Thursday, September 09, 2004

For quite some time now I have been proclaiming Catherine Zeta-Jones as The Scariest Woman in Hollywood. But I was wrong, and I'm big enough to admit it. You see, I had totally forgotten LAUREN BACALL!!!AAAAAAH! Run for your lives!! You know how to scream don't you? Just open your lips and yell!!Take that crown off, CZJ, and hand it over to Ms. Bacall. What? You say you are meaner and more determined to make it to the top of the scrap heap no matter who you have to have killed? Well, that's all true, CZJ, that's all true. But, you see, Ms. Bacall is a dame with chutzpah and moxie--evil, evil moxie--and SHE WILL CLAW YOUR EYES OUT AND EAT YOUR CHILDREN IF YOU STAND IN HER WAY! Once she is dead, we shall re-crown you Scariest Woman in Hollywood, OK? Good. Take three steps back. Slowy, SLOWLY. Keep your hands where I can see 'em!

Now, in this instance Ms. Bacall's terrifying biyatchy ire is being directed, justiafiably, at Nicole Kidman. Richard "Dick" Johsnon writes in his Page Six column that "when Kidman was described by a [British] TV interviewer as 'a legend,' her co-star Lauren Bacall, 79, blurted out: 'She's not a legend. She's a beginner. She can't be a legend at whatever age she is.'" Which translates into "any age younger than me." Uh, yeah, note to English tv person: YOU NEVER REFER TO ANYONE AS A LEGEND IN FRONT OF LAUREN BACALL EXCEPT LAUREN BACALL! Hello? Even a newborn baby could sense THAT. Duh.

Here's the IMDB report, which goes into more detail: "During an interview on British TV show GMTV yesterday morning, Bacall, 79, became irritated when the 37-year-old Oscar winner was described as 'a legend.' Cutting off interviewer Jenni Falconer in mid-sentence, Bacall blurted, "She's not a legend. She's a beginner. What is this 'legend'? She can't be a legend at whatever age she is. She can't be a legend, you have to be older.' Key Largo star Bacall, former wife of Humphrey Bogart, features as Kidman's mother in the controversial new movie Birth, and insists she and the statuesque redhead have a good relationship. She says, 'I love working with a young actress. Nicole and I worked together on Dogville and we were friends when we started this. That laid the groundwork for our fabulous relationship on screen and off.'"

Egads, woman! If this is what you call a "faboulous relationship," what happens to the people you hate? Are they turned into the Fancy Feast you hawk on tv? Note, too, that in order to be a legend, "you have to be older." About forty-two years older, perhaps? That sounds about right.

Back to Page Six, where Dick Johsnon goes on to say that "Bacall's attack came a few days after Sharon Osbourne made a similar crack. Osbourne was appearing on a British TV show when Kidman was mentioned.

'She needs a sandwich, that's what she needs,' Osbourne snapped. 'She needs a bloody good meal. Skinny cow she is.'

The jibe was particularly painful as Kidman recently had to deny reports that she is suffering from a bone disease which has caused her to lose too much weight. The actress has insisted she weighs the same as she always did."

HA ha ha! First of all, Sharon is right, Nicole does need a sandwich. Although I fail to see how her "crack" is remotely similar to Lauren Bacall's. Not being a legend and needing a snack are two totally different insults. But what I love about this most is the peculiar British phraseology, which allows someone to be a "skinny cow." In the States, if you call a woman a "cow," you are saying she is bovine, fat, enormous. I think in England, you can call a woman a "cow" and simply mean she's a cud-chewing dumbass. So that's how you get to be a skinny cow. I think.

The other ridiculous thing is Nicole insisting that she weighs the same as always--that's like Brittany Murphy claiming she hasn't lost half her body weight (and sanity and dignity) since "Clueless." CLEARLY Nicole Kidman is not the same weight as she was in "Flirting" or even the early days of her "marriage" to Tom Cruise. We are not BLIND, you skinny cow! Actually, I kind of feel sorry for her because she seems so miserable (lack of nutrients?) and is rumored to be dating that creepy rich old man who fathered Heidi Klum's baby. I guess if the choice is creepy old rich dude or Lenny Kravitz, I'd choose the creepy old rich dude, too. Maybe. Or perhaps I would opt for lifelong celibacy. What kind of world does she live in where these are her only options? She should've held onto Q-Tip.

Another interesting thing going on with Nicole is that her new movie is pretty risky, career-wise, if you ask me. Now, I'm no expert, but any film in which a grown, albeit terrifyingly thin, woman makes sweet, sweet love with a 10 year-old boy is going to stir some controversy, at least outside of Mary Kay LeTourneau's half-way house. The boy in the movie is supposed to be the reincarnation of Nicole's dead husband. (Wasn't this the same plot as "Chances Are," one of my guiliest cinematic pleasures of all time, starring Robert Downey, Jr., Sybil Sheppard, and Ryan O'Neil? I believe so, yes. But the reincarnated dead husband was in COLLEGE, not grade school, so it's all in good taste. Well, except that he's also dating his daughter, but that's neither here nor there.) Dickie Johnson reports:

"'Birth,' which has a nude scene featuring Kidman and a 10-year-old boy who plays her reincarnated husband, was booed at a preview screening yesterday by some journalists who think it has overtones of kiddie porn."

Sure, there are "overtones," but they are very, very classy. The kind of kiddy-porn overtones that only a cinematic LEGEND such as Nicole Kidman could produce. Just don't tell Lauren Bacall I said that. Even her cat-food commercials scare the crap out of me. FANCY FEAST IS MADE OF PEOPLE!!AAAAAAAH!

No comments: