Screw the review, how the hell is Zach Braf considered a peer to anyone who makes films?

I guess because Braf wrote and directed Garden State, which has the same kind of soundtrack as a Wes Anderson film? Yeah, weird to lump him in with that crowd.

The author of that piece used some big-ass words.

I figured this article, being about the racism of Wes Anderson films, would have to discuss the fate of Kumar Pallana, whose absence in the trailer and the IMDB page for The Darjeeling Limited I recently lamented right here on CM.

The article provided no insight, but a new search of IMDB has let me know that, yes, Kumar Pallana is indeed in Darjeeling Limited! Yes! Phew.

Does writing and directing not count as making films?

True, Zach Braf makes films, but the writer likens him to Wes Anderson, Sophia Coppola, and Noah Baumbach. Just because Zach Braf makes similar films (all while listening to Morning Becomes Eclectic) doesn't make him their peer.

He *is* a peer, he's just not an equal.

Peer: one of the same rank, quality, endowments, character, etc.; an equal; a match; a mate.

That is from Websters. He is not a peer. Three have had some form of critical acclaim, with Oscar noms, etc. The other has had none.

My websters says "one that is of equal standing with another : EQUAL; especially : one belonging to the same societal group especially based on age, grade, or status". by this definition, he's a peer -- a youngish white male american maker of a particular type of movie.

The point of defining peer groups is there should be more than one person in them; if we limit it as much as your websters does, one could argue whether anyone is in a peer group with anyone else. Fine, Wes Anderson is a better and more critically acclaimed director than Braf, and for some reason Braf seems to piss more people off than Anderson, but I hardly think it's objectionable to speak of several men of similar age and similar background with similar sensibilities making similar films that attract similar demographics as being in the same group.

Even dismissing the fact that the other three filmmakers are critically acclaimed, they have all made multiple films. They have a body of work. Zach Braf has made one. Thus, he is not a peer.

OK, then Harper Lee is not a novelist. Can we end this semantic discussion now?

Nope, I will not end it. Did I say he isn't a filmmaker? How they the writer even claim that Braf makes films of a certain type when he has only made one film? A film obviously inspired by Wes. My whole point on this is that it is odd to mention Braf when discussing directors. And stop insulting Harper Lee (who, by the way, was critically acclaimed).

having finally seen "the darjeeling limited," i decided to go back and read this article (bunk) and this thread. i can't believe what it degenerated to. can't you people just leave zach braff alone?! i'm not even disputing your criticisms of him, but this has become an obsession! please, GET HELP!

(also, i disagree that there's anything particularly similar between a "zach braff" soundtrack and a "wes anderson" soundtrack.)

also, jonah weiner seems to me to be nothing more than an envious jew. takes one to know one.