Tom Selleck discussed his financial concerns following the discontinuation of “Blue Bloods,” the television program in which he played the top cop for the New York Police Department for 14 seasons, in a recent interview with CBS Sunday Morning. In addition, the actor is coping with health problems.
At his 63-acre ranch in Ventura County, California, where the meeting was held, Selleck voiced concerns about his capacity to keep ownership of the land now that his primary source of consistent income is coming to an end.
With an emphasis on the value of a steady salary, Selleck—whose ranch was once an avocado farm—frankly addressed the realities of financial stability in the acting industry.
Even though the actor had a long and prosperous career in show business, he told the interviewer that although he might be set for life in general, it would be difficult for him to afford to maintain such a large property.
In response to a question regarding his seriousness, Selleck underlined that he needed to find new employment in order to maintain his lifestyle and control his spending.
Many of his supporters are taken aback by this discovery, since they may have assumed that his long career in Hollywood would have guaranteed him a stable financial future.
HEALTH CONCERNS
Recently, there has been discussion about Tom Selleck’s health, particularly since he finished filming the last season of “Blue Bloods.” His health has been the subject of gossip and worries, especially in relation to his arthritis.
According to reports, Selleck may have arthritis, which is said to cause him a lot of discomfort and necessitated the use of a stunt double for some of the “Blue Bloods” scenes. The Hollywood Gossip reports that Selleck’s management have vehemently refuted these allegations, claiming that the actor is “fit and vigorous.”It’s
Selleck has not officially acknowledged any particular health concerns in spite of these allegations. Nonetheless, he has admitted in previous interviews that doing his own stunts over the years has worn down his body, especially his back. Astute viewers have seen that Frank Reagan, his character on “Blue Bloods,” walks with a limp, which has increased conjecture on his health, according to The Mix.
Remaining busy at seventy-nine, Selleck just published his well-received book, “You Never Know.” He still enjoys his life on his 63-acre ranch in Ventura County, California, striking a balance between his work and family obligations.
A horror movie is so gross and disturbing that it’s been banned in more than 40 countries. In fact, someone even got arrested for showing it!
Warning: The content of this piece may upset some readers.
Most people enjoy getting a little scared by a horror movie every once in a while, right? The kind that’s packed with blood, guts, and surprise moments that you can’t forget.
But do you think you could handle the most talked-about horror movie out there? This one is on another level.
We’re not talking about something like Sydney Sweeney’s Immaculate, which might cause a little buzz because of its satanic themes.
We’re talking about a horror movie so extreme that it’s been banned in over 40 countries. Yes, seriously!
It even got a film festival director in trouble, and he was arrested for showing it.
The movie we’re talking about? A Serbian Film. And believe me, I’m not exaggerating with how intense it is.
The story follows Milos, a retired Serbian porn star, who gets an offer to star in one last movie for a lot of money.
But soon, he finds himself stuck in a horrifying snuff film, filled with such disturbing sexual scenes and violence that some of it is too shocking to even explain.
When the director, Srđan Spasojević, was interviewed by Indiewire about what inspired the film, he said: “We wanted to show our true feelings about our region and the world. On the surface, everything seems polite and politically correct, but underneath, it’s really messed up.”
Released in 2010, the movie caused a huge controversy.
To be shown in any country, major cuts had to be made just to get a rating.
In the US, about a minute was cut to get an NC-17 rating.
In the UK, they had to cut a massive three minutes and 48 seconds from 11 different scenes just to show it in theaters.
In 2011, a bold film festival director, Angel Sala, got into trouble and was charged with “exhibiting child pornography” after a Roman Catholic group complained about a screening of the movie.
Although the charges were dropped, Sala could have faced a year in prison if things had gone differently.
Out of the 46+ countries that have banned the film, big ones like Spain, Australia, and Malaysia won’t allow it to be shown at all.
Critics are divided on A Serbian Film. Some admire the director’s vision, while others call it “disgusting.”
Film critic Mark Kermode said, “The director claims it’s symbolic, but if that’s true, the message gets lost in the ridiculous gore.”
“The most frustrating part is that regular torture porn is bad enough, but when it tries to be deep and artsy, it’s even worse.”
If you’re still thinking, “Hmm, I might give it a try,” a top review on IMDB might change your mind. It says: “I heard about this movie on YouTube, someone said don’t watch it, it’s made to disturb you. But I didn’t listen, and now I feel like throwing up. Please don’t watch this, just don’t, I’m literally crying right now.”
After reading that, I’m thinking I’ll take their advice.
If you’re in the US and still curious, A Serbian Film is available on Vudu.
But honestly? I’d skip it. Seriously.
Leave a Reply