Tag Archive: jennifer aniston


Matthew McConaughey is a pretty big name actor if you think about it. If you think of romantic comedies then his name will be one of the first few you associate with the genre, along with Jennifer Aniston and Katherine Heigl. Funnily enough, if you also think of plain bad films (and I’m talking really bad, not bad but enjoyable, just bad) then Matthew McConaughey must also be synonymous with that too! He does however, have a huge legion of fans, mainly of the female gender and probably because of his looks rather than his acting ability, but you would be hard pressed to find a man who counts Matthew McConaughey among their favourite actors. Now it looks as though that may be set to change as McConaughey opts for more dramatic roles than we are used to seeing him in.

McConaughey began work as an actor in television adverts and the rare television episode appearance but then he got his big break back in 1991 in Dazed and Confused. Maybe, and I never thought I would say this, McConaughey put in a performance that was too good, because this is pretty much what made him a shoe-in for any male lead role in a romantic comedy. As an actor you don’t want to get pigeon holed into one genre but as a young emerging good looking man then you are always going to be wanted for romantic comedies (the same happened for Chris Pine and Chris Evans in recent years although not to the same extent).

Throughout the nineties Matthew McConaughey tried out many different genres including crime (A Time to Kill), drama mystery (Contact) and action (The Newton Boys) but didn’t have as much success in these as he did with his romantic comedies and at the turn of the century McConaughey really started to churn out the rom-coms. In 2001 McConaughey starred in The Wedding Planner alongside Jennifer Lopez and although he continued to try and be versatile with his career it is his rom-coms in this decade that are his most famous films: How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, Failure to Launch, Fool’s Gold and Ghosts of Girlfriends Past.

Now though, there seem to be no signs of Matthew McConaughey returning to make another romantic comedy as he has taken on more serious roles in recent years. This began with McConaughey taking on The Lincoln Lawyer which was a thriller that received great reviews from critics and McConaughey won high praise for his performance in the lead role. Killer Joe, a crime thriller in which McConaughey plays a contract killer/police detective, also won a lot of praise; then Magic Mike came out which also got surprisingly positive reviews from critics. Next up for Matthew McConaughey is Mud, which is already getting a lot of praise from early screenings and that is a drama so it appears that Matthew McConaughey is taking on more serious roles recently and these are really helping his reputation.

McConaughey’s next film project will be another drama The Dallas Buyer’s Club before taking on war film Thunder Run alongside Gerard Butler and Sam Worthington, two more actors who have a lot to prove in my opinion. McConaughey’s recent film choices do signal a more serious approach with his career and this can only be good news. I hope he succeeds.

 

Forbes has announced that the highest paid actress of the last year is Kristen Stewart; this is despite the fact that her acting abilities leave a lot to be desired and that she only has one facial expression. Perhaps, though, these reports will finally see Kristen Stewart being able to put a smile on that face of hers. This is no doubt going to cause some controversy with fans of actual actresses with talent like Angelina Jolie, Sandra Bullock or Julia Roberts (who also feature in the top ten) but if you look at the details, it makes sense.

Twilight, whether you like it or not (and for some daft reason a lot of people like seeing three non talented actors in lead roles of a Hollywood franchise), has become a huge worldwide success with Stewart in the lead role of Bella Swan. You can’t underestimate the importance of remaining consistent with actors and actresses in movies. Stewart is the main character in a huge Hollywood franchise and therefore is pretty much irreplaceable in many people’s eyes, meaning that a huge pay off is needed to keep her on board and stop other studios being able to tempt her away with a higher paycheck.

The list compiles the actress’ earnings between May 2011 and May 2012 and as well as having the Twilight series to promote Stewart has also proved that she can bring in the audiences without the help of Robert Pattinson or Taylor Lautner with Snow White and the Huntsman (although I do think that Chris Hemsworth and Charlize Theron were the main draw for the films success, not Stewart) and she was in the lead role yet again, taking a lot of the credit with the films strong success in the box offices.

Second place on the list might be even more surprising that first place: Cameron Diaz. Yes, she may be an experienced actress but what success has she had recently? Well Bad Teacher did surprisingly well at the box office (no doubt because Cameron was showing off her more raunchy side once more) and she took a pay cut on that in favour of a profit participation deal, a gamble that proved to pay off. She also collected a paycheck from What to Expect When You’re Expecting for which she was very highly paid reportedly so she is sitting pretty on top of a huge pile of cash right now I imagine.

The remainder of the top ten is as follows: Sandra Bullock, Angelina Jolie, Charlize Theron, Julia Roberts, Sarah Jessica Parker (seriously?!), Meryl Streep, Kristen Wiig and Jennifer Aniston. I was slightly surprised to see Jennifer Lawrence not on the list although I anticipate she will be featured very high up the rankings next year with her place in the new X-men franchise and The Hunger Games sequels likely to see her cashing in in the same way that Kristen Stewart has this year.

Kristen Stewart will be seen later this year in Twilight: Breaking Dawn – Part 2, the trailer for which is below:

Seriously Adam, what is going on?!

Adam Sandler’s career infuriates me. He made a name for himself in the world of comedy during the early 1990s thanks to his several appearances on Saturday Night Live and then made the journey to become a big movie star. During the late 90s and the early 2000s he was one of the funniest men working in film and his films were always (okay, most of the time) a treat and well worth a laugh or two. Then something happened. I don’t think anyone quite knows what happened, or even if Sandler himself knows, but his films turned terrible.

After impressing with his writing on Saturday Night Live, Adam Sandler was given the chance to perform on the show. He did so and became famous for his amusing songs that he would write, ‘The Chanukah Song’ being one of his best.

Sandler made the leap into films in the mid 90s and for the rest of the decade continues to be funny. Films such as Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore, Big Daddy and The Waterboy made Sandler a legend among comedy fans. His films were funny, they were worth seeing and they were something that you could laugh about with your friends after watching. These ones still are.

Then the turn of the century came and Adam Sandler continued to make movies. Little Nicky, Mr. Deeds, Anger Management and even 50 First Dates are all good films and worth watching for a laugh. And Sandler impressed everyone in 2002 when he took the lead in romantic comedy Punch-Drunk Love.

For a couple of years Adam Sandler left the mainstream comedy circuit and made sports film The Longest Yard (among his best films in my opinion, not for Sandler’s performance in particular, just as a film on the whole) and he made Click. Click was based in comedy but it was a dramatic performance from Sandler that was worth noting; it was a different performance to his other comedy films and it was very very good.

So far, so good.

Then 2007 came and something absolutely terrible hit cinemas and this is what I have pinpointed as the turning point in Adam Sandler’s career: I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry. It is a rubbish film. Nothing more needs saying. But then Sandler went on to do a ridiculous role in You Don’t Mess With the Zohan in which he played an Israeli counter-terrorist commando who fakes his own death to pursue his real dream of a career in hairdressing. THAT. IS. STUPID!

Sandler continued the decline with Bedtime Stories, Grown Ups and Just Go With It (not helped by the fact it features the cardboard actress that is Jennifer Aniston). None of these films have ever reached the heights of his earlier outings. And his most recent effort, Jack and Jill where he plays both of the title characters saw Sandler nominated for a series of Razzies.

Today I watched the trailer for Adam Sandler’s newest project hitting cinemas in the UK later this year: That’s My Boy. I really hoped the trailer would look good, I want nothing more than for his career to just get back on track, unfortunately though, this film will not be the rebuilding of Sandler’s comedy efforts. Guaranteed.

Adam Sandler needs to take a long hard look at his recent films and think about his career, not just for me but for himself. I can only assume he is working through some massive mid-life crisis and the sooner he gets through it the better, for everyone.

Below is the trailer for That’s My Boy being released in the UK on 7th September 2012.

***MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS***

When the trailer was first released for Horrible Bosses it seemed to promise so much but upon watching it seems that those promises could not be kept. Whilst not terrible, it wasn’t quite as good as it could have been.

Horrible Bosses revolves around three friends (played by Jason Bateman, Chris Day and Jason Sudeikis) who decide that their bosses are getting in the way of their happiness. They then decide that the only possible solution to their problem is to kill their bosses.

The three main actors, particularly Chris Day, each play their parts well providing some great character interaction and the friendship between the three is entirely believable. Colin Farrell, as Kurt’s (Sudeikis) cocaine addicted boss, is not in the film as much as I would have liked but when he is featured he plays his part and provides some laughs. Kevin Spacey particularly impressed in this and is completely believable as the villain of the piece; he doesn’t provide many laughs but he adds some much needed drama. Even Jennifer Aniston, who is completely over rated by every female on the planet, is tolerable in this and puts in her best performance post-Friends as a sex crazed dentist. Oh, and Jamie Foxx is completely rubbish in this.

The pacing, story, action and character interaction in the first two acts is really good. The first act is a great introduction to the three main characters, the dynamic of their friendship and the wholly unreasonable situations that their bosses put them in. It sets up the film with the story and a few laughs but by the end of the third act you feel like the film never really fulfilled it’s potential.

Some of the scenes seemed slightly too long and were filled out with a lot of dialogue that wasn’t really that humorous unfortunately. Although, this could be down the directing of the piece; there were a lot of long takes which made a few scenes seem to drag and I think that this comes down to inexperience. Horrible Bosses is Seth Gordon’s third feature length film as director; his most recent was Four Christmases and his debut was a film called Squirt which holds a 1.7 rating on IMDB so read what you like into that.

The end is really what lets the film down. Where the first and second acts do all they can to build the audience up for what should be a really good climax, the third act seems to go out of it’s way to ruin any hopes and expectations that the audience may have. It just seems a little too convenient, even for a comedy film where similar things can be forgiven. The ending I refer to is being given the all clear by the police thanks to Kurt’s car’s navigation system operator. The actual tying up of the film afterwards with each of the three main characters returning to work actually felt pretty nice.

I would watch this film again and who knows, maybe it will be better upon second viewing.

My Rating: 6.5/10

“Does it really mean anything if [Ryan] Seacrest can have a star?” – Howard Stern, 2006.

Paul McCartney was finally given his star on the Hollywood walk of fame recently and it has been announced that this week Jennifer Aniston will be receiving her star. One cannot help but notice the HUGE difference in the effect that these two entertainers have had on popular culture. This isn’t just being written to criticise Jennifer Aniston (or Ryan Seacrest) but Paul McCartney was a member of the most iconic band in history and remains today one of the most talented entertainers in the music industry, whilst Jennifer Aniston starred in Friends (which I cannot criticise at all) and inspired a haircut (which I can criticise), does her Friends status make her worthy of a star in itself when the rest of her career is full of excrement?

E.M. Stuart is credited with the creation of the walk of fame, citing it as a means to “maintain the glory of a community whose name means glamour and excitement in the four corners or the world”. The first eight stars were unveiled in 1958 and the famous walk is now home to over 2400 people, or groups, within the entertainment industry. On average, twenty new additions are made to the famous tourist attraction each year; each new addition is administered by the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce. With so many people being inducted into the walk is it as exclusive as Stuart hoped it would be when he first had the idea?

Every new addition has to have a nomination sent in to the Chamber of Commerce and the nominee has to agree to be nominated. If the nomination is approved the nominee themselves, or the group/person who did the nominating will have to pay for it out of their own pocket; essentially that person is buying their way into this ‘prestigious’ walk. This surely negates some of the validity of such a commemoration.

Over the years there have been actors, directors, musicians and producers added to Hollywood’s walk of fame but alongside these there have also been some fictional characters; Mickey Mouse, Woody Woodpecker and the Rugrats all have their own stars. Do animated characters really deserve a star? Surely, as fictional beings they do not contribute anything real to life. On the other hand, however, is this simply recognition for the creative team behind the character, as a star for each mind behind the creation (voice artist, animator, creator etc.) may not be plausible?

But really, think about this: is it right that Hollywood’s most honourable gift has been bestowed upon the likes of Ryan Seacrest, Woody Woodpecker and Jennifer Aniston when it has not respected Clint Eastwood, Jane Fonda or Robert Redford, all Hollywood legends in their own right. A star on the Hollywood walk of fame should be something that only the pinnacle of human talent is recognised with; nowadays the announcements do not seem to carry as much significance as perhaps they should.