Live Q&As

Actually, I was not at lunch, I was getting ready to go to a concert, same place I was when Everett news broke.

This is what I get for trying to have a life.

I haven't read Fuller's piece yet, but I think there are a few factors at play here.

First, Stewart is more famous. That's first of all. I dare say that, despite his film work, what Rupert Sanders is most famous for is kissing  Kristen Stewart. Because she's more famous.

Second, some people enjoy grousing about Stewart for doing virtually anything, from not smiling on red carpet to not sounding totally polished during interviews to wearing  Converse sneakers, blah blah blah. You get the picture. So for her to have done something wrong is like a schadenfreude celebration for the anti-Stewart set.

Third, for "Twilight" fans who worship Pattinson, this is a massive betrayal. They feel protective of him. Hence, Stewart rage. (And yes, I know it sounds silly for them to feel protective, but think back to when you were 13 and you almost punched someone for disparaging Power Station ... not that I ever did that or anything. Point is, pop cultural passions run high during adolescence.)

Yes, Sanders has more to be sorry about, as I said in the piece I posted above. But given his lower profile, people just don't care as much.

This whole situation -- from the missing person reports to the legal battles to the Paris Jackson hash tags -- just hurts my brain. Immensely.

It's unclear whether the siblings have any legal legs to stand on, but as you said, based on what we know, it seems not.

Do not repeat the sings of Rupert Sanders. Have we learned nothing from this incident?

Unless, of course, Pattinson is on your celebrity permission slip list, as previously approved by your spouse. Then you may have some wiggle room. But seriously, no, bad idea. Morality issues aside, you will get death threats on Twitter and no one needs that.

Both?

I was thinking about this very issue this morning before I got to the office. (Jen Chaney: always working for you.)

A hotel would not work because there could be a record of their visit. And they'd easily be spotted, and at a hotel, which looks bad on its face. (Of course, they were easily spotted anyway, but still.)

That said, it seems like they would have had access to a private location -- an office, a friend's home, something. I agree that it's strange.

Ha! There is no harm in daydreaming and making jokey comments about it in this chat.

So you go on coo-coo-ka-chooing, Mrs. Robinson.

Sins, I meant sins!

Although I am certain there will be some sort of Stewart/Sanders scandal mix on YouTube. And it will be set to music.

Also, did I mention that my computer, as it does at least once a day, is moving s u p e r s...l...o...w...l...y? That's right, kids, press the right buttons today and there's a good chance I will go on a rant bound to get me fired before this chat is over.

I'll answer these questions in reverse order. First Prince and Paris and their constant tweeting: it is pretty fascinating, although I am skeptical of the one of the alleged text messages. It would be so easy to fake an image like that. Who knows if it's legit?

Now, Stewart's apology: clearly she doesn't need to apologize to us. None of the celebs I referenced in that previously shared post -- Hugh Grant, Jude Law, Leterman, Tiger Woods, Jesse James -- needed to say sorry to the public. It's an image damage control move.

Well, some people clearly feel that way. So there's that.

All righty. Welcome to the Celebritology Chat: Randy Cougar Edition.

Random side note: for reasons I still don't understand, my five-year-old son has recently made a habit of putting his pajama shorts on his head, looking at his reflection in his bedroom window, and yelling "Bryce Harper, you get out of here! You're fired!"

I didn't even know he knew who Bryce Harper was. Either way: should I send him to pre-K therapy?

Well, I think most people respected that he went to Aurora. Some people undoubtedly had a cynical response; we live in a cynical culture.

I don't think his decision to visit Aurora means that he's an infallible human being. But it was an incredibly classy thing to do. And as I said on the Celebritology Facebook page yesterday, when a celeb does the right thing, give him/her some credit. And he deserved credit for this, even though he wasn't seeking it.

I do want to know about typos: jen.chaney@wpost.com. I publish first and am backread by copy editors with tons of copy to deal with, so things get missed sometimes.

That's right: I'm now crowd-sourcing editing.

Another ready said the same thing. No, he does not know who Trump is. The entire thing is a mystery.

Nice. My husband once surprised me by putting up a photo of Josh Holloway in our bathroom. Scared the heck out of me the first time I saw it.

I do what I can.

Ooh, that is a rough one.

She at least accepts that Macchio is Johnny from "The Outsiders," right?

What, you don't want to work for free as a crowd-sourced editor? I don't see why not!

Hutcherson definitely seems a bit young, the kind of guy you call kid instead of man.

Hopefully not guilt. It's not his fault or Christopher Nolan's or anyone else associated with the fuilm. It's just unfortunate on every level I can think of.

Perish the thought. Personal matters being used for promotional purposes? Why, whoever would do such a thing?

By that logic, Pattinson is bound to cheat on her too, since he hooked up with a married Reese Witherspoon in "Water for Elephants."

"Queen of Versailles," which I wrote about in Style last week, is an interesting documentary. I also hear good things about "Ruby Sparks," which opened yesterday. The new Woody Allen movie, "To Rome With Love," is not one of his best but it has some diverting moments.

Other option: stay home and watch Breaking Bad on Netlifx. I've been doing a lot of that, too.

Hmm. Good point.

All I know is that they had better sing about lighting their torches and waving it. By the way, I will be live blogging opening ceremonies tomorrow night as part of our Olympics coverage. Don't have a link yet but will share it in Celebritology once I do. It's important to put a Duranie on this assignment.

I have been told it's not allowed. Which I think is a little strict myself. But those are the rules.

Hilarious. He does enjoy playing wiffleball...

Thanks for the suggestion, Nosy. I have not seen it but I will try to track it down.

I am far from an expert on Hollywood insurance. My understanding, though, is that they want to make sure the actor finishes his/her work without costing the stidio any production days. Stars with lots of arrests on their records, or well documented drug problems, or just general issues of irresponsibility are less likely to show up to set when they are supposed to, which costs everyone time and money.

Make sense?

This question makes me wonder if I should start a regular blog feature where I attempt to answer questions like this about behind-the-scenes celebrity-related matters.

True. To clarify: our sports staff is live blogging in real time and other staffers are live blogging the TV coverage in primetime, which is obviously on a delay. I'm handling primetime tomorrow night.

I apologize. Or, in the words, of Kristen Stewart, "I love you, I love you, I'm so sorry."

Note: It just took two minutes to type this answer, when it should have taken 30 seconds.

This is a much better way of explaining what I was trying to explain. Thanks for this.

Nice to meet you, says my 13-year-old self. You can have Simon. Dibs on John!

The Post chat software barely lets me type ANYTHING today.

I have to say, I also was surprised Janet was involved in this whole mess. She had come across as sad but level-headed after her brother's death, until all this happened.

Of course, if they genuinely think the will was forged, as they alleged in that letter, they may have reason to angrty on principle that extends beyond money.

Thanks for noting this about the health issues. Sometimes it is not an actor's fault at all when he/she becomes uninsurable.

Some have speculated David Beckham, but that seems too obvious.

My hope is that the torch is held by an unseeable presence, at which point Harry Potter whips off his invisibility cloak, then Voldemort syhows up and they have an epic battle in which Harry obviously triumphs, which segues into the announcement that Quidditch is now an Olympic sport. That might happen,  right?

All right, I have to go throw this computer out a window. Thanks for your patience with slowest chat of all time. When I live blog tomorrow (beginning at 8!) I'll use my laptop at home, which is far more efficient than the junkpile I have at work.

Peace out. Keep the faith. Don't let the Robsten get you down.