Natalie Portman Stymied by Celibacy

Why would actress Natalie Portman turn down the chance to be in a film with Oscar winning Meryl Streep?

The answer lies in Portman’s attitude toward Roman Catholic vocations.

“Doubt,” a film adaptation of the successful play by John Patrick Shanley (who, incidentally, directs the movie), tells the story of two nuns (Meryl Streep and Amy Adams) that confront a priest (Philip Seymour Hoffman) whom they suspect of abusing an altar boy. Themes of religion, morality and authority punctuate the dialogue.

Portman reportedly wanted to co-star in the movie but turned down the part for what seems like a fairly flimsy reason, considering that she’s supposed to be a professional.

“We asked Natalie Portman, and Natalie was very interested but kept saying she had a problem. And we finally nailed down as to what the problem was: she basically said she didn’t understand celibacy,” Shanley told the GossipSauce Web site.

If it took so much brainpower to understand celibacy, Portman probably could have benefited from a class in abstinence.

Instead she’s likely to find out that she made a bad career move by ultimately denying herself what actors lust after most, and that is prestige, which in Hollywood comes in the form of a little gold statue.

“Doubt” opens in limited release on December 12, just in time to qualify for Oscar’s attention.

James Hirsen, J.D., M.A. in Media Psychology, is a media analyst, teacher of mass media and entertainment law at Biola University and professor at Trinity Law School.

‘Iron Man’’s Robert Downey Jr. No Longer a Liberal

Robert Downey Jr. may be the actor least likely thought of to play a comic book superhero.

But the critics and public love Downey in Marvel’s latest big-screen spectacular, “Iron Man.”

“Iron Man” is the first film to be produced by Marvel Studios, although it is distributed by Paramount. Marvel is now financing its own flicks after an impressive track record of blockbusters like “Spider-Man,” “X-Men,” “Fantastic Four” and sequels.

Meanwhile, during a recent interview with the New York Times, Downey disclosed a change he experienced in his worldview as a result of his troubled past.

The veteran actor noted that his newfound politics would not necessarily be well received by his Hollywood friends.

“I have a really interesting political point of view, and it’s not always something I say too loud at dinner tables here,” Downey said.

“But you can’t go from a $2,000-a-night suite at La Mirage to a penitentiary and really understand it and come out a liberal. You can’t. I wouldn’t wish that experience on anyone else, but it was very, very, very educational for me and has informed my proclivities and politics every since,” he added.

The New York Times commented on Downey’s educational experience in this way: “Suffice it to say he is not one of the Hollywood types who weeps over innocents trapped behind bars.”

The effects of Downey’s new views are obvious—he’s happily married, a father to teenage kids and far distance away from the struggles he had to endure.

He explained, “If I see somebody who is throwing their life away with both hands and is raging around and destroying their family, I can’t understand that person.”

“I’m not in that sphere of activity anymore, and I don’t understand it any more than I understood 10 or 20 years ago that somehow everything was going to turn out O.K. from this lousy, exotic and dark triple chapter of my life. I swear to God I don’t even really understand that planet anymore,” he shared.

Things on Downey’s new planet turned out really okay. “Iron Man” looks to be the start of a Downey franchise. The movie had the second best opening weekend ever for a film that’s not a sequel, with over $100 million being brought in on the domestic front and another $97 million from overseas ticket sales.

In Variety’s review, “Iron Man” was contrasted with previous anti-war flops: “Finally, someone’s found a sure-fire way to make money with a modern Middle East war movie: Just send a Marvel superhero into the fray to kick some insurgent butt.”

James Hirsen is a media analyst, Trinity Law School professor and teacher of mass media law at Biola University.

Richard Gere’s Kiss Off India’s List

Richard Gere is in the clear.

The highest court in India has ordered that an arrest warrant against the actor be suspended.

Indian Supreme Court Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justice R.V. Raveendran have indefinitely stayed the warrant, which had been issued against Gere for allegedly violating public obscenity laws.

It turns out that while at a 2007 AIDS awareness event, the actor publicly embraced Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty and gave her a big kiss.

Hindu activists had filed three cases against Gere and Shetty, alleging that the two had offended the sensibilities of India’s culture.

An unauthorized spokesperson for Gere suggests that the actor should never have been held responsible for his slippery lip behavior since he has an inherent condition that causes him to offend sensibilities the world over.

‘10,000’ Thumbs-down for Film Critics

Film critics gave the prehistoric adventure film “10,000 B.C.” some scathing reviews.

The San Francisco Chronicle called the movie “completely ridiculous.”

The Washington Post said it was “just plain nuts.”

The New York Post said audiences would be “sorely disappointed with this bloodless PG-13 adventure.”

The USA Today called it a “bombastic bore.”

Despite the hurling of insults by film critics, the public ignored the gibes and flocked to theaters anyway. The cavemen confrontations with woolly mammoths, saber toothed tigers and other prehistoric predators were just too compelling.

The flick was #1 right out of the box, with a weekend take just shy of $36 mill in North America and just over $25 mill overseas.

In the most explicit terms, the Newark Star Ledger warned anyone who was even thinking of seeing the film to “Yabba-dabba-don’t.”

In a clear response, no doubt to the chagrin of film critics across the nation, the public “Yabba-dabba did.”

Will Smith: ‘Barack Obama Stole My Idea’

As I reported a while back in a previous column, Will Smith revealed a secret ambition to someday become President of the United States.

While out promoting his upcoming film “I Am Legend,” Smith said in an interview with the U.K.’s Daily Mail, “I always wanted to be the first black president but Barack Obama stole my idea.”

The actor even expressed some policy ideas for his campaign. He said he would start with universal healthcare and shelter, indicating that he could not “see that happening under Bush. Too many bad things have happened under his presidency.”

Still, Smith distinguished himself from the Bush-hating fringe, saying, “I don’t believe he is an evil man, I just think he has an unevolved perspective. It’s a good thing he’s served his time. Now it’s time for Barack Obama.”

Smith has contributed some campaign cash and appeared in a video extolling the qualities of the Illinois senator and presidential candidate, but his support of the Obama campaign has been overshadowed by daytime TV talk show host Oprah Winfrey.

Evidently, Smith has no animus for Obama for attempting to take the same job that he himself had aspired to.

“That’s OK with me,” Smith explained. “Barack can go first and then I’ll take my turn.”

Redford’s ‘Lions for Lambs’ Penned by Clinton White House Intern

Even the mainstream media critic crowd has had to acknowledge that the Robert Redford directed “Lions for Lambs” film is told through a Left Coast lens.

Variety calls the movie (which incidentally also co-stars Redford, Meryl Streep and Tom Cruise) “back-bendingly liberal but also deeply patriotic.”

The Hollywood Reporter points out that although Redford and scriptwriter Matthew Michael Carnahan set out arguments both for and against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there’s “no doubt” about “where they [Redford and Carnahan] stand.”

And veteran film critic Emanuel Levy says “Lions for Lambs” is Redford’s “most overtly political drama.”

An explanation for the strong leftward tilt of the movie can be found in the background of Carnahan.

While pursuing political science studies at USC, “Lions” scriptwriter Carnahan was also an intern in former President Bill Clinton’s White House. Carnahan’s responsibilities included working in a war room that defended Hillary Rodham Clinton’s failed health care plan.

Carnahan received a career boost from older brother Joe who directed “Smokin’ Aces” and was scriptwriter of the more even-handed terrorist-related movie “The Kingdom.”

In a lefty performance of the off-screen kind, actor Sean Penn gave folks yet another glimpse into his parallel universe in a fawning interview he did with the U.K. Guardian.

In response to criticism he received for his public embrace of dictator Hugo Chavez, Penn carped, “I take a lot of flak, but truth is stubborn. I ain’t going to say it don’t annoy me but, if the intention is to make me do it less, it’s really going the other way.”

About his part-time journalist gig for the San Francisco Chronicle in which he went on a “fact-finding” journey to Iraq and Iran, Penn boasted, “I don’t know if this is true, but I may have written the first published piece in mainstream journalism that actually explained what these contractors were up to over there.”

Regarding the media, Penn complained that “nobody’s watching this stuff, and it’s eating away at our democracy.” He also groused that we didn’t find out “people were building up these private militias out of the Pentagon with tax payers’ money.”

“The way I see it,” Penn said, “if you believe in democracy, you got to do something. We have people running the country now who really should be in prison for what they are doing to democracy. If you define our country by the Constitution, we have enemies of the State in the White House, the Defense Department and the State Department. That’s where we are now.”

Wonder if Penn secretly longs to be the running mate of UFO spotter Dennis Kucinich.