According to UK’s Daily Mail, Winslet’s figure tops the most desirable celeb bodies list, followed by Halle Berry and Kelly Brook. See a pattern here? They’re all not exactly stick-thin (thank goodness).

On the other hand, skinny-minny stars like Victoria Beckham and Kate Moss made the very bottom of the list.

The poll quizzed 2,000 women aged 18 or over, and Winslet scored 16 percent of the votes. Moss and Price came in dead last with one percent of the votes.

Good news? I’d say so. It means we’re valuing women with real bodies! Ok, maybe not real like the rest of us out here, but more real than most of the anorexic-looking celebrities.

Image: Bauer-Griffin

Post from: Film Gecko

The film, scheduled for a 2010 release, follows a New Yorker who travels to India to bury her late husband’s ashes.

Goldie may be adorable, but so is the rest of this clan!

Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell (no idea what that thing is he’s wearing – a bullet-proof vest?):

More after the jump…

Goldie Hawn and son Oliver:

Goldie Hawn:

Goldie Hawn, Kate Hudson, Oliver Hudson and his very pregnant wife Erinn Bartlett:

Kate Hudson and mom Goldie Hawn:

Goldie Hawn and son Wyatt Russell:

Image: Pacific Coast News

Post from: Film Gecko

The movie opens in theaters on Dec. 25, 2009, which is a great Christmas present for all of us, with Robert Downey, Jr. in the title role and Jude Law as his assistant John Watson.

Take a look at the stars – they all look quite dashing, don’t they?

Images: Bauer-Griffin

Post from: Film Gecko

It’s interesting that he’s saying this now, with a hit TV show (“30 Rock”), a big moving coming out in a few weeks (“It’s Complicated”), and a gig co-hosting the Oscars with Steve Martin.

I mean, it’s sort of a slap in the face to his fans, isn’t it? If he doesn’t have any interest in acting anymore, then why is he still doing it? There are probably other things he could be doing to pay the mortgage.

Yeah, maybe I’m just cynical, but if someone achieves the amount of fame that Baldwin has, it just seems a little hypocritical for some reason, to just say, ok, I’m sort of done with it.

As for his film career, he says, "I consider my entire movie career a complete failure. The goal of movie-making is to star in a film where your performance drives the film, and the film is either a soaring critical or commercial success, and I never had that."

So all of those actors who’ve done really well but never headlined a film are failures? No, they’re not, Alec. 

On the other hand, even though actors like Baldwin bring in a nice paycheck, it would be a tough way to make a living. Your life really doesn’t belong to you; it belongs to the paparazzi and the media. I can see why he’d want to do something else.

Anyway, I don’t really think he’ll be done with acting, no matter what he says.

Image: Bauer-Griffin

Post from: Film Gecko

According to Showbiz411, Haggis wrote a letter explaining his decision to Tommy Davis, the celebrity wrangler for Scientology and the son of Scientologist actress Anne Archer.

Two things played into Haggis’ decision to leave the church: Scientology’s backing of Proposition 8 in California banning gay marriage (quite the move, considering they’re always looking for celebs to join the church); and Haggis’ wife, actress Deborah Rennard (J.R. Ewing’s loyal secretary, Sly, on “Dallas”) being ordered to cut ties with her parents because they’d violated some code of the sect.

Haggis is the Oscar-winning writer-director whose credits include “Crash,” “Million Dollar Baby,” and Letters from Iwo Jima.” He’s currently filming “The Next Three Days” with Russell Crowe, Liam Neeson, and former Scientologist Jason Beghe. After the jump, a portion of Haggis’ letter…

Tommy,

As you know, for ten months now I have been writing to ask you to make
a public statement denouncing the actions of the Church of Scientology
of San Diego. Their public sponsorship of Proposition 8, a hate-filled
legislation that succeeded in taking away the civil rights of gay and
lesbian citizens of California — rights that were granted them by the
Supreme Court of our state — shames us.

I called and wrote and implored you, as the official spokesman of
the church, to condemn their actions. I told you I could not, in good
conscience, be a member of an organization where gay-bashing was
tolerated.

In that first conversation, back at the end of October of last year,
you told me you were horrified, that you would get to the bottom of it
and “heads would roll.” You promised action. Ten months passed. No action
was forthcoming. The best you offered was a weak and carefully worded
press release, which praised the church’s human rights record and took
no responsibility. Even that, you decided not to publish.

The church’s refusal to denounce the actions of these bigots,
hypocrites and homophobes is cowardly. I can think of no other word.
Silence is consent, Tommy. I refuse to consent.

I joined the Church of Scientology thirty-five years ago. During my
twenties and early thirties I studied and received a great deal of
counseling. While I have not been an active member for many years,
I found much of what I learned to be very helpful, and I still apply
it in my daily life. I have never pretended to be the best Scientologist,
but I openly and vigorously defended the church whenever it was criticized,
as I railed against the kind of intolerance that I believed was directed
against it. I had my disagreements, but I dealt with them internally.
I saw the organization — with all its warts, growing pains and
problems — as an underdog. And I have always had a thing for underdogs.

But I reached a point several weeks ago where I no longer knew what to
think. You had allowed our name to be allied with the worst elements of
the Christian Right. In order to contain a potential “PR flap” you
allowed our sponsorship of Proposition 8 to stand. Despite all the
church’s words about promoting freedom and human rights, its name is
now in the public record alongside those who promote bigotry and
intolerance, homophobia and fear.

The fact that the Mormon Church drew all the fire, that no one noticed,
doesn’t matter. I noticed. And I felt sick. I wondered how the church
could, in good conscience, through the action of a few and then the
inaction of its leadership, support a bill that strips a group of its
civil rights.

This was my state of mind when I was online doing research and chanced
upon an interview clip with you on CNN. The interview lasted maybe ten
minutes — it was just you and the newscaster. And in it I saw you deny
the church’s policy of disconnection. You said straight-out there was no
such policy, that it did not exist.

I was shocked. We all know this policy exists. I didn’t have to search
for verification — I didn’t have to look any further than my own home.

You might recall that my wife was ordered to disconnect from her parents
because of something absolutely trivial they supposedly did twenty-five
years ago when they resigned from the church. This is a lovely retired
couple, never said a negative word about Scientology to me or anyone
else I know — hardly raving maniacs or enemies of the church. In fact
it was they who introduced my wife to Scientology.

Although it caused her terrible personal pain, my wife broke off all
contact with them. I refused to do so. I’ve never been good at following
orders, especially when I find them morally reprehensible.

For a year and a half, despite her protestations, my wife did not speak
to her parents and they had limited access to their grandchild. It was a
terrible time.

That’s not ancient history, Tommy. It was a year ago.

And you could laugh at the question as if it was a joke? You could
publicly state that it doesn’t exist?

To see you lie so easily, I am afraid I had to ask myself: what else
are you lying about?

The great majority of Scientologists I know are good people who are
genuinely interested in improving conditions on this planet and helping
others. I have to believe that if they knew what I now know, they too
would be horrified. But I know how easy it was for me to defend our
organization and dismiss our critics, without ever truly looking at what
was being said; I did it for thirty-five years. And so, after writing
this letter, I am fully aware that some of my friends may choose to no
longer associate with me, or in some cases work with me. I will always
take their calls, as I always took yours. However, I have finally come
to the conclusion that I can no longer be a part of this group. Frankly,
I had to look no further than your refusal to denounce the church’s
anti-gay stance, and the indefensible actions, and inactions, of those
who condone this behavior within the organization. I am only ashamed
that I waited this many months to act. I hereby resign my membership in
the Church of Scientology.

Sincerely,

Paul Haggis

Ps. I’ve attached our email correspondence. At some point it became
evident that you did not value my concerns about the church’s tacit
support of an amendment that violated the civil rights of so many of our
citizens. Perhaps if you had done a little more research on me, the
church’s senior management wouldn’t have dismissed those concerns quite
so cavalierly. While I am no great believer in resumes and awards, this
is what you would have discovered:

[Haggis lists his numerous awards]

The full text of the letter can be found here. I wonder how it will affect other celebrity Scientologists, and if more of them will leave the church, too. I would imagine that Prop 8 would be a pretty big deal among the Hollywood crowd.

Image: INF; Paul Haggis and Deborah Rennard, 2008

Post from: Film Gecko

According to ETonline, the two actors were in a parked van when a firetruck hit them. The truck was reportedly pulling out of the Deutschtown Fire Station earlier this afternoon when it hit the front end of the van.

Fortunately, no one was hurt, and both Crowe and Banks emerged from the vehicle just fine. A worker at a local bar said everyone was cheery about it, and that Crowe waved back at her when she waved at him.

I don’t know if it was an emergency situation and the firefighters were rushing to or from somewhere. Either way, I’m glad to hear no one was hurt. At least the driver has a good story to tell his or her grandkids (“Hey, kids, want to hear about the time I smashed into Russell Crowe and Elizabeth Banks?”).

Image: INF

Post from: Film Gecko

The movie arrives in theaters Nov. 20, 2009, and Lautner’s character Jacob Black takes center stage with Kristen Stewart’s Bella. Until then, here’s a few yummy pictures of a Taylor Lautner photo shoot to tie you over…

More Taylor goodness after the jump…

Images: Bauer-Griffin

Post from: Film Gecko

Bleu stars as Cale Bryant, a young man who’s determined to win a coveted spot on the Grand National racing team without compromising his beliefs.

With the support of his loving mother (Penelope Ann Miller), precocious little sister (Madison Pettis), and new girlfriend (Sandra Echeverria), Cale proves against all odds that he has the heart, the willpower and the courage to never give up on his dream. Yeah, predictable, but sweet.

“Free Style” is rated PG for language, some sensuality, and thematic material, and opens in limited release in theaters on Oct. 9, 2009.

More pics after the jump…

Images: Samuel Goldwyn Films / Amanda Schwab / Startraksphoto.com

Post from: Film Gecko

Post from: Film Gecko

I love this dress, but I’m not sure about the middle part. Maybe less “band-ish” and more fluid … any thoughts?

Image: Bauer-Griffin

Post from: Film Gecko