Newsletter Friday, November 04, 2016

[LaineyGossip.com - Calling all smuthounds!] Friday, November 04, 2016 [Intro for November 4, 2016] [Romeo + Juliet movie poster] Dear Gossips, Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet was released 20 years ago this week. To commemorate the milestone, The Ringer’s Allison P Davis revisited the film to ask the question… [Are We Sure It’s Good?] Obviously I agree with all of her points – that the film is overstimulating (and overstimulated), that it’s insanely paced, that the plot is driven by the most absurd plot-holes, but also that it’s gorgeous to look at, gorgeous to listen to, and that it was “big and audacious and batsh-t in a brave way”. As Allison observes, Romeo + Juliet was made for social media, only way before social media existed, which perhaps is why it escaped cynicism. Romeo + Juliet’s greatest power though is Leonardo DiCaprio. The film may be a beautiful mess in hindsight but for those of us who still pine for it nostalgically, it all goes back to his face. Allison hilariously writes that Leo’s Romeo face is “the source material for his anguish”. Like his entire performance in The Revenant is based on him being pissed that he doesn’t look like that anymore. But I’d also like to add that his Romeo face is the source material for OUR anguish. Not only because he doesn’t look like that anymore but because that face was a lie. Leo was never Romeo. He has shown us, repeatedly, that he never was and will never be Romeo. And in spite of this, there are those who continue to hope for it. This movie is the reason. The face in this movie and the way he used it. The way he looked at her through that fish tank, raised his eyebrows to ask a hesitant, unspoken question – “Can I know you? I would like to know you” – conning us into believing that Leonardo DiCaprio actually cares about really knowing a girl. Titanic is the film most often credited with turning Leonardo DiCaprio into a heartthrob. Allison counters that “if you didn’t realize Leo Was Hot until Titanic (1997), you were late to the game, dweebs”. Like your parents. Titanic Leo was the first boyfriend your parents wanted for you. Romeo Leo was the first boyfriend you wanted for yourself. Like so many of our first boyfriends, they turned out to be a disappointment. Click here to read Allison’s [A Close Reading of Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet] at The Ringer. Have a great weekend! Yours in gossip, Lainey [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 2:12 PM [Jennifer Lawrence kisses Darren Aronofsky] [Jennifer Lawrence/Darren Aronofsky ] This couple just went from maybe f-cking to definitely dating. The Daily Mail has new photos of [Jennifer Lawrence] on a date with [Darren Aronofsky] in New York. When I first saw the photos, my first reaction was "Ew." Does that make me an asshole? (You can [see all the photos here]). Let's be real for a second. Darren Aronofsky is no Nicholas Hoult. He's no Chris Martin. In these photos, he's wearing a man scarf only a mother could love. Seriously, the scarf. The newsboy cap. The pants. There is nothing about Darren Aronofsky, especially in these photos, that does it for me. The question is: does he do it for Jennifer Lawrence? As my colleague and Lainey's co-host on The Social Melissa Grelo would say, "there's a lid for every pot." It doesn't matter if I'm not down with Darren's "I'm an artsy director" facial hair if JLaw is feeling it. Maybe he's her lid? Speaking of lids, I just did the Lainey Hotness Litmus Test and pictured him on top of me. It didn't go well. Am I being an asshole again? Darren Aronofsky has a 10 year-old son with Rachel Weisz. Jennifer’s last relationship that we know of was with Chris Martin. Aronofsky is 47. Lawrence is 26. The age difference doesn’t bother me as much as his wardrobe. Yesterday, [PEOPLE reported] on J.Law and Aronofsky’s “doggy date.” They are holding hands while walking Jennifer’s dog Pippa. PEOPLE’s source says that Jennifer likes that Darren is “low-key.” As [Lainey has written before], J.Law knows how to keep her sh-t locked. So, if they’re now being papped openly kissing and holding hands, my guess is that whatever these two are doing is getting serious. Well, serious enough that she’s cool with being seen with him in that outfit. Back to the kissing photos. We know how unreliable Photo Assumption can be but I'm going to assume anyway. JLaw looks super happy and affectionate towards him in half of the pics. They’re hugging and laughing and if you squint really hard, they even look pretty cute together. In the pics where they are kissing, however, Jennifer is leaning away from Darren while he’s leaning in. It could be because she’s just as much repulsed by his scarf as I am or she’s flirting. I’ve totally done this move. You know, the leaning away and playing coy while you make the man WORK for it. We’ve all done it. Again, I’m totally assuming things based on a handful of photos but if this is what is happening, Darren Aronofsky is doing it for Jennifer Lawrence – heinous scarf, newsboy cap and all. In an attempt to not be a completely superficial bitch, I looked up interviews with Darren Aronofsky because sex appeal isn’t always just physical. Maybe he’s got a sexy voice or some serious swagger, right? Well, check out the interview below and judge for yourself. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 7:03 PM [Smutty Social Media, November 4, 2016] [Aaron Paul and Annabelle Wallis attend the premiere of Saban Films' 'Come And Find Me' at Pacific Theatre at The Grove on November 3, 2016 in Los Angeles, California] The Sun has pulled a story that said Victoria’s Secret casting directors called Cara Delevingne “bloated.” I believe the letter – she is too famous to go through the regular casting channels. She’s young, she’s cool, she’s popular, she’s fun – VS would want her. [🖕🏽🌞 🖕🏽it's shameless to discuss women's bodies just to sell papers #bloated ❤️ @victoriassecret] A photo posted by Cara Delevingne (@caradelevingne) on Nov 4, 2016 at 4:16am PDT I’m sure she’s feeling empowered (look at her!) but I am a little concerned she’s trying to send a message to someone. A certain someone she should NOT be sending messages to. [#loveyourselffirst #feelingempowered👑 #healthybodyhealthymind] A photo posted by Jennifer Lopez (@jlo) on Nov 3, 2016 at 11:55am PDT Why did CW move Crazy Ex-Girlfriend to Friday night? That’s not a strong time slot. Tonight's episode of [#crazyexgirlfriend] is one of my favorites. Watch it on the CW at 9/8c! — Rachel Bloom (@Racheldoesstuff) [November 4, 2016] Miranda Lambert is not the one when it comes to Instagram comments. [Every now and then I decide to re-join the world of social media and post something really personal. Not promoting anyone or anything. Not selling a better version of myself to anyone or trying to look cool like we all do all the time. Just a picture that either I or someone I know and care about took the time to take and see the beauty in. This is one of those moments that im proud of. My friend Tommy snapped it on a trail ride on his phone at golden hour on the farm in TN. What a blessing. I'm wearing yoga pants and no makeup and im on the back of my beloved Leiani. A Gypsy Vanner horse. 💗. But... Last night I was all dolled up and "out on the town" with my sweet man at the CMA awards in Nashville. I was excited about the night and posted a picture. Just now when I looked I realized so many comments were judgmental and negative. Cowardly people hiding behind a keyboard or a cell phone writing their useless comments about our eyes and clothes and body language. What a bunch of bull shit. Thank y'all for reminding me why I read books , write songs, and spend most of my time with animals and people I trust and love. And one last thing..... "Words are things. You must be careful, careful about calling people out of their names, using racial pejoratives and sexual pejoratives and all that ignorance. Don’t do that. Some day we’ll be able to measure the power of words. I think they are things. They get on the walls. They get in your wallpaper. They get in your rugs, in your upholstery, and your clothes, and finally in to you." Maya Angelou] A photo posted by Miranda Lambert (@mirandalambert) on Nov 3, 2016 at 10:18pm PDT Are Annabelle Wallis and Chris Martin still together? [When you get to do a movie with on of your best friends @glassofwhiskey ...uncontrollable giggles ensue every waking moment. I LOVE YOU AARON!! "COME AND FIND ME" Nov 11 xx] A photo posted by @annabellewallis on Nov 4, 2016 at 9:53am PDT Aubrey Plaza went on RuPaul’s podcast (brilliantly named What’s The Tee?) and yes, she spilled the tea about her relationship with Michael Cera. They totally made sense. They both have the deadpan hipster thing going on. But this is the problem with private people disclosing stuff: I’m greedy and want to know everything. Did they live together? Why did they break up? Who got to keep the vintage t-shirt collection? NEW Aubrey Plaza What's The Tee w/[@MichelleVisage] [@EvilHag] [ [pic.twitter.com/cO72G07vjO] — RuPaul (@RuPaul) [November 3, 2016] Chris Rock loves Atlanta. Best show on TVperiod. [pic.twitter.com/jV9noDzrr3] — Chris Rock (@chrisrock) [November 2, 2016] After her weak-ass apology, Hilary Duff [didn’t take a minute off social media]. Because she didn’t have to. [Guessss whooos excited for the weekendddd! ☝🏻️👱🏻 ♀️] A photo posted by Hilary Duff (@hilaryduff) on Nov 3, 2016 at 2:32pm PDT Chris Pratt is super excited to start promoting [Passengers]. How long until the “Jennifer Lawrence and Chris Pratt” rumours start circulating with the lower-tier tabloids (again)? [Whoop whoop what up Mexico City!? Big shout out to to all the great Mexican fans. Cannot wait for you to see #Passengers More pics to come as we blitz the planet riling everyone up and promoting which I can honestly say is the greatest movie in the world. THE. GREATEST. #pasajerosdepelicula] A photo posted by chris pratt (@prattprattpratt) on Nov 4, 2016 at 9:58am PDT It’s the year 2026. Anna Kendrick and Justin Timberlake are promoting Trolls…. Seriously, [when will this end]? [🚨I'm sorry... Pillsbury makes TROLLS shaped cookie dough and didn't send me any?? What is the point of being in movies?!?!?!? ... also Trolls is in theaters today... or whatever... i don't even...i'm so mad.] A photo posted by Anna Kendrick (@annakendrick47) on Nov 4, 2016 at 9:46am PDT [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 6:34 PM [Johnny Depp’s magical backlash] [Johnny Depp accepts The Rhonda's Kiss Healing And Hope Award onstage during the 2016 Rhonda's Kiss Benefit 2016 Rhonda's Kiss at El Rey Theatre on November 3, 2016 in Los Angeles, California] It was revealed the other day that [Johnny Depp] [has been cast] in the sequel to Fantastic Beast And Where To Find Them and may have a cameo in the first movie. I called it f-cksh-t. And it’s apparently f-cksh-t a lot of other Wizarding World fans as well as there was [instant backlash] when the news came out. For starters, it’s an unimaginative, obvious choice. And then, of course, there’s what we’ve been hearing about Johnny all year after his breakup with Amber Heard. That he abused her, allegedly. And I’m supposed to say here that they were “allegations” because apparently photos are not enough. And a settlement statement that pretty much supports her position. And her subsequent donation of the money she received in that settlement. We need blood signed confessions and a live feed before a woman can be believed when she comes forward – and even then it’s a maybe. As if there was any question. Johnny Depp will be fine, always. And he’s not the only actor who continues to have opportunities despite their f-ckups, what many are objecting to, specifically in this case, is that this franchise will draw a young audience, a lot of children. I mean… that’s already the case with Pirates of the Caribbean. The next movie comes out in 6 months. Not that I’m justifying it. But, apart from Fantastic Beasts, he’s already going to be marketed to kids. They can claim they’re just following a precedent. Like many of you though, I’m wondering about [JK Rowling] and what she thinks. I haven’t seen her tweet about it all. Not that she could because the studio hasn’t officially confirmed it and likely won’t until Fantastic Beasts come out. So I’m curious to see if and how she responds once she’s able to. And I’m scared about that. I’m scared to know what that will look like. Attahced - Depp at 2016 Rhonda's Kiss at El Rey Theatre in LA last night. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 5:43 PM [Keira Knightley is Tragically Normal] [Keira Knightly covers Harper's Bazaar] The other day on our group text, Lorella investigated a picture of Gwyneth Paltrow standing in front of some bookshelves, and discovered there was a book in the background, assumedly in G’s house or office, devoted to napkins. “Napkins with a Twist”. This is a book most of us will never need, but it’s probably legitimately in Gwyneth’s library. This is why she’s Not Like Us, and consequently why she is Gwyneth Paltrow, with all that involves. Keira Knightley, on the other hand, will never be Gwyneth Paltrow, or anyone like her. She works constantly in high-profile projects (including, to be fair, lots of endorsements), but you can’t imagine her having a lifestyle brand—she’s just too resolutely regular and aware. Personally I find this compelling, but you can just imagine that somewhere, there are ‘people’, shaking their heads at how her refusal to be a glamorous, ‘aspirational’ celebrity is getting in her way of making bank. Like in a new [Harper's Bazaar interview], she talks about how she thinks that (U.K.) maternal leave is so incredibly lacking, and unfair against women in the workforce: “I think paternity leave should be the same as maternity leave….when you're thinking about an employer looking at a man and a woman thinking, ‘Well, at some point you could take nine months or however long off, and the guy doesn't have to.’ Don't tell me that that doesn't come into it!” This is not news to anyone who’s ever worked in a workplace, of course, but when’s the last time Keira Knightley had to worry about an employer choosing her over a guy? She doesn’t, and yet this is still front of mind. I’m not just being a fangirl here – I know, [and read about], a lot of people who are a lot closer to hiring inequalities than she is and don’t see them, either out of ignorance or willful denial. Then I realized maybe this comes from her friends. Knightley is probably normal enough to talk with other mothers in her neighbourhood, when they’re both walking around desperately sleep-deprived and lonely in that post-newborn fog – especially since you don’t get the impression there are a team of nannies working around the clock, right? Not that I’m implying she doesn’t have childcare. Of course she does. But again, her opinions on this are similarly fascinating-yet-never-spoken. In a new interview in [Harper’s Bazaar], Keira said: “Childcare is unbelievably expensive. It should be…It's incredibly difficult, it should be well paid. But there is no option for a woman to go back to work unless she's being paid really, really well and can afford full-time care before [her child can] get into nursery. I think I've become unbelievably aware of that and how lucky I've been to be able to afford really good childcare, because otherwise it would be at least four years out of my career. I wouldn't be able to get back to where I'd been if I'd taken four years out.” You know why I’m not cynical about this? Why I don’t think it’s just a bid for our praise, and a ‘I’m just like you, other moms!’ back-door lifestyle launch? In order for those to work, celebs have to tell us how they’re just like us. Our struggles are basically the same, whether we’re making the median income for Middle America or millions of dollars a year! But she’s not doing that. Instead she’s pointing out how fortunate she is, and using her platform to highlight what we don’t usually see celebrities show – in the ‘regular’ working world, the deck is scandalously stacked against women. It’s not the first time, either; she’s been talking about how, when she’s trapped on set for 15 hours a day with no time to do anything, her male coworkers confess they don’t have the same problems because ‘my wife does everything’. You don’t say! Said it once, I’ll say it a thousand times. Celebrities don’t need to be our role models—not least because they often don’t actually live in the real world. But if you’re looking for someone to appreciate, you could do a hell of a lot worse. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 4:05 PM [What Drake and Taylor do well] [Taylor Swift and Drake] So [Taylor Swift] showed up at [Drake]’s 30th birthday party and he spent a lot of time with her and some say it seemed flirty which resulted in all kinds of rumouring that they’re hooking up. Then, earlier this week, [Page Six] reported that the two are actually working on music together. Drake [recently announced] that he’s releasing yet another album in December called More Life. Drake’s Views, released in April, is one of the top selling albums of the year, if not the top selling album of the year. And you already know that Taylor can sell. Also, as I mentioned last week, [these two are Apple artists] so a professional collaboration makes a lot of (cash money) sense. And now, here’s what Drake Instagrammed late last night/early this morning? [Is that velvet? 🌺] A photo posted by champagnepapi (@champagnepapi) on Nov 4, 2016 at 1:34am PDT Taylor like the post almost immediately Taylor liked Drake's photo on Instagram [pic.twitter.com/H0C857nXMN] — Taylor Swift News (@TSwiftNZ) [November 4, 2016] What’s going on here? Well, they’re being sh-ts, obviously. Stirring sh-t, I mean, which is what they both love to do, and they’re both good at it too. It’s not like they don’t know what people are saying and speculating. So when he’s talking about “velvet” like that’s what anybody’s thinking what it’s what nobody’s thinking, he’s been a sh-t. But he got what he wanted. So, Taylor Swift, the songwriter, who’s already written two hit songs for other artists this year, might have written another song for one of the most successful artists to end the year. I’ve already written [a couple of times] this week [about how she’s been leaning in] to the songwriter identity, how she is working on music, but instead of new music of her own, she appears to be gifting it to others – and in multiple genres. Which is a way of claiming that her impact on music is much more broad and profound than she’s given credit for. Again, in my opinion, it’s an excellent business strategy. And an excellent “what’s next?” strategy after making headlines for her thirsty romance and getting served in the summer by her gossip rivals. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 3:27 PM [Ruth Negga and Joel Edgerton in Loving] [Ruth Negga attends TimesTalks to discuss the film 'Loving' at the TimesCenter on November 1, 2016 in New York City] 1967. It wasn’t that long ago. Our parents were alive. Your grandparents could have been going to the movies to see Sidney Poitier and dancing to Elvis, stars that are still relevant today. 1967 was the year Richard and Mildred Loving were finally told that their love – specifically their marriage – wasn’t a crime. Loving is their story and it opens today. The story picks up in 1958 in Virginia where Richard ([Joel Edgerton]) sweetly proposes to his pregnant girlfriend Mildred ([Ruth Negga]). They drive to D.C. to get married and when they return to Virginia, they are ripped from their bed in the middle of the night and arrested. In lieu of jail time, the Lovings are forced to leave the state. Then the story takes us to three kids and almost a decade later, to the Supreme Court ruling on nation-wide anti-miscegenation laws in 1967. In 1967, my mother was a teenager in Jamaica, born of an interracial marriage. When Lainey wrote about the [trailer for Loving in July], she noted that we each have our own personal lens through which we view and connect to stories. I saw Loving with my sister-in-law. She's Korean. Her marriage to my brother would have been illegal. My relationship would have been “no good” in Virginia. My personal connection to this story took my crying problem to an all-time high. Ruth Negga did not help my crying problem. Goddamn, she is incredible. This is truly Ruth Negga’s movie. It was Mildred who convinced her husband to take their case to the Supreme Court. It’s Mildred who stands firm when Richard wants to back away from the spotlight. It’s Mildred who understands, as a black woman, what their case could mean for America’s future. It’s Mildred who breaks your heart with every worried glance she throws in her husband’s direction. I don’t think I’ll ever be able to look at Ruth Negga again without crying. She is THAT good. Put her name on the Oscar ballot. I don’t care if it’s only November. Edgerton’s portrayal of Richard Loving is also devastating. It’s a nuanced look at what masculinity meant in the 60s. In Loving, Richard is a man of few words but his commitment to his family doesn’t need to be said out loud. A scene where he breaks down while promising to “take care” of his wife will destroy you. In the hands of another writer/ director, the film may have focused on the fumbling, inexperienced lawyer, played by [Nick Kroll], It may have been all about rich white men in suits yelling about the fate of the less privileged, like so many films before it. Instead, Loving rarely shows the courtroom and those lawyers are relegated to a few scenes. Instead, Loving, at its core, is a sweeping, gorgeous love story. It’s not shout-y or preachy. Despite their ridiculously unfair situation, Richard isn’t throwing his fists into walls and Mildred isn’t launching into melodramatic monologues. Their anger brews. It festers. We watch it grow over the years. We see it simmer but never boil over. And that is what some critics are saying is the film’s only flaw. Variety called it “[too damn polite.]” There were times where I wanted to yell and scream for the Lovings because they weren’t doing it for themselves. My sister-in-law wondered after the movie if Jeff Nichols actively chose not to show any violence. I hadn’t really noticed but it’s true - the movie’s one true villain is the county sheriff and he’s mean, sure, and he’s a racist, definitely, but it’s only the threat of physical violence that ever shows up. Other films have been critiqued for downplaying the ruthless, inhumane assault black Americans faced during that era (ahem, The Help) so I understand the critique but on the other hand, maybe we’re just so used to seeing black bodies brutalized on and off screen that a film dealing with race in the South in the 50s and 60s seems “too damn polite” without the brutality. Sometimes, racism can be more powerful when it is subtle. Sometimes it manifests in looks and legislation as well as beatings and bruises. For the Lovings, they had to live in constant fear, not knowing if they would get to live freely amongst their friends and family ever again. Isn’t that brutal? And besides, getting exiled from your home state isn’t exactly subtle. In Loving, Richard and Mildred don’t shout or kick or scream but they fight “the little battles,” as Mildred calls them, in their own restrained and dignified way. Leading up to its release, Loving’s Twitter page was tweeting support for the film with the hashatag #MakeLoveLouder. That hashtag is used to stump for the right to love equally, something that is still necessary in 2016. It's easy to look back on 1967 and be appalled that anyone thought it was OK to revoke someone's right to marry outside of their race but have we really come that far? Sure, the laws have changed but an article just last month in Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail revealed that [Canadians still aren't that accepting of interracial relationships]. I was insulted on Twitter recently for having a white partner while writing about race, like my partner's whiteness somehow makes me any less black. We've come a long way since Richard and Mildred's quiet love's deafening influence but how far away are we from a time when seeing an interracial couple together doesn't spark a conversation-- or even a second glance? Attached – Ruth Negga and director Jeff Nichols at TimesTalks in New York on Tuesday and Ruth and Joel Edgerton at The Today Show late last week. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 2:41 PM [Privacy Policy] - [Unsubscribe]