Sunday, June 13, 2004

Something I've noticed in my trashy celeb magazines--a seemingly endless scrutiny of the post-pregnancy weight-loss of the rich and famous. When did this become so fascinating? Is it the large number of female celebs who are gettting pregnant? Is it the fat post-pregnant non-celebs who want to feel better about themselves? On the one hand, I--like everyon else, apparently--enjoy seeing celebs get grotesquely fat; but they are pregnant, for god's sake, and I actually do find myself feeling the teensiest bit sorry for these women (Debra Messing, Kate Hudson, et al) who have to be photographed right after giving birth and have their weight discussed by the mass media. They are under enormous pressure to look EXACTLY like their pre-pregnant selves immediately upon giving birth. Frankly, I find anything and everything having to do with pregnancy gross and disgusting; what about the good old days when famous people disappeared for nine months, had the kid, stayed in seclusion, and then re-emerged, never mentioning the tiny tot? I could care less about what kind of stroller Gwyneth is using, by the way, or what kind of baby shower gifts Courtney Cox got. Yuck! I resent all this coverage taking up so much valuable space in my trashy mags when they could be doing more stories about non-pregnant fat celebrities. I also enjoy the too-thin stories. More Lara Flynn Boyle! And the druggies. Or both at the same time! (Speaking of druggies, after seeing Uma Thurman's acceptance speeches at the MTV Awards, I have one question: Is Uma Thurman on SPEED, man, or what? Is that why she got so skinny? Las drugas? La cocaina? El phen phen? I have no proof, of course, just the observation of her incredibly hyperactive, fastfastfast manic talking coupled with her rather extreme body makeover. Ditto Brittany Murphy, too; she's a lovable nutcase druggie/anorexic if I ever saw one. And she plays Luann Platter. I heart Brittany!) More druggies! More anorexics! More breakdowns! For god's sake, MORE Whitney Houston and Kirstie Alley! Less pregnancy!

I ALSO hate all the coverage of celebrities' pets. I have seen Jake Gyllenhal and Kirsten Dunst's dog more than I have seen Liza, David Guest, and their attorneys put together--and that is just plain wrong. It is a travesty. Who cares about that dog, except their owners? Of course, this is coming from someone who has published an endless stream of blog entries about her own dog's stomach distress, but still. THEIR dog is fine. US Weekly, you need to get more like the Star! You need bitchy, snide features on Jerry Hall's cellulite. You totally dropped the ball on that one, US Weekly. You need more 'blind items,' like the NY Post's Page Six--they just did a great one about a "much-talked about married" celebrity couple who enjoy all-night cocaine parties and threesomes with young ladies...now THAT'S news! Who could it be? Jen and Brad? Denise and Charlie? There aren't THAT many married couples in Hollywood who are much-talked about. THAT'S the kind of hard-hitting journalism that I look for in a no-good, throwaway, embarrassing-to-own celebrity-oriented magazine. NOT Debra Messing's stroller!

And while I'm venting, one more thing: NO MORE REALITY SHOW stories! They are NOT celebrities! Who gives a good goddamn about The Bachelor? Or his wedding, called-off-wedding, anullment, new love, or old flame? Not me! I don't mind the shows themselves, but I really don't care about ANY of the Survivors, Bachelorettes, Apprentices, Forever Edeners, Fear Factorers, or whoever--AT ALL--once the shows are over. They are like fast-food--fun and terrible for you, and you really don't want to think about it after it's gone.

No comments: