Pamela Anderson’s bickering with Jon Peters might last longer than their marriage
Jon Peters is having none of what has been said in recent reports about his short-lived, not-quite-official marriage to Pamela Anderson. The movie producer has fired back, saying their union went belly-up after he paid off her six-figure debts.
“I dropped everything for Pam,” he told the New York Post’s Page Six in an email Monday. “She had almost $200,000 in bills and no way to pay it, so I paid it and this is the thanks I get. There’s no fool like an old fool.”
Peters said everything that a source or sources told the paper over the weekend “was a lie,” even the part about him proposing. She was the one who did that, he said.
“These claims are not only entirely fabricated, they are ludicrous,” a representative for Anderson told The Times on Tuesday. “Despite Mr. Peters’ scurrilous and ongoing efforts to elicit a response from Ms. Anderson, she has no comment to provide and hopes he is well.”
Anderson and Peters had a wedding on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, then announced their split 12 days later, saying they were still friends. Their marriage license was never formalized, which made the breakup legally simple. Done, right?
But then a source close to the actress, 52, told Us Weekly on Friday that the 74-year-old “A Star Is Born” producer developed “marriage remorse” shortly after their ceremony.
“[A]t 74 I need a simple quiet life and not an international love affair,” Peters reportedly said in a text sent to the actress-activist before news of their split went public, according to Us. “Therefore, I think the best thing we can do is that I’m going to go away for a couple of days and maybe you need to go back up to Canada.The world knows we did it and I think now we need to go our own separate ways. I hope that you can forgive me.”
The story also suggested that Peters loved his “sizable fortune” and wasn’t willing to risk it for the former “Baywatch” star, whom he has known for 30 years.
Then, on Saturday, a source close to Anderson (unclear if it was the same source) told Page Six that the actress was the one with the remorse. She was homesick for her ranch in British Columbia and had married Peters only because she was “very open” immediately after returning from a monthlong Ayurvedic cleanse in India. And he treated her “like a princess.”
Also, that source said, “It was important to Pamela she stay independent, financially speaking. But Jon’s as controlling as he’s creative, and he did not respond well to her autonomy.”
The truth of what happened — during what was almost the fifth marriage for both parties — likely lies somewhere in the middle.
Inside the business of entertainment
The Wide Shot brings you news, analysis and insights on everything from streaming wars to production — and what it all means for the future.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.