February 27, 2009 | 5:49 pm

Are Lindsay Lohan and Samantha Ronson Synagogue Shopping?

Posted by Danielle Berrin

Follow me on or

Lindsay Lohan and unofficial girlfriend Samantha Ronson are unofficially looking for a synagogue who will officially sanction their unofficial romance.

According to IMDB.com, this much is true:

Lindsay Lohan and her girlfriend Samantha Ronson have fuelled rumours they are set to wed - by visiting a London synagogue famous for its liberal views on marriage.
The Mean Girls star, who was raised a Catholic, and Ronson, who is from a Jewish family, have been dating since 2008.
They were rumoured to have become engaged last year, after Ronson reportedly told a crowd in a Los Angeles nightclub about their wedding plans.
And now the couple, currently visiting London, has been photographed entering a Jewish church in the British capital together.
The pair visited the Westminster Synagogue, in the city’s exclusive Knightsbridge area, on Friday afternoon.
Faith officials at the religious building is known for providing marriage blessings to couples of mixed faiths, providing the couple has already enjoyed a civil wedding ceremony.

Although the synagogue’s stance on same-sex unions is not known, gay marriages have been legal in the U.K. since the introduction of civil partnerships in 2004.

February 27, 2009 | 5:12 pm

The Coen Brothers’ New Vid: ‘No Such Thing as Clean Coal’

Posted by Danielle Berrin

In direct to defiance to new power in Washington that insists on the development of “clean coal,” The Coen brothers directed a 30 second ad-spot that denies that possibility.

The commercial is sponsored by The Reality Coalition, a group of five environmental organizations that say, “There is no such thing as clean coal.” 

Now, Hollywood and Washington have always had a unique relationship (sometimes harmonious, sometimes volatile), and therefore political activism and commentary is very much in character for industry leaders. But with Obama representing “liberal,” “democratic” and “just” vales—the putative values of Hollywood—it’s a surprise his good intentions are being called out. And that’s the point the Coens are trying to make (sardonically, of course): good intentions are just not good enough. Realism must take precedent over idealism.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

February 26, 2009 | 9:11 pm

Jerry Seinfeld is Back…to Reality

Posted by Danielle Berrin

Jerry Seinfeld and jokes about marriage is a near perfect amalgam of Jewish comedy. He broadcasted such humor for nine years on his hit TV series “Seinfeld,” though, I’m willing to bet that his humor has sharpened a bit in the 11 years since he quit television, got married and has spent more time with his wife. He’s clearly learned a thing or two, evinced by his return to the airwaves with a marriage-themed reality show.

The comedian tells Variety:

“This is not a therapy show, it’s a comedy show,” said Seinfeld, who will, guest appearances aside, be involved in his first TV series since “Seinfeld” left the air in 1998. “After nine years of marriage, I have discovered that the comedic potential of this subject is quite rich.”

So what’s the big idea?

“The Marriage Ref,” a nonfiction series that will feature opinionated celebrities, comedians and sports stars offering commentary and advice to real-life couples enduring “classic marital disputes.”

“Picture well-known people weighing in on a couple’s relationship issues and deciding who is right and who is wrong right on the spot, like a referee,” [co-producer Ellen Rakieten] said.

Jerry pitched the idea to NBC Chairman Ben Silverman (who I’m told is quite desperate for a hit) along with Rakieten, an executive producer of the “Oprah Winfrey Show.”

Though there is no premiere date yet, we’ll wait with bated breath.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

February 25, 2009 | 6:30 pm

Winslet’s Oscar: Was it the Holocaust or Harvey Weinstein?

Posted by Danielle Berrin

I’ve wondered here if Kate Winslet was nominated for “The Reader” (a film, I admit, I found drab) over her superior performance in “Revolutionary Road” because Academy voters have some strange, ancestral penchant for Holocaust drama. But alas, I failed to consider the alternative: dirty, sneaky, Hollywood politics. Thank goodness for Tom O’Neil then, who is wonderfully illuminating in today’s LA Times, for suggesting that Harvey Weinstein perpetrated a full-throttle Oscar push for his “Reader,” leaving “Revolutionary Road” at a dead end. It seems the dead giveaway was when Winslet omitted Weinstein from her acceptance speech. Was that an innocent mistake? Or was Winslet’s collaboration with hubby Sam Mendes snubbed because Harvey is hot for little gold statuettes?

O’Neil writes:

Of all people Kate Winslet should’ve thanked from the Oscars podium as she finally — after five previous losses — clutched that elusive statuette, Harvey Weinstein should’ve been first. That Happy Oscar Warrior took enormous abuse for daring to cram “The Reader” into this year’s derby while Winslet also competed with “Revolutionary Road,” directed by her hubby, Sam Mendes. A producer of both films, Scott Rudin (“The New Harvey,” some wags call him after he won best picture last year for “No Country for Old Men”) was so irked that he took his name off the credits of “The Reader.”
...
Does that mean she intentionally snubbed Harvey at the Oscars? Rumor has it that she was furious with him for challenging her bid for “Revolutionary Road.” Trying to negotiate the clash, the Weinstein Co. campaigned her “Reader” role in supporting, where she won at the Golden Globes and SAG, but Oscar voters weren’t fooled into buying that second-tier status. They promoted her “Reader” performance to lead and — oops — thereby snubbed that other role entirely. After all, they had to choose between one or the other. Actors are only permitted to be nominated once per category..

1 Comments — Leave your comment

February 25, 2009 | 4:45 pm

Carl Icahn’s Designs on Lionsgate

Posted by Danielle Berrin

A potentially explosive power struggle is brewing over at Lionsgate films where billionaire investor Carl Icahn is scooping up shares of the financially troubled company. Icahn’s ownership of the mini studio has rapidly increased from 4% in October 2008 to 14% as of February 2009. He’s been buying the stock at a deeply undervalued price, which sunk to dismally low levels after Lionsgate reported $93.4 million in losses last fiscal quarter. 

If you’re unfamiliar with Icahn, Wikipedia’s bio should illuminate:

Carl Celian Icahn (born February 16, 1936) is an American billionaire financier, corporate raider, and private equity investor. His net worth is US$14 billion as of 2008, making him the 46th richest man in the world.

Icahn has a notorious penchant for buying distressed companies, railing against their CEOs and then reaping sweet financial rewards. When he increased his Lionsgate stake from 4% to 9% back in October, Nikki Finke’s issued the following caveat to Jon Feltheimer, Lionsgate’s president: “Be afraid. Be very afraid, Jon Feltheimer.” Despite the troubles, Feltheimer is staying “upbeat” as he told me at a recent Lakers Game. But with the latest news, in which Icahn notified the SEC he might shake things up on their board, we’ll see how long that lasts.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

February 24, 2009 | 6:00 pm

Woody Allen Signs ‘Slumdog’ Star

Posted by Danielle Berrin

Penelope Cruz and Woody Allen photographed by Annie Leibovitz for Vanity Fair

Woody Allen famously loves women. But as the historic record would show, his relationship to them in life is a bit more complicated. Likewise, his depiction of them on screen—whether neurotic or smoldering—is also fraught.

It could be argued that Allen’s female characters are women you love in spite of who they are (not because of who they are) and yet, the most interesting, beautiful actresses want to work with him. For who else could write the astonishing line, “Talent? I’m not talking about talent. Geeeenius. I said geeenius!” which, when uttered by an emotionally explosive Penelope Cruz, wins an Oscar. And this morning, Hollywood’s newest gem, India model/actress Freida Pinto (“Slumdog Millionaire”) signed on to Allen’s next film alongside Naomi Watts.

Does this mean Scarlett Johansson is getting dumped? With Woody Allen, it never ends well, says Vanity Fair:

The archetypal Woody woman might be the over-educated, over-therapized yammerer—exemplified by Diane Keaton’s characters in Annie Hall and Manhattan—but another type of woman has also recurred in his work: the smoldering, emotionally volatile knockout. Think of Charlotte Rampling in Stardust Memories, Scarlett Johansson in Match Point, or, from Allen’s masterful short story “Retribution,” the Wasp goddess Connie Chasen, possessed of a “lewd, humid eroticism” and a body “the envy of a Vogue model.” In Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Cruz takes on this assignment and then some—throwing in bits of Béatrice Dalle in Betty Blue and Emmanuelle Seigner in Bitter Moon for good measure. As María Elena, the tousled, pouty, impossibly sexy ex-wife of Javier Bardem’s painter character, Cruz is a whirlwind of carnality and psychosis. “You are de meesing ingredient,” she tells her ex’s new lover, an American naïf played by Johansson. “I get thees warm feeling when I hear you both locked in passion every night.” With Allen pulling the strings, you just know it’s not going to end well.

18 Comments — Leave your comment

February 24, 2009 | 1:20 pm

The War Is Over for ‘Waltz’

Posted by Danielle Berrin

Orit Arfa, an Israeli journalist/aspiring actress attended the official “Waltz With Bashir” Oscar party where a disappointed Ari Folman spoke to reporters:

Waltz With Bashir is a movie the expresses filmmaker Ari Folman’s hatred for war, but it felt like a war zone of the spirit in the run up to the Academy’s announcement of best foreign film, with Israeli Oscar dreams crushed by the Japanese.

“I was really hyped and tense. Then it was a drop of adrenaline immediately after the announcement of Departures,” Folman told the Jewish Journal at the post-Oscar bash at the Beverly Hilton.

He described exactly the mood at the Hilton’s International Ballroom, where the Israeli production team not lucky enough to attend the actual ceremony at the Kodak Theater watched the Oscars at the black-tie viewing banquet held by Jewish philanthropist Daphne Ziman’s Children Uniting Nations and co-sponsored by The Hollywood Reporter, Billboard, and 93.5 FM The Beat.

Ziman spread her hope for Zionist victory by reserving several tables for the Waltz With Bashir brigade, engaging in hasbara by leaving brochures about the film for some 600 guests, including Oscar Nunez (of The Office), Billy Baldwin, Jane Seymour, and Tia Tequila.

The battle was long and drawn-out as the Best Foreign Film was announced over two hours into the ceremony.

“It was a total build-up with five categories, then four categories, commercial breaks, sitting here feeling like my heart will jump out of my body,” said Tel Aviv-based animator Neta Holzer, moments after the Japanese bomb fell.

Consul General Jacob Dayan, on hand to provide ammunition of support and hype, had been sure, as many there, that Israel had the creative advantage. “I had good vibes and feeling that this is the year,” said Dayan. “For me, as consul general, it’s a second year in a row we were among five and haven’t succeeded [last year Israel was nominated for Beaufort], so maybe I should resign and bring better luck to the State of Israel.”

Members of Israeli media were clearly upset too, in part because they weren’t sure if Folman would show up to the after-party. “Israelis aren’t good losers,” commented one reporter off-hand.

But the minute Folman walked through the hotel doors with his wife, all cameras and mics flew into his face, as if the couple were Israel’s very own Brangelina. It took the irate security about ten minutes to herd them to the media-designated red carpet at the fire marshal’s request.

Folman, dashing in a tuxedo, acted like the dignified general as he graciously took time to speak with Israeli reporters, rehashing the same soundbites to give each warring network some individuality, all with the same basic message: “It’s a basa (letdown), but on the other hand, we got so far,” he told them in Hebrew, “that it’s not so bad now.”

Folman later related his initial fears of defeat to the Journal, in English, “When we arrived in Los Angeles, I had this feeling I was going to win. As more time went by something in me told me it wasn’t going to be me. It’s the karma of my life.”

But with a Golden Globe and a slew of other victorious battles under his belt, he knows he put up an admirable fight.  “I have no clue what happened, how it happened. It doesn’t really matter. It’s over. It’s a game.”

He now looks forward to going back to Israel and spending quality time with his family—in real peace.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

February 23, 2009 | 6:20 pm

Elton John’s Oscar Party, AIDS and Israel

Posted by Danielle Berrin

Every year, Sir Elton John hosts an Oscar party/AIDS benefit that along with the Vanity Fair party and The Governors Ball is one of the most coveted tickets in town. The $3,500-per-plate price tag supports The Rocket Man in raising millions of dollars for AIDS research: In 2008, his gala raised $5 million and early figures from last night’s festivities are estimated at $4 million.

On the same day Sir Elton entertained a star-studded guest list of wealthy donors, the Harvard and Oxford educated economist, Dambisa Moyo told the NY Times philanthropic and government aid to Africa should stop. The Zambian native said that financial aid is more harmful than helpful—it inhibits entrepreneurship and creates unhealthy dependency on foreign nations.

What would she say to Elton John and other celebrities like Bono who make the continent of Africa their cause celebre?

I’ll make a general comment about this whole dependence on “celebrities.” I object to this situation as it is right now where they have inadvertently or manipulatively become the spokespeople for the African continent.

Jews would not agree with Moyo. While they typically do not support AIDS causes, the Jewish community is a huge advocate of distributing foreign aid because of Israel’s need.

Last summer, while working on a story about “Hollywood Heart,” an AIDS camp for affected youth created by MTV New Media veep David Gale, I asked why he had not tried to solicit funding from the Jewish community. “I wasn’t thinking this was a Jewish cause,” he replied. “Jews aren’t necessarily going to have a particular place in their heart for children affected by HIV/AIDS—not that they’re not compassionate, but their giving is usually specific to Israel or something the community is affected by, whereas HIV/AIDS hasn’t affected the Jewish community very much.”

For a community in which the concept of “Tzedakah” is so deeply inculcated, in which giving is equated with an act of justice, the idea of denying a people in need is unthinkable. But consider how Moyo’s no-aid prescription for an independent nation might affect Israel’s standing in the world: How might Israel be perceived if not as a Middle-Eastern appendage of the U.S.? If not the beloved prize of wealthy American Jews?

1 Comments — Leave your comment