Jennifer Aniston’s ‘Wanderlust’ bombed, only made $6.6 million

Usually when the words “Jennifer Aniston” and “bombed” appear in the same sentence, it’s about how Aniston drunkenly slurred her way through some interview or appearance or Mexican vacation. But today we must discuss another kind of “bombed” – the kind that is so bad, a Nicolas Cage SEQUEL beats you (in its second week!). After promoting Wanderlust for weeks, on multiple magazine covers and in several television appearances, Jennifer Aniston’s latest leading-lady turn flopped in a huge way. This wasn’t some barely-promoted independent film – the studio spread out a lot of money on commercials and ads. How bad was it? Wanderlust opening weekend = $6.6 million. It came in #8 in the top ten films of the weekend. Rough.

Her love life may be hotter than ever, but Jennifer Aniston’s career appears to be at a standstill. The actress’ new movie Wanderlust tanked in its opening weekend, debuting at No. 8 with $6.6 million. The film, which also stars her real-life love Justin Theroux, reunited Aniston, 43, with her longtime pal Paul Rudd, 42, her costar in 1998′s The Object of My Affection.

Aniston hasn’t had a No. 1 box office debut since her appearance in the 2009 ensemble rom-com He’s Just Not That Into You.

Box office revenue was up more than 25 perfect from the previous year, with Act of Valor — featuring real-life Navy SEALS — taking the top spot with a $24.7 million opening.

Tyler Perry’s Good Deeds, costarring Gabrielle Union and Thandie Newton, debuted in No. 2 with $16 million.

Journey 2: The Mysterious Island came in third with $13.5 million, Safe House finished in fourth with $11.4 million and The Vow rounded out the top five with $10 million.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance earned $8.8 million for a sixth place finish, while Reese Witherspoon’s This Means War (No. 7) earned $8.5 million in its second weekend.

The weekend’s other new release, the Amanda Seyfried-led Gone, took in measly $5 million and debuted in ninth place. The film also stars Sebastian Stan, Jennifer Carpenter, Daniel Sunjata and Wes Bentley. Disney’s animated film The Secret World of Arrietty took in $4.5 million for 10th place finish, bringing its two-week total to $14.7 million.

[From Us Weekly]

This surprised even me – I’d seen several of the bad reviews of the film, but really, when does that ever matter to Aniston’s fans? So many of her films are critically panned, but her fans still show up for the most part. So what went wrong here? Do people not want to see the film where she and Justin Theroux got together? Did all of the threats/promises of nudity not help at all? Were Justin’s bangs of doom a harbinger of things to come? Is Paul Rudd simply not enough of a “star” to carry this film alongside Aniston? Bedhead and I think that might be it, actually. Aniston’s films always do better when she’s paired with a recognizable and popular leading man. Not enough people were interested in seeing “a Paul Rudd movie” even though it was being billed as “A Jennifer Aniston Movie with Paul Rudd.” I’m not trying to say that Aniston should hang up her acting spurs – at all. But she simply has more success when she’s playing second-fiddle to a charismatic and well-known leading man, or when she’s part of an ensemble. This whole “Jennifer Aniston is a lead actress who can carry a film” idea needs to go away.

Oh, well. At least we know why Angelina was so giggly at the Oscars now. And since it’s all about the comparisons, remember when The Tourist tanked (in the middle of December when half the country was under feet of snow)? The Tourist opened that weekend at #2 with $16.5 million and went on to make $240 million worldwide. And remember how everyone howled about that FLOP? I’m just saying.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

 

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

179 Responses to “Jennifer Aniston’s ‘Wanderlust’ bombed, only made $6.6 million”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. pheonix says:

    Will whoever in Hollywood who keeps giving her rom com vehicles stop?! She’s so boring in them anyway. She should take on a dramatic role and get an acting coach.

    • Maguita says:

      I think that is the problem. It was not a romcom.

      It was a plain out Comedy, featuring an ensemble cast, with a lot of naked people flopping around.

      But that is the problem also when you keep on putting out bad movies; The moment you put out a half-decent one, with not-so-bad critics (for a comedy, it was very well received by critics generally in comparison to other romcoms and comedies out this year), and it bombs. That is why you should pace yourself and accept only worthy projects. Not simply do movies, for the sake of keeping busy.

      • Kelly says:

        Right, I agree. But it felt like they were marketing it as a JA romcom, instead of an ensemble comedy from a bunch of improv folks from The State, Wet Hot American Summer, etc. (and JA is there as well!), which is how it probably should have been marketed.

        Instead, we got JA talking about boobsicles or whatever and trying to build all the buzz around her relationship with JT (Mr. and Mrs. Smithing it).

      • Harry says:

        The nudity is removed. JA topless scene is so blurred you can’t hardly see her face why are people acting like there’s lot of nudity when there isn’t. It is more like free spirited naturists clothed all the time except the guy wearing a fake penis that looks real you see blocked out most of the time. The movie bombed cause the producers were spineless and catered to JA instead of making a movie.

    • Darla says:

      She’s Boring! Every movie she makes(just like witherspoon and Jolie)she beds the guy in real life. I don’t want to see that cr___. Guys please stay away from her.It will hurt your careers. Only thing I could tolerate her in was ‘Good Girl”.
      She constant;y plays with hair next to face, rolls her eyes and does stupid expressions with her mouth. Yuk.
      Jennifer- challenge yourself. Study Sheakespeare. Do something difficult or retire with all your money.

  2. whatthehell456 says:

    Bwahahahahaha *cough choke gasp* Bahahahahahahahahaha!

    • Carolyn says:

      yes. She should be on the Razzies list. Very average actress who’s sole point of interest is that Brad left her. Zzz.. I wouldn’t see anything she’s in.

    • Sarah says:

      Why does Celebitchy and most of its visitors hate Jennifer Aniston so much? A flop or bomb is a movie that makes a very low amount of money against a big budget. It has to be said that Wanderlust’s budget was relatively small and would likely be recouped domestically. Plus international gross and dvd blu-ray sales? Don’t call it a flop and don’t be so mean with people you are CLEARLY jelous of.

      • dede says:

        the movie cost 35mil to make so to just break even it needs to make 70mil..check Aniston and Rudd movies they dont make 70mil WW unless Aniston is paired with a popular male co-star..Cinemascore was low as well which means the audience isnt even feeling it..it will be lucky to make 20mil domestically

      • Samantha says:

        Personally, I don’t hate or even dislike Jennifer Aniston. The thing is, all the hype around her is completely unwarranted. She’s not a great actress. She hasn’t made any truly good movies (aside from Office Space–and one decent movie in an entire career?). But she’s continually pushed as this BIG HUGE THING.

        Please. She’s a TV star. There’s nothing wrong with that–television has become more inventive and entertaining than movies recently anyway. But stop trying to push her as a movie star when she’s just not.

      • legofdoom says:

        dede – JA’s mainstream movies have at least $30-40M marketing on top of the film budget. Theatres take 50% of the total money (not the profit), so to break even this film needs to make at least $140M (if we’re going with $35M marketing which is standard for a mainstream romcom/comedy).

        No way this turkey is recovering costs…Considering how much a financial drain JA consistently is (when she is selling a film) i honestly don’t know why anyone in hollywood is giving her lead roles. Or secondary roles for that matter.
        She has got to be the biggest waste of money in the entertainment industry – the films she makes are solely to made make money, they are not made as works of art or even for the viewers pleasure. They are meant to be easy/reliable $$$ films so the producers etc can throw money at oscar bait/financial gamble films.

        Thank f#ck her lifestyle/karma is starting to majorly show on her face, so this madness will end (lets face it, she’s been running on borrowed time for several years when it comes to girl-next-door roles).

      • aprayerforthewildatheart says:

        Sarah
        So what if people are saying Wanderlust tanked it’s not a personal attack on Jen, she did her part to promote it. Why wasn’t Rudd promoting his own film? And why was it left up to JA, and her boyfriend? Nobody even knows who JT is unless he’s wearing a Mr. Aniston t-shirt. WTF were they thinking?

        Public opinion is based on opening BO, you think people should wait until all sales are accounted for before they call it a bomb, why? As far as the public’s concerned, it’s a bomb.

        I heard it’s not even that funny, and it’s a comedy. Jen picks bad roles in low budget films, but she’s getting paid so I doubt she’s too concerned. Why are you angry, and calling people jealous for stating their opinions?

  3. Bite me says:

    Whatever… Bitch is still wining ;)

    • YokoDMV says:

      i mean if you call winning JA finally finding the man that loves spray-tans, botox, and hair dye more than she does…then yes, she is indeed winning.

      • OriginalTiffany says:

        Totally, They are both matching oomph-loopma orange status.
        Saw Just go with it last week on the 13 hour flight. It was awful. Glad it was free. And really, since I left at 4:30 pm and landed at 8pm, I actually didn’t lose those hours of my life. Ja just took up 2 “bonus hours”. Haha. Would NOT pay to see her in any movie. No redeeming acting qualities, same expressions and body language in every film. Rachel all the time. No thanks.
        And BTW, look how chunky her arms are here, that shoot with Rudd was SO photoshopped to death!

      • Maya says:

        Yoko, you think Brad Pitt doesn’t dye his hair and have facial treatments to maintain a youthful look (with all his smoking?). What about Tom Cruise and all his enhancements? There are few actors in Hollywood who don’t use botox and hair dye to cover up the grey hair. Once a person reaches their late thirties, they begin to grey. That’s an unavoidable fact.

      • Rosalee says:

        Considering Jolie is the biggest joke out of the Oscars I’d rather be Aniston..smile and wave Jenny..just smile and wave.

      • Emma says:

        Really? The guys who “mocked” Jolie called her “supremely hot”….plus the Oscars 2012, being very boring and panned by critics, is now remembered for Angelina Jolie, who wasn’t even nominated…she totally stole the show (although I agree not in a good way because it shouldn’t have been about her)

      • ZenB!tch says:

        This is to @Maya. Of course Brad Pitt maintains. He and Goop and he and JA used to go for his and hers spa treatments. I just saw Moneyball. He is not toxed. His 47 year old flag was waving but his maintenance – hair, nails, teeth was perfection.

        Justin is who we are talking about here not Jen, correct? Justin’s dye looks fake I have very dark auburn hair VERY DARK and even DARKER eye brows. Black eye brows don’t scream “DYED” like his. Black dye = goth Orange skin = The speaker of the House. What kind of message is he sending. Brad and JA are saying, I want to look as good as I can at 40something. I will blast, scrub, laser, bleach and I will do it over and over again. Justin is saying I B WEIRD N CREEPY

        Actually, it’s not a fact that late 30s = gray. Early-mid 40s here and I have one gray hair.

    • Jill says:

      “wining” = winning or whining? She does more of the latter.

    • Barley says:

      On what planet? She is losing.

  4. rissa says:

    it got decent reviews. ill wait to rent it tho :)

  5. Esmom says:

    Who has she been paired with that’s a much bigger name than Paul Rudd? The co-stars who come to mind are V. Vaughn, G. Butler, O. Wilson, B. Stiller. Are those guys bigger than Rudd? They seem to be in about the same league to me.

  6. samanthalous says:

    look its Angelina’s leg again

  7. HotPockets says:

    I thought it looked cute and it did get decent reviews. I don’t hate Aniston as an actress, I did enjoy the good girl and friends with money, and of course office space.

  8. Nev says:

    I saw it…it was realllllllly silly and stupid…but sooooooooo funny in parts.

  9. cbear says:

    I thought surely 3 movies ago, when it became clear that she could not carry a movie and didn’t bring the crowds in, that she’d stop getting these leading roles. Yet, here she is again – will this movie finally give H’Wood a clue?

  10. Samigirl says:

    My husband and I saw it. He LOVES JA. It wasn’t terrible. It was kind of…obvious, I guess. Paul Rudd was adorable. JA was ok. I’d give it a 5. It wasn’t the best movie I’ve ever seen, but it was good for a laugh.

  11. nikzilla37 says:

    What is up with Theroux’s face? Spray tan & botox cocktail? This Jersey Shore look everyone’s sporting lately has got to go.

    • Marjalane says:

      Her movie probably would have done better if she hadn’t kept trotting out her freaky boyfriend! The latest pics of him in his spray tan and make up just gross me out. I think he might be spraying Emeril Lagasse sprayhair on his bald spot as well!

      • Lucy says:

        OMG, I was gonna say the same thing! It reminds me of when Kramer got the butter tan! He is 3 years younger than JA and Paul Rudd and looks older than both. He really seems to be getting wrapped up in the hollywood phony shit really fast, doesn’t he?? His skin looks like a rotisserie chicken. I really used to like him…putz.

  12. the original bellaluna says:

    It’ll probably make more on DVD. The previews I saw looked funny. I’ll watch it…on DVD or Dish.

  13. G says:

    JA’s fans just don’t seem to buy movie tickets. She’s got no box office.

    Maybe this has a silver lining and this will make the decision for her to move on to TV or some other kind of project.

  14. UKHels says:

    I get bad vibes off that Theroux dude

  15. samanthalous says:

    Ill give it to Jen she buys the rights to books and has movies made, its the best way she can stay in the game cause her movies just suck.

  16. Kim says:

    I would think weekend of Oscars a really bad time to release a film since people rushing to see the Oscar nominated movies they had yet to see.

    This movie does look awful though. Am I the only person who doesnt find Paul Rudd funny at all? And gee let me guess Jennifer will be same character she is in every movie – another bad variation of Rachel.

    Justin has got to stop fake tanning. He looks like an oompa loompa.

    • Kimlee says:

      Not true ” Act of Valor ” 24.7M and Tyler Perry movie made 16M hell even Resse movie made more than “Wanderlust” and this was its second week. So the Oscar’s has nothing to do with it or all the movies would have made way less than what they did.

      Like I and other said this was a DVD rent type of movie.

  17. alex says:

    I feel you…but the name of the site is celeBITCHY. What did you really expect?

  18. Rhiley says:

    I love Paul Rudd but he picks some dumb movies. He is so cute though it is kind of a shame. The last movie I saw him in was that horrible movie with Reese Witherspoon (that also flopped). Let me pose the question, though, why don’t we ever talk about men who are losing their star power: Paul Rudd’s movies are never hits, Johnny Depp films seem to flop in the US, and Ben Stiller’s career seems as stale as old bread.

  19. Jackie says:

    ya, she can play the girlfriend of a high profile comedian in a movie, but i really think she should go back to tv.

    she is a very good fit for sitcoms on the big tv networks. she has a general broad appeal that works for that medium.

  20. Ogechi says:

    I must confess that Angelina Jolie is no better actress than Jennifer Aniston. I think Angy Should do something with her body because she looks sick. Jen always wins.

  21. skuddles says:

    I haven’t seen the movie (and don’t plan to) but a friend did and said it’s pretty dumb and predictable – so no surprise it bombed. I think people are bored to death with Aniston’s ditzy persona.

  22. I.want.shoes says:

    I don’t hate JA as a TV actress. She’s just not movie actress material. Unless you consider every single one of her movies as a 2-hr long episode of “Rachel tries to trick someone into getting her pregnant”, “Rachel gets a Labrador puppy”, etc.

    • Sue L. says:

      This is exactly what I was going to write. TV seems to be her medium – she has had enough time and opportunity to try and make a mark in the film industry and I don’t think she has it. She needs to reconsider TV – a lot of big name movie actors are have done projects on various specialty networks, e.g. Kate Winslet in Mildred Pierce.

  23. Hypocricy says:

    I don’t think she is as bad as people say she is in her typical roles. The problem is, she is NOT a lead actress and is strictly fit for supportive roles.

    She needs a strong A list lead who can carry the bulk of the movie (or a great movie that sells itself whoever stars in it) on his/her name she can support, which she does very well.

    It’s a question of persona, some people have a powerful charsima and take all the light. Julia Roberts had it even if she wasn’t the most beautiful one, hence she overshadowed Richard Gere himself in “Pretty Woman” You just have it or not.

    In that movie there were no strong A list lead to do that, they all are typical supportive type of actors, hence it bombs like it did 99 % under the same circumstances and sames conditions.

    And Kaiser, The TOURIST didn’t reach 240 millions worldwide, more like 278+ millions.

    I also like to point out that Gina Carano’s Haywire which i absolutely adore, but was dubbed as a serious contender for Jolie didn’t even reach 20 millions domestically. The only female star able to pull 100 millions non 3 did action movie is Jolie. Considering that there have been a string of female action stars during the last year (Gina, Zoe,), it’s reay compelling that unlike you are called Jolie, people won’t follow your action movie. Same can be say for many males too, Jason Statham anyone ?

  24. Tuppiv says:

    This actually makes me kinda sad. Idgaf about Jen, but I LOVE David Wain. Everything that man touches is gold, imo. I really wanted this to be big for him.

  25. Noel says:

    I do not understand Jennifer Aniston’s appeal. She is average looking even with tons of plastic surgery, sounds like a 70 year old who has smoked three packs of cigarettes a day, cannot act, is not funny, and is boring. There is no actress in Hollywood worse that her!

  26. dorothy says:

    Honestly I think people like Meg Ryan, Jennifer Anniston and Reese Witherspoon have an expiration point on the amount of chick-flick movies they can do. Look at won at the Oscar’s. People are tired of that and want something with substance. God knows after seeing the crap on TV, ie, Kardashians, RHOBH we are craving real entertainment.

  27. Enn says:

    She needs to go back to TV, and try for a couple small independent film roles – The Good Girl was one of the best performances of her career, if not THE best.

  28. Maria says:

    I agree with the charisma post. It’s not only that Jennifer is average looking at best, it is just that she doesn’t have that ‘it’ factor..she is flat…she doesn’t have that spark. Case in point, Emma Stone. She is pretty, not gorgeous..but there is just something about her that draws you in. Angelina has both, IMO, the looks and this charisma..i think the two together is rare.

    • Hypocricy says:

      it’s really a question of charisma more than physique and comedy is not as easy, you need to create a typical character, your physique is secondary in that form of art, which is something Jennifer has forgotten.

      She wants to focus on the sexy pin up weak character while forgetting to forge a comedic character that will past the test of time.

      There hasn’t been an A list female comedian with a huge charisma since…Whoopi Goldberg.

      And look how she looks…yet just her name was able to move millions of viewers all over the world to see her movie.

  29. NM6804 says:

    I feel bad for Rudd, he deserves a hit. And please, I know you like to show the bad pictures of Theroux and I’m fine with that, it’s funny, but don’t ruin Rudd’s photo with it. He hasn’t done anything wrong, the poor thing :( .

    Oh well, in the end they are getting paid anyway! I’m sure a few millions can ease their pain :D

    Anyway, the studios should stop giving Aniston leads, it’s a waste of money and her M.O. is getting tiring. Why did she get a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame again? Hacks…
    I will download the film…for Rudd.

    Jolie was giggly because she was on something (booze?), for all the talk about how Jolie doesn’t care (because she’s the secure one right, her RightLeg disagrees :D ) we like to point out the “victories” of both ladies when something bad happens to either of them. And let’s definitely NOT talk about the flop B&H, that’s off limits because it’s “art”…

    • luce says:

      she was happy because she wanted to have fun.
      she works hard to promote her movie in Europe : los angeles-allemagne-sarayevo-paris-zagreb-paris-los angeles
      lot of press conference and premieres
      lot of pressure because her movie is controversial, intense and hard to watch. Angelina is a strong woman, she always surprises me.
      Go Angie..and please eat something.

    • toto says:

      so transparent more than you can imagine..

      • NM6804 says:

        @toto: What? You’re weird…

        @luce: So basically you’re excusing her because she failed to do her job correctly? How long did her presentation last? 5min tops? She can be professional at all those premiers, after all that traveling and political debates but can’t pull 5min. of concentrating on honoring her peers?! Selfish or insecure?

        Oh and you’re contradicting yourself: first she wants to have fun/happy and then she is under stress? Girl was nervous, drank too much, flubbed and we are supposed to kiss her a* because her name is Jolie? No thanks. She was the odd duck the whole evening. Oh and disagree on her being a strong woman, her facade broke down more than a little yesterday.

      • Katherine says:

        “she failed to do her job correctly?”

        Bwahahaha. What are you smoking?

      • NM6804 says:

        The same thing Jolie smoked before the Oscars :D , I’m Jolie’ing right now ;)

      • legofdoom says:

        NM6804 – considering the fact Aniston has been drunk/flubbed her lines during every presentation job (and pretty much every public appearance) for the past few years i wouldn’t play fast and loose with your apparent scorn. Though i forgot, TheAnis poops rainbows and can never be wrong (even when she is), right? Ahh i’ve got to get me logic just like that :”’D

  30. shontay says:

    Most of Aniston’s fans cling to her because of friends or because she’s relatable and evil brangelina tortures her existence. They don’t support her with their money because even they know she’s just a sitcom actress who got a fancy haircut and tried to make it big without the actual talent.

    I feel bad for Paul Rudd because he’s very talented but gets stuck in crap like this.

  31. Photo lab says:

    This was by no means a success, but the movie’s per screen average was not terrible. Wanderlust had a third less screens than almost every other movie (about 3000:2000). It’s definitely a sign that the studio didn’t have faith in it, though.

    Saw the flick this weekend (first Movie with Aniston thay i’d paid for in years), and it was s fairly diverting 90 minutes. But I noticed that it was considerably neutered from the script that’s available online, which is actually is much more riske. I hope Wain puts together a durector’s cut on the DVD. And it’s too bad this probably spells doom for a Wet Hot American Summer sequel.

    • Emma says:

      Studios based on advanced screening and reviews and testing determine the number of theaters a movie opens in…so Jennifer’s movie was predicted to do badly so it was shown in less theaters. The low box office is not caused by low theater count…the low theater count is caused by the fact that it was predicted to do badly.

  32. kd sunshine says:

    J.A. is an OK actress that has had a couple of movies that showed real talent. The Good Girl from several years ago. What she needs is a good movie, great director and get away from these same old movies over and over.
    Say whatever you want about her—she has a magnificent body and beautiful eyes. Is she gorgeous, no but she
    does have appeal to a great many people both sexes.

    • Emma says:

      Kind of agree….except it’s an actor/actress’ job to do the acting him/herself. A great director definitely helps, but the acting skills come from the actor alone…if he/she lacks in this, there’s nothing a great director can do…plus most great directors aren’t interested in casting JA

      Also, she does has a fabulous body…but she’s never had kids and her lifestyle is very free, so she can work out a lot. But she definitely (while not gorgeous) has a lot of appeal…I find her bland and “dumb” sometimes, but she’s also very endearing and seems very open, innocent, which is charming…but she lacks charisma, something that Emma Stone and Julia Roberts have.

      • Dees says:

        Agree with you wholeheartedly. Has Woody Allen/Oliver Stone/Clint Eastwood/Martin Scorsese lined up to cast Aniston? No right? Jen is so obviously desperate to be seen as the sexy girl next door ingenue/starlet but she’s damn too old to be playing the part, so it gets annoying

  33. Agnes says:

    good. maybe at some point she will stop “acting”. (please do stop “acting”.)

  34. Jill says:

    Oh come on, now, that’s just mean. Whatever the reason Angie was so giggly at the Oscars, I’m sure it wasn’t because of Aniston’s movie tanking. I don’t think she cares about Aniston or her movies one way or the other. They are two totally different audiences.

    • Agnes says:

      yeah… i somehow don’t think that angelina gives a crap either way. she appears to have a busy, full life, has a large family that prob occupies her time. i’m not a fan of either woman, really, but it seems like jennifer needs to stop her pathetic trolling for sympathy.

  35. Mac says:

    Aniston to take on dramatic role next.

    Jennifer Aniston has just signed on to star in a film that Deadline is already deeming her take on the classic friendship drama “Beaches” (remember that one? the Bette Midler- and Barbara Hershey-starring sobfest?).

    The film is called “Miss You Already” and it centers on “a pair of lifelong best friends whose relationship gets torn to bits when one becomes pregnant and the other sick.”

    It’s not known yet which friend Aniston will play (the new mom or the sick one), and casting is still underway for the other role. The film is set in London, and producer Samantha Horley has said that the other character will be British, though “it’s not yet sure who that actress will be.”

    Filming will begin this summer.

    • dave says:

      That’s quite interesting news. I always thought she was a good actress, now she has the chance to proof it. I mean Reynolds, Witherspoon, Mcconaughey etc are all good actors and actresses. It’s because of their choice of movies the media throws them through the mud. But given serious roles, they put up a great performance. I believe Aniston can do it too.

      Garbage actresses are Megan Fox, Camille Belle.. etc

      • Jill says:

        The main problem with Aniston is she is afraid to step outside of her comfort zone. She goes to the same places for vacation, she eats the same thing for lunch, and she makes the same kind of movies over and over and over. I think it’s hurt her personally (people get bored with her) and it’s definitely hurt her professionally. She’s limited herself and won’t give herself a chance.

    • NeNe says:

      If she is in it, I will lay odds, it will be a major failure. Like all of her films.

      • dave says:

        If all of her movies were major failures then she wouldn’t get any roles. Talking about logic.

        Im not a JA fan, but I hate senseless comments. Though I agree Wanderlust looks like a bad movie, plot seems rly bad, at least what I made from the trailer. Didn’t watch the movie yet, will check it online sometime.. I think.

      • lisa says:

        @dave

        I think many people are saying regarding her movies that “flop” that she as Jennifer Aniston has not had a Box office hit. Yes she has had movies do well, but they had a male lead comedic actor. As a female movie star she has not unlike other women in the same genre had a hit that is all hers. Reese started with Legally Blonde, Julia Pretty woman, Emma Easy A. I could go on. But every attempt Jennifer has had as the LEAD role has not done well. So the question of why or does she deserve that title of Alist seems fair.

        People have been saying for YEARs she needs to mix it up. But really what is stopping her. She has the financial ability to bank roll a project. Lots of actors put there own money in projects that they want to do or star in. She has a Production company. She could option a script from a new writer and make it her own. These things are not happening. So if she is stuck in a cycle. She is the one not fighting much to change it. She could do Indie films like she began. But for some reason she won’t.

        I have always wondered if she actually has the money many assume she does. She doesn’t have to work in silly movies. She is not a struggling young actress. She can afford to be picky. But it seems like she does roles for the money. Not the passion. And that to me says a lot about her supposed money situation.

    • Jackie says:

      ugh. i am sure she will play the mom role so she can milk her childless, victim image.

      i find her so easy to dislike.

    • Original Chloe says:

      /stifled laughter

      Anyway. Aniston is a one-trick pony and the problem with the last x-number of her movies is that they’re not something people seem to care about enough to pay for and see on the big screen. They’re rental, at best, and getting the promotion no other movies of that type get because of JA’s personal life only. (Though I admit I am a bit surprised her fervent fanbase refuses to see her movies.)

    • Original Chloe says:

      [hrm.. saving comment failure]

      I’ve always said she had decent comedic timing and could probably do some actually enjoyable work if given good lines and a good team; the thing is, after a decade of rebranding herself to a movie star, I’m not sure she wants to return doing sitcom.

      And sorry, I don’t see her in a serious, dramatic role. She’ll be wooden and sad-eyed and looking constipated, and that’s about it.

      • Mac says:

        I think she should do alright.

        Jennifer played her parts well in Derailed, The Good Girl and Life with Marley , a thriller, dark comedy and tear-jerker respectively.

        She also purchased the movie rights to The Goree Girls which sounds intriguing.

        Jennifer hasn’t shunned the small screen appearing in episodes of Dirt,30 Rock, Cougar Town and lobbied hard to appear on Mr. Sunshine last year.

      • Original Chloe says:

        You see, Mac, here we differ, I think that her performance in Derailed was completely unconvincing and uncomfortable to watch. In fact, that’s what most of the critics were pointing out, the movie itself did very poorly in all regards, and was promptly shelved.

        As for the Good Girl, which everyone brings up, yeah, it’s a cool movie and I’ll agree that JA did subdue her mannerisms but all I see there is Rachel on a sad day – just like in the Horrible Bosses it’s Rachel being sexeh; to me it’s the same voice, the same set of expressions, sometimes more, sometimes less pronounced. Admittedly, I haven’t seen the one about the dog, and – as someone said up the thread, she’s much better as a part of an ensamble.

        I think Aniston’s problem is that over the last two decades she simply grew into her persona, which is a mixture of herself and the various incarantions of her sitcom role, and I don’t think she’s able to shed it to be belieavable in a dramatic role.

    • Kara Ann says:

      Thanks for the info, Mac. I really like Aniston but I am definately ready to see her in a challenging role. The rom-coms just become too interchangeable after awhile. Plus as she ages, if she wants to continue to work then she’ll have to progress beyond the rom-com stereotypical roles. I really think that she is capable of doing well. She has shown, with her last two roles, Horrible Bosses and Wanderlust, that she is widening her horizons. While you’d never know it on this site, I believe, in general, the reviews for both films have been favorable as far as her performance is concerned.

  36. original sandy says:

    i think the people have spoken, now can she and her fans accept this person is not who or what she and they have been claiming for years, which is, not an A Lister, tabloid..not the same, poor paul Rudd, they left him out promoting this film, building it around her..fluff, it was just a matter of time, most intelligent viewers have been stating this for years, since the beginning, that’s why she received so much hate,people were mad at brad, they were trying to make him pay through her, and she went along for the ride. all the gimmicks in the world could not change this fact.

  37. Tweakspotter says:

    I think she should just go back to sitcoms. I’ll wait till this hits HBO or STARZ.

  38. sullivan says:

    What a slow, painful film-career death. She should pick herself up, dust off the cheeto-tan and head back to the small screen. Oh, and dump the little orange manfriend with the tragic sense of fashion.

  39. MK Martin says:

    I liked Wanderlust. It didn’t suck, it had members of the classic comedy sketch group The State in it, and Justin Theroux was hilarious. Paul Rudd’s ‘too long’ bathroom mirror scene, if you’re into that sort of thing, was HILARIOUS. In short, it was hilarious. Aniston? Coulda been anyone. She didn’t add or detract from the flick as a whole.

  40. NeNe says:

    I am not surprised that this film bombed. I guess Jennifer Aniston does not carry the weight/clout she did when she was on Friends. I have never been fond of her as an actress. I think people thought the movie was going to be terrific, especially seeing some of Jennifer nude, but even that couldn’t save the movie. Perhaps, directors should take note of these ratings when it comes to choosing actresses for their next movies…. Always say NO!!!!!! to Jennifer Aniston. In my eyes, she is now in the same league as Katherine Heigl (however you spell her name,) and that isn’t a good thing.

  41. buell says:

    Wanderlust was horrible.

    The “pep-talk” Paul Rudd’s character gave to the “thinking part of a man” was cringeworthy. I just wanted it to all stop. Jennifer Anniston being in this movie was the least of it’s problems. The whole cast needs to take the blame on this being so craptastically bad.

  42. Jaxx says:

    It’s a rental. That’s why I say about movies I DO plan on seeing just not at theater prices. I’ll rent it when it comes out so I can be comfy on my couch.

  43. Sandy says:

    I do think she’s aging out of these roles. There re a ton f actresses in that age group with good comedic chops and they’re competing for the same dwindling number of roles as new talent comes on the scene.

    She’s defined herself as a sexy bombshell which reduces her shelf life even further. She probably should go back to series TV, where I think she could do well in a comedy.

    • Jill says:

      I disagree. She’s defined herself as the innocent good girl next door who everyone can relate to. Sexy bombshells don’t throw themselves pity parties. The sexy bombshell is the bad woman who stole her man. Aniston is still trying to be the perky little ingenue who simpers and smiles and looks cute. She is long past that now but it’s the only role she is comfortable playing.

  44. TheOriginalVictoria says:

    When “looks” cant’t get you where you need to go, talent is essential. I happen to think Meryl and Glenn and Viola are beautiful women. They have great bone structure, but they aren’t is classic beauties. Many would say they are handsome or attractive.

    But what do they have that have them in the game and in or above the same age range as Jen? Talent. Meryl Streep gets nominated pretty much every year. Glenn Close NEVER less than genius. On her baddest day she is brilliant. And Viola brings truth as well as real training to all her roles. She’s amazeballs (my new favorite word thanks to Glee). The same could be said for Sissy Spasek (sp?). These people are not the “most beautiful” to dumbass Hollywood standards or maybe even in general, but they are always in the hot Oscar worthy movies.

    So what if she has a great body. Being obsessed with your looks is not going to get you critical acclaim outside of Maxim.

    • Hypocricy says:

      Even when you have beauty and talent it may not be enough….Charlize anyone ?

      The problem is charsima or lack of !

      A list leader, meaning stars whose name induce a real financial incentive box office wise have charisma and should be hired in priority in leads because their name is a real financial incentive to most movies whatever the movie.

      The others should stick to supportive roles or ensemble cast and stop acting like they are real incentives. They support the lead, ain’t nothing wrong with that, ain’t nothing to be ashamed of, it’s just a different role not a lesser one.

      There are natural leader profiles and there are the rest, there are managers and there are employees. Just do your best in your specific role, the one your persona fits the most.

      • Karma says:

        And as you mention Charlize the movie ‘Monster’ comes to mind. I could never imagine Jennifer gaining weight and being filmed on screen intentionally as ugly. She is too vain.

        And that makes her an one dimensional actress who lacks courage.

        But yes, charisma and talent are probably the real reason she hasn’t tackled such a role.

  45. Beatrix says:

    mostly, I’m glad this Thoreaux person isn’t happening

  46. anytime says:

    no surprises there. she’s a flop, faux a-list would be movie star

  47. samira677 says:

    As mentioned Jennifer was never a boxoffice draw, even when she was on Friends. Because she gets hits opposite a bigger name and ensembles, people think she’s a draw. But when you look at the movies where Jennifer is the lead, her movies just break even if not lose money. She also gets called bankable because a lot of her movies cost only $20-$40 million and she’s only paid $7-$9 million a movie. People have this image that she’s one of the highest paid when she’s on the lower end.

  48. Sisi says:

    The biggest problem I have is that we’ve heard about this movie for as long as JA and Theroux are in the news together. So give or take I heard about this movie nine months ago. I’m so over it now, I forgot that the movie wasn’t even out yet. The schtick is old, and I’ve moved on.

  49. Dredz says:

    I can’t believe they gave her a star on Walk of Fame *shudder… I can’t think of anyone less deserving… Let’s see, there are Greta Garbo, Marlene Dietrich, Katharine Hepburn… Aniston???

  50. The Original Mia says:

    Was there really any doubt this movie was going to bomb? It had direct to DVD written all over it.

    Jen goes the easy route and does rom-coms when her time in them has come & gone. She should do more indies/supporting roles, but her ego won’t allow her to. She’s either got to be top billed (even when she’s the girlfriend)or nothing. If I remember correctly, critics and fans praised her appearance in He’s Just Not That Into You. Small doses. Small doses.

  51. Nan209 says:

    Why JT always look like he’s doing some weird turtle thing with his neck…like he’s trying to make it veiny ( because he so buff?? ). It’s annoying.

  52. BELLA says:

    JERRY SEINFELD WALKED AWAY FROM HIS SITCOM ON TOP….SHE SHOULD HAVE DONE THE SAME.SHE IS NOT A BIG SCREEN ACTRESS
    JUST SLAP-STICK LOW RATE FLOPS.

  53. AnnieC says:

    Poor Justin looks orange & pained! Hahah! Go away Aniston, that’s all I have to say to you! :-P

  54. kibbles says:

    I’m not surprised in the least. As the article stated, she hasn’t had a hit since her 2009 ensemble rom-com He’s Just Not Into You. Aniston has always been a massively overrated B-list actress. I’ve always considered her to be more of a tabloid staple and celebrity rather than a serious actress. A part of that is due to her marriage and divorce from Brad Pitt as well as her willingness to take off her clothes and discuss her personal life with the media.

    First of all, she is not a good actress. Second, most of her films are critically panned and don’t do well at the box office. It would be different if she were doing critically acclaimed independent films that weren’t widely received but won a ton of Sundance awards. Her films are targeted to a wide audience yet still bomb. Years of this should be the death of anyone’s career, but I have a feeling that Aniston has always been immune to this and will be for quite some time. She’s never really had a solid film career so no one will nor should be shocked by Wanderlust’s box office performance. Aniston will continue to appear in magazines half naked until she is too old to do it anymore.

  55. kira says:

    Haha, I bet Heidi Bivens is laughing her ass off right now.

    Jen/Justin did all that cheeseball, tacky PR for nada (Jen said being “naked” in the film was “liberating”), and she did her Hollywood Star ceremony right before the film opened (She’s such a LEGEND). She’s a nude legend and no one cares… that must burn. Well, the two wandering sluts deserve their film to tank for being cheating liars–smells like a little bit of karma.

  56. Noel says:

    She does have a nice body for her age and compared to most women, but when compared to the Hollywood 20-somethings she does not. She is getting way too old for her genre.

    • Hypocricy says:

      Actually many actresses her age or older, her profession have greater bodies, especially those in TV shows.

      When I see soap opera actresses like Catherine Kelly Lang, Victoria Rowell or Eileen Davidson…all 50+ years old with kids, i say Aniston who ????

  57. Camille (The original) says:

    Kaiser- I love you :D . Great write up lol.

    She should go back to TV, where she can look and act the same way every week.

  58. Hypocricy says:

    On a superficial note, i wasn’t aware that Paul Rudd was 42/43 years old. He looks so much younger next to Justin.

    Justin, his neck, skin, facial features look like burnt paper. His skin has lost its elasticity and he seems as dry as a dry currant that has overstayed under the sun.

    Severe sun damage alert !

    • Karma says:

      Just noticed that too….it’s worse than that.

      He’s an alcoholic. That red neck…that’s the sign to run away ladies.

      He isn’t an outdoorsy type who is working in the sun and would get a red neck such as a construction worker does. Justin’s red neck is the result of a problem with alcohol.

  59. She needs to step out of the stupid romcom box and challenge the hell out of herself. She was really good in “The Good Girl” and I think she needs to slip into the indie niche. She could challenge herself and do some really interesting films. But I doubt she will.

  60. oui says:

    She definitely looks like she’s hit the proverbial wall. Very haggard in the top pic.

  61. Tiffany says:

    It all boils down to promotion for this one. If this was marketed as a RHAS colaboration, I think it would have had a big turnout. That movie has a huge cult following and I am sure they would have supported this just to get a sequel made. The problem also lied with the fact that the meeting and dating of Aniston and Theroux was so in your face, there was no mystery. No one kept their mouth shut and there was no real Rudd promotion since it centered on them as a couple. This all boils down to marketing and the people responsible for this could be out of a job.

    • Hypocricy says:

      I also think that there is a general fatigue of the public related to Aniston in those types of projects. Aniston must be one of the most profic actress of those last two/three years.

      She has delivered too many projects of the same genre in a very short period of time.

      Apart from sequels that can be delivered each year if you like, that strategy doesn’t really work, hence, few actresses do that, even fewer in their forties.

      She doesn’t let people miss her on the big screen and instead deliver as much as she can in a very short period of time cheap predictable product of the same standard in a different packaging, like a working chain delivering the same product in a different version every six months.

  62. Karma says:

    Paul Rudd’s face in the pic with Justin…LOL.

    He always looks to be editing his responses but would love to know what he was really thinking when this pic was taken and then later when Rudd saw it.

    Those bangs, that spray tan….bhahaha. Who let him out of the house looking like that?

  63. Dees says:

    I read on dailymail, an UK website, that Justin and Jen are being hailed as the new “POWER COUPLE”!!! I almost threw up my lunch!!! Seriously, are they really that deluded? Power couple of what exactly? How much are they paying this website? Also, Jen as the hottest woman of all time??? That’s just madness! This woman is so sickening beyond belief!

  64. ManicPixieDreamGirl says:

    I don’t know how she gets paid insane amounts of money when she continues to make one flop after another. She makes the same movie over and over again. The only difference now is she’s starting to take her clothes off. Same boring rom-com just more nudity. I wish some of the really talented indie actresses would branch out and make other types of films. Samantha Morton, Michelle Williams, and Emily Blunt. Now those are some women with talent who deserve those multi-million dollar pay checks.

  65. barbie says:

    if Jen stars in a remake of any movie it should be death becomes her co staring chelsea handler fighting over the serum of eternal youth but which actor to play the Bruce Willis role I don’t know any ideas?

  66. Barley says:

    Maybe people realize this is the movie where she cosied up to Heidi’s man and had an affair with him while he had a partner at home, and the public didn’t want to reward a pair of homewreckers? K.A.R.M.A

  67. die elepha beth says:

    Speaking of which, I don’t think JA is that bad of an actress, only that she is continuously given scripts that make her look like a one-trick pony, i.e. Rachel Green on da Big Screen.

    And it’s not like she’s so vapid and vain that she doesn’t realize this herself. She even said that if there were a Friends remake or a Friends reboot, she’d love it to be Friends, 10 Years Later, see how people grow/change/whatever. And that she can definitely picture it in her head to happen.

    On the other hand, I also understand that different people have different comfort zones, and not a lot of people would be comfortable in branching out too far from what she/he knows to be successful. And there’s nothing wrong with that too. Romcom will always sell, it’s not broken, so it shouldn’t be fixed in a way to make it look as though it was broken.

    And I suppose, if only someone would give her scripts where she could for example play characters that have echoes of “Rachel Green, 10 Years Later”, it would be interesting.

    It’ll be a change, but not that jarring of a change to push her completely out of her comfort zone. Also, it will be a small start for her to explore Romcom from an “older actress” side.

    I think I heard Meryl Streep or some “old” actress once said, the problem with actresses is that when you reach a certain age, scripts dry up or at least, good old woman parts dry up. And that’s why a lot of young actresses fade/flop. But good scripts exist. Meryl, and many old ladies of Hollywood has gotten into some really cool Romcoms playing people more to their age.

    And let’s face it JA is not bad for a 40-something woman. She ages gracefully. Now to find her scripts that portray her that way. Mature girl next door. It can happen.

  68. lisa says:

    Actually The Tourist made 278+ worldwide. Hardly a BOMB. and even a 16 million opening when there was a snow storm was hardly a BOMB..

    but whatever. I just think it funny that if you search this site for the comments about that film how vicious the comments were. And how unfair. But when a film makes almost 1/3 of that total we hear crickets.

    OK.. Reese got clambered for her BO. and it was more. Katherine Heigl got clambered and her film made more. Megan Fox go Clambered for her film and it made a little less. But Jennifer is what excused..

    that is a double standard.

  69. The ORIGINAL Miami D. says:

    BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! BOMB! >>>>>>>>>>>BOMBED!!!!!!!

  70. naturegirl says:

    EIGHT PLACE @ 6 MILLION ITS NOT THE FIRST ONE OF HER CRAP HAS COME IN @ 8TH PLACE
    THERE WAS ONE THAT A SCI-FI MOVIE BEAT & A BLACK MOVIE ABOUT LOTTERY WINNER….
    LOSER

  71. Francesca says:

    Aniston is a TV actress. As she is always compared to Jolie at every trun, I think that people are tired of her playing the same cheesy comical soft roles evey time. Look at Jolie, she is versatile actress, she plays tough gritty fast-paced action movies such as mr & mrs smith and Salt and also shows her acting chops in deeply thought out movies like Gia and Changeling. Yes…Jolie has more depth and takes more risks professionally than Aniston.

  72. Carobell says:

    If I had to choose between seeing a movie starring JA and one starring AJ, I would pick the one starring AJ simply because I like action.

    That said, I don’t think the comparison of Wanderlust to the Tourist is fair to either actress.

    Its apples to oranges.

    As stated upstream, Wanderlust was an ensemble comedy of which the big name was genuinely JA, while The Tourist was an action/spy/thriller with two big name leads. There are a lot of people who will go see a movie starring Depp regardless of the content.

    I think Wanderlust was marketed incorrectly.

  73. Hypocricy says:

    Again Aniston has made 6 projects during the last two years and a half playing a different version of the same produtc.

    It’s like she makes 6 different remixes of the same song and this in less than 3 years.

    At some point there is an overwhelming fatigue. There are many actresses out there whose fans are like “When will se drop another project ?”….Aniston is constantly in our face with the same mediocre project instead of letting her fans miss her while chosing better projects.

    She is into fast food type of products and deliver them as fast as she can.

    THAT’s WHERE LIE THE PROBLEM !!!

  74. Dibba says:

    I love Paul Rudd. Didn’t even know he was in this movie because of all the JA and JT hype. Article seems a bit overly mean towards JA. She’s making money and working, making hay while the sun shines. Women in Hollywood are usually thrown in the trash heap by the time they hit 40. I wouldn’t see the movie unless I was desperate for a rental.

  75. Hawk says:

    Jen needs to take a break for a while. Cranking out movie after movie isn’t helping her career. She has her own production company, why doesn’t she direct a movie or something?

  76. Weezie Jefferson says:

    The author of this article is dead wrong IMO. When I hear Jen Aniston and “bomb” in the same sentence, it’s usually because her movie is stank.

  77. J W says:

    jen aniston is as washed up as kim kardashian. they are still trying to hold onto some fame. i have neighbors that their lives are more interesting than those 2 twits

  78. tracking says:

    I don’t think JA shows good judgment in choosing projects. Although her desire to reunite with Rudd (Object of My Affection was one of her best films) and work with David Wain makes sense, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that a yuppie couple encounters hippy commune storyline could easily turn cheesy and have limited appeal.

    • anytime says:

      there’s a poll on the website asking which of them looks hot. why is there no 3rd option (neither)? both of them had tousled and non-glamorous hair. both of them looked careless, like they just put on the black dress they got their hands on. both were wearing wrong shoes. body-wise jen’s legs are short, but she is tanned and angie’s legs are way too pasty, and you know somebody doesn’t look good when even guys on the internet say “she’s too skinny”. her knees and arms made me cringe as well as her complexion… and her face is now worn, with a huge jaw to boot, but jen’s face is never better in spite of more plastic surgery. again, my vote goes to neither

  79. BT says:

    Did this article just try to make the point that Jennifer Aniston has more success in films when there is a bigger star in the movie with her? Well, no sh*t. In other news, Rick Moranis films (minus the ones about shrinking kids) tend to make a LOT more money when they’re produced and directed by Mel Brooks. Spaceballs > Little Giants, know what I mean?