and where were we, before zac efron interrupted… oh yeah. mac.
if you’ve been around here with any regularity in the last year, you know i’m rather taken with the daily mail‘s accounts of macaulay culkin’s love life. rightfully so, because they are amaze. predictably, given mila kunis’s recent engagement to that man who dumped demi moore, the DM decided to check in and see how mac’s doing. he was not, as it turns out, drowning his sorrows in ‘sad’ ‘by himself’ ‘on his own’ ‘lunch for one’ burritos from taco bell. oh but no, no. now it’s a MAD DASH TO THE ALTAR!!!
you guys! this headline!!! i can’t even. srsly, you could write a thesis on all the work being done in this thing. there’s the direct quote of someone willing to stand by the declaration that this is, in fact, a ‘Race to the altar!’ then there’s the fact that he’s racing to that altar with someone who looks like mila kunis. plus there’s the cramming in of the fact that kunis is marrying kelso and her pregnancy is not yet officially confirmed. (or it wasn’t when this article went up.) that’s a lot, ya’ll. even for the daily mail.
so things are apparently pretty good with macaulay. right? or do we interpret the fact that he’s reportedly in a wedding race with an ex-girlfriend as an indicator that things are not? it’s unclear how to read this from the headline. clarity is gained in the article…
um… that’s not all that healthy, non? but then where is this report coming from? et voilà:
so this is authoritative. because it’s in the national enquirer and not just based on the observations of some rando at the charles de gualle airport.
so what’s mac doing these days? well, he’s in a velvet underground tribute band where all the lyrics have been changed to be about pizza. so basically he’s being as cool as ever.
the daily mail, however, seems to think he’s a joke.
as is pretty much standard, this story turns out to be basically a cobbling together of other publication’s reports. we’ve had the national enquirer. now enter the sun and with it the unfortunate photos of february 2012…
isn’t that ‘However’ beguiling? what does that even mean?!
that the timing of the kunis/kutcher wedding is dependent upon how well they’re able to stand their kid, BUT… macaulay is totes committed to jordan because their relationship is the first he’s had since he and kunis broke up?
or that macaulay’s free to marry whenever he wants because he and jordan aren’t burdened with a child they may or may not be able to cope with?
oh dear daily mail and your efforts to patch together unconnected ideas with a ‘however’.
speaking of patching things together, the chronology in these paragraphs is mystifying…
‘At the time’ being February 2012. but when was tuesday? this tuesday? so it’s in this current issue of the national enquirer that we’re reading excerpts of in the daily mail that the national enquirer ran this autopsy on mac’s situation circa february 2012?
it is never good when news reads as a game of telephone.
also, this is a made for tv movie waiting to happen, non? i mean, omg. imagine. ‘I’M INCREASINGLY DEPRESSED & MY LOVE LIFE IS IN RUINS’: The Macaulay Culkin Story, A Liftetime Television Event starring Charlie Hunnam. (srlsy, lifetime, week after week i give you PROGRAMMING GOLD and you give me nothing but li.lo in the liz taylor story. not cool.)
anyway, things were pretty grim.
because, heaven forbid we end on that uplifting note, let’s catalog some failed relationships before we go… man edition!