gwyneth paltrow goop

celebrities

Martha Stewart has some “advice” for Gwyneth Paltrow

celebrityabout

If there’s one thing we all need to learn in life, it’s this: do not fuck with Martha Stewart. She is not here for anyone’s bullshit. Also, she is not here for your copycat “lifestyle guru” nonsense because she did it first and she does it best, so sit down and stay in your lane. She had to put Blake Lively in her place and now she’s doing it to Gwyneth Paltrow, which is pretty much the best thing EVER (because who among us doesn’t dream of telling Gwyneth Paltrow off?). From Page Six: “She just needs to be quiet. She’s a movie star. If she were confident in her acting, she wouldn’t be trying to be Martha Stewart.” LOL DAAAAAAAAMN. Martha Stewart is so ice cold… but she’s completely correct. No one is saying (at least I’m not) that a woman has to stick to one thing and can never do anything but the thing she’s known for, but to pretend as if Gwyneth Paltrow has any credibility whatsoever when it comes to telling anyone how to live their lives when she advocates eating 700 calories per day and says she’d rather kill herself than let her kids eat Cup-o-Noodles (FOOL!). I’m Team Martha all the way, on this matter and most others, as it happens. Follow us on Twitter | Facebook

celebrities

Gwyneth Paltrow likes being slapped in the face

celebrityabout

Okay, so that headline was slightly misleading. What Gwyneth Paltrow actually enjoys are “aggressive facials” (i.e. cosmetic procedures without actual scalpels) that feel like you’re having rubber bands snapped against your face repeatedly. Mmm, sounds relaxing! From Hello! (via E!): The actress told Hello! magazine that she loves the effective but not-so-pleasant Thermage laser treatment. “It’s non-invasive but it’s quite painful, like having your face smacked with a rubber band that has an electric shock in it. But it works.” The Thermage treatment is also commonly known as the “face-ironing treatment.” Yikes. Sound painful enough for you? But there’s a reason why stars like Gwyneth keep coming back for more. The treatment boosts collagen levels in the skin’s lower layers, creating a tightening effect to the top layer. But even if you’re up for the pain, Thermage laser treatments will cost you. A half-face treatment costs around $3,900, while a full-face treatment comes with the hefty price tag of $5,240. Girl, just go get the full facelift like you’ll end up doing anyway – you could probably get one for the price of two of those “facials” you’re after. I’m cool with whatever, but I wish Goop would get off her lifestyle high horse and stop acting like she’s above all the other women getting older in Hollywood because she’s so holistic. Bullshit. Those “facials” are cosmetic procedures tantamount to plastic surgery, just done with lasers (which is kinda the wave of the future, anyway). Same effect, same purpose – and totally rich from someone who proclaimed that Botox is “vain”. Sorry to break it to you, Gwyneth, but you and Kris Jenner are more alike than you think. Follow us on Twitter | Facebook

celebrities

Chris Martin wishes he could give you a Gwyneth Paltrow scandal, but he can’t

celebrityabout

Gwyenth Paltrow and Chris Martin announced their “conscious uncoupling” earlier this year, but there have been a million and one rumours about the possibility of them getting back together. They’re constantly hanging out together – more than any separated people usually do, even with kids in the picture – but don’t get ahead of yourself, because they’re not reuniting, they just really care about each other. BORING. From 104.3′s Valentine in the Morning (via US Weekly): “The truth is — well, I don’t really love talking about this stuff. But the thing we told everyone at the beginning of the year is true,” the 37-year-old said. “We are very close, we are not together. But, we’re…you know…that’s the truth… and uh, that’s it.” “You know, there’s a lot of love,” he continued. “So there’s nothing — there’s no scandal I’m afraid. I wish i could give you scandal.” Chris has always come off as a really decent guy, so I’m not surprised that he’s handled this entire thing in such a quiet and dignified way. It’s also really great for their kids that this whole thing has gone so smoothly. The last thing kids need is messy ass parents – especially famous ones – ruining their lives with unnecessary drama. Follow us on Twitter | Facebook

celebrities

Gwyneth Paltrow won’t stop bragging about her divorce

celebrityabout

Look, I know the source is somewhat wonky on this one, but is it really so hard to believe that Gwyneth Paltrow is being insufferable about her perfectly orchestrated divorce announcement? She and Chris Martin announced their “conscious uncoupling” last month, and apparently Goopy hasn’t shut up about it since because she thinks she did so brilliantly with it. From Radar Online: “’Conscious uncoupling’ has become a joke among Gwyneth’s friend,” a source close to the 41-year-old Country Strong star told Radar. “All she’s doing is bragging about how peaceful her divorce is and how she and Chris planned it so perfectly that it is hardly disrupting their lives.” “Gwyneth has always thought she had the most perfect life and even though she’s getting a divorce and both of them are getting bad press she doesn’t care,” the source told Radar. “She has become insufferable saying how happy she is with the way everything is evolving,” the source told Radar. “It’s so ridiculous to listen to her talk as if nothing bad is going on at all for her.  But Gwyneth has always had a protected privileged life and this is no different.” LOL, yeah, this actually sounds 100% legit. Now, I wonder how she’ll gracefully get out of that GOOP financial trouble… Follow us on Twitter | Facebook

celebrities

Gwyneth Paltrow and GOOP are in big financial trouble

celebrityabout

Last week, Gwyneth Paltrow‘s friend and GOOP CEO Seb Bishop up and quit out of nowhere. It all seemed kind of suspicious, and while people were trying to say it was because he didn’t like that she announced her divorce from a company perspective, it seems like things might be a tad more serious, since GOOP seems to be in over $1 million worth of debt. From Radar Online: For two years running, they racked up serious losses totaling more than $300,000 — thanks in part to an interest-free loan Paltrow took from the company coffers! According to the most recent corporate documentation filed with the Companies House in the U.K., in 2011, GOOP “incurred a loss of $255,312 (£152,060) and had a net liabilities of $259,969 (£154,834).” And in 2012, they reported “a loss of $39,823 (£23,718) and … net liabilities of $298,512 (£177,788).” It’s not that GOOP wasn’t making money. In fact, in 2012, they raked in more than $1.5 million (£908,378), thanks in part to $463,486 (£276,040) in product sales, as well as an impressive (£222,243) from Groupon promotions and $373,159 (£535,002) in commissions. All told, the company made $1,893,065 (£1,127,456). But that same year, GOOP spent $98,150 (£58,456) on Goop.com, $79,961 (£47,623) on the notorious GOOP newsletter, $189,590 (£112,918) on product costs, and a whopping $1,564,995 (£932,096) in administrative expenses,” adding up to the grand profit total of a loss of $39,823 (£23,718). Chief among those “administrative expenses” were Paltrow and CEO Sebastian Bishop’s “renumeration,” or salaries, for which the company allotted $587,653.25 (£350,000), a sizable increase from the previous year’s figure of $172,585 (£102,788), despite the company’s losses. The documents also show that in 2012, both Paltrow and Bishop were the recipient of interest-free “loans to directors,” with Paltrow’s listed at a balance of $49,025 (£29,200), of which none was paid back, and Bishop’s at $83,617 (£49,800). Other expenses in 2012 included $456,007 (£271,584) in other wages, $34,507 (£20,551) on travel, nearly $4,000 (£2,118) on “Entertaining,” and nearly $5,000 (£2,951) on “Staff Entertainment.” Sooooo… basically they were sorta cooking their own books, or at the very least ignoring the dire financial situation to make sure they got paid even if the company was sinking. There are a lot more numbers that are worth taking a look at (if you care about this sort of thing), but it looks like GOOP may soon be taking a bow unless she can sell a whole lot of $500 sweaters soon.

celebrities

Apparently that ‘Vanity Fair’ Takedown of Gwyneth Paltrow Was Never Real

celebrityabout

Graydon Carter is kind of a wuss, if you ask me. Vanity Fair had a whole long takedown of Gwyneth Paltrow planned for the magazine, and it was gonna be pretty intense and shocking and REALLY damaging to ole Goopy’s career, apparently. Then Gwyn fired back and the whole thing got canned, for some unknown reason and now Graydon, Vanity Fair‘s Editor-in-Chief, is saying that the whole thing was blown out of proportion and was never going to happen. Apparently the piece was more about the “love/hate phenomenon” surrounding her and not a piece about how fucking insufferable she is (not to mention that supposed affair). In a new letter posted on VF’s website, Graydon said he was intrigued by the fact that she was named People’s “World’s Most Beautiful Woman” and Star’s “Most Hated Celebrity” in the same week and wanted to explore that a bit. Apparently the men in the office were shocked that people hated Goopy, but the women thought it was totally right. Graydon himself found her sort of obnoxious, but he assigned the story to Vanessa Grigoriadis, who went out into the world to research Goop and her life. It was one of probably a half-dozen stories we ordered up that week, and once the assignment was made, I didn’t think too much more about it, inasmuch as it wasn’t due in until the end of the summer. Vanessa began making the rounds, talking to people in and out of Hollywood in an effort to get some understanding of the Paltrow phenomenon. And then she reached out to representatives of Gwyneth’s and then to Gwyneth’s friends. Well, this just released a whole mess of furies. Paltrow sent out a mass e-mail to her show-business friends saying that the magazine was going “tabloid” following our coverage of Tom Cruise’s search for the perfect Scientology wife, and Brad Pitt’s search for the perfect action-film franchise. “Vanity Fair is threatening to put me on the cover of their magazine without my participation,” she said. “I recommend you all never do this magazine again.” She asked that they not speak to Vanity Fair about her, or about anything else ever again. Ever. Never. Kim Jong-un couldn’t have issued a more blanket demand. In due time, the e-mail made its way onto the New York Post’s “Page Six.” An actress throwing a hissy fit is hardly news. But the extreme ferocity of Paltrow’s outrage set off alarm bells throughout the dark regions of the celebrity-mining industry. The overall theory: she must have something to hide. Long story somewhat short: the story that was turned in was apparently fair and balanced, but because of the hoopla surrounding it, Graydon decided to sit on it for a while and let things die down. Then Gwyneth called him and they talked things out – and she also asked how to get people to like her (LOL), which is kinda sad. Graydon hasn’t denied that they did indeed discover “bombshells” about her life, but he also said he doesn’t want to publish them at this time, for whatever reason. The fact is the Gwyneth Paltrow story, the one we ordered up, delightfully written as it was, is not the one the anti-Gwynethites expect. That it has generated more mail and attention than many of the biggest stories we’ve ever published only makes the situation more complicated. The thing of it is, we really don’t publish “epic,” out-of-the-blue “takedowns” of individual public figures, unless they are in heated conflict with another public figure or unless their positions and their actions have a grievous effect on the lives of others. We’ll save our gunpowder for bigger stories. And so, sorry as we are to disappoint all those many people out there, for the time being we’ll leave it to another publication to roll out the “epic bombshells” surrounding Gwyneth Paltrow. It’s a story I might read. I just don’t want to publish it. Fair enough, but I don’t for one second believe that this was as simple as just a truce. There was a reason he – and Vanity Fair at large – wanted to publish this story to begin with. For whatever reason, they decided against it, whether from threat of a legal action, someone calling in a favour, whatever. That’s all fine and well, but I was really looking forward to something juicy there. Follow us on Twitter | Facebook