MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Sundance 3 – Pre-Show

It’s too early to be up after a midnight movie, but The Polanski Doc, which started getting acquisitions interest at last night’s premiere, was a critics’ must-see from the day the program was announced, is required viewing. The room is as full as expected.
Last night at near-midnight, it was George A Romero’s Diary of the Dead, his most societally specific film, amongt his best, and ironically by my first viewing date, the much superior version of Cloverfield. What would you do as the world seems to be coming to an end? In 20 days of shooting.
More after the screening….
(via iPhone)

Be Sociable, Share!

4 Responses to “Sundance 3 – Pre-Show”

  1. jackfly11 says:

    I’m with you on Diary of the Dead. I thought it was at least 5 times the movie that Cloverfield is, but was disappointed to read comments to the contrary among the geek-AICN community. Both films are equally hobbled by some film-school level acting, but Romero’s film did a much better job of establishing geography, pace and the edge of a much broader and more horrific world situation. My biggest fear is that Cloverfield’s overwhelming mediocrity might turn people off sampling Diary of the Dead later in the spring. Would be a shame.

  2. jackfly11 says:

    OK…maybe that’s not my *biggest* fear. Really only a grave concern if I’m to be honest…

  3. The power went out in downtown Park City while we were attending a party. My buddy freaked out and said, “Dude, this is how Cloverfield started!!” and he bolted back to the condo. Classic.
    I saw an excellent, excellent film last night as well-FROZEN RIVER. This is exactly the kind of film that needs to be embraced by the press so it can have a life after Sundance. Female writer director…her first feature….all unknowns in the cast and it deals with the truly unrepresented Americans-the dirt poor. I encourage anyone here reading this to go see FROZEN RIVER!

  4. IOIOIOI says:

    Heat: I live for moments when you give dap to something that has been unrightfully panned. IN YER FACE, DEVIN! WOOO! WOO! [runs around for a minute, then hits head into a wall.]

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