Friday, March 11, 2011

Blind Vice: Who's Paying Cruella to Keep Quiet?

New from Ted today -

Blind Vice: Who's Paying Cruella to Keep Quiet?


Rabbit HoleIn case you're all feeling sorry for poor Marky Sweet-Puss—the talented, put-upon husband to the notoriously demanding and overly controlling Cruella St. Shackles—well, don't stop. He needs all the help (and prayers) he can get.
But just wanted to let you all know that Marky's hardly the only man in Cruella's labyrinth-filled past of scheming personal vendettas and bossed-around men.
In fact, she's still getting paid off by...
Another magnificently rich (and just as ambitious) Blind Vice Superstar! Someone, say, somewhere between the ages of 33 and 49 and a half? Pretty good-looking dude, too. But, they had an awfully rough break-up.
So much so, Cruella, who's always looking to get a leg up—just as much as an extra buck or two—signed a deal with this handsome movie star for him to pay her for life. What for, you ask?
To not reveal any of this chiseled guy's deep secrets, which friends say, at this point, he's convinced even himself he doesn't have any more! The man is in such colossal denial, Toothy Tile would be impressed, we're certain!
And Cruella was counting on this stupid lack of introspection when she made her departure deal, once she and her ex broke up. She knew this would be a good little trust fund, if she just always kept her trap shut, which she always has. Consequently, Cruella, to this day, receives very nice checks with lotso zeroes. Every friggin' month.
Jeez. Must be nice. Get all the money you can from the last cuckolded dude while you're still taking it from the current one! Of course, Cruella knows it's a dirty two-way street, and that last lover of hers could also make life very uncomfortable for her. This is actually a stronger possibility than vice versa, but, don't think St. Shackles last man (who's actually damn lucky to be outta her life, and he knows it) has the gumption to pull it off right now, maybe later (let's hope).
Still, this woman Cruella should get an Oscar for the private performances she pulls.
Or, at least a mention in Forbes richest Hollywood heathens.
It Ain't: Angelina Jolie, Gwyneth Paltrow, Scarlett Johansson

Please see the labels below for our other posts on the previous Cruella and Marky BVs, including a full list of who has been eliminated.


Top suspects:  Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban


Superstar Ex: Tom Cruise

40 comments:

sistah2 said...

Wow could this be any more obvious? He really hates Kidman.

blurry vice said...

Yeah very obvious! She must have some good dirt on Tom Cruise.

sistah2 said...

And he on her! TEds saying that if TC spills on her it would be even better...however I dont see him (TC)doing that.

lelale said...

It's obviously Nicole but I have a hard time believing Ted when he is this blatant. Does he really have anything on her or is he just blowing smoke up peoples' bums making an inference any savvy gossip hound could?

Dr.DuckyDuck said...

Did anyone else think that more was going to be revealed publicly about Cruella St. Shackles after that last blind? I'm so disappointed that all we got was a crummy self-revealed story about her botox. Snooze.

I've been slightly bored with Ted's blinds lately.

Clancy said...

Yes, I was waiting for something juicy too. We always seem to be waiting - we're on the verge of a Toothy Tile outing; we're on the verge of a Butter Pussy outing; we're waiting for the Hollywood couple to divorce. Suddenly they all go back into their shells. Well, how about that!

Damn, Nicole's a bona fide bitch! I had no idea she could be this cunning. Did Ted insinuate that Keith's paying her too? Who ARE these people?

I saw Nicole on 60 Minutes recently (in Australia) and the interviewer asked what she'd tell her younger Days of Thunder self if she had her time again and one of the things she said was 'Choose love' which I thought was quite telling.

Jason said...

im not sure if the superstar is tom though. ted did not incude tom in his list of blind vice superstars.

Jacquelina said...

Oh Nicky..what a nasty thing you've been. Lovin' it

I said...

So which is it? FOT is rumored to have have some pretty heinous revelations on the horizon but.....not worse than what he could reveal on Nicole? Having a hard time buying this...Somethings not adding up. Nic doesn't strike me as someone to do really heinous things...just a very calculating and cold person.

sistah2 said...

Agree w/the posters who are a bit tired of Teds act...also, whatever happened to Fake Ala Ferocity? Ted was pushing that one around alot last year. Whatever happened with that? He claimed she was on heroin, and implied to the readers it was Angelina Jolie but that one just did not add up either.

J said...

It's Jennifer Aniston, Brad Pitt, and John Mayer!

Caz1310 said...

Nicole knew what she was getting into with Tom. She persued him in the Days of Thunder period...he was HOT back then and she really wanted Hwood Fame and A-list movies that he could provide access to. In the early days they really did seem in love. She did choose love. It just happened to come with an extraordinary lifestyle and career boost. Funny 'bout that.

Rita said...

Caz - completely agree that Nicole knew what she was getting into when marrying Tom. However, I doubt she was conscience of how deeply troubling Scientology was getting to be, and how it would take hold of her kids.

There were hush-hush stories about 5 years ago regarding Tom's kids. They were making friends outside the church and had to suddenly stop seing those friends, I believe one was of his eldest son, when he first had a drink with that a friend, or something of the sort.

As for Nicole, she learned to lie and manipulate from the best. And at the end, I believe she had bested them, for she had held-on to her faith, Catholicism (although nothing Catholic about her behavior, if all these blinds are to be believed), and never officially entered Scientology. There is something to be admired there, no matter what Ted is reporting.

And she was very much in love with Tom and her kids. But made an error, that Tom and Scientology in their extreme view would not forgive.

Am a bit wary of gossip columnists trashing a woman who had to react to extreme circumstances in order to survive getting away from all things Schientology. Don't know if she is mistreating her husband, but I say give her a break. All these men, Tom, Keith, and whoever else, are GROWN ASS MEN. Nobody forced them into anything, they make their own conscious decisions.

That being said, I believe Keith is now in the same position that Nicole was in about 10 years ago. He is an able adult, let him get out of a relationship by himself, if said relationship is making him miserable, or is not up to his expectations. Nicole did it. And it was against Scientology.

Long rant, but come on, a little bit of woman power, to impower all of those women swimming with male sharks.

I said...

@Rita: It's the old problem of "Do two wrongs make a right?"

Male sharks are horrible. Old boy's club is horrible. But I don't believe there is anything powerful or "woman power" about treating people like garbage and like accessories - regardless of their gender.

Especially since, IMO, Nicole is out for Nicole and no one else. She does not seem to be interested in forwarding and/or helping the cause of women in Hollywood.

However, that being said, just the FACT that there are very successful women like Nicole Kidman and Madonna and Halle Berry in the public eye helps the cause for women. And I say this even though I can't stand all three. Because they got where they are not through phenomenal talent but by selling sex and being vicious biotches to other men and women. There is nothing to respect about that...but at least, as mentioned above, there is some sort of a silver lining.

I said...

But even this silver lining is tainted. Because everyone can see that Nicole Kidman, Madonna, and Halle Berry sell sex - and they commodify themselves. Contrast that with Johnny Depp, Tom Hanks, Bruce Willis (back in his day), Robert de Niro...I could go on and on...who DON'T need to sell sex. The only female who comes close to these men is Meryl Streep. She's an example of "woman power".

You know the one industry that treats women better than men? The porn industry. And that's the sad truth...that many view womens' worth as being directly related to their sexual desirability and women like Nicole Kidman, Halle Berry and Madonna know this, buy into this, and use this to sell themselves. So they are not an example of "woman power" to me. And I do not root for them.

Caz1310 said...

Rita agree that Nic couldn't have known about the Scientology bit. Yep, power to her for avoiding getting in deep with it.

Kelly said...

@I... While I tend to agree with Rita re: each person being an adult capable of making their own choices, I think you also have an excellent point. However, Meryl Streep isn't even close to being the "the only female who comes close to these men."

Case(s) in point: Cate Blanchett, Hilary Swank, Helena Bonham Carter and Dame Judy Dench, just to mention a few.

-KADixonLaw

lisamedia said...

My personal knowledge (from high-up friends in the industry who have produced her films) about Kidman is that she is tweaked - and by that I mean she's half-crazy. What many people don't know about her is that the forehead? It's less botox and more surgery. She gets mini-facelifts every year. @I is totally right - the whole industry is so f'd up that this is what happens to completely sane women. It's not just Tom that has put her in this position.

Rita said...

Great answers to all. Love to take the debate into defending a bit more Nicole's actions.

No, 2 wrongs does not make a right. But let's get real, that woman has been through some shit, and HER reality is now tainted.

Althoug I disagree with @I regarding talent, for all 3 ladies you've mentioned ooze tons of talent. Nicole was an amazing actress up to 4 years ago. Crazy wonderful. Did mostly indie movies; now she is back on track with Robbit Hole. Halle has her ups and downs, but quite decent, especially in Monster's Ball. Unfortunately for Halle, she picks money over quality most of the time (007, Catwoman, etc.)

As for Madonna, PLLLEAASE do not touch the wholly Madge! Yeah she looks like a creep, but she had forged the way. Her way or the highway, whether you are a man or a woman, you bow to the talent that is Madonna. All the current pop stars immitate her. No one has brought anything new to the table that was not done by Madonna first.

The thing is, like Oprah, while on your way to the top, you ammass some dirt and skeletons in your closet. It marks your grey matter because it is a woman, but disappears from memory when it is a man: Jack Nicholson, Marlon Brando, Tom Hanks (oh yeah, he has some skeletons before getting serious with Rita Wilson), Daniel Day-Lewis, Sean Penn, Laurence Olivier, Tom Cruise (well not really, we all remember FOT)to only name a few. The only difference with the ladies, they are few and far in between, and Hollywood tends to velify their fight to stay at the top.

As someone has stated before (I think @I), the industry makes them go cou-cou at the end.

And Kelly, excellent choices of women in power... except for Hilary Swank, a bit debatable seing how her personal life is often a mess.

If Nicole had played hard ball with the men who were trying to bring her down, I say more power to her for playing the game better. Against what most male gossip columnists that wish for her to suffer public humiliation, I hope she finds her way to some peace and acceptance.

I said...

@Kelly: At the time of writing, I could only think of Meryl Streep but, of course, Cate Blanchett is phenom. I'm sorry I can't comment on the others you mentions as I (bowing head down in embarrassment) have not seen them in movies. I don't watch many movies. But my point is...there are many more quality roles for men than for women in Hollywood....so clearly something needs to be done.

As for Madge et al. LOL!! We differ as to Madge's "talent". I feel her talent is as a business woman. Kidman is better but Berry...not so much at least IMO...but again, haven't seen Monster's Ball. (I've seen Kidman in some things though.)

My main point is, though....have you EVER seen Tom Hanks, de Niro, Depp, etc pose in scantily clad boob revealing pics SELLING their sexuality in magazines right before their movies come out? I NEVER have.

Madonna, Berry, Kidman....they are pros at it. Which is what I mean when I say they do NOTHING to advance the cause of women...but EVERYTHING to advance their own cause.

Meryl Streep, Blanchett, Bonham Carter, etc...have never seen them flaunting skin to sell their movies. As for Dame Judy Dench....don't know about her...she may be a harlot that one! (j/k)

pikespeak said...

J, I doubt Aniston needs Mayer to pay her anything. Woman has more money than God.

lelale said...

@sistah2 Ted has all but outed Angelina as Fake ala Ferocity. It's obviously very possible it's all true but I doubt it. I hate to sound like a 'brangaloonie' but I realized he was really slanted towards Aniston when he claimed that her and Courtney Cox were two women who aren't using plastic surgery to age gracefully (and I don't think he was being sarcastic) . I think he just really needs to get attention with all the competition out there which is why he always does posts on the Twilight crap and is constantly hinting a Brad/Angie split is imminent (obviously whatever secrets they have they are sticking together for now no matter how miserable they are or aren't). Not saying some of his stuff isn't true but I think when it comes to some of his bigger targets he makes up stories, uses unreliable sources, or embelishes to get more attention.

I said...

@lisamedia: could the blind about a woman who has photos of herself posted in her room and keeps circling every little thing wrong with her be Nicole Kidman?

Caz1310 said...

I realise this is the wrong spot for this but don't forget Chelsea Handler is v.chummy with poor Jen... Ted would have been told by Ryan (oops, E Management) to be fawning over Jen. That's the way such companies work. Look at any blog on Jen on E - it's swamped by fans saying variations of the same positive thing, all placed by her agent. I'm not particular pro Brangelina, just tired of the Jen PR-fakery.

blurry vice said...

"Dear Ted:
You said, about Cruella St. Shackles and her ex: "Jeez. Must be nice. Get all the money you can from the last cuckolded dude while you're still taking it

from the current one!" Does that mean that both Cruella's ex and her current one are cuckolds, i.e. she cheated on both? I don't remember that bit. Also, I

thought alimony payments stopped when you got married to someone else?
—Agusta

Dear Overly Precise:
I never mentioned anything about the prior relationship being a marriage. There are also many ways to cheat. Maybe it wasn't always an affair—just a romp, or

six, that nobody necessarily ever knew about."

I said...

Superstar Ex: Lenny Kravitz?

Rita said...

Am thinking more someone sleazy, and has loads of money: Steve Bing

See link if you guys don't remember who he is:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-329814/Nicoles-fling-Mr-Bing.html

Also, he is Elizabeth Hurley's baby daddy, whom she took to court, proved that he is the father, and REFUSED any monetary support from, and never letting his son meeting his father, when said father was convinced of the paternity. Liz Hurley thought they were in an exclusive relationship at the time after her break-up from Hugh Grant... Turnes out they weren't per Bing.

ahh, lonng time ago.

blurry vice said...

"
Dear Ted:
Why do you feel the need to always bash Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban? Is it because they aren't press-hungry celebs and love each other, unlike most of Hollywood? And how did Keith copy Kellie Pickler when he filmed the video weeks ago, and Kellie's video just came out? I used to love E!; it was my favorite network. Now all you do is bash and start rumors about stars that actually have careers and are famous for something. Oh wait E! just likes stars that are famous for nothing: the Kardashians
—A

Dear Low Blow:
Hey, the Kardashians may have come from nowheresville, but they sure as hell have most expertly done a helluva lot with their fame (or infamy). That takes talent. As far as Nicole and Keith go, I actually like them both, don't get me wrong. Just don't trust what she feeds to the press, that's all. The woman has an agenda. Always."

Caz1310 said...

Kartrashians and the word talent don't go together. E pimped the show as a concept and have totally PR-d it to the max to make it successful. It's hypocritical for Ted to say he doesn't trust Nic n Keith when Kim & Co have been proved so many times as liars. Everyone in Hwood has an agenda, or their agent does.

Rita said...

Caz - absolutely agree. E! had lost a lot of credibility by supporting the Kardashians. They shove them down our throat at every turn.

If it weren't for Ryan Seacrest beign the producer to all their shows, we would NEVER see them invited to any red carpet. The world had forgotten about Paris H. hope we forget about the Ks soon enough.

That being said, I would like to get out of the box for the supestar ex paying monthlee fees for her silence, and go for Steve Bing. He has loads of money. And they had dated briefly after she had broken up with Lenny Kravitz.

I said...

I'm not going to start on those people all named K as that got me into trouble last time but let me just say that Caz you are SO RIGHT.

Unbelievably unfair and hypocritical to say that they have done a "helluva job" making something out of nothing when SO MUCH MONEY was put into their shows, music video, etc. when other....MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE TALENTED & DESERVING PEOPLE get nada money, nada promotion...and are just left to fend for themselves. And when their show doesn't make it...they must be failures right? Terrible.

It's like the whole Madonna thing. Does anyone really think that "Madge" would have been successful if she hadn't bartered her sexuality like she did? The woman has a range of...what....2 notes?

Throw enough sex and promotion at people and they will buy your product. Ugh. Okay..rant over!!

blurry vice said...

"Dear Ted:
Your daily Bitch-Backs are one of the best parts of my morning! I do have one question. I am completely confused about Cruella St. Shackles now. I thought I

knew who Cruella and Marky were until your last clue. Is Cruella Demi Moore? Or should I be thinking less brunette, more strawberry?
—Leslie

Dear Tied Down:
Demi is a Blind Vice, yes, but she's hardly Cruella. Hers is hardly as damaging."

Caz1310 said...

Rita I'm confused...who went out with Steve Bing & Lenny Kravitz..Nicole or Liz Hurley?

Rita said...

Nicole for both, Liz had Steven Bing's baby. It was so interesting and juicy! Imagine this: after breaking up with Hugh, Liz starts dating Bing. She thinks they're exclusive, and a year into their relationship, she gets pregnant. After waiting the customary 3 months, she announces it to the world (at the time she was hot in little rom-coms), AND HE DENIES IT! Says he never thought they were exclusive, and is quite sure he is NOT THE DADDY!

Hugh sticks by her as her best friend. Is there for the delivery (or staying in waiting room...), she delivers a healthy boy, takes Bing to court, proves by DNA he is the DADDY, then PUBLICLY REFUSES HIS FINANCIAL SUPPORT, and tells him off! Ballzzy! She took him to court to prove that she isn't a money-hungry sl*t, and tells him publicly that a- she doesn't his money, b-she is raising her son on her own thank-you-very-much.

Hught is the godfather.

Juicy! They don't make them that way anymore.

Anyway, Nicole dated Bing after that for a while. After she dumped Lenny Kravitz because he blabbed to the papps about their relationship and was too much up Tom Cruise's ass.
Bing has money. A lot of it. Was trying to get outside the box for the Superstar Ex. Bing is/was considered a superstar Producer and helps finance a lot of movies in Hollywood.

No wonder Nicole dated him.

blurry vice said...

"
Dear Ted:
With Catherine Zeta-Jones doing a big "reveal" (more than usual) this week, does that mean she's Cruella St. Shackles?
—alias912

Dear Snoopy:
Is this some kind of sick joke? Hell, no. Zeta's got way more class that Ms. Shackles—like a ton and a half more."

blurry vice said...

"Dear Ted:
Can you tell me how couples like Cruella and Marky Sweet-Puss get together? Is it a crafty plan put together by their respective PR agents? What happens from

there—before we hear the love-at-first sight stories in gushing interviews? I'm astonished at how people who appear to have been brought up in "good" homes

with strong values, like Cruella seems to have been, can just lie to people's faces like that. Surely Hollywood fame is not worth selling your soul for.
—Rachel

Dear Cruella Intentions:
Totally PR, in this case. Agents talk to managers who talk to publicists—that sort of thing. Then the two schedule meetings and get to know each other Vices

and otherwise so that the tabloids think it's really. Totally romantic, right?! As for Ms. C in specific, please, she's been lying since her first trip to

the plastic surgeon."

blurry vice said...

"Dear Ted:
What's up with Nicole Kidman and that hubby of hers? They looked out of synch at the CMA's yesterday. Or is it just me?
—Sugarsnap

Dear No, It's Not:
I've been wondering the same thing for a while now. But let's give them a break for a bit, ‘K? Clearly, they're out of the honeymoon faze and they've also got some new kids to raise. That cannot be easy, much less under a celebrity magnifying glass.

Dear Ted:
I'm not a Nicole Kidman fan but in all fairness, she and Keith Urban never had a "honeymoon phase" because he went into rehab right after they married. They do seem off, even for them.
—XXOO

Dear Perceptive Pal:
If Nic's recent fashion choices are any indication, something is definitely off in the Kidman/Urban household. A source in the Kidman camp even tells us, "She's losing it." Her mojo, that is. Well what do you think happens when you're married to Tom Cruise for 10 years and then trade him in for a short Australian cowboy? The ladylike actress is bound to have some sort of identity crisis at some point! But despite her sometimes expression-less face, Nic does seem happier than ever. Maybe she is too busy in mommy-mode raising her two young daughters to be as worried about her red carpet choices as she once was? And with a third baby possibly in the couple's future, looks like the Australian odd couple are here to stay. For now, at least."

blurry vice said...

Dear Ted:
I have a question I hope you will answer. Were Cookie Muncher and Marky Sweet-Puss ever an item?
—La Liz

Dear Munch on Mark:
Interesting guess, L2, but you're off the mark(y) on this one. This twosome, besides their taste for same-sex partners, don't actually have too much in common. They might actually make a decent PR couple tho, come to think of it.



Dear Ted:
Does Cruella St. Shackles have any romantic interest in boys or girls? She marries for publicity purposes and her partners have had "relationships" on the side. Does she? I don't know why I find this so fascinating...humor me, please!
—Arls

Dear Whips and Chains:
Cruella did the whole romance thing when she was young—before she ever even went under the knife, so like...forever ago—and it didn't exactly work out for her. Her relayshes now get her in the tabs and that is the most romantic thing anyone can do for Miss St. Shackles.

blurry vice said...

"Dear Ted:
With all the hookups and breaksups and makeups in Hollywood, do exes ever run into each other like in Oscar parties? Isn't it like super weird? Like, let's

say Gwyneth Paltrow and Brad Pitt or Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman?
—Mcsandovalu

Dear All The Time:
H'wood is a small town filled with pretty big names (and everyone's always dating—or at least bangin'—everyone else anyway), so of course these people run
into their exes. Most impromptu encounters are far less awkward than you'd expect though. For the two you named, Tom and Nic would be the worse run-in."

blurry vice said...

"Dear Ted:
Have to know what you think of or if you know any dirt behind the TomKat split?! I don't know why I'm surprised, but I kind of am. Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes' divorce

has to do with his B.V., right? I'm almost positive you said she doesn't have one.
—Katie2001

Dear Duh:
Where to begin, Katie?! Well I'll start by saying this: Yes, I was surprised…by the timing. There have been issues dividing the A-list power couple for a while, it's

true, but maybe Tommy was hoping all the good reviews for his part in Rock of Ages would overshadow this bombshell? Ha! Hardly. As for Vices, you're right on the

money. He has one, though it may have less to do with the divorce than you'd think."

ad