Everything Else, Man, I Love Funny — June 11, 2012 at 3:00 pm

TAYLOR KITSCH UNLEASHES HIS TRIFECTA OF TERRIBLENESS WITH OLIVER STONE’S SAVAGES

by

 

It’s been quite the year for Taylor Kitsch. First, he bombed the box office with the stink of John Carter. Then, pretending that wasn’t enough, he flooded theaters with the naval nasty that was Battleship. Sensing ulterior motives on the part of the model-turned-actor, I sat down with Kitsch while he wasn’t busy crapping all over our summer movie season to ask him why he hates me and my love of cinema.

Right off the bat, I knew Kitsch had something up his sleeve. When he sat down for the interview, he had this shit-eating grin on his face that told me everything without words. “You know,” Kitsch said with a knowing smile. “I’m excited. I’m two-for-two so far this year.” I inquired as to what he was referring to, and he told me his master plan “…to gross the most amount of losses possible in a single year.”

Kitsch watches his box office numbers dissipate as his movie sucks harder and harder the longer it runs

 Wondering why an actor would wish his own films to crash hard and die a fiery death, I asked Kitsch what his problem was. “I don’t have a problem. Maybe you do. Do you remember when the Detroit Lions had a winless season? They went 0-16. That’s amazing! When I saw that, I knew I had to at least try to emulate them. I mean, who else can say they didn’t accomplish anything positive whatsoever in an entire year? Screw the Oscar; I want the Razzie.”

Not everyone was as smug about Kitsch’s box office record. Rich Ross, former chairman of Walt Disney Studios, resigned earlier this year in the wake of John Carter’s $200 million whirlpool of suck. I caught up with the once-happy Ross to see how he’s been handling his life after Kitsch gambled it away. “Did you just say Taylor Kitsch?” Ross asked. “I hate that little prick. No, no. I don’t care anymore. I don’t have a handler or a P.R. guy or any of that crap. I just have a mortgage and a lot of regret. Go away. Please, just go away.” Ross then began sobbing uncontrollably.

Ross, right, with Kitsch. Both men were happier back then.

Now, Ross ends his days by sneaking into his former studio and crying himself to sleep.

Not to be outdone by himself, Kitsch then set his sights on Peter Berg and Battleship. While Berg – much like Ross – holds his own bit of responsibility for that deep-sea debacle, Kitsch certainly didn’t try to make things any better. “Oh, I knew,” Kitsch said with an even smugger grin. “Just the mere fact I was showing my face on-screen meant at least $80 million down the drain. Washed away, down, down..[twirls his fingers downward]….down. You may think me a cruel man, but I’m simply trying to accomplish a dream. Am I not allowed to do that?”

Berg disagrees. “Kitsch should learn to respect other people’s work. Battleship was never going to be an award-winning drama, but I should have at least covered up his face or something so no one could tell it was him. What did it earn? Look, can you pay for this sandwich? I’ll, pay you b…I’ll wash your car or something.”

Berg would soon rather slap Kitsch than his Lego counterpart.

Speaking of masks, Oliver Stone must have been listening in on our interview. Check out this image from his forthcoming film, Savages, which is inexplicably starring Taylor Kitsch.

Which one is Kitsch? Oliver Stone doesn’t want you to know

Oliver Stone really doesn’t want you to know

Despite his facial features being obscured for “…90 percent of the film” according to Stone, Kitsch isn’t worrying. “Yea, Oliver’s been trying to keep me in this mask thing. It’s not going to work. When he’s out to lunch, you can bet your ass I’ll be filming a few new scenes sans this obstruction. Again, it’ll be great. Another $70 million gone. My dream will be complete! Sorry, Oliver, but not really. Sucker!”

It’s hard to tell at this point if he can seriously bat 0 for 3, but if Kitsch’s attitude is any indication, Oliver Stone had better break out the editing suite and replace any emergence of Kitsch’s face with a sleeping kitten or something. I’d pay to see a 6-foot-tall kitten get embroiled in a drug ring and have to fight to get his girlfriend back. Wouldn’t you?

 

Tags
Author:

42 Comments

  • Reply
    Fogs June 12, 2012 6:01 am

    Wow, remind me never to cross YOU guys.

    Oh… wait….

    Anyways, I’m a Friday Night LIghts fan, so I’m rooting for Mr Kitsch. I hope he pulls his career out of the vertical nosedive it’s currently in.

    That said, this article had some amusing moments, I suppose. Such as Rich Ross cursing him out, and Oliver Stone forcing him to wear the Luchadore mask… ;)

  • Reply
    Finn June 12, 2012 1:54 pm

    Thing is, for satire to work, it has to have a grain of truth somewhere. But poor Taylor Kitsch doesn’t control when his movies come out, doesn’t finance them or market them, and he’s about as responsible for their box office totals as Sam Worthington was for “Avatar” being a huge hit, so this just doesn’t work. And Peter Berg has already hired Kitsch to star in his next film, so…

    • Reply
      Sir Phobos
      Twitter:
      June 12, 2012 2:26 pm

      Kitsch certainly didn’t sell me on any of the movies he’s in, so I think you’re off base. It doesn’t matter if he has no say in the marketing. He’s the star of John Carter, and a lot of what you see in the trailers is about him. He didn’t do it for me, so he is a direct reason why I don’t care. On the other hand, it’s satire, so he doesn’t actually have to be the cause of a film’s demise in order for me to rip him on it.

      Is Bruce Willis a major reason the Die Hard movies did well? Probably. What about when Adam Sandler makes another crappy comedy that maybe gets its money back but everyone hates? Is he, as an actor, not responsible?

      So what if Berg hired him again? The joke still plays because of how badly Battleship did. That’s the grain of truth you were talking about. As a satirist, I don’t care if Berg works with him again.

      I’m sorry you didn’t like it, though. Maybe read it again without associating it so 1-to-1 with reality.

      • Reply
        Finn June 12, 2012 10:38 pm

        It’s just not Kitsch’s job to “sell” you on anything – that’s the marketing department’s job, and the marketing campaign for John Carter is going down as one of the worst in cinematic history. (And no amount of good marketing could’ve saved “Battleship.”)

        Of course you’re right that the star power of people who are already very high-profile can be judged on how well their box office totals are. I think the huge flop that is “Dark Shadows” speaks to Johnny Depp’s waning popularity, for example, and “Knight and Day” to Tom Cruise’s and Cameron Diaz’s. But Taylor Kitsch is a nobody; if he wasn’t a selling point in the marketing campaigns, well, neither was anything else.

        I think it might have been funnier with better dialogue, and I agree with the above poster that the Rich Ross jokes worked, if it makes you feel better. But, no, I don’t need to read it again. lol.

        • Reply
          Sir Phobos
          Twitter:
          June 13, 2012 2:19 am

          I dunno. I think you need to read it at least three more times, and act out the dialogue in character.

        • Reply
          Lauren June 13, 2012 7:29 am

          I think it might be Kitsch’s job not to pick bad roles in bad movies. John Carter’s failure might not be his fault (and I’ve heard that it’s better than it seems to be), but he took the part in Battleship. No one told him he had to. He ain’t Liam Neeson and capable of just walking away with a paycheck, not caring how bad the movie is. A good actor is capable of selling a movie, no matter how bad it is. Plenty of great actors do terrible films and are still pleasant to watch (again: Neeson!).

          • Sir Phobos
            Twitter:
            June 13, 2012 2:18 pm

            I don’t think there’s a better example than Neeson. Oh, wait. Does DeNiro count for this? I stopped watching his stuff a long time ago. Maybe that’s to my detriment, I don’t know.

    • Reply
      MarkusWelby1
      Twitter:
      June 12, 2012 2:31 pm

      so what wasn’t truthful about back to back films being multi-million dollar flops?

      • Reply
        Finn June 12, 2012 10:43 pm

        Well, it’s all perspective. They’ve both made hundreds of millions of dollars, which for reasonably budgeted films is a lot of money. But when your star-less movie cost $75 million more than “The Avengers” then, yes, hundreds of millions in BO is still a “flop.”

        That’s not the target of this satire piece, but a satire piece about Taylor Kitsch’s unreasonable contract demands bankrupting two movie studios might have been pretty good.

        • Reply
          Andrew
          Twitter:
          June 13, 2012 9:32 am

          It’s not a matter of perspective because neither Battleship nor John Carter can be called “reasonably budgeted”. The latter cost $250 mil, and it only made ~$280 mil worldwide (with just a quarter of its global take coming out of American cinemas); the former cost around $210 mil, and made ~$290 mil worldwide. That’s horrendous no matter how you look at it.

        • Reply
          Markus
          Twitter:
          June 13, 2012 10:56 am

          Honestly Finn I think you miss the entire point of what we do no disrespect. It’s not about what satire piece about Kitsch would have been better….rather it’s about noticing a pattern and commenting on it. The guy is batting 2 for 2 when it comes to flops. The piece is designed to raise questions like “can this guy ever get a breakout hit” or “is he a big enough star to carry a movie?” We just choose to ask those questions in our own amusing voice, and we’re happy you used your own to let us know what you thought. If you have a satire piece of brilliant comedic gold worthy of checking out please let us know and we’ll happily read it.

    • Reply
      dirtywithclass
      Twitter:
      June 12, 2012 6:42 pm

      …does every actor/actress have there own SWAT team?

    • Reply
      Kaiderman
      Twitter:
      June 14, 2012 4:50 pm

      Poor Taylor Kistch, snorting coke off the ass of models on top of the mounds of cash he made with 3 summer films. ha

  • Reply
    dirtywithclass
    Twitter:
    June 12, 2012 2:25 pm

    If Mickey Rourke can make a comeback, anyone can

  • Reply
    ruth June 12, 2012 2:41 pm

    Poor Kitsch! I actually enjoyed John Carter and the flop isn’t exactly his fault. NO interest whatsoever in seeing Battleship though, but he isn’t the reason I go to the movies or refuse to see one. So I think he’s just out of luck right now, though who knows, he just might bounce back from this.

  • Reply
    Lauren June 13, 2012 7:24 am

    Awww … but he’s so cute!

    • Reply
      Sir Phobos
      Twitter:
      June 13, 2012 2:22 pm

      He kind of seems like a generic “good-looking guy” to me. Like, if he were to pass me on the street, I’m sure I’d notice, but not when Brad Pitt is in the theater next door. Not that I’m attracted to Pitt. Tom Cruise is more my taste.

  • Reply
    Andrew
    Twitter:
    June 13, 2012 9:37 am

    Poor Kitsch. Stone’s one of the greats, so I’ll put some faith in him to get a good performance out of Kitsch, but 2012 hasn’t been kind to Alex Hopper one bit.

    I’ll say this– John Carter isn’t Kitsch’s fault. He’s uneven in the film, working well in much of the Mars footage and none of the Earth footage (he never reads as a Virginian military gentleman for a minute), but the movie’s downfall has a lot more to do with bad script choices and worse marketing. Battleship, on the other hand, is an issue of hubris, a movie made on the success of trash like the Transformers films and which fails on the assumption that audiences will flock to anything that looks like those pictures. Kitsch still doesn’t read as military, and he’s utterly lifeless here, but he’s the least of that film’s problems.

    I don’t know. I can’t help but feel bad for the guy. Seems like he needs the right director to succeed, so hopefully he starts shacking up with those directors.

  • Reply
    Dylan
    Twitter:
    June 13, 2012 10:45 am

    The only real flaw in this piece that I see is that I don’t give enough of a turd about Kitsch to care if he’s floptastic or not. He’s like Josh Duhamel’s little brother, only Duhamel’s already a pale version of Timothy Olyphant.

  • Reply
    3guys1movie June 13, 2012 11:42 am

    He needs to get to work on a Michael Bay directed film as soon as possible.

  • Reply
    Jess
    Twitter:
    June 13, 2012 1:21 pm

    Poor guy is having a rough start to his career but here’s to hoping Savages changes his luck! I can’t wait to see it because I loved the book. The trailer at least makes it look way better than John Carter or Battleship by miles.

  • Reply
    Kaiderman
    Twitter:
    June 14, 2012 4:52 pm

    A movie of Phobos & Welby’s life should be called Trollhunter!

  • Reply
    Heather
    Twitter:
    June 15, 2012 6:06 am

    Just so you know Lions fans are hardcore. You have to be. And Suh will kill yo ass.

Leave a Reply

— required *

— required *

You can add a link to follow you on twitter if you put your username in this box.
Only needs to be added once (unless you change your username). No http or @ Twitter