MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Friday Numbers by Klady – April 29

Not a memorable weekend at the box office… except…
RV making a $13 – $15 million dent at the box office is hardly overwhelming. It may be enough for #1, but with Sony knocking $20 million openings out of the park with cheap goods lately, Robin Williams in a Barry Sonnenfeld comedy with a significant budget doing less than The Benchwarmers is not a win. It

Be Sociable, Share!

66 Responses to “Friday Numbers by Klady – April 29”

  1. jeffmcm says:

    I haven’t seen Akeelah and the Bee yet, but I intend to; given that it seems to have gotten some very strong reviews, it seems like the dismissal of it as “black afterschool special” is a type of critical segregation as well.

  2. jeffmcm says:

    I better clarify, I can’t really tell if you saw the movie and that’s your honest review of it, or if you’re disregarding it because it’s a niche indie film.

  3. EDouglas says:

    I disagree with your analysis re: United 93… I think it’s shooting for a weekend from 11.5 to 12 million, which wouldn’t be bad considering its moderate release, and I expect Universal to try to expand it next week based on that. I think it will end up closer to $33-35 million as people start finding their way to it.

  4. Jimmy the Gent says:

    I hope you’re right EDouglas.
    DP should really choose his words more carefully. Calling A&tB a “black afterschool special” smacks of real insensitivity. It’s okay if he doesn’t like it, but that comment borders on offensive. I could call The Constant Gardner that “Whitey-helps-the-sick-Africans” movie. You know, like Cry Freedom and A Dry White Season.

  5. EDouglas says:

    I think David’s assessment of Akeelah and the Bee is fairly accurate, and I totally agree that the attempt by Starbucks to promote it was a bad match. I really don’t think that the clientele who frequent Starbucks would necessarily be the type of audience who might enjoy the movie. “Black” is not a demeaning or offensive term (see the excellent site blackfilm.com if you don’t believe me), and I personally find the way people go out of their way to use awkward PC terms like “African American” and “urban” to be even more offensive.

  6. Tofu says:

    “Whitey-helps-the-sick-Africans” was a great movie! Whitey deserved that Oscar, and I’m happy to see that dream come true!
    I wasn’t honestly rooting too hard for Akeelah, since it rips wholesale from ‘Spellbound’, one of the best documentaries of the past ten years. Still a great story.
    United 93 was doomed to hit big the moment the news of the 1700 theater count came in. Universal can’t open a movie small worth a damn.

  7. Jimmy the Gent says:

    Some of my best friends live in urban areas.

  8. Martin says:

    After Bee Season died a quick death this should’ve come as no surprise. I think they figured they had a good, original marketing thing with Starbucks, but it wasn’t a very good fit. Prairie Home Companion type shit seems better, the pseudo-intellectual adult type shit.

  9. EDouglas says:

    I think they should have promoted Hard Candy through Starbucks..but then they’d have to change the opening scene where the sexual predator meets his prey at a non-Starbucks coffee shop.

  10. Jimmy the Gent says:

    I always think pseudo-intellectual when I think of Martin.

  11. martindale says:

    RV probably grosses $16 million this weekend. Family films tend to have significant increases on Saturdays.
    As for United 93, I think it grosses closer to $12 million this weekend and has very long legs, just like Crash did around the same time last year. This movie should have even better WOM than Crash did.

  12. Josh Massey says:

    “…smacks of real insensitivity… borders on offensive…”
    I don’t know how some of you get through your daily lives without breaking down in tears at how gosh-darn mean everybody is. Seriously, grow a backbone.

  13. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Nice one Josh!
    I was actually thinking the same as martindale in terms of United 93. As people see it and tell others it’s actually good people may go and see it. Or, next weekend it could fall hard like Scary Movie 3 or Silent Hill or something.
    “(It

  14. Jimmy the Gent says:

    Josh Massey dooesn’t care about black people.

  15. jeffmcm says:

    I don’t think Poland was being snide about Akeelah because of any racial thing…I think he seemed to be snubbing it because it’s a small indie drama and because his website seems to be tailored more and more towards Hollywood blockbusters.

  16. AnonChicago says:

    Hmm, I think the problem with Akeelah &the Bee is Laurence Fishburne and Angela Bassett. They have never ever been box-office draws….Fishburne is more a supporting actor than a starring actor (see MI3 & Matrix)…and Bassett, well she has a problem doesn’t she? All the reviewers loved Kiki Palmer and she was t/selling point…and the promo w/Starbucks was curious…why? Did they even approach the public schools? Give out free tix to students through a spelling contest? That would have been a great marketing tactic…getting back to Bassett…has she done anything “great” besides Tina Turner movie? I can’t remember anything she’s been in…and it’s usually a supporting role…and when you think of “black” actresses, she doesn’t come to mind…maybe because she doesn’t promote herself, doesn’t do interviews, and really seems to be one of those “I’m an actress” type…as opposed to Alfre Woodard who seems to be all over the place and is a very good actress…another one not recognized, but lately in her old age is coming out strong…maybe better management? Sorry to see Akeelah didn’t make it in the top 5.

  17. Nicol D says:

    I just saw United 93 yesterday at a screening in a small theatre that was about half full. I think what Greengrass did was commendable. By filming in a ‘neutral’ documentary like style he allows the viewers to judge the actions of all involved that day for themselves.
    As for myself, the level of tension was harrowing and although I felt anger at the actions of the terrorists that day, I can only say in all honesty I felt more frustration at those who try to justify their actions; those who are ‘proud to be out of touch’. Those, cozy, comfortable well-to-do types who confuse right from wrong and up from down. Those who think America ‘deserved it’ (ie. Noam Chomsky) or those that think they did it to themselves (the conspiracy brigades).
    That perhaps was the most frustrating feeling of all. The fact that so many people smugly seek to excuse the actions of the 911 terrorists in the name of thier own outdated, ideology.
    At the end of my showing, just as the screen went black, a deep male voice cried out ‘Death to America’. The man then ran out of the theatre.
    A Jamaican woman then chastized him as having no soul or heart but he had already left.
    During the credits I went over to her to ask a few questions. She said the man had watched the entire film and constantly mumbled to himself things like (yes, we got the first tower etc.) as the progression of films events continued.
    It angered her and afterward she talked to the manager.
    He obviously was a coward which is why he ran out of the theatre so quickly as we all sat in stunned silence.
    Yet I was not angered by him. His comment reminded me that there are indeed people on this continent that want what happened to those souls on Sept. 11 to happen to all of us.
    Greengrass has made a document that is cinematically neutral so it cannot be considered jingoist propaganda. But by letting the days events speak for themselves, he forces those that only see ‘excuses’ for the actions of the terrorists to confront reality if they choose.
    No one should feel as though they have to see any film…but United 93 is a film experience that I think many should have. Perhaps the ones that don’t want to have it most of all.

  18. Blackcloud says:

    Would someone care to fill me in on the Starbucks angle with “Akeelah”?

  19. Stella's Boy says:

    When I saw it, some guy in an American flag hat and shirt who talked loudly throughout the entire movie yelled “heroes” and “America” when the credits rolled. So a little different from your experience nicol. And who are these people that think America got what it deserved on 9/11? You talk about it like there is this huge group of them out there, but isn’t it just a few loony toons on the fringe? I thought the movie was OK. The first hour is a little boring and repetitive. Greengrass gets the point across (confusion) and then really beats you over the head with it. The final 10 minutes are pretty riveting though. Didn’t blow me away or move me as much as I expected it to.

  20. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    But isn’t that the point of the movie Stellas Boy? That it isn’t over glorified and turned into a big hollywood action movie in the sky.
    AnonChicago, the reason you don’t see Angela out there advertising stuff is because she barely makes movies anymore which is extremely sad. And when she does it’s supporting roles in crap like The Score. If she made some more Sunshine State like roles and get some indie cred back then she could make a big comeback.
    You say you don’t think of Angela when you think of black actresses. Well, maybe not so much anymore but where was Halle Berry in the early 90s? Yes, Alfre Woodard was there but she wasn’t doing anything anywhere as big as Desperate Housewives (which is why she’s “all over the place” atm). It’s sad is what it is.

  21. Martin says:

    Also, just from a financial standpoint, Akeelah was made on the assumption that because Spellbound made like $8 mill (which for a Doc is pretty good) a fiction version of that story would do exponentially better. This has been proven to be a false assumption time and time again. Lords of Dogtown anyone?

  22. palmtree says:

    It will do better than last year’s Bee Season however.
    Did Lionsgate think Akeelah would be this year’s Crash? That would explain the relatively subdued marketing campaign and the just-outside summer release date.

  23. Chucky in Jersey says:

    “United 93” will get its ass kicked next week even it if does expand. How many overhyped pictures do better 2nd weekend than 1st?
    Not to mention the charges being raised that “United 93” is right-wing agitprop. CounterPunch had such a story late last week.

  24. TheManWho says:

    Camel, Australian stories are always easy to translate to American audiences–due to a shared common language. The real problem with your analogy–ignores how AMERICAN Hip-Hop CULTURE–has been adopted by the rest of the world. They take the baggy clothes, the brands, the music, the artists, and the game of Basketball. All aspects of a culture from the US–that is prodominantly AFRICAN-AMERICAN. Yet–with all that being typed–THE EUROPEANS DO NOT GET BEHIND AMERICAN URBAN CINEMA? Yeah–I think–we have a EU full of hypocrites. Europeans with hypocritical attitudes towards Americans? Nah–that’s inconceivable.
    With 93–a really good movie–that should not get lost in the AWARDS shuffle late this year. I am serious about that–because it takes all sorts of skill to pull off what Greengrass and crew–pulled off.

  25. Stella's Boy says:

    I certainly didn’t want a big Hollywood action movie in the sky and I don’t think I even implied as much. My problems are similar to Dave’s.

  26. Jimmy the Gent says:

    Then, shouldn’t you change your name from Stella’s Boy to Dave’s Boy?
    I think people who shout out phrases when the screen goes black in movies are ALL jackasses. United 93 in particular is a movie that demands audiences to sit still for a moment and reflect or think or ever mourn.
    I learned a long time ago I can’t let what other audience members do during a movie alter the way I view the movie. I learned this during Saving Private Ryan when the Cpl. Upham shot the German soldier who had shot Cpt. Miller. People cheered and afterwards I heard people saying how they’d have beat the shit out of Upham if they’d been in his squad. I just shook my head because some people just saw the movie as an old-fashioned WWII action movie. No one took the time to see thaqt Upham was meant to be the character everyone identified with. It certainly was the character Spielberg was identifying with. Spielberg knew one of the functions of war is to humiliate those who are not meant to be in it.
    So, don’t let what some assholes say when the screen goes black alter your immediate reaction to the movie. First reactions are usually the right ones.

  27. Stella's Boy says:

    My opinion of the movie definitely has nothing to do with what the asshole said when the screen went black.

  28. Jimmy the Gent says:

    I guess Universal will be writing a check for 1.1 million. Not bad.

  29. jeffmcm says:

    Hey Chucky in Jersey: why would noted liberal director Paul Greengrass make a piece of right-wing agitprop?
    And why would a piece of right-wing agitprop be occasionally sympathetic to the terrorists? Hell, (Spoilers)
    the bespectacled pilot is practically the protagonist of the movie. Not to mention the end dedication card which is clearly inclusive of them?
    Have you seen the movie, Chucky?

  30. Nicol D says:

    “Not to mention the charges being raised that “United 93″ is right-wing agitprop. ”
    This film is being praised right now by many on both sides of the political spectrum as a skilled and masterful piece of filmmaking.
    I predict by awards season it will be seen as a piece of right wing propaganda and many who gave it four stars now will rethink their initial enthusiasm (guaranteed Ebert will leave it off his top ten by January).
    As far as awards go, I do not think it is even appropriate to judge this film by that standard. I have little taste for awards anymore and if this film wins none it means it will probably stand taller in cinema history for it.
    Greengrass’ style was totally appropriate to the subject matter…he lets the actions speak for themselves.
    I must say that the actors who portrayed the terrorists should be commended for doing what could not have been easy. They humanized the one dimensional and as such found the truth that these individuals acted of thier own volition…not just because they were ‘oppressed’.
    I feel sorry for anyone who is so consumed by hate that they would feel compelled to act as they did…yet there can also be no excuses for what they did.
    These actors hopefully will continue to find work. What they did was probably just as difficult on an artistic level as what the actors playing the passengers did…maybe more.
    Similarly, the sequence where Greengrass cuts from the terrorists praying that shows the bloody plane dashboard to the passengers saying the Lord’s Prayer was one of the most gutsy and courageous I’ve seen in a film in years. As Greengrass has said; sadly…a religion was highjacked that day also.
    Every step of the way Greengrass made the right decision. This was courageous cinema at its best!
    As much as the subject matter was very difficult to watch…on a cinematic level, I had not been this enthralled by artisty in a long time.

  31. Martin says:

    I don’t think there’s anything courageous about this film at all. At best it’s towing the party line (which may or may not be based on fact), and at worst it’s exploiting the audience’s emotions. I’ll give them credit for technical proficiency, good acting, and reasonably tasteful marketing, but beyond that it offers nothing more than the A&E movie from a few months ago. And really, if you need a movie to provide you “closure” on 9/11, or “remind” you of 9/11, you’re pathetic. This is the same sort of progaganda pap Hollywood churned out 50 years ago, and very few of those movies hold up today.

  32. jeffmcm says:

    Can I ask Martin what exactly that party line is?
    Hollywood made a lot of propaganda in the WWII era, but it also made a lot of art. Just take a look at the war films of Hawks, Hitchcock, and Ford.
    I think there’s a difference between a truly jingoistic movie, which aims to create a feeling in its audience of anger and righteousness, and something like this film, where the prevailing mood created is sadness and empathy. I don’t think it provided ‘closure’ – I don’t think any film could do that – but it was an experience I am glad to have had.

  33. jeffmcm says:

    BTW, the phrase is ‘toeing’ the party line. To put your toe up to a physical line.

  34. Jimmy the Gent says:

    How about tomorrow we boycott Martin?

  35. Martin says:

    Ouch, your hitting me with spelling errors? Is that the best you’ve got?

  36. James Leer says:

    How about that Casino Royale trailer? I’m actually kind of excited now!

  37. jeffmcm says:

    Where did you find that Casino Royale thing?
    Conceptual errors in phrasing are bigger than mere spelling errors. I responded to your (Martin’s) broader points as well, feel free to respond, or not.

  38. anghus says:

    would United 93 have made more money if they called it “Terrorists on a Plane”?

  39. Blackcloud says:

    Here for the “Casino Royale” trailer (click on the poster)
    http://latinoreview.com/news.php?id=526

  40. jeffmcm says:

    I definitely sense a little Bourne influence in there, at first, but then it shifts into the same kind of huge action set pieces that are the Bond tradition.
    Did anyone see the clip from X-Men 3 that Hugh Jackman presented on Leno? It looks…laughable.

  41. Crow T Robot says:

    I’m getting a big Timothy Dalton vibe here.
    Not that that’s an entirely bad thing…

  42. Joe Leydon says:

    Crow: I know this will sound sacrilegious, but as I’ve said before — I think Timothy Dalton came closer than any other actor (yes, even closer than Connery) to playing James Bond as the seriously cold-blooded SOB that Ian Fleming described in his original books.

  43. Sam says:

    You’re 100% right. Sean Connery defined the character for film audiences, and after initially deploring the casting choice, Fleming wound up liking Connery so much he infused some of Connery’s traits into the later novels.
    But Connery was never quite the book character, and Timothy Dalton, who purposefully modelled his performance after the character of the books, captured him brilliantly. Not only is Dalton the closest to the book character, but the first 30 minutes or so of The Living Daylights is probably the most Flemingesque sequence of the entire film series. But if you grew up on Connery or especially Moore, Dalton would certainly be kind of a jolt.
    For my money, though, he’s the best of the Bonds, and I really regret that he didn’t get the chance to do more before his tenure was up.

  44. James Leer says:

    That’s why I think Craig is a good way to go for the character. He brings a certain moody thuggishness to the role that Pierce Brosnan really lacked.

  45. Hopscotch says:

    When I walked out of the theater of United 93, I was literally shaking. Me and my friends walked a little while just to calm down. None of us had a bad thing to say about the movie.
    One of my friends and I went to a coffee shop and talked for two hours. the movie, the day, our memories, how we felt. I suppose that’s the best compliment to give to Greengrass and his team.
    I didn’t see the much talked about “the War on Terror had begun” line at the end. did I miss it? anyone else see it?

  46. Eric says:

    Brosnan was almost too perfect– he was like a cartoon of Bond. In that way, he was appropriate for the movies, which have turned into cartoons themselves.
    I’m tired of the over-the-top mindlessness of the last few movies, and I take the casting of Craig to be a hopeful sign that the series may be returning to Earth.

  47. TheManWho says:

    Craig was hired due to another citizen of the crown–Kiefer Sutherland. The Brits love 24. This country in particular loves 24. So–to sell to both audiences–you have to rip off 24 as much as possible. Which, from the script review, this film does in spades. Not like imitating 24 is a bad thing, but it’s BOND imitating a 5 year-old TV series. Something still feels a bit off about that.

  48. palmtree says:

    24 appears to borrow its premise partly from Bond (government agent uncovers dastardly plots and foils them with wits and technology) so it seems fitting. If “imitating 24” means more intelligence and more realism, than I’m all for it.
    What Craig adds that Dalton didn’t as much is physicality…other than that I agree with sentiments above.

  49. James Leer says:

    I don’t get much of a 24 vibe from the trailer, or even from what I’ve heard about the script. Bond is more about exotic locales, romance, etc. which don’t find their way into the strictly confined world of 24. There’s a little bit of Bourne in there via the up-close physical fights and humanizing the character, but I don’t see those as debits.

  50. Stella's Boy says:

    Craig has become one of my favorite actors. I think he is magnificent in Layer Cake, The Mother, Road to Perdition and Enduring Love. I hope he pulls off Bond. I’m cautiously optimistic.

  51. jeffmcm says:

    For me, Bond jumped the shark with that horrible CGI surfing shot in Die Another Day, but it sounds like that point was reached much earlier by other people.

  52. David Poland says:

    Wow – J-Mc loves to bitch about me… I spend last week writing about a bunch of small, overlooked films and I’m making MCN more mainstream? We add The Reeler and Justine Elias to Movie City Indie on the blogs… nah. Classic.
    For the record, MCN has always and always will support indie film with relentless intensity.
    As for Akeelah and The Afterschool Special, I think it would be racist and insensitive to call the film something other than what I think it is because it focuses on black America.
    Jimmy The Gent could “could call The Constant Gardner that ‘Whitey-helps-the-sick-Africans’ movie. You know, like Cry Freedom and A Dry White Season.” I would disagree about Gardener, and less so about the other two films, but I wouldn’t call him insensitive.
    One of the reasons why Spellbound works so well is that it is a doc. One of the reasons Akeelah doesn’t work as well is that it hits some false notes. But that has little to do with opening weekend. The unfortunate reason why Akeelah barely opened is that it is a black film with all black stars that was sold to white people without being particularly aware of that fact.
    It was not sold as a black/”urban” niche film and probably would have done more business if sold to that niche primarily. As it was, it didn’t draw “urban” because it was sold mainstream (which was also true, for argument’s sake, of other niche product like Dark Water) and it didn

  53. jeffmcm says:

    DP, last week you were at a film festival writing about movies most of us will never see because they never got/never will get distribution, or they already came out and may or may not be released on DVD. As laudable as it is, it’s like going to Trinidad for a vacation and saying that you’re doing your part to help Third World debt because you tipped well.
    You used to write more reviews of movies actually in release but, in my perspective at least, you’ve shifted towards being more interested in studio politics, new media, and critiques of other journalists. When a new indie movie like Akeelah comes out and gets rave reviews from Ebert, Armond White, and 84% of Rotten Tomatoes, your initial reaction is a two sentence dismissal.
    That’s all, except that you single me out more than anyone else when you think you’re being threatened, I’ve noticed.

  54. David Poland says:

    You are just always the first to take a silly, petty shot, J-Mc. I don’t mind being disagreed with. That’s why I have this blog. But you often seem to start with why I have done something wrong first before you offer an actual opinion of your own. Boring. And yet, a bit irritating. Threatening? No.
    So you would prefer that I write a nasty review of Akeelah? Is that it? Or do you think that I read (or should read) Rotten Tomatoes to help formulate what I think?
    I don’t spend my time trying to figure out what other writers think or how to make MCN, et al, The Jeff McMahon Experience. If you think festival coverage is too narrowstream and everything else too mainstream, I don’t know how to help you. The David Poland Reviews Current Film On The Day Of Release site? Is that what you want?
    And while we’re here… if anyone else wants to define the sites as they want them to be, here is your chance. I can pretty much guarantee that you won’t get what you want. But I will pay attention.

  55. Cadavra says:

    The other thing that bugs me about AKEELAH’s low opening is that all those “family values” types who’re always whining about having “nothing to take the kids to” failed to support a film that is apparently genuinely uplifting without being schmaltzy, appeals to adults as well as kids, and got great reviews to boot. And yet they’ll keep on whining…

  56. palmtree says:

    Finding Forrester’s $51 mil shows that you can sell a black Afterschool Special to a mainstream audience. The difference with that one though is they had the pedigree of Good Will Hunting, which broke indie film gross records when it was released.

  57. jeffmcm says:

    DP, I would welcome a detailed, nasty review of Akeelah more than a reductive two-sentence dismissal where it wasn’t even clear whether you had seen the movie or not. I understand if you don’t feel like that’s the best use of your time, though…just don’t try to pretend otherwise.
    By the way, I had no interest in seeing The Proposition until I saw your glowing review of it. That’s what we need more of.

  58. David Poland says:

    I don’t reduce movies in two sentences unless I have seen them.
    And if they made more movies as good as The Proposition, I’d write more reviews like that… ecstatically.

  59. David Poland says:

    Please note that Sony saw that $52 million gross of Finding Forrester as a flop.
    Also note that I ate critical excrement for raving that film for more than a year.

  60. Crow T Robot says:

    I’m still waiting for my “Just Like Heaven” apology, Poland. The trailer looked stupid, the reviews all confirmed it, but still I went. You were so on the money with “In America,” I figured a rave like this has got to add up. But nooooooo.
    And where the hell has Andrew Sarris been? Was that plagarism thing a couple months back such a big deal?

  61. Cadavra says:

    FINDING FORRESTER also had Connery at a time when he could still open a picture…and usually to end up with more than $52 million.

  62. palmtree says:

    True, Forrester opened after Entrapment, which did well but had help from Catherine Zeta. Right before that though he came off The Avengers, which flopped at $23 m, and Playing By Heart, which was a small indie film that did not hit $5 m. And he couldn’t get Just Cause or First Knight over $50 m either. He’s a draw but not as consistent as you say.
    And couldn’t we argue that Fishburne and Bassett are similar draws for Akeelah?

  63. Hopscotch says:

    I’ll second on DP’s credit for “In America”, it was also my favorite movie released that year…I even liked “The Terminal” which I think DP and I are the only ones who openly defend it.
    But Forrester…yeesh.

  64. Jeff McMahon says:

    I’d defend The Terminal, muddled though it be and with an ending that doesn’t really work.
    Is Typekey not working for anyone else?

  65. Chucky in Jersey says:

    “Finding Forrester” was Oscar Bait, thus Columbia had to work it to $52M.
    David is correct on “Akeelah and the Bee”. In Montclair NJ — a town where the black community is upper-middle class — the local arthouse isn’t playing that movie.

  66. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    The Terminal was horrible. Way to turn a potentially exciting film into a sentimental blowhard of a waste of 2 hours PLUS!
    I still don’t get the love for The Proposition, but I’ve been listening to it for over half a year since it was released.
    Spellbound worked because it was not only entertaining but geniunely thrilling (moreso than 90% of Hollywood “thrillers”). You really didn’t know how it was going to end. Akeela on the other hand, to most people, looks predictable. Akeela will overcome the troubles in her life and all that junk.

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