Wow.

[libertango]

Apparently there's a video tape titled, The Best of Will Farrell.

At first I wasn't sure whether the title was sarcastic. Then I saw that it was Volume I, and not a 45-second demo reel. Since this implies other volumes, I guess it also implies all sarcasm being unintentional.

Farrell, along with Chris Kattan, was one of the "stars" of the movie -- A Night at the Roxbury -- that gave akirlu and me a private-lexicon word: YAMAD. YAMAD stands for, Yet Another Movie About Dorks.

Most teen comedies tend to be YAMAD, though not all. Interestingly, Kevin Smith usually makes YAMAD, though of a very high order, proving the genre is not without redeeming features. But the crux of YAMAD is to show you a world where everyone is dorkier than you are, and thus reassure you that you're better off than you know. Deepest, darkest YAMAD, like Roxbury (whose trailer played entirely too many times at much better movies), frequently feature recent Saturday Night Live alums, and are produced by Lorne Michaels.

Comments

[photosexual.livejournal.com]

I can't remember a single SNL character movie that was worth the time it took to watch it. I guess I should clarify - when an SNL character is taken to the big screen, vs. the alum actors doing non-SNL related movies, it really can suck. Most of the things they do on the tv show are perfect for their limited situations and 10 minute bites. Put it in 2 hours, and it's old after the first 15 minutes, with actual entertaining movie content up to about 8 minutes, but spread over 2 hours.

I think there are some incredibly funny comedians/actors to come out of the SNL experience, but if all they do is what they succeeded at on SNL, their talent is wasted. Mike Meyers used to frustratedly make his own movies (or characters in them) from being denied by Lorne on SNL. Whether Mike's ideas were great, or crap, I admire the fact that he went beyond being "Wayne" in what felt like the first of the SNL bits gone to a full movie effort.

I remember shaking my head and wondering exactly why anyone would finance or back a move of "roxbury" since the whole appeal was idiots badly dancing and that worked questionably well as a re-occuring theme or repeating joke with various contexts on the tv show. I still haven't rented the movie, but just like my martyrdom in trying the "giant watermelon mocha, so you don't have to" I may watch the movie to learn a new level of bad.

[ckd]

I can't remember a single SNL character movie that was worth the time it took to watch it.

I'd have to say that Blues Brothers (the original, of course; there was no sequel. really. no sequel) was worthwhile. However, I can't think of a second example.

[photosexual.livejournal.com]

You got me there - The Blues Brothers was worthy, but also since it was far more fleshed out in theatre than it was when they were on SNL. Singing on TV vs. acting in the movie - and it wasn't seemingly so desperately done to cash in on a 5 second character and make it a bigger sensation with 2 hours of stretching to be entertainment. The Blues Brothers movie gave you a humorous look into what life must've been like for Jake and Elwood when they weren't singin' their ass off.

[cluefairy-j.livejournal.com]

Wayne's World.

[cluefairy-j.livejournal.com]

I bought the Best Of Christopher Walken SNL DVD for chris for christmas....

YAMAD as a genre....interesting. For me, tho, dork is a positive term. :-)