Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 10:43 AM ET, 12/12/2008

Jennifer Aniston Has No Clothes

By Liz Kelly

First of all, I'd like to apologize to all you fans of Jennifer Aniston out there who continue to find solace in this woman's wooden acting and lackluster films and her now four-year crusade to let Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt know she's nonplussed about the whole cheating/marriage break-up thing.

But it must be noted for posterity that Aniston, of whom I am terminally sick, has made an uncharacteristically risky move. Or, risky for her. In the onslaught of promotion leading up to the release of her newest acting challenge, "Marley & Me," Jen has played the nearly-naked magazine spread card. A tactic, as I'm sure you're well aware, often employed by actresses struggling to spin their way out of scandal, irrelevancy and advancing age.


Aniston on the cover of January's GQ. (AP/Censoring courtesy this blogger)

Sadly, we can't reproduce the exact image here because we are The Washington Post and we don't like naked people or cussing (except when uttered by the vice president on the Senate floor). But, for those of you out there who may be possessed of looser morals, you can see the uncensored shot and several other pix from Jen's spread here. (It goes without saying that these shots are NSFW)

We've seen it work pretty well for some (think Demi Moore's preggo Vanity Fair cover), but backfire big time for others -- then 15-year-old Miley Cyrus, for instance, who brought the wrath of a legion of mad mommies and the Disney channel down on herself for her risky Annie Leibovitz shoot. Of course, the saddest example may be Lindsay Lohan, whose recreation of Marilyn Monroe's famous last photo spread earlier this year in New York magazine was met with a resounding "Meh."

And who can blame us? Even explicit lad mags are no match for ever available online offerings that would make even Hugh Hefner blush. Tastefully naked just doesn't do it anymore. Ask Paris HIlton, who rocketed to fame courtesy of a "leaked" sex tape (the tastefully titled "One Night in Paris") or Angelina Jolie, whose nudge-nudge-wink-wink unapologetically exotic sexuality is probably responsible for at least 50 percent of her popularity.

Sex still sells, but context is everything, Jen. And juxtaposed with the release of a feel good "family" movie, the whole thing just has the smell of naked (ahem) ambition. Or desperation. Or a little of both.

Am I off base? What's your take?

By Liz Kelly  | December 12, 2008; 10:43 AM ET
Categories:  Celebrities  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Morning Mix: Macaulay Culkin's Sister Killed
Next: Morning Mix: Tara Reid Checks Into Rehab

Comments

Well, if you want context, Liz Kelly, you have to remember that the magazine's target market is "Men whose motto is, 'Yeah, I'd hit that,' without knowing who 'that' is."

So in that sense, at least GQ's bang-on.

Posted by: byoolin1 | December 12, 2008 11:10 AM | Report abuse

If I looked that good naked, I would be on the front of every magazine willing to publish the pictures.

Posted by: DCjoy | December 12, 2008 11:10 AM | Report abuse

So much for trying to take the high road in the Brangelina triangle. To Liz's point, when Jennifer Aniston follows Lindsay Lohan's lead, something's amiss.

It's not like she needs the money with all those "Friends" residuals. Bad idea.

One day Hollywood is going to realize that Jennifer Aniston can't act. Cute? Yes. Sexy? No. She's just not that interesting.

Posted by: td_in_baltimore | December 12, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

byoolin, I agree it is all in the context and I think her photoshoot with Esquire was much better.

By the way, does anyone else find her face looking kind of odd in some of those photos, almost to the point of not being able to recognize who it is?

Posted by: DorkusMaximus1 | December 12, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

I. just. wish. she'd. go. away.

Posted by: dablues1 | December 12, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

td,
You are having a great day. First the Bolton song and now comparing Aniston to Lohan -- brilliant!
And I agree, just like I said a couple of weeks ago, Jennifer Aniston is just kind of blah. Sure her body looks great, but she cant act and her face is average.

Posted by: Iowahoosier | December 12, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, you're right, Analston is desperate for attention, what a loser!

She and L.L. are all yesterday's news.

Posted by: Mickey2 | December 12, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

I got to say based on her article in the NY Times Mag section a few weeks ago and this she is kinda cool. Laid back and working the media well.

Just wish she would say re:brad.."Hey you can't help who you fall in love with. I get it, I was hurt but as the say in the food service industry...fecal matter occurs." And that is it.

Posted by: jolu32339 | December 12, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Once again, tdinbalmer has nailed it. Cute but not sexy. Naked OR clothed.

Clearly no Penelope Cruz.

Posted by: reddragon1 | December 12, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

I have always liked Aniston, but I sort of think this is a bit pathetic - what's next? the Playboy spread? I guess I have an issue with taking off your clothes to get attention, but that's just me.

Posted by: suzannepdc | December 12, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Also I'm thinkn DCjoy must be female. E.g, looking skinny=looking good. Guys don't really think that way. Insofar as they think at all when discussing nekkid women.

Posted by: reddragon1 | December 12, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Fortunately, it is not the "haters" who dictates who is a success or popular, eh? She is definitely not Meryl Streep, but to be honest, how many of those do we really want folks? She is sexy, she is cute, she can act, and she is still a superstar, in the minds of most appreciative fans.

Comparing anyone to Lindsay Lohan is grounds for a rumble -- that train wreck is far closer to a Britney, that say someone of Jennifer's career.

Let's face it ladies, your panties are in a bunch, simply because you have to hate Jennifer for having HAD Brad Pitt. Who cares if she lost him. Her loss is beyond most of your wildest dreams. Pretty tough pill to swallow, huh?

Posted by: tonygeron | December 12, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

The real lesson learned here...

if Annie Leibowitz isn't on the other side of the camera, keep your clothes on.

Posted by: mdreader01 | December 12, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

tonygeron,
it's not that. it's that she keeps talking about it. she's not a train wreck, but to keep bringing up one's ex and his current relationship is tacky.

BTW, we "ladies" are wondering: Does it hurt when your knuckes drag on the pavement?

Posted by: dablues1 | December 12, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Wonder how much of that photo is AIRBRUSHED?? Guess we'll find out once it's published!
Yeah, it's sad she has to resort this to get publicity since her film career is on a downward spiral.
Perhaps she should become a UN envoy and improve her image.

Posted by: sfcindy415 | December 12, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

What's with the red, white and blue, USA theme in for a December issue?

I have to say that I am a bit suprised by this photo shoot. Not classy. I always imagined Jen as the "girl next door type". I have seen some of her Brad interviews and she does come off better in person, alot of what she said does not translate well to print. That being said, I don't hate Angelina either. Really I could care less not being a huge Pitt fan.

Posted by: hodie | December 12, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

I'm getting tired of all the actresses complaining about the media invading their privacy and then doing the sexy interviews and photo spreads every time they have a new movie to promote. The worse the movie the more hype needed.

Posted by: buffysummers | December 12, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

My take? Washington is the capital of prudery (I hope that's a word) and Liz Kelly is one of its buttoned-up emissaries. I hope the Village of Salem church fathers are giving you three shiny sovereigns today, Goode Elizabeth, because the human body Truly is a dirty, shameful thinge, as you have pointed out. The angry Lord certainly knows that Sister Aniston's comfortable, slightly wry smile on that cover is BORNE OF THE DEVIL.

In other words, get a life. No, the woman isn't an actor for the ages, but she does have a certain heartfelt empathetic quality to her. Leave her be, eh? Just a thought.

Posted by: B2O2 | December 12, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Don't they all deserve a joint name by now:

Brajenangleina?

Branglejennia?

Jennangelbrad?

I dislike all three.

Posted by: Amelia5 | December 12, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

wow. we are all cranky today, eh?

Posted by: dablues1 | December 12, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Buttoned-up emissary of prudery? Liz Kelly? B202, you must be new here - the regulars all play pinochle at lunch with their very own autographed decks of Naked Liz Kelly Brand playing cards (my personal favourite: Queen of Diamonds).

Posted by: byoolin1 | December 12, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

dablues, I'm not cranky at all. I'm more or less wasting time till I can leave in an hour. And I don't mind discussing nekkid women to pass the time.

Posted by: DorkusMaximus1 | December 12, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

I don't mind discussing nekkid women to pass the time.

Posted by: DorkusMaximus1 | December 12, 2008 12:24 PM

****

Then how about a nice game of pinochle, Raymond?

Posted by: byoolin1 | December 12, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Has anybody ever done a study to correlate the crappiness of a movie to the likelihood of a naked photo spread of the female star appearing in a major publication? Would any of the Lizards care to undertake such a study? (Crappiness would be measured by reviews and total box office, and guys, you could justify the pix as research...)

Posted by: northgs | December 12, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I love Jennifer Anniston, and probably always will.
I saw the NSFW and I don't think it's too bad. I do have to question her judgment re: doing this photo shoot with a family-friendly film coming out.

Posted by: earlysun | December 12, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Great idea, northgs.

I'll take the naked pictures assignment. Who wants the crappy movies part?

Posted by: byoolin1 | December 12, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I think Sas could handle the crappy movies. Also, byoolin, I think there is too much material for you to cover yourself, so I humbly volunteer to take half of the assignment.

Posted by: DorkusMaximus1 | December 12, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

I'll take the naked pictures assignment. Who wants the crappy movies part?

Posted by: byoolin1 | December 12, 2008 12:31 PM

I'll take the Brangelina connections.
Clooney, Clooney, Clooney.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

I CAN'T STAND this middle-aged nitwit! Has she ever read a book? Sheesh!

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

This is a not too unheard of strategy for hollywood babes as they approach 40. Workout and get buff (little pun there) then do the once to the well show all they you're still a sweet young thing. It works sometimes, think Rene Russo in "The Thomas Crown Affair" sort of for Demi Moore in Charlie's Angels II and we'll see for Jen.

Yeah, it's pure career move. Even if it works she'll only get one or two more movies out of it before making way for the next sweeter, younger, thing. Showbiz, folks.

Posted by: jhtlag1 | December 12, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Sometimes i think she is always quoted talking about brad and angelina because thats all anyone asks her about (or cares about.) If brad had never left her, we wouldn't be talking about her so much. It would suck to be defined by the failure of your marriage. So let her pose mostly nude on a mag cover - at least we'll talk about something else for a short time.

Posted by: jcm4 | December 12, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

I would love to know what luvjen thinks of this. Did she get banned from the public library again?

Posted by: hodie | December 12, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Sometimes i think she is always quoted talking about brad and angelina because thats all anyone asks her about (or cares about.)

Posted by: jcm4 | December 12, 2008 12:50 PM

True dat. She shills her latest flick and the topic changes alarmingly quickly to Brangelina. Will she ever get it?

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Not a big fan. Never liked "Friends". (OK, actually only watched it once and couldn't take it.) Never cared for Ms. Aniston at all, acting-wise, celebrity-wise, etc. But even I have to admit that the GQ cover photo is pretty hot. She's much better looking than I gave her credit for.

Posted by: topperale | December 12, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

I say you are of base. Here's to very attractive naked film stars. More please. Any gender.

What, you'd rather see Whoopie Goldberg hype a movie this way?

The photo shoot is done with relatively good humor. Jenn is still bringin' it. And GQ is an appropriately male audience to relate to the display. Obviously, if she is going to do this kind of thing, the sooner the better, and this GQ photo spread is very nice. Bravo. Great photos, great body. etc.

And let's not knock lighthearted comedies in this troubled holiday season. Star quality is in the eye of the beholder. I say Jenn has more than enough to carry the GQ effort.

Note that Liz does NOT have it. Maybe there is some femme envy on display here. In any event, here's to Jenn and whatever the current movie is.

Posted by: roboturkey | December 12, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Aniston is singularly unattractive. Posing nude didn't help.

Next.

Posted by: stratzrus | December 12, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse


Well, Liz, the test is this:

If your snitty little column is anythingbut jealousey, prove that someone, anyone, has asked to see you without a grannie dress and sweater.

If so okay, if not, perhaps tell us what part of Jen doesn't please you.

My take, sinced you asked. is that you're a jerk.

Posted by: whistling | December 12, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

A pro-Jen poster referred to Jennifer Aniston as a "superstar." Uh, no. Julia Roberts,she would be a superstar of the female persuasion. (That is, she guarantees millions in box office just for being in a movie.) Aniston is a cute woman who had the incredible stroke to luck to be cast in the the ensemble of "Friends." Without that, we would never have heard of her. And neither would Brad Pitt.

Posted by: jhpurdy | December 12, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Well, Liz, the test is this:

If your snitty little column is anythingbut jealousey, prove that someone, anyone, has asked to see you without a grannie dress and sweater.

If so okay, if not, perhaps tell us what part of Jen doesn't please you.

My take, sinced you asked. is that you're a jerk.

Posted by: whistling | December 12, 2008 1:19 PM

The test is:

Do you know how to spell, Goober? It's a Celeb blog - dedicated to snark!

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

That might have been sexy 15 years ago.

Posted by: wideblacksky | December 12, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

I don't particularly care for Aniston (or for Jolie and Pitt and their own brand of self-righteous publicity-seeking) but this was a serious display of sheer cattiness, Liz.

"..her now four-year crusade to let Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt know she's nonplussed about the whole cheating/marriage break-up thing"

You and your other gossip columnist buddies are the ones who want to keep reporting every tangential piece of information that still links her to Pitt and Jolie and SHE is the one on the crusade?

Geez, get some of that holiday spirit, Liz. Normally, I would say "get a life" but I guess sadly, this IS your life (I forget, where did you go to gossip columnist school, again?).

Posted by: ad78 | December 12, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

I've got to be honest jezebel, after so many luvlindsey posts, I now have trouble remembering how to spell jealous.

Posted by: DorkusMaximus1 | December 12, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

She looks great. Why all the hate?

Posted by: nic6 | December 12, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

I think the only appropriate response to Ms. Aniston at this point (considering her next movie in post production) is Jennifer, we're just not that into you.

There's nothing overtly wrong with her but there's nothing overtly right either.

Oh and by the way, the reason interviewers continue to ask her about a break up that took place so long ago is because Jen gives such good copy when they do. Do you think if she'd learned to give the subject the proper brush off anyone would still care.

Posted by: jes11 | December 12, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

I've got to be honest jezebel, after so many luvlindsey posts, I now have trouble remembering how to spell jealous.

Posted by: DorkusMaximus1 | December 12, 2008 1:29 PM

Tee-hee.

"Jealous" is soo high school Queen Bee mentality.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Actually, Jes11, I think they would still care. Maybe this is a really path-breaking hypothesis but I will stick my neck out and throw it out there any way: I don't think tabloid journalism is about getting it tight ...just ask Angelina Jolie who probably doesn't like being declared "Pregnant again!" on some trashy tabloid cover every two weeks.

Posted by: ad78 | December 12, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

I don't think tabloid journalism is about getting it tight ...

Posted by: ad78 | December 12, 2008 1:47 PM

Tight? Journalists are the biggest boozers on the planet...ironic typo.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Man, it is so hard to type in this granny dress and sweater.

Posted by: Liz Kelly | December 12, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Because Liz'a reaction is not "whohoo, you go, girl", does that mean she is jealous or a prude? Of course not! She is correctly pointing out that this move seems a bit desparate given the current Pitt-Jolie contraversy and ill timed for a Christmastime, family movie release, which since you asked, Liz, I believe you're right on. Besides, Liz pointed out that others have done similar spreads successfully. I will admit, however, I wouldn't mind having a bod like Jen's.

Posted by: hodie | December 12, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Normally my reaction to Jennifer Aniston is blah. I think she's played the exact same character since Rachel and even that was bad. When I heard about the GQ thing I had the same thought Liz did. Actually I'm beginning to feel a little sorry for her. I believe she mentions Brad and Angelina yet again.

I think when you're over someone you don't keep bringing them up but that's just me.

Posted by: petalceleb | December 12, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Alot of envious, catty women here today.

Posted by: hootathought1 | December 12, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Alot of envious, catty women here today.

Posted by: hootathought1 | December 12, 2008 2:03 PM

Carm down, geek.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

sorry to say this to you Miss Liz but you sound like super jealous of HOT girl

Let's check the fact.Lohan nude on NYmag is ultra hit on sale and internet.Miley also a hit.
J Aniston probably a hit in a cheap way.
Nude in Nymag,Rollingstone is cool but GQ not so much.

Posted by: Johndg1 | December 12, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: ad78 | December 12, 2008 1:47 PM

But I'm not talking about the tabloids, I don't think Jen is giving interviews to them. My point is that I don't think Vanity Fair and GQ would be asking her about this if she had learned how to deal with the questions properly 3 years ago.

Posted by: jes11 | December 12, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Boring!!! New topic, please.

Time to take a dump.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse


Do you know how to spell, Goober? It's a Celeb blog - dedicated to snark!

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 1:25 PM

Carm down, geek.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 2:05 PM

Posted by: hootathought1 | December 12, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

GQ??!!? I thought GQ was an abbreviation for Gay Quotient. Exhibit A: the recent issue with Michael Phelps on the cover, sighted earlier today in my MD's office while I was waiting to get bloodwork done. If Phelps pants were riding any lower, we would have been treated to "Jim and the Twins."

For those Celebritology Lizards who muttered, "Damn the NSFW torpedoes, full speed ahead!", and waded into the Aniston "spread", note that one shot has Jen lounging on her side in her birthday suit amid several very, very "pretty boys." It's nice that CG enables readers who prefer girls to appreciate Jen, and readers who prefer boys to appreciate the male eye candy.

As for Dorkus volunteering me to do the crappy movie research, it now all makes sense. I've been trying for 2 months to identify the perp who leaves flaming Netflix bags at the Quatch Cave entrance. Dorkus, you're busted.

Dorkus, I have two very special Christmas presents for you. Take a look.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B001F9FHIA/sr=8-1/qid=1229109489/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music&qid=1229109489&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00009V7U2/sr=8-2/qid=1229109568/ref=dp_image_text_0?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music&qid=1229109568&sr=8-2

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Boring!!! New topic, please.

Time to take a dump.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 2:09 PM
--------------------------------------------

Not in front of my cave, please!

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Man, it is so hard to type in this granny dress and sweater.

Posted by: Liz | December 12, 2008 1:49 PM

-------------------------------------------

Damn! Mister Liz is into some kinky dress-up!!

But it does beat the fur suit schtick.

Time to clean up those crappy Netflix ashes.

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

'quatch nailed it right on the head. All puns intended.

Posted by: mdreader01 | December 12, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse


Boring!!! New topic, please.

Time to take a dump.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 2:09 PM
--------------------------------------------

Not in front of my cave, please!

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:21 PM

Not to worry, I'll take a dump in my diapers. Dispose of waste properly.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Not to worry, I'll take a dump in my diapers. Dispose of waste properly.

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 2:31 PM

---------------------------------------------
Lisa?
Lisa Nowak. is that you??

One of my associates and I were just discussing adult diapers.

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

I think one of the reasons the whole Jennifer/Brad/Angelina thing keeps coming up is because Brad and Angelina lied about it at first. Everyone pretty much knew that B and A fell in love on the set of Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Duh. But, they denied it with the force of Puritan Morality. As I recall, Angelina was so "offended" she felt compelled to remind everyone that she'd never sleep with a married man because her dad did that to her mom. If Angelina and Brad apologized, or basically acknowleged that their falling in love hurt a third pary, Jen would have an obvious bow out. Accept apology and move on. But, the B and A juggernaut celebrating their love and their family keeps going on, and the obvious question in tabloid land is--wow, I wonder how Jen feels about that.

Posted by: caroleg1 | December 12, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Byoolin, you didn't answer. Does that Khloe Katrdashian PETA spread make my butt look big?

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

I don't care what anyone else thinks. I think she is absolutely adorable - period.

Posted by: JoeT1 | December 12, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

I think she is absolutely adorable - period.

Posted by: JoeT1 | December 12, 2008 2:39 PM
---------------------------------------------

You're saying that Jen is absolutely adorable when she's on her period?

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

And now to address hootathought, whistling, and Johndg...

1. Just because some of us think it tacky to promote a FAMILY MOVIE with a NUDE SPREAD in GQ doesn't mean we're prudes or jealous.

With that kind of logic, why not put Philip Seymour Hoffman on the cover of this week's Time for Kids?

2. Also, the act of shedding her clothes doesn't make a woman automatically sexy-- unless you are not a discerning male.

It's a sad irony that Jen's spread comes out the same week that the great Bettie Page died. Bettie rode that fine line between "girl next door" and "sexy" even in the most ridiculous poses.

Posted by: mdreader01 | December 12, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I wish I looked as good as she does when I'm 39.

I find myself amused that a woman who looks like Kat Von D and Travis Barker's love child is passing judgement on an actress who is about as wholesome as one can get. Liz, in the dictionary, next to the word chutzpah should be a picture of you.

As for lackluster films, I guess you don't let the facts get in the way of a good slam, as her films have grossed over $660,000,000 combined. If that's lackluster, what's successful?

Also, slamming her and her GQ spread by occupying the moral high ground of a family newspaper would be much more successful if your morning column (which is really nothing more than a regurgitation of links) often included NSFW links. But I guess in the morally compromised world of celebrity and celebrity gossip the notion of consistency is pretty foreign.

It's all the more ironic that you think Aniston needs to claw her way back into the public spotlight when her musings about Brangelina and her John Mayer rommance occupy your links on a regular basis.

Your sad, little colum (at least you're writing something) tragically reeks of jealousy.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

I must protest your censoring of the image ... that is no courtesy at all!

Posted by: WashView | December 12, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Little known fact: Liz regularly types her Celebritology posts in a sweater set, a tweed skirt, and a strand of pearls. She also likes to take a break around 10 AM for a cup of chamomile tea and a bowl of mild farina.

Posted by: Bawlmer51 | December 12, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

But I guess in the morally compromised world of celebrity and celebrity gossip the notion of consistency is pretty foreign.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Your sad, little colum (at least you're writing something) tragically reeks of jealousy.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 2:45 PM

Grow up, Bozo. It's a Celeb blog. Is every snark "jealousy"?

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

"I wish I looked as good as she does when I'm 39."

Some of us who are content in our ugliness.

"I find myself amused that a woman who looks like Kat Von D and Travis Barker's love child is passing judgement on an actress who is about as wholesome as one can get. Liz, in the dictionary, next to the word chutzpah should be a picture of you."

Jen can show up nekkid at my cave, anytime. But the moment she lights up a smoke, she's outa there.

"As for lackluster films, I guess you don't let the facts get in the way of a good slam, as her films have grossed over $660,000,000 combined. If that's lackluster, what's successful?"

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

"Also, slamming her and her GQ spread by occupying the moral high ground of a family newspaper would be much more successful if your morning column (which is really nothing more than a regurgitation of links) often included NSFW links. But I guess in the morally compromised world of celebrity and celebrity gossip the notion of consistency is pretty foreign."

Some of us appreciate all the NSFW links we can get. Now if only Katharine Weymouth and the Mister Broccoli would look the other way.....

"It's all the more ironic that you think Aniston needs to claw her way back into the public spotlight when her musings about Brangelina and her John Mayer rommance occupy your links on a regular basis."


There but for the snark of god go us.

"Your sad, little colum (at least you're writing something) tragically reeks of jealousy."

Liz, did you know that you're a tragic figure?


Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 2:45 PM

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

You know, it's almost three o'clock and someone needs to make an off-color reference to a certain dead presidential candidate.

It's the closest we've gotten to that point since converting over to using registered accounts.

Posted by: mdreader01 | December 12, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Nice to see all of Liz's lemmings are hard at work today! Your companies/ organizations must really get their money's worth form all of you!

Liz's column wasn't snark. Snark is funny, amusing, wry comments. This was a full-fledged slam of Jennifer Aniston.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Q: Why didn't Jack and Bobby Kennedy make good boxers?

A: Because neither could take a shot to head.

Could thinman be John Mayer? Or Dane Cook?

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

I'm loving how Liz is apparently both a repressed, out-of-touch Puritan and a tattooed media harlot.
Now can we get someone to use this column to blame Liz for the recession? I know you can do it!

Posted by: Bawlmer51 | December 12, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Liz's column wasn't snark. Snark is funny, amusing, wry comments. This was a full-fledged slam of Jennifer Aniston.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 2:56 PM

Dear "Pencil Dick" Hall Monitor,

What's the diff? Where's the line? Who decides?

Posted by: jezebel3 | December 12, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

The hypocrisy of Puritans is often found in all the secrets they try to hide...like tattoos.

sasquatchbigfoot, thanks for proving my point that Liz's piece was an out of bounds, jealousy-infused hatchet job.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

I have got to disagree with the "nearly naked". A single untied tie does not count as partially clothed no matter how artfully arranged to cover the naughty bits.

That said, a LOT of women would kill to look that good at 39. Or at any age for that matter.

Posted by: yellojkt | December 12, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Now can we get someone to use this column to blame Liz for the recession? I know you can do it!

Posted by: Bawlmer51 | December 12, 2008 3:02 PM

--------------------------------------------
LIZ!! This recession is ALL YOUR FAULT.
Because you can't do long division.

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

jezebel3,
There's a huge difference between an attack and snark, and that difference is often found in humor. There was very little that made3 me laugh in Liz's piece.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

sasquatchbigfoot, thanks for proving my point that Liz's piece was an out of bounds, jealousy-infused hatchet job.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 3:05 PM

---------------------------------------------
I think Liz has been jealous of those Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles for quite awhile!

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

(Okay, mdreader, I'll do it.)

We've got us a BKD that would impress even Pam Anderson's surgeon.

And WhoTF is thinman1? Is that an effort to claim ownership of a general deficiency of frame size, or a more specific lack?

Is thinman1 the creator of the creepy luvjen pizza?

Posted by: northgs | December 12, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

This isn't Ms. Aniston's first time at the naked rodeo.

Don't any of you remember the similar naked pics from Rolling Stone back in the '90s?

Posted by: moviefan | December 12, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Happy BKD day everyone. Congrats Liz on hitting a nerve.

Posted by: hodie | December 12, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

And WhoTF is thinman1? Is that an effort to claim ownership of a general deficiency of frame size, or a more specific lack?

Is thinman1 the creator of the creepy luvjen pizza?

Posted by: northgs | December 12, 2008 3:10 PM

-------------------------------------------

I'm offering 3:5 odds on Dane Cook and 2:3 odds on John Mayer.

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

As the T-shirt says, Who needs brains when you have these?

Posted by: szwheelock | December 12, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

This isn't Ms. Aniston's first time at the naked rodeo.

Don't any of you remember the similar naked pics from Rolling Stone back in the '90s?

Posted by: moviefan | December 12, 2008 3:15 PM

-----------------------------------------
Links, (wo)man! We need links! Especially links that are NSFW!!!!!

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Nice to see all of Liz's lemmings are hard at work today!
-----------------------------------

Oh, my friend, we're being well paid for it. You're the most fun I've had all week (admittedly, it's been a slow week)...it's like watching a clown fall face first into his own pie. Thanks!

Posted by: Bawlmer51 | December 12, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

BKD? Burger King Diners?

Sounds like you captured the readers of this blog quite nicely.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

No bet on Dane Cook, Sas.

Posted by: northgs | December 12, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

BKD? Burger King Diners?

Sounds like you captured the readers of this blog quite nicely.

Posted by: thinman1 | December 12, 2008 3:26 PM
-----------------------------------------------

Odds on thinman being Dane Cook are now 4:3

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

No bet on Dane Cook, Sas.

Posted by: northgs | December 12, 2008 3:34 PM
--------------------------------------------
I see that you're an astute gambler!

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

John Mayer writes frequently on Huffington Post. This week, he compared bloggers like Perez Hilton (who like to show the worst photo of someone or criticize stars for the slightest slight or rumor) to comedians like Don Rickles. Rickles, according to Mayer, used depricating humor about race, sex, weight, nationalities, against others and himself in order to illustrate how ridiculous it all is.

Hilton is a hack, while Rickles is an artist, according to Mayer.

thinman's analysis of Liz's morning post does not offer a similar depth of analysis.

Not all attack is criticism, but not all criticism is attack, either.

Nor does it address the main criticism that Liz and many of us have: why promote a family movie with a nude spread?

Posted by: mdreader01 | December 12, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Byoolin, you didn't answer. Does that Khloe Katrdashian PETA spread make my butt look big?

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | December 12, 2008 2:35 PM

===========
Yes it does, but I didn't want to say anything, lest you think my comment was an "out of bounds, jealousy-infused hatchet job."

Posted by: mdreader01 | December 12, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

thinman1,

Are you one of those leftover Mean Mommies?

(thinman1 = I'd say Dane Cook with a side of Celine Dion.)

VTY,

Curmudgeon

PS: Sas, you're butt always looks big - it's part of your cryptid charm

Posted by: bmschumacher | December 12, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Liz, I love your column, but you can't be serious about Miley Cyrus's photo shoot backfiring against her. This shoot, combined with the racier set of candids which were leaked at the same time, got huge publicity, and helped to create some distance between Miley and her squeaky-clean Disney image, which Miley is doing her absolute best to bust right out of. Don't kid yourself -- Miley has top-notch management who got EXACTLY what they wanted.

P.S. Jennifer looks too hot to touch in those photos... This will only do her good.

Posted by: jerkhoff | December 12, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Maybe she's not promoting Marley and Me. Maybe she is setting the stage for her next career move, which is the movie about the PUMAs. Maybe she just wants to bust out of the girl next door/shunned woman role and have some fun.

Posted by: caroleg1 | December 12, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

BTW, Queen Liz, when you're through with that granny dress and sweater, may I have it? Word on the street is that look drives men wild. It has to do with the line or something they talk about on "What Not To Wear".

Anticipating your response,

Curmudgeon

Posted by: bmschumacher | December 12, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Liz, I looked at these pics very carefully and I don't have a problem with them. :)

Posted by: dcc1968 | December 12, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

a lot of catty talk on this forum. the truth is the jen is still a babe, even though she isn't a spring chicken anymore. she was smokin' when she came on 30 rock, and she's smokin in GQ.

Posted by: fahdp | December 12, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

BKD indeed. Is it scarier w/TTTs or pencil necked, mother's basement dwelling Jen web stalkers?

Posted by: jes11 | December 12, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

My goodness. What a bunch of haters. I'm Jen's age and if I looked that good I'd be proud, too. Her body is amazingly beautiful and I say "you go girl!"

Posted by: shackgirl | December 12, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

oy vey, i get busy at work and it turns out i missed the first BKD we've had in a long time!

yo carm down fatties!

do i misinterpret, or is it mostly guys that have got their boxers all tangled up.

And all just because Liz Kelly dared to suggest the timing of Ms. Anniston's photo spread and the opening of Marley and Me was a bit odd? Sheesh!

Someone find out if Bob Corker's got a blog and let's all go vent at him for a while. Direct that anger productively!

Posted by: dablues1 | December 12, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

I'm female and I didn't have a problem with the spread. Although as I suggested a minute ago, she might be doing some pre-publicity to get the public ready for her PUMA movie she's trying to do. You know, get people used to seeing her in another way

Posted by: caroleg1 | December 12, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

To quote one comment: "Wonder how much of that photo is AIRBRUSHED?? Guess we'll find out once it's published!"

Boy are you behind. That is so 20th Century. Now they PhotoShop!

Posted by: mtndance | December 12, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

I do not see in the picture more skin that the I usually see at the beach. Am I the only one??

Posted by: cordobes17 | December 12, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Well, if you want context, Liz Kelly, you have to remember that the magazine's target market is "Men whose motto is, 'Yeah, I'd hit that,' without knowing who 'that' is."

So in that sense, at least GQ's bang-on.

Posted by: byoolin1 | December 12, 2008 11:10 AM


The "that" you refer to would be the genitalia of the woman in question...

Posted by: ozpunk | December 12, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

dablues1, does Jennifer call up reporters, asking to do an interview? Is it possible that she is talking about it publicly, because some media person has asked and published her responses to their questions? It certainly goes both ways!

Last time I checked, it's the magazines and newspapers that are chasing her, not the other way around.

Posted by: tonygeron | December 12, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

I want to say something snarky, but I do like Jen! How would you answer questions about your failed marriage year after year? And how would you react to the fact that both Angie and Brad have admitted in the past few months they fell in love on the set of Mr. And Mrs. Smith? And you were still married for how long after that? Jen looks great, I'm not gonna snark. And what fun for a Friday afternoon but a BKD!

Posted by: aludholtz | December 12, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Ummm....I didn't know I loved Jennifer until I saw her in her own skin. It just goes to prove she does have lots of talent!

Now I'm waiting to fall in love with Kate Winslet...

Posted by: paultaylor1 | December 12, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Man, I have to go take this professionalism course to be admitted to the bar and I miss a BKD. I would have had so much more fun here.

Posted by: epjd | December 12, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Liz - Your oh-so-clever critique would be more piercing if you used your big words correctly. Look up the definition of "nonplussed" - and go forth and sin no more.

Posted by: gpingree | December 12, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Really, what's the flap about a nice body on the cover of GQ? What do you want? A naked Anne Coulter? Now, that would be gross!

Posted by: diahni | December 12, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

In our view, this whole Jen stripping down thing was a real "pick me up" in these tough times. The only thing better would be free gas at the pump, which apparently is now available. See

http://saturdaymorningpost.com/2008/12/12/free-gas/

Posted by: saturdaymorningpost | December 12, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

I'm o.k. with seeing Jennifer Anniston nearly naked. She was exceptionally beautiful in a film where she was a suburban train passenger scamming rich, horny business types coming into NYC. I frankly had not seen her as that voluptuous, until then, but by God, go for it now!
My guess is that Jennifer Anniston is every bit the female equivalent to Woody Allen, in relationships. I'd guess she's as insecure and strange as Allen, and I feel for her because her former hubby hooked up with a narcissist like Angela Jollie. The latter is strange in her own way, adopting or parenting kids now ... because it enhances some kind of "need" for her. I won't give her much time to Passing Out Of The Child Rearing Phase any time now. She just seems to focused on what these kids might represent for her ... now. Brad, who knows? He seems happy. Jen isn't. Bur I think the latter is just too neurotic for happiness to ever come in a relationship.
Such is her fate. She's very smart and very talented and very beautiful and probably very sad. And, perhaps, very angry, as well.
If she had a good time being nearly naked with this shoot, Good For HER!

Posted by: zennhead614wheatland | December 12, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Sorry all you bitter people, journalists included, but Anniston is smoking hot. Never understood why Pitt bailed on her for the collogen lip girl, esp. since she was Billy Bob's leftovers. Shows poor judgment. I will be very pleased to receive my GQ in the mail any day now...

Posted by: djett1 | December 12, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Jennifer Aniston has an interesting anatomy-- otherwise she is a bimbo. She should realize that her good looks are only transitory and ephemeral. So, she should start working on improving her mind. I am glad Brad dumped her. Angelina Jolie has a lot more depth, she is a classical beauty and is a good human being. She is not a superficial person like Aniston.

Posted by: fridaolay | December 12, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Given that I'm female, any negative thing I say will be automatically dismissed as jealousy. But I've never been jealous of Ms. Aniston or her physical attributes because, given her competition in Hollywood, she's not that special.But then again, I'm female and so I must be terribly unqualified in this regard.

But judging talent isn't gender-based, and so here goes: she's an adequate actress.

So the question I've always wanted someone to answer, every time I see her cover picture in the grocery checkout line is: What's all the fuss about her? What sets her apart from all the other mediocre actresses in Hollywood?

I did understand Brad dumping her though. Angelina is beautiful, she can act, and she has a mind. Now, that's a package.

Posted by: kim4 | December 12, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

What a bitter, cynical garbage article.

People do what they do to get by. She's young, she looks good, she's having fun -- get over it.

Posted by: Frank57 | December 12, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

She's fighting fire with fire!

Posted by: netnuevo | December 12, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

Ah, a lynch mob light with their noses in the air! And what a good thing there is a word like "bimbo", right? What would we do without it?

Aniston is a pretty good comedienne, and has her place in the public room because people like watching her do comedy. That's it. The media also make money out of her failed marriage. I doubt she loves that part.

Nudity in itself is innocent. A nude cover - nah, I don't personally like female nudity displayed as a commodity. But that's no reason to be nasty and smug. Go get yourself a cup of coffee and be nice.

Posted by: asoders22 | December 13, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

"Am I off base? What's your take?"

You are off base. Way off base.

She is 38, and better looking than ever.

And you can't handle that, which is esssentially your problem as I see things.


Posted by: plaza04433 | December 13, 2008 1:05 AM | Report abuse

It is one thing to not like Jennifer Aniston's acting...really, so what. I happen to think Brad Pitt is completely overrated and I do not even watch Angelina Jolie in a movie since I can never get that oh, so sickening picture of her and her then husbad Billy Bob..french kissing at some televised thing...really, it was discusting and they keep replaying it..

So, although I do not think Jennifer is a great actress, she is passable, same as that Kate Hudson, cute, and, midly entertaing when you are absoluetl bored to death and need a movie to watch...these ladies to the trick.

What bothered me about Jennifer's posing in GQ is that for some reason women still think it is not "belitting" to do this. Simply put....it is ladies, I do not know who is telling you it isn't but it is, period. How about getting some males out there to pose in this way....right, it would look kind of sad and dumb...well it looks that way for Jennifer Aniston too.

Jennifer is about to turn forty. She has the body of a teenager, at forty. Those in "hollywood" think this is beautiful and want to know her "secrets," really, this is sad, but it is all the rave. How not to have an ounce of fat on the human body is hollywood's dream of dreams, sad. But to top it off they plump up he breats in the picture! Sad.

As a woman, I felt bad that Jennifer fell for this manipulation..."please take off all your clothes, for us...America loves nakedness" when really probably only the photogrophers really get off on it...

Yes, she was dumped by Brad, lucky her! She was hurt, any wife would be, until time passes and they come to their senses. She doesn't have to pretend otherwise, really. Brad fell "in love" with Angelina's idea of "let's play family" we are rich enough to buy us some kids! I give it 7 to ten years...Brad seems to last that long in relationships...

Jennifer has a great job, she doesn't have to prove anything to anyone..and, as far as I am concerned, if Angelina, keeps rubbing Jennifer's face in the fact that she "got Brad while he was still married to Jennifer" then she can rant all she wants...so what?

Posted by: rannrann | December 13, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Nobody knows what goes on behind closed doors. Let's not pretend we know either Aniston, Pitt or Jolie. I doubt anyone who does reads this, or writes here.

Nobody knows what happened between Aniston and Pitt, or exactly when he fell in love with Jolie, or how it felt to them. With six kids, though, I don't think they are "playing house". Six kids are very real.

If we like seeing them act, we go to see their movies. If we like seeing their photos, that what we'll do. I wish all three of them good luck. No point in trying to figure out what goes on in their minds - and it's actually none of our business. It's bad enough that they can hardly walk down the street without being photographed.

Posted by: asoders22 | December 13, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Call me goofy, but Aniston's face has never attracted me. I think her nose is out of proportion to the rest of her features. She is curvy in the modern way, but my sensibilities lean toward the Playboy Playmates of the 1960s and early '70s, when a bit more "meat" on the bones wasn't considered cause for alarm. I'm not talking zaftig, just a bit more.

Posted by: djmolter | December 13, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I think Jennifer would make my top ten list of women I would like to see naked. What's the problem here?

Posted by: jrw1 | December 13, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

I hate to tell you this Liz, but she's going to be around for a long time yet, most people find her very likeable. I don't think she's a bad actress (pretty decent preformance in The Good Girl, which is probably her toughest role), but she'd be alot more intersting if she'd stop talking about her ex and maybe have a little more of Diane Keaton's verve. I don't really know what she's passionate about except Friends. I think people are intersting in direct proportion to how passionate and purposeful they are in their lives, she seems to want to live in the safety of the past.

Posted by: pinkoleander | December 13, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Man, isn't this woman's 15 minutes of fame over yet? Beyond 'Friends', her biggest claim to fame is being the (dumped) ex-wife of Brad Pitt. Now she's taking the high road to get her name in print and promote her so-so average movie career by shedding her clothes for GQ and Rolling Stone. Man, at least if you're going go bare, have the guts to bare it for Playboy.

Posted by: Flat_Broke | December 13, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

"nonplussed" means flumoxed

Posted by: straydc | December 13, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse

First of all, JA doesn't have a long history of talking about her ex and AJ. That's why it made news when she did say it was "uncool." Not the most articulate response. But then again, she's never pretended to be an intellectual. I personally find it offensive that so many of the responses think that a 40yo woman should surrender her sexuality and fade into oblivion. How sad for american women--and so wonderful for the french.

Posted by: quickowit | December 13, 2008 10:05 PM | Report abuse

I watch her movies. The TV show Friends was a guidebook on stranger sex, but her movies usually have some more levels. So this nudity thing, especially on the heels of her whining about a broken marriage, looks really desperate. That kind of thing taints the image audiences hold in their heads that keeps them coming to the movies of these terminally cute, yet "wooden" actresses. And by the way, men actresses, when you cheat or especially BEAT on your real-life wives, it takes me years before I can see your next film, and I do believe i'm everywoman. In fact, the wife abusers, I never see them again. So, hands off!

Posted by: mcleangirl | December 13, 2008 10:11 PM | Report abuse

omg! someone as ugly as liz(ard) is really knocking Aniston. where do hideous behemoths get the gall. oh, that's right! her daddy told her looks did not matter, and she believed him!!! its your right, liz(ard), to go after beautiful women, but please, could you put a paper bag over your head and spare our eyes!!!

Posted by: MYSTICMOUSE44 | December 13, 2008 10:16 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like a bunch of jealous hags weighing in on this one...she's hot -- get over it. You people wish....

Posted by: dbunkr | December 13, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah, thanks greatly for the hilarious ironic take, I was dreading what I would find when I clicked the link.

I thought maybe some gushing about how Ms Chastity was so brave and all, ugh.

Poor Aniston is prolly the only chick on the planet who could take off her clothes and look like she is Selda Spitzer in a wool dress. It is actually probably her latent talent, how to be totally buck nekkid and still be totally like chaste and all. What can I say.

Britney Spears in a muumuu or a burka is still way more sexy than our Jenny the chaste.

Posted by: MinnieB9 | December 14, 2008 1:34 AM | Report abuse

All the women are jealous and all the men are drooling.

Posted by: jellyhouse56 | December 14, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

The truth is Jennifer Aniston has a nice body and face (although not a classic beauty,she ix cute and works damn hard at it). But it surely isn't as nice as these images suggest, given standard airbrushing technology. I think the subtext is that she she is saying, hey my body is way hotter than Angie, which is actually true. And to plaza04433, she is not 38, she will be 40 in February and believe me 40 makes a girl want to prove to everybody that she she is still hot.

Posted by: drgirl | December 14, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

I dunno. I'm just tired of the Unholy Trinity and wish they would all go away.

Fresh snark!

Posted by: chappell1 | December 14, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm. Let's see, Jenn. You sprawl naked for a photo shoot to get attention. Angie adopts the world's orphans and braves terrorist countries to reach out to the world's neediest people, all out of the goodness of her heart. Brad's choice is a no brainer. Long live Brangelina!

Posted by: murphy6 | December 14, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Those are some funny comments! If you don't dig Jen, you're jealous. Um, OK. She's got a hot body and an OK face. She doesn't really make me go WOW. Neither does Angelina, with her stick thin arms and legs and giant head, despite her beautiful face. Angelina's head on Jen's body? That's a hot chick. Actually, there was a very similar joke in an early Friends episode when Joey's agent talked about the WOW that would be CC's face and JA's rack.

Posted by: atb2 | December 15, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Jennifer keeps on saying that she wants her privacy yet she keeps on bringing up Brad and Angelina in interviews. Her picture belongs on the cover of Playboy or Hustler not on a magazine that is sold openly at grocery stores,etc... I agree with Liz, she is trying to get some attention with this picture. Her talent is limited only to the small screen in cutsy, comedy shows, obviously she cannot carry a movie!

Posted by: isphlong | December 16, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company