Jennifer Aniston Naked in GQ - Stunning or Sad?
Filed under: CELEBRITY STYLE, Celebrity, Hot or Not
Jennifer Aniston: Stunning or Sad?
At 39-years-old, America's favorite romantically-challenged TV icon has still got it. Jennifer Aniston appears on the cover of this month's GQ in barely more than her birthday suit -- but, while she obviously looks gorgeous, we have to wonder: Does this seem a little desperate to anyone else?
Because if you'll remember, Jen's been "revealing" that she's still a little bitter about her Brangelina-induced break-up -- particularly the part where Angie and Brad fell for one another while he and Jen were still married.
Not like that it wasn't totally obvious to the rest of us, but when your ex-husband's new super-hot girlfriend publicly proclaims that he wasn't faithful to you, that's gotta sting.
Of course it wasn't always this way. In the 90's Jennifer Aniston was the center of the universe -- with every man in Hollywood (and beyond) dying for a date with the adorable girl next door.
So when she hooked up with Brad Pitt -- arguably the most desirable man on the planet -- it was a romance that we'd once thought was only possible in fairy tales and impossible romantic comedies.
But by January 2005, that fairy tale crumbled to pieces. Brad and Jen had been sordidly usurped by Brad and Angie, who'd met on the set of their sexy thriller, Mr. and Mrs. Smith. By November of that year Jen was on the comeback trail, showing the world she was over the break-up by showing some skin as GQ's first "Woman of the Year."
And for a moment, things looked good. Maybe Vince Vaughn wasn't just a rebound guy after all. Sure they seemed totally wrong for one another, but if they were getting married then clearly it'd all worked out for the best. Hooray! The dumped girl has been cured!
Oh wait. Maybe not. It seems Jen wasn't ready to accept that she'd fallen from "World's Most Desirable Heartthrob" to "That Chubby Guy You Met in Line for Pretzels at the Knicks Game." And of course rumors start to circulate that she's romantically illiterate and will never find love.
And just for fun, in December 2006, almost two years after Brad and Jen had bombed, our heroine, unlucky in love, gets to relive her failed marriage while suffering through a failed engagement. Awesome!
And that led to a few pretty lonely months. Jen dated some random guy no one had ever heard of -- and it still didn't work out -- but by that point the world had grown weary of the eminent disaster that was every Jennifer Aniston relationship.
OK, time to triumph over tragedy! In November 2007 we met the new Jennifer Aniston -- ready to break free from botched marriages, engagements, friendships, and whatever -- set to devour life as a confident, secure, totally not needy (so there's no reason to be scared of marrying me!) woman in the prime of her life.












Stupid Jimmy 12-11-2008 @ 2:31PM
She is incredibly stunning.
Reply
Alex 12-14-2008 @ 2:08PM
Jennifer Aniston's NUDE video here:
http://celebcvid.com/video.php?v=Jennifer_Aniston_nude
melby 12-15-2008 @ 12:35PM
I agree. I think it is awesome! Why wait, you ask... Well,
why show your 20 year old body off? A body like that at 39 is
not that common. I would be plastering mine all over too. Come on... they were totally cute and tasteful.
guest 12-14-2008 @ 10:29PM
But do not forget, she has never had a kid......
wowmans 12-15-2008 @ 1:04AM
Jennifer Aniston is fully exposed again. Here is a site that has her and the other popular stars with no much clothes on
http://www.warriorrun.com/jennifer-ann/
She has an entire spread on the 3rd page.
Megan Fox 2-02-2009 @ 8:48AM
WOW
I've just found Jennifer Aniston Sex Video HERE
http://exclusio.cn/celeb/.php?v=Jennifer_Aniston_Sex_Video
Good quality video...
1xxl 2-02-2009 @ 8:24AM
WOW
I've just found Jennifer Anniston Sex Video HERE
http://exclusio.cn/celeb/.php?v=Jennifer_Anniston_Sex_Video
Good quality video...
Dave 12-11-2008 @ 3:37PM
Aniston is an attractive woman, but incredibly stunning is a stretch.
Reply
amarie 12-11-2008 @ 4:43PM
she is stunningly gorgeous, any man would be lucky to have her and i dont think shes desperate. It's not like she called GQ and begged them to let her be naked on their cover.. no they called her and asked her to do the cover nude.. shes doing it because shes not always going to have that smokin body so why not do something that u can look back and be like .. wow i was hot ! i would do it if i had the chance and ive been in a relationship for 3 years.. it has nothing to do with desperation !!
Keri 12-14-2008 @ 7:25PM
Well.... if attractive is all you can say I'd really like to see the women you are with. Jen has a naturalness to her beauty that Angelina will never have. I must agree with those who say she is better off without Brad.
rainking 12-11-2008 @ 4:37PM
HOTTTTT!
Reply
Texmac 12-11-2008 @ 4:43PM
This lady has earned her place in the world of simple beauty, "You go girl"
Reply
Ken 12-11-2008 @ 8:48PM
already famous, so removing your clothing is just cheapening the product... other women do it to gain attention - and that is all this is - starved for attention because Brad and Angelina get all the good attention for all their good works.
Reply
Donna 12-15-2008 @ 9:27AM
if you have ever seen her interviewed, you would know she is very content in "her own skin" There is nothing cheap about her, or about this creatively composed photograph. It's ART
Sharon 12-14-2008 @ 3:15PM
The first word I think of is "publicity". I have to agree that she is desperate for attention, probably out of jealously. She is seeing how happy Brad & Angie are. She may even have some fantasy that Brad will notice her again. Sort of a "see what you gave up" kind of message. She really needs to move on and get over it. Maybe she should take a cue from Brangie and start helping others in need and using her celebrity to do good things for the world. Instead she seems to have the "poor me" attitude and only wants to focus on herself and her so-called career. After all, isn't that one reason Brad left her? I also have to agree that she is pretty, but not stunning. Now Angie...she is definitely stunning and I'm not even a guy.
Madeleine 12-14-2008 @ 5:32PM
I don't think she is desperate, she is adorable. I don't think Angie and Brad are all that and a bag of chips, he looks like he needs a good bath and his age is really starting to show, if you heard his interview with Larry King he is one step away from retarded. Angie dons a scarf and sits and talks with a bunch of starving women in Africa, she should give them each some money instead of not eating because they are not eating. She gives two million a year to charity, she makes 20 million a picture, nice tax break there. She is a member of the CFR, enough said. They are two idiots with money, thats all. Brad has donated one house since Katrina, and he was paid for it, why doesn't he just give out these homes, thats donating, not building and waiting for someone else to pay for them, no takers yet so no houses for the needy. Sorry, I'm must be thinking of a different power couple, these two are sneaky losers. Angie posed nude for W magazine, she looked like hell too. Jen is hardly desperate. Lets tell it like it is, Jen might not think so but she is well rid of Brad, can any man be more stuck in a relationship than Brad? She stole Billy Bob Thorton too, his wife was pregnant at the time so this is what Angie does, she seems like the desperate one to me and in a year or two Brad will be long gone and paying through the nose. .
G 12-14-2008 @ 5:25PM
Well thats just stupid Ken
Donna Sullivan 12-15-2008 @ 9:24AM
Absolutely gorgeous! The tie is a very complimentary addition to an already compelling photo. Love it! Very tastefully done.
Reply
kim 12-17-2008 @ 12:36AM
Desperate? really? why is she desperate? because she is 39? if she was 29 there would be no questions. she looks great and if she is comfortable with herself, what makes that desperate. I agree with the poster who said, " go girl"
Reply
Nicholas 12-14-2008 @ 3:14PM
Desperate. Put your clothes back on, and stay behind the scenes, Jennifer. Your day has come and gone.
Reply