If they were real vampires, it would have lasted forever

I love it when celebrities trip up, especially ones I feel are overblown, talentless hacks. Like Kristen Stewart. I know, I know, she's Hollywood's little darling, but I can't possibly be the only one who noticed that, ahem, she sucks. Not only Robert Pattinson ... but as an actress.

So, imagine my delight when I found out she was busted for cheating on her Twilight beau with the married director of Snow White and the Huntsman. First off, dude, you're married, and secondly, if you're going to cheat and had to pick between Charlize Theron and Kristen Stewart, the choice seems pretty obvious.

Stewart is one of those questionable Hollywood creations, full of hype but lacking substance. I've seen her in a few flicks, Twilight and non-Twilight, and it quickly became apparent to me that she has no range whatsoever. She's like a wet noodle, flaccid, uninviting. And yet, according to, like, everyone, she's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Classic propaganda.

I cannot be convinced and will not be brainwashed by studio executives and their media peons falsely marketing their latest ingenue to sell movie tickets. I'm constantly amazed at the power of media to plant ideas in our brains and manipulate our perception to make us believe in things that aren't even there.

This cheating scandal is the most exciting thing Kristen's ever done.

Ahhh, glad I got that pickle out of my ass. You know, these things, they weigh on me, and I just have to let them out, like diarrhea.

They did it! They finally did it!

Almost a month after it opened, I finally saw Breaking Dawn, Part 1, the fourth installment of the Twilight teen vampire saga. I'm slightly dismayed to admit that I kind of enjoyed it. Ok, maybe a little more than "kind of". Or was it the popcorn doused in extra butter after my stepdaughter found the "do-it-yourself" butter dispenser... but I digress.

I'm still convinced that if you haven't read the books and attempt to watch these movies, you'll be bored out of your mind and wonder what the big deal is. Having read them fills out the missing details which must, necessarily, be omitted from the films due to time constraints and short attention spans. That being said, apart from the first movie, which was all teenage angst and longing (I'm a longer (is that a word?) anyway, I live for that shit.), I think this one might be my favorite so far.

It was beautifully shot in lush locations and Kristen Stewart didn't annoy the crap out of me. Taylor Lautner also had some nice moments, and his shirt was on during most of the movie so I wasn't simply blinded by his ridiculously defined, smooth chest. The kid actually pulled off some decent acting. Robert Pattinson took a back seat in this installment. Apart from Stewart's character, I think Lautner had more screen time than Pattinson who was relegated to the background, looking worried (constipated) in most scenes.

There were some great special effects where Kristen Stewart's character was concerned. (SPOILER ALERT). She basically gets the life sucked out of her when she gets pregnant with a vampire/human half-breed, and they did a good job of making her look like a completely anorexic pregnant chick. It was gross, ergo, successful.

I know, I know. You're all wondering when I'll get to the good stuff - the sex. Well, it was... meh. It was obvious the sex scenes and the violent birth were edited with a PG rating in mind. They were both underwhelming. But I've been ruined by True Blood which is basically soft porn and has set the bar extremely high when it comes to on-screen supernatural being / human sex.

My girl Anna Kendrick, who's in the movie for all of 10 seconds, still manages to steal every scene she's in. Love her. So does Michael Sheen, who plays one of the Volturi (bad ass vamps) in a "secret" scene that only appears after the first set of credits at the end of the movie. So if you go see it, don't leave once the credits start rolling. Wait it out people, there's some important info in that scene that sets up the sequel.

What do we have to look forward to in the next and final installment? What I hope will be hot vampire sex since Bella (Stewart's character) finally turns into a vampire so she and Edward (Pattinson) can have unbridled, damned creature sex, and Pattinson can stop looking like he's constantly trying to take a shit.

When are they gonna do it already?

You know when you don't have sex or aren't allowed to have sex and then you obsess about it? I sense this is what's happening with our collective fixation on the sex scene in the next installment of the Twilight saga: Breaking Dawn, part I. It's all over the gossipsphere: how the film almost got an R-rating; shooting the scene; the natural chemistry between Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart, blah, blah, blah....

I, of course, will be seeing the film to judge for myself whether it lives up to all the hype or not. But frankly, with so much attention on it, we're being set up for disappointment. The religious undertones so evident in the books have now got everyone whipped into a frenzy over the "honeymoon" scenes. It's funny how certain prevalent religions don't really get that the more you restrict it, the more people want it, and the more twisted they get about it.

I mean, just look at the Catholic Church. Do you think all those priests started out as molesters? Probably not. But when you can't have sex and can't masturbate, you get seriously warped. Why does the Church not understand this? It's basic human nature. Or the prevalence of the naughty Catholic school girl fantasy? Come on people, this isn't rocket science.

If Bella and Edward had just done it already we wouldn't be so focused on one single moment but instead absorbed in the whole story. As it stands, the only question on anyone's mind in the movies or even reading the books is: when are they gonna do it? Everything else seems to fade into the background.

If you're not familiar with the books (SPOILER ALERT), Edward refuses to have sex with Bella until they're married, which they do, at 18. Then, miraculously, she gets knocked up, at 18, with a vampire/human hybrid. Then, at childbirth, Bella is turned into a vampire, otherwise she wouldn't have survived since her human body was ripped to shreds by her unique progeny. And they live happily ever after, having crazy awesome vampire sex for eternity.

There's that sex thing again. I'm certainly not against a healthy expression of sexuality but this Twilight thing is so obviously religious as to be offensive to us sane people. I'm not advocating unbridled promiscuity, however, the notion that one should be married before having sex is antiquated, and has caused countless untold tragedies among Catholic youth. (I cite the Catholic religion because I used to be one of its faithful followers.)

The Twilight books were some of the lamest I've ever read but they've undeniably struck a chord with legions of diehard fans fanatically defending the Edward/Bella love story. However, the very fact that this tale has so polarized its fans and naysayers leads me to believe that one should be wary of any kind of religious messaging, even when it's masked within fictional storytelling.

Yes, I'm a Twilight fan. Sort of. Ok! Are you happy now?

Last weekend I found myself in a strange, mysterious and slightly disturbing place - the teen vampire drama universe. My stepdaughter and I were trying to figure out what mindless drivel we would watch to pass the time, and I voluntarily (key word here) suggested Twilight, which I've seen already, like, three times.

We then decided that, in preparation for the release of Breaking Dawn, Part 1, the fourth installment in this wildly popular series, we would also watch New Moon and Eclipse again, both of which I've already seen, but only once, and at the time, I felt once was more than enough.

It's interesting what happens when time passes and you watch a movie again that you thought you kinda hated and it's... better than you initially thought. I'm already predisposed to these films due to my long-standing vampire fetish but I was surprised at my new found enthusiasm for what is essentially a lame-ass retelling of vampire lore.

I still can't convince myself that Kristen Stewart can act. She's shit, any way you slice it, and to this day, I can't understand why Hollywood has convinced itself that she's a talented performer. Luckily, the rest of the cast picks up the slack, especially my beloved Anna Kendrick, scene-stealer extraordinaire. She's awesome, any way you slice it. So is Taylor Lautner's bare chest. It's a character in itself.

I did sorely miss Rachelle Lefevre, who was replaced in Eclipse due to a scheduling conflict by Bryce Dallas Howard. How those bastards at Summit Entertainment couldn't work around Rachelle's shooting schedule is beyond me, but if I had to choose between working with Dustin Hoffman and Paul Giamatti on a film based on a Mordechai Richler story and the campy Twilight saga, I'd ditch the latter as well.   

Note to Robert Pattinson: hit the gym 'yo! Taylor Lautner is wiping the floor with your pasty, non-defined, skinny-ass torso. I understand your skin has to look abnormally white due to the vampiric nature of your character but that's no excuse not to get some bulk and definition. When in doubt, consult photos of True Blood's male vampire cast, most notably Stephen Moyer and Alexander Skarsgard. You should bare some resemblance to that body type to convince us of your truly irresistible vampire charm.

After having immersed myself in about six hours of Twilight saga-ness, I find myself actually excited to see the next installment, mostly because I'm curious as to how they dealt with a vampire/human sex scene and what can only be described as an incredibly unusual, violent birth. Sex and violence, that's all it really takes to lure me in. I know, how typically bourgeois.

Of course, I'm expecting some Kristen Stewart-esque bad acting but after having made us wait this long, we're finally getting to the good stuff, and they better not have f*cked it up. Of course, Breaking Dawn won't hold a candle to True Blood's sexual content but that's like comparing apples to oranges - it's a fruitless endeavour.

Today I'm a crusty bitch - part deux

Kristen Stewart is publicly apologizing for likening fame to rape, calling it an "enormous mistake". No shit Sherlock. Comparing an incredibly successful career (despite her lack of talent) to an unimaginably violent act is to belittle victims of actual rape. Having a camera shoved in your face is not the same as being forced to have sex with someone, or something, for that matter. 

Both Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson have this sickening habit of portraying themselves as misunderstood "artistes" who just hate the limelight because it's so traumatic. Like I mentioned in my previous post, if it's so difficult, get out of the spotlight or stop complaining about it. I suspect they secretly love it because deep down they're incredibly insecure and all the attention pumps up their fragile egos.

I've also noticed that it's usually the most talented actors who purposely stay out of the public eye because it's about the work, not their image. Sure, they reappear every once in a while to promote a film but that's about it. 

The ones who tend to constantly be fodder for gossip rags are usually reality TV fame whores or talentless hacks posing as actors who happen to be in schloppy movies that are only popular because of an insane fan base, such as the Twilight franchise. I mean, let's face it, these movies suck. Mostly because they're based on books that equally sucked. Yes, I read all four books so I can say that. 

An apology is nice and all, but acting like some ungrateful, spoiled brat when you're raking in the dough while two thirds of the world is starving smacks of bad taste. It reflects this sense of entitlement so endemic to this new generation. 

Go to some impoverished corner of the world for a while and see how the other half lives. Maybe a camera in the face won't seem so bad after you've witnessed abject poverty. 

Suck it up princess.

Today I'm a crusty bitch

John Mayer has had to cancel the rest of his European tour due to an "unnamed illness". Well John, here are a few questions that may help you narrow down the list of possible ailments:

1) have you been acting like a two dollar hooker on payday?

2) does it burn when you pee?

3) is it really itchy "down there"?

4) are there any red, swollen craters forming on your manly instrument?

If you answered yes to one or more of the above questions, you probably have an STD. It's nothing to be ashamed of. Your doctor will give you a prescription and it should go away. Unless you've got the herp. The herp stays with you forever, like an "accident" you didn't want to abort. (Oooh, over the line? Nah.) 

Speaking of over the line, Kristen Stewart, in an interview with Elle UK, states that "fame is like rape". Wait... wait... I think I just threw up in my mouth. Dear Kristen: cry me a f*cking river. If you didn't like the international fame and insane Twilophile adulation brought on by the first Twilight movie, you didn't have to sign up for the rest of 'em. You could have walked away and they would have recast Bella, as they did Victoria, and maybe they would have replaced you with someone who can act. 

I have no pity for celebrities who put themselves in the limelight, then complain that the glare of fame is too hot. Go do some regional theatre if it bothers you that much.

Oscars lack discernment this year

Well, my dearest Sassies, it happened, as I knew it would. That piece of shit movie, glorifying what Michael Moore dubbed " a fictitious war, started by a fictitious president" at the 2003 Oscars, won best picture at last night's Academy Awards. 

If it weren't for the fact that The Hurt Locker was so tediously boring and cliché, I could be happy that the first female ever won the best director Oscar. But alas, I cannot share in this joy. Not for that movie.

There were far superior flicks in the best picture category. That they chose a douchey movie on the war in Iraq while winners dedicated their Oscars to the troops reeked of overinflated, underinformed patriotism. I try to like the Americans, but then they pull this kind of shit. 

I knew we were in trouble when The Hurt Locker won two awards early on for sound editing and mixing. At least all the acting award winners were judiciously chosen. This seemed to ease my frustration.

I was especially happy Sandra Bullock won the award for best actress. I like that girl a lot. She's the real deal. Talented, smart, funny, hot. Killer combo. And now she's an Oscar winner. This brings joy to my heart. Christoph Waltz, Mo'Nique and Jeff Bridges also richly deserved their awards. Bravo to the Academy for at least that much. 

I wasn't sure about the hosting. I like Steve Martin and adore Alec Baldwin. Some bits were funny but in all, it felt really tacky, like, overly so. Almost cringe-inducing.

Then there was the "next generation" - Miley Cyrus, looking slutty in her bustier top dress, and Kristen Stewart who quite possibly gave the worst Oscar presenter's speech ever. She was completely devoid of poise which simply indicated to me what I already know - this girl can't act worth shit. She can't even present at the Academy Awards! Kristen is a totally overblown ingénue. When will the film industry clue in to this? 

Her colleague, Anna Kendrick, on the other hand, was the picture of grace and elegance, a star on the rise. She was also nominated for an Oscar. Anna wins. 

All in all, the Oscars were a disappointment this year since the big awards went to a movie I have come to loathe. But alas, I am outnumbered, by many, it seems. 

The war in Iraq was a monumental mistake to begin with, a low point in American history that will have repercussions for years and generations to come. 

The US government squandered the world's sympathy from 9/11 on fiction and now they're stuck in a mess of their own creation. Do movies about this colossal failure of democracy really need to be rewarded?

Et tu, Kristen?

Kristen Stewart has disappointed me. I saw Adventureland on the weekend and realized she was playing Bella, except it was the eighties and she was working at an amusement park. Same character, different movie. Then I realized she played the same forlorn teenager in Into the Wild. That was the first film I saw her in, and was impressed with her performance. Of course, at that time, I had nothing to compare it to. Now I do. She was the weak link in Adventureland. The supporting cast kicked ass with genuine, believable performances, and original acting choices. Kristen = yawn.

Then I realized I had my suspicions when I saw her in Twilight. Yes, I've seen the movie, and read all four books, and plan on seeing all subsequent movies because I figure I've earned as much, having survived reading Stephenie Meyer's vampire saga. But I digress. There was a moment, an important moment in Twilight, when Bella reveals to Edward that she knows he's a vampire. It felt totally contrived. Fakey, fake, fake. I think I physically cringed. And I thought to myself: "This can't be. It's Kristen Stewart, a much touted about "up and comer"". A supposedly "talented" actress. Not so, my sassies, not so.

It pains me to think that she may be descending into the ranks of fame-whoring, talentless Hollywood trash such as the Jessica trifecta (Jessica Simpson, Jessica Biel and Jessica Alba), Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, etc... What's even worse about Kristen is that she plays the "artiste" card: I'm a serious actor. Don't ask me stupid questions in interviews. I don't care about being famous. Whatever... If she had talent, I could tolerate that.

Kristen was recently filming a Joan Jett biopic. This will be her chance to redeem herself. I am all for second chances. I want her to succeed. Don't f*ck it up Kristen. It's Joan Jett, not Bella playing Joan Jett.