MovieChat Forums > The Badge (2002) Discussion > Does Billy Bob hate this film?

Does Billy Bob hate this film?


I just saw an episode of Dinner for Five, and BB ragged on a film he did recently that went straight to video because he felt the director (I think he called him a "creepy weirdo") tried to change a comedy into a suspense film. Was this the film, because I know of no other recent BB films that premiered at Blockbuster? I just saw the film, and that would accurately describe it - it's really all over the map.

[wave 3] Whatever you wish for me, I hope you have twice as much.

reply

you might be right. i am watching it right now and it definately seems like billy bob wants it to be a comedy at all times but thats the billy bob we know and love always without a care lookin for the tail and a laugh. im just bugged out how arquette is married to a transexual. woman with a dong. its weird. thank god there was no love scene before her lover died.

reply

[deleted]

You're an f'n moron.

reply

Right on.

reply



I guess you're entitled to your opinion, I'd disagree with out however because Billy Bob is not only an actor but a very talented director as well. I think its a fair criticism from one talented director, Billy Bob, to another not so talented director.

reply

Speaking as a filmmaker myself, it is thoroughly hurtful and unprofessional to not just criticize, but activley attack a filmmaker in the way Thornton has attacked the fellow who directed this film. My first movie was made with no stars on a tiny, tiny budget. I directed it without any previous film experience and when it made its debut at a local film festival, it was well recieved. Now there is talk of finding distribution in Europe and getting it direct to video in the states. I've just finished co-writing my second script, which I am going to produce and my friend is going to direct, and it's been getting some attention from stars that might want to appear in it. Reading what Billy Bob felt the need to scream at Robby Henson, realizing that he somehow decided that it was neccesary to publicly ridicule this man's film and make a laughing stock of him, I've been given pause. Is it really at all worth it to have a star if there is a chance that they might turn on you like that? This is my collegue's first shot at directing a faeture film, he is in the same waters I was in my first time out, and as his primary producer, I feel it might be ill advise for me not to protect him from prima-dona stars that might get all huffy, decide they know better than him or I what the film WE CREATED should be, and knock him off his game. A director needs to know that his cast is with him, if not, things get tricky. It was a pretty crappy thing to do for Thornton (who is indeed quite talented) to put this guy off his game. I've yet to see the film, and indeed it might be garbage, but if it is, I have to wonder how much of the blame goes to Billy Bob, who might have had this director second guessing his every decision. A director needs a sure hand, and it was a terrible thing to rob Robby Henson of that, even if Thornton did think he knew more. The fact of the matter is that the project WAS NOT HIS and it was NOT HIS PLACE to criticize. Oh, and as for Thornton's directing talents? I'd call them a might bit questionable actually. I mean, Sling Blade was brilliant, but All the Pretty Horses sucked, and didn't Daddy and Them go direct to video? I do believe it did. Thornton has also written his share of crap as well, including the aforementioned Daddy and Them, the likewise direct to video and truly abysmal Camouflage with Leslie Nielsen, Don't Look Back, which if I'm not mistaken went straight to television and also sucked. If I'm not mistaken, and I'm not, Billy Bob was a key creative force behind the story that was eventually developed into Waking Up in Reno. How good was that movie? Oh, and just to ice the cake, lets bring in the painfully forced screenplay to the abysmal movie A Family Thing. In fact, if you consider Billy Bob's entire writing resume, only about 50% of what he's written has seen a theater screen, and a full third of his directoral efforts went straight to video as well, and another third sucked mightily. Maybe Thornton is a better director than Henson, but it dosen't give him the right to sieze control of Henson's film, especially when his record as a writer and director is spotty at best. Don't get me wrong, as an actor, he is one of my favorite performers, but there is a line that nobody has a right to cross on a film, and that line is the usurping of the director's job. Later!

Mike Olinger

reply

[deleted]

Movieguy, I agree entirely with what you say about the relationships between actor and director. Having been in both sets of shoes, though, I know how frustrating it is for an actor to feel at odds with a production and how gut-wrenching it is for a director to have to fight an actor. Early in my (theater) directing career I found it was best to bite the bullet and address the issue early--deal with the actor's frustrations or replace him (or her). With film the balance-points are different. Frequently the actor has the edge over the director and if push comes to shove the director will probably be the one shoved.


It's a point of view, of course, but I think "A Family Thing" and "One False Move" are both excellent scripts--hardly abysmal, certainly not profoundly awful! Not up to the subtlety of "Sling Blade," but they produced good little films.

Come read the site: http://www.FeralFiction.com

reply

Billy Bob didn't mention the director by name, but with a little help from the IMDB, it wasn't hard to figure out who he was talking about (I checked as soon as I viewed the Dinner For Five episode).
That's the beauty of Favreau's show: the guests speak with a frankness that they wouldn't in a different setting (talk shows, press junkets). As for the overwrought hand-wringing, weepin' and a-wailin' by that producer about Billy Bob undermining the integrity of first-time directors everywhere, remember, as Henry Hathaway once said to Dennis Hopper, "That was just dinner talk, kid."

reply

So Billy Bob is on a show where they discuss independent film. He has a funny story about a bad film he just made and said he didn't like the director at all. He never names the director by name or even the film, and he's a bad guy.

I he doesn't like someone, why should he have to stay quiet about it. It's not like he's launching an all out campaign against the guy.

And to the person who said he's made crap films too, name me a filmmaker with a relatively long list of credits that doesn't have one bad film on there. And the main reason I think All the Pretty Horses was bad was because that film was stolen from him by the studio. It was suppose to be 3 hours long and the studio decided to cut out a whole hours worth of material, which explains a lot if you watch the film. And Don't Look Back is a pretty great film too. I believe it was on Roger Ebert's top 10 of the year when it came out.

Maybe that's all a family really is; a group of people who miss the same imaginary place.

reply



I think you forgot the bottom line here....


It is a very poorly directed film. Billy Bob signed on because he thought it was a comedy. It's about transvestites and politicians for got sakes! It's a bad movie, and he was right to criticize the director.

reply

Mike,
Two things:

1. You make a big deal out of someone making fun of someone elses work and you follow your complaint about this with a scathing attack on that persons work. You flaming hypocrit! WTF?

2. As a fledgling filmaker, is it wise to attack someone who may one day read something you wrote while having significant power over the course of your carreer? Obvioulsy any new filmaker is a longshot to be successful enough to have their carreer destroyed by an A list Hollywood player, but, one should think big and assume that one day you might be big enough to have Billy Bob aknowledge your existance and use his leverage to send you back to waiting tables.

Make it three things:

3. Are you honestly saying that you have been "given pause" about whether your unfinanced tiny film should accept A list talent because they might hurt your feelings? Do you realize that distribution deals and financing hinge almost entirely on who is in the film and their marketability?

Like it or not, filmaking is a business, cheap indy films frequently cost millions and distribultion is mighty expensive. Investors want guaranteed returns, stars are the closest thing in film to a guarantee. Do not delude yourself into thinking you are going to spit out the next Clerks, Brothers McMullin or In the Company of Men. We can all count the number of nearly unfunded starless film successes on one possibly two hands. If you can get someone who can make your film bankable, you get them. If you are afraid to get your feelings hurt in the process, you are in the wrong business.

Arrogance without a resume or three known seconds of film success, they name is Mike.

S**T make it four things:

4. The point Billy Bob was trying to make is that a bad movie can destroy an actors carreer. Billy Bob could never work again if Badges ends up at the multiplex gets a Gigli and turns him into the next Ben Afleck (can you name his Christmas film?). If I am Billy Bob, and somebody is possibly costing me millions through what I percieve as bad judgement, I might just speak my mind as well. Some might percieve it as undermining the director, others might see it as protecting ones self. Everyone on any job should be held accountable, that includes film directors.

reply

[deleted]

For a man who claims to be a film maker criticizing another one's writing, you sure don;t know how to write. Why no paragraph breaks which are needed and make it much easier to read. I gave up after the first few lines; it got too boring.

reply

If you haven't watched the Dinner for Five episode for the context you are missing the point. They were having a discussion about picking projects and Billy Bob mentioned this film, but not by name and he didn't name the director. With only the tiniest of detective work you can figure out this is the film he talked about. Once again, he didn't mention the film or the director by name and he just stated his opinion. He wasn't trying to publicly call out the director or the production company. He was just glad that it went straight to cable. For a historical perspective Paul Newman took out full page ads about "The Silver Chalice" because it was a bad B movie he made before he got famous, and he was sorry people had to spend money on such a bad movie.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000056/bio

reply

Has anyone read the screenplay Billy Bob read when he signed on to do the picture?

(SPOILERS HEREIN)

Robby Henson is both writer and director here, but we can't talk about the "director's vision" without the context of the original script. The first half of "The Badge" is not a comedy so much as it's played for laughs. It's WRITTEN that way. The murder is a subplot and treated tongue-in-cheek. The picture introduces a lot of local flavor, which I found appealing. I thought it was an amiable rental to that point. And then it gears up for the suspense, there are no more laughs or smiles to be had (not even the cynical, ironic kind that are de rigeur for these kinds of characters in these kinds of movies), and Billy Bob experiences a sudden redemption and easy forgiveness. His father keeps showing up deux ex machina to explain the plot or past. In fact, his father points to the judge as a suspect for no other reason than he's the ubiquitous rich white guy in a suspense picture. And then, oh, Billy Bob does some remedial CSI and prowls the crime scene for maybe a hundred feet and finds the red shoe, then walks another hundred feet into the judge's backyard. Am I the only one who thought Billy Bob was kind of an idiot to live his whole life in La Salle Parish and not know where the country club is?

Which is to say -- did Billy Bob sign on for a different script? Was this one rewritten in midstream? Were jokes cut, scenes rewritten, gestures and expressions and vocal stumblings (the best part of the first 45 minutes, IMHO) edited? Does anyone know the (hopefully) meticulous planning that goes into a shoot, then the chaos that naturally occurs because it's a movie, then the added frenzy of rewrite on location? Is an actor "justified" in criticizing a director when he doesn't shoot the movie everybody else thought he wanted? Did the producers get the picture they wanted and, y'know, PAID FOR? Is there any substitute for a script everyone can reach consensus on PRIOR to shooting? Does a firm commitment to a script make a director's job a lot better for everybody? Is he/she (ha ha, I've been avoiding that construction for obvious reasons) more free to explore nuance of character, composition, transition, etc., and contribute creatively to the story everyone has gathered to tell?

reply

I liked THE BADGE, It isn´t bad film but I think that Billy hates a lot of films himself. May be, The badge, yes, also, ARMAGEDDON,

Billy is a great actor, is like a chamaleon, I liked very much, U-TURN, where he did two roles in one only film. do you remember?

reply

how on earth can thornton think this was a comedy? in an interview, patricia arquette stated she saw the movie as political in way. she had a transvestite lover who was murdered and no1 wants to know. the story for her character is about trying to ge the authorities to treat the death with some dignity. nothing comedic about that in my eyes.

reply

Right on, vichercules!

movieguy,

you talk crap about Billy Bob’s straight to video movies, but then preface your accolades about how your crappy movie might (repeat: MIGHT) go straight to video. why the double standard? i’m sure Billy Bob would put his OSCAR WINNING SCRENPLAY, Sling Blade, up against your crappy movie/scripts any day of the week. dude, you’re truly more delusional than i 1st thought.

t-s-t

reply

Come to think of it, I think Patricia Arquette dissed this film in her sister Rosanna's documentary "Searching for Debra Winger," when she said that a director (of a film in which she plays a stripper) didn't remove a rude male producer from the set after she asked him to do it. If I recall, she said something like...

"I told him, 'You have a lot to learn as a director, because I told you what I needed to feel safe, and you didn't do it.'"

I appreciate another poster's beliefs about not dissing your director, but when 2 prominent actors comment negatively about your direction, it doesn't sound good. I hope he learns and can rebound from this.

[wave 3] Whatever you wish for me, I hope you have twice as much.

reply

that was actually a movie called "Deeper than Deep" in which Arquette was set to star as Linda Lovelace alongside Charlie Sheen. Arquette quit the movie after this incident.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I thought this film was pretty okay, not GREAT, but still okay...it has some really good moments, my favourite being Gizmo's intro...the film COULD have been awsome, but it was all over the place, and their wasn't a fine balance between humour and suspence....

reply

It started fine, but turned into a very hohum action type flick at the end. Disappointing.

reply

I am not sure if she was talking about this movie or the Linda Lovelace movie, which was never made. It could ahve been this film, as she does have a stripping scene(sorry everyone, she is not nude in it).
And hey, she has only played a stripper one time...in this film...and a hooker one time...in 'True Romance'.
She certainly is a well respected and talented actress, who knows her stuff, and is very professional.
Billy Bob does not have a great track record, like Arquette does. Her co star love her, and she seems to be friends with her co-stars, after they work together..

Michael W Anderson

reply

No, it was the movie "Human Nature" Patricia was talking about.

reply

No, Patricia did many interview regarding Human Nature, was signed on before there was even funding, and has not said anything negative about the film.

reply

how on earth can thornton think this was a comedy?


I know, seriously. Why would a person come to that conclusion?

It's pretty clearly a serious theme.

reply

Are you guys sure it's this film he's talking about, and not "Levity?" The director of that film pretty much only has directed comedies, and is a former stand-up.

This film doesn't seem at all like it'd ever have had, or possibly had, a comedic slant. I thought it was pretty enjoyable.

reply

I think you're all wrong...he was talking about 'Waking Up In Reno'

That was supposed to be a comedy, but totally failed on that level imo.



"We're Americans. We don't plan, we do!"

reply


you know, i think you may be right. i bet he was talking about waking up in reno. besides, i think the OP got it backwards. i think billy bob said it was a suspense thriller that the directer tried to make into a comedy, instead of the other way around.

the badge certainly doesn't fit what he said


but, i'm glad i saw your post here, because before that i thought billy bob was talking about CHRYSTAL which i think was done just before the dinner for five episode

anyway, i recall the episode clearly. i may try to replay it


--------------------------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2dKNeLqNas

reply

i think this film had a lot of promise.

it stumbles here and there but i don't think it deserves ridicule. i think the comedic elements should have been maintained into the second half.

reply