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
Everybody I’ve talked to has said they will wait to see it closer to Christmas…..well duh!!!
Pitiful but doesn’t mean its gonna be a bomb. Could have a decent $30 mill weekend, then have a long run. Personally I have no interest in seeing it at all, but I don’t think its quite DOA.. Who goes to see movies on Wed. anyway? Its sad if the big hit of the holiday season ends up being Christmas with the Kranks.
It’s a kids movie!! Parents aren’t going to take their children to a movie on Wednesday night. Well, maybe for Harry Potter.
Why the WB choose to open this flick on a Wednesday
totally devoid of any real holiday by it. Remains
one of those everloving entertainment biz moves
that makes no sense. It should still come in second
this weekend unless the horrible pacing of the
Incredibles has will bring about some sort of
shenanigans no one sees coming.
Wow, it made no money on a no-account Wednesday.
It’s not that bad.
I agree that it should have been released closer to Christmas, but we’re just talking about a Wednesday opening for an obvious family film. I’m a father of two young girls, I didn’t even realize it had opened on Wednesday. I’m sure I’m not the only parent who doesn’t think about such things until the weekend.
I don’t think it’s too far away from Christmas…look at how Elf did last year when it opened in early November. It’s the film that makes the difference but I agree, opening on a Wednesday hurts. Today is a Thursday, Veterans Day and school was off… and I saw a good crowd of kids going to see the Incredibles.
It opened on a Wednesday as Thursday was a day off for a lot of schools around the country for Vet’s day. Things might pick up over the weekend, but The Incredibles will still be #1.
I have no reason to think this movie is going to make any more than $60 million domestic total. If they released it on November 24th I think it would have had a better shot. November 10th is way too early for this kind of movie. I know The Santa Clause 2 and Elf made a boatload the first week of November, but at the time there was real no family film competition.
Still, the IMAX version will play in IMAX theatres every holiday for years to come and that’s a good thing. Santa vs. The Snowman is getting old fast.
The release date was a major mistake. Not only did Wednesday make no sense, but five days after a Pixar release and a week before Spongebob meant too much competition for family audiences.
Many people would like to see this Christmas movie around Christmas, but the problem for WB is that by the time Christmas rolls around few first run theatres will have it anymore, because it opened too soon.
That looks extremely dumb especially since the only true family film opening at Christmastime is Fat Albert. Which looks terrible.
If I had done the release, this would be an IMAX only release right now. I saw the IMAX print and it is mindblowing, like David said in his column last Friday. Let the IMAX release get the buzz really going, and do the full release in mid-December, close enough to Christmas to take advantage of the Christmas season crouds.
But we’ll never know. It sure looks like WB swung for the fences by releasing early and struck out.
Maybe Alan Horn should of listened to Steve Bing and let him cast Miss August 1998 as the female lead and Tracy the cocktail waitress at the Hustler Beverly Hills for the supporting role. Steve Bing certainly knows how to pick up a babe, but he picks the wrong movies to finance. Big Bounce?
Hmmm….maybe I was wrong. I took one look at the first trailer for “The Polar Express” and the first thing I said to my friend after coming out of the theater was, “Wow, ‘The Polar Express’ is going to make all kinds of money.” I mean, just look at it–a stunning new animation style, Tom Hanks, Robert Zemeckis, Holiday-themed, family-oriented, Tom Hanks, Tom Hanks, and Tom Hanks. The opening day numbers are atrocious, so it looks as if I will be wrong…and maybe that will depend on the quality of the film, which has been debated. So who knows..I might have to eat it on this one. If so, that astonishes me…the movie just oozes ‘cash cow.’
Three words: soulless zombie eyes.
The big info is not how much it did, but that it was 40% behind The Incredibles. Sorry, but this is too much (remember that the Pixarfilm is also a children film in a Wednesday). It may not bomb, but it will underperform. The third Tom Hanks film this year to do so. People in WB is by now probably hoping that it still menage to do 100m (which I guess by now will depend on how good word of mouth will be), when this is a film that need to o a lot better than that.
As far as I can remember I was never living in a cave but until this movie hit production I had never heard of the Polar Express, so I have had no real interest in seeing it especially after the trailer. I have always had a irrational fear of zombies so there’s no way I’m seeing this film. Plus if you’re going to do nearly realistic characters then why not just use real people, or is motion capture the only draw to the film? I’ll be surprised if this makes the top three.
If this were live action it would have a shot, but this movie has been Dead On Arrival ever since the trailer premeried and CGI Tom Hanks with a CGI Tom Hanks mustache took the screen.
The film opened Wednesday because the kids were off from school for Veterans Day on Thursday. Given those circumstances, it would have been true idiocy for WB to blow off that extra day. And moviegoers may have steered clear on Wednesday figuring that they had all day Thursday to attend. Still, it cannot be denied that this film has failed to garner the must-see mojo that “event” pictures so handily achieve, at least in their opening days. And as others have pointed out, the really big loser here will be Tom Hanks, who, for the third time this year, has delivered a box-office thud. Wasn’t it the consensus a couple of years ago that he could do no wrong, that his audience would follow him anywhere? Personally, I think his run ended when, like Harrison Ford before him, Hanks started accepting all of those premature Lifetime Achievement awards. Sorry folks, but when institutions like AFI decide to honor the body of your work, the resulting perception is that your best days are behind you. Look out, Nicole Kidman!
2004. not the year of tommy hanks
ladykillers, terminal, polar
ugh
LadyKillers (spec) budget $40 mill
LadyKillers domestic gross $38 mill
Terminal (spec) budget $70 mill
Terminal domestic gross $77 mill
I just want to point out that those two are not bombs… DVD’s and international b.o. will put those two films in profit, easy.
That being said (and I’m a huge Hanks fan), I’ve got to agree with the writers below, 2004 was not exactly his year. Let’s just hope this all doesn’t lead to: Sleepless in Seattle 2: The Married Years
Boy, opening between two “sure things” like THE INCREDIBLES and “THE SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS MOVIE” could be the biggest mistake ever for Warners. I agree with the comments about rolling it out on IMAX first then to conventional cinemas in December.
Will it be in the second-run houses before Christmas?
I peeked into one of the AMC today showing POLAR EXPRESS and it was half empty, everyone was over at the INCREDIBLES, hell SAW was even packed! This movie I think creeps people out a bit, they would rather see Stuff that is not too human like, but ends up being kinda souless and fake like, remember how many people came out in droves for FINAL FANTASY? not many…This was a HUGE HUGE mistake for Warners, what the hell were they thinking? I would have settled for a Mid Dec release, opened against Blade or something….This is gonna fade soon! THE BI POLAR EXPRESS is more like it!
Looks like it did $10 mill on saturday, so a $24 mill. weekend. Not bad. It may chug its way to the $100 mill. mark then perhaps do better outside the US. I think the real problem is that the characters still look very Final Fantasy, very hollow. Brad Bird had an interesting quote about Polar Express, which was basically “animation is not about realism, if thats your goal then you shouldnt be doing animation”. Considering that Incredibles will probably do 4x the Express numbers, maybe he’s right.
It’s not a movie I want to see. I’m an adult, no children, but I did enjoy Finding Nemo. Polar Xpress should have opened closer to Thanksgiving.
The Incredibles is the animated movie to see this year. I’m going to ride out The Polar Express – does not interest me. Santa looks kinda depressed.
Looking forward to National Treasure.
cage owns these kind of movies lately. obviously he likes a paycheck but he brings something different to these no think, action flicks. with that in mind i’m gonna see this
Polar had no buzz whatsoever.