What the Hell Happened to Lindsay Lohan?

lindsay Lohan 2013

Lindsay Lohan isn’t just a train wreck.  She is a train that is perpetually wrecking.  It’s as though someone keeps rewinding the tape and replaying the same disaster over and over and over again.  The situation has gone from sad to funny and back again more times than I can count.  It’s hard to remember, but just ten years ago Lohan was the most promising actress in Hollywood.  She seemed poised for greatness.  On screen, she had a talent and composure beyond her years.  In reality, she was ill-equipped to deal with the pressures of her life.  Her public melt-down is in danger of lasting longer than her career.

What the hell happened?

Lindsay was the oldest of four children all of whom have been pushed into, I mean chosen a life in show business.  By now, most people are familiar with Lohan’s loving parents,  Dina and Michael Douglas Lohan, Sr.  Dina is known to have brought camera crews to film her visiting her daughter in rehab.  She also claims to be a former Rockette despite that no one at Radio City has any record of the claim.  Michael was a former Wall Street trader who was convicted of criminal contempt of court and sentenced to three years.  Since then, he’s been consistently in trouble with the law and in and out of rehab.  Guess that apple didn’t fall far from the tree.

It would be charitable to say that the Lohan clan is lead by deeply flawed people.  For now, I will leave it at that.

lohan - child model

Lindsay Lohan signed with the Ford Modeling Agency at the age of three.  How does a three-year-old sign a contract anyway?  My four-year-old can write her first name.  But something tells me that’s not legally binding.  I feel terribly guilty when I drop her off at daycare some times.  But her parents seemed okay with the head-trip of signing a contract with a modeling agency for their three-year-old.  Different parenting styles, I guess.

Lindsay Lohan and Mischa Barton

Here she is with a young Misha Barton in an ad for a clothing company called Caravan.

Lohan - Abercrombie Kids

Here she is in an ad for Abercrombie Kids at age 12.  I wonder how the two kids she has in a headlock are doing today?

lohan - calvin klein

And here’s Lohan’s serious face in an ad for Calvin Klein.

Lohan also appeared in tons of TV commercials like this grape J-ello commercial starring Bill Cosby:

Lohan - Another World

At the age of 10, Lohan started appearing on the daytime soap opera, Another World.  A soap magazine referred to her as a show biz veteran.  Here’s a clip:

She was the best actor in that scene.

Lohan - The Parent Trap

After a year in soaps, Lohan made the leap to the big screen in Nancy Meyers’ adaptation of the 1961 family comedy, The Parent Trap.

In the original, Haley Mills played a dual role as twins trying to reunite their divorced parents.  In the remake, the parents were played by Dennis Quaid and Natasha Richardson.  Lohan played the plotting twins.

The trailer actually ends with “… and introducing Lindsay Lohan”.  Disney had no idea what it was unleashing on the world.  Reviews for the remake were good and it became a surprise hit of the summer.

ABC MOVIE FOR TV

In 2000, Lohan appeared next to fellow model, Tyra Banks, in the TV movie, Life Size.  Lohan played a girl who brings her doll to life when she wishes to bring her late mother back to life.  Banks played a life-sized piece of animated plastic, so type casting.

I looked for a commercial for this movie, but I couldn’t find one.  You can watch the whole thing on YouTube if you are so inclined.  But after watching this painful clip of Banks lip-synching, I don’t think you will be inclined.

Disney is planning a sequel with Banks.  Presumably Lohan won’t be involved.

Next: Freaky Friday and Mean Girls

Posted on June 23, 2013, in Movies, What the Hell Happened?, WTHH Actress and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 185 Comments.

  1. You’ve totally outdone yourself here Lebeau…. I can not even collect my thoughts!!

    Like

    • Thanks, RB. Honestly, I left a lot out. I didn’t even touch on Lohan’s recording career. I barely scratched the surface of the horribleness (if it’s not a word, it is in their case) of her parents. I skipped over a lot of Lohan’s non-acting projects like her make-up and clothes lines. And her involvement in the fashion community. Or her quote about “just wanting her career back”. I mentioned her last time hosting SNL, but left out all the previous times.

      Like

  2. oh, your judicious use of editing skills is certainly noted along with the usual skill and balance in the writeup. Plus there were some very enjoyable side ventures, for example, the Sean Lennon vehicle that took me back to a complete other dimension. As for LL you are right, her trials and tribulations are amply covered in the tabloid world, and by your skipping over all that it’s a lot easier to see what her career was and maybe, could still be.
    The Elizabeth Olsen role in “Liberal Arts” for example, LL could have totally shone there.
    Hoping she can get her life where she wants it to be some day!

    Like

    • As always, you’re too kind. It’s less skillful editing than a distaste for tabloid fodder. For a long time, I didn’t write up Lohan because I didn’t want to do an article full of TMZ stuff. But when I reviewed her career, I realized there was enough there to focus on that and speculate as to what might have been and what could possibly be if she ever gets her act together.

      Like

        • Can Lindsay Lohan’s career be saved?

          http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/08/31/can-lindsay-lohans-career-be-saved/

          Six years ago, Lindsay Lohan was a redheaded ingenue, headlining a funkily twisted teen comedy written by embryonic super-genius Tina Fey. Lohan was already a Disney sweetheart, but Mean Girls seemed to announce her arrival as a major teen megastar. Almost instantly, everything went sour: Within a year, Lohan had gone blonde, and was beginning a four-way tango with the paparazzi, the L.A. club scene, and the criminal justice system. (In a weird way, Mean Girls anticipated all of this: her character goes from being a spunky outsider to a much-despised popular girl. So basically, Lindsay Lohan is to Mean Girls as Orson Welles is to Citizen Kane.) This summer, Lohan was released early from jail, and then rehab. In an interview from the new cover story of Vanity Fair, Lohan says, “I was irresponsible,” and compares her frantic last half-decade to living her college life in public. The question remains: Can Lindsay Lohan’s career ever really recover?

          Short answer: yes, with an if. No career is ever really over. Mickey Rourke apparently spent 20 years living in a swamp, but he was propelled back into the mainstream by Robert Rodriguez, who gave the actor a redefining role in Sin City. Lohan is appearing in Rodriguez’s new film Machete as a gun-toting nun, which makes more sense than Just My Luck 2. If Lohan can reinvent herself, then she might start filling theaters again.

          Long answer: no, with a but. It’s almost impossible to imagine a director like Robert Altman wanting to work with Lohan again. Heck, it’s hard to even imagine that any marketing department would put Lohan in a movie preview. Lohan wasn’t just a tabloid fixture: she was also the star of the some of the worst movies ever made (one of which provided us with the best PopWatch post ever). As excited as I am for Machete, it’s weird to think that, at the age of 24, Lohan is already getting the kind of cult-fetish role that Rourke was getting in his 50s.

          It seems to announce the beginning of a meta-phase of her career. (Same goes for the rumored biopic about Linda Lovelace. Come on, people, they even have the same initials!) Not that there’s anything wrong with playing a tabloid-ish version of yourself, but in Freaky Friday, Mean Girls, and even Bobby, Lohan was playing real characters. She was an actress. In the interview, Lohan says that she wants to be an actress again, and “if that takes not going out to a club at night, then so be it.” Let’s hope she’s telling the truth.
          What do you think, PopWatchers? Can Lindsay Lohan become a true movie star again? Is it weird that, as my colleagues Keith Staskiewicz and Emily Exton pointed out, every other actress in Mean Girls has a more viable career now than Lohan? (Okay, maybe not Lacey Chabert, but that’s a different PopWatch post.)

          Like

      • Hollywood Hype Machine:
        http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HollywoodHypeMachine

        Lindsay Lohan. This one wasn’t related to any lack of talent — Meryl Streep, of all people, vouched for her acting ability, as did her Mean Girls co-star Tina Fey. Instead, her problems came from a combination of a disastrous relationship with her parents, chronic partying and drug/alcohol abuse (which eventually led to legal troubles), and a reputation for being a diva who often showed up to set late and hung over. Attempts to revitalize her career — most recently, the Lifetime biopic Liz And Dick — haven’t been too successful to say the least. An awful case of What Could Have Been.

        Like

  3. Sadly, she has those sort of problems which usually enhance the stardom aura of male actors and ruin reputation of female actresses. And unfortunately she has not a genius hit in her career which could make her at least an “artist maudit” like Amy Winehouse. She will be remembered (for a fortnight) as only a spoiled brat, but she has talent.

    Like

    • She does. I was very impressed with her in Freaky Friday. And Mean Girls is just a lot of fun. It’s a shame she couldn’t keep making movies like those.

      I think part of the problem is that she has objectified herself. She doesn’t do anything that doesn’t involve her sexuality anymore. And usually in the cheapest possible way. A similar thing happened with Heather Graham as her career started to cool. Lohan needs to stop reinforcing the idea that she has nothing to offer but curves. Her Marilyn Monroe obsession is threatening to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

      Like

      • 10 Misguided Career Moves Made By Talented Actors:
        http://whatculture.com/film/10-misguided-career-moves-made-by-talented-actors.php/9

        2. Lindsay Lohan’s Legal & Personal Woes

        Lindsay Lohan is another victim of ruthless self-sabotage; she started out as the cute kid in the remake of The Parent Trap, and then became an appealing leading lady by starring in Mean Girls. However, she soon enough got wrapped up in the Hollywood party scene, and the effects of excessive booze and drug binges began to take their toll. Lohan has constantly been in trouble with the law and frequently graces the cover of tabloid magazines as a result.

        She has starred in a number of execrable films over the last few years, the most recent of which was the TV movie Liz and Dick, an attempt for Lohan to be taken seriously again by portraying Elizabeth Taylor. It’s a performance impossible to take seriously, and no doubt the critical panning it received will only help her star fade into insignificance. Shame – had she tried to hone her craft a little, she might have actually been a bonafide movie star in the making rather than a washed up “It Girl”.

        Like

      • 10 Actors Who Have Become Parodies Of Themselves:
        http://whatculture.com/film/10-actors-who-have-become-parodies-of-themselves.php

        10. Lindsay Lohan

        Known For: Promising young actress who made the mistake of getting involved in the Los Angeles party scene. Now she’s more recognizable for her constant arrests for drug-related crimes than as the cute girl from Mean Girls.

        The Parody: Lohan eventually decided to give up on trying to course-correct her career and basically began taking the p*ss out of herself, by starring in several films that lampooned her own tawdry reputation.

        Take Scary Movie V, for instance, which features Lohan in the opening scene opposite Charlie Sheen, mocking her own troublesome reputation, and similarly, in this year’s inAPPropriate Comedy, she poked fun at her prior house arrest.

        The problem is that for this sort of self-parody to endear audiences and change our perceptions, it needs to be clever, or at least funny, of which it is neither. Lohan next stars in Paul Schrader’s The Canyons, in which she plays, you guessed it, a skanky actress.

        Like

  4. “Georgia Rule” looks like it could be a good movie, (or…could have been) but apparently it dealt with some very heavy subject matter within the context of being a comedy vehicle. This type of movie confused-identity always seems to be difficult to pull off even with the best cast. Heck, Jane Fonda couldn’t save it! Maybe if they had retooled the plot it would have been better box office, and not panned by critics. Lohan’s antics on set are her own issue of course. On another note, though I try to refrain from posting comments of an attack nature, both her parents should be horsewhipped.

    Like

    • In tend not to judge. But her parents are hard not to judge.

      On Georgia Rule, what was the last good or even decent movie Gary Marshall directed? He has sit-com sensibilities.

      Like

      • Well, a lot of people liked The Princess Diaries…

        Like

        • That was probably the last one that was decent. And that was 2001.

          Like

          • Garry Marshall directed one great movie: Pretty Woman. It’s one of the best romantic comedies I’ve ever seen, though with his sitcom sensibilities it seems more like lightning in a bottle that it turned out so great.

            Like

            • I think I have watched it all the way through once. That may not be true. I may have rewatched it. I remember being thoroughly enchanted in the theater. Laughed my butt off. But I find it kind of hard to watch a fairy tale about a prostitute today no matter how much chemistry Gere and Roberts have.

              The lightning in a bottle you’re talking about is that chemistry. It was the right pairing at the right time. The movie itself almost didn’t matter. So I give Marshall credit for whatever involvement he had in casting. But not much more than that.

              While I’m not a fan of Marshall as a director, I generally find him to be hysterical as an actor. Go figure.

              Like

  5. That ‘Bobby’ (what kind of stupid title is that) nonsense should have been called Hasbeens Galore. I haven’t seen it, but I’ve seen enough clips and trailers to know it’s utter stupidity.

    I absolutely hate these “overlapping stories” huge ensemble movies. They’re pointless and you cannot hold an audience’s interest by meshing together a bajillion stories. “Crash” is another example of a film like that that was utter garbage.

    Like

    • I agree with you that Bobby is a stupid-sounding title. I have the same reaction every time I the movie ends up in a write-up. And it has more than it’s share of has-beens. The reviews suggest it’s not that bad though. I obviously haven’t been really motivated to watch it and I’m not sure when or if I will be.

      I don’t hate “overlapping stories” movies as a rule. Like anything, it’s about execution. Pulp Fiction is one of my favorite movies of all times and it fits that description. Traffic was another good example. Crash, to me, was horribly over-rated. It ushered in a bunch of copy-cats which have mostly been sub-par. And the rom-com entries (see comments on Gary Marshall) have been universally bad lately.

      Like

  6. There could be a list of “baby phenomenon” that followed pretty the same path of Lohan from stardom to self distruction (just think about Maculay Culkin p.e.). I feel sorry for her sad story, but I never liked her too much.

    Like

    • I feel bad for her too. She never had a chance. Unfortunately, pity isn’t helping her. She needs to get herself together. Leaving the spotlight would probably be the best thing that could happen to her.

      Like

  7. “New Year’s Eve” is a good example of an ensemble movie that didn’t work. When you look at the cast list your jaw almost drops, then when you watch it (I didn’t know any better) mostly you are just gritting your teeth because Marshall didn’t do justice to these actors. Michelle Pfeiffer of course, can make the most out of her 5 minutes of screen time, as do most of the other A listers in that movie, but there’s too much going on, there’s too much surface and too little development, plus it’s disorganized and needed rewriting and editing. I think it rather shows how well suited Marshall is, for TV sitcoms, but has difficulty sustaining a feature length film. The critical response for NYE that seemed most on target to me, was the one where the critic said that Marshall assembled a top notch cast and gave them nothing to do. “Georgia Rule” does pique my interest and I might have to check it out to see what Jane Fonda and Lohan were able to do there. How about “Raising Helen”, was that well received?

    Like

    • Off the top of my head, the last Kate Hudson movie to get good reviews was Almost Famous. I checked Rotten Tomatoes and it agrees. Hudson hasn’t been in a well-reviewed movie since 2000. Wow. Considering her output that’s amazing. RT doesn’t have complete listings for Marshall. I’m not sure what’s up with that.

      Like

  8. First, let me say excellent work as usual. I’ve always been impressed by your ability to keep these things interesting even in case like this one where everyone knows what happened (see also, Mel Gibson).

    Second, have you ever thought about doing WHHT… for directors? It is pretty incredible how far guys like Coppola, Reiner and Shyamalan have fallen.

    Like

    • Thanks for the kind words. I always hope that if I stick to the stuff I find interesting others will find it interesting as well. With Lohan and Gibson, I try to stay focused on the career as opposed to the tabloid stuff. People can read the grisly details of the celeb’s personal lives in plenty of other places online.

      I have done a couple of similar articles on directors. The name of the series is “Betrayed by…” which is partially tongue in cheek. I’ve only done Spielberg and Kevin Smith so far. Obviously, Spielberg is still a very relevant director, so it’s less about a rise and fall per se. It was actually inspired by my dad’s reaction to War Horse, which he hated. It wasn’t just that he hated it, he felt betrayed by Spielberg who is probably the only director he knows by name.

      I frequently think about writing up more directors. Honestly, I’m more motivated by who directed a film than who is starring in it. Time permitting, I have been seriously considering a couple of new “Betrayed by…” articles. Shyamalan is high on my list.

      Reiner really was on a roll there for a while. I suppose that was unsustainable. But it’s hard to see how far he fell.

      Like

  9. Another great write up on my current favorite guilty pleasure. I am addicted to LL news; I think only because it amazes me she hasn’t spent any considerable time in jail; OR that there are still some people who will hire her.

    I have never seen any of her movies because I became aware of her thru TMZ. But in reading some info on her I found she was once a talented promising actress.

    Your typical well researched and well thought out expose was great reading, IMO, her childhood was driven more by her fame want to be parents. It is such a shame that someone her age that at one time had the world at their feet, is now an asterisk in most articles.

    Hopefully she can follow Robert Downey’s lead and pull herself out of this downward spiral.

    Like

    • Thanks, Mack. I’m glad you enjoyed it.

      I have been surprised by how many people are addicted to watching Lohan’s perpertual train wreck. Since the article went up, I have gotten traffic from message boards where people discuss Lohan in the most minute details. She clearly remains a lightning rod in spite of the fact she hasn’t made a major movie in close to a decade.

      I find her obsession with Marilyn Monroe fascinating. She seems hell-bent on making her story similar. She seems to only focus on her sex symbol status while hurtling towards tragedy.

      Hopefull, like Downey, she will see the light before its too late. I would love for her story to have a happy ending.

      I am going to highly recommend checking out Freaky Friday and especially Mean Girls. They are great comedies that show what might have been. Plus, they are on cable constantly.

      Like

        • lol – I have no response to that

          Very politically incorrect, but I’ve known women who fit that description.

          Like

        • 20 Classic Hollywood Stars Who Make Lindsay Lohan Look Like a Saint:
          http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/09/infamous-classic-hollywood-stars/?utm_campaign=complexmag+socialflow+09+2013&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

          Whether it is Lindsay Lohan’s boozing or Miley Cyrus’ twerking, it seems like there is a new scandal buzzing through the Internet on a daily basis. With each new Hollywood trainwreck, there is an outpouring of outrage from all corners of the web. Then come the think pieces about the degradation of our moral fabric. As it turns out, our moral fabric has been pretty well-degraded for a long time.

          Even back when Hollywood films meant five-minute reels of clowns hitting each other with baseball bats and damsels tied to railroad tracks, stars were getting crazy. The antics of some early stars of the silver screen make the actions of our favorite ex-Disney employees seem tame. Sure, today’s stars like to get naked and booze, but the rates of heroin addiction, serial adultery, and murder seem to have taken a downturn since Hollywood’s Golden Age.

          From serial spouses to mysterious murders, Hollywood’s past is full of antics that would feed TMZ for an entire year. Once the stars got caught, they wouldn’t go to rehab; they’d just have the studio PR department clean it up and get back to debauchery. Here are 20 Classic Hollywood Stars Who Make Lindsey Lohan Look Like a Saint.

          Like

      • I think maybe the key differences between somebody like Robert Downey, Jr. and Lindsay Lohan is that despite all of RDJ’s issues, he was for the most part, well liked AND excellent on the set. Because of this, directors and producers never really wrote him off (he still had some “good will” to back things up). Lindsay Lohan on the other hand, not only has major drug and alcohol issues but also a reputation of being a diva who often shows up late and/or unprepared on film sets. What doesn’t help Lindsay Lohan (and pardon me if I or anybody else has said this before) looks terrible because her unhealthy lifestyle combined w/ cosmetic “enhancements” made her look much older than her actual age.

        Like

        • That’s a good point. Also, RDJ is arguably more talented than Lohan. Another factor is gender. Hollywood gives actors more second chances. Even with all that good will and talent, I think Hollywood would have written off an actress in RDJ’s situation.

          Like

    • Drew Barrymore, if you want to go w/ another child actress is probably the best “role model” if you will to find in regards to somebody who was able to turn their career and life around. I think what benefited Drew is that she realized that her mother, Jaid was a huge factor in her problems and had to distance herself from her. That’s really one mistake that Lindsay has made since all of her problems have commenced.

      Like

      • I watched “Mean Girls” again the other day, and what’s truly unsettling, is that Regina George’s mom played by Amy Poehler sort of reminds me of Dina Lohan (i.e. both seem to want to live vicariously through their daughters and want to be more of a “girlfriend” then a responsible adult).

        Dina Lohan also kind of reminds me of Fritz Von Erich (the patriarch of the Von Erich professional wrestling dynasty in Dallas, TX), in regards to seemingly living in denial of their childrens’ drug problems.

        Like

  10. I actually have a lot of things to say so please read:).

    I know you talked about this briefly, but honestly her facial surgeries for me have ruined it as far as acting. She’s had all the surgery to combat all the damage hard drugs have done to her face and as a result she looks way older than someone in her 20′s. More like someone in her 40′s. When I think of her, I think of the fresh faced pretty actress who could act. I honestly can’t see that. I saw some clips of Liz and Dick and honestly I’m not sure whether or not she is talented or not anymore- she didn’t even try to do Liz’s accent for most of the movie!

    Think about it: All the movies that she has done well in were movies with bigger stars that were excellent or a great supporting cast: Mean Girls had Rachel Adams, Tina Fey, Amanda Seyfield, and had a wonderful script. That really showcased her talent.

    Freaky Friday: Curtis. I re-watched that movie and I noticed how much Curtis stole the movie in every scene with Lindsay.

    I think the reason why her films have not really succeeded is because she can’t carry a movie by herself. People think she’s a great actress, but her movies often had supporting casts that made her shine. The movies she’s been in that flopped: I know who killed me (terrible), Herbie Reloaded (awful), had her as the biggest star and the script was not that great either.

    Basically, everything has to go right in order to make her look good: script, director, and supporting cast. That’s why movies that lacked that criteria ended up horrible.

    Plus I think by now she’s burned bridges. She’s 26 or 27. By Hollywood standards she is quite old. There are a tremendous amount of actors her age or younger with proven track records. Her best movies happened in her teens. Who would you choose if you were insuring her: a child actor who peaked years ago, or a young eager actress such as Jennifer Lawrence or Rachel Adams. She is being looked the other way by directors and is only able to find work in movies that are B grade or lower. Also, all of her recent movies have failed and she’s had universally negative reviews for recent movies such as Liz and Dick. She’s in The Canyon with a porn star.

    Most importantly, is I think she’s honestly lost her shot. She’s been in and out of rehab for a decade. As you pointed out, she often gets preferential treatment when it comes to jail time. She keeps telling the public she wants to change, plans a comeback, parties, and ends up with charges against her for something. By this point, the public must be fed up. Although she has great movies, her audience has probably moved on by this point. Of course, there are fans such as myself and readers of tabloids who are eager to see her succeed. But every movie she has put out has been disappointment.

    Hollywood doesn’t care if you’re a druggie. As long as you can act, they will accept you. Robert Downey Jr and other actors could act quite well even in movies that were criticized.

    If Lindsay would actually take acting seriously like she tells everyone, stops partying, and actually tries to change her image for good, get rid of her yes men, get away from her parents and distance them from her completely- especially her crazy mother who partied with her, stays out of rehab, stops getting charged, get a driver, get a great script, ask Tina Fey to write a movie and be in it with her, etc… then she could get her career back.

    She has had plenty of opportunities to do so. Britney Spears had a huge breakdown but got back on her feet and was a success. But she did so quickly. Lindsay has had almost a decade and at this point she is a joke- in tabloids, media, directors, etc..

    I’m actually a fan and it does sadden me to see her like this. I always thought she would have more success and even looked up to her because I grew up with her movies.

    Like

    • This article has only been up a relatively short time and I am already really impressed with the passion LL inspires. Of course I am going to read your entire comment. Thanks for taking the time to post such a thoughtful response.

      When Lohan was coming up, she was the textbook definition of “fresh faced”. Substance abuse and surgeries have definitely changed that! She looks much older than her years now. She can still be made up to look presentable, but there is no hiding her world weariness.

      Mean Girls and Freaky Friday are really the highlights of her career. And I agree that both of them have major contributions from others. Curtis really shines in FF. Tina Fey’s script is what makes MG great. But I do think Lohan is carrying her weight in those films. She exceeded my expectations for a child/teen actress.

      There is no doubt she burned bridges. Even if someone wanted to hire her, they have to deal with the headache of getting her insured. And then you never know how reliable she is going to be or if she’ll be available to promote the project or if she’ll be serving some mandatory sentence. Not that those last very long in her case.

      I agree with you up to a point. Lohan has missed some great opportubities. She could have been one of our most popular and successful actresses by now. She has wasted at least 10 years of her career. 10 years which should have been her best.

      However, Lohan still brings big ratings a lot of the time. Her SNL performance was one of the biggest of the season (despite being widely panned). Her Playboy issue apparently broke records. That’s why she’s still somewhat in demand. In the right project, she is still a draw.

      I don’t actually think Hollywood cares if an actor or actress can act. They want someone who will deliver. And usually that means someone who will make them money. Lohan can still do that. But how long will that be true?

      I share your frustration over the things Lohan says versus the things she does. She frequently says the right things. (Although whining that she “wants her career back” was not one of them.) But then she just does the same stupid shit all over again. It’s the behavior of an addict.

      I don’t really expect her to ever have her moment of clarity. She has too many enablers. But I hope I’m wrong. I’d love to see her bounce back like Spears (mostly) did.

      Like

      • What Really Happened To Lindsay Lohan, Part 2: The Ingenue:
        http://blogs.indiewire.com/thelostboy/what-really-happened-to-lindsay-lohan-part-2-the-ingenue

        The Walt Disney Company stopped producing The Mickey Mouse Club in 1995, thereby cutting off a steady stream of child stars who, more often than not, found their way into TV and films. It was, in a way, a little stardom factory in which talented kids could get some experience and visibility. If it had lasted a little longer, young Lindsay might have been a part of it and followed the gig with bit parts on sitcoms. But it didn’t happen that way. At the age of 12, Lindsay walked out onto the Disney stage and stood downstage center, alone.

        Disney honored the remainder of Lindsay’s three-picture deal with “Life Size” and “Get A Clue,” two of the modest and earnest TV movies they released before teen stardom become their main theme. In “Life Size,” Lindsay played a motherless pubertal tomboy who is given a glamour doll that comes to life in the form of Tyra Banks, who teaches her all about inner beauty, and “Get A Clue” features Lindsay as an aspiring journalist-turned-spy. There’s not much to see here, because with her net film, Lindsay finally hit her stride as both an actress and Disney’s most valuable market product.

        The beginning Lindsay’s ubiquity came in 2003, when Lindsay was 15, with “Freaky Friday,” and it also marks the point at which important patterns start to emerge in her career. She was young, with perfect teeth and and a freckled face, and puberty had left her with big boobs. She was a perfect product for the teen market: Full of puckish potential with a dark side rumbling just below the surface, as well as a name everyone knew.

        Like “The Parent Trap,” “Freaky Friday” was a remake of a Disney classic with a good gimmick, requiring the young lead actress to take on two roles: A mother and a daughter at odds with each other. At the time, Lindsay’s Disney contract was over, so she was not among the first choices for the part, and director Mark Waters was not impressed when she was brought in for an audition. She hadn’t had a theatrical film in five years – still her longest break from the multiplex – but no one was going to argue against her casting. Rather than bank on the other, unproven options (Evan Rachel Wood, Michelle Trachtenburg), Disney put the challenging role in the hands of a veteran, even if it didn’t seem to suit her. Being cast in “Freaky Friday” was Lindsay’s first and last stroke of pure luck.

        “Freaky Friday” was also her first opportunity to play an adult. At the time, Lindsay was being shuttled back and forth between work obligations and high school on Long Island, and her parents’ abusive marriage continued on. If Lindsay was convincing – not just as a teen but as her mother – and if the film was a success, she would never have to live at home again. The tremendous power she suddenly had was not lost on her: Lindsay spent a year learning to play guitar, and she meticulously studied videotapes of her co-star, Jamie Lee Curtis. Of course, Lindsay pulled it off. Her performance made Disney hundreds of millions of dollars and she got her first serious reviews.

        Lindsay’s life changed forever that summer. While “Freaky Friday” was rolling out into theaters, Disney and Lindsay shot her first name-atop-the-marquee vehicle, “Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen,” designed to present Lindsay as a triple-threatening, full-powered charisma machine. Lindsay was suddenly America’s most famous teenager.

        As studios had done with their ingenues since the silent era, Disney manufactured a teenage romance for her, as well as a bitchy rivalry with Hilary Duff, her lower-caliber Disney counterpart. Cameras started following her, and she was grateful for their attention. She relocated to Los Angeles, bought herself a Mercedes, and at the age of 17, claimed her hard-won independence.

        Released at the top of 2004, “Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen” is a children’s film of insipid mediocrity. Lindsay plays Lola, an aspiring teen actress with dreams bigger than her high school. She coasts through the part capably, but it must not have been much of a stretch. Lola’s unshakable, possibly misplaced ambition must have resonated with Lindsay, because around this time, she decided she wanted a big piece of the music business. The film came complete generic pop-rock numbers with simple choreography, both of which make Lindsay’s musical incompetence clear. Luckily for her, the film’s embarrassing stench didn’t last for long. Two months later, “Confessions” was followed by her greatest success, a contemporary masterpiece.

        What can be said about “Mean Girls” that hasn’t already been said? It is the pinnacle of Lindsay’s professional career and a colossal piece of writing that quickly fell into place as a generation’s undisputed cinematic urtext. Every last one of us has memorized Tina Fey’s quotable screenplay from top to toe, and if there is a reason why Lindsay remains such a part of our daily media diet, it is because “Mean Girls” made an indelible mark on popular culture. It was her first PG-13 film and her first departure from Disney. She got to curse, show off her cleavage, interact with grown-up SNL talent who took her seriously as a comedian, and best of all, she finally got an honest-to-God leading lady role with wit and insight for an adult audience and satire her teen fans could understand.

        “Mean Girls” represents a crossroads moment; in exchange for an instant classic and a crossover to adult stardom, Lindsay sacrificed her princess crown.

        Lindsay got sick of her teen star cred very, very fast. That summer, Disney set her up in a posh apartment with Raven-Symone, but apparently, Lindsay rarely came home. She started smoking her cigarettes on the street so the cameras would see her, and started dropping hints about her sex life with her older boyfriend, one of the guys from “That 70′s Show.” She signed a record contract with Universal rather than Disney. In the fall of 2004, Lindsay said yes to two projects at once, and suddenly, everything changed for her. At age 18, Lindsay spent her summer shooting one last Disney film, “Herbie: Fully Loaded” while recording her first album in her trailer so it could be rush-released for the holidays. No longer a minor, Lohan was obligated to work fourteen-hour days on the juvenile Disney comedy, while staying up all night writing and recording her album. Before long, Lindsay was in the hospital with exhaustion. Or was it an infected kidney? Or was it something else?

        The press responded with a blitz of rumors. Previously, they had gone relatively easy on Lindsay. She had been spotted out at clubs in West Hollywood, barely old enough to buy a lottery ticket, but it hadn’t been widely discussed. What the media had latched onto were her father’s troubles. That fall, Michael Lohan ended up back in prison for violating Dina’s restraining order and for crashing his car while f***ed up on cocaine. He told the press that drugs were to blame for Lindsay’s trip to Cedars-Sinai. Lindsay had always just kept working, trying not to let her father’s irresponsibility upset her, but this time, it clearly did its damage.

        Throughout the G-rated “Herbie: Fully Loaded,” the male characters (and cars) who encircle Lindsay ogle her and comment on how pretty she is, but the truth is that she looks exhausted. There are visible bags under her eyes in some scenes, and most of the time, she seems to be reluctantly walking through the lackluster writing. She clearly didn’t want to be there.

        When she came back to New York at the end of the shoot, she took a few weeks off before her album promotion blitz, partied at the Marquee (where someone apparently found her lost wallet stuffed with rolled-up dollar bills) and planned her next career move. After three months of co-starring with an animatronic Volkswagon, she went looking for a dangerous part while her agents negotiated her next multi-million dollar contract. She had more options than ever before. She took interest in Kenneth Lonergan’s gigantic New York epic “Margaret,” but Dina objected to its content. She read the first draft of Matthew Wilder’s (notoriously excellent but never produced) Linda Lovelace script and wanted the part, but, of course, a porn biopic was out of the question.

        Much wiser decisions were made for Lindsay’s indie breakout. In March 2005, Lindsay would earn $7.5 million for “Just My Luck,” a conventional rom-com about a surrealistically lucky young PR agent who has her fortunes changed by a tarot reader. After that unfortunate business, she would shoot two films that would, at least superficially, give her a launching pad as a dramatic actress. In Robert Altman’s “A Prairie Home Companion,” Lindsay would have to work opposite Meryl Streep, playing her suicide-obsessed teenage daughter. That fall, she would have one of the better subplots in Emilio Estevez’s “Bobby,” an all-star “Grand Hotel” retread set on the night of the younger Kennedy’s assassination.

        But 2005 did not go as planned. Dina filed for divorce. Lindsay’s debut album “Speak” went Platinum, despite her being little more than a capable vocalist. (Here is the acapella track of her lead single, the anti-paparazzi rant “Rumors,” presumably written on automatic pilot.) Michael filed a lawsuit, claiming he was entitled to a portion of her millions, all the while trying to assemble his own reality show. Sometime around this point, Lindsay was prescribed Adderall, probably more for her extreme schedule than for ADHD, and she started to hemorrhage weight. When she hosted SNL that spring to promote “Herbie: Fully Loaded,” she poked fun at her skinny arms on stage, but backstage, Amy Poehler and Tina Fey were giving her an intervention.

        After the broadcast, Lindsay went out. “Herbie” was released and it earned $144 million.

        Shooting “A Prairie Home Companion” in Minnesota that summer turned out to be a positive learning experience for Lindsay. It was an unconventional shoot: She had never improvised, and she had a hard time getting used to Altman’s long takes. They shot ten pages on Lindsay’s first day on set. Altman and his actors went to dinner every night, and Streep took Lindsay under her wing. It was a proud time for Lindsay, and after doing two awful studio films in a row, it gave her an opportunity to work as a real actress, living the dream light-years away from family drama. Most writers talk about her “holding her own” against Streep and Tomlin, but Lindsay is better than that. “A Prairie Home Companion” represents the best evidence of Lindsay’s squandered talent. She creates a character as visibly as the rest of the star-studded cast, adopting an anxiety-filled half-whisper and a rejected pout, and she carries the film’s musical climax entirely solo.

        Inspired by the summer shoot with Altman, Lindsay decided she wanted to direct. She had been working on her second album, which she decided was going to be a little more personal and raw. The resultant album “A Little More Personal (Raw)” was accompanied by Lindsay’s directorial debut: A music video for the lead single “Confessions of a Broken Heart (Daughter to Father).” To her credit, Lindsay appears to have thought the concept through thoroughly: The video inter-cuts between Lindsay’s parents having a violent domestic dispute, her sister Ali crying in a tutu in her bedroom, and Lindsay, singing and sobbing on her bathroom floor in a bejeweled ballgown. This all takes place in Manhattan storefront windows before the public. The song is unbearably intimate and self-conscious, but for all her narcissism, Lindsay is attempting to taking control of the press surrounding her. In MTV’s “Making The Video,” she says: “My life is on display for the public…People want to find the drama, especially in my life, for whatever reason that may be. They find that interesting, whether it’s in the tabloids or on TV, so I’m giving people what they want. I’m giving them the drama.”

        Lindsay shot “Bobby” at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles at the end of the year. She played Diane, a young woman who marries a classmate so he won’t be stationed in Vietnam. Luckily for Lindsay, she had one of the most poignant narratives out of the ensemble and one of the only pay-offs that works. Even with less than ten minutes of screen time and 24 co-stars, she stood out and made an impression. Lindsay stayed on in Los Angeles and moved into the Chateau Marmont, the famous celebrity safe haven. While staying there, she told Vanity Fair she had been bulimic. And that she had abused cocaine.

        On January 3, 2006, Lindsay is rushed to the hospital with an asthma attack. It is the first of five hospitalizations that year.

        In April, Meryl Streep is interviewed for a W Magazine cover story. She says of Lindsay, “She’s in command of the art form.”

        In May, “Just My Luck” is released. The film comes in fourth on its opening weekend and loses money.

        On July 26, Lindsay fails to show up for work on “Georgia Rule,” a dramatic film with Jane Fonda. Lindsay had spent the prior evening at Guy Tuesday’s in Los Angeles, and is hospitalized for heat exhaustion.

        Two days later, the CEO of the film’s production company releases an open letter: “To date, your actions on Georgia Rule have been discourteous, irresponsible and unprofessional. You have acted like a spoiled child and in doing so have alienated many of your co-workers and endangered the quality of this picture.”

        Damn, Africa. What happened?

        Like

        • The stories about Lindsay Lohan mainly point toward her being from a family that allowed her to be completely out of control at a very young age. You won’t have any problems finding non-celebrity kids that were never abused but eventually ended up out of control because of bad parenting. So imagine being rich and having parents that allowed you to do whatever you wanted because they were scared of being cutoff. That’s apparently the world that Lohan grew up in according to some rumors.

          http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=36778717&postcount=434

          Like

      • It Could Take Ten Years for Lindsay Lohan’s Career to Recover, Experts Say:
        http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/09/24/years-lindsay-lohans-career-recover-experts-say/

        Lindsay Lohan is still in big trouble.

        Despite her release from jail on $300,000 bail late Friday night, experts say the actress is going to have a hard time finding work acting anytime soon.

        “Lindsay is immensely talented, but the big problem is going to be insuring her for the next ten years,” Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney, Mark Geragos, told Pop Tarts. “She is absolutely uninsurable even if a studio was willing to take the risk and hire her, so in this case its only time that can heal.”

        Geragos also said that Lohan would have to stay “absolutely clean and sober” for a minimum period of five years for an insurance company to even consider a coverage plan for her.

        But according to Hollywood Pop Culture Expert Peter Shankman, the way the 24-year-old has been behaving she will simply be lucky to be alive in ten years time.

        “This was the final straw – look at it from a money perspective, this isn’t about her. The ‘Linda Lovelace’ production took a gamble on her, which they’ve now lost. She’s completely unemployable. I hope she can make it to 30,” he said.

        Lohan was scheduled to start shooting “Inferno,” a biopic about 1970’s porn star Linda Lovelace, on November 15, however given the actress’s latest court dealing it seems serious doubt will now be cast over that production.

        So could this really be the end of Lohan’s on-screen career? After all, her looks and talent might very well be questionable in a decade’s time, especially given her history of hard partying.

        “I’ll worry a lot more about Lindsay Lohan’s marketability once she’s no longer young and attractive. Hollywood can be less forgiving of women who age than women who do drugs and get into trouble,” journalist and media consultant Jenny Hontz said.

        Furthermore, she doesn’t exactly have Academy Awards attached to her name.

        “Unfortunately, should Lohan ever clean herself up enough to return to acting, she will require a significant insurance policy common for troubled actors. This is a huge disincentive to Hollywood producers who, today, face a tight rein on production expenses. Lohan’s body of work is hardly that of Marilyn Monroe or John Belushi, so she may find she misses out on roles because studios prefer to find alternatives that are more reliable,” added Jason Maloni, a Crisis Communications Specialist at Levick Strategic Communications.

        And from a financial perspective, the scenario seems pretty dire for the troubled starlet.
        According to an inside source, Lohan is well over $2 million dollars in debt (why she couldn’t afford to hire another lawyer following Shawn Chapman Holley’s desire to resign after she first sentenced to jail in July.)

        Still, Hontz believes that so long as there is still media and public interest in Lohan, and that money and work opportunities will always exist.

        “Notoriety is often just as lucrative as fame. It all comes down to the bottom line in Hollywood. If studios think she can sell a movie, they will hire her. There are plenty of Hollywood stars who get into trouble for drugs and continue working or at least make comebacks after they get clean,” she explained. “And even if her film career implodes, there are other ways for her to capitalize on her fame to make money. As long as the public is fascinated by her, The Lindsay Lohan brand will probably continue to exist. The ‘Disney Child Star Turned Bad Girl’ is her brand at the moment.”

        Like

        • To Be Successful Again, Lindsay Lohan Must Die:
          http://gawker.com/5859677/to-be-successful-again-lindsay-lohan-must-die

          I’ve spent a lot of time considering Lindsay Lohan over the past decade. When I began my career as a gossip columnist she was a sweet freckled little thing whose biggest drama was battling Hilary Duff for the love of Aaron Carter.

          Since those halcyon days various editors have asked me to pre-write obituaries for the consistently downward spiraling Ms. Lohan, just in case she finally went onto that great nightclub in the sky while I was on vacation or taking a nap. It is always good to be prepared. But five years later Lindsay is the hot mess that keeps on messing and not, I argue in my upcoming book Celebrity Inc., to her brand’s best advantage. At this point yet another glimpse at her prematurely aging breasts paying homage to Marilyn Monroe will not reinvigorate Lindsay’s sagging brand and career. The only thing that will save brand Lohan from total Kristy McNichol-dom is if she truly channels Monroe and actually leaves us for good.

          Brand consistency is the hallmark of a successful product. When brands act erratically, consumers become confused and wary. By 2011, Lindsay Lohan had become an untenable brand. She wasn’t unbankable or uninsurable; she was inconsistent and that is what caused her value to plummet.

          It is an understatement to say that 2010 was a terrible, no-good, very bad year for Lindsay Lohan. She was erased from promotional materials accompanying the Nintendo DS video game of Mean Girls, the movie that just a few years earlier had solidified her stardom. Why? Marketers were afraid moms would see Lohan’s face and pass. She was fired in pre-production from the biopic of porn star Linda Lovelace, by the one director still willing to take a chance on her. On top of these relatively minor indignities, Lohan was jailed, rehabbed, jailed, then rehabbed once again.

          In just six years, Lohan had gone from being an asset on a project to being a liability. The press has always claimed her sloppy and seemingly drug-addled behavior makes her unbankable and uninsurable. Neither of those claims is accurate. The dirty secret of Hollywood brand management is that no one is unbankable or uninsurable; there is always money and there are always projects for a celebrity brand that is likable and consistent. Lohan had become unlikable and inconsistent. That’s why no one wanted to work with her.

          The story of Lohan’s rise and fall is a cautionary tale for a generation of young starlets about bad decisions and poor crisis management. As Lohan moved from one side of the balance sheet to the other, from Cash Cow to train wreck, she destroyed hundreds of millions of dollars in potential brand value. She didn’t follow the bad-girl narrative, a good-girl narrative, or an uplifting redemption narrative. She couldn’t even stick to a lesbian narrative for the better part of a year.

          Q scores help to determine an actor and actresses likability so that studios know whether consumers will see a project. One of the reasons Lohan had difficulty getting work after 2007, and why in 2010 she was dropped from the Lovelace biopic, is that her Q scores were some of the worst that the overseer of the metric, Steve Levitt of Marketing Evaluations, has seen over his entire forty-year career.

          In 2004, Lohan had a brand awareness of only 20 percent. Her positive Q was a 19 and her negative was a 20.

          By 2005, when her excessive partying and un-Disneylike behavior were being serialized in entertainment magazines, Lohan’s brand awareness shot up to 53 percent and with it her negative Q, up to a 33. Her positive Q, meanwhile, dropped to 13. By 2006, her brand awareness was 72 percent-almost three out of four people recognized her face and her name. But her positive Q was only a 13, while her negative was a 37. “That’s just a terrible relationship. You had three times as many people feeling negative about her as you did feeling positive,” Levitt told me.

          With each of Lohan’s inconsistent brand decisions, the gap between her positive and negative Q scores widened. After her arrests and subsequent rehabilitations, Lohan’s Q again fell in 2007. With 74 percent brand awareness, she had a positive rating of 11 and a negative rating of 43. Her failed relationship with Samantha Ronson, as well as her nude photo-shoot in New York magazine, increased her awareness score to 80 percent in 2008, while her positive rating remained an 11. Her negative rating, however, shot up to a 52. By any objective standard of accounting,Lohan was getting more famous and more unlikable. By 2010, 84 percent of those polled were familiar with Lohan. And yet her positive rating reached a new low of 9, her negative rating remaining at 52. More than five times as many people disliked Lohan as liked her.

          “Michael Jackson had Qs in that range for a long time,” Levitt explained to me. Almost as an afterthought he added, “His stats only went up after he died.”

          Today, her brand value, like Michael Jackson’s, has nowhere to go but up in the afterlife. America loves a train wreck, until the moment they don’t anymore. But what America loves more than a comeback is a martyr-someone who literally loses everything, including their life, because of the excesses inherent in a system that was meant to protect and nurture her.

          “Once a celebrity passes away, the public is more apt to focus on their talents and the good in their life than the bad,” Levitt explained. Elvis Presley’s positive Q score was at 25 before he died and in 2009 reached 34. Johnny Cash’s positive Q rose from 19 to 35 following his death.

          The death bump happened for Michael Jackson as well. In February 2006, Michael Jackson’s positive Q score was a 9 and his negative was a 67. According to Levitt, that was a historical low within the entire celebrity population. But by November 2009, five months after his death, Jackson’s positive Q had skyrocketed to a 34 and his negative Q had dropped to a 27. It was an unprecedented turnaround, played to the sound of dinging cash registers. With likability comes marketability.

          Executives within the dead celebrity business refer to the high-net-worth deceased as “delebs,” and today these executives preside over an industry that is valued at more than $800 million a year and growing. The attraction of this segment of the celebrity market is obvious: The dead are the easiest clients to manage. Not only do they not meddle in their business affairs, they won’t get caught with their pants down, drunk-driving, or making a racist remark to TMZ. And in an industry where vast sums are made in merchandise licensing and symbiotic partnerships, dead celebrities have just as much earning power as the living and sometimes more.

          An estate actively working to maximize merchandising opportunities will derive the second-largest share of its revenues from licensing. Lindsay Lohan’s image was yanked from the Mean Girls video game because mothers would have been unlikely to buy their daughters something that emulated Lohan as a train wreck, but carefully cultivating the Lohan post-mortem brand to highlight the nostalgia of The Parent Trap, Freaky Friday and Mean Girls and discount the drugs, rehabs and faux Sapphic behavior would allow Lohan’s legacy to be amply more lucrative.

          Like

          • Re: Lindsay obviously isn’t interested in ‘her career.’:
            http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0517820/board/flat/220788121?d=220859259#220859259

            In 10 years she’ll be either dead (like her mom), or left-behind in obscurity with spare and dwindling roles (cameos mostly) – her “fortune” has already dwindled to a debt she cannot afford at this time as well.

            Lesson to be learned from this wretch:
            don’t be a b*tch,
            don’t squander your money,
            don’t booze/drug any sensiblity you might have away,
            don’t take advice from substance abusing parents,
            don’t be a sexual deviant for your ’15 minutes’ of IT-ness,
            don’t ruin your body inside/out with idiotic tattoos, poor health and smoking..
            and alas, don’t continue to behave as if there is nothing wrong and that you are still on top of the world – Linds, you’re a has been.. get over yourself!

            Like

        • Will Lindsay Lohan have a real, career saving movie opportunity?

          http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0517820/board/flat/216045411?p=1

          by poem (Wed Jun 19 2013 15:48:01)

          Well, that’s what people are waiting for since ages.

          Lilo was once pretty big because she was young, beautiful, successful, and very talented. Then she started getting arrogant in interviews, unreliable at work and getting in conflict with the law, which made her even more unreliable. In short, she seemed to concentrate more on getting infamous, instead of famous, than anything else.

          I think its a reasonable state of mind of me as a consumer to expect entertaining movies from Hollywood. Mean Girls and some other Lilo movies certainly fit that bill. More recently, not so much.

          Ultimately, as a consumer, I don’t need neither Lilo nor any other specific actor or other creative artist from Hollywood. I only need any great script authors, great directors, great actors and great other crew, that, working together, then manage to produce great movies. Who this is specifically doesn’t really matter much to me as a consumer.

          And Lilo has proven that she can help creating great movies. But pure talent alone isn’t enough. You also need the other creative people, and you need to actually do your part and actively use your talent. Or its slumbering uselessly.

          by DownStyphon (Sun Jun 23 2013 12:44:50)

          What? Another opportunity?

          Lindsay has trashed so many chances already, why in the world would you expect someone to give her ANOTHER chance?

          She’s late to the set, doesn’t learn her lines, starts fights with the cast and crew, and always plays the diva.

          Lindsay’s experience consist entirely of being a child actor in dumb teen films, and in jamming up productions so they are unable to stay on schedule.

          Why in the world would anyone give her ANOTHER chance?

          by superjaneyjane (Tue Jun 25 2013 07:55:39)

          I’m not sure that Lindsay was ever truly ‘big’. Her only films that were particularly successful both commercially and critically were Freaky Friday and Mean Girls, both filmed a decade ago. If you look at her co-stars like Rachel McAdams, Tina Fey and Amanda Seyfried, Mean Girls was a stepping stone in their careers, while this film is probably the jewel in Lindsay’s crown. And she gives a good performance in it. This and ‘Prairie…’ demonstrate that Lindsay is capable of a solid performance. If she had gone in the right direction and kept it professional, I’m sure she could have built on her acting skills. But she has only ever been ‘good’ not extraordinary.

          Set reports on the Canyons demonstrate that Lindsay is unprofessional and erratic. She has ruined her once beautiful looks with drug use and unnecessary plastic surgery, and looks far older than she actually is. She is not a box office draw and while she has acting talent, she is far from exemplary.

          In short, to cast her is a big risk, and a quite unnecessary one given that there are plenty of other actresses who are a much safer, more professional choice.

          Like

      • What’s interesting about “Mean Girls” (when I was looking up for background information), is that Lindsay Lohan was originally supposed to play Regina, Rachel McAdams’ character. But Lindsay instead wanted to play the “nice girl”, Cady because she was worried that the public would base her real personality on Regina’s. Amanda Seyfried (Karen, the “dumb girl” among the Plastics) was instead originally going to play Cady. Ashley Tisdale most likely, would’ve played Karen (since she auditioned for the role) had Amanda Seyfried played what ultimately wound up to be Lindsay Lohan’s role in “Mean Girls”.

        Like

        • I also read that in reality, they cast Lohan as Cady instead of Regina because the producers decided that Lindsay had too strong of a personality and they therefore, wouldn’t have been able to find someone to counter her as Cady if she played Regina.

          Like

        • I saw that when I was researching. It seems like everyone was on board with the change. I have read differing accounts over whether it was Lohan’s idea or the studio’s. But whoever’s idea it was to make her the lead, no one objected.

          Like

      • Is she too far gone?

        http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0517820/board/flat/210134448?p=1

        by Killingforcompany (Wed Feb 13 2013 00:22:09)

        UPDATED Wed Feb 13 2013 00:22:33
        Quite frankly things could get a lot worse for her. They certainly have for other former starlets who have gone down similar, self destructive paths in the past. I sincerely hope for her sake that this is rock bottom and that she can get her act together, even by doing something as seemingly audacious as walking away from show business entirely. Her career has been permanently damaged for sure. However, it is possible, although unlikely, for her to make a comeback.

        Lindsay Lohan had it all. Hollywood rolled out the red carpet for her and she could have been the next big thing, but she went down a very different path. That town is a gift to some and poison to others, yet the intoxicating allure and addiction of fame is hard to leave behind. Something tells me that unless she is ready to face the reality of her life she is going to have a very hard time when true sobriety hits and she realizes just how much opportunity she has really squandered over the years.

        By the time she shows up Hollywood will want nothing to do with her, which is truly tragic. People should be able to redeem themselves, but the first step is to take personal responsibility for one’s actions, which she hasn’t done. Everyone, and I mean everyone, thought that Robert Downey Jr. was washed up around ten years ago. Things change, people can change too.

        Like

    • You have pretty much said all that I wanted to say about why Lindsay Lohan has landed here. I would also take under consideration, the argument that Emma Stone has pretty much “replaced” Lindsay Lohan:
      http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/01/emma-stone-s-lindsay-lohan-problem.html

      Like

      • Is Emma Stone the New and Improved Lindsay Lohan?

        http://www.bubblews.com/news/234220-is-emma-stone-the-new-and-improved-lindsay-lohan

        Emma Stone burst onto the scene about the time that Lindsay Lohan burst onto the judicial system scene. I have always thought that Emma Stone looked a lot like Lindsay Lohan. In fact, the first time I saw her in a movie I thought it was Lindsay Lohan. Stone was already making movies by the time Lohan went crazy but I have a theory that when Lohan decided to throw her career in the toilet that movie makers saw Stone as a sort of replacement. Her roles have become much meatier. Just look at The Help to see what I am talking about. I wonder if Stone would be as popular today if Lohan had stayed normal. What do you think?

        Like

        • Emma Stone Is the Lindsay Lohan That Could Have Been:
          http://www.blackbookmag.com/movies/emma-stone-is-the-lindsay-lohan-that-could-have-been-1.21795

          Watching the new clip of Emma Stone playing bedroom rockstar in her upcoming film Easy A, we couldn’t help be reminded of another red-haired, raspy voiced young starlet who oozed charm and spunk. Not to take anything way from the movie-star-in-the-making Stone, but this clip wreaks of Lindsay Lohan circa Mean Girls/Freaky Friday. Even the plot of Easy A (which also stars Penn Badgley, Amanda Bynes, Patricia Clarkson, and Stanley Tucci), sounds like Mean Girls redux: “A clean-cut high school student relies on the school’s rumor mill to advance her social and financial standing.” Okay, then.

          Before Lohan destroyed her career with the need to do “serious work” (and, you know, drug addiction), then the role of the slightly dippy girl you love to root for, would have been hers to keep. Come to think of it, Emma Stone isn’t so much the Lindsay Lohan that could have been—she’s the Lindsay Lohan that was.

          Like

          • Sadly, since we’re on the subject of the movie “Easy A” w/ Lindsay Lohan’s Hollywood “replacement” Emma Stone, I think that it’s pretty safe to say that Amanda Bynes is another young star, who is due for a “What the Hell Happened to…”

            Like

            • She’s definitely flamed out. But she was always small time. Did she even have a hit movie?

              Like

              • Yeah, I don’t think Amanda Bynes has ever had a lead role in a hit movie, and even Easy A, which was her last supporting role 3 years ago, was only a modest hit. She’s never been anywhere near the A-list, if anything her recent rash of Twitter-bashing, calling numerous celebrities “ugly”, has probably given her more public exposure than any acting gig she’s ever had to date. That doesn’t make her worthy of a WTTH write-up, though, I think.

                Like

              • Amanda Bynes was in “Hairspray” and “Robots” which were huge hits to the best of my knowledge, but she wasn’t exactly the main star or draw.

                Like

                • What’s funny is, I’ve actually owned “Robots” for several years on DVD, and just last week I decided to watch it again for the first time in years. It’s an amusing, charming animated film with Ewan McGregor, Halle Berry and Robin Williams in the leads, along with appearances from Greg Kinear, Paul Giamatti and Mel Brooks among others in the cast. Basically, it’s chock full of actors I like. Anyway, I was genuinely surprised to see Amanda Bynes’ name on the front cover among the cast, I had no idea I owned any movies with her in them until now. Well, to be honest I had no idea at all who she even was until her recent meltdown these past few months, so there’s that too, but her part in it was minimal and animated films rarely help an actor’s career, so even though Robots was a hit I can’t say it helped her at all.

                  Like

              • Amanda Bynes : She Never Had Her ‘Mean Girls’:
                http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004789/board/flat/205002238?p=1

                by coastin_on_a_dream » Sat Sep 29 2012 00:29:34 Flag ▼ | Reply

                Yeah, to be honest, she never really carried hit movies. She wasn’t really that big of a box office draw. I think she was more fit for TV. Her TV shows always did well (The Amanda Show, All That, What I Like About You).

                Her movies, on the other hand, weren’t really big hits. What A Girl Wants, Big Fat Liar, and She’s the Man performed just “okay” at the box office. And by okay, I mean like 30-45 million nationwide, which isn’t really much to brag about.

                I think She’s the Man got really popular once it came out on DVD though.

                She was in three hit movies though…they are Robots, Hairspray, and Easy A. However, she wasn’t the “star” in any of these movies. Robots did well because it was an animated kids movie, and she was part of the ensemble cast. In Hairspray and Easy A, she was only a supporting character.

                The last movie that she was the “star” of was Sydney White in 2007 and that bombed at the box office, even though she had some momentum coming right out of Hairspray. I think this proved she couldn’t really carry a movie.

                So in the film world, no. She didn’t really make her mark. In the TV world, maybe.

                I think if she had focused a little more and really pushed for better roles, she could have been big. She could have been on SNL. She could have been the next Tina Fey. But unfortunately, she got a little lost in the mix. It’s a shame really, she had a lot of potential.

                by budoka_ch » Thu Sep 27 2012 22:16:29 Flag ▼ | Reply

                I think the closest thing she had to ‘Mean Girls’ was ‘Easy A’, but that was more of a showcase for Emma Stone

                Was gonna say that as well. I also had WILAY in mind (in terms of a semi-cult following), but I suppose that was more of an ensemble gig…

                Come to think of it, even with all this talk of being a ‘star’ that young celebs seem to feel, I think Amanda was always at her best in an ensemble cast…

                by CaptHayfever » Sun Sep 30 2012 20:35:46 Flag ▼ | Reply

                Big Fat Liar more than tripled its budget (& kick-started Shawn Levy’s directing career). What a Girl Wants and She’s The Man both more than doubled their budgets. They ultimately grossed over $50mil each. I think she proved decently profitable.

                Sydney White flopped, yes, but it was also not as good of a movie; all of her other theatrical films (except What A Girl Wants) were better-reviewed.
                Also, all of her other films (except the distribution nightmare that was Lovewrecked) were better-advertised than Sydney White; even if it had been a better movie, not as many people knew it was out there.

                by BlueMoon89 » Tue Oct 2 2012 19:49:49 Flag ▼ | Reply

                Have you never seen ‘She’s The Man’?? That came out in 2006 & it’s become a favorite teen comedy of many.

                Mean Girls wasn’t great because of Lindsay Lohan…it was great because the writing was perfect. Tina Fey deserves all the credit for that one.

                Amanda played a boy & was hilarious in She’s The Man.

                She was also hilarious in Easy A, which has become a teen comedy favorite as well.

                I’d never say Lindsay made an ‘impact’ on the film industry. She made a few cute teen movies and was a Disney star like Hilary Duff…but that was it.

                by qtkidds » Tue Oct 16 2012 13:30:45 Flag ▼ | Reply

                I think Lindsay had a better run. She appeared in Bobby, which was a serious role, she appeared along side Meryl Streep in a Prairie Home Companion, she worked with Jane Fonda in Georgia Rule.. she definitely was well respected at one time, and much more of a name than Amanda.

                Mean Girls is like one of those movies that is carried by a generation. Like Clueless, sure Shes the man was cute and fun, and moderately successful, but comparing it to Mean Girls – which is a movie that is still referenced all the time 8 years later, is kind of ridiculous. Easy A was Emma’s movie and it still didn’t reach that level of success. Amanda hasn’t made one of those yet at all tbh.

                by DownStyphon » Thu Oct 25 2012 09:40:34 Flag ▼ | Reply

                “(Amanda) never had her ‘Mean Girls’”

                Neither did Lindsay.

                “Mean Girls” was carried by Tina Fay, Rachel McAdams, and the other actresses.

                Lindsay and her fans for years have characterized her part as the actress who made the film. But her acting was mediocre at best.

                Endlessly repeating your self-deluded wish doesn’t make it so.

                by CaptHayfever » Thu Oct 25 2012 23:33:29 Flag ▼ | Reply

                The point was that Mean Girls was a tremendous critical & commercial success that sold Lohan as a continuing box-office draw. Bynes, for all her successes & good reviews, never had a lead role in a movie that did as well as Mean Girls.

                by RuralJuror » Fri Oct 26 2012 02:27:34 Flag ▼ | Reply

                I’ve never seen anyone say Lindsay the made the movie what it was. What this thread is saying is that Amanda never starred in a movie that was critically and commercially successful and made her a hot property in Hollywood.

                by ThISbananas » Sun Mar 10 2013 14:56:03 Flag ▼ | Reply

                Totally agree with you. Lindsay never was worth all the hype that she got for Mean Girl. To this day I can only name that Freaky Friday movie and the horrible I Know Who Killed Me and Liz & Dick from her because she’s such a forgettable actress. If Lindsay didn’t have her breakdown that keeps her in the press she would have been forgotten like Alicia Silverstone in Clueless, and all the John Hugh movies Molly Ringwald made in the 80s (teen classics, but was no way a hit because it female lead.

                My thing with Amanda is that she seemed like she wanted to have leading roles, when I think she would have made a better supporting or character actress. Which many actresses overlook now away because it not glamorous enough. She always reminded me of a young Shirley Maclaine or Lucille Ball.

                by michahardy » Sat Mar 23 2013 18:02:32 Flag ▼ | Reply

                Yeah she really needed that one movie. She’s so hilarious, I feel like she should be having Emma stones career. Emma is not even funny…. ugh.

                I feel like Amanda is just so amazing in comedies. I remember dreading having to go watch “She’s the man,” but Amanda was such a crack up, I was dying of laughter. She is one of the only actresses I laugh out loud to in movies. She was great in Easy A and in Hairspray.

                I feel like her chubby face is part of the reason she doesn’t get many roles. I know that sounds weird. I think she is pretty, but movies usually go for certain looks.

                Like

        • Emma Stone Is Not the New Lindsay Lohan, She’s Better Than That:
          http://www.popeater.com/2010/09/28/emma-stone-lindsay-lohan/

          Pop-Ed. With the release of the recent hit ‘Easy A,’ 2010 found its breakout star — Emma Stone. Intensely likable, quick-witted and seemingly down-to-earth, Stone, with her raspy voice and red hair, exudes a cool relatability that is getting her noticed and, blessedly, putting a young actress in the headlines for her talent and ability to carry a film to box office success rather than her drug exploits and court appearances.

          Which brings us to the actress Stone is garnering a lot of comparisons to: Lindsay Lohan (circa 2004, of course). Now, I’m not here to dump on Lohan — I still hope, against all odds, that she pulls it together and emerges from her situation like the film world’s most well-known phoenix, Robert Downey Jr. (don’t forget how desperate things were for him at one point). I’m here to gush about Stone and point out how she differs from LiLo.

          It’s not hard to see why some critics and columnists are comparing Stone and Lohan. The red hair, the voice and their breakout roles in high school comedies create an unavoidable parallel. But let’s begin this breakdown of the differences between the two actresses by making a bold statement: ‘Mean Girls’ would still have been good without Lindsay Lohan; ‘Easy A’ would be nothing without Emma Stone.

          Lohan was excellent in ‘Mean Girls,’ there’s no question, but that film had a lot more going for it than its leading lady. It was written by no less than Tina Fey, who at the time was the head writer on ‘Saturday Night Live’ and would soon after go on to create the Emmy-winning ’30 Rock,’ arguably one of the better TV comedies of all time. The film also boasted stellar supporting turns from megastars-in-the-making Rachel McAdams and Amanda Seyfried. Sure, it was Lohan’s vehicle, but let’s be real, “Boo, you whore” — the film’s most famous line — came out of McAdams’ mouth and not Lohan’s.

          ‘Easy A,’ on the other hand, is all about Stone’s character, Olive; she is in nearly every scene in the film, has all of the best lines and carries the whole thing with a warmth and ease that Hollywood’s stable of empty-headed, fame-seeking starlets can’t fake.

          (Though, were I to lodge one complaint about the film, it’s that many potential storylines for the pic’s excellent cast of supporting characters are ignored in keeping the focus squarely on Olive. Think of how interesting it could have been [spoiler alert!] if they’d have let Amanda Bynes’ underused Bible-thumper discover the real truth about Olive by overhearing her conversations with Lisa Kudrow’s guidance counselor about her affair with Micah [Cam Gigandet]. It would have given Bynes’ Marianne the opportunity to reevaluate what Christian compassion is by seeing that Olive lost her way not by being promiscuous but in trying to help others by providing them cover in her lie. Just sayin.’)

          Stone has also smartly chosen to keep her private life private. During a recent interview with Chelsea Handler on ‘Chelsea Lately,’ the actress wouldn’t open up about who she is dating (if anyone) but did reveal what she did after attending the MTV Video Music Awards. While everyone else partied, including Handler, who “got to bed at around 3:30,” Stone went to Mel’s Drive-In in Los Angeles and had a grilled cheese sandwich with some friends and her brother, who she took as her date to the awards because it was his twentieth birthday.

          Lohan chose instead to make her private life public from the very beginning. We knew all about her relationship with actor Wilmer Valderrama and her “feud” with Hilary Duff. In the years since, we’ve had a front row seat to her string of relationships with both men and women, her failed films and, of course, her substance abuse problems and troubles with the law. She mistakenly welcomed the press into her private life in a bid to increase her fame, was never able to get them out and has suffered the consequences ever since. Once that door is opened, an actress becomes something else; she becomes a “celebrity.” There is a major difference between being a famous actress and a celebrity, and Lindsay Lohan is a case study in how the distinction between the two manifests and what exactly it does to a performer’s career.

          Stone appears to be traveling a different road entirely. With her fame on the rise, she’s thrown herself face first into her work — and it’s some serious A-list stuff. She’s already finished filming ‘Crazy, Stupid, Love,’ a dramedy due next year, co-starring Steve Carrell, Ryan Gosling, Julianne Moore, Kevin Bacon and Marissa Tomei, who between them have one Oscar, eight Oscar nominations, an Emmy, five Emmy nods and countless other acting prizes. Not a bad crew to pick up pointers from, eh?

          She’s currently in production on two features, a buzzed-about romance and an adaptation of a bestselling novel. ‘Friends with Benefits,’ co-starring Justin Timberlake (who is getting Oscar buzz for his turn in ‘The Social Network’) and Mila Kunis, reunites Stone with her ‘Easy A’ director Will Gluck, and is being primed as the rom-com to beat next summer. She’s also taking her first real stab at drama with ‘The Help,’ an adaptation of Kathryn Stockett’s beloved novel about the interconnected lives of a young college graduate and two African American women in Civil Rights-era Mississippi and the racial lines that divide them.

          Two other very big roles are also on Stone’s radar. She’s reportedly being considered for a major part in Marc Webb’s (’500 Days of Summer’) upcoming ‘Spider-Man’ reboot, though it is unclear if she’d be taking over the role of Mary Jane Watson from Kirsten Dunst, or if she’d be playing one of the two other lovely ladies who occupy Spidey’s comic universe: Gwen Stacy and Betty Brant. Stone may also reunite with ‘Superbad’ co-star Jonah Hill in the big-screen version of ’21 Jump Street,’ about a police unit that sends officers undercover into a high school as students.

          In a matter of just a few short years, Stone has compiled a list of credits most actresses would kill for. And it is more than worth noting that she’s done it all without a single salacious headline. She seems to be taking her cues more from the Rachel McAdams School of Keeping it Classy than the Lohan Academy of Any Publicity is Good Publicity.

          And that’s awesome. Because as a writer/editor here at PopEater (and a longtime film nerd/wannabe screenwriter), I’ve read one too many sad stories about fallen actresses and fame-obsessed reality stars.

          So you can only imagine how refreshing it was to walk out of ‘Easy A’ thinking, “Man, she’s got a real shot at something big. Whatever ‘it’ is, Emma Stone has it in spades.” And I recall thinking the same thing about Lohan at one time too. I remember hearing Robert Altman, one of the greatest filmmakers ever and Lohan’s director in ‘A Prairie Home Companion,’ praise her talent. It’s why I’ve stayed on her side for so long, despite the havoc she’s wreaked on her career. I can only hope she gets herself under control and realizes the promise the late director saw in her.

          That’s why I’m on my soapbox now to praise the rise of Emma Stone. With the list of projects she has lined up, her clear-headed approach to stardom and her desire to keep her personal life private, she clearly has her eyes on the prize. As long as she continues to keep the company she has been — that is, on location with award-winning actors and not the Hollywood party scene with disposable fame-seekers — she’ll be just fine. Better than fine, actually; I think she might just be the next big thing. There’s no question we’re a culture that celebrates fame above all things, that we can’t really tell it apart from infamy, and that it has destroyed more than one promising talent. So let’s maybe give this 21-year-old beauty exactly what she deserves: The respect she’s earned and the privacy she has requested.

          Like

    • Breakup Breakout:
      http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BreakupBreakout

      An interesting case for the main ladies of Mean Girls. After the movie, Lindsay Lohan looked like she was poised for superstardom…but things did not turn out that way and she’s been struggling for roles ever since. The other ladies however did well for themselves. Lacey Chabert has been in consistent employment with voice acting and TV-movies, and Rachel McAdams and Amanda Seyfried have become two of the most successful actresses of the decade. Still, Lohan is much more famous than anyone else, so Chabert is probably the least successful of the four main stars.

      Like

      • Amanda Seyfried: The biggest ‘Mean Girls’ star?

        http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/05/13/amanda-seyfried-the-biggest-mean-girls-star/

        “God Karen you’re so stupid!” high school tyrant Regina George exclaimed to her daft minion when she stupidly suggested that they go to Taco Bell. (She was just trying to cheer her up!) Sure, Karen wasn’t the brightest crayon in the box — she was confused by genealogy and thought that ESPN was a fifth sense — but Amanda Seyfried, who portrayed her in the film, may be the smartest of all her Plastics counterparts. Or just the luckiest.
        Six years after the release of Mean Girls, the film stands as a cult favorite. It’s a quotable landmine and a genuinely accurate depiction of the wild animal kingdom that is the high school girl-world. While its themes and funny one-liners remain timeless, the players who brought them to life, and their careers, couldn’t look more different now. In 2004, Lindsay Lohan was poised for Hollywood domination. The not-even 18-year-old was already a bankable Disney star, and was eying edgier, more mature roles (thanks to those pubescent changes). Next to her three co-stars, she was the one we thought was poised for super-stardom.

        But things change. Today, Lohan remains engraved in our pop culture consciousness, thanks to endless tabloid fodder, but as an actress, her resume looks a little thin. (Anyone want to admit to seeing I Know Who Killed Me?…anyone? Bueller?) Party of Five‘s Lacey Chabert, the second “biggest name” on the Mean Girls bill at the time, has done mostly voice work since the film, with the exception of a role in Matthew McConaughey’s forgettable Ghosts of Girlfriends Past. Of course, Rachel McAdams has hardly disappeared (thanks in part to TBS and ABC Family for their constant looping of The Wedding Crashers and The Notebook), and is perceived as an actress with longevity, but in 2010, Amanda Seyfried is arguably the biggest success story to come out of the Tina Fey-scripted film. Her third film this year, Letters to Juliet, hits theaters tomorrow, positioning her to become a romantic film staple. And since Mean Girls, she’s shown she can handle sappy tear-jerkers (Dear John), darker indies (Chloe), and campy high-profile musicals (Mamma Mia!), all while pulling her own weight alongside more seasoned actors (Meryl Streep, Julianne Moore, and Colin Firth).
        For Seyfried, the journey was slow but steady. She did a few guest spots on popular television shows (Law & Order, House, Veronica Mars, CSI), followed by a series of smart, yet risky, choices: Big Love and Mamma Mia! ultimately paid off. Mamma Mia was the fifth biggest film of 2008, and Big Love has raked in critical acclaim over the course of its four seasons (season five premieres next year). On deck for Seyfried: Albert Nobbs, with Glenn Close, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, and Orlando Bloom, and The Girl with the Red Riding Hood with Gary Oldman and Julie Christie. Not bad for the girl whose breasts can tell when it’s already raining.

        But could you tell Seyfried would be a contender for Hollywood Queen Bee simply from her vastly underrated performance in Mean Girls? Her role consisted of mostly blank stares and a few aptly timed silly comments, but maybe that was the brilliance of it. In a way, Karen Smith is to Mean Girls what cheerleader Brittany is to Glee: A blonde scene-stealer with an incredible knack for deadpan.

        Did anyone expect Seyfried’s career to explode and Lohan’s to self-destruct? Should we chalk it up to talent, project choices, personalities, or merely luck? Should Lohan do a Nicholas Sparks film to get back on track. (It certainly couldn’t hurt.) And do you, like me, find yourself randomly quoting Mean Girls throughout the day? Oh my God, Danny DeVito I love your work!

        Like

        • There’s no doubt Seyfried went on to the greatest success. And no, never saw it coming. Who did? I was really expecting big things from all the girls in the cast.

          Like

            • Do We Need to Stage a Career Intervention For Rachel McAdams?

              http://movieline.com/2011/11/17/post-13/

              Like

              • Rachel McAdams 2012:
                http://www.laineygossip.com/Rachel-McAdams-needs-to-pick-up-her-career/22053

                I briefly mentioned this the other day in the article about Emma Stone – click here if you missed it. Duana and I have discussed this a few times lately: Emma Stone is what Rachel McAdams was from 2004-2007. The Wall Street Journal had a lengthy piece on how Rachel was the most sought-after, the most talked-about, the most promising actress. And then… it just kinda… fizzled. She’s not Lindsay Lohan or anything. They just… they let the momentum slip away.

                Poor choices, or poor management? A combination of both?

                It’s so disappointing. Because Rachel McAdams has that rare thing – women love her (don’t you love her?? I love her so much) and she’s not SJP, men are attracted to her, in that way Steve Carell described in Crazy, Stupid, Love: she’s so sexy and cute at the same. Also, she can act.

                I don’t know what happened.

                Morning Glory was… kind of a mess. And she was terrible in Sherlock Holmes 1. I couldn’t enjoy her either in Midnight In Paris, a film that’s on my Top 5 of 2011. She was the only weak link for me. Rachel? Yes, Rachel. Rachel who is one of my favorites.

                This must change.

                Will it be better this time for Sherlock 2? Here she is at the premiere last night. She apparently only has a cameo. Will it improve in The Vow? Oh la. I mean I know that a LOT of you will be seeing The Vow and crying, like Sasha, so it’s clear what The Vow will do for you. But what will The Vow do for her?

                What will it do for her that The Notebook didn’t? (Gulp) Isn’t it like pressing reset?

                Perhaps then the best hope is the Terrence Malick movie she shot earlier this year. The problem with a Malick movie is that he takes forever to put it out. Tree of Life was 5 years. She needs to start closing some other projects. Some interesting projects. Projects that remind everyone why she was the best part of The Family Stone which Duana reminded me of recently. She was GREAT in The Family Stone. God I want her to be great again.

                Like

              • What Happened to Rachel McAdams and Does Buzzfeed Suck?

                http://podbay.fm/show/712316884/e/1384360540?autostart=1

                In this episode of The Popcast, Knox and Jamie discuss the career arc of Rachel McAdams. Also, they debate the merit of Buzzfeed and its contribution to culture as well as offer their own Buzzfeedy lists in honor of the internet giant.

                Like

            • What happened to Rachel McAdams?

              https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130706213010AAQZ6up

              Rachel McAdams is a great actress but she’s been in quite a few so-so movies, or miscast in certain roles. Consider these movies: The Vow, The Time Travelers Wife, Morning Glory – three movies that easily fall into so-so or mediocre romantic movies (2 terrible romantic dramas, and a mediocre rom-com). Even Midnight in Paris – she did a good part as kind of a shrew, but I think its the weakest character in the movie. Family stone = good performance in a so-so movie. (BTW, you mentioned The Notebook – that’s the kind of movie that gets you Teen Choice Awards – it isn’t taken seriously by most people – not to say its a horrible movie – but its nothing spectacular).

              Ironically look at all the other actresses you mentioned – Sandra Bullock – other than Blind Side, most of her movies have been disappointing; Reese Witherspoon – what was her last good performance since Walk the Line? Natalie Portman – for every Black Swan a lot of crap; Julia Roberts – continues to chose the wrong movies (she’s fallen into the same trap Tom Hanks has). The exception is Cotillard, who has an uncanny knack for choosing the right role in the right movie.

              Impossible to tell if the time off she took really hurt her: she did pass Devil Wears Prada, Mission Impossible, Get Smart and Casino Royale, but I’m not sure what effect it had on her career. (I do think Anne Hathaway was a better choice in Prada, but no one noticed Get Smart).

              About the Oscars – what role has she done that was deserving of an Oscar? The best work she has done was in a little seen movie called The Lucky Ones. It’s not her talent – its not getting offered an Oscar-worthy role. (Avoiding movies like About Time, which is a romantic time-travel comedy, would help). I’m sure that was one of the reasons why she quit making movies for two years – hoping for better scripts.

              Like

        • Hollywood Hype Machine:
          http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HollywoodHypeMachine

          Amanda Seyfried was seemingly on a streak of success in becoming a top box-office draw (with hits such as Mean Girls and Mamma Mia!). But in an eleven-month period from 2011 to 2012, she had three major flops in a row (Red Riding Hood, In Time, and Gone) with some reviews for the third one questioning if she even had appeal or talent in the first place (though others reviewers contended she was better than the material). She’s now on the fence and with her next film (a biopic on Linda Lovelace designed solely to beat another one with Malin Akerman into theaters) not likely to win her much cred, she could end up disappearing. Les Miserables 2012, in which she plays Cosette, has been successful critically and commercially, but most of the acclaim has been directed at Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman.

          Like

    • Darth Wiki: Fallen Creator:
      http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/DarthWiki/FallenCreator

      Lindsay Lohan had a decent start to her film career with remakes of The Parent Trap and Freaky Friday, and seemed poised to transition well to young adult stardom with Mean Girls and A Prairie Home Companion. Immediately afterward, her reputation tanked hard thanks to drug addiction and numerous car crashes, plus a publicized letter during the making of Georgia Rule about her frequently showing up late to the set thanks to going out partying the night before. After seeming to hit rock bottom with the universally panned I Know Who Killed Me, Lohan went through rehab and publicly stated that she let success go to her head and she would try to maintain a better public image from now on. Then came her recurring role on Ugly Betty, where she reportedly acted like such a diva on set that the storyline was heavily rewritten just to get rid of her, though there are conflicting reports that say she left the show due to Creative Differences over the way her character was handled. A comeback was apparent when she was cast as Linda Lovelace in the upcoming biopic film Inferno, but she later dropped out of the film.

      Like

      • Lindsay Lohan’s career meltdown: Film-by-film:
        http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/lindsay-lohan-s-career-meltdown–film-by-film-171000559.html

        Too many column inches have been devoted to Lindsay Lohan’s personal meltdown over the years, and the actress’ latest arrest – reckless driving and providing false information to police, for those of you keeping track – certainly won’t stop the red-top gossip. One thing you won’t see written about LiLo is the slow, sad disintegration of her once promising career in film. Back in 2004, Lindsay was fresh-faced and funny; flash-forward to 2013, and Lohan is box-office poison. How did this happen? We chart the gradual decline in Lindsay Lohan’s film career, movie by movie, in an attempt to discover when the rot set in.

        Mean Girls (2004)
        The movie: Acerbic high school comedy, written by 30 Rock scribe Tina Fey.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 83%
        The Lohan factor: Lohan was known for being a wholesome child star in the likes of Disney’s family comedy ‘The Parent Trap’, but ‘Mean Girls’ proved she had real star quality as an adult performer. As Cady, the new girl in school who was corrupted by bitchy clique The Plastics, Lohan showed wit and enthusiasm, overshadowing even the likes of Rachel McAdams and Amanda Seyfried in supporting roles. Still… who’s laughing now?

        Herbie: Fully Loaded (2005)
        The movie: Walt Disney’s final attempt to jump start the Herbie franchise.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 42%
        The Lohan factor: By now a mature young woman, Disney knew they had a firecracker on their hands, even going so far as digitally reducing Lindsay’s bust-size in certain shots. Off-screen, Lohan’s wild side was beginning to show, but a bit of energy wouldn’t have gone amiss on screen: ‘Fully Loaded’ was pretty mind-numbing stuff for the over-11s. Still, as far as Lohan’s contribution goes, it was solid fare – bright, cheerful and sparky.

        A Prairie Home Companion (2006)
        The movie: Robert Altman’s final film; an ensemble piece about the last performance of a popular public radio show.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 81%
        The Lohan factor: Lindsay only snagged a small role as suicidal singer Yolanda, but arriving on set must have been a dream come true. Not only was Lohan playing Meryl Streep’s daughter on screen – which we can confidently say will never happen again – but the young actress shared the spotlight with the likes of Tommy Lee Jones and Woody Harrelson too. The film itself was somewhat overshadowed when Altman died in November 2006, but Lohan made an impression, proving she still had the singing voice that made her a teenage pop star.

        Bobby (2006)
        The movie: Emilio Estevez’s ensemble drama set on the night Senator Robert Kennedy was assassinated.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 46%
        The Lohan factor: One name among 18 on the movie’s poster, no one went to see ‘Bobby’ for Lohan’s performance given that Anthony Hopkins, Helen Hunt and William H Macy were also among the assembled talent. However, Lindsay did manage to turn some heads in her small role opposite Sharon Stone and screen lover Elijah Wood. As part of the ensemble cast, Lohan was nominated for a Screen Actor’s Guild award, but if we’re being honest, our Linds wasn’t doing much of the heavy lifting.

        Just My Luck (2006)
        The movie: Screwball teen comedy, in which a lucky girl trades her good fortune with an unlucky band promoter following a cursed kiss.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 13%
        The Lohan factor: As a kid, Lohan could churn out this sort of high concept comedy in her sleep – hell, she even played twins in ‘The Parent Trap’. As an adult, however, Lohan looks disinterested, perhaps distracted at ‘Just My Luck’s baffling attempts to sell UK boy band McFly to the States. Co-lead Chris Pine ended up the lucky one later on in his career with ‘Star Trek’ in the stars, but Lohan must have felt cursed: critics slated her performance and called the movie “uneven”, “bland” and “drab”. But worse was yet to come…

        Chapter 27 (2007)
        The movie: Destined to be remembered as ‘The John Lennon movie with fat Jared Leto’.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 18%
        The Lohan factor: Another small role, Lohan’s contribution to this biopic of John Lennon’s assassin Mark David Chapman was dwarfed by Jared Leto, figuratively and literally. Leto gained 67 lbs by drinking pints of microwaved ice cream and soy sauce to play the role of John Lennon’s obese killer, while Lohan made significantly less of an impression as conveniently-named Beatles groupie Jude. Inevitably, Leto received all the media attention – both positive and negative – perhaps leaving Lindsay wondering how much melted ice-cream she’d have to eat in order to get a good review.

        Georgia Rule (2007)
        The movie: Ill-advised family comedy, starring Lohan, Felicity Huffman and Jane Fonda as three generations of damaged women.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 17%
        The Lohan factor: Does a Teen Choice Award nomination count for nothing any more? That was just about the only positive Lohan could have taken from ‘Georgia Rule’: the comedy was slammed by reviewers – one labelled it “a sitcom about sexual abuse” – and it was voted among the worst movies of the year. Worse, Lohan’s off-screen antics were beginning to affect her work. Following her hospitalization for ‘exhaustion’, studio executive James G Robinson made public a letter to Lohan, in which he claimed: “We are well aware that your ongoing all night heavy partying is the real reason for your so-called ‘exhaustion’.” The word around Hollywood was that the actress was now uninsurable.

        I Know Who Killed Me (2007)
        The movie: Psychological horror about a serial killer that featured more unintentional laughs than it did scares.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 9%
        The Lohan factor: The ‘black swan’ of ‘The Parent Trap’, this trashy thriller saw Lohan play twins once more, except this time, one of them was a stripper. A cast-iron flop, ‘I Know Who Killed Me’ made history; it ‘won’ eight Razzies, including Worst Picture, while Lindsay Lohan was named Worst Actress twice for her dual roles. A bottom-of-the-barrel script didn’t help matters (“Do I look like I’m in a f***ing coma?” screamed Lohan) but this was the nadir of Lindsay’s film career as a leading actress; an abomination that would prove impossible to bounce back from.

        Labor Pains (2009, TV)
        The movie: Laugh-free comedy about a woman who invents a fake baby to get ahead in business.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: N/A
        The Lohan factor: By now, Lohan’s personal life had spun out of control: barely a day went by without her involvement in another drink and drugs scandal. After serving time in jail for cocaine use – 84 minutes, to be precise – Lindsay was just grateful for work, hence her appearance in this utterly unremarkable comedy that ended up going straight to DVD. Lohan’s character pretended to be pregnant to avoid getting fired from her job, but the role drew unwelcome parallels with her personal life; many thought Lindsay was pretending to be sober to stay in employment.

        Machete (2010)
        The movie: Purposely trashy retro throwback, starring Danny Trejo as the deadliest blade in all of Mexico.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: 72%
        The Lohan factor: Unable to find work as a legitimate actress, Lohan’s only currency in 2010 was camp value. Though technically she was on the same bill as Robert De Niro and Jessica Alba, Lohan’s tiny cameo role – as a drugged, naked girl who later dons a nun’s habit – was nothing to write home about. Appearing nude (with only her long hair covering her breasts) seemed like desperation on Lohan’s part; a plea to remain in the spotlight for a short while longer. It worked – screen-caps of Lohan in a state of undress promptly flooded the internet.

        Liz & Dick (2012, TV)
        The movie: Made-for-TV biopic, starring Lindsay Lohan as Elizabeth Taylor. Seriously.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: N/A
        The Lohan factor: Considered by many to be Lohan’s last chance at a serious acting gig, ‘Liz & Dick’ was inevitably ridiculed by critics, who couldn’t help but comment on the chasm in talent between the character of Liz Taylor, an icon of cinema, and the actress playing her. Woefully under-qualified to embody such a larger-than-life legend, Lohan’s take on Liz Taylor basically consisted of her sighing theatrically, swigging from bottles and throwing glasses at walls while wearing a series of fetching hats. Fittingly, Lohan’s film career appeared to have finally shattered just like one of Taylor’s crystal tumblers.

        The Canyons (2013)
        The movie: Kickstarter-funded noir thriller, penned by ‘American Psycho’ author Bret Easton Ellis and directed by ‘Taxi Driver’ writer Paul Schrader.
        Rotten Tomatoes rating: N/A
        The Lohan factor: A true independent movie, Lohan’s latest movie was funded partially by fans but boasts – on paper, at least – a genuinely exciting writer/director team. However, despite protestations to the contrary, Hurricane Lohan disrupting filming once again; a New York Times on-set report alleged that Lindsay was fired mid-shoot, begged for her job back while crying for 90 minutes in a hotel corridor, drank heavily before filming her sex scene and partied with Lady Gaga the night before being signed off sick. The movie struggled to find distribution and was refused entry to Sundance, with Ellis calling his own movie “languorous… it seems like it’s three hours long.” There’s always ‘Scary Movie 5′…

        Like

        • 10 Romantic Lead Characters Who Were Actually Major Douches:
          http://whatculture.com/film/10-romantic-lead-characters-who-were-actually-major-douches.php/3

          8. Ashley – Just My Luck

          It both shocks and offends me that I am meant to care about the plight of Lindsay Lohan’s character in this film. She experiences a lifetime of everything going right for her, and I’m supposed to feel bad when all of a sudden she has to live life like a normal person? You know, not winning contests she doesn’t enter and getting promoted just for showing up?

          When she loses her luck, she’s so sickeningly naive I can’t even handle it. What really happens to her that is a result of bad luck and not her own stupidity? She loses her job because she set her boss up with a male prostitute and got her arrested at a huge event. She gets rained on because she doesn’t think to carry an umbrella. She’s basically an idiot, and she doesn’t deserve good luck. She’s even so selfish that when she sees Chris Pine with her former luck, doing all these awesome things for other people, she still wants to steal it back so she can have her fairy tale life.

          10 Actors Who Hit Career Derailing Box-Office Free Falls (PAJIBA)
          By Dustin Rowles | Box Office Round-Ups | July 22, 2013

          Coming off of Mean Girls, Lindsay Lohan was poised to be the next leading lady of rom coms, until Herbie Fully Loaded, Just My Luck, I Know Who Killed Me,Georgia Rule, and a host of personal problems essentially killed her film career. She has, however, reinvented herself as a coked-out troublemaker. It has been surprisingly lucrative.

          Like

        • Ranking Every Lindsay Lohan Performance in Movies and TV:
          http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/07/lindsay-lohan-acting-performances/

          Lindsay Lohan’s new movie The Canyons opens in limited theatrical release today. Much ink has been spilled over the the production of this Kickstarter-funded movie, directed by Paul Schrader with a script by novelist Bret Easton Ellis. The New York Times wrote a long piece about it. It’s telling, how they titled the story: “Here Is What Happens When You Cast Lindsay Lohan in Your Movie.”

          At this point, when you cast Lindsay Lohan in a movie, it becomes all about her. That’s what the culture fixates on. She’s a force, a once beloved star who got caught up in tough situation after tough situation, from tax problems to DUIs. Hardly anyone talks about her skills as an actress these days.

          Fortunately, her performance in The Canyons is one of her best. Let’s see how it compares to the rest as we rank every Lindsay Lohan performance in movies and TV.

          Like

        • 10 Actors Who Are Box Office Poison:
          http://whatculture.com/film/10-actors-who-are-box-office-poison.php/9

          2. Lindsay Lohan

          Notable Flops: Now, here’s where things start getting really interesting. Lohan’s long list of flops include Chapter 27 ($187.4K against roughly $5m), Georgia Rule ($24.9m against $20m), I Know Who Killed Me ($9.6m against $12m), Labour Pains (not even released in the US, grossed $1.7 in UAE, Lebanon and Russia), InAPPropriate Comedy ($228k against an undisclosed budget), and The Canyons ($43.4k against $250k).

          Even with her low-fi projects, Lohan just can’t seem to make a movie these days that turns a profit, and given her tawdry public profile, is it much of a surprise that audiences don’t really want to see her anymore? It’s a shame, as the fresh-faced youngster from Mean Girls had so much potential…

          Upcoming Projects: Nothing, nada, zip. Lohan has absolutely nothing lined up for release or shooting, so it’s safe to say that things aren’t looking good. Though there are enough jokes about her eventually resorting to porn, the fact that her last film was shot for a mere $250k suggests that this might not be too far from the truth…

          Like

      • What Really Happened To Lindsay Lohan, Part 3: The Exile:
        http://blogs.indiewire.com/thelostboy/what-really-happened-to-lindsay-lohan-part-3-the-exile?page=1#blogPostHeaderPanel

        Yesterday afternoon, a few hours before Lifetime aired the world broadcast premiere of “Liz & Dick,” their affiliated movie network aired a censored, cable-ready edit of “I Know Who Killed Me” in a stroke of brilliance. The latter film, shot in the early months of 2007, is a seminal film for fans of Lindsay Lohan. It is, for some of us, her greatest role. It is a film that sums up all of the reasons why support and love Lindsay. It is terrible, and at times almost unwatchably bad. But in the five and a half years that came between “I Know Who Killed Me” and “Liz & Dick,” we hung on to Lindsay, carefully watched her disappear from the screen but never from our consciousness.

        It is a period I call “The Exile,” because that is precisely what it was. No one in the top tiers of Hollywood, where Lindsay was perched just a few short years before, will go near Lindsay. No one wants to be associated with her. Disney has never spoken on her behalf, despite the fact that she made them millions upon millions. She remains a fixture inside the entertainment bubble, but the world revolves around her, keeping its distance. For example, two summers ago, I had lunch with another young Hollywood ingenue with ever-changing hair. She had just bought an iPad, but she explained that she was cautious never to be photographed with it, because Lindsay had been showing hers off.

        Marilyn Monroe, the prototypical tragic ingenue fell towards doom slowly and cautiously, fulfilling the narrative of her publicly sanctioned predestination. Part of the ongoing appeal of Marilyn is that, because she got high-profile work until the bitter end, we have convinced ourselves that we can watch her films, look into her eyes, and examine her downfall. Lindsay hasn’t worked, but that doesn’t mean there has been no such engagement. Lindsay remains visible due to photographs and headlines. They get worse and worse. There is an extraordinary Youtube video that you might have seen: It shows the timeline of Lindsay Lohan’s face from infancy until this past summer. At a certain point, perhaps a few years ago, she begins aging rapidly in unflattering pictures. And her legal troubles have similarly become worse. First there was the initial DUI and the second DUI on her suspended license. She gets probation and violates it and goes to jail, steals a bracelet, gets sentenced to prison, and violates probation again. It’s all too perfect: A downward spiral that has wound itself so low that its details become meaningless. The only thing that matters anymore is its perpetual motion south.

        That’s why yesterday’s broadcasts of “I Know Who Killed Me” and “Liz & Dick” are so important. They are the beginning and end of a chapter in her life: The symbolic bookends of The Exile.

        The Exile begins with the infamous letter from James G. Robinson, the CEO of Morgan Creek Productions, to the press. The shoot of “Georgia Rule,” Lindsay’s debut as an A-List dramatic actress, was so catastrophic that public humiliation become the production’s last resort. Unless the film became a blockbuster success, Lindsay would never be insurable again because of this letter.

        “Georgia Rule” is bad film, based on an inept script about troubled women written by a man. The tri-generational story focuses on Rachel, an 18-year-old who was sexually abused by her father. The characterization is inconsistent, vague, and unrefined, as is the whole of the film. It tries to walk that dangerous fine line between familial tragedy and hearty comedy, and it fails in a big way. One would think a film about troubled women, played by interesting actors, might be weak but never boring. “Georgia Rule” is so tasteless and ludicrous that it gets exhausting before the first hour is up. The Lohan performance that ends up in the film is eerie, to say the least. She throws herself wholly into the project, reciting her foolish “serious” dialogue sincerely and adding a touch too much gravitas to her jokes, refusing to let them land. By no stretch of the imagination is it her fault that the film doesn’t work, but she became the scapegoat because of her behavior. Hollywood slammed the door on her heels on her way out.

        After production wrapped, Lindsay spent a few months trying to get another Hollywood role together, but nothing worked out. Instead, she went to parties. Some were industry parties where she would be safe from cameras, but more often, she went out to civilian nightclubs, hanging out with DJs and fashion industry hanger-ons. She managed to get a number of notable independent productions that would be difficult, but would have saved her reputation as an actress. Lindsay was announced for the lead roles in film adaptations of Oscar Wilde’s “A Woman of No Importance” and Tennessee Williams’ “The Loss of a Teardrop Diamond,” as well as the romance “Speechless,” opposite Adrien Brody. The films were all scheduled to shoot in 2007, but none ever came together for Lindsay.

        In January 2007, right in the middle of making “I Know Who Killed Me,” Lindsay checked into rehab for the first time. It wasn’t much of a rehabilitation, though; Lindsay spent the day on set, shooting for 13 hours, and then went back to Promises. It would be her last time on a film set for two years.

        “I Know Who Killed Me” is the definitive Lindsay Lohan film. Nothing else even comes close. A close reading of the film will tell you everything you need to know about her public image. In many ways, “I Know Who Killed Me” is, in many ways, a remake of “The Parent Trap” in which Lindsay must play two roles. This time, her two characters depict the Lindsay Lohan before-and-after. Aubrey is the apple of her parents’ eye and a talented young writer bound for Yale. Dakota is a night owl who works at a strip-club, has a foul attitude and seeks trouble. It has a preposterous twist ending that can only be described as “The Parent Trap” by way of “Sisters”-meets-”Hostel.” However, this is the best film to watch if you want to find out if Lindsay is actually a capable actress, able to elevate bad material and earn a viewer’s sympathies. The truth is that she can: Not everybody could make an amputee sex scene as convincing as Lindsay does. Perhaps because she shot the film during rehab, she is clearly working hard, committing herself blindly and coming through completely unscathed.

        The bad news for Lindsay was that nobody saw “I Know Who Killed Me.” The film was released three days after Lindsay’s second DUI of 2007, and her favorability was at a major low. The Lindsay Lohan punch lines started up, and the film was laughed off with its inevitable bad reviews. The bad thing for Lindsay is that she could no longer make a film that wasn’t a Lindsay Lohan film. Her vehicles paid off and made her a star, and from there on out, she would always be the most famous actor in any film she would make. But Lindsay couldn’t even carry a low-budget horror B-movie past breaking even. She was unemployable.

        The next five years were a whirlwind of court dates, disastrous red carpets, and depressing, desperate-for-attention photoshoots with Terry Richardson. Her DUI’s and rehab stints made her unemployable, so all of her upcoming films were cancelled. When she could find work, it was only for a few days at a time, and they were thankless roles a movie star would never consider: A topless vixen in a Robert Rodriguez grindhouse film, a few episodes on “Ugly Betty,” and a made-for-TV family comedy were all she could muster. Not making any money from films, Lindsay’s millions started to dwindle after taxes and lawyer fees, and she started having to sell interviews to tabloid outlets and tipping off photographers.

        Suddenly, in 2012, a year in which Samantha Ronson is old news and “Mean Girls” is still a staple of the American diet, things started working out. She was let off the hook by the courts with a relaxed probation, hosted an episode of SNL, and successfully fought for the role of Elizabeth Taylor in a Lifetime biopic. She shot the film over the summer, becoming the most insured actress ever to walk onto a soundstage. The production was interrupted by a car accident, and Lindsay told police it wasn’t her fault because she wasn’t behind the wheel.

        Critics took their knives out and pounced. The entire film was a debacle. It was cheap-looking and shoddy, full of careless anachronisms, excruciating dialogue, and deliberately meta moments when Liz cries into her morning newspaper. For the first time, Lindsay embarrasses herself as an actress. She is not merely out of practice. She is so unwatchable, the film doesn’t even have camp value. Perhaps it is jarring to see Lindsay Lohan playing Liz Taylor, for obvious reasons, but Lindsay just doesn’t work hard enough, and the whole world watched the hyped-up post-ironic Happening for the sake of schadenfreude.

        But I am optimistic. What does last night’s broadcast remind you of? It reminds me of Britney Spears’ 2007 VMA performance. In “Liz & Dick,” Lindsay hit rock bottom for the whole world to see. The downward spiral finally stopped sinking for two hours, and it just stayed stagnant as Elizabeth Taylor’s rolled in her catacomb. Lindsay will likely be back in jail in the next week once her probation is revoked over that car accident. She could be there for a year, maybe a few months if she’s lucky. Maybe she’ll take the time to figure it all out. Perhaps she’ll leave the business for good. More than ever before, it’s up to her. The Exile has ended and a new chapter begins.

        Incidentally, the next film we’ll see her in is “The Canyons,” in which she plays a woman named Tara. Yes, Tara. As in: Tomorrow is another day.

        Like

    • Stop Trying to Save Lindsay Lohan:
      http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/01/11/lindsay_lohan_and_the_canyons_mess_the_lesson_is_to_stop_trying_to_save.html

      Why do we keep trying to save the career of Lindsay Lohan? In “Here Is What Happens When You Cast Lindsay Lohan In Your Movie,” New York Times Magazine reporter Stephen Rodrick presents an epic account of the making of the low-budget film noir The Canyons. The film is a collaboration of Hollywood has-beens struggling to get back in the game. It’s penned by 1980s It-novelist Bret Easton Ellis, directed by Taxi Driver writer Paul Schrader, and starring Lohan, the lapsed child actress coasting by on prurient interest in her court appearances and sincere appeals to her star “potential.” Lohan still has the talent to make it as an actress, the theory goes, if only she could get it together enough to hit her mark.

      But logistics are a challenge for Lohan, and much of The Canyons’ production, as detailed by Rodrick, is spent discerning her whereabouts. Lohan fails to appear on set, blaming a sleeping pill consumed at 3 a.m. Lohan is so hungover after the interference of a hard-partying Lady Gaga that she summons her personal doctor to administer an excuse to leave (“inner ear infection”). Lohan shows up, but only under the threat of being replaced by an unnamed Parisian actress. Lohan recruits a posse of assistants to help her escape her handlers. Lohan locks herself into a closet and screams objections to her porn star co-star, James Deen. Lohan drunk-drives away into the night.

      Still, Schrader believes that he can coax a winning performance out of Lohan if only he could catch her at the right moment. “We don’t have to save her,” he says at one point. “We just have to get her through three weeks in July.” Rodrick himself, in a break from documenting the actress’s many professional failures, tells Lohan that he believes she still has a “gift” and that “it shouldn’t be squandered.”

      This is the myth of Lindsay Lohan—that she is gifted with a special talent that is hers to employ if she so chooses. Sure, a child actor—Lohan debuted in Disney’s remake of The Parent Trap at age 11—can get by being talented and cute. A teen actress—Lohan broke out in Tina Fey’s Mean Girls at age 17—can survive being talented and pretty. (And was she really so great in that movie?) But a 26-year-old actress can’t just show up and dispense her “gifts.” Performing is a skill, and Lohan does not exercise it.

      While her more successful peers have been busy working hard at their craft, Lohan has spent the better part of the last decade starring in paparazzi accounts of her own misbehavior. At first, we were captivated by this downfall—good girl gone bad! But now we are tired of that storyline, and we’re impatient for the comeback portion of her life story to kick in. But that miraculous return would require Lohan to exit the spotlight long enough to actually put in the work of being an actress. By that point, I’m not sure anyone would remember why we cared. And even if we did still care, who is to say she’s still any good?

      Like

    • 8 Celeb Faces Destroyed By Drugs:
      http://celebs.answers.com/scandals/8-celeb-faces-destroyed-by-drugs#slide1

      Lindsay Lohan

      The once fresh-faced teen star of “Mean Girls” was a role model for healthy body image and positivity. After an early start in acting, it was believed she had avoided the child star curse. Until about 2007, when a string of DUI and drug busts brought her under fierce criticism. Her downward spiral has been pretty much constant since then despite a string of rehab stints. Her thin and haggard appearance combined with an often bloated face points to a large amount of cocaine use.

      Like

    • Chelsea Lately:
      http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/topic/3155720-chelsea-lately/page-37#entry15914061

      I hate Lindsay and her jokes about keeping the tabloid industry afloat with her exploits annoyed me. She looks 50 yrs old and the clip from the Canyons was so bad I thought it was parody. I’m willing to allow her a comeback if she would just GO AWAY for a while. She just got out of rehab, what, a week ago? Sadly, all of her roles since 2005 have shown that her talent in “Mean Girls” was mainly from good writing, good ensemble and youthful energy, not because she is some amazing actress.

      Like

    • I do agree that it is becoming more and more evident that Lindsay “had her shot”. I mean, it’s has almost been 10 years since “Mean Girls” came out. It’s extremely sad (when you think about it) that a movie that Lindsay made as a teenager is still considered her “peak” (and not a “launching point”). Hiring Lindsay for anything now just reeks of blatant exploitation (she has become a sad caricature of herself I’m afraid). And it really isn’t like Lindsay has the “talent” (like say Robert Downey, Jr.) or the otherwise, cute likability factor (like say Drew Barrymore) to make people truly want to root (I’m not necessarily saying that I or anybody else isn’t hoping for Lindsay to turn her life around for the better, it’s just that I’ve giving up a lot of hope at this point) for her to succeed in conquering her demons. Lindsay Lohan just strikes me as somebody who mostly lives in denial (and wants to blame others outside of course, her parents, like the media) of her problems. And now, I’ve gotten wind that Lindsay’s scumbag, low-life, fame whoring parents are going to appear together on a new syndicated talk show called “The Test”.

      That Elizabeth Taylor TV movie was arguably Lindsay’s last really good shot at proving to people that she can still be taking seriously as an “adult” actress, and she blew it. If Lindsay continued to truly be dedicated to improving and honing her “craft”, and not be more interested in being a spoiled “celebrity”, then maybe she would’ve had a much better, respectable career. It’s very obvious that Lindsay doesn’t have a whole lot if discipline (especially after she broke ties w/ Disney following “Herbie: Fully Loaded”) And Lindsay really needs to stop accepting roles (in fairness, it’s not like she can pick and chose what she wants at this point since she has burned a whole lot of bridges) that pretty much reinforces her tawdry, “bad girl” public image (even if their “self-deprecation” stuff like “Scary Movie V”). It doesn’t help of course, that Lindsay looks horrible now (it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that the general public and Hollywood tend to be more forgiven for a way leading men look to the way leading ladies look) because of her unhealthy life-style combined w/ some unwarranted cosmetic procedures (e.g. lip injections) .

      Like

    • Lindsay obviously isn’t interested in ‘her career.’:
      http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0517820/board/flat/220788121?d=220846053#220846053

      Lindsay has been a practicing alcoholic for 10 years.

      What is worse is that she has a well-earned reputation of being a non-cooperative and willful diva on set. Not being on set on time, not learning her lines, picking fights with cast and crew, etc, etc.

      To producers and other moneymen, her past behavior is much more important than her many addictions.

      It will be almost impossible to get anyone to invest in a Lindsay production. The only thing that will be obvious to investors is that any production that involves Lindsay will certainly over-run it’s budget.

      Even her few remaining fans should be able to agree that Lindsay’s career as a actress is over.

      Like

    • Lindsay Lohan: Jennifer Lawrence Fs for Roles:
      http://www.lipstickalley.com/showthread.php?t=686612

      Lindsay Lohan has just been dropping bombs for the past weeks. With her own docu-series coming to a halt, the troubled actress has made it a point to drop rather nonchalantly explosive revelations about her never ending personal struggles. The “Mean Girls” star emerged sad and weak after her “sex list” surfaced for everyone to see.

      During an interview on her own documentary, the troubled actress said that the sex list was “not only humiliating but was also just mean.” Now, Lindsay Lohan is back for more controversies as the latest publicity act of the actress includes dissing none other than America’s sweetheart Jennifer Lawrence.

      During an interview with Kode Magazine, which the “Herbie” actress is also cover girl, the 27-year old did not fail to generate public drama when she accused American Sweetheart of derogatory terms. The article says:

      “…She saunters off into the opposite side of the room as the conversation then moves to America’s current sweetheart, Jennifer Lawrence. Her feeling towards her infamous stumble at the ceremony’s red carpet is pretty evident. “She’s so fake and I’m sorry I’m not going to f*ck for roles.”

      It is clear from the article that Lindsay Lohan accused the “Hunger Games” star of sleeping around to snag popular roles in movies. While such statements might have been said out of angst or envy, the likelihood of Jennifer Lawrence sleeping around is just slim. For one, the American sweetheart has a stable relationship with “Warm Bodies” actor Nicolas Hoult. Secondly, the 23-year old actress has already won an Oscar for her well-received portrayal of a mentally unstable girl in “Silver Linings Playbook.”

      Is Lindsay Lohan trying to drag in Jennifer Lawrence’s name to generate publicity for herself?

      It could be the case that Lohan is trying to drag in one of America’s most popular faces into controversy to generate publicity for herself. After all, the former child star has been dropping bombs all over the media to possibly up the ante for her low-rating docu-series. Looks like Lindsay is succeeding in generating publicity for herself albeit at a negative kind of fame.

      Like

  11. Was The Lindsay Lohan “My Scene” Doll Responsible For Her Downfall?

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/leonoraepstein/was-the-lindsay-lohan-my-scene-doll-responsible-for-her-down

    It’s entirely possible that this creepy Lindsay Lohan fashion doll was the gateway product for LiLo’s downward spiral.

    Like

  12. Hollywood Career Killers: 15 Movies That Helped Do Away With Major Tinseltown Players:
    http://styleblazer.com/141888/hollywood-career-killers-15-movies-that-helped-do-away-with-major-tinseltown-players/4/

    Eager to break her teen icon status, Lindsay Lohan starred in I Know Who Killed Me in 2007. The psychological thriller cast Lohan in dual roles as a pair of twins (one a mild-mannered pianist, the other a troubled stripper), both of whom are being hunted by a serial killer. The film was stylish, but not particularly coherent. What would have traditionally been written off as a bad horror film was in turn flayed by critics eager to jump on the Lohan hate train (which had begun roaring out of the tabloid station thanks to her rising legal/substance abuse problem). I Know Who Killed Me swept the Razzies later that year, as seen in the ceremony pic above (Lohan was not on hand to accept her award for “Worst Onscreen Duo”). The actress has not starred in a theatrical feature since the film tanked.

    Like

    • 10 Squeaky-Clean Actresses Who Went Bad For Movie Roles:
      http://whatculture.com/film/10-squeaky-clean-actresses-who-went-bad-for-movie-roles.php/7

      5. Lindsay Lohan – I Know Who Killed Me

      It’s impossible to track Lindsay Lohan’s image at any given time: one minute she’s in jail trying to tackle a drug addiction, and the next she’s attempting to re-establish herself as a legitimate film star. It’s proven itself to be an exhausting process, and one that the media have documented in an incredibly bizarre amount of detail over the course of many years. Still, looking back at Lohan’s early career, it’s a shame to see how things have progressed in recent times.

      Lindsay’s transformation from wholesome kid actor into certified sex symbol came in gradual stages. Her starring turn in Mean Girls confirmed her sex appeal, though it wasn’t until I Know Who Killed Me that Lohan decided that she wanted to make the full-on leap from Disney starlet to “actress who takes her clothes off.” The film was terrible, of course, and the most notable thing about it is the fact that Lohan spends much of it swinging around a pole. Given the state of her private life at the time, though, it’s hard to find it all that sexy.

      Like

    • Star Derailing Role:
      http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StarDerailingRole

      Lindsay Lohan in I Know Who Killed Me. Though her out-of-control personal life was largely responsible for the downfall of her career, this film bombed at the box-office and was ruthlessly savaged by critics and audiences alike, so it’s a pretty safe bet to say that even if Lindsay’s life hadn’t gotten so out-of-control, it’s still not too likely that her career and “it girl” status would’ve fared much better after the critical and box-office flop of this film.

      Like

      • Sugar Wiki: He Really Can Act:
        http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/SugarWiki/HeReallyCanAct

        Lindsay Lohan in Georgia Rule although it received mostly negative reviews, most critics praised her acting and said that her performance was the best part of the film.
        Lohan has shown that she’s pretty good at playing more than one character, in such films as her debut The Parent Trap and Freaky Friday. Her impression of Jamie Lee Curtis in the latter is uncanny. However, the winning streak ended with I Know Who Killed Me – Lohan appeared to have a lot of trouble working with prosthetic special-effects makeup.
        It’s more that people forgot she could act. She gained praise for her very first movie, “The Parent Trap”. Being that her performance in her last major movie, I Know Who Killed Me is still pretty fresh in people’s mind.

        Like

    • So Bad, It’s Horrible – Television Tropes & Idioms:
      http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Horrible/Film

      I Know Who Killed Me: Lindsay Lohan plays a double role as good girl Aubrey and foul-mouthed stripper Dakota. Throw in a incomprehensible plot, laughable dialogue, the two most inept FBI agents in the history of film, and symbolism that is as subtle as a sledgehammer to the skull…and you’ve got not only the worst film of 2007, but the one that effectively ended Lohan’s career and “it girl” popularity.

      Like

    • ACTORS WHOSE CAREERS WERE KILLED WITH ONE MOVIE:
      http://screencrush.com/movies-that-killed-actors-careers/?utm_source=zergnet.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_76862

      10
      ‘I Know Who Killed Me,’ Lindsay Lohan

      It’s debatable whether her reputation as a bad girl or her poor movies ultimately doomed Lindsay Lohan’s career, but the psychological horror flick ‘I Know Who Killed Me’ certainly didn’t help. At one point after its release in 2007, the movie held the record for the most Razzie wins in a single year, beating out ‘Showgirls’ and John Travolta’s sci-fi stinker ‘Battlefield Earth.’ Now that’s saying something.

      Like

      • 10 Lamest Excuses For A Movie Failing:
        http://whatculture.com/film/10-lamest-excuses-for-a-movie-failing.php/3

        8. Lindsay Lohan’s Legal Issues Preventing Her From Doing Publicity – I Know Who Killed Me

        The Failure: A borderline-incomprehensible thriller starring Lindsay Lohan that grossed $9.7 million against a $12 million budget, and scored a mere 6% on Rotten Tomatoes, while also scooping 9 Razzie nominations, winning 8 including Worst Actress for Lohan, Worst Director and Worst Picture, rather deservedly.

        The Excuse: PRs associated with the film claimed that Lohan being arrested caused the film to tank financially, because she therefore wasn’t available to do press for the film.

        The Truth: Speaking as a film critic, we are not fickle enough to loathe a film because the actors won’t and/or can’t do publicity; the fact that you’ll struggle to find a single human being who can watch the film without bleeding from their eyes is a sure testament to this. Plus, do many people really care what Lohan has to say to the press?

        Like

  13. Well I’m not much of an LL fan, and the only movie I’ve seen on purpose with her in it is Machete. Gottta say, she has a pretty hot bod in spite of all her problems. Of course one can’t help but know what’s going on with her because it’s all over the news…and I’m not just talking about the celeb news rags either. They cover her on the evening news as well which is kind of sad when you think about it. Not for her; for the state of local news! Anyway I did catch her stint on SNL last season and was not remotely impressed. She was obviously reading from cue cards during her skits, and the attempts at self deprecation didn’t work either. Just kind of a sad and pathetic story if you ask me. Lousy parents and illegal substances gets ‘em every time!

    Like

    • Lohan made a better SNL host in the past. The Harry Potter sketch where she plays Hermione is a classic. After a summer away, Hermione has blossomed into a buxom Lohan who is completely unaware that all of the students are obsessed with her new figure. Sadly, I think most of the hosts and even some of the cast read from cue cards these days. I haven’t watched SNL on a regular basis since I don’t know when.

      Like

  14. You made me curious about “Mean Girls” and I have to say it’s pretty good, I’ve been surprised. I still think “Heathers” is better being much more politically uncorrect, and in some way more “realistic” (in the sense tha the end of “Heathers” seems to say that there’s no way to defeat the “monster” and that “Heaters-type girls almost never change) but “Mean Girls” has been a funny trip back to high school. Far more clever and funny than the average high school comedy.

    Like

    • Heathers is more ambitious than Mean Girls. Mean Girls for all intents and purposes could have been just another high school comedy. But Fey’s script elevates it. It’s still pretty by the numbers, but like you say it’s much more clever than you would expect. I’m glad you enjoyed it.

      Like

      • 11 Movies That Were Far Better Than They Had Any Right To Be:
        http://whatculture.com/film/11-movies-that-were-far-better-than-they-had-any-right-to-be.php/7

        5. Mean Girls (2007)

        Why It Had No Right To Be Any Good: It Sounded So Easy To Screw Up

        It feels impossible to imagine a time where Lindsay Lohan’s name could be associated with a product of genuine quality, but Mean Girls is only a decade old, which seems like a relatively short period given how many crimes the troubled actress has managed to squeeze in since. So here’s a movie that probably shouldn’t have been any good at all, given the premise and title alone, but somehow made it through to the end with its dignity in tact.

        That mainly happened because Disney were smart enough to put Tina Fey on script duties, and to allow the movie room to breathe so that it didn’t feel like we were watching a manufactured, Disney-esque high school. From the marketing material alone (and even the trailer, to be honest) we all were probably expecting a tame and forgettable teen romp, and yet Mean Girls is none of those things: it’s very arguably a classic of the sub-genre.

        Like

    • Top 10 ‘Back To School’ Movie Classics:
      http://thescriptlab.com/features/the-lists/2305-top-10-back-to-school-movie-classics?q=%2Ffeatures%2Fthe-lists%2F2305-top-10-back-to-school-movie-classics&showall=1

      5. Mean Girls (2004)

      Mean Girls, a hilarious comedy about the extreme rules of high school. Witty, outrageous, and yet surprisingly subtle at moments, Mean Girls is infamous among teenagers. There are numerous quotes that my housemates and I abuse each other with, like “boo, you whore!”, “I want my pink shirt back!”, and “she doesn’t even go here!” to name a few. It’s a high school classic for the noughties generation, playing on the stereotypes we overuse in contemporary representations of teenage society. The film shows the jocks, the ‘plastics’, the freaks, the Asian nerds, the cool Asians, the girls who eat their feelings, etc. – every clique you could name, Tina Fey (the writer) pokes fun at the hierarchy of high school by every group adhering to their stereotype profusely. The best example is in facts ‘the plastics’, with their burn book cussing every girl in school and enforcing their ‘rules and regulations’ to the school landscape. Without the level headedness of the central character Cady and her journey of self-revelation, the film would be a mess. But ultimately, the film is balanced between what seems to be an exaggerated unreality, to a mature understanding of the teenage environment.

      Like

    • The 10 Biggest Problems with ‘Mean Girls’:
      http://www.hitfix.com/comedy/the-10-biggest-problems-with-mean-girls

      1. Not nearly enough Cool Mom.

      Amy Poehler steals her first scene as Regina George’s tracksuited, self-identifying “cool mom” who announces to Regina’s pals: “Happy hour’s from four to six!” When Cady asks if there’s alcohol in the drinks she’s serving, Mrs. George deadpans, “No! What kind of mother do you think I am? Because if you want a little bit, I’d rather you do it in the house.” She’s a suburban Jenna Maroney with the crazy glance of Rob Lowe’s character in “Behind the Candelabra.” But aside from basically two other quick cameos in the movie, she doesn’t get another big moment! For shame!

      1. This tired garbage can tumble.

      “Mean Girls” sometimes can’t decide whether it’s a strange black comedy or a straightforward high school satire, and that’s what makes a slapstick moment like Cady’s Looney Tunes-esque tumble into a garbage can so weird. We’re supposed to relate to her as an outsider in the movie’s mean universe, but then this nuttiness reminds us we don’t actually relate to anyone in the movie.

      1. Integers! Let’s flirt about them.

      I don’t demand that “Mean Girls” actually teach us about real math, but the unbelievable flirtation between Cady and Aaron Samuels during their math tutoring session is so shockingly bad that it deserves mention and an analysis from anyone with even a casual knowledge of basic multiplication.

      AARON (checking his work): “Well, the first time I did it, I got a zero. But then I checked it and I got one.”

      CADY: “I got one too.”

      AARON: “Yeah, you have to check it because sometimes the product of two negative integers is a positive number.”

      CADY: “Right. Like -6 and -4.”

      AARON: “That’s right. That’s good.”

      I love the “sometimes” thrown into Aaron’s line, as if maybe the producers aren’t sure whether the product of two negative numbers is always positive. And even better, I love Cady naming two negative numbers to prove his point. Math! It’s not just for smart people anymore.

      1. The animal kingdom metaphor

      We get it. Cady’s from Africa. There are animals there. I’m not sure that should mean Cady interprets every human interaction as a potential safari attack, as this imagined “watering hole” scene at the mall demonstrates.

      1. Every character in the movie is a cliche.

      Gretchen. Karen. Regina. Janis. Damian. Aaron. All the major players in “Mean Girls” are archetypes you’ve seen a million times, and though the movie is doing its best to explain things like cliques and ostracism, that probably doesn’t mean we need to see this expressed by way of a raven-haired loner girl, a slightly dim jock (who ends up getting into Northwestern somehow), and a moronic tagalong gal pal. Here’s some Regina-level shade: “Daria” did all those stereotypes better.

      1. The “buttered muffin” and “hot dog makeout” innuendos.

      Tina Fey noted in the special features of “Mean Girls” that two key lines in the film had to be rewritten in order to satisfy the MPAA’s requirements for a PG-13 rating. When a perverted pollster in the lunchroom asks Cady if her “muffin” is “buttered,” we’re supposed to notice that the question is meant to be dirty. Except as far as I know, a “buttered muffin” means nothing sexually. The original line was, “Is your cherry popped… Would you like us to assign someone to pop your cherry?” Now that is dirty. And also stupid. Later, a female student named Amber D’Allesio finds out that a rumor about her has been printed in the Burn Book (“Made out with a hot dog? Oh my god, that was one time!” Naturally the actual line substituted “masturbated” for “made out,” because that makes actual sense. Small moments like this take away from the believability of a movie about high school; sometimes teens are uncouth! Sorry, moviegoing audiences!

      1. The “inspirational” dad.

      Because the movie can’t let go of its animal kingdom obsession, we suffer through a pep talk where Cady’s dad tells her, “You’re not a warthog. You’re a lion.” Ugggggh. On the DVD commentary, Fey says over that line, “This is where we lost Roeper.”

      1. The sissy joke.

      When the hallways of North Shore are filled with fighting girls during the film’s climax, we see a redhaired student calling his mother and — in a recognizably gay voice — asking, “Mom, can you pick me up? I’m scared.” The gay kid is treated like a wimp in exactly the movie that claims to be cooler than that.

      1. The ending.

      In a movie full of original dialogue and smart observational humor, “Mean Girls” really drops the ball and shreds the crown in the final act. Check it: There’s a spring dance where Cady wins a popularity contest (rather inexplicably), and she announces that she wishes everyone could’ve shared the title. How is that satisfying to these characters? How is that satisfying to an audience that’s been told to expect more? It makes the second half of this movie officially worse than the first half, and you leave the theater thinking, “That was cute” rather than “That was awesome and incisive.”

      1. Miss Norbury’s horrible advice.

      The moral of “Mean Girls,” as expressed by Miss Norbury during the already improbable pep rally sequence in the gym, is easily the worst thing about the movie. “You all have got to stop calling each other sluts and whores,” she says. “It just makes it OK for guys to call you sluts and whores.

      Couple of notes:

      1) Uh, NO IT DOESN’T? Are you insane? Are you A TEACHER?

      2) In a movie that is ostensibly about girls and their relationships with one another, how is it even conceivable that there’s a line saying, “You girls better get along, otherwise guys will be pissed.” This movie is not about guys! They are not relevant to this story. It’s like the whole movie is apologizing for having passed the Bechdel test.

      3) Ms. Norbury follows this up by isolating Cady in front of every other girl in the school (“Is there anything you’d like to apologize for?”) and also Regina (“Raise your hand if you have ever felt personally victimized by Regina George.”), so maybe she’s just a pretty bad teacher.

      Like

  15. Lindsay Lohan when I think about it some more, seems to somewhat be kind of an amalgamation of the previous female “What the Hell Happened to…” subjects:
    *Like Melanie Griffith, Lindsay’s looks have severely weathered over time due to drug abuse and bad cosmetic procedures.

    *Like Thora Birch, Lindsay is a former child star with a scumbag (not that Lindsay’s mother isn’t rotten herself) for a father, who have only made things worse career/image-wise.

    *Like Demi Moore, Lindsay is really for the most part, a tabloid magnet as of late then a true respected or proper film star.

    *Like Alicia Silverstone, Lindsay’s career peaked w/ a hip and smart high school comedy (“Clueless and “Mean Girls” respectively), but they never really managed to build upon that momentum. “I Know Who Killed Me”, I guess can be considered Lindsay Lohan’s “Batman & Robin”.

    *Like Sean Young, Lindsay has become very radioactive for anybody making serious and/or major movies due to their unpredictability/unreliability issues.

    Like

    • There are a lot commonalities among the 50 WTHH candidates to date. One of the reasons I chose Lohan for the 50th article was that she summed up a lot of what the series to date has been about. Definitely agree with the 5 similarities you pointed out.

      Like

  16. Charlie Sheen Says Lindsay Lohan “Held ‘Anger Management’ Hostage” on “Jay Leno”:
    http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=310794

    Charlie Sheen addressed all those rumors flying around about Lindsay Lohan on “The Tonight Show”. Lohan is an upcoming guest on Sheen’s show “Anger Management”, and the rumor mill has been flying ever since she taped her episode. There are stories floating around that she was late and unprofessional on set, and that she even stole things.

    When asked if she was late to the set, Sheen said, “Not on day one.” So things started out well.

    “And then, um, we had to deal with day two,” he continued. “It was as though she had us held hostage, because she gave us half the show, ya know?”

    Overall, though, Sheen was complimentary of Lohan, saying that when she was there she proved both funny and prepared.

    Like

  17. great article, there was also this movie The Canyons that she did with pornstar James Deen, where she supposedly had a lot of problems as well

    Like

    • Glad you liked it. I plan on updating the article to include The Canyons once it gets released. It looks like a continuation of Lohan’s “erotic” career which is a shame. I don’t have high expectations for it to turn her career around.

      Like

  18. 15 Hairstyles That Ruined Celebrity Careers:
    http://www.businessinsider.com/hairstyles-that-ruined-celebrity-careers-2013-4?op=1

    Lindsay Lohan dyed her natural ginger locks blonde and became known as a Hollywood party girl.

    After starring in box office hits “Mean Girls” and “Freaky Friday” with red hair, Lindsay Lohan was one of the most sought-after actresses in the world.

    But shortly after she dyed her red hair bleach blonde and lost a ton of weight, Lohan started to be seen in a different light.

    Today, she’s often associated with partying more so than acting.

    This summer she’s expected to check into a rehab facility for a 90-day court ordered stay.

    Like

    • I don’t think the dye job had much to do with it. It was the substance abuse, legal problems and bad press that sidelined her career.

      Like

      • Lindsay I think let the fame and success go to her head (especially after “Mean Girls” proved that she no longer really needed the Disney machine so to speak to sell her). Of course, Lindsay dying her hair blonde wasn’t as negatively impacting on her career as the other more serious personal issues. But I do think that it was the first indicator that the public was about to turn on her. Lindsay’s red hair put until that point (besides her raspy voice), had been her most identifiable trademark. Lindsay dying her hair bleach blonde therefore, made it look like she was trying to confirm to a certain more conventional image that Hollywood normally seems to prefer in women.

        Like

        • I don’t know about her hair color. I mean, there were a lot of factors that I think were far more important than that. But she definitely let her success get the better of her.

          Like

        • Emma Stone dyes her hair- yet she has the career that Lohan basically threw away.

          Like

          • Not to mention the love of Jim Carrey. I’m still grossed out by that,

            Like

            • Thanks for mentioning THAT- ewww-

              My point is hair color is irrelevant- although you may not want to cut if off like that girl in Felicity!

              Like

              • Right. That was a major mistake.

                I *think* what TMC is getting at is that Lohan was idenitified with her red hair. Kind of like when Jennifer Grey got a nose job and was no longer recognizable as the girl from Dirty Dancing. Although Lohan was still recognizable as a blonde, so I’m not sure that’s a good comparison.

                Like

          • Emma Stone incidentally, is a natural blonde. She started sporting a darker hairstyle for “Superbad”, which was her first film role. She actually dyed it brown first, but the producer, Judd Apatow ultimately had her dye it red before they started shooting.

            Like

  19. Sometimes seems odd how Charlie Sheen’s life is such a train wreck, and yet he still seems able to manage and keep working for the most part. Lindsay though doesn’t.

    Either way, really sad. She was one of my favorites in her early stuff, and I admit I thought for a long time (until her life really started to spiral away) that she was by far the hottest actress out there. For a while I kept hoping she’d pull things together and get her career and all going again. At this point I more so hope she’ll actually spend some time in jail. After all the couple hour stints, failed house arrest, failed community service, I mean its hard to believe the justice system doesn’t wisen up that she won’t learn if they keep being so soft on her.

    Like

    • There seems to be a double standard. I don’t know how Sheen manages to keep coming through one outrageous scandal after another. I have to think the bad behavior is part of his appeal. But then again, I don’t really get Sheen’s appeal either.

      As for Lohan, I’m not sure time in jail would help. Rehab is a must, but it will only work when she’s ready.

      Like

      • Yeah, I’ve enjoyed some of Sheen’s stuff, mainly his earlier films like Hot Shots and Major League, but not too big on him. Especially not his newer things. Granted I know me and a couple friends at least think its really helped him when lately he seems to be typecasted into playing roles a lot like himself. Maybe an anti “What the hell didn’t happen to Charlie Sheen”?

        And as for Lohan, well letting her stay at home and not really punishing her has shown that it isn’t working. So she either needs to do a good long stay in rehab or jail, or something extremely major has to happen to get her to stop. But you’re right, jail may not help. Then again there are some people who going to jail doesn’t help them, but then with those people it doesn’t really help society to keep that person around them.

        Like

        • During Sheen’s hey day in the 80s, I liked him well enough. Wall Street and Platoon were really good movies. I enjoyed Hot Shots and Major League. I was never a big enough fan to see a movie because he was in it. I’m not a fan of sitcoms, so his recent work hasn’t appealed to me. I know 2 and Half Men is popular, but I just can’t sit through it or the Big Bang Theory. Somehow, Sheen’s bad behavior plays into his image. And while I won’t say it makes him more popular, he still gets work. Granted, he did get fired from the best-paying job in TV. But he landed on his feet because people will still watch him.

          That’s why Lohan hasn’t completely circled the drain. She’s still a draw. In fact, this article has been far more popular than I expected in spite of the fact that the internet is flooded with coverage of Lohan’s fall. People are fascinated by her rise and fall. So even though there is plenty of supply, there appears to be even more demand.

          My brother-in-law and his wife have what I will mildly refer to as substance abuse issues. They have both been in and out of jail and rehab. They spend more time in prison than Lohan, but never as long as they are supposed to. It doesn’t do any good. An addict needs to reach the point where they want to get better. Otherwise, nothing works.

          Like

          • True. Sometimes that point can be prison. Often not, but it can be. From the sound of things though, it is doubtful that it’ll be her family she’ll want to get better for.

            Like

            • Yeah, people can hit rock bottom in prison. I doubt Lohan’s prison experience would be all that terrible though. For my brother-in-law, I think prison basically gives him a false sense that his life is normal. He thinks this is how people live. And when he’s not in prison, he’s on the street. So prison can be a safe haven.

              I don’t want to go too far down that rabbit hole, but addiction is a messy business. I don’t know what it will take for Lohan to get her life back on track – much less her career. But hopefully whatever it is, she finds it.

              From the point of view of an average person living a responsible life, it can be a little irritating to see her walking all over the criminal justice system. I’ll grant you that. Oh to be rich and famous.

              Like

  20. 7 Car-Crash Actors Whose Meltdowns Were Better Than Their Careers:
    http://whatculture.com/film/7-car-crash-actors-whose-meltdowns-were-better-than-their-careers.php/6

    3. Lindsay Lohan

    Speaking of Randy Quaid, guess whose on his list as the next potential Star Whacker victim: Lindsay Lohan.

    This one has been on the cycle down for a while now. The millennium just leaves a bad taste in your mouth for some reason. It’s so hard to think back to the golden days of The Parent Trap where Lindsay could do no wrong or the early 2000s when she was a bankable, likable Starlet with looks. Now years later the photos say a thousand words more than any of us would like to hear.

    What’s crazy about Lindsay is that even after all the bad publicity she’s still never owned up to heavily abusing substances. She’s been court ordered to do rehab six times and has been in and out of jail in the past couple years almost too many times to count, but in her interviews still claims she’s clean and sober as ever and that the court ordered rehab is a joke. This is after her reputation has been wrecked by nearly everyone she’s either dated or worked with often being described as a succubus with an addictive personality and the biggest prima donna to please on set.

    However, the trail of Lindsay’s decent is not a clear one, but instead a rabbit hole leading into the abyss. There are no clear facts, just too many rumors of craziness beginning with Herbie Fully Loaded and ending with Liz and Dick. Perhaps her acting career says enough by itself.

    If Lohan would ever be willing to fess up to half of what she’s done it would make for a wildly entertaining Fear and Loathing style autobiography.

    Like

  21. 10 Questionable Reasons Why Actors Turned Down Big Roles:
    http://whatculture.com/film/10-questionable-reasons-why-actors-turned-down-big-roles.php/2

    9. Lindsay Lohan – The Hangover

    This generation’s Courtney Love was up for the role of Jade in The Hangover, but she rejected the project because she didn’t believe that it had the potential to succeed. While this isn’t necessarily a terrible reason to turn down a role, it comes off as a little too picky for someone who doesn’t exactly have offers pouring in all the time. After all, beggars can’t be choosers.

    The film went on to be a box office hit, spawning two sequels and single-handedly launching Mike Tyson’s acting career. Had she accepted the project, it could have been that one role that launched her back into the realm of credibility as an actor. But what am I saying? That would just be the smart thing to do.

    Like

  22. Lindsay Lohan told rehab jokes when she guest-hosted “Chelsea Lately”:
    http://www.tmz.com/2013/08/01/lindsay-lohan-chelsea-lately-guest-host

    “I’ve been on a 90-day court ordered vacation,” said Lohan, who taped her guest stint Thursday to air on Monday.

    Like

  23. Once again Lindsay is in the spotlight for bad behaviour. She was supposed to come to the Venice film festival presenting “The Canyons”, but at the very last she declined to attend. Director Paul Schrader was extremely irritated and call her a “talentous actress with an unwarrantable behaviour” and said he was glad to be free from her. Anytime you think mrs Lohan touched the ground, she suddenly hits new lows.

    Like

    • Director “mystified” that hiring Lindsay Lohan results in Lindsay Lohan-like behavior:
      http://www.avclub.com/articles/paul-schrader-mystified-that-hiring-lindsay-lohan,103373/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default

      By Sean O’Neal September 26, 2013

      After hiring an actress whose reputation for being difficult and irresponsible would create publicity long before his film was even completed, director Paul Schrader has expressed surprise and dismay that that actress has acted difficultly and irresponsibly when it comes to creating publicity after the film was released. In a post to Facebook, where all disagreements are handled professionally, Schrader says he is “mystified and disappointed” by the behavior of his The Canyons star Lindsay Lohan, who has lately proved troublesome in a way that no longer benefits his film.

      Hints that Lohan could prove to be less than asset to the production first arose when the words “Lindsay Lohan hired to star in The Canyons” were published. But it was only after the lengthily detailed accounts of her behavior on set came to light that Schrader seemed to realize that she could be a problem, in exactly the headline-grabbing way he and writer Bret Easton Ellis anticipated. In his statement he says that Lohan’s behavior, which they were counting on, prompted him to threaten to “fire her for unreliability,” because that’s how the story is supposed to go. Those problems of which he was already largely aware flared up again at last month’s Venice Film Festival where, possibly on the advice of her new benefactor Oprah, Lohan failed to appear to promote The Canyons. It was an absence that Schrader, at the time, seemed perfectly happy with, declaring, “Today I am free. In the past 16 months, I have been hostage to Lindsay Lohan” in such a way that got a Paul Schrader movie coverage in Us Weekly.

      And yet, like all sufferers of Stockholm Syndrome and directors who want people to keep talking about their movie, Schrader wanted only to return to his captor, and maybe get them some nice profiles in the New Yorker. Unfortunately, Lohan refused to be a part of that promotional plan, choosing for some mystifying reason to no longer be associated with a movie in which she plays opposite a porn star, and whose tempestuous production was, by design, more interesting than the finished product. Probably because she’s trying to have a healthy life or something:

      I can only surmise that Lindz had decided that Canyons is part of a reprobate past she must put behind her in order to move forward. She was never comfortable working with James Deen and perhaps this still sticks in her craw. I assume those closet to her, her family and reps, had advised her to treat Canyons as an indiscretion. But, for me, the reality is the opposite. In Canyons Lindsay has given a bold, raw, naked original performance which vaults her from the s category of ingenue to leading lady.

      Don’t get me wrong. I want LL to move forward, have a healthy life and, if possible, a career, but I disagree with her decision to (passively not aggressively) turn her back on Canyons. It’s an extraordinary piece of work and serves her well. Lindsay, your work is excellent. Own it!

      Should Lohan fail to heed Schrader’s fatherly advice to, if possible, have a career—beginning with helping him create more publicity for a film that’s already had plenty of it—he’ll be forced to find other ways to get people to talk about The Canyons. For example, this.

      Like

  24. Maybe Linds should watch that ESPN docu “The Marinovich Project” to see how she got the same trap Todd got into
    before straightening his life out,perhaps????

    Like

    • I haven’t seen the documentary, but something tells me it’s unlikely to make a dent in her mental state. You never know what will result in a moment of clarity. But if her brushes with the law and the implosion of her career didn’t do it, I don’t think it’s likely any movie will get through to her.

      Like

  25. It’s been alluded to among several comments that people have not changed so much as the technology has. Internet has meant nothing can really be hidden anymore. I would imagine that anyone seeking a career in the spotlight knows this going in… but, not necessarily!

    Like

  26. Another witty write-up, Lebeau …
    Still waiting on JCVD, Stallone and Snipes … (wait I think you did Snipes)

    Like

  27. JCVD’s latest Volvo commercial got more views than his last 10 movies, the Expendables 2 aside. But there’s renewed interest in him in a positive way, and I think that removes him from the list for now. But he’s definitely one to keep an eye on.

    LL was never an A-list actress, she was merely “it” for a short time because of her looks and a modicum of acting talent, which she has since squandered for a myriad of reasons. Much like Chris Farley before he died, if you come off the rails and there’s no chance you can be “show business clean”, you’re uninsurable, which is the kiss of death to any career. Robert Downey Jr. had to physically get clean then work a bunch of C and B movies to get back to leading man status. He was lucky to have friends in the business like Wesley Snipes, and Tommy Lee Jones, who vouched for him. He’s also insanely talented as an actor, which helps tremendously.

    I seriously doubt Lindsay will last another 5 years on the planet, but stranger things have happened. She should do what others have done, do some shows on Broadway, show you can be professional and talented, then work your way up the indie circuit. And ditch your parents.

    Say what you like about LL, with parents like hers, she didn’t have a shot of growing up normal. It’s sad.

    Like

    • I’ve heard RDJ say in interviews that Mel Gibson (ironically enough) was one of the few people in Hollywood who would keep vouching for him when his he had a hard time getting insured due to all of his personal issues. Maybe that’s why RDJ (as well as Jodie Foster) are Mel Gibson’s most predominate advocates/defenders when Mel himself has been growing through his own controversies.

      Like

  28. Lindsay Lohan Suing Rockstar Games…for supposedly having her likeness used on the “GTA V” cover:
    http://www.gamespot.com/articles/lindsay-lohan-to-sue-over-gta-5/1100-6416493/

    Like

    • Yeah. I don’t see that lawsuit ever actually moving forward. They used a hot girl who kinda sorta looks like Lohan. But clearly is not Lohan. The headline is somewhat misleading. No lawsuit has been filed. The actual story is that she is considering a lawsuit which would be ill-advised.

      Like

  29. Joe Jonas Bashes Disney Channel and “Jonas L.A.”:
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/earshot/joe-jonas-magazine-confessional-demi-661570

    12/3/2013
    by Ashley Lee

    This week, Joe Jonas opened up about sex, drugs and Disney Channel’s definition of rock ‘n’ roll, and while he does explain the recent breakup of the Jonas Brothers and what kind of solo career he hopes to pursue next, he also repeatedly bashes the network on which the trio first rose to international fame.

    In New York magazine’s “Joe Jonas: My Life as a Jonas Brother,” Jonas observed that Disney Channel has a knack for pulling “spunky” stars into the spotlight, and then pushes them off the edge.

    “Being a part of the Disney thing for so long will make you not want to be this perfect little puppet forever,” he said, noting that Vanessa Hudgens was held in Disney offices for a day after her nude-photo scandal in 2007.

    “Eventually, I hit a limit and thought, Screw all this, I’m just going to show people who I am,” he continued, as former Disney Channel personalities like Miley Cyrus and Lindsay Lohan have since worked to shed the images built while with the company.

    “I think that happened to a lot of us. Disney kids are spunky in some way, and I think that’s why Disney hires them. ‘Look, he jumped up on the table!’ Five, six, ten years later, they’re like, ‘Oh! What do we do?’ Come on, guys. You did this to yourselves.”

    Like

  30. 6 Shameless Celebrities On Santa’s Naughty List For 2013:
    http://whatculture.com/offbeat/6-shameless-celebrities-santas-naughty-list-2013.php/2

    6. Lindsay Lohan

    No surprise here then. Assaults, driving under the influence, drug possession – The Canyons actress is better known for her messy lifestyle and brushes with the law than she is for her work these days. If the Mean Girls star’s life was actually in film, it’d a mixture of Groundhog Day and various courtroom dramas. If you’ve been following Lohan’s antics solely through her own social media this month, you’ll see there’s nothing but sweet tweets, charity work…and an array of topless selfies on Instagram. This year though, she’s faced a list of less-than-angelic charges: reckless driving, lying to the police and obstructing justice. With nearly 250 days spent in rehab during her lifetime, eight arrests, and 560 hours of community service, she hasn’t really had time to sit on Santa’s lap. In fact she’d probably fall off.

    The shining influence on the law-abiding Lindsay is evidently her mother, Dina Lohan, who was also referred to a community service programme last month for driving (and speeding) after boozing. She has reportedly written a tell-all book spilling everything about the family’s lives. Linday’s father, Michael Lohan, has demanded to read the memoir before he agrees for it to be published. Since he and Dina have a gag order from court, they are forbidden to discuss each other regardless. This all obviously means we’ll never get to read it, just IMAGINE the scandal festering in those pages! If it DOES miraculously get put out there for the world to see, we know who’s gonna be on this list another year running…

    Like

  31. [Movies] Chris Pine Says Working With Lindsay Lohan in 2006 was a ‘Cyclone of Insanity’:
    http://www.411mania.com/movies/news/308790/%5BMovies%5D-Chris-Pine-Says-Working-With-Lindsay-Lohan-in-2006-was-a-//Cyclone-of-Insanity//.htm

    It was an experience for him…

    Before Chris Pine was a well-known movie star thanks to films like Star Trek and its sequel, he was trying to make his name in Hollywood and appeared in some lesser-known films. One of those films was Lindsay Lohan’s 2006 romcom Just My Luck, for which she earned $7.5 million at just nineteen years old (she was just coming off the success of Mean Girls). Now, Pine says that it was an experience that taught him a lot about fame and what it can do to people.

    Pine told THR of the production, which became known for one of Lohan’s first tabloid-plagued productions, “It was a real cyclone of insanity, like being around The Beatles. It was fascinating to watch, and in hindsight it’s really a distinct moment in someone’s life when you see what’s really wonderful about what we get to do and what’s really dangerous about it.”

    He added that he learned a lot about the movie business, saying, “Hollywood is like living in a weird bubble. A bunch of people take care of you and get you stuff, and you’re the center of that little microcosmic world. You start believing that it is real and … you deserve it.”

    Like

  32. What if had something like Twilight or The Hunger Games came along in the wake of the
    Mean Girls buzz,could Linds even handle the eventual buzz of those franchises????

    Like

  33. 10 Actors Who Completely Wasted Their Careers:
    http://whatculture.com/film/10-actors-completely-wasted-careers.php/8

    4. Lindsay Lohan

    Honestly, we don’t have the space to go into detail about all of the chances Lindsay Lohan blew in her relatively short career.

    However, Lohan once appeared to be one of the few child actors destined for adult success when she starred in the box office hits Freaky Friday and Mean Girls. But since then, her off-screen legal troubles and addictions frequently derail any chance for her to capitalize on her few critical successes, like A Prairie Home Companion. In addition, her once pretty face has been ravaged by what appears to have been botched surgery.

    In 2013 she starred in what was considered her comeback movie The Canyons, which was controversial for being borderline softcore pornography (which probably surprised noone.) It was beset by on-set meltdowns, rejected by film festivals, and grossed only $51,000 in its short run.

    In other words, don’t call it a comeback.

    Like

  34. Lindsay Lohan Somehow Manages To Get Another Movie Role:
    http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Lindsay-Lohan-Somehow-Manages-Get-Another-Movie-Role-41219.html

    Legitimate question: Why take a chance on Lohan at this point? She hasn’t been in a “hit” movie since 2005’s Herbie: Fully Loaded. The Canyons, which I keep referencing, ended up earning $51,135. Wow. You and I could “star” in a movie and earn more than that. I understand that she brings a publicity bump at first, but does that translate into box office dollars? Usually not.

    Like

    • Sounds like straight to DVD bound,to be honest!!!!!

      Like

    • I think a lot of people are so caught up in Lohan’s tabloid headlines, they miss out on the fact that she still makes people money. She can sell magazines. She can deliver TV ratings. True, she can’t deliver a movie. But she can help secure funding for a project if you need it. Lohan’s producer credit on this project suggests to me they are expecting her to deliver some backers.

      Like

  35. OWN will air LL’s reality-docu the Sunday after the Oscars……..here’s the site for it!!!

    http://oprah.com/packages/lindsay.html

    Like

      • Due to TWOP closing their doors soon, here’s a pointer to the previously.tv forum on this wonderful show!!!

        http://forums.previously.tv/forum/342-lindsay/

        #15

        Posted Mar 8, 2014 @ 5:41 PM

        DrivingSideways, on 08 Mar 2014 – 1:24 PM, said:
        I’m excited for this too, but I have a feeling it’s going to be a boring let down. Seriously, has Lindsay ever been interesting? It’s not like she’s capable of awesome one liners like Whitney and Bobby had. She’s just a boring, drug addicted, not very bright has been.

        Lindsay’s talent was always overstated. She gets chance after chance after chance because she did a few charming movies as a kid. She’s never going to come back, maybe this show will be the final nail in the Lohan coffin. Oprah doesn’t give a f*** about Lindsay – she wants her to be a train wreck – that equals viewers.

        I am hoping for messy fabulousness though.

        My thoughts exactly. She’s a good actress, not great. Sure, I love to rewatch “Mean Girls” and thought she did a nice job with the “Parent Trap” remake but in all honesty, I think any reasonably cute tween/teen could have pulled off that performance.

        I don’t wish her ill will. I’d love for this opportunity to be the one that sets her straight. That teaches her that she alone is responsible for her present and her future. Somehow I don’t see that happening but we shall see.

        I am hoping for messy fabulousness though.

        #17

        Posted Mar 8, 2014 @ 6:35 PM

        I do think “Lindsay’s Talent” became more myth like than it actually was when she started going off the rails. IF she was a teen in today’s 17-24 (ish) year old group of actresses I don’t think she’d stand out much but she did seems one of the best in the Hilary Duff, Olsen Twins, Amanda Bynes etc talent pool she was competing against, not that that was hard. I do think she had a lot of charm in The Parent Trap, Freaky Friday and Mean Girls and all of them were big hits so I get why she got thought of fondly.

        IDK her parents + fame and money were the one of the most toxic mixes around, I can’t believe her mother was more interested in pretending to be her sister in clubs than trying to protect her teenage daughter. However I agree that at 27 she has to realise she’s now the one to blame for her continuously terrible life choices and if she doesn’t change then quite frankly she’ll be one of those celebs that gets found dead in a hotel room sooner or later. They gave her a crappy start, she’s had more olive branches than most get including this show. They’re even trying to get it some credibility by calling it a “docu series”.

        Her parents didn’t learn either, her mom and sister had their own short lived reality show at the height of the publicity of Lindsay’s problems and Dinah was set on making Ali famous then as well, which basically flopped.

        Oprah’s definitely doing this for ratings, as are all of the “celeb rehab/trainwreck shows” and she gets to appear sympathetic but also tough on someone who’s been circling the drain for years in public. But Lindsay was also willing to sign up to this and should be aware of the motivations involved. She didn’t appear in the previous reality series at all.

        #56

        Posted Mar 10, 2014 @ 1:54 PM

        Quote

        If you didn’t know, you would think she was 15 years old.

        I read once that one of the side effects of being celebrity is that you stop mentally maturing when you become really famous. So someone like George Clooney who got famous at around 30 is always going to act like a thirty year old. Lindsay got really famous at around age 15 so it makes complete sense she’ll always act like a teenager. And boy… did this documentary ever make her seem like a petulant 15 year old with no self awareness. She moans about people breaking promises to her in her life yet all I saw her do in this episode was break promises.

        Sadly, I don’t think she’s going to have a career (or life) renaissance like Robert Downey, Jr.

        #102

        Posted Mar 11, 2014 @ 8:41 AM

        I think the difference with the other celebs you mentioned and Lindsay is that they aren’t know more for their personal drama than their career. They don’t flounce out of their hotel with their tits flopping in the breeze, huge sunglasses trying to look inconspicuous and jump conspicuously into their waiting car. They just walk out, barely acknowledge the paps and go about their business. Lindsay has no interest in being inconspicuous. She’s a staarr! She craves the attention and then loves to blame the attention for her problems.

        As far as her making appearances for “The Canyons” . I’m not buying that her reason for not doing publicity is that her sobriety is first and foremost in her life. Bitch is filming a reality show! She made a commitment to them and part of her rehabilitation is keeping up with your promises and obligations. She can certainly restrict or limit her appearances and I think the director/producer would understand that. But to prance around town filming her own production and hiding under the cloak of working on herself is BS.

        #121

        Posted Mar 11, 2014 @ 12:52 PM

        The thing is, Lindsay can’t leave the acting life. She has no other skills or talents. She doesn’t have any education to speak of, or any other interests besides buying crap (or stealing it). She tried singing, and that flopped. She can’t even be on time for a photo shoot that starts at noon, but she’s gonna show up on time for an office job or a retail job? No way. At this point, she has to say yes to any paycheck that comes her way, whether it’s a reality show about her trainwreck life, a photo shoot where she dresses up in silly costumes, or a commercial that only airs in other countries.

        #188

        Posted Mar 12, 2014 @ 6:27 PM

        I don’t think parents as managers is the defining issue as in the end parents are the guardians of minors and would be making all choices anyway – presumably in the best interests of their children.

        I think, to some extent, certain people are more resilient than others and can survive – or maybe they were lucky enough to meet the right people at the right time who gave them enough emotional strength so that one has success stories like Drew Barrymore and Robert Downey, Jr.

        I do think that the glare of the media is far greater than it was when Ron Howard was performing and except for his “career”, he led a fairly normal life. And I think there is a difference in the degree of celebrityhood and how it impacts and thwarts emotional growth between a kid who is a relatively anonymous performer (e.g. Sarah Jessica Parker or Ron Howard) and someone who is the eye of an intense pop phenomenon like Lohan, Bieber or even Miley.

        With Lohan (at least in my opinion) you have an absolutely perfect storm of severely dysfunctional parents; early and intense stardom; child who was viewed as an ATM by the family; probably genetic factors of brain chemistry leading to self medication with substances/addictive personality and parents who actively participated in the drinking and drugging.

        ETA – Even with more or less normal good parenting any child who grows up with the intense celebrity-hood of Lohan or Bieber or Miley is going to face issues relating to the world as an adult that a kid with a normal childhood isn’t. Whether the parent is the manager or not – whether the kid is a poster child for train wrecks like Lohan, that’s just the way it would be. On the one hand, they have to be far more disciplined to earn their keep and on the other hand they are going to be treated as a more important entity than the average child – it’s just a given even under the best of circumstances. Elizabeth Taylor’s parents weren’t parasites or dysfunctional but certainly Liz didn’t enter “adulthood” and interact with the world the way an ordinary person would have without early fame.

        #197

        Posted Mar 14, 2014 @ 5:56 PM

        It’s really too bad that Lindsay is so trapped in her own personality/world view/addiction/immaturity that she can’t see what an opportunity this is for her. If she actually pulled herself together, really got sober, got serious about work, and put herself out there to help others, she would be the biggest star around. The public loves a redemption story. Every talk show would want her. Every director would want her. Every women’s mag would want her on the cover. I wish she understood that.

        #201

        Posted Mar 14, 2014 @ 10:52 PM

        I think Lindsay’s development was stunted at age 16/17. That’s the age she was when she was out clubbing seemingly every night in LA, and all the clubs catered to her even though she was underage. Same thing that’s happening today with Justin Bieber.

        #210

        Posted Mar 15, 2014 @ 1:04 PM

        Just watched the first episode, and I am actually under the impression that Lindsay’s problems stem more from mental health issues than alcoholism. Attributing the bizarreness of her behavior to a correctable, simplistic source seems more like a strategy, whether deliberate or unconscious, toward effecting the semblance of recovery- i.e. if the erratic behavior is rooted in liquor, all one has to do is successfully eliminate liquor; dealing with ingrained psychological disorders is a much muddier proposition. Which is not to say that Lindsay hasn’t established a clear history of substance abuse. The interviews with Oprah are stomach-turning, though i’ve long felt Winfrey is an opportunistic predator willing and even eager to exploit easy marks. Regarding the papparazzi at 12 steps, I think photogs already take pictures of celebrities attending; I know Star ran items several months back about Selena Gomez going to one and speculating about the implications.

        #212

        Posted Mar 15, 2014 @ 2:59 PM

        The thing is the 2 Broke Girls thing sounds plausible, even if it isn’t true because there’s evidence that she’s displayed incredible unprofessionalism on (some) sets for nearly a decade now. You’ve got the New York Times writing long articles on your farce of a “comeback” (although the director hardly sounds a prize either) and supposedly her attempt to “pull a Britney” and rehabilitate herself with a well received guest spot on “Ugly Betty” got cut short due to problems on set (although who knows), it’s an easy article to write, even if she was perfect on set.

        I remember a “Friends” outtake where Jennifer Aniston’s phone rings and she answers it and says “i’ll call you back” to the general hilarity and delight of the audience. But she didn’t have Lohan’s reputation. I’d be willing to bet it happens occasionally at tapings and since the scene is ruined anyway some actors answer it and take the call briefly.

        #231

        Posted Mar 16, 2014 @ 10:49 PM

        I’m past blaming her parents for their part in the mess that is Lindsay. At this point I think she knows exactly what her parents are and uses it as a crutch and an excuse and a reason for her problems. Most of the powers that be in Hollywood have cut ties with her folks. Only the tabloids deal with them, buying dirt on Lindsay or tips on her whereabouts. She knows it too. I have no hope for her and little to no sympathy. After this debacle, her career will essentially be over. She’ll eke out a living for a few years and then either be found dead in a sleaze bag hotel or clean herself up and be a redemption story on tabloid TV for a coupe months till she falls off the wagon again and then back into oblivion.

        Instead of resenting the paps, she ought to be grateful for them. They are all that keep her name in the news. When they stop waiting outside for her, she ‘ll be looking all over for them.

        #237

        Posted Mar 17, 2014 @ 5:59 AM

        Quote
        How is Michael Lohan earning enough money to pay for his own living expenses with fiancée and new baby, as well as alimony (?) and child support payments to Dina, and legal fees, etc (snark)?Why does he wear a suit? How does he even have enough money for lunch? What does he do all day?

        I agree Lindsay does look better with dark lippy, but only because it somewhat camouflages the lumpiness of her lip injections. The metre of hair extensions is just sad to me. Like she clings to some notion of herself as a sexy ingenue. The whole thing is sad. It’s like watching a piece of someone’s inevitable destruction. While a storyline of some spiritual breakthrough would be more in keeping with OWN’s brand, I can’t believe that Lindsay ever came across as someone with that potential.

        And nobody really believes an acting comeback in in the cards anymore. Even when, say Robert Downey Jr, had his multiple lapses and breakdowns, he still had his looks. As shallow as that is, it’s a big factor in the acting profession. Lindsay seems physically destroyed. Whatever she’s done to her face can’t be undone, I reckon. And while I do see occasional glimpses of intelligence, I don’t see much strength of character there to draw from. She doesn’t seem to have the wherewithal to develop her acting skills and start over as, say, a character actor.

        Comparing her to another OWN subject with a nightmare, somewhat psychopathic-seeming father, Tatum O’Neal – Lindsay seems so much worse. Tatum is much older of course, but was famous at an even younger age, burnt-out her acting career young (like Lindsay) and has major family and addiction issues. The big difference is that Tatum seems to have some kind of centre, even if she keeps f***ing up. I don’t think Lindsay has that. I don’t think she even has the capacity to care for a pet or participate in anything that would give her genuine focus or comfort.

        #311

        Posted Mar 18, 2014 @ 4:22 PM

        I am not completely sure but I don’t think either Drew Barrymore or Robert Downey ever burned their bridges so egregiously in terms of their employment – i.e. to the extent they were employed while before becoming sober, I never heard of their being issues regarding their failing to show up on set.

        There are a lot of substance abusers and crazy people who work in Hollywood (and not just in front of the cameras). However, the economics of production are such that people show up and, depending on the value of the “star”, the production company provides the tools to get there – but by and large, even addicts know they can’t delay production.

        I don’t think Lohan can get hired because she couldn’t get a completion bond and I can’t imagine any legitimate production being willing to chance hiring her.

        At least in my opinion, Lohan missed what could have been a tremendous opportunity to showcase her new ability to be a professional but completely blew it. Who in their right mind would hire her if the woman can’t even get it together to be filmed going about her business and is shown being thrown for a loop by what most people consider to be completely stress free situations – or at least situations that are dealt with in the normal course of life without histrionics.

        What kind of emotional blow up would she have on the set – if she sleeps until 4 PM for no apparent reason fresh out of rehab, why kind of insanity will ensure when she is expected to show up for the normal production schedule?

        #334

        Posted Mar 19, 2014 @ 2:12 AM

        Quote
        Think of all the crappy movies Drew Barrymore did when she was at her lowest. There is always a market somewhere for C and D list celebrities.I think Linds has fallen lower than that. The Liz Taylor tv movie was probably the last best chance she had for even C-level projects. And with this reality series tanking, what’s left? Acting-wise, that is. She’s at about a Tara Reid level in terms of her prospects, I reckon. One thing that does surprise me a little about Lindsay is that she’s made it this far with no marriages or even engagements. I dunno why it surprises me. It just seems like it would fit her profile.

        #356

        Posted Mar 19, 2014 @ 9:50 PM

        Quote

        I agree. Lindsay may not be Meryl Streep, but to me she has — or had — that something that the camera loves. As a kid she had so much potential, very sparkly and photogenic. But I’m guessing she felt so entitled, she never really worked on her craft and tried to become a better actor. Instead she just partied and squandered her potential and wasted time with her ridiculous singing career. Tara — I just don’t get how she ever got cast. She couldn’t act that well and isn’t that good looking. I always assumed she did sexual favors to get the roles she got. I’m not surprised her career went nowhere. Lindsay, for all that she’s still a walking tragedy, STILL has that aspect to a large degree. She’s charming (when she’s able to hide being such an entitled brat). Go back and watch the appearances she made right after rehab (on Chelsea Lately, Letterman, even to an extent in the Oprah interview). In those moments when she’s “on” you can see why she was a big star. It’s not about being a good actor. It’s not the same thing. She’s got this thing, even still, where you WANT to believe in her, even while (at least these days) all your common sense, as well as seeing and hearing things come out of her mouth in her unguarded moments and via the press, make it impossible to believe in her. It’s part of why people probably STILL bend over backwards for her–to her face it’s probably a lot harder to deny her/truth tell.

        #409

        Posted Mar 24, 2014 @ 2:09 AM

        I used to think that Lindsay was just a lost, entitled brat with jackass parents. Now I think this bitch is crazy. She’s like the caricature of a spoiled, delusional, selfish, self-involved, inconsiderate, rude, bulls***-spewing has-been actress. She acted so self-righteously indignant while yelling at Matt with her nonsense about the stupid keys. “Waah, it’s so hard to look at all these expensive clothes. Wah. I need someone to come here at 8am to fold even though I can’t get my lazy ass up before 4pm to film.”

        She is so dull. What are her interests aside from herself and fame? It seems like all she does is bounce around braless, smoking, smelling up NYC, whining with self-pity and victimization and occasionally barks orders at people. And it’s ALL SO HARD!

        It’s so creepy that she surrounds herself with so many people all the time. Is she afraid to be alone?

        #437

        Posted Mar 24, 2014 @ 4:19 PM

        Quote

        Mean Girls was on TV night and I caught a few minutes of it. The thing is that while she was ok in the movie, as were many others, the film was funny, witty and topical. Credit Tina Fey, who wrote the screenplay and the original book by I’m not sure. Lindsay didn’t make the movie a success, she became a success because she had a great vehicle. Honestly, her part could have been played by a dozen other teen actresses and been just as successful. I think Lindsay has it all twisted around in her head. Without good material or an acting job, you have nothing if you are an actor. And because of her rep, most acting jobs are now out of her reach. I agree that any young actress at the time could have been in that movie and it would have been a success mainly due to how good the script was. I feel similarly about the Twilight actors who lucked into being apart of a franchise that would have been successful no matter who played the leads. When I think of Mean Girls, I don’t think of how great Lindsay was in that movie I think of the other actresses who were way less famous than Lindsay at the time who rose up and really built legitimate adult careers after the success of that film. Rachel McAdams, Amanda Seyfried, and Lizzy Caplan (she is f***ing awesome in Masters of Sex btw). Even Lacey Chabert. That girl has practically spent her entire life in front of the camera just like Lohan did and she turned out just fine and still works pretty consistently. Maybe it really is a case of having responsible adults around you and unfortunately people like Lohan and Bieber and many other child stars never had that. Just dysfunctional parents and various other people who use them for their money. Coupled with the fame monster, they grow up never really knowing a world outside of that. Being “famous” is all they really know how to do.

        I don’t believe Lindsay when she says that her sobriety is the most important thing to her. It isn’t. Being famous, getting jobs again, getting a paycheck. I believe all those come in front of her sobriety. If it was really all about getting well I think she would have gotten her s*** together long before now. She would have stayed in rehab longer and she definitely wouldn’t be doing this reality show.

        #438

        Posted Mar 24, 2014 @ 4:33 PM

        I wonder if Lindsay didn’t start to go off the rails when she realized she didn’t have what it takes to become a successful actor vs child star. She was never an actress. She was an All American looking kid who had charm and charisma. There are tons of them and 99.999% don’t make the transition to adult stardom. Once she had to really act, I think she started to flounder. Her once talent is the ability to cry on cue. And she plays that to the fullest. Any kind of criticism brings on the teary eyes and quivery lip. Honey that works till you’re 10 maybe 12. At 27, you just look a hot mess.

        She and her life coach/sober buddy should have had a daily routine set up for her to begin as soon as she got to NYC. No reason she can’t get up early and go to a gym, a meeting, lunch with a friend, perhaps volunteer at a shelter, even if she was staying in a hotel. She needs someone to wake her up at 7am and walk her thru her daily routine. Instead they let her run the show and fixate on the most chaotic thing she can, moving her massive accumulation of crap over hill and dale to NYC (and since back to LA I assume)

        Right now “my sobriety is the most important thing” is her mantra because it’s what’s paying her bills and keeping a stable of lackeys and hangers on around her dancing to her every whim.

        #440

        Posted Mar 24, 2014 @ 5:04 PM

        Quote

        I wonder if Lindsay didn’t start to go off the rails when she realized she didn’t have what it takes to become a successful actor vs child star. She was never an actress.

        I think part of ‘surviving’ as a child star is to know your limitations. Melissa Joan Hart, for example, is a former child star who is never going to win an Oscar – she is a B-sitcom actress at best. But she keeps working, even if it’s on ABC Family or doing Dancing with the Stars. She’s tried to branch out into films, but she knows TV is her best bet, and it’s worked for her. Jennifer Love Hewitt is the same way.

        At her peak, Lindsay was cute and charismatic and she could ‘sell’ a character.** But in addition to her addictions, she started doing films like I Know Who Killed Me that she just couldn’t pull off. She does still seem to have a sense of comic timing though (judging by her guest stint on Chelsea Lately,) so I suppose she could still go the sitcom route. But I think she’d have to eat some humble pie and realize that she’s never going to be a Hollywood ‘it’ girl again.

        ** = Lindsay was also beautiful! I remember when she first came out, circa 2004, she was such a refreshing change from all those waif-thin actresses. She had that beautiful dark red hair and curves and she made it all work for her. Now she doesn’t look healthy and has ruined her face with all the fillers and drugs; she looks much older than her age. Very sad.

        #441

        Posted Mar 24, 2014 @ 5:35 PM

        Quote

        It will be sad to see what she resorts to once her money runs out. She can’t possibly sustain the salaries of all her assistants, continue to support her mother financially, live back & forth between NYC & LA constantly, etc. She’s already started selling crap to tabloids (list that came out recently of people she’s supposedly slept with). For years now I keep waiting for the sad news report that she’s overdosed. Hasn’t happened yet but I still fear it will if she doesn’t get her shit together. She’s been backsliding for years. She’s even managed to outlive Cory Monteith and Whitney Houston. I remember her being asked (I forget by whom) about the latter’s death as it related to her own drug/alcohol abuse and Lohan didn’t seem to understand the implication. She was almost incredulous about being asked such a question.

        Michael and Dina are toxic IMO. They have been her whole lfie and I can’t believe their hasn’t been one addiction and/or mental health professional that hasn’t recommended to create some distance between her and them.

        Hollywood has given her more chances than she has deserved. There are some that still do throw her a bone like Handler. The reason a lot of people have stopped though is because she’s blown those chances every time. Not showing up for work. Showing up late. Giving laughable performances as she did n Liz and Dick and the Canyons. These last few films alone may have done more damage to her reputation than the drugs or being difficult on set. There are plenty of actors who also engage in that behavior but still manage to work. Lindsay, however, is just more trouble than she’s worth. And this reality show will not help her reputation either. I think she started to realize it wasn’t a good idea after she signed on to do it which is why she is now freaking out about it so much. I think she wants out of it but she also needs that paycheck so she has no choice but to ride it out at this point.

        #442

        Posted Mar 24, 2014 @ 5:44 PM

        Quote
        I wonder if Lindsay didn’t start to go off the rails when she realized she didn’t have what it takes to become a successful actor vs child star. She was never an actress.

        She was starting to have some decent notices in “grown up” movies like A Prairie Home Companion. She didn’t pick or get cast in particularly great roles and was never on course for an Oscar nom age 22 or whatever but she wasn’t transitioning so badly that she had no hope, she was working with a lot of big names who could have been contacts, some of whom have publically stood up for her over the years. Even if she had been worried rom coms were still big business at the time, she could have kept herself busy with those. But problematic reports out unprofessionalism on sets and out of control clubbing were around well before she started doing “proper” roles.

        Personally I do think she had some part in Mean Girls success. Yes the script and Tina Fey were great, Rachel McAdams was the true find of the movie etc but she did her part in making her character rootable and charming and she did have good comic timing. Plus the whole gorgeous trademark red hair thing. I’m sure others would have been just as great but I think she handled it better than many of her closest peers would have done baring in mind their own so so high school comedies of the time.

        ETA:

        Quote
        Giving laughable performances as she did n Liz and Dick and the Canyons. These last few films alone may have done more damage to her reputation than the drugs or being difficult on set.

        Yeah I haven’t seen The Canyons and I really don’t want to but Liza and Dick was so terrible I was almost (but not quite) hilariously enjoyable. That can’t have helped, if you can’t even sell a lifetime movie.

        #474

        Posted Mar 25, 2014 @ 12:13 PM

        My two cents:

        I don’t make any excuses or apologies for Lindsay, but how difficult it must be to have so many expectations placed on you by people who don’t have your best interests at heart?

        Just because she was a child actor it does not mean that she should be pursuing the same line of work as an adult. I’m betting that she does not really want to be an actor but the perks of that world are far too intoxicating for her to be honest and pursue something else. Not everyone can cope with living such a public life. It seems like she’s surrounded by people who want her to be something so that they can benefit too. Also, I don’t necessarily believe she has the exposure to what a normal life looks like. You know, having a job, having relationships with people where you aren’t the center of attention, having to fold your own clothes or cook your own meals. She’s emotionally stunted and people want to keep her that way. While I’m sure all of us would love to have someone pick after us and take care of our needs, we’d be tremendously embarrassed to have to rely on it. How can it be good for her self esteem and personal growth to need people to organize her closet or fold her wrinkled clothes?

        Sad.

        #486

        Posted Mar 25, 2014 @ 2:43 PM

        Quote

        I don’t make any excuses or apologies for Lindsay, but how difficult it must be to have so many expectations placed on you by people who don’t have your best interests at heart? At the very least, that’s true. She’s become a horrid, excuse laden trainwreck, who’s tough to have much sympathy for, but the reason people DO keep giving her second chances (besides her considerable charm, when she chooses to use it) is that you can look at her and literally tell that nobody on the planet probably actually has her back in a real way. So a lot of people probably pop in and out of her life who TRY to, but get it turned back on them, and then she’s back to having nobody.

        But the opportunists certainly never leave. Her Vampire of a Mother. Her dumbass of a Father (I judge him microscopically less harshly than Dina, despite the stories of him being a philanderer, mostly because Dina makes my skin crawl and maybe at some point she started to make his do so as well and he was too much of a coward/greedy to actually divorce her early on). Probably no agent or manager she’s ever had didn’t turn out to be a crook, although she no doubt made it even worse by her behavior and giving them no reason to be especially loyal. Fake club-friends and no real ones. She didn’t have the good parents waiting in the wings that Amanda Bynes did, once her behavior finally got stopped (not that Lindsay and Amanda’s situations are all that comparable otherwise–just pointing out that at least Amanda had some real people she could trust once she actually was forced to do so).

        Really the only answer for someone like Lindsay IS actually similar to what Amanda Bynes did though. Leaving the business. Although even with Bynes I’m afraid she’s likely to backslide, because she’s all over Twitter again, and I’ve always thought that was a real part of her disease.

        #496

        Posted Mar 26, 2014 @ 8:33 AM

        Quote

        I wish I saw her working hard at something — anything. Going to auditions, or working out, or even putting forth the effort to get her apartment settled. She doesn’t work hard at anything, yet she claims to be under so much pressure. There’d be less pressure if she showed the world she was working hard and trying for a better life. All she does is feel sorry for herself as she sits around bemoaning her belief that her “talent” is being wasted. She says it like it’s the entertainment industry’s fault her “talent” isn’t being used. She’s so flipping tedious.

        Just a theory I have about Linds…if she actually did settle down, started to work hard, became dependable and all of that, well, what would happen if it then turned out that she’s not a good actress, can’t carry even a small role in a film or TV show? What if she realized that having her home all set up, having a schedule, fulfilling whatever obligations she had didn’t make any difference and she still wasn’t all that?

        Sure, she’s majorly screwed up, narcissistic, excuse making woman-child. She’s been hiding behind that for years now. If she stopped with the excuses and made an effort, a serious effort and was still a failure–I think that would be the day we see her obit. Her entire identity is that she’s a ‘talented actress’. If she can’t follow through with that she really is and has, in her mind, nothing. Then all the excuses don’t work, blaming everyone else doesn’t hang and it’s all on her and I don’t think she could deal with that.

        #503

        Posted Mar 26, 2014 @ 2:54 PM

        I don’t think the issue with Lindsay is whether she has to audition.

        If she had the level of talent (whatever that is) she possesses, she could be a working actress. We will never know whether she could have taken whatever precocity and charm she possessed as a teen and built that into a real career as a respected actress because she never gave herself that opportunity.

        However, the reality is that she is unemployable in any kind of long term project because she is uninsurable and, any prospective production company would have no reason to employ someone who couldn’t even show up for a reality documentary where she really had to do nothing.

        #512

        Posted Mar 26, 2014 @ 10:17 PM

        The thing about Drew Barrymore is that, even going to rehab as a child, she still showed more commitment to her sobriety when she got out than Lindsay. Drew got out of rehab and successfully petitioned the courts for emancipation to get away from her toxic mother and moved in with David Crosby and his family because he was willing to support her in her sobriety. Drew then did crappy TV movies and B-movies because that was the only thing she could get, but she treated them seriously. She decided that she was going to treat those roles as seriously as major films to prove that she was sincere about her professionalism and to prove it to Hollywood. Compare Drew’s TV movie role as Amy Fisher to Lindsay’s as Elizabeth Taylor. Sure, both projects were jokes, but Drew actually surprised people by giving a good performance and overcoming the material to some extent. Lindsay, meanwhile, was laughably bad and what was worse is that she completely acted up on set. She was late, terrible to the crew and other cast members, cost the production a bunch of money in damages by trashing her trailer, etc.

        Drew Barrymore is actually a decent comparison IMO because neither she nor Lindsay have ever been strong actresses. I think that, by her 30′s, Drew actually became a decent actress but that was basically through sheer force of will, by working at it for 20+ years and playing to her strengths. Lindsay doesn’t have that discipline. Even in Mean Girls, Lindsay was the weakest cast member IMO. You can see how effortless and natural actresses like Amanda Seyfried and Rachel McAdams were in comparison to Lindsay’s stilted, Disney factory style of acting. I think Robert Downey Jr. is a bit of a different case than those two because he was considered a wunderkind, one of the best actors of his generation before he crashed and burned.

        I recently re-read the infamous NY Times article about the making of The Canyons, and it could’ve been a minor victory for Lindsay. The people who made the movie weren’t newbies. If she had impressed them, if she had surprised everyone with the quality of her performance, etc., she could have had a similar trajectory to Barrymore. Drew was able to parlay good notices in crappy indie projects to small supporting roles in better movies, then eventually starring roles in major movies and her own production company, where she worked aggressively at finding good projects for herself. But Lindsay once again acted up on the set of The Canyons. She just didn’t care about being a professional, she didn’t care about her fellow actors, the director, the crew etc. She didn’t care about the material as an actress wanting to make a good film or to create a character, she just cared about whether she looked good. She wanted to have the most screentime, whether it made sense for the film or not. Who would want to hire her? Filmmaking is a team effort, and Lindsay has made it clear over and over again that she doesn’t want to be part of a team. The problem is that you’re able to get by with diva behavior like that in Hollywood as long as you’re profitable, and Lindsay hasn’t been profitable in a long time.

        #517

        Posted Mar 27, 2014 @ 10:23 AM

        I don’t think Lindsay has realized exactly what she missed out on in her childhood. She was the breadwinner. She did not have a good education and did not have a good role model. Her parents were the worst.

        #519

        Posted Mar 27, 2014 @ 12:37 PM

        Quote

        Lindsay is 27-years old, and hasn’t been under her parents’ thumb for many years. She alone is responsible for her behavior.
        I think Lindsay has several problems. I think she’s mentally ill, and her illness comes out as manipulation instead of what we would consider general craziness. I think she has no one in her life who holds her accountable. And her parents, who were supposed to teach her how to be an adult, are even more screwed up and irresponsible than she is. What do Dina and Michael even DO for work? Dina was clearly on drugs on the Dr. Phil show, and we all know about Michael’s addictions and arrests.

        Even the weird thing with Lindsay’s brother and the $48,000 car. No, he does not need the car. But I’m guessing there was a lot of truth in Lindsay’s statements that their father has let them down, over and over. That he makes promises he has no intention of keeping.

        #529

        Posted Mar 30, 2014 @ 9:51 AM

        Frankly, I think everyone kissed Lindsay’s ass too much when she was growing up. She was talented, sure, but she wasn’t that talented. Add a layer of narcissism on top of that, and you have a brat who will never, ever change or work for something she wants because she is awesome and perfect the way she is, duh. It’s enough to make your head spin.

        I can’t see her ever having a back-up plan, even though she desperately needs one. She has dipped her toe in music and fashion design, but neither of those things worked out. I don’t know how other industries work, but I can’t see anyone willing to work with her since she is such a mess. Perhaps she should take Mara Wilson’s advice and take up botany.

        #530

        Posted Mar 30, 2014 @ 10:38 AM

        Eh, I really do blame her family. She was charming and cute and talented, but she was doomed from the moment she opened her baby eyes and saw Michael and Dina Lohan holding her. I truly believe she would have been the same mess on a smaller scale. She’d have been the suburban girl with the dirtbag dad and basket case alcoholic mother who don’t understand why their daughter won’t stop doing meth. They were never good people, from what I’ve read and heard, and they saw her as the gravy train to success. The only difference is she was surrounded by enablers at an exponential level, so she was able to have her personal drama on a much larger stage. Instead of run-ins with the local cops, she’s on TMZ.

        I don’t believe lack of fame would have resulted in a different Lindsay. Just one who was a little quieter about her problems.

        #533

        Posted Mar 30, 2014 @ 7:31 PM

        I absolutely do think that Lindsay’s parents are part of the reason why she is the way she is, I just don’t think they are an excuse for the choices she’s made under her own free will as an adult. Plenty of people have horrific childhoods, yet don’t knowingly and repeatedly disregard the law in numerous ways later in life. Whatever her mental problems, as far as I know Lindsay’s never been shown to be incapable of knowing right from wrong, or understanding the consequences of her actions.

        #544

        Posted Mar 31, 2014 @ 1:32 AM

        I don’t think Lindsay really wants to be an actress anymore.

        I think that Lindsay’s internal mantra for the last 7 years has been: “I’m happiest when I’m on set, I want to be a working actress, my talent is too great to waste.” It is so ingrained into who she is that she can’t see how false it is to her current life. Because over the last 7 years, she has had opportunities to be a working actress, and she has squandered every single one by not showing up to set, not being prepared, not holding up her end of the deal. Part of that is addiction, sure, but here she is sober and she’s still doing it.

        I think she likes the perks of being a celebrity, likes the money and the fame and the parties, the clothes and hairstylists and makeup artists, the red carpets, wants to win the big awards and have the adoration and the attention, but she doesn’t actually want to do the work. Because when she has to do the work, in “The Canyons” or the Elizabeth Taylor movie to this docu-series, she bails.

        Forget whether she still has/ever had the talent to make it as an actress, I don’t think she has the focus or motivation to do the actual work.

        #557

        Posted Mar 31, 2014 @ 10:35 AM

        Wow, this episode was another epic trainwreck. She should have know that the parts she’ll get these days are stunt casting like the Jimmy Fallon one. It was all stunt, no talent. During that sketch, she reminded me of a high school play actor and not even a good one. I also totally thought that Jimmy Fallon was Ari Graynor in the preview last week and until he spoke to her during the rehearsal. With the other acting gigs, I’m surprised that she hasn’t mentioned the Canyons article. I’m convinced it’s why she’s getting the gigs she’s getting coupled with her attitude and lack of work ethnic. As much as Paul Schrader’s an ass for that article and in general, he called her out on everything she’s in denial and delusion of. That article pretty much blacklisted her for any substantial work until she can prove she’s worthy of a comeback. From this “documentary,” she’s not worthy of any sort of comeback.

        I can’t believe that she got sedated for a veneer fix. I’ve had some major dental work and never got sedated during that. If anything, she seemed slap happy that she got drugs for the dental work. I had this program on in the background. Her talking heads are just a wall of excuses and rehab talk that she’s not following through on.

        Like

    • Everyone keeps saying Lohan is unhireable and she keeps getting hired.

      Like

      • More of a ratings stunt,perhaps????

        Like

        • That’s just it. Despite all her issues, Lohan still delivers ratings more often than not. If you can make Hollywood money (which Lohan still does) you will still find work no matter how big a mess you are. When she stops making money, she’ll stop getting jobs.

          Like

          • I don’t think Lindsay delivers ratings anymore.

            Liz and Dick did draw good ratings for Lifetime, but lower than some of their other, less publicized projects.

            From what I understand, the ratings for the debut of her show on OWN was considered pretty good, but not spectacular. The subsequent free-fall of that show’s ratings just showed that she can’t keep an audience even when she succeeds in drawing them, IMO.

            Her episode on 2 Broke Girls actually drew the lowest ratings of the season. So instead of being a draw, she might have become a repellent.

            She’s lucky that she did Mean Girls, she’s still coasting on the goodwill she had from girls connecting with the character she played on that film IMO. She’s to her generation what Alicia Silverstone was to mine, basically. I still have some affection for Silverstone, although I will say that she makes it easier because she doesn’t have anywhere near the personal problems that Lohan has.

            Like

      • At one point she couldn’t get insured – maybe she can now.

        The Canyons was so small it might not have needed it.

        But- if Paris Hilton/Kardasians had/have a career- LL can get gigs for a while- but probably not a $100 million movie.

        Like

        • No, she won’t get big movies. She’ll keep getting little TV projects like this where she can deliver a ratings spike at relatively low risk. Being insured for a movie is very different from a guest role on a TV show.

          Like

  36. Thrtr’s also the Ugly Betty fiasco to worry,BTW!!!!

    Like

  37. Here’s a clip for Sunday’s finale……………

    Like

  38. LL revealed that she had miscarried in finale………

    http://the wrap.com/own-lindsay-lohan-finale-miscarriage-list-of-lovers

    Like

    • Well, they needed something for the finale I guess. Was that too cynical? Oops.

      Like

    • Well, at least Lindsay Lohan’s vagina is getting a lot of work.

      http://jrichardsingleton.blogspot.com/2014/03/well-at-least-lindsay-lohans-vagina-is.html

      Apparently Lindsay Lohan recently compiled a list of the 36 celebrities whom she’d banged, then accidentally(?) let the list get out to the media. On one hand, it seems high for a woman in her late 20s; on the other, it seems about right for Lindsay Lohan.

      So far, none of the men on this list have complained about being, ha, linked to Lindsay Lohan. That’s another reason to call this list legitimate. At this point, I would think more men would be embarrassed of having had sex with her than being proud of it. It’s just no longer something you need to brag about–much like your AAA membership or your American Express card. (Have I had sex with Lindsay Lohan? No, let’s say I didn’t.)

      As terrible as Mila Kunis might be–and she is terrible–you never hear about her clubbing or her coke use or her unprofessionalism. (Mila Kunis does her coke in private.) We can blame Lohan’s parents, her apparent ADHD, her addictions–and we should, and there might be something medically wrong with her besides the “disease of addiction”–but ultimately her career went off the path when she became an adult, and she was no longer moored to having to protect her image as a Disney star. A large part of Lohan’s credibility problem comes from Lindsay Lohan. At this point, she chooses celebration over due diligence in both her personal and professional lives. She is the only white girl with more mugshots than a rapper. The most reflection she does is to compile a list of guys whom she banged.

      Lohan’s career went south because she did not exploit her youth–she was not content to churn out mediocre but profitable PG13 films for the tween crowd. The moment that she turned 18, she wanted to be taken seriously as an adult, but she wasn’t a serious adult. She was chewed out for her tardiness and unprofessionalism in a 2006 open letter from Morgan Creek Productions CEO James G. Robinson–which is an almost unheard of act of criticism, especially against the star of your own project. She is now reduced to doing indie films, because no major producer wants to touch her. (Ha.)

      Lindsay Lohan has had the quickest fall of any celebrity ever, going from the next Julia Roberts in 2004 to a washout in 2006; she was quickly eclipsed by just about the entire cast of Mean Girls except Lacey Chabert (whom I love), having started to refuse to show up on time and sober. Amy Poehler, who’s over a decade older, eclipsed the young woman. Lohan became a spoof of herself. She no longer dares rise to the level of people’s low expectations of her; she manages to sink further. (It’s not an issue of a gender double standard: Charlie Sheen has assloads of money from 2 1/2 Men, so there’s really no humiliating that guy at this point. He was proficient when he needed to be.) She briefly retired from acting to be a lesbian–no one having told her that she she could do both.

      Eighteen was the turning point, where she started the customary attempt of the teen starlet to shed her wholesome image, which is beneficial in one’s youth but restrictive in adulthood. But she attempted to embrace her womanhood immediately after turning 18, not taking the time to enjoy the opportunities afforded to a woman who could still play a teenage girl. Worst, the projects that she chose were objectively awful. She worked with the late Robert Altman, the end.

      She returned to acting, looking older and more out of shape than her youth would suggest. Her unique raspy voice is now just terrible. It seems unlikely that there will be a comeback for Lindsay Lohan. Her attempts to stage a comeback will be torpedoed as long as she’s still in the equation.

      Like

      • LL ruined her career by being, simply, a JERK. Lots of actors/actresses [heck, young people in general] go through a “wild phase” but she took it too far, to the point of being seriously dysfunctional & a lawbreaker and as a result is now pretty much a joke.

        LL had opportunities most people DREAM of and she p*ssed ‘em away. No sympathy for her.

        Like

        • And bad-mouthing folks like J.Law(which she denies,but who’s listening?)won’t do her
          any favors………….how much longer before someone gives her last rites????

          Like

        • When did you first notice she was starting to go downhill?

          http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0517820/board/flat/229071398?d=229094726#229094726

          In 2004-2005, I thought it was just a phase she was going through. Who didn’t party when they were 18/19? I figured she was just acting like a typical teenager.

          But in 2006, it seemed to be getting a bit out of control. She was pissing off quite a few filmmakers that she was doing movies with. I kept thinking that if she didn’t start acting more responsible, she might have trouble finding work. People won’t take you as seriously as an actress if you’re seen partying with Paris Hilton at 3am. But I did not think she actually had addiction problems…I just thought she was acting out. She was only 20. Plus, she was still doing high profile movies, she was such a huge star, she was still hot…it was hard to fathom that her career would just end suddenly. She still had a lot going for her. I just thought she needed to tone it down. 2006 I think is when things started to go downhill.

          Then in 2007, after the two DUIs, it was pretty obvious she was struggling with addiction problems, but I figured that she would just go to rehab, then disappear for a year or two, and then come back bigger and better than ever. She still had so many fans at that point and a comeback was absolutely still possible.

          Then the whole Sam Ronson thing happened in 2009 and 2010 when she went to jail I think is really when she truly lost most of her fans. 2011/2012 is when she reached the point of no return.

          Like

    • It’s funny how the headline and the quote don’t match. The actor actually says Mean Girls would be very different if it were made today because Twitter is basically one giant Burn book. If anything, I think the movie would work even better today as there are more ways for teenage girls to be mean to each other than ever before.

      Headlines are funny. Anything to grab an extra hit these days. Let me suggest to People that mild profanity seems to be a good lure.

      Like

  39. LL eyeing West End debut…….

    http://thewrap.com/p276157/

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,210 other followers

%d bloggers like this: