In defense of Katherine Heigl?
EW’s Ken Tucker took it upon himself to write a blog post on why Katherine Heigl doesn’t deserve the negativity that is coming at her from all sides after the release of her disastrous rom-com The Ugly Truth. As someone who has disliked Heigl for some time now, I thought I’d give Mr. Tucker a chance to convince me otherwise. To quote KT:
As a result of this and other perceived sins, the L.A. Times has published a piece about contempt for Heigl, and a blogger I respect, the first-class TV writer Ken Levine (whose terrific blog you can also find my blogroll), has published a ferocious entry about Heigl as a diva. I respectfully disagree.
Me, I’ll defend her. Her Letterman appearance, if you watch the whole thing, was funny and smart. You have to be on your toes with Dave, and she really engaged with him. She showed genuine, non-diva curiosity about things other than herself (asking Dave about his own, long-gone dog, Bob, for example).
Tucker has a point. Heigl is no diva. But that’s only because she hasn’t earned that title yet. She’s just another TV star trying to make it in the pictures. Worse, her choice of film roles makes it look like she’s quickly heading down the Jennifer Aniston road. Before you know it, Heigl will be playing second fiddle to a canine in her only box office hit.