Options

Rupert Everett criticises Jennifer Aniston - is he right?

teenagemartyrteenagemartyr Posts: 6,782
Forum Member
Rupert Everett has reportedly criticised Jennifer Aniston for starring in "tasteless" movies.

In a recent interview with Radio 4, the actor said that stars like Aniston are "mostly sustained by the business" and not by the quality of their work or audience perception.

"I'm not going to start naming names of people whose films have not succeeded at the box office, but you'll find there's lots of women and lots of men in the business that the powers that be decide are right for their business, and they'll stand with them for quite a long time," he explained.

Everett added: "OK, something will go wrong, like Jennifer Aniston will have one too many total flops, but she's still a member of that club, and she will still manage to... like a star forming in the universe, things will swirl around her and it will suddenly solidify into another vital tasteless rom-com, you know, a little glitter next to the Crab Nebula."

Aniston's recent films The Switch, The Bounty Hunter and Love Happens failed to garner much success at the box office.

Personally, I totally agree with RE here. Jennifer Aniston displayed some amazing versatility in The Good Girl, but she's become lazy over the past few years and seems to constantly play "Rachel from Friends" in every film. She's in her 40s now and it's getting repetitive and unbelievable, hence the fall in box office ratings. Her last "different" role was in 2005's Derailed and her future film Horrible Bosses looks a bit different from her usual fare. This is promising.

She can do it, but it irritates me that she doesn't.
«134

Comments

  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,648
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think the "playing Rachel" thing for her did work, but she's getting much older and surely people will not buy into an actress her age playing cutesy all the time? I would love for her to do grittier roles. I might pay more attention to her movies then. She's done a few good fluff pieces, like Marley & Me, but the majority of her films have been totally forgettable. I'm kind of amazed she's made so many, actually.
  • Options
    Stupid_HeadStupid_Head Posts: 37,826
    Forum Member
    What movies is he famous for?

    Co starring in a Julia Roberts (of all people) rom com? The ultimate cheese feast.
  • Options
    Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    He's always been honest, or what he sees as being honest, while being supported by powerful women.

    Would he say such things about Jen if he wasn't in Madonna's group of sycophants?

    Shame, I've always liked him, even when he came out as a prostitute.
  • Options
    lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    He makes valid points about the star system in Hollywood. Shame that he's such a bitter old bitch about it though.
  • Options
    Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    He makes valid points about the star system in Hollywood. Shame that he's such a bitter old bitch about it though.

    He went on that so called 'casting couch' and well...crap shag?
  • Options
    lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    He went on that so called 'casting couch' and well...crap shag?

    Who knows! The thing is, I like him too, despite him being his own worst enemy, but I do feel he had an unrealistic opinion of his own abilities. That and his insistence that everything that caused his career to implode is down to him being an out gay actor is him refusing to accept the reality, which is: had he had a more pleasant personality and learned how to hustle (they all have to hustle, gay, straight, male, female) and get on with people instead of bad-mouthing them, he could have continued to have a career in the US. I'm not saying it would have been an easy ride for him, being gay, but he could have made it work because he was given good opportunities. But he got all bitter and twisted about it and has done very little since except bitch and moan and slag people off. Not the way to go.
  • Options
    Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    Who knows! The thing is, I like him too, despite him being his own worst enemy, but I do feel he had an unrealistic opinion of his own abilities. That and his insistence that everything that caused his career to implode is down to him being an out gay actor is him refusing to accept the reality, which is: had he had a more pleasant personality and learned how to hustle (they all have to hustle, gay, straight, male, female) and get on with people instead of bad-mouthing them at the first hurdle, he could have continued to have a career in the US. I'm not saying it would have been an easy ride for him, being gay, but he could have made it work because he was given good opportunities. But he got all bitter and twisted about it and has done very little since except bitch and moan and slag people off. Not the way to go.

    Excellent description of him. He gives himself no favours at all, it has nothing to do with him being gay that his career has gone down the dumper, the guy is a bitch and it gets around.
  • Options
    oathyoathy Posts: 32,639
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think he is.
    'rumour has it' prime example some really good cast members not a bad script, she totally ruined the film,her character range is awful.

    she was the same character in that as in Bruce almighty.most of the friends cast landed so lucky that show really carried most of them it wasnt acting talent.
  • Options
    cazzzcazzz Posts: 12,218
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    she is "Rachel" in every film i have seen her in. I now avoid her films, the last one I saw was The Break-up...terrible! Will give her films a miss as they have the same formula, same style of acting.
  • Options
    Pisces CloudPisces Cloud Posts: 30,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If her movies genuinely stop making any profits then they'll stop hiring her. I doubt studios pay people who they know will lose them money.
  • Options
    lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Excellent description of him. He gives himself no favours at all, it has nothing to do with him being gay that his career has gone down the dumper, the guy is a bitch and it gets around.

    But the other pity is that what he's saying about the system is largely true and rarely gets said, but it will be dismissed as bitterness on his part and just 'ole Rupert whining again' about his lost opportunities. But then that's Hollywood, success is dependant for the most part on toeing the line and not rocking the boat.

    But he does need to get over himself and find a new outlet for his rage!
  • Options
    Sez_babeSez_babe Posts: 133,998
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    I can only think of 'The Good Girl' and 'Derailed' where she plays a different character
  • Options
    mr mugglesmr muggles Posts: 4,601
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yes a can be a (cutting) bitch, but, he does it with style. I quite like his barbed honesty. Try not to be put off by his persona & read his autobiography 'Red carpets & Other Banana Skins'. Its hilarious & astute,and boy has he LIVED. I bet a squillion quid Aniston will never be able to write (or ghost write) abook full of experiences like he has! Theres the difference, Rupert has an interest in life in all its bizarre forms. Jennifer, just aint that interesting.
  • Options
    cashloot147cashloot147 Posts: 609
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    She is a good actress though, she was brilliant in 'Derailed' and she was certainly not playing a cutesy character in that.

    However, she is a comedy actress and a bloody good one. I think she just plays to her strengths but I would agree she needs to change it up a bit every now and again to keep people interested.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 664
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Is it wrong that I quite liked The Switch :o I think it was because of the guys performance in it though. I did genuinely like that film :o

    When was the last time RE was in a hit film though........:confused:
    Last time I saw him he was with Katie Price.......enough said really :eek:
  • Options
    elnombreelnombre Posts: 3,625
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I couldn't give a toss what Rupert Everett thinks about anything, and the fact that he has to put down someone in his same profession to be interesting in an interview rather than discussing his own work shows his own deficiencies and shortcomings in an embarrassing light.
  • Options
    DavetheScotDavetheScot Posts: 16,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I love Jennifer Aniston, but I have to concede that he does have a point that she doesn't seem to be adventurous enough in her choice of parts - Derailed aside. But then I believe the response to Derailed (a very good film, in which Jennifer gives an excellent performance) was not favourable, and this put her off going out of her comfort zone again. However, as pointed out already, the rom-com parts won't last for ever, and in the long run playing it safe may actually prove fatal to her career.

    As for Rupert Everett, I'm afraid I'll never see him in the same light again after Comic Relief Does The Apprentice. He was so bizarre on that, shrinking in horror from the camera and assuring everyone that he doesn't know anybody and can't do anything or bear to be watched.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,812
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    She does play the same character over and over again which is annoying. Her films that did well only did so because was starring alongside famous male leads. Her films that flopped were those in which she starred alongside less famous male actors. She isn't capable of opening a movie on her own, she needs hype and actual talent around her to make her movies a success.

    I don't mean to be horrible to her, I actually like her, but it annoys me how she doesn't challenge herself and how she is so one dimensional.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 120
    Forum Member
    I really like Jennifer Aniston, but then I am a huge Friends fan so I probably like seeing her being Rachel.

    Rupert Everett on the other hand I don't like all that much and (aside from Shrek!!!) I can't think of a film he's been in that I've liked. He seems very bitter to me.

    Also, he has had some v.bad plastic surgery and totally messed with his face - a bad move for any actor who wants to be able to convey emotion!
  • Options
    Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    minirog wrote: »
    I really like Jennifer Aniston, but then I am a huge Friends fan so I probably like seeing her being Rachel.

    Rupert Everett on the other hand I don't like all that much and (aside from Shrek!!!) I can't think of a film he's been in that I've liked. He seems very bitter to me.

    Also, he has had some v.bad plastic surgery and totally messed with his face - a bad move for any actor who wants to be able to convey emotion!

    Bad plastic surgery? OK, most can call him out for being a bitch. But bad plastic? Hehe, it's not bad plastic, it's his foul mouth you need to bother yourself over.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,805
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Why are people assuming she's offered komplex roles? She's most famous for friends, so I'm thinking most film roles she's offered are cuetsy charakters.

    Don't think she would reject a deeper role.

    I'm really confused as to why people dislike Jennifer Aniston. She was married to Pitt, they divorced and she's hardly complained about that, it's the press that can't move on. Jennifer just gets on with her life, doesn't insult someone and doesn't preach.

    Why the need to always put her down?
  • Options
    Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Moireen wrote: »
    Why are people assuming she's offered komplex roles? She's most famous for friends, so I'm thinking most film roles she's offered are cuetsy charakters.

    Don't think she would reject a deeper role.

    I'm really confused as to why people dislike Jennifer Aniston. She was married to Pitt, they divorced and she's hardly complained about that, it's the press that can't move on. Jennifer just gets on with her life, doesn't insult someone and doesn't preach.

    Why the need to always put her down?

    She by saying nothing at all has made herself weak.

    In a world of tittle-tattle saying nothing at all is deemed as being 'not playing the game'.

    Jen and Brad were over when she told him she didn't want kids.

    Angie, the devil?

    Nah, she just more likely picked up the mess.
  • Options
    Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I like Angelina Jolie, just to look at her you know she'd grab you by the balls and destroy you.

    That's what you want from Hollywood, a beautiful woman you'd never really ever meet.

    Jen hates her for more reasons than taking Brad away. Jen wanted a Hollywood superstar career.

    No way can she compare.
  • Options
    DavetheScotDavetheScot Posts: 16,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Moireen wrote: »
    Why are people assuming she's offered komplex roles? She's most famous for friends, so I'm thinking most film roles she's offered are cuetsy charakters.

    Don't think she would reject a deeper role.

    That's possible, in which case Hollywood are to blame. She has shown she can do more when given the chance.
  • Options
    Charlie ChuckCharlie Chuck Posts: 2,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That's possible, in which case Hollywood are to blame. She has shown she can do more when given the chance.

    No, she hasn't.

    Angelina Jolie is the most admired and most adored.

    You may think she looks like a dog, you are only one of a few.
Sign In or Register to comment.