Here are more photos from Colonel Keen’s Big Shamrock Adventure, also known as the Prince and Princess of Wales’s trip to the Irish Guards’ base for St. Patrick’s Day – we covered some of this on Friday. This year’s St. Patrick’s Day event was slightly different because Kate is now the honorary colonel of the Irish Guards, a position she’s taken over from William. It’s part of the shift now that King Charles is on the throne – William had to take over his father’s old position with the Welsh Guards, so Kate replaced William, etc. That’s why both William and Kate gave speeches on Friday, it was “the changing of the guards,” only the guards are two lazy 40-year-olds who barely do anything. Here’s the video of their speeches:

While Colonel Keen’s speech-making has improved, she really needs to review her speeches and try to memorize whole sentences before giving a speech. She has to look down, on average, at least three times per sentence. And that was a short f–king speech, my God.

After the speeches, William and Kate joined the Irish Guards for a pint of Guinness and a laugh. Also: the two tweets below went viral and most of the people commenting seemed confused about the shamrocks, especially Kate’s giant shamrock corsage. Here’s the thing – that’s what is given to her by the Irish Guards. When she arrived, she was only wearing that delicate gold shamrock brooch. It’s some Irish Guard’s job to present her with a corsage of shamrocks and I believe the guard has to pin it to her chest. My point is that Kate would obviously not choose to stick an entire shamrock salad on her boob. Nor would William choose to nail a huge garden to his hat. This is the tradition of the Irish Guards, although the big leaf thing underneath the shamrocks seems to be new.

I’d honestly rather u just called me a slur pic.twitter.com/eAz6gwur4c

— Róisín Lanigan (@rosielanners) March 17, 2023

this has radicalised me pic.twitter.com/i1CGz25mHn

— Sorcha Ní Nia (@Luiseach) March 17, 2023

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

I have to apologize to Law Roach – after I read his interview with Vogue last week, I thought he announced his retirement from styling because he was burned out and “the well was dry.” Now that I’ve read his retirement interview in The Cut, I completely understand what was going on and it’s a wonder he managed to be an A-list celebrity stylist for so long, especially given the daily racist microaggressions, the disrespect, the personal politics and the outright racism within the fashion industry. Instead of burning the whole f–king industry down – which would be his right – he simply quit for his own mental health. I hope he finds an amazing job where he’ll be treated with respect and love. Anyway, he explains his exact breaking point – dressing one particular client for the Vanity Fair Oscar party – and it’s already turned into a huge blind item. You can read his full piece in The Cut here. Some highlights:

The lead up to the VF Oscar Party was his breaking point:

“You know, last week, for us, Oscars Week and building up to the Vanity Fair Oscar Party, is some of the most stressful times in the world. And I’ve always been a stylist that did multiple clients, so I’m trying to prepare for multiple clients that week. And I had a lot of pressure because of Meg [Thee Stallion] — it was her first time coming back and anybody seeing her since the trial. And so that was a lot of pressure, you know, because I wanted to make her feel secure and comfortable and make her feel and look as perfect as possible so that she can have the strength to do what she had to do.

So that morning I got a call from one of my clients, and it was her, her publicist, and somebody from a brand that I’m supposed to do project with, and I found myself on the phone with these three women, and I felt like I was defending myself because the one woman from the brand was like, “Oh, he’s not communicating, and you’re not gonna have a dress,” and all these things. And it was just a lot of things that were not true.

And that’s how we lose clients as stylists — somebody from a brand will say something to the publicist, then the publicist will say something to the client, and then, it’s this thing. I thought I had a really strong relationship with this client, and I thought that she knew that my goal always is to protect my clients.

And at that moment I just didn’t feel like I was being protected, because there’s no one who can ever say that they’ve worked with me that I didn’t pull my whole heart and soul into them or that I left them hanging and they didn’t have a dress. It’s never happened. No one can ever say that about me. And I was like, “Okay, yeah. Whatever, we’ll do whatever. We’ll work it out.” And then I got off the phone, and I was like, I’m literally depleted from the day before. I’m an extreme empath, and I give everything to the point, after that night, I could barely finish a sentence. I had given so much.

That call was very early the very next day after [the Oscars]. And the client was one of the clients that I dressed that night. And it’s just like, I got off the phone and I felt like I’m still fighting. I’m still fighting. I’m still defending myself. And one thing people who work with me also know is I don’t like to be managed or feel like I’m being chastised. You know what I mean? That just doesn’t work for me or my personality and especially when I feel like I’m giving so much. And I’m doing the job, I’m getting paid to do the job, and that’s the real of it. But the care and the love that goes in me to do my job, I just feel like I should sometimes be a little bit more taken care of, if that makes sense.

Why he said he’s tired of the lies and false narratives.

“I end up having a real connection with the client, and it very quickly becomes a thing where they trust me and understand me and we have this relationship. And that’s not the way it goes, especially in Hollywood. You have the gatekeepers, right? You have the person that’s in between you and the client, and all the scheduling, and you have to talk to this person to talk to this person. And I think what happens is a lot of times, they become intimidated by the relationships I’m able to have with the clients personally. And so what happens is it becomes a thing like I just don’t hear from the client anymore. Or I’m booked for jobs and then, all of a sudden, I’m released.

And then I’ll bump into the talent at a party or an event or whatever, and I’m always like, “Hey, what happened? I haven’t heard from you.” And they’re like, “Oh, yeah. Yeah, you know, I know my team reached out a few times, but you were busy. Our schedules didn’t match up.” Or, you know, “The whoever said that you were way too expensive,” and it’s always that.

It’s always the narrative of, “Oh, he’s never gonna treat you the way he treats Zendaya. You’re gonna get what she doesn’t want.” And that’s not true, because none of my clients ever look the same. Like, I don’t use edits. I don’t walk around with suitcases of edits that Zendaya didn’t want and offer ’em to other people. It’s always those narratives, and I’ve lost a bunch of clients that I really care for and really wanted to work with because of the gatekeepers.

[From The Cut]

He also addressed whether he was the one who told Priyanka Chopra that she wasn’t “sample size,” and he said that wasn’t the conversation and that he works with clients of all sizes (which is true). But the specific conversation has led people to believe that maybe Priyanka was the one on the call the day after the Oscars, the breaking-point call where he decided he was done. For the VF party, he styled Kerry Washington, Hunter Schafer, Hailee Steinfeld, Megan Thee Stallion and Eve Jobs. Law says he dressed a sixth woman in Galliano, but her dress ripped before she got to the party. So… who was the woman on the call? It doesn’t sound like it was Megan. I honestly don’t think Hunter is famous enough to pull that? Neither is Eve Jobs. It doesn’t sound like Kerry. People think it was Priyanka, just because… Law didn’t name her as one of his final clients, and he didn’t post her photos on his social (and Priyanka attended the VF party). I will hate it if Priyanka caused him to retire.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

On Saturday, “C U Next Tuesday” was trending and I honestly thought it was just some random niche celebrity thing, because Elon Musk’s Twitter is unspeakably broken. But no, as it turns out, people were being hilarious about Ol’ Diaper Don, Donald Trump. During the Dark Brandon administration, I’ve gotten used to tuning out the daily political conversations, as I’ve said before. I trust Joe Biden, and I love the fact that I’m not spending every single day in a state of terror because of what the man in the White House might do on Vladimir Putin’s orders. Well, over the past year, there’s been a lot of movement in multiple investigations and prosecutions of Trump associates and Trump businesses. The investigations in New York have gotten especially heated, so much so that Donald Trump believes that he’s about to arrested. On Tuesday. Thus, C U Next Tuesday.

With a Manhattan grand jury indictment likely but its timing unclear, Donald J. Trump sought to rally supporters to his side, declaring that he would be arrested on Tuesday and calling for protests.

Mr. Trump made the declaration on his site, Truth Social, at 7:26 a.m. on Saturday in a post that ended with, “THE FAR & AWAY LEADING REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE AND FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WILL BE ARRESTED ON TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!”

Two hours later, a spokesman issued a statement saying that Mr. Trump had not written his post with direct knowledge of the timing of any arrest, adding, “President Trump is rightfully highlighting his innocence and the weaponization of our injustice system.”

But Mr. Trump’s social media post had immediate impact: Within hours, Speaker Kevin McCarthy, one of the most powerful people in federal government and who partly owes his position to Mr. Trump, posted on Twitter that he was calling for investigations into whether federal funds were being used for “politically motivated prosecutions,” a thinly veiled threat to Manhattan’s district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg.

Prosecutors working for Mr. Bragg have signaled that an indictment of Mr. Trump could be imminent. But they have not told Mr. Trump’s lawyers when the charges… would be sought or an arrest made, people with knowledge of the matter said. At least one more witness is expected to testify in front of the grand jury, which could delay an indictment, the people said. One of the people said that even if the grand jury were to vote to indict the former president on Monday, a Tuesday surrender was unlikely, given the need to arrange timing, travel and other logistics.

The statement from Mr. Trump’s spokesman did not explain how he had landed on Tuesday as an arrest date. One person with knowledge of the matter said that Mr. Trump’s advisers had guessed that it could happen around then, and that someone might have relayed that to the former president.

[From The NY Times]

It’s the Lucy-with-the-football thing from Peanuts. How many times are we going to get our hopes up that Diaper Don will be handcuffed and dragged to prison? HOW MANY TIMES? I honestly believe that *if* there’s an arrest warrant issued, it won’t happen on Tuesday and the New York DA absolutely would not be able to arrange a surrender that quickly. My argument would be: why does Trump need to surrender anyway? Why not send people down to his Florida compound and hog-tie him and ship him back to New York? Anyway, I’m hopeful yet not getting my hopes up. C U Next Tuesday!

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Keanu Reeves cuddles a pile of puppies on the Tonight Show. [Just Jared]
Pajiba is doing a Ted Lasso podcast. [Pajiba]
A dog named Tofu had to be rescued from her ocean swim! [Dlisted]
More of Keira Knightley’s Boston Strangler promotional fashion. [LaineyGossip]
Hugh Grant & Drew Barrymore also hate each other. [Seriously OMG]
Nick Cave will have an exhibit at the Guggenheim. [OMG Blog]
If you told me this (new) photo of Naomi Campbell was twenty years old, I would believe you. That’s a compliment to Naomi but also a WTF to McQueen. [GFY]
Who was the best dressed at the VF Oscar party? For me, Sophie Turner. [RCFA]
Utah is banning abortion clinics. [Jezebel]
Iggy Azalea is still around. [Egotastic]
Book recommendations if you’re into fantasy romance. [Buzzfeed]
Balmain wants men to have buttons and sparkles. [Tom & Lorenzo]
Bono was “too macho” to admit that he loved ABBA. [Towleroad]

It feels like people are only realizing it now, that they’re going to watch King Charles’s mistress-turned-wife be crowned alongside him at the May coronation. We knew it as an abstraction, like “oh, yeah, obviously that’s going to happen.” But over the past month, Queen Consort Camilla has been making it clear that she “won,” that the coronation is HER victory lap, that everything is going to be all about Camilla. It feels like that energy is being met with widespread revulsion too, the fact that Charles is so weak that he’d allow Camilla to take over his coronation this way. Tom Sykes – Daily Beast’s Royalist columnist – has a new piece about all of this, with some interesting insider quotes. Some highlights:

Camilla’s victory lap: The decision to give Camilla Parker Bowles’ grandchildren official roles in the coronation represents a “victory lap” for her and Charles, a friend of hers has told The Daily Beast. The move will cement her family in a powerful and influential position at the heart of the British establishment. “Camilla never asked for any of this,” one friend of hers told The Daily Beast, “But Charles always wanted her to be queen. Lots of people doubted he could pull it off but he has, and including her family in the coronation is something of a victory lap for both of them.”

Prince William wasn’t consulted on this: However the news that her five grandchildren are to be given a starring role at the coronation, holding a golden canopy over Her Majesty during literally the most sacred part of the ceremony—the anointing of the royal personage with holy oil—came as a surprise to Prince William, who does not have a close relationship with Camilla’s children, journalist Tom Parker Bowles and gallerist Laura Lopes, a friend of his said. Prince Harry is not believed to have been consulted about any aspects of the coronation given his estrangement from his family.

The significance of Camilla’s grandchildren having roles: The idea that the queen’s five grandchildren would have a prominent and official role at the coronation would have been laughed out of court two years ago, simply because none of them have royal ancestry or are expected to perform public service in their adult life, and a coronation is a state event, not a family one. To include them, therefore, is tantamount to announcing them as members of the inner circle; it will elevate them to an entirely new public and social status as Official Royal Grandkids. The corresponding exclusion of the Sussex kids will also, of course, send the opposite message to the Sussex grandchildren, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, who will be passing the Parker Bowles clan on the down escalator.

Camilla’s grandkids: As of May 7, this new famous five will be among the most eligible teenagers in the land. Socially ambitious parents will be well aware that a friendship with them will guarantee their children a VIP pass into the privileged center of British society. It is a leg-up like no other and an extraordinary decision by Camilla and Charles, given that it was only in February last year that the palace finally gave up the line that Camilla would never be queen. Their inclusion is testament to the huge power and authority that Camilla has consolidated since the announcement by the late Queen Elizabeth that she wished Camilla to be known as Queen Consort when Charles ascended the throne.

Charles’s cynicism: The pledge that Camilla would only ever be known as Princess Consort was made on Charles’ behalf to assuage public anger over Charles marrying the woman who Diana blamed for making their marriage impossible. It was never intended to be honored. It was a straightforward, cynical deception aimed at buying time while a team of spinners worked on the long game: improving Camilla’s image and acceptability to the British public. The job is now done, and not only is Camilla queen, but her grandchildren are being publicly recognized as royals in all but name.

William & Kate’s surprise: The move by Charles to include Camilla’s grandchildren in May’s ceremony—Palace spinners have been briefing that it shows Charles is a champion of the “blended family”—has surprised friends of William and Kate. One friend of William and Harry’s told The Daily Beast: “It was unexpected. If you’re meeting William and Kate for the first time, it’s best not to say you’re a friend of Tom or Laura’s. It’s not that they actively dislike them, it’s just that they don’t really know them and are not close to them. Also, all their friends are journalists or in the media in some way because of their lives as writers and critics. It’s a slightly louche scene and it makes [William and Kate] nervous.”

How Tom Parker Bowles feels: A friend of Tom’s said, “He didn’t exactly meet the boys [Harry and William] under the best conditions and they were never mates.” Asked if they were surprised Tom wanted his children to have a pivotal role in the ceremony, the friend said, “Tom is very savvy, and I think he would see it as an amazing opportunity for them. But ultimately he would have left it up to them. I assume they have said they want to do it.”

Christopher Andersen’s take: “It seems like an obvious slap in the face to Harry and William—both of them, we now know for certain, begged Charles not to marry Camilla. There is this gnawing sense that, were it not for Camilla, Diana is the one we would see being crowned queen on May 6. The message it sends is, ‘We really don’t need you and your family, Harry. Camilla’s will fill in the void just fine.’ As for the whole ‘Aren’t we a modern blended family?’ bit, it seems to me that that is little more than a kind of disingenuous New Age cover for Camilla getting her way—yet again.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Sykes overemphasizes the point about “Parker-Bowles in, Sussexes out” when it comes to the royal grandkids, although Sykes claims that Charles “had little choice but to accept Sussex demands that their children got their princely titles.” The Sussex didn’t demand, they acknowledged the reality of the Letters Patent, and they called Charles’s bluff publicly. It’s also clear that the inclusion of Camilla’s grandchildren is MEANT as a slap in the face to both Prince Harry and Prince William. This is Camilla’s victory over her two stepsons as well, her need to lord it over Diana’s sons and completely write Diana out of the narrative as thoroughly as possible. It’s funny that William and Kate’s “friends” are suddenly worried about the optics of all of this and that the louche Parker-Bowles crew is now part of the royal establishment. Hilariously, William is part of the coronation committee too – guess he missed the meeting where it was decided that Camilla’s grandchildren would get precedence over Charles’s grandchildren. Whoopsie!

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Up until this year, Prince William has been the honorary colonel of the Irish Guards and Kate has just been his plus-one at the annual St. Patrick’s Day celebration. Kate’s role was more defined than that, honestly – there was a lengthy history to a royal woman passing out shamrocks on the holiday, a history which was broken when Kate simply didn’t feel like working one year. In any case, now that Kate is Princess of Wales, her husband had to take over an honorary position with the Welsh Guards and so Kate was given the Irish Guards position. Today, Kate and William traveled to Aldershot to do the shamrocks-and-Guinness thing. This is Kate’s first-ever St. Patrick’s Day as Princess of Wales AND Colonel of the Irish Guards.

For the special day, I’m glad that she didn’t repeat one of her many green coat dresses. She wore a new one – a turquoise-y Catherine Walker coat and matching Jane Taylor fascinator. She also wore the traditional shamrock brooch (a Cartier piece) from the Royal Collection. I have no doubt why she chose this design – she loves buttons and she loves a military-style shoulder on her coats and jackets. She loves some button-slathered Colonel Keen Reporting For Duty energy. It is what it is, and this is her “real” style. This is what she loves.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Getty.

There’s a new “royal book” coming out called Gilded Youth, written by Tom Quinn. Quinn bills himself as some kind of royal expert, mostly to American tabloids. From what I’ve seen, Quinn has little to no insider information, but he’s also not a deranged lunatic frothing at the mouth about Meghan. He just sort of goes by vibes. Well, in Gilded Youth, Quinn writes about how Kate is much different than Princess Diana, and how Meghan hated being controlled by the palace.

Kate’s parenting style: Kate is happy for her children, Prince George, nine, Princess Charlotte, seven, and Prince Louis, four, to have the ‘luxuries and privileges of a royal upbringing’. He adds: ‘Kate makes no effort – unlike Diana – to bring the children down to earth, because she doesn’t want them to have a “normal” childhood in the sense that Diana wanted it for William and Harry.’ Kate feels her late mother-in-law’s modern style created issues, ‘most especially with Harry’ by seemingly adding to his ‘dissatisfaction with his royal role’.

Diana loved shrugging off her aristocratic background: The book also quotes a former member of the palace staff, who said: ‘Diana enjoyed slumming it and was in many ways downwardly mobile – she wanted to escape her aristocratic childhood. Kate wants to escape her middle-class childhood. She dislikes burgers and chips and wouldn’t dream of taking her children to McDonald’s, and she doesn’t rock the boat when the vast weight of traditional royal pursuits bears down on her children.’

Meghan was disappointed by royal life: Writing in his new book Gilded Youth, royal biographer Tom Quinn explained he had spoken to a ‘Kensington Palace staffer who remembered Meghan well’, who said she was stunned by the reality of life in the family. The insider claimed: ‘I don’t think in the whole of history there was ever a greater divide between what someone expected when they became a member of the royal family and what they discovered it was really like. She was a global superstar but was being told what she could and could not do, what she could and could not say. She hated it.’

[From The Daily Mail]

I don’t know, I think this all sounds vaguely accurate? I think Meghan was shocked with the amount of control the palace wanted to exert over her life – all while she was paying for everything while she was in the UK – and she was shocked that no one within the royal institution would protect her or treat her fairly. That’s not a character flaw on Meghan’s part, by the way. And yes, Diana was a disruptor who wanted to expose her sons to the real world and enable them to be more than useless toffs in a colonialist institution. Of course Kate doesn’t want to cosplay THAT. Kate loves the institution. She hates being middle class. She would never raise her children as middle-class kids.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

It’s honestly funny and terrifying to watch as the British media decides, en masse, to completely ignore a big story involving Prince Harry. For the better part of seven years, Harry’s every utterance, his every move, his every thought is breathlessly reported and misreported in every British tabloid. But when it comes to Harry’s multiple lawsuits against the British tabloids, suddenly the British media has a code of omertà. Well, Harry is part of a class-action lawsuit against the Daily Mirror (or Mirror Group Newspapers, MGN) for their years of phone-hacking back from 1996 through 2011. According to Byline Times, Harry is scheduled to give direct, in-person testimony in the case:

The Duke of Sussex is set to appear before Judge Mr Timothy Fancourt to give his evidence – and face cross-examination by lawyers for Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) – as one of five test cases alleging extensive illegal snooping by its three national tabloids between 1996 and 2011. It covers Morgan’s often controversial editorship of the Daily Mirror between 1995 and 2004 – and his period as de facto ‘editor-in-chief’ of the Sunday Mirror from April 2001 – until his high-profile sacking for being “hoaxed” into publishing fake photos of British troops supposedly abusing Iraqi prisoners of war.

Justice Fancourt, at a preliminary hearing on 8 March, put the Duke’s case in a small group among around 120 current Claimants who would “not settle without having come to court and had their trial and said what they want to,” having seen MGN vacate five previous trial dates by paying out large settlements on the proverbial steps of the court.

Barrister David Sherborne also confirmed that the arrangement for video-link evidence of witnesses in the seven-week trial starting 9 May “certainly doesn’t involve any of the individual claimants,” seemingly assuring a live public appearance from the Duke.

Full details of Harry’s personal case against MGN – a subsidiary of Reach plc and publisher of the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Sunday People – have yet to enter public record, but they are understood to claim he was targeted from the age of 12 if not earlier.

[From Byline Times]

“…Seemingly assuring a live public appearance from the Duke.” Meaning, Harry will actually have to go to London in May to give testimony and sit for cross-examination?? No wonder his father is evicting him from Frogmore Cottage – King Charles must be utterly panicked and doing the most to keep Harry away from London, away from giving evidence, away from hurting Charles’s partners in crime. It would not surprise me at all if we start seeing a lot of threatening and unhinged stories about Harry’s “security” in next two months.

Byline Times also says that Harry is prepared to talk about how his voicemail messages and phone records were tapped and intercepted as a teenager and young man in his early 20s. Per Byline: “It is also understood the Duke will say MGN journalists unlawfully intercepted voicemails he shared with, among others, his father Prince – now King – Charles, late mother Princess Diana, brother Prince William, ex-girlfriend Chelsy Davy, and friend Caroline Flack, whose suicide in 2020 was partly attributed to her struggles with tabloid Press intrusion.”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Piers Morgan’s social media.

Ben Affleck covers the latest issue of the Hollywood Reporter. This interview is SO LONG. Ben excels at these kinds of long-form interviews though – if anything, he’s better when he has unlimited space to expound, catch himself, backtrack, and smother you with his wit and humor. It’s when he’s trying to be pithy that he gets in trouble. Affleck is currently promoting Air, which he produced, directed and stars in. The film is all about Nike creating the Air Jordans, an entire shoe line based around Michael Jordan. He talks about the film at length as well as Artists Equity, the production firm he set up with Matt Damon and other artists. He talks about everything else too – his wife Jennifer Lopez, his kids, the DC franchises, Batman, Instagram, his grim appearance at the Grammys, the pandemic, the business of streaming, everything. It’s an excellent read, honestly. Go here for the full piece. Some highlights (there are too many, honestly, so I really had to trim this down):

He’s getting over Covid: “I’d had it a couple of times and been asymptomatic, and so I got kind of cavalier and a little bit like, “Wow, COVID doesn’t really actually affect me. I’m one of those people.” And then I just got annihilated. I had the no-energy COVID, where it was too much work to pick up the phone to play Octordle…It’s just Wordle with more words. Don’t be impressed, it’s not harder. I was invited to join a cool little red velvet rope celebrity Wordle group. Matt [Damon]’s one of them. Jason Bateman and Bradley [Cooper], and … Actually, the first rule of Wordle is don’t talk about Wordle.”

Why he started Artists Equity: “One of the reasons I did it was, I’m divorced. I share custody. I don’t want to go to Austin and New Orleans and Georgia anymore and not see my kids. It just doesn’t work. These years are too important. If I miss them, I’ll regret it for the rest of my life. And then I thought, “OK, well, if I’m in Los Angeles and I’m in an office and I’m doing this work, I can step out for the basketball game or the jazz performance.” So I protect those things.

The movie business is changing: “Succession is on. Ozark. Narcos. Game of Thrones. You’re not competing with [1980s crime drama] Simon & Simon on an 11-inch black-and-white TV. There’s really beautiful stuff being made. My daughter is 17. She lives her life largely in opposition to the work her parents have spent their lives dedicated to, where she’ll say things like, “I’m not sure film is really … Do you think it’s a genuine art form?” I like the fact that she has this silver rapier tongue.”

He wasn’t fulfilled on the Justice League crap: “The Justice League experience, the fact that those stories became somewhat repetitive to me and less interesting….You could teach a seminar on all the reasons why this is how not to do it. Ranging from production to bad decisions to horrible personal tragedy, and just ending with the most monstrous taste in my mouth. The genius, and the silver lining, is that Zack Snyder eventually went to AT&T and was like, “Look, I can get you four hours of content.” And it’s principally just all the slow motion that he shot in black-and-white. And one day of shooting with me and him. He was like, “Do you want to come shoot in my backyard?” I was like, “I think there are unions, Zack. I think we have to make a deal.” But I went and did it. And now [Zack Snyder’s Justice League] is my highest-rated movie on IMDb.

The mess with Joss Whedon: “I was going to direct a Batman, and [Justice League] made me go, “I’m out. I never want to do any of this again. I’m not suited.” That was the worst experience I’ve ever seen in a business which is full of some sh-tty experiences. It broke my heart. There was an idea of someone [Joss Whedon] coming in, like, “I’ll rescue you and we’ll do 60 days of shooting and I’ll write a whole thing around what you have. I’ve got the secret.” And it wasn’t the secret. That was hard. And I started to drink too much. I was back at the hotel in London, it was either that or jump out the window. And I just thought, “This isn’t the life I want. My kids aren’t here. I’m miserable.”

How he knows Michael Jordan: “I periodically play cards sometimes with Michael, and we’ve got mutual friends, and … None of it sounds good, OK? And it’s not like he’d be like, “Oh yeah, Ben’s my boy.” (Imitating Jordan’s voice.) He’d be like, “Yeah, I know him.” Jordan is — he’s a hero to me. And I know how important and meaningful a figure he is, in particular in the African American community. If you’re going to f-ck around with talking about Michael Jordan, do it respectfully. Nobody’s asking you to do a hagiography, but get it f–king right. I’ve never known anybody with that kind of charisma and power who walks into a room and it just reverberates.

He hates golf: “I don’t golf myself. Because I just feel like it eats people’s lives up. I look at golf like meth. They have better teeth, but it doesn’t seem like people ever come out of that. Once they start golfing, you just don’t ever see them again.

How he got Viola Davis to play MJ’s mom: “Begging. I’m sure it was because I said, “Michael Jordan wants you to play his mom.” It certainly wasn’t “Ben Affleck wants you to be in his movie.” She’s not comfortable with sycophancy or obsequiousness. You can tell it chafes her. I just treated her with respect, which is to say, “When you’re ready, let me know. We’ll be here.”

J.Lo’s contributions to ‘Air’: “Oh my God, she’s brilliant. She is incredibly knowledgeable about the way fashion evolves through the culture as a confluence of music, sports, entertainment and dance. She helped me in talking about the way in which a part of the reason why Jordans [the shoes] were so meaningful is because culture and style in America is 90 percent driven by Black culture. Black culture has historically pioneered music, dance, fashion, and it’s then been stolen, appropriated, remarketed as Elvis or whatever. And in this case, [Nike], a white-run corporate entity, was starting to do business with African American athletes in an identity affiliation sales thing. They were really taking value from what Michael Jordan represents and who he is. I don’t think the meaning can be overstated. They’re going to switch from “Hey, guys, we are a nice shoe,” to “If Mike has it, you want it.”

On Instagram: “My wife’s a genius at that. I don’t know if there’s anybody who understands Instagram better than her. In fact, she gave me a talk this morning before this interview. She thinks that because of experiences that I’ve had, I’ve become very guarded. And she’s right. I view these things as land mines, where if you say one wrong thing, your career might be over. I had a really painful experience where I did an interview where I was really vulnerable, and the entire pickup was something that was not only not right, it was actually the opposite of what I meant.

The Howard Stern interview where he talked about drinking & Jennifer Garner: “The idea that I was blaming my wife for my drinking. To be clear, my behavior is my responsibility entirely. The point that I was trying to make was a sad one. Anyone who’s been through divorce makes that calculus of, How much do we try? We loved each other. We care about each other. We have respect for each other. I was trying to say, “Hey, look, I was drinking too much, and the less happy you become, whether it’s your job, your marriage, it’s just that as your life becomes more difficult, if you’re doing things to fill a hole that aren’t healthy, you’re going to start doing more of those things.” I think I was pretty articulate about that. It was the New York Post who deliberately mischaracterized it in order to make it clickbait, and everyone else then picked it up, and it didn’t matter how many times I said, “I do not feel this way. I’m telling you, I don’t blame my ex-wife for my alcoholism.”

J.Lo helps him: “But anyway, so [Jennifer Lopez] tells me today, “Relax, be yourself. Have fun. You’re actually a fun guy who is real and genuine and you just seem so serious.” Do I seem serious? But as in many things, she’s really right. And she loves me. She’s looking out for me. She’s trying to help me. So it’s like, maybe I ought to f–king listen to her.

His big night at the Grammys: “I had a good time at the Grammys. My wife was going, and I thought, “Well, there’ll be good music. It might be fun.” At movie award shows, it’s speeches and, like, sound-mixing webinars. But I thought this would be fun. I saw [Grammy host Trevor Noah approach] and I was like, “Oh, God.” They were framing us in this shot, but I didn’t know they were rolling. I leaned into her and I was like, “As soon they start rolling, I’m going to slide away from you and leave you sitting next to Trevor.” She goes, “You better f–king not leave.” That’s a husband-and-wife thing. I mean, some of it is, I’m like, “All right, who is this act?” Like, I don’t keep up. My wife does, obviously. And yeah, it is your wife’s work event. And I’ve gone to events and been pissed off. I’ve gone and been bored. I’ve gone to award shows and been drunk, a bunch. Nobody ever once said I’m drunk. [But at the Grammys] they were like, “He’s drunk.” And I thought, that’s interesting. That raises a whole other thing about whether or not it’s wise to acknowledge addiction because there’s a lot of compassion, but there is still a tremendous stigma, which is often quite inhibiting. I do think it disincentivizes people from making their lives better.

[From THR]

I believe him about the Jen Garner stuff, that the context was that he was miserable for many reasons and his drinking was getting worse and his marriage situation wasn’t making it any easier. I believe him that he doesn’t “blame” Garner for his alcoholism, and I think his point is that the failure of his first marriage (generally speaking) contributed to his drinking. I also believe him about the Grammys – he went because he thought it would be a fun night out with his wife and he became a misery meme. Anyway, I love that Violet is always on his ass about his movies and I love how much he respects J.Lo. That’s all.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Hollywood Reporter (@hollywoodreporter)

Cover & IG courtesy of THR.

What’s the Winston Churchill quote? “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” So it was with that Brian Cox story in the Daily Mail. I strongly suspect that Haute Living New York sent out a promotional email with a few excerpted quotes from their cover interview with Cox, and the Mail decided to create this utterly ridiculous narrative that Cox spent the entire bitching about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I’ve read a lot of Cox’s interviews in recent years – this dude is a socialist and he hates the monarchy and he wants Scotland to vote for independence. I simply didn’t believe that he would save his biggest criticisms for the Sussexes. And he really didn’t. Within Haute Living’s story, it’s clear that Cox is rambling on about economics, politics, the British monarchy and more and there is a larger context. Some highlights from the interview:

On his Succession patriarch Logan Roy: “Logan’s not that bad. I actually have a lot of sympathy for Logan. [Logan] comes out onto the street and he just sees how run down New York is. There are rats everywhere, and a guy eating his supper out of a tin can. Logan sees that and goes, How did this happen? How did we get to this state? It’s a parallel to his own life: he has these awful, entitled children, but he himself does not have that entitlement; he has empathy that his children do not. He believes that everything he’s done, he’s earned … and he’s not wrong. It’s always said that a cynic is a disillusioned romantic. I think that’s true and also the root of who Logan was as a young man. He sees that life doesn’t operate the way one would like it to, but in a more mercenary way. His children, however, don’t realize that if they don’t work, that if they don’t commit some kind of integrity to what they do, that they can’t succeed, and he can’t do anything about that. It’s just the nature of the beast.”

Pretty much an atheist: “I think one of the most fundamental problems we have as humans is that we let religion get in the way so much of the time. I’m not anymore, but I was born a Catholic. I’m pretty much an atheist now, because I don’t think religion serves anybody. I think God is one of the great illusions we cling to in order to give us sanity, but I actually believe in human beings, that they’re much more interesting.”

Why he loves America: “The reason why I live in America, and why I love it, was that I was very attracted by the notion of egalitarian thinking. This country was built on essentially egalitarian principles. And I feel horrible for the immigrant population that comes here with this notion that America represents freedom, because it’s certainly not as free as it purports to be. We’ve allowed so many things to get in the way of that freedom. For me, one of the tragedies of America — because I do love this country and what it represents — is that it isn’t living up to what it represents. It’s not living up to what those principles were built on because all these other distractions have come in.”

On the British monarchy, this is the full section: “I find that it’s really just so sad that we don’t acknowledge our own humanity enough. We don’t acknowledge what we’ve been through on behalf of a family — a ruling family. And that’s why, when you look at what’s happening with Meghan and Harry [there they are!], you go, ‘Well, Harry, there’s an innocence about.’ And with her, too. But you can’t go into a system where somebody’s already been trained to behave in a certain kind of way and then just expect them to cut themselves off. I mean, she knew what she was getting into, and there’s an ambition there clearly as well — the childhood dreams of marrying Prince Charming and all that sh-t we see as fantasy that could be our lives in our dreams. I’m a Cinderella person, you know.” He shrugs. “In my opinion, we shouldn’t have a monarchy. It’s not viable; it doesn’t make any sense. It’s tradition and all that, they say. I say, ‘F–k it! Move on!’”

[From Haute Living New York]

Now, I’m not saying his full comment in context makes more sense, but it’s nowhere near as harsh or anti-Sussex as the Mail would have people believe. My interpretation of his comment is: Harry was very innocent and so was Meghan; it must be difficult for Harry to cut himself from the regimented royal life and his toxic family; and Meghan’s innocence was that she was wrapped up in a princess fantasy and the dream of what their lives could be. Now, I think he’s wrong that Meghan knew what she was getting into. That’s such a stupid conversation, because it’s such a self-own for British people and the British media, because it’s like they’re mad at Meghan for not understanding that they were going to be awful and racist towards her. They’re like “how dare she not realize that we’re utter trash!”

Anyway, it’s still perfectly clear that Brian Cox wants to abolish the monarchy. I tend to think he was just talking about the Sussexes more as a character study than political actors, but what do I know.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, cover courtesy of Haute Living.