Quick, tell me what's wrong with this image? I haven't read Maxim in awhile; usually I'll pick up a copy before traveling as it's something easy to read on the plane, but I haven't gone anywhere in a few months and, thus, haven't read any Maxim. I'm not sure if they've always picked their Woman of the Year wayyy ahead of time (like, in the wrong year), but that's neither here nor there. What's baffling to me is why on earth they would choose Sarah Michelle Gellar to represent woman in 2008. For what, exactly? And don't tell me it's because of that image -- heck, you can airbrush me for a few hours and turn out something that makes me look like Brad Pitt. Seriously though ... why her? Of all people, why Sarah Michelle Gellar? And I wonder if she only agreed to pose for sexy pics under the condition they'd give her some bogus prize like 2008 Woman of the Year.

When asked why she decided to grace the cover now, she replied: "I'm 30, and I'm promoting a bunch of different kinds of movies. I like to shake things up every once in a while. It's good to leave people wanting more, but I don't want to leave them waiting too long or they'll lose interest. Besides, how could I not do a Maxim shoot when I have a movie coming out in which I play a porn star?" That movie is Southland Tales, and as of now Gellar has only three roles lined up for 2008 -- two Korean horror remakes (ugh) and Alice. And she claims to be promoting a bunch of different movies? Like .... Southland Tales? Because that's the only movie you're in. (Oh wait, she's also in Suburban Girl, but that doesn't go straight to DVD until January.) Buffy is Back! Actually, technically, she's not back -- Gellar does not have plans to reprise the Buffy character in the near future. So that's a lie. Surely, if it's hotness you're going after, then Maxim could've easily found a better gal to call their 2008 Woman of the Year? I'm a little disappointed. You?

[via Daily Stab]

categories Movies, Cinematical