And now, a game!! Take a look at these very telling, very sexual photos, replete with tastefully placed BWE.tv logos*, and tell us which one of these things is not like the other… You might also want to play this in the background while scanning, i.e. My Favorite Bon Jovi Song Ever.

NSFW-ish!!

A.

B.

C.

D.

Answer: Trick question!! They all feature Bon Jovi with white women. JK, it’s C.

*If you’d like to see their nipples, feel free to, you know, buy the book.

Photos via Splash News Online.

Follow me on Twitter.

Follow BWEtv on Twitter.

Go to Source

What I’m about to show you now is a new and improved version of that video that includes subtitles.  You are about to lose your mind.  I have laughed multiple times at this video just from thinking about it while in a conference room with other people who were all like, “Are you okay?”

A very special thanks to Lindsay Mound and Max Silvestri for being responsible for this video entering my lives.

Go to Source

We got our hands on a rare promo for this film featuring Hollywood’s human fine wine Rudd and Carell, looking and sounding about as sophisticated as we’ve ever seen them. Also we would 100 percent seriously hang up the painting of Carell surrounded by cats in our offices, but then again, we have severe emotional problems.

You can get this and more in the theaters! Movie opens today.

Go to Source

It’s a CGI-fest starring Dan Aykroyd for some reason that’s likely to insult the intelligence of sub-one-year-olds. This seems unarguable. But rather than just blindly complain about how it’s molesting our childhood or whatever, honestly, what were people expecting from a Yogi Bear movie?

Let’s discuss after the jump:

Yogi Bear is a 50-year-old cartoon about a bear based on a Honeymooners character and named after a Yankee who wears a tie and steals picnic baskets and gets chased by a ranger who always ends up getting messed up. Is a dumb-looking film adaptation really murdering the source material? What did we expect, Paul Thomas Anderson hijacking the project and turning it into some dark, avant-garde meta-animation? Granted, the trailer does look exceptionally stupid, but let’s not act like if the Yogi Bear cartoon came out today, we’d actually care about it.

The nostalgic outrage reminds me of when the Inspector Gadget movie came out and many 80s-kids — myself included — whined about how bad it looked and how they were ruining a cartoon we loved growing up. Obviously I still have fond memories of that show, but seriously, every single episode involved Gadget misunderstanding everything in some impossibly ignorant way, then bumbling through the case as Penny and Brain solved everything on their computer book behind the scenes (very prescient with that computer book, huh?) Sure, the movie was dumb, but it’s not like they butchered Catcher In The Rye, they just updated a thing that I was too young to think was stupid to a time when I was no longer too young to think it was stupid.

We can complain about the actual Yogi Bear trailer itself, and the laziness of the CGI and the voice acting, and about this golden age of Hollywood brand-pilfering, and be completely right to do so. But c’mon people, it’s not like they’re ruining The Flintstones (already done) or Looney Tunes or The Muppets — just because it’s based on an old thing doesn’t mean that old thing wasn’t also kinda stupid. It’s a bad-looking movie, but really, this film isn’t destroying our childhoods, it’s just the product of completely standard Hollywood laziness.

Go to Source

Before we get into this week’s episode, let’s take a moment of B-Roll to honor the brave men and women who gave their lives defending our right to have cable reality cooking competitions:

Thanks dudes! Now let’s criticize the sh*t out of themed foods!

For this week’s Quickfire, 19-year-old congressman Aaron Schock of Illinois explains that when lobbyists buy food for D.C. politicians, the food must fit on a toothpick, so the challenge this week is to prepare an extravagant meal that fits entirely on a toothpick. That…makes complete sense, actually. That is an actual element of D.C. politics, and it is seamlessly represented in a Top Chef challenge. Wh…whaaa? How’saa…. wh… w…. IT MAKES TOO MUCH SENSEEEEEEEEEE!!!!

Headless Dan here now – my body is typing with decapitated aftershock, like a headless chicken blogger for Eggs.com (actually a parked search engine site). This week’s challenge is also a “Mount Rushmore Oops That’s Not Here” High Stakes Quickfire, where the winning chef gets immunity and $20,000 of shady Dial soap charity write-off money. And what the hell, Aaron Schock will judge the winner, because he’s eaten things off toothpicks before.

Schocker picks Kevin, Stephen and Angelo as his Top 3, but “Only one contestant’s food tasted like fireworks going off inside my mouth.” And it wasn’t Stephen, who literally tried to cram fireworks into his mouth.

WHO WAS IT? Find out after the HIGH STAKES Jump:

Angelo wins! Sorry about your failing restaurant and kids, Andrea, but Angelo needs to invest in his Getting People Eliminated Advice Clinic. Looks like Schocker is as good at recognizing chef talent as he is at playing with Pattern Blocks, which he does. Too bad Kenny was still recovering from his stroke this week:

For the Elimination Challenge, it’s POWER LUNCH time. Time to CLOSE THE DEAL and GET ME THE HENDERSON ACCOUNT and GREED IS GOOD 2: MONEY NEVER SLEEPS. The Chefs will be taking over the famous Palm, owned and operated by James Woods as Michael Buffer:

The Palm provides the chefs with 5 random proteins: swordfish, salmon, lamb chops, porterhouse, and ‘roidy-lobsters. Andrea doesn’t cook with swordfish often, and she doesn’t know what she’s doing, but she’s gonna wing it (Always Works Thing #1!) and throw some vanilla in there (Always Works Thing #2!) and she sounds like she taped her testimonials after she lost (Always Works Thing #3). Unfazed, she declares, “There’s no crying in the kitchen!” Especially if you’re playing baseball in the kitchen. Cause you should be paying attention to where the baseballs are going and stuff.

Tiffany says “I know my fish recipe off the back of my hand.” You mean “like” the back of your hand? Otherwise doesn’t that mean you don’t really know it, if you wrote it on the back of your hand? She seems to be in trouble too, but we’ll wait and see. She then cheers up her non-boyfriend Ed, who’s starting to doubt himself because he now talks like Nicolas Cage. But he’ll fine as long as no one totally steals a large component of his dish.

Uhoh, the power lunchers are arriving:

Alex better decide on a salmon preparation quick, or he’s effed. How about an English pea puree? What a great idea that no one told him about the night before in front of Bravo cameras and won’t require the stealing of any fellow chef’s pea puree. In an unrelated event, Ed has lost his pea puree, and asks Stephen if he grabbed it by mistake because they often think they’re the other one. Nope! Must’ve just disappeared.

Bravo pollsters know what happened to it:

At the featured power lunching table, Padma and Gail are joined by Schocker, Art Smith from the restaurant “Art and Soul” (who named that, me?), and 35 tv correspondents. Tom, meanwhile, is eating all by his lonesome:

The judges convene and appear generally unenthused by this week’s offerings, though Art Smith claims that he did sense that a lot of love and care and other abstract things (body thetans?) went into some of the dishes. This leads to one of the funniest obviously-intentional Bravo cuts of the season:

The judges call for Tiffany, Alex, and Ed. Uhoh – surely this is the bottom, because Tiffany’s fish was overcooked and the producers want Alex and Ed to dramatically blame each other over the pea puree. Nope! Top 3. And Alex wins, because Art Smith loved his pea puree so much. Huh? I mean, surely that’s not legal, right? Or did he honestly just make a pea puree and Ed happened to lose his pea puree? Aren’t there seventy-five cameras on everything at all times, and still no one saw what really happened? Did they all accidentally zoom into the Monogram logo at the same time?

Man, this season just keeps getting less and less fair, but the show is called Top Chef and not Top Fair. That’d be stupid because you’d be like “I am not getting enough information from this show’s title.”

After a Stephen “being on the bottom” seminar, we come to…

The Bottom 3: Kelly, Andrea, and Kevin

Future Finalist Kelly makes a rare bottom appearance, and pulls a Jen from last season and breaks down crying even though she’s not gonna get eliminated and she’s still really good. Her steak was too salty, but she escapes by saying that she’s better off when she cooks “her food.” Ahh, the warm, familiar smell of “I need to cook my food.” It’s like coming home from school in the dead of winter to a nice hot bowl of mom’s chicken noodle soup, which you find to be oversalted and your mom’s like “I need to get back to cooking my soup.” So comforting.

Kevin finds himself on the bad end of one of Tom’s “I’m gonna criticize your technique super specifically this week to remind everyone I know what I’m talking about, dammit!” tirades, but he ends up safe too.

Andrea pulls the old “I never cook this dish” excuse, setting up Gail for a snappy “If we want to taste the food that you cook every day we’d just go to your restaurant.” Ouch! Pack your ZINGs and go!

Tom concludes the Elimination with the painful line, “For this challenge, you had to make us a power lunch, but unfortunately, a lot of your dishes left us wanting to take a power nap. NEXT! That was my scripted rejection line from Next. Wait, what show is this? Ohhh right, Chef Men. You are eliminated from Chef Men.”

Andrea gets choked up, and in a rare turn, so does Tom, probably because he remembers how lonely he was when he tasted her food:

Andrea packs her knives, and on her way out explains “It’s a game. And this week, I just didn’t play the game very well.” Wow – most accurate parting speech ever. Let’s bring her back in! Anyone have one of those golden tickets from Singled Out?

Next week on Top Chef: The Fall of Alex -

LULZ! Successful next-episode teaser, Bravo! I am very watching.

Power Lunch episode thoughts? Favorite / least favorite parts? Funny/stupid stuff I didn’t mention? Elimination reactions? Predictions for next week? Leave ‘em all in the Power Comments.

Go to Source

Well good news, Kids!! Now, both you and your parents can enjoy Inception together, with this: Inception for Kidz, a movie the whole family can enjoy. Check out this exclusive trailer!

Yes, it’s true: We’ve made Inception even better.

Follow me on Twitter.

Follow BWEtv on Twitter.

Go to Source

‘I opened the glass door at the front and I saw something. I took it be part of a pair of jeans and then I wondered if it was a toy snake that children use,’ said Mrs Foley, from Exeter. ‘But then it poked its tongue out at me. It was horrible and quite big. It was just lying there on the washing. I don’t know if it had been through the complete cycle or not. I screamed and screamed – I was terrified.’

Yeah, no S you were terrified. Can you imagine thinking a snake was a part of a pair of jeans? OMG. Guys. GUYS. THIS WAS A LITERAL TROUSER SNAKE. I’m going to take a victory lap around the coffee shop, excuse me.

Phew! I’m back! That was both satisfying and embarrassing. Anyway, this story gets worse:

She ran out in the street to ask for help and a passer-by told her he thought it was a boa constrictor. Her ordeal got worse when she called police – and was accused of making a hoax call – while the RSPCA refused to send anyone out until the next day to collect the snake. Mrs Foley and her two sons, aged 18 and 21, were forced to sleep in the house convinced the snake would escape from the machine.

Do the people over at the RSPCA normally get prank calls from frightened sounded middle aged house wives? Is that a thing that older women do for kicks? Like the Jerky Boys? Remember the Jerky Boys? They would’ve so done something like that.

Anyway, that’s what I call a snake surprise! Similar to this:

Go to Source

More pics below of JT bringing BASKETBALL back! That’s what I would’ve typed if this were a tabloid in 2006-07. Which it kinda is. I’m leaving it.

Go to Source

I feel like this is particularly relevant news as Michelle just posted pictures of Russell Brand in his underwear. Now, I’m no underwear expert (I wish. I’d be Dr. Sarah Walker, PhD in Underthings), but Russ appears to be wearing American Apparel briefs. However, he might be changing his underwear tune soon, because as the article says:

Dubbed the R-Pant, the low-rise briefs and trunks are designed to be worn under skinny jeans and trousers, a look popularised by the likes of Russell Brand and Mark Ronson, two celebrities the chain cites as design influences.

So, technically, the R-Pant could be referring to Russell or Ronson. I mean, it’s clearly not. But I’m confused. You’re naming an underwear after someone, but cite different influences? Stop with the MIND GAMES, M and S!

Further:

Pattinson will not star in an advertising campaign for M&S. But a spokesman said the Twilight actor has been seen shopping for underwear at the store.

Sooooo. Cool. Pattinson will not model the underwear, but he has been seen in and around the store possibly shopping for underwear. That’s enough of an endorsement for me to buy the R-Pant (not kidding).

Go to Source

Good to know that only 2 years later (get it? I’m 18 in this scenario), the Wendy’s name still means something. Check out this glowing review we came across where the Wendy’s brand is still proving itself to be above and beyond fast food perfection:

(via Digg)

Go to Source