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
Everything you said is true…
The movie year will be fine….
I am Spam Dooley and I Kill Coppers.
I do think the quick turnaround of theatrical releases to DVD is cutting into Hollywood business. I can at least attest that it is affecting my moviegoing practices. While I annually saw over 50 movies in theaters five years ago, I have seen a total of ONE 2005 release as of today.
However, marketing and quality plays a part as well – because why am I going to pay $10 for a movie I’m mildly interested in (“Constantine,” for example), when I can have Netflix mail it to me only three or four months later – with the addition of any special features I wouldn’t otherwise get?
One aside: Has Val Kilmer told the marketers of “Mindhunters” not to use his face? Because from looking at the ads, you wouldn’t know he had anything to do with that film.
I believe Kilmer’s role is basically a cameo.
Instead of responding in kind to a gratutious swipe by our favorite thug, I would like to raise a serious question: Why is anyone surprised that “Kingdom of Heaven” is an under-achiever? Now, before the Orlando Bloom fans and the Ridley Scott fans join forces to come after me with torches and pitchforks, let me quickly add: I haven’t even seen the movie yet, due to various personal and professional priorities. But I can’t help wondering: If the conventional wisdom dictates that contemporary movie audiences can’t relate to Westerns, why does Hollwood think ticketbuyers will flock to movies set even further back in the past? No, I’m not being facetious: If, as I’ve been told by many of my college students, the prime target demographic responds only to “modern” movies, why should we be surprised that masses didn’t flood the multiplexes this weekend? (The “Lord of the Rings” movie don’t really count because, well, you know, that’s not in the real world, is it?) Yes, I know all about “Gladiator.” But, then again, I also know all about “The Sound of Music” — and, just as important, I know about all the big-budget musicals that followed in its wake. I mean, didn’t even “Master and Commander” perform below expectations? And as for “Troy” and “King Arthur,” well, ’nuff said. Sure, it all depends on the actual movie, not the genre. But, geez, maybe the ticketbuyers (especially YOUNGER ticketbuyers) are trying to tell us something?
no Joe bzzzzt. Take your Doom and gloom to the rubes who read the NYT. A well marketed well made film will nearly always pack em. Lets not get complex about something so simple. HEAVEN looked like some euro tourism commercial. Terribly marketed. GLADIATOR and TROY both had effective sells – they got the thrust of the story across with efficiency. HEAVEN was a postcard looking for a plot. Hollywood should not be scared and they aren’t. People will always want to gather. Cinemas are like churches, where there is no chance of being molested. It is Network TV that should be terrfied.
Joe, try explaining to the studios that they should stop making historical films after the success of Sea Biscuit and The Last Samurai, or even Troy after worldwide returns. They’ll laugh all the way to the bank. Again.
Jef: I wholeheartedly agree that theatrical exhibition will surive. Still, I again raise the question regarding this specific movie: Aren’t we seeing the law of diminishing returns here at work? Yes, “Gladiator” managed to restore some magic to the genre that had long been an “Airplane!’ punchline. But as for epics that have arrives in its wake… Well, let me put it bluntly: If you’re making any kind of period piece set before the 20th century, aren’t you bucking some VERY steep odds? Hell, even it’s the 19th century: Can you imagine ANYONE selling a Western to the 12-to-30 crowd these days? (And before somebody yells Colin Farrell, I suggest you see — however painful it might be — “American Outlaws,” the only Western you’ll ever see with a Moby theme song.) Don’t get me wrong: I like Westerns. I thought Kevin Costner’s “Open Range” was very good. But as I recall, Coster had to take a pay cut and work on minimal budget to get that oine made, and even then it didn’t score a hefty profit. (Of course, on the third hand, I realize I sound more than a little like the folks who told Eastwood that a boxing movie wouldn’t sell. Still…)
There are lots of possible reasons for the dip in box office tallies: gas is expensive, DVDs are cheap (and show up, what, four months after theatrical release?), pre-movie advertisements and the inevtiably rude jerks you ALWAYS sit nearby piss people off to no end, and most of the current movies aren’t causing that “Oh yeah, I wanna seeeee thaaaaat!” sort of vibe among the casual moviegoers. “Gladiator” did because it was an action movie with swords and tigers in the trailers. “Kingdom” did not because it looked like a 2-hour history lesson.
Jam: I’m not sure I would qualify “Seabiscuit” as a historical epic. But your point about “Last Samurai” is very well taken. Except… wasn’t that one also viewed as a domestic under-achiever? Look, I don’t want any of these films to fail simply becasue they’re epics. I’m just questioning whether, in the good ol’ US of A, the biggest chunk of the regular movie audience is averse to period pictures?
Scott: You know, I think you’ve got something there with the tigers. No kidding: Every time I saw that image in the trailer with an audience, the place rocked.
The Last Samurai was definitely viewed a domestic disappointment, like Troy. And like Troy, it made most of its $ overseas.
Yeah, the first weekend’s take is because of marketing, but KOH DID look like a history lesson, and frankly the average American moviegoer is not interested in history – sad, but true – they will go see The Pacifier or 50 First Dates before anything that looks like school! The first weekend of May used to be for fun movies like The Mummy, and hell, even Van Helsing.
I can’t help but think that Kingdom of Heaven’s underperformance had something to do with the fact that it was the fourth movie with swords and/or sandals to come out within the space of a year–after “Troy,” “King Arthur,” and “Alexander.” Particularly after Alex got such bad buzz, and then this trailer shortly followed, the prospect of KOH seemed anti-climactic. The vibe I got whenever the Kingdom trailer came on was “ANOTHER epic? Geez, didn’t we sit through this movie two or three times last year?” I think epic fatigue had at least something to do with its disappointing numbers.
joe – ditto OPEN RANGE, in the end tho, it must have been an okay earner for em. Do the kids even know the difference between a possible new CONAN film and an ALEXANDER? 75% of kids don’t even know what the Holocaust was and that’s only 50yrs ago. I’m saying there will always be a market for a good film, period piece or not. It just has to shoot all the teeth out of the clown’s mouth to do so. SAMURAI was a fizzer cos middle america said why see Dances with Wolves 2 when the wolves are the folks who killed our auto industry. We only like those guys when they speak funny, take photos and Bill Murray makes fun of em.
Jeff: This sounds like a story I’m making up just for this occasion, but… A few years ago, I interviewed the great German actor Armin Mueller-Stahl after he’d starred in (and directed)”Conversation with the Beast,” in which he played (no, I’m not making this up) a 103-year-old Adolf Hitler. He said, more in sorrow than in jest, he thought that, within another 50 years or so, people would be thinking of Hitler the same way we today think of someone like Atilla the Hun or Genghis Kahn. In other words, like some vaguely understood, all-purpose bogeyman. Future generations might appreciate he was a bad guy, but the precise nature of his evil will be forgotten, or at least not widely known. I can’t say I disagreed with Mueller-Stahl.
I disagree on the whole “the American moviegoing
public does not want to see a movie that looks like
school.” If that were the case then how would
Schendler’s List have been anywhere near as successful
as it was? The same could be said about Saving Private
Ryan.
Without insulting the intelligence of the American
public. It has to come down to marketing. KOH sold
Orlando Bloom, an actored loved by teenage girls,
Ridley Scott, and big action scenes. In what way
does that appeal to Bloom’s demo? Outside of movie
geeks or horny guys into French women. Who in the
hell knows who Ava Green is? They just sold this
film incredibly poorly. An absolute cluster to the
folks someone I read has called them; “incredibly
stupid.”
This Summer movie season will redeem it all. The Entertainment
Media just enjoys the blinders. They enjoy ignoring
things for a story. No problem with that, but it
makes them look like a bunch of asshats.
Now excuse me. I must greese back my hair, put
on a very colourful jack, and get in a street fight
with the Jets.
Not a gratuitous swipe… if I hadn’t made a point of it, no doubt the “David just hates the NYT” schtick would reappear.
I am fine with the NYT and with Sharon… I am not fine with deeply flawed stories in the NYT or anywhere else, but yes, a bit more so in The Paper of Record.
I actually give Fox props for putting Eva Green second above the title.
“75% of kids don’t even know what the Holocaust was and that’s only 50yrs ago.”
What kids are you asking exactly.
If you’re asking 10 year olds then of course they’re not going to know. I’m sure most moderately educated 15-18 year olds know about WW2.
Another possibly theory for why KOH didn’t do as well (apart from the obvious poor marketing). Isn’t it said that your average adult doesn’t see that many movies a year. I know recently that “The Interpreter” was a hit with the adults and similarly, the film wasn’t released in awards season so non-movie fanatics may not be aware that good movies are occasionally released outside of October-December (however much the Academy would like us to believe otherwise).
…or whatever.
KINGDOM OF HEAVEN grabbed $56 million internationally this weekend. While it certainly will “underperform” domestically, like LAST SAMURAI and TROY it should make a pretty penny overseas and end up solidly in the black (especially after a no-doubt lucrative home video run).
the dip is due to bad movies. can anyone name a movie that has opened this yr that they have been excited about? that they would see again at the theatre? until ep 3 the answer is no
Camel: Hate to to say this, but maybe the kids in Australia are better educated. I teach college students here in the States, and.. Well, let me put it like this. I’ve taught a Social Aspects of Film course on War in Film. After the first semester, I realized that, in addition to screening movies and lecturing, I would also have to prepare hand-outs to explain who fought who, where and when, in WWI, WWII and Korea. No kidding. When I told them about the very strong anti-interventionist movements in this country before both WWI and WWII, some pople responded as though they thought I was making it up.
And speaking of history: Has anyone seen the trailer for Jodie Foster in “Flight Plan” yet? Did I miss the announcement, or is this an official remake of “The Lady Vanishes”? Because it certainly LOOKS like a remake, right down to the give-away clue on the breath-frosted glass window.
I think Dave is pretty much right when he says it’s basically all about marketing. You can’t get people to see a piece of shit unless you show them the one awesome part in the trailer. The Day After Tomorrow is a great example of this. I love going to the movies and I try to go as often as possible, but then again I don’t wanna spend money to see a piece of shit movie, and I’ve gone to the movies far less so far this year than at the same time for the last 6 or so years that I’ve been keeping track. The only way I’ll see a movie where the trailer doesn’t interest me is if it gets overall very good reviews, and I really can’t say if the general population does this because it’s so hard to tell if reviews really make any difference. I don’t think I’ll be seeing Kingdom of Heaven because the trailers didn’t really do anything for me, and the reviews have been pretty mixed.
Nothing from the trailers, pre release publicity, the acting has made me want to see Kingdom. It doesn’t have the Gladiator type draw. And I hate when movies get preachy. Just tell an entertaining story for once.
I was surprised that KoH didn’t open larger. And David is right, marketing has the most to do with opening weekend. I remember the trailer and TV spots for Troy really got me excited…then I saw that piece of shit. But why did it do bad domestically? oh right, it was rated-R. Oh, heavens to betsy.
But while I agree with David that the NYT article had a filmsy approach. I TOTALLY disagree with the quality of this movie. It’s bad. Not Troy-bad. Not King Arthur-bad. But pretty lame in general.
How long until Star Wars opens?
I still think part of the problem with KOH was that I don’t think Orlando Bloom can carry a film, at least here in the states. I just don’t think he’s that popular.
Has there been a film that the success can be credited to him?
No Orlando Bloom can’t carry a film, but then how many male and female actors can? There are very few capable big-enuf actors, and far too many ‘personalities’ that appeal to a specific demographic and have no all-over appeal.
Orlando Bloom is a Personality and is the acting equivalent of a ‘Boy pop group leader’.
Had RUssell Crowe or Will Smith or Depp been in the KOH lead, then we’d be talking bigger numbers since They are leading men, not simply elf costars/supporting actor types who Publicly Date model types (i.e. Bloom).
What college are you teaching at Joe? Are you saying your students are so academically apathetic on a university level?
Also, it could be argued, that while everyone needs to know history and the holocaust; to teach it to a child in such a way that they are really informed on the experience of that horror, could be damaging to their emotional development at a pre-teen level. It’s important to consider “when” a child should learn something in their emotional development as much as “what”.
i hate it when “professors” lump every student into one big group. like they know whats going on. they teach two days a week and have ta’s grade every paper and their office hours are an hour a week. they really get to know there students every semester.
Not one of my professors even knows any of their students first names. But since most are arrogant jerks anyway, its not like anyone cares as long as they are throwing around the high grades.
On another sort of tangential note:
It seems to me (and I could be wrong) that Mr. Poland (or the person who writes the MCN headlines) has been rather dismissive, almost snidely so, of Edward Jay Epstein’s new book, or at least the portions of it running on *Slate*. (“Edward Jay Epstein Continues His Run Of Old News On Slate… “)
I’m wondering why this is: the book sounds interesting to me. I’m not sure I’d purchase it new, but I might pick up a copy at half-price or less if I found one.
If I’m not mistaken about the dismissive tone of MCN about this book, can Mr. Poland, Mr. Leydon, or someone else who has read the book elaborate on what they find so objectionable about it?
Bob: Actually, I teach three days a week, at two different colleges. This particular semester, I’m teaching Media and Society, Broadcast and Film Writing and History of Film. I personally grade almost every paper by every student. Yes, even in the class with 100 students. (Mid-terms and finals are graded by computer; students write their answers on Scantrons.) I have office hours, I am available by e-mail (even on weekends), and my phone number is easily available. You are correct in assuming that I don’t know each and every student as much as I might like. But, then again, those who rarely show up for class are kind of hard to get to know. As for making blanket statements: Many of my students are hard-working, self-directed and, to my mind, incredibly resourceful. (I had a student two years ago who asked if he could take a final exam early, because his reserve unit had been called up for Iraq duty. I told him that since already had an A average, he should worry about more important things, because he’d already aced the course. I just gave him one final assignment: Return home alive.) Many others are average, and have no desire to be otherwise. And the rest? Well, according to them, Joseph Pulitzer invented the telegraph, Francois Truffaut transmitted the first message by radio, H.P. Lovecraft wrote the Harry Potter books and Armin Mueller-Stahl invented the printing press. (So much for trying to make things “easy” by giving multiple-choice tests.) And, oh yes, “M*A*S*H” took place during World War II. God only knows when they think the Crusades took place.
The really, really scary part? I get term papers all the time that make your blog postings look literate and well-punctuated. No, I’m not exaggerating.
A colleague recently told me about a study that concluded that the average community college student actually is prepared to do, at best, work on a 7th grade level. Somebody is letting these young people down long, long before they get to me. I do what I can, but I know it’s not nearly enough. All I can really hope to do, I guess, is get them to be more aware. It’s like I say on the first day of every class I teach: My job is to make you think. It is not my job to make you think like me.
Somebody said that I’m underestimating the intelligence of American audiences. Fair, I am. Schindler’s List was a December Oscar-bait film and aimed at adults. So was Saving Private Ryan…only difference is, SPR was a July release. Early May releases in the past few years that were successful (The Mummy, Mummy 2, Spider-Man)were “fun” movies and have been aimed at the younger crowd. Would they have come to see KOH if marketed correctly is something I still question.
Joe, I don’t have anywhere near your level of experience in this area, but please don’t get me started on how ignorant and just plain dumb university students can be. And not just at the community college level. Here’s just one shining example:
I’m a graduate of a top-15 law school. During my first year, 1990, I was sitting (nervous as usual) in my Constitutional Law lecture, which on the day in question dealt with the numerous constitutional crises that occurred during Watergate. Suddenly one student insistently raised his hand. He didn’t know anything about Watergate. Nothing. NEVER HEARD OF IT. He didn’t even know that Nixon resigned from office or, for that matter, anything more about Nixon beyond the fact that he used to be a president. After it was all cogently and calmly explained to him, he still couldn’t comprehend it. He brought the class to a dead standstill, repeating over and over, “I just don’t get it.”
The scary punchline: That guy made law review.
BTW: Lest anyone think I’m dissing community college students, let me quickly add that, by and large, their work (at least in my courses) is no worse, and in some cases is better, than what I see turned in by university students. I’m not being PC here, just honest.
if chester really graduated from a “top 15 law school” he’d know that a sample size of 4 isn’t solid evidence to a conclusion. don’t they teach u that u need to back ur ur conclusions with solid evidence before u go throwing it out there?
I am generally dismissive of anyone who claims to have “The Answer.” The questions are endless. And the answers are very specific, not general.
As for the pieces in Slate, they are all literally five years old. This not only means the material has already been treaded over, but it makes many of the conclusions inaccurate.
The window I think is legit right now is about three years… and that has to be inclusive of last summer. The DVD cycle is not that old and it’s already moving into a sophomore slump for films.
bi-boob, if you were ever taught any reading comprehension skills at all you’d know that I never said four reviews counted as solid evidence of anything. In fact, the phrases I used repeatedly were “reading the tea leaves” based on “scarce evidence.” Does that sound like I was claiming a rock-solid foundation?
So Joe, did your student return home alive and make an A? Or did his average drop to a B?
Chester, you just can’t have a decent discussion with some people. Watch Fox News any night of the week for an example of that. bob and Mark simply can’t be bothered to discuss anything like a rational adult. You ask them a serious question, and all you get in return is an insult.
Stella, for someone who bashes Fox News on a daily basis, you seem to watch a lot of it. Why is that, good buddy?
I don’t even have cable, so I don’t watch a lot of it. But friends have cable. My folks have cable. I have seen it more than enough to know what I’m talking about. And Mark, I’m not saying that MSNBC or CNN are any better. And Fox News can be entertaining. But I can only handle small doses.
Stella, its ok if you have it on twenty four seven. Relax. It is just why bash it everyday in every post if you are a faithful watcher? You’re like one of those guys who say they hate Stern yet listen four hours everyday. Sad.
Mark, this is exactly what I’m talking about. You prove my point for me when making a post like that. I am not ashamed to say that I have seen Fox News. I’m not hiding anything. Like I said, I don’t even have cable. Is that clear enough for you? I couldn’t watch it even if I wanted to.
He’s still over there, best I know. So I guess the A still holds. Besides, I can’t change the grade retroactively, as much as I pray I’ll be able to give him an A++.
SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT
I always think that a movie is always as good as it’s bad guy. Regarding Kingdom of Heaven, when you have epic that lives and dies on the battlefield, you dont want ambivalance from the audience. The politically correct muslims were too good, the final battle felt a waste of time and absolutely unnecessary. I came away feeling that it was a waste of lives. Of course all war is. Orlando however needed a great villain. Also why was a blacksmith better at waging war than everyone else. Didn’t the war hungry christians know they would be out of water by the time they reached the muslims. Also, wasn’t the training period given by Liam Neeson seem an extremely short time in which to turn a blacksmith into a knight ready warrior? I felt that if Ridley was already being liberal with history while at the same time being truthful to it, he should have had both a muslim bad guy who was as war hungry as the new king and Brendan Gleeson’s character. Brendan is always a delight, and brings such life to his portayals, and he was so underused. He would have made a great major villain. By the way, they never showed you what eventually happened to the evil king.
Orlando Bloom as a box office draw deserved testing, but I side with David, it’s the movie stupid. People did not stay away from KOH because they did not want to see Orlando, they stayed away because the marketing effort did not impress them and this week they will stay away because their friends will tell them that it’s ok to wait for the dvd or even cable, it’s no must see on the big screen.
Summer starts on May 19th, plain and simple. There is no jumpstarting this season. It will be the second best 3 day opening ever, and cross 400million. Lucas will redeem himself somewhat, people will be happy that they had the experience and it all will be right with the Star Wars universe once again. And so the comic book ends at a beginning.
I just wanted to comment on something Joe said about
his college students. While I admit that few people
love history in this country. I think it’s sort of
odd to cast stupidity on people who have no idea what
happened decades before they were born. No excuse
for their lack of knowledge about the past, but our
society ceased to dwell on the past a long time ago.
Again, no excuse, but you just cannot hold today’s
youth up against those who came before.
Gasp.
Change of topic i know, but…
Revenge of the Sith is getting Best Picture buzz… crikey.
Time has given it a great write-up apparently and other publications are praising it. I know it would never be able to do a Return of the King (despite the numerable similaries – everything down the name! Return of the King, Revenge of the Sith… whatever) but it could very well rack up a major or two. I don’t really know where, but you never know with the Academy.
Hey, here’s a ponderous thought. If Revenge of the Sith got nominated for Best Picture would Stella still remain adament with not seeing it? And for that matter, would nobody in his family or ANYONE in his (obviously massive) circle of friends still refuse to see it. And would he continue to have that holier-than-thou attitute?
All that being said, I, for the most part, dislike the SW movies but am legitimately excited about Sith.
Why the hostility? I do not have a holier-than-thou attitude. Just making things up now hey? Good for you. I have zero interest in seeing this movie. What is the big deal? Why is that a problem? You said you don’t even like them, yet I am the only with an attitude problem? How does that work? And what did you smoke this morning? Best Picture buzz?! That is news to me. Says who?
Sorry, LDB, but this is too good to pass up:
Please go back and take another look at LDB
most professors are too lazy to grade papers joe. thats why they invented scan trons.
Bob: I have to admit that, when you have more than 100 students in the same class — which I have on a fairly regular basis, and NOT because I’m such a great teacher that people are beating down the door to get into my classes
P.S. to Bob: I would be less than totally honest if I didn’t admit to another reason why Scantrons may be popular with instructors: If you give a test in such a fashion, you can’t be accused of any sort of favoritism — sexism, racism, lookism, age-ism, whatever-ism — in tabulating grades. The students either know the facts, or they don’t, and there’s no subjective measurement of their work. I bet that saves universities a lot of money in lawsuits.
It isn’t subjective. And it is hard to grade 300 papers (which some classes have). Like I tell my kids. Go to every class and do all the work and you will have no problems.
I’m sorry, but there’s no excuse for stupidity and ignorance. I was born well after World War II, but I know a great deal about it–because I learned it in school. Not having been alive during an historical event is no reason to be ignorant of it. A couple of weeks ago, Leno was doing his “Jaywalking” routine, and asked a young couple, “In what state does the Kentucky Derby take place?” After about ten seconds of blank stares, the woman finally guessed, “Kansas?” The fact that we’ve grown accustomed to this level of idiocy does NOT mean we should simply throw up our hands and accept it.
I don’t think saying people are dumb because of a Jay Leno sketch is a good argument. But I do doubt most people know who even fought in World War 2.
the fact of life in the good old us of a is there are gonna be people who don’t know who any president is, who we fought in wars, whats the capital of any state in the union, is stella a man or a woman, basically all the basics. but thats america for u. we’re not elitists unlike how some wants us to be
Can’t resist taking a shot at me hey bob? Hope you enjoyed it as much as I did.
what shot? was just speaking the truth there. don’t get so sensitive
I’ll stop being sensitive as soon as you start making sense. Deal?
now take some shots and call me dumb, stupid, homosexual, a cross dresser, etc. all the things that u do after ur views don’t win u points
He’s a Liberal. Everything he says about others is self loathing anyway. Why do you care if he tries for personal insults? It is what they do when they cannot succeed in the fabulous world of, hold onto your hats people, ideas.
joe, what on earth are you talking about? Why on earth would you rush to the defense of bob, who hurls insults around here like he gets paid to do so.
What you going to call Joe Fitz, Stella? If you used up all your good ones on Bobby. I don’t think you have much of a selection after fatty, gay, and dumb are gone. Use some of that great Liberal art to your advantage.
Mark, I never called anyone fat or gay, so I’m not sure where you came up with that. Listen, I’m tired of all this, as I’m sure you are. I’d love to put an end to it and move on. What do you think?
Just remember: Those who don’t learn from history have to take it again next semester.
Also: It would be a far, far better world if the grown-ups had to eat the spinach.
Just thought I’d chime and say that I’ve loved coming to this site for the past few years and i especially love the addition of the blog. I may not be as regular a contributor as most others but I’d really like if we would keep personal attacks out of it. I hail from Trinidad & Tobago, a small island in the caribbean made up of not more tha 1.3million souls, so I love sharing, imparting and being imparted to, with the wider community.
We are all here because we pationately love movies, as well as pationately hate a few others, such is the universality of the silver screen. We are all here for a general commonality that is unmistakebly beautiful. Why ruin it with attacks on another persons opinion, race, age, sexual preference, perceived or real, and any other idiotic stereotype we may subscribe too. I absolutely hate scrolling down the blog page through paragraphs of attacks and comebacks that have nothing to do with why i’m here in the first place. Keep it clean, concise, and most of all topical. I believe what I believe until iI hear a better argument, and then I believe something anew. It’s just movies…everything and nothing. That’s my rant, and i hope we can get back to the movies, I know that I am.
Does anyone out there have any idea how “Unleashed” is tracking for this weekend’s opening? Reason I ask: My son and his buddies had passes tonight for “Unleashed” and “The Longest Yard.” All of them chose “Unleashed.” Pace, Bob: I know that’s a small sampling on which to base any prediction. Even so, I was a little surprised, given Adam Sandler’s drawing power. (To say nothing of the fact that Nelly AND Chris Rock co-star with Sandler.)
I think Adam Sandler has a lot of fans… but a lot more haters.
Plus, it’s a sport movie, so I don’t know about your son and his friends but they might not like sports movies..?
Oh, wait, Unleashed is sort of a sports movie too isn’t it?
I don’t know, I haven’t read anything longer than 2 sentences about Unleashed. But I am confident when I say it will probably do better than Renny Harlin’s er… latest movie…? “Mindhunters”! that’s it.
Do my eyes deceive me, or is “Unleashed” the highest-rated general release on Rotten Tomatoes for this weekend? Geez, maybe I should start taking my son’s advice regarding what screenings to attend.
I noticed that too, Joe, but damn the competition is weak.
One thing that bugs me: While isn’t Bob Hoskins being mentioned much in the “Unleashed” ads? I mean, aren’t there any folks out there who remember “Roger Rabbit” (and have fogotten, or forgiven, “Super Mario Bros.”)?
WOW! With 68 reviews posted, “Monster-in-Law” currently has a measly 18% on the Tomatometer scale. Here’s the real nail in the coffin: It’s at 5% with the Cream of the Crop critics. Five friggin’ percent! This movie’s target audience better be critic-proof or whoever picked the whooping audiences for those early test screenings is toast!
Did anyone expect Mother in Law to be a smash? J Lo hasn’t been box office in a few years.
Way too many people get obsessed with tracking numbers and critic reviews. What ever happend to waiting to see if it was a good movie? A novel thought.
i’ll pass on anything fonda
I have seen Bob Hoskins featured prominently in every Unleashed commercial I have seen.
Who goes to Rotten Tomatoes to gauge whether a movie is good or not? Thats just laziness.
bob, what if your favorite director made a movie with Fonda in it, and the trailer knocked your socks off with its brilliance? Then would you see it?
Terence: Yeah, you SEE Hoskins all through the TV spots. But try to find his NAME anywhere. It’s weird.
Bi-Bob drooled:
“the fact of life in the good old us of a is there are gonna be people who don’t know who any president is, who we fought in wars, whats the capital of any state in the union…but thats america for u. we’re not elitists unlike how some wants us to be”
Ah, I get it. So being educated is now considered “elitist.” Thanks for clearing that up.
no its just that the elitists out there think they know all. thats why no one gives a crap about the elitists of this country because people don’t like being talked down to by know it alls who sit in their ivory towers. kinda like u skell. i’m sure most of the elitists can’t name every president either. actually i’m pretty positive about that
I just don’t think Bob Hoskins is box office. I don’t think Mario Brothers made him a star. I can see why they wouldn’t put his name in bright lights in favor of Morgan Freemans.
this movie sells on jet li and how much action it has. not on the story or morgan freeman or roger rabbitt
Terence: The “Super Mario Bros.” reference was a joke. You see, that movie didn’t do very well at the box-office, whereas “Roger Rabbit” was a hit and… Oh, never mind. Go back to insulting Stella.
Hence why I included it in my response to you, Joe Leydon. I may not be a young man but I still do have a few jokes in this tired, grown, aged body. On occasion.
Bob Hoskins is the definition of “over acting”. I am excited to see how much he chews on scenery in this movie.
Not being an overly big fan of kung fu action movies, I am interested in seeing this because it has the great Morgan Freeman in it. How they got him to play a role I’ll never know. But I am now going to see it.
I’m sure Mr. Freeman received a nice paycheck.
Terence: I am 52. If you’re aged, what does that me? Jurassic?
You’re both fossils.
freemans trying to become the new sam jackson
JoeFitz: Damn whippersnapper!
Anyone read the latest hotbutton column yet? Dave really gets defensive about the Monster-In-Law critical drubbing. Two things: Isn’t it actually possible that all of these critics just didn’t like it? That doesn’t seem too hard to believe. And couldn’t his argument be flipped around regarding his thrashing of Kicking & Screaming? Cause some people really like that movie.
daves still pissed that the rundown didn’t crack 100 mill. he has these kinds of movies. where he falls in love. win a tad with tad hamilton, the terminal. it happens to the best of us
I dragged my then boyfriend to Win a Tad with Tad Hamilton. I think thats why he cheated on me. He blamed me for wasting 2 hours of his life and the 20 bucks the tickets cost. I’ll always hate Topher Grace because of it.
Yeah, I’m still waiting for “Office Space” to crack 100 Million, myself.
I liked the Terminal. Tom Hanks was amazing. But thats a given. An underrated movie.
I’d dump you too if you dragged me to see that movie.
I don’t if the Critical Beating of Monster-in-Law will matter to the millions of people who have inlaws and would like them to strangle them. I am being dragged with my entire LARGE (in numbers, not weight) and LOUD blue collar family to see it this weekend. And no one in my family likes J Ho or Fonda.
It’s the hope that they will kill each other onscreen (or die trying).
Pardon my grammar above. And I have so much Higher Ed. too.
OK, let me see if I get this straight. If critics attack “Mother in Law,” they have a hidden agenda. If Dave attacks the New York Times, he’s just doing his job. That the hang of it?
Mother in Law is just going to be a bad movie. At the box office that is. Fonda should have taken that Cameron Crowe film role.