Going by the reviews and movies shes done and is now doing, she seems to have the brightest future after friends finishes.
Jennifer and the rest of the cast.
Jul 1, 2003, 6:11 AM ET11 posts by 5 posters
11 posts
On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 10:11:20 GMT, [email] (Christopher) wrotE:
She *does* seem to have the brightest future, but still her movies have not been very good. It's just that the other actors on Friends are doing pretty bad in finding movies to star in. Bruce Almighty was a decent movie, but she had a very small part in it. I haven't seen any of her other recent movies, but I don't recall them being big sellers at the box offices. I realize the Friends cast wants to move onto other opportunities, but it doesnt seem like anyone wants to pick them up... I wonder why??
~Jess~
On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 17:40:45 GMT, [email] (Jess) wrote:
Errr their not that good actors and actresses to hold a movie on their own i.e. no screen presence to dominate a sceen, example in Pulp Fiction when ever Samuel Jackson was in a sceen he dominated it.
Lisa Kudrow was very good in both of the "Analyze" movies w/Billy Crystal and Robert DiNiro. Pretty good co-stars, I'd say! ~~~ Kathy
"Jess" wrote in message news:[email]...
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 17:35:22 -0400, "Kathy" wrote:
Co-stars are the supporting cast not the primary star(s) who has/have to carry the movie, and as far as Ive sen none of the Friends cast are that good i.e. none are A list stars like DiNiro.
Matthew Perry was brilliant in The Whole Nine Yards
Matt Perry Rules Matt LeBlanc Sucks David Schwimmer Will Direct Eventually Lisa Kudrow......Well.... She's Pretty Horrible Courtney Cox..... Looking Very Old Jennifer Aniston Is The Easiest To Market "Christopher" wrote in message news:[email]...
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 23:40:46 -0400, "Ian Gooda" wrotE:
awww... LK isn't *that* bad... I think the problem with a lot of the Friend's cast is that they got their start on a TV sitcom, where they played one type of character now for about 10yrs. Now I think it's just more difficult for them to change their acting to conform to another role. Furthermore, it's hard for the public and directors to see their potential as playing another role so they just kind of stick with characters that are not so exciting in movies.
~Jess~
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 18:20:08 GMT, [email] (Jess) wrote:
Hence the dreaded trap of aspiring actors and actresses.
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 20:06:01 GMT, [email] (Christopher) wrotE:
Very true... I guess it's better to get a start in movies rather than sit-coms. Only problem is that you normally get stcuk as an extra for awhile before someone actually notices you...
On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 13:16:12 GMT, [email] (Jess) wrote:
Yes, or more likely IF you get noticed, the more time elapses before you get noticed the harder it is to get noticed as every month an other batch of hopefulls comes on the sceen, and TV offers regular work and a regular paycheque, but as you pointed out, the longer you are doing TV work the harder it'll be to break into movies.
Thats why Courteney was reported to be wanting to go into 'production' its nothing dramatic as that's a WELL worn path for actors and actresses that find their 'star' is rapidly fading, and she probably knows that when Friends finishes she work get the same kind of work anymore.
If Jennifer is smart she'll go full out to get established in A list movies before its to late.
Lisa Kudrow is not bad. She was fantastic in "Opposite of Sex" playing against type and she has some great films lined up like "Happy Endings" and "Wonderland" where she plays John Holme's wife.
"Ian Gooda" wrote in message news:2vsMa.4334$[email]...