They Came Together (David Wain)

[pro-bassoonist]

They Came Together Blu-ray



NEWS/TRAILER
https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=14467

Lionsgate Home Entertainment will release on Blu-ray director David Wain's comedy They Came Together (2014), starring Paul Rudd, Amy Poehler, Bill Hader, Ed Helms, and Christopher Meloni. The release will be available for purchase on September 2.

When Joel (Rudd) and Molly (Poehler) meet, it's hate at first sight: his big Corporate Candy Company threatens to shut down her quirky indie candy shop. Plus, Joel is hung up on his sexy ex (Smulders). Amazingly, they fall in love, until they break up about two thirds of the way through, and Molly starts dating her accountant (Helms). But then right at the end...well, you'll just have to see. (Hint: Joel makes a big speech and they get back together.).

Special Features:

"They All Came Together" featurette
Audio Commentary with Director/Co-Writer David Wain and Producer/Co-Writer Michael Showalter
Deleted Scenes
San Francisco Sketchfest Table Read

Pro-B

[Astro Zombie]

Still need to see this.

[tylergfoster]

When you see it, keep this fun bit of trivia that David Wain revealed to us before the SIFF screening of the film: Although the movie is about the two characters played by Paul Rudd and Amy Poehler, there's actually a third character in the film, and that's the city of New York City. It's like another character in the movie.

[Show spoiler]

[EthanRunt]

Hold on, so you're saying that in many ways the city of New York is like a character in the film? So this story revolves around Amy Poehler, Paul Rudd, and New York City which is like a character in the film?

[Astro Zombie]

Does NYC talk? How does he/she sound like?

[MrTwoArms]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

When you see it, keep this fun bit of trivia that David Wain revealed to us before the SIFF screening of the film: Although the movie is about the two characters played by Paul Rudd and Amy Poehler, there's actually a third character in the film, and that's the city of New York City. It's like another character in the movie.

[Show spoiler]

You can say that again.

FYI...David Wain is on Drunk History tonight.

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by MrTwoArms

You can say that again.

Tell me about it.

[Astro Zombie]

Just watched this, really enjoyed it. Some of the cameos were awesome too

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by Astro Zombie

Just watched this, really enjoyed it. Some of the cameos were awesome too

Now you understand what I mean.

[Show spoiler]The joke is repeated yet again in text form in the credits, a line thanking the City of New York, "which is like a character in the film." Wain pointed at the credit as it scrolled by.

[Astro Zombie]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

Now you understand what I mean.

[Show spoiler]The joke is repeated yet again in text form in the credits, a line thanking the City of New York, "which is like a character in the film." Wain pointed at the credit as it scrolled by.

Yeah, I understand now

[Bad Sandwich]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

Tell me about it.

Well, you came in here looking like crap, and you haven't said much.

[Dunemoon]

Sounds like a modern version of The Shop Around the Corner.

[lolwut]

There's already a thread for this:

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...+came+together

[Cliff]

As the producer of the They Came Together Blu-ray I have to say I'm supremely disappointed in Jeffrey Kauffman's review of the special features and would like to clear a few things up.

First... There is NOTHING "standard EPK" about the interviews in the disc's main making of piece, They All Came Together (short of perhaps the look of them). Every interview on this disc, including Paul Rudd and Amy Poehler, was conducted specifically and exclusively for the Blu-ray (which is more than most of these making ofs can claim). The making of touches on a great many details about the film's production including it's origin, a reading of the original script at the San Francisco Sketchfest, shooting in NY on a microbudget, comedy ensembles, a scene in the film having been shot by an iconic, Oscar-winning director, the movie's editorial rewrite where they added the dinner scene framing device at the last minute, and the reaction to the film when it premiered at Sundance. It's hard to create making ofs for comedies because you run the risk of either being too jokey without much substance or being TOO informational and taking things too seriously. I felt we straddled that line quite adeptly and I'm proud of the making of. In fact, we worked for several months conducting all of the new interviews, including shoots in LA and NY. This wasn't a case where we simply re-purposed and cut together a bunch of pre-existing EPK interviews.

Second... there are over 30 minutes of deleted and alternate scenes personally compiled by director David Wain. In fact, David was very involved throughout the production of the special features. There are some fantastically funny things that were cut from the film (assuming you liked the film in the first place).

Third... the video of the table reading was something shot in January 2012, before anyone knew if the film would ever actually be made. Yes, the video quality is questionable, but it was never shot with the intention to be used for anything and it contains a good half dozen comedians that don't even appear in the final film. It was only through considerable effort and time that we were able to clear it for use. It runs a good 20+ minutes longer than the finished film and it doesn't contain the dinner framing that the film does meaning it has tons of jokes, subplots, characters, and other material that never made it to final cut. It's like an alternate reality cut of the film. It's a minor miracle it exists at all and would be a fantastically unique inclusion on ANY release.

I normally wouldn't comment publicly on something like this, but we all worked extremely hard on this release and it was disheartening to see the special features receive 2 stars (the same as Blended, which contains about 36 minutes of superficial 1-2 minute features in TOTAL, while They Came Together contains nearly 4 hours including commentary). I could chalk it up to different reviewers reviewing on different scales, but Mr Kaufman's review of The Buddy Holly Story, which contains a commentary, isolated score and trailer ALSO rating 2 stars tells me differently. I'm left to believe that this is the all too common practice of judging a movie's bonus features through the tint of the reviewer's like or dislike of the film. I see TOO MANY reviews where a disc's supplemental package is punished because the reviewer doesn't like the film. I've always believed that things should be judged on their individual merits. Even a bad film can have good special features (Batman and Robin comes immediately to mind). I don't get all that upset by a review that calls out a feature I've produced as uninteresting or poorly done (particularly if they can externalize why they feel so). Just don't be dismissive because you can't be bothered to divorce your feelings of a film from the features that accompany it. To me, that is a far greater sin in the 'art' of reviewing.

[Bad Sandwich]

Daaayum Cliff is shuttin it dooown! Btw is Blended any good?? Lulz~

[Wernski]

Originally Posted by Cliff

As the producer of the They Came Together Blu-ray I have to say I'm supremely disappointed in Jeffrey Kauffman's review of the special features and would like to clear a few things up.

First... There is NOTHING "standard EPK" about the interviews in the disc's main making of piece, They All Came Together (short of perhaps the look of them). Every interview on this disc, including Paul Rudd and Amy Poehler, was conducted specifically and exclusively for the Blu-ray (which is more than most of these making ofs can claim). The making of touches on a great many details about the film's production including it's origin, a reading of the original script at the San Francisco Sketchfest, shooting in NY on a microbudget, comedy ensembles, a scene in the film having been shot by an iconic, Oscar-winning director, the movie's editorial rewrite where they added the dinner scene framing device at the last minute, and the reaction to the film when it premiered at Sundance. It's hard to create making ofs for comedies because you run the risk of either being too jokey without much substance or being TOO informational and taking things too seriously. I felt we straddled that line quite adeptly and I'm proud of the making of. In fact, we worked for several months conducting all of the new interviews, including shoots in LA and NY. This wasn't a case where we simply re-purposed and cut together a bunch of pre-existing EPK interviews.

Second... there are over 30 minutes of deleted and alternate scenes personally compiled by director David Wain. In fact, David was very involved throughout the production of the special features. There are some fantastically funny things that were cut from the film (assuming you liked the film in the first place).

Third... the video of the table reading was something shot in January 2012, before anyone knew if the film would ever actually be made. Yes, the video quality is questionable, but it was never shot with the intention to be used for anything and it contains a good half dozen comedians that don't even appear in the final film. It was only through considerable effort and time that we were able to clear it for use. It runs a good 20+ minutes longer than the finished film and it doesn't contain the dinner framing that the film does meaning it has tons of jokes, subplots, characters, and other material that never made it to final cut. It's like an alternate reality cut of the film. It's a minor miracle it exists at all and would be a fantastically unique inclusion on ANY release.

I normally wouldn't comment publicly on something like this, but we all worked extremely hard on this release and it was disheartening to see the special features receive 2 stars (the same as Blended, which contains about 36 minutes of superficial 1-2 minute features in TOTAL, while They Came Together contains nearly 4 hours including commentary). I could chalk it up to different reviewers reviewing on different scales, but Mr Kaufman's review of The Buddy Holly Story, which contains a commentary, isolated score and trailer ALSO rating 2 stars tells me differently. I'm left to believe that this is the all too common practice of judging a movie's bonus features through the tint of the reviewer's like or dislike of the film. I see TOO MANY reviews where a disc's supplemental package is punished because the reviewer doesn't like the film. I've always believed that things should be judged on their individual merits. Even a bad film can have good special features (Batman and Robin comes immediately to mind). I don't get all that upset by a review that calls out a feature I've produced as uninteresting or poorly done (particularly if they can externalize why they feel so). Just don't be dismissive because you can't be bothered to divorce your feelings of a film from the features that accompany it. To me, that is a far greater sin in the 'art' of reviewing.

I feel ya here. I often get the impression in DVD/ blu-ray reviews that the extras have been written up by a reviewer who hasn't watched them all the way through. Blu-ray.com is usually much better than most, but even here at times it's felt a little like the extras have been "needle dropped," and even as just a reader, not a content creator like yourself, I definitely feel like it's a disservice.

And now you've got me curious; I just added the Batman and Robin DVD to my Netflix que.

It's hard to create making ofs for comedies because you run the risk of either being too jokey without much substance or being TOO informational and taking things too seriously.

Oh yeah, "funny commentaries" can be the worst, especially if they never break character and start speaking authentically.

[lolwut]

The rating scale for Special Features on this site is unusually harsh. Blu-rays with lots of good special features get much lower scores than the PQ and AQ, even if there's nothing negative the reviewer says about them. With the exception of Criterion releases which get high marks in that area even if there are only a handful of special features.

[Cliff]

Originally Posted by lolwut

The rating scale for Special Features on this site is unusually harsh. Blu-rays with lots of good special features get much lower scores than the PQ and AQ, even if there's nothing negative the reviewer says about them. With the exception of Criterion releases which get high marks in that area even if there are only a handful of special features.

Agreed. If the ratings don't mean anything then how are they supposed to be interpreted? I agree about certain titles/labels seemingly being favored. Criterion's Harold and Maude contains a commentary, a 12 minute featurette and about 28 minutes of archival audio excerpts, yet rates a 4/5 for extras. Shout also seems to get love on occasion. The Shadow has a 23 minute featurette (the same as They Came Together), a trailer (the same as TCT), and a still gallery (but lacks TCT's commentary, 100 minute table read or 30+ minutes of deleted scenes) and rates a 2.5 from Mr. Kauffman versus TCT's 2/5. Yet he's less favorable to their Cat People, which gets the same 2.5 for having nearly 45 minutes of new interviews with cast and crew.

I guess I can't figure out if he and the rest of the reviewers are grading based on -number of features, -quality of features, -length of features, or just some random methodology that only they understand. Why, for example, does Captain America The Winter Soldier score 3/5 with a commentary and approx 22 minutes of features total (Kenneth Brown even comments on the light supplemental package) against Draft Day (another title I produced releasing this week) which contains a commentary, about 8 minutes of deleted scenes, trailer, a 10 minute featurette on the NFL Draft, and... oh yeah, a brand new, exclusively produced 60 minute documentary on the making of the movie featuring all-new interviews with Kevin Costner, Jennifer Garner, Ivan Reitman, the screenwriters, the editors, the VFX artists, the composer, and additional actors? Cause Draft Day also rated a 3/5. Is it JUST because it's Captain America or is it because Captain America breaks that 22 minutes up into 5 different pieces... creating the illusion of more content versus our decision to present a full, self-contained 60 minute making-of doc? It's frustrating because I respect Blu-ray.com and their reviews. Maybe I'm giving them too much credit.

[tedopolous]

Originally Posted by Cliff

Agreed. If the ratings don't mean anything then how are they supposed to be interpreted?

I'm totally with you. I've also wondered about the wild inconsistency in the extras score as well, indeed when it comes to some labels (one in particular).

[wormraper]

A common tactic is how they LIKE the special features. Many times if a reviewer finds the features boring that weighs heavily on their score. Kind of how if they don't like a movie it gets a lower rating. Same with the features. Its about how they view the perceived QUALITY of the features. Not the quantity

Different forums/magazines etc have different criteria on how to grade features while others allow their reviewers freedom to judge based on their own criteria individually