Tag Archives: writers

Katy Perry Denies Beach Boys ‘California Gurls’ Lawsuit

‘No one is suing anyone,’ Perry tweets. By Gil Kaufman Katy Perry’s “California Gurls” Photo: Matthew Cullen Everybody just needs to calm down, OK? That was the message being sent on Thursday from both sides of the alleged “California Gurls”/ “California Girls” flap. One day after the New York Post reported that the publishing company that handles the Beach Boys’ catalog was considering suing Perry over her song’s appropriation of the key phrase from the classic surf group’s 1965 hit, Perry weighed in on the alleged dust-up. “And just to be clear … no one is suing anyone,” she tweeted . “The press just loves to once again fabricate & exaggerate stories to get hits of sell papers.” In a statement sent to MTV News on Thursday, Beach Boys member Mike Love, one of the co-writers along with Brian Wilson of “California Girls,” said, “The Beach Boys are definitely not suing Katy Perry; in fact we are flattered that her fantastically successful song is bringing to mind to millions of people our 1965 recording of the Beach Boys’ ‘California Girls.’ We think her song is great and wish her all the success in the world.” According to Billboard magazine, a spokesperson for Rondor Music also confirmed that no legal action is imminent over Perry’s smash hit , which has sold 3 million copies and topped the singles chart for weeks. “There is no lawsuit against the writers or publishers of ‘California Gurls,’ ” an unnamed Rondor source said. “We have established diminutive claim. It is up to the six writers and various publishers of ‘California Gurls’ to decide whether they honor the claim or not. … Using the words or melody in a new song taken from an original work is not appropriate under any circumstances, particularly from one as well known and iconic as ‘California Girls.’ … Rondor Music, who publishes the works of Brian Wilson and Mike Love, is committed to protecting the rights of its artists and songwriters, and with the support of the writers, that is exactly what we are doing.” The original song features the famous refrain, “I wish they all could be California girls,” while Perry’s version has rapper Snoop Dogg saying, “I really wish you all could be California girls.” Both Love and Wilson have expressed admiration for Perry’s song , and their spokesperson stressed on Thursday that any legal action over it would be undertaken by Rondor, which owns the track, not by the group’s members. Related Photos The Evolution Of: Katy Perry Related Artists Katy Perry The Beach Boys

More here:
Katy Perry Denies Beach Boys ‘California Gurls’ Lawsuit

MSNBC Guest Host Absurdly Claims: President Obama More Conservative than Reagan

So is President Obama more conservative than the late Ronald Reagan? MSNBC substitute anchor Cenk Uygur thinks so. Filling in yesterday for Dylan Ratigan on his 4 p.m. show, Uygur moderated a segment based on the preposition that President Obama’s policies have actually been more conservative than those of President Reagan. “That’s the silliest thing I’ve ever heard,” former Reagan White House political director Frank Donatelli said of the claims. “It’s an incomplete and distorted picture of everything,” he added. Uygur is a host of ” The Young Turks ,” a left-wing internet political podcast. In fact, both his guests disagreed with him, but the liberal radio show host wouldn’t budge. He provided the following as proof: – President Reagan pushed for amnesty for illegal aliens, while President Obama wants to toughen-up border security. – President Reagan negotiated with an enemy country without preconditions (in 1985, with Mikhail Gorbachev). – President Reagan decided to “cut and run” in the Middle East when troops in Lebanon were under attack. President Obama, on the other hand, called for a 30,000 troop surge in Afghanistan. – President Obama refused to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 per year. President Reagan, however, raised taxes every year of his Presidency after 1981. – President Reagan hosted an openly gay couple at the White house overnight. Uygur, taken aback at the challenge to the accuracy of his claims, wouldn’t let Donatelli get too many words in during the remainder of the segment. Uygur then turned to MSNBC political commentator David Weigel, who confessed that his own views on the matter leaned more toward those of Donatelli. “By his own standards, I think Obama wanted to seem more conservative when he ran for President,” Weigel stated. “But in office he’s acted more liberal than he’s wanted to,” he added. “[Obama] is not a conservative, come on,” he countered Uygur. The guest host also opposed Weigel on whether the American populace is generally center-right or center-left.Weigel admitted that America is center-right overall, while Uygur argued that polls show America as a center-left country. “This is a — at least in rhetoric — a pretty conservative country, and people don’t like change,” Weigel stated. “This is not a center-right country,” Uygur countered. “You look at any poll on the issues, it’s a center-left country. Perhaps Uygur missed this poll . “I totally disagree with both of you,” Uygur wrapped up the segment, thus disagreeing with both of his guests from both sides of the political spectrum. The transcript of the segment, which aired on July 6 at 4:33 p.m. EDT, is as follows: THE DYLAN RATIGAN SHOW 7/6/10 4:33 p.m.-4:43 p.m. EDT (Video Clip) RONALD REAGAN: I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and who have lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally. BARACK OBAMA: And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable. (End Clip) CENK UYGUR, MSNBC NEWS ANCHOR: Yes, you heard that right. Conservative hero President Ronald Reagan pushing for amnesty for illegal immigrants, while our Democratic President calls for a border crackdown. Welcome back, I’m Cenk Uygur in for Dylan Ratigan. The immigration debate, just one reason Obama-Reagan comparisons are abounding right now. We’re breaking it down. Siena College out with its new ranking of the Presidents. Historians put our current President at 15th, with the Gipper ranked 18th. That is going to drive conservatives crazy, but maybe it shouldn’t. So time for a little pop quiz we’re calling “Who’s more conservative?” I’ll give you the policy decision, you decide whether it was President Obama’s or President Reagan’s. We start with foreign policy. Which president negotiated with an enemy country without preconditions? Was it President Obama, or President Reagan?  If you said President Obama, that is incorrect, though he says he’s open to it at some point. (Clip of CNN 2007 Democratic Presidential Debate) Question: Would you be willing to meet separately without precondition during the first year of your administration in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea? CNN Debate Moderator: Senator Obama? SEN. BARACK OBAMA: I would. (End Clip) UYGUR: Republican hawk Ronald Reagan actually did it in March, 1985. At the height of the Cold War, Reagan invited newly-appointed Mikhail Gorbachev, leader of the “Evil Empire,” for a summit in Geneva without preconditions. You will recall President Reagan’s administration was also responsible for trading arms for hostages in the Iran-Contra affair. That would be negotiating with terrorists, literally. Next, which President is famous for his decision to “cut and run” when our troops were attacked in the Middle East? Yep, that would be President Reagan. He withdrew immediately from Lebanon in 1983 after Hezbollah murdered 243 U.S. servicemen in Beirut. Contrast that decision with President Obama’s 30,000 troop surge in Afghanistan. Next, the fiscal policy. Which president refused to raise taxes for anyone making less than a quarter of a million dollars. Yeah, that would be President Obama. On the other hand, and counter to Reaganomics, President Reagan, after initially lowering taxes, raised them nearly every year after 1981, with four significant tax increases. Finally, which President was the first to host an openly-gay couple at the White House for an overnight stay? Well that’s got to be Obama, right? Nope, that would be family-values icon Ronald Reagan. So which President is the real conservative here? Joining us now is David Weigel, politcal reporter and MSNBC contributor, and Frank Donatelli, former White House political director for President Ronald Reagan, and most recently, the chairman of GOPAC. So let me start with you, Frank. Those sound like interesting comparisons. Is there some chance that Obama is actually more conservative than Reagan? FRANK DONATELLI: Well I’m glad the MSNBC interns had something to do for the last couple of weeks. Those are the – that’s the silliest thing that I’ve ever heard. The fact is, that – UYGUR: Which part is untrue? If you say it’s silly, which part is untrue? DONATELLI: It’s an incomplete and distorted picture of everything. UYGUR: So all of that is true, let’s start with that, all of that is true, right? DONATELLI: It’s not all true – UYGUR: Really? Which part is not true? DONATELLI: Reagan negotiated with Gorbachev, but at the same time he built up our armed forces. So to say that he negotiated with Gorbachev without preconditions is silly. It was part of an integrated strategy. It was part – UYGUR: Not it’s not silly, it’s absolutely correct. It’s absolutely correct. Furthermore, Obama has also increased Pentagon spending, and he did a surge in Afghanistan when Reagan ran from Lebanon. That’s got to be true, right? DONATELLI: Not as a part of GDP. Reagan wanted to cut government, he wanted to make government smaller, he wanted to make the private sector stronger. UYGUR: He wanted to. Did he? DONATELLI: Yes. Absolutely. UYGUR: Really? The deficit went up tremendously under Reagan, from 700 billion to 3 trillion. DONATELLI: And some of the taxes went down — [the deficit] wasn’t a trillion dollars every year like Obama’s. UYGUR: No, that’s actually Bush’s, but – DONATELLI: And he won the Cold War, too. Reagan won the Cold War. What did Obama win? Obama hasn’t won anything. UYGUR: (sarcastically) Reagan single-handedly won the Cold War. DONATELLI: [Obama] hasn’t created any jobs. 10 percent unemployment. UYGUR: (sarcastically) Right. I know Reagan won the Cold War single-handedly, nobody had anything else to do with it. DONATELLI: With a lot of other people, including Republicans and Democrats. UYGUR: Let me go to David. David, is it unfair to Obama to say he’s more conservative than Reagan is? Have we stated anything wrong on that count? DAVID WEIGEL: Well I’m going to come closer to Frank than you might expect here. By his own standards, I think Obama wanted to seem more conservative when he ran for President. We remember in the Nevada caucus, in the run-up to that, he gave an interview saying Reagan had been a transformative President, Bill Clinton hadn’t. He was going to be a transformative President. He said liberals had never had someone like this, and then he ran for President saying, as you pointed out, he wasn’t going to raise taxes on anybody. But in office he’s acted more liberal than he’s wanted to, whereas Reagan, apart from the couple reversals early on, you know after ____ when he had to raise taxes again, with amnesty, he was always moving the debate further to the right. I think Obama ran more conservative than he really has been, and had been dealt more reversals as a liberal than Regan was dealt as a conservative. Now you brought up the deficit, that’s true. Regan had the highest deficits since we had since World War II. Obama’s had much higher deficits. And he’s much more apologetic about the reasons he did. Conservatives are still able and willing to say that taxes were lower, that government shrank in some ways. If they can’t defend it at every level, Democrats can’t really defend the way they’ve governed based on the way they ran on. It’s fun to compare a couple of these different, these different issues, and certainly Obama deserves a bit more credit on foreign policy and immigration, if not attacking the very traditions with which the Republican was founded. But he’s not a conservative, come on. UYGUR: No, not come on. You make a good point in that Regan pushed the spectrum further to the right. I hear you on that. But the flip side is the spectrum has already moved, and it’s not like Obama is pushing it back to the left. So I mean, since the spectrum has moved so much, let me ask of you a follow-up question. At this point, when Reagan did it, I don’t know, was it conservative to do amnesty? Now, you know, they’d go ballistic if Obama did amnesty for illegal immigrants and that’s it. Wouldn’t they? WEIGEL: Yeah, I mean, I’d like to see Frank’s answer to that. Because this is something that conservatives wrestle with, explaining why in the year 2010, we’ve actually got better border control than we had two years ago, why this is unthinkable. And I guess there’s space to say – it’s unfair to say that every single thing Obama does is antithetical to liberty. You know, his healthcare plan was not the healthcare plan liberals wanted. It was a variation of the plan Republicans proposed in 1994 as a compromise. So yeah, he’s adapted to a spectrum that’s been shifted to the right. But he’s trying to govern as liberal as possible, and not doing a great job of it, as far as liberals are concerned. UYGUR: I gotta be honest with you, I don’t agree with either one of you. I don’t think he’s being as liberal as he can at all. You know, they are already calling him a socialist, why not actually do the public option, let alone single payer health care? But David asked me a good question. Frank, let me ask you. I think the spectrum has moved. Do you agree that Reagan did amnesty – what now conservatives think is unthinkable? And do you agree that he negotiated with terrorists, which now Republicans think is unthinkable? Didn’t he do those, what you would characterize as very liberal, policy positions? DONATELLI: In 1986, the problem of integration – of immigration – was not nearly what it is in 2010. UYGUR: So it was okay to do amnesty? DONATELLI: The estimates were we had 3 million illegals living in the United States. We now have between 10 and 20 million. So the idea of amnesty didn’t work in 1986, and it’s not going to work in 2010. We need border security, and then we can move onto the other issues. Again, I think the seminal point to be made here is that at every opportunity, Ronald Reagan tried to knock down the size of the federal government. He said in his inaugural address in 1981, government is the problem, it is not the solution. Barack Obama, in just 16 months, has governed in the opposite direction. He believes in making government bigger. UYGUR: I think that, Dave, you say that he tried to make government smaller. He failed utterly then. And David said Obama tried to be liberal. Well, look at the record. It appears he failed. I mean, if Regan had – a final question for you, David. If Reagan had come in and said “I’m going to give the drug companies an absolute monopoly. They get a 12-year patent, nobody gets to import any drugs, and the government can’t even negotiate with them – that would have never worked. That would have been far too right-wing, wouldn’t it have? And now Obama does it, and nobody blinks. WEIGEL: Oh, I think a lot of people blinked. I think a lot of protesters on the right and a lot of liberals on the left blinked about it. No, the point is he’s had to talk more conservative, because Republicans are right. This is a – at least in rhetoric – a pretty conservative country, and people don’t like rapid change. So Obama’s been more hamstrung. But the debate you’re trying to start, I think, is helpful, because it’s not helpful when we pretend that everything Obama does comes not from liberals trying to adapt with a pretty center-right country we’ve got, and are instead trying to pull us back to the progressive, Saul Alinsky socialist tradition. In reality, Obama I think, is a pretty liberal guy who’s operating within these contours, and making a lot of compromises, the way that Ronald Reagan did. But we get completely off track both times, it’s good to take it off track into a different direction like this. UYGUR: Alright, well that was fun, because I totally disagree with both of you. This is not a center-right country, you look at any poll on the issues, it’s a center-left country. The problem is, our politicians tell us they’re going to vote in that direction, and they don’t. And yes, Obama was elected to change the contours. That’s exactly the problem, David. He said “I’m going to bring you change,” and then what did he bring us? He brought us policies that, on the record, that neither one of you can dispute, that are more conservative than Ronald Reagan’s. But it was a fun conversation, and David and Frank, thank you for both coming on here.

Go here to read the rest:
MSNBC Guest Host Absurdly Claims: President Obama More Conservative than Reagan

MSNBC Fill-In Host: Conservative Liberal Media Claims Based On Racism

Cenk Uygur, host of the left-wing internet talk show ‘The Young Turks,’ filled in for MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan during the 4PM ET hour on Wednesday and decried the nation’s “shift to the Right.” He lamented: “…when I started out I was a liberal Republican. No such thing exists anymore.” [Audio available here ] He wondered why the media hadn’t reported on the supposed radical shift in American politics and quickly came up with this explanation: “Why the media didn’t challenge it is because they [conservatives] kept calling them the liberal media, and why did they call them that? Because during civil rights, they [the media] said ‘yeah, black people and white people are the same’ and the conservatives at the time said ‘damn liberal media,’ and, you know, that intimidated the media into not recognizing this trend.” Uygur’s liberal guests, author Linda Monk and Wesleyen University professor Claire Potter did not disagree. In fact, Monk made sure to criticize President Eisenhower for his views on civil rights: “…let’s not be too celebratory of Eisenhower. He did stand up for the desegregation decisions. He did his job as president. But privately he was known for saying that racial desegregation was social disintegration, so he perhaps wasn’t as progressive on the race issue as some would interpret his actions to be.” Here is a transcript of the July 7 exchange: 4:43PM CENK UYGUR: And Claire, why do you think the spectrum has shifted so much, and another question is why is the media apparently not noticed it at all? CLAIRE POTTER [PROFESSOR, WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY]: Well, I think one of the things you have to look at is the context. A figure like Eisenhower, for example, was a politician during a period in which the Republicans and the Democrats had a horror of extremism. I think in the 15 or 20 years after World War II, there was a kind of centrist consensus that both extremes were to be avoided and that cooperation should be the norm. Now the only place that didn’t really work is race, until the Johnson administration. But for- LINDA MONK [AUTHOR, THE WORDS WE LIVE BY]: I think you’ve got McCarthy, though, coming along in the Eisenhower time, and certainly that was within the Republican Party, and that was a strong ideological bent, so I hear what you’re saying about there’s a concern about extremism, but certainly it had a place during the Republican Party at that time. POTTER: Sure. I mean, I don’t think you’re wrong about that, but I think one of the things that you see between 1948 and 1970 is a seismic shift in relation to who is a Democrat and who is a Republican. MONK: Right. POTTER: So that there is an enormous liberal block in the Republican Party the Democratic northern liberals are working with. MONK: Right. POTTER: And that southern Democrats, who are conservatives and can be brought along with a variety of Democratic initiatives, eventually moved to the Republican Party. MONK: Right. POTTER: Over desegregation and busing. UYGUR: Linda and Claire, I agree with both of you, and by the end of it, you know, I remember, even in my lifetime, when I started out I was a liberal Republican. No such thing exists anymore. POTTER: You and Nelson Rockefeller. UYGUR: Yeah. That’s wiped off the face of the earth, and so we see how – and part of the movement I think is because – and why the media didn’t challenge it – is because they kept calling them the liberal media, and why did they call them that? Because during civil rights, they said ‘yeah, black people and white people are the same’ and the conservatives at the time said ‘damn liberal media,’ and, you know, that intimidated the media into not recognizing this trend, I think. MONK: Well, and let’s not – let’s not be too celebratory of Eisenhower. He did stand up for the desegregation decisions. He did his job as president. But privately he was known for saying that racial desegregation was social disintegration, so he perhaps wasn’t as progressive on the race issue as some would interpret his actions to be. POTTER: Well- UYGUR: That’s a very fair point. We got to wrap it up right there. Linda and Claire, thank you, both of you, for joining us. Really appreciate it. MONK: Thanks, Cenk. POTTER: Thank you.

The rest is here:
MSNBC Fill-In Host: Conservative Liberal Media Claims Based On Racism

Jimmy Buffet Blames Bush’s Oil Ties for BP Spill: “It was like Dracula Running a Blood Bank”

Jimmy Buffett, a singer famed for his laid-back island tunes, had some harsh words for the people he claims are responsible for the BP oil spill – the administration of former President George W. Bush. The Obama-supporting musician told the Associated Press on Tuesday that he believed the Bush administration was responsible for the crisis, due to their alleged ties to oil companies. “To me it was more about eight years of bad policy before [Obama] got there that let this happen,” said Buffett. “It was Dracula running the blood bank in terms of oil and leases.” While celebrities from Larry King to James Cameron have already lined up to offer aid to people impacted by the oil spill, Buffett says he also hopes that his sea-side concert next Sunday in Gulf Shores, Alabama will soothe people’s anger over the crisis. Buffett will be playing a sea-side concert next Sunday in Gulf Shores, Alabama. “People were going, ‘What are you going to do about things?’ I mean, hell, I can’t stick my finger in that hole. Everybody wishes they could,” Buffett told the Associated Press on Tuesday. “What I’m best at is two hours of escapism for people that have to go back and either live jobs that they don’t like or whatever…it’s that Mardi Gras mentality.” But Buffett’s attempt to cheer up Gulf Coast residents may have backfired. According to Alabama news website Al.com, the Margaritaville-singer’s comments sparked anger among some readers who said Buffett should stick to music and stay out of partisan politics. Al.com is a site owned by The Birmingham News, The Huntsville Times and The Mobile Press-Register. In an article published by the site’s staff titled, “What you’re saying: Jimmy Buffett should leave out politics,” the writers noted that Buffett’s comments sent readers “into a frenzy of discussion over the singer-songwriter’s political affiliations.” “When is this administration going to grow up and start taking responsibility for anything?” wrote one commenter cited in the article. “I hope the people of Alabama boycott his sister’s restuarant in Gulf Shores. I will never eat there again.” “I have tickets for the concert and plan to attend. However, if Jimmy starts with the Bush bashing and Obama praising, I won’t boo, but I will yell, “shut up and sing,'” wrote another.

Read the original:
Jimmy Buffet Blames Bush’s Oil Ties for BP Spill: “It was like Dracula Running a Blood Bank”

Jake Pavelka-Vienna Girardi Interview Takes Over The Bachelorette, Defies Comprehension

Last night’s episode of The Bachelorette was essentially scaled back to an hour and 15 minutes to make room for the Jake Pavelka-Vienna Girardi smackdown. This left us with two thoughts: 1. This could easily be a one-hour show every week, and 2. This interview was likely the greatest 45 minutes in show history. There were so many ridiculous comments made and insults traded, The Hollywood Gossip has devoted a separate Bachelorette recap to their joint interview. Our traditional Bachelorette rundown will follow shortly. Now, for the blow-by-blow of the much-hyped reunion that followed the Breakup of the Century … Introducing the segment on a somber note, venerable host-pimp Chris Harrison pretends not to be ecstatic this fell in ABC’s lap. What a great job. Plus 8 . Jake comes out to tell “his side” first. Jerry Springer -esque. Minus 4 , if only because a screaming audience and/or chairs thrown would have enhanced this. Oh, if you have this on DVR, have one person do a shot every time she says “fame whore” and another take one every time he says “undermined.” Plus 10 . After Jake Pavelka says he was “blindsided” by the split, Vienna Girardi alleges “emotional abuse.” Hard to tell who’s lying more in the early going. Minus 3 . He seems genuinely surprised, even now, that Vienna is trashy and not that smart. Plus 4 , because 10 million viewers knew this on his season’s premiere. We’ve never been big fans, per se, but when Jake starts being all condescending about text messages, her family, her dog, etc., we feel bad for V. Minus 7 . Vienna, on Jake complaining that she remeasured their room: “I never picked up a tape measure. I never picked up a tape measure in my life.” Plus 12 . For whatever reason, they bleep out Gregory Michael’s name, even though Vienna’s alleged cheating with Gregory Michael was widely reported. Minus 18 . That story about Jake throwing the GPS into the back seat was pathetic and disturbing, but Minus only 5 , because you know how guys are about directions. Asked by Chris what they loved about each other, Jake says Vienna “challenged him.” Plus 14 , because he definitely just became ” the biggest fake liar ever.” Jake: “I believe there is more to relationships than sex and intimacy.” Like updating one’s Twitter and going on as many reality shows as possible. Minus 9 . Near tears and vehemently denying Jake’s accusations of her “flings with other men,” Vienna asks Chris if she can take a “poly-o-graph” test. Plus 1,000 . How the HELL does Chris keep a straight face? Plus 7 . When she interrupts Jake, in the midst of apologizing no less, he raises his hand in rage (not quite making a fist , but close) and berates her. Minus 250 . As she storms off in tears, Jake just shakes his head condescendingly. “There she goes again.” How would these two EVER work as a couple?! Minus 40 . Minus 200 more , because as entertaining as this was, these morons both need to go away forever now … and we have a strong suspicion they won’t. Wow. We always knew Jake was an uptight stiff, but we didn’t peg him for a misogynistic a$$hole. We can’t believe we’re saying this, but … Team Vienna? TOTAL: +524 . Whose side are you on?

See original here:
Jake Pavelka-Vienna Girardi Interview Takes Over The Bachelorette, Defies Comprehension

Kourtney and Khloe Take Miami, Pretend to Flirt, Talk Like Annoying Babies

You know I love you, I try to stick it to you whenever I can. – Scott Disick Not even Fourth of July Weekend could slow down the writers of Kourtney and Khloe Take Miami . They penned such winning lines as the one uttered above and came up with a new episode of this E! reality show last night. We forced an intern to watch and she filed the following report… It’s honestly hard to get through KKTM these days without Khloe speaking like a 4 year old.

Steve Carell Says His Exit Could Be A ‘Good Thing’ For ‘The Office’

‘I have no doubt that it will continue to be as strong if not stronger,’ he tells MTV News. By Kara Warner, with reporting by Josh Horowitz Steve Carell Photo: MTV News In addition to managing a very busy movie career, Steve Carell has spent the past seven years making audiences cringe and laugh — often at the same time — with the zany and awkward antics of “The Office” boss Michael Scott. When MTV News caught up with the “Despicable Me” voice actor recently, we had to ask why he chose to make this seventh season of the NBC hit comedy his last . “I was always contracted for seven seasons, and I’m going to fulfill my contract,” he said. “I just thought it was time. I’m ready to go.” Carell said his decision to leave is not at all based on being tired of his beloved castmates. “No, that’s not it at all, believe me. It’s really like a family,” he said. “I know that sounds like a clich

Steve Carell Leaving ‘The Office’

‘I just think it’s time,’ he says of his exit after next season. By Katie Byrne Steve Carrell Photo: Getty Images Steve Carell has confirmed that he is leaving NBC’s “The Office” after next season. “I just think it’s time,” he told E! News on the red carpet for “Despicable Me,” the upcoming animated movie he provides a voice for. “I want to fulfill my contract. When I first signed on, I had a contract for seven seasons, and this coming year is my seventh. I just thought it was time for my character to go.” Fans might disagree, but Carell seems to think the show can go on without his clueless boss, Michael Scott. “It doesn’t certainly mean the end of the show,” he said. “I think it’s just a dynamic change to the show, which could be a good thing, actually. Add some new life and some new energy. … I see it as a positive in general for the show.” While Carell was a “Daily Show” correspondent and Will Ferrell’s weatherman sidekick in “Anchorman” prior to the 2005 premiere of the American “Office,” the ad-lib-heavy comedy made him a household name. His breakout movie role in “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” soon followed, and he’s had a string of big-screen work since, from “Little Miss Sunshine” to the upcoming “Dinner for Schmucks” with Paul Rudd . With his exit announcement, Carell expects things to be business as usual for the rest of the gang over at Dunder Mifflin. “I didn’t see it as a huge thing, and I certainly didn’t anticipate any sort of hubbub over it,” he said. “I’m just not going to extend my contract, but I didn’t see it as a huge deal. And the show is great, and the ensemble is so strong, and the writers are great, so it’s just one part of that ensemble drifting off. They’ve incorporated so many new characters and so many new, great story lines that I have no doubt it’ll continue as strong if not stronger than ever.” What do you think of Steve Carell’s exit from “The Office”? Let us know in the comments.

Continued here:
Steve Carell Leaving ‘The Office’

WaPo Paints the Spitzer-Parker Show as a ‘Democrat’ and a ‘Conservative’

The Washington Post Style section promised an article on CNN’s new Eliot Spitzer-Kathleen Parker chat show with this front-page blurb: ” Odd couple on CNN: New show pairs a conservative with a Democrat.” Inside, in an article surprisingly shy on her typical snark, TV columnist Lisa de Moraes also described the pairing as the “disgraced/rehabbed former governor Eliot Spitzer, the New  York Democrat” vs. “Pulitzer-prize winning conservative columnist Kathleen Parker,” syndicated by the Washington Post Writers Group (this could explain the lack of snark against Parker, if not Spitzer.) The TV columnist made no attempt to assess whether conservatives felt she was one of them (they don’t). She did see this as a turnabout for “Crossfire”-canceling CNN president Jon Klein, but she reproduced his sales chat without much objection: In an interview with The TV Column, Klein said that Spitzer and Parker “can address an appetite that is not being satisfied now — the 99 percent of the country not watching” the other 8 o’clock cable news shows. “We’d like to begin the long, slow, steady process of reaching the underserved. . . . We think America’s ready for that. . . . I can’t think of two people better suited than these super-intelligent, ultra-opinionated but rational individuals .” Leave it to Klein to make a talk-show sound like a soup kitchen. The cable-news “underserved”? Then, he tops that by making them sound like a super-ultra comic-book pairing, a pundit Wonder Twins? In TV terms, they’re green-as-Shrek rookies, but Klein isn’t bothered:  Klein said he’s not worried that neither Spitzer nor Parker has extensive on-air hosting experience yet are joining forces for a new show in a punishing time slot. “We cast a very wide net, and after looking at scores of potential anchors, Kathleen and Eliot demonstrated they belong at the head of the pack,” he said. I’m sure you could find the same sales talk when CNN acquired Campbell Brown from NBC. That’s pretty empty blather — and at least Brown was a broadcaster, with no vice-squad “buzz.” Actually, Spitzer also had a Washington Post connection to tame the poison tip of the de Moraes pen: Recently, Spitzer has been doing the old phoenix-rising-from-ashes thing as a TV personality, as have so many fallen men before him. He got high marks when he subbed on MSNBC. (Spitzer is also a contributor to Slate.com, which is owned by The Washington Post Co.) Parker made the show sound like it would merge “Crossfire” with “Take 5,”  the hip-friends pundit show they tried with Jake Tapper in 2001. Parker told The TV Column the show’s goal is “to change people’s mind.” To that end, they are rounding up a stable of regular contributors for the show. “We’re looking for the smartest, coolest, hippest, funniest friends.” What she likes about the new show, she said, is that “we are from such different worlds in every way….And, I informed Eliot, there are lot more people like me than him.” This apparently means there are more opportunistic moderates (some who trash popular conservatives to get famous on TV and in the WashPost) than there are partisan liberals with a zipper problem. At least de Moraes rehashed Klein’s old trash talk when he killed “Crossfire” that “CNN is a different animal. We report the news. Fox talks about the news.” Klein told the Post writer “We think Eliot and Kathleen are a can’t-miss show. It’s like your favorite blog — you think, ‘I can’t really understand how to think about what’s going on today until I’ve checked out XYZ blogger.’ We think that’s how their show is going to feel.” Lisa went really, sadly soft here, or an editor slashed some copy: right next to Klein’s “different animal” boasting in the New York Observer in 2005  is his blogger-bashing: He dismissed bloggers as “guys in pajamas” (he coined the phrase while defending Mr. Rather on Fox News) and told NPR that pundit shows on cable news were “crack.” And: “There is always going to be an important role for the guys who grab the cameras and shoot the pictures of stuff that’s actually happening,” he said. “What happens after that in the great repurposing engine that is cable news and the blogosphere is out of our hands.” Already, Mr. Klein’s flip comments had hit the blogosphere. Mickey Kaus at Slate seemed all shook up that former Crossfire conservative Tucker Carlson had been unceremoniously released from service. “Boy, people at CNN do not like Jonathan Klein!” Mr. Kaus wrote. “Doesn’t he realize it’s hard to be a highly unpopular boss in the Web era, especially at a big media enterprise the press will pay inordinate attention to? Ask Howell Raines.” “It’s a little early for Mickey to be rooting for my downfall,” said Mr. Klein, who said he didn’t have time to read blogs. But earlier, Mr. Klein had been happy to compliment the blogs with an easy backhand: “I don’t think that blogging, which is, you know, glorified Web-site hosting — that’s what it is. I had a blog for a while, but I just didn’t have time,” he said. “I don’t think that blogs topple news organizations because of the difficulty of sifting through reliable information and mere opinion. But they certainly have arrived on the scene as a player.”

Read the rest here:
WaPo Paints the Spitzer-Parker Show as a ‘Democrat’ and a ‘Conservative’

‘Jonah Hex’: Dead Man Walking, By Kurt Loder

The venerable comic-book cowboy comes to life … sort of. Josh Brolin in “Jonah Hex” Photo: Warner Bros. “Jonah Hex” is about as anti- as a hero can get. It’s not just his chewed-up cowboy hat, his bullet-riddled duster and his perma-surly disposition. It’s the melted skin running down one side of his face and the ugly hole torn in the flesh next to his mouth (which makes whiskey-drinking a messy enterprise, but not — as we see just before he shoots up a barroom full of bad guys — an impossible one). In cooking down 38 years’ worth of DC comics for “Jonah Hex,” the new movie, director Jimmy Hayward and his writers have produced a lumpy soup of western action and supernatural shenanigans, heavily spiced with narrative confusion. The story leaps back and forth in time, and while the picture is sometimes funny, possibly intentionally, at some points it’s anybody’s guess what’s going on. In playing Jonah, Josh Brolin is stuck with a character whose facial constriction reduces him to little more than a walking bad attitude — he’s like Clint Eastwood’s old Man with No Name in the Sergio Leone westerns but without the warmth. The time is just after the Civil War (at least when it’s not during the Civil War). We learn that Jonah was framed for the betrayal of his Confederate battle unit, which resulted in the death of his friend, Jeb Turnbull (Jeffrey Dean Morgan). Jeb’s demented father, Quentin (John Malkovich in full cuckoo mode), retaliated by killing Jonah’s wife and son, and disfiguring his face with a red-hot branding iron. Now (or sometimes now) Jonah roams the West as a bad-ass bounty hunter, his only love connection a beautiful whore named Lilah (Megan Fox). When Ulysses S. Grant (Aidan Quinn), president of the newly reunited States, learns that Turnbull is creating a “super-weapon” that will be a “nation-killer,” he recruits Jonah to stop him. Our battered hero is well-equipped to do so. After a close call with death some years back, Jonah was left with one foot in the spirit world; and so while he spends much of the movie being shot and beaten, he appears to be unkillable. He’s attended by a pack of hellhounds (“I wouldn’t try to pet ’em if I was you”) and has the useful gift of bringing dead men back to life with a touch of his hand. (“I’m sorry I killed you,” he tells one corpse, after raising him from the grave. Says the dead guy: “I’d better be getting back under ground.”) Jonah also has a taste for esoteric weaponry — saddle-mounted Gatling guns, dynamite-firing crossbow pistols — and a talent for dodging bullets by simply leaning back a bit to let them fly by (past our madly rolling eyes). The lovely Lilah is no slouch in the slick department, either: When she and Jonah are handcuffed to an overhead rod, the cuffs suddenly snap free, and she brandishes a lock pick. “My mama didn’t raise no fool,” she says. (To which we reply, “What the hell … ?”) Despite the picture’s wall-to-wall uproar — train-jackings, bullet storms, incessant detonations — there’s little excitement to it. The action is furious from the outset and remains at that level throughout, increasingly diluting its intended effect. And the dialogue, which I take to be satirical, never quite meshes with the film’s heavy violence. Like its half-dead protagonist, the movie never comes completely alive. Check out everything we’ve got on “Jonah Hex.” For breaking news and previews of the latest comic book movies — updated around the clock — visit SplashPage.MTV.com . Related Videos Exclusive ‘Jonah Hex’ Clip MTV Rough Cut: Megan Fox In ‘Jonah Hex’ Related Photos ‘Jonah Hex’

Go here to see the original:
‘Jonah Hex’: Dead Man Walking, By Kurt Loder