Last night was the premiere of J. Edgar at the AFI Film Fest. All of the stars came out for the film except for Dame Judi Dench, who was in London doing press for the new James Bond film. Several of Clint Eastwood’s former stars and friends came out to celebrate his new film too – including Hilary Swank. This is Hilary’s first public outing since she got publicly slammed for attending the birthday party of a Chechen dictator, and accepting $1.5 million for the pleasure. Days after the scandal went international, Hilary canceled a charity appearance, claiming she was sick, but I guess she feels well enough to hang out with Clint Eastwood, right? There were reports earlier this week that Hilary fired her manager over the Chechnya incident, and now Entertainment Weekly reports that Hilary’s PR firm fired HER.

Hilary Swank’s bad month just got even worse. In the wake of the storm of bad press surrounding her paid appearance at a birthday event for Chechen president, and alleged human rights violator, Ramzan Kadyrov, the two-time Oscar winner has been dumped by her PR team at 42West, a source familiar with the situation confirms exclusively to EW.

The publicity firm parted ways with Swank over a disagreement on how best to deal with the fallout from the Oct. 5 event, which was also attended by Jean-Claude Van Damme, Seal, and English violinist Vanessa-Mae.

Earlier this week, it was widely reported that Swank fired her manager of eight years, Jason Weinberg, and two of his associates at CAA, though not her lawyer, Jeff Bernstein, who reportedly played a significant role in the Chechnya visit. Three weeks ago, Swank apologized for attending and promised to donate her fee to charity, but appeared to stop short of taking personal responsibility. “If I had a full understanding of what this event was apparently intended to be,” she said, “I would never have gone.”

Calls to 42West have not been returned, and Swank’s lawyer has not responded to a request for comment.

[From Entertainment Weekly]

Sucks for Hilary. I guess she’s doing her own PR now, thus this red carpet appearance for Clint Eastwood. She’s probably hoping that Clint will act as a human shield to protect her from the fallout. I can’t believe she’s using an old dude like that.

I’m including some more photos from the AFI premiere. Leo looks great, IMO. Clint looks old as dirt. Naomi Watts looks nice, but Liev looks rough. And Armie Hammer is so cartoon-handsome, it’s creepy. Oh, and my lover Ed Westwick was there! He’s in the movie too. He’s so smarmy and gorge.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

At the beginning of the week, I saw that some major news outlets were reporting that Hilary Swank and Jean Claude Can Damme had done a bad, bad thing. They were invited to a public (televised) birthday party for a Chechen leader named Ramzan Kadyrov in Grozny. As it turns out, Kadyrov is a something of an infamous genocidal bastard, and human rights groups were really pissed off that celebrities were flown in to give the dude legitimacy. I didn’t write about it earlier because… it’s Hilary Swank. I didn’t think people would care what she did, and in her (sort of) defense, I think it’s pretty likely she was just offered a million-dollar check and a private plane to come to the event, and she had no idea who this guy was, or why she should have refused. Anyway, she’s apologizing:

Hollywood celebrity Hilary Swank said she “deeply regrets” visiting a concert held on the birthday of the Kremlin-backed Chechen leader, who is accused of torture, abductions and killings by human rights groups.

The two-time Oscar winner said that she was unaware of the disappearances, house torchings and extra-judicial killings reportedly orchestrated by Ramzan Kadyrov in the southern Russian republic.

“I deeply regret attending this event,” Swank said in a written message to The Associated Press. “If I had a full understanding of what this event was apparently intended to be, I would never have gone.”

Swank issued the message after the Human Rights Watch criticized her — along with Belgian actor Jean Claude Van Damme and British violinist Vanessa Mae — for attending a show that, it says, “trivializes the suffering of countless victims of human rights abuses.”

On Kadyrov’s 35th birthday on Oct. 5, his government organized a lavish concert in Chechnya’s provincial capital, Grozny, that has been restored after being flattened during two wars between Chechen separatists and Moscow since 1994.

The celebrities — as well as dozens of Russian politicians and pop stars — showed up to congratulate Kadyrov from a stage arranged between a gigantic mosque and a newly built business center.

During the birthday show, Swank said that she had been taken by the Chechen government’s “passion to make peace and to make something beautiful.” She claimed in her apology that her invitation to the concert made no mention of Kadyrov’s birthday.

Under Kadyrov’s leadership, Chechnya has become relatively quiet, and the insurgent violence has largely migrated to neighboring republics of the volatile Caucasus region. Kadyrov is a former separatist rebel who has boasted of killing his first Russian soldier at age 15. He went over to the federal side at the start of the second Chechen war in 1999. A string of Kadyrov’s critics and political rivals have been brutally murdered in recent years in Russia, Austria and Dubai.

Kadyrov has consistently denied involvement in any of the killings, saying the accusations are fabricated to blacken his name.

[From The Associated Press]

“If I had a full understanding of what this event was apparently intended to be, I would never have gone” = They gave me a lot of money to show up and I didn’t want to ask questions, and I figured no one would notice. I mean… I buy her apology, I buy that she regrets it, and she probably hates whoever talked her into it. BUT! I would like to know how much she was paid to show up at the event, and if she also “deeply regrets” taking the money, or if she plans to return the money.

Here’s some video of Hilary on stage wishing Kadyrov a happy birthday:

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Shortly after Hilary Swank split from Chad Lowe, she started up with her married agent, John Campisi. John swiftly got a divorce, and his relationship with Hilary is now five years old. Hilary gets along with his son from his previous marriage, to the point where Hilary gives interviews about how much she loves the kid, and how she walks around naked around him. She also plays a little fast and loose with the whole thing about John being married when they got together – she’s still selling herself as a nice girl who believes in “the sanctity of marriage”. Anyway, the Enquirer has an interesting report about what they say is her struggling relationship with Campisi:

Hilary Swank’s five-year romance with agent-turned-lover John Campisi has hit the rocks – because she’s STILL not ready to tie the knot! The Enquirer has learned that Swank has grown weary of her boyfriend’s controlling nature… and that’s the real reason she’s hesitant to say “I do.” Plus, she still smarting over her painful divorce from Chad Lowe, says a close source.

“Hilary and John are at an all-time low point right now,” divulged one source. “To put it bluntly, the spark between them is gone. They’re bickering, and it’s hard to remember the last time either of them looked truly happy.”

According to the insider, Hilary has been grappling with John’s increasing need to control their lives and his constant pressure to get married.

“As much as Hilary respects marriage, she now sees legal commitment as unnecessary in terms of happiness and personal fulfillment… I think eventually she may have been talked into it if John had stopped pressuring her so strongly. But he’s turned her off getting married – at least for the time being – by ramming the idea down her throat, day in and day out.”

One of the issues bothering Hilary is that John, who is one of her agents, is micromanaging her career, says the source.

“She knows John has her best interests at heart, but sometimes she finds him so suffocating, and it’s hard for her to separate work from her personal life. They need to give each other space is they’re to have any chance of turning their romance around and having a future together.”

[From The National Enquirer, print edition]

And that’s why I think it would be really difficult to get serious with someone who technically works for you in some sort of managerial position – it feels like you’re being ordered around. It feels like your partner is micromanaging. It would suck. It makes me wonder how Reese Witherspoon and her guy are managing – although I don’t think her guy is technically part of her management team, so maybe that’s how they make it work.

I also wonder if Hilary isn’t too enthusiastic about marrying John because of the way they got together – Hilary had barely just gotten out of her marriage to Chad Lowe, and John still had a wife. That being said, I just don’t think Hilary is the kind of woman who gets ordered around by her boyfriend. I just don’t believe that’s her dynamic with anyone.

Photos courtesy of WENN & Fame.

Both Kaiser and I have mixed feelings about Hilary Swank’s Gucci Premiere strapless gown with a long dip-dyed feather train. Kaiser gives Hilary credit for looking less horsey with her styling as usual, and she likes the top of the gown, as do I. On camera this dress looked decent but in photos the different shades of gray on the bottom look muddy and seem to emphasize how feathers have no place on a dress that’s sequined on top.

What’s more is that Hilary presented at the Oscars, for Best Director, and that she went to the Vanity Fair Oscar party afterwards but didn’t change up her dress. I know it’s petty to point that out when a woman is rocking a dress that’s probably worth six figures, but it’s the damn Oscars – the dresses are free and the designers are throwing them at you. Switch it up for the after parties. Also, this needs accessories like some earrings and a bracelet. All she’s wearing is a ring!

I’ll say something nice – I like her makeup, and she had a nice jewel in her hair you couldn’t see. That hair needs to go. She had some beautiful loose curls at the SAG Awards. What happened?

I guess awards season is officially open us, because last night the Gotham Awards were held, and today the Independent Spirit Award nominations are coming out. It will probably be just a matter of days until the Golden Globe nominations come out, so we’re in the thick of it. Now, the Gotham Awards aren’t really known as any kind of awards-harbinger – they mostly recognize independent films, and low-budget fare filmed in and around New York. If you’d like to read a decent summary of what went down at the Gothams, go here. Still, it was a pretty good night for fashion. First up: Hilary Swank, in Emilio Pucci. I don’t really hate it – the dress looks nice on her figure, her hair is loose and her makeup is conservative. All in all, Hilary looks way better than she has in past red carpet appearances.

Next: everybody’s girl-crush, Mila Kunis. Mila wore Oscar de la Renta, and she was my pick for best-dressed of the night. I love blue-black, and she pulls it off really well.

Julianne Moore wore Lanvin. Ugh. I mean, it’s not hideous or anything, I just think she could do so much better.

Leighton Meester in menswear-inspired Thom Browne… I actually don’t hate this. You’d think it would look completely dumb, but it doesn’t.

Natalie Portman in Lanvin for H&M…eh. She has a major case of bitch-face lately, and I feel like the dress is completely boring.

I also thought Winona Ryder’s Dolce & Gabbana dress was boring too – it looks like something she wore to a recent premiere.

Oh, I forgot about Anne Hathaway. Maybe I wanted to forget about her. I don’t care for this dress either.

And now for some man candy – my lovers Anthony Mackie, Vincent Cassel and Ethan Hawke were all there!

A little Paul Rudd and Mark Ruffalo to end it:

Photos courtesy of WENN.

These are photos from the London premiere (at the London Film Festival) of Conviction, that Hilary Swank film that is getting so much attention because of Gloria Allred and Hilary’s sketchy styling (seriously, I can’t believe I’m doing so many Hilary fashion posts). As for Hilary’s Donna Karan dress… well. I really, really liked it when I saw the thumbnail of it. That happens to me all the time – sometimes a dress looks really cute in the thumbnails, and then you see it blown up and look at the detailing and how it’s fitting on her body, and all of a sudden, the eye is no longer fooled. This is one of those times. It could have been a show-stopper dresser… but it’s just not… on Hilary. The fabric isn’t sitting right on her waist and hips, and the neck is much too high. I will give her points on hair and makeup though – this is the best she’s looked from the neck up in weeks.

Minnie Driver (who is in the film too) had the exact opposite effect. When I looked at the thumbnails, I thought this Marchesa dress was horrible. The necklace is not a necklace – it’s built into the dress. And the color could come across as just a shade too garish. And yet… it really works on her. The effect is really pretty. Okay, it’s a little pageanty. But pretty.

And of course, my lover Sam Rockwell was there. It’s like he knew what I wanted and he decided to give me a little present. His hair…okay, his hair is still questionable, but the scruffy little beard is giving me a fever, and he’s making some really sexy/hot/funny faces at the camera. So it’s a win for me. Okay, I hate the tie. It would look better on my wrists, ya know?

‘Conviction’ premiere in London, 10/15/2010. Credit: WENN.

Since you enjoyed yesterday’s Hilary Swank fashion post so much, here’s another one – Hilary wore Herve Leger on Tuesday night, to yet another screening of her film, Conviction. Though I don’t really love the dress, I applaud Hilary for somehow making vertical horizontal stripes look interesting and cute and even thinning. Hilary has a fashion problem, though. Her face is so angular, and her body is so tight – if she wears something super-structured, she fails, but if she wears something too loose and flowy, she fails too, I think. Anyway, I don’t hate or love the dress. It’s just there.

Meanwhile, Hilary is making some big news with this film. She just got a gift from publicity heaven – she’s now on Gloria Allred’s sh-tlist. And Ted Casablanca is asking – hand to God – if Hilary is a “thoughtless hag”. I kid you not. Here’s what is going down:

Hilary Swank: two-time Oscar winner…and thoughtless hag? The actress’s reputation is under attack today by none other than Gloria Allred, who is shocked—shocked!—that Swank didn’t even touch base with one of the real-life inspirations for her upcoming film, Conviction.

So what exactly is Allred’s latest beef? Seems Allred’s panties are in a bunch because she believes the actress should have had the courtesy to ring up the family of Katharina Brow, whose grisly killing is at the center of Conviction.

“We don’t think the burden should be on the murder victim’s family members on how to get in touch with Hollywood upon reading the murder victim’s going to be in a film,” said Allred. “The film’s producers, including Ms. Swank [who's listed as an executive producer] have never bothered to contact this family in the 10 years this film was made.”

Allred made the comments at a press conference today, two days before the film hits theaters, flanked by Brow’s son and daughter.

“This family has gone through a lot of pain and there’s no reason to feel they should suffer more,” said Allred. “They’re not going to profit from this film. If we’re talking about a murder we need to reach out to murder victims’ families. As far as I’m concerned that should be the new principle in Hollywood.”

“My mother was not just a name and was not and is not a person who should be used as a line in the script or just a way to make a profit in the entertainment industry,” Melrose Brow added. “She was just a human being and a member of our family.”

Allred says she plans on sending a letter to Swank via her agent (“because that’s the only way we know how to contact her”) on behalf of Brow’s now grown-up children, Charlie and Melrose, demanding a face-to-face meeting.

“They need and deserve to receive answers to many questions they have,” said Allred, adding that she wants the family to get a private screening to avoid having to re-live the incident in a theater surrounded by the popcorn-munching masses.

Specifically, the family wants to know: if their mom’s murder be seen on screen; how will she be depicted (as “the loving mother and grandmother that she was?”) and whether the filmmakers will earmark any of the profits to find the real killer.

While the public has yet to see Conviction, there have been several advanced screenings, so perhaps we here at E! can try and help clear up at least one mystery for the family.

Conviction opens in Brow’s home and we see details of the crime scene, specifically shots of blood, but viewers don’t see the actual slaying. At that point, the movie flashes forward two years to Kenneth Waters (Sam Rockwell), the man wrongly accused of the murder. Swank plays his sister, Betty Anne Waters, who eventually gets a law degree and helps prove her sibling’s innocence.

It’s that story that’s the focus of the movie and not the Brows’ tribulations, though during the end credits, a title card notes that the real killer has yet to be found. So far, reps for Swank and Fox Searchlight, the studio distributing Conviction, have decided not to take Allred’s bait.

[From E! New]

I’m a big believer in “Son of Sam” laws, which are basically laws that ensure that violent criminals cannot in any way profit from their crimes. Like, someone convicted of murder can’t write a book from prison and have it published for profit. However, that doesn’t really seem like the case here – this film is about a man’s wrongful conviction of the murder, not about the murder victim. Maybe Hilary should have met with the victim’s family – but the man who sat in prison for a crime he didn’t commit is a victim too, Ms. Allred. Team Hilary on this one.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

These are pics of Hilary Swank at last night’s screening of Conviction (promoted by The Innocence Project), the film I keep hearing about but have no interest in seeing. First, what I like: the color is gorgeous, the top half of the dress is very beautiful, and it compliments Hilary’s long neck and larger bust. I also like that she styled her hair down – she doesn’t look quite as horsey when she wears it down. The bottom half of the dress… well… I hate it. It’s cut too high, and there are a couple of photos where I swear I saw a flash of something vagina-esque. I also f-cking hate the shoes. Just standing alone, I would find them tacky, but they’re WAY too matchy-matchy with the dress. But overall, the whole effect of this is… not horrible. Not great either.

The screening wasn’t all gladiator heels and vadge-flashes, though. Sam Rockwell was there. He’s been my main crush this week. I always love a dose of Rockwell with my steady diet of Gerard and Clive and Gandy… but ever since I saw Iron Man 2, I can’t get him out of my head this week. He’s always so good when he gets to play smarmy! To me, his preening, incompetent bureaucrat-CEO was a better (and more realistic) villain than Mickey Rourke. I have no clue what’s going on with his hair, though. This hair is making him look ratty. To make up for this horrible photo of him, I’m adding some extra photos from the past month:

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Here are the photos from last night’s big Conviction premiere. Some are claiming that Hilary is going to get another Oscar nomination for her portrayal as a working-class mom who puts herself through law school to represent her wrongfully imprisoned brother. I think the movie looks tough… and slightly boring. But Hilary is doing what she does best – straight dramas where she portrays someone working-class and tough, yet vulnerable. That’s what has won her two Best Actress Oscars (eye roll). Anyway, I don’t really care about that, I care about the fashion. I find this dress on Hilary to be rather uneventful – it shows off her great figure, but it isn’t really sexy or special or anything. What is amazingly awful is Hilary’s styling, though. Check out this ungodly combination of cheesy 80s makeup and an unflattering hairstyle:

Seriously, Hilary? You’re going to put metallic blue eyeliner/shadow on your bottom lid? And then you’re going to pull your hair back so tightly that all we can see is “horsey”?

Hilary’s costar Juliette Lewis looked really cute though – except for the shoes. She always gets one thing wrong.

I liked Minnie Driver’s look too! The dress is weird, but she kind of pulls it off.

And my lover Sam Rockwell. I just saw Iron Man 2 over the weekend, and Sam was one of the best parts of it. He’s so delicious as a weasel! He looks hot here. I would hit like a house on fire.

Photos courtesy of Fame.

I knew when I saw photos of Hilary Swank in a bikini last week that she was gearing up to promote something. Sometimes the timing is a little too “on the nose” especially when it’s a celebrity who rarely gets pap’d. Such is the case with Hilary Swank, who has begun the long, slow descent into being in my “She Plucks My Last Nerve” category. Yes, I think she’s a talented actress – not “two Best Actress Oscars in five years” kind of talented, but she’s got limited chops. Bless her heart, she can never pull off the romantic lead, EVER. And it hurts when she tries. Anyway, Hilary is promoting Conviction, which has a “limited release” in October, and The Resident, which doesn’t even have a release date. Somehow, that was enough to get her the September cover of InStyle.

Thankfully, it doesn’t look like Hilary is talking endlessly about her boyfriend’s son, like she seemed to be doing last year in interview after interview, even talking about how she was constantly naked in front of the then 6-year-old. Instead, Hilary talks about if and when she’ll have a baby, and how her 14-year-marriage to Chad Lowe was a “success”:

Children and marriage aren’t in Hilary Swank and boyfriend John Campisi’s immediate future – but they’ll happen when they should because, according to the actress, timing is everything.

“I believe in the sanctity of marriage. John and I, you know, we were both in long marriages and it’s not something that we need to rush back into,” the double Oscar winner, 36, tells September’s InStyle, on newsstands Friday, about her agent-beau of nearly four years.

The same goes for starting a family together. Already a mom-figure in Campisi’s son’s life, Swank says that although she’s thought about having kids “since a really young age,” she’ll wait until “the time is right.”

Even though the Oscar winner may have gone through a painful breakup with Chad Lowe, she only sees the positives in their split.

“A lot of people look at divorce as a failure. I really look at my relationship with Chad as 14 years of success,” she says about her ex, with whom she separated in January 2006. “I will carry him in my heart forever. He’s a part of me.”

“Friends of mine and I talk about this. Does someone come into your life for a certain time, and then you are supposed to go your separate ways?” she asks. “There’s a part of me that thinks that’s true.”

There are friendships, Swank says, “that we grow out of. But I believe in the long haul. I believe in having a monogamous relationship.”

[From People]

Well, she sounds like she’s in a good place in her relationship, and she’s still getting work, so God bless. She’s not harmful, really. She just annoys me. Oh, and does anyone else think that Hilary is just talking about how stable she and her boyfriend John Campisi and how “monogamous” they are because she allegedly homewrecked his marriage?

InStyle cover and additional photo (by photographer Michelangelo Di Battista) courtesy of InStyle online.