RSS Feeds
Chosen Two Outed As Test Tube Babies
Posted by Molly Friedman at 10:15 AM on July 25, 2008
Excellent news to report for anyone who still thinks Angelina Jolie is perfection incarnate, in spite of that silly husband-stealing fiasco, heroin tape, Billy Bob phase, Life Or Something Like It and...well, there are probably a few of you left! According to Us, the conception of the Chosen Two was quite literally chosen to arrive at a specific point in Brangelina's magical life. A source tells the weekly that the "impatient" soccer team managers didn't rely on Brad's super-sperm or Jolie's scream-filled bedroom style to spontaneously produce Knox and Viv. Rather, the no-longer-immortal duo paid a hefty sum for in vitro treatments to speed up their plan to "have 10 kids...while [they're] young." But their goal may not work out quite as planned. Reports that Angelina is being forced into joining the trendy rapid weight loss/gain club for her next role may cause a serious delay in recruiting new Jolie-Pitts for quite some time.
Even though its B.O. numbers didn't exactly scream "Sequel!", the folks behind 1999's The Thomas Crown Affair, also known as Yet Another Chance For Pierce Brosnan To Convince Us He's Charming, are in pre-production mode for the second installment, slated for a 2009 release. The film's original female lead, Rene Russo, intelligently declined to participate in the inevitable disaster, leading producers to seek out Jolie as her replacement. The only glitch? Said folks have worked with Jolie before on Wanted, and reportedly fear another round of Lohan-esque fainting spells the then-skinny-as-a-rail Jolie kept experiencing while on set. As a result, they're said to be requiring their leading lady to pack on 30 pounds. As in, now. One week after giving birth to twins. Which begs the question: is it possible that Jolie has sped far ahead of post-pregnancy slim fast stars Jessica Alba and J. Lo in shedding her tent-dress-requiring baby weight already? And if not, why the need for this unnecessary sequel to star such a "weighty" co-star?
Ah, yes. The role is that of an "action woman." Because Jolie hasn't ever portrayed a gunfire-equipped, stunt scene-ready, action hero before or anything.
[Photo credits: X17, Wireimage]
Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)
There are currently no AU comments for this post.
inkydinkydo
Posted 3:19 PM 25/7/08
Ick. Ick. And more ick.
inkydinkydo
OldTowneTavern
Posted 2:35 PM 25/7/08
I hope Angelina was watching as they mixed that potion, or those kids will look just like her doctor. Ugly will out.
OldTowneTavern
MissFiFi
Posted 2:30 PM 25/7/08
@RocketRockit: Brilliantly stated. My ears bled through his wailing.
MissFiFi
Beppo
Posted 1:51 PM 25/7/08
@Old No.7: They're not married, which makes it more egregious.
Beppo
Old No.7
Posted 10:59 AM 25/7/08
You're married to one of the world's most stunning women, yet to procreate with her you get to jack-off into a plastic bottle.
Meanwhile, you're ex-wife, who's no Broom Hilda herself, would mount a street bum, if he would produce some viable sperm for her loudly-ringing biological clock.
The grass isn't always greener, huh Brad?
Old No.7
RocketRockit
Posted 10:29 AM 25/7/08
Anyone who is shocked by the in vitro news deserves a PA job on the set of "The Thomas Crown Affair: Part Two, Totally Unnecessary, But Pierce Needs to Do Something to Erase the Memory of His Horrific Singing."
RocketRockit
Scout 3.0
Posted 11:01 PM 25/7/08
So, Jolie is the second choice for the female lead on the sequel of a film that didn't do so well and her co-star is a B minus-List actor. It kinda makes sense. Which of her recent movies have done well enough to justify better? (And I know she got an Oscar and Gia was awesome but that was awhile ago.)
Scout 3.0
SikeChick19
Posted 11:29 PM 25/7/08
Uh, who cares how they're babies were made? Why is this reported as if they've done something wrong or sneaky? Is IVF dirty or something? Maybe people shouldn't assume that pretty people don't experience fertility problems.
SikeChick19
Elsie_Tanner
Posted 11:21 PM 25/7/08
Wasn't there a Defamer post a while back speculating that the suspicious number of twin births in Hollywood of late (Julia Roberts' kids, Brad n Ange er...) was due to IVF? The truth will out...
Elsie_Tanner
Smackdown
Posted 11:17 PM 25/7/08
"Fainting spells..."
So that's what they're calling "nodding off" nowadays?
Smackdown
bigredgambler
Posted 11:44 PM 25/7/08
@SikeChick19: It's the illusion of perfection around this couple that makes the news interesting. That and the fact they didn't screw like dogs on your front lawn for the chosen twins is also interesting considering how a regular schmuck or schmuckette would with either of those two.
bigredgambler
Oxycontinmoron
Posted 12:09 AM 26/7/08
"...thanks Brock for those sports updates. And now in entertainment news we....what's that? Are you sure?! Okay. Sure.
Ladies and gentlemen we were about to discuss recent developments in the Angelina Jolie / Brad Pitt baby story but I have just been informed NO ONE CARES!
Thank you and good night.
Oxycontinmoron
SikeChick19
Posted 12:44 AM 26/7/08
@SikeChick19:
Um, I meant "their". Yikes!
@bigredgambler:
Well, if they were going around saying they screwed like dogs in order to conceive then maybe it would be something interesting and vaguely newsworthy. However, the fact that other people want to think they screwed like dogs to make the babies and are angry and/or disappointed that they didn't, doesn't really make it all that interesting or particularly newsworthy. It actually just makes it creepy because, per usual, people are far too concerned with other people's sex lives.
On another note, it annoys me when Hollywood not only remakes a classic movie, but then decides to produce a sequel for their stupid remake (or two or three *cough*Ocean's 12 & 13). Ugh! I'm gripy today.
SikeChick19
hummingpenguin
Posted 2:55 AM 26/7/08
@SikeChick19: There have also been comments, re: Brad wanting "real" children, that make them come off as hypocrites. It isn't that IVF is bad in itself. It just puts a dent in the facade of these particular people who bank so heavily on their supposed biological perfection. To make it seem like pregnancy and child-rearing is a piece of cake, to hide the struggle (if there was one), is kind of insulting to ordinary civilians who really have a difficult time with infertility.
This is rambling, I know, but I do believe there is a case to made against them here.
hummingpenguin
TheLemon
Posted 2:53 AM 26/7/08
I think people who have IVF because they can't have a baby any other way (besides adoption) might be a little offended that Brad & Ang skipped over the whole "trying" part and just went straight to IVF to make the behbehs fit into their schedule. As if IVF is just another fun way to control every possible thing. Maybe that's why they didn't mention it?
TheLemon
RocketRockit
Posted 2:52 AM 26/7/08
@SikeChick19: Totally agree. There's nothing weird or bad or newsworthy about IVF. I just don't know why anyone would find this shocking, considering how low the odds of conceiving male/female fraternal twins the old-fashioned way is.
RocketRockit
RocketRockit
Posted 2:50 AM 26/7/08
@MissFiFi: I was embarrassed for him. I almost wanted to leave the theater.
RocketRockit
TheLemon
Posted 4:03 AM 26/7/08
@RocketRockit: Not aimed at me, but I'll take a guess anyway. They recently had a biological child. Admittedly, I don't know if IVF was involved in her conception. Assuming it wasn't, they were plenty fertile a few years ago. Usually, couples in that position don't go the IVF route until they have tried to get pregnant for at least 2-3 years. Then there is testing to find "the problem", which takes time. IVF is often a last resort for infertile couples hoping to have biological children.
TheLemon
RocketRockit
Posted 3:55 AM 26/7/08
@hummingpenguin: For argument's sake, how do we know that they don't have fertility problems?
RocketRockit
RocketRockit
Posted 4:12 AM 26/7/08
@TheLemon: That's true, we don't know if Shiloh was conceived via IVF or the old-fashioned way (and do any of us really want to know?). I just don't want to judge them either way -- if they've had IVF, I don't think that it should be viewed as taking away from couples who have struggled to conceive, but I can understand how it would feel to see this insanely rich couple that almost seem to collect children, just IVFing away to complete whatever their ideal set of children is. Wait, maybe that is judgey. In any case, if it was IVF, no one should be surprised, and I don't want to judge anyone who really wants children, biological or not, naturally conceived or not.
RocketRockit
TryThisAtHome
Posted 4:58 AM 26/7/08
You can still f*ck like a bunny and also have IVF. The two are not mutually exclusive.
TryThisAtHome
raincoaster
Posted 7:12 AM 26/7/08
I think this may be the awesomest proof of the stupidity of meat puppets: you have a perfect excuse to have all the sex you ever wanted with BRAD PITT and you go IVF instead. I mean, seriously. "No, honey, it happens. Let's try for another year," isn't THAT hard to endure, is it Ange?
raincoaster
SikeChick19
Posted 10:31 PM 28/7/08
@hummingpenguin:
So the fact that we don't see the day-to-day struggles of Angie's pregnancy or watch Brad break-up fights between Pax and Zahara means what? Anyone dumb enough to think that because they're famous, they don't have those problems probably should avoid breeding her/himself. They are celebrities. Some would argue (many have) that it's part of their job to look good and healthy and happy in public. I don't buy into that particular load, but I'm certainly not going to knock someone who does look good.
And I don't know that we've actually heard Brad say he wants "real" children. A tabloid article claimed a source attributed that commit to Brad. Tabs = not always reliable.
SikeChick19