given a sex reassignment surgery by Oprah-in-training herself on the Tyra Banks Show yesterday. After suffering from discrimination from her competitors on the show, Tyra has the contestant on her show, and surprised the model with the announcement.

Because no matter how many times you go see Oprah, she's never gonna give away a sex change dcuring her Favorite Things.

Does Economic Crisis = Increased Photoshopping?

2008-11-18T21:46:00.000-05:00

So I got my new Entertainment Weekly in the mail last week, as per usual. It arrived a little later than normal though, so it was a few minutes before I noticed something odd about the come-hither looks of Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart (of the upcoming Twilight) on the cover. Mostly it was that somebody had a Photoshopping spree on their faces. Normal, right? Not usually for Entertainment Weekly. While the Time Warner-produced weekly mag constantly has big stars gracing its cover, it's normally more the magazine to criticize excessive airbrushing and photo editing then actually use it.

This particular incident came a week after I grabbed my EW from the mail and was taken aback at the Adobe-assisted lack of facial definition on James Bond himself, Daniel Craig. In fact, ever since my favourite magazine's reformatting this summer, I've keenly noticed that the photoshop factor has had its ante upped.

What could be the root of this?

CONTINUED

There could be many things that it could be blamed on. It could be that airbrushing helps to give the magazine appeal to the Adderall generation. It could be that many celebs have become so vain as to expect it. Yet could it actually be another one of the heinous side effects of the bend-over-and-take-it that the U.S. economy is currently undergoing? In a word, yes.

One of the industries that has taken quite a beating during this fall's economic tailspin has been the publishing industry. Cutbacks have happened at all major U.S. newspapers. Men's Vogue, O at Home and Radar Magazine all have folded within the past month, and Vanity Fair has just announced that it has taken a severe financial beating in advertising dollars. During economic crisis, the first things that get thrown out the proverbial window are luxuries. Nights out for dinner, vacations, $6 coffees at Starbucks, and yes, magazine subscription renewals.

Futhermore, many people aren't renewing subscriptions anymore because they don't need to. Technology has finally, truly come to the point where the paper printed word has become (sadly) almost obsolete. People don't just have the ability to check the news from their computers anymore, but the widespread growth of wireless Internet access and mobile devices now allow people to read the news from their laptop with an Internet stick, or from their iPhone. The advent of web 2.0 has made it that many people are reporting on the news themselves (I also realize the irony of writing this thing on magazines with the very medium that is killing it).

Yet does all of this really mean that airbrushing is done as a magazine's response to draw in readers during economic crisis? Maybe not, but here's a few more tidbits of information. Coincidentally, Barco Imaging (the original computer photoshopper) was first introduced right after the Black Tuesday on the stock market in 1987. Adobe introduced Photoshop during the economic recession in the early 1990's. Coincidence? Maybe so, but it was during those times that magazine publishers first started using them to alter images (Remember the Time controversy regarding its cover of OJ Simpson in 1994? Thanks Adobe).

What's even more bizarre is how unnecessary the photoshopping was for two such young, attractive stars on EW's cover. Kristen Stewart is 18 and pretty easy even on my gay eyes. And Robert Pattinson has already caused a frenzy of attention before the movie has even opened. If this is what is going to happen to the youth, what would this mean if the cover were to feature Cloris Leachman?

In the end, I'd rather have the magazine actually show up still every week than have it not happen at all. So if this is what needs to happen in order for my favourite magazine to still exist at all, then that's fine by me. Just know, EW, that your faithful readers couldn't care less how attractive the people are on the cover. Your magazine has never been about eye candy. Stick to the smart articles and leave the sexy to Maxim and Cosmo.

Who know though, maybe I'm wrong about all of this and all that's happen is they hired a new staff photoshopper. And he's not very good at his job.

I Want a Dance Biscuit

2008-11-17T11:02:00.000-05:00

Paul Rudd and Beyonce were the hosts of Saturday Night Live this past weekend. However, the big surprise was the appearance of Justin Timberlake, who had to back out of his scheduled hosting gig, but was kind enough to stick around for a few skits. The best of the bunch? This riff on Beyonce's "Single Ladies" video, with Timberlake as one of her backup dancers. Watch below and enjoy!!

Watching the Watchmen

2008-11-13T22:35:00.000-05:00

The new Watchmen trailer, scheduled to be released with Quantum of Solace tomorrow, has been unveiled over at Yahoo Movies.

The film, loooooong in the making, is scheduled to be released March 6, 2009 (as long as Fox doesn't succeed in its attempt to block the film's release over a dispute with Warner Bros.). The trailer features plenty of eye candy for fans of the graphic novel.

Alright, just stop wasting time already and watch it below!!

FunnyorDie is Awesome

2008-11-12T16:02:00.000-05:00

Thanks to the Upright Citizens Brigade for bringing this to FunnyorDie.com. an you imagine if this actually happened? Larry King would be soooooo screwed. Watch below and have a laugh.

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

Absorb This: Hilton and Solondz Weirdest. Combo. Ever.

2008-11-12T14:45:00.000-05:00

In what may be the most bizarre movie news I've heard all year, Paris Hilton is getting another chance at acting credability. And this time, someone who actually has some film cred is giving it to her. That would be Todd Solondz. If you've never heard of him before, Solondz directed the critically acclaimed Happiness and Welcome to the Dollhouse, two of the most acclaimed films of the 90's.

The yet-to-be-titled film is said to be a semi-sequel to Happiness, which circled around a various neighbours, including a pedophile. The original won numerous awards, including the International Critic's Prize at Cannes. The sequel will center around a family dealing with the challenges of living during wartime. No word as of yet on what Hilton's role will be.

Whatever the role is, this is certainly a step up from National Lampoon videos of Hilton. Solondz's films have been acclaimed for their ark satire on American society, and often include controversial subjects such as rape, pedophilia and abortion. Whatever the role may be, it certainly gives Hilton an opportunity beyond screaming her face off in horror films. The move seems similar to that of Lindsay Lohan a few years ago, when she did a stint of indie films in order to gain some acting credibility to overshadow her tabloid-centric personal life. While this seems to be Hilton's attempt at doing the same thing, it didn't exactly pan out for Lohan, so we'll see how this goes for her socialite cohort.

And Now On a Lighter Note...

2008-11-07T00:41:00.000-05:00

After getting a tad too serious with the previous post, I thought I'd lighten things up around here. And what better way to do that than by watching a live feed of an entire playpen full of puppies?!?!?!?!?!?

Enjoy!!!

One Step Forward, Another Step Back

2008-11-06T20:06:00.000-05:00

Tuesday was a great day to be an American. After eight years being spent lead by a corrupt administration headed by a Commander in Chief who had become more of a bumbling sitcom character than an international leader, Americans finally got things right by electing Barack Obama. Finally, there was a U.S. election that wasn't officially decided weeks later in Florida. Finally, a leader who was elected whom the people can actually (hopefully) count on to follow through on the promises of change and hope. Finally, as Sherri Shepard from The View (who, of all people, had me close to tears yesterday) put it, African-Americans everywhere can tell their children that they truly can be anything they want to be in this world. Like I said, it was a truly great day to be an American.

Unless you're gay and living in California. In that case, you may have just had your marriage turned invalid.

CONTINUE READING AFTER THE JUMP

Overall, it hasn't exactly been a great week for the gays. First, on Monday Grey's Anatomy's Brooke Smith was fired from the show after ABC execs allegedly took a disliking to her lesbian character. While it seems unlikely that the normally gay-friendly network (home of gay faves such as Ugly Betty and Brothers and Sisters) would do such a thing, the fact that Greys' own Patrick Demspey admitted on Ellen yesterday that ABC tried to script his reaction to the firing for the show, something smells fishy (no lesbian pun intended).

Then Tuesday night arrives, and it turns out that not only California's Proposition 8 has passed (thus allowing a Constitutional amendment that would define marriage in Cali as between a man and a woman), but similar, rights-stripping ballot measures have also passed in Arizona, Florida and Arkansas. The only thing that hasn't made the whole week a total loss for Team Gay is that Lance Bass is still on Dancing with the Stars (and you know it's been a bad week when...)

What this means is that the Constitutional amendment will go forward for now, with lots more protesting along the way from both sides. In the meantime, while government officials has stated that the 18,000 marriages already conducted in Cali since it became legal in May will stay valid, it's left many questioning where the LGBT community stands. Ellen DeGeneres recently issued this statement, saying: "This morning, when it was clear that Proposition 8 had passed in California, I can't explain the feeling I had. I was saddened beyond belief. Here we just had a giant step towards equality and then on the very next day, we took a giant step away. I believe one day a 'ban on gay marriage' will sound totally ridiculous. In the meantime, I will continue to speak out for equality for all of us,".

So if it sounds so ridiculous, how did this happen, especially in arguably the most liberally-minded state in America? Apparently, the strength of countless celebrities, Barack Obama and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger speaking out against Prop 8 were all not enough against the power of the religious right. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints moved members from Utah to California, and between them and various other groups, over $30 million was poured into ensuring a Yes on Prop 8. What looked like a formidable victory against the Proposition a few months ago, quickly escalated into a heated war between both sides. While celebrities such as Ellen, Brad Pitt and Steven Spielberg made donations to help strike down 8, it was apparently futile against the Mormon church as well as the donations of many power-brokers from Newport Beach.

So now, gay Californians are back where they were back in April, only this time with the added disappointment of having been given their rights, and then having them taken away. While the fight regarding Prop 8 continues to wage on, I must ask, had the ballot measure actually failed, would this have made the LGBT community any more equal? Would its opponents not be doing what gay Californians are doing now, protesting and filing lawsuits? It just shows that while the law may be changed, the ideology of the United States can only be changed by continuing to do what we, like so many minorities, have done over the years: educate and inform to promote change for equal rights around the world. Maybe then everyone can be told they can be whatever they want when they grow up.

Well They Just Lost it For You Too, Carrie

2008-11-04T20:39:00.000-05:00

So Carrie Underwood said yesterday that she chooses not to endorse specific political candidates, stating: "There is someone I do support, but I don't support publicly. I lose all respect for celebrities when they back a candidate." (Which is a much more PR-friendly way of saying "I'm a closet Republican").

So while it's all fine and dandy that Carrie chooses not to disclose which candidate she supports, at the same time, she's taken a stab at almost every notable celebrity in America as well. People such as Oprah, Jennifer Aniston, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, Will Smith, Jay-Z, Beyonce, and more (also known as a group of celebrities with much more power than an American Idol country crooner). Yet what do all of these dissed celebrities also have in common? The fact that while they have all endorsed a candidate, at the same time, they have also greatly encouraged that people vote, no matter for what party they choose. I've had my eye on these PSA's and ads, encouraging people of all ages to vote, and Carrie doesn't appear in any of them.

So while Ms. Underwood may believe that these fellow entertainers are falsely influencing people to vote for them with their endorsements, at the same time, what they're encouraging just as strongly is a true democratic process by telling people to vote, no matter for whom they choose to do so. Yes, an endorsement from Oprah is big, but her encouraging true democracy is even bigger.

Furthermore, Ms. Underwood states "Music is where you go to get away from all the BS. Whether it's from politics or just the world around you, music should be an escape." While this is true, has the girl never stepped outside of Nashville? Has she never listened to any songs by U2, Bruce Springsteen, Greenday, Madonna or Bob Dylan? Some of the best music ever created has been boldly political, and the world is all the better for it. Take away the politics from music, and all we have is "Before He Cheats".

So Carrie, you can keep your endorsement to yourself. That's great, and at least you've informed yourself on the process enough to have an opinion and know who you want to support. Just don't expect the Big O to have you on her show next time you want to promote an album.

Gee, maybe that song "So Small" was about her brain.

They Couldn't Be That Stupid, Could They?

2008-11-04T11:46:00.000-05:00

So today is (finally) the big day in the U.S. That's right, the day has finally come where people will choose between Barack Obama and John McCain. It's now become heavily favoured that after 8 years of idiotic GOP bumbling, Americans are going to vote in Obama over McCain. Yay!!! If Obama wins, that's great, because the U.S. could use a change in opinions and views after years of Republicans screwing up various things. Such as starting a fake war. Screwing the economy. Screwing the environment. Just to name a few. So after so desperately wanting change for the past year, could Americans really be so stupid to give it to the party that won't be that change?

While it seems unlikely, hit after the jump to see some other things done by Americans that were colossally stupid.

Idiotic Things We Have Americans To Thank For:

-The McRib

-Nipples on the Batsuit

-Ann Coulter

-Bill O'Reilly

-Lady Gaga

-Paris Hilton's singing career

-The cancellation of Arrested Development

-Whoever the turd was who decided it would be a good idea for teachers to bring guns to school

-The unexplained famousness of the Olsen Twins

-Fred Phelps

-Allowing Shia LaBeouf to grow out his facial hair

-This.

-This.

-And definitely this.

So tonight, if by some ridiculous measure John McCain wins, just remember, sometimes Americans make stupid decisions. That's why According to Jim is still on the air.

A Message to Marvel Studios

2008-11-03T20:29:00.000-05:00

Dear Marvel Studios,

First off, I just want to say that I'm a big fan of you guys. Big fan. Huge, if you will. Even as a lifelong diehard Batman fan, my bias between the two big comics giants has always been with you guys. Since my childhood a large part of my (and my parent's) disposable income has been spent on action figures, comic books, lining up for your films, buying the special-edition DVD's, even the video games. Yes, the X-Men sucked me in at an early age, and my addiction to all things Marvel happily spread to the Fantastic Four, Hulk, Iron Man, and so on as a result.

When news broke a few years ago that you would be starting your own film studio, after the successes of the X-Men and Spiderman franchises, I was jazzed. After all, what this meant was that the superhero movie boom, something that I had happily blown more than a few dollars on, would continue for some time to come. So fast-forward from 2005 to now, and I've spent quite a few moments in 2008 noticing a few things regarding you, Marvel Studios, and your stars. Namely that you might be totally screwing the pooch.

CONTINUED HERE

The main reason I started thinking about this, was because of this new report today of why Terrence Howard got the boot from Iron Man 2, and the reason for it wasn't just because of Howard's reported difficulty onset, but because of salary issues. To sum it up, you replaced Howard with Don Cheadle because Howard refused a reduced salary from what he received in the first film.

This made me recall earlier in the year, when Edward Norton refused to do any press for The Incredible Hulk, after spending months feuding with your studio heads over the content of the film (Norton wanted more character development for Bruce Banner, you guys wanted more action. You won out in the end, but Norton's cut scenes are on the DVD). While Hulk made back its budget, it didn't exactly turn out to be The Dark Knight, did it? Let's face it, it hardly even turned out to be Fantastic Four.

So essentially, you've independently released two movies, with a few more on their way, ad we're already getting word from multiple sides saying that you're not working so well with your stars. Yes, those crazy, egotistical actors. They get paid to much, they show up late, party too hard, and cause trouble onset like only an over-entitled diva could. But guess what? They're also a big reason that a movie can tip the line between Spiderman and Daredevil. It's their talent.

People go to see superhero movies because they want to see superheroes do superhero things in superhero ways. That includes lots of crazy good guys and bad guys with lots of crazy powers and lots of crazy scenarios in grand places (insert Arctic/Golden Gate Bridge/Afghanistan/ Brazilian Jungle here). But what elevates a superhero movie from good (or mediocre) to great, is always an actor bringing a legendary superhero to life. Heath Ledger's pretty much a lock on an Oscar nod because he made the Joker the iconic villain of the year. Hugh Jackman became a star by seamlessly embodying Wolverine in the X-Men films. You guys watched Robert Downey Jr. revive his career this year in your own Iron Man, and propel it into the 2nd biggest movie of the year ('twas not that fancy suit that kept bringing everyone back for a second round of Tony Stark).

There are lots of talented people essential to making a great film, however, the majority of the moviegoing public doesn't care about anyone else but who they see on screen. That's who they connect to. Not only that, but the talent that actors such as Norton and Howard bring to these projects is a rare find in mass commercial fare.

So now you guys are going to continue to move forward, but at what cost? Couldn't an extra ten minutes of Norton's suggested character development actually saved the relationship with the actor, and thus save any future sequels from having Bruce Banner be played by three actors in as many movies? And it's not like Terrence Howard is Johnny Depp and costs $30 million. Maybe you could have just paid him the same amount as the first film and kept him happy, especially since you were probably planning on keeping him around to pimp out a War Machine movie in the next few years?

I only say this because I have concern for you, Marvel Studios. Actors talk to each other, and if you keep on shitting the bed with the ones you work with, maybe eventually most of the good ones won't want to work with you anymore. And that could be an issue. After all, Iron Man was good, but DC totally stole your thunder with The Dark Knight this summer, and now they plan on rolling out all of their big characters too. So learn to play nice, Marvel Studios. Because if Jessica Alba is going to continue being in your movies, I'm lining up for Wonder Woman.

Things Wrong with a Jackson 5 Reunion Tour

2008-10-31T00:45:00.000-04:00

So Jermaine Jackson claimed yesterday to The New York Times, that a reunion of the Jackson 5, with Michael, and sister Janet even in tow. As much as I'd love for the idea of a Jackson 5 reunion tour to become a reality (as much for the songs as for the grand hot mess of keeping all of the Jacksons together in the same place for months on end), I just don't see it happening, and probably for the better.

Here's a list of reasons why the Jackson 5 Reunion Tour should not, and most likely will not, happen:

1. Can even Michael hit those high notes on "I'll Be There" anymore?

2. Didn't the Jacksons start some sort of family rule a few years back banning Tito from doing anything that requires opening his mouth? (wait, maybe that was LaToya...)

3. Michael the child singing school-age come-ons in "ABC"=cute. Adult Michael singing school-age come-ons in "ABC"=creepo.

4. Apparently Janet is going to open for the rest of the Jackson 5. Isn't she the most successful out of all of them now? Shouldn't they be opening for her? Ms. Jackson could probably take her nipple shield on a tour of conservative Baptist churches and still pull in bigger crowds than Tito and Co.

5. Since when did the New York Times actually decide to listen to Jermaine Jackson?

6. What do you mean the Randy they refer to isn't the guy from American Idol?

Regardless of what Jermaine may say, look for this one to probably get denied by Michael very soon. The whole situation looks unlikely, especially since Janet has had trouble managing her own tour recently. But if you want to catch a Jackson on tour, Janet and her vertigo are probably the best bet you'll find for awhile yet, regardless of what Jermaine says to bring attention to a failed musical dynasty.

How Procedurals are Killing Soap Opera Drama

2008-10-30T01:44:00.000-04:00

So the big story of this year's TV season has nothing to do with a particular Californian zipcode (90210). It doesn't have anything to do with paranormal science, either (Fringe). And for the second season in a row, it still doesn't have anything to do with box-store employees with CIA on the brain (Chuck).

Nope, this season's breakout TV hit is procedural show The Mentalist, on CBS starring Simon Baker. The show has broken from the pack to become the only bona fide top ten hit of the year. The show, which follows Baker's faux-psychic Patrick Jane as he solves serious crimes for the California Bureau of Investigation. Yet one of the crimes that Jane should be investigating, is how procedural dramas, and their success, are slowly killing the strength of the soap-opera based drama. Check out why, after the jump!

Procedural dramas, in their modern form, came to rise with the enduring popularity of Law and Order, which started nearly 20 years ago on NBC. That show soon turned into a franchise, with two others spawning and gaining their own success. Yet the procedural crown is currently held by The Mentalist's network, CBS. The network also airs the three CSI franchises, Cold Case, Criminal Minds, NCIS, and Without a Trace. So essentially, CBS has enough procedural dramas to run at least one each night of the week. While one may assume that people would get tired of watching the same format of crime-based show every day, this seems to not be the case: CBS has won every week of the fall primetime season thus far. As we head into November sweeps, everything is very much coming up CBS.

So, since CBS seems to have divested from everything that isn't a procedural drama, what does this mean for all of the more traditional soap-opera dramas airing on the other networks? They're falling short by any and all standards. Returning shows Grey's Anatomy and Desperate Housewives have seen ratings dip again this year. Meanwhile, returning sophomore soaps have taken a significant hit: Dirty Sexy Money, Private Practice, Lipstick Jungle, and Heroes are all down anywhere from 15-30%. All of this has led to a creative tailspin in the drama departments at all the major networks. While returning shows are failing to live up to expectations, new shows aren't living up to the hype either. While Fringe, 90210, and Knight Rider have all received full season orders, none of them haven proven to be the ratings titans their networks had hoped.

Unfortunately, this isn't just a case of one procedural show outshining all the other dramas. New serial dramas have failed in the consequent years since 24 and Lost reinvented the genre. Likewise, the soap opera genre has failed to generate a significant hit since Desperate Housewives began in 2004. So what's the issue causing the big difference in ratings between these genres of one-hour shows?

People just can't commit anymore. Procedural shows such as The Mentalist, Law and Order and CSI excel at emphasizing the majority of each episode on the actual story itself, instead of the development of the characters. This means that viewers get more hooked on the format of the cases than the actual characters investigating them. It also means that people can tune into CSI after missing half the season, and still be able to catch up on what's going on in a heartbeat. There's no dedication required, except to the hourlong story being presented at that time. It's a strong feature that has allowed shows such as the original Law and Order to undergo numerous cast changes over the years without missing a beat.

The idea of becoming dedicated to a show is daunting. I myself am I rabid Lost fan, yet I will be the first to admit that it takes a lot of dedication to wrap your head around the show, to understand its ongoing mythology and character development. While the payoff is often an emotional whallop that CSI: NY could only ever dream of delivering, at the same time, that dedication means watching Every. Single. Episode. I`ve missed an episode halfway through a season of 24 and all had been lost (no pun intended). To devote that time and have it not pay off is not only frustrating, but disheartening.

What this means though, isn`t the death of the soap-opera or serial drama. It just means you may have to call your cable provider. Cable networks such as HBO, Showtime, FX and now AMC (home of the recent Emmy-winning Mad Men) have all excelled at developing character-driven dramas, and have incidentally reaped the awards (siphoned viewership from the major networks) as a result. So maybe what the future of television isn`t one without serial dramas, you may just need to shell out a few extra bucks to sift through the crime dramas in order to get to some real character development.

In the meantime though, you the viewer shouldn`t be afraid to get addicted to a TV show, let alone one that doesn`t involve an open-and-shut quadruple-homicide-mutilation-cold-case-missing-person-navy crime each week. In an age where PVR`s and DVD seasons have become commonplace, even if you don`t have time to sit down for appointment TV each week, you now have the convenience of finding the time. So go find some, as well as a great show that won`t waste it.

CW Plans Melrose PLace Reboot, Starts Search for Thomas Calabro

2008-10-30T00:39:00.000-04:00

Well, if Desperate Housewives ever goes in the shitter, at least Doug Savant knows what his backup plan is. After the success of 90210 at the CW, the network is planning on continuing their trend of making their primetime schedule look like an episode of I Love The 90's, by planning a reboot of Melrose Place.

While 90210 hasn't been the ratings juggernaut that the CW is hoping it would be, it has still become a clear success on Tuesday nights. No doubt the CW is probably hoping to bring back a few members of the old cast (I'm a big proponent of putting Heather Locklear in just about anything). No further news on the development, but former series creator Darren Star may be on board.

The original Melrose was a semi-spinoff of the original Beverly Hills 90210 back in 1992. The show focused on twenty-somethings living in the same apartment complex in Los Angeles. The show often embraced far more soap-opera-esque storylines and had no fear of camp. Throughout the show's seven year history, characters faced multiple personalities, murders, bombings and more double-crosses than one could count. If the CW could embrace some of the camp from the original, then perhaps this could make a welcome addition to the CW's schedule.

However, if the CW starts a reboot of The X-Files, they're to be taken to task for their FOX circa 1993 identity crisis.

To check out of Melrose's more significantly campy moments, when resident uber-loon Kimberly (Desperate's Marcia Cross), sets of a bomb, play the clip below:

Where is the Trailer for 'The Road'?

2008-10-18T14:53:00.000-04:00

Easily one of my top five movies to see this fall (the others being Quantum of Solace, Australia, Defiance, and Milk), the adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's The Road, is slated to be released on November 14th. Yet aside from a few production stills, we have yet to see any live footage of the film, let alone a teaser or a full trailer. So what's the deal? Find out what may be going on, after the jump!

To say that the film version of The Road is highly anticipated would be an understatement. McCarthy's book was critically hailed upon its release, winning the Pulitzer Prize and becoming an Oprah's Book Club selection. The film, directed by John Hillcoat and starring Viggo Mortensen and Charlize Theron, has been the subject of immense Oscar buzz since it started filming, due to its November release, and its cast of awards-friendly stars (Robert Duvall has a small role as well).

So with a film that many are expecting to be in the Best Picture final five come February, one would assume that distributor The Weinstein Co. would be willing to play that buzz game they're so good at, and start to build the hype, right?

Apparently not. With less than a month to go, there's been little to no advance word on The Road. The Weinstein Co. hasn't even mentioned a date when a trailer may be released. What's more, the film hasn't screened at any film festivals thus far either. This is a cause for concern, considering another Oscar contender, Baz Luhrmann's Nicole Kidman-Hugh Jackman epic, Australia, is being released on the same day, and could very well walk away with all the hype.

Dave Karger from Entertainment Weekly, believes that the film may be pushed back until 2009, because the Weinstein Co. seems to want to put its full Oscar push behind Stephen Daldry's The Reader, starring Kate Winslet. While it seems unlikely that a company would push back such a strong Oscar contender, the Weinsteins have been known to do such things in the past, which means that sadly, we may have to wait even longer for this epic father-son journey to be told onscreen.

With a month left to go, do you think we'll see The Road in theatres this fall? Are there any other films that you're wondering why they've gone off the radar? Post below!

It Doesn't Get Any More Creepo Than: Sarah Palin on 'SNL'

2008-10-18T10:44:00.000-04:00

Things are about to take a turn for the bizarro tonight on Saturday Night Live. Alaska Governor and VP Candidate Sarah Palin, the real Sarah Palin, will be appearing tonight on SNL, in some capacity. To make things extra political, Josh Brolin, who stars in Oliver's Stone's newly released W., is the guest host tonight. Now of course, guest hosts and politicians appearing on SNL is nothing creepo. But the possibility of having Tina Fey appear as her dead-on Sarah Palin impersonation, possibly in the same scene as the real thing, is enough life-imitates-art-imitates-life to make my head explode. This could be even more bizarro than when Superman visited Bizarro world and met Bizarro Superman. So creepo!

My greatest wish? That they bring back Will Ferrell as Alex Trebek, and have a Celebrity Jeopardy skit with Brolin as George W., contending against both the real and fake Palins. Oh the hilarity that could ensue!!! Especially if they bring on Darrell Hammond to play Sean Connery again, just to whump some Scottish sense into all three.

Saturday Night Live will air live from New York, as always, tonight at 11;30pm on NBC.

Absorb This: Andy Roddick Offers Up Nude Tennis Lesson

2008-10-17T16:31:00.000-04:00

According to the Los Angeles Times, Andy Roddick went beyond the call of charitable duty recently at the 16th Annual Advanta World Team Tennis Smash Hits event, hosted by Elton John to benefit those with AIDS in Georgia.

Apparently, Roddick auctioned off a private one-hour tennis lesson, but sweetened the deal by agreeing to do the lesson fully in the nude(!). The lesson was won by a female bidder, for the sweet price of $15,000.00.

So apparently, if you have 15 grand lying around and feel like giving it to charity, you can see Andy's peen in the process.

Five bucks says Elton's a little envious he didn't place a bid.

Read the full story, here.

Thank U, Dave Coulier

2008-10-17T12:18:00.000-04:00

Oh Dave Coulier, where have you gone over the years since Full House went off the air? Bob Saget was recently roasted on Comedy Central in hilarious fashion, John Stamos is the resident stud doctor on ER, Lori Loughlin is the hot mom on the new 90210 (to which I must say, Jim and Cindy Walsh were never that hot. My how times have changed). Hell, even the Olsen twins are still raking in the dough just from puckering their lips and looking strung out.

Yet Dave's career took a nosedive after the cancellation of America's Funniest People. Maybe because the show was crap. Maybe because anyone who gets paired with Tawny Kitaen automatically gets their career screwed (see: Whitesnake, OJ Simpson, Tommy Lee). But regardless, Dave has been MIA ever since, (except for that season of The Surreal Life). Yet I will always be thankful for Dave Coulier. Not for his contribution to TV, but to rock music. If you're a rock fan, then You Oughta Know what it is, but check after the jump to check it out!

So this past weekend, I went to go see Alanis Morissette at Hamilton Place, and to sum it up quickly, she rocked my socks off. During a 90 minute set, she played a fantastic string of new songs that, while I'd never heard them before, were still highly enjoyable and entertaining. Along the way, she peppered the set with her greatest hits, including "Uninvited", "You Oughta Know", "So Pure", "Head Over Feet", and a fantastic acoustic version of "Hand in my Pocket". She topped off the evening with two rousing encores, during which she belted out "You Learn", "Ironic" and "Thank U" while backed by her incredible (and seemingly very tightly-knit) band. What's more, Alanis rocked out on the stage, happily running back and forth and shaking her long hair in the air like a possessed demon. Her voice was pitch perfect the entire time, one of those rare occurrences where you discover the singer doesn't need any vocal enhancement. So amazing!!! Easily one of the best concerts I've ever attended (time to amend that Top 10 list).

So what on earth does this have to do with Dave Coulier? For those who are unaware, it has been revealed over the years that the majority of Jagged Little Pill, Morissette's 1995 legendary rock debut, was based around her relationship with Coulier during the mid-90's. Specifially, the songs "You Oughta Know" and "hands Clean" from 2002's Under Rug Swept are both about Coulier. Of course, "You Oughta Know" broke out in the mid-90's and launched Morissette's career as an international superstar, leading to the album becoming one of the highest-selling of all time. So while Morissette's fantastic career ever since then has been largely credited to her, I feel it's time Coulier got some props for inspiring her angry songs that made her popular in the first place. So Thank U, Dave Coulier, for being such a giant douche of a boyfriend. Otherwise I, like many others, may have never been able to experience the wonderfulness of Alanis.

Inside This Fall's Diva Girlfight

2008-10-15T16:08:00.000-04:00

The fall music season is well under way, with several artists debuting lead singles from new albums to be released before Christmas. With the continuing decline of album sales, the market for grabbing a share of the Soundscan pie is more fiercely competitive than ever. This can be seen no more clearly than in this fall's Diva Girlfight. With Pink, Britney, Beyonce, XTina and more releasing new albums, who's the most likely to come out on top? Check it out, after the jump!

Here's the Contenders, along with their chances at Diva Girlfight Victory:

Christina Aguilera: While the lead track from her forthcoming Greatest Hits album, "Keeps Getting Better", shot up to 7th on the Billboard Hot 100 last week, it's tumbled already out of the top 10, during a week that saw rival Britney Spears shoot up to the top spot. Yet with the album being a compilation and not one of original material, it's unlikely that XTina will dominate this fall, in favour of saving it for her next full album, due out next summer. She may not dominate now, but count on it once the weather goes above 30 degrees again.
Odds of Girlfight Victory: 20-1

Alicia Keys: Ms. Keys is one of the few in the industry who can do no wrong. While you can expect her album from last winter to start cleaning up the awards (it qualifies for this February's upcoming Grammys), she's presenting a tough sell of single this fall: Her collaboration with Jack White on "Another Way to Die", the theme from the upcoming James Bond film, Quantum of Solace. While the single certainly rocks (why wasn't this genius pairing thought of sooner?), getting it to catch on with Keys' RnB and Pop radio demographics may be a challenge. The added bonus? It may gain her a few extra rock fans as well. Since it's only a single, don't look for Keys to annihilate the competition this winter (for once). However, one can certainly expect this single to be just as (if not more) successful as Madonna's "Die Another Day" from 2002.
Odds of Girlfight Victory: 15-1

Jennifer Hudson: Regardless of the critical praise thrown upon her debut album and lead single, "Spotlight", it was only this week that the song finally cracked the Top 20. However, it shows signs of a slow burner, as it also just reached the No. 1 position on the Hot RnB/Hip Hop Songs Chart. What's more, Hudson's base garners largely toward the adult-contemporary crowd as well, and that demographic could certainly help boost sales through the holiday season, provided a second single garners such attention.
Odds of Girlfight Victory: 12-1

Pink: Pop's favourite angry wounded singer of the moment is enjoying a career resurgence, thanks to her hit, "So What", hitting the top spot on the Hot 100, and staying steady in the Top 10 ever since. Given the momentum leading up to the release of her next album, Funhouse, on Oct. 28th, look for Pink to have a very enoyable fall indeed. With a slew of radio-friendly tracks from various uber-producers waiting in the wings, look for Pink to possibly generate something even more rare in today's industry: A hit with legs. Got any doubt? Two of her last three albums, M!zzundastood, and I'm Not Dead, both were still in the top ten a year after release. So even if fall doesn't work out, spring is looking good for Pink too.
Odds of Girlfight Victory: 6-1

Britney Spears: Any warblings about Spears' comeback being nothing more than talk (including my own) seem to be unfounded. Today it was announced that Ms. Spears broke the record for greatest gain on the Hot 100 in history, bounding from 96-1, giving Spears her first No. 1 since "...Baby One More Time". With hype building to a peak for her next album, Circus, it appears that Spears' comeback will finally be solidified. Even if the album fails to sell ginormous amounts, if it still contains a slew of hits at radio, look for Spears to dominate most of her competition this autumn.
Odds of Girlfight Victory: 2-1. It would be higher if not for...

Beyonce: You might as well call her the comeback killer. Beyonce leaves many fans divided, mostly because people envy those who are incredibly talented, beautiful, and seemingly never take a misstep. They may have more to envy, because with the release of her two new singles, Mrs. Jay-Z seems to have avoided the missteps altogether once again. "If I Were a Boy" is a surefire hit ballad with mass crossover appeal, much in the vein of "Irreplaceable'. In addition, "Single Ladies" doesn't share the heavy bass or horns of predecessors such as "Deja Vu" or "Crazy in Love", but it does come with ridonkulously catchy beats, and a video that schools Ms. Spears in the dance (and hot bod) category. Since Beyonce's album will probably also score high on the album charts as well as with critics, it looks like fall may belong to a Dreamgirl.
Odds of Girlfight Success: Even

Agree or disagree? Feel as if there's room for more than once champion? Did we miss a contender that would wipe the floor with all of these divas? Post a comment!

Have You Ever Had a Movie Go Weird On You?

2008-10-14T15:34:00.000-04:00

So it was Thanksgiving this past weekend here in Canuckville, and since my friend Jen and I had nothing to do on Thanksgiving Monday, we decided to catch a late matinee of Bill Maher's new documentary, Religulous. The two of us happily chuckled along for over 90 minutes as Bill and Co. made idiots out of religious senators, "Ex-gays", angry Mormons, outspoken musicians, and even the curator of a Creationist museum (yes, there's a Creationist museum. It has animatronic people living happily in harmony with Dinosaurs. Yes, Dinosaurs. There was a triceratops wearing a saddle).

Yet as Bill got to the end of his religious trek, things got weird. The last three minutes of the film contain Bill calling out to all those who are non-religious to speak out against those who are religious, and that people who are religious should defect from their chosen faith, because continuing to adhere to religion will bring about the end of the world, all to the score of some scary fire-and-brimstone music.

Now I'm not complaining for any reason that has to do with being pro-religion. After all, I went to see the film to see Maher rip apart religious zealots for 90 minutes. But the ending didn't suit the rest of the film, where the jabs were humorous and satirical, not serious and tying every religion to nuclear war. There was just a big disconnect from the first 90 minutes of the film, and the last 3. And that's why it got weird.

Have you ever had a movie take a U-Turn into Weirdville? Feel free to post in the comment section below!!

Best. Live. Performance. Ever.

2008-10-11T12:24:00.000-04:00

In celebration of going to see Alanis Morissette(!) tonight at Hamilton Place, I've decided to run down my top 10 live performances I've ever experienced at concerts over my many years of concert going. Check out the top 10, after the jump!

1. AC/DC, "You Shook Me All Night Long", SARStock Toronto, 2003: Of all the many (many, many) live acts that performed at this 2003 festival to promote tourism in Toronto after the SARS crisis, AC/DC was by far the best. Performing in front of a crowd of 500,000 people, their hour long set was the culmination of great expectations for spectators for baked in the hot sun for the daylong festival. While virtually all of their songs were memorable, particular notice deserves to go to their signature hit, which brought the crowd's excitement to a fever pitch, and consequently led to AC/DC stealing the show right out from under the nose of the headliners - none other than the Rolling Stones.

2. U2, "Where the Streets Have No Name", Toronto, 2005: I had been waiting for years to see U2 live, after many unsuccessful attempts at getting tickets to previous tours. After finally lucking out with their Vertigo tour, I had high hopes for the band that Rolling Stone once called the greatest live act ever. They certainly didn't disappoint, and topped an incredible 2 1/2 hour live set with their hit from 1987's Joshua Tree. Rousing, energetic and uplifting, it was the perfect capper to an evening that proved their worthiness of the Greatest Band in the World title.

3. Heart, "Crazy on You", Toronto, 2008: After showing up to the concert late, we caught the tail end of Heart's opening set for (the heinous) Journey. As their encore, the Wilson sisters raged through their signature hit, with Nancy masterfully playing a 2 minute solo intro to the song. Once she started singing, sister Ann showed that with the best singers, voice deterioration with age is never a worry.

4. Dave Matthews Band, "Ants Marching", Toronto, 2002: Dave and Co. and notorious for playing their songs jam-style, which has lead to a devoted following similar to those who borderline stalk other jam bands like Phish and the Grateful Dead. The Air Canada Centre stunk of the ganj that night, and after my friends and I took part, we proceeded to zone out to Dave's hypnotic rendition of "Ants Marching", which continued on for over ten minutes. Long? Yes, but the song left you feeling like you were under the table and dreaming.

5. Pink, "Who Knew", Toronto, 2007: It's always a pleasant surprise when an opening act steals the show out from under the nose of the headliner. In this case, it was Pink who blew Justin Timberlake outta the water while opening for him on his FutureSexLoveShow Tour. In a show that included daring gymnastics and sweaty dance moves that even Justin would envy, her peak came with her 2007 hit, "Who Knew", which showcased something Pink is often underestimated for; her powerhouse vocals. Who knew indeed.

6. Oasis, "Don't Look Back in Anger", Virginfest Toronto, 2008: As has been previously mentioned, Noel truly showcased how to not look back in anger, after being attacked onstage at this recent event on Toronto island by a moronic fan. After a ten minute break, he came back and played the best song that was performed all day, an acoustic version of the song that was all beauty and no anger.

7. Plain White T's, "Penny (Perfect For You)", Toronto, 2002: This was the concert that turned me on to Plain White T's, a full five years before they broke out with "Hey There Delilah". None of us had known who they were when they opened for Jimmy eat World at this 2002 show, but by the end, we were all lined up to get our albums autographed by the band. The highlight was the angry tune from their album Stop, which addresses the spite geared towards a shallow ex. The whole album is incredible, but live, this was the angsty highlight that made away with the evening.

8. The Spice Girls, "Stop", New York City, 2008: Many a person would cry blasphemy at the idea of the Spice Girls being placed on a live act top ten list. However, since expectations were low in terms of singing quality, the girls were a surprisingly talented treat during their reunion tour last winter. The best was their opener though, which feverishly energized the crowd, as they reunited (and flawlessly did the hand motions to) "Stop". Victoria Beckham still can't sing, but that doesn't stop them from being incredible overall entertainers, something essential to crafting a great live performance.

9. Blink 182, "Damnit", Toronto, 1998: This performance, littered with adolescent fart and penis jokes, probably wouldn't make my top ten if I saw it now. However, when I was fifteen, I was all about Blink 182, and this was the first concert I went to. Nothing can compare to the first time you hear a song you're obsessed with, from the band you worship, live. In my case, that first time was with "Damnit", just before Blink truly broke out onto the mainstream pop-punk scene with Enema of the State. I may not enjoy it as much had it been today, but well, I guess this is growing up.

10. A-Rae, "All I Want Is You/Save Tonight", Georgetown, 2008: This highly underrated Canadian duo, currently on hiatus while Amy (the "A" in A-Rae) treks around BC, have become the masters of the acoustic cover. Furthermore, their inspired medleys of various songs provide thorough excitement to their rabid fans (myself included). While their fans all have their own opinions of their favourite A-Rae tunes, my own without a doubt has to be their cover medley of two hits from U2 and Eagle Eye Cherry, respectively. The seamless blending of the songs, combined with their soulful harmonizing, are truly something to leave you in awe. The best part? Their performances of the song weren't just good the one time, they're amazing. Every. Single. Time. When the A-Rae Reunion Tour comes back around, I'll be first in line.

What about you? had an awesome experience at a concert that blew you away? Comment in the section below!!

Absorb This; 'Chinese Democracy' Gets Release Date; Dr. Pepper Kicks Self in Ass

2008-10-10T17:14:00.000-04:00

Yes, it's officially true. As announced on Billboard yesterday, Guns'N'Roses frontman Axl Rose has officially announced the date of what we thought would never, ever happen: Chinese Democracy has a release date. Find out the release date after the jump!

So yes, Axl has officially promised that Chinese Democracy will be released exclusively through Best Buy stores, available on November 23rd. The album has become almost urban legend within the industry and fans alike, as the trials and tribulations of the band have caused the album to be delayed countless times over the past 15 years.

To help promote the release, album track "Shackler's Revenge" will be included as a track on Rock Band 2 (which means that yes, Rock Band's key demographic wasn't actually alive the last time a GNR album was released. Jebus I feel old). In addition, another track, "If The World" will be featured over the ending credits of the film Body of Lies, which is opening today.

One big question remains though, which is whether Chinese Democracy can live up to the hype built by 15 years of anticipation for another GNR album. With album sales continuing to dwindle, the chances of a GNR-inspired frenzy are slim. However, the album is being released during American Thanksgiving, which should give it an interesting, if temporary, boost. Whether Rose and company can launch a satisfying comeback from that, will depend on Rose's ability to not go back to being a creepy dreadlocked hermit.

In other news, soft drink Dr. Pepper announced last spring that it would give a free can of Dr. Pepper to every American (except Slash and Buckethead) if Chinese Democracy was released in 2008. "We're waiting to hear about 'Chinese Democracy' just like all the other GNR fans," Dr Pepper VP of marketing Tony Jacobs told Billboard. "But if the rumors are true, we're putting the Dr Pepper on ice."

Props to Dr. Pepper for making good on their promise. But do you think they may be regretting shilling out 300 million free cans of Dr. Pepper in this starved economy? I guess the chances of expanding that promise to Canada are pretty slim now. Damn.

A Mingle of Singles: Judging the Latest Crop of Wannabe-Hits

2008-10-04T14:58:00.000-04:00

Fall is often the biggest battleground for music, as artists and labels release albums that are aimed to garner both critical praise (eligibility for the Grammys ends every year on Sept. 30th), and commercial success (the biggest album sales weeks of the year are always from American Thanksgiving thru Christmas). So it's no surprise that many a music uberstar is shilling their latest single, in hopes of getting a large piece of that album-sales pie. Hit after the jump to check out critiques of the latest singles from Britney, XTina, Kanye, Akon and more!!!

"Womanizer" by Britney Spears: I've tried. Oh good lord have I tried to like this song. After being skeptical of her "comeback' after her success at the VMA's, I though to myself that a strong single would vanquish any doubts from Britney's critics (myself included). And since "Womanizer"'s release last week, I've made valiant attempts to like the song. The verses are incredibly catchy, but then she gets to that idiotic chorus, and it just goes all downhill. The repetitiveness isn't catchy, it's downright annoying, and reminds me more of a Sarah Palin speech. Couldn't they have added just one more line to the chorus, aside from "you're a womanizer?". Regardless, the song will probably be a hit, and solidify that much-ballyhooed comeback.
Rating: 5/10

"Keeps Getting Better" by Christina Aguilera: The little girl with the big voice debuted this new track, of her upcoming Greatest Hits album, at the MTV VMA's back in early September, but it's only started to gain ground now. Perhaps it took everyone awhile to get hooked on the song, as her performance at the VMA's was slightly bizarre and may have hindered interest. Needless to say though, it has grown catchier with age, and radio seems to agree, as the song rocketed to number 7 on the Billboard Hot 100 this week. Aguilera may have shamelessly stolen her new look from Lady Gaga (who, in turn, shamelessly stole her look from a Cher drag queen), but when it comes to belting out a tune, XTine just keeps getting better.
Rating: 8/10

"Right Now (Na Na Na)" by Akon: I've been an unwitting slave to Akon and every single song he's been featured on since "Smack That" two years ago. Yet that streak seems to be broken here, where he's falling into the same repetitive chorus rut that's also effecting Ms. Spears. Is everyone in the music industry losing their creativity, or are they all learning new tracks from a producer with a stutter?
Rating: 4/10

"Love Lockdown" by Kanye West: Captain Ego has brought forth an interesting new track, one that consists of sparse, steady beats and a vocoder-enhanced singing voice, in place of blazing horns, egotistical raps, and Daft Punk samples. The result is insanely compelling, even if it's a rare Kanye track you can't dance to. Props to Kanye for boldly going where very few rappers have gone before (namely, singing). Clearly it's more "Diamonds are Forever" than "Gold Digger" in terms of mainstream accessibility (as witnessed by its plummet from 3rd to 15th in its third week on the Hot 100), but creativity has never gotten in the way of Kanye's success, so don't look for it to start now.
Rating: 9/10

"Human" by The Killers: I'm in the minority of people who found The Killers' venture into arena rock, Sam's Town, an enjoyable affair. Most prefer the hot dancing mess that was Hot Fuss (which overall, is the superior album of the two). This songs seems to be an attempt to get The Killers back to their dance-rock, 80's synth-inspired roots. Produced by Stuart Price, who brought Madonna back to the dancefloor with "Hung Up" in 2005, "Human" has all the elements that should make it a dance-rock hit, yet there seems to be something missing from this tune, something that ultimately won't lead it to having a constant rotation at Phil's on a Saturday. Maybe it's the lack of hard electric guitar and bass running a current through the song, like they so wonderfully did in "Somebody Told Me". Maybe it's the fact that the songs catchiest synth beats aren't even in the chorus. Or maybe it's that the song contains the most ridiculous lyric of the year: "Are we human? Or are we dancer?" Gee, I don't know Brandon Flowers, can't we all be both? Unfortunately, this lead single leaves me with very little to be Mr. Brightside about.
Rating: 2/10

What do you think/ Agree? Disagree? Got another single you love/loath right now? Post in the comment section below!!

Yet Another Reason To Heart Heart

2008-10-04T14:55:00.000-04:00

This:

I don't know if it's true, but regardless. Way to go Ann & Nancy!

The Opinion Swinger: "Two and a Half Men"

2008-10-04T10:12:00.000-04:00

This is a hard pill to swallow.

I didn't want to admit it for a looooooooong time, but after watching too many episodes where I genuinely found myself laughing, out loud no less, I feel compelled that I must finally admit it.

I like Two and a Half Men.

How did such a thing occur? After the jump!

It's been a good, long while since I last enjoyed a sitcom with a laugh track. In fact, I haven't watched a laugh-track-filled sitcom since the days when Friends was on the air. Since then, I've (very) happily received my sitcom jollies from comedies that can be, at least in the traditional sense, considered very non-sitcomy. Arrested Development. 30 Rock. The Office. Ugly Betty. Extras. All have taken distinctive and inspired approaches to the sitcom format and came away with great success, so much so that many (myself included) have long seen the laugh-track format as dead.

And why not consider it dead? After years of feeling uninspired by a laughing machine trying to force a guffaw out of me, it felt refreshing to see sitcoms where the focus was more on the script and the acting than trying to get a laugh out of the viewer via laugh-track peer-pressure. Since all the laughs I was getting were coming from non-traditional sitcoms, the idea of watching one such as Two and a Half Men, Everybody Loves Raymond, and other "traditional" sitcoms sounded about as pleasant as having dinner with Fred Phelps.

Yet TAAHM has been on for quite a few years now, and it was pretty much unavoidable that eventually, I would see an episode. This was aided by the fact that my roommates love the show and have it on in syndication on a fairly regular basis. I tried to make a valiant effort to dislike the show for several reasons (I'm not a big fan of Charlie Sheen or John Cryer, the laugh track, the fact that every story seems to be something I've seen on any episode of any other sitcom ever created in the history of earth). Yet somehow, unavoidably, no matter how hard I tried, I found myself in the end laughing along to the randomly hilarious storylines of TAAHM.

For this, I credit the most to the strong supporting cast of the show, particularly Holland Taylor (whom I've always loved since her days on The Practice) and Conchata Ferrell, who provide blisteringly funny support as Sheen and Cryer's mother, and Sheen's assistant, respectively. Also, Angus T. Jones as Jake (the "half" from the title) has proven to become very gifted in comedy, especially for such a young actor. Even Sheen and Cryer have become more likable to me, as their odd-couple dynamic is surprisingly fresh.

Props however, should also go to creators Chuck Lorre and Lee Aronsohn for making excellent use of quality guest stars. One particularly great episode featured Elvis Costello and Sean Penn as Sheen's "support group". The one that officially changed my opinion though,was the recent crossover episode with CSI, which deftly lampooned CSI's greatest trademarks with wit and fantastic comic timing (largely thanks to Taylor).

And so, I have no found myself actually enjoying a sitcom with a laugh-track again. Thankfully, it's much easier to do when the show is actually funny enough to inspire one to laugh without the aforementioned laugh-track peer-pressure. So here's to Two and a Half Men, for showing that the "traditional" sitcom isn't dead yet. Consider my opinion swung.

Remembering Paul Newman

2008-09-27T13:18:00.000-04:00

Sad news from Hollywood today as it is revealed that legendary actor, Paul Newman, has passed away at the age of 83. A screen legend for over 50 years, Newman starred in iconic films such as Cool Hand Luke, The Color of Money, The Hustler, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, and The Sting. Even for a film buff such as myself, an actor who is 60 years older than me hardly ever evokes the kind of emotion in a 25 year-old, that I felt this morning. Hit after the jump to find out why Paul Newman will always be more than a legendary actor to me.

In 1963, Newman starred in the film adaptation of Tennessee Williams' Cat On A Hot Tin Roof, with Elizabeth Taylor and Burl Ives, scoring his first of 10 Oscar nominations in doing so. I studied the play in grade 11, when I was seventeen, which was also coincidentally the year when I realized, secretly, after years of being attracted to my own gender, "oh sh!t, I'm gay".

COAHTR is famous for, among many things, its obvious homosexual undertones, centralized around Newman's character, Brick, and his love for his recently-deceased friend Skipper. Even in the film, where the gay theme was toned down significantly, it's still plainly obvious what they were trying to convey with Brick's lack of interest in Maggie the Cat.

Two things happened when I saw COAHTR in drama class that year. The first, was that my feeble 17-year-old brain realized for the first time that yes, even people in 1963 were sexy (and damn, was Paul Newman sexy). The second was that this was a film made in a time when making films about gay characters was forbidden under the Hays Code, much less frowned upon. Yet here was a confirmed straight man (his marriage of over 50 years to Joanne Woodward is the stuff of Hollywood legend), who was willing to portray a gay character. I was terrified of coming out at the time, but what this showed me was that if a straight guy was willing to play gay back in the 1960's, then surely someday I would be able to muster up the courage to truly be myself. I didn't do so until after high school, but it was Paul Newman in COAHTR that first gave me the inspiration, and courage, to do so.

Paul Newman never made his support of the gay community a secret, once stating:
“I'm a supporter of gay rights. And not a closet supporter either. From the time I was a kid, I have never been able to understand attacks upon the gay community. There are so many qualities that make up a human being... by the time I get through with all the things that I really admire about people, what they do with their private parts is probably so low on the list that it is irrelevant.”

When many others in his generation had no qualms about speaking about their hate for gay characters in films (shame on you, Tony Curtis!! And you were in Spartacus!!), it was always refreshing to see an octogenarian who openly supported the gay community. So while many will remember him for his many legendary roles (my personal fave? His Oscar-nominated turn as the stone-cold mob boss in Road to Perdition), I'll remember him for the legendary things he stood for in his own life as well, and what they did for me. And for his awesome salad dressing.

Thanks Paul Newman. May Butch Cassidy ride off into the sunset in peace.

Does People Have a Corner on Coming-Out Celebs?

2008-09-25T11:17:00.000-04:00

So, as noted below, Clay Aiken shocked the world (aka nobody) by coming out on the cover of People magazine this week. First off, congrats to Clay, I guarantee it'll be a sigh of relief to get Perez off your back (although judging from the closet cleaner's site, that doesn't seem to be working). Yet, with another celebrity officially coming out, and using a major publication to do so, one has to start wondering: Does every gay celebrity need to out themselves on the cover of a major magazine? And why are all of those magazines owned by Time Warner? Check out our analysis, after the jump!

"I'm gay".

"Yep, I'm gay".

"Yes, I'm gay".

These were the cover headlines for the three covers featuring Lance Bass, Ellen DeGeneres, and Aiken. Both Bass and Aiken came out on the cover of People magazine, while DeGeneres came out on the cover of Time (which, like People, is owned by Time Warner). Why is it that Time Warner, and most notably People, has become the go-to place if you wanna go from famous, to famous-and-gay?

For every outed celebrity as of late, if you want genuine support and recognition without being hounded minute-by-minute during your outing process, apparently People is the way to go. While they didn't grace the cover to do so, both T.R. Knight and Neil Patrick Harris issued exclusive statements to People before catching the express train to Outville. Yet all this confirms is that People is hungry for good coming out stories, and does nothing to show why gay male celebrities feel the need to use it to vent their feelings - and personal lives.

Let's take a closer look at People magazine. People is a magazine about, well, people. Because that's the case, it often hovers (very) dangerously close to the point of becoming a tabloid, often running stories that are similar to those in paparazzi rags such as Us Weekly and In Touch. The only difference is that People (usually) won't go after a story unless it's true, and often is very capable of creating stories that their readers have a sympathetic pull towards. Because people will believe a story that's on the cover of People, but not Us Weekly, it seems like a smart choice for those who want to come out, and actually be believed.

But this begs the question, why only People? There are several other magazines and publications that have just as much (or even more) journalistic credibility than a borderline gossip rag such as People. Why not release the story to a major newspaper, such as the New York Times? Or how about this: give the interview to a major gay-oriented magazine such as The Advocate, and in doing so possibly enlighten others on several LGBT-oriented issues that would be addressed in that issue?

The main issue with that of course, is the fact that The Advocate doesn't appeal to as broad of a base of readers, so getting the full story out may prove more difficult. But in an age where any mainstream story can be passed around the globe instantaneously via the Internet, news feeds, and various mobile-web devices. Plus, ironically enough, while outing yourself on the cover of a magazine lets the world know you're gay, doing so on the cover of The Advocate may seem "too gay", which is sadly something the mainstream America still isn't ready for. So for a performer who is still looking to have a successful career after coming out, appealing to a broad audience seems like a wise idea, and doing so in People may be the best way to do it.

So I guess People's corner on coming-out stories isn't all bad. But maybe it would be nice for a performer to be able to come out someday without having to have their career saved by gracing the cover of one particular magazine. Until then, Lindsay Lohan, people is waiting for a callback from your publicist.

News That Doesn't Surprise Anybody:

2008-09-25T11:11:00.000-04:00

This:

Was Universal Smart to Say No to Tintin?

2008-09-20T15:10:00.000-04:00

Steven Spielberg has been wanting to make a Tintin feature film since the early 80's, and yet has somehow never found the opportunity to do so. A few years ago, it seemed he found a partner for the project in fellow uber-director Peter Jackson. The deal seemed sealed, with Universal and Paramount co-financing a Tintin trilogy that would use motion-capture technology (much like The Polar Expess and Beowulf).

However, Universal has now balked at the estimated $130 million cost of each film, and is subsequently backing out of its deal with Spielberg and Jackson, leaving both in an odd predicament for the first time: Two very powerful directors with nobody to make their films. While this may come as surprising to many, check after the jump to see why Universal may have made a smart move that wasn't just based on the dwindling U.S. economy.

According to the report, Universal is blaming the economy for dropping out of the deal with Jackson and Spielberg. However, I have a feeling that several other factors may have contributed to the deal-breaker. here's just a few:

1. Lack of Box-Office Pedigree: Spielberg is the only proven box-office draw attached to the projects. While star Thomas Sangster has appeared in films such as Love Actually, he's hardly known at all. His costar, Andy Serkis, may have been in some of the biggest films of the past decade (Gollum in the Lord of the Rings trilogy), but his appearances are always in supporting roles, and never as a leading draw for ticket sales. At least Beowulf had Angelina Jolie, and Polar Express had Tom Hanks. Beyond LOTR, Jackson isn't even a proven draw, as his King Kong remake disappointed commercially in 2005. To sink over almost $400 million into the production of a trilogy without a star brighter than its director seems like a big gamble.

2. How Strong is That Tintin Name?: The last completed Tintin story was published over 30 years ago, with the prime of the series dating back to the early 1950's. How strong and relevent is the Tintin name in today's society? While Spielberg may have found the idea appealing when he was younger, the fact of the matter is that trying to get an 80 year old franchise to appeal to kids and teenagers today is a lot harder than it would have been in 1983, when Spielberg first wanted to film the adaptation. In addition, since their publication, many critics have derided the Tintin franchise for being overly dated, stereotypical, racist, sexist, and homophobic. In fact, I even was forced to read Tintin in university to analyze its racist cultural undertones. While these certainly would not be implied in an actual film, the idea of developing a major film franchise around something that could cause such controversy may have gotten Univseral squirming.

3. Dead-eye Syndrome: While cutting-edge, it has been well-documented that people are weirded out by the uncanny valley shown through motion-capture technology. To put it simple: many viewers who saw Beowulf and Polar Express find the dead-eyed characters downright creepo. While Express eventually became a word-of-mouth Christmas hit, Beowulf and Monster House both disappointed commercially. Furthermore, the cost of these films are incredibly expensive. Combining the cost of producing a motion-capture Tintin trilogy, along with the cost of marketing a Spielberg/Jackson event-sized tentpole film, Universal may have simply seen the film as too risky.

Who knows though, maybe it really is the economy that cause Universal to pull the plug. Regardless of their decision though, as much as a Spielberg-Jackson double whammy sounds tempting, maybe the pair should take the hint, and then collaborate on another dream project, or just abandon the idea altogether for now and focus on their other pet projects. After all, that Lincoln biopic of Spielberg's with Liam Neeson has already been gestating for way too long, and I think I speak for the universe in saying that we want The Hobbit before we have Tintin. Judging from Universal's actions, it looks like Hollywood might feel the same way.

Absorb This: The 90210 Girls Are the New "Too Skinny" Scapegoats

2008-09-18T16:34:00.000-04:00

It's been awhile now since Nicole Ritchie got pregnant and put on weight, so I guess everyone had to start looking for someone else to turn into a bulimic wreck. The focus has now been shifted to Shenae Grimes (Annie) and Jessica Stroup (Erin Silver) of the CW's 90210 reboot (what, is AnnaLynne McCord's Naomi an obese cow?). Apparently, the girls are setting a bad example for their young viewers by being too thin, and now rumors are swirling of an intervention being held by the 90210 cast, encouraging them to gain weight. Yes, there are string beans with more meat on them than these girls, but should the focus really be on them? Hit after the jump for who's really to blame.

So yes, the girls of 90210 are too thin. But guess what? SO IS EVERYBODY ELSE ON TV. And in movies. And music. And on Broadway and just about every other kind of performing art. It's been long recognized that the camera adds ten pounds, and so every female who faces a camera these days is rail-thin. These girls are not to blame, it's the industry itself for putting the pressure on the girls (and all women) to be thin. It's no secret that these industries (and the tabloids that follow them) seem to have a secret chart of ideal weights:

Size 00: Too skinny
Sizes 0-2: Just right
Sizes 3-4: "Curvy"
Sizes 5+: Prey for Captain Ahab

So, because the girls of 90210 appear to be on the slimmer side of size 0, the media has allowed them to take up the mantle previously held by Nicole Ritchie and Lindsay Lohan. Now, even stars of other shows are chiming in on it. Recently, Penn Badgley of Gossip Girl told the press that the girls of 90210 should "eat a double cheeseburger". Maybe Badgley should be saying the same thing to his own girlfriend and GG costar, Blake Lively. While Lively isn't quite as thin as the 90210 girls, the perception of "all girls must be skinny" put forth through these TV characters is still personified by Lively's Serena, as well as all of the other girls on GG. And while we're at it, this could have been said to The OC's Mischa Barton and Rachel Bilson as well. In this week's issue of People, they claim that GG's Leighton Meester and Lively are "curvy". If these girls are curvy, what does that say about everyone else above a size 2? To claim that the GG girls are putting forth a healthier body image than the girls on 90210 sounds downright insulting to a gender I'm not even a part of.

Everyone also seems to be forgetting the fact that Grimes has been on TV for awhile now, and yet nobody seems to have cared what her weight was while she was on Degrassi: The Next Generation. Maybe Canadians are too nice to openly criticize a girl's weight, but here's the kicker: She looks exactly the same now as she did while on Degrassi. While Degrassi has never reached the number of viewers that 90210 does, the fact of the matter is that her weight hasn't changed, so if you didn't complain about it back then, you shouldn't now. These girls on 90210 are having their first shot at stardom, and they're being cruelly investigated not because of anything relevant like their acting quality, but just because the tabloids need a new flock of weight scapegoats. Welcome to Hollywood, ladies.

One last thing; If everyone is going to take shots at the female leads for being uber-thin, when is it going to happen that they start criticizing how unrealistic their male counterparts are on these series? Last I checked, not every guy in high school has toned biceps and rippling abs. The only thing more unbelievable may have been Adam Brody playing the unattractive nerd on The OC. If there's pressure on girls to be skinny, there's just as much now on guys to look like gym slaves. Think I'm wrong? Tell it to the 15 year old who's doing 300 ab crunches a day so he can look like Chace Crawford.

Just Another Reason to Love Brad...

2008-09-18T13:14:00.000-04:00

Brad is part of a dying breed, known often as the "movie star". Aside from a few others (namely his domestic partner and Ocean's Eleven costars), a bona fide movie star is hard to come by these days. And it's an even rarer breed of star that you'll see throw their weight behind a controversial political issue. In this PR-censored era, long gone are the days when the likes of Jane Fonda, Martin Sheen, or Vanessa Redgrave weren't afraid to speak their feelings on certain political issues, let alone do so with their checkbooks.

Yet that's what Brad is doing, as yesterday he donated $100,000.00 to stop Proposition 8, the amendment to be voted on in California in November that would effectively ban gay marriage. Brad is the first major celebrity to make a significant donation to the cause of stopping the ban, the first of its kind that would effectively reverse the Supreme Court's ruling that has allowed gay marriages in California since June.

Both Brad and partner Angelina Jolie have stated in the past that they won't marry "until everyone else can", and this continued gesture of their support is significant in that it's rare for a major celebrity to throw their weight behind a controversial cause these days. So thanks to Brad Pitt, this is just another reason why you'll always be in the hearts (and sexual fantasies) of gays everywhere. And judging by the fact that funding to stop Proposition 8 is a full $5 million behind those who want to ban gay marriage, we need all the help we can get.

Why I'm Not Jumping On The Britney Comeback Bandwagon... Yet.

2008-09-13T15:31:00.000-04:00

As many of my friends can attest, I have been, for several years, a Britney Spears fan. Even in the days when I was "heterosexual", I was a devoted fan of her breathy, only semi-talented vocals. I even own all of her albums, which in this day and age, is actually saying something.
I even stuck by Britney even during those tumultuous Kevin years, followed by last year's level of craziness only equalled by Michael Jackson. And yet now Britney seems to be back, after winning 3 Moonmen at the 2008 MTV Video Music Awards this past Sunday. So why would I, someone whose Britney playlist on iTunes is only succeeded in number of songs by U2 and Madonna, be unwilling to be jumping on the bandwagon with Britney as she hits the comeback trail? Find out, after the jump!

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for comebacks. I was all for Mariah's big comeback a few years ago after her much-publicized bout with "exhaustion". Pink is also enjoying a wondrous resurgence right now with her single "So What", after her previous two albums faltered in sales. Heck, the world even decided to forgive U2 after Pop.

Yet the difference between these people and Britney Spears right now, is that they actually did something creatively to get back in the good graces with the public. Carey released arguably the greatest album of her career with The Emancipation of Mimi. U2 did the same with All That You Can't Leave Behind. Meanwhile, Pink has released her most commercially viable and catchy single in years, and looks to continue her string of critically-lauded albums. All in all, these three, along with various other artists, have had successful comeback stories, not because of hype, but because they created something that proved they were worthy of the public's attention once again.

So far, all that Britney has done is regain her sanity. Aside from that, Britney has done very little to get back in the good graces of the public aside from catching the Mariah Carey Express back from Crazyville, and giggling beside Russell Brand and an elephant in the MTV VMA commercials. All of this is fine and dandy, but it still doesn't equate to anything to compensate for the past few years of crazy we've had to absorb, let alone prove that Britney is even a shadow of the dominant force in music she once was.

This week's past VMA's didn't offer anything better either. While the show was completely tailored to showcase Britney's "comeback", it did very little to showcase any reason why we should be excited about it. In fact, her multiple victories, including for Video of the Year for "Piece of Me" (for which she seemed awfully nonchalant for someone who was "totally not expecting this"), only showcase how meaningless and superficial the Moonmen have become since the days when truly innovative videos, like REM's "Losing My Religion" would reap the awards. Surely "Piece of Me" wasn't the best video nominated, it won simply because Britney's appearance would gain the most hype.

The biggest backer of Britney's return, of course, has been MTV. The network seems to have confirmed with the VMA's that to them, she's this generation's Madonna, and they're going to have a long, collaborative relationship just like MTV and Madge have for over 25 years. The only difference is that Madonna earned that relationship by pushing creative boundaries and constantly challenging not only herself, but MTV as well. And while I'll probably be a big fan of whatever Britney comes out with next (scheduled for spring 2009 tentatively), until then, this guy will take the scenic route instead of jumping on the Britney bandwagon.

My Weekend of Concerts: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

2008-09-08T15:33:00.000-04:00

This past weekend was one full of musical entertainment for myself, as I had the pleasure of going to two very different concerts. The first was the Journey, Heart, and Cheap Trick concert at the Molson Amphitheatre on Friday, Sept. 5th. Two days later, I got to head out to the British Invasion-themed Virgin Mobile Festival on Toronto island, where headliners included Oasis, Paul Weller, the Stereophonics, Moby, plus more (which is what Danko Jones referenced himself as being called on V-Fest's ads). So, after logging a solid 13 hours of live music absorption, I present to you the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of it all:

The Good:
1. Heart: Why oh why were the lovely Wilson sisters not the headliners of this 80's themed concert instead of Journey? Who knows, but after blazing through a set of greatest hits, Ann and Nancy proved two things: female rockers can still play guitar and wail out their hits just as good as any of their over-50 male counterparts, and that you definitely don't need to be a headliner to steal the show. The set highlights? The sisters pairing up to rip through a cover of "Battle of Evermore" and their hit "Crazy on You" during the encore.

2. Noel Gallagher of Oasis: For keeping his cool during a high stress situation (see Ugly), and after a brief hiatus, taking the stage once again to play the highlight of not only the Oasis set, but possibly the whole day, with an acoustic version of "Don't Look Back In Anger" that left the entire crowd in awe. The rapturous applause afterwards for Noel were certainly justified, not only for the incredible performance, but for doing so in such a relaxed manner in the face of a stressful predicament.

3. "Lazy Eye" by the Silversun Pickups: The entire Silversun Pickups set was pretty incredible, as the L.A. based group knows how to make zone-out guitar shredding tantalizingly hypnotic, and did so no better than on their popular single, which closed out their entertaining late-afternoon set.

4. Spiral Beach and Sons & Daughters: The two winners of the award for Bands We Discovered and Loved While at a Music Festival. Spiral Beach opened the main stage, while Scottish group Sons & Daughters headlined the alternative stage. Both were incredibly catchy and had great rapport with the crowd. In the case of Sons & Daughters, that rapport was so good that it reached us even from inside the buzz-happy depths of the beer garden.

5. Jason Tait of The Weakerthans: While the entire Weakerthans set was fantastic as usual, particular kudos go to sometime Broken Social Scene contributor Tait, whose talents on all things percussion raised the performance from live to lively.

For The Bad and The Ugly from the two concerts, take a look after the jump!

The Bad:

Paul Weller: One could blame this on my demographic being not exactly the one Weller goes after. Or you could blame it on me not knowing any of his songs previously. Yet I enjoy many acts much older than Weller, and not knowing any songs was the same case for Sons & Daughters, and they were wonderful. My issue lies with Weller's inability to get the crowd riled up. Heck, Weller failed to even keep the crowd interested, which was noticeable when they barely registered his exit. If Virgin was gonna go for an aging British rock star to add to the lineup, couldn't they at least have gotten Iggy Pop, like they did for the Baltimore V-fest?

2. Lineups: They're always a pain at concerts and music festivals. However, this weekend two were particularly brutal. The first being the sluggish traffic line we waited in for over an hour to get parking at the Amphitheatre, causing us to miss Cheap Trick entirely. Seriously, what's the point in holding a concert if you can't have adequate parking for it? The second was the lineup to get into the DJ tent to see Moby, the lineup for which was longer than the bathroom and beer garden lines combined. While this proves that the Mobster still has some popularity holding over from the late 90's, waiting that long to see only a DJ set bordered on ludicrous.

3. Journey: After witnessing this debacle, I may have to reverse my previous feelings in the Journey vs. Boston debate. While "Don't Stop Believing" was of course a highlight, the rest of the 80 minute set was mixed at best. While new lead singer Arnel Pineda certainly sounds like Steve Perry, he, along with the rest of the band, did very little to connect with the crowd. By the time they had walked off for the stage (and barely even greeting the crowd with any acknowledgment), it was as if the band had lost its favour with the crowd. Plus, out of their 30 year career, the band often focused on the new stuff. Who wants to hear the new stuff?

The Ugly:

1. The Moron Who Tried to Attack the Gallagher Brothers: So the Gallagher brothers of Oasis got into a fight at V-Fest. Oddly enough, this time it wasn't with each other. Whoever the turd was who decided to rush the stage and attack Noel Gallagher, it was obviously not the smartest move. The Gallagher brothers are notoriously prickly when things don't go their way, and many in the crowd (myself included) attributed the band cutting their set short (by almost 30 minutes) to the fact that someone had tried to physically assault them. With a set that focused primarily on new stuff and was surprisingly singles-lite, I'd like to thank Noel and Liam's would-be attacker for not letting me hear "Don't Go Away". Or "Do You Know What I Mean". Or "Champagne Supernova". And I'd like to thank them with a smack on the face.

2. Danko Jones: I've never been a huge Danko fan, and clearly Danko himself is having issues with people not being big fans. While it was humorous at first that Jones took a few jabs at his own band for not being the headliner, it turned awkward when Jones spent over five minutes urging the crowd to "pretend he's Oasis" and cheer louder for him. While it worked at first, the schtick went on too long, and it became pretty clear that Jones has personal issues with his waning popularity. Sorry Danko, but maybe you could take a lesson or two from Sisqo, and learn to accept your waning popularity graciously by appearing on Gone Country.

3. Liam Gallagher of Oasis: For throwing an obvious temper tantrum after the above-mentioned attack on brother Noel, and leaving the stage angrily throughout the rest of the set. Um, Liam, last we saw, the guy attacked your brother, not you. Chill dude, concert temper tantrums involving your brother are soooo 1997.

And now, for some clips from Oasis, including one showing the brief attack on Noel, check out below. Enjoy!

First, here's Noel getting attacked at 1:29

Which he then returned from and sang "Don't Look Back In Anger".

"Wonderwall"

What was the Song of Summer for 2008?

2008-08-30T14:36:00.000-04:00

With Labour Day Weekend upon us, this means two things: Time to put away those white pants for another year, and time to crown the Song of Summer 2008. But along the way, I thought why not crown a few also-rans who gave their best effort? Congrats to these songs below. You may not have been THE Song of Summer 2008, but you certainly are worth honorable mention:

Rock Song of Summer 2008: "Viva La Vida" by Coldplay, solely for making us all embrace sweeping epic rock songs again, just when we all thought Coldplay couldn't come up with something that didn't sound just like "Clocks".

Ballad of Summer 2008: "Take a Bow" by Rihanna. The song isn't actually very good. The lyrics are pretty lame and repetitive. But damn me if it isn't catchy as hell.

Import Song of Summer 2008: "American Boy" by Estelle feat. Kanye West. Brit import Estelle had Kanye featured on the song to gain some further attention Stateside, but she didn't need it. The catchiest parts of the song have nothing to do with Kanye, it's all Estelle's crooning magic.

The Kylie Minogue Memorial Award for Guilty Pleasure Song You Can't Outta Your Head: "When I Grow Up" by The Pussycat Dolls. Narrowly beating out "Burnin' Up" by the Jonas Brothers, the Pussycat Dolls yet again prove that they can make anyone a fan after over 100 listens. Plus, they win the title of Most Confusing Summer Lyric for: "I wanna see the world, drive fast cars, I wanna have boobies". Or groupies. Some even think rubies. Who knows!

Unexpected Hit of Summer 2008: "Paper Planes" by M.I.A. Further proof that all you need to turn your song into a hit is some careful placement in an ad for something that has nothing to do with your song (in this case, the trailer for Pineapple Express).

Song of Summer That Should Have Been: "The Beat Goes On" by Madonna feat. Kanye West and Pharrell. Madge came back in top form with this year's Hard Candy, which produced the springtime hit "4 Minutes". Her followup, "Give It 2 Me" has failed to chart in North America though, except on dance charts. With a killer interlude by Kanye, as well as an uber catchy chorus featuring a Donna Summer sample, this was the tune Madge should have released. Here's hoping she does so this fall.

This is all fine and dandy, but who's the real champion? Who can be declared as having the Song of Summer 2008? Chris Brown? Lil Wayne? Kid Rock? The answer, with the accompanying vid, after the jump!

With much deep thought as well as taking into consideration its success in several completely arbitrary and biased categories, the Song of Summer 2008 is....

That's right, it's "I Kissed A Girl" by Katy Perry!!! What made Perry rise above the rest? First, it's her breakout hit and brought forth a new star on the music scene. The song spent seven weeks at #1 on the Billboard Hot 100, more than any other song this summer. Perry made it acceptable for girls to drunkenly make out with one another, thus starting a trend that is sure to poorly influence 9 year old girls everywhere. The resulting controversy and novelty of the song is undeniable, and contributed to its hit factor. Oh yeah, and did we mention that it's just ridonkulously catchy and fun to dance to? C'mon Katy Perry haters, admit it, by this summer's end, when she kissed a girl, you liked it too.

Did The Dark Knight Ruin the August Box-Office?

2008-08-30T10:40:00.000-04:00

Since it opened on July 18th, all anyone can talk about regarding movies is The Dark Knight. Heath ledger's performance. Christian Bale's rough batman growl. Those record-breaking box office receipts. Without a doubt, The Dark Knight has gained more hype and praise for any movie to come along easily since The Lord of the Rings trilogy, and maybe since Titanic.

Yet with all the hype surrounding The Dark Knight, it seems as if the rest of the releases over the course of August have failed miserably in the wake of the Batman franchise behemoth. While Warner Bros. is doing a happy dance, see why everyone else is kicking themselves, after the jump!

August has traditionally never been the strongest month for summer box-office, yet in recent years, several films have learned that the desire for summer entertainment certainly stretches into the final month of warm weather. Films such as the last two Bourne films, Superbad, The 40 Year-Old Virgin, Talladega Nights, Rush Hour 3, and Wedding Crashers, all easily crossed $100 million and were considered great successes.

This year however, seems to be different. The film closest to crossing the $100 million mark is The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, which will barely cross the mark, and will do so while paling in comparison to the greater successes of its predecessors (and its $140 million budget). Even having excellent word-of-mouth seems to have failed, as comedies Pineapple Express and Tropic Thunder will both struggle to see $100 million grosses. Considering Express's modest budget, there's no shame in that, but compared to previous summers where comedies have dominated August, the numbers put forth by both Express and Thunder are troublesome.

But is The Dark Knight to blame? Partially. Lots of things can be blamed for the lack of success for many movies in August. Heinous reviews for The Mummy. The hard-sell satire of Thunder. Stoners actually don't go to theatres to see stoner movies, so they're waiting for DVD to see Express. The Olympics. Yet all of these films are targeted by The Dark Knight demographic of young males, so would they have had bigger opening grosses if The Dark Knight wasn't so huge? You bet.

Some think that a big movie doesn't hinder others, but helps them, kind of like "well, The Dark Knight is sold out, let's go see Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants 2". This happened with the hoopla surrounding Titanic, as it helped other films, such as Good Will Hunting and As Good As It Gets, push their grosses past $100 million by simply getting people to actually trek to a theatre. Why this hasn't happened with The Dark Knight is a mystery. My best guess is that in summer (unlike with Titanic's winter release), with so many films being action-CGI-spectaculars all going for the same demographic, people just decided to go see the one of quality, instead of the one where Brendan Fraser is fighting the same thing we saw him fight back in 2000.

Or maybe people just thought all of the other August movies were a load of crap. After all, who greenlit Mirrors?

Which Summer Movie Did You Miss The Boat On?

2008-08-29T13:58:00.000-04:00

Summer is a special time for movie-goers. With the major studios packing all of their eye candy into the span of May-August, many people end up going to the movies as often as once per week. And with releases such as Wanted, Hancock, Wall-E, Hellboy II: The Golden Army, Mamma Mia!, and The Dark Knight all coming out within four weeks of one another, sometimes even for the most avid moviegoer it was hard to keep up.

It can be so hard to keep up in fact, that often a movie or two which you had every intention of seeing in theatres, often gets swept aside in favour of BBQ's, cottages, and other summer plans that take advantage of not being indoors. With summer at its end, check out the movies I'm sad I missed out on, after the jump!

Missed The Boat Movie #1: Sex and the City: The Movie. I, like many a 'mo, have often prided myself on being the Stanford to my friends' Carrie et al. Which is part of the reason it's so blasphemous that I completely missed the movie while in theatres. While I was away at a wedding on its opening weekend, thus not allowing me to see it with my Carrie and friends, that's hardly an excuse. After all, the film had one of the longest and most successful theatre runs of any film released this past summer. Yet by the time I got home from the wedding, it seemed that every female in the universe went to go see it opening weekend, and thus I was left with nobody to go with. After convincing my bf to go see it with me at the drive-in, I thought it was a done deal. But then fate shat on my face, and it stormed that night. Boourns Mother Nature! As a hardcore fan of the show, I'm disappointed in myself, but intend to make it up to Carrie and the gals by buying the DVD on September 23rd. Even if the movie turns out to be crap.

Missed The Boat Movie #2: The X-Files: I Want To Believe. And I really did. Want to believe in getting to see this movie in theatres, that is. Yet again, seeing this movie on opening weekend got usurped by busy weekend plans. Yut I assumed I would be able to see the following weekend, right? Not so much. Thanks to underwhelming reviews, even more underwhelming box-office, and opening in the shadow of The Dark Knight juggernaut, the X-Files sequel bombed outta the gate, and never had the chance to recover. Two weeks later we tried to go see it in the theatre, only to discover that it wasn't playing anymore. Apparently, the opening weekend really does count now more than ever.

Missed The Boat Movie #3: American Teen. In the wake of aging archaeologists, brooding superheroes, and robots with acronyms for names, it's pretty easy for a small independent documentary to get lost amongst the sea of explosion-happy summer fare. Yet American Teen was the one indie film this summer that seemed to have the buzz going for it, and could have led it to become the summer's sleeper hit. That is, if anyone went to see it. Unfortunately, all the positive buzz it rode from the Sundance Film Festival, as well as those comparisons to The Breakfast Club, didn't generate at the box office. As a result, the film was never allowed to expand into more screens, meaning it still hasn't even arrived in my lovely town of Waterloo. Maybe the always-wonderful Princess Cinemas will give it a second chance a few months down the road.

What about you? have any movies that you wanted to see over the summer, and missed the boat on? Post in the comments section below!

A 4th Judge Gets Added To The American Idol Resurrection Tour

2008-08-28T15:29:00.000-04:00

Easily the best news to come along since The Battle of the Davids ended with Cook being the champion, Fox has recently announced that American Idol will be adding a fourth judge, songwriter Kara DioGuardi, for this winter's upcoming 8th season of the juggernaut reality contest. DioGuardi has already made a name for herself in the industry by becoming an accomplished songwriter, writing for several big-name female singers, as well as many former Idol contestants.

So, with producer Nigel Lythgoe voluntarily bowing out earlier this summer, and the new addition of DioGuardi, does anyone else smell a reboot of this quickly fading show? Whether or not it'll work, after the jump!

I, of course, have never met Kara DioGuardi, so I have no idea what she's like in real life. She could be a scowling Brit who only wears grey and black t-shirts, a loopy former pop star who loves whatever is in those Coca Cola cups a little too much, or a famous producer who likes to give people improperly-spelled nicknames based upon domesticated animals. Who knows, maybe she's all three. At least the split personalities would provide a much-needed energy injection into the trio of judges.

That's why Idol's producers are going for, at least - a new dynamic. Smelling that over the past two seasons Idol may have become (gasp!) lame in the eyes of its younger demographic, they're looking to spice things up in the most probable place - the judges table. While many people may assume that this is the much-prophesied moment when Idol will jump the shark, I think that after eight years, it's about time they added someone who'll actually add a worthy opinion beyond a combination of "you look so beautiful tonight, and you're heart is in the right place, but it was a little pitchy, dawg. It was like singing on a cruise ship". Who knows, maybe DioGuardi attended the So You Think You Can Dance School of Constructive Criticism, and will be able to actually say things that will help build the contestants into stronger performers, instead of crushed egos.

Some people believe that this will ruin the dynamic amongst the three existing judges. But how? After eight seasons, the dynamic between Randy Jackson, Paula Abdul and Simon Cowell has become so routine that it takes a Paula flub (like this past season's Jason Castro fiasco) to get any attention. Plus, considering the rumors that Abdul may eventually leave Idol, why not ease in her replacement now?

So, with DioGuardi in, I must ask whether this is because Nigel Lythgoe has jumped ship? Who knows, but here's a suggestion to the producers if they're continuing to look for ways to spice up the show: Get rid of Seacrest already and hire Cat Deeley to host both Idol and So You Think You Can Dance. Even if she only gave the illusion of giving a rat's ass about the contestants, that would be more than Seacrest has done for the past four seasons.

Oh yeah, and can we just try to get Simon Cowell to wear colour for once? Just to see what it would if would look like for him to (heaven forbid) wear green.

Pink is Back: "So What"?

2008-08-23T11:20:00.000-04:00

I've always been a fan of Pink, even in her early "There You Go" days when she was an RnB singer (remember that? Gotta love those record labels and their creative control). Yet after her greatest commercial success with M!zzundastood, it seems that fans turned their backs on her ever evolving rocker image. Her third album, Try This, tanked commercially, and it seemed she was going to be one of those pop stars that would just fade away from the pack (paging Willa Ford...).

The same thing happened when her fourth album, I'm Not Dead, faded quickly as well. But a rare resurgence in her singles "U+Ur Hand" and "Who Knew" over the past year, brought Pink back into the spotlight, and is somewhat credited with resurrecting her career in North America. And IMHO, it's essential that we keep Pink around and letting her do what she wants. Check out the reasons why, as well as the video for her new single, after the jump!

It's plain and simple really: Pink has never been afraid to stand apart from the crowd, and the music industry needs more of those. Here's a woman who knows she's different from the generic pop star, and isn't afraid to use it. She's able to use her commercial success to produce her album the way she wants, and above all, is never afraid to, heaven forbid, be herself.

Case in point, "So What", the lead single from her upcoming fifth album, Funhouse. The song takes aim at the scrutiny raised by her recent failed marriage to Carey Hart, and on it she sings about her carefree attitude to what others think of her (ex-husband or otherwise).

Nobody is better at poking fun at their own image either. Listening to the song, many will believe she's taking shots at Hart for their failed marriage, yet Hart appears in the video with her in front of a background littered with tabloid headlines regarding their separation. What this shows is her knack for tackling those who have attacked her, but at the same time embracing those moments of lunacy that go along with being a pop star. The moment in the video when her hair is set on fire is downright hilarious, not just because it's an unexpected sight gag, but because her attitude pokes fun at those of "entitled" pop stars, something that Pink recognizes she is.

Oh yes, and did I mention she's a knockout performer? I was fortunate enough to catch Pink opening for Justin Timberlake last year, and she blew me away, and my friends and I agreed she stole the show out from under Justin's nose. Her voice is notoriously rougher than the likes of Jessica Simpson or Beyonce, but her pipes hold up equally as well live, showing she had a much greater range than I initially expected. Plus, her ability to captivate an audience and perform with a skilled and surprisingly acrobatic routine was unmatched for the evening, regardless of Justin's efforts to bring Sexyback.

So props to you, Pink, for being yourself and embracing it all, both the good and the bad. In a world that's clamoring for Britney to have her third comeback, why not give it to a woman who actually deserves it.

Watch the new video for "So What" below!

Pink - So What

Who's Gunning for Oscar Glory So Far in 2008?

2008-08-22T14:24:00.000-04:00

When it comes to awards in the film industry, the year can be divided into two sections: Fall, and Everything Else. Regardless of some films being able to maintain their buzz throughout the year to score a best Picture nod (Gladiator, Crash, Little Miss Sunshine), it's still a rare feat when a film released before September ends up with a slew of nominations (in fact only six of the forty past nominees in the 2000's for Best Picture have been released pre-September). For actors, it's usually no better, with a performance having to be on par with Julia Roberts in Erin Brockovich or Russell Crowe in Gladiator to survive the onslaught of awards-centric performances that come between September and New year's Eve.

This autumn seems to be no different, with many Oscar heavies weighing in: Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet reteaming for the first time since Titanic in Revolutionary Road; Baz Luhrmann pairing with Hugh Jackman and his Moulin Rouge! muse Nicole Kidman in the epic Australia; Gus Van Sant's biopic Milk, with Sean Penn; Viggo Mortensen and Charlize Theron in the adaptation of the Pulitzer Prize-winning The Road; and the fall season kicks off early with last year's big winners, the Coen Brothers, teaming with George Clooney, Brad Pitt and Tilda Swinton in Burn After Reading.

So in this gamut of Oscar heavyweights, are there any already-released films or performances that stand a chance? Hit after the jump to see who!

Of course, the biggest hype for any film so far this year has to be The Dark Knight. Not since The Lord of the Rings trilogy has there been a film to reap such sweeping critical praise and box office success. If there has ever been a superhero film to come along with a valid shot at Best Picture, it's this one. Partially driving that buzz is Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker. After all the buzz, it turned out that Ledger's performance really did live up to the hype, and is thus far the most obvious choice for a Supporting Actor nomination.

So who else does that leave? Early potential Oscar grabbers have quickly fizzled out, including Kimberly Pierce's anti-war drama Stop-Loss, the political Swing Vote, and the period romance The Other Boleyn Girl. Yet some other films have left many particularly surprised. Iron Man shouldn't be counted out, especially for its timely screenplay as well as career-resurgent acting from Robert Downey Jr. (who may have to fend off himself with his roles in Tropic Thunder and The Soloist).

In terms of other actors, the only others to stick out seem to be Javier Bardem in Vicky Cristina Barcelona, and James Franco in Pineapple Express. Franco's performance however, is hardly the kind to garner Oscar attention, even in a supporting role. The best scene stealer to bet on may be Tom Cruise, who with Downey, runs away with Tropic Thunder in every scene he's in. After a rough few years, this may be Cruise's shot at a critical comeback. No pun intended.

The field for actresses is even more barren at this juncture. While Meryl Streep has (of course) gained Oscar buzz for carrying Mamma Mia!, the material will probably prove to be too lightweight to be considered real awards candy, especially in the shadow of heavy dramas (Streep will probably snag nom #15 though for her work in this fall's Doubt).

If all of this seems to be disheartening, there's plenty of films already released that are shoo-ins in other categories. The screenplays for Hamlet 2 and Tropic Thunder would be great additions to Original Screenplay, while The Dark Knight's inspirational weaving of various classic Batman stories could be a viable choice for Adapted Screenplay.

Meanwhile, the Animated Film race is already heated up, with Kung-Fu Panda, WALL-E and Dr. Suess' Horton Hears a Who! all receiving mass critical and commercial success. Likewise, the documentary field has had its own share of critical gems, with the release of Young@Heart, American Teen and the upcoming Religulous.

So yes, film fans, the big ones are still to come, awards-wise. But take heart at the ones already released, and help me jumpstart the campaign for Hamlet 2's "Rock Me Sexy Jesus" for Best Original Song by going to see it in theatres next week!

Why Another Rihanna #1 Is Another Nail In The Coffin Of Album Sales

2008-08-22T00:08:00.000-04:00

As officially reported today by Billboard, Rihanna entered her second week at #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 today with her single, "Disturbia". That's impressive for any female singer of the ripe old age of 20, let alone the fact that this is her fourth #1. And her ninth Top 10. In three years. Since that ties her with Mariah and Beyonce for the most #1's of any female in the 21st century, I'd say Rihanna's sitting real pretty right now.

So how about that recording industry she works in? Well, during the 21st Century, while Rihanna's been having a blast, the recording industry has never seen a year where album sales increased. Not once. Since that's the big cash cow (yes, even still today - 99 cent iTunes songs don't cost as much as $18 CD's), that means every record label has had to face a juggernaut of constant erosion, and dropping everyone from employees to musicians.

Hit after the jump to find out why Rihanna is the sign of the album's death knell.

Those darn kids (and their parents. And grandparents) and their iPods, driving the world to a place dominated by singles instead of full albums. It's something that technology has always been behind (remember when the big perk of CD's was that you could skip the crappy songs on an album instead of blindly fast-forward past them?), but with the iPod and downloadable music, the album has become what some consider to be merely the obsolete format for artists to release a package of songs. Now people, instead of having to buy the album filler and skip over it, just don't have to buy the filler anymore. In this age, Rihanna has somehow mastered the art of having huge singles, but never big album sales and yet, she is arguably the biggest female star of the moment.

Want proof? With "Pon de Replay", "S.O.S.", "Umbrella" and this year's "Disturbia" and "Take a Bow", the girl has made a run for Song of the Summer four summers in a row. Tack on her other 5 Top 10's from the past few years, and you have someone who has dominated radios and iPods everywhere. Just not the album chart. Rihanna's highest-selling album of the three since her breakout in 2005 has been Good Girl Gone Bad, which, including the sales from it's re-release this past spring, just hopped over the double-platinum mark at the end of May. So since the highest selling albums of the year still go over quadruple platinum, why isn't Rihanna doing the same?

Because she's not Carrie Underwood. Or Josh Groban. Or Chris Daughtry. The people who seem to buy albums still are fans of the country, adult-contemporary, and rock genres, which have great success still in album sales. Rihanna's demographic isn't interested in buying whole albums anymore (exception to the rule: High School Musical), they just want that catchy song they heard on the radio. And they want it now, so they download it instead of getting a groaning parent to drive them to the nearest Best Buy.

This is all fine and dandy, except that it means that the days of the album are slowly drawing to their close, at least in the format that they're in now. If sales continue to erode, record labels may become less willing to commission an artist for a full album, opting just to work with them on a single instead. And so the album may become that rare treat only granted to those with the success and clout to "justify" one. Because eventually, it won't be just teens downloading songs. It'll take time, but country fans, rockers and soccer moms will follow suit eventually. So what do we do if albums go out the door and they start charging us $4.00 a song?

Simple: Watch the video on Youtube. You can already do that on your iPhone already. Problem solved! (well not really, but everyone love a bandaid) Here's Rihanna in one of her non-Top 10's (just for kicks), with Maroon 5 in the "If I Never See Your Face Again" video, below:

America's Best Dance Cruel

2008-08-21T17:11:00.000-04:00

My roommates pretty much despise me every single time I put on repeats on Randy Jackson Presents: America's Best Dance Crew 2. And often, they have every right to. After all, JC Chasez uses the same four criticisms to critique the crews, Layla Kayleigh pretty much serves no purpose whatsoever, and now that he's usurped Matthew McConaughey as the shirtless spokesperson for hot men of the world, Mario Lopez just isn't that enticing with clothes on (not that he ever really was in the first place).

However, this season ABDC did have its merits. The first being Lil' Mama, who at 19 provides better advice and wisdom than Mary Murphy's screams from So You Think You Can Dance ever could (take hint Mary: Lil' mama wears a sequined baseball hat every week and is still more toned down than you).

The second thing that has made ABDC essential viewing this season, even in the begrudging eyes of my roommates, was Fanny Pak, the dance crew selected from the West Coast. Bringing with them an 80's vibe without a hint of irony, as well as the most unique choreography of the season. So why aren't I watching the season finale, which is currently on as I write this? The answer, and a clip, after the jump!

It's simple, Fanny Pak got shockingly booted two weeks ago when they were one of the final three, leaving SoReal Crew and Super Crew (can you tell the difference? Neither can I) to duke it out for the title of America's Best Dance Crew To Come Along Since Season One Ended Four Months Ago.

Now I must disclose that this article has nothing to do with my bias towards Fanny Pak (which in turn has nothing to do with my mild crush on Fanny Pak leader Matt Cady), and mostly about voting competitions coming down to popularity contests. Throughout the competition, Fanny Pak was totally, to quote Lil' Mama, slept on. Every week they came out with a mind-blowing, self-choreographed number that left the judges ecstatic and the audience chanting their names, something that didn't happen with other crews on such a consistent basis. So what happened?

Well, it seems the two Crews (SoSuper and Real... er.... I mean...) had more friends in high places, because they got into the final two on what seems to be popularity and not necessarily talent. Even though the judges were ultimately the ones to let Fanny Pak go, it seemed like they almost felt they had to, after weeks of them being in the bottom two while the other two consistently placed at the top. But did it mean they deserved to be there?

Judging from the final showdown last week, not so much. When it came down to more skilled dancing and choreography, both teams failed in the eyes of the judges for being unable to keep up with the challenges and "blow us away". You could see Lil' Mama and Shane Sparks feeling as if they had really bitten themselves in the ass with this one.

But alas, sometimes this just happens. Sometimes the people who don't deserve to win end up succeeding, and the people with real talent end up getting eliminated. But who knows, sometimes there's a silver lining that proves you didn't even need to win to be successful in the first place. Just ask Chris Daughtry. So while the two remaining crews duke it out tonight, I'm content with knowing that the deserving champions will somehow find a way to succeed. It'll happen Fanny Pak, you wait and see. After all, as JC says (in every episode): "You guys are artists".

Need further evidence? Check out their dance during Janet Jackson week below, or go to muchmusic.com to check out more clips.

It Doesn't Get Any More Creepo Than: Facebook Accounts for Your Infants

2008-08-15T00:53:00.000-04:00

So recently I had an acquaintance from high school add me on Facebook. This person and I weren't particularly great friends in high school, and I believe we haven't actually spoken two words to each other since the 10th grade. Regardless of this fact though, I never hesitate from doing some obligatory Facebook-creeping on their pictures and whatnot once they add me, just to see what they've been up to for the past decade or so.

And so I was browsing through her pictures and realized that lo and behold, she's had an adorable baby recently. Yet this is where the feelings of "aw, isn't that cute" turned into "ugh, that's a little creepo", when i realized that her baby was tagged in all of the pictures. Some further investigation confirmed my worst suspicions: this infant, who judging from the date of the photo album can't be any older than 6 months, has his own Facebook account.

Why is this the more than a little creepo? After the jump!

Some new parents out there may be crying foul at this statement (mainly because they too have also created Facebook accounts for their babies). But here's the thing, as much as I'm all for being able to put on your Facebook profile whatever you want, I'm also a consenting adult, and thus can look at whatever inappropriate drunken pictures, lewd comments, and overall things-you-don't-want-your-boss-or-children-to-see that I like. Children are different, and there's restrictions on things for children, including on the Internet, to shield them from the horrors of the Verne Troyer sex tape until they're old enough. Heck, you can't even get a MySpace account until you're at least 13. These babies may not be able to comprehend Facebook now, but in a few years they will (and yes, Facebook will probably still be around then), and they may not fully grasp the Naughty Toy application they way grownups can.

All of this leads me to my next point. Some may argue that creating a Facebook profile for your infant is no different than creating one for your pet (to which I am certainly guilty. All pets past and present have profiles on my Facebook). The difference is that my Bassett Hound is never going to actually create his own Facebook profile, let alone comprehend what I've put in the one created for him. Imagine that someone created a Facebook profile for you, and then years down the road you discovered this and took it over, and upon first glance, learned that this was the identity they set up for you? Even if you're six years old, this is still like telling a child their favourite dinosaur is T-Rex when it's really Triceratops. That sh!t just ain't gonna fly. So do your kid a favour: Avoid the identity crisis and post his baby pictures on your own Facebook, and when they're old enough to get their own profile, ask them if you want their baby pictures to be tagged. Just don't get offended when they say no. After all, do you have a burning desire to have pictures tagged of you whilst getting a bath? Didn't think so. Unless you're Verne Troyer maybe.

Plus, don't you need an email address to start a Facebook account? Does this mean these babies have email addresses too? Who is going to email an infant? Technology may be leaping forward, but maybe it's in the best interest of children everywhere to let their technology stop at Tickle Me Elmo.

Should George Lucas Stop Making Movies?

2008-08-08T18:21:00.000-04:00

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Krystal Skull was easily the movie I had greater anticipation for than any other coming out this year. In a year when Christopher Nolan was feeding my Batman-obsessed brain The Dark Knight, that says a lot. I stuck through all the early groans regarding Harrison Ford's age, and waited with baited breath for the film itself.

You can imagine what a great delight it was when all the smack talk being circulated regarding Ford's age turned out to be untrue. Even at 64, Ford was still Indiana Jones like nobody else could be. It definitely was not Harrison Ford's age that ruined the movie. It was George Lucas.

Now, Lucas reported to AP that while he has no intentions of passing the torch from Ford to Shia LaBeouf (who played Mutt, Indy's son in IJ4), he claims that he still intends on going after Ford for a fifth installment, especially if he can find a "good" story.

"The franchise really depends on me coming up with a good idea," Lucas said. "And that series is very research-intensive. So we're doing research now to see if we can't come up with another object for him to chase ... hopefully we'll come up with something."

So why is this such a bad idea? And why does this signal that George should just retire already? After the jump!

Well first of all, George and his "good" stories are what sunk the Indiana Jones franchise in the first place. While certain other things hindered the film (lame alien CGI, Steven Spielberg seemed to have mailed in directorial instructions from Malibu), it was the story itself that weakened the film the most. Krystal-skulled aliens? No wonder Steven and Harrison held out for so many years. This was the best George could come up with?

I was willing to go with the alien plot until it strayed too far away from the whole idea of Area 51. The first 20 minutes of the film were brilliant, and then it receded into a brainless plot with even more brainless action sequences (the scene where LaBeouf swings on vines through the jungle with monkeys was particularly brutal).

But does this really mean that Lucas should get out of the movie making business now? In a word, yes.

Why? Well let's first establish the fact that the only new idea Lucas has come up with in the past 20 years was 1994's Radioland Murders, which tanked. Everything that has been a Lucasfilm production during that time since has been a Star Wars or Indiana Jones affiliated production. While Lucas certainly isn't the first filmmaker to get a lot of mileage out of a particular franchise (did anyone actually ask for the upcoming Saw V?), is it too much to ask for something new? Hell, even Terence Malick came out of hiding during that time and started making new films again.

The other issue seems to be that Lucas has become pretty curmudgeonly in his old age. As the story writer and producer on the Indiana Jones films, it is his responsibility to come up with the maguffin that drives the plot. However, he fully admits that while both Ford and Spielberg came up with ideas of their own, it had to be Lucas' way or the highway. Lucas has become notorious for maintaining painstaking creative control over his projects, which is why he independently produced the Star Wars prequels himself. Several other directors refuse to relinquish creative control either, Quentin Tarantino coming to mind. This would be all fine and dandy, except the problem is that unlike Tarantino, Lucas can't seem to make a good movie to save his life.

So Indiana Jones and Star Wars have made Lucas a very rich man. Indiana Jones helped make Spielberg a very rich man too, but at least Lucas' counterpart still continues to challenge himself with artistic and poignant films in between his commercial fare. Is it too much to ask that Lucas do the same? With the animated Star Wars: The Clone Wars opening this weekend, I suppose we'll see in a few days whether the clamour for more of the same stories is still there. Regardless of its success though, it has come high time that either Lucas show us something new, or show himself the door.

Battle of the Power Ballads: "Don't Stop Believing" vs. "More Than a Feeling"

2008-08-08T12:43:00.000-04:00

It would be an understatement to say I have a mere guilty pleasure for 70's and 80's power ballads. Something about the uber-cheese that is seemingly shellacked into each classic power ballad from that era without a hint of irony just always makes me smile, even if it often makes others do the opposite (case in point: my unsuccessful attempts to get someone come see Def Leppard/REO Speedwagon with me this summer). Usually these people are from somewhere amongst a generation equal to or higher than X. I've noticed though that cheesy power ballads have found a home amongst Gen Y (myself included) who seem to relish these gems of the past with an excitable fervor. Some may think it has to do with us being the iPod generation, but I think it has more to do with just being able to freely embrace cheese. And of these relics of the past, no two seem to stand out more than Boston's "More Than a Feeling" and Journey's "Don't Stop Believing". Both are slowly building anthems who've gained a resurgence in popularity over the past few years. But which one takes the (cheese)cake? Find out after the jump!

The two songs shall be judged in a variety of completely arbitrary categories to determine a true champion.

Devoted Cities: For the iconic lyric "Just a city boy, born and raised in South Detroit", DSB is played at just about every single sports event in good ol' Motor City. It's rare to see such devotion of a city to a particular song, and its one that Boston doesn't quite share with their eponymous city. While their songs may be played at Fenway Park, it's not necessarily MTAF that always fits the bill. heck, it could be any song. And really, are all the current members of Boston even from Boston anymore?
Advantage: Journey

Covered in Cheese: Both songs have had numerous covers over the years, but which could fit the bill for cheesiest cover of a cheesy song? (I think my brain just went into guilty pleasure overload) Kanye West has been seen recently performing a cover of DSB on his Glow in the dark Tour. The ultimate in fromage however, has to be *NSYNC's cover of MTAF on the European version of their original self-titled album (it's hard to dig up, but once you find it, you'll have cheddar flowing from your ears).
Advantage: Boston

Critical and Commercial Success: While DSB peaked on the Billboard Hot 100 at #8 in 1981, MTAF hit #5 on the same chart in 1976. Plus, Rolling Stone's List of the 500 Greatest Songs of All Time listed MTAF #500. But DSB? Nowhere to be found.
Advantage: Boston

Best Use in a Sopranos Episode: MTAF was used in the 24th episode of the iconic gangster series, as Tony develops "More Than a Feeling": it's a panic attack. However, the song gets seriously trumped by series creator David Chase's decision to use DSB as the music playing over the controversial fade-out and ending credits during the series finale.
Advantage: Journey

Cultural Relevency: Both songs have been used in recent pop culture. MTAF was hailed the "greatest song of all time" on Aqua Teen Hunger Force, and often gets used in various TV shows, including Criminal Minds, Scrubs, and even as a playable song on Guitar Hero. DSB however, has been seeing an even greater resurgence as of late, thanks to key placement in both The Sopranos as well as MTV's Laguna Beach. The result has been a return to form similar to that of Queen's "Bohemian Rhapsody" after the release of Wayne's World. It even shot to #1 on iTunes for a brief period. If that doesn't give advantage, I don't know what does.
Advantage: Journey

WINNER: Journey's "Don't Stop Believing". I may be slightly biased, as I'm going to see Journey with Heart and Cheap Trick(!) in September. But who cares? The true test will come when 10,000 strong belt out "Just a small town girl...".

Absorb This: Hoffman, Jolie, Depp approached for Dark Knight sequel

2008-08-01T12:30:00.001-04:00

Don't get me wrong, this kind of calibre of actors being added to an already stellar cast sounds amazing, and would fulfill my wildest dreams for a third round in the revamped Batman franchise. However, I find it hard to believe.

The London Telegraph is reporting that Johnny Depp is being approached by Warner Bros. executives to play the Riddler in the sequel to The Dark Knight, which stands to have a domestic gross of almost $400 million by the end of this weekend. Furthermore, this comes on the heels of reports that Warners is going after Philip Seymour Hoffman to play the Penguin, and that Angelina Jolie is reportedly pursuing the role of Catwoman. Read more on whether these rumors should be taken seriously, after the jump!

Realistically, going after such a high calibre cast for the third installment in the revamped Batman franchise is necessary at this point, especially after the strong performances given by Heath Ledger and Christian Bale in TDK. Bale however, is the only person from TDK that's actually signed on for a third installment. Not even director Christopher Nolan has signed yet for another addition to the Batman saga (although I have a feeling Warners will do whatever it takes to keep him).

Batman Begins and TDK scribe David Goyer admitted to Moviesonline.ca, however, that they aren't too keen on using any other past villains for any future installments: "We’re not going to tell you other than to say Batman has been published for 70 years. In the first movie we used Ra’s Al Ghul and the Scarecrow who had not been in the movies before and had not been in the 60s TV show and there are dozens, if not hundreds of other characters that fit that bill. Everyone says you have to use the Penguin or Catwoman. Well, I completely disagree".

I agree with Goyer that both the Penguin and Catwoman aren't necessarily worth repeating, in the face of 70 years worth of Batman villains who could be used. If he has his way, using any of the villains being allegedly offered to Hoffman, Depp and Jolie wouldn't be an option.

However, what Goyer should keep in mind is that some of the best stories ever told in the Batman mythology usually involves the big baddies, and Catwoman, as Batman's most enduring love interest, would fill the female void left behind after (SPOILER ALERT) Maggie Gyllenhaal's character was killed off. Overall, these three are definitely the kind of actors that Warners should be pursuing for roles in the next film, but whom they actually do end up playing, remains to be seen.

Maybe they should wait for a script to be written first anyway. That might be a good idea.

Got any better ideas for who could play a potential villain in the sequel to TDK? Feel free to post in the comments below!

Liveblog: The "So You Think You Can Dance?" Top Six Results Show

2008-08-01T01:29:00.000-04:00

The Top Six results show for FOX's So You Think You Can Dance? was tonight, and as anticipation builds for the finale, a by the minute recap of the results seems in order. Chelsea, Courtney, Joshua, Katee, Mark and Twitch find out tonight who's going home (for a week before getting ready for the tour). Recap after the jump!

9:00: Welcome, to So You Think You Can Dance! Cue "the Rose" by Bette Midler. I'm sure this is probably beautiful, and all I can think of is Napoleon Dynamite. Never mind, Mark's shirt is ubuttoned.

9:03: Cat Deeley arrives!!! She looks pretty fine tonight as well, lovin' the colour. Thank you SYTYCD fashion department for not maiming her tonight. Ooh, Mandy Moore choreographed.

9:04: Do you think Nigel secretly forces the audience into yelling "JUDGES!!" so enthusiastically? Maybe tonight there will be one of those angry grandpa vs. surly teenager arguments between Nigel and the audience. They seem to occur more often every week.

9:05: Ooh, a dancing role in a new (untitled) movie by judge Adam Shankman is being given to the big winner as an extra bonus. Maybe the Hairspray sequel that's been announced?

9:08...aaaaaaaand we're back. And we're kicking off being back from the break with time-filler-judge-peptalk.

9:12: Courtney's probably gonna get the boot tonight, but can we all be in agreement that she rocks the pants off the solo efforts?

9:13: Loving the outfit choice Mark. Never before have suspenders ever been used so enthusiastically. Even if the funky of the bunch gets the boot tonight, at least he brought something never really seen before on the SYTYCD stage.

9:14: Katee is a gorgeous dancer. But does anyone else feel she scores better when being choreographed? She's in my top two, but Joshua may end up squeaking her out on the solo front.

9:18: Best Buy airs the same Miley Cyrus/Jonas Bros. commercial twice in a row, and i suddenly feel on the very old side of my demographic.

9:20: Over 11 million votes!!! It's a shame this isn't the show that brings in the kind of numbers better than presidential elections.

9:20: Maybe I was wrong, apparently Joshua knows how to bring the funk as well.

9:21: How does Chelsie always get the uber sex-bomb outfits? One can't almost blame Nigel for being such a creepo.

9:22: Twitch's solo proves to be the best of the evening. His "Don't Worry, be Happy" seemed like the kind of go-for-broke dance where, feeling as if you may go home, you throw upon the audience the one you just love for yourself.

9:23: A small breakdancing child just exerted more physical energy in 12 seconds than I did all day.

9:24: Maybe Nigel should actually widen the allowed SYTYCD age range to six year olds. But cat Deeley, that kid has no clue who Obi Wan is.

9:25: That Dairy Queen commercial with the couple squabbling over who gets to bring in the ice cream cake is on. Nobody has cheered for a the presence of forks since the middle ages.

19:29: Beware, the Snuggle with Fresh Release Bear has unleashed the unsuperhuman dancers upon us. Avert your eyes.

9:31: Cat cues us into the recaps of the girls' dances for last night. Let the filler clock begin. Tonight's goal is to see if we could fit in all the significant stuff (results, musical and group dance performances, and the 6 solos) into a half hour.

9:35: I do enjoy the recap of Chelsie's Pussycat Dolls dance though. "When I grow up, I wanna be famous, I wanna be a star, I wanna have boobies". Or groupies. Still not so sure. Enunciate, PCD!

9:35: Katee makes it to the finale. Chelsie and Courtney proceed to look like their being tortured as Cat excruciatingly cuts to the break. This is like watching torture porn for reality show contestants.

9:41: We now have a recap of scenes from the boys. Also known as the same dances we just watched recaps of six minutes ago. I'm using this for a potty break.

9:43: I return in time to see a recap definitely worth watching: Cat placing Twitch's grill, "spit and all", in her mouth. That girl is Buck.

9:44: Joshua is the first boy to make it to the finale. Katshua fans everywhere rejoice (myself included).

9:46: Lady Gaga begins her performance, and we're lead to believe were witnessing a Daft Punk show.

9:47: Never mind, it's not Daft Punk. Just a Cher drag queen.

9:48: Lady Gaga should learn that during non lip-synced performances, the mic should be farther away from your mouth.

9:49: What's the deal with shining the blacklight in your eye, Lady Gaga? Your eyes will hurt as much as our ears.

9:53: And girl number two is.... Courtney!!!!! Holy guac!!! I totally thought Chelsie had it for sure. Wow, there's a surprise I'm not mad about. Don't get me wrong, Chelsie was fantastic, but I never clicked with her as much as I did with the other final two girls.

9:55: Awwww.... I'm about to get teary during a SYTYCD results show. It just stings no matter who's going home tonight, they're just all that good.

9:56: And the final boy is..... Twitch!! I thought Mark was gonna slide right in there, figuring Twitch and Joshua would split their own votes. Twitch is amazing and I'm glad he made it. But kudos to Mark for always bringing that overwhelming sense of new to that stage. And you're pretty darn cute to boot.

9:57: Ooh, love the recap song. Go download some Brendan James immediately!! (namely "All I Can See" and "Green").

9:59: So the former partners got the boot tonight. When the top six have been this good all season though, not everyone must be entirely pleased with the top four. However, all of them are strong dancers, so strong that it's hard to pick the big winner. My money has been Katee all season, but now I think the smart money is on Joshua. The fact that he has little to no real training should push him over the edge in the votes. What do you think? Is there another in the top four whom you think has a better shot? Also, aside from Chelsie or Mark, is there anyone who's not in the final four that should be? Post below!!

Is Brad Pitt an "Inglorious Bastard"?

2008-07-31T00:40:00.001-04:00

If you believe the rumors, then yes, he is. Today Brad Pitt's reps confirmed that he's officially in negotiations to star in Quentin Tarantino's long-gestating war epic, Inglorious Bastards. More on this match made in heaven, after the jump!

So after several weeks of much-hyped info released in Hollywood regarding Tarantino's new film, which he released to the major studios in search of backing, it looks like the thing a set to go with Pitt, as well as being released through Universal. Furthermore, those rumors that Tarantino was pursuing Leonardo DiCaprio to costar, are apparently false.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, "Two story lines... converge: One follows a group of prisoners-turned-soldiers whose mission is to take down a group of Nazis, and the other follows a young Jewish woman who seeks to avenge the death of her parents by this Nazi group.

Pitt has been firing on all cylinders as of late (and not just his personal life), balancing both commercial fare (the Ocean's movies, Mr. and Mrs. Smith) with prestige pics that have given him some of his best performances (Babel, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford). Tarantino's last effort, Death Proof, was the stinker in his Grindhouse collaboration with Robert Rodriguez. However, his revenge opus was frenzied over by critics and crowds alike, and has quickly become a cult classic of grand stature.

The pairing seems like a fantastic match. Tarantino has a way of getting great performances out of his actors. Maybe one that might grab Pitt an Oscar nod for once (Jesse James was sorely overlooked). Plus Pitt's presence ads to the chances of commercial success that allows Tarantino to, thankfully, have creative control. Added bonus: Tarantino has already written for Pitt before as a stoner in True Romance (which has been the recent influence of James Franco's character in Pineapple Express).

So with DiCaprio seemingly out, who should be in? Clive Owen would be a smart pick. He's played a Jewish prisoner before in the 1997 film Bent, and he's already been directed by Tarantino before, when he "Guest Directed" the car scene between Owen and Benicio Del Toro in Sin City.

Absorb This: Freddie Prinze Jr. and the WWE Become a Tag Team

2008-07-30T23:53:00.001-04:00

If your first response upon reading that title is "huh?" you're probably not alone. After all, in Freddie Prinze Jr.'s career trajectory, most people probably never saw a creative partnership with the WWE, land of faux-wrestling and enough drama to make Meredith Grey's head spin.

But yes, it's true, Prinze and the WWE are teaming up in a "behind the scenes role that will contribute to the WWE's weekly television and pay-per-view programs". Does that mean he's becoming the new Vince McMahon? One of those behind the scenes guys who also portrays a "villain" in this soap opera with speedos? Regardless of what Prinze's role may be, is this really a good idea?

Don't get me wrong, Freddie hasn't exactly been pulling in the offers as of late it seems. After a string of failed films and an unsuccessful sitcom (remember Freddie? Neither does anyone else. Hell, even IMDB is trying to forget it), lord knows he was in need of something to bring home the bacon. But does this really have the air of a "comeback"? Everyone loves a decent pay cheque (and Sarah Michelle Gellar may want a break from being the breadwinner for once), but is this going to help Prinze in any sort of attempt at gaining national attention. Not so much. I agree that TV is a good place for Prinze at this point in his career. But maybe try joining a strong ensemble cast in a freaky dramatic series, a la Lost or the upcoming Fringe? His previous roles don't promote much in terms of dramatic skills, but he always had that relatable charm that made him a success back in the She's All That days.

Who knows though. Cyndi Lauper joined up with the WWE in the 80's and it worked for her. Maybe Prinze can make it work, and possibly in turn bring the WWE back into the limelight as well, something that has significantly worn off since the Rock left. Even still, I have a feeling that this is gonna take more than a few Hulkamaniacs to make this work.

Emmy Hosts 2008: Bringing the Unfunny

2008-07-30T02:38:00.000-04:00

So the hosts for the Emmys this year have been announced. Yes, that's right, hosts. As in plural. Like, five. Apparently the Emmys didn't learn from last year, when they had Ryan Seacrest bring a whole lot of lame to the big TV party. Instead of giving the job to someone who could actually bring on the funny, they decided to spread the lack of laughs around to the five nominees for Best Reality Host. In case you weren't sure, that means the hosts for Emmys 2008 are:

Tom Bergeron, Dancing with the Stars
Heidi Klum, Project Runway
Howie Mandel, Deal or No Deal
Jeff Probst, Survivor
Ryan Seacrest, American Idol

So why's this such a bad idea? After the jump!

Well, like I already said, none of them are funny. Yes, Mandel is a comedian, but even he barely gets a chance to leave 'em rolling in the aisles on Deal or No Deal. While none of them are stuffy per se, certainly they don't bode for greater entertainment than the lame gay entendres shared between Seacrest and Simon Cowell on American Idol. Is this really the best they could come up with?

Hosting an awards show is pretty much a thankless job, just ask David Letterman. But why not go for someone who would be boldly willing to provide some off-kilter humor to an otherwise sleepy awards show? Jimmy Kimmel, Sarah Silverman (who should be forgiven for her hosting shenanigans at last year's MTV Movie Awards), Chelsea Handler or Amy Poehler would all be great choices. Heck, even Margaret Cho has a show on TV now, so doesn't that make her count too? Even getting the finalists of Last Comic Standing to host would be a cool choice. The crop of humorous TV talent is definitely out there, the Academy should have taken notice. It's a shame that the only thing that will keep me laughing at this year's Emmys will the the choice of hosts.

"90210" vs. "90210": And the real stars are supposed to be...?

2008-07-30T01:35:00.000-04:00

So the CW is going full-force with the hype for their new Beverly Hills 90210 update coming this fall, 90210 (I guess the new generation has no attention span for the actual name of the zip code?). My only question is, who are the actual stars of this show, the oldies who are returning (catfighters-in-waiting Tori Spelling, Shannen Doherty and Jennie Garth), or the new cast who's supposed to carry this newfangled update? With new flowing in regarding the use of the Peach Pit, and even the return of Joe. E. Tata (why? Romantic foil for Jessica Walter is my bet), take a look at the pros and cons of all this nostalgia. Where? After the jump!

Don't get me wrong, the return of Donna, Kelly, and even Brenda Walsh(!), does peak my interest. After all, as a diehard fan of the original series (the first series of which I can say I watched the entire thing from season 1-10), it's that nostalgia that is gonna bring in the demographics beyond the Gossip Girl crowd. And since she never returned after her booting from the original after its fourth season, lord knows that older demographic is uber interested to see what her deal is (myself included).

That said though, why is the CW failing to hype the rest of their cast? In all of their press releases, the information is all about the old crowd, never the new one. For all of the hype, it's not matching the promo material released so far, as it's all pics of the new crowd. The info they're spewing doesn't match. Why should we care about these people in the promo pics, when we have no idea who they are? It's not like the new cast doesn't look appealing, and the older additions certainly give them some leverage (Arrested Development's Jessica Walter, Full House's Lori Loughlin). Why not throw us a bone about all of them for once?

Because here's the big kicker: Doherty is only signed on for a brief few episodes, and Garth's Kelly will only be sticking around on a recurring basis. Hopefully, 90210 will follow the mold of Degrassi: The Next Generation, by making people come for the old crowd (even though Joey Jeremiah lost the hat), but stay for the new crowd with quality storytelling. However, for that to work, they've gotta make the stories actually good. The original 90210 was a groundbreaking series in the teen format back in the 90's. Let's hope for Aunt Becky's sake that lightning strikes twice.

Preview Review: The "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" Trailer

2008-07-30T01:03:00.000-04:00

Post Options
Two weeks ago when The Dark Knight premiered, Warner Bros. posted an IMAX trailer for Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. Unfortunately, it only consisted of some brief dialogue accompanied by the title credits. The only attention it ended up receiving was a brainless 30 seconds that would then be wiped from the viewers memories by the proceeding 2 1/2 hours of Batman brilliance.

Needless to say, Warners probably felt they needed to come up with something juicier fast (especially with their lack of HP presence at Comic Con this past weekend. Who's getting fired for that one?). Thankfully, this one pays off. Check it out after the jump!

While this doesn't contain any real footage of Harry, it does good on setting the chilling tone of the mysteries to be revealed in HPATHBP regarding that pesky Captain of the Creepos, Voldemort. Ralph Fiennes, who plays Voldemort, even has his own nephew (Hero Fiennes-Tiffin) portraying him as the young Tom Riddle. The kid does a great job in the brief scenes here, showing that curiosity for his newfound power, and those hints of how he'll abuse it. Oh yeah, and that shot of Dumbledore in kickass flaming wizard mode (no pun intended) gave me the tinglies.

With no more books to come, I'm pumped that this one looks to keep that unique streak alive and make an even more satisfying Harry Potter film than the last.

UPDATE: Heath Ledger as the Joker

2008-07-26T14:45:00.000-04:00

So awhile back I posted a little ditty about whether or not the hype regarding Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker in The Dark Knight was justified. Having seen it, I can now have a valid opinion.

Every last word regarding the amazingness of Ledger as the Joker is more than justified, it's entirely deserved. Give the man an Oscar nom. And many more for the rest of the movie, since his performance is merely the icing on the cake that is not only the best superhero movie I've ever seen, but one of the best films I've seen, period. Go see it. Now.

Why Cat Deeley Should be the Host of Everything.

2008-07-26T12:24:00.001-04:00

I've been a hardcore fan of Fox's So You Think You Can Dance since day one, when few people (at least less than now) witnessed the wonderfulness of Nick Lazzarini and Melody Lacayanga dancing their little hearts out. The original host in season one was Lauren Sanchez, who did not return for the subsequent seasons when she became preggers (did Nigel Lythgoe not like his host to have a baby bump? Who knows).
When Sanchez was replaced with Brit export Cat Deeley in season two, I found this to be the second season's biggest creative landslide, as it seemed that Deeley had a fear of live audiences. Combined with heinous outfits. And a seemingly ingrained inability to read off a teleprompter accurately. All in all, not such a fantastic host. But I let the whole thing slide, especially in the face of mind-blowing dances choreographed by Mia Michaels, and the cuteness of season 2 runner-up Travis Wall.

Yet now we're well into season four ("IV real!!"), and my love of Cat Deeley has grown over the past few seasons, so much in fact that I think she's the best host of any reality competition, in any genre, in all of TV. Why? After the jump!

It's simple really. Cat Deeley CARES (somebody put that on a button).

Never before in my long-running history of watching reality television (both good and uber-crappy), have I witnessed a host who continually is willing to put her own feelings on the line and develop personal emotions for the contestants. This can be witnessed in virtually every episode of SYTYCD. In the early episodes of each season, Deeley is continually on the front lines, consoling heartbroken potential competitors who have their dreams crushed. Too often does reality TV fail to convey that, while many of these competitors may not be talented enough to make the top 20, they still have hopes and dreams that can be crushed by the judges, sometimes a little too viciously. To have someone outside those big hotel doors, another essential member of the cast who is willing to console them genuinely, is incredible, but Deeley surely hasn't been planted there to be the foil of the judges. What she does is genuine.

Case in point, this week's elimination round, during which fan favourite Stephen "Twitch" Boss landed in the bottom two. The crushed look on his face as he turned his back and got down to both knees in sorrow, was heartbreaking. What made it uplifting though, was Deeley's instinctive move afterwards, when she immediately went to Twitch and consoled him, helping him find the courage to stand back up. has anyone else ever seen anyone do that? Tom Bergeron certainly isn't offering out free hugs to the D-Listed actors who get the boot from Dancing With the Stars.
Furthermore, Deeley is made of steel when it comes to the reactions the judges often have. When contestants are dragged through the mud by Nigel Lythgoe and screamaholic Mary Murphy, Deeley is often the first to challenge them on their opinions, often counteracting them by pointing out how previous performers had made similar mistakes, and yet would receive nothing but praise. Sometimes the judges on SYTYCD are a little too biased in their opinions, and the show needs someone like Deeley to help keep them in line. Some may say that it's all planned, but I don't believe it. Not even Meryl Streep's acting is that good.

And those shallow qualms I had when Deeley first started during SYTYCD's second season? Obliterated. Whatever nerves she may have had, obviously this woman has made herself comfortable by becoming a reality show host in a class all of her own. Some of her wardrobe choices are a little interesting, but we can blame that on the fashion department. Even the Gods of reality hosting, Survivor's Jeff Probst and American Idol's Ryan Seacrest, have been mailing it in for years. Idol has been needing a refresh for the past few years now, so why not give the boot to Millennium Dick Clark in favor of someone who's actually genuine? Suck on that, Seacrest. Deeley does it better any day of the week (mainly Wednesdays and Thursdays).

100 Listens To Make Me Love You: Usher's "Love in this Club"

2008-07-18T16:57:00.000-04:00

Aside from his rippling abs, I had never been a huge fan of Usher. While a few of his songs adorn my iTunes, they mostly arrived there in preparation for various parties where the music was best left at an uber-mainstream level to satisfy everyone. While i totally understand why many others have fallen under his spell, for some reason, the guy just gave me that ick feeling. Maybe it's his self-admitted man-whorishness. But mostly it's that I never found his songs catchy. This all changed though in 2004, when his Confessions album exploded and proved to have not just a song or two, but an entire album of infectious ditties. I thought that maybe the tide had turned in my opinion of Usher.
Then along came his single, "Love in this Club", off his latest album, and the first time I heard it, I felt myself slinking back into the "meh" feeling I'd always had about Usher. But after at least 100 listens, I've changed my mind. Why? After the jump!

Well first off, ANY song may start to sound catchy on the 100th listen. I get that, but it's not always the case, hence why my ears still bleed every time I hear anything by Creed.
What made me hate it in the first place? As the lead single from his new album, I was expecting "Love", especially from the title, to be another blazing club banger in the vein of his 2004 uber-hit "Yeah!". No cigar there. I could hardly find myself tapping a shoe in a pub to this song, let alone instigating a badly choreographed drunken dance-off among friends (yes, we're just that cool). Simply put, this mid-tempo tune was a disappointment.
Secondly, the video made me seethe with its outright pimping of Usher's friends. P. Diddy, Keri Hilson, Kanye West, and others are prominently featured in the video, doing nothing more than looking pretty, in an otherwise uninspired video. Maybe that's needed in a video for an up-and-coming star in order to get their video noticed, but Usher? Not so much. Video name-dropping your friends does not an exciting video make.
So what made me change my mind? Actually, it wasn't Usher at all, but mixmaster Girl Talk's new samplelicious album, Feed the Animals. Somehow, hearing "Love" blended seamlessly with Megadeath and The Cure made me appreciate those midtempo synth beats more than I ever did when it was just usher singing along to them. Suddenly, I found myself bopping along and then inexplicably saddened when Young Jeezy got cut off in favor of a sample of Soulja Boy (ugh). Next thing you know, I'm scrolling through my iPod to listen to the song in its entirety. And then it rained frogs. Y'know, stranger things have happened.
So maybe it wasn't Usher who had anything to do with it, and the cred should go to Girl Talk and his masterful sampling abilities. Regardless, it made me a fan of Usher's latest. And judging by how his latest single, "Moving Mountains" is going nowhere just as fast as the new album's disappointing sales (for Usher, that is), I guess the perennial ladies man should take the fans where he can get'em.
How about you readers. Ever have a song that you hated initially but ended up caving on and thus, loving a few months (and 100 listens) down the road? Post'em in the comments!

The Hype of Heath Ledger as the Joker: Justified?

2008-07-12T12:45:00.000-04:00

I was making dinner on that sad and cold day in January when I received a text from my friend Jen that Heath Ledger had died. After gasping and maddeningly flipping through the channels on TV to confirm the news (thanks, CNN ticker), and holding back a few tears, I pondered what it would be like in six months time, when his final film, the upcoming Batman sequel The Dark Knight, would be released.
Now the praise and hype regarding Ledger's performance is coming in faster than the Batmobile, here's a take on whether hyping his performance (even before the movie is out) is justified. Check out the analysis, after the jump!

Anti-Hype: Judging by the latest Entertainment Weekly article on The Dark Knight and Ledger himself, everyone involved with the production from Christian Bale to Christopher Nolan, would much prefer to talk about other elements of the film aside from Ledger as the Joker, as it still seems to bring grief and sadness to the cast. Let's keep in mind that, especially for a superhero film, the credentials of the cast and director or incredible, with each actor being worthy of the same amount of attention as Ledger. Furthermore, with the film already garnering fantastic reviews regarding it as a genius work of crime fiction and possibly the greatest superhero movie ever made, there's obviously plenty of hype to spread around the the cast and crew, as well as to the film itself.

Furthermore, while Warner bros. has been classy and cautious in using Ledger in their marketing material for the film, I will say that they certainly aren't stopping the hype either, which is leading the box-office predictors to think that The Dark Knight could attain record-breaking grosses on opening weekend. While attention does deserve to be drawn to Ledger as the Joker, he almost appears more in the trailers than Batman does. Isn't this a Batman movie, not a Joker movie? While Warners is certainly being cautious of how to market Ledger's performance, one has to wonder if the box-office grosses can be considered financial success, or blood money.

Lastly, is it wrong to even consider Ledger for an Oscar nomination based solely upon his death? Let's keep in mind that this is a superhero movie, not exactly the kind that usually warrants a slew of Oscars (although between Dark Knight and Iron Man, this may be the year that all changes). While I'm all for memorializing a gifted performer, at the same time, the Oscars are supposed to be awarded to the best performances of the year. If there's five better supporting performances this year, shouldn't they get what they deserve instead of what may be a sympathy vote and tribute to Ledger?

Pro-Hype: First off, Ledger as the Joker is hardly the first performance that has garnered immense hype even before the film's release. Just last year, Javier Bardem's chilling (and Oscar-baiting) performance in No Country For Old Men was being talked about months before its release. Similarly, Ellen Page's performance in last year's Juno was being hyped as having her as the next big thing, and it also turned out to be true. Very often, performances and films are hyped as having the big Oscar buzz long before anyone has seen them. Sometimes it pans out (No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood), sometimes it doesn't (hello, Memoirs of a Geisha). THAT IS WHAT THE HYPE MACHINE DOES. Sometimes it's right, sometimes it's wrong. Overall though, Ledger's performance as the Joker shouldn't be knocked just because most people haven't seen it yet.

Yes, this is a superhero movie. The big guy in the batsuit let's us all know that. And yes, these films are generally not the kind that garner awards attention. But there's always an exception. In 1989, Jack Nicholson was nominated for a Golden Globe for playing, that's right, The Joker in Tim Burton's Batman. Sometimes performances in non-traditional Oscar movies are so strong that they break down those barriers and gain nominations. It's happened in the past with horror (Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs), sci-fi (Sigourney Weaver in Aliens) and even fantasy (Ian McKellen for The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring). As superhero movies have become a genre in and of itself, maybe it really is time that an actor got nominated for one, and Ledger as the Joker shouldn't be ignored just because he's dead.

As for any complaints of marketing Ledger to bring in a greater audience, let's keep this also in mind: while Batman broods in a cave, the Joker is the real performance for an actor to sink his teeth into, as has been evidenced by the various maniacal and over-the-top performances given by Nicholson, Caesar Romero, and others over the decades. Not only that, but the Joker is Batman's Big Bad Archenemy, and his presence in this new film, especially in a franchise praised for its refreshing take on the superhero genre, is of course going to garner attention. To keep the Joker out of the marketing would do no justice to the film. Overall, people deserve to see the performance and the film. If Ledger's presence is what brings them in, hopefully it will do it so that they discover a strong movie overall as well. Judging from the early reviews, Ledger's performance is just the icing on the cake of a fantastic film.

So overall, is the hype good or bad? Probably a little column A, a little column B. But as someone who hasn't seen the film yet, I'm still seeing it as a Batman movie first, a Heath Ledger movie second. If others go see it with the reverse intentions, that's fine. Overall, Heath Ledger was a fantastic performer long before he ever signed onto this movie, and deserves to have that tribute paid to him any way it can.

Emmy's 2008: Picking the Final Five

2008-06-28T13:04:00.000-04:00

Yesterday the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (aka the people who decide the Emmys) announced their top ten finalists in the category of Best Drama Series and Best Comedy Series. Here's the finalists in each caegory, as well as the episode for which they are being considered:

TOP 10 COMEDY SERIES FINALISTS

"Curb Your Enthusiasm" ("The Bat Mitzvah")
"Entourage" ("The Day F***ers")
"Family Guy" ("Padre de Famila")
"Flight of the Conchords" ("Sally Returns")
"The Office" (title to come)
"Pushing Daisies" ("Pie-lette")
"30 Rock" ("Cooter")
"Two and a Half Men" ("Rough Night in Hump Junction")
"Ugly Betty" ("Something Wicked This Way Comes")
"Weeds" ("Go").

TOP 10 DRAMA SERIES FINALISTS

"Boston Legal" ("The Court Supreme")
"Damages" (Pilot)
"Dexter" ("The Dark Defender")
"Friday Night Lights" ("Leave No One Behind")
"Grey’s Anatomy" ("Freedom, Parts 1 and 2")
"House" ("Frozen")
"Lost" ("The Constant")
"Mad Men" (Pilot, "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes")
"The Tudors" (#205)
"The Wire" (Series finale, "30")

So, which of these series will be making the final five in each category? The Acedemy won't be releasing the full list of official nominees until July 17th. However, we have our picks for the final five in each category here. read them after the jump!

Best Comedy
30 Rock
The Office
Pushing Daisies
Flight of the Conchords
Ugly Betty

First, let's start with the funny, and do Best Comedy Series. First off, there's three series that are shoo-ins right off the bat. Ugly Betty has come off a season thast developed the characters even more, and is widely considered to be even stronger than the first. Considering that many thought it would have been the big winner last year, it should still be in the final five this year. That said, last year's winner, 30 Rock, also is coming off a stronger season than the first, and even gained in the ratings a little. Nabbing nomination number two should be easier than winning a Page-off. The Office is the third series that shouldn't be sweating it out come July 17th. By finally bringing Jim and Pam together (and not screwing it up), the series has averted a potential Moonlighting curse. Plus, Steve Carell's got the buzz, and it should help The Office to another nomination.

As for the last two slots, it's a bit harder of a toss-up. While Two and a Half Men is TV's highest rated sitcom, that may count for little in this strike-shortened season where quality became the forerunner to quantity. Weeds had a fairly loopy third season, and will likely get lost in the fray once again (though look for it to score a few acting nods). While it's encouraging to see an animated series make the top ten, I have a feeling that Family Guy may have scathingly lampooned too many voters already to make the top five. Plus, there are too many people who would consider it blasphemy to have the first animated series to get a nomination NOT be The Simpsons. That brings us down to four, and for these last two slots, I'm betting on the fresh blood. Of the three HBO shows, while Flight of the Conchords has the lowest ratings, it garnered a nod from the Golden Globes, and is considered one of the freshest and most creative shows out there, so look for it to edge out Entourage and Curb Your Enthusiasm. That leaves the last slot to Pushing Daisies. While it's been off the radar for awhile, the fact that it made the top ten shows that it's still freshj in voter's minds, and the unique concept and stellar performances (Kristin Chenowith!!) should push it into the last slot.

Best Drama:
House
Lost
Grey's Anatomy
Mad Men
The Wire

Now it's time to get serious and take a gander at the Drama category, which this year is a tough one to wager on. The one series that should be considered a shoo-in in House, which refreshed its format this year with an influx of new characters that gave the series some fresh blood. Combine that with still-crackling stories and performances, and you have a series that fits the bill for best Drama. It'll have to fend off another series that gained momentous creative resurgence this year, ABC's Lost. The resurrection of the island serial this year has been hailed by critics and (rabid) fans alike, with many non-fans praising the show's ability to create fantastic drama, even if you have no idea what's going on. Lost's evening companion, Grey's Anatomy, should also score another nod, which is sure to cause a stir. While the show faltered early on, it recovered nicely in its last few episodes (which, coincidentally enough, are the ones voters will view), and it has the overall popularity (and ace acting) to bring itself to the table once again.
That once again leaves us with two slots, and plenty of series to duke it out for them. I have a feeling the courtroom dramas Boston Legal and Damages will cancel each other out in the series category, but look for both to score some acting nods. While Friday Night Lights is one of my favourite shows, it had a better chance with its stronger first season than it did with this one. While Dexter has a large cult fan base, many voters may consider it too dark for the big prize. Of the two period dramas, Mad Men won the big prize at the Golden Globes, and is overall more highly praised than The Tudors, so look for it to snag a slot. That leaves the last one to The Wire, which, even in its uneven final season, was still better than most dramas on TV, and sorely deserves to be recognized for six seasons of outstanding entertainment.

That's our picks. What do you think? And are there any shows that missed the cut that you wanted to see make it through to the final five?

The Opinion Swinger: Coldplay's "Viva La Vida"

2008-06-27T01:09:00.000-04:00

Welcome to the Opinion Swinger, a once-in-a-while little ditty discussing those things in the world people have a great love for. Or hate. Either way, strong passionate feelings surge whenever the subject is brought up. Until something changes it and that opinion gets swung right to the other end of the spectrum faster than Belinda Stronach's political allegiances. For better or worse, that opinion is changed drastically, and it all get spilled out here.

I've never quite understood what the big stink was regarding Coldplay. I'm that guy who found "Yellow" to be plodding and snooze-worthy, and their following singles to be melancholic and the farthest from catchy. While I'm a self-admitted slave to a tune with a shameless hook, I still have a great love for the off-kilter stylings of other bands (Arcade Fire, I bow to thee). While A Rush of Blood to the Head was an improvement, I still only enjoyed "Clocks" after I was forced to hear it in every commercial I saw. And TV show. And sporting event. And department store. And rock radio station. And everywhere. For a year. Needless to say, their songs in general never really stuck unless I was forced into the deal.

The other thing that really irked me was Coldplay's bold attempts at trying to become "The Greatest Band in the World", that oft-heralded title still being held by U2 and The Rolling Stones. For someone who is an unabashed slave to U2, having these British upstarts start claiming, and only three albums into their career, that they wanted to be the Greatest Band in the World, seemed a little too ambitious, too soon, especially for a band whose singer doesn't hold a candle to Bono in vocal talent. This was no more evident than on their third album, X&Y, an uneven album that more than showcased how Coldplay was still not big enough for their big ambitions. "Fix You" tugged at my heartstrings, and the bridge in "Speed of Sound" was nice, but if you wanna play at the Big Rock Bands table, you gotta bring something new to the mix. Something of your own. And X&Y certainly wasn't it, unless you count making soaring songs in the likeness of Bono and the Edge, as original.

I'd continued to feel this way until recently, as I dreaded the release of Coldplay's newest, Viva La Vida. This was confirmed when in a recent Entertainment Weekly Summer Music Preview, Chris Martin actually said it was their actual attempt at becoming the GBitW. My eyes rolled, and continued rolling until that magical Opinion Swinger moment: Their performance of "Viva la Vida" at the MTV Movie Awards. Subtle and humble in its beginnings, and soaring (yet not aggressively) in all the right spots, I suddenly found myself outright enjoying a Coldplay song. After looking outside and confirming it was not raining frogs, I then downloaded both "Viva La Vida" and their other new single, "Violet Hill", a far more aggressive, and outright alternative-influenced track that isn't necessarily catchy, but leaves you singing it regardless.

Many kudos (and big album sales) have already shown that the world is embracing this new Coldplay, and for the first time, I have no qualms about it. many thanks have been heaped upon Brian Eno for giving the band that magical touch that he blessed U2 with earlier on in their career. Maybe it's really Eno who's the one who should be receiving my praise instead of Chris Martin and Co. However, regardless of that, praise must be heaped upon the band for recognizing their own faults, and going in a new direction, one filled with unique new sounds, and not an album full of "Clocks' ripoffs. Greatest Band in the World? Not yet. But will I be mad when the old boys relinquish the title to these younger upstarts? Maybe not so much anymore. Congrats Coldplay, you recognized that "Fix You" should have been about yourselves, and you did something about it. And actually gained a genuine fan in doing so. Consider my Opinion Swung.

Photo Courtesy of http://flickr.com/photos/whizkeed/

Welcome to the Sponge

2008-06-25T13:48:00.000-04:00

Welcome to the Sponge, my first real attempt at a blog. When I say blog, lots of people groan at the idea, usually because many people post on their blogs with the typical events of their day, and many people get annoyed with reading about Alice feeding her seven cats, and how today was extra special because Mittens coughed up a hairball. This is not that kind of blog. If I ever do choose to write in any sort of personal story, I promise that at the very least it will have some sort of message to be passed across, hopefully humorously.

So what’s the Sponge gonna be all about then, you ask? Well, those of you who know me probably already have an idea; pop culture. I’ve long professed that I am a pop-culture sponge, super-absorbing things of our pop-culture lexicon better than a Bounty paper towel could ever dream of. Everything in this blog will be fair game, let it be movies, music, TV, books, whatever team Lindsay Lohan is playing for today, you name it. However, without naming the names of certain hotel-monikered fellow bloggers, I will say that when I write, it will have a purpose, and to that end, an opinion.

Oh yes, opinions. Everyone has one, and this website will be here for my own to be thrown out into the world. Just keep in mind that when you read them, that these are opinions, not doctrines set to be forced upon anyone else. You may agree or disagree with them, and that’s perfectly fine either way. I’m personally a big fan of different perspectives, and encourage those who have a different one from my own to post comments, especially if you can back it up.

Now, for those who don’t know me, a few things to keep in mind: I’ve got something to say on pretty much anything, and I say a lot. I’m wordy, so that probably means many of these postings are gonna be just as long as this first one. For all of you with short attention spans, I’m sorry, but not really, since you probably have tuned out already. I’ll probably go on long tangents of crazy, but bear with me and I’m sure they’ll have a point. Eventually. For a list of my current faves in pop culture, check my profile. Yes, the rumors are true, I’m an out and proud homo, and while I frown upon stereotypes, I’d be the first to admit how comfortable I’d be walking down the streets blaring Madonna on my ipod without even tha faintest hint of irony. So if my postings seem particularly gay-friendly sometimes and you don’t like it, well, what the hell were you doing on a homo’s blog anyway, hmmmm? Sometimes I’ll probably even contradict myself through earlier postings and whatnot. Feel free to call me out on it. After all, nobody’s perfect. If everyone were, there’d be nothing fun to write about. Enjoy.

Steve
Pop Culture Sponge Extraordinaire