Rupert Everett slams Jennifer Aniston, is generally uncool

wenn2748953

I know some of you like Rupert Everett, but I’ve grown to despise him. It is a relatively recent development – I usually liked him in movies, and I thought he was a decent actor. But over the past couple of years, he’s given some of the strangest interviews. He has been revealed as an extraordinarily bitchy, catty, nasty, self-loathing gay man who blames his own sexuality for his failed career, never considering that perhaps no one wants to work with such an a–hole. Anyway, Rupert gave an interview to BBC radio (audio here), and much of it is simply his greatest hits, a litany of bitching and moaning. But Rupert gets on a roll as he slams the Hollywood system, and he ends up naming names: Jennifer Aniston, specifically. Oh, this should be good.

Despite the stereotype, Hollywood is not at all liberal, says British actor Rupert Everett. Ifact, for gay actors like himself, it’s quite conservative. The 50-year old actor, best known for his role in ‘My Best Friend’s Wedding,’ spoke with the UK’s BBC’s Radio 4, sounding a familiar lament about his role in the film industry, and the discrimination he faces.

Comparing his acting talent to that of Colin Firth and Hugh Grant, Everett said that producers would say they couldn’t find a role that fit him, which he said came only because he was gay.

“I never got a job there, and I never got a job here, after [coming out],” he said. “I did a couple of films, I was very lucky at the beginning of my career… and then, I never had another job here for ten years, probably, and I moved to Europe.”

It’s not just him though; he thinks it’s a problem for all gay — and women — actors.

“I think show business is ideally suited for heterosexuals, it’s a very heterosexual business, it’s run mostly by heterosexual men, and there’s a kind of pecking order. I think the position of women is a pretty difficult one in show business. If you look at the idea of a drunk women in show business on the skids at the age of 50, and a drunken man in show business on the skids, the drunken man gets an awful amount of support, and the women is a slut.”

The system is especially biased, he thinks, because the audience doesn’t see actors as gay or straight.

“The audience has a completely perception of the performers than the business… But the business is what makes the stars, really. There are lots of women and lots of men in the business that the powers that be decide are the right people and they’ll stand with them for quite a long time.”

Still, Hollywood decides on its own who to support, even if its undeserved, Everett says. And to prove his point, he criticized the career of Jennifer Aniston: “Like Jennifer Aniston will just have one too many total flops. But she’s still a member of that club. And she will still manage to — like a star forming in the universe — a whole lot of things swirling around and suddenly solidifying into yet another vital tasteless romcom: a little glitter next to the Crab Nebula.”

His advice for gay actors? As he’s said before, perhaps not coming out is the best bet:

“There are many of them, and I don’t blame them, it’s very sensible. If I hadn’t been someone who liked and if I hadn’t been a kind of sex maniac and all those kind of things and wanted to go to raves and circuit parties, I don’t think there’s anything to wrong with it. It would have been too complicated for me to tell the lie.”

[From Huffington Post]

Ugh. Okay, he has a few points, but they tend to be lost in the miasma of self-pity and general nastiness. First: I’ve said it before, but Rupert is not completely wrong about out-of-closet gay actors. They do have it a lot harder than straight actors. BUT – there have been very notable successes in the past decade, and if you look at those successes, you’ll notice something: all of the gay success stories in Hollywood involve actors and actresses were are extraordinarily likeable and talented. Perhaps Rupert didn’t have the goods to back it up, you know? He’s also right about aging and declining within the industry, and the sexism of how an aging actress is treated. But, once again, there are notable exceptions, and I believe it is getting better because of groundbreaking, talented women.

As for the Aniston stuff… well, I’m not even sure what point he’s trying to make. Hollywood rallies around it’s own? Hollywood will “forgive” someone like Aniston even after several flops in a row? Eh. Whatever. I wonder if Aniston’s rep will even deign to comment about this one (you laugh, but her rep commented about that Joan Collins stuff). Here’s Aniston’s statement: “Rupert Everett IS SO UNCOOL.” Done.

wenn5574978

wenn8903244

Photos courtesy of WENN.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

165 Responses to “Rupert Everett slams Jennifer Aniston, is generally uncool”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. someone says:

    Does he even know her???? He may not like her or her acting ability (I really didn’t understand what he was saying) but Im sure she has made more money in her career than he has…and looks great for her age..him..not so much!

  2. Stronzilla says:

    Oh bitch please, what a whinger. Just look at the difference between this interview and the one given by Richard Chamberlain the other day. Wah, wah, wah. Maybe the reason his career didn’t go the direction he wanted was because he’s a nasty bitch with a chip on his shoulder. And based upon his comments I’d say he’s also quite jealous of Aniston. Watch your back Jenny, you in danger girl! Rupert’s got his shank out!

  3. brin says:

    Maybe they auditioned for the same role and she got it.

  4. spinner says:

    What a bitchy ol queen!! Bitter much??
    And I beg to differ…Hollywood is not run by heterosexuals. It is run & over-run by gays, whether they are in the closet or not. He’s just a jellous looser.
    Hee.

  5. Cheyenne says:

    He looks like he overdosed on Ex-Lax.

  6. mimi says:

    I think he has some valid points. He was wonderful in Best Friends Wedding. So, yeah he’s got talent. I’m sure coming out hurt his career. And Jennifer Aniston…? Why is she one of the richest women/man in Hollywood? She got lucky with a TV show – bargained for an outrageous salary which arguably resulted in the death of the sitcom – too expensive and now we have all this reality crap. Her movies largely have been mediocre and yet she gets role after role…???? I dunno, kinda agree with him.

  7. Isabela says:

    TEAM Aniston. He’s just a hater with a failed career.

  8. Anon says:

    I agree with you that he has some points there – but they are mainly lost in his bitter diatribe, and either way, I don’t necessarily agree that he has been affected or his career has been affected as he thinks. It’s just as likely he’s lost out on parts and good will in Hollywood given his attitude. Not to mention, look at his face! He’s almost completely unrecognizable since he did whatever he did to it and perhaps that has played a role as well in him not getting the roles he desires.

    As for the Aniston comment. I think he was trying to make a point about some stars being able to get away with multiple flops because the Hollywood machine rallies around them. Fair enough – to a point, but Aniston is a terrible choice to illustrate this. Why? Because she has had very few actual flops. It is a media myth that her movies always bomb at the box office, and a simple look at her numbers proves this. She’s been on Forbes most bankable actor list for the last several years, and she’s still one of the top paid actresses. People need to stop being so naive to what they read – Hollywood is a business and the thought that Aniston would continue to get hired if she weren’t making bank for studios is a ridiculous notion.

  9. JuJuBee says:

    It boils down to money. As long as Jen Aniston is making a studio money, she will have work. That goes for the whole lot over in Hollywood. The Kardashians exist because they are making someone, besides themselves, very rich.

    As for Rupert he needs to take a couple of doses of humility.

  10. danielle says:

    I do think he has a point about gay actors coming out of the closet – Richard Chamberlein to. I know people who won’t buy a guy they know to be gay in a straight roll – irritates me half to death. “You were watching them before you KNEW they were gay and had no problem with it!!!”

  11. di butler says:

    Poor old Rupert. He has always been such a drama queen. He’s a good actor, but he burned bridges not for being gay, but being difficult to work with. It’s sad, he blames his bad personality on his gayness. I have always enjoyed his work, hope he chills out.

  12. olive says:

    Rupert has gotten roles as a leading man while out, but he wrecked his career and his face. They weren’t in major action movies but he wouldn’t have gotten that if he were straight either…

  13. happygirl says:

    @Stronzilla – LMAO – “Watch your back Jenny, you in danger girl!” thank you for that!

  14. WhiteNoise says:

    LOL @ Jen’s ‘statement’! :D

    But back to the story, I do still like him but Rupert is his own worst enemy. If he managed his bitter a bit better and didn’t make it quite so personal and petulant, he probably might still have a career of sorts.

    But he’s not wrong in the points he makes about H/Wood having its favourites or the gap between the way disgusting slutty old men (Charlie Sheen to name but one) are treated in comparison to women of a similar age who fall from grace.

  15. mslewis says:

    Kaiser, I feel the same way you do. I used to really like Rupert Everett but in the past few years he has become just a nasty old queen!! Seriously! I think now reporters want to interview him only because they know some stupid sh!t will come rushing out of his mouth. He must not have any friends left because if he did they surely would tell him to just shut up!!

    He might make some valid points in that interview but nobody notices because he seems to always insist on bringing up a famous name like Aniston which gets all the headlines and renders anything else he says moot. The man is an idiot.

  16. nycmom10024 says:

    Dislike him, hate him, whatever, his statements about out of the closet gay men are true. Yes, there has been improvements but would you want to risk your career to further every other person like you?

    It is a tricky road. He may or not be an evil bitchy man, but he truly has a point.

  17. Sumodo1 says:

    Nah, he’s still pissed off about the bad plastic surgery he had, which is REALLY what ended his career. Look at his nose, people!

  18. Sarah says:

    His comments about Jenn make sense. I LOVE her but a lot of her “romcom” stuff is pure crap.

    He obviously thinks so and doesn’t understand the short leash he is on. However! I DO think his lack of recent success does have something to do with his homosexuality… Namely because he is not a good enough actor to appear straight when he is in different roles. So producers are right to not cast him in straight roles. Sorry…but that makes sense to me.

  19. JustBe says:

    I think that most of what he says here comes close to the truth.

    Jennifer Aniston is not that good of an actress. She has had more misses than hits in her movie career. There are far more talented people than she who are within her age ranged, yet she still gets most of the leading roles. There isn’t a lot of logic that can explain this.

    I think that Kaiser helps to make Rupert’s point as well. Why do gays/lesbians have to have a reputation of being overtly nice or amicable in order to be successful. A great deal of A,B,C-List heterosexual stars are known for their extremely unpleasant dispositions. Is it just the gay or overweight or minority actors who are required to be kind?

    I think that Rupert is probably too caustic for most people to tolerate in a work environment, but I think that this is true of a lot of hetero actors as well, but they’re still getting acting calls. Mel Gibson comes to mind.

  20. the original bellaluna says:

    Okay, he sounds like a total bitch, and I’ve never like him anyway, so no loss there.

    As for the “uncool” comment JA made: what she said was “I thought that was uncool” about AJ (funny, no? JA/AJ – get it?) ;) saying she thought it would be neat for her children to see their parents fall in love (while filming Mr. & Mrs. Smith). Especially since both BP & AJ denied there was anything un-kosher going on with their relationship while filming said movie. I don’t care one way or the other, but I don’t like it when people are misquoted and then it’s used against them. As opposed to Rupert here, a bitchy queen who is unable to clearly articulate his point.

  21. Cheyenne says:

    @anon: Most of Aniston’s “bankability” has come from residuals from Friends re-runs, which ended last year.

  22. OXA says:

    Rupert needs an infusion of Midol STAT!

  23. lrm says:

    okay i am not an aniston fan, but i find it fascinating and funny, that she has become the go-to person for examples. she doesn’t need to respond to this sh*t. She certainly isn’t the worst or the only actress out there to make bad movies and still be paid alot of money for them.
    and just to make this all bermuda triangle-AJ’s movies are not always great, either. Anyway, there are plenty of overpaid actresses whose movies bomb. And plenty of male actors whose movies do the same. I think people pick her for an example b/c she’s an easy target. and maybe jealousy.

    But i personally don’t feel that perplexed by JA’s success. Friends was a huge cash cow. Her marriage to BP helped her image, as well, and prob. got her opportunities at that time, which gave her longevity and more buying power/influence.

    The main thing though: People like JA. The fans will pay to see her, or the movie concept she is in. Whether or not I agree, it’s a pretty simple fx. really. If you make hollywood money, you will be in the ‘Club’ rupert speaks about. Something tells me mr. everett wants a little holiday publicity….???

    I don’t really see his ‘valid points’….And, there are also plenty of ‘caustic’ actors who don’t get more work b/c they are a*sholes to work with. Sure, a few do, but many don’t. It’s a competitive business. Perhaps everett came out ahead of his time? And now that it’s a hot topic, he wants to have his say. His perogative.

    However, I would say that JA is decidely ‘not caustic’-she and AJ both have consistent reputations of being nice and respectful on set. he should have used a great example of some nightmare co-star.

  24. WhiteNoise says:

    @JustBe – I agree. it’s a pity Rupert makes himself so dislikeable and therefore easy to dismiss, because he is making valid points about the industry that rarely get public airing.

  25. Javagirl1 says:

    I found “My Best Friend’s Wedding” to be a tasteless romcom..

  26. Ginevra says:

    I’ve not read previous interviews of him so perhaps I’m just not seeing this one in the larger context — but quite honestly, from what I’m reading here, I have to agree with him. You’re right that there are a few notable exceptions of successful older women or openly gay actors — but really, those are the exceptions that prove the rule.

    And my understanding of his point about Jennifer Aniston is that she somehow manages to stay on the A++ list in spite of the fact that her films have been predominately forgettable and have not done terribly well at the box office — so there must be some larger force that propels her.

  27. Roxanne75 says:

    Dear Rupert:

    I think you don’t get any work because, generally speaking, you suck. Doesn’t matter what you suck, but that fact that you suck is all that matters in an actors world.

    Sincerely,
    Nobody at all.

  28. albeli says:

    He may have a point about coming out of the closet, but it’s lost amid all his bitchy whining. Seems like a really unlikeable person.

  29. truthSF says:

    In response to his Jennifer Aniston’s comments, while I agree with him, he should know the saying: It’s not what you know, it’s who you know that will open doors!!!

  30. tango says:

    Rupert makes some good points but sounds so bitter while doing it. That right there just turns people off.

    And I think Jennifer Aniston gets a lot of chances to make mediocre romcom type movies. Probably because the few big hits she does have balances out the many average ones. A better person for Rupert to identify as someone who get roles for some strange reason is Ashton Kutcher. Has he EVER made a hit movie? Why does he keep getting movie roles?

  31. REALIST says:

    Slam away, Rupert. I think Jen IS overrated, and she would be in the ashbin by now if it weren’t for a) her marriage to Brad, and b), her divorce from Brad, triggering her consistent appearances as the woman wronged by husband-stealer Angelina. It is a sympathy ploy and a variation on famewhoring.
    There, I said it!
    I think the comparison to Colin Firth is stretching it, but Rupert did do a great variation of Hugh Grant in “My Best Friend’s Wedding”. Don’t know about Hugh; maybe he is remaining celibate until SleazeE makes up her mind.
    I was just saying on this blog the other day how coming out hurt Everett’s career (sorry, can’t remember). Just look at the time frame of his IMDB list of films-from “My Best Friend’s Wedding” to the villain in “Inspector Gadget”.
    Rupert has gotta take the edge off a bit, then he can line up for those juicy older male roles, e.g. “The Madness of King George”…

  32. Bill Hicks is God says:

    @Spinner: Hollywood is “over-run by gays”? Where are these views coming from? Fox news?

  33. REALIST says:

    @ Olive-you’re right-the SECOND picture shows the botched surgery. Why, why, why do celebs trust plastic surgeons (who, depending on where they practice, often don’t have the rigorous board certification requirements that other surgeons do) with their faces? The old saying “Your face is your fortune” applies here. Personally, the only thing that would scare me more that someone tweaking my face would be eye surgery.

  34. Str8Shooter says:

    Bitter, Party of One?!!

    What a loser! As a gay man, I am embarassed that people like this haggard old has-been get any press at all. And when they do, all they do is reinforce the stereotype of the bitter, bitchy drama queens that they are.

    Get off the whole gay card thing. If you act like a preening diva, no one is going to offer you squat (ask Dame Heigl, who is learning that very lesson)

    You reap what you sew.

  35. Anonymous says:

    He hit the nail on the head when it comes to Jennifer Aniston! Her movies suck.Most of them are flops. There’s no reason why she should be an A lister. And as far as Hollywood and Gays go. They support the gay agenda when it suits them but at the end of the day, most movie ticket buyers are straight and therefore want to see straight people in straight roles.

  36. redlips says:

    @cheyenne, and she is laughing all the way to the bank!

    Such a self loathing, arrogant queen! Gawd, poor, poor Rupert….poor yourself another cocktail.

  37. Vi says:

    ok yes he has points, most of JA movies are awful and old actresses and gay performers have a harder time than straight white males but that shit is true for the rest of the world too! and so what hollywood won’t ditch JA because her movies suck, if they did he’d just be bitching that they did it because she’s getting older. he’s a self indulgent whiner!

  38. Bunny says:

    He is egotistical, but he is right about some points, and it is actually refreshing when actors are honest even if they come off jerky.

  39. nnn says:

    If you want to name someone who is flopping left and right 90 % of the time, and not just little flops, but huge ones, try Charlize Theron.

    She is still for me a mistery because she has talent and beauty and yet, she is consistently unable to attract the masses to the theater. Bar ‘Hancock’ and the movie that gave her an Oscar, her BO resume is shocking.

  40. spinner says:

    @ Bill Hicks…

    Dear God,

    WTF?? Fox News?? Do you know anything about Hollywood? I lived in Los Angeles & worked in the Entertainment Industry for a number of years. Nothing wrong with it but it is pretty Gay. I was referring to Ruperts’ statement that heterosexuals command Hollywood, which is simply not the case.

  41. Johnny Depp's Girl says:

    Rupert, you were bitching so loud behind the closet door, we could hear you!! You had to come out!

    BTW, your acting sucks. Some breaking news for you.

  42. Brito says:

    Who cares if it’s a flop or not? Everyone’s FLOP. She met plenty of people besides, also always involved in the production of films that she participates, she being “famous” and attract media attention is a full plate for disclosure of any film. Jennifer is not a good actress, so it’s participating in these silly movies, playing the same character and earning her money, and there are other “actors”who live to do a lot of bad movies like her, but the difference is that it attracts the media attention … nothing more

  43. Bill Hicks is God says:

    Spinner, there may be a lot of gay actors, agents etc. in Hollywood but the movers and shakers are mostly Jewish, and not gay ones at that.

    I mentioned Fox to be snide, I admit, however there’s been some homophobic posts recently and I was p.o’d about it because your post didn’t read right to me.

    And I do know a bit about Hollywood as a matter of fact. I work in post-secondary for the academic study of film (film as text, record of the human experience etc. and so forth) I have met David Cronenberg (he ate all the shrimp at a party we had for him)and Atom Egoyan. People like producer Robert Lantos; producer-director Norman Jewison come to mind for specific reasons having to do with where I work; Nicholas Cage has made a personal appearance along with Spike Jones when they screened ‘Adaptation’ at our facility. Far as I know, none of them are gay.

  44. jojo says:

    What is so funny is that Rupert thinks there are actually heterosexual actors. Acting is the gayest profession there is and no actor is 100 percent straight. Duh.

  45. spinner says:

    Hi Bill…I reread my original comment & perhaps what did not read right to you was my choice of the wordage over-run. I meant no offense & am far from a basher.

    So…Cronenburg ate all the shrimp…that bastard!!

  46. Bill Hicks is God says:

    @Jo-jo: Paul Newman. Will that do?

  47. nycmom10024 says:

    @spinner I also worked for a major studio. Yes, there are many gay celebs (both closeted publically and openly)however I promise you I have sat in meetings where studio reps have told potential clients that celeb A would not be as open about their homosexuality as celeb B who was out.

    I have seen and heard these things myself not heresy. Remember the general youth culture is more comfortable with homosexuality that the older financial community.

  48. Cruisin Through says:

    Even if you hate Aniston, his comment was classless and he comes across as a whiny ass crybaby. Any time an actor/actress slams one of their own, they make themselves look bad and just appear that they are trying to keep themselves relevant and in the news. Aniston isn’t the most talented actress, but she’s been very successful on limited talent. He just sounds petty and jealous. It’s not her fault that his career is shit or that he hasn’t achieved what he wanted to. Rupert is not without talent, but he’s no freakin Colin Firth by any stretch!

  49. Bill Hicks is God says:

    It’s all good Spinner – written word on a blog is like email, it’s very easily misconstrued.

    Yes, yes he did. There was a line of people behind him and he totally bogied the shrimp. Not like he loaded his plate with it or anything, he just didn’t move until there was nothing but a platter full of tail husks.

  50. Gigohead says:

    I’m with you Kaiser, Rupert has become this nasty, bitter self-hating gay man who doesn’t “get it”. I do believe there is a strike against gays to play straight roles, but the industry is less forgiving of “difficult to work with” performers.

    That’s Rupert’s doing. His ego got the best of him.

  51. Anon says:

    @lrm: 100% cosign your post.

    @cheyenne: you offer a prime example of someone who has been confused by the media. Her Forbes “bankability” designation has nothing to do at all with her Friends residuals – which you would see if you read how they calculated the numbers (available at the Forbes website). It is based on production budgets, box office totals and DVD/TV sales numbers for FILMS only in a given one-year period. Her Forbes yearly salary does include her Friends residuals – as it should given that those are part of her yearly income. However, that is an entirely different list. And when I spoke of her being one of the top paid actresses, I did not mean just based on yearly salaries, but also based on per film income only. She is certainly not at the top (Jolie, Witherspoon), but her $8 million reported salary is in fact one of the top ten for actresses in Hollywood.

    So my point still stands: she earns one of the top ten actress salaries per film (and has for the last several years), and her films in the last four years at least have earned enough to put her on the most bankable actors list top ten. The point is worth noting given that many others on the most bankable list are not also amongst the highest paid.

    While many like to put down rom-coms, the fact is that the public is still paying to see them, and they tend to have lower production budgets than other pictures. Meanwhile, while I would certainly prefer Aniston to do more work like The Good Girl, or Friends With Money, she does have a likeability and an ease and natural talent for comedy. She might not be everyone’s cup of tea, but she is certainly no worse than many other A-listers, and better than many.

  52. Kim says:

    I agree with alot of his comments esp the Aniston ones which are dead on. This is the way Hollywood works – this isnt new news. I dont think it was a classless comment – its true. She is a mediocre actress at best – she gets roles because of her girl next door status and the fact that Hollywood producers love her.

    BUT Hollywood is run mostly by the Jewish but also MANY gays. There are many gay higher ups in Hollywood.

    And from the acting i have seen him do he is nowhere near the level of Hugh Grant or Colin Firth.

  53. BritinATL says:

    Rupert Everett is a talented actor and makes valid points about how some stars seem to remain in the forefront of our minds despite flop after flop. He could have phrased all of this a heck of a lot better than he did. There was no need to make the point by personal criticism of Jennifer Aniston.

    I also agree with the post that there are large numbers of actors who bat for both teams or for the opposite team to the one they discuss openly. History does seem to agree with his comments about openly gay actors. (Look how Ellen was treated a few years ago when she came out. Mind you she’s doing just fine now).

    Travolta and Cruise would have come out as being gay years ago if being gay wasn’t such an issue affecting studio risk/box office return.

  54. Kim says:

    Aniston earns the box office she does simply because the studios put out mega advertising campaigns and put tons of money behind the movies she is in. A great indie movie with way better actors would make far less. Its all about the studios and how they skew the #’s in favor of any movie she is in.

    But her movies are flops in the publics eye anyway you skew the #’s.

    Ive never understood why studios think the public cares about what a movie grosses. Only the execs of movies care about that! The public cares about 1 thing and 1 thing only – is it a good movie.

  55. Lindsay says:

    Just Be- There is logic to it, look at the numbers. The movies take in more than the budget. No, the money money her films make are not blockbuster numbers but they also aren’t 200 million dollars or more budgets either.

    Yes, a certain amount of niceness is required for anyone but not in equal amounts (more for newcomers and minorities to some extent). You have to be bankable or likeable. The less bankable you are, the more likeable you need to be. He can’t open a movie on his own (almost no one can these days) so he needs to be likeable. Most of the stars that have a reputation for bad behavior on set act nice to the studio heads and most importantly act nice during interviews promoting their movie. It is a big part of the way you get repeat work and public goodwill.

    Mel Gibson isn’t getting away with as much now, but he proved himself as being a bankable leading man. He made the studios and himself a lot of money and earned respect and power. When you are producing and funding your own commercially viable movies you can be as terribly behaved and preachy as you want. At least until the public catches on and will no longer pay to see your movies.

    Mimi – Romantic comedies don’t exactly showcase talent but ok. Jennifer Aniston is not responsible for the death of the sitcom and reality TV, you give her too much credit. Yes, all six of them made a ton of money of the last two seasons but it was a huge hit and NBC could afford to pay $6 million an episode to the lead characters and the other production cost and still make money. They proved they were worth it to NBC.

    No one signs onto a sitcom and expects a million dollars an episode starting out at the gate. Courtney Cox was one of the six, she is on and produces a network sitcom and is probably not making what she is used to. Lost was one of the most expensive shows to make in TV history, it is not going to kill TV drama. Simon Baker just inked a huge deal for a mediocre (in quality and ratings) show. He won’t kill the crime procedurals.

    There really aren’t many great sitcoms out there right now and reality TV will always be cheaper to produce. At the end of the day movie and TV executives want the best return for their money, through ticket sales or ad slots and in some cases critical recognition and awards. They also would rather finance low risk projects. A reality show doesn’t do well that’s ok, it probably wasn’t that expensive to make. A small crew and a cheap cast (at the beginning anyway) is all you need, no sets to build, no wardrobe or craft services to provide. If you produce a few episodes of a scripted show and the ratings are so bad they don’t even air them that is a lot of money down the drain. A reality show is a much smaller risk.

    A lot of it is just business, money in vs money out, not a crazy conspiracy. It is that way for TV, movies, and magazines and until the current formula stops making money it isn’t going to change.

    Also, if you are going to bitch and try to make some sort of point on the radio, think about it first and articulate it better. Lord knows he has been whining and bitching about it for years – he has had practice. And complaining and changing something are completely different concepts.
    Plus, Rupert is best known for playing a cliche gay guy in a Julia Roberts romantic comedy. Glass houses buddy.

  56. Leticia says:

    I still like him and I think he is correct in his statements above.

  57. snappyfish says:

    Loved him as George in “My Best Friend’s wedding”

  58. Anti-icon says:

    Rupert has lost it. Didn’t he just “advise” gay men to stay in the closet, because it will hurt their career. Well, Rupert, DUH. The Public (that’s us here) don’t care for whiners who self mutilate, be they Hollywood or otherwise. One would think you would be more clued in. It is not a person’s sexuality that The Public (that’s us here) don’t cotton to. It’s lack of character.

  59. neelyo says:

    Time for the Annual Bitter Tirade by Rupert Everett.

    Why does he have Mammy Yokum mouth? Missing his teeth?

  60. Lila says:

    Nicole Kidman was once rated Hollywood’s most overpaid actress with regards to her bankability by Forbes. There is no doubt that she’s still quite talented, and a highly respected actress. In terms of revenue and box office draw, she should, by his logic, be relegated to folding shirts at The Gap. Even though most of her movies are arguably good, most people would rather see a movie about robot Ninjas and talking dinosaurs. So taste issues are clearly a factor. Good actors and movies doesn’t always equal what the public will pay to see.

  61. Lori says:

    Rupert, you better warn Neil Patrick Harris not to come out, he might lose his role as a womanizer on HIMYM. Oh wait….

  62. Bill Hicks is God says:

    Oh right, Rupert Everett…I’d love to see Morrissey bitch-slap him and tell him to stop being so damned miserable; THAT is how bad Everett is.

  63. Cheyenne says:

    @anon: Aniston’s movies have been “bankable” because most of them are low-budget rom-coms that have managed to make money for the studio. But except for Marley and Me and the last one she did with Gerry Butler (I can’t even remember the name of the film, it’s that forgettable), her recent films have been box-office disasters that didn’t even make back their production and marking costs. She still can’t get a studio to greenlight “Goree Girls” which has been on the storyboards for two years now.

  64. Anon says:

    @Lindsay: hats off to your post also!

    “Aniston earns the box office she does simply because the studios put out mega advertising campaigns and put tons of money behind the movies she is in. A great indie movie with way better actors would make far less. Its all about the studios and how they skew the #’s in favor of any movie she is in.”

    @Kim: are you serious with this? Of course ad campaigns contribute to film successes – but that’s true for every actor/actress and every film. The fact that indies earn less has nothing to do with Aniston and everything to do with public demand, genre and subject matter interest. People see what they want to.

    Aniston certainly gets no larger ad campaigns than anyone else for her studio pictures, and if she did, she would not be so in demand: once again it all comes back to the almighty dollar. In fact, her last film (The Switch) suffered terribly in the promotional department due to the studio’s sale. It is technically an indie given its $19 million production budget, but yet when it failed to earn huge dollars on opening weekend, most in the celeb media declared it a flop. Now, after it earned more than 2.5 times its budget worldwide, it’s clear that it will make money after DVD/TV sales are factored in.

    “But her movies are flops in the publics eye anyway you skew the #’s.”

    @Kim: Her films are only flops in the public’s eyes when the media skews the numbers to suit that agenda. The Switch is a prime example. It made more on opening weekend in the weak end of summer opening period than How Do You Know made during prime Christmas box office season on its opening weekend. While the latter was called out as a flop, little blame was thrown at either of the four stars or even that much made of it in the celeb media world. Meanwhile, it’s budget – a whopping $120 million – was 6 times what Aniston’s Switch cost. This is what I mean about media manipulation regarding Aniston’s film numbers. The Switch will end up making bank (probably already has), but none of the media outlets will report that angle, and thus the initial cries of flop are all that will be remembered by some.

  65. sadie says:

    Rupert, maybe jen gives better head?

  66. hmm(the original) says:

    I think a lot of what he is saying is true. Is he bitter that his career isn’t what it could be? Yes. However, the substance of what he is saying is true. It is naive to think that there isn’t a star system in Hollywood that is protected above all else and JA has had a large number of flops and yet she continues to make movie after movie. The same could be said for Reese Witherspoon, Ashton Kutcher, and so on and so on. He may be a “bitchy queen” but he’s speaking the truth.

  67. original kate says:

    i saw “my best friend’s wedding” on a plane and i was close to jumping out at 30,000 feet to get away from it. horrible, horrible. i loved rupert years ago when he was making small movies in england but yeah, he’s turned into bitchy mcbitcherton. then again, he was besties with madonna for a while to that should tell you something.

  68. Anti-icon says:

    #66:Hmmm: yes, all true, but couldn’t that be said about ANY industry in America. CEOs in technology, politicians with some mileage, definately athletes, who are ALWAYS protected and championed, particularly if they are both talented and can keep their personal lives relatively clean. It is all the same game in America to achieve success. And there’s a lot of luck involved. And your birth status. And the rest is a giant crap-shoot. Good behavior does often keep less talented folks at the top; and great talent often keeps dicks at the top. Same ‘ole, same ‘ole.

    Sour grapes from Rupert Everett.

  69. Buckley says:

    Is it ok to call him a bitter queen just because we don’t like him?
    I’ll call him a bitter wrecked in the face loser, but being gay has nothing to do with this.

  70. Buckley says:

    The only time I liked him was on the ideal husband.

  71. Whatever says:

    “I’ve grown to despise him. It is a relatively recent development”

    This. If he wasn’t such a whiny little bitch, more people would want to work with him. It’s laughable that he makes fun of Jen’s romcoms when he starred in romcoms himself. My Best Friend’s Wedding is the perfect example. That mess was a bigger POS than anything I’ve ever seen Jen in. I’ll amend my statement to call him a HYPOCRITICAL whiny little bitch.

  72. Cyui says:

    The people who run Hollywood are old white men …not Jewish. Unless you go and meet the tons of people in the head offices it’s stupid to try and say they were Jewish. If they were Jewish there would be more Jewish actors directors writers and so forth. They hire Aniston cause her movies are cheap she works for cheap and she puts her money back into the studio. She pays Huvane. How can people say she’s likable when he movies by herself are failing. So now she’s doing the ensemble cast with Sandler and Colin Farrel/Jamie Fox. They like her mediocrity cause she is cheap to pay and her face is familiar. They think they can use her to bring in the plain Jane white girls. It’s not working anymore. Anyway shell be kicked out soon enough.

  73. Cyui says:

    Yeah and shes as rich as her Friends costars. That’s where her money is from. Plus she probably has her Huvane get her on that list.

  74. jzhz says:

    He definitely has some points, but maybe his bad plastic surgery has made it hard for him to think clearly.

  75. fanny says:

    He probably has a point about the gay thing … but he is misguided about JA. Hollywood will kick anyone to the curb who isn’t performing and/or producing. She has star quality DESPITE having been married to a guy who really is the pits!

  76. ZooniQ says:

    He’s definitely a bitter, old whiner. But he makes several valid points here.

  77. Abby says:

    Bitter much Rupert?

    He could learn a thing or two from Kevin Spacey.

  78. mimi says:

    No- I don’t think JA killed sitcoms..and yeah Friends was a huge hit. But is it coincidence that after actors began making millions per episode that all the reality shows popped up? Ray Ramano, Seinfeld, etc..Not saying networks couldn’t afford it…just that everything is now cheap, cheap, cheap and no real talent.

  79. hay says:

    I can understand why he’s bitter. And what he said about Aniston is true – she has made a ton of crap movies but is still in very high demand.

  80. Bill Hicks is God says:

    Oh high-demand, for what? Alligator bags? She may have Mediterranean heritage but there is still such a thing as too much sun.

  81. Shelly May says:

    I went to Internet Movie Data Base and Rupert has been working steadily despite the “imaginary” doors that have been closed to him because he is gay.
    Or is it because people don’t want to work with an bitter, angry queen who ruined his’ face with unnecessary plastic surgery.
    Big Baby!
    PS When has anything about the Hollywood system, whether your gay or straight, has ever been fair or balanced.

  82. Matt says:

    As a British, Gay man, let me just say that this whiny, nasty, negative old queen does not speak for or represent us!

    I have always thought that Rupert was a talented actor, but he just does not have the likeability factor to make it in Hollywood. As someone else already mentioned, the business (any business) is all about MONEY. Yes, it is tougher for an ‘out’ gay man to get to the top of his profession, but that just means you have to work harder and be likeable to get to where you want to go. You have to ‘hustle’ – just like any other minority group in the workforce.

    He hides behind his sexuality to make excuses for his failed career when we really know its because he is a bitter and negative person.

  83. The Hamm is My Dream Man says:

    He’s a bitter bitch who messed up his face and has a poor attitude. You can’t get jobs where your FACE is the first thing people see and have it look like waxy, mushed up Play Doh.

    And Jennifer Aniston is successful because she makes the studios money and believe it or not, has a huge fan base. Many of the people who post here don’t like her but regardless of that fact, there are millions of people who do and will pay to see her shitty little romcoms.

    Romantic comedies are much much cheaper to make than a blockbuster, special affects laden, stunts-heavy super flick.

    Reasons why studios like her: She works for much less than other actresses are demanding so studios can keep her movie costs down while opening a wide margin for profits, she’s apparently easy to work with, doesn’t have any known drug problems, doesn’t have kids or a man trailing around keeping her from her work, she takes exceedingly good care of her body, hair and face (the only three things that are really keeping her afloat), she has just enough of a controversy boost from the Triangle to be popular but not universally hated and she’s approaching middle age so now she appeals to an even wider audience.

    Oh, and she makes the studios craptons of cash while keeping a relatively low profile and not acting like she’s the queen bee of Hollywood. She’s a solid second tier actress who keeps her mouth shut, does what she’s told and makes a mint off of it for herself and for the studios she works for.

    Where is the doubt in why she’s successful in Hollywood?

    EDIT: Her last three movies made a combined total of $219,733,884 with production budgets for those three films topping out at $77,000,000. I’m not seeing where the confusion is.

  84. Bill Hicks is God says:

    Matt, don’t lower yourself to engage the stereotype.

    Of course Rupert Everett doesn’t speak for all gay people. That’s the equivalent of saying Rosanne Barr speaks for all straight women or Ellen DeGeneres speaking for all gay women. The latter, btw, isn’t too highly regarded in the Community, she’s seen as the lesbian “Uncle Tom.”

    At least Rosanne said she wouldn’t vacuum until they made one she could ride. That’s being in touch, and relating, with women. Being the white, gay “Oprah” isn’t.

  85. Hmmm says:

    I like that he speaks his mind- so refreshing. I guess he doesn’t have anyone’s ass to kiss any longer. He’s spot on about most of his views here, IMO, and especially the remarks about Aniston. I am neutral about her and think she is an unattractive, 2 dimensional actress. I just don’t see her appeal or why she’s considered A list and why she is presumed to be a box office draw. So many talented actors can’t even get their foot in the door! It’s a travesty.

  86. Matt says:

    @ Bill Hicks, I am not ‘lowering myself’ to a stereotype, and I am aware that Rupert Everett does not speak for all gay men.

    However I am aware that people like to lump groups of people together and to generalise. That is all!

  87. Blanca says:

    “She has star quality DESPITE having been married to a guy who really is the pits”

    This is precisely WHY she is still ‘here’.Star quality? Noooo…more like people feel sorry for her.If Brad wouldn’t have dumped her,her ‘movie career’ would have gone the way of Katie Holmes’s.

    Now imagine if someone like him wouldn’t have married her? she would be like the rest of her Friends co-stars,trying to make tv shows happen.It isn’t bad,I don’t know why she doesn’t try that.She good enough for tv.

    This Rupert dude sounds bitter though.But I Imagine if someone cool & awesome like Sir Anthony Hopkins would have said something like this (in a cool awesome way),more people would agree.

  88. WhiteNoise says:

    Buckley – “Is it ok to call him a bitter queen just because we don’t like him? I’ll call him a bitter wrecked in the face loser, but being gay has nothing to do with this.”

    Although I see where you’re coming from, in this case, it has everything to do with being gay since RE has used being gay as the primary reason for everything negative that has happened him and his career, with no acknowledgment of the part he himself has actively played in his own career implosion. I like him, I wish he could figure out a way to not be such an arse, but if he behaves like a bitter, bitchy old gueen, which he does, then bitter, bitchy old gueen is what he’ll get called.

  89. Bill Hicks is God says:

    Matt, you misunderstand me. What I meant was that “reasonable” people know Everett doesn’t speak for gay men. You don’t need to spell it out for the lowest common denominator because they have a hard enough time as it is with the alphabet.

    I was trying to show you support my friend. That’s all.

  90. Bill Hicks is God says:

    …lol, I transposed ‘alphabet’ and had to go back and fix it.

  91. KsGirl says:

    “At least Rosanne said she wouldn’t vacuum until they made one she could ride.”

    Did Roseanne say that? Because that? Is awesome.

  92. Cyui says:

    @Bill Hicks Anti-semitism partly comes from Aryans and other bigots trying to say Jews are taking over. Bigots also do it with blacks Asians Latins and every other person of color. Meeting six Jews in the industry doesn’t constitute the whole industry. I swear some so called minority group gets 3 or 4 seats in something then they are falsely labeled as dominating. Thinking that way leads to discrimination …then worse. Go read up on what occurred prior to the Holocaust. What led up to it. Intersting that for years …decades the people who’ve dominated the Hollywood industry have been primarily white, yet Jews dominate. That makes no sense. Not to mention Hollywoods theme of promoting blonde hair and blue eyes as beautiful. Not those with dark features. Yet Jews dominate…please. Last time I checked Jews have dark features. Try thinking with some logic.

  93. Bill Hicks is God says:

    Yes, KsGirl she did. In the documentary “Wisecracks” about female comedians *edit* doing their Stand-up routines.
    :-)

  94. Camille Lynn says:

    Rupert, Rupert, Rupert. You’re soooooo jealous and bitter. Jennifer makes more money than you do, gets more parts than you do, and everyone loves her. Now they all hate you. It doesn’t really matter how good the movies are that Jennifer makes, does it? You are increasing her fans ten fold. You poor creepy excuse for a man and actor.
    Camille

  95. Vi says:

    @bill hicks: i’m what you might call a “lipstick lesbian” and i like ellen. saying ellen isn’t well regarded in the “community” is like saying we all get together at the gay discussion club to decide our opinions on gay celebrities.

  96. Bill Hicks is God says:

    Well, Ms. 91 aka “lipstick lesbian” you just lablelled yourself in hetero terminology so we know you’re not a flannel-wearing diesel.

    The Community I speak of has said this. They’re not happy about it and honestly, are you serious?

    No offense.

  97. mia says:

    I think likeable is the lesson he most missed in life (aside from using a good skin cream). We forgive and embrace based on like-ability (Anniston based her career on being someone you’d want to be friends with). He flopped early on in his success, his personality wasn’t appealing enough for him to come back from it. I feel sorry for him, blaming others for his failings.

  98. Bill Hicks is God says:

    p.s. If you don’t understand the “mainstreaming” of “homosexual culture” (there’s no such thing) then I can’t help you.

  99. nycmom10024 says:

    Wow has this post grown. There seem to be at least a few other present and former major studio employees responding on this post given the comments.

    For those of you just stating he is just bitter, I will say celeb A in my earlier post is Ellen and celeb B was Rosie. Before Ellen’s talk show launched “promises” were made to potential clients that she would not be as political as Rosie nor as “out” as Rosie. This was 8 years ago folks before Rosie was on the View.

  100. JenJen says:

    He doesn’t even look like the same person at all. His bitchiness is seeping out,probably hurting his action. Gay guys like to be happy :)

  101. tpass says:

    Jennifer keeps getting roles because she starts in low-budget comedies that bring money to the studios. Right now her total is 1.02 billion in the US alone. How much has Rupert Evert (who I had to google)movies made?

  102. Bill Hicks is God says:

    nycmom: !
    Thank-you.

  103. caramia says:

    How would that no lips, untalented same character in every film actress (using the term loosely) know what cool is? Unless she is talking about her arrogant erudite aura that exudes a cross between nausea and vacuousity?

  104. Anon says:

    @Cheyenne (and others): You can continue to believe what you like, but I will say this one last time…Aniston’s numbers (the actual numbers of her production budgets, box office takes and DVD/TV sales for her films) show a very different story from what you are trying to sell. You claim that most of her recent films have been “box office disasters” a claim that is simply not supported by actual data. Believe it as you might, it doesn’t make it true. Her last 6 films are Marley & Me, He’s Just Not That Into You, Management, Love Happens, The Bounty Hunter and The Switch. Of these, three were big box office sucesses, one was a modest success, one broke even/probably had minor profit after DVD/TV sales, and only one was a “box office disaster” based on the facts (Management). Three of them opened to more than $20 million. Very few other A listers have that track record – which is what makes her so bankable.

    “Aniston’s movies have been “bankable” because most of them are low-budget rom-coms that have managed to make money for the studio.”

    And your point is? A movie aims to make money – that is the intent as this is a business. Whether it is low-budget or not it still needs to make money and Aniston’s do. Many on the most bankable list are actors from big budget pictures – so it isn’t like those films can’t be money makers as well. My point was simply that she is able to remain in the top ten of actress salaries and in the top ten of most bankable actresses – so even where her films are lower budgets, her salary has still been high (outside of supporting or indie roles), and her pictures make money.

    “She still can’t get a studio to greenlight “Goree Girls” which has been on the storyboards for two years now.”

    Not sure what your point is here. The fact of this proves only two things: that she is like all other actors/actresses (even the so-called biggest ones) in that her pet projects take time in development (FYI: a couple of years is nothing in terms of film development); and that people/studios likely have more confidence in her in the rom-com roles – much like Cruise and Jolie with action flicks, or Witherspoon or Hudson with a rom-com.

  105. Eve says:

    Is it ok to call him a bitter queen just because we don’t like him? I’ll call him a bitter wrecked in the face loser, but being gay has nothing to do with this.

    @ Buckley:

    No, it’s not ok. And please, even though there are people here deffending that — by saying that in the context of his quotes (gay men in the business) it is somewhat justified to call him a “bitter queen” — I still don’t think it makes it right to do so.

    But, you know…he committed the ultimate sin that is saying something negative about Jennifer Aniston. And apparently you’re not supposed to do that. Ever. Even if you are, like he is now, right.

  106. Mizz Tickles says:

    Good points Anon and Tango :) And Rupert is beginning to look a lot like Mel Gibson.

  107. Sherise says:

    He’s right. She’s a horrible actress who can’t open a movie by herself. ANY movie where she’s the ONLY draw is terrible and does poorly. Management made 1 million, Love Happens tanked, and the Switch didn’t do well either. When it’s just Aniston, the movie fails to spark a fire. Even Heigl has done better than Aniston. But somehow Heigl is not yet a star, and Aniston is A-list? It boggles the mind. Aniston is more of a tabloid queen (thanks to Brad and her PR people) than anything else.

    And her fan base is seriously off their rockers. I can’t imagine worshipping the woman who uses vocab like “retard,” poses nude for attention like some Playboy model or reality star, and runs after trolls like John Mayer. Her fans have a stunning lack of taste. Or, they are delusional on some level, thinking she’s sweet innocent Rachel and not the gross women posing with her ass in the air for the paparazzi, while hanging out with c-bomb Chelsea Handler. Gross.

  108. bitingontinfoil says:

    “I think show business is ideally suited for heterosexuals, it’s a very heterosexual business, it’s run mostly by heterosexual men, and there’s a kind of pecking order.” BWAHAHAHAHA!!

    Yes, ’cause everyone knows Hollywood is run by straight goy men!

  109. LUCI LIU says:

    HE’S BITTER, BUT HE’S RIGHT ABOUT JENNIFER ANISTON. SHE IS AN AVERAGE ACTOR AT BEST. MUCH OF HER FAME COMES FROM BEING MARRIED TO, AND ULTIMATELY KICKED TO THE CURB BY BRAD PITT. OH YEAH, AND MOST OF HER MOVIES SUCK!

  110. Rosanna says:

    I’ve ALWAYS loved him – he just says it the way he sees it! Sometimes he blames his sexuality for his own shortcomings but I much rather listen to somebody like him than some “nice” actor, fake to the bone, who likes to pretend being actually smart.

  111. Canuck says:

    @Cheyenne

    The bankability rating has nothing to do with how much money she earns a year, residuals are irrelavent.

    It has to do with how much money her films make per dollar paid to her. I believe she was at $21 dollars back for every dollar she was paid.

  112. Amy says:

    I think you meant to write “blames his failed career on his sexuality” and not the other way around.

    Makes no sense the way that it’s written.

  113. Whatever says:

    I’m laughing so hard at the stubborn refusal to believe Jen makes money for the studios, even in light of actual numbers. The haters even ignore the fact that she is consistently listed as one of the top bankable stars in HW and that is why she continues to get work, NOT because of her ex. Hate is fine, but delusion and ignoring facts is not. Most of her movies do well. In fact, because they have lower budgets to begin with, the films often do better than a movie with a huge budget because there is a bigger gap to cover before profits are realized when a film has an astronomical budget. Math is not our enemy!

  114. lachica says:

    he’s right. Jen is clearly a part of the Follywood in-club. she will still be making those stupid romcoms when she’s Betty White’s age.

  115. chris says:

    This is the first interview I’ve ever read about him so maybe that’s why but it doesn’t sound that bad to me. It sounds like stuff I hear all the time.

  116. eja102 says:

    I’ve never hidden the fact I am gay, here or anywhere.
    His comments have nothing to do with his being gay, it’s his attitude.
    People like JA because she’s innocuous. She smiles, she’s polite in an interview. boring, but innocuous.

    and I laughed at the “bitter queen” comment.

    also, I had no idea Ellen was considered the “uncle tom” of my community. what community is that? it makes me wonder. It’s such a stupid comment, like there is some universal tribe of gay people. There’s not.

  117. kelly says:

    I think youve *framed* his remarks as super bitchy, but personally Im underwhelmed. As a gay veteran of that shitty industry with very little to lose, I was expecting him to name names; he should. And if you can’t see the laughably obvious bias against openly gay actors, I don’t know what to say about that.

    That said, I think ALL actors should strive to keep their shit private because they are in the business of constructing alternate realities; if they want people to suspend disbelief they should try to keep a clean slate personally. Not easy for some, but plenty manage it so it’s not impossible. If I were an actor I’d neither confirm nor deny and tell everyone who asked to butt the fuck out.

    As an actress, JA is a commercial and artistic failure. If she didn’t embody a feminine stereotype that’s obviously still so precious to so many women, she would have been yesterday’s fish and chip paper 10 years ago. Feel free to prove me wrong.

  118. Matt says:

    @ Bill Hicks, thanks – no drama at all, I realise that the posters on this site are pretty swtiched on (unlike other places)!

  119. Shay says:

    He is a bitch, a whinger and a bitter crone. However, he is not wrong about sexuality and its relation to a successful acting career – if that career is based on looks, that is. If Brad Pitt or Clooney came out (hypothetically, I’m not implying they are gay), their status as romantic icons for women would be over. Sure, women will say that this is rubbish now, but our attraction to leading men is largely unconscious. Once the perception (fantasy) of hetero availability is over, then it is over. Look at George Michael’s career. What happened to it after he came out? I remember a time when Rupert Everett was hailed as the next upcoming ‘idol’ in film and the thing is, no one will ever know, including Rupert, how this would have panned out, because he did come out during an era where homosexuality was not an ‘in’ thing for actors to openly admit to. And still, it isn’t. It tends to narrow down actors or typecast them. Look at Nathan Lane. Sure, he is no romantic idol, but he’ll always be limited to campy film roles.

    Even Richard Chamberlain has recently come forth to say that he came out later in life because he knew it would affect his career. Everyone who is anyone in power in Hollywood is aware of this, then as they are now. It is the reason why background stories are made up for actors (e.g. Rock Hudson).

    In response to a comment above about watching an actor or celebrity before they came out, compared to after, how it shouldn’t make a difference: it does. It’s an automatic reaction. One we are probably not even consciously aware of.
    Once you know someone is gay, then their appeal is diminished and that appeal is, whether women like it or not, based on some romantic ideal that is constructed early in life.

  120. mln76 says:

    I’m not going to bother to read the comments because I think this issue is bigger than the triangle, but I have to say I agree with Rupert and sometimes years of rejection can make you a bitter old hag. There still isn’t a famous openly gay man who has his own franchise for instance, and Neil Patrick Harris has a TV show and there have been other out TV stars sure. But its going to be a while before the big movie execs will take a risk on an out gay actor. As for the Aniston attacks he is probably unfair to single her out but I will say that her famousness irks people because she is so bland, it feels like she is famous because she is inoffensive and isn’t gay(that we know of), or of color, and has surgically removed all traces of ethnicity from her face. I can think of a dozen actresses of the same age group with triple the talent who aren’t getting the money or recognition that she does more than likely because they are “too ethnic”. To be fair though the same can be said for other so-called Alisters.

  121. eja102 says:

    @ 116

    How was he portraying the “gay community” is a nasty light?

    I don’t understand your comment.

    I don’t mean his choice of words. Do you really align yourself with other people simply based on being gay? I don’t, which is why I’m asking. The whole idea of the “gay community” makes no sense to me.

    lmao! as I am typing, #116 edited out what I was referring to. ah, well.

  122. Bopa says:

    He makes a valid point though. Aniston has made a lot of tanks at the box office in a row but somehow continues to get roles. She may be likeable but nobody is going to see her movies and last I checked the studios don’t count number of times someone watched one of her movies on Showtime or HBO.

    One thing that’s started to bother me about him though is he’s been looking crazy in all of his photos lately. He has this mad angry crazy looking glare. Did he get bad face work done.

  123. truthzbetta says:

    @ Cyui
    “The people who run Hollywood are old white men …not Jewish.”

    Huh? First of all, that is not a flattering depiction of another group, but anyway Jewish writers beg to differ.

    Predominantly Jewish businessmen started the Hollywood industry. It’s a proud heritage:

    “An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood”

    http://www.amazon.com/Empire-Their-Own-Invented-Hollywood/dp/0385265573

    A & E produced a whole documentary on the subject using the above book.

    And Joel Stein has a whole column about how American Jews are a dominant force in the industry today.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein19-2008dec19,0,4676183.column

    By the way, there certainly are numerous Jewish writers, directors and actors too. There’s Natalie Portman and writer/director Aronofsky up for Oscar buzz on this week’s threads alone.

    Why deny the hard work of people who’ve achieved much with a proud heritage and try to distort facts? Don’t accuse someone else of being anti-semitic for pointing out something factual. Especially since it’s a source of pride for other people.

    Chris Rock says all the time that the NBA roster is dominated by African American players with pride as well as an example of other points he wants to make. That’s not bad to say, the above facts are just facts too.

  124. Trippin says:

    He’s absolutely right. They keep putting Jennifer in flop after flop, while other actors/actresses only get to bomb once. She will always be a tv sitcom star in my mind not a Hollywood film star. And he’s right about the coming out part too liberal Hollywood is hypocritical. It still uses the DADT also.

  125. truthzbetta says:

    Back to the subject at hand, I thought coming out helped Everett’s visibility.

    I didn’t even notice him before because he wasn’t breakout star material in My Best Friend’s Wedding. He never drove a mega hit. When he came out suddenly he was besties with Madonna and someone regularly talked about everywhere.

    He screwed up great buzz by never doing breakout work afterward. He blew it himself.

  126. Dea says:

    Kudos to him for putting the truth out there. J Aniston is one of the worst actresses and a big liability for directors/producers who pay her outrageous fees when the movies are total flops. I wouldn’t go to see her and some other actors’ movies even for free. Movie industry should stop putting actors with no talent if they want to get nice profits in return.

  127. lisa says:

    I have to say.. I loved him in

    The Idea Husband.. beautiful man..

    But everyone has an opinion.. he gave his opinion. Some agree other not so much. but hey everyone has an opinion.

  128. Mel says:

    Wasn’t dear ole’ Rupert best friends with Madonna…do I need to say more.

    Its clear to me Rupert Everett and Joan Collins, who are good friends if I remember rightly, have been frequenting the celeb blogs and have realised Jen’s everybody’s favourite target.

    They can bitch and moan all they want but Jen’s the one taking home the money. Personally I think she’s one of the best comedic actresses around, her timing is perfect, but she could be more picky in the roles she goes for.

    And DEA – Jen’s not a liability, the movies flop because the writing is moronic not because ‘she can’t act’. At least stick to the facts.

  129. LittleDeadGirl says:

    He makes a lot good points but these aren’t points that people weren’t already aware of so it just comes off as whining and self pity, which, no one likes. I’m sure it has been hard for him but at the same time if he cared more about acting than he did money than I think he could keep working in maybe smaller budget films.

    He’s also a good looking guy. I kinda doubt that it’s been harder for him than someone like Paul Giamatti who doesn’t have classic good looks but has been in some wonderful films that I’ve loved. While I only know this guy from that boring Romcom … so. .. sorry … no pity from me …

  130. Robert says:

    Actually, JA is a gifted performer no matter how one would wish otherwise. She has nothing whatsoever to do with this actor’s perceived dilemma. However, the mere mention of her name does bring the loonies out. A slight trickle of blood and they swim to the surface like sharks.

  131. CB Rawks says:

    “Like Jennifer Aniston will just have one too many total flops. But she’s still a member of that club. And she will still manage to — like a star forming in the universe — a whole lot of things swirling around and suddenly solidifying into yet another vital tasteless romcom”

    That was awesome. :D And I agree totally.

  132. Trashaddict says:

    Jennifer Aniston has all the star quality of melted vanilla ice cream. Americans pay to see the same old formulaic crap at the movies, and that’s what the studios give them. Or remakes of old movies/TV series that just weren’t that good to begin with. It is so sad that well-written dialogue is so rare these days.
    It is also sad that posters here seem to be losing their ability to spell.

  133. garvels says:

    Rupert is 100% right on the money. A lead male actor who announces he is gay in Hollywood will not receive leading roles in major movies. He may get some TV work and stage work like Neal Patrick Harris but he will not receive roles like a Colin Firth or a Clive Owen. That is a fact. I like Rupert and I think he far surpasses Aniston in the talent department. I think what people are reading as jealousy is simply frustration and major regret. He regrets coming out because it has greatly affected and limited his role choices. I am sure his career would have taken a different path if he remained in the closet. If someone wants to watch a truly funny movie you should rent his movie “Unconditional Love”. The movie is hysterical and also features Catherine Bates.

  134. nnn says:

    I think what he is trying to say in an undiplomatic and blunt way is that unlike him who is intrinsincally superior to Aniston talent wise, jennifer enjoys a status that isn’t matched by her quality of work or huge bankability.

    In a way he is right but Anon is also right. jennifer’s perceived bombs are overblown and nothing like compared to other actresses like i mentioned before : Charlize who is never blamed for it and often praised and asked by fans to replace others in projects when her bankability is as dry as a razor blade.

    As for Rupert, i sense more bitterness and frustration than jealousy. He basicly don’t like the double standard he perceives in the different treatment of celebrities rending the same crap.

    But again, that’s life. Nothing is really fair.

    For his sake, he should get over it and concentrate on regrouping his energy, gaining a more positive attitude and marketing himself to attract good projects.

    Oh and if he wants to talk about what’s unfair, he unlike jennifer has more options to find more interesting roles at 50′s than jennifer or any actress (hello Michelle Pfeiffer !) even talented would. So he should take his chances for being a male (even if he is gay) in that industry, stop whining (such a femalish behaviour) and get those projects in par with his talent.

  135. Kiska says:

    A bit part of show business is about making connections; working well with others; and plain old “schmoozing” If he acts like a jerk then he better be an A-list actor otherwise the phone won’t be ringing.

  136. Matt says:

    @eja, my original point was that Rupert Everett reinforces a lot of negative gay stereotypes when he spouts off all this bitter ‘the world is against me because I am gay’ crap.

    I definitely don’t align myself with other people purely because they are gay. That would be really stupid and I don’t remember my unedited comment saying anything remotely like that.

    It’s great that a non jolie story has had so many comments!

  137. Minx2 says:

    I think he used JA as an example of someone who’s continuing exposure is not backed by talent or box office results. Let’s face it: if not for her marrige to Brad Pitt and subsequent “triangle” drama, Jennifer would be where Lisa Kudrow and Courtney Cox are today- aging, former TV stars who got extremely lucky with a hugely successful sitcom. She’s propelled not by her own accomplishments but by hordes of females who identify with her “average girl gets famous, marries a Star and gets husband ‘stolen’ by a femme fatale”. For the record: to me, JA is shallow, self-centered and massively insecure, which makes her not very attractive despite her great body and hair ;) . I think that RE just wanted to make a point that success in HW has nothing to do with actor’s talent or accomplishments.

  138. Minx2 says:

    I add that Charlize Theron or Nicole Kidman may not have much box office success but they’re perceived as being talented (Oscars!) and making serious movies, whereas Jennifer Aniston makes fluff in which she always plays the same role over and over again. Maybe this is why her exposure and A+ list status seem unfair and undeserved.

  139. FRED says:

    . I haven’t gone to see anything with her headlining bc I’m tired of her grabbing her stomach, fixing her hair, turning around mechanically, scratching her head, or putting her hands on her hips. It’s all she does!

  140. eja102 says:

    @ 138

    I can’t read your name, sorry.

    thanks for clarifying. I must have misunderstood when you wrote “as a member of both groups (british and gay)”

    obviously not verbatim, the post is gone.

    I disagree. I don’t think anyone pays much attention to his words on the whole, which is why he is trying to garner attention at this point. I do not think he perpetuates any stereotype.

  141. Sandy says:

    @Lindsay
    OH LOOK. ANOTHER NOVELLA. NO ONE CARES. YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING.

  142. skibunny says:

    93.Cyui:
    December 29th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
    Last time I checked Jews have dark features.

    That comment is ridiculous! I have two Jewish friends who have red hair and blue eyes, like me. I’m not Jewish.

  143. mln76 says:

    @ 124 Jewish people may have contributed ALOT behind the scenes however Jewish actors have for the most part had to make themselves more white-washed in order to succeed whether changing their names, or getting rid of their Semetic features. I have heard numerous Jewish performers say they were told by execs that they were “too ethnic”. Hollywood still favors the middle american wonderbread ideal.

  144. what? says:

    its amazing how you ignored all the truthful things he said about women being slut-shamed in the industry, but i wouldnt expect anything less from you kaiser, you seem to like mysogynists.

  145. Dorrie says:

    Minx 2:

    According to you, Aniston’s success is soley based on the “average girl gets famous, marries a Star and gets husband ’stolen’ by a femme fatale” angle. I think you are confusing the obsessions of the gossip world with what people care about in the actual world. People like innocuous entertainment, and she provides it; they don’t go to her movies because the ex “done her wrong.” If movie audiences behaved like this, Robin Wright Penn would be the biggest deal in Hollywood.

  146. Shay says:

    Cyui,
    I don’t get your point. Almost every film producer credit on many a big box office film is Jewish. You don’t have to read articles to know that. It’s quite obvious and so what?
    The way I see it, it’s about who gets in first and who makes a go of it, whatever their ethnic identity.
    But what is peeving me off is how Aniston is singled out.
    Um excuse me, but what about other male actors who are mediocre? What about Gerard Butler? He is the male version of Aniston. Looks good in a film and that is about it. Theatrically/Dramatically limited in terms of acting.
    What about Nicole Kidman? She has been using Meg Ryan as a model for years yet no one says anything. She reached her use by date for romcoms and there was nothing else to put her in. Mediocre? Uber mediocre.
    There are plenty of mediocre actors in Hollywood today as there were in the 30s.
    I can name others who play the same role all the time:
    Sara Jessica Parker.
    Bradley Cooper
    Cameron Diaz

    Despite their films earning, they are mediocre as actors. They play the same role most of the time.

  147. Liana says:

    @kelly: “I think ALL actors should strive to keep their shit private because they are in the business of constructing alternate realities; if they want people to suspend disbelief they should try to keep a clean slate personally. Not easy for some, but plenty manage it so it’s not impossible. If I were an actor I’d neither confirm nor deny and tell everyone who asked to butt the fuck out.”
    *************

    Yes to this. All of it.

  148. Camille says:

    @ nnn and Minx2: Excellent comments. :)

  149. Allison says:

    @Minx 2. Totally AGREE with your assessment. Average people relate
    to Aniston because they see her as the girl-next-door and not the Hollywood manipulator that she is. She’s always using the press to get her name out there and remind people of her plight.
    Just this year, she did that People magazine interview titled, “Jen; 5 years after Brad! Fun, Flirty and 41!”
    I’m sorry but using your ex’s name to stay in the spotlight is pretty trashy.
    Most respected actresses don’t do that.
    I NEVER saw Robin Wright Penn doing
    a Boo-hoo, poor me interview like Aniston did for Vanity Fair. For that interview, Aniston cried on cue, got her friends to show up and bash her ex,
    and then did a semi-nude photo shoot.
    She pulled out all the stops, showing how manipulative she truly is. She’s a famewhore through and through. Her talents is using her sad love life to get people to feel sorry for her and the fact that her fans STILL buy her BS is amazing. I stopped feeling sorry for her right after that interview.

  150. Lindsay says:

    Anon – Thank you I like reading your posts too!

    Mimi- Seinfeld was off the air before the Friends cast got their million dollar salaries. Also Ray Romano and Jerry Seinfeld help produce, write, and create their shows so it isn’t an even comparison.

    Sandy- I am not going to take advice on comment board decorum from someone who types in all caps. I am not the only one here that wrote a long post. I can see how someone who only reads picture books and tabloids would confuse a few factual paragraphs with a 70+ page fictional narrative. Post on the content of the article or the content of another comment or don’t post at all. If you “don’t care” don’t read like I will be doing from now on with your comments.

  151. Larissa says:

    Do anyone EVER considered that romcom´s are not Oscar material???
    Which doesn´t mean they FLOPPED, the numbers are just not the same as in big production blockbusters.
    So yes, Jennifer Aniston is just a mediocre actress like many other working actors out there and she fits perfectly in that romcom category, that´s why she gets to stay on the top of her game, money and career wise.

  152. mia says:

    I think Rupert is right about some things. But the fact is the English don’t seem to be doing many films. I wish they would do more like ‘Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels’ or Cold Comfort Farm or Gosford Park.
    The English are brilliant!!

  153. Whatever says:

    Not that I expect this to matter to the Jen haters, but those who think she is a ‘failure’ and her movies are all ‘flops’ need to check this out.

    http://www.popeater.com/2010/12/30/jennifer-aniston-career-rupert-everett-box-office/

    I know, its that pesky math again, getting in the way of spreading the hate and BS, but suck this Rupert.

  154. Anon says:

    LOL @Whatever! I saw that article yesterday and all I could think was Finally! It’s about time the celeb media reports accurately where it comes to Aniston. I know it likes to paint her as this sad, pathetic woman, but it’s getting more and more ridiculous the longer she is hired and in demand professionally and looking happy, healthy and glowing.

  155. Thea says:

    OK Rupert, life’s unfair, but why compare yourself to a woman? Why not compare yourself male actors who faded out at 50?

    Jennifer Aniston hasn’t beaten you out of any roles – nor has Betty White (so far)

  156. Gramma2one says:

    Hey Hugh….bitter much?

  157. Kurt says:

    Give Rupert a break. He is allowed to speak his mind. I didn’t find him whiny as much as honest. I’ve totally enjoyed his films and do regret that he hasn’t been in more of them. We all evaluate our careers as we grow older. We all aren’t under public scrutiny as we consider that possibly our careers could have been different “if only”. May the first among you who is totally satisfied with their entire career give rupert a big break. I can only guess that he enjoyed a much happier life in general by being able to be honest. He will always remain one of my favorite celebrities.

  158. Dea says:

    It is not uncool what Rupert said – it is the obvious truth. If JA or her PR people reads all these comments and thousands out there published after what Rupert said, she should take it as a constructive criticism and not a jealousy on Rubert’s side. A comment from Rupert is just one comment. But there are thousands of comments out there from people who responded to what Rupert said and so many agree with him. Are these people jealous of JA? I do not think so. They are people like me who love to go to theater and see a great performance from someone that gets paid millions of dollars for a movie. I want my $10 to be worthy, period! So as an author you shouldn’t be angry with Rupert otherwise you are angry with thousands of audience out there who agree with Rupert just to protect JA. JA should do something to change the perception of a bad/average or average actress by changing the type of roles she plays and work on her performance. The fact is that with the exception of Friends all her movies are completely forgettable.

  159. Mikunda says:

    @Minx2- completely agree with you. I am tired of seeing these JAs everywhere in life. How do they do that? I guess it’s a gift to be able to float so well despite the massive incompetence…

  160. Laura says:

    Aniston is a horrible actress. I would rather watch Heigl or Hudson than her.
    And I really can’t stand either of the H’s. All these fake blonde cute-sy actresses are really talentless. They are Meg Ryan copies anyways. If it wasn’t for her ex, and keeping the association with him alive thanks to her good buddy, Chelsea Handler, no one would be saying anything about Aniston at all. Sad–because Aniston released a statement that she’s spending the holidays with Courtney Cox to People magazine. Last year, she released a statement that she spent the holidays with Cox, too. Jeez, how pathetic and famewhorish. Why don’t you spend time
    with your family, you self-abosorbed narcissist? She uses her friends for the fame and the attention, just like she used Brad all those years. But he wised up to the famewhore and moved on just like every guy does.

  161. animac says:

    i dont mind what he says – its his opinion anyway. i would just want to state my opinion: he is a very limited actor and into every role he comes out as sleazy fag overshadowing every role its given to him. i am just amazed he is so lucky to have had a supporting role or two.

  162. Anna says:

    Sorry, Rupert. Love ya work, but it’s the unflattering plastic surgery, not the gayness, that’s turning fans off.

  163. Shen says:

    Although my comment will no doubt be in the minority, I must agree with Rupert’s comments. He makes very valid points, especially on Jenniffer Aniston as an actress. She is awful, all if her movies are flops and yet Hollywood continues to to place her in movies. Yes, she may have been good on Frienda, but she had a cast of co-stars to prop her up. She is an awful actress, period. Kudos to Rupert for saying what needs to be said, and not for pandering to public opinion.