Why did the Oscars snub Jennifer Aniston for Cake?

Movie was very tiny.

She cant really act...

Did you see it? She wasn't that good. Just okay.

R2, R3 The same can be said about the other actresses listed like Julia and Sandra. Not to mention Gwyneth, JLaw, Halle Berry, etc. yet they all got Oscars.

Let it rest, OP.

She's fine in CAKE, just the was she was fine in THE GOOD GIRL. Decent performances, but nothing extraordinary, in decent movies that were also nothing extraordinary.

Nothing award-worthy about it.

She's looked down upon for being too-TV.

Is this the middle troll? Sounds like him.

R6 Not really Alison Janney Helen Hunt. She just missed. And it's been years since Cake now she hasn't put her back into anything else challenging.

Nobody has seen this movie since that Oscar season.

My favorite thing about Cake was that Jennifer Aniston booked a suite at the Four Seasons for the morning of the Oscar nominations so she could tell the press, "It's an honor just to be nominated" while surrounded by fresh flowers.

Actually, it wasn't. [laughing emoji]

R8 Not to mention Sally Field

Did the OP see Cake?

It was an okay movie, but nothing special.

Is that the one where the plot point is that she was disfigured in an accident and her major deformity is lack of lipstick?

R12 like I said to R3, the same can be said about a lot of other Oscar winning movies and performances especially in the best actress category.

Erin Brockovich was a “prestige” film that made lots of money. Julia Roberts was capping off a long string of hits after her comeback in 1997. She was

She was in a terrible car accident--so most of the acting is her back thing.

At the end, we learn the accident killed her daughter. In the middle, it's a depressing road movie where she befriends (for a short time) a skanky young woman who wants to become an actress in Hollywood. (The best line, if I recall correctly, if JA telling her something like, "In two years, you'll be doing porn.")

Nice house though--for people who like real estate movies.

She should have been nominated for Horrible Bosses. She was fantastic in that.

I know those were very different times as opposed to now, but still… I found her performance to be really good.

I also enjoy her on The Morning Show.

Oscars are a popularity contest.

When someone gets "snubbed" (looking at you J-Ho), it usually means they treat people in the industry like shit, no matter how they pretend to be for People magazine.

… (got cut off) playing a real life person who was sassy and she wore a push-up bra.

Reese played a real-life person and learned to play an instrument. She sang as well. The movie was a big hit.

Bullock was also playing a sassy real-life person who adopted a black kid. The movie went bonkers at the box-office.

Cake made only a very small amount of money and Aniston was playing a depressive character. The role wasn’t flashy like the others and there weren’t major emotional scenes. Aniston was able to campaign her way to Globe and SAG nods which was quite far for her to go considering everything.

Additionally, Marion Cotillard delivered one of the best performances of the year and managed to sneak in for a well-deserved nomination.

It’s pretty straight-forward why Aniston missed IMO.

R19 I can understand Julia and Sandra because both of their movies were huge hits and Julia was one of the few female box office stars while Sandra had a banner year in 2009. But Reese's win never made any sense to me. I never understood why critics went gaga over her performance which wasn't even a leading performance like the others. She was too young to be overdue.

Mmmmmmm... cake.... *drools*

Because she’s a one dimensional sitcom actress.

Don’t worry, they snubbed Adrienne Shelly for her pies too, and she was dead, murdered and framed to make it look like suicide.

She was huge in TV before stars could move back and forth between movies and TV without anyone noticing.

^^^ I AM "huge"!

It's all the all-white implausible Generation X sitcoms that got small...

I watched movie, The Break Up, the other day with Aniston and Vince Vaugh. It's a rom com....but I thought she was good in it, especially the scene when she was crying (Vaugh's character stood her up at a concert). Her character was probably closer to herself, and the movie was made in 2006....very close to when Jolie broke up her marriage to Pitt. She must have been channeling the hurt in that crying scene.

She's fine as a performer, but she's just not Oscar material - same goes for Drew Barrymore, Hope Davis, Jamie Lee Curtis, Pam Grier, etc.

Personally, I think the Academy has a bias against both television performers and people known for specific genres (romantic comedies, horror, science fiction, etc.). This doesn't fully explain why Helen Hunt won the year Pam Grier wasn't even nominated, but it's part of why Stanley Tucci and Margo Martindale get invited to the Oscars but Steve Buscemi and John Goodman do not.

She’s a decent TV actress. But has no business being compared to Roberts, Bullock etc. they were fucking movie stars.

[quote] . This doesn't fully explain why Helen Hunt won the year Pam Grier wasn't even nominated,

Two reasons:

1) the other nominees were very weak;

2) for some reason Hollywood used to just love Helen Hunt.

R29 You forgot something else. Every other actress out of the nominees was British and there was backlash about that. Helen Hunt won on the basis of being the only American in the category.

R27 Jamie Lee Curtis has won a BAFTA though. Even if her Golden Globe doesn't count for much, her BAFTA would. We'll see if she can snag an Oscar nomination this year for Everything Everywhere All at Once.

Jamie Lee Curtis was wonderful in an independent film almost no one saw, "Love Letters."

R32 Jennifer Jones got an Oscar nomination for that. What's Jamie Lee Curtis' excuse?

What is the greatest wound Oscar can inflict on a performer?

1) The Jamie Lee Curtis: A versatile workhorse who's done it all and has a jillion friends in that town, but never a nomination even out of pity or old age

2) The Siggy Weaver or Close Curse: Richly talented and appreciated with many nominations, but never a win

3) The Timothy Hutton: Oscar Gold for their first role, and then a lifetime of direct-to-video bullshit that leaves people clucking their tongues

4) The Sean Young: Has all the moxie of an Oscar winner, but none of the talent. And how did she get past security this year?

It seemed very desperate and unlikely at the time. It would be like Sydney Sweeney getting an Oscar nomination.

#2 applies to a lot of actresses besides just Glenn and Sigourney. Also Michelle Pfeiffer, Annette Bening, Greta Garbo, Barbara Stanwyck, Judy Garland, Natalie Wood, Irene Dunne, Deborah Kerr, Thelma RItter, Angela Lansbury, Lynn Redgrave, Naomi Watts, Michelle Williams, Joan Allen, Laura Linney, Emily Watson, Carey Mulligan, Amy Adams, etc.

R35 Not even close. Jenn has always been an A-Lister and one of the most famous people on the planet. Whenever magazines having lagging sales, they throw her face on the cover to boost sales. Sydney Sweeney is a complete unknown to anyone outside of Gen Z or the TikTok crowd.

Aniston isn't a great beauty, but she looks amazing. Great hair, figure and skin...takes good care of herself. Having the money sure helps, too.

She is a fake

Because she couldn't have her cake and eat it too.

Jennifer Anniston is Rachel Greene trying not to act like Rachel Greene in every movie she ever made. Rachel made Jennifer a wealthy star but it also became her straight jacket. Jen, be happy with your house, money and memories of Brad, because that's as good as it's going to get

I think she is wonderful at comedy but rather drab in straight roles.

Cake was good but it didn't really transcend the low-budget/indie genre. Every year there are a ton of really good lower-budget films, like Slow West or Cold in July or Whitewash, which should get nominations but rarely do. Only movies in the very upper echelon of indie films will get an Oscar nomination, like Still Alice or Moonlight. Cake just doesn't rise to that level.

".....because that's as good as it's going to get." We should all be that lucky.

^ We love her too, but her glory days were the early 2000s when she was Mrs. Brad Pitt. Nothing has come close to her greatest role ever... Not shading and maybe just a bit jealous. Angie will soon find 2005-2015 were her glory days as well.

Angelina Jolie has not had a major movie since the divorce. She's basically burnt all her Hollywood connections.

OP, how is it that posters here have missed what must have been your hyper-sarcastic intentions?

I mean, really. Your expectation that the fourth of four cat craps gets a prize because three already done did is irrational. There are too many horrible performances for ALL of them to get Oscars. The Academy obviously COUGH will smith COUGH does the best it can with the garbage out there.

I think it was honestly a case of over-campaigning backfired. I remember (as someone mentioned here above) her reserving the FS suite to “take press” post nomination. That’s just too fucking presumptuous.

There’s also just a perception that someone like her “had it so easy” and why should be just hand her a nomination the second she decides to go “serious” and without makeup.

I thought she was quite good though, for what it’s worth. I hardly think it was some kind of travesty that she wasn’t nominated, but at the same time I see nominees just about every year who are less deserving.

It is a travesty that an A-Lister like Jennifer Aniston doesn't have an Oscar nomination but Z-list nobodies like Andra Day and Cynthia Erivo do.

R49 I think the bigger travesty is that she is an A-Lister at all, given her career choices and level of talent.

She's surely a nice person who tries her best, but she ain't Audrey Hepburn.

Who assigns these letters?

Not Kathy Griffin, that's for sure.

[quote]She's surely a nice person who tries her best, but she ain't Audrey Hepburn.

What makes you so sure she's a nice person?

R50 because Audrey Hepburn was such a powerhouse of an actress.

Audrey Hepburn is the very definition of a wet towel, I have no idea how she got so much work for so long.

Buzz is that Jennifer WILL get nominated for the emotional sequel "More Cak."

She got SAG and Globe nominations, not bad for a movie that made no money and got mixed to negative reviews.

Angelina never did anything interesting after Gia and Girl, Interrupted.

Hepburn looked good and had an appealing persona.

Audrey really understood Givenchy and Dior.

You can give Jen Aniston an army of stylists but there's nothing really "couture" about her, is there?

R50 The fact that Audrey Hepburn is your barometer of talent shows how much your opinion is worth on the matter. To quote Miss Thompson, she's so "twee."

R59 That's because styles change over the years. If you plucked Audrey Hepburn out of her era and into the 21st century, she'd be dressed as badly as everyone else and no one would even notice her. The Hollywood era of glamour is over.

Someone mentioned Hope Davis above. I only know her from Daytrippers and Next Stop Wonderland.

Any recommendations on her best film/films?

Audrey seemed like a lovely person and was a decently competent actress but she lacked a certain something. Nearly every time I saw her on film I would wonder what another actress could do with the role.

OP sweetie, do you really see Jennifer Aniston on par with Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock and Reese Witherspoon?

The story referenced above a couple of times about Aniston renting the hotel suite for her thank-you speeches for the Oscar nomination that never came is DL fodder at its best. I watched 'Cake' when it came out (perhaps on a Netflix DVD?) and was not impressed. She should've actually gotten a nom for 'The Good Girl'. Everyone in that movie was great, to be honest.

[...]

[quote] Why did the Oscars snub Jennifer Aniston for Cake? They awarded Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock, and Reese Witherspoon for basically playing the same role over and over.

In theory, actors receive acting awards for their talents and abilities, and not for the types of roles they are given by producers.

This is a silly question.

It's like asking why Dan Brown and Stephen King haven't been given the Nobel Prize for literature. After all, Toni Morrison and William Faulkner also both wrote fiction, so why is the Nobel committee snubbing the authors of "The Lost Symbol" and "Kujo"?

Julia, Sandra, and Reese made movies that scored big at the box office. The Oscars reward popularity, but more than that they reward people who make money for the industry. Aniston's starring roles have never made the industry that much. Yes, she was in Friends, but that's TV, and she was part of an ensemble.

It really is that simple.

R68 What movies did Reese Witherspoon make which were all-time blockbusters? I don't recall her ever ruling the box office like Julia and Sandra. Jen at least has established her own little niche with her romcoms, terrible as they are. They consistently make money.

R66 young actresses are the favs to win. It's much harder to win as an older actress. The inverse is true for actors. The youngest winner is still Adrien Brody at 29 whereas there are dozens of actresses who won Oscars in the age range of 20-25. It's much harder for male actors to be taken seriously in their 20s.

[...]

Witherspoon should have been in Supporting, she wouldn't have even made the cut if Walk The Line arrived in 2006 where she'd compete with Dench, Mirren, Streep, Winslet and Penelope Cruz.

Her biggest competition was Huffman in Transametica, but many of the old guard Academy voters admitted they never bothered watching "the tyranny movie". Witherspoon won because of lucky timing.

Her only two brilliant performances are as Tracy Flick and Cheryl Strayed in "Wild".

Legally Blonde made a fortune, and Sweet Home Alabama was a big hit. She also helped make Walk the Line a big hit. Now, she's a successful producer and making money for the industry that way.

R71 The Oscars have been around for almost a 100 years now. It's only in the last 5 years or so that they've stopped favoring younger actresses but that's clearly an exception to the norm. We'll have to see how long that trend is sustained.

R72 Agreed that Felicity Huffman should have won for Transamerica. If not her, then Rachel Weisz who was put in the supporting category because they knew Reese was winning all the awards in the lead category. Ironically enough Rachel Weisz had more of a lead role than Reese Witherspoon did. They should have swapped categories.

The fact that she doesn’t have an Oscar makes her even more relatable and likable to audiences. People just love her. She makes tons of money doing commercials and product endorsements. Whenever she decides to promote something… it usually prints money because people buy it.

Gen X and Millennial fraus love her, and that's a fanbase she can ride into old age.

Cake was awful and Aniston was terrible in it.

The comparisons to Julia, Sandra and Reese really don’t work, because they won Oscars for films that played to their strengths and downplayed their respective limitations. Cake did the opposite; it showed that Aniston flails when she plays characters too far removed from Rachel Green.

Despite the Globe and SAG nominations, Cake wasn’t Aniston’s Erin Brockovich. It was her Mary Reilly.

Sandra Bullock was awful in Blind Side, a film so dated that were it released now it would be ridiculed into infamy.

I miss the supermarket tabloid covers featuring JEN’S BABY DRAMA. It was as if an entire nation was awaiting pregnancy news with bated breath. Every fucking week.

The tabloids seem to have given up the dream since she’s turned 50. And America has kind of given up on the tabloids.

I kind of like The Good Girl but have t seen Cake

As has been pointed out, Jen Aniston, her frau fans, and the entertainment press all seem to keep alive some deluded notion that Jen's still an adorable, winsome, sexy 20/30-something gal.

Who does she love? Who's in love with her? Who isn't? (giggle!) When will our best gal finally settle down with her Prince and make some beautiful babies? etc.

As opposed to the well-preserved but increasingly irrelevant 53-year-old she actually is.

She needs to stick with commercials.

[...]

She’s rich so she can do boring ass shit like The Morning Show.

R78 I don't think any actress has delivered a performance as terrible as Julia Roberts did in Mary Reilly. Her "accent" would literally change mid-sentence in every scene.

Whatever people feel about Jen here, I think we can agree that she would still be a more worthy Oscar winner than about half of the actual winners from the last two decades. Between JLaw, Halle Berry, Emma Stone, Meryl's Margaret Thatcher impersonation, etc. That's not even going as far back as the 90s with Goop's win.

[...]

R87 You think Weinstein's whores are more deserving?

[...]

R89 Except he didn't come through for her, as evident by the lack of a nomination, which proves that unlike others she didn't bite...

[...]

R91 I was talking about Jen in Cake. Trust me, everyone here is well aware that Weinstein was responsible for JLaw's Oscar and no one believes she deserved it, not even based on her oral skills.

No, R86, I don’t think we can agree that Aniston is more worthy than any Oscar winner, even the ones you mention. I think Meryl’s Thatcher is terrible, but it’s the type of miscalculation that only a skilled actor can do (it really is her Mommie Dearest).

If you’re arguing against Oscar winners from the past decade and advocating for Jennifer Aniston instead of someone like Isabelle Huppert or Annette Bening, you have truly lost any sense of perspective.

R93 I'm not saying Jen was more deserving than other actresses who lost out like Annette Bening, Isabelle Huppert, Emmanuelle Riva, or Glenn Close. I said compared to some of the actual winners (emphasize on winners), I'd say Jen would have been a better winner. At least she paid her dues unlike JLaw who got instant stardom, success, and awards from the start.

Because she’s not a movie star. The rest. can open a film by themselves. She’s a tv actress.

R79 It was hilarious because Aniston clearly had zero desire for children or pregnancy. But she could never come out and say it for fear of alienating people. I do respect that she stuck to her guns and wasn't manipulated into having a sprogs she didn't want for the sake of publicity or tabloid fawning.

You seriously think *THAT* bitch is worthy of an Oscar???! GFY!!! 🖕💩🤮

R94, I still maintain that saying Jennifer Aniston in Cake is better than Jennifer Lawrence in Silver Linings Playbook or Emma Stone in La La Land or Halle or Gwyneth or really anyone in their Oscar-winning roles is crazy, and it probably stems from dislike of those actresses more than dislike of their performances.

What about Aniston’s performance in Cake is better than anything that those actresses did in their Oscar-winning roles? Even though I wouldn’t have given most of those women Oscars, I really think it’s a stretch to find a valid answer to that question.

🎂 [italic] Because you can't have you cake and eat it too !

Who cares if she can act?

She may be old, but she is one smokin' hot bitch.

We wouldn't charged her a cancellation fee if she had made a reservation with us.

R100 You favor Jennifer? But Angelina adopted you!

🤔 Let's set the record straight .....

Angelina NEVER adopted me. She wouldn't adopt anyone skinnier than she is.

[quote] What about Aniston’s performance in Cake is better than anything that those actresses did in their Oscar-winning roles?

You seem very passionate about this movie, OP.

I saw it in the theatre, and I hardly remember it--except for Jennifer with her hand on her back, struggling to get into the car, and then lying down. It wasn't really particularly interesting. (The maid's daughter was funny.)

Why do you think this film is so good?

[...]

[...]