• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

The Disaster Artist - Teaser Trailer #1

Either I'm going crazy or you're all deaf.

It may not be the Wiseau impression, but he certainly is doing one.

You're not crazy, he's definitely putting on an accent. It doesn't sound as pronounced as Wiseau's, but it's there.

The thing is, when trying to replicate a voice and speech pattern that's distinct in the way Wiseau's is, it can be easy to sound like you're just doing an impression of him. Franco probably played around with how far to push the voice until he found a place where he was comfortable doing it without it sounding like parody.
 
I watched the movie after already knowing what the joke was and couldn't find the funny. I feel like it works best when it catches you off guard. Excited to see this though.
But the movie is so much more than the famous lines. Everything from the way it's filmed to the dubbed audio to the green screen, to the line delivery.. To the bizarre sorry and random ass characters and interactions, there's just so much there to enjoy
 
Really excited for this but I gotta say, I'm a bit disappointed in James Franco's accent here. He's such a good actor that I thought for sure he would nail Tommy Wiseau but in that clip he just sounds like James Franco.
 
Um... Am I missing something? Franco's totally doing an accent here. What are you all talking about?

You want some over-the-top parody or something instead?

No we want him to actually try and sound like the guy he's portraying. It's like if someone was doing a biopic of Ed Wynn and they did a voice that 1) didn't sound like him or 2) sounded kinda like him but not really.

Tommy Wiseau has a very distinct voice and speech pattern. So while Franco is obviously not talking in his normal James Franco voice, he's not exactly pulling off something that sounds like Tommy either (again, maybe it's better in the rest of the movie but it's not very good in this clip). For this particular role, it's not good enough to just do "an accent", the person needs to sound like Tommy Wiseau. Some of us have [sadly?] seen/heard the man speak enough times to hear the difference between what Franco is doing and how Tommy actually sounds.

Even Greg (Mark in The Room) does an amazing, spot-on Tommy voice in the audiobook version of The Disaster Artist, without sounding like an over-the-top parody. Franco doesn't need to be a cartoon caricature of the guy but the timing of his speech and the way his voice sounds is off. I mean, Franco is IMO a good actor, I like him a lot, so you'd think that even if he didn't sounds exactly like him he'd watch the scene he's recreating to at least get the timing of the line right.
 
But the movie is so much more than the famous lines. Everything from the way it's filmed to the dubbed audio to the green screen, to the line delivery.. To the bizarre sorry and random ass characters and interactions, there's just so much there to enjoy
I'm not talking about quotable lines. The whole production of it being a bad movie as the joke. I went in knowing what to expect and I feel like it took a bit of the funny away from the movie for me.
 
It's even more disappointing because a Wisseau impression is basically this generation's Walken or Schwarzenegger. Everyone can do a decent one and Franco still sounds like Franco except for the ending which still sounded kinda like Franco.
 
It's even more disappointing because a Wisseau impression is basically this generation's Walken or Schwarzenegger. Everyone can do a decent one and Franco still sounds like Franco except for the ending which still sounded kinda like Franco.
I dont think that's remotely accurate at all. I doubt the average person has heard of, let alone seen The Room, or even known what Wisseau sounds like
 
There are so many great things about The Room, but my favourite is probably the tracking shots


The green screen for the rooftop just smells like money laundering. BUt I keep forgetting this thing was professionally made and financed. Like, plenty of talented filmmakers were on that set. Watching their work get shoehorned into that thing. His vision. That's the fascinating thing to me - he knows enough about making movies to make one, enough about acting to perform the role - enough about writing to get a script together, but he's just astonishingly weird. There is no escaping his fundamental weirdness. He's like an alien who is trying to be a person.
 
I'm shocked at the hype for this.
This looks terrible and Franco sucks as always

tumblr_ofnr2ddM4Z1vywlp5o1_400.gif
 
No we want him to actually try and sound like the guy he's portraying. It's like if someone was doing a biopic of Ed Wynn and they did a voice that 1) didn't sound like him or 2) sounded kinda like him but not really.

Tommy Wiseau has a very distinct voice and speech pattern. So while Franco is obviously not talking in his normal James Franco voice, he's not exactly pulling off something that sounds like Tommy either (again, maybe it's better in the rest of the movie but it's not very good in this clip). For this particular role, it's not good enough to just do "an accent", the person needs to sound like Tommy Wiseau. Some of us have [sadly?] seen/heard the man speak enough times to hear the difference between what Franco is doing and how Tommy actually sounds.

Even Greg (Mark in The Room) does an amazing, spot-on Tommy voice in the audiobook version of The Disaster Artist, without sounding like an over-the-top parody. Franco doesn't need to be a cartoon caricature of the guy but the timing of his speech and the way his voice sounds is off. I mean, Franco is IMO a good actor, I like him a lot, so you'd think that even if he didn't sounds exactly like him he'd watch the scene he's recreating to at least get the timing of the line right.

I'm getting flashbacks to the Steve Jobs thread, hahaha. Frankly, I don't think capturing someone's likeness, physically or vocally, is the end-all be-all of a performance based on a real person. That's an imitator's job, not an actor's. A strong performance is about communicating the emotions of the person, telling their story, capturing something deeper than their first-blush traits. Considering that nearly every review of the film praises Franco's performance as transformative, hysterical, and weird, I think I'll be ok with his accent not being 100% of the way there.
 
Lol


Well the film itself wasn't created as a joke, unless I'm misunderstanding you
You are. The joke is that it's one of those so bad it's good, but I'm saying that the good only comes from when the bad catches you off guard and you start to realize just /how/ bad it is. If you go in knowing it's all bad the element of surprise is gone, and thus some of the funny with it.
 
Can anyone explain to me where does all the hype comes from?

I'm not trolling, I'm really curious about it, cause while I haven't watched the movie this is based on, I've read about it so it's not an "unknown" subject to me, yet... I fail to comprehend all those "OMG DAY ZERO!!!!" comments.

Thanks!
 
Can anyone explain to me where does all the hype comes from?

I'm not trolling, I'm really curious about it, cause while I haven't watched the movie this is based on, I've read about it so it's not an "unknown" subject to me, yet... I fail to comprehend all those "OMG DAY ZERO!!!!" comments.

Thanks!

Simple. Watch the movie.
 
The book this is based on is a terrific meditation on creativity, filmmaking, the American dream, all through the lens of this absurd, awful film production. It's a great story.

I'm hoping that the movie also gets into Greg's story on Hollywood and trying to make it as an actor. I know some people saw it as vain but I thought it was a pretty good story of how hard it is to make it to become famous even with some good connections.

Greg's story compliments how amazing it is that the Room was actually ever completely filled, edited and released by Tommy even if the end result is The Room.
 
You are. The joke is that it's one of those so bad it's good, but I'm saying that the good only comes from when the bad catches you off guard and you start to realize just /how/ bad it is. If you go in knowing it's all bad the element of surprise is gone, and thus some of the funny with it.
That's too bad. I can watch it at any moment and laugh. Sucks to get hung up on those preconceptions. I've had that happen with other films
 
I mean, I knew The Room was bad before watching it, and had seen a bunch of quotes on Youtube, but the way it's bad caught me off guard. Also, if you are watching on DVD, make sure to watch the Q&A with Tommy, it's excellent.
 
I mean every movie is made to make money, so I'm not sure what you mean.
Everyone wants to make money from their work, but a lot of movies are not made with the primary intention to make money. You can acknowledge that cinema is an industrial and commercial enterprise and still be disgusted by The Emoji Movie.
 
Can anyone explain to me where does all the hype comes from?

I'm not trolling, I'm really curious about it, cause while I haven't watched the movie this is based on, I've read about it so it's not an "unknown" subject to me, yet... I fail to comprehend all those "OMG DAY ZERO!!!!" comments.

Thanks!

The book it's based on it's quite good. Not only sheds light on The Room's insane production and Tommy Wiseau's unexplainable quirks, it's also about the strange friendship between Wiseau and Sestero (who wrote the book), about the idea of "the American Dream" and how hard it is to actually "make it". Plus it doesn't paint Wiseau as a one-dimensional cartoon - it's a bit more nuanced than that.

And... well... The Room. You should watch it. It's a bad movie that "succeeds" because it took itself too seriously, without a hint of self-awareness. It's a bad movie that doesn't know it's bad so it doesn't play it for laughs, it just is.
 
Franco doesn't really sound like Wiseau, but what matters more is if the performance is good than that it accurately depicts the real person.

Dave Franco looks a LOT like Greg Sestero, though, like holy shit.

I never am hyped about movies anymore, especially not movies by pretentious poseur James Franco, but fuck it, I'm all in on this.
 
I dont think that's remotely accurate at all. I doubt the average person has heard of, let alone seen The Room, or even known what Wisseau sounds like
I would say the average person this movie is being marketed to knows.

Regardless of if the average person in a broader moviegoing audience knows what he sounds like, it's still a crucial part of people's ironic love for the movie and the man. And that's all the marketing is aimed at thus far, people who watched or know of the movie. If this were a serious biopic and not a comedy, I would say looking and sounding exactly like the part isn't crucial if you can deliver a powerful performance and channel the character through different ways. You don't want to look like a caricature of important historical figures by simply doing an impression. But this is Tommy fucking Wisseau in a Seth Rogen/James Franco comedy. Go all the way with it.
 
Really excited for this but I gotta say, I'm a bit disappointed in James Franco's accent here. He's such a good actor that I thought for sure he would nail Tommy Wiseau but in that clip he just sounds like James Franco.

Just like Tommy Wiseau wants to nail James Dean but in the end he just sounds like Tommy Wiseau...
 
Can anyone explain to me where does all the hype comes from?

I'm not trolling, I'm really curious about it, cause while I haven't watched the movie this is based on, I've read about it so it's not an "unknown" subject to me, yet... I fail to comprehend all those "OMG DAY ZERO!!!!" comments.

Thanks!

I watched The Room with a good group of friends like over 10 years ago. We laughed, we cried, we made an unforgettable experience. Now this recreation is looking phenomenal, and all the memories are flooding back. You better believe I'll be there to watch this ASAP!
 
The book it's based on it's quite good. Not only sheds light on The Room's insane production and Tommy Wiseau's unexplainable quirks, it's also about the strange friendship between Wiseau and Sestero (who wrote the book), about the idea of "the American Dream" and how hard it is to actually "make it". Plus it doesn't paint Wiseau as a one-dimensional cartoon - it's a bit more nuanced than that.

And... well... The Room. You should watch it. It's a bad movie that "succeeds" because it took itself too seriously, without a hint of self-awareness. It's a bad movie that doesn't know it's bad so it doesn't play it for laughs, it just is.

Thanks a lot for the post, certainly the bolded part make this film looks better.

At first I thought this Franco's movie was more about mocking the original, just for the sake of being satirical. It seems I got the wrong impression.
 
I'm getting flashbacks to the Steve Jobs thread, hahaha. Frankly, I don't think capturing someone's likeness, physically or vocally, is the end-all be-all of a performance based on a real person. That's an imitator's job, not an actor's. A strong performance is about communicating the emotions of the person, telling their story, capturing something deeper than their first-blush traits. Considering that nearly every review of the film praises Franco's performance as transformative, hysterical, and weird, I think I'll be ok with his accent not being 100% of the way there.

You make good points, and I didn't mean to insinuate the movie would be BAD because of Franco's voice/lack thereof. But I think the Jobs comparison is a little off here. Yeah it would be nice to have someone who actually looks like Jobs play him (which IMO they did) but really, you dress someone up like him and teach him the way Jobs spoke when he presented and you're good to go. But one of the defining things about Tommy, aside from his unique face, are his voice and his mannerisms. They're enchanting, they're like the main thing that people are drawn to. As Stinkles put it, it's like seeing an alien trying to act like a human. I fundamentally disagree on your impersonator/actor thing because it's an actor's job to become the character, real or imagined, that they're meant to portray. That's like literally what an actor's job is - to act like someone else for a role. Yes getting the emotion of the person is very important too, but that's only one part of it, especially when the person being portrayed has some very, very distinct characteristics to them. What is the point in hiring someone to act like someone else if they can't act like that person? Then they aren't doing their job. A physical, visual difference, yes I agree that's something that can be overlooked, but when the main characteristic of a person is their distinct voice or the way they speak then it's on the actor to act like that person.

Like the whole crux of everything is that Tommy Wiseau is a weird guy. He has a weird voice, he talks in a weird way, he behaves in a weird way. To not portray those aspects of him defeats the entire purpose of playing the part of him. It isn't nearly the same IMO as being bent that Franco doesn't LOOK like him (which he pretty much does aside from the scarring). Again it's the equivalent of hiring someone to play Ed Wynn and having them just talk in a normal voice. His [Wynn's] voice was so distinct that when they had him on a gameshow where people had to guess the celebrity by their voice, he had to answer questions with a violin because otherwise the game would have been over immediately. So why would anyone have someone portray Ed Wynn without trying to sound like him? In the same respect, why would you try to portray Tommy Wiseau without attempting to mimic his extremely unique voice and speech patterns? Otherwise you're just acting like a normal dude with long hair that made a bad movie. It might still be a good movie about that dude, but the portrayal would be lacking in authenticity. And that's kind of an important aspect for something like this, where it's clearly made for a very specific audience of people who are themselves very familiar with the subject matter and the people being portrayed.

Another example with a more cult-like situation instead of Ed Wynn, would be if they made a documentary about The Rocky Horror Picture Show, specifically about the movie version, but got someone to be Dr. Frank-N-Furter who didn't even attempt to channel Tim Curry's voice or performance and just did their own thing. Fans would be off put just like they are with this.

I wish we had more to go on than this one clip. I know it's not fair to judge Franco's entire performance based on just this short segment. But then again this is an iconic scene, and the voice and the timing are off. If he didn't nail the landing on this sequence then it doesn't bode well for the rest of the movie (which, again, could still be fantastic in spite of Franco's impersonation). I'm sure people who are unfamiliar with Tommy or The Room wouldn't give a second thought to Franco's performance but to fans and those who are, yeah, we're gonna complain and nitpick. It's a very specific kind of role to not go all-in on.
 
I'm mad that this is so far away, been looking forawrd to it since January.

The new film Sestero and Wiseau are making is called Best F(r)iends and it looks incredible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLSgfjKbYCc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZXdU3iuAyI

Properly emulating Wiseau is impossible, so Franco is doing well in that regard

I also HIGHLY recommend you read the original screenplay of The Room after reading The Disaster Artist, if you thought the movie was a crazy trainwreck, Wiseau's original plan was way, WAY crazier.
 
Top Bottom