Articles on this Page
- 06/19/13--17:55: _A Breakdown of the ...
- 06/19/13--17:59: _Chris Bosh to Heat ...
- 06/20/13--15:52: _Justin Bieber Posts...
- 06/20/13--15:55: _Brooke Burke-Charve...
- 06/20/13--15:59: _Angelina Jolie stun...
- 06/20/13--16:08: _Joaquin Phoenix and...
- 06/20/13--16:16: _Rihanna the new Mad...
- 06/20/13--16:17: _Jimmy Kimmel: YouTu...
- 06/20/13--16:17: _CAMERON DIAZ'S 'BAD...
- 06/20/13--16:23: _Evan Peters and Don...
- 06/20/13--16:37: _On Miley Cyrus, Rat...
- 06/20/13--16:37: _Courtney and Doug a...
- 06/20/13--17:32: _Music Choice U&A wi...
- 06/20/13--17:33: _TV network wary aft...
- 06/20/13--17:34: _Marc Jacobs' boyfri...
- 06/20/13--17:34: _Adam Driver isn't w...
- 06/20/13--17:46: _Demi Lovato & Jessi...
- 06/20/13--17:48: _Happy Birthday Nico...
- 06/20/13--17:48: _Disney Channel to f...
- 06/20/13--17:54: _Hannibal Finale Sco...
- 06/20/13--15:52: Justin Bieber Posts a Cute Instagram Video
- 06/20/13--16:16: Rihanna the new Madonna? In her own way.
- 06/20/13--16:17: Jimmy Kimmel: YouTube Challenge - I Made My Dad Breakfast in Bed
- 06/20/13--16:17: CAMERON DIAZ'S 'BAD TEACHER' IS GETTING AN UNNECESSARY SEQUEL
- 06/20/13--16:23: Evan Peters and Donald Glover join horror film "Reawakening"
- 06/20/13--16:37: On Miley Cyrus, Ratchet Culture and Accessorizing With Black People
- 06/20/13--16:37: Courtney and Doug at Roosevelt Hotel
- 06/20/13--17:32: Music Choice U&A with Jonas Brothers
- 06/20/13--17:34: Marc Jacobs' boyfriend covers Junior Magazine
- 06/20/13--17:48: Happy Birthday Nicole Kidman! - Her 5 Bravest Roles
- 06/20/13--17:48: Disney Channel to feature its first same-sex couple
- 06/20/13--17:54: Hannibal Finale Scoop: Get Ready to Scream “Holy #$%!” at Your TV
Even the most devout readers of George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" book series were surprised by how some aspects of the Red Wedding played out (it should go without saying that spoilers abound from here on out in this article), and were handed yet another reminder that HBO’s adaptation of the epic fantasy novels isn't always going to stay true to the source material. But while season two took a few liberties (Daenerys's dragons getting kidnapped, for instance), this past season shuffled even more timelines, amalgamated even more characters, and twisted even more plot points as the one-book-per-season pace was pushed out the window like an overcurious Stark brat. Most changes involved simplifying and condensing Martin’s intricate narrative, but in some instances, the alterations served to enlarge the scope. We could quibble about some of the smaller changes that ultimately fulfilled the same function (Vargo Hoat’s rechristening as Locke, for example) or the shifting reasons behind certain events (such as the mutiny at Craster's Keep, which seemed more spontaneous than planned). But the changes we’re concerned with here are the ones that will affect the story going forward. Let’s take a look at the biggest Games-changers of season three. (Sorry, Ros!)
In the books, Robb's wife is named Jeyne Westerling, and she never does manage to get pregnant with a Stark child. She also survives the Red Wedding because she isn’t in attendance; it was decided that she should sit that one out, so as not to slight the Freys any further. A crucial point not addressed in the show is that Jeyne's family members are Lannister bannermen and that, at the behest of Lord Tywin, her mother had been giving Jeyne poisons to thwart pregnancy. After the Red Wedding, she is pardoned by the Iron Throne and instructed not to marry for two years to ward off any speculation if she were to have a child. Still, even though Talisa comes from a family with no political ties to Westeros, killing her and her unborn Stark baby off at the Red Wedding fulfills the same plot function, namely that Robb leaves behind no heir to Winterfell.
Because he was unable to knock Jeyne up despite their incessant shagging, and because his younger brothers Bran and Rickon were thought to have been murdered by Theon Greyjoy and his sister Arya is presumed dead, Robb had been considering legitimizing Jon Snow in the days leading up to the Red Wedding. The rationale was sound, as the move would have ensured Robb not only that a Stark could inherit the title of King in the North in the event of his untimely demise, but also thwart Tywin's maneuver of putting Tyrion next in line to inherit Winterfell by forcing him to marry Sansa Stark. Of course, Catelyn shot Robb's idea down. On the show, this topic never comes up.
In the books, there is a lot of foreshadowing about what was going to happen at the Red Wedding and about whom Walder Frey's real allies were. Roose Bolton's page is a Frey. The Lannister boys who were Robb's prisoners were related to the Freys. Roslin Frey can't stop crying during the wedding ceremony. The musicians were really awful, indicating that they weren't actually musicians. All of this, in addition to what was shown in the episode, helped set the stage for Walder Frey's betrayal. One thing that isn't addressed on the show is that the Freys never intended to kill Catelyn; it was only after she went mad upon watching Robb die — tearing at her face, laughing hysterically, holding hostage the least valuable member of the Frey household (a half-wit grandson nicknamed Jinglebell, not Walder's wife) — that the Freys decide that they have no choice but to kill her, too.
Like Bran, she's supposed to have a connection with her direwolf, the long-lost Nymeria, but that aspect of her personality is never broached on the show. This could become potentially important, as, in one of her nightly wolf dreams, she pulls the dead body of a certain character out of the river after the Red Wedding, which foreshadows the surprising epilogue to A Storm of Swords, the third book in the series.
In the books, there are two surviving bastards of King Robert: Gendry and Edric. Only one of these (Gendry) is introduced in the HBO series and their respective story lines have been conjoined. So it's Gendry, not Edric, who is taken to Stannis for a little bloodletting. Also, Gendry never learns that his father is King Robert in the books. And he doesn't set off in a rowboat toward King's Landing as he does in the season-three finale, a potentially huge departure from the novels, as it leaves open the possibility that he could become a legitimate player for the Iron Throne in future episodes.
The red priestess Melisandre never leaves Stannis's side in the books. Therefore, she never meets Arya and she never intuits that the red priest Thoros of Myr is blessed with the ability to resurrect the dead.
The Kingslayer returns to rescue Brienne from the bear pit because of a dream he has about her — but despite their pairing up for mutual survival, he doesn't seem to be as infatuated with her in the books as he is on the show. Also, his homecoming to King's Landing happens much later in the books than it does on the show, after some key events that have yet to occur on the show and that directly alter Cersei's mind-set when the sibling-lovers are reunited.
On the show, the prostitute-in-disguise professes her romantic love for Tyrion and her loyalty for Sansa, and is torn apart by jealousy and duty after Tyrion and Sansa marry (oh, the drama!). But in the books, Shae doesn't care quite so much; she doesn't consider "a little girl" to be a rival for Tyrion's affections, and is a bit more mercenary in general than how she's depicted on the show. She seems happy to consider any potential uptick in status presented to her, be it jewelry or promises of houses and servants. If someone had handed Shae a sack of diamonds and asked her to sail far, far away, as Varys does on the show (but not in the books), she likely would have accepted and jumped aboard the next ship out of town.
A fool who is friends with fools, Sansa clings to fairy-tale dreams despite all evidence to the contrary. When it's suggested she marry a Tyrell, she assumes it would be Loras — even though he is a member of the Kingsguard and cannot marry. When it turns out that her intended match is Loras's crippled brother, Willas, she's disappointed — even though marrying him would be her ticket out of King's Landing. More crucially, though, she is unaware of her impending wedding to Tyrion until the day of and is supremely petulant during the ordeal, even going so far as to refuse to kneel so that he can place the cloak on her; her pal Dontos the fool becomes a human footstool for Tyrion instead. Tyrion tries to get Sansa to accept him as her husband, but she can only see a deformed imp. She acts like a child and pouts like a child in the books, probably because, in the books, she is in her early teens.
Osha and Rickon
These two parted company with Bran, Hodor, and the Reed kids long ago as far as the timeline in the books is concerned; their journey is told off the page. Readers never learn much about Osha's past (Bruni who!?) and don't find out where she has taken Rickon until book five, and then only through hearsay. On the show, they've just set off for the Last Hearth, the stronghold of the Umbers.
Bran and the Reeds
"The raven is you" is a line created for the show, and it doesn't quite mesh with what we know so far in the books. The three-eyed raven is an entity of some kind, and isn't that why they're going beyond the Wall, to find it? Jojen also does not have epilepsy-like seizures with his visions and he doesn't enter Bran's dreams.
In the novels, he tells Mance Rayder that he deserted the Night's Watch and joined the wildlings for reasons relating to his being a bastard and never feeling fully accepted by his family — which becomes all the more poignant when, in the parallel story line occuring to the south, Robb is considering legitimizing him and making him a full Stark. Jon's relationship with Ygritte is also more of a true love story on the show than it is in the books; she knows an awful lot (as she repeatedly informs Jon), but one thing she doesn't know is that he's secretly still loyal to the Watch, and she doesn't seem to think that it's the two of them against the world.
She's a little more ruthless in the books, and prone to surprise attacks under the guise of hospitality herself. She tells the leader of a mercenary company that he has a day to consider an offer and gives him and his men wine, but she only does so to get them drunk for a sneak attack she has planned later that night. Also, Jorah Mormont is more explicit in his feelings for her, which causes problems down the road. No romance for Jorah!
Rest of the article at SOURCE
lol bless vulture for this wank bait article
Chances are you've heard about the Miami Heat fans who decided to get an early start on their commute when the San Antonio Spurs held a 94-89 lead with 28 seconds remaining in Game 6 of the NBA Finals on Tuesday night. Chances are you've also heard that rumors of the Heat's demise were greatly exaggerated, as a headband-less LeBron James and a pure-from-the-corner Ray Allen authored enough late-game magic to push the game to overtime, where the Heat held on for a 103-100 win that guaranteed a deciding Game 7 for the 2013 NBA championship on Thursday night.
Heat center Chris Bosh played a major role in the comeback win, playing sensational defense in the late stages, grabbing the offensive rebound that led to Allen's corner 3-pointer and coming up with two huge blocks, including one on a last-ditch try by Spurs sharpshooter Danny Green, to seal the victory. And at the Heat's Wednesday practice, the All-Star center didn't mince his words when asked about those who took an early powder from AmericanAirlines Arena when the chips were down:
"For all those guys who left, don't come back for Game 7." - Chris Bosh— Ryan Wolstat (@WolstatSun) June 19, 2013
He had plenty more to say, too.
"You never give up," Bosh continued. "People gave up on us, and they can stay where they are and watch the game at home."
As we noted after Game 6, many of those who left early tried to rush back into the arena upon learning that the Heat had made a late run to force overtime, only to be turned away by arena workers — and, eventually, Miami police — who upheld the venue's no re-entry policy. Bosh, as you might suspect, had no sympathy for those forced to stay out.
"Yeah, you can't get let back in after you leave," he said. "I know that. Hell, I've been to games. You can't leave a game and then come back. It doesn't make any sense. You left. It's not punishment; that's protocol."
Bosh's teammates took a somewhat softer, more inclusive stance. James said he understood that the Heat had put supporters through the emotional wringer down the stretch.
"I apologize to our fans from last night. But the game is — that's why the game is played all the way to zeros," said James, who scored 18 of his 32 points in the fourth quarter and overtime to help secure the win. "As a fan and people watching at home [...] wow, it had to do a lot to them, both if you were a Spurs fan or a Heat fan or just a general fan of the game. It definitely brought everything out of you that you probably didn't think you had."
Point guard Mario Chalmers struck an appropriately bemused tone.
"To the fans that stayed, thank you," he said, according to CBSSports.com's Royce Young. "To the fans that left, maybe you'll stay in Game 7."
Veteran forward Shane Battier was most welcoming of all.
"The door will always be open for them," he said, according to Young.
This, of course, is a wholly reasonable perspective — there's no reason for the Heat to start lobbing bombs at paying customers before the biggest home game of the season. And yes, as friend Bobby Big Wheel wrote Wednesday at Deadspin, there are all sorts of legitimate real-life reasons for leaving a sporting event early that don't make you less of a fan. I mean, Mr. Wheel's conflation of a random regular-season Penguins/Whalers tilt with a potential elimination NBA Finals game in which the Heat had already made a monster late run feels a bit off to me, but hey, it takes diff'rent strokes to move the world.
Still, it's kind of great to hear Bosh — someone often criticized and derided for being soft, for being aloof/goofy/overly cerebral/insert-not-tough-signifier-here — so plainly and in such a matter-of-fact tone tell the fairweather friends and bandwagon jumpers in his midst to kindly get to steppin'. You bail on us? Good. Who needs you? We're 48 minutes from back-to-back championships. Champagne for my real friends, real pain for my sham friends, and more of the former to go around with fewer glasses to fill.
I'm not quite sure why, but that kind of snarl seems to suit Bosh — especially a version who, twice in the last three games, has been a defensive demon for the Heat, and who damn sure better have earned some stripes in the eyes of cynics by withstanding a first-half hammering from Spurs star Tim Duncan to play his best all-around ball when it mattered most. Let the rest of your teammates play nice and open their arms, Chris; hang onto this tone through Thursday night, huh?
For what it's worth, Heat head coach Erik Spoelstra said he "didn't have any idea about" the fans leaving early at the time, and that he didn't think his players did either.
"We were fully engaged in the moment," the coach said.
As, we hope, he, his team and every single ticket-holder at AmericanAirlines Arena will be come Thursday night. A series this amazing deserves nothing less.
Ya'll done pissed Raptor Bosh off. Idgi tho. Just finish watching your team lose with dignity.
Thyroid cancer survivor Brooke Burke-Charvet thinks Melissa Etheridge crossed the line when she publicly criticized Angelina Jolie's decision to have a double mastectomy as more "fearful" than "brave."
"I feel like to comment on somebody else's decision and their motivation and to criticize it in any way feels really inappropriate for me," says the Dancing With the Stars host, who underwent a thyroidectomy after being diagnosed with cancer last year.
"And I bite my tongue because Angelina is not a personal friend and I can't speak about her experience, but doing something electively to avoid greats odds that you can have a fatal disease, not only is it brave, but I think it's pretty intelligent."
Burke-Charvet said doctors gave her the option of removing just half of her thyroid. "Different medical experts have different opinions," she said. "For me, as a mother of four and a wife, I went and got [a thyroidectomy]. I'm fighting to stay alive for my family—at all costs."
The Grammy winner is clarifying what she meant in a statement to E! News released through her rep.
"I don't have any opinion of what she 'should have' done," Etheridge said. "All are free to choose. I only objected to the term 'brave' describing it."(shut up already!)
Zahara and Shiloh shopping in NYC
Maddox/Pax getting their nails done
A former Hollywood stunt double has sued News Corp and its subsidiary News International, accusing the companies of ordering the hacking of her phone.
The suit, the first such claim from the US, was filed by Eunice Huthart, a British former double for Hollywood star Angelina Jolie.
In the suit, the Liverpool resident alleges messages from family, friends and Ms Jolie were intercepted and in some cases deleted.
News Corp declined to comment.
In a civil complaint filed on 13 June, Ms Huthart seeks damages for violations of federal and California laws and "intrusion into private affairs".
According to IMDB, Ms Huthart worked as Ms Jolie's stunt double on the films Wanted, Mr and Mrs Smith, and Lara Croft: Tomb Raider.
In the court filing, she describes herself as a close friend of Ms Jolie, and says the pair "often travelled and socialized together".
Ms Huthart said that in 2004-05, some friends and relatives complained she had not returned their phone calls, and she in turn complained to her mobile phone provider that voice messages were being lost in their system.
She said Ms Jolie left messages concerning travel arrangements and other plans, which Ms Huthart never received.
Ms Huthart claims News Corp hacked into her phone seeking information about Angelina Jolie
She added that her daughter left messages complaining about bullying in school in Liverpool, which she also never received - rendering her unable to console her daughter. Ms Huthart said her husband had also criticised her for not responding to his messages.
Ms Huthart says her name, telephone number and other private information appeared in the notes of Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator who worked for News Corp's News of the World and was jailed in January 2007 for unlawfully intercepting voicemail messages received by royal aides.
Ms Huthart"believes that they were hacking her cellular telephone as a means to obtain information about Ms Jolie", says the court filing.
Phone hacking arrests
According to the suit, The Sun newspaper published several news stories based on information illicitly obtained from Ms Huthart's mobile phone messages.
Revelations about phone hacking in the UK led News Corp boss Rupert Murdoch to close the News of the World newspaper in July 2011.
The investigation into phone hacking claims and payments to public officials for information has led to scores of arrests of journalists, police officers and other public officials.
Among those charged were Rebekah Brooks, a former News International executive, and Andy Coulson, former News of the World editor and ex-communications chief for UK Prime Minister David Cameron.
UK police have identified more than 4,000 possible victims of phone hacking included politicians, celebrities, actors, athletes, relatives of dead UK soldiers, and victims of the 7/7 London bombings.
The suit comes days before News Corp is to be split into two companies, one for its entertainment assets and the other for its publishing business. Mr Murdoch is to be chairman of both firms.
In the music industry, there have long been comparisons to Madonna thrown around - a pop single here, a fashion look there - but to encompass the scope and success, and global fame of Madonna? That's another league entirely.
Figures came out this week that Rihanna is now the most watched artist on YouTube, with her official channel RihannaVEVO reaching more than 3.47 billion views, nudging aside Justin Bieber who was considered the king of social media.
It's an impressive achievement in its own right. But it also seemed to cement Rihanna as the female artist who has achieved the near impossible - genuinely replicating the global and musical reach of Madonna, but in her own way, with her own sound.
Similarities between Rihanna and Madonna as performers cannot be denied, writes Christine Sams.
It's to an entirely different generation of course. At a time when the internet rules all else.
But the similarities between the two women are quite striking: their prowess in harnessing the power of music clips, combined with genuine star power and sexual allure (and their enjoyment in showing it).
We won't even go near the troubled relationships, or the bad film roles. (Although Madonna was ultra-cool in Desperately Seeking Susan, it was all downhill from there. Rihanna's cameo role in Battleship was not exactly groundbreaking).
For both women though, it is the music - and truly great songs - which keep fans coming back for more.
You often hear older music fans, some groups of men in particular, rubbish Madonna's most-loved pop songs as though they were nothing more than a bubbly, meaningless slice of the 1980s. But there are millions of people who can sing them word-for-word to this day. Or leap to their feet at a dancefloor when they hear the opening chords. To deny the power of that is deluded.
The same will happen with Rihanna's songs. Sure, her break-out hit Umbrella felt like a one-hit wonder (although it strongly defined her distinctive sound which followed) but her 2011 release We Found Love (recorded with Calvin Harris) is one of the most compelling songs released in the last decade.
Rihanna is undoubtedly the musical icon of her generation. Her sound, her clips, her videos, her look - they are viewed and copied and talked about by millions of fans worldwide, every day.
Madonna would be proud.
I see some of the similarities but I think she lacks Madonna's discipline.
not cool tbh..
Bad Teacher has quite the legacy. The 2011 comedy has already spawned a TV series, and now it's getting a sequel. Deadline reports that Bad Teacher 2 is in development, as a follow-up to the film starring Cameron Diaz. The original film, about an alcoholic gold-digging teacher, was a surprise hit at the box office, earning $216 million worldwide. Diaz has not signed on to the project yet.
CBS had previously announced a new series based on Bad Teacher as well. The show stars Ari Graynor and will premiere at midseason. This seems like a bit of Bad Teacher overload, considering the quality of the first movie.Are a sequel and a TV show really necessary?
Sony Pictures' president of production Hanna Minghella said the sequel "hits all the notes that made the first film such a breakthrough hit and also takes the characters in a new direction that is fresh and fun.” But we'll believe it when we see it.
The film follows a team of scientists who discover an experimental serum with the potential to bring the dead back to life. After losing his or her own daughter, the team's lead scientist tests the serum on her corpse, leading to terrifying results.
Donald Glover and Evan Peters are set to join Mark Duplass and Olivia Wilde in Lionsgate's upcoming horror thriller Reawakening, according to a story at The Wrap. Jiro Dreams of Sushi director David Gelb is attached to helm.
The film follows a team of scientists who discover an experimental serum with the potential to bring the dead back to life. After losing his or her own daughter, the team's lead scientist tests the serum on her corpse, leading to terrifying results.
Glover, best known for his role as Troy Barnes on NBC's "Community," has appeared on the big screen in films like Mystery Team, The Muppets and the upcoming The To Do List. Peters, meanwhile, is well known for "American Horror Story" and was recently cast as Quicksilver in Bryan Singer's X-Men: Days of Future Past.
Scripted by Luke Dawson and Jeremy Slater, Reawakening will be produced by Jason Blum and the Mosaic Media Group.
A lesson from Miley Cyrus's new video: If you want to look "cool" and "edgy" and "tough," just steal the styles and dance moves of black people.
The new pseudo-thugged out Miley has been percolating for a while; from her twerking unicorn suit video to her appearance on stage at a Juicy J show, the former Disney seems drawn to specific elements of a specific form of hip-hop. Not socially-conscious hip-hop. Dirty South/crunk hip-hop associated with strip clubs, pimps and drug dealers. Juicy J is formerly of Three 6 Mafia, a group who rose to fame with hits like "Slob On My Knob" and "It's Hard Out Here For A Pimp." The track Miley popped her ass to at his show, "Bandz a Make Her Dance," is specifically about hanging out in the company of strippers. Some key lyrics:
Start twerking when she hear her song, stripper pole her income
We get trippy and then some, so nasty when she rollin’
She put that ass up in my hands, I remote control it
You say no to ratchet pussy; Juicy J can't
Racks er'where, they showin' racks, I'm throwing racks
In the VIP, rubber on I’m stretching that
Rich niggas tippin, broke niggas lookin
And it ain't a strip club if they ain't showin pussy
She make that ass clap, dancin' like she on a dick
Bring it back I threw a stack, that's one lucky bitch
Up and down she’s going she’s sliding on that pole
Making money, stacking them honey, shawty go
Miley seems to delight in dancing much like these strippers do: Twerking, popping the ass, bending at the waist and shaking her rump in the air. Fun. But basically, she, as a rich white woman, is "playing" at being a minority specifically from a lower socio-economic level. Along with the gold grill and some hand gestures, Miley straight-up appropriates the accoutrements associated with certain black people on the fringes of society. (See: "Ratchet Girl Anthem.")
In the video, Miley is seen with her "friends": Mostly skinny white boys and girls who appear to be models. But in a few scenes, she's seen twerking with three black women. Are they also her friends? Or is she just hoping for street cred? Note that she is wearing white, in the spotlight, the star of the video — and they are treated as props, a background for her to shine in front of. We've tackled the use of people of color in the background before; it's a theme that persists, but remains wrong. In a white-centric world, putting white women quite literally in the center of the frame while women of color are off to the side is a powerful, disrespectful visual message, and it really must be said: Human beings are not accessories. These women might be her friends, but the general dynamic created is that she is in charge and they are in service to her. Not so far off from Paula Deen's dream dinner party. Remember when Gwen Stefani surrounded herself with Harajuku girls? Margaret Cho, at the time, labeled it a minstrel show. A really on-the-nose choice of words, since white people have been mimicking black people for fun and profit from Al Jolson to Amos n' Andy to Elvis. Now we have Ke$ha (seen below) and Miley dressing up like they live in the hood. (Do not forget that thanks to her father being a huge star and her time at Disney, Miley has been wealthy for her entire life.)
There was a time, just over a decade ago, that "ghetto" took off: Everyone was using the word "ghetto," talking about being "ghetto fabulous," and even Carrie on Sex And The City was wearing gold nameplate necklaces and earrings of the sort made popular by black women. Now we're seeing the word "ratchet" get tossed around the same way, and the gear associated with "ratchet culture" — gold grills, extensions, long, intricate fingernails, contorting fingers into gang signs — is hip and cool and edgy. (Here is a good piece explaining how "ratchet" went from an insult to a compliment.)
Let's not get it twisted: The exchange and flow of ideas between cultures can be a beautiful thing. I believe in cross-pollination and being inspired by those whose experience is not like your own. If Miley is inspired by gold teeth and bounce music and has friends who are rappers, that's not a problem. But when she uses these things to re-style her own image, she veers into dangerous territory. If she didn't have the grill, if the black women were integrated throughout the video instead of being segregated to one weird scene, if she hadn't worn that headband… This clip might not have been so problematic.
As Tamara Winfrey Harris of What Tami Said once wrote:
A Japanese teen wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the logo of a big American company is not the same as Madonna sporting a bindi as part of her latest reinvention. The difference is history and power. Colonization has made Western Anglo culture supreme–powerful and coveted. It is understood in its diversity and nuance as other cultures can only hope to be. Ignorance of culture that is a burden to Asians, African and indigenous peoples, is unknown to most European descendants or at least lacks the same negative impact.
It matters who is doing the appropriating. If a dominant culture fancies some random element (a mode of dress, a manner of speaking, a style of music) of my culture interesting or exotic, but otherwise disdains my being and seeks to marginalize me, it is surely an insult.
Think of Derelicte, or of dressing kids up as "homeless" for Halloween. Inappropriate. Wearing a gold chain isn't blackface, just like buying a turquoise ring in Arizona is not on the same level of offense as calling your panties"Navajo" or modeling lingerie in a Native American headdress. But it's important to understand that Miley is very privileged to be able to play dress up and adorn herself with the trappings of an oppressed/minority culture. She can play at blackness without being burdened by the reality of it. A new piece for Newsweek reports:
there are more African-Americans in the corrections system today—in prison or on probation or parole—than there were enslaved in 1850.
Miley and her ilk need to be reminded that the stuff they think is cool, the accoutrements they're borrowing, have been birthed in an environment where people are underprivileged, undereducated, oppressed, underrepresented, disenfranchised, systemically discriminated against and struggling in a system set up to insure that they fail. As Sesali Bowen wrote for Feministing in March:
But being ratchet is only cool when you do it for fun, not if those are valid practices from your lived experiences […] Folks with certain privilege are willing and able to float in and out of ratchet at will […]
…Pop culture trends like twerking, “aint nobody got time for that,” or even just using the word ratchet to define the wild things that happened at last night’s party are all rooted in someone’s lived experience. Sometimes it’s your lived experience, but if it’s not, please stop for a moment to consider your privilege and what role you may be playing in the appropriation of someone else’s exploitation.
It's worth noting this track — which is chiefly about the joys of dancing like a stripper and doing lines in the bathroom— was written by two men, producers Rock City and Mike WiLL Made It and originally intended for Rihanna. (True story: Miley said to them: "I just want something that just feels Black.") But blackness is not a piece of jewelry you can slip on when you want a confidence booster or a cool look. And playing at being poor — while earning a profit by doing so — is just distasteful.
Courtney Stodden proudly showed off the results of her recent boob job on Wednesday while out on a date night with her 52-year-old husband Doug Hutchinson.
The happy-go-lucky pair, who married in 2011 when Stodden was just 16 years old, went to the Roosevelt Hotel in Hollywood. Naturally, Stodden, now 18, smiled for the cameras on her way out as she made a suggestive pose or two. Naturally.
Stodden recently told Celebuzz she got breast implants because she was sick of her bras doing all of the work for her.
(Reuters) - One of U.S. celebrity chef Paula Deen's employers said on Thursday it was monitoring the controversy over her admission that she has used a racial slur in the past, while Deen's own company said the cooking star does not condone racism.
In a May 17 court deposition that surfaced on Wednesday, Deen, who is white, was asked if she had used the so-called N-word, a racial epithet directed against African-Americans, to which she responded: "Yes, of course."
The Food Network, which broadcasts two popular shows featuring Deen and her Southern cooking, said it was keeping an eye on the flap resulting from her statements that have been widely criticized on social media.
"Food Network does not tolerate any form of discrimination and is a strong proponent of diversity and inclusion," the network said.
The videotaped deposition was taken as part of a lawsuit by a former employee of Paula Deen Enterprises, Lisa Jackson, who is suing Deen and her brother Earl "Bubba" Hiers in their home state of Georgia for racial and sexual discrimination in the workplace.
Deen said she had used the racial epithet when describing, probably to her husband, how a black man robbed a bank where she was working. She said she had used the word since, "but it's been a very long time."
The lawsuit alleges that, while discussing with Jackson plans for Hiers' 2007 wedding, Deen said she wanted a "true southern plantation-style wedding" and used the slur to describe the black men she would want serving at the wedding dressed in white shirts, black shorts and bow ties. In the deposition, Deen said she referred to the race of the servers as black.
Jackson's lawyer, S. Wesley Woolf of Savannah, did not return calls seeking comment. An attorney for Deen said the author of more than a dozen cookbooks was looking forward to her day in court and did not condone any use of racial epithets.
In a statement on Thursday about the deposition, Deen's company, Paula Deen Enterprises, said she "recounted having used a racial epithet in the past, speaking largely about a time in American history which was quite different than today.
"She was born 60 years ago when America's South had schools that were segregated, different bathrooms, different restaurants and Americans rode in different parts of the bus. This is not today," the statement added. (Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Andre Grenon)
just keep digging that hole, paula
Harry Louis, 25, formerly of gay porn fame and currently best known as boyfriend to fashion designer Marc Jacobs, is the star of Brazilian magazine Junior's 52nd issue. Since retiring from the adult film industry, Louis (real name Edgard Xavier) has reinvented himself as a chocolatier of all things. HL Chocolates Brasil is the name of his fledgling brand of sweet confections, and to celebrate the new endeavor and Junior spread, photographed by Marcio del Nero, Louis held a meet and greet with fans in São Paulo Wednesday, June 19.
Behind the scenes:
Meet and greet:
Even if you’ve never seen Girls, you’ve probably heard about Adam Driver — or, at least, something his character, also named Adam, did on the show. Alongside Lena Dunham, Driver was responsible for the buzzy moments that kept people watching, talking and tweeting throughout the HBO comedy’s dark second season. Fans’ thoughts about Adam can (and did) change moment to moment, and nowhere was that more on display than in the second episode of this past season, “I Get Ideas,” when Adam wrote and sang an intense breakup song to Hannah, texted her and then showed up at her apartment for a declaration of love, maybe committed some “space rape” and was subsequently arrested after an ill-timed 911 call.
“There are so many twists and turns that he does all throughout the season but also scene to scene,” Driver explained on the phone with EW. In addition to a feelings explosion in Hannah’s kitchen, this season also showed his character in AA and as a participant in one very unforgettable sex scene. Watch Dunham talk through Hannah and Adam’s powerful episode 2 fight below (which she directed), and then read on for Driver’s recollections about what it takes to play the guy people just can’t help but cheer for (sometimes).
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: What do you remember about shooting that scene in the kitchen with Lena Dunham?
ADAM DRIVER: I just remember it was our first time back and I’d never been a series regular on a TV show. Even on your hiatus you feel like you need to keep the character in the back of your brain. So I remember that was the first time back and I had no kind of preconceived notions about how it was going to go. Me and Lena talked here and there but it wasn’t until a few weeks before when we got the scripts did I see where it was going and all seem to make sense, although at the same time it was unexpected for me. … I remember there’s a huge trajectory of emotions that happens in that scene in particular, where I think he comes in with all these expectations that if he gets in front of her and says how he feels, things will be fine, and he’ll leave her with that and let her think on it. So I just remember thinking when I was acting in it that it was key to know the script back to front, so that you can forget it as soon as possible. All of his expectations get subverted within a short amount of time, and that’s fun to play.
That scene was a really nice parallel to the end of the season when Adam rushes to her apartment once again. Did you know how the season ended when you were filming?
I’m only working a little bit ahead. We’re in the middle of the third season right now and I think they have a general outline of where it’s going, but they certainly don’t tell me and I don’t ask. I find it’s kind of a fun challenge — I over-analyze things anyway; in part, [my] not watching the show is a way not to get into my own head about it, especially with [a character] who doesn’t … he’s there to a certain extent, but he follows his emotions and sometimes doesn’t have the foresight that in my daily life I feel too much of. I like to plan things before they even happen. So for that character in particular, I’m not sure how much everyone else in the cast needs to know, but I like to remain kind of pleasantly aloof of where things are going, even scene by scene. It’s fun to work that way, so I don’t try to plan anything.
What kind of changes take place in your relationship with Lena when she’s directing a scene with the two of you, versus one where you’re just co-actors?
As far as us working on the story of it, the conversations are pretty much the same: Trying to figure out what the story is. … I feel like she’s really good at compartmentalizing her attention and giving you what you need as an actor. I feel like it’s kind of like a huddle in football: We all get together and do the scene and break. And then everyone breaks up into their own little things. When she’s directing she’ll go and plot [something else] out and then everyone gets a game plan and then the whistle blows and everyone gets back together in the huddle and tries to figure out what we’re doing next. It’s very much like that, I’d say: constant huddle and breaking away. As an actor, it’s not that much different.
Did you have any qualms about the intensity of your scenes with Shiri Appleby [who played Adam's girlfriend Natalia]?
No, never. In terms of like, “I don’t think I want to do that”?
Yeah, I’m just wondering about your opinion on some of the twists this season, as the show, especially Adam’s part, ended a lot darker than it started, particularly with some of the sex stuff.
I think we all attack the sex scenes just as much as we do scenes that aren’t sexual, and hopefully that’s what people are responding to: that there is storytelling happening in the sex, and sometimes it’s good to take risks where the lines are blurry. I know a lot of people just didn’t know how to swallow it, and there’s so much dialogue about, “What is the story we’re trying to tell?” that we don’t need to answer for ourselves. Hopefully we leave to the viewer to debate. I don’t think anyone is trying to do anything for the purpose of offending. … To answer your question, there is just as much dialogue about those scenes as there is about scenes of me and Natalia walking down the street.
Especially with your character, there’s a ton of talk after the episodes on social media. Does any of that inform your later performances?
No, I try to stay aloof. Lena will say things to me here and there like, “People responded to this” or “People liked that,” but not often enough that I can really say that happens on a regular basis. I try to stay out of it and kind of disconnect from it, if possible. Again, back to the thing about over-analyzing and planning things years before they happen, I feel like if I was too involved, it wouldn’t really be helpful. There’s nothing I can control, nor do I even want to or try to interpret anything. I feel like there’s always an expectation that people expect answers or want to know A to B why this happened or what the story actually is and just want things to be explained. I’m not such a big fan of having a linear answer to things.
What can you tease about Hannah and Adam’s relationship? I know you guys are in the middle of filming the new season.
Again about not knowing much, I had the last week off and I feel like the scripts are changing even as we get it. I’m not playing coy in saying I’m not sure where it goes, but I do think [Hannah and Adam] are trying to make a go of it. If I know Lena, I’m sure there will be conflict. [Laughs] I don’t know how that manifests itself, but they start this season in the best place they’ve been.
While in everyday life it may conjure images of people charging into burning houses or diving into choppy oceans to save drowning dogs, “bravery” has a rather different connotation when applied to Hollywood actors and their choice of roles. Threatening to simply become a byword for “gets his/her kit off” or “plays a gay character,” the word "bravery" as critical currency has perhaps been a little undermined by reductive overuse. But there is still value in separating the kinds of performances that are calculated simply to rake in dollars, raise profiles or cement a star persona from those that seem chosen to test an actor's limits and challenge the audience’s expectations. For the sake of argument, the latter roles are the ones we’re labelling “brave” here, which comes in handy when discussing the varied and thriving career of Nicole Kidman, who turns 46 today. This time last year we talked about her 5 Essential Performances, and while there's obviously some overlap, this year we thought instead about which we might consider her bravest.
Of course, it’s a concept that does imply some level of achievement and recognition already attained, as it’s not every actor who has the option of choosing the challenging indie over the formulaic romantic comedy or the tentpole sidekick. Kidman herself broke through with the really quite good but still totally B “Dead Calm,” which got her the role of romantic interest in “Days of Thunder” and Tom Cruise’s life for a decade. But as soon as she established a foothold, she started to try to change things up, with erratic results -- she was totty in “Batman Forever” the year after she was so brilliant in “To Die For” and more recently still, bracketed Jonathan Glazer’s sublimely unsettling “Birth” (see below) and Sydney Pollack’s fine-we-guess “The Interpreter” with the twin stinkers of “Bewitched” and “The Stepford Wives.”
Undoubtedly TWC will be making a push later this year for Kidman to win Best Actress a second time for “Grace of Monaco,” and of course she already has her “The Hours” statue under her belt. But though prestigey roles based on real-life people score highly with the Academy, there are other films of of hers that we admire her more for taking. Here are five performances she won no Oscars for, in films of wildly varying quality, that we feel required not just talent and profile, but chutzpah to take on.
Eyes Wide Shut (1999)
There are probably as many shades of opinion on Stanley Kubrick’s last film as there are people who’ve seen it. But for all the frustrations and triumphs it contains (and there are both), and for all some of the actors seem to drift through unanchored to any particular intention or motivation, Kidman is one player here who seems completely sure of what she’s doing and what she means by it -- maybe even more so than Kubrick himself, if we may be so sacrilegious. She out-acts her then-husband by some distance, giving Alice Harford an inner life and a consistency that makes her character kind of the pole star in the movie which can be hard to navigate through. In fact, as not-massive-fans of the finished film, we have to say we kind of miss that sureness when she’s not onscreen. And the bravery part? Well, the role of a woman who causes her husband to explore an underworld of erotic revelation in response to her own sexual confessions would be a tricky enough one to negotiate even if you weren’t playing against your real-life husband, the biggest star in the world, about whom rumors of closeted homosexuality had been swirling, as well as talk of your possible impending divorce. But it seems again Kidman placed trust in her director almost above all else -- impressive here if for no other reason than that the shooting went on for two years. By the end of that time, she clearly had developed a close relationship with Kubrick, as lovingly detailed in this THR article.
The Portrait of a Lady (1996)
Even those critics who disliked Jane Campion’s interpretation of Henry James’ classic novel (and it is an interpretation, not an adaptation) -- and they seemed in the majority overall -- singled out Kidman’s central performance for praise. And on that level, if on almost no other concerning a film we admire hugely, we can certainly agree with those critics. Kidman is riveting in the central role of Isabel Archer, the naïve, impetuous and intelligent young woman whose promise and curiosity are gradually throttled to nothing after she makes the mistake (the “generous mistake” as her cousin Ralph puts it) of falling for and marrying the wrong man. While “To Die For” the previous year had already suggested that there might be more to the actress than thriller/romance/action furrow she’d been ploughing in Hollywood till then, the arch irony of that film’s satire just didn’t prepare us for the simple rawness of her performance in ‘Portrait.’ It was really one of the earliest examples of traits Kidman would demonstrate again through films good and bad; her unswerving commitment to the character and her total faith in her director. Minimally made-up and with frequent raw close-ups that push almost unbearably close in to her, Campion gives Kidman no part of Isabel to hide behind -- even the lavish costuming and set design is constructed to oppress her from all sides -- and instead she simply embodies her. There were James purists who called foul at, for example, Isabel crying, which she never does in the book, but we’d urge them, or anyone, to take a second look at this performance outside of the context of its fidelity to the novel, or even some of the arthouse flourishes Campion adds. For us, the empathy, the tragedy and the strangeness of the story rewards immensely, and all that is channelled through Kidman’s remarkably egoless but elegant turn.
Of the many epithets that have been attached to Lars von Trier’s name over the years -- enfant terrible, provocateur, genius, misogynist, Nazi -- one of the stickiest has been “torturer of actresses” (you can read about his bust-up with “Dancer in the Dark” star Bjork here, along with other notable actor/director spats). And Kidman was certainly not immune to his hectoring, temperamental ways, with director and star reportedly taking frequent long walks so they could shout at each other in private. But whether the working relationship was better or worse than with his other leading ladies, the performance Kidman gave is among the best he’s ever elicited (and remember both Bjork and Kirsten Dunst won Cannes Best Actress trophies, and Emily Watson was nominated for an Oscar, for their roles in von Trier movies), and definitely among the best she’s ever given. On the one hand it’s a gift of a role for an actress ambitious to show her range, of course, tracing an arc from naivety and innocence through increasingly gruesome psychological and sexual victimization, to powerlessness and hopelessness, before building back up and culminating in a towering act of revenge that wouldn’t seem amiss in a Park Chan-wook movie. But the film’s experimental theatricalism, and hyper-unreal stylization means it could easily have run the risk of alienating the viewer from the human drama and losing the performance or worse, rendering it ridiculous, within the avant-garde trappings. But Kidman is again fearless, and makes us believe the environment through sheer power of her own conviction in her performance.
The Paperboy (2012)
Ah well. For every few gambles that pay off there has to be at least one that doesn’t, right? And boy, Kidman’s all-in, bet-the-farm-and-throw-in-them-gator-hides-too roll of the dice on Lee Daniels’ “The Paperboy” did not pay off. Which actually makes it an interesting and honest addition to this list -- after all, if all daring choices guaranteed even a qualified triumph, there’d be nothing truly daring about them, would there? The instinct for unembarrassed trust in the director’s vision that marks some of her most interesting collaborations is also on display here, but Daniels is no Kubrick, Campion, Glazer or von Trier. Instead his impulse seems to be to coach Kidman (and in fairness, the rest of the cast who rise/sink to the occasion in accordance with their talents too) into avoiding as much as she can any approximation of real human behavior. But whether it’s the headline-grabbing, pun-ready moment when she pisses on Zac Efron or whether she’s causing John Cusack to spontaneously ejaculate by writhing and touching herself flanked by near-strangers at a prison interview, Kidman flings herself into the role, such as it is, purring and clawing and pouring herself wholly into some kind of platonic ideal mould of a hypersexualized white trash woman with a taste for bad boys. The whole thing plays at such a lurid pitch of straight-up bad taste, that perhaps the only unforgivable crime you could have committed as an actor already contractually obliged to complete filming would have been to back out, even a little, to try to wink or nod or allow even the slightest note of irony to creep in to your performance. It’s a credit to Kidman’s professionalism that that never happens, though we fear the results would make us a bit gunshy about committing to as risky a role in the near future.
“Hey, let’s go see that movie where Nicole Kidman takes a bath with then kisses a 10 year-old boy who she thinks is the reincarnation of her dead husband!” was what pretty much nobody said back in October 2004, ensuring Jonathan Glazer’s uncategorizable, flawed but eerily beautiful “Birth” went gently into the good night of box office obscurity. But while maybe a hard sell for even the most adept of arthouse marketers back then, it’s a film that has gradually grown in retrospective acclaim, contrary to some poisonous reviews at the time, and when people do go back and rediscover it, one of the things that can’t be denied is the shimmering loveliness of Kidman’s performance. Yes, the film plays to her patrician, statuesque beauty, but the tenderness she brings to her role, the edge of a grief so old it seems almost physically painful to have it flare back up into hope, is a special sort of lightning in a bottle: a thousand things go on behind her eyes, and yet she retains, as the film’s tone requires, a sliver of unknowability. And for the majority of the running time, she and her director again seem in perfect sync, with Glazer weaving the film around her, as she betrays with only tiny moments, the oceanic feelings inside. The underplaying is vital in a film that has potential to become silly or salacious but actually retains a tone of uneasy intrigue throughout. Well, almost throughout -- the great misfortune is that the film’s ending undoes a great deal of the compelling and uniquely-voiced work up to that point, both over- and under-explaining a plot which till then operated more on the level of fairytale than real-world what-if. But even as it’s crumbling around her, Kidman retains her focus, and her grasp on her character and our attention.
Narrowly missing out on a spot in this list were Kidman’s turns in Noah Baumbach’s “Margot at the Wedding” in which she throws herself into a deeply unsympathetic role (but we did feature it in Essentials, in addition the downbeat but minutely observed "Rabbit Hole" and "To Die For"), and “Fur” which despite an intriguingly offbeat premise ends up just too slight to count among her more daring choices."Moulin Rouge!" which was of course a challenge from the point of view of the singing is otherwise less about performance than costuming, choreography and design, but she’s also terrific in a gruelling early TV miniseries “Bangkok Hilton” that came about before her Hollywood breakout. And there could have been any of several more -- Kidman, even in genre fare, has matured into an actress who can almost always be relied upon to commit to a project and a director completely -- an act that requires a certain courage every single time. Before the end of the year we’ll be seeing her possibly cameo in “Anchorman 2” and after that channel Grace Kelly in “Grace of Monaco.” In the meantime, we’re aware how subjective an assessment of a role’s risk value can be, so feel free to tell us in the comments why our list should actually have included “Trespass,” “Australia” and “Practical Magic” instead.
She is 46! What are your favourite Nicole Kidman roles?
Exclusive: Disney Channel Breaks New Ground with Good Luck Charlie Episode
In a first for the Disney Channel, next season an episode of Good Luck Charlie will feature a family with two moms.
Producers are currently casting the couple, with production set for next week. The episode will air in early 2014 as part of Good Luck Charlie's final season. Because Good Luck Charlie is coming to a close, the characters are only expected to appear in this one episode.
In the storyline, parents Amy and Bob Duncan (Leigh-Allyn Baker and Eric Allan Kramer) set up a playdate for preschooler Charlie (Mia Talerico) and one of her new friends. When the kid arrives, the Duncans learn that Charlie's pal has two moms. That's fine, but the potential new friendship is put to the test as one mom chats with Amy, and the other is stuck listening to Bob's dull stories.
The playdate is actually the secondary story in the episode, as much of the action will center on Teddy (Bridgit Mendler) and her best friend Ivy, as Ivy prepares to head off to college.
But Disney Channel understands the groundbreaking nature of featuring a same-sex couple on one of its sitcoms and took extra care in crafting the episode. "This particular storyline was developed under the consultancy of child development experts and community advisors," a Disney Channel spokesperson says. "Like all Disney Channel programming, it was developed to be relevant to kids and families around the world and to reflect themes of diversity and inclusiveness."
Disney Channel already tested the waters last year with its on-air social outreach campaign "Make Your Mark." In one segment, a teen with two moms was featured, a move that was called a "big step forward" by GLAAD.
LOL, about time. The comments at the source and on TV Guide's Facebook page are as disgusting as you can imagine they may be
Tonight's Hannibal season finale is a feel-good family romp filled with puppies and rainbows and unicorns dipped in glitter!
Or wait, no, it's actually one of the most shocking hours of television this season, with what executive producer Bryan Fuller calls a "huge, ‘Oh my God' cliffhanger." (We saw it, and he's not kidding.)
"Knock wood, the final course [season finale] is incredibly surprising and satisfying," Fuller tells us exclusively. "It plays on some of the iconic imagery that we've known from the Hannibal Lector movies, and delivers it in a unique way through the characters in this show. And how we subvert expectations and also propel the story forward through to season two is going to be a pretty rich meal in and of itself."
Yum? So pour yourself a nice chianti and savor these seven juicy season-finale teases:
(MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD)
2. Will is in dire need for some super-powered Drano for his kitchen sink. Got some? If not, could you hit up CVS? Thankssomuch.
3. Will wears orange.
4. Someone gets shot.
5. Hugh Dancy (Will) appears in his underwear—Yes, that happens every episode but must be duly noted.
6. The showstopping line "I can see you now" will make you scream at your TV.
7. So will the final image, which is incredibly cool.
Let's make this a viewing post for the finale?