Want proof? Here it is: http://www.etonline.com/html/romance/feature/r15.html
Brad and Jennifer have nothing to do with Michael and Catherine, except have a child together. And the coincidence is that...THEY WERE ENGAGED ON THE SAME DAY, New Year's Eve 1999.
I can't believe the most beautiful actress on Friends would marry a faggot like Brad Pitt last July. If I were Jennifer, I'd be like Rachel in the pilot and leave him at the altar.
"Rinoa Heartilly" wrote in message news:8vcil4$dem$[email]...
Jennifer's
<<chop!>>
How does that article prove the Jones-Douglas nutpials "better" than the Anniston-Pitt wedding? All the article did was talk about who showed up and how much money they spent.
In case you haven't figured it out, the Jones-Douglas wedding may have been splashier, but the marriage's days are numbered. Mike Douglas is a self-confessed sex addict who cheated on his ex-wife Diandra numerous times in the course of their marriage. He also insisted that Jones sign a pre-nuptial agreement before this "better" wedding of theirs, and it took them so long to agree to the terms that friends of theirs thought the wedding might be called off.
That's just the problems in their _relationship_. Now let me give you two reasons why their wedding was definitively NOT better than Brad and Jen's:
(1) Douglas and Jones insisted the whole time that they wanted a "private" ceremony. Yet they had it at the Plaza Hotel in New York City, one of the ritziest, trendiest, and above all un-private hotels in the US. As the editor for _People_ magazine put it, "If they had truly wanted privacy, they would not have held the wedding at the Plaza. They're giving us glamour the whole way." And to prove that the request for privacy was a bald-faced lie, the Douglas's then sold exclusive photos of the wedding to OK magazine for over $1 million US.
[Remember how shocked everyone was when we heard Brad and Jen had sneaked off and tied the knot? They _really_ wanted privacy.]
(2) They actually had the nerve to ask their guests to "make a donation" to the Dylan Douglas Foundation, a trust being set up for the couple's son. The spin that's being put on it is that Dylan will give the money to charitable causes when he's older. Doesn't matter the _why_ of the trust. Anyone schooled in basic etiquette can tell you that only trailer park trash tells their wedding guests to give money as a gift. Douglas is worth millions due to his years of work as an actor an producer, and Jones already commands a handsome sum for her work. They have no excuse sticking their hands out like that. It's the _tackiest_ thing Hollywood has seen in years.
Mags, who thinks both Douglas and Jones are great actors, but also thinks Momma was right when she said that "Catherine Zeta Jones has drove her ducks to a bad market" with this marriage.
Well said Mags the Axe. :)
Catherine and Michael even had a pressconference and posed for photographers a few days before the wedding at Plaza. They told the wedding dates weeks in advance to the press. They made their pre nups public, and they sold their baby pics to OK magazine for a million dollars as well as US magazine.And now they sold the wedding pics to OK magazine for another million. It's one of the tackiest weddings I have ever heard of. It even rivals Posh spice and Bechham swedding in tachiness. CZJ and MD are one of the most open couples in Hollywood talking about every detail in their relationship, how he proopsed etc.
But as much as they want publcity, their wedding coverage hasn't even reach a third of the media attenton what Brad and Jen's private wedding got. They were on all covers even though theye sold no pics an dhad aprivate wedding on private property, not a public place sihc as the Plaza with red carpets for the entrencesw whic made it more look like amovei premiere than a wedding. . Here in Sweden Catherine and Michaels wedding got a small notice in one of the papers while Brad aand Jen's were on all covers. In LA Brad and Jen were the top news story on the actual news shows (not just the entertainment shows) on July 28,29,30, while the CZJ and MD wedding only has made one minutes reports in the entertainments news. The only country that seems very interested is England, but even there it had less tv coverage thne the B&J wedding. That speaks volumes, since Catherien is English.I bet CZJ and MD are very disapponited.
It has also turned out that the guest list was gratly exaggerated. Brad and jen was not there, neither was Spielberg or Sharon Stone as previously reported.
Mags The Axe skrev i diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:UryS5.945$[email] tt.net...
and
been
times
they
bald-faced
magazine
to
trash
already
years.
ducks
Yeah let's see, would you rather attend a wedding in Sunny & Warm California, or a freezing cold New York City?
====== es*o*ter*ic b : of or relating to knowledge that is restricted to a small group
2 a : limited to a small circle
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 01:20:42 GMT, Rinoa Heartilly wrote:
Only if they were on a break. :>