“Maybe Apatow will stick around longer if he embraces the dramatic more fully with slight tones of comedy. I can see his audience getting tired of his type of humour but people will always respond to the type of charaters he’s able to write. I rarely laugh while watching an Apatow movie but find hs characters and their plight compelling.
Despite all the dick jokes,“funny people” dealt with the subject of mortality in a very mature way.
“Freaks and geeks” captured adolescent angst so well.”
you must be a hit at parties.
If the intention of Fredo’s original post is to compare the arc of their careers in terms of their need to brach out into more “serious” subject matter, I think there’s some definite similarities between Apatow and Allen.
Having said that, I think Allen’s attempts at seriousness have been a mixed bag at best. He’s only gone truly, full-out, drama a few times. And each of those times has been overbearing. Interiors mimicd Bergman in style, but it had even less soul than a Bergman picture. Allen, at times seemed to forget one of his best assets – he’s funny as hell. I hope Apatow doesn’t fall into the same trap. I don’t honestly think he will.
And, since this thread has sort of become a discussion about the Allen rankings that RUS put out – I can’t believe that The Purple Rose of Cairo ranked so low. Every other ranking I can accept, even if I disagree, but that one just seems like the driveling of a mentally insane person. To each his own, I guess.
Hmmm…..Apatoe needs to learn how to wrap it up much quicker. There is no reason for Knocked Up to be 2:20 long, this isn’t Bridge on the River Kwai. Allen on the other hand, I’ve always wanted to see him try his hand at an epic 3+ hour film. Apatoe just isn’t at the stature of Allen, he’s not even in the class of Albert Brooks.
You guys will talk about anything. Let’s do “Is Bret Ratner the next Akira Kurosawa?” next.
A serious question of my own: is Todd Solonz the next Woody Allen?
Fredo, please ask this question again in 30 years. Then, I would be happy to participate in the conversation (honestly, I would). But Apatow has another 40 or so films to write, direct, or star in before this conversation will be valid.
It’s Francisco from the year 2039. In response to the question: Judd who?
“Apatow isn’t even the next Woody Woodpecker.”
what Matt Parks said…
Woody has quite possibly the greatest sense of interior space (visually) than any director in history (only Fassbiner, Bergman, Rohmer, or Altman come immediately to mind as his peers in this aspect), not to mention the most honest and genuine depiction of sex in American film.
Apatow has yet to develop a mature visual sense (while it’s not quite Kevin Smith-style place a stagnant camera on two people talking, there’s nothing to really call a style yet). He lacks an honesty and willingness to allow his audience to dislike his characters, which hamstrings his characters’ development. Also, where most of Woody’s dialogue is spot-on, I’ve never actually met ANYBODY who talks like the characters in Judd Apatow movies.
I WOUL love to see him do another television series, but I somehow doubt that’s happening anytime soon.
Apatow’s writing for “You Don’t Mess with the Zoltan” combined with “Drillbit Taylor” puts me in mind of Borges.
Maybe Todd Solondz…but Apatow…come on!!!
Apatow can be pretty brilliant when he puts some effort into them. I find all three of his directorial efforts on point regarding human interactions and more specifically the interaction between men and women and developing of relationships. I love Knocked Up.
No. Woody Allen was a little more intelligent.
I would argue if you look at Woody’s first couple films, they’re hardly bastians of intelligencia. I’m sure most people here are only judging Allen by his later films, when he found his stride with such films as Manhatten and Hannah and Her Sisters and were not around when Allen first started out. But I think it’s safe to assume that when he made Take the Money and Run or Bananas, people weren’t clamoring to the gods that they had found their savior of all things high-brow. In that respect, I think a movie like Funny People is far more “intelligent” than Bananas (if such a comparison is even worth mentioning). The point being, it’s not about “who is better” or “who is smarter” it’s about the sensibilties between both filmmakers and whether Apatow will have the staying power that Allen has had.
It should be noted that despite Allen’s staying power, he really hasn’t made a masterpiece in twenty years. Sing the praises of Match Point or Vicki Christina all you want but they hardly compare in stature to some of his earlier work. As far as I’m concerned, Allen has been coasting on fumes for quite a while now.
Mikel… It would seem that Todd Solondz has long since become irrelevant. Why would you think him?
Bananas is MILES AHEAD of 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up altogether!!!!!
unless you think Seth Rogen is a good actor….sigh…no one searches anymore…
shouldn’t the question really be “is Judd Apatow the next James L. Brooks?”
I thought Brooks was the filmmaker whose films Apatow said he would most like to emulate, and it’s certainly evident.
@Johnny Dubiel: I was the first to compare them, and in fairness to both Woody and Todd neither one has ever been relevant or anything but a competent thief.
RUS – You might be right in comparing Apatow to Brooks, at least in terms of content. But I was also interested in longevity and specifically directing and James Brooks hasn’t directed many films (6 films in nearly 30 years). I think of James L. Brooks as more prolific in the producing department and it is my hope that while Apatow will continue to produce and support his friends, he will also continue to direct films on a regular basis and hone his skills as a director.
Fredo, I definitely think you’re on to something. While Allen and Apatow share little in common, Apatow is the first director in a long time to treat comedy seriously. He may not be as thoughtful or prolific, but he is making a significant contribution to the genre. Funny People was actually pretty ballsy, but I think the best still lies ahead.
^^yeah, I think Funny People might be the first movie where Sandler plays an unsympathetic character. That was, when you think about his box office success, a very ballsy move for Apatow and his producers to make.
It paid off.
No. Just… no.
Funny People is the first movie I’ve seen with Adam Sadler where I wasn’t completely turned off by his performance (that’s right, I hated Punch Drunk Love). I felt similarly about Leo in The Departed.
sorry about that Bruce. Guess should give credit where it’s due. However, I would have to completely disagree with you on both fronts. Absolutely nothing to compare in either style, approach, or response.
First on Solondz… He has always come across as somewhat of a hack completely reliant on trying to shock his audience. There is nothing striking about his abilities as a filmmaker or storyteller. His movies fade from memory quite quickly…
…and on to Woody…
…wherein Allen’s films grow in estimation. The best ones get better each time.
Irrelevant?: ‘Annie Hall’, ‘Crimes and Misdemeanors’, ‘Hannah and Her Sisters’, ‘Bullets Over Broadway’, ‘Match Point’ (I only mentioned a few of his films with high commercial and critical ravings). 20 Oscar nominations with at least one nomination in four consecutive decades.
What does a guy need to do to be relevant to you?
Apatow is the next Ted Kotcheff. Pure genius.