MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Back to Sundance – Day 1

I’m very happy about the DGA deal and the WGA that is now 90% sure to follow. I’m not very happy about the coverage in many quarters, which seems to have been pulled directly out of the DGA Ego and AMPTP playbook. Does the New York Times really need to be throwing around negotiation figures intended to make WGA look greedy and irrational? Does Variety need to keep beating the drum for the meeting of “high-powered writers” who want to go back to work?
How about sticking to the deal points? No one has seriously broken down how this settlement matches and doesn’t match the WGA demands. No one has really looked at how it lays out compared to network payments.
Nikki Finke is in hiding and it’s still The Nikki Finke Strike.
Anyway…
The first press screening on Friday morning… the first sell-out. Stranded is the most recent look at the plane crash in the Andes that had soccer players going cannibal to survive. 33 years later, we’re all still talking about it.
Word on In Bruges, which opening the fest last night, was mixed to mixed positive… in other words, a typical Sundance opener. Imagine a year in which they program the best movie in the festival that no one’s seen as opening night. Ahhhhhhh…
The tundra is a little less frozen than the weatherpeople suggested. Still, it’s frickin’ cold.
The price-gouging continues. The Yarrow is up to $20 a day for parking. The City of Park City is $30 a day for their Main Street parking pass. The local lots with credit card timers for up to 3 hours are up to $16 for the three hours. The better restaurants were all sold out of reservations last night. And the one respite from fest hype, The Main Street Noodle Whatever, a pizza and pasta joint, was rented out by some marketing group. All that is left of sanity on Main Street is The Morning Ray, one of the true stalwarts of this annual event… always good, always amusingly obnoxious about the influx of big city idiots, always happy you went.
I watched my first car wreck of a movie from the fest on DVD last night. But my instinct is to just shut up. The thing ain’t going anywhere but your Blockbuster with a “starring TV personality X” on the box. Why pile on?
But in broad strokes, it was an oddly Cloverfield experience. Shaky-cam, self-indulgent, hot people headed for destruction. The cliche of shaky, self-indulgent, hot people trying to manipulate “the kids” even though they have NOTHING to say is a cliche for a reason.
The dance has begun and I am pretty happy… if for no other reason than that indulging in the love of movies for another 9 days is less an indulgence and more a natural pleasure without the real pain of an industry unsure of when it would emerge from the dark hanging over the experience like Death.

Be Sociable, Share!

3 Responses to “Back to Sundance – Day 1”

  1. Tofu says:

    Ah, so Diary of the Dead is @ The Dance.
    Although they’ll just market off Romero as always, from start to finish.

  2. Krazy Eyes says:

    Speaking of shaky-cam films . . . has anyone here seen [REC] yet? The buzz on this Spanish shaky-cam style zombie film is that it’s the most effective film of this genre since (or surpassing) Blair Witch.
    Also speaking of films in this genre I had the misfortune or renting WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE the other night. Tedious and irritating. The director made the mistake of letting the annoying cast ad lib for 60 minutes to disasterous results. I’ve never hated 4 main cast members as much in recent memory. When the weak payoff comes it’s far too little and far too late.

  3. luxofthedraw says:

    David, it was a rugby team that was stranded in the Andes. Just wanted to give you the heads up in case you said soccer again in front of any rugby players. Brings up an interesting and in many ways inappropriate question though, would the outcome have been similar if it was a soccer team instead?

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