Slashdot Mirror
Review: Man On The Moon
From Larry Flint to Andy Kaufman, director Milos Forman has become a chronicler of one of America's most distinct cultural species - the sometimes brilliant, offensive, self-destructive celebrity eccentric. What makes people like Flynt and Kaufman so American is that few societies would tolerate them at all, let alone elevate them to star status.
"Man In The Moon" may turn out to be the best movie of the holiday season. Jim Carrey's portrayal of the tormented Kaufman is the best performance by an actor in months.
Carrey's performance also highlights the one glaring flaw in any Kaufman story. The movie is bigger than its subject. Carrey looms much larger than Kaufman did. Kaufman, who performed on Saturday Night Live, then more successfully as the goofball "Latke" on the ABC sitcom "Taxi," was one of the most self-destructive figures in modern entertainment. And his fame was fleeting.
Although he could be brilliantly funny, he became obsessed with pushing the boundaries of what the public would accept, between parody and reality. He taunted women, working-class whites, and Southerners in particular, constantly challenging his audience to figure out what was a joke and what wasn't. Eventually, they stopped caring.
The producers of Saturday Night Live asked the audience to call in and vote on whether or not the increasingly controversial Kaufman should remain on the show. They overwhelmingly voted to kick him out, a stinging rebuke for viewers on a program that at the time reveled in pushing boundaries.
Carrey is wonderful at playing Kaufman, even as he perhaps inadvertently shows how much more grounded and talented he is as an actor and comedian. Danny DeVito is also first-rate as Kaufman's long suffering manager/agent George Shapiro.
Questions of free speech and public offense have always swirled around media and entertainment. This is the birthplace not only of the First Amendment but of the most elaborate ratings and blocking systems in the free world. Americans can never quite seem to figure out whether they really want freedom, or just love invoking the idea of it. Provocateurs like Hustler Magazine's Flynt and entertainers like the late Lenny Bruce and Kaufman are constantly forcing the issue.
Kaufman was a mess, even by contemporary celebrity standards. He bitterly resented his label as a comedian, viewing himself as a more sophisticated performance artist. Although he was wildly popular on "Taxi" as the odd-sounding "Latke," he despised commercial television and especially that particular role, even though it was making him rich and famous. Sometimes, he even walked offstage during live performances if audiences pressured him to play his TV character. This struggle of a performer to practice his art on his own terms is beautifully rendered by Carrey.
Kaufman flirted with various meditative and holistic groups and practices, none of which did him any good when he was diagnosed as having a fatal form of lung cancer.
What makes Carrey's acting so impressive is that Kaufman was not especially likeable, and so erratic and unpredictable as to be nearly incomprehensible. His crusade to make audiences think was in some ways admirable, but also arrogant, especially after it became increasingly clear that what his audiences wanted was just to laugh. One of the most effective things about this movie is that it makes you root for the audience as well as the performer. Comedy after all, is about escaping reality, not creating additional work.
Even though Carrey towers over Kaufman, in the movie and in life, "Man In The Moon" is a powerful, haunting look into America's celebrity culture.
If you want to jump in, please feel free:
If you don't want to read the reviews, don't read the reviews. I assume that you did since you took the time and effort to actually post this horse shit. Who is low now? Would it hurt you any to actually skip over an article that is of no interest to you? Or do you not have anything else to do then keep up to date on all the /. happenings regardless of whether or not it is of interest to you. Personally, I like Jim Carrey. I like/d Andy Kaufman. I plan to see the movie and I'm glad to have taken the time to read this review.
I think you are lost, Andy Kaufman may not have been someone YOU saw often, but a LARGE number of comedians who saw Andy became what they are today due to his style and flare. Carrey is simply mindless drivel and most of the cast who worked with him on this movie have commented that they were impressed that he managed to portray Andy perfectly, to do it Carrey could not even be called Jim on set he demanded to be called Andy or he didn't respond to them. (My information is based on three interviews done to Danny Devito, and some of the cast members of the film. 12/23 {TNT Cable channel I believe} , 12/26, 12/27) Before someone states that one person is more of a legend then another, they should really do some reasearch. Even my poor research of TV/CABLE interviews have reflected better from the actors who were there. (These actors also worked with Andy when he was alive, most of the interviews were from the Cast of Taxi {A TV show Andy Kaufman co-stared in).
I don't know why, but that post made me laugh. It portrays Jon Katz in a childish book report kind of way. It's fitting since the review was sort of childish in and of itself. After all, Jon didn't even get the movie title right.
Poor Jon. Everybody always picks on him.
Yeah, nice going Katz. Did you actually go to see the movie? Ever hear the song by REM? Guess not... The movie is titled "Man On the Moon". This gives me lots of confidence.... ahem.
Natalie Portman and Courtney Love are both worthless. Andy Kaufmann rules!
I agree, and have only seen two Jim Carrey movies that I've liked... "The Truman Show," and "Man on the Moon." Normally, I think of Carrey as a goofball idiot, funny for about three seconds. In these two recent films, however, Carrey doesn't play Carrey, (well, maybe for a bit in Truman Show.) In Man on the Moon, I'd swear that Carrey _IS_ Kaufman... he plays the part _that well_. Two very big thumbs up to Man on the Moon and to Jim Carrey.
Is this a movie review, or a mini biography of Andy Kaufman?
Anyway, I thought the movie was execellent.
Although I thought they should have used the full "Man on the Moon" song at the end credits instead of just part of it. After all, isn't the song where the movie got it's name?
Does anyone else find it strange that the movie was named after a song that only happened to mention the main character a few times?
and why did this post get a score of +1?
Kaufman brought Pirandello to comedy. Anytime you see self-referential comedy like Gary Shandling, it traces back to Kaufman. Comedy where the comedian isn't lovable? Kaufman brought that to the mainstream, too. I hope you liked "Seinfeld."
Performance art? Aside from some Berkeley stoners, who heard of that before Kaufman?
Of course Kaufman went too far occasionally. True trailblazers occasionally make a wrong turn. Their willingness to do so is what makes them trailblazers.
...my wife doesn't like him either. But he cracks me up. I must be one of the few that like stupid humor from time to time. I don't think this latest one has the earmark of stupid humor that his previous movies had (ie - Pet Detective, Dumb & Dumber, etc) - it would seem that he himself is looking to expand his repertoire and push his genre a little. Remember Steve Martin's evolution from outragious humor (ie - The Jerk, etc) and his later movies (ie - Father of the Bride, etc) that exploited a lighter side of him? For a guy who came to the States with nothing, Carey isn't doing too bad... He works hard for what he does and he isn't afraid to take chances. Getting on a stage and totally tossing your established act to try something new took a lot of guts, in spite of the fact that he bombed. But he didn't slink off into the shadows (only into the piano *grin*), but kept pushing. There was a time when Slapstick Humor was a rage, now Stupid Humor is in. God knows what the future will bring us...
This review seems to equate "comedy legend" with popularity. Jim Carrey is not a comedy legend. He is an incredibly popular comedian. Kaufman is a legitimate legend. He is not the BEST known comedian ever, but he is the epitome of a legend, and not because his movie studio paid for him to be.
This completely contrived "oscar buzz" over Carrey in this role is totally ridiculous. He played a good part but it was not a work of acting genius by ANY means. He wants an oscar though, so the PR people's spin on the movie is purely "jim carrey IS andy kaufman". In this review Katz says that the acting is great because Kaufman wasn't very likable, but that just shows how incredibly little Katz knows about Kaufman. Kaufman was by all accounts EXTREMELY likable, but his characters weren't. Carrey just played him how he was.
Also, ANY free speech talk here is so out of place. Name one free speech issue at all related to Kaufman! There are none. Some people didn't like his comedy, but he never had anythign close to a censorship fight or anything. The closest he came was being bleeped when he went crazy on the Letterman Show and was swearing up and down at Jerry Lawler.
So basically, yeah, it's a fine movie, but this fabricated buzz over Carrey's performance has already been laughed at in most decent media outlets, and it's pretty sad that Slashdot is just buying into it hook line and sinker. And Jim Carrey is simply not a legend. I like the guy, he's funny, but he is not a legend, just look the word up in the dictionary.
I agree, this review just so obviously missed the whole point. So far all the coverage of this movie has said "Kaufman was so unbalanced, that was his beauty", etc, ad nauseum, and that kind of talk has actually become a cliche, but Katz here didn't ever rise to teh level of the true but trite cliche, he completely missed the point altogether.
Oh come on, you *have* too (sic) see the movie before you can make assumptions like that
have to? non sequitur.
i think we've seen enough already. these "you've got to pay us $$ to feel like an idiot for having gone to see yet another film by that carrey monkey" arguments are amazing.
(but then, about 20 years ago i paid $2 at school just to see divine eat fresh poodle shit in 'pink flamingos'.)
This review is insightful and well thought out, and deserves to be featured on Slashdot 100 times more than the review that ran. Kudos for actually understanding what's going on.
Anyhoo, I am looking forward to seeing this flick. Jim Carrey is finally getting some decent roles. We thoroughly enjoyed "The Truman Show", and even "The Mask" was pretty decent. But all of his movies seem to have a common theme - in his more successful roles, he plays characters that are somehow not quite fully connected to the rest of society. This seems to suit him since he always seems to act alone - he never quite has a proper rapport with his fellow actors.
Totally! I think because comedy is more about having people like you than anything else. Some people (not enough) do music and art to express themselves and don't care what people think of it, but comedy is basically all about having the audience like you, and the fact Kaufman could completely ignore is truly incredible. Bombing on purpose is so hard to do!
And the "Jim Carrey is already much more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman" statement is ridiculous. The only entertainment legend in the movie was Jerry Lawler.
Hail the King!
Wow, a review of a review. Kick ass.
When I heard that DeVito was playing Shapiro and not actually himself, I wondered who would play DeVito. I was sorely disappointed that they just left DeVito completely out of the picture. But seeing some of those Taxi scenes recreated was just amazing! It makes me very nostalgic, and I'm sure the original actors must have felt the same way. It's almost creepy... Tank you vedy much...
I could swear that the Slashdot motto is "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." I could possibly see how this relates to news for nerds, but does this really matter?
This is totally false. Jim Carrey has done nothing outrageous or brilliant. He hasn't done anything revolutionary or way out of his ime as Andy did. There is no comparison between these two. Carey is nothing when put beside Kaufmann.
Carry's popularity is far greater then Andy's ever was, they are different types of comedians., Andy was more of an artist, and Carry is more convential, Andy can be called a genius by some, but Carry's success is something Andy never strived to attain.
Aside from playing a squeaky-voiced supporting character in the hit series Taxi I cannot imagine what Kaufman ever did to deserve a movie. Given the choice I'd prefer to see Judd Hirsch's life story over Kaufman's.
What was truly innovative about Kaufman? The way he made the audience hat him so much?
Has anyone else noticed that the E channel has become the "Kaufman" channel of late. One must wonder if Michael Stipe and others have greased the publicity machine to get this two-bit has been's life story appearing weekly.
Probably the only person more undeserving of attention is Courtney Love, who, had her husband not blown his brains out, would have never had her 15 minutes of fame.
Missed the point didn't ya, Carrey is not legend. He is doing NOTHING new for comedy.
Another one missed the point. CARREY DID NOTHING NEW FOR COMEDY. He is slapping together old and well used styles for his own.
As for Jim Carrey - I think you dismiss him to easily. A different type? Yes, I'm sure. But who would most people remember? Kaufmann? I don't think so.
But it doesn't go beyond calling them both controversial provocateurs...
Look most of the reason people don't understand what a legend really is, is due to their not being around before the legend. Andy is one of the reason comedy is the way it is today, from outragous to subtle (sp?) not simply slapstick anymore. Andy didn't care if poeple liked him or if he was popular, he cared about pushing comedy to its limits and beyond. If you ask a rock/pop musician What the big deal about Jimmey Hindericks was you are bound to get lecture, if you ask a jazz muscian who Louie Armstrong was and why he was 'so great' you are in for another long lecture, the same is true with Andy and comedy. Who was Babe Ruth? Why do sports fans point to him and other greats of the games? Even Living legends like Air Jordan will excite comment vs. other popular but not game/music/whatever altering celeberity. Don't confuse fame with legendary status. Sometimes the two go together, alot of times they don't. -------Have Fun and seeya all in the year 1900.
"Even though Carrey towers over Kaufman, in the movie and in life, "Man In The Moon" is a powerful, haunting look into America's celebrity culture."
This last line pretty much proves that Katz is, indeed, an idiot.
I don't know Katz, but my guess is that he's just out of college, has never heard (much less admired) Kaufman before this movie, hasn't seen many American films in his short life, and thinks that films like "Ace Ventura" and "The Green Mile" are the pinnacle of American cinema.
Hey, Katz: here's a clue to get a taste of American film -- bust out some copies of Chaplin's early short films (you're film reviewer, so I assume you have Chaplin's Mutuals on DVD?), maybe take a gander at Citizen Kane (yes, it's in black and white), try to stay awake through, say, Godfather I and II, take a close look at Cassavetes' films (yes, Katz, the same Cassavettes who was in 'Rosemary's Baby' and 'The Fury' -- can you believe it? He was actually a director -- America's first "indie" filmmaker), break out your John Ford collection on VHS (um, no, not *Gerald* Ford, Katz -- *John* Ford), take a look at Chinatown (yeah, you remember this, right? No, not the "Two Jakes" but "Chinatown" -- the first one) -- and then when you've done all that, take another look at "Man on the Moon."
I think if you get even a smidgeon (and the list above is just that -- a smidgeon -- of American cinematic history) you'll realize that (a) Man on the Moon is a bad film, (b) film reviewing is slightly more complex than you've been led to believe, and that (c) Jim Carrey is just a blip on the radar of American cinema.
Kaufman may not be liked -- but he's an original. Were it not for Kaufman (and Robin Williams, Johnathon Winters, and, yes, even Chaplin, Arbuckle, and Keaton) Carrey wouldn't be "Jim Carrey."
Carrey towers above Kaufman "in life"? Please, Katz. Get a clue. Stop posting stuff like this. You just embarrass yourself.
He was brilliant in Dead Poets Society, which is the first role I saw him in. And it sort of made people expect serious movies from him, or at least adult comedy... But movies like Mrs. Doubtfire, Hook, Poeye etc., are certainly more aimed at children.
--nuff said.
A friend of mine who is a comedian and loves Andy Kauffman felt the same way - that you couldn't tell Jim Carrey was there, he really had Kauffman dead on. However, what ticked him off was that they showed Marilu Henner and Judd Hirsch at the end at Andy's funeral, when they were never there in the first place. That alone would make me not want to see it. I hate being deceived.
I'm with you, there. I don't see why this post was marked offtopic - it seems to me that the only reason Katz is allowed to post is because he generates all these flames, and it takes three ad impressions to flame him. The TOPIC of any Katz post is that Katz is a moron who wastes our time, and this post is SO on-topic.
Katz is an idiot. Do we really need him posting articles? It is fine if he posts comments, but I vote we take away his article priviledges.
You have said it wonderfully, thank you. Jon kRATS live , learn, and shut up.
I've never even heard of the guy before this movie came around. What is the big deal? Obviously he's not a very good comedian if I've never heard of him!
Yeah, you hit the nail on the head. I remember one routine of his where he acted like a stand-up comedian while speaking unintelligible gibberish. He made these standard standup gestures and facial expressions to clue you in as to when he was delivering the punch line. It was comedy about comedy/comedians. Meta-comedy. It was actually a pretty funny send-up of stand-up. I think it was great that he was as happy to make the crowd angry as make them laugh. So much 'entertainment' is watered-down, focus-group tested, cut to add a more palatable ending, that it was cool that he would go for a more extreme reaction from the audience, even if it was bad, rather than trying to appeal to everyone. This is why Plan 9 From Outer Space is so much better than The Phantom Menace...
jim carrey is no more a comedian than i am. he's never done any prolific stand up and i am not aware of any at all. the last true comedic genius was Robin Williams, before he became a mushy sentimental actor. the guy was a die-hard fan of Kauffman and was an amazing standup commedian to boot. too bad he doesn't just realize how good he was and go back to performing. maybe it's just that he can't get back to that plateau. either way, get William's 198x HBO special, it's freaking hilarious.
This I find to be a very funny ordeal. It appears that Mr. Katz has inflamed the passions of everyone and we are all aghast at what is going on. Hmmmm? Sounds like a biographical movie I just watched. You silly... silly... people. CruelPlace
Jon, open up your pants. I gots me a bowl of hot grits to pour down them.
For shame, Katz. This was not a movie review. Fuck, you're worse than the hack who always has the good reviews of shitty movies, because you know he's getting paid by the studios, e.g. "Sister Act 2" is the BEST movie you'll see all year!"
TROLLIN' FOR JESUS!
This is an open letter to Jon Katz:
Hi Jon. It seems to me that your talents are wasted by writing for Slashdot. You can write movie reviews without ever mentioning the movie, as well as get things wrong. This means you'd be great for newspapers.
I would like to see you review:
A) Restaurants
B) Music
C) Theatre
D) Concerts
I'm completely dumbfounded by your literary talents, and why you're not making any money here when your work demands the New York Times!
Oh, and next time, go see the movie first before you write a review on it.
Too bad HTML Doesn't have a 'sarcasm' tag. *g*
Read this superior piece on the film vs real life of Andy Kaufman: http://www.slate.com/LifeAndArt/99-12-22/LifeAndAr t.asp
... After being diagnosed with cancer, Carrey's Kaufman decides to do a show at Carnegie Hall. ... But the performance took place in 1979, well before Kaufman got sick."
Quote: "In its most marked deviation from real life, Man on the Moon provides Kaufman with a kind of feel-good comeback.
Feel manipulated? Hollywood, please, if you're going to make a biographical movie with apparent accuracy (e.g. meticulous restagings of past performances), don't play fast and loose with big details for some questionable emotional appeal!
Hey, does anyone else think the movie would have been more powerful (in a quirky but not inappropriate way) if all the restaged performances had instead been the original Kaufman performances, even in grainy video -- with the Carrey stuff only for the background material?
I felt the same way about Apollo 13. Spare me the glossy re-shots of the rocket lift-off. I'll take the grainy real thing, please.
Does anyone else remember that poignant moment on Late Night with David Letterman when Dave said something like "It is with deep sadness that I have to announce the death of my friend Andy Kaufman"?
Jim Carrey is a comedic impersonator, Andy Kaufman is a improvisational performance actor. There is a wide gulf between the two. One requires you to study personalities and copy manerisms, the other one requires more creativity. Andy Kaufman was a creative genius who provoked his audiences to think. Sometimes people don't like to think. Jim Carrey's best impersonation was this movie, Andy Kaufman's best performance was his entire life.
I know that you are pissed because Katz belittled Kaufman, and you don't agree. But, the review is idiotic for so many more reasons. Most of which have been addressed here already, everything is wrong with this review, but it is too poor to be accidentally aweful.
Katz' first installment of holiday movie reviews was terrible. This review is a conscious stab at slashdotters and demonstrates an egregious lack of respect. Katz is saying "You thought my last review sucked and instead of taking some points to heart, I'm going to post an even more aweful one now just to spite you all."
I mean, come on fellas! Are you waiting for Katz to walk up and spit on you? He is mocking you, teasing you and you all let him.
MTV Video Music Awards 9/9/99. That was outrageous.
Nah - is it really any surprise that Katz, who goes to great lengths to pander to his audience and jump on any bandwagon that comes along, would have trouble understanding or appreciating the work of a man who did just the opposite?
Besides, Kaufman probably doesn't appear as disempowered to Katz as all the geeks he claims to speaking for do, so he doesn't earn any "defender of the oppressed" points for taking Kaufman's side.
It appears as if the moderators have abandoned this thread, as nothing has been moderated on it in a long time. Troll and flame away without fear of reprisals!
Trolling For Jesus -- salvation through irritation
[Andy Kaufman] wasn't hopping in and out of beds...
Um... we are talking about the same Andy Kaufman, aren't we? Get a clue.
Should have a poll to keep or toss Katz.
Last time I checked, "Air Jordan" referred to a pair of Nike basketball shoes.
There were moments when I had to wonder if Kaufman suffered from multiple personality disorder.
Being weird is easy; being funny is hard. That statement sums up Andy Kaufman. In watching him you were a lot of times aware that he wasn't able to come up with any new material, so he just acted weird. Weird has no standards of what's good weird or what's bad weird. Anything goes as long as it's weird. It is therefore, a refuge for those who have lost their creativity. Let me show you what an innovative writer I am : "Gerbils in my nose, oocha coocha oocha coocha^^^blasphemous ponies ride roughshod over the architectural pantywaists @[=_? eechy screechy wacky dacky -- did not! did not!......kooooooooooookoooooooooo kravenhoffer flimmyfloppers%%%%%%%bark in my shoes with tobasco sauce ~ & { \\ the broomstick in my cellar is refueling on its way to the moon#### gleguioasnripjxurfznm uhaoiuh aoiuh +++++++++ sloopy doopy frog's breath pie." -- Now if I was Andy Kaufman I would have written 10 pages of such drivel, and phony intellectuals would have said I was challenging my audience's sense of what's creative writing. True geniuses are discriminating; they know what to leave in and what to throw away. Kaufman had no discrimination.
The first part of the movie did an excellent job of portraying a bleak industrialist world. My favorite scene though, was the moonrise on the ocean. It had a very spiritual quality. One bone to pick though : I hated the fact that they had the character cut his hair and end up with that clean-cut Tom Hank's look. The long, shaggy hair did a better job of portraying the softness of the character.
Can we have a poll to see who wants to keep Katz?
Yea, look at how they moderate posts. Look at how they carefully filter what posts they see. Look at how when they see a post they don't like, they cry for someone to moderate it down so hopefully most people won't see the post. Look at how they automatically moderate a post to zero just because someone posts anonymously. They give a big show of being all for free speech and an unrestricted web, but here on slashdot they show a fear of free speech and a desire to censor. Moderating posts IS a form of censorship since it restricts the size of the audience that sees that post. No, I don't see this group as open-minded either.
you moderators suck dick listen people, go to the last page and read some of the comments, they are very good, better than a lot of the crap that's been moderated up Katz is a complete moron, and obviously many people feel that way, I think we should have a poll on whether to keep him
that was sooo dada! lol
When have you known geeks to be wildly funny, anyway? You can only take so much Monty Python.
Andy Kaufman -- a comic genius? Right, and Tiny Tim was a virtuoso.
I'm going to go ahead and assume that your post is meant to be satirical. In that capacity, it's mildly amusing. Taken seriously, on the other hand, I would have to say you are a complete idiot. You apparently didn't grasp the fact that Andy Kaufman was a real person, and that this movie wasn't supposed to be a comedy. Get some culture and a life, then your opinion might carry some weight.
Hmm, Um what are Katz qualifications to review these films? Has he spent years sudying the subject? Dps he have extensive knowledge of it? From what I saw in this review he equates popularity with quality. By those standards the National Enquirer must be the best paper and Windows must be the best OS. No sometimes the masses are not ready for quality, Kaufman while not as popular or well known today as Carey has MUCH more respect from his fellow comedians. Katz condeming Kaufmans gadfly like persona shows his lack of depth of character. Perhaps Katz would criticize Socrates, they didnt just vote him off SNL they made him drink hemlock. Katz is just bleating out an opinion, he doesnt back up any of his assertions. His obvois lack of understanding of the subject matter disqualify him from doing any further reviews of film. I think its clear from the overwhelming feedback on this review that he should no longer do so.
My wife and I were bored to death through the whole movie. It fell much short of our high expectations. We were about to walk out be we kept thinking at some point it would have to get better. It didn't. I expected some profound statement at the end, but it fell short of any sort of tragedy as well since the protagonist failed to articulate his fate in an embellished sort of way. The theme could have been stated a lot clearer. Instead of going to see this movie, save your $7.00/person and I'll sum it up for you- "Andy Kaufman was a performance artist who carried his jokes too far and was misunderstood by the public. He died of cancer." I'm not a Jim Carey fan, but he did an excellent job especially with such a poor script. linuxman@i.am
Actually the review does make a comparison between the two. Actually he equates them. "the sometimes brilliant, offensive, self-destructive celebrity eccentric. What makes people like Flynt and Kaufman so American is that few societies would tolerate them at all, let alone elevate them to star status." "Provocateurs like Hustler Magazine's Flynt and entertainers like the late Lenny Bruce and Kaufman are constantly forcing the issue." I think this really goes beyond saying the director made both movies!?
Pushing the limits doesn't equal funny, no, BUT kaufman was never trying to be funny. He was trying to get a real reaction of any kind. He was shooting more for entertainment than humour, and he didn't care if he looked like a total jerk or unfunny to get it.
If only Hollywood would open source Jim Carrey, then you could fix all his problems.
(This information was taken from "Andy Kaufman Revealed," by Bob Zmuda)
The vote on Kaufman's banning from SNL was modeled after a viewer vote held several weeks earlier on whether to kill or save "Larry the Lobster."
The vote was brought on by SNL producer Dick Ebersol, who had been having a good deal of trouble with Kaufman's material for his scheduled appearances. It degenerated into a screaming match, with Kaufman walking out and never appearing.
The vote was held several weeks after that, and was actually quite close. The final tally was 195,544 in favor of banning him, and 169,186 in support of him.
For a more in-depth (and infinitely better written) description of the event, pick up "Andy Kaufman Revealed" by Bob Zmuda. It was a great read.
i have to say this, because i really think andy kaufman was great and i think jon katz got a lot of things wrong.
first, throw out the free speech bit. that has little if anything to do with the story.
second, however big the subject was isn't really important. the story was touching, unique, and hilarious. who cares how popular or unpopular andy was? it really doesn't matter.
now then, i don't think it's fair to say kaufman was a mess. why does jon think this? because he didn't care so much about the money when he did "Taxi?" because he despised sitcoms? i don't quite see jon's point
it was a good movie. as i stated before, andy's story was quite unique, very touching, and altogether hilarious, so it was quite enjoyable to watch jim carrey (who played the part very well, i thought) recreate it. i will agree to an extent with a previous poster who said he'd rather have watched more real footage of andy, and in fact there is an andy kaufman special that airs every now and then on comedy central which is really a documentary of much of his life. i don't think carrey brought any of his traditional "stupid humor" to the movie though--after having watched the cc special i think he did a really good job of portraying kaufman. most of the time it really felt like i was watching andy and i didn't even think about the fact that it was jim carrey. all things considered, it was a good movie. go see it.
One thing about the Gatsby bit that I haven't seen/read elsewhere was, did he ever read the whole book onstage? The movie takes it that far, but did he really?
very good.
The SNL vote deal was much more sinister than the movie portrays. Andy and director Dick Ebersol had agreed Andy would be voted out, but Tony Clifton would still come on. Ebersol and Lorne Michaels just didn't think Clifton would do well, chastising the audience, on national TV. But Andy wanted him on bad enough, he went through with the deal. And as Andy could do, he ensured enough people voted "No."
Unlike the movie's 20some% voting for him, it was closer, 53% to 47%. And when the tally came in, Ebersol turned on the "deal" and told Andy he (or Clifton, or any persona) would never be on the show. Naturally, he was hurt. And this was just another hit in his downward spiral. It's amazing how many things went bad in those few months, his mother having a stroke, finding he had three months to live, getting betrayed by his favorite TV show, Taxi was cancelled, pro wrestling was over, and the TM powers that be told him he could no longer come to the retreats.
Pick up the "Andy Kaufman Revealed" book by Bob Zmuda, it's worth the read.
Besides, from the trailers I've seen, Carrey has Andy Kaufman down *perfectly*, right down to that demonic gleam he always had in his eye. I somehow seriously doubt that the script involves Carrey talking via his ass. Anyhow, he was pretty good in the Truman Show (which was, at least, an original movie).
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
". . . he deserves more respect than he gets."
I'm sorry. I have to disagree. I think Jim Carrey is perhaps one of the most over hyped "actors" of the nineties. Not only is he a BAD actor, but he is not very funny. Maybe I'm being hard on the guy, but come on... The Mask, Dumb and Dumber, and The Cable Guy (to name a few) were simply horrible movies that aren't even worth $1.25 from the "JACKED UP, WATCHED 427 TIMES, LEFT ON THE DASH OF MY CAR IN THE HOT DESERT SUN (that little dot's not white anymore)" section of Billy Bob's Bar, Gas, and Video Rental Shack.
Remember Veara deMilo? That was funny!!
Actually, you can teach a donkey how to sing, but he will still sound like an ass...
--
Kir
3cx.org - A truly bad website.
I guess that is really what I meant by "bad actor." He is, to me, like the Denzel Washington of comedy. Whenever I see Denzel play a role, it's always DENZEL I see... not his character (unlike Billy Bob Thorton, which amazes me EVERYTIME).
Maybe this movie will change my mind, but I doubt it will.
Actually, you can teach a donkey how to sing, but he will still sound like an ass...
--
Kir
3cx.org - A truly bad website.
I believe the vote was ~160,000 to ~195,000 pretty much a landslide.
Mark
I won't see the movie because he's in it, I hate stupid humour. A movie containing real footage of Andy would have been much more interesting. IMHO
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
No, it's not being close minded, it's I'm not going to pay money to see a performer I don't like. The people that star in a movie are a large part of it's selling value or lack there of. I saw the Truman Show and while Carrey was tolerable in it, I think it would have been much better with someone else. I'll probably end up watching TMITM on an airplane or on TV but I don't think that I want to fork over $8 given a better that 50/50 chance that i won't like it because I don't like the star.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
A lot of people here are not open minded at all. "Alternative" minded, but not open minded.
Look at how many bash BeOS just because it's not Open Source. Look at how many bash FreeBSD because it's not Linux. Look how many bash space exploration because abstract knowledge is "useless".
They may use a non-MS OS, but luddites is luddites.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
there is some funny stuff if you browse at -1. Funny, that is, if you think it's funny to see things ridiculing Jon Katz and comparing his movie reviews to a small child's book report. I do.
Cameron Diaz; you haven't seen "Being John Malkovich" yet have you? Recommended.
I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
I tried to read the threads, but I can't seem to find it, and I have no real interest in seeing the movie at my cost.
I didn't see The Truman Show until I watched it for free. It was well worth the cost and time though.
If you look at the previews and go "hey cool, I think i'd like to see that", then go see it, you'll be very pleased by it. if you look at the previews and you think you'll hate it, then you probably will... so DON'T GO.. if you're not sure, then ask a friend who did see it.. I took my girlfriend who had never heard of andy kaufman, and she thought it was very funny, and she even cried at the end (of course, she cries when she burns a piece of chicken.. so i donno what that says). I thought the movie was hilarious.. in fact it was the first movie I went to in a long time wher I actually laughed _out loud_ during the film. so did at least half the audience. and if you hate jim carrey, I'd still see it. Jim is nothing like his normal characters. I am not a huge fan of the mask, and dumb and dumber, and the many others he's done.. but I thought this was a great movie.
-- "I feel a strong disturbance in the for.."\*Segmentation Fault*\ (core dumped)
I liked the movie. It was well done, and Carrey did a good job. The soundtrack was also excellant (REM always is. :^})
I found that Katz' review meandered towards his usual tact -- about half way through the ''movie review'' he goes off on this tirade about Americans and their view of freedom. (Or at least his idea of what they think of it. )
He attempts to get back on track with the review, but he never seems to. Instead he veers off into the related area of Kaufman's (and Carrey's as well) acting career.
When looking for a movie review, I want to see soemthing that reviews the movie, not the background of the actors. But that's my opinion, YMMV. :-)
Overall, I score this review a 7. Not horrible, but not great either.
--
http://gabrielcain.com/
To the credit of the comedic industry, it has not spawned a cottage industry of teenagers who try to "push the limits" for the sake of it, producing mediocre work in the process, like most performance and visual art fields have (even written fiction).
Rather, they're able to take the queues from Kaufman regarding what _was actually funny_ and move on.
-Dean
Excellent point! Andy Kaufman wasn't so much doing comedy as he was prying it apart, to see what makes it tick. Then he showed you what was inside it. The comparison to writers like Barth is very insightful... the average fiction reader couldn't handle genius work, either. How many of you have read James Joyce' "Ulysses"?
That gets back to what i said in my review... Andy Kaufman didn't so much make you laugh as make you squirm.
---
120
chars is barely sufficient
Hand me that airplane glue and I'll tell you another story.
(I originally posted this review yesterday to a small discussion mailing list i share with a few friends)
Man on the Moon
starring Jim Carrey, Danny Devito, Courtney Love, et al
directed by Milos Forman
produced by Danny Devito
"Man on the Moon" is the story of the rise, fall, and death of legendary
comic Andy Kaufman. Some of you may know Kaufman from his role as the
zany eastern European mechanic on the sitcom "Taxi". Others may know
him for his occasional work on Saturday Night Live, and the story of how
the audience voted to not have him on the show anymore. Or maybe you've
never heard of him at all. Those who have watched his work generally
either love him or hate him. He didn't like neutral reactions, and
didn't get them.
Author bias here: i think Andy Kaufman was one of the greatest geniuses
in comic history. And yes, he fell on his face a lot, and went over the
top A LOT. But when he was on, he was golden. Lots of comedians make
you laugh. Some make you think. Andy Kaufman made you squirm. Of
course, most people don't want to squirm, don't want to find humor in
their own embarassment and shame, so a lot of people hated him.
That being said, i loved this movie. It may not be one of the greatest
films ever made, but it really works well, and tells a fascinating
story. I think it's worth seeing even if you didn't like Andy Kaufman.
What i liked most about it, i think, wasn't so much the story, but
rather getting to see all the great Andy Kaufman standup shows and
routines that were never captured on film. His work on Taxi and
Saturday Night Live barely scratched the surface. In the film, you get
the full story of his pro wrestling career, his famous Carnegie Hall
show when he took the entire audience out for milk and cookies, the
story of Tony Clifton, etc. This is hardcore genius work. And, like
much genius work, it is often difficult to understand (at one point, his
manager (Danny Devito) chides him and his writer Bob Zmuda (Paul
Giamatti) for dragging out the Tony Clifton joke to where it was only
funny to two people in the entire world... but of course, those two
thought it was hilarious).
The acting is generally superb. For me, Jim Carrey never completely
became Kaufman, but that's probably because i had seen the real Kaufman
so much. But i have to credit Carrey with getting his timing and
mannerisms down as well as any actor is capable of doing them... and for
Kaufman, comedy was as much a matter of timing as anything. The
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi once told him the secret of being funny was
"Silence", and he used silence more effectively than any comedian since
Buster Keaton (personally, i say the essence of comedy is timing, but i
suspect the Maharishi and i mean the same thing). So, despite the fact
that i couldn't overcome the cognitive dissonance of Carrey playing
Kaufman, it worked as well as such things ever do for me.
Danny Devito plays Kaufman's manager George Shapiro (the film was his
baby... he worked with Kaufman on Taxi, and then produced it as an ode
to his friend). As George Shapiro, Devito provides the primary lens
through which the audience sees Andy Kaufman. Fans of Milos Forman's
previous work (Amadeus, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest) will recognize
the technique of humanizing a genius character for the audience by
watching him through more ordinary eyes. As usual, Devito completely
absorbs his role, becoming the most believable character in the film.
Paul Giamatti as Kaufman's writer/partner Bob Zmuda, and Courtney Love
as Kaufman's girlfriend, both deliver superbly given their somewhat
limited roles. Courtney Love in particular doesn't get enough meat in
her part to be much more than a mirror, but what she does she does very
well. For someone like her who specializes in being over the top, she
is very subdued and sensitive in the role.
Perhaps the best thing i can say about this film is that i intend to buy
a copy when it is available on video - for my children. Not for
today... although there isn't anything in it that i don't think they
should see (brief nudity? so?), it's very much adult humor, in that it
is humor about how adults see the world. Andy Kaufman's humor, while
childlike and evoking childhood memories, is not something children can
even understand as humor. What's funny to adults is just normal for
them. But, when they're old enough to understand, i want them to see
this film. It's a matter of cultural education, getting a chance to see
one of the greatest comedians ever in action. It's the same reason i'd
get them a Buster Keaton movie, really.
---
120
chars is barely sufficient
Hand me that airplane glue and I'll tell you another story.
Larry Flynt may be a pornmonger, but he also had the balls to stand up for what he believed in. It wasn't sex he believed in. It was the freedom of speech/expression he believed in. He fought long and hard for these things and refused to back down - something most Americans would not do.
Woody Harrelson's representation of Larry Flynt was excellent. It was also a very intriguing movie, although it lacked a few important details.
Now, in relation to Man on the Moon, no movie 'biography' of any person is going to be 100% complete. Yet MotM lacked very important developments of Kaufman which made the movie sub par.
Comedy after all, is about escaping reality, not creating additional work.
I really can't disagree with this more. On the simplest level, what would satire be?
Regardless, Jim Carey has been milking toilet humour too long -- he's been typecast. I haven't seen this movie yet, but I look forward to seeing him in a serious role... it's a shame it has to be as a comedian though.
I think I'll catch it on video.
I think the big problem is that Jim Carrey got 'big' with "Ace Ventura" and "The Mask", and for awhile he was typcast in created "Jim Carrey zannyness" vehicles.
I think that I's only been since "Liar, Liar" that he's been able to show any more serious talent...
jf
hehe it seems people get so flamed about this guy speaking out his opinion. Everyone takes everything he comments about and picks it apart like the bible. Should he be shot because he forgot it was "ON" instead of "IN"? I don't know the guy but I do know he has an interesting point of view on a lot of topics. He is opinionated but who isn't? Its everyone's right to be just that.
:)
As for this movie... I won't go see it for a couple of reasons. And this is my OPINION.
1) Andy was funny because of his insanity but I don't want to see carrey as Andy. I just don't think I would enjoy that. I like carrey but I don't think this will be good.
2) BIG TIME OPINION: I will NEVER see a movie with Courtney Love in it because her entire career has been based on the death of her husband... a man she by most of the facts released, killed or had killed. She disgusts me and she has no talent.. only tits.
3) Well I don't need a 3 but I felt like making it look like I had alot to say.
Anyway. Its a movie. Let anyone review it. Katz words aren't law. If you disagree with his review read another few.
I heard someone on NPR say something about the movie... It went kinda like this:
If you are expecting to see a biography of Kaufman, this is not the film for you. If you want to see something like an MTV "Rock-u-mentary", then you will like what you see. It does not dive into the person of Kaufman, it tends to highlight his career.
Not that I may believe what was said in the review (I have yet to, and plan on seeing this film), but it is typical Hollywood to pump out crap. I cannot remember the last time I saw a film that had a "star" in it or a huge budget that impressed me any.
"Pi" was the best thing I have seen in a long time.
Happy New Year!
James F. Bickford
Sys Dev Assistant
Electronic Interface Support
pronoblem
"even though Jim Carrey is already much more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman, the man he portrays. "
Jon, please follow up on this... What do you base this on?
Money?
Hollywood Acting Rolls?
Did you see someone on the E! channel say this?
People Magazine?
First, it would seem that any popular dead icon will be elivated to "legend", but Kaufman was an innovator. Carrey has emulated a lot of Kaufman's and Jerry Lewis' comedic tactics. Carrey is great, but he is appealing to his audiance. Kaufman was challenging. As it is with all of the greatest artists, it is those that break barriers, challenge the status quo and piss people with their work that will be remembered for their art.
Happy New Year!
James F. Bickford
Sys Dev Assistant
Electronic Interface Support
pronoblem
Bob Zmuda's book on Kaufman (Andy Kaufman Revealed!: Best Friend Tells All) is brilliant. While i haven't yet seen the film (and i am looking forward to it), the book goes into detail about the fact that Kaufman's most astonishing performances were performed for people who didn't know they were watching one. Things he did in restaurants, on the street. It's a great book, very funny. His point was that he didn't have to be funny, just interesting.
And it's hardly fair to say that Andy flirted with meditation; he was a dedicated TM'er for his entire adult life, meditating every day.
Of course, i'd be remiss not to mention Andy Lives.
mahlen
A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer.
--Robert Frost
I love Kaufman and I love Norm, and Norm loves Kaufman. He even has a bit part in the film. You don't have to 'get' Kaufman. He's just a guy who lived life the way he wanted and didn't let society or 'influential' people beat him into submission.
After seeing the movie, I only have one question on my mind: Was Jerry Lawler really in on the wrestling thing?
Before the movie, I had never heard that he was in on the whole idea. However, we know that the movie as semi-biographical and that the producers may have had to accept a revised history to get Lawler on the show.
Lawler was in on itIf Lawler was in on it, why would he give the joke away in the movie? Wouldn't it be better to keep it a secret and keep it larger than life?
Lawler wasn't in on itIf Lawler wasn't in on it, then this was his chance to make it appear like he was. In hindsight, he would have realized that he simply became a prop for Andy. With Andy dead, Lawler can throw in the final "punch."
Does anyone out there know what really happened?
Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
The real Jon Katz would have said that he could feel his pain, even if Kaufman would have taken an Uzi and had taken aim at his audience.
First off (I know it's been mentioned before, but), seem like Katz's articles are anything but thoughtless self-serving fluff if he could do something like review a movie and get the title right. Secondly, Jim Carey is a celebrity. He hasn't been around long enough to be a legend. Andy Kaufman is a legend. He may not have been exceptionally popular, he may have pissed off a lot of people, he may have made folks uncomfortable, but he made a lasting impression on our culture, and probably has shaped what our culture is now to a certain degree.
And okay, maybe he should've just made people happy and make them laugh, but some of us actually like being challenged.
Jon Katz, Voice of the Ordinary.
Another damned comic
+++ NO CARRIER
Where do you get off calling this piece, a 'review' of "Man On The Moon"? You've said NOTHING about the movie, except that it stars Jim Carey and Danny DeVito, and is about Andy Kaufman. ANYONE who has seen an advert for the film already knows that.
Instead, you should have called your article "The Jon Katz Opinion of Andy Kaufman". And even as that, it wasn't a very good, or well thought out, one.
Jon, if you haven't got anything to say, don't say anything. If you must spew, at least give your rant a suitable headline. Some journalist you're turning out to be.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
I'm not sure that he ever actually finished the reading, but he read at least several chapters at some shows.
Something else in the same vein that he used to do was to sing the entire "99 Bottles of Beer on the Wall" song for the audience.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Can't agree with this. Some is. But some of the funniest stuff I've heard has a bite to it.
My other Slashdot ID is much lower.
What? What-what-what?
I think Jim Carrey's life would make a GREAT movie.
His family was so poor that for a while they worked (all of them) sweeping the floor at a factory late each night. For many years his entire family was homeless. He always wanted to become rich enough that his family would never have to go hungry again. ...and he has.
While his early movies were always sophomoric, he has always said (paraphrased), "I'd hate to be 70 years old and still making movies where I say, 'all-righty-then'." Beginning with The Truman Show he is certainly making the transformation he seeks.
Believe me... if you knew what you were talking about* you wouldn't have posted what you did.
--JerseyTom
Footnote:
* -- Don't worry, this is slashdot. Posting about something WHICH YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT is exactly what slashdot is about. You fit in perfectly... ASSHOLE.
I honestly don't think Jim Carrey himself wants to be considered more of a legend thant Kaufman. From what I understand from interviews and articles, Kaufman is one of Jim Carrey's idols.
"Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
The reason why he didn't recover was becuase the rare form of lung cnacer that he had was pretty much untreatable. There was nothing anyone could do for him. The ironic part is that Kauffman was such a health nut, and her certainly never smoked, the most certain route to cancer.
Some people must have thought it was an act, but pictures that were printed in tabloids towards the end of his illness clearly show a man succumbing to a terminal disease. Of course, there were some people who thought that his *death* was a joke. Unfortunately, it was not.
~~~~~~~~~
auntfloyd
Does pushing the limits make one a great human being? Seems that's about all Kaufman did. That he may have been trying to be funny is immaterial. He was offensive but not particularly funny.
All comics try to be funny. Some comics push the limits of what is acceptable. Some manage to do both. I know it's just my opinion (well not just mine, as lots of SNL viewers apparently felt the same way), but Kaufman did not do both. He was just not very funny.
Let me start out by saying that I respect Jon Katz. I disagree with him a lot, but he is out there saying what is on his mind and standing up for that in which he believes. That said, I find it hard to believe that the man who claims to be in harmony with the outcast geek can manage to so totally misunderstand Andy Kaufman.
With all due respect to Jim Carrey, he hasn't a fraction of Kaufman's talent. Katz makes the capital mistake of equating popularity with talent. This is rank hypocrisy from the man who defends the unpopular geek. Apparently that's easy when you're posting on a web site dedicated to the interests of nerds and geeks. It makes him popular here.
Milos Forman has, it seems to me, been exploring what it means to be a rebel. From Amadeus through The People vs. Larry Flynt he seems to be looking for the stories of people who are standing proudly and self-conciously outside the current of their times.
Andy Kaufman is held in awe by comics. This awe is not given him because of his success, but because of his daring. Not because he was always successful, but because he didn't merely make new material, he kept exploding the boundaries of what comedy is.
In a world where you can't tell one comic's airline jokes from another comic's rush hour traffic jokes from yet another comic's relationship jokes, Kaufman kept walking on to the stage and doing material that most comics wouldn't dare to imagine, let alone perform.
Practicing comics know that there is the safe way, which will keep you comfortably nestled in the audience's love, getting easy laughs from the amusing foibles of suburban middle-class life, and then there is the dangerous way where you cut through the assumptions, you pierce our neat ideas of order, you diassemble the human condition and make see ourselves anew. This is what great art in all its manifestations does for us. Sometimes it makes us uncomfortable and afraid.
Most comics are hungry for the laugh, for the audience to like them and to think they are clever. I've dome some stand-up in my time and I must admit that I fall firmly in this category. What Andy Kaufman did may not have always succeeded, but it was done for some other reason. Some deeper reason than winning mere praise. He was driven to find some deeper knowledge of that place in us where laughter comes from.
Now, I would not claim to know Jim Carrey's inner heart, but from watching his work over the years, I would say that he, like many comics of greater or lesser talent, works for the laugh, works for the love. He also, like many others, knows that that is a rather shallow use of the attention given the stage. I think he leapt at the chance to play Kaufman because it was an opportunity to move beyond the self-gratification and to do it from the safety of playing someone else.
I have done both stand-up and stage acting (only semi-professionally, mind, I'm not "somebody.") and they are quite different. Being trapped in a written character actually liberates your behavior. Your free display of emotion is okay because it isn't you. It's the character; it's the writer.
When you do stand-up, it is you, naked and alone before that hungry thing we call an audience. That's why most of us fall into the safe stuff. Andy Kaufman did something much riskier and much more dangerous. He didn't make laughs, he made art.
Love the outsider.
Sure... but the point is that you were trying to argue that he is "a comedic legend." You don't become that by doing nothing new. He is a very good comedian. Fine. I don't debate that. But as of this point in time, he has done nothing to warrant the title of "legend." To get that, you have to be more than simply funny... you have to be bold and innovative. Carrey has potential, but has not yet realized it (IMHO). Is he funny as hell? Sure. But a legend? No. If you think he will become a legend, comedic or otherwise, then simply being funny, is not all that matters.
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Ummm... no-one here was claiming that Carrey did anything new for comedy.
Chill!
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
make up your minds is it "man on the moon" or "man in the moon" get it straight...
either we are networking or we areNT networking
Ya know, I generally like Katz's articles, but I think he's off the mark on this one
In short, I tried hard to like this movie but couldn't quite like it. I got out of the movie feeling like I'd seen a few minutes of a highlight reel and basically got ripped off. Sorry Katz, I think you're dead wrong on this one.
And, for the record, I think A.K.'s comedy is more interesting than J.C.'s, but J.C. still makes me "laugh like a drain" in Patrick Stewart's words. (He was talking about Beavis and Butthead, though.)
I have to say; People that refuse to acknowledge Jim Carrey as an actor need a good slap in the face. I have seen every Jim Carry movie, and -- Damn, he has a -lot- of talent as both an actor and a commedian. It just so happens that being slap-happy and obnoxious is what got him famous.
In The Truman show, he sometimes bordered on his slap-happy character, yet at the times it happened, I found it characterally perfectly acceptable; it was at times when the character should be snapping. Now, in Man on the Moon, he has proven beyond any doubt to me that he is a Damn Fine Actor. Being able to emulate another person's humor and personality so well that (this was on an interview on NPR, the agent was on the interviewee) Andy's agent (being one of his closest friends) says that he was taken aback by just how well Carrey does the roll, is one damn hard and fine accomplishment.
I just don't see, and am incredibly irritated by, people who refuse to acknowledge him as an actor, not just an obnoxious fool.
-Mog
You now have my respect. My attention is another matter ...
Ever say "No thanks, I have enough RAM"?
No, you shut up--I admit nothing!!!
If McDonalds came out with a new McShitwich 70s Classic Burger that they did a really good job on, they would still be McDonalds and they would still suck. Jim Carrey is still Jim Carrey, ergo he still sucks. I am willing to forgive crimes against society way before crimes against culture. People go to prison for smoking a little pot because they're hurting society in some vague way, yet movies like The Cable Guy are OK? What! I don't think I'd want to issue jail time (but i might make an exception for everyone involved in Show Girls, shudder) but there should be excessive fines raised against all the stupid people involved in the making of crimes against culture, to discourage any further similar activity. The money raised could go to the NEA or something.
I'm not joking, i'm serious here! I think Whoopi Goldberg should be made to pay out of her own pocket for damages inflicted on global culture for those Sister Act movies. Seeing her on Hollywood Squares is a small step towards justice, but it just doesn't go far enough. The crimes of Jim Carrey are possibly even greater, I would be willing to forgive him if he donated his proceeds from Man on the Moon towards improving the arts in the US (sorry rest of the world, we need it the most!) and promised to never make another movie similar to Ace Ventura. But thats not too likely to happen, so I don't think its too likely that i'm going to be acknowledging the "greatness of Jim Carrey" any time soon.
This is just the most slanted, misguided quote ever:
"Man In The Moon" may be the best holiday movie of the year so far, even though Jim Carrey is already much more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman, the man he portrays.
Jim Carrey has made more movies and more $$ but he is by no *NO* means more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman. Andy was a genius that will be remembered for generations to come, like Charlie Chaplin. Jim Carrey will be quickly forgotten as an icon of a very stupid age in media, gone the way of the Tony Danza's of this world.
At the time of Kaufman's heyday, sure, everyone had an agent, but there wasn't as much competition for the buck as we have today, 15-20 years later. We want to be entertained, and we want to laugh, and we want to see someone push the limits, as long as it's entertaining. Today we have cable TV, high-spaz network TV, the Internet, and Jon Katz.
Maybe this was true in Kaufman's day, too, but Carrey has successfully made Kaufman an entertainer, and in those moments where Kaufman is portrayed as the entertainer that went too far, Carey becomes a performance genius. This was true for Kaufman, too: this was why his "Taxi" character and lunge lizard characters were so popular: had these characters been the Real Andy, he would have been remembered as an idiot - and no man behind that idiot.
There is no better "proof" of this than the SNL phone-in, where viewers decided that they didn't like Andy's art form, and opted not to see it anymore on late-night television. I suppose I can credit Andy for staying true to his form and not sell out to what the masses wanted him to become; but truth of the matter is, we didn't like Andy - and yet, he's regarded today as a legend.
Someone please answer me this question: is it true that Andy didn't recover from his lung disease because everyone close to him thought he was just performing again (and by the time they realized he was serious, it was too late)?
"He who questions training trains himself at asking questions." - The Sphinx, Mystery Men (1999)
This is what you call a movie review? It seems more like a rant against Andy Kaufman/praise for Jim Carrey. than anything else. Besides Carrey is good, DeVito is good, this review hardly even mentions the movie. Maybe we should have a vote on whether Jon Katz should be allowed to continue to appear on Slashdot. This is ridiculous. .^
^.
Have you ever seen anything in professional wrestling that wasn't staged. C'mon, just watch the tapes of the matches. .^
^.
I wonder who he had to bribe to get that signed.
.^
^.
I think one of the most eloquent that Andy said and actually pulled was something to the effect of...
"Laughter puts to much pressure on the audience, I want to effect them from the gut without knowing why or what is happening to them."
It wasn't about comedy or song and dance. Andy didn't let the audience get away with just having fun. Laughing is just a reaction to stimuli, it's not a life changing experience. He wanted everyone to step back and look at themselves and realize it was all an illusion. The comedy comes from letting people think that it's real. The punchline is for the people who get it and are able to look at the animal in themselves, based on the reaction of those that don't understand.
Everything Andy did was purposeful and exact. He wanted people to not like him, or think he was mediocre. John Katz article was just the punchline of Andy's joke... a perfect example of mediocre, normal response to well defined and orchestrated stimuli.
Jonathan please listen. Andy Kaufman is a comedic genius. We still cannot even today understand the levels his mind worked at. Please do not disgrace his legend and memory by saying that Jim Carey of all people even compares to him.
"...even though Jim Carrey is already much more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman, the man he portrays..."
How much do you want to bet that there will never be a movie about Jim Carrey's life?
In the movie Andy died, then the next scene Andy is up on stage. How does that work?
Did I miss something?
I see a slight parallel between Kaufman's insistance on the audience's intellectual integrity and Richard Stallman's insistance on "freedom"...doesn't RMS (and GNU in general) do the same thing with people's right to use software? People just want to make their computers run...shouldn't we give them the right to pay for something if they want to (even when we can see that it's a ripoff)?
:-)
Hmm..no. RMS is right and so was Kaufman.
-- Merc "And you thought you were your own worst critic."
LouZiffer
LouZiffer
In Katz's defense, the 'O' is next to the 'I' on the keyboard. So maybe he's just clumsy instead of an idiot.
"Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
While you argue that Jim Carrey may be more "grounded" than Kaufman was, you're missing something. THAT WAS THE POINT. IMHO, no one ever was, or ever will be what Andy Kaufman was. Sure he pushed limits and frequently crossed lines but he wouldnt have done it any other way. Honestly comparing Carrey and Kaufman is not even something that can be accurately done but dont confuse his contraverciality with his genius.
God Fucking Damnit
""Man In The Moon" may be the best holiday movie of the year so far, even though Jim Carrey is already much more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman, the man he portrays."
HUH!? Andy Kaufman was the original, the classic! Carrey is just a recent upstart. Sure he's good, in a Jerry Lewis slapstick sort of way, but saying that, while still alive, he has a greater comedic legend than Andy Kaufman is heresy.
Get out. Never do movie reviews again, you curmudgeon.
Jazilla.org - the Java Mozilla
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
It's obious John has missed the point, Yet a lot of the people who saw the movie missed the point too. These were the people who hated Kaufman when he was alive because they couldn't tell it was a joke. Anyway, Ebert's Review is somewhat better, check it out instead to decide if you want to see this movie(Do go even if you don't like Jim Carry, you actually forget that it's him after a couple of minuets).
C'mon, moderators, this is about the funniest, most subversive, Kaufman-like posts amongst the 'Jon Katz Sucks!' and Carrey vs. Kaufman ejaculations making the rounds.
Might I recommend (Score: 3, Funny)?
RKIELFIX.NLM: 312 patch to fix Richard Kiel memorial abend # 27 message
And in the past weeks I've been receiving letters from kids who have been kicked out of school for wearing Andy Kaufman and Copyleft shirts because of post-Columbine paranoia. And don't blame the Blair Witch Project either! It's the most original movie in years, er, I mean, it's overhyped!
grep -ri 'should work'
you know, when you log in, you can customize the page so you don't have to read reviews. anonymous wienie!!
I guess some people think Kaufman was some kind of comic genius, just like a lot of French people seem to think Jerry Lewis was actually funny. They are entitled to their opinion, of course.
My first recollection of Andy was in some kind of second-rate TV talent show (not the Gong Show). He walked on stage and set up one of those old-fashioned record players. Remember the ones with tubes and built-in speaker that we listened to when "doing the hokey pokey" in grammar school? Anyway, he played a record that had someone else talking with spaces where he could talk back. For its time, maybe that was innovative. Maybe. Then he sang a song, I think it was "Old McDonald had a farm".
Now fast-forward to Saturday Night Live and Taxi. I don't remember which came first, but his role in Taxi was not really that annoying, but nothing special either. Just another supporting role. Nothing to compare with Danny DeVito, Christopher Lloyd in my opinion. In SNL, the only parts I remember is where he just would not shut up about being able to out-wrestle any woman. He challenged any woman to the ring to prove him wrong. Yawn. Annoying.
Mercifully, he disappeared from my radar shortly afterwards, and only blipped back a couple times since. He announced that he had adopted a whole bunch of children, to show what a decent human being he was. He was dying from some disease. Then he faked his death, apparently to find out how much people would care once he was gone. Then he re-appeared. Then he died.
Maybe he was a really decent guy in real life. I just know the small pieces of him that he flung at us, and I did not really enjoy the experience. Rest in peace, Andy, but I will not shed a tear.
A dingo ate my sig...
Nuts. "The Cable Guy" was definitely risky -- it
failed, and the movie blew chunks, but it was definitely a gutsy move on Carrey's part. "The Truman Show" had many problems, foremost the cop-out ending, but Carrey's performace was strong there. "The Mask," of course, played directly into his talents and he shone there (and it remains Cameron Diaz' best flick barring "My Best Friend's Wedding" -- the woman cannot pull off lead roles to save her life).
Kaufman gloried in deliberate obscurantism, and committed the one unpardonable sin: deliberately boring the audience. He's an interesting biographical study, if only because he was so fucked in the head, but really -- Carrey's more entertaining.
gomi
At times I was not sure, if i was watching Jim Carrey or watching Jim Carrey playing the role of Kaufman.
I know I'm rambling, but you have to see the fact that Kaufman's act was _so_ much more than what you see on the surface. He was constantly experimenting, and he was different. It was his difference, not his act, that people chose to hate, as many do when faced with something they do not know and are not willing to look into.
I had a point, but I have no idea if I hit it... sorry to have taken up your time.
----- this is my sig, do you like it?
WARNING:POSSIBLE PLOT SPOILERS
I swear Andy Kaufman came back from the dead just to screw with my mind:
I saw MotM at the last showing on opening night at Clarksville, IN's River Falls Cinemas. Those of you who've seen the movie, please remember that in the begining of the film "Andy" addresses the audience, telling them he's cut out the sad parts (or something like that), and then rolls the credits. Now fast forward to where they are sitting in the restaurant where he tells his agent and girlfriend he has cancer. Just as he makes the announcement, our film broke! We're sitting there in the dark watching burnt edges of celluloid, wondering when the "joke" is going to be over.
And we waited.
And we waited some more.
Now we're wondering if that's how the movie ends, seeing as how the credits were at the beginning. Finally someone alerted the management, the film was stopped, and the lights came on. We're STILL not sure if the movie is simply over, or if something really did happen to the film.
Then, one of the managers came in, said the film had shit the bed (my words, not hers), and gave us all cheezy looking re-admit tickets. Give the way Kaufman seemingly loved to torment his audiences, I couldn't be positively sure the tickets weren't just a stunt (like smell-o-rama, pokemon trading cards, and 3-D glasses) until I'd checked out IMDB's user reviews later that night.
Leaving the theater I was thinking: If that's not the way the movie ends, then it damn well SHOULD be!
Mr. Katz, before reviewing a movie, please make sure you know what the name of the movie is.
This one is called Man on the Moon
The movie you reviewed, Man in the Moon, was made in 1960. And it wasn't nearly as funny.
--
What happens when you outlaw guns
Kaufman flirted with various meditative and holistic groups and practices...
I heard a radio interview of Zmuda by Terry Gross on Fresh Aire a few months ago, and to hear Zmuda tell it, Kaufman did much more than flirt. He was for many years a dedicated practitioner of Transcendental Meditation, and was in fact part of the upper echelon / inner circle of the TM movement in the US. This was true before he was a celebrity and continued afterwards (with periodic breaks, apparently, when he was "in character" as Tony Clifton for days at a time).
Does anyone know if this is true, or just another of Zmuda's games?
Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
I'm not sure how being on the cover of Time equals being "ignored by the media." Truman Show was hyped through the roof, if you'll recall, and while I thought it was pretty good, Carrey's acting honestly just proved that he didn't have to be Ace Ventura all the time. He didn't really do much special other than that. Man on the Moon, IMHO, is the first time that Carrey has actually proven that he can actually act, and therefore it's the first movie that he actually deserves an Oscar nomination for.
-jacob
You list some of my favorite movies. I suppose you don't like the Austin Powers movies either, because of their stupid humor. Come on... stop taking everything so seriously. Sheesh, you probably don't even like Monty Python's humor.
SpamapS -- Undernet #Linuxhelp
I have long been an Andy Kaufman fan. Maybe one of the reasons for this is that I came upon him after the fact. Probably not too many Slashdotters actually remember Andy Kaufman, and went through what he put his audiences through.
I am not sure if I would have liked him so much back in the late 70's or early 80's... but I like to think I would have.
I think Katz is off by even trying to compare Jim Carey to Andy Kaufman, saying that Carey is already bigger than Kaufman. Of course he is... Jim Carey is by all means a conventional comedian (I happen to love him though), he has in no ways pushed or challenged conventional methods or barriers or brought any new aspects to comedy or acting. Kaufman did. I tend to agree with Kaufman's view that he was more of a performing artist than a comedian. Just like any succesful artist (of any medium), he painted emotions... and I can scarce come up with anyone else who could so succesfully bring out such a wide range of emotions out of an audience.
We know how many comedians have been influenced by Andy Kaufman and consider him a genius... how many future ones will think the same thing of Jim Carey (and consider him a genius)? So by no means is Jim Carey bigger than Andy Kaufman... at least in my book.
Andy Kaufman's comedy was in pushing people's buttons. With your ridiculous rambling about Jim Carrey, you have paid perfect tribute to a man we barely knew until it was too late.Great job!
...because like the acronym "gnu", Kaufman's "comedy" (it isn't the right word for what he did, but what is?) was recursive.
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
Do you remember seeing him where he stood there and told these awful broken jokes, flopped, sweated, failed? Remember that terror in his eyes? That act sucked me in completely. God I was scared half to death. Fucking guy was a genius, I tell you.
Carrey's pretty good, too, though I don't rate him half as high as the fearless Katz. (As the fearless Katz does. Let's not rate Katz yet for a few years.) I don't much like the movies but I can't wait to see this thing.
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
I was listening to the radio the other day and I heard a clip in which Michael Stipe of REM says that he was opposed to Jim Carrey playing Andy K, but that he "was proved wrong" (in his own words).
Anybody else catch this quote?
Why not default all replies to Katz articles to (-1, Flamebait) to save moderators their precious points? The number of moderator points that have been wasted trying to keep people who browse at 1 or higher from noticing that half of the people who post on /. hate Katz must be staggering.
-=Best Viewed Using [INLINE]=-
i could also enjoy a lively debate over which is/was the better performer, carrey or kaufman.
however, it is not possible to call carrey a bigger legand than kaufman (regardless of your feelings or opinions) based on the simple fact that the world has been talking about kaufman for 30 years.
i personally enjoyed the film, because for years i have been trying to figure out if i love andy or hate him (some of the things he said about women in the late 70' and early 80's made my skin crawl)...
but watching the film helped me make up my mind (and not because of carrey's acting nor because of zmuda's spin on it all). i realized that you can't help but admire the fact that whether serious or joking- damn, that guy was committed. i mean he started someting and carried it through, fully invested. that's pretty amazing.
The whole point of the movie was that maybe some of us just didn't get the joke. As this review shows, maybe some of us never will. Nobody had done what Andy Kaufman had before he did it, and that is one of the many reasons to call him a comic genius. Jim Carey's comedy and talent can't be compared to Kaufman. They are so divergent in what they attempted and attempt that only a tool would attempt to compare them. They were both great to have around and masters of what they attempted to achieve, but can't really be compared beyond that.
Was the call-in vote on SNL overwhelmingly in favor of booting Kaufmann? I watched a documentary recently and seem to remember that it was only a few thousand votes in favor of 'no Andy'. No big deal, but Katz implies that it was a landslide.
What if the Hokey-Pokey really is what it's all about?
I'd disagree on that point-- which is to say that the comedy industry has spawned just such an indistry. Checkout the comedy cavalcades featured on late-night cable (BET has several such shows, as do most interstitial channels.) Most comedians below the level of supa-dupa-star (stars such as old Robin Williams or current Garafalo (sp?)) seem to hover somewhere in the range of "that one guy who swallowed a fetal pig's heart in high school bio class."
Much Love,
"S"HM
*****
(I refuse to spellcheck out of contempt for your belief system)
What it boils down to is this: much as Barth writes meta-fiction (that is, fiction that is not just about the story's characters, but also about itself as a work of fiction, an artifical experience written on a page) Kaufman (sp?) was a meta-comedian. His act wasn't just about being funny, but examining how things are funny and how we find them to be funny. In this sense, yes, the man was certainly an artists. But, that by no means is to say that he was especially aesthetically appealing or all that much of a blast.
Again, just the opinion of one guy who isn't a comedian.
Much Love,
"S"HM
*****
(I refuse to spellcheck out of contempt for your belief system)
isn't this movie entitled "Man _on_ the moon"?
> I think Jim Carrey is perhaps one of the most
> over hyped "actors" of the nineties. Not only is
> he a BAD actor, but he is not very funny.
Well I have to agree that he is WAY over-hyped.
However, I can't say that he is a bad actor.
So far it seems that in every movie I have seen
him in, he basically plays the same character.
All of them have basically been wild comedies
of one sort or another that feature his brand
of humor.
Basically, the roles he has been in so far have
been way too shallow to gauge any sort of acting
ability. Put Cary in a lead role in Hamlet and
see him act, then I will tell you if he is a bad
actor or not.
I have yet to see this Man On the Moon movie,
I have a feeling this role may be the first one
of his that is deep enough to truely get an idea
of his abilities. (deep enough in that Andy
Kaufman had a completely differnt personality than
Cary does) .
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
It is very obvious why some people like Man on The Moon and why some people do. Kauffman was a character that you either loved or hated. For the most part he was hated, but I think that this movie aims to give the viewer a look back at Andy's life and then decide again what you think of him. To look at him as an artist and see what he was doing. I think that although he might not have been humorous all the time, he was entertaining. Perhaps even a genius.
What I'm about to say may shock and amaze y'all:
Jim Carrey is a hell of an actor. I said *actor*, not *comedian*. Though he's not bad at that either.
Anybody who hasn't done so, I highly recommend The Truman Show. Came out last year and was pretty much ignored by the media and the people who give out awards. His performance there is amazing, and he was robbed of a Best Actor nomination.
I plan to see this movie too, even though I have no idea who Andy Kaufman was -- had to ask my dad about him. Since I don't know the history of this guy, I'll have to judge the movie based on his acting, right? It's hard to forget Dumb and Dumber, but we should try a bit harder.
"Honey, it's not working out; I think we should make our relationship open-source."
Katz, I don't rag on you usually - I mostly watch others do it, but here is my turn.
Andy Kaufman was great in that he apealed to high humor - innuendos, human behavior, mass group think, irony. Jim C, on the other hand, deals mainly with slapstick. A whole different type of humor. Andy Kaufman aimed for a gut laugh not the silly oh-he's-so-cute-and-silly laugh which Jim C. aims for.
I saw a clip of Andy Kaufman reading pages and pages of The Great Gatsby from the beginning. After awhile the audience booed. Andy told the audience to not be so rude there is still a long way to go. This is a form of situational comedy.
Also his wrestling spree was an attempt to delve into human behavior - creating a villan, worse than Iago of Shakespear's Othello. Not anything fake like wrestlers of today but a man who seemed on and off camera a villan - he hated women and everyone was convinced of that except for Andy Kaufman.
The movie did not do Andy Kaufman justice, once again your review is flawed. It didn't catch Andy Kaufman's attempt at discovering what entertainment is. It was a shallow attempt to discover Andy Kaufman and reminds one of a bad 6th grade report on flamingos.
I got most of my information from the web and from a documentary I saw on Andy Kaufman. Obviously Katz once again didn't do his homework and his mental capacities sure as hell didn't help. Please, fire Katz before his moronic posts do any more damange.
2 years and no mod points. Join reddit. Because openness is good.
Like it or not, THAT is talent.
Rather, THAT is a part written specifically for Jim Carrey's all too predictable brand of comedy.
Shinma
I haven't rushed out to see Man On The Moon yet. I doubt that I will.
I remember watching Kaufman on television as a kid. He wasn't entertaining, just ridiculous.
As for Jim Carrey, I'm not a big fan. Another reason to not run out to see MOTM. I'll admit that Jim Carrey can be a talented actor, but slapstick isn't my thang.
I've read a lot of posts that say things like, "I don't like Jim Carrey, but I liked the Truman Show." There was nothing special about Carrey's performance in that film. ANY actor could have done just as well. On the other hand, I doubt that there is anyone else who could have played the Cable Guy.
Like it or not, THAT is talent.
cheers,
Really? From my admittedly limited experience with foriegn cinema and television, it seems that America is the country that has the hardest time with people pushing the limits. Have you seen films by Monty Python, John Woo, Jeunet and Caro, or Anime/Manga? And those are just examples that us Americans can tolerate. I've seen foriegn stuff that could never fly over here.
Also, Milos directed Amadeus, who was a non-American eccentric genius. No mention?
Just my 2 cents :)
Why does /. associate itself with someone who is does such a shitty job of reporting on ALMOST ANYTHING.
/. As a writer, he is about as worthless as I am.. And I'm pretty damn bad.
"In the real world" Any writer who did a movie review and couldn't even get the movie's title correct would be out the door.
Granted, you probably do not have the editorial staff that, say, CNN has but one would expect that something as important as the movie title could be correct in your review.
To reitterate someone else's question..
KATZ?! DID YOU EVEN SEE THIS MOVIE!?
I sure as hell hope you don't pay this loony anything to write for
You are a threat to free speach and must be SILENCED!
Fish! LipHo
Jim Carrey is a brilliant comic Actor capable of, and apparently willing to, anything to get a laugh.
Andy Kaufmann was Comedy Incarnate. He did things that I don't think any other comedian would even contemplate. It takes balls to make your act nothing more than reading 'The Great Gatsby', turning the incensed audience into the joke.
Some people have a way with words, and some people, um, thingy.
The name of the movie is Man ON the Moon, not Man in the Moon. Oh, well. But who cares anyway?
I think the greatness of someone can be related to how much influence they have after they die. People say Charlie Chaplin and you automatically know who they are talking. You bring up Andy's name and people scratch there heads until you say "Latka" from taxi. I think Jim C. is doomed to have the same fate. I liked some of his first films, but after a while it just seemed like every scene was the same old rehashed Fire Marshall Bill/Ace Ventura slapstick. It just wasn't funny. I enjoyed Truman because it was the first time in a long time that he didn't do the same old character. And from what I understand it was the director who pretty much kept him in check and left the adlib on the cutting room floor. I will admit that he nailed Andy's character right on. However, as other /. posts have noted, he was already basing a lot of his comedy on Andy. In short, I thought Andy was an Idjit back in the 70's. I fear if I see the movie in the theater that Comedy Central will decide they need to play more Andy Kaufman material. Maybe even dig up all the old wrestling tapes. Ugh!
"milking toilet humor"
Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
Or at least, he never saw himself as such. He considered himself a performer - more than he wanted to push boundaries, he really wanted to perform. Even in his big comic successes like the Carnegie Hall show, he wasn't trying to be funny during probably 90% of the stuff the audience was laughing at. He was there to perform - to entertain - the same way he had been entertained by TV shows like Howdy Doody etc. when he was a child. Was he funny? Absolutely, but not exclusively.
This is just Jon Kats doing his Andy Kaufman type bit. He's just trying to piss you all off because he enjoys the negative response/attention.
It probably doesn't hurt that he's making slashdot quite a bit of money in ad revenues.
Oh and I suppose it's not truely ironic..but we'll just say Kats is doing this for the sake of irony...
I find it humorous that Katz would make a statement such as this. In fact, I found nearly *everything* Katz said in his "review" humorous.
Allow me to explain. Judging from Katz's comments of Kaufman, it would seem that he has fallen into the same trap that Kaufman critics have been falling into for years...and would also lead me to believe that he didn't *really* pay that close attention to the film (Man *IN* the Moon???)
"...he became obsessed with pushing the boundaries..."
Became? It would appear to me (after having actually watched the film) that Andy was obsessed with pushing the boundaries of what people would accept way back when he was a child, performing to the wall.
"He taunted women, working-class whites, and Southerners in particular, constantly challenging his audience to figure out what was a joke and what wasn't."
Hmmm...doesn't really sound *any* different than what any of the scripted bad guys say and do on every episode of WWF RAW. Yet you don't hear Katz whining about any of those guys. In fact, I found Kaufman very reminiscent of the modern professional wrestlers...if not the predecessor.
Katz doesn't seem to be able to differentiate between one of Kaufman's characters (in this case his wrestling persona) and that of the "real andy kaufman."
"They overwhelmingly voted to kick him out..."
Poor Katz. Kaufman was only "overwhelmingly kicked out" in the movie. In real life, the vote was much closer. Andy lost 195,544 to 169,186.
"Although he was wildly popular on 'Taxi' as the odd-sounding 'Latke...'"
Uh...its LATKA!
"Kaufman flirted with various meditative and holistic groups and practices, none of which did him any good when he was diagnosed as having a fatal form of lung cancer. "
This sentence irritated me more than the rest of Katz's "review" did.
Flirted? Kaufman was incredibly serious about his transcendental practices...even the movie was clear in showing how hurt Kaufman was when he was asked to leave the group.
None of his practices did him any good? Maybe it was because by the time his cancer was detected it was incurable and, in fact, not even modern medicine was of any use to Andy.
Mr. Katz, its one thing to attack a movie or a character in a movie, its another thing entirely to attack the personal choices of Kaufman.
As I alluded to earlier, its almost as if Katz didn't even pay attention (or watch it at all...)
He could have told us specifically why the movie was one of the best of the year, but instead he merely tells us generic examples of how he believes Carrey to be better than Kaufman.
That said, I still don't see how watching a movie gives Katz poetic license (or any license whatsoever) to criticize the real Kaufman's religious/spiritual choices.
Very low ball...even for JK.
Come on, Tinkler, Tink!!
Upside: Snappy pacing, good cinematography, excellent makeup and acting job by JC, well written story, pleasant to watch, funny moments, not overly long...
Downside: WTF is Andy Kaufmann?, not a remarkably great movie you'll be dying to see again, no natalie portman, courtney love has nothing to do, movie doesn't get real deep inside what made AK tick...
-troll taker
JonKatz couldn't even get the name right much less do a decent review of the movie. To say that "Kaufman was a mess, even by contemporary celebrity standards" is ridiculous. Lets see he wasn't a drug addict, wasn't hopping in and out of beds, wasn't punching out photographers. I'd say he was pretty sain by todays standards. Also comparing Andy to Larry Flint is a bit of a stretch. Larry Flynn is pornmonger not a performance artist as Kaufman was. I wonder if you even know what a performance artist is because it is certainly different than a comedian. Why the stab about Andy's interest in meditative and holistic groups and practices. If you have Fatal Lung Cancer nothing can help you anyway. So who cares maybe it gave him some peace of mind.
Thank you Jon Katz, for yet another article about stuff that doesn't matter. I eagerly await your Slashdot "ShowBiz" column.
Carrey a comedic genius? Not so much. He is rather funny, and has the facial range of several well-drawn cartoon characters, but he's not a genius.
Lenny Bruce, Bill Hicks, Bill Murray, John Belushi, hell, even Denis Leary if you can forgive him for the Quaker State commercials, they are comedic geniuses. Jim Carrey is simply good at making faces.
This is not to say I do not find Jim funny. I do, and often. But I also find George Bush funny. Doesn't make him a comedic genius.
You wonder if Andy would have "stooped so low"? Andy Kaufman wasn't exactly fond of Taxi but he did it in order to gain exposure and enhance his career. Jim Carrey did the same thing. Before Ace Ventura I didn't even know who Jim Carrey was. Then when I heard that he was going to play a serious role in the Truman Show I jumped on a chance to see how he would handle it. If I had never heard of Jim Carrey before I may not have seen the movie as quickly. Jim just did the same thing that Andy did and gained exposure so that he would be able to land larger and better roles in other movies.
-----
The review was not making a comparison between Larry Flint and Andy Kaufman. It was referring to the fact that the director, Milos Forman, has made movies about both of them, and they are/were both people surrounded by controversy.
-----
One thing about this movie that impressed me and made me want to see it was the way it was made. Jim Carrey was devoted to making this movie as real as possible. While on the set of the movie Carrey was always in character. He was never himself. He was always trying to stay in the mood that made Andy act the way he did.
Also, when the movie was being made it was rumored that Jim Carrey had suffered an actual neck injury at the hand of Jerry Lawler, the wrestler who supposedly broke Kaufman's neck in real life. This rumor was the kind of thing that Kaufman lived for. He wanted people to wonder when he was telling the truth and when he was playing a role.
In conlusion, I think that even if you weren't a fan of Kaufman, but were aware of the kind of person he was, you would enjoy this movie. Jim Carrey did an excellent job in the role and I think that his performance alone merits seeing this movie.
-----
Most of the things i've read from this thread are "I'm not going to see this movie because I'm closed minded"
You'd think that this community would be a little bit against closed mindedness like this, like you guys claim to have issues with "traditional" (microsoft) business values and theories, as well as "traditional" OS's and other ideologies. my $0.02
There *is* a program I enjoy using on windows... It's called FDISK.
The Smoking Gun obtains public documents like celebrity arrest records, autopsy reports, etc. and puts them up on the Web. They have posted a copy of Andy Kaufman's death certificate here.
[command INSERTWITTYQUIP failed: insufficient wit]
I find it amusing that much of the audience that I watched the movie with did not really understand ut, and left saying, "I don't get it." The background comments of people, which normally would offend me, along with their utter confusion, gave me a sense of what it must have been like to have been at one of Andy's shows. Funny how the movie vexed the audience much how Andy used to.
There is a documentary style film on Kaufman called 'I'm From Holloywood'
It shows on Comedy Central every once in a while. It shows the real (although everyting with Kaufman was almost an illusion) footage from the wrestling matches, and the TV shows.
The movie does a great job of recreating these scenes.
I've always thought that Jim Carrey was an artistic genius...with his ad-lib skills an absolute kookiness, he deserves more respect than he gets.
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.