Forbes has compiled a confusing list of the Top 20 Richest Women in Entertainment. To put together the list they ruled out “non-working celebs who essentially live off royalties (Barbra Streisand, for example), and we also excluded ‘old Hollywood” types like Elizabeth Taylor.’” So basically it’s the 20 richest women in entertainment that you’d be familiar with, and not your mom. Here’s their list in order from richest to poorest:
1. Oprah Winfrey
2. J.K. Rowling
3. Martha Stewart
4. Madonna
5. Celine Dion
6. Mariah Carey
7. Janet Jackson
8. Julia Roberts
9. Jennifer Lopez
10. Jennifer Aniston
11. The Olsen Twins
12. Britney Spears
13. Judge Judy
14. Sandra Bullock
15. Cameron Diaz
16. Gisele Bundchen
17. Ellen DeGeneres
18. Nicole Kidman
19. Christina Aguilera
20. Renee Zellweger
There’s a lot of names on there I just don’t understand. Why is Jennifer Aniston number 10? And how did Renee Zellweger make the list? This is supposed to be the Top 20 Richest Women in Entertainment, not Most Likely To Be Confused for a Homeless Person.
BarbadoSlim | January 19, 2007 at 8:00 am
Funny, all who are in that least are worthless to me.
BarbadoSlim | January 19, 2007 at 8:01 am
*list
alcohol and posting don’t mix
Danner | January 19, 2007 at 8:02 am
How many on that list have been in rehab or a “spa” in the last couple of years? Better add and which should have been as well. lol
ScottInFlorida | January 19, 2007 at 8:05 am
Since when is Britney Spears considered an entertainer?
Calling BS an entertainer is like calling a car wreck with severed heads rolling on the pavement “entertainment”.
misanthrope | January 19, 2007 at 8:06 am
Judge Judy? Wha? And, does Britney ‘work’ anymore? Did she ever?
ScottInFlorida | January 19, 2007 at 8:07 am
Judge Judy is richer than Ellen DeGenitals?
Thats fucking outragious!!!!!
BarbadoSlim | January 19, 2007 at 8:08 am
It depends on who’s head ends up in the pavement.#4
think Paris Hilton
ScottInFlorida | January 19, 2007 at 8:09 am
Ummm, I mean, “fucking outrageous”.
Friggin spellchecker screwed me again.
ponk | January 19, 2007 at 8:09 am
celine dion? get the fuck outta here!
ScottInFlorida | January 19, 2007 at 8:11 am
Ummm, I mean, “fucking outrageous”.
Friggin spellchecker screwed me again.
~!@#$%^&* | January 19, 2007 at 8:11 am
Mariah Carey at number six in “entertainment” is misleading – a lot of her wealth is from that signing bonus she got with the Chicago Bears.
NipsyHustle | January 19, 2007 at 8:14 am
judge judy has to be a typo. nicole kidman is the highest paid female in hollywood. julia roberts isn’t working right now. wtf?
Adult Underoos | January 19, 2007 at 8:15 am
seriously.. judge jewy is on the list?!
XeoRad | January 19, 2007 at 8:17 am
Watch Spears slip down the list on spot per month. In a couple of years she’ll be the poster girl for poor, white trailer trash has-beens. Olsen twins? Rich? Yes. Hot?
No way – they look like octegenarians
jrzmommy | January 19, 2007 at 8:24 am
The following people I cannot consider “women”, under my strict code of ethics based on the devout belief in REALITY:
The Olsen Twins
Ellen DeGeneris
Nicole Kidman (no boobs, no woman)
Celine Dion (part horse)
Giselle Bundchen (pictures last week proving she is morphing into a dude)
Cameron Diaz (circus clown)
Britney Spears (pig)
Oprah Winfrey (buffalo)
Madonna (hermaphrodite)
~!@#$%^&* | January 19, 2007 at 8:26 am
Judy Judy’s contract for this year alone pays her $35 million. It’s not a typo.
BarbadoSlim | January 19, 2007 at 8:27 am
@14…agree on the twins, give’em two more years and those two germophobes will be flinging cats at passersby up and down Park Avenue.
BarbadoSlim | January 19, 2007 at 8:31 am
I’d like to add Fergie to your list Jrz, categorize and file under: Iguana
misanthrope | January 19, 2007 at 8:35 am
Julia Roberts = Venus Flytrap. Or Pez dispenser.
jrzmommy | January 19, 2007 at 8:37 am
Iguana. hee hee.
misery | January 19, 2007 at 8:38 am
Olsen Twins? when have they entertained anyone? And I also agree with #14.
Dean | January 19, 2007 at 8:39 am
Judge Judy has more money than Christina Aguilera? WTF?
Remember folks, this isn’t the highest paid list – it’s the rich list. As in, overall wealth. As in, they could buy you and trade you around like Pokemon cards.
jrzmommy | January 19, 2007 at 8:45 am
22–Yes if this was the 17th and 18th century and they were rich plantation owners, they could buy and sell and trade us. But it’s not so they can’t.
misanthrope | January 19, 2007 at 8:48 am
@22… Oh, so that makes them worthy. I keep forgetting… extreme wealth means *better than*.
CDob | January 19, 2007 at 8:48 am
Yeah, this list does seem strangely outdated. I can think of several, if not half, of the people on this list who are a little washed up by now (Mariah, Janet, Julia, Olsens)…I guess the moral is that they were established enough over the last few years to have a large amount of wealth, as opposed to the new, flash in the pan celebs like ScarJo, Lindsay, et al.
danielle | January 19, 2007 at 8:52 am
What happened to Bill Gates? Dude looks like a lady. Hell, he could pass for a woman far better than any of those “things” listed above.
Excluding Oprah.
DrunkBlogger | January 19, 2007 at 8:53 am
Damn, women suck at making money if this is the top list. Oh that’s right….they make less than men! Awesome!
jrzmommy | January 19, 2007 at 8:55 am
Mariah and Janet at least have done something in the last 5 years. Albeit the stuff they’ve done has caused me to grind my teeth in my sleep and has brough on fits of uncontrollable GI spasms………but at least they’ve worked. Sandra Bullock?
chippedbeef | January 19, 2007 at 8:55 am
I love that the Olsen twins are considered one person. They should have listed them as Michelle Tanner instead.
anothershityear | January 19, 2007 at 9:03 am
judging by list-entry 16, this list also includes post-operatives
and about list-entry 11, what have the chimps done lately? aren’t they living off royalties too?
HollyJ | January 19, 2007 at 9:03 am
lol @ 15
29- I was just thinking “Twins? Twins are two people. Shouldn’t they take up two slots?” I bet they get sooooo tired of being referred to as The O Twins
That’s ok – One will be dead from starvation soon, and then it will be The Olsen ::::silence:::::
anothershityear | January 19, 2007 at 9:07 am
#29 lmao
thx for pointing that out, they’re even more pathetic than i initially realized
they also could have been listed as
“bubbles’ siamese-twin sister”
(sorry, conjoined, fucking political-correctness)
jrzmommy | January 19, 2007 at 9:08 am
ps–Oprah is showing us how big Rich’s Chorizo is!!!!!!!
RichPort | January 19, 2007 at 9:12 am
#17 – HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA… You fucking rule, Slim.
#33 – Jrz, I’d blush, but I hear it’s impolite to blush at the truth so I’ll just say thanks. Oh yeah folks… Oprah swallows like a fluffer at a gangbang.
XeoRad | January 19, 2007 at 9:18 am
This list is pathetic. Soon enough we’ll be seeing “The wife of the Geico caveman”
XeoRad | January 19, 2007 at 9:19 am
And she would be hotter than most of this list……
Jenna | January 19, 2007 at 9:26 am
Judge Judy’s contract is for 35 mil? Damn, I always liked her but I dodn’t know she was that cool. Not to mention she’s probably the most entertaining person on that list.
GeannaSparrow | January 19, 2007 at 9:28 am
…Jennifer Aniston? Wtf? Well, I shall throw myself into self-pity, ta see if I make some money, too.
anothershityear | January 19, 2007 at 9:35 am
#15 concur with #28, lmao and it’s an accurate assessment
amazing that most of these women are either manly or just plain old unattractive
how the FUCK is g. bunch-in-her-pants making more than a. lima or a. ambrosio?
are supermodels being paid in ugly-bucks now??
and judge judy is categorized as a “woman”???? there’s gotta be a more appropriate list that she can go under..
gotta disagree with n. kidman though #15
10 years ago, she was smokin’!!
anothershityear | January 19, 2007 at 9:36 am
oops #31 not 28.
dealing with too many fucking numbers today.
86 | January 19, 2007 at 9:57 am
When is Oprah going to do something wrong?
jesseeca | January 19, 2007 at 10:06 am
now is the wealth of the twins combined, because then the should be spilt up and moved down the list. if not, then they should be tied at #11 and the SF would be correct…Renee Zellweger would get bumped.
and who really knows if Oprah is a woman with all that make-up & fake hair. Then again, that could be any celebrity.
Lowlands | January 19, 2007 at 10:15 am
Insane Bitch!!
karifarrell | January 19, 2007 at 10:19 am
I LOVE that Paris Hilton is not on the list. She does NOT entertain me, well except for the ridiculously stupid things she does that gets her on this site….
Well, maybe they don’t consider her rich since most of her wealth is family money? But then again didn’t I just read somewhere that she was getting a couple million dollars just to APPEAR AT A PARTY?!? And she apparently has an album out and she’s been in movies, and that retarded reality tv show, so I just figured she’d be on the list. I mean they put Giselle on there, and how is she an “enertainer”? I’m confused…
ResidentX | January 19, 2007 at 10:34 am
This list is BS. MONEY IS MONEY not matter how you get it or how old you are. We need to see the really female powers…not just the “working” ones.
jrzmommy | January 19, 2007 at 10:36 am
What kind of really female powers? Like, the super dooper eyelash-batting powers of Betty Boop?
cole007 | January 19, 2007 at 10:48 am
jrzmommy, you are Hilarious, and comic genius. The Olsen Twins are (Gelphlings!!!)
Lowlands | January 19, 2007 at 10:52 am
All gay-people luv jrzmami.
Lowlands | January 19, 2007 at 10:53 am
(48)I’m surprised this wasn’t censored!
jrzmommy | January 19, 2007 at 11:00 am
Who the fuck is jrzmami?