The infamous Beautube feud that began at Coachella has finally ended— in the Notes app. 

Tati Westbrook and James Charles have been playing a high stakes game of back-and-forth for a couple of weeks now. What started with Charles taking on a forbidden sponsorship with Sugar Bear Hair vitamins escalated into a spat that, across all videos involved, has racked up over 164 million views. Westbrook’s scathing 43-minute video, “BYE SISTER…” is now unlisted, but has gathered over 50 million views. 

On Sunday Charles uploaded his own 40-minute video in which he defends himself against the myriad of accusations, which range from alleged sexual harassment to entitled behavior. 

“There’s nobody that wants this over with as much as I do,” Charles begins. “Unfortunately, there have been allegations made against me and I don’t really feel comfortable just ‘moving on’ from those. I would like to take this video today as an opportunity to kind of explain everything that has happened,” he continues.  

The video contains screenshots, timestamps, dates, and details that would make any uninformed person scratch their heads and wonder, “Why do I care about ‘the Seattle trip?’” To viewers that have been keeping up with the drama, though, Charles’ explanations offer a different perspective of what may have happened behind the closed doors of YouTube’s beauty elite leading up to the feud. 

At the height of the feud, fellow beauty YouTuber Jeffree Star, for unknown reasons, decided to implement himself by tweeting some since-deleted tweets aimed at Charles and his younger brother, Ian. In the tweets he called Charles a “danger to society” while backing Westbrook’s initial accusations. Star released his own video, titled “Never Doing This Again,” on Sunday night in an attempt to explain just why he felt the need to intervene. 

“Today I would like to shed some light on the entire experience. Because I think that things are getting, crazy, dangerous, and we need to have a conversation,” Star says gravely. He goes on to apologize for his participation in the dispute, and express how his temper got the best of him. Star never apologizes to Charles specifically.

Sunday night, the choppy waters of the beauty community finally came to a glassy still. Westbrook took to her Notes app to type out a statement, calling for an end to the drama. You know it’s serious when a celebrity busts out the Notes app. 

“I have been in communication with James Charles through an intermediary for the last week, and we believe it is in the best interest of our community, our viewers, and our own mental health to put this matter to a rest,” the so-called Mother of YouTube wrote, accompanied by a broken heart emoji. 

SEE ALSO: What are we willing to cancel people over, anyway?

“Even in this moment, I still have so many things I’d like to clear up, however the continued call for ‘receipts’ is nothing more than a call for never-ending bloodshed,” she continued. 

Amidst the drama, Charles and Westbrook both saw their subscriber counts fluctuate, though Charles took the biggest hit initially, loosing over 4 million. However, he’s gained at least 1.5 million back, according to Social Blade, and his numbers continue to rise. After gaining over 5 million subscribers on YouTube, Westbrook’s count is beginning to fall. Star’s is also beginning to dip. 

Alas, it’s time to put the popcorn down and dismiss any more rumblings of cancelations. All parties involved have expressed interest in taking some time off, so don’t be waiting with bated breath for the next installment— it’s done. For now.

Game of Thrones is over and so is the beauty community drama. I guess we’ll just have to twiddle our scrolling thumbs until something new happens. I just can’t wait until this feud is memorialized in a Lifetime movie. Maybe Lori Laughlin could make a return to play Westbrook. 

Until then, bye sisters.

Game of Thrones has ended and the reviews have been pouring in about how the biggest series on television wrapped things up.

While many agree that most of the final season was a rocky, unpleasant road to go down, reactions to the series finale have been mixed. Some critics walked away unsatisfied, others had a handful of emotions, and a few felt content with how things wrapped up given the lead up to the end.

With almost nine years of build-up and a tremendous amount of anticipation, it’s obviously hard not to have a strong reaction to something like this. And boy are some of these reactions…strong.

Here’s what critics thought of the Game of Thrones finale.

Disappointingly dry

Laura Prudom, IGN:

“For the most part, the finale felt oddly flat. For a show I’ve invested countless hours in, both professionally and as a fan of Martin’s books, I figured I’d at least tear up about the prospect of saying goodbye to these characters. But as I discussed in last week’s review, that’s the problem with expectation versus reality, and since Game of Thrones is potentially the last true ‘watercooler’ show that will succeed in gathering such a vocal weekly global audience all discussing and analyzing and obsessing about it in real-time, it was inevitable it could never completely satisfy those of us who have been madly theorizing about it for years.”

“The finale felt oddly flat”

“And while the episode was beautifully directed and shot by Benioff and Weiss (the visual of Daenerys with Drogon’s wings outstretched behind her may be the most indelible image in the show’s history, while the moment when Drogon melted the Iron Throne was the only scene in the episode to truly give me chills) it felt like too many other episodes have this season, like boxes were being checked off, rather than allowing moments and character choices to develop organically.”

Just plain bad

Spencer Kornhaber, The Atlantic:

“The penultimate episode of Game of Thrones gave us one of the most dramatic reversals in TV history, with the once-good queen going genocidal. The finale gave us yet another historic reversal, in that this drama turned into a sitcom. Not a slick HBO sitcom either, but a cheapo network affair, or maybe even a webisode of outtakes from one. Tonally odd, logically strained, and emotionally thin, “The Iron Throne” felt like the first draft of a finale. …”

“Thrones has been shaky quality-wise for some time now, but surely the show would be competent enough to hinge the finale around the mystery of Dany’s decision.”

“Nope.”

Lenika Cruz, The Atlantic:

“Before I get into this episode, I need to acknowledge how unfortunate it is that Tyrion decided to give the new ruler of the Six Kingdoms a name as horrifyingly ableist as Bran the Broken. You could, of course, argue that the moniker was intended as a reclamation of a slur or as a poignant callback to Season 1’s ‘Cripples, Bastards, and Broken Things,’ when Tyrion and Bran first bonded. But given the ‘parade of oofs’ this finale provided—including the troubling optics of Dany’s big speech—it’s hard to make excuses for the show. …”

“It’s hard to make excuses for the show”

“I can’t be the only one who was let down, and at a loss for a larger takeaway, after seeing a high-stakes contest between two ambitious female rulers devolve after both became unhinged and got themselves killed. After all the intense discussion about gender politics that Thrones has spurred and after seeing characters like Sansa, Brienne, Cersei, Daenerys, and Yara reshape the patriarchal structures of Westeros, we’ve ended up with a male ruler (who once said ‘I will never be lord of anything’) installed on the charismatic recommendation of another man and served by a small council composed almost entirely of … men.”

Iffy ending

Zoe Delahunty-Light, Gamesradar+:

The Game of Thrones ending did as much as it could to tie up one of the biggest pop culture phenomena of the 21st century, but with so little time to do so, it was always going to feel slightly… meh. Almost all the decisions make sense (Bran being king could have done with a bit more explaining, especially considering Sansa’s suitability to rule) and having some characters come full circle feels right, but it did come across as rushed. And a little too happy, to be perfectly honest. 

Brian Lowry, CNN:

“The selection of Bran (Isaac Hempstead Wright) to lead the kingdom seemed appropriate, with Tyrion citing his inability to father heirs as an advantage, noting — as the show has amply demonstrated — that ‘the sons of kings can be cruel and stupid.’ That’s as close to a meritocracy as Westeros will ever get.”

“Similarly, the producers offered hopeful endings for the other Starks, with Sansa (Sophie Turner) maintaining her region’s independence, and Arya (Maisie Williams) and Jon both riding into futures that at least carried possibilities.”

“Anything much more definitive than that probably would have felt forced, although this wasn’t the sort of closure that provided a genuine sense the story’s over. …”

“It’s too bad that the show couldn’t completely stick the landing. But when you fly that high, a few wobbles are perhaps inevitable.”

SEE ALSO: The ‘Game of Thrones’ prequel has begun filming

A satisfying conclusion

Lucy Mangan, The Guardian:

“There’s no doubt this season has been a rushed business. It has wasted opportunities, squandered goodwill and failed to do justice to its characters or its actors. But the finale just about delivered. It was true to the series’ overall subject – war, and the pity of war – and, after doing a lot of wrong to several protagonists last week, did right by those left standing. Whether the million signatories to the petition to remake the entire final season, or the majority of the estimated 45 million around the world due to watch the last episode, will agree – who knows. When you play the Game of Thrones, you win or you die. Overall, I think, it won.”

Sansa Stark broke her own wheel.

There’s more to be said on what that means, but she’s the only reasonable choice of MVP for the final new Game of Thrones episode we’ll ever see. To really appreciate Sansa’s importance to both the episode and the future of Westeros, however, we need to look at how she got there.

I guess the more obvious MVP pick would be Jon Snow. He’s the one who murdered Dany and ended a tyrant’s reign in its infancy. He was literally stabbed to death and then brought back to life for that purpose. And in the end, he did the thing. Huzzah, good for Jon.

But did he really change anything? We all watched that weird final half hour. Life in Westeros returned to normal after Dany died and Drogon left. The boring kind of normal where the people who lead sit around a table and reach society-shaping decisions over idle chatter and petty sniping.

Fine, there’s a fair argument that boring statecraft is far preferable to a power-mad despot with a fire-breathing dragon to back up her words. But what did Jon really do? It’s not like he derailed Dany’s fiery rampage across King’s Landing before it happened. 

True to form, Jon Snow knew nothing. His final heroic act was a begrudging, desperate play. It cost thousands and thousands of lives. And he was still broken up about it. Not exactly MVP material.

Sansa was the only one who had the foresight to put her foot down and say: “F*ck this noise.”

The same could be said for Tyrion. He saw firsthand how erratic and irrational Dany had become. He heard the pleading warning from his departed friend, Varys. The former Master of Whispers may have been the most loyal Westerosi citizen when all is said and done; he fought so hard and ultimately gave his life to protect a kingdom he was never in a position to save.

Tyrion’s no MVP. Just look at his ending: a life sentence to a job he absolutely didn’t want. He serves at the behest of a disinterested king who skips out on work to lucid dream while leaving Tyrion with the task of day-to-day kingdom management. 

Yeah, he’s still alive. But do you really think that’s the life this freewheeling, wine-loving Lannister wants? Especially when he clearly feels a sense of responsibility for the deaths of his sister and brother? Eff that. Just like Jon, Tyrion didn’t save sh*t. He rose to the occasion of encouraging Jon to assassinate Dany only after King’s Landing was burnt to a cinder.

In the end, Sansa was the only one who looked out across the political landscape and saw the old patterns reasserting themselves. She was the only one who had the foresight to put her foot down and say: “F*ck this noise.” 

SEE ALSO: Why Sansa and Tyrion are the only rightful rulers of Westeros on ‘Game of Thrones’

She peaced out. Went back to the north to preside over a kingdom of her own. Sansa may not bring about the golden age that idealistic-to-the-point-of-madness rulers like Dany. But she’ll be good to her people as a just and kind ruler.

Sansa survived so much over eight Game of Thrones seasons. When it comes to dangerously bad leaders, she studied at the feet of absolute legends. She’s seen the good too, but life has hardened Sansa. And not in the clunky, poorly written “I’m better for being abused and raped” sense that she articulated in Season 8’s second episode. Sansa has always been strong; even without Joffrey and Ramsay in her life, she was born to rule.

She got the perfect ending. We’ve heard it many times before: when you play the game of thrones, you win or you die. Sansa Stark is the series MVP because she found a third option: don’t play at all. Just do the best that you can for your people and hope you don’t f*ck up.