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.
Yeah Jen's doing a Hugh Grant..same character every dam time. The last film I saw was "The Switch" which I felt ran long but I liked the kid in it and the main male characters.
But I also think Rupert's knee-jerk bitching makes him look sad and doesn't do him any favours at all.
Angelina Jolie is the most admired and most adored.
You may think she looks like a dog, you are only one of a few.
Yes she has, she's absolutely excellent in The Good Girl, always thought it a shame she hasn't gone more down this route, when she really showed her acting chops and moved well away from the Rachel character.
Quite what Angelina has to do with this thread I've little idea, although many of her films have bombed as well.
I'd like to see Jennifer in some indie films that give her the chance to play someone other than 'Rachel' - go down 'The Good Girl' route. Let's be honest, in all the rom-coms that she's appeared in - can we actually remember her character's name in them? Marley & Me, Bruce Almighty, Along Came Polly, The Bounty Hunter, The Break-Up, Picture Perfect etc etc.
'Derailed' bombed at the box office and that was her last film where she didn't play 'Rachel' - perhaps that scared her into playing it safe?
Anyway, I named all those Jennifer Aniston movies and could name more - yet I can only think of 3 that Rupert Everett's starred in - My Best Friends' Wedding, Shrek 2 and that one with Madonna. I'm sure there was one with Reece Witherspoon too though.
Why does every Jennifer Ainston thread turn in to a lets bash Angelina Jolie thread.
What has she got to do with this thread topic? I am confused? Surely this is going off topic?
I was enjoying reading through this thread and then it turned into another Angelina Jolie VS Jennifer Aniston thread.
Rupert everett is wrong to use Aniston as an example of someone whose films regularly flop. They may not all make good box office but all her films are low-budget and generally the international box office alone gets a good return for the studios. But then you factor in international dvd sales and rights of her films to tv companies and this boosts the return considerably. As someone said earlier, there is no way the studios would continue to employ her and pay her the salaries they pay her were she not making money for them. She is. This is nothing to do with whether she's a good or versatile actress - I personally think she's pretty one-note - but to suggest that all her films are box office poison is just plain incorrect. Bottom line, were she the dud that Everett suggests she is, we would not still be seeing her on the screen.
He's right of course, but I don't know why he's bothering.
Everyone knows the film business is corrupt in that way, and it's been known for a long time, he knew it before he decided to be an actor but he took the risk... if the tide was turned the other way and it was himself benefitting from it then I'm sure he'd be keeping his mouth shut.
Jealous are we Mr Everett? The Rom Com is Jennifer's bread and butter but she is far from a one trick pony. Being amiable and pleasant to work with will help keep her a popular choice with movie makers.
Who'd want to work with him? bitter, difficult bitch.
Quite amazing how much money Jennifer has made for playing "Rachel" in every movie she is in. When did she last do a role where she actually acted? I do not bother to go to any of her movies anymore as it is the same thing all the time. Lovely Rachel looking for love which is getting ridiculous as she is now 40 plus!! Same for Tom Cruise the only time he acted was Fourth of July and now he plays the same role again and again. I enjoy REAL actors, e.g. Russel Crowe who changes so much in his films that you hardly recognise him. HE CAN ACT but these other Hollywood stars are just playing themselves. John Wayne did the same thing, always John Wayne in certain situation, again and again and again....
I'd like to see Jennifer in some indie films that give her the chance to play someone other than 'Rachel' - go down 'The Good Girl' route. Let's be honest, in all the rom-coms that she's appeared in - can we actually remember her character's name in them? Marley & Me, Bruce Almighty, Along Came Polly, The Bounty Hunter, The Break-Up, Picture Perfect etc etc.
'Derailed' bombed at the box office and that was her last film where she didn't play 'Rachel' - perhaps that scared her into playing it safe?
Anyway, I named all those Jennifer Aniston movies and could name more - yet I can only think of 3 that Rupert Everett's starred in - My Best Friends' Wedding, Shrek 2 and that one with Madonna. I'm sure there was one with Reece Witherspoon too though.
Rupert has given many interviews about his career and I think it is true to say he has been very honest when discussing his career in Hollywood. He was doing great until he came out and talked openly about being gay. Suddenly he disappeared from our screens and no longer played the leading man in Hollywood movies..
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.
There was a post on IMDB, saying that the poster had seen footage that had been cut from the Comic Relief Apprentice which showed that Everett had been really quite bullied by the other contestants.
Quite amazing how much money Jennifer has made for playing "Rachel" in every movie she is in. When did she last do a role where she actually acted? I do not bother to go to any of her movies anymore as it is the same thing all the time. Lovely Rachel looking for love which is getting ridiculous as she is now 40 plus!! Same for Tom Cruise the only time he acted was Fourth of July and now he plays the same role again and again. I enjoy REAL actors, e.g. Russel Crowe who changes so much in his films that you hardly recognise him. HE CAN ACT but these other Hollywood stars are just playing themselves. John Wayne did the same thing, always John Wayne in certain situation, again and again and again....
I disagree with that. He was excellent in Magnolia and in Collateral.
I disagree with that. He was excellent in Magnolia and in Collateral.
Magnolia was a superb and beautiful film, and Cruise was astonishing in it, really showed what he can do in the right hands. Ditto Collateral. Also, did you see Tropic Thunder and his cameo at the end? Seriously hysterical! It nearly made me forgive and forget all the CoS creepiness.
I agree with him..she plays the same old character everytime...I watched the switch and wanted it to end badly (they always end happy those films)..I really wanted her character to get nothing in the end
There was a post on IMDB, saying that the poster had seen footage that had been cut from the Comic Relief Apprentice which showed that Everett had been really quite bullied by the other contestants.
I remember watching Piers Morgan trying to get Everett to involve Madonna in his scheme. Although, Everett kept trying to explain that he really wasn't still in contact with her as most actors usually lose touch with their co-stars once the filming is over. He left not long after that, and I got the impression that he thought he was being used for who he might know.
I really like Jennifer Aniston and think she's actually a great comedy actress (not just comedy either, as she has proved). But she does tend to stick to one type of movie - the feel good romcom. She's not the only one who does that though.
But Rupert Everett's bitchiness is uncalled for. Of course he's entitled to his opinion, but expressing it in such a way says far more about him than it does about Jennifer.
Magnolia was a superb and beautiful film, and Cruise was astonishing in it, really showed what he can do in the right hands. Ditto Collateral. Also, did you see Tropic Thunder and his cameo at the end? Seriously hysterical! It nearly made me forgive and forget all the CoS creepiness.
I agree. Movies like Mission Impossible leave me cold, and it's just money for old rope for Tom. I don't like the man; there's something about him that gives me the creeps -but in Magnolia and Tropic Thunder (haven't seen Collateral), he was excellent.
Jannifer Aniston lovely lady, but just plays the same person in whatever role she plays, which to me is a very limited role indeed. Oh yes and she flicks her hair a lot too and thats about it really
As for him criticising, he never really did that much to be fair, and last time I saw him was on TV on Celebrity Apprentice and he bombed, his team thought he could draw in all the A List Celebs to help and basically he didnt have anyone
So although it could seem as sour grapes to a certain degree, neither of them have done anything substantial
Rupert everett is wrong to use Aniston as an example of someone whose films regularly flop. They may not all make good box office but all her films are low-budget and generally the international box office alone gets a good return for the studios. But then you factor in international dvd sales and rights of her films to tv companies and this boosts the return considerably. As someone said earlier, there is no way the studios would continue to employ her and pay her the salaries they pay her were she not making money for them. She is. This is nothing to do with whether she's a good or versatile actress - I personally think she's pretty one-note - but to suggest that all her films are box office poison is just plain incorrect. Bottom line, were she the dud that Everett suggests she is, we would not still be seeing her on the screen.
Jennifer continues to get work because she is a profitable actress for the studios to hire. Her films consistently earn 2-3x their budget at the box office. And when you add in DVD sales, etc., the studios almost always profit from her films. Only ignorant people who don't know how the movie industry works say that her films "flop." The producers of her films are certainly happy.
You want an example of a critical and box office bomb? Look at Angelina Jolie's The Tourist. 20% score on Rotten Tomatoes (and some critics calling it the worst movie of the year) & has failed to make even $50 million domestically on a $100 million budget. The producers will never recoup the production costs on this film. That makes it a flop.
Plus, most "stars" play the same character over and over again & have appeared in at least a few bad films. Rupert Everett himself was in a Julia Roberts rom com, for goodness sakes! So how can he criticize Jen for the career moves he's made? He's just bitter that his career has gone nowhere whereas Jen has a successful career. (Plus, she is going to stretch her acting range in her upcoming films Horrible Bosses and Wanderlust, so Everett is wrong about her film career.) Apparently, the only way this washed up actor can get publicity is to resort to attacking successful actors. This is the first time I have heard his name in years, so apparently it worked.
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.
If you look at the quality of Rupert's CV even since he came out, it's a CV that many an out of work actor would be proud of. I really don't see that he's got too much to complain about. At least he works and earns money, which is more than can be said for most actors.
A note to him though, if he hadn't given away all of the things he knew about Madonna in his autobiography, they might still be friends!
Yes she has, she's absolutely excellent in The Good Girl, always thought it a shame she hasn't gone more down this route, when she really showed her acting chops and moved well away from the Rachel character.
Quite what Angelina has to do with this thread I've little idea, although many of her films have bombed as well.
I agree with you, Jennifer did really well in The Good Girl and it's a shame she doesn't exercise her versatility a bit more. Maybe it's Hollywood or maybe it's just Jennifer feeling more confident in the Rachel-type roles, I don't know.
If you look at the quality of Rupert's CV even since he came out, it's a CV that many an out of work actor would be proud of. I really don't see that he's got too much to complain about. At least he works and earns money, which is more than can be said for most actors.
A note to him though, if he hadn't given away all of the things he knew about Madonna in his autobiography, they might still be friends!
I totally agree with you. Rupert Everett likes to complain. Sometimes it seems he likes more seeing his name in print than doing the actual acting work. Okay, he may not be the biggest Hollywood star but he has worked a lot in both movies and the theatre.
Comments
I agree with Mr Everett for once! :eek:
But I also think Rupert's knee-jerk bitching makes him look sad and doesn't do him any favours at all.
Yes she has, she's absolutely excellent in The Good Girl, always thought it a shame she hasn't gone more down this route, when she really showed her acting chops and moved well away from the Rachel character.
Quite what Angelina has to do with this thread I've little idea, although many of her films have bombed as well.
'Derailed' bombed at the box office and that was her last film where she didn't play 'Rachel' - perhaps that scared her into playing it safe?
Anyway, I named all those Jennifer Aniston movies and could name more - yet I can only think of 3 that Rupert Everett's starred in - My Best Friends' Wedding, Shrek 2 and that one with Madonna. I'm sure there was one with Reece Witherspoon too though.
What has she got to do with this thread topic? I am confused? Surely this is going off topic?
I was enjoying reading through this thread and then it turned into another Angelina Jolie VS Jennifer Aniston thread.
Everyone knows the film business is corrupt in that way, and it's been known for a long time, he knew it before he decided to be an actor but he took the risk... if the tide was turned the other way and it was himself benefitting from it then I'm sure he'd be keeping his mouth shut.
Who'd want to work with him? bitter, difficult bitch.
Rupert has given many interviews about his career and I think it is true to say he has been very honest when discussing his career in Hollywood. He was doing great until he came out and talked openly about being gay. Suddenly he disappeared from our screens and no longer played the leading man in Hollywood movies..
There was a post on IMDB, saying that the poster had seen footage that had been cut from the Comic Relief Apprentice which showed that Everett had been really quite bullied by the other contestants.
I disagree with that. He was excellent in Magnolia and in Collateral.
Magnolia was a superb and beautiful film, and Cruise was astonishing in it, really showed what he can do in the right hands. Ditto Collateral. Also, did you see Tropic Thunder and his cameo at the end? Seriously hysterical! It nearly made me forgive and forget all the CoS creepiness.
I remember watching Piers Morgan trying to get Everett to involve Madonna in his scheme. Although, Everett kept trying to explain that he really wasn't still in contact with her as most actors usually lose touch with their co-stars once the filming is over. He left not long after that, and I got the impression that he thought he was being used for who he might know.
But Rupert Everett's bitchiness is uncalled for. Of course he's entitled to his opinion, but expressing it in such a way says far more about him than it does about Jennifer.
I agree. Movies like Mission Impossible leave me cold, and it's just money for old rope for Tom. I don't like the man; there's something about him that gives me the creeps -but in Magnolia and Tropic Thunder (haven't seen Collateral), he was excellent.
Angelina is admired for her looks, not her talent.
As for him criticising, he never really did that much to be fair, and last time I saw him was on TV on Celebrity Apprentice and he bombed, his team thought he could draw in all the A List Celebs to help and basically he didnt have anyone
So although it could seem as sour grapes to a certain degree, neither of them have done anything substantial
Jennifer continues to get work because she is a profitable actress for the studios to hire. Her films consistently earn 2-3x their budget at the box office. And when you add in DVD sales, etc., the studios almost always profit from her films. Only ignorant people who don't know how the movie industry works say that her films "flop." The producers of her films are certainly happy.
You want an example of a critical and box office bomb? Look at Angelina Jolie's The Tourist. 20% score on Rotten Tomatoes (and some critics calling it the worst movie of the year) & has failed to make even $50 million domestically on a $100 million budget. The producers will never recoup the production costs on this film. That makes it a flop.
Plus, most "stars" play the same character over and over again & have appeared in at least a few bad films. Rupert Everett himself was in a Julia Roberts rom com, for goodness sakes! So how can he criticize Jen for the career moves he's made? He's just bitter that his career has gone nowhere whereas Jen has a successful career. (Plus, she is going to stretch her acting range in her upcoming films Horrible Bosses and Wanderlust, so Everett is wrong about her film career.) Apparently, the only way this washed up actor can get publicity is to resort to attacking successful actors. This is the first time I have heard his name in years, so apparently it worked.
If you look at the quality of Rupert's CV even since he came out, it's a CV that many an out of work actor would be proud of. I really don't see that he's got too much to complain about. At least he works and earns money, which is more than can be said for most actors.
A note to him though, if he hadn't given away all of the things he knew about Madonna in his autobiography, they might still be friends!
I agree with you, Jennifer did really well in The Good Girl and it's a shame she doesn't exercise her versatility a bit more. Maybe it's Hollywood or maybe it's just Jennifer feeling more confident in the Rachel-type roles, I don't know.
I totally agree with you. Rupert Everett likes to complain. Sometimes it seems he likes more seeing his name in print than doing the actual acting work. Okay, he may not be the biggest Hollywood star but he has worked a lot in both movies and the theatre.