MovieChat Forums > Mr. Woodcock (2007) Discussion > So was Mr. Woodcock evil, or was Farley ...

So was Mr. Woodcock evil, or was Farley deranged?

posted 8 years ago by daredevil1-1
1 reply | jump to latest

The movie couldn't decide what it wants to be, so it ends up neither fish nor fowl. On one hand we have Farley and Ethan Suplee complaining how Woodcock is the devil, but then the entire town seems to love him and praise him as a hero. So which was it?? Someone mentioned in another thread that it would've been funny if at the town hall ceremony everyone turns on Woodcock and he's disgraced and run out of town, but he actually turns out to be a pretty decent guy to everyone BUT Farley. And Farley's our main character, so the viewer can't decide whether we should be taking his side or if he's an unreliable narrator. I think that was one of the most frustrating things, if the movie had just committed to one side rather than trying to get you to like everyone in a total non-ending, the comedy would have improved overall.

[–] SoAudreyHepburn 8 years ago

I suppose that it could be left up to the viewer as to who was the worst; Farley or Woodcock.

Unfortunately we'll never really know whether Woodcock was as bad as Farley and Nedderman claim due to the fact that another director was brought in and had reshot 3 weeks of filming. It could be that the studio saw reels of the film and didn't like what they saw so the original director was usurped with another who went all over the place.

Both Billy Bob Thornton and Seann William Scott went on record stating they didn't like the end result which was what reshot.

My take is that yes, Woodcock was a prick to most of his students but only to the ones that needed an extra foot in the behind to motivate them. As Farley later said lf it weren't for Woodcock he wouldn'tbe where he was in his life, career which was what made him into a self help
Gurur motivational speaker