According to Collider, the wide-eyed Amanda Seyfried and tween country songstress Taylor Swift have been offered the roles of Cosette and Eponine in Tom Hooper‘s movie adaptation of the French revolution musical extravaganza known as Les Miserables.

It seems like Hooper already exhausted all the other options for these roles (Lea Michele, Scarlett Johansson, and Evan Rachel Wood were all up for the role of Eponine). That’s good and all, but I am still not 100 percent convinced that Seyfried and Swift are “the ones”. Hell, I don’t even think the choice of Anne Hathaway as Fantine is solid. As for Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe as the lead characters Jean Valjean and Javert — I am OK with that. More with the former than the latter.

But I digress.

As I write this, I am listening to the Original Broadway Cast recording of the musical to inspire my choices on who else should be considered for the roles of Cosette and Eponine — because I just KNOW my opinion counts in this matter. That said, here are my alternatives:

Elle Fanning as Eponine: In the production of Les Mis I saw, Eponine was kind of like a bean pole, but with a sweet face. She’s kinda gangsta because she’s a street urchin. I could totally see this happening. All she needs to do is get some voice lessons, get dirtied up and she’ll be GOOD TO GO! It’s as simple as that.

Dakota Fanning as Cosette: Cosette is a bit more refined, proper and raised in a more privileged environment. In other words, she’s high class and Eponine is low class. Cosette and Eponine are kind of rivals. They are both fighting for the heart of Marius (he will be played by My Week With Marilyn‘s Eddie Redmayne). What better way to create the rivalry than with two sisters?!

Mia Wasikowska as Cosette: The Alice in Wonderland actress has plenty of experience doing period pieces (Albert Nobbs, Jane Eyre) so visually, she would totally work as the refined Cosette. I don’t know about her singing skills though…but she can learn, right?

Emmy Rossum as Eponine: She was decent as Christine in the lukewarm movie version of Phantom of the Opera so she deserves another crack at the movie musical genre.

Jennifer Lawrence as Eponine: She’s a hot commodity right now so WHY NOT cast her as the rebel gal who Marius totally uses to get closer to Cosette? Lawrence can fulfill that heartache like no other but still be a tough gal. Plus, she’s Katniss Everdeen. She can do anything.

Shailene Woodley as Eponine: Again, another hot commodity. Did you see her performance in The Descendants?! Whether or not she could sing shouldn’t matter, right?

Evan Rachel Wood as Cosette: I know Hooper already passed on her, but she can sing well…and she can rock a merkin like no other if needed.

Ellen Page as Eponine: I think she would go for this role if an endless amount of neckerchiefs were involved. If this role doesn’t work out, she can always go for the role of the little scamp Gavroche.

Grace Park as Eponine: Yes, I know she’s Asian — but if you look at the track history of the casting for the musical, it’s fairly diverse. If Lea Salonga can play Eponine, the Battlestar Galactica diva can too.

Beyonce as Cosette: After she pops out that baby, she should jump on this role. She killed it as Deena in Dreamgirls and no one — absolutely NO ONE — has a diva growl like her. Les Mis can use a little bit of soul.

Adam Levine as Eponine: Since my casting is colorblind, it is gender-blind as well. Plus, he has a magical falsetto. Need I say more?

Justin Bieber as Cosette: If they are going to cast him, they better do it before his voice COMPLETELY changes.

Rooney Mara as Eponine: I only support this if she keeps the piercings an bleached eyebrows.

Taylor Momsen as Cosette: This would totally work if they made Cosette look like a Goth skank.

Kristen Stewart as Cosette: I just put her on the list to see how you would react.

Who are some of your choices? (If you are thinking Jennifer Love Hewitt I am right there with you!)

Here are some of the top news items that have been plucked from my Facebook and Twitter feed…

I must preface this post by saying that I wrote a review for AfterElton.com but decided to ramble some more so I posted an “unabridged version” of the review here. Enjoy it…or not.

In the sci-fi, futuristic “thriller” In Time, no one ages past 25 and time is a form of currency — which sounds pretty cool, but actually causes more problems than it solves.

Justin Timberlake plays Will Salas, a blue collar worker living in the lower echelons of “time” wealth. Even so, he has the heart of a lion. He saves a reckless “time billionaire” (played by the dreamy Matt Bomer) from a bunch of thugs led by the sleazy Fortis (played by Alex Pettyfer. I want to take this moment and brag about the time I interviewed him back when this movie was called Now) Bomer’s character thanks him by giving Will all of his time wealth — which is over a century. (Pettyfer? Bomer? Am I sensing a Magic Mike connection here?)

This unexpected time windfall turns out to be more of a curse than a blessing and creates several complications for Will. He winds up on the run not only from Fortis and his band of thugs, but also from the official “Timekeepers” who think Will has stolen all the extra minutes. Along for the ride is the anime-eyed Amanda Seyfried (remember when she liked the way I smelled?) as his abductee love interest Sylvia.

In Time director and writer Andrew Niccol (known for his work with Gattaca, Lord of War, The Truman Show) created a very clever story with that revolved around the old adage, “time is money” — but the execution was hardly worth my time (you can probably expect many bad puns like that from my review and others).

One big problem is trying to wrap my head around Timberlake as a sci-fi action hero. It doesn’t work here. He may have jumped the gun in silver screen stardom. He definitely needs a little more time to earn those stripes.

Another issue is Pettyfer. His character is just there to fulfill the role of a villain twisting his handlebar mustache. He’s nothing but a playground bully that is supposed to be menacing, but as played and written winds up being unintentionally comical. The film’s other antagonist fares better. Cillian Murphy does his best with the odious lead timekeeper Raymond — and mostly succeeds.

The movie had so much potential and there was a certain level of excitement that made me think that this could possibly be something cut from the same cloth as The Matrix or Blade Runner — but alas, it wasn’t. It flowed in the same vein as Solarbabies or Waterworld.

Also disappointing was the thinly written romance between Will and Sylvia. After abducting her, they fall in love, she quickly develops Patricia Hearst syndrome and falls into line behind him, something totally at odds with her previously bored, rebellious character.

Lastly, the pieces of this time bandit puzzle are all there, but it just does not come together in any satisfying way. I had a strong urge to like this movie, expecting it to be a savvy sci fi thriller in the vein of Gattaca, say. I was left disappointed.

I must reiterate my geeky adoration coolness of the movie’s concept.More than that, I love that Niccol actually wrote an original story in a cinematic world of comic book adaptations, sequels, prequels, and remakes.

Nonetheless, I would have enjoyed the movie more if the Madonna/Timberlake collaboration “4 Minutes (To Save the World)” wasn’t playing through my head the entire time.

In Time opens in theaters today.

Nevermind.

In any matter, after seeing Friends with Benefits this weekend, I came to the conclusion that no matter how hard I try, I cannot NOT like Justin Timberlake. I think my main qualm with Mr. Sexy Back is that he reminds me of those “popular guys” in high school who would be nice to me, not out of good heartedness, but out of pity. He seems like he would be kind of douche, but his charm is unbelievably magnetic that you can’t help but be drawn into his twinkling smile orbit.

His next big project that I am looking forward to is a sci-fi thriller called In Time; a story set in the future where no one ages past 25 and time is currency. (Side note: I talked about this movie when I interviewed Alex Pettyfer (who also stars in the movie) when it was called Now.)

Other reputable names in the movie include Amanda Seyfried, Olivia Wilde, Cillian Murphy, Johnny Galecki, and Matt Bomer. It was showcased at Comic-Con, but didn’t get as many fan boy grunts as the more Marvel-centric movies, but it has potential. Check out the trailer:

…or it could be The Island for 2011.

Watching Red Riding Hood was like watching a version of Twilight with cheap(er) production value and a big red cloak. It has props & costumes from a high school drama department and an overwhelming feeling to fast forward to the end just so we can see who the damn wolf is (Spoiler alert: it’s not the Grandma — that would be too predictable.)

Edgy director-turned-teen movie visionary, Catherine Hardwicke makes this movie as if its in a petri dish. It’s a insular village placed under a microscope — and for that it succeeds. Each scene is ripped right from the pages of a poorly illustrated and dated iteration of the childhood fairy tale. The cast includes a roster of respected thespians: Gary Oldham as the crazy evangelical wolf hunter; Julie Christie as the crazy hippie Grandmother; and Virginia Madsen in the crazy, thankless role of the mother. Then there is the duo of love interests who are up and coming actors who will soon appear (if they haven’t already) on “Hot 20 under 30 lists” in various magazines: Max Irons and Shiloh Fernandez.

Finally, there’s Amanda Seyfried (who likes the way I smell). As an actress, it seems that she has taken a backseat to other starlets — but that doesn’t mean she ain’t talented. She’s just embodying roles that seem like stepping stones.

With that in mind, perhaps she’s on to something with this fairy tale shtick. Her expressive outsized features and classic, animated Disney demeanor are perfect for her to build a reputation as the go-to gal for future fairy tale movie adaptations. Here are just a couple of ideas:

The Little Mermaid: Dye her hair red, slap some gills on her and she’d be the perfect angsty mermaid. My suggestion is to make it more indie and emo — a fusion of the Disney version, Splash and Juno.

Hansel and Gretel: Hollywood is already churning out a version of this tale called Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters starring Keremy Renner and Gemma Arterton, but imagine if Amanda did it. It would be a moral tale about eating disorders and the dangers of overindulging on a gingerbread house owned by a witch who was minding her own business.

Beauty and the Beast: Any other adaptation would be better than Beastly.

Rapunzel: I enjoyed Tangled, but let’s rethink a live action, more “adult” version of this: a raunchy comedy starring Seyfried directed by Judd Apatow where it’s not just her long hair on her head that’s magical.

Goldilocks and the Three Bears: I picture this as an arthouse flick about the isolation of a girl with golden locks (in this case, Amanda) and her attempt to find comfort and acceptance in the home of three bears. The perfect director: Sophia Coppola. Expect little dialogue and scenes of Goldilocks staring at a wall for five minutes in a very character-driven manner.

The Worst Witch: Fairuza Balk and Tim Curry starred in this magical TV movie (it was also a TV series) based on a series of books about a girl who isn’t the exactly the greatest student at Miss Cackle’s Academy for Witches — but she is just so darn endearing! It would definitely be one of those obscure movies that gets modernized and is made to be “retro-cool.”

Teen Witch: Imagine Amanda Seyfried performing this scene with Leighton Meester. I don’t think I need to say anything else.

Jennifer’s Body II: OK. This isn’t really a fairytale, but it was an underrated movie that is need of a sequel. Who wouldn’t want to see Amanda continue to demonically ravage indie bands donning skinny jeans and manscara? Plus, I think the movie world is yearning for the return of some good ol’ fashioned Diablo Cody dialogue.

Red Riding Hood opens in theaters today.

Egan with Seyfried in ‘Letters to Juliet

Before my interview with Chris Egan, I run into him at the refreshment table. He smiles as I ask “Which one is not decaf?” of the five pitchers of coffee on the table.

With an Aussie accent and dressed in All Saints garb (which I would later learn he loves) he’s just as puzzled as me, “I don’t know.” He calls out to the people in the next room, “Which one is not decaf?”

“I think all of them are regular,” says one of the random voices accented with a splash from the land down under.

He politely pours me a cup and then fills his own. I ask, “Do you take sugar or the fake stuff?”

“I need the real stuff,” he says.

“I never really understood fake sugar – sometimes it scares me,” I admit.

He laughs as we, along with his cohorts in the next room, go into a really interesting discussion of aspartame and saccharine.

Besides his need for the real “raw” sugar in the brown packets, my knowledge of Chris Egan didn’t go beyond his role in Eragon; a movie about dragon mythology that starred Jeremy Irons.

I never saw it — and I really like any movie that involves dragons and things of the fantastical variety.

Shame on me.

Egan in Eragon

Needless to say, I felt a little guilty when meeting Mr. Egan, who stars in Letters to Juliet with Amanda Seyfried and Vanessa Redgrave. In it, Egan is Charlie, an uptight English bloke who accompanies his grandmother (Redgrave) on a journey to find her long lost love that never received a love letter she wrote over 50 years ago. This is all thanks to Sophie (Seyfried), a Verona-vacationing American woman (and Charlie’s possible love interest) who finds said letter while volunteering with a group of Italian ladies who respond to letters asking for love advice from “Juliet” (as in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet).

Despite the sun-kissed vineyard setting of Italy, the movie is definitely a romance cynic’s worst nightmare, but it is a romantic comedy. Perhaps people who frown upon happy endings should cut it some slack.

“Everybody wants to go to a movie to see the guy and the girl get together,” says Egan. “(Letters to Juliet) is just a fun, down-to-Earth movie – it’s not trying to be something that it’s not.”

Egan and I chatted some more about getting started in the industry, his role as the anti-romantic robot Charlie, the hesitant joy that can come from romantic comedies and his past with musical theater and Glee creator Ryan Murphy.

Your character, Charlie, is kind of a prick in the beginning of the movie.

Yeah he is. (laughs)

But at the same time, he’s charming – maybe it’s the accent. Did you model the character after someone in your life? How did you find your inner-prick?

I had so much fun with this character. Reading (the script) from the beginning, I knew there was so much I wanted to do with him and really take it over the top. There are brutes like that out there. Even though he seems surreal in the beginning, but his unpleasant behavior comes from the love for his grandmother. He just doesn’t know how to show it in any other way with the girl he’s attracted to. They let us improvise a lot so I got to do quirky, weird mannerisms.

So you did like your character from the very beginning. Play audio clip for his answer (player works best in Safari or Google Chrome):

Talking about the role of “Charlie”

I’ll be kind of up front with you – I’m kind of a cynic when it comes to romantic comedies.

Yeah – I am too. (laughs)

What would you say to cynics like me to change their minds about romantic comedies?

I think it helps that Charlie isn’t romantic – at the same time, these are characters who are dealing with real issues. They have pasts and pain – especially with the loss that he and his grandmother has had. I don’t really think it’s like any other romantic comedy – even though it does have the corny balcony ending – but that’s even a constant joke in the movie. Other than that, everyone can relate to one of the characters.

Let me backtrack a little bit – how did you get involved with acting? Was there an “A HA!” moment? Play audio clip below, which includes a funny incident with a crying baby in the hall:

Chris Egan’s A HA! Moment

You said you started in musical theater – have you jumped on the Glee bandwagon?

I have seen a little bit of the show. I’ve actually worked with Ryan Murphy before.

Really?

Yeah, we worked on a pilot together. He is one of the most talented guys in Hollywood.

So what was your first role in musical theater? And would you go back? Play audio clip for his answer:

Chris Egan sings!

Okay – going back to the movie and “romance” – what was the most romantic thing you ever done?

The most romantic thing I have done was a road trip. I took my girlfriend at the time on a road trip from Paris to Italy. That’s another thing about this movie. There’s an element of this movie that’s like a road trip – it’s like a journey for all of them.

Do you think guys secretly like chick flicks?

I think they’ve become popular – so yeah, I do.

So what can guys get out of this movie?

I think it’s just great to remind people about romance – real romance.

…and that was said with a heaping amount of real sugar. Not the fake stuff.

Letters to Juliet is in theaters Friday May 14

While Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried were in San Francisco, they made an appearance at Macy’s. I took some footage with my Mino and thought I would make a little video using my broadcast media skills (please note the lower case “b” in “broadcast”).

Here’s what I came up with:

My friend said that my commentary sounded like I hated everyone – and I kinda had the tone of Dwight Schrute.

I don’t know if I should take that as an insult or a compliment.

While answering a question, she caught a whiff of something and, well….just have a listen:

Amanda likes Chanel

I was sitting quite far from her and she smelled my cologne from across the table! All that from my daily single spritz of Chanel on my wrist! She really has a powerful nose. I wonder if she is an X-man with a mutant ability to identify luxury fragrances.

After the interview, she came around the table and asked to smell it one more time. I felt really flattered…and a bit nervous. I never had a talented actress smell my wrist before.

She walks into the cavernous room towering in these killer heeled boots and she has a look of concern. She walks over to our table and says, “My child is sick.”

I didn’t know she had a child.

Then she says, “My dog.”

“Awwws” fill the room and she explains that her doggy back home has a runny nose. Luckily, her dog sitter is taking him to the vet. But alas, she composes herself in order to chat with us.

Savannah (Seyfried) reads a heartfelt letter from her dear John

Amanda has a resume of diverse characters and in Dear John, she plays Savannah a love interest that is too perfect for John – but love prevails. At the same time, the character is conflicted because John is overseas serving the country as a soldier in the Army Special Forces. That said, the first topic brought to the table was: how did she feel like playing a romantic lead?

“I felt like I had to fit into this mold when the script came out. I thought, ‘Wow, how cool would it be to play a romantic lead.’ That was my dream. I wanted to be Claire Danes in Romeo and Juliet when I was 12,” she laughs. “This is my chance to inspire other girls to fall in love.”

She goes on to say that it was a challenge fitting that role:

Amanda on Beauty

Then again, she says that playing a role like this is good for her. Being one of the emerging talents in Hollywood, tons of scripts get sent to her – but she says she doesn’t read them. That’s her agent’s job. “She knows exactly what I want to do – I trust her 100 percent,” she says. “People know that I can do more than play myself.”

And that she does – especially in an upcoming movie that she just finished.

Amanda on Scripts

Relating to prostitutes is one thing, but working with a director like Lasse Hallström is another thing. Working with someone that has foreign symbols in their name has to be intimidating, right?

Working with Lasse

“I grew up watching his movies,” she adds. “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape is one of the best movies ever made. He’s just really good. You sometimes worry that he doesn’t know what he wants, but he’s just chill. He’s laid back.”

Savannah and John (Tatum) have a scientific, yet romantic, discussion about the moon

Throughout the movie, Savannah grows with her relationship with John. She goes through some pretty emotional bumps but still manages to keep her head on straight – a characteristic that Amanda admires.

“Savannah is way more confident than I am,” she says. “In the beginning of the movie she’s 21 and she knows who she is and what she wants. She’s way cooler than I’ll ever be.”

I don’t think Savannah is necessarily “cooler” than Amanda. One common bond they share is music. They both sing well. And that is something Amanda wants to explore in the near future.

Amanda and her music

And then there’s the whole ordeal about working with Henry Thomas.

Amanda talks about Henry Thomas

But if anything, Amanda wants people to walk away from the movie with the overall theme: Love.

Amanda on love

“We can all relate to it,” she adds. “You can take a lot from the movie. It shines a light on autism – it’s something we should know about. There’s a lot of elements that make it easy to watch even if you’re not a 12 to 17 year old girl. It’s not just Channing Tatum with his shirt off.”

Speaking of a shirtless Channing, Amanda feels that at times, people seem to be more interested in him than her when it comes to this movie – but she jokes about it and understands why this press tour is becoming Channing-palooza.

Amanda on the sidelines

Amanda may be correct, but if it wasn’t for her, Channing’s character wouldn’t have found his heart. He also would’ve been making out with himself throughout the entire movie. Although that might be good for some, it wouldn’t necessarily make an ideal movie-going experience for the masses.

’Dear John’ is in theaters February 5. Read my interview with Channing Tatum by clicking here.

It’s hardly the greatest use of space.

We sat there chatting about what we were going to ask Channing. We mentioned the whole “burned hot dog incident” and although we heard he is pretty open about the ordeal, we thought it would be better not to mention it.

John (Channing Tatum) reads a letter from his boo in ‘Dear John’

As I sat there, I couldn’t help but think of how hungry I was. I am always hungry before these roundtable interviews. The Fiji Water from the refreshment table wasn’t cutting it. Why couldn’t they have some cookies or croissants on the table? Or maybe even an entire breakfast buffet?

I was also thinking, “Why couldn’t we do this interview some where more casual? Like a Starbucks? Borders? Somewhere out in public where people could see me chatting with Mr. Tatum.

As I was contemplating where I was going to eat after the interview, Channing Tatum walked in. He was looking casually sharp in a vest/button-down/tie/jeans combo. His hair was longer than it was in the movie Dear John and it was effortlessly combed with a hint of disheveled charm.

His latest film, Dear John is cut from the same cloth as The Notebook. Maybe because it was based on the book written by the same author: Nicholas Sparks. Channing plays John, a rough-around-the-edges sun-kissed dude in the Army Special Forces. His relationship with his father (Richard Jenkins) isn’t the greatest and he has gotten into his fair share of trouble. While home on leave, he falls for Savannah (Amanda Seyfried) and – well – you can guess what happens from here.

“The weather here is crazy,” he says as he approaches the table. By “crazy” he means it’s a little chilly. He should be lucky it wasn’t raining.

He looks just like he did onscreen: handsome with a kick of Southern edge. We all start chatting casually as he makes the effort to go around the table and shake all of our hands. It was very Southern of him.

We get down to it and start asking him questions – a lot of them had to do with being a fictitious military character in three movies.

“G.I. Joe wasn’t a real soldier to me – it was like X-men,” he says. “It’s not like we were trying to depict what a real soldier was like and what he has to go through. In Stop-Loss, we went through pretty intense training.”

He says that no matter how much training he has done, he – or anyone else for that matter – will never know what it’s like to be a soldier.

Channing’s sympathy for soldiers

Channing isn’t necessarily new when it comes to the military. His grandfather was a soldier in the Korean War – but he didn’t have the opportunity to talk with him about it because he lost the ability to speak before he could ask him. This is explains Channing’s fascination with the military. He has always wondered if he had what it takes to be in the military. He even thinks he may have enlisted if it weren’t for his football scholarship to Glenville State College in West Virginia.

By observation, he has learned a couple of things about being in the military – and it doesn’t necessarily involve basic training or guns.

“I have a lot of friends that are soldiers after doing some of these movies – they tend to surround you with them,” he says. “All the guys in Dear John were really (Army Special Forces) guys except for four of them. You talk them all the time and some of them have family. It’s mind-boggling in what they have to go through. I just can’t imagine being away from my wife or my family for 10 months at a time – sometimes more – being in harm’s way and not knowing what’s going to happen. Everyone deals with it different – some people don’t deal with it.”

Channing points out that these soldiers are just normal, everyday girls and guys. “They are just trying to figure out what’s going on in their lives,” he says. “They are just in extraordinary circumstances.”

From this, he figures that Dear John goes beyond war.

Channing on war and love

At this point of the interview, we are in really deep. Frankly, I wasn’t expecting the thoughtfulness of Channing’s answers. I underestimated him because I was expecting something along the lines of his character from Step Up – which, by the way, I loved.

He proved me wrong and thensome.

The relationship with Savannah isn’t the only thing John has to deal with in the movie. Channing points out that the development of John and his father is just as important – and it reflects that of today’s children. It just so happens that the father-son relationship in the movie is a heightened experience of that.

John and Savannah have some good ol’ fashioned summer lovin’

“Everyone can understand where there is a misunderstanding between parents and children – I definitely do,” he admits. “ John’s father has no social skills so he never taught him social tact. I think that’s why John joined the military – so he can learn to be a man and have skills to deal with the world.”

Then Savannah comes along to change all that:

The father-son relationship

As we talk about the emotional heft of the movie, I, being the unemotional robot I am, break the flow with the question, “Why should single guys see this movie?”

Why should guys see this movie?

Point taken.

He continues, “I think if you do have a father, brother, sister – it’s a good family movie. I think kids could see the movie – I don’t think it’s too bad. There is one racy scene, but I think it’s done tastefully.”

We have seen Channing in a multitude of roles, most of them being dramatic, but can we expect anything else?

Channing’s roles

Channing is just full of surprises. I wouldn’t have expected him to be such a character-driven kinda guy. That’s very un-jockish of him.

With his career in full stride and with comparisons to Marlon Brando under his belt (which Channing laughs and says “That is ridiculous!”), could it be possible that this Southern boy has lost a sense of humility? Has Hollywood corrupted him?

Channing’s sense of humility

“I have friends at home who will never let me forget who I am,” he adds with a smile. “They smack me in the face with it everyday. I’m just normal, idiot Chan!”

You can also take a gander at my interview with Amanda Seyfried. ‘Dear John’ is in theaters February 5, 2010