Candice Bergen’s still promoting her memoir, A Fine Romance. I talked yesterday about Candice’s feelings on plastic surgery (she’s done with it). The more interesting discussion revolved around Candice’s stance on her weight gain (she believes she’s fat and doesn’t care). She talked more about diet and weight during her visit to Today. She won’t eat lunch with anyone who orders a kale salad. Candice also covers the notion of “having it all” as a woman, aging as an actor, and her father’s will:

Her weight comments: “It was a scant reference on page 150 or something. I was just saying, I don’t enjoy eating lunch with some women who only have kale. I just find it limiting … I’d rather not go on, if that’s what I have to eat to fuel myself. I’m very comfortable. I mean, would I love to lose 10, 15 pounds? Absolutely. But I just haven’t taken the steps to do it.”

On aging in Hollywood: “I’m on the older margin these days. I play mothers — mothers of old men, by the way! It’s so sort of distressing. But yeah, I feel free, frankly, pretty much across the board.”

On the single motherhood storyline on Murphy Brown: “That isn’t something that I in the least encourage; fathers are not dispensable. It’s like, ‘You can have it all.’ Well, you can’t quite. It costs your child or your job or your husband. When they were writing the scripts for Murphy, I fought tooth and nail that she not look like someone whose child was second priority to her career.”

Her dad left her out of his will: “I’d chased my father’s approval all my life and here was proof I’d never get it.”

[From Today & Daily Mail]

The part about her father’s will is an unexpected detail, but I guess it works for a memoir. Edgar Bergen, a well-known ventriloquist, left $10,000 to his dummy. He made a deliberate move to leave Candice nothing but give money to an inanimate object. That probably stung, but I hope Candice isn’t upset about the money itself. She made her own money.

On the kale thing, I agree with Candice but for a different reason. Kale is healthy and pretty cheap, so I eat it at home, and my dogs dig the stuff (for real). But when I visit a restaurant, there’s no way a salad will be the main course. Going out to eat is a treat, so it should be an occasion for indulgence. But if anyone else wants to eat kale at a restaurant, then I don’t have a problem sitting next to them. More bread for me!

Here’s the today show clip where Candice disses kale eaters.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Photos courtesy of WENN

We haven’t had a lot of Benedict Cumberbatch news in the past week. I’ve been waiting for the Cumberbaby to arrive, but so far, no go. Benedict is due to host the Laureus World Sports Awards in one week, on April 15th. Hopefully the Cumberbaby will wait until Papa Batch is back. Who will give birth first, Sophie or Duchess Kate? And where is Jessica Biel these days?

Anyway, The Year of Cumberbatch is still sort of happening. He’s still getting nominated for big awards, even though I would have thought that Bendy would have gotten nominated for a BAFTA TV Award last year for Sherlock Season 3, not this year. But he was nominated this year. This is his third BAFTA TV nomination for Sherlock, having been nominated in 2011 and 2012. You can see the full list of nominations here. There’s a bit of a scandal, because Martin Freeman wasn’t nominated for Sherlock OR Fargo, which is a travesty. Freeman was INCREDIBLE in Fargo. Season Two of The Fall was also snubbed, and Jamie Dornan’s fan girls are upset about that.

Last thing: someone made a chocolate Benedict Cumberbatch. And apparently, people are licking and biting it and ripping off pieces. Because that’s the world we live in, people.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Here are some photos of the family Kardashian-West putting on a united front for some reason at LAX yesterday. Usually, Kim Kardashian, North West and Kanye do not fly together. He’ll fly ahead of his wife and daughter and the girls will come to whatever city a few days later. Huh. According to E! News, the whole Kardashian clan is heading to Armenia! Robert Kardashian Sr. was Armenian-American, and the Kardashian ladies are half-Armenian. An insider told E!: “Visiting Armenia has been on Kim’s bucket list forever. They are all so excited! They want to learn about their heritage.” I have no idea what Kim is wearing either – it seems like she went with simple jeans and a tank, but then added a floor-length coat? Was that really necessary?

I ignored this Sunday’s episode of Keeping Up with the Kardashians, because it seems like it was just more of Kim’s fertility drama. Let me be clear: if Kim is having legitimate problems getting pregnant, I totally sympathize. But it does feel like this is “her storyline” and it’s being publicized so heavily so Kim can just get a surrogate.

Here’s another Kimye story – remember back in 2013, when Kanye West went crazy on a paparazzo named Daniel Ramos? Go here to see the photos of the assault. Kanye was exiting LAX and Ramos apparently shouted some questions at Kanye, and Kanye tried to grab Ramos’ camera and ‘Ye sort of put Ramos in a headlock. It didn’t look like either man sustained much in the way of injury, but Kanye still pled no contest to misdemeanor battery in criminal court, and Ramos still sued ‘Ye in civil court. Well, Kanye finally settled the case, just a week before they were supposed to show up in court. We don’t know how much Kanye paid to Ramos, but we do know a handshake and an apology from Kanye was involved.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

View image | gettyimages.com

Mischa Barton filed suit in LA Superior Court this week against her own mother. Mischa’s suit alleges that her mother, working as her manager since Mischa was a child, siphoned money from Mischa’s earnings and conspired to steal and defraud her for years. The suit describes how Nuala Barton regularly stole from Mischa, opened side businesses under Mischa’s name, put her name on the deed to Mischa’s mansion without informing her about it, and even kicked Mischa out of her own home. Nuala put Mischa on an “allowance” of her own money, leaving Mischa unable to pay her bills. What’s more is that Nuala would sign Mischa up for endorsement deals without her permission, including for a weight loss drug called Proactal. Mischa didn’t learn that she was supposedly representing Proactal until they threatened her with breach of contract. She’s since fired her mother and hired another manager.

The lawsuit is long and you can read the full PDF here on E! Online. Some excerpts from the suit are below and there are summaries on E! and People:

This action arises from the tragic tale of a greedy stage mother posing as a talent manager who, instead of acting in the best interest of her daughter/client, schemed to defraud her unsuspecting victim. In the process, Defendant Nuala Barton… forged documents and has even kicked Barton out of her own home – the home purchased with Barton’s money but that Nuala has turned into her own personal ATM. Barton now seeks recovery of what her own mother stole from her and to be able to proceed with her career free of the meddling that Nuala continues to engage in and the damages she continues to cause.

As Barton’s manager, Nuala committed a series of egregious acts to intentionally exploit and harm her own daughter, including (1) inducing Barton to purchase a $7.8 million Beverly Hills home, granting herself a one-half undivided interest in the property, and encumbering the property with two deeds of trust without providing adequate documentation to Barton or an explanation of her rights; (2) withholding Barton’s compensation for her acting, modeling and endorsement work and refusing to provide transparency with respect to the accounting for such compensation; (3) lying to Barton by representing that Barton’s compensation for a particular film was less than what was actually negotiated and paid by the production company so that she could pocket the difference; (4) exploiting Barton’s name, image and likeness to create side businesses – including a Mischa Barton handbag line and Mischa Barton fashion boutique – without compensating Barton for said exploitation or sharing in the profits; and (5) damaging Barton’s reputation in the industry and exposing Barton to legal liability by entering Barton into contracts for endorsement of certain productions without first informing Barton of her obligations under said contracts.

Neither Nuala nor Barton’s father, Paul, has had a job independent of Barton in over a decade. Instead, they sit back expecting their daughter’s hard work and dedication to her craft to support their lifestyle. Both comfortably reside in the $7.8 million Beverly Hills home that was purchased with Barton’s funds while Barton is not welcome at the property…

These revelations of exploitation and fraud, coupled with ongoing instances of bullying and verbal abuse, eventually led to the breakdown of Barton and Nuala’s personal and professional relationship.

[From PDF of Mischa Barton’s lawsuit, available on E!]

Mischa’s lawyer is an excellent writer, right? I love the turns of phrase in that lawsuit, it’s like a screenplay. I guess we now know what’s been going on with Mischa over the years, and her 2009 breakdown (which she blamed on medication for wisdom tooth surgery) makes a lot more sense. She’s seemed somewhat out of it in the past, maybe with substance abuse issues, and definitely with delusions about her career. Mischa must have been dealing so much if her mother was emotionally and financially abusing her like that. If this is all true, it’s despicable. Her parents have been exploiting her since she was eight. I hope that Mischa is able to get her mansion and some of her earnings back.

View image | gettyimages.com

photo credit: WENN.com, FameFlynet and Getty Images

First, let me welcome all of the lawyers and legal scholars who are going to be schooling me on everything I’m about to get wrong with this story. Welcome! Grab a cocktail and pull up a chair. As I covered back in January of this year, Prince Andrew got caught up in a decade-old sex scandal involving his friend and epically shady “financier” Jeffrey Epstein. A woman named Virginia Roberts claimed that Epstein had “hired her” when she was just a teenager (she was 17) to entertain his friends and business associates. Roberts claimed that Prince Andrew was one of the Epstein associates she had sex with. This happened more than a decade ago.

Epstein has already been to jail once, for 13 months, back in 2008. Roberts and a few other of Epstein’s former underage sex slaves are currently trying to sue the Department of Justice because of the way they believe the DOJ mishandled the Epstein case. To be fair to them, Epstein was and is pretty well-connected, and it’s believed that Prince Andrew’s association in particular was worrisome to several DOJ officials and senior Bush administration officials. It’s more than possible that Epstein was given a lighter sentence than the average sexual predator would have gotten, simply because of Epstein’s political contributions and connections. But! The current case against the DOJ has just been dealt a blow. I think?

A federal judge in Florida on Tuesday rejected a bid by two women to join a high-profile sex-abuse lawsuit — and ordered that shocking sex allegations against Britain’s Prince Andrew and famed lawyer Alan Dershowitz be stricken from the court record. US District Judge Kenneth Marra ruled that Virginia Roberts’ accusations about Andrew be removed as he denied her and the other woman’s attempt to join the salacious suit against convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a friend of the prince.

“At this juncture in the proceedings, these lurid details are unnecessary,” Marra wrote in his order. “These unnecessary details shall be stricken.” He added that “factual details regarding with whom and where” Roberts claimed to have had sex “were “immaterial and impertinent” to her argument.

Dershowitz expressed his satisfaction with Marra’s ruling. “It’s a complete vindication of my position,” he told The Post. “The judge has already sanctioned those lawyers for defaming me and criticized them for filing (the lawsuit).”

Roberts, 31, identified as Jane Doe No. 3, and the other woman, Jane Doe No. 4, claim to be among dozens of women Epstein sexually abused when they were teens. They were seeking to join a long-running civil lawsuit against the US Department of Justice filed by other alleged Epstein victims. They claimed that government officials violated their rights by not letting them know that Epstein had received a sweetheart plea deal that exempted him from federal charges. The freaky financier served 13 months of an 18-month sentence in a county jail after pleading guilty to soliciting an underage prostitute in 2008.

Roberts has accused the filthy-rich sex offender of pimping her out to Andrew and his other high-powered friends when she was just 17. She alleged that on some days, Epstein, 62, would sexually abuse as many as seven girls — and that the X-rated romps usually started with erotic massages. Roberts claimed to have bedded several powerful prominent pervs, including the royal Brit, whom she was paid $15,000 to sleep with.

She also has claimed former President Bill Clinton stayed in one of the many villas on Epstein’s US Virgin Islands estate — where group sex was a “regular occurrence.” She said she never had sex with Bubba. Andrew and Buckingham Palace have vehemently denied the allegations.

[From Page Six]

Um… this is shady, right? I think it’s “pertinent” to actually hear the claims of the women bringing this suit against the DOJ. Why aren’t they being allowed to tell their stories? Why is all of this being swept under the rug AGAIN?

View image | gettyimages.com

Photos courtesy of Getty, WENN.

Here are some “street style” photos of Amal Clooney breezing around New York yesterday. Of all the street-style and date-night looks I’ve seen on Amal since she’s been in New York, this might be my least favorite. Amal is tall, thin and pretty. She can pull off a lot of different looks. But with her coloring, she thought it would be a great idea to pair orange with a fleshy beige? Nooooo. With any kind of olive skin tone, you have to be very careful about the tone of your tans, beiges and nudes. They can really turn on you. If I had to describe exactly what was wrong here, I would probably go with the tone of the tan skirt – if she had gone a few shades lighter or darker either way, I’m not sure it would have been so bad. As is, it’s too matchy with her skin.

Then again, you guys know that I’m not a big fan of the yellow and orange trends. Orange and yellow are really, really difficult colors for most women to pull off. Can Amal handle this orange Gucci blouse with a snakeskin color? Eh. It doesn’t make her look ghoulish or anything, but it’s not her best color or style. The Gucci blouse is $900 retail, by the way. So far, Amal hasn’t repeated any looks in NYC.

A lot of sites are pointing out that Amal looks particularly ‘70s in this ensemble. My first reaction was “how Mad Men,” especially because Mad Men’s premiere episode on Sunday was all about the characters’ entrance into the 1970s. This style also reminds me of those great old photos of Jackie Kennedy, only she was Jackie Onassis at that point. It was after Onassis died and the twice-widowed Jackie moved to NYC full time, and she even worked at a publishing house. She totally dressed like this. Cough. George Clooney and Amal lean so heavily on Kennedy nostalgia, don’t they? At times she channel Carolyn Bessette, sometimes Jackie Kennedy.

Photos courtesy of Pacific Coast News and Fame/Flynet.

For the first time, Bjork has written a smear album. She’s currently promoting Vulnicura, which is all about her broken heart after the end of her marriage. Bjork told The Guardian she had no choice but to let these feelings come out in a record: “There was nothing in my subconscious that would let me fast-forward and just write a disco song.” Fair enough. Sadly, this record has mussed up how Bjork and her ex, Matthew Barney, were peacefully managing the joint custody of their daughter. Now Matthew is suddenly suing for more time with 12-year-old Isadora. The specifics of the case aren’t available, but it sounds like Matthew’s upset about being dragged by Bjork.

I talked about Bjork a few months ago when she discussed how hard it is for women to take credit for their art. She made sense in that interview, but it was a snoozy story. Bjork is back with a more inflammatory interview in the spring issue of Gentlewoman magazine. Most of the discussion is normal artsy stuff. Then this happens:

“A lot of times, when I go to museums or galleries and there’s sound there, the speakers are rubbish or broken. So you have a place that’s the most super-duper visual standard in the universe, but there’s rubbish music with concert speakers, and one isn’t plugged in. Sound is the n***** of the world, man.” And then there were her new circumstances to consider. “For 13 years, I’ve been with my husband every day, and my children…” She trails off, but the implication is there: now she has time on her hands.”

[From Gentlewoman UK]

*Big sigh*

I’m going to take a wild stab and guess that Bjork is invoking John Lennon’s song, “Woman is the N***** of the World.” Yoko Ono coined the phrase in 1969, and then she and John wrote the song. Those two were attempting to draw comparisons between gender inequality and the oppression of black people, and … it’s not the same.

As for Bjork, she’s trying to sound like an artiste complaining about how the man just doesn’t appreciate music. She’s acting like the injustice of broken speakers are the same as racial inequality. Her statement is even more out-of-touch than the Lennon song. What’s even worse is that this isn’t the first time Bjork has said this stuff. In 2001, she told Spin magazine, “Audio is the n**** of the world.”

Unrelated: Bjork also wore a swan costume to the Oscars in 2001.

View image | gettyimages.com

View image | gettyimages.com

Photos courtesy of Getty & WENN

So thankful to God for this handsome little guy! 9lbs 10oz, 23 inches long! #IsraelDavidDillard #babydilly

A photo posted by Jill Dillard (@jillmdillard) on Apr 7, 2015 at 12:52pm PDT

Well, we knew it had to happen eventually. Jill Duggar-Dillard has finally given birth to her first child, a little boy she and husband Derick Dillard named Israel David Dillard. Thoughts on the name? I actually don’t mind the name Israel at all for a boy, but then again, I rarely mind country-names unless they’re really out-of-nowhere, like Alicia Keys naming her baby Egypt (I still don’t get that). Like, I love the name “India” for a girl. And I’m fine with Israel. It’s an ancient Hebrew name that means “May God Prevail.” I would expect it more from a Jewish family, but the Duggars clan is so churchy and so Old-Testament-heavy, I guess it makes sense.

Jill was actually about two weeks past her due date, and she still didn’t go into labor naturally, she had to be induced. Late babies are pretty common, especially for first-time mothers, but it really seems like Isreal didn’t want to come out. There was some reporting that she had gone into labor on Good Friday, but it was just Braxton Hicks contractions. Baby Israel ended up coming very late on Monday night, or Easter Monday (as some Christians celebrate). People Magazine says mother and child are doing well, so that’s good news. Derick also posted a lengthy essay ahead of his baby’s birth about what fatherhood, childbirth and Jesus (of course) – go here to read.

Well, here’s hoping the new generation of Duggars isn’t as nutters as the previous generation. And let’s hope Derick and Jill never get Israel a little kitty.

He’s a beautiful baby boy! Israel David Dillard, born last night at 11:49pm! ??

A photo posted by Jill Dillard (@jillmdillard) on Apr 7, 2015 at 12:47pm PDT

Photos courtesy of Derick & Jill’s social media.

Kate Upton appears in a swimsuit feature in the April issue of Vogue UK. She was photographed by Mario Testino in a shoot called “Venus Rising,” which is meant to evoke Botticelli’s famous painting with a modern edge. Maybe. Kate looks hot, but the name of the shoot is unoriginal. Vogue should have let her beachy hair and amazing curves stand on their own without a mythological analogy.

This interview was conducted by Alexa Chung, who adopts a Blake Lively-esque manner of describing Kate’s beach bunny assets as they chat over Skype. This isn’t typical Vogue material, but the interview does depart from Kate’s recent routine of complaining about her fame. Instead, she complains about the revolting Terry Richardson, which is a worthy cause. Kate discusses her infamous “Cat Daddy” dance and how she was angry when Terry published the video without her permission:

Alexa Chung on Kate: “Upton is warm, relaxed and beautifully backlit. With her golden locks bundled into a loose ponytail, everything about Miss Upton is full and perky — including her beguiling personality.”

Kate on keeping her cool: “A lot of times I’d be on the phone with my mum as I was walking into a meeting and then calling her right after. She helped me word things and express myself so I knew what I was saying. I knew I was frustrated but I was 15 so I didn’t know exactly how to put things. My mum told me when I was younger that I could never raise my voice but I could always match a tone. I’ve kept that with me because, in fashion, there can be some heated moments. I’m never the one raising my tone, but I will match one.”

Did Kate stand up to Uncle Terry? “Yes, I did. I was like, ‘That was disrespectful, you could have told me! Now, obviously, it’s fine.”

Terry on whether he takes credit for Kate: “No. Kate was born a star.”

Kate the Marilyn Monroe comparisons: “I always thought Marilyn was so beautiful and iconic, it was amazing to even be mentioned in the same sentence as her. But I feel like nowadays it’s easy to be genuine and show your personality, whereas I don’t think Marilyn had that opportunity. And clearly she had a dark side, and I don’t have that.”

[From Vogue UK]

I can’t even muster up a wry comment about how Alexa Chung described Kate’s personality girls. Let’s talk about Uncle Terry instead and how Kate reveals that he didn’t have permission to release her “Cat Daddy” dance. We’ve heard many stories from other models who felt used and abused by Terry. Kate doesn’t tell that kind of story because she was already a big name before Terry met her. Of course he didn’t do what he did to unknown models when he encountered Kate. But he still overstepped his boundaries, and Kate called him out. Then she talked about it to Vogue UK. Baby steps.

Photos courtesy of Mario Testino/Vogue & WENN

Andy Murray is finally marrying his long-time love Kim Sears this weekend. People have always sort of compared Murray’s relationship with Sears to Duchess Kate and Prince William, partly because the British papers love to compare any woman to Kate (for some reason) and partly because Andy and Kim have been together since they were teenagers (like Will and Kate). Kim and Andy met in 2005, when they were both 17 years old. A decade later, they’re finally marrying! I felt a little bit sorry for Murray because it felt sometimes like he was getting a lot public pressure to propose. But he finally did, and they’re going to have a big wedding in Scotland this weekend.

So, what’s controversial about that? Nothing really. Except Murray is making a big deal about how he’s not going to sell the wedding photos. Except that he and Kim gave Hello Magazine a really big exclusive cover interview ahead of their wedding. Which makes me wonder if Hello will get their wedding photos.

Tennis star Andy Murray has turned down a deal worth more than £1 million to sell his wedding photographs to glossy magazines. Titles such as OK! and Hello! reportedly offered seven-figure sums for exclusive shots of the tennis champion’s wedding to Kim Sears. However, the couple refused the offers and instead are choosing to have a private affair with close family and friends. They are to get married at Dunblane Cathedral on Saturday. A private reception at Murray’s £1.8 million hotel, Cromlix House, will follow the ceremony.

Invited guests are believed to include actor James Corden, television presenter Sue Barker and former tennis player Tim Henman. A source close to the couple reportedly said: “All the magazines you can think of made offers, but Andy and Kim are not interested. It doesn’t sit with the kind of people they are. It’s not about money – they do not want a glitzy wedding.”

[From The Scotsman]

Hello points out that Andy and Kim have revealed their complete wedding plans, which include a walk to greet wellwishers after the service. So maybe they won’t sell their wedding photos because they’re going to be giving them away for free, to anyone with a camera in Scotland.

As for the alleged “star-studded” invite list, apparently Murray hasn’t invited Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal or Roger Federer. Harsh, right? I mean, I know Murray and Nole aren’t friends in real life, but I kind of assumed that Federer is pretty close to all of the major players on the men’s circuit?

What else? Let’s see… Murray says he let Kim plan the wedding how she wanted, that he wasn’t interested in having a say in flowers or anything. He did want a say with the food and the cake though. Kim apparently wanted a “natural” theme, with silver birches and lots of floral arrangements. Kim’s going to have four bridesmaids and he’ll have four groomsmen (or a best man and three groomsmen, whatever).

Photos courtesy of WENN.