In the spring, I met up with a group of girlfriends for dinner and drinks before going to see the "Sex And The City: The Movie." Being a big fan of the HBO series, I was looking forward to the film. Two hours into the two-and-a-half hour flick, I thought, eh, it's OK and it's a bit too long.

During my recent staycation, I watched the movie again on DVD. This time around, I still thought it was too long, but instead of being OK I now think it's a load of crap.

AP file

Only Charlotte, left, comes off as sympathetic in "Sex and the City: The Movie"

First off, I loved all four of the main characters, each different, but each fantastic in her own unique way. Samantha, the utter id who did it all her way, Charlotte, the eternal optimist, Miranda, the cynical career woman and Carrie, the voice of reason with the pathological shopping problem.

After watching the movie again, the only one I liked was Charlotte. She was the only one who remained true to her character, confessing that she found something she loved about her life and her marriage everyday.

Miranda was turned into the worst version of her sometimes bitter self -- unforgivingly judgmental, angry and utterly unyielding. Samantha turns to food to suppress her primal instincts because she just can't be a one-guy gal. And finally Carrie, who ditches the quiet restrained wedding she was going to have with twice-divorced Mr. Big for a Page Six extravaganza because of "the dress."

OK, the characters were always more or less two-dimensional representations of archetypes. In the movie, those types are whittled down to a sliver. When did the writers lose their respect for these ladies?

I'm growing increasingly dismayed by how women are portrayed in movies. Watch the trailers for these two upcoming movies -- "Bride Wars" and "He's Just Not That Into You." According to "Bride Wars," women are so self-absorbed and petty that they would battle with and lose a best friend rather than pick another day to hold a wedding.

And yet Hollywood keeps churning out this junk. Why? Because we women spend money to see it! I'm guilty -- I saw "Sex And The City" twice!

Does anyone else share my dismay about the portrayal of women in films? Anyone else think "Sex And The City" was more like hate mail than a love letter?

Last week, it was officially announced that "The Road" would be pushed to 2009. And frankly, I'm glad. 

Don't get me wrong, Cormac McCarthy is my favorite living American fiction writer. My favorite McCarthy novel: "The Crossing," the middle novel of his Border trilogy. I challenge you to find a book that begins with a more fascinating 80 pages. But when I heard Hollywood was making a movie of "The Road," my first instinct was a slow-motion head shake.

The Weinstein Company

"The Road" was supposed to come out on Nov. 14. Now it's been pushed to 2009.

To be fair, all the players looked promising: Director John Hillcoat helmed one of my favorite Westerns, "The Proposition." Viggo Mortensen seemed the perfect, unshowy actor for the lead role. And, hey, I'd been skeptical of the film version of "No Country For Old Men," but was happily surprised by the Coen brothers' efforts (too bad the same cannot be said for Billy Bob Thornton's "All the Pretty Horses").

And I know it's hard to adapt a book to film. After all, part of what makes "The Road" so compelling is that you take that journey while you read, and the tension builds as you turn the pages, in a way that wouldn't seem possible to translate to the screen. But, honestly, it wasn't just that. 

"The Road's" post-Apocalyptic tale of a man and his son making their way across the country, avoiding the starving marauders who have resorted to cannibalism, and just trying to stay alive seems just a little too prescient for our times. The two characters head east, not because salvation lies there, but because they literally just need a direction to go in. In these dropping stock market, war-torn, mortgage-crisis, befuddling days, I'm not sure I can bring myself to a theater, sit down and watch what's going to happen after the world ends.  

These days, I'm having a hard time watching anything that's very dark, which seems darn inconvenient because this is the time of year we usually get great, albeit depressing films. Usually, I'm grateful after a summer of fluff to dive into something deeper and darker. Hey, if it weren't for awards season, I wonder if we'd even get these films at all. Usually, I'm first in line. 

But not this year. At least not right now. Even at home, I seem to indulging in more escapist fare than usual, whether it be John Woo's "A Better Tomorrow" or episodes of "Stylista." And my passion for TV crime drama feels even more comforting. They're like sitcoms for dark times. No matter what the tragedy, at the end of the hour, it's solved and justice (which I can't seem to fathom these days in real life) prevails. 

During the Great Depression, gangster films and comedies reigned. And I wonder if, in a way, we're back to a place where we need entertainment to play the role of comforter again. Yes, films should illuminate, but shouldn't they also provide an escape from all that's dark, dreary and seemingly insurmountable? 

Is the economic and political climate affecting what you watch on television and at the movies? Share your views in the comment space below.

(Warning: Possible spoilers for a whole raft of movies ahead. You have been warned!)

I love Halloween, and I love scary movies, as you've probably noticed.

We've talked about scary movies that don't rely on gore, and we've also discussed horror movies where the victim films the events as they happen. Now, let's talk about the lines that make those movies so scary.

So much goes into a good fright flick. To me, it's all about the suggestion. Your own mind can always create a scarier monster than anything the special effects department can dream up with latex. Movies that create a sense of true dread, that set up a scenario where you can feel the fear without being overwhelmed by monsters and gore, will win me every time.

I feel that one of the most overlooked elements of a great horror movie is the dialogue. Dramas and comedies are expected to have eloquent or snappy dialogue, but horror-movie lines often get lost in the avalanche of fake blood. Yet a great horror-movie line can chill you to the bone and stay with you for months. It can also break your heart.

20th Century Fox

"They mostly come at night. Mostly."

Some of my favorites:

"We'd better get back, 'cause it'll be dark soon, and they mostly come at night... mostly. "
    --from "Aliens," when young Newt gives Ripley and the others the benefit of her hard-earned knowledge

"I spent eight years trying to reach him, and then another seven trying to keep him locked up."
    --from "Halloween," when Dr. Loomis explains his work with killer Michael Myers

"With endless love, we left you sleeping. Now we sleep with you."
    --from "28 Days Later," the note Jim's parents leave for their comatose son when they kill themselves to escape the incurable Rage virus

"They're coming to get you, Barbara."
            --from the original "Night of the Living Dead." Barbara's brother had no idea how right he was. 

You know what's next. Submit your favorite scary movie lines in the comments.

A few ground rules:

--Some lines are bound to have swearing (90 percent of "The Exorcist," one of the scariest movies ever), but since we can't print those words, do your best to substitute (the old comic-strip swearing of @$#%! works pretty well). Still, some lines are scary but just too foul to be published in the blog. Strive for lines that I can publish.

--I'm not expecting you to have the line exactly memorized (and, please, don't comment to tell someone else they didn't phrase their quote perfectly), but do your best.

--Let's stay away from entire speeches, though horror movies have some great ones. Aim for one or two lines of dialogue, like the ones I share above. Short and scary.

--Please don't just share the line, give an idea of how it's used in the movie for those who haven't seen every scary film ever made. And if you want, tell us why you think it's so good. What about the line chills you?

As for me, I'm going to need to keep a light burning all night, and possibly all week. They mostly come at night. Mostly.

Last week, Gael Cooper wrote about TV shows that belong in the TV dead pool. This week, I want to focus on three that have pleasantly surprised me and become part of my TV watching ritual:  ABC's "Life on Mars," HBO's "True Blood" and the CW's "Privileged."

ABC

Jason O'Mara in "Life on Mars."

"Life on Mars"
I came into this show a skeptic. I had thoroughly enjoyed the BBC version and was positive that ABC's spin would be more "Coupling" than "The Office." But I've been happily surprised. As someone who loves crime procedurals, it's incredibly fun to see how cops solve crimes without the help of modern technology (crime scenes are contaminated, fibers aren't analyzed, blood splatter isn't measured).  Add to that solid work from Jason O'Mara (last seen on "Men in Trees") as Sam Tyler and a completely over-the-top (in the best way) performance from Harvey Keitel as Lieutenant Gene Hunt and you have a fun night of TV. I also like that ABC has added hippy neighbor Windy, who believes a meal isn't complete without a little marijuana.  And in a time when every TV show seems to share the same indie rock soundtrack, "Life on Mars'" '70s tunes, such as Mott the Hoople's "All the Way to Memphis" and Sweet's "Little Willie" are pretty refreshing.

HBO

Stephen Moyer in "True Blood."

"True Blood"
OK, now this one is tawdry. And that's what's so great about it. This story about vampires as the minority in a small Louisiana town has sex, drugs (in the form of vampire blood) and more sex. Anna Paquin combines savviness and innocence in her portrayal of Sookie Stackhouse, the virginal (depending on how many episodes you've watched) waitress who can hear what everyone is thinking. This show was criticized early on because creator Alan Ball leaned too hard on the vampires-equal-homosexuals metaphor, but frankly, this show is more about fun than preaching. You find yourself rooting for Sookie's romance with vampire Bill Compton (the easy-on-the-eyes Stephen Moyer). But you get just as easily drawn into the other characters' storylines, whether it be Jason Stackhouse's (Ryan "check out those abs" Kwanten) addiction to easy sex and vampire blood or Sookie's best friend Tara Thorton's (Rutina Wesley) on-and-off romance with Sam Merlotte (and what's going on with him, anyway?). Yes, basically this is a soap opera with vampires, but it's much naughtier than anything you'll find on regular TV.

"Privileged"
I have an admitted yen for shows about teenagers, but I really thought this one was going to be on the must-skip, too-good-to-be-true "7th Heaven" side of the equation. Instead with the charming Joana Garcia (who's a dead ringer for Amy Adams in looks and manner) as Megan Smith, the aspiring journalist-turned-tutor of two spoiled girls, the show is actually a "Gilmore Girls"-esque charmer. And, yes, it's a bit humorous that the nastier of the twins Sage (Ashley Newbrough) looks like Rumor Willis. Hey, it gives a bit of authenticity to the show. And, OK, it does seem odd that not one but three handsome men are after Megan, but this show takes place in fantasy land, where a job as a tutor includes a convertible, a bedroom the size of a hotel suite and a lot of time to yourself. Yes, this one is definitely a guilty pleasure, but, hey, at least it's a pleasure.

Are there new shows that have you hooked? Which ones are they and why?

I'm of the opinion that no holiday offers as many fun Web links as Halloween. Here are five fun time-wasters with spooky, scary, monstrous themes. Boo!

AP

That kid's gonna set his pantlegs on fire...

• Kids today have such fancy-shmancy costumes. In my day, we had the cheapie plastic ones with the masks whose rubber bands would inevitably break and snap right in your face. Retro Crush remembers, and offers a photo gallery of the costumes I knew so well, from Rubik's Cube to Chachi to that super-creepy robot girl from "Small Wonder." Don't see your favorite retro costume on that page? Check this amazing gallery of old costumes and if you find it, e-mail it to your sister and remind her of the year she got to be Cinderella and you had to be Soupy Sales.

• Few people online wait for Halloween with the same anticipation that Matt of X-Entertainment does. Every entry in his Halloween countdown blog is worth reading, but this year, I especially liked his Whatever O Lantern contest, where he invited people to find a substitute for a pumpkin, give it a Jack O' Lantern type face, and send in a photo. The winner? A swimming pool. I also liked the Pop Tart O'Lantern, but you may have a different fave.

• Don't feel like getting your hands all gunky and carving a real pumpkin? There are plenty of online pumpkin carving sites, but I kind of like this one for its clean looks and simplicity. Here's a more cartoony one, if you prefer that look. And if you just want to look at amazingly arty pumpkins other people carved, check out Extreme Pumpkins. I kind of love the Nerd O Lantern.

• The San Antonio Express-News has a fun online Monster Maker. But one major flaw: You can't save and send your creation, you can only print it out. Hello, it's 2008, Webmasters of the Alamo City.  (Via Pop Candy.)

• This link is from last year, but I love it: Expensive purses that scarily resemble movie monsters. This melty face dude and his handbag twin may be my favorite.

Share your own favorite Halloween links -- from pumpkin carving ideas to candy to costumes to scary movies and more -- in the comments.

At the end of last week, after reading several reports about how mad actor Mark Wahlberg was with a "Saturday Night Live" sketch that made fun of him, I weighed in here saying the actor apparently couldn't laugh at himself.

Some of you thought I was misreading his mock anger over comedian Andy Samberg's animal skit during an appearance on Jimmy Kimmel's show Thursday night. And sure enough, Wahlberg showed up on "SNL" this weekend and confronted Samberg in a scene aimed at showing he does indeed have a sense of humor. I think it also showed that Samberg does Wahlberg better than Wahlberg does Samberg doing Wahlberg.

And it shows that Wahlberg had a keen enough marketing sense in a week when his new movie, "Max Payne," was opening. I still think he was initially unamused by "Mark Wahlberg Talks to Animals," but had a sensible change of heart when he realized the potential to impact the box office. I should have known better than to question a movie star's promotional tactics.

So, Mark, thanks for proving me wrong ... and say hi to your mother for me.

"Saturday Night Live" has been making plenty of news in recent weeks, thanks mainly to the high interest in the show's political sketches -- namely Tina Fey's spot-on impersonation of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

But a seemingly random sketch ("Barky Bark and the Donkey Bunch" -- ha!) by cast member Andy Samberg that consisted of the comic impersonating actor Mark Wahlberg talking to an assortment of real animals is generating some buzz of its own. This isn't because the Oct. 4 sketch is particularly relevant or comically brilliant. The buzz is coming from Wahlberg's apparent inability to accept being the butt of a joke.

Reuters

Mark Wahlberg: No joy in Max Payne.

In a recent interview with the New York Post, the "Max Payne" star says he wasn't amused by Samberg's skit.

"'Saturday Night Live' hasn't been funny for a long time," Wahlberg said. "They've asked me to do the show a ton of times. I used to watch it when Eddie Murphy was there and Joe Piscopo and Bill Murray. I don't even know who's on the show now."

Fair enough. He's got a new movie coming out and he's a little tweaked at being mocked on a national TV show that has recently seen a huge uptick in viewers. But Thursday night Wahlberg was on "Jimmy Kimmel Live" and the host brought up the animal sketch again. The two watched a clip, the audience laughed and then Wahlberg launched into a expletive-filled rant about how he was seriously going to fly to New York and punch Samberg in the face.

How many years has "Saturday Night Live" been making fun of ... everyone? It would seem to me that at this point if you're a public figure and haven't been the subject of a sketch on "SNL," that should be your concern. Wahlberg acts like he's playing a character in one of his action movies and he takes the lamest possible approach to dealing with the diss -- he doesn't laugh it off. Now he's undoubtedly drawing more attention to Internet clips of the sketch itself and to his own silly reaction on talk shows.

So what do you think? Was the original "Mark Wahlberg Talks to Animals" sketch even funny? Have you lost a little respect for Mark Wahlberg -- or did you ever have any anyway? How should celebs deal with being parodied -- is there any choice but to laugh it off?

Oh, and by the way, if Wahlberg's entire reaction turns out to be a farce and is his way of generating his own buzz for his new movie, it'll have been his best work in years.

UPDATE: Hey, maybe Wahlberg does indeed have a sense of humor! Access Hollywood is reporting that he'll make an appearnace on "SNL" this weekend.

Last week, msnbc.com's Anna Chan wrote in Test Pattern about female celebrities who she thinks have got it all going on. She only named two women before asking readers to name more. I would have written that post, but the Internet couldn't hold my list and our servers couldn't handle your responses.

So instead this week I get to respond with male celebrities who I think have it "all." By "all" we'll stick to Anna's definition of looks and talent and apparent smarts. I watch enough movies and television and read enough magazines and Web sites that I think I can cobble something together. And my wife and I have always had a fun back-and-forth regarding celebrities and who each of us would be allowed to hook up with if we were alone in New York or Paris and the stars just happened to align. Perhaps you're in a relationship that can handle such make-believe.

Reuters file

Clive Owen: Playing the hand he's been dealt.

So let's start with Clive Owen. You'll find that I'm going to reference mostly men who leave little doubt that they are in fact men. Meaning, they probably look great in a tux, they might have an accent and they can likely beat up your boyfriend if provoked. Owen fits all of these criteria. Rent "Croupier" or "Children of Men" or watch one of these extended BMW ads because a hot male film star should know how to drive, too (Steve McQueen! Paul Newman!).

It's not difficult to transition from Clive Owen to James Bond and these days 007 means Daniel Craig ... again, the accent and the tux. When Craig walked out of the water in "Casino Royale" wearing those little swim trunks all he needed to do was kick sand in Matthew McConaughey's face to seal his status as king of the beach. Watch him here on Charlie Rose because, well, you should watch a little less of "The View."

How about another tough guy to complete the trifecta? "300" star Gerard Butler brings the accent and the abs necessary to make the list. And if I had a dollar for every time I've heard a guy in my office say, "This is Sparta!" I wouldn't be sweating the economic crisis. Not to mention that my boss is practically stalking Butler online and not putting him on the list wasn't an option for me.

I could go on and on with the hunky action stars who don't speak "American," but that wouldn't leave me time to name Robert Downey Jr. (beyond talented), Dominic West (best cop on TV -- ever), that model guy Gabriel Aubry (I have no idea if he's talented or smart, but when's the last time you got the sexiest woman alive pregnant?), and, oh yeah, what's his face ... George Clooney (when I grow up, I want to be him).

Alright, ladies (and gentlemen), let 'er rip. Which male celebrities are worth the price of a ticket, worth setting the DVR for, worth thumbing through a magazine in the checkout line or worth that one night in Paris for you? 

When the thought of looking at your 401 (k) balance makes you feel slightly nauseous, you know we're in strange times. But it seems like money advice is coming at us from everywhere. Especially daytime TV talk shows.

CNBC

Why is Suze Orman so mad at me? And how can I get her to stop talking?

Dr. Phil recently devoted a show to having Ben Stein and Jim Cramer scream at us about saving money. Even Oprah has gotten into the game. Not only does she have Suze Orman scold us on a regular basis, Oprah also recently had "America's Thriftiest Family" on to give tips about "living within our means."

Now, I know that Oprah grew up poor, but at this point, having her give advice about "living within our means" is a bit like asking Neil Armstrong how to pilot a paper airplane. She's a bit beyond the clipping coupons stage.

And do we really need all this scolding? It reminds me of the old Preston Sturges film, "Sullivan's Travels," about a film director (Joel McCrea) who wants to make real, gritty films about how hard life is during the depression finds out that what people really want is to laugh and escape.

Personally, I want to watch the Oprah shows where Nate Berkus transforms someone's home or the ones where she gives advice on dog care (and I don't even have a dog). Frankly, even the recent show about the father who forgave the son who killed their family, was more of an escape than Orman telling me to stop using my credit cards.

What are daytime talk shows really for? Do we really need all this money advice, and is that why we tune into "Oprah," "Ellen," "The View" or "Dr. Phil"?

Frankly, the best two shows I've heard (they were on the radio, not on TV) on the current economic crisis came from NPR's "This American Life."

The first one, "The Giant Pool of Money," explained why banks started offering mortgages to people who couldn't actually afford them. And the other, "Another Frightening Show About the Economy," will teach you everything you ever wanted to know about credit default swaps and what scared Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson so bad that he finally felt the need to take action.

What distinguishes these shows is the lack of hysteria and the fact that real people from the financial industry explain exactly how these events occurred without the spin. And guess what? Afterward, you won't feel reprimanded, you won't feel panicked; you'll just feel like you understand what's going on a little bit more clearly.

Until Oprah gets around to that, I'll be skipping those Suze Orman shows. If I want to feel bad, I can easily go look at my 401(k) balance.

The new TV season has barely begun, and yet at least one show has already been canceled. "Do Not Disturb," a Fox comedy starring Jerry O'Connell and Niecy Nash as hotel employees, got the hook after just three episodes.

The news came as no real surprise to readers of our Fall TV Preview. Writer Stuart Levine gave "DND" the harshest review of any new show, calling the jokes not just lame, but offensive, and saying the show was "so terrible that one would be better off buying the season one DVD package of last year's 'Cavemen' and watching that on a permanent loop."

NBC

Has new "Knight Rider" already run out of gas?

Now that the first show has fallen, it's only a matter of time before other shows also get the axe.

Miami Herald critic Glenn Garvin picks "Worst Week," yet another American adaptation of a British sitcom, to die an early death. But other critics have said the comedy is one of the better new offerings out there.

Speaking of international remakes, "Kath & Kim," a remade version of an Aussie show, was receiving some negative buzz from the critics even before regular viewers got to see the first episode, which aired last Thursday.

And you can't talk about cancellation possibilities without discussing the "Knight Rider" remake. Alan Sepinwall of New Jersey's Star-Ledger was blunt in his review, saying: "How many things are wrong with NBC's 'Knight Rider' remake? Well, how much time have you got? Or is all you need to know that NBC is doing a 'Knight Rider' remake?"

You be Nostradamus, here. Predict the future. And yes, you can choose either new shows or old standards that really need to pack up their sets and go home. Is it time for "Til Death"  to die? Has "Cops" already arrested every drunken lout in the nation -- at least twice? Make your own TV dead pool list in the comments.

It's been two weeks since Paul Newman died, and if you're still feeling the loss, you're not alone. Thankfully, my favorite cable channel, Turner Classic Movies, has prepared a fitting tribute to this great man by devoting Sunday, Oct. 12 to his movies (really, they could have done a whole weekend). Since there are only 24 hours, every great movie won't be shown, but TCM has compiled an eclectic mix.

Here's what they're showing (times are EST):

6:00 a.m "The Rack"
8:00 a.m. "Until They Sail"
10:00 a.m.  "Torn Curtain"
12:15 p.m.  "Exodus"
3:45 p.m. "Sweet Bird of Youth"
6:00 p.m. "Hud"
8:00 p.m. "Somebody Up There Likes Me"
10:00 p.m. "Cool Hand Luke"
12:15 a.m. "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof"
2:15 a.m.  "Rachel, Rachel"
4:00 a.m. "The Outrage"

Courtesy Everett Collection

Paul Newman's character Luke prepares to eat 50 eggs in "Cool Hand Luke."

The must-sees on this list are the films from 3:45 to 12:15 (not a bad one in that bunch). If you haven't seen "Cool Hand Luke" or "Hud," and only have time to watch two movies on this list, pick these. In both, Newman plays iconic anti-heroes, and he radiates charm. In "Hud," especially, his ungrateful son character is supposed to be the guy we're rooting against, but you won't be able to.

"Sweet Bird" and "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" are Newman's foray into Tennessee Williams plays, with Richard Brooks writing and directing. "Cat" is especially interesting considering that the taboos of the time meant that Newman's character Brick couldn't be overtly homosexual -- everything had to be subtle and implied. "Somebody Up There Likes Me" was Newman's first big-screen role playing Rocky Graziano and he made this first impression count.

As for the rest, I have to admit that I've never seen "The Rack," "Until They Sail," "Rachel, Rachel" (in which he doesn't appear, but directs wife Joanne Woodward) or "The Outrage," so I'm curious. "Torn Curtain" and "Exodus" are lesser efforts for Newman and their directors, Alfred Hitchcock and Otto Preminger.

If I worked at TCM, I would add the movie that is not only my favorite Newman flick, but my favorite all-time movie, "The Hustler." In this nearly perfect film, Newman seems to inspire everyone around him -- including Piper Laurie and Jackie Gleason -- to give the best performances of their careers.

I would also add "Mr. & Mrs. Bridge," "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid," "The Sting," "Paris Blues," "The Long Hot Summer," "Slap Shot," "The Verdict," "The Hudsucker Proxy" and msnbc.com college basketball editor Mike Miller's favorite, "Nobody's Fool."

Take this opportunity to see some Paul Newman movies. The man had more great films than bad -- and luckily for us we get to enjoy this legacy forever.

If you haven't read or seen all the various Newman tributes yet, allow me to suggest Robert Redford's in Time magazine, the video of David Letterman's tribute, Maureen Dowd's in the New York Times, New York Times film critic Manohla Dargis, New York magazine's tributes from Philip Seymour Hoffman, Sam Mendes and author Richard Russo.

I'm a horror-movie fan, and I know admitting this in certain circles is not cool. Scary movies are considered the Twinkies of cinema, it seems, cheap and bad for you, shunned by many in favor of subtitled black-and-white classics or complex art films.

Well, I love a good art film as much as the next person, but that doesn't mean I'm not in favor of a good scare. It's October now, Halloween month, and the horror flick that's giving me the creeps based solely on its trailer is "Quarantine," opening this Friday. (Possible spoilers ahead.)

Sony

---

I mean, have you seen the trailer? (It's embedded at the bottom of this post.) A journalist and her cameraman tailing a fire crew end up at an L.A. apartment building for what seems like a routine call. A woman in an apartment is sick. Or is she? From the preview, she's either turned cannibal, or zombie, or vampire, or been infected with some other movie-monster virus. The clips of her are only all the creepier for being seen through the ghostly green camera light flickering through the dark.

Apparently the building gets -- duh -- quarantined, and now our heroine and her pals are trapped inside the infected building. The final scene of the trailer actually made me jump, although as an old-school horror fan I really should have known what was coming.

Apparently "Quarantine" is a remake of the Spanish horror film "[Rec]," whose trailer is even creepier for its lack of dialogue. [Rec] is from the abbreviation for "record" or "recording," as found on cameras. "Quarantine" and "[Rec]" join a host of other horror flicks (helloooo "Blair Witch Project") that use the old "victim records his or her own demise/descent into madness" trick.

And that trick works for me, every time. Once you accept that fact that any normal person would have dropped the camera after the first monster attack (I'm looking at you, "Cloverfield"), the concept is chilling.

I firmly believe that the scene in "Aliens" where the Colonial Marines, with cameras on their helmets, go creeping through the seemingly abandoned colony, is one of the most chilling scenes in moviedom. We watch their footage as they explore, crack jokes, start to figure things out, are attacked, and eventually, we watch as their cameras, one by one, start to fizzle out. Few scenes build suspense and sheer horror like that one does, and the fact that we watch it through the Marines' own footage just puts the fear right over the top.

We're used to watching camera footage, but we're used to having it edited and packaged for us. Seeing the victims' raw footage gets me. I buy it. I suppose a bad movie could turn the concept into nothing more than a fake snuff film, but generally, the movies I've seen in this genre are enthralling. (Rent "The Last Broadcast" if you haven't seen it -- it came before "Blair Witch" and many say it's the superior film.)

These are my last moments, the camera footage in these movies seems to say. Here is how I got here, and maybe you would have made different choices than I did, but now you can see how I did what I did, and how I ended up dead.

Will you see "Quarantine"? What are your thoughts on fake camera footage in horror movies? Were you one of those who got sick at the shaky footage in "Blair Witch" or "Cloverfield," or does this horror-movie concept work for you?

On Tuesday, manly mag Esquire named Halle Berry its Sexiest Woman Alive, 2008. I certainly can't argue with that. Not only does she always look great (how quickly she sprang back into perfect form after welcoming baby Nahla!), she's talented and seems smart.

There are those actors I love no matter what they do (Philip Seymour Hoffman, I'm looking at you), and there are actors whose films I avoid like the proverbial plague (hi, Robin Williams), but somewhere in between those two extremes are my feelings for Russell Crowe.

AP

Let's hope this haircut is for a role.

Crowe first came to my notice in the 1992 Australian skinhead flick, "Romper Stomper." But most people really got to know him in 1997's "L.A. Confidential," in which he plays an overly physical cop who wants to protect abused women and wishes he could be known for more than his brawn. He was a bit of a female fantasy:  A man who was tough on the outside and surprisingly tender on the inside – and I don't know a woman who didn't fall for him a little bit in that role.

He followed up that film with a few duds ("Mystery, Alaska," "Breaking Up") before roaring back to form in 1999 with his turn as tobacco-company whistle-blower Jeffrey Wigand in Michael Mann's "The Insider." It was a tough, subtle performance and one that, looking back, should have won the Oscar over Kevin Spacey's fine (but somewhat more hammy turn) in "American Beauty." It also marked the last time for a while that I would enjoy a Russell Crowe film.

First came "Gladiator," a shiny toy of a movie that I personally fell asleep during and that netted Crowe that Oscar. Then came Ron Howard's treacly, overly sentimental "A Beautiful Mind," during which my eyes got achy from rolling so many times. And I'm sure there are those of you who love those films, but as for me, I wondered what happened to Crowe. When did he become a seemingly pompous "actor" type who did important films as though he were trying to emulate Tom Hanks' career?

Crowe had seemed to me a Richard Burton-esque actor, who moved bodily through his films like he was pushing through a crowd, and frankly, I was relieved when he indulged in a little off-screen bad-boy behavior (although Burton would have scoffed at something as wimpy as phone-throwing). And as for his alleged affair with Meg Ryan; count me among those who simply shrugged. I'd already written off Crowe after his "Beautiful Mind" performance.

Lately, though, I've seen a little bit of the old Crowe resurfacing. I loved his nasty anti-hero (though hated the softy ending) in "3:10 to Yuma." And though "American Gangster" was mediocre at best, its finest moments involved Crowe, who seemed more at home on the streets of New York than co-star Denzel Washington. Crowe is starting to disappear into roles again (a tough thing to do once you're a big star – see Tom Cruise). 

I don't expect "Body of Lies" to be the best movie ever, but I love that it's not a film Crowe's doing for Oscar consideration; it's a piece of meat that he can sink his teeth into.  And my favorite Russell Crowe films are the one where he eats the role raw.

Are you a Russell Crowe fan? Are there actors who drive you crazy when they waste their talents? Talk about it in the comment space below.

How about another Multi-link Monday? I pull together five fun time-wasting links to start off your week, but remember, you, too, can suggest sites for me to include. Just post them in the comments, and thanks!

•  So I always thought my mother's maiden name was French, but according to World Names Profiler, it turns out it's a lot more popular in the Netherlands. Warning: Once you start typing family names into the World Names Profiler, it will be hard to stop, and you may need to start rethinking long-held assumptions about your family origins.

• Have you taken the color IQ test yet? You drag and drop different shades and try and arrange them by hue. It's simple to attempt, but so, so hard to get right. I'm gonna blame my monitor. Yep, that's it. I'm sure the color on my monitor is off.

• Dolphin Olympics is one of those really sweet, cute online games. You go, Flipper! (Via Metafilter.)

• I love this: A world map showing the locations where the photos on album covers were taken. Yes, I was once part of a group of four friends who re-enacted the Abbey Road crossing while in London, like 80 million other groups of tourists.

• A wonderful reader-submitted link comes in from Adrienne. She says: "I can't believe how bad I was at guessing world accents! Perhaps fellow readers will fare better."

As the entertainment editor at msnbc.com, it's my job to keep up on the latest celebrity news, from Heather Locklear's arrest to Britney's tour plans, possible move to New York, continuing court appearances ... well, you get the idea. And while gossip and celebrity news are not the only stories we produce for our section, it is among the most viewed content on the entire msnbc.com site.

So each day, I troll through the various celebrity news Web sites and blogs. For the most part, it's entertaining, and occasionally informative. It also can be disturbing, and has upon occasion forced me to question my role in this ever-expanding area of "news."

Wednesday morning, I stumbled upon this link on TMZ.com. It's just your garden variety paparazzi chasing a celeb (in this case, Keanu Reeves) down the street, yelling remarks at him as he tries to go to an appointment, pick up his dry cleaning, what have you. It was the remarks, however, that caught my ear. Insidious, hostile, cheap shots solely intended to provoke a reaction from Reeves, resulting in (Tah-duh!) a brilliant video moment that would equal a big payday for the photographers in hot pursuit. Reeves did not take the bait, but I wondered aloud to one of my colleagues, "How does he keep from popping that jerk in the mouth?"

For many in Hollywood, this scenario is all too familiar. Some celebs seek it out, while others take it as part of their daily lives, and bite their tongues and keep moving.

The paparazzi are doing this because magazines will buy the photos, because YouTube will get millions of clicks on the video, because you will buy it, read it, watch it -- because it sells.

Hey, I read it too, and I'm not trying to put myself out of a job, but it does give you pause. Msnbc.com does not buy paparazzi photos or video, but we often cover the stories that bloom from such encounters. We get comments from readers all the time saying they are tired of reading about the tawdry details of celebrity lives. The high number of clicks on such stories would seem to indicate otherwise.

So during this election season, if you are really tired of it, vote with your mouse, and your wallet. 

The death of Paul Newman this past weekend was a big blow to the world of actors who can both act and carry off being a hot-shot celebrity. In Hollywood these days, they don't make 'em like they used to.

It seems way too many movie stars today are known as much or more for what they do off the silver screen as for what they do on it. And to me, the ability to suspend my disbelief in the theater is muddled by my inability to get some actor or actress' tabloid exploits out of my head.

The stars themselves are not entirely to blame. Newman certainly didn't come of age as a movie star in today's media culture. But think about Daniel Day Lewis or Ed Norton or Viggo Mortensen or Laura Linney or Cate Blanchett or a host of others. When you see these stars in a movie you buy into the role they are playing because you haven't spent the past six months reading about how many kids they've birthed in France or whose couch they're jumping up and down on.

AP file

Paul Newman in "Cool Hand Luke." Nobody can eat 50 eggs ... and no one should be on 50 magazine covers a year.

I find it hard to watch Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Aniston and so on in a movie these days without being able to erase their tabloid persona. Could you imagine watching Paul Newman in "Cool Hand Luke" and think to yourself, "Gosh, he's really a great actor, but I wish he hadn't dumped J.Lo and bad-mouthed Brooke Shields like that."

For many people, the philanthropic work that Newman did through his line of food products made him a star really worth celebrating. But there are many stars who do great charity work for a number of causes. Jolie and Pitt are probably first among them when it comes to putting their money where their mouth is and shedding light on the underprivileged. Yet somehow it just doesn't measure up for a public that can't stomach the millions they're paid for pictures of their latest babies.

The sad thing is that Jolie, Pitt, Cruise and others have all proven that they're not big stars for no reason -- they can act. But it's being lost in the glare of the spotlight they live in. In a recent episode of the HBO show "Entourage," Ari the agent tells his young client Vincent Chase that he's not worried about whether Vince can act, he just wants him to be a movie star. It was a classic piece of dialogue that, to me, exposes what really matters in Hollywood.

But, hey, maybe I'm way off base and moviegoers actually like to think they know the stars on screen. Does the endless stuff you read about some celebrities nowadays taint their ability to make you believe in a character they're playing? Do you miss the days of less-is-more when it comes to your favorite stars' lives?