Inside Hugh Jackman's new relationship after Deborra-lee 'betrayal' statement
Hugh Jackman and Deborra-Lee Furness' split has taken an unexpected turn with the Waiting actor opening up on her experience with 'betrayal.'
The Wolverine star, 56, and his ex-wife, 69, announced their separation in September 2023, which appeared to be amicable.
But Deborra has since seemingly hinted at adultery playing a part in their shock split, releasing a statement talking about 'betrayal' amid the breakdown of her 27-year marriage.
An insider told MailOnline that Hugh was 'extremely disappointed' to read Deborra's statement just days after she filed for divorce.
Since their split, Hugh has moved on with another actor, with reports suggesting they are set to move in together.
Hugh confirmed he was dating Broadway star Sutton Foster 16 months after splitting from Deborra.
Just days prior to the announcement, the X-Men icon was spotted watching the 50-year-old actor on stage in Once Upon a Mattress in Los Angeles' Ahmanson Theatre.
Their budding romance comes just months after Sutton filed for divorce from her husband of 10 years, Screenwriter Ted Griffin, in October 2024.
It is thought that Hugh and Sutton first met after starring in the Broadway show The Music Man together in 2022.
The pair both praised each other after starring together, with Sutton telling People in June 2024: 'He's one of the greatest guys ever, an incredible costar. I think everyone already knows that, though.'
During a joint appearance with Sutton on Late Night with Seth Meyers in 2022, Hugh also gushed: 'This is a six-time Tony nominee, two-time winner. Like, I saw her do Thoroughly Modern Millie when you were like 4 years old. But I've watched everything she's done. It's amazing.'
Sutton is best known as a Broadway actor who made her stage debut in 1996 in Grease as Sandy Dumbrowski.
She has since had roles in Shrek the Musical, Anything Goes, and Thoroughly Modern Millie, which earned her her first Tony Award.
Sutton has also made the move into the world of film and TV with roles in The Marvellous Mrs Maisel, The Angriest Man in Brooklyn, and Younger.
Like her ex-husband, Deborra is an actor who began her career in an unlikely fashion.
She first got a job as an assistant to the news director at Channel 9 in Australia before being asked to work on the daytime current affairs programme No Man's Land.
She first performed on the stage after graduating from the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in the 80s before landing her first movie role in Shame in 1998.
She went on to star in the likes of TV miniseries Stark and Michael Rymer's Angel Baby before landing the title role in the TV series Correlli in 1995.
Hugh and Deborra-Lee first met on the set of Correlli and instantly became inseparable, with the Wolverine actor getting down on one knee just months later.
Neither Hugh nor Deborra has publicly announced why the couple has split, but the latter recently hinted at infidelity in their relationship.
Deborra spoke about 'navigating betrayal' in a statement released on May 28, just days after filing for divorce.
'My heart and compassion goes out to everyone who has traversed the traumatic journey of betrayal,' she began.
'It's a profound wound that cuts deep, however, I believe in a higher power and that God/the universe, whatever you relate to as your guidance, is always working FOR us.'
She then specifically spoke about her 27-year marriage to Hugh, saying: 'This belief has helped me navigate the breakdown of an almost three-decade marriage.
'I have gained much knowledge and wisdom through this experience. Even when we are presented with apparent adversity, it is leading us to our greatest good, our true purpose.
'It can hurt, but in the long run, returning to yourself and living within your own integrity, values and boundaries is liberation and freedom.
She then added 'that none of this is personal,' and said: 'We are all on our individual journeys and I believe that the relationships in our lives are not random.
'We are drawn to people, we invite them in, in order to learn our lessons and to recognise and heal the broken parts of ourselves…I remain grateful,' she concluded her statement to MailOnline.
Hugh has since responded to the statement, with an insider saying he was 'extremely disappointed.'
'Hugh was extremely disappointed after reading what his ex had said,' an insider told MailOnline.
'There was no stipulation that she could not address this, but there was an unwritten understanding that she would not trash him to the press.'
The insider suggested that Deborra 'got around' this agreement and added that Hugh 'caved' to her divorce requests.
'She got around this by not naming him – instead focusing on how she felt.
'Hugh knows that he cannot change anything, and it is unfortunate that Deb feels the way she did given the fact that he caved in to all of her divorce requests.'
Announcing their separation in September 2023, the couple was amicable.
'We have been blessed to share almost 3 decades together as husband and wife in a wonderful, loving marriage,' their joint statement to People at the time read.
'Our journey now is shifting, and we have decided to separate to pursue our individual growth.' More Trending
'Our family has been and always will be our highest priority. We undertake this next chapter with gratitude, love, and kindness.
'We greatly appreciate your understanding in respecting our privacy as our family navigates this transition in all of our lives.'
Hugh and Deborra share two adopted children named Oscar, 25, and Ava, 19.
Metro has reached out to representatives for Deborra-Lee Furness and Hugh Jackman for comment.
Got a story?
If you've got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the Metro.co.uk entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@metro.co.uk, calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we'd love to hear from you.
MORE: Pregnant Rihanna 'playing hide the bump' in sizzling Savage X Fenty lingerie photoshoot
MORE: Robin Thicke, 48, ties the knot with model April Love Geary, 30, after seven-year engagement
MORE: Ricky Gervais risks backlash once more with dicey jokes in Hollywood Walk of Fame speech
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
14 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
We swapped our UK home for an exotic beach where rent is just £166 a month, but paradise ripped my marriage apart
A COUPLE who swapped their life in the UK to live out their dream life, paying just £166 a month to live a stone's throw from the beach, have split up. Matt Dearing, 38, and his partner Carlie Donnelley, 37, left Manchester for Bali so their family could be "financially free". 5 Carlie Donnelley and Matt Dearing with their kids Lincoln, Delilah and Adelaide Credit: SWNS 5 They sold their home and all their possessions to move from the UK to Bali to become 'financially free' Credit: SWNS 5 Things haven't gone to plan for the couple having now split up Credit: SWNS But two years on, the pair, who also moved their three children – Lincoln, Delilah, and Adelaide – across the world with them, have split. As well as adding adventure to their kids' lives, the relocation was intended to bolster their bank balance after growing tired of 'living to work' and spending cash on soaring bills. The family sold their three-bedroom home in Denton for £365,000 to 'escape the rat race' in favour of life on the idyllic Indonesian island. They exchanged it for a similar-sized home on the island that cost just £2,000 to rent for the whole year. Whilst living overseas, the couple planned to start their own construction firm, called Serenity Living Bali, and intended to build their own luxurious villa, as well as a number of two, four, and five-bedroom properties to sell or rent out. However, according to the Mail Online, the couple, who had been together for 15 years, have now split. Carlie, who has 11,000 TikTok followers, explained that things 'did not go to plan' but she is now 'trying to navigate this new life, on the other side of the world, on my own.' Despite 'living in paradise,' the single mum revealed that she is going through 'a really bad time' but doesn't have any regrets. Carlie said she would still recommend Bali to other Brits as 'the people are amazing' and they are 'striving to be their best selves and it's definitely a more positive way of life.' I ditched my retail job in the UK for island paradise…rent is just £225, dinner costs £2 & our poolside office has a spa She also mentioned that the kids are happy, but it is just Carlie, who continues to co-parent with Matt, finding the breakup hard. Carlie did not reveal details about the split, but both parents are remaining in Bali and are trying to continue to make a 'better life' for their children. The mum has also deleted her former Instagram account, which was filled with pictures of her and Matt. Instead, she has a new account showcasing 'Bali living' and her life as a mum-of-three in her 'beach gal era.' Family thoughts The couple had bought one-way tickets to the country in November 2022, despite relatives thinking they were 'mad'. Matt – who claimed he sometimes worked ten hours a day, seven days a week in the UK – says his family had "struck gold" in Bali. Speaking previously, and prior to the split, Matt, who previously owned five houses in Manchester, said: "The return on your investment here is amazing. We sold the house we were living in [in the UK] for £365,000. "With that money, we were able to buy a 1,200 square foot plot of land to build two four or five-bedroom villas on. 5 They decided to make the move two years ago Credit: SWNS 5 The couple planned to start their own construction firm, called Serenity Living Bali and build their dream home Credit: SWNS "We have struck gold – this is everything we want. "For us, being financially free is literally freedom to do whatever we want with the kids, compared to working 10 hours, seven days a week sometimes. "I have always dreamed of dropping the kids off at school and picking them up – I can do that here. "The people here are lovely and show a lot of gratitude – it ticked all the right boxes."
Time Out
15 hours ago
- Time Out
Smash star Brooks Ashmanskas on audiences, reviews and playing gay men
Brooks Ashmanskas has been doing his thing so well for so long that it's easy to take him for granted. In a Broadway career that has spanned nearly 30 years and included 16 shows, he has been one of the Great White Way's most valuable musical-comedy players, with a speciality in playing flamboyant gay men. Nobody does it better, and this past season found him lending his talents to two different productions: a revival of the fairy-tale musical Once Upon a Mattress, in which he played the scheming court wizard, and the new backstage tuner Smash, in which he stars as the stressed-out director of a struggling Marilyn Monroe biomusical called Bombshell. Smash has earned him a Tony nomination (his third) in the category of Best Featured Actor in a Musical, but his character, Nigel, is many ways the show's central role. That in itself is remarkable, especially on the heels of his leading performance in 2018's The Prom as Barry Glickman, a vain actor on a misguided mission to enlighten midwestern homophobes. The kind of person Ashmanskas has mastered playing—a gay man who is highly theatrical but not a drag queen—has long been relegated to the margins; it is a sign of changing times, but also of Ashmankas's prodigious skills, that this type can now be trusted to hold center stage. The actor deserves more credit for that than he has received (or than, ever self-effacing, he would probably accept): It is partly thanks to the strength and the brilliant colors that he brings to it, and has brought to it for decades, that the once-humble pansy has come to full flower on Broadway. We chatted with him recently about Smash and other highlights of his career. In advance of the Tony Awards on June 8, Time Out has conducted in-depth interviews with select nominees. We'll be rolling out those interviews every day this week; the full collection to date is here. How did you get involved in Smash? The writers contacted me, so it was simple; I just answered a phone call and said, 'Yeah, of course!' I had worked with Bob Martin before, and I had known Rick Elice for years, and I love both of them, so it was an easy yes. This was right when the pandemic was opening up a little bit, and they had written this musical version of Smash. There was no director yet—it was just to see what they had, basically, for the producers and people like that. It was maybe two days: We got together one day and then read it for them the next day. Basically, they handed it to me—which was foolish, I thought, but even more foolish was that they stayed with me over the years as we developed the project to where it is now. You match the role so perfectly, though. It feels like it was written for you. I think maybe it became that way. I really don't know if they were thinking that initially. But once I was doing it, you could tell—in the rewrites that would come, and the things that we would collaborate on—that they were very open throughout the process. Even when [director Susan] Stroman and the rest of the creative team joined in, they were all so great about it. They weren't very precious about anything; we just all wanted to make the best, most entertaining show possible. So if I came up with something in a rehearsal and it worked, we would keep it in. I've been thinking a lot lately about an underexplored phenomenon in musical theater: the degree to which the original cast can stamp itself in the DNA of a piece that's being developed—how the piece eventually gets frozen and the role ends up reflecting the strengths and style of whoever played it originally. I think it depends on the writers and the other people in charge. It's not even about them being too limiting; it's just how they're running the show. If they're really trying to honor what the writer's initial intentions were, and sticking to what they wrote as the Bible—and that's not necessarily a bad thing—it would be less so, other than just putting their words through your own filter. To some degree it's always going to be you as well. But with most of the things I've worked on, and certainly new work, it has been a relatively, if not wildly, collaborative effort. It has to be: It's such a collaborative medium. There are so many things that have to come together and hopefully it's on the same page. And you have a certain persona as an actor—in the roles you tend to play and the way that you tend to play them. When you have a strong personal style, maybe that has the potential to make a stronger stylistic impression on the piece. Yeah, but especially on Broadway, because there's so much money at stake, a lot of that depends on what you're allowed to do or what you're asked to do. Not that I'm like, 'Oh, I have a lot of range'—Who cares? Everyone does. But if I'm not doing a Broadway show, which I'm often not, I go work somewhere else, and if you look at the stuff I've done regionally, it's a much more rangy situation. I'm not always asked to be the silly and perhaps effeminate comic. But that's what I'm asked to do on Broadway, and why would anyone say no to doing a Broadway show? I've been very pleased and very fortunate to be able to do it. And to do it a lot! You did two musicals this year on Broadway, which is very rare. Insane. It never works out that way, but this time it did. It was just timing. It was great. Because after The Prom was the pandemic, and I wasn't lucky enough to be on Broadway for quite a while. Which is five years ago, almost six now. Which is crazy. In fairness, though, for a lot of that time Broadway wasn't happening at all. Right, exactly. It couldn't go on without me. [ Laughs.] The musical version of Smash is so different from the TV show—it's much closer to 42nd Street now, with Nigel as a gay Julian Marsh. Your character in The Prom, Barry, was another theater queen of a roughly similar type. To you, what distinguishes them from each other? That certainly crossed my mind even when we were first reading Smash —and one of the writers also wrote The Prom, so of course the similarities are there. But there's something about Nigel in Smash that's much darker than Barry was. Barry was just a big-hearted, loving guy who happened to be gay and funny, hopefully, but Nigel is a much more troubled character, and he is certainly troubled by what happens to him and his production throughout the piece. That's what I tried to glom onto: the put-upon-ness of the character in the situations he has found himself in, and how he goes about using the tools he has, which are usually his sense of humor. He also seems so much more competent than Barry. I think so, definitely. Dee Dee, Beth Leavel's character in The Prom, was a two-time Tony winner, and she carried Barry with her. And he had a Drama Desk that was kind of half broken. Even though he was a successful actor, he was not as successful. Whereas Nigel is Casey Nicholaw or Susan Stroman—he's someone who has worked a lot as a big-time director of Broadway musicals. And in The Prom, Barry creates his own mess, but Nigel is the only one working on Bombshell who has a real possibility of fixing it in some way. Exactly. And it turns out that he's right. He's saying, Let's make this bright and celebratory. We can't go too deep with this show. We can't go down the road of having her die at the end and all that dark stuff. Ironically, that's part of the challenge of making Smash into a musical at all, out of the existing material. The songs are great, but they're also partly tongue-in-cheek so it's hard to imagine the musical-within-a-musical that they come together to create. It's a delicate road. Like, are we to believe that this actress can do 18 numbers? But tone-wise, I think the way in which the songs are presented—only in rehearsal or in a performance situation, until the very end—keeps the show about the process. It's not really about Bombshell. It's about these people trying to put on a show. It's 42nd Street. It's The Bandwagon. One thing that's striking for me about your roles in both The Prom and Smash is that characters like them have been around for generations, but previously as decidedly supporting characters—the nellie, the nance. But in these two shows, they're the central characters. Yes! Very much so, and I think that's a good thing. I would even go further to say that—mostly because I'm the one who's played them—they're also not the leading man–looking type of person, either. I'm of a certain age, I have a certain type of physique. This is what I look like. And isn't that wonderful? [ Laughs.] But I think that's also something great about that. Some of the response I've gotten, during The Prom and even now this, from people my age or older who see a sort of representation—I never saw that coming. These older gay guys who are like, 'Oh my God, when I was growing up, if I had a Barry or a Nigel, to see that kind of representation and that kind of humor.' And I think that's a good thing. I do. Oh, I do too. These conversations so often get reduced to the question of whether characters are good role models or something, whether they're inspirational. And I think that's the wrong way to look at it. It's just that they're there, and they're human beings. The fact that they are not perfect is better. I agree, that's what representation is. And you see it reduced. There is not a conversation that does not get reduced now—everything is reduced to something without degrees, unfortunately I think. That's why I bring up how I look or how old I am as a leading character in a show. It's lovely in that it opens up degrees for viewing, conversation, response, whatever. Just the fact of it is significant. I think that's what I mean, too. The fact of it is good. Whether you hate it or love it, who cares? It's there. It's about the fact of it. You're giving one of my favorite performances of the year in this show. I'm also talking this week to Justina Machado, who's fantastic in Real Women Have Curves— And she's fabulous, too. Her fabulousness comes through. I love when that happens—it just all works. I'm bracketing these two performances together because they're a kind of masterful musical-comedy performance where everything is funny and the audience is so with you that you can take your time or go faster or whatever you want because you have full control of the room. Which is great. It's so important with comedy, because if you don't have control—if you're not conducting the orchestra of the audience—it's not going to work. They don't get to do it. And if they do, it's trouble. Again, I have to go to the writing: When you have a piece that's written in a way that makes you capable of orchestrating the room, it's a gift. It makes it more fun, and easier—even when it's hard, it's easier. It's a real gift, this kind of role. It doesn't come around often. How much does the audience response vary from performance to performance? I've been onstage a fair amount and that's still so mysterious to me. Yeah. If we knew how to figure that out, we'd follow that formula and there would be nothing but hits going on. I talk about it all the time, too much probably—backstage, even during the show. The short answer is that it's wildly different every show. You do a Wednesday, for instance, when probably it's a little older out there and a little quieter. And it's not that they're not enjoying it—they just don't want to let you know that. But then on Wednesday night, you're giving the same basic performance and they won't stop screaming with laughter. So I have to believe it is the molecular structure of the room. It can't just be them, and it can't just be me. It is just what is going on. And so there's no way to pre-prepare in a way, other than knowing what you're doing. And it's a surprise every moment. And you can't get too nervous or too in your head about what the response is, especially in comedy. That's something I admire so much in people who can be funny on stage, which is something that I usually can't do. People ask all the time, 'How do you do it eight times a week? How do you do a long run? Don't you want to put a gun in your mouth?' And of course, the answer is yes, sometimes. But the truth of it is, that's what keeps it interesting, or even keeps you awake during it. I can do it hundreds of times, but every single time I'm trying to figure it out: Like, I know that this line over here has to get a laugh. So if they're not where they need to be to get to that place, we gotta get 'em there! And that's what makes it interesting and athletic in a way, and tiring and tiresome, but also inspiring and fun. It's everything. And you're doing it within a quite regimented structure of existing writing and blocking. So you have limited tools. If you're doing a standup comedy, you can feel things out or chop things up as needed when you feel the energy moving. Yeah, it's limiting. But it also makes it all that more important to be open to having to do it a different way every single time. Which is hard and scary and vulnerable and all that stuff, but you have to be open to that or it's not gonna work. I just did an interview with Jessica Hecht — That bitch! [ Laughs.] I love Jessica so much. I've worked with her a number of times and it just brightens up my life every time I see her. She's a wildly unique individual. A totally free person on stage and in life, but she's also very careful. I mean that in a good way, not in a yucky way. She's full of care in what she's saying and what she's doing. I love it. Same! But anyhow, we went through some of her past Broadway experiences as I'd be curious to do that with you too, if you don't mind. Your first show was almost 30 years ago in the Matthew Broderick revival of How to Succeed, right? Yes, I replaced as Bud Frump. I didn't do it originally. But I felt a connection to it even when I was auditioning—and the director, Des McAnuff, really got what I did and supported it, which was lovely. That's not always the case, especially then, because nobody knew who I was to any degree. So that was very comforting. And Wayne Cilento, the choreographer—you'd never know it now, but when I was young, I was a dancer. Mostly tap, but I did a lot of dancing. And I think Wayne was surprised that this funny guy who was doing this role could do this dancing. I know he really pushed for me to get that part. It was hard, because it was quick. I was young and was a big part—the bad guy of that show in a way—and I only had five or six days to learn it, so it was scary. I can't even remember my opening night of that show. There was one section where I was all alone on stage in the lights, and I had an out-of-body experience—I didn't know what I was doing. But I did it. It was very exciting, and it was certainly a huge moment for me. Was Matthew still in it at that point? He had gone off to make a movie—I think it was The Cable Guy— so he had a break, and John Stamos replaced him. There was a week between John Stamos and Matthew coming back, and that's when I went in, at the same time as the woman who was going to play Rosemary, the female lead, who was a girl named Sarah Jessica Parker. This was before they got married. And so we had a week with the understudy, the wonderful John Bolton, and we rehearsed with Matthew a couple times during that week. And then we all did it together for the last six or seven months of the show. I would love to have seen the two of you do The Producers. I feel like that would've been an interesting mix. Wow, yeah. I love working with Matthew. I would drop everything to work with him. We've done a couple shows along the way, and I just adore him. I adore both of them. You did do The Producers eventually, but as Carmen Ghia. I did, and by that time, Matthew was out. It was years after it opened. I went in with Jonathan Freeman as Roger, who I also did How to Succeed with. Those were the only two times I replaced. I don't know if I'm always the best at that—I might be a little too individual sometimes, and that can be tricky, honestly, for people who have an existing show like The Producers, which was a huge smash. That machine was going. It's like Hamilton today: If you go into Hamilton, it's like, 'That bullet goes there,' you know? You have to fit in. I'm not sure I'm the best at that, but I did the best I could. There's a patch there— The Producers, Gypsy, Little Me —where you track seems to be a certain kind of snotty or ineffectual assistant. The second banana. As we were talking about earlier with Smash, that sort of put-upon quality is something I trained well for. Especially in Little Me, where every character I played, Martin Short was just screaming at me—'Rararararararararar'—and I'd just be like, 'Yes, father' or whatever. But then you got to do Martin Short: Fame Becomes Me. Yes. When we did Little Me, we became friendly very quickly, so Marty's show came about because of our relationship, and because we knew we worked well together. Marty's been a formidable person in my life—mostly as a friend, but he's also a parental, mentor-y kind of guy. He's very smart and wildly funny, obviously, and so sweet on stage, so generous. That really proved true on Fame Becomes Me. It was his show, but he let the rest of us who were in it shine. He needed that. He was very bright about that. And that show was a great, fun thing to do. And then came Bullets Over Broadway, which ended up a little bit of— —a miss. Not for everyone. My colleague David Cote, for example, liked it very much at the time. But it was hard to compete with a movie that was so memorable and successful. I agree. It had a lot going against it that maybe I didn't realize as we were going along. And I think people had a problem with the fact that there wasn't an original score. But I loved being a part of it. I loved that group of people and it was a great part. During the workshop and rehearsals and previews, it was like, 'This is a hit!' And then we opened and—bomb. You could tell by the audience response the day after we opened. It's the only time I've experienced that. I don't think that it was a bomb, but it closed very quickly. Sadly. I loved doing it—it was a really fun show to do. But it just didn't connect. I have a complex relationship to this issue, needless to say, but I know that negative reviews can sometimes take the wind out of a show's sails. For the audience, at least, if not for the performers. I'm a little weird about reviews. I really am able to take them with a grain of salt. Obviously, on a personal level, it's nice when someone says nice things and it's not so lovely when they loathe you. But you can't give—no offense—you can't give it that much power. When you see a show, that's your day, your opinion, your unique evening. These things can't be taken as the gospel, end-all truth. No offense taken! I totally agree. So I don't have a problem with reading reviews. It also depends on one's investment in the piece. The Prom is a great example. We worked on that for almost a decade before it barely got to Broadway, so I was curious—just as someone who spent so much time on it—how it was received. And I was very pleased overall that people liked it and got the heart of it. But it's mostly about curiosity, from my point of view. I get that. I read what people say about me on the rare occasions that people say things about me, and I often find that frustrating, because it always seems to get something wrong. I don't just mean I disagree, I mean it's factually wrong. Absolutely. Even a good review, Adam, is sometimes…I mean, if I'm gonna be fully honest, which I am, even some of the nice things that were said about me in this performance I'm giving now are not the nice things I want them to say. You know, it's lovely and it's terrific, but it's also, like, ' That's what it is to them?' That kind of feeling. One show that I really liked that you were in, and that I wish had had a longer run, is Shuffle Along. Yeah, me too. Just the best. The subject matter of the piece, how it was presented—I just thought it was gold. And the process couldn't have been more lovely. Everyone was so wonderful and I'd been fans or friends with all of them for years; I'm such a fan of George [C. Wolfe]'s work, and to be able to work with him on that was a highlight of my life. Not to mention being the sole white person in that show: The experience of that, of being the minority for a change, was invaluable. So yes, I'm sorry that it didn't run longer as well—deeply sorry, because that's one I would like to still be doing. But it was great, honestly, that it happened at all and that I was allowed to be a part of it. I'll take those couple of months. Sometimes there are just those heartbreakers. One of my first great disappointments as a critic—a show I really loved that didn't get the response it deserved—was another George C. Wolfe show, Caroline, or Change. Which to this day is one of my very favorite musicals. Absolutely. Me, too. So great. On a list of the great shows of your life, as an audience member, that would be one of, like, five shows. But the thing about Shuffle Along is that that was a once-in-a-lifetime staging. I can't imagine it being done in high schools or regional theaters. It would be way too expensive. It was that group of people—it could only be those people, and mostly George. So it closed on Broadway and that's it. And the thing that hurts even more about Shuffle Along not having a longer life is that it was all about trying to say, 'These people should be remembered, but nobody knows this show because they were Black.' And what the show was saying came true again, in a way. But on the bright side: Thousands of people did get to see it who wouldn't have seen it otherwise. Yes. It happened. It happened, and that's incredible. In a way, that any show can happen on Broadway is incredible. It's a victory.
Daily Mirror
19 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
When does Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 3 end this week
Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 3 is the biggest Star Wars-themed event in Fortnite history, with the Galactic Battle themed season bringing a new storyline and POIs to the Island This year's Star Wars season, Fortnite: Galactic Battle, marks the most significant collaboration between Epic Games and Disney to date. Star Wars and Fortnite have joined forces for numerous crossovers since the battle royale game's inception. However, Chapter 6 Season 3 is the first time Epic Games has fully embraced the partnership with a dedicated Star Wars-themed season. That being say, it runs shorter than the usual three months, with a condensed Battle Pass as well, offering just 50 tiers for players to grind through. Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 3 began with Emperor Palpatine arriving on the Island in the Death Star, accompanied by his fleet of Imperial Star Destroyers. The Star Wars narrative for this season has been unfolding over five weeks in a five-part saga, and will culminate in a Fortnite live event on the final weekend. The Island has also undergone a Galactic Battle-themed transformation, introducing new Points of Interest such as the First Order Base, Outpost Enclave, and Resistance Base. Shogun's Solitude was repurposed by Darth Vader Samurai and his army of Stormtrooper samurai guards, but . Now we're nearing the end of the Star Wars mini-season, so here's how long it lasted and when exactly Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 3 concludes. When does Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 3 end? Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 3 concludes on Sunday, June 7 at 11am / 2pm EDT / 7pm BST. The details were confirmed in a blog post on the impending live event which lines up with the Battle Pass page. The end of of the Star Wars season will be marked by a live event, where players take to their X-wing or Imperial TIE fighters to bring down the Death Star during the "short window" that it'll be susceptible to attack. How long is Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 3? Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 3 is brief. It's not quite short enough to claim the title of Fortnite's shortest season, but it's not far off – that accolade belongs to the original Fortnite OG season at the end of 2023, which lasted for 29 days. This Fortnite season spans just over five weeks – exactly 37 days. Each week, a new chapter of the Star Wars story unfolded, and will culminate in the Death Star live event this weekend. Here's how the timetable looks: Following the live event, we can anticipate server downtime before the introduction of Fortnite Chapter 6 Season 4 and its speculated superhero academy theme.
