Sailorgirl26

This article delves more into that theory. I think it's a great speculation! https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/features/whoe-dies-white-lotus-episode-season-b2241758.html

Here's a great write-up from The Independent speculating about who dies. I love the analysis of the Tanya situation because it touches on a death I haven't seen mentioned much--Gregg. I'll add to the in the media thread, but thought it appropriate here too: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/features/whoe-dies-white-lotus-episode-season-b2241758.html

I just went and watched -- she waves to somebody -- single hand -- like a goodbye, thanks kind of wave, so she's not gazing down into the water at something. (I just watched the preview hitting pause every second trying to see as much as I could!) :-D

Just think if you were the makeup artist who gets to put those scars on him. Over and over. Talk about loving your job!!! He is a fine specimen of the male form.

You called it!! Well done!

I think Bert is going to be one of the bodies. We’ve gotten a few references to him hitting his head. I could see him having another fall or hitting his head that takes him out. Not sure how he’d end up in the water, but there’s groundwork of multiple head injuries.

Except . . . wouldn't Daphne know where Cameron was? In the opening scene of Episode 1, she said they were leaving in a few hours -- if he was on the beach, he would have been with her. If he wasn't on the beach, she would know he would be in the hotel packing or having lunch with Ethan, or whatever (sneaking off to meet Lucia to pay her possibly). I don't see a way he would end up in the water unless he and Daphne were on the beach together and he had gone in the water for a swim before her. But she gave the impression she was there alone, and when swimming, wouldn't she have been looking for Cameron as she swam out? She was very much in her own world as she was taking that swim (I rewatched the opening scene last night). Perhaps Cameron struggled with Lucia (and possibly Mia -- they did say "a few" bodies) and they both went over a balcony and landed in the water, but wouldn't someone have noticed multiple people falling off a balcony? Even if no one witnessed the fall, the splash would have been noticeable. You'd think some part of that scenario would draw attention. . .

My take on Lucia's pimp -- he's not actually a pimp -- he's an ex-boyfriend she broke up with because of jealousy issues, him holding her back, etc., so she decided to prostitute herself to earn money in order to change her situation. The ex is jealous, possibly physically abusive, and she walked away. But in a small town, they will run into each other, and jealous exes will lash out when they see "their" woman with another man. Her rates are inconsistent -- she was $2K for one client, $1,300 for another. I would think if she had a pimp she had to cash up to, the rate would be consistent. Plus, there was no mention of a pimp until she couldn't/was having a hard time getting payment. It seemed a bit too convenient to me. And she was out in the town spending money on dresses, which a pimp wouldn't "allow." Its an easy way to get men who might otherwise refuse to pay to pay up. They wouldn't be scared of her threats, but throw in an angry pimp, and they would be more likely to pay up. That was hysterical and I do think that was likely a Jennifer Coolidge ad lib.

FWIW, I wondered if he was playing off Brokeback Mountain. I've never seen the movie and only know peripherally what its about, so I could be completely off base. But isn't the saying that the best lies vary only slightly from the truth. . . so theoretically building a backstory based on a movie would be fairly easy to remember. I like your speculation, though -- it would certainly be unexpected! But wasn't Tanya the one who picked the location for the trip? And why would Greg say "I love you" on the phone? Quentin made it clear the feelings were not reciprocated by the cowboy -- did the cowboy even know about Quentin's feelings? It would be quite a convenient coincidence that Quentin happens to own a property there and Greg is the cowboy. My $0.02 is that Quentin and co. are just trying to scam Tanya for her money to maintain their lifestyle and something else is going on with Greg.

Metaverse commercial overload

I was in Dallas in August and hit up Tiffany Derry's Roots Southern Kitchen. I had the fried green tomatoes, gumbo, and german chocolate cake. It was all crazy delicious. It was a Sunday night and the place was packed. Highly recommend it if you're ever in Dallas!

Yes. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/30/special-series/amber-rose-slutwalk.html "At Ms. Rose’s first SlutWalk in 2015, she was joined by a few hundred women for a march to Pershing Square in downtown Los Angeles. She invited performers and speakers, including one of the founders of the original SlutWalk in Toronto. Ms. Rose carried a sign that read “Strippers Have Feelings Too” and revealed in an emotional speech that playing a kissing game at a party at age 14 had led to an awful experience. “I went to school the next day and I was extremely slutshamed by the entire school,” she said, adding, “I thought my life was over.” The message at her events, Ms. Rose explained recently, is “Wear what you want, do what you want, have your own sexuality, whoever you want to date, whoever you want to love.” "“I go to battle with people,” she said. “I hate to see an injustice when it comes to women, or the L.G.B.T.Q. community or sexual assault or rape victims.” "The event exists as part of an informal SlutWalk movement of organized marches that started in Toronto in 2011, after a police officer suggested that women could protect themselves against assault if they avoided “dressing like sluts.” "Ms. Rose said she felt that people now were more aware of issues around toxicity and relationships — and more willing to look at someone’s public behavior and say, “Hey, what he’s doing isn’t right.” While she acknowledges that her initial fame came thanks to her high-profile relationships, she feels she has been scrutinized and caricatured ever since, as people fixated on her back story as a stripper and a video vixen." "In 2015, for example, GQ published a profile of her in conjunction with her book, “How to Be a Bad Bitch,” and the writer characterized her as an “infamous ex,” a “baby mama” and “the most famous girlfriend in rap history.” Ms. Rose expressed her outrage on social media, noting that she is “so much more” than the person they described. Asked about her reaction, she said defiantly, “You’re not going to reduce me to someone’s girlfriend.”

I feel the complete opposite. I am much more into her character this go-round than last season and find myself laughing at how over-the-top but at the same time authentically Coolidge is playing it -- she is fully committed to the awfulness that is Tanya. I didn't understand last season how she won an Emmy, but I could totally see her getting one this season. When she was packing up the tarot card reader and pushing her out the door complaining about how negative the card reader then stomping to her room --I lost it. The absolute obliviousness and irony of her reaction to the tarot card reader in the face of her negativity about every single thing, and at the same time that she forced her assistant to wait in the bathroom and saw nothing wrong with it, was some pretty incredible character writing. That small scene was very deep in character exposition -- no easy feat for a writer to create, nor an actor to convey. That she is insufferable is pretty much the entire point of the character. That she seems like she's in a different show is exactly how the character functions in life -- in her own universe focused solely on how everything negatively impacts her and her alone. Is it painful and cringey to watch? Absolutely. But again, that's the point. We're watching this woman devolve more and more into her own mental instabilities. While some characters may be written to redemption or awareness, we KNOW that Tanya never will because its simply beyond her capacity. This show isn't about nice people in pretty places. Its about various types of crappy people who arguably have the least to be crappy about. In pretty places. We know at least one person will die either directly or indirectly because of some character's crappiness -- will it be someone who "deserves" it or someone who is collateral damage from the crappiness? Some will get a little less crappy, some will stay the same, and some will get even crappier. Tanya is the latter.

In this video posted by Domenicholas, Anne is brunette. I've always thought of her as a brunette. I think the casting of older Anne is good -- the actress has her no-nonsense walk and attitude down.

I don't care how remotely close to factual this episode was or not, I loved it. So far, I'm enjoying this season more than I thought I would based on the tepid reviews. I will say its a good thing Dominic West has the voice down, because otherwise, I wouldn't be buying him as Charles in the least. And the Queen Mum was not taller than the Queen, nor thin. Those are the only two really taking me out of it.

Its not. No tears for me until the 7th episode, and I'm pretty quick to the waterworks. I thought the entire series was very sweet and touching.

https://www.instagram.com/amauryguichon/

Depending on the severity, plastic surgeons do work with oncologists for skin tumor removal. I would imagine, given that her "face" (regardless of version), is a fundamental element of her "job," she would involve a very good plastic surgeon to ensure as minimal evidence of skin removal and/or scarring as possible.

oh. dear. lord. What in the actual hell . . .

Tell the same lie enough times, people begin to believe its true. Seems to be her plan.

The same way parents who adopt children do. Carrying a child does not mean you won't be a good parent. Blended families; chosen families; relatives who raise another family member's child as their own -- the people who raise those children may not be the ones to give birth to them but they do the work of parenting. My cousin had lupus triggered by her pregnancy. I raised her son from 3 months to pre-teens. I didn't give birth to him but you better believe he was my kid -- and at 35 years old -- he still is. And always will be. My issue with the "that's sad" comment was that it was judgmental of someone else's reasons for being okay with using a surrogate. No one has the right to determine whether someone else's situation is sad based on personal opinion about the other person's reasons, no matter what those reasons may be. People need to stay in their own lanes.

Yes it's sad if a woman who wants to carry a child can't but that wasn't the implications of the original post I commented on--that poster came across as saying they thought someone didn't want to carry a child for their own personal reasons was sad--, it came across as very judgemental. That's what I took umbrage with. As far as having the fortitude to raise a child you didn't carry, people do it every day. Women and couples who adopt don't physically carry and birth that child but they raise it amd provide for it and deal with everything that comes with having kids--that is their child. Speaking as someone who raised a cousin from the time he was 3 months old to his early teens because his mother was too sick to care for him, i feel he was (and is) as much my child as if I'd given birth to him. I've been through it all with that kid. He's 35 now and just last week he had a significant life crisis issue that I helped him through. We now live about 1200 miles apart but I would drop everything without a second thought and get on a plane if he needed me to be there physically. Just because I didn't birth him doesn't make him not my kid.

Why? Not everyone wants to carry a child and have it wreak havoc on their body or run the risk of the potential lifelong health issues that can result from pregnancy, and some people medically can't. There should be no judgments on anyone for deciding to use a surrogate, no matter the reason (including vanity). It doesn't make them any less of a good mother, nor does it make them not a "real" mother. Nor is anyone who chooses to remain child-free less of a person or somehow "missing out" on something. Carrying and/or having children is not the be-all, end-all for everyone, and there is nothing sad about it.

Vogue and many other outlets and publications disagree with you.... https://www.vogue.co.uk/arts-and-lifestyle/article/kardashian-jenner-familys-impact-on-the-world from the article re: Kim: "she slowly built up the credibility to become the biggest fashion influencer the decade has seen." They also discuss the influencer roles of the rest of the koven.

But they are -- they are considered "influencers" -- in other words, their words, actions, appearances, products, etc., are all created with the goal of influencing others and getting people to want to emulate them. That's what people look to role models for -- to find lifestyles, behaviors, actions, appearance, attitudes, goals, etc. they'd like to emulate.