1. HAHAHAHAHA, GO HUGH!!!!!! ;-)

Posted at 12:53PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Ledbetter1212

2. That polite British gentleman mess is just a farce. Who knew Hugh Grant had it in him? LOL!

Posted at 12:55PM on Apr 25th 2007 by vanessaem

3. Good for Hugh. These photogs have no right to invade their privacy. Photogs are nothing more than paid STALKERS. It's wrong and I will never put down any person who lashes out. I don't like the person behind me in line at the check-out getting too close to me. These photogs are constantly IN THEIR FACES. It's an invasion of space and privacy. When I leave my place of work, the people I work with aren't following or approaching me in the grocery store and just because someone is doing a movie junket does not mean that the press should be able to invade the personal lives.

Posted at 12:55PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Kelly

4. Way to go, Hugh! Who says British guys are too stuffy? Before everyone starts judging him, we don't know what the Dumb@$$ photographer did to provoke him. Why is it okay for women to say "No!" to unwanted attention but not men? I'm a huge fan of Hugh Grant, and NONONONO I don't want to see photos of him being stalked and harassed.

Posted at 12:58PM on Apr 25th 2007 by krafty_momma7

5. I like to read stories, that's why I check your web site. Why do you have to chase people around for a photo? Why can't we use our imagination while reading your story. I will no longer visit your site because of the harrassement your causing these folks. They maybe a "celebrity" but what about being a human being? Would you like? Really think about what it would be like, really think.

Posted at 12:58PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Michele

6. Sounds like a bully to me, maybe he doesnt like being "important" after all ,, lol, if he really is...who IS he anyway??? hahaha

Posted at 1:02PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Mirabella

7. Of course TMZ would be against a celebrity going off on a photog. They are TMZs bread and butter. If they don't want to be photographed, then leave them alone. When thier career tanks, they will come back and beg you to take their stupid picture or not. Maybe you should stick with celebs that want the exposure like Paris, Gummie, Greasy, and all those losers.

Posted at 1:04PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Buster

8. Who the hell is this guy?

Posted at 1:09PM on Apr 25th 2007 by lottie

9. Well, Kelly, that makes you a bit of a hypocrite for reading this site, doesn't it?

Posted at 1:12PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Calls 'em like I sees 'em

10. You don't really see too much of Hugh in the tabloids anyway, I'd certainly love to see more of that gorgeous man. But stars deserve their privacy. If they are at an event or on the red carpet, sure, but in front of their home they should have some sanctuary.

Posted at 1:12PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Mysty Maples

11. It would be fun if they added Amy Sedaris -- who is kind of a female version of Martha Stewart -- to the bench at The View when Rosie O'Donnell leaves in June. She could do a weekly craft and food segment with Joy Behar or something.

Posted at 1:13PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Serena Smith

12. The comments of Kelly and Buster have reminded me of what the undertaker said to me a while back when I had to arrange my son's funeral: watch out for paps hiding outside the crematorium. If they think it's a newsworthy story they will try and get a shot. We'll sort them out if they come anywhere near the building.

Why in God's name would anyone want a photo of mourners at a child's funeral? Well apparently, they would, but not on this occasion.

If they had, there were a couple of big lads of my acquaintance who would have been happy to go and say hello and take out a bit of the day's trauma on the parasites.

I live in the U.K, btw, I think our press is about as low as any for this kind of unnecessary behaviour.

Posted at 1:13PM on Apr 25th 2007 by cynci

13. Where is it written that these people are not entitled to privacy? It seems to me that the paparazzi go too far in their attempts to catch them in compromizing situations then they snap away and earn tons of money that is paid by the various tabloids and magazines. I do not read any of them because of this invasion of privacy. These people are merely entertainers and nothing more of interest to me other than when their next movie comes out and if I want to go and see it or not. I do not know what the hell newsworthy it is taking a picture of Hugh Grant going about his every day life. Of, course, they provoked him to react and now they have their shot. Too bad Mr. Grant doesn't strike me as a combative individual - rather passive I should think. But when provoked, he will lash out the same as any human being. He cannot be faulted for this.

Posted at 1:24PM on Apr 25th 2007 by susan

14. I say TMZ do what ever you need to get the picture. I do not feel
sorry for rich famous people that make too much money in the first
place. Celebrities gave up their right for privacy the day they
decided to be famous. If you want privacy, don't become famous. Hey
Hugh, relax, it's not like they are taking a picture of you getting a
BJ! Remember the infamous prostitution bust for Hugh.

Posted at 1:25PM on Apr 25th 2007 by Sidney

15. thses paparazzi pigs get off damn easy. been thru the wars with these turd sniffers. a persons life no matter who ,you want to make a living????????? learn how to mop a good floor job, i presume this may be a bit to hard for these pigs to fathom. is private , unless others are invited in. like the old rustler days, to stop em . hang em. eventually the others may take the hint.

Posted at 1:40PM on Apr 25th 2007 by the builder