Dejana

I think the implication is that Olivia became romantically involved with Harry before she ended things with Jason. Even if they were "only" engaged, that would still be cheating and it's not shocking he would feel blindsided in that case. However, if they really split last spring and Jason was in denial about that, it's his problem if she's moved on and he can't deal. At least Jason's not a singer and won't do a desperate album begging her to come back *cough* Robin Thicke *cough*. People can get engaged and subsequently decide they like the relationship but don't need it to result in marriage. Or, it can be that they do believe in marriage, just not to the person they're with currently, or the two sides aren't really on the same page about the issue. Wilde is also the director on this film that Harry Styles is starring in, where he replaced Shia LaBeouf. There are a lot of bad allegations against Shia that go back years and he's burned many bridges in Hollywood. It's not like Wilde fired this perfectly nice, consummate professional. Still, it seems like she started dating his replacement pretty quickly. Maybe male directors have acted similarly throughout film history, but IMO it's not the best look for anyone regardless of gender.

Dionne Warwick agrees: Loving her social media presence! * Just visit Age Gap Twitter if you want to find people endlessly concerned and troubled by onscreen and offscreen pairings of women in their 20s dating men in their 30s. Or even men in their late 20s dating women in their mid-20s... The big development with Olivia Wilde/Harry Styles is that now there are "sources" saying her breakup with Jason Sudeikis happened much later than previously reported: I don’t think running to US Weekly about your heartbreak is going to help with that! These "sources" (supposing they're even real) are clearly Jason’s team/friends, right?

John David Washington has already had to defend the age gap with Zendaya for Malcolm & Marie and the movie isn't even out yet. He points out that she has been in show business much longer than him. Also, the movie was her idea, so if anything, she picked him. The story is about a director and his aspiring actress girlfriend, so it's not like the age difference is unrealistic. It apparently gets addressed in the movie. Another thing is that Zendaya got her big break as a Disney kid and still plays a teenager on a TV show now, so some people can't deal with her playing an adult (I guess this is why there wasn't a huge objection to Zendaya/Zac Efron in The Greatest Showman, because he's also an ex-Disney kid). People say she looks like a child next to JDW, which I think is ridiculous. The near-ubiquity of twentysomethings playing teenagers in TV shows/movies for decades has skewed ideas of how teenagers actually look in real life. It's also funny to see the Zendaya fans saying, "No one complained about Jennifer Lawrence in Silver Linings Playbook!" I guess some of them really are too young to remember the years of people saying JLaw was getting roles that should have gone to older women, bless... I get that large age gaps in films, if they only go in one direction, can be indicative of a system that easily discards women while endlessly propping up men. OTOH, adults in different age ranges can have a good rapport and even find love, if they want. Maybe they'll work as an onscreen couple; maybe they won't. Frankly, more annoying (to me, anyway) is the subset of social media which, I swear, is "disturbed" and "uncomfortable" with any age gap greater than 2-3 years. I mean, good for you that you personally never ever want to date anyone that you couldn't have theoretically attended middle school with, but that does not mean every relationship with an age gap is grooming or has a troubling power imbalance. Do you want to raise the age of adulthood to 25 or what? And IMO not enough people entertain the idea that maybe it's the men who are too old for some of these roles. For the last decade or two, Hollywood has treated men like they are boys until they are 30, so no wonder onscreen (and offscreen) pairings work out how they do. Even in the Golden Age, you would get the 50+ men with a woman in her 20s, but they still let guys in their 20s play actual adults in mainstream, big budget movies.

It's probably a screenwriting thing; exchanging goodbyes would be considered wasted words/time that could go to some other thing that moves the story forward.

The trailer is even better (worse?), though it depends on your perspective, I guess:

The tabloids moralizing about The Crown now were the ones who gleefully spilled all the sordid royal gossip back in the day. The papers are probably worried about being depicted poorly in upcoming seasons and how that may affect their own bottom line. More and more British celebrities are speaking out about how awful and unethical the tabloids are over there, and any examination of the shady press in the 1990s will remind people that little has changed, and the reasons why Harry and Meghan bolted. The show is fictional but all the bellyaching only makes viewers want to seek out books and documentaries, and people on Twitter who lived through this era are more than happy to fill in the gaps of things the show didn't mention. In the past three weeks, so many sweet, summer children just learned about what was delicately called Camillagate (which actually occurred during the S4 timeframe). Yes, Diana had her affairs and her own leaked embarrassing phone call, too, but she’s not here now, and it's not so much her side trying to convince everyone that the show is exaggerating everything. Monarchy is an old-fashioned institution by nature, but even within its framework, some people are better than others at adapting to the times. A savvy PR person would tell Charles and Camilla and their defense brigade to shut up and take the L about Season 4. Let social media vent for a few weeks and then people will be preoccupied by the next outrage. Some people will never forgive Charles and Camilla or like them very much, but complaining about a TV show being unfair to them isn't going to help with that.

The Bachelor does have a bigger budget (it gets higher ratings, generally), but I think The Bachelorette being their first attempt at filming in a bubble put it at a disadvantage. TPTB probably weren't sure how smoothly filming would go, if/when it would be disrupted, and stuck to Southern California out of an abundance of caution. Then, as things turned out okay at the La Quinta (in terms of pandemic safety at least), they could take stock of what was working and what wasn't, and feel more comfortable branching out to another part of the country for the next Bachelor bubble. The timing sucks for the season first out of the gate. * Bekah was 21 when Arie's season was filming and it was big thing some of the other women in the house held against her, as someone that age was "too young" and "not ready" to settle down, especially with Arie being 36 at the time. It was played like this shocking secret and threw Arie for a loop when he found out. The funny thing is that Bekah entered a relationship shortly after that season and she’s now a mother of two. * There was the lingerie pillow fight on Peter's season, women riding tractors in bikinis on the Chris Soules season, and on Ben H's season, there was a stage performance date where the "villain" of the house ended up in a costume that was just a thong on the bottom. IIRC, she was not comfortable with it. On Hannah's Bachelorette season, there was the so-called local tradition of nude couples bungee jumping (online, people familiar with the region were saying, "Yeah no, that is not a thing there."). The strip dodgeball was degrading; bad sexual politics are the norm for this franchise.

In the early years, the Sexiest Man Alive choice didn’t necessarily have to agree to the whole publicity campaign. Before everything was online, People could just put together available photos of the guy looking "hot" with an article about how appealing he was. For JFK Jr., he could think it was ridiculous and embarrassing, but the magazine could publish some photos of him around town or working out shirtless in Central Park, a basic life summary, and the issue would still sell like crazy. Now, they need the exclusive content and PR that only a willing participant can provide. So, when the latest Sexiest Man Alive is named and there are loud complaints that it's not some celebrity who would never agree to the "title" anyway, I wonder if people think it's like a draft or something.

Yes, it's a family picture from Archie's christening that includes Diana's sisters Jane and Sarah. This is Tiggy nowadays: In her younger days:

Princess Diana Confessed That She Would Have Gone Back to Prince Charles "In a Heartbeat" Princess Diana and Prince Charles Were Past the ‘Ugly Stage’ of Their Relationship at the Time of Her Death

Conspiracy theories are scandalous and exciting (not to the people implicated, obviously), so they persist. I'm mildly surprised the theories haven't evolved to Philip somehow being Hewitt's father... On the Squidgy tapes (recorded circa 1990), Diana worries about getting pregnant and references a soap opera where a woman has a baby resultung from an extramarital affair. I know people aren't always careful about these things, but I always thought that if she'd been down that road already and "gotten away with it," so to speak, she'd be on industrial/triple strength contraception going forward. There wasn't social media back then but the old-school press was plenty pervasive, and the risk of being caught was very high. The same people who insist the Firm murdered Diana don't seem to think they would have bumped off Harry Hewitt one way or another (obviously not advocating this!), and have arranged it in a way that made the Windsors sympathetic in the eyes in the public.

Definitely, seeing the 1980s rehashed dredges up a lot of fresh anger for people who watched it unfold the first time. I also think a not-small share of the social media outrage happening now is from people too young to remember Charles/Diana when it happened, or they started paying attention to the Royals when Kate or Meghan married into the family. They might know that Charles was in love with Camilla but married Diana, there was a public, bitter divorce and Diana died when William and Harry were young. Seeing it play out, how 32-year-old Charles was still emotionally involved with Camilla and wanted her to be friends with his 19-year-old fiancée...this is a generation that cares about age gaps and power dynamics in relationships, so the particulars of Diana/Charles/Camilla are going to go over especially badly with the younger set. I cannot count how many tweets I've seen from people who cannot believe Charles really said, "Whatever in love means," during his engagement interview, and thought the writers had to have made that part up. They are probably familiar with the William/Kate, Harry/Meghan engagement interviews and the notion of either prince: 1) being in his early 30s but engaged to a 19 year old, and 2) openly noncommittal about actually being in love with their future wife, on camera... To contemporary eyes, it would not only be an unfathomable PR disaster, but a terrible way to treat someone. It would get the guy "cancelled", at least temporarily. It's one thing to read about what really happened on a season in an article but another for viewers to see the real Charles saying, "Whatever in love means," or hearing Diana in her own voice, talking about this period of her life. It greatly undercuts all the protests that the show is fiction. It is, but no more than any previous season and before, it felt like we could go five minutes without being constantly reminded that what we are watching isn't real. I bet Season 5 will show a less flattering side to Diana, but to some, whatever she did later is a result of how Charles (and Camilla) treated her first. Is that the entire truth? Is it fair to Charles and Camilla? Maybe not, but the people looking at the Charles/Diana marriage from a fresh perspective in the 2020s might not be in the mood to handwave how it played out as things being different then, and let's let bygone be bygones.

New couple alert?

Camilla's great-grandmother was a mistress to Edward VII, which Camilla supposedly mentioned to Charles IRL when they met in the 1970s. That's probably how she saw their relationship going in those days, and didn’t want anything more. As much as Charles may have loved Camilla as a young man, by all real-life accounts, he also very much enjoyed being an eligible bachelor. People point out that Elizabeth got her way in marrying Philip even when he wasn't thought to be "suitable", and Charles could have done the same with Camilla. However, in a lot of ways, Elizabeth was tougher than Charles, and it helped that Philip wasn't averse to the proposition or its timing. Elizabeth also wasn't brought up thinking that she was entitled to have lovers if she wanted, so it was either marriage to Philip or nothing. Charles and Camilla both knew they could still have a relationship of a sort, even if they both ended up marrying other people--family history told them so. It makes for a more dramatic show if Charles is daydreaming of marrying Camilla in the late 1980s, regardless of whether he was actually known to have felt that way at the time.