Write about me!

No, silly, I don’t require movies to be realistic to be enjoyable, and neither does any true fan of film. But I do expect that the reality that the filmmakers are creating will be intriguing, will follow its own set of rules, and will pay off in an innovative, comedic and compelling way that impacts me on some level. Stories, for example, about a guy with a magic remote control or a mentally deficient waterboy, simply don’t fit those criteria for me. If they do for you or for a large audience, hey swell, but there are plenty of movie comedies that create a far better and more satisfying sense of unrealism than most of Sandler’s filmography. Apatow has created some of them, and so has Rogen, whose output I appreciate on a higher level than that of Sandler.

But then that was the original point, which I think you probably missed when you were rushing to make a disparaging comment.

I think a Sethrogenized Sandler might certainly be more versatile, thus my own intrigue in bringing this up. Sandler is a talented guy and every so often - yes, even outside of PUNCHDRUNK LOVE - one sees glimmers of something going on behind the smirks and silly faces. And I think Apatow is a stronger creative guide than perhaps Sandler’s worked with before, so I’m curious to see the result.

Ultimately, it may be the first Sandler movie in years that I won’t automatically decide to avoid, for whatever that’s worth.

Thanks a bunch for the link and discussion!

Not to hammer this quote, but did you ever imagine, the white guy from “In Living Color” playing the lead in a “Eternal Sunshine” and not only playing the lead, but knocking it out of the park.

Also Zack & Miri proves nothing other than Smith and Rogen each wanting to work with one of the best in there genre’s.

Who cares. Zack and Miri is only the third comedic film that Rogen’s headlining. I don’t think anyone should be expecting him to be branching out at this stage. I’m sure he feels like he needs to prove himself as a comic actor before he starts showing up in period pieces.

It took Sandler 7 years of comedies before he did Punch Drunk Love.

“Seth Rogen type which, as Zach and Miri proves, could easily be applied to non-Apatow projects, but which we’ve as of yet seen no evidence can easily be funneled into, say, a Paul Thomas Anderson film.”

What a bullshit statement. What in Sandler’s filmography indicated that his ‘type’ could work in a PT Anderson film? Who’s to say Rogen isn’t capable of making the same transition in a few years? Nobody.

Stupid question, of course Sandler can be more versatile, and will when he wants to. What will that prove anyway? is it your opinion that he’s not versatile? or are you just throwing it out there to see if it’ll stick somewhere in the online world? How is he an aging comedy star?

I like how your graph shows a major downslope after Click/Superbad. Didn’t Sarah Marshall and Zohan make $100M+ each?

Sandler cameod on Undeclared and they reunited on Zohan which Apatow co-wrote with Sandler.

I guess Funny People is getting more attention because it’s Sandler’s first appearance in an “Apatow film”, rather than a “Sandler Film”. It’s a smart move, his films may consistently do well at the box office, but even he must know that the general opinion is that his comedy vehicles have gotten progressively crappier. I expect Funny People to buck the trend.