When did Matthew Broderick stop caring about his craft? — Page 3

P.S. It's hilarious that the ONE day you actually post something is the ONE day I return. It seems as though you have NO knowledge of the industry or what is happening on Broadway, because you never post about anything of substance.

Your posts usually stem from insightful thoughts mentioned in MY posts. Then you bicker. For no reason.

For this reason, your "I KNOW EVERYTHING AND YOU ARE WRONG" posts have no credibility. No one reads them--God knows I don't!

And stop PMing me with attacks. I could get you banned. Consider yourself warned.

It's not the roles, it's his ability to handle them. Everything I've seen him do on stage is, to me and in my opinion, an extension of Ferris Bueller. You don't need to look any further than TALLER THAN A DWARF or NIGHT MUST FALL. There he really did have the opportunity to show some range. I didn't see it.

---

I think for many performers that have seen some success, people (fans, casting agents, etc.) just want them to keep recreating their most recent, successful role. As a result, much of the work offered to them is quite similar. Not everyone can be fantastic every single time. I think some of the opinions expressed about Matthew Broderick can be said for Nathan Lane. Have we not seen him repeat similar performances in different shows? It happens!

As for "The Music Man" Matthew was hardly the reason it failed! Miscasting of many roles, uninspired directing, etc! Just not a good adaptation. (Just my opinion of course!)

---

But unlike Broderick when Lane has accepted diverse and dramatic roles on TV and stage he has excelled in them. I don't need to think back any further than TRUMBO.

---

Having Matthew Broderick follow Robert Preston as Harold Hill, even some 40 years later--well, he just can't even come close!

---

Alright...I actually LOVE Matthew Broderick. But that's just it...I LOVE Matthew Broderick and Sarah Jessica Parker. They're both essentially child actors who grew up and did well. Their careers are something to be admired. Both have worked consistantly and have had their good roles and bad roles, but...both have had extreme iconic roles. Think of a world without Carrie Bradshaw...or Ferris Bueller.

I think the problem with Matthew is that he gets pigeonholed into certain types of roles: The wormy, Felix Unger/Leo Bloom role. When you get stuck in these kind of roles which go as far back on stage with Taller than a Dwarf and movies...geeze...pretty much everything after Glory....you get stuck. He's still entertaining and fun to watch, but like Nathan Lane, his diversity in roles is lacking.