Stylish Celebrity Escapism
Contributing Writers
Jul 30
'07
Lohan’s film early contender for Razzie


Lindsay Lohan’s new movie is already getting a lot of attention as the most terrible 90 minutes of the year. A few random samplings of review headlines include “Lohan’s new movie one of the worst of the year” “’I Know Who Killed Me’ another low for Lohan” “Just kill me, please” “How bad is Lohan’s latest? You don’t want to `Know’” “Career killer for Lohan” and “Lohan’s bad week just got worse with release of her new film” - and I wasn’t cherry picking headlines. I can’t actually bring myself to pay $11 for anything with Lindsay Lohan, so all I can do is tell you what everyone else is saying about her film. First off, she plays two characters. Never an indication of an Oscar-worthy film (Freaky Friday anyone?). One of her characters wakes up minus a hand and a foot, insisting that she’s not an up-and-coming writer, but a stripper. Now this is sounding eerily familiar, with uncomfortable parallels to my own life.

“There’s a fresh candidate in the running for worst movie of 2007 honors. ‘I Know Who Killed Me,’ a ridiculous thriller (minus the thrills) starring the embattled Lindsay Lohan in a dual role, has all the hallmarks necessary for qualification: A nonsensical plot that grows sillier by the second, tawdry special effects, heavy-handed symbolism that’s big on electric-blue hues and mechanical performances are all culprits as far as the title’s concerned.”

[From the Hollywood Reporter]

Can anyone really say they’re that surprised Lohan’s movie stinks to high heaven? We all know the only reason she even took the role was those free pole dancing classes she got to take. In other Lohan news, it turns out she is still insurable, according to experts, but it will be a challenge. Most likely, she will have to put her salary in escrow until the end of any film she works on for the next few years.

“’I don’t think it (a problematic artist) is any more of an issue [thank it ever was],’ said Wendy Diaz, entertainment underwriting director at Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co., the leading film underwriter. ‘It’s pretty standard year to year.’

“But Diaz did say the terms for covering Lohan would likely be ‘serious at this point.’

“She said Fireman’s Fund, in such a case, would likely put in higher deductibles, or ask the star to put their salary into escrow to pay for any losses if production was disrupted.”

[From CNN]

So she’s not out of the running due to insurance – the article goes on to discuss other troubled actors, like Robert Downey Jr., who was still able to work. The biggest issue for Lohan seems to be: would anyone want to work with her? Lately it seems that everything she touches goes to hell, whether it’s films or friends. Why would a director want to work with her, considering all she has going against her at this point? I’m sure, at the very least, she’ll have to take a serious hit on her salary demands. Lindsay could also, (hopefully) be facing some serious jail time, and probable lawsuits. I wish I could end this story with one of those optimistic “hopefully now she’ll realize the error of her ways and get her life back together” sentences, but we all know that’s bull. She’s going to crash and burn, and keep doing it until she dies. I know I’m going to get angry comments for that, but considering everything that Lohan has done to herself that hasn’t made her change her behavior, do we really think even jail could straighten her out at this point?

Picture note by Celebitchy: Here are stills from the film, courtesy of Allmoviephoto. The trailer is below, and it probably doesn’t do justice to how truly awful this film must be.

Written by JayBird

Posted in Lindsay Lohan, Movies, Razzies

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

On-Page Comments are closed.

Add a comment in pop-up window
(for posts before 4/21/08)
On April 21, 2008, comments were moved from the pop-up Haloscan format onto the page. Older posts still use the Haloscan comments for discussions, and you are welcome to comment there. All new posts use on-page commenting.

Recent Comments:
  • Kim: He looks ummm… wrong. He always does.
  • Kim: I love the show and I have come to greatly admire Jen. I think this is a brilliant idea.
  • Ally: I’m sure Mr. Schreiber is a great guy despite his difficult childhood, but especially as he ages, he has...
  • Ally: It seems glaringly unfair that she loses custody cause she took the kid out of the county, but now he gets to...
  • mtngirl: Scientology does a body good…not! Nice try…looks like daddy’s little girl has already left...
  • Christina X: Re: Britney Spears’ song She’s a 27 year old woman. I think that the controversy surrounding...
  • MJ: The report calls her 30-Rock guest stint a “cameo,” which it totally was not. It was a major role in...
  • Christina X: This show on the whole is completely frivolous at best, but I’d just like to say that even though...
 
 

Celebitchy is a celebrity gossip site written by several independent authors. The opinions of the authors are their own and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Celebitchy, LLC. All information on this site is for entertainment purposes only. Articles are based on rumor, conjecture, and published information in other sources. Celebitchy, LLC makes no claims that content is valid, accurate, or true. Celebitchy, LLC and the authors contributing to it will not be held liable for damages resulting from errors, omissions or falsehoods published on this site. It is not the site or the contributing authors' intention to defame or malign any particular group, religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual. Celebitchy, LLC is not responsible for content on linked or quoted sources. All comments made by visitors to the blog are the responsibility of their respective authors and are only sporadically monitored. Celebitchy, LLC will not be held liable for comments in any way.