MovieChat Forums > Overnight (2005) Discussion > Maybe Duffy wasn't THAT bad?

Maybe Duffy wasn't THAT bad?


First I'd like to say that I am not a Duffy fan. I liked Boondock Saints to a certain extent, it's a decent flick, and it's impressive considering it's the directorial debut of a bartender with no background and who also wrote the script, but I do not consider it a masterpiece.

I just watched Overnight and obviously I was disgusted with how Duffy acted, but is he really the absolute devil? He has some issues, and yes, fame got to his head way too quickly, but can we really judge a person by a subjective documentary made by people who hated him?

If someone films me punching you, and then you beat me up, but then they only edit the footage and show the part where you start hitting me, people will think I'm the victim. All I saw in this documentary where bits of Duffy acting like an *beep* but do we know what got him into that position? One of the most extreme ones was when he was yelling at the phone.

But what if that guy really was an ass to him? He was just being effed over by Weinstein & co. so I'm sure he was an emotional mess, and just couldn't take it anymore.

I read here some pretty interesting opinions, like "he hurt the people who stuck by him and believed in him" -- really? Did they actually help him cause they believed in his talent and wanted to see him succeed, or did they help him because he had a few hundred thousand dollars and a ticket to stardom, and they wanted a taste?

I'm not defending the guy, he obviously was at fault because you can't fake a documentary about a decent person and turn him into a monster. He has to be short-tempered, narcissistic, etc... to put himself in those positions, but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that maybe he was working with a bunch of shallow opportunists who wanted to cash in on his deal.

I read the interview with the two creators of the documentary from AintItCool and they came off just as bad as he was. Like saying he could have been in the closet and making fun of the sequel, are these really the people you trust to give you an objective view?

Don't get me wrong, I couldn't care less, but I am a filmmaker myself and when I did my short film everyone on the "set" kept butting in and giving me opinions. You should do this, and that, this doesn't work, etc... Unfortunately most of the cast and crew were friends with no real experience, and all of them wanted to make changes to my movie, it was VERY ANNOYING. Now I'm a calm and civilized guy and I just answered them respectfully. But what if I wasn't? What if instead of a short movie I'd be doing a 15 million dollar picture? They'd want a taste of that money and they'd be worse, and I'd be pretty nervous about not screwing up the movie, so I'd be worse as well, so it could lead to some really bad arguing...

And if someone is filming and showing only the bits where I get mad, it might make me look like the *beep* So don't be so quick to judge. We don't know these guys and we weren't there.

reply

I disagree that it's impossible to capture bad moments from a decent person. That sort of decent person doesn't exist, it's a pipe dream. Find any random person. Capture them over a long period of time, or during times of stress. Pick the worst moments. You can make them look like anything you want them to look like (especially when they are young and naive and don't guard their words). Viola: Arrogant jerk.

In the case of Troy, he had a right to be quite angry. He didn't 'fail to secure rights to back-end sales', as I've heard it put. He was cheated deliberately, and his relative naivety used as a weapon against him. He was defrauded of millions of dollars. Something to become angry about, imo. Do you think a decent person can be captured looking like a jerk, after you steal a few million dollars from them? Better believe it.

Did they mistreat Troy out of envy, like he says?
According to Billy Connolly, and many other members of the cast: YES.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAjm_ChF-Qk&feature=channel
Envy was one of the primary reasons for the attack on Duffy, according to the well-respected, likable and good-natured Connolly. Money, of course, was another. It's easier for them to suffer looking like a cheat, if at least they can convince the public that 'the person had it coming'.

reply

Hey, I'm with you on that one. I agree cutting a movie in a subjective way can pretty much make you seem way worse than you are, especially if that movie is made by two people who HATE your guts... I've already addressed this in my original post.

But, some scenes just show Troy talking like a douche, which is why I am sure he has a huge part in his downfall. His constant bragging about being "the new kid in Hollywood, the best, etc..." was all him and there's not much editing you can do there... Plus constantly reminding everyone he runs the show, and in a condescending way at that, that's just not something a good guy would do. Not saying he's entirely a bad guy, I wouldn't know, never met him, just saying a professional would not act like that, let alone to his friends. And being a angry is no excuse...

Oh well, he's making the sequel now. Hopefully it will be good and no matter what, if he's learned anything from this, he should be a better person, a better director/writer and most importantly, A PROFESSIONAL!

I wish him the best to be honest, but I wish more people would just give him the benefit of the doubt. He was an a-hole, but maybe he wasn't a monster.

reply

Yeah, it seems he did learn some humility from the experience. Watching the behind the scenes footage from the new film shows him in quite a different light.

reply

i have no sympathy for him and couldn't care less if he's gotten more humble in the last few years. what other choice did he have? plus i hate boondock saints.

reply

Is the film totally and completely objective? Probably not. But if their purpose was to make Duffy look like an ass, well, let's just say he certainly gave them plenty of material to work with. The most telling thing to me is that Duffy's behavior pretty much stays the same throughout. He displays enormous arrogance coupled with a pretty nasty streak even in the heady early days when it appears all his dreams are coming true and the world is his oyster. And his arrogance and nastiness just increases with the rigors of trying to get the movie made and watching things go south.

I'm guessing the Troy Duffy seen here is a fairly accurate representation of what the guy is really like.



"I don't want any Commies in my car. No Christians, either."

reply

i think it's quite telling that by the end of the film troy's own brother is pleading with him to return to sanity, and troy tells him he doesn't trust him anymore (that guy has seen the godfather 2 waaay too many times)

no doubt this is a compilation of troy's worst moments, and probably things were left out, but it's clear that at the time at least, troy was acting like the most obnoxious, deluded dickface on the planet.

wouldn't you hate a guy like troy? just look at the faces of everyone in his little entourage...they either look completely bored, or highly dubious of the nonsense that troy is spouting, or in some brief moments they are swept along with his arrogance and act like the worst kind of idiots.

bias or no, there's no defending troy. he hung himself with his own rope.

reply

didnt his brother make this movie

then he kind of DOES have reason to NOT trust them


http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1070584060

reply

[deleted]

The two guys who made the documentary were friends of his (at the time). Then, during the making of said documentary and realizing what a prick he was, they stopped being friends wth him. And who can blame them?!

Plus Duffy himself initially endorsed AND authorized Overnight. Why would he do that if it were completely fabricated and one-sided? He wouldn't, ergo this is probably fairly accurate depiction of his personality. Perhaps only when viwers/critics began remarking on the film, and he himself had seen it a few times, did he realize how much of a colossal prick he was.

reply

No amount of editing makes up for calling Kenneth Branagh a *beep* or Ethan Hawke 'talentless' or any of the other nasty stuff he came out with. I have no doubt that I'd get worked up dealing with a weasel like Harvey, but mouthing off at people he's never met who are infinitely more successful and talented than himself is plain stupid and downright rude and just confirms the general feeling that he is not a pleasant person.

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.

reply

What I got was that things were out of control and Duffy decided he needed to take over and do whatever it took to make it. He came off as an a-hole, but he really was just attacking failure head on. And he succeeded in the end.
But personally, I think he is overly judgmental and thinks his success justifies his actions. He could have acted professionally and done even better, but taught himself that you can be an a-hole and succeed, so why change?
I still love this because there are so many a-holes out there that think they got there by being a-holes, yet the people that are so much better than them did not have to go that route.
I think he actually did have to go this route because it made him stand out. Kind of like Axel Rose, Michael Jackson, and Speidi. The less talent you have or the more washed up you are (or desperate), the more of an a-hole you become to attract attention which puts money in your pocket.
At least that's how it seems.

reply

But what do Axl Rose and Michael Jackson have to do with your list?

Axl may be an *beep* but he's also manic depressive which is a serious condition, and that's what caused his being like that, not his "lack of talent." That guy can sing.

As for Michael Jackson, I'm not a fan but I hope you are not seriously questioning his talent, cause that man was 1 in a million, musical wise. Personal life -- I don't care about. Besides, when was MJ an *beep* He acted like a child all the time, I can't picture him bullying anyone in any way.

You're right about "Speidi" though. They have absolutely zero talent so they have to act that way to get attention.

reply

[deleted]

i have to agree with you mojo. theres gotta be some eccentric dickheads in hollywood. theres also some talented individuals that would deserve envy alot more than duffy would. no matter the road it took and whether or not i like the film, boondock saints made some money, so why nothing else? maybe its because hes a *beep* human being.

with all the self destruction during the making of this film maybe everyone who was trying to keep him from making it werent THAT bad. maybe they saw he was talented and figured he was his own worst enemy and wanted to save him. in the end they probably did him less harm.

reply

If you're truly a filmmaker, you'd know that NOBODY would last ten minutes in the business acting like this *beep* does. It's all about relationships, and this guy is obviously incapable of cultivating any, so convinced was he that he was Gawd's gift to films and music.

The guy has done nothing in his career, yet freely insults Ethan Hawke, Kenneth Branagh, and "who's that idiot Jerry Bruckheimer". Seriously?

The most telling moments were with his family members. His mother is seen trying to reign in his most despicable condescending behavior towards his band-mate brother, who, unfortunately seems to be the talented member of the family.

Then even his little brother haltingly hints that Troy is the insufferable, arrogant bully the family has always known, and it's just a question of time before the rest of the world figures that out and he blows the chance he has been given.

Duffy's curse is that he is not an artist at heart, neither musically or cinematically. He's simply an alcoholic bullying douche who wanted to be famous for fame's sake. His pedestrian vision is never more apparent than when posing for the CD cover in shades, trench coats and pitbulls.

And without having actually achieved fame based on performance, he decided to adorn himself with the crown anyway, and treated everyone like he was Henry VIII in the throes of narcissistic dementia, and everyone else in the world from his sensitive brother to Jeff "Skunk" Baxter, were simply his abused subjects.

The quote at the end of the film about success not changing a person, but acting as a truth serum to what truly resides in their soul is telling. Even when things looked good, Duffy never seemed to enjoy it, always raging, always acting like a low-rent Jake Lamotta.

There's not a minute of narration in this film. Duffy hangs himself via his own big, cruel mouth. It would seem it couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Or, as the Guardian UK put it, an *beep* to the power of *beep*

reply

Yes. Everything you just said..

The Devil's in the detail, my lovelies... !

reply

Nearly 5 years later I had to sign in to reply to this. I could not put it better myself. This was a hard watch.

reply

There's an interview with both of the guys that mentions objectivity
http://suicidegirls.com/interviews/Overnight+directors+Tony+Montana+an d+Mark+Brian+Smith/



"Mickey, he y'kn-- he takes a punishment.........I dunno why he does it"

reply

I don't think this is a documentary about someone being bad, I think it's a documentary about someone being deluded. What stood between Troy Duffy and his dream was someone's money but the moment that someone gave it to him he took complete ownership of that success and what followed.

What I took from this was "don't own your success". Remember who you owe.

Enjoy your egg whites.

reply

Troy Duffy did do everything in the documentary that we are shown. The only problem is we just don't know how consistently he acted like a total prick. But yeah, I was never a huge fan of Boondock Saints and then when I saw this back in '08, my sadistic side was so glad to see him fall. I was sad when I found out the sequel was in production, I still haven't seen it. Damn Hollywood, they blacklist him then a decade later "You know we could make some money off sequels". Bastards brought him rags-to-riches-to-rags-riches..

I am Jack's cold sweat.

reply