Russell Brand, Katy Perry

So True So False blog tile

There's plenty we know about Katy Perry and Russell Brand's Indian wedding: it took place Saturday night at the Ranthambhore tiger sanctuary in front of 85 of their closest friends and family. And it involved his-and-hers silly bandz.

The rest is more or less anybody's guess. Here, we separate fact from tabloid fiction with the five biggest rumors about the couple's vow swap, in this edition of So True! So False!

1. Things got catty. We understand how this could be trouble, after all it seems so perfect: Tomcat Russell gifted his sex kitten Katy with a tigress. Well, you know what they say about things seeming too lame good to be true. Even before the couple swapped vows on Saturday night, word broke that the couple had exchanged wildlife (a tiger for the bride, an elephant for the groom), though the couple's rep shot down the report over the weekend. (Much more believable is the report that she gave her hubby a vintage car.) So where did the rumor come from? Well, let's just say their wedding party did have some real animals. Brand is believed to have made quite the entrance on an elephant, while a Bengal tiger nearly crashed the reception. He at least could have RSVP'd. So false!

2. The case of the missing pop stars. You've heard the stories. Diddy was a guest of honor who kept the reception going well into the night! Presumptive maid-of-honor Rihanna snubs BFF! Well, unless he has the ability to be in two places at once (we wouldn't put it past him, actually), Diddy spent Saturday night hosting a raucous evening out at Pure nightclub in Las Vegas—not getting an intimate crowd worked up at the Ranthambhore Sanctuary outside Jaipur. As for Rihanna, while she hosted her pal's bachelorette party and was expected to show for the ceremony, she pulled out at the last minute due to a work commitment. No hard feelings, we presume. So false!

3. They went native. Though a rep for the couple confirmed that the backdrop for Perry and Brand's vow swap was "the inspirational and majestic countryside of Northern India," and the telltale signs of some henna tattoos were apparent when the couple jetted off on their honeymoon to the Maldives, that was the extent of their local inspiration. Despite rumors that the duo held a Hindu ceremony, complete with Hindu priest, the duo's rep announced that "a Christian minister and longtime friend of the Hudson family" actually officiated the event. And despite speculation that the newlyweds were holding a traditional weeklong extravaganza in the lead-up to the big day, the couple themselves only arrived in the country Wednesday (and left Monday), leaving little time for the supposed over-the-top celebrations. So false!

4. She made for a haute bride. The couple kept security fiercely tight for the intimate do, thus resulting in paparazzi failing to answer the question on every fashionista's mind: namely, what would the wackiest dresser this side of Lady Gaga wear for her walk down the aisle? We didn't have to wait long to find out! Elie Saab Haute Couture quickly took credit for her wedding gown, though out of privacy for the couple, gave no details as to its style (like that would stop us sussing it out). However, pre-wedding reports that Perry had donned a traditional bridal nose chain for her Indian landing were quickly disputed. Turns out, the morals-challenging nose chain was really nothing more than a pair of sunglasses. So true!

5. They fought the law, and the law won. This couple knows from scandal, and the run-up to their wedding day didn't disappoint. First, Brand's bodyguards attacked news photographers, leaving them to fend for themselves in the middle of a tiger sanctuary. However, despite reports that Brand's posse would face legal fallout from the incident, his handlers apologized to the photographers and no charges were pressed. However, the trouble didn't end there, as the couple's wedding ceremony reportedly caused enough of a late-night ruckus so as to result in some public complaints. An investigation has been launched into whether any noise ordinances or laws against creating a disturbance were breached. So…time will tell!

  • Share
  • Tweet
  • Share

We and our partners use cookies on this site to improve our service, perform analytics, personalize advertising, measure advertising performance, and remember website preferences. By using the site, you consent to these cookies. For more information on cookies including how to manage your consent visit our Cookie Policy.