Updated, 6:44p
I am headed to ComicCon for a screening tonight… so I won’t be here when the The Simpsons Movie review posts on the MCN front page later this afternoon. Here is a preview… click on the front page for the whole thing in the late afternoon…
As I write in much more detail at the top of the review, “My embargo was lifted and others, I was told, were being contacted to lift their embargoes. Obviously, this doesn
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 know two or three peeps who’ve seen this and the reaction has gone from bad to worse. Too bad. After nearly 20 years you’d think they’d be able to hit one out of the park. Or perhaps the creative juices drained from this franchise a decade ago?
that’s too bad Wrecktum since I enjoyed being Simpsonized the other day.
Maybe if they had charged peeps $5 to be Simpsonized they’d make more cash than the movie will.
the reviews so far have been all but positive. Granted this is the first wave.
What pissed me off about the HR and Variety reviews is they give away the surprise big star cameo. thanks jerks.
I’m going to see The Simpsons on Friday…just to see The Dark Night teaser.
Many movie theaters in LA have a midnight showing tomorrow night. But I also will be seeing it Friday night at the Arclight.
Didn’t know about the Dark Knight Teaser. sweet. My guess would be a AVP 2 trailer or… whatever junk fox has in the works.
60 million Thursday midnight to Sunday.
$60 million is possible, but when’s the last TV-to-film adaptation that actually lived up to expectations?
Also, it’s 2D and what is the current record holder for 2D? Is the opening record for 2D still The Lion King after all these years? Was that the only one to open over $40 million? Maybe also Pokemon?
My prediction is for about $40 million – nothing to sneeze at and it will probably double its budget.
Miami Heat’s review reads like a guy who has not seen a Simpsons episode in like 15 years. Seriously; that’s one of those bogus Miami Heat reviews, that he puts out there from time to time. Who wants to see a Simpsons movie with hardly any Simpsons in it? That criticism alone deflates any point Heat’s trying to make. Nevertheless, this will make a pretty penny, and we will get a sequel at some point. I just hope they do not have as many COOKS in the Kitchen next time. If you have read the EW piece, then you should get that hint. Three writers should be enough to write a freakin Simpsons movie.
>>>>Some think $50 million is possible
IOIO – The Simpsons has always been written like a sitcom… roundtable… not one writer or three or six.
Grand – I do feel strongly both ways. I can argue either. I have no f-ing idea. I don’t think the film will make $150 million domestic. But I do think it could open huge. Remember, opening has nothing to do with the movie itself. Also remember, lots of these blanket marketing events don’t work.
I run Box Office Hell because people like it. But I got out that game (publicly) a few years back.
Boo-urns! Boo-urns!!
Most of the reviews I’ve been reading down here are positive with a slight negative edge. In that it’s good, but could’ve been better. THe middle act is apparently not the greatest, but the first act is up there with classic Simpsons episodes.
Hopefully seeing it this weekend alongside my Melbourne Film Festival duties.
Yes Miami Heat; I do understand how a sitcom is written, but the strategy deployed on the Simpsons movie seems a bit drastic. Especially the way they went about writing this movie. This means that I can get the point of your review, but I still find your argument a bit odd. This is not the freakin Cletus the Slacked-Jawed Yokel film. It’s the Simpsons movie. They should be prominent.
Shrek 42 million open. Shrek 2 108 million open. I don’t think that 2D vs 3D is all that important with the Simpsons, with all the computer work, it’s like 2 1/2D.
I still say 60 million open.