This year’s Australian Open was the third Slam in a row where the women’s side was a million times more exciting than the men’s side. American Madison Keys, 29, won her first-ever major title, taking out the #1 and #2 seeds in the semifinal and final, and both of those matches were three-set nail-biters. On the men’s side… *sad clown noise*. Novak Djokovic retired in his semifinal, which meant that German Alexander Zverev got into his third major final. Jannik Sinner – who tested positive for doping twice last year – barely broke a sweat as he marched his way through the draw to defend his first major. So, the final was set: Sinner vs. Zverev. Either Sinner would win his third major or Zverev would win his first. Since I didn’t watch it, I’m just going from commentary: Sinner cleaned Zverev’s clock, winning in straight sets. Zverev didn’t even have any break points.

The thing is, Alex Zverev is largely loathed by real tennis fans and people who are actually paying attention to the tennis world. In 2020, Zverev’s Russian ex-girlfriend Olya gave a heartbreaking interview in which she described months of physical abuse by Zverev. Nothing happened to Zverev after Olya’s interview, and the ATP didn’t even introduce any kind of DV policy for their players. Then, in 2023, Zverev’s former partner and mother of his child, Brenda Patea, also accused him of assaulting her. She sued him in Germany, and Zverev’s team was able to largely sweep it under the rug and settle out of court with Patea. Once again, nothing happened to Zverev’s career, and ATP played dumb when it came to instituting any new policies.

After Zverev lost in the AO final on Sunday, he got up to the microphone to begin his runner’s up speech. That’s when a woman in the audience shouted out: “Australia believes Olya and Brenda! Australia believes Olya and Brenda!” That’s more than the French crowd did at Roland Garros last year.

Zverev lost his third Grand Slam final against Jannik Sinner, 6-3, 7-6(4), 6-2, and stepped up to the microphone to speak after receiving his runner’s-up trophy.

Before he spoke, a woman in the crowd appeared to shout: “Australia believes Olya and Brenda! Australia believes Olya and Brenda!”

Zverev looked up to the crowd as noise rippled across the stadium, smiling to himself. A few boos and bits of applause followed before Zverev began his speech. The German did not make reference to the heckling when he spoke.

“I believe there are no more accusations. There haven’t been for, what, nine months now. Good for her, I think she was the only one in the stadium who believed anything in that moment,” Zverev said in his news conference when asked about the incident. “I think I’ve done everything I can, and I’m not about to open that subject again.”

[From The NY Times]

“I believe there are no more accusations. There haven’t been for, what, nine months now.” Wow, nine whole months without any current or former girlfriend accusing him of beating the sh-t out of her. An absolute piece of sh-t. People should heckle this motherf–ker every time he steps on court, imo.

Shoutout to this woman pic.twitter.com/mQZeDrnnQn https://t.co/GeoKJQ0Raf

— Owen (@kostekcanu) January 26, 2025

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Anna Wintour is not only the editor-in-chief of American Vogue, she’s the Global Chief Content Officer for Conde Nast. Various outlets always try to make it sound like Wintour is one bad Vogue cover away from being fired, but if anything, her position within Conde Nast has been massively solidified in the past decade. Vanity Fair is a Conde Nast publication, meaning Wintour arguably signed off on VF’s February cover, a massive hit job on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. So… does that mean that Wintour isn’t interested in doing a Vogue cover with Meghan? And does that mean that Wintour is going all-in on the Windsors? Well, funny that – the Mail claimed this weekend that Wintour has offered the Princess of Wales the “global covers of Vogue.” Hm.

The Princess of Wales has been offered the global covers of Vogue, The Mail on Sunday understands. Anna Wintour, the magazine’s editor-in-chief and the most powerful woman in fashion, is said to have made a personal appeal to her.

The offer – which would allow Kate to choose her own photographer, be in charge of fashion choices and decide whether or not to grant an interview – is said to have been made in the past few days. A source told the Mail on Sunday that Ms Wintour reached out via an intermediary to offer Kate her choice of global Vogue covers, including the US and UK versions.

Kate appeared on the cover of British Vogue in June 2016 to celebrate the magazine’s 100th anniversary. A source said: ‘The princess has come a long way since that first cover. She’s a global fashion icon but she is so much more. Her brave battle against cancer while raising three young children in the public eye makes her a role model to millions. Her story would be an inspiration to so many women going through what she has gone through. She would get to chose which covers she would feature on but the UK and the US would be a given.’

[From The Daily Mail]

That typo was in the original Mail piece – “chose” rather than “choose.” As for the story… eh. I think Wintour has wanted Kate to do Vogue covers before now, just as I believed that there was probably a standing offer for the Duchess of Sussex too. The thing is, I’m pretty sure that most of those cover offers have been contingent on some kind of interview, however basic. Which is probably why Kate has turned them down before. I also think that if Meghan has been offered a Vogue cover and turned it down, that was a mistake on her part. If Kate was smart and this offer is for real, she should totally do it, honestly.

Photos courtesy of Paolo Roversi/Kensington Palace, KP and British Vogue.

Pete Hegseth has been confirmed as Secretary of Defense by the US Senate. Hegseth ended up benefiting from the Matt Gaetz situation – Gaetz was originally Donald Trump’s choice for Attorney General, but Gaetz has a long history of soliciting sex from teenagers and being an unrepentant sleaze, so even Republicans felt comfortable saying “nah, not this one” on Gaetz. Hegseth ended up slipping right through for the most part, and I doubt most people even know that he was credibly accused of drugging and raping a woman in 2017, and that his victim tried to get him criminally charged, and he ended up settling out of court with her. He’s also on his third marriage, having cheated on his previous two wives, and even his mother thinks he’s an abuser. Did I mention he also has significant alcoholism issues? That too. Don’t forget about the white supremacy and weird white nationalist tattoos either. Surprisingly, a handful of Republican senators voted “no” on Hegseth’s confirmation. Mitch McConnell was one of the “no” votes. Long story short, JD Vance was the tiebreaking vote.

Pete Hegseth was sworn in as the defense secretary on Saturday morning by Vice President JD Vance after the Senate narrowly confirmed Mr. Hegseth the night before. The Trump pick survived a bruising struggle with Democrats who decried him as unqualified and unfit to oversee the country’s 1.3 million active duty troops and the Pentagon’s nearly $850 billion budget.

Vice President Vance had to cast a tiebreaking vote to confirm Mr. Hegseth, after three Republicans — Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky — joined all Democrats in opposition.

The final vote, 51 to 50, was the smallest margin for a defense secretary’s confirmation since the position was created in 1947, according to Senate records.

Mr. Hegseth, a military veteran and a former Fox News host, has vowed to bring his self-described “warrior” ethos to the Defense Department, which he says has been made weak by “woke” generals and diversity programs.

Republican leaders embraced that outlook as they cheered his confirmation.

“Peace through strength is back under President Trump and Pete Hegseth,” Senator Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi and the chairman of the armed services panel, said in a statement after Mr. Hegseth’s confirmation, adding: “We cannot wait another minute to rebuild our military might and put the war-fighter first.”

But Democrats, who unanimously opposed Mr. Hegseth’s confirmation, promised to continue their scrutiny of him.

“I am going to watch him like a hawk,” Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the armed services panel, said in a statement, adding: “I will point out where we disagree. I will demand accountability.”

Mr. Hegseth’s selection by President Trump and the confirmation process were complicated by a claim of sexual assault and accusations of abusive behavior, public drunkenness and fiscal mismanagement of two nonprofit veterans groups. In a sworn statement submitted to the Senate on Tuesday, a former sister-in-law of Mr. Hegseth’s described him as frequently intoxicated and “abusive” toward his second wife. Mr. Hegseth, 44, has denied the account, along with other allegations that have dogged his nomination.

[From The NY Times]

Yeah, I don’t know what to say here. The only “interesting” thing of note is that before Trump and his cult of personality, the Republican Party always branded itself as pro-military, everything rah-rah-militarism and bloated Pentagon budgets. In his first term, Trump only liked having military people around him for the optics, but he actually didn’t care about the military or national defense or military preparedness or any of that. That will get worse in this term, especially with Hegseth at the helm of DOD. I was going to paint a vivid picture of how bad it will get, but you know what? I won’t bother. I’m sure it will surprise everyone and the media will expect us to react with outrage and tears as Hegseth launches Operation Make Greenland Great Again.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Alright, where are my fellow Dry January participants? How’s everybody doing now that we’re in the home stretch? I’ve done Dry January every year since 2020 and despite all of the real world sh-t that’s bombarded this last week, this has been my easiest year yet.

Every year, we hear about celebrities who are doing Dry January. Last year, we got play-by-play updates from Amy Robach and TJ Holmes. Tom Holland and Bella Hadid are both on record as Dry January success stories. Now, we can add Kelly Ripa to the list! Last week, Andy Cohen was a guest host on an episode of Live with Kelly and Mark. When Andy talked about how he’s doing Dry January again this year, but hasn’t lost any of the weight that he usually loses, Kelly shared that although she doesn’t drink anymore, the year that she did do Dry January, she ended up gaining 12 pounds!

During the Wednesday, Jan. 22 episode of Live with Kelly and Mark, Ripa was joined by Andy Cohen as a stand-in co-host while her husband. Mark Consuelos, is filming a new project. During the opening segment, Cohen, 56, revealed he’s currently participating in “Dry January” and not drinking for the month.

However, as Cohen detailed his experience, he remarked that “usually a little weight loss comes my way after,” but this year, it’s “not really happening yet.”

“I told you when I quit drinking, I expected there to be this windfall of weight loss because everybody’s like, ‘Well, you are going to get too skinny, and you can’t afford to lose it,’ ” Ripa, 54, said before revealing the opposite occurred. “I gained 12 pounds [and said], ‘I don’t understand this magical weight loss that people apply.’”

“I think I just took to eating the sugars,” she continued. “Because apparently, alcohol is like a lot of sugar, which you don’t really realize when it goes in it tastes kind of bitter.”

Ripa revealed in January 2020 during an episode of Live with Kelly and Ryan that she eliminated alcohol from her diet in 2017. The following month, she told PEOPLE that she and her friends decided to try a sober month, and once she completed it she realized she “felt great” and “liked the way [she] felt.”

“It wasn’t even really a thought process. It felt great, I felt like I looked great, I felt like I didn’t feel hungover. Not that I was a heavy drinker — I wasn’t someone who got drunk — but even like two glasses of wine at a girl’s night out dinner; I would feel it the next morning,” she said.

“I just didn’t really feel the need or desire to go back to it,” she continued. “It wasn’t really a choice or a thought, it was just, ‘Yeah, I guess I don’t drink anymore.’ ”

At the time, Ripa said quitting smoking in the early ’90s was something that she “really had to think about,” noting that quitting drinking “was very easy” and she “didn’t really think about it at all.”

“I’m not comparing cigarettes to alcohol, but for me it was just like, I don’t do that anymore,” Ripa added. “I felt better so I just stopped.”

[From People]

Replacing alcohol with sugar and extra food in general is absolutely a real thing. I remember a friend from college telling me once that they kept either gummy bears or Swedish Fish on hand to keep the cravings down when they were trying to give up alcohol. That’s crazy that she put on 12 pounds though! For Kelly, giving up alcohol was probably easier than giving up smoking because she had that sugar substitute. The nicotine patch was only available by prescription from 1992 to 1996 until it was made available over-the-counter. I’m happy for her that she’s living her best sober life. That’s awesome.

I’m in Andy’s camp this year. My first year, I lost 16 pounds and in subsequent years, “only” lost around five. Honestly, this is my first Dry January in which I haven’t lost any weight, but my kids have been home from school for this entire month (they’re in year-round school) and I’ve definitely had more than my fair share of Crumbl Cookies and Peanut M&Ms over the past four weeks, lol. Ha, gee, I wonder if that could have anything to do with it…

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kelly Ripa (@kellyripa)

Embed from Getty Images

Photos credit: Janet Mayer/INSTARimages.com, Getty and via Instagram

Embed from Getty Images
There were many inauguration balls last Monday, which is fairly standard. But given the bigly-sized ego of this particular baby-fisted president, I was surprised that he allowed one ball to proceed that wasn’t wholly and dictatorially focused on him. I’m talking about the Make America Healthy Again gala (I know, vomit), that feted Trump’s pick for the Department of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., along with 800 of RFK’s nearest and dearest. Cheryl Hines even came to support her worm-eaten brained, beached whale beheading, dead bear cub relocating, rumored dog and goat-eating husband. (What affair with a New York Magazine reporter?) Well, another guest at the bash was the surprise singer for the evening: Jewel. Apparently, Jewel’s fans doubted the singer’s good intuition in joining forces with the dark side the MAGA/MAHA front, so she posted a video on Instagram on Friday in which she explains her participation.

In a video posted to her verified Instagram, the “Who Will Save your Soul” singer started off by identifying herself as “a mental health advocate” and saying, “if there’s anything that I’ve learned in the past 20 years, it’s that mental health affects everybody’s lives, across party lines.”

Jewel went on to say, “I believe I can help, and if I believe I can help, I have to try. And if I wait to try until I agree 100 percent with the people that might be willing to help me, I’d never get off the bench. I don’t think that’s how activism works, waiting until everything’s perfect enough to participate. It’s actually because things are so imperfect that we have to find ways to engage and to participate.”

“We cannot wait another four years,” the Grammy nominee continued, in reference to Trump’s nascent second term. “I believe there are people in the new administration that are willing to help on this issue, and I dod not agree on all the politics, but if I can help shape policy, make sure mental health is in the conversation when it comes to American health, if I can help put resources or mental health tools into the hands of the most vulnerable who need it, I’m going to try, and I’m going to fight.”

She referenced the political polarization in the US post-election, “Half of our country feels hope right now, and I honor that,” while “half of our country feels disenfranchised and scared and vulnerable, and that is unacceptable.”

“I am so sorry that some of my longtime fans feel that I let them down,” Jewel said.

“I am so sorry that I caused pain, especially in my LGBTQIA+ community, because you guys are treasures,” she added. “You make the world a better place. You’ve made my life a better place. And I will not stop fighting. None of us can afford to stop fighting, and I really believe that the only way we change is in relationship. It isn’t in isolation or by isolating, it’s by being in relationship, by reaching out, by having hard conversations.”

[From CNN]

I feel like I’m missing something, so let’s walk through this together please. Jewel is “a mental health advocate.” Great, the more the merrier (ideally). So she agreed to sing at the MAHA party because it’s health related, right? Even though RFK, Jr. has been more vocal about physical health issues like ensuring Americans are freed from vaccines, pasteurized milk, and seed oils… But ok sure, it’s all under the health umbrella. It’s the progression to “we cannot wait another four years,” that’s tripping me up. I must really be an idiot (don’t answer that!), because I would’ve thought that Jewel, or anyone, could champion mental health causes, still during this Voldemortian administration, without doing a gig for this administration. But clearly, the way Jewel lays it out, the only choice was to perform for the worm or she’s given up on mental health. I’m sure you can hear my eye roll through the interwebs. I’ll be honest, I couldn’t stomach watching her whole video. Her affect is so sanctimonious. But I did enjoy that she wrote “please be kind to one another in the comments.” From the comments I saw, people were kind to each other… just not so much to Jewel. I guess it’s not kind of me, but I can’t say that I mind the messes Carrie Underwood, Billy Ray Cyrus, and Jewel experienced as a result of performing at this inauguration.

PS — A Vogue reporter got to tour the MAHA ball before the dinner started, and the article included snaps of artwork that was up for auction of RFK, Jr. with various animals, and I’m DYING to know if the theme was “Animals RFK, Jr. has abused post-mortem.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jewel (@jewel)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Vogue (@voguemagazine)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jewel (@jewel)

It has been almost two months since Luigi Mangione allegedly shot and killed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City. It feels like it happened much longer ago, though. The press around his case has died down a lot since he was last seen serving face at his arraignment hearing. As soon as Luigi’s picture started showing up online, the Internet was abuzz about his looks, especially after that security picture of him flirting with the hostel worker was released. There were also a lot of jokes about how Ryan Murphy was handed his next season of American Crime Story on a silver platter. After he was caught, people knew just who should play Luigi, too: his celebrity look alike, Dave Franco. It wasn’t just strangers on the Internet who saw the resemblance, either. According to Dave and his wife Alison Brie, just about everyone and their mother was blowing up his phone to tell him he looked just like “hot Luigi.”

Yes, Dave Franco knows you think he looks like Luigi Mangione.

The Hollywood Reporter caught up with Franco at the Sundance Film Festival, who is on the ground with two films, including the horror Together which co-stars his real-life partner Alison Brie. When asked if anyone has reached out about the comparisons many have made between him and Mangione, Brie responded, “Anyone? Do you mean everyone?” Franco added, “I have never received more texts in my life about anything.”

He continued, “Anyone who has my phone number has reached out about it.”

Mangione has dominated headlines since Dec. 4, when it was reported that UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was shot and killed in midtown Manhattan by a person later alleged to be the 26-year-old. A multiday manhunt followed for Mangione, who was arrested on Dec. 9 in Pennsylvania and has been charged with murder. He has pleaded not guilty and is currently awaiting his next court appearance in February.

Shortly after Mangione was revealed to be the killer, social media quickly identified Franco as the actor who should play him in a would-be movie. While a scripted movie has not yet been announced, several documentary projects about the murder are currently in production, including one from Oscar winner Alex Gibney.

“But I don’t think there have been any official offers,” Brie joked, with Franco saying, “No, no official offers.”

[From The Hollywood Reporter]

That is too funny that so many people immediately texted him about it. Like everyone else, I saw the Dave Franco resemblance immediately, too. If I squint my eyes, I can also see Penn Badgley, Nick Jonas or maaaaybe Timothée Chalamet. While I’m on this subject, did y’all know that there was a Luigi lookalike contest in Florida last month? Wild. But really, whenever Murphy does make his TV show about Luigi, it’s Dave’s part to lose. What’s the point in looking like an attractive, popular, alleged killer if you can’t get cast in a role playing them, especially a role that’s probably guaranteed to get an Emmy nomination. Someone from Ryan Murphy Productions, give this man a phone call already and make him an official offer.

photos credit: Jeffrey Mayer/Avalon/Avalon, BauerGriffin/INSTARimages, Backgrid

Getting to know first-time Oscar nominee Monica Barbaro, the actress with an angelic voice who played Joan Baez in A Complete Unknown. Full disclosure: I have accidentally referred to her as “Melissa Barbaro” on multiple occasions, and I’m sorry about that. It’s just in my head now, that she’s “Melissa” and not “Monica” and I have to keep catching myself. [Pajiba]
Guy Pearce & Carice Van Houten broke up “years ago.” [Just Jared]
Carrie Coon looks insanely glam on the cover of T&C. [Go Fug Yourself]
Reese Witherspoon went to a premiere. [Socialite Life]
Analysis of the Oscar noms and the race from here. [LaineyGossip]
Troye Sivan’s GRWM. [OMG Blog]
Mikey Madison looked cute in Patou & Proenza Schouler. [RCFA]
Joel McHale is hosting another Fox show. [Seriously OMG]
Reality star details their ayahuasca journey. [Starcasm]
When will The Brutalist come out on streaming? [Hollywood Life]
Ethan Slater celebrates Ariana Grande’s first Oscar nom. [Buzzfeed]

Last November, certain segments of the British media got off their asses and actually did some investigative journalism on the Windsors. Specifically, Channel 4’s Dispatches, along with the Mirror, did a series of exposés on the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall. Lancaster is the “private income” of the monarch, and Cornwall is the “private income” of the Prince of Wales. The investigations revealed just how thoroughly Charles and William loot taxpayer money for sh-t like “garage space for ambulances” and “seabeds used by the Navy.” Alongside that, we learned that the Windsors are full-on slumlords who trap desperate, broke people in cold, moldy rentals. The duchies are under no legal obligation to maintain these rentals either. Speaking of, the Duchy of Cornwall owns the land underneath Dartmoor Prison, and taxpayers have to foot the £1.5 million annual bill to “lease” that land. Except Dartmoor was recently shut down, yet they’re still expected to pay Peggy.

The Prince of Wales is due to receive millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money from a vacant prison that may never reopen. The Duchy of Cornwall, the estate which provides a private income for Prince William, owns HMP Dartmoor and leases it to the Ministry of Justice for £1.5 million a year. But the category-C prison has been empty since July after high levels of toxic gas were recorded in prisoners’ accommodation earlier this year. Its 682 inmates, many of whom are sex offenders serving long sentences, were moved to other jails as the government grappled with the prison overcrowding crisis.

Under the terms of the lease, the Duchy is not responsible for the upkeep of the prison and even has a “dilapidations clause”, which requires the taxpayer to spend up to £68 million to repair the building, despite the fact that it is not owned by the state and was built with taxpayers’ money. This means that the taxpayer is effectively liable for any repairs that are required at Dartmoor.

A report published last month shows that the prison has fallen into further disrepair since staff were ordered to leave. There have been infestations of rats, birds, bats and insects since windows were left open to increase ventilation. The report by the independent monitoring board at HMP Dartmoor, calling for an “urgent decision” on its future, suggests that the prison may never reopen, or 2026 at the earliest. It reveals that unsafe levels of radon — a colourless, odourless radioactive gas which has been linked to lung cancer under prolonged exposure — had already been detected in the prison when the lease was signed.

Some staff have been permanently reassigned to other prisons. The report notes that the “lease requirements would have to be met at, potentially, some considerable cost” if Dartmoor is closed for good.

The 25-year lease, which was struck when the King was Prince of Wales and head of the Duchy, was renewed by the government in March 2022 and commenced in December 2023. The Duchy has increased the cost of the lease by more than double the amount paid in the 1980s, even after taking into account rises for inflation and the terms dictate that the taxpayer would still be required to pay at least £13.5 million more, even if the Ministry of Justice were to end the contract now. A Tory source familiar with the details of the lease renewal said that the MoJ felt it had no alternative but to sign or lose vital prison spaces.

The prison was revealed as the most lucrative taxpayer-funded source of income for the Duchy of Cornwall after a joint investigation by The Sunday Times and Channel 4 Dispatches revealed the assets owned by the royal property empires for the first time.

[From The Times]

“This means that the taxpayer is effectively liable for any repairs that are required at Dartmoor.” Here’s the thing – if this was a state-owned prison, the taxpayer would be liable to make repairs too. But it’s blowing my mind that William’s slumlording extends to refusing to account for upkeep on a prison he OWNS and leases to the government. Not only that, the Duchy is clearly demanding that the government continue to pay the lease, even though Dartmoor is likely to be permanently closed. When I read these stories, it’s unbelievable to me that more people aren’t throwing eggs at Charles and William every time they go outside.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

News Nation’s gossip person, Paula Froelich, has had some bizarre royal exclusives in recent months. Last September, she made some wild claims that Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace obsessively watched everything Prince Harry and Meghan do and that the palaces weren’t happy with the Sussexes because King Charles and the Princess of Wales were both at death’s door. Then in November, Froelich’s sources insisted that Meghan “doesn’t know what she’s doing” with her Netflix cooking show and that it was likely that Netflix would “drop it.” This stroll down memory lane is sponsored by These People Don’t Know What They’re Talking About, in association with The Palace Is Still Briefing Against The Sussexes On a Daily Basis. Obviously, Froelich has an exciting new palace briefing/exclusive about NGN settling with Prince Harry this week.

Word that Rupert Murdoch’s News Group Newspapers (NGN) settled at the last minute with Prince Harry rocked the media world this week when Harry scored a major victory as the Sun newspaper not only admitted to hacking the Prince but apologized to him for his “torments”… and gave him, what I hear, was a whopping $12.3 million for his troubles.

After the case was settled on Wednesday, News Group Newspapers agreed to pay “substantial damages” for what it described as “the serious intrusion” by two of its flagship titles, the Sun and the News of the World. But there’s more to the settlement than meets the eye.

”They needed the money,” my insider said. “The way (Harry and Meghan) live, and the rate they spend, they would run out of cash sooner rather than later — and it’s not like anyone is running to hire them or give them more contracts. As they’ve proven time and time again, the only time they make money for people is when they’ve sold out his family and that cow has been milked.”

And I’m hearing it’s an insane amount of money — $12.3 million dollars (10 million GBP), which not only covers Harry’s legal fees, it also puts a chunk of change in his personal bank account. An insider added: “If he had been able to file in the United States the damages would have been a lot more, but since the crimes happened in the UK he couldn’t file here — and the UK rarely gives out massive amounts of money for damages.”

The cash is important as Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, live an expensive life. Their Montecito house was bought for $14.65 million and costs at least $500,000 to maintain a year (insurance, maintenance, taxes, etc). They also have a nearly $1 million annual security bill and both like expensive things like polo horses and private jets.

While they were rumored to have scored a $100 million deal from Netflix, only their docuseries “Harry & Meghan” scored any eyeballs. The other shows they created — “Heart of Invictus,” “Live to Lead” and Harry’s “Polo” — bombed… and there’s little hope that Meghan’s cookery show “With Love, Meghan” will do well.

”It’s completely contrived and so very 2004,” an insider said about Meghan’s upcoming show that was set to debut mid-January but was pushed back until March due to the LA wildfires. “She wants people to have a look inside her life but she didn’t even film inside her own home. And no one knows who these pretty people are she’s cooking for. It’s insane. The price of eggs is skyrocketing and she’s showing us how to put edible flowers in ice cubes — like that hasn’t been done before.”

Meanwhile, there are no more book offers (unless Harry does a sequel to his runaway hit “Spare” which, again, sold out his family), and while the numbers quoted about the Sussex’s projects were huge ($100 million for Netflix, $40 million for a series of books, $20 million for a Spotify deal) — those numbers are the CAP own what they would have made had all their projects been successful. Likely, the pair were given production support and marketing but would have only garnered big bucks if they’d met sales targets. Which they did not.

The couple’s publishing deal has gone by the wayside and the Spotify deal was canceled after just one year, with Spotify exec Bill Simmons calling the pair “grifters”.

[From News Nation]

The way I know some/all of this is coming from Buckingham Palace is because this is a near-constant storyline from Charles’s camp in particular: the money will run out at some point, and when the money runs out, then we’ll have Harry right where we want him. They’ve been saying that for five years, they’ve been trying to promise everyone that “Harry will crawl back, broke and divorced.” Anyway, this reads like the feverish rants of a courtier who knows nothing about how money, business or contracts work. The publishing deal has not “gone by the wayside” – Harry wrote one of the most wildly successful books of the decade, and I’m sure Penguin Random House would love a second book (and Harry should absolutely write it). Netflix seems happy with the Sussexes, and the money from their original contract hasn’t just disappeared. They have investments, they have other jobs, they’re doing fine. Harry didn’t “need” the settlement money. NGN needed to settle so that Harry wouldn’t reveal all of their criminal activity in open court.

Photos courtesy of Netflix.

Angelina Jolie did not get an Oscar nomination for Pablo Larrain’s Maria. She’s actually the first actress in Larrain’s “famous women” series to not receive an Oscar nom for his films – Kristen Stewart got a nomination (her first) for Spencer, and Natalie Portman got a nom for Jackie. Jolie is the first one named in all of the “Oscar snub” lists, but can I just say? I’m genuinely shocked that Nicole Kidman and Denzel Washington were snubbed too. Nicole is a perennial awards favorite – she got an Oscar nomination for that god-awful Lucille Ball movie, for goodness sake – and Denzel (arguably America’s greatest living actor) was the best part of Gladiator II, and he was having a f–king ball and chewing the scenery.

In any case, yes, Angelina was snubbed. Her name was trending yesterday after the Oscar nominations came out, but I had already made my peace with the fact that Jolie wasn’t going to get a nom. She had already been snubbed for a BAFTA nom and a SAG nom, so I knew what was up. It just wasn’t going to happen. The question is… why? Was it all down to how Hollywood took Brad Pitt’s side? Well, funny that, because Brad Pitt’s favorite outlet, Page Six, had this exclusive:

Angelina Jolie is surely “devastated” over being snubbed by the Oscars after pouring her own pain into “Maria,” Hollywood insiders say. Jolie, 49, spent months learning to sing for the role of Maria Callas — and said she made the opera singer’s anguish “personal to me.” Although nominated for a Golden Globe, she missed out on a nod by both the SAG Awards and the Academy of Motion Pictures, which announced its contenders Thursday.

“Angelina will be devastated … look at all the press she did for the film — she wanted to get nominated,” a senior awards source said. “She did Jimmy Fallon, her first late-night show in over a decade. She even went to the Gotham awards. She did all these magazine covers.”

The star made her acting comeback in biopic “Maria” after taking a few years off, and a second Hollywood awards expert told Page Six that Jolie would undoubtedly be upset — adding the Oscars snub “wasn’t great for Angelina – or Netflix [which produced the film].”

A movie insider, meanwhile, insisted the snub comes down to Jolie’s very public divorce from Brad Pitt.

“This just shows that Hollywood is Team Brad,” said the insider. “The Globes showed that the foreign press loves her, but that’s not Hollywood. Nobody was going to go against Brad and give Angelina a vote … people just love Brad.”

Pitt and Jolie finally resolved their bitter divorce in December after eight years of intense legal fighting. At the time, Jolie’s lawyer James Simon admitted that she was “exhausted” and trying to find healing for her family.

Another Tinseltown source, however, told Page Six, “The divorce is done, and yes, politics do come into play a little alongside the films and the performances. But the fact is that there are a lot of first-time nominees shows that we still have a healthy industry.”

[From Page Six]

I hate that they’re throwing “she wanted a nomination” in her face… like, yeah, they all want nominations. ALL of the actors on the awards-season circuit want to get nominated for their performances. I genuinely loved seeing Angelina go out and hustle a little bit. She “went outside” for the first time in many years and it was so fun to see her, and people loved seeing her at those Q&A sessions and screenings and film festivals. It was fun, and it didn’t end in an Oscar nom and that’s fine. This reads like Brad Pitt gloating that his years-long campaign against her worked. PS… I blame those fakakta bangs too. Never soft-launch bangs in the middle of the awards season! The bangs jinx!!!

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.