Kate Winslet is currently promoting The Regime and Lee, a film which should come out later this year. The Regime is the HBO dark-comedy/satire of an oppressive European dictator, where Kate plays the dictator. It looks like yet another brilliant turn for Kate on the small screen, following her massively successful HBO miniseries Mildred Pierce and Mare of Easttown. For her promotion, Kate recently spoke to the New York Times Magazine about life, love and Ozempic. She’s not on Ozempic, and before she was asked about it in this interview, she had no idea what it was. Some highlights:

She had an eating disorder in the 1990s. “I never told anyone about it. Because guess what — people in the world around you go: ‘Hey, you look great! You lost weight!’” For that last bit, Winslet slipped into a pitch-perfect American accent — Los Angeles, maybe a film executive. “So even the compliment about looking good is connected to weight. And that is one thing I will not let people talk about. If they do, I pull them up straight away.”

On what she thinks of Ozempic: “I actually don’t know what Ozempic is. All I know is that it’s some pill that people are taking or something like that.” I told her that Ozempic — which apparently has not yet saturated English culture as it has in the United States — was a very in-demand diabetes drug now commonly taken off-label for weight loss. “But what is it?” Winslet said, her mouth full of pastry. I went on: It was a shot people took that dampened their interest in food. Winslet looked appalled… “Oh, my God. This sounds terrible. Let’s eat some more things!” She made a show of eating more of her pastry, crumbs tumbling onto the blankets.

On intimacy coordinators: “I would have benefited from an intimacy coordinator every single time I had to do a love scene or be partially naked or even a kissing scene. It would have been nice to have had someone in my corner, because I always had to stand up for myself.” And often, she didn’t — she felt that whatever was being asked of her was simply part of the job. She has a litany of unspoken objections she wished she had felt empowered to make: “I don’t like that camera angle. I don’t want to stand here full-frontal nude. I don’t want this many people in the room. I want my dressing gown to be closer. Just little things like that. When you’re young, you’re so afraid of pissing people off or coming across as rude or pathetic because you might need those things. So learning to have a voice for oneself in those environments was very, very hard.”

She never wanted to be known as a complainer: “I was already experiencing huge amounts of judgment, persecution, all this bullying. People can call me fat. They can call me what they want. But they certainly cannot say that I complained and I behaved badly. Over my dead body. I would not have known how to do that without people in power turning around and saying, ‘Oh, Jesus Christ, you know, her again, that complainer.’ I would rather suffer in silence than ever let that happen to me, even still today.”

Accessing her emotions on screen: “In the beginning, I would rummage around my emotional toolbox and pull out something that had actually happened to me. But that stopped working for me at a certain point. I don’t know why. As you get older, you live more life; you have more real experiences that you add to the emotional toolbox without realizing that you’re doing it. And so sometimes, as you get older, quite honestly, emotions are easier to access because they just simmer below the surface all the time — because there’s just so damn many of them.”

[From The NY Times]

I’m not judging Kate’s reaction to the Ozempic stuff because I doubt she understands that Ozempic is supposed to be used for obesity and diabetes, not garden variety weight loss. Plus, it’s kind of clear that Kate still has a somewhat skewed relationship with how she talks about her body, food and weight. I don’t blame her for that either – the way she was treated when she was younger was traumatizing for her, and the things people said about her weight were cruel and toxic. All of it left a mark and, besides that, she’s damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t. Also, to all of the younger women out there: don’t be afraid to complain, to take up space, to point out when things are not right. There’s also a huge difference between “standing up for yourself and your needs” and “complaining.” “Suffering in silence” is not something to aspire to.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.

Sharon Stone is going full steam ahead with her painting career because she’s not getting the acting roles she deserves. As she just told The Guardian about Hollywood, “I want to work with the masters because I have earned my place there.” Goals. So while the film industry slowly catches on to what they’re missing (if at all, let’s be honest), Sharon is exhibiting her vibrant artwork across the globe. She has a show right now in Berlin, and another one coming up in San Francisco. To promote her work, Sharon just chatted with Dana Carvey and David Spade on their Fly on the Wall podcast, and they discussed the time in April 1992 when Sharon hosted SNL and… a lot happened:

“I came out to do the monologue live, which is super scary, and a bunch of people started storming the stage saying they were going to kill me during the opening monologue,” Stone recalled. “The security that was in there froze because they never had seen anything like that happen.”

“Lorne started screaming at [security], ‘What are you doing? Watching the f–king show?’ And Lorne started beating them up and pulling them back from the stage,” she said. “The stage manager looked at me and said, ‘Hold for five.’ So all these people were getting beat up and handcuffed in front of me as we went live.”

“If you think the monologue is scary to begin with, try doing it as people are getting handcuffed in front of you,” Stone added.

She said the protesters were mad at her “because it was the beginning of my work as an AIDS activist. No one understood at the time what was happening and they didn’t know if amfAR could be trusted or if we were against gay people. Instead of waiting for an intelligent, informative conversation they thought, ‘Oh let’s just kill her.’”

“I was so not prepared,” Stone continued. “As you remember, the audience wasn’t up like it is now. Every time we were making a change you’re really physically changing your clothes while you’re running through the audience. I was just terrified. I honestly blacked out for half of the show.”

When the conversation pivoted to some of the sketches, Carvey noted that Stone “was such a good sport” and “the comedy we did with Sharon Stone, we’d literally be arrested now. That was 1992.”

One of the more controversial segments was “Airport Security Sketch,” in which Stone played a woman who gets stopped by airport security and asked to remove one item of clothing at a time. Stone isn’t carrying anything dangerous, the security guards just want to see her take her clothes off. Carvey appeared as an Indian security guard.

“I want to apologize publicly for the security check sketch where I played an Indian man and we’re convincing Sharon, her character, or whatever — to take her clothes off to go through the security thing,” Carvey said, with Spade chiming in that it was “so offensive.”

“It’s so 1992, you know, it’s from another era,” Carvey continued.

Stone said she actually didn’t mind the sketch at all, adding: “I know the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony. And I think that we were all committing misdemeanors [back then] because we didn’t think there was something wrong then. We didn’t have this sense. That was funny to me, I didn’t care. I was fine being the butt of the joke.”

[From NBC News]

Was Sharon’s character really the butt of the joke? From my 2024 vantage point I think it’s the guys in the sketch who are the jokes; they come off as giggling school boys who can’t think of anything better to do with a woman than ask her to take her clothes off. I can’t help but think of Sharon Stone doing the sketch now, and imagine her stripping, proud and secure in her presence, knowing full well the men are completely in over their heads. It was only right for Dana and David to apologize for the sketch as a whole, and especially for Dana to acknowledge how inappropriate it was for him to play an Indian character. I was intrigued with Sharon’s misdemeanor vs felony analogy, but at the same time I wonder, what is the statute of limitations on the “it was another era” defense?

Also, Lorne Michaels snapping at the too-stunned-to-act security guards had me laughing out loud. “What are you doing? Watching the f–king show?” Nailed it.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by GLAAD (@glaad)

photos credit: Jeffrey Mayer / Avalon and via Instagram and screenshots from YouTube

Grace Jabbari sued Jonathan Majors for defamation & assault. [Jezebel]
Hollywood wants to monetize Travis Kelce & Taylor Swift’s relationship. [LaineyGossip]
Review of Late Night with the Devil. [Pajiba]
PR professionals unpack the Kate Middleton situation. [Buzzfeed]
These candid shots of a head-scarf-wearing Jennifer Lawrence look so Old Hollywood, except for the wireless earbud. [JustJared]
This male model is very furry (positive). [Socialite Life]
What to know about Beyonce’s country album. [Hollywood Life]
Beyonce’s latest Cowboy Carter promotional image. [Seriously OMG]
Sandra Huller’s awards season fashion was heavy on LV. [RCFA]
John Waters talks about being a “filth elder.” [OMG Blog]

Richard Eden at the Daily Mail had a hot tip about an American woman hiring a photographer, you guys. Did you know that the Duchess of Sussex hired a photographer to take some family photos? The audacity! Why would Meghan do that when she could just cobble together her own frankenphotos and release them publicly as proof of life?!?! Eden seems particularly incensed that someone would care about her privacy and yet bring in a photographer to privately photograph her children and refuse to release the photos?? These people are so utterly desperate to change the subject back to the Sussexes.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were so protective of their children’s ‘privacy’ that they refused even to name the godparents of their son, Prince Archie. So it’s fascinating to discover that Archie and his sister, Princess Lilibet, have been the subject of a very glamorous shoot by one of Meghan’s favourite photographers.

I hear that New York-based Jake Rosenberg flew to California earlier this month where he took a series of pictures of Meghan on her own, cooking, and her with the children. The photo-shoot, at Prince Harry and Meghan’s mansion in Montecito, coincided with the launch of Meghan’s lifestyle and cookery brand, American Riviera Orchard.

The venture was unveiled last week, in a glitzy Instagram video, in which Meghan could be seen busying herself in a rustic-looking kitchen. The video was posted a day after I contacted Meghan’s office for comment on her plans. American Riviera Orchard will focus on home, garden, food and lifestyle wares.

Rosenberg, who is originally from Toronto in Canada, where Meghan spent six years while filming the television legal drama Suits, has photographed the Duchess many times. On his website, he says ‘his lens has captured the radiance of talent such as Meghan Markle, Oprah Winfrey, Priyanka Chopra, Cindy Crawford, David Beckham, and Michael B. Jordan, unveiling their authentic personas through his vibrant imagery’.

There have been very few photographs of Archie, who turns five in May, and Lily, two, issued by their parents. They did. however, feature in Netflix’s tawdry documentary series about the couple. A friend of Meghan confirms that the photo-shoot took place but insists they were ‘portraits for the family’. The pal tells me: ‘I would not connect those to the business.’

Rosenberg could not be reached for comment.

[From The Daily Mail]

“Netflix’s tawdry documentary series” – it was actually amazing to see how many cute family photos were used in the series, and it just goes to show you that the Sussexes wanted to show off their photogenic children for a while but they simply wanted to do it on their terms, in a careful and thoughtful way. I get what Eden is trying to do though – he’s trying to say HOW DARE Meghan have her children photographed, presumably to aid in the launch of American Riviera Orchard. Like, these people have no chill – all we’ve gotten is a grainy little IG clip. Be patient.

Photos courtesy of Misan Harriman for Archewell and Netflix.

This feels like Kensington Palace trying to push back on their own clownish behavior. Prince William covers the May issue of Tatler, and while he didn’t give an interview to the magazine, make no mistake, he and his team absolutely approved of the cover story. It’s a lengthy, overwrought piece in which they try to convince their readers that William is doing great, thanks for asking, and he’s stepping up and stepping into his “next act.” Tatler’s Wesley Kerr recites William’s royal titles like Huevo achieved these things through merit. Kerr also tries to pretend that William and his staffers haven’t been engaged in months of clownery, clownery which has significantly destabilized the monarchy. You can read the full piece here, I’m not going to excerpt many highlights because this is one of the most contemptible pieces of royal propaganda I’ve ever seen. Just unbridled sycophancy, with absolutely zero new information.

Grand but different: William is grand but different, royal but real. At 6ft 3in, he has the bearing and looks great in uniform after a distinguished, gallant military career. He will be one of the tallest of Britain’s kings since Edward Longshanks in the 14th century and should one day be crowned sitting above the Stone of Scone that Edward ‘borrowed’. William, by contrast, has a deep affinity with Scotland and Wales, having lived in both nations and gained solace from the Scottish landscape after his mother died. He’s popular in America and understands that the Crown’s relationship to the Commonwealth must evolve.

Time to step up: The Prince of Wales’s time has come to step up; and so he has deftly done. In recent months, we have seen a fully-fledged deputy head of state putting into practice his long-held ideas, speaking out on the most contentious issue of the day and taking direct action on homelessness.

William’s BAFTA appearance: More stardust followed when William showed that, even without his wife by his side, he could outclass any movie star at the Baftas. There’s also his immense aim of helping to ‘repair the planet’ itself with his Earthshot Prize: five annual awards of £1 million for transformative environmental projects with worldwide application. This project has a laser focus on biodiversity, better air quality, cleaner seas, reducing waste and combating climate change. Similar aims to his father; different means to achieve the goal.

Charles’s approach was to work constantly: As Prince of Wales, [Charles] was involved in the minutiae of dozens of issues at any one time, working into the night to follow up on emails, crafting his speeches, writing or dictating notes. Add to that much nationwide touring over 40 years (after he left active military service in 1976), fitting in multiple engagements, often being greeted formally by lord lieutenants. This is not William’s style. He has commended his father’s model, but he does things his own way. Although patronages are under review, William has up till now far fewer than either his father or his grandparents.

Valentine Low is a big Huevo fan: ‘He defuses the formality with jocularity,’ says Valentine Low, citing two public events in 2023 that he witnessed. In October, Low reported, William ‘unleashed his inner flirt as he hugged his way through a visit with Caribbean elders [in Cardiff] to mark Black History Month. As he gave one woman a hug – for longer than she expected – he joked: “I draw the line at kissing.” And while posing for a group photograph, he prompted gales of laughter when he quipped: “Who is pinching my bottom?”’ Low believes that when William eventually becomes king, he will be more ‘radical’ than his father but wonders if people will respond to ‘call me William’ when ‘the whole point of the Royal Family is mystique and being different’. However, William has thought deeply about his current role and is prepared for whatever his future holds.

The kids’ schooling: For now, there is a decision to be made on Prince George’s secondary schooling. It’s said that five public schools are being considered, all fee-paying. Eton is single-sex and boarding but close to home. Marlborough (Kate’s alma mater) is co-ed and full boarding. And Oundle, St Edward’s Oxford and Bradfield College (close to Kate’s parents) are co-ed with a mix of boarding and day.

[From Tatler]

Having read/skimmed the whole piece, this is not an underhanded, shady takedown like Tatler’s infamous “Kate the Great” debacle in 2020. It’s just straight propaganda, as they’re trying to rewrite very recent history before our eyes. They can’t say that William showed up under the influence at an investiture or that he was a crude buffoon at the BAFTAs, but do they have to lie about it completely? It’s also notable just how few mentions there are of Kate. While she’s not completely ignored, it’s clear that this is about William alone and how HE is stepping up and it’s HIS next act.

Photos courtesy of Instar, cover courtesy of Tatler.

On Tuesday, Tina Brown was in London and making media appearances. The royal expert/author appeared on Andrew Marr’s show and she gave Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace a thorough beatdown over all of the shenanigans which have taken place in recent weeks/months. There was one good clip on Twitter, but the YouTube video has even more. This is the second big interview Brown has given in recent weeks – last week, she was on CBS’s morning show, ripping into the “flailing” Kensington Palace and saying that the wheels have truly come off.

She says that the whole missing-Princess of Wales issue is “febrile, and it’s out of control…it’s conspiracy theories galore. Actually, a great sort of final, I think, transition of the royals, from royalty being a kind of respected institution into being simply a kind of wild, you know, Kardashian episode. I definitely think there is sort of a loss of stature that’s accrued to all of this, because it all feels silly and scandalous. And there’s a real feeling that the palace is no longer a kind of institution of great renown.” While this is true, please put some respect on Kris Jenner’s name – she would never oversee an operation this clownish.

On the comms disaster of the past month: “[It’s been] an absolute comms disaster. I do think that it’s more cock up than it is a conspiracy. I think a perfect storm of disasters hit the royals all at once.”

She also shrugs off the issue of Prince Harry’s visa and Donald Trump, basically pointing out that Trump is a moron who just says dumb sh-t all the time. It was so obvious that Marr was trying to bait her into trashing Harry as a deflection from the palace sh-tshow, but they immediately get back to that topic.

Hilariously, Brown says that the Windsors “should be concerned” about the lack of public affection and trust and they need to have a “massive reboot.” Speaking of, Buckingham Palace just put a new job listing online – they need one new communications assistant, with an annual salary of £25,000. Oof – that’s a really low salary. I get that it’s not for the head of communications, but still. You’re not attracting the best-and-brightest talent with that kind of salary. Plus, it’s a sh-t job and you have to coordinate with a wiglet-wearing gopher.

‘This is a final transition of the royals being a respected institution to being a wild Kardashian episode.’

Royal expert @TinaBrownLM tells @AndrewMarr9 that the ‘comms disaster’ surrounding Princess Kate’s whereabouts is ‘more cock up than it is conspiracy’. pic.twitter.com/5vh9YxU6W7

— LBC (@LBC) March 19, 2024

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar.

There’s a lot being done this week by people with one particular agenda. That agenda? That the Princess of Wales is absolutely the woman who carried a heavy bag and walked briskly out of the Windsor Farm Store last Saturday. A lot of people have a lot of doubts about it, including at least one BBC reporter and one TMZ executive. Someone who doesn’t have any doubts? People Magazine’s royal editor Simon Perry, who insisted: “No, it wasn’t fabricated or featuring a body double (the photo would surely have been better if that were the case!). And yes, it was indeed Kate. Did their handlers mind that they’d been spotted looking happy as they ran their errands? I suspect not.” The Sun also ran an interview with Nelson Silva, the man who took the video, who insists that it’s Kate and that people questioning it are “delusional.”

So, sure. For argument’s sake, let’s say that Kate really is up and about and feeling well enough to walk briskly at a Windsor farmer’s market and carry heavy grocery bags. Let’s say that her abdominal issues have healed and she magically came out of the procedure looking fifteen years younger, with a radically different face. It begs the question: why then has Kensington Palace insisted that Kate take such a lengthy recovery time, and why wasn’t she capable of simply recording a video of thanks for all the support, and why did “she” hack together a frankenphoto for Mother’s Day? Not only that, if she’s feeling well enough for these kinds of outings, surely she can do some work? Like, a Zoom meeting or a work briefing at Windsor Castle? Apparently, Kensington Palace staff just figured out that their silence-is-confirmation on the TMZ video means that people are curious why Kate is still not working. Like magic, this story appeared:

The Princess of Wales has been working from home on her early years project to improve the lives of babies, as she eases back into normal life after her abdominal surgery. Kensington Palace confirmed that she had been kept up to date with her campaign and the “overwhelmingly positive” results of a study she inspired.

The Princess’s Royal Foundation Centre for Early Childhood has funded a trial of a baby observation tool, which is to be used by health visitors to improve how they spot signs of social and emotional development in young children, with the results being published on Thursday. Having personally suggested that the tool could be used in Britain after seeing a similar system during a royal visit to Denmark, the Princess has been particularly invested in the four-month trial.

A spokesman for Kensington Palace said: “The Princess has been kept updated throughout the process.” The comment from Kensington Palace is the first official update on the Princess’s early years work since her recovery from surgery in January, during which she has been taken off public duties.

Ordinarily, she would have been expected to undertake engagements relating to the study’s publication. Instead, she has been at home recovering and is just starting to get back on her feet for small outings, including to a Windsor Farm Shop at the weekend.

The Princess of Wales’s Centre for Early Childhood will on Thursday report the results of a study conducted in two NHS trusts by the Institute of Health Visiting and the University of Oxford. It asked health visitors to use a version of a tool known as the Alarm Distress Baby Scale (ADBB), which focuses on a baby’s social behaviours such as eye contact, facial expression, vocalisation and activity levels, to help experts and families better understand the ways babies express their feelings.

[From The Telegraph]

I forgot that Kate took credit for “funding a study” after all of last year’s nonsense about her latest rebranded Early Years crap. Last year, it was Shaping Us, with a creepy claymation video and an “awareness raising” campaign. As in, Kate raised awareness that the early years are important. That’s it. Now she’s funding a landmark study into whether you can tell a baby is upset when they cry. Anyway, Keen is back to work! Back to busy-work.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

There’s been a palpable sense of panic among Prince William and Kate’s political base, the sycophantic royal reporters who feel their only job is propping up an angry egg and his bewigleted wife. Maybe I’m being generous, but I do believe that there are some royal reporters who genuinely understand that the events of the past month have irreparably altered the Windsors’ standing and public trust. But as we’ve seen time and time again, these people are short-sighted and unimaginative – they can’t see that there’s money to be made from doing honest coverage of the monarchy’s death rattle. So instead, they trudge along, writing their sympathetic “Poor Prince Huevo” pieces. Becky English had a doozy, published on Wednesday: “What William really thinks about the Kate conspiracy theories. And why it’s been so heartbreaking for him to see her reputation trashed in the same way as Diana’s.” Can someone tell William that his own mismanagement and tone-deaf messaging has done the most damage to his wife’s reputation?

William has had such a difficult four years: All this against the backdrop of a series of devastating losses, beginning with the death of the Duke of Edinburgh in 2021 (always a tower of strength for the princess, to whom he frequently wrote fond letters, as well as William) and then his irreplaceable grandmother and sounding board, Queen Elizabeth, the following year.

The grief of exiling a brother who refused to divorce his wife on William’s orders: There has been grief, too – well, at least a form of it – at the devastating defection of Prince Harry, whose almost primeval need to snipe, strike and rile his brother and sister-in-law, to whom he was once so close, has been one of the most devastating sucker punches of them all. Sure, William’s heart has been hardened and his resolve reaffirmed when it comes to his sibling, particularly after his disloyalty to Catherine in his bile-fest of a memoir, Spare. But it is important not to underestimate, friends tell me, just how much of a form of bereavement it has been.

The weight of the world on his hunched shoulders: But having covered the Royal Family for so long you do get to pick up the signs, and it was clear that William was also a man with the weight of the world on his shoulders. I know he is angry, frustrated and, yes, deeply disappointed, at what has transpired over recent weeks. ‘When will it all stop?’ he is said to have asked. William has worked hard over the years to ring-fence his family and protect them from the worst excesses of public scrutiny. While he doesn’t have an easy relationship with the British media, he has learnt to work with us professionally – and has, rightly, been afforded unprecedented privacy for a publicly funded national figure.

William always hoped to control all of the media: William has now learnt the hard way that this degree of control does not extend to the sump of social media – let alone foreign publications and even prime-time US television – which are simply not subject to a fraction of the same regulation as news outlets here. Most worrying for the prince and his team is the way that the worst sniggering excesses of internet trollism have broken through the barrier and appear to now be controlling a particularly spiteful form of public discourse.

William’s own-goals: Of course, there have been a few own-goals on the way. I’ve been clear in my view that Kensington Palace were desperately naive in thinking one of the most famous – and, let us not forget, much-loved – women in the world could disappear from public view for three months and people not talk about it. Do we have a right to know what’s been wrong with the Princess of Wales? Absolutely not. But might it not have been prudent to consider a slightly more informative approach in order to fill the vacuum that is now, inevitably, overflowing with rumour, conspiracy and bile?

An even more insular Huevo: The trouble is that approach doesn’t come naturally to William – who, insiders fear, will become ‘even more insular’ as a result of his wife’s experience. And after events of recent days, you can honestly sympathise. It’s also worth noting that while everyone hopes and prays for the King’s successful recovery (and from what I hear, currently, his spirits are excellent), Charles’s cancer diagnosis is a gnawing reminder for his son and heir of what is coming down the line, possibly faster than he ever feared. That’s a huge burden for William not just as a man, but also a husband and father of three young children, to bear.

Allow their actions to do the talking: For now the prince and his team are not minded to publicly react to what they describe as ‘the madness’, and feel their actions should do the talking. That said, I’m told they have not entirely ruled out making some kind of public statement in the coming weeks, ahead of Catherine’s return to public duties. There is much William would like to say. It has been tough for him to stand by and see his wife’s reputation shredded by the court of public opinion in the way his late mother’s once was.

[From The Daily Mail]

Stop for a second and really think about how f–king bizarre all of this is. William is not a one-man royal office. He has a staff of dozens, if not hundreds at his disposal. He has a brand new private secretary from the diplomatic corps and access to the top Tory spinmasters. He also has an eager, sycophantic press corps openly telling him what they want from him and what he should do to simply change the narrative. He’s either too stupid, too stubborn or hidden option C to actually do the things he needs to do to get through this. Release the original Mother’s Day photos, release a clear, unedited photo or video of Kate, have Kate release a real message of thanks for all of the care and support she’s gotten, actually respect the British public enough to communicate with them directly in some way. Instead, he wants to whine, dither and throw a tantrum about how he still hates his brother and he’s mad that people actually want to know if his wife is alive. BTW, hidden option C is that William can’t do any of the things the media wants him to do because Kate is refusing or she’s incapacitated. Who even knows?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Jason Momoa, O he of the luscious locks and a love of loincloths, says he runs A-OK on six hours of sleep. So uber fit, 6’4”, looks like he’s in his mid 30s when he’s 44, that Jason Momoa keeps all that going from only six hours of sleep. He must be a vampire, right? Jason has a brand new partnership with Guinness, for which he just co-wrote, co-directed, and starred in a commercial that debuted earlier this month. To tout the video — that has a Director’s Cut for a beer commercial! — Jason recently spoke with GQ about his sleep routine, favorite foods (aside from sardines for breakfast), and the bit of casting he did for this project with Guinness:

So, are you getting up early?
Generally, 5 to 6 a.m. I generally get six hours of sleep and am good with six. I don’t get more than that.

So you’re going to bed every night at midnight?
I would say 11 to midnight, yeah. But I went to bed the other night at nine, and my body woke me up at 3:30 a.m., and I was like “Get f–ked!” And my body’s like, “That’s six hours, bro!”

Okay, what are we doing for lunch?
I love sandwiches, and for lunch, I keep it simple and have a sandwich. I have a chef who travels with me for dinner, but I consistently love the same stuff. I love Hawaiian food, so I’ll have nice chicken and rice, mac salad, poi, and salad. I love a simple salad. I like radishes and tomatoes; then there’s just the greens and olive oil. I’ll do protein; I’ll always have chicken. I ate red meat for a very long time, and I loved it to the point where it hurt me. So, I don’t eat as much red meat as I used to. I love seafood, like uni and stuff like that. I should eat way more vegetables than I do, but we’re working on that. Baby steps!

Okay, before we go, hit me with your favorite memory with Guinness.
I have one that’s just a little too personal, so I’m going with the latest one. I was raised by a single mother — it was just me and her. We ate shitty pizza — she’d send me coupons, so the pizza we ate was like 88-cent pizza. She worked three or four jobs, and she busted her ass, but she would drink a beer, and she taught me how to drink Guinness. When we were looking for this woman to play this role in the commercial, I was like: Oh my God, let’s just get my mom. Most people aren’t gonna know that’s my mother. I told my mom, and my mom’s obviously so giddy — she’s never been in anything before. It’s one of the coolest moments I’ve ever had with my mom, and to share it over something that she taught me. We went to the Guinness factory, wrote this story with my friends, directed it, and starred in it with my mother. That’s about as good as it gets.

[From GQ]

Nepo mom alert! I actually think the commercial he made is pretty cute, and a reminder that his comedy chops are being vastly underutilized (much like Chris Hemsworth). Chiseled hunks can be funny too! And of course it was really sweet of Jason to give his mom a cameo, especially for something that was already meaningful between them. I’m not much of a beer drinker (as in I don’t drink beer at all), but if some brand ever wants to make me their ambassador for root beer floats, you can be sure I’ll loop in Mama Kismet.

Now getting back to six hours of sleep. I’m still suspicious! And by that I mean jealous! Look, I “function” many days on six hours of sleep. It’s hard to get around that with the demands of life, though I always strive for the rule of eight: eight hours for the day job, eight for my own pursuits, and eight for sleep. Emphasis on strive. But to look like Michaelangelo’s long lost Hawaiian David, on only half of Rob Lowe’s or less than half Dakota Johnson’s nightly slumber? To quote the man himself, “Get f–ked!”

Embed from Getty Images

photos credit: Darla Khazei/INSTARimages, Xavier Collin/Image Press Agency/Jeffrey Mayer/Avalon

I follow Peter Hunt on Twitter (you can see his handle here). He’s a former BBC presenter and sort of a self-styled royal critic. He’s a royalist, don’t get me wrong, but he also criticizes the way the Windsors do business. For years, he’s made some good points about the Sussexit and how horrible the Windsors were to Prince Harry in particular. One of Hunt’s special interests is how the British media is far too obsequious to the Windsors, how access-journalism has ruined everything, and how the media should do their jobs and act as a check on the monarchy’s power. Well, guess who has many thoughts about the Mother’s Day Frankenphoto Fiasco? Hunt was appalled that after years of bowing, scraping and supplicating to the Windsors, the British media didn’t have the balls to question the photo and it took the international media calling out the palace clownshow for anyone to mildly criticize this horrible system. Hunt shared even more thoughts:

The media should use the Kensington Palace photo editing row as an “opportunity” to insist it has full editorial control over royal footage, a former BBC royal correspondent has said. Peter Hunt, now a royal commentator, said parts of the media had “a bar that was perhaps too low” when it came to examining material handed out by the palace.

Earlier this week, Phil Chetwynd of AFP said the palace was no longer a “trusted source”, adding that the photographs more usually subject to a “kill notice” were issued by North Korean or Iranian news agencies. Mr Hunt, speaking on Radio 4’s Today programme, said broadcasters including the BBC should follow suit in insisting filmed material is not controlled by the palace, proving to viewers that it can be trusted.

Mr Hunt said: “It’s a new world for the royals and a new world for the media. That senior person from AFP mentioned the British monarchy in the same breath as the so-called axis of evil, which isn’t a good look when he says that they previously killed pictures only from the North Korean and Iranian news agency. It shows that they and maybe others had a bar which was perhaps too low when it came to photos from this sort of source.”

Mr Hunt said he had raised concerns in 2016 about footage of the Royal family and projects including the Heads Together mental health campaign being filmed by others and handed out.

“The BBC has made considerable focus on this issue of transparency,” he said. “The BBC constantly talks about transparency being an essential element in ensuring audiences feel they can trust BBC journalism.” He suggested the corporation could make use of the existing “royal cameraman” paid for by the BBC, ITV and Sky. “This would be an opportunity for the BBC to make clear to its audiences that the material that individual provides is material that they control. That it’s not edited by the palace, not controlled by the palace. They can make clear that the sound that’s picked up by the cameraman is not interfered with in any way as well. It’s an opportunity for broadcasters to follow suit.”

[From The Telegraph]

I appreciate that Hunt is bringing this up, if for no other reason than the issue puts a spotlight on the fact that no British media outlet has followed the lead set by Reuters, AFP, AP and Getty. The Sun, The Times, the Mail, the Telegraph, the Mirror, the BBC – none of them have pledged to examine and verify the authenticity of photos and videos provided by the Windsors. You know why that is too, it’s not that the Telegraph or the Mail has some kind of implicit trust in everything they’re handed from the palace. It’s that every British outlet (save for the Guardian, arguably) sees itself less as a member of the Fourth Estate and more as a helpful propaganda arm of the British monarchy and Tory Party. Why examine a palace-issued photo when you can use it in your royalist propaganda?

Photos courtesy of Kensington Palace.