Megan Fox Dissed By Another Filmmaker

 

You know that's how Megan Fox looked when she read the insult 

"Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle" co-writer Peter Laird has slammed the decision to cast "Transformers" actress Megan Fox, in the part of character April O'Neil. Who will they cast then, Shaquille O'Neal (get the joke based on them having the same last name). 

Laird wrote on his blog, "I think it's safe to say that there are probably hundreds of better choices for the role of April O'Neil." Yep, that was a diss. He further stated, "My only exposure to Megan Fox as an actress is through her role in two 'Transformers' movies and the wretched (but happily forgettable) 'Jennifer's Body.'" He's right about 'Jennifer's Body' *gagging.*

He politely took another dig at Fox stating, "Of course, her name has promotional value and maybe that's what they want." In short, she is not a real actress and is known for her looks. I don't know that pregnancy and motherhood have mellowed Megan Fox out enough that the former viper tongued actress will ignore that diss. Over to you Megan.

2011 Charlie’s Angels TV Show Reboot Is Not As Good As The Original Series

Another ABC Reboot Goes Wrong

Charlie's Angels (2011)

The original "Charlie's Angels" television series, produced by Aaron Spelling, was a big hit in the 1970s and 1980s. The show was rebooted this month for ABC and not very well. It is not as good as the original. The Judiciary Report does not think Spelling would have liked the new treatment.

Charlie's Angels (1976-1981)

The movie series done several years ago, was not that great either, but the new television series is somewhat cheesy. This maybe due to ABC and NBC struggling with making reboots. The new "Wonder Woman" series that was made, but not aired, was pretty corny, ruining a former hit concept.

Charlie's Angels dolls are adorable

Hollywood has been going into overdrive with reboot after reboot and many of them simply are not good. To do that is to damage the legacy of the original product and sometimes upsetting the public in the process, as revealed by feedback posts on various websites.

Movie Review: The A-Team

Title: The A-Team

Year Of Release: 2010

Review Date: March 31, 2011

Rating: PG-13

Running time: 119 minutes

Box Office Gross: $176,933,591

Site Rating: 2 out of 10 stars

Hollywood decided to reboot the 1980s television show "The A-Team" as a film and the results were very mixed, to say the least. Critics gave it lukewarm reviews and apparently audiences did as well, as it struggled in its first few weeks of release at the box office.

Casting for the film was not good. The cast of the remake is led by Liam Neeson, who plays "Hannibal" well enough. However, Bradley Cooper as "Faceman" was not the best idea. Quinton Jackson, who was amusing, did his best as "B.A." and probably as close to the character as anyone other reboot actor could, but it would be hard for anyone to play the role the way Mr. T did, as he was so unique in the part. Sharlto Copley was passable as "Murdock." He didn't do a bad job at all. Dude got a double shot of the crazy.

The storyline of the film, which is stealing money pressing plates, is not original, as it has been used in a number of films, such as "Rush Hour 2." This movie was rife with unoriginality in stunts and the dialog. "A-Team" gets off to a slow and strange start, as the group comes together in a weird way that is at odds with the original series, leaving viewers confused.

http://www.celluloidfilmreview.com/the-a-team.htm

Film Review - Star Trek

Title: Star Trek

Year Of Release: 2009

Review Date: August 31, 2010

Rating: PG-13

Running time: 127 minutes

Box Office Gross: $385,4946,555

Site Rating: 5 out of 10 stars

Star Trek is the 2009 reboot of the long running science fiction franchise, which began as a television show, occasionally making leaps onto the big screen. This installment of the movie gave viewers the opportunity to see a young Captain Kirk and Spock. It did fairly well at the box office, becoming the highest grossing Star Trek film to date.

The special efx in this film were good and that caught audiences' attention. However, the script was average and the sensuality in it unnecessary, considering the wide demographic, which includes kids.