April 26, 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
Links, David, links. Please.
MCN front page will get you up to date
Righto. Thanks.
So now it doesn’t matter if the movie is awful? This certainly feels bitter.
Just saw the cartoon. Did you not post the link for fear of copyright infringement?
btw, it’s Don Hertzfeld.
Of course it matters.. but this is not about the movie… it’s about something more than that.
That’s Don Hertzfeldt’s “Rejected”.
I know it’s off topic but I just saw a trailer for Babel and I’m breathleeeeeeees! (read that as an opera singer) Breathleeeeeeeeeees!
Brain fart on DH’s first name… corrected… where is a link?
And J-Mc… what is there to be “bitter” about?
I am egining to think this is a full column, but I am feeling as though the last three weeks have been a raging reaction the diminishment of the critic and journalist. Its not that the stories are factually wrong. It is the “gotcha” tone and the look of drool oozing out of the sides of the graphs.
Add to that the idea that everyrone is now fighting over timing instead of quality. It’s like the bad old days of the web, fueled by an increasingly desperate Traditional Media.
So one of the most anticipated movies of the summer, if not the year, gets its first public screening at Cannes, critics in attendance publish their reactions, and suddenly they’re all “morons” and “attention seekers”?
Poland, your insufferable arrogance never ceases to amaze. Or is it just sour grapes because you couldn’t find anyone to pay your way to Cannes and you’re stuck compiling yet another utterly pointless and idiotic Oscar list?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArG7mABnLis&search=rejected
I am a banana!
The cartoon didn’t impress me. But at least now I know the source of this “I am a banana” stuff.
I don’t remember the last Tentpole movie review I read in a major media publication or site. (MCN being the exception,of course). After years of stories of Hollywood press junkets, with perks; and, the knowledge that media rarely attacks its major advertisers; I became fed up with 3 thumbs up reviews for lousy movies. It seemed like only the negative reviews were honest. Now it seems unless the critic absolutely raves about a movie, it must be mediocre. Therefore, for a critic to get recognition; he must be first to pan.
DP, I was missing some major context. How did you know that every critic was going to gang up against the movie ahead of time? And why is it happening to this particular movie? Is it the subject matter or Ron Howard that you think they’re ganging up on?
All of this context is what seems to have been fueling your “so what” feeling, which is fine, but how are the rest of us supposed to have been aware of that?
Well, I never read the book and don’t find that stuff interesting. I don’t believe the Xtian story anyway, so something that goes against it wouldn’t touch me.
And then, the trailers . . . what’s interesting there? Creepy looking guys and corpses don’t care me after being Bruckheimered to death all week on TV with the medical examiners and all. Crapo.
Plus, Grazer and Opie are NOT good. Apollo 13, OK. What else? Too many kidnapped young’uns in the works. Opie may be lamenting the loss of his childhood w/ his choice of topics for film. Beautiful Mind? No, sorry. Couldn’t stand it.
Bottom line, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if this is a major el-busto, bad film, etc., but too bad it probably won’t fail completely at the BO.
Well, the book was a vapid potboiler, so I expect the film will be the same.
Everyone is waiting to gang up on the movie because you can’t really find an ‘intellectual’ who read the book that will admit to liking, most of the time it’s “I read the damn thing it’s incredibly terrible but I couldn’t stop reading the bastard.”
something about it just screams hard for really vicious criticism, be it book or movie and now both appear to be getting plenty.
heh, back in high school we’d judge how awesome a comedy or action film with great trailers would be (like ace ventura or dante’s peak) by how awful the reviews were, the motto was, if the critics hate it, it must be good. Armageddon is a good later example of that sort of movie for many many people. But even we knew to stay away from trash like Volcano. I think Da Vinci Code is very likely to do business and pop culture success like Armageddon did. But it will probably also be one of the most universally critically reviled popular films of last four or five years.
A poorly written book can be fixed if the premise and plot are interesting. An imaginative filmmaker could have taken the bare bones of the book and made something out of it but who in the world would think that Ron Howard was the filmmaker who could do that?
Volcano is a better movie than Armageddon.
Jeff speaks the truth.
Volcano is an awesome movie. Any film where racial unity comes about due to a LAVA flow needing to be stopped. Well–I think we all know how SPECIAL a film, that film HAS to be.
Not all of them, moviefreak.
But you seem to be prepared to rage at me. What about my idea? Do you think that there is a kind of hyper groupthink hysteria sometimes?
Insufferable arrogance? I’ll buy that.
And not going to Cannes has nothing to do with money. MCN affords me the freedom to go wherever I like, thanks.
I’ve been reading the book and frankly, I’m pretty bored by it compared to Angels and Demons. It seems like it’s destined to be a movie with a lot of talking and I can’t imagine it being exciting or interesting… but obviously, people must like that if so many books have sold, right?
“Do you think that there is a kind of hyper groupthink hysteria sometimes?”
Yes… I’ve been saying this for years. It’s so much easier to go with a group then have an opinion of your own and critics are this concept to the nth level. The Smoking Gun should spend some time trying to out critics by listing their DVD collections… I’m thinking that at least one or two will have a Rob Schneider movie in there. (No… I don’t. )
I read “Angels and Demons” after I read DVC. A&D is much the better book. I can definitely see why EDouglas would find DVC boring in comparison.
When I realized that the world premiere of DVC would be at Cannes after months of speculation, secrecy, and holding the wolves at bay, I thought, ‘uh oh’.
I’m not in the business, but I figured this wasn’t a good way to kick this one off.
But then every single aspect of this project has seemed ‘off’…..the book is one of those better left alone for many reasons…..
….but its so popular…and that’s too good to pass up….so if you’re going to take a chance, be very savvy about casting: chose actors who are compatible with what the readers imagine, but also surprising…..Hanks and Tattou do not match the characters very well at all and do not match at all with each other……
…..so the response is not unexpected to anyone who watches Cannes even casually…..its kind of ugly but its happened before and (as soon as they forget), it will happen again.
So, the critics are saying Da Vinci Code is a little dull and much too talky? Hallelujah! After two weeks of bombastic stuff (MI3 and the big sinking ship), give me a summer movie with a little restraint and some actual… gasp!… extended dialogue scenes!
Lots of huge hits get terrible reviews, I just want to see it. Anyone up for 6AM screening friday morning at the Arclight???
Me neither. But I’ll see it that night.
I still want to see it. I just read Corliss’ review, not good. But the critical vs. mainstream audiences gap can be very wide at times.
Come on, who didn’t think that the critics were going to pan this? Book critics get their spurs by writing enjoyably vindicitive articles about how much the Da Vinci Code sucks, and I always thought that film critics were just itching to get in on the fun. There are always at least one or two films each year which the critics pick on to rip to shreds beyond all perspective and Da Vinci Code, because of its guaranteed hit status and tag-team of Ron Howard and Tom Hanks, made them feel impotent to really affect how the movie would turn out or its success. Therefore – ATTACK!!!!
ps, I always said what this film needed wasn’t a straight adaptation but something which skewed the story and brought in the whole ‘Da Vinci Code’ phenomenon. It may have ended up a pit post-modern, but I reckon it could have been done with real humour and still kept the thriller and controversial elements
It’ll still open to $75M. You think any huge fan of this book (and there are literally millions of them) aren’t going to see it because A.O. Scott said it was boring? Not a chance…we’ll see how it does second week vs. the X-Men.
Da Vinci Code opening weekend: I say 67 million. Well, 67.2.
It might do Harry Potter numbers, say like $85M to $90M. But as more reviews come in, it’s looking worse and worse for good word of mouth.
First 2 weekends should be OK. Canada has a 4-day weekend (Victoria Day) this weekend. US has a 4-day weekend (Memorial Day) the next.
I’d love to know where Matt “Keep Snitching” Drudge was when the NSA/domestic spying scandal broke. Too busy paying sources for stories?