relationship

Raise your hand if your group chat is still talking about “You Can See Everything.”

For anyone who has watched Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim’s documentary about former Theranos CEO (and convicted felon) Elizabeth Holmes and her partner Billy Evans in the past week, every new think piece, funny meme, discussion thread or video parody about the film has been something to revel in. I’ve personally spent several hours messaging or speaking to friends and colleagues over the phone about the documentary, and it seems like a lot of people similarly can’t stop obsessing about it.

The film has sparked renewed interest not only in Holmes, but also in works previously released about her, including “Bad Blood,” written by John Carreyrou, the journalist who exposed Holmes and Theranos’ fraudulent practices, and Alex Gibney’s 2019 documentary “The Inventor,” which senior writer Greg Braxton rewatched and analyzed in the context of the new documentary. Also notable has been the resurgence of Hulu’s “The Dropout,” the 2022 limited series created by Liz Meriwether (“Furious”) that stars Amanda Seyfried — Variety reported this week that the series has seen a jump in viewership over the past month. And of course, there’s been lots of interest in Fielder; we’ve put together a guide to his work if you’re looking to understand him and his style.

But with all the attention on Holmes, Times culture critic Mary McNamara raises an important question: Why are we still so fascinated by Holmes, despite her track record as a con artist and fraudster? There are many answers to the question, but there’s no denying the public’s renewed fascination with Holmes, and now Evans as well.

However, if you prefer to think about lighter relationships that are less perplexing, NBC’s latest sitcom will do the job and remind you of what it’s like to be immediately swept off your feet. “Newlyweds,” starring Téa Leoni, Tim Daly and Jamie Lee Curtis arrives on NBC today. Curtis, who co-created the series, stopped by Guest Spot to talk about what inspired it and the recent changes behind the scenes.

Also in this week’s Screen Gab, our writers recommend a documentary about a saga surrounding one of the greatest hip-hop groups of all time and a cult-classic horror film that’s perfect for spooky season. — Maira Garcia

Turn on

Recommendations from the film and TV experts at The Times

Tarik Azzougarh, left, and the RZA in Netflix’s “The Disciple.”

(Netflix)

“The Disciple: A Wu-Tang Fable” (Netflix)

In 2015, the only copy of the Wu-Tang Clan’s “Once Upon a Time in Shaolin” sold at auction for $2 million. The buyer was revealed to be hedge fund and pharma dirtbag Martin Shkreli, who infamously raised the price of an antiparasitic drug by 5,000% overnight and later went to prison for securities fraud. Joanna Natasegara‘s enchanting documentary “The Disciple” explores the long run-up to this Guinness Book of World Records event, and its aftermath, through the surprising, touching, funny and sometimes sad story of the album’s co-producer, Tarik Azzougarh, a.k.a. Cilvaringz. A Dutch Moroccan superfan whose freestyling and persistence earned him a place in the group’s auxiliary, it was Cilvaringz who first proposed the idea and brought it to fruition with Wu-Tang main man RZA — both a culmination and the beginning of an end. The film raises questions of art and ownership, friendship and business, creativity and capitalism, asking the questions who is music for, and what is it for. — Robert Lloyd

‘Highway to Hell’ (Tubi, Prime Video)

This is the perfect spooky-season flick to pop on when you don’t mind interruptions from trick-or-treaters or your buddy who treats movie night like an audition for “Mystery Science Theater 3000.” Directed by Ate de Jong (“Drop Dead Fred”), this 1992 comedy-horror cult classic stars Chad Lowe and Kristy Swanson as an eloping couple who take the wrong shortcut and wind up in Hades — basically, an even worse version of the drive to Vegas — where a young Ben Stiller works the roadside diner and Gilbert Gottfried plays Hitler. Every shot has a snort-worthy gag: a stop-motion Cerberus, a casino-bar called Hoffa’s, a cop whose handcuffs are literally a pair of severed hands. A flop at the time, “Highway to Hell’s” breakneck mix of smart and stupid was applauded by former L.A. Times film critic Kevin Thomas as “the Greek legend of Orpheus, revved up ‘Mad Max’-style.” Screenwriter Brian Helgeland would eventually win an Oscar for “L.A. Confidential.” Somehow, I never hear him brag about this goofy delight. He should. — Amy Nicholson

Guest spot

A weekly chat with actors, writers, directors and more about what they’re working on — and what they’re watching

Jamie Lee Curtis as Claudia in “Newlyweds,” a sitcom she co-created and executive produces.

(Nicole Weingart / NBC)

Jaime Lee Curtis has been in showbiz for a very long time. And when she sets her mind to something, like returning to a sitcom, she’s going to make it happen.

“It’ll be 50 years next January that I have been a professional actress,” she says over a video call earlier this week. “It’ll be 50 years that I’ve been driving on the lot at Universal.”

Over the course of her long career, Curtis, 67, has developed a lengthy résumé in film and television, winning numerous accolades along the way, including an Oscar and an Emmy (she’s been nominated for a Grammy too — there’s still time for an EGOT). But she longed to return to a sitcom ever since wrapping her lead role on ABC’s “Anything but Love,” a series that premiered in 1989 and ran for four seasons.

While she’s had guest appearances and some recurring roles on sitcoms over the years, including on shows like “New Girl” and “The Drew Carey Show,” NBC’s “Newlyweds” was an idea she had gestated for years, and now it’s set to arrive as part of the network’s Friday prime-time lineup. The actor, who executive produces “Newlyweds” and has a recurring role, took some time to discuss how she came up with the idea for the show, her co-creator’s firing and the political thriller series she’s watching with her spouse, filmmaker Christopher Guest. — M.G.

Jamie, you co-created this series and it’s loosely based on your relationship with your husband, Christoper Guest. Tell me how it came about and how you wanted to tell that story in this show.

It was April 25, 2019. I was in New York City … I was in a car being driven by a man in his 60s in a suit with gray hair on his temples. We were chatting, as one does in the back of a car, and I asked him if he was married, and he said he was divorced. I said, “Do you have kids?” And he said, “No.” And I said, “Well, that’s the blessing that you know you’re not dealing with divorce and children, which I’ve dealt with a lot.” And he then said, “But my new wife.” In that second, I went, “Oh, my new wife.” That’s a sitcom about people in their 60s hooking up, similar to the way my husband and I met, which was we met and married very quickly. And in fact, we would have gotten married had we gone out on our first date. We have said we would have gone and gotten married that night. So the idea popped in my head: What happens if two people in their 60s get married on a whim, and decide to just throw caution to the wind and go for it? What happens to the families and the friends and their own lives and the very routinized lives that they had led leading up to that moment? I knew it was a sitcom.

It wasn’t until years later I was put together with Gail Lerner, and we — during COVID actually — started working on the idea. But much of what’s in that script was kind of what happened to me and my husband … it’s something that’s been around for a while, and I’m just really excited finally that it has turned into this version, “Newlyweds” starring Tim and Téa.

Let’s talk about Tim and Téa. They’re the newlyweds, but they’re also married in real life. What was it like playing off their dynamic and vice versa?

When the pilot got picked up, … it was what they call “cast-contingent,” which means they like the idea, but they want to make sure that the right person gets in … so they wanted us to find Jeanie first, and it was a very short list of actresses they would bank a show on. Téa, luckily, was one of those actresses and had been looking for something on the lighter side. … and it so happens she’s married to a guy IRL who happens to have a lot of experience in the comedy space on TV shows, and all of a sudden we were like, oh, wouldn’t that make a kind of fantastic bit of pairing.

What do you think we’re going to learn about Claudia? She seems so liberated, but we’ve only seen the surface. She’s got a soft spot for Jeanie and even James.

I think you’re gonna see, in fact, that she becomes not just a foil but a friend. I feel like her acceptance of Jeanie … we’re going to mine it for its comedy. I mean, I think at the end of the day, she will always shake things up because that’s just her nature. We get to meet Claudia’s mother. I can’t tell you because we haven’t announced it yet, who plays my mother. I can tell you that she’s over 90.

You’re going to have me Googling.

We get to see a little bit of the oak tree and the acorn. We definitely get the snarky oak tree and the snarky acorn.

I want to come back to your co-creator Gail Lerner, who was recently dismissed from her role as showrunner, and has been replaced with Bruce Helford. Regardless of the news, she has called it “the most joyous TV experience of her life.” How are you and the cast moving forward after these changes?

Well, you can imagine it was a bummer. You know, network television has a whole series of requirements, way beyond … my little creative ideas. It has to do with management of scripts and the amount of early drafts of things, and it’s required within a network structure. And to run a show on television, and to consistently run a show, is a different animal than just the creativity that it takes to think of a show or to develop a show. That’s why Bruce has stepped in very quickly because Bruce has proven over and over again that he’s a guy who can make 100 episodes of a show with a much bigger worldview.

It was beautiful that Gail said the very things she said because we all felt that way too. It was joyous, fun, but there were a lot of things that were way beyond my understanding. What I’ve come to learn, I’m 67, is that creativity is a continuum. That it is not rigid and binary. That I had an idea that then Gail took and built on that idea, and now Bruce has come in and taken Gail’s idea … and is building out another version of the show.

Bruce Helford was the second in charge at the TV show “Anything but Love” when I did it back in the day, so I’ve known him.

So y’all are back together.

The only other time I was ever on a sitcom was “The Drew Carey Show” when Bruce Helford wrote me a part of this crazy hairdresser who … goes on a date with Drew Carey and ends up doing bungee jumping with him on the date. It’s a funny continuum for me to be back with Bruce, who weirdly enough was the actual first person I called when I had the idea [for “Newlyweds”]. I called Bruce because I knew him as a showrunner for sitcoms. We talked about it very briefly, and then he went off to something else. I went off to something else, and it kind of fell apart. So it’s slightly weird to me, and beautiful in that way that the person I actually called when I had the idea is now the one running the show.

It’s a full–circle moment.

Completely full-circle moment.

Has Christopher seen the show? What does he think?

I will say this: Christopher Guest is not a sitcom fan. You know, my husband is a very specific person and makes very specific, very funny movies and television shows. [Sitcoms are] not the thing that he is drawn to. But he genuinely understands that I’ve wanted to do a sitcom for a long time.

Because it’s spooky season right now, and you’re one of the OG scream queens, I have to ask you: Do you watch anything in that vein?

So I’m boring because the truth is, I don’t like scary things. I don’t like scary movies. I have zero interest in scary movies, and I think if someone ended up doing some analysis of me as a human once I’m dead, they would understand that actually my natural fear of scary things is what, in fact, made me such a good actress in them, and I don’t pretend to like them. I like the fans of [scary movies] because there’s a passionate group of people that love them. But I don’t have to love the movies, I just have to love what I do.

Is there anything else you’re watching right now?

My husband and I just started watching the [fourth] season of “The Diplomat” [Netflix], which the writing is so great. Last night we watched an episode written … by Peter Noah, who was the guy who took over “Anything but Love” … and was the showrunner. This episode last night [Episode 4, “Pagliacci”] was what Chris and I watched, and I wrote to Peter last night to say, “Bravo, bravo! Oh, the writing is so gripping.” Of course the writing leads the performances, which lead the filmmaker. It’s always the writing.

ICYMI

Must-read stories you might have missed

If you’d like to live near the water along the spectacular California coast at some point in your life, you have a number of options.

You can settle in, say, Culver City, which is several miles inland, and wait for rising tides to arrive.

Or, if you just can’t wait that long, I saw a listing you might be interested in. It’s in Capitola, near Santa Cruz, right next to the wharf. The three bedroom, two bath, 1,850-square-foot condo, one of a string of Venetian, pastel beachfront homes, is listed for $3,995,000.

“The beach is your backyard, the cool ocean is your pool,” says the promo.

Given what’s happening right now along the California coast, you might not have to leave that condo to go for a swim. But UC Santa Cruz oceanographer and geologist Gary Griggs, who has seen the thrashing of that row of homes in previous years, is not going to make an offer.

“I’ve got a number of photos,” he said, “that show waves breaking over the top.”

Someone will buy the place, eventually, despite the chance of it becoming a fish tank. California is flush with dumb money and bad judgment, and an insatiable romance with an epic 1,200-mile shoreline.

But it’s time to rethink the relationship.

Last weekend in Long Beach I said a few words at the 50th anniversary of the California Coastal Act, which has kept our shoreline from looking like Atlantic City or Miami Beach by balancing sensible development with conservation and public access.

“The coast is never saved, it’s always being saved,” I said at the 50th, borrowing as I often do from the late Peter Douglas, hammering home the need for constant stewardship, from one generation to the next.

But in an ironic twist, part of the parking lot was underwater, a tractor had raised a berm to hold back the ocean, and just to the south, homes were being thrashed by waves. The coast wasn’t being saved, it was being reclaimed by the sea.

From there I headed south for a friend’s planned birthday party on the sand in Newport Beach, but city streets had been flooded and beaches were closed. The party was moved indoors.

We have not seen the worst of it, with a fall forecast that includes the possibility of an epic Super El Niño that could coincide with king tides, Kelvin waves and a peak lunar nodal cycle, all of which my colleague Rosanna Xia laid out a couple of days ago.

It’s not going to rain hammerheads and sea horses, I don’t think, but coastal destruction could be dramatic.

“We’re likely going to break a number of water level records,” said Timu Gallien of the UCLA Coastal Flood Lab. “It’s not implausible to see some of the piers wiped out, or breakwaters or jetties.”

“This is a glimpse of our future,” said former California Coastal Commission Director Jack Ainsworth. “This is it. It’s here.”

Some low-lying communities have been warned for years to prepare for rising sea levels, Ainsworth said, but have put off the inevitable.

In some areas, the only sane maneuver is what’s called “managed retreat,” meaning relocation of structures farther inland. But that is fraught with legal and political challenges and resistance.

Look, if you want to live on the sand and can afford to do so, good for you. But the general public should not be on the hook for your losses. Along the entire coast, public infrastructure that we all benefit from is under threat, including roadways, parks and railroad tracks, and that’s where any public investment ought to go.

Among the tools available are sand berms, cobble berms (sand on top of small stones), jetties, dredging and relocating sand, and below-surface breakwaters. Living shorelines, such as those along the Orange and San Diego county coasts, involve piling sand atop boulders or smaller stones and covering the berms with vegetation.

But these projects don’t happen overnight, Gallien said. “Right now we’re seeing reactive responses. OK, let’s throw up some sandbags and plywood.”

Kelsey Ducklow, coastal resilience director for the Coastal Commission, said the agency has awarded millions in grants for local planners to study the threat to their communities and come up with plans. Some locales are further along than others, Ducklow said, but there’s no single strategy that will work everywhere, and one typical response is, “Yeah, we know we need to do something. But where’s the money to do it?”

The three choices we have are mitigation, adaptation and suffering, Griggs said. We’re likely to do some of each, but on the mitigation end of things, sea walls, rock revetments and armored cliffs are temporary fixes.

“In the long run, there’s nothing we can do to hold back the Pacific Ocean,” said Griggs, 83, who has been teaching for 59 years. “Everything we do is a Band-Aid, and comes with different price tags and lifespans.”

Griggs was featured in Xia’s award-winning book “California Against the Sea: Visions for Our Vanishing Coastline,” which explores the impact of sea level rise and community responses that range from denial to respectful intervention.

Precious ecosystems are under threat, Xia wrote, “trapped between rising water on one side, pavement on the other.” And multiple Southern California beaches that are “so deeply tied to the state’s heart and soul” could be lost.

I asked Xia what she thought about the rising threat this year.

“So many people think about the coast as a place — a place that doesn’t move,” she said. “But the coast in reality is a living dynamic process that changes every time a wave crashes ashore. That’s the heart of the issue — we’re fundamentally trying to impose permanence onto a space that is meant to be constantly changing.”

We haven’t been the best stewards of the planet, and maybe what’s happening now is a bit of a reckoning. From the first time I saw the California coast as a young lad on vacation from the hot interior, I think I understood that the truest way to love the sea was to fear and respect it.

I now have more fear and more respect.

And maybe, too, a deeper love.

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Twenty-one years into its run, “Dancing With the Stars” is one of the hottest and buzziest shows on TV right now.

ABC’s competition series kicked off its 35th season in September, scoring its biggest premiere ratings since 2020. Fueling a lot of that viewership power are Gen Z and millennial viewers, attracted by a cast loaded with social media influencers, reality TV stars and nostalgic favorites. And a certain 55-year-old late-night sidekick has emerged as a social media hit with his lovable underdog journey: Guillermo Rodriguez.

Best known as the former parking lot security guard-turned-sidekick on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!,” who was discovered after he was caught sleeping in the car of the show’s announcer, Rodriguez regularly steals the spotlight on the late-night talk show with his humorous, humble interactions in comedy bits and as a red-carpet correspondent. Now, he’s expanding his profile as a celebrity contestant on “Dancing With the Stars,” paired with dance pro Witney Carson.

Rodriguez says he’s been asked to join the show before, but he passed because of a busy schedule and his insecurity as a dancer — “I’m not a dancer,” he tells me. “I dance when we have Thanksgiving, Christmas, but it’s for two seconds, four seconds. Not a minute and a half!”

He praises Carson, who is competing while pregnant, for her patience and encouragement in his journey.

“Oh, my God, Witney is a great partner,” he says. “She’s telling me, ‘Listen, just follow me. Follow the steps. Remember, do not look at the floor; look up. And just be yourself. If I want to ask you to be a diva, you be a diva. I don’t want you to laugh.’ She’s been fantastic. She’s helping me a lot. She tells me, ‘The audience know that you’re not a professional dancer, and that you’re trying hard and everything. Just enjoy because this only happens once in a lifetime.’” Read more from my conversation with Rodriguez in Guest Spot.

Also in this week’s Screen Gab, our writers recommend a miniseries about a mysterious sea creature terrorizing a small coastal town and a pair of psychological horror dramas exploring female rage. And just a quick PSA — not funded by taxpayers, I promise — before I wrap up: “Felicity” is now streaming on Netflix. If you want to get (re)acquainted with collegiate angst, the art of making “hey” pack the same power as a Keats poem or experience Keri Russell’s controversial haircut moment, give it a whirl. As a superfan who returned to it often when it was on Hulu, it’s my duty to warn you to proceed with caution when it comes to Season 4. — Yvonne Villarreal.

Turn on

Recommendations from the film and TV experts at The Times

Josh Hartnett as Calvin and Mackenzie Davis as Fonda in Netflix’s “Below.”

(Netflix)

“Below” (Netflix)

A first-rate sea monster miniseries, set in a small fishing village in Newfoundland, where the natives add an “s” to some verbs (“anyway you slices it,” “I gets it”), making them sound a little like Popeye. Creator Jesse McKeown drops enough “Jaws” references to let you know he’s aware of the similarities, but “Below,” which goes some crazy places in its latter half, is very much its own aquatic whirligig. Josh Hartnett plays fisherman Calvin Penney, attempting to harvest blue ice for vodka in the face of declining stocks, but finding his haul smelling strangely of ammonia. Mackenzie Davis is marine researcher Fonda Howander (year’s best name), who has an idea about that. (Global warming, your real-world villain.) The series, in which I detect a quality of Canadian naturalism, uses its special effects budget sparingly, and I would say, wisely; when something extraordinary happens, it doubly registers. But the series’ strength is in its evocative background and nicely drawn characters, going about their messy human business, as the town debates whether to let the government transplant them to somewhere less remote while Calvin tries to get his adult kids on his page. — Robert Lloyd

Summer H. Howell as the titular teenager in Prime Video’s “Carrie.”

(Robert Falconer / Prime Video)

“Carrie” (Prime Video) and “Monster: The Lizzie Borden Story” (Netflix)

Killer women usher in the Halloween season with these two new horror series. The TV adaptation of Stephen King’s novel loosely follows the 1976 big-screen classic starring Sissy Spacek, but reimagines the bloody prom queen Carrie (Summer H. Howell) in today’s world, replete with cyberbullies and smartphones. The limited series from horror master Mike Flanagan (“The House on Haunted Hill,” “Midnight Mass”) pits the terror of the modern world — school shootings, conspiracy-theory fanaticism — against a naive girl’s deadly telekinetic powers for a smart and powerful reimagining of the chilling classic. “The Lizzie Borden Story” is the fourth season of the “Monster” anthology series from Ryan Murphy and Ian Brennan, and it stars Ella Beatty as the titular character. With the help of an enviable cast (Sarah Paulson, Vicky Krieps), it dramatizes the events before, during and after the 1892 ax murders of Borden’s father and stepmother, and jumps timelines to connect Borden’s story with that of another violent female killer who shocked the country a century later. Does it take historical liberties? Absolutely, and it makes for a thrilling new take on a notorious chapter in American crime. — Lorraine Ali

Guest spot

A weekly chat with actors, writers, directors and more about what they’re working on — and what they’re watching

Witney Carson and Guillermo Rodriguez perform during Mariah Carey night on “Dancing With the Stars.”

(Eric McCandless / Disney)

When Guillermo Rodriguez signed up to compete on “Dancing With the Stars,” he came in with no dance background and the least nimble body, but he had experience in how to win over fans as the scene-stealing sidekick on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Now, Rodriguez has danced the cha-cha, paso doble, foxtrot and samba before millions of people — captivating audiences with assisted knee walks, floor drops and a bare-chested message for the world. He may be the lowest-scoring star on the leaderboard each week, but the 55-year-old knows how to hold an audience and, with professional partner Witney Carson, has managed to stay alive in the competition. After channeling his inner diva for Mariah Carey night on the show (cheekily performing to “Obsessed”) and making it past this week’s elimination round, Rodriguez spoke to us about how he’s feeling at this stage in the competition. — Y.V.

How is the diva life treating you?

Oh, my God, Yvonne, it’s hard work. Being a diva is not easy.

What body part is hurting you today?

You know what — my legs. My legs and my back hurt bad. If you’re in the 20s and 30s, it’s OK, but when you’re like in the 50s, it’s hard. In the 20s and 30s, you have all the energy and also your body is young.

When you get home from rehearsals or after performance night, what’s your routine? Are you doing a bath soak? Are you elevating your feet?

I actually I get in the pool, I get in the hot tub. But someone was telling me I gotta get a massage and I gotta get a cold plunge because that’s gonna help the body. Also, you know what is helping me. I haven’t [had a] drink in two months, and I feel good. I have a shot, I have a drink, so it can relax me and everything. But with “Dancing,” I cannot have a drink because I don’t wanna forget the steps.

You’ve said that you’re doing the show because you want to dance with your wife. How’s that going? Have you been showing her any moves at home?

I have a little bit. And she said, “Well, wait, this is it?” I go, “No, this is only the beginning [steps]. I still got to show [you] more. She goes, “Oh, now I understand why you’re so tired.” And I go, “Yeah, we have to rehearse and everything, and you gotta smile at the camera, you gotta watch your steps, you gotta move your hips and everything.” And I tell her, “When I move to the left, I hear a noise like [mimics creaking noises], ‘Oh, oh, my body is clicking!’ I move left to the left — my knee is making noise!’” But I’m having a lot of fun. It’s great.

How has this experienced changed you so far? How do you feel when you’re out there performing?

It changed me in that I get nervous and it’s hard, but when I go over there [onstage], I like it. I enjoy. You get like a minute and 12 or 40 [seconds], depending on the music. But I’m happy. I get to push myself.

I get out there and [I think], I gotta give my best. And I feel so good because a lot of the audience, they like it a lot. They go crazy and everything, and that makes me feel so good. You know what — I might not be the best dancer, but I’m trying my best, and the people see it. But who knows what’s gonna happen. I might go home next week.

Witney Carson and Guillermo Rodriguez perform the paso doble on “Dancing With the Stars.”

(Christopher Willard / Disney)

We’ve seen you in the bottom a few times. This week, you were there again. What was going through your head this week as you waited for the names to be called?

I feel very nervous. I said, “Oh, my God, this is it. We going home.” I told Witney [before the show], “Witney, I think this is it. I think we’re going home.” She said, “Well, listen, if we’re going home, we did a good job. You told me that you wanna pass the first week, and you already passed the first week, so you don’t have nothing else to lose.” But I feel very nervous. And then when they say, “The couple going home is Ciara [Miller] and Brandon [Armstrong],” I was like, “Oh, my God.” It was hard. And the dance was hard too. Samba is a fast dance. We didn’t have too much time to rehearse because we were going to New York back and forth.

The fandom for “Dancing With the Stars” goes hard. What has surprised you about the fan response?

A lot of the fans are voting for us. I want to say thank you to all the fans. They‘re keeping us alive. They’re voting a lot. They’re making it happen and everything. I was so surprised. [This week,] Carrie Ann [Inaba] give us bad comments, and the audience started booing. I was like, “Wow, this is so amazing! The audience is on our side.” They want us to keep going. And I told Witney, “Witney, we gotta keep going.” We dance for the people. If we make it past next week, it will be great. If we go home, we did it and that’s it.

On the other side of that, there can be some negative talk too, some frustrated fans who think other contestants should still be there. How do you deal with that? Or when the beefs get stirred up on social media? Are you paying attention to that?

I don’t know. The first week I was listening to the comments and everything, but now I don’t listen. I just go have fun. Everybody has different opinions. You cannot please everybody. So I just go have fun, enjoy, and that’s it. If they like it, [or] they don’t like it. Some people say, “Oh, he’s too old. He’s out of shape.” I say, “You know what? Come and dance yourself. It’s not easy.” Every week I try to do better and better.

How do you think Jimmy Kimmel would do in the competition?

Oh — you want me to be honest? He doesn’t dance. And he told me that. He told me, “You know me, that I’m not good.” And I go, “Yeah, I know you’re not good. You’re like a rock.” I told him, “Jimmy. I think when it’s time and they say, ‘Dancing the cha-cha-cha, here’s Jimmy Kimmel,’” I said, “I’m gonna come right away before you start and I’m gonna spray WD-40 so you can move good.”

Is there a song you really want to dance to if you had the opportunity to pick it?

Oh, I would like to dance to one that goes [begins singing “You’re the Best” by Joe “Bean” Esposito, which is featured in the “Karate Kid” soundtrack]: “You’re the best. You’re the best around. No one’s ever gonna keep you down. You’re the best.” I’m like, oh, my God, I would love to dance that one.

I know you’re super busy with all the rehearsals, but is there a show that you are enjoying right now, one that helps you unwind?

Oh yeah, there’s a show that I’m watching right now. It’s called “The Studio” with Seth Rogen. I cannot wait for the new season. I love the show. Seth Rogen is doing a great job. Bryan Cranston too, and Ike Barinholtz. Oh, my God, everyone in the cast is so funny.

We have to get you on that show, Guillermo. You can play yourself.

Yeah, I want to. I want to be in that show. Hopefully, it happens soon.

ICYMI

Must-read stories you might have missed

WASHINGTON — A pro-Israel Democratic advocacy group on Thursday released a framework intended to help the party better articulate its vision for the U.S. relationship with Israel, an issue that has deeply fractured Democrats this year and could lead to further divisions heading into the next presidential campaign.

Democratic Majority for Israel is calling on the party to continue providing security and military assistance to the country while supporting a negotiated path to statehood for both Israelis and Palestinians and a future for Gaza that doesn’t include Hamas.

It notably does not insist on unyielding support for Israel, acknowledging that “Israel’s security does not require support for every decision made by an Israeli government.” The document also calls on Israel to “act decisively against settler threats, intimidation, and violence.”

The framework is being released at a sensitive moment for Democrats following a primary season in which voters from New York to Michigan embraced candidates who backed positions including ending military aid to Israel. If Democrats retake control of the U.S. House or Senate in next month’s elections, these candidates could play a significant role in shaping the debate over America’s posture toward Israel.

The issue could also play prominently in the early stages of the next presidential campaign, which could begin shortly after the midterms.

Democratic Majority for Israel’s chief executive, Brian Romick, said his goal is to provide a “helpful guide for our mainstream Democratic candidates on how to engage with a complicated issue.”

“It’s important to remind Democrats and Americans that there’s value in the U.S.-Israel relationship,” he said. “We thought it was important to kind of lay out a forward-looking vision.”

The question is whether such a framework will go very far in shaping the views of Democrats, who are increasingly skeptical of Israel.

About 58% of Democrats said the U.S. is “too supportive” of the Israelis, according to a June survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, up from 45% in January 2024. Roughly half of Democrats believe that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians during the war with Hamas, an accusation Israel rejects.

Former Obama administration chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, who has argued Democrats need to return to the political center ahead of launching a potential presidential bid, went to Israel in July and delivered a blistering speech warning the country was at risk of becoming a “territorial pariah.” He specifically called out Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has closely aligned himself with President Trump, a Republican.

Emanuel, who’s also a former congressman, Chicago mayor and U.S. ambassador, blamed Netanyahu for driving Israel to a “dead end,” emboldened by poor decisions from American leaders.

The framework from Democratic Majority for Israel takes a less strident view on Netanyahu, who faces another election this month. “Support for Israel,” the group argued, “transcends any one Israeli government.”

The group took a similarly long view on military and security assistance for Israel, arguing it shouldn’t be stopped now even as it acknowledged the possibility of change in the future.

“Over time, and by mutual agreement, today’s partnership should be capable of evolving beyond the traditional assistance framework toward an increasingly reciprocal relationship centered on joint investment, innovation, and technological advantage,” the framework reads. “The objective should be to build the partnership both countries will need to confront the threats and seize the opportunities of the coming decades.”

Daniel Shapiro, the former U.S. ambassador to Israel under President Barack Obama, acknowledged “strong, passionate views” on the issue.

“Clearly, not everyone will agree with every aspect” of the framework, he said. “But I think there’s a lot there that many Democrats would find speaks to them.”

Sloan writes for the Associated Press.