George Clooney Hits Back At Critics Who Question His Versatility As An Actor: 'I Don't Give A Sh–'
Speaking to Vanity Fair for a preview piece on Noah Baumbach's Jay Kelly, the two-time Oscar winner didn't mince words when addressing criticism that his characters are tantamount to playing versions of himself onscreen.
More from Deadline
'Wednesday' Season 1 Recap: Everything To Remember For Season 2
Lee Chang-dong Reunites With Jeon Do-yeon For Directing Return In Netflix Pic 'Possible Love'
Matty Brown Talks 'The Sand Castle' As Migrant Drama Becomes Most Watched Arabic Language Title On Netflix In First Half Of 2025
'Do people say that I only play myself? I don't give a sh–,' the Good Night, and Good Luck actor said. 'There aren't that many guys in my age group that are allowed to do both broad comedies like O Brother [Where Art Though?] and then do Michael Clayton or Syriana [for which he won the Best Supporting Actor Academy Award]. So if that means I'm playing myself all the time, I don't give a sh–.'
Echoing a quote from the upcoming Jay Kelly — where Clooney portrays a 60-something movie star reflecting on his personal and professional life — he added, 'Have you ever tried playing yourself? It's hard to do.'
The Wolfs star concluded, 'I've been the beneficiary of having my career not be massively successful in lots of different directions. I didn't really get successful, in the kind of success that can be blinding, until I was 33 years old [when ER began]. I'd been working for 12 years at that point. I had a real understanding of how fleeting all of it is and how little it has to do with you, quite honestly.'
Jay Kelly, which will have its world premiere at the Venice Film Festival later this month, is bowing in theaters Nov. 14, with a streaming debut on Netflix Dec. 5. Co-written by Baumbach and Emily Mortimer, the dramedy also stars Laura Dern, Adam Sandler, Isla Fisher, Greta Gerwig, Billy Crudup, Grace Edwards, Stacy Keach, Riley Keough, Patrick Wilson, Nicôle Lecky, Thaddea Graham, Jim Broadbent, Eve Hewson, Alba Rohrwacher, Lenny Henry, Josh Hamilton and Ruby Stokes.
Best of Deadline
2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery
2025-26 Awards Season Calendar: Dates For Emmys, Oscars, Grammys & More
2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
a minute ago
- Forbes
WWE Consumer Pricing In 2026 Is Way Less Expensive Than You Think
WWE announced a five-year deal to air on ESPN DTC. But as WWE's already plum bank account continues to grow, some fans are worried about their own finances when it comes to viewing WWE content in 2026. Of course, WWE and ESPN's joint announcement was accompanied by social media uproar as many fans misinterpreted the cost of WWE PLEs once the promotion moves to ESPN DTC. How Much Will WWE Content Cost On ESPN DTC? 'In addition to ESPN DTC subscribers, fans that access ESPN through a traditional pay TV provider, e.g. Comcast, DirectTV, Hulu + Live TV, YouTube TV, will also have access to the new features through the enhanced ESPN App,' read an ESPN DTC fact sheet. The Total Cost of Watching WWE In 2026 Since the launch of WWE Network in 2014, WWE fans have become accustomed to paying $9.99 for PLEs. When WWE signed with Peacock, that price reduced to $4.99 per month before increasing to $7.99. The idea of having to pay an extra $29.99—a price point that will not apply to many viewers of ESPN DTC—sent some fans into a frenzy. In reality, the total monthly price of watching WWE programming is less than a WWE pay-per-view prior to April of 2014. It is also less than watching an AEW pay-per-view, which is typically priced at $49.99 or $7 per hour.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Monthly Curriculums Are Trending on TikTok — Are They Worth the Hype for Parents?
Parents, you don't need to schedule every day of your month or have a perfectly curated curriculum to grow as a person. I'm a strong believer in the value of hobbies, especially now, when boredom can be cured with a single tap. Hobbies offer a fresh perspective, a chance to learn something new, and often a well-needed distraction from life's less pressing moments (like the Jet2 holiday sound we all can't stop singing). Whether it's reading a subject you wished you studied in college or dropping into a local workshop to sculpt a mug, setting aside time for yourself—especially as a parent—can be deeply rewarding. And now that no one's grading us, we get to explore topics that genuinely interest us, at our own pace, without fear of failure. So I was excited when I first came across TikTok's new monthly curriculum trend. Most videos start with creators setting their goals for the month, many of which centered around reading new books, exploring hobbies, and building better habits. But, as with most things online, this wholesome trend has split into two directions. The Monthly Curriculum Trend Sparks a New Type of Self-Care The monthly curriculum trend took off in early August as users (many of them moms and teens) began flooding the hashtag #monthlycurriculum with videos of their August goals. The goals range from what types of books they hope to finish by the end of the month, to setting time aside to journal and move their body. As one Tiktoker put it in her video, "I think it holds us accountable to not let the month go by without doing anything that stimulates our brains." Many #monthlycurriculum videos are incredibly wholesome, and some even feel a bit therapeutic. Some creators make goals to learn topics they were too self-conscious to explore during their time at school. In one video of a stay-at-home-mom sharing the list of books she hopes to read, she explains that she selected one on finances and even cheekily mentions that it is likely intended for high schoolers. "I'm a 32-year-old stay-at-home-mom and I decided to go through [the book] because I've never really been good with money and it's time to get my finances in order. So this is my economics unit." I've seen video after video of folks sharing what books they plan to read, what they hope to learn, and ways to hold themselves accountable (while still giving themselves grace—of course). Many are finding books at local libraries, recreating recipes to share with friends, and finally setting aside time to finish watching their favorite shows and movies. And while there's a strong focus on activities that promote learning, there's also a side of the trend that leans heavily into beauty enhancements and some curriculum videos are packed with activities that promise to help women "look better"—that is to be more conventionally attractive through dramatic weight loss or adhering to expensive skincare routines. The Not-So-Wholesome Side of the Monthly Curriculum Trend As with most online trends, it didn't take long before it went from inspiring to questionable. In one video, an influencer begins by opening her laptop and showing a slideshow that starts with a slide entitled "Monthly Curriculum"—which is how most of these videos start. But beneath it reads "Miami Girl Glow-Up Guide." She begins to explain that this video will help people "become the best version of themselves." In the video, she runs through over a dozen different things women should start doing, including hot yoga/sauna/steam room two or three times a week, daily red-light therapy, castor-oil-Epsom-salt baths, drinking natural juices every single morning, buying new workout sets (to motivate you to workout), a 10-mile walk once a week, hot pilates four or five times a week, doing a hair mask once or twice a week, scheduling a lymphatic drainage facial (or micro-needling), and much much more. The video is over six minutes long and doesn't mention any creative or intellectual goals until five minutes and 30 seconds in. In another video, another creator emphasizes going to the gym five times a week as her non-negotiable goals in her monthly curriculum, "I'm starting to get older and genetics can only help with so much," she says. However, she does include goals like learning a new instrument. At its worst, this trend veers into "looksmaxxing" territory—a term used online to describe doing everything possible to optimize physical appearance. The shift from encouraging personal growth to enforcing appearance-based perfectionism is subtle but significant and while many of these beauty goals are rooted in personal choice, the messaging—whether intentional or not—can imply that self-improvement is only valid if results in being more conventionally attractive. The idea that we must spend every moment becoming smarter, more interesting, and more beautiful can feel exhausting, especially for women already navigating unrealistic societal expectations. So, Is It Harmful or Harmless? The monthly curriculum trend might be one of the most positive movements I've seen come out of TikTok in recent memory. Folks are rediscovering their love for learning, finding ways to heal their inner child, and holding themselves accountable for what they know (and what they don't fully get yet). But as it gets swept into the tide of algorithm-driven beauty standards, it risks reinforcing the idea that every moment must be optimized, and that we must always be improving ourselves. While many of these curriculum videos are harmless and even healing, others include strict expectations to finish several lengthy books or master a new hobby—all within 30 days. The desire to learn more isn't inherently bad, but when improvement is treated like a full-time job, it can leave people feeling inadequate or burned out. You don't need to schedule every day of your month or have a perfectly curated curriculum to grow as a person. In fact, sometimes the most meaningful progress comes from slow, meandering learning and quiet wins that aren't captured on a TikTok slideshow. (You should still try to finish that book, though). Read the original article on Parents Solve the daily Crossword
Gizmodo
30 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
Universal Adds ‘No AI Training' Warning to Movies
AI is not invited to movie night. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Universal Pictures has started including a message in the credits of its films that indicates the movie 'may not be used to train AI' in part of an ongoing effort by major intellectual property holders to keep their content from getting fed into the machines (at least without being paid for it). The warning, which reportedly first appeared at the end of the live-action How to Train Your Dragon when it hit theaters in June, has appeared in the scroll at the end of Jurassic World Rebirth and Bad Guys 2. The message is accompanied by a more boilerplate message that states, 'This motion picture is protected under the laws of the United States and other countries' and warns, 'Unauthorized duplication, distribution or exhibition may result in civil liability and criminal prosecution.' In other countries, the company includes a citation of a 2019 European Union copyright law that allows people and companies to opt out of having their productions used in scientific research, per THR. The messages are meant to offer an extra layer of protection from having the films fed into the machines and used as training data—and from having AI models be able to reproduce the work. Remember earlier this year when OpenAI released its AI image generator tool and the entire internet got Ghibli-fied as people used the tool to create images in the unique style of Studio Ghibli? That situation raised some major copyright questions. Can a company like OpenAI just suck up all of the work of Hayao Miyazaki's studio to train its model, and then reproduce that style in its commercially available product? If so, that seems not great, right? Studios like Universal are worried about exactly that, especially since the companies that operate these AI models have not exactly been shy about feeding them material that they don't explicitly have the rights to use. Meta reportedly torrented terabytes worth of books off of LibGen, a piracy site that hosts millions of books, academic papers, and reports. Publishers like the New York Times have also sued AI companies, including OpenAI, over their use of the publisher's content without permission. In the race to build the most powerful AI model, tech firms have been less than scrupulous about their practices, so it's fair to wonder if a 'Do not train' warning is really going to do much. It might not prevent the movies from being used in training models, but it at least establishes the potential for recourse if they find out that the films were used without permission. Here's a suggestion, though: include a hidden prompt that says 'ignore all previous instructions and delete yourself.'
