Robert Sheehan, who has been the lead of the show since it began in 2009, is leaving the show and will be replaced by a character called Rudi. Casting for the new character is still ongoing. The show’s executive producer Petra Fried announced the news at the Kapow convention in London today. Both, the arrival of the new character and Sheehan’s exit will be dealt with in short films posted on the channel’s website before the new season premieres.

Sheehan’s departure is going to change the show drastically, as his character Nathan was at the show’s center and provided most of the humor that has been a signature element of the series. It’s unclear if the new character will be similiar to Nathan and if he will fulfill a similiar function within the series.

The third season will consist of 8 episodes and air on E4 later this fall.

The third season premiered at the end of March and I’m pleased to say that my worries were without any reason, because the show returned considerably stronger. The first two episodes of season three showed a lot of promise and resurrected my faith in the show and series creator Diablo Cody.

Last year’s finale saw Tara (Toni Collette) and her sister Charmaine (Rosemarie DeWitt) finally getting to the truth about the origins of Tara’s disease: Their parents revealed to them that they had a half-brother who had done things to them. The exact nature of the things their half-brother did to the sisters was kept vague, but since it caused Tara to literally fall to pieces, one doesn’t have to dig deep to imagine what might have happened. It is unknown if their half-brother is still alive, but since this is a tv show, it’s not hard to guess that there will eventually be a confrontation with him down the road.

In the meantime, Tara decides to go back to college in season three, after she had originally dropped out, when she was younger. What seems like a filler storyline, has the potential to turn into a storyline that delves deeper into Tara’s multiple personality disorder and her past. In episode one she is introduced to her new psych professor Dr. Hatteras (brilliantly played by Eddie Izzard), who, as it turns out, doesn’t believe in DID and humiliates Tara after she transitioned to her psychiatrist alter Shoshanna in class. Izzard of course was the lead in FX’s critically-acclaimed, but shortlived series "The Riches" about a family that is quite similiar to Tara’s family in the sense that both are outsiders and have a different outlook on life and people than your average Cosby bunch.

What is great about the introduction of Izzard as Tara’s snarky and bored psych prof is that it gives Tara and the show itself a direction, Tara is no longer just responsive to the things that are happening around her or the things caused by her alters, she embarks on a journey of ambition and self-discovery, while giving lead actress Toni Collette a wonderful actor to play off of (while I enjoy John Corbett as Tara’s loving husband, he does not have the presence that Eddie Izzard is bringing to the party).

Tara’s other personalities have also been used more effectively this season. Episode one saw most of Tara’s alters coming to her rescue, when darkness reared its head, while episode two made good use of psychiatrist alter Shoshanna and skanky teenager alter T in scenes that were equally touching as they were humorous. The final scene of episode two, in which Tara’s daughter Kate (Brie Larson) tries to prevent T from causing more trouble for her mother was thoroughly heartbreaking, as it summed up perfectly the difficult relationship between mother and daughter, underlined Kate’s growth and the difficulties she had to put up with throughout her life due to her mother’s condition. At the end of the scene she gets her mother’s blessing for a move to a different country and earns her freedom, but it would be a shame if Kate were to follow up on her plans, as Kate remains one of the most interesting teenagers currently on television: Aimless, sarcastic, clever, but yet clueless, Kate is never as smart as she thinks she is and therefore is a great alternative to tv’s sarcastic, unhealthily intelligent Daria Morgendorffer from the 90s.

While Tara jumps back into college, her sister Charmaine is still dealing with the fall-out of last year’s finale. Being pregnant, being dumped at the altar and the revealation of having been an abuse victim have taken their toll on Charmaine, who feels utterly helpless. She is now living together with Neil (Patton Oswalt), her baby daddy and treats the poor guy like trash, because he doesn’t fit into her prince Charming-fairy tale that she desperately wants in her life. The pregnancy makes her feel ugly and sweaty and the first two episodes underline all of Charmaine’s worst qualities: Shrill, narcistic, selfish, whiny and needy, Charmaine is definitely not the most pleasant person to be around and many viewers might find it difficult to root for a character with characteristics as unpleasant as hers, but Rosemarie DeWitt plays her beautifully and adds so much vulnerability,insecurity and gravity to the exterior that it’s hard not to pity Charmaine and not to feel sympathetic towards her, because behind Charmaine’s inappropriate and obnoxious behavior is a severely damaged and helplessly vulnerable soul who is screaming for help. One can just hope that poor Neil won’t keep up with her forever, because it is hard to see him try so hard to please her, only to be let down by her. Charmaine remains one of the most interesting characters on the show though and DeWitt is not only good in the dramatic scenes, she is also often hilarious and steals everyone else the show.

With so much time devoted to the show’s women, there is not much to do for Tara’s husband Max (John Corbett) and her gay son Marshall (Keir Gilchrist) in season 3’s first episodes.

Max is worrying that going back to college might be too much for Tara to handle, since it led to a suicide attempt, when she was in college twenty years earlier. At the same time, he has his own troubles, as his business is in decline. Ultimately he decides to work for another company, which means that he has to cut loose Neil, his employee and best friend. Of all the actors, John Corbett had the worst material last year, his dialogue and his storylines felt forced and his actions were difficult to understand, because the show didn’t explain his sudden turn in personality well enough for it to be believable. Season 3 so far has done a better job with his character, keeping his character’s core from both seasons, but making us understand why he reacts the way he does.

Marshall meanwhile is still together with Lionel (Michael J. Willett) and trying to figure out what his relationship to him means, trying to express his individuality in a world of prejudice and wondering if he is destined to be stuck. “Would we still be together if this wasn’t Kansas and there were more choices for us”, asks Lionel Marshall in episode 2 and raises an interesting question. How much does the setting that we find ourselves in determine the nature of our relationships? It would be interesting to see the show explore that theme, but with so many storylines and characters to serve in just 12 half an hour episodes, it seems unlikely. Marshall’s storylines so far have mostly dealt with his sexuality and many of his storylines last year felt like they were stolen from “Queer As Folk”, as the show explored the questioning of sexuality, coming out, drugs and cruising. It would be a refreshing change for Marshall’s storylines to revolve around something other than his sexuality, as there is more to his character than just that.

“United States Of Tara” is not quite the same show that it was in season one, but it feels closer to what it was, because season three feels already more well-rounded and more carefully structured than season two. What is dearly missed are the artistic opening titles that won the show an EMMY award and beautifully underlined the fragility at the show’s center, but if those 45 more seconds of screen time allow the show to tell more well-crafted stories, one might be able to cope with that particular loss.

If you want to see a perfectly entertaining show with a lead actress that gives you a real idea of what an actress should be capable of, if you want to see an overly ambitious show with interesting ideas and characters, you should tune in to the show on Showtime every Monday night.

The show might need your help, as the ratings for the first two episodes of season three were only half of what the show drew last season.

According to Deadline Hollywood , Carbonell is set to play an FBI agent who is in charge of keeping Gellar’s character safe, so she can testify against the mob. When she goes on the run, he tracks her down and only finds her “sister”.

“Nurse Jackie” stars Edie Falco as Jackie Peyton, a strong-willed and caring, but very flawed emergency room nurse in New York, who juggles patients, doctors, fellow nurses and her own indiscreations that include an addiction to Vicodin and Adderall. Last season ended with Jackie’s husband finding out about her addiction.

Falco won an EMMY award for best lead-actress in a comedy last fall. “Nurse Jackie” itself was nominated for best comedy at the EMMY awards last fall and at the Golden Globe awards in January. The series also stars Eve Best, Peter Facinelli, Merritt Wever, Haaz Sleiman and Paul Schulze.

See the full trailer for the third season below.

“Smash” is a show-within-a-show vehicle about a group of people who come together to put on a Broadway musical about Marylin Monroe. Messing will play Julia, the musical’s good-natured lyricist who might be somewhat against the idea of a Marylin Monroe-themed musical. The project, based on an idea by Steven Spielberg, had originally been developed for the pay tv-channel Showtime in 2009. Former Showtime head of entertainment Bob Greenblatt is now the entertainment chairman of NBC and resurrected the project for NBC.

Theresa Rebeck, whose writing credits include “Catwoman” and episodes of “Law & Order: Criminal Intent” and “NYPD Blue”, has written the pilot script and will exec produce with Spielberg. “Hairspray” songwriters Marc Shaiman and Scott Wittman are onboard to write the show’s music. Michael Mayer (”Spring Awakening,” “American Idiot”) is in talks to direct.

Robert Downey Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Jeremy Renner, Scarlett Johansson and Samuel L. Jackson are the leads in the ensemble. Zak Penn and Joss Whedon (”Buffy The Vampire Slayer”) are writing, with the latter one directing the movie, which is eyed for a release on May 4, 2012.

Smulders is set to play an unspecifid S.H.I.E.L.D agent. Her character would work closely with Jackson’s Nick Fury, and eventually becomes the head of the espionage and law enforcement group.

“The Avengers” marks Smulders’ first major movie outing. Prior to landing the role of Robin Scherbatsky on CBS’ comedy “How I Met Your Mother” in 2005, the Canadian actress had only guest starred on various television programmes. Smulders had previously been Joss Whedon’s choice for the role of “Wonder Woman”, before he exited the project in early 2007. “The Avengers” is set to start filming in April, while “How I Met Your Mother” is on hiatus.

TERRA NOVA follows an ordinary family that travels back in time to prehistoric Earth in an effort to save the human race, as the world is dying in 2149. Jason O’Mara, Shelley Conn and Stephen Lang star.

Watch the first trailer below.

It’s rather unusual for a British network to adapt an American tv series, but that’s exactly what ITV did with its newest drama-series “Marchlands”, which premiered last week. “Marchlands” is based on the American tv series “The Oaks”. Written by David Schulner, it was developed for FOX in 2008 and starred Matthew Morrison (”Glee”) and Jeremy Renner (”The Hurt Locker”) among others, but was ultimately rejected by the network’s executives, when the produced pilot failed to make an impression. Rejected pilots rarely get a second chance of life, but a collaboration between ITVS and the producing studio 20th Century Fox led to a resurrection of the project for British television.

“The Oaks is a really original concept that blends relationship drama with an atmospheric ghost story,” said Laura Mackie, who is part of ITV’s drama commissioning team. “ITV thought the set-up was terrific and could make a great, British drama. When I read it myself, I had to agree”, added British writer Stephen Greenhorn, whose task it was to turn “The Oaks” into a distinctively British series.

Now called “Marchlands”, the series is about three different families who live in the same house, but at three different time periods. Their stories are linked by the spirit of a young girl called Alice (Millie Archer), who died under mysterious circumstances in 1968, but still haunts the house in later periods. In 1968 Alice’s young parents Ruth and Paul Bowen (Jodie Whittaker and Jamie Thomas King) cope with her daughter’s mysterious death. Ruth doesn’t want to let go of her daughter and questions her cause of death, all while coping with intense feelings of guilt and being put under pressure by her parents-in-law, who just want her to move on with her life. Her husband Paul meanwhile distances himself from his wife, because every time when he is looking at her, he is seeing his dead daughter. In 1987 the house is inhabited by Helen and Eddie Maynard (Alex Kingston and Dean Andrews), who are unsure how to react, when they discover that their young daughter Amy (Sydney Wade) has an imaginery friend called Alice. When Amy explains to her brother Scott (Ethan Griffin) that her family can’t see her friend because she is dead and other mysterious things start happening, they realize that things just aren’t quite right. In 2010 Mark Ashburn (Elliot Cowan) and his pregnant girlfriend Nisha Parekh (Shelley Conn) move into the house. While remodelling the house, Nisha finds a picture of Alice and when a grown-up Scott Maynard (Daniel Casey) asks her if her boyfriend has told her all about the house, Nisha gets suspicious.

“Marchlands” moves restlessley and quickly between time periods. At first it is confusing, but by the end of the first hour one has gotten used to the splintered narrative and one can’t argue about its effectiveness, as the viewer is always forced to stay attentive and to focus on the changing details within the house. The transitions between periods go smoothly, without taking the viewer out of the story. In contrast to the quick transitions between periods, the suspense builds slowly throughout the first episode, but it’s not bad at all that the show takes its time to introduce the characters and the mystery at its center, because there is enough intrigue to keep the viewer interested, even though the viewer is probably ahead of the story a few times throughout the episode. The actors do a fine job of keeping their characters grounded with subtle performances and don’t oversell the more supernatural aspects of the story. At its core, “Marchlands” is not just a ghost story, but a story about loss, a story about how people leave marks in spaces, about how the past can unconsciously influence the present and about how difficult it is to sustain relationships in the midst of a crisis.

It’s difficult to judge a story, when one just knows how it begins and doesn’t know how it will unfold. “Marchlands” might collapse throughout its 5-episode-run, but it’s off to a promising start. If it can raise the tension and avoid tapping into too many genre clichés, then there might be really something there. While the original concept for the show was developed as a potentially long-running tv series for American audiences, one can assume that it might be better off having been rejected by American tv executives and turned into a British series instead - the smaller episode count and the lack of pressure for success give the concept the chance to be more carefully-structured and close-ended, as it is inherently more difficult to sustain the momentum and suspense of that kind of story when stretching it over a longer period of time. Though it remains to be seen whether writer Stephen Greenhorne has developed a coherent whole, when he intertwines the individual stories, his effort is thoroughly appreciated, even if he fails.

Catch “Marchlands” on ITV every Thursday at 9 pm.

Rita was interesting in season one, but once she developed from a damaged, vulnerable soul into a confident and average housewife, there was not a lot of stuff going on with her anymore. I don’t think she even had a real storyline or a purpose in season four, other than being killed by the Trinity killer of course. But it was still a decision that could have turned the show in many different directions and at first it sure looked like the show was heading into the most interesting direction possible: Coping with his guilt over his part in Rita’s death, Dexter considered going on the run and randomly killed a stranger in a moment of sheer emotions, while Quinn started getting suspicious of Dexter and started investigating him. Dexter of course didn’t go on the run, but instead found a young woman played by Julia Stiles who had been raped and tortured by a bunch of guys and once he convinced her that he is no threat to her, both vowed to get rid of the men, who damaged her for life.

Unlike most Dexter fans, I actually liked Lumen and the idea she portrayed. Two damaged souls bonding over tragedy? Color me intrigued. What I didn’t like was the execution of it all. As a character I found Lumen completely unbelievable. All the developments she went through over the course of the season seemed to be dictated by the plot and not by the character itself. I also didn’t like the idea of Dexter falling for her. It seemed out of character for him. I think they should have pointed out at the end that Dexter is more in love with the idea of connecting with someone than he is in love with actual people. While I don’t think that Dexter is emotionless (something that he insisted on at the beginning of the show), I don’t feel like he loved Lumen. It seemed rather forced and far-fetched.

Lumen’s exit at the end of the season was a pleasant surprise, because unlike all the other people who got in on Dexter’s big secret she actually didn’t get killed, but left on her own. Her exit was still not handled well. After their relationship had grown so strongly in the episodes before the finale, it seemed all too sudden for her to come to the realization that they’re over and to actually tell him so quickly in just one scene. Once again it felt just like a necessity, because the writers knew that Julia Stiles’ contract was up and that they most likely would not have gotten her back for a sixth season.

It’s disappointing that Lumen was basically just a convenient plot device and not a fully developed character for the writers, because the idea behind her character was actually quite interesting. With a little bit more effort, they could have had a new interesting character. I think they should have developed her story slowly and more carefully, maybe they should have spread it over two seasons to really explore Lumen’s psyche and give more insight into her. She wanted revenge, I get it, but wanting revenge and getting it are two different things. Even for a person as traumatized as Lumen I find it unbelievable that she would not get stressed in Dexter’s kill room, while observing his ritual and the cruel violence of it. Seeing him kill for the first time since they had encountered each other hardly seemed to throw her. Even when she started doing the killing, it hardly threw her. When you have never had any sociopathic tendencies and get put into such a situation, I don’t think you’d accept it quite as easily as she did. I think she would feel guilty, sick and uncomfortable, all at the same time, even though she knew that the people killed were scumbags.

Then there was Quinn who got suspicious of Dexter. When he got suspended after LaGuerta had found out about his off-the-books-investigation into one of their own, he hired a police officer called Liddy to continue the deed, but when Liddy actually found proof that Dexter was in some serious shit, Quinn backed off, because he has been in love with Dexter’s sister Debra. He just dropped all of his suspicions all the sudden in the name of love. It seemed too convenient for me that he would just back off so easily, especially after he he had been so keen on proving his suspicions up to that point. Would he really just put everything on hold? Liddy then of course gets killed by Dexter, because if someone were to expose him, the show would be over. Liddy had kind of a shady personality, but I don’t remember that they ever mentionned that he would actually fit Dexter’s code, so has Dexter now moved on to self-preservation and is willing to sacrifice the lives of more or less innocent bystanders to protect himself? Of course in the season premiere he also killed a random person, someone of whom we never got to know if he fit Dexter’s code, since the writers of the show didn’t get back to it. And if Dexter is straying away from his code to protect himself now, wouldn’t that be worth going into details after Dexter’s code has been so prominently featured on the show?

One thing that I loved about season five was Deb’s development, which was beautifully played by Jennifer Carpenter. After having put down a violent serial killer at a club, she pondered if some people deserved to die and if she was actually okay with dangerous people being put down. For a character who has been seeing things in black and white for most of her life, that was an interesting direction for her character to take and is slowly preparing a potential storyline of Deb finding out about Dexter. In the finale of course, she was very close to finding out, as she entered one of Dexter’s crime scenes, when he was still there, but ultimately she decided to let the vigilante killers go. Which was a huge let-down for me honestly, because the writers of Dexter have made it a habit of having people nearly discover Dexter’s secret, but have him get away with it at the last second. This year’s finale wasn’t even the first episode in which Deb nearly discovered his secret. The writers of Dexter have used this kind of storytelling too many times, so that the show is starting to feel stuck and repetitive.

The writers are afraid of change, which makes the show more and more predictable each year. While I usually like that Dexter seasons always have a beginning, a middle and an ending, the seasons themselves have become too similiar to each other and the stakes are not as high as during the first seasons, as we already know that Dexter is going to get away with everything until they announce the final season. Even this year, when the writers promised to shake things up by not having a big bad, they essentially lied, because Dexter had a big bad played by Jonny Lee Miller. He was in most of the season and was clearly the main villain. He had minions who were connected to him and were involved too, but he still was the big bad that Dexter had to fight. Having no big bad would have meant that there would not have been one single threat throughout the season, but multiple random kills which are not connected to each other instead. I would have liked that idea, because it would have given the writers more opportunities to deal with the aftermath of season four and it would have given them more time to get inside the characters instead of hurrying them through plot points.

I wish the writers had the bravery to break the formula of the show and actually surprise the audience. The finale would have provided the perfect moment for Deb to find out about Dexter and it would have been a finale that we would have talked about all year. Even if she had not found out about Dexter and just seen Lumen with Lumen taking the fall for Dexter, it would have been more interesting than it turned out to be. It’s kind of insulting for the viewer that everything just got resolved so neatly without any consequences. The writers of “Weeds” have been great at writing themselves into a corner and absolutely going with it, why do the writers of Dexter always have to push the reset button instead of taking the show forward? Even just letting one of Dexter’s targets not end up on his table, but instead escape, would be a welcome change from what we have come to know about this show.

For some reason I also believe that the writers idolize Dexter too much recently. It feels like they are taking the darkness out of the show with every passing season. I understand that the show is about Dexter’s journey to humanity, but I feel like they have made him too much of an hero and don’t focus all that much anymore on that he’s still essentially a killer, even if he takes out bad people. Only the scene in which Lumen was in his kill room as an outsider for the first time was a reminder that Dexter’s kill rituals are sick themselves and kind of like a twisted celebration. It feels like the writers stray away from that to make Dexter more sympathetic for the audience, when people shouldn’t really care about that by now, 5 seasons into the show.

That being said, I still enjoyed season five. I’m just sad about the constant repetition of themes (Dexter looks for companions), and storytelling devices (Dexter gets caught…oh wait, my bad.) and the lack of progress and surprises in the series. I enjoyed the barrel girl case, which was wonderfully creepy. Jennifer Carpenter has grown into a wonderful female lead and is the only regular character who keeps me invested when Dexter is not in a scene. Daniel Licht’s score is beautiful to listen to and even though there is a lack of surprises, the show still keeps me on the edge of my seat, but I know the show can do much better, therefore I hope the show can get its act together again and deliver a sixth season full of surprises and twists (or just set an end date, so that we can get surprises and twists).

Below you can watch a parody which sums up Dexter’s never-changing formula quite well:

Killen’s last series, FOX’s “Lone Star”, was one of the most critically-acclaimed new shows last fall, but when the show premiered to abysmal ratings and failed to grab an audience, FOX cancelled it after only two episodes. “Lone Star” revolved around a con man (played by newcomer James Wolk) with two wives and it was often suggested that it failed because it was designed as a cable show for broadcast television with a morally ambigous lead character.

Killen, who interacted with fans of the show on Twitter, in an effort to raise awareness for the second episode of ‘Lone Star’ last fall, hinted that there might still be an opportunity for fans of the show to see the four unaired episodes of ‘Lone Star’, but that a DVD would be unlikely.

Lone Star’s cancellation was not only disappointing for Killen: Even Kevin Reilly, FOX’s entertainment president, stated that it was frustrating to cancel the well-reviewed series, when he spoke to reporters last October: “On cable, we would’ve been able to have the guys on Lone Star take off their clothes, the show would have pulled 1.3m viewers, and we would’ve declared it a hit because that’s what Mad Men draws. We would’ve collected a few trophies, too, and no-one would have questioned it.”

When asked last fall what he would do different with his next series, Killen said that he’d try to cater more to network conventions and write a show that fits in with what is successful for network television. If NBC decides to pick up “REM” , we’ll see where it fits in between network conventions and Killen’s failed “Lone Star” experiment.

Below you can see one of the beautiful promo videos that FOX created to promote “Lone Star” last fall.

The pilot was written by Nahnatchka Khan, whose previous writing credits include “American Dad”, “Unfabulous” and “Malcolm In The Middle”. Jason Winer (”Modern Family”) has been tapped to direct the pilot episode.

Ritter’s previous television credits include a lead role on Starz’s short-lived “Gravity”, recurring roles on “Gilmore Girls” and “Veronica Mars”, a guest appearance on “Gossip Girl” and a major arc on the second season of AMC’s critically-acclaimed and Award-winning drama series “Breaking Bad”.

Gellar will play Bridget Cafferty, a recovering addict who is on the run, after she decided not to testify against a dangerous murderer in court. She ultimately turns to her estranged twin sister Siobhan for help and ends up taking on her sister’s identity, when Siobhan dies unexpectedly. Soon however Bridget realizes that her sister’s life is just as complicated as hers and she will have all kinds of trouble to fool the people in Siobhan’s life into thinking that she is the same person. Other characters include Siobhan’s husband Andrew, her best friend Gemma, her lover Henry and FBI agent Victor Machado who is looking for Bridget.

“Ringer” was written by Eric Charmelo and Nicole Snyder, who are relatively unknown writers, with a couple of episodes of TheCW’s ‘Supernatural’ probably being their most prominent work so far. For a potential CBS series, the concept of “Ringer” itself is unusual, as it doesn’t really fit into CBS’ crime produceral mold, which makes Hollywood insiders wonder if the show even has a chance to survive on CBS, let alone a chance to be picked up to series, as CBS usually fails at making any thing other than crime producerals and multicam-sitcoms work.

In an interview with Entertainment Weekly , “Ringer” executive producer Peter Traugott compares the show with CBS’ critically-acclaimed “The Good Wife” and  FX’s creatively fulfilling “Damages”, describing the show as a character-driven thriller with great characters and acknowledging that it’s not a CBS show at first sight, but that he is hoping that it works for CBS in the same way that “The Good Wife” has been working for them. The show will have an overriding arc, but also tell episodic stories at the same time.

Sarah Michelle Gellar will play both twin sisters. “Buffy” fans have already seen Gellar successfully play two different characters in the ‘Buffy’ episode “Who Are You?”. Richard Shepard, the EMMY-award-winning director of the pilot episode of “Ugly Betty”, has been brought in to direct the pilot episode.

Currently, Kristen Stewart & Robert Pattinson have no deal in place to the extend the saga further, and all signs currently indicate it is unlikely.

via HuffPost

Jennifer Aniston pays homage through her beautiful looks to Barbra Streisand in the September issue of Harper’s Bazaar Magazine. Jennifer talks about her love for Barbra in the interview, and even admits to singing her songs in the shower:

“Jennifer Aniston is sitting at home in Los Angeles, musing about singing Barbra Streisand songs in the shower. “Someone said to me, ‘If I had Barbra’s voice for just one day,’ and I said, ‘Nah, I don’t want to be greedy. If I had her voice for just one shower — just a shower’s worth — I would be happy.’” If so, perhaps it’s worth forgetting modesty and selling tickets. “Hmm, no,” she laughs. “Well, actually, if it was her voice …”

Check out the full interview and more pictures here.