Monday, June 11, 2012

Cele|bitchy

Cele|bitchy


Jennifer Lopez denies she’s engaged by getting her song stuck in our heads

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 08:31 AM PDT

Jennifer Lopez
Whenever I think of J.Lo’s song Jenny from the Block, the refrain gets stuck in my head and I see Ben Affleck rubbing her ass in a loop. He’s always biting his lip and looking like he’s concentrating really hard on it. I just re-watched that part of the video (at 3:20 here) and it’s not as bad as I remember, although he does kiss it. So that’s why I was reluctant to report this story that Jennifer Lopez denies that the rock she’s been wearing on her left hand is an engagement ring from Casper Smart-enough to get a $10k a week allowance. She denied it with the line “don’t be fooled by the rocks that I got,” which means I have to keep seeing Ben Affleck touching her ass, but worse than that I have to hear the song.

We’ve heard all sorts of stories that Lopez is just about to marry Smart. It’s her M.O., and US Weekly even ran a story in late April that she was about to marry Casper, was “certain she wants to be with Casper forever” and was anxious to expand her family with him. Well Jennifer says she’s not engaged, and we shouldn’t be fooled by the diamond she’s got on her left ring finger inviting speculation.

Jenny from the Block won’t be walking down the aisle any time soon.

“Rumors!!! Don’t be fooled by the rocks that I got,” Jennifer Lopez wrote on her website Friday in response to buzz boyfriend Casper Smart popped the question. “No engagement!”

After quoting her 2002 R&B hit (and posting a white-hot self-portrait without any bling on her ring finger), Lopez asked fans, “What’s the best way to stop a false rumor?”

Chatter that Lopez, 42, and Smart, 25 – who’ve been romantically linked since last November – were taking the next step first heated up in March, when a fake Tweet from fashion designer Roberto Cavalli seemed to suggest the two were engaged. (A source close to Lopez then confirmed to PEOPLE that the reports were false.)

Since then, Lopez has been photographed stepping out with a questionable ring on her finger.

But rumors aside, it appears to be a lasting sweet romance for the couple, who shared candy (and some cozy moments) last weekend in Las Vegas.

[From People]

So she’s not engaged, but she is letting Casper sabotage her career by sitting in on really important business meetings he should have no access to as her boy toy. Maybe this means her people are starting to get through to her, and are telling her she better not make herself a laughing stock by making Casper any more legitimate than she already has. Or maybe she’s starting to wake up to the reality that this is a fling with a much younger guy, and that it would be supremely stupid to marry him, although I doubt it. Hell she might just be engaged and the people running her website are doing damage control. It’s not like she even retweeted this.

Jennifer Lopez

Jennifer Lopez

Jennifer Lopez

Kim Kardashian’s divorce deposition won’t be filmed, but the trial might be

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 08:28 AM PDT

Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries are still married. Can you believe that? My general thought is that Kris wants to make Kim pay out big time, and he wants to "destroy" her as best he can. Kris and his lawyers are waiting out Kim and her lawyers. My guess? Now that Kim is with Kanye, she has even more incentive for wanting her divorce to be completed so she and Kanye can begin their famewhore-marriage storyline.

Throughout the negotiations and back-and-forth, Kris Humphries has always maintained that he's the injured party, that Kim is a slut who was boning other dudes during their marriage, and that he (Kris) is the only victim in the situation. He's also maintained this idea that he wouldn't "date" anyone until the divorce came through. As you can imagine, Kris hasn't been living up to that idea. As CB reported last week, Kris was seeing a girl named Myla Sinanaj. She's a famewhore too, and she was promoting herself with her association with Kris. Kris's lawyer tried to shut her down, and TMZ reports today that there are still negotiations with this girl. Team Humphries says Myla is trying to "extort" him for large sums of money, using the evidence of their relationship as collateral. Kris has taken the matter to the FBI, which is… bizarre. What the hell does this girl have that's so "damaging"? Proof that they were dating while Kris is still a married man? Ugh. You can read more about the situation here.

So, the divorce is still proceeding at a snail's pace. Radar reports that Kim and Kris have finally scheduled their depositions, and Team Kardashian won a "victory" – the depositions are NOT going to be videotaped. Which is probably the first major event in Kardashian history to not be on camera.

The upcoming depositions scheduled for Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries in their bitter divorce battle will not be videotaped, but the NBA star still wants television cameras rolling during the actual trial, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.

The E! reality starlet’s deposition will take place in Los Angeles at her lawyer Laura Wasser’s office while Humphries’ will be conducted in Minnesota and both are scheduled to take place in the next two weeks.

“Both parties mutually agreed that it wasn’t necessary to have Kim and Kris’ deposition filmed,” a source close to the case tells RadarOnine.com exclusively. “There will be a private stenographer present that will provide a transcript of the proceedings. There was concern about the depositions being filmed and then getting leaked to the media. To ensure that won’t happen everyone recognized and agreed to not have proceedings filmed."

However, Kris’ lawyer, Lee Hutton has told Laura Wasser that they absolutely intend to ask that cameras be permitted in the courtroom when this divorce goes to trial.

“This is absolutely going to trial and it’s not about money. Kris wants Kim to publicly acknowledge that the marriage was fraudulent and he wants an apology. Of course, if Kim were to do so, a messy divorce trial could be avoided. Team Humphries has been told in no uncertain terms though that is never going to happen.

“Kim is just livid that she has to be deposed. She has tried to get out of it, but there is no way she can,” the source adds. “Kris is ready for his deposition to be taken and just wants the truth to get out about what he says really happened when they were dating and after the wedding,” the source reveals.

Once the depositions take place a trial date will likely be scheduled for later this year.

[From Radar]

The last time I talked about this ongoing divorce battle, I ended up calling Kris a petty dumbass who needs to get over it. Everyone yelled at me because you're all so, so anti-Kim. I don't really get it, though – I'm not crazy (krazy) about Kim either, but it's perfectly possible to think Kim is a dumb, cat-faced famewhore AND think that Kris is a petty dumbass who really needs to move on. He's not morally superior. He's not some shining anti-Kardashian advocate. He's just the dumb caveman loser that agreed to marry Kim and now he wants to get paid and he wants to humiliate her.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN.
wenn3488506 FFN_Kardashian_Kim_BJSTFF_060712_9164208 FFN_Kardashian_Kim_BJSTFF_060712_9164204 FFN_Humphris_Kris_LAV_051712_9096351 FFN_Kardashian_Kim_BJJFF_060212_9146396

Katy Perry might play Freddie Mercury’s girlfriend in a new biopic: disastrous?

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 08:26 AM PDT

Freddie Mercury

We were warned a few months ago that Katy Perry was being courted by Hollywood producers as an instant movie star simply because she’s so pretty. Now an actual project is reportedly being lined up with quirky Katy in a featured role as the girlfriend/common-law wife of late Queen singer Freddie Mercury, who will be played by stunt-butt-for-hire, Sacha Baron Cohen. Katy is said to be thrilled to be considered for the role of Mary Austin because she idolizes Freddie, which doesn’t mean that she’s a talented actress of course or that she has the chops to pull of playing Freddie’s wife. Still, Katy thinks she can do it, and if she’s already been shortlisted, that means someone has faith in her ability, I guess. If you’ll remember, Katy dressed up as Freddie for Halloween in 2008.

Katy Perry

MTV has a photo of Mary Austin with Freddie, and I really don’t see the purported resemblance between Katy and Mary at all. But hey, there’s always makeup. Here’s the details:

Katy Perry is reportedly being lined up to play Queen legend Freddie Mercury’s girlfriend in a new film.

According to The Mirror, K-Pez is being considered for the role of Mary Austin and if successful, will star alongside funnyman Sacha Baron Cohen who is set to portray Freddie.

Baron Cohen is said to be already working with remaining Queen members Brian May and Roger Taylor on the biopic – which is apparently due to start filming next year.

A pal of Perry’s is quoted by the newspaper as saying that the Teenage Dream hitmaker would be thrilled to play Austin, adding: “Katy would love to be in the film as she is such a huge fan. Katy has a similar look to Mary and would be a brilliant foil to Sacha.”

Mercury famously dated Mary in the 1970′s for six years before admitting that he was bisexual, causing the couple to separate.

Freddie later claimed that despite having several male partners, he remained close to Austin calling her his “common-law” wife.

Before his death in 1991 after a battle with HIV, Freddie said: “All my lovers asked me why they couldn’t replace Mary. But it’s simply ­impossible.”

Katy has previously praised Mercury, describing him as her ‘musical idol’, while also dressing up as the iconic singer at her birthday party in 2008.

The film about Freddie is being produced by Academy Award winner Graham King, with the plot focusing on Mercury’s rise to fame, his time in Queen and the band’s historic Live Aid performance in 1985.

[From MTV]

This sounds like a disaster in the making because Katy has a little esperience in voice work (The Smurfs) and will play herself in an upcoming 3-D concert movie, but when she tries to actually act — such as during her “Part of Me” video where she joins the Marines — she comes off looking ridiculous. But hey, if investors want to throw their money her way, I guess that’s ultimately their problem. Poor Freddie Mercury.

Freddie Mercury

Here’s a few photos of Katy showing off a butt cheek as she stumbled out of a London nightclub over the weekend. Pure class, that one.

Katy Perry

Katy Perry

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN

Katy Perry Leaves the Gansevoort Hotel wenn1887927 wenn2144836 wenn1887928 wenn3935507 wenn3936124

Jennifer Aniston’s beauty secret for “keeping wrinkles at bay”: Vaseline…?

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 07:53 AM PDT

Back in March, The Mail had a story about Jennifer Aniston shelling out thousands of dollars a month to maintain her beauty. According to the report, Aniston was all about the "best" in skin care, beauty treatments, massages, spas, makeup, etc. The Mail's figure was $8000 a month – excessive, of course, but I didn't think much of the report, figuring that Aniston probably did spend a lot of money taking care of herself, but it probably wasn't $8,000 a month. A few weeks afterwards, Aniston actually went to People Magazine to specifically deny The Mail's story and claim that she only spends $200 a month on beauty treatments. Which was interesting because A) I don't believe Aniston ONLY spends $200 a month on herself and B) Aniston will not come out and deny any of the stories about the unholy Bermuda Triangle or any of the millions of stories about her womb, her dating life or how she casually uses the word "retard" in conversation, but she'll totally come out and deny a story about her beauty treatments.

Which leads me to what I'm sure is another dumb "Aniston's beauty treatments" story. Now Magazine and The Mail claim that Aniston loves using Vaseline to "keep wrinkles at bay." For real.

Thrifty Jennifer Aniston doesn’t just rely on expensive creams and overpriced serums to maintain her youthful skin. The wealthy 43-year-old actress keeps wrinkles at bay using a tried-and-tested technique that costs just £1. Every night, she religiously smoothes trusted beauty stand-by Vaseline below each eye.

The former Friends star starts each morning with another simple – and free – technique for glowing skin. She fills her sink with water and ice cubes and dips her face in it to shrink the pores and reduce puffiness around her eyes.

‘Jen doesn’t like the thought of surgery because she doesn’t want to look stretched, so she has a 30-minute nightly beauty ritual,’ an insider told Now magazine. ‘Jen’s very disciplined when it comes to staying young.’

The LA-based actress, who is dating Justin Theroux, begins her DIY facial by steaming her pores for ten minutes. She then applies a gentle cleanser and toner, followed by Cetaphil Moisturising Lotion. Next she gives herself a ten-minute facial massage to stimulate skin cells and help tighten her muscles, finishing with Dr LeWinn’s Ultra R4 Restorative Cream.

Dedicated Jennifer then applies a vitamin A treatment from Anna Lotan called Rénova, which she leaves on for another 10 minutes, in which time she smooths vitamin E capsules on to her shins and elbows.

The final touch is the quarter of a teaspoon of Vaseline under each eye. It may seem like an effort, but if the key to flawless skin is elbow grease rather than pricey products , perhaps we should all start trying the Aniston regime.

[From The Mail]

Sure, I'll buy that she spends a half an hour every night doing this crazy-extensive beauty ritual. I'll also buy that Aniston is tweaking occasionally – sometimes she looks Botoxy and full of fillers, sometimes not – which says to me that she's not getting the "non-surgical" stuff on a weekly basis, but she is doing something. As for the Vaseline – my mother swears by it, but she uses it to take off her eye makeup. I guess it works as some under-eye treatment too.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.
FFN_AnistonJennifer_WalkFame_KMFF_022212_8798324 aniston 1 aniston 2

Serial mistress who brags about dating married men (update: she emailed us)

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 05:15 AM PDT


This whole article is probably an advertisement for a very expensive cheaters website in the UK, similar to AshleyMadison, that I will not name. If you’re really interested in visiting the website you can easily find it on the source article. So it’s hard to know if it’s true. It reminds me a lot of the Samantha Brick “I’m such a hot trophy wife” story in that it seems like an average woman is being used to troll readers and get coverage. It’s so easy to cover this damn story. You just point out that what she’s doing is morally reprehensible and that she’s not particularly attractive. Since what she’s doing is terrible, you have no guilt for focusing on her looks. The end. Only she/the publicist who wrote this brings up a lot of important points about infidelity and the boredom that sets in with long term relationships. I might care more about these issues if the essay wasn’t such a joke. Here’s more, with more at the source and on Female First.

On a personal checklist for my ideal man I'd tick the box "married".

Married men are better trained. Married men have had all their rough edges sanded off by their wives and know how to behave around a lady.

And married men are better in bed.

I've learned that a single man in his 40s is single for a reason.

Either he has no social etiquette whatsoever or he's a player, just looking for his next wrestle.

A single guy I was on a date with licked his plate in a restaurant.

A married man would never do that because his wife would knock his head off his shoulders.

I do still occasionally date the odd single man in-between to prove a point to myself.

I give them a really good chance on the date. But then I get back to married men.

And I like dating a few at a time.

One of my guys lives in Geneva and sees me every three months. Well, I'm not going to live like a nun while I wait!

I always have a team of men on the go and some on the subs' bench.

I know some women will despise me. But I am not the temptress here. I am not the evil mistress or a home-wrecking b****.

I am not the girl in the tight skirt in the office who bends herself into an S-shape and says 'Do you fancy a bit?' to a married man who has never thought about having an affair…

As a member of IllicitEncounters.com, the dating website for married people, I see men who are actively seeking affairs.

These men pay £134 a month to the site to find a date, so they are definitely looking for someone on the side.

If it wasn't me, it would be one of the other hundreds of women registered on it.

These men have well and truly made the conscious decision to have an affair.

And their wives should be grateful when it's me their husbands choose.

Because I am the perfect mistress. I am never going to ask them to leave their wives for me. Most mistresses do, but not me.

If I asked him to leave his wife, in every argument from then on he'd say: 'Do you know what I gave up for you?' I don't ever want to be part of that.

In fact, when one of my men confessed about me to his wife and told me his marriage was over, I finished our affair.

I was horrified. I don't want to steal someone else's husband for good, just borrow him for a while.

I know how to behave as a mistress – and I don't just mean in bed.

I would never ring one of my married men at home at 2am or at the weekend because that's their time with their family.

I would never throw a hissy fit if they don't spend Valentine's, Easter or Christmas with me.

We both know exactly where the goalposts are. That's the beauty of it all – we're both open and honest with each other, which must sound ironic, considering my men are not open with their wives.

But that's how it is.

And yes, I have been confronted by a couple of wives. They called from his phone and said: 'How do you know my husband?'

I would never be honest and say I was having an affair with them, because that is cruel.

I said they needed to have a discussion with their husbands about why they had a friend's number that they kept secret.

Usually they have that conversation and work things out and that's marvellous.

I don't just date any old married man. I don't pounce on my friends' other halves.

I mostly stick with the men on the site because, since it costs so much to join, I get a certain quality of man.

Not that I'm a gold-digger, because I have my own money and am not interested in presents or fancy dinners.

[From Mirror.co.uk]

It goes on, but I’ll spare you. I love how she says it’s “cruel” to tell women their husbands are cheating with her, but how she justifies it as not hurting anyone in this other essay. If this is true, if this woman really feels this way and if she wasn’t just paid to lend her face to this website ad, then of course I think she’s a bad person. She can justify it all she wants, but it’s still obvious what she is. There’s no pride in being a serial mistress. As for why men find her attractive in the first place, it kind of speaks to the phenomenon of cheating. It’s not about looks. I’ve heard that men often cheat “down,” and go for low hanging fruit when it comes to getting some on the side.

Update: Karen has e-mailed us asking us to change the title from “bedding” to “dating.” She writes that she “dates married men occasionally, I certainly haven’t bedded them all.” She adds “I have had enough grief from the article since other sites (who I might add have been sent exactly the same email) have been rewriting what was originally printed. I approved the original story, I have not approved any of the rehashed crap that has followed. People will still think what they want, and judge, but I just prefer the facts out there rather than scandal with no substance.” So this is for real. I’ve been e-mailing with her quite a bit and she’s been pretty decent to me about this whole thing, and about what we wrote about her.

Blake Lively covers Marie Claire, talks boyfriends: “I’ve been with very few people”

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 04:33 AM PDT

Blake Lively covers the July issue of Marie Claire as part of her promotional press tour for Savages. That's the film she did with Oliver Stone – and Blake is really hoping her performance takes her to the next level. I don't really have an opinion on it, considering I haven't seen the film and I don't have a rampant hate-on for Blake. I will say this – I was not impressed with her voiceover in the trailer. She sounded bored and vapid. Maybe that's her character, though. In which case I think Blake might have been typecast. Anyway, here are some highlights from Blake's Marie Claire interview:

Blake likes a well-dressed man: “It’s definitely attractive when a man can dress well… What I love most is when someone, guy or girl, is effortless and has this old-timey sort of feel [that] you could take a snapshot of them and they could exist in any time period.”

She loves talking about food: “To be around me, you must love food or I’m the most obnoxious person you’ve ever met. I’m in a big cooking phase. That’s all I’ll talk about.”

She also loves talking about her Louboutins: “What I planned before I got into the business has changed… Now I’m like, ‘Hmm, I wonder what shoes Christian [Louboutin] is going to make me. And which couture house should I go to?’ ”

She's her own stylist: "My assistant will call fashion houses for me, but I always pick the outfit, shoes, jewelry, and a lot of times I do my own hair and makeup for events. Sometimes I think, God, why do I do this to myself? It’s so much extra work!"

Why does she style herself? "Because I love fashion. It’s such an expression of self. I often see people and they look great, but I can identify who styled them. Every stylist has a signature. Maybe it sounds jerky, but I’m lucky to be on such a fashion-centric show [Gossip Girl]. There’s no designer I don’t have access to."

She's holding at "four" boyfriends: "People like to draw parallels between my life and the scandalous stories on Gossip Girl. I dress the same as my character, so they think, She lives this life on and off set. I recently shared how many boyfriends I’ve had [four], and people were like, “That’s impossible!” But it’s true. I’ve been with very few people. If I’m not with somebody who really excites or inspires me, then I’d rather be by myself."

[From Marie Claire & People Magazine]

Marie Claire's Nina Garcia also notes that Ryan Reynolds' dog Baxter makes an appearance during the interview, which is basically yet another confirmation that Ryan and Blake are totally serious about each other. They will get married. Eventually. Blake is waiting to see how Savages does. You think I'm joking – the reaction to the film will determine the next steps she takes with Ryan.

As for Blake's continued insistence that she styles herself… I tend to believe her. I think that's why she looks "off" on some many red carpets. But I respect that it's HER vision for how she presents herself and not someone else telling her "You look amazing!" when she clearly doesn't.

Photos courtesy of Marie Claire.
blake 1 blake 6 blake 5 blake 3 blake 4 blake 2

Lil’ Kim performs at the LA Pride Festival: unrecognizable and sad?

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 04:30 AM PDT

This is just an FYI: this is what Lil' Kim looks like these days. We haven't documented Lil' Kim's transformation into a cutlet-cheeked cat over the past several years, but I guess it's worth noting that Kim's face used to be somewhat normal, back in the day. I think her plastic surgery makeover really began in earnest after she got out of jail… maybe five years ago or so? Anyway, she's 37 years old and this is what she looks like now. These photos are from Lil' Kim's performance at this weekend's LA Pride Festival – she got a really great reception there, which is nice.

She is known for her dangerous curves, which she often displays in risque attire. And rapper Lil’ Kim once again flaunted her voluptuous figure when she appeared on stage in West Hollywood for the LA Pride Festival tonight.

Wearing an array of eye-popping skimpy outfits, the diminutive singer paraded her ample curves in front of a frenzied audience, shaking her behind and dancing on death-defyingly high heels.

For her first outfit, the Lady Marmalade rapper wore a tight-fitting sequined and beaded gold leotard. With a plunging neck and high-cut bottom half, the outfit made no secret of the 37-year-old’s famous curvy thighs and behind. She completed the outfit with death-defyingly high silver and black heels. For her second costume, the feisty 37-year-old strutted her stuff in black micro shorts, a sparkly silver and black hoodie, shades and another pair of killer heels.

She was accompanied by a handful of dancers dressed ninja-style, wearing black handkerchief scarves covering their faces and holding black fans.

The performance took place in West Hollywood, also known as ‘Boystown’ to locals, as the sun was starting to set around six o’clock last night.

Kim, real name Kimberly Denise Jones, broke into the music business in 1994, as part of the group Junior M.A.F.I.A., which was a protegé of the late American rapper Notorious B.I.G. Junior M.A.F.I.A.’s first and only album was titled Conspiracy, spawned three hit singles, which helped Kim launch her solo career. Over the years, the female rapper from Brooklyn had a string of hits and sold millions of records. The LA Pride Festival continues over the entire weekend.

[From The Mail]

I don't really know how to feel about Lil' Kim and her new face and her faltering career. I remember when Kim used to a much bigger star, and she brought an interesting energy to the music industry – she was interesting, you know? She was sexy and unconventional and it feels more and more like "unconventional" isn't acceptable in the hip-hop world. Unless you count Nicki Minaj, who probably owes Lil' Kim a great debt. I also think Nicki and Kim might have the same surgeon.

Just for reference, here are some older photos of Lil’ Kim, circa 1999-2002:

And here she is the Pride Festival.

Photos courtesy of WENN.
wenn3936102 la_pride_backstage_37_wenn3936318 wenn3936081 wenn3936065 wenn3935310 wenn3936341 wenn28109 wenn1240904 Lil' Kim

‘Prometheus’ comes in 2nd in the weekend box office: did you love or loathe it?

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 04:28 AM PDT

I went to see Prometheus this weekend. I wasn't alone – Ridley Scott's kind-of/sort-of Alien prequel ended up making $50 million in the US over three days (Friday through Sunday), and it came in second at the box office. Surprising no one, Madagascar 3: Europe’s Most Wanted won the box office battle with more than $60 in its opening weekend. Family-friendly films, cartoons especially, they always do well. The top five was rounded out by (in order): Snow White and the Huntsman, Men in Black III and The Avengers. Both Madagascar 3 and Prometheus are doing really well overseas too.

Many are calling Promtheus's opening "strong" and "proof" that Ridley Scott and Damon Lindelof (the screenwriter) have some kind of magic touch. Would you like to know what I thought of the film….?

***SPOILERS***

This isn't a full review or anything, mostly because I'm still trying to figure out if I liked the movie. I didn't think Prometheus was "great" or mind-blowing or anything like that. It actually reminded me a lot of Lost - debates about science versus faith, debates that go nowhere, plot points forgotten and never resolved, more questions than answers. I think the performances by all of the actors were much better than the meandering and sometimes stupid script deserved.

Obviously, I saw it for Michael Fassbender (mostly) and a little bit for my girl Noomi Rapace. Noomi plays the lead character, and I really hoped she would be strong, tough and kickass in the vein of Sigourney Weaver's Ripley. Noomi wasn't. It wasn't her fault. Damon Lindelof has issues writing for women. Noomi did the best she could do, but at the end of the day she really wasn't kicking anybody's ass and some of her lines made me roll my eyes. I will single out Logan Marshall-Green – he's really sexy in motion, and he has a great body, and I was genuinely sad when some stuff happened to his character. Charlize Theron's part was basically a throwaway – it felt like she could have been a cut-throat, manipulative hardcore bitch, but again: Lindelof cannot write for women and her character felt like they were trying to give the audience a “reason” to understand why she was the way she was. Idris Elba was basically sleepwalking through his role. Eh.

Do you want to hear more about Fassy? His dong-bot David was the opposite of sexy. He was a cold, freaky bastard and Fassy played him very asexual. There's a scene – one of my favorite, crazy, "WTF?" scenes in the beginning – of David bleaching his roots while watching Lawrence of Arabia. And it stuck with me because… robots have hair that grows? And David wasn't a natural blonde? And a robot decides to dye his hair? So f–king random. That's what the movie was full of – random crap like that, and it's like you were supposed to put all of these BS pieces together to form some kind of monumental realization about faith and mankind… and it was just kind of meh.

Photos courtesy of All Movie Photo, WENN.
fassy 2 wenn3844897 fassy 1 wenn3919889 wenn5855904

Jenny McCarthy on her Playboy cover: “I grew out a bush”

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 04:27 AM PDT

Jenny McCarthy
The more Jenny McCarthy talks, the more annoying she is. The last time we covered Jenny, she was calling out her ex, Jim Carrey, for not visiting her 10 year-old son, Evan, after their breakup. Evan is not Jim’s biological child, but apparently they shared a strong bond. Jenny even revealed that Evan had been asking about Jim and that he’s in therapy to deal with the loss. In a statement responding to Jenny’s claim, Jim called her out for violating her son’s privacy and said that he will always love Evan. The whole episode gave me the impression that Jenny is a jerk, and it made me feel for her son.

As you may know and not care about, Jenny is about to pose in Playboy again. She first posed for the men’s mag at 21, which helped launch her career as a sexy doofus. Recounting her first experience posing nude, Jenny told Oprah that s the Playboy people were surprised when she first took off her undies because she supposedly had the hairiest nether region they’d ever seen. In an appearance on The Today Show, Jenny said she’s using her pubes to maintain her modesty or something:

When asked recently if she plans to bare it all, McCarthy, 39, answered without hesitation.

“What’s everything?” she said with a laugh during an interview on Today. “I mean I grew out a bush so nobody sees anything.”

Explaining her reason behind the upcoming racy shoot, the Love in the Wild host says, “I figured [I'd do it] one more time before everything really falls apart. Why not? And [my son] Evan’s tuition was really expensive this year.”

The revelations didn’t stop there.

When asked if she’ll ever find “true love” by co-host Kathie Lee Gifford, McCarthy – who dates Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher – softly admitted, “I think I might be there – almost.”

You know how Jenny has her talking points? We heard her talk about her sex life during her last press tour, when she bragged that she was very horny and claimed she was great in bed. She did the same thing on Howard Stern last week (video is here) on which she said of giving beejs “I’m very very good at it. I will actually research on how to make sex more interesting and better, whether that’s positions and I’m cartwheeling on that… talking dirty.” This woman only has so much to sell, you know? It’s not like she has a particular talent that we know of.

Jenny talks about her Playboy spread at 2:30 in the video below.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Jenny McCarthy

Jenny McCarthy

79116PCN_Jenny06 wenn5856104 wenn5856095 wenn5856101 wenn5856107

Photo credit: Josiah True/ WENN.com and Enrique Rc, PacificCoastNews.com

Ellen Barkin leads the Botox parade at the Tonys: doesn’t she look like a zombie?

Posted: 11 Jun 2012 04:25 AM PDT

Last night, the Tony Awards were held in NYC. Neil Patrick Harris was the host, and he referred to the night as "Fifty Shades of Gay.” Which isn't funny, honestly. Unlike the past few years of the Tonys, the awards weren't dominated by movie stars-turned-Broadway stars, like Denzel Washington and Scarlett Johansson. This year the winners included Broadway stars that you've probably never heard of like Steve Kazee, James Corden, Nina Arianda. You can read more about the awards here. Neil was there with his partner, David Burtka, of course. I love NPH – and I love that he continuously gets the Tony hosting gig – but I'm still iffy about David. Still, both boys looked nice in their tuxedos.

More stars/celebrities at the Tonys – Cynthia Nixon in an unknown designer. The dress is horrible, but typical of Cynthia – she really isn't interested in fashion. She shaved her head for Wit, which she was nominated for (and lost).

Andrew Garfield, nominated for Death of a Salesman. He lost but he wins in life because his girlfriend Emma Stone was with him inside the ceremony – she didn't walk the carpet, so we don't have photos – you can see some here. I love this boy, but he does not photograph well.

Amanda Seyfried in Givenchy. OMG, this is so terrible. WHY would you do this? Why would you make this dress and why would a young star want to wear it?!? The color combination of purple and orange is always going to be garish and cartoon-y, never sophisticated. And even if the dress worked (which it doesn't), Amanda's styling sucks too. Stop with the Croydon facelifts, people.

ELLEN BARKIN IS COMING FOR YOUR BRRRRRAINS. This is why you don't tweak and Botox.

Cote de Pablo is so pretty, I think. I love her. She had no reason for being at the Tonys other than the show airing on CBS, and she's one of the stars of CBS's biggest show, NCIS. I would have chosen another dress for her, but she's still so pretty.

Photos courtesy of WENN.
wenn3938129 wenn3937051 wenn3937043 wenn3937104 wenn3938108 wenn3937095 wenn3937323 wenn3938107 wenn3938128

No comments:

Post a Comment