Jennifer Lopez Breaks Down on Camera

Last night’s episode of “American Idol” definitely seemed a little more centered on the judges’ feelings than on the contestants’. In one of the first big emotional moments of the show’s tenth season, first-year judge Jennifer Lopez had to break it to fan-favorite contestant, Chris Medina, that he was no longer in the running to become the next American Idol. After breaking the news to Chris, Lopez broke down into tears while the other judges, Stephen Tyler and Randy Jackson, consoled her through this difficult time. The incident begins at the 3:27 mark on the video below:

Now, don’t get me wrong, I feel bad for Medina, and I definitely understand Lopez’s difficulty with having to reject so many people every week. I almost thought she was going to pull something like Sharon Osbourne tried to pull on “America’s Got Talent” nearly four years ago. Anyway, I’m sure the constant rejection-giving can get a bit exhausting and take a toll on the spirit, but I feel like the drama surrounding the judges has eclipsed the competition surrounding the contestants.

This is all a public relations strategy to get more people interested in the show. It’s kind of brilliant when you think about it, actually. Viewers think that they are turning their TV on to watch a singing competition, but what they mostly get is celebrity drama, and they don’t even realize it while it’s going on!

When this show started ten years ago, it was about the contestants. That’s what made the first season so good (and is probably why Kelly Clarkson is still the most successful “Idol” winner). But over the years, the show’s focus has shifted to the judges and their drama. There were rumors of fights between Paula Abdul and Simon Cowell, there were emotional moments that mainly focused on the judges, and it was all about what the judges had to say. The contestant’s slowly became background noise.

Sadly, I still think this is the case with the show. When Cowell announced his leave from the show, all the drama last summer centered around who the new judges were going to be, and now with this latest episode, Lopez is getting all of the news headlines rather than Medina. I think it’s all an effort for Fox to promote the show since this season has significantly lower ratings than previous seasons. I don’t think Lopez faked crying; obviously she was really upset. But I think Fox is exploiting her breakdown to increase ratings when it should be focusing on Medina’s emotions after being told he did not make it into the top 24.

Maybe I’m being too critical of Fox’s desire to exploit emotions all for the sake of good public relations. I mean, isn’t that all “American Idol” is really? It’s just a show about people being emotional and crying, which tugs at the heartstrings of America. Barf. Either way, I think the show needs to get back to what really matters on the show: the contestants. I’m hoping that once the final 12 are chosen, the show will focus more on them and less on what the judges are doing.


Is the Governator returning to acting?

Image Credit:

Arnold Schwarzenegger is no longer the governor of California, so what is his next career move? Why, returning to acting of course! In a Tweet posted last Thursday, Schwarzenegger wrote:

“Exciting news. My friends at CAA have been asking me for 7 years when they can take offers seriously. Gave them the green light today.”

Schwarzenegger’s personal aide, Daniel Ketchell, confirmed the Tweet last Friday morning, according to an article in USA Today. The former governor hasn’t starred in a movie since 2003’s “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines,” although he did have a cameo in last years Sylvester Stallone vehicle “The Expendables.”

After leaving California with an estimated $25 billion deficit, Schwarzenegger seems quite content with returning to his old career.

Now, I love me some Schwarzenegger action movies. Whether it’s “True Lies,” “Terminator 2: Judgment Day,”  “Predator,” or even “Eraser,” he has never really failed to entertain me in his films. But is the public ready for another Schwarzenegger film? Or, possibly, another Schwarzenegger-centric “Terminator” film?

Image Credit: TriStar Pictures

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve heard a single positive thing about Schwarzenegger’s acting (or political) career since he became governor of California back in 2003. I would definitely go see him in another film, but I can’t think of even five of my friends that would want to see it.

Also, his return to acting was announced via Tweet. I understand that Twitter is becoming the new way to communicate to people in this Digital Age, but if he wants more support from his fan base (if he still has one anymore) he is going to have to do a little bit more to win over their affection.

I just don’t think that a Tweet is enough. After all, how much information can a 140-character sentence really say? I expect a lot of ridicule from the media about his desire to return to acting, like this article in the LA Times.

I think Schwarzenegger needs to do something to communicate more effectively with people. I feel like he has become a joke to most audiences today and either he or his representatives needs to create some kind of image campaign to show everyone that he isn’t a complete failure at life like some people seem to think he is.

More importantly, if he is truly to return to acting, it needs to be in either a) a legitimately good movie, or b) a wild shoot-’em-up action movie. What say you readers? Do you want to go see another movie starring Ah-nuld?  Or would you rather not see him at all?

Disney trying out some mature material at the ‘Prom?’

It looks like Disney is trying to catch up with the times and not have the innocent G-rated fare that pervades their extensive library.

Not to say they’ll be doling out PG-13 teen movies; but according to an article written in USA Today on Tuesday, Disney’s new film “Prom,” out April 29, is facing a lot of skepticism from people who think the film “won’t be able to handle any edginess in the storytelling.”

Director Joe Nussbaum (“Sleepover,” “Sydney White”) maintains that they’re “not going to show sex and drugs and cursing, which is a part of teenage life, for sure. But there are a lot of other parts to teenage life, too — insecurity, anxiety, disappointment on the negative side, and also falling in love, having crushes, and the excitement of an event like this on the positive side.”

So, who exactly is Disney trying to target here? High schoolers? This reassessment of their target audience seems similar to what the studio did with “Tangled” back in November when they tried to market their last fairy tale movie to boys.

I suppose I belong with the skeptics in this situation. Granted, I think the movie looks cute, but the trailer looks a little bit too similar to “High School Musical” to me:

I appreciate what Disney is trying to do. They are facing a generation where cutesy cartoons just aren’t bringing in the money anymore. 2009’s “Princess and the Frog” was a moderate success at best in terms of box office gross.

I honestly hope for the best for Disney. I personally would like to see more mature films released by them. I’m just not sure how all of this is going to fly with the parents of small children who are used to seeing the cute fairy tale princess movies. Parents can be a tough crowd, and Disney is rather famous for doing what they want.

So my question is: Can Disney succeed in marketing its films to new audiences while still retaining the audiences they used to cater to?

I realize that small children and their parents aren’t going to be completely left out, but the number of films released that cater to them are going to shrink in number. And I’m also not including Pixar films in this post. I am talking about straight-up Disney films.

What do you think guys? Is Disney making a smart PR move here? Or does it seem like a disaster in the making?

Why is no one watching ‘Cougar Town?’

Image Credit: Buena Vista

I know, I know. Because it’s a show about cougars. Middle-aged women preying on young, 20-something aged men. But that’s where you’re wrong. Sure the show started out as a raunchy sitcom about a recently divorced mother who decided to try out the dating scene again, but after around episode eight of the first season, the writers realized that most people didn’t want to watch a show about a 40-year-old woman having sex with various 20-year-old men.

Granted, I found those first eight episodes to be quite funny, but I was in the minority. No longer is the show centered around Jules’ (Courteney Cox) love life, it is now an ensemble comedy centered around the relationships between the members of “The Cul-de-Sac Crew.”

The Cul-de-Sac Crew, from left: Ian Gomez, Christa Miller, Dan Byrd, Courteney Cox, Josh Hopkins, Brian Van Holt, and Busy Phillips; Image Credit: Buena Vista

Produced by Bill Lawrence and Kevin Biegel, the men behind “Scrubs,” “Cougar Town” found it’s groove about 2/5 of the way into the first season and since then has become one of the funniest ensemble comedies on TV, sometimes even funnier than (dare I say it?) its lead-in “Modern Family.”

Before you harp on me calling out “blasphemy!” I dare you to actually go back and start watching “Cougar Town” from the very beginning and catch up (you have 2 months since it is going on hiatus in order for ABC to test out its Matthew Perry sitcom “Mr. Sunshine”). I think most people would be amazed at how funny the show is (unless you didn’t like “Scrubs” humor, in which case “Cougar Town” might turn you off no matter what). Take this joke about Jules throwing her boyfriend’s words back into his face:

Funny, no? Or maybe it’s just me.

Enough of my praise for the show, let’s get down to why I think the show has dropped from 11.28 million viewers a week to 5.03 million viewers. All in all, it boils down to the name of the show, and the reception of those first few episodes. Today’s audiences are pretty quick to judge whether they like a show or not and “Cougar Town” just didn’t pass with them. As soon as a viewer rejects a show, it is almost impossible to bring it back into his or her good graces.

A name change for the show was even under discussion over the summer to get people to realize that it just wasn’t about cougars anymore (“Family Jules” was my personal favorite as an alternative title idea). One thing the writers have been doing that I find hilarious is inserting self-aware pre-title headers on the title card of each episode. Besides (Still) “Cougar Town” located at the top of this post, there has also been (Badly Titled) “Cougar Town,” (It’s Okay to Watch a Show Called) “Cougar Town,” and (Titles Are Hard)” Cougar Town.”

That being said, it is a pretty funny way and a nice wink to current viewers of the show, but it doesn’t really do much for people who started the show during season one and then gave up. The sad truth is, most of the show relies on in-jokes (just like “Scrubs” did) that new viewers just won’t understand.

Part of this blame, I feel, goes to ABC for not promoting the show very much. I watch all of my TV on Hulu so I can’t speak for the ads ABC does on its own network, but I don’t think I have even seen so much as an online ad for “Cougar Town” since season 2 started. Luckily, ABC renewed the show for a third season last month so any fan’s worries about cancellation after this two-month hiatus have been assuaged. I guess all of us will have to kill time for the next two months playing “Movie Mash-Up.”

You would think that lead-in “Modern Family,” America’s number one comedy, would be able to transfer some viewers over to visit “Cougar Town,” I honestly feel that most viewers that watch only the former show consider themselves above the “low-class” humor of the latter. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s the impression I get (I also happen to watch “Modern Family” and love it, so don’t think I’m elitist in my love for “Cougar Town”).

All in all, I think the show can be saved if ABC showed a little bit more faith on it. It is all about how the public perceives the show and how confident the network is in it. But the network isn’t doing anything to show viewers that it believes in “Cougar Town” as much as it does in its critical darling “Modern Family.” Even with  reviews for the second season of “Cougar Town” being almost all positive hasn’t helped the Nielsen Ratings. Most of these reviews cited the drastic improvement in quality of the show. Entertainment Weekly even named it the most underrated show on TV.

ABC should try to find an audience for this show. But who should the audience be? Honestly, I think it should stick with its original market of middle-aged women. I searched for “Cougar Town” on Facebook just to see what people are saying about it and most people who seem to like it are middle-aged women commenting on how much the show reminds them of their own lives (not the cougar lifestyle, since there is only one cougar in the show anymore and she shows up for a 10-second spot every other episode). Particularly meaningful to this audience are the moments when Jules shows her (somewhat insane) love for her son Travis, or jealousy over his new college  girlfriend. The show has a heart and ABC needs to market that instead of just the goofy scenes.

But as a 22-year-old college student who adores the show, maybe college students are also a viable target audience for the show? It is certainly quirky enough. ABC needs to do something to really push the show to a broader audience. Use Facebook and Twitter like all the other PR practitioners seem to be doing to get things noticed.

Hopefully this post might get some of you to try out “Cougar Town.” If it doesn’t, I suppose I’ll have to enjoy my weekly meetings with the wino group of the self-proclaimed Cul-de-Sac crew for as long as I can. I’ll still be opening a bottle of red wine every Wednesday night, because you just CAN’T watch “Cougar Town” without some red wine in your hand, can you? I even have my own “Big Joe” to drink out of. For those of you who watch “Cougar Town,” you know what I’m talking about, and if you don’t, you can just watch the video below.

I’m interested in all of your thoughts as well! Why do (or don’t) you watch “Cougar Town?” Can ANYTHING be done to get you to give it a(nother) try? Sound off below.

NBC loses peacock in merger with Comcast

Image Credit: NBC Universal

See that image above? You won’t be seeing it again on your local NBC station. But before I get to my thoughts on that, let’s discuss the events leading up to this drastic change.

About a week ago, the long-gestating merger between NBC/Universal and Comcast finally reached its close. While most news stories focus on the business aspect of the deal, I would like to discuss what this merger could mean for the shows on NBC, their ratings, and the possibility of changing NBC’s public image.

It’s no secret that NBC’s former president and CEO of NBC, Jeff Zucker, has had a career riddled with controversy. As stated in Deadline’s article, Jay Leno and Zucker’s own NBC show “30 Rock” crack a joke at his expense every chance they get.

Now that Zucker is out of the way, Comcast and Universal are hopeful that they will be able to bring NBC back to the “must-watch TV” that it claims (and used) to be.  Remember Thursday nights 10 years ago? NBC had shows like “Friends,” Will & Grace,” and “ER.” But times have changed.

I’m not saying that Thursday nights today are bad, per se. But NBC is not having much luck bringing in more viewers with its niche (but still hilarious) shows like “Parks and Recreation,” “Outsourced,” “Community,” and (a declining in quality) “30 Rock.”

Sure, all of these shows are (or were at some point, in the case of “30 Rock”) critically acclaimed, but NBC might want to consider a more broad, less quirky comedy. Now, I know that fans of these Thursday night shows will scream “No!” at my suggestion, but from a business and ratings standpoint, this makes sense. You can still make a broadly comedic sitcom very funny and good. It’s just hard to believe because we haven’t seen one in a while.

One other concern I have is the new logo that NBC has, shown here:

Image Credit: NBC Universal

Notice something missing? NBC’s iconic logo, the multi-colored peacock has been removed from the logo, cited as being “too busy” by NBC Universal’s chief executive Steve Burke. I can only assume that this is meant to distinguish the “new” NBC from Zucker’s NBC, but I’m just not sure this is a good idea. Remember the GAP logo fiasco?

That being said, I also think this logo change could be a genius move on their part. I predict that most viewers will be rather vocal about their dislike (or liking) of the new logo. This will (in my opinion) create enough uproar and publicity to put NBC back in the headlines and minds of the viewer. It may start off as negative, but you know what they say: “There is no such thing as bad publicity.”

I’m sure many of you will disagree with my thoughts on this merger and logo change, so feel free to voice your opinions below. USA Today had some interesting suggestions for NBC Universal as well, and I think that most of these suggestions could help the studio.

Kevin Smith purchases his own movie for $20; announces road tour

Red State teaser poster; Image Credit: The Movie Poster Shop

Independent film director Kevin Smith (“Clerks,” “Dogma,” “Zack and Miri Make a Porno”) announced this weekend at the Sundance Film Festival that he would be severing all ties with Hollywood, according to an article in Entertainment Weekly. In a bold move by the director, Smith gave a nearly 30-minute-long speech after the screening of his new religious horror film “Red State” explaining how he was planning on using his fan base to help distribute his film.

The unusual thing here is that Smith announced via Twitter that he was there to sell his film to a studio for distribution, knowing that he had no such plans to do so. He announced that he was going to purchase his own film for $20 and use Twitter and a road tour of his film to raise money and release the film himself, without the help of the studio system.

While Smith did apologize for the deception about the auction, he did claim that the people in the studio system has “lied to [him] many times,” further motivating this hoax.

A video of the speech can be found below:

Later that day, the dates and locations of the road tour were released on This is not the first time something like this has been done with a cult film. Darren Lynn Bousman’s 2008 film “Repo! The Genetic Opera” did something similar, although to unsuccessful box office results.

Now, I have a great deal of respect for Kevin Smith, but I’m not so sure this is the best course of action for him right now. He has been in trouble with the film industry before, as evidenced by his backlash towards critics of his last film “Cop Out.”

I’m certain that others feel this way as well. Devin Faraci, of the blog “Bada** Nerd,” finds Smith’s analysis on the state of the independent film to be “hurtful to the many good people working in indie film today.”

Smith has always been a bit of a rogue in the Hollywood circuit, and this debacle at Sundance could potentially destroy his career. Granted, he also announced that his next film “Hit Somebody” would be the last directorial effort of his career. Then he will strictly be working with his own distribution company.

This announcement of his retirement from directing came as a bit of a shock as well, but that may be why he chose this point in time to directly attack the studio system and try to do something about it. Is he wanting to start a revolution? Only time will tell.

While I don’t think Smith would ever accept help from a publicist, I think it is exactly what he needs right now. If I were his publicist, I would suggest possibly taking a less radical approach to the entire affair. I understand his frustration with the studio system but I feel like, despite his 1.7 million Twitter followers, he could be isolating his fans by doing this.

If Smith truly wants to make “Red State” for the fans and bring it to them personally, I would suggest not being so preachy about the studio system. I also think that he needs to make his statements about his issues with the studio system sound less like attacks and more like actual concerns. This might garner more sympathy for his cause from his viewers and even from people in the studio system itself.

Either way, I look forward to seeing “Red State” when it is (hopefully) released on October 19 (the anniversary of the release of “Clerks,” Smith’s directorial debut).  I just hope Smith’s plan works, and that he learns to perhaps be a little bit more soft with his attacks. Although anyone who has seen at least one of Smith’s movies (with the exception of “Jersey Girl”) knows that “soft” isn’t something he is very skilled at.

“Red State” stars Michael Park, Academy Award nominee Melissa Leo, John Goodman, and Kyle Gallner. A trailer for the film can be found below the jump.

‘Scream 4’ possibly undergoing additional shooting? Uh-oh

Scream 4 Teaser Poster; Image Credit: Dimension Films

UPDATE: Wes Craven vaguely confirmed via Twitter on Feb. 1 that he was “In Michigan getting you more to #SCREAM4” and tweeted a photo of star Alison Brie. After fan concerns of reshoots, Craven stated in an exclusive interview with Entertainment Weekly the next day that “They’re not reshoots. We had a couple test screenings and we saw two scenes where they had moments you could add to and we just saw a spectacular opportunity. Bob [Weinstein] just said to me basically, ‘You go to your dark side and I’ll give you the money!’ The two scenes were really good, but we saw how they could be spectacular, so we thought, let’s just go for it. They were key moments of the script, so we just decided to go back and go for the grand slam on them.” Also confirmed is that the ending is not being changed. END UPDATE

Well this could be one of the more depressing bits of information I have read recently.  According to, Wes Craven’s “Scream 4” might be heading back to Michigan to film some additional footage.

Here’s what they say:

“One of our readers, Amy, received a filming notice in Northville, MI (on Clement St. between 7 mile and Frederick) for Jan. 31 & Feb. 2 that simply listed a motion picture entitled “Z”. Anyone who was following the Scream 4 shoot last summer will remember much of the film was shot in Northville under the production name Z. So, it sounds to us like Scream 4 may be returning to Northville to shoot another scene.”

If this is truly the case I have one big concern: that these re-shoots are a result of the current print of the movie not being very good. Any movie aficionado knows that re-shoots of any kind are usually a fairly good indicator that the movie is going to be a stinker, with the filmmakers making a last-ditch effort to try to improve the film.  Just look at the remakes of “Black Christmas,” “Clash of the Titans,” and “The Wolfman,” both of which went through extensive re-shoots to produce quite terrible end products.

Also, the word-of-mouth on this could be disastrous for the film. I don’t see the point in using a fake name for the film and keeping everything so secretive. Obviously, Dimension Films does not want the plot of the film to get leaked, but since news of additional shooting has been leaked, I would at least expect a news release to be sent out explaining the reasons for the additional shooting in order to assuage any concerns fans of the series might have.

Kristen Bell and Anna Paquin in "Scream 4;" Image Credit: The Weinstein Co.

I honestly don’t see “Scream 4” being a box-office failure, but the horror community is one of the most loyal and rabid fan bases in existence. It is not wise to abuse their trust like that, which is why Dimension Films should do something to show their confidence in the film. Even Wes Craven coming forward to say something would help.

Nevertheless, Dimension Films needs some help in the public relations department and learn to communicate with their audience a bit more.

“Scream 4” opens on April 15 and stars Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox, David Arquette, Emma Roberts, Hayden Panettiere, Adam Brody, Rory Culkin, Marley Shelton, Kristen Bell, Anna Paquin and Alison Brie.

The trailer can be seen after the jump: