In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

domesticelefant · 11 Oct 07 :: 19:55

I second what Tina said.

Illinoisguy1 · 11 Oct 07 :: 20:03

Justin isn't in it that much. I believe he's the narrator and has at least a few scenes one being a musical # where he has blood on his shirt.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 11 Oct 07 :: 22:40

Laura, you are KIDDING! You have GOT to see AD. Chris is flippin' adorable and brilliant in it. Seriously. You get to watch him transform to ebullient, goofy stoner to clammed-up, terrified little boy.

Forget your JT prejudice for a couple of hours. You will not be sorry. I've never been able to stand that guy, but he was terrific in the movie. Totally different than you'd expect. By the end, he will have you in tears. His scene with Anton Yelchin at the climax is one of the most powerful things I've seen on film in years.

Well, until Stephanie Daley, that is...

magicalturkey · 12 Oct 07 :: 00:59

I added it to my netflix list.

With the exception of Mandy Moore movies, because I think she's a better actress than singer, I tend to stay away from movies where a wash out singer tries to break into acting. Nine times out of ten, they just prove they have no talent in any kind of performing art.

Last edited by magicalturkey (12 Oct 07 :: 01:00)

TheCentralScrutinizer · 12 Oct 07 :: 01:24

Well, as much as I loathe JT's music, I would hardly call him a washout.

And see, I'm old enough to remember when Hollywood wanted everyone to sing, dance and act. Everyone. They got James Cagney to sing in Yankee Doodle Dandy. They got Marlon Brando to sing in Guys & Dolls. We won't talk about Elvis. What he did wasn't really acting. You know the movie Psycho? Anthony Perkins, who played Norman Bates, was also a singer. He did a lot of musical theatre and even released some jazz albums. Most people don't know that about him.

And what about David Bowie? He has always done both.

You're not an ER fan, right? My fave guy on that show, Scott Grimes, who plays Morris, has always done both. He started in musical theatre on Broadway as a kid.

And this might surprise you, Chris started out in musical theatre as a kid too. His mom has been talking a lot lately about how she wishes he would take up singing again.

Lots of singers act and lots of actors sing. It's really not that big a deal.

magicalturkey · 12 Oct 07 :: 01:36

I wasn't really talking about the actors who sing in their movies or were trained in musical theatre. That's fine. Shane West was in ER too, he's in a band too and he's great at both.

I was more poking at pop stars who try to "expand" their careers by putting out a crap movie, when there's no real proof that they can really sing or act. IE: Britney Spears in Crossroads.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 12 Oct 07 :: 02:34

Yeah, that practice is also as old as the entertainment biz. In the 50's you had Elvis and Fabian and all those other teen idols. Ricky Nelson. Frank Sinatra. In the 70's Michael Jackson, Peter Frampton, The BeeGees. Sting did it in the 80's. Madonnna. And most of what they did was craptastic all right.

I think the kids on TV bug me the most. I mean why all of a sudden is Miley Cyrus a superstar with a concert tour?

Mandy Moore did OK playing herself on Entourage.

And I'll go out on a limb and say there are some excellent rapper/actors. Some of them get into like the pop stars to make money off their name. But a lot of them are for real. Ice-T is amazing. Ludacris has a lot of potential.

Hey, here's one of my favorite singer/actors... Meat Loaf. Hee.

magicalturkey · 12 Oct 07 :: 02:45

Alright... honestly, I was just in a really bad mood when I had my mini rant. Not that I didn't mean it, but I was clustering all pop stars as generally bad actors and actresses. Which isn't true. Sometimes.

I wasn't thinking about the people who act and sing and do both fairly well.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 12 Oct 07 :: 03:00

Yeah, and I'm just yammering more of my useless show business trivia. Not really trying to change your mind. I've just got this thing where I love movies and TV and music and books and when anybody crosses over from one to the other and does it well, I'm REALLY enamored. Doesn't mean I think everyone is great who can do more than one thing. That's definitely not true. There's a lot of crap out there.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 12 Oct 07 :: 03:01

Oh, I forgot Will Smith and Queen Latifah. Love them both. Not that everything they do is gold. They've both done crap. But they've also been great.

Can't wait for I Am Legend

Illinoisguy1 · 12 Oct 07 :: 14:51

Just thought I'd chime in with some more casting news about the Star Trek film that stars Alpha Dog co-star Anton Yelchin.

John Cho (Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle) has been cast as Sulu, the Enterprise's helmsman, while Simon Pegg (Hot Fuzz, Shaun of the Dead) has signed on to play Scotty, the ship's Scottish chief engineer, in J.J. Abrams' Star Trek feature for Paramount.
Already on board are Eric Bana as the villain, Nero, Zoe Saldana as Uhura and Anton Yelchin as a young Chekov, the Russian-born navigator, as well as Zachary Quinto as a young Spock. Leonard Nimoy, who originated the role of Spock, is on board as well. Chris Pine is in talks to play the young Kirk.
The movie is expected to shoot from November-March.
Plot details are begin kept under wraps, but it is understood that the movie chronicles the early days of the Enterprise crew. The lead roles remaining to be cast are Christopher Pike, the first captain of the Enterprise, and Kirk's parents.

http://www.chris-marquette.com/forum/vi … 135#p17135

Illinoisguy1 · 12 Oct 07 :: 14:56

Forgot to add that the Star Trek film will have a huge budget, and the largest of any Star Trek film.

From moviehole.net.

Moviehole has received reliable word from inside the cream buildings on Melrose that "Star Trek" is going to have a bigger budget than any of the previous films in the series. I'm thinking Roddenberry's estate must have been auctioned off to pay for this puppy.

According to our contact, the film initially had a budget of $130 million but now J.J has been handed a few extra biccies – he'll shoot the thing with a fat allocation in the environs of $150-160 million!

It's a huge story they're doing - and boy does it sound orgasmic, even for a Non-Trekkie like me – so not surprised that it's going to cost so much, just surprised they got it! It's not only the most expensive "Trek" ever it's a "major gamble" for Paramount, says our insider. Sounds like someone's got some high-up pals at Paramount. Nice!

TheCentralScrutinizer · 12 Oct 07 :: 15:44

Holy crap! Well, I guess it's not cheap to reinvent the wheel. Paramount sure is putting an awful lot of faith into JJ Abrams.

TeeJay · 14 Oct 07 :: 01:37

Just watched Michael Welch's Numb3rs episode. I was getting a little too excited about it... It wasn't a bad episode, but Mike was barely in it. He had three scenes, only in one of which he actually talked. The first one was him crawling out of a crashed car for all but five seconds. The second was him lying unconscious in a hospital bed with bandages all over his head and the third one was him saying four or five lines about the accident. Not that he did a bad job or anything, but it wasn't exactly mind-blowing stuff. Let's hope his part on CSI:Miami is a little more exciting.

For the record: He played a 17-year-old kid named Kyle and he looked quite good, though you only really saw him with bruises and wounds on his face. And a bruise in the shape of a shoe print on his cheek. Not pretty. Make-up did a good job.

-TeeJay

TheCentralScrutinizer · 14 Oct 07 :: 01:43

Well, then I don't need a copy.

TeeJay · 14 Oct 07 :: 01:45

No, you really don't. The guy who played Faith's husband on Third Watch had a pretty big part. You a fan of his?

-TeeJay

TheCentralScrutinizer · 14 Oct 07 :: 02:09

I don't remember who that was.

domesticelefant · 14 Oct 07 :: 09:38

TeeJay wrote:

Just watched Michael Welch's Numb3rs episode. I was getting a little too excited about it... It wasn't a bad episode, but Mike was barely in it. He had three scenes, only in one of which he actually talked. The first one was him crawling out of a crashed car for all but five seconds. The second was him lying unconscious in a hospital bed with bandages all over his head and the third one was him saying four or five lines about the accident. Not that he did a bad job or anything, but it wasn't exactly mind-blowing stuff. Let's hope his part on CSI:Miami is a little more exciting.
For the record: He played a 17-year-old kid named Kyle and he looked quite good, though you only really saw him with bruises and wounds on his face. And a bruise in the shape of a shoe print on his cheek. Not pretty. Make-up did a good job.

Boo. And I was all exited about that.

TeeJay · 14 Oct 07 :: 11:11

Here's my review that I posted on Michael's IMDb board. And I need to correct myself, he had four scenes and not three, but two were almost the same because he was just lying unconsious in a hospital bed.

Numb3rs - 4x03 Velocity

I can't believe this show is already in its fourth season. It seems like yesterday that I saw the pilot... But let's talk about this episode, called "Velocity". I was excited about it ever since I heard that Michael Welch was gonna be in it. I loved him as Luke Girardi on Joan of Arcadia and have been watching what I could find with him ever since. I have talked to people who know him in person, and I don't need to mention that I think he's a very talented, skilled young actor with whole lot of range and potential--and I have yet even to see his best stuff.

Unfortunately, looking at the fact that I was excited about Michael being on the show, I was in for a bit of disappointment. Not by Michael's performance or the overall episode, but by the amount of screen time he had. He had exactly four scenes, only in one of which he had any lines. In the first one you see him for all but five seconds, crawling out of a crashed car. In the second and third, you see him lying unconscious in a hospital bed with nasty bruises and cuts all over his face and a bandage obscuring half of it. In the fourth one he has maybe four or five lines about the accident.

Now, I'm not saying that Michael did a bad job--far from it. Even with that little screen time, there was a moment in his last scene where you could see the emotion play on his face. Very well done. As a fan of his, I just wish he'd had a role where he would have had more to do than lie around motionless.

As far as the episode itself goes, I didn't go crazy over it, but it was one of the better ones. The storyline was interesting and not about something you see on TV every day (kids racing tuned cars in the streets at night).

What I love most about the show this season is the conflict that they introduced when they brought Colby back. In a "substitute agony" kind of way (if you wanna know what I mean by that, please look at my MySpace blog.) I love the awkwardness between Colby and David, and I also find it interesting to watch how Megan and Don are thrust in the middle of it and how Don handles the situation as their boss. It looks like Colby is gonna stay on the show, and I sincerely hope that's true.

I can't say I dig Charlie much this season. He constantly looks like he only just stumbled out of bed without going ot the bathroom after. Don't you have a razor and a comb, man? I get it that they wanna portray him as slightly disheveled, outside-the-box Math professor, but, guys, it's not working when you make it so über-obvious.

Another word about Larry... I also don't like what they're doing with him. I know they had to write him out of last season because he signed on to 24. The space mission was a nice touch, and I believed it. What I don't believe is this whole I-need-to-reflect-on-my-life-in-a-monastery thing. Granted, he was always a bit of an eccentric, and he still is the way he dresses, but I just don't buy it.

That said, I still love the show and will keep watching. What I will also watch is Michael's upcoming episode of CSI:Miami. Please keep us in the loop as to when it'll air.

-TeeJay

domesticelefant · 14 Oct 07 :: 11:33

TeeJay wrote:

I can't say I dig Charlie much this season. He constantly looks like he only just stumbled out of bed without going ot the bathroom after. Don't you have a razor and a comb, man? I get it that they wanna portray him as slightly disheveled, outside-the-box Math professor, but, guys, it's not working when you make it so über-obvious.

Do I have to be worried?

TeeJay · 14 Oct 07 :: 11:50

I don't know. You'll have to judge for yourself. I like Charlie less this season than any season before. He just looks unkempt. He looked disheveled before, which is fine, but there's a difference between the two. Also, he's become a little bland in my eyes. He hasn't done anything other than his usual math magic, which we've seen him do the same way over and over again in every episode. There's nothing going on with him and Amita so far, other than that she seems to have moved in with Charlie and his dad.

But you might still love him, he's your backup guy. I never cared that much for him in the first place.

-TeeJay

domesticelefant · 14 Oct 07 :: 12:25

TeeJay wrote:

I don't know. You'll have to judge for yourself. I like Charlie less this season than any season before. He just looks unkempt. He looked disheveled before, which is fine, but there's a difference between the two. Also, he's become a little bland in my eyes. He hasn't done anything other than his usual math magic, which we've seen him do the same way over and over again in every episode. There's nothing going on with him and Amita so far, other than that she seems to have moved in with Charlie and his dad.

Yeah, the writers should definitely pay more attention to Charlie's and Amita's relationship. Hopefully they will do in the new season.

TeeJay · 14 Oct 07 :: 12:37

I thought maybe the Amita actress was pregnant because they've been putting her in these hideous pregnancy clothes-like tops recently. But then she was wearing a more tight-fitting t-shirt towards the end of Friday's episode, and she didn't look pregnant. People might get bored with the two of them (Charlie and her) if they don't explore their relationship a little deeper some time soon, I fear.

-TeeJay

domesticelefant · 14 Oct 07 :: 12:57

The only actress who was pregnant in that show is Diane Farr. If Navi Rawat would be pregnant too, I would know. LOL
I certainly will not get bored with Amita and Charlie, but I wish they would show more of their relationships. They have Don flirting around like every second episode and Charlie and Amita get nothing! That's unfair, especially since the people I know don't like that Liz woman at all (including me).

TeeJay · 16 Oct 07 :: 20:35

I present to you.....

Michael Welch on Numb3rs. Very battered and bruised.

I found a continuity error. In other words, a goof. In the early hospital photos, he has a ventillator attached to his neck, meaning he had a tracheotomy and they placed a breathing tube right into his trachea there. In the later photos, there is no bandage or wound where the tube should have led into his neck previously. Gotcha! LOL

I'm no doctor, but I don't really see a reason why they'd give him a tracheotomy in the first place. It didn't look as if he sustained injury to this throat or mouth at an extent where they couldn't have intubated him if he needed a ventillator. Don't they normally only do a trach as emergency solution if for some reason they can't do a normal intubation? Of course something could have been obstructing his throat or it was swollen shut or whatever. But somehow this reeks of lack of research.

-TeeJay

Chris Marquette Message Board

#26 11 Oct 07 :: 19:55

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#27 11 Oct 07 :: 20:03

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#28 11 Oct 07 :: 22:40

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#29 12 Oct 07 :: 00:59

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#30 12 Oct 07 :: 01:24

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#31 12 Oct 07 :: 01:36

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#32 12 Oct 07 :: 02:34

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#33 12 Oct 07 :: 02:45

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#34 12 Oct 07 :: 03:00

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#35 12 Oct 07 :: 03:01

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#36 12 Oct 07 :: 14:51

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#37 12 Oct 07 :: 14:56

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#38 12 Oct 07 :: 15:44

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#39 14 Oct 07 :: 01:37

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#40 14 Oct 07 :: 01:43

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#41 14 Oct 07 :: 01:45

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#42 14 Oct 07 :: 02:09

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#43 14 Oct 07 :: 09:38

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#44 14 Oct 07 :: 11:11

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#45 14 Oct 07 :: 11:33

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#46 14 Oct 07 :: 11:50

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#47 14 Oct 07 :: 12:25

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#48 14 Oct 07 :: 12:37

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#49 14 Oct 07 :: 12:57

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

#50 16 Oct 07 :: 20:35

Re: In Praise of Chris's Colleagues

Board footer