One of the most astounding things about the British media’s lunatic hate campaign against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is that the British media does not understand that the rest of the world can see what they’re doing. Every time they throw a tantrum about Harry and Meghan attending a premiere or shaking hands with a country’s prime minister, we can see it. The British media says some truly crazy sh-t solely for their domestic audience, forgetting that, say, Jamaicans notice when the Mail or the Mirror puts Bob Marley’s family in the Sussex crossfire. Britain’s deeply colonialist and downright “possessive” attitude towards Jamaica this week is appalling, racist and antiquated, and all of those salty people have really shown their asses just because Harry and Meghan (two private citizens) went to a premiere in Jamaica. Well, a Jamaican outlet (Jamaica Live) has had enough. They published this piece online:

The recent appearance of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, at the “Bob Marley: One Love” movie premiere in Jamaica has stirred up a whirlwind of controversy in the International media and among royal commentators. This visit, encapsulating a moment with Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness, has served as a flashpoint in discussing the intricate relationship between the British monarchy and the former colonial territories seeking to redefine their political identities.

In what was supposed to be a star-studded night to celebrate the legacy of Bob Marley, Harry and Meghan’s presence at the premiere turned into an intense political discourse surrounding anti-monarchist sentiment and the quest for full sovereignty within Jamaica. Caught in the midst of this political and media storm is Prime Minister Andrew Holness. His willingness to pose alongside the Sussexes—figures moving away from traditional royal roles—has earned him an anti-monarchy label from critics.

The British Royal Family has long been a subject of fascination and scrutiny by both the British public and the international community. However, in recent years, the treatment of Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle has taken a particularly vicious turn. Following the announcement of their relationship, the media appeared to show an unhealthy interest in Meghan, which quickly degenerated into a litany of hate. Tabloids amplified negative and unfounded stories, often based on racist or misogynistic undertones that aimed to discredit and undermine the couple. This led to increased scrutiny and racist abuse from the public, making their lives almost unbearable.

The British tabloid press has a history of targeting royal family members who are seen as controversial, such as Princess Diana, and they have continued this pattern with Meghan and Harry. However, to an unprecedented level, tabloids have deliberately manipulated the public discourse surrounding the couple to make it increasingly toxic and hateful. This hateful campaign landed on the doorstep of Jamaica.

Jamaica, a former British colony and current Commonwealth realm, finds itself at an ideological crossroads as it grapples with its colonial past and visions for a self-determined future. In the wake of dynamic shifts in global power relations and heightened sensitivity towards historical injustices, the discussion surrounding colonial legacies has never been more pertinent. Prime Minister Andrew Holness’ stance on transforming Jamaica into a Republic is a reflection of an emerging trend within former colonies that seek to redefine their identities independent of their colonial past.

The Sussexes were among a number of dignitaries and celebrities who attended the selective viewing of the Marley movie. They attended the movie premier with Paramount Film Chief Brian Robbins and his wife Tracy James. The meet and greet with Prime Minister Andrew Holness, Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle, was a matter of informal decorum while engaging with other guests on the red carpet.

According to our source, The Sussexes are friends with Ziggy Marley and Kevin Frazier who is the host of Entertainment Tonight. Frazier was also in attendance of the premier and interviewing guests on the red carpet.

Despite the obvious informal nature of the meeting between The Sussexes and Prime Minister Andrew Holness, this did not stop the predatory British Press to turn this joyful event and celebration of the life and legacy of Bob Marley, into a hateful political firestorm.

Speaking to the Daily Mail, royal commentator Phil Dampier condemned the couple’s move, labeling it as “insensitive.” According to Dampier, ‘Under normal circumstances there would be nothing wrong with them going to a film premiere. But at a time when his father is going under the knife and Jamaica is making noises about ditching the monarchy, this is rather insensitive.’ Noting, this was not a formal event, and The Sussexes were not invited by the Prime Minister of Jamaica. Additionally, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are not working royals and can go wherever they please.

Jamaica’s journey towards becoming a Republic is rooted in it’s desire for an absolute self-governance, free from the vestiges of external control. Andrew Holness’ political trajectory, focusing on the transition of Jamaica from a constitutional monarchy to a Republic, underscores a democratic urge to redefine Jamaica’s head of state as a true reflection of it’s independent status. The characterization of this movement as “anti-monarchy” denies the legitimate and democratically supported aspirations of the sovereign people of Jamaica to take full control of their political destiny.

[From Jamaica Live]

All of this is completely correct. I’ll add something else – the Sussexes’ warm greeting with Andrew Holness reflected their ability to simply not make asses out of themselves (unlike Will and Kate). A huge chunk of the “outage” about Harry and Meghan’s trip to Jamaica is that they genuinely showed Britain how easy it could have been for them to be the monarchy’s brightest ambassadors, using their soft diplomacy and charisma for the good of the UK. Everyone over there, throwing hissy fits about Jamaican leaders being “anti-monarchy” are missing the fact that Holness was democratically elected, and when Jamaica becomes a republic, it will be because of a democratic vote.

This clip is UNHINGED.

They’re really mad about H&M’s visit to Jamaica pic.twitter.com/06p6b0X2EN

— Jaevion Nelson (@jaevionn) January 26, 2024

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

I’m going to keep writing about the Oscar snubs for Greta Gerwig and Margot Robbie, even though some of y’all are going to keep commenting sh-t like “but it was a bad movie” and “they didn’t deserve anything.” If you want to keep doing the patriarchy’s work, so be it, I can’t stop you. As I’ve said, I’m enjoying all of the thinkpieces, analysis and reactions to the snubs. It’s fascinating to watch as Oscar voters freak out (in a sort of “are we the villains?” way) and it’s interesting to see, like, Oscar historians talk about how significant these snubs were.

Margot Robbie and Greta Gerwig’s individual omissions from the recently announced Oscars 2024 nominations won’t be forgotten anytime soon, according to an expert.

“It’s definitely not a good look that the Academy members left out Greta Gerwig and Margot Robbie for directing and starring in a movie that’s largely about how impressive women are often marginalized,” says Dave Karger, Turner Classic Movies host and author of 50 Oscar Nights.

“Even though [Robbie and Gerwig] both received nominations for their work on Barbie in other categories, these two high-profile omissions will be remembered — and they will sting — for a long time,” Karger tells PEOPLE.

The film’s comedic nature may have also affected overall nominations, he adds.

“I do think that the Academy membership has a bit of a bias, unconscious or otherwise, against true comedies and towards heavier dramas,” says Karger. “Greta and Margot surely made it on to thousands of ballots, but since those ballots are weighted towards voters’ No. 1 and No. 2 favorites, we can assume they simply didn’t earn enough of those top-tier votes.”

[From People]

“These two high-profile omissions will be remembered — and they will sting — for a long time.” Is he saying it will sting for Robbie and Gerwig, or it will sting for the Academy that they bungled it so badly? As all of the Barbie-haters have screamed a million times by now, Gerwig and Robbie will both be fine – Barbie’s success ensures that they will get to make anything they want with any kind of financing. Robbie proved herself as one of the top producers in the industry, and Greta is already working on Narnia. But yeah, the snubs will “sting” for Robbie and Gerwig personally and professionally, and they’ll also sting for the industry. If there’s one thing AMPAS doesn’t want, it’s to look this out of touch, this sexist, this anti-woman. AMPAS has spent years trying to weather the “Oscars So White” issues, and now their voters are discriminating against white women who made the most successful and creative movie of the year? Come on, it’s bad.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

In recent days, the Daily Mail’s columnists have suddenly discovered something dreadful: people on the internet with negative opinions about the Windsors. Specifically, negative opinions about the Princess of Wales. The Mail’s royalists have finally put it all together: this is internet bullying! But it’s only bullying when it’s about Kate. When it’s Jeremy Clarkson or Piers Morgan or Camilla Tominey or Dan Wootton or Richard Eden writing truly horrific sh-t about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, that is NOT bullying in the least. When Piers Morgan called Meghan a liar after Meghan wept as she described her suicidal ideation, that was not bullying in the least. When royal reporters all decided, en masse, to lie repeatedly about “Meghan making Kate cry,” that was not bullying in the least. But if you even suggest that Kate could possibly, perchance, be slightly more forthcoming about her medical drama, then you are unquestionably a bully. So says Richard Eden!

The Princess of Wales should ignore internet bullies who demand further details of her recent operation. That’s the view of Richard Eden in the latest edition of his Palace Confidential news letter.

While King Charles is to be applauded for discussing his own condition – an enlarged prostate – and raising awareness in the process, the princess deserves more privacy, Eden writes: ‘I believe that Catherine should ignore the demands for more details. Why should she have to make public highly personal information about her health? She is not our head of state, or even married to one.’

Since Kensington Palace issued a statement last week reporting that the Princess of Wales had been admitted to hospital for ‘abdominal surgery’, there have been growing calls for her to provide more details about the nature of her operation.

‘We know that it was serious because officials said Catherine, 42, would remain in hospital for up to two weeks and was “unlikely to return to public duties” after Easter, ten weeks from now,’ writes Eden. ‘It hasn’t just been commentators online urging our future Queen to shed more light on her condition; even The Times published a letter suggesting that it would encourage women to come forward for treatment if Catherine gave more details.’

‘Buckingham Palace’s statement about King Charles’s health has, it must be said, been grist to the mill for those calling for greater openness. Its statement, published scarcely an hour after Kensington Palace’s, revealed that the Monarch, 75, required treatment for an enlarged prostate.’

But Catherine is not in a comparable position, writes Eden. ‘If chooses to give more details later, that’s up to her,’ he concludes. ‘But, as she convalesces with the support of her family, she should feel under no pressure to tell us more. And she certainly shouldn’t give in to the online bullies.’

[From The Daily Mail]

“She is not our head of state, or even married to one.” In fact, when Britain’s previous head of state was apparently dealing with pain and severely limited mobility because of bone marrow cancer, no public disclosures were made. When the previous head of state’s spouse was also dealing with some kind of very serious infirmity – possibly cancer – once again, no public disclosures were made. Kate is merely doing what QEII and Prince Philip did: treating every serious medical issue like it’s a dreadful secret which must never be spoken of. So in that sense, King Charles is the outlier here, with his “grist for the mill” prostate disclosure.

In any case, I agree that no one should “force” Kate to say anything. It is up to her, like Eden says. If she never wants to address it, so be it. As I said last week, I get the feeling that many of these royal reporters already know what’s going on and they’re just waiting for someone else to break the story (much like the “royal racist” issue). Given the way the press has reacted, I am reassured that she’s going to be OK and hope that’s the case. Sources have already let it be known that Charles disclosed his situation because he didn’t want to cause any worry or have people spin wild worst-case-scenario conspiracies. I do think that’s a pointed message from Buckingham Palace to Kensington Palace.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.

I’m calling it right now: this Madonna late concert lawsuit has all the makings of being the next Gwyneth ski trial. As we discussed on Wednesday, Madonna is being sued by ticket holders who went to her Celebration Tour concert in Brooklyn last December, for starting the show over two hours late. They were left “stranded!” in downtown Brooklyn (above 11 separate subway lines). These people had to work the next day — before noon! Here’s the thing, I agree that it’s despicable for Madonna to disrespect her paying fans’ time for hours on end, especially given her history of charging backup dancers $100 a minute for being late to rehearsals. I’m on the side of the concertgoers. But they keep saying too much and making their own case sound bad, in my opinion. The latest development is that Madonna’s team has made their first comments on the lawsuit:

Flippant difficulty: Madonna is being called to task by a pair of ticketholders for exhibiting ‘flippant difficulty’ in starting her recent string of Brooklyn “Celebration Tour” concerts on time, court records show. A lawsuit against the entertainer filed Wednesday, January 17 in New York, and obtained by CNN the next day, accused her of false advertising and negligent misrepresentation after the singer started her concerts at Brooklyn’s Barclays Center last month after 10:30pm on all three nights, when the tickets advertised that the shows would start at 8:30pm.

Significant inconvenience: The suit claims that most concertgoers left the venue after 1am each night, causing them significant inconvenience, including being “confronted with limited public transportation, limited ride-sharing, and/or increased public and private transportation costs at that late hour… In addition, many ticketholders who attended concerts on a weeknight had to get up early to go to work and/or take care of their family responsibilities the next day,” the complaint read.

Defendants & plaintiffs: The lawsuit cites Madonna as a defendant, along with tour operator and promoter Live Nation Worldwide, Inc; Live Nation M Tours; and Brooklyn Events Center, LLC, which does business as Barclays Center. The proposed class of plaintiffs includes ticketholders for her tour throughout the US, and the plaintiffs are asking for an undisclosed amount in damages to be determined at trial.

Consequential damages: “Defendants have collected money for concert tickets from Plaintiffs and other Class Members who reasonably believed the Concerts would promptly begin at 8:30 p.m. Had Plaintiffs and other Class Members known that the Concerts would start after 10:30 p.m., they never would have agreed to purchase the tickets,” the complaint read. The plaintiffs involved in the proposed class action “demand judgment against Defendants for actual and consequential damages.”

Team Madge responds: “Madonna’s just completed, sold out 2023 Celebration Tour in Europe received rave reviews,” a joint statement from Live Nation and Madonna’s management shared with CNN on Wednesday read. “The shows opened in North America at Barclays in Brooklyn as planned, with the exception of a technical issue December 13th during soundcheck. This caused a delay that was well documented in press reports at the time… We intend to defend this case vigorously,” the statement concluded.

[From CNN]

Am I crazy (don’t answer that) or is this statement from Madonna’s people just as spotty as the claims from the concertgoers? I guess you could say the opposing sides are well matched in that sense. Taking it from the top: “Madonna’s just completed, sold out 2023 Celebration Tour in Europe received rave reviews…” The reviews are irrelevant to the case, unless there’s a rule somewhere that you can hold up a show for hours as long as it’s good or well-reviewed. And as for touting that the tour was sold out, that’s like highlighting for the plaintiffs that they can squeeze her for hefty damages. Moving on, if the delay was down to a technical gaffe during soundcheck, why wasn’t the soundcheck done earlier? That’s just stage management 101. And for the life of me I cannot understand what they’re aiming for by saying the delay was “well documented in press reports at the time.” How does this help her defense? Are they suggesting it’s old news? Cause the suit was filed only one month later, a month in which there were major holidays.

Yeah, so legally I’m disappointed by the arguments from both sides so far. The ticket holders should have simply said “The show started over two hours late, as was well documented,” and Madonna’s team should have left it at “We intend to defend this case vigorously.” But as an audience member, I am sufficiently intrigued by this teaser trailer and am eager to binge on the full series when it airs in a courtroom some time this year. Of course the perfect pilot episode would be Madonna arriving at court… two hours late.

Photos credit: Papculture/Backgrid

Did anyone else genuinely think that King Charles’s prostate procedure was going to happen much earlier this week? When Buckingham Palace made the announcement two Wednesdays ago, it felt like the procedure would happen on Monday or Tuesday of this week. But no, it’s happening today. Charles spent much of the past week in Sandringham, resting and clearing his schedule of events for the next month or so. He returned to London yesterday, and then today, Queen Camilla joined him at The London Clinic, where he’s been checked in for his procedure.

King Charles is expected to have his prostate procedure at the same hospital where the Princess of Wales underwent surgery last week after he was pictured arriving at the London Clinic. The King and Queen were photographed being driven from Clarence House just after 8.30am, having returned to London on Thursday ahead of the planned operation. Shortly after, he was pictured arriving at the London Clinic.

A spokesman for Buckingham Palace said: “The King was this morning admitted to a London hospital for scheduled treatment. His Majesty would like to thank all those who have sent their good wishes over the past week and is delighted to learn that his diagnosis is having a positive impact on public health awareness.”

Charles, 75, had been resting at Sandringham in Norfolk following the cancellation of his public engagements this week. Buckingham Palace has declined to provide further details of the surgery. The Princess of Wales has been recuperating at the London Clinic after undergoing abdominal surgery at the hospital last week.

[From The Telegraph]

According to the royal reporters (see below), Charles visited Kate’s hospital room and checked on her before he was settled in his room. There’s no mention of Camilla checking on Kate, but Camilla did go into the hospital with Charles, and I would assume she will be staying with him or visiting him for however long he stays at the London Clinic. Chris Ship also suggested that “if” Prince William wanted to, he could visit his father and his wife at the same time, at the same hospital.

It can be confirmed that His Majesty is undergoing his operation at the London Clinic and his visited his daughter-in-law the Princess of Wales before his own surgery. She is still recuperating there following abdominal surgery https://t.co/fEnLTyXk18

— Rebecca English (@RE_DailyMail) January 26, 2024

Queen Camilla has gone into the hospital with King Charles. Whilst this might seem normal for most families, it is very unusual for the Royal Family to accompany their spouse like this (the late Queen and Prince Philip always went into hospital on their own.) https://t.co/Vh0yXxQPph

— Chris Ship (@chrisshipitv) January 26, 2024

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Last year, The Hill published an absolutely unhinged column/analysis about King Charles’s coronation and the biggest problem facing Charles’s reign: his son, Prince Harry. While I will always agree that the Windsors’ Sussex mess has been their biggest crisis in decades, the Hill took the perspective that Prince Harry’s very existence and his success as an author and content creator are threats to democracy, a threat to NATO and a threat to national and international security. Seriously, go back and read those excerpts – it was one of the most delusional pieces of right-wing political commentary I’ve ever seen. Well, the same columnists are back on their bullsh-t and The Hill once again published this mess. Wouldn’t you know, Harry and Meghan’s appearance at a film premiere in Jamaica is absolutely a gigantic security risk to the UK and the British Commonwealth. For real.

Meghan’s dress was not gaudy!! `Red carpets, Hollywood glitz and staged photo ops are not evocative of a humble Rastafarian lifestyle. Nor was Meghan Markle, gaudily wearing an oversized black ball dress during a surprise appearance at the movie premiere of “Bob Marley: One Love” in Kingston, Jamaica. Prince Harry didn’t sport Marley’s iconic dreadlocks, but certainly the appearance of King Charles III’s youngest son is causing dread in Whitehall and Buckingham Palace.

The premiere was intended to upstage King Charles & Prince William. “Knives Out,” the 2019 dark comedy about an antagonistic family taking aim at its patriarch, would have been a more apt movie premiere choice. Harry and Meghan, ever the self-unaware narcissists, are clearly out for petty familial revenge in this latest installment of their South Park-branded “Worldwide privacy tour.” The timing of the scheming duo’s PR stunt in the Caribbean was likely calculated. Catherine, the Princess of Wales, who remains in hospital after abdominal surgery, will be laid up for months. William is sidelined from royal duties as well caring for their children. The King also will be out of pocket for some time as he begins treatment for an enlarged prostate.

The Sussexes are promoting Russian propaganda!! This would all be amusing, were it not for the serious damage Harry and Meghan continue to inflict upon the national security of the United Kingdom and its Commonwealth partners, and by extension to the U.S., with their effective promotion of Russian and Chinese propaganda. Harry and Meghan’s attention-seeking behavior was bad enough in the waning years of Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip’s lives…But now it is far worse, given how rapidly an ideological global war is overtaking the globe. Harry and Meghan are incapable of reading the room at a geostrategic level. Devoid of much-needed Whitehall guidance, they are foolishly playing into the propaganda hands of Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping. Moscow and Beijing are out to destroy the Commonwealth headed by King Charles, and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex continue to help them at every turn. Simply put, it is time for Harry and Meghan to be formally stripped of their royal titles by an act of the British Parliament.

Unforgivable to warmly greet local government officials! Their decision at the “One Love” premiere to gladhand Marlene Malahoo Forte, the Jamaican minister for legal and constitutional affairs, was unforgivable from a king-and-country point of view. Forte is spearheading the movement for Jamaica to cease being a realm of King Charles and to become a republic. Nor was it constitutionally wise for Harry to be pictured with Jamaica’s Prime Minister Andrew Holness who is continuing with his plans to hold a referendum on it later this year. While formal independence and republicanism are certainly choices Jamaicans have a right to make for themselves as a country and as a people, Harry in his capacity as the king’s son should not be seen as endorsing it.

William & Kate’s Flop Tour wasn’t their fault!! At the time, William and Catherine’s trip to Jamaica and Benin was widely thought a disaster, but unfairly so. Russian and Chinese disinformation campaigns to subvert the Commonwealth and the UK’s remaining realms had long been underway. The two simply ran into a buzzsaw not of their making.

LOL I hope Harry does this: What next? Will they meet with Argentine President Javier Milei, to discuss Argentina’s sovereignty over the Falkland Islands?

[From The Hill]

So, I’ll be slightly fair to the two lunatics who wrote this piece. I don’t doubt that the Sussexes’ appearance in Jamaica did cause some consternation in Whitehall and the palace. I don’t doubt that the Sussexes’ living their lives and thriving wherever they go IS damaging to the crown and commonwealth, because Harry and Meghan have revealed that the crown is antiquated, racist and poorly managed. That’s not “Russian propaganda,” that’s a fact. Now, what was Harry supposed to do when Jamaica’s prime minister greeted him? Should Harry have been rude and refused to shake his hand? Of course not – these people are just mad that the Sussexes do it better. They’re more charismatic, they’re friendlier and more polite, and they’re not colonialist clowns in Edwardian cosplay. Speaking of, whatever bonkers argument these men are trying to make is upended by their refusal to acknowledge that William and Kate f–ked up their Caribbean Tour. That’s not “propaganda,” that was their own racist clownery and poor management.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Mark Ruffalo just nabbed his fourth Oscar nomination this week, for supporting actor in Poor Things. All four of his noms have been for supporting roles, which puts him in an exclusive club of legends tied for the most number of nominations in that category. It feels fitting that he’s always honored for “supporting” work, since he seems like a real team player, a costar who genuinely cares for his fellow performers. A mensch, if you will. Clearly he takes his work seriously, but that doesn’t mean he’s a dick about it to anyone during his process. Maybe it’s me, but I just get kind, good-intention vibes from him. So when he says that he had a dream telling him he had a brain tumor, and it turned out that he did have one, I believe it that his unconscious psyche was looking out for him. Ruffalo just visited the SmartLess podcast and described the benign vestibular schwannoma he had in 2001 and its residual effects:

“I had a brain tumor after the success of You Can Count on Me,” he said, noting that he discovered the tumor after having a dream about it. “It wasn’t like any other dream I’d ever had. It was just like, ‘You have a brain tumor.’ It wasn’t even a voice. It was just pure knowledge, ‘You have a brain tumor, and you have to deal with it immediately.’”

Ruffalo admitted that the dream was “so intense” that he went to the doctor for a CAT scan after feeling a “sense of doom.” At the time, the only symptom he had was an ear infection.

“The nurse calls the doctor up, I could hear them talking in the other room. She comes in, she’s kinda like a zombie and she says, ‘You have a mass behind your left ear the size of a golf ball, and we don’t know what it is. We can’t tell until it’s biopsied,’” he said.

The Avengers star said the tumor was benign but he needed surgery to remove the mass. Ruffalo said that he ultimately decided to keep the diagnosis a secret from his wife Sunrise Coigney, who was pregnant and days away from giving birth to their first child, son Keen, now 22.

Ruffalo told Coigney of his health a week after their son was born and the night before his appointment to “meet the neurologist” and figure out a treatment plan.

“When I told Sunny about it, first she thought I was joking,” he said on the show. “And then she just burst into tears and said, ‘I always knew you were gonna die young.’”

Ruffalo had the benign tumor surgically removed. The star was told that during the procedure, there was a 20% chance of “killing” the nerve on the left side of his face and a 70% chance of losing the hearing in his left ear.

‘[I am] completely deaf in one ear, and when I woke up, the left side of my face was totally paralyzed,” he recalled of the surgery’s aftermath. “I couldn’t even close my eye. I was talking out the side of my mouth.”

The paralysis eventually went away a year later, however, the actor still deals with hearing loss today.

“Take my hearing, but let me keep the face and just let me be the father to these kids,” he recalled thinking at the time. Ruffalo and Coigney later welcomed two more children, daughters Bella Noche and Odette.

[From People]

His story is wild! I wish my dreams would give me such direct, emphatic messages. Maybe I’m just not as spiritually evolved as Mark, sigh. The timing of when it happened is also insane — right after his big break in You Can Count On Me and shortly before the birth of his first child. I found his phrasing very curious about this happening “after the success of” the movie. Is he suggesting that the stress of the moment was in part responsible for the tumor, or is that just for the timeframe? And I’m not yet sure how I feel about his not telling his wife until after their son was born. I understand his reasoning, he didn’t want it to weigh on her on top of imminent childbirth. But on the other hand, it was a pretty big deal and she’s his partner! My biggest follow up question, though, is about what Sunrise said to him in response: “I always knew you were gonna die young.” WHAT is that about?! I’m fascinated and need to know more. Is he accident prone? Is she basing it off a dream she had? It’s such a tease! And so what does he say to her these days, “Ha! I’m 56 and still alive, Sunny!” I mean if he passed now it would still be young, but you get the point.

Mark, we’re glad you’re still with us, and congrats again on the nomination. You and that mustache earned it.

Photos credit: Avalon.red

Tom Hollander, 56, is a veteran British actor who’s been in everything from Gosford Park to Pride & Prejudice to The Night Manager, and most recently The White Lotus. Tom Holland, 27 and also British, is Spider-Man. Hollander stars as Truman Capote in Ryan Murphy’s Feud: Capote vs. The Swans that comes out January 31 on FX, and he recently dropped by Seth Meyers’ show to plug the series. During his visit Hollander told Meyers that while briefly with the same agency as Holland, Hollander was mistakenly sent a bonus check intended for Spidey. The experience was quite sobering.

On NBC’s “Late Night with Seth Meyers” show on Monday, host Meyers said to [Tom] Hollander, “I feel like it’s almost the elephant in the room. There’s an actor named Tom Holland.”

“Oh yeah,” Hollander replied amid an uproar of audience laughter.

Meyers asked: “Do people ever make that error?”

To which, Hollander jokingly said, “Yes. It’s been very difficult. ‘Cause, you know, I was here first. But he’s enormously famous.”

While the pair do not look alike, Hollander said that “in non-visual contexts, I am mistaken for him all the time,” such as when talking to utility companies.

“‘And what’s your name?’ And they go, ‘Tom Holland?’ ‘Cause they’ve heard Tom Holland,” said Hollander, adding: “You go, ‘no it’s Tom Holland-er.’”

“Or I’m introduced to somebody’s very, very excited, then confused, then disappointed children,” he continued. “They go, ‘My children are so excited to meet you.’ And I go, ‘Are they though?’”

Hollander then illustrated what happens when he asks the parent to bring out their children, saying, “They come out and they go, ‘Where is he? Where is he?’ And they go, ‘No. N-no.’”

Hollander went on to recall what happened when he was with the same agency as the “Spider-Man” star — “briefly,” he made sure to emphasize — and the people in the accounts department “got confused.”

He said he went to see a friend who was doing theater in England for £300 ($382) a week, and Hollander sat “smugly” in the audience having just done a BBC show for around £30,000 ($38,000).

However, Hollander recounted that, when he checked his inbox during the interval, “I got an email from my agency saying, ‘Payment advice slip: your first box-office bonus for ‘The Avengers.’

“And I thought, ‘I don’t think I’m in The Avengers.’ And it was an astonishing amount of money. And it was not his salary, it was his first box-office bonus, not the whole box-office, the first one. And, it was more money than I’ve ever — it was a seven-figure sum.”

He added that Holland was “20 or something. So, my feeling of smugness, that you remember I had in the first half (of the play), disappeared very quickly. But that’s showbiz. It’s up, it’s down. It’s hero, it’s zero.”

[From CNN]

Um… finders keepers? I love his British dry sense of humor, particularly the way he says “I don’t think I’m in The Avengers.” Oy. He’s joking now, but that had to be a bit of a soul-crushing moment. He (Hollander) has spent decades working steadily across theater, film, TV, and then this kid’s first bonus check is more money than he’s probably ever made combined. It’s a real “I laugh because I dare not cry” moment. Hollander, for his part, looks and sounds fabulous as Truman Capote. I say sounds because with someone like Capote nailing the voice really matters. But going off of the trailer there’s not a whiff of an English accent. I hope this role brings Hollander some good attention. It’s not likely to be a seven-figure check, but it’d be nice if people solidly knew his name for his own work.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos credit: Janet Mayer/INSTARimages.com, Jennifer Bloc/Future Image/Cover Images, Justin Ng / Avalon, Getty Images

Jon Stewart will return to hosting The Daily Show on Mondays, and a revolving door of comedians will host Tuesday-Thursday. Stewart is also stepping back in as executive producer of TDS (after his AppleTV show was canceled). [Hollywood Life]
Photos from the latest All of Us Strangers premiere. [GFY]
Glenn Close is enjoying Paris Fashion Week! [LaineyGossip]
Review of Return to Seoul. [Pajiba]
This AITA story – I don’t think this woman is wrong. [Buzzfeed]
Sofia Vergara is “limited by her accent” in Hollywood. [JustJared]
Spotlight on male model James Yates. [Socialite Life]
New Khloe Kardashian face just dropped! [Seriously OMG]
More photos from the Argylle premiere. [RCFA]
“Corporate Erin” did a skit for WGN News. [OMG Blog]

Glen Powell and Sydney Sweeney actually made a sleeper-hit movie with Anyone But You. It ended up serving as a reminder that studios used to make these kinds of low-budget or mid-budget romantic comedies all the time – they were always rated PG or PG-13, they never needed greenscreens or CGI, and everything was dependent on two actors’ on-screen chemistry and a half-decent script. If the studio had made Anyone But You in 2001, it would have still cost the same ($25 million) and it would have starred Kate Hudson and Josh Lucas. Well, because half-decent rom-coms are a rarity these days, Anyone But You has now crossed $100 million at the box office. When Glen Powell was at Sundance, he took a little bit of a victory lap.

Glen Powell and his “Hit Man” co-writer and director Richard Linklater stopped by the Variety Studio presented by Audible at the Sundance Film Festival, where Powell celebrated his role in reviving the romantic-comedy genre. “Anyone But You,” his Sony-backed rom-com with Sydney Sweeney, has earned $64 million at the domestic box office and crossed the $100 million mark worldwide. It’s a huge win for the $25 million movie at a time when many people were writing off the genre as dead.

“At least for me, I’ve always been a fan of movies in general and I always find it silly when certain actors diminish certain genres,” Powell said. “At its best execution, it gives an audience such joy and such fun, and as an actor you do get to play a lot of gears. To kind of scoff at a genre and look down on it is kind of silly.”

“For me, ‘Anyone But You’ was such a treat to see audiences dance out of the theater and feel so happy after watching a movie,” he continued. “To see the box office not just stick but grow has been such a cool lesson that sometimes the genres that have been forgotten are the ones audiences are craving the most.”

[From Variety]

“Sometimes the genres that have been forgotten are the ones audiences are craving the most.” He’s right, but I fear that this is the first time studios will realize it, now that a white man has said it. Actresses and producers have been saying this for years, that studios don’t have to endlessly sink $200 million into some action/comic-book production, you can actually invest in mid-budget rom-coms with an eye towards the female audience. Barbie also showed the power of the female audience, and that if you explicitly make an enjoyable, fun movie for women, they will come to the theaters. Also, here’s a sad little fact: Anyone But You is now the highest-grossing R-rated rom-com since Bridget Jones’s Baby in 2016!!

Also: props to my Virgo sis Sydney Sweeney. Anyone But You was her first outing as an executive producer. Her production company put this together and (much like Margot Robbie and Barbie) she deserves a lot of credit for simply wanting to make a low-budget genre movie.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.