This story is really bizarre, but lets just say that Camille Paglia has been losing her feminist touch over the years. A little while back, she took a swipe at Lady Gaga for not being sexy in the proper way and, instead, appearing “clinical and strangely antiseptic, so stripped of genuine eroticism.” Paglia then wrote a haphazard essay in which she blamed Taylor Swift and Katy Perry for the death of feminism, and in the same piece, she went on to declare that Rihanna was a wonderful, sparkling display of “authentic sizzling eroticism” and feminism. So I guess that Paglia has always had a bit of a hard on for Rihanna as “the pleasure principle incarnate.” Never mind that Rihanna is a pretty awful role model for young females after returning (time and time again) to the abusive Chris Brown.

Paglia wasn’t done with Rihanna though, and now she’s unleashed an even sketchier essay that basically says that Rihanna is the new Princess Diana. The comparisons made in this essay are absolutely absurd, but while Rihanna (with Cara Delevingne’s eyebrows in tow) was tumbling out of a nightclub in London on Saturday night (after the tragic debut of Rihanna’s fashion line), The Sunday Times was on its way to her hotel doorstep and newsstands throughout the world. The Times’ cover story? “The Princess and the Showgirl: Why Rihanna is the new Diana.” See if you can make sense of this nonsense (with reference photos here), and we’ll discuss below:

Rihanna is in love with the camera, and the camera is in love with her. Not since Diana rocketed from a shy, plump kindergarten aide to a lean, mean fashion machine has there been such a ravishingly seductive flirtation with the world press.

Like Diana, Rihanna has worryingly drifted into using photo ops to send messages of allure, defiance, or revenge in a turbulent relationship with an errant partner. Rihanna, another victim of a festering romantic triangle, has bounced dizzyingly back and forth in her checkered affair with rapper Chris Brown, who was convicted of a felony in 2009 for abusing her.

Diana’s anguished helplessness and isolation inside the royal family, with its stoical code of duty, led her to gravitate toward the ever-hovering paparazzi, whose global power as a media institution increased exponentially because of her popularity… The problem is that, in this era of social media, Rihanna in her fury of tainted love has tools ready to hand that Diana never dreamed of. Instagram, for example, a photo-sharing program with a palette of special-effects filters, allows Rihanna to send personal pictures to friend and foe in the blink of an eye, without the mediation of professional photographers. It is autobiography written by a volatile mix of impulse and mood…

The speed of Rihanna’s self-documentation from dawn to dusk accelerated in the months following her reunion with Brown last October. The climax was an extraordinary holiday melodrama during which Rihanna cooled her heels in a luxury rental in Barbados. Provocative photos of Rihanna lolling in skimpy beachwear followed forth, soon followed by darker shots of a morose Rihanna pacing a balcony, for all the world like Diana pining in lonely abandonment at the Taj Mahal…. the photograph is echoed 15 years later by the shot of Rihanna on her balcony in Barbados, in turmoil over her relationship with Chris Brown.

Some of Rihanna’s candid shots, particular the fireplace photos where she poses half-nude in a fur-lined jacket, have an atmospheric eroticism that is genuinely artistic and has not been seen in decades. Pr0nography today has become hard, plasticised and stereotypical, with a boring lack of intrigue and subtext. Rihanna’s impressive visual archive demonstrates that eroticism is a function of mental projection, not bust size…

Diana and Rihanna began as sensitive, wounded, but appealingly bubbly and good-natured provincial girls who slowly discovered their own photogenic virtuosity and began to conceptualize themselves as living sculpture for the lens. Both developed a false intimacy with photographers and the public and began to cannibalize themselves in their futile search for security in love. Diana, rebuffed, eventually accepted her exile. But Rihanna, in the classic syndrome of the battered woman, still pities and hopes to change and save her abuser…

[From The Sunday Times]

Now this is only an abridged version of the entire article (which is not available online), but did anyone else walk away from this wondering what the hell Paglia was smoking when she wrote this piece? Kaiser mentioned to me that Paglia once compared Paris Hilton to Diana at one point too, and sure enough, this comparison took place in the 2009 MTV documentary, Paris, Not France, in which Paglia can be heard saying that, like Di, Paris had “the ability to enchant the still camera.” Of course, the Paris bit only makes the Rihanna-Diana comparison more hilarious.

As for Rihanna, she’s (naturally) thrilled with the comparison and immediately tweeted her happiness as such: When your face is pic-stitched to Princess Diana’s on the cover of The Sunday Times…. I mean……. Just so happens I came home drunk to this in a pile of papers outside my hotel room! My lil Bajan behind.” Then Rihanna probably passed out drunk in (what she probably sees as) a fitting tribute to her life as Diana III.

As a side note, Hollywood Life says that Chris Brown and Karreuche Tran have been love-nesting in Houston while Rihanna’s been in London. Well, obviously.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN

Naomi Watts covers the February issue of Vogue Australia, and I think this is maybe one of her loveliest pictorials ever. Now, that being said, I can’t really recall many of Naomi’s magazine editorials ever making an impression on me either way. I actually don’t think she does a lot of magazine interviews and editorials…? So this is a special case, and it’s lovely. I like the floral background and I love the green Gucci gown on the cover. Beautiful.

Naomi appears on the cover for two projects – one, she’s promoting The Impossible, for which she will probably get a Best Actress Oscar nomination, and God knows, she might even be a major contender for the award too. She’s also talking a lot about her Princess Diana film, which as this point is only called Diana (it used to be Caught In Flight…?). That film doesn’t even have a US or UK release date yet, so God knows when it will come out. Anyway, Naomi spent a big chunk of this Vogue interview talking about Diana:

Playing Diana: ‘In the case of Diana, of course, there is a huge pressure to look right, to have good hair, to walk and speak like her. And I instantly thought “Oh no, I’m going to fail at that because the comparisons are going to be monumental”. I’m always interested in complicated women, in women who are full of contradictions: strength, vulnerability, success, loneliness and all those things. Diana exemplified that in major ways. She was a great mother, did a lot of things with AIDS charities and the landmines, and had an extraordinary life, but her life was filled with tragedy and, of course, ended in the most tragic way.’

Comparing her celebrity existence to Diana’s: ‘Most of the time I go completely under the radar but I do understand a little the pressure and how awful it must have been for her. She was properly isolated because of the media attention and, as a result, paranoid. She didn’t know who to trust and that is horrible. Such a lonely idea…a horrible way to live.’

On The Impossible: ‘It was definitely hard work but had it been on green screen, you wouldn’t have got the same feeling. I mean, we were in that pool, struggling to breathe. Of course, nothing to the extent to what the real people went through, but, nonetheless… I’m not even a strong swimmer. The pressure of The Impossible was huge because it is such a sensitive subject and needs to be told with a lot of truth.’

On living a normal life: “There is nothing that is going to stop me [living a normal life]. I won’t allow that. Sometimes we may be suddenly surrounded by 10 or 15 photographers on the school run and they just won’t get out of your face, but most of the time we’re fine and can get through it. I don’t want to be stuck in the house and send someone to fetch the children.”

On keeping a work-life balance: “You know, I want be able to do normal things. You can also add to the problem if you do the secretive thing, putting up the umbrellas and all that. It creates more allure that way. I think it’s better to go out with messy hair. They might write that I look tired or old or something but they are going to pick on something regardless.”

On tough criticism: “I got knockback after knockback at auditions. Just before ‘Mulholland Dr.’ my agent told me I was so intense I was freaking people out. She told me I was a brilliant actor but the feedback was that I made people feel uncomfortable because I was so nervous and intense. I just sat there and blubbed. My mum was staying in LA at the time and I went to her and said: ‘I just can’t do this. I’m not cut out for it.’ She just said: ‘Don’t believe a word people say about you. Forget them.’”

[From The Mail]

Is it weird that Naomi kind of gives me Jessica Chastain vibes? I mean that in a good way for the most part – I think both women try to be purposefully bland and noncontroversial in their personal lives, and I think both women are talented and intelligent and they take their work seriously. It’s funny to me that they’re probably going to be going against each other for Best Actress. Jessica, Naomi, Jennifer Lawrence… maybe Marion Cotillard or Rachel Weisz or Helen Mirren. If you had to choose between Naomi and Jessica, who would you pick?

Photos courtesy of Vogue Australia.

You know I’m old, right? Not super-old, but I’m definitely old enough to remember very specific details about Princess Diana and her death and the gigantic clusterf—k of blame, accusations and idiocy that followed that tragedy. I remember George Clooney coming out and blasting the hell out of the paparazzi/stalkarazzi culture. I remember for a brief moment, it seemed like the media was going to turn inward and have a frank discussion amongst itself about what was and was not appropriate. And I remember The Earl of Spencer, Diana’s brother, excoriating the press AND the monarchy for basically leaving his sister dangling in the wind post-divorce. I also remember how Diana managed her own press – at time brilliantly, and mostly to her advantage – and how SHE refused royal protection (because she correctly assumed her protection officers were selling information about her to the press). I also remember that Diana probably wouldn’t be dead today if Henri Paul hadn’t been drunk off his ass, or if Dodi Fayed hadn’t nonsensically wanted to leave the secure cocoon of the Hotel Ritz for his own apartment across town.

Basically, I remember a lot. I don’t go in for Diana conspiracy theories, but I will engage in the occasional “what ifs” of the circumstances of her death, and I try to be pragmatic about assigning blame. Was it the paparazzi’s fault? Partly. But it was also a drunk driver and a coked-up boyfriend and a princess who didn’t wear a seatbelt. It was also a royal protection service (and a royal staff system) that allowed payoffs and bribes for information, leading to well-earned mistrust and disloyalty, which left Diana feeling as if she could trust no one.

As I said… I’m old. Miley Cyrus is NOT old. Miley doesn’t know what the f—k she’s talking about. She decided to tweet out some nonsense about the paparazzo who was killed while photographing Justin Bieber’s car during a traffic stop. Miley tweeted this:

[Via Miley’s Twitter]

“Conscience” not “conscious”. And it’s not super-classy to just flat-out blame the paparazzo who thought it was super-cool to stand in the middle of the street talking photos (I’m not as angry at Miley for that one though). Mostly I’m just mad that Miley improperly invoked Diana’s death in a situation that doesn’t compare. And while you could make arguments for or against keeping a tighter rein on the paparazzi, Miley is definitely not the celebrity to make that case, you know?

Oh, and Justin Bieber issued a statement about the paparazzo’s death too, saying: “While I was not present nor directly involved with this tragic accident, my thoughts and prayers are with the family of the victim. Hopefully this tragedy will finally inspire meaningful legislation and whatever other necessary steps to protect the lives and safety of celebrities, police officers, innocent public bystanders, and the photographers themselves.” I still don’t really understand? There are already laws about traffic safety and all of that. Shouldn’t this be a call to ENFORCE existing laws?

Photos courtesy of WENN and Jlnphotography/wenn.

I really have to wonder if all of the speculation about Prince Harry’s “gigantic” scandal-to-come is just coming from my list of possible scandals. Not only did Radar report that Harry might have been in the room while cocaine was going around in his Las Vegas suite, now Radar claims that an actual coke dealer was probably partying in the suite too. And hookers. Did I bury the lead? Hookers were probably there too. Dude knows how to party, I’ll say that for him.

Hookers and a known cocaine dealer were in Prince Harry’s Las Vegas hotel room during his now infamous naked romp, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting. This new bombshell brings the Royal family scandal to a new level amid Radar’s report that the Prince’s wild night was caught on tape and piggyback’s the eyewitness account of party-goers doing drugs in Harry’s Wynn Hotel & Casino suite.

“A really good friend of mine is a cocaine dealer and texted me from the hotel room while the party was happening and said, ‘Guess where I am?!?’” a source exclusively told RadarOnline.com. “Turns out he was in the Wynn suite with Harry, his pals and all those girls.”

RadarOnline.com has confirmed that at least one of the women partying in Harry’s suite has been known to prostitute and accept money and gifts for sexual favors.

“My friend won’t give up any of the details about what happened in that hotel suite, including whether or not Harry was doing coke, but he was definitely there,” the source concluded.

[From Radar]

I really don’t mean to sound crude or like I’m making a gross generalization about Las Vegas women, but I think there are probably a lot of women in Vegas who “have been known to prostitute and accept money and gifts for sexual favors.” Vegas seems to encourage that kind of thing as part of their “big-spender packages” – a prince (like Harry) would get a nice suite, a private club cabana, and of course the hotel would send over some “complimentary girls” for his enjoyment. And even if that’s not what happened here, it could be that some girls who sometimes escort just decided to party with a prince.

Also – Radar reports that Prince Charles is already “over” his youngest son’s scandal:

Prince Harry has been told to forget about publicly apologizing for his naked photo scandal by his dad Prince Charles, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting. The 27-year-old ‘Party Prince,’ who planned on saying sorry for his Las Vegas hijinks has now been asked not to say anything in the hope the latest royal scandal blows over.

In a heart to heart with his son, Charles admitted he too got caught up in some embarrassing bad-boy behavior when he was the same age and that he accepts boys will be boys.

“Of all the royal family, Charles was the most accepting of Harry’s behavior,” a source revealed. “In his younger years he was just as much a playboy as Harry is now, so he’s more understanding when it comes to this sort of thing.”

Charles also believes that the sooner Harry joins his military unit in Afghanistan the sooner it will all be forgotten.

“While he told Harry to be a little more responsible, he didn’t chastise him because he didn’t think he did anything wrong,” the insider said. “Charles doesn’t believe there’s any need for a public apology and instead said to Harry he should go to Afghanistan as soon as he makes an appearance at the Paralympics and join his rank.

“The quicker he goes out there, the sooner this will all blow over,” the source said.

[From Radar]

Prince Charles is just thinking of himself – Charles was never really a “playboy”. He was in love with Camilla and they kept seeing each other even while she was married and before he even met Diana. That being said, Charles might have a point – most people in America and the UK seem to think Harry’s scandal is just a big “meh” in the grand scheme of things. Most people even seem to like him MORE now.

Meanwhile, today marks the 15th anniversary of Prince Diana’s death in Paris. Where were you? I still remember waking up and watching CNN. I remember everything about that week in which it felt like all of England stood still, mourning their princess. And the outpouring of grief from around the world… it was one of the most incredible moments I’ve ever lived through.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

I’m still not really seeing it. Are you? These are new photos from the new English set of Diana (formally Caught In Flight), the sketchy bio-pic of Princess Diana’s last year. Naomi Watts was cast as Diana, and while I think Naomi is a fine actress, and I think they could have cast this part with many sketchier choices, I still have concerns. Mainly, my concerns are about how low-budget this whole affair looks. If you go back and look at photos of Diana, she often looked very “dated” – very 1980s and almost dowdy (to our modern eyes). But Diana never looked CHEAP. And this production looks cheap. It looks budget and tacky and like everything is being done at the last minute. It looks like no one thought to spring for a really good Diana wig, or to get a hair stylist who was familiar with Diana’s signature styles. Naomi has gone from looking like she had a dilapidated, synthetic rug attached to her head, to this… I can’t even tell if this is a wiglet or if someone just did Naomi’s hair into an abbreviated “Farrah” style.

But, according to Naomi, Diana has given her permission for the role and for the film. Because Diana came to Naomi in a dream! Oh, Naomi. Bad move.

NAOMI Watts’ portrayal of Princess Diana has won the ultimate endorsement, the late royal bestowing her approval upon the Aussie actor in a dream.

“This is a first, but I find myself dreaming about her,” Watts told News Ltd on location outside of London. “I felt like I was spending time with her. One particular time, I felt that permission was granted.”

Watts’ upcoming film, simply called Diana, focuses on the former Princess of Wales life after her divorce from Charles, in particular her romance with Dr Hasnat Khan (played by Lost star Naveen Andrews). Watts, 43, was initially extremely hesitant to take on the role of “one of the most famous, if not the most famous, women of my time”.

“An awful lot of pressure comes with that, so you want to get it right,” she said. “I was dreading people saying `she looks nothing like Diana’, and `why her and not somebody else?’ But I couldn’t not do it.”

Watts’ transformation into the peoples’ princess has involved six weeks’ training with a dialogue coach, repeated viewings of Diana’s infamous interview with Martin Bashir, as well as four wigs and a prosthetic nose piece courtesy of the same make-up artist who years ago turned Meryl Streep into Lindy Chamberlain.

Watts also wears several Jacques Azagury dresses that belonged to Diana, while Versace custom-made a replica of the famous one-shouldered, blue silk dress that Diana wore to a benefit for Dr Victor Chang’s Cardiac Research Institute in Sydney in 1996.

Watts said she felt Dianas presence especially keenly when wearing her original gowns.

“Theres one particular Azagury dress that was completely unaltered. I was surprised how short she wore it, quite risque! There’s been a few eerie moments and that was one of them. There’s been moments of a presence felt.”

Director Oliver Hirschbiegel believes his leading lady has more than captured Diana’s essence.
“Its scary. Sometimes it’s as if you’re watching the ghost of Diana,” he said.

Diana’s children with Prince Charles, William and Harry, do not play a big part in the film, but Watts admits to worrying about how the princes will react.

“Were not trying to destroy any memory. We’re trying to show her in the best possible light as a human being, though, full of different layers. It’s a story that should be told. A piece of history. But its tricky because they are here, the boys. I think about that a lot.”

The royal family’s approval of the production has been implied, however, with permission granted to film outside the gates of Kensington Palace and in Kensington Gardens.

Though Watts is widely considered an Australian, the team behind Diana seem pained to assert they have an Englishwoman playing this most iconic of English women, as though having a colonial in the role would be bad for business. Watts diplomatically offered that her time spent out of the UK (she moved to Australia when she was 14) gives her a good perspective on the Diana story.

“I never wasn’t English. I was born here, I still have a British passport, but I’ve lived in Australia and I have Australian blood in me. Maybe being a little removed is a good thing.”

Diana will continue shooting in London until late August, then wrap with a week in Mozambique in late September. A release date is yet to be confirmed.

[From News.com.au]

Wait, what? They actually use some of Diana’s real clothes? And Naomi has a prosthetic nose? And the confirmation of the wigs. I cannot detect the prosthetic nose at all in these or any photos, which shows that the prosthetic is good, but it still doesn’t make her look anything like Diana. GAH, WIGLET. Maybe it’s just about the wigs.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

The header photo is the first promotional image of Naomi Watts in character as Princess Diana (or Diana, Princess of Wales for you anal retentives out there). As we discussed earlier this week, Naomi is filming Caught In Flight (now called simply Diana), the (mostly true) story of Diana’s years-long relationship with Hasnat Khan, and their breakup which led to Diana’s rebound relationship with Dodi Fayed. I’m also including some more paparazzi photos (at the end of the post) from the film shoot in Croatia. I have to say… continue to say, rather, that the production really should have gone the extra mile to find Naomi a better Diana wig. This thing looks a busted, repurposed Farrah Fawcett wig from the 1970s. It’s AWFUL. Anyway, here’s some addition information about the film:

With her blonde hair perfectly coiffed, a jewelled choker sitting around her neck and a plunging black dress highlighting her slim frame, there is certainly no confusion about which role Naomi Watts is taking in on her new movie.

In the first official picture from the upcoming movie about Princess Diana, Naomi takes on what was arguably the late princess’ trademark look. The official shot has emerged after it was announced that the movie, previously reported to be called Caught In Flight, will go by the title of just Diana.

Naomi appears to be completely flinging herself into the role after initially feeling apprehensive about taking the part. However, it seems the chance to work with German director Oliver Hirschbiegel, who is famous for his portrayal of the last days of Hitler in his bunker in Downfall, was too good to turn down.

The acclaimed filmmaker said that Naomi is ‘a truly exceptional actress’ who embodies ‘the warmth, humanity and empathy’ of the ‘global icon’ Princess Diana. And she was certainly working hard to make sure her performance at the nighttime dinner party scenes was note perfect. She was seen spending much of the day preparing, and was locked in discussions with Oliver about the best way to approach filming the important scenes.

The film is a particularly difficult balancing act, as it follows the last two years of the tragic royal’s life before her death in 1997. The film is thought to focus on her relationship with heart surgeon Dr Hasnat Khan and also looks at her time with Dodi Fayed, who she was with at the time she died. The movie will include her death, aged 36, in a car in a Paris tunnel in 1997 with Dodi.

Miss Watts, who at the start of her career starred in Australian daytime soap Home and Away, has admitted she is ‘absolutely terrified’ of playing the part of the princess. The Oscar-nominated actress has said of her controversial new role: ‘She is a part of our history, an incredible woman and fascinating but a tragic ending. The film-makers came to me and it’s a good script and it’s very scary and I kind of wanted to say “no” but I couldn’t.’

Miss Watts moved to London’s Kensington to prepare for the role and was said to have visited Diana’s favourite places -such as The Harbour Club and Beauchamp Place – as part of the preparations to get into character.

Filming of Diana comes after news that another movie about the tragic princess has been scrapped.
The Keith Allen-directed documentary Unlawful Killing, about the deaths of the British princess and her boyfriend Dodi Fayed in a Paris car crash in 1997, claimed the royal was murdered in an establishment plot involving her former father-in-law Prince Philip.

However, the movie, which was screened at both the Cannes Film Festival in France and the Galway Film Festival in Ireland in 2011, will not be released after producers failed to secure insurance to protect distributors against legal action.

Lawyers had warned there are 87 contentious allegations that would have to be cut before a British screening and although there were plans to release it in the US in August to coincide with the 15th anniversary of the deaths, the insurance was needed to protect the European offices of the distributors.

A spokesman for the movie said: ‘Unlawful Killing has been sold all around the world. But there was a specific form of insurance needed by the US distributors to cover them for their French and UK offices. This proved impossible to secure. The film has been withdrawn in perpetuity.’

[From The Mail]

I believe Naomi is a talented actress, and I think she’s capable of pulling off the Diana “role”. But I do have doubts about A) whether this particular Diana story should be told and B) Whether enough time has passed to do a Diana film without it blowing up in Naomi’s face. The wig isn’t inspiring confidence that this is a well-produced film, honestly. And I agree with some of our commenters – I kind of think they should have given Naomi a prosthetic Diana nose.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Here are the first photos (that I’ve seen) of Naomi Watts in character as Princess Diana, filming Caught In Flight. Thoughts? I’ve been staring at these photos for about ten minutes now, trying to form an opinion. I will say this – I knew immediately what the photos were when I first glanced at them. I knew it was an actress playing Princess Diana. So… that’s something, right? It’s good that the hair and makeup people are good enough that the Diana character is instantly recognizable, and that Naomi is doing a good “Diana-Eyes-Downcast” look. But… just a cursory glance through the pics, and you realize that it’s just Naomi Watts in an especially busted Diana wig. I’m sorry, Diana didn’t really do the “double Farrah” hair either – she did the “wings” sure, but was it ever double-paneled?

Anyway, I’m a bit worried about this movie. Thankfully, they haven’t screwed up the casting, like, I don’t know, hiring Nicole Kidman to play a 19-year-old Lady Diana Spencer or something along those lines. Jessica Chastain was originally cast as Diana (Diana circa 1995-96), but Jessica had scheduling problems and Naomi took over the role. Caught In Flight is about Diana’s last great love affair/relationship, the quiet, years-long relationship she had with a Pakistani doctor named Hasnat Kahn. Kahn had broken things off with Diana just a few months before her death – many believe Diana was just seeing Dodi Fayed as a way to make Hahn jealous. There are some reports that claim that this film is about Diana “stalking” Kahn, which… I don’t know. She was in love with him, they had a relationship for several years, and she was (reportedly) heartbroken when he ended things. I don’t know. I wish they were making a different Diana movie, because this one seems kind of rough.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Katie Couric managed to score one of the biggest “gets” for a journalist – she got exclusive interviews with Prince William and Prince Harry, both promoting their grandmother’s Golden Jubilee celebrations, which begin this coming weekend. I think the full ABC interview comes out tonight? Damn, I’ll have to remember to watch it. Anyway, People Magazine just got another excerpt from the interview – William talking about his mother, and how his wedding was “the one time since she’s died where I’ve . . . thought to myself it would be fantastic if she was here, and just how sad really for her, more than anything, not being able to see it.” Here’s more:

Despite the overabundance of dignitaries in attendance on his 2011 wedding day to Kate Middleton, there was one person missing, though very much on Prince William’s mind: his mother, Princess Diana.

“Very difficult” is how the prince recalls her absence that day, as he reveals during an ABC interview airing Tuesday night, as part of The Jubilee Queen with Katie Couric.

“I sort of prepared myself beforehand so that I was sort of mentally prepared … I didn’t want any wobbly lips or anything going on,” says William, 29. “It’s the one time since she’s died, where I’ve … thought to myself it would be fantastic if she was here, and just how sad really for her, more than anything, not being able to see it.”

Diana was killed in a Paris car crash in August 1997, when William was 15.

“I think she … she would have loved the day and I think, hopefully, she’d be very proud,” he tells Couric. “I’m just very sad that she’s never going to get a chance to meet Kate.”

Prince Harry, 27, also gets a chance to remark on his brother’s wedding day and what it would have meant to their mother.

“I think she had the best seat in the house, probably,” says Harry. “But yeah, she would have loved to have been there.”

[From People]

God, that is super-sad to think about. Diana would have loved to see William’s wedding. She would have had a lot to say about the planning of the wedding, and I think she would have had a lot to say about Kate Middleton too. We’ve played this “What if, what if” game before, to mixed results, though. I still think that had Diana lived and seen her boys grow into adult men, the women that Harry and William choose as girlfriends and wives would be a lot different.

Here are some of released videos we have of the Couric interviews. I enjoy the American tendency to completely overlook Prince Charles. Like, people (specifically Americans) act like William is going to inherit the throne after the Queen. Which won’t happen.

And here’s some video of Harry’s interview (I think Harry’s got the sexier voice, right?):

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN.

I have such mixed feelings about this casting choice. While I generally like Naomi Watts, I think she’s overhyped as an actress, and I get tired of people trying to make her “happen” as a lead actress. She’s pretty and talented, but there’s something so milquetoast about many of her performances post-Mulholland Drive. Naomi was just cast as Princess Diana in Caught in Flight, the bio-pic about the last two years of Diana’s life. I just… I don’t know. Jessica Chastain was originally cast as Diana, but she was either pushed out or she jumped out, and now Naomi is in there.

Naomi Watts will soon be morphing into the People’s Princess. The Oscar-nominated Australian actress, 43, has been cast as the late Princess Diana in Caught in Flight, an upcoming new biopic.

Directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel and written by Stephen Jeffreys, the film will focus on the last two years in the life of Prince William and Harry’s beloved mother; after famously divorcing Prince Charles, Diana reinvented herself as a global humanitarian and was on the path to self-fulfillment before she died at age 36 in an August 1997 car crash.

“It is such an honor to be able to play this iconic role,” Watts said in a statement. “Princess Diana was loved across the world and I look forward to rising to the challenge of playing her on screen.”

Last November, it was rumored that Oscar nominee Jessica Chastain (The Help, Tree of Life) was attached to Caught in Flight, which also focuses on Diana’s relationship with Dr. Hasnat Khan, said to be the love of her life.

Diana met Dr. Khan in 1995, and they embarked on a two-year affair — breaking up in 1997. Diana rebounded with billionaire Dodi Al-Fayed, who died with her in the tragic Paris car crash.

[From Us Weekly]

There’s a similar look to Naomi and Diana, and if this was just about aesthetics alone, I wouldn’t be too peeved. But is Naomi “light” enough to play Diana? Meaning that the last two years of Diana’s life were good for her – she was in love, she was rebranding herself, she was free of Charles – she’s was a spiritually “lighter” person. Naomi can only play “morose” and dark. I just went back and read the synopsis of the film, though – apparently, they’re going for “damaged”. Ugh. I’m worried about this film.

Vintage Diana – her last photo shoot with Mario Testino, still one of the best photo shoots ever.

Photos courtesy of WENN, archival Mario Testino images of Diana.

YIKES. I had no idea that various production companies and studios felt like it was okay to make movies about Princess Diana’s life now, but apparently there are several Princess Diana projects in various stages of pre-production. So how do you cast one of the most famous women EVER, in the history of the world? Much like the Grace Kelly project, I would imagine that producers created a master list of blondes who have a passing resemblance to Diana: Charlize, January Jones, La Blanchett, perhaps. Incidentally, La Blanchett as Princess Diana? Epic. I would watch that.

Anyway, there’s a new film called Caught In Flight about one of Diana’s last romantic relationships, with Pakistani doctor Hasnat Kahn. Most of the books written about Diana – by the people who close to her and by those people who actually have a solid journalism background – consistently claim that Diana was deeply in love with Dr. Kahn in the last years of her life, and even when Kahn broke off their relationship in the months just before her death, Diana was still in love with him – and that she only went with Dodi Fayed to make Kahn jealous (which didn’t work). So who to cast as the 30-something Diana in love, at the height of her fame and beauty? Why, American ginger Jessica Chastain, of course. Oooooooh, the Brits are going to hate this one.

It was just over a year ago that it was revealed that two rival Princess Diana biopics were in the works. One, from producer Stephen Evans, was going to be based on the book “Diana: Closely Guarded Secret” by Diana’s lifelong bodyguard, Ken Wharfe. The film was budgeted at $30 million, with boasts of Charlize Theron and Ewan McGregor circling roles. Meanwhile, Pathé films was also developing a biopic with names like Keira Knightley and Dame Helen Mirren (as the Queen Mother) being tossed around.

But it seems, a third project has now leapt into the pole position and it’s bringing along some surprising talent.

2011’s omnipresent Jessica Chastain will dye her hair and cut it short, taking the lead as Princess Diana in “Caught In Flight,” which is sure to be a highly controversial take on her life. Written by Steven Jeffreys (”The Libertine”), the film will focus on Diana’s affair with Dr. Hasnat Kahn that lasted from 1995 until a few months before her death in 1997. He was regarded by many to be the love of her life, and she was said to be devastated when the relationship was over, with some speculating that she dated Dodi Fayed in order to make him jealous. And indeed, the script “Caught In Flight” will apparently portray the Princess “as a damaged person who stalks the doctor after he ends the affair.”

No stranger to tough material, “Downfall” and “Das Experiment” director Oliver Hirschbiegel will direct the film which is already in pre-production. Lensing is gearing up to start in March, with shooting planned for Pakistan, Angola, the South of France and Paris for the film budgeted around $15 million.

It’s certainly a big gear change for Chastain, who will have to wear a British accent for the first time onscreen, in addition to undergoing a complete transformation into a public figure known and beloved by millions. With this picture, the sci-fi spectacle “Horizons” and the Guillermo Del Toro produced horror “Mama” on the way, Chastain refuses to be pigeonholed, with her upcoming roles among her most interesting yet.

[From Indie Wire]

Diana “as a damaged person who stalks the doctor after he ends the affair.” Er… seriously? Yes, she was still in love with Kahn, by most accounts. Yes, she wanted to marry him. Yes, she might have even gone to see Kahn’s family in Pakistan as a “surprise” which he didn’t care for. Yes, Kahn didn’t want all of the drama and attention that Diana brought to everything – at the end of the day, he ended up marrying a no-drama Muslim girl too. And yes, Diana had some issues, but I don’t care for the idea that she was “damaged”. Rough. Let’s not throw around the word “stalking” either. Jesus, the lady is dead.

As for Chastain in the role – I’m concerned, but I don’t flat-out hate it. Jessica is sort of becoming a mini-Blanchett, or a mini-Meryl Streep, and she’s everywhere and she does everything. So I’ll wait and see what she makes of the part.

Photos courtesy of WENN.