Carl Icahn Now Wants ALL Of Lionsgate 
FINAL MGM BIDS DUE FRIDAY: So Who's In And … 
Action Comedy TV: Showrunner Matt Nix 
SAG National Board Approves Joint Bargaining … 
BBC Drama Unfreezes Development Money; … 
Lionsgate Board Rejects Icahn's $6/Share 
Is Betting On Box Office Good For Films? 
Marvel Still Looking For Captain America 
'Sopranos' Creator To Film Rock Drama 
LIVE-SNARKING THE 82ND OSCARS... 
'ALICE' IS A MONSTER! $116.3M Blows Past … 
Oscar Not-So-Thriller: Diller Mogul Picnic 
'Precious' Sweeps 25th Indie Spirit Awards 
Howard Stern Won't Be Next 'Idol' Judge 
Justin Theroux Readying 'Zoolander 2' For … 
This was emailed to me by a Judd Apatow insider who's also a prominent filmmaker (he asked to "stay in the shadows") in response to my box office report that Universal execs had "begged" Apatow to shorten Funny People:
"Despite what anyone at Universal is saying now -- trying to cover their asses -- I can 100% assure you: Universal execs never begged or pleaded with Judd to shorten his movie. Not one of them would have had the balls to. They never would have done anything to piss Judd off.
There was a mini feud on "40 Year Old Virgin" between Judd and [ex-Uni exec] Mary Parent, and everyone learned never to side against or ever really question Judd after that. Trust me. Besides, all questions of length were precluded by two words, "Knocked Up". It was almost as long and it was an out and out comedy. No one would have been brave enough to challenge Judd on this, even in a joking matter. Trust me, Nikki...
Better or worse it was Judd's show and he delivered to them the movie he wanted and they smiled and said "Thank you." Privately they may have worried, but they never, never, never asked Judd to shorten it.
"PS... Judd did shorten it. I saw a three hour, forty five minute version of "Funny People" and Judd's goal was to get it to "Knocked Up" length. And that's where he got it, too. And the studio was happy with that length. And the idea that someone would directly tell Judd that the part with his wife had to be particularly shortened is ridiculous. Ask that person to give you details on that conversation. I would love to hear how that went. It didn't happen."
Loading ...
Wow.
Apatow must have quite the ego to think that his comedies deserve the attention of audiences for two and-a-half hours.
And with this latest serving of ego, he’ll continue to alienate his audience.
Of course Universal would sign Judd to direct another three films for them. That makes complete sense.
The projects will either be…
A) Smaller 40 Year Old Virgin type affairs big character small on budget.
B) Apatow may attract another A-Lister (one he didn’t go to college with) to star in his next project. Tom Hanks and Apatow teaming up?
And having Apatow on the lot makes loads of sense owing to the talent he attracts. Let’s see Sony try and hold on to the rest of the ‘Apatow gang’ now that the man himself is on the Universal lot.
The real problem with the film is that it cost too bloody much. The film is great, it really is but because it made such a low percentage of its budget back opening weekend it’s being written off. When the Academy announced it was nominating 10 films this year, I legitimately though this had a shot. It’s that good.
As entertaining as 40 Year Old and Knocked UP were (the last was a little overrated IMO), both would have been better a little shorter.
Sounds like Apatow needs to upgrade his hat size now.
I haven’t seen Funnny People yet. I heard it cost over 75 million to make. Are there lots of CGI dinosaurs or space aliens? How the fuck does a comedy cost that much to make?
Sounds like I should just wait til it’s on HBO.
I find this whole matter ridiculous Nikki — size does not matter — why is there even talk of this? Was there talk about Harry Potter being too long or your favorite movie Orphan being over 2 hours long? Funny People is not a 3 hour movie — its about the same length as Knocked Up — which did not even feel as if it was over 2 hours. This movie is touching, more drama than comedy but still worth the price of admission. Leslie mann should get an oscar nomination — she is that good — especially at the dinner table scene. And this is Adam Sandler’s highest R rated film.
This is a tricky situation. We all know that studio executives and their “notes” on films are legendary for being asinine. And Apatow’s success gives him a certain about of kiss-my-assness.
The problem is that all studio commentary is not stupid and no filmmaker is infallible. It always pays to have someone around you who will tell you the truth no matter what. Alas, this is Hollywood and no one has any balls.
Apatow’s “formula” works well with broader comedic stories like Knocked Up and Virgin. Not so much with a more dramatic leveled film like Funny People. When the laughs stop, people look at this phones to see what time it is.
And I know you’re thinking that no one can hit them out of the park all the time, that the vagaries of the business and random luck will always bring disappointment in the clash of egos and personalities.
One word: Pixar.
ps: lay off Apatow’s wife. She’s a good actress and it’s just silly and mean.
Unfortunately, the movie is bad. Really bad. It lacks consistency in tone, and it feels like it’s trying to hard to be funny, trying too hard to be earnest, and missing on both counts. I agree with your “source” Nikki. If Universal was at all worried about Apatow, they wouldn’t have given him a three picture deal at a time when no one gets it. I do hope part of their conditions in that deal was a time constraint. Though funny, I thought KNOCKED UP was too long. This is a guy who knows comedy (sometimes) but obviously is unable to edit his own “genius”. And therefore, he gets in the way of it. Hopefully, this isn’t yet another bad decision made by the Universal family. Note to Ron: you may need some new execs to mix things up.
And it’s a good thing Judd’s wife’s scenes weren’t shortened or he might have been treated to a tantrum ala the one her character in Knocked Up threw after being denied admission to that nightclub for being too old, a totally bizarre and out-of-place scene which not only made everyone around me scratch their heads in the theater I was in, but begin talking and leaving as well.
Comedies work best short.
This was what Irving Thalberg told the Marx Brothers when he shortened A NIGHT AT THE OPERA to 96 minutes (including credits).
A 2:20+ comedy is NOT going to sustain. And FUNNY PEOPLE, dealing with cancer and infidelity and penis jokes, was not going to sustain.
How long is THE HANGOVER? How long is THE PROPOSAL?
It’s not like Judd and Company have multiple Oscars to their credit. They have multi-million-dollar films. I’ll bet privately some execs have moaned about how KNOCKED UP probably could have made another $15M if it was 15 minutes shorter as well.
Sounds like Nick Stoller to me.
There’s no point in making a movie more than 2 hours long other than director ego (except for epics and period pieces). Whether they want to admit it or not, they’re saying, “I know throughout time that the best movies have stayed under 2 hours, but I am different. I understand how movies work. I’m the one person who can make them longer.” I mean seriously. He couldn’t shorten it to two hours?? It was *that* hard??
So, this Judd Apatow “insider” (conjures up an appropriate mental picture) tells us no Uni-execs would dare to question the Almighty Judd, that they ‘learned never to really question’ him, and that the idea that somebody would ask him to cut down the self-indulgent crap with his wife is ridiculous.
Didn’t take Judd Apatow long to become the most self-obsessed arrogant prick in Hollywood!
Actually, the nightclub moment was the best scene in the film. A brutal, honest, humorous look at when adults come to the painful realization that they are truly ‘grownups’.
Who the hell does this guy think he is, Richard Attenborough?
The only problem I have with Apatow’s movies is that they are too long. And it’s obvious the guy can’t do dramaedy very well and his slacker/bromance comedies are wearing thin.
Don’t worry, Mr. Studio Boss, you’ll be able to call the shots again soon.
I liked the movie! It was not perfect by any means (it really did feel like it lost the main thread of the story for a long time and then when it got back to the core story, we no longer cared as much). But it was interesting and engaging and had alot of funny to semi-funny parts. And clearly it was the work of a talented man who clearly is trying to grow as a creator. Why in the world are people on this site- who I assume love movies- taking the piss out of him because he tried something interesting and didn’t quite get there? Beats cookie cutter crap H-wood usually gives us.
Also, I liked Apatow’s wife. I think she’s sexy and funny and was totally believable in the flick. It did not feel like vanity casting at all (i.e. it was no Sophia in Godfather III…not even close). I think people are gunning for her just because she’s his wife. She did the role justice and was appealing.
I think many people on here are just out for blood but I’m not really sure why. Apatow has given audiences some great movies and some great television. And perhaps this flick was too costly. But I think we really need to balance holding our artists accountable while at the same time giving them the freedom to grow and stretch…otherwise, they will die out and no longer be there to entertain us.
Someone earlier posted that he overheard a couple saying that they should have seen THE HANGOVER again instead of FUNNY PEOPLE. Well a few years ago, 40 YEAR OLD and KNOCKED UP were THE HANGOVER of that year. And probably in 2-5 years, there will be another flavor of the month while the director of THE HANGOVER struggles to step up his game. Hopefully folks will be kinder to that director than they are currently being to Apatow.
Don’t forget, Apatow’s the one who oversaw “Anchorman,” a film that was so over-long and self-indulgent that they re-shot much of it and released about an hour-long “extra” movie on the DVD edited together of the rest.
The truth is, “Funny People” is two movies – the laugh-riot first act where Sandler thinks he’s dying and then the hour-and-a-half second/third act where the movie shifts from Rogen’s character’s POV to Sandler’s and it becomes much more serious after Sandler learns he’s going to live.
It’s the tone shift that kills it, not the length.
@ ScriptShadow:
Absolutely. Hasn’t Apatow learned to “kill his darlings”, not only in the editing room but also while scripting? Cut out the lame standup scenes and the more lame jokes out of “Funny People”, and you’re left with a more agreeable (and shorter) movie.
A movie’s worth is not based on length — you shorten it — you end up losing character development, you lose “well why did they do that” kinda moments. I don’t see why comedic films should be treated any differently than say public enemies which ran for more than 2 and 1/2 hours or Transformers which also ran at that same amount of time. This is a non-issue and all of you are complaining too much for a movie that is only 2 hours and 15 minutes, not the 2 1/2 hours everyone is saying. This is a good film
puhlease… this apatow mafia needs to protect their don?… man up… and this “director” who needs to stay in the shadows?… they’re about as mysterious as lint…
No movie should be over two hours long, Carson? What about NORTH BY NORTHWEST? What about ALIENS? What about FIGHT CLUB? All great movies. None of them epics or period pieces. All about 138 minutes. A movie can be any length it wants to — as long as its good.
If Leslie Mann is such a great actress, how come she can only land parts in her husband’s movies?
on the way out. this is the beginning of the end for his movies. he’s the next farrelly brothers watch. what an ego? if he just knew how to cut a movie he’d be okay. why doesn’t someone like his MANAGER or AGENT tell him. Oh right, they need the money too. Well hopefully he reads Nikki Finke. WAY TOO LONG. Go make Ghandi.
it’s this freakin’ town. it’s got no balls. it’s easy to say “no!” as execs routinely reject specs at the submission stage. they have no issue turning down a project which “might” go on to make a gazillion dollars – their fear is green-lighting any project that would lose it.
and when it comes to the golden boy filmmakers on the lots execs are just as quick to say “no!”, as in “no, i can’t tell the man his film sucks! he’s made the studio a lot of money!” oy, shades of “1941″, and also reminiscent of “mr. saturday night”, with its poignant “sunshine boys”-style potential. could’ve been a wonderful film, perhaps, just arguably needed to be dialed-back. billy (who still does comic genius cartwheels around today’s dumbed-down lot) was huuuuuuuuge, but no one had the balls to step to the plate.
it’s what good producers (which is becoming more of an oxymoron) do. the mid-to-upper suits are not producers, they’re cogs in the wheel. it’s the relationships that studio heads have with strong producers that counts, and those days are dwindling as more and more suits deal directly with auteur-filmmakers. ugh, jack warner is rolling in his grave.
I love Judd’s movies and the length of his films is what makes them so watchable. You get so caught up in the lives of the characters you never want it to end. There’s nothing better than watching a Judd Apatow movie on cable on a lazy afternoon when there’s nothing to do. I once watched “Knocked Up” three times in a row and never got bored with it.
Don’t hate the guy just because he has talent and a movie deal.
Keep up the good work, Judd.
Carson,
I’m disappointed in you.
I loved this movie. If it didnt have Judd’s name on it and all the expectations of a Judd movie, they could have opened it small and platformed it out like an academy movie. it’s that good. it’s a shame audiences are so narrow minded; they’re missing something very real, and yes, it’s funny too.
Whoever wrote that email is an asshole and a suck-up. Good lord! I’m almost suffocating from the fumes of it. It’s only “Judd’s show” if he’s footing the bill. When Judd is willing to gamble his own money only then is it “Judd’s show”. Until then, he’s just gambling with mommy’s (the studio’s) money. I hope Universal cancels Apatow’s multi-pic deal and kicks his ass to the curb. Paramount did it to Tom Cruise so what makes anyone think they won’t to Apatow and that awful wife he keeps foisting upon the world? Meanwhile, whoever wrote that email needs to get up off his knees and take a cold shower because it’s affecting his brain.
Flyover (and Mary Parent) are right. Both Apatow’s previous efforts should have been shorter. His problem is that be only works with his buddies, who think everything he does is hilarious and awesome. But the audience isn’t made up of Judd’s buddies. If the consensus of open night viewers was that the tone was uneven and the movie was too long, then you have to consider that they might be correct.
Guesses on the source: Adam McKay or Jake Kasdan?
But if it was shorter we wouldn’t have been treated to all that slo-mo footage of his wife and kids hula-hooping!
Quality is all that matters. Not to generalize, but the complaints may be a case of, a) people who aren’t fans to begin with, or b) mediocre viewers, who can sit through crap if it finishes quickly. Sure they also like cuts to gamble on complacency (point ‘b’) and to squeeze the world-famous one-extra-daily-screening, but if it isn’t an event, it adds up to nothing.
If this is the movie he wanted to make then good for him. I liked it. I know some people gasped when at the arclight the young usher announced the length of the movie. Adam Sandler gave a great performance. The Hulk is really pretty funny. The great scene stealer is the daughter singing a song from Cats. If JA, gave the same pitch to the studio as he talked about the movie with Charlie Rose then he delivered like a hammer hitting a nail. If you didnt like the concept then dont make the movie. Don’t paint JA as one to be feared. He should be embraced “he is a man of his word.” Robbie Goldstein
you guys are fucking nuts…
funny people is by far the most sophisticated film made this year. It’s brave, daring, funny, and filled with amazing performances.
Just because the guy had already brought in over a half billion dollars in 3 years, doesn’t mean that he can’t deliver a movie that smokes every James Brooks movie other than Broadcast News and Terms of Endearment.
Nikki as a true film fan, you should be ashamed at the way you’re covering this.
Most filmmakers do require discipline to prevent themselves from delving into narcissitic self-indulgence. Someone has to be there to tell them “no” and to be the voice of reason. Smart filmmakers recognize this.
Hopefully they hire the right film editor to keep them on track, which helps to keep the execs and producers at bay! Otherwise, these self-indulgent almost 3 hour long comedies probably deserve the execs chiming in.
No director has a “perfect” record these days… enough to have true “final cut.” By the same token every movie has a natural rhythm — sometimes it is longer, sometimes it is shorter. If it can sustain the audience’s attention, then whatever works! I’m sure Apatow will be laughing all the way to the bank, either way. People seem to like his films and that’s probably why Universal jumped to book him on his next few. The only thing that can quiet execs is cash or kudos.
Oh please, Judd delivers and Judd gets what he wants. What’s the big deal? Who delivers more comedy at this point? Someone waiting in the wings to replace his dominence? I don’t think so. What’s the BFD?
So it’s not perfect. What is?
“Bruno” was an HOUR shorter than “Funny People” and that movie fizzled out quickly. So what’s the ideal length? Exactly two hours?
What a sack of gutless twats. Not being able to have a constructive conversation with a man you pay millions of dollars to. All these hacky studio slobs should be fired and people with balls should be put in charge. Universal is on the verge, with the Halburtonesque Immult at the helm, things will only get worse. By the way were is the media outrage over Obama and Immult’s relationship? Let them eat cake!!!
It’s clear now that the indulgent unwieldiness of Funny People was a direct result of Apatow surrounding himself with yes-men who are programmed to encourage and fawn over any creative decision he makes. It’s a pathetic commentary on Universal’s flawed business model that they approved the allocation of 75 million in production resources toward a nearly three-hour project where the final third is dedicated entirely to cramming down the audience’s throat how cute the director’s wife and kids are. Ugh. At this rate who would be surprised if “The Fourth Film by Judd Apatow” is revealed to be a 130-minute documentary about Leslie and the girls going to the grocery store. I feel slimey for ripping a guy’s family, but he really shouldn’t known better. That stuff at the end was nothing but tacked-on deadweight that he was unwilling to trim because it showcased his better half and offspring. You can’t just make movies for yourself. You have to take the audience and the people who footed the bill into consideration. An equilibrium has to be established.
Some of the best movies ever made have been three or four hours long — Gone With The Wind, Lawrence of Arabia, The Great Escape, Schinder’s List… It takes tremendous skill to keep an audience engaged past the two hour mark — and Apatow ALMOST does it. I found myself looking around maybe once or twice in the third hour, but not really annoyed or bored. Probably because the stakes weren’t huge, a la Titanic. We already knew Sandler was going to survive by the 90 minute mark, and the last half hour was about how he was going to sort out the wreckage he’d made. Leslie Mann’s decision of whether to get back with Sandler was the big moment of stakes — but it wasn’t life or death.
Knocked Up was good but kind of lost steam at the end.
40 year Old Virgin lost steam at the midway point. It limped along until the end credits.
I think Judd is trying to be the Woody Allen of his generation? Not quite, buddie. Sorry.
Oh lord, I can’t believe this movie was once 3 hours and 45 minutes…
The Apatow frat pack is ’soooo’ 2007. Bring on the boys from “The Hangover.”
For no other reason than it was on the 99¢ Favorites rack at Blockbuster, we watched THE TV SET. I had heard about it, but had resisted because it’s about the biz of the biz. What a delightful surprise! I laughed my ass off! And, now, reading all these silly ego-comments, I realize what a spot-on film it really is!
Does it make you flyover soccer mom trolls feel important to post here? Let me help you out:
Here in Flyover: a movie like this costs so much when you have low 40s in above the line costs. Look it up.
Mr Jeff and Scriptshadow: the Jim Brooks masterpieces all run over two hours. Judd wants to be Jim. End of story.
There is no reason a lame dick comedy (or a dick comedy that pretends to have heart) should be more than 90 minutes.
Every movie he’s made has been (minimum) a 1/2 hour too long! Some were forty minutes too long!
Oh bull! No one told Judd what to do? If Judd wanted a four-hour bore, instead of the current 146-minute bore; no one would have questioned it? Stop defending this bullshit, covering for someone you work for. The movie is WAY to long and of course executives wanted it shorter! And they said so. Who is Apatow, Cecil B. Demille? Theaters want it shorter too so they can have more screenings. That is just a basic fact. Shut up, “Mr. Silent Voice!!” No one is buying it.
The movie would be dull at any length.
Like sausages, no one cares how comedy is made, and it’s not that enjoyable to see.
I can count on one hand the films worthy of being two plus hours. Most are Oscar winners or nominees. Not one is a comedy. I would rather walk out of a film wanting more than wanting less.
Yeah, long movies never make any money nor do they garner good reviews and awards. Unless of course you exclude The Godfather, Lord of the Rings 1, 2 and 3, Harry Potter 1-6, Ben Hur, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button… not to mention the highest grossing movie of all time, Titanic.
I reviewed this film and thought the parts that needed to go were the scenes with older comics trying to make Adam laugh. It looked like he gave them a nod to get them an extra year of SAG insurance. Leslie Mann is brilliant and so was Adam but that ending scene was superflous and too long. 40 yr old Virgin remains the best and Apatow does have a comedy gift. It’s a long gift, but a gift nonetheless.
Length in itself doesn’t matter. As long as the film doesn’t feel long, it deserves to be as long as necessary. Orphan was the rare horror film over 2 hours long. It didn’t feel that long at all because it held your interest.
Funny People does not hold your interest. It’s a self-indulgent, gross, unfunny and dramatically inert mess. Why am I supposed to care about these rich and/or self-centered people again?
Christ! There was a three hour and forty-five minute cut! I would have blown my brains out. If he had just cut out all the unfunny penis and ball jokes it would have been 90 minutes.
I did think it was Sandler’s best work (and I’m not a fan) and I loved Leslie Mann’s work on it. I just thought it was too long and took too long to get there. And by there, I mean the credits.
Jesus Christ. What is truly frightening about this post are the implications behind such phrases as…
– “Universal execs never begged or pleaded with Judd to shorten his movie. Not one of them would have had the balls to.”
– “They never would have done anything to piss Judd off.”
– “There was a mini feud on 40 Year Old Virgin…and everyone learned never to side against or ever really question Judd after that.”
– “No one would have been brave enough to challenge Judd on this, even in a joking matter.”
– “And the idea that someone would directly tell Judd that the part with his wife had to be particularly shortened is ridiculous.”
Let’s face it: Apatow comes across here as some crazed, unreasonable, power-mad egomaniac. And the fact that Apatow in comfortable instilling this kind of fear in other grown-ups is appalling. I mean, letting Apatow have the last word is fine, but this post suggests that the executives at Universal were afraid to disagree with him — even tactfully — FOR FEAR OF INVOKING THE WRATH OF JUDD.
I mean, what the fuck?! Isn’t Apatow over 21? Is he not an adult? Is he that fucking averse to having a CIVIL CONVERSATION with people with a differing point of view?
It seems to me that the best, most talented filmmakers WELCOME other points of view — provided, of course, that their own authority is not usurped.
After all, if somebody has a fresh insight, I’d want to hear about it. I may ultimately reject it, but I’d still want to listen to it.
So why can’t Joel?
@ Script Shadow
I hope you’re joking. A lot of great movies and most of the iconic ones come in well over two hours. The reason for having a runtime under 2 hours is almost always financial not artistic. The truth is the target length of 90 mins is very limiting in how complex of a story you can tell and what depth you can give to your characters. Though long film length could very possibly be a sign of self-indulgence it isn’t necessarily the proof you proclaim it to be. I can only assume from your post that you have easy access to the internet, maybe you should use it to educate yourself before you start labeling artists as egomaniacs.
The Shawshank Redemption 142 mins
The Godfather 175 mins
The Godfather II 200 mins
Pulp Fiction 154 mins
Godfellas 146 mins
The Good, The Bad, The Ugly 161 mins
… and many more!
Wow. These comments make me embarassed to be a reader of this site. I don’t even know what to say.
I don’t think I’m going to visit the comment section any more. If everyone who reads this site is that petty, mean, and most of all stupid, I’m worried what that says about *me*.
*cough* pass the torch to Todd Phillips *cough*
What an arrogant asshole. For Judd to shoot three hours and forty five minutes of film is the height of arrogance. Spielberg doesn’t shoot that much ever. I don’t think he shot that much on Schindler’s List. I hope Universal deducted the overages on this movie from Apatow’s fee. Only a crazed egomaniac would shoot that much film from his own script. You’re terribly overexposed in the news media now Judd you need to go away for a while and stop campaigning for the cover of Time magazine. You’re not that important in the scheme of things.
Ok everyone, relax. Three hours plus of Funny People is an assemblage. Anyone ever hear of an assmeblage? Like everything these with studios always bending over for talent, no one was allowed to weigh in on the script because even at “knocke up running length” this movie was too long. As Woody Allen always said when asked what he would do with his movies in hindsight, “I’d make them shorter.” And that’s true for comedy everywhere. Judd Apatow is talented but a little zeitgeist right now. Everyone’s rich so I get it, but to truly be a great filmmaker one has to make a truly great film and we’ve yet to see that from him. Funny People simply wasn’t funny and let’s face it, Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill et al are in overexposed mode and Adam Sandler can’t pull off these kinds of mature storylines as a performer. Bad combination across the board.
And Script Shadow…allow me to shed a little light on COMEDIC scripts, okay?
They should be SHORT.
The great ones are SHORT.
The best ones are SHORT.
And even NON-comedic movies should as a rule come in at under two hours.
Director George Roy Hill put it best when he said, “If you can’t tell your story in one hour fifty, you had better be David Lean.” And before you start calling GRH a hypocrite, just bear in mind that even the great GRH movies that EXCEEDED the time he imposed in his maxim (such as THE STING) were still shorter than FUNNY PEOPLE!
nice letter weinstock!
Hey Chris –
One problem with the movies you listed — none of them are comedies. Sorry, dude.
Glick, it’s actually very common for rough cuts of movies to be much longer than their intended length, and I’m quite sure that’s the version the viewer was referring to–the original rough cut of Annie Hall ran three hours long; Allen knew it would never be that long, but he had to get a feel for the scenes and see how they played up against one another. Comedies are tricky beasts. Again, that’s stuff people in the industry know–rough cuts tend to run really long, so directors & editors can test out a lot of stuff.
I haven’t seen “Funny People” yet, but I’m going to, on the strength of the New Yorker review.
I’ve been there. Worked on a film that was CLEARLY too long, and the studio execs told the director to cut it. He refused. The execs did nothing. The cowardice within the studios would knock your socks off if you could see it up close. I loved Judd’s film, until the third act, which needed some serious cutting. One would think that the studio writing the check would do whatever it takes to make him deliver a tighter film.
the email to Nikki sounds a lot like Barry Mendel. Anyone agree with that?
“They never would have done anything to piss Judd off. There was a mini feud on “40 Year Old Virgin” between Judd and [ex-Uni exec] Mary Parent, and everyone learned never to side against or ever really question Judd after that.”
Is this true? Apatow was a well-known writer/producer at the time, but did he really have THAT much clout as a newbie director of a movie starring a Daily Show correspondent?
Judd Apatow, must deliver, to have that kind of clout.
For a director to have the final cut, is not unusual. For a studio exec, to fear asking a director, to shorten or change the director’s cut, is unusual.
I know a director, that refused a request, by a studio bigwig, to re-cut his movie. He doesn’t work much anymore…
Apatow comes off like a genuinely pleasant guy in interviews. I doubt Funny People being overstuffed was a result of egomaniacal hubris on his behalf. I’m sure his heart was in the right place. Sometimes filmmakers just need to learn the hard way that less is more with certain content. The mixed reviews and the box office underperformance will hopefully slap some sense into him and make him realize that he needs to start accepting input from people with fresh eyes on how to put out the best product possible.
SPOILER ALERT! SPOILER ALERT! The movie was really great, I thought. One of the most touching scenes I have seen in a movie in a very long time was when Leslie Mann’s character goes to Adam Sandler’s (George’s) mansion and she confessed he was the love of her life. Mann, I cried. That was some damn superb acting there by Leslie.
I don’t have any problem with Apatow using his clout to keep the studios from meddling in his picture. I think it’s great. But I also don’t think he’s much of a filmmaker. Granted, people’s taste in comedy varies by miles, and I find him a bit conventional and broad. BUT, his movies all do have their moments… until they are dragged down by z grade sentimental shlock. The problem is it seems in his quest to become a “real” filmmaker he’s moving towards focusing on his weaknesses rather than his strengths. And he’s just indulgent in the wrong ways. Even Paul Thomas Anderson, who has trouble bringing in any movie at less than two and half hours, was smart enough to bring his Sandler pic in at 95 minutes. Granted it was far too obtuse and purposefully odd to make any money, but at least it wasn’t overlong for no reason.
@ disturbed:
I’m just pointing out that Apatow has his flaws. I think he needs to surround himself with new people rather than his buddies all the time. He could also have civil discussions with studio execs about the length of his movies. Especially those that tread a fine line between comedy and drama like “Funny People” — sometimes studios are right about running times and filmmakers who aren’t willing to compromise on certain issues (like Apatow) could hurt the bottom line and their future careers.
Apatow can save his final cuts for the DVD and Blu-ray releases — like he did for “Virgin” and “Knocked Up.” (I don’t get his Tarantino-esque aversion for avoiding film composers either.)
It should be easy to figure out who wrote the email. Wasn’t every Judd Apatow insider cast in the movie? My money’s on the younger daughter.
Rough cuts run long, WE ALL KNOW THAT! But that is when you begin to cut and structure. Cutting from three and a half hours to two and a half hours is a SECOND PASS at best. NOT something you release! Particularly something with material so lame that it couldn’t even sustain 70 minutes. That is the hight of arrogance. Even Jerry Lewis, the most egotistical comedy maker had the sense to keep his stuff well under two hours!!!!
And just for the record, “Knocked UP” and “Virgin” were also WAY TOO LONG also– and NOT good movies. Stop telling me this junk is good!
I’m fairly certain most of the people who post in the Deadline Hollywood comments section have never worked in the industry. They’re just too damn stupid, even by Hollywood’s standards.
Dear “Disturbed”
I’ll tell you what it says about you, you probably worked on the film an feel the need to defend it just like “the silent one” who assured us Judd was not told to shorten the film!
Can’t believe someone invoked the embarrassing New Yorker review. Kiss of death when one of those guys go apesh– over a 2 1/2 hour comedy.
“Well you’re in your little room
and you’re working on something good
but if it’s really good
you’re gonna need a bigger room
and when you’re in the bigger room
you might not know what to do
you might have to think of
how you got started
sitting in your little room”
-Jack White
I never thought I’d live to see the day when I’d ask “Where is Harvey Scissorshands Weinstein when you need him?”
“I once watched “Knocked Up” three times in a row and never got bored with it.”
lol you must have a jumbo bong
you know what. i call bullshit on the leslie mann dissing. she’s actually really good and usually my favorite thing in his and really any movie she’s in. including that zac efron one i watched on a plane.
Running times are out of control across the board. Yes in capable hands a brilliant script that HAS to be that long is the exception, but, news flash, no Apatow movie falls in either category.
And comedies are a special case because once you lose the audience during a lull it is nearly impossible to get them back. It is like telling a joke at a party but in the middle of it you forget a key part, by the time you remember no one cares.
Hollywood makes three hour ass killers for the same reason McDonald’s makes 3000 calories meals: because the proles demand “their money’s worth” using the crudest possible measure (decibels of noise, number of explosions, wild overindulgence of story).
Length doesn’t matter. It’s more the notion of how you put it in motion.
Bad humor? Change the title to “Knock-knocked Up.”
Leslie Mann was horrible in The Cable Guy and George of the Jungle. She’d be getting turned down for roles in Lifetime movies of the week if she didn’t hit the jackpot by marrying a guy whom Hollywood would have you believe is the medium’s preeminent comedic auteur. Apatow’s reaction to Funny People bombing will be to think that it failed because there wasn’t enough Leslie Mann so she’ll probably go on to headline whatever needlessly long project he decides to undertake next.
I like Judd and respect what he’s done and hope he continues to do it on his own terms. Not even saying that to suck up (or I’d put my real name here).
Dear Ricky Coogan,
Everyone who posts here is stupid? I noticed you posted here.
Hey “Judd shill”
Stop shilling for Judd. You’re not fooling anyone.
Nikki-
how about a post on the coming changes atop Universal? come on, beat your competitors to the punch! everyone in town knows SOMETHING is going down…we just need the details!!!
The script was 140+ pages if memory serves correct. They knew what was up before shooting started so what’s the surprise? Did they think a 140+ page script would ever have a chance to come in at 2hrs?
I love “Knocked Up” and “40 Year Old Virgin” but they are WAY TOO LONG. There is no reason in this world why a comedy needs to be over 2 hours. Watch “500 Days of Summer” and look how brisk and fast paced it is. They cover a lot of material and a full 500 day romance all in 95 minutes. I don’t understand why Apatow insists that his movies either have the comedic charm or the dramatic weight to run 2 1/2 hours long. Movies like “Braveheart” and “The Lord of the Rings” I get, but nothing from the Apatow camp needs to run that long. I’ll wait until “Funny People” hits DVD so I can skip through it…just like I did with “Knocked Up.”
How’d you like to have Rogan’s next film The Green Hornet?
I was looking forward to this film, but at 90 minutes I was ready for it to end. From minute 91 forward my skin crawling got worse. At 2:26, it became the nightmare film of the year. And all those dick jokes were just stupid. This man clearly should not be making movies. I hope his wife and kids leave him.
The issue really shouldn’t be the length, it should be the content. I mean, really, who wants to see some guy’s home videos? And maybe it’s just me, but I’m getting tired of the cock jokes and trying so hard to root for the slacker main character (and failing!). Seriously, Apatow is NOT FUNNY. All he does is regurgitate the same old schlock film after film and I for one am getting really tired. When will Hollywood wake up and smell the shit that they’re making?
“I’m fairly certain most of the people who post in the Deadline Hollywood comments section have never worked in the industry. They’re just too damn stupid, even by Hollywood’s standards.
Comment by Ricky Coogan — August 2, 2009 @ 7:24 pm”
—————————————————-
This is a stone cold truth. Especially at the weekend.
When Scriptshadow (who is nothing more than some kid who will never sell a script owing to all the people he as pissed off in town with his little blog) is taken as some sage industry insider you know this whole discussion is doomed.
Other posters have nailed this. Apatow tried to make his Terms of Endearment here. And he failed miserably. Funny People (As ironic a title as you’ll ever see) reeks of self-indulgence from start to finish. I could have overlooked that near fatal flaw, if the movie had been funny. Apatow is the same comic “genius” that in the last five years has produced Kicking and Screaming, Drillbit Taylor, and Year One. All colossal turds.
At the Museum of Moving Image Screening of Funny People, Judd Apatow told us this was three film ideas he had that he rolled into one. You could clearly see this throughout the film. Apatow is great at coming up with ideas but tends to lose focus in his films at the midway point. He doesn’t know how to wrap it up into a package and deliver at the end. I wanted to love this film, but after 2 hrs and 43 minutes I was having a snoozefest. Comedies need to stay within the 90 minute rule. Mr Apatow, Please keep your next film at 90 minutes and don’t venture onto serious ground. It doesn’t work for you.
Dorothy Parker has a wizard sleeve!
Sorry, it’s one of my pet peeves. Movies that are too long that don’t need to be. If you have a *reason* to be long, I’m there with you, but Apatow’s movies don’t need to be long. Not saying he’s not talented. I like the way he’s changed comedy. But this is basic storytelling we’re talking about here. Get rid of the stuff you don’t need. They teach it on Day 1 of every screenwriting class in the nation.
Dear Judd, Don’t you wish everyone was simply talking about your own penis?
Yes, Mr. Apatow, sit back in your nice little corner and play with your comedy toys. You want to make a more serious film? That’s cute. Now sit down, shut the fuck up and make some more nice little comedies that we all enjoy. But don’t make them too long or anything, we’re all busy people and while we like you, we don’t like you THAT much.
It’s not the length of FUNNY PEOPLE that’s the problem. It’s the structure. The movie hits a wall when it gets to Marin County and doesn’t recover. Should that have been caught at the script stage? Yes, probably. But is FUNNY PEOPLE, for all its flaws, still an extremely ambitious film? And isn’t this exactly what we want big studios to be putting out? For all the kvetching about Universal this year, they’ve unquestionably put out the most interesting films of the summer, and that’s something to be happy about, given I don’t work in the industry and couldn’t possibly care less about the business side of things.
Greg – That’s not a New Yorker review, it’s a David Denby review. Big difference. Denby is a jackass, a well-known pompous blowhard, and he didn’t review FUNNY PEOPLE, he played the Peanut Butter game with Apatow’s nutsack.
Anthony Lane is the credible reviewer for the New Yorker. Denby is dead weight.
Everyone knows you don’t dare question Judd Apatow. Just ask Mark Brazill.