Jennifer Aniston to star & produce drama ‘Cake’ with Chinese financing


This is an interesting story that is only partially about Jennifer Aniston and how she just signed on to a new film. That alone is somewhat newsworthy, I suppose, although the film’s premise sounds… odd. Like, “why are they making that story into a movie?” kind of odd. But really, this story is about the Chinese market for Hollywood films, and how Chinese financiers are exerting themselves within Hollywood. The basic gist is that Jennifer has signed on to a film called Cake, which will be produced by Shenghua Entertainment/Cinelou Films, a Chinese outfit. The film’s budget is paltry (for Hollywood) at $7-10 million. But it sounds like this is going to be the first of many films produced (with Chinese money) through the Hollywood system specifically for Asian markets. This is very insidery and “how the sausage is made,” but I find it fascinating:

After Dark Films and Shenghua Entertainment, a leading producer of television drama series in the greater China market, announced a five picture, USD $50MM co-financing pact, for the production of five $7MM-$10MM films over the next 18 months. Under a new banner, CINELOU FILMS (DHJ), Courtney Solomon (An American Haunting, Transit, Dungeons & Dragons) will produce the films which will focus on director and star driven material in the dramatic, dark comedy and thriller genres. Cinelou is being repped by WME Global, who will assist in the sourcing and packaging of the films produced under the new banner.

One of the first deals of its kind from the burgeoning Chinese entertainment arena, the pact allows for films to be chosen based solely on creative merit, with no limitations on where the films are produced. The deal was put together by Solomon and South China Media, under a new production venture between Solomon and Mark Canton (300, 300 Rise Of An Empire, Escape Plan).

The first film under the new deal will be Black List script CAKE written by Patrick Tobin. Jennifer Aniston will star as the acerbic, hilarious Claire Simmons, who becomes fascinated by the suicide of Nina, a woman in her chronic pain support group. As she uncovers the details of Nina’s suicide and develops a poignant relationship with Nina’s husband, Claire also grapples with her own very raw personal tragedy.

Along with starring as Claire Simmons, Jennifer Aniston also will executive produce the film. Daniel Barnz (Phoebe in Wonderland, Won’t Back Down) will direct. Ben Barnz, We’re Not Brothers partner (Phoebe In Wonderland), Kristin Hahn, Echo Films partner (The Departed, The Switch, The Time Travellers Wife), and Solomon will produce, and Shyam Madiraju and Canton will executive produce.

…Director Daniel Barnz said “Of the zillions of Jennifer Aniston fans, I might be the biggest one of all. I’ve especially loved her more dramatic performances, and I can’t wait to watch her tackle a role that has such a brilliantly funny voice and so much raw pain (hats off to writer Patrick Tobin). I’m honored to be collaborating with Ben, Kristin and Courtney, and it’s exciting that Cake will be the first film under the Cinelou banner. It feels like we’re all taking a leap of faith together, and that’s pretty thrilling.”

Producer Ben Barnz said “I’m thrilled to be working alongside Courtney and Kristin, and so very appreciative of Cinelou’s commitment to Cake. Patrick has penned a stunning script, and there’s no doubt Jennifer will amaze in a role that exploits both her comic and dramatic abilities. Daniel always gets terrific performances from his cast and brings great visual panache to his films.”

The deal for CAKE was negotiated by CAA and WME Global who are repping the film together, and Scott Karol, on behalf of Cinelou and Conquistador.

[From Deadline]

Ah, so I guess it’s going to be just a straight-up drama, maybe with some black comedy streaks. That’s interesting. I guess one of the parts I find so fascinating is the idea that Aniston is some kind of hot commodity overseas and that Chinese financiers would want to get into bed with her (metaphorically). I don’t mean that as disrespect to Aniston at all, but I’ve always thought of her fanbase as more centralized in America, maybe Canada and parts of Europe. I mean, Aniston isn’t a franchise player. She’s rarely in the big blockbuster movies, and if she is in a big movie, she’s never the lead. Why do these Chinese financiers think Aniston will win over the Asian markets? Or is the production cost so low that they could basically toss anyone in the lead role and still recoup their money?

PS… If I was writing a film for Jennifer Aniston called Cake, it would be a rom-com about a cake baker looking for love amongst her rag-tag group of parolee baking students. Right? Matthew McConaughey would play the thief who embezzled money and set about embezzling Aniston’s heart.



Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

129 Responses to “Jennifer Aniston to star & produce drama ‘Cake’ with Chinese financing”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. DanaG says:

    Have they seen Jennifer do dramatic? I don’t see this being released anywhere but china somehow. At least it gives Jen an excuse not to be around Justin for awhile longer.

  2. Samantha25 says:

    Based on the article I didn’t get the impression that the Chinese are desperate to work with Jennifer. They just wanted to get their foot in the door. $7-$10 million is nothing so the deal probably still would have happened if Jessica Biel was starring. Except for a few countries I think Jennifer is mostly C maybe B-list. Predominately known for “Friends” and being Brad Pitt’s ex-wife.

    • Sullivan says:

      I agree that if she’s known outside the U.S., it is because of Friends and her A+ list ex-husband. These are not bad reasons, in my opinion. Aniston is not an actor’s actor. She’s not much of a dramatic actor and she’s not a stand-out comedic actor. She’s someone of average talent and looks who has done a remarkable job of making the most of it. I’m not nearly as entertained by her movies as I am by Aniston gossip. Now that’s good comedy, even if the laughs are usually at her expense. I don’t think she cares.

  3. Lilacflowers says:

    Work? She’s going to do some work?

  4. danielle says:

    Good for Jennifer. Seems like she has been trying to stretch out creatively lately.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      I agree. My major complaint about Aniston’s career choices was the constant rom-com roles. It was great to see her change it up with We’re the Millers and Horrible Bosses. The fact that both of those films were successful may have been the impetus that she needed to continue to stretch herself creatively. Obviously, she couldn’t continue rom-coms forever and it’s wise that she recognized that. Let’s face it money is shouldn’t be a deciding factor in her life/career at this point in her life. She is wealthy so in makes sense to pursue more challenging roles. Like you said, good for her :)

  5. Maya says:

    I am sorry but Jennifer Aniston is not that big of a name in Asia – even in UK and US only the movies with an ensemble cast (or famous male lead) have been hits. None of her movies when she has made where she is the famous one has ever been a hit – infact those have been megaflops – hence the reason critics gave her the nickname boxoffice Poison. Lets be honest – Jennifer is no Sandra Bullock, Meryl Streep, Angelina Jolie who can carry a movie on their own without a male lead.

    Having said that I am glad Jennifer is branching out and has decided to do drama instead of the same old boring Rachel in a movie. After 2 decades its about time I would say and I am actually looking forward to see if she does have the talent to do drama.

    PS: Where are those Jen fans who keeps on claiming that Jennifer is an A-lister who get $5-10 million per movie? This whole movie’s budget is between $7-10 million and no way will they pay Jennifer her fee.

    • Esti says:

      Stars doing an interesting movie with a small budget obviously don’t get paid what they would on a bigger film. I honestly have no idea what Jen makes for something like We’re the Millers, but it’s a little silly to suggest she doesn’t make big bucks in general because this one time she signed onto a smaller movie with a tiny budget.

      • Maya says:

        The only reason I said that Jennifer is not getting around $10 Million per movie is because a they wrote a piece about that now since Jennifer’s movie Were the millers in a surprise hit she can finally claim $5M. Hence my comment that she is not one of those A-Lister’s who can claim above $10M and above.

      • Esti says:

        I still don’t really understand what that has to do with her salary on this small movie, but for what it’s worth I just googled it and apparently she’s likely to get 15M for the We’re the Millers sequel.

      • Tippy says:

        Jenn’s salary could be in the form of a percentage of the film’s profits.

        Clooney convinced most of the actors in Monuments Men to settle for much less up front and increased their backend potential.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I don’t think Jennifer made huge paychecks for her romantic comedies. I do think that what she did was make many of them and they made enough profit for the studios to consider her a profitable actress in that genre.
        Happily for Jennifer, her more recent films that were not romantic comedies but simply comedies have been uber-successful (WTM and HB). While she alone was not responsible for this, she was an engaging and very publicity worthy part of it. That may have translated to the studios into the opportunity to get out of the strictly rom-com roles successfully i.e. she’s still making them money.
        As for this indie film, idk what she will be paid. Obviously with the reported budget, she will not make a huge paycheck. Will she make more or less than she did for the rom-coms? IDK but surely for a woman as wealthy as she is that wouldn’t be the deciding factor.

    • JojoAnn says:

      Well, I’m in Asia and I can tell you that thanks to Ftiends reruns, shes generally well considered. There arent many actresses that people here are aware of (Cate Blanchet who? and I hate to break it to you bub most people couldnt pick Meryl out of a line up). But Jen definitely has a higher Q rating here than she does over there.

      Now does that public awareness translate to box office? Meh, depends on the movie. We love our action films and our old school stars, see Stallone and his cohort of aging muscle men. Those films are massive here, dramas not so much. That may explain why Sandy and Angie make bigger box office here than Jen. In terms of popularity though, gor as long as Friends airs, Jen rides very high.

    • Artemis says:

      Wanderlust was quite different than her usual comedic characters, I saw it and found it quite good. Rudd’s scenes were better but she held her own. And Theroux was very funny, he’s a good actor but I already knew that from his dramatic roles.

      In We’re the Millers she played a stripper and the film was a success. Horrible Bosses was also different. I think she is slowly branching out since 2011 but some people always maintain she plays Rachel which doesn’t ring true. Maybe they keep seeing Rachel but I doubt Rachel would do what her characters did in the three movies I mentioned.

      Bullock et al also had stinkers but they are more versatile as actors which is maybe why people forget their horrible movies (plot, critical or commercially wise) so easily.

      • Maya says:

        Wanderlust was so boring – I had to fast forward the whole movie. I was looking forward to see the movie where Jennifer met Justin (to see their chemistry) but damn that movie was boring and time wasting.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I posted something similar above. Aniston may not have made the best career choices post-friends (I’m a firm believer that she did not) but she is making some wise choices now. I do believe that the success of the two films that you mentioned, WTM and HB, may have invigorated not only her career but her desire to do more various work. I’m interested to see how it goes for her.

      • Artemis says:

        @Maya: I found Anison’s ‘high’ scene the funniest moment for her but Rudd and Theroux (+ Rudd’s douchebag brother) really made the film worth watching even during the boring bits. I didn’t watch because of Aniston + Theroux, I needed a comedy and heard good things about it through my friends.


        Agreed, imo she took a safe route because she knew it would keep her fans happy. With the Good Girl, she didn’t have that pressure yet and she proved she can pull off drama. I wonder why she didn’t mix her early ’00s roles a bit more to ease the audiences into it post-Friends?

        I think WTM and HB it showed that fans are more receptive of her doing something else than her usual safe comedic performances.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        About Wanderlust, I found Rudd’s brother, the brother’s wife, and Theroux to be the best parts of the movie. Rudd and Jennifer were good too but I really felt like the other parts were just funnier as written. Also, imo, Theroux was hot, hot, hot in that role. I watched the movie because I am an Aniston fan. It wasn’t groundbreaking or even her best work but I did enjoy it.

        I don’t know why Jennifer made the career decisions that she has. I do think that she is capable of much more and has proven it in the past and is starting now to begin to attempt to realize that potential. My speculation about her decision-making is that she was getting paid well, she was enjoying her work, and for whatever reason that satisfied her at the time? Or as someone downthread mentioned that they thought Jennifer thrives in business and maybe that is the simple answer. She amassed a fortune safely and reliably. I don’t know. Maybe she will address that in the future. I would be curious to know her answer.

  6. Artemis says:

    Good for her. Finally producing something that’s interesting!

    I don’t know many dramatic roles she played but I have seen The Good Girl which was awesome. She got upstaged by better actors Gyllenhaal and J. C. Reilly. I read somewhere she wanted an Oscar for that role :) . I believe she can do drama but she is better at comedy which people say is harder than drama.

    • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

      I don’t know–it says she’s executive producing….she exec produces most of her films. What’s different about this one is that she’s doing a drama. I’m not sure if she can do drama, but I don’t find her talented, so there’s that. The only movie I’ve liked her in was Horrible Bosses, and I probably will only see the second one, because of Christoph Waltz–the script already doesn’t make sense to me (see the JA post on it, I offered up the reason why, it’s long).

      But I hope this doesn’t go the way of ‘Goree Girls’…….

      • Maeve says:

        Jen only ex. produced “The Switch”. After production she got a credit on “management”. Probably because she financed a couple of premieres. It had been on the shelf for about 2 years. Her production company has done zilch. When she had the opportunity to learn producing at PLAN B she did nada. She doesn’t have even ONE producing credit from the time she was “involved’ of any sort. She pressured Brad & Brad to buy properties for her and then couldn’t get financing for the projects or couldn’t get the roles from the directors hired. After the separation Meryl Streep left the project they were supposed to do together. and nothing ever came of the other one she got in the divorce settlement. She just doesn’t’ do the work. She’s like George W. Bush …… she woke up one day on third base and thinks she hit a triple.

      • Bridget says:

        @maeve – Plan B was always pretty clearly not Jen’s baby. And its okay that she doesn’t have a real interest in producing and making movies. At this point, its pretty clear she has the career she wants. Aside from a few exceptions, she’s not really into the awards-baity kind of movies, she’s not going to go full Charlize in Monster. It’s always been interesting to think that A Mighty Heart was originally acquired for her, since would have been a truly bad fit.

      • jasmine says:

        VIrgilia, I think we all know by now how you feel about Aniston, you hate her and you idolize Angelina, and before someone responds to me and says that’s her opinion and she can say whatever she wants, I agree, she has every right to voice her opinion, I guess I’m just tired of reading all of your negative comments on Jennifer or your long winded rants on some previous Jennifer stories…

  7. Kali says:

    On the gossip side, I’d really love to see Jennifer do a straight-up pitch black comedy like “Four Lions” (or something similar). I don’t think she would ever go that truly dark in a movie though.

    On the nerd side, I am fascinated to see how the changes in movie financing that we’re going to see over the next 10-15 years will play out. Really interesting times ahead.

  8. Kim1 says:

    I just Googled the writer and the director.I can understand doing an indie film but..
    Maybe she is trying to help,bring attn to some relatively unknown filmmakers.Let’s see if she can get some of her A list friends to be in the film.

  9. Belle Epoch says:

    Nobody finds it strange that she couldn’t “branch out” with US financing? To me this sounds desperate. Some actresses are known for choosing unusual indie films, but JA isn’t one of them – and those films are still for release in this country. Maybe I read the article wrong.

    • pleaseicu says:

      A smaller drama where JA would be stepping outside her niche? In super conservative (creatively speaking), franchise/comic book/war movie obsessed HW?

      Nope, not shocked a more dramatic/darker comedic turn is with a smaller production company, a less flashy concept/film and a smaller budget.

  10. Kiddo says:

    I really liked her in Office Space. She was sarcastic and played to a darker side.

  11. Cecilia says:

    This is very interesting & a big step outside the box. Good for Jennifer.

  12. Liberty says:

    SmartWater is up against a competitor in China.

  13. Suze says:

    I’ve always said that Aniston is a good businesswoman – that is where she really shines. So good on her.

    • mayamae says:

      I like her best in Friends with Money and The Good Girl. I think she did sadness and vulnerability well, and although she had love interests in both films, it was secondary to the plot, unlike rom-coms.

    • lenje says:

      Agree. I do think this is a business decision, and the Chinese movie industry (which include their investors etc.) is a waking giant. I read that Hong Kong and Taiwan actors are now focusing on the mainland China’s movies because they also get paid better than in Hong Kong/Taiwan movies. Korean and Japanese actors are competing to get roles in Chinese (mainland) movies. I also found a blog which gives tips to non-Chinese people who want to work in the Chinese movie industry, as actors or crew.

  14. Milena says:

    Wasn’t Iron Man 3 heavily backed by Chinese financiers or producers? I remember that they specifically filmed scenes in Shanghai for that reason. The scenes were later pulled from the international/North American release’s final cut, and shown in the Chinese version of the film. I thought that was interesting at the time, as I hadn’t heard much about similar investment before then.

  15. Evyn says:

    Isn’t After Dark Films the studio that makes those really bad, direct-to-dvd horror movies?

  16. The Original G says:

    Maybe this is just what she needs to refresh her career.

  17. Bea says:

    “Zillions of fans”? Yeah, that right that there should tell you all you need to know.

    The 2005 movie of the same name sounds a lot more interesting than this one which seems to have Lifetime reject written all over it.

  18. epiphany says:

    All this proves is that a stellar PR guy translates across cultures. Celebrity tabloids are available in China now. I’m certain the Chinese are almost as well versed in the “poor Jen” saga as we are.
    Is ‘Five Years After Brad’ a better read in the Mandarin translation?

    • Tulip Garden says:

      Can you just let it go already?
      Some people are just Aniston fans.

      • epiphany says:

        And some of us aren’t. This isn’t a forum for cheerleading. I revel in the snark, and Aniston creates a target rich environment.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        Oh, please, snark to your hearts content. Snark is wonderful and I am an advocate of it myself. But don’t you think attaching Aniston’s success (or lack thereof if that’s your belief), here or in China or anywhere else to a long dead relationship isn’t so much snarky as ridiculous at this point?

        Either way, carry on! :)

      • epiphany says:

        I think Aniston and Huvane using her marriage and divorce incessantly after it was long dead for every last drop of publicity is ridiculous. I didn’t tell her to do the ‘Five Years After Brad’ story – she fell in that mess all by herself. If every story her PR people put out about her was akin to this one – strictly about her work – I would have nothing to say. When the lion’s share of media coverage about a middle-aged woman consists of her boyfriends, hair, and vacationing in Cabo, I find that ridiculous. If you like her, that’s great, and it’s your choice, enjoy. Some of us just find her vapid, self-involved, and attention seeking.

      • Lou34 says:

        I wonder how people can be a fan of hers.
        What exactly is so interesting or fascinating about her? Serious question.
        I just could not imagine being a fan of someone who only talks about her hair and her maybe babies.

        What do her fans see in her? She talks like a self help book, seems fake and insecure (ie friendships with Handler and Stern who used to trash talk her), and scrunches up her face at every question. I have never heard her say an intelligent thing.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I don’t know of many actors whose PR is only about their work besides Christian Bale and the like. And even many of them use their private/family life at times, like Oscar campaigning, for publicity. Although, I don’t think Bale himself was guilty of this that I know of. I get though that you don’t like the person that you have come to know thru your take on what is considered the “lion’s share” of coverage on her. I have a different take on her versus the coverage of her.
        IF Aniston and/or Huvane did use the marriage angle for publicity, that time is many years in the past, imo. Not so for tabloids, of course, but they generate stories about all sorts of stars based on whatever angle sells. The new angle for Aniston, per the tabloids, is her current relationship with Justin (re: marriage and/or breakup). I, for one, am glad that this new angle, at least, frees all involved in the past relationship from the continual tabloid stories about that. Still, if you dislike her based on the fall-out (media created or Huvane driven) following her separation and divorce then okay.
        Regardless, PR doesn’t sell movie tickets or make profit. It does keep her in the public eye as it does every actor or actresses that engages in it or is kept in the limelight thru the tabloids. Aniston’s projects make enough money to make her viable in some roles and, imo, that is what keeps her working.
        Still as you said I like her and you don’t so, really, you should enjoy this site and its many posters more than I because Aniston is not popular in these parts :) so enjoy :)

      • Emma - the JP Lover says:

        @Tulip Garden, who wrote: “But don’t you think attaching Aniston’s success (or lack thereof if that’s your belief), here or in China or anywhere else to a long dead relationship isn’t so much snarky as ridiculous at this point?”

        No, not at all. I for one contend that Jen will probably never re-marry, because once she does she will no longer be the ‘ex-Mrs. Brad Pitt’ with the attention/free PR that status brings. As long as she stays single her name will be linked to Brad, whether or not he and Angie marry. Jen knows it. Her PR Guru Huvane ‘definitely’ knows it.

        If not for Jen’s divorce from stellar A+ list movie star Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston wouldn’t be any more relevant than the other “Friends” co-stars.

    • Linda says:

      But she is very popular in Nigeria where I leave and nobody really gives a damn about her love life. We don’t have the kind of tabloids you guys have in the states so this Huvane angle does not factor here.

  19. Lela says:

    I liked her in The Good Girl.
    I know it’s not related to this particular subject but:
    I find it very strange that she wasn’t at Philip Seymour Hoffman’s funeral? If my husband lost a close friend I would be there.

  20. LAK says:

    Hollywood has been bankrolled by Indian/chinese/Middle Eastern money for a decade now. Every single major/minor studio is either part or entirely owned by them.

  21. db says:

    LIke her or not, JA is one the biggest stars on the planet, that is why she keeps working. For a number of reasons, America is no longer THE prime market for movies. Although still very important, the U.S. market is on a par with China’s and India’s, so if you’ve noticed a shift in tone in U.S. movies, that is probably has something to do with it. And by “tone” I mean a shift toward comics, action over plot, and generally lighter fare.

    • Beeeeeeee says:

      She is NOT one of the biggest stars on the planet! How can people say that with a straight face???
      She cannot open a film on her name alone and most people would associate her as Rachel, not Jennifer.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        Maybe because she is known more of a star then as an actress? Being a movie star with a high Q rating isn’t the same as being a uber-successful acting powerhouse. I would believe that Jennifer is considered one of the biggest “stars” just based on recognizability.
        I don’t think that she would be considered one of the biggest acting successes of the planet but that is a different thing, imo.

      • db says:

        Well I think “big star” and “big open” are two different things really. Names don’t count the way they have in the past. Does anyone really rush out to see a movie, just because Clooney is in it? Or anyone else for that matter? Not really, it’s more about the action. That is why some truly terrible movies are big hits, and some meh names are “big stars”.

        JA has been in hit after hit in a certain niche, light comedies, and she’s “likeable” — never underestimate the power of being “the girl next door”

      • Chinoiserie says:

        Bulture placed her number 16 out of 100 in their this years list of most valuable stars. So they certainly consider her a A list- star. You may disagree with her placement that high perhaps, but if you read from their list of the reasons why she was put there you might chance your opinion of her star value at least slightly. They are experts when it comes to entertainment business and they did a lot of research for their list.

        And for the record I liked Jennifer in Friends but I have barely seen her in anything else, I am not a fan. I am merely interested in list like this and Hollywood in general and I disagree with people who say that she is not a star. Compared to the other Friends cast she has handled her career incredibly well, and it is not common that TV stars have that level of success Jennifer has. Personally I dislike the kind of movies she makes (not that I should really judge since I have not seen them), but she might and there is nothing really criminal with making movies like that, but is nice to see her try different things.

    • Soulsister says:

      ‘LIke her or not, JA is one the biggest stars on the planet, that is why she keeps working’
      Umm. I think not. Furthermore she does keep working but with non-descript directors and actors. It’s clearly obvious that the real HW powers don’t want to work with her. She recently auditioned for some lame comedy film with DeNiro and couldn’t even get that part.

      I think all of those congratulating Aniston are damning her with faint praise because you are clearly insinuating that her movie career, thus far, is in the sh*t and considering how long this woman has been in the business, that’s pretty pathetic.

      Didn’t she say last year that she was going to direct a movie this year?
      Why doesn’t her production company actually produce any films?

      Sorry but I think that this whole movie adventure has been a big dud for her and she should just quietly revert to the TV hacktress that she once was.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I grant you that Aniston has been no acting powerhouse in her post-Friends career. She hasn’t worked A-list films or directors. What she did do was work consistently within the romantic comedy genre. While that may not be the best respected work (putting in mildly), she did make a successful career of it and she made money for herself and the studios (in most cases) because the films were of a lower budget. While that may not be an ideal career, it is far from “pathetic”.
        Also, why would she revert to television now that she has branched out from the rom-com genre with a couple of films and found success? That would seem counter-intuitive to me. Had she returned to t.v. prior to We’re the Millers or Horrible Bosses, I would have thought a good career move but now that would seem to be taking a step backward at this point. From what I understand none of her planned projects are now in the rom-com genre. While we don’t know if they will be successful yet, it certainly earns her praise from me for making the attempt.

      • db says:

        Yes, but I’m talking about broader, global audience appeal. Commenters on this site may be up to the eyeballs with ol’ JA, but there are plenty of people who out there who either like her, or at least don’t object to her enough to avoid her movies. I’m talking worldwide, which is what counts. So, a movie might be considered a bit of a flop *here*, yet still make a half billion dollars worldwide.

      • mayamae says:

        Tulip Garden,

        I think TV is actually a good idea for her. But one of those premium channel shows where there’s only 12 episodes or so. That would give still give her plenty of time to pursue films, and the actors in the TV series I described always seem pretty content.

    • Kim1 says:

      Aniston is a B list actress ,who can’t”Open” a film as the lead.She has never carried a major film.Carrying a film means your name alone about the title.Now she is doing a low budget film written by no name writer with a no name director.Progress?!
      I guess unless it goes straight to DVD or straight to airplane.

      • Cecilia says:

        From TV to film, Jen has pretty much always been an ensemble actress. She hasn’t pretended to be anything else. When you think about it, most actors are better as part of a team. Unless it’s a ‘one man show’ the team is needed. Very few actors can open a movie on their name alone but that certainly doesn’t take anything away from the supporting ensemble. The idea is that everyone prospers & that the film as a ‘whole’ is a success.

  22. Beeeeeeee says:

    So…………being directed by the the director of Beastly? We will see how that goes.
    And sorry to bring up the baby thing, but I hope her fans see how signing up for this leaves even less time for the 45 year old. Oh well.
    I even saw her fans Photoshopped a baby carriage into a pic of her and JT, saying they are waiting!!!!

  23. Paloma says:

    If she really wants to work, she should try TV again. Even David Schwimmer is set to star in a new TV series; which means every Friend has returned to the small screen except for Jen.

    • Maya says:

      Well that’s because the rest of the Friends cast knows when to stop chasing impossible dreams and return back to what does work.

      Jennifer not so much – she probably thinks TV is beneath her now and she is much better than tv folks.

      But you never know – didnt Justin Theroux say that only people without talent does TV and there is nothing inspiring and he will never sign onto a longterm contact for a TV Show (something along those lines)? Well now after failing in the movie world he is shooting for a tv show. Maybe Jennifer will also come to her senses and try another tv show.

      • mayamae says:


        There’s arguments on both sides regarding who has a more successful post-Friends career. I don’t know enough about it because I haven’t watched any of the TV series the others starred in, nor have I seen most of JA’s filmwork.

        I personally think she should look into a premium channel series, but it’s mostly because I think most rom-coms are frothy and shallow, not just hers.

    • Artemis says:

      She’s been in at least 2 films /year since post-Friends and is moderately to hugely successful in them so why should she return to TV like the rest of her ex-castmates who can’t maintain film career?

      It also depends on what kind of show you’re on, if it’s good quality (e.g. Six Feet Under), yeah it’s a good bet to become a recurring cast member (and combine it with the occasional film every year) but if it’s shit, what’s the point?

      They talk about the resurgence of TV series but that’s only because a lot of them are good, there are MORE shit ones though. Or pilots who never kick off (after working on them for 1 year+!) or who prove to be unsuccessful after 1 season. Aniston is one the lucky ex-TV actors who survived a hugely popular TV series. She got a solid albeit mediocre film career.

  24. Layla5645 says:

    Lets see if this actually gets made or ends up like the Goree Girls or Miss you Already…..or like other movies she has made lately that have no release dates and no excitement surrounding them.

    No one gets excited about a J.Aniston movie. No one says they must see her next film. It is that they will see a film that just happens to have her in it.

    Other stars have months of build up/excitement. She gets a big ol’ MEH from people.

  25. Kim1 says:

    I just read today is her 45th bday.Happy Bday

  26. Luca26 says:

    This is a mixed bag. On the good side a change-up in roles, and a blacklisted script on the bad a sketchy director and production company. I’m thinking this will be one of those movies that disappears almost immediately and makes no money and barely any critical attention. I still think it’s a smarter move then doing another rom-com or another raunchy comedy. I think she’s much better in ensemble indie roles than she is as a compelling lead. As for whether or not she’s really an A-list star it’s obviously debatable but she’s been able to garner the A-list lifestyle and bank account even without the box office to back it up so I guess she’s beat the system.

  27. The Original G says:

    I’m not a fan of Jen’s acting or movies in general. I see most of them on TV.

    I think I’ll wait to actually see the film before I decide what I think. There’s nothing wrong with her trying something new or stretching herself.

  28. Lucky Charm says:

    I’m surprised no one caught that the deal was made by CAA and is being repped by them. Basically if it wasn’t for that then JA would never have been considered for this role, I’m sure. And she’s most likely executive producer because she wouldn’t make any money acting with that budget, especially not her regular salary.

    • Maya says:

      Not surprised – Jennifer’s whole life is linked with CAA. From her pity parties, to showbusiness friends (all of her so called friends are also repped by CAA) to her career choices.

      She must pay at least 50 percent of her salary to be able to make them do the things she wants then to do. Or she must have some dirt on her agent Stephan Huvane.

  29. Annie says:

    Aniston is probably the only reasonably popular HW star who is desperate enough to star in a movie of her own even with that small budget, so the Chinese just got her. I bet it has been offered first to Angelina, sandra bulock! nicole Kidman, cate blanchet, you know all the most sought after HW actress and all of them turned it down. Ha ha

  30. Katherine says:

    I hope the script is better than the short story it’s based on. The main character in the short story isn’t very likable and she snarks a lot, is very bitter and angry over her ex-husband who left her. LOL!

    Unfortunately Aniston’s career is full of poor choices and it doesn’t seem this is much better. I guess people can now say she must read the gossip forums because many of us have been saying for years why doesn’t she look for a good, cheap script and take a chance. Problem is this isn’t much of a story nor is the director noted for much in the directing category. The only movie she got any real kind of notice for was The Good Girl and I tend to think that director just told her to try not to act or mug and just stare off a lot into space with a blank expression. I can remember cheering her on since it was at least a change. I think we will see a repeat of that with Cake. This time it will be even easier to look blank since she can just ramp up the botox.

  31. Anon2 says:

    Jennifer Aniston rarely does an interview where she doesn’t bring up ‘Friends’ or babies or somehow get one’s mind to reference back to 1998 or 2005, she’s a master at it. Those ‘Friends’ reruns are probably sold to a lot of countries outside the U.S. borders and abroad. So, she’s tapped a new fan base–unfortunate for Jen’s age and reality will catch up, and people wise up to manipulation.
    Btw, I thought Forbes said she does not make that fat salary anymore, maybe 4 million at the very most…budget/other stars’ salaries permitting. Remember, she has the PR Guru spinning non-stop.

  32. lunchcoma says:

    I think it’s a matter of needing a star and signing the biggest one who was willing to go for the deal. Aniston’s work in dramas has been inconsistent, romantic comedies are a sagging genre, and she’s eventually going to age out of those roles. I can see her having an interest in something like this, either from a financial perspective or as a chance to show range.

    I’m guessing they’d rather have someone with more international cache, but who would they sign? I can think of women who are more recognized than Aniston but who don’t have problems getting dramatic roles, and women who are up and coming and who’d be even trickier as anchors in projects like these.

  33. Rena says:

    Well her career appears to be following the track of most other 40+ actresses, making less money from films and being offered roles in smaller and smaller films. And before I am screamed at yes she had hits in 2 ensemble films in recent years, HB and WTM and sequels are filming or planned, BUT in both films she had to strip and show off her body and she is now a middle aged woman whose face is showing that no matter how much makeup she has plastered on.

    For this latest announced film, depending on who they cast with her, she will make at the most $500,00-$750,000. Probably signed on as executive producer to get a little fee there also. The director does not bode well based on his previous films and the producing company does mostly straight to VOD. I can see the Chinese putting funds into low low budget films for domestic tv/theatres, a smart move for them, using cheap talent to make a profit. A $7-10 mil film is less than the budget of many Lifetime tv films.

    Her quote has been around $1mil for years, she is making most of her funds from her endorsement deals. HB and WTM sequels MAY pay her $5mil but more than likely she will get $1mil plus a backend. She lives a very expensive lifestyle and needs to keep working to keep the $$ flowing. The last 2 films she has have not yet been released and they are both low budget indies. She is not getting studio offers like the film she had to audition for with DeNiro The Intern which went with AnneH (who is both much younger more talented). Truth is older actors want and get younger co-stars. CAA keeps her afloat as she is paying them huge sums like she is paying her publicist. The Huvane bros have a true cash cow in her.

    Even those of you saying she is known world wide point to Friends re-runs on tv, not to her films. That is da*ning with faint praise. She cannot open or carry a film on her own, she needs ensembles to surround and support her. She has been very lucky in her career as many with more talent have fallen by the wayside. She found a safe niche in rom coms which has worked well for many years but she will soon be relegated to pure older woman character roles as fewer and fewer see her as what she said she feels which is that “she is still a 20 something”.

    And she ruined Derailed.

    • Springtime says:

      I agree with everything you said. At this point Aniston will have to continue to accept low budget indie or Lifetime films to work or pony up her own dollars to finance a movie. We know the later will never happen because she has to pay for her high dollar pr to keep useless stories about her in the tabloids and blogs.

      Aniston and her pr took her personal life and turned it into gold for her. She is not that talented acting wise and her big screen presence is forgettable, however it is her personal life that keeps tongues wagging and nothing more. They milked it for every role she ever gotten since her divorce. Yet she can’t get endorsements on her name alone without having to invest in the stock of the companies.

  34. Abbicci says:

    What is really interesting is that she will be the exec producer. In the Chinese market she can make loads of money producing, especially since she doesn’t have to put up any money to make the film she has nothing to lose. She gets to learn how to produce with other people’s money. It’s about time she put that production company of hers into action and I hope this all comes together for her.

    And for every actress out there that complains about the lack of parts after a certain age not many seem to want to put up the money to make films that aren’t limited to 20 year old girlfriend parts. They all start production companies when they turn 30 and not many of them ever produce a film. As much as I throw shade at Drew Barrymore these days at least Flower films made some movies back in the day and some pretty good movies at that.

    Maybe Jen will find her niche as a producer and we can get past the betrayed woman/victim crap she and her PR team are always spinning. As much as I find this woman boring and annoying I hope she can really make some films. More power to her and if she makes films that aren’t stupid ron-coms maybe she can really have some impact someplace other than the tabloids.

    Heres to hoping it does well and can have a positive impact on women making films in Hollywood. Maybe now that Goddess circle of hers to get to work on things better than Cabo vacations and talking about Brad and Angie.

    • Rena says:

      Jen did not exert much energy learning what a producer does when she was a shareholder in Plan B so I doubt she will exert much energy at this time in her life. She let the planned films she got from Plan B all fall by the wayside in the abyss of never to be made by her here to date defunct production company (like the one which sounded fairly good with MerylS who left the project when it left Plan B). It takes guts to take your own money and put it into a film as a producer to ensure that your planned project gets made, and so far she does not stick her neck out or spend her money on projects. Maybe at age 45 she will do so but that has not been her history.

      This aside it is wonderful when women take control as men have always done, this is how it should be. Producers have the power that actors mostly lack. And that group Is still a male dominated private club. This is why I like Megan Ellison.

      DrewB early saw what needed to be done by a woman for longevity and has an active production company which has made a profit over the years. She is now really into a motherhood phase so is making beauty products and a film a year. A nice balance in her life.

      I don’t know how this venture with the Chinese financial backers will work out or even if it ever gets made. Cake’s success will mostly depend on the director and the other cast. This seems like Management to me which had a similar tiny budget and which she was critical of when it debuted, and that is always a sad case to me when an actor dings their own film.

      And she ruined Derailed.

      • Abbicci says:

        I hope she gets some producing chops. Justin might dress like a hipster douche but he has always been involved in some cool projects( including Megamind which surprised me when I saw his name in the credits the other day). Maybe he has inspired her to do more than carry water bottles in Cabo. And he has some seriously good insight into making films, way more than she does.

        I always thought Plan B was more Brad than her. She wanted the credibility but not the work. Maybe now she realizes she is going to have to do some heavy lifting to be more than just tabloid fodder. Not every film needs to be a blockbuster or award bait but a watchable film can make some money and give her some experience.

        I hope she pulls it off. I find her annoying but I never want anyone to fail. Hopefully she can make something of this. I will overlook the shilling and the victim BS if she can have a viable production company that takes chances and makes some decent films.

        And she did make Derailed unwatchable for me.

      • Tiffany says:

        Rena, Meagan Ellision has her father’s billions now and to fall back on if her career does not work out. Aniston, while very rich in her own right is not even in the same category of money as Meagan. As someone mentioned upthread, she leads a very expensive lifestyle and I doubt she would downsize to front money to get a film made because if that was the case Goree Girls would have been made a long time ago. Production would have been around 7 million. She could have picked up an endorsement deal for that. Then she would have had a great story to tell and speak about this new found love of producing. But no, it will still be the same interview about yoga, hair and facial. She has the platform to have really make a change in her career for longevity (how many of the same characters can she play ten years from now) but is choosing not to take it.

  35. AnnieCL says:

    My comment: ‘Sometimes’ fame trumps acting ability..hmmm

  36. ann says:

    I really think if she wasn’t married to Brad before, she would be a has been by now, or back to TV like her Friends co-stars. She doesn’t have the looks nor talent to stay that long in HW, she should thank Brad Pitt.

  37. I give her credit says:

    I give credit… this lady never gives up. She is a go-getter and has a great sense of what works for her/doesn’t work for her. I would think she feels she can handle this role. It says the character is “hilarious” right? So she can handle that. I think she is one of the most successful actresses to succeed beyond what they were given, as far as talent and looks. Look at us… we are all talking about this woman, is not that talented and mediocre looks. I am constantly baffled at her attraction, yet here I am.