Connect with us

Entertainment

Victoria Beckham ‘won’t let family feud ruin Christmas’

Published

on

Victoria Beckham ‘won’t let family feud ruin Christmas’


Victoria Beckham ‘staying stronger’ for Harper during family feud

Victoria Beckham has reportedly decided not to let the fallout with her son Brooklyn disturb her family’s Christmas.

Victoria, 51, and Sir David, 50 are involved in a feud with their eldest child and his wife Nicola Peltz. 

During this time, the couple have missed all of the family’s important events over the past year-notably the footballer’s 50th birthday celebrations and his knighthood. 

In this situation, Brooklyn, 26, is likely to celebrate the festive period with Nicola and her family in Miami, while the Beckhams celebrate without them in the United Kingdom.

In this difficult scenario, Victoria is believed to be working hard to put on a brave face and stay strong for her husband and teenage daughter Harper, 14. 

The couple are also parents to Romeo, 23, and Cruz, 20.

A source said: ‘It’s been a year since they last all saw each other and it’s something she will never come to terms with. But she won’t let it get her down over the festive period as she needs to be strong, especially for Harper, as well as her parents and David’s parents’.

Friends of the Beckham family have said Victoria’s mum Jackie and David’s mum Sandra are ‘very sad’ at the rift that means they no longer see Brooklyn, especially because they were always so close.

The insider told The Sun: ‘Brooklyn spent so much time with her parents Jackie and Tony for the first few years of his life and they had such a special bond, while Sandra looked after him so much growing up’.

‘Harper really misses her big brother and Nicola. Victoria is hoping that Brooklyn at least calls his grandparents over Christmas. She’s given up on him calling her.’ 

It comes after his estranged brother Cruz offered another Olive branch to Brooklyn on Sunday, by sharing a home video clip of himself and Brooklyn as children.





Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Entertainment

Simon Cowell responds to ‘staged’ December 10 show accusation

Published

on

Simon Cowell responds to ‘staged’ December 10 show accusation


Simon Cowell answered critics who claimed the new Netflix talent series The Next Act show which introduced boyband December 10 felt scripted.

December 10 which is made up of Cruz, Danny, Hendrick, John, Josh, Nicolas, and Sean released their first music video this week.

It sparked renewed debate about how the group was formed on Cowell’s show.

On The Rest Is Entertainment podcast, host Richard Osman questioned the show’s ‘authenticity’.

“What I thought I was going to watch was something with a bit more authenticity if that makes sense,” said the American Idol judge.

“You’re so brilliant at controlling narrative and understanding what people want and understanding how to give it to them.

“I wondered if you execing that show meant that we missed out on some genuine authenticity, as I felt a number of times where you were saying ‘oh this is a big problem, oh I don’t know what’s gonna happen here’ and I thought ‘I think you do know what’s going to happen here’.”

The 66-year-old pushed back firmly stating, “No, Richard… pinky promise I didn’t. Absolutely didn’t… I promise you it was all genuine, what you see is what happened. And there weren’t any second takes.”

Co‑host Marina Hyde also raised eyebrows over the inclusion of “bad auditions,” likening them to the “theatre of cruelty” seen on The X Factor.

Cowell insisted that showing both strong and weak performers was part of the reality of auditions.

“But that is the reality with auditions, I’ve always gone with about half a percent of the people you see are gonna be good,” share Cowell.

“So there were some not so good people. So I guess it was a decision to show the people that turned up and some of them weren’t very good.”





Source link

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Kiefer Sutherland recalls “extraordinary” day with Rob Reiner on “A Few Good Men” set

Published

on

Kiefer Sutherland recalls “extraordinary” day with Rob Reiner on “A Few Good Men” set



Kiefer Sutherland was directed by Rob Reiner at the start of his career when he filmed the 1992 legal drama “A Few Good Men.”

Sutherland recalled the day Jack Nicholson, who played Colonel Nathan Jessup, delivered his famous courtroom line, “You can’t handle the truth!” Nicholson did the entire scene from one end to the other in one “breathtaking” take, Sutherland said.

“No one said a word, and Rob went up to Jack Nicholson and whispered in his ear, ‘Do you want to do another one?’ And Jack Nicholson said, ‘Well, we’re here,'” Sutherland told CBS News in the upcoming special “CBS News: Rob Reiner – Scenes from a Life,” airing Sunday. “So they did another one, and it was just as extraordinary.”

The plan was to continue shooting the whole day, Sutherland said, but Reiner was so impressed with Nicholson’s last shot that he sent everyone home early.

“They had planned to shoot the whole day, and Rob looked at everybody and said, ‘I couldn’t ask for anything more, so you guys all have the rest of the day off,” Sutherland said.

Reiner and his wife, Michele, were found fatally stabbed in their Los Angeles home on Dec. 14, authorities said. Their son, Nick, has been charged with first-degree murder in their deaths.

You can hear more from Sutherland and others who knew Reiner in the one-hour special “CBS News: Rob Reiner – Scenes from a Life.” It will be broadcast Sunday at 8:30 p.m. ET/8 p.m. PT on CBS, and will stream on Paramount+.  



Source link

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Royal family, King Charles turn a deaf ear to warning about monarchy

Published

on

Royal family, King Charles turn a deaf ear to warning about monarchy


Royal family, King Charles turn a deaf ear to warning about monarchy

The royal family always maintained their silence on gossips about the monarchy and focuses on their mission and goals to serve their people with maximum approach.

However, latest questions about the Firm’s existence may have raised eyebrows among the concerned.

Presenter David Dimbleby left Britons in deep thought with his blunt queries about the monarchy’s role in the modern era.

He discussed the role and power of the sovereign in new BBC series What’s the Monarchy for?

The royal family has always tried to address things with their gestures instead of directly indulging in debate, but the questions seem to be too tough to be responded in words.

The Firm is often debated for it’s core objective to exist. However, the prople believe the monarchy symbolises national identity and unity. It promotes cultural heritage and tradition.

The royals also supporting charitable and public engagements and  foster tourism and economic benefits.

They are also called a unifying figurehead for the nation and have ceremonial role in governance as a symbol of continuity and stability.

The Question Time host has spent much of his career commentating on the royal family, but for the past two years he has dedicated his time to making this monarchy-focused three-part documentary.

He even asked, “What role is there for our unelected head of state?”

The monarch’s loyalists may also be shunning the question as they want them to continue with the same spirits.

However, the late Queen Elizabeth II herself said: “No institution should expect to be free from the scrutiny of those who give it their loyalty and support, not to mention those who don’t.”

Dimbleby asks what real tangible power does the monarch have with regard to government and explores cases, such as the time Charles’ private letters to government ministers and prime minister Tony Blair were made public, to prove if, in fact, the then Prince of Wales was lobbying politicians.

Dimbleby makes a point: “Charles may not have been able to influence government policy but he was determined to do so if he could.”

The presenter went on say that it would be naive to think that a Prime Minister’s weekly audiences with the monarch would have no effect or influence on government policy.





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending