MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

The Upper West Side Has Changed

Manhattan’s Upper West Side has changed again. Walking around this afternoon, I noticed how much less gentrified it has become. Ethnic was in full force.  The range of ages had expanded back to a time more like the 70s.  And the women aren’t as attractive.

Not that I am. The path to me has always had plenty of foliage on it.  And at 40, there is snow that hasn’t been plowed in a while.

But it is different. 

I’m sure when the temperature rises another 20 degrees – it was a beautiful, sunny day today – the short skirts and the parade of skin will turn even the most jaded eye once more.  But that “Oh My God” rush one could get just wandering around this town has moved.  Maybe to Soho or Brooklyn or perhaps into hibernation. 

Be Sociable, Share!

4 Responses to “The Upper West Side Has Changed”

  1. Eric says:

    David Cross has a funny bit about the challenge of living in New York City: Every five minutes or so, you’ve got to decide if you want to look at the hottest woman in the world, or the craziest guy in the world. They’re moving in opposite directions, so you can only look at one. “She’s gorgeous! But wait, he’s shitting in his hand!”
    Maybe he was talking about the old New York.

  2. lazarus says:

    Love that Cross bit. Almost as funny as the post 9/11 defiant rollerblader, or the garbageman trying to pick up the woman. “Hey pretty pretty, show me a smile!”

  3. Joe Fitz says:

    As a New Yorker who has lived on the Upper West Side, I don’t see that much change. But maybe thats because I have lived there for years.

  4. lisa says:

    um, the Upper West Side has been a no-show for quite some time. yes, yes. try brooklyn.

The Hot Blog

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