|As an Actor||Supporting||1||$25,096,862||$0||$25,096,862|
|Best known as a Supporting Actor based on a credit in that role in 1 film, with $25,096,862 worldwide aggregate box office (rank #39,717)|
|Best-Known Acting Roles: Paddy Armstrong (In the Name of the Father)|
|Most productive collaborators: Daniel Day-Lewis, Jim Sheridan, Pete Postlethwaite, Emma Thompson, Saffron Burrows|
October 26th, 2014
Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was a risky show to make, for a couple of reasons. Mostly it was risky because of the public's perception of what a super hero show should be like. When the public's expectations are not met, they tend to react negatively, even if the movie / TV show is good. For example, Drive was sold as an high-octane action film, but it was a slow burning drama. The critics loved it, but a lot of people attacked the movie for not living up to expectations. A little closer to home, The Tick was a live action TV series that could be described as, "Seinfeld, but the four main characters are super heroes." This is a great idea and I loved the show. However, a lot of people were disappointed as it wasn't a super hero action movie. Of course it's not a super hero action movie. You can't make a super hero action movie on a TV budget. Even today, you can't make a super hero action movie on a TV budget. Unfortunately, a lot of people were expecting Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. to be just that, so while the ratings were huge the first night, they quickly dropped off. Were those who stuck with the show rewarded? Should those who stopped watching start again?
September 15th, 2013
Leverage's ended its run after five years, so it is a bittersweet time for fans. Sure, they get to complete their DVD collection of the show, but they also know there will be no more episodes in the future. Did the show at least go out on a high note? Do we get a satisfactory ending? Or does it just sort of fade away?
|12/29/1993||In the Name of the Father||Paddy Armstrong||$25,096,862||$0||$25,096,862|