Ah, yes, a normal morning, a day, Hump Day, ha ha, what’s on tap? I see. Beef, seared hard, still bloody, not fully-formed, irrelevant.... thank you, Susan Sarandon, for stirring the little pot! Everyone’s got an October surprise hanging around somewhere in their coat closet, I guess.
Here’s the tepid tea: Long ago in 1987, Susan Sarandon, Cher, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Jack Nicholson starred in The Witches of Eastwick, a sexy (LOL) adaptation of John Updike’s novel of the same name. In the movie, Cher plays Alex, a seductive sculptress; Sarandon is Jane, a cellist who is not seductive. Michelle Pfeiffer plays a woman named Sukie and Jack Nicholson literally plays the Devil. Anyway, the issue here is that apparently ol’ Suze was supposed to play the role of Alex, the aforementioned sexy sculptress, but Cher got the part because she did... something with the producer, Jon Peters.
This information was revealed during a chat with screenwriter Michael Cristofer, as part of some sort of Halloween fundraiser screening that is, improbably, hosted by Sandra Lee. This is some Nancy-Meyers-movie-ass drama, but let’s lean in, yeah? Here’s Suze:
“I initially was cast in Cher’s part, and didn’t find out till I got to LA — because I was living in Rome — that I was actually moved to a different part,” she recalled. “I had to learn suddenly to play the cello, and I had never played an instrument in my life. They said they would sue me if I left, so I didn’t have much choice!”
“Cher sort of muscled her way into that part,” Cristofer said. Sarandon replied, “That’s Jon … [He] and Cher had a past liaison or something, so that was another element.”
Hm, okay, yas, and sure? I haven’t seen the movie in a long time, or possibly ever, as the likelihood that I’m conflating it with She-Devil or Death Becomes Her is high. However, I think that Cher playing the sexy one is the obvious choice, and that Sarandon, given what she had to work with, did a decent job! Anyhoo, it seems Sarandon also turned down a role in The First Wives Club, and her reasoning for doing so is..... ma’am?
“[It] ended up making a lot of money. It starred all great women, who were getting revenge on their ex-husbands, in the script that I got, by being mean to other women. And I was just like … who needs that, you know? I don’t want to be in something where women are tearing down other women.”
ZZZZZZzzzzzzz. “Women tearing down other women” is essentially what Susan Sarandon is doing by implying that Cher got a part she wanted by fucking a director. Some food for thought, hm? [Page Six]
Great, Tory Lanez is continuing his fuckery on the socials, all in service to his own ego and supposed “innocence.” He hopped on Instagram Live Tuesday night to say that the allegations against him are “not true,” but did not quite deny that he shot her?
On Live, Lanez insisted the allegations are “not true,” though he doesn’t exactly claim that he didn’t shoot her. Instead, he tries to discredit her story by saying the initial TMZ report of the incident did not mention Megan’s gunshot wounds. He goes on to claim he was going to release a statement, but Roc Nation warned him against it....
Lanez continued to undermine her account by saying she couldn’t have seen who allegedly fired the shots if she was walking away from the car. He also questions why she didn’t tell the police that she was shot.
I’m confused as hell, and so was Megan Thee Stallion, who kept her mouth shut and tweeted this, instead:
Sounds about right to me. [Vulture]