Bleats

When Exactly Did We All Start Hating On Gwyneth Paltrow?

A serious investigation into the starting point of when Gwyneth Paltrow became the internet's punching bag.

Gwyneth Paltrow says dumb stuff. That much we know is true. Hell, she says and does so much facepalm-y stuff that coming up with new ways to make fun of her actually gets exhausting.

But here’s a big question: When exactly did Gwyneth become the internet’s punching bag?

Ummmm…

Surely there was a point before the tide turned and the name “Gwyneth Paltrow” became synonymous with “insufferable idiot”. Since this is a very serious question that deserves a deep dive, the GOAT team decided to go through the many – MANY – “Gwyneth” moments over the last few decades in order to find the origin point of all this hate.

It was a hell of a rage-inducing odyssey but we managed to narrow it down to a few key moments where Gwyneth could’ve plausibly taken on the “butt monkey” tag.

Winning the Best Actress Oscar

Between her ill-fitting pink dress, her blubbering acceptance speech and winning the Oscar over other better performances, the whole night was a cauldron pot of hate-worthy moments for Gwyneth critics.

Naming her daughter “Apple” and other random cringey mum bits

When Gwyneth decided to name her daughter Apple, this felt like a slap in the face for many. Like, who names their kid after a fruit? It’s bonkers.

While this would be nothing compared to the glut of weird celebrity baby names we see these days, it was a bit of an anomaly back in 2004 and it made people think that maybe Gwyneth was a bit of a lemon.

Then there’s all the weird stuff she’s said and done since she’s become a mother, like posting photos of Apple without permission and telling folks – without irony – that being a mum is harder for an actress than someone with an office job.

Heavy front-runner this one.

Oh boy…

“Conscious uncoupling”

The whole divorce announcement was actually really nice since it was made clear that there was still much love and respect, but Gwyneth labeling it “conscious uncoupling” pushed it from “awww” and straight into “oh for god’s sake.”

Why couldn’t she just go with a simple “we’re breaking up” announcement, Gwyneth?

No wonder why her new husband can only stand to hang out with her a few days a week.

Plugging her weird Goop stuff

Hoo boy, where do we even begin with the dumpster fire of a lifestyle brand that is Goop.

There’s the ridiculously expensive health fads, the absolutely bonkers gift guides, promoting the shoving of jade eggs up people’s vaginas as a positive thing, and just making up weird crap for her website. And that’s just from the last few months.

Enough said.

Forgetting she was in a bunch of Marvel movies

The last thing you want to do is piss off comic book fans and Gwyneth somehow managed to do it by simply forgetting that she’s been in some of the biggest Marvel films ever.

In her defence, she’s been in seven Marvel films so it can get a little hazy but try telling that to annoyed fanboys.

Toxic Masculinity Went Full Throttle On Fast And Furious With The Stars’ Pathetic Demands

Pitting three protein-chugging bros on a Fast and Furious movie set was always going to end in tears.

Fast and Furious has unexpectedly become a behemoth of a franchise over the past decade or so. They continue to find ways of defying the laws of physics with their action scenes, the cars have become even flashier, and the cast continues to get bigger with the addition of several A-list stars like Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham.

With so much money and star power on one movie set, you’d think that a lot of ego massaging would be going on to appease all those A-listers, particularly the male leads.

And you’d be completely right actually because it turns out that Fast and Furious is less of a movie and more a haven of toxic masculinity courtesy of Vin Diesel, Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham.

Run at me, bro.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the making of the last few Fast and Furious movies essentially consisted of trying to not make either Diesel, Johnson or Statham look, ahem, weak.

In fact, the trio’s respective egos were so fragile that each had a ridiculous agreement that limits how many punches they can take during a fight scene, though this was later abandoned because it just caused unnecessary headaches for the poor film crew.

According to producers and crew members on the films, Mr. Statham, 51 years old, negotiated an agreement with the studio that limits how badly he can be beaten up on screen.

Mr. Diesel, 52, has his younger sister, a producer on the films, police the number of punches he takes. And Mr. Johnson, 47, enlists producers, editors and fight coordinators to help make sure he always gives as good as he gets.

Diesel sounded particularly sensitive to all the male energy that was happening on the Fast and Furious set, so much so that his sister Samantha Vincent, who is a producer on the films, weighed in on fight scenes and rehearsals to make sure her bro got to “get his licks back in.”

Three punches for you, three punches for me.

That only scratches the surface of this protein-heavy saga as this level of dick-swinging went above and beyond onscreen fisticuffs. Statham reportedly liked to stop by the editing room to give his input on the fight scenes (i.e twisting the editor’s arm to make him look better).

If you think this is all pathetic and ridiculous, you’d be correct but you also haven’t heard the worst of it yet.

According to a crew member working on The Fate of the Furious, there was a scene that required Johnson to be lying on the ground at Diesel’s feet. Apparently this was too much for Johnson’s fragile ego to handle and he insisted that his character should “at least be sitting up.”

Guess that explains where scenes like this came from.

Must. Overcompensate.

While all the men were worried over who looks the best, the women were didn’t really give a crap about this sort of “scorekeeping” and were, you know, adults about the whole thing.

It’s all pretty pathetic and speaks volumes about why we must quash this toxic masculinity thing once and for all. Then again, should we have expected anything more from three hyper-masculine bros who are in reality nothing more than “candy asses“?

Definitely not.

Ben Affleck's Batman Movie Was Going To Do What No Other Dark Knight Was Brave Enough To Do

Still looking forward to Matt Reeves' take on Batman though.

It’s been long confirmed that Batfleck has hung up his cape and handed over the reins of the new solo Batman to Matt Reeves and Robert Pattinson, who are directing and starring as the new Caped Crusader respectively.

While there’s little doubt that the new Batman movie will be entertaining at the very least, one does wonder what Ben Affleck had in mind for his Batman film that made Warner Bros go “nope, get out.”

Well according to the canned film’s would-be cinematographer, Robert Richardson, Affleck was going to focus less on the boom-boom stuff and more on the “hey, isn’t a guy running around chasing crims while dressed as a bat kinda messed up” angle.

Basically this scene from Batman Begins but extended to two hours.

Richardson spilled the beans on the Happy Sad Confused podcast, saying that Affleck’s take on Batman would’ve been about “insanity” and it was going to dive deep into Arkham Asylum.

“So I think you would’ve seen something a little darker than what we’ve seen in the past and more into the individual, who’s inside Batman. What element may be sane and what element may actually not be sane.

“So he was entering into a little more of the Arkham, as you know, he’s going into where you keep everyone who was bad, everyone that shifted and Batman.”

So less fisticuffs and branding crims with bat symbols and more of a look into the mind of a billionaire who thinks dressing up as a bat vigilante is normal?

That… sounds pretty damn cool actually.

Badly.

We’ve seen surface level explorations into Bruce Wayne’s mental state in previous films, but Affleck’s idea of going all in on the heady stuff is new territory that other incarnations of the Dark Knight wouldn’t have dared to touch.

And then there’s the Arkham Asylum setting idea, which is an inspired choice. Putting Batman in the world’s most escapable mental health facility filled with Gotham’s most psychotic crims is a great way combine Affleck’s intended deep dive into Wayne’s twisted pathology and the compulsory series of fights against baddies.

Considering how well Arkham was used in Rocksteady’s critically acclaimed Batman: Arkham trilogy of games, it was a slam dunk idea.

The (un)happiest place in Gotham!

We’re now left in a perpetual state of “what if” regarding Affleck’s Batman movie, which had so much promise. But hey, Reeves and Pattinson are going to do a good job on their version and that’s what ultimately matters.

And if you’re still looking for your “dark, heady Batman movie” fix, there’s the Joaquin Phoenix-starring Joker movie to look forward to.

#Trending

Show More Show Less

Follow Us