This past weekend, my social media was full of people who went to see Madame Web and love-hated every minute of it. The film is apparently completely terrible, poorly written, poorly acted, weird and likely another nail in the coffin for superhero films. On the other hand, it might become a camp classic, because it’s so stupid and terrible that people can’t even believe it was made. Anyway, after Madame Web bombed in its opening weekend (it only made $15.4 million domestically), the mood at Sony is quite glum.

The trailer buzz was worrisome, advance ticket sales anemic. Then last week, the critic reviews for Madame Web were posted, and they stung deepest of all — Sony’s Spider-Man spinoff received the lowest average Rotten Tomatoes score (13 percent) of any major superhero film in nearly a decade. “On Wednesday night, you could actually watch advance purchase sales declining in real time as buyers were refunding their tickets,” marvels a major theatrical chain insider. “It really says something when you’d rather have Shazam! 2 numbers.”

It marked one of the lowest starts in Hollywood history for a film based on a Marvel character. Domestic box office for the first six days in North America was just $26.2 million after opening midweek on Valentine’s Day. International tallied $25.7 million from 61 markets. Even the fan-friendly CinemaScore grade was poor (C+ — extremely low for a superhero title).

Like DC and the once-unstoppable Marvel, Sony is now finding itself in under the gun to reevaluate how it makes comic book movies. Sony’s previous Spider-Man universe movie — 2022’s Morbius — was a critical bust and much-maligned by fanboys online, but at least it managed to earn $170 million worldwide. There’s no such hope for Madame Web. Plus, the feature’s collapse doesn’t just impact this film, but a new potential franchise led by star Dakota Johnson that Sony had hoped to spin out (spoiler alert: her character is connected to Peter Parker, whose birth is documented in the movie).

The film introduced a trio of supporting characters (played by Isabela Merced, Celeste O’Connor and Sydney Sweeney — now one of the top stars her age). It set up a future in which the three could have become a team of Spider-Women under the guiding eye of Johnson’s Cassie Webb. Now that’s not going to happen. “We’re not going to see another Madame Web movie for another decade-plus,” quipped one industry veteran. “It failed. Sony tried to make a movie that was a different type of superhero movie.”

“I don’t know if women are enough to carry the box office here,” one veteran studio source outside of Sony says. Indeed, males make up 65 percent to 70 percent of the superhero audience in North America. In the case of Madame Web, the percentage of female viewers was still only 46 percent.

“We are in transition when it comes to superhero movies,” notes the insider. “I don’t know how big that transition is or what the other side looks like. It may be fewer movies, but bigger brands. Sony is willing to take some risk but also wants home runs — that’s good. And if [Sony’s upcoming Spider-Man Universe title] Kraven is a gigantic hit, the narrative could be completely different. So it’s too early to know the outcome.”

[From THR]

The “women didn’t carry the box office” stuff is a pointed reference to Sony’s attempts to shake up the marketing and really sell Madame Web to women and girls. It wasn’t enough because, from the looks of it, Madame Web is simply a bad movie. One of the most pointed criticisms I saw (and it was backed up by Dakota Johnson’s interviews) was that the script had the feel of something half-written by AI and half-written by committee. Anyway, there would have never been a second Madame Web movie anyway because Dakota f–king hated this experience and she really does not want to do it again.

In case you’re wondering about the money, THR says that Sony spent “in the low $100 million range” on Madame Web. Do you see it on screen? I’m really asking. From what I’ve seen and heard, the film looks cheap as hell.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images. Posters courtesy of Sony.

One of the things driving me crazy about the British media’s current unethical journalism is that they constantly claim that they’re being briefed by “sources close to Prince Harry” when it’s clear that they’re being briefed by Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace. Remember when there was wall-to-wall reporting about Harry calling his father on King Charles’s birthday last year? That came from KP, not the Sussexes. Initially, I thought it came from BP, but no, some royal reporter recently confessed that it was coming from William’s office. So it is with the current fiction, that Harry wants to “come back” to the UK temporarily to help out dear old dad. This did not come from “sources close to Harry.” This whole story came from Buckingham Palace. They did it to poke Prince William and they did it so that they could once again create a cycle of “we hate Harry, he’s the worse!” Speaking of, Tom Sykes’s sources claim that Charles and William would NEVER allow Harry to come back.

Rumors of Prince Harry’s potential return to royal duties were unequivocally crushed Monday morning, with sources telling The Daily Beast that the king and his older son, Prince William were “totally united” on the issue and there was “no way” they would “re-royal” Harry.

The pushback came after Harry’s team last week floated in the London Times the notion that he could step back into a part-time royal position, helping out with royal jobs while his father is battling cancer. The prince was said to have told friends he would be happy to “step into a royal role while his father is unwell.”

However King Charles’ camp have made it clear the offer has been unilaterally dismissed, and that Charles and his heir are unified on the issue, and that his younger son should not return to representing the family in any official capacity, having traduced them in a number of TV shows and his memoir, Spare.

A friend of the family’s told The Daily Beast: “William and his father are totally united on this. There is no way they are going to re-royal Harry after what he has said.”

Asked if there was a difference of opinion between Charles and William on the Harry issue, and it was accurate to say that the king wanted to rebuild the personal relationship with Harry, the friend would only say: “The king loves both his sons very much and was delighted to see Harry the other day, and of course, he wants to see more of him.”

Charles’ camp have made it clear that the king continues to build bridges with Harry, as evidenced by his 30-minute meeting with Harry earlier this month in the immediate wake of his cancer diagnosis. However, that doesn’t mean Harry will soon be back on the balcony of Buckingham Palace waving at the crowds.

According to a report in the Daily Mail, by the paper’s respected royal reporter, Rebecca English, sources close to the monarchy have asserted that the king holds the view that Prince Harry’s return as a part-time working royal is out of the question. The king’s camp appear to have briefed that the king is “firmly of the opinion” there is no way back for Harry as a working royal “in any way, shape or form.”

[From The Daily Beast]

This is how palace courtiers spend their days, starting rumors about Harry so they can deny those rumors and bash Harry. That is one thing which unites William and Charles, the one thing they can agree on, that if they’re trying to deflect or hide something, start a rumor about Harry. That being said, I agree with a lot of commenters, that this whole storyline was about Charles telling William to get off his ass and do some work or else Charles will ask Harry to come back. I also think that Sykes’ “friend of the family” is just the same William-centric source who is constantly making William sound like a psychopathic nutjob.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

If you ask me, the only questions which surprised Prince Harry in his Good Morning America interview were the ones about American citizenship. You could see him get thrown off and actually weigh what he wanted to say and how to say it. He was prepared for questions about his father and his family and Harry knew exactly what he wanted to say. But Will Reeves caught him off guard by asking him “Do you feel American?” and “Would you think about becoming a citizen?” Harry’s responses were that he loves his life in California but he doesn’t know if he feels American, and that “I have considered it” and “it’s a thought that has crossed my mind” when it comes to naturalizing. He also said that American citizenship is “not a high priority for me right now.”

In my coverage, I wondered if Harry had already begun the process of applying for citizenship. It takes years, even if you’re a wealthy white prince married to an American. Given the Heritage Foundation’s year-long endeavor to seek and publicize Harry’s visa application, it would make sense that Harry has already looked through all kinds of paperwork, including what it would take to get a green card. Incidentally, this week, Heritage’s lawyers are going back to court to try to force immigration to hand over Harry’s files. If Harry does apply for citizenship (or if he already has), you know the right-wing groups will target him for that too.

The coverage in the British media about the subject has been a bit weird, like they have also never considered the idea that Harry might one day become a naturalized American. The Telegraph suggested that Harry just said that because “he hoped to please the American audience watching.” They got a royal source to snipe: “Pity his immigration lawyers, they must be beside themselves.” The Telegraph also did this stand-alone story about how Harry would have to “renounce” his titles:

The Duke of Sussex has said he has “considered” becoming an American citizen, in a move that would appear to compel him to renounce his titles. According to policy published by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services, any application would require him to renounce his title. It would be one resolution to the long-running criticism of the Sussexes, who continue to use their titles despite their public disparagement of the Royal family and institution.

Critics have called for the King to strip them of their titles, a move it is understood the palace has never considered. Others have argued they should drop them voluntarily. They have already put their HRH titles into abeyance under an agreement made when the late Queen Elizabeth II was alive.

The Duchess is understood to have begun the process of applying for UK citizenship during her short time in Britain, but she did not complete it. She remains a US citizen and the children are reported to have dual citizenship.

US immigration policy states that “any applicant who has any titles of heredity or positions of nobility in any foreign state must renounce the title or the position”. Part J of the USCIS policy manual, about the oath of allegiance, states: “The applicant must expressly renounce the title in a public ceremony and USCIS must record the renunciation as part of the proceedings. Failure to renounce the title of position shows a lack of attachment to the Constitution.”

In order to renounce a title, the applicant must say: “I further renounce the title of (give title or titles) which I have heretofore held” or “I further renounce the order of nobility (give the order of nobility) to which I have heretofore belonged.”

The decision would also have implications for tax.

[From The Telegraph]

Yeah, the last sentence is more significant than everything that comes before it. Whatever Harry is considering or whatever applications he’s already put in, I would assume it’s more about taxes. And probably wanting to be a citizen of the same country as his wife and children too. The thing about titles… well, I don’t even know, I don’t know the ins and outs of immigration law when it comes to titled foreign nationals, but I would assume that IF Harry seeks American citizenship, he would want dual citizenship and as a British citizen (subject) he would still retain his titles.

Photos courtesy of Netflix, Instar.

On Sunday, I followed the BAFTA ceremony on the BAFTAs social media account, where they were posting videos and updates. After the In Memoriam section aired during the telecast, there was a sudden kerfuffle in the Twitter comments – people were outraged that Matthew Perry had been left out of the tributes for artists who had passed away in the past year. The poor BAFTA social media person kept posting the same explanation to everyone complaining, which was that Perry would be memorialized during the upcoming BAFTA Television Awards. People were NOT happy.

The British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) has responded to online backlash over Matthew Perry’s absence from the 2024 EE BAFTA Film Awards’ In Memoriam segment on Sunday. After Perry, who died last October at age 54, did not appear during the tribute — set to a special arrangement of Cyndi Lauper’s “Time After Time” performed by Ted Lasso’s Hannah Waddingham — social media users were quick to criticize the decision.

On X (formerly Twitter), users called out BAFTA for the perceived omission, which one dubbed “bad form” alongside a GIF of Perry’s Friends character, Chandler Bing, saying, “You can’t make this stuff up.”

Some were perplexed by Perry’s absence, calling it “shockingly bad” and a “shocking omission.”

Others simply sought an explanation, writing, “Why wasn’t [Matthew Perry] included in the memorial sequence???”

Responding to Perry’s absence from the tribute, a spokesperson for BAFTA tells PEOPLE, “I can confirm Matthew Perry will be remembered in our forthcoming BAFTA Television Awards.”

On X, BAFTA echoed this statement, writing, “Matthew Perry will be remembered in this year’s TV Awards ceremony,” and shared the link to the academy’s online tribute to the actor.

[From People]

As I said, I felt bad for the social media person, because they were really under siege from people who outraged by BAFTA’s decision. I even sort of thought that the social media person probably disagreed with the decision, given they made a point of responding to several critics (thus probably making it into a bigger deal). It was such a stupid call by the BAFTAs, to gatekeep which deceased actors were “worthy” of the BAFTA Film memorial. While Perry was absolutely more famous for his television work, he appeared in fourteen films, including The Whole Nine Yards (an expected hit). His loss was devastating to the acting community entirely, regardless of whether he was “film actor” or “television actor.” This whole thing is so utterly snobby.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images, Instagram.

As we discussed, Prince William was a horse’s ass at the BAFTAs, wandering around, telling people that he’d barely seen any movies and blaming that on Kate’s health issues. While I get that he’s “busy” on the fakakta school run, he’s also the BAFTA president and, as many have pointed out, it would be pretty easy for him to get some screeners. While he fully admitted that he hadn’t seen most of the BAFTA-nominated films, he also tried to improvise when he met with Phoebe Dynevor, Ayo Edebiri, Sophie Wilde and Mia McKenna Bruce. Mia starred in the film How to Have Sex, which I have not seen and neither has William. He still remarked that she looked like she “had a lot of fun” making the film. Y’all, her character is raped in the film.

Prince William appears to have made a gaffe talking to an actress who won a BAFTA for her film – which ends with her character being raped after saying the movie looked like it was ‘a lot of fun’, despite not having seen it.

The Prince of Wales made the remark as he mingled backstage last night with nominees at the Royal Festival Hall in London – including Rising Star winner Mia McKenna-Bruce, who was hailed for her role in the drama How To Have Sex. McKenna-Bruce, 26, won the prize after her performance as Tara, a virgin who goes on holiday with friends to Greek island Malia where she is raped by a fellow tourist.

The actress said she hoped the film would improve society’s ‘conversation we’ve been having around consent’ and help ‘people talk about situations they’ve been through’. William had greeted the Rising Star nominees on Sunday night by telling her: ‘I haven’t yet watched your film – I think it looked like you had a lot of fun all the way through.’

The father-of-three, 41, shook hands with Mia and her fellow nominees – The Bear’s Ayo Edebiri, Phoebe Dynevor and Sophie Wilde – while admitting he had not watched any of their movies.

[From The Daily Mail]

It is a bad gaffe and one which could have been easily avoided if William wasn’t trying to perv out on young, attractive actresses. He heard the word “sex” and he was trying to be sexy or flirtatious towards Mia and instead he was awful and awkward. And offensive. Even if the film had been “sexy,” he still would have come across as a dirty old man with bad teeth and an ugly combover.

What else? He did say that he watched Oppenheimer, but he still hasn’t seen Barbie. Like, did Charlotte not want to see Barbie? William probably thinks it’s a “girl movie.” When talking about how few films he’s seen in the past year, he apparently said: “I’ve done the fewest I’ve ever done before. With my wife it’s been a bit [hand motion] — but hopefully we’ll catch up, I’ll make my list tonight.” If I was on bed rest after surgery, I would want to watch movies & TV shows, but who knows what kind of state Kate is in.

Anyway, another successful outing for the heir! He really can’t leave the house these days without making an ass out of himself.

This will get scrubbed soon, but my god this man is a danger. pic.twitter.com/T3Cc2TTTE0

— Jennifer (@MamaSassington) February 19, 2024

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Kristen Stewart was in Germany for the Berlinale (Berlin Film Festival) over the weekend. She’s promoting Love Lies Bleeding, and she wore Chanel to the premiere (and I think that’s a Chanel outfit at the photocall too). I’m fine with all of this except her hair – her hair is getting worse and worse every time I see her. In general though, the premiere look was very buttoned-up for Kristen, especially given that she recently covered Rolling Stone in a jock strap. The RS cover was “risque,” according to the Hollywood Reporter, although I must have missed the outrage about it. Were people actually in their feelings about it? Anyway, Kristen talked about the RS cover and more during her Berlinale press conference:

Kristen Stewart has defended her risque’ photo shoot for the March Rolling Stone magazine cover that went viral and divided audiences on social media platforms.

“The existence of a female body thrusting any type of sexuality at you that’s not designed for exclusively straight males is something people are not super comfy with and so I’m really happy with it,” Stewart told a press conference on Sunday at the Berlin Film Festival for her latest movie, Love Lies Bleeding.

Stewart, who is bisexual, said she enjoyed breaking with traditional stereotypes about what it means to be feminine. “It’s okay to take different pictures and mix them up in a way that people aren’t used to and want to go and that’s okay, too,” she added. Stewart insisted the androgynous images taken by Collier Schorr for Rolling Stone should not be that big of a deal. “In fact, it’s pervasive and it’s everywhere and it’s being denied and it’s crazy that there aren’t more pictures like that. I loved the opportunity,” she added.

Stewart talked about making lesbian-themed films like Loves Lies Bleeding for mainstream audiences, rather than in and for an echo chamber. “We can’t keep doing that thing where we tell everyone how to feel, and where we sort of pat each other on the back and receive brownie points for providing space for marginalized voices and only in the capacity that they are allowed to speak about that alone,” Stewart told the Berlinale presser .

“The era of queer films, being so pointedly only that, is over. It’s done. Maybe they’ll happen, but I think things develop and move on. It’s just so inherent to how we’re all moving forward,” she added. Stewart pointed to Happiest Season, her LGBTQ+ Christmas romcom that was entirely commercially-driven, and yet sparked in her an interest in bringing to wider audiences other movies with diverse voices and issues. “It’s not making (movies) about the reasons that they’re sidelined, but peoples’ actual experiences, what they love, what their desires are, where they come from, where they want to go and, yeah, not feeling like you always have to stand on a f–ing soapbox and be everyone’s spokesperson.”

[From THR]

“Stewart insisted the androgynous images taken by Collier Schorr for Rolling Stone should not be that big of a deal” – they weren’t a big deal! They were just cool androgynous pics, plenty of people have done similar photos. I’m not negating how important it is for young LGBTQ kids to see someone like Kristen on the cover of Rolling Stone, but let’s not act as if the wheel has been reinvented. As for what Kristen said about the kinds of “queer films” she’d like to make… I agree, what she’s seeking is desperately needed. Not endless “coming out” films or films where the character’s sexuality is their defining (or sole) characteristic. The “gay best friend” trope needs to be over too.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

America Ferrera is having a great year. Her powerful speech in Barbie earned its place in cinematic history as a major cultural moment and she was just nominated for her first Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress. I’m a huge fan of America, so I’m thrilled that she’s getting the recognition she deserves. (I know I say this often but if you’re looking for a new sitcom to binge, go watch Superstore!)

Last week, America appeared on Late Night with Seth Meyers to talk about the movie, her Oscar nomination, and her different experiences at Oscar events. At one point, she shared that she met Martin Scorsese at an Oscar event and was starstruck saying hi to him, prompting Seth to ask her if that happens often. America responded by telling a story about the time she met Leonardo DiCaprio and cried.

Appearing on Late Night with Seth Meyers on Friday, the 39-year-old Barbie star explained that being starstruck will “sneak up on you” at industry events, before she detailed one celebrity encounter in particular that left her “weeping.”

As she explained, it usually happens when she meets someone she had a “childhood connection” to, such as when she met DiCaprio, now 49, at the 2007 Screen Actors Guild Awards, where she won an award for her performance in Ugly Betty.

“I watched Titanic in the movie theaters seven times. [I was] 13, 14 [years old], prime time to be in love with Leonardo DiCaprio, right? OK, so first time I went to the SAG Awards, and I had won for Ugly Betty, I had been onstage and the whole thing,” she recalled. “I was feeling kind of like, ‘I belong here, this is cool.’ ”

At the awards show, she ended up saying “hello” to DiCaprio. “And I promptly departed [from] him, went around the corner and just started weeping,” Ferrera said.

“And my husband, then-boyfriend, was with me and he was like, ‘I am so embarrassed right now.’ ”

Ferrera’s spouse, Ryan Piers Williams, whom she wed in 2011, then encouraged Ferrera to “stop crying.”

“I hope Leonardo DiCaprio never sees this,” Ferrera told Meyers, who joked that he “probably won’t.”

[From People]

That is SO funny. I’ve been trying to think of which celebrity I’d be so starstruck that I’d cry if I met them and I don’t know! Honestly, I think it would be Judy Blume. There are celebrities that I’ve admired or would love to meet, but Judy’s books meant so much to me when I was growing up that I could see myself becoming emotional if I ever met her. I would also love to sit in on a Fiona Apple recording session and see how her genius works. Oh, and Gillian Anderson would definitely inspire a lot of feels. I wouldn’t have cried meeting Leo, though. I was more of a Devon Sawa girl growing up. Those five minutes he’s on screen during Casper…

You can watch America’s entire segment with Seth below. They tell more funny stories, including Seth joking about which famous person he met that made him cry (at least, I think he was joking!) and which Full House star she was thrilled to have met. She also talks about meeting Tom Hanks and trying to hold it together as he said nice things to her. It’s a fun interview and she comes across as a really nice, down-to-earth person.

Embed from Getty Images

photos credit: Xavier Collin / Image Press Agency / Avalon, Jeffrey Mayer / Avalon and Getty

Embed from Getty Images

Tom Hiddleston attended the People’s Choice Awards & gave a shout-out to his partner/fiancee Zawe Ashton (who wasn’t there). [People]
Megan Fox had pink hair at the People’s Choice Awards. [Just Jared]
Orville Peck would “risk it all” for one night with Brad Pitt. Gross. [Socialite Life]
Travis Kelce’s first executive-producer credit. [LaineyGossip]
Kelly Rowland has an issue with Today’s dressing rooms. [Seriously OMG]
Another review of spectacularly bad Madame Web. [Pajiba]
Tom Hiddleston & Zawe Ashton attended a BFI event last week! [Go Fug Yourself]
Lara Croft’s latest redesign. [OMG Blog]
More dudes at the BAFTAs. [RCFA]
90 Day Fiance: an Indonesian wedding? [Starcasm]
All about Jennifer Lopez’s new documentary. [Hollywood Life]
Gen Z has some ideas about what constitutes middle class. [Buzzfeed]

Embed from Getty Images

Here are more photos of Prince William, backstage at last night’s BAFTAs. He went solo, was seated next to Cate Blanchett during the ceremony, then he was taken around to meet of the beautiful young actresses, because that wasn’t obvious at all! Remember how often, in 2023, William was being branded as a “hunk” and a “hot single dad”? It kept happening, over and over in palace-approved stories. As you can see, he spent some time last night trying to chat up Phoebe Dynevor, Ayo Edebiri, Sophie Wilde and Mia McKenna Bruce. As you can see, William was not very successful. Ayo’s face in particular betrays just how badly this went. Still, the Mail hilariously tried to tell everyone that Hot Single Dad William really won over these starlets!

Prince William won over BAFTA winners last night as he met with rising star nominees and other people who had picked up gongs at the award show. Making a dapper appearance at the Royal Festival Hall in London, the Prince of Wales, who made a last-minute solo appearance while his wife Kate remains at home recovering from abdominal surgery, chatted with the nominees for the Rising Star award – plus winner Mia McKenna-Bruce.

The father-of-three, 41, shook hands with the star-struck actresses, who also included The Bear’s Ayo Edebiri, Phoebe Dynevor and Sophie Wilde, before revealing he had not seen any of the films they had starred in.

Earlier in the night he apologised for confirming his attendance to the ceremony late in the day, and for also not watching many of the films – noting that, understandably, he has ‘other things’ on his mind.

However, ever the entertainer, William kept things light despite a difficult few months for the royal family and told Mia McKenna Bruce, who stars in How to Have Sex, that she looked like she had ‘a lot of fun’ making the film.

As William walked into the green room following the award ceremony, he smiled as he greeted the three young actresses.

‘It was very close between all of you,’ he told the talents, before turning to Mia to congratulate her. He then told her: ‘I haven’t yet watched your film. I think it looked like you had a lot of fun all the way through’.

After revealing he hasn’t had time to ‘get through’ many of the nominated films, William said: ‘It is a very very strong year for categories.’

[From The Daily Mail]

“The father-of-three, 41, shook hands with the star-struck actresses” – they were not star-struck, they looked disturbed by his behavior and mannerisms. These photos went viral last night (along with my tweet with the Michael Sheen photo) and it was yet another moment where non-royal-watchers were talking about William’s awkwardness, weirdness and how he always manages to fall flat whenever he’s trying to impress women. It was also funny to watch all of the behind-the-scenes videos of no one in the BAFTA auditorium clapping for him or acknowledging him at all. How embarrassing.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

This weekend was full of royalists screaming into the echo chamber they made for themselves, mostly about the Times report about Prince Harry offering to “temporarily return” to royal work while his father has cancer. That story came, in my opinion, straight from Buckingham Palace. I’ve developed a theory that Queen Camilla has her own side operation and she ends up briefing all kinds of bullsh-t, mostly about her stepsons. Well, I also believe this new Sun exclusive came from Camilla’s operation, because she’s still pissed that her husband met with Prince Harry one-on-one two weeks ago and she was kicked out of the room. Now she wants people to know that Harry was “blocked” from meeting his father in Sandringham.

Prince Harry was stopped from joining the King at Sandringham after flying to the UK because Palace aides feared “they’d never get rid of him”. The Duke of Sussex was told to get a hotel instead of staying with the cancer-stricken King. The Sun on Sunday can reveal Harry, 39, planned for a long heart-to-heart with his dad. He had even hoped to join the King — recuperating from cancer treatment — for a few days at Sandringham.

But instead he was instructed to visit Clarence House, his dad’s London home, for a short managed face-to-face meeting — and then told to get himself a hotel for the night.

It was understood Buckingham Palace accepted his quick visit to Britain as a kind “gesture” and “cause for optimism”. But it was not believed to have led to a major thawing in relations. When Charles rang his younger son to reveal his shock cancer diagnosis, Harry “took it upon himself” to fly to London. But after landing at Heathrow on February 6 he was told not to set off for Norfolk, where the King, 75, was planning to spend time with Queen Camilla, 76.

As Charles delayed his departure for Sandringham, Harry was directed to go to Clarence House. He spent 45 minutes inside, but only around half an hour with his father. An insider revealed: “Harry came over to see his father, expecting to go to Sandringham. But instead he was asked to be at Clarence House and was restricted to 30 minutes. The fear was that if he went to Sandringham they would never get rid of him.”

Just six minutes after Harry left the meeting with his father, the King and Queen made their way by Bentley to a helicopter in the Buckingham Palace gardens before flying to Sandringham. Harry later stayed in a hotel in London, although it has not been reported which one.

[From The Sun]

Someone suggested that Harry’s flight was delayed because of the huge storms hitting California in that 48-period when Harry was trying to get to England. Which I believe – I would guess that the original plan was to have a longer visit between father and son, but Harry arrived too late and Charles was probably pretty tired from his first cancer treatment that day. The fact that Harry had a police escort from Heathrow tells you all you need to know about Charles agreeing to Harry’s visit and how much Charles wanted to see his younger son. This whole “Harry was PUNISHED by not being allowed to go to Sandringham” thing is so dumb – my guess is that Harry asked “where should I meet you” and Charles thought Clarence House would be better and so that’s what happened. It also sounds like everybody Over There is still salty about the fact that Harry breezed into town, saw his dad, met with his lawyer, dipped in 25 hours and made it back to America in time to present an award at the NFL Honors.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Getty.