Taking too long? Close loading screen.
Connect with us


Iggy Azalea Appears In 1st Music Video Since Giving Birth With Tinashe: Watch ‘DLNW’



Iggy Azalea is back on the grind. In her first new track since confirming that she gave birth on the down-low, Iggy teamed up with Tinashe on ‘Dance Like Nobody’s Watching’ and delivered a music video with a wardrobe straight out of a storybook!

Get ready to dance like nobody’s watching. Iggy Azalea reunited with Tinashe to release “Dance Like Nobody’s Watching” on Aug. 21, an electro-funk dance banger rumored to be the first taste of Iggy’s third studio album. It also marks the first bit of music from Iggy, 30, since she let the world know she gave birth to a baby boy while …seemingly no one was looking. Well, all eyes are her and Tinashe, 27, now, especially since they delivered a music video for their collab!

Iggy Azalea, Tinashe
(Courtesy of YouTube)

The music video is edited like an animated scrapbook, an effect that’s enhanced with Iggy and Tinashe’s dresses that look straight out of a storybook about princesses. After filming the music video, it appears that Iggy strolled right out in her fairy princess dress, because she was pictured in the same outfit while pushing a Fendi stroller in a parking lot on Aug. 13. So, it appears that Iggy filmed this music video after giving birth!

Iggy Azalea
(Courtesy of YouTube)

Iggy announced the new song with Tinashe on Aug. 14. The two previously collaborated on Tinashe’s “All Hands On Deck (Remix)” in 2014, a career highlight for Iggy. “So soooo excited about this one! All hands on deck rmx is one of my favorite moments!” Ms Azalea posted to Instagram. “So yeah – I’m crazy excited for a round 2 & insanely grateful to have you be a part of this record @tinashenow we made another one for the books.” She later revealed the single’s cover art, which featured here in the Victorian-England-Meets-Von-Dutch outfit she wore while taking her baby for a stroll on Aug. 13.

Courtesy of YouTube

“DLNW” comes more than two months after Iggy confirmed the reports that she had secretly welcomed a baby. “I have a son,” she posted to her Instagram Story on June 10. “I kept waiting for the right time to say something but it feels like the more time passes, the more I realize I’m always going to feel anxious to share that giant [news] with the world. I want to keep his life private but wanted to make it clear he is not a secret [and] I love him beyond words.” A month later, she revealed her son’s name is Onyx, a touching reference to her real name of Amethyst Amelia Kelly. As of August 2020, she’s yet to name her son’s father, but many suspect Playboi Carti is the daddy

Iggy Azalea and Tinashe teamed up for another track (AP Images/SplashNews)

Iggy’s last bit of new music was 2019’s “Lola,” her collaboration with Alice Chater. Following Iggy’s surprise birth announcement, fans returned to “Lola” and think they spotted a moment in a behind-the-scenes video where Iggy may have low-key confirmed her pregnancy by rubbing this stomach. Even with this “bump,” Iggy didn’t look like she had a bun in the oven. In fact, a common statement online after Iggy revealed she was a mom was, “when was she pregnant?

Blame Kylie Jenner for the secrecy. Though there were multiple reports that Kylie was preggers in late 2017, she revealed she had given birth to Stormi Webster in February 2018. Iggy saw how Kylie did her best to “hide her pregnancy and that kind of gave her the inspiration to do it too,” a source told HollywoodLife EXCLUSIVELY. Though the cat was out of the bag in late 2017, by that time, Kylie was reportedly four months pregnant. After the news broke, she withdrew from the public eye. Iggy, on the other hand, didn’t go into hiding like the makeup mogul. “She was just able to throw people off by wearing baggy clothes whenever she did go anywhere,” the insider added.

Source : Hollywood Life Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Netflix is developing a live action ‘Assassin’s Creed’ show



Netflix announced this morning that it’s partnering with Ubisoft to adapt the game publisher’s “Assassin’s Creed” franchise into a live action series.

The franchise jumps around in history, telling the story of a secret society of assassins with “genetic memory” and their centuries-long battle the knights templar. It has sold 155 million games worldwide and was also turned into a nearly incomprehensible 2016 film starring Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard, which underperformed at the box office.

The companies say that they’re currently looking for a showrunner. Jason Altman and Danielle Kreinik of Ubisoft’s film and television division will serve as executive producers. (In addition to working on adaptations of Ubisoft’s intellectual property, the publisher is also involved in the Apple TV+ industry comedy “Mythic Quest.”)

“We’re excited to partner with Ubisoft and bring to life the rich, multilayered storytelling that Assassin’s Creed is beloved for,” said Netflix’s vice president of original series Peter Friedlander in a statement. “From its breathtaking historical worlds and massive global appeal as one of the best selling video game franchises of all time, we are committed to carefully crafting epic and thrilling entertainment based on this distinct IP and provide a deeper dive for fans and our members around the world to enjoy.”

It sounds like there could be follow-up shows as well, with the announcement saying that Netflix and Ubisoft will “tap into the iconic video game’s trove of dynamic stories with global mass appeal for adaptations of live action, animated, and anime series.”

Netflix recently placed an eight-episode order for “Resident Evil,” another video game franchise that was previously adapted for the big screen. And it also had a big hit with its adaptation of “The Witcher,” which is based on a fantasy book series that was popularized via video games.


Continue Reading


Original Content podcast: ‘Lovecraft Country’ is gloriously bonkers



As we tried to recap the first season of HBO’s “Lovecraft Country,” one thing became clear: The show is pretty nuts.

The story begins by sending Atticus “Tic” Freeman (Jonathan Majors), his friend Leti Lewis (Jurnee Smolett) and his uncle George (Courtney B. Vance) on a road trip across mid-’50s America in search of Tic’s missing father. You might assume that the search will occupy the entire season, or take even longer than that; instead, the initial storyline is wrapped up quickly.

And while there’s a story running through the whole season, most of the episodes are relatively self-contained, offering their own versions on various horror and science fiction tropes. There’s a haunted house episode, an Indiana Jones episode, a time travel episode and more.

The show isn’t perfect — the writing can be clunky, the special effects cheesy and cheap-looking. But at its best, it does an impressive job of mixing increasingly outlandish plots, creepy monsters (with plentiful gore) and a healthy dose of politics.

After all, “Lovecraft Country” (adapted form a book by Matt Ruff) is named after notoriously racist horror writer H.P. Lovecraft, but it focuses almost entirely on Black characters, making the case that old genres can be reinvigorated with diverse casts and a rethinking of political assumptions.

In addition to reviewing the show, the latest episode of the Original Content podcast also includes a discussion of Netflix earnings, the new season of “The Bachelorette” and the end of Quibi.

You can listen in the player below, subscribe using Apple Podcasts or find us in your podcast player of choice. If you like the show, please let us know by leaving a review on Apple. You can also follow us on Twitter or send us feedback directly. (Or suggest shows and movies for us to review!)

And if you’d like to skip ahead, here’s how the episode breaks down:
0:00 Intro
0:36 Netflix discussion
3:18 “The Bachelorette”
6:30 Quibi
14:35 “Lovecraft Country” review
31:32 “Lovecraft Country” spoiler discussion


Continue Reading


The short, strange life of Quibi



“All that is left now is to offer a profound apology for disappointing you and, ultimately, for letting you down,” Jeffrey Katzenberg and Meg Whitman wrote, closing out an open letter posted to Medium. “We cannot thank you enough for being there with us, and for us, every step of the way.”

With that, the founding executives confirmed the rumors and put Quibi to bed, a little more than six months after launching the service.

Starting a business is an impossibly difficult task under nearly any conditions, but even in a world that’s littered with high-profile failures, the streaming service’s swan song was remarkable for both its dramatically brief lifespan and the amount of money the company managed to raise (and spend) during that time.

A month ahead of its commercial launch, Quibi announced that it had raised another $750 million. That second round of funding brought the yet-to-launch streaming service’s funding up to $1.75 billion — roughly the same as the gross domestic product of Belize, give or take $100 million.

“We concluded a very successful second raise which will provide Quibi with a strong cash runway,” CFO Ambereen Toubassy told the press at the time. “This round of $750 million gives us tremendous flexibility and the financial wherewithal to build content and technology that consumers embrace.”

Quibi’s second funding round brought the yet-to-launch streaming service’s funding up to $1.75 billion — roughly the same as the gross domestic product of Belize, give or take $100 million.

From a financial perspective, Quibi had reason to be hopeful. Its fundraising ambitions were matched only by the aggressiveness with which it planned to spend that money. At the beginning of the year, Whitman touted the company’s plans to spend up to $100,000 per minute of programming — $6 million per hour. The executive proudly contrasted the jaw-dropping sum to the estimated $500 to $5,000 an hour spent by YouTube creators.

For Whitman and Katzenberg — best known for their respective reigns at HP and Disney — money was key to success in an already crowded marketplace. $1 billion was a drop in the bucket compared to the $17.3 billion Netflix was expected to spend on original content in 2020, but it was a start.

Following in the footsteps of Apple, who had also recently announced plans to spend $1 billion to launch its own fledgling streaming service, the company was enlisting A-List talent, from Steven Spielberg, Guillermo del Toro and Ridley Scott to Reese Witherspoon, Jennifer Lopez and LeBron James. If your name carried any sort of clout in Hollywood boardrooms, Quibi would happily cut you a check, seemingly regardless of content specifics.

Quibi’s strategy primarily defined itself by itself by its constraints. In hopes of attracting younger millennial and Gen Z, the company’s content would be not just mobile-first, but mobile-only. There would be no smart TV app, no Chromecast or AirPlay compatibility. Pricing, while low compared to the competition, was similarly off-putting. After a 90-day free trial, $4.99 got you an ad-supported subscription. And boy howdy, were there ads. Ads upon ads. Ads all the way down. Paying another $3 a month would make them go away.

Technological constraints and Terms of Service fine print forbade screen shots — a fundamental understanding of how content goes viral in 2020 (though, to be fair, one shared with other competing streaming services). Amusingly, the inability to share content led to videos like this one of director Sam Raimi’s perplexingly earnest “The Golden Arm.”

It features a built-on laugh track from viewers as Emmy winner Rachel Brosnahan lies in a hospital bed after refusing to remove a golden prosthetic. It’s an allegory, surely, but not one intentionally played for laughs. Many of the videos that did ultimately make the rounds on social media were regarded as a curiosity — strange artifacts from a nascent streaming service that made little sense on paper.

Most notable of all, however, were the “quick bites” that gave the service its confusingly pronounced name. Each program would be served in 5-10 minute chunks. The list included films acquired by the service, sliced up into “chapters.” Notably, the service didn’t actually purchase the content outright; instead, rights were set to revert to their creators after seven years. Meanwhile, after two years, content partners were able to “reassemble” the chunks back into a movie for distribution.


Continue Reading