Putting Hollywood’s biggest bombs back together
<img src='http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/130708180658-worstmovies-hudsonhawk-horizontal-gallery.jpg' width='360px' alt='“Hudson Hawk” (1991): Another film done in by a bloated budget, poor marketing and backroom gossip (star Bruce Willis, center, was the subject of several rumors). The film by “Heathers” director Michael Lehmann was one of the biggest bombs of the 1990s. But more recent takes say it makes a pretty decent screwball comedy.’ style=’float:left;padding:5px’ />
Maher didn’t just give at “the office” by trashing Republicans on pay-cable TV. He brought a large check onstage during a standup comedy performance in San Jose on February 23 and none of the networks cared. They could ask if Donald Trump was going to embarrass and distract from Romney, but they wouldn’t make that connection with a bigot like Maher and Obama. Just days before, all three networks rang the national alarm bells over how “far to the right” Republicans were tilting when Santorum Super PAC backer Foster Friess had repeated a very old, and equally innocent, joke about Bayer aspirin being used as birth control. Nobody would warn about the Democrats being stuck with a hard-edged atheist image for standing with God-hating Bill Maher, the guy honored for saying “religion must die for humanity to live.” But this assault on humanity by Friess must be denounced!
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2013/07/12/barack-hollywood-obama-how-media-sold-president-populist-not-elitist
Two Hollywood Producers Can’t Escape Foreign Bribery Penalty
They aren’t just at the curb by the bins. It is all the way up the side of the house. I can see them in a commercial area. ‘There were complaints from the neighbours and the neighbourhood association, and city code inspectors acted appropriately and required the homeowner be in compliance with city codes.’ The Fine China star filed an appeal against LA’s Department of Building and Safety, claiming the mural ‘enhanced the architectural and aesthetic features of the residential property’. Eyesore: Chris has been living in the $1.5million home since 2011 He took to Twitter last month after he was fined and told parents to keep their children inside.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2361618/Chris-Browns-monster-murals-wall-Hollywood-Hills-home-painted-loses-initial-bid-them.html
Home video built up this more eclectic breadth of taste and options.” All this watching lends itself to our current pop culture moment, when nothing is really gone and every opinion is up for grabs. “Taste has really been fragmented,” says Herbert. “We use movies more and more to distinguish ourselves and our personalities and our identities. People who celebrate bad movies are using it to differentiate themselves from the mass and saying, ‘I don’t agree with the standards of evaluation.’ ” So films once buried get revisited. It’s happened before — the French New Wave directors first made their mark as essayists who re-evaluated genres and filmmakers before entering the business themselves — but now there are armies of bloggers who can watch a film on video and announce that it got a bum rap the first time around.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/10/showbiz/movies/big-bombs-revisited/index.html
Chris Brown’s monster murals on wall of his Hollywood Hills home are painted over after he loses initial bid to keep them
STORY: Rupert Murdoch Bribery Admission Caught on Tape (Report) Kozinski notes that “while the Supreme Court has yet to hold whether Apprendi applies to restitution, it has said in dictum that ‘[i]ntruding Apprendis rule into’ decisions to impose ‘statutorily prescribed fines and orders of restitution’ would ‘cut the rule loose from its moorings.’ Thats some indication the Court would not apply Apprendi to restitution… .” The judge also declined to accept the Greens’ “trigger argument” that while Apprendi might not apply to the amount of restitution, it should pertain to restitution in the first place. Nor the other way. Kozinski asks, “If Apprendi covers the determination whether there are any victims at all, shouldnt it also cover the determination whether theres one victim who suffered a $1,000 loss as opposed to 1,000 victims who suffered a combined $1,000,000 loss?” Finally, the judge also looks at Southern Union Co. v.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/two-hollywood-producers-cant-escape-583974