ShutterstockPaulWalkerIt’s a  modest, unbylined attempt at Bonnie vs. media goliaths criticism. One that completely misses the mark.

HollywoodLife, four days later, is taking issue with a December 1 NYT article by Emma G. Fitzsimmons. The publication feels that no one should be chipping away, posthumously, at the Paul Walker film career.

The only problem is that neither New York Times excerpt highlighted by HL is anything close to “trashing.” The paper is simply and factually reporting on Walker’s professional trajectory, relying in part on an A.O. Scott film review.

HollywoodLife also mangles the meaning of a Vulture headline for Bilge Ebiri‘s article published Sunday. New York magazine is not reducing Walker to an “Everyman.” Rather, they were angling in on Walker’s charming and extremely rare post-Golden Age combination of an everyman’s personality with a Hollywood leading man’s good looks. They’re actually paying the late actor two separate compliments in that one, single headline.

Read more