Page 1 of 1312345...10...Last »


Feb 8
'12
Connor Cruise apologizes for his homophobic rant post-Patriots loss

One of the Tom Cruise stories that has always stuck with me is Bronson Pinchot’s assessment of Cruise as a young man, when they worked together on Risky Business. In a 2009 tell-all interview with The AV Club, Pinchot described a 20-year-old Tom Cruise this way:

“He was tense and made constant, constant unrelated homophobic comments, like, ‘You want some ice cream, in case there are no gay people there?’ I mean, his lingo was larded with the most… There was no basis for it. It was like, ‘It’s a nice day, I’m glad there are no gay people standing here.’ Very, very strange.”

[Via previous Celebitchy story]

I was reminded of that story this morning because Page Six has a very interesting piece about Tom’s son Connor. Connor is 17 years old, and I have mixed feeling about Connor being the subject of this gossip piece, but in my defense, Connor seems to want to be a public figure – he’s using his Hollywood connections to launch himself as a DJ. Anyway, Connor is a Patriots fan, and his rep, Todd Krim, is not. When the Pats lost, Krim sent his client a playfully gloating text. And Connor responded with a homophobic hissy fit.

Gisele Bundchen isn’t the only sore loser left cursing after the New England Patriots’ crushing loss at the hands of the Giants. Connor Cruise — a die-hard Patriots fan and the DJ son of Tom Cruise — lashed out at one of his reps, Todd Krim, who tweeted after the game, “Sorry @TheConnorCruise maybe next year!!!”

According to an e-mail forwarded to publicists by Krim, Cruise, 17, texted him back, saying, “That was a gay ass [bleeping] tweet . . . U don’t say [bleep] like that about my team the second they lose. Low.”

When Krim — who heads entertainment/ charity Web site Give Back Hollywood and helped book DJ gigs for Cruise — wrote back, “Umm ok . . . Dude I was [bleeping] joking,” Cruise responded, “That was [bleeped]” and “Idgaf” (“I don’t give a [bleep]).”

Cruise and Krim were both in Indy where Cruise DJed DirecTV’s Saturday night party. Krim says the Twitter tantrum ended their professional relations, while sources close to Cruise say they’d parted ways weeks ago.

On Monday, Krim e-mailed colleagues with a screen grab of Cruise’s texts, saying, “I am no longer working with Connor Cruise. In fact, I am no longer speaking with [him] . . . I refuse to be professionally (or even personally) associated with someone that engages in this sort of behavior . . . I just thought you should know who and what you’re dealing with.”

He called Cruise’s comments, “highly offensive and what I consider homophobic . . . after I jokingly tweeted about the Patriots losing.”

Krim told us, “I did a lot for [Connor], and he was less than respectful and appreciative… I made a joke, and let’s just say his reaction was not what I expected. It’s disappointing when you think someone is one way and they turn out to be another.”

Cruise told Page Six through his rep: “What I texted was unacceptable. It is not a reflection of who I am and what I feel, and it certainly won’t happen again.”

[From Page Six]

It sounds like the Cruise camp has mixed feelings about how to handle this – Connor apologized through his reps, and yet this line is still included: “Krim says the Twitter tantrum ended their professional relations, while sources close to Cruise say they’d parted ways weeks ago.” That’s a classic “this dude has an axe to grind, that’s why he’s making up this story” tactic. With Connor’s apology, it looks like Krim’s account is likely pretty accurate. So that means Connor is a chip off the old block, right?

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Posted in Connor Cruise, Controversies

Written by Kaiser         149 Comments »
Jan 17
'12
Beyonce’s latest “lighter skinned” album photo causes controversy

This is a just-released image from the photo shoot for Beyonce’s 4 album artwork. And what an art project it is, eh? This one image has already scored yet another round of “Beyonce systematically lightens her skin in post-production” complaints. One of the first times this happened was back in 2008, and was probably not even Bey’s fault – it was an ad for L’Oreal, so the company probably decided to lighten Beyonce’s skin color. But since then, Bey has been criticized several more times. I noted back when he discussed the original art work for 4 and the first video from the album – Beyonce’s weave was especially blonde, and her skin looked really, really pale in those photos.

She faced controversy back in 2008 when her skin appeared shades lighter in an advertisement. But it appears Beyoncé – or her producers – have not learned their lesson. A promotional picture has emerged of the pop princess looking much paler than her usual colour.

The new photo, taken before the 30-year-old fell pregnant with her newborn daughter, are being used to re-advertise her fourth album, 4, which was released last year.

In the seductive pose, Beyoncé dons a blonde wig and lies on a leopard-print couch, wearing a skimpy black crochet monokini. She also wears suspenders and a lashing of dark red lipstick. Experts told The Sun the appearance may have been down to lighting used in the studio. However this is not the first time the wife of rapper Jay-Z has accused of appearing to ‘lighten’ her skin.’

It has been alleged that in the early days of award-winning band Destiny’s Child her father Mathew Knowles had persuaded her to use skin treatments to remain the lightest-complexioned member of the successful girl group. And some commentators have expressed fears, that these images of the superstar singer – who is famous for her honey-toned hair and complexion, could have the effect of making darker-skinned black girls ashamed of how they look.

In August 2008, cosmetics giant L’Oreal was accused of ‘whitewashing’ the star in an advert by digitally lightening her skin. And last February, a very blonde Beyonce stepped out, wearing a black minidress which revealed unusually pale skin on the star.

At the time writer Yasmin Alibhai-Brown accused the singer of ‘betraying all Black and Asian women.’ She wrote in The Daily Mail: ‘Too many black and Asian children grow up understanding the sad truth that to have dark skin is to be somehow inferior. Of course, black and Asian parents work hard to give their children a positive self-image and confidence in their appearance, despite the cultural forces stacked against them. But when black celebrities appear to deny their heritage by trying to make themselves look white, I despair for the youngsters who see those images.’

At the time, the cosmetics house denied that the pictures had been altered in such a way but The New York Post newspaper called the advert ‘shocking’ and accused it of making the singer look like a ‘weird, nearly white version of herself’.

She has not commented on the photos.

[From The Mail]

Yes, the whole “lighter is better” complex is felt in the Asian communities too – Freida Pinto spoke about the fixation with lighter skin amongst Indian women last year too. My thought? If it was an odd advertisement where Bey may or may not have had control over, I would think the controversy should not fall at Beyonce’s feet. But this has been happening with Beyonce for YEARS. In promotional images, in magazine photo shoots, in advertising, her skin is almost always lighter than it is in “candid” photos. Sometimes, there really is a conspiracy. And I don’t understand why Beyonce is still so obsessed with putting herself out there like a blonde white woman. For why?

Photos courtesy of WENN, Beyonce Online.

Posted in Beyonce, Controversies

Written by Kaiser         251 Comments »
Jan 12
'12
Beyonce’s controversial delivery was investigated by NY Health Dept.

I don’t really want to talk about the scandals and conspiracies involved with Beyonce’s (real or alleged) delivery of baby Blue Ivy at Lenox Hill Hospital. And yet… there are still tons of stories, and the scandal keeps growing by the day. After reports of multiple “peasant” parents being denied access to the prenatal unit at Lenox Hill – and denied access to their own newborn children while Beyonce and Jay were in the house – reports now indicate that the situation around baby Blue’s birth is being investigated by the New York City Health Department. (UPDATE: TMZ reports that the investigation is over? O RLY?) Plus, the hospital is conducted their own in-house review of everything that went down. What will they find? Will they find that Beyonce and Jay spread around more than $1 million within the hospital to keep everyone quiet? Or will they find that Bey and Jay shelled out a large chunk of change for a temporary remodel of eight hospital rooms? That’s what Us Weekly claims:

Sweet suites! To prep for the birth of their daughter Blue Ivy, Beyonce and Jay-Z didn’t just build a deluxe nursery at their Tribeca home — they had two private, over-the-top suites built at NYCs Lenox Hill Hospital for the express purpose of Blue’s arrival.

“A month ago, [workers] tore down 6-8 rooms and turned them into 2 suites,” a Lenox Hill Hospital source tells Us Weekly. Beyonce, 30, and husband Jay-Z, 42, “paid to have it constructed just for them.”

Featuring “mahogany walls” and other posh accents, the “amazing” suites sat empty for about a month until Blue Ivy’s Jan. 7 birth. “You’d want to live in there!” the hospital source gushes.

Officials for the hospital shot down rumors that the superstar couple caused turmoil at the hospital — and that some patients and families were temporarily denied access to the NICU to accommodate the VIPs on the premises.

No word yet on what’s to become of the suites now that Beyonce and Blue have departed.

Now that little Blue Ivy is at home at her parents’ palatial Tribeca home, she’ll kick back a $3,5000 NurseryWorks VETRO Lucite crib.

[From Us Weekly]

Dear God. How f–king wasteful! They tore apart six to eight perfectly adequate rooms so that Blue Ivy could enter the world in her own VIP suite? And no one was allowed in there for a month? How does the hospital justify this kind of thing to its board? If it was just about sprucing up an existing suite or something, it would be a meh story. But taken with the stories of Bey and Jay’s complete disregard for all of the “peasants” in the hospital, and now the idea that part of the prenatal wing was under construction just for THE BIRTH OF A PILLOW, the whole thing is just insane. TMZ has photos of the VIP birthing suite that Bey and Jay had constructed – you can see it here. TMZ says it includes “4 flat screen TV’s, state of the art electronics, a kitchenette, nice art, mahogany walls and plush furnishings.” Sources tell TMZ, “the suite was not constructed specifically for Beyonce, but it was always intended that Beyonce would be the first patient to use it.” WTF?

Anyway, there are even more Blue Ivy stories. She’s already the biggest little princess ever. Even the eventual child of Duchess Kate and Prince William will not roll in the kind of luxury that Blue Ivy is getting. This is what has been allegedly stacked up for Blue – the list is worth more than $1.5 million, and includes:

*A “fantasy” crib fit for Cinderella – a coach-like crib from PoshTots, for which her her parents paid nearly $20,000.

*A solid-gold, handmade horse from Japanese jeweler Ginza Tanaka that Jay-Z bought for $600,000. (This has been denied in some outlets.)

*A $15,000 highchair dripping with Swarovski crystals.

*A $285 Jean-Paul Gaultier dress.

*A $30,000 windmill playhouse.

*A trunk full of children’s books, a present from Oprah.

[Via The NY Post & The NYDN]

I can’t even. You know she’s just going to be pooping, sleeping and nursing for the first three months or so, right?

These are all photos from a trip Bey and Jay took to Paris in late April of last year. Bey would have been almost two months along in her pregnancy. Maybe that was why her face looked so jacked?

Photos courtesy of Fame.

Posted in Beyonce, Controversies, Jay-Z

Written by Kaiser         215 Comments »
Dec 28
'11
Duchess Kate praised by animal rights groups for not participating in royal hunt

As we saw a few days ago, Duchess Kate’s first royal Christmas seemed to go very well. She got lots of attention in her plum coat and coordinating hat, she wore her seemingly new Christmas gift earrings (green amethysts!), and she looked happy. But all was not perfect in The Queendom of Waity. Animal-rights activists had basically come out and said that they would be putting a fatwa out on Kate if she participated in the royal family’s annual Boxing Day pheasant shoot. So what did Kate do? She went to the hunt, but she “stayed in the background,” not participating in the blood sport. Good for Kate? I don’t know. It seems like the animal-rights people are gloating, and they feel like they have leverage on her now.

Kate Middleton has declined to participate in the Royal Family’s traditional Boxing Day bird shoot. The wife of Prince William reportedly went against protocol and opted to “stay in the background” following pleas from animal rights organizations to step out of the Sandringham Estate celebration.

“At the moment Kate is very much the bright new star of the Royal Family and the Palace is keen for her to keep her nose clean,” a source told the Daily Star. “Activists have begged her not to join the shoot. No-one wants to see her caught up in a scandal so soon.”

Middleton’s move has been commended by a number of charity representatives, with the League Against Cruel Sports commenting: “We are pleased that Kate has decided not to take part in the annual bloodbath.”

PETA further praised the Duchess of Cambridge for continuing the anti-bloodsport sentiments held by her late mother-in-law Princess Diana.

“The Royals have always had a hard time adjusting to social value,” president Ingrid Newkirk commented. “Rather than emulating Diana the Huntress, perhaps the British public is seeing a new Kate who is taking after Diana, the Princess of Hearts.”

Prince Philip was absent from the Boxing Day shoot due to his hospitalization for a blocked coronary artery. He was discharged this morning (December 27) after recovering from heart surgery.

[From Digital Spy]

“No-one wants to see her caught up in a scandal so soon.” Is it really a “scandal” to take part in the royal family’s annual Boxing Day activities? She would have been criticized if she had taken part, but it wouldn’t have been a “scandal,” it would have just been a (minor) animal-rights controversy. You know I’m no Kate-defender, but I dislike how the animal-rights groups are using poor Kate. She’s damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t, and why is only HER participation an issue? What about the other members of the royal family?

So… in my opinion, the only real “scandal” Kate is currently embroiled in is The Great Weave Scandal. I still have concerns that Kate is employing weaves and extensions. Oh, and let’s not forget The Raccoon McWaity Scandal. I wonder what her eyeliner budget is? Why doesn’t anyone think of the poor, victimized eyeliner?

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame.

Posted in Animal Rights, Controversies, Kate Middleton

Written by Kaiser         63 Comments »
Dec 13
'11
American Airlines may yank episodes of 30 Rock after Alec Baldwin debacle


You’ve undoubtedly seen Alec Baldwin’s SNL skit from this weekend, in which he spoofed his ouster from a domestic American Airlines flight for refusing to turn off his phone. On SNL Baldwin impersonated an American Airlines pilot, complete with a moustache and a pitch perfect accent, and apologized to himself. He played it completely straight and it was pretty amusing.

Baldwin previously issued an apology to his fellow passengers for refusing to turn off his phone while his plane was sitting at the gate, causing a further delay in takeoff while he was kicked off the flight. He never apologized to the crew or flight attendants though, and claimed in his statement that he was singled out by one flight attendant, whom he compared to a retired Catholic school gym teacher. Well the flight attendants aren’t forgiving Baldwin, either. E! News has confirmed that the American Airlines flight attendant union is lobbying the bankrupt airline to pull all episodes of “30 Rock” that play on the in-flight entertainment system. I think we know now why that stewardess was so annoyed with Alec Baldwin. Anyone who has to see the same sitcom episode every day at work (no matter how good it is) is going to harbor some grudges.

E! News has confirmed that the seemingly grudge-holding American Airlines Flight Attendants Union has taken the first steps to make sure Baldwin—or his TV alter ego—never step foot in their planes again.

The airlines confirmed that since Alec’s game of Words With Friends gained him some enemies (or more accurately, since the actor spoofed the airline on Saturday Night Live over the weekend), the union has broached the subject with those in charge of making such decisions of pulling the critically lauded 30 Rock from its inflight entertainment lineup.

So if it was possible, the skies just got even less friendly for Alec Baldwin. And less amusing for Alec Baldwin fans.

No decision has yet been made regarding the sitcom’s yanking, though an airline spokesperson was quick to explain that NBC routinely rotates which programs it offers onboard the AA flights, and that not every flight offers the same lineup (so just because passengers don’t see Tina Fey & Co. on their next voyage doesn’t mean the show has been pulled).

Currently, the show does continue to air on some—though not all—of the airline’s flights, which is standard programming procedure. For now.

[From E! Online]

This would be a very petty move. I have to fly in a couple of days and I’m not looking forward to it at all. It’s not some cushy one-off domestic flight, either, it’s international and I have two freaking layovers. I did side with Baldwin slightly in my coverage of this as I’ve suffered air rage silently and I’ve held it in. I’ve dealt with some nasty flight attendants and I’ve wanted to tell people off. I’m sure the flight attendants hate us when we’re bitches too, and they have more of us to deal with. They don’t want Alec to become some sort of folk hero. If they deliberately and obviously ban his TV show from flights, they may be giving him more credit than he deserves, though.

Alec Baldwin is shown on 12/6, 8/20 and 7/25/11. Credit: Fame

Posted in Alec Baldwin, Controversies, Travel

Written by Celebitchy         58 Comments »
Dec 8
'11
Alec Baldwin’s essay in response to getting kicked off flight: I was singled out


A lot of people assumed that Alec Baldwin was probably in the wrong when he got kicked off an American Airlines flight for playing Words With Friends on his phone. The guy has some well known anger management issues and it’s not a stretch to assume that he acted like an entitled ass. Still, flying can be a demeaning experience and it’s similarly easy to imagine Alec getting singled out and taunted by a flight attendant. According to Alec, that’s exactly what happened. After he live tweeted his experience on the flight, Alec deleted his Twitter account. He later penned an essay for the Huffington Post detailing what happened. The way he explains it, the cabin door was closed, the plane was at the gat and everyone was sitting there, playing with their phones. In his version, one mean flight attendant kept telling him to put his device away, but everyone else was doing it and she was ignoring them. Here’s his story:

First off, I would like to apologize to the other passengers onboard the American Airlines flight that I was thrown off of yesterday. It was never my intention to inconvenience anyone with my “issue” with a certain flight attendant.

I suppose a part of my frustration lay with the fact that I had flown American for over 20 years and was brand loyal, in the extreme. The ticketing agents and Admiral’s Club staff have always been nothing but abundantly helpful to me, as I have flown hundreds of thousands of miles with the one carrier.

My confusion began when the flight, already a half hour behind schedule, boarded, the door closed, and we proceeded to sit at the gate for another fifteen minutes. I then did what I have nearly always done and that was to pull out my phone to complete any other messaging I had to do before take off. In nearly all other instances, the flight attendants seemed to be unbothered by and said nothing about such activity, by me or anyone else, until we actually were pulling away from the gate.

In this case, while other people were still manipulating their own phones, this one employee singled me out to put my phone away. Afterward, we still sat at the gate. I pulled out my phone again, while others did the same. Again, I was singled out by this woman in the most unpleasant of tones. I guess the fact that this woman, who had decided to make some example of me, while everyone else was left undisturbed, did get the better of me.

However, I have learned a valuable lesson. Airlines in the US are struggling with fuel costs, labor costs, bankruptcies, you name it. It’s no secret that the level of service on US carriers has deteriorated to a point that would make Howard Hughes red-faced. Filthy planes, barely edible meals, cuts in jet service to less-traveled locations. One of the big changes, in my time, is in the increase of the post-9/11, paramilitary bearing of much of the air travel business. September 11th was a horrific day in the airline industry, yet in the wake of that event, I believe carriers and airports have used that as an excuse to make the air travel experience as inelegant as possible.

Most of the flight attendants I have ever encountered still have some remnant of the old idea of service. Add to that the notion that in this day and age, many people have a lot of important work to do, by phone, and would like to do so till the last possible minute. But there are many now who walk the aisles of an airplane with a whistle around their neck and a clipboard in their hands and they have made flying a Greyhound bus experience.

The lesson I’ve learned is to keep my phone off when the 1950′s gym teacher is on duty. That was my fault there, even though this trip was quite a bit different from so many others. But it is sad, I think, that you’ve got to fly overseas today in order to bring back what has been thrown overboard by US carriers in terms of common sense, style, and service.

[From Huffington Post]

His story kind of resonated with me, to be honest. I’m not saying he was in the right by any means or that he shouldn’t have just given in. He should have, he knows the rules and everyone has to follow them. I fly a lot, though, and the flight attendants have the power to make or break your flight. So I don’t blame Alec for putting American Airlines on blast, especially if they treated him like that. Again, I’m not saying he should have stood his ground at all. He just should have put the phone away and tried to read a magazine or something. Everyone is supposed to put their devices away, even if they weren’t doing it at the time.

American Airlines has issued their own response to this story. They make the claim that Alec was abrasive, that he swore at the flight attendant, and that went to the bathroom and slammed the door while the seatbelt light was still on. Supposedly the cabin crew heard the door slam and got worried.

Since an extremely vocal customer has publicly identified himself as being removed from an American Airlines flight on Tuesday, Dec. 6, we have elected to provide the actual facts of the matter as well as the FAA regulations which American, and all airlines, must enforce. Cell phones and electronic devices are allowed to be used while the aircraft is at the gate and the door is open for boarding. When the door is closed for departure and the seat belt light is turned on, all cell phones and electronic devices must be turned off for taxi-out and take-off. This passenger declined to turn off his cell phone when asked to do so at the appropriate time. The passenger ultimately stood up (with the seat belt light still on for departure) and took his phone into the plane’s lavatory. He slammed the lavatory door so hard, the cockpit crew heard it and became alarmed, even with the cockpit door closed and locked. They immediately contacted the cabin crew to check on the situation. The passenger was extremely rude to the crew, calling them inappropriate names and using offensive language. Given the facts above, the passenger was removed from the flight and denied boarding.

[From American Airlines via USA Today]

If both versions are correct – if Alec really was singled out by a nasty flight attendant and then he did respond like this – I get both sides. I would have acquiesced the first time, I would have turned my phone off and put it away and sat there seething wondering why everyone else got to use their phones while I didn’t. In my mind though, I would have stood my ground and told them all off, making a huge scene. Hell I’ve wanted to do that on plenty of flights in the past. As it is, both parties were in the wrong and a whole plane full of people with busy lives got inconvenienced. I hate flying.

After I wrote all that, I noticed that a flight attendant’s organization issued a response to Alec. It’s frankly pretty bitchy, but I guess he deserves it. The rudeness goes both ways on flights, as this story shows. If you think about how much it sucks to fly, it must suck even more to be a flight attendant.

hile I personally enjoy Words with Friends as much as anybody, passengers can continue to search for that double letter triple word score after takeoff. I’m sure people are used to Alec Baldwin and his expressions,” Julie Frederick from the Association of Professional Flight Attendants told RadarOnline.com.

“There is a difference between being funny and being mean,” she continued. “Flight attendants have not been the only recipients of Alec Baldwin’s ill temper.

In 2007, a voice recording was released where Baldwin called his little daughter Ireland a “rude, thoughtless little pig” for which he ultimately apologized.

Frederick expressed support for flight attendants and the difficult and sometimes lifesaving job they do. “If Alec Baldwin needed emergency help on a flight then the ‘retired Catholic school gym teachers’ would save his life for another day of expressing himself,” she said.

[From Radar]

Here’s Alex at JFK on Tuesday after he took the next flight out of LAX. He’s also shown on 9/23 and 9/18. Credit: Fame

Posted in Alec Baldwin, Controversies

Written by Celebitchy         91 Comments »
Nov 10
'11
Ashton Kutcher quits Twitter after tweeting support for Joe Paterno

wenn3577955

I’ve been following this ongoing Joe Paterno/Penn State debacle for most of the week. If you’d like to read real stories about it, go here to Gawker/Deadspin’s ongoing reporting. The basic gist is that Penn State’s Assistant Coach Jerry Sandusky was raping young children in the showers, and when Penn State’s legendary coach Joe Paterno was told about it by an eyewitness, he simply informed Penn State’s athletic director, who then began a coverup involving several key administrators. There’s additional evidence to suggest that Paterno knew a lot more, but kept quiet and allowed the coverup to take place. Well, everything just went crazy this week, and Paterno thought that he could just quietly retire, but he just got fired yesterday. Riots ensued on the Penn State campus – Paterno is a beloved figure, yes, but are those kids seriously rioting because they didn’t think he should lose his job for failing to inform law enforcement about children being raped?!? I don’t care if football is a “religion”. When children are being violently assaulted, YOU DO SOMETHING. And yes, people are going to get fired, rioters.

Anyway, I wouldn’t be talking about any of this except that a douchey celebrity has now inserted his d-bag self into the whole controversy.

Following an avalanche of criticism, Ashton Kutcher deleted a controversial Tweet Wednesday night protesting the firing of Joe Paterno, admitting he hadn’t known about the sex-abuse scandal at Penn State.

“How do you fire Jo Pa? #insult #noclass as a hawkeye fan I find it in poor taste,” Kutcher wrote to his 8 million Twitter followers.

His followers responded with an explosion of insults, many of them extremely vicious, blasting the actor for defending the 84-year-old coach, who is under fire for possibly covering up former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky’s alleged sex abuse of young boys.

Kutcher, 33, soon realized his mistake, quickly backpedaled and admitted his ignorance. “Heard Joe was fired, fully recant previous tweet!” he wrote. “Didn’t have full story.”

He later deleted that message, too, and added this one: “As an advocate in the fight against child sexual exploitation, I could not be more remorseful for all involved in the Penn St. case.”

He also made this pledge: “As of immediately I will stop tweeting until I find a way to properly manage this feed. I feel awful about this error. Won’t happen again.”

This is the second Twitter faux pas in recent months for Kutcher. On Sept. 11, he backtracked after calling it “the greatest day of the year,” because it was the start of football season.

Paterno had earlier announced that he would retire at the end of the football season. Also fired was Penn State president Graham Spanier.

[From People]

It’s funny because Ashton Kutcher is a g–damn fraud. It’s funny because Mr. Real-Men-Don’t-Enslave-Children was defending a person who helped do just that. And seriously, how can you hear the Joe Paterno was fired and NOT hear WHY it happened? Watch the news for two minutes, you’ll get the gist.

ashton1

wenn3577966

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Posted in Ashton Kutcher, Controversies, Twitter

Written by Kaiser         139 Comments »
Oct 12
'11
Beyonce’s rep blasts “stupid, ridiculous and false” fake-bump stories

fp_7916609_beyonce_pulse_nyc_23_24

Here’s what I don’t understand: why is everyone bending over backwards to insult and patronize Beyonce’s critics? Ever since the video of Beyonce’s Sunday Night interview came out – complete with her baby bump “magically” folding in on itself as she sat down, Bey’s stans have been pulling out their hair that anyone would dare question The Beyonce Bump. She’s a celebrity, not Jesus. She’s not untouchable, and in my mind, I think it’s perfectly valid to ask “WTF?” when viewing the collapsing “bump”. You want to see it again?

Now legitimate, mainstream media outlets are getting into to it too – from People and Us Weekly to ABC News and the Washington Post. They’ve all run stories about the “bump conspiracies”. It’s getting so bad Beyonce’s publicist Yvette Noel-Schure even had to come out and do some damage control, telling ABC News, “Stupid, ridiculous and false.” BITCH PLEASE.

But since everybody is debating the bump and whether or not it’s real and why it looks like it’s collapsing on itself, let me just lay out my theory. I’m sorry I haven’t done this clearly before now, but I thought I already said some of this when the bump conspiracies came out. My conspiracy theory:

* Beyonce is actually pregnant. This is not a surrogate situation where Beyonce is wearing a fake bump to simply pretend she’s pregnant, and she’s going to pass off a someone else’s baby as her own.

*It’s debatable whether she’s due in February, but that’s what she claims, so I’m guessing it’s probably true-ish. Maybe the baby will be “late” and she’ll end up giving birth in March. We’ll see. My take is that she’s not as far along as everyone thinks she is. If she’s due in late February/early March, that means she’s about 4-and-a-half months right now.

*Beyonce is wearing a fake bump for the simplest of reasons: famewhorin’. She started wearing a prosthetic bump at the VMAs, when she did her big bump “debut” – when she was only about 12 weeks along and she magically had a nice-sized “bump” which she cradled lovingly for the cameras. She didn’t have a big enough bump on her own (remember how flat and fit she was just days earlier?), and she wanted to be the center of attention at the VMAs. She strapped on a prosthetic, and she created her own media-storm.

*For why? Because her latest album sucked, and it was the worst-reviewed album of Bey’s career. Beyonce did what any good con artist does: draws your eye to something else. Plus, she now gets to play the “I’m going to be a mother!” card to the hilt and introduce herself to the Mother Mafia fanbase.

*So now that Bey is presumably showing, why is she still wearing a prosthetic bump? I don’t know. But I do know that over the past month and half, every time Beyonce is photographed, her bump is a different size, and it goes up and down constantly. I honestly think Bey just wants the visual to be very powerful, and she thinks wearing a fake bump will be a bigger impact. Sometimes. Other times, she still wants to wander around NYC in a what amounts to a blouse and nothing else.

*Epilogue conspiracy theory: It might have something to do with deflecting attention from her recently tweaked face too. Several months ago, Bey debuted a new “look” that I’ve had difficulty describing. I think it’s a nose job, but there’s something else in the eyebrows/eyes too. Now she gets to say that her face just changed because of pregnancy, I guess.

bey12

fp_7874485_barm_beyonce_09_09

fp_7897620_barm_beyonce_09_12

Photos courtesy of Fame.

Posted in Beyonce, Controversies

Written by Kaiser         151 Comments »
Sep 27
'11
Patti Stanger apologizes for her homophobic remarks on Bravo show

wenn3456405

As you may remember, I watch The Millionaire Matchmaker. I don’t consider it a good show or anything, and it’s not like I wait around to watch new episodes or anything, but if Bravo is showing a marathon, I’ll totally get caught up in it and end up watching several episodes in a row. My take on Patti Stanger is that she’s not the best matchmaker, AT ALL, but she is the queen of conventional dating wisdom, stereotyping, temper tantrums and drama. In Patti’s defense, most of the dudes who hire her are pretty awful people, and they haven’t “found love” because they’re just terrible, the end. Patti does what she can, and yes, I’m defending her a little bit. I watch the show because I think the dudes are hilarious – more often than not, they’re rich and middle-aged and they have huge, glaring personality flaws that drive sane, normal women away, which is good news because most of the guys don’t want sane, normal women anyway – most want a 22-year-old stripper who will soothe their damaged, immature ego.

So, with that caveat in place, here’s the latest Patti-controversy. A few nights ago she was on Bravo’s Watch What Happens Live, with host Andy Cohen. This show is notorious for getting the guests sauced up, but I’m not sure if liquor was the problem here. Throughout the evening, Patti made some comments that have upset… well, they’ve upset almost everybody. Here are some video clips of the most awful comments (courtesy of Gawker’s Matt Cherette):

Tough love or total bigotry? Millionaire Matchmaker’s Patti Stanger appears to be practicing the latter. On Sunday night’s premiere of Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen on Bravo, Stanger made sweeping, stereotypical generalizations about gay men looking for love.

When a caller named Dustin asked the reality star what she thought about “open relationships,” she told him: “In the gay world, there’s always going to be open [relationships]. Are you straight or gay?”

He answered gay, to which she said: “Ok, well then you’re ok. There’s Grindr [the online site that connects gay/bisexual men in the same area] for you. Go on Grindr. You’ll have a great time.”

Cohen, 43, looked appalled at Stanger’s remarks. “Hold on,” he said. “So wait, the gays can have open relationships?” (Stanger’s dating policy across the board calls for monogamous relationships only, but this apparently only applies to heterosexual couples.)

“There’s no curbing the gay,” Stanger snapped. “I’ve tried to curb you people and you just don’t [change]. I’ve decided to throw in the towel and just say, ‘Do what you want. But when you find the right person, you will know.’”

When Cohen told Stanger, “I am a gay and I’m down for the monogamy,” she burst out laughing in his face and asked, “When was the last time you had a [serious] boyfriend?” He answered that it’d been six years, and then became “uncomfortable” and moved the conversation along.

When Tyler, a self-proclaimed “gay man from Los Angeles” Skyped in to ask a question about finding “a long-term relationship” and whether he’d have luck outside of the city, Stanger, 50, gave some more offensive advice.

“First of all, you’re very handsome. I thought you were straight,” she said. “That’s a compliment!” (Cohen cocked his head quizzically and made a disgusted face at Stanger’s seemingly bigoted remark.)

“Why is being straight a compliment?” he asked.

“Because he’s not queeny,” Stanger said. “Like you want a queen. Alright, I don’t think so.”

Stanger tweeted Monday: “It’s true. L.A. guys [are] toughest nuts to crack to monogamy,” then added: “Attention male gays: I support you and my comment on [Watch What Happens Live] was to an L.A. guy who can’t find commitment.”

Following intense criticism, Stanger issued a statement to Us Weekly Monday: “I am so sorry. I did not mean to offend anyone with my comments last night on Watch What Happens Live.”

A Bravo spokesperson added that the network “regrets the comments expressed by Patti Stanger on Watch What Happens Live last night. Her comments are not representative of the network’s beliefs and opinions. We apologize for the offense it caused.”

[From Us Weekly]

Okay, if you listen to Patti’s whole argument about open relationships amongst the gays, I don’t think it’s that offensive, it’s just her conventional dating wisdom – she’s saying that gay dudes are always going to be more into “open” relationships, but once they find “the one” that will all disappear. As for her comment that it’s a “compliment” to think that a gay dude appears to be straight… yeah, that one is just dumb. Whatever. She apologized, and you know what you’re getting with Patti.

wenn3532317

wenn3532314

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Posted in Controversies, Patti Stanger

Written by Kaiser         52 Comments »
Apr 15
'11
Natalie Portman’s Black Swan ballet double won’t back down any time soon

fp_7164869_portman_natalie_ini_03_06

I don’t know why these new photos of Natalie Portman and Benjamin Mille-whatever are making so happy. Usually in candids of Natalie and Ben, she’s the one who is extremely covered up and he’s the one who is like “Pose. Turn. Pose. Blue Steel. Clench.” In these pics, he looks like the Unabomber and she’s all “Oh, it’s just Perfect Me, out with my Perfect Baby-Daddy!”

Speaking of Perfect Natalie and how she does Everything Perfectly, Forever, there’s a new chapter in the ongoing saga of Who the hell did the dancing in Black Swan? I know, you thought it was over, right? I’m not even going to recap everything, just know that Natalie’s dance double Sarah Lane has been claiming for a month now that she did all of the big dance sequences in Black Swan, and everybody else from the film has been like “No, Natalie is Perfect!!” The last chapter we had was Natalie Portman finally saying something about the controversy – and referring to it as “nastiness”. Because Sarah Lane = NASTY to Perfect Natalie. Well, Sarah Lane sat down for an interview with ABC News… and she makes some good points:

Some quotes from the article, here at ABC News:

“[A producer] asked if I would please not do any more interviews until after the Oscars because it was bad for Natalie’s image,” Lane said. “They were trying to create this image, this facade, really, that Natalie had done something extraordinary. Something that is pretty much impossible … to become a professional ballerina in a year and half. Even with as hard as she worked, it takes so much more. It takes twenty-two years, it takes thirty years to become a ballerina.”

Jess Cagle, the managing editor for Entertainment Weekly, agreed, saying, “they diminished what Sarah did by telling Sarah to shut up and not talk and don’t let anyone know.”

Portman’s face was superimposed onto Lane’s body through special effects called “face replacement” in pivotal dance scenes to make it appear as if it were Portman executing technically sophisticated moves.

“Full body shots with actual dancing is me. That’s why they hired me,” Lane said.

In a written statement, “Black Swan” director Darren Aronofsky said, “Here is the reality. I had my editor count shots. There are 139 dance shots in the film — 111 are Natalie Portman untouched. Twenty-eight are her dance double Sarah Lane. If you do the math, that’s 80 percent Natalie Portman.”

“It’s possible if you’re counting the close-ups of her face as actual dancing shots. I don’t call close-ups of her face actual dancing,” Lane said.

“Black Swan” editor Andy Weisblum agreed to take a closer look for “20/20.” “There are about 35 shots that are full body shots in the movie. Of those 35 shots, 12 are Natalie, and then the rest are Sarah,” Weisblum said. “But over the overall film, Natalie did a lot more than that. I mean, she did most of the other shots. It was sometimes hard for me to tell the difference as the editor, it was so close.”

Lane said her feelings about being credited changed late last year after Portman received an Oscar nomination for best actress and the movie’s backers began an aggressive campaign on the actress’s behalf.

“There’s so much emotionally that goes into motivating yourself and being able to physically push yourself to reach a certain level, that you have to reach to be a professional ballerina with one of the biggest ballet companies in the world and to sustain that standard over a whole career,” Lane said. “It really hurts for someone to say that, they got a personal trainer and they became what I spent blood, sweat and tears doing every day, all my life, in just a year and a half.”

“A lot of the campaign was focused on the physical preparation, the transformation,” Cagle said. “The Academy loves it when an actor does something besides act in a movie. There was in a lot of the marketing materials for “Black Swan,” certainly the implication that Natalie became a great world class ballet dancer.”

Lane acknowledged that while Portman trained hard for the film, her dancing technique was nowhere near as good as hers.

“I’ve been doing this for 22 years, and to say that someone trained for a year and a half and did what I did is degrading not only to me but to the entire ballet world,” Lane said.

Wendy Perron, editor-in-chief of Dance Magazine, a choreographer and a dancer, said she knew of Lane’s role in “Black Swan” and wondered why a soloist ballerina whose technical skills were vital to the complicated dance sequences was being cast out of the limelight.

“She’s an artist,” Perron said. “It’s not just that it was difficult. It’s that she brought an artistry to it, and Natalie Portman is a dramatic artist, a film artist. But Sarah Lane is a dance artist, and she helped make the movie what it was. … It bothered me. I think she should get credit for it.”

Perron wrote her opinion in a blog that was soon picked up in the national media, and “Black Swan” filmmakers moved swiftly to defend their star.

Portman has continued to decline to comment on the controversy, and told E! News last week, “I had a chance to make something beautiful with this film, and I don’t want to give in to the gossip.”

For Lane, the silver lining in this controversy may just be that ballet is taking center stage in a national discussion. An unanticipated opportunity to share the commitment and dedication of all ballet dancers.

“I have so much respect for this art form and the people who are able to do it so beautifully and I want to stand up for that,” she said. “I want people to know how hard we work as professional dancers. What is not necessarily, really portrayed in the movie, is the beauty that ballet can create. How it can reach across oceans, and how it can bond countries who are completely at war.”

[From ABC News]

I was over this controversy weeks ago, but I’m giving Sarah Lane credit for not shutting her mouth and going away just because everyone is falling all over themselves to defend Perfect Natalie. I think Lane had a point back then and she still has a point. And I personally don’t think the “Natalie won her Oscar for her acting, not the dancing” argument holds water. Natalie won her Oscar for the entirety of the performance on film, and there was a concerted effort to make it sound like Portman did more of her dancing than she actually did. And yes, I’m talking about the actual dancing, not just the little constipated dance faces Natalie made while flapping her arms in close-up.

fp_7164871_portman_natalie_ini_05_06

fp_7164870_portman_natalie_ini_04_06

fp_7164868_portman_natalie_ini_02_06

Photos courtesy of Fame.

Posted in Benjamin Millepied, Controversies, Natalie Portman

Written by Kaiser         190 Comments »
Page 1 of 1312345...10...Last »
 
 
 
Legal Disclaimer| Privacy Policy | Comment Policy