Why does Sup Forums have such a hate-boner for this film...

Why does Sup Forums have such a hate-boner for this film? Is it because you're afraid normies are going to discover your secret le-spoons movie?

Yes.

Because James Franco isn't funny and does a piss poor Tommy. People have shit on and known about The Room for years, there's nobody acting like it's a secret club anymore.

Yes.
Also it wastes compelling and nuanced source material in Sestero's book

Because Franco is proven to be a bad director. Name one of his movie that is decent by your standard on top of your head. Doubting the movie is perfectly reasonable

>Why does Sup Forums have such a hate-boner for this film?

It's a really awful adaptation, so if you liked the book you probably won't like the movie. If you can ignore that or haven't read the book, there's a lot to like about it.

>secret le-spoons movie
the room hasn't been a secret for year senpai

I'm watching it right now. The post drink coitus and I'm a normalfag with a girlfriend and friends and shit

Yeah, I'm pretty sure Greg's bestselling book blew the lid on the secret club.

Because this place derives its worth from being counter to the mainstream opinion. To make matters worse, it's about Tommy Wiseau - a meme huge on Sup Forums before The Room ever became really famous.

>muh reference the movie

The ending where they just showed remakes of scenes from the room side by side to the original...cinematic masturbation.

75% of Sup Forums is faggot little kids. How can you take any opinion on here seriously. Unless you are part of this 75%...

Because James Franco a shit

I liked it, but didn't love it, quite disappointing after all the hype, but I wouldn't call it a bad film. Franco did a great job as Tommy and then film did a good enough job portraying Tommy correctly as a polarising figure, who switches from being sympathetic, to a complete asshole and back again.

My main problem is it didn't focus nearly enough on the actual production of The Room and how Tommy pissed off the cast/crew. There was no slow build up of Greg getting sick of Tommy's shit and they went with a really shitty hollywood happy ending.

Also the start and finish of the film sucked. I didn't mind the side by sides so much, but the talking celebrity heads and slideshow ending can fuck right off.

Also, this could probably be attributed to Tommy's autism preventing it from being filmed, but not including the chapter that spells out his backstory really frustrated me.

get off my board, normie

Tommy Wiseau was on Tim and Eric in like 2010.

>but not including the chapter that spells out his backstory really frustrated me.

Yeah maybe it was tommy having something to do with it, but also it's a problem how speculative all of it is. Greg sometimes gives multiple versions of each event, and says he doubts a lot of it happened, which makes it almost pointless to include.

Everyone here knows normies know all about The Room, right?

Daily reminder that these are the people who hate on Franco and the movie.

Did Ed Wood get the same treatment as this film?

I guess. There are some objective facts that can be discerned, like why Tommy has so much money to burn. In the book, when they do the reshoots in San Francisco, Greg learns about all Tommy's businesses. The film version of that event just seems so ridiculous in comparison.

Having a short flashback sequence at some point or a series of flashbacks, giving you a vague idea of Tommy's past would've been enough.

Red Letter Media hated The Disaster Artist and their word is sacred

Franco has always been a hack, I don't know why this is getting a pass.

>b-but I watched br2049 at the cinema.. Alone.. And liked it.

t. Didn't watch the movie

Ed Wood is a legitimately entertaining film on it's own right whether you know anything about the guy or not.

I'm not really sure who The Disaster Artist is aimed at. It does a good job at caputuring some of the craziness that fans of the film know, but it's a pretty poor standalone story, that's shallow and cheesy.

I'd say that it's okay, 6/10 really. The book was a lot more interesting and talked more about Tommy's supposed backstory.

Mike Stoklasa was right, this should've been a Todd Solondz movie

because Franco plays a shit Tommy and he always has to include his buddy Seth Rogen on whatever he's doing. (are these 2 joined at the hip or soemthing)

Both Mike and Jay were kinda on the fence. Disaster Artist is a classic case of having great source material to draw from, but a hack director/writer, so the end result is kinda mediocre.

>normies making fun of a mentally handicapped man following his dreams: the movie

t. James Franco

RLM didn't like it that much, and they can't go against their masters.

Am i the single human being that recognizes and is bothered by the use of the After Burner font on this movie? Fuck.

I watched it today and thought it was actually a very good impression, better than shown in the trailers.

You're not wrong. I knew going in that it would be difficult to fit all the build up in the book into your standard length movie, I thought they fit a lot in though.

I don't even hate it. Or dislike it. I just don't like it either.

It's so incredibly meh it could have passed me by and nothing would have changed for me.

So what is it ? Le ebin seth rogan dude weed comedy or drama or what ?

There are a lot of things wrong with the film, but in truth Franco's impression is one of the best things about it.

>no scene of Tommy lying his way into a restaurant and ordering a cup of hot water

missed opportunity

It was honestly a pretty good movie. Both of the Francos turned in solid, sympathetic performances. The supporting cast was inoffensive; it makes sense the script supervisor of a movie like this would be so schlubby Rogen-type. Overall it has a positive message about film and filmmaking, something I'm sure both the principals and Wiseau himself care for passionately. Am I wrong for thinking a lot of the criticism here is related to personal bias against the "pineapple express" crowd?

RLM said it best
>it feels like they made this movie just so James Franco could play Tommy wiseau and recreate scenes.

Not at all a stoner flick.
It's a light drama/biopic about Tommy Wiseau.

The movie does a good job of balancing him looking like a psycho vs. a tragic dreamer hero.

Biggest flaw of the movie is that it can't be enjoyed without seeing The Room first, and it's a bit overhyped, but overall it's a much more solid title than most shit you see advertised to you.

I'd recommend watching it, but this one will be on Netflix etc. within the first half of 2018.

Because Franco and Rogen seemed more interested in basically doing a shot-for-shot remake of The Room instead of properly adapting the book. Leaving out all the terrible shit Tommy did to the crew, for example, and how Greg was obviously using Tommy for money was lame.

I haven't seen it yet (doesn't come out in my country until early february and no torrents available of it this early), but I think the main point is that James Franco misunderstood the book

>everyone who has a different opinion than me is a nadzi

the book was great and well received here. movies are not normally as good as the book. also james franco

It was ok, but as someone who really loved the book, the liberties they took with the movie really did a disservice to Greg and Tommy’s relationship
>joining the movie because le best friend instead of for the ridiculous pay check
>not showing Tommy’s jealousy over Greg’s D-list success
>Not showing the original Mark and Tommy being an asshole to him
The list goes on, but Greg’s motivations were so cheap in the film and Dave was too short. Tommy clearly wishes he was Greg in real life, but there’s no way movie-Tommy would idolize Dave’s Greglet in the same way

Not really, it's more about the fact a lot of the more interesting and nuanced parts of the book were left out. Which probably has to do with the fact Tommy had to approve of it before it got made