Blake Lively wants to keep having lots of babies: ‘We’re officially breeders’


I really do think that Blake Lively has the best pair of legs in Hollywood, or one of the best pairs of legs. These are photos of Blake outside of Rockefeller Center on Monday, where she appeared on the Today Show to promote her new movie, The Shallows. Blake is well into her second trimester of her second pregnancy, and just like her first pregnancy, she looks totally amazing. She really looks so stunning and glow-y, it’s a wonder she doesn’t just stay permanently pregnant. And from what she told Savannah Guthrie, that’s the plan. Blake says that she and Ryan Reynolds want so many babies. Some assorted quotes:

Her 2-year-old, James: “She’s always doing something fun and exciting. She’s the most fun, funny human being I’ve ever been around in my life.”

She wants more than two kids: “I’m one of five kids; my husband’s one of four. We’re officially breeders. You can go on our website and we will give you some of our children.”

Filming The Shallows alone: “At least I got beautiful settings and a shark and all these things to help me! But an isolation film is tough. It’s you the whole time and your imagination. I don’t know. I hope people like it… We shot in this beautiful island—Lord Howe Island. No one’s ever shot there before. It was pristine and amazing. And then the rest of it was basically in a giant swimming pool.”

She isn’t afraid of sharks: “I actually had an amazing experience. I went diving with great white sharks and an incredible shark conservationist. Being in the water amongst them, it suddenly takes away that fear, because you see them in movies and they’re villainized and all of that, but when you’re in their habitat, you see that they’re not actually hunting you, you know? They’re just in the sea.”

But the shark is definitely the enemy in The Shallows: “Because of global warming, sharks are pushed closer to shore. She’s attacked, and you think of a shark attack being in the deep ocean. But it’s almost scarier when the shore is right there and it’s just so close. It comes in handy that she’s a medical student. I think that she’s not necessarily the most resourceful person to start, but it just shows the human’s ability to survive when you’re faced with life or death.”

[From E! News]

The most unbelievable part (and I mean that literally, as in I do not believe it) is that Blake is playing a med student. Nope! I’ll buy Blake as a fashion student. I’ll buy her as a creative writing student (“allure of Antebellum,” anyone?). I’ll even buy her as a cooking-school student. But medical student? No. Never. As for Blake wanting lots and lots and babies… sure, I hope she does. She seems to have easy, no-drama pregnancies and it seems that she and Ryan both want a lot of kids, so go for it. I hate the term “breeders” though.


Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

146 Responses to “Blake Lively wants to keep having lots of babies: ‘We’re officially breeders’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Here or there says:

    Better her a med student than Natalie Portman as an established physicist.

    • Missy says:

      No. Natalie was voted “Most Likely To Succeed” in high school, and has an ivy league education. She might not be well-liked here, but she is intelligent.

      • kok says:

        When you are famous since a child and get accepted into an ivy……..

        Yea, that doesn’t impress me much. What does impress me? The people I know who worked hard to get into league schools…who aren’t public figures.

        They want you if you’re famous, intelligent or not. You don’t need to try. She may be smart compared to the rest of hollywood, but getting into an ivy league when you’re famous is not impressive.

      • Naya says:

        Truth. Natalie has actually demonstrated that she possesses a real brain unlike this woman. Every time she opens her mouth stupidity comes spewing out. I cant even with people who would try to put them in the same sentence.

      • JenniferJustice says:

        Portman graduated from Harvard. It was always her goal to go to college regardless of her acting career. Her father is a doctor. She got into Harvard because she had a 4.0 in highschool and graduated with honors. She didn’t get the preferential treatment for being famous that you think she did. Neither did Jodi Foster. They are both highly intelligent, hard working and committed. They earned everything they got.

      • teacakes says:

        yeah but does everyone with a 4.0 in high school get accepted to Harvard if they apply? I’m pretty sure her fame did help, as did her money (parents were rich enough to pay Ivy League tuition fees without needing to touch Natalie’s movie money).

        That’s not to say she wasn’t smart, at the very least she seems somewhat well-read, in contrast to Lively and her ilk.

      • roroooter says:

        In defense of Natalie, let’s say she did have strings pulled to get her into Harvard. Fine. However, Natalie and only Natalie could do the work to STAY at Harvard and graduate. Listen, the boards of these Ivys want famous people, yes, but I’m here to tell you the professors don’t give a sh*t if you’re famous or not and will flunk you in a heartbeat if you don’t do the WORK. She did the work and graduated. I’ve had friends who’ve gone to Harvard and Yale and Columbia and Brown and they’re NOT EASY SCHOOLS. Everyone is SMART! You have to be smart to survive, So, yeah, my money’s on Natalie being intelligent.

      • perplexed says:

        I give her credit for graduating. I’m not diminishing that. She has the degree and no one can take it away from her. Ditto for Emma Watson and whoever else are actors who stuck it out and got their degrees despite knowing that they could drop out at anytime.

        But Harvard is known for grade inflation. People are always talking about Harvard handing honours out like candy. Heck, even Natalie admitted she benefitted from grade inflation during the speech she gave at Harvard recently.

        I don’t think Natalie is dumb (I’d say she’s a motivated person of normal intelligence who had a good support structure), but I don’t think the entire school population at those schools is smart either (cue citing the infamous George W. Bush example). Stanford isn’t an Ivy but it is a prestigious and highly reputed school, and the swimmer who got 6 months for rape doesn’t strike me as bright at all. Before he had messed up in the worst way possible, he was at one point going to a very prestigious school. But boy is he ever dumb, dumb, dumb. I was in shock at how stupid this kid who happens to be going to Stanford of all places happened to be.

      • Poisonous Lookalike says:

        @rorooter, they may not be easy schools, but that doesn’t mean students at other schools have it better. When I was doing the lit review for my master’s thesis, I found a relevant PhD thesis from a Columbia student… and it was all of 30 pages. My master’s thesis was more than double that length; and my doctoral dissertation was 10 times its length.

        Since it was highly relevant to my experiment, I read the thesis in full and was not impressed. It really wasn’t even at the caliber of an honors undergrad thesis. That was a very eye-opening experience, and a good reason why I don’t buy one bit of the Ivy League hype.

      • Redgrl says:

        Rorooter — George W Bush was accepted at and went to an Ivy League school. Enough said.

    • tegteg says:

      Natalie Portman got her BA at Harvard and was Alan Dershowitz’s research assistant, so it’s not too out there compared to Lively as a med student.

    • CornyBlue says:

      How is Natalie Portman not believable as a scientist. She has published research papers in science journals

      • Here or there says:

        She co-authored, which in peer-reviewed lingo means should could have contributed to the work, but was not the lead scientist, and may not even have had a hand in actually writing it.

        On the NeuroImage paper, she’s listed as the next-to-last author on the paper, which is lowest in the scheme of things.
        First author – most contributed to the work, last author is usually the head of the lab/ head of the funding responsible for the work.

        I wouldn’t say she has ‘published research,’ but more likely contributed to work that was published. Big difference to those in STEM.

      • CornyBlue says:

        She was in high school. Of course they are co authored. Why do you want to undermine her achievement ? Also I too work in STEM and I know how appers are written wtf

      • Boo says:

        Uh, i’m 3rd listed on a medical paper and i’m actually the only one of all 3 of us with the most information on the paper. I also did more than half the research. We put the ‘professionals’ – doctor, science person – first because they had the publishing source, they were helping treat the patients and they did contribute. But the entire paper was based on 10 years of my research and interaction in the field.

        fwiw, I asked to be listed last. It was important the paper be taken seriously as consideration at least on behalf of patients and doctors involved. So, you can’t always go by order of names on papers.

        Also lots of papers get published which are not trustworthy but that’s a whole other issue.

      • perplexed says:

        If Natalie Portman was a Phd student who had 10 co-authored or 3rd listed authorships, I could believe that she was a genuine career scientist who did a lot of hard work in her science career and got shafted and taken advantage by her advisor/mentor/PI. That I believe happens.

        But in her case she hasn’t done anything science-related beyond her BA in psychology, so I guess I don’t see anything wrong with saying that she’s not a scientist who has published extensively as a researcher. If she got published when she was in high school, I see that as indicative of the fact that she went to a really good public high school and was privy to opportunities that perhaps people from other backgrounds who are just as bright might not have had access to. I won’t take away her achievement that she got one paper published, but I don’t think of her as a a career scientist whose academic career is on par with other scientists. I see her as more of a highly motivated student who took good care with the opportunities she was granted and did some stuff in science while she was a student (like most of us who are studying do). I would also say she has an “intelligent face”. But why she’s never convincing to me in the roles she has played despite holding a BA from Harvard, EVEN when she’s playing someone who graduated from Harvard, I couldn’t tell you. Her inability to convince me of what she’s playing is inexplicable even to me, since I don’t think of her as being an academically dumb person or anything like that. I do think she can be just as annoying as Blake Lively in interviews though. To be fair, most actresses are since they’re given a lot of opportunities to stick their feet in their mouths. I think Natalie is motivated to be seen as more than a pretty face (which I think is a good goal to have) and to some extent I think she is in terms of her striving to meet academic goals she had for herself, but do I ever actually think she sounds smarter or more interesting than Blake Lively in interviews? Not really.

    • Alex says:

      Natalie is published and went to Harvard so…

      • perplexed says:

        I don’t think she’s a first author though. She was published as a co-author, which I don’t think means much among Phd students or post-docs. She went to Harvard, but I think her accomplishments are exaggerated to some extent. She’s not dumb, but I don’t think she’s a scientist in the vein of what Miayim Bialik could have been if she stayed in academics as a professor. That said, these people are actors and they don’t choose normal looking people to play these roles so it is what it is, I guess. She and Blake Lively are pretty — they’re the ones who will get these roles.

        Even though Natalie did actually go to Harvard, I have to admit I didn’t find her very convincing as a Harvard educated lawyer in The Other Woman or as a Harvard (or Yale) educated doctor in No Strings Attached. It was weird that I didn’t find her convincing in these roles given where she got her education from and that she’s the daughter of a real doctor. Even I’m baffled at myself that I didn’t find her convincing since I wouldn’t go so far as to classify her as dumb or unintelligent. I definitely believe she got good grades as a high school student and that getting a BA was important to her, but in terms of actual acting I don’t find she plays those “intelligent” roles any better than her peers do.

      • Alex says:

        Depends. I’ve coauthored things as an undergrad where I did a LOT of work. Depends on the type of leeway your PI gives you. Mine have given me a lot of latitude and credit. Obviously once you get to your doctrate first author means more but to get authorship as an undergrad means she did some work. Most undergrads get zero authorship on papers. Obviously it depends on how many authors, what position she is in, etc etc. But again she’s no slouch. Blake Lively seems like an idiot

      • perplexed says:

        I think she’s a normal educated woman (sort of like Kate Middleton though not nearly as dim) who was able to go to a prestigious university given her socio-economic background. When you look at the neighbourhood she grew up in, I think it would have been weirder if she hadn’t gone to Harvard, if I’m truly honest. People who grew up where she did are most likely expected to go to the prestigious schools (the actress Troian Bellisario from Pretty Little Liars said this about her own privileged background). When someone like Gwyneth Paltrow fails to make it into college on their own, after having the kind of support system that she did, I actually find that much stranger. Portman had the socio-economic privilege and family support to make it to Harvard, not necessarily superior intelligence.

        I think I read somewhere that she got co-author credit when she was in high school, not undergrad.

        She was a research assistant for Alan Dershowitz, but the veracity of the findings in his book have been challenged extensively.

        I find Blake Lively annoying, but I don’t necessarily think she comes off dumber than Portman, just probably “sexier” or more “bombshell-like”. Portman has the more dignified look to her I guess, which can be perceived as intelligent. But I’ve also seen statements from Portman that could probably be interchanged with Lively’s statements and we most likely wouldn’t be able to tell the difference in terms of social or emotional intelligence.

      • Carol says:

        Its perplexing to me that women want to diminish Natalie’s intelligence or her hard work. She may have opinions that contradict yours (by ‘yours’ I don’t mean point to anyone in particular), but that doesn’t mean she isn’t a hard worker or a critical thinker.

        I too know people who have graduated from Harvard and while I wouldn’t call them geniuses. they are smart, well-read and achievers.

      • perplexed says:

        I don’t think it’s diminishing to say that Natalie is of normal intelligence. I also don’t think it’s out of the ordinary to note that she’s a person of normal intelligence who was motivated enough to get a degree and that her socio-economic background played a strong role in helping her get into Harvard and to PAY for her education (she noted that her father insisted that he pay for her education and not use her movie star money to pay for tuition — everybody knows Harvard doesn’t come cheap). That’s simply how the system consisting of the haves and the have-nots works. Saying that Natalie is of normal intelligence and an actress rather than a bona-fide scientist isn’t an insult either.

        As an aside, there’s also nothing in her interviews to really indicate that she’s emotionally or socially smarter than Blake Lively either (as indicated by comments she made about the recession, etc), if people want to insist Lively is so much dumber than Portman. I don’t think Lively says anything profound but I’ve never come away thinking Portman does either.

      • Veronica says:

        I echo perplexed’s opinion on this – mostly because I hate this idea that some people view Ivy Leaguers as Übermensch that can’t be questioned or wrong. Academia is fraught with people who are very narrowly intelligent but not necessarily competent or bereft of personal flaws that may impeded them elsewhere. Doing well in college has a lot less to do with IQ (which is NOT a static number, despite colloquial ideas about the concept) than work ethic and discipline. Yes, some people are naturally smarter than others, there’s no getting around that, but I’m no genius, and I’m usually top of my classes because I put the work in that’s necessary to do well in them.

        This is not to downplay Natalie’s accomplishments – and a degree IS an accomplishment, don’t get me wrong. It takes skill and dedication and work, but it’s not necessarily impossible for somebody with relatively average intelligence to accomplish that – especially if they grew up with the kind of education available to the upper classes in America. Being honest about her privilege is just that. Money and social affluence inevitably play a role in college selection. I have GPA and entrance exam scores that are Ivy League level, but it’s unlikely I could attend them if I was accepted simply because of the financial cost. Overlooking that aspect of academia is how we quietly erase the cost of economic stratification and how it filters out otherwise academically sound candidates.

    • M.A.F. says:

      The only reason why I didn’t buy Portman as a scientist as more to do with the SCRIPT and how her character developed (or lack thereof). Plus, I think she acts the same in everything she does, so there is that.

      But she has always come across as an intelligent woman. Blake? Not so much who just comes across as naive.

      • perplexed says:

        Natalie Portman did sign the petition in defence of Roman Polanski which isn’t much different from Blake’s comments on Woody Allen. Despite the Harvard degree, I think Portman might be more similar to Blake than people want to believe. I don’t think either is naive though — just out for themselves probably in order to get ahead (they both want the roles, which is probably why both have the attitude that they do towards these directors, I guess).

    • perplexed says:

      According to this article, Blake Lively had a 4.2 point average in high school and was elected class president. Just sounds like she chose a different route than Portman based on whatever advice she was getting at the time:

      As far as I’m concerned they both sound annoying in interviews, but I don’t know if Lively is necessarily less hard-working or less driven to succeed in whatever she’s chosen to do than Portman. I think Portman did have the advantage of doing the Star Wars movies and being able to work into her contract that she could go to school from September to May while doing the movies in the summer. For Lively, it sounds like she had to work every day during a school year on Gossip Girl because it was a tv show and thus couldn’t make the Ivy League aspiration come true.

      • M.A.F. says:

        That’s high school. And speaking as a high school teacher, GPA’s can be VERY inflated at that level. VERY INFLATED. For all you know, her senior year, she could have had only two core classes (History and English) and the rest TA classes (she could have met her math and science requirements her junior year). So take that report with a grain of salt.

      • perplexed says:

        Fair enough. I just mentioned it because someone mentioned that Natalie had had a 4.0 gap in high school and graduated with donors. If we are expected to take Portman’s 4.0 seriously, then it seems reasonable to bring up Lively’s record to point out that hers appears equal to Portman’s. Yes, Natalie went to Harvard afterwards, but the grade inflation from her very own 4.0 helped her to get there. My general point is that I don’t think Lively and Portman are necessarily worlds apart in what they achieved in high school, and that Portman had the advantage of getting the Star Wars contract to complete the Harvard degree whereas other actors don’t have the luxury of doing a franchise while studying for a degree. Some have to do tv work which operates on a different type of schedule. To add, Harvard is also known for extreme grade inflation.

    • Kate says:

      Except that Natalie Portman actually is brilliant, maybe not the greatest actress, but she’s no dummy.

  2. Nancy says:

    Don’t tell the parents of the two year boy who was killed by a shark wading in the shallow water by Disney World how much you love sharks. I don’t know about this one, she seems very dim.

    • Goats on the Roof says:

      The 2YO was killed by an alligator, not a shark. Also, I love sharks. Love them. They are gorgeous creatures who are hunted and killed for no other reason than people are scared of them and like their fins.

      • Amelia says:

        Nancy, sharks are hugely important apex predators that contribute a great deal to the ecosystems of the oceans in which they live.
        As scary as they can seem and are portrayed as such in films, the world’s oceans would be much, much worse off without them. There are only about a dozen species of shark that could be considered potentially dangerous to humans, and more people died taking selfies last year than at the hands (fins?) of sharks.

      • Nancy says:

        GOTR: How I got a shark out of an alligator is beyond me. My bad. I lived in Florida and don’t share the love of sharks. As long as they do their thing away from people, fine with me. The alligator situation is getting out of hand though. They were an endangered species and now have gone nuts in FL. They’re appearing in areas where they once didn’t. I’m glad I’m back on dry land where the Golden State Warriors were the biggest enemy and the Cavs took care of them! #KingJames

      • Amelia says:

        How do people deal with alligators in Florida? Are there ways of gator-proofing property to stop them wandering out of their habitat?
        I heard that they crop up near pretty much any body of water, and finding them in swimming pools isn’t as rare as you’d hope it would be.
        As giant, prehistoric predators go, I know they’re fairly chill and usually don’t go out of their way to chomp on humans unlike crocodiles which tend to be (for lack of a better word) more ‘proactive’ when it comes to hunting food, but the idea of sharing a backyard or a theme park with them makes me wonder what steps could be taken to ensure everyone’s safety.

      • Alex says:

        We just deal. As kids we know gators can pop up anywhere. You just don’t bother them. There was a gator in the lake in my neighborhood and he would just chill in the water or right on the bank. Never had any issues. Eventually he had to be moved because he was too big but yea its just a part of FL life

      • KB says:

        I have family that used to live in West Palm Beach, FL and they always had alligators in the neighborhood lakes. They were only like four feet long and not aggressive. I don’t know what they ate, but I remember not feeling particularly threatened by them. You just knew they were there and to look out for them when you were on walks and stuff.

        We have them in Texas too, and sometimes they’ll show up somewhere crazy. There are non-profits that will come and relocate them when they’re really big. There was one a few months ago that showed up in a suburban shopping center that was 12 feet long and 800 pounds. Here’s a link about it, if you’re interested. They named him Godzilla and moved him with a forklift.

      • Lahdidahbaby says:

        Wowzers, KB, what a story – thanks for the link. I love how humanely the removal of that enormous, blind-in-one-eye gator was done. Speaks well for Texas. I can easily imagine such a giant alligator being shot by panicked deputies almost anywhere.

      • Ange says:

        Amelia: can’t speak to gators but where I used to live in Aus had a huge population of Saltwater crocs and it was just part of life. You knew not to swim in the ocean and during wet season most swimming holes were closed and you stayed out of water in general because they could pop up anywhere (they can go in freshwater as well). A lot of people were still taken but they were doing risky things like fishing on the riverbank or had terrible luck like falling out of their boat. The offending croc would be hunted and killed. Croc safety was very big and people often made the front page of the news if they were caught doing something stupid, eg tourists playing on croc traps or in one instance a family of 7 were on the river in a tiny little overweighted dinghy. Living with water predators just means you adapt to them, it’s easy to do if you’re a land dweller.

    • Erinn says:

      I love sharks as well.

      Like any other animal – they do what they have to to survive. Alligators ( the actual killer in that scenario ) freak me out a bit, but I have a weird respect for how amazing and ancient they are.

      But frig- I love sharks. I’d jump at the chance to get in a shark cage.

      • lisa2 says:

        I have great respect for sharks. There is a reason they have not changed much in evolution. They are perfection. and we as humans forget that we are not the rulers of nature.

        regarding Blake.. I don’t envy many celebrities.. but I would sell a part of my soul for her legs..

      • Giddy says:

        Erinn, I admire you because I can’t imagine getting in a shark cage. I react to sharks and alligators with a deep atavistic fear that I cannot control. If somehow I was forced into a shark cage I would probably manage to drown myself in fear while the shark watched!

        lisa2, I agree with you on Blake’s legs. She was on Fallon last night and each time she crossed and re-crossed them my husband was fascinated. I guess I was too, and horribly envious!

      • Sarah says:

        And I was amazed that Sharks were way down on the list of animals that kill humans. Number 2? Elephants, yet we still love them. Number 1? Mosquitoes!

    • Nancy says:

      You’re right kay, it was a stupid early morning post. But on the bright side you got to make me feel bad since you’ve never said a nice thing to me.

    • noway says:

      It was an alligator, a totally different species fish versus amphibian. I don’t think there are great white sharks in the seven seas lagoon at Disney generally the wrong kind of water, fresh not brackish or salt.

      Also, people it is acting. If she can act well, she can play a med student, not like she is actually a med student. I know you all think George Clooney would be a great doctor, or maybe if he is your doctor you don’t mind being sick.

      • PrincessMe says:

        “Also, people it is acting.”

        I came here to say this. She’s acting… she’s not trying to be an ACTUAL med student here. As long as she can ACT the part (and they chose her), what’s the problem? How many times do people people admonish actors for being too “method” by saying “it’s called acting”. Apparently more people need to remember that.

      • pinetree13 says:

        Alligators aren’t amphibians they’re reptiles.

    • Amide says:

      @original kay – Agreed

    • Nancy says:

      I’m going through a divorce and have two kids. My life, as others I know, isn’t going well at the moment. Since I seem to irritate so many, I’ll do you all a favor and stay off the site. Will miss Kitten and GNAT, since they will disagree but not hurt your feelings. Sorry for the pity party. Love to all….

      • nicegirl says:

        Hey Nancy – don’t leave. I am so so sorry to hear about your divorce. Especially with kids – I’ve gone through that hell myself. It can rip your heart out.

        Celebitchy helps me to ‘take a brain break’ – I know others appreciate that ‘escapism can be fun’ and I SURE DO NOT WANT YOU TO BAIL. STAY AROUND, Nancy.

        So you got something confused mistakenly, BFD – get in line. I am almost perpetually confused.

        And in the words of my favorite Aunt (Auntie Kim!!), “F-ck ‘em if they can’t take a joke.”

        Blessings to you Nancy. It will get better.

      • Snowflake says:

        @ Nancy
        Hey, don’t go anywhere. Scr$w the people who are nasty. Don’t let them win. When I see opinions I don’t agree with, oh well, that’s life. Not everyone thinks alike. You’re welcome to say how you feel. Sorry to hear about your divorce, I’m sure that sucks. Hang in there. Don’t go away. Please.

    • mrspanda says:

      Who gives a shit, she skimmed a news story and got something confused. Remind me to triple-fact check every comment I make on Celebitchy – we are clearly passing UN resolutions here and there is no time for errors! ;)

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Don’t leave, Nancy. If the site makes you laugh, you need that right now. Original K and other shark lovers, calm down ffs. Nobody is saying you can’t love sharks. They’re just pointing out the OBVIOUS truth that they are dangerous. And they are. That doesn’t mean they’re evil or bad – they are what they were intended to be. Nancy made a mistake. I’m constantly seeing stories of NC shark attacks – a little boy lost his arm not long ago. Maybe she mixed up the two stories. That doesn’t make her stupid. You are both nice people who maybe got off on the wrong foot?

    • Kitten says:

      Nooooo come back, Nancy!
      Ah, this place can be so brutal sometimes. Man.

      Oh, and add me to the I Love/Respect Sharks list. (^^^)

    • Ana says:

      As I saw that others have corrected you in terms of the predator involved, I’ll ignore that part.

      Other than that, so what?
      Wild animals (!) such as tigers, lions, wolves, bears etc can and do also kill humans on occasion, does that mean that I’m not allowed to like/love them?
      If I put it the other way, I’m hiiiighly arachnophobic and poisonous spiders do kill people occasionally, does that mean that I should adopt your approach and say something akin “How dare you like spiders, don’t you know that they can kill people and you’re disrespecting relatives of the deceased???” to people who are head over heels about them? That’s just plain ridiculous.

      There will always be people who are afraid/hurt/offended by something other people like and it’s unreasonable and, frankly, childish to expect for everyone to conform to your likes and dislikes.

      • Wren says:

        Exactly. Animals kill people all the time. You can like or love a species while still having healthy respect for it and recognizing the dangers it can pose. You can be sad over seemingly needless deaths and tragic accidents caused by the worlds of humans and wild animals overlapping, while still loving said animals.

        The alligator was doing what comes naturally to it, there was no malice or evil intent. It’s still a horrible tragedy, and I feel for the parents.

        The animal doesn’t even have to be wild to be dangerous. Cows kill more people than alligators and sharks combined, and I love cows.

      • Sarah says:

        Elephants are second on the list of animals that kill people. Yet we all love them.

    • Birdix says:

      land shark!
      can we laugh this one off? I post all kinds of stupid, incorrect things, especially since it’s so early west coast when stuff is posted. Don’t mind the grumpiness from anonymous online posters Nancy, seems like you have enough pulling you down already. gl

    • original kay says:

      I don’t know GNAT.

      I do know if we had awards here, I’d nominate you for nicest poster.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        thank you guys for saying that, so much. It means a lot to me. But I have my moments when I’m not nice at all, as I’m sure you have noticed, but are kind enough to overlook. ❤️

      • Kiliki says:

        You’re loved because you’re real AND kind, GNAT. If you didn’t have a spicy or salty side, you wouldn’t be so disarming! We might not trust you❤️❤️❤️

    • Noname says:

      @original kay- maybe Nancy didn’t have her coffee yet? She made a mistake… not really a big deal. I agree that GNAT is the nicest poster and that is something to be proud of. I was always told by my grandmother that if I did not have anything nice to say to not say anything at all.

    • JenniferJustice says:

      Your information is wrong. Your point is mute. I wouldn’t be calling anybody dim for saying they love sharks. I love Gorillas. I’m sure some time in history, a gorilla has killed a human. Does that mean I should hate gorillas or never acknowledge my fascination with them?

  3. Snowflake says:

    She looks great. She knows how to dress her figure, unlike some people %cough% kk.

    • mellie says:

      Agree, but she does have an easier figure to dress than KK — don’t get me wrong…I’m not a KK fan at all, but can you imagine trying to dress that booty…tastefully?!

      • M.A.F. says:

        KK bought that “booty”. It wasn’t nearly as difficult when it was her real butt.

    • Kitten says:

      That yellow dress with the jean jacket is so cute.

    • Elisa the I. says:

      I love both outfits in the pics and she looks incredible!

  4. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I think it’s Rather foolish to be unafraid of sharks. You don’t have to villianize them, but they can and will kill you under certain circumstances.
    She does look beautiful, but she’s very vapid.

    • Spiderpig says:

      So can a dog but no one gives dog lovers a hard time.

      Confused why this is proving controversial.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        That’s utterly ridiculous. There is no comparison and I think you’re smart enough to know that. Also, did I say she couldn’t love sharks, or think they are beautiful? I just think it’s foolish to pretend they are normally gentle, human loving domesticated animals, like dogs. They’re not. You should respect that and treat them as the beautiful, wild and dangerous creatures they are, or you’re very foolish.

      • Wren says:

        Actually I think one should treat all creatures with respect and never assume that something can’t hurt you.

        Domestic animals cause more death and injury than wild animals. Partly because of the increased exposure to them and partly because we become complacent and forget just how much they can hurt us in a very short period of time.

        I don’t think anyone would argue that sharks aren’t potentially dangerous. Blake seemed to be going overboard and oversimplifying (as she does) the fact that they aren’t evil killers, hellbent on chomping their way through humanity.

        I think that our assumption that domestic animals are gentle and people friendly leads to a lot of needless dog bites and other injuries. And worse, that assumption gets carried over to all animals, domestic and wild.

      • Boo says:

        @Spiderpig – Lack of adventurous spirit ;-) also likely not a trailblazer. Seriously though, i’m not Blake’s fan or anything and usually find her annoying, but I enjoy happy people. They’re a breath of fresh air.

        She was speaking about herself and an experience she had and her perspective formed as a result of her singular experience. That makes her inexperienced perhaps but to judge her intelligence or discernment based on that is kind of mean.

        My Dad was born and raised in caribbean. He’d have enjoyed Blake’s story and related to it also.

    • Birdix says:

      I saw a (big) shark scuba diving and it felt like my lizard brain reacted first–instinctively took a huge breath. So handsome but so eerie the way it swam by and swiveled its eyeball backward to keep an eye on what I was doing.
      I’m a little embarrassed to say that I’m excited for this movie–love shark movies.

    • Kiliki says:

      I have to support you here, GNAT.

      Comparing sharks to dogs?! Come on! Only a few sharks, i.e. Great Whites, Hammerheads, are dangerous to humans. They’re also the ones who WILL come for you. It is an evolved emotional response to be afraid of sharks; at the very least one should be educated. Same with dogs, but please. Comparing the two is a real stretch.

      I’m a huge animal lover and until I was twenty I was a bit too romantic about marine life. I think she’s saying she loves sharks for her movie. It’s always irked me when people say they love them because I guarantee over 90% of them haven’t had experience with them as I have. I also know to keep the hell away from dogs you don’t know who might turn on you. I work with rescues everyday.

      Have a healthy fear of sharks and tigers. Other animals as well. It’s a good idea.

      They’re loving but they get scared and they get emotional, just like us. Humans come in good and bad and can learn to control emotional reactions, animals can’t always do that. Have compassion nontheless. Without being stupid.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I agree with you. It’s a ridiculous comparison. Dogs have been domesticated for centuries. A normal dog is loving towards humans and an aggressive dog is usually aggressive BECAUSE of humans. Sharks are wild and see humans as treats or food. That doesn’t make them bad or good, it’s just who they are. Really stupid to have to explain that.

      • Kitten says:

        I just knew that you would be an animal person, Kiliki. Animal people are the best :)
        I agree that it’s good to have a healthy fear or large animals, predatory animals, and animals in general. Even our domesticated animal friends can be unpredictable.

    • Tiny Martian says:

      Agreed, GNAT.

      I think it’s foolish to sit at home on one’s couch fearing sharks…………..if that is the case, then people should seek help, because that would be a serious phobia! But if one is swimming in an area where there could likely potentially be sharks? Then yes, be afraid, and use caution. And yes, I feel the same way about large, off-leash dogs. If you don’t know an animal, and it is strong enough to harm you, then keep your distance! Common sense, and all that.

    • Chinoiserie says:

      When she compared them to dogs and implied they are domesticated or harmless? You just choose look at her words from a perspective she is dim and must not know what she is talking about even though she discussed with shark expert in preparation for this film.

  5. Mia4s says:

    Hey if more kids = less of her “acting”?…I’m fully in favour. 🙄

    • Starkiller says:

      I can never understand comments like this. If you don’t like her, don’t watch her movies. Pretty simple, really.

  6. DenG says:

    Blaaaaake is welcome to breed all she wants to make up for the spawn I’ve never had. Yes, I am spawnless.

    • MsGoblin says:

      I’m spawnless, too, but feel it is socially and environmentally irresponsible to have many, many children.

      • cicada says:

        I agree. Climate change and monoculture is going to make food and water harder to come by in the future which isn’t going to go well with a growing population.

    • Kitten says:

      Spawnless here as well. My boyfriend and I were stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic driving to/from south shore this weekend and he said “serves us all right that the planet will eventually implode from humans draining all of its resources.”

      It was a dark (and slightly hyperbolic) statement but this is the place that your mind goes when you see thousands of people, just one person per car, clogging the highway.

  7. als says:

    I feel like she is the heiress to Jennifer Garner’s ‘throne’.
    Besides her legs and her men what makes her interesting?

    • Naya says:

      I dont know, maybe its because she cant do an interview without reminding the world that she is just like us plebs, a cupcake guzzling machine? Or maybe its the part where she has no sensitivity whatsoever for black slave history or her fetishizing of our bodies? Perhaps its the part where she defends a child molester after his own son calls him out because “career”? Or maybe its that pretentious obsession with artisenal toilet paper? I cant speak for others but I myself find her stupidity fascinating.

    • JenniferJustice says:

      I agree with everything you said Naya, except I don’t see it as stupid – more like niaive and ignorant. She’s perfectly smart – capable of learning, etc. But she’s grown up in a CA bubble and has no clue. The nicer part of me gives her a pass because it’s almost charming – I say almost. Most of spewing is harmless, but then she does something that’s offensive to an entire population of people or sticks up for someone clearly criminal b/c it’s to her advantage to do so and I know there’s no cuteness in that. The charm wore off when I realized she is another who is willing to forget the word integrity if it benefits her. I don’t think she is stupid. I think she is ignorant and in recent years, highly self-serving in her judgment or lack thereof.

      • M.A.F. says:

        “CA bubble?” Are you implying that those of us from California live in a bubble? Take a step back. She grew up in bubble thanks to her parents and how she chooses to live her life as an adult and not so much of where she is from.

        Speaking as someone from California.

    • OrangeCrush says:

      All I see when I look at her is plastic surgery and fake hair, with an underlying layer of smugness. We get it, Blake. You’re married to Deadpool.

      • minx says:

        OrangeCrush, same here. Nose job, boob job, dental work, and little talent. Yes, she dresses nicely, bfd, and her husband is sort of cute. Enough of this chickie.

  8. Pinky says:

    They’re “breeders”? Oh, the Nazis would be so proud.


    • Missy says:


    • als says:

      Let’s not forget she also admires the old glamour of Hollywood, you know, the one full of praised mysoginists, with underpaid and underappreciated women.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        And antebellum life. She loves that, too, because you know, it was so great for everyone involved.

      • Chinoiserie says:

        You can admire look of something while not agreeing with everything. You could basically not admire any fashion in any society with that kind of thinking. There is nothing wrong with the fashion itself and it us nice if some stars choose to emulate the look.

    • Fiorella says:

      Can Someone explain this reference please?

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        I think it’s because the Nazis were big into the eugenics movement popular at the time (which also took root in other countries) — “breeding” humans to weed out “undesirable” traits and promote “desirable” traits. In the eugenics movement in the USA, for example, this led to sterilizing people who were considered “mentally defective” (and without consent). For the Nazis, it meant a “breeding” program for the Master, or Aryan, “race” – white, blonde, blue-eyed and so on. A woman like Blake Lively (assuming she’s a natural blonde) would have been pressed into service to breed baby Aryans. Some women engaged in this effort with enthusiasm, others were forced into it.

        Oh, I should add that eugenics was/is a pseudo-science, at least in terms of personality or intellectual traits. Hair and eye colour are directly heritable.

      • Fiorella says:

        Thank you I appreciate you taking the time to answer. Ok I totally understand it now

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        Sure thing, no problem.

      • M.A.F. says:

        the Nazis gave out medals on August 12 (Hitler’s mother birthday) to those women who gave birth to the most children. There was gold, silver, and bronze medals.

  9. Lynnie says:

    I love her pink two piece outfit. Agree with you Kaiser the term breeders is crass.

    • Amide says:

      Nice avatar. Blake was actually joshing along with the interviewer who was teasing her. Odd how one tongue in cheek line from a 20 minute paint-by-numbers day time interview, has become something else.

      • Lynnie says:

        Aw thank you! 😊 That really made my day haha. Are you Nigerian btw? You’re name looks very familiar lol.

        I didn’t know that about the whole soundbite though :/. I guess she can’t win.

    • SnazzyisAlive says:

      I quite like the yellow dress too,actually. And I normally don’t like yellow. But it looks great on her.

  10. Tiffany says:

    Her and her husband annoy me. I should like them, but just don’t.

    • Lee says:

      Same. I used to like them both, but they try too hard to look like the perfect couple imho.

    • original kay says:

      I tend to agree with you. Also, that movie he just did was terrible. That superhero one, I’ve lost the name.

      Green devil? **shrugs** 2 hours I can never get back.

      And “breeders” is gross.

      • Lynnie says:

        Deadpool you mean? I heard all the reviews were great. You might be thinking of Green Lantern which he did a while back, and that was terrible.

    • JenniferJustice says:

      Aside from her support of Woody Allen (which is cause for major judgement on my part), I actually like Blake and Ryan way better than Kristen Bell and Dax Sheppard. Those two are nauseating. Can’t stand the affected adorable try hard. At least Blake and Ryan act like normal people – not vying for “cute couple” of the year awards.

      • Tiffany says:

        I cannot stand Dax and Kristen. For making a career out of not showing their children and talking about them in every breath. The hypocrisy is strong with those commercials and them.

  11. ItDoesntReallyMatter says:

    I love seeing her gray roots! It makes me feel better about mine as I am in my 40′s and that is the only thing right now that makes me feel old. I should dye my hair but I am just too lazy to maintain it.

    • SnazzyisAlive says:

      Meh, you don’t have to if you don’t want to!
      my hair is black and I have quite a few grays. I don’t colour my hair because I don’t have the patience for the maintenance. I think it looks fine. To each his own, you know? :)

    • Wren says:

      Should? Why? Unless you want to and it would make you happy there’s no “should”.

  12. ShinyGrenade says:

    You can go on our website and we will give you some of our children.


    Yeah. Stay pretty and shush.

    • perplexed says:

      Does anyone understand what she meant by that statement? I didn’t get it because it sounded so weird (she only has two, right?). Maybe the comment would have made more sense coming from Jolie and Pitt, although I don’t think they would have said it.

      • ShinyGrenade says:

        I don’t know really. It’s really tacky. And it’s so offensive for people that tries and fails at having kids.
        Breeders indeed…. Feck them.

      • Lynnie says:

        I think she was trying to say that she and Ryan want/will have so many kids by using the hyperbole that they could sell some/start a business. She just worded it poorly as always

      • Fiorella says:

        It was a joke, like she was asked about having more kids so she said that instead of answering earnestly . Because their thing is being private about their kids. But instead of getting serious and refusing to answer she makes a joke which is obviously not possible to be true.

      • perplexed says:

        I get that she’s joking — I just don’t think the joke makes any sense. People who are excited to have more children, which she claims to be (as indicated by the bolded part which says she wants more children) don’t generally joke about wanting to sell them on a website. The joke itself has no logic to it if she’s excited about having more kids (which seems to be the assumption presented about her?). Maybe there was a part that was cut out that would have made joke sound funny, but the statement as it looks here sounds, well, weird. Maybe I would have laughed if someone with a more sardonic personality like Al Bundy who is grimly cynical about life and kids had said it.

    • Alyce says:

      If you watch the interview, that statment was clearly a joke and was treated as such by the interviewer.

      • Susan says:

        I feel like we are quite sensitive and irritable here on CB today. Let’s all take a collective deep breath and know that some other ridiculous celebrity is going to say something stupid very soon to make us laugh. Or Kate is going to wear a blue coat dress and flash someone. Cheers!

    • Sophie says:

      She was Joking.

  13. Love Blake says:

    She’s a highly talented actress who isn’t taken very seriously in Hollywood. Her performance in Shopping with Virginiaca on SNL was spectacular. I hope they make Virginiaca into a full length feature .would be howlarious. But alas, if a woman is not morbidly obese a la Melissa then they are not taken seriously as comedians by Hollyood

    • FingerBinger says:

      Only obese comedians are taken seriously? Tell that to Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, Kathy Griffin and Sarah Silverman. They’re fairly thin and they’re taken seriously. Your trolling needs some work.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      🎈hi, Blake

      Yeah, those fat people. How DARE they be taken seriously!

  14. Beckysuz says:

    I wish pregnancy was super easy for me. My two year old needs a playmate closer in age. He tries so hard to keep up with his 7 and 11 yo sibs and it’s so cute. But they just want to do big kid stuff. My mom had seven kids and being pregnant was no big deal for her. It was a non stop nightmare for me though.

    My mom always hated the term breeder. She would say its a disrespectful way of reducing a woman. That she was more than her ability to bear children

  15. Celebwatch says:

    I wish people would come to grips with what the world is going to be like in fifty, a hundred years. We will hit ten billion people before long. Our insatiable consumption of fossil fuels means food and water will become less and less secure. Breeding to reproduce yourself (i.e. 2 kids) may be defensible, breeding to increase population seems less so.

    • Mumzy says:

      My 83 year old dad loves to sit in busy, public places and observe the people going by. One of his favorite games is to imagine that he must choose 20 random passers-by to accompany him into space because humans on earth are about to become extinct. He and the 20 will return to earth and rebuild, and try to do better next time! You wouldn’t believe how long it takes to choose 20 people who look sane, healthy, intelligent and diverse enough to build a better planet. Maybe he just needs to sit outside of Blake’s house and let the breeder fill his spaceship. (Disclaimer–We both admit that neither of us would ever be chosen for anyone else’s rockets — age, bad eyes, bad knees, bad attitude…lol. This is a *game.*)

      (Our other favorite people-watching game is to choose intriguing looking people and then guess their names and what they do for a living.)

      • Giddy says:

        My grandmother had a list of her friends who she thought would go to heaven. Of course she revised it constantly and would announce that she had. Her dearest friend had a fallout shelter and, depending on how nice family and friends were being, revised her list of who could be in the shelter when the bomb came. They loved to fuss about their respective lists and the illusion of power the lists gave them. It actually gave them a lot of fun, but I imagine it was disconcerting when they announced to anyone that they had been removed from their lists.

      • M.A.F. says:

        @Mumzy- I want to play this game with your dad. I think I just found my new pastime activity.

  16. Amide says:

    Lively looks lovely.
    I saw the interview online and the breeder remark was made 100% in jest , cause Savannah was teasing her.

    • Fiorella says:

      I agree! In other words the reporter tried to find out if b and Ryan we’re going to birth a soccer team. She made a joke , deflected, evaded revealing anything. I was more offended that she refused to reveal anything! She’s a pretty smooth talker (other than the woody Allen thing of course)

  17. Cheryl says:

    Anyone have id on those killer heels in the top pick?? I want them…. And the legs to go with em.

  18. Fiorella says:

    Her hair and skin looks so good! Love the pink dress with the cute purse – she looks not pregnant in those pics

  19. Lucy says:

    More Deadpool babies with nice legs? Sure, why not. Also, I think she was just joking about the breeder thing…

  20. nicegirl says:

    Just had to note that I am in LOVE with her lemon and denim look. GORGEOUS.

  21. Ashley says:

    It’s kind of hilarious to me that she’s getting crap for talking about how sharks are beautiful creatures when if she wasn’t, she’d be getting crap for being in just another film that villainizes sharks. It’s nice that she’s actually shedding light on the fact that sharks are feared and shouldn’t be if they’re being respected.

  22. Birdy says:

    meh shes all right. I love love ryan he is handsome! will not be seeing that crapfest of a movie! sharks have enough problems without this nonsense

  23. iheartgossip says:

    Not sure I appreciate the term ‘breeders’. That’s all.

  24. Hello jenniferjustice, the point is moot. Couldn’t resist.

  25. The point is moot, jennifer