Jennifer Aniston is in talks to play a hooker pretending to be a wife. For real.

One of the biggest criticisms launched at Jennifer Aniston is that she almost always plays the same character, or the same kind of “Rachel Green/good girl” in strikingly similar romantic comedies. In most of her films, she always has a California tan, her hair is (almost always) perfectly highlighted, her costumes are always cute and there are always scarves and sleeveless pieces to show off her toned arms. Many of her roles blend together. But perhaps that’s the point? Aniston has her brand – a brand which involves looking cute and playing cute. Would it be nice to see her play a different kind of character? Sure. But I also wonder if she’s capable of it as an actress. So what do you make of this news – Aniston is in talks to play “the wife” in a comedy with Jason Sudeikis. But not just “the wife” – Aniston would be playing a hooker-slash-fake-wife. Epic?

Jennifer Aniston and Jason Sudeikis are in talks with New Line to reunite for the studio’s long-gestating comedy We’re the Millers. Rawson Marshall Thurber is attached to direct.

The dysfunctional family road-trip movie originated with Wedding Crashers writers Steve Faber and Bob Fisher but has since seen a rotating mix of writers, directors and actors attached since it was first picked up in 2002. Millers centers on a drug dealer who creates a fake family to help him pull off one last job that entails bringing 1,400 pounds of marijuana from Mexico into the U.S.

Aniston has had an offer in hand for a few weeks, but negotiations have yet to produce a commitment. The greenlight likely is dependent on her deal closing.

Aniston most recently starred in the Universal comedy Wanderlust and the New Line comedy Horrible Bosses, which also featured Sudeikis. The actors, both repped by CAA and Brillstein Entertainment, also appeared together in The Bounty Hunter for Sony.

Sudeikis also co-starred in the New Line comedies Hall Pass and Going the Distance. He stars opposite Will Ferrell and Zach Galifianakis in The Campaign, which Warner Bros. will release in August.

[From The Hollywood Reporter]

So from what I gather, Aniston’s character is a hooker who gets hired by Jason’s drug dealer character to pretend to be his wife? Aniston was just a “pretend wife” in Just Go With It last year! So… it sounds like more of the same with that angle. That being said, I’d like to see Aniston pull off some trashy hooker stuff. Like, I’m already envisioning her costume demands. Do hookers wear scarves and wedges? That’s what Aniston will be asking.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

60 Responses to “Jennifer Aniston is in talks to play a hooker pretending to be a wife. For real.”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lizzie says:

    I like Jason Sudeikis, he’s funny. This film doesn’t sound too bad at all.

  2. Kara Ann says:

    Hmmm…what I’d like to know is will this be a rom-com in the traditional sense? Same old, same old. If it were to be a comedy, a true comedy, with a side of romance thrown in then I’d be all for it. I think Aniston is a talented comedian and I wish she would use those talents.

    • wasa says:

      sounds like a romcom to me. i expect something even more easy than pretty woman used to be.

  3. Bite me says:

    Saw horrible bosses a coupe weeks ago, Jenny was great in the role, it was an ensemble piece which she excel …

  4. LittleDeadGirl says:

    Well I liked her when she was playing the psychotic boss so maybe she can do this too? I honestly never liked her as an actress, she does play the same schtic, and when she has tried to play anything else it’s usually ended up terrible but that time she pulled it off well.

    • wasa says:

      i liked her in friends with money, so i guess she is a decent actress. she just choose the same crappy characters to portrey :C

    • Vesper says:

      I really liked her in Derailed, and that is as far away from romcom as it gets.

  5. Rux says:

    I am going to actually back up Jennifer Aniston on one movie that was completely out of her charachater and she was not dressed cute AT ALL it is aptly titled “The Good GIrl”. She was really amazing in it. At the time, I thought/hoped she would depart into this type of acting. I am so sick of Racheal Green I could f;ing strangle someone.

    • Ari says:

      Yes! She was really good in that film.

    • Relli says:


    • Caroline says:

      Thought she put in a good show in Good Girl, I wish she would stretch her acting chops a bit more.

    • Irishae says:

      I knew I wouldn’t have to scroll down too far before someone brought this up–and it’s soo true! ‘The Good Girl’ and ‘Horrible Bosses’ are the only movies I’ve enjoyed her in. Not sure how there could still be people clinging to the Friends legacy–her box office cred is atrocious. Not that she must be worried, I hear US Weekly and InTouch cut some pretty nice checks 😉

  6. Josey B says:

    Interesting that the film being greenlit depends on her saying “yes”. For all the “A-list naysayers”.

    • Sue L. says:

      To Josey B: “The greenlight likely is dependent on her deal closing”… the operative word is likely – sounds like speculation to me. I doubt very much that she is the deciding factor.

      • Josey B says:

        I’d say that if The Hollywood Reporter is tossing tha in, it’s bevause it’s more than just “speculation”.

      • deb says:

        still better than Jolie.
        who seems to only be talking small parts nowadays, or parts that does not show her face (cartoons), or distorts her face (disney).

        at least jen is still a leading lady.

    • Jamie says:

      Why bring Jolie into this deb? Are you that obsessed with the triangle that Aniston can’t stand on her own, you have to bring up someone else just to make Aniston look good, she can’t stand on her own merits? Thats sad. And no, she is not better than Jolie, she is worse. Jolie has an Oscar, something Aniston will never be nominated for. Also Jolie makes more money than Aniston, with less films. That means Aniston has to pump out cheap movies at a quicker rate, to make the same money. Jolie who has cut back on acting because she has a family, makes more money with small parts and less frequently, than Aniston does. So, all round, Jolie is the clear winner. Jolie, an Oscar winner, is the most celebrated and biggest leading lady in Hollywood. Aniston will *never* be a leading lady of any type. And given what Aniston did to Heidi Bivens and Aniston’s reputation for going through all the men in Hollywood, lets face it, this role is basically just her playing herself.

  7. alison8701 says:

    I think this could be OK. Imagining her as a prostitute is kind of funny, depending on the direction. Will she go the crass uncouth route or try for seductive?

    I’m happy that she’s rebounded a bit. I got really tired of all the lonely, desperate, “Jennifer Can’t Get A Maniston” crap, which was really just a self-perpetuating story. And I’m glad she is really confident in her looks… but.. going for sexy all the time when you’re in your 40s can begin to look a little desperate. And it’s a defining moment for actresses, I think. She needs to expand her repertoire now if she hopes to continue acting past her “prime looks” age.

    So I hope she goes the trashy route, with un-dyed roots and blue eyeshadow, where she chain smokes and eats slim jims, and not the “I’m sexy and I know it” route.

  8. Trillion says:

    She’s squarely in Jennifer Love Hewitt territory now.

    • Jackie says:


      she probably wants to wear the trashy hooker outfits to try to prove she is sexy.

  9. fabgrrl says:

    I don’t know about trashy hooker outfits. Generally, the type of “companions” that are hired to play wives/girlfriends are high priced escorts who look good in evening gowns and can string together coherent sentences.

  10. Nanz01 says:

    My first reaction: the character will be like her Horrible Bosses character, except not a dentist. It seems like every time she tries to branch out, her fans don’t like it. I’d like to see her take roles that she likes rather than worry about her brand so much. I don’t know if she is an actress with a lot of range (I think probably not), but I don’t think she takes those risks to show us.

  11. mln76 says:

    You really can’t tell a thing it could POSSIBLY be a departure but my instinct says its a rehash of JGWI and Horrible Bosses with some Pretty Woman references thrown in. I guess if the studios are willing to throw money at her for more dreck why not take it 😉

  12. sirsnarksalot says:

    Who in their right mind would hire this woman? Every film she has been in has bombed. Every. One.

    And for the record she tried to play “bad girl” in a movie with Clive Owen that also…wait for it…bombed.

    Box office poison, this one. Stop hiring her to ruin movies!

    • alison8701 says:

      Is she box office poison or does she make bad choices?

      I mean yes, she is clearly the common denominator, but I’m not sure if her movies suck due to lack of skill or lack of trying. If I could phone it in, make a dumbass movie for millions and get away with it, time and time again, I’d probably do it. I already phone it in. For free!

      • Yiarr says:

        Last year both her movies made over 200,0
        00,000 – not saying she is not in a lot of bad movies – but poison!! I think not.

      • Emma says:

        Yiarr, Jennifer had less than 10 minutes of screen time in Horrible Bosses…how can the success of that film be attributed to her?

        Likewise, like anyone knows, Adam Sandler is one of the biggest (in terms of box office receipts) male comedic stars…Jennifer not so much.

        She can’t carry a movie. Actresses who serve as the sole draw for a movie and the movies do well are Julia Roberts (Eat pray love), Angelina Jolie (Salt), etc.

    • Cooper Lucy says:

      Just off the top of my head Marley & Me and The Breakup both did well. Not every movie she’s been in ” has bombed.”

      • Guest says:

        i think what they mean is that Jennifer cannot carry a movie with her name alone, she always needs a comedic actor..Julia Roberts use to be able to carry a movie and Sandy B can carry a movie, not saying that only Jen cant carry a movie becuase there are others actresses who cant as well

      • Josey B says:

        I don’t think she meant that at all, since she’ll be starring in this with a … comedic actor co-star. Nope, those were definitely gratuitous lies because someone doesn’t like the woman.

      • Emma - the JP lover says:

        “Marley & Me” did well because it was based on an International bestselling book called “Marley & Me” about a dog. People came to see the movie because of the dog … ‘not’ Jennifer Aniston.

        Personally? I think playing a hooker at her age–even a high class hooker–is the kiss of death (or at least, the end of any possibility for dramatic roles) for her career.

      • cameron says:

        That is what she meant. The box office hits that are attributed to JA had bigger male stars. Jim Carrey, Ben Stiller,and Adam Sandler. You could have inserted any comedic actress in her role and it still would have been a hit. Same as Horrible Bosses, it was a frat boy movie and if Katherine Heigl was the actress, it would have still been a box office hit. However, when she’s the bigger star in a movie, it bombs. Wanderlust, The Switch, Love Happens,etc.

        I have to disagree about ” The Good Girl”. She was okay in it,the film industry obviously agree with me since she wasn’t nominated for any acting awards for that role.
        It’s sad that you have to go back 10 years to find a movie that she showed some inkling of acting. She’s made like 20 movies since then.
        Honestly, I don’t see a 43 year old playing a paid escort they are usually the Madam by that age.

  13. Coffee drinking says:

    Aniston was really quite good in Derailed, at least I thought so…
    oh, and Friends with Money was good too. She played a lost, unsuccessful, very dull woman, amongst her rich troubled friends, and quite well.
    I liked her in The Good Girl too and Horrible bosses too!

    I think she has the acting chops! For what ever reasons she keeps doing these movies that are, well frankly becoming out of her age bracket and stupid.

  14. danielle says:

    I also thought she was great in horrible bosses, and I hope she stretches her comedic chops more too.

  15. layla says:

    Aniston’s brand isn’t “playing cute”. Aniston’s brand is continuing to play varying versions of Rachel. Plain and simple.

  16. Agnes says:

    i am pretty certain she will suck at this. she could have gone in a different direction after “the good girl”, but that time has long gone. she’ll manage to turn it into a rom com. ha!

  17. OMG WTF says:

    Shes should go back to TV or fade away!! Go back to greece! Are there no fresh young actersses anymore in Hollywood? Aniston cant sell a movie just trashmagazines! She must be s*cking these producerd*cks very good to get a role again!

    There are millions of fresh talented woman out there and still the Exwife gets the jobs? Only possible in america. Stupid nation!

    Shes a superrich superficial whiny snob and still americans think shes cute, natural LoL or a girl next door. well, the US deserved Bush! Go and vote again for the republicans, you realy dont desever it any better haha

  18. spinner says:

    This sounds like a good role for Jen. Love that top pic of her. She is such a cutie. I wish her the best.

  19. Esmom says:

    I think she’s a better actor than she gets credit for. Girlfriend cannot catch a break ever since she was put under the microscope for managing to land Brad Pitt.

    I can’t imagine that she will ever be able to separate her professional self from her personal self for people to ever take her seriously. It’s too bad. (And I’m not a Jen Hen or a Loonie, btw!)

    • alison8701 says:

      You’re right, she is put under the microscope, but I will say that… in my opinion, she still comes off pretty good. Anyone scrutinized as much as her would probably eventually come off really unfavorably. After the brad thing, i don’t really recall her personally coming off as “woe is me”, but everyone painted her that way. She also is really into her appearance, but i don’t think she comes off as haughty as Gwen Paltrow. but that’s just my perception!

    • Ange says:

      She wasn’t put under the microscope, she threw it all out there for the world again and again. That woman has traded on her divorce for years now.

      • Jamie says:

        ITA. She used the role of the ‘wronged wife’ (when she was never wronged) to get ahead in Hollywood, only to turn around and steal someone’s man herself. Shes just a homewrecking town bike.

  20. NerdMomma says:

    In what way was she “good” in Horrible Bosses? She was stiff and weird, a weak link.

    • Vesper says:

      I agree. She didn’t seem comfortable in the role, and she didn’t pull it off by any means. It seemed more like she was reading a script rather than acting.

  21. KellyinSeattle says:

    Well, she’s kind of playing a fake wife in real life.

  22. sup says:

    Jason’s body language in those photos is kinda uncomfortable. Anyway I do admire her (really, I do) for really spending money and effort on making her image even more popular. so in addition to her general efforts at buying magazine nominations (hottest woman ever) and stars on the hollywood boulevard, she is trying to change the “one-note-rachel” image by getting roles like this and horrible bosses. she was actually good in that movie and made me laugh. but she or her p.r. genius imagemaker always go after her nay sayers: she bought holidays for chelsea, and her friendship, did the same for joan rivers who called her boring, only joan didn’t change her opinion of her. and there was a long article on Spike that said “why we wouldn’t date jennifer aniston” and then she made them give her an award for being the hottest female or something like that again. jason sudeikis was rumoured to be her date by her team because her team leaks and denies a co-star being her new bf for every movie. at the time wanderlust wasn’t out so justin wasn’t hired yet, so for horrible bosses jason was her new rumoured beau and he didn’t like that. when the press asked jason if he was seeing jeniston he laughed and said “she should be so lucky”. i thought, wow that was mean, and now she made him hire her and poses seductively by his side and acts all coy “we never dated, right jason?” lol made him eat his words. money is power and that woman and huvane sure have lots of it!

  23. sullivan says:

    A movie about a middle-aged hooker sounds just plain sad.

  24. prefect says:

    Sex addict, pretend wife and now hooker.
    She is 43 trying to act young so she would definetly prefers to play these roles than playing a mother. She can’t play a mother cause she doesn’t know the first thing about it. She never get along with her mother either. @ 43 this is the only roles she can get and she can spice up by remembering everyone Brad and Angie in the characters as she did with the sex addict and the pretend wife. Smart move.

  25. Raven says:

    Think “Pretty Woman” but as a wife instead of a pretend gf.

  26. Jordan says:

    From the title of this article, it sounded like a Lifetime original movie, but I like Jason and her in comedies so maybe it could work.

  27. kira says:

    Rachel as a hooker? Sounds like another stupid, pointless bad movie.

    In which case, she’s perfect for it! 😉

  28. Sugar says:

    here we go again & again & u get the point

  29. mollination says:

    Actually she has proven that she can play other roles with varying degrees of success. The Good Girl and Horrible bosses (and even Office Space) were all good shows of her range; one being dramatic and dark and one being comedic-dark/trashy. She’s also stumbled in that category with projects like Derailed. I haven’t seen Wanderlust but I heard it wasn’t great either. So I don’t think it’s a matter of “if” she can play anything else. I think she can. But that doesn’t mean she *always* does so successfully.