GoneTrending

Everybody handles fame and criticism differently, but that doesn’t make the vastly different opinions about it from the actors behind Squid Games notorious VIPs any less fascinating. Following Squid Game becoming, you know, the biggest show on the planet, nearly every last one of the Netflix original’s actors were quick to rise to fame in the U.S., receiving nearly universal praise for their performances in the hyper-violent Korean drama. However, for the four men playing the show’s English-speaking, masked billionaires referred to as the “VIPs,” their reception — and respective reactions to it — have been a very mixed bag.

Shortly after Squid Game became a phenomenon, more and more articles, threads, and tweets began to circulate asking why in an otherwise excellent show were the English-speaking actors playing the VIPs so bad. Some critics even went as far as to say the show would have been better off if the showrunners had picked random people on the street to fill the roles. The Guardian then reached out to three of the men behind the performances — John D Michaels, Daniel C Kennedy, and Geoffrey Giuliano — to ask them how they were dealing with the less-than-positive feedback and their newfound fame, only to be met with startlingly different answers, as well as a pretty solid explanation for why the show might have some English-speaking awkwardness from Michaels.

“I think the first thing to dispel is this myth that they just pick us up off the street .. Non-Korean performers often act with dialogue that is translated by a non-native — sometimes even by Google Translate — so it can sound unnatural,” he says. “And often we don’t have the scripts for the rest of the show. We are only given our scenes, so we have no idea of the tone.”

Michaels then explained this is merely the start of the issues when it comes to recording English lines for Korean television, adding that the show’s editors not speaking English as a first language might cause them to select a bad or strangely worded take for the final product. Kennedy also weighed in on the issue, stating that English-speaking viewers not understanding that the lines are meant to be delivered dramatically — just as the show’s Korean lines are — is another big problem. While people are quick to be able to recognize dramatic speech, imperfect translations, and awkwardness in their own language, Kennedy explained, the rest can be lost in translation.

Ultimately, however, Michaels says he loves Squid Game‘s message and is proud of his portrayal on the show which he believes adheres to “an interpretation of what a westerner is from the point of view of a different culture” that is vital in keeping the show truly Korean in nature. Kennedy, however, has been struggling to grapple with his feelings about his performance as well as his own mental health issues.

“I suffer from extreme clinical depression, so it’s been a bit of a challenge. Initially, I was gutted by the comments but, with time and distance and some honest self-reflection, I’ve been better able to filter the feedback into the stuff I can use to improve next time, versus the stuff that is bound to come when you’re part of a project that gets global recognition.”

However, less apt to defend his work or kick himself for any perceived mistakes is third VIP actor Geoffrey Giuliano, who “ain’t complaining” about being on “the hottest show in the world.” In fact, Giuliano seems to be far too busy celebrating the kind of success we’re certain his Squid Game counterpart would be a bit jealous of,

“I got fanmail. Just today I got a woman who said: ‘Send me your autograph.’ So I did, and two hours later she sent me a photo where she had ‘Geoffrey Giuliano, VIP four,’ tattooed right across her forearm.” He pauses. “There have also been some sexual invitations, from males and females .. This project has elevated me from absolute, total obscurity. I get tattoos of my signature. I get invitations for fellatio. I’m a star!”

If you’ve yet to watch Squid Game and watch these actors’ performances for yourself, the entire series is streaming on Netflix right now, and we’d definitely recommend giving it a go before you’re confused by all the Halloween costumes the series’ is sure to inspire.

Some actors don’t like watching themselves. Gwyneth Paltrow certainly doesn’t. But sometimes there’s bigger things to worry about. For instance, what will their kids think, especially when their movies or shows are risqué? One such thespian is Zach Galifianakis. He’s made some racy movies. Indeed, the movies that made his name are very much R-rated. But he has a plan if they ever ask him about the Hangover trilogy: deny it.

As per Entertainment Weekly, the Emmy- and Streamy-winning actor and comic was asked what his two sons, aged 4 and 7, think about the three films where he keeps getting black-out drunk and doing unprintable things (and decapitating a giraffe). And he had a good answer.

“They shall never know of it,” Galifianakis joked to EW. “I’ll just deny it. I’ll say, ‘I don’t know what you’re talking about. I had nothing to do with that movie.’”

Galifianakis admitted that, given how popular the films are (and how much they’ve paid for all the things they enjoy), his kids will “get to that point” where he’ll feel okay showing it to them. They’ll just ” need to mature a little bit before they see that.” He added, “You [want to] protect their innocence as much as possible. They’re just children. People used to come up to me and be like, ‘Oh, my kids love The Hangover,’ and I’m like, ‘You’re a terrible parent.’”

There’s more they don’t know, he joked. “My kids think I’m a librarian somewhere. They don’t even know,” Galifianakis said. “They think I’m an assistant librarian somewhere.”

(Via EW)

Nicki Minaj and her husband Kenneth Petty are currently facing a lawsuit from Jennifer Hough, who claims that, since getting married in 2019, the two have intimidated, bribed, and harassed her to change a past testimony in hopes of getting Perry removed from a sex offenders list. The harassment case has not yet started, but according to Rolling Stone, Minaj landed somewhat of a win, as it was ruled that she will not have to pay a $20 million default judgment in the case.

Earlier this week, Hough’s lawyer Tyrone Blackburn filed a motion on his client’s behalf alleging that Minaj and Perry failed to respond to the harassment case against them. However, a federal clerk for the Eastern District of New York ruled that Minaj did not fail to respond to the lawsuit, writing, “it appears” that she filed paperwork last week to hire a lawyer to defend her in the case. Despite this, the clerk noted that Petty “has not filed an answer or otherwise moved with respect to the complaint.”

Minaj delivered a sworn statement on October 15, stating that she hired a lawyer last month, but “innocent miscommunications” led to late payment fees and the inability to secure the attorney’s services. “My failure to respond to the complaint was the product of an innocent mistake, and I ask the court to excuse the delay so that I can defend what I believe to be an entirely frivolous case,” her statement read.

Judd Burstein, who will now represent Minaj in the case, shared a statement that aligned with her claims. “I confirm the truth of those portions of defendant’s declaration concerning my role in her failure to secure my services promptly,” he said.

Despite the ruling, Blackburn plans on defaulting the motion against Petty for the $20 million. “It’s interesting that Kenneth Petty is currently in the Eastern District of New York suing the state of New York, but he has no respect for this proceeding and no respect for this judge to come forward and to answer for raping Jennifer Hough in 1994 and all the harassment he and his wife and his goons visited upon her since then,” he told Rolling Stone.

A boy of about 10-years-old with a mental disability stole the show at Pope Francis’ weekly general audience on Wednesday at the Vatican auditorium. In front of an audience of thousands the boy walked past security and onto the stage while priests delivered prayers and introductory speeches.

The boy, later identified as Paolo, Jr., greeted the pope by shaking his hand and when it was clear that he had no intention of leaving, the pontiff asked Monsignor Leonardo Sapienza, the head of protocol, to let the boy borrow his chair.

The boy’s activity on the stage was clearly a breach of Vatican protocol but Pope Francis didn’t seem to be bothered one bit. He looked at the child with a sense of joy and wasn’t even disturbed when he repeatedly motioned that he wanted to remove his skull cap.

---

Pope Francis’ skull cap or zucchetto as it’s called in Italian, is a symbol of his rank in the Catholic church. The Pope is the only church official allowed to wear a white zucchetto.

The zucchetto has been a Catholic tradition since about the 13th century. Capes with hoods went out of style so the clergy wore the small hats to keep their shorn heads warm.

Monasteries used to mandate that men shaved the crown of their heads, based on the writings of Paul. “Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him,” (1 Corinthians 11:14).

A church official brought out a white skull cap for the boy and then he happily to returned to his seat while receiving a round of applause from the Vatican crowd.

Boy Steals Scene At pope’s Audience By Wanting Francis’ Skullcap

www.youtube.com

At the end of his address, Francis commented on the incident by praising the “spontaneity and freedom” of children. He lauded the boy for his ability to “come close and move around as if he were at home” and said the faithful should feel the same freedom to come close to God without fear.

He also asked God to help the boy with his disability.

“I thank this boy for the lesson he has given all of us. May the Lord help him in his limitation, as he grows, because what he did came from the heart,” the pope said.

Pope Francis could have easily had the young boy removed from the stage for being a disruption or seen him as affront to his high position as pope. But instead he took a page out of the good book and welcomed the child to his arms, just like Christ.

“Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven,” Jesus is quoted as saying in The Bible. It’s wonderful to see the pope as a living example of those words while also being a shining example of how to relate to children with disabilities.

It’s another tale of the age-old war between art and censorship. When two museums in Vienna were banned on social media for risqué works, they turned to the one place where they knew their adult subject matter would be welcomed: OnlyFans.

In July, the Albertina art museum had its TikTok account blocked for displaying the art of Nobuyoshi Araki, whose photographs (like the one seen below) have a reputation for blending eroticism and bondage. So, okay, sure, his work explores sexual themes. But does it really warrant a social media ban?

---

Screenshot from a blog depicting Araki’s Sentimental Journey2.bp.blogspot.com

Only one month later, another museum, the Leopold, experienced a similar form of overly strict censorship when Facebook flagged its post of a piece made by Art Nouveau illustrator Koloman Moser. Does this image look “potentially pornographic” to you?

Facebook even deleted a post by the Natural History Museum of Vienna showing the Venus of Willendorf. I mean, I guess it can be considered lewd for those with a Paleolithic fertility fetish.

This brings up a nuance that A.I. has failed to grasp: nudity ≠ sex. And by not recognizing this, social media outlets restrict arguably uncontroversial subject matter while simultaneously failing to actually prevent anyone from being exposed to inappropriate content.

In a recent press release, the Vienna Tourist Board labeled the clearly flawed social media algorithm as a “new wave of prudishness.” So they had to go to the least prudish place on the internet.

As part of the “Vienna Laid Bare” initiative, the museums have teamed up with OnlyFans, a platform that not only allows nudity and sex, it prospers from it. Not without its own history of crackdowns against sexual content, OnlyFans nevertheless maintains a reputation for being a safe place to share NSFW images. Free from the scrutiny of Facebook, virtual visitors may now look upon the works of previously censored artists like Araki and Moser. All for only $4.99 a month. What a steal in the name of rebellion!

Though it has been quite the marketing maneuver, Helena Hartlauer, head of media relations at the Vienna Tourist Board, says it’s more than a publicity stunt. According to an article in Art News, Hartlauer said the platform pivot was also to “show solidarity with artists who are censored. If you can’t show your artwork on social media this can really be an obstacle to your communications efforts, and even to your career.”

The launch didn’t happen without a few hoops to jump through. The Guardian reported that Twitter, Facebook and Instagram all rejected links to the platform, delaying actual promotion for weeks. In the article, Hartlauer remarked that the obstacle presented is just another clear-cut example of suppression of artistic expression made by the all-powerful social media platforms.

Hartlauer continued, “This marketing initiative of ours is not the ultimate solution for this problematic relationship between the art world and social media, but … we want to stand up for our values and our beliefs. … Vienna has always been famous for being open-minded.”

Hopefully, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok can also become a little more open-minded.

Singer/songwriter Joy Oladokun is having a bit of a moment following the release of her 2021 album, In Defense Of My Own Happiness. Spotify took notice and tapped her to be part of their Spotify Singles program, where artists do live or new versions of one of their own songs, and usually do some sort of unexpected cover or collaboration, too. For Oladokun, being part of the program feels like a big look, and she even called it “a dream come true.”

“I’ve been a rabid consumer of Spotify Singles since their inception,” she said in a press release. “Being asked to do one was a dream come true and I wanted to bring in the best crew. I asked Jason Isbell to play guitar on the Bonnie Raitt cover and he absolutely smashed the energy and emotion of what I was trying to do. So excited to have these out in the world.”

Released today, her singles include a version of her song “Sunday,” and a pretty incredible cover of Bonnie Raitt’s stone cold classic, “I Can’t Make You Love Me.” For her version, Joy tapped Jason Isbell to add some epic guitar work as Joy delivers a version that will make Bonnie proud. Check out both new songs below.

Nicolle Snell, an adventure leader for Black Girls Trekkin’, sees hope around every bend in the trail. In a recent interview for Greater Outdoors for UPROXX, Snell proclaimed, “I think things are changing. The stereotype of who belongs in the outdoors or who’s welcome in the outdoors or who you even see in the outdoors is changing because there are so many groups like ours that are trying to change that narrative.”

It’s often overlooked just how widely minorities were segregated or outright barred from the outdoors and how recently that shifted. Up until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Black, Indigenous, and various other people of color were either segregated while entering U.S. national parks or, in some cases, barred entirely from entering. That very real discrimination created a gap in how different groups of Americans engaged with nature that still has echoes in the present day.

But things are changing as Nicolle Snell describes in the latest installment of Greater Outdoors. Jasmine Lowe, who also leads adventures for Black Girls Trekkin’, agrees.

“Our mission really is to promote diversity and inclusion in the outdoors,” she says. “It’s just making sure that there are more of us out there [in nature] and feeling comfortable.”

While getting out into nature is a big part of what groups like Black Girls Trekkin’ do, it’s also about physical and mental health, finding a community, and healing of trauma. Both Snell and Lowe agree that a big part of why they love leading hiking groups is that they’ve found people who share in their love of the outdoors and are looking for a way to engage in nature on a deeper level, which is a powerful draw.

You can watch the whole segment above to learn more about the important work these members of Black Girls Trekkin’ are doing. For more ways to get out into the outdoors yourself, check out the 2021 Uproxx Fall Experience Guide.

As the members of former girl-group Fifth Harmony slowly but surely begin to launch their solo careers, Lauren Jauregui fans have been patiently waiting. Though Camila Cabello went solo first, and not even her fellow bandmates can deny the star power of Normani — who is riding high off not one but two perfect singles, “Motivation” and “Wild Side” featuring Cardi B — but now it’s Lauren’s turn. After letting fans know back in September that her new project, Prelude, was going to be coming soon.

Earlier this month, she shared a bit more, dropping the magnetic and contemplative “Colors,” and announcing a live show with the streaming platform, Moment House, during which she debuted new music. “Scattered” is a brand new song from Jauregui, and it’s sticking in the jazzy, quieter lane she’s been working in lately. But, it’s different from her past work because this one features a rapper cameo, from none other than Vic Mensa, who knows a thing or two about the jazzy, quiet lane himself. Vic shows up in the middle of Lauren’s dance performance to drop his verse, and his lowkey flow is perfect for her aching single.

Prelude will officially be out on November 5th, so keep an eye out for more new music potentially coming before the release. She also announced a handful of intimate underplay shows following up the EP’s release, check out those dates below.

11/20 — New York, NY @ The Bowery Ballroom
11/22 — Chicago, IL @ Lincoln Hall
11/23 — Miami, FL @ Club Space – The Ground
12/01 — Los Angeles, CA @ Teragram Ballroom
12/02 – San Francisco, CA @ The Independent

Steve Bannon is awfully close to being hunted down by U.S. Marshals. Former president Donald J. Trump’s former Chief Strategist has defied a subpoena to provide documents and answer questions about his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol siege. The committee unanimously voted that he should be held in contempt. The matter now heads to the House, and on Wednesday they held a Rules Committee hearing about what to do next. And during it, two of the legislative body’s Trumpiest members — Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan — did what they do best: acted like total nuisances.

The two representatives — once widely dubbed as Beavis and Butt-Head — were grilled separately during the hearing, though both had the same objective: derail the occasion with far right talking points, false equivalencies, misinformation, and general shoutiness.

Let’s take Gaetz first. Among the many claims he tried to push forward was that no one cares about what Steve Bannon said on his podcast the day before the Capitol siege, when he told listeners to “stap in” for something “very dramatic.”

But members of the House asked him questions anyway. His biggest foe for the day was Rep. Jaime Raskin of Maryland, a longtime constitutional scholar and member of the committee. He and Gaetz got into a shouting match, with Raskin eventually telling him that one line he fed him “might work on Steve Bannon’s podcast, but that’s not going to work in the Rules Committee of the United States House of Representatives.”

Raskin also asked him, point blank, if he believed Joe Biden won the 2020 election, which of course he tried to dodge.

Rep. Ed Perlumutter, of Colorado, also gave him hell.

Meanwhile, Jim Jordan tried to draw a false equivalency between an assault on a federal building, inspired by sitting Republican politicians, and nation-wide protests that either got out of hand or were exacerbated by aggressive police.

Jordan also once again tried to claim he had no idea how many times he spoke with a sitting president during arguably the darkest day of his tenure.

Jordan was big mad that subpoenas had been issued for those with connections to the Jan. 6 violence, although maybe he was jealous he hadn’t been summoned (yet).

Raskin also grilled Jordan.

Eventually Rep. Norma Torres, of California, dropped some excellent shade on both Gaetz and Jordan, referencing both of their biggest ongoing scandals, which each involve sexual misconduct.

Both congressmen have a habit of derailing hearings, but some argued it was clear that by opening themselves up to questioning, they were both in over their heads.

But of course, their antics on Wednesday were why they weren’t part of the committee.

The House will vote on Thursday whether or not to hold Bannon in criminal contempt. In the meantime, Gaetz may join him, albeit possibly in a different prison.

It’s another tale of the age-old war between art and censorship. When two museums in Vienna were banned on social media for risqué works, they turned to the one place where they knew their adult subject matter would be welcomed: OnlyFans.

In July, the Albertina art museum had its TikTok account blocked for displaying the art of Nobuyoshi Araki, whose photographs (like the one seen below) have a reputation for blending eroticism and bondage. So, okay, sure, his work explores sexual themes. But does it really warrant a social media ban?

---

Screenshot from a blog depicting Araki’s Sentimental Journey2.bp.blogspot.com

Only one month later, another museum, the Leopold, experienced a similar form of overly strict censorship when Facebook flagged its post of a piece made by Art Nouveau illustrator Koloman Moser. Does this image look “potentially pornographic” to you?

Facebook even deleted a post by the Natural History Museum of Vienna showing the Venus of Willendorf. I mean, I guess it can be considered lewd for those with a Paleolithic fertility fetish.

This brings up a nuance that A.I. has failed to grasp: nudity ≠ sex. And by not recognizing this, social media outlets restrict arguably uncontroversial subject matter while simultaneously failing to actually prevent anyone from being exposed to inappropriate content.

In a recent press release, the Vienna Tourist Board labeled the clearly flawed social media algorithm as a “new wave of prudishness.” So they had to go to the least prudish place on the internet.

As part of the “Vienna Laid Bare” initiative, the museums have teamed up with OnlyFans, a platform that not only allows nudity and sex, it prospers from it. Not without its own history of crackdowns against sexual content, OnlyFans nevertheless maintains a reputation for being a safe place to share NSFW images. Free from the scrutiny of Facebook, virtual visitors may now look upon the works of previously censored artists like Araki and Moser. All for only $4.99 a month. What a steal in the name of rebellion!

Though it has been quite the marketing maneuver, Helena Hartlauer, head of media relations at the Vienna Tourist Board, says it’s more than a publicity stunt. According to an article in Art News, Hartlauer said the platform pivot was also to “show solidarity with artists who are censored. If you can’t show your artwork on social media this can really be an obstacle to your communications efforts, and even to your career.”

The launch didn’t happen without a few hoops to jump through. The Guardian reported that Twitter, Facebook and Instagram all rejected links to the platform, delaying actual promotion for weeks. In the article, Hartlauer remarked that the obstacle presented is just another clear-cut example of suppression of artistic expression made by the all-powerful social media platforms.

Hartlauer continued, “This marketing initiative of ours is not the ultimate solution for this problematic relationship between the art world and social media, but … we want to stand up for our values and our beliefs. … Vienna has always been famous for being open-minded.”

Hopefully, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok can also become a little more open-minded.