MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Eaing It, Virgin Style

Do you every have one of those moments when the circumstances and bad choices lead to embarrassment? Welcome to my Wednesday.
On August 5, someone sent me a link to an eBay item titled

Be Sociable, Share!

9 Responses to “Eaing It, Virgin Style”

  1. Mark says:

    Good choice in sucking it up and pay the 4 grand. It’s worth it for the reputation.

  2. Panda Bear says:

    Wow. You just got punk’d. Hard.

  3. Angelus21 says:

    Dave this is really funny. This has to be a big article soon.

  4. David Poland says:

    Apologies for the removed comments… I have started a seperate thread for Chester’s issues with me where we all can have at it.
    The idea that some poor first timer might wander into this thread, looking to give me a proper whatfor for my eBay stupidity and being subjected to an in-blog fight that it utterly irrelevant to them was making me feel the need to take action.
    I guess I do want to be responsible for postings now and again. Mecurial me!

  5. the_doom says:

    you should probably be thankful that no one bidded you up to your maximum!

  6. Bill Pearis says:

    when you posted the link to the auction earlier in the week, i saw the fine print about it going for charity. it was not “nearly illegible.” and then when i saw the story on variety tonight i was like “oh who would do that to a charity auction?” and was shocked — shocked — that it was you.
    obviously it was a mistake, but you shouldn’t be bidding on ANY auction you can’t pay for, whether you think it’s bogus or not. you shoulda payed up.

  7. David Poland says:

    Well, Bill… I fucked up.
    $4000 is a lot of money.
    And the reality if you look at the bidding suggests that all the bids past $105 were not very serious.
    The Variety story was, I feel, very mean spirited and made me sound anything but contrite.
    I am not happy and I wish I knew how to fix it… and not just for me, but for all the people it has created any discomfort for. There is nothing good about this for me.

  8. jeffmcm says:

    Well at least the subject matter of the thread makes sense now.

  9. jeffmcm says:

    DP, you can delete my posts here if you want this thread to fade back into memory.

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