Mailbag for February 14, 2025
Caring about SNL's 50th, why Anne Hathaway isn't Blake Lively, Ke Huy Quan and Oscar non-bounces, data nerd questions, why Nicole Kidman isn't Mikey Madison, and how Oscars have changed
Dear Squawkers,
By now I think we’ve established that I’m a Saturday Night Live geek. The other day I was on text with a friend, trying to make plans to see Captain America: Brave New World this weekend and both of us were like, has to be Saturday. Because on Sunday the main entertainment event on the schedule: the SNL 50th anniversary three-hour bonanza.
Some people don’t care – and that’s OK, not everyone has to care about the same thing. For those who do care about SNL, though, it’s often at the level where you’re as excited about the anniversary the way others are about the Super Bowl. Seriously, I’m looking ahead to the SNL special like I would an award show. The BAFTAs are actually happening that day, too, and the time difference works here because it’s BAFTAs in the afternoon as the appetiser and SNL at night, a whole day on the couch!
And, for those who do care about SNL, we will consume anything related to SNL. The books, the oral history, the breakdown of the sketches… so of course I squealed when I saw Vulture’s new feature,
“50 seasons of Saturday Night Live’s impact, as told by 65 of its writers and cast members”. There is gossip here, fresh revelations, and so much workplace insight that goes beyond live sketch comedy. Here’s something I just learned, from Sasheer Zamata:
“When Kristen Stewart hosted, she dropped the F-bomb during the monologue. We all thought it was really funny, and I guess she did too, because she gave everyone custom Vans with “FUCK” written on the back of the shoe. They were untouched in my closet for years, and I just started wearing them out with my wardrobe.”
Here’s something to feed the pettiest part of my gossip soul – from the section where the cast and writers are asked to name the best SNL host of all time. Steve Martin got the most votes. And then there’s Vulture’s observation about how the show’s members answered:
“Only two votes for Justin Timberlake feels low. (Should he really be only narrowly ahead of Mitchell Kriegman’s joke pick, Herbert Hoover?!) His hosting period ranges from 2003–2013, which means roughly one-third of our participants worked directly with him and could have gone to bat for his inclusion as a historically great host. Former writers Alex Baze and Jorma Taccone were the only contributors to single him out.”
HAHAHAHAHAHA
But the best part of Vulture’s coverage is that, for me, it’s basically a Show Your Work Porn Hub. Particularly the answer to the question “what’s the best lesson you learned from working at SNL that has helped you in your life and/or career”.
These are some of my favourites:
“How to move on from career or artistic disappointments quickly. It’s a fast-moving show and it happens every week, so there’s not a lot of time to feel super sorry for yourself.” – Cecily Strong (I miss her every week!)
This is what I meant last month when I wrote, in this space, that SNL is “a showcase of artistic and creative resilience”! They have to keep going, because it’s LIVE. They don’t get to stop and edit and do it again. They don’t get to add a filter, swipe to another screen and apply a fix – the only choice is to “dust it off and try again” (Aaliyah forever!) because the red light is on. This is why SNL continues to be vital, maybe more now than it ever was in these times of truth manipulation and camouflage. It is a training ground for so many performance and production skills that, really, you’re not getting anywhere else in Hollywood on this scale.
Which is what David Mandel says he took away from the show. And, by the way, if you’re not familiar with David Mandel, he was the showrunner for Veep and one of the producers on Seinfeld and Curb Your Enthusiasm after spending three seasons writing at SNL.
“It’s showrunner training school, even though I didn’t know that at the time. The writers are the mini-producer/directors of their own pieces, and that was invaluable.”
And then there’s the underrated Ellen Cleghorne – the Vulture piece is fulllll of hilarious bits from her. Including this one which is both funny and insightful:
“Anything is possible if you are a white person. I always ask myself when confronted with a dilemma, “What would a white person do?” Then I do that. I have exposed my daughter to that mind-set; ergo, she is an oral surgeon, has an M.P.H. from Columbia University, and she is a dog owner.”
“She is a dog owner” sent me…
And finally, the question about who should take over SNL after Lorne Michaels, who is now 82 years old. Tina Fey is the name who came up the most. Tina has been doing some publicity this week ahead of the special – she and Amy Poehler were on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon the other night, you can watch that here…
– and to also promote their tour. Do you think Tina should succeed Lorne? Please share your thoughts in the comments.
Oh, and one more thing – Chevy Chase is confirmed to be part of the special on Sunday. One of the biggest dicks in comedy, like a real fucking asshole. But he’s part of the legacy so nobody’s questioning why he gets to be there but I’m sure there are a lot of others in the room who’ll be dreading having to tolerate him again after all these years.
According to Matthew Belloni’s most recent Puck newsletter the hardest ticket to get right now is for SNL’s Sunday night. Lorne’s overseeing the guest list. The concert tonight at Radio City will take care of 4000 people, most of whom will not be attending on Sunday – even David Zaslav is a Friday night seat and not for Sunday. There’s only room for 300 people at Studio 8H and all 160+ former cast members have been invited along with certain guest hosts through the years. Yes, that includes Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce who, according to Matthew, have yet to RSVP as of last night.
Mailbag time!
Question from Alice:
How “normal” is it for actors to have their say on set and change something related to wardrobe, the script, lighting, marking, etc? After watching Blake Lively’s Forbes interview I’m genuinely curious is this is normal. Like, does Gwyneth come to set asking to change the pants she’s been assigned to wear? Is it normal to improv a scene if you’re Robert Pattinson?
Lainey’s Answer (for now):
I started writing my answer to this question…and at the 750-word mark, Jacek’s voice came in my head. He’s always, like, some of your longer answers, they’re better suited as newsletters. I don’t often take Jacek’s editorial notes, LOL, but once in a while he’s right. So I’ll be answering this question as a standalone newsletter next week after I tinker with it more this weekend. Look for it Monday or Wednesday as a newsletter for paid subscribers next week.
Question from Myra:
Is it possible for anyone to make a comeback from a bad publicity run? To turn their reputation from negative to positive? Drake? Harry and Meghan? Ellen?
Lainey’s Answer:
Harry and Meghan, I wouldn’t put in the same category as Drake or Ellen DeGeneres. There are sinister currents at play where H&M are concerned that will probably never be eradicated – unless you think we can solve racism in the near future. Much of their so called “bad publicity” has to do with targeted and toxic online campaigns of hate and that’s a much bigger issue that, frankly, is having an impact on all of us.
Which brings me to the first example that came to mind: Anne Hathaway. She was so unpopular for a time that there was actually a word that was invented for it – “Hathahate”. Anne co-hosted the Oscars in 2011 with James Franco. You know what I was just saying up top about SNL and resilience training? This was Anne Hathaway that night. She and James were flopping. James decided to be a suck about it and check out. She, meanwhile, a true theatre kid, kept trying; she stayed present, instead of detaching, unlike the coward he is, she leaned in even harder. And she was punished for it. There was some minor criticism of James, but Anne ate most of the shit. Because, at the time, pop culture hated a try-hard and because, at all times, the culture hates women.
Two years later when she won the Oscar, people were tired of her, they said her Oscar campaign was grating, she was too thirsty (even though they’re all thirsty!), and when she finally won, the backlash came fast. There were rumours about her dress, rumours that she made Amanda Seyfried change because their dresses were too similar. They painted her as a desperado who would do anything for the trophy and step on anyone to get up on stage to accept it.
Anne has said that “Hathahate” cost her roles. She told Vanity Fair last year that:
“…a lot of people wouldn’t give me roles because they were so concerned about how toxic my identity had become online.”
It was Christopher Nolan who she credits for “backing” her so that she did not lose too much momentum. And cut to the present and, well, people have come around to the fact that Hathahate was bullshit, and she’s now become an internet darling. She’s a fashion darling. And, of course, she remains Mia Thermopolis and Andy Sachs, two iconic characters who were introduced to audiences of a certain age who happen to be very online in our current timeline. Nostalgia has played a big part in Annie’s comeback, if this actually qualifies as one.
You will note, Annie savvily dips into the nostalgia, too, and has used it to her benefit. Sequels for both Princess Diaries and Devil Wears Prada are currently in development.
Could the turnaround have happened, though, if what went down in 2013 went down in 2023? The online toxicity that Anne had to confront over a decade ago seems almost like child’s play compared to what it is now. Back then it was really only Facebook and Twitter. Instagram was around but didn’t really pop until later. And it would be another few years before TikTok, which has taken social media hate to nuclear levels of chaos.
Which brings me to Blake Lively. No matter what happens with this legal battle and Justin Baldoni, even if she wins the case in court, I think we can all agree that she’s currently losing in the court of public opinion. Will there be enough time that passes where she can play the Serena van der Woodsen card? Gossip Girl was a cornerstone series for a lot of people. And yet…
They’re combing through every interview she ever did when she was working on that show. Everything she ever said as a 20-year-old is being used against her, and I’m wondering if that could contaminate the nostalgia, as powerful as even nostalgia can be.
So… to go back to your question… is it possible to come back?! In these fucked up times of TikTok and Muskology? Sure, it’s possible. But selectively. I just saw a post at PEOPLE.com the other day about Mel Gibson speaking at some kind of fan convention and getting a standing ovation while talking about all the roles he passed on in huge movies. Mel FUCKING Gibson. Watch, he’ll probably be at the Kennedy Center Honours this December now that Trump has taken over. How’s that for a comeback?
Question from Elizabeth K:
After watching and absolutely loving Ke Huy Quan’s comeback and awards triumph, I feel very invested in how Love Hurts performs. I even bought a ticket for Friday night, although I couldn’t go. The current rating on Rotten Tomatoes is a not-great 18%. If this bombs, will opportunities dry up for him again? I saw he also announced a new project with Lili Reinhart so maybe everything will be fine. But I’d love to hear what the LG team thinks about his future prospects. Thank you!
Sarah’s answer:
Love Hurts is not performing well, with less than $10 million in box office so far. But I don’t think this really impacts Ke as much as, well, being not-a-white-guy in Hollywood. His post-Oscar career so far reminds me a lot of Lupita Nyong’o, with a lot of voiceover performances but few leading roles on his resume. He does have that serial killer movie with Lili Reinhart, and he has another action movie in the offing, called Fairytale in New York (I bet that title changes). Those are both still in pre-production/development, though. More immediately, he has two voiceover roles coming up in The Electric State and Zootopia 2.
It's just always a harder climb for non-white Oscar winners. I wish that weren’t true, but we fretted over Lupita a decade ago, and here we are still fretting over Ariana DeBose (who maybe needs to fire her agents) and Ke Huy Quan. Ditto for Daniel Kaluuya, who won in 2022 for Judas and the Black Messiah. Since then, Nope is his biggest film. Other than that, it’s smaller work—though he did get a film he co-wrote and co-directed made—or voiceover work. The Oscars have changed a little bit, but it remains true that non-white winners don’t benefit from the Oscar bounce the same as their white counterparts do.
Question from LazyCat:
Data nerd here. How much do you know about demographics of your subscribers - age, location etc. I'd also be really curious to know how long people have been followers of the main site, what other gossip sources they follow, etc. Alternatively, would you ever try to conduct such a survey?
And…
Follow-up to LazyCat from Laura:
I’m interested in the Squawk people as well! Do you get new subscribers often? Is there a turnover rate?
Jacek’s Answer:
We haven’t gone about really drilling down profiles of our readers via survey at this point, but we have a pretty good idea of who visits based on some of the basic data we have access to in Google Analytics, social media demographic profile insights, and a handful of third party data firms. With the emergence of alternate IDs and the increased use of first party data mechanisms that’s slowly changing and we’re probably going to need to get a little more scientific about it in the future, but I can tell you right now that our site visitors are, as you might expect, 75% female (probably more if you take out Google Search and Discover traffic that often bring one-time visits); skew a bit older than most celeb blogs on the net with the 45-54 group being our biggest (followed by 35-44s); and mostly from blue/liberal leaning urban centres in North America. The US represents our biggest country by traffic percentage (~60%) and Canada second.
How long folks have visited is hard to tell based on the data since so much has changed over the last few years in how things are measured on the internet, and with more privacy tools at people’s disposal it’s really hard to gauge from the data. But a LOT of our Squawkers have told us that they’re OGs or have been reading the blog for over a decade, some of whom procrastinated on it through college and still come back today. It’s actually pretty cool to see how so many of you have stuck with us though all the changes both in how the site is written and, more recently, in how the world seems to have shifted away from inclusivity and self-examination.
Many of you, but not all. We used to have a greater following in “red states” (for lack of a better way to put it) but we found that some folks dropped off during the #MeToo years and certainly during Trump’s first term, where we couldn’t help but be critical of the parasite’s rants, policies, and blatant racism. Some of those folks couldn’t keep reading us, so over time we’ve become somewhat more “niche” in the sense that if you’re reading this column, you’re most likely someone who isn’t afraid of hearing about something like ‘white privilege’ or DARVO, or that an LGBTQ+ person is a person. And of course, if you didn’t follow the arc of the site in how it slowly changed over time, our old content ‘reckoning’ a few years ago would have been reason to say goodbye if you didn’t care to dig a bit deeper.
But if you really want to get a good sense of who reads us, spend a little bit of time in our chat threads, and you’ll see these things in how people interact. I know I say this often but we’re so proud of who makes up our community now. It might be more niche than it was in 2015, but it’s a group of readers who respect each others’ opinions, own theirs, and are willing to be a little uncomfortable at times.
As for those Squawk subscribers and turnover? It’s in the range of 3-4% annually which I think isn’t bad. Most of it came at annual renewal time when people either decided they couldn’t or wouldn’t re-subscribe when notified, or when credit cards expired, or banks blocked transactions for security reasons and people let their subscriptions pass. We’ve also seen some folks ‘pop in’ for a couple of months because they were initially motivated by a paid-subscriber-only post. They often drop off without explicitly sharing why and that’s 95% of our unsubscribes. A handful have taken the time to say why they’re unsubscribing. For instance, we saw some people leave because they felt we didn’t talk enough about Gaza, and others who at one point took issue with Substack’s stance on free speech. People are passionate about what motivates them, and we can’t please everyone so that’s something we accept.
And lastly, about when we get new subscribers. We had a massive burst, of course, when we first launched when our hardest-core readers jumped on board. We also had a rise in the couple of months leading up to Princess Kate’s diagnosis announcement, because we wrote some paid-only features about the PR handling of that situation and as you can probably guess, people are very passionate about the British royals. And Lainey’s recent post about Harry and Meghan drove some new subscriptions for similar reasons. In fact, that post de-throned what was previously our most widely read/liked/shared post on the Squawk to date, which was “Which Could Mean Nothing…” about Ben Affleck and Matt Damon’s mutual… admiration.
Question from Phyl:
When will we know the people at LaineyGossip’s Oscar predictions? Who will dress Timothée Chalamet? Will he show up in a scarf? Nicole Kidman was robbed as was Halina Reijn. How could we have been so wrong? I watched some of Emilia Perez but never went back to it. I saw enough to wonder if Zoe Saldaña will win. Are Lainey and Duana going to LA? Will ctv broadcast etalk live on the red carpet on tv? What aspects of the Oscars production could be affected because of the fires?
Lainey’s Answer:
Phyl, I love your rapid-fire style of questions. I have a longer answer to one of them and will answer the others relatively quickly.
Nicole Kidman was robbed as was Halina Reijn. How could we have been so wrong?
We were not wrong. We just forgot that… well… some voters within the Academy, who probably represent more people in the world than we’d like to believe, are still uncomfortable with the kinds of women who get to be sexual and vulnerable on screen.
Anora is not my favourite film. Most of my issues with it are similar to Sarah’s – and you can read her review here. Mikey Madison does her best, but the movie is taken away from her by scene stealers, people who get to do much more than she does, especially after the midpoint. She spends the back half of the film basically saying, “What’s going on?! where’s Vanyaaaaa?” the whole time.
But back to your question – there’s a lot of sex in Anora just like there’s a lot of sex in Babygirl. The difference between the sex is that in Babygirl we have a middle-aged woman who gives into her desires, who indulges in her own pleasure even if it means compromising her career and her family. She willingly gives over her power while, arguably, abusing her own power. Halina Reijn is playing with all these ideas through the brilliant, beautiful vessel that is Nicole Kidman.
None of this complication exists in Anora. She has no power from beginning to end. She is a plaything, a pawn. And she’s definitely not middle aged. Just like Emma Stone’s character wasn’t middle aged in Poor Things when she was having all the sex as, basically, a baby. This is the kind of sexual the Academy prefers – nobody wants to see old(er) bitches getting fucked, but she’s allowed to have agency if her character is an adolescent.
When will we know the people at LaineyGossip’s Oscar predictions?
Soon! We’ll be posting a predictions newsletter ahead of the Oscars and there might also be a contest attached.
Who will dress Timothée Chalamet? Will he show up in a scarf?
I really hope so. I’m so curious as to how dressed up or dressed down Timmy will be on that carpet. And if I got a vote on the matter, I’d go with dressed down, as the ultimate finish to this campaign in which he hasn’t worn a single suit. As for the designer, maybe he should just go to a thrift store and call it a day.
Are Lainey and Duana going to LA?
Yes.
Will ctv broadcast etalk live on the red carpet on tv?
I can’t answer this question yet. But I should have more information for you soon.
What aspects of the Oscars production could be affected because of the fires?
The Grammys did the Oscars a huge favour. The way that show was produced – still entertaining but also fundraising – made it so that there was virtually little to no criticism about trophies and parties so soon after the devastation. And they’ve also done such a good job in the industry as a whole to explain how much Los Angeles needs award season because it’s work for tens of thousands of people who need it more than ever right now.
So I don’t expect the glam factor to be dialed down. They will do their best to honour first responders and raise money. But I don’t think they’ll have to worry about the glitz and the celebrity of it if they look to the best practices that the Grammys established.
Question from Jen C:
I asked this last week, but maybe it was either too late or maybe it was no good lol. I’ll try again either way. What’s the biggest change you’ve seen in Oscars since you started covering them? I’m speaking broadly, anything from movies that are nominated to the show itself to the campaigns to anything else.
Sarah’s answer:
The biggest change is the membership expansion that took place primarily in the late 2010s (having met their diversity goals, the Academy has since scaled back their annual invitations). That led to a more international membership, and we’ve seen the results of their power with things like Parasite’s Best Picture win in 2020, and more non-English language films being nominated outside the international feature category, in general. Last year, three non-English language films were nominated for Best Picture, this year two are, and in each case, the films have multiple nominations, meaning that they’re strong contenders in general. Bong Joon-ho once called the Oscars “very local”, and while they are still a predominately Hollywood circle-jerk, it’s a little less true today than it was in 2019.
Also, in 2022 the Academy stopped showing clips for the acting nominees. This was done to speed up the show—it didn’t—but the effect it had was immediately felt. Actors don’t need to have an “Oscar moment” in their performance to get nominated anymore. You used to look for that moment in a film, the obvious clip they’d show at the Oscars to demonstrate why this person is nominated—a big speech or teary expression, that sort of thing. But now no one really needs that. See also: Monica Barbaro, nominated for A Complete Unknown without a showy monologue. That’s a positive change in my books, it allows for more subtle performances to be highlighted.
Thanks for sticking it out with us this week and looking ahead, we are pretty much in the home stretch for award season. It’s award shows for the next three weekends, starting with the BAFTAs on Sunday, the SAGs next weekend, and then of course the Oscars. Take a breath, saddle up, and prepare for the mad rush… while, of course, keeping the chats going in this community. THANK YOU for your support!
Keep squawking and keep gossiping,
Lainey, Sarah, and Jacek
Re: demographics and where I fit into them, I may be atypical, I don't know. My body is 67, but in my head I'm about 20 most of the time. I enjoy the company of my young adult granddaughters waaaaaay more than I do people in my age range. I started reading LaineyGossip somewhere between 12 and 15 years ago, and I got here by way of Tom & Lorenzo, who I rarely if ever read anymore. They used to link to LG and I enjoyed it very much, and even more so today. I've watched all of you grow, and it's been a wonderful thing to witness.
I also live in a very red part of a very red state. It was once quite blue here, mostly due to union support and the way people were raised to treat others. But sometime back in the 60's, 70's and 80's, parents would send their kids off to college, and those kids never came home. Rural life became hard and brittle, and those kids that weren't college material stayed here and grew bitter and hateful. They're the adults of the present, raising their children to be bitter and hateful, too. But those kids still go off to college, and many of them don't come home, either, and their views change over time and become different from their resentful parents. There is still a strong cluster of us blues, huddling together and trying to make change where we find it.
Anyway, not sure where I fit in, demographics-wise, but I'm a longtime loyal reader, and will continue to be until my body outlives itself. Keep doing what you do and growing. I'm here for it.
1. Lainey, et al doesn't care about the NFL or the SuperBowl and we have Kendrick'd all week. BUT, I want to talk about FINEness because Sarah said Steve Yuen was FINE and that word has been on my mind all week. FOINE, if you will, regarding the SB MVP. Jalen Hurts is 90s FINE. FOINNNNEEEEEEE. Does anyone in the demographic Jacek referenced that subscribes to this platform understand 90s FINE??? I want to hear about who you think is 90's fine, or I would love for Lainey to talk it about it in the future because some of the people of various races that are 90s FINE are not good people today. This is purely genetics. It's partially why I don't understand lusting after these very talented pudding faces (women still have to be pretty or as close to it as possible). I'm from a time where being beaten with the good genes meant you were beautiful on some sort of scientific scale (Morris Chestnut). Who today is 90's FINE? (I'll start, Kofi Siriboe, Keith Powers, J-Hope, Rishi Nair, Austin Butler)? Why was that metric traded? Was this apart of the Ronald Miller-esque tech nerds messing with our opinion algorithm? And yes, I know this is vapid. I don't apologize. Who's pretty to you? Aside from Jalen Hurts. Did I mention Jalen Hurts my eyes he's so pretty? I'm not sorry. NFL players are not always this conventionally attractive. Yay, for Jalen (and his genes)!!
2. I don't know a lot about SNL, but recently I've come across Ellen Cleghorn's comments on profiles I follow and this lady is entertaining.
3. I think about Lainey's live television commentary more and more. It makes everything...more. If that makes sense. Good education.
4. I was not on the Hathahate train, but I am very happy to have her standing in her Anne-ness. Doing the most and being the best Anne. I just now wondered if she's directed or has producing projects? I think she's got much to offer us. Yay us! Blake has always been a lot, but the not nice version so I do wonder if her prickliness will be accepted if her work ascends expectations. Could she Joan Crawford herself through it? Be talented + allowed to be a flawed? I am uncertain of her skill level. Anne has been in front of my eyes with very good work. Maybe Blake will blossom in her craft? I'm not relitigating whatever opinions are formed on all the lawsuit stuff. Just if her skill level will show us an Anne level of goodness.