Who Asked for This?: Venom

Why Goddammit, Why?

Already spinning a web with a rewrite of “Spider-Man 4” for Columbia Pictures, Gary Ross will follow by taking over the Spidey spinoff "Venom."

Ross will rewrite to direct the picture. Marvel Entertainment, Avi Arad and Ross will produce. In “Spider-Man 3,” Venom was a reporter rival to Peter Parker, who became infected by an alien organism that grafted itself to his skin, giving him superior superpowers and a generally pissed off attitude.

Even though Marvel Entertainment was just acquired by Disney in a $4 billion deal, Columbia Pictures is able to turn Venom loose in a film because the studio holds rights in perpetuity not only to Spider-Man but the villains in his universe.

Again, this is why Marvel/Disney needs to get all their sh*t back. Nobody, or rather not enough folks want to see this. Who told them we were screaming for Venom?

A cartoon flick maybe, but live-action? Hell Naw! This will be an exact replay of the Elektra mess.

And I'm still healing from that.

Cease action now!

source

Interesting Quote: Richard Ramey

"There were 62 victims, not including the staff. And not one person had a weapon or drugs on them. When they couldn't find anything, an officer said, 'I guess we have to go through IDs' and he brought in a laptop. All of this was against their civil rights. There was no probable cause. Why did they have to have up to 30 police officers to control 62 homosexuals?"

Richard Ramey describing the foolishness that took place at The Atlanta Eagle this weekend.

I DON"T want a Gay Real House (Rent) Boy Show

Hera help us if this is true.

So, the folks behind the Real Housewives drama are thinking about doing a gay version.

Now you may rejoice, but please look at this email from Beth Bigler from True Entertainment.

I'm looking for the hottest young, fabulous gay men NYC has to offer for an upcoming docu-series. These boys need to be living the good life, keeping up with all the hottest shopping, restaurants, and clubs, and preferably have lots of drama keeping them busy at all hours of the day…and night.

I'd love for them to be in a relationship, and we're looking for diversity in those relationships – especially younger/older dynamics. Do any of your friends fit this bill? We all know SOMEONE who needs to have their own TV show, right?

Diversity in those relationships? How about diversity in race, size, style and lifestyle.

I'm sick of this Gay= party boi and fashion clown notion.

This is the last thing we need. I don't want millions of cretins feeling justified about their distorted view of us. This possible mess will not do us any favors. Actually, if this is the premise of the series, I will use my hex bolts to SHUT IT DOWN.

We need positive images and positive people in the limelight. Having a bunch of silly bitches running around NYC, acting like they're 16 ain't the deal. I mean look at the PK or PJ from NYC Prep, I don't want to see grown versions of that travesty.

Now, I could jumping the gun here, but knowing Bravo, we will get the not-so-cute side of our community.

So no, Bravo, I can't go for that.

3 possible amendments that can Kill the Hate Crimes Bill

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) wants to add 3 other amendments to the hate crimes bill today. According to the HRC staff, they are not feeling it at all. In fact, they found the amendments to be foolish, unhelpful and should not be adopted.

So what are these 3 vile amendments? Well here they are, via HRC:

* The first Sessions Amendment would allow the death penalty to be applied in hate crimes cases under some circumstances. This Amendment is unnecessary and is a poison pill designed to kill the bill. The Amendment is being offered by and supported by Senators who oppose the Matthew Shepard Act. It’s ironic that the very Senators who have falsely argued that this bill would put clergy in jail because of their beliefs think that those same clergy should be subject to the death penalty.

* The second Sessions Amendment would place an additional burden on the Justice Department to revise its long established guidelines for hate crimes cases. This Amendment is unnecessary. The Department already has well-established, clear and precise guidelines to govern cases involving bias-motivated violence that work well.

* Finally, the third Sessions Amendment would provide additional penalties for crimes involving servicemembers or their families. This Amendment is unnecessary. Existing statutes already provide special penalties on attacks against members of the Armed Services and veterans. In addition, the vague language of the Amendment is problematic. The Amendment provides for additional penalties for injuring the property of a serviceman or immediate family member. The scope of “family member” or what constitutes an “injury” to their property is unclear.

Again, HRC are not feeling these additions. They believe these amendments are created to kill the bill and stall the process. Hopefully, senate will vote down these amendments.

The discussion starts today.