Coming off her successful and swift(y) campaign to change Apple’s music streaming policy, Taylor Swift is riding high. She’s about to kick off the European leg of her tour in England, so she sat down with ITV for an exclusive interview. She ended up chatting about where she sees herself ten years from now, when she’s 35 years old. Apparently, she wants to be like Angelina Jolie when she grows up! Tay-Tay, I feel you.
Taylor tells ITV News that she hopes to have a family by then, but also admits she does worry about protecting her children due to her fame. Swift also said that she’s long admired Angelina Jolie, who is definitely one who knows what it’s like to raise a large brood under the spotlight.
But her admiration stems more for Angelina’s ability to live “her life not just for the purpose of making money or coming up with the most lucrative business deals,” but for what she can give back.
Swift had a slightly different idea in her mind when it came to her future and kids while talking to InStyle last year.
“I don’t know if I’ll have kids,” she told the magazine at the time. “It’s impossible not to picture certain scenarios and how you would try to convince them that they have a normal life when, inevitably, there will be strange men pointing giant cameras at them from the time they are babies.”
It’s true, Angelina Jolie isn’t playing the game at this point for the money, if it ever was about the money for Angelina. Even when Angelina has taken big modeling contracts (like Louis Vuitton), the money goes to charity. Taylor is pretty charitable too and she gives back in major ways, more than many of her pop star contemporaries, although she’s got a ways to go before she reaches Jolie-like proportions. So… what do you think? Do you like Taylor more because she’s becoming a Brangeloonie? Or is that a dealbreaker?
Meanwhile, following the Apple Music streaming thing, Taylor got blasted by a photographer who claims that Taylor is such a control freak that she demands the rights to all photos taken by tour photographers on her tours. Taylor’s rep responded to those accusations, basically saying that Taylor – like Beyonce! – just wants approval over which photos are used/sold. As in, she’s very controlling about her image, but the photographer still has the copyright. I think that whole debate – whether it’s Beyonce or Swifty or anyone else – is stupid on so many levels. For one, if you’re a photographer signing on to be a tour photographer, of course you’re going to have to work with the artists, for better or for worse. Secondly, some of these artists are too control-freaky for their own good.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
The humanitarian work Angelina does is amazing, and she doesn’t do it for the money. But, she did use it for her image when the whole Angie/Brad/Jen fiasco went down. Let’s not kid ourselves.
Yet, she was doing it four years before Brangelina.
Funny, Angelina was doing it many years before she met Brad.
Sounds like you’re the one who’s been kidding themselves.
I wonder if people think because they are not aware of something then it means it didn’t happen or doesn’t exist.
14 YEARS is a long time to be revamping an image she didn’t need to revamp. She didn’t murder anyone nor was she covering up anything. She told the world everything about herself. Has never run away from her past or felt the need to apologize for it. So what was she revamping?
I hate when people drop Angie’s or Brad’s names in their interviews because the story then becomes about them and not the person in the interview
I think she meant that all the work Angelina did for charityprior to Brangelina was uesd to promote her “saintliness” when she was stealing other peoples husbands (on more than one occasion). Don;t kid yourself, Angelina knows how to manipulate the media for her benefit.
Yes, she did. But it was used as PR in turning her from Hollywood’s wild child into the Angelina we see now. And it was used during the triangle days. She does an amazing job, but she does use it for her image. A lot.
Angelina is way past caring what people think of her ‘image’, if she ever cared. Complete financial independence, not caring if she acts again, and getting projects grew lighted to direct or produce has nothing to do with her ‘image’, only if she can make a film that earns money.
it wasn’t “pr” that turned her into who she is now…it is called GROWING UP and seeing a bigger picture…and that happened when she adopted mad…this was prior to her and brad. if you are going to try and promote a fictional narrative, at least get the events and time lines right.
Jesus, fine, she’s a super special snowflake who would never ever use anything for her image. She’s probably the only one in Hollywood.
Angelina is the only hollywood a lister who has no pr-team or spokesperson. Isnt that prove enough that she really doesnt care? If she ever used that for her image then its because that blond airhead tried to make angelina a bad woman and herself the victim (which we all know was not true) until she met justin, heidis boyfriend. All she did was to save herself from that superficial selforiented aniston and that was the best thing she could have done! She had to it because that airhead forced her to do it. If it was just for the image, its been 10 years, she would have stoped doing charity in this intense way years ago. She does so much good, its ok when this comes positive back to her.
Franca, its called growing up! Angelina knows what she does of course, shes a strong and powerfull woman. But to say she only used her work to save her image is childish. angelina said by herself that people are so obsessed in worthless stuff, that its better to use this insane interest to do good with that and bring people to think about things that really matter instead in the life of superrich overpaid american actors who are totaly worthless for out planet!
I didn’t say she ONLY used it fir or. I said she ALSO used it for pr.
Stop Taylor. Dame Jolie will not join your harem of girlfriends.
Yeah, I was wondering if that is what she is aiming for.
I can’t imagine Jolie liking Lena Dunham all that much.
lol i would love to be the fly on the wall if that happened.
I find her annoying. That’s all I’ve got.
+1. She’s got something about her that puts me off. The self-entitlement, the friend collecting, its all so needy,
Right… I am just not into it at all.
Yep. That is all I got.
Taylor tends to do more charitable work if there are cameras involved, unlike Angelina. I don’t see Swifty taking a stand in important issues because she’s too worried about hurting her image. Also, I think she loves the shallow world of celebrity too much.
Taylor does secret charitable stuff, I’ve read anyway. Not everything is publicized, I don’t think.
I don’t have issues with Angelina, but I don’t think she really says controversial things that could hurt her image in terms of international issues. Most of what she says is pretty much logical and no one would contest what she’s saying (i.e rape in war zones is bad, let’s help refugees, women are suffering in other lands, etc.). She’s never talked about the complicity of particular countries in creating certain situations around the world, so I’ve never really gotten the whole Angelina is taking a stand while everyone else stays silent mantra. I’m not dissing Angelina though. I’m sure her name lends publicity to certain causes. I just don’t think she says anything outspoken that could land her in trouble, hurt her image, or be seen as divisive or unpopular.
Does she have to create controversy? She has children, maybe there are things she does not want to be involved in. Some people create controversy, send the bloggers on a writing rage, and suddenly the conversation stops and nothing happens. She is helping in what she can, she doesn’t have to hurt her image or land in trouble for her help to be meaningful.
No, I’m not saying she has to create controversy. I’m saying that I don’t think she says anything controversial that could hurt her image, which seemed to be the criticism lobbied at Taylor. My response is in relation to the critique of Taylor — that’s the context I’m looking at. I tried my best to write out my point as in such a way that it would not be misconstrued, since it is Angelina we’re talking about, but ultimately, imo, Jolie doesn’t say anything that could hurt her image any more than Taylor does. I do agree she helps out where she can, however.
What was a AJ doing at age 25? It’s unfair to compare how a 25 year old handles this sort of thing versus a 40 year old. At age 25, Jolie was taking questionable pictures with a horse; it doesn’t seem that the big issues of the day concerned her all that much. At 40, she’s doing incredible work to bring attention to important issues that much of the world would rather ignore.
There’s an awful lot of growth that goes on between those ages. I doubt many people would have looked at those horse pictures and seen somebody who’d be working with the U.N.
Uh-oh, I just looked at the horse images. What was she doing???
I think Jolie is sincerely committed to her causes, but there is plenty of photography involved.
Taylor actually does quite a bit of charity work. (And yes, I am a fan, and no, I’m not a rabid Swifty).
The thing with the photographer doesn’t surprise me. Taylor is very willing to speak out about injustice…if it directly affects her.
She’s like Megyn Kelly, tbh.
Angelina has been doing her Humanitarian work for 14 years.. She and Brad have been together for a bit over 10.
I don’t get the obsession Beyonce and Taylor have regarding pictures. I mean it just seems they spend so much time trying to look perfect in every photo. Angelina is not on social media. Not posting selfies or on Instagram posting pictures. NOR is she on twitter. The pictures we see of her are either candid shots, on a RC , her UN work and such. I think people obsessed with image go a lot further in trying to control things.
Angelina was different when she was 25 though. Maybe Taylor will be like Angelina when she’s 39. Who knows? Not that I really care what Taylor does with her future…
She needs to stop talking. I’ll like her more when she stops talking and starts feeling like an authentic human being. Not a picture perfect tumblr ballerina paparazzi doll.
It’s funny with Taylor there’s such a ‘waiting for the other shoe to drop’ feeling about her. Like it all seems so pretty and stable and she’s got the feminist! girlfriends and the popular boyfriend and the amazing music career and still…something about her gives me pause.
Even when a celebrity is a total jerk I can accept that and not like them, but something about Taylor keeps me at a distance just waiting for ‘it’.
Here’s the thing: you sign a contract to do the photography for a tour. You are working FOR the artist, not for yourself. You are being hired to document a tour. If I contract you to do my wedding photos, THAT is what I am contracting you for. I would expect that I would have the right to decide if and when you are using those photographs that I have paid you to take. If I don’t like what you want to use my photo for, I will not allow you to use it. This is NO different. A tour photographer is a contract player and must abide by the contract signed. Musicians have no such contract with Apple that will allow Apple to do what they like with their music, including not paying them for the use of it.
From what I’ve read the contract that Taylor makes these photographers sign is incredibly restrictive. She’s not paying the photographer at all. She doesn’t ever pay the photographer one cent. The photographer is hired by publication X to take photos. The photographer is given a press pass by Taylor’s team in accordance with that signed contract.
However, the contract restricts the photographer from ever using the photos in any capacity or selling the photos to any outlet except publication X, even if publication X declines to pay for the photos and use them. The photographer is not allowed to use them in any other capacity–even to include one shot in a professional portfolio.
The contract does allow Taylor and her team to use the photos the photographer takes in any capacity she likes without ever having to pay the photographer for the use of those photos. Her team could like one of the photos and slap it on a t-shirt and make $35 million from it and never ever have to pay the photographer for use of that photo on the merchandise. That is where the Apple comparisons are coming from.
and the photographer is free to NOT sign the contract. Again, there is no such contract with Apple.
The contract IS restrictive, but it has also, to a degree, been misrepresented. (as per the 2011 contract) It does not say that the photographer can’t use the photographs again, he/she has to have the written consent of FEI to use them (paragraph 2, at the end). FEI can use the images for NON COMMERCIAL use (paragraph 3). So the contract does NOT state that FEI can slap a picture on a t-shirt and sell it, because that would be commercial use and the contract only covers FEI having the rights to that photograph in perpetuity for non commercial use.
I agree, and the wedding photographer is a good example. I can see allowing the photos to be used in a portfolio as an example of work, but not for any further use, especially commercial.
I think it’s really great that she is considering the well-being of her hypothetical future children. I don’t think most celebrities ever think about that. They just think about what they want – a baby. They don’t think about the impact their fame has on their children. Sometimes, frankly, it ruins them for life.
i agree. when i think about it its probably the best if celebs wouldnt have children.
Sounds good TS! Love both Swifty and Angelina!!
Maybe Taylor is currying favor with the commentors here at Celebitchy hah!
this was a really nice post. In idea I would like to put in writing like this additionally � taking time and actual effort to make a very good article� but what can I say� I procrastinate alot and by no means seem to get something done.