Ana de Armas covers AnOther Magazine to promote Blonde, for which she wants an Oscar nomination. No, scratch that – I think Ana is being told to promote the hell out of Blonde because an Oscar nom might be on the table, but that doesn’t mean that she’s actually trying to get nominated. I think she’s fine with whatever happens – it’s clear that she fell deeply in love with Marilyn Monroe and MM’s iconography, beauty, tragedy and trauma. She’s promoting this so hard because she’s actually proud of her performance and the film, however exploitative, stupid, offensive and ridiculous. You can read the full piece here (it’s super-long). Some highlights:

The cast & crew signed a card and left it at Marilyn’s crypt: “We got this big card and everyone in the crew wrote a message to her. Then we went to the cemetery and put it on her grave. We were asking for permission in a way. Everyone felt a huge responsibility, and we were very aware of the side of the story we were going to tell – the story of Norma Jeane, the person behind this character, Marilyn Monroe. Who was she really?”

Norma Jeane vs. Marilyn: “The more famous Marilyn became, the more invisible Norma Jeane became – Norma was this person no one ever actually met. And Marilyn was someone even she herself talked about in the third person. In some ways Marilyn saved her, gave her a life, but at the same time she became her prison.”

Cuban dreams: “I grew up watching everything from Titanic to The Terminator, but I always knew that reality was so far from my reality. Kids in the US, they believe they can be princesses because you can buy a princess dress and a princess crown and become one. I never had that. I didn’t even know what an apple tasted like.”

Trying to do Marilyn’s voice: “It just wasn’t working when I tried to imitate the sound or the pitch. Marilyn’s voice, her expressions, were a consequence of the speech classes she took herself, of her insecurities, of her not having any boundaries and letting people in, of playing this part of having to be rescued all the time. So I had to know what she was thinking and feeling every time. Because the way she rounded her lips for the ‘O’s, or how much of her lower teeth she would show, what her eyebrows were doing, all these expressions were a consequence of Marilyn in survival mode. They were tricks that she was pulling in desperate circumstances.”

Marilyn couldn’t afford to be angry: “In some early scenes I played it way too strong. I got defensive and angry and Andrew said, ‘You’re not allowed to get angry. Ever. Anger is not something Norma can afford.’ Well, can you imagine what that does to a person? At its heart the movie is about her looking for an absent father. Part of the reason I think she became Marilyn Monroe was to be so visible there’s no way he could not find her. You see how a childhood of feeling unloved and unwanted led her to need love, attention, need someone with her always. So I thought, OK, if I can’t get angry, what are my options? How else can I survive? And I started to explore all these other feelings.”

The violence against Marilyn: “We tried to show the fight she had to put up, not just to be successful, but to survive. What she went through was dark. So dark. When you know that, f–k, I love her more. So the whole point is not bringing down the myth, the point is humanising this icon and making her real, a real woman going through all these different kinds of abuses and situations. And as a woman today I can easily understand how you could find yourself in that situation. So, yes, there are scenes that are hard to watch. But I don’t think this movie has anything sensational or exploitative or gratuitous in it. In many of the scenes people are talking about, you don’t actually see anything. You just know what is happening and that it’s coming from a place of zero love. I do think the audience will feel uncomfortable – because she is uncomfortable. When she feels dirty, you feel that the scene is dirty. It’s all in the way it makes you feel.”

Filming in the home in which Marilyn died: “Those final scenes at her house – I know she was there with us. We all felt it. And I think you can feel that in the movie.”

[From AnOther Magazine]

One of the interesting things I learned from this profile is that Ana not only reread Joyce Carol Oates’ Blonde several times, but Ana also sought out other Monroe material, including Truman Capote’s excellent essay, “A Beautiful Child.” Capote gave Marilyn more depth, agency, humor and sweetness in one essay than Oates did in an entire book, doubly so for the movie. “I don’t think this movie has anything sensational or exploitative or gratuitous in it…” That’s a damn lie. The book is exploitative as hell, and there’s a reason why the film got an NC-17 rating, even with months of edits. It IS a very specific kind of torture-p0rn and I hate that Oates’ book was the only real source material.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by AnOther Magazine (@anothermagazine)

Cover and IG courtesy of AnOther.

Khloe Kardashian addresses Kanye West’s anti-Semitic hate speech. [Just Jared]
It sounds like Lana del Rey lost years of work. [OMG Blog]
I think the “Karen” Halloween decoration is clever. It’s hilarious that Karens complained about it and had it removed. [Dlisted]
Lainey’s take on Taylor Swift’s Midnights. [LaineyGossip]
Marion Cotillard & others attend a party for Chanel’s jewelry line. [RCFA]
I remember when Lara Logan was a respected journalist and to see her turn into a fascist lunatic is shocking and disturbing. [Jezebel]
I’m in love with Boris Kodjoe & his hoodie. [Go Fug Yourself]
Has Taylor Swift outgrown Easter eggs? [Gawker]
Recap of Andor, Episode 7 (spoilers). [Pajiba]
Every day is Halloween when you dress up in Balenciaga. [Egotastic]
Liz Cheney talks about whether Donald Trump will testify before the January 6th Committee and whether it will be a circus. [Buzzfeed]
Nancy Pelosi says Donald Trump isn’t man enough to testify. [Towleroad]

Boris Johnson withdrew from the Tory leadership race yesterday, and then today, Penny Mordaunt withdrew. Their withdrawals meant that Rishi Sunak is the new British prime minister. The third prime minister in seven weeks, the third prime minister is less than two full menstrual cycles. Sunak is also the first person of color to ever serve as prime minister – he’s the son of Indian immigrants, so he’s the first British Asian person to run the government and the first Hindu! Happy Diwali, Mr. Prime Minister.

Rishi Sunak will become Britain’s next prime minister, prevailing in a chaotic Conservative Party leadership race on Monday after his remaining rival for the position, Penny Mordaunt, withdrew. He will be Britain’s third leader in seven weeks and the first prime minister of color in its history.

The 42-year-old former chancellor of the Exchequer who is the son of Indian immigrants, Mr. Sunak won the contest to replace the ousted Liz Truss, who resigned under pressure last Thursday after her economic agenda caused turmoil.

King Charles III is returning to London this afternoon from Sandringham, the family’s country retreat in Norfolk. Rishi Sunak must see him to be officially installed as prime minister, after Liz Truss relinquishes the job.

[From The NY Times]

Interesting that King Charles was in Sandringham this weekend? KC3 will have to meet with Sunak and this will be the first time that the prime minister has to kiss Charles’s hand and ask to form a government in his name. Liz Truss had to do the hand-kiss thing with QEII, I doubt she had to do it again for Charles (especially given that Truss arguably gave the kiss of death). Sunak’s big claim to fame recently was that he warned the Tory party that Truss’s economic policies would crash the British economy. Which they did. Still, people are mad because they want a f–king general election and they probably won’t get one for a while.

Photos courtesy of Justin Ng/UPPA/Avalon and Imageplotter/Avalon.

Honestly, plans for King Charles III have just begun. The coronation committee has probably only had a few meetings, if that. All of the focus on whether Queen Camilla will wear the Koh-i-noor is important, but the conversation probably took Charles by surprise given how little is in place at this point for his May 2023 coronation. That’s what this new Telegraph story is about, how everything needs to be planned and how Charles has put William in a major position of power on the coronation committee, and how this whole thing will probably be done smaller and on a budget. Some highlights:

Prince William’s active role: The Prince of Wales is to take an “active role” in planning the coronation of his father King Charles. The Prince, who is likely to also have a place in the May 6 ceremony itself, is expected to join those on the King’s coronation committee in the coming months to help set the tone for the event. The King’s eldest son will have an active advisory position, taking a keen interest in the ceremony and how it reflects modern Britain. He and the Princess of Wales are likely – but not confirmed – to have a role in the Westminster Abbey event, with discussions currently under way about how it can be modernised and shortened from the spectacular celebrations for the late Queen.

Zero clarity about Prince Harry: There is less clarity over the King’s younger son, the Duke of Sussex, who is no longer a working member of the Royal family.

Charles will probably do a “civil” coronation outside of the church too: The coronation committee will recommend considering a separate civil ceremony at Westminster Hall or in Horse Guards Parade as a “venture of ‘recognition’ of the new monarch outside the religious canopy”.

The coronation won’t be about the “British empire,” it will be about the “united kingdom”: With both Brexit and the Scottish independence referendum adding to “pressures on the monarchy to be a symbol of national unity”, it finds, the coronation should better reflect the Union as well as reducing any previous Imperial associations – to acknowledge that Britain is no longer a “truly international power”.

It should be smaller, less feudal & not so archaic: Dr Bob Harris, of The Constitution Unit at UCL, writes: “The UK no longer has the capacity to mount anything like this spectacle, nor should it do so in straitened times. The next coronation will inevitably be smaller. Archaic elements such as the Court of Claims could be dropped. So should the homage, and thought be given to how the King as head of the nation should be enabled early in the reign to signify support for, and encouragement of, modern civil society. A modernised form of homage could take place, for example, in Westminster Hall, or in a procession on Horse Guards Parade.”

Modern Peg: The involvement of the Prince of Wales in planning the May coronation will be welcomed by royalists as a sign of continuity between the generations and the closer working relationship between the King and his heir. The Prince will, at age of 40, naturally represent the concerns of his own generation, with an eye to modernising the monarchy for the sake of its future.

[From The Telegraph]

It’s funny that the Telegraph’s sources can’t even make it sound like William has even taken an interest in his father’s coronation thus far. Everything is in the future tense – William “will” do such and such, he’s looking forward to eventually advising the committee, he will tell them to do this and that. Why does it feel like Charles is telling his son “this is what you need to be doing” and William is ignoring him and f–king off to Norfolk? The only part of the planning of interest to William will be finding a way to be cruel to Harry. Anyway, this coronation already sounds like a bummer – whoops, Britain is no longer a global power or an empire, whoops, our prime minister was outlasted by a head of lettuce, whoops the British pound is in free fall, whoops, the crown prince is a lazy lightweight who still refuses to do any work. KC3 is going to have to bribe Kate with significant jewels to get her to do jacksh-t too.

Photos courtesy of Instar.

Dixie D’Amelio, 21, is the older sister of TikTok star Charlie D’Amelio and she’s a very popular influencer too. I’ve heard of her through her family’s reality series, The D’Amelio Show, which I admittedly haven’t watched. Dixie recently revealed that she’s been diagnosed with premenstrual dysphoric disorder, or PMDD, a more severe form of PMS which can severely affect mood. She’d been dealing with this for years before she got a diagnosis. It sounds like it was a relief to her to realize what was wrong. I appreciate that Dixie is opening up about her mental health struggles though and wanted to talk about it. Trigger warning on this content as she talks about feeling suicidal.

“I wasn’t feeling great and not really sure why,” she began. “I recently got diagnosed with this thing called PMDD, which is premenstrual dysphoric disorder.”

PMDD, a more severe form of premenstrual syndrome (PMS), is a chronic medical condition that can cause extreme mood shifts and symptoms like depression, anxiety, irritability, insomnia and more.

“It really affects your moods and your behavior and many different parts of your life,” D’Amelio continued. “I feel like I didn’t realize how much it was affecting me until I got to this point I was in last week.”

She said that for two weeks each month the condition “really disrupts” her life, impacting her attitude, personality, relationships and anxiety.

“I have never been so low … and having no idea what was wrong with me was very alarming,” she explained. “I just felt like I had no control over my body or mind and I had no idea what was wrong but it would turn on and off like a light switch.”

“That was very confusing to me because how can I go one day feeling fine and then the next day not wanting to be here anymore?” D’Amelio continued, admitting that she was struggling with suicidal thoughts.

The social media influencer said the condition is something she’s dealt with for the past seven years but was only recently diagnosed. “I’m very happy that I know what’s wrong because now I can find better ways to handle my emotions.

“I’m feeling better now and I will probably be going through the same thing next month and the month after that,” she added, sharing that she’s still learning about PMDD.

[From People]

That just sounds awful. Hormones can seriously disrupt our lives. I wasn’t familiar with it before this and I really appreciate it when famous people open up about what they’re going through. It definitely helps raise awareness. While I’m on the other side of this now and dealing with perimenopause I remember how hard it was when I was younger too. Health.Harvard.Edu has more on PMDD including how it is diagnosed and treated. It sounds like a multifaceted approach with lifestyle changes and medication is most effective. If you suspect that you or a loved one has PMDD please reach out to a doctor for treatment.

Also her hair is so cute!

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by dixie (@dixiedamelio)

photos credit: Robin Platzer/Twin Images/Avalon and Instagram

Taylor Swift’s Midnights was released last week, and obviously, it’s already breaking all kinds of records. It broke the record for the most Spotify streams in a single day. The album is already the best-selling album of the year, sorry to Beyonce, Adele and Harry Styles. Even I took some time to listen to the album, or as much as I could bear. Like, I’m not part of the Snake Fam whatsoever, but I genuinely think that Taylor has some bops. I enjoyed several songs from Folklore, although I never really got into evermore. Midnights seems to aim to have the more lowkey energy of Folklore, with some of the pop sensibilities of Lover. One of the songs stuck out to me: “Vigilante Sh-t.” The message of the song is: I’m coming for my enemies and I’m helping women hunt for their enemies. Here’s the song:

Spiritually, this feels like the sister track to Reputation’s “I Did Something Bad,” which, in my opinion, was one of the few good songs on Reputation. The lyrics have caused a lot of Snake Conspiracy Theorists to wonder just who Taylor is referencing, especially with “She needed cold, hard proof, so I gave her some/She had the envelope, where you think she got it from?/Now she gets the house, gets the kids, gets the pride/Picture me thick as thieves with your ex-wife.” I also wonder about: “While he was doin’ lines and crossin’ all of mine/Someone told his white-collar crimes to the FBI.”

Some fans insist that at least some of these lyrics are referencing Kanye West and Kim Kardashian. My opinion: Taylor still hates both Kim AND Kanye pretty equally, so no, she’s not giving “proof” to Kim, although Taylor would absolutely turn Kanye over to the FBI. Now, other Swifities suggest that Taylor is referencing Scooter Braun’s now-ex-wife Yael Cohen. Cohen filed for divorce from Scooter last year, and the divorce was finalized recently. Cohen got a $20 million settlement and he has to pay $60K a month in child support. Yeah… Scooter’s net worth is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. I’m sure Yael had dirt on Scooter, but I have my doubts as to whether Taylor provided that dirt. I don’t know. It’s interesting though.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Taylor Swift (@taylorswift)

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Taylor Swift’s social media.

Currently, The Crown’s Season 6 is in production, filming in Europe. Season 6 will pick up with Tony Blair’s victory and quickly move into Princess Diana’s death in Paris later that summer. It will be interesting to see how Peter Morgan handles the subject matter now, considering he’s “revisiting” that storyline as the screenwriter for 2006’s The Queen, directed by Stephen Frears. Obviously, Season 6 will go through most of Tony Blair’s years as prime minister. What’s interesting is that Peter Morgan now insists that Season 6 won’t go all the way through until 2007, when Blair stepped down. Morgan has been telling people that the series will end on a high note for King Charles III: Charles and Camilla’s 2005 wedding in Windsor.

It will trawl through one of the Royal family’s darkest and most tumultuous periods. But the sixth and final series of The Crown will end on a high for King Charles when it is released next year, show insiders have insisted in the wake of a slew of criticism.

The last episode will depict the wedding of Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles in April 2005, highlighting what proved to be a notable turning point for the monarchy and leaving viewers with a feel-good, positive image of the institution. The dramatisation of the civil ceremony at Windsor Guildhall will bring the curtain down on one of the most successful yet controversial dramas in recent history.

The final series, which is currently being filmed and is likely to be released next November, will turn its spotlight on the “adventures and misadventures” of New Labour. A source told The Telegraph that a “chief focus” will be the premiership of Tony Blair. It will also cover the death of Diana in a Paris car crash and chart the lives of Prince William and Prince Harry in the immediate aftermath of their mother’s death. The series will depict Queen Elizabeth II’s thawing towards her future daughter-in-law.

For the King and Queen Consort, as they are now, such celebratory scenes and a focus on largely positive developments will come as a welcome relief.

Writer Peter Morgan said he could not continue beyond the early 2000s as he believed that there should be at least a decade between a real-life event and its fictionalised retelling in order to gain “proper perspective”. He is said to have become irked by the recent criticism, having been keenly focused on historical research and determined not to convey events purely to be “sensational”.

A source defended the high-budget drama, arguing that the Royal scandals dramatised by Morgan were of the family’s own making.

“He purposely seeks to dramatise historical events as they happened,” they said. “He can’t change history, he reflects it – hence the controversial content of season five that is currently under discussion. Royal events took an upward turn post-1997 and, thankfully, a return to political events, so The Crown can return to that.”

[From The Telegraph]

“The series will depict Queen Elizabeth II’s thawing towards her future daughter-in-law…” WHO? Are we talking about Sophie, Countess of Wessex? That would be the only “future daughter in law” around this time frame (Sophie and Edward married in 1999). I find it curious that Morgan would end the series in 2005 and not 2007 though. What is he afraid of? Having to dramatize Prince William and Kate’s infamous 2007 breakup? Anyway, let’s be real – Charles and Camilla’s 2005 wedding was not the beginning of some grand new royal storyline, it simply put a bow on the sh-tshow that was and is Charles and Camilla’s relationship.

Photos courtesy of Netflix, WENN and Avalon Red.

For years, it’s felt like both King Charles and Prince William could not wait to get their hands on the spoils once Queen Elizabeth II passed away. William and Kate postponed their “move to Adelaide Cottage” until the very last minute, seemingly hoping that they wouldn’t have to move into the “cozy” four-bedroom cottage when they had their eye on the whole castle. William and Charles have also both seemed very eager to get their hands on Sandringham (a private estate) and of course, William wanted the Duchy of Cornwall. So… why haven’t we heard about any big royal real estate shuffle? While William and Kate are seemingly happy to be Windsor-based, and they’ve been holding events at Windsor Castle, they haven’t “moved in.” Charles also has zero plans to move into Buckingham Palace. So the two biggest symbolic pieces of royal real estate sit uninhabited.

Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace are both set to stay empty — with no royals moving in permanently following the Queen’s death. It had been thought William and Kate would live in the castle once they became Prince and Princess of Wales. But the family of five — with children George, nine, Charlotte, seven, and Louis, four — have only just settled into their four-bed Adelaide Cottage nearby on the Windsor estate.

Last week, The Sun revealed the King and Queen Consort will not move into Buckingham Palace for at least five years due to a £369million renovation. They will use it as an office while living mostly at nearby Clarence House.

Balmoral Castle, in Scotland, is also set to be opened up to tourists and will also have no royals in official residence. The Queen split her time between Buckingham Palace in the week and Windsor Castle at weekends. She spent her summers at Balmoral and her final few months there.

But a vacant Windsor Castle opens the prospect of Prince Harry and Meghan moving there, should they decide to return to the UK. They were previously disappointed not to get the 1,000-year-old castle after they wed, receiving much smaller Frogmore Cottage instead.

A source said: “It was previously said that William and Kate would move into Windsor Castle, but there are no plans for them to leave Adelaide Cottage.”

The couple moved from Kensington Palace in September, so they can do the school run. They spent no money on refurbs. The Sussexes paid back the £2.4million they spent doing up Frogmore.

[From The Sun]

The Sussexes never wanted the run of Windsor Castle or to be the sole royals living there, they simply asked for their own apartment(s) within the castle. They were told no, and given that dilapidated shack, Frogmore Cottage. I think it’s hilarious that the Sun is trying to make it sound like Harry and Meghan could come back and move into Windsor Castle… all while William and Kate made do in Adelaide Cottage? Please. If anything, mentioning the possibility of the Sussexes getting the castle will force William to move in even faster.

Since QEII’s passing, I have idly wondered what would have happened, real-estate-wise, if Harry and Meghan had never Sussexited. I’m not looking to write a dissertation on this, I just wonder how Charles would have shuffled the real estate if H&M had stayed. William and Kate would have moved into Windsor Castle already, I’m sure. Charles clearly wanted to hold onto Clarence House no matter what. So would Harry and Meghan just… stay in Frogmore Cottage? LOL.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

At the end of the day, I found the “nanny” interviews to be super-creepy. Jason Sudeikis and Olivia Wilde had a nanny for their two children for several years, then they fired the nanny – reportedly her name is Erika Genaro – in 2021. Genaro was there for Jason and Olivia’s breakup, and Olivia’s affair with Harry Styles. She gave her exclusive to the Daily Mail and I would assume she was paid a nice sum for all of the receipts she provided, including texts from Jason. Did I pore over everything? No. I read one of those Mail stories and got the gist of it, and I saw that Jason and Olivia issued a joint statement about Genaro, saying that she’s made “false and scurrilous accusations” and she’s gone on a campaign of harassment. I don’t know. It’s a big fat mess, is what it is. So I’m going to ignore a lot of it, but this one story made me gasp out loud. Genaro claims that before Olivia started banging Harry Styles, Florence Pugh had a fling with Styles. Thus, Olivia and Florence’s beef?

It’s the one question on everyone’s lips: why did Florence Pugh exactly fall out with Olivia Wilde?

Well, Wilde’s former nanny has alleged that Pugh, in fact, had a fling with Harry Styles before Wilde started dating him.

The nanny — named as Erika Genaro by TMZ and confirmed by sources to Page Six — made the claims in a blockbuster interview with the Daily Mail this week.

In a video posted online, Genaro claimed that Sudeikis told her that “Flo was f–king Harry and she had a boyfriend.” Pugh split with longtime love Zach Braff earlier this year.

As Page Six previously revealed, Pugh fell out with Wilde during filming, as multiple sources told us that the Britstar was unhappy that Wilde, her director on “Don’t Worry Darling,” and Styles, her co-star, hooking up on the Palm Springs set. One industry source told us, “I can tell you for a fact that Flo seeing Olivia and Harry all over each other on set did not go down well as Olivia was still with Jason when she first hooked up with Harry.”

[From Page Six]

So… the nanny, Erika Genaro, says that Jason Sudeikis told her that Florence was “f–king Harry” while Florence was still technically dating Zach Braff? I believe that was probably something Jason said to Genaro, but that doesn’t make it true. Personally, I believe Olivia’s affair with Harry probably started very quickly in the DWD production, and I believe Olivia was actively pursuing Harry from Day 1. I simply don’t think Harry would have time to hook up with Florence, nor do I honestly believe that Florence would have cheated on Braff. I mean, she was ride-or-die for Braff? I don’t buy this as an explanation for why Olivia and Florence fell out either – I think Florence was simply appalled by Olivia’s lack of professionalism, her behavior and her general assholery.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Backgrid, Avalon Red.

We’ve already had more than a month of screaming, crying and throwing up from the Windsors when it comes to The Crown. The fifth season of the Netflix drama premieres on November 9th, two weeks away. Y’all better prepare yourselves for two more weeks of royal tantrums, that’s all I’ll say. What’s funny is that it’s clearly just King Charles who is beside himself with anxiety. But he knows it’s not like he can come out and say “they’re going to be mean to me” and “how dare they dramatize the awful way I treated Diana!” So the king has given little “tasks” to his friends, associates and political allies to carry out. Over the weekend, an unnamed family friend ran to the Times to cry about how the series is “vicious” and how Harry should be ashamed of himself:

The close friend of the royal family, who attended the Queen’s committal in Windsor, strongly criticised Netflix, which has resisted calls for a fictional disclaimer before each episode.

The friend said: “I’m horrified by what is going on with Netflix and how they are vilifying the royal family. It is vicious. It’s as if they’re trying to destroy the royal family.”

Asked what Queen Elizabeth would have made of the plot lines, the friend said: “It would have destroyed her.” She added that it put the Duke of Sussex “in the most invidious position”, given his lucrative deal with the streaming giant. “If I had my family being vilified like that, I wouldn’t take a penny [from Netflix].”

[From The Times]

Charles is setting himself up for such awful stories once the series comes out. Because he’s raised such a fuss, everyone will feel the need to “fact check” what’s in The Crown with the actual historical receipts, and all of that will A) look worse for Charles and B) extend The Crown’s power and narrative and C) make Charles look “vicious” and sadistic. Speaking of sadism, one of Princess Diana’s old friends got a call from the new king:

Diana’s close friend Simone Simmons told The Sun that the hit drama risked forcing Princes William and Harry to recall “the most painful time” of their lives.

She said: “These are cruel, sadistic and wicked people to recreate these moments. They are the lowest of the low. They are rewriting history as they go along and that’s what makes me very angry. Netflix are deliberately reviving the most painful time in the boys’ lives. It’s forcing them to relive the pain, agony, and psychological torment they suffered when their mother died. I think it’s disgusting and sick. Why are they setting out to upset William and Harry? The makers of this programme do not care about the heir to the throne and everything he has been through. Why do these callous, insensitive people feel the need to recreate that horrible day? They are going out of their way to hurt the Royal Family.”

[From The Sun]

Considering Simone Simmons was such a good friend to Diana, you’d think she would spare a thought for her friend Diana, who was treated so abominably by the Windsors? All Diana wanted was to survive all of the pain and torment that family put her through, and to tell her story. As for Diana’s adult sons… William has clearly said on the record that he thinks his mother was paranoid and delusional. William and Charles want to solely own Diana’s life and memory for their own narratives… all while Harry, his mother’s son, has shown the world how little has changed in the House of Windsor.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, The Crown/Netflix.