|
Post by Strawberry on Mar 4, 2015 0:21:25 GMT -4
I agree with chonie's assessment. I think that the focus on her former spouse kind of says more about others than it does her, in the world where that matters. I like the Audrey parallel, too. Truman haaaaaated her for Holly Golightly! I mean, wow. If you looked at my posting history you'd see that normally, I'd agree with you. But last month I read an interview ( People, I think) of JA's where she said something to the effect of " we were going through our divorce", but the article, and that moment in context, wasn't about her *and* Brad. It was about her mastering her personal anger. It was just so weird that she is still thinking and talking in terms of 'we' and 'our'. For the first time ever, I sympathized with Angelina and thought JA was being totally inappropriate. Like...wow. My opinion has completely changed.
|
|
|
Post by narm on Mar 4, 2015 0:35:06 GMT -4
I haven't seen that. But even at that (her having a narrative for her marriage and subsequent divorce in her own words, no matter how long it has been) just doesn't negate that she is indeed an actress in movies, and thus can be a reasonable presenter.
The Oscars just aren't that prestigious to me that they should feel above *anyone* when they engage in honoring people like Polanski and Allen, while virtually ignoring movies like Selma, Fruitvale Station, etc. the Oscars kind of suck, but at the same time, she appears to have proved some sort of staying power in Hollywood beyond mention of past relationships. That isn't getting her parts now.
|
|
|
Post by Hamatron on Mar 4, 2015 0:37:54 GMT -4
I look forward to Becky Connor and Mallory Keaton presenting at the Oscars soon too if being an awesome sitcom charater is all it takes. Becky Connor and Malory Keaton never really made movies. Of the Friends cast, Aniston is the one that makes movies...
|
|
|
Post by scarlet on Mar 4, 2015 0:41:59 GMT -4
I just find her objectionable on a personal level. Are any of her Friends costars presenting awards? Not even Lisa Kudrow who has the only critical acclaim/noms among them? Jen's there because she married Brad, pure and simple. I look forward to Becky Connor and Mallory Keaton presenting at the Oscars soon too if being an awesome sitcom charater is all it takes. Those actresses aren't continuing to make movies that put them in the public eye--therein lies the difference. Lisa Kudrow did present back in 1999. Her career in the last decade has been primarily TV, as has all the other "Friends" co-stars. Jen has been in movies. Lots of them haven't been great, but several made a lot of money. I'm not sure what criteria you think there needs to be to be an Oscar presenter, but as has been noted: the bar isn't that high. JA doesn't stick out like "what is she doing here?" in any way. And I say that as someone who doesn't even like her.
|
|
grommit
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 473
Apr 25, 2006 19:33:23 GMT -4
|
Post by grommit on Mar 4, 2015 4:15:38 GMT -4
Aniston this year got Best Actress nominations from the Golden Globes, Critics Choice and SAG awards. Not bad going for a sitcom actress. It's hardly surprising she was asked to present at the Oscars.
Of course, if she refused the offer of Oscar presenting after not being nominated, the media be full of what an uppity, entitled bitch she is.
I have no time for the Clooneys, Afflecks and Pitts of the world who make it known they're only showing up if they're a chance of them personally getting some glory. Not saying they should be there every year, but how about you support/celebrate your fellow actors and their achievements instead of only your own.
|
|
|
Post by chonies on Mar 4, 2015 10:17:48 GMT -4
Here's the Hollywood Reporter articleIn my opinion, it's hard to tell what the question was, or what the context of the statement is. Maybe she had been asked about how she and Brad were trying to sell their house or whatever, and in the process of that narration, she said, "and we were blah blah blah." In the article, she had already been asked if she and Brad were in touch or friends or whatever, so it brought him into the conversation. I don't think there's a lot to hang on Jen, and I think she actually sounds calm about it.
|
|
|
Post by Mugsy on Mar 5, 2015 17:45:57 GMT -4
P Interesting that only women are named here. How about side-eyeing Chris Evans, Josh Hutcherson, Kevin Hart, Chris Pine or Channing Tatum? Sure, they had hit movies, but Oscar noms? What on earth gives them the right to present at the Oscars?
She was hardly "reaching for a nom". She was nominated for Cake, for a SAG, Critic's Choice and Golden Globe (as others have mentioned). And yes, if asked to present, why say no?
So do I, if they ever made movies.
I get that some people just don't like Jen, but I hardly think that means she's not allowed to attend the Oscars.
|
|
|
Post by Coffeecakes on Mar 5, 2015 17:59:19 GMT -4
I think its fine when someone goes and presents once in a while but the Jennifers, Jessicas and the Chris' are there every damn year presenting. Funny how the people who share the basic names are the biggest offenders.
Channing Tatum needs gtfo as well. He cannot act and that face should not be on my screen unless I pay money to see it. He has been going and presenting that mug ever since Magic Mike became a hit.
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Mar 5, 2015 18:02:53 GMT -4
I'd say reaching is a good word. She campaigned way too hard for a nomination that was beyond a long shot. The strategy seemed to be that if she bombarded the Academy with media saying she gave a serious performance for a change that they would relent and throw her a nod. At least Michael K's snark was fun to read for a few months.
It seems to have become a tradition that when somebody has a breakthrough year, they get invited to the Oscars to present, hence all the Chrises (Pine, Evans, Pratt). However it seems in poor taste to me to then keep coming to the party over and over again when you have failed to get to the next level and actually get into nomination territory. Jennifer has the most powerful publicist in Hollywood and that's why she got any attention for that movie Cake and why she was a presenter.
But she's certainly not the most egregious presenter to keep coming back - Jlo is worse and she's gone way more times than Aniston.
|
|
|
Post by canuckcutie on Mar 5, 2015 19:38:58 GMT -4
Jennifer hired an Oscar consultant. I don't recall hearing of Julianne or Rosamund or Marion hiring a consultant to lobby on their behalf. And then her "famous pals" were throwing parties and luncheons to promote the movie. So I very much think she was reaching for a nom. She was in a small movie that very few people had actually watched. She built up buzz enough that people seemed to think she was a shoo-in for a nom regardless of whether she deserved it.
|
|