What is wrong with doing TV - steady job, steady face time. Generally no travelling so family life tends to be more stable [unless you do something like absolutely have to have your family live in LA and it is filmed in Vancouver or some shit so you commute twice a week]
The thing probably cost about $12 to make, so anything it takes in will make it successful from a financial perspective.
The idea that TV is a step down for film actors is pretty outdated, except for people on the top of the A-list.
Watch the trailer here, it’s got quite a bit of famous actors in it. While I was watching it I kept thinking “this movie looks like it might not completely suck ass” during all the parts where the titular Bucky wasn’t on-screen. Then, sure enough, when it cut to him and he opened his mouth I thought “nah, it’ll completely suck ass.” It’s a shame because I actually like Nick Swardson.
I’m sure every single one of you will hate this, but I laughed. Maybe that says more about me than the clip. 
The only good thing I can say about this movie is that I found out about 13 Assassins from a link on its Rotten Tomatoes page.
It is a parasite. While there is some good in it, it was stolen from another, better ad.
In the down staircase of her career, it really doesn’t matter if this movie is simply one step, or the floor at the bottom that finally breaks her neck.
They’ve really doubled down on using that over-tanned jackass in the commercials since I complained about him in the other thread.
I think the word you’re looking for is parody.
Every time that ad airs I rush for the remote as quickly as I can.
I was refuting the person who said her career apex was the Addams Family. I haven’t asked her why she’s starring in Pan Am.
Glenn Close, Holly Hunter, Julianna Margulies. There are no good roles for women over 40 in movies, and if that’s an exaggeration it’s true there are no good careers for women over 40 in movies these days. Moving to television is smart. And hasn’t been a career comedown in a decade. There might be a half dozen A-list stars who won’t do a series (and that’s only in America: think of Helen Mirren) but television is a far better place for almost any adult women to work. Maria Bello at 43 is taking Helen Mirren’s old role.
You can object that Ricci is only 31. But she’s been in the business since childhood and she’s not likely to star in rom-coms. And look at the other young actresses moving over from movies to tv shows this year. Zooey Deschanel will be in a sitcom this fall. Amber Heard is in The Playboy Club. Minka Kelly in Charlie’s Angels. And bunches of others who go back and forth between movies and tv. That’s the way it is these days, and it’ll stay that way as long as every major movie is action hero crap with ten males leads for each female.
It seems Swardson is aiming for the same type exaggerated naif character Steve Martin played in The Jerk. However, judging from the preview, he’s missing it by a mile.
Aside from the same name (and it’s a clichéd cop term anyway), how much similarity does Bello’s Prime Suspect have with Mirren’s? I don’t recall DCI Tennison, for example, waving her gun at a cab driver or getting punched repeatedly in the face.
Who cares? For the purposes of this argument it’s a pair of movie stars, one A-list, doing television. If Helen Mirren can do a television series called Prime Suspect so can Maria Bello, and it’s not a career ender in either case. kunilou is just plain wrong about this.
Wait a second! I never said a word about Christina Ricci (or anyone else) doing television. That was spun off by other people. My original point was that, by all rights, Christina Ricci had a promising career and now she’s doing Bucky Larson. I don’t need to cite anything else on her resume to make that argument.
Eh, Steve Buscemi did a bunch of lame Adam Sandler movies, too. Lots of good actors occasionally appear in lowest common denominator crap. Not really a good gauge of career trajectory.
breaking in to ask - have any films actually been rated 0% at rotten tomatoes? was the Palin film rated 0%? [I’d check myself but can’t get to their website from here & in the internet age Must Know Now]
What scares me the most is if the promo’s are what the advetisers think will get folks into the movie in a “surely it can’t be as bad as it looks” kinda game - and its actually worse.
Can anyone run down what the basic ‘plot’ of this thing is supposed to be?
According to Rotten Tomatoes, apparently some loser finds out his parents were in porn, and decides “You know, maybe it runs in the family!”
There have been a few. For example, One Missed Call scored a solid 0%, with 76 reviews. There’s also Pinocchio, with 54 negative reviews. And Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever scored a 0% with 108 reviews.
Palin’s film did get a 0%, but that’s with only 14 reviews posted.