Media Should Leave Jennifer Aniston Alone: She's Not on the Taxpayer Dime and Can Do What She Wants With Her Own Money

Fox News reported that actress Jennfier Aniston spent $50,000 on her hair during a recent PR stint for her new movie Marley & Me (an EXCELLENT movie), while average Americans are having to cut back.

I don't have an issue with someone spending their own money on their own stuff. She IS helping part of the economy.

If Uncle Sam were paying for it, I'd be pulling my own hair out, but that isn't the case at all. I think the media ought to give her a break and let her spend her money the way she wants to.

I wouldn't spend $50,000 on styling my hair, that's for sure, but if she wants to, more power to her.

If Hollywood Wants Obama to Win, They Need to Shut Up About McCain

It occurs to me that the more Hollywood talks politics, the more the right gets fired up. So it stands to reason, that if they want their "chosen one" Obama to win, they need to shut up about McCain and keep making movies. In fact, the less we hear from Hollywood, so much the better.

If they want to use the power of their celebrity to promote a cause, that's one thing. But everyone saw what happened when McCain ran his "Celebrity" ad and use Britney Spears and Paris Hilton in it: Obama's numbers began to slide and haven't recovered. He'll have a bump in the numbers next week due to the Democratic Convention starting tomorrow, and all eyes will be on Obama.

The week after, the GOP has their turn. Then I fully expect one of the most negative campaigns in American political history to begin.

But with the success of McCain's "Celebrity" ad, Hollywood should take note that most common folks don't care about their opinions. They'll wind up hurting Obama instead of McCain if they trash-talk McCain.

Another Iraq War Movie Bites the Dust: Hollywood Doesn't Seem to be Learning

"Stop-Loss" is the most recent Iraq War-related movie to go in the toilet, making about $4.5 million in it's opening weekend.

The movie had a budget of $25 million, so it looks like Paramount will be eating it, unless the overseas market saves it.

This movie was said to be better than the other Iraq War movies that flopped, as described in this blog before. Hollywood either isn't learning anything, or it's simply taking a while for this slate of Iraq War movies to go through the pipeline.

No one wants to see a movie that is a grim reminder of how terrible the war is, and the price that we as a nation have paid for that war, in terms of national treasure. If people want to see the war, they just turn on the news and get all the horror that they can stomach. Why would people want to pay to see it?

Disgusting.

Latest Iraq War Film Bombs at Box Office: More Proof That Hollywood Needs to Shift Gears

The latest Iraq War film, "Redacted", utterly bombed at the box office, taking in a paltry $25,628 across the country in it's opening weekend. It's a portent of things to come when (IF at this point) it goes into wide release.

It's more proof that Iraq War films are not appealing the the American viewing public, and that Hollywood needs to get out of Iraq War films until after the war is over. It joins "Lions for Lambs", "Rendition" and "In the Valley of Elah" in the trash can for box office performances.

Anti-war films at this juncture are boring, depressing and a waste of money for the studios.

Are the Hollywood elites getting it yet?

Hollywood is Learning a Lesson on Anti-Iraq War Films: Movie After Movie Flops at the Box Office

The latest and the not-so-greatest thing coming out of Hollywood has been a slew of anti-Iraq War films. And every one of them has been a box office failure. People don't want to go to a negative movie when events in reality are already so negative.

Here's the latest takes:

"Rendition" with Reese Witherspoon and Jake Gyllenhaal---$10 million domestically--a "disastrous" performance. It's been in theaters since October 19th.

"The Kingdom" with Jamie Lee Fox--$47 million domestically--budget was $70 million, so this one didn't fare as well as expected either. It's been in theaters since September 28th.

"In the Valley of Elah"--an independent film with Tommy Lee Jones, made $7 million. It was said to be a good film, but the subject--a father investigating the death of his son in Iraq--was too much for a war-weary U.S. public to stomach.

"Home of the Brave" with Samuel L. Jackson made a paltry $43,753 domestically. This was released in December of 2006, then widely released in May of 2007 before being pulled. Somehow "disaster" doesn't even begin to cover it.

And most recently, Robert Redford's film "Lions for Lambs" with Tom Cruise made $2 million on opening. This is much weaker than anticipated and may be a sign of things to come for this film.

Hollywood ought to be reluctant to put out multi-million dollar films based on the Iraq War right now. They should be waiting for a few years after the war ends to start producing this stuff; it might attract more people.

All they have to do is look to the past: Vietnam-era films produced in the 1980s did well: "Full Metal Jacket" made $46 million on a $30 million budget; "Platoon" made $138 million on a $6 million budget. "Good Morning, Vietnam" made close to $124 million. "Apocalypse Now", made in 1979, just six years after American troops were pulled from Vietnam, made $83 million. "Rambo: First Blood" made $47 million on a $15 million budget.

With a war in progress, Hollywood needs to pay closer attention to the mood of the viewing public when they produce Iraq War-era films.