His lackluster performances in ODD COUPLE and on film in THE PRODUCERS makes it obvious that he's not even trying anymore. He used to be a talented guy. Now it just appears that he hasn't done any of his homework.
Was it just me who thought his Leo Bloom in clips from The Producers movie is the exact same person he played for Harold Hill in "The Music Man"?
I actually thought he was the one of the better parts of the film, and that he outshined Nathan Lane. It's funny, but too me it seems he's getting better with age. Granted, I never saw his Leo Bloom on the stage, so I have nothing to compare to, but His film interpretation was hysterical IMO.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/20/03
War Games
Torch Song Trilogy
Ferris Beuller's Day Off....
Election
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/9/04
He was stellar in Election. While the movie itself left me a little.... speechless.... But he carried that movie, IMO.
I think I would get lazy about my "craft" if I were contracted at $100,000
"He was stellar in Election. While the movie itself left me a little.... speechless.... But he carried that movie, IMO."
And that was the whole point.
Understudy Joined: 12/17/05
he's wonderful in THE PRODUCERS. I haven't seen ODD COUPLE, but his performance in MUSIC MAN for TV a few years back was just lame. Talk about MISCASTING!!!
I feel terrible for Broderick, that he has suddenly become the whipping boy of the theatre community. First, people hate his Felix Unger because he's too much like Leo Bloom. Now, when he plays Bloom again, people say he can't do it. I havent seen the film yet, only the clips on movies.com, but I must say, he looks perfectly fine. His Bloom performance here isn't anything far off from the stage version. The voice, the big eyes, the awkwardness--it's all there. So what's the big deal?
Interesting question.
Matthew is a terrific character actor, imo, and easily my favorite performer in The Producers (2005 film). I can see how others might feel that he doesn't demonstrate enough range; of course, with such a distinct voice, I imagine he must have a hard time disappearing into roles that are completely different from one another.
Updated On: 12/17/05 at 02:46 AM
Stand-by Joined: 5/5/05
Was it just me who thought his Leo Bloom in clips from The Producers movie is the exact same person he played for Harold Hill in "The Music Man"?
__________________________________________
No it wasn't just you. I kinda thought they were the same person.
The day he started.
I'm exaggerating, but still-I never 'got' him.
I don't know... I never really liked Matthew Broderick. He always seemed to me to have just one expression... I hated his version of The Music Man (whose idea was THAT?) and from The Producers clips I've seen I don't think I'm going to like him in that either.
Probably when he saw how people went crazy buying tickets to the Odd Couple. At that point he probably figured he could phone it in.
It might be better for the two of them to get a trial separation & appear in things themselves for a couple of years to get back on their individual feet again
Matthew Broderick told you he stopped caring about his craft? Wonderful!
It's not the actor, it's the material. Doing THE ODD COUPLE and the PRODUCERS again (and again and again and again) leaves no room for growth or improvment. Time to move on.
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
I have to agree with Jane 2. I never really "got him" either. He was charming as a kid in the Neil Simon comedies. As an adult I find him charmless and dull. He was adequate in THE PRODUCERS on stage. I found him forced and artificial in the film version. And a woefully pale imitation of the great Gene Wilder. I always felt Gary Beach and Roger Bart were the real shining stars of the stage play and I felt the same way after seeing the movie.
Don't forget :
The Foreigner - same schtick
The Music Man - the same
The Stepford Wives - the same
My guess, if he does Young Frankenstein (and I hope he doesn't ruin that too) it will be the same.
Understudy Joined: 3/13/04
what a totally lame thread. matthew has not stopped caring about his craft--that's a ridiculous blanket statement. he's been a solid member of our community for decades and has given Broadway some very, very fine performances in his short lifetime--from 'Brighton Beach' to 'The Producers' two decades later. besides, this 'what have you done for us lately' bull---- is so boring.
and, hey, if you don't feel a light was lit under his latest performance, perhaps the director could be just as easily at fault...ya never know the situation...
"Blanket Statement" is a blanket statement. But, what you have said holds some truth.
Once again, it is not Broderick as an actor, it is the pieces he chooses to do. The Odd Couple on Broadway?! Come on...how can anyone expect to take risks or bring something new to the table. THAT'S the "same old schtick".
NickatNight - You are right - we shouldn't be asking when he stopped caring about his craft - because we don't know if he did.
The more appropriate question is "When did Matthew Broderick become such a BAD ACTOR".
Happy now?
Still WRONG, South Fl Marc
"When did Matthew Broderick stop doing GOOD work"
It has nothing to do with him. It's the work. Clear now?
Updated On: 12/17/05 at 10:49 AM
A five letter word explains why he came back to the stage version of The Producers, the movie version & The Odd Couple. The magic word is MONEY
The money was too good to pass up. He would not be the first actor who did something just for money & won't be the last. Maybe with Lane he is not getting movie offers & stage offers are not rolling in .
Just an opinion
That is correct. The terrible, unnecessary revivals/remakes/adaptations pay the big $. So, as I have said, it's the work.
Videos