#angel19924

[ingravinoveritas]

How did u feel with the age gap question was it pr or do u really think he meant it and this was the truth

This is referring to the question asked on The Assembly last night. I'll post the clip here, for those who haven't seen it yet:

A lot of what I felt while watching this was touched on in this incredibly thoughtful post from @body-face-words, so I encourage folks to give that a read. But I think for me, when it comes to Michael's answer, it's not a matter of whether he lied or told the truth. It's that his response was sweet, but it was also a version of the truth that sounded convincing because it needed to, because this was not a time or place where he could say what he actually felt.

I'm really not sure what people expected him to say, in all honesty, as he was never going to say anything that would make him or Anna look bad, and especially not anything that could potentially negatively impact the kids, so he instead gave a very perfect PR answer. This again does not come as a surprise because we know Michael has scripted his answers about AL/their relationship in the past, but I noticed how careful he was in his response, which seems to contrast with how off-the-cuff he normally is when discussing every other subject. Part of what so many of us love about Michael is how unfiltered he is and always has been, with the exception of how much he filters and edits himself when talking about Anna.

It also seemed like, at least from my perspective, that Michael answered the question without answering the question. What the girl asked wasn't so much about the age gap, but about AL being five years older than Michael's daughter Lily, and it would've been a perfect opportunity for him to mention her, or how the relationship with AL affected his and Lily's relationship. He could've talked about the falling out he had with her (and Kate) in 2019 once AL's existence/pregnancy came to light, and what has happened in the years since, or how Lily now gets along with Anna/her half-sisters. But instead Michael deflected from all of that and talked about everything while saying nothing at the same time.

It was also the things Michael didn't say that stood out as much as the things he did. In the entire answer to the question, Michael never once used the word "love." Prior to the show airing, I saw a lot of people online confident that he would say that he loves Anna, but he never did. He never praised her, never talked about the things he loves about her, or how glad he is to be with her. He never once mentioned her by name. The pivot and focus was on the kids, and there was a clear distinction made between how happy he is to have the family he does, rather than to be in the relationship that he is in. Michael's use of the phrase "very happy" was also identical to the wording of a comment AL wrote on Instagram the other day, which added to the whole "reinforcing a public narrative" feeling of his response.

I think what struck me most of all, though, was how somber and heavyhearted Michael sounded while saying how happy he is. It reminded me of the song "I Am a Rock" by Simon & Garfunkel, where the upbeat and cheerful music contrasts starkly with the fraught, angry lyrics. There was no sparkle in Michael's eyes when he said it, no enthusiasm for what he was saying (which is particularly jarring when we know Michael has the capacity for incredible enthusiasm), and his face never lit up while he was talking.

There was one specific moment (which is also highlighted in the body language post) where he seemed to visibly wince and the micro-expressions were in overdrive, and it immediately made me think of a moment from Good Omens:

Time and again, I have seen fans talk about Michael's micro-expressions as an actor and how he uses them to such devastating effect (especially in the role of Aziraphale). And while these two moments are not completely identical, the idea of ignoring how Michael uses those same micro-expressions in real life makes no sense to me at all. In this instance, what we're seeing could be either because he has put so much of himself into Aziraphale that we can now recognize those "Michael" moments...or it could be because in both clips he is performing, albeit for different reasons.

The difference between Michael when he is doing this vs. when he is being genuinely himself is made even more apparent by the question immediately following this one. Unprompted, he brings up David, and the change in his expression and demeanor is swift and dramatic:

Having the mention of David happen so soon after the AL question seemed to highlight so many things. I can't help but feel that David is a security blanket for Michael, something he hides behind when he is feeling anxious or sad or overwhelmed. I wondered if perhaps he was even already thinking of David while answering the AL question, which would explain why he named him so readily--as if his mind needed to drift to someplace else just to finish answering that question.

To me, this made it abundantly clear that David is Michael's safe place. Here was where we saw Michael's eyes sparkling. Here was where we saw him light up from the inside. And it was David he kept returning to and bringing up during the rest of the show in response to other questions. So if that doesn't speak volumes about where Michael's heart seems to be, I'm not sure what does.

So yes, those are my thoughts on Michael answering the age gap question on The Assembly. As always, this is just my interpretation, but I am glad to hear from my followers with your take as well. Thanks for writing in! x

[ingravinoveritas]

wtf is that all she has to say about her boyfriend michael fans praised him more than. so is this her saying the show phenomenal or her boyfriend cos honestly this chick don't make sense what ur thoughts on this post

Hi there! And oh, wow. I've had a little time to process this now that I'm home, and I think the biggest thing that comes to mind is how this Insta story feels so...obligatory, and the bare minimum. As you said, it's not clear whether Anna is talking about the production itself or Michael's performance, and there is hardly any energy or enthusiasm to the post, especially not compared to the multiple posts AL made about Photobombing Michael J. Fox at the BAFTAs.

It becomes even more noticeable when you look at it next to the Insta story that Georgia posted:

Georgia and David didn't even attend the show tonight, and yet they hyped Michael up in a way Anna did not. You can feel the warmth and silliness and love in how they're rooting for him and cheering him on--David, in his manic Scottish way, and Georgia in her more sarcastic/dry English way--and how they seem genuinely excited for Michael. Yet I got absolutely none of that from AL's post.

All of the above is augmented by the choice of pictures in the post, with David and Georgia's photo centering Michael, literally and figuratively. He is the focus of the picture and of their attention, and the message there seems to be that Michael is what David and Georgia are most excited about. In contrast, the picture AL used is of a nearly empty dimly lit stage with a hospital bed on it, and I do not think that is by accident.

As I have said previously, my reaction is never to any one post in isolation, but to the continuation of a pattern of posts/comments from Anna over the course of several years. The same thing happened when production photos were released of Michael as Prince Andrew a few months ago, and when he played Chris Tarrant in Quiz in 2021:

AL hated the wig then, and my feeling is that she hates the wig Michael is wearing now, as well as the pyjamas that are his costume for a significant portion of the play and how he looks in them. I think that she does not care at all about the play itself or its significance to Michael, and has no desire to hype him up because his appearance in Nye is not what she considers "attractive." In addition, a fan posted stage door pictures on Twitter, including one with AL, and it seems to very much echo the lack of enthusiasm in her Insta story.

So yes, I think AL's post seems very generic (at best). It makes her come across as disinterested and somehow "removed" from both Michael and the show itself, again in contrast to David and Georgia's picture that conveys the exact opposite.

Those are my thoughts, at any rate, and I could be completely off the mark, but as always I'd be glad to hear from my followers about what you think. Thanks for writing in! x

[ingravinoveritas]

So came I came across this repost from Al that a fan posted yesterday to which she reposted and to have her say and ad I much I can see she trying to defend ms with the radio getting his name wrong it a common thing for poor ms and I don't think this personally was the guys fault and I think they was reading from a script which I think most radio presenters have I think.

But the thing I noticed also was yes she was trying to defend her parter but also seems complaining that she and the children have to endure listening to the station in the car all the time and that like a another red flag like they literally have nothing in common and I'm still wondering why they still together. Cos I've noticed since michael been London he seems alot happier and heathly cos he closer to his best friend and beaming also. Can we have him stay permanently in London and not go bk to Wales in May.

What ur thoughts on this repost for Al I would to hear

(Grouping these together for ease of answering.)

I had this sent to me a little while ago and I'm...well, it takes a lot to floor me these days, especially in this fandom, but...I think this did it. Because there is so much going on here, and almost none of it is good.

On the surface, I know this very much looks like AL defending Michael, but I do not think that's what this was about at all. I think she saw BBC Radio 6 tagged in the original tweet and saw an opportunity to gain attention due to the proximity of a high-profile account. The way she did it, however, was by making something related to Michael about her. Again. And again, the wording of this retweet takes it from AL defending him to something else entirely.

Saying that she has to "endure" Michael listening to this radio show in the car is just a terrible look, as if listening to something he enjoys is so unbearably awful, and that she only puts up with because she's stuck in a car with him. It feels like she's literally complaining about Michael under the pretense of defending him, and I don't know how she (or anyone else) thinks this is okay.

The thing is, the whole "Martin Sheen" thing has become a running joke precisely because Michael has been dealing with this not just for his whole career, but his entire life. It's something he has frequently talked about, and I can imagine that it has been challenging on so many levels, but Michael also knows that Martin Sheen has been in the business for 60 years, and more than that, he is also a fan of Martin's. He's even talked about being introduced to him at a party years ago (I can't remember by whom, but Michael described the person as saying "Mr. President, meet Mr. Prime Minister"--referring to Martin and Michael's roles in The West Wing and The Queen, respectively).

So yes, the overarching point is that Michael doesn't blame Martin Sheen for these repeated mix-ups, and actually respects him as an actor and person. And when he has felt annoyed about this happening (as he did in 2020 when an ITV announcer called him the wrong name prior to a new episode of Quiz), Michael has had no problem calling it out himself on his own social media. Which speaks to your point @thetardisisblueandroseistoo about her trying to speak on Michael's behalf, and again doing a miserable job of it.

Also, what Michael hasn't done--and I suspect would be horrified at Anna doing--is go after the hosts of a show that he just appeared on yesterday. Particularly a show with hosts he is a tremendous fan of, as he spent a good portion of his appearance gushing about them and how much he enjoys listening to the show. I think he would more than understand the one host making this mistake--given his age and how much more embedded Martin Sheen is in pop culture--and would certainly exercise a lot more graciousness than to write a nasty tweet like the one AL did above.

That's the best way I can describe it: Shades of what we saw in the Insta story from last week, with that same self-aggrandizing, passive-aggressive (and now also kind of bitter) tone. There are a hundred other ways she could have responded to this, yet what she chose was to get in a dig at Michael, plus QT a fan tweet so that it could be misconstrued as her yelling at the fan. And again, in the cases where Michael has called out announcers or others for getting his name wrong, it's because he felt he deserved to have his name said correctly. In this case, however, it seems that AL wants the presenter to get Michael's name right because not doing so is an inconvenience to her.

Those were my impressions of AL's tweet, at any rate. All I can say is that from my perspective, if this was her attempting to defend Michael, it could not have been more backhanded. Glad to hear from my followers as well about your thoughts on this. Thanks for writing in! x

[ingravinoveritas]

I personally think its disgusting of what she posted yet again its all about her and she the reason why micheal keeps trending 4th day oh please he was trending for days before she came in the picture. And for someone who has no career and basically living off her parter who works so hard and been ill with virus the last few days and haven't been able to perform and she post this. Taking the credit for something that has nothing to do with her. He very grateful that she keep him grounded what that suppose to mean ? He was doing better before she came in the picture since he been with her his career have been slowed a little and she probably the reason for it

What do u say ?

Oh, boy. I saw this a little while ago, and all I could think was that the bar is so low at this point--like halfway between the fourth and fifth circles of Hell--and this still somehow falls short.

I know there has been a lot of talk about the t-shirt Anna is wearing (which was a gift from a fan at the stage door of Nye), but for me, the t-shirt is the least concerning part of all this. It's a reference to a quote from Staged (it's the title of a season 1 episode, in fact), and I am sure Michael found it funny. The only problem is that without the context of why it's a joke, it actually just isn't that funny. And it sets the stage for everything else that is happening.

Which brings me to the caption she wrote, which was what primarily caught my attention. The reason Michael is currently trending on Twitter (X, whatever we're calling it) is because of the overwhelmingly positive response to The Assembly, which aired last Friday night. He is receiving a tremendous amount of praise for being on the show, how he spoke to the interviewers, and the respectful and joyous atmosphere that was cultivated on the show. And rather than allude to any of that--not to mention Michael being sick recently, or the trip they went on to Disneyland Paris--Anna made Michael trending on Twitter about her.

That is what stands out to me the most. The idea of "keeping him grounded" that is coming across more like kicking someone when he is already down. That he somehow needs that, and that she would have us believe he is "grateful" to her for, what...comparing him to a loud bird? Repeatedly making fun of his looks and interests without a shred of respect or affection behind it? I'm also confused by the implication (and the irony) that Michael somehow has a large ego that needs to be kept in check when she is the one coming across as self-involved in this Insta story. So, yes. I'm at a bit of loss here.

I just keep thinking of the things she could have said instead. How she could have uplifted Michael, wished him well on returning to the stage tonight after several days' absence, said how she was glad to have spent time with him or taken care of him while he was ill. Just something that would give him a reason to hold his head high. But I guess it might just be easier to convince herself/everyone else that he is smiling if his head is hanging down instead.

I am just glad Michael is out performing again tonight and getting to be on stage and do the thing he truly loves to do. But those are my thoughts, and I'd be glad to hear from my followers about what you think, regardless of whether you agree or disagree...

[ingravinoveritas]

So michael isn't performing tonite which wasn't planned and obv no stage door this week do u think it cos of the assembly being Aired to tonight and the events of the last 2 days also I hope he ok and will be bk well rested but I have a feeling it not illness related

What would u say

Oh, boy. Well, I've gotten several DMs about this, and I think the most likely and logical explanation is that he probably is ill. I'm basing this on the fact that Michael didn't do stage door earlier this week, either, and the recent trip to Disneyland Paris. Illness can mean a variety of things, too, so it might not necessarily even be Covid, but Michael just feeling run down from the grueling demands of being in a play and doing stage door nearly every night for months on end.

That certainly does not take away from the timing of this, of course, or how it curiously coincides with the Assembly airing tonight. I do think, though, that if Michael just wanted to avoid the fans/potential questions, he could simply skip the stage door, so the fact that he's not performing at all also makes me think that this is an illness-related absence.

However...I will also say that it is interesting to me that the second Michael and David are apart, they both potentially get sick. All these months when they were together, there wasn't a peep the whole time about either of them being ill....and now the one time we know that they’re actually not in the same city (or even on the same continent), this happens. This is not me trying to be conspiracy-brained, either...just making a (wistful) observation about how Michael and David seem to be at their best when they are around each other, and how noticeably that changes when they are not.

So those are my thoughts on this latest news. I'd of course love to hear from my followers and what your takes are on this in the comments. Thanks for writing in! x

[ingravinoveritas]

So al was asking ppl to ask her questions as her Fridays are so dull while her partner doing a play. Doesn't she find when she wiv michael it dull cos usually shows it or the other way round and then the bird one I found interesting cos since when have we seen Ms be protective over Al we haven't seen him speak or defend his relationship of what the journalists or ppl say about his relationship of what was said on weds where she defended it and and put a insta story about it we all know he loud but protective I think if he had to choose to protect or save someone it would be david hands down not al

What ur thoughts love to hear ur take on this

(Grouping together for ease of answering. @hyperfixating-rn-brb's Ask is referring to the last screenshot.)

So, I saw this as it was happening on Friday, and...yeah. I'm not sure what the impetus behind this random Insta AMA was (perhaps PR suggesting that Anna do something to counter her rash of recent off-putting social media posts?), but whatever the reason, choices™ were definitely made with some of (well, most of) her answers.

I think what struck me about the ones in these screenshots is how they’re lowkey insulting to Michael, but all in different ways (and not overtly, but passive-aggressively, as hyperfixating-rn-brb mentioned). It also seems odd that AL is currently in London, one of the most dynamic and attraction-filled cities imaginable, yet acting as if there is nothing to do on a Friday night. (Because Michael (and/or Georgia) aren't there to entertain her, I guess?)

Leaving that aside, the entire way this happened was just strange. A lot of the questions felt very boilerplate ("Are you currently reading anything?" "Who is your biggest inspiration?") and almost like they were planned in advance (I think at least one actually was from someone AL knows personally, IIRC), yet interspersed with enough "wacky" questions to give the impression of it being this spontaneous Q&A thing.

As for the answers in the screenshots above, I saw people on Twitter getting outraged over the "girly" question on Saturday, but predictably for all the wrong reasons. In particular, I noticed people once again blaming Michael/David shippers for it, but just from the wording alone, my feeling was that whoever sent in this question did not seem to be a shipper at all. "Girly" has a very specific, borderline homophobic connotation to it (akin to someone asking Anna if she "acts dykey" around Georgia), and while I know English is not her first language, I don't think that meaning is something AL would have missed.

So, no, it's certainly not a great or appropriate question by any means. But the bigger issue, at least in my opinion, wasn't so much "Why would someone ask this?", but rather "Why would she post this?" Because Anna is a grown woman who could have very easily just ignored this question altogether. Instead, she chose to draw attention to it, and to react in much the same way as her "vagueblogging" from the other day. It was as if the purpose in sharing it was to show people what she has to "put up with"--either from the fans or from Michael or both.

That's the other piece of this--that she shared this question with seemingly no regard for how it makes Michael look, or whether it would or could be embarrassing to him. It immediately made me think of this tweet from Michael two years ago, where he chose to answer a question in such a way as to deliberately not embarrass David (further explanation can be found here). It's something that seems so small but means so much, and that you'd think would happen effortlessly for someone you love. So the contrast of that to Anna posting this was striking to me, and it was further compounded by her answer to the "favorite bird" question.

Again, it's almost unsurprising at this point. Anna has previously made unflattering comparisons between Michael and Cousin Itt, a Hobbit, and Hagrid--among others--and now we can add a cockatiel to this list. What’s weird is that the question itself had nothing to do with Michael, so there was absolutely no reason to bring him into it...and yet. It felt like name dropping for the sake of name dropping, which just seems like a weird thing to do when she's been dating him for five years now. Did she think we forgot? That we needed a reminder? Whatever the reason, this definitely seemed like such a strange choice, and another instance of passive-aggressively putting him down under the pretense of a compliment.

(A note about the "protective" part, as I noticed that was particularly mentioned in this Ask. I would agree that there are a lot more overt/visible instances of Michael being protective of David--many of which I have talked about on my blog--than of Anna. That does not mean I don't think he is protective of her, however, but that there is a distinction between the two. It is possible to be protective of someone out of a sense of responsibility and obligation, and those are not necessarily bad things. But it's very different to being protective of someone not because you feel like you have to be protective, but because you want to be. Interpret that how you will...)

Finally, I just need to mention that one of the questions AL was asked was about Georgia ("Is Georgia secretly holding you hostage?"), and what I have hardly seen anyone talking about is that Georgia reshared that Insta story a short while later...and added a song called "I'm Trapped"...

I just...was this meant to be shady on Georgia's part? Who, exactly, is "trapped" here? The subtext and potential implications can go in so many directions here that it's hard to know where to start, but...yeah. The optics of Georgia resharing this story and adding that song in the middle of AL's Insta Q&A were and are questionable/cringey/unintentionally hilarious on multiple levels.

So yes, that is my take on the events of Friday night. As I've said before and will again, I know I could be totally off the mark here, so I'd love to hear from my followers as to what you think. Thank you for writing in! x

[ingravinoveritas]

So what ur thoughts on the bafias nominations David been nomination for best comedy actor while Michael hasn't been nominated for anything and the fan on twitter can't understand why now I personally think after Al aggressive behaviour on a post when they got his name wrong on his favourite radio station and how her stories on ig recently just werid behaviour do u think Al may had sabotaged his chances of getting a nomination for anything

What ur thoughts

Hi there! So I am once again on the road and attending a conference in Las Vegas that just wrapped up, and now I finally have a chance to comment on today's exciting news.

I'm sure everyone has seen by now, but congrats to our lovely David on his first (main) BAFTA nom for Male Performance in a Comedy!

It seems almost surreal that David has never been nominated for a (main) BAFTA before now, and given the breadth of his other recent TV performances (Des, Litvinenko) nominating him for Good Omens season 2 is certainly a choice...especially in the absence of a nomination for Michael. Looking at the list of nominations, it appears that Best Interests was nominated for Limited Drama, as was Sharon Horgan for Leading Actress...but no nomination for Michael for Leading Actor, either. So very quickly, this starts to look like a visible and intentional snub.

In terms of why Michael would be snubbed, I think there are a few possible reasons, but none of them have anything to do with AL. Readers of my blog know that I am never hesitant to call Anna out when it is merited, but in all likelihood the BAFTA nominations were decided long before now, and in my opinion she would not have any influence on whether Michael is nominated regardless of when her social media posts were made. So it does not make sense to place blame on her in this instance.

My feeling is that the reasons for Michael's lack of a nomination (and really, David's nomination specifically for GO) are likely twofold. One is that I'm guessing Amazon/whoever submitted David for consideration didn't want to pit Michael and David against each other. If they were both competing in the same category, it could split the votes, so only nominating one of them seems the best way of avoiding that. The second reason (again, in my opinion) seems to be political.

I was surprised to recently learn that Prince William is the president of BAFTA--British followers, help me out here, because this is very, very weird to a confused American--and as we know, Michael has spoken out on a number of hot button issues over the last few months: Opening a conversation about Welsh independence. The question of the devolution of the crown estate to Wales. And of course, abolishing the title of Prince of Wales. Not to mention all of the backlash incurred by the release of The Way, which was roundly savaged in the press and accused of promoting anti-English sentiments.

Granted, there have been politically active nominees and winners at the BAFTAs in the past, but it really feels like the combination of all these things is somehow working against Michael. Let's also not forget this epic picture from the BAFTA film awards last month, with Michael giving Wills the side-eyest of Welsh side-eyes:

All this said, it is difficult (if not impossible) to think of Michael and David's performances in GO as separate things, because they are so inextricably intertwined. The reason that we got David's incredible performance as Crowley is because Michael was there as Aziraphale, and vice-versa. I think David and Michael themselves would be the first ones to say it, as well as to be in awe and so supportive of each other's acting. The response of fans to this nomination news--saying Michael is a better actor, Michael deserved to be nominated instead, etc.--is so perplexing to me, because I think he was probably the first one in line to congratulate David, and would chew out anybody who put down David's acting for any reason.

I also think that if the lack of a nomination is due to the above-mentioned political reasons, then Michael is probably wearing it like a fucking badge of honor. I think he is also happier for David than anyone else on the planet right now (because that's his boyfriend, damn it), and I truly hope the stars align and give us Michael presenting David with an award again like at the NTAs in 2021. (Michael subsequently carrying David off the stage bridal style would be the cherry on top of the already extremely homoerotic cake.)

I also feel that there is no question David is as taken aback by his nomination/Michael's lack of a nomination for GO as much as the rest of us are. While I have no idea what David's chances of winning truly are, I think he would wholeheartedly and enthusiastically share that award with Michael. And I think he will share that night with Michael no matter what, regardless of what happens on the broadcast.

So many possibilities come to mind, really. I can imagine David and Michael re-enacting Every (without the heartbreaking bits, of course) on stage. I've seen people making references to the infamous Slow Show fic/how it parallels to real life, and while I've only read part of it (haven't gotten to finish), the thought of any kiss between Michael and David is beyond gorgeous to contemplate. Not for the sake of "content" or as a joke, of course (because I don't think they would be willing to kiss as a joke, because if they were, they would've done it by now), but because we would see a facet to Michael and David's relationship that's always been there in private become public. And it would be their choice to share it with us.

Those are my reactions to the BAFTAs announcement today. I'd love to hear from my followers as well with your thoughts and comments. Thanks for writing in! x

[ingravinoveritas]

So anna posted this picture just after the trailer the assembly got released abit it fairly obvious after the trailer showed the 1st question so is she trying to show ppl that michael happy in this photo like he smile like he happy or been made to look happy for the family photo

What ur thoughts on Al post

Ask from @kime11e, who also included a screenshot of the above comments:

(Grouping all of these together for ease of answering.)

So...whew. Of course this all had to happen on Wednesday as I was at one speaking engagement and traveling on the way to another one today. Let me just make sure I have the order of events down... - The trailer for The Assembly came out earlier in the day; - Anna then shared the above photos from the trip to Disneyland Paris; - An hour or so after that, she shared the trailer as an Insta story; - ...And then a few hours later we see that she's replied to the comment in the screenshot above.

Wow. It feels like an entire week (or month's) worth of content somehow happened in the space of a day. I will say that for me, again what this all comes down to is timing and/or PR. The trailer was released and soon all of social media was abuzz over that one particular question (It was rude! It was totally fine! Let's use this as another excuse to attack Michael! and so on...). Bear in mind that we (as of now) have no idea what Michael's answer is to that question, but that did not stop the almighty furor from the fans assuming that he must have been offended/uncomfortable/upset and so on, and this set off a wave of fresh speculation and discussion about Michael and AL's relationship.

...And just when all of this chatter is happening, AL posts the family photos. The reasons for this could be numerous, from damage control (again, without us knowing how he even responded to the question) to trying to (again) push the "happy family" image, to who knows what. Whatever the case may be, I really don't feel like the timing was a coincidence. Also again, I am baffled by her choice of caption: "We dragged him" immediately followed by the tag #itwashisidea. Two things that seem to contradict each other, leaving it unclear what the truth actually is. Was it actually Anna's idea, insisting on them going away on Michael's three days off, and using that tag as a deflection?

It becomes even more interesting when you realize that David and Georgia are currently in Disneyland as well (albeit in California, rather than Paris). Not long after AL posted the pictures, the discourse on social media immediately shifted to "Omg, are Michael and David and their families are on vacation together?" And just like that, the focus yet again shifted away from AL and back to Michael and David (as it always seems to do).

One other thing that is interesting about the caption is that one of my followers sent me the below screenshot via DM, which is of a tweet Michael wrote in 2020 for Lyra's birthday, and the similarities are quite striking:

The cadence of AL's caption and Michael's tweet could be a complete coincidence, but it's hard not to think that there is some PR aspect to this/that someone went to the trouble of echoing a previous tweet about the kids to reinforce a particular narrative.

In any case, I do think it is lovely to see Michael smiling, which he always does when the kids are there (in contrast, notably, to when we are talking about a picture of just him and AL). But what really struck me about all of this is the comment shown above, and Anna's response to it. The commenter added another response that is not shown, so I will include a screenshot of it now:

What's so interesting is that the commenter asked exactly the same question that Michael was asked in The Assembly trailer...and AL set a very specific tone in her response to that (and to this commenter).

I've been surprised to see people characterize her response as "chill," when there is really nothing chill about this at all. It's her typical passive-aggressive style, which we're all used to at this point, but it also reeks of insecurity. I have a hard time seeing how this makes her a "queen," as someone who is "unbothered" would not respond in the way that she did. Regardless of whether the commenter was asking sincerely or meant it as a dig, someone who genuinely felt confident and secure in their relationship wouldn't even respond to this comment at all. I'm also not sure what people expected her to say. Do we think she would be fully honest about her feelings or admit to any cracks in their relationship? Most people (famous and otherwise) would not, and certainly not on social media, either.

My feeling is that Anna was very bothered by this, and (again) tried to copy Georgia's snarky/quippy way of responding to comments, and likely did not at all expect that person to throw it right back at her. So why, then, bother responding at all? Why not just block the person, or ignore the comment entirely? Because from my perspective, it seems like all AL did was draw attention to it, and to the fact that it struck a nerve in her, which just does not seem to be a good look from any angle. And all of this coupled with the timing of the post directly after the release of the trailer really makes me wonder what, exactly, Michael said in his interview. We'll find out soon enough, though, since the show airs tomorrow.

That is my take on AL's post and all of the events of the past few days. As always, this is only my perspective, but I am glad to hear from my followers with your thoughts, whether you agree or disagree. Thanks for writing in! x