Barry Keoghan’s furry tank top stole the show at the Masters of the Air premiere in London. Also there: Callum Turner & Austin Butler. [RCFA]
Kristen Stewart looked great at Sundance. [GFY]
Rihanna fan-girled over Natalie Portman at the Dior show. [Socialite Life]
People have really started dressing up for Sundance. [LaineyGossip]
True Detective Ep. 2 recap (spoilers). [Pajiba]
North West posted an unedited photo of her mom. [Buzzfeed]
Interesting Oscar facts. [JustJared]
Prince Harry mentioned his father at the Legends of Aviation event. [Hollywood Life]
Who’s under the rabbit mask? [Seriously OMG]
Norah Jones has new music! [OMG Blog]

The Oscar nominations came out just now and holy crap, you guys. Those misogynist a–holes didn’t nominate Greta Gerwig for Best Director for Barbie. Not only that, Margot Robbie was snubbed in Best Actress!!! The Academy voters really said: we despise Barbie and girls and feminism. It’s insane!! While Barbie got nominated in Best Picture, the Gerwig and Robbie snubs are HUGE. Here are all of the big categories (and you can see the full nomination list here):

Best Picture
American Fiction
Anatomy of a Fall
Barbie
The Holdovers
Killers of the Flower Moon
Maestro
Oppenheimer
Past Lives
Poor Things
The Zone of Interest

Best Director
Justin Triet, Anatomy of a Fall
Jonathan Glazer, The Zone of Interest
Yorgos Lanthimos, Poor Things
Christopher Nolan, Oppenheimer
Martin Scorsese, Killers of the Flower Moon

Best Actress
Annette Benning, Nyad
Lily Gladstone, Killers of the Flower Moon
Sandra Hüller, Anatomy of a Fall
Carey Mulligan, Maestro
Emma Stone, Poor Things

Best Actor
Bradley Cooper, Maestro
Colman Domingo, Rustin
Paul Giamatti, The Holdovers
Cillian Murphy, Oppenheimer
Jeffrey Wright, American Fiction

Best Supporting Actress
Emily Blunt, Oppenheimer
Danielle Brooks, The Color Purple
America Ferrera, Barbie
Jodie Foster, Nyad
Da’Vine Joy Randolph, The Holdovers

Best Supporting Actor
Sterling K. Brown, American Fiction
Robert De Niro, Killers of the Flower Moon
Robert Downey Jr., Oppenheimer
Ryan Gosling, Barbie
Mark Ruffalo, Poor Things

Adapted Screenplay
American Fiction
Barbie
Oppenheimer
Poor Things
The Zone of Interest

Original Screenplay
Anatomy of a Fall
The Holdovers
Maestro
May December
Past Lives

I won’t lie, I’m happy that Anatomy of a Fall made such a huge surge at the exact right moment. Sandra Huller absolutely deserves her nomination, and Justine Triet deserves everything too. I love that Bradley Cooper was snubbed for Best Director, because please, no one cares. Some love for Past Lives, but nothing for Greta Lee. Also: no nomination for Leo DiCaprio, thank God. Nothing for All of Us Strangers or Saltburn. May December got zero acting nominations, which is sad because Charles Melton really did give a great performance. I still can’t get over the Barbie snubs, holy sh-t.

Photos and posters courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Apple, Warner Bros.

Two weekends ago, Robert Hardman’s new royal book began to be excerpted in the Mail and Telegraph. The biggest headline was “Queen Elizabeth was furious that Prince Harry and Meghan named their daughter Lilibet.” Royal reporters spent all of last week screaming about Meghan and Harry’s appalling rudeness for using QEII’s family nickname for their daughter. Columnist after columnist swore up and down that QEII was incandescent with rage over a baby’s name, and the Mirror reported exclusively that palace aides were “celebrating” because the truth finally came out about how much QEII despised her great-granddaughter’s name. Then, weirdly, Hardman began steadily walking back the story. Hardman claimed that QEII was merely upset that Harry’s lawyers threatened the BBC, when the BBC lied and reported that QEII had not been consulted or asked about the name ahead of time. Hardman said no, of course QEII was not mad about a baby’s name. Well, Operation Walk It Back is still upon us, with Hardman giving a new interview to Newsweek. Some highlights:

Whether Charles should repair relations with the Sussexes: “Yes, in some way I do [think that he should]. I don’t know how and when. Certainly, on this side of the Atlantic, the door is always open, and there’s so much other stuff going on. For Harry, it’s a different order of magnitude, because, does he want to reengage with his family? Charles would love to have him back in the fold, not being royal again—I think that ship has sailed, and I’m sure Harry would not want to do that.”

The Sussexes’ half-in solution: “Someone said to me today, ‘could this be the moment with the royal work shortage, for Harry to step in?’ But it doesn’t work like that. What would probably help move towards that situation is if he gradually started having a sort of normalizing… suddenly it’s not such a big deal if Harry and Meghan are coming over to the U.K. privately with their children and having a playdate with their cousins. A lot of families go through these things, and they don’t have to have it all scrutinised endlessly by the likes of you and me. I don’t pretend to be close to the Sussexes at all but, from what I glean, it’s a ‘never say never’ situation.”

On QEII’s anger about the name Lilibet: “I’ve seen a lot of reports that the queen was furious about the name. It wasn’t the naming that was the issue; it was the way that the naming was presented. The sort of war of words. It was the fact it was presented that she was in favor of this and then the BBC reported that actually she wasn’t asked. And then the Sussexes said, ‘That’s not true; here’s a lawyers’ letter,’ and the palace were asked to endorse this and very pointedly did not. That was what was the source of great fury.”

The controversy that Hardman created is unfair on a toddler: “I get that. She’s a completely blameless, adorable child. Queen Elizabeth loved Harry and loved Lilibet, and I’m quite sure didn’t envisage this ding-dong [quarrel] going on after her death. Once the lawyers’ letters start flying around, this has been a story in the public domain for some time.”

[From Newsweek]

First of all, when are the royalists going to learn that “Charles would love to have him back in the fold” is the very reason why Harry will never return? Harry and Meghan have been married for almost six years, they have two children and they have a strong marriage. The king or the institution constantly sending the message that they only want Harry back, or that they want the marriage to end, that’s not doing them any favors. It’s giving “leave your Black wife in America and come running back to us, your abusers.”

As for the Lilibet stuff… Hardman explicitly had the Lilibet stuff locked and loaded for the first round of book excerpts and it all went as planned, with royalists dutifully rolling out their stories about how the Sussexes are despicable people for honoring Harry’s grandmother by naming their daughter Lilibet. Then something shifted with the coverage – mid-rollout, Hardman and others were like “wait, this makes QEII sound awful and it’s also not believable in the least.” Weird that Hardman’s walkback hasn’t gotten anywhere near the kind of wall-to-wall coverage as the first version of the story.

Note by CB: Harry and Meghan say they got Queen Elizabeth’s blessing to name their daughter after her nickname, but the courtiers and royal rota disagree! Sign up for our mailing list and get the top 10 stories about the drama over Lilibet’s name. We only send one email a day on weekdays.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

A few years ago, Kim Kardashian appeared in a Balenciaga print-ad campaign. She didn’t do it for the money, she just did it because she loves Balenciaga, she’s friends with creative director Demna Gvasalia and she loves that these huge labels actually want her to wear their clothes. Kim’s Balenciaga ad campaign blew up in her face a year later, when Balenciaga did a separate campaign which seemed to glorify child abuse and violence. Kim was forced to make a public statement about how she was outraged and disgusted by it. After that… she continued to wear Balenciaga. She continued to be friends with Demna. And now she’s officially the brand ambassador for Balenciaga.

After Kim Kardashian cut ties with Balenciaga in 2022 following backlash in response to a campaign depicting children in questionable light, the beauty brand billionaire is now the face of the luxury fashion house.

“The Kardashians” star, who has worn the Balenciaga to the Met Gala and walked in one of their Paris Fashion Week shows, was named brand ambassador of the longstanding French fashion house Monday.

“For several years now, Balenciaga’s designs have been a part of my many looks – and some of my most iconic fashion moments. This historic fashion house embraces modernity, craftsmanship and takes an innovative approach to design under Demna,” Kardashian said Monday in a statement shared on her Instagram Story.

“For me, this long-standing relationship is built on mutual trust and a commitment to doing what’s right. I’m excited about this next chapter for the brand and to become their ambassador,” Kardashian continued.

[From USA Today]

What’s crazy about this is still the fact that Kim doesn’t actually need any of this – she doesn’t need the money, nor does she even need the “prestige” of being a brand ambassador for a French label. At this point, all of those designers want Kim to wear their designs. That being said, Kim really does wear so much Balenciaga these days, maybe she was just like “f–k it, I should get paid for this.” I wonder about her brand ambassadorship contract though, and whether it’s anything like her print-ad campaign contract from two years ago. Back then, she was not contractually bound to wear Balenciaga on every red carpet or every event. I wonder if it’s the same now.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, print ads courtesy of Balenciaga.

Robert Hardman sort of lucked out, releasing his new authorized biography on King Charles just as a major royal newscycle dominated headlines. Hardman has been giving a lot of interviews in the past week, and he’s updated his talking points to include his thoughts on the king’s enlarged prostate and the Princess of Wales’s hospitalization. Hardman, like so many authorized royal biographers, is a company man who will not rock the boat. He does his best “nothing to see here, everything is going smoothly” argument, ignoring the fact that Kensington Palace and Buckingham Palace seem incapable of doing the same. Some highlights from Hardman’s interview in the Times:

What Hardman makes of all of the medical drama: With three senior royals out of the picture — Prince William, 41, has cancelled all engagements during his wife’s time in hospital — he views this as “a reminder that we have a slimmed-down monarchy. Elizabeth II had all her cousins, a whole extended family she could depend on. That’s not going to happen. There’s even less to go round for the next few weeks. But it just adapts and evolves. If it doesn’t adapt then it is doomed. It can’t stay in aspic.” In the short term, Hardman, 58, says we can expect “a bit of shuffling, but January is always a bit of a quiet time…[but] the back-up team is there: Princess Anne, the Edinburghs”. The result, however, will be a period of the monarchy being perceived as quite elderly.

William’s decision to scale back work commitments during his wife’s recuperation: It is “in keeping with the modern regular guy that I perceive him to be. I’m sure in previous generations that would have been more heavy lifting for the nanny,” but William will want to “keep things as normal as they can be” for the couple’s three children.

The Windsors will have to disclose more from here on out: Given this new level of transparency, Hardman says that from now on “people will expect that degree of clarity. If a member of the family goes to hospital, I don’t think they’ll be able to say it’s a minor operation, they will probably have to say what it is. That’s moving with the times.”

The future of the monarchy: Hardman believes the monarch’s future is “looking solid”. He adds: “It’s not a ratings game, they know that.” But there are long-term challenges that can’t be overlooked. Of the 14 realms outside the UK that the King inherited, nearly half are in the Caribbean. Reparations for slavery are a gnawing problem. “That is a debate that is not going to go away,” says Hardman. “It needs very careful handling. I think he’s going to be much more engaged in that than perhaps people think.”

The Sussex circus. “Charles is a realist, but he’s an optimist. Bridges can be rebuilt. Gradually, a new modus operandi will evolve, maybe when the children are a bit older.” He says that the way forward “is to make it less of a thing when they come over to Britain. The more that they do start coming back, maybe in the summer, to see Dad up in Scotland or whatever, that sort of thing very gently will lead to … some rapprochement between Harry and Meghan and the King.” However, Harry’s relationship with William is a “much more complex issue to be resolved”, and he says he wouldn’t be surprised if there was a sequel from Harry or indeed a book from Meghan.

[From The Times]

Re: transparency… I’ll admit that I was pleasantly surprised that Charles did disclose his prostate issue and the clarity provided by BP likely soothed a lot of nerves and ended up calming everything down. It would have been much worse if Charles had done what Kensington Palace did, which is gracelessly obfuscate and refuse to do the bare minimum of transparency. The difference, I suppose, is that Charles is the head of state and Kate is not. Then again, the palace failed to disclose vital pieces of medical information about QEII’s health in her final years, so it can be done – which makes it even smarter that Charles did his disclosure.

As for what Hardman says about the Sussexes… again, this is coming from Charles’s official biographer, and this is probably close to Charles’s perspective, that the Sussexes have to make the effort to make peace and travel to Scotland this summer, etc. Which will be difficult because Charles has made it abundantly clear that Balmoral is whites-only and I don’t imagine he will extend an invitation to the whole Sussex family for anything. I hope the Sussexes spend the summer going on beach vacations and working on their projects.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dylan Stone-Miller (@donordylan)

Life is full of many surprises, but I imagine discovering you have nearly 100 children you didn’t know about has to be up there among the more shocking ones. Dylan Stone-Miller was an undergrad at Georgia State University in 2011 when his roommate suggested donating sperm to earn some funds. Dylan, who says he was broke at the time, estimates he visited the Atlanta sperm bank Xytex about 400 times over five years, at $100 a pop. For those of you mathing along, that’s $40,000 he made for… that activity. Dylan signed a form that said his info would not be provided to any offspring until they turned 18. Although there are no national regulations on sperm donations (a fact that Dylan would later become very acquainted with), Xytex told Dylan that his contributions would be used on no more than 40 families. Nearly 10 years later, one mother tracked Dylan down to thank him for his donation, and then everything spiraled from there:

The first connection: Back in 2020, just minutes into his new job at a software engineering firm in Atlanta, Dylan Stone-Miller read a direct message on Instagram that left him stunned. A woman who had conceived a daughter with the sperm he first donated to a sperm bank nine years earlier while attending college had managed to track him down — and wanted to thank him. Soon Stone-Miller found himself clicking through the woman’s Instagram profile, staring at hundreds of photos of his biological daughter. “Seeing this little girl’s beautiful face just filled me with so much joy, love and gratitude,” he recalls. “I had to fight to hold back the tears.”

There was a Facebook group for families with children using his donor #: In the months that followed, Stone-Miller began hearing from dozens of parents — all of whom welcomed children with his sperm. Using his donor number, they had found their way to one another online and formed a Facebook group to stay in touch. At last count Stone-Miller estimates that he has at least 97 biological children in six countries — but says the true number could be more than 250. The revelation altered the trajectory of his life and eventually inspired him to become a passionate advocate for donors and families. Now he’s calling for legal limits on the number of pregnancies that result from one sperm donor, as well as changes to the ways that the multibillion-dollar industry treats people like him and recipient families.

His real number of kids is likely between 150-250: When Stone-Miller began meeting other parents online and became aware of his ever-increasing number of offspring, he was in disbelief. “Right now I know of at least 62 families,” he says, noting that some of them have had multiple children using his sperm. “But typically only about 40 percent of recipient parents report their birth back to the sperm bank, so I anticipate there being around 150 families and more than 250 children.”

He meets his kids with families that welcome it: Soon Stone-Miller — who had spent years helping to raise his ex-wife’s son — decided that he owed it to his biological children to meet them before they turned 18 if the parties were interested. “I know how inquisitive children are and how important it is to answer their questions, especially ones about where they came from,” he says. Starting in 2021 he began meeting one after another. (He thinks the oldest of his kids would now be 12.) By the time he decided to take a sabbatical from his computer programming job and embark on his cross-country road trip last May, he had gotten to know 18 of them. The number now stands at 26. The parents and children first connect with him online, “and then we figure out if we want to meet in person,” he says. “It’s not like strangers meeting. It’s like online friends becoming friends with a mutual lifelong commitment.”

He’s an advocate now: For Stone-Miller — who is currently based in Washington State and works remotely for a non-profit that he’s launching to help sperm donors and recipients navigate challenges — the days ahead will be filled with more meetings with his biological children, including a second trip to Australia, where at least five of them live. He recently learned that his youngest was born four months ago. “The sperm bank tells me that they’ve retired me,” says Stone-Miller, “but there is no legal requirement in the U.S. for them to stop distributing my donated sperm.”

A family for himself? Asked whether he hopes to someday start a family himself, Stone-Miller thinks it may be irresponsible. “At one point in time I really wanted to raise children of my own,” he says. “But I don’t think it would be ethical for me to bring more children into the world. For now I’m seeing if I’m fulfilled enough by the connections I have.”

[From People]

The article doesn’t suggest in any way that Dylan split with his wife over the discovery of his kids, but I can’t stop the image in my head of a judge asking “And why are you seeking this divorce?” and the ex-wife answering, “I learned my husband had 97 kids.” My goodness, there are soooo many questions. Does Dylan start making Christmas calls in September? If there’s a Facebook group, does that mean that these families are getting together without him? If so, what do the parents say to their kids? Once these kids are of dating age they’ll have to download Iceland’s am-I-related-to-you app. I just hope Dylan doesn’t go broke with the birthday present upkeep.

All right, now that I’ve gotten the juvenile responses out of my system, let’s talk about Dylan. I don’t think it would be a stretch to say that many, if not most people in his situation would become completely overwhelmed and back away. Dylan hasn’t. He’s embraced this improbable circumstance and made it his life’s work, sharing resources for donor conceived people, recipient parents, and for anyone who wants more info on the current state of anonymous donations and suggested reforms. This line in his bio says it all: “Doing what I can to show up for the ones who want a connection.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dylan Stone-Miller (@donordylan)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dylan Stone-Miller (@donordylan)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dylan Stone-Miller (@donordylan)

Fashionistas yell at me when I share my thoughts about Schiaparelli, but I can’t help myself: this stuff might be beautifully constructed, but the looks are always completely tragic and unflattering. I get why fashion girls wear Sciaparelli and why it must feel like you’re wearing a challenging piece of avant-garde art, but I’m simply too much of a traditionalist, I guess. Why would you wear some dumb sculptural piece which makes you look like an alien, when you could just wear some basic-bitch flattering gown?

Anyway, these are some photos from Monday’s Schiaparelli show during Paris Fashion Week. I was surprised to see two headliner celebrities attend the show: Zendaya and Jennifer Lopez. J.Lo is a traditionalist – she loves Valentino, Oscar de la Renta, Ralph Lauren, Versace. Why Schiaparelli? Why THOSE glasses? Why that hair??? Speaking of bad hair, check out Zendaya. When I use the phrase “bangs trauma,” this is what I’m talking about. I’m sure it’s a wig or hairpiece, but we’ve finally answered the question of “can Zendaya pull off any look?” No, she cannot. I’m also surprised to see her at this runway show, given the fact that she signed an exclusive contract with Louis Vuitton.

Bonus: Hunter Schafer got the best Schiaparelli, honestly. There’s like one good idea in a collection full of bullsh-t – the stand alone gilded lily, unattached to the dress. People would love to just buy that one piece and wear it as jewelry.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Angela Levin is looney-tunes royal commentator and, bizarrely, one of Queen Camilla’s biographers of record. Levin gets some of her talking points from the palace, I’m sure. But some of her talking points come from the voices in her head, or the darkest, most deranged parts of the anti-Sussex internet. Levin has been called in to give some commentary about all of the royal health crises going around these days, from King Charles’s enlarged prostate to Fergie’s skin cancer to Princess Kate’s mysterious hospitalization and abdominal surgery. The clip of Levin talking about Kate and William has gone viral in some quarters:

Some partial transcript of Levin’s comments:

“It’s very unusual to stay in hospital for 14 days. If at home you’ve got all the comfort that you could have with someone coming in and looking after you. She could have nurses galore and the children could see their mother. But she is there for 14 days and they seem very firm that she won’t be doing anything until around Easter, which is a very long time. I think that’s the most scary thing about it. She works so hard and tries so hard that I think it’s very concerning that she’s there. She’s not the sort of woman who wants to stay in a hospital.”

“[William] goes back to his own mother, when he became what she called ‘the man of the house.’ He had to deal with her mental illnesses and crying and screaming and he put tissues under the bathroom door when she locked herself in, to help her. And I think he’s took that responsibility on when he was only 15 and didn’t quite know what to do. But here is a mature man and he will know that his priority is to look after his wife, who has been so wonderfully supportive to him, that he’s decided that this is the thing he’s going to do.”

[Via GB News]

It’s the comparison of Diana and Kate, specifically the idea that William will understand how to handle Kate’s situation because of his mother’s “mental illnesses.” Not to give Levin the benefit of the doubt here, but I suspect she wasn’t trying to spill anything, she was just trying to position William as a “caretaker” to his mother and now his wife. I will say that I find William’s absence at the London Clinic the most bizarre part of all of this. Kate had major surgery last Tuesday (a week ago) and he’s only visited her once? And the kids haven’t gone to see their mother? And Carole hasn’t been to the hospital either?

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by NICK CANNON (@nickcannon)

As you all know, Nick Cannon has 12 children with six different women, ranging from ages 12 (his twins with Mariah Carey) to 13 months (daughter Halo Marie with Alyssa Scott). Over the last couple of years, Nick has gotten a lot of side-eye – to put it nicely – over his large brood and his unconventional arrangement with his children’s mothers. This arrangement involves Nick only financially supporting them as long as they don’t date anyone other than him while stipulating that he can date as many women as he wants to.

Nick, for his part, has always outwardly expressed happiness and been welcoming of all of his children. He even drops $200k a year to take them to Disneyland! In a recent interview with People, Cannon was asked about his kids, including what it’s like having them in such an extensive age range, what’s rewarding about it, and whether or not there’s room for one more.

The most challenging aspect of having teens to infants: “My entire life is challenging. I don’t live a normal existence, but I embrace it. I love challenges. I wouldn’t say there was one specific thing that stands out more than another. Every day, there’s a new challenge, and I accept it.”

The most rewarding part of fatherhood: “Just hearing your kids say, ‘I love you, Daddy.’ You know what I mean? The first time they say it, whether they’re one year old or 18 months, to hearing it from your kids that are on the brink of being teenagers, there’s nothing better than that,” he continues, also noting that “big hugs” and “picking them up from school” are some other “best” moments.

From Christmas to Spring Break: Currently, Cannon says that he is “finally coming up for air” after celebrating the holidays with his kids and is now “preparing for all the spring break type of stuff that’s right upon us. So, a lot of getting back outside again, a lot of basketball starting back up, and just a lot of sports and outdoor activities. As a dad, that’s the kind of stuff you structure your schedule around, all of your kids’ extracurricular activities.”

Cheaper by the Baker’s Dozen? When asked if he has any plans to welcome any more kids to his larger-than-life brood, Cannon laughs, telling PEOPLE, “I’m chilling right now. There’s no plans on the horizon as of yet. It’s so funny, everybody’s always trying to get me to have more kids. It’s like, 12 ain’t enough?”

[From People]

I mean, for me, two was enough, so if you want my opinion, I’d say yes, 12 is plenty, lol. I’m glad he finally got there. As for most rewarding moments, there really is something to be said about how happy your kids are to see you when you pick them up from school. (Three of Nick’s kids are school-aged and a couple are preschool-aged.) Those hugs really are just the best. I also really enjoy the bedtime chats I have with my boys, which is when they’re most willing to openly share. I wonder how much Nick actually picks his school-aged kids up or participates in bedtime.

I do wonder who exactly is trying to get him to have more kids. People who love reporting on this kind of stuff? The women with whom he already has children? Are there new girlfriends in the mix? Is it his publicist who just wants a head’s up? You know, Nick, there’s a way for men to continue having unprotected sex without the threat of pregnancy. It’s called a vasectomy. I promise it won’t take your manhood away from you. It will only lessen the amount of time and money you have to spend at Disneyland.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Bre Tiesi (@bre_tiesi)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Abby De La Rosa (@hiabbydelarosa)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Alyssa (@itsalyssaemm)

Sofia Vergara is starring as the late, real-life former drug lord Griselda Blanco in the upcoming Netflix series Griselda. Blanco, who was also known as the “Cocaine Godmother,” immigrated to Miami, Florida from Colombia in 1964. She began a successful cocaine operation that led her to reign over the Miami drug trade. (Note to anyone who has read The Thursday Murder Club series: I know they are nothing alike, but now whenever I read about a cocaine Queenpin, I can only picture Connie in my mind, lol.)

The first of six episodes of Griselda was set to drop on Thursday, January 25. Vergara, who is also a producer, has been heavily promoting the series. However, this premiere date is now in jeopardy because Netflix and Vergara are being sued by Blanco’s family for using their image and likeness without permission. Her last surviving son, named – I kid you not – Michael Corleone Blanco alleges that he’d been sharing stories with parties interested in giving his mom’s story the Hollywood treatment up until 2022. According to Mikey C, Netflix told him that they wouldn’t use any of these stories. They did anyway. Oops!

In the lawsuit, Blanco’s son reportedly said that he’d been shopping around his and his mother’s life stories since 2009 in the hopes of developing them into a production. Netflix expressed interest during that time, he said. The son, who has previously shared tales about his mother in multiple public interviews, alleged that the streamer said it wouldn’t utilize any of his anecdotes. But the upcoming series heavily relies on them anyway, he claimed, adding that he did not receive any compensation.

According to the lawsuit, the Blanco children are seeking a court injunction to prevent the show’s release. Representatives for Netflix and Vergara did not immediately reply to HuffPost’s requests for comment.

Vergara recently sat down with ET to discuss her portrayal of Blanco, describing her as “a complex person.”

“There are so many nuances to explore in terms of who she was as a drug lord and, of course, as a woman, as a mother,” said Vergara, who herself is Colombian. “She was someone who did whatever it took to protect her family. I really wanted to explore that from the point of view of, you know, of her being one of the only women in history to have gone as far as she did.”

Blanco was reportedly one of the first Colombian women to traffic cocaine into the U.S. She spent years behind bars for drug trafficking and three murders. But some suspected that she was linked to dozens more killings, if not hundreds.

Blanco was also a focus of 2006’s cult-classic documentary “Cocaine Cowboys.” She was shot dead in 2012.

[From HuffPo]

I’m always kinda struck by these types of lawsuits. Well, not the lawsuits themselves, but by the fact that production companies will use images or personal stories about their subject without the necessary permission. On one hand, wouldn’t it be easy enough to write a check and get permission? But on the other hand, is there any kind of legal document that Michael Blanco should have signed ahead of time to make sure Netflix didn’t do him dirty? I think US copyright laws probably would indicate that Michael gave permission by consenting to the interview because nothing he said was copyrighted, but I’d love to hear more about this area of law from any experts out there. I do know that companies will steal ideas from people they interview from jobs and, other than not just answering those types of interview questions, there’s not much you can do about it. Either way, I have a feeling that Michael and Netflix will probably work something out that (hopefully) fairly compensates him. Griselda sounds like she was a fascinating and powerful woman who is about to gain a whole new generation of notoriety.

Photos credit: Netflix Press