MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Is it Irony or is it Memorex?

The irony part is that I Know What You Did Last Summer will be leaving the Top Ten for the last time just as Scream 2 (the Memorex part) comes into the number one slot that Kevin Williamson and his “summer job” (IKWYDLS) held for so many weeks. This is one sequel that should have a lot more opening bite than the original. Look for a massive $33 million weekend. Amistad has very little negative buzz, but still carries the very real limitations of being a lengthy historical drama, Spielberg or no Spielberg. And though the plagiarism lawsuit shouldn’t discourage moviegoers, it clearly knocked the DreamWorks media campaign off center. Hard to imagine more than $15 million for the film this weekend.
For Richer or Poorer and Home Alone 3 are kinda the same movie for two different age groups. Who knows what will happen? Home Alone 2 opened big despite plenty of negative buzz, as did Jungle 2 Jungle on Tim Allen’s appeal. I think both films will do somewhere between $9 million and $12 million, but that’s as far as I’m willing to stick my neck out here. (If either is going to stiff, I’d bet on HA 3.) Brushing up against these two should be the only other comedy on the list, Flubber, which should take fifth with a 40 percent drop to $6.8 million.

The Rainmaker
should fall softly (35 percent) to fifth with $3.7 million, passing Alien: Resurrection, which should drop 50 percent for a sixth-place, $3.3 million weekend. (In last week’s final tally, Alien 4 did $6.66 million — more demonic irony!) Anastasia should forget another 40 percent for $3.1 million and seventh. The Jackal will bite off another $2.4 million for a 40 percent drop off and eighth. Warner Bros. fired its marketing president, misplacing the blame for misses like Midnight In The Garden Of Good And Evil. Marketing was good. Distribution plans were evil. Midnight will take ninth place with $1.9 million, heading for a total under $25 million and no Oscars. And Mortal Kombat: Artistic Annihilation will grab tenth with $1.3 million.
Lots of room for opinions with this week’s openings (read: David could really be wrong!) Join the growing crowd of box office guessers by e-mail.

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