Back in 2009-2010, there was a particularly disturbing story in the tabloids about Morgan Freeman. By “story,” I mean “tabloid reporting, including interviews, for several years.” The story was that Morgan Freeman was having some kind of affair with his step-granddaughter, and the affair destroyed his marriage and for a while, many believed that he would end up marrying the young woman. That story completely disappeared after several years. Then, during the height of Me Too, CNN reported on Freeman’s years of inappropriate behavior around female costars and colleagues. All of which to say, there’s a reason why we haven’t written about him in years. Well, Freeman has a role in Zach Braff’s new film, A Good Person. To promote the film, Freeman gave an interview and he talked about how much he hates “Black History Month” and the term “African-American.”

On Black History Month and the term “African American.” “Two things I can say publicly that I do not like. Black History Month is an insult. You’re going to relegate my history to a month? Also, ‘African American’ is an insult. I don’t subscribe to that title. Black people have had different titles all the way back to the n-word and I do not know how these things get such a grip, but everyone uses ‘African American’. What does it really mean? Most Black people in this part of the world are mongrels. And you say Africa as if it’s a country when it’s a continent, like Europe.”

On Denzel Washington’s quote “I’m very proud to be Black, but Black is not all I am.”: Freeman added: “Yes, exactly. I’m in total agreement. You can’t define me that way.”

He can’t be a chameleon anymore: “When my career started in film I wanted to be a chameleon. I remember De Niro early on doing very different parts. Almost unrecognizable as the same actor. I had opportunities like that. But as you mature in this business, eventually you become a star. Then you’re pretty screwed in terms of referring to yourself as a character actor. You play a lot of the same type of role — people hire you and say, ‘It’s you that I want.’ And you live with it. I don’t think I’ve done much in the last 10 years that was much different. ‘Driving Miss Daisy’ and ‘Glory’ were different. Now? It’s just…me. The character will adapt itself to you rather than the other way round, so I do what piques my interest. Sometimes it’s just the money alone.”

[From Variety]

Regardless of all of the scandalous sh-t which has largely been buried, I think it’s fine that an 85-year-old actor is simply like “yeah, I play the same character constantly, what do you want, the money is good.” It’s the voice, really – his voice is so iconic, he got to the point where he couldn’t play those smaller character roles. As for “African-American” – it’s part of a larger conversation about how Black folks want to identify or not identify. It’s none of my business!

I also think every month should be Black History Month, or rather, Black history should be ingrained in all history education. But that’s what got Republican-led legislatures and Republican governors banning Toni Morrison for being “too woke.” Republicans are literally running for office on a platform of “don’t teach children Black history.” And they’re winning.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

This Armani gown is lovely but kind of boring on Rachel Weisz. [RCFA]
People already have some really strong feelings about Ari Aster’s Beau Is Afraid. Some people think it’s amazing, other people hate it deeply. [Pajiba]
Madonna sent love to Sam Smith. [Dlisted]
Background on the Shawn Mendes-Camila Cabello Coachella hookup. [LaineyGossip]
I loved the big reveal on this week’s Succession (spoilers). [Jezebel]
Justin Theroux & Woody Harrelson went to the premiere of their new show. [JustJared]
Are you interested in Chevalier? [GFY]
This history of Barbie’s friend Midge. [Buzzfeed]
Sounds like SpaceX isn’t doing too good. [Towleroad]
The latest trailer for The Idol – can we ignore this mess? [Egotastic]

Embed from Getty Images

Last August/September, it honestly felt like Bradley Cooper and Irina Shayk were sort of getting back together. Ever since their split several years ago, they stayed on good terms and co-parented their daughter Lea in New York. Before Lea’s school year started last summer, they took a family vacation and it seemed to be a new era. There was talk of a possible reconciliation, and Irina definitely let it be known that she wanted a second child. Then… nothing. Those stories faded in a few months. I kept expecting a low-key pregnancy announcement from Irina, but nada. Then, this weekend, Irina went to Coachella… and she partied with Leonardo DiCaprio. Oh, nooooo.

Leonardo DiCaprio and Irina Shayk are out in the desert. Over the weekend, DiCaprio, 48, and Shayk, 37, were spotted mingling at Levi and Don Julio’s Neon Carnival event after Saturday’s Coachella performances wrapped for the evening at the Empire Polo Club in Indio, California.

Shayk and a friend were seen dancing with DiCaprio, who wore a plain black baseball cap, matching T-shirt, a necklace and mask pulled underneath his chin when the photo was taken. The model, who shares daughter Lea with ex Bradley Cooper, had posted photos on Instagram from the annual music festival earlier in the weekend.

DiCaprio and Shayk, who are longtime friends, were part of a larger group at the event that included model Stella Maxwell and the actor’s close bud Tobey Maguire. Representatives for DiCaprio and Shayk did not immediately respond to PEOPLE’s request for comment Monday.

[From People]

I mean… she’s 37 years old. Leo wouldn’t even *pretend* to date someone that “old.” He had to swallow his pride just to fake-date 27-year-old Gigi Hadid. That being said, Irina might view Leo as something of a “white whale,” and who knows, she might even convince him to give it a try. I just don’t think they’re each other’s types though – it’s far more likely that they’re all friends and they can hang out together like that because Leo’s not going to try anything with a 37-year-old. I bet Leo’s team is happy that he was photographed with a 37-year-old though. They’re really working their asses off to convince everyone that Leo isn’t a sad cliche (he is though).

Embed from Getty Images

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by irina shayk (@irinashayk)

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Instagram, Getty.

I remember some criticism of the Duchess of Sussex’s “look” on her wedding day. People had complaints about her Givenchy gown. People had complaints about her hair. People had complaints about how she was a Black American woman marrying the charismatic ginger prince. There were a lot of forces working against Meghan on that day, in the months before her wedding day and, obviously, in the years following her wedding day. Now, does it follow that Meghan is currently holding grudges against every single person who sniped at her wedding look? I hope not. According to complete randos, Meghan is holding one particular grudge: she hates Katy Perry, because Katy complained about the fit of Meghan’s wedding gown.

Meghan Markle is reportedly holding a grudge against pop star Katy Perry after she made negative comments about her wedding dress. The 41-year-old Duchess of Sussex, who moved to Montecito, California with Prince Harry in 2020 after they decided to step down as senior members of the Royal Family.

Meghan married Prince Harry, 37, in 2018 and wore a simple white gown designed by Givenchy for the lavish ceremony and since moving to the United States, Harry has apparently struck up a friendship with actor Orlando Bloom, who is Katy Perry’s fiance. While Harry and Orlando might be getting on like a house on fire, Meghan is reportedly still upset about comments Katy made in 2018.

During a promotional tour in the US for American Idol, Katy said regarding Meghan’s wedding dress that she “would’ve done one more fitting.”

A source told The Daily Star: “Orlando is very sympathetic towards Harry and Meghan and does reach out if he ever sees anything suspicious in the neighbourhood. However, Meghan is keenly aware of a comment that Katy Perry made in 2018 about her wedding dress and is notorious for holding a grudge.”

The source continued: “While the comment wasn’t meant to be hurtful, Meghan felt under siege at that time and was overwhelmed by arguments with staff, the Duchess of Cambridge, and Thomas Markle.” They added: “I would not expect to see Meghan and Katy carpooling to PTA meetings anytime in the future!”

[From The Daily Mirror]

The way I felt about Meghan’s dress on the day of her wedding is not the way I feel about it now. On the day, I kind of thought it was a tad too loose as well, but five years later, I kind of like the fit. I like the clean simplicity of the design and I like that she didn’t go body-con or corseted.

This is actually kind of an old story, but I didn’t cover it at the time because I thought it was so random, and who cares what Katy Perry thinks about anything, really? But given the news about Katy headlining the coronation concert next month… well… it actually looks like this might be some kind of pattern for Katy Perry? Does Katy Perry have an anti-Sussex bias??

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Joshua Jackson is currently promoting Paramount+’s Fatal Attraction limited series, where he plays the lead character, Dan, the one who cheats on his wife with Alex (played by Lizzy Caplan). There were rumors about infidelity when it came to Joshua’s longest relationship, with Diane Kruger. Kruger’s supporters always swore up and down that Joshua cheated on her, and yet Kruger was the one flaunting her affair with Norman Reedus before she and Josh broke up. I bring that up because Joshua is asked about his own thoughts about infidelity, and his answer is interesting. Almost as if he’s been on different sides of it. Some highlights from his Times interview:

On Dawson’s Creek: “I think the secret to the show was that it didn’t talk to young people like they’re stupid. Those characters and what they were going through felt real. We were trying to tell stories about those moments in your life and we were close enough to it in our own ages that we deeply remembered what that angst was.”

Dawson’s changed his life. “I wasn’t poor but I also wasn’t economically stable, so being on that show for that long gave me the chance to put my sister through school and helped my mum buy a home. It changed my life.”

He loves his career these days: He says he is now in the “golden era of my career. This is when the roles as an actor are the most interesting.”

Stepping into an iconic Michael Douglas role: “The film is beloved and iconic and so burnt into our collective psyche. I was intimidated by that. Ultimately I’m curious and interested in portraying characters who are examining the frailties of being a grown-up, and particularly a grown man.”

What are his own views on cheating? “I think an affair can be forgiven. We’re all grown-ups. No one wants to be cheated on and there is massive repair to be done. Affairs aren’t about the partner, they’re about the person who has transgressed. It’s not purely about the sex. There’s a deeper violation.”

Why he felt ready to get married & become a father in his early 40s: “Partially it’s age. I’m old enough to be able to do this. Partially it’s about finding somebody in the right moment of life. If we had met five years earlier we probably would have had a torrid affair, but all the rest of this stuff, I was just not ready. I didn’t think I ever wanted to get married.”

Falling for Jodie Turner Smith: “In the beginning we did this dance with each other like, ‘Oh, this is casual.’ Except that we’d spend every moment together and find reasons to be in other cities together at the same time.” She proposed to him during a New Year’s Eve holiday in Nicaragua. “I don’t know if she planned it or if it was a spur-of-the-moment thing, but out popped a proposal I was not expecting and the organic and instinctive answer was yes. Six months later she was pregnant and we were on our way. And now we have this beautiful baby who is literally the manifestation of that love. It is impossible for me to look into the face of my child without feeling love for my wife.” Indeed, Jackson is besotted with fatherhood. “It has changed me in every single possible way,” he says.

He’s embracing middle age. “Being in my forties is far and away the best decade. I wouldn’t want to go back to my twenties again, that amount of angst. I would make more money doing four episodes of Dawson’s Creek than most of my friends’ parents made in a year. That was the centre of my impostor syndrome: ‘You’re trying to set me up to be a role model to kids, and I definitely am not, and you’re paying me all this money that I don’t deserve.’ ”

[From The Times]

Maybe he’s a real prick in real life, but I came away from this piece just liking him so much and admiring the man he’s become. He’s always been one of my favorites though – I like his answers about finally feeling ready and meeting the right person, how fatherhood has changed him and how much he adores Jodie. As for what he says about affairs…”I think an affair can be forgiven. We’re all grown-ups. No one wants to be cheated on and there is massive repair to be done.” Yeah, I kind of agree? For some people, it will be a dealbreaker, for others, they’ll try to repair their relationship. It sounds like he’s cheated and been cheated on.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

In 2018, Clarence House released two photos for then-Prince Charles’s 70th birthday. The photos were from a family photoshoot, where Charles and Camilla posed with Prince Harry and Prince William and their wives, plus Charles’s grandchildren at the time. That was the last portrait session with these particular people, and now King Charles has included one of the photos in his coronation program. The Daily Mail and other outlets are acting like this is the most scandalous thing ever, the fact that Charles would actually include a photo of (gasp) Harry and Meghan. It feels more notable that it’s likely that Buckingham Palace has no new photos of Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet with their grandfather. Add to that, grandpa made a point of not inviting them to his hat party.

Meanwhile, Charles and Camilla are reportedly taking a pre-Chubbly holiday in Scotland. They must have traveled up to Balmoral soon after Charles appeared at the Sandhurst graduation last week. People Magazine points out that his mother did the same before her coronation – she spent a week relaxing in Scotland with Philip and her corgis. These people and their vacations, my goodness.

And finally, this story is getting so much attention, probably because it sounds so gross. Buckingham Palace released a video of one of their chefs making a “coronation quiche,” and they’re providing the recipe for people to make it at home to celebrate Charles and Camilla’s crowning. Like, I’m not on Team British Food Is Terrible – I think a lot of your Sunday roasts look amazing, and I would definitely try some pub food. But this quiche looks so unappetizing to me – it’s just spinach and cheese, two of my least favorite foods. The palace really should have done something like Coronation Chicken or a Coronation Roast. Even a Coronation Salad would have been better than this. (I also think anything involving a blind bake is probably way too complicated for most British home cooks, but what do I know.)

Introducing… Coronation Quiche!

Chosen personally by Their Majesties, The King and The Queen Consort have shared a recipe in celebration of the upcoming #CoronationBigLunch taking place up and down the country. pic.twitter.com/aVcw9tNarP

— The Royal Family (@RoyalFamily) April 17, 2023

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

I didn’t cover this last week, because it was too vile to even excerpt, but Dan Wootton was predictably apoplectic about the Duchess of Sussex avoiding the coronation. He called her egotistical, “gutless,” openly expressed his desire for Harry and Meghan to divorce, and said the only reason why she wasn’t coming was because she feared being booed. He also wrote that the Princess of Wales “in particular is delighted she won’t have to face her treacherous sister-in-law at the King’s Coronation next month. But it would be no surprise if her husband staged another necklace-ripping duel over the dog bowl at Kensington Palace such is the visceral anger that remains at the highest levels of the Royal Family.” This is what William and Kate want their toady to write: that Kate is delighted that she won’t have to be around a Black woman, and that William will likely “stage” another violent assault on Harry.

Well, just to drive home the point that Dan Wootton is far from sane, he’s written another Mail column: “William is right to snub Harry during the Coronation. The Duke of Woke already made the late Queen’s funeral all about his and Meghan’s psychodrama – this time the focus must be on the King.” William has absolutely been briefing every friendly rota reporter about his plans to snub and ignore Harry. It’s giving Tiny Flaccid Energy, especially since I feel pretty strongly that Harry was the one asking to be seated nowhere near William. But please, allow Wootton to tell you all about how William is enraged, angry, irate, furious. It’s giving non compos mentis.

Peg’s silent treatment: What I do respect one hundred per cent, however, is the steely determination of our heir to the throne Prince William to give short shrift to the Duke of Delusion. On his upcoming solo visit for the Coronation, Harry will be subjected to his older brother’s brutal silent treatment. There will be no reconciliation talks; certainly not the public or private apology Harry and Meghan were laughably demanding up until just a few weeks ago.

Irate William: Understandably, he remains irate about Harry’s behaviour the past three years, but especially since the death of the late Queen seven months ago, as the Sussexes used their anti-Commonwealth Netflix series and publication of spiteful autobiography Spare to cause maximum damage to the British monarchy during some of its darkest hours. That’s before you get to his palpable fury that Meghan also used two major TV platforms to cast aspersions on his beloved wife Kate, knowing that, as a future Queen, it was impossible for her to conduct any form of fight back to reveal the truth.

The future of the monarchy: He knows full well that, for the future of the monarchy, next month’s Coronation simply cannot be upstaged by the constant distractions set up by Harry and Meghan. Unfathomably to William, his selfish brother already managed to make the funerals of the late Queen and Prince Phillip – not to mention the otherwise magnificent Platinum Jubilee – a great deal about his and Meghan’s unending psychodrama, causing untold stress to their older relatives.

William’s previous attempts to make peace: On each of these occasions, William rightly feels the goodwill has been thrown back in his face, all while creating more headlines about the desperately intense feud. This time he is determined not to fall into the same trap; the stakes are simply too high.

They’re terrified of Meghan: The decision for Meghan to stay at home, which I believe is because of her innate fear of being booed by a furious British public, has at least made the scenario easier to navigate. William and his team were initially fearful that the presence of the former Hollywood actress alongside her husband at her Coronation would provide a big distraction, with genuine concerns the couple’s time in London together would upstage the king with public appearance to illustrate the woke brand they want to enforce on the Royal Family.

[From The Daily Mail]

The rest of it is just Wootton slobbering all over William for being so wise, keen and full of spite towards his brother and sister-in-law. That is also what William wants – he wants a total capitulation from the press, from his brother, from his sister-in-law and from his father. What’s interesting is for all of William’s rage-briefing about his juvenile plans to “give Harry the silent treatment” (like he’s f–king 5 years old), I’ve gotten the sense from Buckingham Palace’s briefings that… William wasn’t part of any of these negotiations. It was just Harry dealing with his father and his father’s courtiers. William was merely *told* what was negotiated after the fact, which probably made him shriek with rage even louder. Surely that’s a much bigger problem? William and Kate are desperate to be included in any narrative about Harry, so much so that they’re crying to Wootton about how they’ll ignore Harry and maybe William will assault Harry again.

Meanwhile, the palace announced that Kate and William will do a day of events in Birmingham on Thursday. In the past month, they’ve basically only done one “event” – the church walk on Easter.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

Note: this is a second version of a story I covered earlier, about Princess Kate “resenting” Meghan. Some backstory: on the day QEII died, King Charles called Prince Harry. The conversation likely took place a short time after the Sussexes confirmed that they would travel to Balmoral, which is where (at the time) QEII was barely hanging on. Instead of keeping Harry informed about his beloved grandmother, Charles used that moment to insult and disrespect Meghan and tell Harry not to “bring her” to Balmoral. We knew that in the hours after QEII’s passing, because the Windsors openly and gleefully briefed the media about how Charles’s first act as king was banning his Black daughter-in-law from Balmoral. Harry also addressed that moment in Spare, and he basically confirmed exactly how disgusting it was that Charles used that moment to denigrate Meghan and order her not to come.

What was interesting about the whole debacle was that Kate, the soon-to-be Princess of Wales, was never flying up to Balmoral with her husband. It was one of her kids’ first days of a new school, and she had to pick them up. That would have been my excuse, if I worked for royal comms – lean into the motherhood-above-all-else thing. Instead, they made it sound like of course Kate never would have been invited, because she “knows her place” unlike Meghan. Well, to continue with that bizarre narrative, both Russell Myers and Robert Jobson are now leaning into this idea that Charles asked Kate to stay away from Balmoral as a way to keep Meghan away too…??

Royal Editor Russell Myers says Meghan Markle was asked to steer clear of the late Queen Elizabeth II amid “upset and upheaval” within the royal family over the couple’s lucrative media deals. Mr Myers was responding to claims King Charles had “struck a deal” with Princess Kate that she keep Meghan away from the Queen’s bedside to avoid upset in the monarch’s final moments.

Royal expert Robert Jobson had earlier told the Daily Telegraph of the steps King Charles took to ensure the former actress was not around amid the Queen’s ill health.

“Privately, he wanted to say Meghan was not welcome but he couldn’t say that to Harry so he personally intervened and asked Kate to stay back so that it was fairer on Meghan,” Mr Jobson said. Speaking to Royal Report host Caroline Di Russo, Mr Myers said while he wouldn’t use the words “strike a deal” there was a lot of anxiety surrounding Harry and Meghan’s return for the late monarch’s funeral.

“William and Kate’s children had just started a new school, had just move to Windsor from London, so obviously a very unsettling time for the whole family. And after the late Queen’s passing you of course could understand the sort of anxiousness around the family that Harry and Meghan would fly back. During that period of time we had a lot of upset and upheaval within the royal family to do with Harry and Meghan – the Oprah interview, the possibility of Harry writing his book at that stage and a Netflix interview on the cards.”

Mr Myers said there were conversations between Harry and Charles about Meghan but Princess Kate’s choice to stay back was more likely “a family decision”.

“Whenever Harry and Meghan were in and around the royal family it was becoming a bit of an issue so those conversations really took place between Harry and his father,” he said. “For Kate to stay away and look after her children was probably more of a family decision to work out what’s best for the overall feeling of the family at that time.”

[From Sky News]

This continues to be utterly bizarre, the haphazard, months-long debate about why Kate didn’t fly to Balmoral that day. It’s always been so puzzling to me, because “the cover story” made perfect sense at the time: of course Kate wanted to be in Windsor to pick up the kids from their first week at school, and of course she wanted to be the one to tell them about QEII’s passing too. Why wasn’t that explanation ever good enough? Why did it become “Charles ordered Kate to stay back as some kind of excuse to ban Meghan.” I’ve also never understood why Charles and the rest of the family was so f–king nasty about Meghan simply wanting to physically be with Harry on the day his grandmother died. Like, this was how Charles wanted to start his reign: banning his son’s Black wife from Balmoral because Harry must grieve alone?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Weeks ago, we heard the somewhat sudden news that Carole Middleton hired an “adviser” to help her sell Party Pieces, the “party supply” catalog company widely reported to be the source of the Middleton family’s mysterious wealth. It was no secret that PP’s business has been failing for years, and while the Middletons blamed the pandemic and the post office, I would argue that party-supply discount stores and Amazon are the real reasons why PP has lost millions. Plus, not for nothing, I never believed that PP was all that successful to begin with. Well, recently we heard that Carole and Mike Middleton are definitely selling the business and they’re planning on retiring to spend more time with their grandkids. Well, funny story – PP’s business is in such shambles that the Middletons are offering a six-figure “dowry” to whoever “buys” the company.

Party Pieces, the online party goods supplier founded by the Princess of Wales’s parents, is considering handing a six-figure sum to a buyer as part of efforts to offload the business.

Sky News has learnt that a dowry deal is one of the options being considered by Carole and Michael Middleton as they seek new owners for the company they founded in 1987. Sources said on Monday that a dowry was under discussions with prospective bidders as the Middletons and their advisers at Interpath, the restructuring firm, seek to finalise a deal.

One of the leading contenders to acquire Party Pieces is Club Green, a family-owned business which has also operated for decades in the party goods sector, the sources added.

The Middletons, who conceived the business as they were seeking inspiration for daughter Kate’s fifth birthday, were reported to have instructed Interpath to find a buyer last month. Insiders said there were “multiple parties” interested in acquiring Party Pieces.

The prospective dowry is said to be worth less than £1m. According to information circulated to potential bidders, Party Pieces has shown “some recent UK performance contraction during international expansion and focus on margins”. The company is reported to have made losses in the last financial year for which accounts have been filed.

One industry source said the Middletons were “trying to do the right thing for the business and its stakeholders”. A spokesperson for Mrs Middleton declined to comment, while Interpath also declined to comment.

[From Sky News]

While I don’t have an MBA, I can safely say that it’s a really horrible sign that the Middletons have to pony up hundreds of thousands of dollars/pounds to SELL their business. While we knew the business wasn’t healthy or successful, before now, I never really considered the fact that PP likely holds more debt than it’s worth. Think of it less like a “dowry” and more like “whoever ‘buys’ Party Pieces will be buying debt, and the whole thing will probably be some huge tax write-off.” They’re not looking for someone to buy the business, this is a fire sale and someone is basically just being paid to take their remaining product and then PP will cease to exist. Jesus H. This is a horrible look for the Future Queen’s parents. Carole so wanted to be queen too.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red, Cover Images.

On March 25, Jonathan Majors was arrested in New York for assault and harassment. The police report – which TMZ leaked – showed that his girlfriend told police that they were in the back of a taxi and they fought over his phone, and during the fight, he struck her and strangled her. As it turned out, the assault was probably much more violent than we first believed, and at one point, the victim collapsed and passed out. She was hospitalized, which is where (I believe) that police became involved. Majors’ lawyer put out a statement saying that it was all a misunderstanding from a hysterical, emotionally imbalanced woman, and that they also had a statement from the woman where she recanted. A week later, Majors’ lawyer released that “recantation” – the texts she sent him after he was arrested, in which she sounded terrified of him and which included details which were extremely damaging to Majors. It was insane that his lawyer released them. Well, it looks like Hollywood wants no part of this sh-tshow. His management team is dumping him.

Talent manager Entertainment 360 has dropped Jonathan Majors, several sources tell us. The recent move by Majors’ longtime manager comes three weeks after the Magazine Dreams star was arrested on domestic violence charges in New York City.

Currently starring in Creed III and Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, Majors’ departure was due to issues surrounding the actor’s personal behavior, we are informed.

Majors’ representation problems don’t stop with Entertainment 360. PR firm The Lede Company also initiated a break with the Avengers actor in the last month. As a more minor element of this, Majors and fashion house Valentino “mutually agreed” that the actor would not be attending this year’s Met Gala as one of its guests.

Majors has already shot the second season of Marvel/Disney+’s Loki, in which he reprises his uber-villain role of Kang the Conqueror, and won’t go before the cameras in Avengers: The Kang Dynasty for quite some time. Deadline hears there’s been zero conversations in the Marvel camp to drop Majors from the MCU.

[From Deadline]

There’s enough anecdotal evidence to suggest that this March 25 incident was far from the first time, but it doesn’t matter if it was the first or fiftieth – what he did to this poor woman is awful and hopefully there’s enough evidence to actually put him in jail or make him face serious consequences. That could be Marvel’s calculation – why fire him when it’s possible he could go to jail? But yeah, Marvel needs to be more proactive. As for Majors being dumped by his management and his PR – reminds me of what happened to Armie Hammer. Hammer lost his entire team in a matter of weeks.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.