MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Posted Tuesday, July 28th, 1998 - Comments Off on In Ailing Technicolor
Be Sociable, Share!

In Ailing Technicolor

I’m sure that you’ve all read about the missing prints of Saving Private Ryan at over 100 theaters around the U.S. last Friday. Well, the blame has fallen at Technicolor’s door, and things over there are looking more than a little hairy. The film processing company’s last tangle with DreamWorks involved mishandled trailers for Antz. Having seen this screwy trailer, I can tell you exactly where they blew that one. They had the original trailer of the Woody Allen-voiced “Z” talking to his therapist with the soundtrack that would end up correctly attached to the newer, action-filled trailer. It was surreal. (By the way, just got a new trailer from DreamWorks that includes more on characters voiced by Stallone, Hackman and Glover. Terrific.) Then, there was the Gone with the Wind debacle that had audiences complaining about blurry sections of the frame, screwy color and other unintended faults in the “new and improved” version of the classic. And now, the Ryan deliveries. Looks like Technicolor’s efforts to move back in front of the technological wave will leave them submerged for the next while.
IN & OUT: Hollywood mogul-guy Robert Evans annulled his marriage to Hollywood fabulous-babe Catherine Oxenberg after a 12-day marriage. Evans, who was recovering from a stroke before marrying Oxenberg, a mere 32 years Evans’ junior, blamed the split on his work obligations. His work? Well, there was a day when Evans ran Paramount, pushing out such films as The Godfather. He segued into producing and knocked out films like Marathon Man, Chinatown and Urban Cowboy. But that was a while ago. Evans’ films of the ’90s are The Two Jakes, Sliver, Jade, The Phantom and The Saint. Films which all but destroyed Jack Nicholson, Sharon Stone, Linda Fiorentino, Billy Zane and Val Kilmer, all at the heights of their careers. In other words, give us all a break and go back to trying to boff the 36-year old.
IN OTHER DIVORCE NEWS: Good feature in Variety about the trouble with Rupert and Anna Murdoch‘s mega-divorce. With California community property laws getting in the way of Rupert’s efforts to keep up with Michael Eisner, he could go the A Perfect Murder route. It would be a great story. But before Murdoch gets Viggo Mortenson to kill his estranged wife (and don’t you think Viggo would rather do that then appear in a movie as poorly received as A Perfect Murder again?), he had better purchase the underlying murder plot rights to the film from Warner Bros. He could get sued. (Word on the grapevine is that Saddam Hussein is currently negotiating with the financially strapped MGM for rights to certain Bond villians’ attempts to take over the world.)
DEJA FOX: Twentieth Century Fox has Star Wars next Memorial Day but now they’ll also make way for Leo. The studio just forked up big bucks for Leo’s next picture, the Danny Boyle-directed The Beach. Not only does this bring DiCaprio back to the senior studio partner on Titanic, but it reunites Boyle with the company that ate dirt with his A Life Less Ordinary just last year. Another happy Hollywood marriage that is all about the art. The art is the bottom line.
CASTING CHRISTINA: Christina Ricci is returning to the loving hands of Tim Burton for Sleepy Hollow opposite Johnny Depp, who may be perfect (as one of the most pasty-skinned of all bog screen swarthy guys) casting for the role of Ichabod Crane. After taking on the tough roles of slut/vixen/bitch in Buffalo 66 and The Opposite of Sex, Ricci gets to go back to studio work as an adult. And Burton gets to fetishize the now very grown-up Ms. Ricci in corsets and heels. It already smells like a whacked-out classic.
VIDEO FORECASTING: Sony has announced that Godzilla will hit the video racks on November 3. My bet would be that Armageddon will follow it to Blockbuster about a week later, still ready for the Christmas buying season. No doubt you will find Dr. Dolittle, Zorro, Lethal Weapon 4 and Mulan there, too. So, the “blockbusters” of Summer ’98 will likely be in your home before Thanksgiving. And I’ll bet right now that Saving Private Ryan will be re-released into theaters — and only theaters — right about the same time. Handling with care. Could it be the latest trend?
READERS OF THE DAY: From Rich B: “I’m reading some criticism of the framing sequence Spielberg uses in Saving Private Ryan. I was skeptical myself, but I think the device is essential. Spielberg’s intent isn’t just to tell a story, but to pay tribute to the veterans, and the framing sequence focuses that message and makes the audience think about the sacrifices that were made. I don’t see how it takes anything at all away from the rest of the film, and I’m a little puzzled at this criticism.”
Also, from Larry Freeman: “I am disturbed by those who make light of the graveyard sequence in this very great movie. I am a Vietnam veteran who has visited the Vietnam Veteran’s memorial in Washington D.C., and my wife’s father participated as an infantryman in the landing on Omaha Beach. It is important that people understand the need for so many veterans to make the pilgrimage to where their buddies are remembered, or are buried, and the grief that jolts each of us when we connect with our memories in that way. We survivors do feel the burden of having lived while those close to us were taken. The graveyard scene was absolutely important as recognition of the closure each veteran must face. And the scene is real with respect to the grief of the old soldier and of what he feels he owes to those he left behind.” Correction: Yesterday’s TWO BAD MOVIES EQUAL should have read simply TWO MOVIES EQUAL. My mistake in not correcting my template as I usually do when I butcher good movies. Sorry.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments Off on In Ailing Technicolor

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