Connect with us

Entertainment

Donald Trump to Wage HOLY WAR Against Taylor Swift: I’m More Popular Than You! on January 31, 2024 at 4:58 pm The Hollywood Gossip

Published

on

There appears to be some very bad blood between Donald Trump and Taylor Swift.

There’s definitely no love story between the former President and the global pop music superstar.

When it comes to the massive popularity of Swift and the headlines she continues to generate while attending professional football games in support of boyfriend Travis Kelce — along with her apparent affection for Joe Biden — Trump seemingly cannot shake his annoyed feelings off.

And things may soon get ugly in response.

Advertisement

Taylor Swift is making loving eyes here at boyfriend Travis Kelce. (Getty Images)

For a significant majority of the population, Taylor Swift is a talented artist who appears to be in love with Kelce, the All-Pro tight end on the Kansas City Chiefs.

She has barely discussed the relationship in public, simply supporting Kelce when his team plays and getting close to his brother, mother and other loved ones.

With the Chiefs headed to the Super Bowl on February 11, however, and with Swift likely to be featured on camera at times during the most-watched telecast of the year… a segment of the U.S. population seems to be losing its mind.

Advertisement

This segment is being led by Donald Trump.

Taylor Swift with Travis Kelce in Baltimore after the Chiefs defeated the Ravens. (Getty)

According to a new article in Rolling Stone, Trump has been flipping out over all the attention Swift has been earning of late.

(Swift, of course, has been earning this attention for well over a year due to her wildly successful Eras Tour and a music catalog that continues to break records. But anyway.)

Advertisement

Considering the fact that Swift endorsed Joe Biden during the 2020 Presidential election, many observers think that she will do the same ahead of the 2024 Presidential election…

… and Trump is hoping to damage her credibility and her reputation long before this alleged endorsement takes place.

Taylor Swift and Brittany Mahomes celebrate a touchdown during the second quarter of the game between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Los Angeles Chargers at GEHA Field at Arrowhead Stadium on October 22, 2023. (Photo Credit: David Eulitt/Getty Images)

Rolling Stone claims that Trump is planning to wage a “holy war” against Swift, whatever the heck that means.

Advertisement

The former Commander-in-Chief believes he is “more popular” than Swift, based on this same magazine’s reporting, and thinks he “obviously” should have been named TIME Person of the Year in 2023.

For those unaware, that honor went to Swift.

Trump, for his part, has not actually commented at this point on Swift or Kelce or any of the conspiracies floating around out there — but, yes, folks, those conspiracies absolutely exist.

And they’re being pushed by Trump surrogates and/or far-Right members of the Republican Party.

Advertisement

Donald Trump gives pauses to answer a reporters’ question about a whistleblower as he leaves the Oval Office after hosting the ceremonial swearing in of Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia at the White House September 30, 2019 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

“I think they’re using Taylor Swift right now,” Jack Posobiec, an influential rightwing conspiracy theorist, said in a video posted on Truth Social on Monday, for example.

“They’re gearing up for an operation to use Taylor Swift in the election against everything: against Trump, for Biden, they’re gonna get her and … the Swifties… they’re going to turn those into voters, you watch.”

First, it’s unclear who THEY is referring to here.

Advertisement

Second, We’re pretty sure that encouraging young citizens — heck, encouraging ALL citizens! — to vote should be the goal of all political parties.

We’re not really sure what the shady aspect of this supposedly nefarious plan could be.

Taylor Swift attends “Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour” Concert Movie World Premiere at AMC The Grove 14 on October 11, 2023. (Photo Credit: Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images)

Then there’s Vivek Ramaswamy, the former Republican presidential candidate and lover of misinformation; he shared his own totally logical thoughts on Swift this past Sunday.

Advertisement

“I wonder who’s going to win the Super Bowl next month,” Ramaswamy posted on Twitter in a reply to a post from Posobiec.

“And I wonder if there’s a major presidential endorsement coming from an artificially culturally propped-up couple this fall.

“Just some wild speculation over here, let’s see how it ages over the next 8 months.”

In this case, Ramaswamy seems to be saying that Biden and other Democrats are in cahoots with the NFL in order to rig the Super Bowl in the Chiefs’ favor.

Advertisement

We guess that means they forced Lamar Jackson to throw a backbreaking interception against Kansas City in the AFC Championship Game last week?

Powerful forces are apparently at work here.

You did it, honey! We’d have to imagine that’s what Taylor Swift is saying to Travis Kelce here. (Photo by Rob Carr/Getty Images)

We’ll give the final, ABSOLUTELY INSANE word to Jack Lombardi, a Conservative influencer who unsuccessfully ran to be a Republican congressional candidate in 2022.

Advertisement

After the Chiefs beat the Ravens to advance to the Super Bowl, he Tweeted:

“With all the unneeded and unwanted Taylor coverage at the games. KC’s journey to the Super Bowl – totally scripted.

“Next … Travis and Taylor together at the Super Bowl, appearing happy, and in love. Then KC wins. And then later announcing their support for Biden.

“Coincidental? No. Bought and paid for couple. SMH.”

Advertisement

Ignoring the claims that Taylor Swift (the highest-earning singer of her generation) is somehow “bought and paid for,” allow us to conclude with this simple question:

If one party is THIS afraid of a political endorsement from a musician who has indisputably connected in a deep and personal manner with millions of people across the country, might it say a lot more about that party than about the musician herself?

Donald Trump to Wage HOLY WAR Against Taylor Swift: I’m More Popular Than You! was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.

[[{“value”:”Donald Trump is reportedly aiming his wrath at Taylor Swift. The Presidential hopeful hopes to put the global superstar in her place!
Donald Trump to Wage HOLY WAR Against Taylor Swift: I’m More Popular Than You! was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.”}]] 

Advertisement

​   The Hollywood Gossip Read More 

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Entertainment

STREAMING PREMIERE · JUNE 13, 2026

Published

on

Laughter Meets Inspiration: Our Ladies Show Lands on The Roku Channel

A bold new sketch comedy series for women premieres June 13 across the U.S., U.K., and Canada — arriving on the back of a festival-winning run that has critics and audiences already paying attention.

It isn’t every day a brand-new comedy arrives already wearing a row of trophies. Our Ladies Show does. The seven-episode inspirational sketch comedy series — created, written by, and starring Christin Jezak — begins streaming on The Roku Channel on Friday, June 13, 2026, available free to viewers in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada.

Produced in partnership with global media services leader Encompass Digital Media, the series sets out to do something rare in today’s streaming landscape: make women laugh out loud and leave them lifted. In a media moment crowded with noise and cynicism, Our Ladies Show is a deliberate counterweight — comedy with a conscience, built for women of every age and background.

A Show Built Around Real Life — and Real Laughs

Each of the seven episodes opens with a monologue from one of the cast members introducing the theme, then rolls into three or more sketches that hit the subject from every comedic angle. The series tackles the things women actually carry: holding grudges, comparison, beauty, patience, gift giving, the importance of community, and dealing with anxiety.

The comedy comes from a place of warmth rather than mockery — a “laugh at ourselves” spirit that runs through a gallery of unforgettable characters: a nosey neighbor, an overwhelmed mom, relentlessly optimistic flight attendants, beauty pageant winners past their prime, and a crew of unruly campers with a counselor who simply cannot hold it together.

Advertisement

Then the show does something most sketch series don’t. In the final segment of every episode, the cast gathers in a living-room setting and invites the audience in — sharing real inspiration drawn from the theme, the sketches, and their own personal stories. It’s the moment the laughter turns into something that stays with you.

The Women Behind the Show

Our Ladies Show brings together three performers with serious range:

  • Christin Jezak — creator, writer, and star (Miracle at Manchester, Raising Hope, Jimmy Kimmel Live!)
  • Hillary Hawkins — (Primal, Nick Jr.’s Play Along, Gullah Gullah Island)
  • Sarah Hernandez — (Nefarious, Unplanned, House of Payne)

“In a world with so much division and depression, I hope women of all ages and backgrounds will watch this show, laugh, be reminded of how beautiful, unique, and loved they are, and remember how much we need each other.”— Christin Jezak, Creator & Star

Already a Festival Favorite

The series’ recurring long-form sketch, Neighborhood Watch, didn’t arrive quietly. Originally released as a web series and revamped for Our Ladies Show with new footage, sound, and music, it has been sweeping the festival circuit:

  • 🏆 Best Webseries — 2026 New Media Film Festival (Los Angeles)
  • 🏆 Best Web/TV Series — Paris Film Awards
  • 🏆 Best Web Series — Dallas Movie Awards
  • 🏅 Additional wins at the London Movie Awards, Florence Film Awards, and Hollywood Gold Awards
  • 🎬 Official Selection — 2026 Harvard Divinity School Film Fest
  • ⭐ Finalist — Houston Comedy Film Festival
  • 📣 Three nominations — 2025 Content Christian Media Conference, including Best Actress in a TV and Web Series nods for both Christin Jezak and Sarah Hernandez

Where and When to Watch

Our Ladies Show premieres Friday, June 13, 2026, streaming on The Roku Channel — the home of premium and free entertainment — in the U.S., U.K., and Canada. All seven episodes deliver the series’ signature blend of sharp sketch comedy and genuine encouragement.

Click Here To Get Tickets

Watch the trailer now on your platform of choice:

For more information, visit www.ourladiesshow.com and follow @ourladiesshow on Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok.


About Christin Jezak

Christin Jezak has worked for over 15 years in the entertainment industry. She created and stars in Our Ladies Show and the award-winning web series Neighborhood Watch. She produced the EWTN TV program For the Sake of the Gospel and the all-women web series Ladies Keepin’ It Real, played Dr. Sam in Miracle at Manchester (starring Dean Cain, Daniel Roebuck, and Eddie McClintock), and voices Agnes in the podcast Confessions of a Catholic Single. She held a lead role in a short film for NTT Data directed by Academy Award–winning cinematographer Janusz Kamiński, has co-starred on Raising Hope, and appeared in Jimmy Kimmel sketches and a Grubhub Super Bowl commercial.

About The Roku Channel

Roku pioneered streaming on TV and is the #1 TV streaming platform in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico by hours streamed (Hypothesis Group, Dec. 2025). The Roku Channel is the home of premium and free entertainment, alongside Roku’s Howdy and Frndly TV services. Roku is headquartered in San Jose, California.

About Encompass Digital Media

Encompass Digital Media is a global managed services company — technology-driven, software-defined, and people-powered. Trusted by world-leading broadcasters, networks, sports rights-holders, and OTT platforms, it processes over 25,000 hours of content daily, serves 850 channels to 84 countries, distributes over 243,000 live events annually, and reaches 400 million radio listeners weekly worldwide. Learn more at www.encompass.tv.

Media & Interview Requests: To interview creator Christin Jezak or the cast, contact Christin at cjezak@p2ptheatre.com.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Entertainment

What Filmmakers Should Actually Steal From Euphoria

Published

on

Most of the talk about Euphoria asks one question: was it realistic? That’s the wrong question if you make films. The better one is simpler. How did Sam Levinson get an audience to feel addiction from the inside? And what did it cost him to end the show the way he did?

Strip away the noise and Euphoria is a clinic in three choices: point of view, style, and the ending. Here’s what’s worth taking — and what isn’t.

1. Put the Camera Inside the Character

Most shows about drugs watch from across the room. Euphoria doesn’t. When Rue is high, the camera is high too. Walls breathe. Floors tilt. Time skips. You’re not watching her — you’re stuck inside her head.

That’s the lesson: point of view is a decision you make with the camera and the cut, not a mood you add later in color. Levinson builds it into the lens, the blocking, and the edit.

So before you shoot a scene through a character’s eyes, ask one thing on set: whose eyes is this lens standing in for? Then make every cut respect that.

2. Your Style Has to Mean Something

The glitter. The slow push-ins. The impossible club lighting. Euphoria‘s look got copied everywhere. That’s the trap.

Advertisement

The style worked because it carried weight. The beauty wasn’t decoration — it was the lie addiction tells you, the reason the next high looks worth it. The camera made self-destruction gorgeous on purpose.

The copies missed that. A thousand music videos took the look and left the meaning behind, and you can feel how hollow they are. So here’s the test: if your signature style could be swapped onto any other project and still “work,” it’s not a style. It’s a filter. Every choice should have a reason behind it.

3. The Ending Tells the Audience What It All Meant

When Euphoria ended for good in Season 3, Levinson killed Rue — an accidental, fentanyl-laced overdose. He called it “the honest ending,” saying he wanted to tell a true story about addiction and grief in a time when one mistake can be the last one. Reportedly, that wasn’t the original plan; the death of Angus Cloud, who played Fezco, changed the script.

Forget whether you agree with the choice. Study how it works. An ending is the last instruction you give your audience about how to read everything before it.

By ending on consequence instead of recovery, Levinson reframed seven years of beautiful chaos as a story about cost — not a celebration of it.

It’s also the show’s most debatable move, and that’s worth noticing too. A show that spent years making pain look beautiful had to fight to make that pain land as loss. Did it earn the ending, or enjoy the wreckage too long to stick it? Smart filmmakers will disagree — and that argument is exactly what a good ending is supposed to start.

Advertisement

What Not to Take

The neon grief is the most copied part. It’s also the least useful. Take the surface — the colors, the slow-mo, the trauma-as-texture — and you get the costume without the body.

The real craft is underneath. Commit your camera to a real point of view. Make every stylistic choice earn its place. Treat your ending as the point of the whole thing. Do that, and your work won’t look like Euphoria. It’ll do what Euphoria did.


This piece touches on addiction and substance use. If you or someone you know is struggling, support is available through the SAMHSA National Helpline at 1-800-662-4357.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

How a 22-Person Film Crew Each Walked Away With $300,000

Published

on

In the spring of 2020, with Hollywood shut down and most film workers suddenly out of a job, Zendaya made a movie in a single house with a crew of 22. The film was Malcolm & Marie. What happened to that crew afterward is the part worth paying attention to — and it’s quietly become a blueprint indie filmmakers are borrowing five years later.

Instead of paying everyone the standard flat day rate and sending them home, Zendaya structured the production so the crew owned a piece of it. They received “points” — a share of the film’s revenue.

When Malcolm & Marie sold to Netflix for roughly $30 million, those points turned into real money. Because one point typically equals 1%, a single point on that sale was worth around $300,000.

For a crew used to being paid by the day, that’s a life-changing number.

The Math That Makes It Click

The reason points are so powerful is that their value scales with the film, not with your hours on set:

Advertisement
  • At $30 million in revenue, 1% equals $300,000
  • At $50 million, 1% equals $500,000
  • At $100 million, 1% equals $1 million

Now hold that against traditional indie crew pay, which runs roughly $300 to $800 per day. A 20-day shoot totals somewhere between $6,000 and $16,000 — full stop, no upside, no matter how well the film does. The points model flips the entire logic: you stop getting paid for time and start getting paid for success.

This Isn’t New — It’s Just Newly Accessible

Backend deals are how the biggest names in Hollywood get rich. Robert Downey Jr. reportedly earned tens of millions from his Avengers: Endgame backend; Keanu Reeves made a fortune off The Matrix through profit participation. The leverage to demand that kind of deal has always belonged to A-list stars.

What changed with Malcolm & Marie is who got a seat at the table. Zendaya didn’t reserve the points for herself and a couple of producers — she extended them to the crew, the people she described as laying the tracks and doing the heavy lifting. That’s the shift indie filmmakers are now studying: ownership as something you share down the call sheet, not hoard at the top.

Why Indie Filmmakers Should Care

Advertisement

Independent films usually run on budgets between $50,000 and $500,000, where labor can eat up 40% to 60% of total costs. That creates a permanent squeeze: how do you attract genuinely skilled people without torching the budget before you’ve shot a frame?

Equity is the pressure valve. Offering ownership instead of higher upfront pay lets you reduce immediate production costs, attract more experienced collaborators, and — maybe most importantly — build a team that actually wants the film to win.

How to Apply It to Your Own Project

You don’t need a $30 million Netflix sale for this to work. Say your budget is $250,000 and your revenue goal is $500,000, making 1% worth $5,000. Instead of stretching cash thin across every line item, you might offer 1% to a cinematographer, 1% to an editor, and 1–2% to a producer. You preserve cash during production and hand your key people a real reason to overdeliver.

Ownership Changes How People Show Up

Advertisement

A stake rewires behavior. People who own a piece of the outcome stay sharper on set, pitch in on marketing and promotion without being asked, and stay invested long after wrap. That last part matters more than it sounds — a crew that’s financially tied to the film becomes part of its distribution engine, not just its production.

Read the Fine Print

Equity is not a salary, and it’s honest to say so. Malcolm & Marie worked because it sold to Netflix at a high price — that’s the upside scenario, not a guarantee. If a project underperforms, points can be worth little or nothing. So if you use this model, do it cleanly: define revenue participation explicitly in contracts, spell out recoupment structures so everyone knows who gets paid and in what order, and offer partial upfront payment where you can to balance the risk. The whole thing runs on trust, and trust runs on transparency.

The Bigger Picture

What Zendaya pulled off with a 22-person crew in one house pointed to something larger about how creative work gets valued. In an industry where funding is the hardest wall to climb, ownership has become its own currency. You may not control access to millions in financing — but you fully control how value gets shared on your set. And that, more often than not, is the difference between a film that stalls in development and one that actually gets made.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending