Newsletter Thursday, December 08, 2016

[LaineyGossip.com - Calling all smuthounds!] Thursday, December 08, 2016 [Intro for December 8, 2016] [Last Tango In Paris movie poster ] Dear Gossips, Over the last few days, there’s been all kinds of confusion about what happened on the set of Last Tango In Paris. To be clear, even though the initial headlines that exploded all over Twitter certainly suggested it, Maria Schneider was not actually raped. My friend Jessica Allen wrote about the [media misrepresentation of the situation] yesterday, pointing out that what Bernardo Bertolucci did to Maria Schneider was really reprehensible on its own, without embellishment. The subsequent mangling of the story and resulting corrections have now undermined a legitimate and urgent conversation about inequality and abuse in the workplace. The truth is both Bertolucci and Schneider agree that he treated her disrespectfully. In his words, “I had been, in a way, horrible to Maria because I didn’t tell her what was going on, because I wanted her reaction as a girl, not as an actress. I wanted her to react humiliated”. The only way for her to “react humiliated” was to “FEEL HUMILIATED”. He humiliated her, deliberately, by leveraging his power over her, leaning into that power imbalance as her director and as an older man. He took away from her the opportunity to prepare, to do her job, even though that courtesy was certainly extended to her much more experienced co-star Marlon Brando. Brando had the heads up. Brando went into that scene with full knowledge, with all the tools and information provided so that the legend Brando could do his work – but the young woman playing opposite him was just expected to roll with whatever the men around her had decided that morning, which was that there was going to be butter involved, a detail purposefully kept from her – in the workplace. As Nico Lang [wrote in Salon] this week, “A number of actresses can likely relate to that situation. Workplace abuse in Hollywood has been extremely common for decades, due to a toxic culture of gender inequality that skews the balance of power in favor of men like Bertolucci and Brando.” Not just actresses but female producers too. Later on his piece, Nico Lang astutely points out that while Last Tango In Paris happened over 40 years ago, in 2010 Casey Affleck was [sued for sexual harassment in the workplace] by two women on the set of his fake documentary I’m Still Here. One of the women alleges that Casey amused himself by forcing her to look at a crew member’s penis, basically making her the butt of his jokes, surrounded by other men. Casey Affleck is probably going to win an Oscar in February. Because nobody’s talking about how he may have been running his workplace, and whether or not women were treated as second class citizens there. On Monday, SAG-AFTRA told [The Wrap] that what happened to Maria Schneider is unlikely to happen today because of provisions that the union has put in place. However… The union said it receives a call “once every two or three months” about questionable scenes — usually from an actor’s agent, and almost always before the scene has been filmed. SAG-AFTRA also made it clear: It takes these incidents very seriously and will send a business representative to the set if a member raises a concern. Moreover, the union believes there may be more incidents, but that they aren’t reported and encourages member actors to raise concerns within the organization. Sure. It’s great that the union is a safe place for actors to come forward with their complaints, but why do they have to be in those situations in the first place? What is being done within the community to make sure this sh-t doesn’t happen, AT ALL? Yours in gossip, Lainey [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 2:44 PM [Smutty Social Media, December 8, 2016] Yesterday [I wrote about Cruz Beckham], and shortly after David posted a video of Cruz hearing his song on the radio for the first time. I have no comment on the song – it’s a child singing, what is there to say? I’m much more interested in the fact that David is a “wooooooooo” guy. [Not his average morning before school... Proud of my little man with his new Christmas single and also helping children around the UK with the proceeds from this... #ifeverydaywaschristmas @cruzbeckham @AppleMusic @globals_make_some_noise 🎅🏼🎅🏼 smarturl.it/IEDWCi ❤️] A video posted by David Beckham (@davidbeckham) on Dec 7, 2016 at 1:10am PST I actually don’t agree with 2 out of 4 of Tina’s pieces of advice. Maybe even 3 out of 4. (NSFW swears) [Tina Fey's advice for young women: "Don't smoke, wear a bra, trust your instincts, don't f— John Mayer." #THRWomen] A video posted by Hollywood Reporter (@hollywoodreporter) on Dec 7, 2016 at 4:38pm PST Armie Hammer and Joe Manganiello are both quite tall, I hadn’t noticed that before. What do you think they are working on together? Judging by the setting I want to say they are recipe testing for a cookbook but it’s more likely a superhero something. The comments suggest it’s Green Lantern but I will leave it at that because nerds love to get shouty. [Burning the midnight oil with my man @armiehammer #espresso] A photo posted by Joe Manganiello (@joemanganiello) on Dec 8, 2016 at 2:11am PST What’s more punk than a middle-age (I’m assuming) man giving the finger while his friend takes a selfie. (PS: The Joker [doesn’t take selfies].) [Fuck your-self portrait 📸 @lallo25] A photo posted by JARED LETO (@jaredleto) on Dec 7, 2016 at 6:14pm PST Dammit I thought I was being all cute and did this last night. If you wished upon that first Star you saw tonight in twilight, then it will not likely come true. You wished on planet Venus — Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) [December 2, 2016] Half of Lainey’s obsession and a puppy. [Puppy love ❤️] A photo posted by Artist & Director (@samtaylorjohnson) on Dec 7, 2016 at 2:41pm PST I really, truly never thought I’d see the day: Pete Doherty looks and sounds great. Good for him. Tonight on [#c4news] he's back. Eloquent and musical. Pete Doherty, after the [#Bataclan] [pic.twitter.com/GjmDDExQE4] — Krishnan Guru-Murthy (@krishgm) [December 8, 2016] Busy Philipps and Sarah Michelle Gellar need to have an Elf on the Shelf face-off. I think I just invented a new TLC show. [#werk] [#elfontheshelf] [pic.twitter.com/Q4eODNBKQY] — Sarah Michelle (@SarahMGellar) [December 7, 2016] [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 8:55 PM [Is this premature?] [Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling attend their hand and footprint ceremony in Los Angeles, December 7, 2016] [Emma Stone] and [Ryan Gosling] were memorialised together in Hollywood yesterday. Here they are at their hand and footprint ceremony at the TCL Chinese Theatre. As you know, they’re the stars of La La Land. And La La Land is one of the frontrunners for Best Picture Oscar. The film opens next week. Emma and Ryan also worked together on Crazy, Stupid, Love and Gangster Squad. I love Emma Stone. Ryan Gosling is a terrific actor. Their chemistry is amazing. I enjoy watching them on screen together. But… this Instagram post by Vanity Fair’s Krista Smith that Joanna sent me this morning: [This morning didn’t suck. No one can quite put their finger on what makes chemistry happen between two actors. Yet it is exactly the ingredient that has created some of the greatest cinematic legends of all time. Ryan & Emma are that modern day Bogart & Bacall, Fred Astaire & Ginger Rogers, Hepburn & Tracy, Myrna Loy & William Powell. It was an honor to be mistress of ceremonies at their Hand & Footprint Ceremony. #EmmaStone #RyanGosling #LaLaLand] A photo posted by Krista Smith (@kristasmith) on Dec 7, 2016 at 5:24pm PST Bogart & Bacall. Fred and Ginger. Hepburn and Tracy. It’s not that I’ve any doubt that one day, ONE DAY, they could join that list. For sure. They’re both SO talented. But right now? Ummmm… do you think, maybe, it’s a little premature? No hate. Just asking a question. In my mind they’re not legends yet. And we’re being told they’re legends already. Agree or disagree? [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 6:52 PM [Sing is a joy jukebox] [Matthew McConaughey at the LA premiere of Sing, December 3, 2016] Sometimes it’s impossible to dislike a movie. There are just some movies that, no matter how many problems they may have, are so winsome and entertaining that you—happily—overlook flaws because of the feelings. Sing is one such movie. Following up on the success of The Secret Life of Pets, Illumination has made a movie so exuberant it dares you not to like it. Sing, despite a legit rough beginning, has such a rousing, joyous ending it’s simply not possible to hold any of the movie’s failings against it. Sing revolves around Buster Moon ([Matthew McConaughey]), a koala who has dedicated his life to show business only to see his theater failing as he has never produced a hit show. This is McConaughey’s second voice role in an animated movie this year, following Kubo and the Two Strings. He [says] he’s taking on these roles to make movies his kids can see, and he turns out to have a knack for vocal performance. Buster is super cute and it is surprisingly easy to hear “past” McConaughey. To save his theater, Buster decides to host an American Idol-style singing competition, and a mishap boasts the prize money as $100,000 instead of $1,000. Buster doesn’t have $100,000, but the movie is only intermittently concerned with that. Also, how is Buster supposed to save his theater with what amounts to a one-off show that requires a large cash prize? This is getting into George-Bailey-saving-Bedford-Falls-with-bad-mortgages territory. No sooner than you start thinking about the completely illogical story mechanics, though, another song starts up and Sing pummels you into submission with sheer goodwill. It’s impossible to deny the charm of Sing when there is actual singing. The music ranges from Top 40 hits to standards, so there’s something for everyone—guaranteeing family-wide appeal—and all of it is performed by cute animals dressed like people. Buster’s talent show includes Rosita ([Reese Witherspoon]), a harried mother of twenty-five piglets who Rube Goldbergs her house in order to make time for rehearsal. Rosita has pipes but not much stage presence, so Buster pairs her with Gunter (Nick Kroll), a gregarious, Gaga-esque pig with a penchant for sequins. Then there’s Johnny ([Taron Egerton]), a gorilla from the wrong side of the tracks (Egerton’s charisma is irrepressible even in cartoon form. It’s only a matter of time until the internet is completely obsessed with this guy); Ash (Scarlett Johansson), a punky teenager porcupine; and Mike ([Seth McFarlane]), a gambling mouse who is just The Worst. Rounding out the group is shy elephant Meena ([Tori Kelly]), and Buster’s friend and nominal business partner, Eddie (John C. Reilly). Most of Sing is thinly drawn sequences meant to propel us to the next song, so stuff like “character development” and “cohesive plotting” aren’t really the priority. Every time I started thinking about how Sing doesn’t stand up to examination another cute animal would burst into song and every lyric was, “The message is believe in yourself/Don’t ruin it for the five year olds/We just want to make you happy/Stop being such an asshole”. And when the animals sing, it’s impossible not to get into it. The musical numbers are all well done, and the big show at the end is just a joy. While Sing is not a statement movie like Inside Out or Zootopia, it does have some nice messaging like “believe in yourself” and “follow your dreams”, and slightly subtler, there is some nice stuff about competition and good sportsmanship. The animals are in a competition, but they encourage and comfort one another, and no one is sabotaging anyone. Mike is rude, but he also gets washed down a sewer, so the point about being polite gets made. At its deepest level, Sing says that you can compete and still be friends, you can want to win and still be supportive. Written and directed by Garth Jennings (Son of Rambow), Sing has some great comedic moments—Miss Crawly the decrepit lizard is a hoot—but really, it’s the music that makes the movie, especially the last half hour when the talent show is staged. Don’t be surprised if people in the audience clap and cheer after each performance like they’re happening live. Sing plays fast and loose with the story, but emotionally it hits all the right notes. (Couldn’t resist). [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 6:13 PM [Missing Taylor Swift] [Katy Perry and Jennifer Aniston attend the Premiere of Paramount Pictures' 'Office Christmas Party' at Regency Village Theatre on December 7, 2016 in Westwood, California] The premiere of Office Christmas Party last night in LA. [Jennifer Aniston] and [Katy Perry] were both there. And hanging out together. Which of course is notable because of [John Mayer]. Obviously he's not a factor. Which is how it should be. PS Jennifer and Gwyneth are also friends. And all of them roll in that Jennifer Meyer circle. Katy too. But not [Taylor Swift]. She's the missing piece in these photos. And it would be such a great shot if one day all three of those women stood next to each other. And someone framed it and sent it to John Mayer to look at while he plays his guitar and making his come face. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 5:16 PM [The Rock and Zac Efron have muscles] [Baywatch trailer stills ] That is the takeaway from the Baywatch trailer. Lots of slow-motion beach running. Lots of shirtless dudes and half-naked women. Lots of abs. So many abs. What storyline? All the abs. The trailer dropped this morning and it’s exactly what I expected from a Baywatch remake starring [Dwayne The Rock Johnson] and [Zac Efron] but apparently, [fans of the original series aren’t happy]. Who are these Baywatch purists? Please expose yourselves so I know who to avoid. The first thing a woman says in the trailer is “if you want me, you can have me” right before literally being tossed overboard like trash. Listen, it’s an insult to everyone’s intelligence to try to take a movie like this seriously so I won’t. Baywatch is directed by Seth Gordon, the guy who directed Horrible Bosses and I get that they are going for a 21 Jump Street slapstick comedy/action vibe but based on this trailer, it’s not going to deliver the same laughs or buddy cop chemistry. Zac and The Rock seem to be trying really hard, bless them, but none of the jokes land. When Zac impersonates his own balls in a high-pitched voice and The Rock says, “Why the f-ck do your balls sound like 3-year-old girls?” I literally said, “NOPE” out loud at my computer. Their character names are Mitch and Matt but they might as well be called Douche 1 and Douche 2. I usually can’t resist The Rock’s goofy charm and I just saw Moana so I’ve really got a soft spot for him right now but even his charisma can’t make up for the overwhelming douchiness in this trailer. The good thing is that it looks like Zac Efron will be just as objectified as all the bikini-clad, slow-motion running women. From what we can see in the trailer, Efron’s character seems to be good at diving into bodies of water, yelling about shots and saying dumb sh-t. He’s also described as a reckless liability with two gold medals. So he’s Ryan Lochte. Actually, if Efron comes out and says that Lochte was his inspiration for this character, I could get down with that. I could also get down with this movie if it really leans into how bad it is, ramps up the campiness and becomes one of those movies that is so bad it’s good. As for the ladies, Alexandra Daddario’s delivery of the sarcastic “Ha!” after Efron’s sh-tty boob joke is surprisingly on point and I wouldn’t be mad if her character’s sole purpose is to call Douche 2 on his crap. Kelly Rohrbach, [who traded in a Leonardo DiCaprio for this job], is the butt of the trailer’s standout “self-aware” joke about slow motion running. Priyanka Chopra gets about a frame of screen time even though she’s been promoted as the film’s big villain. Pamela Anderson and David Hasselhoff don’t show up in the trailer but they are both set to make cameos in the film. For more abs and bad jokes, the full trailer is below. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 4:30 PM [World War Brange: the legal letters] [Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt] As [posted yesterday], a judge denied [Brad Pitt]’s application to seal the divorce documents after [Angelina Jolie] formally filed their temporary custody agreement with the court last Friday. He claimed that she was compromising the privacy of their children. Her side argued in court documents that “his request is a thinly veiled attempt to shield himself, rather than the minor children, from public view”. Representing Angelina, Laura Wasser noted that that Brad’s motion to seal the documents did not meet the requirements for an “emergency”, a position the judge evidently agreed with, and now another hearing has been scheduled for January 17th when both parties will go at it again after more time to prepare. So how did we get here? While Brad’s team is insisting that he’s reacting to Angelina’s filing of the custody agreement on Friday, calling it an unnecessary move, Angelina’s team makes the case in their documentation, submitted to the court yesterday, which includes correspondence between Laura Wasser and Lance Spiegel, Brad’s lawyer, that all of this started well before Friday’s filing and has to do with Brad’s attempts to change the temporary custody agreement, an agreement both Brad and Angelina agreed to. The temporary custody agreement was put in place on October 26th – Angelina has full temporary custody of the children, Brad has to go therapy on his own once a week and participate in joint therapy sessions with the children and Angelina, and has to submit to drug and alcohol testing four times a month. And it’s up to a therapist to decide whether or not the supervised visitation schedule changes. These terms were agreed upon by both Angelina and Brad. Three weeks later, however, Brad’s lawyer was sending letters and emails to Angelina’s lawyer demanding to change the terms of the agreement, asking for more time with the kids and asking to add another therapist to the therapy team, without consulting the therapists that have been handling the case. Angelina’s lawyer responded and was like, OK, we can do that, but can we sit down with the current therapy team first, and get their buy-in, before we make any changes? Here’s the exact wording from correspondence – this is Laura Wasser to Lance Spiegel: You have told us that you intend to file a request for additional non-therapeutic visitation and do not seem to have any regard for what the children's therapists feel is in their best interests. I understand that Brad is frustrated but feel that it is incumbent upon us to help this family achieve their long-term reunification goals in a smooth and expeditious manner. Litigation absolutely does not effectuate that goal. Is it not the end goal that within the next 6-12 months Brad is enjoying frequent and continuous contact with all of the children on a joint custodial basis? If we know that we will get to that point via either costly, ugly, protracted and public court battles or by virtue of out-of-court resolution and the therapeutic process upon which we all agreed less than a month ago, why would you opt to blow it all up and choose the former? Please give the therapists a chance to tell us how the kids are feeling. I absolutely know that it will not be dispositive of your/your client's decision on how to proceed but I cannot imagine that it will not shape how we move forward. There must be a middle ground upon which we can all agree, one which does not necessitate a public battle. Angie's reluctance to enter into a stipulation to seal the file stems from her firm belief that litigation is the wrong decision. We have discussed a custody evaluation in this matter. As we advised yesterday, we are agreeable and would like it to commence immediately. We propose that Dr. XXX be appointed. Is Brad agreeable? You have told us that you will not agree to the appointment of minor's counsel. We feel it is essential that the children have advocates who can communicate with the evaluator or the judge on their behalf. Will you reconsider? We also propose that the parties participate in joint sessions with a trauma specialist so that they may learn how to best support and interact with their children given their currentstate. Please consider and ask your client to engage with us in trying to figure out how to effectively satisfy this family's concerns. And here is Lance Spiegel’s response to Laura Wasser the next day, December 2: The message that I attempted to deliver on Wednesday was that it is inconceivable to me that the court will not provide Brad with much greater access to the children than the time that I proposed earlier this week. It would be an extraordinary understatement to describe Brad as an involved parent. Based on evidence that has been corroborated by multiple sources (including public and private statements from your client), he has been a great father and there is no reason to exclude him from the children, including the isolated incident that was investigated and rejected by the DCFS. As you know, we have confirmed that we will be present for the meeting on Monday. However, I have to tell you that this case is not going to end up in a court room because of my reluctance to listen to the therapists. If there is litigation, it is going to be because your client is either unable or unwilling to recognize that the children need to continue to have two loving parents in their lives. I will get back to you regarding Dr. XXX and on Monday I hope that you will be able to respond to Brad's request regarding the holidays. After that, Angelina’s team formally filed the temporary custody agreement with the court, presumably to ensure that the terms would be complied with. Brad’s team, as you know, interpreted it to mean she wanted to embarrass him. And, of course, both of them are aggressively pushing their respective positions through the media, which is what will still happen anyway even if Brad’s application to seal the documents is granted. These letters, at least, give you perhaps a better idea of how the situation looks on paper. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 4:03 PM [Trevor Noah’s backlash] [Trevor Noah at Watch What Happens Live studios, December 7, 2016] Last week, [Trevor Noah] interviewed Tomi Lahren. Since then, he’s sparked a heated debate online about the conversations people of colour should be having –or not having—with people who don’t value their rights or humanity. On Monday, Noah wrote an op-ed in The New York Times related to Lahren’s appearance on The Daily Show and yesterday, he went on The Breakfast Club to talk about the now infamous segment. I’ll start with the Tomi Lahren interview. That clip went viral. You can [watch it here] if you haven’t seen it yet. The segment was hailed by some as Trevor Noah’s [best work] – some critics even calling it his ONLY good work on a show many have written off since Trevor is not Jon Stewart. Other critics slammed Noah and The Daily Show for inviting someone on their show whose nickname is Racist Barbie and says [sh-t like this] to reach a massive platform. Since the segment went viral, Lahren has been profiled by The New York Times and been the subject of many “5 Things to Know about Tomi Lahren!” puff pieces. This needs to be said: Tomi Lahren’s views are abhorrent, rooted in racism and deeply dangerous. This is a woman who frequently likens the Black Lives Matter movement to the KKK, spews false facts about protestors and routinely attacks black people who object to inequality like Colin Kaepernick, Beyoncé and Jesse Williams. When I first saw the Daily Show interview, I shared it on Twitter. I thought Trevor handled himself beautifully considering he didn’t scream at Lahren, like I would have wanted to. I thought he asked smart questions, followed up calmly to reveal her as a ranting idiot and threw in a few jokes to prove that some of what she says is so ludicrous, it’s laughable. But then came the backlash. After the Daily Show segment, Trevor and Tomi exchanged pleasantries over Twitter. They were papped going out for dinner and Tomi even shared a photo of cupcakes Trevor allegedly sent her. [When @trevornoah sends you cupcakes and you realize a mutual love of sugar might be the common ground you needed! #TeamTomi #thedailyshow #sweettooth #cupcakes #commonground] A photo posted by Tomi Lahren (@tomilahren) on Dec 6, 2016 at 5:48pm PST So, let’s get the gossip out of the way. Noah has a girlfriend. He clarified on The Breakfast Club that the dinner was set up by their producers who were also there but the paparazzi cut them out of the photos. They weren’t on a date. And [TMZ reports] that the cupcakes weren’t directly from Noah, but his staff. But does every guest who goes on The Daily Show get a dinner with producers and cupcakes? Why is a blatant bigot getting special treatment from the show? Feminist writer and one of my favourite people to follow on Twitter, Jamilah Lemieux sarcastically tweeted “[Comparing Black Lives Matter to the KKK puts people's lives in danger, but let's just be pals!]” in response to how friendly it seemed Noah was being towards Lahren. She also pointed out that Lahren’s appeal is directly related to her looks. An op-ed in [Very Smart Brothas] called “It’s Time to Stop Allowing Ourselves to be Seduced by Sh-tty White Women,” put it like this: “…their looks have granted them the privilege of consideration. Sometimes even kindness. (And sometimes even cupcakes.) Because women that young, that blonde, that petite just can’t possibly also be that hateful.” It’s hard not to think this is true when Breakfast Club host Charlamagne tweeted this in response to his own “friendship” with Lahren. Would be dope if a young black or Hispanic "WOKE" woman used social media to create a Platform to be a voice like Tomi Lahren did. — Charlamagne Tha God (@cthagod) [December 7, 2016] He completely disregards the countless women of colour who are creating thoughtful work every day but aren’t invited to spaces like The Daily Show or The Breakfast Club to share their views. Is it because they aren’t blonde enough? Trevor addressed the idea that he shouldn’t have interviewed Tomi Lahren in the first place on The Breakfast Club while Charlamagne also defended his interactions with her. "I do not believe we are in a situation where we are providing exposure," Noah said, since Lahren’s videos garnered tens of millions of views on YouTube (face palm) before her appearance on his show. Here’s where I hesitantly agree with him. Jon Stewart repeatedly engaged in heated conversations with conservatives like Bill O’Reilly or Glenn Beck. This is what The Daily Show does. I take issue with the dinner, the cupcakes, the nice notes on Twitter and the normalization of a human being who mobilizes her followers with hatred and intolerance. Trevor Noah went on to say it’s important to "talk to people who would never hear you in the first place…. It doesn't mean you have to agree, but at least you're in the world where you are hearing the opposing view.” It’s a nice sentiment in theory but considering the climate in America right now, it’s naïve. Noah doubled down on this view [in his op-ed for the Times] writing, “We can be unwavering in our commitment to racial equality while still breaking bread with the same racist people who’ve oppressed us.” Trevor grew up in South Africa during Apartheid. In the article he drives home the point that “divided people are easier to rule” and that America should look to South Africa as a cautionary tale. While I see where he’s trying to go and I know this is simplifying an incredibly complex issue, it’s not like racism in South Africa magically went away because everyone sat down for biscuits together. I’ve shared on this blog how much I like Trevor Noah. I still really like Trevor Noah a lot and I think his heart is in the right place but this week, his views have been at odds with the views of many of the black feminist writers I follow and admire. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie wrote a stunning piece in The New Yorker (written before the Trevor Noah controversy) where she [outlines the dangers of appeasement]: The responsibility to forge unity belongs not to the denigrated but to the denigrators. The premise for empathy has to be equal humanity; it is an injustice to demand that the maligned identify with those who question their humanity. On The Breakfast Club, Noah repeatedly stated that if we all just befriend people with racist views, we might change their minds. Again, it’s a nice sentiment and I understand where he is coming from. I wish solving racism were that simple. But that idea makes it seem like racism, homophobia, xenophobia and misogyny are valid notions up for debate and that these views aren’t inherently dangerous. I have no intention of “breaking bread” with anyone who believes my life is worth less than theirs – and why should I have to? Watch Trevor’s full interview with The Breakfast Club below. Here's Trevor Noah on Watch What Happens Live last night. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 3:16 PM Wednesday, December 07, 2016 [Smutty Tingles] I hate his hair more than the outfit ([Dlisted]) Rihanna does not want to be stung ([Just Jared]) Princess Kate will attend a scout event ([Cele|bitchy]) When I see people working out and their hair isn’t tied back, I assume they’re not giving it 100%. Too judgy? ([TooFab]) Suicide Squad, honestly ([The Superficial]) See? Mimi’s not sharing her space, and definitely not with the backup dancer ([TMZ]) Sienna Miller in a mess of a dress ([Go Fug Yourself]) I’ve always wanted an ugly Christmas sweater and now the royals are wearing them, sort of ([Jezebel]) Who f-cks best in Love Actually? ([Pajiba]) [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 11:11 PM [Billy Bob Thornton in Bad Santa 2] [Bad Santa movie poster ] This week I am attempting to watch all of the holiday-centric new releases and so far, while I haven’t hit the low of [Love The Coopers], I also haven’t seen a seasonal gem like [The Night Before]. Christmas movies are hard to get right, which is why there are only three Christmas movies people actually like, plus It’s A Wonderful Life which is a [stupid f*cking movie] we’ve been conned into putting up with every year. Nothing I’ve seen so far this year suggests we’re going to get a new, good Christmas movie to revisit and enjoy year after year, starting with Bad Santa 2, which would be destined for the $3 DVD bin, if people still bought DVDs. [Billy Bob Thornton] returns as Willie The Thieving Santa, but this time the action takes place in Chicago—as played by Canada—and the goal is robbing a charity. Bad Santa works because it’s a precise blend of raunchy humor and lonely-hearts romance, but Bad Santa 2 suffers from the passage of time—we’re no longer shocked by a cussing Santa Claus. These “bad examples of something typically good” comedies have become a sub-genre unto themselves, what with Bad Teacher, Bad Moms, Bad Words, and The Bronze (aka Bad Gymnasts)—how has no one made a Bad Dogs yet? With its central gimmick so thoroughly co-opted, Bad Santa 2 has nothing to fall back on and so it just doubles down on the cussing until the word “f*ck” loses all possible meaning. None of the creative team of Bad Santa—which included the Coen Brothers doing an uncredited pass on the script—is back for the sequel, and you can tell there’s been a change in management. Bad Santa was gleefully misanthropic and vulgar, but it has slivers of real humanity to leaven the anti-cheer fest, such as the relationship between Willie and Sue (Lauren Graham), and also Thurman Merman (Brett Kelly), the dorky kid to whom Willie becomes a reluctant father figure. Kelly returns as Thurman in the sequel, still an awkward social misfit clinging for inexplicable reasons to Willie, but Lauren Graham is replaced by [Christina Hendricks] as Diane, socialite and charity organizer. She tries, but Hendricks and Thornton have so little chemistry it’s like they filmed their scenes separately and had their performances spliced together later, and the “romance” is more about degrading Diane than mining a kinky romance for laughs. In fact, this movie is terrible to women in a way that #1 isn’t, with Hendricks and Octavia Spencer suffering the worst of it. Kathy Bates appears in the sequel as Willie’s mom, Sunny, and she’s as awful as you would expect a character in a Bad Santa to be. Bates is the closest thing to a “saving grace” this movie has, but not even she can turn Bad Santa 2 into something watchable for more than three minutes at a time. And when she proudly declares, “I don’t speak ‘politically correct’,” the line falls so flat you can hear it go splat. That might have passed for a joke in ye olden days, but this year, when “politically correct” has come to mean anyone or anything trying to treat all people with dignity regardless of circumstance, it’s actively painful, and the audience tangibly recoiled from the moment. So Bad Santa 2 has a little bit of a timing problem—no one is in the mood for hateful people screwing charities out of money right now—but mostly it has a “story/character/joke” problem, which is a death knell for a comedy, or really, any movie. The vulgar delights of the first movie are gone completely, replaced with nothing, really. This is a movie that does not realize it missed its moment. Bad Santa 2 has to nail being a good comedy sequel and a good Christmas movie, and it fails on both counts. The result is a flaccid belly flop of a movie. [Click here for the rest of the photos.] Posted at 11:02 PM [Privacy Policy] - [Unsubscribe]