RichWatch.net

There have been insane and scary buzz rumors about the next Batman movie, including Cher playing Catwoman, Johnny Depp give us a new interpretation of the Riddler and suggestions turned into speculation about Hoffman playing the penguin (which he denied just days ago, which shouldn’t surprise anyone considering the weakness of these claims and rumors).

One rumor’s source has been confirmed though, and that is that Johnny Depp and Phil Hoffman were in fact suggested to play their rumored parts. Stuff.co.nz has “confirmed” that both actors will appear in Batman 3, but the actual claim is just that they were wanted for the job.

Michael Caine, who plays Alfred in the Nolan-Batmen said to MTV: “I was with a Warner Bros executive and I said, ‘Are we going to make another one?’ They said, ‘Yeah’.

“I said, ‘How the hell are we going to top Heath Ledger as The Joker? And he says, ‘I’ll tell you how you top Heath - Johnny Depp as The Riddler and Philip Seymour Hoffman as The Penguin’.

“I said, ‘Shit, they’ve done it again’.”

“Shit they’ve done it again” sounds like an odd exclamation for Cain to utter, but ok.

Work is expected to begin on the next movie, starring Christian Bale as Batman, some time next year.

A downer for Nolan fans however, as he says he ain interested in making another Batman:

Ain’t It Cool News: Eckhart: I think Heath was the one that was going to come back. And since he can’t… (Pauses) You know, Chris hasn’t said that he’s going to make another one.

[Interviewer]: True. He’s been on vacation. I spoke to David Goyer at Comic Con, and he said there have been no discussions.

Eckhart: (Smiling) He never said he’s going to make another one. I’m sure they drove the Brinks truck up to his house and dumped money on his lawn. But I think Chris wants to go out and make other movies, too. And he should. He’s an independent filmmaker at heart. He’s got a lot of ideas.

Or conversely: “why I dumped my girlfriend”…

Likely? eh-no. Possible? meh… the offer has been extended. For a shoot to take place in three years that is of course. A countdown to Miley’s 18th birthday can be found here, which I find disturbing because she is so kiddish and non-sexual (from what I’ve seen of her anyway). The Hermione (Harry Potter) countdown was funny to me because at least the actress played a serious and mature character. Hannah Montana is way too kiddie for that kind of humor to be effective for my tastes. But anyway - about her showing her tots for a nudie magazine:

‘Playboy’ founder Hugh Hefner called 15-year-old Miley Cyrus a ‘very pretty lady’ and has floated an idea that will have the shirts at Disney and dads of teenage girls cringing - he wants Miley Cyrus to pose for Playboy.

I don’t want to over analyze the words of an 80 year old sex mag publisher, but I think it’s important to note that 15 year olds are not “ladies”. They’re older kids, and if they’re really really mature in all areas then maybe “young ladies”.

Hef had previously made the offer to not-yet-legal stars to pose, including Lindsay Lohan (who later decided to get naked for a magazine anyway and get paid much less) and Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen (who I’m sure will be staying clothed until their careers show a steep sign of fading). On the latter, Jack Ryan, who’s article in the Post Chronicle I’m quoting from, says:

Just before Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen turned 18, Hefner called them “every young man’s fantasy” and implored them to strip for his centerfold. Now 21, they decided to pass.

Then he uses an unfortunate word to describe miss Cyrus:

Best known to her adoring tween fans as Hannah Montana, Cyrus is a pretty 15-year-old Lolita at the moment and comes at a time when Cyrus has been fending off criticisms for her semi-naked photo shoot in Vogue magazine.

Dude.. Again: Miley Cyrus is NOT a Lolita. She’s not even a sex symbol. I’m aware that she gave a slutted up performance at an American Idol event, but come on - the rest of the time she is not in that direction. Or am I missing something huge? The term Lolita is supposed to reference a sexually matured girl 12 to 14 that preys on weak male adults for sex. I didn’t even think it was accurately applied to Amy Fisher (especially if her stories about how Joey advanced on HER first and forcefully are true), but at least she was actually doing an adult guy.

Miley Cyrus appears to be unfairly sexualized by everyone observing her when she herself has not made a deliberate attempt to go in that direction.

Tom Hanks, in this video shows how to do it, if you MUST and only if you absolutely MUST endorse a presidential candidate as a celebrity: with humility, self deprecating humor, candor, and sincerity not wild eyed passion.

The only misstep I didn’t care for was his line about the country considering people of his skin color only 3/5ths of a human. Phrasing it that way is to imply that ALL people of color had that worth legally atattched to them. I’ve heard others in the media distort the history on this (none intentionally I believe) and its important to correct that the United States never said that all black people were 3 fifths of a human being. That designation was applied only to slaves, and even in 1776, not all people in America with dark skin were slaves. Michael Medved, who is a big American History afficionado (as is Tom Hanks) made an interesting point about this the other day when he said the 3 fifths designation was actually more than anti-slavery activists at the time wanted because its only purpose was Congressional designation. So in other words, if you hated slavery then you wanted slaves to be counted as 0% of a person because they weren’t allowed to vote. Counting them as 3 fifths of a person only served to seat more congressmen.

Although it’s disappointing that Hanks’ endorsement comes down to it being all about race (isn’t Obama supposed to be the ultimate non-divider?), the delivery is pleasant and not at all obnoxious, which is something other politically active celebrities could take a cue from.

Exit question: was it the best idea to hand over the subliminal metaphor of Obama’s possible campaign result in that sinking ship picture over his shoulder?

Vanity Fair released this behind the scenes’ featurette of the shoot:

Then the real unedited version of it:

BONUS slideshow:

and PS if you have no idea wtf these videos are about, here’s the Today Show on it: