Thursday, June 12, 2008

Friday question of the week: Katherine Heigl

It’s Friday question time. Here’s a rather timely one.

J Gillespie wonders what I think about Katherine Heigl pulling out of Emmy consideration because "Grey's Anatomy" failed to deliver the goods for an award-worthy performance.”

I think it’s an unconscionable slap in the face to the writers of her show. It seems to me there are three possible explanations for her taking this position.

1) She thinks this will motivate the writers to better service her character. It’s hard to believe anyone could be that stupid. If I were producing that show her part would be reduced to giving enemas. And there would be messy equipment failures.

2) She’s looking to get her release so she can pursue her feature career. Making a fortune on a hit television show is keeping her from starring in such breakout films as 27 DRESSES.

3) Her integrity as an artist prevents her from performing anything she feels is below her very high standards. After all, this is a thespian who has appeared in BRIDE OF CHUCKY, VEGAS DICK, BUG BUSTERS, and of course UNDER SIEGE 2.

If Katherine Heigl wants to pull out of Emmy consideration, fine. Let her. There are much better, more deserving dramatic actresses anyway.

But how would she feel if the producers of Grey’s Anatomy were allowed to disqualify her from consideration because they thought she did a horseshit job performing their scripts?

There’s such a thing as professional courtesy. And gratitude.

Katherine Heigl, YOU have failed to deliver the goods.

51 comments:

Michael J. Bell said...

mmmmmm....Katherine Heigl....

I'm sorry, what was the question?

Hank Hollyweird said...

You're forgetting her heroic actions during the strike--I'm mean, after all between Heigl and Diablo Cody writers would be nothing at all. Between the two of them they spoke for us, defended us, made us feel worthy just to be lucky enough to walk the picketline with them. In short, Heigl is one half of the duo that saved Hollywood...

And after all that, why wouldn't she slap her show writers in the face? I mean, they'd be nothing without her, they should write that much better so she can shine. They owe her that much, don't they?

R.A. Porter said...

Ken, I see where you're going with the enema idea, but I think it's horribly unfair to the guest stars.

I think a better solution would be to have her character have an off-screen accident that reduces her to a drooling idiot who sits mute in a bed for ten or fifteen minutes an episode. "More drool! Roll your eyes around more!"

From her behavior this week - not to mention her churlish behavior at last year's Emmys - it's clear that "drooling idiot" is right up her alley.

I'm reminded of the Friends when Joey was written off Days of our Lives for bad-mouthing the writers. Not to insult Joey Tribbiani by comparing him to a no-talent hack like Heigl.

The Milner Coupe said...

I'm glad you said something. When I read about this in the paper, it was written as news, no commentary.

Her sense of self is a little inflated beyond even that stellar resume.

What a gooch.

Pat said...

First thing I thought of, too, was Joey Tribbiani badmouthing his writers, then finding his character stepping into an open elevator shaft. Would that such a fate could befall Katherine.

BTW, I think that anyone who would even consider giving an Emmy to "Grey's Anatomy" over "House," particularly when Hugh Laurie has yet to win one, need to have his head X-rayed to see if it contains any random scraps of brain matter.

TCinLA said...

She's an Aaaaac-tressss. Need one say more???

As opposed to actors who happen to be female.

sephim said...

It's a pity you're already married Ken, you've just won my heart.

Heigl's a fucking whiny bitch, I bet nobody had this trouble with Loretta Swit.

Well, maybe not until after the 8th season of MASH anyway.

Charles Jurries said...

If this will open up a spot to put Elizabeth Mitchell on the ballot this year, then I am okay with Heigl pulling out due to "bad material." Would that she have pulled out because she thought that SHE was doing a bad job!

rita said...

wow! reminds me of john lennon's statement about the beatles an jesus. but in his case, he was catering to his *own* talent and not denigrating the work of others -- without whom ms heigl wouldn't even have a job to begin with... professional suicide much.

Bitter Animator said...

Woman in 'Says How She Feels' Shocker.

Diogo said...

Oh, you mean this time we won't have her correcting the the Emmy announcer? "it's Heigl". I had the destinct feeling that if the poor woman was down on stage Heigl would slap her. On another celebrity news, Jon Voight will join 24 next season. Another class actor searching for work on tv. He's gonna play the main villain for season 7. I can just imagine those torture scenes "tell me how to get your daughter in the sack! NOW, DAMN IT!" (or dang, if the FOX censor is in a bad mood)

emily said...

She should have said, "I do not feel I was given the material this season to warrant a JOB NEXT YEAR."

Or maybe she simply was afraid the announcer would mangle her name again?

The Crutnacker said...

To paraphrase Homer Simpson: "Actors. Is there anything they don't know."

It is amazing to see Heigl's evolution as an actress from semi-hot chick to annoying semi-hot chick.

It seems as though Heigl chose the David Caruso route over the George Clooney route. Rather than be grateful that a hit show gave you the opportunity to a) work, and b) expand your career to heights 99.9% of other actors only dream of, you decide to bite the hand that feeds you. She should ask David how well that worked out for him. Hey, what's Gary Burghoff doing these days?

The Crutnacker said...

Didn't Heigl bash Knocked Up, the thing that made her a "star"? Wonder what truly IS up to her standards.

Maybe Ken could pen Mannequin 3 for her. Only this time the mannequin doesn't come to life or talk.

I think her Gray's Anatomy demise should be her character yelling at her bosses as an emergency goes on around her. A stat flight helicopter is getting ready to land, and as she starts screaming at the top of her lungs at the subpar assignments she is being given, the helicopter tips and decapitates her character.

The kicker.... her character continues talking through the rest of the episode as they try to reattach her head.

The Crutnacker said...

Someone on another board had a perfect suggestion......

Do a Suzanne Summers to her. Remove her from the set and have her entire performance "phoned" in to characters on the show.

steve said...

Wasn't she on a talk show emphasizing how her husband lives in "MY house?" Class all the way, Kathy!

Tom Quigley said...

The deer should have kicked her squarely in the ego...

Mary Stella said...

Sounds like pre-emptive sour grapes. By removing herself from consideration, and blaming others, she doesn't suffer not being nominated or, if nominated, losing.

Sam Kim said...

I could be wrong, but I interpreted her remarks a bit differently from at least one or two people here. I don't think she was complaining about the quality of writing. I think she was complaining about how the producers and writers chose to write her character on the show.

So it's still quite offensive. She was being ungracious and ungrateful. But not really insulting.

The Milner Coupe said...

Did we get the whole quote? Maybe she also removed herself from contention for an Oscar or a Tony.

I hope she didn't leave out the Pulitzer or Nobel Peace prize.

Or a Sainthood.

Man, everyone is ruining everything for her!

Anonymous said...

Maybe after this her career will be reduced to doing porn because no one will want to work with her. Yay, Beer! We all win! Seriously, what an ugly mouth on such a beautiful woman.

Emily Blake said...

Her character's gonna get raped and murdered. That'll give her something to act about.

Cap'n Bob Napier said...

Yeah, she was wrong, but I'd do her.

What John Lennon said was that The Beatles "are more popular than Jesus Christ, AND THAT"S WRONG." Of course the news whore cut off the qualifying words and made it something it never was meant to be. So much for objective journalism. I think this was also a contributing cause to the War of 1812.

Cybele said...

Okay, what's wrong with saying "my part wasn't very dramatic this year" and just pulling out of the race. Ever consider how stressful it is to have a whole machine working to get you an Emmy nom, after you've had one before?

How about the fact that she recognized that the show wasn't a machine to make Emmys for the individual performers ... that just being part of the team didn't mean that she needed to be singled out?

Ever consider that some of her comments have been spun in a way that makes it look like someone else is to blame?

Jeeze ... I don't think the stuff she had to perform was Emmy worthy either.

Let's look at this ... each performer has the OPTION to put themselves out there for nomination. She didn't. Why is that news? Why aren't you making fun of all the crap performances that are coming in the mail via the academy screeners?

R.A. Porter said...

@cybele, perhaps in a vacuum that would have been a valid interpretation of Heigl's rude remarks. But this is just another in a long line of actions and statements that indicate she is a spoiled widdle princess with no grace or class.

Allen L. said...

As an actor I wish I could take umbrage with the spate of anti-thespian commentary but, truth be told, we're a notch below porn stars where intelligence is concerned, which puts us just above models and reality tv stars.
As an actor who was IN Bug Buster, I wish I could say that the behavior is surprising......

Darth Weasel said...

I think in the debate over the cause/meaning/point/pointlessness of her comments, we are missing some vital news...someone cares about the Emmys?

sephim said...

What's an "Emmy"?

jbryant said...

I agree that it's not classy for Heigl to diss the hard-working colleagues who helped put her where she is today. Also, it's kind of odd to be saying, in effect, "Dear Emmy, even though you had the good taste to reward me last year, I can't in good conscience allow for the possibility that you'll be so blinded by my uncanny turd-polishing this year that you'll overlook some deserving soul who had better material to work with."

And yet in a way, the Grey's writers are getting off easy, because the show has become pretty embarrassing. While it's always been "high school in a hospital," it used to be fun. Now it's just inane. Heigl is superb when the material is there (e.g., the Denny storyline), but her character has become truly annoying.

Also, Ken, like it or not, 27 Dresses was a hit (grossed over 75 million) and Grey's ratings are dipping. As you suggested, Heigl may well feel like she's trapped in a crap show while her feature film iron is hot. But yeah, she should've kept quiet. If she did land a nomination, she could've just gone on talk shows and been all humble about how she didn't deserve it. There's a way to do these things without creating a PR nightmare.

rob! said...

could she be replaced by Sarah Chalke? Chalke used to replacing actresses on a hit series, plus she's been playing a doctor for years on Scrubs. moves right in!

alan said...

I took the comment to mean she thought her performance sucked.

I would also like to throw my hat in the ring to be enema recipient every week on the show. And I'm a method actor, so I'm not afraid of getting my hands, or any other part of me dirty.

Robert H. said...

Can one do a good thing for the wrong reason?

Personally, I'd be more offended if she remained on the nominee list. Don't really care why she requested to be taken off of it.

Consider it to be one of the rare moments of divine serendipity...

Julio said...

I know this goes against the flow on this board, and it appears most of you know more about this stuff than I do, but has anyone considered she may have been correct? I agree it was stupid and insulting to do what she did, but did she get crap written for her character this year?

Of course, after these comments, more crap may be coming her way

adam _______________________ said...

I have to go against the flow as well. I hardly ever side against my beloved TV writers, and I think the way she handled it was wrong on all counts, but.... the writing for her character was crap this season. So she may be insulting, rude, inconsiderate, and politically misstepping, but she isn't wrong.

Or did none of you see her biggest scene of the season where she resuscitated a deer in the back of a pick-up truck to win the respect of her interns?

Eee-yup.

Rhymes With Orange said...

Can I really be the only one who remembers that Katherine Heigl pulled this sort of stuff before, when she was on "Roswell"? She didn't dump on the writers then, she just didn't show up on time.

On the one hand, Heigl is giving herself a reputation for being difficult. On the other hand, she made a point of mentioning her prior passive-aggressive bad behavior in interviews before "Grey's Anatomy" aired, so no one at the show should be surprised at her behavior now...

KEN LEVINE said...

Ms Heigl has every right to be upset with the material she's being given to perform, but she doesn't have to go public with it and embarrass the people who work their asses off trying to make her look good, with the best intentions.

A. Buck Short (aka Mud?) said...

May I approach Your Honor – for the defense?

First, an Emmy should go to everyone commenting so far for resisting the temptation, unlike certain movie reviewers, to introduce any reference to nihilism, despite the different surname spelling. Second, in the woman’s defense, anybody forgets to pull out early enough you can get seriously knocked up. (OK, take back the nihilism Emmy.)

I think both Mary S. and Cybele may have valid observations on either side of this. It’s possible there could have been some contract-breaking or loss-preemption Machiavellianism going on. And maybe we can extrapolate from prior brushes with tact. But I prefer giving the benefit of the doubt.

I keep seeing references to Heigl’s “announcement” that she was withdrawing her name from consideration, and why. What announcement? The way I understand it there was none. She asked to be removed from consideration (or more likely not to have her name submitted). Somebody mentioned that her name was missing to Tom O’Neill at the LA Times; and since it’s been common for previous years' winners to at least be submitted for consideration, O’Neill called and asked her why she wasn’t on the list.

I may be opening myself up for a “bring it on” moment here, but first of all, I’m not sure how anybody or any show gets listed among the “for consideration legions.” My guess is they’re submitted by the network, it’s publicists or their counterparts at the studios or production companies. Most likely these “departments” are under tremendous pressure to submit tons of names that haven’t a prayer just to massage egos, let somebody know the network appreciates them, or at the very least to keep a very nice person from feeling dissed. Again only guessing.

Unless Heigl “issued a statement through her publicist” -- and it didn’t seem like she did -- unlike writers, you don’t generally get rewrite options when answering a phone call, unless somebody’s running interference.

I find it very easy to believe that, genuinely not feeling of sufficient stature this year, Ms. Heigl requested that whoever does the submitting either withhold or withdraw that. Then for awhile nothing happens.

Out of the blue, it’s O’Neill on the horn. Unprepared for the ramifications, she answers the question honestly in terms of what she felt was one of the principal reasons her performance this past year wasn’t up to Emmy standards --- like a normal person – not like a President’s press secretary.

Most of us would think of it as just the courtesy of answering a question, not making a pronouncement. And in doing so it's not thinking of yourself as overly important, it's thinking of yourself as less important that apparently alot of others do.
(And if the answer did come through a publicist, it’s just as likely that it came from the publicist, who may have repeated the truth or just felt it was a way of not demeaning the client’s performance.)

It’s also very easy for someone to say that she didn’t have a lot of good material to work with this year – without fully realizing that she’s also criticizing actual living breathing people in doing so. It may be different in TV where there’s an ongoing relationship and potentially more internecine activity. But from my experience, part of writers’ complaints about being seen as lower on the totem pole than they should be, at least in pictures or theater, is that most people on the production side of a drama or comedy (as opposed to a live late night show) consider the script as just another tool, like a prop. Albeit an important one. They ask themselves, “How can/should I work with this?” Or “with what we’ve been given?” Not “How can I work with what these people gave me?” I would imagine this is especially true what the playwright has been dead for 100 years. Now one can criticize her for having the writers themselves the last thing on her mind, but that’s not what we’re talking about here.

As was pointed out with the Lennon allusion, have you ever been misquoted or only partially quoted in the newspaper, knowing “That’s not what I said,” or at least “That’s not what I meant.” Then you read where somebody else allegedly says something derogatory about you in response to a reporter’s question, and, despite your own personal prior experience, your immediate reaction is, “That sonofabitch, how could he/she go to the papers and say something like that about me?”

As I recall, last year, Heigl was genuinely surprised to have won over two of her co-stars and gracious and self-deprecating in her acceptance. Including thanking Eva Longoria, Piven et al for getting her name right. It was cute Although she expressed them in terms of the script, I think her “Knocked Up” comments were more about how it made her feel. And she immediately followed up with how it was the best production experience she had ever had – or some such.

The bottom line: when she wakes up tomorrow morning, she’s Katherine Heigl – and we’re not. Just look at her for God’s sake! What can I say, Heidegger, I just dig’er. (OK now I owe you all a damned statue.) But just try to get that Heigl-Theron-you threesome image out of your head.

Max Clarke said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Max Clarke said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Actually, for the record, Heigl's publicist made the statements to the AP as well as O'Neil.

Just FYI.

John said...

Nowadays, modern science can do DNA testing of people and determine pre-existing medical conditions that could pop up and affect their health later in life. Wouldn't it be great if they could come up with the same sort of test for the dread disease divaism?

You do a reading before the series starts with an actor/actress, and they seem great for the part, but DNA tests show that person's genetic makeup puts them at high risk of terminal divaism if the show has any modicum of success. Medical ethicists are concerned that DNA testing will cause insurance companies to redline people with conditions from receiving benefits due to future medical problems, but here, TV producers, directors and writers could use the insurance companies as a justification for rejecting a tempremental actor or actress for a role, because they're going to cause production delays and internal disharmony on-set in the future. Then it would be up to the producers to decide if that person was so great in the role they were worth the future headaches.

D. McEwan said...

Now, now r.a.,
Be fair. Miss Heigl is not a "no-talent hack". She is a talented, self-involved bimbo.

Sam Kim,
I don't really see much if any distinction in the clarification you posted. She wasn't complaining about the quality of the writing, but about how they chose to write her? They wrote a bad storyline really well? Hates the scripts but loves the plot? Hates the plot but loves the writing? That's a mighty fine hair you're splitting.

I think Mary Stella may be right on the nose.

Anyway, wouldn't someone who gave a terrific performance in a lousy script be doing a more Emmy-worthy acting job than someone who sailed effortlessly through a diamond-perfect script?

12 years ago I was given an acting award (Well, actually it was 2 awards, but who is counting? Oh yes. I am.) for my performance on stage as John Barrymore's ghost in a production of Paul Rudnick's play I HATE HAMLET. When accepting, I said, "Please. This script is so beautifully written, anyone who says these words in the proper order, enunciating them clearly enough to be understood, will win this award. It's nothing to do with me. You were laughing at Paul's great jokes."

All that said, I haven't even tuned in GRAY'S ANATOMY this season, because I'd just gotten so bored with it's characters that I realized I no longer gave a rat's ass who ended up with whom this season. Also "Izzy" has been an extremely annoying character ever since the season where she kept an $8,000,000 check on the refrigerator door for months. I haven't wanted to slap a fictional character so much since Gloria Stuart threw the diamond overboard in TITANIC. Frankly, Izzy is a big reason I stopped watching. Firing Isaiah Washington just wasn't enough to keep me.

A. Buck not nuch shorter than last time said...

Anon,
So you couldn’t have told me BEFORE I withdrew my name from consideration by this blog with carpal tunnel syndrome? :)
Down here in yee-hah land we only get our news by placing an ear to the ground and announcing a large war party is apparently headed this way. Actually I was only going by O’Neill’s blog (below). I guess in journalese “So we asked Heigl” also covers so we asked Heigl’s publicist.” Can’t figure out why? Katherine always takes all MY calls

"Her omission from the official ballot just happened to be noticed yesterday by one of our forum posters. So we asked Heigl: Whazzup?"

http://goldderby.latimes.com/awards_goldderby/2008/06/katherine-heigl.html
http://goldderbyforums.latimes.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1106078764/m/587107281

Incidentally, according to the blog, the matter was apparently called to the reporter’s attention by a “Kelly Clarkson fan,” for whatever that’s worth. Also for the record, Mitt Romney’s publicist just called to say Mitt has NOT withdrawn his name from Emmy consideration, he's only “suspended” his name from Emmy consideration.

John
So if Heigl had bitten Isaiah Washington on the nose for speaking out of turn, could he have called in sick with a diva-ate-his-septum? There, said it. Not sorry!


d. mcewan said…
Anyway, wouldn't someone who gave a terrific performance in a lousy script be doing a more Emmy-worthy acting job than someone who sailed effortlessly through a diamond-perfect script?

Yes, sometimes that person was called Jason Robards.

Sam Kim said...

D. McEwan said...
Sam Kim,
I don't really see much if any distinction in the clarification you posted. She wasn't complaining about the quality of the writing, but about how they chose to write her? They wrote a bad storyline really well? Hates the scripts but loves the plot? Hates the plot but loves the writing? That's a mighty fine hair you're splitting.


Yes to the first one. No to the rest. I don't think she said anything about the "quality" of the writing or the plot. Her complaint had nothing to do with the skill or talent of the writers.

There's a world of difference between being dissatisfied that your baseball manager wouldn't let you pitch during a season, and saying that your manager is incompetent or that the team is poorly managed.

moopot said...

To be fair, the writing has gotten AWFUL on Grey's Anatomy. It used to be fun, and now... now it just sucks. I can't stand it. Every week, I go, oh I'll give it a try, maybe it's stopped eating crap, and then boom! Ten minutes in, something mind numbingly lame happens. Heigl's character has also gotten steadily lamer as the years go on. "Oh! I'm in love with George, but he was married for a while, and now I'm maybe not so in love with him, a bit". What the hell? It's awful. I agree with everything she said about it.

Mary Stella said...

a. buck short said:
But just try to get that Heigl-Theron-you threesome image out of your head.

Thank God it was never there in the first place. Now, McSteamy-me-another player to be named later . . . Oh yeah!

d. mcewan said:
John Barrymore's ghost in a production of Paul Rudnick's play I HATE HAMLET.

Great role, great play, even when produced by a small community theater in the Florida Keys.

VP81955 said...

Cap'n Bob Napier said...
Yeah, she was wrong, but I'd do her.

What John Lennon said was that The Beatles "are more popular than Jesus Christ, AND THAT"S WRONG." Of course the news whore cut off the qualifying words and made it something it never was meant to be. So much for objective journalism. I think this was also a contributing cause to the War of 1812.


I remember when that remark was publicized; it was near my birthday, and because of what Lennon said, my parents refused to buy me the new Beatles album. Instead, I received a consolation prize, the newest album from a band whose members would never say something so sacreligious...the Rolling Stones. "Aftermath."

Yes, "Paint It Black," "Stupid Girl," "Lady Jane" (an obvious paean to marijuana), "Under My Thumb" -- so clean and uplifting from Mick, Keith and the gang.

As far as Ms. Heigl is concerned, I'd be very careful about ditching TV for feature films if I were her. This isn't 1938 or even 1978 where actresses are concerned -- few movie vehicles are designed for female leads. The multiplex is a young man's game, and the roles Heigl will get on the big screen will largely be as decoration to the male lead. In other words, "Knocked Up" will be the rule rather than the exception.

The market, not talent, guides moviemaking these days; if Carole Lombard reappeared today, or Goldie Hawn was magically reverted to her 32-year-old self, they'd have a tough time in today's Hollywood, too (think of Warners executive Jeff Robinov's inflammatory comments last year about women leads). Films oriented towards women usually don't have inherent fast-food marketing tie-ins, and sadly, these days that's often deemed more important than the storyline.

David said...

I think you're over-reacting, probably because you're a writer and you perceive that she's attacking your profession. While I don't agree with how she's handled the situation, 1) it's her right to not appear on the ballot if she so chooses, for whatever reason. 2) The material she was given this past season WAS bad. And who gave her that material? The writers. 3) She never said the material was BAD (even though it was), she inferred that it wasn't award-worthy, and she's right.

So even if she didn't handle it diplomatically you shouldn't spin it as an attack on your entire profession; do you accept responsibility for all the dreck on TV just because you're a writer? This isn't an all-or-nothing situation. And as a long-time Grey's Anatomy watcher, there's no doubt that this past season's material was below-par.

I think her intent was good and her actions were clumsy. And you're looking for a scapegoat to vent left-over bad feelings from the writers' strike. If you don't like people implying that the material needs improving, then do something to help improve it. Attacking the actors who joined you on the picket line isn't going to solve anything... speaking of lack of gratitude.

D. McEwan said...

Sam,

I'd let it go except I suspect you have a point in there I'd find interesting even if I didn't agree with it, but your clarification only leaves me understanding your point less.

The baseball analogy only made things cloudier to me, as I don't see or understand your analogy at all. The writers kept her on the bench all season? Because to me, her statement reads: "They used me, but they wrote these lousy plays for me." (I'm really at sea with the baseball analogy here. At the last baseball game I saw, the first ball was tossed out by Walt Disney. That is a fact, not a joke. I don't really follow the sport.)

I'm not trying to be snarky with you; I just really do not see the fine distinction you're making.

David,
"3) She never said the material was BAD (even though it was), she inferred that it wasn't award-worthy, and she's right."

Well then, maybe she should trust the writing branch not to honor the scripts, rather than tactlessly announce her own judgements. The fact is, she used withdrawing from a nomination she didn't have yet in the first place (hubris) to publically spank her show's writers, and her showrunner. Not the way to behave professionally. (Does no one on that show understand how to behave publically? Isaiah, I'm looking at YOU.)

In her statement (And that it came it came from a publicist doesn't absolve her. It was HER publicist, speaking on her behalf.), she said she was doing it "in an effort to maintain the integrity of the academy organization." Quite aside from how pretentious and full-of-herself that sounds, since when does the Academy need HER to maintain their integrity? She didn't just insult her writers; she insulted The Academy, who, without her wisdom, would have turned unethical, and nominated her simply to - well I have no idea why she thinks they would nominante her if they didn't believe she deserved it, regardless of writing. Because she's just so great they would nominate her just for being her?

Mary Stella,

"Great role, great play, even when produced by a small community theater in the Florida Keys."

Yup, and also when produced in-the-round in Riverside, CA, with me wearing a thick, HOT, heavy, black cloak throughout the whole play - even during the sword fight - in the middle of summer, in the sesert, with it being over 100 degrees outside during the matinees. (The creaky old air conditioning sometimes managed to force the inside temperature down to a balmy 90.)

So you know my acceptance speech was true. It's a gorgeously-written gem of a role. They had a LOT of trouble with Nicol Williamson in the original Broadway production. (He makes Heigl seem like a picnic in Spring.) Rudnick said to me, "John Barrymore was a great alcoholic actor, but you don't have to hire one to play him."

Sam Kim said...

The writers kept her on the bench all season?

D,
No they just didn't let her pitch. So sticking with the analogy, they put her in right field instead, where she couldn't really contribute much to the team.

If my point isn't clear to you now, we should drop it and move on.

Tom Dougherty said...

A rather uninspired actress who is rather good looking in a conventional, dull kind of way. Next!