1,979 pics of Jennifer Garner
and 510,070 images of 16,392 celebrities!
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Next
-
Jennifer Garner Filmography
Jennifer Garner Gossip
Jennifer Garner Info
Jennifer Garner Is Related
Sources
- For the 2007 Auto Express, Jennifer Garner stars as Herself.
- In 2007, Jennifer Garner is cast in the role of Clara Forsythe in the magazine Heavy Metal.
- For the 1953 show The 25th Annual Academy Awards, Jennifer Garner's character is Cheryl Ann.
- Jennifer Garner plays Herself in the 1947 show 58th Annual Tournament of Roses Parade.
- In 2007, Jennifer Garner plays Sarah Troyer in the show Amazing Moments: National Geographic's Most Daring Moments.
- In 2002, she stars as Diane Agostini in the video release of American Nymphette 5.
- Herself/Presenter in the 1997 video release of Anal Perversions of Lolita.
- She is cast in the role of Herself - Presenter: Short Subject Awards (Animated Award: with 'Mickey Mouse') in the 1994 video Anal Planet.
- She stars as Elektra Natchios in the 1993 Anal Praxis Dr. Med Pervers.
- Jennifer Garner stars as Herself (Hostess) in the 1996 Anal Princess.
- Jennifer Garner plays Nurse Sandra in the 2005 release Anal Retentive 6.
- For the 2005 video Anal School 1, Herself.
- In 1921, she takes the role of Herself/Sydney Bristow in the movie The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes.
- For the 1975 show Aecheoiligi, Jennifer Garner plays Woman in Elevator.
- For the 1992 production of All Can Become a Rose, Jennifer Garner is cast in the role of Sydney A. Bristow.
- In 2003, Jennifer Garner plays the part of Kiley Bradshaw in the movie Alphorn, Das.
- Jennifer Garner plays the part of Kelly in the 1923 movie The American Plan.
- In 1982, Jennifer Garner stars as Herself - Host: Technical Awards Banquet in the production of Ao Sul do Meu Corpo.
- For the 1912 show Assisi, Italy, Jennifer Garner plays the part of Herself.
- For the 1995 show Bonjour tristesse, Jennifer Garner's character is Nell Glennon (1998).
- In 2002, she plays the part of Mary Rose Clayborne/Victoria Elliot at 17 in the release Break Ya Neck with Busta Rhymes.
- In 1964, Jennifer Garner plays Sasha in the movie Avventura dei Monti Pallidi, L'.
- She plays Elektra Natchios in the 1986 movie Biao wang.
- In 2009, Jennifer Garner plays Jenna Rink in the show Brimstone.
- Herself - Co-presenter: Outstanding Made for TV Movie/Nominee: Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series in the 1995 movie BSR: The Trash Movie.
- For the 1921 release of Casa dos Filhos dos Soldados do Porto, A, Jennifer Garner plays the part of Stacey Sampanahoditra.
- Jennifer Garner plays Herself (Winner of Best Actress in a Drama Series in the 1980 release of Charlots contre Dracula, Les.
- Jennifer Garner stars as Marian Almond in the 1992 show Colonna sonora.
- In 2007, she stars as Herself - Nominee: Best Actress in a Television Series [Drama] in the tv series Deadly Suspicion.
- Jennifer Garner's character is Annabell in the 2006 feature Crossing the Line.
- For the 2005 movie The Crow: Wicked Prayer, Jennifer Garner plays Romy Sullivan.
- In 1974, she takes the role of Herself in the show Disputa, La.
- For the 2007 Fraternity Massacre at Hell Island, Jennifer Garner plays Herself - Winner: Best Actress in a Television Series [Drama].
- Jennifer Garner plays the part of Herself in the 1961 production of Go Naked in the World.
- In 1972, she takes the role of Herself - Nominee: Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series in the feature Gold.
- She stars as Herself - Winner: Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Drama Series in the 2002 show Goldfish in a Blender, A.
- Jennifer Garner stars as Herself - Co-presenter: Best Supporting Actress in a Television Series, Mini-Series or Made for TV Movie and Best Supporting Actress in a Television Series, Mini-Series or Made for TV Movie/Nominee: Best Actress in a Television Series [Drama] in the 1933 feature The Good Companions.
- In 1958, Herself in the movie Grad od deset ljeta.
- For the 1967 feature Group Hunting on the Spring Ice: Part 1, she is cast in the role of Herself.
- For the 1992 release of Hard les: honban zetsugi, Herself.
Jennifer Garner and Violet: School Day
Taking care of her motherly responsibilities, Jennifer Garner was spotted taking her daughter Violet to her Santa Monica school earlier today (July 2).
The “Catch and Release” hottie looked fit and fine as she carried her toddler past the p
on 2009-07-03 04:50:07Jennifer Garner and Her Girls Go About Their Days
Jennifer Garner had a mid-day outfit change yesterday, switching from the workout gear she wore dropping Violet off at school into jeans and a t-shirt when picking her up later. Seraphina went along for the afternoon trip, though she stayed home today whe
on 2009-07-03 04:50:48Jennifer Garner and Violet: Schoolhouse Stop
Getting back into the swing of life on the west coast, Jennifer Garner was spotted dropping off her daughter Violet at school in Santa Monica on Wednesday (July 1).
Both seeming to be in very pleasant moods, the mother/daughter duo strolled past papar
on 2009-07-02 04:51:58Jennifer Garner Turns Up at Toscana
Sporting some nasty bruises on her knees, Jennifer Garner ventured out for a bite to eat at Toscana restaurant in Brentwood on Tuesday (June 30).
The afternoon lunch outing comes after a lengthy stay out east in Boston, where the “Alias” ac
on 2009-07-01 04:50:09Jennifer Garner Will Fight For Ben
Jennifer Garner will "kick the a*s" of anyone who makes fun of her husband Ben Affleck.The actress clashed with her 'Catch and Release' co-star Kevin Smith - an old friend of the 'Pearl Harbor' star - because she didn't understand he wasn't making serious
on 2009-06-20 04:51:12Smith Offended Garner With Affleck Gags
Director Kevin Smith got on the wrong side of his Catch And Release co-star Jennifer Garner - after he ridiculed her husband Ben Affleck when he visited the set.Smith, who is a longtime pal of Affleck's after directing him in 1995 cult hit Mallrats, eager
on 2009-06-20 04:51:06Jennifer Garner: Errand Girl
Taking care of a few errands, Jennifer Garner was spotted out and about in Boston, Massachusetts yesterday (June 15) sans daughter Violet or husband Ben Affleck.
The ?Catch and Release? cutie looked pretty intense as she chatted away on her mobile phone
on 2009-06-17 04:51:26Affleck/Garner School Fights Back in Paparazzi War
The pre-school Jennifer Garner and Ben Affleck's daughter attends is set to be made anti-paparazzi if concerned parents and local councillors get their way.The First Presbyterian Nursery School in Santa Monica, California has become a popular target for p
on 2009-06-12 04:49:36L.a. School Complains Over Paparazzi Intrusion
Parents at the school in Los Angeles attended by Jennifer Garner and Ben Affleck's young daughter have complained to authorities over the constant presence of photographers.Garner and Affleck's three-year-old daughter, Violet, attends the First Presbyteri
on 2009-06-11 04:50:00Jennifer Garner and Violet: Rainy Day Shopping
Out for mother/daughter bonding time, Jennifer Garner and Violet Affleck braved the rain in Boston, Massachusetts to do some shopping on Tuesday (June 9).
As the former “Alias” actress walked along, her little girl followed beside her wear
on 2009-06-10 04:51:47Jen and Violet Bring Their Bright Smiles and Shirts to the Park
Jennifer Garner and Violet Affleck followed up their swimming outing with a trip to the park on Friday. Violet spent part of the afternoon off at preschool, leaving Jen free to catch up with a friend over coffee. It's usually just the girls during the wor
on 2009-06-08 04:53:17Jennifer Garner: Out with Her Two Little Ladies
Keeping up with her daily walks around the park, Jennifer Garner was spotted out with her two lovely daughters in Boston, Massachusetts on Sunday (June 7).
With baby Seraphina comfortably perched in front of her mommy, the “Alias” actress t
on 2009-06-08 04:51:57Jennifer Garner and Violet: Playtime Pals
Enjoying a beautiful day of mother-daughter bonding, Jennifer Garner and Violet Affleck were spotted out and about in Boston, Massachusetts yesterday (June 4).
The ?Catch and Release? mommy and her adorable 3-year-old hit up a local hotel for a swim sess
on 2009-06-06 04:50:44BWR publicist shifts to 42West
Exclusives: Holly Shakoor reps Britney Spears, Jennifer Garner -- PR firm 42West has hired Holly Shakoor, who has spent the past seven years at BWR.
on 2009-06-04 04:47:25Jennifer Garner: Family Time in Boston
Stepping out for an afternoon stroll, Jennifer Garner was spotted pushing baby Seraphina in her stroller up and down the streets of Boston on Tuesday (June 2).
The mother-daughter duo later met up with Jen’s mom and sister, with the Garner ladies
on 2009-06-03 04:53:44Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner: Boston Family Time
Taking some time off of his gig on the set of ?The Company Men,? Ben Affleck was spotted hanging with his wife Jennifer Garner and daughters Violet and Seraphina in Boston yesterday (May 31).
The ?Good Will Hunting? stud looked to be enjoying his wonderfu
on 2009-06-02 04:51:01Heigl Rep Shoots Down Salary Demand Rumors
Katherine Heigl's representative has lashed out at reports she was dropped from an upcoming A-list movie ensemble due to her extortionate salary demands.The Grey's Anatomy star, who broke into movies with 2007 comedy hit Knocked Up, was expected to join H
on 2009-05-28 04:50:48Julia Roberts: Malibu Family School Party
Enjoying a fun-filled family outing, Julia Roberts and her husband Daniel Moder were spotted out at a school party in Malibu on Sunday afternoon (May 17).
The “Pretty Woman” beauty and her hunky hubby escorted their children, Hazel, Finn a
on 2009-05-19 04:51:27Ben Affleck's Domestic War
Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner fight over housework.The 'State of Play' actor doesn't understand the necessity of some domestic tasks, but risks his wife's wrath by ignoring them.He said: "I got into an argument with my wife about making the bed, my poin
on 2009-05-10 04:47:04Film 'snob' Jennifer Garner
Jennifer Garner used to be a film "snob".The 'Ghosts of Girlfriends Past' actress studied for a drama degree at Denison University, Ohio, but admits she was previously only interested in a career in theatre.She explained: "I certainly never expected to be
on 2009-05-09 04:48:40-
wrote in message
news:1149669598.840812.187040@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> them what they want and then they'll go away." However with these two
> publicity hounds.................................must I finish??? They
> could just as easily QUIETLY negotiated and donated, but that wouldn't
> have given them the publicity HIGH that they crave. IMHO
>
You are so right. They could have easily have done what SJP did, just go
about your life and if they take a picture of your child, they take a
picture of your child! Sheesh. I didn't see Jennifer Garner putting up
much fuss either (I could be wrong). Her daughter is adorable, imo.
Puzz
-
"As far as I know there have been only two movies that presented
12/7/41 more or less in its entirety: PH and TTT. "
Well, that only indicates that your historical understanding is even
less than your artistic judgement. Tora x3, however artistically
limited, was a fair docudrama type depiction of those events. Pearl
Harbor was a travesty in historic and artistic terms, a banal film
which cynically used real events to give it a veneer of respectability.
They lost me a few minutes in, when our boy heroes were playing aircrew
and calling out enemies on a clock system in 1930 that wasn't used
until WW2. The list of inaccuracies was a virtual tran of the
film. The nice thing about seeing a film like that on tape or dvd is
the fast forward button; seeing it in a theatre for a historically
minded person is apt to induce uncontrollable rage. Anyone who could
have sat through that thing without rage or contempt would be an
historical ignoramus or a member of Jerry Bruckheimer's entourage.
Then there's the money decisions. If this movie was the nail in the
coffin of Ben Affleck's big screen career, it did some good at least.
It also indicated Kate Beckinsale's small screen destiny. I noted the
prominance of James (or Jamie) King's obvious lack of screen presence
while Jennifer Garner was shoved behind wallflower goggles in the
backround. And someone was obviously telling Tom Sizemore that "More"
was needed.
-
"grapheme" wrote in message
news:12236rdgrv8u8b5@news.supernews.com...
> news:u9bUf.67$2H1.4437@snnrp1.syd4.maint.ops.aspac.uu.net...
> her well.
That bitch Matt better not get between the two of them.
-
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 23:11:23 +1100, "Rick in Oz"
wrote:
>http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2006-03-22/
>Tinseltown mothers in favor of healthy eating and a light exercise regime.
>The Alias star, who gave birth to daughter Violet last December, has
>enlisted the help of fitness guru Valerie Waters to shed the extra weight
>gained during her pregnancy. Waters says, "Jen is on target to getting back
>her pre-baby figure through moderate exercising and sensible eating. She's
>not jumping on that celeb mom bandwagon of getting super-skinny,
>super-quickly. She is more concerned about keeping healthy and spending time
>with Violet than anything else. So because she's a busy career woman and a
>hands-on mum who nurses the baby, it's unrealistic for her to aim for a
>rigorous exercise regime. I think it's great that Jen doesn't obsess about
>her weight and is losing it at a sensible rate."
Good for her! That's the sane way to do it. :-)
--
"Every one of the innocents who died on Sept. 11 was the most important person on earth to somebody.
Every death extinguished a world." -- President George W. Bush, 12/11/2001
www.hillary-watch.org
-
"Rick in Oz" wrote in message
news:u9bUf.67$2H1.4437@snnrp1.syd4.maint.ops.aspac.uu.net...
> http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2006-03-22/
> by
> Tinseltown mothers in favor of healthy eating and a light exercise regime.
> The Alias star, who gave birth to daughter Violet last December, has
> enlisted the help of fitness guru Valerie Waters to shed the extra weight
> gained during her pregnancy. Waters says, "Jen is on target to getting
> back
> her pre-baby figure through moderate exercising and sensible eating. She's
> not jumping on that celeb mom bandwagon of getting super-skinny,
> super-quickly. She is more concerned about keeping healthy and spending
> time
> with Violet than anything else. So because she's a busy career woman and a
> hands-on mum who nurses the baby, it's unrealistic for her to aim for a
> rigorous exercise regime. I think it's great that Jen doesn't obsess about
> her weight and is losing it at a sensible rate."
>
Good for her. She seems like a genuinely sweet person. I hope Ben treats
her well.
-
Don Tomlinson wrote:
> "f5" wrote in message
> news:k7ydnc_9DobPy7zZRVn-pg@magma.ca...
> didn't even seem to know how good looking she was.
And she has such a cute laugh
--
preesi
~~~~~~~~~
"If you've got a passion for fashion, and you've got a craving for
saving, take the wheel of your automobile, and swing on down to Ideal."
~~~~~~~~~ My Websites and Favorite Links: http://tinyurl.com/yvw45
Yahoo/SidekickII Name: MissPreesi
Skype: Preesi
-
Don Tomlinson wrote:
> "f5" wrote in message news:k7ydnc_9DobPy7zZRVn-pg@magma.ca...
> even seem to know how good looking she was.
She has always struck me as a very genuine person, which is why I'm a
big fan of hers. I think she's great. And, you have to give her
credit, with the work she has done on Alias, she is most certainly one
of the hardest working actresses out there. She rocks!
-
Don Tomlinson wrote:
> "f5" wrote in message news:k7ydnc_9DobPy7zZRVn-pg@magma.ca...
> even seem to know how good looking she was.
I hope Ben deserves her.
mc
-
"f5" wrote in message news:k7ydnc_9DobPy7zZRVn-pg@magma.ca...
> news:u9bUf.67$2H1.4437@snnrp1.syd4.maint.ops.aspac.uu.net...
I saw her on Ellen DeGeneres and she was really down to earth. She didn't
even seem to know how good looking she was.
-
"Rick in Oz" wrote in message
news:u9bUf.67$2H1.4437@snnrp1.syd4.maint.ops.aspac.uu.net...
> http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2006-03-22/
> adopted by
> Tinseltown mothers in favor of healthy eating and a light exercise
> regime.
> The Alias star, who gave birth to daughter Violet last December, has
> enlisted the help of fitness guru Valerie Waters to shed the extra
> weight
> gained during her pregnancy. Waters says, "Jen is on target to
> getting back
> her pre-baby figure through moderate exercising and sensible eating.
> She's
> not jumping on that celeb mom bandwagon of getting super-skinny,
> super-quickly. She is more concerned about keeping healthy and
> spending time
> with Violet than anything else. So because she's a busy career woman
> and a
> hands-on mum who nurses the baby, it's unrealistic for her to aim
> for a
> rigorous exercise regime. I think it's great that Jen doesn't obsess
> about
> her weight and is losing it at a sensible rate."
What a breath of fresh air! A nice change from "it's all about
meeeeeee".
-
http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2006-03-22/
Garner Loses Baby Weight Slowly
New mom Jennifer Garner has turned her back on the extreme diets adopted by
Tinseltown mothers in favor of healthy eating and a light exercise regime.
The Alias star, who gave birth to daughter Violet last December, has
enlisted the help of fitness guru Valerie Waters to shed the extra weight
gained during her pregnancy. Waters says, "Jen is on target to getting back
her pre-baby figure through moderate exercising and sensible eating. She's
not jumping on that celeb mom bandwagon of getting super-skinny,
super-quickly. She is more concerned about keeping healthy and spending time
with Violet than anything else. So because she's a busy career woman and a
hands-on mum who nurses the baby, it's unrealistic for her to aim for a
rigorous exercise regime. I think it's great that Jen doesn't obsess about
her weight and is losing it at a sensible rate."
-
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 23:42:31 +1100, "Rick in Oz"
wrote:
>http://jam.canoe.ca/Movies/2005/12/30/1373716-ap.html
>helicopters. Some are brazen enough to openly brandish their cameras, like
>old western gunslingers.
>moments - is coveted. They are the paparazzi, purveyors of pix that are the
>lifeblood of the weekly star-tracking mags and tabs. Their photos demand
>huge sums of money and are circulated worldwide. And as the public hunger
>for such glossy grist has grown they've become ever more relentless and
>ruthless. But starting Jan. 1, there'll be some new reins on the paparazzi
>parade.
>against overly aggressive photographers - dubbed "stalkerazzi" - who
>forcefully thrust their cameras into famous faces or crash their car into a
>celebrity's vehicle. They will now be liable for three times the damages
>they inflict; plus they'll lose any payments their published photos might
>earn. Publishers can also be held liable.
>celebrity anywhere in California," said Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez, who
>drafted the bill, which was signed into law in October by Gov. Arnold
>Schwarzenegger. (The former actor had an infamous paparazzi moment in 1998
>when they used their cars to surround his SUV as he and wife Maria Shriver
>picked up their child from school.)
>said. In May, a photographer following Lindsay Lohan crashed into the
>actress's car in West Los Angeles. The photographer was booked for assault
>with a deadly weapon, but prosecutors found insufficient evidence to press
>charges.
>Disneyland parking lot after being followed by paparazzi, and actress Reese
>Witherspoon said photographers tried to run her car off the road in April.
>No criminal charges resulted from those incidents, but the Los Angeles
>district attorney's office continues to investigate paparazzi photographers'
>aggressive tactics, said spokeswoman Jane Robison.
>attempt to get the photograph."
>increasingly aggressive behaviour, others call it unfair and unnecessary.
>And it may even be unconstitutional.
>chilling effect" on newspapers and other media, said Jim Ewert, legal
>counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association.
>potentially a story (resulting from the photograph), with a frivolous
>lawsuit in an attempt to keep the public from being informed," he said. "The
>constitution demands a little bit higher standard before the government puts
>the kibosh on a newspaper's ability to publish that story."
>infringement on the rights of journalists."
>until they catch the celebrity in a state of compromise," she said. "They
>engage in assaultive behaviour, and we can't condone that."
>photo agency - which bills itself as "the Hollywood Hunt Club" - said
>existing laws already cover attempted assaults and that the new legislation
>unfairly targets celebrity photographers.
>celebrity photographer?" he asked.
>paparazzi have emerged to fill the pages with images of the rich and famous.
>The more exclusive the photo, the bigger the paycheque, said former
>celebrity photographer Brad Elterman.
>could be worth $500,000 US, he said. Even less-exclusive pics of hot stars
>can sell for $10,000 or more.
>pictures don't care how they get the photo because they have nothing to
>lose."
>photojournalist by day and a paparazzo at night," said paparazzi photography
>has always been intrusive, but increasing competition has led to more
>in-your-face tactics. There might be "15 to 20 cars outside someone's house,
>waiting for them to leave so you can chase them down," he said.
>got to rein these guys in, so we don't have a Diana here in Southern
>California," he said, referring to the princess who was killed in a Paris
>car crash in 1997 as paparazzi pursued her vehicle. Investigators later
>found that the driver of Diana's car was intoxicated and speeding.
>their publicists returned calls for comment here.
>overzealous photographers, has said that being photographed is the price one
>pays for celebrity, but some tabloids take things too far.
>Madonna's baby,' there are lots of people who are willing to break the law
>to do that," Clooney told CNN in 2003.
>concept of "constructive trespass" for photojournalists. It said that using
>a long lens to capture an image of a person who had "a reasonable
>expectation of privacy" was tantamount to trespassing.
>questioned the constitutionality of that law, but it has not been challenged
>in court, he said. Laws are presumed valid until challenged.
>probably even more unconstitutional, if that's possible," Ewert said.
>law attempts to stop that conduct with a very broad brush."
They hide in bushes? Gee. Makes you wonder what would happen
if the liberal anti-gun halfwits realize they can do target practice
on their own properties. "Oops, I didn't know he was in the bush
there". Bet you a lot of them turn and join the NRA...
-
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 23:42:31 +1100, "Rick in Oz"
wrote:
>http://jam.canoe.ca/Movies/2005/12/30/1373716-ap.html
>helicopters. Some are brazen enough to openly brandish their cameras, like
>old western gunslingers.
>moments - is coveted. They are the paparazzi, purveyors of pix that are the
>lifeblood of the weekly star-tracking mags and tabs. Their photos demand
>huge sums of money and are circulated worldwide. And as the public hunger
>for such glossy grist has grown they've become ever more relentless and
>ruthless. But starting Jan. 1, there'll be some new reins on the paparazzi
>parade.
>against overly aggressive photographers - dubbed "stalkerazzi" - who
>forcefully thrust their cameras into famous faces or crash their car into a
>celebrity's vehicle. They will now be liable for three times the damages
>they inflict; plus they'll lose any payments their published photos might
>earn. Publishers can also be held liable.
>celebrity anywhere in California," said Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez, who
>drafted the bill, which was signed into law in October by Gov. Arnold
>Schwarzenegger. (The former actor had an infamous paparazzi moment in 1998
>when they used their cars to surround his SUV as he and wife Maria Shriver
>picked up their child from school.)
>said. In May, a photographer following Lindsay Lohan crashed into the
>actress's car in West Los Angeles. The photographer was booked for assault
>with a deadly weapon, but prosecutors found insufficient evidence to press
>charges.
>Disneyland parking lot after being followed by paparazzi, and actress Reese
>Witherspoon said photographers tried to run her car off the road in April.
>No criminal charges resulted from those incidents, but the Los Angeles
>district attorney's office continues to investigate paparazzi photographers'
>aggressive tactics, said spokeswoman Jane Robison.
>attempt to get the photograph."
>increasingly aggressive behaviour, others call it unfair and unnecessary.
>And it may even be unconstitutional.
>chilling effect" on newspapers and other media, said Jim Ewert, legal
>counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association.
>potentially a story (resulting from the photograph), with a frivolous
>lawsuit in an attempt to keep the public from being informed," he said. "The
>constitution demands a little bit higher standard before the government puts
>the kibosh on a newspaper's ability to publish that story."
>infringement on the rights of journalists."
>until they catch the celebrity in a state of compromise," she said. "They
>engage in assaultive behaviour, and we can't condone that."
>photo agency - which bills itself as "the Hollywood Hunt Club" - said
>existing laws already cover attempted assaults and that the new legislation
>unfairly targets celebrity photographers.
>celebrity photographer?" he asked.
>paparazzi have emerged to fill the pages with images of the rich and famous.
>The more exclusive the photo, the bigger the paycheque, said former
>celebrity photographer Brad Elterman.
>could be worth $500,000 US, he said. Even less-exclusive pics of hot stars
>can sell for $10,000 or more.
>pictures don't care how they get the photo because they have nothing to
>lose."
>photojournalist by day and a paparazzo at night," said paparazzi photography
>has always been intrusive, but increasing competition has led to more
>in-your-face tactics. There might be "15 to 20 cars outside someone's house,
>waiting for them to leave so you can chase them down," he said.
>got to rein these guys in, so we don't have a Diana here in Southern
>California," he said, referring to the princess who was killed in a Paris
>car crash in 1997 as paparazzi pursued her vehicle. Investigators later
>found that the driver of Diana's car was intoxicated and speeding.
>their publicists returned calls for comment here.
>overzealous photographers, has said that being photographed is the price one
>pays for celebrity, but some tabloids take things too far.
>Madonna's baby,' there are lots of people who are willing to break the law
>to do that," Clooney told CNN in 2003.
>concept of "constructive trespass" for photojournalists. It said that using
>a long lens to capture an image of a person who had "a reasonable
>expectation of privacy" was tantamount to trespassing.
>questioned the constitutionality of that law, but it has not been challenged
>in court, he said. Laws are presumed valid until challenged.
>probably even more unconstitutional, if that's possible," Ewert said.
>law attempts to stop that conduct with a very broad brush."
They hide in bushes? Gee. Makes you wonder what would happen
if the liberal anti-gun halfwits realize they can do target practice
on their own properties. "Oops, I didn't know he was in the bush
there". Bet you a lot of them turn and join the NRA...
-
Rick in Oz wrote:
> http://jam.canoe.ca/Movies/2005/12/30/1373716-ap.html
> helicopters. Some are brazen enough to openly brandish their cameras, like
> old western gunslingers.
> moments - is coveted. They are the paparazzi, purveyors of pix that are the
> lifeblood of the weekly star-tracking mags and tabs. Their photos demand
> huge sums of money and are circulated worldwide. And as the public hunger
> for such glossy grist has grown they've become ever more relentless and
> ruthless. But starting Jan. 1, there'll be some new reins on the paparazzi
> parade.
> against overly aggressive photographers - dubbed "stalkerazzi" - who
> forcefully thrust their cameras into famous faces or crash their car into a
> celebrity's vehicle. They will now be liable for three times the damages
> they inflict; plus they'll lose any payments their published photos might
> earn. Publishers can also be held liable.
> celebrity anywhere in California," said Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez, who
> drafted the bill, which was signed into law in October by Gov. Arnold
> Schwarzenegger. (The former actor had an infamous paparazzi moment in 1998
> when they used their cars to surround his SUV as he and wife Maria Shriver
> picked up their child from school.)
> said. In May, a photographer following Lindsay Lohan crashed into the
> actress's car in West Los Angeles. The photographer was booked for assault
> with a deadly weapon, but prosecutors found insufficient evidence to press
> charges.
> Disneyland parking lot after being followed by paparazzi, and actress Reese
> Witherspoon said photographers tried to run her car off the road in April.
> No criminal charges resulted from those incidents, but the Los Angeles
> district attorney's office continues to investigate paparazzi photographers'
> aggressive tactics, said spokeswoman Jane Robison.
> attempt to get the photograph."
> increasingly aggressive behaviour, others call it unfair and unnecessary.
> And it may even be unconstitutional.
> chilling effect" on newspapers and other media, said Jim Ewert, legal
> counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association.
> potentially a story (resulting from the photograph), with a frivolous
> lawsuit in an attempt to keep the public from being informed," he said. "The
> constitution demands a little bit higher standard before the government puts
> the kibosh on a newspaper's ability to publish that story."
> infringement on the rights of journalists."
> until they catch the celebrity in a state of compromise," she said. "They
> engage in assaultive behaviour, and we can't condone that."
> photo agency - which bills itself as "the Hollywood Hunt Club" - said
> existing laws already cover attempted assaults and that the new legislation
> unfairly targets celebrity photographers.
> celebrity photographer?" he asked.
> paparazzi have emerged to fill the pages with images of the rich and famous.
> The more exclusive the photo, the bigger the paycheque, said former
> celebrity photographer Brad Elterman.
> could be worth $500,000 US, he said. Even less-exclusive pics of hot stars
> can sell for $10,000 or more.
> pictures don't care how they get the photo because they have nothing to
> lose."
> photojournalist by day and a paparazzo at night," said paparazzi photography
> has always been intrusive, but increasing competition has led to more
> in-your-face tactics. There might be "15 to 20 cars outside someone's house,
> waiting for them to leave so you can chase them down," he said.
> got to rein these guys in, so we don't have a Diana here in Southern
> California," he said, referring to the princess who was killed in a Paris
> car crash in 1997 as paparazzi pursued her vehicle. Investigators later
> found that the driver of Diana's car was intoxicated and speeding.
> their publicists returned calls for comment here.
> overzealous photographers, has said that being photographed is the price one
> pays for celebrity, but some tabloids take things too far.
> Madonna's baby,' there are lots of people who are willing to break the law
> to do that," Clooney told CNN in 2003.
> concept of "constructive trespass" for photojournalists. It said that using
> a long lens to capture an image of a person who had "a reasonable
> expectation of privacy" was tantamount to trespassing.
> questioned the constitutionality of that law, but it has not been challenged
> in court, he said. Laws are presumed valid until challenged.
> probably even more unconstitutional, if that's possible," Ewert said.
> law attempts to stop that conduct with a very broad brush."
I totally support this. One of the reasons I participate in this
newsgroup is so I can enjoy the snarky gossip without abetting these
leeches. I don't need to see these photos.
Mez
-
Rick in Oz wrote:
> http://jam.canoe.ca/Movies/2005/12/30/1373716-ap.html
> helicopters. Some are brazen enough to openly brandish their cameras, like
> old western gunslingers.
> moments - is coveted. They are the paparazzi, purveyors of pix that are the
> lifeblood of the weekly star-tracking mags and tabs. Their photos demand
> huge sums of money and are circulated worldwide. And as the public hunger
> for such glossy grist has grown they've become ever more relentless and
> ruthless. But starting Jan. 1, there'll be some new reins on the paparazzi
> parade.
> against overly aggressive photographers - dubbed "stalkerazzi" - who
> forcefully thrust their cameras into famous faces or crash their car into a
> celebrity's vehicle. They will now be liable for three times the damages
> they inflict; plus they'll lose any payments their published photos might
> earn. Publishers can also be held liable.
> celebrity anywhere in California," said Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez, who
> drafted the bill, which was signed into law in October by Gov. Arnold
> Schwarzenegger. (The former actor had an infamous paparazzi moment in 1998
> when they used their cars to surround his SUV as he and wife Maria Shriver
> picked up their child from school.)
> said. In May, a photographer following Lindsay Lohan crashed into the
> actress's car in West Los Angeles. The photographer was booked for assault
> with a deadly weapon, but prosecutors found insufficient evidence to press
> charges.
> Disneyland parking lot after being followed by paparazzi, and actress Reese
> Witherspoon said photographers tried to run her car off the road in April.
> No criminal charges resulted from those incidents, but the Los Angeles
> district attorney's office continues to investigate paparazzi photographers'
> aggressive tactics, said spokeswoman Jane Robison.
> attempt to get the photograph."
> increasingly aggressive behaviour, others call it unfair and unnecessary.
> And it may even be unconstitutional.
> chilling effect" on newspapers and other media, said Jim Ewert, legal
> counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association.
> potentially a story (resulting from the photograph), with a frivolous
> lawsuit in an attempt to keep the public from being informed," he said. "The
> constitution demands a little bit higher standard before the government puts
> the kibosh on a newspaper's ability to publish that story."
> infringement on the rights of journalists."
> until they catch the celebrity in a state of compromise," she said. "They
> engage in assaultive behaviour, and we can't condone that."
> photo agency - which bills itself as "the Hollywood Hunt Club" - said
> existing laws already cover attempted assaults and that the new legislation
> unfairly targets celebrity photographers.
> celebrity photographer?" he asked.
> paparazzi have emerged to fill the pages with images of the rich and famous.
> The more exclusive the photo, the bigger the paycheque, said former
> celebrity photographer Brad Elterman.
> could be worth $500,000 US, he said. Even less-exclusive pics of hot stars
> can sell for $10,000 or more.
> pictures don't care how they get the photo because they have nothing to
> lose."
> photojournalist by day and a paparazzo at night," said paparazzi photography
> has always been intrusive, but increasing competition has led to more
> in-your-face tactics. There might be "15 to 20 cars outside someone's house,
> waiting for them to leave so you can chase them down," he said.
> got to rein these guys in, so we don't have a Diana here in Southern
> California," he said, referring to the princess who was killed in a Paris
> car crash in 1997 as paparazzi pursued her vehicle. Investigators later
> found that the driver of Diana's car was intoxicated and speeding.
> their publicists returned calls for comment here.
> overzealous photographers, has said that being photographed is the price one
> pays for celebrity, but some tabloids take things too far.
> Madonna's baby,' there are lots of people who are willing to break the law
> to do that," Clooney told CNN in 2003.
> concept of "constructive trespass" for photojournalists. It said that using
> a long lens to capture an image of a person who had "a reasonable
> expectation of privacy" was tantamount to trespassing.
> questioned the constitutionality of that law, but it has not been challenged
> in court, he said. Laws are presumed valid until challenged.
> probably even more unconstitutional, if that's possible," Ewert said.
> law attempts to stop that conduct with a very broad brush."
I totally support this. One of the reasons I participate in this
newsgroup is so I can enjoy the snarky gossip without abetting these
leeches. I don't need to see these photos.
Mez
-
http://jam.canoe.ca/Movies/2005/12/30/1373716-ap.html
New California law hits paparazzi in the pocketbook
By SANDY COHEN
LOS ANGELES (AP) - They lurk in bushes, camp out in cars and hover in
helicopters. Some are brazen enough to openly brandish their cameras, like
old western gunslingers.
They may be hated, but their work - candid pictures of celebs in unguarded
moments - is coveted. They are the paparazzi, purveyors of pix that are the
lifeblood of the weekly star-tracking mags and tabs. Their photos demand
huge sums of money and are circulated worldwide. And as the public hunger
for such glossy grist has grown they've become ever more relentless and
ruthless. But starting Jan. 1, there'll be some new reins on the paparazzi
parade.
That's when a California law goes into effect that increases penalties
against overly aggressive photographers - dubbed "stalkerazzi" - who
forcefully thrust their cameras into famous faces or crash their car into a
celebrity's vehicle. They will now be liable for three times the damages
they inflict; plus they'll lose any payments their published photos might
earn. Publishers can also be held liable.
"Now the paparazzi are going to have to think twice about chasing down a
celebrity anywhere in California," said Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez, who
drafted the bill, which was signed into law in October by Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger. (The former actor had an infamous paparazzi moment in 1998
when they used their cars to surround his SUV as he and wife Maria Shriver
picked up their child from school.)
The new law was inspired by a rash of recent celebrity car chases, Montanez
said. In May, a photographer following Lindsay Lohan crashed into the
actress's car in West Los Angeles. The photographer was booked for assault
with a deadly weapon, but prosecutors found insufficient evidence to press
charges.
In August, actress Scarlett Johansson was involved in a minor car crash in a
Disneyland parking lot after being followed by paparazzi, and actress Reese
Witherspoon said photographers tried to run her car off the road in April.
No criminal charges resulted from those incidents, but the Los Angeles
district attorney's office continues to investigate paparazzi photographers'
aggressive tactics, said spokeswoman Jane Robison.
Montanez said the new legislation "targets those who break the law in their
attempt to get the photograph."
While some celebrity shooters think the new law is needed to curb
increasingly aggressive behaviour, others call it unfair and unnecessary.
And it may even be unconstitutional.
Though the legislation is aimed at paparazzi photographers, it could have "a
chilling effect" on newspapers and other media, said Jim Ewert, legal
counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association.
"This law now gives (celebrities) the ability to quash a photograph, and
potentially a story (resulting from the photograph), with a frivolous
lawsuit in an attempt to keep the public from being informed," he said. "The
constitution demands a little bit higher standard before the government puts
the kibosh on a newspaper's ability to publish that story."
Montanez insists the law was "specifically crafted in a way so there is no
infringement on the rights of journalists."
"This is about paparazzi who wait and hunt the celebrities, their prey,
until they catch the celebrity in a state of compromise," she said. "They
engage in assaultive behaviour, and we can't condone that."
Longtime celebrity photographer Frank Griffin, co-owner of the Bauer-Griffin
photo agency - which bills itself as "the Hollywood Hunt Club" - said
existing laws already cover attempted assaults and that the new legislation
unfairly targets celebrity photographers.
"Why should there be different standards for a hard-news photographer and a
celebrity photographer?" he asked.
With the proliferation of photo-filled, celebrity-centred magazines, more
paparazzi have emerged to fill the pages with images of the rich and famous.
The more exclusive the photo, the bigger the paycheque, said former
celebrity photographer Brad Elterman.
Shots of Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner with their new baby, for example,
could be worth $500,000 US, he said. Even less-exclusive pics of hot stars
can sell for $10,000 or more.
"The business is driven by money," Elterman said. "The guys who take the
pictures don't care how they get the photo because they have nothing to
lose."
Jim Ruymen, a Los Angeles photographer for 30 years who worked as "a
photojournalist by day and a paparazzo at night," said paparazzi photography
has always been intrusive, but increasing competition has led to more
in-your-face tactics. There might be "15 to 20 cars outside someone's house,
waiting for them to leave so you can chase them down," he said.
"Part of the paparazzi act is you really have to have no conscience. You've
got to rein these guys in, so we don't have a Diana here in Southern
California," he said, referring to the princess who was killed in a Paris
car crash in 1997 as paparazzi pursued her vehicle. Investigators later
found that the driver of Diana's car was intoxicated and speeding.
Celebrities are likely to appreciate the new legislation, though none of
their publicists returned calls for comment here.
George Clooney, an outspoken defender of the first amendment yet a critic of
overzealous photographers, has said that being photographed is the price one
pays for celebrity, but some tabloids take things too far.
"If you say to someone, 'I'll give you $400,000 for the first picture of
Madonna's baby,' there are lots of people who are willing to break the law
to do that," Clooney told CNN in 2003.
The new legislation amends a bill passed in 1998 that established the
concept of "constructive trespass" for photojournalists. It said that using
a long lens to capture an image of a person who had "a reasonable
expectation of privacy" was tantamount to trespassing.
Ewert, counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association,
questioned the constitutionality of that law, but it has not been challenged
in court, he said. Laws are presumed valid until challenged.
The new legislation, which expands what constitutes invasion of privacy, "is
probably even more unconstitutional, if that's possible," Ewert said.
"We don't apologize for the behaviour of the paparazzi," he said. "But this
law attempts to stop that conduct with a very broad brush."
-
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 13:49:56 +1100, "Rick in Oz"
wrote:
>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/indexd?blogid=7
>rocker Melissa Etheridge in 2004 so he can concentrate on being a family
>man.
>Violet into the world on December 1.
Am I the only one who hates the term "sells up"?
-
Rick in Oz wrote:
> http://breakingnews.iol.ie/entertainment/story.asp?j=12658086&p=yz658y4x&n=1
> 2658200
> Garner a gift basket to celebrate the birth of their baby daughter.
> December 1, and have been flooded with well wishes from loved ones ever
> since.
> co-star Affleck last year (04), has also stepped in to congratulate the
> couple.
> "She'll always have a special place in her heart for Ben."
It's a "nice" gesture in a way but I wonder how Jennifer Garner feels
about that !! If I was the recipient of such a gift, I would take it to
the homeless shelter or battered woman's shelter and give it to them.
-
http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2005-12-05/
Affleck and Garner Not Sponsored by Starbucks
Ben Affleck has laughed off claims he and wife Jennifer Garner are
sponsored by coffee giants Starbucks to drink its beverages whenever they
are in public. In recent months the expectant parents have barely been
spotted without one of the firm's products - prompting speculation they had
arranged a deal to promote the global brand. But Affleck's publicist insists
in the New York Daily News, "No contract with Starbucks. Maybe Ben likes
Starbucks and is willing to ignore the morons who spend their life waiting
to take the same photo every day of him drinking coffee."
- Celebrity Gossip
- "My husband, was as flabbergasted as I was. I think he almost flew out of his skin, he was so surprised and excited. He is just the most supportive and proud friend. My family is just beyond out- of-control excited." - on winning a Golden Globe.
- "I never get recognized! I'll be with my husband (actor Scott Foley from "Felicity") and people will think I'm his manager, and they'll start giving me their business cards." - on (not) being recognized.
- "We looked him up on IMDb, and we just cracked up - his resumé goes on and on. He was even on "Cagney and Lacey"" - on Alias co-star Carl Lumbly.
- Early in the filming of "Daredevil" while doing a stunt, Jennifer became tangled in the wires that were helping her do a flip and she nearly crashed into a wall that she was supposed to flip off. Ben Affleck, in his Daredevil costume, rushed up to her, grabbed her, and pulled her away from the wall before the accident could finish. Jennifer later commented "It was like he was Superman."
- Played saxophone in high school
- Is a trained ballerina who initially left dance for theater acting.
- Named the #1 sexiest woman of 2001 by MAXIM men's magazine.
- Named one of the 50 Most Beautiful People [People Magazine - May 2002]
- Used to be a hostess at Isabella's restaurant in New York W_hen she was trying to launch her acting career.
- Named one of People Magazine's 'Breakthrough Stars of 2001'.
- Graduated from Denison University, Granville, OH, 1994.
- Earned a theater degree from Ohio's Denison University.
- Was going to go to Yale to study drama, but got an acting job in NYC instead.
- Graduated from George Washington High School in Charleston, WV.
- Met husband Scott Foley on the set of "Felicity" (1998).
-
ImagineContact.com is an online service provider which offers a convenient web gateway to freely available binary content, including but not limited to images of Jennifer Garner, as well as other content associated with celebrities posted within Usenet newsgroups. Users can join instantly online and have access to gigabytes of new images, updated daily. Every night, ImagineContact.com automatically crawls, sorts, converts, thumbnails and indexes these files from the Usenet for access by users on the website. Every day there are hundreds of new images posted to the Usenet.
-
The binary content on ImagineContact.com, including but not limited to any and all images of Jennifer Garner, is directly obtained from the Usenet, and as such, reflects the uploaded files of millions of people worldwide. As an online service provider, ImagineContact.com does not and cannot editorialize the content posted on Usenet.
-
Some Usenet postings may contain nudity, otherwise be of an adult nature or will simply be objectionable to some people. Users who object to such content are advised to not use this service.
-
Pics Info
-
- 1280 x 1609
- Jennifer_Garner-see-through_to_pussy-hai
r_1.jpg
- Jun 9th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities.diva
-
- 452 x 622
- Jennifer_Garner-Ripped_Undies-picking_up
_child_from_school-03_29_2009_4.jpg
- Apr 6th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities.caps
-
- 452 x 622
- Jennifer_Garner-Ripped_Undies-picking_up
_child_from_school-03_29_2009_9.jpg
- Apr 6th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities
-
- 452 x 622
- Jennifer_Garner-Ripped_Undies-picking_up
_child_from_school-03_29_2009_2.jpg
- Apr 6th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities.piccaps
-
Pics Info
-
- 960 x 1280
- Elektra001.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities
-
- 1350 x 1800
- Elektra003.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities
-
- 1350 x 1800
- Elektra002.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities.diva
-
- 1350 x 1800
- Elektra006.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities
-
Pics Info
-
- 1349 x 1800
- Elektra008.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities
-
- 1051 x 1400
- Elektra010.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities
-
- 1500 x 2000
- Elektra016.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities.nospam
-
- 2133 x 1600
- Elektra017.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities
-
Pics Info
-
- 1708 x 1280
- Elektra015.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities.alist
-
- 1867 x 1400
- Elektra018.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities.nospam
-
- 1350 x 1800
- Elektra025.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities.alist
-
- 1216 x 1800
- Elektra026.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities.alist
-
Pics Info
-
- 1350 x 1800
- Elektra027.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities.repost
-
- 1181 x 1800
- Elektra028.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.pictures.celebrities.caps
-
- 1350 x 1800
- Elektra030.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities
-
- 1212 x 1600
- Elektra035.jpg
- Mar 8th, 2009
- alt.binaries.celebrities.diva
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Next
