Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are planning one of the most anticipated celebrity weddings in recent memory, but the couple is keeping the biggest decisions firmly between themselves. 

Despite both families playing major roles in helping shape the lives and careers that brought them here, insiders say Taylor and Travis have chosen a far more private route for their big day. 

Surprisingly, even their famously close-knit parents are on the outside looking in.

Taylor Swift And Travis Kelce Are Reportedly Making Every Major Wedding Decision Together

Taylor and Travis are said to be taking full control of their upcoming wedding, with insiders revealing that neither the Swifts nor the Kelces are directly involved in planning the event. 

According to the Daily Mail, the superstar couple has decided to work closely with a wedding planner while keeping the final say between themselves.

A source told the outlet that while both families are thrilled that the pair are getting married, they have not been included in the decision-making process. 

“Both sets of parents are all really happy and think getting married is the right thing for them to do because they’re old school and wanted him to put a ring on Taylor’s finger,” the insider said.

Still, support from the sidelines is where the parents’ role reportedly ends. “But none of them are involved in the wedding planning, although surprisingly Travis is,” the source added. 

Taylor, who has spent her career overseeing every detail of her music, tours, and public image, is said to be bringing that same energy into wedding preparations. 

“Taylor’s not the official wedding planner, but most of the ideas are hers. She’s used to taking control. This will be her big day and along with Travis she’ll be the mastermind,” the insider explained.

Far from simply nodding along, Travis is reportedly just as invested. “She literally runs everything past him. If they don’t agree on something they scrap it,” the source said. 

Taylor’s Family Helped Build The Life That Brought Her To This Moment

The decision to leave parents out of the planning may seem surprising given how involved Taylor Swift’s family has been in shaping her journey. 

Andrea and Scott Swift have long been more than supportive parents; they have been active participants in helping Taylor build her career from the ground up.

After marrying in 1988, Andrea and Scott made a major sacrifice in 2004, selling the family home in Pennsylvania and moving to Nashville so Taylor could pursue country music. 

Both took active roles in helping her manage the early stages of her rise, laying the foundation for the global stardom she enjoys today.

Andrea also reportedly played a key part in Taylor and Travis’ love story. When Travis famously attended the singer’s Eras Tour stop in 2023, hoping to hand her a friendship bracelet, Andrea was immediately charmed by the gesture. 

The report said she was impressed by his “earnest” effort and started thinking about how to help the pair connect.

That early push from Andrea helped spark a romance that has since become a cultural phenomenon. However, despite her long history of helping guide Taylor through major milestones, insiders say this is one chapter Taylor wants to lead herself.

Taylor Swift And Travis Kelce’s Families Have Grown Closer Despite The Planning Snub

Even though they are not selecting venues or reviewing floral arrangements, both families are said to remain deeply involved in Taylor and Travis’s day-to-day lives. 

According to insiders, the Swifts and Kelces have developed an easy, genuine bond over the course of the relationship.

One source said family remains a major priority for the couple. “Taylor and Travis are big on family, so when they can have any functions, they want their parents there and they love it,” the insider shared. Whether it is a holiday, a football game, or a quiet dinner back home, time together still matters.

The source added that while the couple does not make every occasion a full family affair, they regularly spend time with both sides. 

The source added, “Family events are often around the holidays, or when they’re all at a game they will often go back to the house and eat together. They will continue the family time when they can.”

Insiders also pushed back on any idea of behind-the-scenes friction, describing the two families as remarkably grounded. The source said they are “pretty normal” and claimed “everyone gets along.”

That closeness extends especially to Taylor’s mom, Andrea, and Travis’ mom, Donna Kelce. A second insider revealed that the women are building a friendship of their own. 

In their words, “They talk. Together with Taylor they’re all in contact, talking about everyday things, like recipes or a TV show recommendation or plans to hang out. They’re definitely becoming great friends.”

Taylor Has Already Locked In Key Details For Her Big Day

While much about the wedding remains private, previous reports suggest Taylor Swift has already made several firm decisions about what she wants. 

Sources told the Daily Mail earlier that preparations are well underway for an early-July ceremony, timed to take place before the NFL season kicks off.

One of the “Cruel Summer” singer’s clearest preferences is that the wedding happen indoors. 

Insiders said she wants the event to “take place someplace indoors” to ensure the highest possible level of security and privacy. 

The wedding is reportedly expected to take place in New York, ending months of speculation that Taylor’s Rhode Island mansion would host the ceremony. 

Invitations have already gone out, and the guest list is expected to include close family, longtime friends, and a handful of famous faces.

Taylor Swift’s Future In-Laws Have Faced Intense Public Scrutiny Over The Wedding

If anyone has learned how intense Taylor’s spotlight can be, it is the Kelce family. 

Since Travis began dating the pop superstar, his relatives have faced constant questions about everything from their opinions on the Grammy Award winner to their role in the wedding.

Donna recently found herself at the center of fresh online chatter when she was approached by a photographer at LAX and asked about the wedding plans. Her answers quickly became the subject of fan debate.

Asked how involved she was in planning, Donna replied: “Oh… is a groom’s mother ever involved?” 

When the photographer followed up by asking if she wished she were more hands-on, she looked down and said, “I’m just happy, just so happy for them.”

When pressed again about whether she would at least like to help with Travis’ tuxedo or wedding candles, Donna answered simply, “Not really.”

Those remarks led some online critics to speculate that she was being left out, but Travis’ sister-in-law, Kylie Kelce, quickly shut down the noise. Speaking on her “Not Gonna Lie” podcast, Kylie said people need to “quit asking me and my mother-in-law about upcoming nuptials” because “nobody is f-cking telling you anything.”

By Britta DeVore
| Updated 13 seconds ago

When it comes to Natalie Portman and sci-fi, most people’s minds gravitate toward her role as Padmé Amidala in the Star Wars prequel films, but it’s her role in Alex Garland’s 2018 film, Annihilation, that the Garden State actress is seeing the most critical acclaim.

Mixing your typical sci-fi standard with a horror twist, Annihilation follows the story of a team of explorers who have set out to learn more about a sealed-off zone known only as “The Shimmer.” From what they understand, the quarantined area hosts an array of ever-changing plants and animals, something that’s been said to be caused by aliens.

When they enter for themselves, they find more questions than answers. Along with Natalie Portman, the film also stars Oscar Isaac, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Tessa Thompson, Tuva Novotny, and Gina Rodriguez.

Annihilation was based on a novel that was penned by Jeff VanderMeer in 2014. One of the production team’s first goals was to ensure that Natalie Portman would sign on for the leading role, something that the Black Swan star gladly did under her own filming terms.

Backlash Over Natalie Portman’s Casting

Ultimately, both Portman and Leigh’s castings would face backlash with the fandom as their characters in the books were depicted as Asian and mixed-race and half-indigenous, respectively, with many calling for those fitting that background to be recast in their places.

As we know, both Jennifer Jason Leigh and Natalie Portman would keep their jobs on the project, which went into production in 2016. While the title wasn’t a straight-to-digital release, first celebrating a theatrical drop, it only played in cinemas for a month before it was made available for home-viewing audiences.

Whether audiences just weren’t hyped on the production, or if they knew they could soon watch it from home, the global box office numbers didn’t hit the markers they were hoping for, bringing in only $43.1 million against the film’s $40-55 million production budget.

Despite its financial shortcomings, Annihilation was a hit among fans and critics alike and currently holds a well-earned score of 88 percent on Rotten Tomatoes. As one could expect, the performances by the stacked leading cast, including Natalie Portman and Oscar Isaac are cited as being a major draw for the film, while the VFX are also given their fair share of praise.

Known for his incredible VFX work on the 2015 psychological thriller Ex Machina, it came as no surprise to anyone that Garland’s follow-up feature would be packed to the brim with the same amount of impressive effects.

Even though the box office numbers didn’t quite hit the level the team behind Annihilation was hoping for, the film has managed to gain a cult following over the last few years and is even one of Natalie Portman’s highest-ranking films on Rotten Tomatoes. It finds itself alongside the likes of Black Swan, both Thor and Thor: The Dark World, Jackie, and V for Vendetta just to name a few. 

What’s Next for Natalie Portman?

While she may have taken her final bow in the Marvel Cinematic Universe as Jane Foster in 2022’s Thor: Love and Thunder, Natalie Portman isn’t showing any signs of taking a break from the bright lights of Hollywood.

The critically acclaimed actress most recently appeared in the dark comedy thriller, The Gallerist, a project that she was also attached to as a producer.

TV audiences can also see Natalie Portman on the small screen in a series titled Lady in the Lake. Based on Laura Lippman’s novel of the same name, the show follows a journalist who becomes obsessed with unraveling the truth behind two seemingly unrelated murders. Lady in the Lake streams exclusively on Apple TV+.

Annihilation is currently streaming on Paramount+.  

Pirates of the Caribbean is a franchise that lost its way, starting strong with Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, single-handedly reviving the swashbuckling genre, before falling prey to too many supernatural elements and too much of Johnny Depp‘s Jack Sparrow. The talk of a sixth installment was recently revived with producer Jerry Bruckheimer, including discussions of Margot Robbie‘s reboot and even a return for Depp, if he wants it.

The wise choice for Disney would be to drop the idea altogether and leave the franchise in the grave it dug for itself in No Man’s Land with Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales. But it’s hard to walk away from an enterprise that’s garnered over $4.5 billion to date, so it’s a foregone conclusion that Disney will dig up the corpse for another kick at the zombie monkey. And when, not if, they move ahead with a sixth installment, they need to resist the urge to revive Captain Jack Sparrow. Blasphemy? Perhaps, but they’ve already proven it can be done.

The Pirates of the Caribbean Franchise Is a Master Class in How to Botch a Sure Thing

Image via Buena Vista Pictures

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl is a film that, by rights, shouldn’t have succeeded. The swashbuckling pirate movie was bereft of life at the time, with the infamous debacle that is 1995’s Cutthroat Island delivering the final blow. There was little in the way of buzz, only doomsayers preemptively throwing the film onto the burning heap of fire that was their failed attempts at turning their famed theme park attractions into live-action features (The Country Bears, we hardly knew ye). It was also the first Walt Disney Studios movie to be rated PG-13, a bold move, no matter how ridiculous it may sound (and it does), for a studio that prides itself on entertainment for the whole family.

Yet the film defied the naysayers’ gloomy predictions to emerge as a huge hit, landing in the top 5 of the worldwide box office earnings for 2003 and launching Depp into the stratosphere with his iconic Captain Jack Sparrow. The film was a savvy mix of excellent casting, fun, bold set pieces, a winning (and original) screenplay, and a straightforward, easily understandable narrative. More importantly, it had a healthy balance of screen time for the characters. But with each sequential film in the franchise, the narrative grew increasingly convoluted, and while Jack Sparrow was a huge part of the first film’s success, Disney made the mistake of attributing a larger portion of that success to the character as opposed to those other key elements, and increased Sparrow’s presence in its sequels. Soon, songs were being sung, hearts were in boxes, ships were in a mirror world, or something, and Sparrow’s antics became tiresome.

‘Pirates of the Caribbean 6’ Can Succeed Without Sparrow

Long story short, Disney took what was a secondary character, a spectacular one at that, and ruined him with a promotion. There’s little doubt that announcing the return of Depp to the franchise would initially be met with roaring approval, but little doubt again that moviegoers would remember how tired they were of the same shtick over and over again. But is there a Pirates of the Caribbean without the one character who has been present throughout? You bet. It goes back to those lessons that should have been learned from the first film. Jack Sparrow may have drawn the moviegoers in, but they stayed because the story and its execution was perfect.

The franchise didn’t fall apart when the likes of Geoffrey Rush‘s Barbossa, Orlando Bloom‘s Will Turner, or Keira Knightley‘s Elizabeth Swann weren’t on-screen, so the franchise has already proven it doesn’t need its main players to succeed. In fact, it could be argued that their absence for a time made their return to the franchise later on that much better. Absence, as they say, makes the heart grow fonder, and in the case of Sparrow, his absence in a sixth film would give the franchise the opportunity to right the ship with a new cast and a new, unrelated story, one that brings back the fun, simplicity, and excitement of Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. It would also lend itself to a “new” Captain Jack Sparrow, if you will, a supporting character that complements the story with his antics, maybe an Aliens‘ William Hudson (Bill Paxton) type, a mouthy, but funny, hothead adept at drawing trouble. Disney should remember the gamble they took with the first film and how it paid off, and approach a sixth Pirates of the Caribbean film with that same moxie instead of playing it safe. Set sail for new horizons, ye scurvy dogs of Disney. There could be buried treasure waiting.

When Netflix was first founded, it was a way to rent DVDs through the mail, before it transformed into a streaming service, which changed how audiences watched movies and TV shows. Now, all you needed was an internet connection and a Netflix account to see the best original content all in one place. Netflix has been the home of many great shows over the years. Stranger Things, The Crown, and Mindhunter are only a few of many that come to mind. One of the greatest of all is Orange Is the New Black. Created by Jenji Kohan and released in 2013, Orange Is the New Black could have been just another prison drama, this time with a nearly all-female cast to make it more provocative. Instead, its ever-changing cast of characters led to an impressive show that stayed compelling for seven seasons.

‘Orange Is the New Black’ Initially Focuses on Taylor Schilling’s Piper Chapman

Part of what keeps Orange Is the New Black so grounded is that it’s based in part on a true story, with inspiration coming from Piper Kerman‘s memoir, Orange Is the New Black: My Year in a Women’s Prison. In the series, the renamed Piper Chapman, played by Taylor Schilling, is the way in to this terrifying world. This shouldn’t be how Piper’s life ends up. She comes from money, has a fiancé named Larry (Jason Biggs), and the most hardcore thing about her life is owning a business where she makes bath soaps. However, Piper also has a past with an ex-girlfriend, Alex (Laura Prepon), who she once carried drug money for. Love and getting in over her head eventually come back to take her down, landing Piper in prison with a 15-month sentence for money laundering.

Orange Is the New Black puts terror around every corner. Piper is the scared blonde who prison will eat alive if she doesn’t adapt. It’s not found only in her fellow inmates, like the scary Russian boss Red (Kate Mulgrew) or the unstable Tiffany (Taryn Manning), but in the guards meant to protect as well. One guard, George (Pablo Schrieiber), is the most feared of all by women as a man who uses his power to terrorize the inmates who don’t really have a voice in their prison.

Related

Netflix’s First Smash Hit Series Makes a Criminally Good Streaming Comeback

The first real Netflix sensation.

Advertisement

Orange Is the New Black is dark at times, while also brimming with uncomfortable comedy, twists, and intrigue found not only by showing how Piper’s fiancée and other family are doing without her, but also through flashbacks that show how she landed herself in prison. Piper evolves in this new environment that forces her to learn how to hold her own. But Orange Is the New Black was never just meant to be about Piper Chapman. The series took things to the next level by taking the supporting characters and making them the heart of the series. If Piper was our way into the series, the rest of the cast is the reason to stick around.

A Well-Written Cast of Characters Kept ‘Orange Is the New Black’ Moving

What separates Orange Is the New Black from other shows is its ability to keep changing. This is a prison where inmates come and go. In that way, it’s similar to The Pitt, which stays fresh with its flexible casting decisions between seasons. Every new season of Orange Is the New Black truly does feel new for this reason. Every season acts like a soft reset, staying in a familiar setting, but offering new twists with characters who must change in their environment and not simply because a script demands it.

Orange Is the New Black was also praised at the time for having a spectacularly talented and diverse cast of women. They are heroes and villains, coming from all types of backgrounds, yet none of them fit easily into some stereotypical box. Even Tiffany, who goes by Pennsatuckey and comes across as the typical prison villain, can become someone audiences end up rooting for. Suzanne (Uzo Aduba) gets stuck with the nickname “Crazy Eyes,” but remains one of the most well-crafted and likable characters of them all, with Aduba’s performance resulting in two Emmys. Red is the aging boss among the inmates, losing her powerful hold on her fellow inmates. Nicky (Natasha Lyonne) is cool and cocky, and she seemingly has no worries, but dig a little deeper and there’s so much more to her than just her façade. Poussey (Samira Wiley), who begins as a comic relief character, has a story that ends in a heartbreaking tragedy. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to this series. Forcing all of these different personalities together creates constant chaos in the series, which fuels the drama, especially as new people are brought in every season.

Orange Is the New Black is a brutal drama, a black comedy, and a series that shows compassion to its characters rather than turning them into predictable stereotypes. It also has a lot to say about the prison-industrial complex and how prisoners are treated. Some of the guards can break the archetype, like the kind John Bennett (Matt McGorry), while others are almost completely irredeemable. It doesn’t stay inside the walls either. Just like with Piper’s story, Orange Is the New Black explores how these women ended up in prison through flashbacks, which gives more insight into their true selves. This Netflix series is so much more than a gimmick or just Piper Chapman’s story. Orange Is the New Black will make you laugh and break your heart at the same time, all while being an exciting thrill ride to the very end.

Eight Chick-fil-A employees at Tuskegee University in Alabama were reportedly fired. This, after footage of them doing the chest bounce, went viral. The employees were mostly college students, and Sophomore Landin Rolle believes the university’s administration, not Chick-fil-A, was responsible for their firings.

Now, the fellow sophomore Denevea Simpkins and the other ex-employees are speaking out.

And The Shade Room’s Justin Carter is recapping the events on ‘TSR Investigates.’

Chick-fil-A Staff Go Viral

According to Carter, Landin Rolle suggested the trend to the group one day during their closing shift. The group created a 25-second clip that went viral, racking up over 8 million views. However, it wasn’t the first dancing Tok they had reportedly created.

Per Ty’Keria Clemons, the group’s former supervisor, they then received a message from a manager.

“And he was like, ‘You guys need to come to see me on Monday. Immediately. Do not clock in,’” she recalled.

However, Clemons believes it was the leadership at Tuskegee University that got her and her staff fired.

“A lot of the students here are very disrespectful… I feel like some of them were very much petty and sent it to the higher-ups and the Vice President,” Landin Rolle told Carter.

More On The Staff Losing Their Jobs

According to Carter, a public employee handbook for Chick-fil-A has not been located. However, the company has reportedly encouraged employees to refrain from recording videos at work. This, unless the content is approved.

Scroll above to watch as Carter shares previous instances where staffers were fired for their activity on social media. Additionally, fellow sophomore Denevea Simpkins is speaking out, sharing that she’s allegedly been turned away from leadership opportunities on campus, seemingly because of the viral footage. Lastly, Carter shares how the university is reportedly connected with the Chick-fil-A location.

RELATED: After-School Fight Ends In Tragedy For Houston Teen | TSR Investigates

Season 1 of Beef was fast-paced, anxiety-inducing, and perfect in many ways. The concept revolved around two people who crashed into each other’s lives after a road rage incident, and their “beef” causes a domino effect of problems in both of their lives. Considering how cleanly it was wrapped up, it was hard to imagine how Beef could justify a second season. It turns out that showrunner and creator Lee Sung Jin had the answer when Season 2 was announced: an anthology.

On the surface, Beef Season 2 has a very similar skeletal composition to Season 1. Instead of two people butting heads, the conflict now involves two couples at very different points in their lives, clashing with each other. This brings with it not only new drama involving the individual couples but also attempts to approach relationships through a realistic and flawed lens. Where Beef Season 2 starts to unravel, though, is when it becomes overly filled with concepts it wants to tackle. From the widening socioeconomic divide to impossible beauty standards to discussions involving race and identity, there’s simply too much for eight episodes, and the result is an ambitious but bloated sophomore season.

‘Beef’ Season 2 Takes a New Twist on the Conflict

While Beef Season 1 focused on a road rage incident that leads to bad blood between Danny (Steven Yeun) and Amy (Ali Wong), Season 2 expands its focus beyond just two people. Josh (Oscar Isaac) and Lindsay (Carey Mulligan) are an affluent married couple in their forties who have been growing emotionally and sexually distant. Ashley (Cailee Spaeny) and Austin (Charles Melton) are a younger, recently engaged couple who are financially struggling but happily in love. Ashley works for the country club in bougie Montecito, where Josh is her boss, and when Ashley and Austin witness Josh and Lindsay have a blow-out fight that nearly turns violent, they record the incident and use it as blackmail to get Ashley a promotion.

Threatened with the potential ruin of their reputation, Josh and Lindsay capitulate begrudgingly, and Ashley begins to move up in the world. With Ashley’s new position at work, she also begins to maneuver a full-time position for Austin at the club as a physical therapist, though he has no actual experience with PT. Despite the blackmail and worrying about where rent money will come from next month, Ashley and Austin are very devoted to each other. Austin is highly sensitive and thoughtful, while Ashley is motivated and determined to gain stability leading up to their eventual marriage.

On the flip side, Josh and Lindsay’s marriage is crumbling. Although they live in a beautiful house, Josh has a great job, and they have a cute dachshund named Burberry, they’re burdened with money problems and a growing rift between them. They haven’t had sex in a long time, with Josh preferring to go to OnlyFans and Lindsay flirting with Woosh (BM), the tennis instructor, and random guys who slide into her DMs. They might have loved each other once, and probably still do on some level, but their marriage is fractured. At the heart of Season 2 is the complicated dynamic that these two couples have with each other, which is actually far more interesting than the actual beef that was the impetus for the series, and therein lies the problem.

‘Beef’ Season 2 Fails to Hit Its Biggest Target: Class Divides

Image via Netflix

Josh and Lindsay’s relationship is a dark mirror to Austin and Ashley’s, and one thing that Season 2 gets right is just how complicated romantic relationships can be. You might fall out of love with someone and decide to stay with them, or you might be deeply in love with someone and still decide to separate. Although that offers enough material for a strong series, that kind of show wouldn’t exactly fall under the Beef umbrella.

So, instead, the series puts the relationships center stage, but then clutters episodes with all manner of storylines to offer the twisty roller coaster ride we experienced in Season 1. Like in the previous season, wealth inequality and money are major motifs, but they’re handled much more sloppily here. Rather than solely focusing on the nuances of Josh and Lindsay’s wealth compared to Austin and Ashley’s financial burdens, the series inserts another third party: Youn Yuh-jung‘s Chairwoman Park, the owner of the country club that Josh manages.

Related

From ‘Chernobyl’ to ‘Beef,’ 10 Award-Winning TV Shows You Can Watch in One Weekend

Time to clear your calendar!

Advertisement

The series is not subtle in the way it continuously reminds us that while Josh is financially more secure than Ashley, he is not nearly as rich as the people he serves. The club members casually jump on a private jet and fly to a chalet for a party, they’ll make quick trips to South Korea for a little plastic surgery, and people like Chairwoman Park can even make the law turn a blind eye if she wants to cover up any mishaps.

Though Youn is, as always, deeply compelling as an actor in her scenes, both she and Song Kang-ho, who plays the chairwoman’s second husband, Dr. Kim, feel like they exist to kick up more dirt and create more drama. The shift in tone when the chairwoman arrives makes the initial conflict of the recorded fight seem almost inconsequential. The series tries to make a commentary on relationships through Chairwoman Park and Dr. Kim’s transactional marriage, but the parallel doesn’t hit quite as well and ends up muddying the waters.

Image via Netflix

While Beef Season 1 tightly orbited its two main protagonists, the larger main cast of Season 2 makes everything messier. There’s not enough in the series to hold it together, and the result is a story that feels disjointed. Social issues, such as commentary on both Austin and Josh’s identity — Austin is half-Korean, and Josh is Cuban — are only lightly touched on and feel almost performative rather than impactful.

The same can be said for the episodes that get into the broken healthcare system in America and the unrealistic beauty standards set for women. The scenes we get present the issue, but offer no new arguments, and the message is about as predictable as you can imagine. Plus, all the storylines with Chairwoman Park feel genuinely lifted right out of a corporate espionage story rather than Beef. The series makes a major tonal shift that is jarring rather than refreshing, and, ultimately, the final twist is rushed in a way that leaves you with more questions than answers.

Perhaps on its own, without the near-perfect first season, Season 2 might have been a hit, but I found myself wondering several times during Season 2 why this show was even called Beef. Who is the beef with? Is it between the two couples? Kind of, but not really. Is it between the protagonists and the system? Kind of, but also not really. Is it between the couples and Chairwoman Park? Kind of, but there’s not enough runway to make that really work. There’s no doubt that showrunner Lee Sung Jin was ambitious with Season 2, but the result throws the series into disarray; it doesn’t elevate it.

‘Beef’s Season 2 Performances Almost Outshine an Uneven Plot

All complaints aside, the performances at the heart of Beef Season 2 do shine through. Mulligan and Isaac have insane chemistry with each other (as we’ve seen already in their previous collaborations), and as chaotic and toxic as their relationship is, there’s always a part of us that wants to root for them. Both actors are given a chance to shine and are, by far, playing the most complex characters. Though Josh and Lindsay seem easily hateable, especially when their privilege is compared to Austin and Ashley’s humble lifestyle, they are still redeemable. It all culminates in a scene in the finale that’s both triumphant and emotional as well as devastatingly tragic.

Unsurprisingly, Youn and Song are both fantastic. Youn takes on a rare villainous role in Beef that suits her so well that I’m disappointed we haven’t seen her take a darker turn sooner. Though the material she’s given is a little flat and honestly somewhat stereotypical, Youn can make even the most lackluster lines shine with her delivery. Her surprising chemistry with Song creates an interesting foil to the main couples, and Song delivers a great monologue near the end that’s tinted with bittersweet heartache as well as humor, something the actor excels at.

What is surprising is Melton. Playing opposite Spaeny, Melton’s Austin is the epitome of a himbo — a golden retriever in human form. He’s cluelessly funny, endearingly wholesome, and deeply dedicated to Ashley. However, in the moments when the cracks start to show in their relationship, Melton grasps onto the nuances of Austin’s character and proves that he’s far more than just a pretty face with some muscles. The same, unfortunately, can’t be said for Spaeny’s Ashley. The script does no favors for her, making Ashley one of the most grating characters with the least redeemable traits. Spaeny’s performance also isn’t reaching the same heights as her co-stars — especially opposite someone like Mulligan, whose performance is so subtle, it makes Spaeny’s performance almost fall flat. Spaeny and Melton have decent chemistry, but Melton’s better moments lie with Seoyeon Jang‘s Eunice, Chairwoman Park’s translator and assistant, rather than Spaeny or the rest of the cast.

Related

The 10 Greatest Oscar Isaac Movies, According to IMDb

From Llewyn Davis to Spider-Man 2099, the actor has range.

Advertisement

‘Beef’ Ultimately Didn’t Need a Season 2

Image via Netflix

The disappointing thing about Beef Season 2 is that there is a lot to love about it. The performances are fantastic, the banter is sharp when it wants to be, and the moral lessons it’s trying to impart are there — but it just isn’t fleshed out enough. The overload of characters creates far too much clutter, not to mention the story being forced to live under the shadow of Season 1.

The series still retains some of the same style and aesthetic, including pulse-pounding needle drops and frenetic storytelling that jumps from one ridiculous moment to another. The cinematography is compelling, and the production and set design are sleek and stylish. There is one unnecessary “oner” shot that feels more gratuitous than enjoyable, but the series is otherwise shot beautifully. It’s perhaps the only thing that the season properly inherited from the last.

At the end of the day, Beef Season 2 struggles where so many other shows flounder today: The show is trying to do too much with too little. With double the protagonists, the season would have had more room to breathe with even just ten episodes, allowing for the final arc — which takes our protagonists out of California and over to Korea — to feel a bit more natural in the transition. Season 2 is by no means bad, but it’s a step down from what this series can accomplish, and I can only hope that if there’s a Season 3, the series will course-correct, because this just isn’t working as well.

Beef Season 2 premieres April 16 on Netflix.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

April 6, 2023

Network

Netflix

Advertisement

Showrunner

Lee Sung Jin

Advertisement

Directors

Hikari, Jake Schreier, Kitao Sakurai, Lee Sung Jin

Writers

Advertisement

Alice Ju

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Pros & Cons

• The performances, specifically Charles Melton, Oscar Isaac, and Carey Mulligan, shine through and add depth to the protagonists.
• The series maintains the same visual language and style as Season 1.
• Youn Yuh-jung is fantastic as a morally dubious businesswoman.

• Season 2 doesn’t have enough episodes to pack in all the messages it’s trying to convey.
• The season doesn’t feel cohesive ? and the titular Beef doesn’t seem to actually matter at all.

Advertisement

Lisa Hochstein enjoys solidarity from her “Real Housewives of Miami” co-stars!

The reality star’s castmates on the Bravo show publicly declared their support after she voluntarily surrendered to the police over an allegation of illegal spying by her ex-husband during their divorce process in 2023.

Lisa Hochstein has since gone viral for her mugshot, which was taken minutes after she turned herself in as agreed upon, according to her attorney, Jayne Weintraub, making the reality star appear as a cooperative citizen, respectful of the law.

What Are Lisa Hochstein’s Castmates Saying About Her Arrest?

Bravo stars Alexia Nepola and Adriana De Moura showed that there is strength in numbers at the Turner Guilford Knight Correctional Center in Miami on Wednesday, April 15. The duo’s visit was to support Lisa, who turned up at the police station after facing some criminal charges.

Nepola and Moura took the time to speak to reporters about the whole situation, with the former describing it as a “very sad and unfortunate” situation, but her support for Lisa remained firm. Both TV stars refused to answer any questions about their thoughts on Lenny Hochstein’s allegations that Lisa spied on him.

As noted by Page Six, De Moura, on her part, added that she was there to support Lisa as a friend and make sure her children are well taken care of. Nepola had earlier confirmed in a virtual interview that the news of Lisa’s legal woes was shocking to her, but whenever she came out, a big hug and love were waiting for her on the outside.

The 43-Year-Old Wants To Wrap Things Up For Her Kids’ Sake

Another “Real Housewives of Miami” star, Maryol Patton, confessed in the interview with Page Six that when she heard about Lisa’s arrest, she thought it was one of Lenny’s tricks to make Lisa’s life hell again.

She clarified that upon further investigation, she realized that the arrest stemmed from an earlier complaint three years ago, and now the court is investigating it, which means it is in the hands of the law now. Lisa was all smiles when she arrived at the facility alongside her attorney, Jenny Weintraub, who reiterated that the reality star voluntarily surrendered to the authorities.

As for Lisa, she affirmed that anyone distracting her from her big divorce case this month would not get the chance to. The TV personality affirmed that the well-being of her kids remained important to her because they had been through enough drama with her and Lenny. Lisa added, “I’ve heard nobody has been charged with eavesdropping in Miami history.”

‘RHOM’ Fans Want Lisa Hochstein And Her Co-Stars Back

A handful of people were touched by De Moura and Nepola’s warm gesture and took to the internet to express that. “The Miami girls are rallying around each other like they always do,” this commenter stated.

Some fans of the shows wondered why the cameras were not rolling for such an iconic moment that could be a great source of entertainment for those who watch the show. Another X subscriber added, “I’m really p-ssed Miami is on pause during all this drama. It would be great television. Bravo, y’all messed up!”

One other fan commended Nepola for always keeping things real, proving to everyone that she is true to such a kind lifestyle. “Like real sisters!!!” was another anthem of the day on the comment section on X, followed by this user who wrote, “I’m sorry, but I would pay money for Bravo to film this interaction of Alexia and Adriana with the paparazzi.”

The Bravo Star’s Castmates Kicked Against A Reunion With Lenny Hochstein

The jail support is not the first time Lisa’s co-stars have proven their loyalty to her well-being and happiness. As reported by Bravo TV, she got candid with her girls, Nepola and Patton, on the season 7 premiere episode about her ex-husband asking them to get back together. Patton and Nepola instantly urged her to reject such an idea, informing her that she was in a relationship with Jody Gilden at the time and they had been dating since 2022.

However, Lisa expressed that while she loves Jody, the thought of raising her children with their father seemed pretty appealing. Nepola then asked how Lisa intended to justify getting back together with someone who hurt her repeatedly to her kids, prompting Lisa to admit everything was a prank. 

Advertisement

She proved how serious she was about not getting back with her ex, stating, “I’d rather post a really f–king ugly picture of me naked that I would never show anyone in a million years than get back together with Lenny. I know that doesn’t sound bad to a lot of people, but I would just be devastated.”

Lisa Hochstein And Jody Glidden Were Both Slammed With Criminal Charges 

The Bravo star and Glidden were accused of unlawfully and intentionally” intercepting Lenny’s phone calls between March 12 and March 31, 2023, earlier in the week. As shared by The Blast, Lenny’s filing alleged that Lisa had placed at least one listening device on his car to enable her to listen to conversations he has been having about their divorce.

Lenny emphasized that no one knew the extent of information his ex-wife had gathered during the process, which may have compromised the integrity of the divorce. The “RHOM” star and her plastic surgeon ex finalized their divorce about two years ago, where Lenny was ordered to pay $15,000 for their two children, Logan and Elle.

He was also ordered to pay spousal support as stipulated in their original prenuptial agreement. The proceedings of the divorce were marked with some public clashes, including claims of financial strangulation from Lisa and a temporary restraining order filed by Lenny’s then-girlfriend Katharina Mazepa.

Advertisement

By Joshua Tyler
| Updated 28 seconds ago

I recently coined the term “zealot porn” to help explain a new kind of entertainment. Zealot porn is what happens when you make programming specifically designed to torment characters for their personal ideological views, with the goal of your viewers deriving pleasure from their suffering.

zealot porn (noun) — Media that graphically depicts violent punishment of ideological opponents, crafted to gratify the viewer’s sense of moral superiority and deliver cathartic satisfaction through retributive spectacle.

The key to zealot porn is that not only must the characters on screen be portrayed as zealots, in order to dehumanize them, but the people watching must themselves be zealous opponents of the characters’ ideology, in order to fully enjoy their suffering. Zealot porn is what happens when you make stories about zealots for zealots. 

zealot (noun) — a person consumed by devotion to a cause or belief, so blinded by passion that reason becomes collateral damage.

This new genre took its clearest and most defined form in the second season of Peacemaker, when creator James Gunn crafted a scene designed to give his viewers the jollies over watching the murder of people who seemed like they might think good things about Nazis. Obviously, no one likes Nazis, but whether you personally like or dislike the views of the people being harmed isn’t relevant to whether or not something is zealot porn. 

What matters is the intent of the media you’re watching, and whether that intent is to give the audience pleasure by dehumanizing and punishing people for their views. What those views are or their morality is irrelevant to defining the genre. 

How To Spot Zealot Porn

Zealot porn isn’t difficult to spot, if you’re not emotionally invested in the topic. It’s nearly impossible to spot, however, if you are. 

To determine if you’re watching zealot porn, use this checklist. If more than three of these are true, you’re probably watching zealot pon.

The “bad side” is cartoonishly evil, leaving no room for nuance



Violence or humiliation is framed as morally satisfying, not disturbing



The hero is always right, even when acting brutally



Opponents exist only to be punished, not understood



Emotional payoff outweighs logic or realism



Scenarios feel engineered to justify a specific worldview



Complex issues are reduced to simple good vs. evil

Zealot Porn Wins Oscars

The movie One Battle After Another is a zealous feast, and that won it Best Picture. We put together a video to explain it in depth.

Zealot Porn In Real Life

Zealot porn isn’t limited to fictional entertainment. Often, people get catharsis by watching videos or reading coverage of real-life ideological opponents being made to suffer. That’s on the rise too.

As I write this, prominent Democrat Eric Swalwell is getting his comeuppance over various salacious accusations, and Republicans are cheering and gaining pleasure from his downfall. This is a milder form, since no actual violence or death is involved.

catharsis (noun) — the sudden, involuntary purge of buried emotion that floods the mind like a breached dam, leaving behind a raw, emptied stillness that feels strangely like peace.

A more extreme example would be people celebrating the murder of conservative debater Charlie Kirk with similar elation. For them, watching him shot was another form of zealot porn, despite his very clearly not being a Nazi.

Others had similar reactions to videos showing the public execution of a health executive carried out by Luigi Mangione in 2024. That, too, was real-life zealot porn.

Early Zealot Porn

Zealot porn is not a new invention, but it’s been a long time since it was accepted in the mainstream. In the early days of Christianity, Romans fed believers to lions in front of cheering audiences. That was a low-tech version of zealot porn. Using media like movies and television as a delivery mechanism is, however, a recent phenomenon. 

Past creators would have balked at the idea of dehumanizing characters for the audience’s base pleasure. Entire books have been written about it being a bad idea. It’s why George Orwell wrote 1984.

On a creative level, it would have formerly been considered bad writing. Normally, good writing aims to humanize the writer’s creations and make them relatable. Zealot porn does the opposite. 

Early media that skewed closest to zealot porn are propaganda films from World War 2 or some of the more extreme grindhouse or blaxploitation movies of the 1970s. Most of those, however, focused more on the idea of dismantling a system or punishing someone who’d actively done something wrong. They’re revenge fantasies and not really the same. In the most despicable cases, as with movies like Triumph of the Will, they focused on hurting people based on some immutable outward physical characteristic.

The idea that it’s acceptable to dehumanize and destroy someone for their thoughts is newer in the modern mainstream, and it’s a growing phenomenon.

Quentin Tarantino Births Modern Zealot Porn

If you’re looking for the start of modern zealot porn, its roots can be found in Quentin Tarantino’s 2009 movie, Inglourious Basterds. 

The movie presents an alternate history in which a group of American commandos wipe out the evil Nazis and kill Hitler, without the need for a global war. It isn’t about character arcs or military realism; it’s about watching the most evil regime in history get flambéed to the sound of David Bowie. 

Nazism was a uniquely perfect ideology to use in birthing modern zealot porn, because nearly everyone has been pre-conditioned toward a zealous hatred of Hitler and his cronies. So Tarantino gives audiences, raised on decades of history classes talking about how uniquely evil Nazis were, exactly what they want: Nazis humiliated, carved, and annihilated. Punished for their beliefs even more than just their actions.

Inglourious Basterds is bloody, indulgent, and engineered specifically for moral satisfaction.

Still, Inglourious Basterds largely focused on murdering those embedded in the Nazi regime’s power structure. It didn’t, for the most part, take pleasure in killing random Germans walking down the street who might be thinking Nazi thoughts.

Inglorious Basterds is a more high-class type of zealot porn, but its existence helped give a green light to the growing wave of more extreme copycats that followed.

If modern zealot porn has a father, it’s Quentin Tarantino.

Robert Rodriguez Targets Conservatives For Destruction

If modern zealot porn has a mother, it’s Robert Rodriguez.

Robert Rodriguez’s Machete began as a fake trailer and mutated into a full-on immigration revenge epic. Danny Trejo stars as a former Mexican Federale turned one-man army after being betrayed by corrupt politicians and anti-immigrant vigilantes. 

Where Tarantino created a movie designed to visit violence on a historical group almost universally agreed to be evil, Robert Rodriguez targeted his movie at a mainstream, modern group of people and their current (and widely held) beliefs on border security.

To make that work, he had to dehumanize his targets by twisting their views to cartoonish extremes. Rodriguez takes anti-immigration rhetoric and dumbs it down to absurdist levels, so that he can turn those who agree with it into fodder for righteous decapitation. 

Every kill in his 2010 movie is meant not just payback for Machete’s betrayal but for decades of what his audience would perceive as xenophobic cruelty. The film is indulgent, cartoonishly violent, and completely lost in the bubble of its own politics. 

Kevin Smith Finds Catharsis In Crazy Christians

If modern zealot porn has a weird uncle, it’s Kevin Smith.

Two years after Inglorious Basterds, filmmaker Kevin Smith applied Robert Rodregeuz’s anti-Conservative formula to fundamentalist Christians with the movie Red State. 

The Evangelicals depicted in the movie are a cartoonish, demonic caricature of what real-life hard-line Christians are. That’s a key piece of the zealot porn formula, since it serves to dehumanize the real-world group, thus allowing the audience to take pleasure in their violent end.

By the movie’s end, Red State takes intense pleasure in their doom. As an audience, it feels acceptable because the movie makes them into monsters before it does its worst. 

Later examples of purified zealot porn won’t go through as much trouble, but Red State, like Inglorious Basterds before it, was still pushing at the boundaries of what audiences would find acceptable. It’s more restrained than its predecessors but also more pointed in its attack on its character’s beliefs.

Thriving In Independent Film

Once Tarantino, Rodriguez, and Smith showed creators the way, there was a brief explosion in copycats. Those copycats stuck mainly to the topics that those three had already covered.

God Bless America followed in Rodriguez and Smith’s footsteps, gleefully cartooning conservatives for the righteous satisfaction of its audience in 2011. Iron Sky continued Tarantino’s zealous crusade against Nazis in 2012. All of those movies followed a similar pattern, where they turned their ideological opponents into cartoonish straw men to justify dehumanizing them before the slaughter.

Like Machete and Red State before them, none of these movies gained the widespread acceptance and viewership that Tarantino earned when he kicked things off with Inglourious Basterds. Their targets were often too divisive, and most people still recoiled at the idea of getting satisfaction from watching the suffering of people who might share the same views as their neighbors.

The Purge Takes Zealot Porn Big Time

It wasn’t until the arrival of The Purge franchise’s first sequel, in 2014, that zealot porn began to flirt with mainstream acceptance again. 

The first entry in the series is a simple survival horror, but the second movie, The Purge: Anarchy, begins drifting into zealot porn as it sets up cathartic violence against wealthy elites. By the time The Purge: Election Year rolls around in 2016, it’s closer to an early-stage blockbuster zealot porn franchise. Each Purge sequel picks a different ideological target. 

The Purge: Election Year takes aim at conservatives by turning them into cartoonish caricatures worthy of slaughter, in the mold of Kevin Smith’s Red State. 

2018’s The First Purge goes back to the old standby by turning white Americans into modern-day Nazis, thinking racist thoughts, and in need of some murdering.

That push transitioned into zealot porn against nationalists in 2021’s The Forever Purge. That movie takes a weaker approach to it than its predecessors and isn’t as clearly dedicated to its satiation through zealotry. 

The Hunt Bait And Switches Audiences

If you’ve been paying attention, you’ve probably noticed that most of the earliest zealot porn entries are aimed squarely at pleasuring left-wing viewers. Their targets are always conservatives or Christians, and they expect their audience to be the most liberal of liberal extremists. 

The Hunt tried to trick audiences into thinking it was a commentary on the phenomenon of conservatives being targeted by billing itself as a movie about elite liberals hunting conservatives for their views. In reality, it’s another example of zealous slaughter of conservatives as the movie turns the hunted right-wingers into idiotic caricatures and tries to make the case that they had it coming due to some conspiratorial tweets.

The movie’s only real hero is totally apolitical, which I guess is in its own way a commentary on political polarization, but a weak one. 

The Hunt is more of a muddled commentary on the rising popularity of zealot porn than an example of zealot porn itself.

Streaming Pushes Zealot Porn Forward To Its Final Form

Movies had begun paving the way towards making zealot porn socially acceptable, and streaming television took the next step.

The Boys is the best example of this. It started as a show primarily designed to deconstruct and hate on the standard tropes of superheroes. Over time, it morphed into something increasingly political. It creates supervillains designed to embody the political ideology its writers loathe most and then constructs situations in which they’re either humiliated or killed in the worst possible ways. 

No character embodies that more than the character of Homelander. He isn’t just evil, he’s the delusional cartoon version of what bubble-dwellers imagine Fox News viewers to be. And even while he survives, the show does everything it can to humiliate and degrade him. Meanwhile, the show’s creators used social media to openly invite audiences to see him as an avatar for Donald Trump and his ideological supporters.

Whenever Homelander or one of these symbols gets publicly humiliated, exploded, or blackmailed, the show delivers a dirty hit of catharsis to its similarly minded, zealous viewers. That’s exactly what they’re going for.

Peacemaker Perfects Zealot Porn

Peacemaker took zealot porn to the next and purest level. All previous efforts used cartoonish oversimplification to dehumanize their ideological opponents, before brutally making them suffer.

Peacemaker doesn’t bother. Returning to the genre’s roots by setting the show’s second season in a world run by Nazis, Peacemaker doesn’t show its residents as engaging in evil before killing them. It simply kills them, because they’re residents of a Nazi world. The show assumes that the viewers will do all the dehumanization in their heads, on their own. 

That works because we’re dealing with Nazis, but as Inglorious Basterds demonstrated, it’s unlikely to stop there. Movies like One Battle After Another represent the next wave of mainstreamed zealot porn, which takes the dehumanization of wrongthinkers to previously unseen levels.