Has anyone tried to read the book again, after all this time of fandom and the movie and everything? If so, what are your opinions now? (I'm asking because I think the genre (or comedic styling) of the movie and book are different, they went a completely different direction with the movie. I'll elaborate if you'd like)
Also don't the new editions of the book have some kind of reference to the movie on the cover? I'd imagine it'd be pretty difficult to hear about one and not the other (and even more difficult to do a google search on Tucker Max and not read about the movie). Again, the movie wasn't "one of the greatest of all time" (or even close), but it was immensely watchable, and re-watchable. The comedy in the movie -- as has been said before -- was such that you keep catching more with each viewing, so it's not necessarily the same movie as the first time. I think that, as (I think it was?) Guy Fawkes and others have said above, people are still finding out about the book, and because of that they're going to keep checking out the movie. Even if it isn't the greatest thing they've ever seen, it's still a decent comedy you're going to tell your friends to check out, I think because of that the movie will have enough of a shelf life to see at least one sequel.
Honestly, I bought the book about three, maybe closer to four? years ago when it was on the best seller list, after being a fan of the site for a year or so before that. Right now, I have *no* idea where my copy is at. My SO? has been lending it to guys he works with over the last year or so. Unfortunately, when the movie came out, the closest theater was about an hour away. And I hate going to the movies, I much prefer to watch them at home. So.... I picked it up about three weeks ago (yes, I bought the DVD). I finally got around to watching it last week. As someone who is a voracious reader, and a casual movie watcher, the movie was entertaining. Now, that might have something to do with the amount of alcohol I drank prior to watching, the fact it was myself (a female) and three guys sitting around who have *never* read the book, but it was what it is. An entertaining movie to kick back with some friends and watch. Is it a great critical masterpiece? No. Did I see flaws with it? Yes. But I do that to damn near every movie I watch (including The Hangover, since that keeps being a comparison). Being more than a little ADD, you have to keep my interest. Make me laugh, cry, something. Or I get bored and.... SQUIRREL! It kept my attention for the most part. Some parts, meh. But overall, just an enjoyable movie. There were parts I laughed my ass off, and parts I was more like WTF? I will say with *not* reading the book, the guys probably enjoyed it more than I did. I'm sure my copy of the movie will now be passed around. Personally, I'll keep track of who has it, I'd like to watch it again sometime, but not a priority like some movies. What it did more for me was hope that Tucker finishes Assholes Finish First, because I truly believe he is a good writer. The movie may not have shown his true potential in that regard, but I'm still looking forward to his next book. Is it destined to become a cult classic? I don't think I'd go that far. But I will say it will end up on the, "Dude, if you haven't seen this, it's a pretty funny movie," category.
Exactly it is a movie that you can put on, walk away go fold laundry and return to watching. It is also a good alternative at Poker night if there happens to be no worthwhile sporting event on. You don't have to give it 100% of your attention. Allot of the bitterness that is felt was because of the ridiculous, incredible hype of one person describing the film. If you drank that kool-aid you are going to have way to strong of feelings about the movie.
I watched this movie and kept thinking, TM couldn't have possibly seen the same thing I have. From the opening sequence, where the title fades into red, looks campy, and unprofessional. I can honestly say that with my limited use of Photoshop I could've done better work. The movie was just not professional, not polished. Maybe he was going for that, but pulled it off incorrectly. I'm not really an expert film critic or anything, but I've watched enough movies to know what is going to attract an audience. and the lack of professional polish really pulls you out of the movie. A polished movie isnt going to draw you in just because it doesn't make mistakes. An unpolished movie can, however, pull you right out. The strip club scene, in particular has this problem. At times, I felt that jokes were forced in there simply because Nils and Max thought they were so funny, but their inside jokes. You're not going to win new audiences with inside jokes. You're looking to expand, not humour an almost existing fan club. Having inside jokes like that is funny, don't get me wrong. However, that scene with the Mcgriddle, or whatever the fuck its called, was so painfully unfunny. The friends I watched it with were so lost because it was just so random. Having said that, the movie is fucking funny every other time it tried to be.
No your not, and your post was opinion, which is fine. However if you have been reading any of the other post's or any of what the Mod's and senior members have been saying is that attacking Tucker or "wondering what he could be thinking" is irrelevant unless of course you have at some point produced a film. Do you think Napoleon Dynamite is an incredibly polished film? No it's not, and the thing everyone knows about movies is you never really quite know what will be a success. The point is writing a review and your opinion is fine, that is what the thread is for, but posting your thoughts and idea's about what he should or should not have done is worthless, regardless of how many films you have seen. Please people stick to a review, talk about what you liked and what you hated but leave your producing and directors hat at home. What makes me furious about this is I feel like I'm defending the producer of the movie and I assure you I'm not, but please stop with the nonsense or I promise you the thread will be locked.
I have no idea why you went off on this rant, as dcg's post was a completely legitimate review of Tucker's movie. Cinemaphotography has and always will be a vital element of film, as "Avatar" so capably reminded everyone. Now granted, it's a lot less important in an R-rated comedy than an action/adventure, but this flaw was striking in "I Hope I Serve Beer in Hell", which many people have already noted. The sound was either indistinct or completely off in some scenes, and it was shot in this cheap, dark, muddy tone. You don't have to be a fucking film expert to tell when something doesn't look good.