Just when you thought it couldn't get worse for Lindsay Lohan, Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood Daily reports that Lohan has been dropped from the true-life crime flick, Manson's Girls. According to DHD, "people associated with the movie told agents that Lohan quickly became more of a deficit than an asset when they discovered that they couldn't find any name actresses who wanted to co-star with her. (And even some name actors...) So now Lindsay is off the pic."

Ouch, that can't be good for her self-esteem, although the gossip gal in me would have liked to hear the names of some of those "name actors".

I just had to share this picture with you guys, which was nabbed from a collect of orange-tee pics up over at Just Jared. Doesn't it seem like we just went back in time? If Lindsay Lohan wasn't sporting the blonde locks in the picture above, it almost looks like this was taken during the good old days of Lohan, when she was a popular, upcoming actress, rather than a girl struggling with personal problems and tabloid frenzies.

As I told you the other day, Lindsay will have a short stint on the show, starting with the season finale this year. She's playing an old classmate of Betty's who was bitchy to Betty back in the day, but is now down on her luck.

I think this might just be the way for LiLo to work on her career -- not something that regresses her back to kid fare, but something that merges her pre-struggle past with the hopes of her present. I could be fooling myself, but it'd be nice to see the tide change for the troubled ex child stars we hear about so much these days.

Watch out, TV land -- there's another tabloid princess on the horizon. Britney Spears' stint on How I Met Your Mother brought in a ton of viewers, and now Lindsay Lohan is getting her shot. After rumors broke last fall, Variety reports that the actress will have a guest spot on ABC's Ugly Betty. Unlike Spears, who started off with brief role, and is now reprising it, Lohan has signed on to do an extended gig. LiLo will pop up in Betty's May 22 season finale, plus another 5 episodes next season, and she's already begun filming her first stint.

It seems that LiLo will play an old schoolmate of Betty Suarez (America Ferrera). "Lohan's character was not particularly nice to Betty back then, but when the two bump into each other in the finale, Lohan's character is down on her luck, in sharp contrast to Betty's glamorous and promising career at Gotham fashion mag, Mode." Hmm... That sounds a bit familiar!

I must say -- I prefer this to the strippage, and this could be good for the actress -- re-proving her acting chops in something simple, to an already established audience, rather than mis-guided movie choices. (Although Ye Olde Times is a good pick.) Now we'll have to see if she can bring in the same audiences that Britney scored.

It was almost a year ago that Lindsay Lohan claimed she wanted to be a serious actress, one who wins an Oscar. Soon after, she signed on to play a stripper in I Know Who Killed Me. To be more precise -- a stripper who gets tortured and her legs cut off. Somehow, Lohan didn't see how the hope and the action clashed. Now it seems that she's trying to make a better post-rehab go of things, but she's still completely set on this ridiculous notion that nudity equals respectability. First she redos classic Marilyn Monroe nude shots, and now some reports say that she's going to show more skin for an upcoming film called Florence.

Ace Showbiz says that the actress has signed on to play a sex-addicted waitress in the film, and that Star Magazine claims that she is going to get naked for the role. Why? "Further, it was said that the actress/singer took the opportunity to play the controversial role to show others she still has her acting skills. To the publication, a source revealed, 'She just wants to remind people she can act and she's worth hiring.'"

Lindsay, oh Lindsay... If this is true, I hope someone out there sits you down and at least tries to make you understand this: Showing skin does not equal respectability. It will not magically wipe away your past turmoil. It will not make people think more of you. What will prove you have the talent -- acting! You don't need to strip to do it. You need to pick a film with a good role and then reveal the acting talents you're determined to showcase. Please -- keep your clothes on.

Entertainment Tonight reports that Lindsay Lohan will star in the true life crime film Manson's Girls. Lohan will play Nancy Pitman, a pampered surfer girl who fell under the thrall of Charlie Manson's "charms". News of Lohan's casting hit when the film's producer, Brad Wyman, spilled the beans to ET. (I guess she has a thing for 'celebrity murderers'; I mean she's already in a film about John Lennon's murderer (Chapter 27), and now the granddaddy of all wackos?)

On August 8th, 1969, Charles Manson directed four members of his 'Family' to the home of an absent Roman Polanski and his pregnant girlfriend Sharon Tate. By the morning, Manson's followers had brutally murdered five people (including Tate). Pitman never took part in the brutal murders of Tate and four other people that night. But, she was eventually charged with being an accessory after the fact and served 18 months. There were even rumors that she returned to the Tate house with Manson after the murders to help plant false evidence.

So far, there isn't much info about the film, but since the title is Manson's Girls, I can only assume that they are going to need to hire a few more gals to fill out the cast. Likely, to take on the roles of Manson devotees Susan Atkins, Patricia Krenwinkel, and Linda Kasabian. Not to mention who is going to play the head loon himself, Charlie. So while Girls might have the potential to be a half decent movie, the whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Especially if Manson's Girls turns into some horrible hybrid of Helter Skelter and I Know Who Killed Me.

Do you want to see a film about the Manson girls? And shouldn't it be called Manson Girls Gone Wild?

The most annoying thing about following movie news and patronizing film festivals is the pesky waiting. You hear about a film, you get excited, and then you wait. And then you wait more. Once you hit that 365-day mark, it's no longer just an exercise of patience, but trying to come to terms with the fact that you might never see the movie at all, or might never see the movie again. It seemed that this is what would happen with Chapter 27, which premiered back in January of 2007, but now, finally, the film is going into limited release this week.

To refresh your memory: this is the film about John Lennon's killer, Mark David Chapman, and details the days that lead up to the infamous day. It's got Lindsay Lohan pre-clean up, and Jared Leto all body-morphed. In an interview with New York Daily News, Leto talks about morphing into the pudgy killer, and his take on the role.

Um, no, not that Lohan. As if Disney would ever take a chance on a gal fresh out of rehab. BUT, they might take a chance on Lohan's little sister, Ali. Oh yes, E! reports that Ali Lohan (Lindsay's 14-year-old sister) is auditioning for a part in High School Musical 3. Word has it she might take on the role of a spoiled little princess; E! says to "think of her as a Sharpay (Ashley Tisdale) in training." For this third installment in the ultra-popular Disney franchise, Troy (Zac Efron) and Gabriella (Vanessa Hudgens) will reunite as high school seniors preparing for college. If you thought there was plenty of singing and dancing before, wait till you get these kids as seniors -- the possibilities are endless!

Thankfully, Ali Lohan is no stranger to singing. Back in 2006, she released her debut album full of Christmas tunes, Lohan Holiday. I tell ya, after hearing about this girl's older sister for the past several months, I'm about ready to take a Lohan holiday too. A part in High School Musical 3 would almost guarantee the minor Lohan a future career in front of the camera (assuming she doesn't hit 18 and go absolutely nutty on us). How do you fans of HSM feel about a Lohan sibling joining the party? Does it pump you up for the new film, or leave a sour taste in your mouth?

If someone came to me and asked, "Erik, if you could pick any two actors to appear opposite one another on screen, who would it be?" -- I'd probably tell them Kermit the Frog and Javier Bardem. But my second choice would most certainly be Lindsay Lohan and Jack Black. E! News reports that Lohan has decided to get back to work, and she'll do so by starring in the comedy Ye Olde Times, opposite everyone's favorite slightly overweight funnyman, Jack Black. The film follows "two rival Renaissance Faire troupes as they make their way through the competitive circuit." Currently, there's no word on whether Lohan will be competing with Black or against him, but regardless this film just hit my "Must See When Intoxicated" list.

Lohan, who recently left rehab to shoot the tango flick Dare to Love Me, seems keen to hop right back into the spotlight. Earlier in the week, her nude photo spread for New York Magazine was revealed, and while I'm not sure which step on the 12-step program includes nude photos for a prominent magazine, I'm sure it's probably toward the latter end. Ye Olde Times, which will be directed by R.A. White, also stars Cary Elwes, Matthew Lillard, David Arquette and Orlando Jones. The film will most likely hit at some point this year.

The decision for any actor or actress to appear naked, whether on screen, on stage, or in photographs, can sometimes help, sometimes hurt, and sometimes not make any difference at all to the performer's career. In the case of Lindsay Lohan, her freckle-baring photos in New York Magazine may reinforce the public's perception of her as a "bad girl." We saw a very different reaction when "good guy" Daniel Radcliffe, better known as Harry Potter, stripped down for a production of the stage play Equus. While some decried the example he was setting, young women reportedly attended in droves for the opportunity to admire his (acting) form. From a career standpoint, he widened his future possibilities far beyond the family market.

On the big screen, Viggo Mortensen's deadly naked spa duel in Eastern Promises caught everyone's eye. Playing a "bad boy" with a good heart, Mortensen's willingness to display every inch of his physique only expanded his appeal. His performance earned him a nomination for an Academy Award as Best Actor. Portraying both "bad boys" and "good guys," none of the other Best Actor candidates appeared in the buff in their nominated films, though all have in the past.

As we did yesterday with the women, today we offer a selection of five Academy Award-nominated men. All have appeared naked on the big screen, either this year or in the past, with their most revealing appearance noted. Whose career benefited the most from their willingness to bare all?

The firestorm sparked by Lindsay Lohan's decision to pose naked for a photo spread in New York Magazine is fascinating. The comments in response to Erik Davis' post were mostly negative, either disparaging Lohan's looks or her reputation as a "bad girl." I'm sure her age (21) also affected how people felt about the pictures and her exposure in them. Would the reaction have been the same if she had appeared naked in I Know Who Killed Me, in which she played a stripper who kept most of her clothes on?

We'll never know, but we do know that not every actress who doffs her duds provokes such a heated reaction. And, sometimes, it's not even the actress' body parts on display. For example, initial reports were that Cate Blanchett appeared nude in Elizabeth: The Golden Age, but that proved to be false. The actress didn't feel the nudity was required, and so a "bum double" was called in. None of the other women nominated for an Academy Award in the Best Actress category appear naked in their nominated films, though three of them have done so in the past. In the Best Supporting Actress category, we find only Tilda Swinton has bared all before. Therefore, we'll cheat a little and add screenwriter Diablo Cody, who worked as a professional unclad dancer for a brief period in her life.

We've listed four nominated actresses and a nominated writer, all good women of distinguished accomplishment who, at one time or another, have appeared naked in public, all but one on the big screen. Who's Your Favorite Good Girl Gone Nude? And don't worry, the boys get their turn tomorrow.

She's done the DUI thing. She's done the rehab thing. Now, Lindsay Lohan is mounting her comeback by posing completely nude -- as Marilyn Monroe -- in New York Magazine. The photos are meant to re-create Monroe's famous 1962 shoot, shot by Bert Stern, called The Last Sitting. Says NY Mag: "But the pictures are also remarkable for the raw truths they seem to reveal. In them, we see an actress whose comedic talents were overshadowed by her sex appeal, a woman who is cannily aware of her pinup status, yet is also beginning to show her 36 years. In many shots, she is obviously drunk. This was an unhappy time for Monroe."

On why she wanted to pose for the fairly scandalous (and provocative) photos, Lohan said, "I didn't have to put much thought into it. I mean, Bert Stern? Doing a Marilyn Monroe shoot? When is that ever going to come up." There are 10 photos in the batch -- most of which feature Lohan semi-nude, or nude from the waist up, draping herself in some sort of fabric. You can check out the entire gallery over here -- though keep in mind (for those at work or in front of kids), she is definitely nekked in a few of the photos. What do you think about this one? Do you see Monroe in Lohan?

To see images from Stern's original 1962 photo shoot with Marilyn Monroe, head over here.

Chalk up another missed opportunity for Lindsay Lohan, as it now appears the gal will not be starring in the upcoming flick Poor Things, no matter what Shirley MacLaine tells us. Lohan originally dropped out last year when she was admitted to rehab (first or second trip for her, I forget?), and now according to The Hollywood Reporter, they're looking at Brittany Murphy as a possible replacement. I say 'looking at' because negotiations with Murphy haven't even begun yet; she's just one actress they're eying for the role. Poor Things also has a new director in Scott Marshall (Blonde Ambition), who replaces Ash Baron-Cohen after the dude dropped out over "creative differences."

Poor Things tells the story of two female con artists who befriend and then murder homeless men for their insurance policies. Sounds interesting enough, although I never knew the homeless were known for their phenomenal insurance policies. The film already stars Shirley MacLaine and Olympia Dukakis (as the two female con artists, I believe), as well as Rosario Dawson and Channing Tatum. HR also says that Murphy was cast in Sin City 2; a project we haven't heard much about as of late. I assume she'll be reprising her role from the first film. No word on when Poor Things will finally go into production, but we'll let you know.

Sure, it's the time of Sundance, and the push towards the Oscars, but it is also the time of the Razzies! There's a million and two fests and awards ceremonies that tout all that is good in the world of cinema, but sometimes, you just want to revel in the bad. So, enter the yearly Golden Raspberry Awards.

Last year, the big, battling losers were Basic Instinct 2 and Little Man. This year, LiLo's I Know Who Killed Me is battling I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry and Eddie Murphy's Norbit. Miss Lohan's film has scored the first hurrah by grabbing the most nods (9 over Larry and Norbit's 8), but Eddie got the personal title with a record-setting five nods just for himself.

Rounding out the top stinker nomination-grabbers was Bratz, Daddy Day Camp, and Captivity. On the actor side of things, we've got talent wasting their abilities like Jim Carrey, Cuba Gooding Jr., and Julia Ormond, while others aren't so surprising -- Carmen Electra, Dane Cook, or Jessica Alba. (The last on this list, Alba, also scored herself romantic doom -- she hit the worst on-screen couple nod three times for her work in Awake, Good Luck Chuck, and Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer).

Also, I give big props to the Razzie folks for their Patty Duke reference. See what I mean after the jump.

It's about to get a smidge gossipy in here, but once I read these stories back-to-back, I had to write up these bits for you...

First up: Early Obituaries
There's death pools for the masses, and early obits written up by the press just in case the sometimes-inevitable happens. Why waste time writing it up and losing the scoop if you can just hear the news, grab the story, and click "publish"? Well, that's what the Associate Press thinks about Britney Spears, according to Ace Showbiz. The AP have confirmed that they are preparing a blurb for that possibility, and editor Jesse Washington says: "We are not wishing it, but if Britney passed away, it's easily one of the biggest stories in a long time. I think one would agree that Britney seems at risk right now. Of course, we would never wish any type of misfortune on anybody, and hope that we would never have to use it until 50 years from now ...but if something were to happen, we would have to be prepared." Topping this off, Ace says she has chronic mood disorder and is predicted to die in six months if she doesn't get treatment. Poor Spears. Her problems seem never-ending.

Meanwhile... Morgues!
While some people are waiting for Britney to hit the slab, Yahoo reports that Lindsay Lohan will have to visit one. Still in her first legal drinking year (21), Lohan will have to work at a morgue as part of her misdemeanor drunk driving punishment. She's gone to rehab, done some community service, and now she has to do two 4-hour days at the morgue -- "part of a court-ordered program to show drivers the real-life consequences of drinking and driving." Topping that off, she'll also have to spend two days in a hospital ER. I'm sure that will be all sorts of scary for Lohan, but considering how many damned stars and celebs drink and drive, I think all of them should be put in this program.

But all hope is not lost, Wonder Woman is coming!
Justice League is kaput, and that whole live-action project for the lady with the lasso isn't going anywhere, but that doesn't mean we can't get more Wonder Woman. TV Guide reported recently that their sources say that there's a straight-to-DVD animated Wonder Woman feature on the way, and Keri Russell will be voicing the epic, Amazonian heroine. That leads me to wonder (pun!), should she pull off the voice well (and these rumors are true), could Russell also make it work in a live-action setting? Stay tuned!

So I've been watching this whole Britney Spears drama unfold today, and it got me thinking about the kind of biopics we'll be seeing in 10-15 years; the sort of stuff that will be based on the fascinating lives people are living right now. I hate to be the one who says this -- and as much as she's a total trainwreck, I still hope she pulls through -- but are we really that far away from waking up in the morning to TMZ breaking the news of Britney Spears' unfortunate death? Yeah, you've got Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton -- two giant headaches; there's no denying that. But Spears is in a league of her own. She's right there. She's on the verge of leaving this planet ... and it's almost like the media want her to die in some absurd way because they'll have their story of the year.

And then after she dies, MSNBC will run non-stop coverage (though it's an election year, so Entertainment Tonight and Access Hollywood will win out in the end), interviewing the editor of In Touch Magazine 30 times throughout the day, asking them this same question: How come no one was there to help this girl out? And while the editor from In Touch Magazine talks, they'll show the same music video montage -- Britney in a school girl uniform, Britney in leather, Britney at the VMA awards. Larry King will bring on her mother. Then her father. And if he's lucky, he'll get a pregnant Jamie Lynn. The trifecta! You go Larry! The film sites (including Cinematical) will try to find a way to spin the story in a way that announces which jackass first nabs her life rights for a biopic, and that will be it. The end of Britney.

Until the day comes for a biopic. And we run through the names of a few up-and-comers trying to decide who should play Britney. I'll probably write the post, and say something like -- "I vote for Lohan, since she already knows how to sing and could probably pull off a believable Britney." And how ironic would it be if that performance is what nabs Lohan an Oscar nod? Nah ... too soon. Too soon. Maybe Jamie Lynn would play Britney, in a fitting tribute to the girl who taught her how to have stupid sex at 16. But you know what? It doesn't have to go there. Now is the time for her f**king family to drop whatever sh*t is stored in that warehouse they call an attic and get this girl some help. Because when and if it ever happens, I want Britney to star in her own biopic. And I want it to end with her smiling at the camera, with her middle finger in the air, as she goes ... "See, I survived. And f*ck you Perez Hilton!" (Only the MPAA will ask her to remove the word 'f*ck' in order to get the film down to a PG-13 rating. And we'll probably write a post about it.)