On his Hollywood & Fine blog, Marshall Fine wrote an open letter to The Hangover's Zach Galifianakis urging him to stay focused and not be lured into starring in scripts that Seth Rogen, Jack Black, and Steve Carell turned down. It's good advice, because Fine is right: Someone is going to want to turn him into a comedy commodity, and "Invariably, it leads the comedian to abandon his instincts — or compromise his vision — in pursuit of a massive payday. Or it leads the comic to believe that, in fact, his flatulence is vanilla-scented – and that every idea that comes to his mind or bursts from his lips is pure genius, deserving of the aforementioned buttload of cash."
Fine then runs through the actors whose careers went off-course or are threatening to. Comedy is subjective, yes, but do you agree with his analysis? A few highlights:
• He says Chevy Chase "went on to an undistinguished movie career notable for its lack of memorable films (possible exceptions: National Lampoon's Vacation and Caddyshack)." Since when are those films only possible exceptions?
• He says Dan Aykroyd never headlined a movie that didn't costar Jim Belushi that was worth the price of admission: What about Ghost Busters, Spies Like Us, Dragnet, The Great Outdoors, and My Girl?
• He says good marketing is behind the success of Adam Sandler, Will Ferrell, and Rob Schneider, as opposed to the quality of their movies. Maybe a little strong, but okay. "Each has dozens of titles on his filmography — and no more than three that you’d want to see at all, let alone more than once." Definitely true for Schneider (who I'd rather remove from this conversation entirely) and Sandler (though I suspect that number is too low for even moderate fans). But I'm torn on Ferrell: Of the films he's toplined, I'll only sit through repeat viewings of Old School, Elf, and Anchorman, but that's just because they don't play Dick a lot on cable. While I was let down by Blades of Glory and Step Brothers, I don't regret seeing them and I have watched certain scenes again…
• "The same thing is happening now to Steve Carell, Jack Black and Seth Rogen." I concede that there's a certain type of role that appeals to each of them, but I'm not ready to sound the alarm. At least not on Carell…
• "I find it dismaying when I read interviews with young comics who proclaim Sandler as their role model. I’ll give him props for films like Reign Over Me and Punch-Drunk Love — but little else on his resume. Sandler’s success is really what’s wrong with film comedy today." To me, that last sentence refers to the fact that a funny man becomes a franchise in himself when the humor stays the same even as the roles change names (see also: Ferrell and his sports oeuvre.). Becoming a "comedy commodity" is risky: You do what you're good at because it works and people love it, but the moment you cease to make us laugh, we call you a one-trick pony and suddenly, you're someone whose films half of moviegoers have to see and the other half couldn't be paid to watch.
Whose career do you think Galifianakis should model his after? Whose career would be your ideal for the comically gifted? (Do you think it's any easier for guys like Paul Rudd, and now Bradley Cooper, who are closer to what audiences perceive as the traditional romantic leading man? Even if they're able to avoid the self-franchise syndrome, they could still have to deal with romcom clichés?)








Should I know who Marshall Fine is?? Is it me or was this a pointless article? I find myself wondering more and more why I waste my time with this site. Its like you have a bunch of monkey’s writing the stories.
Didn’t you mean “that didn’t co-star *John* Belushi”? And while he wasn’t the star of the movie, what about “Driving Miss Daisy”? Didn’t he get nominated for an Oscar for that one?
As for Galifianakis, couldn’t he have a very good career just being the “spice” of a movie–that is, not the star, but a solid, funny, buzzed about supporting role? After all, he’s had small supporting roles in a lot of different types of movies. You have a better chance of lasting in the business that way.
I’m surprised he didn’t talk more about the travesty that is Eddie Murphy’s post-’80s career. Coming to America? Trading Places? Yes, please. Anything after that? no thank you. His movies have been getting increasingly ridiculous for years.
I’d say Galifianakis should follow the Jack Black career trajectory, minus the weird attempt at starring roles in sub-par movies. It’s okay to be picky!
Don’t forget Ferrell’s brilliant turn in the vastly underrated Stranger than Fiction.
I happen to be a fan of Chevy Chase in “Memoirs of an Invisible Man”, but, okay– I’m probably in a tiny minority there.
Dan Ackroyd was also the villain in Gross Point Blank, which is a pretty hip movie. And I happen to love his dramatic turn in My Girl.
Good marketing can’t save that niche once you’re stuck in it, and Sandler has been doing roughly the same humor for years… but he also takes chances. Again, I’m probably in a minority (pun definitely not intended), but I love Spanglish. And Sandler’s record is proven. He gets ‘em in seats and entertains. Marketing can’t save that. That’s people who like to laugh at dumb comedy. I can’t dis anyone for liking a Sandler movie.
Zach should just ignore that article and do things that look good to him. I’m not to worried about whether or not Between Two Fers continues.
First, Mandi, it’s John Belushi, not JIM. I could not disagree with the guy more. I’m no fan of Sandler, but for nearly a decade he was the uncrowned king of the box office. Pitt and Clooney have the marketing power, but Sandler brought the cheeks in the seats. For a number of years, he was the driving, consistent force of the American box office. Dan Akroyd made popular decisions early in his career that allowed him to be anything from a character actor in Driving Miss Daisy to a voice shilling the Ghostbusters games today. That he still can pick and choose says how talented he is. Jack Black is not new to this game either as both a comedian and an actor.
I guess what I’m trying to say, is comedians grab the zeitgeist and ride it until it’s over. Many of them ride it brilliantly. The smart ones grab the money and spend the rest of their careers as character actors. To say they’re “comedy commodities” is to misunderstand the box office and their talents.
In my mind, Steve Martin represents the best role model for any actor, comic or otherwise. His “hits” may be few and far between, but he strikes me as a man who has lived his passion, whether it’s comedy, writing or music. So my unsolicited advice (is mine any better/worse than this Fine fellow?) to Zach is: have confidence in your own abilities, and do what you love.
I can’t believe they haven’t yet changed Jim to John in the article.
How does ‘Mandi’ STILL have a job here? She may have ‘talents’ keeping her employed but they sure aren’t writing, pop-culture taste or knowledge (nor fact-checking).
Many people need jobs. Most of them would be a vast improvement on her. Please give some of them a chance, EW.