logo
L.A. Affairs: My husband left me for an actual movie star. I thought I was done with love

L.A. Affairs: My husband left me for an actual movie star. I thought I was done with love

Yahoo4 hours ago
I was just back in L.A. after a stint in Vancouver that saw my soon-to-be-ex-husband realizing his dreams of becoming a successful actor and hooking up with a movie star who was not me. I was hurt, but it had always been a terrible relationship with more heartache than happiness. And now, though still licking my wounds and feeling adrift, I was relishing my newfound freedom.
I bought a cute yoga outfit, burned innumerable overpriced scented candles, began a morning ritual of walking to the local bakery for a bagel and coffee, redecorated my apartment to my taste and took a French lover.
I met him on a night that can only be described as enchanted. Spontaneously, I'd joined a group of old friends on their way to a house party in Hollywood. Crammed into a rideshare, someone passed out little yellow pills debossed with an E. I'd done ecstasy once before, and the high I felt then hadn't come anywhere close to making the low that followed worth it. I had sworn never again. But this was a new day — and a new me who wasn't deterred by anything so inconsequential as soul-crushing despair. I tucked the little yellow pill in my pocket for later.
Read more: L.A. Affairs: My boyfriend told me that he didn't want to get married again. Dealbreaker?
The party was in a chic work-live space: four stories of industrial design thumping with music and packed with hipsters. My crew grabbed beers and dispersed. Walking on a balcony, I turned a corner, and there he was, tall and slender, with soulful brown eyes and a longish mop of brown hair threatening to hide them. On his lapel, he wore a little button, a heart over crossbones. 'Are you a heart pirate?' I asked.
His response didn't matter. The moment he opened his mouth and a French accent came out, I didn't care what he said as long as he kept talking. It wasn't long before we were kissing. The pill in my pocket forgotten, I had found all the ecstasy I needed.
The next day, he texted me a time and date with a drawing of what looked like giant floating lava-lamp blobs with two pairs of little feet sticking out from underneath. I knew at once that the place was a public art exhibit in Silver Lake and that nothing could keep me from filling one pair of those shoes.
An electric first date led quickly to another and another, and we slid easily into a coupledom of cute texts, dinners out and exploring Los Angeles together. He was an animator in the country on a work visa and he invited me into his group of friends, also young men from around the world on a grand adventure. They often went out to explore interesting new bars, restaurants and attractions. Or they just gathered at someone's apartment to make dinner together. When wives and girlfriends were included, I came along too. They were fun and lively, and I enjoyed them almost as much as I enjoyed him.
He had opened his world to me, and showing him the sights of mine made it feel fresh and new to me as well. We took a trip up the coast to Big Sur, passing the elephant seals and San Simeon, staying at the Madonna Inn and driving on to the restaurant Nepenthe, where we ate a fancy dinner and camped across the road. We also took a trip to Baja, staying in La Fonda and visiting Ensenada. Walking on the beach, I was almost too smitten to feel embarrassed by his very European Speedo. Later, a woman at a restaurant commented how sweet it was to see two people so in love.
Read more: L.A. Affairs: I knew what I wanted to enrich and sweeten my life. I was seeking ethical nonmonogamy
This was so different from the tortured courtship with my ex. This was so effortless and light and so much of what I had been hoping for that when any cracks appeared in the perfect facade, I reasoned them away before they got big enough to threaten the dream.
On Valentine's Day, he told me that he didn't believe in Valentine's Day because it was commercial. Instead, he said he'd make me dinner in his apartment. I would have been happy with the offer of dinner in minus the anti-consumerism explanation. But something about the fact he felt obliged to make it and that he hadn't bothered to ask me how I felt about Valentine's Day felt off — as if he was clarifying that what I thought or wanted did not figure into his choices.
When we first met, he had just returned from a trip home to France. While there, he had taken up with another woman who was now sending him long, angry texts. When I asked about the situation, he shrugged and said, 'She thought it was more than a fun thing.'
Surely what we had was different, I told myself, despite the telling pit in my stomach.
Read more: L.A. Affairs: He was kind and rich. His expensive gifts hinted at something darker
When we were alone, his focus was all on me. But when we were with his friends, I often felt as though I'd come solo, just another member of the gang. Badly wanting this to be different from my codependent and stifling marriage, I told myself his aloofness was a good thing. It meant we both had our own lives, that we weren't getting so lost in each other that we lost ourselves.
But he wasn't the one in danger of getting lost. Despite my best efforts, it was getting harder and harder to ignore that what I wanted to believe was a blossoming relationship was actually two people in very different places with very different ideas.
I had come into this promising myself honesty, but I'd been working overtime to avoid the truth. Even when it was banging me over the head, like when he told me he loved me and then quickly quipped, 'Unless you get pregnant. Then bye-bye!' I laughed, pretending the comment hadn't stung. He was 28 to my 32. I wanted a baby badly, and the realities of biology were telling me I didn't have much time to waste.
In the end, I was the one who broke it off. We went to a big studio launch party and, as usual, when offered the possibility of something newer and more interesting than me, he peaced out. The party was in a meandering warehouse converted to an intergalactic space station.
Read more: L.A. Affairs submission guidelines
As I explored the party, feeling abandoned and alone, the pieces began to form a complete picture I could no longer ignore. By the time we met up hours later to leave, I understood that I could linger in this half place for as long as I chose, but that it would never be the partnership I wanted. I was seeking a destination, while he was in love with the journey. He wasn't a pirate; he was a tourist to my heart.
Just like the first time I took ecstasy, coming down from our romance sent me into a pit of despair. But like a stomachache from too much candy, the pain was short-lived. It wasn't long before I met someone who did want to share his life with me — all of it. For years, I kept the little yellow pill in my jewelry box. I never did take it.
The author helps brands tell their stories; sometimes she tells one of her own. She lives in Los Angeles with her husband and two children. You can find her at linkedin.com/in/ksmayfield.
L.A. Affairs chronicles the search for romantic love in all its glorious expressions in the L.A. area, and we want to hear your true story. We pay $400 for a published essay. Email LAAffairs@latimes.com. You can find submission guidelines here. You can find past columns here.
Sign up for The Wild newsletter to get weekly insider tips on the best of our beaches, trails, parks, deserts, forests and mountains.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Solve the daily Crossword
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The book is ‘closed' on ‘Sex and the City' after ‘And Just Like That…' finale
The book is ‘closed' on ‘Sex and the City' after ‘And Just Like That…' finale

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

The book is ‘closed' on ‘Sex and the City' after ‘And Just Like That…' finale

'And Just Like That…' the book is really truly 'closed' on the saga that is Carrie Bradshaw. 'Party of One,' Thursday's series finale of the 'Sex and the City' spinoff really was the end of the road for the gals, their Cosmopolitans, men and Manolos, as showrunner Michael Patrick King told Variety. 'It is closed. Because I care so much about what we've done. … I never thought once about continuing,' insisted King, who directed the final bow, which Susan Fales-Hill co-wrote. 'Telling it like it is: It's an instinct. Anyone else could keep going. I can't,' said King, 70. King similarly reached a natural conclusion with the 2004 'Sex and the City' finale: 'We don't just want to do it. We want to do it well, or do it when there's something kind of dangerous and exciting to say.' King and Carrie herself (Sarah Jessica Parker) announced in the midst of the show's third season — ironically, its highest-rated — earlier this month that the franchise was 'coming to an end.' It was a shock, and in some cases, a relief, to viewers who'd held on through many an out-of-character antic or plotline and were finally enjoying themselves beyond the hate-watch. 'I always like the fact that you wish you were getting more. The idea of leaving a party while it's still happening is the most elegant thing you can say for a TV series,' said King, whose sole rule for the writers' room was 'don't repeat. And we've done a lot. The one thing we haven't done was get Carrie to the point where she says, 'Maybe I'm enough.''

Does Steven Spielberg's ‘AI: Artificial Intelligence' Play Differently Today?
Does Steven Spielberg's ‘AI: Artificial Intelligence' Play Differently Today?

Gizmodo

time25 minutes ago

  • Gizmodo

Does Steven Spielberg's ‘AI: Artificial Intelligence' Play Differently Today?

Rewatching Steven Spielberg's 2001 film AI: Artificial Intelligence, it feels as plausible as ever, but also more misguided. In 2001, AI was barely a thought in everyday life. It was the thing that destroyed the world in Terminator, and still a lofty goal in tech circles. Today, as the technology continues to grow and dominate daily conversation in almost every way, you may expect to watch the film and have a slightly new perspective. Some change in insight. Instead, the film falters as Spielberg's views on his titular technology take a backseat to a story unsure of what it wants to be. The movie's flaws shine brighter than ever before, even as its world becomes increasingly familiar and likely. But, maybe, there is more to it than meets the (A) eye. Based on a short story by Brian Aldiss and developed in large part from work previously done by the late Stanley Kubrick, AI is set in an undefined future after the icecaps have melted and destroyed all coastal cities. As a result, society has changed drastically, with certain resources becoming increasingly important and scarce. That's why robots, which don't need to eat or drink, have become so crucial. Tech companies are always looking ahead, though, and inventor Allen Hobby (William Hurt) thinks he's figured out the next step. He hopes to create an artificially intelligent robot child who can love a parent just as a normal child would. Hobby sees true emotion as the logical next step in robotic integration into human life, and about two years later, he believes he has achieved it. The first act of AI then follows David (Haley Joel Osment), a prototype child robot with the ability to love, as he attempts to help two parents, Monica (Frances O'Connor) and Henry (Sam Robards). Monica and Henry have a son, Martin, but he's been in a coma for about five years. Assuming Martin will pass away, Henry is chosen to bring David home. Initially, Monica and Henry treat David very coldly, and rightfully so. He's weird. He's creepy. He does not act human in any way. So, when Monica decides to keep him and 'imprint' on him, it feels like a bit of a shock. And this is the first of many places AI today just doesn't quite get things right. We learn that David can love whomever he's programmed to imprint on, but that it's irreversible. So, if for some reason the family doesn't want him anymore, he has to be destroyed, not reprogrammed. Which feels like a pretty big design flaw, does it not? David's deep-seated desire to be loved by Monica is crucial to the story, but watching it now, it feels almost silly that a company wouldn't have the ability to wipe the circuits clean and start it again. Also, the notion that any parent would want to have a child who stays a child forever simply feels off. Isn't the joy of parenting watching your kids grow up and discover the world? Well, David would never do that. He'd just be there, forever, making you coffee and pretending he loves you with the same, never-ending intensity. Which is a little creepy, right? The beginning of AI has very distinct horror vibes that feel even more prominent now than they did in 2001. But, clearly, this was the intention. Spielberg wants to keep the characters and audience on their toes. After two decades of killer robot movies, though, it's even more unmistakable and obvious. That unsettled tone makes it difficult to feel any connection to these characters, at least at the start. Eventually, Monica and Henry's son miraculously recovers, comes home, and develops a rivalry with David. The two clash, and, instead of returning David to the company to be destroyed, Monica leaves him in the woods. Which feels so much worse! Truly, it's irredeemable. When an animal is sick beyond aid, the merciful thing is to let them go, not throw them in the woods where they will scream in pain forever. But that's what Monica does to David. You hate her, you feel for him, and it's weird. From there, AI gets even weirder. David meets Gigolo Joe (Jude Law), an artificially intelligent sex robot who has way more emotion and humanity than the ultra-advanced David (the same goes for David's low-tech teddy bear sidekick, Teddy, the best part of the movie). The two traverse a world that has either become disgusted with machines taking over their lives or fully embraced it. It's an interesting dichotomy, one brought to life by wild production design such as the 'Flesh Fair,' where humans watch robots be destroyed for fun, and 'Rogue City,' which is basically AI Las Vegas. And yet, these scenes only touch on larger concepts of what AI means and what it has done to society. Joe delivers a monologue about humans' distrust of technology that feels poignant and thoughtful, but then it's largely forgotten. The ideas are there, but not crucial to what's happening around them. What stands out about all of this, especially from a modern viewpoint, is how Spielberg's vision of AI is still so distant. Things in the movie are well beyond what we have today. Even with modern chatbots, self-driving cars, generative AI, and the like, everything in the movie is clearly science fiction. Artificial intelligence in Spielberg's world isn't special. It's been around for so long; it's already been monetized, exploited, embraced, and rejected. One scene, however, does ring truer now than it did in 2001. As Joe and David look for the Blue Fairy that can turn him into a real boy (more on that in a second), they go to 'Dr. Know,' a store where an AI Albert Einstein, voiced by Robin Williams, can search through the entirety of human knowledge to answer any question for you. It's basically ChatGPTat its highest form, and in this world, it's just a cheap attraction in a strip mall. Dr. Know is a crucial plot device in the film because it puts Joe and David back on the track of the Blue Fairy, a character from Pinocchio who turned that character into a real boy, and whom David believes is real and can do the same for him. This is another disconnect that's hard to get your head around. We're continuously told how advanced David is supposed to be technologically, and yet he exhibits none of that mentally. He only shows the emotions and mind of a small child. There's never any hint that he'll learn or develop past that. That he'll evolve in any way. He's the most advanced robot in the world, but can't grasp that Pinocchio isn't real. So, we're left confused about what he believes, what he doesn't, his potential, and his overall purpose. Nevertheless, when Joe and David ask Dr. Know about how the Blue Fairy can turn him into a real boy, the program somehow understands this request and sends them on a journey to Manhattan, which has been lost under rising seas. There, David finds Hobby, his creator, and we learn Hobby and his team have been monitoring and even subtly seeding David's adventure to get him to this place. Which feels incredibly forced on multiple levels, but also essential to the big reveal. To this point, AI has been pretty all over the place. Cautionary, brutal, near-horror movie. Wild, cross-country adventure. Whimsical fairy tale. But finally, Hobby explains the film's central drive. Having completed this adventure, David is the first robot to actually chase his dreams. To act on his own self-motivation, not that of a human, and that's a huge jump ahead for artificial intelligence in this world. It's a fascinating revelation ripe for exploration. And yet, it immediately gets forgotten as Joe helps David escape and complete his journey to find the Blue Fairy, which he settles on being a submerged carnival attraction at Coney Island. Now, I hadn't seen AI in probably 20 years, and, for some reason, this is the ending I remember. David, stuck underwater, looking at the Blue Fairy forever. His dream, kind of, achieved. But that's not the ending. I forgot that the movie had about 20 more minutes left. We jump ahead 2,000 years. The world has ended, and advanced aliens are here studying our past. They find David buried in the ice, the last being on the planet with any connection to living humans, and, to make him happy, they bring his mom back for one day. The happiest day of his life. Roll credits. It's a touching ending, but it also speaks to how all over the map the movie plays in 2025. Basically, the movie is a horror, fairy tale, social commentary, and sci-fi adventure with heart… but only sort of. There's no real reason why David's mom can't be around for more than one day. It's just an arbitrary rule the aliens tell us. However, it does hammer home the film's ultimate message about the importance of love and how emotions are what make humans so special. A message that works completely independently of anything regarding artificial intelligence. In fact, calling the movie AI in 2025 is almost a conundrum beyond the movie itself. Upon release, most of us assumed the title just referred to David and the robots. But now, maybe I see that's not the case. AI in the movie is so not the point, maybe calling it that is a commentary on human intelligence itself, or the lack thereof. We certainly take for granted the things we inherently have as people. In the end, I did not care for AI: Artificial Intelligence as much as I did when it came out. At the time, I found it kind of profound and brilliant. Now I find it sort of messy and underwhelming, with a few hints of genius. But, there are a lot of good ideas here, and as the world of the movie becomes increasingly recognizable, I'd imagine another 25 years is likely to re-contextualize it all over again. AI: Artificial Intelligence is not currently streaming anywhere, but is available for purchase or rent. Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what's next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

How ‘Nobody 2's Powerhouse Producers Win In Hollywood In Tough Times
How ‘Nobody 2's Powerhouse Producers Win In Hollywood In Tough Times

Forbes

time26 minutes ago

  • Forbes

How ‘Nobody 2's Powerhouse Producers Win In Hollywood In Tough Times

"When we're in love with something like Nobody, and we get a green light on it, it's hard to say no," admits producer David Leitch as we chat over Zoom just days ahead of action sequel Nobody 2 landing in theaters. "Those green lights are hard to come by, and they're getting harder and harder, so we've been fortunate that we are in demand and we're taking advantage of that." He and his producer wife, Kelly McCormick, are the powerhouse pair behind 87 North Productions, the world-renowned production and action design company behind such crowdpleasers as Bullet Train, Violent Night, The Fall Guy, and the original Nobody. "We love to work," he continues. "We are grateful to be where we are in the business, where we have a lot of opportunities to make stuff." Leitch and McCormick, who are married, have found a small window behind night shoots on another movie to discuss R-rated Nobody 2. Days later, they're heading to kick off production on Violent Night 2. Times are challenging in Hollywood, but 87North is weathering the storm brilliantly. Leitch, a former stuntman who directed Atomic Blonde and Deadpool 2, credits McCormick as a significant reason for that. "When you look at other companies that are in our genre of action filmmaking, there isn't an iconic producer that rises to the top like there used to be back in the Bruckheimer days. I think she's making a play for it," he enthuses. "Kelly is definitely this incredible producer who can run multiple projects at any given time and still add production savvy and tons of creative input on our big movies that we do, but also the smaller genre films that we produce for Universal, so she's the rock star that keeps it all together." "If we didn't have someone as skilled at it as her, it would be hard for our production company to stay afloat, and we wouldn't be able to do the volume that we do and have the quality that we have." Nobody 2 sees Bob Odenkirk reprise the role of Hutch Mansell, a suburban dad who also happens to be a former lethal assassin. The sequel has him and his family heading off on vacation for some quality time together, but, as usual, where Hutch goes, trouble is not far behind, and what appears to be a sleepy town turns out to be a hotbed of organized criminal activity. The ensemble cast also includes Connie Nielsen, Sharon Stone, Colin Hanks, Christopher Lloyd, and RZA. The first film made $57.5 million against a $16 million budget, with critics and audiences giving it the thumbs up. That success meant Nobody 2 had $25 million to spend, but it wasn't something they had expected. "These days, getting a sequel doesn't necessarily mean getting a bigger budget," McCormick admits. "In all the sequels that we hope to do, it's about thinking about the character, but also where the audience might want to go with them. That's what was our North Star here." "We didn't start work on Nobody 2 immediately after the first film, in the sense that we weren't expecting a sequel. Our first thoughts on what could happen next were a vacation. In the first film, they talk about going to Italy one time and how special it was. We talked about going to Italy, and then we pivoted and thought, 'You know what? He's such a middle American hero, why doesn't he go to a destination in middle America and have that experience, rather than what you would expect of a globe-trotting sequel?' It kept it super grounded." Leitch And McCormick's 87North Has Created Landmark Moments In Hollywood Nobody was considered a barometer of the industry. Landing in theaters in March 2021, it was one of the first big studio movies to drop after the pandemic. Its success was a landmark moment. Leitch and McCormick only founded 87North in 2019. "We released the first one as people were coming back to the theaters after COVID. Shockingly, people came," McCormick exclaims. "When we're talking to people, a lot of them are like, 'That was my first movie back after the pandemic,' and it's a cool thing to have for that film. After the theaters, it continued to play well, and people found it so that as those numbers started stacking up, it was like, 'Let's just see where we might go and get a script going.' Bob's been really busy, and to get it right took a minute, so we just wanted to take our time. It's probably within a year of its release that we started working on it. It was a long development process." Although both Nobody's are very Midwest American movies, they were filmed in Canada and have had international directors. Hardcore Henry's Ilya Naishuller helmed the original, with Indonesian director Timo Tjahjanto making his English-language feature debut for the second entry in what has become a franchise. "We have been dying to work with Timo, and he hadn't quite found his moment in the American English language market. He had done a bunch of stuff on Netflix, but it was local language," McCormick explains. "He is such an interesting and bold filmmaker. We developed Nobody 2 with a different director. When we got our greenlight, he received one for another movie at the same time, and he had to make a tough decision. I love the kid, but he put me in a bit of a spot. We were something like eight weeks out with a green light, and we had to find a director." Leith interjects, "We had been developing another project with Timo, but we said, 'Hey, you want to jump on Nobody?'" "I was like, 'Who would work for this for the studio, for Bob, and us? Who is that guy?' Timo is game, he's a shooter, he loves to get behind the camera, and he'll just run with something and make it better, but also be thoughtful about what we've already got going," McCormick continues. "There was really only one candidate, and thank God he said yes. Then we had to handle his international visa; we were rewriting so that it felt like his movie too, and then somehow we got into production without even stretching the schedule. I don't know how we did that. I think it has a lot to do with Timo as a collaborator, because he understands the team, and he jumped in and put his own special sauce on it. That's exactly what we needed." "It's something David has done because he jumped into Deadpool 2 and jumped into Hobbs and Shaw. Those feel like the franchises they originated, but they definitely have a patina of a Leitchian movie, and I think that Timo did that in spades on Nobody 2. He's a dream and we'd love to work with him again." Having already filmed multiple movies this year under the 87North banner and with more things to make before the end of 2025, Leith and McCormick are on a roll. However, the film industry is still in a weird place with unstable box office returns and theater attendance remaining below pre-pandemic levels. So what do they make of the state of the industry right now? Nobody seems to know. "Neither do we, but I don't know if you ever did. It has always been a wild, untangible data collection industry, and the moment they say, 'Oh, everything's a disaster in the theater,' is the moment when some surprise happens," McCormick concludes. "For us, the goal is to keep our heads down, experience and feel the gratefulness of getting to do stuff, push for the right movie at the right time, whether that be like IP-driven or original, and to try to make the best movie possible, and believe in that. That will either make it pop at the box office or sustain to the point that our partners will profit as well, and keep the mark of our 87North brand strong too."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store