Misc. inanity

"What Angelina Did Was Really Uncool"

By November 25, 2008No Comments

I don’t really keep up with celebrity gos­sip, so it was only just now, at the news­stand, that the Vogue cov­er line her­ald­ing an inter­view with pul­ing non­entity Jennifer Aniston registered with me. “What Angelina Did Was Really Uncool.” Jeez, lady, move on. It’s like, three years ago. If I, or you, still nattered on  about the cir­cum­stances of a break­up that long in, we’d be looked at as poten­tial stalk­ers, and told to get help.

Still. I like the way that sen­tence rolls off the tongue. It could make a good all-purpose rejon­der. As in:

“I think Obama’s cab­in­et choices are really under­cut­ting his cred­ib­il­ity as an agent for change.”

“Maybe so, but what Angelina did was really uncool.”

Probably sounds even more con­vin­cing com­ing off of a hit from a bong fash­ioned out of a used bear-shaped honey dis­penser. Incidentally, it really glad­dens my curdled heart to see Aniston’s latest cine­mat­ic ven­ture has her play­ing third fiddle to an unruly golden retriever.

No Comments

  • Tony Dayoub says:

    Ever meet Aniston? Cuz it sounds like you really don’t like her.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    She killed my cat, Tony.
    No, actu­ally, nev­er met her, but in every inter­view with her I’ve bothered to read she comes across as one of those par­agons of vapid­ity who non­ethe­less con­sider them­selves ter­ribly fas­cin­at­ing and per­tin­ent. Meh.
    Also, she’s pre­sump­tu­ous. Limited per­formers who’ve achieved some meas­ure of suc­cess in tele­vi­sion have no inher­ent right to try to foist them­selves upon the cinema. I feel exactly the same way about Larry The Cable Guy.

  • Fox says:

    I think the most telling thing about this is that Aniston used the word “uncool”. Uncool!?! That kinda sums up her school­girl type of grudge hold­ing, don’t ya think?
    Now, if she was to say “My boy­friends music is really uncool”, I would let that pass, b/c uncool is pretty much the per­fect descrip­tion for what John Mayer is.

  • Cadavra says:

    Considering that she’s nev­er even come close to open­ing a pic­ture (THE BREAK-UP was Vaughn com­ing off WEDDING CRASHERS), I think her place in the cos­mos has been determ­ined. She’s really a media star more than a movie star.
    I did meet her once at a cinema, in the pre-FRIENDS days, when she was rack­ing up flop sit­coms right and left, and she was quite nice. And since the movie in ques­tion was THE SEARCHERS, I’d say she isn’t quite that vapid–or at least was­n’t back then.

  • Campaspe says:

    I sub­scribe to Vogue, although I should­n’t as I really pretty much hate it. (It was one of those impulse pur­chases.) Anyway, I read the full inter­view and Aniston did­n’t bring up Angelina, inter­view­er Jonathan van Meter did. Considering that AJ has been flap­ping her gums all over the place about how she and Brad fell in love on set, when Brad was still quite mar­ried, I think Aniston’s entitled to her chag­rin. She was mar­ried five years. Three years of being pissed off does­n’t make her Miss Havisham.
    As an act­ress, to me Aniston is irre­triev­ably small-screen. She no more trans­lates to film than did Maureen McCormick. But AJ does not impress me much more. I saw her Oscar’d per­form­ance in Girl, Interrupted, and thought what I think every time I see her in any­thing: She saves her inter­est­ing choices for her life, not her acting.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    @Campaspe: Hey, I’ve got noth­ing against Vogue. John Powers is one of my favor­ite writers (and people)!
    Jonathan van Meter WOULD bring it up, would­n’t he? Of course Aniston could have enter­tained the notion of say­ing, “I’d rather not dis­cuss it.”
    Whichever. Anyway, what Angelina did was really uncool.

  • Campaspe says:

    Oh I like Powers too, he’s one reas­on to read the thing. It’s the relent­less celebrity-worship that gets me. So why, you ask, with per­fect legit­im­acy, was I read­ing about how Jen thinks Angelina is uncool? Because the dadgum train took half an hour to arrive last night, that’s why. I ran out of Powers. It was either Aniston, or won­der­ing how the rats know to avoid the third rail.

  • Gareth says:

    So someone asks Aniston about a break­up and she’s a poten­tial stalk­er, because for once she answers instead of tak­ing the high road as per her usu­al strategy? As you so wisely said, Glenn, there’s no pleas­ing some people.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    I’m not call­ing Aniston a poten­tial stalk­er. I’m talk­ing about celebrity cul­ture (albeit obliquely) and say­ing some­thing about how non-celebrities who go on about exes can be per­ceived by friends and soci­ety in general.
    And yes, I know that one looks like a jack­ass explain­ing one­self like this. But as you’ve been a civil com­menter before, Gareth, I thought it would be a more appro­pri­ate response than delet­ing your com­ment, or ques­tion­ing your read­ing comprehension.
    And now I’m going to bite my tongue again.

  • B.W. says:

    Speaking of phrases that roll off the tongue, “pul­ing non­entity” is quite a doozy. I’m going to have to remem­ber to steal it in the future.
    I will say that Aniston was hil­ari­ous in her guest spot on “30 Rock” the oth­er week. One of the fas­cin­at­ing things about that show is how it affords pre­vi­ously use­less, dull enter­tain­ers (includ­ing her Friends cost­ar David Schwimmer) the oppor­tun­ity to work with, for per­haps the first time in their celebrity careers, some truly excel­lent writ­ing. Aniston’s work in that epis­ode made me think she could cred­ibly pull off a screw­ball dame type of char­ac­ter, if she was ever called upon, and if the writ­ing was good enough. It’s really true that even very lim­ited per­formers can hit it out of the park with the right material.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    @ b.w.—Well, whatever it is that she has, it works bet­ter on tele­vi­sion than it ever has in film. And in fact, she her­self has admit­ted to hav­ing more of an affin­ity for tele­vi­sion than film, if I’m read­ing her recent inter­view with The New York Times Magazine cor­rectly. It seems like her for­ay into film is a res­ult of what’s expec­ted of her, or what some people (a cadre of man­agers and agents, likely) have con­vinced her she’s entitled to. Whatever. I still think that as a pub­lic fig­ure she’s bey­ond use­less. As she her­self reportedly once said, “I guess we’d be liv­ing in a bor­ing, per­fect world if every­body wished every­body else well.”

  • B.W. says:

    Hey, no argu­ment here that her film career (such as it is) has been a dead fish. I’m just say­ing she did a good job execut­ing the role that the bril­liant “30 Rock” writers handed to her, and extra­pol­at­ing that she could be put to use in a sim­il­ar fash­ion in the future, wheth­er in TV or movies – if she’s to be around for the fore­see­able future in the cul­ture, that is, which it looks like she will be.

  • B.W. says:

    (My hid­den agenda, Glenn, is to get you to watch 30 Rock, assum­ing you aren’t already a fan)

  • Gareth says:

    We agree about celebrity cul­ture, but I sin­cerely – how­ever snarkily I may have expressed it – don’t under­stand what the issue is with Aniston’s com­ments; they were brief, they were in response to someone else’s ques­tion, and I guess I don’t agree with you that men­tion­ing the cir­cum­stances of a very pub­lic break-up three years on qual­i­fies you for pro­fes­sion­al assist­ance. Man, in com­par­is­on to the wall-to-wall Angelina show,those few sen­tences from Aniston seem pretty lim­ited; on some level, it’s really pretty funny to me – albeit queas­ily funny – that we (and by we I mean me too) are dis­cuss­ing this at all. Since you men­tioned read­ing com­pre­hen­sion, per­haps I mis­read your “If I, or you” to mean you, or Aniston, since you had just admon­ished her in the pre­vi­ous sen­tence, but you prob­ably mean you or the dear reader.

  • don lewis says:

    I could give 2 shits about Jolie or Aniston.…but put your­self in Rach…err…Anistons shoes. Some crazy bitch who was last linked to Billy Bob Thornton and before that, her own broth­er, steals your man. Your man just so hap­pens to be the sex­i­est man alive. Then they pro­ceed to act like fuck­ing king and queen of the world. Adopting all these kids, hav­ing their own, donat­ing money, try­ing to save New Orleans. And it’s all on the front cov­er of a magazine EVERY week.
    I mean, ser­i­ously. I can­not remem­ber a time in the last 3 years when I was in line at the mar­ket and Jolies gigant­ic, holier (and cra­zi­er than thou) grin was on some mag cov­er. It’s fuckin g nut and it’s gotta sting a Aniston more than a little.
    Plus, she’s keep­ing time with John Mayer who’s either 1/2 chro­mo­some away from retard­a­tion or has the worst “O” face ever. “O…O…O…I’m doing a gui­tar solo…ahhhh…”

  • Aniston is best when in intim­ate indies like The Good Girl.
    And David Schwimmer is a vastly under­rated act­or. Anyone who dis­misses him must’ve not seen him in the slightly over­rated Band of Brothers and the under­rated Duane Hopwood.

  • Owain Wilson says:

    In Aniston’s defence, she has appar­ently nev­er dis­cussed her divorce or Jolie in pub­lic until the inter­view in ques­tion. Given that every squal­id corner of a celebrity’s life is for sale these days, I think her silence is quite nice. I’d take that over Jolie’s front cov­er breast-feeding and detailed descrip­tion of Brad’s love for her body any day.
    For the record, I think Aniston is an extremely gif­ted com­ic actress.

  • MaxPower says:

    Seeing the internet-wide tizzy over what is, after all, a single sen­tence quote, made me think of Chuck Klosterman’s obser­va­tion that there’s really no upside to celebrit­ies giv­ing inter­views (e.g., here: http://www.wpr.org/book/081116a.cfm). Basically, his point was that pro­file writers are so des­per­ate to find any semi-fresh angle on their sub­ject that if a celebrity hap­pens to say ONE inter­est­ing and/or unusu­al thing, it will inev­it­ably become the focus of the story and be blown out of all pro­por­tion. So of course Aniston’s quote finds its way to the cover.

  • Brian says:

    I agree with everything Campaspe said about the Anniston-Jolie-Pitt tri­angle, and Jolie in gen­er­al. I would only add that I’m equally unim­pressed by Pitt as an act­or– he always seems either vacant or wildly over­done (his turn in 12 MONKEYS always reminded me of Jon Lovitz’s Master Thespian char­ac­ter on SNL). I still think the best media com­ment­ary on Pitt is the Chad Palomino char­ac­ter in LIVING IN OBLIVION.
    I know what Glenn pos­ted was tongue-in-cheek, and I take it in that spir­it, but maybe Anniston’s quote should have been “What Brad Did Was Really Uncool.” Which, from what I’ve read, it really kinda was.

  • Tess says:

    I think Glenn has the hots for Jennifer.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    Tess, you’ve read my psy­cho­logy exactly. If I were to cat­egor­ize it myself, I’d say my jibes at Aniston are equi­val­ent to pulling the pig­tails of the girl you “like” in third grade.
    Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go pick up the new issue of GQ.

  • I don’t know what is the exact word that I want to tell to Jennifer, I agree of what you said that She should move on..Pass is pass. Just focus the present and give more import­ance for the future.