Day (Not really) Twenty – #30DayBlogChallenge

Day twenty – The meaning behind your blog name.

But first, I’m quite impressed with myself. Only took twenty days to break the post-a-day thing. I went to the Observatory here in Cape Town last night with two of my friends – honestly, one of the most awesomely fun things I’ve done in ages – and spent the whole of yesterday playing Skyrim (At last!! At long last!!) And it completely slipped my mind. Then this morning when I was meant to post, I woke up to the news that Whitney Houston had died – and so I spent most of my day working on tributes, features, galleries and keeping up with all of the news that was pouring in. So very tragic. Although, as my manager said, these celebrities really do keep dying over weekends. Enough already.

So, the meaning behind my blog name? Well, it’s two-fold. Firstly, I wanted something celebrity-related. I had visions of making this blog mainly celebrity-oriented (hey, I was relatively bright and shiny in those days) and I wanted something to do with stars. Stardust is one of my favourite movies, for some weird reason, and so it worked. And in the URL “Africa” because a) stardust.wordpress was already taken and b) I live in Africa.

So now you know. Stay tuned for Day (Really) Twenty-One.

Day Seventeen – #30DayBlogChallenge

Day Seventeen – Your celebrity crush.

Bitch, please. I’m an entertainment editor. I don’t have just one celebrity crush. I have loads. My top ones are: Andrew Garfield, Elijah Wood, Hugh Laurie, Ryan Gosling, Mila Kunis, Emma Stone, Olivia Wilde.

Andrew GarfieldAndrew Garfield: Thought he was outstanding in Boy A (Seriously, I say it at least once a month… Go rent that film!), divine in The Imaginarium of Dr Parnassus and unbelievably gorgeous in The Social Network. And now he’s in The Amazing Spider-Man. Yay.

 

 

Elijah WoodElijah Wood: Possibly my longest-lasting celeb crush, it developed not with The Lord of the Rings but with Oliver Twist (a Disney made-for-TV movie, he played the Artful Dodger). Then came LotR and since then… I’ve been sold.

 

 

 

Hugh LaurieHugh Laurie: Smart, funny, sexy as all hell… Sure, I’m probably more than half in love with his House character, but there’s no actor I’d rather see interviewed.

 

 

 

Ryan GoslingRyan Gosling: Lame, I know. So sue me, he’s ridiculously hot.

 

 

 

 

Mila KunisMila Kunis: See above.

 

 

 

 

Emma StoneEmma Stone: One of the smartest, wittiest, most beautiful stars in Hollywood… And she also seems to have both feet firmly in the ground. She’s awesome. Definitely my biggest celebrity girl-crush, by a country mile.

 

 

 

olivia wildeOlivia Wilde: She was “Thirteen” in House, and ridiculously hot in Cowboys & Aliens. Seriously, she’s gorgeous. And funny. And huge-hearted.

A new addition to the “Why are they famous?” club

So I have quite a few people on my “Erm, why are they so famous again?” list*. You can see the original list (with original snarky comments!) on iafrica.com, if you like. But here are my favourites:

It started off with Paris Hilton (she’s famous for going to parties and releasing a sex tape), Kim Kardashian (supposed to be famous for Keeping Up With the Kardashians, actually famous for a sex tape), local girl Khanyi Mbau (in the Paris Hilton model, has she released a sex tape? I’m sure she’s made one), “Speidi” (originally on The Hills, when their fame waned they claimed there was a sex tape), Kendra Wilkinson (was a former Hugh Hefner girlfriend), Jordan (big boobs) and Mike “The Situation” (nice abs).

Sure, most of them have their own reality shows etc etc, but there’s a new addition. A spectacular new addition. Courtesy, this time, of the British Royal Family. And what, might you ask, is this new addition famous for?

Find out after the jump…

Continue reading

A mini-rant on celebrity news haters

Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries

Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries on this week's cover of People magazine. I don't think I need to tell you how successful this magazine actually is, do I?

Indulge me, if you will.

I regularly get comments on articles and Facebook posts and @ replies on Twitter in the same vein. Somebody will almost always, as if reading from a script – write “Who the fuck cares?”

Well, buddy… (I’m tempted to respond every.single.time but don’t because I have more important things to do) Millions and millions and millions of people across the entire world care. It’s why I have a job. It’s also why channels such as E! Online are so massively successful and generate so much money. It’s also the reason that celebrity gossip sites are some of the biggest on the Internet. Just because you don’t deem it newsworthy (which is your right), it doesn’t mean that it isn’t newsworthy, to somebody. Celebrity gossip articles are very, very regularly one of the top 10 most read stories on our entire portal. So, yeah, “Who the fuck cares?” is a pretty stupid question.

Aaaaand… If you don’t care (and you’re entitled not to care, by the way) then why, for the love of all things good and holy, do you click into the article, read through it, click on the “comment” button, write a comment and click submit?! I don’t care about, for example, car-related news. I don’t care and it doesn’t interet me, so I don’t read it and don’t leave comments.

Let me tell you a secret, you people who think you’re so rebellious by writing “Who the fuck cares?!” at the bottom of all of our celebrity gossip articles. We’re laughing at you. Hard. If you know anything about how online media works, you’ll know that one of the ways we measure the success of a story and generate advertising is through clicks. So – the minute you click on an article and comment, you effectively ensure that I get to do the job that I love for another day. And I thank you for that.

It still irks me, even though I’ve largely become used to the comments and the insults. I get told at least once a week that I publish “trash”, that what I write isn’t useful to anybody and that I practice “gutter journalism”. I’ve also been called a whore, a moron, an idiot, a blonde slut and a c**t. This week’s catch phrase was “incredibly snobby” (and I can work with that).

It’s the aggressive tone that irks me. It’s the fact that these people think that they’re so very, very much better than everybody else because they don’t find celebrity gossip interesting – and so they can be as rude to everybody else as they like. The anonymity of the Internet doesn’t help much, either. You can hide behind a name on a screen and swear as much as you like – and then turn around and scold your child for doing the exact same thing.

I work in entertainment. Sure, I will never, ever think that my article on Arnold Schwarzenegger’s love child is more important than the latest election results or the volcanic eruption in Iceland. But what my section is – what reading about Kim Kardashian’s engagement is – is escapism. Which we all need. Just for a minute. Something light and fluffy to remind ourselves that yes, the world has issues but there’s always space to hang out, breathe, and not deal with blood and death and destruction all day, every day.

And that is why I do what I do. Because my silly stories might brighten up someone’s day – and I’m perfectly happy with that.

Angelina vs. Jennifer. Let it go, guys. It’s over.

You know, it’s been six years. But there is always, always, always somebody who brings up the Jennifer Aniston vs. Angelina Jolie debate/feud/comparison/whatever.

The most recent was a reader on my site. On an article and poll on Angelina’s Cannes gown – where really, all you had to do was say whether or not you liked her outfit – a reader managed to wangle in the Jen-and-Angelina thing (Jengelina?). “Anistons toned body would have done greater justice to such an awesome dress [sic]”.

*facepalm*

And then I thought about it a little more. The media still makes SUCH a thing out of it. There are regular references to the Angelina-Brad-Jennifer triangle. And honestly, there probably will be references until the day they die.

Honestly, people were so moved by the situation that you would have thought that they were the ones that had been divorced. There are still people who call Angelina the “whore of Hollywood” – even though she’s been with the same man for the past six years. And we’re always talking about “unlucky-in-love Jennifer”… We cast these wonderful roles for them to play and we expect them to do so for the rest of their careers. It’s typecasting, really.

Why did we have to pick sides? Why do we assume that Brad was “tricked” into falling in love with Angelina, or believe that she ruthlessly seduced him? Why do we always cast Jennifer as the victim and Angelina as the villain? Surely the bad guy here is Brad? Still, after six years we refer to Angelina as the h0mewrecker where it appeared that Brad did a pretty good job of wrecking his home all by himself.

At the end of the day, he picked Angelina. Now can we move on and stop comparing the two (they’re hot in entirely different ways, can we not accept that?!) and feeling sorry for Jennifer (especially as she has said that it irritates her beyond belief).

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it’s a superinjunction!

You can now read the jazzed-up version of this post on iafrica.com. And vote in a sexy little poll.

There have been some pretty loud rumblings in the UK over so-called “superinjunctions” taken out by various public figures/celebrities/footballers with more money than sense – and it’s come forcefully into the fore after a Twitter account was created with the aim of allegedly revealing gag orders taken out by celebs. Whether or not these claims are true is largely irrelevant to this blog (although Jemima Khan has protested, strongly, against claims that she had taken out an injunction) – but it does stir up the debate over whether or not these superinjunctions should exist at all.

To kick off with – a superinjunction is basically a gag order on steroids. The media aren’t even allowed to report that an injunction had been granted to an individual. Sure, they can (and do) hint until they’re blue in the face, but this Twitter account is a way to just show one finger to the courts and the spoiled celebs in the UK.

It’s an ongoing debate. Continue reading

‘The Hobbit’ finally on the roll…!

I’m currently man-down with a radical cold, and am therefore not up to much else other than a) My basic day’s work b) Drinking lots of tea and c) Playing as much Dragon Age 2 as is humanly possible before my fingers seize up. But – much excitement – production has finally started on The Hobbit! After years and years of delays, they’ve finally kicked off – and are still aiming for a December 2012 release date for part one, which is apparently subtitled There and Back Again.

The Hobbit

Peter Jackson poses on the set of 'The Hobbit'. © Warner Brothers

These cool promotional photos have been released by WB – and wow, is Peter Jackson looking a little trimmer than his Lord of the Rings days! Compare:

The Hobbit

Peter Jackson poses on the set of 'The Hobbit'. © Warner Brothers

Peter Jackson

Peter Jackson in a promo image for 'The Lord of the Rings'.

 

I’ve had a bit of a Hobbit overdose today – working on a feature to accompany the news. And now, I want to reread the novel for the zillionth time. With more tea, and sympathy.