Does that image above look like Britney Spears at all? Like if you just saw this photo on its own, would you realize who it was supposed to be? I’m not sure I would. On the December issue of Lucky Magazine, Britney looks like a different person, and she’s obviously wearing a really cheap wig that’s giving her Teresa Giudice’s hairline. Someone Photoshopped the features on Britney’s face so much we can’t recognize her, and one of her eyes looks bigger than the other, right? Well Lucky Magazine may realize that their Photoshop artist did a hack job on Britney, and they received enough negative feedback about it that they’ve actually apologized, via Twitter. This is surprising. Here’s what they wrote:

Thank you all for sharing your thoughts on our cover! As always, we will share with our team and we’re sorry to have let some of you down.

That was a decent way to handle it. They stayed detached and upbeat, but acknowledged they made a mistake. As for the interview itself, it wasn’t super interesting, but Britney did give some nice quotes. She said her fiance, Jason Trawick, is cool with her sitting around in her sweats when she’s not working. We’ve seen her casual looks when she does go outside, it’s got to be similar when she’s at home. She also said she loves makeup and that she hate socks. Remember when she went around wearing the same boots for a whole season?

On the perks of being a mega-star and the woes of having zits: “I get, like, these giant boxes of lip gloss and nail polish, and it’s like candy.” Not that she actually wears all of it. “I really just wear mascara all the time. And powder, because I have zits.”

On what set fiancé Jason Trawick, apart from her other boyfriends (and two husbands): “He was sweet.” For example: “He says he doesn’t mind that I sit around in sweats all the time.”

On how her two sons react to her being, well, Britney Spears: “They’re in the middle right now of trying to figure it out. They try to figure out where I go when I go to film X Factor. They’re like, ‘Mommy’s going off to be a superhero.’ and then I get back, and they just see me as Mommy. And then when I’m back working on the show, they say, ‘Oh, Mommy’s a superhero again!’”

On how she occupies her time when she’s not being ‘Britney the Icon’: “I work out. I swim. I play with the kids, I cook and I garden. We play Connect Four. We play Candy Land. Last night we read The Night Pirates.”

On dealing with her haters: “It’s just something that you get used to in this business.”

On the number of shoes in her closet: With a terrified look, the mag reports, Spears says, “I don’t know. A lot.” When pressed, she stammers, “I don’t know, 50.” She quickly responds, “Is that not enough?” (Our answer: No, Brit-Brit, you can never have enough shoes!)

On her current fashion obsession: “Big, stupid earrings, like with loops and feathers.”

On the item you won’t catch her wearing: “I never wear socks. I hate socks.”

On her fashion icons: She calls Jennifer Lopez, “A classic beauty,” and of Sarah Jessica Parker, she says, “Her looks are really bright and funky and young.”

[Lucky via USA Today]

Britney came across as kind of goofy and trying to be nice here, which is not the same impression I get from her on X-Factor. I haven’t been keeping up with it, but she seems a little ruthless on that show and very blunt. She seems to be holding her own for now, although we’ve heard rumors that she’s had trouble, especially in the beginning, and that producers are considering putting in a longer than usual time delay in case she has any problems during the live episodes. That could just be hype for the show, though.

As for the photo shoot, this is ridiculous. Apart from the bad photoshop job and the wig slipping down on her head, she’s wearing some very girlish clothing and posing like a kid. It’s bad all around.

A few days ago, Women’s Wear Daily (WWD) broke the epic political news that Pres. Barack Obama had given an exclusive interview to… Glamour Magazine! The editor-in-chief of Glamour, Cindi Leive, had flown to Portland, Oregon in the middle of Obama’s campaigning to interview the president herself. This, of course, is the biggest, most gigantic political scandal ever. Conservatives and Washington media types (“media elites,” I almost wrote) are really angry that the leader of the free world would sit down with a glossy fashion magazine! And I’m sure they were equally pissed off when George W. Bush sat down for an interview with Glamour in 2008.

GLAMOUR GETS TIME WITH O: Add Glamour magazine to the list of nonpolitical publications that have scored an interview with President Barack Obama.

Editor in chief Cindi Leive flew to Portland, Ore., last month to sit down with the President for an interview that will appear in the magazine’s November issue. It is not the first time Obama has sat down with Glamour — he did so in 2008, along with John McCain — but it is his first time as a sitting president.

A woman’s magazine like Glamour would not traditionally be in play for an interview with the President — first ladies have been more their turf — but agreeing to the interview is a mark of changing media strategies. The Obama campaign has recently been exploring alternative news outlets to press their message — ESPN Magazine, People magazine and Entertainment Tonight have all scored interviews, much to the dismay of the White House press corps, who have not enjoyed the usual privilege of questioning the President since Aug. 19. Stephanie Cutter, a spokeswoman for the campaign, described these outlets as being “equally important” to traditional political media.

Glamour pitched them on a big audience, said Washington editor Linda Kramer Jenning. “There’s a lot of attention being paid to young, women voters,” Jenning said. “That’s the calling card that opens the door.” It took five months to lock down some face time.

Jenning said Leive asked the President about women’s health care, among other topics, even though the interview took place before the recent uproar over the antediluvian comments about rape by Missouri congressman Todd Akin.

The Obama interview is not the extent of Glamour’s political coverage. Like other magazines, it is sending staffers to report from both political conventions, with the Republicans beginning [this week]. All and all, 15,000 credentialed media are expected at each event. Tina Brown buddy Martin Amis is traveling to Tampa as part of Newsweek’s six-person team to cover the RNC; the same number is at the DNC, minus the novelist. Esquire is sending five staffers to Tampa and four to Charlotte to report for both its political blog and the magazine; contributing editor Charles Pierce is working both events, while writer at large Tom Junod is going only to Charlotte. GQ is sending a team of four, including senior editor Mark Lotto. Marie Claire editor in chief Joanna Coles is moderating a panel — on women’s leadership, natch — and Seventeen has asked six teenagers to blog for its relaunched Electionista blog.

Jenning, who’s been covering the conventions for Glamour for four years, wants to share with the magazine’s readers “what it’s like to be there.” Sometimes, she’s also just looking at the fashion. “There are more pearls at the Republican convention.”

[From WWD]

On one side, I can see why the White House press corps would be pissed off that Obama isn’t giving them enough access (during an election cycle, which seems weird) all while reaching out beyond the Washington “echo chamber” to less political media outlets. But the bulk of the criticism is ridiculous, sexist and hypocritical, in my opinion – why wouldn’t the POTUS (any POTUS) want to reach out and speak directly to women? Sure, the president should give interviews with Meet the Press and Face the Nation and 60 Minutes. But I think it’s smart for Pres. Obama (and any politician) to reach beyond the traditional news outlets. Glamour Mag has an average circulation of 2.3 million, and my guess is that not many of those women watch Meet the Press (no disrespect, I haven’t watched Meet the Press in a few years too). And Pres. Obama has made it clear that he’s actively seeking the women’s vote. Why NOT give interviews to fashion, health and beauty magazines? Or, put another way, why isn’t Mitt Romney also giving interviews to women’s magazines? Or is Romney content to let Todd “Legitimate Rape Won’t Get A Lady Pregnant” Akin speak for the GOP’s platform on women’s issues?

Photos courtesy of WENN.

There’s a lot of rejoicing over this story that Seventeen Magazine has responded to a plea by an eighth grade girl to stop Photoshopping the young women in their magazine. A girl named Julia Bluhm started a petition at Change.org asking Seventeen to commit to presenting just one photo spread a month without Photoshopping. Seventeen’s editor in chief responded by issuing a statement they would not change girls’ faces or bodies in the entire magazine, and that they never have. I’m not really buying that and think that it depends on your definition of “change,” but good for them for taking this seriously and making a commitment to boost positive images of girls. Seventeen’s editor also says that they’re committed to representing all types of “beauty” in the magazine, including “body types, skin tones, heights and hair textures.” Here’s more:

Seventeen magazine, which in recent months has been inundated by pleas from teenage girls to publish photographs of models that don’t look touched up, said on Tuesday that it would be more transparent about its photo shoots and promised to “celebrate every kind of beauty.”

Ann Shoket, the magazine’s editor in chief, wrote in the editor’s letter in the August issue that the magazine had drafted what it called a Body Peace Treaty, after she heard from girls “who were concerned that we’d strayed from our promise to show real girls as they really are.”

She said the entire staff signed the eight-point pact, in which the magazine promises that it will “never change girls’ body or face shapes” and will include only images of “real girls and models who are healthy.”

It also said it would provide more transparency about its photo shoots by posting images of the shoots on the magazine’s Tumblr blog so readers could see the progression of the pictures.

The retouching of photographs to improve a subject’s appearance has long been a source of debate and anguish in the magazine industry. Editors often speak of balancing the pressures of presenting authentic photographs while also showing subjects in a way that can attract and inspire readers.

The policy points outlined by Seventeen represent a victory for young women who have been encouraging the magazine to present more realistic images of women. Their views became widely known through an online petition started by Julia Bluhm, a 14-year-old from Waterville, Me., who blogged about her frustration with how many girls in her ballet class were complaining that they were fat.

“While we work hard behind the scenes to make sure we’re being authentic, your notes made me realize that it was time for us to be more public about our commitment,” Ms. Shoket wrote in her letter to readers.

She also included an example of “what really changes” in photo shoots by showing a photograph of a model before and after the image was altered. Seventeen’s photo editors removed some flyaway hairs, a bra strap, a fold that made the model’s blouse look untucked and an altered background. Ms. Shoket described them as “a few messy details — cleaned up.” She added “Her gorgeous smile — totally authentic!”

The campaign to bring about changes in Seventeen began on April 19, when Ms. Bluhm started the online petition using Change.org, asking Seventeen to print one unaltered photo in its magazine each month.

The results were striking. Within days, Ms. Bluhm had 25,000 signatures. Ms. Shoket invited Ms. Bluhm and her mother to visit Seventeen’s offices in late April for a talk.

Ms. Bluhm’s supporters were quick to share their stories of how altered photos made them feel. Annette Okonofua, a woman who signed the petition, wrote: “I know that most of these girls on magazine covers are photoshopped, airbrushed and edited but yet, when you’re looking at those photos physically, you can’t help but think, ‘Wow. I wish I looked like that.’ ”

By Tuesday morning, the petition had attracted 84,168 signatures. And Ms. Bluhm reacted enthusiastically to news of the magazine’s policy statement.

“Seventeen listened!” Ms. Bluhm wrote on her petition page, under the headline “How We Won.” “They’re saying they won’t use Photoshop to digitally alter their models! This is a huge victory, and I’m so unbelievably happy.”

“It’s even more than what we asked,” said Ms. Bluhm in her lunchtime break at ballet camp. “The important thing is they agreed to do what we asked them to do. However they want to say it in their magazine is O.K.,” she said.

It’s still unclear how these pledges will change Seventeen’s actual content. Ms. Shoket stressed in her letter that the magazine’s editors “never have, never will” change girls’ body or face shapes.

Shareeza Bhola, a spokeswoman for Change.org, she was pleased that Seventeen was giving readers “a new level of transparency on photo shoots that they’ve never had before and a companywide commitment to diverse representations of young women.” She added that Seventeen would be watched closely over the next six months to make sure it keeps its promises.

In outlining its initiative, the magazine said it had worked with groups like the National Eating Disorders Association.

[From Blogs.NYTimes.com]

That’s incredible, and it really shows Seventeen’s commitment to this cause. I’m impressed that they brought Bluhm and her mom to their office within just a few weeks after she started the petition. I spent a little time on their website, and they’ve had this “body peace” movement, which involves advice for girls on self esteem and body image, since 2007. They also have a “Body Peace Treaty” which is different from the excerpt above, in which they invite readers to sign a pledge with statements celebrating their current shape and place in life. An example: “Not let my size define me. It’s far better to focus on how awesome I look in my jeans than the number on the tag.” I actually felt better about myself after I read all that, really!

Inspired by the changes at Seventeen Magazine, two teenagers from New York have created a petition asking Teen Vogue to make the same commitment to presenting girls that are not Photoshopped. In May, Vogue proper banned models that are “under 16 or who appear to have an eating disorder.” Getting even the Teen version of Vogue to stop Photoshopping seems very unlikely, but at least people are trying.

This image is from Seventeen.Tumblr.com

Are you guys watching “Ringer”? I’ve heard mixed reviews for it, like it’s supposed to be super cheesy but soapy and fun. Sarah Michelle Gellar is enjoying a comeback of sorts with the show, and she has a large loyal fanbase from “Buffy.” The 34 year-old mother of one is on the cover of Self’s December issue looking hot in a little gold sequin mini and off the shoulder sweater. She tells Self that she doesn’t own a scale, that she doesn’t believe in weighing herself at all and just goes by how her clothes fit. She exercises and eat healthy though, and also tries to buy fresh food every day with her husband, Freddie Prinze, Jr.

On working out
I still work out, but not five days a week. I do Pilates, I run on the treadmill, I walk to the soundstage rather than taking the cart. I wish I could say I was in the best shape of my life right now, but I don’t put the same pressure on myself that I used to. So I don’t rock a bikini on Wilshire Boulevard — but I don’t know many people who do!

On not owning a scale
You can’t live your life by the scale. We don’t even have one in our house. I’ve never believed in them, because your weight fluctuates. It’s more about how my clothing fits than a number. Besides, if you deny yourself everything because you’re so focused on the mirror or the scale, then when do you get to enjoy life?”

On being judged by her weight
If you wear one bulky sweater, you’re pregnant or you’re fat. When you’re 5-foot-4 like me, any weight gain can look like a lot. People dissect you for 2 pounds. That can be incredibly difficult, but I don’t take it as personally anymore.

I care only that I’m healthy. Besides, I’m not an actor who is known for her body necessarily. I hope I have a few other things going for me!

On having cake when she wants
Every weekend we’re at two or three parties. Now I’m not going to eat the cake at every one, but when it is homemade or looks particularly good, I’ll indulge.

Really, how is eating a piece of cake bad? Being bad is murdering someone. That’s bad. Don’t do that.

On unplugging
Everybody is on text and Twitter. People don’t have conversations. I turn off my iPhone every evening, and my games aren’t on it. I keep my games only on my iPad, so I don’t have to hear the buzzing of Words With Friends all the time.

On not googling herself
I never Google myself. There has to be something better I can be doing than reading about myself!

On being a mom to 2 year-old Charlotte
Charlotte is my best friend and any free time I have, I want to spend with her. But … I can’t define myself as only Charlotte’s mother — one day she’s going to be an adult, and then where am I?

On her relationship with her husband
Freddie and I get our time together, too. Relationships are like flowers: They need attention to grow and develop.

On shopping every day and clipping coupons
People think it’s so expensive to eat like that, but there are ways to do it so it’s not as pricey. We shop at Whole Foods, but we ask which fish is on sale.”

And I clip coupons all the time. Why should you pay for something that someone else is paying less for?

[Self online and via US Weekly, People]

I can’t relate to not using a scale because I usually weigh myself every morning and then I write it down in a little book. This may sound obsessive to some of you, and I know that a lot of diet plans, like Weight Watchers, recommend that you weigh in just once a week because you can get frustrated by the daily changes. For me, though, I need to know that I’m on track and weighing myself is my way of doing that. When you see those numbers go up, you are motivated to rein it in. By the time my clothes start getting tight, that feels too late, you know? Other people have different relationships with food though.

Anyway Gellar also told Health Magazine a couple of months ago that she never looks in mirrors and probably has body dysmorphic disorder. So she may not be stepping on a scale or even looking in the mirror but she’s looking amazing by everyone else’s estimate. She also seems really candid and down to earth. I love that she’s still with Freddie Prinze, Jr. Can you belive that they’ve been married for 9 years!

These photos are from Self, where there are more. Cover image via glamorous-smg.com.

Whenever we run photos of Alex Skarsgard, there are always a few of you who say he doesn’t do it for you. That’s fine, you know, it takes all kinds and that just means there’s more to go around for the rest of us. I personally don’t get the Fassbender love that Kaiser and Bedhead have. I mean I wouldn’t kick him out of bed or anything but he’s not my type. That’s part of the reason I’m surprised that Kaiser has so much love for Alex Skarsgard. He’s not her type, I wouldn’t think, in that he’s so angelically lovely. (She likes ‘em a little rough around the edges.) The guy is perfection on a tall perfectly toned… stick.

So here we have Alex for German GQ Style’s Fall/Winter issue and in September’s InStyle adding so much joy and meaning to hump day. He does look like a typically gorgeous male model, but to me he’s also a man of substance. Yes I’m overstating my case, but he just seems so nice, normal and humble in interviews. He does have poor taste in women, so we know he’s not perfect.

Skars is blowing up the newsstand this coming month. He’s also on the covers of Wonderland (along with Kiki Dunst) and Blackbook (along with his ex and upcoming co-star, Kate Bosworth.) I doubt that his parts in Straw Dogs or that Battleship movie are going to be breakout roles for him, but it’s still nice to see him get so much exposure. He’s a talented actor and oh-so-easy on the eyes.

[some photos via ONTD]

This week’s OK! Magazine has the news that Britney Spears’ turned down a live radio interview with Carson Daly and refused to do anything unless it was pre-recorded and pre-approved. This seems to be supported by her print “interviews” to date and her recent appearance on Jimmy Kimmel, where she did two pretaped segments and no interview. She also made a quick appearance on the Kids’ Choice Awards where she got grossed out by Jack Black’s Kung Fu Panda character eating some noodles, but that was obviously also pretaped as I didn’t even see her in the audience or on the red carpet.

As we’ve seen from her stints on How I Met Your Mother and Will & Grace, Britney is a passable actress but we also know she has a hard time with live interviews. (Remember when she chomped gum, cried and got defensive with Matt Lauer in 2006?) Judging from her print interviews it’s doubtful that they’re conducted in person or that she even partially writes the answers herself. Kaiser covered her US Weekly “25 Things You Don’t Know About” article and noted that it was like someone was trying to sound like Britney but was just slightly off.

Her people are working hard to make us forget the past few years, and to present Britney as this devoted mom in a steady relationship. She’s on the cover of US Weekly (with a lovely photo, she’s so pretty when she’s styled) and an accompanying “interview.” It’s all so predictable and packaged. It also includes some adorable pictures of Britney with her boyfriend, Jason Trawick, and her boys. Here’s some of what Britney “said” and given her past interviews it’s clear she’s not actually saying this. They don’t even use the pretense of describing where they met her or what she’s wearing so I’m guessing this interview was conducted via e-mail, like some of her other recent interviews.

Congratulations on Femme Fatale! How did making this record compare to making your first, Baby One More Time?
I’m at such a different point in my life now than I was back then. I’m more mature and much more hands-on now. I know exactly what I like and what I don’t like. I guess that can make the recording process difficult, because I’m very particularl about songs I put my voice on.

You’re a parent now too. How has motherhood changed you?
It really puts life into perspective. You have to think about all your decisions so much more carefully, because they are affecting your kids too. My priorities have changed, and I do everything for [the boys]. They remind me what life is all about.

Tell us about Preston and Jayden
Jayden is the youngest, and he might be the mama’s boy. He’s very outgoing, always making us laugh, and he’s very creative. Preston is definitely the big brother. He’s very independent. He’s really, really smart and thinks everything through.

What are they into these days?
Their new favorite thing is dressing up as different superheroes, and they’re just so cute! They especially love Batman and Spiderman. We love watching Disney movies together. I also love reading them Fancy Nancy books [a children's series by Jane O'Connor and Robin Priess Glasser] before bed…

What’s your parenting style? And what about Jason’s?
With some things I’m strict, and with other things I’m easygoing. I guess I’m right in the middle. Jason is just amazing with the boys. They look up to him so much – they adore him. He’s their hero.

What else do you love about Jason?
We have such a great time together! He makes me laugh, and we are so comfortable being ourselves. We like to stay home, order in, watch movies, go to dinner with friends. And we love getting away for the weekend. Some of our favorite spots are Las Vegas, Hawaii or Mexico.

Do you see yourself getting married again?
Maybe. Never say never!

[From US Weekly, print edition, April 18, 2011]

Does that even sound like Britney? You would think they would make more of an effort to make it sound casual. I get that she needs to be rolled out as “Britney 2.0: sane and better than ever,” and she seems to have made a big improvement, but I don’t think these staged articles are fooling anyone. She’s still lip syncing and kind of strutting around the stage and she just doesn’t seem into it. We’ve seen her struggle with fame, the paparazzi and with bathing before she leaves the house. I really want Britney to be happy and content in her life. I just get the feeling that she’d rather be doing something else instead of touring and putting out another album. It’s all she knows though, and she has a lot of people on the payroll depending on her.

Here’s are photos of Britney performing on Jimmy Kimmel on 3/29/11. Credit: WENN.com

I love some Matthew McConaughey, and I usually find him kind of fascinating, like he has this real joy for life and talks in parables. In the latest issue of Esquire, for which Matt is the cover boy, he comes across like a poser, though. He’s like one of those guys in college who thinks he’s the first dude to backpack around Europe and you just have to try it, or you haven’t lived. Only Europe is too good for Matty, he had to go to South American to challenge himself since they have modern conveniences in Europe. It became clear to me after reading a few paragraphs that this wasn’t the McConaughey I loved, though, it was some insecure journalist’s opinion of him.

In this Esquire story, McConaughey is so hospitable and accommodating. He invites the journalist to his spend a couple days with him, to go golfing, to attend a party at his house and to stay overnight on the property in one of his Airstream trailers. Only the journalist kind of sh*ts all over everything and comes across as insecure and out of his element. He portrays McConaughey as a caricature of himself and kind of mocks him. It’s hard to portray in a few segments, because it’s the overall tone of the piece.

Here are some excerpts, and I would encourage you to read the whole thing to get a better picture of what’s going on if you’re interested:

The journalist on McConaughey’s vernacular
Over the weekend he refers to six things as “nectar” — a steak, the wine, the company of his older dog, a hat he found for his two-year-old son, the arrival of his final set of friends, and that one golf shot. Broadly speaking, nectar is good.

McConaughey on his trip to Peru
When things are going right in a golf cart, familiarity builds. And so I ask him the question that is sometimes awkward: why he took time off from making movies. I’m inquiring about the previous two years, before this most recent comeback, but McConaughey goes straight to his own question. The last two years don’t seem to be any of my business.

“I’ve done that before,” he says. “I went to Peru after A Time to Kill. I had a lot to think about. Just grabbed a bag and left. And I went up and further in, until I was about as uncomfortable and unfamiliar with things as I could be. You know why I don’t go to Europe for these trips? Because in Europe everything pretty much works, or it almost works. I mean, it’s almost what I’m used to. But Peru, Mali, Morocco? Nothing works. Nothing. So you have to give up on what you know. At least I do. And for a while it’s very uncomfortable. Extremely. I mean you’re faking the language as best you can, nodding at things you probably shouldn’t be, and you start to miss the things you know. And you need to eat.”

For the first time since we met, the truths pile themselves, emblematic but also pragmatic, hard-earned or maybe stolen from the lyrics of a pop song. I can’t tell yet. But he persists. “And I started to strip things down. I took off my hat and my ring, just this big old gold ring. I’d made it, melted down one of my dad’s old rings and mixed in some gold from I don’t know — one of my mother’s teeth I think. And this ring — big old M on it — I took it off. One morning I get up — Count of Montezuma, the whole bit, threw up, diarrhea, puked. It was a purge, man” — this word he enunciates precise as a birdcall — “and it was sick, but it was a spiritual cleanse, and after that I was high as a kite. I was able to look at all the stuff I’d stripped away and ask questions: What does that ring mean? What does my name mean? What do I make of that old American flag that’s sewn onto the hat I’ve been wearing for eighteen years? All these things that give me pride, what did they add up to?”

He was standing over a putt then, or he’d walked up onto the apron of the green, or he’d reached down to pull his ball from the hole — some golf gesture. I don’t remember; I was listening. “It all comes into balance between day nine and day thirteen,” he said.

“What happens then?”

“That’s about the point where I start to see I can survive. And all my discomfort just disappears and then I pretty much feel free to go home. I try to let the place own me. Then I can go home.”

On his partner, Camila Alves, and their new home
“Before this, I had a super home in the Hollywood Hills that I did by myself — landscaping, detailing pretty much everything. But that house was mine. And yeah, we coulda gone in there right away. Camila would have said, Fine, don’t change a thing. But I thought, I found the woman I wanna do it with, the woman I wanna make a family with, hopefully live our life out together. She needs to have 50 percent of that. I mean, it’s a lot easier for me to be at 100 percent. I’d always been 100 percent. It’s braver for me at 50 percent.”

McConaughey calls himself religious
“A friend of mine who’s a lawyer said something about me a couple of weeks ago, and it’s true. You know how that is? When a friend you’ve known a long time declares something about you and wham!” Here Matthew McConaughey snaps his fingers so loud it sounds like the cracking of a Lincoln Log. “I mean, you think, Hey, that’s true!” His voice drops. “Good friend,” he says. He speaks in many directions at once. “He said to me, Matthew, you’re into commas. Every time you think you’ve stopped, you always come out of it. Every time you think you’ve reached the end of that long dead-end street, you slip around the edge, past that stopping point, past the right angles. And I thought: Yes.” This is a word he hisses, almost every time, stretching it right into an invitation. “It’s all continuation! Even if you’re dying, that’s a kind of continuation, because you move on. And you have to change. Now, you lose something in your life, or you come into a conflict, and there’s gonna come a time that you’re gonna know: There was a reason for that. And at the end of your life, all the things you thought were periods, they turn out to be commas. There was never a full stop in any of it…”

McConaughey takes that fifth bite of rib eye, then sighs. “Listen,” he says, “I was thinking. Earlier, when I was talking about the commas, and the continuation? You might be tempted to call that ‘spiritual.’ ” He tilts his head, as if weighing the word. “But I think that description would be a dodge. I’m religious. I like that word. You can use it.”

So he’s hunched, quartered toward me, speaking softly, cheek full of rib eye, and he pretty much whispers, “Yes, you can look at the table and say you see spirituality. Fine. Friendship, love, reverence for one another” — he’s darting his eyes in various directions, so I get eye-blink camera shots: heads thrown back in laughter, glasses clinking, women striking a harmony, children climbing into the laps of their fathers. “And I can shake hands with that. Spiritual. It’s perfectly good. But what I see here is ligare.”

“Ligare.” I repeat the word to be sure I got it. I was taught by Jesuits. We’re in for some Latin here.

“It’s the root word of religion. It’s the Latin. Ligare. ‘To bind.’ ”

“So, re-ligare?”

McConaughey starts nodding. “To bind us together again,” he says. He gently pushes away his plate. “That’s how I read it, anyway,” he says. “That’s what I’m after. I’m religious. We are religious. You can say that.”

[From Esquire via Huffington Post]

Not everyone gets McConaughey, and not everyone thinks his way of talking isn’t some kind of affectation. That’s why McConaughey went out of his way to be accommodating, so that he would be portrayed well. Only he got someone who had already made up his mind about him. All the golf and hospitality in the world wouldn’t have made this guy write a positive profile.

Photos from Esquire

Matt Damon and Emily Blunt make joint appearances on the cover of Men and Women’s Health’s March issues to promote their upcoming film The Adjustment Bureau, out March 4. Matt was much thinner when he made that movie, as it was before he put on some sympathy pounds during his wife’s last pregnancy. (Or maybe he was gaining weight for his role in We Bought a Zoo.) Still, these covers seem so false to me, particularly Men’s Health, which Photoshopped him even thinner than Women’s Health. The dude has put on at least 20 pounds since these photos were taken and he’s hot either way (I would hit that like a house on fire) but he just doesn’t look like this anymore. I don’t think he even looked like that back then.

Anyway Matt and Emily talked about their rapport on set, and it sounds like they got along very well and were fast friends. Matt also made some choice comments comparing star vehicle movies to watching people masturbate. I just love him.

Matt on Emily’s acting abilities: “There are a lot of great actresses her age right now, but Emily is just f—king unbelievable.”

Emily on having fun with Matt: “I met Matt and he was lovely and very funny, and instantly, I thought, ‘Oh, we could be like teenage boys together. Just be weird and stupid and silly.’” Emily on getting in shape to play a ballet dancer: “I looked like an aerobics teacher. My shoulders puffed out, my back looked like there was a barrel of snakes in it and I had an eight-pack!”

Matt on movies that are just star vehicles: “That’s like watching someone jerk off, really. It’s just absolutely not at all interesting, and not something I want to spend any time doing.”

[From Men's Health via Popsugar]

I just re-watched the trailer for The Adjustment Bureau (below) and this movie looks so damn good! Damon is such a great actor and it comes through in everything he does. Blunt holds her own too. I can’t wait to see it.

I need to just point something out though – the Bourne movies became a star vehicle for Matt Damon, even if the first one wasn’t written for him specifically. It doesn’t matter though because there are plenty of us who would love to spend a couple of hours watching him jerk off.

Here are promotional photos of Matt and Emily in The Adjustment Bureau. I guess he was that thin. via Allmoviephoto.

*Click the image to see the enlarged cover.

After last year’s “pretty white girl” cover for Vanity Fair’s annual “Hollywood Issue”, the editors must have decided they needed some diversity. Thus, they made sure to put two actors of color on their fold-out cover. Well… one actor of color, and one mixed-race actress. It’s like VF is just placating their haters! Honestly, though, what pisses me off more than the consistent lack of diversity is the simple fact that Ryan Reynolds (ugh) and Jake Gyllenhaal (UGH) both made it to the front section of the fold-out. Seriously? Are those two considered the brightest of youngish actors? For real? Anne Hathaway and James Franco, I don’t have a problem with. Beyond those four, here are the rest of the people on the cover: Jennifer Lawrence, Anthony Mackie (yay!), Olivia Wilde, Jesse Eisenberg, Mila Kunis, Joseph Gordon Levitt, Andrew Garfield, Rashida Jones, Garrett Hedlund, and Noomi Rapace (YAY!)… with Robert Duvall in the back. I completely cosign Mila, Anthony Mackie, JGL, Andrew Garfield, Noomi, Jennifer Lawrence and Jesse Eisenberg (the last two are Oscar-nominated, after all). But Olivia Wilde? Rashida Jones? Garrett Hedlund? Ugh.

Anyway, VF hasn’t put up much of a preview, and there aren’t any good-quality photos from the portfolio hanging around, although there is this bad-quality image of Helena Bonham Carter as “The Changeling”.

Photos courtesy of Vanity Fair.

Huffington Post and several other sites are asking if a new fashion pictorial in Interview Magazine is racist. The photo spread features model Daria Werbowy (who is considered “The Next Gisele”) and is shot by photographer Mikael Jansson, a long-time contributer to Interview, and the photographer behind many ad campaigns, like Gap, H&M and Chloe. I’ll let HuffPo explain why this could be/probably is a racist photo shoot:

This Mikael Jansson-shot editorial titled “Let’s Get Lost” for Interview Magazine is provocative, without doubt, and really got us thinking about what exactly it means for Daria Werbowy to “lose” herself in a throng of black partygoers.

From the differences in their dress (Daria’s in ethereal, angel-like gowns, the others are in knits and leathers) to their body language (A limp yet super-sexual Daria is the main focus, the others feel almost like props), the whole spread has a rather racist vibe that we can’t get down with despite the gorgeous art direction of the spread. Don’t you agree?

After all, regardless of what some say, fashion is at its core a political and social product–how power relationships are set up in editorials can speak volumes. So while the super-sexy, ethno-traditional thing is very of the moment, it all seems to be setting up a 21st century colonial construct that makes us very uncomfortable. What do you think?

[From HuffPo]

You know what it reminds me of? That old Bill Pullman horror movie, The Serpent and the Rainbow, where Pullman plays an anthropologist studying Haitians, and the drugs that are given to some people that turn them into zombies. Daria looks like a drugged-out zombie, and the dark-skinned people look like they’re the ones who drugged her. Racist? Yes. But I’d put it more in the category of “just cheesy, inappropriate and stupid.”

Interview Magazine photos courtesy of HuffPo & Interview online.