Jennifer Aniston
- Thread starter pursegalsf
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
It's not the questions I'm talking about. Its the answers and the body language during the answers. "Do you still talk to your ex-wife" and she said it in a sarcastic, almost snarky way - like most people move on from their ex, why should people expect her to still talk to & dwell on Brad Pitt?
True and she moons on and on and on AND on, about Brad and the kids. I think you use whatcha got, right?
I think we see it differently.
Any magazine or interviewer needs permission from celebrities and publicists to ask the questions they are presenting. It's always the same… what else could it be about?
She wasn't ambushed. She had time to decide how to respond. Should she be snarky, patient, amused, bored, sad, nonchalant, reluctant… the thing is, she allowed the question to be asked. She knew it was coming and we get to see her planned response. Her PR guy could have said, we're tired of that old question, but he didn't.
Not all celebs actually require an ok prior. And it's very possible she tells them no 90% of the time then answers sometimes just to keep the peace.
I still see no issues. I also see no issue with AJ talking about Brad, her kids or her ex's. But I guess if you don't like a celeb you'll find an issue with everything they do.
I still see no issues. I also see no issue with AJ talking about Brad, her kids or her ex's. But I guess if you don't like a celeb you'll find an issue with everything they do.
That's not how it works. They don't need permission. As a professional courtesy and now fairly standard practice, they let the manager/pr person know what questions they're going to ask but that doesn't stop them from asking. Sometimes they have a specific list so the celeb can review or sometimes they just give the PR person or manager a quick briefing of the "types" of questions they'd like to ask. Some celebs want to review the questions, some already gave their manager a set direction on what they absolutely will not discuss and some are fine with taking questions directly. They often rely on their manager or agent to say to the interviewer that their client wants to avoid a certain topic.
Obviously Jen doesn't mind answering these questions. In regards to if that's part of her marketing/brand image or if it's all just the media, I think a little from column a and a little from column b. I'm sure she is fully aware that there is a segment of the population that is interested in any statements she makes about Brad. I also thinks she chooses moments to play that up and the sympathy she's received from the whole situation. That's only smart, IMHO.
Personally, I think the only thing interesting about her is that she was married to Brad, her dad was one of my fav soap characters and she has great legs. It's sad though that she has to continue to talk about Brad.
Last edited:
Does anyone else think its a little weird for her to be doing a "get to know me!" interview at this stage in her career? I feel like the universe is well familiar with her back story so the "my parents' divorce was hard", "all I ever wanted to do was act" "I did a bunch of stuff before I got the part on Friends" stuff seems silly.(It seems as though the stuff about her estrangement from her mom has dropped out of the narrative, maybe that doesn't play so well at 45?)
Also odd that she didn't talk about the film more, she didn't really say the script was great or that she wanted to work with the director or how much she respected felicity huffman or how she got into the role (really, because chronic physical pain and emotional pain share some characteristics but are essentially not the same) or whatever, just "i wasn't sure i could do the role". and 'wah, poor me". she's not deflecting the personal stuff, she wanted it pursued. she's campaigning on the basis of her being jennifer aniston, not on the film.
Also odd that she didn't talk about the film more, she didn't really say the script was great or that she wanted to work with the director or how much she respected felicity huffman or how she got into the role (really, because chronic physical pain and emotional pain share some characteristics but are essentially not the same) or whatever, just "i wasn't sure i could do the role". and 'wah, poor me". she's not deflecting the personal stuff, she wanted it pursued. she's campaigning on the basis of her being jennifer aniston, not on the film.
Unfortunately it happens a lot around here in every celeb thread. The majority of comments are from people who seem to truly dislike, sometimes even despise the celebrity (in this case, Jen) and they take pleasure in antagonizing the people who respect, or - Lord, forbid! - even like a celebrity. Personally, I don't get why anyone would waste their time following a thread and commenting on a regular basis when they have no interest in the subject or have publicly admitted having a strong dislike for, or not caring for a particular celebrity and/or their work. Doesn't make much sense to me, but as its repeated on a regular basis - this is a public forum and a gossip thread and all opinions are allowed.
I like Jennifer Aniston and don't feel like she's used her marriage to Brad to advance her career. I also find it the least interesting thing about her even though many feel its her MOST interesting thing. Whatever - naysayers aren't going to change my mind & I'm not gonna debate them. Antagonize away. This is the Jennifer Aniston thread, and the topic of conversation is Jennifer Aniston, not Brad and/or Angelina - I'm pretty sure they have their own thread, but I dunno. I don't go in there cuz I'm not a fan or have anything to contribute about them, so I have no reason to post a comment in a thread where they're the topic of conversation
As for CAKE -- I truly believe she made this movie (and released it herself) because she wanted the challenge. She even said in that interview exactly what's been said repeatedly here -- that she always plays the same role & is never given the chance to play against type. So she took a dramatic role, gained some weight for it and "uglied" herself up for the part & then released it herself because no one else would. Now she's bing accused of marketing herself and gunning for an Oscar and using her friends for the same reason & is bing criticized for it. God forbid that maybe she really did do a good job. Maybe she is a good actress. If she hadn't taken the part, people would still be accusing her of taking the same roles and playing it safe, never stepping outside her comfort zone. No matter what, she can't win with her critics - so antagonize away. I envy you if you've got nothing else better to do with your time or have so much free time that you need to waste time commenting about a celebrity you so strongly dislike and don't care for. I sure wish I had that much free time to waste!
Last edited:
Every celeb has their thing that people have unending questions about, is she supposed to be different? The topic actually seemed to have come back around because someone posted an article. If it's posted, it will be discussed be it her movie, her current or past relationship, her marital status, or her womb. Guess the best way to try to end the convo about it is for folks not to post articles that remotely allude to any of those topics, no?
You've gotta be kidding me with the "people post on purpose to antagonize the fans!!" lol. Not true, at least not from what I see. People post opinions and stories yes. Personally I don't even look to see who is posting what, just the content.
And you have posted in the B&A thread, more than 10 times. Before I get flamed for having "too much time" on my hands, which isn't true, it took less than a second to see, something to do while having my morning coffee while reading global news stories etc.
