MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by Klady… Simpsonize


Be Sociable, Share!

16 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Klady… Simpsonize”

  1. Eric says:

    Moliere really pumps my nads.

  2. mutinyco says:


  3. martin says:

    What they need to do is a Seinfeld movie, that I’d pay to see.

  4. Dave Vernon says:

    Hey, I’d pay to see a Seinfeld movie too, come to think of it. Much more interested in that than a Sex in the City movie. But then again, I’m still waiting for the film version of Hazel.

  5. bmcintire says:

    I finally caught the trailer for ARCTIC TALE last night and I think I can safely say that thing completely burned up any goodwill MARCH OF THE PENGUINS had built up for it. Queen Latifah’s cultivated homegirl narration? Walrus boob/tusk and fart jokes? What the hell were they thinking? I had once actually entertained the thought of going to see this by the (albeit shaky) merit of the poster, but no longer. This thing screams “Stay away!” louder than the trailer for WHO’S YOUR CADDY?

  6. doug r says:

    What they need to do is a Seinfeld movie, that I’d pay to see.
    Saw a trailer for Bee Movie before the Simpsons Movie.
    Spider pig, spider pig.

  7. jeffmcm says:

    I’d rather see a Curb Your Enthusiasm movie where Larry David goes on an I Love Lucy-style road trip across America.

  8. doug r says:

    Dave, any chance for a Simpsons Movie spoiler discussion thread?

  9. David Poland says:

    oy… are there spoilers in The Simpsons?

  10. Wrecktum says:

    I suspect that if spoilers are mentioned in this thread that most people wouldn’t mind.

  11. doug r says:

    oy… are there spoilers in The Simpsons?
    Only in almost EVERY review. Seems like the point of a lot of reviews is to review major plot points. I’d start reading a review and about a paragraph in, Homer causes blah blah, the town blah blah…The movie’s only 88 minutes long, it’s kind of a sore point with me.
    Now that I’ve seen it, though, it would be nice to have a discussion thread of said plot points…

  12. anghus says:

    so you know, i hate to keep taking potshots at Finke, but i can’t get through reading an article about her without laughing.
    there’s her laughable box office predictions (i.e. the guy from sony that feeds her the tracking info)and barrel scraping pieces, but even her boring stuff contains lots of ‘what the F’ moments.
    Here’s todays
    “Some people don’t realize that Warner Bros owns DC Comics”
    I guess by some people she means ‘Brain Dead Coma Patients’ which probably aptly describes her readers.
    Maybe we should start a contest to see who can find the stupidest thing she said, and we can call it the Finke Awards

  13. Hallick says:

    I wish I could have added another 10 bucks to that total for “This Is England”. “Dead Man’s Shoes” was a real discovery for me, and the reviews for this one are even better.

  14. “I’d rather see a Curb Your Enthusiasm movie where Larry David goes on an I Love Lucy-style road trip across America.”
    If this ever gets made the Oscar race will be proven redundant. No way it could even possibly lose every single category, right?
    Glad to see the Simpsons numbers are very high. It will surely get to over $70mil for the weekend.
    Also, I’d say something about IKWKM or Who’s Your Caddy but it’d be like kicking someone when they’re down. That and I know almost zero about what this Who’s Your Caddy even is other than it’s got Big Boi in it and it’s sort of like Caddyshack?

  15. ployp says:

    I finally got to see Ratatouille on this side of the world!! I wish it were making more money than it is now. Such a great film… (I know, quality has nothing to do with box office)
    ps. did anyone go see Lindsay Lohan’s film? I’m really curious about how it is.

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