Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER

Umbelina

Member
  • Content Count

    10.3k
  • Joined

Everything posted by Umbelina

  1. Thanks! Frogmore COTTAGE was said to have 10 bedrooms and basically been apartments before Harry and Meghan renovated it to 5 bedrooms, etc. Either way, I'm sure they can isolate from one another. It's just 5 days. Then a test. Lots of acreage to explore and places to relax anyway.
  2. As much as I (and several others) disliked the episode "MOONDUST?" In several of the tributes to Prince Philip, or memories, a couple of people have mentioned that was the episode of The Crown that most accurately portrayed Philip. ! Some of the comments were that when the answers couldn't be found from outer space/science he became quite spiritual, and from there, went on to help shape that space for troubled or searching men to have a place to speak openly and find solace or companionship, and he was quite proud of that.
  3. Where are you (generally?) He's brought up in the USA quite a bit, especially every time Ghislaine Maxwell's various nonsense requests are mentioned. It's obviously still an open case, and he is a witness and suspect the US wants. ETA Just noticed than in another post you say you are Canadian. I can understand not hearing as much about Andrew in your press as we do in the USA.
  4. I was trying to remember who told Andrew to shut up, apparently it was Charles? Anyway, odd source, but interesting take on this: https://www.thedailybeast.com/did-prince-andrew-really-just-use-prince-philips-death-to-sneak-back-on-tv Coming out of church on Sunday morning, just 48 hours after the death of his father, whose greatest disdain was reserved for royals embarrassing the family, Andrew made a beeline for the camera and started giving what appeared to be an off-the-cuff interview to a news camera about how the entire royal family was “all feeling a great sense of loss.” Andrew has clearly missed his media appearances. On and on he went. How grateful he was for the tributes paid to his father. How “calm” his father was as a man. He was also careful to suggest his father’s death had helped connect him to the proletariat, saying it “brought it home to me not just our loss but actually the loss that everybody else has felt, for so many people who have died and lost loved ones during the pandemic.” It was shockingly unshocking to see Andrew, not a drop of perspiration on him despite having gained a few extra pounds, bad British teeth and all, standing there in his black suit, acting like nothing had happened, freelancing away for the cameras. Maybe we had all just imagined the past year and a half, especially the bit where Prince Charles, now more than ever the acting head of the royal family, had stripped him of all his royal patronages, kicked him out of his office in Buckingham Palace, and removed his obscene $300,000 a year grant from the British taxpayer. It was, at first, all rather inoffensive waffle that was emanating from Andrew’s mouth. It might not have even made the evening news. But if there is one thing that is guaranteed to galvanize the British public, it is insight into that most mysterious of things: how the queen is actually feeling, up close and in private. Asked about the effect of Philip’s death on Her Majesty, Andrew, stunningly, decided to go there: “She described it as having left a huge void in her life,” he said, adding that she had described her husband’s passing as a “miracle.” Hopefully, the press will now feel free to start writing about the real black sheep of the family, Andrew, now, and lay off Meghan and Harry for a few months.
  5. Holy crap! Andrew went on camera for an interview. I'm trying to imagine the reaction from Charles, and others to this. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/prince-philip-s-death-has-left-huge-void-queen-elizabeth-n1263748 ETA, longer youtube, Andrew and others speaking at the end.
  6. The tabloids print what will sell. Hatred for Megan sell in the UK. It's already everything from joy or hate for her not coming, to her causing his death with the interview. It's idiotic, and all about the money. As far as the vaccinations? I have friends in southern California in their twenties already vaccinated, Harry wouldn't have to "jump the line." He was probably vaccinated months ago. On the west coast, whenever there has been excess vaccine, since it has a short shelf life, anyone on the list can get it, regardless of age, in some cases, anyone simply showing up can. Lots of it is also now with personal physicians/clinics as well. I doubt she's been sleeping next to him very often, but yes, she fell in love so young, and he's been in her life and heart for her entire adult life. It will be a shocking blow for her, even if expected. Since she previously miscarried, she may not have been vaccinated yet. Data is scarce and I could easily understand a pregnant woman waiting. I personally know a few pregnant women who have been vaccinated, and several more who will wait until they give birth. One of those is already a problematic pregnancy and adding even a possible risk factor is just not prudent. Given Meghan's history and age, I wouldn't do it, and I am as pro-vaccine as it's possible to be. I am too. He obviously loved his grandfather, and I'm glad this gives him a chance to see his grandmother as well. As someone else said, there is a chance, slim though it may be, for some personal healing here, even though the "suits" or "men in mustaches" or "the FIRM" probably won't like or permit much of it. They zoom. In my opinion, it would be incredibly irresponsible to bring an unvaccinated child on such a trip in the middle of a global pandemic. Given the many variations that aren't even covered by current vaccines, it's risky enough for Harry, let alone for a toddler. Exactly. He is staying at Frogmore with his cousin. (Released today.) He's letting them use Frogmore, which is more than large enough for him to isolate, and they are also close to Meghan and Harry. I think many of us have had the same thoughts about Elizabeth. Let's hope her sense of duty sees her through, if not her heart. Screw his father, but yes, it would be nice if somehow Harry and William could at least obtain some kind of start in reconciling. (I doubt it, sadly, but stranger things have happened in this odd family.) Oh, it's already happening, by the dozens, started just after the announcement was posted on the gate. Whatever sells, sadly, that does, just as it did for Harry's mom. The only thing I like about Prince Charles is that he detests Andrew. The only part of Charles being King that is palatable to me is that he just might allow the FBI to have him. (yeah, probably not, but one can hope.) They will focus on whatever sells in that particular country. In the UK, it's Meghan hate, with a large serving of Harry hate, and dessert of William and Kate love. Australia, from what I've seen, has focused more on Philip, since he was there so often, and enjoyed sports available there, etc. In the USA, it depends on who owns the paper/channel. Generally favorable to Harry and Meghan and to the Queen, and tolerant of Philip's gaffs over the years, but not ignoring them. Other countries? Not sure, I follow a few, but haven't seen much mentioned in those I do follow, but I am now curious and may go look. BBQ or grilling is interchangeable in many areas. I'm remembering a scene in The Queen where she's there with her lamb stew in Tupperware, just in case they don't catch enough fish for BBQing. I think Balmoral has always been their place to be the "most normal" and that was/is part of the tradition there. ---- I've read with interest all the comments about Philip. Yes, he's been an ass towards minorities and women numerous times, but I do wonder, how many of us have much older relatives or friends who have done the same, and while we cringe, or at times actually try to educate them a bit, at some level, still love them for the whole person they have been, not ignoring the bad, just tempering that with the good in them, and on balance, decide to love them in spite of it all? In nearly 100 years, I'm pretty sure there must be a lot of good mixed in with the crap.
  7. The latter.
  8. To me, Lydia "line" passes smoothly through. I read it, and had to go back and reread parts, I don't know if an audio book would have worked for me on this particular book. I can't WAIT to see this all play out on screen though, obviously probably not the entire sequel, but certainly parts of it have already been shown, June's revolutionary trajectory for example, perhaps even the odd moments when Lydia was not cruel.
  9. Exactly, they are still trying to establish trade with countries, including Canada, so tearing the bridges down would be idiotic.
  10. I am SO ready. After reading the sequel, I'm ready.
  11. Maybe Dean will talk.
  12. I don't think Violetta was setting them all up, it's possible she made connections with the ladies in some cases, etc. We actually know Ludo tampered with the electricity at the Thursday house, Mrs. Thursday tells her husband that he (in the guise of a faith healer) obviously did that. As far as who got her to sign over the insurance policy, or her husband? They didn't really say, that could have been Violetta or Ludo. I think shooting had to stop early because of COVID. I actually loved that this season brought Thursday and Morse back together with Morse soothing Thursday's ego in that letter, and Thursday rushing to Venice to be Morse's back up and to save his life. Haven't read the books, but I completely bought the whole love story, and I always thought Violetta did love him, even though, to me, it was obvious she was also using him. I'm on of the few who LOVE that show! She admits she loves him, dying words, nothing to gain, so yes, I think in those moments he knew she had loved him all along, but was trapped. (new to this thread, just read the last couple of pages so far, looking forward to reading more.) I stumbled on this show, it captured me, I really like it. Season 6 was depressing, but still, so real, I hated "the team" not being solid anymore, but with the resolve in season 7, I actually appreciate season 6 more. It stepped into a very much more "real" feel to me. I want to know more about that cop that joined the secret group, and more about that group as well.
  13. Exactly. Strippers maybe, but not someone who wanted to be a serious actress. One cousin was scheduled for a breast reduction at age 58 (it's a big deal to do that operation, involves moving nipples, etc.) She just couldn't afford if before that, and her former husband loved them. He died suddenly of a heart attack pretty young. Anyway, a guy at work (all of them really) loved her boobs, and she eventually started dating him. They are married now, but she had to promise not to have her boobs reduced. Men and boobs honestly bewilder me, not all men of course, but so many are fascinated by SIZE more than just nice boobs. My niece was in a DD at age 10, they grew from there. She's lucky though, they never grew more than a DDDD, so she's not in Christina's boat at least.
  14. I agree that they should have at least padded the teenager, since all the super huge breasts people I personally know sprouted them early. I don't think Christina's boobs are fake though, and she has denied it and scoffed at it several times. Not only do they look real to me, I believe that there are men who go wild for huge boobs (like the hit man) no matter what the rest of the woman looks like, when you add in "pretty" and Christina certainly is pretty, game over. All my cousins, and my nieces have giant boobs, which they do their best to minimize. All have been harassed often by men everywhere. In my family at least, boobs came very early for them, around 12 years old, in one case at 10. If we just were walking to the store, or a park men would honk, go nuts, if one passed us by, one cousin simply said: "Yes they are real" and kept walking when we were stopped, which oddly worked, the man, usually with a look like he'd just seen heaven or a pot of gold, wonder all over his face, said back "thank you" breathlessly. I was shocked. I basically said, "What the hell was that?" She told me it happens all the time, they always ask the same thing, so if I answer first it saves time." ETA Sad that she'd been dealing with that long enough to know how to get rid of the men. She was 13 at the time that happened while I was there, the men were old (to me, over 35 at least.)
  15. Sorry the link is in a quote. It's a good article though, mentioning several things already mentioned here (for example Beth's sexual attractiveness, and mom issues with the other two, etc.)
  16. Disclaimer: I watch this on Netflix, so obviously this season is not up yet, so I'm reading your comments (and will go read recaps) to see "what happens next." I have no problems with spoilers, obviously. Yes to your comment here, it not uncommon for exceptionally bright children to be bored in school and get average grades. I speak from experience there, for example, try reading "Dick and Jane" (over and over again) when at home you've already read Nancy Drew, or Dr. Seuss. At the very least you will get "doesn't pay attention in class" demerits. If that therapist still not getting any sex from his partner? (again, reading, not watching.) If so, it makes sense, and people can be attracted for many reasons, but certainly a sex lover vs no sex at home could be...complicated. ETA It reminds me a bit of the Betty Draper story on Mad Men. She's not just a mom, she's a person. "Getting her life together" doesn't happen for everyone, it can be a life long project. That said, I always thought that in many ways she IS a great mom. She's very loving, and open. She accepted his new school because she saw it made him HAPPY, even though she'd been against it. She took care of him being bullied, and was smart enough to do that without humiliating him and going to the school (which honestly, never really works.) She accepted her daughter's announcement that he was now her son with love and complete support. Hell, she even helped her ex's new wife give birth (and got in that stew in the pool!) Yes, she did questionable things as well, most certainly, crime, and sleeping with her ex (although hello! HE was the one who took vows and married someone else, and most certainly came on to her!) Why is the man never blamed in these things? I am SO bummed to hear that this "plot" is still happening! I was completely annoyed with it the first time! The only interesting thing was watching Ruby and Stan work through marriage issues, because that always felt real and pretty moving on the show, whatever horrible problems they had, from the kidney transplant, to money, to Stan losing his job due to Ruby's crimes? It always worked for me, made me see "marriage" in a very new way.
  17. I think the question is, how much negative press have you seen about any of the royal family, other than Harry, Meghan, and Archie since Meghan arrived on the scene? The second question is, how many times have you seen the FIRM step in to correct misinformation on others in the royal family, while not once (that I can remember) correcting misinformation on Meghan, or Archie, or even expressing distress at the blatant racism about a baby? Just for the hell of it, when was the last time you've seen a negative article in the cooperating press about Camilla, or William, or Kate, or Andrew, or Charles? Sure, there may have been a softball bone thrown into the mix, but in general, since Meghan arrived? They are all off the hot seat, while Meghan, literally daily, is pilloried. That is the point. That makes what Harry said about the press quite true, in every respect. He knows how it works, he was an insider for a long time, still sacrificed to protect William, but he didn't care about that. However, when his wife and newborn baby were the targets? He did care. He tried to stop the lies, went to The Firm, got nowhere, for a very good reason. He, his wife, and his child didn't matter to the FIRM, only Charles, Camilla, William, Kate, The Queen, and Andrew did, so all press puff pieces for them, and a completely different story for Harry's family.
  18. Harry said this on January 8th (which, IMO is pretty clear that they wished to step back, but to continue to be working royals as well: "We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen," the caption read. "We now plan to balance our time between the United Kingdom and North America, continuing to honor our duty to The Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages." "This geographic balance will enable us to raise our son with an appreciation for the royal tradition into which he was born, while also providing our family with the space to focus on the next chapter, including the launch of our new charitable entity." Then the Queen issued this on January 18th: As agreed in this new arrangement, they understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties, including official military appointments. They will no longer receive public funds for Royal duties. With The Queen’s blessing, the Sussexes will continue to maintain their private patronages and associations. While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty. The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have shared their wish to repay Sovereign Grant expenditure for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage, which will remain their UK family home. Buckingham Palace does not comment on the details of security arrangements. There are well established independent processes to determine the need for publicly-funded security. This new model will take effect in the Spring of 2020. (me again, so it's unclear to me that this is a lie. Also, it's difficult to discover the date Charles removed financial support, I don't see why Harry would lie about that, and being blindsided by that. Also, I don't believe they ever received public funds, I think that was all Charles, for both of his sons and their families.) The children of William would be in the same boat, except perhaps for George, yet somehow, the palace managed to make Charlotte and Louis princess and prince, leaving only one grandchild of the future King Charles without a title, and more importantly, without security. It's tit for tat, and honestly that's been known and obvious for a long time. It's detailed in several postings in this thread as well. They get access if they lay off the senior royals and the Queen's favorite, Andrew. Unflattering stories certainly existed, but after Harry and Meghan married, the "unflattering" stories were all (or very nearly all) about THEM. Also, they were endless, daily attacks on them, never refuted or challenged by the palace. Privilege doesn't mean no bullying though. The things Meghan complained about were the press lies going unchallenged, her child being Charles' only grandchild to not receive a title, and thus security protection, even though that baby was getting death threats and horrific racial hatred. You can be privileged and still wronged, the two don't equate, especially when the palace permitted that, while protecting Andrew, Charles, William, Kate, Camilla, and Kate's children from the daily vicious slander and hate that Meghan and Archie endured. That said, I think it took an American to show Harry that indeed, this way of living was complete insanity, and unhealthy. Harry wanted to keep ties, to split his time, continue with his patronages, and Meghan with hers, but just to get out of England and away from the unchecked nasty press for 6 months of the year. Harry had known no other kind of life, but his wife had. When fitting into his became impossible and unhappy for both of them, they decided to try another way.
  19. The new FBI people aren't grabbing me. DISCLOSURE, I'm watching on Netflix, so haven't seen any of season 4 yet. I don't know if I'm interested enough in having the woman FBI agent bust this case, maybe, but I'm going to need more about her than her strange interactions with yet another gay male FBI agent. Nope. Zero chemistry. That isn't Christina's fault. I'm about to read the article, but yes. Much like when Breaking Bad killed the kid on the bike, we've reached a no return point. Lucy's death was gutting. Her poor boyfriend's reaction? Ditto. Rio and Beth do work for me. I would have loved to see more of Rio and his son's mother though, and frankly, more of Beth interacting with her too. The hitman story bugs the crap out of me. Do it, or don't do it, but damn, season's 3 final two episodes were boring. Agree. Although, logically, Rio had no choice. She would have gone to the cops, or, at the very least, told her boyfriend, who would have gone to the cops. Rio doesn't seem to kill emotionally, it's all about keeping himself out of jail/danger. Rio's "it's business" rings true to me. Having a show where no innocents, or likeable characters die would be pretty ridiculous. I agree though, it shifts the tone, and they need, IMO, to double down about that. I find it unbelievable that Rio doesn't already know about the hitman. He probably does, and will "handle it." Yes, saying "I lost it." What I wish they would have resolved is the baby momma saving Beth. She wasn't used enough. It was awful, but in retrospect, it doesn't surprise me. I can't help but compare this to Breaking Bad. Innocents will die. However, I don't think they will kill off all 3 women (the Mr. Whites) at the end, so how will they resolve this?
  20. https://time.com/5945032/what-is-the-firm-royal-family/ The senior royals, obviously—including Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip; Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall; and Prince William and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. But the institution also consists of the offices that manage royal affairs, including the Private Secretary’s Office, the Privy Purse and the Treasurer’s Office. These departments, like at any company, manage everything from the Queen’s government relations to finances and human resources. (This broad coalition of employees is officially called the Royal Household, and consists of hundreds of workers.) During Markle’s interview with Winfrey, she made two distinctions. First, she drew a line between the family and the “institution”: “So, there’s the family, and then there’s the people that are running the institution,” she said. And she drew a line between her personal relationship with the head of the family and her dealings with the institution, saying that Queen Elizabeth “has always been wonderful to me.” In contrast, she said that she requested mental health support from the institution’s HR, but was denied because she was not technically on payroll. How is The Firm connected to the royal press? The royal press—called the Royal Rota—and the royal family share a symbiotic relationship, with the press reporting extensively on the family’s events in exchange for access. Given the appetite for royal news in the U.K., the relationship has been lucrative for the media and important for the family in their attempts to maintain relevance and a connection with non-royals without sacrificing privacy. But the proximity of the two was disturbing to the Sussexes. “There’s a reason the tabloids have holiday parties at the palace,” Markle said. As Winfrey’s interview pointed out, Markle did not experience a positive working relationship with the Royal Rota, especially in comparison to the treatment of other members of the royal family. Her experience of harassment in the tabloids is well-documented. In fact, Markle recently won a part of her suit against Associated Newspapers for privacy invasion and copyright infringement. (A third portion of the suit, around data protection, remains to be argued.) There is more here about finances and other issues addressed in the interview. More about "The Firm" here (and about the interview): https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielshapiro/2021/03/10/inside-the-firm-how-the-royal-familys-28-billion-money-machine-really-works/?sh=38dd1d2b2bcc Beyond the extended family, the House of Windsor has thousands of employees around the world. Buckingham Palace alone employs some 1,200 people—even if they aren't always paid a Queen’s ransom to work there. An entry-level IT specialist can make upwards of $40,000 a year, as well as benefits, at Buckingham Palace, according to a recent job listing on an official palace portal. The Crown Estate, the institution that oversees the assets of the monarchy, also employs an additional 450 people, including a board of directors that make the financial decisions for the monarchy. It's difficult to find an actual number of how many people are employed by the Crown, there are several properties that must be managed as well, but it certainly seems to be a lot, all of whom have a vested interest in the monarchy continuing. It's their livelihoods. I think the "firm" that Harry and Meghan were talking about, and that previously Diana and Fergie talked about, are the managers and advisers, the PR people, and those loyal to various other royals who employ them, Charles and Camilla's staff for example. I'd love to see an exact number if anyone has one. ETA they also have at least 26 properties requiring management and gardeners and all the rest, but I don't think lowly housekeepers are what everyone refers to as "the firm" but rather the courtiers and decision makers. https://www.veranda.com/luxury-lifestyle/g27044934/royal-family-homes/#:~:text=A Look at the 26 Homes Owned by the British Royal Family&text=It's common knowledge that the,Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace.
  21. I'm new to this show, binging it, so I'm pretty sure my comments about it have probably already been made. I admit to not yet reading all 32 pages! I adore the cast, except perhaps Mathew Lillard, who is adequate, but does little for me in the role of Christina's husband. There just isn't much there there, he doesn't really distract, but for me, he adds so little. As a female "Breaking Bad" it's been pretty good though. I do like the addition of issues for women, and I adore the transgender Izzie in the role and in the story. Just as in Breaking Bad, I'm rooting for the bad guys, enjoying the extended family situations, and having more focus on friends and on children, and the additional money worries (though still, based on medical costs in the USA to a large degree, driving normal good people to crime.) Manny Montana is excellent, again, and his "just business" attitude is very familiar. I am still not completely clear about his relationship with Beth, but I feel like he sees her as a talented underling that can bring in cash, and sometimes a pet project, all of that while knowing she did try to kill him and probably will again. They are playing with both chess and sex, and it's ALMOST working for me. So close, but just not quite there. I adore the relationship between the 3 women, and that makes up for quite a bit. I would like to have seen more of Rio's wife (or is she just a baby mamma?) Not only is she stunning, I just wanted more, more with Beth, more with Rio.
  22. The lavish televised weddings (the boost to the U.K. economy from Harry and Meghan’s royal wedding was an estimated $1.5 billion), buzzy tours of Commonwealth countries and public displays of pomp and circumstance generate massive interest—and profits—for a global business enterprise that spans from prime real estate in central London to remote farmlands in Scotland. That wedding earned more than it cost. Specific finances are in this article, and other financial matters raised by this interview, such as William and Harry's salaries though Charles, etc. Inside ‘The Firm’: How The Royal Family’s $28 Billion Money Machine Really Works
  23. From what I've seen, most tabloids/comments are using it more as proof that Meghan is a liar. Not Harry, who also talked about it, just Meghan. As far as the legitimacy of Archie and the future baby, the thing I keep seeing is that both kids are actually through a surrogate mother, and Meghan has always worn a fake "baby bump" to fool everyone. (yes really) That is also apparently why Archie isn't "dark." Sorry if that is at all off topic, but trying to answer your question. So, no, since no one is doubting that Harry is the father, and Archie was born long after the wedding, no one that I've seen has questioned their legitimacy as far as royalty is concerned.
×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size