Cele|bitchy

---

• Katherine Heigl is no longer “the great white hope of women,” was she ever?
• Michael Fassbender was just cast as a loin-cloth-wearing Irish warrior God
• “Biggest Loser” contestants go on strike, shut off production: justified?
• Jennifer Aniston’s THR interview: “My hair has never been my greatest feature”
• Angelina Jolie wrote the foreword to Billy Bob Thornton’s new memoir
• Dina Lohan explains her crackie reasons for canceling her Dr. Drew interview
• Sweden’s Crown Princess Victoria gives birth to a “very cute princess”
• Enquirer’s cover image of Whitney Houston in her casket – way too far? (photo blurred)
• Jennifer Aniston wears Chanel for her Walk of Fame ceremony: cute or church-y?
• Star: Christina Aguilera’s weight gain, booze problems are “out of control”

Katherine Heigl is no longer “the great white hope of women,” was she ever? Posted: 23 Feb 2012 08:56 AM PST I never thought that I’d ever say this, but I’m really warming up to Katherine Heigl. Yes, she’s got a major image problem (not unlike Megan Fox) that was fueled by her own rather expressive mouth, but Katherine has seemed a lot more human by way of her recent essays on marriage and mothering as well. Obviously, I’d still like to burn her entire closet — a feeling that is entirely justified by these photos of her latest outings (over the past month or so) while shopping with her mother. On a more professional front, people are starting to talk about Katherine’s faltering movie career in terms of reflecting upon women in Hollywood. They might as well call it the “The Katherine Heigl Problem” since it’s expressed in such dire terms. One piece in particular from HuffPo’s Nico Lang is worth exploring in full, but here are some excerpts: Hollywood is not a nice place for actresses, something even a passing glimpse into the career trajectories of Thora Birch, Jessica Alba or Janeane Garofalo will indicate. If you’re a woman in Tinseltown, the industry is not a space that’s run by you or for you — and any success you have is seen as ancillary, a tie-over to summer tentpole season. When a movie you’re in does well, like Oscar nominees The Help or Bridesmaids, people won’t stop talking about what a huge surprise it was, and if your movie tanks, studio heads will threaten not to cast women as leads anymore. Unless you are Meryl Streep, Judi Dench or Helen Mirren — women known more for being “thespians” than “entertainers” — this treatment intensifies as you get older. Even one time box-office darlings Julia Roberts and Reese Witherspoon can’t open a movie these days; Witherspoon’s new film, This Means War, counts her third disappointment in a row, and Roberts’ highest-grossing recent film as a lead, Eat Pray Love, failed to come even close to the $100 million success mark — starkly underperforming especially when considering its star power and mega best-selling source material. This brings us to Katherine Heigl, a woman who went from being the great white hope of women at the box office to not being able to outgross $50 million or even make back her budget. Much has been said, including by me, about how Heigl herself has created the fiasco that has become her career — her alleged difficult behavior on set, her unpopular public statements about the projects she’s involved in, her perceived irritability — but this has more to do with media gender bias than Heigl herself. For instance, Daniel Craig and Matt Damon have recently taken to making increasingly brash public statements about projects they’ve worked on, their personal politics and views on modern society — and no one has criticized them, questioned their box-office viability or used their gender to explain their remarks. Like Sean Penn, they’re men in an industry dominated by men — and unless they’re saying something overtly racist, they can say just about whatever they like, and in the case of Charlie Sheen, they might even be applauded for it. In fact, I would argue that the male-dominated public backlash about Katherine Heigl’s statements on Knocked Up — in which she called the film “a little sexist” — proved her own point on the film’s sexism. I like most of Judd Apatow’s films, but I don’t think even Apatow would call himself a writer who understands women — as the women in films like Knocked Up are generally mothering figures or unsympathetic — brittle, shallow or unstable. If women are seen as being “cool,” it’s because they’re like “one of the guys.” In Forgetting Sarah Marshall and Funny People, which were, respectively, produced and directed by Apatow, it’s the laid-back, dude-like qualities of the female leads, Mila Kunis and Aubrey Plaza, that attract their male counterparts. When he does create sympathetic women, it’s because he’s leaving the writing of women up to women, as in the case of Bridesmaids, or because he’s writing for a man — but with boobs. However, the problem with Heigl herself is that she’s good at talking the talk — speaking out about the inherent sexism in the movie industry — but terrible stepping out and doing anything about it, and she seems almost willfully against challenging the norms of gender in cinema that she criticizes. In an interview conducted shortly after Knocked Up made her a star, Heigl criticized the fact that every up-and-coming actress is touted to be the “next Julia Roberts” but mentioned, “There’s not another woman I look at and think, ‘That’s it. That’s whose career I want to have.’” Similar statements on the subject and her subsequent career choices show Heigl doesn’t care about awards; she wants to be a rom-com queen, a genre not exactly known for empowering women. However, what Heigl doesn’t get is that rom-com stars like Roberts got to their A-list positions by taking chances within those genres and pushing the boundaries of what women are allowed to be. Although Pretty Woman wasn’t doing much for equality, Julia Roberts’ best vehicles, My Best Friend’s Wedding and Erin Brockovich, show the lead achieving happiness by not ending up with the guy. Roberts finds herself through her career, getting involved with her community, helping others and becoming a better friend to those around her. She does not need to find a man or become more male to be powerful, and in Erin Brockovich, her femininity is the source of her strength. In the case of Heigl, it’s her less-than-progressive scripts that present the problem — ones that, as a producer, she has a strong hand in picking for herself. Her best post-Grey’s Anatomy film, 27 Dresses revels in the exact kind of light-hearted fun that Heigl should be having. 27 Dresses doesn’t push boundaries, but it’s a great role to showcase her talents, allowing her to be the magnetic mixture of sassy and sweet that made her Grey’s character so likeable and relatable; however, vehicles like The Ugly Truth, Killers, New Years’ Eve, and One for the Money don’t portray her as spunky and fun; they make her, well, ugly. [From HuffPo] I think audiences gave up on Heigl at a certain point after she kept choosing to appear in really crappy movies. All the evidence we need can be found in the fact that One for the Money grossed $28 million worldwide on a $40 million budget. The movie performed that poorly despite the fact that it was based upon a (relatively) beloved book series from Janet Evanovich. The main problem I see isn’t really isn’t Heigl’s tendency to sh-ttalk her projects (although that has hurt her a lot more than when her male counterparts have done the same thing) but that she hasn’t challenged herself at all as an actress. Does she truly possess the talent to do so? Who knows, but she’ll never know if she doesn’t try. Heigl needs to leave Hollywood for a few years and stop referring to herself as “an artist“ when she appears almost exclusively in romcoms. She’s a fairly talented writer, and I see no reason why she couldn’t write an inventive script that stretches her boundaries and presents women in a more interesting light than merely as “one of the guys” or the token love interest. Then she can come back and prove her detractors wrong. Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet

Michael Fassbender was just cast as a loin-cloth-wearing Irish warrior God Posted: 23 Feb 2012 08:34 AM PST Seriously, y'all. It should not be this slow in the gossip world on the Thursday before the Oscars. Where is the last-minute publicity angling? Where is the fashion drama? Where is the story about two stylists getting into a fist-fight? Where is the last-minute breakup and subsequent angst about who would get custody of the Oscar red carpet? Yeah, it's dead in here. So let's talk about Michael Fassbender!! There's lots of news about him this week, so let me just cover it in bullet points: *Fassy has been confirmed for Ridley Scott's new film, The Counselor. Fassy and Scott worked together on Prometheus (out this summer), and Ridley must have liked what he saw, because Fassy just scored the lead role in a film people are describing as "No Country For Old Men on steroids." Now Ridley has to cast the "bad guy." Which may be Jeremy Renner? Fassy & Renner? I would watch that. *Fassy made a recent appearance on the UK's Top Gear. The interview is super-cute, even for the non-Fassbender-obsessives. Fassy wears leather, he races in an inexpensive car, he talks about motorcycles, he's lovely and Irish, he talks about his "impressive sausage" and he utters the magnificent line, "I'm sweating like a cornered nun." *Fassy's Shame director (and close friend) Steve McQueen recently spoke out about Fassy's "snub" at the Oscars – many people feel Fassy deserved a lead actor Oscar nomination for Shame, and McQueen thinks it didn't happen because the role was too "sexy." McQueen said: "In America they’re too scared of sex, that’s why he wasn’t nominated. If you look at the best actor list you’re saying, ‘Michael Fassbender is not on that list?’ It’s kind of crazy. But that’s how it is, it’s an American award, let them have it.” Damn, Steve. Most Americans are all about Fassy's dong, okay? It's just the old white dudes in the Academy who are scared of the impressive sausage. *And finally, maybe my favorite piece of Fassbender news, and something that a lot of people sent me (sidenote: My Fass-love means I have lots of Irish fans!). Fassy might be staring in a film adaptation of "Irish Myths" (working title). He will play "Cuchulain, the hero of the Ulster Myth Cycle." The character is "an Achilles-esque hero who is known for spazzing out in battle to the point of turning into an unrecognizable monster, and he fights from a chariot. It was prophesied that he would be famous, but also lead a short life." Fassy might produce it too. So… Michael Fassbender, Ginger Warrior God!!! This means lots of loincloths, doesn't it? Praise Jesus. Here are more photos of Fassy looking gorge! Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

“Biggest Loser” contestants go on strike, shut off production: justified? Posted: 23 Feb 2012 07:57 AM PST Note that the older gentleman, Roy, couldn’t have been one of the walkouts as he was just eliminated This news came out yesterday, but we didn’t know how much interest there would be in it and we’re honestly a little scrapped for stories this morning. (Thursdays are usually slow before the tabloids come out, and everyone must be gearing up for the Oscars this weekend. I have the feeling that they’re going to suck, but we’ll see.) So the remaining contestants on “Biggest Loser” apparently walked off set halfway through the season when they heard of producers’ plans to bring back some of the eliminated contestants to compete for the final prize. This has shut down production for “at least a week.” There’s a big, fat problem on the set of “The Biggest Loser” — TMZ has learned nearly all of the remaining contestants have walked off the show and are threatening to quit after learning about a secret “twist” that could seriously affect their shot at the $250,000 grand prize. Multiple sources connected with the show tell us … the mutiny took place this week … when the losers got word that producers were considering bringing back previous contestants to compete for the grand prize. We’re told most of the current contestants were pissed — feeling it was unfair that prior losers would get a second bite at the apple … so they banded together and decided to protest by walking off the show in the middle of shooting an episode. Sources tell us … show honchos have shut down production for at least a week while they figure out how to handle the situation. [From TMZ] Biggest Loser trainer Bob Harper semi-confirmed this news, telling Radar that the contestants this season were “bullies.” He named the people he liked and I guess you can figure out whom he’s referring to by process of elimination. He said: “They hate me saying that but it's like you know what? It's true. It's nasty and it's tough." The hateful drama each week on the NBC show has shown the least inspirational characters yet this season, and Bob hesitated for about one second when asked if he liked anyone on the show. "I mean…No." With Conda, Kim and youth pastor Mark leading the pack of bullies, Bob did say there were contestants he liked, but they weren't on his list. "There are some. I'm going to regret this. Emily, Cassandra, Chism, I love them they're really fantastic. Buddy, buddy's a really sweet guy. The rest of them, they're nasty!" And the bad attitude they're showing to other contestants isn't sitting well with Bob, who called them out for their behavior. "Bullies, they're bullies." [From Radar] For those of you who watch this, is it true? Is the dynamic especially mean this season? A lot of people in Radar’s comment section are pointing to Conda as an instigator, and saying Kim and Mark are in on it. What’s more is that trainer Jillian isn’t around to keep people in line and put a stop to it, according to chatter about the show. (She wasn’t around last season either when Anna Kournikova took over.) So is it understandable that the contestants are striking in opposition to a policy that was sprung on them mid-season? Is it suddenly unfair to switch the rules around without warning? It sounds like it is, but I’m not watching this show. The contestants could just be pains in the ass this season. On a side note, isn’t Bob Harper dreamy?

Jennifer Aniston’s THR interview: “My hair has never been my greatest feature” Posted: 23 Feb 2012 07:54 AM PST Aniston, Aniston, Aniston!!! Some of you have been asking why there are so many Jennifer Aniston stories this week. Um, she's promoting Wanderlust. She's giving lots of interviews, and there are tons of new photos. It's not a conspiracy. So Aniston has a longish interview in the new issue of The Hollywood Reporter, and guess what she talks about? The national debt? The crisis in Syria? Campaign finance reform? Of course not (nor would I want to hear her opinions on those issues). She talks about Friends. And her hair. You can read the full piece here, and here are some highlights: THR: If you could pick whose star [on the Hollywood Walk of Fame] yours is placed next to, who would it be? Aniston: I would not balk at Lucille Ball! THR: Your boyfriend and Wanderlust co-star, Justin Theroux, is pushing more into writing, including penning the upcoming musical feature Rock of Ages. Does writing interest you? Aniston: Oh God, no. That's a bug I don't even understand. I'm lucky if I write a letter. I'm more interested in the execution of what the writer puts down on paper. THR: Former Friends stars Matt LeBlanc and Lisa Kudrow are thriving on cable with Showtime's Episodes and Web Therapy, respectively. What would it take to bring you back to series TV? Aniston: It would probably take those five actors and be somewhere where we left off. I loved what I did for 10 years; it was pure joy and nothing but fun, and it'd be hard to top it. The way we sort of felt the excitement of what Friends was when it started, it would have to be something where you felt a similar charge. But I'll never ever say never. THR: You've had success in both TV and film. Where do you feel the better opportunities for women exist? Aniston: Independent film. But I also think, thanks to the Kristen Wiigs of the world and thanks to Bridesmaids and those kinds of female comedies, that it's going to open up and change. It has to evolve; there's only so much we can see of guys with guns and frat boys. THR: Looking back at your career, is there one role that stands out as what you'd most like to be identified for, that you're most proud of? Aniston: I really loved [2002's] The Good Girl. Rachel on Friends, I owe everything to her. But I also loved Dr. Julia in Horrible Bosses [2011]. Those three mean a lot to me. THR: Your father, John Aniston, has been a longtime castmember on NBC's Days of Our Lives. Has he, or anyone else in the industry, given you career advice that has really stuck with you? Aniston: My dad's advice has always been: "Don't do it. Become a doctor. Become a lawyer." He didn't want me to be heartbroken because he knew it was a tough business. It compelled me to go for it even harder. Do what keeps you happy, and don't ever let people box you in. There was a period when I was on Friends where The Good Girl came to me, or [2006's] Friends With Money came to me. I thought, I've got to go for it now and try to not just be Rachel Green so I can get out of the Fruity Pebbles section at the grocery and explore the organic food. It's a terrible analogy, but I had to get out there and do something different so they could see that I'm an actor, so I didn't forget that I could do other things. I was lucky that happened. THR: Were you surprised when "The Rachel" shag haircut became so widely imitated and iconic in the mid-1990s? Aniston: Of course. My hair has never been my greatest feature, so that was funny enough unto itself that my hair became so focused on. I have curly, uncontrollable hair! I didn't love that cut; it was a haircut to clean up damaged hair. I'm really a long-hair kind of girl. THR: If Friends were still going, what would Ross and Rachel be doing now? Aniston: They're absolutely, 100 percent together. They have more kids! He's probably still working, and hopefully they're still hanging out somewhere. It would be really upsetting if they weren't; it would bum me out. THR: LeBlanc said recently that a Friends movie isn't something he could ever see happening. What are your feelings about that? Aniston: I can't imagine how you would do it, unless you did it years from now. Then it would be: "Who are these guys? What are we watching?" I can't imagine what that would be. It's not normal. Friends is in your living room; Friends is not in a movie theater. It doesn't make sense to me. I think it would be going against its authentic self. THR: Your red-carpet style tends toward the classic little black dress. What is it about that simplicity that most appeals to you? Aniston: The little black dress is just comfortable. It's all about being comfortable, being easy and having you be able to wear something and not having it wear you. It's classic. Every time I've tried to be bold and crazy, I feel like a Japanese animated cartoon character. [From The Hollywood Reporter] There are some questions about directing too, and Aniston says that she feels the push-pull of directing again, versus simply doing yet another comedy script that she's offered. Is it wrong that I like her Friends talk? She's not disrespectful about the show that launched her career, and she's game for talking about it when she's asked. And yes, I realize that she was ASKED about her hair again. Dear God, please stop asking this woman about her hair. Please. Aniston is also on Ellen's show today – there's a clip too. Ellen asks her about the whole "sexiest woman ever" thing. Obviously. And they talk about Justin Theroux. Of course. Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

Angelina Jolie wrote the foreword to Billy Bob Thornton’s new memoir Posted: 23 Feb 2012 07:47 AM PST The past week has been full of nostalgia for the halcyon days of Billy Bob Thornton and Angelina Jolie. Memories of their relationship (circa 2000-2002) do not make me sick, oddly enough. BBT is no prize these days, but people easily forget that for a moment there in the 1990s, he was considered a writing and acting genius because of Sling Blade and his Oscar-nominated turn in A Simple Plan. I even had some moments during Monster's Ball where I thought, "Yeah. I'd hit it. I get why Angelina is with him." Of course, he's gross now. And while Angelina and BBT might have a friendly sort of post-divorce friendship, I can't imagine that Angelina ever feels any sexual or romantic nostalgia for that man. I'm sure he feels it for her though – he's making a movie sort-of-kind-of loosely based on their marriage. Anyway, last week the Enquirer claimed that Brad Pitt was totally crying because Angelina was planning on meeting up with BBT and having an actual conversation with her ex. I don't buy that Brad is that insecure, and I don't buy that he cares that Angelina used to bone BBT. And now there's further proof that Jolie and Thornton and still friendly – she's written the foreword to his new memoir: No bad blood — or blood vials — here! Angelina Jolie has written the foreword to ex-husband Billy Bob Thornton’s new memoir, The Billy Bob Tapes: A Cave Full of Ghosts, a rep for the book’s publisher, HarperCollins, confirms to Us Weekly. Jolie, 36, and Thornton, 56, were married from 2000 to 2003; during their intense, sometimes odd union, the couple famously wore vials of one another’s blood around their necks. Jolie and Brad Pitt have been together (but not married) since 2005. Married five times overall, Thornton and makeup artist Connie Angland have been in a relationship since 2003. “We talk every now and then,” the Faster actor said in late 2010 of Jolie. “She seems to be doing very well directing her own movie [In the Land of Blood and Honey], which I am so proud of her for. She’s real smart, and very creative, and I think it’s a great job for her.” Cowritten with country music singer and author Kinky Friedman, The Billy Bob Tapes promises to tell, according to book description info on Amazon, “colorful tales of his modest (to say the least) Southern upbringing, his bizarre phobias (komodo dragons?), his life, his loves (including his heartbreakingly brief marriage to fellow Oscar winner Angelina Jolie), and, of course, his movie career.” [From Us Weekly] You know what I like about BBT's comments regarding Jolie? He doesn't talk about her beauty. He talks about how smart she is, how hard she works, how he's proud to know her. And she in turn always talks about him with a great deal of respect, and I think she still thinks highly of him as an artist. I think that's nice. Of course, I'm sure that the tabloids will turn this into something devastating. "Brad walks out after reading Angelina's 'love note' to BBT!" and "Brad Screams: 'You're still in love with Billy Bob!' as he cries and cries." Et cetera. Photos courtesy of WENN, PR Photos, PCN.

Dina Lohan explains her crackie reasons for canceling her Dr. Drew interview Posted: 23 Feb 2012 06:17 AM PST Dina Lohan went with her daughter Lindsay to court yesterday – Dina could be seen in the background of some of the Lindsay photos, plus Dina was photographed on her own. It doesn't really surprise or shock me that Dina came with Lindsay, as we've known for so many years that Dina is Lindsay's biggest enabler/enforcer/defender/pimp. But Dina does have another side to her – the side that wants all of the attention that her daughter gets. Thus, Dina still schedules interviews for herself. A few days ago, she was scheduled to appear on Dr. Drew's HLN show. Then, the day of her scheduled appearance, HLN's PR person sent an email to all outlets – "Dina Lohan has just cancelled her appearance scheduled for tonight on HLN's Dr. Drew@ 9pm ET. She has not rescheduled." Now, considering Dr. Drew and Lindsay have a tortured history (as in, he thinks she should be framed for a crime and thrown into a dark hole, which is pretty bad coming from someone who fancies himself a medical professional), it's weird that Dina would agree to speak to Dr. Drew in the first place. And when she canceled, I just figured that Lindsay had crack-squawked to her mother and Dina had acquiesced, pulling the interview. But Dina's spokesman (incidentally, the same man who speaks for Lindsay too – the dreaded crack-enabler Steve Honig) went to Radar to paint a pretty picture: Dina Lohan was by her daughter, Lindsay Lohan's side when she received a glowing progress report in court Wednesday, and she intends to support her fully, even going so far as to cancel a scheduled interview with TV host Dr. Drew Pinsky, after deciding it's best not to talk publicly about her family, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting. As previously reported, Lindsay was praised by Judge Stephanie Sautner during her progress hearing stemming from her misdemeanor theft case. The judge told the 25-year-old during the brief hearing that it looks like she has gotten “her life back on track.” Furthermore, Lindsay is in the homestretch of completing all her probation requirements, and once she finishes the remaining 14 days of community service and 5 therapy sessions she will have fullfilled all of the obligations from the Court and will no longer be required to report to her probation officer. Mama Lohan was scheduled to appear on Dr. Drew’s HLN show Tuesday, but at the last minute backed out. “Dina’s decision to not appear on Dr. Drew was hers and hers alone. Her feeling is that right now it is better to support her family than to talk about them,” Lohan family rep Steve Honig tells RadarOnline.com. However, Dina hasn’t ruled out sitting down with the respected doc in the future. “Dina truly respects Dr. Drew and would love to do his show in the future. Maybe in a month or so she will revisit the invitation. Dr. Drew was very gracious and understanding about her reason for canceling, and there are no hard feelings at all between the two,” a source close to the situation says. Meanwhile, with Lindsay’s legal woes almost behind her, the actress is mounting a comeback and has inked a deal with Lifetime to play Elizabeth Taylor in the biopic television movie, and will be hosting Saturday Night Live on March 3. [From Radar] All this time, I always figured that "Steve Honig" was just Dina's alias. Like, she puts on a fake accent and calls up media outlets to supply cracked-out quotes. Anyway, is it even worth noting how incredibly stupid the Family Lohan is? Dr. Drew and Lindsay were engaged in a verbal death-match not so long ago, and LL (rightly) claimed that Dr. Drew is "a quack and a sellout." But Lindsay's mom still totally respects him, especially if he wants to pay attention to her! Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN.

Sweden’s Crown Princess Victoria gives birth to a “very cute princess” Posted: 23 Feb 2012 05:22 AM PST Yay! I kind of forgot that Sweden's Crown Princess Victoria was pregnant, so it came as such a pleasant surprise this morning when I saw that Victoria had given birth. Victoria and her husband, Prince Daniel (a commoner and former personal trainer), announced her pregnancy last August. Daniel was allowed to come out and speak to the press after Victoria gave birth overnight… to a girl! Yay! Victoria will be queen of Sweden after her father, and now her daughter is second in line to the throne. Sweden doesn't make it all about the male heirs – whomever is born first is next in line to the throne! Anyway, Prince Daniel seemed really sweet and really proud when he spoke to the press, describing his daughter as "a very cute princess." Sweden’s Crown Princess Victoria has given birth to the first royal baby in three decades. Her husband, Prince Daniel, announced the birth of his daughter this morning. Daniel said the baby was born overnight at 4:26 a.m. (0326 GMT) at the Karolinska University Hospital in Solna, a suburb of Stockholm. The emotional prince held up his hands to show how big she was, said she tipped the scales at 7lb 3oz. Mother and child are doing well. The baby girl is now second in line to the throne of Sweden, as the first grandchild of the king and queen, the court said on its website. Her mother is first. The father, Prince Daniel — the former personal trainer of the crown princess — was present at the Karolinska hospital in Stockholm during the birth, the court said. The child’s name will be announced Friday or Saturday, her father said. Visibly moved, the prince described the baby as “a very cute princess” in an appearance on Swedish television Thursday morning. “Well, when I came down from the room, the little princess was laying on her mother’s chest, and it looked like they were having a very cozy time, so it was hard to take my eyes off them,” he said on CNN affiliate TV4. “The Crown Princess is feeling fantastic, she is so happy and everything has worked out well and the little daughter and the Crown Princess are feeling very well,” he said. Admitting he was “very nervous” during the birth, he said “everything has worked out well,” and thanked the hospital staff for the “wonderful care they have provided us.” “And I would also like to thank everyone who for the last nine months have shared our joy, which we have really appreciated,” he said. He added that his father-in-law, King Carl XVI Gustaf, and mother-in-law, Queen Silvia, ‘are very happy’ about the birth. In August last year, the Royal Court announced that Victoria was pregnant and expected to give birth in early 2012. Victoria, 34, is next in line to the throne. Her father has been king since 1973. The Swedish monarch is primarily a figurehead, representing the country as the head of state but without political power. The royal family has recently been shrouded in controversy. In 2010 a book claimed that King Carl XVI Gustaf had a playboy lifestyle. The King denied the allegations in a rare interview in May 2011 but also apologised for undermining trust in the monarchy. It is hoped that a new royal baby will restore the Swedish people’s faith in the monarchy. [From The Mail & CNN] So sweet. I'm not aware of any controversy surrounding Victoria and Daniel – they were another couple (like Prince William and Kate Middleton) who waited years and years to marry. But unlike Will and Kate, Daniel seemed to spend his time, pre-royal engagement, in heavy royal training, and he hit the ground running as soon as they were married. I really like Daniel – he seems like a really good guy, and they seem solid as a couple. I'm so happy they had a princess!! Photos courtesy of WENN.

Enquirer’s cover image of Whitney Houston in her casket – way too far? (photo blurred) Posted: 23 Feb 2012 05:15 AM PST This is a version in which I’ve blurred over the photo. In the version on newsstands, Whitney’s full face is shown. She’s made up and looks like she’s sleeping I still remember when OK! Magazine featured a cover photo of Michael Jackson after he’d died. It was sad and unnecessary, and many people found it both disrespectful to the family and to Michael’s memory. That’s how I feel about this Enquirer cover photo of Whitney Houston’s open casket. This will be featured on the issue that’s about to hit newsstands today, and it makes me wonder: will it have a “family shield” to cover up this image of a dead person? My son is at an age where he can understand death, but when he was younger he had no concept of it and I wouldn’t want to have to explain it to the little guy in a supermarket checkout line. I’d rather my kid see some T&A (and he can see two daddies or mommies any day) than a dead person staring out at him. It’s not the image so much as the questions and sadness it brings up. Last week The National Enquirer seemed to have stooped to a new low when they published photos inside the magazine that recreated Whitney’s death scene. They even had a photo on the cover that looked like Whitney laying dead face down on the bathroom floor. (Really! Here’s that cover above, thanks to Sammie.) That picture was captioned “Photo Re-Created” below in smallish lettering, but larger font screamed that they had “Exclusive Crime Scene Photos.” Well they didn’t have to use a fake Whitney to recreate the poor lady dead in her casket, since someone at a private open casket viewing scored a payday by snapping a photo and selling it to the tabloids. Here’s more: Whitney Houston fans expressed shock and outrage Wednesday after the National Enquirer printed an image of the iconic singer in an open casket on its cover. The morbid photo, purportedly taken inside the family’s private viewing at the Whigham Funeral Home in Newark, N.J., last Friday, shows Houston’s body lying in her half-opened, polished bronze casket. It shows the dead pop star wearing what looks like a purple dress along with a brooch pinned to her chest and an earing sparkling in her ear. The headline claims she was buried wearing $500,000 worth of jewels and gold slippers on her feet. Facebook and Twitter users lashed out at the tabloid, calling the move trashy and shameful. “MADD at who ever sold Whitney Houston’s pic of her in a casket,” reality star Evelyn Lozada, from VH1′s “Basketball Wives,” wrote on Twitter. “Whoever sold the photo of Whitney Houston in her coffin to the National Enquirer is a vile, twisted, evil and unscrupulous sub-human,” London-based fan Christiana Mbakwe tweeted. Even celebrity blogger Perez Hilton called it a “tasteless, insensitive, morbid thing to do” on his eponymous website. Of course, the death photo is hardly without precedent. The National Enquirer famously ran a photo of Elvis in his coffin in 1977. [From The NY Daily News] In 2007, The Enquirer ran a “photo recreation” of a deceased Anna Nicole Smith in a body bag after her death. We covered that, and some outlets claimed that the photos were really of Anna after her death. At least one paparazzi agency did claim to have photos of Anna’s corpse, which lent credence to the stories that it was really her. Let’s play devil’s advocate for a moment: Whitney looks pretty in that photo in her casket, she appears at peace, and some may say that she lived in the public eye so it’s fitting that this photo be published. That reasoning doesn’t account for all the people and loved ones she left behind, particularly her 18 year-old daughter, Bobbi Kristina. Bobbi is already going through the worst time of her life, how is this going to affect her to have to see her deceased mom on a tabloid cover? That’s just ridiculously mean. My heart has been sinking the whole time I’m writing this, because I’m imagining seeing a loved one in their casket before going through the awful process of attending their burial. We have open casket viewings to provide closure to family and loved ones, the dead person is not meant to be publicly gawked at. I deliberately didn’t include a link to the photo. It’s all over the place though and if you have even moderate Google skill you can easily find it. Hell, just go to the store on Friday and it will probably be there already.

Jennifer Aniston wears Chanel for her Walk of Fame ceremony: cute or church-y? Posted: 23 Feb 2012 04:25 AM PST I have been properly chastised by the Aniston-loonies! Except not really. You have to understand, in mind, I was complimenting Jennifer Aniston's animated, sober-ish, "breasticle"-dropping performance on Chelsea Lately two nights ago. I guess it wasn't taken that way, though. So let's see if I can be nicer to Jennifer this morning! These are new pics of Aniston at her Walk of Fame ceremony yesterday in Hollywood. I thought she already did this, but that was last year's Grauman's Chinese Theater hand-and-footprint ceremony. For this one, she got her star! I'm actually surprised she didn't already have a star – some really cheesy people got their stars before Aniston. Aniston wore Chanel for the event – it's not her usual style, which is nice. The hemline is not grazing her biscuits, which I appreciate. It actually seems rather conservative and church-y to me. I think I'm coming down on… liking it? Sort of. I think the print is kind of tacky, but I like the cut and the vibe. Adam Sandler was at the event, and he gave a speech about Aniston too. I get that Adam is a "regular guy" and all, but do you think he could have managed to wear a button-down shirt and take the gum out of his mouth? That's just disrespectful to the event, and to his friend. Aniston's producing partner Kathryn Hahn was there too, as was Aniston's latest costar, Malin Akerman. Oh, and Jennifer's dad was there too, and she happily posed for photos with him. She did not pose for photos with Justin Theroux, though. Justin was wearing his hipster "fancy" uniform – skinny jeans, white button down, skinny black tie. Basically, he wore the same thing to her Grauman's event last year too. Note that John Aniston and Justin are sitting beside each other! That's nice. Truly. Also nice? Theroux has given up his itty-bitty dude-bangs trauma. Huzzah! In her speech, Aniston told the crowd that she was “extremely flattered, humbled, nervous and excited” to be honored and “It feels very surreal to be honest. I was born here and it’s sort of something you went and saw as a kid and got excited about just walking and seeing the names. To imagine that you're going to be there is really special. It’s fun.” Photos courtesy of WENN.

Star: Christina Aguilera’s weight gain, booze problems are “out of control” Posted: 23 Feb 2012 04:10 AM PST I do not know if this Star Mag cover is a Photoshopped image, or if someone just snapped a photo of standard-issue Christina Aguilera after a night of partying ("just another night"). As you can see, Star Mag is taking the bold step of calling out Christina for being a crazy boozehound, only they dilute the issue by going on and on about her "65 pound weight gain" and her diva behavior on the set of The Voice. True, the weight gain and the diva behavior are likely part of the same alcoholic issues. But let’s not go overboard with the weight stuff, okay? Here's more from Star, via Jezebel: Star – Sources claim Christina Aguilera is “out of control.” She is “getting wasted a lot and just embarrassing herself.” Among her offenses: She “goes days without ever getting out of bed. She’ll have food brought to her, and she even drinks in bed too!” Another source says: “Her dressing room is always littered with wine bottles.” And yeah, some stuff is not so nice, like how she left her son, Max, on his fourth birthday, to go get drunk. She and boyfriend Matt (who is “just in it for the ride”) went to dinner, where they had a few rounds of sake, and then to a club, where they ordered bathtub loads of vodka and cranberry and partied until last call. But even more important than drowning her sorrows in booze is Christina’s weight, amirite? That’s why the mag offers a sidebar called “packing on the pounds.” Contrasting photos from Xtina’s “Genie In A Bottle” and “Dirrty” days — 1999 and 2002 — with current photos, as though any of us weighed the same at 18 years old as we do (or did) at 31. [Star via Jezebel] Yeah, it's not about comparing Christina's body now to her body when she was 18. It's simply looking at her now and thinking, "Jesus, Christina, put on some pants. No one wants to see that." I would feel differently about Christina's weight gain if she actually dressed for her figure instead of jacking up her bolt-ons, pouring herself into dresses four sizes too small, and going commando TO A FUNERAL. As for how she looks… I feel the same way about Vince Vaughn's yo-yo weight gains and losses – he simply doesn't look healthy. Neither does Christina. And that worries me. As for Christina's Voice co-stars hating on her… I don't even know. Those stories are getting a lot of traction, but for now, Cee Lo Green and Adam Levine seem to be defending her publicly. When Levine was on Howard Stern's show, Stern asked him about Christina's weight gain and why she wears such uncomfortable-looking clothes. Adam said: “I wouldn’t go that far actually. Her clothes are tight, she likes to wear tight clothes! She clearly likes to talk about being comfortable with being a woman, and snapping her fingers and doing the whole (diva) thing." Photos courtesy of WENN.

You are subscribed to email updates from Cele|bitchy To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

You have read this article with the title Cele|bitchy. You can bookmark this page URL http://thisgirlreprobate.blogspot.com/2012/02/celebitchy_23.html. Thanks!