We’ve got something much more important to tell you, something that will cause the world’s population to sigh in unison.

It’s James Blunt. He might write all sorts of songs that get used in chick flicks, love albums and as a weapon to torture terror suspects, but this could soon stop. You see, James Blunt has promised to sew his mouth shut for the right amount of money. Or never step foot in a recording studio again, at least.

We’re usually quite reluctant to back any sort of fundraiser, but this one is too good to ignore. So pull the cushions from the sofa and hunt for all those fluffy two pence pieces. As he’s come to realise, the general music appreciating public don’t take that kindly to the songs of James Blunt. So he’s prepared to reach a compromise with us all. Speaking to Uncut magazine, he said:

“If someone is prepared to pay me enough, I’ll stop.”

Buts what’s the catch? Well, from what we can tell, he won’t settle for the £2.36 that was rustled up between the various hecklerspray writers. You know he’ll be a complete twat and demand millions in order to stop making more records that contain the words “love” “dove”, “forever”, “kiss”, “danger”, “octopus” “cuddle” and “chat.”

There are always plenty of fundraisers for various causes. If we need to feed the world again, Bono is quick to step in. When it comes to stopping the UK reaching a decent temperature, you can rely on Madonna to wiggle her arse on stage for a bit and tell us we’re all shafting the planet by leaving the kitchen light on all day.

If only these people would get involved and help to raise some money for a really good cause – to ban James Blunt forever. We’re sure our buddy Lee Ryan would love to do a gig for us. And we know he wouldn’t con you by miming at our first annual ‘James Blunt The Cunt Aid’. See, we can even write songs that rhyme like him!

If that falls through, though, we know we could always rely on our darling readers to donate a couple of quid. After supplying you with thousands of badly-spelt and grammatically-incorrect stories, we’re sure you’ll repay us with a charitable gift to a worthy cause. Not that we’re forcing you or anything, but you’ll only have yourself to blame if you continue to see a weepy man continue to make music that is no better then the local SuperBrewed-up busker at a bus stop.

Blunt also appears to be going a bit mental, and has also taken an unprovoked swipe at cake. What’s cake ever done to him or anyone? It’s, sweet, sticky and the reason why we can’t walk very far without wheezing heavily. Seemingly pissed off with the fact that people find him annoying, Blunt said:

“If someone puts some chocolate cake in front of you and you don’t like it, but there’s some cheesecake to the right, would you start screaming at the chef? Just eat the cheesecake without calling the chef the Antichrist.”

What? Does he mean Satan is actually made up of yummy icing, a calorie-laden body and not a fiery hot centre? Umm, even our minds aren’t warped enough to work that one out. Answers in the comment box below please.

Mr Blunt, if you name your price we will attempt to raise the desired amount to stop you from making music ever again. A dedicated Paypal account will be set up for people to donate to. A deal is a deal after all. If not, we’ll, er… get our PR people to send you cake and make you cry.

For example, the movie that Kevin Smith wants to make after his new flick Zack And Miri Make A Porno is a horror called Red State. Trouble is, Smith says no studio will touch Red State because it’s bleak and dark and utterly noncommercial.

A Kevin Smith film that’s bleak and dark and noncommercial? Is Kevin Smith remaking Jersey Girl already? Right? Right? Because, you know, Jersey Girl was bleak, and it was dark, and, um… yeah. Would someone mind calling us a taxi, please?

This is a bad time you get your movie made, people. All the stock market crashes have hit Hollywood right where it hurts. As we speak, movie executives are trading in their cigars for cigar-shaped clods of animal turd, actors are trading in Scientology for other, cheaper spurious religions invented by weirdos, and actresses are storing up their bulimia vomit in Tupperware in case they get peckish later. It’s a bad time to get your movie made.

Things gave got so bad that not even Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson can get films made, so it’s bound to hurt people like Kevin Smith even harder.

True, Kevin Smith’s films are all made for about 50p anyway, but since nobody actually goes to see them that’s 50p that a movie producer could spend insulating his roof with hay. And that means that the movie Kevin Smith wants to make next – the horror Red State – probably isn’t going to get made at all.

Of course, things aren’t helped by the fact that – by Kevin Smith’s own admission – Red State sounds so completely abhorrent that nobody would make it even if studio executives could ejaculate gold bars. In a podcast with Cinemablend, Kevin Smith detailed exactly why Red State doesn’t stand a chance:

“It’s decidedly non-commercial, it’s really fuckin bleak and dark, so bleak that it makes The Dark Knight look like Strawberry Shortcake. There’s no character to root for, everybody dies. It’s a series of insane, bad choices based on moral or immoral quandaries. Based on all that nobody wants to write a check for it and I kind of get it. I’m not sitting here going ‘What? Why wouldn’t you want to finance a loser?’”

A series of insane bad choices based on moral or immoral quandaries featuring no character to root for? No wonder nobody wants to finance Red State, Kevin. You’ve essentially written The Ben Affleck Story.

Still, we can definitely see Kevin Smith’s tactic here – by bragging about what a notoriously disgusting movie he’s written, Red State’s bound to build up a swell of internet popularity, and that might just be enough to push it over the top. It’s even working with us, to some extent.

And even if it doesn’t get made as it is, Kevin Smith shouldn’t give up hope – change a few bits around, swap a character for a funny-looking puppet and, bingo, you’ve got the script for Saw 6.

Read more:

Weekly Blend: Guest Starring Kevin Smith - Cinemablend

In what has to be a nudge to the British public to remind everyone that it still existed, last night Big Brother made the remaining housemates nominate each other face to face on live TV. Then Sara and Lisa – the two housemates with the most votes – had some sort of convoluted quiz thing to go through before one of them won £50,000. Except they both ended up splitting the prize in two and doing a kind of piggyback thing around the room for a bit. They’re still up, though.

Are you still with us? Sara and Lisa are still up for Big Brother eviction tomorrow. That’s the important part. Well, maybe important isn’t the word…

So who’ll go tomorrow? Here are the Big Brother betting odds for Sara to win the show, with help from Paddy Power…

Sara – Not an incredible surprise that Sara’s up for Big Brother eviction this week, since she’s had such a bizarre time of it lately. First off, her cockteasy exploits with Darnell ended up shitting the bed in dramatic style when he had a gigantic shuddering meltdown and started calling her an ‘ugly bitch’ in that unsettlingly angry way of his. And then Rex made her cry, although that was more predictable – Rex makes everyone cry because he’s got a weird lumpy ginger skull. Anyway, since Sara’s up for Big Brother eviction against Lisa, we’d have to guess that she doesn’t stand much chance of surviving, partly due to Lisa’s psychological mother-figure position in the Big Brother house, and partly because listening to Sara speak is as painful as shitting giant shards of glass. Current Big Brother betting odds -33/1

Tomorrow – Lisa’s Big Brother eviction betting odds. But if that’s too long to wait – or you feel like making more money than you know what to do with – head right over to Paddy Power to see the full list of Big Brother betting odds.

But no one seems to have put any real thought into how this has affected the girl on a financial level – yes, we’ll all happily point out that she’s gone mental, we’ll laugh (and wince) when we see her ladybits on show in public and we’ll wonder why she’s such a glutton for punishment when she’s rumoured to make a second appearance at the MTV VMAs.

Then, when all the other news has run out, when she’s calmed down and stopped being as mad, when the kids are safely hidden away with Kevin Federline, people start resorting to cold, hard figures. Namely the ones that say Britney Spears has spent around $700,000 on legal fees trying to get her kids back.

Then the smirk about the situation fades and we are left feeling a bit bad for her again. She’s got quite good at making us not take the piss out of her, actually. The crafty wench.

Whereas the lawyers working on the legal battle between Britney and K-Fed, regarding custody of their children, aren’t just crafty – they’re incredible, evil geniuses. One attorney involved in the case was raking in a reported $700 per hour – PER HOUR – for her services. Now, we all know parasi… lawyers are renowned for being expensive, but by god that’s insane.

The fact that the $407,000 that this Stacy Phillips is claiming is for four months work, well – it makes the blood drip out of our eyes with more force than we’ve ever seen before. There’s rage, anger, vitriol and righteous fury, then there’s this. And we don’t know what it is yet – we need another naming session. Answers below, kids.

Compare Phillips’ rates to those of Britney’s family lawyer, who was re-hired and managed to negotiate increased visitation rights for the mentally fragile poplet – $60,000 for two months work. Still a hell of a lot of money, but Jesus H tapdancing fuckery it isn’t nearly half a million dollars.

The hecklerspray sarcasm/reasonably funny quip generating machine seems to have broken in the wake of this news, being replaced by one that only produces sheer, undiluted rage. Oh well – the shoe still fits.

The question could be raised to the lawyers involved in this case of “how do you sleep at night?” but the simple answer would clearly be that of Rainier Wolfcastle from The Simpsons, who when asked the same question responded: “On top of a pile of money, with many beautiful women.”

Or they’d just gleefully ignore the question and drive off in a money-filled car, to a house made of platinum-laced gold to eat money salad with sauteed money and a side dish of roast money. The absolute, god-awful parasites. They haven’t even managed to get Britney her kids back, so what’s the point in paying them? Surely they’re not worth that much.

Surprisingly enough – or not – the fees are being contested by Britney Spears’ current legal team. Who are probably on more than minimum wage themselves, let’s be honest here, and while the girl can afford it, it doesn’t mean she should be fleeced endlessly.

In fact, she should probably donate some cash our way for being really nice to her.

It’s not that we didn’t expect him to go down that route, but it does still irritate when it actually happens. After all, he is still a dull nobody that would have faded into obscurity had he kept his mouth shut about the relationship and consequent split.

So obviously he’s gone for the old ‘talk about her to the press in an annoying fashion, just so people don’t forget who I am for at least two extra weeks, and places like that amazing hecklerspray.com will write about me again’ route that so many ineffectual Z-listers opt for.

Well we won’t, John Mayer. We wo… oh. We have. Bugger.

See, after the breakup – no, not the movie with Jennifer and another of her exes Vince Vaughn – Mayer decided to talk to anyone who would listen, spunking his intimate knowledge around as many media outlets as he knew would report it. And some that wouldn’t.

Speaking to reporters in the street, apparently, Mayer said:

“There’s no lying, there’s no cheating, there’s no nothing. Jennifer Aniston is the smartest, most sophisticated person I think I have ever met. People are different, people have different chemistry. I ended a relationship to be alone, because I don’t want to waste somebody’s time if something’s not right.”

Well isn’t that just sweet, eh? It’s obviously as dull and middle of the road as we expected from the king of mediocrity, but at least there’s no real venom in it. We can sleep soundly at night. Though it is still the rampant fame-hungry behaviour of a man desperate to cling on to some of the limelight that fleetingly glanced across his brow for such a short amount of time.

And it did clearly irritate Jennifer Aniston, if those magical sources we love so much are to be believed. Speaking to the press, one ’source’ said these words, and by the looks of things they were frothing at the mouth when they did so:

“Jennifer will never kiss and tell, but it’s she who ended the relationship. John’s childish behaviour only confirms she was right to dump him. Now he’s acting like a spoiled child. Expect Jennifer to behave like a lady.”

The righteous fury didn’t end there though, and the source (of rage) went on:

“Jennifer was tired of paying for everything. Cobwebs come flying out of John’s wallet when he opens it. John liked living like a movie star when he was with her. Jennifer would never say anything, but you could tell it irritated her.”

Which probably means Jennifer had to pay for this meal that we reported on in such world-changing fashion oh so long ago. We do remember seeing Mayer pat his pockets and shrug his shoulders when the bill arrived, showing the international sign language for ‘whoopsie – me gone dun and forgot mah wallet!’.

Well John – you’re going to have to pay for your own meals now. Take that!

The Welshman, who no one seems to realise is Welsh, has been recommended to receive a caution by the Crown Prosecution Service for his alleged actions, should he plead guilty to charges next month. If, however, he pleads not guilty then he could be looking at more severe penalties, all according to the bastion of truth, honour and glory that is The Sun newspaper.

Though, let’s be honest here – he probably wouldn’t be looking at any really severe charges. A fine, a slap on the wrist and a bruised ego, leaving the Baler ready to take on Terminator 4 and Batman 3. Unless the authorities were to decide on making an example of him and imprisoned him for life – alledgely pushing your mum and sister about is no laughing matter, after all.

Especially when they apparently want money from you.

Last month saw Christian Bale arrested on suspicion of assault, and while everyone went mental thinking the guy had beaten some evil-doers to death with their own shoes, we soon discovered it was allegedly for getting mad and pushing his family about a bit. Not that we condone that kind of behaviour, but it was a bit of a let-down.

He didn’t even do it in his Batman costume, allegedly.

After being released on bail, Bale bailed from the UK to get back to work. That sentence was pretty unnecessary, but hecklerspray enjoys using the same word three times in a row, so hush down.

Anyway, rumours were flung around about the reasons for the alleged assault, until it was generally accepted that the row came about over money. Being rich and all, Bale was apparently expected to give over a fair wodge of cash for his sister’s kids, simply for sharing blood ties with these people. And he allegedly wasn’t happy, so he apparently made his feelings clear with some shouting and a push.

He didn’t, as some had hoped, beat up his clown sister. In his Batman costume. While on fire. Upside down. Such a let-down, honestly.

And now, bringing this whole debacle to an end, hopefully, we are greeted with the news that the only thing that will befall Christian Bale – should he plead guilty to the alleged assault – is a caution. All this news, all this coverage, all the speculation over the ‘curse’ of The Dark Knight and he’s getting told ‘don’t do it again’.

Maybe Robert Downey Jr can provoke a better reaction from the Baler after his non-too flattering comments about Batman, and we can get some genuine controversy going. A fistfight. In public. With both actors in full costume.

It’s not like Iron Man or The Dark Knight need any more publicity, it’s just that we need something exciting to happen that isn’t death, attempted murder, countries getting invaded or some crap sporting event in a country where people don’t exactly enjoy what you would call ‘freedom’. You know – just to keep us going.

Please?

Now sure, if it’s someone like the Baler losing ridiculous amounts of weight (or putting it back on to be Batman), or generally any kind of actor that’s willing to put their body on the line and actually change themselves physically or mentally to help their performance, then fair enough.

But when you’re Charlie Sheen? Come on. You don’t really deserve that much for your acting talent, do you? Sure, you were entertaining in ‘Hot Shots’, but does that mean you should be able to command $825,000 (about £420,000) per episode of ‘Two and a Half Men’, thus making you the highest paid TV actor in the US?

Apparently it does. Colour us confused.

It’s difficult to argue that there’s much genuine talent on show when Charlie takes to the screen on ‘Two and a Half Men’.

Yes, he is capable in his role and can get some laughs from you – though they do tend to be the kind of laughs where you want to immediately gouge your throat out for creating such a sound in the first place, then probably spay yourself – but the fact of the matter is, he isn’t really acting.

Yes folks, Charlie earns what is approaching a million dollars per episode, overall around $20 million a season, playing a man who prefers his life of womanising, lazy luxury to that of a man who actually works hard to earn what he deserves.

He’s being paid a crapload of money to pretend as if he’s actually Charlie Sheen. Which he is. Sometimes there is no justice in this world. Just behind Sheen on the earn-o-meter was William Petersen of ‘CSI’.

Like we said – no justice.

Craig Tomashoff, editor of TV Guide, in which the results of the highest-earner poll were posted, said:

“[Sheen and Petersen] are at the very top of their game and are the best at what they do. You’d expect them to be at the top of the scale.”

Which, frankly, comes across as a load of rubbish. There are far better TV actors out there who deserve far more money for what they do.

Rather than appealing to the lowest common denominator (while at the same time barely even acting), these people push themselves, see what they do as an artform and truly care enough to not make countless spinoffs, specials and other watered-down rubbish that completely devalues the original artistic vision.

Basically, hecklerspray is just annoyed that the cast and crew of The Wire weren’t just given all the money in the world as a thanks for being incredible. That would have been deserved in every way, shape and form.

Oh well, at least Charlie Sheen can spend his vast amounts of cash entertaining us all outside of his televisual work. Thanks, Charlie!

But, in all of this possibly-illegal motherclown-beating kerfuffle, one question has stood out above all others – what makes a newly-minted megastar like Christian Bale start whaling on his mother and sister on the happiest day of his life?

Turns out the reason might be cash. According to reports today, Christian Bale kicked off after his sister asked him for £100,000 to help raise her three children. Frankly we’re disgusted – doesn’t Christian Bale know that all children have the right to receive occasional gifts of more than the average British annual working wage that their mother has managed to guilt out of their moviestar uncle? Shame on you, Mr Bale. Shame on you indeed.

One of the downsides to being famous is that your success tends to attract unwanted curiosity – people know that you’re loaded and they want to take a little slice of your cash for themselves.

When this happens the best thing you can do is to retreat into the bosom of your family. But if you’re Christian Bale, and it’s your family that’s doing the begging, well then you’re pretty much effed up the bum.

That’s apparently the reason for Christian Bale’s still-bemusing assault arrest this week. For the newcomers among you, Christian Bale was arrested on Tuesday on suspicion of assaulting his mother and sister right before the London premiere of The Dark Knight. He denies the charges and his family denies calling the police.

Since then, Christian Bale has been bailed and the assault has been described as a strong verbal attack, possibly combined with a mild push. At first the reason for this alleged attack was that Bale’s mother was slagging off his wife, but now The Sun has spoken to a source who claims that Christian Bale got a bit shirty when his sister Sharon asked for £100,000 to help raise her kids:

“Christian is a very wealthy young man and was asked to help his sister out financially. He was asked to loan her £100,000 but he refused and that caused an almighty row. During that row, the women claim, he assaulted them by pushing and shoving them… They are both devastated that it has come to this but want him to be taught a lesson.”

Yeah! Jesus, Christian Bale is such a bastard, isn’t he? He deserves to be taught a lesson – the lesson that you’re supposed to financially bail out any of your relatives who appear to be either greedy or living beyond their means whenever they want just because you’ve starred in a couple of films about a funny-voiced crimefighter in a gimp suit.

Sharon Bale could hardly ask any other members of her family for support, could she? Her mother’s a part-time clown – what kind of financial help could she possibly offer? Those kids need £100,000, not a shipment of abnormally large shoes and a tiny spluttering car that keeps falling apart!

Still, not to worry – even though Christian Bale chose not to help his nieces and nephews out, they’ll still get their cash one way or the other. Probably from all the royalties from their forthcoming memoirs I Wear Rags Because My Uncle Is Stingy And Allegedly A Bit Violent.

Yes, the Fresh Prince has taken most of his time in-between promoting Hancock defending himself from rabid media types hurling these accusations at him.

We at hecklerspray feel very sorry for Will, so we’re starting a ‘Help Will Smith Fund’ where we will collect aluminium cans and sell them at local scrap yards to raise funds to help young Willy defend himself…

What’s that? He earned how much?! Oh. Well sod him then.

Yes, poor old Will will have to console himself with the fact that he’s only managed to be the highest earning Hollywood type of the last year, bringing home around $80 million clams (around 40 million British clams) for Jada Pinkett and the rest of the family. It will be hard, we’re sure, but there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Light made out of money, most likely. In a tunnel forged from gold-laced platinum.

We’re not ones to be jealous, nor are we ones to judge – much – but in this case we’re jealous and we may just have to judge ol’ big Willie. It is interesting to see that his alleged affiliations with Scientology haven’t harmed his career in any way – the box office performance of Hancock is testament to that. Even ignoring the huge success of the man and his movies, the performance of Hancock has even gone so far as to be record-breaking – Smitty has managed eight movies in a row grossing more than $100,000,000. That’s one hundred million dollars. More than. Eight times. In a row.

Crikey.

So really – what does Will Smith have to do to fail? What cock up does he have to make before people decide they don’t like him any more? He’s tried bankruptcy, berating an old woman’s driving ability, a failed marriage, cussing Eminem, Men In Black II and possibly being one of those crazy Scientology types, and nothing has made the ever-hating public dislike him. In any way. Ever.

Maybe his constant appearances at the top of rich lists will change all this? Maybe not. Hecklerspray has bore witness to many popular celebrities over the years that have achieved something of a massive fall from grace, normally due to them earning vast amounts of money. Case in point – will anyone openly admit to liking Mike Myers (also in the top five rich list) any more? Thought not. Go back to the early/mid nineties and he was much-loved. This scientific theory doesn’t seem to apply to Will Smith though, and frankly it’s hurting our giant mind.

Maybe it’ll have to be something drastic, like threatening his mum and sister (allegedly), or… errm… getting pregnant underage…

Wow – this horse really is easy to flog when it’s dead!

First of all, who knew The Sun could be so bloody, bloody funny? Crack team! Sniff! Brilliant.

Daniel Kitson, Tony Law, Stewart Lee, John Hegley and Doug Stanhope combined couldn’t hope to come up with a single joke as original or brilliant.

And neither can we, so that’s why the rest of this article’s comedy will continue in a similar vein.

HA! Get it?! Vein! Drugs! Drugs go into veins and Pete Doherty likes drugs! In your face, Kitson!

So, where has all the money gone? Huh? Where? Where has it gone? Does anybody know?

We’re going to take a stab in the dark and suggest that perhaps maybe, just maybe, a little bit of it went here, a little bit there, and, perhaps most stupidly of all, quite a lot of it went on this.

We’re probably wrong though. Good luck crack team.

The same article claims that Babyshambles guitarist Mick Whitnall is planning to quit the band:

It says:

“(He) plans to quit the group for good because he has had enough of the travelling circus that surrounds Potty Pete. The axeman now intends to join AMY WINEHOUSE’s touring band.”

Good luck finding all your cash, Peter Doherty. We’ll toss you some pence next time we pass Tottenham Court Road tube station. If we have any left.

But get this – now Charlie Sheen is saying that he’s right and Denise Richards is wrong! That’s crazy – it’s like everything we know is a lie! Or it’s like Charlie Sheen and Denise Richards are a couple of utter shitbaskets who can’t stop bickering in public even though it’ll obviously be detrimental to their childrens’ development.

Anyway Denise Richards has been saying that she only made her reality TV show because she hasn’t got any money, and Charlie Sheen has hit back saying that actually he gives her loads of money. Not all of it, though – he needs the rest of it for his whore fund. That’s if he has a whore fund, obviously. Legally we wouldn’t like to speculate.

A question – has this sudden flurry of televised mad-eyed bitterness from Denise Richards recently made you a) eager to watch her E! TV show Denise Richards: It’s Complicated, b) eager to avoid her new E! TV show Denise Richards: It’s Complicated or c) eager to run over half your own head in a car and then stagger through a crowded area, all one-eyed and bloody with your half-head sloshing gore and membrane everywhere, pleading with screaming children to kill you because you’re in so much pain?

Funny, it was c) with us too. It’s always c). How strange.

Anyway, it doesn’t matter how you answered because Denise Richards has a reality show to promote, and if that means she has to crawl around as many TV shows as she can and pick away at the festering scab that is her divorce from Charlie Sheen in public with the least amount of dignity she can, then so be it.

So far Denise Richards has been on Larry King, the Today show and The View, and while Denise hasn’t quite managed to hit the heady heights of the time she strongly implied that Charlie Sheen was a prostitute-murdering borderline paedophile yet, she has often pointed out that the only reason she agreed to appear in her reality show was because she doesn’t have enough money to support her children.

That appears to have made Charlie Sheen angry. That’s not something you want to do, by the way, not unless you want to wind up getting called a “sad jobless pig” or a “fucking cunt. Fuck you. You’re a coward and a liar and fucking nigger alright so fuck you.”

Anyway, this time Charlie Sheen has decided to give a more sober response to Denise’s claims, via the medium of mathematics. The New York Post reports:

“Denise gets $52,000 a month tax-free in child support,” a Sheen insider fumed. “Most people in America can figure out how to live on that, but Denise can’t?” In addition to the child support, Richards got $60,000 a month (also tax-free) for two years in alimony – adding up to a whopping $1.44 million. Richards also gets a chunk of Sheen’s hot sitcom, “Two and a Half Men,” which “eventually will net her up to $25 million,” the source said.

Who to believe? Oh, it’s so difficult. On one hand, Charlie Sheen has got the backing of numbers and facts, but on the other hand Denise Richards looks like she hasn’t had a decent meal in years.

It’s a tricky one, that’s for certain.

Read more:

SHEEN CALLS RICHARDS UNREAL - NYP

It must be, because Anne Heche is moping around court because her TV show got cancelled and now she can’t even pay her child support bills.

Seriously, is this how bad the credit crunch has got? It’s scary to think that not even a famous actress like Anne Heche can pay for the upbringing of her children because the measly $65,000 she gets for each of her tiny movie roles won’t cover the cost of keeping her two international homes, her cars and all her other various expenses. Maybe we should stage a telethon for her.

Remember that TV show Men In Trees? No, us neither. Shame it wasn’t better, really, because if it was then maybe Anne Heche wouldn’t have had to go to court just now and whine about being so poor.

You’ll know Anne Heche, of course, as the woman who regularly does things that make you feel a little bit sorry for her until you realise that actually she’s being a dick. And the terrible Psycho remake, probably. Last year Anne Heche made the news for losing custody of her child to her ex-husband Coley Laffoon. Sad, but only until you realise that her main argument for keeping custody was that her ex-husband wanked and played ping-pong a lot.

It’s a pattern that stretches way back, past the time that Anne Heche started a lesbian affair with Ellen DeGeneres and then broke it off so she could tour around America telling everyone how God had cured her of her homosexuality all the way back to when she invented the alter ego of hers who could talk to aliens. You know, the one who was Jesus’ half-sister.

Anyway, it’s time for the cycle to come around again, because Anne Heche has gone to court claiming that she can’t pay her child support bills because she’s been a tragic out of work actress since Men In Trees got cancelled. E! Online reports:

“Since January 18, 2008, I have been unemployed and had no income from unemployment except for one very short term contract for a movie role for which I received a total of $65,000, approximately the amount I received for one episode of Men in Trees [which has not been renewed for a third season],” Heche’s filing states. Among the expenditures listed are private school tuition for Homer, rent for her L.A. residence, the mortgage on her Vancouver abode and miscellaneous auto and personal expenses. Heche says the $240,000 she received in January from the sale of her and Laffoon’s Hollywood home is already long gone.

Anne Heche got paid $65,000 an episode for Men In Trees? Yeah, we remember that time we got paid a total of $2,275,000 just for going to work 38 times as well. We barely know how we managed to get by. We literally had to dig through other people’s rubbish because our servants kept serving us our whole roast suckling pig on cold plates. Cold plates! What did they think we were? Animals?

Anyway, you’ll be pleased to know that the court granted Anne Heche’s wish to suspend her child support payments for the month of July, potentially putting their son’s private school tuition in danger. That might be a good thing, though – after all, the less educated he is, the longer it’ll take him to realise that his mother seems to be a Curly Wurly short of the full selection pack.

Read more:

Anne Heche Doesn’t Have to Pay for July – E! Online

You make it big, you keep on doing what you do, and sooner or later people start complaining that you're just not as good as you used to be. Surely every artist has to battle against this at some point? Woody Allen, for example, even went so far as to reference the concept in his film Stardust Memories, while we have it on good authority that the bloke from Babylon Zoo spends five hours every day crying over his framed gold disc of Spaceman, howling 'I could have been a god' and scaring away the postman.

You want to know who else is sick of having their early stuff dredged up again and again? Menopausal groovester Madonna, that's who. And she's so goshdarn annoyed that she's never, ever, ever going to play any of her old songs ever, ever again.

Oh – unless someone gives her a shitload of money.

Speaking to New York radio station Z100 FM, Madge moaned that:

“I'm not sure I can sing 'Holiday' or 'Like A Virgin' ever again. I just can't – unless somebody paid me like $30 million or something. Like if some Russian guy wants me to come to the wedding he's going to have to a 17-year-old, you know it."

$30 million to perform Like A Virgin? A horrifying thought, and one which would surely have dire implications for the global economy. With that amount of money being bandied around, we may well be entering a world in which financial value is determined by eighties pop songs.

Therefore a performance of Club Tropicana would be enough to buy you a three-bedroom semi-detached house in Sussex, a quick singalong of Never Gonna Give You Up would net you a used car in decent condition, and a recital of Shaddup Ya Face would be able to get you a bus ride from Luton to Watford.

Just don't go singing it once you get there, okay? There's more of an Agadoo vibe going on round those parts.

Read More:

Madonna Needs 30 Million To Perform Early Hits – Gigwise

In a recent interview, Nigella Lawson has stated that she's refusing to leave her children any money in her will, because she thinks that rich kids are arseholes and that not earning money "ruins people."

Nigella Lawson married a man worth £100 million and lives in his £7 million Belgravia mansion. And her dad used to be Chancellor Of The Exchequer. We're just saying.

You know what the world needs more of? Poor posh people. No, really, poor posh people are the best. With a poor posh person, you get all of the grating behaviour you'd except from the privileged – like the nails-across-a-blackboard voice, the embarrassing name, the condescension, the endless talk of childhood skiing holidays – with none of the upsides, like them suddenly deciding to buy you a pony on a mad posh whim.

Plus, since they're poor, they've probably decided to give dreadlocks a go. Poor posh people are brilliant. So it's just as well that Nigella Lawson is hell-bent on creating a couple more of them by not leaving her children any money at all when she snuffs it.

Speaking to My Weekly, Nigella Lawson revealed her plans to leave the kids out of her will:

"I am determined that my children should have no financial security. It ruins people not having to earn money. I argue with my husband Charles, because he believes that you should be able to leave money to your children. I think we'll have to agree to disagree."

In a way, we can see where Nigella Lawson is coming from here. She just wants to protect her children and stop them turning into Paris Hilton, and that's fair enough. Plus this way Nigella's final words get to be a croaked "fark off, you ain't getting nuffink!" and who can really say they haven't wanted to go out like that?

Plus all child psychologists agree that the healthiest thing a parent can do is raise their children in a £7 million mansion with a fleet of staff to carry out their every whim surrounded with enough money that they could literally want for nothing and then tug it all away from them by screwing them over in the will leaving them with tit-all. We swear we read that somewhere.

But now that she's not going to leave diddly-squat to her children when she dies, that leaves Nigella Lawson with an awful lot of money to try and burn through in her final years. Whatever could she spend it on? More tinfoil dresses? Enough cream cakes to make her arse continue to swell up like an infected cyst?

Or will Nigella Lawson spend her money on furthering the ridiculous Nigella Express pretence that she's a normal busy mother who rides the bus to work by recreating a full-scale Victorian slum to set her next series in, where all her recipes will heavily feature dead rats and baby-scabs, because she read in Tatler that that's how normal people live these days?

Frankly, who gives a shit. But at least it's good to see that Nigella Lawson is already giving her two kids – Mimsy Sniggleberry and Tarquarthaaar VIII, we think they're called – a head-start on knowing what it's like to be poor by giving them the shittest haircuts in all of history. That's bound to help them when she dies. That and the commemorative spatula she plans to leave them. They have to share it, though – Nigella's seen how one spatula each can ruin people.

Read more:

No millions for Nigella's children – Press Association 

Thom Yorke and EMI boss Guy Hands are in the middle of a war of words about why Radiohead left the record label. According to Hands, Radiohead wanted a £10 million advance for In Rainbows and control of their old albums, while Thom Yorke is claiming that the band just wanted to make sure their back catalogue was treated correctly. The emotional impact of this public bickering is thought to have already taken its toll on Thom Yorke, and has made him ditch plans for his forthcoming Europop collaboration with Same Difference from X Factor called A Very Merry Radiohead Party Fun Time.

As planet Earth's most sensitive wonky-eyed warbler, Thom Yorke feels things way more than you ever will. You know that time you were on a bus and the man sitting next to you coughed and didn't cover his mouth and you felt the cough-air touch your hand? You remember that you didn't think much of it afterwards? Well the same thing happened to Thom Yorke in the early nineties and he wrote The Bends about it. All of it. Ask him, it's true.

So just imagine the pain that Thom Yorke felt when Guy Hands, head of Radiohead's old record label EMI, spoke to newspapers about Radiohead leaving the company because they were being greedy and wanted £10 million to fit a stripper's pole, a foam machine and a constant supply of coked-out prostitutes in their studio, or something.

OK, that's not strictly true – Guy Hands said that Radiohead wanted a £3 million advance, a £3 million international marketing budget for In Rainbows, and the rights to a couple of old Radiohead albums that would have cost EMI £4 million in future earnings. And Hands says he couldn't commit to that deal, knowing that every penny that Radiohead got was a penny that KT Tunstall would miss, causing Radiohead to throw a tantrum and leave.

But Thom Yorke doesn't quite see it that way. Taking to the Radiohead website this week, Thom Yorke gave his side of the story:

we did not ask for a load of cash from our old record label EMI to re- sign. that is a L I E. The Times in the UK should check its facts before it prints such dirt. whAT we WANTED WAS some control over OUR WOrK and how it was used in the future by them-that seemed REASONAblE to us, as we cared about it a great deal. Mr Hands was not interested. So neither were we. We made the sign of the cross and walked away. Sadly. We are extremely upset that this crap is being spread about. To bedigging up such bullshit, or more politely airing yer dirty laundry in public, seems a very strange way for the head of an international record label to be proceeding. 

Obviously we're going to side with Thom Yorke here, for the simple reason that his crazy writing style makes us think that he's possibly left comments on hecklerspray before.

And anyway, what's all this fuss about in the first place? Radiohead leaving EMI has been the best thing for everyone – by releasing In Rainbows on the internet Radiohead became more relevant than they have in a decade, everyone got to buy In Rainbows for nothing and EMI has got more time to devote to Sheena Easton now. Everyone's a winner here. Especially Sheena Easton. And isn't that the main thing?

Read more:

F Y I_____ if you care – Radiohead