[–] lepersbell ago
Not even his worst movie by a long shot, like Year One or Youth in Revolt.
I still wish they let him cut loose like he wanted. There's a whole bit where the viewer is signaled with numerology, showing a number, a number of things or verbally saying the number representing each ex so as the movie progresses it's a countdown. In one of the final scenes the last ex offers Scott a "Coke Zero" and would have a waitress bring it out to him, implying he's not even worthy to be among Ramona's exes, just a complete nothing.
Cera said that he fought hard to be allowed to not just knock the platter holding the Coke Zero out of the waitress' hands, but to also punch her in the face as a "you've created a monster" moment. They wouldn't set it up to happen, though, because they already reworked so much of the screenplay to prevent any guys beating on girls, which, you know, Hollywood. Or Toronto.
[–] badruns ago
You don't like being challenged on preconceived notions huh.
You're right bro, that movie was terrible. Definitely don't watch it.
[–] Dalai_Llama ago
Not sure how the product of something that's been filtered through multiple focus groups is deemed to "challenge preconceived notions" but whatever.
I mean, you're subjecting yourself to what a group of investors have agreed is the most appealing to the least common denominator.
In Alfred Hitchcock's "Suspicion," the studio forced him to change the end so that the public wouldn't see Carry Grant as a villain because in those days contracts between studios and actors were much more controlling.
I mean, you're just watching something that a group of people deemed to be the most effective at separating the most people from their money.
[–] badruns ago
I see you're a fan of non-sequiturs as well. Why are you even replying? You won't watch the movie and your mind is made up. You win. Go you!