I got nervous for a second because I thought the series I Am the Night was going to start airing, like, tomorrow. But we have a few weeks to prepare for it – the first episode airs on January 28th. To promote the series, Chris Pine and Patty Jenkins cover the latest issue of Variety. They collaborated on Wonder Woman – that was their first project together, and they became huge fans of each other. Patty pitched this miniseries to TNT, with the idea that Pine could play the sort-of co-lead, Jay Singletary. Pine not only agreed to go to television, he signed on as an executive producer.

The story of I Am the Night sounds a bit tortured – it’s a period piece and a somewhat true story involving a young woman’s secret identity, and Chris Pine’s seedy journalist trying to help the young woman piece together her background. Chris Pine has quickly become Patty Jenkins’ muse, and this seems like a meaty role for a character actor, as opposed to a showcase role for a leading man. Such is Chris Pine’s career at this point – leading man, supporting actor, action hero, dramatic actor, character actor – he can do anything. You can read Variety’s cover story here. Some highlights:

His relationship with Patty Jenkins: “I found Patty at a time in my life when I was searching for deeper resonance with the material. It’s about witnessing and being witnessed. As a friend, Patty does that, and as a creator she helps me see aspects of myself that I usually don’t notice.”

Pine was only in if Patty was directing: “I can entrust Patty with what should be one of the genetic pieces of directing, which is understanding another human’s psychology. She is keyed in to me in a certain way where she can use the trip wires and pull that switch and throw some spice here, some pepper there, and I can go off and do what I do.”

Pine’s big tool bag: “I’m certainly not the greatest actor in the world, but I consider myself someone who has a nice big tool bag. And I really like to be directed. [On ‘I Am the Night’] I had very little time to prep, and I said, ‘Look, Patty, give me the steel pillars of this guy, and I’ll start throwing paint on.”

He doesn’t mind playing second fiddle to his leading ladies: “As a leading man, it’s the male actor’s job in the pieces that I do to inhabit the role or do the job that Gal did so wonderfully in ‘Wonder Woman.’ Being in the film and supporting a woman doing that job is kind of a dance between ego and soul. I’m not too proud to admit it and say that at times, I’d have 30-minute conversations with Patty; I’d look at her, and she was wonderfully patient. I’d realize it had abso-f—ing-lutely nothing to do with me…. But as a man and an actor and an ego-ful person, you really make peace with that and have a sense of humor about it and say, well, screw it then — let’s just go to this party and do this thing that should be done and fulfill the job as presented to you by your general.”

He’s letting go of his ego: He says he’s letting go of “the 8-year-old in there saying, ‘When’s my turn?!’” and accept work that’s richer than a traditional movie-star part precisely because it’s not the starring role in a big-budget production. Pine says he now feels “more at ease playing someone like Jay than I would otherwise. I’ve never been Thor, never will be. I think any actor would say this — that the complexity and the shadow is as vital and important to —” Jenkins cuts him off. “They don’t all feel like that. They super don’t. That’s why Chris is so great; they super don’t.”

[From Variety]

I appreciate how honest he is about his qualms and his ego getting in the way, especially on Wonder Woman. He signed on to be in a big DC Comics movie, and it turned out that his female costar was the big deal, not him. But that’s just it, isn’t it? He handled that with such grace long-term, giving Gal Gadot and Patty Jenkins all the credit they earned, and happily taking a backseat. That won him so many fans, that he was able to put aside his male ego and celebrate the womanity and girl-power of Wonder Woman.

Also: “I consider myself someone who has a nice big tool bag…” *fans self* I bet he does have a very big tool (bag).

Between installments of #WonderWoman, Patty Jenkins and Chris Pine keep their collaboration going with a surprising noir thriller https://t.co/fxqeRqCkAd pic.twitter.com/w4p8qAS4Ea

— Variety (@Variety) January 9, 2019

Photos courtesy of Variety.

I’ve been banging the drum against Green Book ever since I watched it over the holidays. It’s the “true story” of Frank “Tony Lip” Vallelonga working as a driver for jazz pianist Don Shirley in the early 1960s. The film was written by three white men, Peter Farrelly, Brian Hayes Currie and Tony Lip’s son Nick Vallelonga. The script is a mess, mostly because Tony Lip is treated as the hero of the story, and the film happens almost entirely through his perspective as a racist dude who is redeemed because he befriends one African-American dude. Don Shirley is treated as little more than a plot device for Tony Lip’s growth and humanity. Plus, I believe Don Shirley’s relatives – many of whom have issues with the film – that Vallelonga and the other writers misrepresented Don Shirley in significant ways, both big and small.

What I didn’t know before now was that it seems like some other studios have done some research on Green Book too, and that now that Oscar season is in full swing, all of the sh-t is coming out. Did you know that Nick Vallelonga – again, the son of the protagonist in this “true story” and a writer/producer on the film – is a deplorable Trump supporter who spread at least one of Trump’s false conspiracy theories?

“Green Book” writer and producer Nick Vallelonga has been a staple on the awards circuit this Oscar season, earning screenplay nominations from the Golden Globes, the Writers Guild of America, and the Critics’ Choice Awards, but, in the wake of awards buzz, a controversial social media post published by Vallelonga in 2015 has resurfaced online. Vallelonga is the son of Frank “Tony Lip” Vallelonga, the character played by Viggo Mortensen in “Green Book.”

Back in November 2015, Vallelonga replied to Donald Trump on Twitter corroborating a story in which Trump alleged he saw people cheering in Jersey City, New Jersey on September 11, 2001 as they watched the attacks on the Twin Towers. As Trump said at a rally (via The Washington Post), “I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering.”

Vallelonga replied to Trump, “100% correct. Muslims in Jersey City cheering when towers went down. I saw it, as you did, possibly on local CBS news.”

When asked for comment, a Vallelonga representative replied over email: “The twitter account has been deleted… not sure if any comment is actually needed here.” IndieWire has also reached out to Universal Pictures for further comment.

[From IndieWire]

Vallelonga didn’t delete his account until yesterday evening, when this story began to get picked up. Whoever did the research and found that old tweet, I applaud you. Do I think a person’s entire career should be wiped out because they’re a Deplorable Trump supporter who agrees with Trump’s unhinged conspiracies and Islamophobic lies? Well, that remains to be seen, but there’s a difference between “losing one’s career” and “not being an Oscar favorite.” Green Book should not be an Oscar favorite for about a million different reasons, and hopefully this piece of news will help significantly.

Also: The Cut dug up some old profiles of Green Book director Peter Farrelly from the ‘90s, when everyone had a good laugh about how he used to flash his coworkers all the time. Har har, sexual harassment is hilarious amirite.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Some stories bring up gossip memories from years ago. This reminds me of the time that Jennifer Love Hewitt publicly pressured Jamie Kennedy to propose to her. That was almost 10 years ago and Kaiser wrote it, but I remember because it was so cringey. Hewitt went on to marry another guy, they had two kids and seem really happy together. I just spent a paragraph talking about Jennifer Love Hewitt in a story about Jennifer Garner.

My rambling point is that John Miller could be Jennifer Garner’s for-keeps guy, he keeps a low enough profile it’s hard to tell, but that it’s lame to use “sources” to say he’ll probably propose, even if they’ve talked about it. This is not a smart move, especially when they’ve been together less than a year. Play hard to get girl, stay busy! Before you tell me that US may be making sh-t up, they’ve been Garner’s outlet of choice for years and they had the first story about this new relationship. This is straight from Garner.

Eight months into their romance, Jennifer Garner and her businessman beau, John Miller, “are more in love than ever,” a source reveals in the new issue of Us Weekly. The Camping star, 46, who finalized her divorce from ex Ben Affleck in October, “admires John because he is just normal,” and their bond is totally drama-free. “No one would be surprised if they got engaged by summer,” says the insider. “John has discussed marrying Jen.”

[From US Magazine]

In the video on US’s site they add the quote that Garner and Miller “have been spending quality time at Jen’s house before she puts the kids to bed.” However the kids still “know him as mommy’s friend. They haven’t even kissed in front of the kids.”

I bet Garner told US this hoping she’d get another cover, but it didn’t happen for her. This is dangerous. Does she talk to Miller before these stories get leaked and let him in on the game or does she just deny culpability?

Her October, 2018 US cover:

photos credit: WENN

The Duchess of Sussex won’t make her first 2019 royal-event appearance until next week, but don’t think that she’s just been sitting around doing nothing. Meghan has been quietly meeting with charities and potential patronages for a year now. And today, Kensington Palace finally did an excellent rollout for Meghan’s first four solo patronages. Meghan is becoming the patroness to the National Theatre (a patronage which belonged to the Queen), the Association of Commonwealth Universities (another patronage passed to Meghan from the Queen), Mayhew, and SmartWorks.

The Duchess of Sussex has announced her first patronages, as she vows to help unemployed women to feel confident about their upcoming job interviews with personal styling and makeovers. Kensington Palace today disclosed the four roles the Duchess will take on, as the new Royal Patron of the National Theatre, the Association of Commonwealth Universities, animal charity Mayhew, and Smart Works, which provides a new wardrobe for women who are seeking work, as well as one-to-one coaching for interviews.

The Duchess, who has long advocated for women’s empowerment, is understood to have paid numerous quiet visits to each of the charities already, sitting in to help on client meetings as worked to choose suitable royal patronages within her areas of interest. Two of the patronages, the National Theatre and Association of Commonwealth Universities, which represents higher education across all 53 Commonwealth countries, have been handed down to her from the Queen. A fourth will represent her concern about animal welfare, with the Mayhew providing shelter and care for pets and working to keep homeless people with their dogs.

A spokesman for Kensington Palace said: “The Duchess is delighted to become Patron of both national and grassroots organisations that are part of the fabric of the UK, and is very much looking forward to working with them to bring wider public attention to their causes. Her Royal Highness feels she can use her position to focus attention on, and make a particular difference to these organisations and, more widely, the sectors they each represent. Over the last year, Her Royal Highness has held meetings and conducted private visits with each of these organisations.”

The four patronages represent the key interests of the Duchess, from women’s empowerment to fashion and animal welfare. Announcing her patronage of Mayhew, which provides care for pets while their owners are going through times of crisis, a palace spokesman said: “The Duchess has long understood the connection between animals and community welfare and has supported various animal rescue centres in Los Angeles.”

Speaking of the National Theatre patronage, artistic director Rufus Norris said: “It is a privilege to welcome The Duchess of Sussex as our new Patron. The Duchess shares our deeply-held conviction that theatre has the power to bring together people from all communities and walks of life. I very much look forward to working closely with Her Royal Highness in the years to come”.

Kensington Palace added: “Whilst Her Royal Highness spent ten years working in television, her training is in theatre. As well as a double major in theatre and international relations from Northwestern University, which is renowned for its drama programme, Her Royal Highness volunteered at a performing arts after school programme for children in underprivileged school districts in Los Angeles.”

The fourth patronage will see the Duchess continue her work with The Association of Commonwealth Universities, after she made a speech during her tour of Fiji last year about the importance of women’s education.

[From The Telegraph]

What I love about these patronages is that Meghan knows her own mind, and knows what she’s interested in. I’m sure she was told – like I suspect Kate was too – that she should start with softer charities, focusing on kids and doing events which would look good in photos. Meghan was like “Nah, I’m going to focus on empowering women through higher education, preparing working class women for careers, how animals are often the first victims of domestic violence and poverty, and diversity in theater.” These are BIG subjects to tackle… and granted, some of them will include great photo-ops, but all of them feel authentic to who Meghan is.

Oooh, I just saw this – Meg did an appearance with her new patronage Smart Works today:

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of WENN, Getty, Backgrid.

For more than a month, the Academy has been trying to figure out what to do about their Oscar-hosting dilemma. Kevin Hart quit that bitch in a flurry of homophobia and controversy in the first week of December. Since then, it’s honestly felt like the Academy has been frozen, like deer in the headlights. They couldn’t figure out who to get to replace Hart, and they’ve got an enormous list of names of people who they could ask, and an even bigger list of names who will never be asked. This is now the latest the Academy has ever gone without confirming a host. So… what’s their solution? Their solution sounds like it was made by a committee, and that it will please absolutely no one.

The Oscars are poised to embark on one of the most radical reinventions in the awards show’s long history. For the first time in nearly three decades, the biggest night in movies plans to go without a host, individuals with knowledge of the plans told Variety.

Producers will select a crop of A-listers to introduce various segments instead of relying on one marquee name to kick things off in a monologue filled with Trump zingers, said the insiders. The producers and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the group behind the Oscars, are scrambling to line up top talent needed to carry the telecast, which is just six weeks from airing live — on Feb. 24 — from Hollywood’s Dolby Theatre. Hand-wringing at the Academy has been palpable.

As it stands, no new offers are out, nor are any expected to be made to a single potential host to fill the void left by Kevin Hart, who dropped out within hours of being selected when he refused to apologize for his past homophobic remarks that had resurfaced on Twitter.

Barring an eleventh-hour pivot by the Academy — in the event that a superstar host materializes — the show producers are moving forward with a broadcast that will focus on starry skits and play up a high-profile year for music in film, thanks to likely nominees Lady Gaga, Dolly Parton, and Kendrick Lamar, one individual involved with the show said.

[From Variety]

Variety goes on to detail how Kevin Hart could have potentially come back if he showed real remorse and issued a substantive apology, but the sources say that his “woe is me, gay people are bullying me” drama on Ellen DeGeneres’ show backfired with the Academy, and so Kevin is persona non grata now. As for the Academy’s idea to have no madman (or madwoman) helming the SS Oscartastrophe, obviously I think that’s a sh-tty idea. They’re trying to have it every way possible, rather than making a concrete decision and sticking to it. Mark my words, this year’s Oscars telecast is going to be a disaster with this format.

Speaking of disasters, The Hollywood Reporter claims that A-list celebrities were told, ahead of the Golden Globes, that if they decided to present at the Globes, they would not be invited to present at the Oscars. As in, celebrities had to choose – Globes or Oscars. The Oscars are more prestigious, obviously, but besides that, the Oscars have a MUCH better presenter gift bag. So obviously, some celebrities declined to present at the Globes. Margot Robbie was one of the people who declined, and now I wonder if they’re going to get Margot to do one of the big presenting-chunks at the Oscars.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

I’m wary of treating the “collaborators” the same as the perpetrators. We saw that over and over with Harvey Weinstein, where people acted like the people who worked with Weinstein were somehow “just as bad” as Weinstein. Same with Woody Allen – I’ve always maintained that many people didn’t know the extent of the accusations against Woody, and that a mere statement against him should be sufficient in most cases. So it is with R. Kelly as well – there were so many people who truly didn’t know the extent of his monstrous, predatory and criminal behavior. I only sat down and read about his disgusting behavior back in 2013, when a journalist who had been tracking R.Kelly’s crimes for years wrote a long-read piece. That was the same year that Lady Gaga collaborated with R. Kelly on “Do What U Want,” and she also defended him publicly, telling journalists:

“R. Kelly and I have sometimes very untrue things written about us, so in a way this was a bond between us. That we were able to say, the public, they can have our bodies, but they cannot have our mind or our heart. It was a really natural collaboration.”

[From CNN]

Yeah. As I said, this was being written about and discussed extensively back in 2013. In that year, there was a public movement to cancel R. Kelly, to kick him off the airwaves, to ensure that all women/people knew about his monstrous crimes. Then I guess people forgot, or they weren’t paying attention back then, because Lifetime’s Surviving R. Kelly special arrived in 2019 like a hurricane, with new details, new victim accounts and a new movement to #MuteRKelly. Considering that Lady Gaga is in the midst of a massive Oscar campaign and she’s trying to get attention for all the right reasons, she really didn’t want her old collab with R. Kelly to come back to haunt her. But it already has – there were pop culture critics and journalists asking aloud,”Why hasn’t Gaga said anything about R. Kelly?” Well, she did. Finally:

I stand by anyone who has ever been the victim of sexual assault: pic.twitter.com/67sz4WpV3i

— Lady Gaga (@ladygaga) January 10, 2019

I completely buy that Gaga had yet to fully process her sexual assault and I completely buy that victims will often have very messy journeys towards reconciling what happened to them. The only thing that bugs me a little bit is that… Gaga got sh-t back in 2013 for working with R. Kelly because, as I said, this whole thing was a huge conversation back then too. It feels too cute by half for Gaga to basically claim that she’s only heard about R. Kelly’s crimes now. That being said, what I said at the beginning still holds too – stop blaming women for the crimes committed by men. Gaga’s collaboration with R. Kelly doesn’t make her “just as bad” as him.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Embed from Getty Images

The Surviving R. Kelly docuseries that aired last week (and can still be viewed on mylifetime.com) shined a light on the egregious behavior of R.Kelly towards underaged girls and women for the last three decades. Even though credible rumors and video evidence have been out there for years, many chose to look away rather than believe the countless women who claimed to have been assaulted or witnessed assault by him. After the series aired, it became impossible to look away. You either had to admit it had happened or call all those women and girls liars. As happened with his child pornography charges in 2001, media exposure has given investigators the evidence they need to pursue charges. And according to TMZ, the state of Georgia is looking into doing just that:

We’re told the probe was launched over the past few days as a direct result of what ‘Surviving’ depicted.

We’re told investigators have been reaching out to several survivors featured in the TV project.

[From TMZ via Jezebel]

TMZ confirmed in their story that investigators had contacted Asante McGee, a survivor who was featured in the series. While authorities are trying to do right by Asante, R. Kelly is proving himself, once again, to be the Devil’s apprentice. A Facebook page called Surviving Lies was put up to discredit all his accusers. Among the other nonsense posted there were stills from a sex tape featuring Asante. It is believed that R. Kelly posted this to punish her for speaking out but somebody in his circle realized that revenge porn is a chargeable offense so the whole page was deleted. The flames are coming for you, fool – you can’t out run them.

Any charges filed against this degenerate makes me happy and I hope the heaviest hammer of the law comes down on him. However, I also feel like Rhea Butcher in this tweet:

I’m glad this is happening but you shouldn’t have to make a documentary to believe black girls https://t.co/GNVBKJiXsn

— rhea butcher (@RheaButcher) January 8, 2019

Those that participated in the docuseries are not his only victims. Starcasm reports that R. Kelly’s former tour manager, Demetrius Smith, who was appearing in the series, gave a radio interview on The Domenick Nati Show in which he seemingly admitted to even more crimes committed by his former employer. And, once again, Demetrius justified the whole thing away. Writer Jamilah Lemieux was also featured on the series as a commentator, not a survivor or witness. She tweeted this yesterday:

My mom (who still lives in Chicago) was out getting food the other day and a woman stopped her to say, “You used to walk around here with a little girl. Your daughter? Was that her in the R. Kelly docuseries?”

She proceeded to tell her what Robert did to her when she was 17.

— Jamilah Lemieux? (@JamilahLemieux) January 8, 2019

It’s a long time in coming but like Bill Cosby and like Harvey Weinstein, the floodgates are open. I shudder to think what the numbers will be when all is said and done. And even then, that might not be all. According to TMZ, Chicago prosecutors are urging his victims to come forward. A few have already. If you or anyone you know wants to be heard, the State Attorney, Kim Foxx’s, number for witnesses or victims is (773) 674-6492.

Embed from Getty Images

Photo credit: WENN Photos and Twitter

Nicole Kidman is on the cover of People Magazine, she’s promoting her awards-baity role in Destroyer, where she plays a hard scrapple undercover agent. She’s only been nominated for a Globe so far, but we’ll hear the Oscar nominations in two weeks. It’s by the writers and director behind The Invitation, a solid horror thriller starring Logan Marshall-Green. (I really enjoyed The Invitation, it’s on Netflix!)

The first segment released from Nicole’s interview focuses on her relationship with husband Keith Urban. I never thought that Nicole and Keith would still be together in 2019. Keith went to rehab just a few months after they got married in 2006 and there were some cheating rumors. They weathered that storm and are one of the most solid and sickly sweet celebrity couples. They give the impression that they’re really like that and it isn’t a put on. Nicole told a story to People about the moment she knew Keith was “the one,” it was when he showed up with flowers at her doorstep at 5 am. I want to roll my eyes reading this, but that’s my usual response whenever she talks about him.

Nicole Kidman had known Keith Urban for less than six months when she knew.

“It was my [38th] birthday, and he stood outside with gardenias at 5 a.m. on my stoop in New York,” Kidman, 51, tells PEOPLE exclusively in this week’s cover story.

“That is when I went, ‘This is the man I hope I get to marry.’”

Urban, 51, took her to Woodstock, N.Y., the site of the 1969 music festival, on a motorbike for a getaway (“My kind of guy!” she says), and she’s never looked back.

“It was pretty intense,” says Kidman, whose gritty drama Destroyer will be released wide this month. “I believed by that point he was the love of my life. Maybe that’s because I am deeply romantic, or I’m an actress, or I have strong faith as well, but I just believed, ‘Oh, okay, here he is.’”

The two married a year later at a romantic wedding in Manly, Australia, and have since settled down in Nashville, where they’re happily raising their two daughters, Sunday, 10, and Faith, 8.

For his part, Urban was always equally smitten with his Oscar-winning bride. He tells PEOPLE, “I could sum up Nic as a wife, mother and human being in three words: She’s all heart!”

[From People]

I’m glad they’re happy, I do buy them as a couple, and I’m sorry for being such a cynical bitch. Ooh I’ll tell you when I knew my boyfriend was a keeper. I don’t believe in “the one” or “soulmates” or anything, but I knew after he also mildly disliked Blade Runner 2049. There were about five different movies, some of them critically acclaimed, which we both didn’t like (Annihilation, Three Billboards, Hereditary) and others which were supposed to suck which we loved (The Meg). Have you ever gone to a movie which you either love or hate and your friend has the exact opposite reaction? It depends on how close you are with them, but that can really test a relationship. (I was mad at a friend who disliked The Incredibles 2. I take movies too seriously, don’t I?)

Photos credit: WENN and Avalon.red

Jessa Duggar Seewald revealed today that she has another baby on the way. This will be the third child for Jessa and her husband Ben. They don’t know the gender of their baby just yet, but the couple is already guessing. After being pregnant twice before, Jessa has an idea what she is having this time around.

People revealed the big news about Jessa and Ben expecting. The couple is excited about another baby and they already have two little boys. They do feel like they already know what they are having, though. Jessa explained what they think and why.

“From the day we found out we were expecting, we both guessed boy, and if our predictions are right then we already have a ton the clothing and accessories ready to pass down! At the same time, we would absolutely love it if we found out we were having a girl — though we’ve joked that we’d be starting from square one and might have to learn a few things.”

They are sure that it is going to be a boy, but they don’t know just yet. Jessa doesn’t seem like she is far enough along to find out. If they do have a girl, she is lucky that her sister just had one so hopefully she shared a few things back. Anna and Josh Duggar could have saved a few girl items as well. Regardless, the Duggars know how to thrift shop and save money.

Happy news from the Seewald family! Baby #3 is on the way! Click the link in my bio to read our predictions! ?

A post shared by Jessa Seewald (@jessaseewald) on Jan 9, 2019 at 10:35am PST

It was also just revealed that Counting On will be coming back for another season. It will start airing on February 11, 2019, on TLC. This should show Jessa pregnant and hopefully announcing the news to the family. It has been a while since any of the Duggars announced a pregnancy. There has been a lot of speculation that Jessa was pregnant before this though.

Henry and Spurgeon are going to be big brothers. This is going to be all new to Henry, but Spurgeon has already done this before. It turns out that Henry doesn’t quite understand, but once the baby arrives he will figure it out.

Do you think that Jessa and Ben Seewald are right about the gender of the baby? Share your thoughts in the comments section below. Don’t miss Counting On when it returns to TLC with new episodes on February 11, 2019. It is exciting to see that another season will be here soon.

The post Jessa Duggar Seewald Shares Her Gender Prediction For New Baby on The Way appeared first on Celebrity Baby Scoop.

Michael K is totally right – of course he is – about Lady Gaga’s accessory looking like a turkey and I didn’t notice it until I read his post. BUT. I’m still into this look. So much more than her Golden Globes look. Because this tuxedo dress is beautiful. It’s so good on her. The fit is perfect on h…