Jen's Not Having A Baby But She Is Stealing Brad Back
OK! Magazine has probably decided that even with them there are limits as to how many times they can actually say Jennifer Aniston is pregnant and then not actually ever have a baby. Now, that is not to say they won't bring it back next month, but for this week's issue they just go for the always popular, Jennifer is stealing Brad back.
They make a big deal of the fact that Brad & Jen's 10th anniversary would have been last week, but don't actually tell us that Brad and Jen have been split up for what, like five years? I was talking about this with someone the other day who refuses to ever hear a bad word about Jen and thinks Angelina is the devil for stealing Brad. This is who these tabloids are focusing on when they deliver these cover stories.
My answer to that person and now is that at some point you have to move on. It has been five years. Does anyone really expect Brad & Jen to get back together? Will this still be going on in 20 years? If you were Jennifer Aniston, would you want to be known only for this? Well, with her bad acting, maybe this is what she will be remembered for, but at some point, this just has to stop right?
19 comments:
Until Jen settles down in another relationship (not with John Mayer) this will go on for the next 10 years.
Seriously, who buys these magazines?
What timebob said.
Well said, Enty. I thought the exact same thing after reading this story this morning.
Staying in the tabloids means staying relevant. If she didn't want this association, why does she always seem to time a photo layout or a movie release or product placement right on top of everything Angelina may be showcasing? Smells like tactical publicity. Sadly, turning out one mindless chick-wins-guy movie after another isn't half as effective for her popularity as being faced-off in the tabloids.
I've thought for a long time that she let Brad do the Dirty Work of actually leaving the marriage because, well--why not? It worked for her. Reading some of her 2005 comments (and Ted C. said that the marriage was floundering before Mr. and Mrs. Smith), it just seems to me that she's clever and calculating.
Agree with timebob, until she settles in a legitimate long-term relationship this story will keep surfacing over and over. And even then, who knows?
Wasn't she the blind about the abandoned wife who was so boring?
Sunny - do you have a link to that blind? I don't remember reading it.
no way is it ever going to stop. this is our generation's Liz and eddie Fisher and we still read about that now and then. as soon as poor liz kicks it, you can believe it will be in everyones's Looking Back On Liz montage, same as debbie.
This story keeps her relevant because her movies sure as hell don't do anything for her. She puts out the same drab rom-com's all the time. I feel bad for Jason Bateman being associated with the flop that will be that "Baster" movie or whatever its called.
@Share, sorry I don't. Something about she would talk about granola and would bore the pants off everyone around her.
Jen usually is the one to deliberately bring him up in yet another "exclusive" "Jen Speaks!" "first" interview. So it'll always be news as long as she's still trying to sell a pathetic movie by getting in the news with her personal life. (And yes -- their marriage has now been over longer than it lasted. Enough.)
Who are these people?
Before Mr and Mrs Smith, Jen won some awards. The supposedly happy Mrs Pitt thanked just about everyone in the world--except her husband. That was a big eye opener.
I think the covers are quite hilarious. Both of those pictures of them are about 10 years old aren't they?
Even though I like Angelina Jolie I wouldnt want to be with her leftovers.
ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz
Post a Comment