I am going to admit something that certain women will find unbelievable:  I have seen only one-and-a-half episodes of Sex And The City.  Why?  Well, for one thing, we don’t have HBO, and the only reason I saw what I did of the show was because there was a free promotion going on at the same time the SATC series was wrapping up, so I saw half of the next to last episode and all of the last.  That, and oh yeah…I found out I just don’t care.

In an attempt over the years to try and figure out the appeal, I’ve seen pieces of episodes here and there, but I have come to the conclusion that I just don’t get it.  If it’s your kind of show, great…it just isn’t mine.  Frankly, there were two reasons I tuned in to the episodes I did…Baryshnikov and Noth, two yummy pieces of man flesh.

So with that in mind (and don’t say I didn’t make it clear), we go to the movie premiere of the superfluous SATC movie, which took place in London over the weekend.

But wait, there’s more…

May I say it’s about time.  John Travolta was photographed on the set of his new movie, minus the fake fur which was thought to be permanently glued to his scalp:

With a new cropped haircut, it appears as if Travolta has decided to do the decent thing now that his hairline is waving goodbye to his forehead.

And the moustache and bold new sideburns certainly draw the eye away from his shiny pate, as does the tough-guy tattoo he is sporting on his neck.

It’s a far cry from the days of Grease and Saturday Night Fever in the 1970s, when Travolta’s famously slick hairstyles almost stole the show.

He was photographed on the set of his new movie, a remake of the 1970’s thriller The Taking Of Pelham 123, which also starts Hollywood bigshots Denzel Washington and James Gandolfini, himself no stranger to male pattern baldness.

So what’s the big whoop?  I thought he was totally bald under that hairpiece.  The reality is such an anticlimax.  So his hairline looks like Florida, big deal.  Look at James Gandolfini…his hair is completely gone on top, but that doesn’t stop him from being a major babe magnet.  It’s attitude, baby…all in the attitude.  As long as men keep their hair cut short or shaved off, and don’t go for the Gallagher/skullet look, a man can totally make it work for him.

Now, however, about that Scientology thing…

And sorry, Johnny…I have to agree.

Gene Wilder says that he likes Johnny Depp, and that is why he has not seen the new version of the famous candy man:

“I haven’t seen it. I like Depp, but when I heard they were doing a remake, I heard: mistake. When I saw clips on TV and I saw what Depp was doing, I thought, ‘Don’t see the movie — you like Depp too much.’ I always get comments: ‘Yours is better.’ I know they’re talking about Willy Wonka.” In fact Leonard Maltin’s “Movie Guide” says: “Depp, though amusing, is no Gene Wilder.”

Sorry, Johnny…while you’e undoubtedly hotter than Gene, I’m siding with the comic legend on this one.

While I fully admit that I haven’t seen the entire 2005 version of the movie, I’ve seen enough of it to know that this new and updated Willy Wonka leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.  For one thing, Johnny’s version of the character (and the ubiquitous chocolate factory-slash-private playground) reminds me entirely too much of Michael Jackson for my own personal comfort level.  A while back, I even did a side-by-side comparison of Michael’s latest photo shoot and Depp’s incarnation of the Willy Wonka character, and the similarities are eerie.  That, and the latest film strives to take the chocolatier to a place he was never meant to go.  I read the book as a child, and from what I remember the 2005 version is more faithful to it, but at the same time it adds elements that were never meant to be there, especially since the latest version is more geared to adults.

My daughter has seen both versions and she completely and wholeheartedly prefers the 1971 version.  When I ask her why, she just says that Gene Wilder’s version, over three decades old, is “more fun”.  And isn’t that the point of candy, anyway?  It isn’t supposed to be good for you or to try and make you a healthier individual…it’s just supposed to be fun.

Variety is reporting that some aspects of two of Heath Ledger’s final films, The Dark Knight and The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, are in doubt due to his sudden death:

Production on Terry Gilliam’s indie “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” has temporarily shut down, while Warner execs are still determining how to adjust their marketing campaign on “The Dark Knight,” which is keyed to Ledger’s Joker character in its early stages.

“Parnassus” has three options: Replace Ledger in the role, shoot around him or shut down the production entirely. The insurance company will likely determine which option the producers take. […]

Production on Christopher Nolan’s “Batman Begins” sequel is believed to largely completed — principal photography concluded in the fall — but the initial marketing campaign focuses on the ghoulish Joker character.

To complicate matters further, the studio has just restructured its marketing operation. International marketing topper Sue Kroll now oversees all marketing for the studio in the wake of the exit of former domestic marketing president Dawn Taubin, who developed the “Dark Knight” campaign.

Kroll will likely have to move quickly to rejigger the studio’s current phase of the marketing campaign for “Dark Knight,” focusing on Ledger’s Joker character. This phase of the campaign had been set to run until March.

Dawn discussed this some on tonight’s guest spot on BlogTalkRadio Today.  Maybe it’s just me…I understand that perhaps the marketing of the movie might have to be revised, but I hope they don’t change his scenes in the movie (and I don’t know that there are plans to do so, but it could happen).  Heath was an actor, and he understood that when he was on a set he was there to do a job.  That job sometimes consisted of scenes that were perhaps a bit on the edge (such as his Joker character), but he understood.  It was what he was supposed to do.

I’d think after putting so much work and effort into a part, he’d want a movie he was involved in to be released just as it was always supposed to be.  Imaginarium is in the beginning stages of shooting, and can be revised at this point, but The Dark Knight is pretty much completed and to mess with scenes now, even with the best of intentions, would change too much of the movie.  I don’t think Heath, by all accounts the consummate professional, would want that of a project he was involved in.

I say be sensitive to his family when it comes to marketing the movie, but leave the movie itself alone and let it stand as a testament to his acting skills.  The best homage one can pay to an actor’s craft is to let them act.

Sylvester Stallone does Edgar Allen Poe?  Apparently, it’s going to happen.  After he is finished with Rambo MXVIII, Sly has plans to make a movie about Poe, and guess who he wants to play the lead?

Our source says, “Stallone has recently met with Viggo Mortensen and has offered him the role of Edgar Allan Poe in the film. Mortensen is consdiering the role although he wants some slight revisions in the script.” Yep, Viggo Mortensen could end up doing drugs and quothing the Raven for Sly. How cool is that notion? […]

UPDATE! We’ve been able to get a little more information from our source this morning, and a lot of what he’s saying checks out. This is starting to look credible. Additionally, our source has also told us that if Viggo doesn’t take the part, Clifton Collins Jr. (recently cast in Star Trek) and John Hawkes are being considered as backup options for the role.

Well, now.  I’m incredibly picky about my movies, and even pickier about who I like.  But since Viggo comes highly recommended by none other than our illustrious D, and since Poe has long been a favorite of mine, and since I’d rather watch historical dramas than typical Hollywood twaddle, this could be something I’d actually go see.

When I heard “Stallone”, and “Poe” together, however, I had a sinking feeling that Sly hisownself was going to play the part of the tortured poet.  “Ay, yo, is ALL dat we see er seem, budda dreem widin a dreem?  ANNABELLE!!!”

The second installment in the Marvel Comics Fantastic Four series is set to be released in theaters on Jun 15, The Fantastic Four: Rise Of The Silver Surfer.

This is the summer for blockbusters with several big movies coming out over the course of the summer including Pirates of The Caribbean: At World’s End set for release this Thursday, May 24th just in time for Memorial Day Weekend, Harry Potter and The Order Of The Phoenix July 13th (the world premier is set for Jun 28th in Tokyo) and the new Fantastic Four nestled in the middle of these likely box office blockbusters.

The first FF was ok by “comic book” to “big screen” standards. It filled all the requirements of setting up the origin of how our superheroes Mr. Fantastic aka Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd), The Thing aka Ben Grimm (Michael Chiklis), The Human Torch aka Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) and of course, The Invisible Woman aka Susan Storm (Jessica Alba) get their powers - as well as their arch-nemesis - Dr. Doom aka Dr. Victor von Doom (Julian McMahon).

A “cosmic storm” (a full blast of intense radiation - it’s Marvel, what’d you expect) is the catalyst for the genetic mutations that transform the team of scientists and pilots. The original comic series, the four of them minus Dr. Doom, attempt a risky space trip to test our Reed’s latest invention, a space exploration starship. Faced with bankruptcy after spending all his inheritance working on his aeronautical inventions, Reed made a last ditch effort and asked two pilots, the quiet and gentle Ben Grimm, and the hotshot Johnny Storm to help him pilot his craft, along with his former flame (and older sister to Johnny) genetic scientist Susan Storm to accompany him on a mission in an attempt to keep his government backing for the project (gee that sounds familiar, see Green Goblin/Harry Osborn).

As we know, the cosmic storm bombards them with radiation and instead of dying a ghastly death, they are instead transformed into supercool superheroes: with the power to stretch, there’s Mr. Fantastic, the power to be really strong and durable, The Thing, the power to fly and create supernova strength heat, Human Torch and the power to turn invisible and create otherworldly force fields, Invisible Woman.

But wait, there’s more…

Today marks the 27th anniversary of Ian Curtis’ death, when at age 23, Curtis hanged himself on the eve of his band’s departure for a tour of the U.S. In a fitting tribute to his brief, but brilliant career, a new biopic titled Control premiered last night at Cannes which chronicles his short life and that of his band Joy Division. The film is based on the book written by Curtis’ wife Deborah called Touching From a Distance and follows his life from the start of band’s formation (1976) to his death on May 18th, 1980. The couple have one child, daughter Natalie who was born in 1979.

It would be difficult to imagine today’s musical landscape without the influence of Ian Curtis and Joy Division. Despite having the legacy of being one of the youngest rock musicians to die so early in his career, Ian Curtis like so many before and after him, continues to impact our lives through his music.

Dutch rock-photographer and videographer Anton Corbijn, who is making his directorial debut with Control, photographed Joy Division in the late 70’s. He’s also a legendary music videographer who directed Nirvana’s “Heart Shaped Box,” Depeche Mode’s “Personal Jesus,” and literally dozens of others, as well as, having photographed virtually every big name in music including the album covers for Depeche Mode and U2′ s Joshua Tree. Corbijn is quite literally a legend of rock in his own right, which makes him the perfect fit to capture the life of a rock legend.

Working as a photographer for British rock mags, Corbijn was on the scene to capture the dark, but electric mood of the late 70’s as the now legendary label Factory Records helped spawn the careers of Joy Division, and later New Order (see also OMD, Happy Mondays and Duritti Column) during a period that also saw the emergence of The Sex Pistols and the Buzzcocks, just to name a couple.

Corbijn recalls the period and his decision to film the movie in stark black and white:

”My whole memory of that period is black and white. There is basically no color photography of that band around. So it felt very proper to the project.”

Corbijn also felt strongly about his decision to cast a relative unknown actor Sam Riley in the role of Curtis based on his initial impressions of the actor:

”A lot of bands I met, including Joy Division, were kind of underdressed - a thin coat on, smoking and shivering in the cold. When I met Sam it was also in the winter and he was totally the same…had an innocence and a freshness that I was hoping for but never thought I would find.”

Despite an all-too-short life, both as a group and for that of their lead singer Ian Curtis, Joy Division has had a tremendous influence of many of today’s biggest names in rock. U2’s Bono has described Curtis voice as “holy” and wrote the song “A Day Without Me,” as a direct reference to the suicide of Curtis. This was the first single released off of U2’s debut album Boy in 1980. NIN’s Trent Reznor is also a fan of Curtis’ work and covered Joy Division’s amazing song “Dead Souls” which was a released on The Crow soundtrack and Reznor often lists the band and Curtis as an early influence.

It would be fair to trace Curtis and company in the sounds of Bauhaus, Echo and The Bunnymen, Depeche Mode, The Cure, Siouxie and The Banshees and certainly later in the sounds of techno master Moby, who covered “New Dawn Fades” for the Heat soundtrack, which may possibly be the greatest movie soundtrack ever made.

Clearly, Curtis’ life was polarized between his creative forces and his personal pain. Ian suffered from epilepsy and this certainly contributed in part to his various spikes in emotions and personality conflicts. His wife Deborah described him as very controlling, often moody and distant. At the time of Curtis’ suicide the couple were contemplating divorce which was exacerbated by Ian’s affair with a Belgian writer named Annik Honore.

Deborah says these torn feelings may have been at the root cause of his suicide, but even she has no definitive answers:

“Maybe he was concerned about doing the right thing. Maybe he was torn between what he should do and what he wanted to do. Maybe Annik wasn’t the one, but he felt he needed to go. I don’t know. I’ve spent a lot of time wondering, because there were so many other things he could’ve done besides commit suicide.

Only Ian Curtis knows why he took his own life on the eve of what was clearly to be a journey into rock greatness, leaving behind many broken lives, including that of his bandmates. With the end of Joy Division (the band agreed that if any member departed, they would change the name) New Order was created, and we should all be thankful for that.

Hopefully this new biopic will shed some light into the world of a mysterious figure that most of us know only through his lyrics and haunting voice; and while these gifts are priceless in quality, their absence in quantity is painful to bear.

Perhaps the answer to the mystery of his death can be found in Ian’s own words:

Love Will Tear Us Apart

When the routine bites hard
And ambitions are low
And the resentment rides high
But emotions wont grow
And were changing our ways,
Taking different roads
Then love, love will tear us apart again

Why is the bedroom so cold
Turned away on your side?
Is my timing that flawed,
Our respect run so dry?
Yet theres still this appeal
That weve kept through our lives
Love, love will tear us apart again

Do you cry out in your sleep
All my failings expose?
Get a taste in my mouth
As desperation takes hold
Is it something so good
Just cant function no more?
When love, love will tear us apart again

Spider-Man 3 broke the record for ticket sales in its opening weekend, making an estimated $375 million worldwide. Considering the cost of the film was close to $500 million, it seems certain the film will break even and likely set more records. The test will be how people react to having seen the film and if the mixed reviews will keep on-the-fence movie goers from seeing it.

The critics have been panning the film for a variety of failures, including an all too emotional cast with everyone shedding a tear (including villians) Kirsten Dunst singing (twice!), a fair number of convoluted plot devices and a seemingly cramped story-line filled with too much going on. All of that is true, but even still - I found it still very much worth seeing.

My kids, ages 3 and 7, loved it. My daughter cried at the end (spoilers ahead, so beware) and my son who is possibly the biggest Spidey freak on earth was mostly able to sit still for the entire 2-hour+ film: no small feat for a 3-year old.

Sam Raimi, who’s been getting some heat for some of the over-the-top scenes in the latest installment in the Spider-Man series, needs to be cut some major slack. Unlike movie critics and your average movie-goer, we are a family submersed in comic books and the superhero/villain lore. I grew up on “origin stories” with a dad who collected comic books. So even with our “slightly above average level of Spider-Man sophistication” we were able to see the movie for what it was meant to be: a fantasy engagement with our inner child.

But that doesn’t mean they stayed true to the story(ies).

***Spoiler Warning***
But wait, there’s more…

Holy Tapdancing Saints In The Cathedral! Spider-Man 3, which opens nationwide in theaters tomorrow, is getting the chronic beatdown by the critics. Radar Online has a whole big list of not-so-nice reviews of the third Sam Raimi installment in the extremely popular Spider-Man film series. Here’s a couple of my favorites from Radar:

Rope of Silicone: “Spider-Man 3 presents a world where people come into rooms, make heartfelt speeches, and then exit for no apparent reason while the other person looks off into the distance. It’s all a wacky attempt at Steel Magnolias (with webs) and it comes off as fully contrived.”

Dallas Observer: “It all just feels so … Fantastic Four, so dopey and forgettable and crafted out of second-rate cheese.”

Well, I actually liked Fantastic Four, but it was cheesy. Here’s a few others I found on Rotten Tomatoes, which in all fairness has some nice reviews about the movie as well:

FilmsInReview: A disappointment. Spidey keeps his mask off and weeps. Everyone cries. I hated the silly monolith sad sack Sandman. Did Dunst’s contract stipulate she sing two songs?

Slant Magazine: Is this Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 3 or Aaron Spelling’s?

Here’s the thing, this film (and those like it) are about comic-book heroes. Most of which base their superhero powers around the same contrived premise: gamma rays gone right. In reality, gamma rays go wrong, usually leading to strange cancerous growths and the eventual death - so really - let’s not be too harsh on Spidey. Even if it sucks out loud, which I doubt it does, it will still kick ass at the box office. Why? Because we’re all kids at heart and superheroes are cool - and none are cooler than Spider-Man.The merchandising alone will make millions. My son has every freaking Spider-Man action figure and supplement toy that they could squeeze out of that franchise.

And let’s face it, movie critics are a bunch of uptight, snotty, sneering d-bags anyway. Every time they say something sucks, I usually like it.

Of course, I might have really crappy taste in movies. In fact, that’s a distinct possibility!

Update:  Blogcritics has some sweet stories and reviews as well.

From the Cleveland Spider-Man 3 set, a star in the making, sort of. And of course, our very own review from BC Critic, TV and Film Guy:

…And that is the real problem with the movie. The Harry Osborn/Peter Parker story could be a full movie, the Flint Marko/Peter Parker story could be a full movie, the Peter Parker/Venom story could be a full movie. Yet, here they all are, rolled up into one huge, overstuffed film. There is too much happening and not enough time to really explore it all.

Go read the whole review - it’s a much more well-balanced approach to the film as a whole.  And for the record, TV and Film Guy is neither sneering, snotty or uptight — and definitely not a d-bag.

Last night, I caught the last 20 minutes of Just My Luck on cable as I was waiting for American Idol to come on. It was, as they say, time NOT well spent. I have always considered Lindsay a talented actress, but a bit immature and misguided. Well it seems that was a grave miscalculation on my part. She’s a lot immature and terribly misguided.

She is right about one thing though, she should be allowed to blow off steam, go out and dance with her friends. Live it up a bit if she wishes. She’s young and that’s really what youth is for. By the time you are in your 30’s people don’t want to see you out partying every night, and truthfully, your body just doesn’t recover like it used to.

This however doesn’t mean that you can have your cake and eat it too.

Lindsay is living under some kind of delusional misconception that she can be an irresponsible younster and still be taken seriously as an actress. In the last year alone, Lohan has dropped out of four different film projects, and was publicly chided for her unethical behavior on the set of the ONE she did show up for. The latest drama involving Lindsay’s faltering acting career is the Dylan Thomas film (The Best Time Of Our Lives) that she was set to star in with Keira Knightley - certainly a name anyone in the film industry would want the opportunity to star in a film with.

Say what you want about Keira’s eating habits, she is respected for her acting. Let us not forget, Ms. Knightley also stars in the summer’s most anticipated film, Pirates of The Carribean: At World’s End, and who wouldn’t want the opportunity to have their name associated with that kind of starpower?

Apparenlty not Sienna Miller. She cheerfully took Lindsay’s place in the Dylan Thomas film after Lohan backed out at the last minute due to “contract changes.” A brief recap: this is the fourth film Lohan has dropped out of. According to this article, all three of previous bailings were under dubious excuses, ranging from “too busy, recovering from rehab” (Woman Of No Importance with Anette Benning)” “not interested in projects with no big names ” (Bill, directed by two up and coming director Bernie Goldmann and Meliss Wallack)” and she was dropped for a film penned after a Tennesee Williams story, The Loss Of A Teardrop Diamond, for as of yet undisclosed reasons.

That should bring us up to speed, with exception of her Georgia Rule fiasco, which we mentioned above, resulted in some severe criticism from the Morgan Creek execs and her fellow cast members. Oh, and of course she took a brief hiatus (to attend rehab) from shooting her film I Know Who Killed Me, surely jeopardizing that film’s budget and staff. And now, The Best Time Of Our Lives (also starring the hot Cillian Murphy) makes it quattro failure.

As I stated earlier, Lohan’s camp used “contract changes” as the excuse for backing out a mere week before production was to begin, yet according to a “not so blind item” on Perez Hilton’s site, it seems that something much for scandalous was the root cause. From the post:

What recently rehabbed hard-pAArtying actress was fired from her latest movie, though she claims she dropped out, because she refused to comply with the producers’ demand of mandatory drug testing????

Hey, I am no Mensa member, but I can figure that one out. How much you wanna bet this story surfaces again but with names being mentioned that rhyme with “Frenzy Blohan.” I’m just pointing out the obvious. If drug testing is truly the reason for Lindsay dropping out, then her being replaced by Sienna Miller is a shocker. In case you didn’t know, Sienna is an admitted drug-dabbler — but she also has reputation for showing up and doing her job.

And of course there’s these recent telling statements from an interview in Nylon. An interview that was set to take place a week earlier in LA where the writer was to meet Lindsay, only to discover the day of the interview that Lindsay was in NY. Why? Because her little brother and sister wanted her to stay. Ahh, the whimsy. Here’s some excerpts:

Lindsay discusses her role as a stripper in I Know Who Killed Me:

“I don’t think that there has been a role for an actress like this movie was for me in so long…At first I was like ‘I can’t do this, I’m getting my leg cut off. I don’t want to look like that in scenes, I want to look decent!’ But that was just just me being young and stupid. And I have my first sex scene in it, which I always said I wouldn’t do…I wanted to this movie so people can see that I’m a f@#%ing actress and I’ve been doing it forever and it’s about time people see that. It felt so good to really act.”

Lindsay on the photogs:

“I get embarrassed about the paparazzi if I’m in a chic restaurant, or when I was in the AA meetings. I felt very disrespectful because those people are doing that for themselves and it’s no one elses’ business. But that was the only time it was embarrassing–other times, I obviously like it I wouldn’t ever want them to not take my picture. I’d be worried. I’d be like, ‘Do people not care about me?’”

When you couple her recent track record with her rambling vignettes of incoherency and manic logorreah, the now infamous interview in Nylon magazine, a central theme keeps blinking in neon lights: “Lindsay Lohan’s Blowing It, Lindsay Lohan’s Blowing It” and by blowing it, I mean B-L-O-W-I-N-G I-T!

Take that anyway you want.