August
1
Comic-Con: Superbad Trumps Superheroes
[Posted by Peter Debruge]
It’s been 10 years since Variety named Greg Mottola a “director to watch” on the strength of his debut film, Daytrippers. Then he sorta disappeared from the feature scene, resurfacing only now to direct Superbad, the latest comedy from the Judd Apatow stable. “Being gone for 10 years takes the pressure off the sophomore slump,” Mottola told me after “Superbad’s” Friday-night sneak peek at Comic-Con.
But he hasn’t exactly been idle. Mottola fell in with Apatow’s crowd back on Undeclared, directing a few episodes of the show. “It was like comedy boot camp,” he said. “Undeclared” led to directing Arrested Development, which opened the door to “Superbad.” Michael Cera (an Arrested Development star with his own web series) and Jonah Hill play sex-obsessed high-school seniors in a screenplay that “Knocked Up’s” Seth Rogen and longtime friend Evan Goldberg started writing 10 years earlier.
The entire posse — including breakout Christopher Mintz-Plasse, who plays “McLovin” (“This movie is about to destroy this young man’s life,” Apatow joked) — was present at the Comic-Con screening, but Mottola deserves a special mention since I predict he’ll be the unsung hero of this equation (at the post-screening Q&A, the questions went to everyone but him).
Apatow, of course, is on top of the comedy world right now, and the cast are all up-and-comers. But without Mottola’s touch, the comedy wouldn’t play nearly as well. Under his guidance, the movie manages to be sincere without getting sentimental and raunchy without lapsing into the unreal (check out the red-band trailer on Sony’s official site ).
Even the rowdy Comic-Con crowd couldn’t believe they “went there” during a scene that involves some very dirty dancing, but the MPAA went along with it. According to Apatow, “Superbad has the least that’s gotten cut from any movie I’ve ever worked on. We were trying to extend the DVD and there was nothing to extend.” Credit Mottola for making his sophomore outing anything but sophomoric.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
the crowd LOVED the SHOOT 'EM UP screening and you so didn't get it so why do you even bother to post your loser opinion?
Posted by: Don Murphy | August 01, 2007 at 02:46 PM
Don, I was at both screenings...there wasn't as standing ovation for Shoot 'Em Up...
Posted by: Gregory Ellwood | August 01, 2007 at 03:20 PM
Kids, kids, don't make me separate the two of you. And personally, I hold Mr. Debruge's opinion in high regard. Don't take cheap shots because karma is a bitch...
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | August 01, 2007 at 03:31 PM
wholovesya bullshit- you weren't there then- simple as that
miraaisn if you use Harry's last name you can never talk about Karma- and the asswipe got FACTS wrong in his review so don't call the shots cheap when they aren't
Posted by: Don Murphy | August 01, 2007 at 04:27 PM
Don, what do you mean by the Harry comment? And the cheap shots I was referring to was the name-calling. Calling Debruge a "loser" and an "asswipe?" Aren't we above that? I thought this was supposed to be an intelligent conversation about your movie. I asked you, as a journalist, what are the incorrect facts that you're talking about. If they're facts then you should have no problem revealing what Debruge got wrong. And if they are facts, and not opinion, then I'm willing to bet Debruge would've made the corrections online. But please, correct me if I'm wrong. Don't be so vague and mysterious. I haven't seen the movie so I don't know what may or may not be wrong in the review. Since I haven't received a media invite (yet), right now, you can view me as a potential paying customer, but I'd like to be as informed as possible before I pay money to see your film, so can you please tell me what errors Debruge made, if in fact, there are any. And while we're having this dialogue, I have to tell you, I wrote my high school senior thesis on NBK. A brilliant film and one of my all-time faves. I still believe it's one of the most influential films ever made.
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | August 01, 2007 at 04:40 PM
Your name is named after Aint It Shit News, right? Mirajeffaicn? So what is confusing about the Harry comment? Harry is a 500 pound walking refuse container with no honor and no pride. If you want the email I sent asswipe, here it is---re SHOOT EM UP
OKay let's differentiate opinions from facts. Like baseball, three strikes and you are out.
1- Davis' films are not stinkers- I doubt you have watched any of them, flyboy. But if you have, then this is an opinion.
2- PING- Fact- no one ever calls Monica DAIRY QUEEN in the movie. Not once. Strike one.
3- (typical of Davis' sense of humor, the artificially inseminated mothers provide the off-color pun of the movie's title) not sure what that means- if you think the title refers to anything but gunplay then PING Strike two you are an idiot.
4- PING Strike two- or is it three?- Giamatti reveals Clive's backstory three times in the movie
5- PING- there is hardly any death metal in the film- perhaps you don't know what it is?
So in an objective way, not opinions- YOU SUCK.
Next time review a film you understand, flyboy.
Posted by: Don Murphy | August 01, 2007 at 05:10 PM
Don, thank you for illuminating the situation. Allow me to respond.
Preface: "Harry is a 500 pound walking refuse container with no honor and no pride." But you'll still use his site to promote your film to the hundreds of thousands of fanboys who read it, which is why Moriarty was granted access to the editing room and an exclusive one-on-one with Davis.
1. No idea whether or not Debruge has seen Davis' other films but if he has, and he didn't like them, then the comment is justified. Either way, it is certainly not a FACT at all that his movies aren't stinkers, since that is completely a matter of opinion.
2. So no one refers to Monica as 'Dairy Queen.' This was changed in the review, but in all fairness, that IS the way her character has been described all over the Internet, including Moriarty's set visit. I think it's a funny name, and really, what's the harm? At least it's a name audiences will remember.
3. I am not sure what that means either. I always thought the title referred to the fact that this movie features balls-to-the-wall gunplay. But you have to admit, if the plot does concern artificially-inseminated mothers, then the title could have dual meaning. Either way, deciphering what a film's title means or refers to is hardly a fact. It could mean different things to different people.
4. I can't comment on this, having not seen the movie.
5. I know 'death' metal was changed to 'heavy' metal in the review. Chalk it up to Debruge probably not being a fan of either genre, but seriously, as a fan of metal, there isn't that much of a distinction between death, thrash, heavy or whatever you wanna call it. So that one isn't that big a deal.
Continuing on, I know Debruge and seeing as he's a pretty smart guy, I think it's safe to say he understood the movie. If he didn't, your film could be in a world of trouble if someone as well-versed in cinema as Debruge didn't 'understand' it. Really, what is there to understand? It's a movie called Shoot 'Em Up. This isn't exactly Primer we're talking about here. Bullets kill bad guys. I think I already get it.
Lastly, what is a flyboy? I know it's a lame-duck James Franco movie, but is it also some sort of dis?
In closing, this is what Moriarty wrote in his Shoot 'Em Up visit. "Don and I have had an occasionally contentious relationship in the past, but I get the feeling that’s true of pretty much anyone who writes about movies. That’s just Don. He’s one of the few producers out there who presents himself unfiltered online, and if that means he goes toe to toe with writers sometimes, I get the feeling that’s just the way it’s going to be. "
Honestly, I have a ton of respect for you Mr. Murphy. I appreciate it when a filmmaker hops on the message boards to converse with the fans and defend his vision. I wish there were more people like you in this business, who present themselves unfiltered and don't speak in carefully worded, publicist-approved soundbytes. But the truth of the matter is this. I AM your target demographic for this movie. And from what I've heard from the fans at the Con, people loved the footage and are really excited about the movie. BUT, and I can only say this judging from the footage in the trailer, I, personally, do not expect to like Shoot 'Em Up. Like Debruge references in his review, I think the movie looks to be in the vein of Smokin Aces and Domino, two horrible, overblown movies ruined by over-the-top ridiculousness and an emphasis on style over substance. Yes some people go to the movies for kinetic entertainment and pure visual thrills, but most of us go into a movie looking for a good story and good characters, and I could be wrong, but those two things are not what I'm expecting from Shoot 'Em Up. I hope Davis and Co. prove me wrong, but I am less than optimistic. Good luck with the film. Opening against a very good Russell Crowe/Christian Bale film and a looks-great George Clooney film, it might need all the help it can get. Although considering the gaping divide between critics and audiences' tastes these days, I wouldn't be surprised to see Clive slug his way to the top of the box office. I still look forward to seeing the movie and I'll be the first one to write a glowing review if it proves me wrong.
Sincerely,
MiraJeff, AICN
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | August 01, 2007 at 06:13 PM
0- I like Drew. He has never wronged me. Refuse Container has. Not sure how I feel about you.
1- I noted that this may or may not be opinion
2- He is a journalist, like you claim to be. This is a FACT. FACTS are objective not subjective. Your points are excuses. He fucked up a fact, a big one, which makes me wonder if he saw the film.
3- No. The title does not have a dual meaning. Therefore he FACTUALLY got this wrong.
4- Well trust me- another FACT wrong.
5- It is not up to you to decide whether the FACTS gotten wrong by an alleged journalist are a big deal. He got this wrong too.
--- We have just proven he is an idiot who got multiple FACTS wrong. If you say he is smart, then you must be less smart than a proven idiot. Fair enough. Meanwhile, please accept the fact that as simple as this is, he did not GET the movie and should not have reviewed it.
--- I have made a note that will go out with each print that you are not ALLOWED to see the movie. This will make any concerns you have moot.
--- we are opening against a remake of Western. I didn’t choose that but I’ll take it. The last Russell Crowe film made $3.00. The last non Batman Christian Bale film I had to rent. What George Clooney movie? Are you as FACTually challenged at this other bozo?
As I said, you CANNOT see the movie now. Ever.
Posted by: Don Murphy | August 01, 2007 at 06:52 PM
weird
these thousands of fanboys of which you speak
where are they?
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?site0=4chan.org&site1=chud.com&site2=gaiaonline.com&site3=ebaumsworld.com&site4=aintitcool.com&y=t&z=3&h=300&w=610&range=3y&size=Medium&url=http://www.aintitcool.com/
Posted by: Don Murphy | August 01, 2007 at 07:02 PM
Very mature response, Don. Maybe you are more in touch with your audience than I thought, considering you responded like a 13 year-old might. The Clooney movie I was referring to was Michael Clayton, which opens on 9/5 in limited release according to IMDB. Probably won't impact your box office, so you have nothing to worry about, since box office is all you guys care about, right? I don't think whether or not you 'GET' a film should be the deciding factor in whether or not you should be allowed to review it. If I'm assigned a review and see the film, and go back to my editor and say, well I didn't "get it," he'd probably tell me to write about the fact that I didn't get it. He wouldn't say, ok, well then I'll assign it to someone else who is more likely to "get it," when the possibility exists that the other reviewer might not "get it" either. Anyways, I'll make sure and ask my projectionist friends if there is said note included with each print. I have to admit, that'd be kinda cool if it was true. You want me to email you a photo so you can notify every theater manager in California to bar me from entering the theater too? Maybe you should call Fandango and tell them not to accept any transactions from MiraJeff's credit card. How will I live without seeing Shoot 'Em Up? How will I be able to write my Oscar article? I'm going to go home and watch NBK just to remind myself than once upon a time, you did care about making good movies. Maybe you still do, but I'll never find out, since I'm now not allowed to see Shoot 'Em Up. Before today, I was a big fan of yours Mr. Murphy, you were the type of producer I aspired to be, but you just knocked yourself down a peg in my book. Facts speak for themselves, and the fact of the matter is that today, you showed your true colors. Way to go. You should give Uwe Boll a call. You guys are perfect for each other. Give my best to DQ.
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | August 01, 2007 at 07:23 PM
Ouch, bringing traffic graphs into the discussion. Who are you, Nikki Finke? You made me do it. Drumroll please...
Transformers SUCKED! Glad it made you a fortune, but that movie was a complete mess. Megatron was weak. Besides Bumblebee and Optimus, you gave everyone else the shaft. It was too long by 30 minutes. There was zero emotional resonance when Duhamel was reunited with his wife and child. Half the action sequences were just shiny balls of metal clashing on screen. The ending was a total disaster. I had fun with it while I sat there, but upon leaving the theater and dissecting it with friends, I realized just how stinky it was. Shia put that movie on his slender shoulders and carried it as far as he could. You should send him a fruit basket for the effort, but in the end it all came down to Bay and this time, he couldn't save the day. Way to hog all the credit on that one too. You're a real class act, Don. I've gotta get some actual work done. Maybe you should look into that instead of riding other peoples' coattails.
Hey, speaking of FACTS, since that's what started this whole discourse: Michael Bay re: Tom De Santo and Don Murphy-- "Tom and Don are very nice guys but let's get some facts straight... I never spoke creatively with Don."
http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/michael-bay-wants-to-get-facts-straight/
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | August 01, 2007 at 07:41 PM
Ok, this is my last post of the night. The bottom line, Don, is that Variety gave your movie a bad review. Big deal! Suck it up and get over it. Move on! The people who are going to go see Shoot 'Em Up don't care what Variety thinks. And Variety, by the way, reaches a percentage of AICN's traffic. It just sounds like you're being a sore loser. Obviously Debruge saw the movie. So he made a few MINOR errors. Congratulations, you've spent ALL day making a federal case out of it. Your movie is going to do well, so just wait a few weeks, put the bad review behind you and wait for the box office receipts to pore in so you can count your money and stop picking a fight with your own fans. They say the pen is mightier than the sword, but the world revolves around the almighty dollar, so a bad review in Variety for a movie that had people at Comic-Con drooling with anticipation must feel like a pinprick, hardly the sword you've made it out to be.
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | August 01, 2007 at 07:55 PM
Jeff
If you want to compare me to Boll, that is fine. I didn't start with you, you started with me. For all I know you are a hell of a guy. Seriously, no tone intended. I don't hold the fact that Harry assfucked me and should explode soon against Quint or Drew or Capone and I will not against you.
If the most you could do on Transformers is knock the script then link to a post wherein Michael (who removed it anyway) knocks Desanto repeatedly and can only claim I wouldn't cut my fee (on a $145m film!) and knocked the script you don't make sense, son. And why this Debruge love? He is entitled to hate anything he wants. I recall Variety hating on NBK back in the day. If there is any review that means shit it is Variety. But when he has MULTIPLE facts wrong and starts out my just being mean to the director, who is my friend, that is UNCOOL. That's all.
I never asked to be on ANY peg in your book. I DO care about making great movies. I have simply learned that sometimes you can and sometimes you can't and that ANYWAY movies are SUBJECTIVE. He the guy had SEEN the film and gotten his facts straight and not attacked Davis, a genuinely passionate, hard working, NICE guy about his dvd films, the review can stand. Shit, like I said, Harry hated Transformers. I don't care. I think we made the BEST version that anyone could make live action.You don't. Fair enough.
I guess what I am saying is I hope I meet you in the real world. I be we will have a nice coffee and like each other. Getting into a fight while you defend a guy who isn't even man enough to defend himself is silly.
Cheers, Don
Posted by: Don Murphy | August 01, 2007 at 08:43 PM
Don, are you kidding? I would LOVE to sit down and grab a drink sometime and talk movies, since we are both clearly passionate about them. You're a guy I've looked up to since I was in high school for Christ's sake. And I think we both started this war of words with the best intentions. For you, it was defending your friend and collaborator, Michael Davis. Regardless of what Debruge thought about Shoot 'Em Up, I'll admit, it wasn't entirely necessary to dredge up the guy's past work, which has little to no bearing on where he is now and how far he's come from those DVD movies. I know how hard Davis fought to get this movie made, the years he spent fighting the good fight, so I applaud you for your loyalty. Likewise, in the interest of full disclosure, Debruge is my friend and co-worker. And I felt like you calling him a "loser" and an "asswipe" was unfair. We all make mistakes in this business. I myself am guilty of a few factual inaccuracies in my original reviews of Half Nelson and Rocky Balboa. Some are born out of laziness and not checking FACTS, but that wasn't really the case here. I felt they were minor mistakes that didn't deserve the shit you gave him when you said, FIRST mind you, that Debruge's was a 'loser opinion.' The truth is, Debruge is one of the genuinely nicest and most knowledgable guys about film in this office, so to discount his opinion because of a few minor mistakes felt unfair. And then when you attacked AICN, I got defensive. I thought it was the stereotypical big Hollywood producer taking potshots at a community that (at least on this particular movie) has done nothing but help him and help promote the movie. That's why I pounced on you... that and we're encouraged to comment on Anne's blog because discussion drives traffic up, and when Variety.com signs your paychecks, the bottom line is attracting people to the site. And Don, you and I know you could never be like Uwe Boll. I apologize for the low blow. In closing, if I did in fact have a book, you would still be A-OK in it, so long as I'm still ALLOWED to see Shoot 'Em Up. If you're serious about that drink, have your asst. give Variety a call and ask for the only Jeff in the office. Even though I work til 10pm to pay the bills, I think we could arrange a rendezvous. Considering I've already seen Yuma, it's safe to say I'll be in line for Shoot 'Em Up opening weekend when I'll make up my own mind about the film. It's been a pleasure chatting. You should link to this entire exchange on your website. Traffic, baby, traffic!
Best,
Jeff
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | August 01, 2007 at 09:40 PM
Will do... confused how you can work for Variety AND write for Harry...but okay
Posted by: Don Murphy | August 01, 2007 at 10:46 PM
There's no conflict of interest. I write reviews for AICN for no pay. I don't break news, just contribute the occasional interview. And work at V as a web editor, posting stories, writing web headlines, and monitoring these here talkbacks. This is our new talkback feature. Not bad so far, huh? Spread the word, tell your friends. Jeff Wells has Mike Binder and George Hickenlooper. We'd be honored to have you. Think about it: "Variety: It's the only review that matters" - Don Murphy
I'll run it by our marketing dept. Maybe throw you on the back cover, but instead of reading Variety, you're surfing Variety.com. Not bad if you ask me. Always thinking about the business angle. I'm sure you can relate.
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | August 02, 2007 at 12:44 AM