MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Posted Thursday, July 30th, 1998 - Comments Off on Views of News
Be Sociable, Share!

Views of News

A reader, Brian G., wrote in earlier this week to “demand” (his word) that I write about Sony’s spin on Godzilla this week since I had written so much on the Armageddon spin. I wrote him back in private to explain why I felt that the Godzilla spin, which took place this week in a Daily Variety interview with Sony execs led by John Calley, was not the same beast as Disney’s spin on Armageddon. Why? Because Disney actively spun the Armageddon story, while Sony was asked and answered a question as part of a much larger interview with completely different issues to spin (whether Calley will soon leave Sony and resetting the media position on the studio aprés Godzilla). Also, I believe that Sony spun toward what they really believe. Devlin and Emmerich are still, indeed, valued parts of the Sony family, and there may well be a Godzilla sequel (albeit at a much smaller price tag for the production and the hype and with Devlin and Emmerich as executive producers, not the main team.)
What really inspired me to write about this today was another story in Variety. This one is about Samuel L. Jackson dissing the Academy Awards, as he feels that the institution has dissed black movie talent. Now, I am sure that Jackson will stand by everything that he said in the article. That’s not the point. The feature was titled “Actor Samuel L. Jackson picks bone with Oscars” when, in fact, Jackson was out selling The Negotiator. In that context, a reporter asked him a question, and Jackson answered honestly. But readers would likely get the idea that Jackson was on some sort of campaign against the Academy. He’s not. He doesn’t like them, but he’s not on a Jesse Jackson-like crusade. We tend to use our perceived context as part of our determination about whether an interviewee is thoughtful or a loud mouth. Sony wasn’t looking to spin Godzilla, but was certainly willing to do so. Jackson wasn’t looking to talk Academy racism, but didn’t shy away from it either. How can we blame them for answering when we asked the questions?
BOND BUZZ: Speaking of Sony spin, they lost the first major skirmish in the war to turn James Bond into a two-studio schizophrenic. U.S. District Judge Edward Rafeedie said he was “99.9 percent” sure that he’d be putting the reins on Sony even developing a script for a possible Bond movie until a December trial resolves the issue once and for all. This is Sony’s second failed (so far) attempt to acquire Bond, having attempted to woo Barbara Broccoli from MGM a little over a year ago. Of course, leave it to a lawyer (Art-Buchwald-hero-turned-blowhard Pierce O’Donnell) to take a victory and turn it into absurdist hyperbole, claiming that the ruling created “one of the darkest days in the history of Sony Studios.” Didn’t this guy see Striptease?
WHEN YOUNG MEN’S FANCIES TURN TO SPRINGER: That Jerry Springer movie is moving full-steam ahead. After blonde bombshell Jamie Pressly made her big debut as the often-naked, white-trash title character of Poison Ivy III (and after a small role as the busty blonde of the trio of wags who complimented, then dissed Jennifer Love Hewitt in Can’t Hardly Wait) she just signed up to play a lead in the too-hot-for-video movie (now known as Springers) as a trailer-park queen who claims she’s having an affair with her stepfather in order to win syndicated airtime. So, what do you want to bet that she’ll add the “naked” element to her work in this film, too? And the Playboy spread (so to speak) can’t be far behind. Hollywood. Even when you win, you lose.
KISS AWAY YOUR YOUTH: In other trashy news, New Line Cinema has signed Kiss to appear as itself in the must-be-renamed Detroit Rock City. It’s a story set in 1978 about some guys who go on a quest to meet their favorite band. One problem. I saw Paul Stanley the other day; I run into Gene Simmons now and again. And I can tell you, it may be 1978 in the movie, and they may be wearing a lot of make-up already, but making them look like twentysomethings is going to require more CG work than Spawn did.
CHAT: Friday is my Yahoo! chat day around these parts. Actually, it’s called Movie Chat. It starts at 2:00 p.m. PT/5:00 p.m. ET. And I’ll give you a hint: Show up a little early and start sending questions. As the hour progresses, it gets harder and harder to get a question into me.
READER OF THE DAY: From Ann Minnix: “Last week you asked what women thought of the movie Saving Private Ryan. It is one of the best movies ever made. I saw this film with a theater full of people (all ages and genders), and we all clapped when it was over. I haven’t spoken to one person (male or female) who didn’t love it. This is a film about humanity (and inhumanity) and all who see it will benefit. As far as I can see, any criticisms made about the film are not looked at as carefully as needed. Spielberg spent time framing, writing and editing every shot to make points relevant to his view and it must have worked, because the nearly three-hour film seemed like minutes. Saving Private Ryan was a great movie experience.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments Off on Views of News

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