"The Heartbreak Kid" script

email this story
read comments (27)
post a comment

A guy sent me an October 2006 script for the Farrelly Brothers' The Heartbreak Kid (Dreamamount, 10.5.07), which stars the rapidly graying Ben Stiller.

The cover page says "Most Recent Revisions by John Hamburg and Peter Farrelly," and then "Revisions by Peter Farrelly, Bobby Farrelly and Kevin Barnett," and then "From a short story by Jay Friedman" and "Adapted from the original screenplay by Neil Simon," and then "Previous revisions by Leslie Dixon & Scot Armstrong."

"Leslie Dixon did the first draft," the guy explains, "and it was pretty good before it became Farrelly-ized. Her draft attracted Jason Bateman for the lead part, but the Farrelly drafts attracted Stiller. Although the movie tested higher than There's Something About Mary, they went back to re-shoot the ending a few times to make it just right."

"No Country" trailer<< previous | next >>Morrison's folly

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 13, 2007 at 7:32 PM

comment #1

travis b says ...

"the rapidly graying ben stiller"

totally necessary description. great journalism.

Posted by travis b at June 13, 2007 7:59 PM

comment #2

Craptastic says ...

rapidly graying...?

Who cares?

Wells, what the fuck is it with you? You sound like you should be chatting it up with a bunch of hens in a church basement.

You are the shallowest "columnist" I've ever read.

Thank god he's not "fat".

I say we all call Wells for what he is... a real moon face.

How's that feel, moon face?

Posted by Craptastic at June 13, 2007 8:40 PM

comment #3

BurmaShave says ...

With a special rewrite by Sir Stewart Wallace as himself.

Posted by BurmaShave at June 13, 2007 9:14 PM

comment #4

JamesK says ...

Jeff -- when exactly is your 60th birthday? In October or November? Get thee to the "salon" posthaste for thine coloring appointment!

Posted by JamesK at June 13, 2007 10:06 PM

comment #5

The Winchester says ...

But Ben Stiller was that gray in Night at the Museum, which couldn't have been more than a year ago to film. He's like Clooney grey in this heartbreak kid movie.

(By the way, saw a test screening of it a few months back. It's pretty funny, and there's a lot more nudity than I thought. Not their greatest, but far from horrible)

Posted by The Winchester at June 13, 2007 11:07 PM

comment #6

Mcflyboy says ...

I still don't know what exactly Jeff is trying to say with these recent Heartbreak Kid posts. By posting an item about how many screenwriters worked on it and how grey Stiller's hair is, I figure he is insinuating something. I think Jeff may think both Stiller and the Farrellys are "over."

Posted by Mcflyboy at June 14, 2007 1:32 AM

comment #7

George Prager says ...

Stiller is 41, Grodin was 37 in the original. Face it, Stiller is too old for the part.

Posted by George Prager at June 14, 2007 5:16 AM

comment #8

George Prager says ...

I get the feeling that some people on this board would prefer it if you heeded the old maxim "If you can't say somethinig nice, don't say anything at all."

That said. Maybe you should revive the old USA TODAY Larry King's News and Views model:

If you look up class in the dictionary, you see a picture of Tommy Lee Jones. That Margaret Thatcher was one great lady. Ran into Tony, the little boy who lives in Danny Torrance's mouth at LAX. He's producing films now. My record is clear, I've never set foot in a Rickle's...

Posted by George Prager at June 14, 2007 5:29 AM

comment #9

jesse says ...

It is true, George, that about a quarter-to-half of commenters come here to scream about what they hate about Jeff's every word. Or at least pick it apart like they're really sticking it to someone (cough, jeffmcm).

I mean, I think some of Jeff's hang-ups are weird, too. But I'll at least try to make some kind of counter-argument, like: I think it's refreshing that Stiller is letting himself go gray. Dying your hair for vanity is easy enough. He looks kinda cool with the Clooney-ish grayness.

Posted by jesse at June 14, 2007 7:11 AM

comment #10

Mr. Muckle says ...

Oh, George, they'd be hypocrites then, because if that's what they preferred, they wouldn't say anything nasty about Jeff, would they?

Posted by Mr. Muckle at June 14, 2007 7:34 AM

comment #11

The Winchester says ...

Here's a compliment: At least it's not another Sopranos post.

Posted by The Winchester at June 14, 2007 8:02 AM

comment #12

nemo says ...

"... the rapidly graying Ben Stiller ..."

I'll admit it, I laughed when I read this. But he's not much older than Charles Grodin was when he made the original. Stiller was born in November 1965, so he's still 41. Grodin was born 1935 and made HB in 1972, so he was 37. A difference of 4 years. Nothing.

I haven't seen Charles Grodin in years. I miss that guy. Stiller's comedy turns awfully manic too often, but Grodin was always cool, dry, and ironic.

Posted by nemo at June 14, 2007 8:14 AM

comment #13

gruver1 says ...

Wells to travisb, craptastic, jamesb and all of the other elegant gentlemen who became enraged at my observation that Ben Stiller is going rapidly gray: I was only struck -- in a way that I felt was neutral and non-judgmental -- by the sudden onset of gray in Stiller's thatch. Sorry, but it struck me -- it would strike ANYONE, including the Int'l Society of Professional Hairdressers -- as significantly grayer than the texture of Stiller's hair as it appeared in "Night at the Museum." You guys were also struck by it -- and anyone who's been watching Stiller since the days of the "Ben Stiller Show" has also. It's just honesty. This isn't to say that Ben Stiller is withering on the vine or that he's a devalued person because his hair is rapidly graying -- that's in YOUR heads. I just said to myself, "Whoa...rapid manifestation of a syndrome that affects some guys when they turn 40" and then, because it's at least somewhat startling, I said "rapidly graying." It's called being candid and honest, you pricks. And then you guys come back with flat-out physical insults and cheap age-ist bullshit -- slings and arrows used by the truly crude and thuggish. You trashed me for noting a thuddingly obvious organic manifestation, which, like it or not, is WHAT'S THERE. And anyone who would tell me they wouldn't notice a sudden, nay, radical advance of gray hair on a guy they know and/or comment on it to a friend at a party is AN OUT-AND-OUT LIAR. To my use of a two innocuous words you responded with torrents of truly ugly, low-grade vitriol. What I wrote was allowable because, however you want to slice it, it's FUCKING TRUE. What you wrote is low and contemptible because it was about your own RAGE and HOSTILITY and WHITE-KNUCKLE FEAR about a fate that awaits us all.

Posted by gruver1 at June 14, 2007 8:15 AM

comment #14

travis b says ...

actually i brought it up because it was a random interjection about a person who is only peripherally involved in the story at hand and it came across as a way to throw a cut at someone, who you obviously have a distaste for. your other story earlier about this stiller movie would've been better fit for this interjection because A.) it was about stiller and his involvement and B.) there was actually a picture of stiller. here, you're talking about the process behind the script which has zero involvement with stiller. what it told me is that you're afraid that the story you posted sucks and that you need something else to get people involved. and you know what, it works. we all have flaws and most of the time those flaws are talked about. but, does it really need to be brought up in a story about a script? again, poor journalism jeff. if you think that's thuggish, then that's too bad. i think most of the time you're great, but that was just too bizarre not to comment on.

Posted by travis b at June 14, 2007 8:51 AM

comment #15

Craig Kennedy says ...

As one who is probably put in the "quarter-to-half of commenters who come here to scream" category, I didn't have a problem with the gray hair observation, but for one week I promise not to say anything critical or sarcastic about anything Jeff posts...except for the one comment I already made in another thread.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at June 14, 2007 9:48 AM

comment #16

christian says ...

"It's called being candid and honest, you pricks. And then you guys come back with flat-out physical insults and cheap age-ist bullshit -- slings and arrows used by the truly crude and thuggish."

that could describe your own style here, jeff. the problem is that you call out aicn for acting like second graders but you resort to the most base shallow comments regarding a person's appearance, typically when it has nothing to do with the films you're talking about.

so stiller is 41. hey, age happens. with you it's always a negative tho. it sounds like your son talking: "man, that dude is way old!"

for somebody who rails against the shallow hollywood folk, you often revel in this pool.

Posted by christian at June 14, 2007 10:11 AM

comment #17

George Prager says ...

Jeff's comments are totally relevant--Ben Stiller is too old for the part.

Posted by George Prager at June 14, 2007 11:22 AM

comment #18

christian says ...

right. because 41 year olds just don't get married.

where's seth rogen?

Posted by christian at June 14, 2007 11:32 AM

comment #19

Craptastic says ...

Wow. I think the "moonface" bit really got to him.

Wells, face it.... Go back and look at a majority of your posts. You just described yourself. There's a reason why people here complain... and it has nothing to do with my own issues. How childish is that to brush someone's comment aside and say that the issue lies within US and not YOU. That argument never works. Especially with women.

If your point was to say that you were dumbfounded by how quickly he's graying... why didn't you just say that in the first place? By just saying "rapidly graying"... it comes across, to me anyway, as snide and catty.

Posted by Craptastic at June 14, 2007 11:32 AM

comment #20

jeffmcm says ...

Nobody ever wants to admit that they're a bad guy.

Posted by jeffmcm at June 14, 2007 11:41 AM

comment #21

George Prager says ...

"Wow. I think the "moonface" bit really got to him."
I know that there are some people on this board with delusions of grandeur, Crap, but you really take the cake.

Yes Stiller is too old. 11 and 13 years older than the actresses opposite him.

Posted by George Prager at June 14, 2007 12:32 PM

comment #22

christian says ...

"Yes Stiller is too old. 11 and 13 years older than the actresses opposite him."

yes, welcome to the wonderful world of movies.

Posted by christian at June 14, 2007 1:04 PM

comment #23

Craptastic says ...

Stuff it, George. It was a joke.

Posted by Craptastic at June 14, 2007 2:18 PM

comment #24

George Prager says ...

Do you think they'll ever remake Soul Man?

Posted by George Prager at June 14, 2007 3:49 PM

comment #25

christian says ...

yesm with eddie murphy playing a white guy who turns himself into a black guy.

Posted by christian at June 14, 2007 3:52 PM

comment #26

The Winchester says ...

I realize I'm far too late to this again, and what's been said has been said, but I just realized my post should have read "Stiller was NOT that gray in Night at the Museum".

My post was actually supporting Wells, but I typed to fast and changed the whole meaning. Yeah, Stiller quickly turned gray, and it's weird in the movie. Again, sorry for the tardiness, but it seems to have upset Wells.

Posted by The Winchester at June 16, 2007 10:17 AM

comment #27