Sasha Filimonov is living out every teenager's (and young adult, and grudgingly-admitting 30-something's) dream of being an extra on Gossip Girl. Sure, she had to go all the way out to Staten Island to film a scene, sure, the director paired her up with a 70-year old man as her date, and sure, Chase and Ed didn't make eye contact when she was standing less than a foot away. But the memories of backgrounding on the CW's hit show that most people consider more plausible than The Hills? Priceless.
Former Press Secretary and defector from the Bush regime Scott McClellan reviews Oliver Stone's W. on its accuracy and entertainment value. And he likes it (for the most part)!
Not that McClellan the most objective viewer, seeing as how he literally wrote the book about George the 2nd being a naive, goofy pawn for his father, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney.
But which of the White House cronies does McClellan continue to carry a grudge for, after all these years?
Only a couple months ago, President George Bush was the biggest goof America had on its radar. Lovely, innocent times those were, before Sarah Palin came down from Alaska and gosh darnnit if she didn't just steal folks' hearts with her colloquial syntax and adorable doodles.
Back then, when the first trailer for Oliver Stone's biopic (is that what it is?) on our fearless leader hit the screens and the blogs, everyone was pissed. Conservatives were mad that W. made George Bush look like an alcoholic fratboy who got the presidency through nepotism, and the liberals were pissed because having a detrimental picture come out so close to election time would give the right something to rally against. So, everyone loses? Especially Josh Brolin, who got so into caricature as Jr. that he was arrested in Shreveport for bar fighting.
But in a twist worthy of M. Night Shyamalan, the first reviews are in, and it looks like W isn't the usual heavy-handed Stone affair that people were afraid of. In fact, it could have done with some more liberal interpretation:
Cate Blanchett's posturing isn't the only thing inside this month's W. There's also a chat with NBC's new-ish programming chief Ben Silverman, wherein he responds to rumors that he was responsible for leaking his new appointment. CONTINUED »
First it was Lindsay Lohan and Vanity Fair. Then, it was Lindsay Lohan and W. Now, the controversy involves Michael Douglas and GQ. And of course Brad Pitt and Angelia Jolie.
It's no big deal when a celeb denies what's printed about them in a mag — it happens all the time. But why is it becoming increasingly difficult for journalists to prove they're right?
The latest controversial quote (which though not as ruffling as a bulimic Lohan, did cause quite a stir among celebrity gossip writers and tabloid editors) has Douglas knocking Brangelina in last month's issue of GQ.
"I don't know about Brad Pitt. Leaving that beautiful woman [Jennifer Aniston] to go hold orphans for Angelina. I mean how long is that going to last?"
One problem — the quote is (gasp!) not on the tape. Which leaves Douglas claiming that GQ writer Jeanne Marie Laskas made it up.
"I didn't say it," he told "Entertainment Tonight." "I spent a number of hours in that interview, a lot of it on tape and when I asked the reporter … to play back the tape for me, I was told the tape was turned off, and it was something that was written down, and I just don't buy that."
While the magazine stands by its writer "one hundred percent," Douglas is busying himself trying to make amens with the celebrity couple.
We hear the best way to win them over is to just start giving them children. Surely he and Catherine Zeta Jones can spare some spawn — it's a pretty small price to pay for a dinner party invite.
To make best of a Brad situation, Douglas claims he's misquoted [Rush & Molloy, Daily News]
