It’s been a crazy Monday… three films and a cancelled lunch. (Cancelled by me when I found I couldn’t get there on time.)
Talk amongst yourselves… and here is a little sneak of a piece going up later tonight on MCN… can you guess the film?
The emotional wallop of the film does come in throbbing fists of FEEL IT. It comes from the small, personal, human places where we all live. It is in the eyes of our children, the small regrets, the unfinished work around the house
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"]
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
I spose the obvious guess would be World Trade Center.
But I’ll go with… John Tucker Must Die?
Are we supposed to be surprised that DP likes WTC? He’s been hyping it for months.
WTC, I make it three. I believe that is statistically significant.
Well, one was really just a predictable personal shot.
Talladeega Nights?
Barnyard?
Dreamgirls? Someone had to say it…
DP, I’m asking a legitimate question. I guess it would be the shocker if you _didn’t_ write a glowing review of this, Monster House, or Dreamgirls, though, so I guess I’m the one wasting my keystrokes.
I mean, I guess this is the bigger question: what is there that I said to take offense at? It’s like someone saying “I sure think chocolate ice cream tastes good” for two months, and then when they get a taste…surprise! So what.
Snakes on a Motherfuckin’ Plane?
Brokeback Mountain = )
I agree with palmtree, it sounds just like Brokeback Mountain to me. Please cue the sad guitar music.
Actually yeah, that’s almost perfect for BBM.
I’ll be more surprised if DP gives a poor review to Lady in the Water at this point. He seems to hate it when journalists pile up on something, and prefers to be one of the few contrarian dissenters. Gunning for Shyamalan is bad enough, but giving him a good review because you feel he’s an easy target is even worse.
I love Brokeback Mountain!
Waterbucket: Really? Then why didn’t you say so before, back when it needed all the pre-Oscar boost it could get?
Has Dave been “hyping” WTC? Dreamgirls, sure. But WTC?
I’m going to guess Trust The Man. And if I’m right, my only comment is…….”Really?”.
Easy. ROCKY BALBOA – can you feel it?
Maybe not as much as Dreamgirls, but there’s been a pretty clear pro-WTC attitude since at least United 93’s release, couched in seemingly-objective tidbits here and there.
He’s been predicting WTC to make $125mil or whatever and saying he thinks it will be a great film. So, yeah, he’s sorta been hyping it.
But I predict many people will like it, so I don’t have an issue.
Joe? Hilarious!
Yeah, I hope it’s good too. I just don’t expect it to be as good as United 93 was, especially given its trailer, and DP’s anticipation means that his review must be taken with a grain of salt.
Well gee whiz, Jeff: I’ve already postes here that I’m eager to see “Idlewild.” If I turn out to think it’s great, should you distrust my review of that one?
I’ve never even heard of Idlewild, so it’s pretty much off my radar.
It’s not a matter of ‘distrust’, it’s a matter of false objectivity.
I will say WTC….By the way David I’m starting to think that you need to Flip the two upcoming Frat Pack movies on you Summer Chart. Just the ads for T Night are all over the place right now (Or the right places. ESPN, TBS Comedies, Fox Sports, ect…) and My Super Ex Girlfriend just seems like it going to get Crowd out between Lady and Clerks 2…..
shake it like a polaroid picture
i’ve heard of Idlewild
World Trade Centre is ‘only’ a PG13? How could Oliver Stone have ever managed that
You’ve become a bore, McBuzzkill. The first thing you add to every entry is an attack on me, not the content.
You sure you’re not Wells?
I know you love Old Media and want me to do nothing but write proper criticism, but I do more than that. And if you can’t deal with me having an opinion about how a movie fits culturally and also how I feel about the movie once I see it, I can only apologize.
Paul – There will be a major change in estimates for one of the films on Thursday because of word-of-mouth problems, but they should land without one affecting the other.
I hate Jeff Wells. That’s why I hang out on your blog, not his.
I really have no opinion on New/Old Media, it’s interesting that that’s where your instincts take you. I really have no idea what you mean there. I love to talk about what movies mean culturally (which is a pretty universal function of criticism)…
I still don’t understand what your problem is. I wasn’t attacking you. Just pointing out that your coyly disguised rave is no surprise. Why does this bother you?
Out of curiosity, I looked up my first posts on the ten most recent threads. I went after DP twice (re: the gay men remark on Prada and here) both for, I would say, legitimate reasons. I went after M. Night Shyamalan once, Jeff Wells once, and (shocking!) merely advanced the conversation on 4 posts.
DP, if you don’t like it, ban me.
McBuzzkill – Like most men, I am not a big fan of, “it’s not what you say… it’s your tone.”
But it is your tone. And the fact that you always start with something about me, not about the subject. You go there like a moth to a light… it’s irresistible.
You opening salvo was, “Are we supposed to be surprised that DP likes WTC? He’s been hyping it for months.”
Besides being a gross overstatement, it has nothing to do with your real issue, which came up later… you like U93 much more than I do and YOU are dubious about WTC on that basis.
Step up and make your opinion about you and not about me.
Even in this last comment… “your coyly disguised rave.”
What does that even mean? Is there anything there besides snark?
Get it?
You are the subject of every post here. It’s your blog. You may think you stand outside of the stories you report, but that is often not the case.
I am dubious of WTC because the trailer looks cheesy and overwrought. I am suspicious of your opinion because you didn’t get United 93.
“your coyly disguised rave” refers to the fact that, for some unknown reason, you felt it necessary to make a guessing-game out of your WTC review. Why, especially when it was so obvious? Are the words “coyly” “Disguised” and “rave” not each correct?
Also, DP, I think you assume a tone of nastiness from me by default at this point, even when my words are essentially neutral.
And you know damned well, McDrama, that I am not going to ban you or anyone else. You know I’d rather kill the blog. So why throw that stank out there?
“Okay, after watching that I find it much easier to forgive you for the Prada/gay men remarks.”
“Dave, Dave, Dave…we know you’re a good liberal, but every time you bring up anything to do with gay men, you really put your foot in your mouth.”
“Yeah, thanks again, Poland, for another thread that can only be filled with “I’m really looking forward to this” for two and a half weeks.”
“Are we supposed to be surprised that DP likes WTC? He’s been hyping it for months.”
Yes, you are less likely to attack me when you get to an entry late. But when it turns ugly, I can count on you being the one who turns it.
Nothing coy about it. Nothing disguised about it. A rave it will be.
I didn’t post anything all day, so I thought I’d offer something to get a conversation going. And amazingly, everyone else who participated added something interesting or fun. Only you felt a need to take a shot at me.
“I am dubious of WTC because the trailer looks cheesy and overwrought. I am suspicious of your opinion because you didn’t get United 93”
THAT’s fine! Say that. But your comments are much more insidious and snide than that.
And notice that we have, once again, driven everyone out of this otherwise pleasant discussion. I am responsible for responding to you.
Yeah, you could have not responded and saved everyone the problem. My initial post is pretty innocuous and could have easily been ignored.
First it was engaging Wells on his blog, now this. Poland, you sure have been charitable to your adversaries recently, haven’t you?
No. It wasn’t innocuous, Jeff.
Save us all the trouble from now on and stay on topic.
I mean, if you think I’m so childish, be the bigger man and ignore me, already.
I’m serious, don’t you have quote whores and sloppy journalists to attack or something? I’m small fry.
Again… a game… same as “ban me.”
Lead with your own opinion, not ust a reflection of mine.
As the person who has, by far, the most comments in the history of this blog, I would think you would be comforted by not having to police me endlessly.
And Wreck… I am sick of a lot of shit lately. That was my first contact with Wells in 3 months. Hopefully, it will be the last for another 6 months.
McBuzzkill is not an adversary. But frankly, I was perfectly happy today, finally seeing a movie worth seeing for the first time in months. And it took JMc all of 5 minutes to piss on me for it… not on the movie… on me.
My stomach for hatefulness – and Wells is the most pathetically hateful (including self-hateful) journalist I know – has been reduced to nothing lately.
You, Wreck, can be a jerk at times (as can I)… but it is almost always in the name of adding a real opinion of your own. And that is always welcome.
Actually it was nine minutes…and I still respectfully disagree that I did any ‘pissing’. Matter of opinion.
You know, I’m as sick of you as you apparently are of me, Poland…but I’m not on a pedestal every day, putting my opinions out there and asking for responses. And you are.
I’m just sick of this particular schtick you’ve gotten into. I find it controlling and unpleasant. Aside from that you are welcome.
If you are sick of me, no one is making you come here. It’s a world wide web out there. On the other hand, I have readers to deal with and a business to run.
If you need to continue this conversation, let’s take it private.
I have nothing further to say, I don’t consider myself to be the one with the problem. If a lone blogger can ruin your evening, I think that says more about your sensitivity than it does about my assholeness.
I believe you have my email address.
jeffmcm, while you’re often entertaining, and occasionally insightful, why are you insisting on trying to get the last word ON SOMEONE ELSE’S BLOG? Because even if you’re right, or people think you’re right, you’re not going to win. you’re playing a game, and DP’s not, he’s just trying to mop up the perpetual verbal diarrhea you can’t seem to clear out of your system.
shut the fuck up already and stop trying to be a celebrity, or self-righteous Friend Of The Blog Commenter. nobody cares.
you can’t talk about the film because you haven’t seen it, so all you’re left with is skepticism about the baggage that DP brought into the screening room. how about discussing something that matters, like what’s brought Oliver Stone to this point, how it may compare to United 93 (which you started to discuss, but preferred to get mired in your drama instead), or what DP mentioned about the questionable timing of the release date.
Anyone?
here here. I give Dave some stick now and then but I know I’d enjoy a beer or two with the guy in person, whereas my gut instinct tells me that jeffmcm is someone who could clear any social gathering in minutes. Occasional astute observations aside, he comes across as a total sausage slapper for the most part and I suspect is an enormous drama queen in real life. Seriously Jeff, you’re as much fun as David Irving MC’ing at a Simon Wiensenthal dinner.
I was *really* looking forward to seeing WTC to see how Stone handled the material and I was sorely disappointed. The movie was tedious at times and overly melodramatic at others. It screamed “give me an Oscar, dammit!” and if it was about any subject than New York’s most tragic moment in history, maybe it would be deserving. The movie looks good (particularly the recreation of the WTC site)… but the script is not good and only a few performances are worthwhile. It’s funny how I agree with the emotional potency of many of the other movies DP mentions in the review (In the Bedroom, etc.) but not this.
btw Jeffmcm you post this line “You know, I’m as sick of you as you apparently are of me, Poland” – christ in heaven you sad little runt, why on gods big balls are you even hanging around his blog for? Did you run out of needles to insert in your scrotum or something?
i asked the same question a couple weeks ago JBD.
“Barnyard?”
BTW, this is my favorite guess.
Hey, did we ever learn what that really bad movie was that Dave saw last year (just to add fuel to the agro fire)
^ That comes up every few weeks. Still no answer.
Why is there so much hate between Poland and Wells? I truly don’t understand it (I have read both for a long time, generally enjoy both), but if it’s so acrimonious, you should really start a video blog together and review movies, that would be great. The Odd Couple of Movie reviews, or like Siskel and Ebert would go after each other over certain movies, only all the time Celebrity Deathmatch style.
Yeah, I’d be pretty f-ing annoyed too if the comments on my blog just tried to psychoanalyze me and then ask me to ignore those comments since I was on a pedestal.
So you dug WTC, huh, Dave? Good to hear. Between this flick and Miami Vice, you’ve been able to recharge my batteries on two movies I was getting all “meh” about.
I’ll not add any fuel to the Comments War fire, but one thing I know for sure: With a writer like Poland, you can fight him, argue him, call him dead wrong — but if you imply that he’s a shill or a bullshitter, he’s gonna get pissed. Frankly, I don’t blame him.
I do a lot of movie-centric blogging myself, and if 65% of my comments were focused on ME and not the subject at hand, I’d probably get a little sick of it. Not giving anyone any instructions here, just sharing my own .02.