art

Actresses Ad art Book celebrities Celebrity Court diane kruger dress Fashion flattering H&M hair image IRS jessica biel Jewel lace lips looks Naomi Watts NYC Owe photos real red Reese Witherspoon RIP size style styling tall tan thin tiffany

Who had the best dress & jewels at the Tiffany Blue Book Ball in NYC?

celebrityabout

Here are some photos from Friday night’s Tiffany Blue Book Ball in NYC. Four major actresses/celebrities came out for the event, and considering they were all DRIPPING in fabulous jewels, I totally believe that Tiffany’s paid them all to be there, looking fabulous and wearing certain high-end pieces. Those ladies? Jessica Biel, Diane Kruger, Reese Witherspoon and Naomi Watts. I’m trying to include some close-ups of the jewels too. First up, here’s Jessica Biel in The Row. I’m starting with the worst, just FYI. While Mary-Kate and Ashley’s The Row is a well-respected line, I always struggle to understand why anyone thinks this looks good? This dress looks so cheap and basic. Biel doesn’t help the underwhelming dress either, she was aiming for less-is-more and she just looked like she was in desperate need of lipstick and a hairstylist. Diane Kruger knows how to stand out. This Kaufmanfranco look would have looked ridiculous on another woman, but Diane is killing it. Also, Diane got the BEST necklace. Diamonds, emeralds, aquamarines, sapphires, possibly some tourmalines? It’s really gorgeous. The silhouette on Reese Witherspoon’s J. Mendel dress is incredibly flattering, but I still don’t really care for the look as a whole. I think the flower applique/beading sort of morphs into something moldy-looking. And I wish Reese had done something else with her hair. Still, the necklace she got to wear? Perfection. CB loves Naomi Watts while I’m sort of meh on Watts and her style. She never looks hideous, but sometimes I do think Watts is stuck in a style rut. This Prada is a good example – I know why Naomi picked it, it’s because she thinks ice-blue looks good with her coloring, and because she likes these frothy, light dresses. But no one on her styling team realized that the ice blue was very similar to the “Tiffany Blue” of the background, which means Naomi looks like she’s blending into the wall. That’s a rookie mistake, IMO. Photos courtesy of WENN.

Ad art Babies Baby Blake Lively celebrities Celebrity Celebrity Moms Court emma stone Eva Mendes H&M Hollywood image interview live looks Lost magazine photos pot Pregnant quote Rant real Ryan Gosling size sur tall thin TV VS

Eva Mendes, 42, and Ryan Gosling, 35, are expecting their second child

marc

Well surprise surprise. Even though the tabloids would have you believe that Eva Mendes and Ryan Gosling’s relationship is in tatters because he’s obviously got eyes for Emma Stone, the truth of the matter seems to be that Ryan and Eva are totally fine. So fine that she’s pregnant again! Eva Mendes has another bun in the oven! Multiple sources confirm exclusively to Us Weekly that the actress and her longtime boyfriend, Ryan Gosling, are expecting their second child together. According to a source, the mom of daughter Esmeralda, 17 months, was spotted hiding her burgeoning bump during a photo shoot in Los Angeles in February. In an October 9 interview on the Today Show, Mendes, 41, revealed that she’s taking a break from Hollywood to focus on her family. “If I’m even like, ‘Oh, what should I wear? Or, should I do this project? All I have to think about is my daughter and her face, and I know the answer immediately,” the Lost River actress said. “She’s my moral compass in a way.” [From Us Weekly] People Magazine seems to be confirming the news, and the Daily Mail has the photos of Eva “hiding her bump” here. It’s a lot like the Blake Lively thing earlier this week – Eva just looks knocked up even though we can’t really see a bump. What surprises me more than anything is that Eva is 42 years old… officially, although there’s always been gossip about how she’s shaved a few years off. And she seemingly got knocked up without any fertility treatment drama. Granted, we don’t know for sure, but it seems like she just wanted another baby and she got pregnant pretty quickly. Anyway, congrats to Eva and Ryan! Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

Ad AMC art CBS celebrities Celebrity Died Directors figure fit Friends heart Homes image interview IRS jennifer lopez live Movie Movies Owe Pee Philip Seymour Hoffman photos quote red RIP Sad size son Sued thin Twitter Win

AMC may allow texting in some theaters (Update: they have nixed this idea)

videos

The movie industry is trying to adapt to new technology as you know. We can watch almost anything, anywhere except for first run movies in our homes and on the go on our devices. It’s even changing to the point where we will probably be able to rent first run movies at home soon at a premium. This should give us the opportunity to pause the show to go to the bathroom (although there’s an app for that*), get snacks and just not go through the hassle of traveling to watch a film with friends and family. There are a lot of inconveniences to watching movies away from home, not least of which (to some people) is the fact that we’re expected to turn off our phones for two hours. In a new interview with Variety, AMC head Adam Aron said that they’re looking into ways to allow texting during movies. AMC is now the world’s largest theater chain after their acquisition of Carmike Cinemas last month, so this is significant. Would appealing to millennials involve allowing texting or cellphone use Yes. When you tell a 22-year-old to turn off the phone, don’t ruin the movie, they hear please cut off your left arm above the elbow. You can’t tell a 22-year-old to turn off their cellphone. That’s not how they live their life. At the same time, though, we’re going to have to figure out a way to do it that doesn’t disturb today’s audiences. There’s a reason there are ads up there saying turn off your phone, because today’s moviegoer doesn’t want somebody sitting next to them texting or having their phone on. Would you have a certain section for texting? That’s one possibility. What may be more likely is we take specific auditoriums and make them more texting friendly. [From Variety] Variety also asked Aron about The Screening Room, which would allow consumers to rent first run films at home. (Creator Sean Parker has been trying to make deals with theater chains for a cut of the profits.) He wouldn’t comment, simply saying that he prefers “To keep our counsel private right now.” As far as checking phones and texting during movies, I was watching American Hustle when the news came through that Philip Seymour Hoffman had died. Bedhead had been trying to contact me. I know an extra two hours doesn’t make that much of a difference but I felt like I missed this sad news. So now I check my phone a few times during a movie. I’m careful to sit away from people if possible, I have the sound turned off and in the winter I’ll only check it under a poncho or oversized sweater to block the light from my phone. In the summer I just bring a light jacket or poke my head under my shirt. This is a good idea to allow texting I think, as long as it’s disclosed to everyone and moviegoers have a choice whether to attend texting-allowed movies or sit in that section. Maybe they can provide little blocking devices that you put in your lap where you can only see the light from your phone at certain angles. This doesn’t seem that hard to implement. Also, theaters should specify that all sounds must be turned off. No one wants to hear that tap-tap. Update: AMC has issued a statement saying that they have “Heard loud and clear that this is a concept our audience does not want” and that they will not be implementing this idea. I have also heard from you that it is very rude of me to check my phone, even under a sweater, while in a movie. I will stop doing this and have taken your feedback to heart. NO TEXTING AT AMC. Won't happen. You spoke. We listened. Quickly, that idea has been sent to the cutting room floor. pic.twitter.com/JR0fo5megR — AMC Theatres (@AMCTheatres) April 15, 2016 *Thanks CL for the tip! Photos credit: WENN.com

Ad art botox celebrities Celebrity Court Crazy Dog dress Fashion figure flattering H&M hair image IRS Jack White jennifer aniston Julia Roberts legs looks photos red red carpet rock shorts size son styling thin Tracy Anderson white

Jennifer Aniston v. Julia Roberts: who rocked the best ‘business shorts’ suit?

celebrityabout

Here are some photos from last night’s LA premiere of Mother’s Day, the latest Garry Marshall-directed holiday monstrosity. In this post, we are going to be discussing Business Shorts/Cocktail Shorts and whether they are ever a good idea. First, let me say – I don’t think Jennifer Aniston and Julia Roberts meant to both do Business Shorts for the premiere. Meaning, I think if Jennifer knew that Julia was going to do shorts, Jen probably would have gone with a cocktail dress. The fact that they both did Business/Cocktail shorts is amusing to me. Also amusing? Julia and Jennifer didn’t pose together on the red carpet at all. That just shows you Julia’s Alpha-Dog tendencies, just my opinion. We’ll start with Jennifer Aniston, who wore this sort of deconstructed Armani suit which, yes, involves shorts. At first, I just saw the top half and I didn’t care for it, but the whole look is much better. The cut-off on the jacket/shorts is very flattering to her figure and her body looks great. I think her face looks less filler’d and Botoxed too. Now if we could just stop with the hair-in-the-face styling. As for Julia, she wore this shorts-suit from Rag and Bone. While Julia looks nice, I feel like this is millionth time she’s tries to make Business Shorts a thing. And I’m just not feeling it. I get that she has crazy-long legs and she wants to show them off. But why not just do a short cocktail dress? I don’t know, I just feel like this wasn’t her best choice out of all the available options. Additional photos… here’s Jack Whitehall. He’s a British comedian and I mostly know him from his appearances on Graham Norton’s show. And finally, here’s Tracy Anderson, looking like she pulled her hair back to wash her face and somehow just ended up on this red carpet. Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

abs Ad art celebrities Cool Court designers Died dress Fashion food Fuse image Kate Middleton photos Prince William quote real red RIP royals size style tan thin Twitter Weight Win

Duchess Kate had a ‘Marilyn Moment’ in Wickstead at the war memorial

videos

Embed from Getty Images I told you guys that this week was going to be full-time Celebwiglet, and here we are. The time difference is affecting when and how we get photos of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s royal tour of India and Bhutan, but these are photos from their second day in India. They wore the same thing as they quickly moved through several events, and while Will and Kate were criticized for bringing too many activities to them (as opposed to going out in the city), I have to say, they are getting out of their luxury-hotel-comfort-zone. For the day-activities, Kate chose to theme-dress in what seems like an almost militaristic-inspired Emilia Wickstead dress with a full skirt. While I think this could have been pretty, the things that bug me the most are the breast pockets. I’ve convinced myself that they’re not even real pockets, they were just added to give a certain look to the dress, and the design bugs me because… well, those faux-pockets just look like breast flaps. Oh, and the dress costs £1,700. Which is sort of ridiculous. As everyone predicted, Kate loathes adding weights to her hems, so of course her full, un-weighted skirt blew up several times during the day. It was particularly inappropriate considering they were making a somber visit to lay a wreath at the India Gate memorial to pay their respects to the 70,000 Indian soldiers who died in WWI. Cool war memorial, would you like to see my duchess-biscuit? You can see those photos here. Oh, and Kate also refused to eat some Indian food that William had made (food he tried himself). The Duchess of Cambridge's dress caught by a gust of wind in New Delhi but did this soldier save her dignity? pic.twitter.com/Qq8lI9g3h6 — Elliot Wagland (@elliotwagland) April 11, 2016 Embed from Getty Images Embed from Getty Images Embed from Getty Images Embed from Getty Images Photos courtesy of Getty.

Ad art celebrities Celebrity Charity Court debate Dog future General H&M image interview legs OWN photos pot Prince Prince Harry quote red royal family royals size The Game thin Weird white

Would we feel differently about the monarchy if Prince Harry was the heir?

videos

Here are some photos of Dirty Ginger Snap Prince Harry unveiling the UK Invictus Team in London on Wednesday. These photos made me sigh deeply and think about his mother. I actually thought, “His mother would be so proud of him in this moment.” To turn his military career into something so positive for veterans… it’s a unique and wonderful thing. At this event, Harry spent a lot of time posing with veterans (and a dog!) – go here to read more. The Invictus Games are in May, and Harry still has more to do to promote the games and work with some of the commonwealth teams. It’s just been announced that he will be traveling to Toronto on May 2 to launch the countdown to the games and meet the Canadian Invictus team. While Harry is in Florida next month, he’ll also be playing a polo match for charity, and he’s bringing his favorite horse. With all of this positivity about Harry (HONKS!), would it be weird if we also discussed the recent comments by Dr Anna Whitelock? She’s a historian – a royal-history historian – and she gave an interview a few days ago about how the British monarchy will likely end in our lifetimes. Whitelock predicted that after the Queen has passed, there will be a larger conversation about ending the monarchy, especially when Charles takes the throne. Whitelock said, in part: “All of those questions about ‘What the hell do we want this kind of unelected family (for)? What does that represent in Britain today?’, all these profound questions have been held in check because of the Queen. I think there’ll be a discussion and a debate in a way that there hasn’t before [after the Queen dies]. As the older generation who are generally more wedded to the monarchy die out, the question of the future of the monarchy will become even more pressing, and then potentially more critical voices will come to the fore. I would say by 2030 there will be definite louder clamours for the eradication of the monarchy. I can’t say that there won’t be a monarchy. I would definitely say that the monarchy – its purpose, what it’s about, will be questioned and challenged in a way that it hasn’t been before. I don’t think it’s out of the question that the monarchy would be potentially be on its last legs.” [From The Express] I do wonder what will happen after the Queen passes. I’ve stopped worrying about what Charles would be like as a king, just because he’s a workhorse and I believe he genuinely cares about public service. Charles has always been prepared to step up to whatever challenges would face him. But yes, when the queen passes and Charles becomes king, there will be these conversations and it will mostly be about what comes after Charles, whose reign will likely be brief. Because people are actually pretty concerned about Workshy Will. If Harry was the heir? If Harry was going to be the Prince of Wales? I think it would be a different story altogether. Photos courtesy of WENN.

Abuse Ad art celebrities Celebrity Court Dr. Luke fit H&M image Law Lawsuit Lawsuits live looks Music OWN photos poll quote rap red size son Sued tan thin Weight Win

Kesha’s appeal dismissed: ‘Every rape is not a gender-motivated hate crime’

marc

Back in February, Kesha’s lawsuit/injunction against Dr. Luke was thrown out. The lawsuit was about Kesha’s right to break her contract with her alleged abuser, and how she wanted to record music away from Dr. Luke entirely. The judge threw out the case because the judge believed in upholding the contract, for whatever reason. It seemed like the judge was so Pollyanna to believe that everything operates in the music industry with perfect, profit-driven capitalism and no one ever has a personal or non-financial motive for any of their actions, but it may have been a legal judgment. Kesha and her lawyers filed an immediate appeal and her lawyers seemed to overreach a bit by comparing Kesha’s situation to “slavery.” Well, the same judge has just thrown out Kesha’s appeal, meaning Kesha is still contractually tied to Dr. Luke. Kesha was delivered a huge blow Wednesday by a New York judge who dismissed nearly all of the singer’s counterclaims in her ongoing lawsuit against Dr. Luke. The star previously accused the producer of drugging, raping and abusing her during her career. The hitmaker, in turn, has vehemently denied the allegations and countersued for breach of contract and defamation. The singer has been adamant about being released from her contracts with Luke because, she wrote in February, “This is about being free from my abuser.” On Wednesday, New York Supreme Court Justice Shirley Kornreich cited lack of jurisdiction and failure to procure facts proving the allegations when tossing out the majority of Kesha’s counter claims. The pop star’s claims invoking human rights laws were dismissed – alleging the plaintiffs “discriminated against [her] based on her gender” – were dismissed because “Kesha failed to plead that any of the alleged discrimination occurred in New York State or City … the court has no jurisdiction over” the claims, the judge wrote. As for the civil rights, or “hate crime,” laws, the singer had to prove Dr. Luke “harbored animus towards women or was motivated by gender animus when he allegedly behaved violently toward Kesha,” the judge stated in court documents obtained by PEOPLE. “Every rape is not a gender-motivated hate crime.” According to Justice Kornreich, the only allegations Kesha made that meets the elements of “physical violence or property damage” were claims that Luke assaulted her on an airplane and raped her in his hotel room. But “the claim is time-barred,” writes Kornreich. The singer’s claim of “intentional infliction of emotional distress” was also dismissed because the judge believes her allegations “do not meet the strict pleading standard. Her claims of insults about her value as an artist, her looks, and her weight are insufficient to constitute extreme, outrageous conduct intolerable in civilized society,” Kornreich wrote, adding the instances that would constitute as intentional were “time-barred.” Aside from throwing out her claims, the judge also denied Kesha’s request to make amendments. “Kesha’s request for leave to amend the CCs is denied because there is nothing in the record from which the court can determine whether the amendment would be meritorious,” state the papers. [From People] Ever since I read about this ruling last night, I’ve been thinking about the judge’s words: “Every rape is not a gender-motivated hate crime.” True or false? Is every rapist a misogynist? Is every rape a hate crime? It’s not just a linguistic argument, it’s a legal argument and one that I would like to see more of. I have long believed that we should consider mass shooters to be “terrorists” regardless of race. Can we not say serial abusers of women are hate-crime assailants or misogynistic terrorists too? Anyway, Kesha’s still got legal options. The part of her case about her recording contract is still going forward, and Kesha is putting together a larger legal team to pursue more actions in California. Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.