Kardashian joined the show as a co-host with entertainment personality Mario Lopez partway through the second season of the show, in October 2012. Before Lopez and Kardashian took on hosting duties, Pussycat Dolls lead singer Nicole Scherzinger and UK TV presenter Steve Jones served in the positions. (Scherzinger later became a judge when former judge Cheryl Cole left and the show needed a replacement.)
The New York Post reported that Kardashian isn’t being asked back for season three, quoting an anonymous source.
“They are asking Mario [Lopez] to come back, but not Khloe,” a person named as an “insider” told the Post.
But a spokesperson for the reality competition told the Post that nothing was decided yet.
“The producers have not yet made the talent decisions for this year,” the representative said.
Kardashian first became well-known on the reality program “Keeping Up with the Kardashians,” which first aired in 2007 on the E! cable network. The show led to other spin-offs, including one that focused on Khloe Kardashian and her husband, Los Angeles Clippers player Lamar Odom, titled “Khloe & Lamar.” Kardashian has also worked as a fashion designer and has written a novel as well as a book about her life with her sisters Kim and Kourtney.
“The X Factor” is an American version of the British show of the same name, which, like its US counterpart, was created by former “American Idol” judge Simon Cowell. The show airs on Fox and follows aspiring singers, either as a one-person act or in a group, as they try to win a contract with Cowell’s record label. Unlike fellow popular singing competition “American Idol,” judges take on contestants for mentoring, offering them advice about singing and performance style.
“Factor” has already experienced some judging and hosting turnover, with judges and hosts being replaced for the show’s second season. Original season one host Paula Abdul left “Factor” after one season, while judge Cheryl Cole only lasted two audition rounds in the first season before she left and was replaced by Scherzinger. Singers Britney Spears and Demi Lovato came on as judges for season two, with L.A. Reid and Cowell remaining from the first season. Spears and Reid have already stated they won’t be coming back to the show for its third season.
'Beautiful Creatures' and other young adult adaptations will fill 'Twilight' void – for better or for worse
With the release of “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2” (did you forget how long that title was?) last November, the Twilight movie series, adapted from the books by Stephenie Meyer, officially came to a close.
We assume, that is. Brooding vampires could be coming back to a cinema near you if Meyer writes more stories or a movie-only narrative is cooked up.
But movie executives noticed the overwhelmingly successful box office grosses reaped by the story of ordinary girl Bella Swan and the melancholy vampire she loves, and those craving a young adult series fix over the next year won’t be disappointed. For better or for worse, every movie adaptation based on a young adult novel with similar themes will be compared to “Twilight” – whether they’ll be able to come out from that shadow remains to be seen.
One out now, the movie “Beautiful Creatures,” adapted from the 2009 book by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl, follows a boy, Ethan, who falls in love with a teenage girl named Lena who belongs to a family of witches. Lena is approaching her sixteenth birthday, on which she will be “claimed” by either the forces of good or evil. The book is the first in a series.
“Creatures” director LaGravanese told Newsday that the two stars of the film initially passed on the movie because they didn’t want to invite “Twilight” comparisons, an apprehension he also shared.
“My own hesitation about doing this was fear of getting lumped into this sort of 'Twilight' world,” LaGravanese said.
Actor Alden Ehrenreich, who plays Ethan, said he was uninterested at first by the pitch he got (which he said was “Twilight meets Romeo and Juliet”), but he was immediately won over when he read the script.
“Whenever you're pitched something that sounds like it's just a rehash of other things that were successful, it's not very exciting,” he said. “Because you assume that means it's not somebody's personal vision, just a meld of certain tropes and conventions… within three pages I knew I wanted to do the film, because this character that I got to play I just identified with so much.”
The film was released yesterday but has suffered in reviews, currently holding a score of 53 on the review aggregator website Metacritic. Monitor critic Peter Rainer gave the movie a C+, writing, "[LaGravanese] outsmarts himself by playing everything too straight. (Mustn’t mess up the franchise.) A dash – only a dash – of Tim Burton ghoulishness might have helped."
But some were won over. Writer Meriah Doty titled her article for Yahoo! Movies “Beautiful Creatures is not Twilight (and you might like it better).”
“The love story in "Creatures" is decidedly relaxed, cerebral, dare I say more authentic and charming than the heightened, over-the-top passion between Bella and Edward,” Doty wrote.
Others are coming down the pike as well. The movie “The Host,” which is scheduled for a March 29 release, is based on the novel of the same name by “Twilight” writer Stephenie Meyer. “Host” is the story of Earth after aliens known as Souls inhabit the planet and start living in the bodies of humans. A Soul named Wanderer takes over the body of a girl named Melanie, who is in love with a boy named Jared, and Wanderer and Melanie struggle to coexist.
Actress Saoirse Ronan will play Melanie and “Red Riding Hood” actor Max Irons will play Jared, with actor Jake Abel of “Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief” playing Ian, a man with whom Wanderer falls in love.
And the adaptation of the first book in the supernatural young adult series “The Mortal Instruments” by Cassandra Clare is scheduled for an August release. “Mortal” follows a girl named Clary who discovers she has powers to fight evil demons. She is forced to try to reconcile her feelings for a boy who also battles evil creatures with the love her childhood best friend feels for her.
Star Wars fans had a lot of questions when it was first announced that Disney was set to purchase Lucasfilm – with the intention of producing an entirely new trilogy in a Galaxy Far, Far Away. However, one of the biggest questions surrounding the future of Star Wars is where the story would go in Episodes 7-9. Would the new films continue the narrative established in the original six installments and bring back fan-favorite actors (now 30 years older) to reprise their characters or would Lucasfilm clean the slate and center the trilogy around entirely new faces?
Now, we’re getting unofficial word that Harrison Ford has signed-on to reprise his role as Han Solo in Star Wars: Episode 7 – lending credence to hopes that the film will directly continue storylines from the prior trilogy – while introducing new characters too. Of course, if the rumor turns out to be true, it would likely mean that other high-profile casting announcements are also in the pipeline.
Now that director J.J. Abrams is officially helming Episode 7, Star Wars-related rumors and reports are at an all-time high. Joining the chorus of unconfirmed reports on the production, Latino Review took to the Fox News Latino airwaves and announced that, according to their sources, Harrison Ford has officially signed-on for a “significant” appearance as Han Solo in Episode 7. Not entirely a big surprise, given that Ford has previously stated he’d be open to returning – if the story would allow for it. When pressed for further information, Latino Review admitted that there scoop was limited to the signing of Han Solo and anything beyond the casting itself would purely be speculation at this point. Latino Review has a relatively successful record with their scoops – so there’s more than enough reason to believe that there’s at least some truth to the report.
So what role will Han Solo play in Michael Arndt’s upcoming Star Wars: Episode 7 story? Assuming that use of the word “significant” was deliberate (and accurate), it’s safe to say that Harrison Ford won’t just appear in a flashback or be viewable shooting a Rodian (first) in the background of a future cantina scene. Where Lucasfilm intends to take the character down the line (for Episodes 8 and 9) is still up in the air but, for Episode 7, it’s pretty safe to say that Ford will have a central role – especially if the film deals in some way with Han Solo and Princess Leia’s children (Jaina, Jacen, and Anakin Solo) as many have speculated.
A lot of fan-favorite Star Wars Extended Universe fiction centers around the Solo children and, even if Episode 7 doesn’t directly follow any one specific storyline (i.e. possible female protagonist – aka Jaina), they could serve as a smart jumping off point for a new trilogy – not to mention provide an excuse for the return of other familiar faces: their mother, Leia (Carrie Fisher), Jedi Master Uncle Luke (Mark Hamill), and Wookie Uncle Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew).
Early reports of the Disney purchase indicated George Lucas sat down with Fisher and Hamill ahead of the final acquisition – mentioning the possibility of Episode 7, 8, and 9. This led many fans and industry insiders to speculate that he might have been putting out feelers to see if they’d be open to returning. As a result, the Han Solo rumor (and possible story implications) makes all the more sense.
Of course, this isn’t the only Han Solo-related report that we’ve heard in the last few weeks. Disney has confirmed that in addition to the core trilogy event films, we’ll also be seeing regular standalone movies set in the Star Wars universe – with spin-offs possibly involving Boba Fett, Yoda, and a Seven Samurai-like Jedi movie from Zack Snyder. A Han Solo standalone film (a prequel) was also mentioned and has quickly become the most talked about option among fans who are eager to see the smuggler’s early days – or at the very least, see him make the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs.
Harrison Ford in Star Wars: Episode 7 is a strong probability but Lucasfilm has yet to officially announce the casting. So, as with all unconfirmed reports, take this news with grain of salt for now.
Ben Kendrick blogs at Screen Rant.
(Watch out – spoilers follow...)
“Glee” fans were shocked on Valentine’s Day by an episode in which a planned wedding between high school teachers Will and Emma didn’t happen, but many other twists occurred.
The Feb. 14 episode was supposed to feature the wedding between glee club teacher Will and guidance counselor Emma, but Emma ended up fleeing the wedding beforehand. Meanwhile, former glee club member Rachel, who is now attending the fictional New York Academy of the Arts on the show, found out that she may be pregnant.
Emma was panicking before the wedding after having been kissed by Finn, her former student, who was filling in as glee teacher while her fiancé, Will, was away. The guidance counselor ended up leaving before the wedding, but Will decided to hold the event’s reception anyway, which was attended by the former and current members of the glee club.
Cast members had teased that there would be several huge plot developments in the episode.
Actress Lea Michele, who plays Rachel, tweeted to fans to expect something big to happen.
“So excited for #Glee tomorrow,” the actress tweeted on Feb. 13. “The episode is gonna blow your mind! HUGE shocker at the end!!!”
“Glee” is currently airing its fourth season on Fox, which featured many of the original glee club members leaving for work, college, and other pursuits after having graduated at the end of season three. While many shows based around high schools struggle with how to integrate graduation into the show, “Glee” has been praised for how it’s handled the transition, with equal show time being given to the remaining glee club members in high school and the members who left.
The last time alternative rock band My Bloody Valentine released an album, Michael Jordan was on his way towards leading the Chicago Bulls to the second of six NBA titles. A Bush occupied the Oval Office – George H.W. Bush – and gas cost just a little over a dollar per gallon.
Such a hiatus explains the joy My Bloody Valentine devotees felt when the band announced they were at work on a follow up to 1991’s "Loveless." It is why, on Valentine’s Day 2013, indie music fans have an entirely different kind of Valentine to cherish and love.
The band’s unforgettable 1991 album pioneered a hypnotic musical style called "shoegaze" for the doubled-over pose its practitioners assume when playing their instruments. "Loveless" evoked a “wall of sound," burying whispered lyrics under layers of heavy, rambunctious guitars.
RECOMMENDED: The 25 best musicians of the Rock era
In "Loveless," distortion is not merely an effect applied with the click of a pedal. It is instead the center and the circumference of the album’s sonic landscape. Guitars are tools used to forge a sound so large it might as well occupy physical space, a tone dense enough to send forth some semblance of gravitational pull. When it was released in 1991, the album embodied a logical conclusion of rock and roll music.
Twenty-two years have passed. Michael Jordan is now nearly half a century old. Still, the sheer sonic force of "Loveless" remains unmatched.
That’s not to say nobody has tried. "Loveless" has had an enormous influence on a generation of musicians, including the Smashing Pumpkins, Nine Inch Nails, Radiohead, and just about any indie rock band to play music post-1991.
Even Kevin Shields, the band’s enigmatic frontman, has trembled at the prospect of following an album that often ranks towards the top of “greatest albums of all time” lists.
"I lost it,” he told The Guardian in 2004 on comparisons people have made between Shields and Brian Wilson, Syd Barrett, and other brilliant-musicians-cum-obsessive-recluses. “I lost what I had, and I thought, ‘You know what? I'm not going to put a crap record out.’"
Radio silence endured for a pair of decades, apart from Shields occasionally contributing to one project or another. Rumors of a follow-up to "Loveless" never quite seemed to disappear completely, and Shields dropped tantalizing hints throughout late 2012.
The patience paid dividends. On Groundhog Day 2013, a new My Bloody Valentine album finally became a reality.
It’s difficult to overstate just what that means to followers of this virtually mythical band.
“For those of us whose relationship to music and maybe even the act of hearing has been changed by 'Loveless,' it's hard to believe,” writes Mark Richardson in the influential indie music site Pitchfork. “I'd grown comfortable with the idea that there would never be another My Bloody Valentine album. Even as recently as two months ago, I figured it would never happen.”
But happen it did, and "m b v," the band’s third full-length album, is arresting. From the opening chords to its growling conclusion, it makes big noises, flush with seemingly impossible chord progressions and sounds you thought you’d never hear.
It most resembles the hazy dawdling of "Loveless," but makes use of the post-punk from My Bloody Valentine’s first full-length album, "Isn’t Anything." Bombastic drums undergird the track “who sees you.” A sulphurous guitar, distorted beyond recognition, shudders violently through “only tomorrow.” At points, it peaks, threatening to split the sound wide open.
The song “if i am” serves as a centerpiece, and is My Bloody Valentine at its finest, at once loud and quiet, harsh and soft. Dreamy “oohing” swirls on flirty guitar lines, over buried, pulsing drums. The serenade culminates in a melody that begins simple and sweet enough, and proceeds to collapse in on itself, tying a knot that requires innumerable listens to pick apart.
This is big music; "m b v" demands to be played at ill-advised volumes. It is not an easy album, and it is unlikely to spark a revolution on par with "Loveless." But it guarantees mesmerization and is singular in execution.
It might be it, this time – the end of My Bloody Valentine’s grossly important contribution to alternative sound. But, then again, that’s what they said about "Loveless." Between that album and the band’s latest opus, the apotheosis of rock music is contained somewhere within.
David Unger is a Monitor contributor.
RECOMMENDED: The 25 best musicians of the Rock era
There is possibly nothing more famous about Hollywood romance than the happy ending – the moment where someone runs after someone else in the rain, or heedlessly runs through security at the airport, or says “Follow that cab” (that would be fun to say) and catches up to the other person just in time and delivers a declaration of love and everything is resolved.
So it’s to their credit that two of pop culture’s favorite romances in movies are two stories where the central couple doesn’t end up together at the end.
One, the 1942 movie “Casablanca,” is often called one of the best movies of all time and stars Humphrey Bogart as cynical club owner Rick Blaine and Ingrid Bergman as Ilsa Lund. Rick and Ilsa met in Paris, just as the Nazis arrived to take over, and hit it off immediately. Rick asked her to leave the city with him and she agrees, but when the time comes to meet at the train station, she’s nowhere to be found. Cut to WWII-era Casablanca, where Rick serves drinks to desperate refugees who are trying to get to America, and one night… well, you know how it goes. “Of all the gin joints in all the world, she had to walk into mine.” Ilsa arrives at Rick’s with her husband, Victor, but she's still very clearly in love with Rick. Will Rick, who doesn't "stick his neck out for nobody,” betray Victor and take Ilsa for himself?
RECOMMENDED: 10 romantic movies for Valentine's Day
At the end, he almost fools you – until that famous plane is behind them and Rick convinces Ilsa to go with Victor so Victor will have the heart to carry on with his importance resistance work that might help topple the Nazis.
The other movie is also called one of the best of all time, though perhaps not ranked quite as high (it does have the distinction of coming out in 1939, often called the best year ever for movies). “Gone with the Wind,” based on Margaret Mitchell’s hugely popular novel, follows spoiled Southern belle Scarlett O’Hara (Vivien Leigh), who gets a rude awakening when the Civil War begins and she’s forced to fight tooth and nail for the survival of those she loves against the forces of war and, later, poverty. Rhett Butler (Clark Gable) is a sarcastic blockade runner who recognizes in Scarlett a similar lack of morals and falls in love with her almost as soon as he meets her.
For movie viewers, the love story between Scarlett and Rhett is almost throw-something-at-the-TV frustrating. Scarlett doesn’t love Rhett for a long time, but when she finally begins to, it’s just when he withdraws, believing that she’ll never fall in love with him. He makes an overture; she takes it for sarcasm. She tries to reach out; he thinks she’s pitying him.
It all culminates in the famous last scene, when Rhett says he’s done with her forever. Where will Scarlett go? What will she do? “Frankly, my dear…” Well, you know that one, too.
Scarlett’s determined at the end to get him back. Does she? Some hope so.
It may not be violins and endings in the pouring rain, but when two of Hollywood’s best love stories are ones where the two characters are going their separate ways by the end – and we still love them – you know their writers must have done something right.
RECOMMENDED: 10 romantic movies for Valentine's Day
When The Walking Dead finished off the first half of season 3 with ‘Made to Suffer,’ it wasn’t the hasty infiltration and subsequent firefight between Rick’s crew and the people of Woodbury that breathed new life into series, it was the introduction of another group of survivors.
So far, season 3 has been about the core survivors meeting new people. Some of these encounters have gone south pretty quickly, e.g., Thomas and the other inmates not named Oscar or Axel (Lew Temple) wound up dead and now the citizens of Woodbury, spurred on by the Governor (David Morrissey), are cheering the Dixon brothers in gladiatorial combat. In terms of overall friendliness, these instances don’t rank too high, but there’s hope in the form of the seemingly capable and mostly affable Tyreese (Chad Coleman) and his dwindling crew – not to mention the ever-scowling face of Michonne (Danai Gurira). All in all, the infusion of new blood had The Walking Dead ready to take on the rest of season 3 with some real gusto.
But for all the life that was put back into the show during the midseason finale, ‘The Suicide King’ seems to come in and suck a lot of that life right back out. Sure, there’s a tense moment at the beginning of the episode that resolves the issue of Daryl (Norman Reedus) and his brother Merle (Michael Rooker) being trapped in Woodbury and potentially having to fight one another to the death, but the scene plays out almost too quickly. Rick (Andrew Lincoln) and his crew attack again, causing a stampede of formerly bloodthirsty Woodburians that, along with all the gunfire and smoke grenades, provides the perfect cover for Daryl and Merle to escape.
And while the action offers fans an opportunity for everyone to breathe a little easier knowing that Daryl isn’t next on the chopping block, it causes the action to shift into the series’ default setting of watching small clusters of survivors argue with one another. No sooner does Rick’s crew find their way back to Glenn (Steven Yeun), Michonne and the ever-lasting Hyundai, than the situation devolves into an argument highlighted by raised voices, guns and a sword. Naturally, nobody wants Merle in the group, but Daryl refuses to abandon his brother like he did before, and soon the Dixon brothers are off on their own adventure somewhere between Woodbury and the prison.
Meanwhile, the situation back at the prison begins to get tense as two of Tyreese’s team, Allen (Dan Thomas May) and Ben (Tyler Chase), propose the idea of overtaking Carl (Chandler Riggs) and Carol (Melissa McBride) and then using their weapons to take the prison for themselves. To their credit, Tyreese and Sasha (Sonequa Martin-Green) argue that that’s not the way they want this situation to play out, and instantly we know something useful about them as characters. Once Rick arrives at the prison, though, the news of Daryl’s absence hits hard, leaving the group feeling more vulnerable than before and forcing Hershel (Scott Wilson) to mention that if ever they needed some reinforcements, now’s the time.
It’s in keeping with Rick’s arc that his first instinct is to reject every new person’s offer of help, and to look at them as a potential threat, rather than a much-needed addition to his group – which, in terms of maintaining the character that’s been built is a plus. But after the way Tyreese and his group were introduced, and how it really helped make the series feel fresh again, it was something of a bummer to see the character interaction settle back into the stifling sameness of what’s come before. This scenario will undoubtedly play out with the two men working together, and when they do, it will probably be a very successful moment; it just feels as though the first meeting between Rick and Tyreese was a great opportunity to try something new that went back to the start, rather than pushing forward.
Instead, the writers chose to play up the fact that Rick is still cracking under the pressure of keeping these people alive and safe by having him see a vision of Lori – at least it seems like Lori. It’s a confusing moment for the survivors, and rightly so; there’s reason to suspect that an attack by the Governor and the riled-up citizens of Woodbury is on the horizon and the guy everyone has put their unquestioning faith in is suddenly yelling and waiving a revolver around. It’s easy to see this playing into Rick eventually having to put some trust in strangers, but in the moment, it just feelt too reminiscent of the phone call scene that was pulled off far more successfully.
Finally, back in Woodbury, Andrea (Laurie Holden) has to keep the citizens from being shot by sentries as some attempt to abandon the town, and then things get worse after the Governor shoots a bite victim after some walkers make it past the town’s barricades. She makes a quick speech that, despite it’s cloying hopefulness, seems to prevent anyone from trying to leave for the time being, and therefore prevents the need for further violence – against the citizens of Woodbury, anyway. This makes Andrea and the Dixon brothers the undecided factor when the conflict between the prison and Woodbury gets underway. And for Andrea, at least, it’s an interesting position that her character is very much in need of being in.
Although the midseason premiere lacked the energy and the sense of forward momentum that the finale had back in December, ‘The Suicide King’ still alluded to the power of the human vs. human conflict that has been a great success so far this season, and likely will be again in the weeks to come. There were times when the episode felt like it was taking two steps back, but with several episodes left, there’s still plenty of time to start moving forward again.
Kevin Yeoman blogs at Screen Rant.
The movie universe has broken wide open since the announcement that Disney purchased LucasFilm and plans to release new Star Wars movies – beginning with Star Wars Episode VII in 2015. Just yesterday came the news from top executives that standalone spinoff films were in the works as well, to fill the years in between each numbered chapter of the unfolding new saga.
A Yoda movie was the first rumored prospect for spinoff; following in the trend of revisiting old characters from the original trilogy, today we get word that Han Solo and Boba Fett might also get their own, respective, feature films.
EW is dropping the exclusive, claiming to have it from sources that Solo and Fett are indeed the characters we will see in spinoff films. It makes perfect sense for Disney/Lucas to take a two-pronged approach to the franchise; on the one hand offering fans the nostalgic thrill of new adventures with old, beloved (lucrative) characters – meanwhile expanding the brand with the new Episodes and their characters.
Word is the Han Solo film would take place between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope, chronicling how a young rapscallion bacome the legendary lovable roughneck smuggler. Of course (as will be detailed in our upcoming editorial) there must be a “How Han Met Chewie” element to this film for it to be all it can be.
If you couldn’t tell by the parameters being set, Han Solo would have to be played by a younger actor – though like The Hobbit, an aged Harrison Ford could still be utilized to frame the piece. Ford himself said he’s open to returning to the franchise.
The Boba Fett movie is more vague in shape, but basically the idea is to set it between either Episodes IV & V, or V & VI, with the gist of it being Boba tangling with a collection of fellow intergalactic Bounty Hunters and scumbags to obtain (or protect) some quarry. With a loose frame like that, we could very well end up seeing Han Solo’s carbonite slab bounced around the screen for an hour an a half while Boba tries to get it back. Add in cameos by unscrupulous types like Darth Vader, and this anti-hero Star Wars flick could be something refreshingly new.
The current game plan is for Episodes VII – IX to be released every three years between 2015 – 2021, with additional films (like these solo spinoffs) in the gaps between Episodes chapters. Given the resources of Disney/LF, there very well could be two Star Wars films out a year, keeping with the Marvel blueprint.
No word on casting, writers or directors yet – and given the state flux we are living in regarding Star Wars as a whole, anything could end up happening. Don’t count Yoda, Republic Commandos, Shadow of the Empire or anything else out.
What about you guys? Any ideas to share?
Kofi Outlaw blogs at Screen Rant.
“It's the fastest way to get around the city,” he said in an interview. “When I'm on the train, I play solitaire, Angry Birds, and backgammon on my phone.”
The actor also said in the interview that he had a disguise made up so he wouldn’t be recognized by fans, but that he was surprised by how he felt when he was treated like everyone else.
“Fame is very much a double-edged sword,” Bacon said, according to MSN News. “I had a prosthetic disguise made, because I wanted to see what it would be like not to be recognised. I didn't like it very much – no one was nice to me. People didn't bother me, but they also looked right through me.”
However, the actor, who is now starring on the Fox TV show “The Following” as a determined former FBI agent who is on the trail of a serial killer (“Rome” actor James Purefoy), isn’t the only famous face who takes public transportation. Actors including Katharine McPhee of “Smash,” which has a set in New York, and Katie Holmes, who recently starred in a Broadway play titled “Dead Accounts,” have been spotted on the New York subway. Others who have taken the subway include Hugh Jackman and singer Rick Springfield, who started singing his hit “Jesse’s Girl” while riding and got others to sing along.
But McPhee told Self Magazine she stopped taking the subway after she had trouble the first time.
“On my first day of work, I said, ‘I'm going to be a real New Yorker, get there on my own and not spend $30 on a cab,’” the singer said. “But I went the wrong way on the subway, and when I asked for directions, the person in the booth was mean to me. So I ended up crying and in a cab anyway. Now the show sends a van for me.”
One of the most famous stars to board the train recently was rapper Jay-Z, who took the subway to Brooklyn when he performed at the newly opened Barclays Center. A video of him speaking with a 67-year-old woman on the train who didn’t know who he was quickly became popular online.
“My name is Jay,” he said to the woman, Ellen Grossman, asking her name.
Grossman asked him if he was famous.
“Yes,” the rapper replied, then added, “Not very famous. You don’t know me. But I’ll get there someday.”
When he gave his full name as Jay-Z, Grossman said she knew who he was.
The new medical drama from David E. Kelly may be innocuously titled MONDAY MORNINGS, but it is anything but benign. In fact, it aims right for the jugular with storylines intent on piercing even the most hardened of hearts. MONDAY MORNINGS seeks to tell the internal trials which doctors face from their peers after a medical misstep, while providing a human face to back-dropped the problem from which it stemmed.
Co-created and executive produced by world-renown neurosurgeon Sanjay Gupta, the stories of MONDAY MORNINGS resonate with authenticity and humanity. The medical world may appear cold and clinical from the outside, but inside the operating rooms, in the waiting rooms, and in the doctor’s offices, life and death decisions are made each day. Many result in a favorable and happy ending. But then there are those decisions that make every doctor and surgeon question whether something more could have been done. That is also where the Monday morning Morbidity & Morality (M&M) sessions come into play. Those meetings ensure doctors hold each other accountable for risky decisions that resulted in adverse consequences.
With an all-star cast of Jamie Bamber, Jennifer Finnigan, Alfred Molina, Ving Rhames, Keong Sim, Sarayu Rao, Bill Irwin and Emily Swallow, MEDICAL MORNINGS shall tug on the heart strings and yet be heart-crushing, simultaneously. But for those who make the life-and-death decisions, making hard decisions is their job. They were trained to make the hard calls; yet living with those decisions can be painful, and accountability can both haunt and destroy. However, for every bad call, there are thousands of decisions that result in a happy-ending and those are to be celebrated as well.
The thing to remember watching MONDAY MORNINGS is that while there will be episodes with sad outcomes, there are also episodes with joyous outcomes. And, by far, the best part of the show will be getting to know the characters populating the world of Chelsea General Hospital; for each offers a unique way of looking at medicine, ranging from outrageous confidence to preposterous hilarity. Just like patients come in all shapes and sizes, so do doctors. Each has a temperament or personality that shines differently depending on the prism from which the light of medicine shines.
As long-time fans of Alfred Molina and Ving Rhames shall recognize, their characters cannot be categorized into a box description. They shall be imposing, determined, inspiring, and yet somehow offering their own quirky take on what it means to be a doctor. Lending their unique presence, they set the standard to which the other characters shall aspire to emulate. Yet even with such strong presences in their midst, Jamie Bamber, Jennifer Finnigan and the rest of the cast find a way to shine on their own. Discovering each of their quirks and the reasons we shall fall in love with each of them shall be a fun journey.
Tiffany Vogt blogs at The TV Addict.