Deep Question



Recently, a leading publication posed an important question. So important, they had to use an exclamation point where there should have been a question mark.



Allow me to answer this one for you, In Touch Weekly.

Angelina Jolie.

If you couldn't tell from the cover above, In Touch attributes Jennifer Aniston's resurgent sexiness to her recent appearance on the cover of GQ.




That's not a bad pic, but we're talking about Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Aniston here. One boudoir photograph isn't going to make up the sexiness gap between them.

I've never really gotten Jennifer Aniston. Well, that's not true. Back when she was in Leprechaun, I understood that. She had that wholesome, if boring, look that allows her to play a normal teenager caught up in the supernatural. It is the second phase of her career, where she became a multi-millionaire for putting up with Lisa Kudrow getting all the laughs on a weekly basis that I don't get. And I especially don't get why she was constantly anointed as "sexy" in some quarters. It's not that she's bad looking, but she is very vanilla. I imagine that she appeals to men who feel like their lives peaked in high school. She's the head cheerleader all grown up. If Dr. Strangelove need good breeding stock, he'd go to her. But sexy?

Angelina Jolie, on the other hand, oozes sex. She's really kind of funny looking, but damn does she work what her mama gave her. (Her father is Jon Voight, so she really has to work her mama's stuff twice as hard.) Sure, sometimes the sex Jolie oozes is creepy "I open-mouth kissed my brother at the Oscars and married Billy Bob Thorton" sex, but it's sex nonetheless.

Maybe this is the best way to put it: By any stretch of the imagination could Jennifer Aniston have pulled off the role of the wife in Mr. & Mrs. Smith, even if she was playing against her real-life husband Brad Pitt? I don't think so.

Posted: Sun - November 27, 2005 at      

©