I loved this movie. In fact, I laughed more at Baghead than at the multimillion dollar F/X extravaganza Tropic Thunder, which made me laugh every fifth joke or so (at best). What makes a movie funny? A good script, actors who know how to deliver the lines, and good editing. You hear that, Hollywood? YOU NEED A GOOD SCRIPT. Stop wasting your money on all those stupid effects, and start investing in writers who know how to make people laugh.
shareI love a good indy as anyone - but damn this really isnt as good as your saying! Maybe a 5 , 6 tops! Are you really saying the acting was better here?? I mean I laughed more when the brothers were trying to be serious. It really didnt work. And this is such a lackluster film. Not horrible, but Tropic Thunder was way more fun.
I hate how IMDb signatures look like part of the post.
I issue a loving *beep* you to your ass. This movie's budget was $140,000. Tropic Thunder's was 188 MILLION. Seriously just stop posting on imdb, you're an idiot. Stop.
No, seriously stop.
I get that you're considering typing again now, but no, really stop. You're an idiot. Stop.
What a lovely way to burn...
I really liked this movie too. I actually thought Tropic Thunder was really funny, but this one was good and had 1/10000 the budget.
I'll easily take what the Duplass Brothers can do with $100 than what most Hollywood studios can do with $100 million.
Stop talking. This was awful. Why does somebody have to take jabs at big movies? Tropic Thunder cleared 100 mil, so there's a bit of people that also disagree with your absurd statement. If you wanna cry about this film's competition, try the Clerks route.
shareI was about to reply to your post, but I could not get past your first sentence. I won't converse with anyone who thinks people on a public forum on a film should not express their views on a film--if their views happen to disagree with your own!
The number of jerks per users on imdb has got to about 1/3, if not 2/3.
Damn right. Tropic Tunder was hilarious. Seriously though, if you're trying to make a point of little known film that doesn't get the attention you think it deserves, taking a jab at a big budget film is unnnecessary. Seriously, if someone wants to give a little movie more attention, he should just talk about what makes a great instead of putting down other movies just because they're popular. I applaud you.
shareThe 1st Clerks was definitely made of win. This is sort of off topic, but seriously, it was like everything was happening in a whole other world, the Clerks universe, much like Star Wars.
shareare you their agent or their mother?
shareare you a rival filmmaker or simply a jerk?
sharehallo-world it's great that you have the capacity to appreciate low-to no-budget films, it is a great credit to you that you as well require (at least what you think is) intelligent writing. But it is only your opinion. and I find it funny that while you are upset that some may tell you to just stfu, or slam your choice, maybe you should realize that you are doing the same. You slam Tropic Thunder (wow, get on the wagon a little late? go join the specials (( oh wait!, no specials were upset, *gasp* it was vocal dicheads that did more damage by repeatedly saying "retard" more then any char in the movie did, but sorry I digress, thats a rant for another day)))saying it is nothing compared to WHAT YOU THINK is better. Do you not think that maybe you are part of a minor group? That perhaps your tastes are a bit eclectic for some? As someone in this thread said, "if you like something then write about its merits or what was so good too you, But to try and promote what you think is good by slamming something that has many more fans then you can deal with by your lonesome is in poor taste. As a great great man once said (me) "I know it is frustrating to see the sheep constantly served the best food, but its their world". oh and btw? Hollywood don't give a flying bootfluck as to your note, you want to effect change? Then start making movies, otherwise be happy that there are others out there making them for you (and everyone else)
"I'm going to be eaten by zombie woodsmen. That's not how a philosopher should die"
I enjoyed this movie for what it was, but I honestly did not laugh once. There weren't even any moments when I thought that I was supposed to be laughing. I'm very curious, can you describe one scene in this movie that was supposed to be funny? Again, I enjoyed the movie as a drama/thriller (not really horror either), but I do not understand how this qualifies as a comedy. I guess in an "american idol" kind of way it was funny when the fat guy went in for the kiss and got rejected. So what was so funny?
shareThis is a good question. Thanks for asking it. I can't think of a moment that had me clenching my gut. However, I was frequently chuckling. For example, I liked the scene when the nerdy guy was telling the cool guy (sorry for being too lazy to look up the characters' names) not to screw the girl he liked. The cool guy said, "I promise not to screw HER." The nerd said, "Who is 'her'? See, you're already trying to get out of it." That is not gut-bustingly funny, but it was funny to me in the way that ordinary are funny. If I overheard that conversation at a party, I would laugh. I would also laugh if I were sitting in a kitchen and saw four knuckleheads with no ideas or writing skills trying to write a screenplay. But if other people don't find it funny, they don't find it funny. All I can say is that I personally would rather see a movie like this than Tropic Thunder.
Maybe what I'm trying to say is that I like comedies where the humor grows out of the characters. The characters are sort of funny so what they say and do becomes funny. The humor is almost a byproduct. In big-budget movies like Tropic, the aim seems to be "Make people laugh here, here, and here," and I only laugh about every fifth "here."
The humor is very dry. Sometimes these things don't resonate with people. I found it very amusing.
shareOther movies to check out if you liked this one are Foot Fist Way, The Puffy Chair, Wristcutters, and Team Picture
shareDude. Tropic Thunder was intended to be a comedy...an outright comedy? You see the difference, and how flawed your comparison was?
This was a...I don't know rightly, as they don't make many movies like this...drama?
I laughed at parts. I thought the film invited and encouraged a great spectrum of emotions.
Oh wait. IMDb have this tagged with "Comedy" as the first genre...well, their mistake. This film goes beyond genre, and I don't think it's wise to compare it to genre films.
One of my other low budget indie favourites of late was "Blood Car", but again I don't see that as "comedy" either, even though it was a hell of a lot funnier. I wouldn't even compare Baghead beside it.
Well, if we have to bag and tag everything...Baghead was an "emo" film. Yes...emo. Bwahahahahahahaah! Flame me hard.
Hey tropic thunder was a clever comedy. Its a great movie. Lay off it.
shareThis movie is held together by the acting and the striking visual of a man with a bag on his head. The script is BAD. The Duplass brothers present a genuine world with decent actors squirming around in a plot that would have made a better TWIN PEAKS episode than a whole movie. The problem with the Duplass brothers is that they're weak narrative writers; they give you movies where a lot can happen then, instead of a lot of things happening, one thing happens and the characters just talk that event to death. Whatever happens in the story, the audience never gets a chance to digest any of it because it's slowly chewed up on screen and then regurgitated back in the audience's face. I feel cheated after watching their movies; for all of the heartfelt moments in their movies, they cannot be enjoyed because the writers simply spoon-feed you the plot and have characters discuss everything instead of doing anything.
Well stated.
I have to admit that I have seen worse films, and while there were some merits to this film, there were also a number of things I found objectionable.
One being the script, not the story exactly, but script and the sophomoric way the story unfolded. As johnwhiteheadsaid of the Duplass Bros:
"...one thing happens and the characters just talk that event to death....the audience never gets a chance to digest any of it because it's slowly chewed up on screen and then regurgitated back in the audience's face."
And I'm aware that it's become popular to emulate the cinéma vérité style in many films these days, but for this film it seemed a poor decision and only made the film appear more amateurish than adding a sense of reality; a bit of moderation might have served this film better. Far too many of those floating camera shots used, and whoever filmed this should’ve eased off the “zoom” button and not relied on it so much. I found it very annoying at times; usually just when it was the last thing you wanted to see.
All things considered I feel the 5.8 rating this film received was fair, but that is not to say it was a “terrible” film, it was just not a very good film and wasn’t executed very well. The Duplass brothers should look at this a s a learning experience to grow from, and I wish them well. But next time they should consider using a tripod, less zoom and perhaps a different DP, as well as a better screenwriter.
"Stick with me baby, and you'll be fartin' thru silk!"
You have a way with words, CountSuckula. Too bad the screenwriters weren't nearly so eloquent.
I appreciate the "mumblecore" movement and loved the Duplass brothers' "Hump Day," which was genuinely provocative, but this was just random and artless. I didn't find it annoying, just dull, and right when the film gets momentum it ends abruptly.
The rating stands at 5.9 now, which seems very generous. I could only muster a 5. Really, this deserves a 5.5 because it's solidly average.