MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Holy One Sheet!

Looks like it’s either going to be so audacious as to be a major event or so audacious that it loses 85% of the audience… we soon shall see…

Be Sociable, Share!

26 Responses to “Holy One Sheet!”

  1. jeffmcm says:

    This style was brought to you by: Ocean’s Thirteen! Coming June 2007!

  2. Campbell says:

    The question is, do they want the audience that’s already seen Casablanca, or the audience who hasn’t?

  3. Monco says:

    Has to be my favorite poster in quite some time. It echoes my favorite films, 30s and 40s noir. I don’t know if they are comparing Clooney’s character to Bogart but if they are they have a lot of work to do. I gotta say that I’m intrigued.

  4. Cadavra says:

    I second that. It’s nice to see a one-sheet that hits its target so spot on.

  5. Eric says:

    A very lovely poster. And 90% of the audience will be turned off, as it is by any poster with a retro style.
    Anybody remember the Out of Sight posters? Same people, same approach to the poster, same problem.

  6. Josh Massey says:

    “Out of Sight” was retro, but original (and still a favorite of mine). This one seems like a carbon copy of 100 other posters. I don’t see the fuss over it.

  7. Blackcloud says:

    Why do I suddenly feel like watching “Casablanca”?

  8. Hopscotch says:

    Most posters are plain and ordinary with likeness of the movie’s star(s) as the character…and that’s about it. Art film posters are usually better. But this one is freakin’ sweat. I dig it, I know it’ll alienate some people but it looks like a breath of fresh air.
    BUT, the best Soderbergh movie poster is still THE LIMEY. I had that up on my wall for years.

  9. Wrecktum says:

    Soderbergh’s key art always kicks so much ass. The original Ocean’s 11 teaser, the Out of Sight one-sheet (voted one of the best ever in some publication, probably EW), The Limey, etc. Such great, classy taste.

  10. Kambei says:

    Hopscotch, I hope you mean “sweet”. 😉 And I thoroughly agree, a fantastic poster. I am now very intrigued for the film.

  11. Nicol D says:

    Nice and attractive, but would have been prettier if it was drawn as opposed to photo-shopped heads.

  12. Seems this has been kicking around for a few weeks though. I wonder why they “officially” sent it out just today.

  13. Blackcloud says:

    I’m surprised this leaked so early:
    “You Know My Name”–the theme song for “Casino Royale”.

  14. PetalumaFilms says:

    That poster rocks! Clooney looks like Davis Straithairn though.

  15. PetalumaFilms says:

    David Straithairn…that was…and however you spell it.

  16. Lota says:

    I like watching George Clooney. And the poster is nice too. I like noir of it.

  17. Nicol D says:

    I hope this is the classic Hollywood entertainment that it promises to be (by the poster). Clooney gets much atention for his politics, but as a leading man in a solid film he is actually quite compelling.

  18. Aladdin Sane says:

    Love the poster. 😀

  19. James Leer says:

    So did I, Hopscotch! At least, in college. And signed by Stamp, to boot.

  20. Cadavra says:

    And let’s not forget the movie’s in glorious black-and-white, so it’s completely appropriate.

  21. austin111 says:

    It’s okay I guess

  22. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    I’m surprised they didn’t retitle the movie Berlin or wherever it’s set. And that tagline is horrible. And I don’t like the red heads down the side. That looks awfully photoshopped.
    Something just doesn’t feel right. Like they’re saying “WE’RE AS GOOD AS CASABLANCA (and don’t you forget it)!!!”
    But still, if your black and white post-ww2 romantic thriller is gonna ape the style of any movie it may as well be Casablanca, right?
    I wish more movies were in black and white though.

  23. jeffmcm says:

    Does nobody else think there might be something ironic going on with this design? Soderbergh is too smart of a guy to blatantly invite comparisons with Casablanca unless he was intending to play with those expectations.

  24. JPK says:

    Am I an idiot or does it look like a young Anette O’Toole is staring at me?

  25. brack says:

    so is this a prequel to Pleasantville?

  26. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Ooh, Tobey’s character returns to the 1950s to attend his sister’s wedding, but he accidentally goes back a decade too far and gets involved in spy intrigue and George Clooney’s dreamy eyes.

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