MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

The Trailer Says It All…

I’m sure some people will like Bobby.
For me, this trailer does actually capture the essence of this film. It’s got plenty of historical Kennedy footage, some rousing music, and so many celebrities that getting them all into 2 minutes required at least one composite shot to get the writer/director seen. Everytime the trailer seems to be going somewhere, it suddenly turns into a parade of celebrity faces.
You tell me.
ADDED, 1:15p – Just found this very special version of the trailer floating around the web…

Be Sociable, Share!

7 Responses to “The Trailer Says It All…”

  1. EDouglas says:

    Haven’t seen the movie yet, but I really like the trailer. Looks a lot like what I expected and hopefully, each of those actors has a strong moment in the movie and it’s just not consecutive cameos.

  2. jeffmcm says:

    Looks very Magnolia/Boogie Nights-esque.
    So it looks like no actor is playing Bobby himself, just archival footage? In classic Hollywood fashion, like how you don’t see the actor playing Jesus in Ben-Hur etc.?

  3. EDouglas says:

    Holy shit.. was that the fastest retooling of a trailer ever? (not that it would take long to replace the soundtrack)

  4. The Carpetmuncher says:

    Saw the movie in Toronto, not a great film, certainly not one that should be up for Oscar, but a good film. Very indepted to Nashville in it’s structure. But feels like something HBO would make for the first two-thirds. The ending, however, is incredibly moving, and worth the price of admission. Estevez really did nail it with the device he uses to tie together the third act. Very powerful stuff. He should be proud.
    Yes, there were stars everywhere, but I have to say that made it a lot of fun. Strong performaces from Sharon Stone and Lindsay Lohan, and nice intros to good young actors Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Nick Cannon.

  5. Brett B says:

    I didn’t even realize that it wasn’t the real music until about 45 seconds in.

  6. Goulet says:

    Real trailer bored me, but with the Love Boat music, it really pops!

  7. Josh Massey says:

    I actually liked the retooled one better.

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