How do you jump from one of New York's best-loved insightful film blogs to a L.A.-based weblog better known for bite than brain? What's it like to blog the Oscars for Vanity Fair? What will it take to have big-studio publicity recognize the online world? And what are some of the standout films and special selections at this year's Los Angeles Film Festival? Joining us this week live from one of L.A's most hallowed cultural institutions -- The Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf -- to talk about all these topics and more is Stu VanAirsdale, Senior Editor at Defamer and the founder of The Reeler. Cinematical's podcast is now available through iTunes; you can subscribe at this link. Also, you can listen directly here at Cinematical by clicking below:



As ever, you can download the entire podcast right here -- and those of you with RSS Podcast readers can find all of Cinematical's podcast content at this link.

Cinematical is often mentioned in a lot of places; on a lot of different sites, in movie advertisements, on DVD boxes and in trailers. But one place we've never been mentioned (I don't think) is Vanity Fair. Thus, we thought you'd be interested to know that VF has listed Cinematical in its Blogopticon, as one of "the most influential or amusing blogs about politics, gossip, Hollywood, media, and miscellany ..." It's pretty cool stuff, and we're joined by our fellow film fanatic friends over at Slashfilm and AICN. Yay!

When I sent this around to the team earlier, my favorite response came from Cinematical's James Rocchi, who said: "I've always wanted to have something I've been a part of mentioned in Vanity Fair; until this week, I thought it was going to be my planned string of cat burglaries in Monaco, or my probable death at the hands of the new Russian Oil Oligarchs. This is way better, and congratulations to all."

Indeed, sir. Congrats to all -- especially you, our readers, because we wouldn't be anywhere without your continued support, wisdom, humor, feedback and, of course, love.

In these supposedly progressive times, gender equality is one of those touchy issues relegated to the last paragraph of a trend piece nobody reads. When Katherine Heigl suggested to Vanity Fair that Judd Apatow's movies were sexist, the assertion came across like an after-the-fact shrug of acceptance. Ever the galvanizing provocateur, New York Times critic Manohla Dargis confronts the issue head-on with a thorough analysis of the gender bias in this year's summer blockbusters.

With "Iron Man, Batman, Big Angry Green Man" and other massive expressions of virility invading the box office, female roles appear to be relegated to the back of the multiplex. Dargis touches on the rumors that Warner Bros head Jeff Robinov believes no woman has been able to sell a movie since Julia Roberts (a point that Natalie Portman might contest, but not Paris Hilton) before sizing up numerous upcoming studio releases, with particular attention paid to Anna Faris, "who could be the next Judy Holliday but without the right material will, alas, probably end up the next Brittany Murphy." It's the kind of pronouncement that hits you in gut.

Oh my, oh Miley. Blogs around the internet are buzzing over these photos of 15-year-old Hannah Montana star Miley Cyrus, taken by famed photographer Annie Leibovitz for Vanity Fair. Movie City News' David Poland, writing about the pics on his Hot Blog, said, "People do know that 15-year-old breasts, while they really have no business being shown in public, do exist, whether covered in a sheet or a t-shirt, right?" (Poland has the full picture up on his website, I'm not going to put it up here. You can see it there or on Vanity Fair.)

Well, yes, we know that 15-year-old girls have 15-year-old breasts, but that does that make it appropriate for a magazine to publish photos of a half-naked teenager? Whether because the folks over at Disney, where Cyrus's show Hannah Montana is one of its biggest properties, pitched a bitch about the photos, or because she's genuinely mortified by the photos in retrospect, Cyrus issued a statement to fans that said, in part, "I took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be 'artistic' and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed."

So, over on Vanity Fair, they have this piece up on the relative importance of Britney Spears and why even respectable magazines such as VF have dipped their toes into covering, first Paris Hilton, and now Britney. Matt Pressman ponders in the piece:

In fact, this recent spate of "serious" coverage, combined with the uncomfortable fact that no dinner conversation can proceed for more than 15 minutes without the name Britney being invoked, raises a sinister question: is Britney Spears-along with, perhaps, President Bush-the most important cultural figure in America?

Maybe in Pressman's house, Britney is a frequent topic of dinner conversation, but she's certainly not in mine. If we're not talking to the kids about their current obsessions (Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, My Little Pony and Twilight), we're talking about how to best get our fledging organic garden going or mulling over the latest in the ongoing Clinton-Obama debacle. But Britney? Not so much.

Pictured: Gwyneth Paltrow and Robert Downey Jr. re-create a scene from Alfred Hitchcock's To Catch a Thief (click on the image for a larger version).

There's been lots of talk surrounding Vanity Fair's 2008 Hollywood Portfolio edition (March issue), which features several notable celebrities re-creating memorable scenes from Alfred Hitchcock films. VF loves to do stuff like this, but I have to say this one is my favorite so far. Among the celebs who took part are Gwyneth Paltrow, Robert Downey Jr. (seen above), Jodie Foster, Seth Rogen, Naomi Watts, Keira Knightley, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Marion Cotillard, James McAvoy, Emile Hirsch, Scarlett Johansson, Javier Bardem, Charlize Theron and many more. You can scope out Johansson and Bardem re-creating a scene from Rear Window (one of my personal Hitchcock favs) below, then head after the jump to see more (and click on all photos for larger versions).

[via Oh No They Didn't, Slashfilm]

Remember that Vanity Fair story from last week? The one with all the pics, and the quotes from Steven Spielberg, George Lucas and Harrison Ford? Well the author of that story, Jim Windolf, is back now apologizing to his editors and the readers for not pressing Spielberg harder on the issue of whether he plans to continue the Indy franchise following this May's Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Windolf isn't the first one to raise this question, as last year rumors began floating around with regards to the contracts Ford and co-star Shia LaBeouf signed for Indy 4. At the time, it was speculated that both Ford and LaBeouf agreed to appear in at least three more Indiana Jones films after Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Shortly after that rumor surfaced, Lucasfilm jumped to deny the whole thing, calling it "idle chatter."

But Windolf, in a follow-up story that's way longer than it needs to be, takes a nothing quote from Spielberg and spins it into something much larger. Whether Vanity Fair was saving this second article for another day (and more additional traffic) or if Windolf really did get hammered for not asking about sequels -- we do not know -- but we do know that nothing earth shattering is included here. In case you're interested, here's the key paragraph of Windolf's story:

"When I asked him why he hadn't gone forward with the "Indy IV" script written by writer-director Frank Darabont, he said, "In this case George [Lucas] was passionate that this was not the story he wanted to tell at this point in the Indiana Jones saga ..." Noting that he had used the magic phrase "at this point," I followed up by asking him, "Is that leaving room open for another one?" To which Spielberg replied, "Oh, I don't know. I haven't even thought about that. I'm still in the cutting room. I can't even think beyond the next cut."

Windolf goes on to talk about whether LaBeouf could successfully continue the franchise -- whether he's a big enough name right now -- and blah blah. Like I said, this has all been covered. And until we see the kid operate in that leather jacket and slicked back hair, there's no way we can really form an accurate opinion.

[Thanks Pat for the heads up]

What happens when you make a few lame comments about the film that skyrocketed your per flick payday from $300,000 to $6 million? Well, you call up People Magazine and "clarify" your statements. Yes, we're talking about Knocked Up's Katherine Heigl, who, while speaking to Vanity Fair magazine recently, called one of this year's funniest films "a little sexist." She then added, "It paints women as shrews, as humorless and uptight and it paints the men as lovable, goofy, fun-loving guys. It was hard for me to love the movie." Now when her comments first hit the net, I wrote a somewhat scathing post bashing Heigl for, well, bashing the film that "made her." I also said that, if anything, it was the men in the film who came off as idiots; as guys who either couldn't commit to their wives or had absolutely zero motivation in life. The two prominent women (Heigl and Leslie Mann ) were strong female role models, in my opinion. One was a successful mother, while the other was a motivated career gal.

After I wrote the post, I had plenty of people who went the whole "her comments were taken out of context" route. And that may be the case. In a new interview with People, she does allude to the fact that her statements were (kind of, sort of) taken out of context. She says, "I was responding to previous reviews about the movie the interviewer brought to my attention. My motive was to encourage other women like myself to not take that element of the movie too seriously and to remember that it's a broad comedy." Wait, where in those comments does she "encourage other women like myself to not take that element of the movie too seriously and to remember that it's a broad comedy." I missed that part.

But anyway, Heigl later goes on to say, "Although I stand behind my opinion, I'm disheartened that it has become the focus of my experience with the movie. The truth is, it was the best filming experience of my career. Every person that was a part of making Knocked Up helped to encourage, support and inspire me. I never intended for anyone to think otherwise." Fair enough. She still thinks the film is sexist, but she had a great time making it. Should we let her off the hook?

Katherine Heigl in Pictures:

---

Ever since I found this story earlier today, I've been singing Purple Rain to myself all morning. And this is one of those songs I don't have memorized, so if you were near me you'd hear something like this: [To Purple Rain tune] "Don't tell me ... you could ever see me again -- Purple Rain ... Purrrple Rain." C'mon, like I'm the only person out there who fudges the words to songs. Guaranteed you will start humming this tune now, it's that addictive. Just don't blame me. Anyway, Vanity Fair magazine decided to list the 50 greatest movie soundtracks of all time, and at the top sits Purple Rain -- which consists of such memorable Prince tunes like Let's Go Crazy, When Doves Cry and I Would Die 4 U, among others. Personally, I think the soundtrack is great (even if the movie was kind of terrible), but I'm not crazy about giving the top spot to a soundtrack that featured one artist. Or perhaps that's more of a reason to reward it? Here's Vanity Fair's reasoning behind the choice: "[The] Purple Rain soundtrack was a flawless combination of funk, R&B, pop, metal, and even psychedelia into a sound that defined the '80s."

Be that as it may, but should Prince beat out, say, The Beatles? Yes, coming in at number two on their list is A Hard Day's Night, followed by an interesting choice in The Harder They Come. The rest of the top ten is as follows: Pulp Fiction, The Graduate, Superfly, Trainspotting, Saturday Night Fever, American Graffiti and The Big Chill. All very good soundtracks, although I may have pushed Pulp Fiction higher up on the list ... but I'm just a sucker for the music from that film. Unfortunately, Zach Braff's Garden State soundtrack did not reach the top 10. Sorry kids. And what's The Big Chill doing all the way at number 10? I mean, c'mon -- that soundtrack ruled (and as he says that, he opens up iTunes in a separate window). What do you think? Did they get the top 10 right? Would you have shifted things around. And please tell me which songs are now stuck in your head after reading this ...

Roy Scheider is one of those actors that was really popular many years ago and who appeared in several important and successful films and then, for the most part, disappeared. Sure, he's been working here and there but after you've starred in some of the best and most interesting films of the 70s: The French Connection, Klute, Marathon Man and, of course, Jaws, you probably are not so quick to highlight your more recent appearances in such "classics" as Chain of Command, Dracula III: Legacy and Dark Honeymoon.

Even if his recent projects may not up to his former standards, according to Vanity Fair's James Wolcott, Scheider deserves recognition for his past triumphs as well as for his most recent TV role -- as a psycho killer matching wits with Vincent D'Onofrio's detective Goren on TVs Law and Order: Criminal Intent. In fact, Wolcott is so in love with Schneider and his latest role as a TV psycho he wants next Monday -- the day the episode airs -- to be declared a holiday commemorating Scheider and his body of work.

According to Wolcott, "Roy Scheider Day," as he wants it known, "is my way -- America's way -- of toasting an actor too seldom seen these days on big screen or small." I have to agree with Wolcott on this one -- Scheider is a good actor that deserves recognition. Not only was he in some great films over the years that I, an many others, enjoyed but he also had the brains not to make any more Jaws films after Jaws 2. For that, alone, he deserves our respect. Kudos to you Roy. What's your favorite Roy Scheider film?