For Jennifer Aniston, "The Break-Up follows a terrible professional run. In the last year she has appeared in two high-profile movies -- the disappointing thriller Derailed and the stink-bomb comedy Rumor Has It -- and the smaller Friends With Money, in which she was the least convincing member of an ensemble. The characters in these films are wildly different, but Ms. Aniston's performance isn't. She projects the same high-maintenance Jennifer Aniston style -- the trademark sleek hair, the natural-looking makeup, the body so toned you wonder how many hours a day a person can spend with a trainer. [Plus] she exudes coolness and self-possession even when the part calls for warmth or vulnerability. She did warm and vulnerable winningly in the cult movie Office Space (1999). But lately all her characters uncomfortably resemble the one who made her rich and famous, the feather-brained Rachel on Friends, who thought being pretty was her full-time job. It's as if she has substituted a movie-star pose for acting." -- Caryn James on Aniston's career slump in the 6.5.05 N.Y. Times.

<< previous | next >>

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 5, 2006 at 10:34 AM

comment #1

Anonymous says ...

Yep. Jennifer Aniston sucks.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 10:44 AM

comment #2

AH says ...

No she doesn't.

Posted by AH at June 5, 2006 11:06 AM

comment #3

delbomber says ...

Her character was too strong, which is her failing, but the writers should be blamed for leaving her undeveloped and opposite an unsympathetic character. Despite these shortcomings, however, I thought it worked overall and the post-release buzz I've heard and read is more positive than negative.

Posted by delbomber at June 5, 2006 11:08 AM

comment #4

Anonymous says ...

No guys find her attractive or go to see her movies unless they are forced to do so. There's a weird group of women that love and support her, and call Jolie a homewrecker, but they also do not pay to see her goddamn movies. It's just a massive group of zombie housewives and misguided women eager to feed off of the drama of others. The opening of The Break-Up has everything to do with Vince Vaughn, just as the opening of Bruce Almighty had everything to do with Jim Carrey. Her handlers and supporters are going to have a field day with this opening weekend, and they'll get her another high paying gig, that will fail miserably unless Carell or Sandler are the male lead.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 11:24 AM

comment #5

Lewis Beale says ...

Yep, I agree that Jen does not open a film. This was a Vince opening all the way. Plus, I think Caryn James' column totally over-rates her viability as a film star. Simply put, she ain't one. She's cute, but so are millions of women. And her talents seem mediocre at best. Really - put her up against, say, Cate Blanchett, and you see the difference between a real actress and a TV star. They are two separate entities.

Posted by Lewis Beale at June 5, 2006 11:32 AM

comment #6

Sanfred says ...

What the hell? Even after liking The Break-Up, Jeff insists on contributing to the Jennifer Aniston bashing.

Posted by Sanfred at June 5, 2006 11:38 AM

comment #7

Anonymous says ...

Michelle Monaghan is going to push her into obscurity withing two or three years. This sentiment won't seem off-the-wall once everyone watches Kiss Kiss Bang Bang on DVD. I suspect a lot of people will start making the same claim.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 11:38 AM

comment #8

Anonymous says ...

Aniston is freakish and fake. Her skin looks like a purse and she can't act. It's true what the earlier poster said - guys might sometimes go to a movie just because Natalie Portman is in it, or Jolie, or even Keira Knightley. But never Aniston. She's utterly sexless.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 11:45 AM

comment #9

Abe Golson says ...

From Fox News

Add "FWM" to "Derailed" and "Rumor Has It," her last two films, and what we have is a big problem. Is Jennifer Aniston a movie star, or is she a TV star with a loyal but cheap following who will only pay to see her in a guaranteed blockbuster? The latter is probably the case. So far Aniston's only real success, and a critical one at that, is "The Good Girl."

According to the Internet Movie Database, Aniston has a couple more comedies and a thriller on the horizon. Unfortunately, the material doesn't look terrific and except for George Hickenlooper, the directors attached to the projects aren't very promising.

It's hard to say what's gone wrong here: in person Aniston is a friendly, generous soul who so far has not played the diva card. She's accessible and amiable.

In "The Good Girl" she was able to show off a different side of her acting. But the succession of bad scripts that followed have done nothing but emphasize her worst qualities.

If "The Break-Up" is really as shrill and annoying as the advance notices indicate, Aniston may really have trouble attracting audiences in the future. She really should take a page from the playbooks of Goldie Hawn and other actresses who needed custom-made material to get out of ruts. And fast!

Posted by Abe Golson at June 5, 2006 11:53 AM

comment #10

Abe Golson says ...

From Fox News

It's hard to say what's gone wrong here: in person Aniston is a friendly, generous soul who so far has not played the diva card. She's accessible and amiable.

In "The Good Girl" she was able to show off a different side of her acting. But the succession of bad scripts that followed have done nothing but emphasize her worst qualities.

Posted by Abe Golson at June 5, 2006 11:54 AM

comment #11

Abe Golson says ...

From Fox News

It's hard to say what's gone wrong here: in person Aniston is a friendly, generous soul who so far has not played the diva card. She's accessible and amiable.

In "The Good Girl" she was able to show off a different side of her acting. But the succession of bad scripts that followed have done nothing but emphasize her worst qualities.

Posted by Abe Golson at June 5, 2006 11:56 AM

comment #12

Abe Golson says ...

From Fox News

It's hard to say what's gone wrong here: in person Aniston is a friendly, generous soul who so far has not played the diva card. She's accessible and amiable.

In "The Good Girl" she was able to show off a different side of her acting. But the succession of bad scripts that followed have done nothing but emphasize her worst qualities.

Posted by Abe Golson at June 5, 2006 11:56 AM

comment #13

Bob says ...

"She's cute, but so are millions of women."

And that's the appeal :)

Look at what were, in the heyday of a rom-coms, the "top" women-appeal actresses: Julia Roberts and Meg Ryan. Both attractive, never really dipped below a "6" in their careers so far... but neither of them or really ANY major actress with a primarily-female fanbase are the sort of "hot" that'd sell a poster or a magazine spread if they weren't already famous.

This is WHY they are so beloved by "average" American women: They're pretty enough to not be visually unpleasant to men, but the gals can rest reasonably easy that THEIR man wouldn't leave them for a Meg or a Julia (or a Jen or even a Sandra) if they were just one more okay-looking woman at the mall. By contrast, look at how women DESPISE Pam Anderson, Jenny McCarthy, etc., nevermind the fact that these women have the same basic range (read: not very much) as the A-list female stars of romantic comedy.

Women already "liked" Anniston for this reason, and now that she's lived their ULTIMATE nightmare (being left for an exotic, globe-hopping, perfect-11 sex goddess) for them they positively ADORE her.

And because someone will bring it up: No, Jolie DOESN'T really have a female fanbase comparable to Meg, Julia, etc. The big chunk of Jolie's female fanbase are under-20 gals who want to sleep with her even more than her MALE fans do :)

Posted by Bob at June 5, 2006 12:00 PM

comment #14

Todd says ...

Oh ya. I can't agree more with Caryn James comments. I did like her in The Good Girl. Bruce Almighty was the only other film I've seen her in though. She needs to quit playing Rachel in her films.

Posted by Todd at June 5, 2006 12:06 PM

comment #15

Andrew says ...

Who else is out there? There's Reese, Rachel McAdams if she ever makes another movie and then... who?

I'm no big fan, but all this bashing seems a bit odd -- you know, considering the Break-up opened to 40 mil. I mean, I'd much rather watch Anniston in something than Cameron Diaz who still commands a big payday for some reason. Whatever happened to the Cameron Diaz that was in Something About Mary?

Posted by Andrew at June 5, 2006 12:13 PM

comment #16

Rob says ...

I thought she did a good job of playing Sad, Average Women in The Good Girl and Friends with Money, but she's one-note in her other films and she was all wrong in Derailed.

But still, why the vitriol? Male stars hardly ever get treated this badly by the press (except for Jeff's fabulous takedown of Matthew McConaughey a few months back).

Posted by Rob at June 5, 2006 1:13 PM

comment #17

Patty says ...

She's just another vapid woman, who contributes nothing of value to the cinematic world. She's really not even worth discussing.

Posted by Patty at June 5, 2006 1:25 PM

comment #18

Steve says ...

Hey, I'd fuck her.

Posted by Steve at June 5, 2006 1:39 PM

comment #19

JD says ...

Are people losing their ability to distinguish writing and acting from directing? I felt Rumour Has It was a well-written script with a pretty solid performance from Aniston that was incompetently-directed by Rob Reiner. Why does everyone keep blaming Aniston and the script? Do you really think Section Eight and all these high profile actors would have backed a first-time director if the script was bad? Clearly, they had a problem with the way he tried to direct the film -- and, as a result, they fired him -- but the script simply isn't bad. It's a very clever and elegantly structured piece of writing.

The real problem in the film is Rob Reiner's love of broad comedy and caricature acting (which is all over the supporting performances), not the writing. In spite of Reiner, Aniston came across quite well in that film, as she did in Friends With Money. She was far more interesting and appealing in that film than Catherine Keener, Frances McDormand or Joan Cusack, all of whom were shrill and one-note. Personally, I think people are just bashing her because she gets too much attention in the tabloids.

And who cares if these performances are similar to her performance in Friends? Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson (not to mention Jack Nicholson, Cary Grant, and many other great actors) have been giving similar performances in film after film for years and nobody seems to mind when they do it. Acting is about interpreting a script and relating moments of writing in a credible, honest, and entertaining way. Different accents, hairstyles, and clothes don't prove anything. The Beatles never released a polka, country or jazz album, but they were still a great band.

Posted by JD at June 5, 2006 1:44 PM

comment #20

Mark says ...

Aniston is the same age and stuck in the same career rut of another former TV darling some 8 years ago; one George Clooney, who had his share of moderate bombs following his ER departure. Acting wise, it's as if they had both attended the same NBC seminar titled "The Patented Head Twitch; how to signal to the viewer your disapproval with also adding a hint of condescension". The results are apparently magic on the tube and teeth-clench engendering when viewed on the big screen.

Fortunately for Clooney, he finally hooked up with some smart directors that actually directed, and it didn't hurt that he's quite intelligent and also a man entering his prime years as a looker. Needless to say, it's an uphill battle for Jennifer.

Posted by Mark at June 5, 2006 1:45 PM

comment #21

andrew says ...

The woman is a comedy robot. She has the mechanics down right, but there's no humanity or spontaneity in her delivery. Before she even finishes a line, you know how it will end. She's coasting - has been for years - and deserves to be called on it.

I don't understand the passionate fan base for someone who comes across bland and wooden - maybe the women who have copied her various hairstyles through the years have now blurred the line between themselves and the woman they see onscreen.

Posted by andrew at June 5, 2006 1:50 PM

comment #22

JD says ...

I'd be curious to hear who Aniston's comedy superiors are in her age group. And don't say Reese Witherspoon because she's totally ill-suited to comedy and doesn't even seem human in her comedic performances (ie. Legally Blonde, Just Like Heaven). I really don't think people recognize how difficult it is to be real and human in the kinds of movies Aniston makes. As someone who never watched Friends, I'm starting to think this anti-Aniston revolt is fueled largely by Friends fans who a) are understandably afraid to identify themselves as Friends fans and b) take Aniston's talent for granted because they used to get it for free every week. Courtney Cox and Lisa Kudrow certainly couldn't pull off the performances that Aniston has.

Posted by JD at June 5, 2006 2:51 PM

comment #23

Anonymous says ...

JD, you're out of your mind. The people that hate Aniston DID NOT watch Friends when it was on TV. And it's not like this is a new revolt. No one saw Picture Perfect. No one saw that one movie where she dated a gay guy. No one saw Office Space (regrettably). No one saw Rock Star. No one saw Good Girl (although, 14 million dollar for a 5 million indie from the director of Chuck and Buck is HUGE). The people that saw Along Came Polly saw it because they loved Stiller. The people that saw Bruce Almight saw it because they loved Carrey. The people that saw The Break-Up saw it because they loved Vince Vaughn. I hate to be repetitive, but I feel it's necessary to cure your specific brand of stupid.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 2:59 PM

comment #24

Daniel Zelter says ...

Lew: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2084&p=.htm
said women were 2/3 of the audience, so Vince definitely wasn't the factor on this one.

Bob: "By contrast, look at how women DESPISE Pam Anderson, Jenny McCarthy, etc., nevermind the fact that these women have the same basic range (read: not very much) as the A-list female stars of romantic comedy."

Have you seen Pam and Jen act? Anyone would look professional next to them.

"And because someone will bring it up: No, Jolie DOESN'T really have a female fanbase comparable to Meg, Julia, etc. The big chunk of Jolie's female fanbase are under-20 gals who want to sleep with her even more than her MALE fans do :)"

I'm surprised Jolie has a male fanbase. I never understood what the American fascination is with Eurotrash.

Andrew: " I mean, I'd much rather watch Anniston in something than Cameron Diaz who still commands a big payday for some reason. Whatever happened to the Cameron Diaz that was in Something About Mary?"

Something About Mary happened to her. And to the Farrelies, unfortunately.

JD: "Do you really think Section Eight and all these high profile actors would have backed a first-time director if the script was bad?"

Have you seen Universal's output lately?

"And who cares if these performances are similar to her performance in Friends? Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson (not to mention Jack Nicholson, Cary Grant, and many other great actors) have been giving similar performances in film after film for years and nobody seems to mind when they do it."

Cus no one likes Friends? They just watched it because nothing else was on.

" As someone who never watched Friends, I'm starting to think this anti-Aniston revolt is fueled largely by Friends fans who a) are understandably afraid to identify themselves as Friends fans and b) take Aniston's talent for granted because they used to get it for free every week."

The Aniston revolt is fueld by Friends haters who
would prefer actresses who actually worked to be discovered, not just one who got a free ride, because they stinted on a teen sitcom and married Brad Pitt.

Posted by Daniel Zelter at June 5, 2006 3:12 PM

comment #25

zoey says ...

Substitute another actor for Vince Vaughn in this movie and keep Aniston in it, and it doesn't come close to what it did this past weekend.

Substitute another actress for Jennifer and take Vince out of the movie, and the movie would still have hit the same numbers.

Posted by zoey at June 5, 2006 3:34 PM

comment #26

Anonymous says ...

She seems cold, bitchy and off-putting to me. Both my girlfriend and I are only interested in this movie for the Vaughn factor.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 3:40 PM

comment #27

Anonymous says ...

Not to mention her performances of late have been wooden, and mannered. She's a one trick pony and a bland one at that.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 3:43 PM

comment #28

Rob says ...

Folks, exit polling indicated that Aniston ranked higher than Vaughn among reasons that people chose to see The Break-Up this weekend. It's right there in Variety.

Posted by Rob at June 5, 2006 3:44 PM

comment #29

goldenhorse says ...

JD -- you say "Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson (not to mention Jack Nicholson, Cary Grant" have been giving the same performances for years...

difference is those guys are charismatic and likeable. Anniston is not.

Mark -- that's a very good observation about her acting style.

Posted by goldenhorse at June 5, 2006 3:48 PM

comment #30

goldenhorse says ...

Rob -- despite what exit polling indicates, I think zoey is right. I don't trust exit polling.

Posted by goldenhorse at June 5, 2006 3:52 PM

comment #31

Anonymous says ...

Everyone is making a big deal out of ow numbers, First off, this movie had no opening weekend competition, second mostly women showed up who dragged their husbands/boyfriends to this film, myself included, which was the rom-com crowd that wanted comedy regardless who was in it. Third, this movie will drop big time next weekend, everyone i talked to who saw it, hated it, including myself. The most common answers given: it was depressing as hell and i thought this was going to be a LOL comedy.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 3:53 PM

comment #32

JD says ...

Okay, guy who's scared to use a name, if you're gonna cure my "specific brand of stupid," let's cure your boring, predictable, utterly familiar brand of stupid. Like all misogynists, you insist on attributing all of Aniston's successes to males and all of her failures to herself. Okay, so Rock Star is her fault (even though it's a Mark Wahlberg vehicle) and the box office failure of Office Space is her fault (even though she's barely in it), but she gets none of the credit for Along Came Polly, Bruce Almighty, and The Break-Up? You can't have it both ways. Whether she's talented or not, there's a simple reason she was cast in those three films: women go to see romantic comedies with Jennifer Aniston, no matter who the male star is.

And Daniel, if you're gonna argue that nobody liked Friends, I'm gonna argue that Rumour Has It was the biggest hit of 2005. Universal's output may have been weak lately, but Section Eight has exclusively pursued quality projects. Some of their movies turn out poorly, but all are produced with the intention to create quality films, not low brow box office hits. And what's makes you think Aniston got a free ride? Ever seen Leprachaun? That's called paying dues. She was 25 when Friends went on the air, whereas Julia Roberts was only 23 when Pretty Woman came out. As far as I can tell, she struggled just as hard as any other successful actress.

By the way, since I'm deliberately avoiding the lazy position on the Jennifer Aniston issue, I'd really like to hear who should be cast in these roles. Tell me. It's starting to look like this is more of an anti-actress debate than an anti-Aniston debate. Are there any comedy actresses that people around here like...who are still alive?

Posted by JD at June 5, 2006 3:53 PM

comment #33

Rob says ...

"Rob -- despite what exit polling indicates, I think zoey is right. I don't trust exit polling"

You're right, anecdotal evidence from people you've happened to talk to is much more reliable.

Posted by Rob at June 5, 2006 4:06 PM

comment #34

JR says ...

"difference is those guys are charismatic and likeable. Anniston is not."

Come on - "charismatic and likeable" are in the eye of the beholder. There's obviously a demographic out there that finds her chasismatic and likeable.

Posted by JR at June 5, 2006 4:11 PM

comment #35

Kates says ...

Good Question ... cannot think of one A-list "comedy" actress. In my universe Judy Greer or Zooey Deschanel would have Aniston's career.

Jennifer Aniston is overexposed, she churns out movie after movie and none of them are memorable. The Break Up is slightly better that Along Came Polly due to Vince Vaughn but her name on a film always signals something generic and safe. That can be tolerable and amusing when its a half-hour sitcom, but she does not have the charisma to make a comedy unpredictable and fun.

Posted by Kates at June 5, 2006 4:43 PM

comment #36

Joe, PartTimeHero says ...

C'mon, Jennifer "Rachel" Aniston did not open this film, VINCE VAUGHN did. His style and charisma is very much in vougue again, and he put together a smart movie film on location, making it feel more attractive. He should be getting the props for this opening.

Posted by Joe, PartTimeHero at June 5, 2006 4:43 PM

comment #37

Nick says ...

Using the word "elegant" to describe any aspect of "Rumor Has It" insults the very etymology of that word, J.D., but that's just my $.02. That said, that movie was not her fault. For whatever it's worth, my girlfriend LOVES Vince Vaughn and couldn't care less who's in this movie with him, and my best friend LOVES Jennifer Aniston with the same sort of sentiments shared by Steve above.

Posted by Nick at June 5, 2006 5:02 PM

comment #38

Anonymous says ...

The problem with Jennifer in "The Break-Up" for me was not that she reminded me of Rachel -- it was that it was *not* a comedic performance. She was hurt and angry through the whole movie and it made it a drag. To me the movie would have been better if it had been more of a black comedy and the female character had been less sympathetic.

Posted by Anonymous at June 5, 2006 5:12 PM

comment #39

JD says ...

I know it seems like a stretch, Nick, but read the script. It's pretty good. While people love to give a director all the credit when a movie's good, they have a hard time giving him all the blame when a movie's bad. Rumour Has It really is Rob Reiner's flop, not Ted Griffin's.

Posted by JD at June 5, 2006 5:14 PM

comment #40

goldenhorse says ...

rob -- as far as you know.

Posted by goldenhorse at June 5, 2006 6:05 PM

comment #41

Andrew says ...

Ted Griffin's script for Rumor Has It was pretty great. When he got canned as director Reiner and a team of writers gutted it and made it into... well the piece of crap everybody saw.

Posted by Andrew at June 5, 2006 6:09 PM

comment #42

delbomber says ...

Have the efficacy and accuracy of exit polls been peer reviewed? What is the scientific consensus? How many positive responses equate to a .01 degree Celsius rise in ocean temperatures?

Lol, I love this site.

Aniston is fine...if she had better taste in scripts this wouldn't be an issue. She has the tools and she has the talent, at least in 'Office Space', 'The Good Girl' and 'She's the One'...unfortunately those are all in the past...maybe she needs to reinvent herself through supporting/unconventional roles.

Then again, what do I know?... I live in Philly.

Posted by delbomber at June 5, 2006 6:49 PM

comment #43

Brody says ...

Aniston is one of the most defensive and boring interview subjects currently out there. Watching Conan trying to pry anything but sulky, annoyingly one word answers from her was beyond tedious.

And women love Vince Vaughn, so the two thirds women thing doesn't mean they went to see her.

Posted by Brody at June 5, 2006 7:01 PM

comment #44

mikeg says ...

Anybody remember that Rolling Stone cover Aniston did a few years ago? If she had built her movie career around that image (tousseled, bedroomy, sexually challenging) she would have been fine. It was a perfect jumping-off point for her. Instead, she jumped in that anodyne, comedy-like-substance box and everybody lost interest. She needs to do an In the Cut kind of movie, jostle the perception, else she will be obsolete in a trice.

Posted by mikeg at June 5, 2006 7:26 PM

comment #45

Dixon Steele says ...

Jennifer Aniston is sexy, talented, and wildly successful as an actress.

Not sexy? Then why in hell did Brad Pitt and Vince Vaughn hook up with her?

Yes, some of her movies are better than others, but what actor can't you say that about?

RUMOR HAS IT really did suck...yes it did.

But still, I'd like to father her child, since Brad chose not to,

Posted by Dixon Steele at June 5, 2006 7:27 PM

comment #46

Kylie says ...

"...But still, I'd like to father her child, since Brad chose not to..."

Brad very much would like to father her child, but Jennifer A. chose not to. That's why he has hooked up with Angelina and they now have a baby daughter.

The same goes with the Ben-Jennifer L.-Jennifer G. thing.

Ditto the Tom-Nicole-Katie situation.

Dixon - Don't you see a pattern here?

Posted by Kylie at June 5, 2006 8:48 PM

comment #47

Dixon Steele says ...

I'm still available...

Posted by Dixon Steele at June 5, 2006 9:43 PM

comment #48

lac says ...

This was Vince Vaughn hit movie. Jennifer is a good sidekick to funny actors. If VV had not been in this movie it would have bombed. The media just still has pity for poor jenny.

Posted by lac at June 5, 2006 9:48 PM

comment #49

Daniel Zelter says ...

JD:
" and the box office failure of Office Space is her fault (even though she's barely in it)"

Office Space came out when the economy was strong, and trashing corporate culture was considered absurd. If it was released a few years later, it would have probably done as well as Dick and Jane, except it would have made money.

"Whether she's talented or not, there's a simple reason she was cast in those three films: women go to see romantic comedies with Jennifer Aniston, no matter who the male star is."

Except for Picture Perfect, Object of my Affection, and Rumour Has It...

"And Daniel, if you're gonna argue that nobody liked Friends, I'm gonna argue that Rumour Has It was the biggest hit of 2005."

That's still not saying much for 2005. Friends is as endearing as an Aaron Spelling production. There's a difference between liking a show and liking a concept for a show. And any pretty face like Aniston could have made it on there, and it'd
be just as successful without her.

"Universal's output may have been weak lately, but Section Eight has exclusively pursued quality projects. Some of their movies turn out poorly, but all are produced with the intention to create
quality films, not low brow box office hits."

Too bad most of them are just vanity vehicles for Clooney.

"And what's makes you think Aniston got a free ride? Ever seen Leprachaun? That's called paying dues."

And Courtney Cox was in the He-Man movie and Ace Ventura. What's your point? They're not owed success for being in crappy films. They're owed success for being talented. By your logic, Paris Hilton is paying dues for being in a home-made porno video.

" She was 25 when Friends went on the air, whereas Julia Roberts was only 23 when Pretty Woman came out. As far as I can tell, she struggled just as hard as any other successful actress."

Threatening to shut down production of a show unless you're paid $1 million per episode isn't what I'd call "struggling"...

Posted by Daniel Zelter at June 6, 2006 2:37 AM

comment #50

Nick says ...

J.D., admittedly I haven't read the script, and I'm aware how stuff gets, um, massaged by directors and teams of writers, etc. But I might know all I need to know if you tell me one thing: Was the blunt testicular trauma bit in Griffin's original screenplay? That might have the been the most singularly unfunny bit in any comedy I saw last year.

Posted by Nick at June 6, 2006 6:59 AM

comment #51

Melquiades says ...

Interesting debate here. I don't find Aniston particularly sexy, but I think she did a good job on Friends. I've only seen one or two of her movies and wasn't moved one way or the other.

I find the comment about women being threatened by "real beauties" like Pam Anderson and jenny McCarthy hilarious! Those women are as unsexy and plastic as they come.

Give me Rachel McAdams or Michelle Monahagn any day of the week. Or Naomi Watts. Those are real women... seriously sexy, beautiful, real women. (And no, Aniston isn't on their level).

Posted by Melquiades at June 6, 2006 7:15 AM

comment #52

Andrew says ...

Like Aniston or hate her, please tell me who else is out there? I mean, like I said before there's Reese Witherspoon, maybe Rachel McAdams if she ever does another movie and... well who are the female "stars" that mean a lot at the box office?

Posted by Andrew at June 6, 2006 8:58 AM

comment #53

Steven R. Silver says ...

The Break-Up is not a Jennifer Aniston movie, any more than the upcoming Click is a Kate Beckinsale movie. They are just actresses along for the ride in a star vehicle. There are at least twenty or thirty reasonably attractive, reasonably talented actresses who could have played the Aniston role equally well.

The Break-Up is Vince Vaughn's breakout role however. He shows here that he can carry a movie with his trademarked fast talking, easy going character. Try imagining The Break-Up with Will Ferrell in the lead role and the result would be a disaster.

I don't see why people continue to get on Aniston's case about her not being a movie "star." She's not. She can't carry a film on her own, but there's only a couple of actresses out there who can. She can do very well playing straight gal roles in romantic comedies opposite Vince Vaughns or Jim Carreys for the next ten years easily.

Posted by Steven R. Silver at June 6, 2006 4:19 PM

comment #54