Tag Archives: People magazine

Crowning achievement

The cover of People?

image

Wow, the Pope must be so excited.

This probably ranks right up there with his election by the college of cardinals in Rome.

I wonder what color smoke came out of the chimneys?

Liquid lunch

People magazine is all about the ‘boozy popsicle‘ today —

watermelon mojito pops‘Boozy’ as in popular popsicle flavors spiked with alcohol — like the watermelon mojito pops garnished with mint pictured at the left.

Looks cool and refreshing, yes…and perhaps a bit lethal for the younger set.

But, I’m sorry.

Every time I hear the phrase ‘boozy popsicle,’ I think —

What a perfect stripper name.

Or maybe even the name of a band (depending on what kind of music they play). Let’s not forget that one, folks.

It’s a keeper.

Most Annoying Celebrity Rag

You know how some TV show plot lines are ‘ripped from the headlines?’ I’ve decided People magazine rips theirs from any handy movie premiere calendar.

Easier than workin.’

people gwynethTake their latest World’s Most Beautiful Woman issue featuring Gwyneth Paltrow.

Gwyneth is lovely — I’ll give you that.  But the most beautiful woman in the world?  Of all the choices in Hollywood and around the globe?

In the words of Jerry Seinfeld — speaking to his young son outside my brownstone one Saturday afternoon —

“Probably not.”

But it is far simpler — isn’t it People editorial staff — to crown Ms. Paltrow?   She has Iron Man 3 coming out in a theatre near you…plus, your rival Star magazine just named her Most Hated Celebrity (which is probably more accurate).

Your advertisers are happy!  Moms her age are happy!  And Star has been put in its place.

Who cares if it isn’t true?

Finally

Sometimes I’m a little ahead of the game.  I’m the first to admit it.

Remember when cobalt blue kitchens were all the rage?  I had one a few years before they were trendy.  When I had a cobalt blue kitchen, it was just funky, not fashionable.

I’m okay with that.

So when I was all “Ryan Reynolds is funny and sexy,” and the rest of the world was occupied with other people, I wasn’t that surprised. 

(I’m sure you see the commonalities between Ryan Reynolds and cobalt blue kitchens, so I won’t insult you with an explanation.)

Therefore, it is with great happiness and a heartfelt ’bout time, world’ that I greet the news that Ryan has been named “Sexiest Man Alive” by People magazine.

I mean, look at the man.  He’s gorgeous and ripped.  His sense of humor and comic timing  on screen are even biggest assets in my book.

Probably didn’t hurt that he’s got a couple of big blockbuster films headed our way, “The Green Lantern” most noteably.  People never makes their decision based on sex appeal alone.  (Isn’t that why Johnny Depp got the nod last year, right before “Public Enemies” tanked at the box office?  Sorry, Johnny.)

It already has me thinking about next year’s choice.  Let’s see… November 2011. 

Wonder if any interesting movies are being released then??

Gossip girl

If your holiday lights seem to have lost some of their twinkle today, don’t waste time searching for a faulty bulb.  The shadow that has fallen comes from an altogether different source.

Today Nancy O’Dell co-hosts “Access Hollywood” for the last time.

Gasp.

After 10 years of anchoring this entertainment staple, Nancy is stepping down, and two years before her current contract ends.

The reason?  O’Dell is unhappy with the more ‘sensational direction’ that the show has taken in recent years — this from an unnamed source in People. Nancy isn’t talking, though; her website says nothing.  She hasn’t tweeted, either.  But supposedly today is her final day co-hosting with Billy Bush.

Now, I don’t watch “Access Hollywood” regularly, but the thought that Nancy is leaving because entertainment news is becoming ‘sensational’ makes me laugh.  More intrusive?  Absolutely.  But I think sensationalism is a just a part of the celebrity machine.

I suspect Nancy has bigger things up her sleeve.  Will be interesting to see where she ends up.

Or not.

I object

Why do I have to be wrong for you to be right?

I’ll tell you why.  At our core, we are all judgers.  That’s judgers, judgers, judgers.

From the first moment we see someone — whether in person, in a photo, or in a Youtube video — we dissect their looks, voice, dress and actions, and in a matter of seconds, decide whether they are worthy of our time.

It’s a wonder we have any friends at all.

Now, obviously, there are some people who pass our test. The men featured in the 2009 Sexiest Man Alive issue of People magazine were judged exceptionally attractive by a national panel of editors.  There has also been an obsessive frenzy surrounding the stars of the “Twilight” movie franchise. Those actors have been judged worthy of their fans’ time, attention and somewhat scary mania.

But probably most fascinating to me is how quick people are to judge other people who like something that they don’t.

The “Twilight” movies are a great example. The fans of this franchise have been practically demonized by those who haven’t read the books or seen the movies.  The Comments page of this week’s New York magazine was brutal.  One reader said of the Twilight moms: “Their poor children, and their poor husbands! I wish they’d get some perspective and see how sad they really look.”

Wow.  There’s some judging going on there.

Why can’t people just be different?  Or think differently?  Or, god forbid, like different things?

Why do they have to be inherently wrong?

We say ‘live and let live,’ but as a society, we don’t practice what we preach.  What we really mean to say is,  ‘let me live the way I want, and you live my way, too…’cause if you live or think differently or enjoy different things, that’s wrong.’

Now, “Twilight” isn’t the most important issue in the world — believe me, I know.  But it’s also not the most deadly, god-awful, dangerous book ever written.  Teenage girls and their families are exposed to more controversial things on episodes of “Gossip Girl” — can you say three-way? — so I find it interesting that people are trash-talking a very old-fashioned romance with vampires.

If you don’t like the series, that’s fine.  That’s your choice. But other people liking it isn’t wrong…it’s simply their choice.

So, stop your judging.  That’s right.  I’m looking at you.  Judger.

That’s judger, judger, judger.

People bites

Just yesterday, my friend Dan commented on how quiet I had been about the rapidly approaching premiere of “Twilight Saga: New Moon.”  (It’s midnight tonight, in case you’re wondering.)

I took this as a big compliment.  As an avid Twi-hard, I know I tend to chat up this particular franchise to anyone who displays even an iota of interest (i.e., breathes air), so I have tried not to belabor the topic here.

But today, guys, I gotta let loose…because an injustice of such magnitude has occurred, it cannot be ignored:

Robert Pattinson was not named People Magazine’s 2009 Sexiest Man Alive.

What the — wha?!??!

This is one year that pretty much everyone — and I mean everyone, not just Twi-hards — knew that Robert Pattinson had Sexiest Man Alive sewn up.  There was no real competition — that is, if you were looking at things from a topical, trend-driven, male, SEXY point of view.

And somehow the editors of  People still managed to screw it up.

Johnny Depp?  Gorgeous, yes.  He was Sexiest Man Alive back in 2003.  But this year?  Why this year?  His movie “Public Enemies” kinda tanked at the box office.  He did shoot “Alice in Wonderland” — which comes out in 2010 — but, seriously, which is sexier:  a vampire or the Mad Hatter?  Oh, and don’t forget the voice work he did for “Spongebob Squarepants” — wow, that’s hot.

Now, some would argue that naming Robert Pattinson Sexiest Man Alive this week would make it appear that People was part of the whole “Twilight” movie promotion machine.  A fine point.  Their magazine might get lost amongst all the other covers with RPatz right now.

But that’s thinking like a corporation.  You should publish for your audience.  And let me ask you, People Magazine — who would your readers say is the 2009 Sexiest Man Alive?  Johnny Depp because he needs a media bump before his new movie hits?  Or Robert Pattinson because he has dominated the imagination of movie goers for the past year?

I think we all know the answer.  And not giving the title to the most deserving man that really sucks.

Pun intended.

Living dead – part deaux

In honor of Halloween, Moviefone.com conducted a poll, asking:

“Who is the sexiest movie vampire of all time?”

Website polls are great, aren’t there?  As a former managing producer, I can tell you, it is a brilliant way to have site visitors do all the work for you.  They not only get to vote — which they love doing — but you can also let them comment — which they also love doing — that you can then use to build your feature.  Add some stock photos, and zip bing bang — Halloween feature approved and posted.

Cynical, but true.

And honestly — could Moviefone.com have asked a more obvious question this year?  The site producers probably had the top five vampire pages built before they started.  This is an example of a website asking a question that they already knew the answer to.  (In case you have been living under a rock the past year, here are the poll results.)

I guess People magazine will be going through the same trauma when they select the “Sexiest Man Alive.”  Can this year’s campaign maintain its usual hype?  Is there any real suspense at all?  If the editors pick anyone other than Robert Pattinson of “Twilight,” do they risk having their headquarters burned to the ground by an angry mob of Twi-hards?

Might be a good poll question…

Keep it in the family

We all have our secrets.

Some we eventually choose to reveal.  Others we keep to ourselves, because telling them might hurt someone or show a side of ourselves we’d rather not share.

But telling a secret that both hurts someone and shows yourself in a freakish light — that really helps sell a memoir…right, Mackenzie Phillips?

In her new autobiography “High on Arrival,” Phillips reveals that she slept with her dad, singer John Phillips of the Mamas and Papas.  Their first encounter was ‘accidental’ when she was 19-years old (they were both stoned), but the incestuous relationship apparently continued for some time.

In the PEOPLE magazine article, she said, “Don’t hate my father.”

Don’t hate her father? The incest story — if true — is horrendous, and it sounds like their drug problems led to and exacerbated the situation, but the gross offender in this story to me is Mackenzie herself.

What is gained by sharing this now?  Am I supposed to believe Mackenzie is telling her story of drugs and incest to encourage ‘everyday people’ to deal with theirs?  Yeah, right.

John Phillips isn’t even alive to tell his side of the story.  With all the drug use that Mackenzie admits to, this could be pure hallucination.

This story serves one purpose and one purpose only — shock value to sell books.  Shame on you, Mackenzie.  There are other, more honorable ways to make money.