Diego Luna: Paparazzi Should Face Legal Penalties

MEXICO CITY — Mexican actor Diego Luna wants the paparazzi to face legal penalties for meddling in the private lives of celebrities.

The actor has been hounded by photographers trying to capture images of his daily life since his son was born in August. Mexican magazines have recently published photos of Luna at a bar with a fellow actress and dancing with an unknown woman under scandalous headlines.

Luna, who is married to Mexican actress Camila Sodi, says it saddens him that so much time is spent talking about "insignificant things, gossip and false information."

Luna, whose movie credits include "Milk" and "Y Tu Mama Tambien," made the comments Wednesday during a news conference to promote his new film "Mister Lonely."

Comments

[kathy001]

I agree, paparazzi should face legal penalties for violating the privacy of celebrities, just as you or I would face if we invaded that person's privacy. Sure there are those people that just live for private information about celebrities but I think there are more people who would not miss these photos and stories that invade a celebrity's privacy.

Most people will look at a train wreck, no matter how hard they try not to look. That doesn't mean that there should be more train wrecks. It's the same with celebrity photos. It's very hard not to look when there are scandalous pictures and stories, even if you don't believe the stories. That doesn't mean that everyone wants these scandalous pictures and stories, it just means they can't help looking at a train wreck.

As for those people who just live for those stories garnered by invasion of privacy, they'd just have to get along living only one life.

[kevingiampa]

He's right.

[sense11]

I Agree, freedom of press is one thing and harassment is quite another. Harassment should be enforced every time.

[deckard70]

Indeed, the paparazzi are stalkers. That they do it openly seems to confuse some people.

There are no celebrities. There are actors.

That some magazines and newspapers like to bother actors when they're living their personal lives, and dub them "celebrities", is strictly for their own enrichment.

When actors are making appearances related to their profession, i.e. attending awards ceremonies, or being paid to appear somewhere, they're fair game -- they are working in the context of their profession.

But to stalk them when they're shopping, or eating, or going to the grocery store, or at the beach (anywhere other than the Cannes Film Festival!), on the pretext that they are "celebrities" and therefore have no right to privacy, is absurd.

[IrishTaco]

I Love Diego Luna.. Can't wait to see Rudo y Cursi!

[DawnK]

The papparazzi creates careers where there aren't any, they keep actors/actresses in the spotlight. If the actor or actress isn't doing anything f'd up then the paps ignore them. Maybe actors and actresses should realize that cheating in public is a bad idea. However, leave their kids alone. It's not even fun to read about celebrity children. Who cares what Suri Cruise did.

[deckard70]

"they keep actors/actresses in the spotlight"

There's something called "auditions" (and "agents" to line up auditions) that keep actors in the "spotlight", if by "spotlight" you mean "available for roles".

[KPinSEA]

They "create" a career the way a lamprey creates a fish .....

[HuffyAmy]

Something "f'd up" like having a terminal illness? Look at the way they have hounded Patrick Swayze and Farrah Fawcett just because they have cancer!! Don't even act like the people who make it into the tabloids all deserve that kind of treatment, harassment, chasing and hounding.

The paps are out of control and dangerous even. I just wish people would stop buying tabloids and people magazine, and that celebrities would stop dealing with any publications that publish intrusive photos. And if fines would make a difference, so be it...

[ObamAtomic]

If you can not take the heat,get out of show business !

[EnragedJ]

In addition to being an intrusion in a celebrity's private life, why is it that talk shows have to pay actor's to appear so they can run advertising and profit off of their celebrity but TMZ gets away with profiting off of celebrity image without paying the celebrities dime one?

[charitabledonation]

Endoresement versus a public hungry to "know" their favorite celebrities.

[Carlton Jordan]

Here's a suggestion Diego!

Boycott all magazines (People, Us Weekly, etc) and TV Shows (Entertainment Tonight, E!, Access Hollywood, Telemundo etc) that use paparazzi photos and video. Dont talk to them at all unless they all agree to only use boring red carpet shots of you.

Dismiss all fans that read gossip magazines, and watch these shows as crazy nosy people who need to get their own life. And DONT take their money at the box office.

Finally, quit the entertainment business altogether and then there will be no more paparazzi. Because, as you know Diego, they didn't exist before you came on to the scene!

NOT!

[AlexNYC]

I agree with Diego. Why does the media find the practice of stalking celebrities and taking unauthorized photos while they are living their private lifes to be acceptable? Take your photos when they're at public events or while they're promoting films, new albums, award shows, etc. Nobody wants their private lives under the microscope, and non-stop gossip and rumors just for the sake of selling more magazines.

[PresidentRobertBooth]

I'm of the belief that (intentional) photographs of celebrities should be limited to events directly relating to their profession.

So for example, it would be fine to take a photograph of Nicole Kidman while she's at a movie press conference, premiere or award show, but not fine to take a photograph of her taking her daughter to school.


But personally I blame the magazines, newspapers and websites that buy those personal images and the consumers who are frighteningly interested in where Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie walked their dog.

[MSNichols]

What about the people that BUY those trash rags?

[MorpheusXNYC]

I agree, all across the board.

[seachild]

so does this mean he's upset because he got caught?...(raising the eyebrows)

big deal...you're an actor/cele­brity...yo­u KNOW it goes with the territory...stop whining

[thewhitewitch]

People who say what you just did suck & have no empathy for other human beings, which, believe it or not, entertainers are. Getting stalked should not be a part of any job. It's a JOB, not a jail sentence. They should be allowed to have a life too.

[charitabledonation]

When an actor reaches that point in 'celebrity land' that they get paid more than enough to know what comes with the territory, then they should -know- what comes with it. Brad Pit and Angelin Jolie come to mind who best know how to manipulate and use the paps to their advantage as part of their career.

[Zoe2]

Or maybe move to another state?

[tlgeiger62]

He looks like Scott Baio - in younger days.

[fuzzyhearts]

"Mister Lonely" is not a new film. It's a Harmony Korine film from 2007. His new film is called "Rudo y Cursi."

Hello. Does HP have any fact checkers?

[Aramarcal]

get over yourself Mr. Luna. BTW I love your movies.

[cinesimon]

I think he's dead right - their privacy shouldn't be stalked.
Of course they will be photographed out in public, but when it gets to the point of telephoto lenses and spy-type activity, it should be called what it is - stalking - and dealt with through the justice system.
The paps themselves may think they don't pose a threat(I'm sure Lady Di's fans would disagree), but who's to know who is a stalker and who is media these days?

[TurtleGuy]

He needs the paps to keep him relevant, more than the paps need him to survive. Most celebrities get this.

It's the price you pay for the money you make. I don't see anyone holding a gun to his head forcing him to be an actor. The princess Di case is irrelevant, her driver was blind stinkin drunk.