Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » WTF is wrong with the REAL Cooter? (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: WTF is wrong with the REAL Cooter?
Mike Heenan
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1896
From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Registered: Mar 2000


 - posted 07-24-2005 10:46 AM      Profile for Mike Heenan   Email Mike Heenan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Is he really that pissed he didn't get a part in the movie? OR was he so blind he didn't see Catherine Bach running around in next to nothing on the TV show? Funny guy....

article

'Cooter': Don't Go to 'Dukes of Hazzard' Movie 'Unless It's Cleaned Up'
Wednesday July 13, 11:44 am ET

WASHINGTON, Va., July 13 /PRNewswire/ -- Former Georgia Congressman Ben Jones, who played "Cooter" on the hit TV series "The Dukes of Hazzard," has blasted the new film version to be released in August as a "profanity-laced script with blatant sexual situations that mocks the good clean family values of our series."

In an open letter to the fans of the show on his Web site, Jones says that "rather than honoring our legendary show, they have chosen to degrade it." He closes by saying that fans should send the producers a message that says, "If you don't clean it up, we're not going to see it." He adds, "Maybe a kick in their pocketbook will get their attention."

Jones, who was defeated by Newt Gingrich in 1994, now operates two "Dukes of Hazzard" museums, in Nashville and Gatlinburg, Tenn.

The series is now having a very successful cable run on CMT based in Nashville, Tenn.

Below is the letter as it appears on Jones' Web site http://www.cootersplace.com:

Hey Y'all,

I thought this would be a good time to let everybody know my feelings about the upcoming "Dukes of Hazzard" feature film, since if it weren't for the "Dukes" fans, our show would have been long since "put out to pasture." The folks who love our show have kept it alive and well, despite the lack of respect it has been shown by "Hollywood."

Web sites like ours have been an extraordinary means of communication for the "Dukes" community. The power of the internet has enabled us to not only keep the show viable, but to help make it a hit show all over again. CMT is getting record ratings and the kids of America think it is a new show. In our business, it doesn't get much better than that.

Like our fans, those of us who worked on the show have a special affection for it. For over 25 years we have cared about it, nourished it, and fought for it. And it seems to me that it is time for us to have our voices heard again. From all I have seen and heard, the "Dukes" movie is a sleazy insult to all of us who have cared about the "Dukes of Hazzard" for so long.

You probably know that the creators of this film wanted absolutely nothing to do with the original members of the cast. Doesn't that seem strange to you, given how popular our show is right now, and how popular our cast still is? After all, our huge success for so many years is the reason they are making the film, and the film, after all, is about us.

In the last few years I reckon I've done many hundreds of interviews around the country on radio and television and for dozens of newspapers. I always tell them that ours is a classic family show with positive values, great action, wonderful slapstick comedy, mighty fine country music, and a very gifted cast who had great chemistry. America could tell that we were clearly enjoying what we were doing and for that hour folks could forget their troubles and just have fun along with us. It is exactly the kind of entertainment that families crave right now.

Lately most of the interviewers want to know my opinion of the "movie" version that is coming out in August. I've always tried to be candid with my opinions, and when it comes to this film, I think it would be a mistake for me to pull the punches. Like you, I haven't seen the film, but I have read the script, I've talked to a lot of people who worked on the set, and I've seen the raunchy TV commercial. Frankly, I think the whole project shows an arrogant disrespect for our show, for our cast, for America's families, and for the sensibilities of the heartland of our country.

Unless they clean it up before the August 5th release date I would strongly recommend that true blue Dukes fans hold their noses and pass this one up. And whatever you do, don't take any youngsters to see it. As plain as I can put it, the only thing this movie shares with our show is the title. Oh, they do have the General Lee flying through the air, although according to the New York Times, they didn't even use stunt drivers.

Sure it bothers me that they wanted nothing to do with the cast of our show, but what bothers me much more is the profanity laced script with blatant sexual situations that mocks the good clean family values of our series. Now, anybody who knows me knows that I'm not a prude. But this kind of toilet humor has no place in Hazzard County. Rather than honoring our legendary show, they have chosen to degrade it.

When CMT brought our series back on the air in February of this year, 23 million viewers tuned in on that first weekend. Very few, if any, movies have ever matched those kind of numbers for an opening weekend. Our show is a hit right now! Very young children have fallen in love with the "Dukes" on CMT, just as their parents did 25 years ago. They love the positive values of our show, its wholesome friendliness, and the fact that Bo and Luke are heroes who always make the right moral choice. How can the producers of this film be so cynical, so jaded, so out of touch with America's heartland as to trash a great family show in this way?

Well, there may not be much we can do, but we have to do all we can. Let's send them a message: "If you don't clean it up, we're not going to see it." Maybe a kick in their pocketbook will get their attention.

The Hon. Ben Jones
The BriarPatch
Washington,Va.

 |  IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 07-24-2005 01:20 PM      Profile for Tim Reed   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Actually, I wondered the same thing, Mike. I don't know this guy from Adam, or the show, but I've seen stills from it over the years. He does have a hypocritical point: Hollywood has indeed gone off the deep end with vile language and toilet humor, particularly in "kid's" movies. It's just not necessary to storytelling. [Roll Eyes]

 |  IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002


 - posted 07-24-2005 02:59 PM      Profile for Mark J. Marshall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sounds like his problem is that he's upset at the prospect of his family friendly TV show being turned into a PG-13 frat-boy comedy complete with "Sexual Content, Crude And Drug Related Humor, Language, and Comic Action Violence" (quote from the MPAA rating) ...although he probably isn't all that upset with "comic action violence" as much as he is with the other stuff.

Frankly, it sounds to me like he has a point. You would NEVER have seen such a warning on the TV show. But as usual, the Hollyweird crowd feels compelled to use the lowest form of humor every chance it gets.

Meanwhile, studio execs continue to wonder why attendance is declining.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Heenan
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1896
From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Registered: Mar 2000


 - posted 07-24-2005 03:22 PM      Profile for Mike Heenan   Email Mike Heenan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
But isn't all that stuff in the TV show itself except for the language, crude and drug related humor? Lol. I think he's just steamed he didn't get any royalties or wasn't offered a part. I remember him on an interview when the movie was announced or in production, saying something to the effect of "I'm available".

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 07-24-2005 09:42 PM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mark J. Marshall
You would NEVER have seen such a warning on the TV show. But as usual, the Hollyweird crowd feels compelled to use the lowest form of humor every chance it gets.

Meanwhile, studio execs continue to wonder why attendance is declining.

Oh, come on. Do you think if they made the movie with the same content, production values, etc. as the TV show that they wouldn't have gotten their G-rated butts laughed right out of town?

Raunchy sells because people like it. Look at "Wedding Crashers" and the "American Pie" series. "Dukes" would probably be a hit movie if they had Daisy crawling around naked on the hood of the General Lee and got an R-rating.

 |  IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 07-24-2005 09:48 PM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If the trailer is any indication, "Dukes" is gonna be one big steaming turd. [bs] [puke]

 |  IP: Logged

Erick Akers
Arse Kicker

Posts: 201
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 07-24-2005 10:22 PM      Profile for Erick Akers   Email Erick Akers   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I second that opinion,

Dasy did have the scanty look; but, most of the sexual content was inuendo, which she used for distracting Cleatus and Rosco P.

As things go,
The series was also a far cry from the movie that started it all in the first place!

 |  IP: Logged

Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002


 - posted 07-24-2005 11:24 PM      Profile for Pravin Ratnam   Email Pravin Ratnam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Catherine Bach was sexy, but she didnt come across as a retarded airhead.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002


 - posted 07-25-2005 01:34 AM      Profile for Mark J. Marshall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mike Blakesley
Oh, come on. Do you think if they made the movie with the same content, production values, etc. as the TV show that they wouldn't have gotten their G-rated butts laughed right out of town?
Then why not just make an original PG-13 (or R) comedy about two southern schmucks riding around in a car getting chased by an inept sheriff and his deputy? Why hijack the characters and title of a family friendly TV show?

 |  IP: Logged

Brian Michael Weidemann
Expert cat molester

Posts: 944
From: Costa Mesa, CA United States
Registered: Feb 2004


 - posted 07-25-2005 03:01 AM      Profile for Brian Michael Weidemann   Author's Homepage   Email Brian Michael Weidemann   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Am I missing something? The original premise of the original show was two guys, the heroes, bootlegging alcohol and running from the law, and getting away with it! Wasn't it? Is that particularly family friendly? Whatever "family values" were on top of that would seem a little lost on me.

And that said, I have no interest at all in seeing this [bs] anyway. Never mind the fact that I will never contribute anything to Jessica Simpson's career, ever; this movie just has nothing I would want entertainment out of.

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 07-25-2005 10:33 AM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mark J. Marshall
Then why not just make an original PG-13 (or R) comedy about two southern schmucks riding around in a car getting chased by an inept sheriff and his deputy? Why hijack the characters and title of a family friendly TV show?

Well first off, it may have felt like it was family friendly, but you can disguise just about anything well enough and call it family friendly.

Secondly, if they did a movie with all the same elements, it woudl be a theft of orginal concept material. There would be lawsuits, and no one would care.

By actually PURCHASING the rights to the show, they can make a movie BASED on the tv show, which of couse was stolen from an original movie.

In fact they had to shell out big bucks to get all that dirty laundry taken care of.

The DUKES are easily recognizable, easy to make money with, and just some plain dirty fun, no deep story.

You know, we have too many efforts to make film all kinds of serious, and they usually fall flat and fail. This one makes no kind of pretentious effort at all to come off serious. It is what it is, and people knock it for NOT lying to you about what it is?

I personally will go and have fun. That's all this film is. A big stinking pile of fun. No story, no plot, no acting, just racing cars around and people acting like itiots. It takes none of my remaining brain cells to "figure" this movie out. All it takes is me, three hot dogs, a pack of nachos, a pepperoni pizza, a gigantic diet coke ( [Eek!] by the way, yes I know a DIET coke with all that crap makes no sense, other than to cut out the ungodly amount of sugar in my soda, cuts down on teeth rotting ya know), and I am set.

Afterwards, I go home, sleep, go to work, and not give a flying rats ass if it was good or not, as long as i had fun.

Ciao

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 07-25-2005 02:15 PM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mark J. Marshall
Then why not just make an original PG-13 (or R) comedy about two southern schmucks riding around in a car getting chased by an inept sheriff and his deputy? Why hijack the characters and title of a family friendly TV show?

Beeeecaussseee..............name recognition. By "hijacking" the name, they can save about 75% of the advertising budget.

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 07-25-2005 05:18 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Brian Michael Weidemann
Am I missing something? The original premise of the original show was two guys, the heroes, bootlegging alcohol and running from the law, and getting away with it! Wasn't it? Is that particularly family friendly? Whatever "family values" were on top of that would seem a little lost on me.
Well said, Brian. I'll second that opinion.

The original Dukes of Hazard TV series is NOT a "family show." Catherine Bach may not have had her tits out in full view, but the overall tone of the show made the image of being an outlaw cool. How in the hell can anyone say that's family friendly with a straight face?

We seem to have a really stupid form of "morality" in movies and TV shows. Basically everything is okay as long as there are no naked body parts and a few curse words are bleeped. We can get away with showing brutal acts of violence or glamorizing characters that betray their professional collegues or their spouses in affairs.

Of course one can pose that bigger picture argument of "art is just imitating life versus life is imitating art." Regardless, part of the culture in the United States is pretty vicious. Our murder rate and rate of other violent crimes is much higher than all other developed countries. Our culture sends the message that violence and selfishness are tools for success. But all we're worried about is fuzzing out some harmless titty nipples and bleeping a few curse words. Yeah, that'll get a lot accomplished.
[Roll Eyes]

 |  IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 07-25-2005 06:19 PM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If you have fun watching this, more power to you. It would be a chore for me to sit through though. Kinda like that last Charlie's Angels movie. So I'll be skipping it.

Is that OK? [uhoh]

[beer]

 |  IP: Logged

David Favel
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 764
From: Ashburton, New Zealand
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 07-25-2005 07:41 PM      Profile for David Favel   Email David Favel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Did I read that the MPAA okayed swearing in a movie because it didn't refer to sexual penetration?

By that logic,
You're fucked is O.K.
Where
I'm gonna fuck you is not.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.