Jennifer Aniston Covers NY Times Magazine

I think she never look at herself in the mirror. Maybe she think she is a beautiful women. ? nope. Let me tell you Jen. It’s not funny. It’s really look ugly. you are not even pretty. so stop doing that. it’s weird.

SHE LOOK LIKE A GHOST. LOOK SCARY. THE LIP. THE CHEEKS . EWL!

Brad will be having nightmares after seeing that image.

Jen looks hot on that cover.

I love you Jen

maniston!!!why make face , you think you are a teenager? You looked like a horse!!!!!!!

holloween cover???

Too bad she has to pay to get attention.
That chin is ugly but I guess that’s the best they could do.

Why would Jen have her own tv show on. I’ll bet they got sick of her.

Jean @ 11/19/2008 at 11:41 pm That chin is so lllllllllllllllllooooooooonnnnnngggggggggg. Ewwwwww!
Does it get longer the older she gets.

Jean, don’t worry, your chin and nose also get longer as older you get!!!! Thats normally, Jolies mouth get bigger and biger as older she get

Thanks for the warning.
I won’t buy the NY Times this weekend.
What a terrible choice for its Magazine cover.

I think Aniston is nothing more than a grade C actress. I am not the only one who thinks so. According to many news reports, she “ruined” a recent episode of “30 Rock”‘ and brought down their usual high ratings because most of their loyal viewers were not interested in watching an episode with her in it.

I would not be surprised if the same happens with your readership this weekend and beyond.

During these troubling and challenging socio/economic times, I think Aniston’s sucking face is a distasteful, insulting, and annoying image to present to intelligent readers who cannot afford to waste time or money to read about a boring, self-obsessed, immature personality. .

What were you thinking????

If you really wanted to sell-out all of this weekend’s NY Times Magazines, I think Angelina Jolie’s face on its cover would have insured that. She’s a great humanitarian who is doing remarkable things to help make a difference in the lives of millions world-wide. She is also a sublime, iconic actress, a beautiful mother who cares about children everywhere, and is an example of a highly successful, much admired and well-respected independent American woman. Jolie also has the stature of a UN representative, a champion for Human Rights, who is thought of internationally as one of the most beautiful women in the world.

You could also have chosen Rachel Maddow ,who is considered our newest American treasure, or a contemporary female filmaker/director /writer whose works have influenced the thinking and attitudes of people everywhere, or any other woman who has worked to improve the cultural, economic, or social atmosphere in our country. A photo of one of these women would have graced the magazine’s cover and a feature story about any of them would have been quite interesting, even compelling.

You blew it.

Instead of chosing a woman who represents the hope, dreams, and accomplishments that Americans want and need to celebrate during these difficult times, you decided to feature someone who, I think, represents Hollywood mediocrity at its worst;; an extremely self-indulgent, self-absorbed, unatrractive, uninspiring actress, whose film roles are forgettable, and her never-ending resentments constantly used to get attention and publicity.
,
I used to think very highly of the NY Times and its motto, “all the news that’s fit to print” . It think the NY Times Magazine has failed to live up to those words, or maintain its usually high journalistic standards, as demonstrated by its choice of this weekend’s “unfit” cover story.

AS money, time, information, and natural resources become more and more precious commodities, I think most New Yorkers, like me, will no longer pay for, or spend their time reading, the NY Times Magazine, which will have used-up a huge amount of valuable paper and its natural resources on this weekend’s irrelevant cover, wasted human resources on this story, and disregarded the real interests of the American people.

It’s too bad that the NY Times let Aniston ruin its magazine’s fine reputation.

deana @ 11/19/2008 at 10:16 pm

Actually, I feel kind of sorry for Jennifer. It must be hell seeing the woman your husband dumped you for on every single news stand, seeing her career take off at warp speed while you can’t even get your movies distributed, and hearing everyone saying your ex-husband traded up when he left you for her.

That said, Aniston needs to recognize that she was punching above her weight when she married Brad. She caught him on the rebound and she didn’t have the smarts to hold him. She can’t compete with Angie and she looks silly trying to. But she really needs to let this obsession with Angelina go. It’s been four years already. I’m sure she felt better after venting, but it’s going to be a very short-lived relief. It’s already backfiring on her. She’s getting ridiculed all over the web as a bitter ex who refuses to let go.

It’s going to be damn hard for her to let go now, though, because she’s caught in a web of her own design. She launched this pity party four years ago and now the tabloids won’t drop it even if she wanted them to. They are going to milk this triangle to the bitter end whether she wants it or not. The tabloid editors don’t give a damn about what she wants or how she feels. All they care about is their bottom line.

brad looks as HOT AS HELL on O!!! hagistons cream their panties like women acRoss the country!!! hater ******* hate angie cause she f*ck that MAN!!! ok jEN HAS GOT john mayer!! HE IS hotter and younger!!! hags, love the MAYER!!!!