| | |  | Celebrity News & Gossip
|
|
| | Zendaya to star alongside Tom Holland in Christopher Nolan's upcoming movie | | Added 35 hours ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
If you?re a fan of Zendaya and Tom Holland and want to see them in a movie together that doesn?t belong in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, then I have some great news for you! Late last week, Deadline and Variety announced that the couple have both been cast in Christopher Nolan?s next film. Tom?s casting was made public in October, so Zendaya is a new addition. Details about the movie itself are scarce, but Matt Damon and Anne Hathaway are also co-starring in this untitled movie. In addition to directing it, Nolan is also writing the film, which will begin filming in early 2025 and currently has a release date of July 17, 2026.
Zendaya is reuniting with Tom Holland on the big screen, this time at the direction of Christopher Nolan. The Dune and Challengers actress, 28, will be joining Nolans next film at Universal alongside Anne Hathaway, according to Deadline and Variety. The movie, which also stars Matt Damon, will be released in July 2026, the outlets reported.
Details of the films plot are reportedly under wraps.
Holland, 28, and Zendaya, who confirmed their romantic relationship in 2021, have previously teamed up for 2017s Spider-Man Homecoming, 2019s Spider-Man: Far From Home and 2021s Spider-Man: No Way Home.
Zendaya and Hathaway, 41, previously worked together on set of a Bulgari ad in 2022, while Hathaway and Nolans working relationship dates back to 2012?s The Dark Knight Rises and 2014?s Interstellar.
Nolans next movie will mark his follow-up to the 2023 blockbuster Oppenheimer, which also featured a performance from Damon, 54. Multiple outlets, including Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter and Variety, reported last month that Holland was in talks to star in the directors next movie alongside Damon. All three outlets indicated Nolans next movie would begin filming in early 2025.
On Good Morning America last month, Holland said of the Nolan project, I?m incredibly excited. And, obviously, honored, but that?s all I can say because, to be honest, that?s all I know.? The star has also indicated that a new Spider-Man movie will begin filming next year.
Earlier this year, Hathaway spoke with Vanity Fair for a cover story, when she detailed how Nolan, 54, helped her career during a period of online scrutiny in the 2010s. After her Oscar win for 2012s Ls Miserables, Hathaway said many people wouldn?t give her roles because they were so concerned about how toxic my identity had become online.
I had an angel in Christopher Nolan, who did not care about that and gave me one of the most beautiful roles I?ve had in one of the best films that I?ve been a part of, she said of Nolan and Interstellar.
?I don?t know if he knew that he was backing me at the time, but it had that effect,? she added. ?And my career did not lose momentum the way it could have if he hadn?t backed me.?
[From People]
It?s kinda crazy that Tom signed on to do the movie without knowing much about it at all. I mean, I?d do that too because?well, duh. A Nolan film is guaranteed Oscar bait. I?m excited to see what his and Zendaya?s roles will be and hope that they get to interact on screen together as characters that are completely different than we?re used to seeing them play. I?m sure both will kick butt in whatever part they?re cast as. We need more details about the movie, stat!
As for what Anne says regarding Nolan being her ?angel,? I actually finally watched Interstellar for the first time last month, and OMG! I cried so hard throughout several different parts. Anne, Matthew McConaughey, Jessica Chastain, and Michael Caine are all fantastic in it. It?s one of Mr. Rosie?s favorite movies, but I really did not like Inception and thought The Dark Knight Rises was just meh, so I avoided all Nolan movies until Oppenheimer. I feel like I?m now back on the Chris Nolan train. Im excited to watch Anne, Zendaya, and Tom in his next flick.
Embed from Getty Images
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Melania Trump has not accepted Dr. Jill Biden's invitation to the White House | | Added 35 hours ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
In 2016, Barack Obama famously invited Donald Trump to the White House after the election. Obama even did a short photocall inside the Oval Office with Trump. This is how it?s been done for decades, if not centuries. The incoming president is invited to the White House by the outgoing president. Not only that, it?s tradition for the outgoing First Lady to invite the incoming First Lady to the White House as well. Four years later, the Trumps did not do the same. Donald was a sucky baby and a sore loser, and he refused to do anything to help or coordinate with the incoming Biden administration. Then he incited an insurrection on the Capitol. Four years later, the Bidens have invited the Trumps to the White House. Donald Trump has accepted President Biden?s invitation, in what will likely be a depressing and awful meeting. But notably, Melania Trump has not accepted Jill Biden?s invitation.
Melania Trump is not expected to attend the traditional White House meeting with first lady Jill Biden, sources familiar with her plans said. It?s a decision that underscores Melania Trump?s long-held willingness to buck tradition as she prepares to retake the high-profile ? but unelected ? role of first lady, one with no manual and an automatic global platform.
The sources cited a prior scheduling conflict for the former first lady
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Angelina Jolie's motions to dismiss were thrown out in her Miraval countersuit | | Added 37 hours ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Here are some photos of Angelina Jolie last night in NYC. She attended yet another industry screening for Pablo Larrain?s Maria, this one for the Directors Guild. I don?t have the IDs on her ensemble, but she?s been wearing similar stuff to these kinds of industry screenings trench coats, black (sack) dresses. She looks tired she?s already been hustling for Maria for months, and Maria?s limited theatrical release isn?t until November 27 (it comes on Netflix on December 11).
Meanwhile, there?s been a well-publicized update on Angelina and Brad Pitt?s years-long legal battle over Chateau Miraval. He?s suing her because he claims they had a secret agreement that she would only sell her half of Miraval to him. She?s countersuing him because he?s a liar and an emotional, physical and financial abuser. Angelina has been fighting for at least two years to get Brad?s lawsuit thrown out. Well, a judge just threw out Angelina?s demurrers, meaning Angelina?s motions to dismiss were not granted.
Brad Pitt just secured an important win in his ongoing legal battle with ex-wife Angelina Jolie over the French winery Chteau Miraval. In new court documents filed on Friday, Nov. 8 and obtained by PEOPLE on Monday, Nov. 11, judge Lia Martin of Los Angeles County Superior Court dismissed three demurrers ? otherwise known as motions to dismiss ? recently filed by Jolies legal team
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | NY Post columnist to Martha Stewart: 'I?m alive, bitch!' | | Added 37 hours ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Martha Stewart is supremely miffed that her past legal troubles were even mentioned in her Netflix documentary, Martha. You know, that little kerfuffle where she was accused of insider trading and then convicted of lying to the FBI after being targeted by an overzealous James Comey that resulted in a two-month prison sentence. Why on earth would anyone want to put that in a biographical documentary! Martha hasn?t forgotten that period, though she?d very much like you to. Martha also hasn?t forgotten the NY Post columnist who covered her 20 years ago, though she has forgotten the woman?s real name. And the fact that she?s still alive. During an interview segment in the doc, Martha declares it a very good thing that ?New York Post lady? is dead. Which of course prompted said ?lady,? aka Andrea Peyser, to clap back with: ?I?m alive, bitch!? Excellent, no notes.
Martha Stewart mistakenly killed off a journalist mentioned in her new Netflix documentary, Martha.
In the film, which aired on Oct. 30, Stewart, 83, claimed Andrea Peyser ? a New York Post columnist who covered Stewart?s infamous 2004 trial ? was ?dead now, thank goodness.? Except, she isn?t.
Peyser used her latest column for the newspaper to declare, ?I?m alive, bitch!? Peyser, who started working for New York Post in 1989, has published at least eight other stories in 2024.
Stewart was convicted for lying to the FBI during an insider-trading investigation in 2004.
?Guilty, guilty, guilty on all these counts of whatever,? she said in Martha. ?My daughter, she fainted when they read the verdict. Poor child.?
Stewart referred to Peyser as simply ?New York Post lady? and recalls seeing her in the courtroom when the verdict was announced. In her latest story, Peyser confirmed she ?wrote weeks of Post columns? during that time.
?New York Post lady was there, just looking so smug,? said Stewart. ?She had written horrible things during the entire trial. But she is dead now, thank goodness. And nobody has to put up with the crap she was writing all the time.?
?News of my passing came as a shock,? said Peyser of her ?uncredited cameo appearance.?
?But rather than feeling angry or worried that Martha has offed me, or to seek an emergency order of protection, I am overwhelmingly sad in the face of Martha?s bitterness.?
It is unclear why Stewart believed Peyser was dead.
[From People]
See, Ryan Reynolds, you got off easy just being called ?not so funny in real life.? Martha could?ve knocked you off in her imaginary life! Ahead of its release, I predicted the pop cultural ripple effects of Martha would be epic, and I do believe that prediction has borne out, my friends. Martha was denouncing the trial?s inclusion before the doc even came out, which only served to bring more attention to that ordeal and whet our appetites for what else filmmaker R.J. Cutler had in store. (For what it?s worth, I thought Cutler actually did right by Martha in presenting a compelling case for the indictment being a legally-murky, overblown response from Comey.) It?s still hilarious to me, as an ardent observer of the human condition, that Martha was in a tizzy about coverage of her trial, when the real bombshells all had to do with her marriage, and selectively applied beliefs on fidelity. Martha wanted to cast her ex-husband Andy Stewart as a terrible cheater? and then turned around and casually dismissed her own indiscretions as not unfaithful but ?emotional,? or not consequential because she would never leave her marriage over it and/or because Andy ?never knew.? I?m not saying everything was Martha?s fault, I just find the gap in self-awareness FASCINATING.
Someone who?s not so enamored of all this rehashing? Andy Stewart?s current wife, who posted on social media recently that she wished Martha would please stop talking about a marriage that ended 34 years ago, one that she says was ?painful and abusive? for Andy. And I think we all know who Martha?s going to declare dead next.
Embed from Getty Images
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Chris Pratt & Katherine Schwarzenegger welcomed son Ford Fitzgerald | | Added 37 hours ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
I totally forgot that Chris Pratt and Katherine Schwarzenegger were expecting again. They announced Katherine?s pregnancy back in June, and last week, they welcomed their third child together (and fourth for Chris). After two girls, they ?got the boy.? Which is what Chris wanted, I?m sure. This is their third child in five years. Which is on-brand for Chris Pratt.
Chris Pratt and Katherine Schwarzenegger?who tied the knot in 2019?welcomed their third baby together, a son named Ford Fitzgerald Schwarzenegger Pratt, on Nov. 8.
We are overjoyed to announce the birth of our son, they shared on Instagram Nov. 11. Mama and baby are doing well and Ford?s siblings are thrilled by his arrival. We feel so blessed and grateful. Love, Katherine and Chris.
Katherine confirmed that they were expecting their third baby together in July with an Instagram post featuring her bump and a pair of Pink plaid maternity overalls.
Their little one joins big sisters Lyla, 4, and Eloise, 2, as well as Chris? son Jack, 12, with ex-wife Anna Faris. And over the years, the Jurassic World actor has given insight into life with his kids.
[From E! News]
Ford?? Ford Fitzgerald Schwarzenegger Pratt. That name is a mouthful. Fitzgerald obviously has a connection to Katherine?s mother Maria Shriver and the Kennedy-Shriver family. But at no point has Katherine used ?Shriver? for one of the middle names. Lyla does have the middle name ?Maria? though. So, what our thoughts on the name Ford Pratt? Eh. And not to be too bitchy, but I really hope Chris Pratt doesn?t praise Katherine for giving him another ?healthy? child again.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Instagram.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Why did a royal reporter say that Princess Kate had 'pre-cancerous cells?' | | Added 37 hours ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of people have been posting a British talk show clip over the past week. In the clip, reporter Rhiannon Mills (Sky News? royal reporter) is speaking about the Princess of Wales, and instead of Mills reciting the palace?s lines about Kate?s cancer, Mills said that doctors found ?pre-cancerous cells.? This clip has been cited repeatedly on social media, as people have been expressing skepticism about what we?ve been told about Kate?s health for months now. Looking back on everything around Kate in the past two years, I?ve become a Kate-Really-Was-In-Poor-Health-Originally Truther. As in, the start of all of this was legitimate, and she needed some kind of abdominal surgery to take care of something (which has never been disclosed). But so much of what has happened this year and so much of what we have been told absolutely *feels* like some kind of cover story or PR move. I don?t know the truth, but I understand why so many people feel like we?re being lied to. As for the ?pre-cancerous cells? situation, the Daily Beast?s Royalist is one of the few outlets to touch the controversy:
Conspiracy theories surrounding Kate Middleton?s cancer diagnosis and recovery have erupted online again, after a report by a respected and accredited royal reporter suggested the Princess of Wales never had cancer but was instead found to have ?pre-cancerous cells.? Vicious rumors perpetrated by online trolls alleging that Kate either faked or exaggerated her cancer to cover up personal difficulties have been turbocharged by the claim.
When Kate announced she had cancer in March 2024, she said tests after abdominal surgery ?found cancer? and that she was advised to ?undergo a course of preventative chemotherapy.? However, a doctor told The Daily Beast, ?You either have pre-cancerous cells or you have cancer, the two terms are not interchangeable.?
The renewed attention on Kate?s condition was triggered after a September report by Rhiannon Mills, senior royal editor for Sky News, resurfaced this weekend. When covering the Princess of Wales? joyful video announcement that she was ?cancer-free,? Mills wrote: ?In March the princess confirmed that pre-cancerous cells had been found following abdominal surgery and that she would have to undergo a course of preventative chemotherapy.?
The specific formulation of the words went largely unnoticed at the time amid relief at Kate?s announcement that she was ?cancer-free? and widespread astonishment at the deeply personal nature of the film, which showed Kate and Prince William and their family engaged in a series of wholesome and well-lit pursuits.
Mills? remarks cannot be easily dismissed, however, as she is a member of the so-called royal rota, a quasi-official group of royal journalists working for British media who, while maintaining their editorial independence and frequently writing critical stories about the royals, cooperate with the palace, especially on logistics, in a broad sense. The palace is often able to get simple errors made by rota journalists corrected, and the fact a correction hasn?t been made is relevant. Mills is a hugely experienced journalist.
[From The Daily Beast]
Not only is Mills well-respected within the British media, Mills was one of the reporters who traveled to South Africa last week with Prince William. Mills secured an exclusive interview with William (the ?hardest year of my life? interview). From a media-management perspective, if Kensington Palace was pissed about Mills accidentally (or on purpose) revealing something about Kate?s health, they would have kicked her off the traveling rota for this trip. And William certainly wouldn?t have given her an interview. There?s another possibility too, connected to William?s interview perhaps William?s interview was part of a quid pro quo to keep Mills from spilling more? A completely different possibility: maybe Mills was just talking out of her ass and she actually forgot what the palace?s line was, and she never thought people would call attention to it.
I?m not sure where that has come from. I may have missed it but I don?t recall the Princess or anyone at Kensington Palace using the phrase pre-cancerous cells. https://t.co/8VJ6J4OGtj
Richard Palmer (@RoyalReporter) November 7, 2024
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Megan Fox & Machine Gun Kelly are expecting their first child together | | Added 37 hours ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Megan Fox and Machine Gun Kelly have been mostly together since they met in 2020. They were drawn to each other immediately and began referring to each other as ?twin flames.? Their relationship certainly has been fiery the engagement ring designed to make Megan bleed if she ever removed it, the very loud breakup in early 2023, the on-and-off status of their engagement for a year, and on and on. Their relationship seemed toxic to me, but I think Megan likes the drama. Well, Megan and MGK are now expecting. This will be their first child together, and fourth overall for Megan.
Congratulations are in order for Megan Fox and Machine Gun Kelly. Fox took to Instagram on Monday to share that she is pregnant with her fourth child, her first with Machine Gun Kelly (whose real name is Colson Baker). Fox shares three sons with ex-husband Beverly Hills, 90210 star Brian Austin Green. Kelly is also a father to a daughter from another relationship.
?Nothing is ever really lost. welcome back,? Fox wrote alongside an angel emoji and a heart. In the post, Fox can be seen cradling her baby bump while covered in black liquid, tagging Kelly in the photo. In another image, she shares a photo of the positive pregnancy test.
The caption references song lyrics from Kelly?s ?last november,? a song about his and Fox?s past pregnancy loss, which Fox had opened up about in some poems in her book Pretty Boys Are Poisonous.
Appearing on Good Morning America last year, Fox talked about the miscarriage: ?I?ve never been through anything like that in my life. I have three kids, so it was very difficult for both of us and it sent us on a very wild journey together and separately ? trying to navigate, ?What does this mean?? and ?Why did this happen???
In an interview with Women?s Wear Daily, Fox said of the miscarriage, ?That experience was so much harder than I would?ve anticipated it being, and I?ve really analyzed ?why was that? Why was that so difficult for me?? Because when I was younger, I had an ectopic pregnancy, I?ve had other things that I?m not going to say because God forbid the world will be in an uproar. But I?ve been through other similar issues, but not with someone who I was so in love with.?
[From THR]
Congrats to them. As I was looking for photos of them, I realized that they?ve been pretty quiet (as a couple) this year. All of their drama was front-loaded, and once they got back together for good last year, they?ve been keeping their sh-t off people?s radars for the most part, minus some of Megan?s interviews. They were seen on Halloween, where Megan dressed up as Padme and MGK dressed up as Anakin Skywalker. FIERY! Honestly, Meg?s Padme costume slaps, she really pulled it off. And to think, she was actually covering up her bump on Halloween.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Megan Fox (@meganfox)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| | | 5.458.390
Photos Online+ 3.369 past week
1.523
Users Online | | |
| | | | | | | | We Salute
Sandra Bullock
Photos of Sandra Bullock will not count in your daily view limit, if you are a registered member
Tribute ends in
19 hours | | |
| | | | | |
|
