It is not with pride that I admit that part of the $30,000 box office take for The Boondock Saints came from my own pocket. I’d had friends on the Boston sets of the film, and the script super, who I’d worked with a lot, had told me some pretty fun stuff about Willem Defoe from her time in Toronto, where most of the film was shot. So when it opened up the street from me at the Somerville Theatre I was happy to plunk down a few bucks.
I was not, however, happy to stay in the seat. I’m still not sure why I didn’t walk out; Batman and Robin might be the only other film I’ve sat through while reminding myself every three minutes that I didn’t have to be there.
Skip forward a bit to the film’s DVD release, championed by Blockbuster, and eventual accumulation of a frantic, unlikely fanbase. With a mix of violence and self-aware gangster stylization, Boondock Saints became a prime cultural signpost. I know people who would happily associate with rapists and murderers, but not fans of this movie. (And vice versa.)
Now step forward to St Paddy’s Day 2008, when Duffy posted a video on YouTube announcing the completion of his long-simmering deal with Sony to produce a sequel, which he claimed would shoot this summer. This in on the heels of a mid-February blog from Duffy that promised ‘very fucking good news’ about the sequel in the next couple of weeks.
But the video has been pulled from YouTube (/Film has a copy archived for your pleasure) and so I’ve got to wonder about the actual status of the Sony deal. This is not the first time that a sequel has been ‘announced’, either. Duffy has been talking it up for years.
Word is that the last decade has mellowed Troy Duffy somewhat; I’m told he’s no longer the wanker he appeared to be in Overnight, the documentary about the making of his Boston gangster flick. I’ve also been told that Overnight is not quite as true as it would pretend to be. But in the words of Ed Tom Bell (“well, it’s true that it’s a story”) the doc is still one of the best cautionary tales you’ll find about filmmaking.
I expect a furious back and forth in the comments section about whether this news is salvation or akin to the birth of a two-headed Antichrist. I’m somewhere in the middle (but leaning towards the latter) but have to admit that a sequel shot a decade after the fact would represent a pretty great second chapter to one of the best indie filmmaking stories to come out of the Miramax years.
27 comments
"I expect a furious back and forth in the comments section about whether this news is salvation or akin to the birth of a two-headed Antichrist." naw he sux
I'll cop to being a pesudo fan of Boondock. I saw it first when I was very young, ( I feel ) and really dug it.
I pulled it out a few nights ago because my fiance has it on dvd, and I couldn't finish it.
I saw overnight too, so I couldn't help but feel sullied by the experience. I also couldn't help but notice the DRASTIC changes in tone that occur throughout the film. It was as if the director was spazzy and bipolar. Oh wait…
I'm pretty indifferent to this. I enjoyed the first film, but haven't felt the need to revisit it. If this does get made, I'll probably rent it just out of curiousity.
Overnight may or may not have been manipulative, but unless they CGI-ed Duffy behaving like Boston's biggest maggot, I'd say it's safe to assume they didn't need to do much to make him look bad. Put Boondock next to Gone Baby Gone, fuck put it next to Ted Demme's Monument Ave and it stands out as the chump's Boston movie.
Boondock is my St. Patrick's tradition, and watching it again last night I noticed more and more problems with it, but dammit if it still didn't entertain me something ridiculous. Yeah, Gone Baby Gone, Monument Ave., The Departed … they're far better movies … but Boondock has the swagger of a Greg Dulli joint and a casual "I don't give a shit" attitude that you can't buy …
I know he's a prick, but after the bullshit that was Overnight, about as cowardly and disingenuous a "documentary" as I've ever seen, I'm rooting for him a little, even though I could care less about his movie.
One time I went to a party in the mid 90's where I met a wanna be filmmaker. When I asked him what kind of movies he liked, he got a blank look on his face and after a while mumbled "Pulp Fiction". That was the first, but not the last time I got that response from somebody. What you get when guys like that make a "movie" is usually something like the Boondock Saints.
Two-headed antichrist. I thought I'd stepped into Bizzaro World when all my friends started trying to tell me how awesome BOONDOCK SAINTS was. Utterly intolerable.
Camperton, what were you looking for him to say? "I like joyous romps that are laugh-out-loud funny?" "I like heartwarming celebrations of humanity?" I don't want to defend anybody whose conscious ambition is to derive from Tarantino of all people, but let's be fair, here.
My brother and I have pretty much the same taste in movies, except he loves BS and I was depressed by how cheesy and bad it is. The only good thing about it: when Dafoe is explaining his theory on how the suburban murders took place and we see the action happening while he is there explaining it. That was clever filmmaking.
Get over it!! This movie was fun…end of story. I dont' anything about this filmmaker, i've never seen that doc…i just know that it was a good low budget romp through the absurd…i'll go watch a sequel if it looks entertaining…and thats just one of the prerequisites i ask for in a film…..
Still no Patrick Swayze? Fuck this movie!
I rather enjoyed the movie. It was bad, obviously, but it was a sort of insane 'fuck it, let's put on a show!' kind of bad that I can really enjoy. And like Friendo Calrissian said, there was at least one clever bit in there. Actually I thought there were several clever bits.
Anyways, all that aside, we don't want nor need a Boondocks 2: The Dockening (not the Dokkening). It's unnecessary and unless I am COMPLETELY wrong, it won't have anything to add to the "legacy" (loosely put, to be sure) of the first film.
I hope for a "Boondocks" sequel just so we can get a sequel to "Overnight". I would love to see this blowhard fall right on his ass again.
I find Boondock Saints to be a pretty enjoyable movie. I'm kind of surprised at all the hatred it's receiving here.
I'm so happy to discover that not everyone thought that Boondock Saints was fried gold like so many of my friends thought it was. I was mildly amused but I can't see myself watching a sequel.
The Boondock Saints was sub tarantino rip off crap at its very lowest. A complete load of shit. So forced and desperate. it deserved its fact as did the director.
It certainly does not deserve a sequel.
Reactionary trash that actually believed it's own bullshit. I can never beleive how many people thought this was great on video. I guess there's a thing about it being a word of mouth discovery; nobody really expects some straight to video title on the bottom shelf to have any redeeming features what so ever. So its occasional laugh and clever bit seemed like hours of mirth.
It really didn't seem to be having any fun with the idea of righteous catholic vigilantism though. It was deadly serious about that. The movie has Travis Bickle at its core and I think so does most of its fans
Willem Defoe was the only good thing about this movie. I knew this really hot girl who let me borrow this telling me that it was her favorite movie "EVER!". She had big jugs, I mean BIG ones, and I was struck by the fact that she was into "indie" cinema. I was thinking, damn this girl could be the one, if she is hot AND has good taste in movies. I would say this movie was the equivalent of me hooking up with her(which I never did), and when it came to taking off her panties finding a big hairy dick underneath, Crying Game style. After I saw this terrible movie, I lost all faith in her movie recommendations. Even those giant breast couldn't bring me back. Oddly enough, I met my future wife right after that and she is actually way hotter and loves good movies like No Country For Old Men, Kubrick, Hot Fuzz, etc. Thank you and fuck you for this movie.
When all my friends went off to college (I stayed home and become a community college townie), I started hearing about this thing. I swear, it's like dudes who move into a dorm are issued a box on condoms, an alcohol awareness pamphlet and The Boondock Saints. That's the audience it appeals to, though: 18-year olds whose tastes are maturing (but not yet mature) and who think the greatest movies in the world are Fight Club, American History X and Snatch. So they dig The Boondock Saints because its dark and sorta funny and violent and indie. Too bad it's a steaming pile of crap. Whenever somebody tells me how great a flick that is, I have to slap them silly and sit them down in front of actually good crime flicks.
Horrible, horrible movie. If you like this movie, you most likely buy all your clothes from Hot Topic and breath through your mouth.
Fight Club, American History X and Snatch are all good movies though. (Well more the first two than the latter, but still)
Boondock Saints forgettable mediocre.
Didn't love it, didn't hate it, but did enjoy it in a couch-and-pizza way. As for Duffy, I haven't seen Overnight and don't really plan to.
Truth is, most people hate this movie because others champion it so religiously. I loved "Overnight" (although anyone that thinks it is realistic is GRAVELY mistaken) and i cant deny Duffy's talent, but i wouldnt say hes a rian johnson or darren arronofsky. Hes a passable action director with style and anyone who says they cant have fun watching something like "Boondock Saints" and claims to be a fan of similar garbage like "Crank" or "Running Scared" (which this site champions religiuosly) is too conscious of what others think
I like what unknown user #24 has to say. I would love a logical/analytical explanation of why Crank and Running Scared are superb action movies and Boondock Saints is shit. Obviously for people to be so adamant, there must be an absolutely objective truth to the superiority of the two CHUD-faves and the inferiority of BS. (I'll show my bias: I enjoyed Boondock Saints a lot when I saw it at 18, it has diminishing returns though… Running Scared was great both times I saw it, and Crank was boring garbage. That's my subjective truth.)
I remember I liked bits and pieces of this movie when I saw it on video about a decade ago. It's not the worst film I've ever seen, but I don't understand why it seemingly has a strong cult following. I have no interest in the sequel, although I may check out that documentary.
I thought I was the only one who hates this movie. Every time I hear someone champion this flick I cringe. That's the problem with it, it isn't a spectacular movie at all, and it really makes me think less of anyone who recommends it. I mean this movie actually has the power to color my opinions of people I otherwise respect. Kind of an unfortunate litmus test. Crank for example, is a way better movie simply because it has no cult following. It doesn't really deserve one (and it doesn't aspire to gaining one). Neat premise, quick and light execution, in and out, done. BS on the other hand, filled with insincere even juvenile Boston pride, deserves a cult following even less. It's just a bad movie, moreso because some parts of it are kind of inspired, only to be shat upon by the other absurdly stupid parts in between. Willem Dafoe, detective in drag, just having a great time on set. Wasted! And it really pissed me off that a cameo by Billy Connolly as some legendary Irish super criminal badass had to happen in a movie that didn't deserve the novelty. I remember thinking what a cool idea, what the fuck is it doing here?
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.