By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

The Family Stone Movies To Dec 16

Posted Saturday, October 15th, 2005 - Comments Off on The Family Stone Movies To Dec 16
Be Sociable, Share!

The Press Release –
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 14, 2005
IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HOLIDAYS,THE FAMILY STONE IS MOVING TO DECEMBER!
LOS ANGELES…Twentieth Century Fox is capitalizing on the feel-good playability of this holiday comedy and its amazing ensemble cast (Diane Keaton, Sarah Jessica Parker, Rachel McAdams, Luke Wilson, Claire Danes, Dermot Mulroney, Craig T. Nelson) breaking THE FAMILY STONE wide on December 16th. The move follows a great response at last week’s junket and will let the movie get started the week before Christmas and play through the historically powerful holiday season.
The move also unites Diane Keaton with the release weekend of her last great comic success, 2003’s “Something’s Gotta Give,” which opened to $16 million and went on to gross $124 million domestically. Keaton received her second Golden Globe award and her fourth Academy Award nomination for her work in the film.
THE FAMILY STONE reunites Fox and Michael London after last year’s “Sideways” garnered seven Golden Globe award nominations and five Academy Award nominations including one for Best Picture. It also marks the first major feature film for Sarah Jessica Parker after her six season run on HBO’s award winning “Sex and the City,” for which she won an Emmy and four Golden Globes. The film propels rising star Rachel McAdams higher after four successive hits “Red Eye,” “Wedding Crashers,” “The Notebook” and “Mean Girls.” Film is one of three upcoming Fox projects for Luke Wilson who will also star in Mike Judge’s “Idiocracy” and Ivan Reitman’s “Super Ex” opposite Uma Thurman.
THE FAMILY STONE is a comic story about the annual holiday gathering of a New England family, the Stones. The eldest son brings his girlfriend home to meet his parents, brothers and sisters. The bohemian Stones greet their visitor – a high-powered, controlling New Yorker – with a mix of awkwardness, confusion and hostility. Before the holiday is over, relationships will unravel while new ones are formed, secrets will be revealed, and the family Stone will come together through its extraordinary capacity for love.

Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in Note Pad | Comments Off on The Family Stone Movies To Dec 16

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