Spies on Scott Caan's upcoming film, "Mercy" tell us Stacy Keibler lobbied hard for a scene in which she would expose her breasts.
Then the unthinkable happened! Director Patrick Hoelck nixed the idea!
People on the production team were stunned, lobbying Hoelck for a change of heart. And finally, Hoelck saw two really good reasons why he should change his mind.
Keibler now realizing her rack's worth said no way and declined the role completely.
The role has since been given to a no-named actress. Her name? Not Stacy Keibler.
You Might Want to Rethink6/1/2008 10:24 AM PDT BY TMZ STAFF
Stacy Keibler's Breast Reduction
See More
Reader Comments
(Page 2 of 3) Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments17.
I am confused by this story. First of all, is there a character, with a bigger role in the movie, which goes topless.. and Stacy wanted that character? Or did Stacy want the character that she was originally slated for --- to take off her top?
I love the way TMZ's writes it blurbs, but sometimes the satire writing doesn't translate very well and leaves people guessing.
One would think that Stacy Keibler wouldn't be so picky when it comes to parts -- seeing as she really was an unknown to like 90% of the US population ...until Dancing with the Stars... now about 80% of the population knows who she is.
Beggers can't be choosers.
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
18.
If TMZ is saying that she wanted to the original character that she was to be playing ---- to take her top off and when the director decided against it.. she dropped out.. I call BS! I do not believe that.
If she wanted a bigger part in the movie & the role required being topless but the director decided she wasn't a suitable fit for that role and gave her a small role/bad character --- then the story might be true.
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
19.
What a dumbass, just lost a huge number of WWE fanboys (Or Dancing with the Stars fanboys or both)
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
20.
She was offered a role that required nudity, she wanted it, the director did not want her. The crew told the director he was wrong, he realized it and it was too late because she thought she was slighted. They had there chance, they blew it. There loss, not Kiebler's.
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
21.
I see TMZ is letting the trained monkeys type and post "articles" again.
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
22.
One of the classiest and most beautiful people in the world. She is really sweet if you just knew her. It makes me laugh and mad too to hear poeple write things about people they don't even know. She's a terrific gal!
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
23.
WTF does having pix of dead wrestlers have to do with a story of a former WWE Diva going topless in a movie have to do with each other?? Someone not like wrestling and taking every opportunity they can to propagate the thought that all wrestlers die young??
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
25.
I've never heard of this director, but I now officially hate the man!
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
26.
ProWrestling.net has officially announced Patrick Hoelck as the winner of the 2008 "Biggest Douche in the Universe" Award.
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
27.
C'mon...you're all missing the real inexplicable angle of this story - a Scott Caan film???????
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
28.
How do we put out a contract on this "Hoelck" IDIOT.
I guarentee you that every male wrestling fan out there would have watched his sutipd ass film just for the brief flash of Stacy's chest.
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
29.
This no-name demanded a topless scene in a movie?? And that makes her a credible actress??
And did somebody suggest posing for Playboy, as if it would be a career booster?
First of all, she sounds like she's more suited for movies such as "Porky's". What kind of BIMBO demands a nude scene in a movie?!
And secondly... posing in Playboy would make you even MORE of a bimbo... That's not a career move... it's a career ender!
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
30.
@PUDDLES (Which is a stupid screen name, by the way):
Here's the thing: First of all, so what if she doesn't have huge breasts? That's a moot point right now, and shouldn't ever be a point in ANYTHING to begin with. Making it as such, is immature, shallow, and maybe even a bit dumb.
Now, as for turning down the role: You know, some people have things called MORALS and PRINCIPLES, and won't compromise them just to whore themselves out for a few seconds of fame. Stacy has been one of those people, during her entire career. While she did do some provocative pics and videos while in WCW and WWF/E, and yes, you could argue that it wasn't all that wholesome, she has stated over and over again that she would never do nudity, and would rather leave those sorts of things to the imagination. Plus, she's already turned down at least 3 offers from Playboy in the past, and probably more from other men's mags as well, so while she would do, and has done obviously, some sexy and provocative shoots, it doesn't appear that she's actually going to ever appear completely nude, which would compromise her own morals and principles, especially just to tack on just another few seconds of fame to her name. And in any case, it's ultimately HER decision, and not ours, to make about anything she does in her career. It doesn't matter if she's a "great actress" or not, what matters is what's important to HER. And the "pretty women in Hollywood are a dime a dozen" statement you made may be true, but again, is a moot point, and doesn't matter, as again, it's Stacy's decisions to accept or turn down whatever she wants, not ours.
Finally, her last name is spelled "KEIBLER," not like the stupid elves that make those half-@$$ed cookies.
Likes 0
Dislikes 0
