<![CDATA[Gawker: defamer, defamer investigates]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: defamer, defamer investigates]]> http://gawker.com/tag/defamer/defamerinvestigates http://gawker.com/tag/defamer/defamerinvestigates <![CDATA['No Nikita': Megan Fox's Crush Missing From Body Shop's Stripper Database]]> Megan Fox's bracing candor in the new issue of GQ continued to captivate readers today, with her stripper-wooing antics and confession that "Olivia Wilde is so sexy she makes me want to strangle a mountain ox with my bare hands" stirring both deep resentments and arousal among animal-loving lesbian fetishists around the world. The sexless Defamer investigative crew, meanwhile, had more specific interests in mind: Olivia Wilde is lovely enough, but who exactly is "Nikita," the Body Shop stripper Fox claimed to have had a brief, intense fling after relocating to LA a few years ago at age 18? It's funny — when we called The Body Shop this afternoon, a veteran employee there wondered the same thing!

Told about the Fox story and asked if he knew a Nikita, the man who answered the phone replied in brusque, Slavic-accented tones. "No," he said."No Nikita."

This would have been back around 2004, maybe 2005. We know it was a long time ago, but —

"No, we haven't had Nikita. But lots of girls come and go." He said he'd been there 13 years, but responded with silence when asked his name and position. "Everybody's coming and going. They work one day, two days, one week. It's like this."

But no Nikita? "No." Click.

We were worried about this, particularly after Fox doth protested too much to her interviewer about her high-octane acknowledgment projecting "a Lindsay Lohan vibe" and asking, "Are you going to push an ‘Is she a lesbian’ angle?" Well, kind of, though we'd technically need another girl before buying into all the Aerosmith ballad-dancing and Fox's lovelorn urgings to Nikita to leave the lifestyle.

Still — we want to believe! If "yes Nikita," there surely must be some Body Shop regular or former patron who can put a name to the date or — better yet — a face to the name. Operators are standing by!

[Photo Credit: GQ]

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5050812&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Did a Canadian Ad Spoil The Big '90210' Secret?]]> Once upon a time, we thought that the babydaddy mystery surrounding Kelly Taylor's love child on the new 90210 would be the "Who killed Laura Palmer?" of the CW set, with Jennie Garth given mysterious, clue-laden bon mots to drop all season, then a hasty denouement revealing Kelly's torrid night of cappuccinos with Nat at the Peach Pit five years ago. Then, producers threw us for a loop, stating that Shannen Doherty would reveal the big secret as early as tomorrow night's episode when Brenda confronts Kelly about dating the hot hipster teacher at West Bev. Now, in the wake of that hint, a tipster has informed us that a Canadian ad for the big episode may unwittingly supply the father's identity. Spoilers, after the jump...

According to tipster "Lezzy McGuire":

I live in Canada. We have a different version of the trailer for next week's episode. Brenda yells at Kelly, "You still love Dylan."

So I'll be like Maury and announce, Dylan you ARE the father of 4-year-old Sammy.

Damning evidence, or will Kelly coolly reply, "Au contraire, Brenda: I still love Steve Sanders, provided that Ian Ziering is available to shoot a three-episode arc during May sweeps"? We're still holding out hope that Brandon Walsh will swoop in (now played by Zach Galifianakis), but with the future of the CW looking awfully shaky, the only thing we know is that somebody had better claim this splash-off, and quick. [The CW]

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5049984&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA['90210': Who's The Familiar Father Of Kelly Taylor's Love Child?]]> Despite being paced a bit too frenetically for our liking, last week's two-hour debut of the 90210 reboot managed to intrigue us enough to tune in for last night's episode (although it appears that 25% of those first week viewers didn't feel the same way). And while the new brood of West Beverly High School students still can't stop smiling, we couldn't help but find ourselves smiling a little bit during the episode's (admittedly shoehorned-in) plotlines revolving around Kelly Taylor. Suckers for nostalgia, rejoice! Last night, we finally got some details about her mystery four year old son, the product of a one night splash-off with someone who she "had a lot of history together [with] in high school" (but has since left her high and dry). Join us as we investigate the eight likeliest candidates for being the dude whose little swimmers got all up in Kelly Taylor's biznass.


8. David Silver - Yes, there was a time when he wanted to get in her pants. But, considering that the semi-incestuous angle was too bold for Cruel Intentions, we think it's definitely too much for the fledgling CW.
7. Colin Robbins - Two words: coke dick. Ain't happening.
6. Nat Bussichio - While we're aware that Madonna famously proclaimed that "Italians Do It Better", Nat's been too busy trying to figure out how to use his capuccino machine to knock Kelly up. Plus, he doesn't seem like the type who would sell out his good buddy Brandon.
5. Noah Hunter - The heir to a massive oil fortune had a good thing going near the end of the original 90210's run, but by this point, he's more likely to be boning Sienna Miller than getting back together with Kelly.


4. Jake Hanson - Tall, dark and handsome, Jake originally pursued the then high school aged Kelly in the series' third show. That said, he's got to be like Larry King's age by now.
3. Brandon Walsh - The two almost walked down the aisle. If we lived in a fictional universe, this would be our #1 choice. But recent comments lead us to believe that Jason Priestley would sooner star in a Unabomber biopic than return to the set of 90210 as an actor.
2. Dylan McKay - "May the bridges I burn lead the way!", he famously proclaimed while riding out of Beverly Hills on a Harley, which leads us to believe that he'd do it again. He seems like just the type who would promise to pull out, only to renege when it counts. But then there's...
1. Steve Sanders - Just look at that kid! Blond, curly ringlets? Check. Big, dumb grin? Check. Oh Steve Sanders, you ole bareback rider, you! If the kid had blue eyes, we'd say it's a lock. Also, don't forget that Ian Ziering was fame hungry enough to appear on Dancing With The Stars, so you just KNOW that he would head back to West Bev in a heartbeat. Give him a five episode arc at $35 - 50K per episode and we'll have ourselves a nostalgia trip that just might keep The CW alive.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5048149&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[The Strange Case Of Nikki Finke, CAA and Defamer's 'Exceptional Smear Campaign']]> Our item yesterday about the rumored C-word contretemps between CAA agent Dan Aloni and Fox Atomic exec Debbie Liebling — which we heard led to a unilateral CAA ban from the Fox lot — drew quite a bit of interest from all involved. Make that "everyone but CAA," rather, which had Nikki Finke do its dirty work for them. Variety even accused us of "an exceptional Internet smear campaign" — before pulling its story down minutes later. But we'll get to that in a moment. First things first: After the jump, a studio "denial"!

A Fox spokesman sent over the studio's official response late Tuesday:

The Defamer.com story about the Studio banning CAA from the Fox lot, is categorically untrue. The exchange, which took place well over a year ago, between a Fox executive and a CAA agent — that supposedly triggered the "ban" — never at any point escalated to the level and language as reported on Defamer.com.

Oh, that clears everything up. A few hours later the exact same non-denial denial showed up on Deadline Hollywood Daily. There, infallible attack creep Nikki Finke scarfed down a plate of face-value spin while attributing bad agency reporting to everyone from Anne Thompson to Patrick Goldstein to Kim Masters and finally yours truly, to whom she attributed a Gossip Apocalypse that pierced the fragile, fledgling Death Star to its very soul. She had already sent us a bullying note about the veracity of our Aloni item, much like previous harassments that accused us of misleading our readers and "fudging the truth for just a few more dollars" — this from someone we've caught whitewashing any of her own gossip that bothered to stand still for her. "Whatever," we thought. "You can't fix crazy."

This morning we had a look at Tuesday evening's Variety headlines, one of which read, "CAA Agent on Defamer's Radar." The accompanying excerpt was... interesting:

"Business News: Dan Aloni in rumored Fox beef with Atomic CEO — In the cutthroat world of agenting, power reps make plenty of enemies. CAA agent Dan Aloni is no exception, but he appears to be the target of an exceptional Internet smear campaign."
Naturally we clicked through, only to get a story about a Canadian production shingle nabbing American representation — and it wasn't CAA. The story was gone! Then we searched the paper's archives. There was the headline again, but the piece still redirected. A bad link, maybe? No; a Variety source confirmed this afternoon that the story was online for mere minutes before it was pulled down, saying it was something the paper "didn't want to weigh in on."

So on one side we've got Nikki Finke cursing a gossip blog for, you know, gossiping; on another we've got Fox, vaguely acknowledging an "exchange" almost despite itself; and on yet another we've got the industry's biggest trade publication quietly pulling back accusations of our "exceptional Internet smear campaign." Ever curious, we hopped on the phone with the only people we thought might know something about all this.

"I'll let Fox's statement stand for itself," said the CAA spokesman we contacted this morning, who declined to specify if the agent cited was in fact Aloni. Did anyone at CAA call Variety? "I didn't call Variety, and I'm not aware of any smear campaign," he said. "I can't speak for everybody at the company, but I didn't call them."

OK! Well, it's back to you, readers. If we're so wrong, why does it seem like we're the only ones not on the defensive?

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=393788&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Scarlett Johansson CloneGate Blows Lid Off Actress's 'Illegal' Genetic Twin]]> It was a busy holiday weekend inside Defamer's Special Investigations Bureau for Starlet Genetics, where a bombshell tip revealed the long-suspected truth about the young actress's sketchy provenance. No — not half-Jewish / half-Protestant, and not Upper East Side post-deb. In short, as her close friend "Sergei Galabekian" tells us, the Scarlett Johansson you know... is a clone.

That clone was created illegally by using stolen biological material. Original person is very nice (not damn sexy), most important - CHRISTIAN young lady!

A "not damn sexy" Christian! Ha! We knew it. But that's not the half of it — hit the jump for additional, [sic]-heavy CloneGate revelations.

I'll tell you guys more, that clones (it's not only one) made in GERMANY - world leader manufacturer of humans clones, it is in Ludwigshafen am Rhein, North Bavaria, Mr. Helmut Kohl home town. You can not even imaging the scale of the cloning activity. But warning! Helmut Kohl clone staff 100% controlling all their clones spreading around the world, they are very accurate with that, some of them are still NAZI type disciplined and mind controlled clones, so be careful get close with clones you will be controlled as well. Think wise..
Apparently those clones is very actively shown on your website . This is just a warning, because original person is not happy about those images and video, rumors and etc., in that way it would be really nice if you try slow down that ''actress'' career development on your website, original Scarlett's parents will really appreciated that. Please do that, do not wait until FBI agent give you a call with questions. Please remember that original family did not authorize any activity with stolen biological materials, no matter what form it was created, it all need to be return back to original family control to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.
Original Scarlett is not engage!

Whew! Alanis Morrisette will be so relieved. Meanwhile, forgive the publishing delays here as we scrub CloneJo from the Defamer archives and get back to the business of covering the original versions of your favorite celebrities.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=393521&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Script Review Hints Oliver Stone's 'W' Might Just Be A Well-Cast April Fool's Joke]]> The hyper-sensitive Defamer April Fool's Bullshit Scanner went off again moments ago as we browsed ABC.com's exclusive screenplay review of W, Oliver Stone's upcoming biopic about the transition of George W. Bush from spoiled drunk Texas asshole to election-stealing, malaprop-slinging, Jesus-loving Texas asshole. To this very moment, in fact, we can't verify the legitimacy of Marcus Baram's trenchant read-through whose very headline — "Daddy Issues, War Lust in Oliver Stone's W" — flirts with incredulity. To that end, we combed through Baram's script review in an attempt to determine the moments that seem authentic versus those that appear to be inexplicably hacky:

We Think We Buy: "When his father cries after losing to Bill Clinton in 1992, Bush sticks it to his dad by telling him that he would have won if he'd ousted Saddam at the end of the first Gulf War."
Bullshit, Right? "When he hears about French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac's desire to give weapons inspectors 30 more days to work in Iraq, Bush explodes: 'Thirty days! I'd like to stuff a plate of freedom fries down that slick piece of s—'s throat!' "

We Think We Buy: "Before the invasion, he tells a shocked British Prime Minister Tony Blair about alternative plans such as baiting Saddam by painting a U.S. spy plane in U.N. colors and assassinating the Iraqi leader."
Bullshit, Right? "In one scene, Bush practices his parachute landing in the White House pool but forgets to properly release the harness and sinks to the bottom."

We Think We Buy: "At one point, Bush describes giving up sweets as 'my personal sacrifice to show support for our troops.' "
Bullshit, Right? "Bush explodes in a profanity-laced outburst , 'Did you tell her I don't like motherf— who gas their own people! Did you tell her I don't like a— holes who try to kill my father! Did you tell her I'm going to kick his a— all over the Middle East?' "

We Think We Buy: "But the film also strives to paint a humanistic portrait of the commander in chief, with Bush once telling the Rev. Billy Graham that 'there's this darkness that follows me.' "
Bullshit, Right? "During the planning of the war, Bush and his top advisers are shown locking the war-wary Powell out of a room, erupting into laughter when they finally let him in."

So wait — it's a comedy? Try as we might, we cannot envision an Oliver Stone so out of touch with reality that SNL-grade practical jokes would elude broad editorial snips. That said, we've also long suspected the Animal House qualities of the Bush 43 Cabinet, and at the end of the day (even April Fool's Day) we can't imagine ABC foisting a gag this political on its readers. Did we miss a clue somewhere that gives this away, or are we actually supposed to be looking forward to this?

[Photo Credit: ABC News]

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=374786&view=rss&microfeed=true