The Barbenheimer release date “snafu” was designed to do one thing: annoy Christopher Nolan. Warner Bros was trying to screw over Nolan’s Oppenheimer by scheduling Barbie for the same release date. I’m not sure WB planned out what would come next: a months-long viral campaign for both films and millions of dollars worth of free media and publicity. At the end of the day, Barbenheimer was a huge success by any metric – Nolan’s Oppenheimer was his biggest non-Batman opening ever, and Greta Gerwig’s Barbie is breaking all kinds of records for woman directors, non-comic-book movies and on and on.

Over the weekend, moviegoers turned out in force for Greta Gerwig’s neon-coated fantasy comedy “Barbie,” which smashed expectations with $155 million to land the biggest debut of the year. But they also showed up to see Christopher Nolan’s R-rated historical drama “Oppenheimer,” which collected a remarkable $80.5 million in its opening weekend.

Hundreds of thousands of ticket buyers refused to choose between the two seemingly different auter-driven blockbusters with sprawling casts and twin release dates. So they opted to attend same-day viewings of “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer,” turning the box office battle into a double feature for the ages.

The cultural craze known as “Barbenheimer” worked to fuel the biggest collective box office weekend of the pandemic era, as well as the fourth-biggest overall weekend in history. It’s worth noting the top three weekends of all time were led by the debuts of sequels in massive franchises (“Avengers: Endgame,” “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”).

In the end, though, it wasn’t a competition as “Barbie” loomed large over box office charts, thanks to an inescapable marketing campaign, as well as quality to match the stratospheric hype. At the international box office, the film added $182 million for a stunning global tally of $337 million.

The $145 million-budgeted movie, backed by Warner Bros. and Mattel, dominated the zeitgeist in the weeks leading up to its debut (even reportedly causing a shortage of the color pink) to a degree that’s rare for original fare. (Yes, Barbie is perhaps the world’s most famous doll, but the movie isn’t a sequel or part of a pre-existing film franchise.)

“We have a pink unicorn here,” says Jeff Goldstein, the president of domestic distribution at Warner Bros. “We thought it would be $75 million for the opening weekend. Nobody saw $155 million coming. This doll has long legs.”

[From Variety]

While I’m happy for Nolan and the Oppy team, I’m beyond thrilled for Gerwig, for Margot Robbie, for what this hopefully means for women directors and women producers and female-led stories. Women are a huge market and an underserved market – give them original summer films, give them fun marketing campaigns and we will rush to the theater. I know Gerwig and Mattel will get a lot of well-deserved credit for what they did, but don’t discount Margot’s amazing contributions here. She was the producer and her company, LuckyChap, pitched this to Mattel and hired Greta to write and direct. Margot has had so much success as a producer already, even before this, but this success should get LuckyChap all kinds of deals. Also, shout-out to the Barbie marketing team and Margot’s stylist – y’all did incredible work.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images and Warner Bros/Barbie.

Prince George turned 10 years old on Saturday, and Kensington Palace released a new portrait of the heir’s heir on Friday. This was not taken by Kate – it was yet another photoshoot by Millie Pilkington, who did most of the portraits released by KP this year. This was apparently taken at Windsor Castle, somewhere. George looks tall for his age in this photo. But it’s not some big deal, really – we’ve seen so much of the Wales kids in recent months. Anyway, I don’t have much to say other than “happy birthday, kid.” Trust that Camilla Tominey will devote three pages of chaotic rambling about the photo though. Tominey wrote a very strange piece about George’s birthday, in which she lied about the color of George’s eyes (she claimed he has blue eyes – he does not), made shady references to Charles and Diana’s separation (they all know that the Wales marriage is not what it seems) and made multiple references to Prince Harry and Archie. Some highlights:

George never had blue eyes: “As the blue eyed toddler with the determined gaze and careful smile, it seemed almost impossible that this young man would one day hold the future of the monarchy on his shoulders, however much he resembled his grandfather at the same age.

George’s quiet confidence: “Less formally, William and Kate have introduced George to public life at sporting fixtures and the odd charitable engagement. In the crowds at Wimbledon he seemed a serious little chap, but quietly confident too, and close to his siblings. While the young prince can appear less boisterous than his little brother (already a camera puller at just five) and less assured than his sister, one source told the Daily Mail: “George has turned into a confident little boy and loves meeting new people. [He doesn’t] get nervous in public and [is] already showing signs of becoming [a] great leader.”

Charles & Diana separated when William was 10: For his father, George’s landmark birthday perhaps has added poignancy. Prince William was 10 when his parents separated in 1992. Seeing his son (who enjoys as stable a home life as a little boy in the public glare could hope to have) begin to find his way in the world, he must find himself reflecting on the turbulent times he and his brother endured when their parents’ marriage fell apart. Contrast the touching family scenes that unfolded in the Royal Box at Wimbledon last Sunday with what we now know was going on behind closed doors in Kensington Palace when William was growing up, and the two future kings’ childhoods seem worlds apart….The current Prince and Princess of Wales are determined to do things differently while raising George, his eight-year-old sister Princess Charlotte and his brother Prince Louis, five.

Hands-on parents: Diana was undoubtedly a hands-on mother – but the couple have taken this further by ensuring that one of them is always around at breakfast and bedtime. “Diaries are very carefully managed to ensure that one of them is always there for the children,” confirmed one insider. “They are the ones doing the school run most days.” As one friend recently told the Mirror, this is a no-frills affair: “There are no blow-dries – it’s always hair up in a ponytail. She’s often in her gym clothes, with very little makeup, apologising as she’s late before dashing off.”

Deft Buttons: In public, the Princess deftly helps all three children behave for the cameras, distracting them with things of interest in the crowd or calming them if it overwhelms – as it did once in 2016 at the Royal Air Show, when a three-year-old Prince George had a wobble and needed his mother’s comfort. Keen to avoid the sibling rivalry that has plagued her husband’s relationship with his brother, Kate is careful to treat all her offspring equally – even though one is a future king.

The move to Windsor: Moving from the “goldfish bowl” of Kensington Palace, to Adelaide Cottage on the Windsor Great Park estate has changed things considerably for the family. Originally built for Queen Adelaide in 1831, the four-bedroom home does not have any staff accommodation, so the Waleses are largely going it alone domestically. While they have retained the services of Maria Borrallo, the Spanish Norland-trained nanny who has been with them since George’s birth, their wider domestic entourage has been significantly scaled back. “It’s partly by design,” said one source. “They want the children to grow up in a family home rather than a palace.”

Another decade of keen promises: One insider said: “They are very happy right now at Windsor and for the next decade or so everything will be pretty much dictated by what is right for the children.”

Parenting in the age of social media: Another concern is protecting the children’s privacy as they grow in independence. The young William and Harry had the press and paparazzi to worry about – now it’s anyone with an iPhone. “They are in the unique situation of being famous from birth,” said one former aide. “No other royals have grown up in this environment and it’s going to be tricky to navigate. This is the one thing the royal brothers will want to converse on. Because the decisions facing William and Kate with George will soon be upon Harry and Meghan with Archie.”

George doesn’t have to be a working royal until he’s 35?? Yet the truth is none of these decisions have yet been made. It is not even certain whether George will be required to become a full-time working royal by the age of 35 or pursue his own career.

[From The Telegraph]

“There are no blow-dries – it’s always hair up in a ponytail. She’s often in her gym clothes, with very little makeup, apologising as she’s late before dashing off.” So… Kate is doing drop-offs and then she dashes off to the gym, and then what? How does she spend the rest of her day? Also, Kate and William don’t treat their kids equally. We have seen that time and time again – George gets singled out, just as William was singled out for more beneficial treatment. And WTF is this quote? “This is the one thing the royal brothers will want to converse on. Because the decisions facing William and Kate with George will soon be upon Harry and Meghan with Archie.” Like… the Sussexes live in America where they live as private citizens in a home they own, with private security they pay for. Harry’s not going to be checking in with William about “the paparazzi,” especially since the Windsors seemed especially gleeful about that paparazzi swarm (or whatever it actually was) in New York.

Photos courtesy of Millie Pilkington/Kensington Palace, Avalon Red and Cover Images.

Michael Cera is only 35 years old, but it feels like he’s been famous forever, and it also feels like he’s permanently stuck at 18 years old, especially with his babyface. Cera plays Allan, the discontinued doll, in the Barbie movie. Allan was introduced as Ken’s male friend, but it turned out that no one wanted Ken to have friends. Ken was solely dedicated to being Barbie’s boyfriend. I kind of love that Greta Gerwig included Allan and Midge, who was also discontinued – Midge (played by Emerald Fennell) was supposed to be Barbie’s knocked-up friend, and I guess the Barbie mythology is that Midge and Allan were married. Boring! But Michael Cera isn’t boring – he’s just Canadian, and his Canadianness is felt throughout this Guardian interview. Some highlights:

Why Allan was discontinued: “Somewhat of a marginalised figure. It turned out people didn’t need to go deeper into Ken’s world.” An Allan doll, which the actor bought on eBay, sat in the hair and makeup room, as inspiration and “a sort of mascot, until after shooting, when I took him home”, says Cera. “I definitely wanted to have my own Allan.” He has a broken sandal, says Cera, with a touch of sadness, “but it doesn’t matter – he’s like 60 years old or something”.

He loved working on ‘Barbie’: “I was desperate to be a part of it.” Gerwig, who co-wrote as well as directed, had “her stamp all over every single part of it”, Cera says. He loved going on to the sets – Barbieland on a massive scale. “I would stand there and marvel, and never got tired of looking around and finding new little details. It was one of the most stunning things I’ve ever seen.”

His thoughts on artificial intelligence (AI). Cera says he asked an AI service recently if we were living in a simulation and its reply was: ‘It’s totally likely that you are.’”

He likes to hear recommendations from friends, not an algorithm. “I think that things are a little too optimised. Even with parenting” – he has a young son – “you have a million questions when you have a new baby and you look online, and there’s always some highly optimised answer about whatever problem you’re having.” He prefers the idea of muddling through, working it out for himself “and not trying to do everything perfectly, and have everything become this sort of homogenised version. I kind of miss when things were a little sloppier.”

He does not own a smartphone. Google Maps? “That’s the thing everybody always asks. I just figure it out ahead of time.” Sometimes he draws a map. Social media? He doesn’t do it. Endless photos? He bought himself a camera while his wife was pregnant and taught himself how to use it, “and now I love that as a hobby”. What about when he has a spare 30 seconds and desperately needs to save himself from agonising boredom? “I don’t know. Sometimes I’ll just be bored.” He laughs, as if it’s no big deal. It gives him space to process things, he says. Checking email? He has a computer at home for that, “and I waste a lot of time playing chess. It’s completely got its tentacles in my brain, but at least I leave it at home.”

He doesn’t feel judgmental towards phone-addicted people: “I feel sorry for my son, I feel sorry for the world. I think it’s getting very lonely.” Sometimes he will look around the subway and “do a head count of how many people are looking at their phones and it makes me feel lonely. Even being with friends or with family, you’re with someone you love and haven’t seen in a while, and they’re with their phone. It’s like they left the room. I think it bums a lot of people out, honestly. I feel the loneliness creeping in….That’s the triumph of the Apple corporation. It has done a good job of making people feel they can’t exist without its product.”

Getting famous from ‘Arrested Development’ & Juno: “That was sort of overwhelming. I didn’t know how to handle walking down the street. Fame makes you very uncomfortable in your own skin, and makes you paranoid and weird. There were lots of great things about it, and I met a lot of amazing people, but there’s a lot of bad energies, too, ones that I was not equipped to handle.”

His wife: He and his wife, Nadine, met in a bar in Paris, where she was studying and he was promoting Arrested Development. “We trip out about that all the time. It’s completely unlikely that we would ever meet.” She didn’t know who Cera was. “She thought I was Swedish, until we spoke. I didn’t know if she would speak English, and if we would even have a chance to talk, and it was very lucky that she did because we wouldn’t have a son, we wouldn’t have a relationship.”

[From The Guardian]

Imagine meeting Michal Cera in a bar and not knowing who he is! I wonder if he had any game at all – he has never seemed like a guy with any game. Maybe that was nice though? I mean, it worked! I like that he talked about how Gerwig created real sets and didn’t just leave everything to CGI. I also appreciate that, and it must have been so cool to be on that amazing set and be able to look at all of the craftsmanship and detail that went into everything. I also have a love/hate relationship with smartphones, and I totally understand why someone would opt out or just use an old-school flip-phone. It’s insane how much phones have just completely changed society in less than twenty years.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Getty.

Tony Bennett has passed away at the age of 96. [Variety]
Bethenny Frankel thinks reality-show people should go on strike too, because they’re also getting screwed over in residuals. I mean… she’s actually right (a broken clock, etc). [Starcasm]
The Marvels trailer is here and Zawe Ashton is introduced as the villain. [Just Jared]
Review of Justified: City Primeval. [LaineyGossip]
Hype for the Women’s World Cup. [Pajiba]
Jodie Turner Smith is on the picket line. [Go Fug Yourself]
Kevin Smith is the most famous person at Comic Con. [Seriously OMG]
Matt Gaetz’s wife cries about Ken’s “low T.” [Jezebel]
We haven’t heard anything about Nicola Peltz in a few months, huh. [Egotastic]
“Boy Dinner” is also a thing. [Buzzfeed]
LGBTQ youths of color feel most comfortable on TikTok. [Towleroad]
The Belgian royal family celebrated a national holiday. [RCFA]

It’s hard out here on the Dirty Ass beat, but this one isn’t so bad. The ladies of Barbie sat down and recorded a cute video with Vanity Fair (before the strike). The video is “how well do you know your costars,” it features Greta Gerwig, Margot Robbie, Issa Rae, Kate McKinnon and America Ferrera. America’s part is getting a lot of headlines – she asked the women to name her biggest guilty pleasure. Their answers ranged from self-care stuff, eating cookie dough or looking on Redfin and dreaming about real estate. America says no, she doesn’t feel guilty about any of that, then admits: “I’m going to really regret saying this… It’s not showering for a few days.” You should feel guilty about that!! Here’s the video:

I love the way the other women were kind of grossed out. They were really surprised. America has two kids, btw – a son and daughter, both under the age of five. I can’t imagine not showering for a few days, but maybe she simply doesn’t have time.

Issa’s “America, no” was also very, very funny.

Issa Rae says if she could have anyone sing/rap the theme song to her life it would be Megan Thee Stallion.

(via vanityfair on TikTok.) pic.twitter.com/rQyyCIebIA

— TheeStallionNews (@MegansCharts) July 20, 2023

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

Valerie Bertinelli has been open about her struggle with weight and body image for many years. She’s spoken about realizing that she can’t find happiness just from losing weight, and she’s had her fair share of body-shamers on the internet. She’s responded to trolls in the past and called them out for being petty and cruel. Recently someone commented on one of Valerie’s TikToks, “the Botox looks great,” which was definitely meant as a snarky comment. So Valerie made a TikTok where she talked about why that type of comment hurts, and detailed her own experience with Botox. She had it before, but she didn’t like how it turned out. Valerie comes across so genuine and sweet, it just makes me more annoyed that people are coming at her for the apparent crime of aging as a 62-year-old woman.

The “One Day at a Time” alum posted a TikTok Sunday in response to a user who commented “The Botox looks great” on one of her prior videos.

The Food Network star interpreted the comment as sarcasm, but decided to switch gears by responding to the mockery with mindfulness.

“I know you didn’t mean that as a compliment, but let’s talk about it, shall we?” Bertinelli began. “I have tried Botox … I hated it.”

The “Hot in Cleveland” star then pulled up a photo of herself from six years ago when she did get Botox, and explained that the procedure “changed the shape of my eyebrows” resulting in her not recognizing her own face.

“What I thought it was going to do was help me with my genetically puffy eyes,” Bertinelli explained. “They’ve always annoyed me. I’ve always wanted those deep-set eyes. Don’t have ’em. Never going to get ’em. So, just live with it.”

But then Bertinelli got to the real reason why she wanted to talk about the comment.

“Because you’re trying to shame me, and you’re a woman. Like, what made you go out of your way to try to shame me?” Bertinelli said. “And I’m not the first person to try to be shamed on TikTok or Instagram or any place. So, we’re women. We have to stick together, OK? Don’t shame somebody if they want to do something, anything, to make themselves feel better as they go out into this insane, flippin’ crazy world, OK?”

She then shattered any kind of stigma surrounding cosmetic procedures by admitting that if Botox helped her feel better about her appearance, she’d use it.

“Some people can do Botox, and it looks amazing on them,” she said. “I am not one of them, unfortunately, or I would’ve kept doing it. But thankfully, it faded. I couldn’t wait for it to fade.”

[From The Huffington Post]

I wonder who told Valerie that Botox would help with puffy eyes because that just seems like bad advice. Botox in the forehead will slightly lift the tail of the brow in many cases, but it won’t meaningfully change how your eye socket looks. Anyway, good for her for calling this person out. The stigma against women getting treatments like Botox is so annoying, and it does feel like women can’t win. If they age naturally, people shame them, and if they get professional help, people shame them.

As for the person shaming her being a woman, I’m not surprised at that. In my experience, women can shame each other worse than men sometimes. And I think women often shame each other because of envy, or because they feel threatened. I was raised in a very conservative church and I carried parts of “modesty culture” around with me even after I left the church. I’d never say anything to other women, but I would judge them in my mind for wearing revealing clothes, and it would bother me so much. I had to examine why I was getting so activated, and I realized it was because I envied them. I wanted to be seen, I wanted to be desired, I wanted to own my femininity like they were. And the culture I was raised in told me I was a deviant and a Jezebel if I wanted any of those things, so I suppressed a lot of stuff. Now I’m not triggered at all by other women wearing whatever the heck they want. In most cases when other women annoy me, it’s because they’re reflecting back something I haven’t accepted about myself. I think a similar dynamic is often at play when women shame each other for how they manage aging or treatments like Botox. Valerie has always looked great to me and I hope she doesn’t let mean comments get to her.

Valerie Bertinelli replying to @ lisaweiss711 [TikTok]

I couldn’t hear it that well so I cranked up the volume and had to shorten it for twitter. [1/2] pic.twitter.com/yU7DdQqKZO

— aka stardust (@a_k_a_stardust) July 17, 2023

Embed from Getty Images

photos credit: Getty, Avalon.red and Cover Images

It doesn’t feel like most American outlets are capable of explaining any part of what’s really going on with Brad Pitt, especially when it comes to Angelina Jolie’s sale of Nouvel (her half of Chateau Miraval) and Yuri Shefler, the man who owns Stoli and Tenute del Mondo. Jolie sold Nouvel to Shefler in 2021, after going to court repeatedly to unfreeze her jointly-held assets after years of divorce battles. Pitt was well-informed of the sale and he attempted, in real time, to stop the sale. The courts cleared the way for Jolie to complete the sale and Pitt’s life has been hell ever since. Pitt tried to do the same thing to Shelfer that he did to Jolie: cut him out of the business entirely. Only Shefler isn’t playing – Miraval has been raided by French authorities, and now Shefler and the French courts have Pitt’s chaotic business records. It seems most outlets are incapable of providing this clear explanation for this recent history. Speaking of, the Blast (via Yahoo) got their hands on Pitt’s latest legal briefs.

The legal battle over Chateau Miraval between Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie is getting very nasty with new allegations of a “hostile takeover.” According to new legal documents, obtained by The Blast, Pitt and Jolie are making more allegations against each other — including a continued fight over the winery’s ownership. The latest filing is brutal, with Pitt saying, Jolie’s cohorts are attempting a hostile takeover of the business.

As you know, Pitt claims Jolie sold interests in the family’s winery to a Russian Oligarch, even though they had an agreement not to sell if they ever divorced. The famous actors bought the stunning property together in 2008. Jolie’s investment company, Nouvel, is also a part of the case — is being called out by Brad Pitt for the shady deal.

“Jolie and Nouvel were obligated not to sell interest in a private family home and wine business without (Brad’s) consent. They nevertheless did so, secretly, through a purported sale to Tenute del Mondo, an entity controlled by Russian oligarch Yuri Shetler,” the document reads. It continues, “Defendants have since attempted a hostile takeover of the business.”

Of course, Angelina isn’t taking this accusation sitting down, filing her own new allegations that this is just the latest in Pitt’s “problematic pattern.” Angelina’s legal team put it like this, “Ms. Jolie contends that (Brad’s) causes of action are frivolous, malicious, and part of a problematic pattern, adding they are fighting to have a judge confirm, “Pitt’s allegations that he and Ms. Jolie had a secret, unwritten, unspoken contract for consent right on the sale of their interests in the property is directly contrary to the written record.”

This comes just days after Angelina accused Brad of “looting” the winery of assets and acting like a “petulant child” in the legal war. At the moment, Angelina’s company is seeking $350 Million in damages, saying “Pitt masterminded a so-far-successful plan to seize de facto control of Château Miraval, despite lacking a controlling ownership interest. He has frozen Nouvel out of Château Miraval and treats it as his personal fiefdom.”

[From Yahoo]

Again, Jolie has not accused Pitt of acting like a “petulant child.” Nouvel did that in legal filings, and Nouvel is owned by Yuri Shefler. Shefler is the one attempting a “hostile takeover” of Miraval and IT IS WORKING. Pitt has his back against the wall, Pitt keeps running to court and whining about Angelina and pretending that she is the only one responsible for this. Pitt lives in a fantasy world where he thinks he can reverse the sale of Nouvel based on a fictitious and unwritten “agreement” where Jolie would only sell Nouvel to him. Which, in point of fact, she tried to do, except he tried to force her to sign a gag order about his abuse of her and their children. So here we are.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgird.

The backstory on the “Barbenheimer” phenomenon is that Christopher Nolan had long found a home at Warner Bros, from 2002 up until the pandemic. During the pandemic, Warner Bros dumped many of their new releases on their streaming platform, HBO Max. Nolan and many other directors and actors slammed Warner Bros’ decision, and Nolan got especially spicy about it, saying this on the record: “Some of our industry’s biggest filmmakers and most important movie stars went to bed the night before thinking they were working for the greatest movie studio and woke up to find out they were working for the worst streaming service.” After that, Nolan left Warner Bros and Oppenheimer was made at Universal. As a screw-you to Nolan, Warner Bros waited until they saw what release date Universal claimed for Oppenheimer, then Warner Bros scheduled Barbie’s release for the same day. So, Barbenheimer came out of significant drama, even though the casts of both films took pains to celebrate each other’s work. Well, reportedly, Nolan’s ass still hurts about it.

Christopher Nolan was reportedly ‘upset’ that Warner Bros chose to release Barbie at the same time as his thriller Oppenheimer. Despite the Barbenheimer (a playful hybrid of Barbie and Oppenheimer) phenomenon continuing to grow – the 52-year-old director was reportedly less than impressed.

‘Summer, in a healthy marketplace, is always crowded, and we’ve been doing this a long time,’ he recently told IGN. ‘I think for those of us who care about movies, we’ve been really waiting to have a crowded marketplace again, and now it’s here and that’s terrific.’

But sources close to the director said ‘Nolan wasn’t nearly as diplomatic in his stance behind the scenes,’ according to Insider. The publication claimed ‘Nolan was upset that Warner Bros scheduled Barbie for release on the same weekend as Oppenheimer, especially since mid-July has been known in the movie business as “Nolan’s weekend” for years.’

There was reportedly an attempt by the movie-theater community to get the Warner Bros studio to move the Barbie release date – but it ultimately would not budge.

Despite the ongoing rumblings, earlier this year Variety said the new heads of Warner Bros, Michael De Luca and Pam Abdy, wanted Nolan to return. It claimed that the executives had sent Nolan a seven-figure royalty in relation to Tenet in an attempt to re-build a bridge and lure him back.

[From The Daily Mail]

Last week, Nolan was asked if he planned to see Barbie and he said a “curt ‘no’.” So, yeah, I believe this. I believe he’s still mad and that this is all some big studio beef. It’s hilarious though, and I have to admit… it’s well-played by Warner Bros. While they might want Nolan back, they’re not acting like it. They’re acting like they’re fine with gleefully burning that bridge. It must kill Nolan to see his cast and Barbie’s cast be so gracious towards each other too. Before the strike, Cillian Murphy, Matt Damon, RDJ, Margot Robbie and everyone else leaned into the Barbenheimer thing. Not Nolan. LMAO.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Backgrid.

Vanity Fair recently published an interesting article about “the saga of royal rents and monarchs-as-landlords.” There’s some interesting history about various king’s mistresses and the various grand apartments or estates they were given. There’s also some interesting stuff about more modern royal real estate drama and how King Charles is going to make some big changes, especially with the grace-and-favor homes and apartments given to distant relations. Of course, they mention how he evicted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from Frogmore Cottage, still one of the most rotten moves from Charles. Especially given that, as this article makes abundantly clear, most of the Windsors are living in homes they didn’t pay for whatsoever. Some highlights (mostly quotes from Tom Quinn, author of Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir and Scandals of the Royal Palaces):

All of the royals rebuild & refurbish their gifted real estate: “There has also always been an insane habit of each new royal resident insisting that their palace or house has to be completely refurbished, even rebuilt, before they can bring themselves to move in,” Quinn explains. “When Princess Margaret and Lord Snowdon moved into their Kensington Palace apartment vast amounts of Georgian fittings were destroyed—Margaret insisted—according to one of her staff—that she had absolutely no intention of using a lavatory that had ever been used by anyone else!”

Grace-and-favor homes: The near constant hassles over royal real estate have become increasingly fraught in recent decades with the press exposing the unfairness of “grace-and-favor residences” given to family members, loyal friends, and servants at the discretion of the monarch. “In the 1970s, there were more than 200 grace and favor apartments and houses––dozens at Hampton Court Palace and at Balmoral, at Sandringham, Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace and Clarence House,” Quinn points out. Things came to a head in the 1990s when it was revealed that Prince and Princess Michael of Kent, who are non-working royals, were paying very little to live in Kensington Palace.

What happened to the Kents: To quell the furor, Queen Elizabeth II decided to raise the couple’s rent. “The Duke and Duchess of Kent found they suddenly had to go from paying a peppercorn rent for their grace and favor apartment at Kensington to paying market rent. From paying around £69 a week for their five bedroomed apartment they were forced to pay around £60,000 a year,” Quinn writes. “Fair enough perhaps given at the time—the 1990s—the duke was only 49th in line to the throne.”

Charles won’t be as generous as his mother: According to Quinn, there are still more than 100 grace-and-favor residences controlled by King Charles III, but apparently, he won’t be as generous as his mother. “Charles has every intention of curbing the wild expenditure on royal houses that typified earlier generations of royals and a member of staff told me he is determined to reduce further the number of grace and favor apartments,” Quinn claims.

Charles’s ultimate goal: As his ultimatums to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Prince Andrew attest, the king believes the family squabbles over royal property are out of control and bad for both public relations and the bottom line. There have also been reports that the king will eventually ask more royal family members to pay up or vacate their homes, and in turn, will rent them to people outside the family at market rates. He wants members of the royal family to stop behaving with such an air of entitlement, especially when it comes to housing. One aide told me that even Charles can’t understand why each new generation has to strip out everything in their apartments before they are prepared to move in—whether at Kensington or Windsor—and start again from scratch at great expense.”

William & Kate: “William and Kate are as guilty as anyone else when it comes to this sort of thing,” Quinn says. “Their Kensington apartment was virtually rebuilt when they moved in and now includes an underground bunker.” (Outlets report the apartment includes a panic room and escape tunnel.)

Caretaker royals: “Charles is also keen to emphasize that each generation of royals is, as it were, merely a caretaker when it comes to housing—they are there to keep the houses and palaces in good order for the next generation and for the public,” Quinn explains.

[From VF]

While Kensington Palace Apartment 1 really did need a big overhaul – they had to remove asbestos – Quinn is correct in that William and Kate were so excessive with how much money they spent renovating and refurbishing not only KP Apt. 1, but Anmer Hall as well. Kate ripped up Anmer, which had already recently been renovated. I remember how she tore out a perfectly lovely kitchen. What was also crazy about the KP reno was that the PR around the whole thing was that the money was worth it because KP would be their permanent home and they would be based in London. Instead, they quickly moved to Anmer for years, and then they moved to Windsor, where they’re looking to push Prince Andrew out of Royal Lodge. You know Kate can’t wait to spend millions renovating Royal Lodge too.

The Frogmore Cottage eviction makes even less sense when you consider how many royals and royal-adjacents are paying next to nothing for their palatial estates and lavish apartments. The Sussexes literally paid back the cost of renovating that dilapidated shack AND they paid for the lease. And Charles’s big scheme is to evict the Sussexes and “give” Frogmore to Andrew free of charge. Anyway, I can’t wait to see how many enemies Charles makes when he starts evicting all of his relatives, all while giving William and Kate their sixth, seventh and eighth homes.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Netflix, Instar, Kensington Royal social media.

Back when Shakira was with Gerard Pique, she owned a home in Barcelona and that was her main residence and where she raised her children. She also owns homes in her home country of Colombia, the US, Uruguay and other countries. Now that Shakira and Pique are over, she’s moved to Miami full-time and she’s cut her ties with Spain. Except the Spanish tax authorities are still trying to drag her to court over her time spent in Barcelona. This has been going on for a few years now and, from the beginning, it sounded like the Spanish tax authorities are the scammers, not Shakira. Even by the most basic Spanish reporting on the issue, Shakira paid what she owed plus interest. Shakira has also spoken about the tax issue at length in interviews, getting very specific about how many days a year she spent in Spain and how thorough her tax specialists are – she’s worked with PricewaterhouseCoopers for years. Well, funny story…

Shakira is facing a second tax fraud case in Spain. Almost 10 months after the singer, 46, was ordered to stand trial in her $13.9 million tax evasion case in the country, she has now been hit with another investigation.

According to Reuters, a Spanish court said Thursday that it has started a new investigation against the Colombian star linked to alleged fraud on personal income tax and wealth tax in 2018. The court, which is in the town of Esplugues de Llobregat near Barcelona, said it had no information on how much money was in question, according to the Associated Press.

Per a translation from Spanish media outlet El Pais, the court opened a second case as a result of a complaint by the Barcelona Economic Crimes Prosecutor regarding Shakira allegedly defrauding the Tax Agency. Another local outlet, El Periodico, reported that the prosecutor’s office has filed a complaint for two alleged tax crimes.

A representative for Shakira told PEOPLE in a statement Thursday that she “defends having always acted in accordance with the law and under the advice of the best tax experts. She is now focused on her life as an artist in Miami and is confident that there will be a favorable resolution of her tax issues.”

Her representative also said she is yet to receive any formal notification of the second probe regarding the 2018 financial year. The statement continued. “The singer’s legal team will not make any comments until the notification reaches them through the official and legally established channels.”

“As it is publicly known, and as the Spanish Treasury was officially notified, Shakira is now living in Miami, so she must be notified personally at her new address, in strict accordance with the provisions of the Law.”

[From People]

I feel sorry for Shakira and I’m glad she got the hell out of Spain. They’re trying to make an example out of her, they’re trying to tie her up in court for years, they’re trying to wear her down and jam her up. It also looks like they’re mad that she left the country. It’s very Meghan Markle-coded, right? The anger towards a “foreigner,” the otherizing, the need to make an example out of her. Shakira has been handling all of this the right way, in my opinion – she’s been open about what they’re doing and she’s provided details through her reps and in her own interviews. She also believes that the Spanish government has executed a smear campaign against her, and it’s easy to see why she believes that.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.