Danny Roane: First Time Director

Andy Dick's fictional film within a film about a drunken comedian with a mediocre TV career attempting to make a movie about himself -- a drunken comedian with a mediocre TV career -- is astonishingly, one of the freshest, funniest movies I've seen in years. Even if you're no fan of the shtick you have seen Andy Dick do on TV and elsewhere, this movie catches you off guard with some of the most outrageously funny stuff I have ever seen. Similar to Borat in its honesty and fearlessness of taboos, this no holds barred hysterical perspective on indie film-making should not be missed. The cameos by numerous famous people are more than just cameos. They all have roles that add something funny and could only be played by that person. Watch for Bob Bancroft, the guy who used to play the evil head of the hospital on Chicago Hope, who is brilliant as Andy/Danny's Dad in this film.

Andy Dick's new movie doesn't truly feel like a movie. It wanders from scene to scene with Dick's often funny, unmistakable brand of humor. A lot of the jokes don't work, but there more laughs then you'd expect. To enjoy it, think of it more of an extended episode of "The Andy Dick Show". But an episode of his brilliant (but short lived) series this isn't, and as a movie it's pretty awful.

Dick's "mostly autobiographical" story follows the title character, a down-and-out former sitcom golden boy who is quickly slipping to the F list. We learn through a horribly filmed, lazily directed "News Radio" spoof that it is wasn't Andy/Danny's proudest career moment, even if it was of his most successful. With a muddled motivation, he puts together a movie about his substance abuse problems.

With this story, Dick able to make jibes at the industry and these are the best moments of the film. Starting with the untoppable "Late Night With Jimmy Kimmel" sequence and continuing with hilarious scenes ripping apart empty-headed execs, intense crew members and naive actors, Dick is able to stick it to the industry. He is also able to make fun of himself and his colleagues in the process (Ben Stiller, Jack Black, James Van Derbeek and more are all able to make fun of themselves in assorted scenes).

There's no doubt "Danny Roane" is filled with some great moments, but they are strung together with bad camera work, platitudinous scenes, and plenty of unoriginality. Not to mention none of it feels consistent or effectively planned out. Dick and producer/star Marshall Cook admit to not following many conventional film techniques, and it really hurts the film. It wouldn't be so much of the bother if the script wasn't such a banal rip off of "Bowfinger" and "Living In Oblivion".

With more work, higher talent in crew and a bigger budget, "Danny Roane: First Time Director" could have been a hit. As it is, it far too often descends to bomb territory and gets tired out too quickly. In all, it's a pretty awful debut, but that's not to say there's some laughs to be had.

Note: I attended the Northeast Premiere of this film, where Andy attended obviously drunk. Although I reviewed his film with as little bias as possible, he was disrespectful to even the fans in the audience. Seems pretty contradictory of the final words in the credits ("Thanks to my fans who stuck with me through the bad times.") It was hard to tell if Andy was really acting in this movie-and if he was intoxicated while shooting most of it. With his film, one can tell he's pretty jaded from the industry- but it seems he's jaded more so from himself.

In 1993, Andy Dick was in Arthur Borman's movie spoof called "The Making of '...And God Spoke'" playing the part of Dick Andrews to perfection. He really won my heart in that movie. He was that good. I'd never seen physical comedy that made me laugh so hard before. That movie set my standard for mockumentaries.

"Danny Roane: First Time Director" is like that movie's younger teenage cousin. It has a ton of amazing actors in it: Ben Stiller, James Van Der Beek, Anthony Rapp, Jack Black, Mo Collins, Bob Odenkirk, Maura Tierney, Kate Flannery. Then you've got Michael Hitchcock, also from '...And God Spoke', who is always fantastic. I love watching him. Plus, Kevin Farley! Gotta respect that. Dispersed in between all this star power is this crazy plot, which basically allows Andy Dick to do whatever he wants. It's pretty hilarious but there really isn't much variation from that '...And God Spoke' format. It's kind of the same film. That's not a bad thing; that's why I bought it.

Basically, this movie has a lot of funny people in it, and it's a vehicle for Andy Dick to do some more great physical comedy. If you like Andy Dick, definitely check this out.

Please, let's not get into a battle of the films here. "Bondage" and "Danny Roane" are two separate pieces of work. They were each made for different reasons and both deserve to be judged on their own merits.

There is an art form to getting a reaction from an audience, especially one that is controversial - meaning that it possibly has people confused, upset, enraged, etc. Oscar Wilde once said (in the preface to "A Portrait of Dorian Gray") that all criticism is in fact a form of autobiography.

I saw "Danny Roane: First Time Director" while at South By Southwest. The audience had a strong reaction to the film. And just like anything else in the world or in this country, their reaction was not all the same.

Liking or disliking someone's artistic expression is only one form, in a vast array of forms, in which one can evaluate a piece of work. If we are to remove "like" or "dislike" as the simple-minded binary means in which we look at this film, there is a lot there that cannot be denied. Undeniability is one of the hardest things to achieve in any art form.

Andy Dick, whether consciously or not (although I suspect consciously) blurs the lines between fiction and reality - an art within itself. He shows the audience the baffling and overwhelming power of not only alcoholism per se, but what happens to a person when they are in the grips of a spiritual crisis.

Everyone thought it was funny when we read in the press that Chris Penn got drunk at the Sky Bar and got into a fight with a midget, throwing him into the pool and getting tossed out himself. Now he is dead at 40.

There is something tragically haunting about Andy Dick's film. It is hard to watch, I agree. But I wouldn't dismiss it so quickly for that reason. If you look at his resume, Andy Dick has made a zillion movies and television appearances. His has a certain mastery over his craft, which is to say that he knows what he is doing. You may or may not "like" it, but clearly a lot of insight into his personal, real life struggles went into creating the film.

Regardless of your opinion of it, this is a movie that cannot be dismissed or ignored - just like Andy Dick himself. There are people who will like it for the wrong reasons, and there are people who will dislike it for the wrong reasons. But either way, there is no denying it. This movie, or this phenomenon rather (as Andy blurred the lines between the movie and real life afterward) clearly demonstrates that there is intelligence in the meltdown - a general dissatisfaction. And when one is courageous enough to face the dissatisfaction, intelligence is no longer restrained.

Personally, I'd like to know what "Indyfan1983" is referring to in the film "Danny Roane" when he rants about it having "more scat than a scat film and more blood than and stag film (sic)". Maybe I am confused. Besides his comment being grammatically incorrect, just what kind of stag movies is this guy watching where blood is an element? Also, how many scat films does one need to personally watch to be able to make a scat film/"Danny Roane" comparison?

What exactly is going on in this movie? What is so bad or horrible? I am an Andy Dick fan and want to see it, but some of these posts are so disjointed. What is the deal? Is it funny or not?

God Bless, Susan