Discuss: Is Judd Apatow This Generation's John Hughes?
If you're a fan of either man (or both), I bet the question Is Judd Apatow this generation's John Hughes? inspires an immediate, gut-level "yes" or "no." It's either a valid comparison or a terrible insult. But let's talk about it. The two filmmakers are similarly prolific. Between 1984 and 1991, Hughes served as writer, director, or producer -- and sometimes all three -- on a whopping 14 movies. Apatow, meanwhile, has his name on 15 films just since 2005, three as director (The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Knocked Up, and the upcoming Funny People), and the rest as writer or producer. Granted, a producer (especially "executive producer") doesn't always have much influence on the actual creative content of a film, but it's not hard to look at something like, say, Superbad, and see Apatow's fingerprints.
Apatow-produced films tend to rely less on tight screenplays and more on improvisation and horsin' around -- but Hughes dabbled in that, too, particularly when working with people like Steve Martin and John Candy (Planes, Trains & Automobiles) or Chevy Chase (the Vacation movies). There are supposedly enough deleted scenes from Planes to make a three-hour version of the film, an idea that should sound familiar to Apatow fans.
On a deeper level, the films by Apatow and Hughes tend to focus on teenagers or immature adults whose lives are altered either by regular slice-of-life stuff (losing one's virginity; graduating from high school) or major events (unplanned pregnancy!). The films are always comedies, and often sarcastic and caustic (and, with Apatow, incredibly vulgar), yet there's always a tender side, too. Their films have heart.
Technically, Apatow and Hughes even worked together on Drillbit Taylor, which Apatow produced and which was based on an old story by Hughes (who was credited as "Edmond Dantes").
But there are differences, too. Hughes is reclusive and avoids interviews; Apatow is outgoing and omnipresent. Hughes worked almost exclusively in the PG and PG-13 realms, while Apatow is usually rated R (and a hard R at that). Hughes' films felt simpler, more teen-friendly -- but then again, teens have changed a lot since the mid-1980s. Kids under 17 might technically be barred from seeing Apatow's films, but they see them anyway, and they relate to them.
Finally, John Hughes and Judd Apatow both have four-letter first names starting with "J," and six-letter last names. I don't know what more proof you need.
I leave it to you. Is Judd Apatow this generation's John Hughes? If not, does that title fall to someone else? Or was Hughes a hack who wasn't worth emulating anyway? (Note: If that's your position, may the gods have mercy on you.)
Black Friday Movie Deals: Best Buy
Sex and Nudity Don't Draw You to the Movies?
What Makes a Real Vampire?
Robert Downey Jr. Wants to Retire?
Jaycee Dugard's Horrific Story to Get a Sleazy Adaptation
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-02-2009 @ 12:15PM
MarkH said...
You mean, is Apatow going to flame out after only directing 8 movies, and then do pretty much jack squat creatively for the next 20-odd years?
No, probably not.
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 12:18PM
Mike said...
I don't know I'd necessarily make that comparison. At least not yet. I think Apatow needs a longer resume as director before you start drawing that parallel.
If we're relating the two as THE comedic filmmakers of their respective decades, then I'd probably agree with that. The 80s were the John Hughes era, as the 00s seem to be Apatow's. But I think it has more to do with success and impact of their films than any correlation between the subject matter or target audience.
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 12:24PM
DiZarien said...
I think he is my generations John Hughes, we ( I'm still one) teens have changed dramatically since the 1980's. I believe Superbad set the bar for teen comedies this decade, and maybe for the next.
Hats off to Apatow....
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 12:27PM
dwester said...
He's just as overrated, so why not?
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 12:28PM
Eric said...
I would have to agree. The man can make me laugh and touches my heart at the same time. Just like Hughes.
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 12:42PM
Baxter said...
I think it's both a valid comparison AND a terrible insult because it means he makes a ton of movies with varying quality and a lot of the same cast.
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 3:02PM
mlavoie said...
My gut-level reaction is "not really." But I can't say I'm an Apatow fan (Hughes was kind of hit-and-miss for me), so perhaps I'm not the best judge.
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 3:08PM
Pingles said...
I enjoy Apatow but I think the comparison is off.
Hughes (a smattering):
# Home Alone (1990) (written by)
# Planes, Trains & Automobiles (1987) (written by)
# Some Kind of Wonderful (1987) (written by)
# Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986) (written by)
# Pretty in Pink (1986) (written by)
# The Breakfast Club (1985) (written by)
# Sixteen Candles (1984) (writer)
Apatow:
# Pineapple Express (2008) (story)
# You Don't Mess with the Zohan (2008) (written by)
# Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (2007) (written by)
# Knocked Up (2007) (written by)
# Fun with Dick and Jane (2005) (screenplay) (story)
# The 40 Year Old Virgin (2005) (written by)
I suppose if you include PRODUCING there might be more on Apatows resume, but Hughes is pretty impressive. Gonna be a while before I throw Apatow in the same group.
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 4:57PM
fuzzy dunlop said...
James L. Brooks is a better comparison.
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 4:43PM
mcafee_matthew said...
It is entirely a generational thing - thankfully though there are many of us who grew up watching Hughes' films and remember those films with nostalgic euphoria but who also can relate to Apatow's films - they are absolutely definitive of this era of comedies.
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 5:17PM
Jim Rob Jones said...
You pathetic lowly idea stealing mofo's. I have posted everytime you mentioned Judd "Flash in the Pan" Apatow that he is this generations John Hughes. And now you write a blog entry about it?!?
Pathetic! And if you feel my comments have enough merit to start a discussion on your blog WHY DO YOU DELETE MOST OF MY POSTS! PARTICULARLY THE ONES CRITICAL OF YOUR IMMATURE MOVIE VIEWPOINTS!
YOU KIDS ARE MORONS!
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 6:36PM
Dan said...
Sounds like Jim Jones needs to cut back on the Kool-Aid.
...In any case, yes! This is totally a valid claim, and one that I have also contended in conversations with friends.
Reply
3-03-2009 @ 6:52AM
Vivian said...
John Hughes made movies for everyone. Judd Apatow makes movies for men. When was the last time he made a movie about a woman, whose sole purpose was not restricted to what a man wants from her ? Give me "The Breakfast Club" and "Sixteen Candles" anytime, over the sexist drivel coming out from this "filmmaker".
Reply
3-03-2009 @ 4:18PM
Kevin said...
He actually reminds me more of Roger Cormin, believe it or not. Well, actually more like a Roger Cormin-like figure of comedy. He likes to dabble in a lot of different comedy waters, he seems to vehemently trust his peers (Jason Siegel getting Sarah Marshal made otherwise seems unlikely), and he likes to put his name all over things that he might not have had the biggest hand in.
I have to say I'm a pretty enthusiiastic fan of his two directorial features, and saying his films "rely less of tight screenplays" than Hughes is pretty unfounded. Just because they feature improvisation doesn't detract from the realization of the characters or story. Does a Hughes movie with oddly placed dance sequences written into the script display tighter screen writing?
These were the first decent comedy films of the last ten years that weren't ridiculously high concept (I realize titling a film The 40 Year-Old Virgin is about as high concept as Robocop, but that hurdle was overcome with surprisingly fleshed out character rarely seen in comedy, this decade or any). The films might all seem to focus on men in different states of arrested development, but they ring truer than any of Hughes archetype high school stand-ins.
For some odd reason, I enjoy that his directorial efforts almost completely date and bury in cement some of the more traditional comedies he's had a smaller involvement in (Zohan, Drillbit Taylor, Walk Hard, etc), as though he's saying, sure I'll take a check, but I'm not gonna spend six months of my life on this thing..
Plus, he was the first to give significant spotlight to Paul Rudd, so he can't be all bad.
Reply
3-03-2009 @ 8:00PM
David Musto said...
Judd Apatow isn't even this generation's Chris Columbus. Hughes' films actually contains something that Apatow's don't approach: wit. His movies are nothing but lowest common denominator garbage. Good god, Hughes made Anthony Michael Hall and Matthew Broderick funny. I have never laughed at anything Seth Rogen has ever said except his objection to a possible Ghostbusters 3 (and that was more ironic funny, not ha-ha). It's a shame that Kevin Smith felt the need to dumb himself down further just to try and compete with Apatow's box-office numbers.
Reply