Month: December 2023

F. Scott Fitzgerald said there are no second acts in American life, but what did he know? After all, George Santos is probably going to get one. Last week, after a full year of creatively damning revelations about his sketchy past, the New York representative was expelled from Congress. Now what? Surely he’ll wind up on Dancing with the Stars or Bravo. But for now, he’s trying out a new gig: Cameo star.

Per Newsweek, Santos recently set up a page at the video-sharing service, which allows celebrities to make some extra bucks recording greetings for pay. On Monday morning he was charging $75 a pop. Later that day he’d jacked up the price to $200.

In his bio, Santos describes himself as a “former congressional ‘Icon’! (painted nails emoji)” as well as “the Expelled member of Congress from New York City.”

According to Mediaite, Santos’ first Cameo video was made for Megan Hunt, a Democratic senator from Nebraska. She said her friends requested it as a joke, but he delivered.

“Megan, how are you, darling?” Santos said in the video. He then seemed to allude to some problems she had with a conservative group earlier this year. “I hear that you’re getting some tough heat in the press and that life might be a little rocky now. Let me tell you something: If you believe in what you stand for, and if you fight for what you do, and you stand by those convictions, screw the haters.”

Santos also talked directly about his own woes:

“Look, they can boot me out of Congress, but they can’t take away my good humor or my larger than life personality, nor my good faith and the absolute pride I have for everything I’ve done. So this is about you, Megan! Be yourself unapologetically! Just love yourself, just make sure that you don’t buy into the hate, and stand your ground and don’t let them force you out, don’t let them bully you. You do you, girl! I’m cheering for you.”

Newsweek reports that he’d made over 100 videos available, though as of Monday evening, his page was listed as “temporarily unavailable.” But surely he’ll be back. Till then, we can all await the George Santos movie.

(Via Newsweek and Mediaite)

Did the world ask for a Willy Wonka origin story? Will the world actually pay to see a Willy Wonka origin story? Starting next weekend we’ll find out. Wonka stars floppy-haired Timothée Chalamet as the third onscreen incarnation of children’s literature’s most famous chocolatier. But perhaps everyone should be stoked: After all, Wonka is what lured Paddington 1 and 2 auteur Paul King away from the Paddington series. It must be good!

Perhaps you assume Wonka is all about the guy, as a young pup, building his magical chocolate factory? Not so, according to Uproxx’s Mike Ryan. Instead, this is what it’s about:

Willy has no money, but he’s presented with a contract too good to be true that lets him stay now and he can pay later. Of course, since Willy is illiterate he can’t read the contract that says he now owes 10,000 units of currency for the room and if he can’t pay it off he has to work for the inn for one unit of currency a day for 10,000 days – which comes to roughly 27 years. Willy now has to sell chocolate on the street to try and earn enough money to pay off his hotel bill. So anyway, that’s the plot of Wonka.

Or as Ryan succinctly puts it, “The plot is Willy can’t read.”

But is Wonka actually good? According to many critics, yes. The Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw went in a skeptic but emerged a believer:

On paper, it is the worst possible idea: a new musical-prequel origin myth for Willy Wonka, the reclusive top-hatted chocolatier from Roald Dahl’s 1964 children’s story Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, who decides in the onset of middle age to offer five Golden Tickets at random for kids to look round his secret confectionery paradise, staffed by a slave labour workforce of Oompa-Loompas. But in the hands of Brit-cinema’s new kings of comedy, writer Simon Farnaby and writer-director Paul King (who have already worked their magic on Paddington), this pre-Wonka is an absolute Christmas treat; it’s spectacular, imaginative, sweet-natured and funny.

Ditto Vox’s Esther Zuckerman:

But, like Paddington, Wonka defies expectations. The movie, which is out in theaters December 15, is absolutely charming and, dare I say, extremely Paddington-core. King has infused that same sort of warm, intelligent energy into his tale of an ambitious, kooky sweets purveyor who arrives in a vaguely European town with the hope of opening up a shop, only to have his dreams stifled by a pair of scheming launderers and an evil chocolate cartel. Timothée Chalamet may not be a furry little bear, but his Wonka is akin to Paddington. He’s an oddball optimist who inspires those around him — all except for the naysayers who see his good mood as an imposition.

The Telegraph’s Robbie Collin says that Paddigton heads shouldn’t expect simply more Paddington:

When it was announced that the creative team behind the Paddington films were making a musical about Willy Wonka’s early life, some cynics speculated that we were just going to get Paddington again, but with more songs, less marmalade, and a different shape of hat. To which the rest of us could only respond: ooh, yes, that sounds lovely, thanks.

Wonka – which is one of the best times you’ll have in the cinema this year – isn’t exactly that film. But it’s far closer to the recent big-screen adventures of Michael Bond’s beloved bear than it is to Dahl’s original Charlie and the Chocolate Factory novel – and, frankly, is all the better for it. This is no conventional prequel, full of bucketloads (or even Bucket-loads) of laborious foreshadowing: there’s no breezy cameo from a hot Grandpa Joe, a la Jude Law’s young Dumbledore, in tasteful midcentury knits.

Although The Independent’s Clarisse Loughrey argues it’s still very Paddington:

Yet, Wonka’s inability to imitate its predecessor doesn’t feel like a failure when you consider this: it’s not so much a prequel to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory as it is a companion piece to director Paul King’s two Paddington movies. Much like those genteel, ursine escapades – released in 2014 and 2017, respectively – Wonka is old-fashioned, cinematic magic writ large. It whips up wit, warmth, and the beloved memories of classics past: there’s a big dollop of Mary Poppins here, a little Matilda, some Oliver!, and, then, unexpectedly, a pinch of Les Misérables.

Entertainment Weekly’s Maureen Lee Lenker had no doubt Paddington maven Paul King could pull it off:

In many ways, Wonka is far more delightful than it has any right to be (and lightyears better than its dreadful trailers). But that goes to show that no one should underestimate co-writer and director Paul King, the man behind everything pure and good in this world, a.k.a. the Paddington movies. Much of those films’ earnestness, emphasis on kindness, and whimsy can be found in Wonka, even if the movie doesn’t approach that franchise’s level of emotional resonance. Still, Wonka shares a lot more with King’s affable sensibility than Charlie and the Chocolate Factory author Roald Dahl’s cynical approach (which, to be clear, is a good thing).

IndieWire’s David Ehrlich spots a perhaps accidental topicality in terms of Warner Bros. Discovery’s current big boss:

At the risk of overstating the political edge of a children’s story about an eccentric entrepreneur whose signature confections make customers float in the air before crapping live bugs out of their buttholes, there’s a delicious irony to the fact that Warner Bros.’ first big release since Discovery CEO David Zaslav (once again) canned a completed film in exchange for a $30 million tax write-off is an anti-capitalist fable set in a city run by a ruthless chocolate cartel who’ve diluted their own product in order to hoard the profits.

One semi-naysayer is The Hollywood Reporter’s David Rooney. He slams what he describes as “strained whimsy,” and says Chalamet’s Wonka has two modes: “he’s either beaming with almost manic exuberance, as if willing us all to have fun, or pining away for the late mother (Sally Hawkins) who promised to be by his side when he realized his dreams.” Rooney concludes that “so much wide-eyed optimism becomes wearying, and the wistful memories of Willy’s mother, while beautifully visualized in photo flipbook style, are more sentimental than affecting.

Another is Variety’s Owen Gleiberman who calls Wonka “square” in its old-fashionedness, especially compared to more modern movie musicals like La La Land, In the Heights or even the 22-year-old Moulin Rouge!:

Yet I’d wager that it might have been an even bigger hit had it been a little less sanded off for children, and had it tapped more into the Roald Dahlness of it all (which was there in last year’s lively adaptation of Dahl’s “Matilda”). The movie’s songs, written by Neil Hannon, carry you along, though with more rambunctious energy than rapture — at least until you get to the iconic song reprised from “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,” “Pure Imagination,” which does a lovely job of tickling our sweet tooth of nostalgia. “Wonka” makes you feel good, but it never makes you levitate.

Deadline’s Pete Hammond basically agrees with Gleiberman’s “square” take, except he doesn’t mean it as a jab, calling it a “throwback to that kind of feel-good musical confection designed to be released during the year’s end.”

So which side will you wind up on? Are you a Paddington partisan who’ll leave charmed? Or will you wish you were watching Gene Wilder in the 1971 OG instead? You can find out when Wonka hits theaters on December 15.

St. Louis rapper Nelly has been a pop culture fixture for 20 years, but there are still some things even his most hardcore fans don’t know about him. With the news breaking that he and longtime girlfriend Ashanti are expecting their first child together, some of those fans might be wondering whether Nelly has any other kids — or just how many.

As it turns out, when his and Ashanti’s child is born, that will make five kids for the “Country Grammar” rapper, who has two children from prior relationships and two adopted children, who are also his niece and nephew. He adopted them after his sister Jackie died from luekemia complications in 2005. Although he generally keeps all of the kids out of the public eye, he has occasionally posted photos with them on special occasions:

How Many Kids Does Ashanti Have?

Ashanti’s child with Nelly will be her first.

How Long Have Nelly And Ashanti Been Dating?

The couple’s dating history is more complex than the average. They originally began dating in 2003 and were together for nearly a decade. After another ten years passed, though, they rekindled their relationship early this year after trying being just friends. At the Grammys, Nelly told Entertainment Tonight, “Time does wonders for a lot of different things. And time is one those things that allows you time to reflect on what’s what, and you get a chance to see things in a different light and see your faults. So I think we both did that and it’s cool that we just friends.”

It certainly looks like they’re back together for real this time.

Look, sometimes we walk in on things that we just shouldn’t see. Those situations can be embarrassing for everyone involved and there’s never a clear way to address it depending on what exactly was seen. Sure, some situations are easier to explain than others while others may be completely innocent but no amount of explaining will make the unsuspecting party believe it.

One Italian couple was recording a video for a TikTok trend when the woman’s father walked in on them. Music is blasting when the dad slowly opens the door to take a peek at what’s going on. It appears he was not ready to see what he saw because he stood in the doorway looking confused and flabbergasted at the sight.

Matilde Morra and Daniele were having a good time dancing for the trend while she was wearing her partner’s baggy clothes and he was wearing…her leopard print dress.

---

It was paired with a cute bag and shoes to complete the look. The couple was having a blast by all appearances–that is until dad accidentally interrupted their shenanigans. A lesson in knocking before entering a bedroom takes place in real time as the dad tries to put together what his eyeballs are seeing.

The couple uploaded the video to their TikTok page where it went mega viral with over 27.1 million views and 5.2 million likes. Commenters couldn’t get enough of her dad in the background and Daniele slowly closing the door on him.

“It’s giving Michael Scott closing the conference room door on that old man,” one person says.

“Closing the door like it’s going to wipe away the trauma that dude just experienced,” someone laughs.

“Mannn the thoughts that are going through that poor man’s head. He didn’t know what the h*ll was going on,” a commenter exclaims.

“I just know he stood on the other side of the door for a min while processing what he just saw,” someone else writes.

You can watch the hilariously embarrassing moment below:

@matildedaniele29

@Matilde Morra #fyp #fypシ #boyfriend #couplegoals #omg #funny #couple #trending #new #foryoupage

(WARNING: Spoilers for the most recent Power Book III: Raising Kanan episode will be found below.)

The Power Universe lives on to see another season as Power Book III: Raising Kanan season three is officially underway. The show’s latest season kicked off last week with its first episode that already left many stunned thanks to its shocking conclusion. Kanan is still at odds with his mother Raq, as is Lou-Lou while Marvin and Jukebox continue to work to improve their relationship. Then there’s Detective Howard and Detective Burke whose story we won’t spoil just yet if you’ve yet to see the first episode in season three. With all that being said, here’s how long you can expect the ride that is Power Book III: Raising Kanan season three to last.

How Many Episodes Are In Power Book III: Raising Kanan Season 3?

Season three of Power Book III: Raising Kanan has a total of 10 episodes, the same amount as the show’s first two seasons. The new episodes are available on Fridays starting at midnight ET/PT. Each week, the new episode will also air on the STARZ TV channel at 8 pm ET/PT.

What Is The Release Date For Power Book III: Raising Kanan Season 3, Episode 2?

Power Book III: Raising Kanan season 3, episode 2, titled “Flipmode,” will be released on the STARZ app on Friday, December 9 at midnight ET/PT. The episode will also air on the STARZ TV channel at 8 pm ET/PT that same day. You can read the synopsis for the episode below:

Raq continues her farewell tour with one last job for the Mafia while Kanan dives further into the drug game with an innovative business idea. Howard faces a new threat at the precinct.

New episodes of ‘Power Book III: Raising Kanan’ are available on the STARZ app on Fridays at 12:00 am ET/PT and on the STARZ TV channel at 8:00 pm ET/PT.

Titus Welliver has been playing Harry Bosch for almost a decade, and at that point, you either want to keep going or kill off your character and never see him again. There is no in-between unless you are Kevin Costner, who seemingly exists in a Gray Area. Luckily for the Bosch fans in your life, Welliver is all on board.

After first portraying Bosch in Bosch and then again for Amazon Freeve’s Bosch: Legacy, Welliver told The Messenger that he is willing to Bosch it up forever. “I’ll do it as long as they’ll have me,” he said. “Look, there’s tremendous artistic and intellectual sustenance with this character that constantly challenges me. I know this character like I know myself now,” he added of Bosch. Bosch: Forever would be a great new spinoff idea.

It’s not that surprising that there is a lot of Bosch lore to learn, as there are two dozen Bosch novels out there, so there are plenty of new ideas for the coming seasons if they end up happening. Season three has already been ordered, though there is always room for more Bosch, even when he’s in his nursing home.

The actor continued, “Harry’s a lot older than I am in the books, and he’s still out there working cases,” Welliver admitted. “He doesn’t move as fast as he used to, but he’ll still throw down if somebody comes after him. That’s the beauty of the character,” he said. Not only is the beauty of Bosch his ability to “throw down,” but also his insane set of tattoos.

(Via The Messenger)

Lil Nas X is one of modern pop music’s greatest trolls, but what he won’t do is stand for miscategorization of his antics by commenters who won’t even seriously engage with his art. He’s proven himself to be the young king of clapbacks and he defended that title today after having his music once again characterized as satanic, despite it actually being about his journey of self-realization.

“The fact that lil nas x had that satanic album is the problem I have with him making Christian music,” wrote a fan account, likely in response to Nas recently posting a snippet of what appeared to be a gospel song. Nas shot back, “The devil is mentioned ONE time throughout my entire last album and the line is ‘tell the the devil i wont have him inside, i know everything’s gonna be alright.’ Y’all have spent this entire last week rewriting history over me releasing a snippet.”

And while Nas is 100 percent correct about the content of his debut album Montero, the confusion could be understandable considering the packaging that came with it. The title track — which doubled as the lead single — was infamous for its video featuring Nas’ devilish makeup and its plotline following Nas going from a paradise-like realm to an Alighieri-inspired hellscape where he gave a demon a lapdance.

The controversy caused by the video led to the song reaching No. 1 on the Hot 100 and a wave of reactionary coverage from conservative outlets. It looks like even going the opposite way isn’t stopping folks from still taking issue with Nas, though. It looks like dumping on the kid was the point all along, but at least he’s not alone — fellow pop-rap provocateur Doja Cat has also been battling her fair share of satanic accusations from people who apparently think Avengers is a documentary.

In case there wasn’t enough proof that Friends was a certified hit, Hollywood superstar Julia Roberts appeared in a Season 2 post-Super Bowl episode. It was a major casting coup that all went down thanks to some heavy flirting and an eventual romance with Matthew Perry.

While promoting her new movie Leave the World Behind, Roberts recently opened up about Perry’s passing and her one-time cameo on the beloved sitcom. “All good thoughts and feelings,” Roberts told Entertainment Tonight of the Super Bowl episode where she played an old classmate of Chandler who was out for hilarious revenge:

“They were all so welcoming to me as just a kind of a one-off character and it was a really fun time,” she continued.

“The sudden passing of anybody so young is heartbreaking,” Roberts said of her ex. “I think that, you know, it just helps all of us just appreciate what we have and to keep going in a positive way as best we can.”

In his memoir, Perry wrote about the three-month courtship with Roberts that all started with when the A-lister said she’d do the show, but only if she was in a Chandler storyline. “Was I having a good year or what?” Perry wrote.

However, the actor first had to “woo” Roberts and explain quantum physics to her. (Yes, really.) With some help from the Friends writers, Perry managed to get the girl and lock down a major cameo for the show that was only in its second season.

(Via Entertainment Tonight)

Anyone who’s ever been on Tinder knows having a cute animal in the photo is usually a big hit.

But what if Tinder profile photos only featured that cute animal? And what if, instead of a millennial would-be hooker-upper, it was the adorable dog or cat itself looking for true love?

That’s an idea some animal shelters are toying with.

---

“We are always trying to come up with … creative new ways to get our shelter dogs out in front of potential adopters,” says Karen Hirsch, public relations director at LifeLine Animal Project in Georgia.

And experimenting with online dating for dogs and cats might just be working.

The harsh world of pet adoption is extremely competitive: About 6.5 million dogs and cats enter U.S. shelters every year, each seeking a good forever home. It’s too big a need for shelter operators to just sit back and hope they all get adopted.

That’s why you see adorable dogs on display outside the grocery store, partnerships with Uber that will bring puppies directly to you for playtime, and aww-inspiring social media campaigns like dogs in pajamas.

An estimated 50 million people worldwide use Tinder. So LifeLine and other shelters and rescues figure why not give it a shot?

After all, people using online dating apps are already looking for love and companionship — just maybe a slightly different kind.

Hirsch says they recently created profiles for 22 of their dogs and cats.

Animal profiles are also showing up on Bumble, which is home to another 20 million users or so.

Like sweet Duke here.

Each pet is assigned to a volunteer who creates the profile and handles the conversations after a match

“In a crowded shelter, pets often get overlooked, but on a dating app, the animal becomes an individual,” Hirsch says. “People learn about them and form a ‘virtual’ attachment.”

Plus the witty banter is oodles of fun.

For LifeLine, the experiment is still new. But Hirsch says people are responding to it incredibly well so far.

At the very least, Tinder and Bumble have proven to be great for word-of-mouth awareness-building on the importance of adopting shelter pets. The animals are getting dozens of matches. Hirsch says there have been more than a few online adoption inquiries, as well as people coming into the shelter to meet their “match” in person.

She also notes that one of the matches even became a regular volunteer at LifeLine.

This new animal dating idea has another upside for apps — and the people using them, too.

Dating experts are finding that people are getting burned out by online dating. Between “ghosting,” “cushioning,” “the slow fade,” and a bunch more of those annoying slang terms, humans out there are wondering if dating apps are even worth the effort.

For romantic love, who knows?

But now that you might just meet the dog or cat of your dreams, that’s not a bad reason to keep on swiping.

This article originally appeared on 01.10.18

Grieving in the technology age is uncharted territory.

I’ll take you back to Saturday, June 9, 2012. At 8:20 a.m., my 36-year-old husband was pronounced dead at a hospital just outside Washington, D.C.

By 9:20 a.m., my cellphone would not stop ringing or text-alerting me long enough for me to make the necessary calls that I needed to make: people like immediate family, primary-care doctors to discuss death certificates and autopsies, funeral homes to discuss picking him up, and so on. Real things, important things, time-sensitive, urgent things.

At 9:47 a.m., while speaking to a police officer (because yes, when your spouse dies, you must be questioned by the police immediately), one call did make it through. I didn’t recognize the number. But in those moments, I knew I should break my normal rule and answer all calls. “He’s dead??? Oh my God. Who’s with you? Are you OK? Why am I reading this on Facebook? Taya, what the heck is going on?”

---

Facebook? I was confused. I hadn’t been on Facebook since the day before, so I certainly hadn’t taken the time in the last 90 minutes to peek at the site.

“I’ll call you back”, I screamed and hung up. I called my best friend and asked her to search for anything someone might have written and to contact them immediately and demand they delete it. I still hadn’t spoken to his best friend, or his godsister, or our godchild’s parents, or a million other people! Why would someone post it to Facebook SO FAST?

While I can in no way speak for the entire planet, I certainly feel qualified to propose some suggestions — or, dare I say, rules — for social media grieving.

How many RIPs have you seen floating through your social media stream over the last month? Probably a few. Death is a fate that we will each meet at some point. The Information Age has changed the ways in which we live and communicate daily, yet there are still large voids in universally accepted norms.

This next statement is something that is impossible to understand unless you’ve been through it:

There is a hierarchy of grief.

Yes, a hierarchy. It’s something people either don’t understand or understand but don’t want to think or talk about — yet we must.

There is a hierarchy of grief.

Hierarchy is defined as:

1. a system or organization in which people or groups are ranked one above the other according to status or authority, and
2. an arrangement or classification of things according to relative importance or inclusiveness.

What does this mean as it relates to grief? Let me explain. When someone dies — whether suddenly or after a prolonged illness, via natural causes or an unnatural fate, a young person in their prime or an elderly person with more memories behind them than ahead — there is one universal truth : The ripples of people who are affected is vast and, at times, largely unknown to all other parties.

A death is always a gut punch with varying degrees of force and a reminder of our own mortality. Most people are moved to express their love for the deceased by showing their support to the family and friends left behind.

In the days before social media, these expressions came in the form of phone calls, voicemail messages, and floral deliveries.

If you were lucky enough to be in close proximity to the family of the newly deceased, there were visits that came wrapped with hugs and tears, and deliveries of food and beverages to feed all the weary souls.

Insert social media. All of those courtesies still occur, but there is a new layer of grief expression — the online tribute in the form of Facebook posts, Instagram photo collages, and short tweets.

What’s the problem with that? Shouldn’t people be allowed to express their love, care, concern, support, and prayers for the soul of the recently deceased and for their family?

Yes.

And no.

Why? Because there are no established “rules,” and people have adopted their own. This isn’t breaking news, and you’re not trying to scoop TMZ. Listen, I know you’re hurt. Guess what? Me too. I know you’re shocked. Guess what? Me too. Your social media is an extension of who you are. I get it. You “need” to express your pain, acknowledge your relationship with the deceased, and pray for the family.

Yes.

However…

Please give us a minute.

We are shocked.

We are heartbroken.

Give the immediate family or circle a little time to handle the immediate and time-sensitive “business” related to death. In the minutes and early hours after someone passes away, social media is most likely the last thing on their minds. And even if it does cross their mind, my earlier statement comes into play here.

There is a hierarchy of grief.

Please pause and consider your role and relationship to the newly deceased. Remember, hierarchy refers to your status and your relative importance to the deceased. I caution you to wait and then wait a little longer before posting anything. This may seem trivial, silly, and not worth talking about, but I promise you it isn’t.

If the person is married, let the spouse post first.

If the person is “young” and single, let the partner, parents, or siblings post first.

If the person is “old” and single, let the children post first.

If you can’t identify the family/inner circle of the person, you probably shouldn’t be posting at all.

Do you get where I’m going with this?

In theory, we should never compare grief levels, cast the grief-stricken survivors into roles, or use words like status and importance. But maybe we need to at this moment (and for the next few weeks and months).

The “RIP” posts started hitting my timeline about an hour after my husband’s death, and I certainly didn’t start them. This created a sense of confusion, fear, anxiety, panic, dread, and shock for the people who knew me, too. What’s wrong? Who are we praying for? Did something happen? Did someone pass? Why are there RIPs on your wall and I can’t reach you? Call me please! What’s going on?

That’s a small sample of messages on my voicemail and text inbox. I had to take a minute in the midst of it all to ask a friend to post a status to my Facebook page on my behalf.

Your love and expressions of support are appreciated and needed, but they can also be ill-timed and create unintended additional stress.

The person is no less dead and your sympathy no less heartfelt if your post, photo, or tweet is delayed by a few hours. Honestly, the first couple of hours are shocking, and many things are a blur. Most bereaved people will be able to truly appreciate your love, concern, prayers, and gestures after the first 24 hours.

I’ve learned this from the inside — twice within the last four years. And I assure you that if we each adopted a little patience and restraint in this area, we would help those who are in the darkest hours of their lives by not adding an unnecessary layer of stress.

A few extra hours could make all the difference.

This article originally appeared on 05.07.19