The hardy bucks movie

Corkfeen

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Irish media often tend to over hype how Irish movies do in the US.

When we are told that an Irish film has "taken America by storm" it usually means that it ran for a week in some art house cinema in Boston.

Most foreign films get limited releases to be fair. A better gauge is to check how US reviewers responded and going by the critics reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, it went down rather well with them so the humour appears to be exportable. It also got Brendan Gleeson a best actor nomination in the Golden Globes.

In terms of how much it made stateside, it was 5.4 million according to RT. In Bruges was a far more accessible film but only made two million more. The Guard made a respectable sum for a film that wasn't designed for US audiences. I don't expect anything of the sort from The Hardy Bucks.(I do find them entertaining though) :pac:

Galvasean

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Irish media often tend to over hype how Irish movies do in the US.

When we are told that an Irish film has "taken America by storm" it usually means that it ran for a week in some art house cinema in Boston.

Based on IMDB it made just shy of €5 and a half million at the US box office. Can't find figures for elsewhere, but since the movie cost €6 million to make I'm guessing it probably just about broke even overall.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1540133/business

Miguel_Sanchez

Galvasean wrote: »

Based on IMDB it made just shy of €5 and a half million at the US box office. Can't find figures for elsewhere, but since the movie cost €6 million to make I'm guessing it probably just about broke even overall.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1540133/business

It made a profit definitely. It took over 2 million in Ireland alone. I heard that it was biggest box office success for an Irish film ever.

Galvasean

€2 million in Ireland? That's very impressive.

JP Liz V1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEJganhFanM

Looks like is it out here 21st of February

constitutionus

gotta be honest.

it looks fecking awfull.

but then again i never liked the show so i suppose im not its audience. i was cringing during the trailer in VUE last week.

ManFromCheese

they are the mostunfunny fcukers to grace our tvs since katherine lynch

afatbollix

Cute hours tho getting paid to head off to Poland for the Euros.. Smart feckers.

IncognitoMan

ManFromCheese wrote: »

they are the mostunfunny fcukers to grace our tvs since katherine lynch

I dont think anyone deserves to be compared to katherine lynch.

chuckliddell

so basically its dude where's my car/road trip/the hangover in a camper van?

i'll give it a chance, good to see Irish lads giving it a go!!

best of luck to all involved

VEN

sore jaw comedy, tries too hard to be funny, anything from the wesht should stay in the wesht - crap.

403 Forbidden

VEN wrote: »

sore jaw comedy, tries too hard to be funny, anything from the wesht should stay in the wesht - crap.

I tend to agree. They had a budget of €300,000 and I am wondering where all the money went!

There are some good one liners in it but that's it. I haven't seen any Hardy Bucks Stuff and went straight in to see the movie. Maybe fans of the show will enjoy it.

ricero

Looking forward to this very much. I think if your not a fan or familar with hardy bucks you shouldnt see this movie, defintly one for the fans

Seedy Arling

It's one thing to watch a road trip based on lads acting that they are pissed off their heads, but's it's another thing having to watch the real thing.

I've seen the 'lads' around Galway occasionally and they have been a fair bit 'under the weather.' It wasn't very funny in real life.

AnonoBoy

flowrider04 wrote: »

I tend to agree. They had a budget of €300,000 and I am wondering where all the money went!

300,000 is small budget. Films cost money, crew, post production, advertising etc.

From the trailer it looks like they put all of the budget on screen.

Seedy Arling wrote: »

It's one thing to watch a road trip based on lads acting that they are pissed off their heads, but's it's another thing having to watch the real thing.

I've seen the 'lads' around Galway occasionally and they have been a fair bit 'under the weather.' It wasn't very funny in real life.

What's that got to do with the film though?

Seedy Arling

AnonoBoy wrote: »

What's that got to do with the film though?

I've seen them drunk and in very high spirits out and about in Galway. Don't think i'd bother paying to see it in a cinema. See quote below.

budgemook wrote: »

I met Eddie Durkan in Poznan where they were making the film. He was absolutely twisted and by all accounts was like that most of the time. I asked him how's making a film while drunk / hungover all the time. Makes it easier he said.

Mickeroo

Seedy Arling wrote: »

I've seen them drunk and in very high spirits out and about in Galway. Don't think i'd bother paying to see it in a cinema. See quote below.

So instead of judging the film on its own actual merits(or lack there of as the case may well be) you'd rather judge it on your dislike of/holier than thou attitude towards the people involved. Well, go you.

Seedy Arling

Mickeroo wrote: »

So instead of judging the film on its own actual merits(or lack there of as the case may well be) you'd rather judge it on your dislike of/holier than though attitude towards the people involved. Well, go you.

Well yeah, basically. I've met them in real life, thought they came across as being less than nice, particularly when they appear to have taken a few too many.

I'm just saying i wouldnt pay to see it. Not a holier than thou attitude. The Durkin character basically admitted that he was pissed all through the production.

I'd love to be paid to go on the piss and star in a movie too, but to be fair, i'd need a brass neck to fcuking expect anyone to pay to watch the end product.

And please don't ever call me holier than thou, ever again.

mikeym

Cant wait to see it im a huge Hardy Bucks fan

Mickeroo

Seedy Arling wrote: »

Well yeah, basically. I've met them in real life, thought they came across as being less than nice, particularly when they appear to have taken a few too many.

I'm just saying i wouldnt pay to see it. Not a holier than thou attitude. The Durkin character basically admitted that he was pissed all through the production.

I'd love to be paid to go on the piss and star in a movie too, but to be fair, i'd need a brass neck to fcuking expect anyone to pay to watch the end product.

And please don't ever call me holier than thou, ever again.

But you are being holier than thou, whether they were drunk or not during production or are nice people in real life has absolutely nothing to do with how good or bad the film actually is. Some directors have famously used drunk actors to their advantage and actors not being particularly nice in real life is nothing new either. This is a film like any other and deserves to be judged as such, if you don't want to watch it then thats entirely up to you of course.

AnonoBoy

Seems like people think Eddie Durkan is a real person. He's not, he's a character. If you hear him talking and he has a Mayo accent then he's in character as the actor has an English accent when he speaks normally.

It's a simple concept but seems to escape a lot of people.

Of course Eddie Durkan will say they just went on the lash across Europe - that's what his character would say. It doesn't mean it's true.

If you don't fancy seeing the film that's fine (not sure if I'll go to see it myself) but if actually believe that they made the whole film while drunk then you've very little understanding of how films are made.

Seedy Arling

Look, we're not talking that they are making Citizen Kane here. It's a road trip movie about a bunch of culchies going on the lash. Meeting them in real life left a bad taste in my mouth and to be fair in one individual instance there was no separation between the character on screen and that off. It's my opinion, like assholes we all have them. Some opinions are bigger than others around here it seems though.

Ciao ladies.

spodoinkle

Seedy Arling wrote: »

Well yeah, basically. I've met them in real life, thought they came across as being less than nice, particularly when they appear to have taken a few too many.

I'm just saying i wouldnt pay to see it. Not a holier than thou attitude. The Durkin character basically admitted that he was pissed all through the production.

I'd love to be paid to go on the piss and star in a movie too, but to be fair, i'd need a brass neck to fcuking expect anyone to pay to watch the end product.

And please don't ever call me holier than thou, ever again.

I met the boy who plays Eddie Durkin at the Rory Gallagher festival last year and he was mighty craic.

JohnFalstaff

AnonoBoy wrote: »

If you don't fancy seeing the film that's fine (not sure if I'll go to see it myself) but if actually believe that they made the whole film while drunk then you've very little understanding of how films are made.

Aki Kaurismaki maintains that he made half of his films sober and the other half drunk and that nobody can tell the difference.

Film crews are often filled with functioning alcoholics. Peckinpah was frequently drunk on set, the cast and crew of Easy Rider were off their heads.

So long as you aren't crawling on the floor, alcohol is no impediment to making movies.

AnonoBoy

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

Aki Kaurismaki maintains that he made half of his films sober and the other half drunk and that nobody can tell the difference.

A director being drunk and the actors being drunk are different things. I'm not denying that they probably had some craic while making it but I seriously doubt they're going to blow their shot at their first movie by being drunk the whole time.

Also there's none of them on that set that were as talented as Kaurismaki so I doubt they could do it drunk.

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

Film crews are often filled with functioning alcoholics.

Yeah they drink at night and work during the day. They don't drink while they're working - well the crew don't at least.

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

the cast and crew of Easy Rider were off their heads.

They were alright. And then Hopper went mental making his next one. So that's very productive alright!

So long as you aren't crawling on the floor, alcohol is no impediment to making movies.

Yeah, let's see a focus puller turn up on set drunk and see how long he lasts! :pac:

JohnFalstaff

AnonoBoy wrote: »

A director being drunk and the actors being drunk are different things.

Martin Maloney (Eddie Durkin) doesn't direct the Hardy Bucks.

AnonoBoy wrote: »

I'm not denying that they probably had some craic while making it but I seriously doubt they're going to blow their shot at their first movie by being drunk the whole time.

Lots of down time on film sets. I don't see why the actors wouldn't get pissed if it helped them stay in character for when the cameras roll.

AnonoBoy wrote: »

They were alright. And then Hopper went mental making his next one. So that's very productive alright!

The Last Movie is a great film... up there with Out of the Blue.

Many great artists get branded as being 'mental'.

PTH2009

just saw it there. good movie with some funny laughs but the

best laughs may be over if they do a new series because Viper and Eddie are of good friends now because Viper saved Eddies life by switching the hash with the porn mags.

Id give it a 7.5/10.

I think it will do well with the fans and the student/teen market

budgemook

Looking forward to this

IncognitoMan

Saw it tonight. I thought it was very good. Couple of brilliant one liners.

Very surprised they managed to make it for 300k. I've seen a lot of films with multiple times that budget that come nowhere near this.

shanered

cant wait to see it now, sounds alright!