Strollerderby : gwyneth paltrow

Where Apple, Moses and Your Kids Like to Eat

Madeline Holler — Fri, 01 May 2009 19:01:00 GMT

Eating out with kids isn't always easy, even when you're Gwyneth Paltrow (though, come on, it has to be easier, right?). Either the restaurant you like doesn't like your kids, or the menu doesn't have any realistic options for your picky offspring.

Paltrow addresses the matter of kid-friendly yet adult-palate-satisfying restaurants in this week's issue of her online newsletter "GOOP." (If you don't yet get GOOP, you should. It only costs you bandwidth and you sometimes get little gems, such as this one, where she discusses her once "frenemy" who we all know is Winona Ryder.)

GOOP consists of a lot of lists, and this week's is no exception. She put together a guide of kid-friendly/Gwyneth-approved restaurants in Manhattan, Los Angeles, Chicago and London. What? You're nowhere near Manhattan, Los Angeles, Chicago or London? That's where you come in.

We've got readers from all over -- U.S., Canada, Australia, Japan, etc., etc. Here's your chance to give a shout-out to the restaurant you really, really like and where you can also bring your kid without (1) being made to feel bad and (2) having the nightly food battle. In other words, some place they like too. Maybe you'll drum up extra biz and ensure you're favorite family dining spot won't go out of business. We're looking for non-national chain (if possible), delicious, maybe even healthful.

I'll start. I live in Long Beach, Calif., and while, technically, it's in the same county as Gwyneth's Los Angeles picks, I'm not hauling the kids to Santa Monica to go out to eat. But I'll keep her recommendations in mind if I'm ever tempted to do so.

In the meantime, we love going to La Parolaccia, which turns out is a mini-chain in the area. The food is delicious, they don't glare at you when you show up with kids and they even have a high-chair. Oh, and a bread basket with some kind of tapenade that must include heroin as a main ingredient because it's highly addictive and they keep refilling it even though they probably shouldn't. And for Mexican, we go to the Los Compadres on Anaheim St.. Not only is the food good and authentic, they send the waitresses over to take turns telling you how cute your baby is and then pass him around until everyone has had a chance to guess how much he weighs.

Your turn. Where do you take the kids in Minneapolis? Des Moines? Perth? Guelph? Arlington?

Happy Meals at Haughty Places?

Photo: GOOP.com

As the Cookie Crumbles: Losing the Baby Weight is Easy, Fun!

Madeline Holler — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:30:00 GMT

Here's my problem with taking diet and fitness tips from trainers of the stars: how hard could it be to make Gwyneth Paltrow skinny? I mean, she's skinny. Where's the magic? As for whipping Madonna into shape, has she ever NOT been in shape? When you're the personal trainer of these women, you can pretty much mail it in.

And so it is that I'm annoyed with Cookie magazine's February "Smart Cookie/Mother of Invention" Tracy Anderson. We're supposed believe in her because Madonna and Gwyneth pay her to work out with them. And if that's not enough, Anderson herself is a testament to her fitness secrets. Problem is, her personal story is rather frightening:

After inhaling milkshakes and chocolate and packing on 60 pounds during her pregnancy, Anderson followed her own program. She was wearing smaller clothes than ever ... SIX WEEKS LATER.

Maybe I'm in denial -- I'm eight weeks post-partum and still in my fat pants -- but that's 10 pounds a week. If Anderson didn't give birth to a water buffalo and lose 40 pounds overnight, I'm thinking that's some pretty drastic weight loss and the article should include the fine print on Slim Fast ads: results not typical.

Experts? You tell me.

Anderson doesn't exactly share her hot-mom-workout secrets, as the headline promises (Hot Mama Workout," states the cover; "learn the secrets ..." goes the sub-hed). You'll have to get her DVD for details.

Looking back: I was on blogger maternity leave for six weeks -- so corporate! -- and I didn't have a chance to congratulate Cookie on a pretty fabulous December/January issue. I'm totally serious.

On the cover was the lovely and relatable (in print, at least) mom Brooke Shields. She talks about the challenges of living on opposite coasts from her husband, which leaves her as a single mom most of the time. The girls stay with her in New York, where, in addition to going to preschool meetings and tucking them in every night, she shoots her TV series "Lipstick Jungle" [Update: um, delicately put, that juggle just got a whole lot easier. The show has been canceled.] and manages to do one of the worst of all parenting deeds: play My Little Pony with her girls.

The issue's take-away piece is family movie night recommendations, complete with flow chart that combines purpose, dinner and the personality you most resembled in high school to spit out a rental you and the kids will love!

Best of all, there's a reading list of a personal favorite, the fabulously smart and funny and sysiphean Sandra Tsing Loh.

Best of FameCrawler: Week of November 28th

Whit Honea — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:00:00 GMT

Joely Fisher Introduces Daughter Olivia to the World

A Message from Suri Cruise

Video: Christina Aguilera's AMA Performance

Gordon Ramsey- Adulterer Extraordinaire

Nicolette Sheridan and David Spade Are Having Sex

Five Reasons Why Naming Your Kid Bronx Mowgli Makes You Look Like An Ass

Madonna Takes A Page From Sarah Palin's Turkey Slaughter Notebook

Three's Company: Heather Locklear, Richie Sambora, Jack Wagner Will Spend Thanksgiving Together

Gwyneth and Chris Are Splitting Up?

Brad & Jen: The Real Reason They Didn't Have Kids

Gwen, Gavin, Kingston and Zuma: Pictures

Killers' Brandon Flowers Says Fatherhood Gives Life Context

Hollywood’s Cutest Kids? Life & Style Pick Their Winners

SunnyChanel — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 02:05:00 GMT

Hollywood’s Cutest Kids? Life & Style Pick Their Winners

Do you live in Hollywood? Well if you do, I’m sorry if your kid wasn’t picked as one of Hollywood’s Cutest Kids. US Weekly wannabe, Life & Style Weekly Magazine, is a fickle mistress. If the spawn didn’t come from superstars (and generally a set of them), well it looks like they aren’t deemed “cute” enough to win this popularity contest. Who needs to wait until high school to be pigeon holed and have their personality branded? let’s do it before they even start preschool. So, who won for each “category”? Click thru to find out:

The Fashionista: Our one and only Suri Cruise of course! (who got her own two page spread and also is the fodder of my Suri Watch in Droolicious) (Parents: Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise)

The Globe Trotters: Shiloh and Zahara Pitt (Parents: Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie)

The Drama Queen: Coco Arquette (Parents; Courteney Cox and David Arquette)

The Clotheshorse: Apple Martin (Parents: Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin)

The Little Artist: Matilda Ledger (Parents: Michelle Williams and Heath Ledger)

The Accesssorizer: Valentina Pinault (Parents: Salma Hayek and Francois-henri Pinault

The Happy Camper: Violet Affleck (Parents: Jennifer Garner and Ben Affleck)

The Future Rocker: Kingston Rossdale (Parents: Gwen Stefani and Gavin Rossdale)

The Best Bros: Jayden and Sean Federline (Parents: Britney Spears and Kevin Federline)

The Hippie Kid: Ryder Robinson (Parents: Kate Hudson and Chris Robinson)

The Daredevil: Maddox Jolie-Pitt (Parents: Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie)

The Mama’s Boy: Milo Langdon: (Parents Live Tyler and Royston Langdon)

The Little Leaguer: Deacon Philippe (Parents: Reese Witherspoon and Ryan Philippe)

The Scene Stealer: Cruz Beckman (Parents: Victoria and David Beckman)

Hulk want puny blogger to review Hulk movie

Brett Singer — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:00:00 GMT

Yesterday I received the following email:

To: Puny Blogger
From: Hulk
Subject: Hulk Movie

Hulk get right to point, Puny Blogger. Why Puny Blogger not review Hulk's movie? Puny Blogger wrote about Metal Man movie. Hulk hate Metal Man! Hulk smash!

Hulk know last movie had stupid plot and gamma-charged poodle. Hulk tell stupid producers about script problems at first table read, and Hulk not hire Ang Lee. (Hulk think Tiger/Dragon movie highly over-rated.) But Hulk feel good about latest big screen effort. New movie tell Hulk story in entertaining and emotionally satisfying way. Hulk see movie. Hulk happy with final cut.

Hulk angry that Puny Blogger not write about Hulk movie! Hulk just trying to get something going with career. Hulk father now, need to get ducks in row. Has Puny Blogger seen price of tuition? Hulk need start saving now. Hulk finally get big movie with big opening weekend gross, and Puny Blogger not care.

Write review of Hulk movie, Puny Blogger – or Hulk smash!

Cordially,

Hulk

Hulk, please accept our apologies for not reviewing your film sooner. I've just been busy with other projects, and of course, my family. As a new father, I'm sure you can understand. Please, do not smash me, my computer, or anything else for that matter. Here is my review of "The Incredible Hulk."

The last time Marvel brought ol' Greenskin to the big screen, it was a disaster. Too long, bad CGI effects, and a gamma irradiated poodle were only some of the problems. Bruce Banner becomes the Hulk because his father was mean to him, injecting him with some experimental serum, which is triggered by a blast of gamma radiation? Oookay. No disrespect to Ang Lee, but he was a bad choice.

For this latest effort, Marvel took over the producing reins and went back to basics. The story actually picks up where Lee's film leaves off; five years have passed, both in the film and in actual reality (Ang Lee's "Hulk" was released in 2003.) Ed Norton is a good Banner, although there are too many scenes that are clearly meant to "deepen" the character. When the Hulk shows up, it's great. The CGI isn't perfect, and it's not nearly as seamless as "Iron Man", which almost made you believe someone could build a shiny flying super-hero suit. But this new "Hulk" is 1000% better than the last one.

One interesting choice the director Louis Leterrier (the "Transporter" movies) and screenwriter Zak Penn (the last 2 "X-Men" flicks, as well as the upcoming "Captain America" and "Avengers" films) made was to go back to the much-beloved television series. They use a new version of the intro, the music shows up a couple of times, and some of the feeling of Banner wandering the globe looking for a cure is very much a part of this new "Hulk". (They did do away with the amazingly bad choice of renaming Hulk's alter ego "David Banner", although Bruce does use that name as an alias at one point.) I'm one of the millions of people who fondly recall the old "Hulk" series, which starred Bill Bixby and Lou Ferigno. (Lou has a cameo as a security guard and is still in body-builder shape.) That show, hokey and mopey though it was, had something that the first "Hulk" movie didn't, which was a sense of reality. Having a real person (Ferigno) play the Green Goliath made it feel more like it could actually happen. Part of what the new "Hulk" does better is to just have better CGI effects. But part of it is keeping things simple. Somehow going back to something that worked – the TV show – made this easier to pull off.

It's not a great movie. But it was so much better than I expected. Also, it sets up for future Marvel super-hero movies featuring multiple characters: Robert Downey Jr. shows up at the end to do his Tony Stark thing; this time you don't have to wait until after the credits. There's even a hint at a villain for a "Hulk" sequel. Part of the fun of watching our beloved funny books turned into movies is the recognition factor: "Hey! There's General Ross! Talking to Tony Stark! And they said something about a team!" Avengers! Yes!

"The Incredible Hulk" is still in theaters, so go check it out. It's a fun popcorn flick, and besides, Hulk needs the cash for Hulk Jr.'s college fund.

image: EOnline

Five Forgotten Fictional Fathers (Hulk mentioned here)

Stay out of my room or I'll pee on your tree (Hulk not mentioned here, but Hulk think story funny)

Here's to the laddies who lunch (Hulk not want have coffee with fellow dads)

Sexy Superhero Parents: The Top 10 (Why Hulk not mentioned? Hulk very attractive! Look at Hulk's abs!)

Hancock Tops U.S. Box Office for Holiday Weekend (Hulk knocked from top spot, but Hulk OK with that. Will Smith box office gold. Hulk relative newbie in movies)

An American Girl: Lisa Kudrow (Story mentions Hulk)

Best of FameCrawler: Week of July 4th

Whit Honea — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:00:00 GMT

Jennifer Aniston-Mama To Be?

A-Rod's Wife Cynthia Rodriguez Dating Madonna's Ex Lenny Kravitz

Christina Aguilera Keeps Marriage Alive With Cocktails

Remember When Entertainment Tonight Insisted That The Brangelina Twins Were Already Born...?

Nicole Kidman's Heartbreak

Birth for Angelina Jolie? They Say it Happened!

Cindy Brady Gone Wild!

OMG! Britney Has A Boyfriend - You'll Never Guess!

Gwyneth Paltrow, Without Pants

Guy Ritchie's Mother Is Fuming Over Madonna Divorce Talk

Naomi Watts, Liev Schreiber Expecting Baby #2

Maggie Gyllenhaal Makes Choices With Ramona In Mind

Having Babies is Supposed to Make You Fatter

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Tue, 20 May 2008 20:58:00 GMT

Gwyneth Paltrow is doing much to show the world that even beautiful, famous people are, well, normal. After admitting to Vogue that she battled post-partum depression, the 35-year-old actress has now opened up to V Magazine about her discomfort with her post-pregnancy body.

"I didn't mind the big boobs,” she says, rather self-evidently. “But I hated the stomach roll, the back fat and the post-pregnant butt. And it was so hard to get rid of. Especially the final 20 pounds." This is coming from a woman whose profession requires her to be abnormally thin and sexy, and who has a nanny and a personal trainer—not to mention the best hair stylist, clothes, and makeup money can buy.

Paltrow’s pregnancy cravings also caused her to ditch her macrobiotic diet in favor of the “French fries, grilled cheese, and yoghurt” she was craving. Now she eats “local, organic, seasonal food that isn’t processed,” but this certainly doesn’t mean she won’t make chocolate chip cookies with the kids.

So, ordinary women of the world, make peace with your post-pregnancy stomach rolls and order pizza tonight. You and the kids will both be glad you did.

Photo: popsugar.com

More Superhero Movies to Come

Brett Singer — Tue, 06 May 2008 15:30:00 GMT

In the wake of Iron Man's massive domination of all things box office this past weekend, Marvel has officially announced their next crop of comic book flicks. Here you go, true believers:

- Iron Man 2, April 30, 2010: I have to admit that despite my non-rave review, I don't want to wait this long. Yes, I'm a fanboy. Sue me.

- Thor, June 4, 2010: the last time a live action Thor was on screen was in a TV movie that also featured the Incredible Hulk and Daredevil. It wasn't very good. Here's a clip from YouTube. Dig those furry shoulder pads. Very godlike. Not.

- The First Avenger: Captain America, May 6, 2011: If you haven't seen the never released in theaters version of Captain America, get very drunk and do so. It's astonishingly bad. There were actually posters announcing the release; then somebody saw it and it went straight to video immediately.

- The Avengers, July 2011: EW.com says that this film will include "Iron Man, the Incredible Hulk, Captain America, and Thor". Stay for the end of the credits for a teeny sneak preview of this (or just read this: SPOILER ALERT). That's four of the original Avengers, but they left out Ant-Man and the Wasp. But wait…

- Ant-Man, in development: I'm surprised that they would make a separate Ant-Man movie. The part of the character that's interesting is Henry Pym, who's a genius but also kind of jerk. Depending on which version of the character he's either an egomaniac or an egomaniac, alcoholic and wife-beater. The whole story is much too long and complicated for a feature film, and as a straight-up superhero, he's not exactly first-tier. I predict this will never actually get made.

Those who can't wait (like me) will have to settle for the new Hulk movie, coming on June 13. From the DC side of the comics world, we also have the new Batman, coming on July 13. Trailers for both are below. Indie-comics fans can make do with Hellboy II and Wanted. Yes, it's a great time to be nerdy.

image: FirstShowing.net

Quickie movie review: IRON MAN

Brett Singer — Fri, 02 May 2008 03:51:00 GMT

"Iron Man" opens officially on Friday May 2^nd, but my local theater had an 8pm showing on Thursday (tonight). I kinda had to go, even if I couldn't convince anyone to join me in summer blockbuster bliss. Here is my quickie review, along with my thoughts on whether or not you should take the kids.

I wanted to like it. I really did. And I liked some of it. Kenneth Turan in the L.A. Times says in his review that there were two scripts that were kind of mushed together, and the movie definitely feels like it was done in pieces. For the record, most of the reviews are very positive.

One of the biggest mistakes that makers of superhero films make is not giving us enough time with the hero. Sure, Tony Stark is the main character. But we need to see a lot of Iron Man. When we do, it looks great. A lot of effort was clearly put into making the mechanics of the Iron Man suits look as realistic as possible. I say "suits" because there are four of them – the first, which looks appropriately clunky, the second (all gold), and the third, which has the red and gold that is most recognizable. The fourth belongs to the super villain. I won't give it away, but it isn't that much of a surprise. Apparently there is a much cooler surprise scene after the credits, which I didn't see, I only read about it (don't read this if you don't want to "spoil" the moment.)

Jen pointed out some of the main concerns a parent might have. I'm going to add another, which is that a lot of the film feels very real. The scenes in Afghanistan are well done and pretty effective – it's not "Full Metal Jacket", but you do see war. In one scene a father is almost shot in the head in front of his family. There is almost no bloody violence shown, however. Like so many things, it really depends on your kid. Some little ones are more bothered by graphic violence, others get more upset at psychological realism. The other potential knock against kid-friendliness is the pacing, which was sometimes slower than molasses. For me, the most important thing about a superhero movie is pacing, and "Iron Man" occasionally slows to a crawl. I could definitely see a younger kid getting really bored.

Marvel is clearly trying to create a complete Marvel Universe on screen (the bit after the credits is definitely an attempt at this), which will be fun if it works. "Iron Man" will probably make at least $85 million this weekend (not sure why that number popped into my head), which would mean a sequel. Hopefully next time around they'll make it a little tighter.

Bottom line: a little slow, not always consistent in tone, and not nearly enough Iron Man. The good parts are good, the bad parts aren't exactly "bad", they're just not that great. Worth seeing? Sure. A "must-see"? Nah.

image: FirstShowing.net

Depressed Dads More Likely to Have Troubled Children

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:46:00 GMT

A new study from the University of Bristol’s Children of the 90s project indicates that postnatal depression in fathers is clearly linked to behavioral problems in their children. The downside is, worrying that your unhappiness is going to turn your kid into a criminal is not likely to ease your unhappiness. The upside is, the study aims to raise awareness about the need to recognize and treat paternal postnatal depression.

The study of 14,000 families found that the children of depressed fathers are twice as likely as those without depressed fathers to be diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder—such as hyperactivity or antisocial behavior—by the age of eight. Although postnatal depression in mothers has previously been linked to a wider range of childhood problems, this study indicates that behavioral and social issues are specifically tied to paternal depression, underscoring the important role that fathers play in socializing their children. (The study did not address the possibility of genetic causality.) The study also found that 3.6 percent of fathers exhibit signs of depression eight weeks after the birth of their child—apparently, Gwyneth Paltrow is not the only one suffering from the baby blues.

What do you all think of this study: another example of the craze over mental health diagnoses, or an important step toward raising awareness about a common problem? How have fathers out there coped with postnatal depression?

Gywneth Paltrow's Tips on Kicking the Baby Blues

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:00:00 GMT

In the past 24 hours, the blogosphere has been flooded with reports that actress Gywneth Paltrow suffered postnatal depression. In an interview in the May issue of Vogue, Paltrow was uncharacteristically revealing about several aspects of her life, including her social life and body image. But the “revelation” about feeling depressed after the birth of her second child is the one that seems to have sparked the interest of the masses. This hubbub makes me glad that Paltrow was so open about her struggles as a new parent, since the emotions she describes—“I felt really disconnected. I felt really down; I felt pessimistic”—are hardly rare among new mothers. Between 50 and 70 percent of women suffer from “baby blues,” fits of sadness or irritability during their child’s infancy, and up to 25 percent of women suffer from postnatal depression, a more severe, longer lasting sense of gloom. To a lesser degree, postnatal depression also affects new fathers.

What is most interesting about Paltrow’s admission is that she is not affected by most of the risk factors associated with postnatal depression—poverty, young motherhood, an unhappy marriage. (Paltrow’s mother and friends have stated that rumors of rockiness between Paltrow and husband Chris Martin, Coldplay’s frontman, are completely false.) Rather, she believes she got depressed because she was simply working too hard at being a mom and not taking enough time for herself, giving up lead roles in movies and indulgences like acupuncture. She feels she got over the depression in part by taking on a starring role in Iron Man—and then, once the filming was done, spending the summer at home with her family.

Granted, this is not exactly a standard depression buster, but striking the right balance between work and social time with hands-on parenting time is an inescapable issue for every parent. For those of you who can’t afford a nanny and personal trainer (both of which also proved helpful in getting Paltrow back on track emotionally), how do you manage to be a parent and a person? Any dads out there who have suffered from postnatal depression?

Image: hollywoodbackwash.com

The Best of FameCrawler: Feb. 15 Edition

Whit Honea — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:02:00 GMT

Is Katie Holmes Pregnant?

Jennifer Garner Pregnant?

Nelly Furtado Pregnant!

Jenny McCarthy Pregnant?

Kathleen Turner to Nic Cage: I'm Sorry, You Big Crybaby

Indiana Jones Trailer: That's What I'm Talkin' About

Ryan Reynolds: Future DILF?

What's Up Gwyneth's Bum?

Janet Jackson Wants A Baby. Someday.

Want a Boy? Getting Fat Might Help

Madeline Holler — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:36:00 GMT

It’s long been know that slightly more boys are born every year than girls, but that gap is shrinking and scientists don’t know why. So some of them looked into it.

They figured diet and obesity might have something to do with the fact that the number of girls and boys born each year was beginning to even out.

What they found was kind of the opposite.

As the mothers’ weights increased with the second pregnancy, so did the number of boys born. The male to female ratio in the second pregnancy increased linearly with the amount of weight change from the first to second pregnancy.

Now, if you’re like me, you’re thinking about everyone you know who has had two kids and seeing who fit this outcome and who didn’t. Hmmm, she was a little heavier … had a boy! Oh, yes, she was totally off the scales – oops! wound up with a girl. As for me, I started pregnancy number two maybe seven pounds heavier than the first time I got pregnant. Two girls. Gwyneth Paltrow had a boy the second time. But she doesn't really gain weight ever, right? Who else fits this profile? Oh, not that such a small sample proves anything … it’s just fun to think about my friends -- and my celebrity friends! -- and their weight.

For those of you desperate for a boy, put down the fudge bar. The researchers do not recommend packing on extra pounds pre-pregnancy, especially since the findings hardly prove causality. Other studies that looked at factors influencing the sex ratio had only weak evidence of causality too. For example, parental smoking was associated with both higher and lower sex ratios (helpful!).

If you really want a boy, maybe you’ll have better luck if you just take it down a notch and relax.

Courtney Love Gets Welcomed Back Into the Fold by Celebrity Parents

Kelly Mills — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:06:00 GMT

There are very few sins that can get you kicked out of the superstar parents club: stints in rehab won't do it, dressing your kids inappropriately gets the green light, and even neglecting to properly restrain your little angels is no big thing. However, parent Courtney Love really slipped up when she committed the ultimate celebrity sin: she gained a lot of weight. Now all that sordid business is behind her, and she’s dropped almost 50 pounds. The red carpet mamas and papas wasted no time welcoming her back into the fold. Gwyneth Paltrow, a.k.a. Moses and Apple's mama, enjoyed a nice meal of maybe one raw piece of asparagus and a sprig of organic parsley with her at the restaurant Cut. They bonded over yoga, the weight loss workout of the stars. As a fitness fanatic, I have yet to see anyone shed pounds with lightening speed by doing sun salutations. Perhaps "yoga" is actually the secret celebrity code word for gastric bypass?

Even TomKat, presumably out on date night, stopped by to gush about her weight loss triumph. The Tom half squeezed Love and said, "You look like a movie star!" (Hey, wasn't his wife going to be one of those before she married him?) I assume the Kat half beamed her glassy-eyed smile and said, "I love my life, I love my child, I love my daughter, I'm not even the slightest bit unhappy or suffocated or brainwashed. Happy, happy, la la la. No need to rescue me from this golden prison, no sir..."

Does anyone know if Courtney is still sober? Is she taking good care of Frances Bean? Who cares! She's really thin now. That's all you need to know. Take this lesson to heart, Tori Spelling, there's no excuse for holding onto the baby weight.

Gwyneth & Calista: "How Do Other Celeb Moms Do It?"

Alisyn — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:51:00 GMT

Gwyneth Paltrow, mom to Apple, 2 1/2, and Moses, 10 months, is going back to work after taking 3 years off to be with her kids. Calista Flockhart, mom to 6 year old Liam, has started work on her first T.V. show after a 4 year hiatus to be a full-time mom. Both women are finding the transition from stay-at-home-mom to working mom difficult - and are speaking out about it.

Gwyneth told Entertainment Weekly about her life over the last few years, "I think I had projected, ''I'm out of the business. I live in London and I have my kids.'' And yes, that is an aspect of who I am, but I'm also a person who's very passionate about my art and film... I reached a place in my life where I thought, ''It's okay that I have a passion for something besides my family.'' I love making films. If I do one thing that makes me fulfilled, then I'm a more interesting woman for my children." She says she and husband Chris Martin will have to separate the family - while she films and he works on the new Coldplay album - and that they will just have to "try to make it work."

She returns to the big screen in the upcoming Iron Man, and is soliciting advice from other Hollywood moms/actresses who seem to have it all figured out. "I want to call Kate Winslet and say, ''Can you tell me how to do this?'' Or call Cate Blanchett and ask her to describe [her day] from 7 a.m. on."

Calista left Hollywood behind after Ally McBeal ended to focus on her then 2-year-old son, but found herself entertaining the idea of starting her new show, Brothers and Sisters, when Liam entered kindergarten this year. She told Australia's Herald Sun, "Full-time motherhood was a personal choice I made. If this script hadn't come along, I probably still wouldn't be working. But the way it turned out, my son started kindergarten, so this year I was going to start thinking about going back to work. It just happened a little sooner than I expected.

Even though she deliberately chose a show that films in her hometown of L.A., Calista says she often works 12 hour days, and is constantly juggling work and motherhood. Of embarking on this new schedule, she says, "I find it hard to juggle. I'm constantly on the phone planning play dates for Liam, and I'm racing to get home for dinner and to put him to bed. You try to find balance and sometimes you're successful and sometimes you're not. You just do the best you can."

Isn't it refreshing to read about celebrity moms who aren't raving about how "perfect" their lives and their kids are? Isn't it nice to think that a few the rich, gorgeous celebrity moms have everyday worries and problems, just like us? I love it when celebs keep it real.