Sarah Snook is probably a shoo-in for the Best Actress Emmy for her work in Succession’s final season. Whenever the Emmys eventually happen, I think Succession will largely sweep all of the major awards anyway, but Snook does deserve special mention and special attention. The way she played Shiv Roy was a revelation – Shiv gets in her own way, sells out everyone, compromises her principles at the drop of a hat and she’s constantly getting screwed over. Currently, Snook is home in Australia with her newborn baby girl, but she chatted with Variety for a pre-strike conversation as part of her Emmy campaign. Snook talks a lot about what she thinks would have been next for Shiv, had Succession kept going.

Reading the last Succession script: “I arrived and was like, ‘That’s it. It’s done.’ And I walked in, and Matthew was like, ‘No, I don’t think so. I think that’s quite hopeful! The last handhold, maybe there’s potential for what’s going to happen with Tom as CEO.’”

Why Shiv couldn’t vote for Kendall: Yet at the company’s boardroom showdown, as the members vote, Shiv wavers, and can’t bring herself to go through with it. “It’s just pure instinct,” she says. “I think it’s trigger response.” According to Snook, Shiv turns on Kendall when she sees him putting his feet up on their late father’s desk in the lead-up to the vote. “There’s something in her that goes, ‘Ahhhhh!’ — sorry to swear, but — ‘Motherf–ker!’ I don’t think she’s decided in that moment when they’re in Dad’s office to say no. But once it gets down to it in the room, she just can’t physically bear to say yes.”

She doesn’t believe Shiv was trying to plan it out: “I never really considered that Tom becoming CEO is Shiv, by proxy, winning, For Shiv, that is so not a win! That is ‘I’m once again power adjacent. I’m not the winner.’” Snook doesn’t think about Shiv’s future much, but when she does, she sees her going into “quite a deep postpartum depression.” About Shiv’s resigned look in that conclusion, she says, “I think the baby thing is really about to hit in a way that is inescapable.”

Kendall’s disgusting shake: Shiv spat into with each take — “and he drank it every time, because he is Jeremy,” Snook says. It was “maybe the closest to all three of us in our playful selves as actors — as Kieran, Sarah and Jeremy, not just Shiv, Roman and Kendall,” she says. “And because of it being the last scene of the series, we may have leant into personal sort of actor celebration, and indulgence of what’s going on.”

She cried through the finale: “Because I was sad for Shiv. She just tried so f–king hard, and ended up where she is — in this kind of gilded cage, next to the thing that she wants. And the journey’s not over for her. It’s not over for any of them, but still, she’s in the orbit of the CEO, and that will be really painful for her.”

Shiv & Roman: “I feel like Shiv and Roman would reconcile in a way where he would be the shitty but great weird uncle for her kid, and there might be some sort of strange little family unit that gets splintered off.”

[From Variety]

I absolutely believe that Shiv and Roman would find a way back to each other as dysfunctional brother and sister. Like, with no more company to fight over, Shiv and Roman would be able to figure out a way to be in each other’s lives, 100%. I’m not so sure about Kendall though. Poor Ken. I read that one idea was for Ken to try to throw himself into the river in his final scene but they thought it would be too dark. But that is very Ken – self-destructive, self-defeating, too impulsive. I also agree that Shiv and Tom are about to be miserable together for a long time.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images. Cover courtesy of Variety.

Sydney Sweeney looked orange/gorgeous at the Variety Young Hollywood event on Thursday. Her dress is Mara Paris and it’s so Angelina Jolie-coded. [Just Jared]
Taylor Swift, Kaylor conspiracies and the “eye thing.” [LaineyGossip]
Men are salty that their companies offer abortion benefits. [Jezebel]
Dua Lipa is having a fashionable vacation. [RCFA]
I’m anti-AI, but I think AI did a good job with “Russian life” photos. [OMG Blog]
Meanwhile, here’s a good reason to be anti-AI. [Pajiba]
Lil Tay is not dead, it was all a hoax. [Socialite Life]
What’s your Holy Grail bra? Mine is a certain Bali model with underwire and just the right amount of minimizer. [Go Fug Yourself]
Wonder Woman 3 isn’t happening after all. [Seriously OMG]
Addison Rae’s Canadian Tuxedo Lite. [Egotastic]
Salary transparency is such an important issue, especially for women. [Buzzfeed]
Kuwait banned Barbie?!? [Towleroad]

I genuinely believe that Buckingham Palace courtiers were a toxic blend of bored and petty, and they decided to organize a little counterprogramming for Prince Harry’s trip to Japan and Singapore this week. Basically, as soon as Harry arrived in Japan, the British media was suddenly full of stories about how the Royal.uk webmaster had removed Harry’s HRH-style from his page of achievements. Given how disorganized and racist Royal.uk is, it seems notable that they only completed that particular task this week. Plus, that story was packaged with quotes from King Charles’s biographer Robert Jobson, who basically admitted that the king will continue to play these games but he’s not going to do anything real, like remove the Sussex ducal title. So, these rancid people had their “fun.” But it’s not enough for the Mail:

Buckingham Palace’s decision to quietly cut Prince Harry’s HRH title from his website profile page last week was a ‘petty’ and ‘trivial’ move, that avoids the ‘big changes’ that really need to be made.

That’s the view of the Daily Mail’s Diary Editor Richard Eden, who was speaking on our royal talk show Palace Confidential.‘They should be going much further,’ he tells the programme.

‘What actually matters is that he’s still in the line of succession. God forbid if something was to happen to the Royal Family, he would become our king. That should end, he should be removed from the line of succession and he is still one of those counsellors of state that can stand in for the king… why not remove him? It’s ridiculous to be doing petty things to the website – deal with the big things and make the big changes that matter.’

[From The Mail+]

People always say that it would take an act of Parliament to remove royal titles, but what would it take to remove a prince from the line of succession? Especially when the prince has not been accused of a crime or done anything heinous. Harry literally prioritized his wife, his children and his mental health and the lunatics running the asylum over there are still trying to devise even more punishments. While I don’t pretend to understand the will of the British people, I kind of think it would go over like a ton of bricks if the king removed his own son from the line of succession. It would be especially bad considering Harry would be a much better king than his father or his brother. But again, what do I know.

Meanwhile, Harry’s Spare is still the #1 book of the year all across the UK, minus Northern Ireland. In Northern Ireland, the #1 nonfiction book was a cookbook. But everywhere else on Salt Island, people were reading Spare. Therein lies the problem for the Windsors, and why they’re still so hellbent on diminishing Harry.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty, Avalon Red, Instagram.

Maybe I’m not “smart” enough to “get” Grimes, but I honestly believe that she’s just one of those people who memorizes random cool/tech phrases and just repeats them in interviews to sound smart. She’s not a moron (Elon Musk is though) but she’s also not as smart as she thinks she is. Grimes covers the latest issue of Wired and the interview is ridiculous. Not as ridiculous as that Vanity Fair cover story, but still mind-numbingly idiotic. In the first half of the interview, she talks about music and how she’s pro-AI, and then the second half of the piece is about her personal life, her two children (X and Y) with Elon Musk, and what she learned from being with Musk. Some highlights:

What she learned from Elon Musk: “I’ve got NDAs. It’s hard to talk about things very explicitly without saying things about other people’s lives who are very private….I learned from him, like, the best internship ever. People don’t like talking about Elon, but it was incredible to be right there watching all that SpaceX stuff happen. That’s a master class in leadership and engineering and makes you understand how rare it is to have a leader of that quality.

Musk holds people to high standards: “I know, the stuff on Twitter doesn’t make it look like that. He didn’t build the culture there. And the cultural fit has obviously been very intense. He holds his people to really high standards. Watching him, I understand how difficult it is to be a great general and do something of that magnitude. Elon has an old-world kind of discipline I really respect. And I think it rubs a lot of people the wrong way. They don’t want to be in that hardcore zone. If you’re not consenting to being in that hardcore zone, I get it. But he’s challenged me a lot. I learned a lot about running my own team and my own life. I’m now way tougher and smarter than I used to be.

What Elon learned from her: “Maybe to have more fun. I try to soften him up, to build family culture. And he steals a lot of my memes.

Whether she worries about her kids’ privilege, being the children of the richest man in the world: “A little bit. I think their life is gonna be pretty intense. Being Elon’s kid is not the same as being anyone’s kid. In my house, at least, I want it to be more of a crazy warehouse situation and a cool art space.

Whether she was disturbed by Elon’s tweets: “I don’t want to talk about this too much. But take the trans thing. After that, we had a big, long conversation. I was like, “I want to dissect why you’re so stressed about this.” Getting to the heart of what Elon says helps me get to the heart of what other people’s issues are, because it’s this über guy situation. And it came down to pretty much every way that you transition can cause fertility issues. I was like, OK, you don’t hate trans people, you hate woke culture. I get that it can be annoying, and you have concerns about the fertility thing. So let’s figure it out, because there’s a lot of fertility tech that could be innovated that would help trans people have kids, which would be great and would solve a lot of problems. He’s just on Twitter, and he’s unhappy with woke people, and the arguments happened.

Whether or not she’s woke: “Probably not. I don’t know what the term means. I think we need to change the discourse. The more people you can convince that this dichotomy is silly, and an out-of-date fight, the better. The root cause of this is people not resolving mental health stuff the right way. And not educating people on screen time where they get hooked on dopamine spikes.

[From Wired]

I’m sorry??? “And it came down to pretty much every way that you transition can cause fertility issues. I was like, OK, you don’t hate trans people, you hate woke culture.” So Elon Musk joined the trans-bashing MAGA cult because he believes (and Grimes believes) that it’s all about “fertility,” and fertility issues in general or specific to transitioning are a “woke culture” issue. My head is spinning with the hurricane of fallacies here. First off: Elon’s need to make everything about procreation is really unsettling. Give a guy an emerald mine and suddenly he’s talking about how it’s every billionaire’s duty to populate the earth and dictate transgender people’s fertility levels. And “I don’t know what the term means”… lmao.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid and cover courtesy of Wired.

At this point, the standard operating procedure for royalists is to acknowledge, in a roundabout way, that Prince William is the problem, generally and specifically with regards to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. While King Charles is a dogs-t father and a horrendous grandfather, I buy that he is more than open to making some kind of peace with Harry and Meghan. Would he actually go out of his way to achieve peace? No. He wouldn’t. But he’s more conciliatory than William, who is full of rage. Speaking of, royal commentator Nick Bullen has some thoughts about the “entrenched” feelings between Harry and the Windsors. Even Bullen says, in that particularly roundabout way, that William is the problem.

On Harry’s trip to Asia: “I’m sure everybody managed those diaries to make sure there was no crossover whatsoever,” True Royalty TV co-founder Nick Bullen told Fox News Digital. “Harry hasn’t even been going to old friends’ weddings. So, those moments where they might bump into each other aren’t happening, let alone the choreographed moments.”

On Will & Kate’s summer plans: “William and [his wife] Kate [Middleton] are going to be spending time at Balmoral this summer,” said Bullen. “They’re going to be staying up in a cottage that was a favorite of the queen’s when she was alive. William and Kate have taken it over with their children for this summer. So, it’s nice to see the traditions are continuing.”

Charles is eager to make peace with the Sussexes: “I’m told that the king continues to reach out to Harry and Meghan and that the door is always open,” said Bullen. “I think, probably, he more than anybody, wants to repair the relationships. We all know things are still very tense between William and Harry, but I think the king does want to repair [things]. … There is probably an open invitation to visit the king whenever they can. And he would love to see them. Look, he’s the king. He’s not going to be able to make it to California very often. They don’t have official roles. They don’t appear to have a 9-to-5 job. So, I would say they’ve probably got the ability to make a visit to Scotland should they wish, and I’m sure the king would have them there.”

William & Harry’s beef: “I think there is so much water under the bridge between William and Harry that how they intend to find that common ground is beyond most royal commentators. I think there needs to be a brokerage from another person. There almost needs to be an intervention. It requires both parties to be willing to come to the table. But I think it’s going to be very difficult to see how this is going to happen. People have such entrenched views. [During] the coronation, the seating plan was carefully worked out [so] that they wouldn’t have to have an interaction. … I think it will require big apologies from both sides. But whether they’re going to come or not, I think it’s pretty unlikely.”

[From Fox News]

What continues to amuse me is that there’s this sense in the UK and among British commentators that some kind of rapprochement NEEDS to happen, that the brothers cannot simply hate each other forever, that some things are simply unforgivable and there’s no coming back. This entire industry and the entire monarchy institution simply bet everything on Harry crawling back to them at some point and agreeing to their terms. What is so unprecedented to them is that A) he doesn’t want to come back and B) he doesn’t need to come back. That’s why they’re still fussing over “what can be done, someone needs to stage an intervention!” I agree that William needs an intervention though.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

The big news today over in Britain is that Buckingham Palace announced twenty-one new “honorary appointments” for working royals. All of the appointments are to military positions, because there are so many military units left patronless these days. It’s been a problem for years now, but the issue has been exacerbated by the Duke of York’s perversions, the Sussexit, QEII’s death and the chronic laziness of the heir and his wife. Suddenly, the Windsors find themselves without enough working royals to fill all of the military and charity patronages. Which might explain the Telegraph’s rather pointed coverage of the military patronage announcement:

Today’s announcement from Buckingham Palace of 21 new honorary appointments in the Armed Services for “working members” of the Royal family, chiefly concern those regiments, corps and units formerly headed by Elizabeth II. That said, some roles have been passed to other members of the Royal family by their present holder, the King, presumably to maintain tri-service balance.

Clearly, part of the much larger current review and redistribution of the late Queen’s patronages, which numbered at her death in excess of 600 organisations, these armed services patronages, for that is in effect what they are, have been much easier to deal with than those in the charity and other sectors, such as the patronage of Sunningdale Ladies Golf Club and the Royal Caledonian Curling Club.

However, the task cannot have been entirely easy – particularly when trying to make personal royal links to the units – by the absence from the working royal roster of the Sussexes, the Duke of York and his daughters. Add to that the increasing age and infirmity of the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra, who are both notably absent from the list. Indeed, it can’t be long before the Kents’ military roles come up for review and replacement, most notably the Duke’s Colonelcy of the Scots Guards, for which post the Duke of Edinburgh is the most likely candidate.

Some of the new appointments are obvious, others less so. The new Queen, who is not – unlike her late mother-in-law – particularly noted for her religiosity, surprisingly takes on only one new job to add to her existing three colonelcies. She has been made Patron of the Royal Army Chaplains’ Department. This is hardly an onerous task, since chaplains are distributed among the whole of the Army. Unless, of course, she is planning to meet all of them individually.

The Princess Royal’s only new job, Deputy Colonel-in-Chief of the Royal Regiment of Scotland, must have been an easy call given her strong links to Scotland and her existing appointments with the regiment’s 1st and 6th Battalions. The same is true of the helicopter pilot, the Prince of Wales, who assumes the role of Colonel-in-Chief of the Army Air Corps, and the Duchess of Gloucester’s appointment as Colonel-in-Chief of the Adjutant General’s Corps, of which she has been Deputy Colonel-in-Chief since 1992.

Less obvious are some of the other jobs. Indeed, the attempt in the Buckingham Palace announcement to make personal links are at times somewhat strained, if not entirely absent. The Prince of Wales is not particularly associated with Mercia but is now Colonel-in-Chief of its eponymous regiment.

… And while on the subject of the newly-created Duke of Edinburgh’s colonelcies, surely the Palace knows that he is Colonel, not Colonel-in-Chief, of the London Guards as stated in the announcement. Still on the subject of accuracy, guardees the length and breadth of the land must be harrumphing over their kippers at seeing the King described as “Colonel-in-Chief of the Household Division”, when no such appointment exists. He is, of course, ex officio Colonel-in-Chief of all the regiments of the Household Division, but that’s not the same thing. Standards are clearly slipping at the big house.

[From The Telegraph]

I guess I’ve developed an ear for the nuances of British bitchery, because I snort-laughed a few times: “The new Queen, who is not – unlike her late mother-in-law – particularly noted for her religiosity” and “He is, of course, ex officio Colonel-in-Chief of all the regiments of the Household Division, but that’s not the same thing. Standards are clearly slipping at the big house.” LMAO. They also seem to be hitting King Charles and Buckingham Palace for not working faster to redistribute all of QEII’s 600-plus patronages, and I agree – it’s been a year, surely they should be further into the process. But the problem is as the Telegraph notes – too few working royals. Please, this is so funny.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Remember how excited people were for Jennifer Lawrence’s “raunchy” sex-comedy, No Hard Feelings? Well, it made about $85 million worldwide, which is pretty decent for a stand-alone R-rated comedy. It’s not a franchise, it was an original script, and the film starred an Oscar-winning actress. One of the reasons why the film got so much buzz is because… Hollywood rarely makes those kinds of movies anymore. The mid-budget – or even low-budget – comedy, with an original script and no merchandising tie-ins, nothing based on a game or a toy or a comic book. In the ‘80s and ‘90s, those kinds of comedies came out every other week. Some were middling, but some were great. And they just disappeared into thin air over the past ten-to-fifteen years. Well, Adam DeVine has a theory about that.

Adam Devine appeared on Theo Von’s “This Past Weekend” podcast during his press tour for Netflix’s “The Out-Laws” and shared his theory that Marvel movies and other superhero films killed the traditional Hollywood comedy. The “Workaholics” and “Pitch Perfect” alum noted that because Marvel movies rely so much on humor (see the “Ant-Man” and “Guardians of the Galaxy” franchises, for instance), they ended up becoming Hollywood’s new de facto comedy films.

“You watch comedies nowadays and you’re like, this is not a f–king comedy,” Devine said. “Where are the jokes? Where are the bits? There’s still good [comedy] shows, but movie comedy…it’s hard. My theory: I think Marvel ruined it. I feel like superhero movies ruined comedies because you go to the theater and you expect to watch something that cost $200 million to make, and comedy movies aren’t that. So you’re like, ‘Why would I spend the same amount of money to go watch a little comedy in the theater if I can spend that and watch something that is worth $200 million?’ And they still make those movies kind of funny, like, ‘Oh my god, is that raccoon talking? This is hilarious!’ Which it is, but it’s not a real comedy.”

“Every studio used to put out several comedies a year,” Devine noted. “And there were like 45 comedies in the theater per year. So every week or so, there’s a new comedy in the theaters. Now, last year, there was like 6 or 7. It’s crazy.”

[From Variety]

I don’t think DeVine is wrong, per se, but his theory is missing the bigger picture. Yes, some of those Marvel films function as “buddy-comedies” just with a massive budget. But the larger issue is that with the success of those comic book films and the Star Wars films, Hollywood simply decided that they wouldn’t “gamble” on a moderate-budget original comedy when they could make a bigger gamble on a film which had a “built-in audience.” The same thing happened with rom-coms – instead of making comedy or romantic-comedy theatrical releases, all of that kind of thing has moved to streaming.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

This Dan Wootton story continues to be unofficially embargoed in almost all of the British media outlets. Byline Times has just published their eighth exclusive exposé, and as of this moment, only the Guardian is doing any kind of follow-up reporting. Last week, we did hear that the Mail has suspended Wootton following what sounds like an ass-covering internal investigation. The Sun is also conducting an investigation, only they hired a neutral third-party to look into the claims raised by Byline. Wootton still appears on GB News and he’s still trying to influence Britain’s right-wing political system. Meanwhile, Byline’s reporting just gets worse and worse:

Dan Wootton met young male reality TV stars through his work as a prominent showbusiness journalist and then privately propositioned them to do photo shoots at his home for “underwear brands” in an “abhorrent abuse of power”, Byline Times can reveal.

Among those Wootton targeted over an eight-year period between 2011 and 2019 – during which he was working for The Sun, ITV and the Daily Mail – were The Only Way is Essex star Kirk Norcoss, Big Brother contestant JJ Bird, and an X Factor singer who was just out of his teens. Each had first encountered Wootton – today a star presenter on GB News – as a result of their involvement in the television industry, on which it was his highly-paid job to report and through which he enjoyed a powerful media influence.

Wootton was on his first day as a columnist and feature writer for the Daily Mail in December 2011 when he approached Big Brother series 11 contestant JJ Bird, then 25, and who is today a boxing trainer having also been a pro-fighter. Mr Bird, who refused Wootton’s offers, is among the first group of people in the public eye to discuss their interactions with Wootton.

He told Byline Times: “Dan told me he was an amateur photographer and was ‘working with underwear brands’. He invited me to a test shoot at his flat with a fee attached. At that time, I was trying to fund my boxing career and develop my career in entertainment. Dan was a big name in the world of showbiz journalism who had the power to do that – plus anything where I was going to receive payment would obviously have been very useful. Looking back now, it was a complete abuse of his power and position and he should not have been offering to do that kind of thing.”

[From Byline Times]

I don’t want to delve too deep into Wootton’s sexual pathology, but it’s clear that Britain’s media culture has an unsettling “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy when it comes to powerful men preying on boys and much younger men. The fact that no one said anything and Wootton operated like this for years, while simultaneously running dozens of kompromat, blackmail and catfishing schemes – it’s just so shocking.

Photos courtesy of GB News and AvalonRed.

Do you think the Duchess of Sussex gives much of a thought to the Princess of Wales whatsoever at this point? Let me put it another way: do you think Meghan thinks of Kate with anything other than pity? I still think about how Meghan referenced Kate in the Oprah interview and it was clear that there was some sympathy, even pity there. That bothered Kate and it bothered everyone else in the UK – that Meghan didn’t idealize Kate or think Kate was admirable. Even in Prince Harry’s Spare, Kate is a pitiful figure who gets irrationally angry about Meghan’s “baby brain” comment. All of which to say, I don’t believe this story, but I guess it’s worth discussing:

Meghan Markle is reportedly upset that her sister-in-law, Kate Middleton, still hasn’t apologized for the way the Duchess of Sussex was treated when she was a working member of the royal family. The “Suits” alum feels Middleton and her husband, Prince William, have “never been held accountable” for their actions, a source told Closer magazine (via the Mirror), adding that the pair “never apologized and have seemingly got away with it.”

The source added that Markle was “convinced” people would sympathize with her following the release of her and husband Prince Harry’s Netflix documentary, “Harry & Meghan.”

“That hasn’t happened,” the source claimed. “This isn’t how she envisioned things would turn out, but Meghan knows the truth and will tell anyone who will listen that Kate had an edge to her.”

A spokesperson for Markle did not reply for comment.

[From Page Six]

Accountability would be nice and I believe Kate has “an edge” – the edge of a bully, the edge of a Karen, the edge of a passive-aggressive a–hole. But yeah, I just don’t even think Meghan is hung up on this anymore, if she ever was. It’s also weird to assume that tens of millions of people watched the Netflix docuseries and came out of it without any sympathy for Meghan? Anyway, what a weird story – Kate and William have made it clear for three years that the Sussexes live rent-free in their heads, now we’re supposed to believe that Meghan wanders around Montecito, telling people that Kate is unpleasant?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Back in April, we were briefly obsessed with the idea that Sydney Sweeney and Glen Powell cheated on their respective partners while filming a romance in Australia. Glen’s three-year relationship with Gigi Paris ended the moment people noticed how flirty Glen and Sydney were together. Sydney’s fiance Jonathan Davino didn’t seem to go away, although he definitely gave off the vibe of someone who would stick around, even if his fiance cheated on him. Anyway, that was months ago and the rumors died down. Now Sydney is addressing some of it in her Variety cover story, which she did pre-strike as part of her Emmy Award campaign (for Reality). Some highlights:

All of the gossip about her life: “Sometimes I feel beat up by it,” Sweeney says pensively. “It’s hard to sit back and watch, and not be able to stand up for yourself.” Her study of the industry has yielded crucial insights: Never respond to the rumors, and always find a connection back to the project. “I’ll see my uncle comment on things and I’m like, ‘You gotta stop.’ But it’s so hard, because I grew up in a small town, and they don’t get the business of it all. Just like Reality, it was all these tabloids and headlines, but no one knew the actual story.”

She never had a plan B: “I was going to five to 10 auditions a week, and not getting a single callback. I always believed that if you have a plan B, you’re prepared to fail. No matter how hard or how long it was going to take, I was just going to keep working at it.”

Just as she found work, her parents divorced and filed for bankruptcy. “My parents sacrificed so much to support my dream, and they lost so much during it. I just felt a responsibility to show them that it was worth it,” she says. Did the sacrifices her parents made contribute to these crises? “I’ll never know,” she says. “I think as a kid, as the eldest, I feel a responsibility. They’ll say no, or they’ll say yes, depending on what fight it is. But I’ll always feel responsible. But that’s OK.”

Her mother’s infamous birthday party: Photos of the celebration showed guests in what appeared to be Blue Lives Matter garb and MAGA-styled red caps later revealed to read “Make Sixty Great Again.” “There were so many misinterpretations. The people in the pictures weren’t even my family. The people who brought the things that people were upset about were actually my mom’s friends from L.A. who have kids that are walking outside in the Pride parade, and they thought it would be funny to wear because they were coming to Idaho.”

The rumors that she had an affair with Glen Powell: “It’s a rom-com. That’s what people want! Glen and I don’t really care. We have so much fun together, and we respect each other so much; he’s such a hard worker, and I’m a hard worker. We’re excited for the press tour, and I literally just left ADR with him. We talk all the time like, ‘That’s really funny.’” In a media environment that’s outside even a gifted actor’s control, there can be a certain pleasure in leaning into the narrative. “They want it. It’s fun to give it to ’em.”

She wants to find a balance between her career & family: “I always thought I’d have a kid by now. I always wanted to be a young mom. I love acting, I love the business, I love producing, I love all of it. But what’s the point if I’m not getting to share it with a family? The time will come, and I’ll have four kids. And they will come with me everywhere and be my best friends.”

On Madame Web: “I think it’s different from what people expect a superhero movie to be. Quote that! That’s a quote, because the tabloids will pick up everything else we talk about.”

[From Variety]

Much has been made about the fact that Sydney is the rare hot Hollywood commodity who is NOT a nepo baby, and I think you can see that here – Sydney is very much about the grind, the hustle, what’s next, how do I leverage my power, will I have time to have a family, all of the stuff that nepo babies don’t even think about, frankly. As for what she says about Glen Powell – I learned in this piece that Sydney put the film (Anyone But You) together and she produced it. Meaning, even if Glen and Sydney are not boning, they’re going to play up those rumors throughout the promotion to help sell the movie. (And I do think they were boning.)

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images, Instagram. Cover courtesy of Variety.