The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
I’m an emotional, sensitive and empathic person, and I tend to seek out films which will make me think, move me to tears and tell a narrative that resonates with me. However, I have a good barometer for films that are trying too hard to tug at my heart strings and doing just a little too much to get an emotional reaction out of me. When you try to watch a movie or two a day, you can usually figure out which direction a movie is going to go either from its trailer or by where the film is taking its audience. “A Good Person,” directed by Zach Braff, started out incredibly promising until its wild and heavy-handed third act.
“A Good Person” stars the always lovely and talented Florence Pugh as Allison, a young woman who is about to get married to the love of her life, Nathan (Chinaza Uche). They are the perfect couple and the film opens with their engagement party where they are at their happiest. But then things spiral out of control for Allison when she gets into a car accident with her fiancé’s sister and husband in the car. She took her eyes off the road for one second to check Google Maps, and while she survived, they both perished. This sends her down a path of becoming addicted to OxyContin to deal with the physical and emotional pain of the car accident.
Allison cuts her hair one day and is making rash and impulsive decisions in her life, which worries her mother, played by Molly Shannon. She hits up an old friend for pills, former classmates, and even curses out the pharmacist. Finally, she decides to go to a meeting, which is being led by Simone (Zoe Lister-Jones). While there, she runs into Nathan’s father, Daniel, played by Morgan Freeman. Allison is hesitant to stay, as she knows the pain and hurt she caused his family, but he insists that she stay. Daniel has his hands full as he’s a recovering alcoholic who is now in charge of taking care of his granddaughter, Ryan (Celeste O’Connor), after her parents were killed in the car accident.
The best thing about “A Good Person” is the back-and-forth interactions between Pugh and Freeman. When you have actors of this caliber, it’s best to just stay out of their way and let them do their thing. Freeman plays an ex-cop who never really knew how to be there for his son Nathan growing up. He used to beat him, which has caused a lot of trauma and resentment in Nathan toward his father. The two of them barely speak and don’t have much of a relationship. For Allison, she’s trying to deal with the grief and guilt of what she has done to Daniel, as she has taken his daughter away from him. However, he could use some help when it comes to figuring out how to talk to a sixteen-year-old teenage girl about safe sex when her parents are now deceased.
I really enjoyed the first hour and a half of “A Good Person.” I thought Pugh really, really went for it with her performance. She’s an actress who really immerses herself in her characters. Physically and mentally, this is a fantastic performance. She looks, sounds and acts like an addict. Freeman is also very good, as he usually is, at portraying many different emotions throughout as he’s trying to be a grandfather, deal with his own demons, and also forgive Allison. Thanks to the two lead performances and a fast-moving plot, I was really enjoying “A Good Person.” Sadly, the film takes a wild and crazy turn in the third act, which really sent things spiraling off the rails.
Yes, this is a drama, and you expect certain emotional moments and sequences to be displayed on screen. In “A Good Person,” it felt forced and like writer/director Braff had an idea for a movie and the right cast, but didn’t know what to say at the end or how he wanted to end it. Instead, it turns into a cheesy soap opera, and he, sadly, wastes the performances of his two leads and his supporting cast. The film is also about 15 to 20 minutes too long. Once again, the drama felt forced at the end and it seemed like they were really trying for an emotional and powerful ending. Instead, I could see right through the fact they were trying to make me feel something instead of letting it happen organically. The film didn’t need to try so hard and throw so much into the last 30-40 minutes of the film.
* * out of * * * *
Blu-Ray Info: “A Good Person” is released on a single-disc Blu-ray from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. It is rated R for drug abuse, language throughout, and some sexual references. The film has a running time of 128 minutes. It comes with a digital copy of the film as well.
Video Info: The 1080p High-Definition transfer is very, very solid. It’s a clean looking film with a green tint that really translated itself well to the material. Visually, Zach Braff did a great job behind the camera. It’s his script which really needed work.
Audio Info: The DTS-HD MA: English 5.1 audio track is also really good for this film. I did feel like Zach Braff relied on music a little too much throughout the course of this film to get the audience to feel something. I enjoy music in a film, but it needs to be properly placed and not shoved down our throats. There is also a Dolby Digital: English Descriptive Audio track. Subtitles are included in English, French, and Spanish.
Special Features:
None
Should You Buy It?
It’s always disappointing when I want to like a movie and don’t. I know this might sound like a rather simplistic approach to film viewing, but I had high hopes for this one. I’m still a huge fan of 2004’s “Garden State,” and I think Zach Braff is a talented director. When it comes to his writing, I think he can be a little too earnest. He means well and his heart is in the right place, but sometimes it just seems like he can’t keep himself from going a little too far. I didn’t hate the film and I enjoyed a good portion of it, but it was just a little too sappy for me which is saying something. The film looks and sounds good on Blu-ray, so it’s not a huge disappointment they didn’t give it a 4K release. There are no special features on this disc at all. I think it’s worth watching for the performances of its two leads, but I don’t think it’s a film you need to own. If you see it on Max or at Redbox, it’s worth watching. However, this is not a film I need to watch again. This is a case of two performances which deserved a better script.
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
A lot of movie trailers are scored with certain kinds of music to where certain themes are used over and over in them such as the ones from “Black Rain” and “Requiem for a Dream.” But for the “Little Children” trailer, however, the images we see are instead scored to the sound of a locomotive train which is about to reach its desired destination, and it proves to be the perfect illustration of the repression the main characters are experiencing, and of how they will eventually see their passions rise to the surface in a much-needed way.
“Little Children” is a romantic psychological drama film released back in 2006. It was based on the novel by Tom Perrotta who wrote the screenplay with the film’s director, Todd Field. I loved how the trailer used the sound of a train to show how these characters innermost desires, passions and needs were just simmering underneath surface, and of how they were about to explode through the confines placed upon them. Images of Kate Winslet breathing deeply while wearing a red bathing suit while Patrick Wilson looks on in an escapable way to where he is trying his best not to be seduced made this film look all the more alluring to me. This was also aided by the appearance of Jennifer Connelly who plays Patrick Wilson’s wife, and she openly wonders why he is spending a great deal of time with Winslet.
This is one of the most brilliantly conceived movie trailers ever as its sounds and images promised you a most enthralling time in a theater when this one came out. It also proved to be one of the most unique trailers of its time when it was unveiled to audiences everywhere and, to me, it made this motion picture one which I owed it to myself to see on opening day. Some movie trailers want you to believe they are promoting the next Oscar-friendly bet, but this one made me believe it would sweep the Academy Awards with relative ease. The fact that it did not is unfortunate, but it does not take away from the film’s incredible merits which include a great cast of actors who inhabited their roles ever so deeply and believably.
Actor Clark Duke made his big breakthrough with his own web series “Clark and Michael” in which he played a fictional version of himself opposite Michael Cera. Since then, he has gone on to give a number of hilarious performances in movies like “Sex Drive,” “Kick Ass” and “Hot Tub Time Machine.” This past summer, he stole some scenes in the eagerly awaited sequel “Kick Ass 2″ in which he reprised his role of Marty who has now taken on the superhero identity of Battle Guy.” Clearly, he has become the guy to go to for memorable supporting roles.
In his latest movie, “A.C.O.D.” (Adult Children of Divorce), Clark plays Trey who lives in the basement of his older brother Carter’s (Adam Scott) house. Both Trey and Carter managed to survive their parents’ bitter divorce as kids, but it looks to have forever soured Carter on the thought of marriage. Trey, however, ends up getting engaged to his girlfriend and begs Carter to get their estranged parents to come to the wedding. Knowing how their parents can’t stand to be in the same with one another, Carter knows that this will be a challenge to say the least, but he goes through with the improbable reunion because that’s what his little brother wants. But as things get underway, Trey has yet to learn the real truth of what is going on behind his back.
We got to catch up with Duke during a roundtable interview which was held at the SLS Hotel in Los Angeles, California as part of the “A.C.O.D.” press conference, and he proved to be as funny off screen as he is on it.
Question: When you’re playing a character like Trey, how do you keep him grounded in reality as an actor?
Clark Duke: Well, this script was pretty grounded. We didn’t have to improv a lot. A good script makes our job a lot easier.
Question: You and Adam Scott play brothers in this movie. How did you go about establishing that chemistry and working together?
Clark Duke: Well, it probably helped that we knew each other beforehand and we were friends before the movie so there wasn’t much of an acclimation period, I guess. I have one sibling, a younger brother, so I kind of tapped into that. As to how to play it, I related more to Adam’s character while reading the script. When you have a cast that’s good, nothing’s too hard.
Question: How did this project come to you and what made you want to do it?
Clark Duke: I just read the script. You get sent scripts all the time, but ninety-nine percent of them are just unreadable and terrible. So, when you get a really good one that really stands out… That’s just the truth; most of them are just god-awful. I went to the table read in just actively wanted to do the movie, so I did (laughs).
Question: Ken Howard, the current President of the Screen Actors Guild, co-stars in this movie as well. What was it like working with the union boss?
Clark Duke: No riffraff on the set. No grace periods for lunch, just ended right on time every day (laughs). He’s a licensed deputy as the SAG-AFTRA head.
Question: Adam Scott joked that Ken Howard deputized the both of you and gave you both firearms…
Clark Duke: We immediately abused it (laughs). I would waive mine at cars. We were in Atlanta so I would go to a lot of strip clubs with the gun, and then I’d float my SAG card and they are like OK. They just had to put up with it (laughs).
“A.C.O.D.” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray and Digital.
WRITER’S NOTE: This interview took place back in 2013.
Who doesn’t love Jane Lynch? We see her everywhere these days either as Sue Sylvester on the hit show “Glee” or hosting the NBC game show “Hollywood Game Night.” Lynch is an endlessly talented actress who never fails to give a tremendously entertaining performance in anything she does. While we may not have recognized her right away as a doctor working alongside Harrison Ford in “The Fugitive,” she would later go on to steal scenes in the Christopher Guest mockumentaries “Best in Show” and “A Mighty Wind.” After that, she made her big breakthrough opposite Steve Carell in “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” as Paula, the electronics store manager who offers, in a rather bizarre way, to have sex with the man of the movie’s title.
We got to meet with Lynch during the press day for the comedy “A.C.O.D.,” its title meaning Adult Children of Divorce. In it she plays Dr. Judith, a therapist who was there for Carter (played by Adam Scott) as a young boy when his parents go through an incredibly messy and bitter divorce. Now Carter has come back to Dr. Judith after hearing that his younger brother has just gotten engaged to get her advice on a few matters. But what Carter soon realizes is that Dr. Judith was not actually his therapist when he was a child, but instead a writer who used him and other kids for her study on children of divorce, and it ended up turning into a book which is now in its umpteenth edition.
The press day for “A.C.O.D.” came just a few days after the Emmy Awards in which Lynch got to share the stage with a number of entertainers including Neil Patrick Harris.
Question: The opening of the Emmy Awards this year was fantastic. What exactly were you going to do to lynch Mr. Harris?
Jane Lynch: I was going to throw him down and show him what kind of a woman I can be, but that’s something he would not enjoy unless I said that I would enjoy it less (laughs).
Question: You did have the somber tribute to your “Glee” co-story Cory Montieth, but then you are also celebrating and get to have this great comedic moment.
Jane Lynch: Yes, that was great and to see the company I keep on being one of the guys with Jimmy, Jimmy, Judy and Neil and Conan. I was just out of my body going wow, this is pretty amazing!
Question: Many were surprised that you didn’t have a singing and dancing number given that you have been on Broadway a number of times.
Jane Lynch: Yes, exactly! Well, I’m kind of glad that it was confined to what it was (laughs).
Question: What attracted you to the role of Dr. Judith in “A.C.O.D.?” You have actually played many therapists throughout your career.
Jane Lynch: Many times, and I’m playing one on Saturday in a little spot for a friend of mine. I think I’m fascinated with therapy and I’m fascinated with my own therapist (laughs). I have a terrific therapist who I have seen over the years and I would say that we’re probably friends now. We’ve come to the point where we’re friends. I always take a little bit of her and blow it up because she’s a very interesting person.
Question: Has your therapist ever been offended by your portrayals?
Jane Lynch: NO! She’s like ha, ha, ha! She loves it!
Question: It seems that many actors do go to therapy for years and years. Why do you think that is?
Jane Lynch: Well, I don’t know if that’s absolutely true, but I wouldn’t be surprised. What we do is we examine ourselves because we’re interested in all aspects of humanity, and the place you have to start to be any good at acting is with yourself. Everything is inside of you, all of it; the murderer, the great mother, the therapist, the husband, everything is inside of us. Because we’re human beings, we can relate to almost every emotion and I think that kind of exploration you do in therapy makes you more open and creative and more empathetic. You are able to see a character from the point of view of the inside out as opposed to, ooh, I’m playing a bad guy! Let’s get deep inside this person so we know what makes this sociopath tick. What in me is sociopathic? We all have it. For me, my therapy has always run parallel with the characters I play. I’ll find something that I’m dealing with that will come up in a character.
Question: For the longest time there was a lack of roles for women of age but now that seems to be changing. Do you believe that the tide is turning?
Jane Lynch: I don’t know if you will be able to point to a moment in time where the tide did turn, but I think that it definitely has. I love this new generation of girls coming up. It sounds so old when I say that, but there’s an entitlement to people like Amy Poehler and Tina Fey where they just expect to have a seat at the table so they have a seat at the table.
Question: Do you ever think you will step behind the camera to direct?
Jane Lynch: I don’t know. I don’t feel that I have to, but I have a feeling that I will at some point. But it will come out of something that will have me saying, ooh I want to do that. But I don’t think I can sit here and go, I would like to direct one day.
Question: Do you think you could direct yourself?
Jane Lynch: Yeah. Sometimes I wish I could, you know? One of the worst moments on set is when the director says, “Jane I have an idea…” I hate that! I will have the ideas thank you! I think a great director sees what you can bring to the table and they go okay and maybe they build on that. But to take you in a completely different direction… If Christopher Guest does that then fine, but not Joe Schmo.
“A.C.O.D.” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray and Digital.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
I vaguely remember watching 2020’s “Becky” when it was released through various digital platforms. Besides the brutal violence and seeing Kevin James as a Neo-Nazi, the film didn’t really leave a lasting impression on me as a viewer. When I heard they were going to make a sequel, “The Wrath of Becky,” I was intrigued for two reasons: Lulu Wilson and Seann William Scott. Wilson is a tremendous young actress who shows maturity beyond her years, and Scott has shown a knack recently for playing chilling and unsettling villains. I figured it was worth giving it another go around, and I’m happy to report “The Wrath of Becky” is lightyears better than the first film.
When the film introduces us to Becky a few years later, she has an edge to her after the traumatic events of the previous film. She’s sarcastic, matter-of-fact, and she doesn’t suffer fools lightly. She has been bounced around from group home to group home. Eventually, she decides to rent out a room with an older African-American woman who takes in strangers and is dealing with her own sense of loss. Her name is Elena, played by Denise Burse. One night while waitressing, Becky runs into a group of men who call themselves the Noble Men. They are a white supremacist militia group with bad intentions. After she spills coffee on one of them, they follow her back to Elena’s house, where they proceed to kill Elena and take Becky’s dog Diego.
Now, Becky is looking for two things: revenge and to get her dog back. The film uses an interesting technique where it will show the audience a violent sequence of what she is hoping to do, and then what she actually does. They use voiceovers for this as well, which was a nice touch. She communicates with the audience and lets us know what she’s thinking. They don’t overdo this, thankfully. The Noble Men are brought back to the house of one of their leaders named Darryl, played brilliantly by Seann William Scott. Scott and Wilson are the stars here, and Scott knows how to be unnerving and very intense without trying too hard. I remember him in a film called “Bloodline,” and he crushed it in that film. He’s really, really good at playing these low-key, calm, and sadistic villains.
The rest of the group consists of DJ (Aaron Dalla Villa), Anthony (Michael Sirow), and Sean (Matt Angel). Twig (Courtney Gains) is already with Darryl at the house. They have members all over the world, and they are looking to take down Senator Hernandez (Gabriella Piazza) at an upcoming town hall event. First, they have to deal with extreme girl scout Becky, and she is not one to back down from a fight, especially since they have her dog and they killed the one living person in the world she actually liked. From here, it’s a rather straight-forward film with Becky taking on these misogynist, hateful, and narrow-minded men. The characters are a little too on the nose at times, politically, but it works as a film like “The Wrath of Becky” is one where you are going to sit back and watch Becky destroy bad people in creative and brutal ways.
The film is not shy about its violence. It really goes for it. As with any sequel, especially one which relies on violence, they really up the ante here. They were also smart enough to keep the film under 90 minutes. We are reintroduced to Becky, find out what she’s up to, meet the villains, and then it’s time for the mayhem. It’s a formula, yes, but it’s a formula that works because Wilson is terrific at playing Becky. She’s a badass chick and easy to root for as the heroine. She also has a worthy adversary in Seann William Scott. The scenes with the two of them together are just brilliant.
In the end, you know what you are getting with “The Wrath of Becky” and what you have signed up for as an audience member. I could have done without the dog being involved, not because it offended me, but because it seemed to take a page out of other films, most recently “John Wick.” We have seen people try to avenge their dog when it has been captured or killed. The ending seems to hint that there might be another film or two still left in the “Becky” franchise. If they keep the budget low and stick to one location, which is basically what they did here, I see no reason why they can’t continue to make more of these films. Wilson is a star, and she deserves her own franchise. I look forward to seeing her take on more villains portrayed by quality actors in the future.
Should You See It?
The film is being released on May 26. I know there are a lot of movies to choose from at the box office right now. “The Wrath of Becky” is a nice change of pace, though, from the usual fare of blockbusters and franchises. It’s bloody, gory and very, very entertaining. As stated in my review, this film knows what it needs to do, it stays out of the way of its actors, and it’s a ton of fun. I truly enjoyed seeing Lulu Wilson and Seann William Scott in a battle of wits. It’s way better than 2020’s “Becky,” as it moves at a faster pace, gets right to the meat of the matter, and it doesn’t hold back with its violent, in-your-face approach. I think it would be a lot of fun to watch on the big screen. It’s in limited release, but you can find it at a theater near you. I don’t think you will be disappointed if you enjoy blood, guts and have a sense of humor.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
The idea of being a superhero is something which appeals to people all across the world. They want the chance to start out as an ordinary individual and transform themselves into something special and magical. 1978’s “Superman” is a perfect example of this, especially with its leading man, Christopher Reeve. It’s an iconic role and performance which continues to stand the test of time. It also achieved the rare feat of being both a financial and critical success. When that happens in Hollywood, everyone is pleased as punch. It’s the magic formula Hollywood is always trying to achieve as they want to do quality work which is meaningful to an audience while also making a lot of money.
There are so many things which make “Superman” great. Of course, as mentioned previously, you have the tremendous performance by the late, great Christopher Reeve. However, you also need a really, really effective villain, and it’s hard to find a better Hollywood villain than the legendary Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor. He oozes with charisma, personality, and you love to root against him. As far as the supporting cast, it is filled with some of the greatest working actors and actresses in Hollywood history, such as Marlon Brando, Margot Kidder, Glenn Ford, Jackie Cooper, Terence Stamp, Ned Beatty, Jack O’Halloran, Maria Schell and Sarah Douglas.
It also doesn’t hurt when you have a director like Richard Donner behind the camera as well. He knows how to pace the film, allow his actors room to breathe, and he is also respectful of the source material. There was also the magnificent score by the iconic John Williams. When you have all of the right pieces in place like Donner did such as the script, the actors and the budget, you have to stay on track and basically not screw it up. He was just the right man for this big budget affair. During its release, it had the highest budget for a film at the time, coming in at $55 million. It’s funny to hear that number now, considering how much budgets have increased in Hollywood since then.
What speaks to me about the first “Superman” film is the idea of having a double life and people not knowing who you really are. During the day you are Clark Kent, a mild-mannered reporter, but you also have the ability to be Superman. It shows we all have something special inside of us. It is up to us to really find that, harness it, and use it for good. Superman is your all-American, clean cut, good guy. He’s very likable and effortlessly charming. On paper, this idea might sound ludicrous, but because the filmmakers took it seriously and had the right actors and participants involved, they really had lightning in a bottle. Even to this day, the film holds up incredibly well. When you see the special effects, they were really ahead of their time and they helped pave the way for a lot of the effects we see today, only they are now taken up a notch. Most importantly, this film has a big heart and a big soul attached to it. This is why the film is beloved by so many.
With this tremendous release from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment, we are also treated to “Superman II” in two different versions. We get the original theatrical cut by Richard Lester and the Richard Donner Cut on 4K. To this day, people still debate which version they like better and which is more worth watching. If you ask me, it’s best to watch both versions. I see things in Donner’s film I like more than in Lester’s and vice versa, but overall, I felt like Lester’s version was a much more polished, easy to follow, and complete film. Donner’s version is flawed with moments of greatness, and it deserves to be seen. Thanks to this set, you can watch both versions, which, as stated previously, I highly encourage you to do as I love a good film discussion. Film is subjective and there is really no right or wrong answer.
In “Superman II,” Mario Puzo is back once along with fellow screenwriters, David and Leslie Newman, again with a really good story, and this is a great thing for the audience. All three really know how to flesh out a story and create unique and interesting characters. It doesn’t hurt when you have actors like Beatty, Kidder and Hackman completely invested in the material. While not as good as the first one, and it’s rare for a sequel to be as good as its predecessor, it’s still a very, very good movie. There is some great humor here, and even in a superhero movie where the stakes are high and we are in a fictional world, some levity is very much appreciated! Sometimes it is nice to have a different vision and a new voice in a franchise while also staying true to what made the first film successful. Richard Lester was not put in an ideal situation, but he made it work, and you have to give him credit for that.
By “Superman III,” it seemed like the magic was starting to disappear, and they totally shifted the focus of the franchise into a campy, goofy and comedic realm which really rubbed audiences the wrong way. I understand they were going for something different, and they brought in Richard Pryor, but the script, the jokes and the material are just really, really bad. There is no denying that Pryor is a funny man with great comedic timing, but his abilities didn’t lend themselves to this film franchise. Overall, “Superman III” was doomed because of behind-the-scenes issues, script issues, and a film in search of the right tone. The filmmakers seemed to have lost the plot all together as well as their love for the character and the franchise. When a franchise has success, many times it is how the filmmakers handle that success which defines how it will carry on and continue. It is clear they didn’t know how to handle success here.
It didn’t get any better with “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.” It was so poorly made and received that they didn’t make another Superman film until 2006. As is often the case with sequels, they went cheap. Even though Hackman returns and Kidder receives more screen time, this film was dead on arrival. The plot is incoherent, messy, and just plain dumb. It was a cash-grab sequel, and when you are focused on money over quality work, you end up with “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.” It’s a very frustrating film and incredibly hard to follow. As you can see with the “Superman” franchise, you have the law of diminishing returns.
4K Info: The “Superman” 5-Film Collection 1978-1987 is in a terrific box set with all the films getting their own individual dual 4K case which also includes a Blu-ray version of the them. I was really happy they didn’t stack the discs in the set here, as that is always a pet peeve of mine. I was also very happy they gave each film its day in court with artwork and its own individual dual case. “Superman” was previously released on 4K, but this is the first time the other four films have been released in this format. You also a digital code for all of the films as well.
Video Info: If you already own the first “Superman” 4K, please know they have not added anything new to it here. It’s the same “Superman” 4K that had been released in its standalone edition. That being said, it’s hard not to be stunned and blown away by the beautiful Dolby Vision look of the original film. I had not previously owned the first “Superman” film, so I had no qualms about there not being anything new here. It’s just something to keep in mind for those who already own it on 4K. Overall, this is far and away the best these five films have ever looked on home video. They look sharp, clean and free of grain or mess. They have cleaned these films up very, very nicely. I was very impressed with these transfers. Warner Brothers has really been knocking it out of the park with their releases this year during their 100-year anniversary celebration, and this “Superman” box set is no exception.
Audio Info: We are treated to Dolby Atmos on all five films which is fantastic news! I am a huge fan of Dolby Atmos, and the sound is such a vital part of these films. The audio sounds crystal clear, concise, and it comes in at just the right pitch without being too loud or in-your-face. I’m always happy when I can leave it on one volume setting and still get the same impact throughout. That was the case with all five films. They also all come with subtitles in French, English and Spanish as well.
Special Features:
“Superman: The Movie” Special Features:
Commentary by Ilya Salkind and Pierre Spangler
The Making of Superman – vintage featurette
Superman and the Mole-Men – vintage featurette
Super-Rabbit – 1943 WB cartoon
Snafuperman – 1944 WB cartoon
Stupor Duck – 1956 WB cartoon
TV Spot
Teaser Trailer
Theatrical Trailer
‘Superman II” Special Features:
Commentary by Ilya Salkind and Pierre Spengler
The Making of “Superman II” – 1980 TV Special
Superman’s Soufflé – Deleted Scene
First Flight
Fleischer Studios’ Superman vintage cartoons:
Superman
The Mechanical Monster
Billion Dollar Limited
The Arctic Giant
The Bulleteers
The Magnetic Telescope
Electric Earthquake
Volcano
Terror on the Midway
Theatrical Trailer
“Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut” Special Features:
Commentary by Richard Donner and Tom Mankiewicz
Introduction by Richard Donner – featurette
Superman II: Restoring the Vision – featurette
Deleted Scenes
Lex and Ms. Teschmacher Head North
Lex and Ms. Teschmacher Head South
The Villains Enter the Fortress
He’s All Yours, Boys
Clarke and Jimmy
Lex’s Gateway
Famous Studios vintage cartoons:
Japoteurs
Showdown
Eleventh Hour
Destruction, Inc.
The Mummy Strikes
Jungle Drums
The Underground World
Secret Agent
“Superman III” Special Features:
Commentary by Ilya Salkind and Pierre Spengler
The Making of “Superman III” – 1983 TV Special
Deleted Scenes:
Save My Baby
To the Rescue
Making Up
Going to See the Boss
Hatching the Plan
The Con
Rooftop Ski
Boss Wants This to Go
Superman Honored
Gus’ Speech
Hanging Up on Brad
Theatrical Trailer
“Superman IV: The Quest for Peace” Special Features:
Commentary by Mark Rosenthal
Superman 50th Anniversary Special – 1988 TV Special
Deleted Scenes:
Clark’s Morning
Jeremy’s Letter
Superman’s Visit
Nuclear Man’s Prototype
Metropolis After Hours
Lex Ponders
Flying Sequence (Extended Scene)
Battle in Smallville
Battle in the U.S.S.R.
Nuclear Arms Race
Superman’s Sickness
Red Alert
By My Side
Lark and Lacy Say Goodbye
No Borders
Theatrical Trailer
Should You Buy It?
Last time I checked, this set is going for about $90, which is a great price for five films. Granted, you are really paying for “Superman,” “Superman II” and “Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut,” so you need to own all of the Christopher Reeve “Superman” films if you are a completist like myself. I’ve heard a lot of people in the film community complain about some of the special features from other releases not being included on this set but they are included in the other Blu-ray releases. This did not bother me as there are still plenty of special features to shift through here. I’m happy they included the Blu-ray discs for all of the films and didn’t just include the 4K’s. The good films in this franchise leave me with a warm and fuzzy feeling. When films make me feel this way and put a smile on my face, I’m a happy camper. There is also something to enjoy about the total and complete absurdity of the bad films as well. If you have a sense of humor and come in with the right mindset, you can enjoy them on the level of they are aiming at. All the films come with Dolby Atmos tracks, which is a great perk. My one minor nitpick is the fact that not all these films include Dolby Vision except for the first one. However, in 2023, when physical media is hard to come by in stores but very much appreciated by us hardcore film historians and lovers, I don’t want to be too overly critical or negative over the little things. Warner Brothers and other studios are really going all out to preserve important pieces of cinematic history. We shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth. This set comes highly recommended, and I enjoyed revisiting these films in 4K. It gave me a whole new appreciation for these films, Christopher Reeve’s performance, and the intense feelings of happiness and joy the first two (three if you are counting the Richard Donner cut) films brought to me. You can’t put a price tag on that. This set comes highly recommended!
* * * ½ out of * * * *
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
WRITER’S NOTE: This interview took place back in 2013, and I have indicated the specific question I asked during it.
Catherine O’Hara is one of the best comedic actresses working today, and she never fails to give a hilarious performance in anything she does. After making a name for herself on “SCTV,” O’Hara went on to a career in movies that included unforgettable roles like the self-centered Delia Deetz in “Beetlejuice” and the forgetful mother Kate McCallister in “Home Alone.” But some of her best work to date has come from her being in the hilarious mockumentaries of Christopher Guest such as “Waiting for Guffman” and “Best in Show.” O’Hara even received a number of nominations and awards for her role as Marilyn Hack in “For Your Consideration.”
In “A.C.O.D.” (an abbreviation for Adult Children of Divorce), O’Hara plays Melissa who, as the movie starts, is undergoing an extremely bitter divorce from her husband Hugh (Richard Jenkins). Since their marriage ended, Melissa has made it clear that she hates Hugh with every fiber of her being. Then she gets the news that her youngest song Trey (Clark Duke) has just gotten engaged to his girlfriend of a few months, but what she has yet to discover is that her other son Carter (Adam Scott) is working on getting her and Hugh together so that they can attend Trey’s wedding in a peaceful fashion. While you may think you know what happens from there, “A.C.O.D.” proves to have many surprises and takes you in directions you don’t see coming.
We got to meet up with O’Hara during the “A.C.O.D.” press junket which was held at the SLS Hotel in Los Angeles, California. She still looks very lovely after all these years, and her hearty laugh is more than enough proof that she hasn’t lost her sense of humor in the slightest.
Question: “A.C.O.D.” was written by Stu Zicherman and Ben Karlin who have great pedigrees as writers, and you also have Zicherman directing this movie as a first-time director. How did he do as a first-time director and what was the atmosphere like on set?
Catherine O’Hara: I wasn’t aware of him being a first-time director while we were working because he wrote it for one thing. He and Ben wrote it and they are great friends, and Ben was there all the time so you had a good support system. Stu seems like a levelheaded kind of clear, confident guy and he’s funny. When people are smart and good at what they are doing like that and have a sense of humor about everything outside of themselves and even themselves, they are not threatened by anyone giving ideas or working collaboratively. It is a collaborative venture and you can’t lose by being open to the people you’ve hired. Not in the way that it was like a free-for-all, you just knew there was a chance to discuss everything there and he’s so open and he’s a great writer. It just felt like I was in good hands.
The Ultimate Rabbit: The thing I really liked about this movie is that you really don’t know what’s going to happen next. Most comedies you kind of get a sense of the formula and where it’s going to go, but this one really had surprise after surprise. Have you read a lot of scripts like that recently?
Catherine O’Hara: No, you would have seen me in them (laughs). If I was reading them, hopefully I had a chance for them. No, there aren’t enough. They (Stu and Ben) took their time writing this and it’s based on their lives and they have been friends since they were six or seven years old. They know all their extended families and their stepparents, and they really took their time and did a great job and they really thought it out. Every character is taken care of, that’s what I love. It’s not just one or two leads and everyone else is just barely there. Where are you going now? Out of your movie…
Question: That seems to be the case with most movies, but this one gives each of its characters the attention they deserved.
Catherine O’Hara: It is, far too many. This one was really well thought out.
Question: Ken Howard who plays your second husband Gary is also President of the Screen Actors Guild. What was it like having the union leader on set?
Catherine O’Hara: There was that whole merger thing coming up (with SAG and AFTRA) and I personally was against it and he was for it.
Question: Did you talk with Ken about it?
Catherine O’Hara: I did. I asked him why is this good. He seems like a good, smart man, but I just didn’t get it. His explanation was… You could tell that he really cares about the unions and wanted the best for everyone so that was nice to hear.
Question: But you still disagree with him?
Catherine O’Hara: I’m really so not involved with the union in any way, so I had to trust him. He actually is really involved and knows what he’s talking about, so I thought okay. I just like to work and get paid (laughs).
Question: You have been in show business for a long time now. Have you seen a change because for the longest time there was this great void of roles for women over 40 and 50. Do you believe that the tide is now turning?
Catherine O’Hara: There are more and more women writing, and there are more and more good male writers who decided and learned that it’s worth writing for women. I guess the more women are present and out there in life, the more their stories will be told. Our stories have always been told on Lifetime (laughs).
Question: Have you ever thought about stepping behind the camera to direct at some point?
Catherine O’Hara: I only want to write. I don’t care about directing really. I’ve tried it and it was fun, but it’s not like something I have to do. I hate losing trust in a director, that’s awful.
Question: So, what’s coming up for you next?
Catherine O’Hara: I have a movie at the Toronto Film Festival which will hopefully come out soon and it’s called “The Right Cut of Wrong,” and I think I’m reshooting a pilot that didn’t get picked up.
Question: That’s good, and they’ll pay you to do it.
Catherine O’Hara: There you go! Work and pay. Work and get paid, and good for Ken Howard looking after us (laughs).
“A.C.O.D.” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray and Digital.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
I saw “Creed III” in theaters when it came out in March, and I walked away very impressed by the directorial debut of Michael B. Jordan. Even though we were only three months into the new year, I felt it was an early candidate for one of the best films of 2023. I enjoyed his creative and inventive approach to filmmaking, the tremendous acting throughout the film, and the way it was paced just perfectly. Here we are, almost half-way through the year, and I feel even stronger about “Creed III.” It really surpassed any and all expectations I had for the film, and it also shows the “Rocky/Creed” franchise is in very good hands. Much like the “Scream” franchise did with “Scream 6,” it proved you can leave a key player or two from the franchise behind and not miss a beat if you have your heart in the right place, a good script, and you forge your own path while also remembering the pulse of the franchise.
I think by now it is common knowledge that Sylvester Stallone is not in “Creed III.” Stallone expressed his reasons why in interviews, and while I would have enjoyed him in this film, even if it was only in a minor role, I can’t say he was missed. I say this as a huge fan of Stallone and his contributions to the “Rocky/Creed” franchise. It says more about the fact that Jordan took the bull by the horns and really ran with it when it came to “Creed III.” He’s in front of and behind the camera here, and from what he showed me as a director, I can’t wait to see what he does with his next project. He has a keen visual sense and tremendous style without losing the heart and emotional weight of the film.
“Creed III” opens by showing us a young Adonis Creed hanging out with his friend from his group home, Damian Anderson. They are like brothers to one another, and Damian looks out for Adonis. Damian is on the rise as a young up and comer until he finds himself in prison for pulling out a gun while defending a young Adonis. Adonis ran away and never faced any jail time. Damian, on the other hand, spent almost two decades in prison and saw his chance go by the wayside. Adonis is ready for retirement after winning his final fight and leaving as the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world. He’s now a family man with a beautiful house, wife, and young daughter.
Adonis is also running his own gym with the help of Little Duke (Wood Harris) and helping promote a fight for the world heavyweight champion Felix “El Guerrero” Chavez (José Benavidez Jr.) against Viktor Drago (Florian Munteanu). On his way out of the gym one day, he runs into Damian (Jonathan Majors) who is out of prison and looking to make up for lost time. He wants to fight for the heavyweight championship of the world, as he was a top prospect and a Golden Gloves champion before he ended up in prison. Adonis agrees to let him hang around the gym and spar with Felix, but he feels uneasy about having him around and wonders what his true intentions are, especially after all these years.
As a matter of fact, Mary-Anne (Phylicia Rashad) is not too keen about Damian being around, as she remembers some of the trouble he and Adonis would get into as youngsters. Adonis is also dealing with parenthood as his hearing-impaired daughter Amara, played perfectly by Mila Davis-Kent, is having trouble expressing herself in school. When she is being bullied by another student, she resorts to violence instead of working things out in a more peaceful way. This is very troubling to her mother Bianca, played by the lovely Tessa Thompson. She is looking to raise their daughter to express her emotions in a more productive way instead of resorting to violence. For Bianca, she’s been adjusting to her career as a producer. While she enjoys it, she also misses performing and doing her own thing. However, she must also be protective of her hearing as she doesn’t want to cause further damage. She’s also noticing Adonis is pulling away from her and that something is bothering him. It’s clear he has unresolved guilt and anger from his past with Damian. Until he deals with those feelings, he will never be able to move forward in his life and will be stuck in the past.
I have to give major credit to the women of “Creed III” from Rashad to Thompson to Davis-Kent. They are attempting to help Adonis see the forest from the trees and learn that it’s okay for him to open up about his past and talk about his regrets and his pain. It’s not good for him to bottle it all up inside. The two main male characters played by Jordan and Majors are also terrific together on screen. Jordan is fantastic at expressing his emotions on his face and not overacting. That being said, he knows when to tap into an emotion, anger, and turmoil when the scene calls for it. His facials here are terrific, and he knows how to tap into whatever the screenplay needs out of him. Majors reminded me and others of a young Mike Tyson. He will do whatever it takes to win, and he is physically imposing and carries a tremendous presence on screen. When he’s on screen, you can’t take your eyes off him.
For a film which is nearly two hours long, there is rarely a dull moment. There is something dramatic which occurs in the film (no spoilers) that seemed to get glossed over and moved on from very quickly. It seemed rather unnecessary, and that is my only gripe with the film. As with any “Rocky” or “Creed” movie, the best scenes are not in the ring. The best scenes are the characters talking to one another, figuring out their inner conflict, and dealing with the past and the present. Yes, it’s a boxing movie, but the boxing ring serves as a therapeutic canvas for them to work out their pain. That being said, the boxing scenes are beautifully shot and are the best kind I’ve seen in a boxing film in a long time. Jordan makes some really interesting choices as a director, and they worked out perfectly for him.
“Creed III” is a feel-good film with a big heart behind it. It has a great soundtrack with some real bangers on it. It also has some fantastic acting from everyone in the cast. There isn’t a bad performance to be found here. The stakes also seem very high throughout. There is an urgency here. For a first-time director, this is a very, very impressive debut. I can see them carrying on the “Creed” franchise with Jordan working both behind-the-scenes and in front of the camera. He really hit a home run here, and I loved this movie from start to finish.
* * * ½ out of * * * *
4K Info: “Creed III” is released on a two-disc 4K/Blu-ray combo pack from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. It is rated PG-13 for intense sports action, violence and some strong language. It has a running time of 116 minutes. The 4K combo pack also comes with a digital code for the film.
Video Info: I loved the way this film looked in 4K. Warner Brothers has become one of the top studios for 4K releases, and they do not disappoint here with “Creed III.” I’m always happy when a film gets the Dolby Vision treatment, and this film is spectacular looking. We get a detailed, clean, and smooth look with dark darks to set the mood for the emotional trauma Creed is dealing with inside of him. This film really, really pops on 4K. Dolby Vision and Warner Brothers are always a match made in heaven. I truly was impressed by this 4K transfer and how it lends itself to the film.
Audio Info: More good news—we also get a Dolby Atmos track! For a film like this with great music and intense boxing action, you have to have a good Atmos track. The Atmos track makes the film sound absolutely perfect. Warner Brothers really did the right thing by “Creed III,” and I’m very thankful for that.
Special Features:
Michael B. Jordan: In the Ring/Behind the Camera – Featurette
There’s No Enemy Like the Past: Donnie and Dame – Featurette
Deleted Scenes
Should You Buy It?
If you saw it in theaters like I did, I’m happy to report it holds up very, very well on a second viewing. It’s one of the reasons why I love to watch a movie in the theater and then at home. It’s two totally different viewing experiences, and you pick up on certain things you might have missed initially. It was actually better on a second viewing. I highly recommend you pick this film up on its release date on 4K. It is truly the best way to watch this great film. With Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos, Warner Brothers really did a magnificent job of putting this film together for a great home-viewing experience. The supplements are a little light, and I would have liked a commentary with director/actor Michael B. Jordan, but still, this is a day-one purchase. I’m not sure how the rest of the year will play out, but this film is still one of the best of 2023, in my opinion. I loved the powerful performances, incredible emotion, ingenious boxing sequences, and how much fun this movie was. I highly recommend “Creed III” as a movie to proudly own on 4K. You won’t be disappointed.
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
Alright! We are back in Paul Schrader land with his latest film, “Master Gardener.” Just as with “Taxi Driver” and “First Reformed” among other films, it focuses on a loner who keeps a journal and is struggling to deal with a past which was never less than traumatizing. Some directors tend to make the same film over and over again, but I always enjoy seeing Schrader doing so as he always has an interesting angle on this, and “Master Gardener” is no exception.
Joel Edgerton stars as Narvel Roth, an infinitely meticulous horticulturist who is employed at Gracewood Gardens, a beautiful estate owned by Norma Haverhill (Sigourney Weaver). Judging from the blooming flowers featured in the opening credits, this is an individual who takes his job ever so seriously as he clearly revels in bringing a garden and the flowers in it to exquisite life. There is even a scene where Narvel invites his fellow workers to smell the soil they have been working on endlessly. Watching this, it made me wish this film came with one of those scratch and sniff cards like those Odorama cards John Waters used for “Polyester.” I would love to have smelled what these characters were taking in as it might just give new meaning to the word “organic.”
Norma, who it turns out is having an affair of sorts with Narvel, has invited her wayward step-niece, Maya (Quintessa Swindell), to become his apprentice. While Maya may be a wealth of trouble at home, she slides into her new job with what seems like relative ease. But, as you can expect, nothing will stay sane for our main characters as revelations of who they are will truly eventually come to the surface whether everyone is prepared for it or not.
Looking at Narvel and hearing how he talks, it is tempting to think he has been a dignified individual since birth, but he eventually takes off his shirt to reveal two things: he has spent a lot of time at the gym, and he has a plethora of tattoos of swastikas and other neo-Nazi images covering his body which indicate he has had a racist past which he is trying to get past. It would have been enough if Narvel had just one swastika tattooed on him to indicate he was once a white supremacist, but the fact he has so many reminded me of a scene from Martin Scorsese’s “Cape Fear” remake in which Robert Mitchum looked over Robert De Niro’s heavily tattooed body and said, “Jesus! I don’t know whether to look at him or read him.”
This revelation brings about complexities as we wonder if Norma and Maya are aware of Narvel’s sordid past. Looking at this, I kept thinking Narvel would reveal the truth of his past existence to both women in an intelligent fashion. But if he did, would this film have such rich dramatic tension?
Gardening and horticulture never struck me as something which could be captured in a cinematic way as it can seem rather boring. It is a credit to Schrader and company that “Master Gardener” makes gardening seem far more immersive than it might be to some. Like I said before, I would love to smell this garden Narvel is cultivating because it is clear no one can cultivate one the way he can.
Schrader also makes the characters and their situations all the more dramatic by pointing out how different their ages are to one another. Now I have long since learned to NOT ask any women their age as serious bodily harm is likely to occur and deservedly so, Norma being almost twice Narvel’s age and Maya being close to half of his. Taboos are bexploited for dramatic effect as certain things are not quickly accepted in today’s culture, but here we may need to look more closely at what is going on.
Looking at Joel Edgerton’s resume, I wonder if I have given him enough credit as an actor. He has played a variety of roles in the “Star Wars” prequels, “The Thing” prequel, “The Felony” and “The Gift” among other films. Each has shown him going from playing good guys to villains with relative ease, and that is a gift many in his field would love to have. While it might seem like Edgerton is playing Narvel as a far too reserved, it becomes clear why this is the case as he nails this character’s complexities perfectly from start to finish.
Sigourney Weaver is a very welcome presence here. As Norma, she gives off a very regal vibe which makes her seem like a peaceful individual, but her play on words reveals someone whose anger is just simmering beneath the surface. I also love how she makes indigent sound like a four-letter word.
Quintessa Swindell does very interesting work as Maya. We learn a lot about this character before she appears onscreen, and Swindell makes Maya into something more than a mere cliché or stereotype that many might expect her to be. As we find Maya becoming involved with a man who is at least a decade older than her, Swindell comes to hold her own opposite Edgerton in their scenes together to where it becomes clear who has the upper hand in this relationship.
When it comes to Schrader and his films, he typically works with the bare minimum of budgets, and I am always impressed with what he accomplishes with them regardless of how tight they are. The cinematography by Alexander Dynan is quite lovely, the music score by Dev Hynes fits the material just fine, and kudos to those who gave Schrader the money to make this one as indie films like these do not get as much support as they once did.
How does “Master Gardener” compare to Schrader’s other works? Hard to say as there are many I still need to watch. This one does not quite reach the cinematic heights of “First Reformed” or “Affliction,” but this one reminds me of what a compelling voice he still is in cinema. Perhaps the conclusion left me wanting more as it did not quite fill my cinematic bloodlust, but maybe that was because I was expecting the wrong kind of movie. Whereas many of Schrader’s films end in an orgy of violence, this one concludes in a way which gives a certain piece of dialogue from “Natural Born Killers” an infinite amount of meaning, “Love beats the demon.”
Perhaps the loners who inhabit Schrader’s recent works have found reasons to not end their lives in an intensely dramatic and fatal fashion as the women they encounter give them a reason to live on. While the writer of “Taxi Driver” and “Raging Bull” might be treading through familiar territory, it is clear he has found how love can alter one’s destiny. This makes “Master Gardener” stand out in a memorable way as it defies certain expectations which I never should have brought into the theater in the first place.
Moreover, this film makes me view gardening and cultivating in a whole new light. I really enjoyed the specifics Schrader gives us when it comes to certain flowers as few other writers could these details down so perfectly. Perhaps I should visit the local flower or garden shop to truly appreciate the plants and their smells which are on display here.
I am glad Schrader is still making films in this cinematic climate. There always needs to be something outside of the mainstream.
WRITER’S NOTE: This article was written in 2013, and it contains spoilers for this film.
Stu Zicherman and Ben Karlin are best known for their work as writers in film and television. Zicherman was one of the screenwriters on “Elektra” which he did not even try to hide his disappointment over, and the Hong Kong action film “2000 AD,” and he is currently working on the FX show “The Americans.” Karlin made a name for himself as a writer and executive producer on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” and “The Colbert Report,” and these days he serves as one of the writers for the acclaimed ABC comedy “Modern Family.” But what you may not know is these two were best friends when they were growing up, and they are also children of divorce.
When they reunited as adults, Zicherman and Karlin began working together on the screenplay for “A.C.O.D.” which tells the story of when Carter (Adam Scott) is tasked to get his bitterly divorced parents, Hugh (Richard Jenkins) and Melissa (Catherine O’Hara), to come to their youngest son Trey’s (Clark Duke) wedding. Writing the script allowed Zicherman and Karlin to deal with their own memories of their parents separating, but they also manage to find humor in a situation which is usually filled with tremendous sadness and anger. In the process, they both succeed in turning a lot of comedy conventions on their heads and give us a movie full of endless surprises.
I got to participate in a roundtable interview with Zicherman and Karlin when they appeared for the “A.C.O.D.” press junket held at the SLS Hotel in Los Angeles, California.
Question: What was the genesis for this movie?
Stu Zicherman: Ben and I have actually been friends since we were born. What’s the quickest way to explain this? Basically, my mom was friends with Ben’s parents, and Ben’s parents were friends with my mom’s first husband who I didn’t even know about. We’ve been friends our whole lives. I have always wanted to do something with this subject matter, this generation of divorced kids. We’re both part of this generation.
Ben Karlin: Yeah. We were friends growing up and our families were friends growing up, but then, when his parents got divorced and shortly thereafter my parents got divorced, we stopped hanging out because that was the end of our families getting together and doing things.
Stu Zicherman: It was a very romantic journey where our families used to go on vacations together.
Ben Karlin: So, when we were both professional and we were established as adults in our careers, I moved to New York, and Stu was working there already and he said, “Hey, I want to write a movie about how messed up we all are” (laughs). I went, “I’m in!”
Stu Zicherman: We grew up on movies like “Kramer vs. Kramer” and dramas that were kind of tragic. Ben and I talked about this when we first started working on the movie. Our parents’ divorces were tragic and sad in their own way, but they were also not to be believed at times (laughs). They were irreverent, funny and weird. We wanted to try and find a way to make light of it and make a comedy that still had some gravity to it because it’s something that people don’t laugh about. What’s been really fun about making this movie and about taking it around and showing it at Sundance and all these places is that people are excited and relate to it. People will come up to me after screenings and want to tell their stories like, “My parents got divorced when I was 8.” We’re almost giving them license to laugh about it.
Ben Karlin: We were shooting in Atlanta, and the night before production started, it was just us. It was me, Stu, a couple of the actors, a couple of the producers, and we were out in the bar at the hotel. There was a wedding going on and there was the after party for the wedding. There was the groom, the bride, the whole bridal party. Everyone was in tuxedoes. So, it was like these two worlds. We were about to make this movie about divorce and these people who were just starting. And they were great. They were lovely people. We closed the bar down with them. And then, a week later, I got a letter from one of the bridesmaids who I had been chatting with, and she told me this long story about her family’s divorce and how it affected her. It was just so weird. Even in that moment, people were just connecting to what we were trying to do, and we found that throughout the whole process, that there seems to be something that everyone can relate to about this subject.
Question: So, everybody is trying to figure out who got married at the movie’s end…
Stu Zicherman: Well, you know, we didn’t really want to give it away. Ben and I always talked about the movie as being an anti-romantic comedy. There were certain beats we would get to in the movie as we were writing it. There’s the obvious romantic comedy beat. We were trying to turn away from that wherever we could, not to the detriment of the movie, but the end of the movie was not so much about who got married. It was more important to us that the characters, especially those three men, have evolved through the movie to a point where it could be any of them. When pressed, I always say it’s all three of them, but we like the idea of leaving it open-ended because it didn’t matter.
Ben Karlin: It didn’t really trouble us, I have to say. We wanted to create a scenario where all three characters were repaired to the point where you’d be just okay with any of them. And it could be all three of them or none of them. The point is that whatever was waiting for them in there in the church was okay.
Stu Zicherman: And it’s funny too, when editing the movie, every single time I would adjust frames or tried a different shot and put it in front of an audience, people always guessed a different person. It was bizarre. I started to lose track of why people felt what. We had to calibrate it so that it’s pretty hard to tell now. We’d had a version where there was a faceless bride running through the background.
Ben Karlin: Oh, deep, deep background. A limo, a bride, the whole thing.
Stu Zicherman: Again, it distracted from the movie. It’s such a nice, clean moment with the three of them walking in, and we like it.
Question: Everyone seems to have their own version of the movie’s ending, and that really serves as a testament to your writing because you got us so deeply invested in every single character to where we really want to know what happens to them
Ben Karlin: It’s a very hard thing to do. You want to give in. You want to give people what they want. And then, there’s the creative jerk part of you that’s like, “I know better.”
Stu Zicherman: But also, we thought about a lot of this when we were writing the movie that we didn’t want people to be right or wrong. It’s not a right or wrong thing. It’s the dad who does this impetuous thing and they get back together. He’s not wrong. He’s following his heart. What’s wrong with following your heart? And again, at the end of the movie, I always say to people it’s not a movie about divorce per se. I don’t want people just to think it’s about that. It’s really about if you’re married, if you’re not married, divorced, whatever kind of family you’re from, you’re not destined to repeat the patterns of your parents. You’re free to make your own mistakes. You’re free to live your life. That’s why I always love the word “adult” being in the movie. I always felt like you become an adult when you actually can put your past into perspective. That’s when you really start becoming an adult. And I like that about the ending because, up to that point, everybody is acting like a child.
Question: You have said the script is loosely based on your families. Have you gotten any flak from them about it?
Ben Karlin: We’ve done a pretty good job of hiding or changing details. There used to be more stuff in the script that was literally word for word from our lives. There was an incident in his family and a specific incident in mine that involved the handing off of kids on a bridge, like a prisoner transfer, but it was between the parents. And it literally, at this moment, happened to me in Cape Cod where it was my dad’s new wife actually and her children and her ex-husband, and they had to exchange and they decided the exact mid-point. It was like North Korea-South Korea. Here’s the DMZ and we’re going to trade these children over that line, and we had that exact scene in the movie for years. That probably wouldn’t have gone over so well.
Stu Zicherman: And then there was a thing in my family called the hysterectomy conspiracy that was so absurd that when it was in the script, people would read it and be like…
Ben Karlin: “That’s not real.”
Stu Zicherman: They didn’t believe it. “No, no. It’s real.” We had to take it out because people didn’t believe it. But that happened to me. There’s one moment in the movie that is sort of torn from my life and its funny. It’s the one where Carter sits his parents down. My sister was getting married, and my parents would not agree to come to the same wedding. My brother-in-law and I sat them down. What’s hilarious about that is my parents don’t remember that. They block it out.
Question: How long did it take you two to get this film made?
Ben Karlin: Oh my God! I was just talking about this the other day. I was living here (in Los Angeles) and I moved to New York in 1999, and Stu was already living there at that time. He probably approached me in 2000 or 2001 to start working on it. Obviously, we had other jobs.
Stu Zicherman: Yeah. We had other jobs, so we were working on it nights and on weekends and vacations.
Ben Karlin: The amazing thing is we were both single when we started working on this movie. I have since gotten married, had children, and gotten divorced (laughs).
Stu Zicherman: It’s crazy. We were both single when we started this thing, and now I’m married with two kids and he’s got two kids, which I think helped inform the movie a little bit.
Ben Karlin: Yes, definitely.
Stu Zicherman: It’s been a long process. It’s funny though. The movie almost got going at one point. It came really close to get going. What was great about it was once we committed to Adam Scott, the movie started to finally roll. Finally, eventually, you get so frustrated with all the games you have to play to try and get a movie made. The thing is that we always loved Adam for this. And again, it fits in a little bit with the anti-romantic idea. He’s got an anti-romantic lead in a way because he’s got a very cynical humor and perspective on life. It just worked really well. And once we got Adam, then we got Richard Jenkins. It just started to roll.
Ben Karlin: Once you have those first few pieces in place, it starts to gain a terminal velocity.
Stu Zicherman: Right. The phone starts to ring and all of a sudden people want to be in your movie. That was very exciting.
Question: What I like about the script is that you don’t know where it’s going to go. From a distance, it looks like your typical formulaic comedy, but it really isn’t. How did you go about that? Were you looking to avoid certain things that you see in a lot of comedies like this?
Ben Karlin: Yes. There are so many tropes to these kinds of movies. Because we always were around, we were like, “How do we deal with the subject of a wedding in a movie that’s essentially about divorce?” We were very resolute that if we were going to have a wedding, we were going to do it differently than that typical moment at the end of the movie where people are walking down the aisle. So, we knew we wanted that outside the wedding moment to end it. We just were acutely aware of convention and trying to understand why those conventions worked and why they existed, and then trying wherever we could to tiptoe around the obvious thing.
Stu Zicherman: But the big thing was stakes. I mean, there were so many times where we were hyperconscious with the movie, and we would do readings just to find out where we were with it. The main character, Carter, is in every single scene of the movie and he doesn’t have cancer. He isn’t beaten. It’s the kind of thing, at a certain point, where the audience could be looking at him and go, “Hey dude, get over it.” And so, there were scenes we really liked but we felt like we were going to lose the audience. We said, “We have to keep the audience rooting for him.”
Ben Karlin: We didn’t want to turn the guy into a jerk.
Stu Zicherman: So, it was this balance. At times, people would read the script and say, “Why doesn’t he want his parents to get back together?” We just had to find a way and we kept trying to find ways in through relationships. But we did at times always try to move away from the tropes like the scene with the ring that turns into the key, and moments like that. It was funny. I did a Q&A; in New York the other night and someone asked me about the whole cheating thing with Jessica Alba and how he never gets caught. In the classic romantic comedy, you always get that scene where she’s like, “What were you doing with that girl?” It never crossed our minds to go there, and the truth is because in real life most people don’t get caught. You’re just forced to live with it. And that was the great liberty of making this movie independently. We’re not beholden to a studio to hit certain tropes. Also, it made the tone what it is, because the movie is funny but it’s also got some gravity to it and it’s got this balance. I’m excited. The fact that the movie is finally coming out, I’m excited for people to see it, but I’m also going to miss it because we’ve just been carrying it around like this for so long.
“A.C.O.D.” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray and Digital.
The Ultimate Rabbit 