MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

More On…

Some mornings, reading the Wall Street Journal is just a thrill. Today, the paper went past others and really did a great job of thinking deeper about some of yesterday’s news.
First, a smart piece on Disney’s web strategy and the question, which I completely missed, which was just how much reruns on the web will interfere with the value of syndication.
The funny thing, for me, is that I have already gotten past believing that there is any future for local station syndication, outside of branding like TNT/TBS have done, where a local station runs nothing but comedies and local news and anotehr run nothing but hour-longs and news… basically offering a free answer to the pay cable networks to come.
Second, a nice update on the technologcal move allowing you to watch your computer on your TV. The one thing the piece doesn’t adress is the difference in quality in the files sized for watching on your computer vs the materials you watch on your TV.
Finally, there is a stat in this story that hits home – “The New York Times in yesterday’s editions noted, a bit smugly, that the Daily News had ‘pulled out all the stops.'”
In fact, the Times, a unit of New York Times Co., has actually spilled more ink on the Page Six scandal. As of last night, it had written 10 articles totaling 10,865 words since the news broke, compared with 6,588 words for the News, in seven articles. The story was on the Times’s front page Saturday and Sunday, and the fronts of two sections yesterday.”
Ha.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

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