April 20, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
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
You seem to want/wish this movie to be fantastic with every ounce of your being.
Not really.
I saw what I saw. And I am enthusiastic.
Am I supposed to be bland about it? When you see it, I think you will see what I am describing. I have no idea if the whole movie will follow suit. But this material is pretty sensational.
I think what Grandcosmo is reacting to is that this film seems to have gotten an inordinate amount of attention, from casting now into production and marketing, from you, more than lots of other movies coming out at the end of the year, and for no apparent reason.
If I had any materials on the Eastwood movie, they’d get a lot of attention too.
If I had Babel materials, they’d be here.
If I had Margaret materials, they’d be here.
If there is stuff up, it’s because there is stuff happening and materials available.
Geez, I don’t have stuff on Miami Vice and I would kill to be running things on any Mann film…
So there have been things happening and materials available, for this movie more than for any other fall release, for months now?
Have you seen a teaser trailer for any other holiday movie… besides Happy Feet… in theaters since Christmas? Have any of the holiday films had set events for the L.A. press corps?
There have been six Dreamgirls entries in the last year, starting 5/12/05 with Jamie Foxx getting hired. Six.
Whose agenda are we really discussing here?
So your answer to my question is “yes”, which is fine. And it’s also ok, DP, to just admit that it’s a movie that you’re eagerly anticipating. No harm in that.
Just to let you know, Poland, that they’re not the only ones who’ve noticed your inordinate enthusiasm for this film. There’s nothing wrong with being excited for a film. Even though you’re a journalist you’ll allowed to pick favorites.
Yeah, I think everyone has noticed your massive hard-on for this film. Not that there’s anything wrong with it. You’re allowed to look forward to stuff, it’s just an unexpected choice.
I always thought there must be someone working on this film that you’re close to and you have a vested interest in seeing it succeed, especially since you knew so much about the budget and talent negotiations way back when.
Dreamgirls is Dave Poland’s own Crash. Next up, it will be compared to Dickens in some way.
To have this entire thread be about me is silly. But isn’t “inordinate” determined by whether it my enthusiasm is appropriate?
Anyway, I don’t quite get it. Superman, Da Vinci, WTC, U93, and others have gotten more ink from me than Dreamgirls. Is there some debate the Dreamgirls is not one of the handful of films currently towards the front of the awards pack? Do I qualify for not being “inordinate” by never writing about the movie again? Help me out here.
Those four movies are: a hugely expensive summer movie, an expensive and controversial movie that was just released, and two contentious 9/11 movies. Those are the titles that you are right to be spending ink on. By contrast, I think most of us consider Dreamgirls to be just one of a dozen or so awards-contending movies that won’t be out for six months, by an interesting but hardly cult-worthy director, and with no more starpower than several other projects.
Maybe your audience is just geekier/less Motown than you are, DP.
And six blog entries in a year is a cult now?
And six blog entries in a year is a cult now?
Really, we should get this bickering done, because I would expect there will be other mentions of Dreamgirls (and everything else) over the next six months.
You’re mixing my words around. I said ‘cult’ because Bill Condon is not a director anyone’s excited about, the same way people are for Scorsese, Mann, Shyamalan, etc, hence it seems odd to be excited about a Condon film.
Poland is needlessly defensive here. I think he should take this as good-natured ribbing, for the most part.
I think most people couldn’t give a rat’s ass about Dreamgirls and that’s why they notice how much it’s been mentioned on this blog.
We’re just teasing, DP.
What’s your personal history with Dreamgirls? Did you see it on stage? It’s obviously made a big impact on you.
Dreamgirls, DP wishes he knew how to quit you.
(in the melody of that Dreamgirls song)
YOU’RE GONNA LOVE IT!
Jeff Wells is sooooooooooo pissed that DP beat him on this Dreamgirls scoop. From the USofA no less. You can read it on his site.
Made my day.
Dave,
You had Dreamgirls as #2 on your first _40 Weeks to Oscar_ list before you had even seen the sneakpeek and now you are saying that Eddie Murphy’s performance “stinks of Oscar” just from watching a minute long clip.
Nothing wrong with looking forward to something especially with how bad the first major releases of the summer have been.
I’ve also noticed a real interest in this film for awhile now on this blog. It struck me as odd, mostly because I’d never heard of it.
But I’ll also echo the “nothing wrong with it” comments… if I had a blog, I’d be writing everything I could about Babel.
Talk about mean spiritedness, right here, it practically feels like it
DP has been crowing that Eddie Murphy will win the Oscar for this film before they even started shooting, or had finished casting for that matter.
Poland’s stage-to-screen premature ejacuation track record:
Phantom 2004…
Producers 2005…
and now Dreamgirls.
This movie is officially doomed.
Just for the sake of accuracy, Crow, even if you are teasing…
The Phantom thing happened after seeing the movie and lasted two weeks.
Producers always had the issues that were brought up and it failed. The studio also sat on it completely until just weeks before release. If I had seen four numbers from Producers, the failure would have been clear.
And what about my premature calls on A Beautiful Mind, Chicago, Lord of the Rings, Million Dollar Baby and Brokeback coming up short.
You know what movie is doomed. A bad movie.
Well, Dave’s recent track record missing the musical calls for Best Picture might just end this year. I recently read the script for “Dreamgirls,” and I actually found it quite sensational. In many ways it reminded me of “Ray.”
The only thing left to be seen is whether Condon can handle the material as a director. Rob Marshall was coming out of theater with “Chicago,” and hence had the capabilities to direct a musical in tow. Condon is coming off of dramas, and might not have the most steady hand directing his script, however great the words on the page are.
In the meantime, you’ll want to watch for Hudson in the Lead Actress race (even if she kind of nails it), Beyonce in supporting, Foxx as a lead at the Globes, but likely missing for Oscar, and, indeed, Eddie Murphy in the supporting race, something many have been looking hard at for a long time. He’s had the juciest role from day one, and after finishing up the script, it seems to me he just seems primed for some awards recognition.
Crow: your humor is lost here.
Unlike a lot of you guys, I am eagerly awaiting “Dreamgirls”…the same way I awaited “Chicago” for years (through all the false starts and rumored casting).
I saw it on Broadway with the original cast. I have the cast album. I watched way too many drag queens lipsynch the big numbers in clubs. “Dreamgirls” is deeply embedded in certain parts of our culture and lots of us will turn out for it.
Whether it becomes another “Chicago” or “Evita” or…gulp…”A Chorus Line,” a lot of people are going to line up for this one. Those people just don’t write much in this comment section, so you’re not aware of their huge interest in this film.
Oh Poland, you knows I love yas. But if you’re gonna start guessing Oscars in May, you need to be a little goofier about it, because goofy it is (that column should have been one of your famous songs parodies).
Though I’m still marveling at that Brokeback call. Seriously, that was some Carnac shit there.
Adorian, what you say is why I suggested the crowd on this blog is ‘geekier’, because it probably skews young and male and more into action and sci-fi than for black-themed musicals. So Poland may in fact be more into the general audience’s perspective than we know.
1) There is a lot of interest in this film.
2) It’s a hugely important film for Paramount/Dreamworks. Nowadays, any film that studio does is going to be a big story, and this is their big Oscar contender.
3) It’s rare for a non-sequel, non-action, non-animated film to get this big of a push (teaser, behind-the-scenes stuff, Cannes preview) so far out from the actual premiere. As Poland said, Paramount/Dreamworks has made a lot of materials available early.
4) Bill Condon’s hardly a nobody…he’s been on his way up for years, and this is his first big test.
5) The cast contains a recent Oscar winner (Jamie Foxx); a huge all-time box-office star in a rare dramatic role that may finally get him the credit he deserves as an actor (Eddie Murphy); and a huge pop star (Beyonce Knowles).
6) The casting hunt for Effie was a huge story: who could replace the legendary Jennifer Holliday, one of the rare Broadway sensations that ever entered the mainstream consciousness.
All in all, I would find it terribly curious if Poland were NOT covering this movie at the level he is.
Who’s Jennifer Holliday?
Bill Condon is an Oscar-winning somebody, but you’re not going to see this movie sold with his name in the advertising. His name alone is little reason to get excited about the movie.
Jennifer Holliday was the choir singer on Ally McBeal who had an affair with the priest then sang about it. And who really should’ve had one episode not the 10 or so she ended up in. I honestly wasn’t ever impressed.
And to hop on DP’s back about this, I think the only reason everyone thinks DP has his hand up Dreamgirls’ skirts is because the only even remotely negative comments were concerns about casting and budget. No “this could go awful.” Almost every other movie has a DP caveat.
The one Dreamgirls call I have been dubious about was Jennifer Hudson.
And now, that seems to be a heedless concern. She seems strong in both songs in the preview. And the trio of women seems to mesh pretty well.
I knew she could sing. The question is, can she act? And we still are just one step towards that answer. We’ll see.
You never know until you see the movie… and not always then.
But note, I’m not all over Clint Eastwood for hiring Paul Walker either and that is far scarier to me.
Generally, I am much more careful about pissing bile than offering hope and praise. Any asshole can be right 90% of the time by being negative about everything. But it’s not a game to me.
People should sorta be thankful that there’s positive news about a movie that looks good instead of news about how a movie’s budget has been blown, a studio head as stepped down or how a movie flopped.
i WANT to read about this stuff. It’s setting us up for the bumper Oscar season.
“In the meantime, you’ll want to watch for Hudson in the Lead Actress race (even if she kind of nails it), Beyonce in supporting, Foxx as a lead at the Globes, but likely missing for Oscar, and, indeed, Eddie Murphy in the supporting race”
Kris, I would normally follow your thinking but are you serious about Jennifer and Beyonce’s Oscar placings. It seems obvious to me (and quite a few others) that Beyonce is the bigger star so she will go Lead and Jennifer will go Supporting (even though she is the true lead).
Do we really need to list the amount of times the true lead of a movie has been shoved into Supporting merely because they’re less famous. Scarlett Johansson (Lost in Translation), Naomi Watts (Mulholland Dr.), Jamie Foxx (Collateral), etc…
Jennifer will be Supporting and will be nominated and could very well win because they don’t seem to give a rats arse about previous work in that category. Beyonce will be lead but may find being nominated harder (a GG win should be much easier). Actually, thinking back to Chicago, Jennifer and Beyonce could both go lead but Jennifer going Supporting for Oscar.
It also happened with the two men from Brokeback last year. Jake was submitted into Lead but didn’t make it.
And BTW Everyone who knows the slightest bit about Dreamgirls knows that Eddie’s role is Oscar bait.
The talk on category placement has never been anything beyond speculation. While I could see Hudson slipping into the supporting slot, I can’t imagine Knowles going lead ahead of her. Nothing in the script even makes the part look like a supporting hopeful, let alone lead.
And these roles are nothing like the co-lead nature of the Brokeback roles.
As far as Murphy is concerned, I don’t think anyone ever contested the notion that the Broadway role was bound to translate its showy nature in the form of potential Oscar contender.
The last three films based on Broadway musicals–THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA, RENT and THE PRODUCERS–have a combined domestic gross of just under $100 million (and PHANTOM accounted for slightly more than half). Plus unlike DREAMGIRLS, they’re all still running in New York. Throw in the African-American cast plus a genre of music that’s largely out of favor with black audiences (at least young ones), and this strikes me as far from a sure thing.
Cadavra I think you underestimate the AA audience. There are precious few mainstream movies about black history and this is one of them. It is filled with AA pop culture references and covers an extremely significant time period in the crossover of AA culture to broader appeal. Not to mention the stars. It’s a bit condescending to suggest that AA audiences (even “the young ones”)would not embrace it because the musical styles are not contemporary enough. Regarding box office, I for one think this will be a repeater. Its diva-glam-soul appeal will not move everyone but it will be heroin to some (as the show was). Finally, in contrast to every other musical or music-fueled biopic of recent years, this one has both broader market appeal (than, say, Rent) and an actual dramatic structure (vs., say, Ray or Walk The Line). This is an audience pleaser and I predict a monster hit.
Oddly, I agree with Cadavra on a commerical level. There is a long way to go for this film to be a $100 million movie.
And don’t think that The Academy is any more black friendly than “real” audiences.
But the flip side is that because this will play for 80% of the world as a new musical with popular stars, music that is often more pop than Broadway, and a strong story. Unlike the other two shows you mention, Cad, this is not just a filmed version of the play with bigger sets. And that is an advantage, I think.
The problem with those three musicals that Cadavra listed is that there were no cool people in them. Who cares about those washed up Rent people? Who was even in Phantom? And, The Producers? Well, Uma pulls her weight, but outside of Broadway fans, nobody cares about Lane or Brodrick. Dreamgirls, however, has 3 cool people off the bat. Jamie Foxx = HUGE. Byonce = even MORE HUGE. Eddie Murphy = legendary. And that doesn’t even include the push they’ll make with Jennifer Hudson – who will no doubt have an album or a movie or something in the papers before Chirstmas. Plus the music is better. It doesn’t SOUND like a musical. It sounds like old school motown rock – which is still very popular. I think this movie is gonna be the biggest musical ever. And I don’t even like movie musicals.
I’d just like to say that Jennifer Hudson is THE STAR of Dreamgirls. She not only plays the lead role, she plays it excellently. Don’t know why the media is making it seem as if this movie is based on Beyonce’s character when it is not. People need to accept the fact that there are a lot of beautiful, multi-talented people out there, it didn’t begin or end with Beyonce. Jennifer Hudson deserves all the accolades and should be recognized for her excellent performance. She deserves the Oscar for for the lead role – not a supporting role. Let’s be fare and give credit where it is due!!!