This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"Superpowers, a scintillating wit, and the best body money can buy... and I still rate below a corpse."
11944 members | you are not logged in | 30 August 2014




Tweet







April 20 2004

Will Boreanaz be the next to suffer the Ziering curse. MSNBC article, "For every successful television show, there's one doomed acting career." talks about Ian Ziering's career (or lack of) after 90210 along with the top list of candidates to follow in his footsteps back into obscurity. David is one of those mentioned.

"But there’s a dark side to scoring a successful TV series that no one seems willing to face: in the ensemble cast of nearly every long-running show, there’s one actor whose career is destined to die with the show. That actor is The Ziering."

"TV actors who intend to continue having careers once their shows go off the air must plan very carefully to make it happen. They must spend every hiatus working on other projects — ideally, in roles very different from those with which they are identified in their day jobs."

The strikes they list against David is he's a headliner, he's untalented, and he's part of a TV institution.

They are also asking to vote - this is one case where I will ask everyone to vote for someone other than David.

I'm not sure if Boreanaz will have that much success after Angel, but it certainly won't be due to lack of talent.
Untalented, bah, there's not a single actor in the Jossverse I'd say was untalented. How can they say an actor who can be totally believable as a hero, and equally believable as an evil b*stard in untalented.

One questions whether or not they watched the show to come to the conclusion, or whether they merely read that it was a spinoff from a show with a silly name.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if his career goes tits-up after Angel, and that's not a question of whether he's a good actor or not, it's a question of whether or not the audience will be able to accept him as characters that aren't Angel, James Marsters would have the same problem, but changing the hair I believe help the audience to accept him as somone else.
What an ugly, mean-spirited article. I can't imagine how humiliated I'd feel if I was Ian Zierling and stumbled across that column.
That article was meeeeeeeean! I did enjoy the jabs at James Van Der Beek though. He's a running joke with me.

[ edited by electricspacegirl on 2004-04-20 22:26 ]
People still read MSNBC? Wow. Snark for the sake of snark and pointless at that.
It's ugly and mean-spirited, yet it's true! Ziering just got to be the poster boy for something that is a fact of ensemble cast shows.

I don't think Boreanaz should be labeled as untalented though! I think he's made some bad choices, movie-wise, but hopefully that will improve. He couldn't have had all that many options while doing Buffy-verse work anyways - when you only have summers free to work on independent projects you take what you can get.
Well in "I'm with Lucy", his hair had blond tips and in the upcoming Crow film his hair is longer and his look is somewhat different - he did the "White Flag" video around the same time of the crow. I think they are mistaking David for really being like the character he plays - which if they even watch more than 1 episode you can see that is not the case. I'm not saying he'll blow them away at the academy or anything but I think he has shown as more range than Clooney or Pitt for that matter and I think if given a chance he may have a pretty good career left in him.

Also the Ziering effect has been around for awhile now and even Ian knows about it and he makes jokes about, I guess he knows any publicity that is getting him mention may be good .... remember the hollywood adage there is no such thing as bad press.

One last thing, the authors of this article also write for the television without pity site.

[ edited by RavenU on 2004-04-20 19:55 ]
Agree that it was incredibly mean, but probably has at least a little truth to it ... making me again wish Marsters did more acting during the hiatuses and less vanity band and convention-going--which stroke his ego but do nothing to build his career.

[ edited by herself_nyc on 2004-04-20 19:55 ]
Or, you know, maybe he enjoys making music? James Marsters strikes me as the kind of person who doesn't really care about his career so much as doing what he loves.
[Shatner] Must.. resist... encouraging... mean writing behavior..! Can't... click on link! [/Shatner]

Actually it wasn't so hard to avoid it. The mere mention of MSNBC keeps me away easier than castor oil & vinegar.
I really don't expect many of the Whedonverse actors to get very far (not saying if they do or don't deserve it, just a realistic comment on actors' futures after being in long-term genre shows.) That being said, I think Boreanaz has a better shot than Gellar at this point.
I thought it was a mild article. They do point out successes at the end.
This article was mean spirited and probably written by someone "untalented". First off the article didn't seem to be very professional. First off your using an actors face for icons, second your calling people ugly and last accusing people of being untalented.

I would argue that everyone of those actors had some level of talent. They had to read for the parts and beat out other actors. Miami Vice was one of the most popular shows of its time and I bet nobody was arguing back then the lack of acting talent. I admit that I don't think DB will ever be a superstar. I even feel the same way about SMG despite the movies she is signed to do. Saying they have no talent is way over the top.

We should bombard the MSNBC editor email about how rediculous and unprofessional this article really is.
Much as I love Whedon and his programs, there's about a zillion actors I can point at and say, without the nuturing touch of Joss, I wouldn't watch them in much of anything else.

Boreanaz is one of them. Sadly, Nic is, too. Charisma Carpenter. Michelle. Emma Caulfield.

About the only actors I'd put some effort into seeing are Aly, Alexis, ASH, J (because he's very underrated), and James. And I have my worries about James.
I agree with the wondering if they've actually watched more than one episode of Angel before making their judgement of DBs acting ability. In three years of Buffy and five of Ats he's shown more range, and been stretched more by the scripts, than most actors do in their entire careers and done an excelent, believable, job.

But I suspect there is truth to the suggestion that actors need to do as many other projects in completley different roles as they can before they get typecast. In that respect DB will suffer, in eight years he's done Valentine and The Crow and JM has done a bit part in House on Haunted Hill. That's not a lot in eight years! Michelle Trachtenberg has done more in one year, and has picked a range of different movies and roles. Eurotrip won't feature in the next Acadamy awards but has shown her as something other than Dawn.
Why has this turned into JM bashing? I thought this article was about DB. I disagree with it, by the way. I think some of the Jossverse actors are going to surprise people.
Yes, zz9, but MT also has the benefit of only being in Buffy for 3 years. She is going to have a much easier time of escaping being "pigeonholed" by that role, whereas SMG is ALWAYS going to be remembered as Buffy. People often forget that SMG was a major daytime star and even won an Emmy before her job as Buffy. For better or worse, SMG is going to be "Buffy" until she dies. And then, her obit will probably say "Played eponymous heroine of Buffy the Vampire Slayer for seven seasons on tv."
MSNBC really should put the fact the writers of this article also run TWoP in their byline. When you read it knowing that it is intentionally snarky it's a lot more entertaining.

Also, in the first season of Buffy some of Boreanaz's acting is pretty bad - but he did get a lot better.

[ edited by prufrock on 2004-04-20 20:52 ]
WTF? David Boreanaz is NOT untalented. Doesn't Robert Bianco, the best TV critic IMO, consistently praise David, ranking him in his list of top ten TV actors (I think he might even have been number one last time). And I wasn't aware that David ever had a drug problem, either. David and James have the best chance of having ongoing careers out of anyone on Angel.

*Sigh* I voted for Michael Richards.
Yes, let's count the ways Boreanaz has improved. Number one: that Irish accent. Let's face it, the first time he tried it, cats making love in an alley sounded better. But now, not so bad.

All in good fun, people, all in good fun.
I think you can see David's acting improve in the course of the five seasons of Angel. He can do a lot of action, which is always good for an actor. He probably won't run out of jobs.

Btw on the Season 4 DVD commentary for "Spin the Bottle" Joss says that he thinks David will have a big career. I thought it was a bit odd, because Alexis Denisof does the commentary with him and Joss doesn't say anything like that about him ;)
What about the fact that most people haven't seen Boreanaz or Marsters in these roles because of, say it with me people, LOW RATINGS. But I guess what counts in Zieringhood is whether casting directors have seen them & feel they can't do anything else?
Whether they're being snarky or not, I think the writers of the article are grossly underestimating what DB is capable of. He's clearly not untalented, having managed to carry his own successful-in-its-own-right series for five years (and as was pointed out above, through an affecting, compelling character evolution and emotional arc that few other actors will ever have the good fortune to experience in their careers).

It's also possible he'll end up achieving greater success behind the camera than in front of it as time goes on; he did earn a degree in film at college, and this season's episode "Soul Purpose" was as good as many that were done by seasoned series directors. He said at the time of filming SP that he hoped to do more of that kind of work, and by all accounts his co-workers agreed that it was something he was good at and should definitely consider pursuing (especially as he ages). I wouldn't write him off just yet. He's still young, he's easy to work with, and his agent is one of the most well-connected in the business; I think he'll find work as long as he wants it, though not necessarily of the block-buster variety.

Personally, I'd love to see him go the indy-film route, just because I think he'd benefit from getting more involved in more adventurous kinds of storytelling. Though I think he could easily fill the sort of roles that Harrison Ford is aging out of, now that I think about it....
It is mean-spirited, but that's par for the course from TWoP'ers. The reviewers at TWoP are not known for their critical acumen, so I can't give much credence to their "insights" here. It's just nonsense.
ill probably get creamed for saying this but there are better actors in the whedonverse than DB. hes not that great, JM is a lot better, and so was SMG. i like the character of angel and i like DB but i still dont think he has much of a future after Angel ends.........and someone above said he has more of a chance to make it than SMG......lol..sorry not true at all. i hope he does great, but i dont see it happening. and i think SMG is doing pretty good so far of getting other roles despite being known for Buffy..............oh well, only time will tell. i could be totally wrong...........

[ edited by norman on 2004-04-20 21:35 ]
First of all, I haven't seen 'bashing' in this thread yet, so cal, keep your hat on. Secondly... let's not take an article like this so seriously. Chill.
Well, what a mean freak'in article. Obviously, there are people out there who do not recognize talent. I feel sorry for them, but, those who of us who know better - can have a good laugh - anyway it is only 1 opinion. Cheers everyone!
prufrock - they did mention it - it's the very last line in the article ... "Tara Ariano and Sarah D. Bunting are co-creators and co-editors of Television Without Pity".

As for JM not making movies and such during his stints on Buffy and Angel well I don't think there was much call for bleached blonde pale dudes (unless of course someome had made Powder II or and Village of the Damned film). Remember both James and David were not allowed to tan because of the roles they played.

Actually looking at the list he is included in I think it's a compliment cause all but 2 of those shows (Angel & Dawson) ended it's run in the top 20 shows. I would have though Jerry Orbach from L&O would make that list or perhaps Sam Waterson - I could think of a lot more Z people to be on that list before David but hey like they say any pubicity is good publicity. :)

[ edited by RavenU on 2004-04-20 22:19 ]
I think David got better the longer he's been in the acting business, all those directors, other actors, it's all learning, 8 years of Angel, especially Angelus performances, he can easily do villian roles.
I agree with Caroline that people shouldn't take this article too seriously. You could list a ton of actors who were on hit shows that didn't have much of a career afterwards and it didn't matter how talented or untalented they were. I don't think we need to start comparing the different actors on Whedon's shows either and pitting them against each other. It will be tough for all of them to have successful careers after because that's how it is in Hollywood on a regular basis.

Personally, I think DB is a great actor but the part of Angel is about a rather low key, quiet guy. When they let Angel show his humor or become Angelus, we get to see some really great acting. Oh and he definitely improved the longer he was in the role. I hope he, and all of these actors and actresses have great success in the future.
*touches head* No, hats still there. :-) I think both DB and JM will do well outside of AtS. I hope that all of the cast do. Sorry, if I took some comments the wrong way.
Heh, fair play to ya, cal.
The competition for good roles is probably hard enough without having to deal with subjective and/or mean-spirited speculation that someone's career is going to go down the toilet.

That said, I just say "boo hoo poor you" to Courtney Cox who made, what, $1 million an episode for Friends? And her castmate Jennifer Aniston whose character in The Good Girl seemed to express her ennui through perfectly groomed eyebrows. Kelsey Grammer's Frasier salary is supposed to be about$1.6 million an episode. If he gave it up, that would almost pay for an episode of Angel. Who cares if they never work again. They don't have to.
Hmmm, I've seen articles more mean spirited that this one so...

Anywho, with that said, I don't see any of the current Angel actors making it big at all, that includes DB (He needs to find himself a better agent), Alexis (as much as I love him so), James (He's 41 going on 42 and unless you're an already established star, not a lot of *lead* roles coming in for the older generation), Amy Acker, JAR, Mercedes, and even Charisma (I have low expectations for her UPN sitcom, not because it's her sitcum, but just because it's on UPN). Just don't see it happening. Mark my words though... SMG and Alyson are gonna be HUGE!!!
Wiseblood, doesn't he have a Harrison Ford look on his face sometimes? And I say that as a Harrison Ford fan. Probably can't hurt to be compared with someone really famous :)
RavenU, I said they should mention it in their byline - not buried in their blurb at the bottom. Most people don't read those and by the time they get to them they're already upset.

I won't spend too much time defending TWoP, even though it is one of the best television sites out there and I love it. I admit the often brutal commentary can turn people off - but it's the site's mission to relentlessly skewer all things television. It's not for everyone.
I dunno. I think it's kinda spot-on, as a few posters have mentioned above. I don't expect any of the regulars except Alyson and SMG to really go anywhere huge after the shows. Maybe working behind the scenes on TV shows, as was previously suggested. We love them, but to most other people everyone except the two ladies are C-list actors at best.

Both of them managed to parlay their Buffy career into movie success while they were still on the show. You can't really say that for any of the others involved, sadly.
You know what? I think he's a truly talented director. Really, his ep had a special shine this past year on so many levels.

Being 'in his head' may not work so well for him as an actor--though he does have a very nice 'John Wayne' qaulity. But his seeming ability to analyze and be a 'thinker' are some very important gifts for a director.

Why should one always stay at the same task if new challenges are available? And like great actors, being a good director isn't something you can teach--you lean a lot on native gifts. Stuff you are born doing. I think he'd cinch it as a director.

Consider Ron Howard.
Well, talent is really subjective, isn't it? I know some people think Nick Brendon is the best actor on Buffy, while I think he's just doing a bad immitation of Chandler Bing. I think James is amazing, and some people think he's an overactor. Just really all in a person's taste.

Personally, I don't expect the actors to go on to great careers, as much as I hope differently. Very few people make a successful leap to the big screen, or better careers beyond their tv existence.

And just to give an example of what I consider TERRRRRRRIBLE acting, check out Tom Welling on Smallville. I can tell he's trying, but the poor kid only has 2 facial expressions, and that's if you really look hard for them. And I'm sure someone else thinks he's Emmy caliber.....different strokes.
I do think it's important to not let someone's pretty face cloud your judgment of their acting ability. Which is why I consider James dog ugly.......;)
Rogue Slayer, I agree with you about Tom Welling. And, actually, the entire cast of Smallville has that problem. That's one of the reasons why I've never been able to watch more than 10 minutes of that show at a time.
As far as the cast of Smallville goes, I agree on all of them but Micheal Rosenbaum. He is the only thing that show has going for it. But this article is completly wrong about David Boreanaz. He is very talented-just happened to pick some flop movies.
**cough, cough** Seth Green **cough, cough** is bigger than all the other cast members combined and he just keeps on working in front of and behind the camera. Actually, his association with BTVS is hardly mentioned anymore in interviews. Although he is still close to a lot of the BTVS cast members.

**cough, cough** Marc Blucas **cough, cough** is starting to make his move into features with starring roles in First Daughter and the new MI 3. Also he's has been getting great reviews for his roles in independant films like "Prey for Rock & Roll".
My favorite season of Angel is the second and I'm constantly amazed by the extraordinary range of his acting abilities. He plays every type of role you could imagine in that season, and he seems to do it so effortlessly. He's very subtle with the character sometimes. I think that if he chooses the right roles, nothing can stop him. He's definitely got the chops to be a top-rate director, too.
RavenU, I agree with you on Seth Green. I think he's succesfull. He's doing alright. But you can compare Seth Green with AH, SMG etc. Seth Green had more time to have some non-Buffy project under his belt (5 years).
Elo, DB *does* get a Harrison Ford look sometimes, doesn't he? Glad I haven't been imagining it. He emotes that soulful, manly long-suffering vibe so well that even Ken Tucker said DB's 'macho vulnerability' was on par with James Garner as Jim Rockford, even. Not a bad comparison, if you liked The Rockford Files. I mean, c'mon, there's got to be someplace in the TV and film world for macho vulnerability -- if Harrison is off doing carpentry and riding horses with Calista on his ranch, I say DB should get a shot at carrying the torch. ;)
I think of DB as a really good character actor. He plays evil very well, he can probably have a long career in the Action and Horror genres if he wants.
"It is mean-spirited, but that's par for the course from TWoP'ers. The reviewers at TWoP are not known for their critical acumen, so I can't give much credence to their "insights" here. It's just nonsense."

Seconded.
It is hard to take that article seriously, especialy with the "ugly" catagory. I honestly don't agree with the swooning over the looks of half the people in Hollywood so I am not going to take this dude's writting as The Freaking Word.
Oh, yeah, I forgot about Michael Rosenbaum. He is really good; the best actor on the Smallville cast. I remember when he was on "Zoe, Duncan, Jack, and Jane."
While it may be fine for a snarky article to be posted on TWOP, having this piece on an "actual news" site sends the wrong message.

That being said, I would never thought that this was meant to be a serious article due in part to the ridiculous chart at the bottom.
I found the article to be pretty funny and truthful, though I certainly didn't agree with David being labeled as untalented. I think that too many people confuse subtlety in a role with lack of talent, but the fact is that Angel tends to be a subtle guy. He is Mr. Broods A Lot, after all. In the past 8 years, the true fans have seen David do everything from drama to comedy to action to villainy, and he's been great at every one of them.

I'm not sure who in the Buffyverse has a real career ahead of them, but even if they end up unemployed it certainly won't be for lack of talent. Well, maybe in Iyari Limon's case, but certainly no one else's.
Ummmm, this b!tch who wrote the article seems to forget the power of a Dido Vido!?!? He's set for life.

ghost spike(2nd post for this article) said it and I hafta agree(ugh, not with him!j/k) Sure, maybe my love for the Angel Verse makes me a little biast(or is it unbiast, I always mix em up)
But I truly feel there hasnt been one bad actor in this universe of Joss' and Co. I really think Angel and Buffy has had some of the most talented actor of this generation, seriously! I mean, it can possibly be easy having to portray one of these characters for 3, 6, or 8 years like a couple have had to, always growing and always changing as their arcs do. I think they are all truly magnificent.

I mean hell, I was a hardcore devoted fan of 90210(Im 24, yeah Im from that generation...sorry) for it's entire 10 year run and I cannot think of a single moment from that series where I cried. Where I shed tears. Where I screamed at the people and what they were doing. where I got goosebumps. Not only David, I fimrly believe and pray that all these people that have made me go through so many motions over 5 years land on their feet and take H-town by storm - and they will

And besides, they still got the couple of movies next year to work on (gawd I need these funking movies like a fix!)
I don't know why or how David Boreanaz ended up on that list, but that's perverse!!! But clearly, the authors do not recognize brilliant acting with the potential to grow and expand into a lifelong career if it danced naked right in front of them . DB has been dedicated to the Buffyverse for eight years, now it is his time to show the world how diverse his talents are. He will prove them wrong and I can't wait to see what he does!
This could happen, unless he plays it smart like most of the Buffy cast (excluding Nicholas Brendon...sorry). Hopefully David will find work, but lets hope he doesn't get too busy for Angel. Like Sarah Michelle Gellar's scheduling conflicted with her Angel gues appearance...I hope that movie (The Grudge) is one of her better works, I hate seeing her talent wasted. But back to David, I think he will kick ass in movies and other T.V things.
I'm actually looking forward to the new Crow film, whenever it materializes. The first one was stylish and fun, the next two forgettable messes. But I love the idea of DB playing a 40-ft. tall bad guy who gets to chew the scenary for a change. I hope he wears lots of creaky, funky leather that you just know smells like sweat, and grins lasciviously, while at the same time astonishing critics and thrilling fans by portraying unexpected depths within the character which would have gone unmined in lesser hands.

I plan to sit up front and enjoy myself. :) Because even if it's bad (which may not be the case -- early buzz has sounded more promising than I would have ever expected, especially about his performance), it's going to be fun to watch him on the big screen.

It's funny. I would never in a million years have cast DB -- a hunky, cheerful, sun-burnished, goofball jock -- to play an ensouled, conflicted do-gooder vampire. It sounds doomed from the onset, yet here I sit, convinced, converted and addicted. Ultimately, it was his conviction and energy and not his look as Angel that won me over. He's so physically imposing and has such gravitas for a young actor, and there's an edge and focus he's just started tapping into in the past year or so that's very exciting to watch. Kind of crackly and intense, like early Pacino (or Mickey Rourke circa Barfly or Angelheart, when he was good).

You know, like when Angel is just standing there, still, but all this emotion is bottled up inside him and he's just a hair's breadth from exploding? Or like that scene in the hospital when he almost chokes Wesley to death (that string of spit just killed me)? Or when he and Connor go head to head at the end of 'Deep Down'? Those are the kind of Angel moments I rewind again and again because there's something there, some mysterious thing conveyed through more than his expression or voice that grabs me and won't let go. Whatever it is, I want more, and I hope future TV and films offer DB many opportunities to take that energy even further.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home