Anonymous wrote:One thing we all should agree on and give J Lo credit for is that she NEVER gives up on l❤️ve where the majority of people would have already.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think JLo is a better actress than Jen Garner, who is pretty mediocre (also pretty, but mediocre). JLo has real magnetism onscreen, but has done a lot of terrible movies. But Out of Sight, her room com era (the Wedding Planner and Maid in Manhattan), and Hustlers all show her to her best effect. She's not like a method actress or anything, but she knows how to create on screen chemistry with a wide variety of leading men, and she has decent range (pulls off the softness of rom coms surprisingly well IMO).

I think one issue with JLo's career is that she doesn't love acting-- she loves music and dancing. Her "singing" career is her real passion but she doesn't have a good voice or any skill as a writer/musician/producer. She's a dancer. It's a shame because dancing is just not something you can make money doing, so if she wanted to dance but stay at the level she was at as an actress, she had to sing.

I think both Jens are mediocre actresses overall but each has had a few great parts. For Jen G it was 13 going on 30, Alias, and Juno.

I agree that they’re both mediocre. JLo might actually have more range, but Jen G had two iconic roles in Alias and 13 going on 30. JLo can’t seem to decide what kind of actress she wants to be. (She can’t seem to decide on what kind of career she wants overall, she just jumps into everything, singing, rom coms, crime dramas, modeling, documentaries, designing, not doing anything really well, instead of finding something where her passions and talents collide and focusing on that). Jen G had the good sense to know her skills and make some smart choices. She also seems far more content to step away from the limelight and just be a person, obviously, and that’s something JLo will never be capable of.

I think you assume she has more agency over her acting career than she actually does. Neither of these women gets to pick their roles very much. Especially if you want to stick with movies and won't go the Witherspoon/Aniston/Kidman route of creating the roles/career you want by producing TV and streaming. JLo took the roles she was offered. I don't know that she was dying to make a bunch of rom coms, but the industry decided that was a good way to market her and it worked so she made a few. As she aged out of that, I think it's been very hard to find roles that make sense for her as not only a middle aged woman but also a Latina woman. I am sure there were many roles over the years that she went after and lost to people like Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock, etc. She wanted to be up in their echelon but she was type cast in different ways and it didn't happen. I don't know that you can blame that on her -- I guarantee there were roles that she could have done great things with but she didn't get the opportunities. That's how the acting industry works, especially if your focus is on movies.

I think her music career enabled her to work and perform even though she wasn't necessarily getting the acting opportunities she wanted and that she believed were appropriate for her level. She branded herself as a multi-hyphenate and that worked fairly well -- she's made a lot of money and never really been totally out of the public eye. Women in entertainment really do have to hustle in a way men don't.

Jen G also was, I am certain, quite limited in her roles. She tried to make a pivot to action movies based on Alias, which would be great because there's so much money there, but her one feature (Elektra) was a total flop and after that she was never going to get another opportunity like that (unlike Ben who magically gets to be Batman despite the fact that Daredevil wasn't a huge hit years ago). She did resurrect Elektra for Deadpool but like a lot of her parts in the last 10 years, it's a small role. Sure, she'll say she was focusing on her kids and I believe her. But has also "branded" herself as someone who was focusing on her kid. And so most of the roles she's gotten in recent years are mom roles in lower budget family shows or TV. I'm sure she'd happily take more interesting or higher profile roles. She can't get them.

These women are at the mercy of the market in a way that Ben has never been.

Yea but Jen G pivoted. In terms of money, she makes a ton with all of her promotional stuff, the credit card ads, some skin scare stuff, just saw in a hair ad. And she built a really successful business with the whole organic farming snacks for kids thing. She found a way to keep her income up, keep working, and run a business that probably is really fulfilling.

I know what you mean in that she probably wants to make more important and fulfilling films, but if that’s what being at the mercy of the market means, I’ll take it. No one gets to do their dream job forever with no end. Most actors will never see the success that she has had and will never even get to make one film or show they are proud of… She has a few of those.

As for JLO, same general thing. She got to make a bunch of movies and music and perform. Yes, maybe now she doesn’t get to top roles and her stadium tours anymore. Boo hoo. she’s made plenty of money and she still can have a very lucrative career and stay busy. She just needs to accept that, it what it is, and get over herself a little.

I don’t think she’s capable of that, but she’d probably be a lot happier. I was in utter disbelief of the trailer of her documentary or whatever. Absolutely insane she put that out.

Not a knock on Jennifer Garner, but JLo has worked much more consistently and has made a LOT more money than Garner in the last 10-15 years. She gets better film projects than Garner (much better) and while I don't know this for certain, I am pretty sure that JLo gets a lot more backend on the projects she does than Garner, because her name is a bigger draw at the box office and she has greater ability to get a project made by attaching her name. Like JLo certainly got good backend on Hustlers, which really needed her in order to get made. Can you say the same about any Garner project in the last 20 years, if not ever?

Garner has found a way to make money without getting great roles or even working that much. That's great. It probably makes her a better mom. But JLo is unquestionably more professionally successful. Love her or hate her.

LOL at the bolded. Okay, fangirl.

I'm not a fan, actually. I haven't even seen Hustlers. But.

Garner's last three feature films: Family Switch (played the mom in classic body switch family movie), Yes Day (the mom in family movie about saying yes to your kids), The Adam Project (secondary role in Ryan Reynolds space vehicle). Not awful, but not exciting, and she keeps getting these mom roles. The more she does, the more pigeon holed she gets in them.

Lopez's last three feature films: The Mother (JLo action-suspense vehicle), Shotgun Wedding (co-lead with Josh Duhamel in action-romance, she got top billing), Marry Me (co-lead with Owen Wilson in rom-com, equal billing). Now, I haven't seen any of these movies, but these are better projects -- she's getting top billing, getting more screen time, much meatier roles.

Garner does have another Deadpool movie coming up (and her work on that is likely how she got the Adam Project with RR, so that's fruitful). But her role is still supporting cast. She does not get lead roles in feature films unless they are lighthearted, low budget, family comedies or tear jerkers. That is not any actress's dream.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think JLo is a better actress than Jen Garner, who is pretty mediocre (also pretty, but mediocre). JLo has real magnetism onscreen, but has done a lot of terrible movies. But Out of Sight, her room com era (the Wedding Planner and Maid in Manhattan), and Hustlers all show her to her best effect. She's not like a method actress or anything, but she knows how to create on screen chemistry with a wide variety of leading men, and she has decent range (pulls off the softness of rom coms surprisingly well IMO).

I think one issue with JLo's career is that she doesn't love acting-- she loves music and dancing. Her "singing" career is her real passion but she doesn't have a good voice or any skill as a writer/musician/producer. She's a dancer. It's a shame because dancing is just not something you can make money doing, so if she wanted to dance but stay at the level she was at as an actress, she had to sing.

I think both Jens are mediocre actresses overall but each has had a few great parts. For Jen G it was 13 going on 30, Alias, and Juno.

I agree that they’re both mediocre. JLo might actually have more range, but Jen G had two iconic roles in Alias and 13 going on 30. JLo can’t seem to decide what kind of actress she wants to be. (She can’t seem to decide on what kind of career she wants overall, she just jumps into everything, singing, rom coms, crime dramas, modeling, documentaries, designing, not doing anything really well, instead of finding something where her passions and talents collide and focusing on that). Jen G had the good sense to know her skills and make some smart choices. She also seems far more content to step away from the limelight and just be a person, obviously, and that’s something JLo will never be capable of.

I think you assume she has more agency over her acting career than she actually does. Neither of these women gets to pick their roles very much. Especially if you want to stick with movies and won't go the Witherspoon/Aniston/Kidman route of creating the roles/career you want by producing TV and streaming. JLo took the roles she was offered. I don't know that she was dying to make a bunch of rom coms, but the industry decided that was a good way to market her and it worked so she made a few. As she aged out of that, I think it's been very hard to find roles that make sense for her as not only a middle aged woman but also a Latina woman. I am sure there were many roles over the years that she went after and lost to people like Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock, etc. She wanted to be up in their echelon but she was type cast in different ways and it didn't happen. I don't know that you can blame that on her -- I guarantee there were roles that she could have done great things with but she didn't get the opportunities. That's how the acting industry works, especially if your focus is on movies.

I think her music career enabled her to work and perform even though she wasn't necessarily getting the acting opportunities she wanted and that she believed were appropriate for her level. She branded herself as a multi-hyphenate and that worked fairly well -- she's made a lot of money and never really been totally out of the public eye. Women in entertainment really do have to hustle in a way men don't.

Jen G also was, I am certain, quite limited in her roles. She tried to make a pivot to action movies based on Alias, which would be great because there's so much money there, but her one feature (Elektra) was a total flop and after that she was never going to get another opportunity like that (unlike Ben who magically gets to be Batman despite the fact that Daredevil wasn't a huge hit years ago). She did resurrect Elektra for Deadpool but like a lot of her parts in the last 10 years, it's a small role. Sure, she'll say she was focusing on her kids and I believe her. But has also "branded" herself as someone who was focusing on her kid. And so most of the roles she's gotten in recent years are mom roles in lower budget family shows or TV. I'm sure she'd happily take more interesting or higher profile roles. She can't get them.

These women are at the mercy of the market in a way that Ben has never been.

Yea but Jen G pivoted. In terms of money, she makes a ton with all of her promotional stuff, the credit card ads, some skin scare stuff, just saw in a hair ad. And she built a really successful business with the whole organic farming snacks for kids thing. She found a way to keep her income up, keep working, and run a business that probably is really fulfilling.

I know what you mean in that she probably wants to make more important and fulfilling films, but if that’s what being at the mercy of the market means, I’ll take it. No one gets to do their dream job forever with no end. Most actors will never see the success that she has had and will never even get to make one film or show they are proud of… She has a few of those.

As for JLO, same general thing. She got to make a bunch of movies and music and perform. Yes, maybe now she doesn’t get to top roles and her stadium tours anymore. Boo hoo. she’s made plenty of money and she still can have a very lucrative career and stay busy. She just needs to accept that, it what it is, and get over herself a little.

I don’t think she’s capable of that, but she’d probably be a lot happier. I was in utter disbelief of the trailer of her documentary or whatever. Absolutely insane she put that out.

Not a knock on Jennifer Garner, but JLo has worked much more consistently and has made a LOT more money than Garner in the last 10-15 years. She gets better film projects than Garner (much better) and while I don't know this for certain, I am pretty sure that JLo gets a lot more backend on the projects she does than Garner, because her name is a bigger draw at the box office and she has greater ability to get a project made by attaching her name. Like JLo certainly got good backend on Hustlers, which really needed her in order to get made. Can you say the same about any Garner project in the last 20 years, if not ever?

Garner has found a way to make money without getting great roles or even working that much. That's great. It probably makes her a better mom. But JLo is unquestionably more professionally successful. Love her or hate her.

LOL at the bolded. Okay, fangirl.

I'm not a fan, actually. I haven't even seen Hustlers. But.

Garner's last three feature films: Family Switch (played the mom in classic body switch family movie), Yes Day (the mom in family movie about saying yes to your kids), The Adam Project (secondary role in Ryan Reynolds space vehicle). Not awful, but not exciting, and she keeps getting these mom roles. The more she does, the more pigeon holed she gets in them.

Lopez's last three feature films: The Mother (JLo action-suspense vehicle), Shotgun Wedding (co-lead with Josh Duhamel in action-romance, she got top billing), Marry Me (co-lead with Owen Wilson in rom-com, equal billing). Now, I haven't seen any of these movies, but these are better projects -- she's getting top billing, getting more screen time, much meatier roles.

Garner does have another Deadpool movie coming up (and her work on that is likely how she got the Adam Project with RR, so that's fruitful). But her role is still supporting cast. She does not get lead roles in feature films unless they are lighthearted, low budget, family comedies or tear jerkers. That is not any actress's dream.

Yeah, but is this a surprise? If someone had told mid-twenties Jenn Garner when she was starting out, she would be in a very successful show. Do a few successful action movies, do a really successful romcom that people talk about 20 years later, and then still be consistently working in her 50s and be able to make tens of millions through her promotional deals while still being available for her three kids, she probably would’ve jumped at that life. Are we supposed to feel sad that she’s not winning Oscars at this point? It all sounds like a really really good deal to me.

Are we supposed to feel sad that she’s not winning Oscars at this point? It all sounds like a really really good deal to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think JLo is a better actress than Jen Garner, who is pretty mediocre (also pretty, but mediocre). JLo has real magnetism onscreen, but has done a lot of terrible movies. But Out of Sight, her room com era (the Wedding Planner and Maid in Manhattan), and Hustlers all show her to her best effect. She's not like a method actress or anything, but she knows how to create on screen chemistry with a wide variety of leading men, and she has decent range (pulls off the softness of rom coms surprisingly well IMO).

I think one issue with JLo's career is that she doesn't love acting-- she loves music and dancing. Her "singing" career is her real passion but she doesn't have a good voice or any skill as a writer/musician/producer. She's a dancer. It's a shame because dancing is just not something you can make money doing, so if she wanted to dance but stay at the level she was at as an actress, she had to sing.

I think both Jens are mediocre actresses overall but each has had a few great parts. For Jen G it was 13 going on 30, Alias, and Juno.

I agree that they’re both mediocre. JLo might actually have more range, but Jen G had two iconic roles in Alias and 13 going on 30. JLo can’t seem to decide what kind of actress she wants to be. (She can’t seem to decide on what kind of career she wants overall, she just jumps into everything, singing, rom coms, crime dramas, modeling, documentaries, designing, not doing anything really well, instead of finding something where her passions and talents collide and focusing on that). Jen G had the good sense to know her skills and make some smart choices. She also seems far more content to step away from the limelight and just be a person, obviously, and that’s something JLo will never be capable of.

I think you assume she has more agency over her acting career than she actually does. Neither of these women gets to pick their roles very much. Especially if you want to stick with movies and won't go the Witherspoon/Aniston/Kidman route of creating the roles/career you want by producing TV and streaming. JLo took the roles she was offered. I don't know that she was dying to make a bunch of rom coms, but the industry decided that was a good way to market her and it worked so she made a few. As she aged out of that, I think it's been very hard to find roles that make sense for her as not only a middle aged woman but also a Latina woman. I am sure there were many roles over the years that she went after and lost to people like Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock, etc. She wanted to be up in their echelon but she was type cast in different ways and it didn't happen. I don't know that you can blame that on her -- I guarantee there were roles that she could have done great things with but she didn't get the opportunities. That's how the acting industry works, especially if your focus is on movies.

I think her music career enabled her to work and perform even though she wasn't necessarily getting the acting opportunities she wanted and that she believed were appropriate for her level. She branded herself as a multi-hyphenate and that worked fairly well -- she's made a lot of money and never really been totally out of the public eye. Women in entertainment really do have to hustle in a way men don't.

Jen G also was, I am certain, quite limited in her roles. She tried to make a pivot to action movies based on Alias, which would be great because there's so much money there, but her one feature (Elektra) was a total flop and after that she was never going to get another opportunity like that (unlike Ben who magically gets to be Batman despite the fact that Daredevil wasn't a huge hit years ago). She did resurrect Elektra for Deadpool but like a lot of her parts in the last 10 years, it's a small role. Sure, she'll say she was focusing on her kids and I believe her. But has also "branded" herself as someone who was focusing on her kid. And so most of the roles she's gotten in recent years are mom roles in lower budget family shows or TV. I'm sure she'd happily take more interesting or higher profile roles. She can't get them.

These women are at the mercy of the market in a way that Ben has never been.

Yea but Jen G pivoted. In terms of money, she makes a ton with all of her promotional stuff, the credit card ads, some skin scare stuff, just saw in a hair ad. And she built a really successful business with the whole organic farming snacks for kids thing. She found a way to keep her income up, keep working, and run a business that probably is really fulfilling.

I know what you mean in that she probably wants to make more important and fulfilling films, but if that’s what being at the mercy of the market means, I’ll take it. No one gets to do their dream job forever with no end. Most actors will never see the success that she has had and will never even get to make one film or show they are proud of… She has a few of those.

As for JLO, same general thing. She got to make a bunch of movies and music and perform. Yes, maybe now she doesn’t get to top roles and her stadium tours anymore. Boo hoo. she’s made plenty of money and she still can have a very lucrative career and stay busy. She just needs to accept that, it what it is, and get over herself a little.

I don’t think she’s capable of that, but she’d probably be a lot happier. I was in utter disbelief of the trailer of her documentary or whatever. Absolutely insane she put that out.

Not a knock on Jennifer Garner, but JLo has worked much more consistently and has made a LOT more money than Garner in the last 10-15 years. She gets better film projects than Garner (much better) and while I don't know this for certain, I am pretty sure that JLo gets a lot more backend on the projects she does than Garner, because her name is a bigger draw at the box office and she has greater ability to get a project made by attaching her name. Like JLo certainly got good backend on Hustlers, which really needed her in order to get made. Can you say the same about any Garner project in the last 20 years, if not ever?

Garner has found a way to make money without getting great roles or even working that much. That's great. It probably makes her a better mom. But JLo is unquestionably more professionally successful. Love her or hate her.

LOL at the bolded. Okay, fangirl.

I'm not a fan, actually. I haven't even seen Hustlers. But.

Garner's last three feature films: Family Switch (played the mom in classic body switch family movie), Yes Day (the mom in family movie about saying yes to your kids), The Adam Project (secondary role in Ryan Reynolds space vehicle). Not awful, but not exciting, and she keeps getting these mom roles. The more she does, the more pigeon holed she gets in them.

Lopez's last three feature films: The Mother (JLo action-suspense vehicle), Shotgun Wedding (co-lead with Josh Duhamel in action-romance, she got top billing), Marry Me (co-lead with Owen Wilson in rom-com, equal billing). Now, I haven't seen any of these movies, but these are better projects -- she's getting top billing, getting more screen time, much meatier roles.

Garner does have another Deadpool movie coming up (and her work on that is likely how she got the Adam Project with RR, so that's fruitful). But her role is still supporting cast. She does not get lead roles in feature films unless they are lighthearted, low budget, family comedies or tear jerkers. That is not any actress's dream.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think JLo is a better actress than Jen Garner, who is pretty mediocre (also pretty, but mediocre). JLo has real magnetism onscreen, but has done a lot of terrible movies. But Out of Sight, her room com era (the Wedding Planner and Maid in Manhattan), and Hustlers all show her to her best effect. She's not like a method actress or anything, but she knows how to create on screen chemistry with a wide variety of leading men, and she has decent range (pulls off the softness of rom coms surprisingly well IMO).

I think one issue with JLo's career is that she doesn't love acting-- she loves music and dancing. Her "singing" career is her real passion but she doesn't have a good voice or any skill as a writer/musician/producer. She's a dancer. It's a shame because dancing is just not something you can make money doing, so if she wanted to dance but stay at the level she was at as an actress, she had to sing.

I think both Jens are mediocre actresses overall but each has had a few great parts. For Jen G it was 13 going on 30, Alias, and Juno.

I agree that they’re both mediocre. JLo might actually have more range, but Jen G had two iconic roles in Alias and 13 going on 30. JLo can’t seem to decide what kind of actress she wants to be. (She can’t seem to decide on what kind of career she wants overall, she just jumps into everything, singing, rom coms, crime dramas, modeling, documentaries, designing, not doing anything really well, instead of finding something where her passions and talents collide and focusing on that). Jen G had the good sense to know her skills and make some smart choices. She also seems far more content to step away from the limelight and just be a person, obviously, and that’s something JLo will never be capable of.

I think you assume she has more agency over her acting career than she actually does. Neither of these women gets to pick their roles very much. Especially if you want to stick with movies and won't go the Witherspoon/Aniston/Kidman route of creating the roles/career you want by producing TV and streaming. JLo took the roles she was offered. I don't know that she was dying to make a bunch of rom coms, but the industry decided that was a good way to market her and it worked so she made a few. As she aged out of that, I think it's been very hard to find roles that make sense for her as not only a middle aged woman but also a Latina woman. I am sure there were many roles over the years that she went after and lost to people like Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock, etc. She wanted to be up in their echelon but she was type cast in different ways and it didn't happen. I don't know that you can blame that on her -- I guarantee there were roles that she could have done great things with but she didn't get the opportunities. That's how the acting industry works, especially if your focus is on movies.

I think her music career enabled her to work and perform even though she wasn't necessarily getting the acting opportunities she wanted and that she believed were appropriate for her level. She branded herself as a multi-hyphenate and that worked fairly well -- she's made a lot of money and never really been totally out of the public eye. Women in entertainment really do have to hustle in a way men don't.

Jen G also was, I am certain, quite limited in her roles. She tried to make a pivot to action movies based on Alias, which would be great because there's so much money there, but her one feature (Elektra) was a total flop and after that she was never going to get another opportunity like that (unlike Ben who magically gets to be Batman despite the fact that Daredevil wasn't a huge hit years ago). She did resurrect Elektra for Deadpool but like a lot of her parts in the last 10 years, it's a small role. Sure, she'll say she was focusing on her kids and I believe her. But has also "branded" herself as someone who was focusing on her kid. And so most of the roles she's gotten in recent years are mom roles in lower budget family shows or TV. I'm sure she'd happily take more interesting or higher profile roles. She can't get them.

These women are at the mercy of the market in a way that Ben has never been.

Yea but Jen G pivoted. In terms of money, she makes a ton with all of her promotional stuff, the credit card ads, some skin scare stuff, just saw in a hair ad. And she built a really successful business with the whole organic farming snacks for kids thing. She found a way to keep her income up, keep working, and run a business that probably is really fulfilling.

I know what you mean in that she probably wants to make more important and fulfilling films, but if that’s what being at the mercy of the market means, I’ll take it. No one gets to do their dream job forever with no end. Most actors will never see the success that she has had and will never even get to make one film or show they are proud of… She has a few of those.

As for JLO, same general thing. She got to make a bunch of movies and music and perform. Yes, maybe now she doesn’t get to top roles and her stadium tours anymore. Boo hoo. she’s made plenty of money and she still can have a very lucrative career and stay busy. She just needs to accept that, it what it is, and get over herself a little.

I don’t think she’s capable of that, but she’d probably be a lot happier. I was in utter disbelief of the trailer of her documentary or whatever. Absolutely insane she put that out.

Not a knock on Jennifer Garner, but JLo has worked much more consistently and has made a LOT more money than Garner in the last 10-15 years. She gets better film projects than Garner (much better) and while I don't know this for certain, I am pretty sure that JLo gets a lot more backend on the projects she does than Garner, because her name is a bigger draw at the box office and she has greater ability to get a project made by attaching her name. Like JLo certainly got good backend on Hustlers, which really needed her in order to get made. Can you say the same about any Garner project in the last 20 years, if not ever?

Garner has found a way to make money without getting great roles or even working that much. That's great. It probably makes her a better mom. But JLo is unquestionably more professionally successful. Love her or hate her.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-13454723/Jennifer-Lopez-abs-Ben-Affleck-separate-lives-divorce-rumors.html

ben smoking, eating pizza... i bet he wasn't allowed to eat pizza for 2+ years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jennifer is a workhorse and wants a handsome leading man. She doesn’t want an old billionaire who goes to bed before 9pm and takes medications .

She wants to be on the scene . She embraces the glamour of Hwood like the old movie stars of the Golden Age and she wants to be seen as a movie star more than just an actress. That’s why she sings, dances, and acts like the old Hwood actresses did. That’s her goal or so she says.

Ha! No one is going to take her seriously as Hollywood Oscar glam as long as she is twerking on stripper poles at the Super Bowl. She needs to make her mind up, she is no Taylor Swift and never will be which is what I think led to her thinking she could have an "Eras" tour moment this year. Not going to happen. Either you sing or become an actress who can crush that Oscar, pick one.

It worked for Cher and Cher didn’t follow that advice about covering up during an even more prudish era .

She doesn’t have to be Taylor Swift. She’s Jennifer Lopez. Two very different performers. I am sure Taylor can’t dance in heels the way Jennifer does at half her age . When Taylor was in diapers, Jennifer was already on television as a background dancer (the bottom pile of the entertainment industry) and she climbed (some would say clawed) her way to the top without a rich dad to start a record label for her .

Cher could really sing though.

I do think comparing JLo to Taylor is dumb. Taylor isn't an actress (and she's tried, oh she's tried -- she does not have the chops). Also not a dancer! But she's a great songwriter and a good performer. She found her niche.

JLo has too, actually. But she's never been as secure in it as Taylor is in hers. But few people are.