Talk:Frat Pack/Archive 1

Dax Shepard

Should he be getting some treatment from the group and fans as well. He is in "Idiocracy" with Luke Wilson, and was in "Let's Go to Prison" with David Koechner. Also he was in "Employee of the Month" with Andy Dick. Could we possibly consider Dax a possible candidate for the Frat Pack sometime in the future?

Christopher Walken

Why not? He's in basically everything with these guys? Show him some love maybe?

• Basically everything is two movies out of about twenty? (Bottle Rocket, The Cable Guy, Bongwater, Permanent Midnight, The Suburbans, Meet the Parents, Zoolander, Orange County, Old School, Starsky & Hutch, Envy, Dodgeball, Anchorman, Meet the Fockers, Wedding Crashers, Wendell Baker, Tenacious D, Night at the Museum, Blades of Glory, Tropic Thunder)

• You'd be able to convince folks better if you spelled Walken's name correctly. Anyway, the whole idea of the Frat Pack is that these guys are contemporaries - Walken is a generation older. He had a sort of big role in Wedding Crashers and in the barely-a-Frat-Pack-Classic Envy. And he was in the Cowbell sketch with Will. What else??? As for the love, he's listed on the Frat Pack Circle of Trust (http://www.the-frat-pack.com/circle.html). Kevin Crossman 17:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Jackie Chan, Matt Dillon ,David Koechner, Fred Willard

I dunno maybe something....I am not going to argue or anything I just want you guys to consider them for thought not neccessarily for Wiki.

• All four are listed in the [Frat Pack Circle of Trust][1], and Koechner is listed as a Pledge there as well as in the Wiki article. Can you provide more info about what you're actually asking/suggesting?Kevin Crossman 19:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Envy

Why isn't the Envy movie included?

Maybe because it was horrible. Seriously, though, Jack Black and Stiller as leads; sounds like Frat Pack to me. Anyone else? Mujarimojo 01:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

That's the reason. Frat Pack friends like Walken and Poehler don't hurt either.Kevin Crossman 04:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Animated Films

Why can animated films not be in the mix?

• For the same reason that Permanent Midnight is not considered a Frat Pack.66.129.224.36 22:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Jim Carrey

Why not a Frat Pack member, he has been in The Cable Guy, Bruce Almighty, and will be starring with Steve Carell again in the upcoming Horton Hears a Who in 2008.

• Well, let's eliminate Horton since it is an animated feature. The problem with Carrey is that he hasn't costarred with any of the Fratters (unlike Carell, who costarred in Anchorman). If Carrey had made Used Guys with Ben Stiller then this would have been an interesting argument but otherwise there's not a lot to hang you hat on for Carrey. Cable Guy was not the same kind of humor as the classic Frat Pack films, for example.Kevdo 17:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, when you think of Jim Carrey movies, you don't think of any of these guys. He's kind of a big enough star to be a stand-alone guy (not that Wilson(s) and Stiller aren't, though). MAybe he's in the 'circle of trust' though. Mujarimojo 01:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Jennifer Aniston

Why is she not a Frat Pack member?She's been in movies with Ben Stiller,Vince Vaugh and Steve Carell.Isn't that enough? User:alfredosolis

As stated in the first line of the article, the Frat Pack is "a group of male Hollywood actors." --Miss Dark 22:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

It also states that "... actresses such as Jennifer Aniston, Christine Taylor" could be members so why not? Another woman people forget is Juliette Lewis, who appeared in both Old School and Starsky & Hutch. If Paul Rudd can be considered a member surely these two could ...

Why is Mystery Men listed as a Frat Pack movie?

The only Frat Pack cast member was Ben Stiller, which hardly qualifies it as a Frat Pack movie.

Also a topic for discussion is listing "Wilson Brothers" films like Bottle Rocket and Rushmore as Frat Pack films. I disagree with Wilson Bros. films included as a subset of Frat Pack films.

I think your disagreement is more with Wes Anderson films. I don't think his films really fit into the classification. But then again, what is the classification here? Is any film containing several of these actors to be included in this list? Or is a frat pack movie something that embraces sophomoric humor as its central philosophy? That's how I would classify it, and thus wouldn't regard The Royal Tenenbaums -- despite containing both Wilson brothers and Stiller -- as a frat pack movie. If we go by actors alone, we could argue that Cannonball Run 2 is a Rat Pack film, because it has Frank Sinatra and Sammy Davis Jr. in it. I'm also removing The Cable Guy, because that's just plain wrong. It's got a few of the peripheral frat pack members (most of whom I would argue are misplaced here), but nothing else. Everything else on the list is a movie from the very late 90s, early millenium. The Cable Guy is not frat pack.

Jack Black? Am I just missing things, because I cannot see how he fits in with the rest of them, at least in terms of movies they've done. Ok, even reading what is in the article, I still don't agree with the logic that he should be considered with the other five.

• No, Jack Black should be left in the list. Both the USA Today "Frat Pack" article and the original Entertainment Weekly "Slacker Pack" article include the same 6 in the "pack," and Jack Black is definitely in the Pack. --Josh, September 20, 2005, 7:35 PM EST
  • Indeed, while it didn't seem obvious to me at first, black even had a decent cameo in Anchorman, (which I had somehow forgoten about) combine with his roles in films like Orange County, and you can't really deny his place.

rolling stone included him in their list of six.

This doesn't make any sense whatsoever. None of these actors have anything to do with eachother besides doing a couple of movies together. Doesn't merit being compared to the Rat Pack. --Purchase Mafia

Agreed that the Wes Anderson films are not comedically similar, despite similar stars. Blatant disregard for the topic when "Life Aquatic" is used in place of "The 40 Year Old Virgin" to describe a "Frat Pack" film with only one Frat Pack star. (see http://www.the-frat-pack.com/learn-more.html This is the problem with Wikipedia - no quality control. Black gets additional cred for many appearances with other Frat Pack stars, Stiller and Ferrell in particular (note Black/Ferrell appearances at the 2004 Oscars and 2003 MTV Movie Awards), though we agree his overall credentials are less than Stiller/Ferrell/Vaughn/Wilson/Wilson -- Kevin Crossman, Feb. 27, 2006

Organizational Format

Would it be too much to suggest renaming "Other people who often collaborate on the Frat Pack Films include:" as "Pledges"?

Also, shouldn't Jim Carey and Tim Robins get "Honorable Mentions"? Its clearly stated in the article of their contributions. - ConradKilroy, 20 November 2005, 10:31 AM EST

Also, why was Jackie Chan removed? He's been in movies with Owen and Luke Wilson.

Because he's only been in movies with the Wilson brothers, and never Luke alone (or for only one scene,) and never made an appearance in a Frat Pack movie.--Josh 12:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Even though Jackie wasn't in a Frat Pack movie, he should be on the list on because there is no good reason the Wilson brothers were in 80 Days without some sort of camaraderie. Also, Jack Black and Jackie are together in the upcoming movie Kung Fu Panda. -Kurt 24 May 2006

The 40-Year-Old Virgin

Could The 40-Year-Old Virgin be considered a Frat Pack movie? Steve Carrell and Paul Rudd are both considered to be members and were since their roles in Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy and are stars in "Virgin..."

• According to the article, neither Steve Carell nor Paul Rudd is a member. --LostLeviathan 02:53, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  • They're not founding members, but they could very well be considered "Pledges." However, as there were no founding members starring in "The 40-Year-Old Virgin," the movie should be left out of the article for now, until some sort of mass media considers them official members. --Josh, September 20, 2005, 7:37 PM EST

I agree, Steve Carrell deserves to be upgraded, he even sings it so. - ConradKilroy, 20 November 2005, 10:31 AM EST

Granted, media upgrades don't necessarily set grounds for who is in the Frat Pack, but a recent New York Post article (http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/63050.htm) suggests Paul Rudd is also a Frat Pack member. I don't feel Rudd's a member YET, but you could see the validity of the inclusion. He's got co-starring roles in Anchorman, Virgin, and the upcoming Knocked Up, as well as a cameo in Ben Stiller's A Night at the Museum. My point here is that the increasing argument in Rudd's favor raises the overall inclusion of 40 Year-Old Virgin as a Frat Pack film. Sure, if you set strict guidelines, that 40 YOV falls short. However, just as you could argue against, there's more than enough to argue for its inclusion (Frat Pack star, Judd Apatow's involvement, similar farce elements, co-stars like Rudd & Rogen, the Koechner cameo, Frat Pack references to Luke Wilson & Jack Black.) Anyway, while I don't think Rudd's in the Pack yet, I do share the increasingly popular opinion that 40 YOV counts as a Frat Pack film. That's just my two-cents on the whole situation. - Rick Duran, 10 May 2006

New Pledges?

What about Ryan Reynolds (Van Wilder), Kal Penn (Harold & Kumar), John Cho (Harold & Kumar)? I don't know for certain if they have been in any movies with the others of the "Frat Pack" but their humor seems to be in the same style.

I also don't think Jim Carrey should be included. He hasn't starred in any of the more recent/prominent films of the "Pack" nor has he made one of the trademark cameos of the group in fellow packers' films.

Finally - how about a page for the old school comedians? Bill Murray, Dan Akroyd, Chris Farley, David Spade and others formed a similar group back in the day but never received a name per se.

While the humor is similar, the article's about the actual actors that keep working together.

I agree with you about Jim Carrey. The main reason he is listed is because The Cable Guy is considered the first Frat Pack project. I just don't see the harm in leaving him as a friend, because that category isn't that important.

As far as an article involving Farley and Spade, see Bad Boys of SNL.

-Josh, October 30, 2005, 12:34 AM EST.

Eventually there may be a seperate group for Reynolds, Cho and Penn, should they keep making movies together.24.48.127.51 03:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Total profits?

This paragraph in the article doesn't make sense: "With all their movies' profits ($643,816,307) added together, then subtracting by all of the budgets ($281,000,000), The Frat Pack is ahead by $362,816,307." Is that supposed to be relative to the Rat Pack? --LostLeviathan 02:51, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

That was what I came to the talk page for as well. I was wondering if it's relative to the Rat Pack or the Brat Pack. Also, is inflation taken into account? And where did the statistic come from? I'm going to remove it till someone can show a source... I suspect if I dig deeper I'll be able to find it in one of the references but I don't know which one. Dismas|^(talk) 10:21, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Ahead in terms of profits over costs. Not ahead in profits over profits of some other group. The paragraph simply seeks to illustrate the massive profitability of the cadre of actors. Of course, this information isn't particularly useful in it's acontextual state. IE How many movies added up to that 600 million mark? How does that compare with other films by established comedy toups.

Capitalization

Alright, this has been bothering me for a while, and I decided to finally bring it up. For some reason, "Frat Pack" is redirected to "Frat pack." The fact that it's the title of a group, along with the capitalization used by the media and it being a reference to the Rat Pack, not to mention the capitalization used throughout the entire article, makes me think someone should switch this around and make "Frat Pack" the official title, with "Frat pack" redirecting to it. -Josh, October 10, 2005, 8:19 PM EST

• I went ahead and did this myself. -Josh, October 10, 2005, 8:25 PM EST

I switched revised back to an older version.

Snoop Dogg's not even an actor, and he's only appeared in Old School, playing himself. He's certainly not a friend of the pack. Especially if someone doesn't want to include Chris Parnell. And "40-Year-Old Virgin" only has Steve Carell, and it's not even been determined that he's official yet. The last reviser obviously had no idea what s/he was talking about -Josh, October 21, 2005, 9:15 PM EST

No, Snoop Dogg was in Starsky and Hutch you Huggybear Hater

You're right. I somehow totally forgot about Huggy Bear back when I made that change.--Josh 16:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

The "Frat Pack movement"? Come on... we're talking about half a dozen actors who work together. This is a "clique", not a "movement".

"40-Year-Old Virgin" should defnitely count because it also stars Paul Rudd, who was in "Anchorman". By the way for anyone who is interested here is a chart showing most of the connections between the members.

Response to Clean-Up tag.

I removed the paragraph on how the people considered "friends" are connected. It was not well put-together, and was filled with weak connections. I left the information on Steve Carell, as he's been considered a member of the Frat Pack in some articles since the mentioned SNL appearance. I moved the information on directors, which was mixed into the paragraph, after the movies, as I thought it worked better there in the article. --Josh 23:56, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Contradiction - Anchorman director?

The article contradicts itself. Both Adam McKay and Judd Apatow are referred to as the director of Anchorman in different parts of the article.

The article states that 'the dan band' played a cover of 'Lady' by Styx in the bat mitzvah scene in 'Starsky and Hutch'. That song was played in 'Old School', not 'Starsky'. I don't know the name of the song they were playing in 'Starsky.'

Adam Sandler?

Can Adam Sandler be considered member of the Frat Pack? Benzh 11:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

No, he is included with Chris Farley, David Spade, and others in the Bad Boys of SNL.--Jklin 18:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Steve Carell?

According to the article carell is a core meber of the frat pack, how? He wasn't even mentioned amongst them untill the 40 year old virgin came out. So how is he a core member? -Brodey

He was a minor character in Anchorman as well as a few roles with Frat Pack members not mentioned as Frat Pack films (like Melinda and Melinda) and is known to have hung out and been good friends with the group outside of movies. As noted, it's debateable whether he's a core member or a good friend. Right now, the article's just working off the idea that in future movies, he'll become more an obvious part of the group. -- Viewdrix 01:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree that he's not part of the group. Just looking at the current movie grid, he appears in 1 of the 21 movies listed. Andy Dick has more roles in those movies than he does. Whether or not he's a good friend with the others of the group, I think that by that criteria alone he just doesn't fit with the group. I don't think "working off the idea" is good enough reason to include him. Wikipedia isn't a crystal ball, IMO. --Billdorr 03:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

No, both Carrell and Rudd, are desperate for Frat Pack initiation. I say we DONT give them that satisfaction by leaching off the originals after they've put up with years of comedic exploits to get where they are. Now even Jon Heder from Napolean Dynomite is trying to cash in on the scene too. When is it going to end? Not everyone can be a Frat Packer!

• How are Carell, Rudd, and Heder leeching for initiation? Rudd has one upcoming movie them. Carell has none. Heder has never even been in one.

If Carell isn't included on the main list of Frat Pack members, maybe it makes sense for a new section to be created describing his "some consider him in, some don't" status? Kevdo 20:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

This is unrelated to the rest of this discussion, but my apologies for saying that Carrel was nominated for an Oscar. I could have sworn he was nominated for best supporting actor or something like that in 2007, but I guess not. I do remember him being included in a joke at the beginning of the show. --Fez2005 01:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

• It's okay but don't make it a habit, okay? :-) This is a good example of the standards that Wikipedia has -- fact checking and such. It's too bad Steve wasn't nominated...Kevin Crossman 17:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Remove Carrey

Its one thing to include carell an up and comer as a frat pack member but Jim Carrey? This guy had an already establised movie career over a decade before this term was even coined. He is rarely seen in the same circles as the other member. And should everyone who shares the same agent as Will Ferell be included in the pack? I hate to be picky, but if you're including Carey you might as well include every other comdedian associated with sophmoric comedies. ~~Brodey

It's not that he's an actual member, just a possible friend, though his work with the Frat Pack has been sporadic, which is why there's special mention as well as the circumstances of him sharing an agent with Ferrell and Carell. There should be some mention as to why some people consider him associated in any way. -- Viewdrix 00:37, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed the context that you probably wrote that while he was on the list of main members, in which i agree, he is not a main member. However, he should still have his paragraph. -- Viewdrix 00:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that when I wrote Carrey in, it was as a possible "Friend", not a core member. Whoever has moved him up to the core list misinterpreted that intention. -- Viewdrix 13:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

He has not been "moved up to the core list"; he and Carell have just both been demoted from "core members" to "friends". The sole solid evidence for Carell being considered a member of the Frat Pack seems to have been Carell's own statements on the matter (i.e. his song on SNL), which is hardly a very good determining factor. Considering Carell's been in fewer Frat Pack movies than Carrey (and much fewer than Andy Dick), there's no justification for listing him as one of the "core members". He and Carell, and any other quasi-members/friends of note (I'm thinking a paragraph on Andy Dick would be a good idea at this point), should be written of in paragraphs following the "core list", followed in turn by a raw list of various other quasi-members/friends. The only point of the move was to keep things more organized by not arbitrarily separating the expanded paragraphs on "various other people associated with the Frat Pack", including Carrel and Carrey. -Silence 15:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

When I said "moved him up to the core list", I meant placing it where it is now. When considering its current placing of above the "Friends" list, it implies that when the paragraph says Carrey may be "strongly associated" with the Frat Pack, it means he's arguably a core member. He's much more arguably a Friend, so maybe his paragraph should be moved back to where it was, as a note after the Friends list. -- Viewdrix 19:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

If he's moved to below the Friends list, then I'd say that Carell should be moved below the Friends list as well, as it's only arguable that he's a friend as well: he's alluded to such being the case, but he's only appeared in one movie that's widely-considered a "Frat Pack" one. It was mentioneda bove that one of the main reasons Carell's been over-valued as a "core member" on this page has been based on the assumption that he'll become more "core" in future movies, but that's outright speculation, and a violation of the Wikipedia policy that explicitly states that "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball"; if he becomes a core member in the future, we should note that then, and until then make no more assumptions about his status than we do about Jim Carrey's status.

However, I think the organization makes more sense by having the paragraphs above the simple list. It might even be best to make Carell and Carrey's paragraphs a part of the list, and add brief descriptions to everyone else on the list explaining why they're considered to be associated with the "Frat Pack" and providing citations supporting these associations (lest we risk including original research). That probably makes more sense, especially organizationally, then arbitrarily drawing a line between Carrel/Carrey and the other possible friends and quasi-members. -Silence 19:50, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand the promotion of Jim Carrey here. One of the hallmarks of the Frat Pack is the onscreen teaming with the other Frat Pack stars. Carell scores major points for Anchorman in this regard, along with this Frat Pack-style cameo in Bewitched, and the numerous "friend" connections and very similar subject matter in The 40 Year-Old Virgin (man-boy does not want to grow up, like Old School, Wedding Crashers, Dodgeball, etc.). Carrey (to date) hasn't done anything except The Cable Guy which didn't even have the same kind of comic sensibility (it's a dark comedy, not a farce). You could make a case for Carrey with Bruce Almighty, but only if Carell is a core member. - Kevin Crossman

I agree completely. The belief that Carrey is a member is not widely-held enough to be notable. It's been removed. --Josh 19:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Heat Vision and Jack

I considered adding this to the Movies table but hesitated because of how it was:
A) A TV show, and
B) Never publicly released.
Any objections about adding it if I do? -- Viewdrix 00:37, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I was considering adding the youtube link featuring the lost pilot of that show to the page, i think it should simply be added to the external links with a brief description.-- Brodey 00:56, 31 March 2006

Criticism

I do not understand why the criticism section was removed. It is absolutely relevant. I could not find sources offhand but there aren't many sources for anything else either. It should stay.

• It was removed because no one logical would ever think that an unofficial group of actors has some sort of evil conservative goal. Plus why the fuck WOULD the Nation right about them? That's like pointing out that Taste of Home hasn't written about them.--Josh 00:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

** no one logical It is absolutely logical.

evil conservative goal Nobody ever said it was evil. In the movie Starsky and Hutch, for instance, the character "huggy", played by Snoop Dogg, is a snitch for the government. He is also portrayed as a positive character. This is a clear sign that the characters in the movie support a stronger system of law and punishment. Art, even comedy, tends to contain social commentary and this gruop of actors are no different, nor any less relevant.

I don't think portraying a pot-smoking criminal in a positive light is very conservative. Plus, that's a character from a TV show from when these actors were children.--Josh 21:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Plus why the fuck WOULD the Nation right about them? Ummm the Nation has often times written about popular social phenomenon in the arts, including movies. There complete exclusion from the arts and culture section is obviously intentional and deliberate on their part.

No. Like I said, the Frat Pack is an unofficial group. A lot of magazines haven't mentioned it. Maybe this one liberal magazine hasn't mentioned it. but it's not like Bill O'Reilly is on his show raving over them.--Josh 21:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

If you want to edit the section because you feel it is unfair, well fine. But to exclude a common criticism of this group - well that is bias, plain and simple.

It's not a common criticism of the group, it's an incredibly uncommon one. If you want to link to an established media source that is making this complaint, be my guest.--Josh 21:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Could someone please provide any cited eveidence that their is an actual common criiticsm of their comdey for being neo-conservative in nature? If not it should be removed, wikipedia is supposed to post commonly accepted beleifs and facts, if this is something a few guys and their friends feel then it shouldn't be included. Honestly with lines like : Some feel that the overall tone of movies such as Starsky & Hutch, with its references to crime and notions of justice, are innapropriate or out of place, i feel this is just cammouflaged vandalism.--User:Brodey

OK on the first count... as for the second, I don't know what other citation is needed... Startsky and Hutch has political overtones; Always has. But I'll try and fix it up this afternoon.

Having political undertones in not the issue. The section says "the group has garnered a considerable amount of criticism" and "Some feel that." You need to cite these critics or else the section remains weaselly and original research. Cite these sources soon or the section will be deleted. Crumbsucker 10:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

The Controversy section contains alot of weasel words.

This article is pointless and inane. Thank you very much.

Defamer link.

I replaced the link to the Defamer article with a mirror of the New York Times aticle "They're in on the joke." The Defamer article was just two sarcastic paragraphs referring to the Times one, which is linked to. I linked to the mirror on Vince-Vaughn.com so that people following the link wouldn't have to register at nytimes.com. The Times article is the primary one, not the Defamer one, so it's the one that should be referenced.--Josh 15:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Maintaining a Neutral Point of View

One of the key policies of Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, or NPOV. This states that all articles must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly and without bias. What you recent editors need to understand is that I too consider Steve Carell to be in the group. However, his inclusion is widely disputed, and he was not considered to be a member in either of the original articles. His inclusion is not "absolute and non-negotiable," as Wikipedia NPOV requires. Steve Carell's not the only person outside of the original six who has been considered to be a member before. Paul Rudd, Seth Rogen, Jim Carrey, David Koechner, Snoop Dogg, and Jason Bateman have all also been considered to be a member at one point or another. However, as a Wikipedia article devoted to maintaining a neutral point of view, it would be biased to name any of these people as one of the members of the Frat Pack as if it were solid fact. That is why Steve Carell, for the sake of fairness and neutrality, must be left off of Wikipedia's list. Please do not put him on the list again. The article clearly states that Steve Carell is considered by some sources to be a member, and that is as much inclusion as he can recieve without being biased towards a certain point of view.--Josh 19:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

See, what makes Steve different is his humor style and popularity. Paul Rudd, Seth Rogen, and David Koechner are still relatively unknown names. Jim and Jason hardly star with them. Snoop Dogg is hardly an actor! However, Steve is a good friend of Frat Pack members, his humor style is similar, he has appeared in Frat Pack movies and movies with Frat Pack cast or crew. He even sang a song and appeared with Will Ferrell at the Oscars. He is a Frat Pack member. Check IMDb (his biography, as well as other Frat Pack members'), check the Frat Pack tribute site, articles, and ask around. It's time for an upgrade Steve. Who's with me? - Patrick 19:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't need to "check the Frat Pack tribute site." I'm a regular visitor there, I'm on its message board every day, and I've called in to the podcast twice now. I agree with the belief of Steve being in the pack as well. But I must stress that stating it as fact is not NPOV. I'm more than fine with the paragraph about Steve Carell being included; honestly, I'm glad it's there. But the only way to keep this article with a neutral POV is to only list the original 6, as it's solid fact that those were the original members included.--Josh 00:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I would agree with the fact that the Frat Pack should stay with the 6, orginal founding members. But they didn't found anything. The fact that all of them haven't appeared in a movie together and that they did not make this up themselves proves that they didnt found it. And the point is, if everyone agreed on something, we wouldn't have war would we? I've seen many articles stating the Frat Pack to not include Jack Black. I've seen some to include even Paul Rudd. But I've seen MOST to include Steve Carell. His style suits. - Patrick 00:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Paltrow addition

I added Gwyneth Paltrow's name to the list of frequent collaborators, because she was in The Royal Tenenbaums with Ben Stiller, and Luke and Owen Wilson, and she was in Shallow Hal with Jack Black.--NWilson120, May 14, 2006, 7:53 AM EST

Snoop Dogg

It is irrelevant whether Snoop Dogg is an actor or not. The whole reason the frat pack exist and are called as such, is because of thier similiarites to fraternity stereotypes, or being "fratty" if you will. Broaddus is a rapper and clearly trys to embody the "gansta rap" style (and he does so well). But for this reason alone he would never be considered as part if the group.--TAMU May 27, 2006, 1:25 PM MST

It's not like he says "I can't be friends with those guys...they're referred to as a fraternity by the media, that conflicts with my reputation." They're friends, and the group doesn't refer to themselves as the Frat Pack. They just hang out, if there was some sort of image crisis going on, I doubt Snoop Dogg would star in the kinds of films these guys were in. Your argument makes no sense. -- Viewdrix 20:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Movies.

The chart in the Movies section has been alphabetized. I'm not quite sure if this is the best idea. I personally think it works better in chronological order, but I'm hesitant to revert it. What does everyone else think?--Josh 15:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

This list is basically a filmography. Everywhere else on Wikipedia (I think?), discographies and filmographies are chronological. I have discovered this article about ten minutes ago, and was bothered by the fact that the filmography is alphabetical, as one cannot see from it how the pack evolved. --Netvor » user | talk | mail | work » 19:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, guys. I'm the one who alphabetized the list. I thought it would help people better find certain films, but if you think it works better chronologically, by all means change it--nwilson120 9:57, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Is Jack Black really a member?

He's more closely associated with his work with writer Mike White and the band Tenacious D. His roles in the major Frat Pack films such as Wedding Crashers, Dodgeball, Starsky & Hutch, Old School, and even Meet The Parents are either minimal or non-existant. Black would fit better as an honorary member alongside someone like Andy Dick or Seth Rogan.

According to the original EW and USA Today articles, and most written since then, yes he is.--Josh 23:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, Josh, but it doesn't change the fact that he's not a very strong member. Just because some writer from a major newspaper (who probably thinks about this stuff much less than we do :-) says so doesn't make it true. I agree, Jack Black has no place being in this 'frat pack'.

WP:NOR. -Silence 10:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

You yourself are violating WP:NOR by thinking your own fucking opinion matters somehow more than Entertainment Weekly, USA Today, MSNBC, The New York Times, etc. Jack Black stays included for a very simple, obvious reason: the first two articles and most following them include the same exact six actors.--Josh 00:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Get anger management Josh.

Though he does not appear as frequently with the other five original frat pack members, Black was one of the original members associated with The Frat Pack and therefore is a member. --Brandon 2:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Tim Robbins...

...Could he be listed in "other friends..." youngamerican (talk) 16:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Steve Carrell will never be a true Frat Packer

I think that Frat Pack Fans should distance themselves from Steve Carrell's obvious pandering and longing to be part of the Frat Pack. His SNL skit was incredibly pathetic and while he may be friends with the crew he is NO FRAT PACKER! If anyone claims HIMSELF to be part of the Pack on national TV, then you know they are really not involved and only wish to be.

The FRAT PACK should remain the original seven (even Jack Black is debatable). I think it's getting a little out of hand that so many second rate comedians (Carrell,Rudd,Heder) are dying to get into the crew. If anyone even deserves to be annointed into the crew it's Andy Dick, who has been with the crew since day one.

• Carell made a point that he was a famous comedian. He never said he was a Frat Packer. Andy Dick is not well known. Heder can't be counted, he's been in no movie. If you could Carell, he's been in 3 (Anchorman, Melinda and Melinda, and Bewitched). If you count Rudd, Carells been in 4 and Rudds been in Anchorman, Virgin, and Night at the Museum. You have to realize that new comedians will continue to appear and what happens when the other guys retire? If it's to be continued you need to add to the list. Many are now accepting Carell, and I've even seen Rudd and even Kroechner. Consider it people.

• Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Carell may be a future Frat Packer, but with only one or two such movies under his belt, he cannot be considered one at this time. And even if he could, he cannot be considered a "core" member, which is what the movie list and main list deal with. Additionally, although I've been a fan of Carell since his first Daily Show appearance, to say that he is "famous" and Andy Dick is "not well known" is rather absurd. Dick is at least as well-known as Carell, and I could see a strong argument for him being much, much more well-known. Heck, Andy Dick is practically a legend, even if he's not exactly "mainstream". So I don't think that's the line of argument you'll be wanting to use to justify Carell's inclusion. -Silence 02:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• The second poster has NO argument. Andy Dick is is proly more memorable than Carell for a variety of reasons, one of which happens to be that he has more notches on his belt than Carell. And yes, Heder is co-starring in a new film with Will Farrell called Baldes of Glory. So he is trying to cash in on the Frat Pack act. And if the originals retire, then so does the name frat pack with them, just like with the Rat Pack and the Brat Pack. Because I would rather it slowly fade with them, then have wannabes like Carell take over.

• The problem with Andy Dick is that his humor style isn't anywhere close to the sleezy layed back weirded out style of the Frat Pack. And he's only been in cameos with them. He is the same as Judah Friedwalher or whatever. He couldn't even be included as a Secondary Member. Paul Rudd, David Koechner, Seth Rogen, and Steve Carell are very similar to the Frat Pack style, proven in at least Anchorman and Virgin. Andy Dick, however, is not well known in mainstream comedy, which is what the Frat Pack is. Put Andy Dick in lead and he wont get good reviews or make money (Andy Dick: First Time Director), guarenteed.

• Agreed. Steve Carell isn't in the Frat Pack. He's hardly even a pledge. He's only been in 1 Frat Pack movie. Sure, he's a buddy of Will Ferrell, but so what? Jack Black (Cable Guy, Heat Vision & Jack pilot, Orange County, Envy, Anchorman) and Andy Dick (Cable Guy, Permanent Midnight, Bongwater, Zoolander, Old School, Danny Roane) are in more movies with Stiller, Vaughn, Ferrell and the other dudes. Carell's only in one movie that featured more than 1 Frat Pack guy. If you count Bewitched and Melinda & Melinda, you're nuts. They don't even have the same kind of humor as the other Frat Pack films. the-frat-pack.com's got it all wrong.
• What about USA Today? They made the first chart describing the Frat Pack. They include Steve Carell. Are you saying you're right and they're wrong?

And Virgin didn't have anyone from the Frat Pack. And because it's not a Frat Pack film, Rogen and Rudd are hardly pledges. You Me and Dupree and Anchorman are the only films Seth's been in that have a Frat Pack star even appear. And Rudd's only in Anchorman. So Rudd may be friends with Carell, being in Anchorman and Virgin, so that's a "connection," but Carell's hardly connected to the Frat Pack. He's like a friend of a friend of a friend of the Frat Pack.

• Rudd's in Night at the Museum starring Ben Stiller, also with an Owen Wilson appearance.

• If you count Carell, Rudd, Koechner, and Rogen as Frat Pack members, Carells been in 5 Frat Pack movies, Rudd's been in 6 movies, Koechner's been in 8 movies, and Rogen's been in 6 movies. Jack Black's been in 7 movies. Vaughn's been in 9. And they've been in the group longer. Carell, Rudd, Koechner, and Rogen have a great start. They're basically secondary members now, but in 2 or three years, whats going to happen? New comedians are going to keep appearing.

• USA Today isn't God Almighty. And that article was probably written by only one guy at USA Today. It's not like everyone who works there thinks Steve Carell's in the group.

Anyway, the point is, people like Steve Carell so much they think he's a part of the Frat Pack just because they're a fan. If you're unbiased, I think you'd see The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up aren't much like Zoolander or Starky and Hutch. The Frat Pack is a separate thing from Steve Carell's clique with Judd Apatow, Seth Rogen, Paul Rudd, Jonah Hill, Leslie Mann and Nancy Hall (the Christine Taylor of Carell's group). It seems they're just connected because Stiller and Apatow go back with The Cable Guy, and Will Ferrell's just done three movies with Carell but only one of those movies has a FP actor other than Ferrell in it (...Ron Burgundy). Anyhoo, does anyone agree The Frat Pack and the Carell Clique (ooh, that's a good name for their group cuz the whole "The ["a"-sound] Pack" is really uncreative now = The Rat Pack, The Brat Pack, The Frat Pack, it's not cool) are two different things with only slightly similar humor?

• I don't know what you mean about "unbiased" (since everyone is biased in some way). I think there are a lot of similarities between Virgin and previous Frat Pack projects such as Zoolander and Wedding Crashers. First, the movie is a farce. Secondly, there's a large male-bonding component, even set against the romantic angle. Where Virgin is different is that a) it does not have a "romantic comedy" plot between the male characters, and b) the movie has more dramatic and realistic moments. But, it's still a farce. On the Frat Pack Tribute site, we call Carell a junior and part-time member (a status between full member and pledge). Our rule of thumb for "promoting" him was "Just like Jack Black or better" in terms of popularity.Kevin Crossman 16:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
• On the USA Today issue, unfortunately, the way Wikipedia works is that it is based on referenced sources. So, the publication/author who named the Frat Pack does indeed have a big say in determining the "official" list of members. Kevin Crossman 16:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

new USA Today article

There was a new article about the Frat Pack in yesterday's USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2006-07-12-frat-pack-main_x.htm). It might have some useful info to integrate into the article. At least one interesting tidbit: They do discuss Carrell as a member of the Pack. Enjoy. --Gpollock 16:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Steve Carrell is not a frat pack member! USA Today is full of it.

If the criteria for not including Steve is because the original article didn't include him (and all the other stories that piggy backed on it), then you should include him now. Same author, original publication. It's clearly an update to the original article. - Kevin Crossman

I agree. CynicalMe 03:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

We should be conclusive as to whether or not Carell is a true member, just becuase one article claims he is does that automatically make it so? and if were basing it on USA today we might as well include Leonardo dicaporio and matt damon to the list since USA today at one point listed them as being frat pakers. Duhon 18 July 2006

If you're going to attempt sarcasm, make sure you don't sound like a buffoon.

If a major publication says someone is in the pack then this article should list them as such. This should not be described as controversial unless a major publication has described it as such. What we as individuals think is entirely irrelevant as wikipedia works on verifiable sources. It is not our place to dispute them. On that note, has a major publication ever catagorised anyone as a pledge?--Super Ted 07:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

None at all Super Ted, which is why I attempted (and failed) at removing the list from the main page. It's entirely unsourced, and I don't believe I've ever read a publication actually mention any of these people as "pledges". Personally it's a breach of the original research rule that Wikipedia doesn't want us to take part in. Radagast83 02:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Frat Pack

Principal members:

• Will Ferrell
• Vince Vaughn
• Luke Wilson
• Owen Wilson
• Ben Stiller
• Steve Carell
• Paul Rudd

Principal films:

• Zoolander
• Anchorman
• 40 Year Old Virgin
• Dodgeball
• Old School
• Starsky and Hutch
• Wedding Crashers

 - Steve Carell

Paul Rudd is not a principal member, though his upcoming cameo in Night at the Museum gives him some credibility.

Trademarks

I think the trademarks section needs a lot of work. Twice is not a trend. Fondue? Should we say that including Lance Armstrong in the movie is now a trademark because he's done two cameos now (Dodgeball, Dupree)? How about something a bit more substantative, such as the fact that these movies are farces or the fact that they usually tell a story of men growing up (or, focuses on "man child" characters)? -Kevin Crossman, 7/15/2006

British Frat Pack members.

I think British comedians who appeared in past, current and upcoming Frat Pack films/TV shows should deserved to be in the Frat Pack. Steve Coogan appeared in Around the World in 80 Days, which includes 2 Frat Packers. And he is currently appearing the movie adaptation of the Persuaders starring him and Ben Stiller, also a Frat Pack member. So yeah, he deserved to be in the Frat Pack. Ricky Gervais should also be in the Frat Pack, since he is also the creator behind both the US version of the Office which stars Steve Carrell, who is a Frat Pack member. He also wrote an episode of the Simpsons, which also includes Frat Pack collaborator Hank Azaria, and also in Extras with Ben Stiller. So he should be in th Frat Pack. Another British comedian who should be a Frat Pack member is Sacha Baron Cohen, aka Ali G. He appeared in Madagascar with Ben Stiler, and also Talladega Nights with Will Ferrell. So yeah, he should be a part of the Frat Pack.

That's a nice opinion you have there. If it ever becomes a common opinion, Wikipedia will cover it.--Josh 22:43, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

What's next? The Black Pack? Just because Michael Clarke Duncan, Romany Malco, and Snoop have appeared in Frat Pack films doesn't mean they should have their own "division," same goes for the Brits.

 I'm sorry about the British division thingy, but atleast they deserved a credit. I'll be adding them in the list of Frat Pack collaborators list.

Andy Dick: Secondary Member?

Andy Dick has never had a successful lead role. He is a supporting actor with the Frat Pack. However, at this point, so is Seth Rogen and David Koechner. Andy Dick is good friends with the Frat Pack. Do you think he could be secondary member with Carell, Rogen, Koechner, and Rudd? Or is his comedy style too different? If we were to be included as a secondary member, he would be in 6 frat pack movies, one less than Black and one more than Carell. --Patesta 00:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

His comedy style is too different, plus, like Carrey, he already had an established career before this "group" arrived on the scene. CynicalMe 22:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

So did Ben Stiller. He was in Heavyweights, Reality Bites, Happy Gilmore, his own Emmy Winning TV show, and some small roles before the Cable Guy came along. In fact, Andy Dick was in Reality Bites and the Cable Guy. In this case, he and Stiller both helped launch the Frat Pack without even knowing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patesta (talk • contribs)

I think it's safe to say that Andy Dick did not help launch the Frat Pack. Ben Stiller at least has a similar comedic style.CynicalMe 01:54, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Matt Dillon

Should Matt Dillon be considered as a secondary member, he has starred in There's Something About Mary with Ben Stiller and in You, Me, And Dupree with Owen Wilson.

• 2 movies is not nearly enough. Probably 5 at least.

Says who? If a reliable source is found (ie a magazine or newspaper article) saying Dillon is in the Frat Pack then he is. It is not out place to decide an actor's status ourselves as this is entirely our own point of view. This is why wikipedia requires verifiable sources for all its articles. Please remember this when deciding who is in the pack and who isn't. It is irrelevant whether you personally agree with who the press decides is in the pack. --Super Ted 08:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Secondary Members

While it could be argued that Secondary Members do exist, it's purely speculation at this point. Whoever added the "Recently, newer comedians have been added to the list" comment references themself, not an actual web article. Steve Carell is the only actor identified as a new member by most media outlets, including USA Today. Paul Rudd has also been cited as a member by a couple sources. However, this notion that Carell, Rudd, Seth Rogen & David Koechner are secondary Frat Pack members is purely someone's opinion. Until articles are printed addressing this issue, the Wikipedia page shouldn't address the "secondary members" as if it's a fact.

The seconday members section has no sourced basis for the inclusion of these supposed "seconday members" as of right now it seems all like fan speculation, with people actually discussing here who they should add next. This is highly non-encyclopedic. Duhon July 30, 2006.

• I think the secondary members section needs to cite the "Frat Pack splits" article, to describe how the original Fratters aren't co-starring with each other much anymore. The article mentions how this split allows for guys like Seth Rogen to step up to the plate. Also, this article (http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2005-08-11-steve-carell_x.htm?POE=LIFISVA) talks about the junior varsity, acknowledged by Paul Rudd.
• While not just about the "Secondary Members", I think the entire "other" list should be reworked and give a sentence or so reason why they are included, or have most of them removed if there isn't proper siting. Adding them because they were co-stars with a few of the actors on some movies, some not even some of their "fratty" films, just doesn't cut it. Also, (as just one example) I'm kind of interested why "Around the World in 80 Days" would even be listed here when "Swingers", is not. Radagast83 05:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
• Because Around the World in 80 Days featured the Wilson brothers, and Swingers was only Vaughn.

If the requirement is that at least 2 of the people in the "group" are part of a film, then the entire Trademark section should be striked from the page, because most, if not all of them only actually apply to 2-4 of the films at once out of 25 "Primary" films (that is about 15% accuracy at best). Also, I propose that we should remove the entire secondary actors sction (or move to a new page) because frankly, it is very subjective and just remove Tertiary members, which is VERY subjective. Wikipedia is not a indiscriminate collection of data. The article either needs to be seriously cleaned up and sourced, or it needs the impossible-to-source information removed. Radagast83 23:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

carrell frat packer=

i will be updating the article with info from http://www.the-frat-pack.com/ and carrell will be a primary member -ishmaelblues

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia you can't base information on a fan-site. There are lots of sites that say stalin was a nice guy but were not putting that on his wiki page are we? -Duhon August 5 2006

Carell is increasingly known as a primary member, but it is not neutral point of view as of yet. He is still very new and doesnt have that many upcoming Frat Pack roles. There will come a point where he may be a primary member, but he fits more with Rudd, Koechner, and Rogen than the others. Rudd, Koechner, and Rogen "appeared" at the same time as Carell in the Frat Pack.

But Koechner, Rogen & Rudd haven't been acknowledged in the media as a full member like Carell has. Putting him with those guys isn't being neutral, it's creating a fan-based opinion.

- agreed Carrel is in -ishmaelblues

Wet Hot American Summer

Not sure why someone took down Wet Hot American Summer from the secondary filmography but I am sure this hasn't been the first time. Paul Rudd is a main character in it plus it has a sleuth of friends and collaborators(Molly Shannon, Judah Friedlander, Elizabeth Banks, and Amy Poehler). If you are going by the two main character frat pack rule that is just ridiculous. This film makes up for that rule with all the other friends and collaborators.

You need to have at least two Frat Packers in the film to be a secondary or primary frat pack film. Thats why along came polly cant be one either.

I understand that as I stated above. I just think that rule is a bit ridiculous. The rule should be amended to include friends and collaborators.

Unnecessary complication?

This discussion of primary/secondary members, pledges, etc. is complicating this far more than it needs to be. Frat Pack is a genre, and an encyclopedia article that covers it should approach it as such: Talk about where it came from (The Farrellys/Stiller/Sandler-type comedies of the mid-90s would be my best guess); talk about the absolute, proven Pack movies (using high standards, like three Packers in each, so sorry, Along Came Polly and Around the World in 80 Days); and then talk about the ripples in other comedy genres, where you can bring up the other movies; and finally, talk about the future/legacy.

I think the biggest part here is, acknowledge that genres can change focus. I don't care what Entertainment Weekly said on April 11, 1999, although it's nice background information... Maybe also changing the name of "secondary members" to "later actors associated with Frat Pack" would alleviate the Steve Carell flame war for a while. Paper pusher 16:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Your high standard suggestion would exclude Dodgeball.

I'm sure there's a good standard that will accommodate Dodgeball as well, such as "two leads or one lead and two supportings, and counting any Apatow/McKay connection as at least a supporting role." This would create the following list:

• Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy
• Blades of Glory
• Bottle Rocket
• Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story
• Envy
• Knocked Up (accounting for Apatow's roles as Writer and Director)
• Old School
• Old School 2
• Outsourced
• Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby (McKay/Apatow)
• The 40-Year-Old Virgin (Apatow)
• The Royal Tenenbaums
• Starsky & Hutch
• Wedding Crashers
• Zoolander

To add my personal opinions, I think Bottle Rocket doesn't fit because Anderson and Wilson wrote it while they were buddies in college (ironically); also, I think Black and Stiller are tenuous connections, so Envy doesn't fit either.

Just to be fair, since Wikipedia's not a crystal ball, Vaughn & Wilson have acknowledged that they are no long attached to Outsourced, and Ferrell has stated he's not sure if Old School 2 will ever be made.

• The problem with this, is that it doesnt follow the articles. I agree with a lot of the stuff, but we're following the two + collaborator rule. Also Vaughn is attached to Outsourced, and Owen has recently been reattached to the project. Old School 2 will probably be made.

I completely agree with the original person's post that this page isn't encylopedia quality. As you can tell by the edit history on the page, I was the one who removed the "Tertiary Pledges" section (a very un-encylopedic name as is, but that's getting off the point), mainly because it's just an unsourced list of people who have (or may not have) appeared in multiple "Frat Pack" films. Their bearing on the actual "Frat Pack" is weak at best. The very definition of a "Frat Pack" film is flimsy at best, because many of the films that are listed (The Cable Guy for instance) were made even before the term was 'created' (now bare in mind that this isn't a genre like Film noir that has some films that were created before or after the "official" date that the genre starts or ends). Either films that can't really be sourced as being refered to a "Frat Pack" film need to be removed until a legitimate source can be found, or a better standard needs to be found that multiple websites/news or entertainment sources agree with.

There are multiple references to who is in the "Frat Pack". What needs to be defined is the people who are always included (Ferrell, Vaughn, etc.) and then the few that sometimes are included or excluded in the "Frat Pack" listing (Jack Black, Luke Wilson, Steve Carrell, if the case is that). At the very least films like Wes Anderson directed Royal Tenenbaums, Rushmore, or othe films like Around the World in 80 Days are not what a "Frat Pack" film is anymore than Cannonball Run II is a Rat pack film because it stars both Sammy Davis and Dean Martin (on a side not would "Ocean's 11" be a "Frat pack" film if it had stared the two Wilson films (before they left to do Tenenbaums)?

As far as I can tell, the entire definition of what a Frat Pack film is comes directly from a single fansite, which defines a "Frat Pack" film not on the merits of the film (in context with the label) or when it was made, but only becuase at least two of the "six" actors appeared in them. As is, the "trademark" section is no where close to even encompassing a tiny fraction of the current list. An agreement needs to be reached to bring this page up from a fansite quality page, to an actual page that is encylopedic and full of sourced, documented data. Radagast83 22:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Note, you are completely wrong about the Frat Pack Tribute's "merits of the film" comment. See my comments below. Also, what source do you consider to be "documented data?" Because if it's USA Today then I'd like to hear your thoughts about Carell's inclusion. Kevdo 17:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

To the person who said that movies earlier than the term can't be Frat Pack movies, those movies were listed by the articles that invented the term to begin with. The Cable Guy is considered by many to be the start of the Frat Pack. To the poster after that who mentioned Oceans 11, you're talking about the Primary and Secondary thing we already have set up, except that Black and Luke Wilson are almost ALWAYS considered members despite that both appear in a fewer number of films. But you know, up until 2000, Vince Vaughn didn't appear in ANY Frat Pack movies. But he was there before the term was created, the same as Luke Wilson and Jack Black. Carell, Rudd, Koechner, and Rogen are new faces that that sometimes are included and sometimes excluded. Now, yes, there is definately a comedic style that applies, which would definately take away Around the World in 80 Days. But Bongwater, Bottle Rocket, and the Royal Tenembombs are included all the time as Frat Pack films, and they should count. For the "Tertiary Pledges", the name could use a change, but the whole point of that section is to list people who are friends (Judd Apatow, Adam McKay) or collaborate excessively with Frat Pack. I think it needs to be limited. People like STEPHEN ROOT who appear twice should not be included. But Christopher Walken, Jim Carrey, Amy Poehler, and others should definately be there.--Patesta 00:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I've limited the friends and common collaborators section to include only friends and/or COMMON collaborators. Some people on the list before shouldn't have been there like Matt Dillon and Hank Azaria.--Patesta 00:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Patesta, please remember to sign your comments. The point is, what makes someone a common collaborator? I would like to see a (and better yet, multiple) news article(s) or Neutral website(s) that discusses the "secondary" or "pledges". It is good to hear there are people willing to contribute to the website (about setting up the definitions of who fits where), but it STINKS of original thought: Wikipedia:WWIN. The first time I ever heard of the "Royal Tenenbaums" (among others) called a Frat Pack film, as opposed to just a Wes Anderson film, is right here. Radagast83 23:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Pledges and secondary members have been referred all over, and the first time I heard of the Royal Tenenbaums was on the original chart, right here: http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2004-06-16-fratpackchart.htm --Patesta 00:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

If you can direct me to news articles that refer the "other" people as pledges, I'd love to see it. Radagast83 02:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

http://www.fametracker.com/2_stars_1_slot/rogen_long.php (Seth Rogen & Justin Long as "pledges")

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2005-08-11-steve-carell_x.htm?POE=LIFISVA (Carell, Rudd, Koechner as "junior varsity)

Okay, I'd like to chime in on this. While the Frat Pack Tribute website is certainly a "fan site" let's be careful with that term. It isn't some haphazard site but one that is extensively devoted to the topic and includes collaboration with many people (though, clearly, we come from the editorial rather than community model as it applies to the information provided). Also, I was interviewed extensively for the second USA Today article. So, I guess I would say that if we're following an encyclopedia model I think I should get some credit as a "leading expert" or something along those lines. - Kevin Crossman Kevdo 17:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I was careful with that term. It is a fansite. A "superfan" (the term from the site) compiled the list we are using. While there is nothing wrong with that it generally isn't something that wikipedia really wants people to use as sources. Wikipedia warns to "Beware [of] false authority" and the Verifiability of facts. It is generally accepted around the entertainment world of the 6 (and for the most part currently 7) "main" people in this group of actors. It is also easily verifiable to find out information about most of the "secondary" people in the group (people who appear in a great many of the films and/or are major/major-minor characters in previous 'group' films. Many newspapers and reliable websites agree on most of these things. You then get into the hazy range of "collaborators" or whatever term anyone wishes to use. Unfortunately most of the people listed on the Frat Pack website that's being all but shilled here constantly is not easily verifiable and at the very least if it IS verifiable, using the primary source instead of linking to the fan site would be more in keeping to Wiki guidelines. I propose working on a references/footnote section (that actually points directly to more reliable sources (more in keeping with wikipedia) would be easiest to sort through all the various citings that need to be done with the current listing of actors/actresses. Radagast83 06:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Let's discuss the Carell issue. He wasn't on USA Today's original list -- but he was on the revised article. To me, that should count for something. The fact that he was the star, not costar, of 40 Year-Old Virgin to me sets his status higher than Rudd, Rogen, etc. but we acknowledge that he's more like a junior than senior member. Kevdo 17:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Not sure I understand the hate towards Along Came Polly. If Jack Black had been in the movie instead of Phillip Seymour Hoffman then it surely would be on the list. Several frequent Frat Pack contributors or actors in the movie as well. Kevdo 17:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

With regards to movie genres - let's be clear what the "classic" Frat Pack movies have in common -- it's a farce kind of humor, typically involving men who aren't grown up ("man child") or who go through some sort of transformation of maturity. Classic examples are Old School, Wedding Crashers, Dodgeball, Starsky & Hutch (esp. Owen Wilson's character), and Anchorman. If you set 40 Year-Old Virgin in this context it fits in much better than the Wes Anderson films or the Stiller/Wilson drama Permanent Midnight. Virgin is certainly more of a "Frat Pack" film than ANYTHING Jack Black has done to date (Tenacious D movie likely to change this status). So, our thought was -- if Jack Black is in the Frat Pack then Steve Carell should be too. Kevdo 17:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Lastly, let's stick to movies that are at the very least in production. That would mean keeping Blades of Glory and Knocked Up around for discussion but omitting Outsourced and Old School 2 (both of which have had tenuous histories, at best) for the time being. Kevdo 17:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Root

Stephen Root should be considered a pledge. He appeared in both Dodgeball and Wake Up Ron Burgundy.

No, he shouldn't, but thanks for playing.

The man was in 2 frat pack movies.....yes

Secondary Members.

I changed the Secondary Members section to include all "Pledges" listed by the Frat Pack Tribute. This way, more people with genuine connections are covered, and a respected source is cited. Before we were listing four based on original research, which is against Wikipedia policy.--Josh 05:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

• As noted above, updates to the Frat Pack Tribute site and the Frat Pack Circle of Trust in particular occur in an editorially-oriented collaborative process amongst several editors. Kevdo 20:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

• However, the first paragraph states that David Koechner, Paul Rudd, and Seth Rogen are the closest comedians to being in the Frat Pack. Other people on your list are merely family or directors.

• Do you think that Christine Taylor's starring roles in Zoolander and Dodgeball might have had a wee bit to due with it as well? How about Bateman in Dodgeball and Starsky & Hutch. Most of these actors have had Frat Pack stars guest in their projects (Arrested Development, Andy Dick's Danny Roanne movie, etc.). Kevdo 21:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

• Maybe so, but none of those other guys are involved as much as Koechner, Rogen, and Rudd. Even the first paragraph on that page says those three are on "the verge of Frat Pack-hood". Plus you're quoting the site that includes Along Came Polly as a Frat Pack movie and Steve Carell as an absolute primary member, which completely messes up your list because that isn't NPoV yet. Koechner and Rudd are together, Rogen goes with Carell's path. Those four are very Frat Pack-ish. I'm sorry but Justin Long? Not even close to Frat Pack. Andy Dick is not funny and was around a lot longer than people like Vince Vaughn. Judd Apatow and Todd McKay aren't even actors!

Many credible articles have since included Steve Carell as a primary member. Just this past weekend, the Los Angeles Times cited Carell as part of the group. If anything, excluding Carell at this point is violating NPoV.

No, because it's arguable. Many, yes, but still not all. He's been noted in particular, which makes since. But listing it as something that's unwaveringly agreed on would be inaccurate.--Josh 18:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

As time goes on, it's becoming less and less arguable. CynicalMe 19:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

No, as time goes on it's becoming a more and more commonly held belief, but not one bit less arguable. The only undeniably Frat Pack film that he's starred in is Anchorman, period. Bewitched and 40YOV's inclusion as Frat Pack films are just as debatable as he is. And the entry already plainly states that several sources include him, which is really the best way to handle him. It's not like the people who don't include him have some anti-Steve agenda. It's just that it's not fair to list his inclusion as solid fact. The only undebatable thing we're ever going to have is which actors were listed in the original article.--Josh 23:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Well if we're going to quote the FRAT PACK TRIBUTE SITE on the secondary members list, then we have to quote them on how they say that Carell is a member. Otherwise its just stupid.

• I removed the term "secondary members" from the page since the primary members aren't even an official acting clique themselves having actors listed as secondary members seems benign, they should eb listed as what they are; actors who are at times associated with the packers. The refference to the frat pack fan site was removed as well. It seemed like promotion, as well facts on wikipedia should not be cited from a fan site in general. .--Duhon 23 August 2006 (UTC)
• For what it's worth, I did not add the link to the Frat Pack Tribute site (my site). As noted above, though, I think the "fan site" term is misappropriated here. Why does a newspaper reporter for a random newspaper carry more clout than a reference website that's been around for over two years? I'll give you the prominence for USA Today and Entertainment Weekly but as things relate to the Frat Pack I think the Frat Pack Tribute site ought to carry a bit more clout than "Joe's Frat Pack site." Heck, nobody "defined" what defined a Frat Pack film until our site did it (certainly not USA Today and EW). I have no issue listed Carrell separately from the original six but I think it's a mistake to remove the secondary members section since Seth Rogen, Paul Rudd, et. al. DO get press as being "pledges" or junion members of the Frat Pack (recently Movie Entertainment magazine in Canada - "FRAT PACK'S MANHATTAN PROJECT Hearththrob Paul Rudd studied theatre in L.A. and at Oxford but has become better known as a member of Hollywood's Frat Pack, with rolls in comedies like The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Anchorman.....") Kevdo 06:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC) (Kevin Crossman)

Because it is a Wikipedia guideline: Wikipedia:Reliable sources, while your work is commendable, it enters into a realm which Wikipedia guidelines state: "Personal websites, blogs, and other self-published or vanity publications should not be used as secondary sources." Even within "reputable" sources of information there are varying degrees that it is suggested that those sources should be used ("The HilBilly Sun Times" might not actually be considered a reliable source of information for example). The only data that the page should include is any data that can be verified by a reputable newpaper, book, or other publication (USA TODAY, EW, etc). Several independent sources (sources that don't reference eachother) should be used to conclude whether or not it should include any people beyond the 'main' actors. If there are multiple instances of people considered part of the group, it's more reliable and accurate than if one place says Actor X is a member. At the very least we should list the original members seperate and then list any "additions" below and note them justly. Beyond that, no one else needs to be on the page, regardless if "pledges" are mentioned in the article. Some things just aren't notable. Radagast83 07:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding pop culture please see these Wikipedia guidelines: "Sources for popular culture 2) Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources do not specifically address the reliability required with respect to popular culture such as celebrity gossip, but it is unrealistic to expect peer reviewed studies. Therefore, when a substantial body of material is available — e.g., that shown by a google search for 'bisexual "James Dean"' [56] — the best material available is acceptable, especially when comments on its reliability are included. What I was trying to point out with my additional comments on the second USA Today article was that the Frat Pack Tribute site was a co-author on one of those links, enhancing the credibility of the site as a source for this particular topic. Kevdo 17:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

If USA Today deemed it wise to use so-called fansite as a resource for a article on the frat pack, then I do believe it would meet Wikipedia's expectations for sources for popular culture. Yearsago 19:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

• I honestly don't agree with that in terms of that website relating to wikipedia's popular culture expectations. this whole page is essentially becoming an extension of that frat pack fan site. We are actaully basing much of the information and terms here from that site. Terms like secondary members and pledges seem to only be refferenced from that site wihtout other external or "more credible" sources confirming that. if the the site decided to list bette midler as a member the way things are going she would be listed here as well. Terms like "secondary mebers" or pledges should be left off the page since they seem to be terms coined by that fan opperated site.

• EW's August 18th edition (fall movie preview), calls Justin Long a Junior Frat Packer/Pledge. I do not know how to link the article, but this is furthering evidence that there should be a pledge/junior members, since mainstream popular media are including these characters (Rudd, Rogan and Now Justin Long have all been called junior frat packers/pledges by several publications) Yearsago 19:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

and kevdo i'm not trying to doubt your intentions here but the fact that you seem very interested in refferencing your personal site on wikipedia gives me suspicion you may be just using this as a platform for promotion.

Duhon 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• The motivation is that I (obviously) have expended a lot of effort on this topic and have been less-than-enamored with much of the info contained herein. Worse, my site which frankly is the largest and leading authority on the topic is actually given LESS status than sources of (IMHO) dubious authority just because they are printed on paper. I am NOT using this as a platform for promtion, other than promoting the site as a credible resource for this topic. Look, I have a Masters Degree in Library Science, so I understand the whole cited reference policy at Wikipedia -- but honestly I am having a hard time understanding why there's so much negativity towards my site that is far and away the most authoritive resource on the Frat Pack. What would increase my credibility with you guys? When primary sources such as USA Today call me for Frat Pack articles, does that not illustrate that my site should be a primary resource (not "the" primary resource)? Kevdo 23:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• My site was the first to define what a "Frat Pack" movie was or wasn't, and I was the first to use the terms "Frat Pack Friend" and pledges (way back in 2004). That is the reason that my site is referenced. Even though it's "only a fan" site. Kevdo 23:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Now, I've noted many times in this discussion I'm open minded to areas where there is reasonable debate. Which is why I've been okay not having Steve Carell on the primary list here at Wikipedia even though he's a main member on my site. Same goes for "loose definition" movies like Along Came Polly or Talladega Nights. Kevdo 23:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Although I am the owner of the Frat Pack Tribute website, it is far from a one-man operation. I have several writers and an editorial "board" who help me with the editorial content on the site. Not sure if that makes a difference to anyone out there but thought I'd mention it just in case it does.
• Lastly, please understand and remember that not every mention of my site on Wikipedia is put there by me...Kevdo 23:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I think I speak for many of the people who are "less-than-enamored", mainly because much of the article reads like an ad for the "tribute" site (or at least did until recently). Most, if not all the material within is based off of your own site. I think the problem is that a lot of the page contains a whole lot of subjective information such as who the "pledges" are. The best suggestion that I have at this time now would probably be to limit the actual article to the people who have been mentioned as being part of the "Frat Pack" or have been widely mentioned as being secondary characters (say, if Rudd or someone else has been widely mentioned as an up and commer). The actual article doesn't mention anyone outside the 'group' in any of the actual text, and the lists feel tacked on. Even better would be to rewrite the lists into prose, which would greatly curb the edit wars over who is and is not an actual member. I'll tinker with some text to see if a quality paragraph could be worked in instead of these lists. Radagast83 20:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I think adding some additional context to the pledges/secondary members sounds great. Regarding the "ad" issues again I remind folks that I've done very little editing to the Wiki article (mostly small little changes)Kevdo 01:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, add a paragraph of context explaining the associated actors/"secondary members." Link articles clearly mentioning their connection. Let's hurry this up and end the bickering. This place is starting to sound as ridiculous as the Aint It Cool talkback boards.

• I have removed Justin Long from the 'other pledges', and have included him into the main pledges. I have sourced 4 major media outlets, that have called him variations of a pledge (pledge/jv/frat packer of the future) etc. I have also sourced a interview that he acknowledges inclusion into the group (see IGN interview), and how he comments that he is honored to be considered part of the group. Yearsago 00:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

For the person who removed Justin long from the pledge section of the main page, can you give us a reason? I listed 4 credible sources proclaiming Justin as a pledge, and one of those sources justin acknowledged inclusion into the group. Yearsago 13:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Step Brothers

• From the Wiki page: "will reunite for the comedy Step Brothers, which will not be the third movie in Ferrell/McKay's mediocre man trilogy, according to McKay." Can someone confirm this statement (that it won't be the third film in the trilogy). The article referenced doesn't say anything about the trilogy.Kevdo 23:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
• I did some research and can confirm that Step Brothers is not the third film in the trilogy. However, I wonder if even having the "it's not the third film" comment is even worth keeping. Thoughts?Kevdo 20:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• I don't know what article it was, but Judd said it wasn't and that they were throwing around ideas for one.

Chronology?

Do you think that the films should be placed in chronology like other charts rather than alphabetically? State your thoughts.

Yes. C'mon, do it.

Justin Long

I'm not sure I understand the removal of the Justin Long note along with Rudd, Rogen, and Koechner. Yearsago cited several prominent and recent publications, as well as the actor himself.Kevdo 17:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, it should stay because there are sources that confirm his place on the list, if it happens again it should be treated as vandalism unless a good reason is stated for why it was removed. Radagast83 19:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Justin Long doesn't fit with the comedy style, and the source that the rest of that section is quoting doesn't mention him being anymore than a pledge like Aniston or Dick, unlike Rudd, Rogen, and Koechner. --Patesta 05:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Justin Long was in the frat pack movie Dodgeball, as well as Wake up Ron Burgandy and will be in the upcoming Idiocracy. You need to review the 4 sources that I directly linked all four of them major media outlets calling Justin a pledge, and Justin in a interview acknowledging inclusion into the frat pack. Yearsago 17:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Not to mention The Break-Up, which also boosts the credibility of Bateman, Aniston & Favreau. That's four Frat Pack-related projects. Accepted is a stretch, but it does star Jonah Hill who is appearing in many Frat Pack-related films (Virgin, Evan Almighty, Knocked Up.) It's Long's Frat Pack association that's getting him big roles, which is why the media acknowledges his Pledge status.

If you're referring to the Frat Pack Circle of Trust, you may wish to double check, because Long is indeed included in the blue circle which is referred to as a the "Pledge Circle". It's true his writeup isn't as extensive as Rogen/Rudd/Koechner, but I'm not sure that's the point. Several publications have put Long in this company, as cited. So it seems fair to have him put there.Kevdo 16:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course he's a pledge, Koechner, Rudd, and Rogen aren't the only pledges. Aniston, Dick, Taylor, and them are all pledges, but the article we are referring to states Koechner, Rudd, and Rogen being on the edge of Frat Pack hood. Long is what Aniston, Dick, Favreau are. A pledge, yes, but not close to being a Frat Packer. --Patesta 19:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure if you are just refusing to acknowledge the four sources that state Long as a pledge, and Long who himself acknowledges inclusion into the group? Yearsago 21:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Nobody is writing about Aniston, Dick, Favreau being pledges. But they ARE writing about long. That's the point of the note/reference.Kevdo 21:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Ryan Reynolds

Should Ryan Reynolds be considered a friend of the frat pack? He co-starred in waiting with Justin Long (Who has been source'd as a JV/pledge of frat pack). Yearsago 17:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Only with reliable references. Radagast83 18:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there are friends of the Frat Pack here anymore. I think it's just the pledges mentioned in the Tribute page that can be seen in the pledge section. Compared to those other guys, Reynolds really isn't that close.

Good point. If it's anything other than a "pledge" then he should not be added. Radagast83 19:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Changes

To end these almost daily edit wars that seem to occur on this page, the article needed to be reformatted. It was discussed a few days ago, but I think I should bring this to the attention more clearly. Here are some of the changes I made:

• The lists needed to go. They may be easy to look at, but the format lends to people adding (or removing) anyone they see fit. I rewrote them into prose, and I feel the whole issue could be greatly diminished ths way.
• The section should be re-named "members" into something more general (Perhaps "The Pack" for the time being, this is the only issue I had with the edit). This allowed the director's section in the "appearances" section to become part of this new section, as it is in keeping with the various connections the films have with eachother over the list of films, of which the second paragraph in that section does all the work.
• The "Appearances" section should be re-named "Filmography" with a sub-section for "Secondary Filmography".
• Are the TV appearances notable? I've never heard anyone talk about the group in terms of TV, so I removed them.

I have all of this pretty much ready to go online if everyone thinks it's a good idea, it needs to be fleshed out, but it's a start. I hope no one reverts it without giving an explanation why. Please give your thoughts and we can work this out. Radagast83 07:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

• • I don't think you should completely remove the television section on your own without seeing what other people think. Clearly there are some projects (especially Heat Vision & Jack) that do show their connections. You should've waited for other people's opinions before making that call.

I think the changes do help for the Pledges section, but it makes it a LOT harder to easily see who the main Frat Pack members are. I'd make the list of Vaugh, Stiller, et. al. a list so that it's easier to read. Especially since they're not easy to see in the opening paragraph as well. However, I do like how Steve's inclusion is handled.Kevdo 00:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC) Heat Vision and Jack should be put back. Kevdo 00:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Good, make any changes you feel would benefit from this, and looking at it, I do agree it's a little difficult to see exactly who is a main Frat Pack member (so a list might help with just the main members). Radagast83 02:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Colbert

Colbert should be considered a pledge. He's been with Carell(The Ambigusly Gay Duo,Bewitched,The Daily Show) and Ferrell(Bewitched,Strangers with candy(guest star))

• Colbert is a perfect example of someone who definitely belongs in the Frat Pack Circle of Trust (as a friend of Steve mainly, but also Will as noted). But he's definitely not a Pledge has he's never been in a classic Frat Pack movie.Kevdo 04:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The Daily Show in Television?

Judging solely by the definition up for the TV section of "any Frat Packers in a large role with other Frat Packers as... frequent guest stars", The Daily Show qualifies. Obviously, it's a different idea, as the "frequent guest stars" line may be void in some people's opinion in the case of talk shows, but on the other hand, this is only part talk show. Then on a third hand that is closely related to the first, these guests are usually only on for the talk show part. However, Steve Carell was a Senior Correspondent for years, and the show seems to have a good rapport with Frat Packers, as recently I rarely see a core member not appear for an interview when they have a movie coming out. When IMDB kept track of frequent guest stars, a few Frat Packers were near the top, Paul Rudd being the most or second most frequent (I believe David Cross was the other one in the top two; Rudd also did a "dramatic re-enactment" for a Correspondent field piece), though I know that's hard to verify now. On small notes, it would create further connections to Rob Corddry and Ed Helms, the former being in Old School and guesting twice on Arrested Development, the latter starting a regular role on The Office this season and having done a guest spot on Arrested Development as well. Anyway, it's a debatable subject, so I thought I'd throw it out there. -- Viewdrix 01:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, I just saw it above this, but it'd be a big connection to Stephen Colbert if people were to accept him as a pledge, though personally, I disagree with that idea, as he's been in too little despite blowing up big. -- Viewdrix 01:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

If that was the case, Leno, Conan, etc. would be on the list. Those don't work because, even though many Frat Packers frequently contribute, when you think of the Daily Show, you don't think of Frat Pack. Sorry, I disagree.

Leno and Conan never had a Frat Packer as a star. It's not an idea of "when you think about the show, you think of the Frat Pack." It's that, by the definition given, it fits perfectly. That's my take. -- Viewdrix 02:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

• I think it's a stretch to include any talkshow in the Frat Pack TV section. The Daily Show should be there for Carell's involvement but I'm not buying Conan, Leno, etc. The only talk show that should be in consideration would be The Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn, since Will and Vince both appeared on his final show (after he appeared in Old School).Kevdo 04:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

• Stiller,Ferrell and Wilson have all been guests in the daily show more than once.Not to mention Carell's involment as correspondant.User:Alfredosolis

• • The Daily Show is a very big stretch, since it is a talk show. The argument has been made that The Daily Show, because of Steve Carell's success, is the new Saturday Night Live. However, its talk show format makes it hard to classify. That'd be like including Jay Leno as part of the Askewniverse just because Kevin Smith films segments for the Tonight Show. Or for that matter, considering Conan O'Brien in the Frat Pack for being in Bewitched. Clearly, the Daily Show connection IS there (Rob Corddry in Old School & Blades of Glory, Ed Helms in The Office, Night at the Museum and Evan Almighty, Stephen Colbert in Bewitched), but again, I can't stress enough how its format minimizes the Frat Pack connection. Now, if say, Ben Stiller or Will Ferrell cameo in Rob Corddry's new movie, The Donor, then maybe The Daily Show might have some more Frat Pack weight.

Wait, I've never heard the Frat Pack ever be refered in any articles, interviews, or other internet related material with specifications towards TV series. While the various members can be cited with sources, someone needs to come up with a reliable source, because it appears to be OR. Radagast83 21:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

• Originally, the television section was just a chart noting the instances when various Frat Pack members and associates have crossed paths. Someone deleted the chart, creating a list, making it look like official Frat Pack projects. Perhaps some text would better explain key appearances/involvement. For example: Judd Apatow worked on The Ben Stiller Show, cast Stiller in cameos on Freaks and Geeks/Undeclared (Ferrell too); Stiller was a member of Saturday Night Live for one season (which Ferrell & McKay later had their era of); USA Today cited the connections to The Office. In other words, the connections could be cited by the actors' own filmography. However, proper text and citation should note these aren't actual "Frat Pack television shows" (except Heat Vision.) -- see me let go

It is nice to have a way to show that the "Frat Pack" transcends movies and have worked together on Television. That is not my problem, my point is that it isn't encylopedic (even noting as such would show that the section is OR). I've done some topical google searches and not a single article or website has come up that discusses TV shows. Heat Vision should stay, as there is a obvious link to the group and can be noted as such, but unless proper citations can be found, the section just has to go. Radagast83 07:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

If guidelines say it's absolutely gotta go, then I guess that's that. See me let go 08:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's exactly what the guidelines say, but given the cinematic nature of the group I think removing the TV section is okay. That said, it's pretty important for Jack Black's credibility as a member of the group to have Heat Vision and Jack as part of the canon. Just because nobody has written about it doesn't make it important (once again I will remind folks that it is pretty unlikely to expect a "proper" publication to delve into the minutia that we do with such as narrow topic -- and therefore the typical Wiki policies about primary sources should be looked at in context.) Perhaps a reference to "Jack Black's important connection with Stiller and Owen Wilson from the TV pilot Heat Vision and Jack has been noted by the Frat Pack Tribute Movie Scorecard"?? Kevdo 00:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Regardless if it is important or not, it needs to be sourced (in any credible way shape or form), correctly. Having us extrapolate and infer meaning into the article (based on "our" judgement) is tantamount to Original Research (which should be avoided at all costs, regardless of the amount of data out there on the subject). There is already a mention of Heat Vision and Jack in the "See also" section. Black's credibility in the group is established and confirmed based on the number of articles that have been published in print and online that include him on the list. Radagast83 01:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Accuracy dispute over?

The content on the site, especially as it relates to Frat Pack "membership" seems to have stabilized. If y'all agree, how do we remove the big "in dispute" banner from the top of the page?Kevdo 20:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd say keep it up until you get a few responses. The amount of edit-warring that took place is virtually gone. While I would feel better with more sourcing of minor 'members', I'd say that most of the "dispute" occured based on Steve Carrell's inclusion/exclusion. I believe it's been firmly shown that he is a member, and thusly, the dispute is over. Radagast83 20:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

On the subject of minor members, perhaps a link section should be added highlighting such noteworthy links. Like you said, keeping with the encyclopedic nature, proper sourcing would make things better. See me let go 02:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

See "External Links" at the bottom of the Frat Pack page.--Patesta 21:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Relevance

Does anyone still dispute the relevance of any of this information or oppose removing the 'relevance disputed' tag at this point? User:Pedant 21:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Hearing no objection, the tag has been removed.Kevdo 18:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Listing Unannounced Movies

The listing of unannounced movies such as Anchorman 2, Old School Dos, and Outsourced is starting to get ridiculous. Can we agree to only list movies that have commenced filming (which would avoid listing projects such as Used Guys which almost got made... almost). Showing projects that are a looong way from being filmed does not provide accurate information about The Frat Pack. Thoughts?Kevdo 16:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Well OSD is in the writing process as is Outsourced, and I'm pretty sure that Ferrell and Apatow are brainstorming for ANCRMN2.--68.115.84.52 04:28, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the Outsourced script has been complete for a few years now. This past summer, Vaughn & Wilson have said they want to work together again, but that it won't be on Outsourced. The screenwriter of Outsourced has also said that the film's producers decided it could be made for the price of Vaughn or Wilson's entire salary. He also said that guys like John Krasinski & Andy Samberg are among the names being suggested for it.

In regards to Anchorman 2, while you may be "pretty sure" Ferrell & Apatow are brainstorming it, it's just hearsay at this point. Ferrell's stated that Anchorman would be the only sequel he'd consider. But people took a joke he made about pushing Step Brothers aside for A2 seriously, and thus, now the rumors have begun.

So, does anyone object to removing the movies that have not yet started filming (Anchorman 2, Old School Dos, and Outsourced)?Kevdo 21:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

How about we only remove the movies that are not in the pre-production process, with the actors signed on and the script finished? There are some movies that will begin filming soon, like Blonde Ambition, Step Brothers, and the Wilson bully one, that are already ready to go. Yes, I will remove those three since Anchorman 2 has not been written, and Outsourced and OSDos do not have actors signed on yet.--68.115.84.52 20:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Owen Wilson not appearing in Anchorman

Someone took it upon themself to say Owen Wilson did not appear in Anchorman because he "had reportedly not liked the idea of this film." A link was not posted confirming this rumor. It's believed that Owen did not film a cameo because he was overseas filming The Life Aquatic. Granted, I don't have a link confirming this, but for that reason, I'm not posting it. This rumor about Wilson not liking the film needs to be linked or removed.

UK Interview with Will Ferrell

It was mentioned in the Frat Pack article that Will said in a interview with a UK magazine, that he was the leader of the frat pack. Can the person who put that into the wiki, please put the source? Would love to see it Yearsago 19:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone disagree with moving this quote about Will being the leader of the frat pack? There still has been no source. Yearsago 18:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleting it is a good idea for two reasons. 1) it's not attributed. 2) Ben Stiller is the leader of the Frat Pack (as noted in numerous quotes by Vince, Luke, Owen, and Jack) (see www.the-frat-pack.com)Kevdo 04:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Permanant Midnight

I suggest taking this off the list since it's not a comedy. It's a drama. It's the adaptation of Jerry Stahl's memoir of the same name. And Melinda and Melinda is a Woodey Allen movie. Shouldn't be in this list either. I would say the Tenacious D shorts should be removed as well.

• The heading at the top of the chart describes what "Frat Pack" movies are vs. related projects. I say keep it.Kevdo 01:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

An earlier Frat Pack

This article provides no coverage of the prior attempt to christen the cast of the film School Ties (along with a few others) as the "Frat Pack". As one can see from this Entertainment Weekly article reprinted at NewsAskew.com, this version of the "Frat Pack" featured the likes of Leonardo DiCaprio, Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, and Edward Norton. How should this information be handled? It invalidates several claims in this article, particularly the one about who coined the term. Erechtheus 02:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• I suggest you read the first paragraph of the article. It mentions the EW article, noting that the usage of the Frat Pack term for those actors has not been used elsewhere. USA "coined" the term as it applies to the current Frat Pack group (though the term was used in at least a one movie review of Old School).Kevdo 17:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• That would explain why I thought there was no coverage. I expected the information to be much deeper into the article, so I didn't even bother to skim the lead paragraph. I wouldn't think such prior use information would be so important it should be in what is supposed to be a summary. Erechtheus 06:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • It wouldn't bother me to see it lower on the page.Kevdo 18:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Night at the Musueum a frat pack movie?

Night at the Musueum is a family/children's film based on a popular children's short i think it hardly qualifies as a frat pack film. The defintion we have here is way too overly simplistic, simply becuse a few of the actors are working toghether on a film does that automatically warrant reffereing to it as a frat pack film? To most people the the frat pack label refers a to a genre of somewhat sophmoric buddy comdedies that have emmerged the last 5 years or so. In my opinion there needs to be an overhaul of what exactly a frat pack movie is here i.e more of a genre than a strict set defenition, otherwise films like this suddenly are reffered here and nowhere else as a "frat pack film".

---Duhon December 22nd 2006.

• NATM was certainly family friendly, but I'm not sure I would call it a kid's film. There was definitely a lot of humor aimed at adults. Where the film does fit well with other Frat Pack fare is the large roles by Stiller and Wilson, along with recurring friends (e.g. Paul Rudd). And it's a fantasy/farce not too different from something like Bruce/Evan Almighty, Pick of Destiny. It's not "classic Frat Pack" storyline ala Old School or Wedding Crashers, but it's certainly more the kind of humor we're used to than, say, The Royal Tenenbaums.Kevdo 16:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I do think it should be a frat packer, but i must agree some movies should not be in there, When i think of the movies i think Owen, Ben and Will as %100 With luke and vince at %95, However, with me and most people i know Jack Black is a %0 and Steve onlt about %50 (even tho i love him). The description does need to be changed, . The movies: Bewitched, Around the World in 80 Days, Meet the Parents, should not be in there. I Mean 80 days, has two camoes and NO secondary how is that a Fratter?IAmTheCoinMan 18:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

On the Frat Pack Tribute site we took care of this issue by noting which films were "classic" Frat Pack films (e.g. Old School) and which ones weren't (e.g. 80 days). Of course, we also created tight (at least two Fratters in starring roles, farce elements) and loose (one Fratter, similar humor style) definitions of what a Frat Pack film really is. For Wikipedia, I'm not sure you can use any other source except The Frat Pack Tribute for that, and as noted in other threads that may not be enough source material to go on. The chart on the Wiki page does say "filmography" and it's certainly accurate. But I understand the want to highlight the "canon" films,.Kevdo 21:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Ian Roberts a secondary member?

Ian Roberts (of Upright Citizen's Brigade) has appeared in minor roles in both Anchorman and Talladega Nights (the latter of which is listed as a secondary movie). Anchorman includes all but one core member, while TN features one core member (Will Ferrell) and several secondary members including Adam McKay and David Koechner. With this in mind, might Roberts qualify as a secondary member of the Frat Pack?

• Maybe someday. His role in Anchorman was really small, and in Talladega it was larger (more so on the extended version). He gets no props from me for his (and Adam McKay's) awful Talladega Nights DVD commentary. It's true that Koechner's role was no larger, but Koechner gets credit for earlier work (incl. work with other Fratters besides Ferrell).Kevdo 22:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Needs a complete rewrite

I am sorry, but this page is utter garbage. There is a time to be nice, and this is not it. It is not encyclopedic, it is incoherent, there is no organization, there is irrelevant information, sources are not cited, and opinion and original research is everywhere. Most of the "research" comes from a self-proclaimed "superfan" website, and I am sure the authors of said website are also the ones editing this article.

All of the arguments about whether a given member is or isn't in the Frat Pack are not only juvenile but irrelevent: Wikipedia is not supposed to make such judgement calls, but should simply note that such controversy exists.

"Frat Pack Pledges" are a fiction created by the fansite and, as such, do not deserve any recognition in the article whatsoever.

"According to the Frat Pack Tribute website, "to 'strictly' qualify as a Frat Pack movie, a movie must have at least two Frat Pack members involved." -- nobody cares what a fansite thinks. You have to ask what the press thinks. Here's a hint: they don't think Woody Allen films like "Melinda and Melinda" qualify as Frat Pack movies, Will Ferrell or no.

I am not trying to be mean, only frank. This page is an excellent example of what Wikipedia is not. It is unsalvagable. It's time for a rewrite. 24.74.148.61 20:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Well, the Tribute site was the first and so far best "authority" for defining what a Frat Pack movie is (Old School) and isn't (Royal Tenenbaumns, Melinda). The Frat Pack Tribute has never called Melinda and Melinda a Frat Pack film (unless you consider a film with two Frat Pack actors a Frat Pack film). We don't call Permanent Midnight a Frat Pack film either. Regarding the question of "fansite" nature of the Tribute website, I hope you'd consider the collaboration done with USA Today's second Frat Pack article an indication of the "authority" of the site. But, as has been discussed at length on this discussion page the Tribute site isn't the only source of Frat Pack lore -- but it is a source.
  As for your gripes about the wiki article. If you'd like to propose a rewrite, please feel free...Kevdo 00:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Regarding this statement: "I am sure the authors of said website are also the ones editing this article". Boy, talk about "opinion and original research"; I wish you practiced what you preached, because it you had actually looked at the editing history of this wiki page then you would know that -- in fact -- the Tribute owner/editor has done very little editing of this page (disclosure: that would be me).Kevdo 01:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  A few other retorts:
  • "All of the arguments about whether a given member is or isn't in the Frat Pack are not only juvenile but irrelevent." Actually, this is the very purpose of why some people may come to this page. Who is in the Frat Pack or not? Again, if you look at the history, there's been a long process to remove non-Fratters such as Jim Carrey, Adam Sandler, et. al. Which leads us to...Kevdo 01:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • ""Frat Pack Pledges" are a fiction created by the fansite and, as such, do not deserve any recognition in the article whatsoever." Again you are incorrect. There are many, many articles (some of which are actually indeed cited in the article) that refer to various people as "pledges". The notes regarding that are included to provide context for those visiting and looking for an answer.Kevdo 01:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I think you need to understand the difference between calling an argument juvenille, and calling the subject matter at hand juvenille. Dealing with Frat Pack minutae may be viewed as juvenille by some, but at least the discourse has been posititive. Which is more than I can say for your comments.Kevdo 01:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Lastly, I challenge the assertion that only "the press" can be considered experts on pop culture topics. Do you really think that "the press" have any more to say about whether or not Steve Carell is a member of the Frat Pack than a fan site (or, multiple fan sites). Especially if said fan site uses the same sort of editorial principles that a print publication would? Again, I will say again that the Frat Pack Tribute site not the only source of Frat Pack lore, but by any reasonable objective measure needs to be a part of the equation.Kevdo 01:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• ""Frat Pack Pledges" are a fiction created by the fansite and, as such, do not deserve any recognition in the article whatsoever." Please do some research before you make claims like this, as the guy that added Justin Long to the list of Pledges, I sourced four different sources in respect with Justin Long as a pledge/JV member of the frat pack. Its not fans saying who should be in or is out, Justin Long has been noted as a Member, NOT by just the press, but by LONG himself, check citations in the article. There is nothing wrong with this page.

Yearsago 17:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• • EW=Justin Long Pledging the Frat Pack

• • USA TODAY= Frat packer in training

• • IGN=New go to guy in Frat Pack

• • • Not to mention USA Today even had an article describing the "Frat Pack Junior Varsity" including Paul Rudd and David Koechner. They also listed Steve Carell, before officially inducting him a year later. See me let go 18:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
      • USA Today: Carell just wants some love

Well, I am not sure about a rewrite. I think the presentation of the sources for the article could be better, and I have started work on improving this. The original anonymous criticaster may want to see User_talk:StudyAndBeWise/HarvardHowTo for simple instructions on one way to improve the article. StudyAndBeWise 06:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Removed citations

I removed a citation to http://www.ew.com/ew/features/980424/fratpack/ which does not exist. StudyAndBeWise 05:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

• Here's the updated link: http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,282766,00.htmlKevdo 00:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Unreliable source

I am considering removing the following as a reference:

http://www.the-frat-pack.com/circle.html

Becuase:

1. It is an unsigned. (The graphics and comments are attributed, but the text is not). E.g., from the article:

“ Frat Pack superfan Rick Duran put together this diagram showing the Frat Pack Circle of Trust. ”

2. It does not cite its sources.

I moved it here in case anybody disaggress that such a source is not a reliable source.

*{{Harvard reference | Surname = Anonymous | Given = Unknown | Year = 2007 | Date = [[2007-01-28]] | Title = The Frat Pack Circle of Trust | Publisher = the-frat-pack.com | URL = http://www.the-frat-pack.com/circle.html }} Retrieved on [[2007-02-09]]

See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources and Wikipedia:Verifiablity. StudyAndBeWise 05:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

It should be removed. That site is an understandable related link, but not an actual reference. There is a growing number of articles with similar content to that site, so it's becoming more common to find some more concrete reference links. See me let go 05:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

• Would it help to attribute Rick Duran as the author of the text (which he is)? As for citing of sources, the design is an original creation and unlike anything out there (that I've seen). It is certainly created from an editorial perspective (then again, so are the articles from USA Today, et. al.) Kevdo 19:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Attribution for Rick Duran's authorship of the entire piece is now in place.Kevdo 21:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm done for now

If you want to continue harvardizing the references (which will improve the article by allowing people to know more details about the sources without having to go the the sources, some of which launch annoying pop-up adds), see User_talk:StudyAndBeWise/HarvardHowTo. I hope the work I have done has helped. Please continue it. StudyAndBeWise 06:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Secondary Filmography

The secondary filmography seems to complicate the article, mixing and matching actors that just happened to be cast in the same film. Some listings are notable (The 40 Year Old Virgin, The Break Up), but does Bruce Almighty really warrant listing? When you take a group of people (almost 20 in the case of this article), it's not unfamiliar for their paths to cross. Does each case really fit in with the Wikipedia guidelines? Not saying to delete the list, but it does seem to need some kind of clarity. See me let go 07:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Jon Heder?

I think he is quickly gaining approval as a frat pack member.

Outings in School of Scoundrels and the upcoming Blades of Glory.

I think he should be listed, maybe as a primary member. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Teerev (talk • contribs) 03:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

School for Scoundrels isn't a Frat Pack movie. And even if it was, two movies with the Frat Pack would have barely qualified him as a pledge. -- Viewdrix 04:30, 4 March 2007 (

But saying that..wait for Blades of Glory Teerev 17:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

• It would take a John C. Reilly-style performance for Heder to get any serious consideration for this one role. School for Scoundrels was a bad movie that was quite a bit darker than the typical Frat Pack fare, despite some stylistic similarities and common creative talent (i.e. Director Todd Phillips). At best he might be considered a pledge, but agree with above that he needs to have at least one more role for serious consideration. He's been on the Frat Pack Circle of Trust for a while, though. That's a good vehicle for acknowledging his large role in Blades.Kevdo 17:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• • So far, Heder's just a famous co-star. John C. Reilly at least seems like an actual buddy of the guys. See me let go 19:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Despite how big a part someone gets in one movie, it doesn't change the act that it was one movie. Heder can't be considered a pledge, or even anywhere near a total member, for sharring top billing with Will Ferrell. The precedented criteria makes this clear. -- Viewdrix 22:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

what about???

The group of guys that make up Happy Madison are they just the "happy Madison Pack?"

you know like grandma's boy, rob snieder is...something unusual, big daddy, the wedding singer, etc.

• There was a Wiki article about the "Bad Boys of SNL" but for some reason it is no longer around. They are definitely a distinct "pack" from the Frat Pack, despite some overlap. Same for Kevin Smith's View Askew crew.Kevin Crossman 19:18, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

James Carville?

James Carville appeared in both Old School and Wedding Crashers, two of the most central Frat Pack movies of all time. I think he should be given honorary member status. Aznlaxboy 20:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Carville has been listed on the Frat Pack Circle of Trust for some time.Kevin Crossman 23:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

"Pledge Films" section

I don't think the Pledge Film section should be there, esp. with Shrek3 as the example. Please comment on including this in the article.Kevin Crossman 22:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Scorecard removal

Anyone have an opinion regarding the removal of the scorecard and just a straight list. It seems the scorecard table provided more examples of how these guys work together.Kevin Crossman 16:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I just thought that a list would be easier to understand for people who wanted to see what the frat pack movies were. however i think that there should be a link to the old chart so that people can also see who has worked with who on what film.User:Harry Weasley 19:23, 4 june 2007

I prefer the old format but if you're going to use a list why not at least list the Frat Pack actors for each film (similar to the the list below where you see the primary fratter with the secondary fratters).Kevin Crossman 22:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

After seeing both versions again i see that the chart is better because is shows who has worked with who, and if people just want to see the name of the film they can look down the film name column (Sorry for any Inconvenience).User:Harry Weasley 14:27, 5 june 2007

Mediocre American Man Trilogy

does anyone else agree that this article should be deleatedUser:Harry Weasley14:58 5 june 07

Well, it does not contain any citations, that's for sure. And, there's quite a bit of uncertainty regarding the "common themes" since the third movie hasn't even started pre-production.Kevin Crossman 22:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

The Leader of the Frat Pack

does anyone disagree with this order User:Harry Weasley15:32 5 june 07

1) ben stiller

2) owen wilson

3) will ferrell

4) vince vaughn

5) luke wilson

6) jack black

7) steve carell

Not sure what the purpose of this list is. There are a myriad of quotes indicating that Stiller is the acknowledged leader. And I think a look at the films TO DATE would put Black and Carell at the bottom in that order. On the other hand, Black is going to do a movie produced by Owen (The Year One) and his role in Tropic Thunder certainly puts him, arguably, with more in-group work than Luke Wilson. You could easily argue for Ferrell or Vaughn as #2 instead of Owen (any any those guys could be 2-3-4). Not sure we need this list. Something about Ben being the leader might be interesting, if you can dig up the quotes. There's a certain related, external Frat Pack website that has a bunch of those. But if I mention the site the administrators think I'm spamming.Kevin Crossman 22:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

The Frat Pack Tribute

Why is there a big issue about external links to the frat pack tribute site. That site offers a detailed analysis of the frat pack members, films, and news (which is much more than wikipedia can offer). Kevin crossman should be applauded for his tireless work towards the frat pack and not accused of spamming or trying to promote his own site(which if its was full of rubbish and biased views would not come up first on google or yahoo searches). User:Harry Weasley 11:22 6 june 2007

DreamGuy's notable for his bold editing, which sometimes can be excessively bold. He found a guideline that approved, not demanded, for the deletion of links that were added by the authors of their respective websites. I took the liberty of looking at the website and deemed it worthy of mention, so the 'self-promotion' bit is out the window now. If it is edited out again without further discussion/mediation/general consensus, flag the editor for vandalism. Kerrow 20:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

My point was not that I "added" the links but "undeleted" them after they had been there for a year (technically an "addition" to the page but definitely not the same as adding it in the first place.) Most of the Wiki admins/editors seem to think all "fansites" have no redeeming quality so they should not be included, which was actually DreamGuy's major gripe.Kevin Crossman 00:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

High rank in Google should definitely not be considered as a great reason to deem anyone as an authority on anything. It might be a factor but far from the only one, FWIW.Kevin Crossman 00:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Mentioning the Back Pack?

I'm leaning toward thinking that the Apatow-group "Back Pack" reference should be removed from the page. I think it would be better as its own Wiki article with a crosslink from the Frat Pack page. What do the rest of you think?Kevin Crossman 20:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it's already been removed, but a separate article is a good idea. There's no article yet, but I'm not sure if anybody really knows exactly who is in the Back Pack. The USA Today article referenced Rogen, Hill, Baruchel, Segel, and Starr, but I would think there are other actors just as qualified, no? Michael Cera comes to mind, because of the starring role in Superbad. I'm pretty sure he'll also be in Year One, which Apatow is producing. LunchTable 02:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

• Among the many problems with the article (besides the awful name) was the exclusion of others in the Apatow Association. Cera is notable for the two films you mentioned, as his DVD extras work on Knocked Up. Also included, of course, would be Rudd, Carell, and Mann.Kevin Crossman 21:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

And since there's really only one article on it, we wouldn't be allowed to add those members, however justified it may be, because of Wikipedia's rules. LunchTable

19:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Removal Of Films

Why have school of rock and elf been removed from the table.

• All of the films with only one Frat Pack member have been removed (see also: Along Came Polly, The 40 Year-Old Virgin). The listing below that, for better or for worse, is only for films with a single Fratter and at least one "pledge" costar. Neither Elf nor School of Rock would qualify under that criteria.Kevin Crossman 21:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
• If you think a different arrangement would make sense, please note it here. There well may be a better way to present things. Kevin Crossman 21:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Should Knocked Up be removed then, since 40 Year Old Virgin didn't make the cut? JohnnyB 16:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Knocked Up isn't any more of a Frat Pack film than Permanent Midnight, Melinda and Melinda, or some of the others on the list. It's inclusion is due to Steve and Owen's documented cameos from the movie (Owen's for the DVD). It's an "involvement chart" not a "list of Frat Pack movies."Kevin Crossman 21:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

This Article is a Disgrace

Jack Black isn't in the Frat Pack. Secondly, it isnt a Frat pack movie if only one or two of them are in it, it has to have a bunch of them. I'll give this article a week to change, after that I'm setting it straight.

• Threats aren't a good way to make friends and influence people. Thinking constructively, Jack Black has been included in virtually every article about the group, and he's made reference to the group as well. Kevin Crossman 04:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• As for defining what a "Frat Pack" movie is or isn't, there aren't many instances of people trying to define that. And since Wikipedia is not original research, you have to cite another source to defend your position.Kevin Crossman 04:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)