Jennifer Aniston’s new in vitro romcom with Jason Bateman, The Switch, seriously underperformed at the box office this weekend and finished in a bomb-worthy eighth, well below other movies in their second week. I’d heard that the movie might have trouble due to distribution issues, although this is probably much worse than they were expecting. If you calculate how much money The Switch made per theater it was fourth, which isn’t that bad I guess. It made $8.1 million in its opening weekend, which might be ok if you factor in how much it cost to make. (Box Office Mojo does not list a production budget for The Switch. Update: it cost a relatively low $16 million – thanks to pity party for the link.)
The Expendables was top this weekend in its second week, followed by Vampires Suck, Eat Pray Love, The Lottery Ticket, The Other Guys, Piranha, then Nanny McPhee 2, then The Switch. I don’t think it helped that the movie poster for this film was so nasty. It looked like Jason Bateman was about to take a shot of spooge. Here’s the very matter-of-fact way that Box Office Mojo explains the performance of the film and why it may have failed to fill seats:
The Switch delivered an estimated $8.1 million at 2,012 locations, which was about the same as Love Happens but more impotent than The Back-Up Plan. The comedy featuring Jennifer Aniston and Jason Bateman had a largely nondescript advertising campaign, as if the marketers tried to hide the movie’s potentially unappealing premise of a man switching the semen in a woman’s artificial insemination with his own. Distributor Miramax’s exit polling showed that 63 percent of the audience was female, 73 percent was over 25 years old and over 80 percent were couples….
The Switch may star Jennifer Aniston and Jason Bateman, but it has been presented as an also-ran. Many of the movie’s television spots eschew the movie’s premise and show a nondescript comedy, relying on the charm of the actors and how the movie is supposedly from the folks behind Juno and Little Miss Sunshine. Not that the premise of a man replacing the sperm in an artificial insemination with his own would be particularly palatable for a supposed romantic comedy. Ms. Aniston headlined Rumor Has It, which had a salacious storyline and disappointed, and, last year, she starred in Love Happens, which took the bland route and had little impact.
[From Two Articles on Box Office Mojo]
The film is doing ok on Rotten Tomatoes with a still somewhat respectable 51%, although many critics say it’s incredibly predictable and tedious despite Bateman’s strong performance. Is this going to derail Aniston’s plans to produce more starring vehicles for herself? Maybe. She has a ton of films in the works but it’s clear that she’s no longer a box office draw – if she ever was. It doesn’t help that she’s been playing the same character with minor variations for over a decade. (Although I did like her in The Good Girl.) I’d like to see her expand her horizons, which she might do in that musical comedy The Goree Girls – if she gets a chance to make it. From what I can tell, filming hasn’t started yet.
From Hollywood Reporter:
“The Switch” represents the first Miramax pic to bow since Disney agreed to sell the specialty unit, whose new owners will cover prints and advertising costs on the release once the transaction with Disney closes later this year.
Mandate sold off various territorial rights after producing “The Switch” for roughly $16 million. Disney and Maple Releasing will get unspecified distribution fees for handling the pic for Miramax in the U.S. and Canada, respectively.
Rated PG-13, “The Switch” skewed 65% female, with 72% of patrons aged 25 or older. Couples represented 84% of pic support.
“It performed right as expected,” Disney distribution president Chuck Viane said.
————————————–
This INDIE was produced for 16 million dollars, made 8.1 this weekend. Certainly not a flop
Might rent it. She was good in Friends With Money.
She was AWESOME in The Good Girl, it’s really too bad she doesn’t branch out more and do more films that showcase her talent like that. She really is a great actress with depth and amazing timing, but is sooooo underused.
Yep, because that’s what people want to see, a movie about sperm. Poor Jason Bateman! Is August crappy movie month or something??
Thanks Pity Party, I will update it with the production budget.
This isn’t something I’d pay to see but I will probably end up renting it because Jason Bateman is in it. He is so adorable…
It wasn’t an Indie film. A 16 milllion dollar budget doesn’t qualify a film for an independent status. It was released in over 2000 movie theaters and the marketing for the film was certainly very expensive since Aniston was on every show in the world promoting it. Disney and Miramax certainly don’t release independent films.
I’m sure it’s a really cute movie and will probably rent it sometime. I wouldn’t consider the movie a flop just because it didn’t turn out at #1.
Love Jason Bateman!
Wesley Morris, a critic at Boston.com make an interesting point in his review of The Switch (2 stars) where he says that Aniston’s “adventures in good films” (The Good Girl, Friends With Money) never seem to improve her abilities as an actress. Instead of growing from these roles, she just refers back to the same shtick when she returns to the romcom format.
Not to nitpick, but this movie is about artificial insemination (IUI), not in vitro (IVF)…I’ve done 6 IUI’s & 2 IVF’s, and believe me, there’s a HUGE difference!! My husband & I joke that when our daughter was conceived, neither of us was actually in the room.
I’m seeing this movie this week and am really looking forward to it.
Seriously, who cares about financing and distribution. Either you want to see the movie or not. Either it was good or it wasn’t. I don’t want to hear about business deals.
The man drops the woman’s sperm down the sink and feels the need to fill up the bottle himself and doesn’t tell her. Gross.
I hope that Aniston will be able to realize that being an actress is a job that requires a lot more than just:
– hot body
– good hair
– rumors about a new boyfriend
– talking about your divorce for 5 years
This movie could have been a success (rom com, famous actors, lot of promotion) but I guess people are tired of her.
If I were her I would take a major risk for my next movie (like C. Theron in Monster). She needs to stop being the same character over and over.
The Jennifer Aniston fans are dismissing this movie as “an indie” (HA)and that it “made back half its budget” (HA HA) and therefore is not a bomb. Fine, say what you want but when a supposedly major star like Jennifer Aniston releases a movie that lands in EIGHTH place and only brings in $8M . . . that is a bomb in anybody’s book!!
And, no, it has not earned back half its budget. The theatres have to be paid and there was a promotion budget to add to that $16M production cost. This movie ended up earning less per screen than “Lottery Ticket,” a movie with ZERO promotion budget. (Tell the truth: Did ANYBODY hear anything about Lottery Ticket??) This movie is a major disappointment for Disney and Miramax, I don’t care what the budget was.
As for “Goree Girls” . . . Don’t anybody hold their breath waiting for it to go into production. I don’t see how Jennifer can get the money together to produce it with the box office numbers she has been putting up lately.
Meh. I’ll watch it if it comes on the airplane movie listings while I’m flying somewhere but otherwise, no desire to waste $13 on seeing it (or most current films) in the cinema.
it’s hardly shocking, i would never watch a Jennifer Aniston film she’s always in the same lame rom coms that flop 3 times out of 4.
Oh well at leasy Salt was amazing lol
I think Aniston has more potential than she’ll allow herself to tap — but she’s simply too afraid to take a major risk. She could never do a role like Monster, because she would never have the guts to get out from behind her perfect hair, perfect body, and perfect make-up.
Does the production cost include the salaries to the actors? Because 16 million doesn’t sound as though it would cover Bateman and Aniston alone, much less as part of the payroll for an entire film cast.
Whatever. It will bomb. Aniston is played out.
It might have been a cute movie – I really like Jason Bateman – if the whole premise wasn’t so skeevy. It’s not a physical violation what he did but it is reprehensible that a guy who’s supposed to be your best friend would switch out the sperm that you had had carefully tested and selected with his own. *spoiler* His being drunk at the time is no excuse. Oh and why would you have a ‘conception party’ before actually conceiving? What if it doesn’t take?
HR is wrong as it is many times. $16 mil is what the distribution rights were sold for, not the film’s production cost. That is the reason BOMojo does not list a cost. Cost maybe $25-30mil plus $20 mil for publicity. Spin on overdrive from her PR bulldog. Film is not a success by any means. The RachelGreen character has worn out its welcome in films. Time for a retreat and retred. A 41.5 year old woman is not a sweet young thing cutie, no matter the hair flipping or well exercised body.
I think that with the right director, and the right script, she is an amazing actress as we have seen in The Good Girl and Friends With Money. But she has to be willing to venture out of her safety zone more often, and maybe this will be the impetus she needs.
omg. FACE IT. Stop doing these career ‘huddles,’ for Jen Aniston about what she NEEDS to do. NO ONE OWES THIS BISH A CAREER. She’s had 15 years to make it work, and it doesn’t. It just does NOT.
.
At this point I am so fcking sick of seeing, and hearing her – if a supernatural spell was cast and she suddenly was capable of delivering a Meryl Streep like performance in a Sophie’s Choice like movie, I STILL wouldn’t give a F*!!!
.
I mean think about it – for THIS film, we were lambasted 24/7 with trailers, on our TVs, internet, radio and in our flippin’ dreams (make that nightmares!), had to suffer through her leery wary monosyllabic TV talk show spots (all 87 of them) where she displays no wit, no intelligence, no charisma and ends up INSULTING the handicapped – and this was all for a movie some of her fans are now claiming as ‘throwaway.’
.
Which leads me to wonder….IF ‘The Switch’ suddenly doesn’t count — and let’s say she perchance WAS in a super wide releasing movie that was half-way decent, and she was a step up from the below par she usually delivers, how much MORE of this oversaturation would we be buried in?! It cannot get any deeper. If we get buried for a silly dumb movie, it would be an avalanche of mediocrity for anything that was slightly better. Just thinking about THAT makes me want to hurl til I’m exhausted.
.
LOOK – it’s simply NOT worth it when you consider this woman’s BEST performance, would STILL come in second to watching friggin’ PAINT DRY! ENOUGH!! GTFO already!!
We saw this on Saturday and really enjoyed it – JA was great, and Jason Bateman is just fantastic. It was funny, but it was also really touching in a non- sappy way. I think it will end up doing very well.
Cr. Socialite life- The Switch failed to be the hit that Jennifer Aniston was looking for…in fact, it turned out to yet another flop to add to her ever-growing collection. The film debuted this weekend with a disappointing $8.1 million. Let’s put it this way: Vampires Suck, Pirahna 3-D AND Lottery Ticket (which all had low expectations) did better than this rom-com bomb. Seriously, not even Jason Bateman could save this stihnkbomb. Then again neither did Bill O’Reilly. Jen (pictured at the L.A. premiere on Aug. 16) drummed up a little publicity for the movie by making comments promoting voluntary single motherhood that fired up the conservative talk-show host. But none of the hoopla seemed to help. Seriously, I think it’s high time for Jen to re-evaluate her options. Like investing in a time-machine and just going back to the 90s
sorry, I just don’t see her as a big screen movie star. Okay in an ensemble but that is it.
IMO people in general are just tired of her and her “same old, same old” movies. And she puts out – how many of these things a year?? 5? 6?? Borrrriiiiing. I agree with other posters who say she needs to stretch out her acting wings and try something different.
I have never understood why people are so MEAN to Jennifer Aniston. It’s really weird.
How old is this woman now? Mid-40s?
I might start enjoying her movies when she’s in her 50’s and still playing the same character over and over.
Now that would be entertainment.
“Watch 50/60/70-something Jennifer Aniston, in this charming new romantic comedy…looking for love..”
“80-year-old Jennifer Aniston starring in the role of her lifetime…don’t miss this new romantic comedy!”
Jennifer Aniston has a fan base that will go see her movies, no matter how silly they are. They are not art house productions, and they’ve never been billed as such. Some people just like vanilla…she’ll continue to make these same kinds of movies and they will continue to have an audience.
I saw it and thought it was better than the premise. I agree, the plot line is pretty ludicrous. To be honest, I only went to see it in the theater because I won free tickets to a pre-screen event. It was a pleasant way to spend a couple of hours though.
You know, the plot line of Mamma Mia always bothered me and that was wildly successful. A woman is getting married and wants her father, whom she’s never known, to walk her down the aisle…only problem is, mom was such a slut that there are three possible candidates so let’s just get the three men and mom together in a room and figure this whole thing out. Really? REALLY??!?
@ Granger:
“I think Aniston has more potential than she’ll allow herself to tap — but she’s simply too afraid to take a major risk. She could never do a role like Monster, because she would never have the guts to get out from behind her perfect hair, perfect body, and perfect make-up.”
This perfectly highlights why she is so boring. Despite her money and fame she’s stuck in the same routines. When John Mayer is right about you, then there’s a problem…
I saw “The Switch” over the weekend and thought it was good. Jason Bateman and Thomas Robinson were great together and Juliette Lewis is always a stitch. I think the low turn-out can be attributed to the fact that the type of audience in the theaters was paying to see Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenneger or Piranha 3D.
I think is just proof that Hollywood does not produce actors with talent anymore. There was a time when a studio had long term contract and was making sure that they had quality scrips ready to go for actors. There is the difference between actors and ‘stars’. I would wonder if we did not have the instant gratification of the internet for celebrities, would we not have such rose tinted views on some people that clearly don’t have talent?
Jennifer Aniston has a fan base that will go see her movies, no matter how silly they are.
——————————————————-
But that’s just it . . . her fan base has apparently strunk because fewer and fewer of them seem to be turning out for her movies. Every movie she has done lately as the star has bombed. Only when she does ensemble or sentimental dog movies do her movies seem to make money. So, actually, her fan base is very tired of her and aren’t paying money to see her movies.
@whitedaisy . . . the salaries are included in the production costs. As someone mentioned, this movie cost more than $16M. The numbers are covered up by all of the financial mumbo jumbo that the studios are putting out there. I don’t know why that is, but if the trade mags can’t get a true cost for the movie then somebody doesn’t want it out there for public consumption for whatever reason. Also, Jennifer might have taken a cut from her usual $6-$8M salary because she is a producer on the movie and Jason Bateman is probably only in the $2-$3M pay bracket. Maybe they both took cuts thinking they could get some money on the “back end” but that only works if the movie is a hit.
I had seen that the cost was estimated budget was 32 million last week now it’s 16 mill. I am not buying it,she was in the top 5 highest paid actresses in Forbes and her asking price is 7-8 mill so half of the production went to her salary alone? I think the studio is fudging the numbers to make it less of a bomb.
amazing that her fans continue to make excuses for her. They said she is a “famous movie star” which I think is hogwash. A major movie star take chances and don’t make the same old cr*ppy movies over and over again.
She needs to take a break maybe a year off and maybe people will go see her movies again. She is making movies back to back and people are tired of it.
BTW: If AJ’s movie had make 8.1 millions Aniston’s fans who have said it bombed as well and rejoice in it’ but JA’s movie make 8.1 millions and all of a certain it is a indie movie and they are making all the excuses in the world, still feeling sorry for the ex-wife and blaming everyone else but her and all of a certain this movie is Jason Bateman’s not Aniston, when she was the only one that was promoting it. If it was a success it would have been her movie, now that it is a failure it is Jason Bateman’s movie, got to love the jenloonies with their delusional views.
mln: That is exactly what the studio are doing and it is disgusting
JA needs to lay low for a while she is too over exposed. She really needs to branch out and take a character/role that has substance to it. She needs to challenge herself and do something other than rom/com. She needs to take her time, chose her scripts more carefully and not make so many movies in one year. She is a very capable actress she needs to take a chance and get out of her comfort zone.Besides didn’t J Low make a movie that was almost the same idea?
If you clck on this and press view more it says the budget was 32 million maybe the 16 is what the studio paid to buy the film???
http://www.metacafe.com/topics/the_switch_(film)/
mln: She’s a top highest paid actress because of her endorsement deals with various products.
The movie didn’t seem that bad but look at the stuff that made it to the top of the box office-something with a 5% rating and The Expendables. Nothing made over $16.5 million. It was a sh*tty movie week.
Movie stars aren’t what bring people in to see movies anymore, clearly. Vampires Suck has no major “stars” and neither does The Expendables-Stallone and the other famous people are in it for like, 10 minutes altogether in one scene (according to the Entertainment Weekly review).
Its been clear for studios for a long time that the old “movie star vehicles” are going the way of the west. Knight and Day? Flop. Salt is in it’s fifth week and isn’t even in the top 10 while Inception is in it’s 6th week and still number 9. It’s major movie star is Leonardo DiCaprio and he’s not really a “star” because he tends to keep to himself and doesn’t sell his life to sell his movies.
Studios are going to have to learn that people want good stories. It doesn’t matter how unknown the actors are if the story is there.
Salt is a box office hit… it made over 100 already domestically. and inception had made over 200 million dollars domestically,(both moview help up pretty well against the competition) the baster is a bomb… bomb baby bomb…now its time for jennifer to consider returning to tv, the public clearly isn’t buying what he is trying to sell.
90% of the movies she’s in are romantic comedies and are all the fuckin same.
It’s gotten so beyond stale now.
This isn’t a movie I’d pay to see at the threatre but I might rent it later. I find JA a lukewarm actress. It’s like she’s playing a watered down version of Rachel, over and over and over again.
@The Hamm is My Dream Man
Several sources state Anistons’ asking price per film is 7-8 million including this weeks NY magazine. I know she got dough for Smart Water and Friends residuals but that is her stated salary and I haven’t read anywhere that she took less to do this movie. The last 2 weeks in August is historically where they dump movies that they don’t expect to do well.
BTW I like your name
@ Hamm is my dream man
Why are you comparing Salt and Inception to this movie both of them openened pretty big Inception did what 42 mill its first weekend and Salt did 37 million.Inception is at over 300 mill worldwide and Salt is at over 200 million they are both blockbusters there is no reason to and compare them.
Plus the Switch is actually better reviewed than the Bounty Hunter. People are just sick of Aniston.
IDK why Salt was brought into this discussion but Salt Has made $216 million worlwide Domestic 109.9 foreign 106.4. Also Salt just opened in Europe last week so it should reach $250 million by this weekend AJ is an international star so 65- 70 % of bo will from the foreign markets.
With all the promos, interviews on Extra, AH, ET, GMA, Regis, Letterman ,Leno,Reelz channel etc The Switch starring America’s Sweetheart should have done better. Also its very curious that JA’s salary for Marley and ME was 8 million in 2007 and she is still making that in 2010
She has gotten less enjoyable to watch with the years – I liked in her in Office Space of all things, and the Good Girl was OK, and Friends of course….but her recent movies — I can’t think of many I was overwhelmed by.
Actually, mslewis I’ve seen dozens and dozens of commercials for Lottery Ticket. To be fair, I’ve not seen one for The Switch, but it looked god awful enough for me in the trailers.
mln: Well thank you. The Hamm is the love of my life, he just doesn’t know it yet. 😉
The point I was making about Salt and Inception is that on paper, Salt should be miles ahead of Inception. It has a shorter run time, a bigger star, a simpler plot. It isn’t a flop by any stretch of the imagination but I just find it interesting that even though it has all that going for it, it still hasn’t done better than a 2 and a half hour long cerebral mindf*ck of a movie.
I mean, in 6 weeks Inception still hasn’t dropped out of the top 10-it was number 1 at the box office three weekends in a row. It kept Salt from opening at number 1. I think it’s a great film and I’ve seen it twice but considering what is topping the charts this week (a movie with a 5% rating and The Expendables), shouldn’t Salt be higher up?
If I want to watch sperm swapping I’ll turn on a soap opera, sitcom or medical show. In the past few years every combination of sperm/egg/embryo stealing switching etc. has been done.
#48
SALT was never intended to do better than INCEPTION, never.
INCEPTION was marketed as NOYCE MASTERPEICE the same way as AVATAR was marketed as being Cameron one. Both movies projects were written in a span time of an entire decade and both ad were made around the director and its past successes more than its actors.
INCEPTION was marketed as being the masterpeice of the DARK NIGHT producer not around one of his actors and most of the people before its release were even expecting it to do at least as much as the Dark Night and even to rival AVATAR.
You should have seen all the talk before its release between the Dark Night fans, the Avatar Fans and the Inception fans…all battling as what movie was the best while INCEPTION talk was it was the best and that it will blow both movies out of the water financially wise. They even predicted that it will reach at least 150 millions on its release weekend and were kinda disappointed when it reached 62 millions.
SALT at the time was never included since it is a mere summer action flick and is totally in par to the Bourneesk type financial wise, hell it already outperformoed the first Bourne worldwide.
SALT, for all its talk was a Bourne-esque, Mission Impossible, Die Hard action flick made within a few months around a new character to launch with the hope of doing a sequel if it made enough money, especially from the foreign market, hence they needed an international star to sell that new project that could carry the new character with the extra difficulty that it was around a female character who never or so rarlly reached that amount of money in an action flick which is by essence masculine inclined.
No matter how much you pay out to make a movie, the goal is to produce a bestselling blockbuster, I dont think any director sets out to make a mediocore moive and just maybe break even..
80-year-old Jennifer Aniston starring in the role of her lifetime…don’t miss this new romantic comedy!”
==========
LOL,, just stop, but,,,,
nnn: WELL SAID
Okay, numbers:
$16 million is NOT what the movie cost to make. $16 mil is what the production rights were sold for.
The actual production costs were probably more in the neighborhood of $30 — #35 million.
Which does not include promotion/marketing costs. TV commercials, print media and internet advertisements, billboards etc. All very expensive. Figure another $20 mil at a conservative estimate.
Altogether, including production and promotion costs, the film probably cost the studio upwards of $50 million.
The fact that the studio is fudging on releasing the data on the production costs tells me they don’t want to admit how much money they blew on this dog.
As for Salt, which somebody upthread already brought into this, as of yesterday it has earned $216 million world-wide and that doesn’t include several European countries that haven’t released their box-office totals yet. Throw in expected overseas box-office receipts plus DVD and TV rights, I’d guess Salt stands to earn over $300 million and maybe $350 million.
Salt is a hit. Switch looks like a flop. Done and done.
@The Hamm is My Man – I’m getting persuaded by your thesis (ie that star vehicles don’t work anymore). One contributing factor: I feel that trailers are getting more and more influential because they are done so well and because we have so many ways to see them on demand nowadays. So when we go to the movies, it’s because we liked a trailer, not because we are just going to the movies and select one based on familiar names and faces. Sound likely at all?
Sorry INCEPTION was NOLAN Masterpeice not Noyce. I mixed up those two names
I agree with @Pity Party- 16MM is an “indie” film for miramax.
I was sorry it didn’t do better though, because I still believe in Jen (She was great in Good Girl and The Break up) but as a die-hard loyal Team Aniston member- I could not make my man go see it.
Sigh.
The Switch did not cost only 16 mil– 16 mil is for the distribution rights. It probably cost in the upwards of 30 to 35 mil to produce, and this does not include marketing costs.
Sorry Jen fans, but The Switch is a flop. Pure and simple. Can’t believe this woman keeps getting headlining roles in theatrical releases. Given her miniscule fanbase, she should be headlining direct-to-dvd releases only.
Well said: Alex, nnn, Lilou, mslewis and mike. I agree with you all! Couldn’t have said it any better myself.
I think Ms Aniston needs to go back to TV. She could do TV movies (basically all of these rom-coms could be TV movies anyway), and that way she still gets to be a kind of ‘movie star’, but be back where she fits best.
I have to laugh at the people claiming that The Switch cost $16 million and that it’s an indie film. Unless everybody worked for free, the budget is at least twice that. Jennifer’s films usually cost in the $30 million range if she isn’t starring against a A-list comedian or big cast film. How ridiculous to claim a movie opening in over 2,000 theatres with a huge promotional push is an indie film? That doesn’t happen. There’s minimal promotion and start out in a few hundred theatres. Nice try.
That picture on top is Jason realizing that he’s still got another film with her coming out.
Hello? Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, Sandra Bullock are considered A-List actors and they had some bombs too. (All about Steve, anyone?)
I don’t understand the hate towards Aniston, I really don’t.
Sandra Bullock was kind of a rom-com Queen until recently, but now because of one good drama she’s legit.
I agree Aniston needs to try something new, give her time.
But why all the hate as she was the only A-list actor who bombs at the BO?
please bear my English, thanks
As has been said by posters before me, Mandate sold the distribution rights for $16M. Somebody’s spinning the numbers.
i think you all are being too nice, she should stop acting all together, SHE CAN’T ACT!!! she has money, she gave it a good shot, it’s time to leave us alone now, as someone already said, just leave. her fan base, lol are minimal and have them only because she GOT DUMPED BY BRAD PITT 6 YEARS AGO. NOW WE ALL HAD TO PAY FOR THAT, her few fans have made a fool out of her, it’s just sad, they failed to get from her what they were hoping for because she doesn’t have it in her to give,( revenge) but they keep pushing her.
I don’t think there is more hatred towards her than towards any other actresses who can’t act. I mean, Megan Fox and other starlets much younger get even more bashed and are much more hated and criticized for saying stupid things or having horrible acting skills though they have their youth and inexperience as a credible excuse.
There is less tolerance towards them than towards Jenniffer Aniston who has 20 years of professional experience on her sleeves.
The point is, it’s very difficult for any actor to make that transition from TV icon to successful movie star. When you do it, people forget you ever were a TV star.
As long as you didn’t succeeded in having a greater role/acting resume in the big screen than the one you had on TV, you still are perceived as TRYING, as being in an transition from TV to big screen, as being more of a wanna be big screen star than a real one.
Depp is now a movie star and people have forgotten he was ever a TV star. Clooney is not Doctor Ross anymore, will Smith is not the Prince of bel Air in his movies. They both are greater than their main TV role who launch their celebrity in orbit. You get my point.
I beleive that many people who are fed up about jennifer’s movies are just fed up because of the fact that she is stretching that trial period excessively by putting out there lots of lame movies in a very short period of time like she is forcing it to the public and with no real improvement.
Of course everyone has bombs, even the Oscarized actors but their career type is balanced with ups and downs, with cricitcal acclaims and financial ones and bombs. It’s not consistently linear in the low financially wise or/and critically wise.
In the case of jennifer she is still transitionning from TV, hence some people think she is just not fit for the big screen and should give up already and get back on TV where she is more bound to be successful.
Ain’t no shame to that. Many former great movie stars and icons end up on TV and are successful there (Brooke Shields, Rob Lowe, ect…)
Oh and i read months ago than the Switch had a production costs that amounts to 32+ millions.
Why do people hate her?
Because she built a career mainly about herself, not her talent. Her hair and her divorce are the 2 most identifiable aspects, and mild comedic timing.
She is vain and the “feel pity for me, everyone one is uncool” is for high school girls, not a 41 yr old. Ewww on John Mayer, and the awkward posing at the Oscars, and if she mentions one more time how she is an independent amazing woman, but makes rom-coms about love and her need for a man, SHOOT ME!!!
@Jackie: I don’t think people “hate” her; there isn’t enough there to hate. I think she just bores the bejesus out of people and irritates them no end. People are just sick and tired of her and wish she’d get gone.
Cheyenne: I wasn’t comparing Salt and The Switch. Had you actually read my post, you’d know that.