View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Law Roach (@luxurylaw)

Zendaya, Law Roach & Tom Holland attended the opening of the Nita Mukesh Ambani Cultural Centre in India (this was basically India’s version of the Met Gala). [Just Jared]
Gigi Hadid wore Abu Jani Sandeep Khosla to the same event. [RCFA]
Fundamentalist Christian Lauren Boebart won’t “nitpick what the Bible says” when it comes to her family, just your family. [Jezebel]
Quentin Tarantino confirms that his tenth film will be his last. [Dlisted]
Even while pregnant, Rihanna keeps rock star hours. [LaineyGossip]
No surprise, Quinta Brunson was a great guest host on SNL. [Pajiba]
Teyana Taylor looks so great here. [Go Fug Yourself]
An Unexpected star got her college degree. [Starcasm]
Dianna Agron stars in Clock?? [Egotastic]
Holy crap, this story is insane and tragic. [Buzzfeed]
Shemar Moore will return to the Young & the Restless. [Seriously OMG]
Another big mess: copyrighting AI art. [Towleroad]

Embed from Getty Images

Carole Middleton’s business, Party Pieces, has been struggling financially for years. During the pandemic, the company began posting significant losses and, according to recent reports, they’ve had so much trouble with suppliers and the Royal Mail (meaning, significant shipping delays). The combination of Brexit and Covid hit Party Pieces especially hard, although I do question whether PP has been struggling financially for many years before the pandemic, simply because they really aren’t making unique products – you could buy most of PP’s stuff online or at discount stores. Still, Carole tried to grow her failing business, even introducing Party Pieces to the ShopRite chain in America. Looks like Party Pieces’ big American invasion was a total flop as well. So here we are: Carole is looking to sell Party Pieces.

An online party decorations retailer owned by Carole Middleton, the Princess of Wales’s mother, has hired advisers for a potential sale of the business as it struggles with dwindling sales. Party Pieces, which was founded by Carole Middleton, has appointed Interpath to advise on its strategic options, which could include a possible sale or funding from an outside investor.

It comes after reports that the company, which is owned by Mrs Middleton and her husband Michael, became embroiled in a row with suppliers and suffered a dip in sales over the crucial Christmas period. The retailer struggled as cost-of-living pressures hit households and Royal Mail strikes caused delays to deliveries, the Daily Mail reported. Mrs Middleton was also reported to be in a dispute with suppliers over attempts to extend payment terms to 90 days from the usual 30 days. Party Pieces declined to comment at the time.

A spokesman for Party Pieces said: “We are working with our advisers to secure additional investment which will help support the business as we look to embark on the next phase of our growth plan.”

[From The Telegraph]

Whenever I read these straight-reporting pieces about Party Pieces’ failing business, I think about how many dumbf–k books have been written about the Windsors and the Sussexes, and I always wonder why some enterprising British journalist has never done a deep dive into the Middletons’ finances. I’m a broken record about this, I know, but I just have so many questions about the whole PP operation, as well as the Middletons’ real estate in Bucklebury, that weird story about a pot farm adjacent to the Middletons’ property, whether Gary Goldsmith has laundered money through his sister and a lot more. Anyway, I always thought that maybe James Middleton was the black sheep of the family, the only one with zero business sense, but I suspect it’s more of a family trait.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, cover of Good Housekeeping.

Last week, the first portrait of King Charles III’s reign was revealed. Meaning, this is the first official painting of Charles commissioned and completed during his reign. It was painted by Alastair Barford, a former Queen Elizabeth Scholarship Trust scholar. It featured Charles wearing a bracelet given to him by an indigenous Amazon leader. In general, for major birthdays or major title changes, the Windsors will give the public new portraits although the younger generations have definitely been phasing out “sitting for paintings.” In any case, new portraits have been commissioned for the new (old) king and since Britain is still a monarchy in which the monarch’s portrait must be displayed in public buildings, schools, courts, police precincts and government offices, the government has set aside millions of pounds to help people get brand new portraits of King Charles.

Ministers have been accused of “losing the plot” after setting aside £8m to offer every public body a free portrait of King Charles. In a move that drew criticism amid complaints of shrinking budgets across Whitehall and local government, Oliver Dowden, the cabinet office minister, said it was part of plans to celebrate the new reign and bring the nation together.

Dowden, who has also been co-ordinating the government’s response to the public sector strikes over pay, said local councils, courts, schools, police forces and fire and rescue services will be among the public institutions eligible for a free portrait, before the coronation at the beginning of May.

“We have entered a new reign in our history,” Dowden said. “Now as we unite in preparing for the splendour of the king’s coronation, these new portraits will serve as a visible reminder in buildings up and down the country of the nation’s ultimate public servant. They will help us turn a page in our history together – and pay a fitting tribute to our new sovereign. I am sure the portraits will take pride of place in public buildings across the land.”

However, it drew immediate criticism from anti-monarchy campaigners last night. Graham Smith, from the Republic group, called for the scheme to be scrapped. “This is a shameful waste of money,” he said. “At a time when a majority of local councils are raising taxes and cutting public services, when schools and hospitals are struggling, to spend even £1 on this nonsense would be £1 too much. The government has lost the plot if they think that people want their money spent on pictures of Charles. They need to scrap this scheme and direct the money where it’s really needed.The coronation is estimated to cost anything from £50m to £100m – and we can see why. This waste is absolutely scandalous.”

The government said that official portraits of Queen Elizabeth II were currently on display in many public institutions, and “offering of the new official portrait of King Charles III will enable organisations across the UK to carry on that tradition”.

[From The Guardian]

In most government offices here in America, they change the portraits when a new president is inaugurated, although I have no idea if schools and all public buildings do the same at this point? But, like, if you walked into a federal building, there would be a portrait of President Biden on display somewhere. I’ve never really thought about the cost of that, but I’m sure it’s noted somewhere on some line-item budget. So… yeah… I think the British government is spending way too much money to glorify King Charles, but I also think… if there are rules about where the monarch’s portrait is displayed, people are going to want to adhere to that rule? Like, what’s the other option, just keep portraits of QEII up forever? Or try to keep up with the parade of prime ministers and put their portraits up?

The most offensive part of this (to me) is “the nation’s ultimate public servant.” Dude has eleventy billion castles and a net worth of something like a billion dollars. Don’t call him the ultimate public servant.

Here’s the portrait done by Alastair Barford. He just had to hide his sausage fingers.

Prince Charles new £8m portrait.

Be nice if he had put his hand in his pocket to pay for it, or his £100m Coronation.

But alas it was your pocket.#NotMyKing pic.twitter.com/fHfjgPjNGy

— BladeoftheSun (@BladeoftheS) April 2, 2023

Portrait by Alastair Barford, additional photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

Last Thursday, a judge dismissed Samantha Markle’s unhinged defamation case against her half-sister, the Duchess of Sussex. Samantha had spent a significant amount of time and money trying to convince people that Meghan “defamed” her when Meghan spoke about how she grew up as an only child and that she wasn’t particularly close to her half-siblings. Samantha is a con artist, an opportunist and I strongly suspect that this entire nuisance suit was being bankrolled entirely by people within the British media, or by one of the British tabloids. This goes alongside my longtime conspiracy theory that Piers Morgan was the one writing Thomas Markle’s scripts. The point, for Samantha, is not to win the case, but to make Meghan’s life a misery and to ensure “content” for the tabloids. Speaking of, Samantha is telling everyone that she plans to “refile” her lawsuit.

The Duchess of Sussex’s half-sister is planning to refile an “even stronger” defamation case against her sibling. Samantha Markle’s legal team has revealed it will focus on comments Meghan made during her and the Duke of Sussex’s 2021 television interview with Oprah Winfrey. The lawyers’ announcement comes after a Florida judge last week threw out part of the case related to the biography Finding Freedom by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand.

The sister claimed the Duchess spread “demonstrably false and malicious lies” to a “worldwide audience” in the book and her CBS television interview. The £60,000 ($75,000) lawsuit claimed Samantha was subjected to “humiliation and hatred” following her sister’s claims she felt she grew up as an only child.

Samantha Markle’s lawyers said it was “unfortunate” that the judge’s ruling was seen by many as the end of the legal action, known as “Markle vs Markle”. Instead, they said the judge had allowed the legal team 14 days to amend their complaint. Their statement adds: “This upcoming amendment will address certain legal issues that are related to our claims for defamation as it specifically relates to the Oprah interview on CBS.”

The statement, written by Samantha’s attorney Jamie Sasson, says that “we vehemently oppose the narrative” the media reported claiming the Duchess had won, adding how they “look forward to presenting an even stronger argument for the defamation and losses that our client has had to endure.”

The amended claims could also cite elements of the 2022 Netflix series which covered the Meghan and Prince Harry’s relationship, from early courtship to their decision to step back from the Royal Family and move to America.

[From The Telegraph]

I read part of the judge’s dismissal, and it’s absolutely clear that Meghan WON. The judge absolutely believes that Samantha’s lawsuit is dumb as hell and wrong on the law across the board. Again, the point is not for Samantha to win, her entire goal here is to be a fly in the ointment, to be the white trash relative on the sidelines, getting attention for selling out and lying about her half-sister. As for Samantha refiling with the stuff from the Netflix series… is she going to sue her own daughter Ashleigh too? The daughter she didn’t raise, the daughter who wants nothing to do with her?

NEW: Samantha Markle’s attorney told me that his client plans to file an amended complaint in her defamation case against her half-sister Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. It will likely include claims made about Samantha in the Netflix docuseries “Harry & Meghan.”

Full statement: pic.twitter.com/yhMhyM5Q6Q

— Ellie Hall (@ellievhall) March 31, 2023

Photos courtesy of WENN, Netflix.

Sign up for our mailing list and get the Top 8 Stories about Kate’s Business Initiatives!

Introduction: Minutes 0 to 4:30
We’ll be off for three weeks and back on April 29th. I got my first pair of Crocs and have been watching Fire Country. Chandra is watching Ted Lasso. You can listen below!

Royals: Minutes 4:30 to 22:30
This week Prince Harry made a surprise appearance in London in his case against Associated Newspapers. He and other plaintiffs like Elton John and Sadie Frost are suing them for surveillance and harassment. Harry issued written testimony on Tuesday and it was damning to his family. Prince Harry’s presence at the hearing has brought so much attention to it.

After that came out, a royal source told The Daily Beast that Harry’s statement has “torpedoed any remaining bridges” with his family. It’s curious that the Windsors are acting like Harry is attacking them when the case is against the Daily Mail. The Telegraph reported that Charles was too busy to see him. Charles was at Highgrove after his trip to France was canceled so he wasn’t too busy. Will and Kate are conveniently out of town too because their kids are on break. Camilla Tominey accused Harry of upstaging Charles’ big trip. The Sussexes upstage the Windsors partly because the British press has built them up so much with negative reporting.

We still don’t know whether Harry and Meghan will come to the Coronation. There was a story that if Harry does come to the coronation, he won’t have to bow to Camilla! There was an offensive article in The Times about how world leaders love Charles and want to meet him. Biden isn’t going to the coronation and he’s not planning on visiting Charles during a visit to Northern Ireland in April. Charles has a history of taking bribes from despots.

Meanwhile Charles is evicting and firing people. He’s trying to cut staff and end subsidized housing and London apartments for royals. He might evict the Queen’s royal dresser, Angela Kelly, from her grace and favor cottage, which is what she deserves. He did appoint Rose Hanbury’s husband, David Rocksavage, as his lord-in-waiting though!

Kate’s private secretary we heard so much about, Alison Corfield, declined the job. She’s been working for Jamie Oliver for eight years and chose to stay at that position rather than work for Kate. Kate has been without a full time private secretary since last summer. This should have been a huge story but there’s been no follow up since the announcement.

Sign up for our mailing list and get the Top 8 Stories about Kate’s Business Initiatives!

Trump got indicted: Minutes 22:30 to 29:30
In this section recorded Friday we talk about Trump being indicted on over 30 counts of business fraud, Gwyneth Paltrow winning her court case and Samantha Markle’s defamation case being thrown out.

Comments of the Week: Minutes 29:30 to end
Chandra’s comment of the week is from girl_ninja on the story about Prince Harry “torpedoing bridges” with his family.

My comment of the week is from Frippery on the post about Gwyneth Paltrow at court.

Thanks for listening bitches! 

pic.twitter.com/b425o2pKBm

— James Urbaniak (@JamesUrbaniak) March 22, 2023

A few weeks ago, the Mail embraced a new line of attack against Prince Harry: his immigration status in America. To be fair, the British media (particularly the Mail) has been obsessed with the idea that they can somehow get America to deport Harry on a technicality, like the man isn’t white, Christian, rich and married to an American citizen. Harry can afford the best immigration lawyers in California, and I strongly suspect that he’s already years into his American naturalization process. But, the Mail’s latest thing is that Harry wrote about using drugs in Spare, therefore he can and should be deported as a “drug abuser.” The Mail has convinced the Heritage Foundation, an ultra-right-wing American thinktank, to back up their delusions. The Heritage Foundation has now filed a Freedom of Information Act request to get their hands on Harry’s visa application. Like… that’s not the way it works, correct? You can’t just FOIA your way into getting your hands on a random person’s visa application.

Prince Harry has been urged to be ‘totally transparent’ and release details of his US visa application or risk becoming a ‘political pawn’ over his past drug use. US immigration authorities have until April 12 to respond to a Freedom of Information (FoI) request filed by a leading American think-tank which is seeking to determine how the Duke of Sussex was allowed to enter the States after openly admitting using a variety of substances in the past, including marijuana, cocaine and magic mushrooms.

The issue of immigration is expected to become one of the main focuses of the 2024 presidential election, with Republicans attacking President Joe Biden for his lax border controls. And there are fears that Harry’s friendships with prominent Democratic Party figures such as former president Barack Obama and major Democratic donors including Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry could see him become an ‘unwitting pawn in a highly political game’.

Last night, in an exclusive interview with The Mail on Sunday, senior lawyer Samuel Dewey at conservative think-tank the Heritage Foundation, which has filed a 127-page FoI request to see the Duke’s application, said: ‘It is in the public interest to know how Prince Harry answered the drug question. If he has been honest and open about his drug use, and there is no reason to believe he has not been, it could well be that he ticked the “yes” box, in which case he would need a waiver to be granted a visa to be admitted into the States. That means he would have had to be interviewed in person and someone would have had to grant him a waiver. We are simply asking who granted that waiver.’

Mr Dewey added: ‘An admission of drug use doesn’t automatically ban you for ever. There is a waiver process and a lot of people get a waiver on a case-by-case basis. If Prince Harry was given a waiver, who authorised it? Was the correct protocol followed? It’s something the American people deserve to know…There is no suggestion Prince Harry did anything wrong and, if he was granted a waiver, he may not be aware of any political strings that may have been pulled, if indeed they were. But there is a danger he could become an unwitting pawn in an issue which has become a political hot potato.’

Reports in the US have suggested Harry was admitted on an ‘O’ visa – given to people of extraordinary ability.

[From The Daily Mail]

The question on the visa application is about “drug abusers” and “drug addicts.” Not to parse, but they’re trying to get Harry on a technicality, so let’s be technical about it: he’s not a drug abuser, nor is he a drug addict. He has used drugs recreationally in the past, which he wrote about in his bestselling memoir. He has never been arrested on a drug charge. He would not need a waiver, and even if he did, it would still be none of the Heritage Foundation’s f–king business, nor is Harry’s visa application in the public’s interest. If the “immigrants are coming to get you and eat your brains” crowd believes that making Prince Harry some kind of poster boy for their racist public policy, they are going to be shocked by how many conservative Americans think Harry is “the good kind” of immigrant.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Two Fridays ago, Reese Witherspoon and Jim Toth announced their split. Given Reese’s personality and the huge amount of money at stake, I felt pretty certain that they would have only announced their split when they’d already gotten all of their financial and legal ducks in a row. I still believe that, just as I believe that the steady Friday/Saturday announcements have been preplanned, and organized in a particular way. So, two Fridays ago, we got the split announcement. Over the weekend, we learned that Reese has filed for divorce. Two Fridays from now, we’ll probably get a joint statement saying they’ve worked out their divorce agreement.

Reese Witherspoon has initiated divorce proceedings after announcing her split from Jim Toth. According to court documents obtained by PEOPLE, the Academy Award winner, 47, listed “irreconcilable differences” as the reason for their divorce when she filed Saturday in the Circuit Court of Davidson County, Tenn.

Witherspoon’s document lists the filing date as the date of their separation and says the couple has a prenuptial agreement in place. She also asks the court to designate her and Toth as joint custodians of their 10-year-old son, Tennessee James.

Witherspoon and the CAA talent agent announced their divorce in a joint statement last Friday, days before their 12th anniversary.

A source told PEOPLE that the two “really are the best of friends,” adding: “This is such an amicable decision. They are so committed to co-parenting together. They are invested in their whole family and making this as smooth as possible for everyone.”

[From People]

I’m glad Reese has a prenup, although given how much money she’s made in the past twelve years and given they live in a community-property state, I do wonder if Toth is trying to get a much bigger settlement than Reese wants to give. I mean, she sold Hello Sunshine for $900 million AND Toth was part of the production company and he helped her facilitate some of those deals. He wants a slice of that, I’m sure. But yeah, I’ll say it again – this is going to be like Gisele and Tom Brady. I guarantee Reese and Jim are already working with a divorce mediator and probably a private judge. They’ll have this divorce wrapped up in a bow by the end of April, if not sooner.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.

The Telegraph’s Camilla Tominey is frantic. When Prince Harry showed up unexpectedly at a London High Court last week, Tominey could not contain her rage and fury at Harry for daring to stand up to a British tabloid. She barfed out an especially crazy piece about how Harry is a piece of sh-t for calling out the Daily Mail and calling out his father, who hires senior staff straight from the Mail’s editorial board. Tominey even admitted that Harry’s work-trip to London last week “would almost certainly have upstaged the King’s European charm offensive.” Camilla Tominey is such a loser and she defends losers. Well, she had another column in the Telegraph where she latched onto the Daily Mail’s “exclusive” story about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Archewell charity tax filing, wherein they claimed (for tax purposes) that they worked one hour a week on Archewell’s charity arm. Behold, I give you “Harry and Meghan could be a poster couple for workshy Britain.” Sub-head: “But when it comes to self promotion, no one can doubt that the publicity shy couple have put in the hours.” Here’s part of her piece:

We all know that productivity has gone down since the pandemic…But who knew that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would have what it takes to become a poster-couple for workshy Britain, even after they left the UK to become “financially independent” in the United States?

The revelation that they last year carried out just one hour’s work a week for the Archewell Foundation, their non-profit organisation, has naturally been seized upon by the sort of people who revelled in that South Park episode. To be fair to the Duke and Duchess, it is standard practice for directors in the US to list their hours, as they have done on these newly released tax records.

Moreover, we can hardly say that they haven’t been busy since they stepped back as working royals – what with their Oprah Winfrey interview, their six-part Netflix documentary and Prince Harry’s autobiography, Spare.

Indeed, the Duke has also been occupied at the High Court this week, bravely setting aside his security concerns to join a group of well-known faces in suing Associated Newspapers Limited, the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday, for allegedly stealing their private information, which the newspaper group denies.

Clearly, the amount of hard graft that is necessary, supposedly to protect one’s privacy, should not be underestimated.

In Harry and Meghan’s case, it has involved the traducing of a great many people to generate the requisite number of headlines to show just how intrusive the press can apparently be. We must never forgive the sacrifices they have made in the name of global royal reporting.

To be a royal is to be duty-bound in pursuit of the service of others, but Harry and Meghan’s approach has been rather more self-serving than that. For when it comes to self promotion, no one can doubt that the couple have put the hours in.

[From The Telegraph]

Imagine writing this about two people who left the UK in 2020, had their security pulled, were in fear for their lives, and were simply trying to survive for months with the kindness of a relative stranger (Tyler Perry). And in three years, this is what Harry and Meghan have done: welcomed a second child and recovered from a miscarriage; bought a home; won at least two lawsuits against the Mail; produced a wildly successful memoir; produced a wildly successful Netflix docuseries; produced a wildly successful and award-winning podcast; taken a Chief Impact Officer position with a billion-dollar life-coaching business; made a successful investment in a small oat-latte business; built a charity which has already worked on several substantive projects with tangible objectives and raised millions of dollars as well as working with corporate sponsors; organized another successful Invictus Games despite a global pandemic; continued conservation work in Africa; built an actual business and charity from the ground up, and on and on. While I wish we saw more of Harry and Meghan too, what they’ve managed to accomplish in three years is amazing.

Imagine writing all of this snide bullsh-t about “work-shy” Meghan and Harry… and then having nothing to say about Prince William and Kate, who barely do one event a week and are currently on a month-long vacation. I guess someone’s buying it?

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

Stormy Daniels is an American heroine. Whenever I hear her speak or read her interviews, I’m always sort of blown away by her integrity. She was one of only a handful of people adjacent to the entire Trump clownshow who spoke up, did the right thing, sought justice until the end and faced a lot of danger because of it. Now that the grand jury has indicted Donald Trump for multiple counts of white-collar crime, all stemming from the hush-money payments Trump made to Stormy, she’s talking about the years-long journey to get here and how much it cost her and how much it cost the country. Some highlights from her Times interview:

No one is exempt from the law: “Trump is no longer untouchable. A person in power is not exempt from the law. And no matter what your job is, or what your bank account says, you’re held accountable for the things you’ve said and done, and justice is served.”

On Trump’s indictment: “It’s vindication. But it’s bittersweet. He’s done so much worse that he should have been taken down [for] before. I am fully aware of the insanity of it being a porn star. But it’s also poetic; this p–sy grabbed back. It’s monumental and epic, and I’m proud. The other side of it is that it’s going to continue to divide people and bring them up in arms. He’s already gotten away with inciting a riot, and causing death and destruction. Whatever the outcome is, it’s going to cause violence, and there’s going to be injuries and death. There’s the potential for a lot of good to come from this. But either way, a lot of bad is going to come from it, too.”

The violent threats against her: “The number and the intensity is the same as it was the first time around, but this time it’s straight-up violent. The first time it was ‘gold digger’, ‘slut’, ‘whore’, ‘liar’ whatever. And this time it’s ‘I’m gonna murder you’. They’re way more violent and graphic.” Is she frightened? “For the first time ever, yeah. And part of me is hesitant to say that because you don’t want blood in the water. It kind of encourages the sharks.” But, she says, “it’s especially scary because Trump himself is inciting violence and encouraging it.”

Trump’s supporters feel emboldened, post-insurrection. “The country is more divided and people are more desperate. I’m not afraid of him, or of the government, but it just takes one crazy supporter who thinks they’re doing God’s work or protecting democracy.”

She’s not afraid of facing Trump in court. “I’ve seen him naked. There’s no way he could be scarier with his clothes on. And after what Avenatti put me through last January I’m not as scared.” (She was cross-examined for hours in court by her former lawyer Michael Avenatti, who was representing himself on charges of cheating her out of hundreds of thousands of dollars in book proceeds; he was jailed for four years.)

She wants to testify against Trump: “I hope that I do have to. I’m not afraid, I have nothing to hide, and I look forward to telling everybody what I know.”

How she sees the NDA & the hush money: “If I hadn’t signed the NDA, and I hadn’t taken the hush money, then he didn’t do anything wrong. He banged another hot chick — which he’s kind of known for doing — and nothing about that is illegal. Signing the NDA and taking the hush money was actually the greatest gift that I gave. Because it’s what made it illegal, which made it possible to actually go after him.”

She couldn’t be shamed: “Can you think of a single time that ‘porn star’ wasn’t put in front of my name? Imagine if I did something else — would ‘school teacher Stormy Daniels, or ‘accountant Stormy Daniels’ have ever been printed? No, it was salacious and used against me and used to ruin my credibility.” But, she says, it also went in her favour. “Because I couldn’t be shamed. I couldn’t be threatened with nude photos — they are everywhere.”

She doesn’t regret speaking up: “Sometimes in the moment, I’m like, ‘What the f*** was I thinking? Was it worth it?’ But I wouldn’t be able to look at myself in the mirror. If I could go back far enough to where I did go to the hotel that night, I wouldn’t have done that. But . . . coming forward, I would do the same thing again. Because it was the right thing to do.”

[From The Times]

See what I mean? I’m actually tearing up because she’s an amazing person. The fact that she was brave enough to stand up to him, to see this to the end, to be the one to take him down… it’s beautiful and poetic. I’m very worried about her safety too – I hope she’s got good people around her, and I hope she stays in secure locations, because she’s right – the people who support Trump are absolutely unhinged.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

When I watched the first season of Wednesday, I was blown away by Jenna Ortega’s performance and I genuinely thought “wow, where did she come from?” I truly didn’t realize that Ortega has been acting since she was a little kid and that I’d already seen her a dozen times before then. Part of that is because Wednesday Addams is such a specific character and look, but there is a shapeshifter element to Ortega, plus she has an “every woman” quality which… is going to give her a lot of career longevity. Jenna is promoting Scream VI, her second time in the (rebooted) franchise. She covers Elle and this is very much a “star is born” introductory piece given the overwhelming success of Wednesday. Some highlights:

Music is her preferred language. “I listen to absolutely anything. I know everyone says that but sometimes I’ll listen to stuff that I don’t even think is good because I just need to understand.”

She works constantly: “From ‘Action’ to ‘Cut’ is the only reason I like my job,” she says. Between those two directions, she says, “It’s like I pass the f–k out.”

The ‘Scream’ franchise: “I have so much respect for the franchise that I didn’t want to do it wrong. I wanted to do it justice, but I also didn’t want to be ripping anybody off.” In this movie, for the first time, Neve Campbell won’t reprise her role as Sidney Prescott. Campbell walked away, she told Variety, due to a salary negotiation that she felt undervalued her contribution as star of the 25-year-old franchise. “It was really unfortunate,” Ortega says of Campbell’s absence, “especially because Neve is the coolest, sweetest, most talented lady. The franchise wouldn’t be what it is without her.”

Ortega is naturally introverted. “If I want to make films so badly and I want to play characters or I want to direct and write film scores, I could do that all in my backyard. I don’t have to be doing it on a grand scale like this. But ultimately, all the other side stuff that comes with my job, sometimes it makes it feel like it’s almost not worth it. I don’t want to feel like a walking billboard, which is a really, really scary feeling because then you feel less and less in control of your life. I feel like I’ve seen a lot of people or know people who have succumbed to that pressure. I don’t want to belong to anyone or anything.”

Seeing ‘Man on Fire’ with Denzel & Dakota Fanning changed her life: “I was happy sitting and dissecting that movie over and over again. I couldn’t fathom how someone so young could do something that would scare me so aggressively. But I also loved the way that it made me feel. I decided that’s what I was passionate about.”

Her mom would drive her to auditions from northern California: “To do that four to five days a week and still raise your other children was absurd. My family made a lot of sacrifices.” The prospect of building her career was exciting—and daunting. “It was the guilt of, Okay, well if this doesn’t work out, I’m screwed, I guess. I just put my entire family through this because that’s a lot of money and time that we did not have.”

Is she really this dark horror/Wednesday person? “I feel very conflicted in what I’m interested in or what I’m passionate about, because there’s apart of me that always feels like the girl in the Coachella Valley.”

She doesn’t like traditional rom-coms: “I hate being googoogaga over a boy. I think it’s secretly a pride thing. It’s a problem with a lot of female characters, that a lot of them are guy oriented or what they’re expressing or emoting is based on a guy’s position and a guy’s story.”

She’s not dating: “Maybe I am too obsessed with my work, but the idea of relationships stresses me out. And also being that vulnerable with someone and having to get to know someone that well and having someone see you for all that you are… My brain knows that I don’t need to think about that right now.”

[From Elle]

She comes across as charismatically neurotic, if you know what I mean? Like, she’s not burdened by deep neurosis, she’s just a young working-class woman who buries herself in work so she doesn’t have to figure out her own sh-t. She’s 20 – that sounds completely normal, especially given her talent and given “hustle culture.” I’m actually surprised she hasn’t done “more” already with her sudden fame from Wednesday, and that probably speaks to her inherent discomfort with the trappings of the industry. She just seems like “I don’t want to f–k this up, I want to keep working.” She will.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by ELLE Magazine (@elleusa)

Cover & IG courtesy of Elle.