MovieChat Forums > Where the Buffalo Roam (1980) Discussion > Thompson didn't like it, why should i ev...

Thompson didn't like it, why should i even bother to see it?

posted 20 years ago by Yea-Bo
49 replies | jump to latest

This is from an interview that Thompson did before "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" was begun. I am a huge HST fan and trust his opipion. If the movie sucks... it sucks.

BookpgSara: What did you think of "Where the Buffalo Roam?"

Hunter Thompson: Horrible pile of crap. Murray did a good job. But it was a bad script. You can't beat a bad script. It was just a horrible movie. A cartoon. But Bill Murray did a good job. We actually wrote and shot several different endings and beginnings and they all got cut out in the end. It was disappointing. Not to mention that I have to live with it. It's like go into a bar somewhere and people start to giggle and you don't know why, and they're all watching that f*cking movie.

full interview: http://www.gonzo.org/articles/other/aol.html

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] eatmorepossum 20 years ago

If Hunter jumped of a bridge, would you?

Despite what you might think, it is possible to watch both movies without comparing them to one another.

I'm Audrey Horne and I get what I want.

[–] Bandelero 20 years ago

To say that Murray did a good job is a great review from Hunter. He realyl doesn't like it when people messes with his work, and when the movie didn't turn out the way he liked it, of course he objected. I like the movie alot though.

[–] King_Slim 20 years ago

OK,

[–] King_Slim 20 years ago

OK, i loved the film (fear and loathing), and since ive read the book and thought that was awesome too, is it worth me getting this out?? BTW, Bill Murray is growing on me?

[–] liquidtool 20 years ago

Possum, you sound like an idiot with far too lofty an opinion of himself. Most of the people on this entire board rate "Buffalo" on it's own merit, and then as afterthought they mention that they "most likely would have enjoyed it more had they not seen 'Fear and Loathing'", or something of that nature.

Of course not all of the posts are that way, but, to me you still seem like a pain in the ass.

In answer to your question, "If Hunter jumped [off of] a bridge, would" I? Well, if the bridge belonged to him, and he knew that it was a safe drop, knowledge one might assume the owner of the bridge would know, Yeah. I might. Now, you, in your infinite wisdom, as displayed by the use of age old proverbs such as the one above, ought to have no trouble puzzling out the point of my preceding passage (you know, the one about Hunter's bridge).

But I was just making a point. No, I wouldn't jump off if he did. I'd throw you off after him.

"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently." -Nietzsche

[–] leeds_manc 13 years ago

you sound like an idiot with far too lofty an opinion of himself

[–] flagass 20 years ago

It's so-so. I think HST pretty much called it. The script was real cartoony it didn't have the real life element to it. Bill Murray was very good though. Watching Murray portray Hunter is what makes this movie watchable.

[–] wildbillkelso 20 years ago

Thompson doesn't like it because it is not true to him but the movie standing alone is hilarious. Fear and Loathing is much more darker and relies more on Thompson's writings. Anyone who likes Bill Murrays style of humor should love this even though it isnt the Thompson bio pic some people wanted it to be.

[–] gooselax27 16 years ago

I respectfully disagree. WTBR shows a much wider slice of Thompson's life. Fear and Loathing happened over a period of a couple weeks. If WTBR had a better director it could have been one of the best movies ever. They have some amazing scenes in this movie. The College Circuit, the Zoo Plane, and the Super Bowl, to name a few. They really *beep* up the script by having Oscar Ocosta being played by Peter Boyle. No disrespect to Boyle, but he was just the wrong man for the job. Bill Murray spent a little time with the Doc as well. There is a picture book of Thompson called Gonzo. Check it out, good pics of Murray shooting guns and John Belushi trimming weed nuggets.

"One God? Thats like one Drug!!!"
-Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

[–] haafket 13 years ago

One reason: To make your own opinion. I think the greatest thing that can happen is when I watch a movie without knowing anything about it at all. :)

[–] TheEnigmaticRonin 16 years ago

Hi, well the prob is I'm a huge HST fan, the thing is, I don't like Bill Murray movies at all, would u still recommend it? ,
tnx =)

The key to immortality is first living a life worth remembering - Bruce Lee

[–] runtheplacered 14 years ago

"I don't like Bill Murray movies at all"

Does not compute.

[–] thewood 14 years ago

i know ... whats that all about ...
_____

it frequently gets too weird for me
RIP HST 1937 - 2005

[–] Artie_Choke 16 years ago

Watch it, and see for yourself if you liked it or not. How much of a sheep can you be?

Go ahead, squeeze the wheeze!

[–] willpryoractor 9 years ago

exactly watch it and make your own decision!!

[–] saintkhalib 16 years ago

It's worth watching it just because of Murray's portrayal as Dr. Thompson. It's just as good as Colonel Depp's.

[–] liam147 16 years ago

In comparison, Stephen King absolutely hated Kubrick's version of The Shining, but most regard that to be a masterpiece.

[–] Serris 16 years ago

This isn't the Shining.

[–] sebastianlassebro 16 years ago

"In comparison, Stephen King absolutely hated Kubrick's version of The Shining, but most regard that to be a masterpiece"

So what!? Kubrick was a genius and King is an idiot.
The case with WTBR is the other way around. Thompson was the genius while Art Linson´s film really was crap.

[–] zroy_1 16 years ago

This film falls into an interesting category: it breaks a bunch of fundamental screen writing rules but there appears to be a method behind the madness. There is genius in the work; Bill Murray and the late Peter Boyle managed to create genuine one screen chemistry. The movie is jumbled much like Thompson's life. Like the media which the "acid generation" gave us it gave off the vibes of an acid experience without the acid. Much like the Merry Prankster's movement. This movie is very much disregarded because of "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" directed by Terry Gilliam. Fear and Loathing kept many of the same things from the book but ditched an essential plot piece to make it more "Hollywood friendly". This movie is a sort of masterpiece for the Thompson snobs, like myself. You may understand the absurdity of the film but it doesn't nearly scratch his surface in the way that "Fear and Loathing:On the Campaign Trail '72" does.
This film represents the failed attempt for a Gonzo screenplay. It wasn't received well and died, unfortunately, before something great could happen.

[–] chilone 9 years ago

So what!? Kubrick was a genius and King is an idiot

One of the most successful writers of all time? You're right! What an idiot!! He should totally re-think his life!! Perhaps you could give him some advice. SMH.

I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

[–] ben-729 14 years ago

"In comparison, Stephen King absolutely hated Kubrick's version of The Shining, but most regard that to be a masterpiece."

Fantastic point, also Douglas Adams was apparently heavily consulted on the wretched abortion of a stab at Hitchhikers Guide.....but as you can probably tell I'm not the biggest fan of it (horrific apart from Stephen Fry as the book).

I watched it because I was intensely curious to see what Bill would do with the role, and in return I was well entertained for the duration. Watch it if you want to, don't if you don't, but whatever you do, do it for your own reasons :)

[–] charliesafari 13 years ago

I could not possibly agree with you more about The Hitchikers Guide, probably my favourite book, and my most hated film, what were they thinking?

I come in peace, Shoot to kill!!!

[–] efroe 16 years ago

I was already a fan of HST's books (especially Fear & Loathing) long before I saw this movie, but shortly following it's release on VHS. Bill Murray's performance had me laughing so hard, I nearly vomited!! This movie is for the hardcore fan. I'm sorry that it wasn't pleasing to the late Dr Gonzo, but it certainly was to me.

The modern film more closely resembles the book, however, WTBR is a must see for any fan of the author himself. Keep an open mind.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JackZack 16 years ago

Shortly after the movie opened and vanished but quick, ROLLING STONE
published two articles about the movie. The first was really about
Ralph Steadman and his thoughts on Hunter as well as some of his
splatter artwork.

The second article described the troubled making of the film, from
Bill Murray having last second reservations about the script, to the
director Art Linson (who is usually a producer), to daily production
matters, to the disputed editing of the film. Bill Murray and Hunter
did some rewriting and reportedly, the prologue and epilogue were
filmed just weeks before the movie opened. Murray was reputed to be
upset that most of his narration was cut from the film.

I also seem to recall this article mentioning that Steadman
claimed to have seen several versions of the movie.

Murray's Hunter is great...spot on...the late great Peter Boyle is
quite amusing and watchable as "Lazlo" and the late great Bruno Kirby
is funny as the Jann Wenner character. The movie though is a mess.

I remember it disappearing after just 2 weeks or so from every
theatre in the Hudson Valley where I grew up.

[–] zeekveerko 16 years ago

"Thompson didn't like it, why should i even bother to see it?"

Because "Bill Murray did a good job" of capturing the essence of Hunter Thompson, and in fact, up until Thompson's death, the two were friends. In fact, the last article Thompson wrote for ESPN.com before he died involved an anecdote of him calling Bill Murray at 3AM (I'm not sure what any of it had to do with sports...)

Peter Boyle was horribly cast, much of the story didn't make sense, and yes, it's not a great movie, but it's worth watching at least one time for Bill Murray's performance, which rivals Johnny Depp's (and that says a lot for me, Fear and Loathing is one of my all-time favorite movies) portrayal in Fear and Loathing.

"You wanna talk jive?! I'll talk some jive like you never heard!" -- Royal Tenenbaum

[–] BostonDave1 16 years ago

I love how so many posters in this thread are somehow authorities on Hunter S Thompson as if they knew him intimately. Too funny how delusional fanatics can get...

[–] movie_nazi 16 years ago

The film was not that good. It just didn't have any balls, you know? Murray did a good job but I think the film failed to capture just exactly where Thompson was coming from. By watching the film he just comes off as a "wild and crazy" guy and he is so much more than that. The man really was very intelligent and had some really great beliefs. I think whoever directed the film and whoever wrote the script is to blame. Also Boyle as a Mexican-American lawyer? Talk about miscast.

My vote history link:http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=5504773

[–] JoeLoebner 16 years ago

You should see it. Forget what Thompson thought about it, he never knew $hit from shinola. This movie is enjoyable.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] zeekveerko 15 years ago

Uh, Thompson's lawyer wasn't Mexican-American, he was Samoan. Big difference.

"You wanna talk jive?! I'll talk some jive like you never heard!" -- Royal Tenenbaum

[–] jinx_malone 12 years ago

You're joking, right?

Please tell me you're joking. Oscar Acosta was Mexican.

-------------------------
"It's better not to know so much about what things mean." David Lynch

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]