news

Report: Hell’s Angels Planned To Kill Mick Jagger

2008-03-03T03:50:00.000-08:00

Mick Jagger, the singer from the Rolling Stones, managed to escape an assassination attempt almost 40 years ago by Hells Angels, according to a BBC documentary.

A new documentary from BBC that will be transmitted on BBC Radio 4 on Monday will disclose the fact that Jagger was the target of an attack of the motorcycle gang after they had a dispute about the security of the concert.

The details of the plan were revealed by Mark Young, an FBI agent, for “The FBI at 100” documentary.

According to Tom Mangold, the presenter of the documentary, Jagger refused to continue working with the Hells Angels after a fan was killed by one of its members during the Altamont concert in 1969.

The Rolling Stones hired the motorcycles to provide security for their concert near San Francisco where security was poor.

The crowd was terrorized by the bikers and one of the members stabbed to death Meredith Hunter, 18, in front of the stage.

After the concert Jagger refused to work with the bikers anymore and they felt deceived. So the gang planned to kill Jagger at his holiday home in Long Island, New York, according to BBC.

According to Young, the members of the Hells Angels took a boat and set out to kill Jagger.

Mangold told the Sunday Telegraph: "The Hells Angels were so angered by Jagger's treatment of them that they decided to kill him. They planned the attack from the sea so they could enter his property from the garden and avoid security at the front. The boat was hit by a storm and all of the men were thrown overboard. All survived and there was not said to have been any further attempt on Jagger's life," Reuters reports.

In 1972 Alan Passaro was tried for Hunter’s death, but later was acquitted as the jury decided that he was acting in self defense as Hunter had a handgun on her.

It is not known if Jagger was informed of the plot against him.

Review: 'New Amsterdam' shoots blanks

2008-03-03T02:33:00.000-08:00

Tim Goodman

Monday, March 3, 2008

Printable Version

Email This Article

(0)

New Amsterdam: Drama. 9 p.m. Tuesday on Fox. Second episode 9 p.m. Thursday. Regularly scheduled 9 p.m. Mondays.

They spent a lot of money on the pilot of "New Amsterdam," but maybe not enough on the writers. Or, more accurately, the plot.

"New Amsterdam," which premieres Tuesday, has a long, strange (and funny) history to it.

In July, during the Television Critics Association press tour in Los Angeles, Fox trotted out "New Amsterdam" to a room full of critics, some of whom were a little perplexed about the premise, namely that the main character is an immortal New York City cop. He was born in Amsterdam more than 400 years ago, came to New Amsterdam, which of course became New York City, and saved an American Indian girl by blocking the sword meant for her. That was 1642. Her tribe repaid the favor by giving him immortality, with a catch: When he meets his true love, he will die.

Confusing - and corny. But that could describe any number of shows.

Armed with all kinds of plot questions, critics were just about to dive into the fray when what can best be described as the "sci-fi wing" of the critics took charge. They said the show seemed a lot like "Highlander." The producers said they'd never seen "Highlander." How could you never see or know about "Highlander," they were asked. It's huge (which, of course, is highly debatable). Anyway, someone else said the series was awfully similar to Pete Hamill's novel, "Forever." The producers said they hadn't been aware of "Forever" until after the series got started. For his part, Hamill told the Associated Press that the similarities were "astonishing," but that he knew better than to try to sue, because those cases cost a fortune and never end justly. Hamill said he'd rather spend the money on his grandkids. "You've got to laugh," he said.

In July, there was much laughing. The sci-fi wing of the critics brigade would not let this go. And others began pressing for information on how a guy who doesn't age can live in Manhattan and not be seen by people he's been involved with. Like people in his neighborhood who are growing older while he's not. Or how he changed his name all the time - it's now John Amsterdam (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau) and got a Social Security number, etc.

The producers didn't have very convincing answers. But at least Coster-Waldau is Dutch. That part makes sense. Though, if John Amsterdam has been in Manhattan for 400 years and hasn't picked up a New York accent - which he hasn't - that may be an issue with the accuracy police.

What does help is that Amsterdam (he used to be John York, once, by the way), is a master forger. (As it turns out, he's also a master furniture maker and very, very good at other things as well - perhaps the perk of having a lot of lifetimes to kill.) He calls his dogs by a number - like 36. His snappish (but not curious enough) new partner, Eva (Zuleikha Robinson), reminds him of the past. "You're just like my last 609 girlfriends," he says. Yes, it's supposed to be funny but no, he's not trying to reveal himself (though he's an alcoholic as well, and proclaims at his AA meeting that he's been sober 15,495 days).

In fact, Eva never gets any of the hints or jokes he drops. (And why would she - nobody's immortal, right?) But it turns out there are people in Manhattan who know Amsterdam has been around for a long, long time: his children.

Apparently he's got a lot of them. They end up being much older than he is, of course, but they keep his secret. There's precious little freshness in "New Amsterdam," so no need to point out his kids before you watch. If you watch.

Which brings up a good question. Should you watch? "New Amsterdam" is very average - and in many aspects is well below average. It never feels like much more than a cliche. The writers put him in situations where it doesn't take a genius to figure out what happened. (Fox sent two episodes and it was pretty clear who was the killer in each one.) So, it's not a fascinating police procedural - nor should it be. The main character is immortal - that should be the hook.

But that just brings up all those unanswered questions about the rules at work here. Amsterdam has kids. He's been married. Was that not love? He says he's been in love. But it must not have been true love, because he's still alive. Could it be that this whole soul mate thing is more complicated? For example, if you meet your true love, do you die instantly? Do you just start to age, then figure it out and have to wait like the rest of us to see how it ends? Car accident? High cholesterol? Boredom?

Ah, but the pilot has a little twist. Amsterdam is just about to nab a suspect in the subway when he has a heart attack. J'accuse! Well, sure, but who? There were a lot of women on that platform when he had the heart attack. "New Amsterdam" lets this play out for, oh, about a minute until it confirms the obvious: The woman who saved him was a doctor. It's her! You're a detective, go find her!

Well, he doesn't. But in the second episode, he's basically given her name and place of work. Which means - what? That she's "the one"? Yeah, probably. We know her name is Dr. Sara Dillane (Alexie Gilmore) and that she's a permanent cast member. So much for suspense. But the producers already said he's not going to keel over soon. (A professional guess: He starts getting really sick in the fifth season, right before there are enough episodes to syndicate, then dies in the last episode, which conveniently occurs during sweeps?)

The gray area of true love and soul mates is annoying. If she gave him a heart attack the first time they got near each other (not to be a buzz kill, but she actually kills him), what's next? Aneurysm?

Maybe this can all be explained away by the sci-fi crowd. Maybe all the plot holes can be covered up with believable explanations. But beyond the questions raised so far, "New Amsterdam" is pretty hokey, not especially compelling and altogether flat (except for the shots of a very vibrant New York City).

You can be immortal if you want, but that doesn't make it any less boring.

'Semi-Pro' fails to score big win

2008-03-03T01:14:00.000-08:00

New Line Cinema

The latest Will Ferrell comedy did not meet expectations at the box office.

The Will Ferrell comedy is No. 1 with $15.3 million, but it was expected to shoot much higher.

By Josh Friedman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
March 3, 2008

The gloomiest week in New Line Cinema's 40-year history ended with a clunk as the Will Ferrell basketball comedy "Semi-Pro" opened to an estimated $15.3 million, below box-office expectations for about $10 million more.

In a hollow victory, "Semi-Pro," produced for $57 million, ranked No. 1 for the weekend, followed by Sony Pictures' holdover thriller "Vantage Point," which took in $13 million, and Paramount Pictures' family fantasy "The Spiderwick Chronicles" at $8.8 million.

Photo Gallery

Box office top 10

Photo Gallery

Will Ferrell sports movie primer

Photo Gallery

Will Ferrell: Life in Pictures

Related Stories
-	Review: 'Semi-Pro'
-	Will Ferrell smells good to Old Spice
-	Will Ferrell and the dream of a multifaceted future

Executives at New Line -- which learned late last week that the studio would be merged into corporate sibling Warner Bros. by parent Time Warner Inc. as a cost-saving move -- declined to comment Sunday on the box-office results.

Best known for the blockbuster "The Lord of the Rings" series, New Line will continue as a production label but is expected to make fewer, and cheaper, movies. Hundreds of jobs probably will be eliminated in the transition.

Despite extensive marketing by New Line and Ferrell himself, "Semi-Pro" opened well below the star's other recent sports comedies. "Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby" started at $47 million and "Blades of Glory" opened with $33 million.

Those two were rated PG-13, while the raunchy "Semi-Pro" had a restrictive R rating that kept young moviegoers away. But even "Old School," one of Ferrell's few other R-rated comedies, opened better, launching to $17.5 million in 2003.

Industrywide results were down from the same weekend in 2007 for the third straight time. A year ago, total receipts were 21% higher as the comedy "Wild Hogs" led the way with almost $40 million.

Even so, box-office revenue is up about 8% year-to-date, according to data tracker Media by Numbers, thanks to a strong January.

Two other new movies matched industry expectations.

"The Other Boleyn Girl," a period romance starring Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson and Eric Bana, took in $8.3 million to rank No. 4 for the weekend, according to Sony's estimate. The movie, made for $35 million, was a co-production with Relativity Media and Universal Pictures' Focus Features division.

"Boleyn Girl" averaged a solid $7,000 per theater at a moderately wide 1,200 locations, an indication that it could hang tough for several weeks in the marketplace, said Rory Bruer, Sony's president of domestic distribution.

The movie got mixed reviews but a decent reception from audience members surveyed: 80% rated it "excellent" or "very good," Bruer said.

As expected, the PG-13 film skewed female, with women and girls making up 72% of the customer base. Two-thirds of the audience was under 35.

Summit Entertainment's romantic fable "Penelope" also skewed female, opening to about $4 million and ranking No. 8 or 9 depending on the final results. Studios issue weekend estimates early every Sunday that include projections for that day, but final results come out Mondays.

The PG-rated movie, starring Christina Ricci, James McAvoy, Reese Witherspoon and Catherine O'Hara, was produced for less than $15 million by Stone Village Pictures and Witherspoon's Type A Films. Summit is spending a modest $10 million to market "Penelope" domestically.

Business climbed by an encouraging 57% from Friday to Saturday, and audience members surveyed by CinemaScore gave it an "A-minus" grade, said Richard Fay, president of domestic distribution at upstart studio Summit.

"Vantage Point," whose ensemble cast includes Dennis Quaid, William Hurt and Sigourney Weaver, held up strongly in its second weekend, dropping 43%. The movie, produced for about $40 million, has grossed $41 million domestically through 10 days. It is shaping up as what Hollywood types call "a solid programmer for adults."

The holdover science-fiction adventure "Jumper" continued to perform well for 20th Century Fox. It took in $7.6 million domestically, lifting its total to $66.8 million through three weekends. The picture, starring Hayden Christensen and Samuel L. Jackson, has grossed about $150 million worldwide.

It cost $85 million to produce and is being backed by an expensive marketing campaign.