You Must Be Talking to Me, Since I'm The Only One Here.
Monday, September 6, 2010
One Minute Review - Boondock Saints 2
Troy Duffy represents the quintessential indie film story: a young, cocky filmmaker whose number one fan is himself, with a collection of everyone else's ideas in his head, alienates just about everybody around him and more or less destroys himself on the blind path to making a truly terrible movie.
There was a great documentary made about it called Overnight, which chronicled Duffy's rise and fall. He was so confident in himself that he commissioned some friends to follow him around with a camera as he was making the original Boondock Saints so that they could see a masterpiece in the making. However the guys are no longer friends, the documentary tells the tale, The Boondock Saints sucked and the sequel is even worse.
The legend is that Duffy, a near alcoholic musician and bar owner signed with the William Morris Agency and cut a deal with Harvey Weinstein to make his directorial debut, a foul mouthed crime tale of two Irish guys in Boston who kill in the name of the Lord. Weinstein said he'd pay for the picture, buy the bar, sign the band, whatever. Weinstein, by that time, was known to be an infamous reneger but Duffy still didn't take the hint when the man never returned his calls.
Alas the Boondock Saints was finally made, grossed nothing and inexplicably became a huge hit on DVD; enough anyway to to justify this sequel which is loud, over-stylized, stupid, vulgar, unfunny, racist, homophobic and doesn't even try to make sense. Duffy still riffs on Tarantino's cred as if he can out-hip the master while never once fully realizing what makes Quinten a true original. I just finished reading an invaluable book by David Mamet entitled On Directing Film in which Mamet muses, to simplify the concept, that great writing and direction breaks things down into their simplest form and uses shots to tell the story. If it doesn't contribute to the story or the character achieving their desired ends, throw it out because it's useless. It's advice Duffy could have used although, in that case, he'd be without a film.
I consider the original Boondock Saints to be one of the most loathsome films I have ever seen. Consequently, I found the sequel to be comparatively good. It's still not a "good" movie, but the big difference from the first -- an important difference, I think -- is that this time, Duffy is able to laugh at himself a little bit. At least those insufferable brothers got to smile and crack jokes this time around.
I should say that there's a good probability that I liked this film more than I should have because I attended its gala Los Angeles premiere, the first such premiere I've ever attended. Still, I went in with my arms crossed, and slowly uncrossed them during the movie, so that has to count for something. (Also, I thought Julie Benz was pretty hot in this film, and I mean this as an all-around compliment to her persona, not just a shallow appreciation of her physical appearance.)
Vance - I'm glad you found something of worth here but there is nothing anyone can say to make me believe that there is anything redeemable about this movie. Duffy laughs at himself? So what, he's just riffing on Tarantino whose own riffing works towards building a wholly original and involving work. This whole movie is just like Duffy patting himself on the back.
Well, I'm pretty sure my findings of worth are all relative, given that the original was literally one of my ten least favorite movies of all time. The mere existence of a sequel made me incredibly angry, because it somehow validated those several years of bigoted, big-headed self-destruction Duffy was involved in. The fact that legit actors were involved with the movie also angered me. However, I gots ta be honest and say that I didn't hate it.
The sequel was in fact very poor and a step down from the original (which I highly enjoy on a a simply brainless level). What smart writing the first had are non existent here and the ending was probably written on a napkin at 3 in the morning.
Still is was unexpectedly funny and what got me was the ending...I mean how can you see that cameo and not just smile?? It left it open for a third one that hopefully will never be made. But it's till fun to dream of what might happen...
Marc - interesting difference in perspectives between you and Vance. The thing about the ending, and I won't spoil it is that, yes, it is a clever cameo, but that Duffy let's it play out as a whole scene just shows his weakness as a filmmaker. There was a perfect note to end the movie on before said cameo even speaks a word. As it played, the scene was tacky and overdrawn.
Troy Duffy represents the quintessential indie film story: a young, cocky filmmaker whose number one fan is himself, with a collection of everyone else's ideas in his head, alienates just about everybody around him and more or less destroys himself on the blind path to making a truly terrible movie.
There was a great documentary made about it called Overnight, which chronicled Duffy's rise and fall. He was so confident in himself that he commissioned some friends to follow him around with a camera as he was making the original Boondock Saints so that they could see a masterpiece in the making. However the guys are no longer friends, the documentary tells the tale, The Boondock Saints sucked and the sequel is even worse.
The legend is that Duffy, a near alcoholic musician and bar owner signed with the William Morris Agency and cut a deal with Harvey Weinstein to make his directorial debut, a foul mouthed crime tale of two Irish guys in Boston who kill in the name of the Lord. Weinstein said he'd pay for the picture, buy the bar, sign the band, whatever. Weinstein, by that time, was known to be an infamous reneger but Duffy still didn't take the hint when the man never returned his calls.
Alas the Boondock Saints was finally made, grossed nothing and inexplicably became a huge hit on DVD; enough anyway to to justify this sequel which is loud, over-stylized, stupid, vulgar, unfunny, racist, homophobic and doesn't even try to make sense. Duffy still riffs on Tarantino's cred as if he can out-hip the master while never once fully realizing what makes Quinten a true original. I just finished reading an invaluable book by David Mamet entitled On Directing Film in which Mamet muses, to simplify the concept, that great writing and direction breaks things down into their simplest form and uses shots to tell the story. If it doesn't contribute to the story or the character achieving their desired ends, throw it out because it's useless. It's advice Duffy could have used although, in that case, he'd be without a film.
I consider the original Boondock Saints to be one of the most loathsome films I have ever seen. Consequently, I found the sequel to be comparatively good. It's still not a "good" movie, but the big difference from the first -- an important difference, I think -- is that this time, Duffy is able to laugh at himself a little bit. At least those insufferable brothers got to smile and crack jokes this time around.
ReplyDeleteI should say that there's a good probability that I liked this film more than I should have because I attended its gala Los Angeles premiere, the first such premiere I've ever attended. Still, I went in with my arms crossed, and slowly uncrossed them during the movie, so that has to count for something. (Also, I thought Julie Benz was pretty hot in this film, and I mean this as an all-around compliment to her persona, not just a shallow appreciation of her physical appearance.)
Vance - I'm glad you found something of worth here but there is nothing anyone can say to make me believe that there is anything redeemable about this movie. Duffy laughs at himself? So what, he's just riffing on Tarantino whose own riffing works towards building a wholly original and involving work. This whole movie is just like Duffy patting himself on the back.
ReplyDeleteWell, I'm pretty sure my findings of worth are all relative, given that the original was literally one of my ten least favorite movies of all time. The mere existence of a sequel made me incredibly angry, because it somehow validated those several years of bigoted, big-headed self-destruction Duffy was involved in. The fact that legit actors were involved with the movie also angered me. However, I gots ta be honest and say that I didn't hate it.
ReplyDeleteThe sequel was in fact very poor and a step down from the original (which I highly enjoy on a a simply brainless level). What smart writing the first had are non existent here and the ending was probably written on a napkin at 3 in the morning.
ReplyDeleteStill is was unexpectedly funny and what got me was the ending...I mean how can you see that cameo and not just smile?? It left it open for a third one that hopefully will never be made. But it's till fun to dream of what might happen...
Marc - interesting difference in perspectives between you and Vance. The thing about the ending, and I won't spoil it is that, yes, it is a clever cameo, but that Duffy let's it play out as a whole scene just shows his weakness as a filmmaker. There was a perfect note to end the movie on before said cameo even speaks a word. As it played, the scene was tacky and overdrawn.
ReplyDelete