Maxim Loses All Credibility
Posted by John Campeaon 15. 11. 2007in News Chat
Let’s face it, Maxim Magazine is a publication that mostly just tries to be legal porn. That’s why most of us pick up issues from time to time… to see as close to naked as possible famous woman wearing the skimpiest and most revealing things they can get away with without actually being porn.
But for a while now Maxim has been trying to increase its presence in the movie world. I often get PR emails from them letting me know about their recent movie feature and wanting me to link to it (I usually don’t, but once in a while they have some decent stuff). However, their attempt as a magazine to gain some credibility as a film source has just come to a quick and sudden death. They just named Sarah Michelle Gellar as Woman of the Year.
And why did they name her as such? As my friend Erik over at Cinematical puts it:
Gellar has only three roles lined up for 2008 — two Korean horror remakes (ugh) and Alice. And she claims to be promoting a bunch of different movies? Like …. Southland Tales? Because that’s the only movie you’re in. (Oh wait, she’s also in Suburban Girl, but that doesn’t go straight to DVD until January.) Buffy is Back! Actually, technically, she’s not back — Gellar does not have plans to reprise the Buffy character in the near future. So that’s a lie.
Just recently I did an article on Gellar I called “Remember When Sarah Michelle Gellar Was Hot?” in which I pointed out the womans career has gone nowhere but DOWN since her long lost glory days of Buffy fame. She’s been exposed for not having a lot of natural talent and has failed to impress at all up to this point with her movie career. She’s a BEAUTIFUL women, and I do think there is hope she can develop and improve… but as of right now she’s just one step above Neve Campbell.
I’m sorry, but calling Sarah Michelle Gellar “Woman of the Year” based on her HOT movie career is like giving Steven Seagal the lifetime acheivement award at the Oscars.
I’ll be ignoring all Maxim PR emails to me from now on.
This post was written by :
John Campea who has written 6783 posts on The Movie Blog
visit author's website | Contact the Author
Um, when did Maxim EVER have any credibility?
BTW, love the graphic links to your top features.
Vic
ditto Vic, saying Maxim lost credibility here is like a new article saying Courtney Love lost her dignity.
Yeah, I don’t read Maxim, but I would have put Megan Fox on the cover as woman of the year vbefore Gellar. Foxy came outta nowhere and, even though her acting sucks, she is a very pretty girl. Gellar is BEYOND old news. Paparazzi don’t even bother to tail her since they’d fall asleep at the wheel on account of how boring she is.
Maybe her agent paid for a nice PR injection before the proverbial nail is struck into her career coffin.
I am almost positive that these are paid features. Although I see nothing wrong with it. It just doesn’t mean it is all that socially relevent.
That being said. I will never be opposed to see SMG scantily clad outside of my head.
There’s so much digital work done on that cover it doesnt even really look like her anymore
“legal porn”?
When did porn become illegal, and why didn’t I hear about it? I might be in some trouble.
I used to read Maxim back when I was in the Corps. Then is stopped when I figured out they’re pretty much a one note magazine. All they do is put up the prettiest face they can find for the moment, then watch as that young womans career goes nowhere. I much more prefer reading Playboy anyway since they have better articles.
Kristina is right though they should have put up Megan Fox.
“I much more prefer reading Playboy anyway since they have better articles.”
Wow, I’ve never heard THAT one before…
Just kiddin’ ya, bud. :-D
Vic
southland tales / promo budget / $$$$ / maxim.
Playboy has articles?
Ehh I dont care. I like her as an actress and she’s fine, so I’m good with it, hahha.
mmmm I can’t help it…I got a think for the way she looks. I think shes really hot.
More pictures plz.
She needs to gain her boob weight back, before I can believe this air brushed picture represents her actual body shape. Her chest is non-existent on the red carpet because of her thinness.
Even though I sort of mildly liked reading one feature on Maxim on-line (the article was bringing old ‘canceled’ TV shows back) I also have to question the choice here.
Is she hot? Yes.
Has she had any good films in the past year, let alone two, awww shit, lets just say…four years. Hell no. Her last box office hit (if one were to call it that) was ‘The Grudge’.
Would I think Eva Mendez, Jessica Biel, Megan Fox, Keira Knightley…etc…etc…etc…is hotter? Yes. Maybe some women are like films: Opinions are subjective. I’d like to believe that, but the reality is only Sarah was available for a photo shoot. (I think Blender took Eva)
Here in my country, I used to buy MAXIM.
But I prefer FHM because it has been in my country for so many years.
Maxim is very expensive here, which is why I stick to FHM.
Steven Seagal should definitely get a lifetime achievement award.