Hollywood Reporter - Meghan and Harry

[ThatAvidViewer]

Why Hollywood Keeps Quitting on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (hollywoodreporter.com)

Why’d they all leave? What explains the churn? “Everyone’s terrified of Meghan,” claims a source close to the couple. “She belittles people, she doesn’t take advice. They’re both poor decision-makers, they change their minds frequently. Harry is a very, very charming person — no airs at all — but he’s very much an enabler. And she’s just terrible.”

I'd be amazed if Angela Kelly ever spoke out about anything controversial anyway TBH

There's a story of when she was in service at a Governors mansion and the late Queen - not then her employer - came to visit. It's said the Queen asked who the next to call would be and Angela declined to tell her, even after Philip expressed surprise at her refusal, which if true might easily have led to her discretion earning her the position so very close to the monarch

I read that Charles bought her a home in Yorkshire (?) close to her family, but it will revert to the RF on her death. He obviously had issues with her and her closeness to HLM, but seems to have treated her respectfully.

I agree. If I'd been treated in the way described in Knauff's email it would really stick.in my craw to watch H&M swanning round the world lecturing how to prevent bullying.

The problem is how can you possibly do that?

For a start think about the impact on their children?

Let's rehabilitate Dad's reputation with a targeted PR offensive at the expense of Mum...

Or H seeks redemption and a road back by throwing M under the bus?

Whatever conclusions people want to draw here there are two young children who don't deserve to become collateral damage.

That includes their parents separating.

I think the only way forward for H&M is for them to admit they made some (many) errors of judgement during a very difficult/emotional time.

To say they have reflected and wish they had handled things differently.

Then demonstrate through actions over time that this is a genuine sentiment.

I've never blamed them for wanting to forge a different life. I don't hate them - why would I? It's a strong emotion/sentiment for people I've never met (if anything I feel frustrated by the opportunity they wasted and disappointment in respect of their hypocrisy and treatment of others).

But I am entitled to have a view on their behaviours - the same as for anyone who chooses to be in the public eye and especially so for people whose platform has been secured by British Institutions and the British Taxpayer and seek to monetise that.

Quite a masterclass from SC in saying nothing in response to a question that wasn't already in the public domain (and thus not under NDA) whilst simultaneously giving an answer.

I do find it fascinating that Bryony Gordon, friend of Harry (or Haz as she now calls him) has very recently started writing for the Daily Mail, one of her first articles rehashing the story of a visit to Montecito.

Now I know journos get about (my DHs CV has to be seen to be believed ) but the timing of her joining seems interesting, in light of the gathering storm.

ETA gathering storm feels a bit OTT portentous, but I think quite a few of us have sensed something brewing for a while, over and above the usual shenanigans.

There's a story of when she was in service at a Governors mansion and the late Queen - not then her employer - came to visit. It's said the Queen asked who the next to call would be and Angela declined to tell her, even after Philip expressed surprise at her refusal, which if true might easily have led to her discretion earning her the position so very close to the monarch

AK herself tells that story in her book, The Other Side of the Coin.

The book also shows that she loved and respected the Queen, so I don't think she would reveal anything the Queen wouldn't want made public, NDA or no NDA.

I reckon she was one person H&M found they couldn't bully, though. I think H said something to the effect that she gave him a Look that shrivelled him. Good for her.

I don't think AK was necessarily a paragon of virtue.

She clearly had attributes/skills HMQ valued highly.

But she wasn't known as AK47 for nothing in respect of how she allegedly leveraged her close relationship with HMQ to her advantage not just with staff but with family.

For someone so loyal to The Crown you'd have thought Charles/Camilla would have wanted to retain her no? But they couldn't get her out quick enough.

Maybe some parallels to be drawn here about people who cultivate "upwards" relationships only that ultimately backfires when you don't play a long game and you realise you are now dependent on people you disrespected as peers or subordinates.

In this respect I remember being quite perplexed by the relative respect H&M displayed to HMQ/PP in their statements and OW interview and H in Spare in contrast to Charles and William/Catherine.

It's not as if the succession wasn't clear, nor that there was a limited window wrt the status quo.

Baffling tbh but I can only conclude they overestimated their own skills/appeal/ability to monetise so it didn't matter as they would effectively run their own Court/Royal Franchise in the US.

I sense that they are not necessarily very good strategic thinkers.

Whatever conclusions people want to draw here there are two young children who don't deserve to become collateral damage.

I agree with this, but then it reminds me of Harry and Meghan calling Catherine a racist, imagine the impact of that on George, Charlotte and Louis, they are old enough to understand what a serious allegation that is. Imagine having to sit your three young kids down and explain to them why you think their Uncle and his wife have called you a racist. Then the remarks that William didn't marry Catherine for love.

I know two wrongs don't make a right, but I think if Harry wants the palace PR to step in to rehabilitate his image, it will only be because he is separated from his wife, and if that happens, I can imagine MM will want to bury him and his family, she is very vengeful and of course their kids will end up becoming collateral damage

If she dumps Harry though she will have no right to be vengeful. I don’t think he would ever dump her. He’s put all his eggs in one basket .

In this respect I remember being quite perplexed by the relative respect H&M displayed to HMQ/PP in their statements and OW interview and H in Spare in contrast to Charles and William/Catherine.

They may have used some thin 'respectful' words but their actions were heinous - to choose to broadcast the OW interview whilst his GF, PP as in hospital on end of life care and his GM was enduring a living grief whilst her grandson tore apart her family and the instituation she worked tirelessly to build and maintain for over 70 years right up until the day she died. For him not to visit her in her failing months when he was in the country is so disingenous.

I agree @Thedom . I am absolutely not wishing separation on them at all, but I think if it does happen, it will make Charles and Diana look like the most amicable split ever. Actually, after the Queen put her foot down and told them to divorce, the War of the Waleses fizzled out a lot. It was the lead up that was awful. However, I don't think Diana had any wish to destroy the RF and crucially, the Monarchy, being mindful that William would be King. Meghan doesn't have any such motivation to hold back.

If they were willing to stop playing at being Hollywood A list, commerce tycoons and international philanthropists (simultaneously) downsized, shut up, went dark and regrouped, I think there would be a chance of pulling something back. However, I don't think either of them have the personality to do that and I can't see a good outcome at all.

But H&M thought they were being clever in making the allegations but not naming the person.

It was a threat arguably - potentially tottering on blackmail but I don't think they understood the nuances of that.

As per my pp - not particularly good strategic thinkers.

She's dumped plently of people before (husband, longterm partner, father, numerous best friends, ex colleagues) - she's very scorched earth and does n't look back - thats her consistent and persistent MO.

She usually goes quiet tho so doubt she would go full scale public Amber Herd style.

@Smirke I agree with you, hence the word "relative" :-)

Quite possibly - and its all about how wonderful PH is .... minimal mention of MM.

Are they going to be together forever? Not sure. I can’t see it but can see others side that they need each other.

However, will he remain faithful to her? Not a chance.

He’s from that Aristo stock, where as long as you are discreet, then shagging about is tolerated. Maybe not as much as it was in the past, but it’s still there.

He will be shagging a posh polo blonde at some point, 100%

The trouble with "think of the children" is that neither Charles nor Diana and their hangers on gave much thought to William & Harry. And as PP have said, this could be a whole lot worse.

I genuinely hope it isn't, it would be positive to think they would put their DC first and maintain their dignity, rather than engage in war by tabloid, but my expectations are low.

I don’t agree with this. He’s not all that much of a catch these days anyway. His access to posh Polo blondes is also not what it was and M is hanging off him every minute anyway.

I genuinely hope it isn't, it would be positive to think they would put their DC first and maintain their dignity, rather than engage in war by tabloid, but my expectations are low.

Oh the irony if they did this - resorting to utilising the evil tabloid press to amplify their gripes.

I think with his wealth, status and weak spots - hes an easy target for another social climber.

He could be like his grim uncle Charles Spencer - how many marriages has he been through?

Just dispensed with his third but also had two broken engagements.

As per my pp - not particularly good strategic thinkers

Exactly, @BreadInCaptivity - hence, as you said yourself, the (relative) leniency they used towards the late Queen and later Charles as the ones holding the power, piling all the blame onto the next one down

A mistake when the Queen was over 90 and even Charles in his 70s and at risk of the illnesses of old age, but then they've never exactly been noted for their insight

In public I would agree she is hanging off him and being all doe eyed but I doubt very much she is like that when the cameras aren’t rolling. A pp brought up an interesting point that pre marriage Harry was the 100% focus of her attention and reeling him in, now she has hit the jackpot she now has the 2 children, fancy friends to keep in with, car park pap walks to arrange, new “projects” to promote (i.e herself) I doubt Harry gets much of a look in these days.

Thanks so much, I’m definitely going to try this.

I am very similar to you and avoid commenting on appearances or anything to do with aesthetics. (Other than clothing!)

I find analysis of expressions and body language really interesting. Like you say, one snapshot doesn’t mean a lot, if anything. But if it is part of, or, if it backs up a wealth of information, it shouldn’t necessarily be dismissed. Especially if there are many snapshots that capture a certain behaviour. Actions speak louder than words and photos depict actions and sometimes even intention. The eyes give much away especially. Thanks @Puzzledandpissedoff 😊