MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

THAT's A Loota Pay Per View

I just saw an ad for a Wrestlemania 22 Pay Per View for $88.95.
Seems like a very thought out price point. Fascinating.

Be Sociable, Share!

9 Responses to “THAT's A Loota Pay Per View”

  1. PandaBear says:

    Back in the 90’s these things were expensive at 39.99$-49.99$.

  2. Sanchez says:

    I must say.
    Hilarious headline by DP or someone at MCN.
    “But They Really Want Brokeback Mountain
    Walk The Line Plays Folsom Prison”

  3. PetalumaFilms says:

    I remember being 10 or 11 and paying $20 to watch Wrestlemania at the local fairgrounds on a huge screen. Ah, memories…

  4. Terence D says:

    I remember being young and watching Hulk Hogan beat Andre the Giant. It was almost as note worthy as a Super Bowl back then.

  5. bicycle bob says:

    vince mcmahon should have plaques set up on andre the giants honor for throwing that match and allowing wrestling to grow. hes like the babe ruth of the sport.

  6. patgeary says:

    The price is for 3 PPV Events leading up to Wrestlemania 22. It’s a package deal. Why not post a little less frequently and actually take 30 seconds to see if your post has any basis in fact? Given that you are a media critic and all…..
    I heard that Vince McMahon has a big part in APOCALYPTO! He’s going to call W-Mania 23 RETURN OF APOCALYPTO….or so goes the rumor.

  7. Josh says:

    Does any average person know of any other wrestling event other than “Wrestlemania” and will they even care? They’ll just assume its 100 bucks for one. It’s like charging for the Super Bowl than saying you get the Conference Championship games included. Football fans will know. The average person? Not a clue.

  8. patgeary says:

    You don’t get Wrestlemania AT ALL for this price. The price is only for the 3 events leading up to Wrestlemania 2. To judge from comments – wrestling fans may understand what’s going on more than you film guys.

  9. ZacharyTF says:

    Where exactly did you see the ad?
    If patgeary is correct, I find it hard to believe that it would be $90 for the 3 events and then more $$$ for the main event itself.

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