<![CDATA[Comments from STV]]> <![CDATA[Comments from STV]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Pistol-Packing Angelina Jolie No Match for Puttering Pixar Robot]]> @Superawesomerad: It's very, very good, actually.

@SanFranBetsu: Puritans that we are, coke never even occurred to us. It's all about the suicide.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Breakthrough Awaits Talented Hollywood Hamster]]> @CourageousCoward: @hughman: Ah, rats rodents -- our mistake! We regret the error.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Dear Reader: Please pay no]]> @Victor Ward: I owe it all to Edith Wharton.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on The Campaign for Gender Equality In Late-Night Talk Show Hosting Rights Starts Here]]> @Shumina: She's laughing! But OK.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on The 'Smart' Money is on Anybody But Mike Myers]]> @Fama Est: Actually, $44K per screen is about as many little white girls and their parents as those five theaters could probably accommodate. It's a pretty massive number.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Rambling 'Actors Studio' Filibuster Definitively Proves That Mike Myers Has Lost His Mojo]]> @heliogabulus: It's a bit of a perversion, but not an especially unusual one. Our English professors' angry letters are likely on the way, anyhow.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Don't Call Isabella Rossellini's Revolting Bug-Sex Romp a Comeback]]> @BScrivner: Hence the opening line, "We'd seen this in bits and pieces since its Sundance premiere this year, but an incidental reminder..." Scold us when we do an Altman or Kubrick mash-up or something.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Lovely Vera Farmiga Teaches Us the Seven-Syllable Word for 'Disabilty Fetish']]> @LauraElizabeth: It's kind of a third cousin, maybe. It's more of a mystery than pathological survey, and the sex is secondary to what may or may not be between the principals. I'll cover it more tomorrow in Defamer Attractions, for what it's worth.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Bold Starz Campaign Insists You Will Hate The Lindsay Lohan Film Airing Saturday]]> @thetaobera: Not really, but maybe in the "wank off to Lindsay stripping" kinda way.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Report: Studio Unaware Of Production Shingle's Completely Stupid Tiger Movie]]> @Lala11_7: Lions vs. tigers... Yes, it all makes sense now.

]]> <![CDATA[STV clipped Dennis Hopper Isn't a Racist, But He'll Play One on TV]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Bad-Buzz Watch: M. Night Shyamalan Defaced; Deepak Chopra Stumps for 'Love Guru']]> @Old No.7: You mean Manoj's movie is different?

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Burn, 'Patch Adams,' Burn (and Other Reflections From the Universal Studios Blaze)]]> @CourageousCoward: Yes, we're merely hypothesizing about the worst-case scenario. Or, considering the opportunity to torch Idlewild, the best-case scenario.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Burn, 'Patch Adams,' Burn (and Other Reflections From the Universal Studios Blaze)]]> @Juancho: No, just films to which Universal owns the negative.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Comeback Kid John Cusack Wants A Word With Defamer]]> @dalejrfanfreak: You may be right about the quality of the film, but $60K on two screens during a holiday weekend with zero critical traction or conventional advertising is an excellent showing. As far as limited releases go, it's not really a subjective statement.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on 'People' Non-Exclusive! Angelina Jolie Still Pregnant! Must Discredit 'ET!']]> @juniperjenny: Thanks, I needed that.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Record Vowel-to-Consonant Ratio Not The Only Exciting Thing About 'Ouija' Movie]]> @UCLA Hockey Rules!: We checked with a third-party vowel arbitrator on this, I'm afraid, who disqualified AI on the grounds of being an abbreviation. But I'm sure Spielberg will appeal.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Donald Sutherland Thwacks Hillary Clinton in Web's Least-Essential Political Commentary]]> @hughman: Come to think of it, "Mr. Sutherland" would have made a great Dickens character.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Seven Reasons Why 'Beverly Hills Cop 4' is a Better Idea Than it Sounds]]> @jackvinyl: That's hilarious.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on German Cinema Legend Makes Comeback With Cannes' Prestigious 'Crap d'Or' Trophy]]> Some people just deserve lifetime film-financing exemptions for one especially great work: Grand Illusion, Citizen Kane, Cries and Whispers, The Godfather, Blue Velvet, Pulp Fiction... It's like winning the Masters; you're always invited back. Cosmically, anyhow (except for Welles), this seems to hold for Wenders; Paris, Texas entitles him to as many Palermo Shootings as he wants. He's gotta make another good one eventually, right? Right?

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on The Strange Case Of Nikki Finke, CAA and Defamer's 'Exceptional Smear Campaign']]> @clevername: We'll have to agree to disagree on the tone and nature of the CAA thing, but you're missing the point on the rest. The Kimmel thing wasn't a non-story, not in a period when distributors are shutting down monthly, jobs are lost by the hundreds (you're still avoiding Picturehouse, BTW) and, sure, less importantly, when Nikki runs outright falsehoods before people call her. Find me another another example of someone calling her on it, with proof, and I'll be happy to link to it. But you won't because she routinely threatens editors and journalists who dare to call her so much as a "gossip," and they cave. This actually happened to me at two publications. She steals with impunity; e-mail me if you want proof (lest I further "self-link" here). She's out of control.

As far as your personal attacks, what can I say? Google me. I (and a lot of other people) stand by my work.

@Jeff from LA: Is it really that either/or? Is there a joke I should have made about Variety accusing us of a "smear campaign," then withdrawing it as if it never happened? Maybe Molly could have made a video about it? Next time, I suppose.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on The Strange Case Of Nikki Finke, CAA and Defamer's 'Exceptional Smear Campaign']]> @juniperjenny: Great point! Though we ran something "entertaining" about Robert De Niro and CAA and look where that got us.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on The Strange Case Of Nikki Finke, CAA and Defamer's 'Exceptional Smear Campaign']]> @clevername: PS Of course I linked to my own blog -- it was relevant.

Listen to what you're saying:

A) If I don't provide context, then I'm a reckless gossip.

B) If I do provide context -- by, God forbid, one link in three months to a site where I did the reporting you say I don't do -- then I'm a glory hound.

Seriously, what the fuck is your problem?

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on The Strange Case Of Nikki Finke, CAA and Defamer's 'Exceptional Smear Campaign']]> @clevername: The thing about the De Niro post was that it's humor; we weren't breaking any fucking stories. If you read to the end it's fairly clear that it didn't matter to us who wrote the comment or not. Whether you laughed was another thing, but we're hardly to blame if Anne or Kim or whoever took a fairly obvious joke at face value.

Either way, Nikki's treating it like it's Watergate. In an institutional sense, what's the worst thing it means if it's true? Nothing. What's the worst thing it means if it's not true. Still nothing. Does this really deserve such vigorous finger-wagging from Nikki and Michael Mand? Of course it's not indefensible -- it's just stupid.

As to your other point about this site, its voice, etc, I don't know what to tell you. I didn't see you griping when we reported out and broke the Picturehouse story earlier this month (which Nikki *still* hasn't picked up, simply out of spite for us and, apparently, her readers), or had sourced stories on critic firings, etc. It's not like this was a goddamned hard-news clearinghouse when Lisanti worked here, so either quit your bitching and roll with it or go read press releases on Deadline Hollywood Daily. See if Nikki takes half the time to solicit, respond to or even publish your slightest criticisms.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Remember last month when we]]> @martini-shark: That's hilarious. He's gotta talk, though, too: "Mutt's the name I chose. You got a problem with that?" Or, "This bitch ain't my Dad!"

I wanna roll the motorcycle into a wall.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on 'Indy' Proves There's Some Country For Old Men]]> @MartyPants: Are you fucking kidding? That was ant-repelling, hyper-magnetic, staring-contest-winning, solid fucking quartz, man.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on 'Indy' Proves There's Some Country For Old Men]]> @Juancho: I know, right? I can't believe there are people who give this shit a pass.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Loud, Coarse Motorhead Legend to be Featured in Surprisingly Loud, Coarse Documentary]]> @RonMwangaguhunga: Hilarious, and true.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Indy's Box-Office Bullwhip Kills Uwe Boll, John Cusack and Rest of Competition]]> @pixie: "I'm John Cusack, and I approved this message."

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Indy's Box-Office Bullwhip Kills Uwe Boll, John Cusack and Rest of Competition]]> @CourageousCoward: Motion denied. Sorry!

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Paramount Preps, Fanboys Revolt as Box Office Waits for 'Indy' Windfall]]> @LoveHandles: Everything in the immediate orbit of this film makes me sad.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Today in Cannes Hell: Spike Lee vs. The World, 'Che' Unveiled and Mouthbreathing Over Penelope Cruz]]> @Sweet Panda Love: @Cam/ron: I think Lee primarily objects to Flag of Our Fathers, which was so racist as to cast a Native American where the black guy would usually go. I mean, talk about a slap in the face.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on IndyMania Continues with Gay Rabbis and Dangerous Furniture Adventures]]> @PeterSob: You guys have enough to worry about without ripping up other critics: Literacy, taste, standards, etc. -- for starters. Really, though, let's face it: You're probably just pissed you didn't think of it first.

Anyway, the people sitting behind you at your screening didn't complain about you wearing your fedora for two hours and clapping after every one-liner, so maybe everything's even.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Even Hours of Instant Messaging Can't Help Us Make Sense of 'Indiana Jones 4']]> @fembot: Raiders of the Lost Ark is timeless. It's about as close to perfect as Hollywood got in the '80s.

I remember really loving Last Crusade, but it's true I haven't seen it since I was 12. Temple of Doom, meh. Nightmares, though, seriously. For weeks.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Even Hours of Instant Messaging Can't Help Us Make Sense of 'Indiana Jones 4']]> No, Mr. Stevens. IW live-blogged the film. We chatted about it after viewing it. We have no interest in or plans for SMS reviews.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on And now, a very important]]> @raincoaster: @The Evil Beet: The "LA Gossip Rag" has always cast a pretty wide net in general culture, and Tourette Syndrome Awareness Month struck me as an unusual and interesting subject to address. That's something we've always done, even when Lisanti was here. That said...

@kylo4: You're right. I know the stats, I know the symptoms and I obviously know Tourette sufferers do not choose to be afflicted. This was a line better left uncrossed, and I sincerely apologize to those readers I've offended.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Joel Silver Leaving Warners! Except He's Not! Let Him Get Back to You!]]> This is actually a shot of his little-known Speed Racer cameo as a racetrack cone.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Resolution No. 3: Put The Weinstein Company to Death For Forthcoming 'Fraggle Rock' Film]]> @mitchel_stevens: I think I may eventually have no choice but to physically involve myself in Harvey's day-to-day operations, kinda like a social worker.

]]> <![CDATA[STV commented on Resolution No. 3: Put The Weinstein Company to Death For Forthcoming 'Fraggle Rock' Film]]> @Old No.7: We pretty much addressed the Wachowski issue last week, though I'm sure they're on a short list of resolutions to come.

]]>