MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Cannes-y

Interesting Cannes kick-off from Tony & The Man at the NY Times

Be Sociable, Share!

5 Responses to “Cannes-y”

  1. a1amoeba says:

    Kung Fu Panda opens Cannes.
    What more do we need to see before everyone agrees that Cannes has jumped the shark?

  2. The Pope says:

    a1amoeba,
    Kung Fu Panda did NOT open Cannes. It does not screen until tomorrow night. BLINDNESS opens the festival this evening. It is not within the control of the festival organizers as to who (pandas) or what (Jack Black) decides to promote their film down on the beach.

  3. David Poland says:

    The problem is, Pope, that the media, which drives the hype, seems to think that Kung Fu Panda is the first major event of the fest. No?

  4. Noah says:

    I guess it depends what you’re looking for. When Cannes rolls around every year, for me it’s a pleasure to read the reviews of the films I’ve been excited about; like Arnaud Desplechin’s A Christmas Tale or the new Dardennes Brothers films or the new Woody or the new Kaufman or the new Fernando Meirelles, Blindness (which apparently isn’t so hot, according to Variety).
    I think the majority of the coverage of this fest will focus on Spielberg, Lucas, pandas, Che and communism and film length, all that stuff that the majority of people want to see and read about. But like I said, I enjoy the coverage of Cannes simply to hear about the films that I’m excited about. Unfortunately, as David has pointed out, we don’t hear ENOUGH about the films that actually need the support.

  5. LexG says:

    When does “Changeling” *drop*? I assume Turan’s at Cannes, so can’t wait to read his inevitable 42-page fawning report in The Times, to be followed later in the year by his near-daily trumpeting of it… at least until “Gran Torino” comes out.
    Don’t get me wrong, HUGE Eastwood fan, but Turan’s impassioned fanaticism reads like Amy Adams just popped out of a cake at the Film Critics Association dinner.

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