Lou Diamond Phillips Got Busted For DWI After Asking A Cop For Directions


Lou Diamond Phillips could have driven 1000 mph in a school zone while twacked on booze, diesel fuel, coke, uppers, downers, bath salts, Kellog’s Corn Pops, and airplane glue and I would still practice gratitude over not writing about rape again. Thank you, Lou. Oh, and yes, the star of La Bamba was arrested early this morning in Portland, Texas for DWI.

TMZ reports that Lou was motoring along when he apparently got lost. He stopped to ask a cop for directions.

The cop immediately concluded Phillips was hammered and had him take a field sobriety test, which he flunked.

The actor most famous for playing Ritchie Valens (and for The First Power, which is a delightfully cheesy movie that should be a cult classic) was hauled off to jail. It was there that he reportedly blew a .20. That’s 2 1/2 times the legal limit which means he must have put a $ 100 bill in the TouchTunes machine cuz’ he was at whatever bar for quite awhile. As of this writing, he remains in jail.

When you have too many Atrial Rubicites (yes, I researched what the most popular beer in Texas is because I am that dedicated to my craft), you should probably get an Uber or Lyft or call some sort of celebrity car. (I’m sure he has some money from the 3 jillion tv shows he’s guest-starred on). Drunk driving is always a poor choice. The cops are not always your friend when you launch a beer-breathed request for directions at them. Use GPS and get your drunk ass home without killing anyone.

This story makes me imagine actress Rosanna De Soto showing up outside the jail to shriek NO! NOT MY LOU DIAMOND! NOT MY LOU DDDDIIIAAAAMMMMOONNDD!” and throw soapy laundry.

Pic: San Patricio Police Dept.


Donna Karan Offers The “They Were Asking For It” Defense Of Harvey Weinstein, And Then Lamely Apologizes


I hope Donna Karan likes the taste of an overpriced chunky wedge because that’s what’s she’ll be eating for the foreseeable future. Donna kicked up her foot and got to chomping when she defended alleged serial sexual predator Harvey Weinstein and revealed that she’s got some deeply troublesome and downright idiotic opinions.

According to The Daily Mail, Donna was interviewed on the red carpet of the CinéFashion Film Awards in Hollywood last night and was asked about the accusations against Harvey.

She told a reporter: ‘I think we have to look at ourselves. Obviously, the treatment of women all over the world is something that has always had to be identified. Certainly in the country of Haiti where I work, in Africa, in the developing world, it’s been a hard time for women.

‘To see it here in our own country is very difficult, but I also think how do we display ourselves? How do we present ourselves as women? What are we asking? Are we asking for it by presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality?

There are more levels at work here than in a bookstore that only sells loose marbles. Does she think Harvey is the first man to try some shit? And did she really suggest they were asking for it? It’s like she watched an after school special on rape and took away the exact opposite message. Her response is so comically clichéd that a three year old could tell you that’s the wrongest response. Is her ponytail too tight?

But she didn’t stop there! I can only imagine the concealed glee on this reporter’s face as she kept digging herself deeper and he realized he’s sitting on a pot of crack pot gold. The eyes, the ponytail tossing, the lunatic smile, the words coming out of her mouth, it’s all bananas. Donna concluded her little performance with this nugget of wisdom.

‘You look at everything all over the world today and how women are dressing and what they are asking by just presenting themselves the way they do. What are they asking for? Trouble,’ she said.

Here’s the whole thing.

Of course as soon as this aired, some poor assistant had to quickly find Donna for her inevitable apology statement. And, as apology statements so often do, Donna’s tells us what kind of person she really is. Donna’s said, in part, “I made a statement that unfortunately is not representative of how I feel or what I believe” and that her statements were “taken out of context”.

Pics: Wenn.com


Salma Hayek Is Asking Her Followers to Help Mexico After the Devastating Earthquake

Salma Hayek announced that she’s pledging $ 100,000 to UNICEF’s relief efforts in Mexico after the country was devastated by a 7.1-magnitude earthquake on Sept. 19 — exactly 32 years after another massive quake. The 51-year-old Mexican actress posted a very moving video on her Instagram, recounting her experience during the catastrophic 1985 earthquake, which killed at least 5,000 people.

«After the 1985 earthquake in Mexico City, I was evacuated from my building. A lot of friends died, including an uncle that was very, very close to me,» she said in the touching video. «I have lived through the aftermath of a disaster of this magnitude and it’s horrific . . . I implore you, I implore to your hearts, to the goodness of your hearts, to your compassion to help. Anything that you can give will make a big difference.»

Mexican authorities have already reported 333 deaths and the country’s capital has been ridden with extreme damage, including collapsed buildings and road destruction. This quake followed an 8.1-magnitude quake on Sept. 7. Earlier this month, the country was hit by Hurricane Max. «The people of my country have now suffered three natural disasters in a row. Many children and families are hurt and in terrible need,» Salma wrote in the CrowdRise page connected to her campaign to raise funds to help those affected. So far, over $ 669,000 has been raised.

POPSUGAR Celebrity

‘What Happened’: We’ve All Been Asking Ourselves That, And Clinton Has The Painful Answers

Oh boy. Where to start with this book? For starters, it’s going to annoy a lot of people. And I’m not going to lie — some of it hurts. Clinton writes that when she watches Trump on the news, or reads about him in the papers, it’s like picking at a scab. The book is a bit like that. It’s an often painful look at what might have been. And even though she says in the introduction that she doesn’t «have all the answers, and this isn’t a comprehensive account of the 2016 race», it feels pretty comprehensive to me.

Let’s be brutally honest about two things. 1: There is no such thing as an unbiased reading of this book. And 2: How you respond to Clinton’s book will depend entirely on what you want from it.

Do you want her to fall on her sword? Are you expecting 400 pages of Clinton screaming mea culpa for not defeating Trump? If so, you will be disappointed. She owns her mistakes, and there are things that she wishes she could have done differently. But — and this is the part that has wound up lots of other readers — she is also quick to point out that there were plenty of other factors that contributed to Trump being sworn in rather than her. And she doesn’t hold back.

Do you want her to be begging for absolution? Because you won’t get that. A lot of people seem to be adding a question mark to the title, but What Happened isn’t an incredulous rhetorical question from a woman who doesn’t know why she isn’t in the White House right now.

If you want her to explain the complexity of the clusterfuck that was 2016’s presidential election in a calm and rational way, then great. You’ve got it. Just as she was the most qualified candidate, so is she the most qualified narrator for her story. Her perspective is smart, knowledgeable, thorough, and full of data. There is an awareness of shortcomings, but an admirable refusal to take the fall for all the other myriad reasons that President Trump is now a thing.

She points a lot of fingers. She will take her share of the blame, but so too must others. If you’re a Bernie Bro, there are some passages you won’t like. Also facing her steely glare is the political press, who she says treated Trump as a lucrative source of clicks and shifted the narrative away from policies to spectacle.

She had powerful and influential enemies. You may need to brace yourself for the chapter on ‘Those Damn Emails’, where she has some stern words for Comey, and on the following chapter exploring Putin’s interference, which she says should be seen as an act of war.

But it wasn’t just people that were against her. Even though it seemed inevitable that Clinton would become President, she is honest that it was always going to be an uphill battle. Looking at history, «It was exceedingly difficult for either party to hold on to the White House for more than eight years.» Being a ‘continuity’ candidate rather than a ‘change’ candidate was a challenge. Her last name was more of a hindrance than a headstart; she is fully aware of ‘Clinton fatigue’.

Cultural attitudes were also against her. She speaks frankly about sexism and misogyny, and the impact of these. Her chapter on the working class, ‘Country Roads’, is also frank about the «complex dynamic» of class and gender in working class whites:

«When people feel left out, left behind, and left without options, the deep void will be filled by anger and resentment or depression and despair about those who supposedly took away their livelihoods or cut in line.»

She stands by her policies to address the causes of the issues faced by the working classes, but admits that Trump «tapped into all these feelings» more effectively than she did. He provided an easier answer. It was just that the answer he provided was a lie.

Where Clinton criticizes both Sanders and Trump (though not equally — she is very emphatic about avoiding false equivalences) is that she sees them as stoking a mood and making promises that they either couldn’t or shouldn’t deliver. Hers is a pragmatic form of politics, full of compromise and thoroughly evaluated calculations, principled but not idealistic or purely ideological. Her policies were long reads, not headlines. And the way that we consume news now lends itself more to headline politics.

She points out ruefully that in a parliamentary system, she would have been a dead cert. I’m inclined to agree.

But there’s something else you get from this book as well; it’s a peep behind the curtain. I liked her more by the end than I had before. Don’t get me wrong — I was Team Hillary, but I would have just described her as intimidating and formidable. She is still as intimidating as ever — you certainly wouldn’t want to mess with her — and she knows she can come across as frosty and distant, saying «I wear my composure like a suit of armor, for better or worse.» But there is a real warmth to her in the book.

And this is the point where I have to use two of my least favourite words ever, because really, they are the only ones that work here. Clinton is also relatable, and sassy. Clinton is someone who puts on her yoga pants at the end of the day and knocks back some Chardonnay. She’s also someone who uses cleaning and organizing as a psychological self-care strategy. She yells at the TV when Trump is on. She watched Kate McKinnon sing Hallelujah on Saturday Night Live and had a cry. She is the pushy friend who nags you to go to the doctor, and reminds you to put warm socks on. (Yes, this really is a thing in the book. In, uh, her emails.)

And when she comes for Trump, oh it’s glorious. There’s some truly eloquent shade here.

She knows she could have won. She knows she should have won. She knows she could have phrased some points more effectively. (Though that ‘deplorables’ comment seems more prescient than ever now, right?) She knows that some of the data models were off. But — and here’s the really admirable part — she knows that we have to move on and look ahead to the next fight. Clinton’s not someone to rant and vent; she’s a fixer.

Here’s a little statistic that will make you think, and then maybe howl into the abyss:

«If just 40,000 people across Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania had changed their minds, I would have won. With a margin like that, everyone can have a pet theory about why I lost.»

If what you want from this book is Clinton’s theory, then you’re set. But stay for the shade. It’s therapeutic.


Aaron Carter Still Asking People Out Via Twitter

US singer Aaron Carter performing live during a concert

Poor Chloe Grace Moretz can’t catch a break. She gets fat-shamed by some twentysomething d-bag on set when she was only 15, and now Aaron Carter is using rerun pick-up moves to get her to go to Olive Garden with him. Chloe was too young for the West Side Story battle of the 90s: Backstreet Boys v. N’Sync. But girlfriend was around for “Aaron’s Party,” and apparently she really wanted to be that honey over there: per the Hollywood Reporter:

“When I was 4 years old I thought Aaron Carter was so cool. My friend, when we were both little babies back in Georgia, she liked Aaron Carter too and we used to fight over who would get Aaron Carter one day. Who knows, maybe we’ll meet.”

Girl, all you have to do is check the back alley of an AutoZone one state over, and you’ll see him! But also: are you insane? If he’s holding up a “Will sign autographz 4 Jiffy Lube” sign at the Walmart automotive department, he sure as hell is going to come for you and your equal pay-loving paycheck! Aaron took the bait:



Don’t do it, girl! You don’t want to date someone who can only limit you to two things off the $ 1 menu. Elizabeth Cady Stanton didn’t fight the good fight for that. You’re worth at least six! Chloe has yet to respond, and why would she? He’s used these moves before! While he didn’t explicitly ask her out, he definitely was trying to woo ex-piece Hilary Duff on Twitter back in 2014. Kind of like how back in first grade you would send your crush “Do you like me: YES NO? Plz circle one!” notes. Well, Aaron seems to be the broody type as, like many of his queer brethren before him, he took to a gay bar to let out his emotions… though, it’s not exactly over Chlo.

TMZ says he was at a Hamburger Mary’s in Florida performing his new song about an ex-girlfriend. Recently out as bisexual, Aaron went around saying “you’re gorgeous” to different dudes and ended with a whimper on one with a “you’re kind of cute.” To which, I assume said kind-of cutie replied, “Bitch, you seen your latest mugshot?” He later let the tears fall after performing his song about his lost love. Or was it? Aaron’s new to the gay KLERB world, so I think it is just shame knowing every drag queen that night did a better job on the main stage.

Pic: Wenn.com


How Many Jumpsuits Is Too Many Jumpsuits? Uh… Asking For A Friend.

As I clicked to purchase my latest billowy, featureless set of full-body pants, I realized that I may have a problem. Or my closet does. In that it’s full of fucking jumpsuits.

I’m no fashionista. I thrift like a fiend, but not for those one-of-a-kind risky vintage pieces I imagine Chloë Sevigny digging through racks for. I wish that was me, but I don’t really have a «style» (interesting or otherwise) and instead I usually look for the kinds of vaguely name-brand shit I refuse to pay top dollar for new. Otherwise I wait for stores to put their sale stuff on double sale and then buy whatever is left in my size.

All of which is to say that I don’t really follow, or even comprehend, trends. The closest I ever got to being on-trend was buying a pair of knee-high fake biker boots out of a Delia*s catalog in the late 90s. And then jumpsuits made their resurgence. It started, oh I don’t know, a few years ago? I definitely wasn’t paying attention, and then I started seeing all these pretty ladies flouncing down the New York City sidewalks in glorified onesies. And I hated them (the jumpsuits, not the ladies — I’m not THAT judgmental. Usually.).

So I certainly didn’t hop on the bandwagon from the start. As is my usual M.O., I joined well after the craze had hit it’s peak. Because that’s when the shit goes on sale (duh), and by then you’ve witnessed so many people wearing so many ridiculous getups that you forget it ever seemed weird in the first place. Except rompers. I don’t do rompers, they still just look weird. Splitting hairs, but as the great Lin-Manuel Miranda sang, «If you stand for nothing, Burr, what’ll you fall for?»

I wish I could say that once I tried on a jumpsuit, I understood the fascination. Logically, on paper, it all makes sense — they combine the throw-on-one-thing-and-you’re-done ease of a dress with the versatile comfort of pants. In reality, however, they are a nightmare. Finding the right size is an exercise in sheer luck. The torso is too short, or too long! The crotch rides or drags! The ass pouches or wedges in your crack, and you can’t do anything about it!

(In retrospect, this may be why I have stockpiled so many jumpsuits over the years. Once I find one that does, miraculously, fit my frame, I feel compelled to purchase it for posterity. Like a me-sized jumpsuit is some weird object of intrigue that I must collect and display to prove it actually exists.)

The other problem with jumpsuits isn’t noticeable in the store. You won’t discover it until you buy it, take it home, and then try to wear it for a full day. The problem? Bathrooms.

With pants, you pull them down. With dresses, you hike them up. With a skirt, it’s dealer’s choice. But with a jumpsuit, YOU HAVE TO TAKE IT ALMOST COMPLETELY OFF. That’s right, you have to get naked every time nature calls. Have you ever gotten naked in a public bathroom stall, squatting over a toilet and trying to keep a full body’s-length of clothing off the filthy bathroom floor? Welcome to the joys of the jumpsuit.

Maybe I just get off on misery, but naked bathroom sessions be damned, I kept on buying fucking jumpsuits. Baggy hippie ones that look like a human parachute. Fancy, flowing ones that basically look like dresses anyway so what’s the point? I even own two denim jumpsuits. Two. Which means at some point in my life I consciously made the decision that owning one denim jumpsuit wasn’t enough. In total, I think I own an astounding nine — with one more on the way. No amount of discounts and deals can justify this. It’s utterly absurd. I think I own more jumpsuits than underwear. I’m a monster.

This has been my confession to a hideous crime against fashion, logic, decency, humanity, and my own sense of self.


Tom Holland Gives a Mini Spider-Man Advice on Asking Out Zendaya

We are eating up every moment from Zendaya and Tom Holland’s press trip for Spider-Man: Homecoming, but their latest interview definitely takes the cake. During a junket for the Marvel superhero film, the costars sat down with a precious mini Spider-Man, and it’s just too much for us to handle. Not only does the little boy, whose name is Liam, look so cute in his costume, but we can’t get over how sweet the actors are as they interact with him. Plus, Tom gives Liam some excellent advice on how to ask out Zendaya on a date. Swoon! See the overwhelmingly adorable video above.

POPSUGAR Celebrity

A Ranting Alex Jones Is Asking that His Megyn Kelly Interview Not Air on Father’s Day

This is my new favorite thing today!

Sarah went to Gwynnie’s Wellness (with a capital «W») retreat, «In Goop Health» (no, seriously, that’s what it’s called) and in addition to a bag of $ 85 rocks, she got to experience Goop. — (Lainey)

I NEED ALL OF THESE! — (Nerdist)

Megyn Kelly’s new NBC newsmagazine is not making friends with either side of the political spectrum. The left is furious that Kelly and NBC would give a platform to Sandy Hook truther Alex Jones (and at least one advertiser, JP Morgan, has pulled their ads for the episode), while Alex Jones is also pissed, calling Kelly «cold and robotic» and claiming that the interview is a «hit piece trying to destroy independent media» that make fathers look bad, which is why he doesn’t want it to air on Father’s Day. (Also, because Alex Jones is terrible father). (Uproxx)

If you missed the Tony Awards last night, you might have missed the orchestra trying to play Bette Midler off. Hahahahaha. You don’t tell Bette when she’s finished speaking. Bette finishes when she’s damn good and ready. — (Dlisted)

Also at the Tonys was Mary Beth Peil, who most people would recognize from Dawson’s Creek, but whom I recognize as Peter’s mother from The Good Wife. She looks fantastic and is my new inspiration for aging beautifully. — (GFY)

I feel like I’ve said this so many times, but here it is again: REPRESENTATION MATTERS! And you can see it here in this small sampling of adorable childpeople who saw Wonder Woman. — (The MarySue)

Barron and Melania have moved into the White House and awwwww, doesn’t the First Family look so joyously happy to be together again? That hand-holding doesn’t look awkward at all. — (Jezebel)

Amanda Bynes is back and sober and ready to work, and I just love her so much, I hope she’s happy and feeling good! I also hope she does another movie with Charming Potato because I would buy it and watch it over and over even though my husband would say, «Are you seriously watching this stupid movie again? Is this supposed to be funny? I don’t get it.» HYPOTHETICALLY. — (Celebitchy)

Jessica Chastain got married over the weekend and she looked just lovely! But really? What the shit was Anne Hathaway wearing? — (LG)

Have you watched Curtis Hanson’s film L.A. Confidential? Bea Pants is here to tell you that compared to James Ellroy’s book L.A. Confidential, Hanson’s movie is the happy parts of a Pixar movie. Elroy’s Los Angeles is "dark, mean and merciless." Though not for the faint hearted, L.A. Confidential is a smartly written book. (Cannonball Read 9)

A quick shout-out to a longtime reader of ours, Laura, who offers up reviews at her blog, Movie Mommy. (Movie Mommy)

I said The Defenders picture was my new favorite thing today, but actually, THIS is my new favorite thing today!


Why You Shouldn’t Even Think About Asking the Royal Family For Autographs (or Selfies)

We’re sorry to disappoint you, but if you ever get the chance to meet a member of the British royal family, please don’t ask for an autograph. Not only is it a breech of royal protocol, but their likely response will be, «Sorry, they don’t allow me to do that.» Unlike celebrities, royals cannot afford to have their signature forged and possibly used against them at a later point. They may sign visitors books or official documents, but autographs never. Back in 2010, Prince Charles surprised everyone when he broke protocol to sign an autograph for victims of the Cornwall floods. While meeting with a couple, he was asked, «Can I be really cheeky please Sir and can I have your autograph for my young son Tom? I’m not sure if you do autographs but it would make his day?» Charles then shocked his bodyguards when he asked one of them to find a piece of paper for him to sign. He wrote «Charles 2010» and even apologized for the «shaky writing» because he «never writes standing up.»

And if you thought you could get away with a selfie, think again. Those same rules apply to selfies. In fact, Prince Harry isn’t even a fan of them. While visiting the Australian War Memorial back in 2015, a young fan waiting among the crowd asked the young royal for a selfie, to which he replied, «No, I hate selfies. Seriously, you need to get out of it. I know you’re young, but selfies are bad.» He then made up for it by asking her to simply take a normal photo of him.

POPSUGAR Celebrity

Maybe It’s Time to Stop Asking Goldie Hawn Why She Hasn’t Married Kurt Russell

Image Source: Getty / Max Mumby / Indigo

Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell first met while starring in 1968’s The One and Only, Genuine, Original Family Band, but it wasn’t until 1983 that they began dating while working on their second joint film, Swing Shift. The couple recently rang in their 34th anniversary, an incredible feat for any couple but especially one made up of Hollywood A-listers. But what is particularly unique about Kurt and Goldie’s relationship is the fact that they aren’t married. Over their three decades together, they haven’t felt the need to «make it official,» and it’s something that still seems to both fascinate and perplex the public.

«A lasting relationship isn’t about marriage. It’s about compatibility and communication

It feels like in nearly every interview Goldie does with a major publication, she is asked about her choice not to marry Kurt. Despite the fact that she has made her reasons painfully clear over the years, Goldie is still bombarded with questions about how she could so bravely stay in a relationship with a man and have the audacity not to enter into a legally recognized union that has a large chance of ending in divorce. Like, how dare she?! Goldie has answered these questions with aplomb because she’s Goldie f*cking Hawn, but it might officially be time to maybe trust that she knows what she’s doing in her own relationship and accept that maybe their arrangement isn’t that hard to wrap a head around. Goldie certainly isn’t the first celebrity to eschew marriage in favor of a more modern, independent romantic lifestyle, and we should stop acting like it’s some wacky concept.

«There’s something psychological about not being married because it gives you the freedom to make decisions one way or the other. For me, I chose to stay, Kurt chose to stay, and we like the choice

Image Source: Getty / Steve Granitz

What’s worth noting is that being a woman with 50 years in the entertainment business, a woman who scored a spot in the The Nutcracker at 10 years old, opened her own ballet academy, and founded a charity dedicated to improving the academic lives of young kids, should warrant some more interesting, thought-provoking questions than why she hasn’t felt the need to marry a man who she has been in a committed relationship with since many of us were in diapers, a man with whom she has built a beautiful family and a complete life full of love, understanding, respect, «fun, laughs, and sex

«The question is, ‘Why (get married)?’ it’s not, ‘Why not?’ We love each other. We fight the way people are supposed to fight. We love our lives together.»

The societal pressure to get married is everywhere and usually focused on women. Getting hitched is touted as the ultimate goal for us ladies, which could explain why we rarely hear about Kurt Russell being asked these types of questions — for some reason it falls on Goldie to constantly explain their joint decision to enjoy life without a marriage license. But instead of putting the emphasis on Why haven’t you guys gotten married? we should shift the conversation to include more questions about their commitment to keeping things fresh after 34 years, helping their children become Hollywood stars in their own right, and staying fly as hell on the red carpet. After all, not being married might actually be the biggest «secret» to Goldie and Kurt’s relationship success — so can’t we just celebrate it?

POPSUGAR Celebrity

1 2 3