Anyone read Jennifer Aniston's Op Ed to Huffington Post?
In it, Jennifer declares that she is FED UP with the media scrutiny of her body. We saw the latest, a few weeks ago with the tabloids/paparazzi going to town over whether or not she was pregnant, because she had a "delicious lunch", per her PR Guru, Huvane, and had a bit of a protruding stomach while on vacation with her husband, Justin Theroux. Speed up to a few days, and she's all over NYC in work out gear, her "protruding stomach" completely gone.......because newsflash! women gain weight without being pregnant. Especially when they're hitting up 50 in a few years.
She then goes on to say that the scrutiny that women endure about their bodies and their actions is appalling--true--and that little girls internalize a lot of this from the get go--also true--and that we, as women, are judged whether or not we have children, whether or not we have a husband or boyfriend--which is very, very true. I do not disagree with her on any point. Although it is very ramble-y (and I know I can't talk--but she has how many millions of dollars? She can afford to have someone polish her work before she sends that out to be published)--every bit of it is true.
But I still rolled my eyes throughout the entire Op Ed.
Honestly, because it's Jennifer Aniston saying it.
Now I'm just going to ignore her engagements for the last twenty years with the media and tabloids about her being pregnant or not, and pick an example that is within the last few years, that showcases exactly why I rolled my eyes when I saw this op ed.
You all remember Jennifer Aniston's run for Oscar glory and an attempt to be seen in a more serious light as an actor back in late 2014 and early 2015?
Well this is how her Oscar campaign went.
Her early interviews had the same, main talking points--about how she felt "empowered" without makeup on (as per her acting in the film Cake, which I did not understand, because she clearly had facial scars in the movie, so yes, she had makeup on for that to blend in with the rest of her face), her body (she gained weight for the role), calling the tabloids "bs and lies", talking about her relationship with Justin, etc. But the most interesting part was how she allowed Brad and Angelina's names to be referenced--that or the UnHoly Triangle--along with TABLOIDS. Always tabloids.
In Instyle Magazine, girlfriend lied straight through her teeth about when she and Justin got together. She was introducing Justin around as her boyfriend back in April 2011, on the set of her Lifetime movie short, Five. Last I checked, April was not "the following summer", as she claims. Yet here she is, addressing tabloid rumors (and lying). Later, she also talked shit about plastic surgery and injections--something I find ironic given that she's had like three nose jobs.
In Allure magazine, she says speculation about whether or not she is pregnant is "rude, insulting, and ignorant". Bonus/gossip conspiracy: she also comments on Gwyneth Paltrow on her style, and says "she's always been sweet to me". Um. This is the same woman who referred to her as "that tv girl".
Then she hires Lisa Taback, Oscar Consultant (which is probably why she went on Dr. Oz's show), and the shift from calling the tabloids shits on the tabloids some more for being sexist and treating her personal life with double standards--and in this interview with CBS is asked about the tabloid headlines with her ex-husband, Brad Pitt, saying
I don’t find it painful. I think it’s a narrative that follows you because it’s an interesting headline. It’s more of a media-driven topic. (When asked if she keeps in touch with Brad, she says)We’ve exchanged good wishes an all that sort of stuff to each other, but it’s not a constant thing.
Next, E! News has her speaking about the scene in Cake, in which she puts her head underwater--which apparently was a major undertaking for her, because she is apparently terrified of water being above her head.
In the New York Times, she allowed the interviewer to bring up Angelina and herself in relation to the tabloid rumors, and then to speak about the infamous Sony Hack email where Scott Rudin called Angelina a spoiled brat, with a "I don't want to add fuel to the fire" remark. In this same interview is the first mention of her first love, a man that she had been with at the age of twenty-five, and had left to go to LA to start her career. Jennifer says that he died of brain cancer a few years ago, and that he sent Justin to make up for her being stupid enough to let him go.
Unfortunately for Jennifer, and fortunately for us gossip lovers--her true lurve's widow was NOT pleased with her speaking about her now deceased husband, particularly because a) he was married to her, NOT Jennifer, b) Jennifer was not around in any form when he got sick, and then died, and c) Jennifer did not return any of her attempts at contact--to give her some pictures of the two of them together, and did not attend the funeral, nor give a condolence card.
She was not there. But you know what bringing him up was an attempt in doing? Leaving the tabloid story behind that she pines for Brad.
Next she speaks about her and Angelina's supposed rivalry to Entertainment Tonight--at this point, the Oscar nominations are out, and her name is not on the list,
It’s just tiresome and old. It’s like an old leather shoe. Let’s buy a new pair of shiny shoes. I think that’s slowly coming to an end. I really do. I mean, that movie is so beautiful and wonderful and she did such a gorgeous job. I think that it’s time people stop with that petty B.S. and just start celebrating great work and stop with the petty kind of silliness
In her next few interviews, she speaks about Justin--and how his mom would be upset if they eloped, how she's the number one snubbed (for the Oscar), and that Cake is the first film to talk about chronic pain.........which leads way to her THR interview.
Now obviously, she had expected to be an Oscar nominee when she was interviewed, and she was not by the time the article came out in full--and why she still gave this interview, I have no idea.
I urge you all to read it. Instead of speaking about the new type of roles she wished to be considered for (crack addict looking to get clean, homeless woman taking care of two kids she found on the street, a struggling restaurateur trying to balance her burgeoning business with her love life, etc), the scripts or books that her production company, Echo Films was optioning, or any other bajillion topics revolving around the acting profession, instead she talks about the same old bs that we've been hearing from her.
She talks about Brad, and how "no one did anything wrong"--in reference to their divorce. She has no wedding date with Justin. She wants babies with Justin, but doesn't know if they'll have them. She's passive aggressive. Her mother was mean and criticized her.
The only thing that even remotely gets close to her talking about her future in Hollywood and acting is when she says that she doesn't know what she wants to do that is "bigger" than herself--whether it's a foundation, a baby, or another film. She does talk a bit about Cake, but that's it.
This is an interview, may I remind you, to The Hollywood Reporter, a trade magazine. And she chooses this moment to bring up tabloid bs.
After she hasn't got the Oscar nomination.
Actually during. Yes, she was claiming that she was over it. But how many times can you declare that you are over something, before we believe you?
Let's be clear--Jennifer has complete and total control over her interviews. Back in 2012, the British Editor of Vogue, Alexandra Shulman told the world that Jennifer Aniston would not be on the cover of her magazine, with a lengthy interview inside, because of the demands that she made. She has complete and total copy control over her interviews. If she did not want something to be asked, it is not asked. If the journalist "sneaks" it in there, then she has the power to a) end the interview, or b) say "no comment".
Which brings me to my overall point. Jennifer's Op Ed is all about body shaming and how sexist the tabloids are, and how fed up she is with all of it. That's true.
But it is also true to acknowledge that Jennifer plays the tabloids and the media like a fiddle, and then gets upset when she cannot control that perception. That's what her problem is. Let's ignore the years upon years that she talked about having babies soon and then acting like her fans wanted her barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen when she didn't have babies. Or ignore all the times she's gone to People Magazine denying that she was on a baby food diet (or dating Justin, hehehe), and go back to my example of her Oscar campaign.
She had no problem using the tabloids to bring up a "feud" between her and Angelina, when she was going after an Oscar nomination, succeeding in getting a Golden Globe and SAG nod. She had no problem using a dead man to revoke the tabloid image that Brad Pitt was her true love. If you read the link I provided for her dead ex boyfriend's widow's Facebook post--because of Jennifer's comments about her husband, she had tabloids writing and calling her about her husband and his relationship with Jennifer. Did Jennifer issue a statement apologizing to the widow and lambasting the tabloids for intruding on the privacy of a private citizen?
And then in THR, Hollywood's trade Bible--she had no problems speaking about all of her problems, all of her issues--with her mother, bringing up that she wants babies, when she's said for years to stop the speculations about her womb.......but she keeps bringing babies up, and then gets mad when people speculate on what SHE said.
Let's also be real.
Jennifer is upset that the media is basically calling her fat. I feel her. I'd be upset too. But I can't tell you one interview that I've read from her over the years that did not have to do with her looks--she's famous, especially in recent years, for giving infomercials on her hair (Living Proof), her skin care regime (apparently Aveeno and that's all--I don't know who buys that), her diet (Smartwater), how many hours a day she works out, etc. She's famous for her body. And while it is a sad reality to be reduced to your body, that's what she has helped do to herself. When you, as an actress become more well known for your advertising of products than acting, there's a problem, and we see that with Jennifer.
So no, I can't take her Op Ed seriously, because she ignores the fact that she benefits from such speculation, and encourages it. I have no problems with celebrities taking the bull by the horns and managing THEIR image.
THIS is what she managed and created--a celebrity image that is incumbent upon her image and her looks. Yes, it is doubly sexist for women.......but that is not an excuse, imo.
I mean, come on. The week she got back from the Bahamas, the Dailymail ran pap photos of her in NYC all week in work out clothes, looking a lot more fit than she did on vacation. That's not a coincidence, especially considering most celebs go to NYC to get AWAY from the paps. Yet every time she's there, she gets pap'd (which also shows you how little she's there, lol).
In a surprising/unsurprising turn of events, it appears that Jennifer Aniston has married her jorts wearing beau, her fiance--Justin Theroux. Like there are actual receipts to this--People (and TMZ....not sure which one I should trust more, lol) confirmed it. Surprising, because I would've bet every penny I own that they were not going to get married. Unsurprising, because I figured something like this was going to come up after her failed awards campaign resulted in a) no Oscar nod (but two other "major" nods), b) after said campaign, movie made about 2 million in box office...on an 8 million dollar budget, and c) the only movie she could find, months after stating that she wanted to do more serious roles was a Gary Marshall movie.
So a playa had to do what a playa had to do. That phone wasn't ringing for her, and she kept doing hair infomercials. We all bitched and moaned about it (well, I did)....well she gave us something to talk about. Well done Jen.
They got married yesterday, in Bel Air--with over 70 people as their guests. TMZ got photos of their backyard set up of chairs, etc for the wedding. The big celebs for the wedding were (apparently) Lisa Kudrow, Howard Stern, and Chelsea Handler.
Where are her parents? His parents? Courtney Cox? This is PEOPLE magazine. Obviously this article was given approval by Jennifer/Justin (Jennifer). Sloppy, sloppy.
So....congratulations?! I still side eye the hell out of them......they've been together officially for four years. I don't think they'll last. At the same time--I think they'll last because they seem to be like booty call (but married! now) to each other....him in New York/Texas (wherever his show is filming), her in LA or Cabo. Or wherever she's filming Mother's Day.
And lol, reading the People article.....Jennifer said in a previous interview that Justin would be wearing his gold "name" ring. Lord, I still remember when they debuted their couplehood--with tacky tacky tacky gold name rings. What person, over the age of 25, thinks that's cute?
But I'm glad they're married. Now we won't have to hear about her wedding plans anymore. And we'll see if this'll stop her talking about two certain someone's. Because I'm tired of her talking out of both sides of her mouth. Talk about your jorts wearing husband, and leave your ex and his wife alone.
P.S. I'm wondering how this will be played. Knowing Jennifer/Huvane--this isn't the end (not saying that's a bad thing). We'll be getting little stories about the wedding. I bet you we'll get a cover as well, especially after what happened after the Oscars in 2013--Jennifer was on the cover of People for their Oscar edition, to talk about her wedding that never came. Was she nominated for an Oscar? Hell no. She was presenting...which is what made the whole thing SO tacky. You're an actress, and you can't wait a week to talk about your wedding plans--if you wanted the whole cover THAT bad? Anyway, she (or her sources, whatevs) talked about how she was going to get married in the Spring of 2013. Spring comes and goes, no one notices...until she puts out another article about how she's putting off her wedding because reasons in the summer. And then the Dailymail ran a story about how People scrapped a third cover (I'm thinking because they were promised pictures and po'd)....so yea. This is just the beginning.
I just have to laugh at this. Last year, and earlier this year, Jennifer Aniston spent a hefty amount of time and money, trying to get the public to believe that she was an Oscar worthy actress with her film, Cake. Honestly, the only thing she proved to me was that she can't carry an eight million dollar movie, and is going to be in a rough ride when it comes to getting more roles in films. Which is true. It's been almost seven months since Jennifer was not nominated for an Oscar, thus ending her glory run, and up until now she's been without a j-o-b.
Well, Jennifer Aniston fans, don't worry. She's got one now! In Gary Marshall's upcoming movie, to film in August, Mother's Day. Which, as you will note, is not the dramatic role that Jennifer purported to have wanted, but a romantic comedy/comedy film. She needs to up her game, and pour some of that Smart Water/Living Proof money into producing, if she wants to change the conversation about her acting. Cake wasn't it. Cake should've been her stepping stone. If I was advising her, the minute I started getting nominated for awards, I would've started saying in interviews that I viewed Cake as the stepping stone to making a second career in dramatic films. Talked more about that, not about how dreamy it was to go without makeup.
The movie will star Jennifer Aniston, Kate Hudson, Julia Roberts, and Jason Sudeikis. Honestly, the only person I think who doesn't need this movie is Jason Sudeikis. The others have been kicking rocks for a long time. Gary Marshall seems like a real sweetheart, saying that the movie will start filming in August. There is also apparently another film with the same name that has been filming on and off for the last few months, starring Susan Sarandon...and Courtney Cox. Lol. Jennifer and Courtney must get a kick out of that.
He talks to The Hollywood Reporter saying,
"Ours likely won’t be called Mother’s Day but I don’t know what the title will end up being," says the legendary filmmaker, who tells THR that he learned his lesson about titles way back in the Pretty Woman days. "It was originally called $3000 and I was trying to be a gracious director and I got everyone a jacket that said ‘$3000 cast and crew’ but they changed the title. Now everyone has this jacket that is worth nothing. I’m not doing that again with Mother’s Day. I’m waiting for the final title."
I think Gary Marshall is a sweet old guy, but man. He needs to just stop doing these terrible romcoms. They give the good, great, and even semi-decent romcoms a bad name.
Update: Apparently THR just links their previous story about how Jennifer is in negotiations to do the film. So I guess this isn't a hard confirmation that she is doing the movie....just that she wants to? We'll see, in August, I suppose.
Source: Hollywood Reporter
Let's start with the bare bones of the story. Jennifer Aniston is still waging her one woman Oscar campaign, so she had an interview with The New York Times. The part I'm going to cover is this, where she talks about her boyfriend who was The One:
“He was my first love — five years we were together. He would have been the one. But I was 25, and I was stupid. He must have sent me Justin to make up for it all.”
Now, I'm covering this story from Life&Style, and I find their title to be hilarious--"Did Jennifer Aniston Diss Brad Pitt When Talking About An Ex Boyfriend?".
Because, of course, it never occurs to Life&Style to ask the question of whether or not Jennifer was dissing Justin Theroux--the guy that she's engaged to. Her true lurve. The guy who converted her from Indian jewelry to Giant Diamond Rings (I knew that tacky ring wasn't her style. I would've told him to bring it back to Cracker Barrel where it belongs). The guy who managed to get her to vacation somewhere other than Cabo for a few days (Italy).
Which she is. Dissing the guy she's engaged to--Justin Theroux. How would you feel if your fiance was giving interviews, romanticizing about the one that got away, when she can't/won't do the same for you. I suppose you'd feel the same as if she said that you weren't the love of her life.
But really. I find it hard not to cast shade on an engaged woman telling the world that an old boyfriend is the one that got away, when she's engaged. And the most romantic thing she's ever said about said fiance is that his eyeballs are beautiful. Like I'd be worried about our future together. What is the point in getting engaged, getting married, if you don't even believe that the person you're marrying is it for you?
Some people don't believe in monogamy. They have no desire to be with the same person for years on end. And that's fine. But don't get engaged/married when you feel the exact opposite of the views that getting engaged/married espouses.
Source: New York Times
Chelsea Handler recently sat down with the Huffington Post to talk about just how exhausting it is to be friends with Jennifer Aniston, and about (briefly) her move to Netflix, with her tour, Uganda Be Kidding Me. It's just too much to friends with a celebrity as famous as Jennifer Aniston--Handler says:
"Everywhere I go, people ask me about Jennifer Aniston's wedding. Do you know what it's like to walk down a red carpet and [reporters] go 'When are Jen and Justin [Theroux] getting married?' like I'm in charge of that."
I would think that that's par for the course. Handler isn't that famous by herself. And what's more is that she and Jennifer actively promoted their friendship over the years. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but when Jennifer goes onto Chelsea's show to promote her films, both of them talk about their friendship. One of the last shows of Chelsea's that Jennifer went on (I think it was to promote We're The Millers) Chelsea made a joke (about a tabloid story that said Jennifer and Justin were nudists) about seeing Justin Theroux naked, and Jennifer responded that that's because Chelsea barges into 'places she's not supposed to be in'.
So it's really not hard to connect the dots. And Jennifer is friends with a lot of different celebs--I don't think I've ever heard them complaining about being asked questions about a different celeb. You deal with it. Tell the interviewer that you don't want to be asked any questions about your friends.
I find it ironic that she complains a lot about celebrities. She said that she got bored interviewing celebrities for her show (when she signed on with E! I'm not sure what she was expecting). She hates being asked questions about her celebrity friends. It's little (nothing even really worth 'bashing' her over), but I just find it so ironic.
But she said this, which is the only thing that she's ever said that I liked--
"This isn't a reason for leaving [my show], but if one more person asks me what it's like to be the only woman in late night. This is a good reason to stop being the only woman in late night, so I have to stop fielding the same idiotic question. Journalists sometimes ... they'll say, 'Do you think there's a lot of similarities between you and Sarah Silverman? Or Lena Dunham? Or whoever? Amy Schumer?' I'm like, 'No, we're just women. Just because we're women doesn't mean there are tons of similarities. Every single one of us is vastly different."
She's absolutely right. I hate the comparison between Lena Dunham and Tina Fey. There is no comparison. But they are compared, because they are both women. Their comedy isn't even the same, nothing in their backgrounds, how they made their name and career are the same, yet they are compared. Whatever.
Source: Huffington Post, Huffington Post