A photographer in California says Keanu Reeves ran him over with his car last year, and he's suing the dull celebrity for damages. But the paparazzo's lawyer is asking the judge to keep the words "paparazzo" and "paparazzi" out of the trial, because he claims they're prejudicial. It's an interesting philosophical question: is it prejudicial to call someone a "soulless celebrity bloodsucker" if they are in fact that very thing? Probably not any moreso than calling Keanu Reeves a "mumbling stone-faced subhuman who couldn't be more comically unsuited for his chosen profession." [LAT]