In a few weeks, Prince Harry’s lawsuit against News Group Newspapers moves to trial. NGN is the Murdoch family’s British media arm, which publishes the Times of London and The Sun, although the hacking claims against NGN put News of the World out of business more than a decade ago. While gossip blogs have been covering the ins and outs of Harry’s lawsuits for years, it’s worth remembering that pretty much all of the American and British media will be watching this trial closely. I didn’t know this, but it’s the first time someone has accused NGN of hacking and unlawful activity and taken it all the way to trial. Hundreds of hacking victims have sued NGN, and NGN has managed to settle with them before their cases have gone to trial. According to Puck News, the Murdochs have spent hundreds of millions of dollars/pounds settling these cases. Puck News spoke to a British lawyer, Mark Stephens, about what to expect from Harry’s trial, and I found all of this fascinating. You can read the full Puck piece here. Some highlights:

What is Harry’s legal claim? “The claim is essentially that there was an unlawful acquisition of information by the newspaper—sometimes by hacking, but sometimes by deception. Given that in previous cases, judges have made findings about particular journalists being involved with particular private detectives who got information unlawfully, the question is: How did they get information [about Harry] which wasn’t in the public domain? And the inability to demonstrate where the information comes from creates an inference of hacking.”

A deal with Prince William: “The first question is whether this is time-barred, and here there is an additional layer of complexity because it’s asserted that [Murdoch’s company] did a deal with Buckingham Palace to give Prince William good publicity. And as a consequence of that, members of the royal family—William and Harry—[agreed they] wouldn’t sue. So there becomes the question of first, did Harry know about the claim, and second, did he know about the compromise of the claim?

An alleged secret deal: “The trial is going to delve into some of the backroom deals that Harry says were done, and are probably more embarrassing, both for the newspaper and the palace. Was there a secret deal for the newspaper to give good publicity to the royal family, and in return, they undertook not to sue? The judge has to make that determination first. If the newspaper loses the time-bar issue, I think it’s almost certain that Harry will win at least some of the unlawful acquisition of information claims. The time-bar issue is really important, which is why the newspaper is bringing in a very eminent king’s counsel to cross-examine Harry.

Harry’s four-day cross-examination: “They’re going to try and destroy him in cross-examination, because Harry’s case is pretty straightforward. Harry says, “There may have been people in the palace who knew about this unlawful intrusion, but I didn’t know, and therefore I wasn’t able to exercise my rights.” The newspaper, on the other hand, says, “Well, of course you knew, and you had every opportunity to bring your claim, and you just missed the time.”

What kind of damages Harry needs to win: “I think the answer is that this is not an economic case. Harry has made it clear that he’s not in it to either cover or make his cost. He wants accountability. He feels that his life has been intruded upon, that it’s had an impact on his relationships with others. And then you layer on top of that, the way in which the media treated Princess Diana, his mother. And of course, you start to understand why this is such an issue of principle for Harry.

The Will Lewis issue: “Here, it’s the position from claimants—not just Harry, but all of them—that Will Lewis oversaw the hiding of information, the deletion of emails. That’s part of the discomfort he’s been experiencing these last few months….There’s basically three phases of what happened you can categorize. First, pretty much industrial-level unlawful newsgathering. Then, the stage when they decided to stop it. Finally, what they did about evidence of past wrongdoings. And that’s where Harry says they deleted internal emails in a way that was non-retrievable. Not only deleted them off the local servers, but also backup servers. And you’ll understand just how unusual that is. That is going to be an interesting area at this trial, because, of course, when you’re dealing with an inferential case where there’s no smoking gun, you’re having to piece information together. So the question becomes: Is that the action of an entirely innocent news organization that they delete all historic emails from particular mailboxes? The judge will have to make an assessment.

Whether Will Lewis will testify: “I don’t think he will be testifying, but he will be mentioned in the dispatches, in the evidence. And the allegations made against him—that he oversaw a cover-up or a clean-up, whatever you call it—is something, whether the newspaper wins or loses, that’s going to raise more questions after the trial.

When a decision/verdict might come: “I would think it’s going to take a while, because it’s an inferential case, so the judgment will be reserved. [Ed. note: The trial is scheduled to last two months, and the outcome won’t come immediately.] It’s going to be quite a long case, and so I would think it’ll take a month or so before the judge gives his judgment.”

[From Puck News]

The thing that struck me, as I read this, is that Harry and his lawyers have spent years getting their ducks in a row, and once they prove that there’s no statute of limitations on his claims, it’s pretty likely that he’ll win at least part of his case. The fact that Harry seemingly doesn’t care about the money is interesting too – I mean, we knew that, and we knew that even if he wins, it’s likely he won’t even break even financially. He really is standing on principle, and even more than that, he wants to burn the whole thing down and expose the rot within Britain’s tabloid media and the compromised royal institution. The thing is, say he wins or has a partial win here, but the damages don’t even come close to ensuring that he breaks even. THAT is how it will be reported in the British media and probably the American media too – they’ll be focused on the money, not necessarily the legal victory.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

This year, King Charles delivered his Christmas speech at Fitzrovia Chapel, a former London hospital chapel. Royal commentators theorized that Charles chose the location so that people wouldn’t analyze the family photos on display on one of his desks, because usually the Christmas speeches are staged in one of palaces or castles. Charles apparently chose the location because it was associated with a hospital, and because the Windsors have had a lot of medical and health crises in 2024. Charles said, in part: “From a personal point of view, I offer special, heartfelt thanks to the selfless doctors and nurses who, this year, have supported me and other members of my family through the uncertainties and anxieties of illness, and have helped provide the strength, care and comfort we have needed.” I saw people talking about how it was notable that Charles didn’t mention Kate by name, but it’s possible that he wanted to be more general about it because of Princess Anne’s head injury and hospitalization. Meanwhile, all of the royal commentators are talking about how there was no mention of the Sussexes as well.

King Charles crucially left Prince Harry and Prince Andrew out of his Christmas Day speech. While his annual message featured snippets of Prince William and the wider Royal Family, Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle, and his disgraced brother Prince Andrew, were not mentioned at all. According to royal expert and historian Dr Tessa Dunlop, the omission was a sign that the King had ‘clearly made up his mind’.

Analysing the King’s speech, Tessa told The Mirror: “Lest we are in any doubt, the clever film that accompanied this speech, underscored the importance of the King’s royal A-Team, on hand to deliver what Charles considers to be an alternative to global killing: a listening and understanding mission that leads to actions for the good of all.”

“As well as a replay of the King’s famous hug with the New Zealand women’s rugby team, there was footage of Kate at Trooping the Colour, Camilla in Scotland and Australia, William serving food to the homeless and, of course, those royal stalwarts, Princess Anne and the Edinburghs.”

Tessa noted: “Crucially, also-rans Princes Andrew and Harry were nowhere to be seen. The King has clearly made up his mind about how to ‘act for the good of all’, choosing to focus on family strengths, not weaknesses, to shore up a nation (and a world) for a difficult year ahead.”

It has been years since Harry and Andrew featured in the royal monarch’s Christmas speech, with the late Queen Elizabeth notably missing the pair from her message in 2019. The King has since ditched the tradition altogether.

[From The Daily Mirror]

The thing is, I don’t really care if Charles failed to mention or reference his son or one of his brothers in a Christmas speech. I get the idea that this is always supposed to be a more general speech, rather than a laundry list of grievances or a roll call of family members. The thing that bugs me is that Charles publicly ignoring one of his sons (not to mention a daughter-in-law and two of his grandkids) reflects how Charles treats the Sussexes privately, with zero interest or care or warmth. It simply doesn’t reflect well on Charles as a king or a father that he’s allowed this estrangement to metastasize to this point. Which was also what Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast said about the Christmas morning walk in his piece, “Royals’ Walk to Christmas Service Reveals Deep Family Dysfunction.”

The annual walk to the Church of St, Mary Magdalene is supposed to exude an impression of unity, stability, and conventional family values. Despite a rapturous reception by a crowd estimated at over 1,000 at this year’s promenade, it exposed deep fractures within the family.

While Kate and William and their children George, Charlotte and Louis were the stars of the show, there was zero public acknowledgement of the king’s other son, Prince Harry, his wife Meghan Markle, or their children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, who are in self-imposed exile in California.

[From The Daily Beast]

I’m not sure how there could have been an “acknowledgement” of the Sussexes at the walk to church, but perhaps Charles and his courtiers could have NOT briefed the media that no invitations were extended to the Sussexes and that Charles does not give a sh-t about one of his sons and two of his grandkids?

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

For the past five months or so, Ben Affleck and his publicist give monthly updates on how well he’s doing. The updates always feel so utterly random too, they’re always variations of “Ben Affleck is doing great these days, he’s looking forward to spending time with his kids for [insert holiday].” Well, People Magazine got another update just before Christmas – Ben wants us to know that he is “healthy, single and enjoying life,” according to a source, who also said that Ben “is spending the holiday with his children and is excited to have Violet home for break.” Ben keeps insisting that he’s single and that he spends his free time with his kids, and I simply don’t believe it. I still wonder what went down with Kick Kennedy and whether they’re still dealing with each other, and whether that was one of the bigger reasons why Jennifer Lopez filed for divorce. Speaking of J.Lo, Ben apparently gave her a book for Christmas.

Ben Affleck put some thought into his Christmas gift for Jennifer Lopez this year despite their ongoing divorce. The “Batman” star, 52, “purchased an autographed Marlon Brando book” for the “Let’s Get Loud” singer, 55, before the estranged couple exchanged presents Sunday, Page Six can exclusively reveal.

Mystery Pier Books owner Louis Jason tells us Affleck bought “a few books” from his West Hollywood, Calif., store located on Sunset Blvd. The Oscar winner picked up the meaningful item before heading to meet the “Hustlers” actress for lunch at the members-only Soho House.

“Ben gifted Jennifer with the book because she’s a fan, plus her Super Bowl bodysuit was inspired by Marlon Brando,” a source tells Page Six. “The gifts were mostly for each other’s kids, but they did exchange a few small things for each other as well. It was nothing over the top, but more so a gesture to celebrate the holidays. Ben and Jennifer have remained amicable despite the ongoing divorce proceedings.”

As we previously reported, Affleck and Lopez have every intention of continuing to be in each other’s lives despite not being romantically involved.

“Ben and Jennifer are still connected, and they do communicate when it involves their kids,” a source recently shared with us.

[From Page Six]

I actually looked up the Marlon Brando-inspired costume for her Halftime performance, and it’s real. Jennifer really did base one of her Halftime costumes on a 1991 Vogue photoshoot with Brando. The more you know! Yeah, I didn’t realize that J.Lo enjoys Brando that much. It feels a bit weird to me that Ben and J.Lo met one-on-one to exchange gifts, but he didn’t personally give his gifts to Emme & Max? He was their stepfather, he spent a lot of time with them and now he didn’t even see them for the holidays? Hm. Also: J.Lo and her kids were in Aspen for Christmas (photos below), so that explains why she and Ben met days before Christmas.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Angelina Jolie finally did a Vanity Fair “Awards Insider” interview. Every awards-season hopeful does these but she had been avoiding it for some reason. She ended up calling in from Paris, where she’s working on Alice Winocour’s film Stitches. She spoke about working on a French film, and she spoke a lot about Maria Callas and what this journey has been like, promoting Maria for months. VF also got her to talk about the 25th anniversary of Girl, Interrupted too. As a special treat. Some highlights:

Most of her dialogue in ‘Stitches’ is in French. “I’m not fluent—I speak a bit, but…to mean every word and give a performance takes a different kind of understanding about what it is I’m saying, to be emotional and not think about the language. It’s a different challenge.”

Why ‘Maria’ felt like a homecoming for her as an actress & artist: “I wasn’t myself for a while, so I wasn’t able to give as much to my work for a few years. To feel like I could work again and communicate and to be with nice people—so much of what I do is collaboration with other artists. When it goes well, you’re creating together. When you’re with nice people and creative people, you learn so much about yourself and about life. You’re in a safe place to play and stretch.”

It feels meaningful to be doing this kind of work again: “It really does. Probably more than I can even express. If no one receives your piece, or if you don’t connect, then it’s like shouting in the dark. It means a lot that people have responded to Maria. I’ve always felt, ever since I was very young, that film has been a way to communicate with the world and not feel as alone. We’re all going through this human condition and this life. So it’s very, very healing to be able to be a part of these films and to talk to you about this and to live that way. And I missed it. I realized I did really miss it. I missed being an artist.

Going dark: “I went very dark for reasons I’d rather not explain, but I didn’t have a lot of light and life within me. Your light’s dim. I also just needed to be home more, so I couldn’t commit large periods of time to pieces. The choice of what to work on and when was not a creative choice, often, the last few years, but sometimes the practical choice. Really, I think Maria was the beginning of starting to come alive again. I needed a lot of kind people around me to hold my hand. I know I say it too often, but our business can be a lot of things. At the end of the day, we’re very fortunate to do what we do, and we are spending a lot of time with big, deep, emotional feelings. If you don’t do that with people who you’re safe with, it can affect you in very bad ways.

Shooting ‘Maria’ was a heavy experience: “It was heavy. Maria was a very full experience. I wasn’t able to leave her on set like you sometimes do. Part of that was because I was always doing training after [shooting] anyway; there was always a next aria. But it was all leading towards the death, and the death was the last thing we shot. I’m almost 50, and my mom had cancer when she was 48. You’re actually thinking about death, about things that cause you grief or that you have lost in your life.

25 years since Girl, Interrupted: “I remember that I didn’t think of [Lisa] as crazy and that she was a real person. She needed to be loved, and she felt alone, and she wanted truth. I only saw it once—it’s hard for me to talk about it because I saw it once 25 years ago—but from my memory, she wanted someone to be honest with her and to connect, and somehow ended up feeling very, very alone in that way—not dissimilar to Maria. Not finding somebody who understood her enough, not finding a way forward where she was okay. Is this a theme? That I’m alone? What is this? [Laughs] There’s probably some very tragic thing that I don’t want to address right now, but—yeah.

How she related to Lisa: “Even if they thought they were complimenting me playing Lisa, they were complimenting me playing a crazy person. That did make me sad because I didn’t think of her that way, and I didn’t like hearing I was referred to that way. But it was also a time where I was still trying to understand myself, and maybe there was something about me that I was not understanding—about what people consider crazy. I mean, that’s the honest truth. The honest truth was during that time when you’re trying to figure yourself out and you’re young and you’re a bit wild and strong and curious and emotional—and people say, “No, that’s crazy. She’s crazy. You’re crazy.” It probably just isolated me more and made me think I must be different. Maybe I’m dark, or maybe I’m off, or maybe I’m not what people want me to be either.

Taking ‘Maria’ to Venice: “It was a funny thing bringing her to Venice because she was in Venice—we even say it in the film; Onassis talks about seeing her in the Venice Film Festival. I was trying to figure out what to wear, and there were pictures of her in Venice wearing little fur; that’s why I wore a little fake fur. It was strange. And I sing in Italian and I’m in Italy; how’s that going to go? These are people that really know these arias, and this is an art form that is very respected and understood here. I was very excited for those reasons to bring it to Venice and very nervous. When it was received well, when you felt the room appreciated it, it was a huge relief. Then when you’re with people you love, you look around at the faces of the artists that you worked with, and it’s a beautiful moment.

She’d like to do a comedy! “I just wrote to a friend of mine today, Eunice, who’s in Liverpool, and she said, “Why aren’t you doing—you should do something funny.” I wrote back and I said, “I’d like to find something funny,” but I’m not sure. I’m never sure how funny I am. I would love to do something fun and light. I think I’d have to be the straight man. I feel like that’s what I am. I get that. In Maleficent, it was like, Okay, I’ll be the straight person. There are so many wonderful directors I’d love to have a chance to work with. I’d like to just be allowed to play in this arena. I’d love for people to reach out and be willing to invite me to play with them and create with them. So we’ll see. Yeah, comedy, maybe.

[From Vanity Fair]

“Your light’s dim. I also just needed to be home more, so I couldn’t commit large periods of time to pieces. The choice of what to work on and when was not a creative choice, often, the last few years, but sometimes the practical choice.” I get that, and we knew it as it was happening, that she was taking work which would shoot quickly or smaller roles where she could do her part in a month or so. After she left Brad Pitt, she really just needed to be home with her kids and heal, but she also needed money and I’m glad that people were still giving her those roles and projects. I really hope that Maria represents the next era of her career, where she gets back to acting regularly and takes on bigger roles in bigger films. Also: crazy that she was nervous about going to Venice, because the Italians were obsessed with her. She was met with a rapturous response in Venice and elsewhere.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Embed from Getty Images

On December 23, Luigi Mangione appeared in person at the New York State Supreme Court for his arraignment. He pleaded not guilty to the first-degree murder charges for the shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. He already has at least one heavy-hitter defense lawyer, Karen Friedman Agnifilo, who appeared in court with Luigi at his arraignment. She already put the NYPD on blast for the over-the-top perp walk last week, which looked more like some melodramatic scene from a copaganda movie. She name-checked NYC’s Mayor Eric Adams too, who is (like Luigi) under indictment.

I try not to spend too much time on social media during the holidays but even I am aware that Luigi’s arraignment caused a large-scale commotion. People were analyzing his clothes – a burgundy sweater (from Nordstrom), button-down shirt and khakis – and his overall styling and grooming. During his perp walk, people noticed that Luigi had seemingly gotten a fresh shave, a fade haircut and someone had groomed his eyebrows, all while he was in custody in a Pennsylvania prison. He looked similarly well-groomed in court this week. Some suggest that this is the way prisoners from Pennsylvania to New York are showing that Luigi is being protected and cared for while in custody. That being said, I don’t think they’re giving him facials. I think he just has great skin and he’s extremely photogenic.

Speaking of Luigi serving FACE, there is obviously a growing contingent of Luigi Mangione supporters. Per ABC News, at Luigi’s arraignment, “about two dozen women, who waited in line in the frigid cold for public seats in the courtroom gallery, said they were there to support Mangione. Most of the women wore face masks and a few appeared visibly emotional as Mangione entered the courtroom.” I’ve mentioned this before, but I’m not sure I’ve seen anything like this in my lifetime – like, the lionization of an accused murderer on a national scale. The babygirlification of a guy accused of murking a CEO.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

Last week, Blake Lively filed a lawsuit against Justin Baldoni for sexual harassment and social manipulation. From the coverage of Blake’s case against Baldoni, it seems like she has ample documentation for the sexual harassment part of her claim. She got the studio (Sony) involved in the process during filming, which goes a long way towards explaining why Sony went out of their way to give Blake everything she wanted in It Ends With Us’s post-production and promotion, including allowing Blake to bring in a different editor and create her own cut of the movie.

The social manipulation part of her case is turning out to be a radioactive issue in Hollywood though. Hollywood insiders are fascinated by Blake’s claims that she received access (via “subpoena”) to texts and emails between Baldoni’s publicist and crisis management team. Variety analyzed how Lively possibly got access to “private” work-product messages within Baldoni’s team, and they suggest that this was actually a retaliatory measure by Jonesworks founder Stephanie Jones – retaliation against Baldoni’s publicist Jen Abel, who worked at Jonesworks but was making moves to leave and start her own PR firm. As in, Jones grabbed all of the contents of Abel’s phone, then handed everything off to Blake Lively’s team, all to burn Abel just as Abel was leaving. Which is the backstory for this – Stephanie Jones is now suing Baldoni.

Justin Baldoni‘s former publicist sued him, his company and his current publicity team on Tuesday, amid a spiraling scandal over an alleged smear campaign against Baldoni’s “It Ends With Us” co-star Blake Lively.

Steph Jones, who owns Jonesworks, accused Baldoni of breaching their contract, which required him to pay her $25,000 per month. Baldoni dropped the firm in August, a few months into a year-long deal, after his Jonesworks publicist, Jennifer Abel, left the company to start her own publicity firm. Jones also sued Abel and publicist Melissa Nathan, accusing them of implementing the smear campaign against Lively behind her back and without her knowledge. She alleges that they are now trying to blame her for the ensuing meltdown.

“To this day, Abel and Nathan continue to point the finger falsely at Jones now that their own misconduct is coming to light, and to defame and attack Jones in the industry,” the lawsuit states.

Abel, Nathan, and Baldoni are represented by attorney Bryan Freedman. On Monday, Freedman threatened to sue Jones for releasing the contents of Abel’s phone to Lively’s legal team. Freedman, Abel and Nathan did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Jones’ suit. In her lawsuit, Jones relates that she “forensically preserved” Abel’s company phone after Abel was fired.

[From Variety]

I’m not saying that Baldoni and his crisis management team (which he hired in August) didn’t implement a smear campaign or an amplification campaign to hurt Blake. I absolutely think something like that occurred, but I also think there’s a lot of other sh-t happening behind-the-scenes and it’s about PR people beefing with other PR people. Blake’s lawsuit was like a bomb going off in the world of Hollywood PR and crisis management. I also wanted to link to this Hollywood Reporter story – Baldoni’s publicist Jen Abel posted a lengthy explanation on Facebook, which she deleted (probably at the advice of her lawyer). Abel completely rejects the notion that she was actively spreading smears about Lively, but it’s an insider look at how a publicist and crisis manager monitor these kinds of situations.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Here are some photos from “Royal Christmas” at Sandringham. King Charles and Queen Camilla hosted Christmas in Norfolk, and they did the big walk to church on Christmas morning, with the extended family. Prince William, the Princess of Wales and their three children were front and center, of course. Even in photos and moments where I think Charles and Camilla were trying to be front and center, Kate and her Christmas wig managed to preen their way into being centered. Going from memory, this is the first time Kate and Camilla have been at the same public event since Trooping the Colour in June. Before that, the last time they were at the same event was… last Christmas at Sandringham.

Oddly, Camilla and Kate both wore green. They were the only women in green as well. Given what we know about how petty royal women are about colors and who wears what, I definitely wonder if Kate knew Camilla would be wearing green and Kate decided to wear a similar shade anyway. Kate’s green coat is much prettier, honestly – it’s McQueen, a repeat. She paired it with a tartan scarf and a green hat. I think her earrings are new? I don’t remember seeing them before.

The kids looked fine. Tired, perhaps. Maybe they stayed up playing games on Christmas Eve. William and the kids were coordinated in shades of navy and black. Charles has been looking better in recent weeks, as I’ve said before. You can tell that he’s had a bad year, but honestly, he has the look of someone who has come out of the worst of it.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Leading into Christmas, there was a lot of agitated gossip about Prince Andrew and the Yorks, meaning Sarah Ferguson, Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice. Once Andrew was exposed as a compromised idiot who provided access to a Chinese spy, suddenly Andrew was no longer welcome anywhere near the Windsors for Christmas. It was widely assumed that the invitations had also been rescinded for Fergie and the York princesses. In fact, Beatrice and Eugenie both seemingly confirmed plans to spend the holidays with their respective husbands’ families. Then, just a few days before Christmas, Beatrice’s plans changed yet again. She’s in her third trimester of her second pregnancy, and her doctors told her to avoid flying. So she ended up going to Sandringham after all. Royal sources also claimed that Beatrice would not go on the Christmas morning church-walk. Whoops! Beatrice turned out with Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi and Edo’s son Wolfie.

Some of you theorized that Andrew and Fergie were probably in Sandringham for Christmas as well, but they were just staying undercover. I don’t think so, but I could be wrong. I read People Mag’s coverage of Beatrice and Edo’s appearance, and People’s sources insist that Beatrice “was the only member of the York family to join the King’s Christmas festivities. Her father Prince Andrew and mother Sarah Ferguson are keeping a low profile and staying away from Sandringham amid Andrew’s connection to an alleged Chinese ‘spy.’” People Magazine also says that Eugenie spent the holiday with her in-laws, the Brooksbanks family. So maybe Eugenie didn’t go to California to spend the holiday with her cousin???

I’m adding additional photos of some of the other royals in this post – the Duchess of Edinburgh walked alongside her daughter Lady Louise and Princess Anne’s husband Tim Laurence. Prince Edward walked alongside his sister Princess Anne. Zara and Mike Tindall were there with their kids, and Mia Tindall seems especially tight with the Wales kids. The Earl of Snowden was also in Sandringham for Christmas, as were Samuel and Arthur Chatto (Princess Margaret’s grandsons). It doesn’t look like Prince Michael and Princess Michael of Kent were invited? No Gabriella Windsor either, although they were invited to Kate’s Christmas carol thing. I have to say, Zara had the best look of royal Christmas. I love a vibrant shade of mulberry/plum.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

I can’t believe that the NFL schedules two games for Christmas Day, but hey, people genuinely wanted to spend their holiday watching football. In Texas on Christmas Day, the Baltimore Ravens crushed the Houston Texans, 31-2. But the football game wasn’t the point. The point was the halftime show. Netflix must have dumped a truck full of cash at Beyonce’s door, because she agreed to perform the Christmas Day halftime show in Houston. Not only that, but she convinced several other artists to perform with her. Post Malone, Shaboozey, Blue Ivy, Tanner Adell, Tiera Kennedy, Reyna Roberts and Brittney Spencer all joined her at various points of the performance, although I think the part with Adell, Kennedy, Roberts and Spencer was pre-taped? Still, Post Malone, Shaboozey and Blue turning out for Bey on Christmas day is wild! The show was obviously perfect. Beyonce is a consummate professional and arguably the best entertainer in the world.

That video might get taken down, but no worries – Netflix announced that subscribers can watch Beyonce’s Halftime show as a stand-alone special. Considering that’s the whole reason why millions of people tuned into the football game anyway, that’s a pretty smart move. Obviously, Beyonce focused on songs from Cowboy Carter, including “16 Carriages,” “Levii’s Jeans,” “Ya Ya,” and “Texas Hold ‘Em,” as well as her covers/interpretations of “Blackbird” and “Jolene.” The fact that Blue Ivy looks so grown up and she’s actually taller than her mom now?? *sob*

After the show, Beyonce teased a big announcement coming on January 14th. Some Beyhivers think it will be an announcement or drop of Act iii? But wouldn’t it make more sense if she was announcing a 2025 tour? There’s always the possibility that she’s previewing a second insurrection! You never know.

Look at that horse. pic.twitter.com/2AtteP5lZk

— BEYONCÉ (@Beyonce) December 25, 2024

Photos courtesy of Netflix and Beyonce.com.

Merry Christmas & happy holidays! We’re off for Christmas Eve & Christmas, but we’ll be back on Thursday. Hope you have a lovely & safe holiday season!

Tom Hiddleston & Hayley Atwell attended the opening night of The Tempest in London last week. A nice little Hiddles gift. [Socialite Life]
Timothee Chalamet & Saoirse Ronan reunited. [LaineyGossip]
Pajiba’s top ten films of the year. [Pajiba]
Jeff Bezos & Lauren Sanchez are not getting married this week. [Just Jared]
A French film festival in winter, with puffer coats. [Go Fug Yourself]
An interview with Chappell Roan. [OMG Blog]
Lily Rose Depp’s Chanel suit is actually cute. [RCFA]
House of Villains had an epic ending. [Seriously OMG]
Kim Kardashian wore a wig made by an Orthodox Jewish wig-maker. [Starcasm]
Hilariously bad architectural-design fails. [Buzzfeed]

Photos credit: Bear Bear, Andrew Te, Chuttersnap, Elizabeth Smirnova and Showcat Goldstrand on Unsplash. Alfo Medeiros and Fotios Photos on Pexels