Click on the Manage Content for adding and managing content.
Click on the Rotator Settings and choose what and how it will be displayed.

Jennifer Lawrence contó que perdió un papel en una película de Tarantino por no ser lo suficientemente guapa

Kraig Pakulski 0 24 Article rating: No rating

Por Amarachi Orie, CNN

Jennifer Lawrence puede haber protagonizado éxitos de taquilla como “Los Juegos del Hambre” y la franquicia “X-Men”, pero se ha perdido al menos un papel importante en una película, y esto, según ella, se debió a su apariencia.

La ganadora del Oscar afirma que no fue elegida para el drama de época de Quentin Tarantino de 2019, “Érase una vez… en Hollywood”, porque la gente decía que “no era lo suficientemente guapa”.

En el podcast en vivo “Happy Sad Confused with Josh Horowitz”, publicado el lunes, Lawrence habló sobre la lista de cineastas con los que quiere trabajar.

“Tarantino te ha estado persiguiendo. Te quiere”, le dijo Horowitz a Lawrence mientras la señalaba.

“No sé nada de eso”, respondió la actriz.

“Es cierto. (…) él dijo eso”, insistió Horowitz. “En ‘Los Ocho más odiados’ el papel de Jennifer Jason Leigh fue escrito originalmente para ti, creo”.

“Lo rechacé, lo cual creo que fue un error”, intervino Lawrence, antes de que ambos rieran.

Tarantino declaró a Entertainment Weekly en 2015 que era un “gran fan de Jennifer Lawrence” y que la había contactado para interpretar a la fugitiva Daisy Domergue en el thriller de misterio de 2015 “Los Ocho más odiados”, pero Lawrence estaba demasiado ocupada con “toda (la) publicidad de las películas de ‘Los Juegos del Hambre’”.

“Y creo que en ‘Érase una vez… en Hollywood’ también, ¿no te quería?”, preguntó Horowitz.

“Bueno, sí que me quería y luego todos le dijeron: ‘No es lo suficientemente guapa para interpretar a Sharon Tate’, y luego no me quiso más”, dijo Lawrence.

Tras la reacción compasiva del público, ella respondió: “Lo sé”.

Poco convencida, Horowitz dijo: “Eso no es verdad”.

A lo que Lawrence respondió: “Estoy bastante segura de que es verdad. O es que llevo tanto tiempo contándolo que me la creo. No, pero estoy bastante segura de que eso pasó, o simplemente nunca me consideró para el papel y en internet se desvivieron por llamarme fea”.

Margot Robbie fue la elegida para interpretar a Sharon Tate en la película, basada en la actriz y modelo real que fue víctima de los asesinatos de Manson en 1969.

Meses antes del estreno, la hermana de Tate, Debra, declaró a TMZ que prefería a Margot Robbie para el papel antes que a Lawrence debido a que su “belleza física, e incluso su porte, era similar al de Sharon”, y añadió que Lawrence no era “lo suficientemente guapa para interpretar a Sharon. Es horrible decirlo, pero, ya sabes, tengo mis estándares”.

En lugar de elegirla para interpretar a Sharon Tate, Tarantino declaró en 2021 en el podcast “WTF with Marc Maron” que había “investigado la idea de que Jennifer Lawrence interpretara a Squeaky”, una de las seguidoras de Charles Manson. Añadió que ella fue a su casa y leyó un guion, pero que al final “no funcionó”. “Es una persona muy agradable y la respeto como actriz”, añadió. El papel fue interpretado por Dakota Fanning.

Más tarde, en el podcast de Horowitz, Lawrence dijo, con seriedad, que hizo una audición para “Crepúsculo”, pero añadió: “No lo conseguí porque supongo que era demasiado fea”.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

The post Jennifer Lawrence contó que perdió un papel en una película de Tarantino por no ser lo suficientemente guapa appeared first on News Channel 3-12.

Virginia Democrats set up a referendum to try to flip as many as 4 GOP-held US House seats

Kraig Pakulski 0 26 Article rating: No rating

By Fredreka Schouten, CNN

(CNN) — Virginia on Friday became the latest state to escalate the nationwide redistricting battle ahead of November’s midterm elections that will determine which party controls the US House during the final two years of President Donald Trump’s time in office.

Democrats who control the state Senate moved forward on a proposed constitutional amendment on redistricting, setting up a referendum as soon as April – similar to California’s 2025 ballot initiative – on whether to enact a new US House map in time for the midterms.

Friday’s 21-18 vote in the state Senate creates another high-profile and expensive contest over redistricting, the latest salvo in a mid-decade redistricting fight began last year in Texas at Trump’s behest in an effort to gain more seats that are favorable to Republicans.

So far, that fight has yielded nine more GOP-friendly seats and six that favor Democrats. While Virginia Democrats have not yet released the map they want to enact, party leaders have talked about flipping as many as four Republican-held US House seats, a potentially critical margin.

A Democratic-aligned organization, Virginians for Fair Elections, this week launched its public push to mobilize ahead of a referendum that could occur as early as April. Meanwhile, Virginians for Fair Maps, a GOP group whose leaders include former US House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, is vowing to fight the redistricting effort and is still trying to block action by Virginia Democrats in court.

Neither group has publicly released fundraising goals, but the coming confrontation mirrors last year’s redistricting fight in California that saw Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom raise more than $100 million for a redistricting ballot measure. In the end, Californians overwhelmingly backed a map promoted by Newsom that made five US House seats friendlier to Democrats.

Virginia, like California, must take the redistricting issue to voters because their state constitutions give independent commissions, rather than lawmakers, the power to draw congressional maps.

Democrats haven’t said how many seats they’ll target

Virginia represents the largest remaining redistricting prize for Democrats, but political figures in the state are still wrangling over how aggressively to target Republicans in their map-drawing.

Democrats currently control six of the state’s 11 US House seats and entered 2026 emboldened by big victories in last year’s elections that saw the party flip the governor’s office and grow its majority in the House of Delegates.

Some lawmakers favor a maximalist approach. Virginia Senate Pro Tem Louise Lucas has spent months taunting Republicans with social media posts promising to draw the GOP out of all but one seat.

“I said in August of 2025 that the maps will be 10-1 and I’m sticking with that today,” the Democrat wrote recently on X. “Anyone in the Congressional delegation who wants a seat needs to campaign for it and not expect a safe seat.”

Virginia House Speaker Don Scott also has said he’s open to a 10-1 map.

But some prefer a map that would cluster Republican voters into two districts, giving Democrats more secure margins of victory in nine.

So far, efforts by Virginia Republicans to block Democrats’ actions in court have been unsuccessful. Another court hearing is set for next week.

Michael Young, a veteran GOP strategist working with the Virginians for Fair Maps, said Republicans planned to fight Democrats “in any available venue if th

What we know about Trump’s ‘Great Health Care Plan’

Kraig Pakulski 0 24 Article rating: No rating

By Tami Luhby, CNN

(CNN) — Seeking to show Americans that he’s concerned about affordability, President Donald Trump on Thursday released his long-awaited plan to tackle the high cost of health care.

Light on details, the proposal is largely a broad framework of the president’s health care priorities, including reducing drug prices, lowering health insurance premiums and increasing price transparency. It punts the hard work of coming up with specific legislation to Congress, though the White House said it will work with lawmakers.

What the plan does not recommend is extending the Affordable Care Act’s enhanced premium subsidies, which expired at the end of last year and sent premiums soaring for more than 20 million Americans for 2026. The Senate is currently wrestling with whether to renew the subsidies.

It also does not make changes to Medicare or Medicaid, which cover nearly 150 million people.

Trump’s promise to lower health care costs comes as premiums are jumping in Medicare and employer plans, in addition to the Obamacare exchanges. The president has also said he will meet with insurers soon to discuss lowering premiums, much as he has pressured drugmakers to reduce prices.

“You can have great health care at a much lower price,” President Donald Trump said at a White House event on rural health care on Friday. “This is the biggest thing to ever happen to health care in our country.”

Here’s what’s in Trump’s health care plan:

Drug prices

Trump is calling on Congress to codify the “Most Favored Nation” deals he signed with 16 drugmakers in recent months. Under the voluntary agreements, manufacturers will provide their products to Medicaid and launch new medicines in the US at “Most Favored Nation” prices, which are the lowest prices available in peer countries. (Other nations’ governments often negotiate or set prices they will pay for medicines.)

Also, the drugmakers have agreed to sell certain medications at a discount to patients willing to pay cash through TrumpRx, which is expected to launch soon. And they will beef up their investments in US manufacturing in exchange for three-year reprieves from tariffs on pharmaceutical imports.

While these agreements might reduce patients’ prices for certain medicines, experts have questioned how much it will move the needle on drug costs for most Americans.

The framework also aims to allow more prescription drugs to be sold over the counter. These could include gastric ulcer and higher-dose nonsteroidal medications, according to Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Insurance premiums

Following Trump’s repeated demands, the plan calls for sending federal subsidy payments directly to consumers, instead of insurers, to allow them to buy health insurance on their own.

Healthier people could potentially find less expensive, less comprehensive policies outside of the Affordable Care Act marketplace. But if they leave Obamacare, it could greatly raise the cost of coverage for the sicker enrollees who rem

RSS
First37333734373537363738374037413742Last