Oh Britney — Part Two
As you may remember from my column from last week I announced that Britney Spears and her beau Kevin Federline got hitched in a private ceremony. Well, it appears that there may be some dispute over the legality of this so-called ‘wedding.’ There is a report saying that it was only a ‘ceremonial’ ceremony and that, in fact, the lovely couple are not married. Whatever that is supposed to mean. The oh so trusted source US Weekly claims that they have documents — signed by Spears and Federline — in which the couple refers to the September 18 wedding as a ‘faux’ wedding and instead refer to the originally planned October 16 wedding as the real thing. “Our story is accurate, true, well-documented and air tight and verified by her own people,” said Ken Baker, West Coast executive editor of Us Weekly. There is no new word from Spears”s people as of yet, however Spears calls the magazine”s story ‘ludicrous,’ while Federline told people that he thinks it is ‘BS.’ (He is obviously a very articulate person.) Federline explains that they delayed filing the marriage license because there was a delay in the signing of the pre-nup. He tells People, “But it wasn’t any big deal. However, after finishing, we were advised to wait a certain grace period before filing the license.” Okay, is it that hard to get married? People get married in supermarkets and Walmart”s all the time. What”s the big deal? While there are no further details about this inconvenient mishap, there are too many details about the wedding night because this is Britney Spears, and of course we have to know her sex life, because we care so damn much! The couple dished on everything from what they did on their pre-wedding night to the intimate details of their wedding night, and you can read about that somewhere else because I don”t care and you shouldn”t either. Federline commented on his and Britney”s first evening as a wedded couple, “It was great — all night.” Ewwwww. Thank goodness for pre-nups.
Olsens — Part Deux
Why would we have a week without the Olsen sisters in the news? (Note: As a twin I am going to start referring to them as ‘sisters’ as opposed to ‘twins’ because it sucks being called the ‘twins’ all the time. Actually on a matter of principle I should refer to them as Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen because they are not one entity, they are two very different people. Okay that”s enough of that.) So, I guess there are these shirts that say ‘Save Mary Kate’ and Mary Kate and Ashley have some sort of issue with them. The designers of the shirts, Randy Bol and Melissa Moss, received a threatening e-mail from lawyer Gregory Redlitz, who represents the girls and Dualstar. Redlitz demanded that Bol and Moss stop making the shirts or else they would face a lawsuit for unauthorized use of the Mary Kate and Ashley brand. Apparently, the team questioned the authenticity of the letter and requested a hard copy, however they immediately removed the t-shirts from their website. What happened to ‘any press is good press?’
Paris New Face of Guess
Guess has hired Paris Hilton to be their new model. This is something that I find strange for two reasons: one, she”s unattractive. Two, she can”t pose for shit. So this is clearly a good idea, don”t you think? Basically the story here is that they asked her to do it, she wanted a gazillion dollars (because she needs it, obviously), they said no, and she still did it. Okay, okay, this news is really just space-filler. Damn, I give up.
Archived article by Amanda Hodes