Posts Tagged ‘Jason Segel’
7 items.
Apr18
I’m not exactly sure what part of my brain the idea for this comic escaped from. I just started thinking about Forgetting Sarah Marshall and how it’s a Judd Apatow production, ALL of the Judd Apatow productions lined up for release in 2008 and the rest just kind of leaked out of my ear.
I’m sure the working environment on an Apatow film is much less contentious as I’ve depicted here. But you can’t help but notice the low-grade nepotism involved with these movies anymore.
At first I thought it was pretty cool to have the same stable of actors on call for any given movie. Now I can’t imagine a comedy that DOESN’T feature Jason Segel, Seth Rogen, or Jonah Hill in some capacity. Do they even make comedies without their involvement anymore? It’s hard to tell.
Then again, maybe that was the point.
At this stage, Apatow productions have become like the Laff-O-Lympics for my favorite comedy actors. I just watched Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story on DVD last week and there are tons of small cameos from the likes of Jack McBrayer and Ed Helms. Complete throwaway roles that could have been played by anyone. But then they show up on screen and that wave of recognition hits you. “Hey! That’s so-and-so from [insert popular comedy television show here]!” In a weird way, it’s like it adds some kind of credibility to the affair.
As far as Forgetting Sarah Marshall is concerned, it’s a movie I’ve been looking forward to for a while. It looks like it’s got the same mix of crudeness and sweetness and they’re mixing things up a little bit by adding Kristen Bell and Mila Kunis to things. Also, those two actresses are very attractive and I’ll take any advantage I can get in terms of muting the amount of wang that is supposedly in this movie. Reportedly, Segel shows the goods 3 times in this picture. At what point did the wiener become a standard visual gag? I know it looks weird, and everything, but…
Peter Segel is an actor I kind of like, but not really – and mostly for the roles he’s chosen. Specifically, the stalker boyfriend from Undeclared and the dirtbag MILF-chaser in Knocked Up. I don’t watch How I Met Your Mother, but I understand he plays a much more squeaky clean version of himself on that show. So maybe it’s been the wrong exposure for me.
That said, I’m impressed that he wrote the screenplay for this one and somehow managed to wring A NEW MUPPETS MOVIE out of his involvement with Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Apparently there is a sequence with puppets at the end and people from The Henson Company were doing the puppeteering. Segel floated the idea past them and the rest is (soon to be filmed) history.
Cami and I are trying to line up a babysitter this weekend so we can get out of the house and see this. I know I say that a lot, but this is the first movie in a long while that I feel extremely motivated to see. Motivated enough to inconvenience another family member and deep-six their Saturday night to hang out at our house and make sure my baby doesn’t drink a case of Colt 45 while we’re away.
Wow. That’s a visual for you.
One last thing — If you missed it on Wednesday, be sure to download the first recorded broadcast of Boxcar Comics Hobo Jamboree. Myself, Joe Dunn from Joe Loves Crappy Movies, Phil Chan from Martriculated and Clay Yount from Rob & Elliot were all in attendance and we laid down the ground work for what you can expect from our monthly podcast. We had a good time recording it and I’m already looking forward to the next one.
A couple of people wrote to tell me that we didn’t give you guys enough notice to listen to the show live. Sorry about that. It all came together kind of quickly and we just ran to press with it. Next time, we’ll try to talk it up a week or so in advance.
I’m really excited about the progress that Boxcar Comics has been making lately. So far we have one jam comic and this podcast under our belt. We’re working on our second jam comic as we speak. Boxcar has been around since 2005. I think we’ve gotten more done in the last few months than we have in the last few years. I feel good about it. We’ve justified ourselves beyond just sharing traffic. Good times.
That’s all from me! Have a great weekend everybody!
[ No Comments ]
And with an awkward pause, we inch quietly away from 2008. That’s the note I leave you on.
Today will be the last comic of the year. I’m going on vacation with Cami and my sister-in-law starting Sunday and there will be no guest strips to pad things out while I’m gone. Don’t forget about me! You’ll want to be sure and check out the site again in 2009 because I’ll be introducing a new site design as well as announce the pre-order for Theater Hopper: Year Three! Big news all around!
As for today’s comic, it’s somewhat based in truth. Cami *did* in fact get me a Blu-ray DVD player, but for my birthday, not Christmas. And it’s true that we put it through it’s paces by watching Forgetting Sarah Marshall. It’s probably not the first movie you’d think of when it comes to testing out the picture quality of a Blu-ray DVD player, but I have to admit — I did notice a distinct difference in picture quality!
It’s funny, because I was talking about receiving the Blu-ray player for my birthday during Monday’s night’s Triple Feature podcast and I was riffing on how you have to find a movie that’s worthy of the technology because it’s cost-prohibitive to buy every single DVD you want in that format. Specifically, I think I said “I’m not going to get Step Brothers on Blu-ray so I can see Will Ferrell’s jacked up teeth in 1080i resolution.”
Oh, but Jason Segel’s wang is perfectly acceptable!
I should point out that I tried to get something cool, but Cami nixed The Dark Knight because seeing in the theater bummed her out and she didn’t want to watch it again. Also, pathetically, I couldn’t find any copies of Iron Man at my local Best Buy. LAME! I did grab Wall-E, though. We haven’t watched it yet because we actually watched it a few weeks ago in the inferior “regular” DVD format.
I think I have a clever idea about replacing some of my old DVDs with Blu-ray editions, though. I had the idea to sell them on eBay with an original sketch of the title character. So you guys out there can bid on one of my old movies and get something a little extra to boot. It might be fun! We’ll have to see how it works. Stay tuned for that in the future.
Anyway, Forgetting Sarah Marshall was great. A lot funnier than I remembered it! There’s a lot going on in that movie. Lots of different plots and character points to keep up with. That’s a good thing! Gives a comedy dimension rather than it being a catch phrase machine.
I’m kind of kicking myself that I didn’t pick it up on DVD earlier, but now I’m kind of glad I didn’t so we could enjoy it on Blu-ray. The extras are crazy. There are literally dozens of them. Good stuff.
That does it for me today. I hope everyone who celebrates the Christmas holiday had a happy and safe experience.
Remember, no new comics next week and that includes taking a break from The Triple Feature as well. So if you’re a fan of the show, we’re not recording on Monday.
I’ll be sure to post a reminder of the hiatus to the front page on Monday as well as ways you can be notified when the new site design goes live on Monday, January 5th. You guys are going to love it. I’ve shown it to a bunch of my web comic buddies and they’ve been very supportive. If these guys can’t find anything wrong with the layout, than that means you guys are going to LOVE IT!
Have a safe and happy New Year and I’ll see you again in 2009!
[ No Comments ]
I have deeper thoughts about I Love You, Man. More so than what the comic might suggest.
When I saw the trailers for this a few months ago, I was really pumped to see it. Mostly because I am nurturing a serious man-crush for Paul Rudd and will watch anything he’s in.
But as time went on, I started asking myself “What is this movie?” The plot is simple enough. A man (Rudd) is getting married and realizes that he doesn’t have any guy friends to stand up on the altar with him. So he goes on a series of “man-dates” to find a new best friend and a Best Man for his wedding.
If you stop and think about it and if the genders were the opposite… wouldn’t this be a chick flick?
Both Rudd and co-star Jason Segel have gone on record stating that they don’t like how their film has been categorized as a “bromance.” But what else can you call it? Personally, I think it’s more fitting to label I Love You, Man a “bromance” such than other films that have been identified in that way. Knocked Up or Pineapple Express, for example.
Here’s another question… It’s shown in the trailer that Rudd’s character has both a brother and a father who is still alive. Why does he not ask either of them to be his Best Man. I don’t mean to judge the film based on the trailer (and hopefully they acknowledge the issue in the movie) but give us something to hang our hat in during the preview so we’re not asking dumb questions like that. A throw away line. ANYTHING!
“Hey, brother. Wanna be my best man?”
“No.”
“Dad?”
“No.”
#smash cut to a hilarious montage of “man-dates”#
Whatever. I’m totally seeing I Love You, Man this weekend anyway. Like I said, I have a man-crush to tend to.
Incidentally, while I was researching information about I Love You, Man, I came across this video of a performance in Rudd’s cannon I’m sure he’d like to forget. It’s from the Hong Kong action movie Gen-Y Cops (a sequel to the popular movie Gen-X Cops). In the film, Rudd plays F.B.I. Agent Ian Curtis (paging Joy Division!) who walks around with awesome feathered hair and highlights.
The video is a little more than 8 minutes long, but I encourage you to watch it in its entirety. You won’t be disappointed.
Gen-Y Cops came out in 2000, a few years before Rudd became more of a mainstream talent but a few years after he made his splash in Clueless. I am begging for some late night host to find this clip and show it to him when he’s making the promotional rounds for I Love You, Man. Not to make him uncomfortable, or anything. Just to hear him explain it. Rudd has a very winning self-deprecating sense of humor. I’d like to hear his take on it.
I had a couple of other things not related to the comic that I wanted to talk about today, but I think I’m going to quit while I’m ahead. It’s kind of hard to follow up with anything else after watching a video like that.
So… anyone holding out for a follow up with Gen-Z Cops?
[ 13 Comments ]
As far as R-rated comedies go, I Love You, Man is kind of like a sheep in wolf’s clothing.
Sure, it tries to convince you that it’s a raunchy sex farce with it’s jokes about masturbation stations, oral sex and grandma’s riding Sybian machines. But in actuality, it’s an adorable little film about the difficulties of making friends in your 30’s.
I Love You, Man tries frequently to shock you into laughing, but is undercut by the sweetness and likability of it’s principal players.
After proposing to his girlfriend, real estate agent Peter Klaven (Paul Rudd) realizes that he doesn’t have a lot of guy friends and goes on a series of “man dates” in an effort to make friends. After a series of set-ups and disasters, Peter meets the enigmatic Sydney Fife (Jason Segel) and hijinks ensue.
The ever-agile Rudd takes his character’s earnestness and propensity for inventing half-cooked slang and nicknames (“See you later, Joben!”) beyond the socially awkward situations he finds himself in. Rudd’s character is pathetic in a way that you root for, not laugh at.
Segel as Sydney is meant to come off like some kind of latter-day hippie. We don’t know what he does for a living or why he dresses like a pawn shop refugee. Later, when Sydney asks Peter for an $8,000 loan, we’re meant to question if his intentions are honorable. But Segel’s sincerity as a performer shines through. And even though Sydney is a bit of an odd duck, he operates within the parameters of a very specific, laid back personal philosophy. He’s never really as outrageous or dangerous as the movie wants you to think he is.
These are not criticisms meant to convince you that I Love You, Man is a bad movie. In fact, it is a very tidy, effective and humorous examination of making friends later in life and the importance of male bonding.
Certainly it is buoyed by the strength of it’s phenomenal supporting cast. Writer/Director John Hamburg did an excellent job of gathering talent. Everyone from the adorable Rashida Jones as Rudd’s fiance, Andy Samberg, Jaime Pressly, Jon Favreau, J.K. Simmons, Jane Curtain, Human Giant’s Rob Huebel and The State’s Thomas Lennon and Joe Lo Truglio make appearances.
On Blu-ray, the movie looks spectacular. You can see every last freckle on Jason Segel’s face. Although, I’m starting to become concerned that between this movie and Forgetting Sarah Marshall on Blu-ray, I’m becoming a little too knowledgeable about Segel’s dermatological landscape.
Extras on the disc are everything you would expect. Deleted scenes, extended scenes, a gag reel, a “making-of” documentary and audio commentary from Hamburg, Rudd and Segel.
The extended scenes and gag reel demonstrate not only the large amount of quick-fire improvising that was happening during production, but also Rudd’s aparant inability to keep a straight face at any given time.
Then again, when you have Rob Huebell (as Peter’s real estate rival) sitting across from you ad-libbing all of the celebrities he’s sold homes to, it’s kind of hard not to laugh “Gary Coleman, Emmanuel Lewis, Jaleel White, Donald Sutherland…”
In fact, everything about these extras seems to indicate that the production of I Love You, Man was one of the most loose, playful, happiest experiences ever captured on film. And there’s nothing wrong with that! Next time, don’t try to compete with Bruno for shock value. There’s nothing wrong with making a sweet natured comedy and playing to those strengths.
For people looking for some relaxed laughs with a couple of sex jokes thrown in, I Love You, Man fits the bill.
[ 5 Comments ]
The red band trailer for Cameron Diaz’s Bad Teacher came out recently and it’s so completely ridiculous, I had to share it with you.
The gist of it is basically that Cameron Diaz swears a lot. Awkwardly. Is anyone convinced by this “bad-girl” persona she’s slapped on? This performance seems specifically designed to counter-act Diaz’s bubbly Every Girl reputation. Instead it comes off as contrived.
Justin Timberlake is acting so unbelievable goofy, it’s like he wandered out of a Saturday Night Live sketch.
In fact, I can’t decide if this movie is supposed to be straight up satire or if we’re supposed to take any of the characters seriously?
Jason Segel appears to be approaching his role with some sincerity and, as Forgetting Sarah Marshall proved, he’s endlessly endearing as the underdog.
But from this trailer, it looks like casting Diaz was a mistake. Whatever they’re selling, I’m not buying. To me it looks like some vain attempt to make Diaz relevant again by shocking us into paying attention. She’s like Madonna, or something.
What do you guys think of Bad Teacher? Is it a Bad Santa knock off or something worse? It Diaz at all believable in this role? Leave your comments below!
UPDATE: If anyone needs proof that Cameron Diaz is desperate to reinvent herself as a bad girl, check out this headline from The Huffington Post – Cameron Diaz On ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live’: ‘I Love Porn!’
[ 4 Comments ]
There’s so much I want to say about this trailer. But if you haven’t seen it yet, I don’t want to be the guy that ruins it for you.
Sit back, relax, watch the trailer and then wonder silently why Hollywood hadn’t gotten around to making a movie like this sooner.
Leave your comments below because I DESPERATELY want to talk about this trailer with someone! SPOILERS AHEAD!
[ 21 Comments ]
Nov14
The Muppets comes out two weeks from now and – as I declared on Twitter – that means you get two weeks of Muppets-related Theater Hopper comics.
I’ll be frank and admit that I don’t entirely know what to expect from The Muppets. I’ve been in lockdown mode on this one for a while. It has been extraordinarily hard to do this because it seems like Disney is practically littering the internet with clips from the film. I’m even doing my best to avoid the commercials.
I hope I haven’t gotten my hopes up too far. There’s been inklings of dissaproval swirling around the movie from people in the know – most notably, Frank Oz. The creator of Miss Piggy, Fozzy Bear and original Muppeteer has been quoted as saying that the new movie sacrifices the integrity of the characters for the sake of making cheap jokes, and rewrites their personas and relationships in a way that “creates a false history that the characters were forced to act out for the sake of this movie.” There’s even been talk of some of the Muppeteer’s who performed in the movie wanting to take their name off of it.
The main complaint seems to be that writer/actor Jason Segel had the right intentions with the movie, but that basically… it’s not what Jim Henson would have wanted.
Personally, I see both sides of the story. Yes, it’s important to maintain the integrity of The Muppets. There is something unquantifiable about these characters that people have fallen in love with and we don’t want to see the sullied.
But to disparage the film because it’s not what Jim Henson would have done is simple short-sighted. Where would Disney be if they stopped producing cartoons after Walt Disney died? At some point, you have to prepare for the reality that the characters you may have had a hand in creating really don’t belong to you anymore. They belong to the people who believe in them. If you want your work to live on, it might not hurt to be a little magnanimous about it and hand them down to the next generation.
Oz’s comments in the Hollywood Report article strike me as a little possessive in a “get off my lawn” kind of way. If the new Muppets movie gets it wrong in some way, let them go back and try again. Were the Muppets fully formed characters out of the box when they were introduced 50 years ago? No, the evolved over time. There’s got to be a learning curve to this.
But to lock the characters in amber because you don’t want their integrity sullied? Well, that’s just selfish.
What are your thoughts about The Muppets? Are you looking forward to it? Specifically, I’m kind of interested in what Gen Y’s reaction to The Muppets will be. Do they feel left out of the loop since The Muppets were essentially a lost property during the 90s? Do they have the same affinity for the characters that older audiences do? Will the elixir of nostalgia be as potent among that audience?
Leave your comments below! I’d love to hear them! And, as always, if you could use the ShareThis tool at the bottom of the blog post to share the Muppet-y goodness, I’d appreciate it!
Have a great week!
[ 17 Comments ]
