MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Sony Takes the BO Lead

Sony Pictures (a.k.a. Columbia/Tri-Star) has broken the box office, passing the previous record of $1.2 billion in domestic grosses for one year. The studio hit the record high six weeks earlier in the year than the previous record-holder, Disney, leading the box office pack for the first time in over 25 years. How’d they do it? Bugs! Men In Black‘s aliens were pretty buglike. Julia Roberts went buggy in My Best Friend’s Wedding. And Starship Troopers proves that bugs and tight pants mix just fine. Just one fly in Sony’s ointment. The run of hits is the product of the past administration and the deja-vu will continue until next Memorial Day Weekend’s release of Godzilla. Well, at least next year’s monster is a reptile. Thank goodness for evolution.
Former b.o. king, Walt Disney Studios, is going through its next evolution. Studio chief Joe Roth says that the studio will cut back to 22 releases next year after putting 40 flicks in theaters this year. By 1999, he says Disney will release only 15 films. As Roth told The Hollywood Reporter, “You have to make your shots count.” All of this would seem to make a lot of sense since no matter how cheaply you make a film, releasing the film costs at least $20 million and close to $40 million on average these days. This year, that’s about $1.2 Billion (with a capital “B”) out of Disney’s pocket before you even pay for the movies! If they cut 25 films from the schedule, saving $800 million, even missing one Men In Black-size hit and a few other moderate hits would leave the studio in better financial shape than they’re in now.
Finally, studio-moguls-to-be, Charlie Sheen and Bret Michaels, have started production on No Code of Conduct, their latest venture as Sheen/Michaels Productions (The first was a cheesecake calendar). Michaels will direct the film that he and Charlie wrote, with Charlie acting his butt off as a former vice cop. How original! One novel thing. The boys will be served legal papers in a few days that claim they refused to make good on their oral contract with Alexander Tabrizi and Anthony Esposito, a couple of producers who helped initiate the project on this, their maiden voyage.
Anything on your mind? Don’t be shy, e-mail me.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon