UPDATE: Nathan Fielder denies these clearly unfounded rumors of trailer copying
The Curse rolled out a trailer poking fun at Powell and Sweeney's Anyone But You in less than 24 hours
Aux News Nathan Fielder
It’s been one whole day since Sony Pictures rolled out a new trailer for Anyone But You, its new Glen Powell/Sydney Sweeney rom-com, a promo vid that saw Powell and Sweeney doing a little “Oooh, they have chemistry in real life, too!” banter with some pre-roll bickering. Which leads us to a genuine question: How the hell did Nathan Fielder, Emma Stone, and Showtime’s The Curse get together so goddamn fast to drag their asses in response?
Because it was pretty much exactly 24 hours later that The Curse released the above trailer, in which Fielder and Stone flop-sweat their way through the exact same “bickering” as Powell and Sweeney, complete with the same awkward body language in front of the same robin’s egg blue background. (They’re even wearing basically the same “Bland Hollywood people being casual!” clothes.) It’s such a random swing that it picks up thathint of personal amusement that informs so much of Fielder’s work—because why else would Stone and Fielder have apparently raced to get together to mock this particular bit of stilted Hollywood promotion? You can easily imagine someone calling someone with a quick “Have you seen this? We’ve got to.”
Of course, the actual trailer that follows the parody bit is a hell of a lot darker than its source material, showcasing The Curse’s complicated, deliberately squirm-inducing examinations of gentrification, white guilt, and the kind of people who deliberately state “We’re good people!” because they’re making a “better” kind of reality TV show. In some ways, it’s a better fit for the Sweeney/Powell bit than Anyone But You, since The Curse takes the “Who’s in control of this story?” tensions in that back-and-forth far more seriously than Powell and Sweeney’s movie is likely to.
The Curse is running right now on Showtime; Anyone But You lands in theaters on December 22.
Update, 11/17/23 at 4:11 p.m.: Fielder has now responded to allegations of copying the Anyone But You trailer on Instagram, claiming that his and Stone’s The Curse trailer was filmed “over six months ago,” and accusing Sony Pictures of copying them. Referencing the fight against AI, and noting that “I personally will not be pursuing legal action,” it ends with a statement that “I know that both Emma and myself will personally be booking front row seats to Anyone But You on opening night”—and a reminder to the rest of us of how nice it can be to have a really top-notch troll working so prominently in media at the moment.
117 Comments
Damn. Sometimes something is so embarrassing that the best way to mock it is to just copy it exactly with no changes. Just brutal.
Disagree. This is my major problem with Tim Heidecker’s version of parody as well. If something is so embarrassing that it’s hilarious, doing a 1:1 recreation is fucking pointless. Just watch the genuine article. No public access weirdness on Tim & Eric is ever going to be as interesting or amusing as the public access weirdness they are playing at.
That little to do on a friday that you need to pop into every comment to register your dislike of T&E style anticomedy, huh?
Watching things done 1:1 through an ironic lens has an energy that just watching a bad thing unfold doesn’t. Otherwise people would stuff theaters full of the worst comedies just to laugh AT them. In fact, it could be argued that trying to MST3K-ify the world is less genuine than doing a 1:1 tributary gag, while being equally as derisive. Speaking of, watching Stairway To Stardom and laughing at them makes you no better of a person than watching people paid to be in on the joke with T&E-style productions.
Anyway all you want to do is broadcast your holier-than-thou joyless manifestos to the world and the world will continue to roll its eyes at you as you affect nothing. Get friends.
Yes, I’m taking 5 minutes to write a few sentences responding to a handful of comments in one article. I’m definitely spending my WHOLE night on it.
No, you definitely didn’t. That’s completely believable.
Ha, I never really liked the Tim & Eric show for that exact reason. I agree. I’d much rather watch actual public access weirdos than fake ones.However, some of Heidecker’s recent parodies online are absolutely perfect and ruthless while barely having to change anything from the source material. For example, his recent parody of Bill Maher’s video podcast is scorching in how accurate it is. Obviously, it’s not a 1:1 recreation like this is, but it feels like it is.I get what you’re saying but, when dealing with something as phoney and hollow as that pre-trailer banter (I’ve got nothing against Sweeney or Powell; no one could have given that crap life), it’s almost better to just let recreate it exactly. The clip was so inorganic feeling that doing an exact copy is its own heightening of the hollowness.
I do think it’s an interesting thing to do for this particular show since the idea is that Fielder and Stone’s characters are disingenuous fame-seekers and the Anyone But You trailer is pretty disingenuous. I just also happen to not be nearly as bowled over by it as, well, most of the people here.
Mate you’re responding to almost every thread on this, it’s kinda weird. Like I’m scrolling through and all I see is your name popping up. If you don’t like pretty much everything related to this article why are you here?
A bunch of the performers on Tim and Eric Awesome Show Great Job! are actual public access creators from Los Angeles
Dude OKAY you dont like Nathan Fielder or Tim Heidecker we get it. You dont have to go and make your case against them in EVERY comment chain on this post, one was plenty. You got your pat on the back, move on.
I’m already married, but is there some way I can also marry both Fielder and Stone?
No, but I can direct you to some very informative guides on how to date Natalie Dormer.
OK I’m not American here but… who the heck is Nathan Fielder?! I’m pretty much in tune with the US pop culture (even too much I’d say sometimes) and this is legitimately the first time I’ve heard about or seen this guy.Looking at the trailer, he looks extremely bothersome and unfunny, and doesn’t seem to have any chemistry with Emma Stone.Looking at his imdb page, I see a lot of secondary rate roles and TV movies, and most prominently the series “Nathan for You”, where he apparently plays a poor-man version of Sacha Baron Cohen.Seriously, what is going on here? Is he really a thing in the US? Is he some kind of politically leaning comedian who is well known by the dems/reps, but not for the others, and therefore missed out on any kind of international recognition? I’m seriously baffled here…
He’s just a guy that got really good grades in business school.
Fielder is a comedian who started out with Nathan For You, where he played a version of himself that is deeply socially awkward, doing a Baron Cohen-style docucomedy where he tries to ‘help out’ businesses, the joke being that the ideas are over-the-top and almost always very bad. It’s ironic you call him a poor-man’s Sacha Baron Cohen, actually, because he was a writer/director on his show Who Is America.Nathan For You ended back in 2017, and last year he came out with a sequel show called The Rehearsal. Again playing Nathan Fielder, again a docucomedy, this time he went around ‘helping’ people deal with social situations by creating a simulation of those social situations. It got a lot of (mostly bullshit IMO) flak for… i don’t know, making fun of people by showing them be themselves when they know there are cameras recording them? There was a really annoying couple month streak where people called it manipulative.And now, he’s making a show called The Curse. This show is scripted, as opposed to being a documentary, and is more about gentrification/reality tv. I haven’t seen the second episode yet, but having seen the pilot last week, I think it’s really good! As to why you haven’t heard of this guy, I guess it’s just social circles, he’ll generally be talked about on social media/sites like this one for a couple months, then when his show ends there’s nothing. I’d recommend checking his stuff out, as long as you can handle cringe comedy. He’s a hilarious improviser, and especially as Nathan For You goes on, there’s a lot of really interesting themes going on, that are expanded even further in The Rehearsal.
I agree that there was a lot of unnecessary frumfing about the manipulation. But I would also say that for every person who was unfairly complaining about the premise of the show there were five who were non-stop telling everyone how fucking brilliant it was. Both parties were kind of aggravating.
Fair enough. I’ll admit that I’m biased, being on the side of the people who think it’s brilliant. To each their own!
To admit my own bias, I also really dislike Cabin in the Woods and Funny Games. Metatext is not something I enjoy generally and that show was very metatextual.
I love Cabin In The Woods, but have absolutely no desire to see Funny Games ever (I had heard about it and then read the plot summary). I would not put those two films together
Really? Both are horror satires about the responsibility that the “viewer” bears for the bad things that happen to the protagonists of horror movies. Both are attempting to make a thematic argument about the ritualistic participation of horror audiences. Both use genre “twists” to undermine tropes. The biggest difference between the two is the level of comedic intent. I’ll give Cabin credit for trying to be funny and more “ribbing” the audience than Funny Games, which is a moralistic finger-wag of the audience by Haneke. (And people have tried in the past to argue this with me but not only does the text of the film support this view of it, I was at a screening hosted by Haneke at my grad school where he *stated that this was his purpose.*)
Cabin in The Woods is subversive and fun. Funny Games may mean to be subversive, but does not sound like fun. It sounds like Last House On The Left without any comeuppance for the bad guys.
I think the fun people have with Funny Games depends on how enamored they are with metatext and heavy-handed cultural critique. I do think it’s *interesting* to create a home invasion narrative where the villains are so overwhelming they actually affect the fabric of reality. And I have friends who like the movie’s thematic resonance but those friends are not horror movie fans and thus don’t feel, as I did, that Haneke was both talking down to them (the idea that horror audiences are somehow *unaware* of the fact that they are participating in the narrative is so insulting) and misunderstanding the appeal of the genre. There is something to your parallel but it’s less that there’s no comeuppance and more that the comeuppance happens and then gets reversed. I understand the appeal of Funny Games, I just happen to think it’s heavy-handed in its messaging. But I would say that Cabin is *just* as heavy-handed. The major difference is that Cabin has some self-awareness and the makers are actually fans of horror. Which to me makes it all the more disappointing in the way it repeats some of the same messaging. It really seems to think that the whole “Secret organization dedicated to voyeuristically watching people get killed as part of a ritual” audience parallel is clever and not, you know, *obvious*. Or stuff like, “Hey, well-rounded characters don’t fit the archetypes of the ritual.” Yeah, duh. BAD horror movies do that shit. Cabin seems preoccupied with satirizing a very particular strain of horror film while totally ignoring the existence of the many, many non-cliche horror films in existence. Which is another reason I lump it in with Funny Games. In their satirizing of horror narratives neither movie seems to recognize the depth and breadth of the genre.
Then yeah, you should definitely keep arguing with people about something that is part of a genre you don’t like.What, may I ask, is the fucking point of you?
Check out one of his first gigs, Jon Benjamin Has a Van.. specifically the episode Star Door. That is a great episode lol
He’s from Canada, which means he was in a bunch of stuff much earlier but will be thought of as having “started out” in the first thing Americans were able to see.
Fair enough, but in my defense I feel like most people would say that Steve Carrell got his ‘start’ from The Office even though he was on The Daily Show before that.Also – Thin Watermelon is my favorite pre-NFY piece of media from Fielder.
He is. He’s not for everyone but he’s also not a poor man’s anything. He’s now got shows on HBO and Hulu. You’re missing the humor of The Curse—he’s somewhere on the cringe humor spectrum and chemistry is not the goal. Nathan for You is great and The Rehearsal is amazing.
I am begrudgingly being won over by his seduction of me. Did anyone catch them on Jimmy Kimmel the other night? I think that’s when he entered me without lube and I enjoyed it.
You are so out of tune with American pop culture. If I see you sneering about Joe Pera next, we’re revoking your pop culture license.
Looking at his imdb page, I see a lot of secondary rate roles and TV movies, and most prominently the series “Nathan for You”, where he apparently plays a poor-man version of Sacha Baron Cohen.He is nothing like Cohen. His show is something different altogether. If you want to understand what he’s like, just watch a few episodes. Personally always start middle of the show as the first episode is one of the weaker ones IMO.
That’s good because he’s Canadian.
Nathan For You is one of the most ambitious TV shows I’ve ever seen. He started a clothing company for the express purpose of letting people know the holocaust happened, he convinced a pretty lady to tell him she loved him until he cried, and he made shit-flavored frozen yogurt. Also, Fielder isn’t American either. He went to one of Canada’s top business schools where he got really good grades!
The thread between him and Sasha Baron Cohen is very thin, if it’s there at all. They play in the similar formats but Nathan is much more dry, socially awkward, and flat while Sasha is more expressive. I love them both. They don’t really need to be compared.
If only there was a massive network of interconnected computers that collected information together for easy access where you could find out instead of writing long-winded diatribes where you pretended not to know something so you can grind your ax.
I think you got it in one: ‘bothersome and unfunny’ is a pretty good description of what he does.
Remember, US pop culture is the “default” pop culture in the internets, including here. Well, this is an American website, I guess it’s actually reasonable to think that US pop culture would be the default on here.
I’m American and I’ve never heard of him.
All due respect to the man and his legion of stans, I am just fucking exhausted by Fielder at this point. No, I don’t think that it IS nice to have a top notch troll working in media, even if it’s meant to be amusing. There is so much IRL fucking trolling by insane dipshits, I really can’t say I enjoy it in my entertainment. And the breathless praise for this Kaufman-come-lately black hole of irony makes me want to nap forever. Fielder should join Tim Robinson, Tim & Eric, and the writers of Rick n Morty to create a shitty ironic Voltron who forms an anti-comedy Blazing Sword that shrieks catch-phrases at me until I fall into a coma state of permanent jerkoff motion and eyeroll.
All due respect, though.
you are the joke, thank you for being there
Sure.
I wish that for you too, for all our sakes
Well, in your case, I’d say Fielder’s mission is accomplished.
Sure.
I don’t normally like when people respond to criticism of a comedian/anything by saying ‘you don’t get it’, but in this case… I really think you just don’t get it.
I can’t convince anyone otherwise and it would be fruitless to try. That said, if you can take my word *at all*, I do get it. I just don’t find it funny. Or I don’t find HIM doing it funny. I do like some cringe comedy. Something about Fielder’s version…. (shrug)And I can’t deny that the hype gets under my skin. That’s not on Fielder or his shows. But like I say in my rant, nothing he does strikes me as all that unique. He’s got some Kaufman, some Tim & Eric, someone mentioned that he wrote for Baron Cohen and yeah, that tracks. Like…. I’m supposed to flip shit for THAT?
I think it’s just a Your Mileage May Vary thing. I think he’s a very funny improviser/writer, and he’s really good at commenting on a lot of stuff in a really unique, interesting, funny way. I think the hype is more for him as a creative than as a comedian. Also, coincidentally, pretty sure it was my comment that said he wrote for Cohen.I also feel like you’re being a little over-the-top by comparing him and Robinson and those guys to fucking Rick and Morty. I honestly don’t see any connection beyond the fact that you find both annoying. You’re presenting Fielder as some kind of reddit Jesus. This is a guy whose first show aired on Comedy Central, not some weirdo youtube microcelebrity.
I have laughed at things he’s done so I can’t say I’ve never found him funny. But I don’t think his commentary is actually all that unique or interesting. Even The Curse doesn’t strike me as particularly unique. Oh, are outwardly well-meaning white people awkward? Do they engage in a certain amount of performative progressive activism? Is home improvement reality TV actually quite awful? I’ve never heard that! Quick, pick my jaw up off the floor! (Am I being hyperbolically shitty about this? Yeah. Probably.)The connection is that all of those performers and that show engage in anti-comedy and meta comedy in a way that always feels to me *desperate* to be taken as clever or smart. I’ll admit that may be more something I get off their various fandoms than the performers or shows. I love the comedy I love and none of it ever strikes me as thirsty for intellectual clout like the aforementioned performers and show. But again, that may be me conflating the material with the fans of the material. Which I acknowledge is not fair to the material itself.
I dunno, I don’t see it as trying to be seen as smart as much as I just see it as people doing things they think are funny. Like, I don’t see Tim Robinson writing a skit about someone going on a dating show just to use the zipline and thinking “I’ve created a comedic masterpiece”, I just imagine him thinking it was a funny idea. That’s probably where it’s dependent on personal taste, though.What with the first point, I don’t know, I feel like expecting a tv show to say something you’ve never heard before will lead to you liking nothing. Obviously it’s been said before, that’s why they’ve made it. What makes it unique is the way it’s doing it. But, like literally everything, it’s all subjective. I’m planning on watching the second episode in a little bit, and I’m hoping it’ll be like the first episode, a little unnerving, pretty funny, and at some times so unbearable I’ll want to throw my laptop across the room. I know a lot of people who don’t want that (imagine having to buy a new laptop!), and I fully get it.
The show isn’t *really* about how home improvement shows are bad. That is very surface level analysis. Try putting your cell phone away while you watch, maybe. Hope this helps
Are you really knocking me for surface level analysis in a response where you blatantly surface level read my post?That is some Fielder-level meta right there, friend.
Excuse me but I read your post so in-depth I’m able to paraphrase it: ‘whine whine humph harrumph whine whine whine’
Setting aside that you’re wrong, your paraphrase is demonstrably different from the various responses to my post… how? Cuz you Fielder stans seem pretty quick to defensively whine.
“Durrrrrr” – you right now
“He’s got some Kaufman, some Tim & Eric…”Well, yeah, there’s nothing new under the sun. (I love that this quote is 2500 years old.)I’m surprised you say he’s not unique, because I genuinely don’t have a comparison for him aside from, as you say, assembling a Voltron of awkward white guys. He does seem to uniquely bug you — can’t that be an indication that he’s doing something differently? Anyway sorry to join the chorus of people asking you about this, because obviously we’re all allowed to just not like certain bits of pop culture even if they’re the current “it” thing.
the more likely scenario is you not getting it
You should stick to not using that criticism. It’s just as lazy in this instance as it always is.
I don’t dislike it because it’s lazy as much as I dislike it because it’s condescending. But yeah, that was a little condescending
Well, then go take a nap, graynecbeard! Maybe when you wake up you’ll be less cranky about not “getting” alternative comedy, and can go find something that you do enjoy. I’m not counting on it, though.
There’s plenty of alt comedy that doesn’t make me want to grind my teeth to dust.That bullshit aside, I think it’s fun that you’ve tried to insult me with the cliche “neckbeard” when alt comedy is fucking RIFE with “neckbeards”. Hipster comedy nerds are the neckbeardiest of all! Do you have some notion of comedy nerds that is a Men’s Health magazine cover? Go to a Kyle Kinane show and count the male models.
You don’t like trolls though, right?
Someone is having a rough Friday!
Not particularly, no. I’m watching an Andy Sidaris movie starring William Smith that is quite amusingly bad.
Would you say someone is having a bad case of the Fridays?
Mate, he’s a sarcastronaut. And he rides an ironicycle.
I’ve never seen Fielder’s work (though I suspect it’s not for me), and I quite enjoy most of Tim Robinson’s stuff, but I agree about the others you listed. I think the legions of shitty internet trolls have ruined comedic trolling for me, which is a shame because I imagine there’s a version of that “Hey, I got you” comedy that could work for me.In any case, however good ‘The Curse’ might be, I don’t think my anxiety could stand it. I’ve learned to accept my limitations with certain kinds of entertainment.
Robinson has a tendency to A) let sketches go on past the point of funny/put a hat on a hat on a fucking hat and B) fucking scream. I absolutely LOATHE screaming in sketch comedy. The worst improv and sketch comedy that I have ever endured involves people screaming because… fuck, I dunno, I guess they think screaming is inherently funny. I hate screaming in comedy and I hate vulgar improv for the sake of vulgarity. Will Ferrell and Danny McBride are two of the worst for that. Which is always a shame because they can be very funny and creative. (That said, I will take them every day over John goddam Cena, who has never met an awkward “Isn’t it funny that I’m saying bad words?” overreach he didn’t trip over himself to puke out.)
So stop paying attention dude. It’s not like Nathan Fielder is everywhere all the time. He pops up now and then when he has new stuff coming out like every other person in Hollywood.Personally I love his material and his promotional appearances because what he does with that time is way more interesting than the usual late night banter / interviews. And also, he’s part of the reason we got How To with John Wilson.
Ah, we’ve run into the “person commenting on article is told to not pay attention to subject of article because they are critical” portion of the responses. A thing I have done myself, so don’t think I absolve myself of that particular bit of internet meh. Even so…. meh.What he does is only interesting if you find it interesting. I’ll take a Conan-Olyphant casual chat over whatever performance art shtick Fielder chooses to do in interview/promotion any day.
When someone claims they are “fucking exhausted” of something yet continue to read articles about it and comment more than anyone else is about it, it’s odd. It has nothing to do with you being critical about him, it’s because of the quoted words you used.
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=what+is+hyperbole
You don’t like that Fielder trolls people though, right?
if glen and Sydney didn’t wanna get trolled then they shouldn’t have been such easy targets through their hideous acts of what I can only describe as self-gentrification. ugliest pair of pee-blonde scalps I ever did see
Good job. You played yourself.
So you came here to, what? Troll people who like Fielder?Cool, I guess. I don’t know why you can’t just let people like what they like, but you definitely should do you.
All dude respect.
Would it be any consolation if I told you that Anyone But You is directed by the guy who directed Easy A and is still friends with Emma Stone?
I’m aware. I talk about it elsewhere in the comments.
Oh…okay…-Nathan Fielder
You heard the guy. Stop doing parodies! Trump killed parody!
Huh. I am amazed at the raft of shit you got for voicing your opinion. Kind of sucks. And the “topic” is pretty much a nothing burger, too. People here at one point would at least engage in dialogue instead of just disdaining/attacking someone. I guess any hill is a good hill to die on when you’re posting on the internet. You be you necgray. BTW-I happen to agree with you. And if I didn’t, I would still be fine with you having your opinion.
It was a hyperbolically stated opinion about a niche artist who trafficks in a particular kind of intellectual engagement that will always bring out aggressively defensive fans. Viewed generously, I appreciate their passion and wasn’t really surprised by the pushback.That said, thanks for the support. I yam what I yam and that’s all that I yam, to quote Robert Altman’s most treasured film character.
I understand why you’re exhausted by him. I find The Curse is too much for me (although that’s more because of Safdie). I don’t think you’re giving him the credit he’s due, though.I don’t think Fielder’s work belongs in the same category as Tim Robinson, Tim & Eric, or Rick and Morty (although I enjoy all of those tings as well). It more resembles Tim Heidecker’s On Cinema universe, The Eric Andre Show, or Sacha Baron Cohen’s work. I think the “reality” aspect of it has been very important so far, although The Curse seems to be fully scripted so maybe that’s going to change. But the Curse is still about reality TV, so we’ll see.You’ve compared him to Kaufman, and while Nathan’s obviously influenced by him, I think he’s got a unique take. This is partly because when Kaufman was alive the idea of media artifice was something only professional performers could really participate in. These days everybody can. The sort of things that Nathan is commenting on didn’t exist in Kaufman’s time.The interaction between Nathan and real people is unique. Unlike Kaufman or Cohen, Nathan is very passive. He’s not wrestling women or singing about killing Jews at a rodeo. Instead, he’s playing this beta male character that doesn’t intimidate his subjects. More often than not they become comfortable around him. I don’t mean to say that they don’t find him awkward, but they don’t perceive him as a threat. They just see him as an uncharismatic loser, and one they recognize as normal (unlike the foreign cyphers of Latke and Borat), and they let their guard down because he seems like a normal, unimportant guy. And he’s not playing what is obviously a character.There is an aesthetic of normalcy to Nathan’s work that is in contrast to bizarre nature of Kaufman or Cohen. By not playing these big characters, he’s grounding his ideas in reality. At the same time, he reveals that reality itself is quite bizarre. He allows his subjects to reveal more of themselves. This isn’t the same as Borat tricking people into saying something racist, though. Sometimes a gas station attendant will reveal that he drinks his nephew’s pee, or a realtor will confess that she was raped by a ghost. All of these elements add up to what I think is his main thesis is: The reality presented to you by media is manipulated and presented as normal. This has warped our own sense of normal, and we are easily manipulated because of it. What is real isn’t necessarily normal.
I agree with you.
I’m still in the greys so my opinion never matters but… why all the negative reaction to this post critical of the comedian? Is there any law or rule that demands that decent people 100% stand behind Fielder and consider him a comedic genius?
You seem like you’d be a lot of fun to take to a comedy show.
You can just not watch their shit and let people enjoy things. Jesus Christ what a screed.
People really pay to watch movies like Anyone But You? And that trailer was supposed to sell it?
Based on the trailer, I’d say that we used to call them “date movies”, back when people went to movies and would go on dates.
I think it’s genuinely a shame that romcoms, especially earnest romcoms (cuz we’re all irony all the time now), have taken such a cultural beating in the last couple of decades. I’m sad that AV Club no longer features Caroline Siede’s excellent When Romance Met Comedy articles.
+1 for the Caroline Siede/When Romance Met Comedy love. Probably my favorite column on this site, and impactful in that it got me to appreciate romcoms rather than looking on them all with disdain. It’s a shame how there’s no longer anything here that’s even close to level of thoughtful analysis she brought to her pieces. At least they’re all still up on the site for rereading.
It was such a good column. She really nailed that difficult balance of lovingly critiquing a genre. I find that too many people who analyze genre are either dyed-in-the-wool devotees and thus unable to be sufficiently critical or ivory tower intellectuals overeager to rip down everything that defines the genre.
Sort of interesting, Anyone But You is directed and co-written by Will Gluck, known for one of Emma Stone’s early breakout hits Easy A.
I watched ‘Easy A’ recently and it was really good. From the trailer I saw for ‘Anyone But You’, I am not confident Gluck has struck gold again.
That’s fair. Honestly, I think he maybe got lucky with Easy A. I liked Friends with Benefits but only because I have an enduring pathetic crush on Mila Kunis. The movie itself is pretty meh. Annie is a serviceable remake. Peter Rabbit… okay? His TV work is similarly sort of shrug-worthy. He’s successful, he’s just kinda dullsville.
I think the trailer was supposed to say, “These two people are conventionally attractive, and we have put them in swimwear as much as possible.”
I don’t get the excitement over how fast it was put together. It’s just a twenty-second shot of them against a blue background. It’s not hard to get generic clothes on short notice, and they’re already on a promotional tour together. Plug this interview instead:
I a want a Nathan and Doja cat colab,make it happen, universe. Thats all.
How boring to reduce what Fielder does to just “trolling.”
No more boring than what he does.
Your weird comments are boring.
Could hear Fielder cultists doffing their fedoras and dropping their champaign glasses of Code Red Mountain Dew all the way from Gizmodo.
It sounds like you’re describing incels who lack the self awareness to enjoy Fielder’s comedy.
Oh, come on. Nobody deserves having to sit in the front row of a movie theater.
This really made me laugh. Watching the actual Anyone But You trailer was also the first time I’ve ever watched Sydney Sweeney in anything. Is she always just a gorgeous black hole of charisma? Her line readings were something else.
She has actually given some great performances although her characters don’t have charisma, that’s true
She was pretty good in S1 of The White Lotus, but I think its because she was so adept at playing a shallow annoying teen with no charisma.
As good a time as any to rewatch this weird masterpiece (of bread)…
So like, are there actually people out there who sincerely think this guy’s work is sick or what? I’m confused.
Some people just aren’t very media literate, so they take what Fielder does at face value.
Nah, I get it, it’s just incredibly mid.
So are you saying that you sincerely think this guy’s work is sick? I’m confused.
Oh, you meant “sick” as in “siiiiick.” I thought you meant as in mean-spirited, cruel, etc. I misunderstood.
People act so put out by Fielder sometimes but, although I have not watched a ton of his stuff, I have found it to be mostly inoffensive and enjoyable? The fake response on iPhone notes, making fun of Kimmel for the Oscars, these are pretty mainstream trolling targets, he just hits them dead-on. It might be that some people want his content to be less offputting (like they can’t handle it at all) and others want it to be more edgy and alienating. The conversations about him using real people at least get people talking. I think anti-comedy is an established lane for a long time at this point, he’s pretty good at it, sometimes really good, and people shouldn’t seem so surprised?
“Oooh, they have chemistry in real life, too!”This entire statement is a lie.
thathint