At the end of 2024, various royal commentators tried to take stock of the Windsors’ sh-tshow year. King Charles’s cancer, Princess Kate’s disappearance, a “kill order” on a palace-released frankenphoto, more sleazy Prince Andrew shenanigans, Princess Anne getting kicked in the head by a horse, and on and on. The Daily Mail’s A.N. Wilson did a summary of all of that, but instead of striking a rosy tone about how 2025 could be better for the Windsors, Wilson makes the family sound like they’re on their last leg, especially with “future king” Prince William. What’s also remarkable is that this is a highly critical piece and yet… Wilson did not mention the Sussexes whatsoever. Usually, the conversation is “yes, the Windsors are doing terribly, but we still hate Harry and Meghan!” There’s none of that. Some highlights from “Without their links to the Church and Armed Forces, the Royal Family are just a bunch of celebrities. Sooner or later, that means the end of the monarchy.”

Charles & Camilla in Australia: “In spite of their age and vulnerability, the King and Queen visited Australia in October and put up as robust a defence of the monarchy as they could. It was impossible not to feel sorry for them having to endure that embarrassing week when, despite displays of loyalty by many Australians, the couple almost seemed to be there on sufferance. When an Aboriginal member of Parliament bellowed her nation’s grievances at King Charles, it prompted many to ask themselves: How long before this voice of Republicanism becomes as strong back in the United Kingdom?”

William got heckled: That premonition seemed to come true just weeks later when Prince William was heckled with the chant ‘Free Palestine’ during a visit to Northern Ireland – as if he were to blame for the tragic situation in the Middle East. Such an outburst in the presence of Queen Elizabeth II would have been unthinkable. ‘How long?’, the Republicans must gleefully have wondered – how long?

The Slumlord Windsors: At present, Republicanism is not popular. But there are signs the movement is gathering strength. One of the most damaging arguments against the House of Windsor is its personal wealth and the way it is exercised – which was put under stark scrutiny this autumn. A joint investigation by Channel 4’s Dispatches and The Sunday Times revealed some of the ways in which Prince William and his father have accrued truly vast sums of money through the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster….The huge personal wealth of the Windsors is not a problem while they are popular and continue to believe in the constitution they sustain. But it is undeniably an embarrassment. Even the most fervent monarchist cannot really believe that the vast revenues from the duchies should be regarded as the royals’ private money. It isn’t their money, is it? Not in the way that your wage packet or salary is yours.

The sorry state of modern royalty: Prince William has long strived to prove he is a modern royal. Last year, for example, it was reported that he saw no reason why his son George should – unless he chose – be a member of the Church of England or serve in the Armed Forces. That’s fine. We can all see that William is a very different person from his father. He has described it himself as being royal without a capital R. All of this works perfectly well, so long as the popular members of the Royal Family are in robust health and the monarchy continues to be stable. But when the King, Queen Camilla and Princess Catherine were taken out of the picture through illness this year, we were forced to imagine what the monarchy would look like without them. The vision, certainly, was a bare one. Princess Anne remained the ‘hardest-working royal’ this year despite taking some time off in the summer when she was kicked in the head by a horse. But what of the other royals and younger members of the family? What are they doing to bolster those crucial connections with the country?

What is the point of royalty? To put it another way: What is the point of royalty if it is not spelt with a capital R? If the men and women who are serving this country do not feel a deep sense of kinship with the monarch – a kinship that is meaningless unless he or she can wear a uniform on public occasions – have we not lost one of the essential building blocks of what makes the royals royal? If – as seems increasingly possible – the Church of England is disestablished and the monarch is no longer required to belong to it, another deep link with the past is removed…Sir Keir Starmer’s Government plans to remove the last hereditary peers from the Lords. You can see why. In today’s climate, how can the hereditary principle be defended?

William is not religious & he won’t retain links to the armed forces: But, if you apply that argument to the non-elected members of our Second Chamber, surely it also applies to the monarch? Why should someone be our head of state simply because they have inherited the role? The answer would once have been: Because of the link with the Church. But Charles will surely be the last English monarch who takes that link seriously, and William is not even especially religious. Another answer is – because of the link with the Armed Forces. But, as referenced, William has suggested he does not think even that would continue when George grows up.

The burden on William & Kate: Abolish those two ingredients – church and military – along with the hereditary principle in political life, and the monarchy starts to look vulnerable. It is straying perilously close to being just a group of celebrities, like the Beckhams or Elon Musk. If that is all they are, then the end – sooner or later – will come. The burden of all this is on the shoulders of Prince William and his wife. They are the ones who have to carry the institution forward into new generations, for the sakes of their children and the majority of Britons who wish them all the very best. That burden is particularly heavy on William as the shadow of Catherine’s illness continues to loom. We can only pray she makes a full recovery, for the prospect of her absence from royal engagements – however short-term – heaps further pressure on William’s already mighty task.

[From The Daily Mail]

In Endgame, Omid Scobie wrote about how Queen Elizabeth’s courtiers always believed that the monarchy would be in safer hands with William than Charles, that the courtiers believed that William would be more popular and a more uniting figure than Charles. But since QEII’s passing, I’ve genuinely gotten the feeling that there’s some panic within the “establishment” that William is a total dud, completely unprepared for the job and utterly unwilling to do much of anything. That’s what 2024 showed us too – that with Charles and Kate largely out of commission, William could not be counted on to pick up any slack.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

At the very end of 2024, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie finalized their divorce after more than eight years. We still don’t know what shifted, but I said at the time that it would not surprise me if part of the Miraval case affected the divorce situation. As in, Angelina was given access to Brad’s emails and texts with his PR team from eight years ago, and Brad suddenly decided to settle the divorce? Yeah. But according to Team Pitt, Brad’s girlfriend Ines de Ramon was the one encouraging him to finalize everything with Angelina. Hm.

Brad Pitt’s girlfriend Ines de Ramon encouraged him to settle his nearly decade-long divorce battle with Angelina Jolie so that they could move on with their life together, sources tell Page Six.

“He was influenced by Ines to finally settle,” says the insider. “Ines wants to have a life together — with possibly children in the future — without the albatross that was the eight-year War of the Roses. She has made [it known that] her opinion is that life would be much more enjoyable with this settled,” the source added.

Another source tells us, “Ines is positive influence on Brad. She has a really good perspective on things. It’s sad how this whole thing has played out, but at least this is progress in the right direction.”

They also tell us when it comes to signing, “Both sides realized it was time to move on. it was mutually beneficial to get it done with.”

[From Page Six]

From the way it sounded, with Angelina reportedly deciding on Christmas Day to sign the papers, I would assume that Brad finally made her a real settlement offer and it was more like Angelina’s decision, rather than Ines whispering in Brad’s ear to sign the papers? But whatever, if Ines was pushing Brad to let go of his one-sided obsession with Angelina, then good for her. While I think Ines is an idiot for getting involved with Brad, I actually buy that Ines is a “good influence” on him, because of this kind of thing. Still, it doesn’t sound like Ines is getting a ring any time soon:

Brad Pitt isn’t looking to get down on one knee to propose to girlfriend Ines de Ramon … at least, not yet … TMZ has learned. Sources with direct knowledge tell TMZ … reports claiming Brad is planning to get married next year after settling his divorce from Angelina Jolie are a bunch of hogwash. We’re told the Oscar winner has no imminent engagement plans … though, he is still very happy in his relationship with Ines.

Per our sources, Ines is currently living and constantly traveling with Brad as he wraps up filming his upcoming sports action flick, “F1.” So, it’s clear these two are still going strong after first linking up in 2022.

Sources say Brad is feeling positive about the divorce settlement, as it now allows everyone involved to get on with their lives. We’re told the whole experience has been an exhausting one for Brad, but he moved on from the drama a long time ago.

[From TMZ]

Poor Ines, but also…whew, at least she won’t be legally tied to him any time soon. I hope she gets out while the getting is good, you know? I still don’t know what she’s really getting out of any of this.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Backgrid.

It was a New Year’s Day surprise, and I hope a harbinger of things to come this year: the Duchess of Sussex dropped a video on Instagram on New Year’s Day! It turns out that the @meghan IG account really does belong to Meghan. Hopefully, this is the start of something great for 2025 – Meghan on social media, promoting American Riviera Orchard and other projects, and a new era of visibility on her own terms. People Mag got the confirmation that Prince Harry was the one who filmed Meghan’s video too:

Meghan Markle is back on Instagram! On Jan. 1, Meghan, 43, kicked off the new year with a new account on the social media platform. It had long been rumored that the handle @meghan belonged to the Duchess of Sussex, and her first post under that account featured her in a video, wearing all white and running on the beach, writing “2025” in the sand before running back off camera. PEOPLE understands the unfiltered video was shot by her husband Prince Harry at a public beach near their Montecito, California home.

In addition to her first post, the @meghan account also updated its profile picture to a black-and-white shot of Meghan smiling and wearing white, though a different white look than in her first post.

PEOPLE understands Meghan is excited to return to social media as a way to reconnect with communities around the world and share updates about the projects she’s working on, looking to lead by example in demonstrating the potential for social media to bring joy and positive connection.

[From People]

“PEOPLE understands…” As in, this came from the Archewell team. Don’t @ me – Harry, Meghan and their team sometimes speak to the media in this way, and I wish they would do it more. Anyway, I’m glad she’s on Instagram and I wish she would have been ‘gramming this whole time. I get that she and Harry are rightly concerned about the effects of social media, especially on kids and teens. But social media can absolutely be a tool for good, a tool for promotion, and a platform to spread a positive message directly.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (@meghan)

Photos courtesy of Instar, Instagram.

Happy New Year, everyone! Hope everyone stays safe! We’re off for New Year’s Day, but we’ll be back later this week.

Ben Affleck & Jennifer Garner spent Christmas together. Unsurprisingly, it was mostly about their three kids. Like, divorced parents do that all the time. [JustJared]
Jimmy Carter’s funeral has been scheduled for January 9th. [Hollywood Life]
OMG, Walmart is selling a knockoff Birkin bag. [OMG Blog]
Timothee Chalamet & Elle Fanning recreated the “holding space” meme. [Socialite Life]
More analysis on the Blake Lively situation. [LaineyGossip]
Thoughts on A Complete Unknown – maybe Joan Baez deserves her own biopic? I could see that, because I kind of think they messed up the Baez “character.” [Jezebel]
Yeah, Lauren Sanchez’s publicist is doing too much. [Pajiba]
Margaret Qualley is tired of doing these artsy films. [Buzzfeed]
Glen Powell has a new thing. [Seriously OMG]

The first three months of 2024 were pretty bonkers for people who follow royal gossip. A missing Princess of Wales, a mysterious health crisis, a cobbled-together frankenphoto released officially by Kensington Palace, and photo agencies issuing kill orders on an official palace-released photo. All of this happened in a bizarre period of time for Prince William and Kate’s office as well – Kate had been without a private secretary since the fall of 2022, and William’s private secretary left after William shared his plans to hire a CEO. William and Kate’s office seemed like it was being run by clowns as they staggered from self-made crisis to self-made crisis. I still believe that the situation at KP got so dire that King Charles had no other option than sending in royal fixers to “manage” the mess in March. Well, you would think that William and Kate would have learned a lesson about their poor management skills and childish antics. But no – apparently, they’re still committed to bypassing “the men in gray.”

The mysterious image of “men in gray suits” who operate the monarchy behind closed doors has long intrigued the public. Princess Diana reportedly feared these “gray men” – palace courtiers and aides – and their influence over her personal life. Prince Harry has also publicly discussed his struggles with some of his family’s courtiers, referring to three of them by unflattering nicknames in his memoir Spare and describing them as “middle-aged white men who’d managed to consolidate power through a series of bold Machiavellian maneuvers.”

A royal expert recently suggested that after analyzing Prince William and Kate Middleton’s actions over the past year, which have seen the couple face significant challenges, it appears that the future King and Queen plan to manage their roles more directly, possibly avoiding these “gray men” entirely.

As William and Kate juggle their royal duties with raising their young children – Prince George, 11, Princess Charlotte, nine, and Prince Louis, six – they’ve made it clear that family is their top priority, according to royal expert Jennie Bond, formerly the BBC’s royal correspondent, in an article for the i newspaper. This is a significant shift from the House of Windsor’s culture during the late Queen Elizabeth’s reign, who was known to prioritize her monarch duties over motherhood, reports the Mirror.

Bond believes this change, along with a recent hire in their office, indicates that William and Kate plan to do things differently when William ascends the throne. “The Waleses have stepped outside the Palace walls in more ways than one,” says Bond.

“They’ve appointed a former CEO of Tescos to head up their Royal Foundation and are planning a more corporate approach for their private office. While plans are on hold as the Princess recovers, it’s clear that the couple intends to bypass some of the ‘gray men’ at the Palace and take more direct control of their affairs.”

[From The Daily Mirror]

I actually think Bond is correct, in that William and Kate still intend to do things in their own clownish, mismanaged way. There were several moments during the year where I thought William in particular was rebelling against his father after Charles cleaned up William’s mess. William and Kate’s September “cancer-free” video was also a “f–k you” to Charles, done without Buckingham Palace’s input. There’s a real push-pull on William these days as the courtiers try to prepare him for kingship and he has to be dragged kicking and screaming into those preparations. It will just get worse in 2025.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

This past fall was the eight-year anniversary of Angelina Jolie filing for divorce from Brad Pitt just days after he attacked her and their six kids on a private plane. Their divorce was bifurcated in 2019, but they spent the bulk of the past eight years in a dispute over money and custody of their children. It’s been a long road, especially when Angelina went to the California Supreme Court and successfully voided a joint-custody ruling from a compromised private judge. In recent years, the divorce negotiations seemingly stood at a stand-still because Brad has been suing Angelina over the sale of her half of Chateau Miraval, and Angelina’s countersued. Recently, in the winery dispute, Angelina successfully got the court to order Brad to turn over all of his communications with his publicist and crisis management team. Weeks later, the Jolie-Pitt divorce has been settled. Coincidence?

Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have reached a settlement in their divorce eight years after the Maria star filed to end their two-year marriage, citing irreconcilable differences.

Jolie, 49, and Pitt, 61, signed off on their divorce on Monday, Dec. 30, according to Jolie’s lawyers.

“More than eight years ago, Angelina filed for divorce from Mr. Pitt. She and the children left all of the properties they had shared with Mr. Pitt, and since that time she has focused on finding peace and healing for their family,” Jolie’s lawyer James Simon tells PEOPLE in a statement.

“This is just one part of a long ongoing process that started eight years ago. Frankly, Angelina is exhausted, but she is relieved this one part is over.”

A source close to Jolie adds, “She doesn’t speak ill of [Pitt] publicly or privately. She’s been trying hard to be light after a dark time.”

[From People]

Again, I love how Angelina’s lawyers are so much more proactive these days with giving statements to the press. She’s needed that for years. TMZ had some additional information – Angelina signed off on the divorce on Christmas Day, and the paperwork was filed yesterday. According to TMZ’s sources, Angelina is “forgoing spousal and family support from Brad.” Which could mean that he’s giving her a lump-sum settlement (I think that seems likely). There’s also not an agreement over custody, but Knox and Vivienne are 16 years old now and most family courts would say they’re old enough to decide which parent they want to live with and see. TMZ also says that Brad and Angelina recently “exchanged final financial disclosures.” Interesting.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red and Backgrid.

Unsurprisingly, Blake Lively covers this week’s issue of People Magazine. She filed her complaint with the California Civil Rights Department just before Christmas, and it’s more than likely that she will end up suing Justin Baldoni, his production company, his publicist and his crisis manager. It’s also quite likely that Baldoni will file a lawsuit against Blake and her team in the new year, at least that’s what they’re telegraphing. People’s cover story is mostly a recap of where we are now, including a comprehensive summary of Blake’s case, with Baldoni’s lawyer interjecting here and there. It also includes a summary of everyone lining up behind Blake. Including People Magazine, but they were always going to take her side. Here’s the part which came from Blake’s team:

The whole ordeal has been a nightmare for Lively, who shares children James, 10, Inez, 8, Betty, 5 and 22-month-old son Olin with Reynolds, 48. Behind closed doors, says the complaint, she has suffered “grief, fear, trauma, and extreme anxiety” in the alleged campaign’s aftermath.

She is seeking unspecified damages from Baldoni and Wayfarer for “intentional infliction of emotional distress” and “interference” in her other businesses, like her Blake Brown haircare company, which launched in early August and suffered a decline in sales by “56-78%” amid the bad press and negative social media comments, Lively’s lawyers claim. “The Baldoni-Wayfarer astroturfing campaign forced each of Ms. Lively’s businesses to go ‘dark’ on social media in August,” according to the complaint.

A Lively source says putting together the legal case has been painful but necessary work. “Blake along with her team have been working on this lawsuit for months. It’s truly been so ugly for her. And insanely stressful. She’s never dealt with anything like this before,” explains the source.

What happens next? Lively’s legal team is currently evaluating her options while awaiting a decision from the California Civil Rights Department, which has 60 days to notify her if they will investigate the matter.

“If they find some barrier to it, a lot of times they’ll step in and try to mediate a solution with the employer,” says legal expert Gregory Doll, a California attorney who is not involved in the case. “If not, they’ll give her what’s called the right to sue letter, which means that she can go to court now and submit her claim there.”

If she does sue and she and Baldoni don’t settle beforehand, they’d head to a trial. “The most likely cases that don’t settle are the ones like this where it gets intensely personal between two people,” he notes.

Baldoni could countersue as well, something Doll says is very likely due to the bitter back and forth between the two legal teams: “Based on what I have observed, it’s almost guaranteed that he will file a counterclaim,” he predicts.

But no matter what happens, Lively has a vast support system of family and friends who have her back — especially her husband.

“Ryan is always her rock,” says a Lively source, who adds that the actress has been focusing on her family after filing the complaint. ”For now, she’s said what needed to be said.”

[From People]

I’m on Blake’s side about so much of this situation, but this caught my eye: “like her Blake Brown haircare company, which launched in early August and suffered a decline in sales by “56-78%” amid the bad press and negative social media comments, Lively’s lawyers claim.” If Blake Brown launched in August – which she did on purpose to promote her haircare line alongside It Ends With Us – then what metrics are they using to determine that sales of Blake Brown went down? Declined compared to what? You can believe Blake and be on her side and still think that there are some really interesting legal issues contained in this complaint.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.

Stephen Mangan is a 56-year-old British actor and writer. He’s really well-known in the UK for his long history on British television, but he’s also done a lot of stage work and some film work. Plus, he’s a regular on chat shows because he’s so charming and funny, and I recognize him from his multiple appearances on Graham Norton’s show. While he’s described everywhere as “English,” it turns out that his parents were Irish republicans and their republicanism affects him even now. Mangan was profiled by the Times of London, and they asked him if he would accept one of those British “honors” like an OBE or CBE. Some highlights from the Times:

He became a first-time father at 39: “Before that, being settled didn’t feel like a goal in my work or private life, but I look at friends who have children now in their twenties and think it must have been nice having kids when you were younger. I’ve an eight-year-old. I’m not quite in Mick Jagger or Al Pacino territory but .. I had a great time in my twenties and thirties, so it’s all worked out. It keeps you young hanging out with the parents of other eight-year-olds. I have to keep reminding myself a lot of them are twenty years younger than me, so if I start talking about Bagpuss they’re, like, ‘What? Sorry?’ ”

America isn’t for him. “LA’s such a tense town. Everyone measures each other’s status on an hourly basis. Who’s up, who’s down, who’s important, who’s not — it’s so tedious. I know I could probably have earned more money or been more famous or been in bigger jobs if I’d stayed, but the variety of what I do now fills me with joy. I suppose I feel I’m catching lots of little fish, instead of going out there to catch one big fish.”

His parents’ early deaths. He runs — “I’m addicted” — eats healthily and has virtually quit alcohol. His ageing role model is his 91-year-old Portrait Artist co-presenter and Primrose Hill neighbour Joan Bakewell. “When I was cast I went round to her house and explained that I’d lived in the area for 25 years, and she said, ‘Yes, it’s not been the same since Ted and Sylvia left.’ ” She was referring to Hughes and Plath. “I was, like, ‘OK, you win.’ ”

On the possibility of an honor: “I wouldn’t do any of that. I’m from an Irish republican family. I’m not bowing down in front of King Charles.” Has he been offered something? He arches an eyebrow. “I wouldn’t be at liberty to say.”

[From The Times]

I always like when British actors do this, announce that they’re not interested in playing games and sucking up to the Windsors or the establishment. Even though I love Emma Thompson, I’m constantly disappointed in how much she sucks up to King Charles and Prince William. Judi Dench as well. The honors/honours have very little to do with achievements at this point, especially when the Tory leaders made sure to give themselves knighthoods as they were all leaving. Not to mention, Charles passed out knighthoods to anyone who handed him a bag full of cash. It’s cool that Mangan is like… yeah, I would never bow to these people. Good for him.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Rihanna made a post-Christmas Target run. [Just Jared]
Mark Wahlberg did a 4 am cold plunge. [Socialite Life]
The 20th anniversary of Lost? GTFO. [Pajiba]
The year of Timothee Chalamet’s fashion. [Go Fug Yourself]
Adam McKay thinks Wicked could be banned in 3-5 years. [OMG Blog]
I missed this – Ariana Grande in vintage Dior. [RCFA]
Remember Kieran Culkin in Home Alone? [Seriously OMG]
What happened to the Duggars over Christmas? [Starcasm]
Jimmy Carter’s family photos. [Hollywood Life]
All of these bosses are awful. [Buzzfeed]

As many people noted last week, King Charles did not reference or mention the Duke and Duchess of Sussex at all throughout the Christmas holiday. I still believe that Charles and his minions did the most to brief the media, a month ago, that the Sussex family was not welcome in the UK and that they were not invited to Christmas at Sandringham. You could tell that stuff was coming from Charles’s camp because A) it didn’t center or mention Prince William’s rage towards his brother and B) there was zero mention of how the Sussexes wouldn’t have come to the UK even if they had been invited. Well, I don’t know why Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast is still fussing over this, but he seems quite upset that there were zero Sussex references over Christmas. Sykes also blames the whole thing on William.

King Charles’ has been criticized for not acknowledging his son Prince Harry, his wife Meghan Markle, or their two children in a Christmas address, which focused on how the holiday was “a chance for family and friends to come together.”

The closest Charles came to acknowledging his family in California was when he spoke about the need to protect and safeguard the environment “for the sake of our children’s children,” however, no direct reference was made to Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet. By contrast, multiple images were shown of his son, Prince William, and his wife, Kate Middleton, and their three children, Princess Charlotte, Prince George and Prince Louis.

The refusal to acknowledge Harry’s family went almost entirely unremarked in largely fawning accounts of the annual televised speech in the British media but was criticized on social media.

The Daily Beast has been told that Charles would like to reconcile with Harry but is being blocked from bringing him back into the family by William, who is implacably opposed to any such move. The elder son believes Harry’s betrayal of the family in his books and interviews, in which he accused a member of the family, later revealed to be Kate, of racism, has put him beyond the pale. William’s consent is needed because Charles, who is sick with cancer, feels he cannot bequeath his heir a settlement with Harry that William cannot live with.

[From The Daily Beast]

“…But was criticized on social media.” Sure. You can find a tweet/post to justify saying “Charles was criticized,” but honestly, I think most people just shrug about Charles at this point. It’s been abundantly well-established that he’s a horrible father and grandfather. It’s been abundantly well-established that he only gives a sh-t about Camilla (and even then, theirs is not a grand love story, despite their PR). Even if you believe that Charles has an okay relationship with William, the fact that Charles’s people are still tossing William under the bus over the Sussex situation shows that Charles still uses William as a scapegoat and fall guy.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.