Amy Adams is opening up about why she rejected a “graphic” sketch idea while hosting Saturday Night Live in 2008.
The Oscar-nominated actress hosted the late night NBC show a few months after her family-friendly fairytale comedy Enchanted, also starring James Marsden, hit theaters. So when SNL castmember Andy Samberg pitched her the skit, she chose to turn it down to protect her young fans.
“I’ll give you the gist without telling you the punchline,” Adams said of the sketch during a recent appearance on Late Night With Seth Meyers. “It was this couple [and] he got bit by a spider in the park, and she’s like, ‘Honey, I love you so much, and now that you’re dying, is there any last wish?’ And he’s like, ‘Yes, I never got a chance to…’ And then said what could only be described as the most graphic thing that he wanted to do with me.”
Host Seth Meyers told the Cape Fear actress that Samberg had previously praised her for speaking up for herself and her image, as well as considering her young fans.
“I was so keenly aware of all the young girls that were watching Enchanted,” Adams explained. “And I didn’t want to be the princess singing about that particular act, you know?”
Last year, on The Lonely Island and Seth Meyers Podcast, Samberg shared that the skit in question would have featured a “very dirty” duet. And though he said Adams thought it was “really funny,” she nicely explained that she “can’t do that. Little girls are so obsessed with Enchanted right now they will find this and it will be scarring for them.”
Not long after, when they went to film the “Hero Song” short for that SNL episode, Samberg was able to fully understand where Adams was coming from.
“Within five minutes, a mother and her little girl walked up and the look on the little girl’s face upon seeing Amy Adams, I was like, ‘Oh, she was so right,’” the Brooklyn Nine-Nine actor recounted. “And it was very instructive for me. It’s not something I even ever thought about in our line of work, you know what I mean? Like, she actually has an obligation and a responsibility to those kids, and she took it really seriously. And I remember being really impressed by that.”

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Tyra Banks has filed a defamation lawsuit against Netflix and the directors of its docuseries “Reality Check: Inside America’s Next Top Model,” alleging that the producers stripped down hours of interview footage to construct a false narrative.
In the lawsuit filed Saturday in Los Angeles federal court, the model who created and hosted “America’s Next Top Model” said she was interviewed for 3 ½ hours, during which she took responsibility for some of the show’s controversial decisions. Those interviews were edited down to 16 minutes and manipulated “to support a false and defamatory narrative unrelated to what she actually expressed,” the lawsuit said.
“The accountability Ms. Banks took ended up on the cutting room floor. It was there, but viewers were never given the opportunity to see it,” her lawyers wrote.
Banks is seeking damages in her lawsuit against Netflix, the directors Daniel Sivan and Mor Loushy and EverWonder Studio. She’s also seeking an injunction barring the use of her image in connection with the docuseries’ soundtrack, released as an album.
Emails seeking comments were sent Sunday to the defendants’ representatives.
“America’s Next Top Model” launched in 2003 and ran for 24 seasons. In recent years, the reality competition series has undergone a critical reevaluation over accusations of body shaming, manipulation of contestants and problematic photoshoots. Banks has previously addressed those criticisms, acknowledging “the insensitivity of past ANTM moments” and “some really off choices.”
The lawsuit contends that the producers of the Netflix docuseries used “selective editing, deliberate omission, and surgical manipulation of continuous footage” to formulate a narrative that Banks allowed a contestant to be sexually assaulted on the show, used the contestant’s trauma to drum up ratings and then couldn’t remember it when asked during the interviews.
“Defendants edited the Netflix Series to make it appear that Ms. Banks knew she was being asked about a sexual assault and was intentionally trying to evade the topic,” the lawsuit stated, contending that Banks hadn’t been told — or asked — about the assault during the interview.
Banks’ lawyers wrote that she wasn’t permitted to review the docuseries until a day before its Feb. 16 release. According to the lawsuit, she had not been contacted for fact-checking after her interviews, and was not given an opportunity to respond to accusations from other participants. Other judges from the show, including one her lawyers contend holds a grudge against Banks, consulted on the docuseries.
“Had Ms. Banks known these individuals were so deeply involved in the formulation of the Netflix Series, also serving as consultants shaping the editorial direction, and that she had been excluded from such a role, it would have raised a red flag,” the lawsuit read. “She would have known she was being set up. She would not have participated.”
Banks’ lawyers reached out to Netflix in March to request access to the full footage of her interviews. Netflix and EverWonder denied that request, according to the lawsuit. Since the docuseries’ release, public reaction has been “swift, harsh, and directed squarely at Ms. Banks” — even SMiZE & DREAM, her ice cream shop in Sydney, Australia, has been subject to review bombing on Google, the lawsuit read.
The Associated Press sent an email seeking further detail from Banks’ lawyers and representatives on Sunday.
“Every other conversation about ANTM’s legacy — including the candid reflection Ms. Banks came prepared to have — is now drowned out by an accusation she was never given the chance to answer,” her lawyers wrote. “This lawsuit is that answer — particularly after her efforts to resolve the matter directly with Netflix and the producers were refused.”

Two helicopters have collided in mid-air over the Brazilian city of Rio de Janeiro, killing all six people on board, local authorities said.
Officials have launched an investigation into the cause of Sunday morning’s crash over a western suburb of the city called Recreio dos Bandeirantes.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 items
list 1 of 3Indonesian rescuers find wreckage of plane that had 11 people on board
list 2 of 3Three British navy personnel killed in helicopter crash in England
list 3 of 3At least 22 killed as Pakistani military helicopter crashes in Kashmir
end of list
Firefighters said the helicopters collided before plummeting into the parking lot of an electric car dealership, setting about 20 vehicles on fire.
Fire services spokesman Fabio Contreiras said the blaze was difficult to extinguish because of toxic gases released by lithium-ion batteries in the electric vehicles.
“When this type of battery catches fire, it releases highly toxic gases and intensifies both the temperature and severity of the blaze,” Contreiras said.
“Extinguishing a fire in one of these vehicles requires three to four times the amount of water needed for a standard car fire.”
He added that the surrounding area was densely populated and that the death toll would have been far higher had the helicopters not crashed into the car park.
Contreiras said rescue workers had discovered one helicopter in flames among the electric cars, with five victims inside. A second helicopter, found about 100m (328 feet) away, was carrying only the pilot, who also died.
Debris from the helicopters was found hundreds of metres from the crash site. Footage shared online showed a thick plume of smoke rising from the car park into the sky.
Contreiras said authorities would need to review recordings of the incident before the cause of the crash could be confirmed.
Helicopter crashes are common in Brazil.
According to statistics from the Center for Investigation and Prevention of Aeronautical Accidents (CENIPA), there had been 84 aircraft accidents in 2026 prior to Sunday’s crash.

Steven Spielberg is many things. Hollywood icon. Nostalgia dealer. Dinosaur daddy.
But is he cool?
The 79-year-old filmmaker returned to the summer box office for the first time in a decade over the weekend with “Disclosure Day,” an original science-fiction spectacle. It collected an estimated $44 million at 3,824 theaters in the United States and Canada from Thursday through Sunday, according to Rentrak, an entertainment data service.
“A very good opening,” said David A. Gross, a film consultant who publishes a newsletter on box office numbers, noting that original stories are inherently harder to market than established franchises. A week ago, “Disclosure Day” was on track to take in roughly $35 million in its first weekend, with analysts basing that estimate on advance ticket sales and surveys that track moviegoer interest.
The primary reason for the uncertainty was that no one, not even Universal Pictures, the studio behind “Disclosure Day,” was quite sure whether the film would attract younger moviegoers. They’re the ones who typically rush out to see new movies and who have recently powered extra big opening weekends for films like “Backrooms.”
And if teenagers and young adults didn’t show up, could “Disclosure Day” rely on older moviegoers to pick up the slack? Ticket buyers over 34 — “old” by Hollywood’s reckoning — have been the slowest to return to theaters since the pandemic.
In the end, the oldsters saved the day. About 59 percent of the “Disclosure Day” audience was over 34, according to PostTrak, a movie research firm.
Compare that with “Backrooms,” a cooler-than-thou horror movie (from a 20-year-old first-time director who built a following on YouTube) that managed to sell an eye-popping $81.4 million in tickets on its opening weekend last month. Roughly 14 percent of ticket buyers for “Backrooms” over its first three days in theaters were over 34.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Tyra Banks filed a defamation lawsuit against Netflix and the directors of its “America’s Next Top Model” docuseries, claiming they manipulated hours of interview footage to support a false narrative about her role on the show.
The lawsuit, filed on Saturday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, says that the three-part docuseries, “Reality Check: Inside America’s Next Top Model,” which premiered on Netflix in February, defamed Ms. Banks by implication and portrayed her in a false light.
The lawsuit also claims breach of contract and false endorsement. The production company EverWonder Studio is also named as a defendant.
Representatives for Netflix, as well as for the show’s directors, Mor Loushy and Daniel Sivan, and EverWonder Studio did not respond to requests for comment on Sunday. A representative for Ms. Banks declined to comment.
“Reality Check,” which explored the legacy of triumphs and controversies of “America’s Next Top Model,” drew a variety of responses. Some questioned why it had taken so long to scrutinize the show, which ran in the United States for 24 seasons (or “cycles,” in the show’s parlance) between 2003 and 2018. Others wanted to hold Ms. Banks, who created, hosted and executive produced “America’s Next Top Model,” accountable for the show’s missteps, which included asking models to pose as people who were homeless, bulimic, drug-addicted or victims of violent crime, and requesting them to adopt different races or ethnicities.
Ms. Banks says in her lawsuit that the producers did not share enough of her responses from the three-and-a-half-hour interview she had given to them, in which she answered questions about the show’s history, including criticism of decisions that she says she would approach differently today.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.