For the first time in thirty years, the Oscars went forward without a host. There was much speculation about what the award ceremony would be like without a traditional emcee, but turns out it was handled: Three legends—Tina Fey, Maya Rudolph, and Amy Poehler—were brought out to set the tone for the evening.
Taking the stage early in the show, Fey joked right away that the three were definitely, 100 percent not the evening’s hosts. “We are not your hosts, but we’re going to stand here a little too long so that the people who get USA TODAY tomorrow will think we hosted.”
This lead to all of us watching at home to wonder the same question: Why the hell weren’t they hosting the Oscars? One viewer even tweeted, “Maya Rudolph, Tina Fey and Amy Poehler should never be at an awards show not hosting it.”
Fey, Rudolph, and Poehler have been slaying the game together since they were all co-stars on Saturday Night Live. (Their famous “mom jeans” sketch from the show is worth a revisit, if you somehow haven’t seen it.) And it’s not like these women don’t have experience—Fey and Poehler have hosted the Golden Globes together multiple times, starting in 2013. Last year, after Rudolph presented at the Oscars alongside Tiffany Haddish, Twitter lead a campaign for the two of them to host the 2019 show together.
Imagine a world where we got more than just three quick minutes of Fey, Rudolph, and Poehler’s banter? Even better, what if that included a few incredible cameos from Haddish? Hello, ratings gold.
Instead, they revealed that they were simply on stage to present the Best Supporting Actress award—no surprise hosting twist here. The three then spoke out about how women always offer a supporting role in their work. While that included joking that they support each other’s boobs (because, of course) and that Rudolph dubs Fey’s lines overseas, their message rang true. After The Oscars suffered from a series of controversies leading up the ceremony—including the removal of original host Kevin Hart—these women still showed up and supported the Oscars, helping the show put its best food forward. Because that’s what women do.
Meghan Markle‘s much-anticipated baby shower happened this past Wednesday, February 20. The star-studded event took place in New York City’s Upper East Side and reportedly featured jazz music, food by Jean-Georges Vongerichten, and flower-arranging activities.
One thing that didn’t happen at the shower, though, was present opening. Gayle King, one of the celebrities who attended the baby shower, revealed Friday (February 22) on CBS This Morning that Markle opted not to open up her gifts during the actual celebration. And her reason is very sweet.
“She didn’t open up any of the gifts because she wants to do that when she and Harry are back together,” King said. “So I really don’t know what everybody got [her].”
King said a “good time was had by all” at the baby shower, which was also attended by Amal Clooney, Serena Williams, and Markle’s Suits costar Abigail Spencer.
“She’s a very private person,” King also noted. “I think she should decide what she wants to say about [the shower].”
Watch King discuss this for yourself in the videos, below.
The only tidbit King reveals here is about the flower-arranging activity. “We all each made an individual base, and then Meghan, at the request, got in touch with an organization I’ve never heard of, Repeat Roses, and all of those [bases] were donated to different charities. I thought that was a very sweet thing. It just speaks to who she is: She’s very kind. She’s very generous and a really, really sweet person. I think her friends just wanted to celebrate her.”
King says Williams and Markle’s longtime friends, Genevive Hillis and Jessica Mulroney, hosted the shower: “It was a very small, private affair and just a very special time for her.”
Kensington Palace announced in October 2018 that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were expecting their first child. She’s due this spring.
While the 2019 Grammys were a star-studded event, there was one pop star noticeably missing: Ariana Grande. She was originally supposed to perform at the ceremony, but pulled out following a creative dispute with the show’s producers—and it caused drama. (You can catch up on all of it here.) But Grande already had a dress picked out—custom made, even—and she wasn’t about to let it hang in her closet, unworn.
On Sunday night, Grande got all dressed up in the gown Zac Posen made for her and staged a photoshoot, presumably in her apartment, to capture all the angles of this look.
“when @zacposen makes u a custom gown it doesn’t matter if you’re singing or not… thank u,” she captioned one image.
Even though she wasn’t in attendance, Grande did take home a Grammy, for Best Pop Vocal Album.
Because she wasn’t there to accept the award in person, she shared her thanks on Instagram: “I know I’m not there tonight (trust, I tried and still truly wished it had worked out TBH) and I know i said I try not to put too much weight into these things …. but fuck …….this is wild and beautiful. Thank you so much.”
The trophy is nice, obviously. But judging by how fun this impromptu shoot looked, Grande had a winning Sunday evening regardless of whether she won her category. May we all bring this energy with us into Monday.
One of the most talked-about moments from Game of Thrones season seven was when Arya Stark (Maisie Williams) murdered Petyr Baelish, a.k.a Littlefinger (Aidan Gillen), in front of literally everyone. It was a long time coming for fans, who had been waiting to see Littlefinger pay for all the scheming he’s done in Winterfell. I mean, right before Arya slit his throat, Sansa casually reminded him that he betrayed both her and her mother. He was a bad apple, simply put, and fans weren’t sad to see him go.
But what if Littlefinger isn’t actually dead? That’s what a YouTuber who goes by Neo suggests in this recently-unearthed fan theory. Neo posits Littlefinger paid one of the Faceless Men of Braavos to die in his place so he could GTFO. Of course, Game of Thrones fans know the Faceless Men have the shape-shifting abilities to easily pull this off—and Neo has evidence to back his theory.
HBO via Alamy
Think back to the fifth episode of season seven, for instance, when Littlefinger is talking in hushed tones to an unfamiliar woman. Neo believes this woman told Littlefinger his “time is up,” effectively tipping him off that Winterfell wanted him dead. We then see Littlefinger drop a coin in her hand—the same coin, Neo suggests, that Arya used to pay a Braavos in an earlier season. Ultimately, Neo concludes this woman was a Faceless Man sent to kill Arya—but Littlefinger intervened with the coin and instructed said Faceless Man to die in his place. Make sense? Watch Neo’s video here to learn more.
For what it’s worth, many fans seem to think Littlefinger is alive too:
Obviously, Neo’s theory has its problems. For one, we’ve never seen a Faceless Man use their abilities to die in someone’s place. Also, bringing back such an abhorrent character might anger the fandom. Game of Thrones has pulled more shocking stunts, though. At the very least, this is interesting fodder to keep us occupied until the show returns April 14 on HBO.
Lifetime kicks off a month of true crime biopics, featuring women with incredible stories, tonight with the premiere of Escaping the Madhouse: The Nellie Bly Story. Christina Ricci plays investigative journalist Nellie Bly, born Elizabeth Cochran Seaman, who went undercover to expose the horrendous conditions and treatment at the notorious Women’s Lunatic Asylum in Roosevelt Island. Without giving too much away, Bly undergoes treatment at the asylum and has no recollection of how she got there or who she really is.
If that’s creepy and disturbing, imagine what it was like for Ricci to play the role. “I had a really hard time with one of the scenes, because as a mother in real life it’s just horrendous [to see these women suffer],” she says. But it was important for Ricci to tell Bly’s story, even though she didn’t have an extensive knowledge of her previously. “I found it really interesting to see how we treated our poor and mentally ill. The whole point of studying history is to not repeat the mistakes we’ve made, so it’s important to understand that this was a reality for people.”
Even so, Ricci found herself looking for ways to leave such dark subject matter on set. “It’s natural defenses,” she says. “Your brain doesn’t want to think about terrible things, so [for me], if you just allow it to recover, my brain will go right to the adorable kitten nearby.”
In her nearly 30 year career, Ricci has certainly mastered the art of evolving and focusing on the positive. She says she’s grateful she didn’t grow up in the age of social media (“Thank God I was done with all my hard partying [by then].”) and that there’s now smarter roles for women in TV and film (“For a very long time, the things we were supposed to be in were so stupid”). But it hasn’t been easy either. Ahead of tonight’s premiere, she tells Glamour what she’s learned. Read on.
PHOTO: Michelle Faye Fraser/Lifetime
Christina Ricci in Escaping the Madhouse: The Nellie Bly Story
Glamour: How often do you watch your films when they come on TV?
Christina Ricci: It depends. We have Apple TV, so I’d have to go search for my own stuff. It’s been a long time that I’ve been like, “I really want to go and see that movie…” I think the last one we watched was Addams Family Values. I had to talk about it since it was being re-released for its anniversary, so I watched it again to familiarize myself with it.
My sister was adamant that I mention Now and Then, which is one of her favorites.
CR: I was in a bathroom recently with (co-star) Rita Wilson and didn’t say hi! I don’t think she recognized me. I looked at her, but she didn’t recognize me, and I totally forgot she was in that movie and that I worked with her until after. I should have just gone right up to her. When you’ve worked as long as I have, and I was a child then and am an adult now and such a different person, it’s hard to almost remember that you had contact with some people.
You’ve seen so much change through your career. What’s changed for you personally?
CR: I think there’s a real appreciation for intelligent filmmaking and seeing it reflected in movies and TV. For a very long time the things we were supposed to aspire to be in were so stupid. I had to pretend that I thought it was good, you know? So it’s nice now that you can actually say, “No, I want to be in something really smart, and I don’t care if only 10 people get it. I want to make art.” There seems to be real value to that now.
Is there anything you wish you could go back and tell yourself during your teen years?
CR: Yes, for sure. I would tell myself it’s all about the work I did and what I created, and nothing else mattered. I didn’t know that for a very long time, and I wish I had. I think it’s very confusing when you introduce a child to fame because fame is so warping. People clamor for and want it so badly. I think as a kid, you get confused, when really any adult should tell you, “No, it’s about what you create and the work you do. It’s about valuing yourself as an artist and not something to be put up for people to consume.” I didn’t understand that…I thought that I was meant for other people to consume. [But] I was a kid.
PHOTO: Dave Allocca
Christina Ricci in 1999.
Is there anything you do now to make sure you don’t have to deal with the pitfalls of fame?
CR: I never really went out anyway. The thing is, I’m not naturally attention-seeking, but I tried to be that for so long because I thought I was supposed to be. It led to me doing a lot of things to cope to be this person that I wasn’t, and that caused a lot of problems. I think now just knowing you don’t actually have to [play that game], it’s not about fame, and it shouldn’t be about fame. If what you’re seeking is fame, you’re always going to be empty. It’s something I’m trying to teach my child because I think social media and all of this attention-seeking stuff is soul-crushing. I don’t want him to have to learn that the hard way.
Right. It’s become about the amount of followers you have.
CR: It’s very strange. It’s like taking the worst part of high school and making it [a profession].
Remember when actors would go out to clubs and it wouldn’t wind up on social media?
CR: I don’t know how these young actors aren’t getting into more trouble.
It’s why I think Netflix and chill became such a huge phenomenon. What else are people going to do?
CR: Well, it’s smart and thank God. Nobody needs to be embarrassing themselves. Somebody said to me the other day—and it’s kind of funny—they were like, “You were a part of the last group of young, famous people that were insane.” Because there was no one to cover it! So it was like the last hurrah of like throwing TV’s out of hotel rooms and stuff, you know? Because right after…I think the Internet hit when I was 22 or 23, and thank God I was done with all of my hard partying. [Laughs] It’s nuts.
Escaping the Madhouse: The Nellie Bly Story premieres on Lifetime on Saturday, January 19, at 8 P.M. ET/PT.
After we were finished bursting with excitement at the fact that rumors of Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle‘s feud have officially been squashed after seeing pictures of them together on Christmas morning, we noticed something odd about the photos: Three very important (and very adorable) members of the royal family were missing. So, why weren’t Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis at the Christmas church service with their parents?
The answer is more or less an expected one: They’re just too young. George is 5 and Charlotte is 3 (and Prince Louis is only 8 months old), and junior royals don’t attend family services until they’re older—Prince Harry, in fact, wasn’t seen at his first Christmas service until he was 7. Although Prince George was, however, photographed attending a Christmas church service with Kate Middleton’s family in Berkshire in 2016, but this year at the royal Christmas, it just seems like he decided to stay home with his siblings.
Also absent from the royal event on the morning of the 25th? Prince Philip, who was said to be relaxing at home, and Camilla Parker Bowles, who is reportedly recovering from some sort of bug.
While the kids didn’t make it to church, there are still plenty of other royal Christmas traditions they’ll likely get to enjoy in honor of the holiday. They attended the Queen’s Christmas lunch with the rest of their family earlier this week, and will no doubt be feasting on some Christmas stew once presents have been unwrapped. “They’re getting excited for Christmas time because they’ve started all their Christmas songs, and Christmas trees are going up,” Kate Middleton said during a recent appearance. “It was really sweet.”
The best part? Next year, these three little royals will have a new little cousin to celebrate the holiday with.
