According to some French actress who won an Oscar, the 9/11 attacks were just the United States wanting to destroy a couple of big buildings that were simply too expensive:

Referring to the two passenger jets being flown into the Twin Towers, [Marion] Cotillard said:

“We see other towers of the same kind being hit by planes. Are they burned? They [sic] was a tower, I believe it was in Spain, which burnt for 24 hours. It never collapsed. None of these towers collapsed. And there [in New York], in a few minutes, the whole thing collapsed.”

She added that the towers, planned in the early Sixties, were an outdated “money-sucker” that would have cost more to modernise than to rebuild altogether, which is why they were destroyed.

She said: “It was a money-sucker because they were finished, it seems to me, by 1973, and to re-cable all that, to bring up-to-date all the technology and everything, it was a lot more expensive, that work, than destroying them.”

She also doesn’t believe a man walked on the moon, although I include that more as a sad attempt at comic relief:

She said: “Did a man really walk on the Moon? I saw plenty of documentaries on it, and I really wondered. And in any case I don’t believe all they tell me, that’s for sure.”

Okay, Marion.  I get that we shouldn’t swallow every line of bull that comes down the pike and that you’re a quirky revolutionary thinker who thinks on a level above the rest of us peons (heretofore to be known as “Citizens Of The Real World”), so here’s a cookie.

I suppose the almost 3000 people killed that day were just “collateral damage”.  The attacks on the Pentagon and the downed plane in Pennsylvania, reportedly on its way to another attack site, were both red herrings designed to take the focus off the demolition of the Twin Towers.  The widespread panic, air pollution, injuries, and aftershocks in New York were just because the planes didn’t hit the buildings at the optimum angle for a clean implosion.  The firefighters and first responders who were injured and killed attempting to rescue those trapped in the buildings should have stayed out of a demo site.  All the people, including children, on the four airplanes involved were expendable and needed to be on the planes to give the impression that these were just routine flights.  I suppose one could say that the towers collapsed in “minutes”, because Tower 2 stood for 56 minutes before falling and Tower 1 stood for 102 minutes.  Nearby buildings that were damaged in the attacks, such as the other WTC buildings and St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church?  Well, maybe they needed to be torn down too, and it was just gravy that they happened to be damaged.

I’m not gullible.  I know that there are many things about the attacks that horrible day which have yet to be explained, and there are many things we will never know.  I understand that we shouldn’t believe everything we hear, and not all is as it seems when it comes to politics and those involved in making it digestible.  Many, many mistakes were made both during and after the attacks, mistakes with long-term ramifications.  But for some actress to tell us that the planes full of innocent passengers flew into the towers because the buildings were outdated and needed to be torn down is at best stupid, and at worst…stupid.  She, of course, knows how the buildings properly should have burnt and fallen because she recieved her engineering degree at acting school…the same school that graduated Sean Penn with a degree in economics and Angelina Jolie with a diploma in world affairs.

Her insinuation that the towers were a “money-sucker” and it would be cheaper to fly planes into them in a form of demolition-via-aircraft are ironically laughable in the knowledge that the economy of Lower Manhattan was devastated after the planes flew into the buildings.  This doesn’t even include the effect the attacks had on the economy of New York as a whole, not to mention New Jersey and Washington.  She also hasn’t taken into account that the attacks and the ensuing aftermath have already cost New York almost $95 billion dollars, the Pentagon around $500 million dollars, and the incalculable cost it has taken on the lives and psyches both of those who lost loved ones and those who survived.

All that to tear down two buildings in a cost-effective manner.

The actress later insisted that it was all a misunderstanding, and that her remarks should in no way affect her acting career, in particular the new movie she’s making with Johnny Depp:

Her Paris-based lawyer Vincent Tolesano said: “Marion never intended to contest nor question the attacks of September 11, 2001, and regrets the way old remarks have been taken out of context.”

The apology coincided with Cotillard preparing to fly to Chicago next week to start filming Public Enemies with Johnny Depp - a movie that was set to become the first big money spinner for the previously unknown actresses .

In fact Cotillard, a green activist for Greenpeace, had used an interview with the French channel Paris Première to make her views abundantly clear.

Speaking on the cinema discussion programme Paris Dernière in February 2007, Cotillard had said: “I think we’re lied to about a number of things”, even claiming the Americans had destroyed the Twin Towers themselves because the were an outdated “money sucker”.

Expanding her conspiracy theory, Cotillard said it would been “a lot more expensive” to rebuild the towers “which is why they were destroyed”, with the loss of thousands of American lives.

Never intended to question the attacks?  Remarks taken out of context?  It’s amazing how people can backpedal when millions of dollars are at stake.  Lives, however, apparently are expendable.  If you don’t like it here, then go make your little movies somewhere else.

Her ignorant words and arrogant attitude are an insult to all those who perished, survived, and overcame those horrific attacks.  Yet another reason why actors shouldn’t be involved in politics…they need to stick to what they know best, which is pretending to be something they are not and living in alternate realities.

Oh wait.

This is exactly what I was alluding to in my earlier post about the inherent snobbery which goes into the selection process of the Academy Awards. Character actors are often ignored for their great performances for what can only be what Academy voters deem as a lack of versatility, or even popularity by the masses. If the people voted for whom they deemed to have given the best performance, I am sure the outcome would be different more often than not.

Actor Brad Renfro appeared in 21 films before his tragic death on January 15, from a heroin overdose. Brad was 25 at the time of his death, and his recent life had been marred by substance abuse problems, including an arrest in 2005 for attempting to purchase heroin. This however, does not diminish his talent or his previous work, which garnered him critical acclaim at the time. His first role was in the blockbuster The Client, a film adaptation of a book by John Grisham. (I love his books btw)

He also starred alongside the likes of Brad Pitt, Dustin Hoffman, Robert de Niro and Kevin Bacon in Sleepers, and with Scarlett Johannson in the indie classic Ghost World. In 1995, he won Hollywood Reporter’s “Young Star” award, and was voted nominated in the People’s “Best 30 Under 30.”

My point is, while Brad had derailed his career at the end, he was hardly a nobody and was certainly someone people in the industry respected for having talent and potential. They didn’t ignore Heath Ledger who died because of an accidental overdose, but of course, he’d been nominated for an award.

The Academy has released a statement to Us Magazine, stating:

“It was really an editing decision because we can’t fit everyone in,” a rep for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences tells Usmagazine.com. “There was no specific reason.”

That’s some BS right there. Heath Died AFTER Brad, and how hard would it have been to stick Brad’s picture in there? Seriously, this industry takes these young people, throws them into a world of excess, practically plies them with drugs, sucks them of their soul and then discards them like yesterday’s trash.

Tell me Academy, how about you edit this, you buttlicks!

Right before the Oscars aired last night, we watched a Barbara Walters special which featured actor Harrison Ford. Harrison was discussing his long and distinguished career with Walters, with some sneak peeks at the new Indiana Jones movie. Harrison, 65, has never won an Oscar. He was nominated once for his role in the 1985 film Witness, but lost to William Hurt who won for Kiss of the Spider Woman.

It seemed inconceivable that an actor as revered and talented as Harrison Ford had never won an Oscar. Ford’s certainly not short on monetary success, having starred in huge blockbuster films like the Star Wars triology, all the Indiana Jones films, as well as cult faves like Blade Runner and American Graffiti, but alas the gold statue has eluded him.

When you consider Ford’s age, and dwindling opportunity for roles which might garner Academy Award attention, the chances at this point of him winning an Oscar are slim. That seems an incredibly harsh reality. And dare I say, unfair.

This brings me to Johnny Depp, an actor who has been through many ups and downs in his career, but in the last few years has been on a real high. Essentially, through his own inimitable style, Johnny carried a somewhat off-the-wall Disney film, (based on a popular ride at Disneyland) and turned the film Pirates of the Caribbean into a HUGE financial enterprise. His depiction of Captain Jack, an 18th century metro-sexual pirate of questionable morals, was incredibly brilliant. But then again, Johnny Depp is an amazing character actor. I can imagine anyone else playing a modern day Willy Wonka, or any of the other quirky roles he is best known for.

Depp’s collaboration with director Tim Burton has created some great films, including Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Sleepy Hollow, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Corpse Bride and his latest Sweeney Todd. One of my personal favorites is his portrayal of Gilbert Grape from What’s Eating Gilbert Grape. Johnny has been nominated for three Academy Awards, J.M. Barrie (author of Peter Pan) in Finding Neverland, Captain Jack Sparrow, Pirates of The Caribbean, and his latest role as Sweeney Todd, the murderous barber looking for revenge in the film Sweeney Todd.

This year’s winner for Best Actor was Daniel Day-Lewis in There Will Be Blood, a brilliant actor certainly, but one who’s already been honored by the Academy. My first thought when Daniel won (besides who the hell dressed he and his wife?) was “Why not Johnny, or Viggo Mortenson for that matter, I mean let’s not get greedy there Daniel.” Of course, this response was utterly inappropriate and without any real merit or objective basis, but still. It kind of raised my hackles when I thought back to poor old Harrison Ford and his year-after-year snubs, his age, what’s left of his opportunities to win an Oscar and how bad I’d feel to have lived my life working hard, doing brilliant work and never fully actualizing my dream of winning the highest achievement in achievement.

Demoralizing to say the least. Of course Johnny Depp, Viggo Mortenson and another favorite of mine, Leonardo Di Caprio (his portrayal of Howard Hughes in The Aviator is one of the finest ever) are young enough to have numerous opportunities to play roles which will hopefully showcase their talent, and it their lucky, win an Oscar.

But then again, with guys like Daniel Day-Lewis (2 Academy Awards), Jack Nicholson (3 Academy Awards), Tom Hanks* (2 Academy Awards) and Denzel Washington* (2 Academy Awards) hoarding all the golden statues, they may end up like Harrison Ford, looking back over their lives and wondering what they might have done differently.

Not sure what the answer to this conundrum is, but surely, like with all honors, there’s some politics and snobbery going on. And dammit, I don’t like it one bit. Spread the love Academy, give some others a chance.

(Both of these are favorite actors of mine, so I am NOT picking on them for anything other than multiple wins)

I’ll let you in on a little secret:  I generally hate awards shows.  I think they’re overdone glitzfests designed to show off people’s egos.  Having said that, I am glad the Oscars went on with the show this year, if only for tradition’s sake (the writer’s strike would have seriously hurt the ceremony, with no scripted banter and actors refusing to cross picket lines), and I do like to see people rewarded for their hard work.   But sorry, I don’t make my viewing choices based on who won what, and I couldn’t care less who wore what designer gown.

Having gotten all that out of the way, here are some of the winners at last night’s Academy Awards:

Best Motion Picture: “No Country for Old Men.”

Lead Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis, “There Will Be Blood.”

Lead Actress: Marion Cotillard, “La Vie en Rose.”

Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem, “No Country for Old Men.”

Supporting Actress: Tilda Swinton, “Michael Clayton.”

Director: Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, “No Country for Old Men.”

Foreign Language Film: “The Counterfeiters,” Austria.

Adapted Screenplay: Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, “No Country for Old Men.”

Original Screenplay: Diablo Cody, “Juno.”

Animated Feature Film: “Ratatouille.”

Art Direction: “Sweeney Todd the Demon Barber of Fleet Street.”

Cinematography: “There Will Be Blood.”

Sound Mixing: “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

Sound Editing: “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

Original Score: “Atonement,” Dario Marianelli.

Original Song: “Falling Slowly” from “Once,” Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova.

Costume: “Elizabeth: The Golden Age.”

Documentary Feature: “Taxi to the Dark Side.”

Documentary Short Subject: “Freeheld.”

Film Editing: “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

Makeup: “La Vie en Rose.”

Animated Short Film: “Peter & the Wolf.”

Live Action Short Film: “Le Mozart des Pickpockets (`The Mozart of Pickpockets’).”

Visual Effects: “The Golden Compass.”

That’s because everyone’s favorite nottie, Paris Hilton, has been banned from the Oscars.

Yep, you read it correctly…Paris has been given the old heave-ho by Academy Awards organizers and told that she’s not wanted there…mainly because her latest film The Hottie and the Nottie totally tanked at the box office, bringing in about $25,000 (or $225 per theater showing it).  I mean, how far down on the level of bad do you have to descend to be completely and utterly snubbed by the very people who are as close to your peers as you’ll ever have?

The Daily Star said it best, I can’t possibly put it any better than this, and I’m not even going to try:

Paris Hilton’s fairy godmother has furnished her with a £2million [$3.9M USD] outfit for the Oscars.

But the wonky-eyed Cinderella won’t be going to the ball.

The blonde irritant, 27, has been leaking her eyes all over ugly sister Nicky, 24, after being refused a chance to get her publicity fix at the swish ceremony next Sunday.

Ever the presumptuous and stingy carbuncle, Paris blagged a bum-clenchingly expensive dress and diam-onds from designer Kira Plastinina.

But her latest movie The Hottie And The Nottie has been voted the worst in history by users of film bible IMDB. So organisers of the ceremony have pointed out that giving her an invite would be like sending Jim Davidson a VIP ticket to a Gay Pride party.

Our man in the pumpkin said: “She cried hot, salty tears when she was banned from the Oscars.

“She’s desperate to be taken seriously as an actress and hoped she would be able to network with the film bods.”

Unfortunately, Paris’s greatest screen glory was in night-vision in her infamous 2004 grumble flick 1 Night In Paris which she made with her equally wooden ex Rick Salomon, 40. Rather gallingly for Paris, she actually had to do real work to promote her latest offering to the silver screen, which sees her push the boundaries of character acting as the “Hottie”.

A gossiping mouse squeaked: “She’s tempted to go to the parties afterwards, but might wear her trademark brunette wig to save her dignity.”

So if any Prince Charmings find a glass slipper by Chateau Marmont sniff the OdorEater for traces of Paris.

PWNED!

After a strike that lasted longer than most thought it would, writers laid down their picket signs and once again picked up their keyboards, to the delight of television audiences everywhere:

More than 92 percent of the Writers Guild of America members who cast ballots Tuesday in Los Angeles and New York voted to end their work stoppage over residuals for writing in the digital age, including new media and the Internet. The new deal is for three years.

“The strike is over. Our membership has voted, and writers can go back to work,” said Patric Verrone, president of the WGA’s West chapter.

While the new deal does not give the writers everything that they had asked for, it is a better deal than what they had previously:

Verrone said the WGA achieved two of three goals through negotiations with the studios.

The first goal relates to writers’ “jurisdiction” in new media, Verrone said, meaning that any content written by guild members specifically for new media, such as the Internet or cell phones, will be covered by their contract.

The second goal relates to reuse of content in new media, Verrone said.

The agreement bases payment for reuses on a distributor’s gross formula for residuals, “so that when they get paid, we get paid,” he said.

It is the “first time in our history that a new delivery system pays on a residual formula superior to the prior existing system,” Verrone said.

The third goal, which Verrone said the guild did not achieve, was to shore up writers’ shares of the revenue from animation and reality television.

“Giving up animation and reality was a heartbreaking thing for me personally,” he said. “But it was more important that we make a deal that benefited the membership, the town as a whole, that got people back to work and that solved the biggest problems in new media.”

Well, maybe next time.

The new deal also means that workers who were affected by the strike, but not directly involved in it, can go back to work as well…people like makeup artists, hairdressers, set designers, camera operators, and the person who operates the Teleprompter.  It was my belief that the studios held out so long because they believed that by creating collateral damage (the non-striking workers affected by the strike), writers would feel pressured to cave in and go back to work.  It does seem to have worked somewhat, as the strike drug on for months, workers were fired or laid off, and the WGA eventually did have to concede on one of their points.

This also means that the Oscars can now go on as planned, with scripted banter and A-list stars.  Had the strike continued, many stars said they would not cross the picket lines out of solidarity, and the planners would be forced to rely on either improvised jokes or letting Jon Stewart write his own material for the hours-long telecast.  And actors who have waited a lifetime for an award can now rest assured that the show will go on.

Of course, some late-night shows went back on the air before the end of the strike, so that the jobs of their crews could be salvaged (a precedent set by none other than the late, great Johnny Carson during the 1988 writer’s strike), and some shows negotiated deals with their writers independent of the greater strike.

But don’t set up your Tivos just yet…it will take about four weeks to get new episodes of comedies back on the air, and six to eight weeks to get drama episodes aired.

Word on the internets is that, for the first time in its 80-year history, the Academy Awards could be cancelled because of the ongoing (and going and going) writer’s strike:

Oscar producer Gil Cates insists that isn’t going to happen. ”The show is going on,” he says. ”I’m looking forward to it. We’re on schedule and, hallelujah, I can’t wait until the 24th.” Good news, right? Except that the Globes insisted that the show was going on too, and look how that turned out. ”If this is still not settled in a month, we should boycott the Oscars,” Don Cheadle tells EW. ”We have to be consistent. We can’t go, ‘Well, the Oscars is a bigger show and it is more important so we should go to that one but not the Globes.’ I kinda feel like all shows should be boycotted to drive the point home.”

As you may (or may not) know, the Golden Globes, Oscar’s red-headed stepchild, was cancelled because of the strike, reduced from a glitz-filled champagne-fueled televised party to an hour-long press conference preceded by a Dateline NBC show featuring the strike. Oh, how fun. I’ll be sure and break out the popcorn and hot cocoa for that one.

If cancelling the Golden Globes and turning it a press conference is akin to cancelling the high school prom and announcing the King and Queen over the PA during first hour announcements, then cancelling the Oscars, to the entertainment world, is like planning all your life for a Cinderella-style wedding at a five-star resort only to show up and be taken to the Justice Of The Peace with your future mother-in-law and her dog.

But wait, there’s more…

If you haven’t seen Helen Mirren’s award-winning performance as Queen Elizabeth II in the movie, The Queen, go rent it now and watch it.  Right now.  Go ahead.  I’ll wait.

The five Corgis in the film, named Poppy, Anna, Alice, Oliver, and Megan (I believe only four were shown at a time), were awarded Top Dog honors at London’s inaugural Top Dog Film Festival:

“I know one should avoid acting with animals and children,” Mirren said. “But these little chaps were a pleasure to work with and deserve all the plaudits for their fine performances.”

The five Corgis, who were the monarch’s pets in the movie, were rewarded Sunday with a gong at London’s inaugural Fido Film Awards, which are part of the British Film Institute’s London Film Festival.

“The inaugural Fidos are a first in more ways than one: dogs have truly come in from the cold,” said Toby Rose, the event’s organizer. “Dogs take up considerable minutes of film time, but they never get a nod. Nodding to dogs is the way to go.”

The canine quintet’s success at the Fidos takes the tally of awards won by the movie to 59. In real life, Queen Elizabeth II has owned more than 30 Corgis during her 55-year reign.

The little dogs steal a couple of scenes in this movie with their unabashed cuteness.  But where are the awards for the Labs who were featured in hunting/stalking scenes at Balmoral?  Well, perhaps they were just stock.

Really, you should see this movie.  I rented this and Elizabeth I (also featuring Mirren) one weekend and had a royal good time.  Elizabeth I was a bit factually off, but an enjoyable movie nonetheless.  And besides, The Queen introduced me to the adorableness that is Michael Sheen.

Sean “Puffy P. Diddy” Combs gets what he wants, when he wants it.  Including some other dude’s chick. 

A real estate agent named Gerard Rechnitzer filed a complaint against Combs for allegedly punching him in the face.  According to various reports, Mr. Rechnitzer and his girlfriend were leaving the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel on Sunday at around 2:30am, when he stopped off to use the restroom.  Upon exiting, he noticed a group of men circled around his girlfriend, with Mr. Combs pressing her to come join them for an after-hours Oscar’s party.  The hotel is directly across from the Kodiak Theatre where the Oscars were held the same night.

Mr. Rechnitzer claims he observed this “chatting up” of his girlfriend for a few minutes (WTF? pansy!) when he finally interrupted and urged his girlfriend to leave with him.  Here’s where it gets fuzzy.  Either Diddy was telling Rechnitzer to piss off and get lost, or the girlfriend was reluctant to walk away from such a stellar opportunity to hang out with some high end thugs - whichever the case - Mr. Rechnitzer stated he was punched in the face so hard he “flew back five feet.” 

Alright, some things don’t add up here.  First of all, if this woman was really his girlfriend and she allowed herself to be surrounded by an entourage of Diddy and his posse, then she is a straight up ho.  I would have Emma Peeled their asses and hit them with my purse and taken a head count, all while filing my nails and checking my profile.  Why?  Because I am secret government agent who models on the side. 

Second of all, Diddy is a rapper.  Not an intimidating gansta rapper, but a lamesta rapper.  He dines on champagne and caviar, not crack and rusty nails.  It’s not like he’s got fists of steel or something.  If he hit a man and knocked him back five feet, then that man was made of lucky charms and marshmallows.  In which case, he deserved to be punched and have his girlfriend leave with the likes of Diddy.  

That said, Diddy’s a punk.  Any real man would have beat Diddy’s ass down, and my man, he would have rolled up on his flaming Harley, head bathed in fire and blown all their asses away.  Yeah, he’s hot!! 

Eddie Murphy is a dickhead.  And that’s why I didn’t root for him to win.  Plus, I haven’t seen Dreamgirls.  Movies starring Beyonce Knowles are not high on my list of things to waste two hours on.  So, yeah, Eddie Murphy got pissy after losing to Alan Arkin for Best Supporting Actor.

My response is: Eddie did you think the Academy Awards would forget A.) you like tranny whores B.) You’re a tempermental hothead C.) You will shamelessly star in any movie that allows you to degrade women of size and color for money, a cheap laugh, and D.) You are a dickhead.

It seems that Mr. Murphy, 45, escorted by girlfriend Tracy Edmonds left almost immediately after the award for Best Supporting Actor was handed out to the non-chalantly accepting Alan Arkin.  Murphy’s response to the loss, “It’s fine. It happens. It’s OK”  which when translated means, “Fuck no. Bullshit. Sham.”  Murphy didn’t bother to stick around to see his castmate, Jennifer Hudson win her award or the Dreamgirls performance starring Hudson and Beyonce for the awards show.  Man, what self-absorbed prick.

I bet Scary Spice enjoyed watching the Oscars, and most likely a whole box of Krispy Kremes too. Pic source.