Eva Mendes covers the new issue of Women’s Health. Not a great cover, right? I’m not Eva’s biggest fan or anything, but she’s a beautiful woman who is extraordinarily photogenic. Why choose a photo where she’s, like, mid-sentence? In the interview, Eva talks about being a mom to baby Esmeralda, her diet, and how she really believes in therapy. Some highlights:

Esmeralda isn’t sleeping: “I’m actually enjoying the sleepless nights because it’s bonding with my little girl.”

Parenting advice: She says she hasn’t “earned the right” to give mom advice. “I want to respect all the moms out there. They’re going to be like, ‘You know what? You’re a few months in. Just shut up.”

Her workouts: “I realized a long time ago that I needed to have some kind of routine,” she shares of her fitness plan, which includes running and interval sprints. “I don’t love it, but I’ve made peace with that.” Mendes also lifts weights but “nothing too heavy, because my muscle bulks up pretty easily. I mix it up with yoga, or sometimes I’ll hike with my trainer.”

Her diet: “I haven’t eaten meat in about six years, because I don’t agree with factory farming here. This is just what worked for me, it’s important to say, but when I cut that out I immediately felt better. And also, after a year of eliminating it, my skin looked brighter and healthier overall.”

Mental health: “Having [a therapist] who’s totally objective and who points out my patterns— I find that really helpful. And I’m lucky to work with someone who doesn’t just sit there and nod her head, you know? I need to hear what you think! Tell me what’s wrong with me so I can fix it!”

Privacy: “I believe there is a public self and a private self. My sisters and my good friends are experiencing that now [with] Facebook and Instagram. When they freak out about a friend of theirs posting a bad picture of them, I’m like, ‘Well, imagine how I feel! Get used to it!’”

[From E! News]

Sounds like she’s in a pretty good place and enjoying being a mom. I find it interesting that this is her second magazine cover and interview since giving birth – her first was with Violet Grey last fall – and she really isn’t promoting anything. She’s just talking about the baby, motherhood, diet and her privacy. Hm.

Also: Ryan organized a special party for Eva’s 41st birthday last week – he rented out the Moonlight Rollerway and they roller-skated the afternoon away with baby Esmeralda and friends and family.

Photos courtesy of Women’s Health.

Is two in a row considered a trend?

George Clooney was out last week at a benefit in New York. And he stepped out for the second week in a row last night, this time with Amal, in support of The 100 LIVES initiative, to honour those who saved Armenian lives during the genocide 100 years ago. Y…      

View image | gettyimages.com

A jury verdict was announced yesterday in a lawsuit claiming that Robin Thicke and Pharrell’s 2013 hit, “Blurred Lines”, infringed on the copyright of Marvin Gaye’s #1 1977 song, “Got to Give It Up.” (Comparison video below.) The jury ruled that “Blurred Lines” did violate Gaye’s copyright and awarded the late musician’s family $7.3 million. There was a second song at issue, Thicke’s 2011?s “Love After War.” The jury found that “Love After War” was not an infringement of Gaye’s 1976 ballad, “After The Dance.” (Note that the suit originally claimed that “Blurred Lines” also infringed on Funckadelic’s “Sexy Ways”, however the defendant for that song, Bridgeport music, dropped out. Funkadelic frontman George Clinton has defended Pharrell and Thicke.)

It’s worth mentioning that Thicke, Pharrell and T.I. sued the Gayes first, seeking a declaration that “Blurred Lines” did not infringe on Gaye’s copyright. The Gayes’ lawyer claims this successful countersuit was a reaction to the original lawsuit. Here’s more:

A Los Angeles jury found Tuesday that Pharrell Williams’ and Robin Thicke’s 2013 hit “Blurred Lines” infringed upon the copyright for Marvin Gaye’s 1977 “Got to Give It Up” and awarded $7.3 million to Gaye’s family.

The Gayes’ attorney, Richard Busch, told reporters that he had immediately filed for an injunction to stop the sale of “Blurred Lines.”

“They started this fight, and we ended it,” Busch said. “The jury saw through everything, and we’re very pleased…”

Howard King, the attorney for Williams and Thicke, said, “Of course, we’re disappointed.” He said he had “no idea” whether his clients wanted to appeal, but he said the case “is only in the seventh inning.”

“Nothing detracts from the fact as we know it that the track ‘Blurred Lines’ came from the heart and soul of Pharrell Williams,” King said.

Williams, T.I. (real name Clifford Harris Jr.) and Thicke — who performed “Blurred Lines” — took credit in multiple interviews for co-writing the song. They preemptively sued the Gaye family in August after members complained about similarities between “Blurred Lines” and “Got to Give It Up.”

The family countersued, claiming not only that Thicke ripped off “Got to Give It Up” but also that he infringed on the copyright to “After the Dance” for the title track of his 2011 album “Love After War.”

The jury found that T.I. wasn’t responsible for any infringement.

Williams testified last week that he grew up listening to Gaye’s music and was familiar with “Got to Give It Up” but didn’t use it as a basis for “Blurred Lines.” He said he was only trying to evoke the feel of Gaye’s music.

Gaye was “one of the ones we look up to,” Williams said. “This is the last place I want to be.”

[From NBC]

When you hear the two songs in comparison, video below, the similarities are hard to deny. What’s more is that Thicke told GQ that when he wrote “Blurred Lines” with Pharrell, he told Pharrell that “Got To Give It Up” was ‘one of my favorite songs of all time,’ and said that ‘we should make something like that, something with that groove.’ Thicke later claimed in a deposition for this lawsuit that he didn’t actually co-write the song because he was high on alcohol and Vicodin. So it sounds like the original Marvin Gaye song was either a direct inspiration or deliberately ripped off, which of course Thicke and Pharrell denied. Thicke also told Oprah that “half of his music was inspired by Marvin Gaye.”

Many musicians worry that this lawsuit will have a chilling effect on the music industry. They cite the different melody and chord changes in the two songs, along with the fact that the jury wasn’t even allowed to hear a full version of “Got To Give It Up.” (This was due to the fact that in 1977 only sheet music was allowed to be copywritten, not songs.) The LA Times has an editorial which questions whether Gaye’s estate would have sued if Thicke hadn’t directly acknowledged Gaye as an influence. Whatever the case, this lawsuit seems far from over. Pharrell and Thicke are likely to file an appeal. Meanwhile a lawyer for the Gayes has stated that they will petition the court to cease sales of “Blurred Lines” until they can reach an agreement on profit sharing.

View image | gettyimages.com

View image | gettyimages.com

View image | gettyimages.com

Dear Gossips,

My happiness from the Blue Steel on the Valentino runway yesterday still hasn’t faded. But even though I practically begged her to join me in my post about it yesterday (click here for a refresher), Sarah remained unmoved. I think she was turned off by the February 12, 201…      

Madonna has a really good new interview with Out Magazine, and it’s actually one of the best pieces I’ve read in a while. Shocking, I know. For some reason, I’ve been liking Madonna’s interviews in particular lately, and this Out piece might be her best one. It’s not just what she says – although the conversation goes from Joan of Arc to women’s rights to Detroit – but the analysis of Madonna’s decades-long relationship with the LGBT community. If you have ten minutes, it’s definitely worth the read. Some highlights:

Madonna on the theories that Joan of Arc was gay: “Why was she gay? Come on! OK, she dressed like a boy and she cut off her hair. That’s what the church tried to say. Also that the dauphin who supported her, that he was gay. According to historians, the dauphin is the one who supplied her with the army, the cavalry, whatever, to take on England. Did they thank her for that? Of course not. They went, ‘Wait a minute, how could a girl do that? There must be something wrong with her.’ ”

She relates to Joan of Arc: “I can relate. Sometimes I’m getting burned at the stake metaphorically. Though not right this second.”

On gay rights being ahead of women’s rights: “Gay rights are way more advanced than women’s rights. People are a lot more open-minded to the gay community than they are to women, period… It’s moved along for the gay community, for the African-American community, but women are still just trading on their ass. To me, the last great frontier is women…. Women are still the most marginalized group. You’re still categorized—you’re still either a virgin or a whore. If you’re a certain age, you’re not allowed to express your sexuality, be single, or date younger men.”

On wishing that she were gay: “I didn’t feel like straight men understood me. They just wanted to have sex with me. Gay men understood me, and I felt comfortable around them. There was only that one problem, which is that they didn’t want to have sex with me! So…conundrum! I was like, ‘How am I ever going to get a date? Maybe if I cut my hair and I lose a lot of weight, someone will mistake me for a guy and ask me out.”

[From Out Magazine]

It seems like Madonna didn’t so much wish she was gay as she wished she was a gay man. Look at her career, look her approach to her career and her life: she’s less a straight woman and more of a gay man. I also think it’s interesting that the “Queen Bee” of gay culture is telling gay men – in one of the biggest LGBT publications in the country – that they still have it easier than the average woman. That male privilege extends to gay men too, and women still have to “trade on their ass.” She’s not wrong, you know?

Photos courtesy of WENN, Madonna’s Instagram.

Oh, I was hoping we would get a repeat of this coat! I remember this “Dalmatian print” Hobbs coat from Duchess Kate’s first pregnancy – she wore it to a boat christening in 2013 and I kind of loved it on her. Kate rarely does animal prints and I thought this was a surprisingly great look for her. So I’m glad she repeated the coat today, for her appearances in Margate. I really like that she paired the coat with black shoes and a jaunty, bouncy ponytail too. We have to praise her whenever she does an event without her hair falling into her face a million times.

First on the agenda today was a stop by the “Self: Image and Identity” exhibition at the Turner Contemporary art gallery in Margate. She will also stop by Resort Studios. Tomorrow is Downton Abbey day! I also have to say, because it’s actually worth noting: Kate’s second pregnancy hasn’t had any big Marilyn Moments. I think it’s because she actually hasn’t worn any maternity miniskirts.

Meanwhile, People Magazine had a story yesterday about how Kate might be expecting a girl. When Kate was shopping in Chelsea, at one of “her favorite stores,” Amaia, Kate was apparently “drawn to the girls’ clothes.” I actually don’t think Kate and William know what they’re having. That’s what they’ve said and I believe them. Kate might be hoping for a girl (I bet William is too), but don’t think she’s expecting a girl just because she was checking out the girls’ clothes.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

I’m probably going to sound crazy, but I actually think this is best Kim Kardashian’s blonde has looked all week. It doesn’t look like white-blonde straw in these photos. Like, she found some really good conditioner, maybe? Granted, I’m reassessing my opinion once I’m getting a look at the close-ups, but from a distance, the blonde doesn’t look as terrifyingly damaged as it did a few days ago.

As for her outfit, Kim is wearing head-to-toe Givenchy. Her friend Riccardo Tisci gave her this Spring/Summer 2015 ensemble to wear before the pieces are even available in stores. Is it wrong to like the coat? I like the coat. The rest of the outfit is too small – the Daily Mail had pics of Kim without the coat, and it looks like the pants are unnaturally cinched (to the point where it must be difficult to sit down properly).

Kim went shopping by herself yesterday – according to the photo agency, she stopped by Didier Ludot (a vintage clothing shop) and La Perla (lingerie). With her dead eyes and expressionless face, I was reminded of someone else… this is how Katie Holmes used to look when she was with Tom Cruise. Like, Katie was always spaced out and wandering around cities, shopping and looking like she was on drugs. Now that’s Kim. It’s like Kanye West is a one-person cult and we might need to FREE KATFACE.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

View image | gettyimages.com

Benedict Cumberbatch and his wife Sophie Hunterbatch made their first post-honeymoon appearance last night in London, at Buckingham Palace. They only do royal appearances now, darling. Benedict and Sophie joined Princess Anne, the Princess Royal, for a charity dinner to raise money for the MND Association (MND = motor neurone disease). Benedict is an ambassador for the MND Association and has been for years (that’s why his Ice Bucket Challenge was so over-the-top). Also at the dinner? Stephen Hawking and his ex-wife Jane Hawking. The Princess Royal is the royal patron for the MND Association, just one of her many good works.

Sophie sure loves gowns with pockets, doesn’t she? I don’t have the designer ID on this, but considering she wore so many Erdem gowns throughout the awards season and considering Erdem’s pocket-friendly designs, many believe this is Erdem. Could be. Her bump is pretty big too. Where are we on the birth schedule betting? I don’t know who will give birth first, Sophie or Jessica Biel. Both of them look ready to pop.

As for Bendy… well, he has a brief moment where he’s not rushing around doing ten different projects. I believe the Sherlock special has wrapped principle filming and Benedict’s rehearsals for Hamlet will be starting up soon enough. Then he’s got Doctor Strange. Busy, busy, busy. At this event, Benedict wore blue velvet (sigh) and he kept his arm around Sophie throughout the night.

View image | gettyimages.com

View image | gettyimages.com

Photos courtesy of WENN, Getty.

Chloe Sevigny has always been a shade-throwing hipster Mean Girl. And it’s sort of been glorious. I mean, it’s Chloe Sevigny! She’s not trying to get your approval. She’s not trying to make you like her. She throws shade because she doesn’t care for some upstart hussies and that’s that. One of my favorite Chloe-beefs was her constant shade for Gwyneth Paltrow. More than a decade ago, Chloe pointed out that Gwyneth was just trying to be Carolyn Bessette (so true), and Chloe continued the shade parade at the Met Gala a few years ago, when Chloe smirked at Gwyneth’s sleeves.

Anyway, Chloe has a new interview with V Magazine and she has words about Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Stone, Angelina Jolie and more. The point of the interview is that Chloe has put together a coffee table book full of her life as Chloe Sevigny. Some highlights:

Why she wanted to reclaim her own aesthetic: “the Internet has all these terrible images, plus Google Image is boundless and never ending….”

She’s not about “good taste”: “Everyone is so obsessed with good taste, and I find that really boring. It wasn’t about every cover and every ad I’ve been in. I was really selective and wanted to set a mood and capture this spirit of not, like, the pretty girl, the sexy girl, but a different quality. I’m not arching my back in every photo.

Criticism, Vincent Gallo & aging: “When Brown Bunny came out, there was a real puritanical press onslaught. They dragged me over the coals. Doing something transgressive like that, it was kind of inevitable, starting off with Kids. I love Vincent [Gallo] as an artist. We’re not friends anymore, which kind of makes me sad. Maybe we will be again one day. Now that I’m getting old, though, it’s hard to see people you haven’t seen in a while because everybody ages so much and I don’t want him to see me older. But yeah, other than that, people love to say that snide, “She’s so indie, cooler-than-cool” stuff. I don’t take offense to any of it.

Marketing & movie stars: “So much is about marketing and selling the product. They’ll have a really peppy funny girl on the talk show rounds, and everybody adores her and loves her and wants to be her or f–k her, and then so many more people want to watch the movie or TV show. I understand that star quality, how much value that carries. I love when a movie star is a great movie star. I think Angelina Jolie is a great movie star. I don’t think I can be that, or just be an actor. I don’t think I have the charisma. Which is probably why I never reached another level. I like Emma Stone. Whenever she’s herself, she’s really cute. Jennifer Lawrence I find annoying. Too crass.”

[From V Magazine]

Jennifer Lawrence is crass? Eh, I can see how a random person would describe J-Law as crass, but coming from an artist/bohemian like Chloe, it seems rather judgy. I mean, Chloe gave Vincent Gallo an on-camera hummer. THAT is crass. But I find myself agreeing with Chloe about the value of star quality and how that translates into financial success. I also agree with her about Angelina Jolie being a “great movie star.” As for Emma Stone… “Whenever she’s herself, she’s really cute.” Meaning that whenever Emma is playing a character, it’s NOT cute? Ha.

For those die-hard Sevigny fans, go and read the full interview – she references Terry Richardson and Larry Clark a few times, and gives an account of wandering into Clark’s art-filled apartment when she was still in high school. It reads like the beginning of an after-school special about what happens when teenage girls get invited to random strangers’ apartments to be “filmed” for an “art project.”

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Last year, I covered one of Jeremy Clarkson’s seemingly endless racist controversies, and it seems like people were interested in him, so here we go again. Clarkson is the decade-long host of the BBC’s Top Gear (seen in the US on BBC America). Top Gear does celebrity interviews, they get celebrities to drive a tricky course in a reasonably priced car, and they also do non-celebrity road trips around various countries. In the past few years alone, Clarkson has been acting like a neo-colonialist buffoon, alienating Argentinians, referring to an Asian man as a “slope,” using the n-word (and then lying about it), mocking disabled people, alienating all of India and describing Mexicans as “lazy” and “feckless.” Seriously. And it’s only now that the BBC has gotten around to doing a temporary suspension. So mysterious, you guys.

Top Gear host Jeremy Clarkson has been suspended by the BBC “following a fracas” with a producer. The corporation said the 54-year-old presenter had been suspended “pending an investigation”.

“No one else has been suspended. Top Gear will not be broadcast this Sunday,” it said.

Clarkson was given what he called his “final warning” last May after claims he used a racist word while filming the popular BBC motoring show. At the time, he said the BBC had told him he would be sacked if he made “one more offensive remark, anywhere, at any time”. The BBC gave no further details on the current incident involving Clarkson, and said it would not be making any further statements at this time. Clarkson’s representatives have yet to reply to requests for a comment.

[From BBC]

So what was involved with this “fracas”? No one knows for sure. The Daily Mail says Clarkson threw a punch at a male producer. Seriously, and that was what went too far? Not when he said striking workers should be shot? Not all the racist crap?

Obviously, Clarkson has been making “jokes” on Twitter about his suspension – go here to read some of them. There are also a lot of Clarkson fan-boys signing a petition to force the BBC to reinstate him. Hm… is it like the Duck Dynasty thing in America? Like, Clarkson can be as racist and offensive as possible and there will still be knuckle-dragging jackasses who defend him because “people are too sensitive” and “political correctness has gone too far” and “you should be allowed to punch your coworkers, mate.”

Photos courtesy of WENN.