Slate's Bizbox
the breakfast table: An e-mail conversation about the news of the day.

the breakfast table
entries
123456789101112
from: Lloyd Grove
to: George Rush

Julia Redux

Posted Wednesday, March 27, 2002, at 1:01 PM ET

Who are these people?

Dear George:

Hope you got back safe and sound. Can we please move on from the Oscars now? Not yet. What is it with this Julia Roberts person? Last year, it seems she was hanging over the proceedings like a soggy blanket, dragging everything down in an unpleasant moist heap, and it was just so refreshing to think that this year she would be relegated to bit-part status. And then there she is again, front and center, reminding me of her estranged brother Eric in one of his creepier roles as she presents the Best Actor award to Denzel—weirdly confusing Tom Conti, the actor, with Bill Conti, the orchestra leader who attempted to cut her off during her longwinded oration last year, when she dissed him as "stick man."

This time, once again, Julia tried to suck all the oxygen out of the hall, confiding that "I love my life!" as she announced Denzel as the winner. She even jumped the poor guy and hung on for dear life as he tried to make his way backstage after his classy acceptance speech.

These dyspeptic reflections come after reading Jeanette Walls today. I know it's not my place as a gossip columnist to be overly judgmental—especially when it comes to big box-office movie stars on whom I depend to get on the phone with me every so often. And I don't expect you to agree with me. But I just think everybody concerned would be better off if Julia took a sabbatical.

You had another killer column today. I bet you're about to hear from James Woods, Oliver Stone—or both—about that item on Sean Young's claim in her diary that she and former fling-partner Woods bonded over their mutual hatred for Stone. As far as I know, Jimmy and Ollie are buds. I hope you'll give us a full account of the phone calls. Me, I'm getting flamed by various alumnae of the Madeira School, the exclusive Washington-area girls' prep school made famous by former headmistress Jean Harris, for my item this morning about their scandal over a "Black List" some of the kids have compiled against their fellow students. My favorite e-mail so far: "Madeira is an excellent institution. As someone who is unable to attend, I can understand your envy."

I suppose I would have liked to have attended Madeira, but then I probably would have become a responsible citizen, not a gossip columnist.

All best,
Lloyd

the breakfast table
entries
123456789101112
from: Lloyd Grove
to: George Rush

Julia Redux

Posted Wednesday, March 27, 2002, at 1:01 PM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Lloyd Grove, a 22-year veteran of the Washington Post, took over "The Reliable Source" column in May 1999. George Rush writes the "Rush & Molloy" column for the New York Daily News with his wife, Joanna Molloy.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Reader Comments From The Fray:


Let's face facts, all this stuff about terrorists, the Middle East, Enron, Northern Ireland, and the mid-term elections is kind of a downer. Finally, Slate has bravely put forth two people who write about celebrities. I mean I like politics and foreign affairs as much as the next guy, but this has been a long stretch without a lot of humor. Finally, the "Breakfast Table" addresses the real issues: Is Russell Crowe a thuggish alcoholic, do movie people act as badly as we hope they do, and do gossip reporters feel like badly dressed party crashers? Apparently, the answer to all these questions is yes. I for one hope this exchange continues into an exploration of the sexual relationships between famous married people and relatively attractive starlets. By exploration I mean naming names and the reactions of the betrayed spouses. Onward, no more international bummers, and drinks for everyone.

--Neill Hamilton

(To find or answer this post, click here.)


Everybody bitches about the speeches going on too long, but this isn't the problem. We want to see people who are happy to receive the award. It's part of the reward itself to get a multi-million-person captive audience for a minute or two. No, the Oscars seemed to run long this year because the running time was fueled by the Academy's own filmmaking: the innumerable montages, tributes, and other "entertainment" that looks for all the world like it was inserted to pad out the ceremony time-wise. We could do without three honorary awards with a montage each. We could probably get by without the circus acts, the meaningless pre-recorded comments, and the insider's walks down memory lane.

Or could we? I was entertained by all these things, and would regret seeing them go. I like the idea that the academy hold reverence for people I've never heard of because they were behind-the-scenes. If you get bored easily, don't watch; or wait until the next day when it's all boiled down to more manageable chunks of highlights. If you want to see what the Academy wants to offer, then by all means do so--but get ready to hunker down

--Mangar

(To find or answer this post, click here.)

(3/26)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Over the Line
Harold Ford Jr. | I know what it's like to be smeared by your opponent.
: The Positive in Negative Ads
PLUS » Milbank: The President's Lullaby