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
AICN out of touch with the real world? What’s next, Dave, you gonna tell me the moon’s not made out of green cheese? Way to shatter my illusions!
*goes to grab popcorn*
I have a really hard time, these days, taking “Sad, really” as a genuine expression of emotion from anybody.
“It’s just a movie”, and “get a life”. Two phrases not uttered often enough, or loudly enough.
I think the most depressing news of the week is that “Fly Me to the Moon” is going to end up with a per-screen average comparable to Vicky Cristina.
Surprised to see that “Henry Poole” got dumped in a select cities release…
Speaking of Luke Wilson is it too soon to declare his career completely dead?
Check out his last five releases and their grosses:
Blonde Ambition (With Jessica Simoson)-$6,422
You Kill Me-$2.4 million
The Wendell Baker Story-$127,000
Vacancy-$19 million
Idiocracy-$444,000
Now Henry Poole is being dumped and his next flick is a rom-com with Gretchen Mol that’s being directed by some guy named “Mike Million” who’s never touched a feature length film in his career….yikes.
Luke Wilson is sorta the Zeppo Marx of the 2000s. Not funny enough to fit in with his brother. Not handsome or charming enough to be a leading man.
Perhaps he should marry Barbara Sinatra.
EthanG: I’m under the impression that Henry Poole will widen come the 29th, although I suspect that it won’t be as strongly carried by feel-good word-of-mouth as Overture hopes it might.
Besides, this week through the 29th remains steadily crowded between mainstream openings and indie expansions. Unless it really hits its stride, who’d want to keep sparing it a screen?
(And on top of all that, it’s just not a very good film.)
I thought Wilson was just perfect in BOTTLE ROCKET and IDIOCRACY — now that is some cult film.
I think that Luke Wilson’s best roles have been co-written by his brother – Bottle Rocket, Rushmore and Royal Tenenbaums. He’s got a bit of a different presence that isn’t utilized in the best ways (if that makes sense).
I did like him in My Dog Skip though. Also his cameo in 3:10 to Yuma was pretty good too.
Hopefully he gets a rebound eventually.
As someone who unabashedly reads and defends Moriarity on other boards, I have to say I’ve never been more disappointed in him.
His writing is so reasoned- even if he seems to go off the handle with David here- on AICN. I truly like his criticisms and often match his feelings when I come out of a theater.
That said, he just came off like a talkbacker, even as he was taking digs at them on the issue. Who cares if Lucas is a bully? It’s his intellectual property and he invited the press to view the new flick with limitations.
I love Star Wars. Make that LOVE Star Wars. The worst thing about loving the movies (not interested in EU at all) is the fanbase. They’re detached from reality in a way that’s disturbing. What other director is held to some standard with his franchise the way he is. He owes us nothing. He entertained us with the stories he wanted to tell and sell to us.
What we do with the fandom afterward is our fault. OUR FAULT, NOT LUCAS. You keep coming back for it and getting emotionally wrapped up in it, it’s YOUR fault. I’m not interested in the Clone Wars flick because it’s dramatically irrelevant. It’s filler. Getting worked up over filler is, well, insane.
One other thing that disappointed me about Drew’s rant… it’s inconsistent with his written reviews of the last two Star Wars flicks. He offered effusive praise of the last two prequels, with the words “Thank you, George. Thank you, George. Thank you, George,” capping off one of his Sith reviews.
Now, it’s, “I don’t even own them on DVD” or whatever.
There’s this really weird thing he and many geeks have done over the years to praise those flicks (like Harry) and then over the years write swipes at them like they never liked them at all.
When those guys are using the words, “masterpiece” as a reaction and now try to assimilate with the year’s after geek hatred, it takes away genuine value from their words in anything they do. Be consistent.
Otherwise, it comes off like a guy who’s stumbling onto pictures with the old girlfriend and telling friends, “Who needs that bitch?!” You do and quit acting like you don’t care, big guy.
udterp, the fanboys who do that — and your description of the weird self-revisionist stuff is dead on — are really just following the lead of a lot of media folks. I remember in one of his “Ask a Critic” columns, someone asked Owen Gleiberman what review of his generated the strongest reader reaction or most hate mail or whatever. He said one of them was his “pan” of Episode I, with the smug aside that he wonders how many of those vehement fans even still like that movie.
What’s hilarious about that is if you go and look it up, Gleiberman didn’t pan Episode I at all; he gave it a B-minus, and while I realize most critics don’t care much for an absolute rating system and may not even be the ones choosing those ratings, the grade is an accurate reflection; the review is pretty clearly mixed with some positive aspects. In fact, he could’ve made an even stronger point about ridiculous fans if he had admitted his review wasn’t a pan, but got mail as if it was.
But even if it had been an evisceration of the movie, he was essentially endorsing the weird second-thinking that so many fans and media people do — one where only a negative reaction is truly measured and thought through. It’s this kind of thinking that can lead people to say “no one” liked the prequels, which is patently ridiculous. Surely, many people did not like them. Just as surely, many people did. A fuckload of people saw those movies! Of course some people liked them and some didn’t. The urge to reduce everything to “movies everybody liked” and “movies nobody liked” (with 80% of movies tagged as the latter) is sad and, obviously, simple-minded.
Yup. The “no one liked” Phantom Menace crowd is a bizarre one. You can say there’s a dislike for a flick, but it made $420 million in the country $924 million worldwide. SOMEONE liked that flick and when a film does that, odds are a lot more people liked it than didn’t.
I thought Shrek 2 was terrible in comparison to the first, but a box office take like that starts to say it resonated more with other people than it did with me.
An opening weekend is one thing, a leggy run is another. Still, the culture has felt the need to conform and change their opinions to feel “in.”
Geeks have done this too much with Star Wars over the years. The foot-stomping is ridiculous. If you’re going to the film as a critic, be a critic. Go in with an open mind and review the flick. If you’re not going to review the film because of some personal vendetta, move aside because you are wasting a seat for a potential critic there who takes the profession seriously and has readers to address.
You’re not there for a free flick and to please your inner geek. Grow up and respect the job.
“Thank you, George. Thank you, George. Thank you, George,”
In all fairness I think Drew stated that after seeing the trailer for EPISODE ONE. We all got caught up inis the hype before the clusterfuck Jar Jar flick opened.
Here’s the thing with Drew, he’s an insider now and doesn’t want to shoot his career to shit if the studios get alienated, but I am dissapointed simply because AICN was the rebel boy, the one who told mainstream studios to ‘fuck off’ – the ones who warned us about crap fare like BATMAN AND ROBIN, the ones who touted TITANIC as a blockbuster before it opened (and when most mainstream media referred to it as WATERWORLD 2), the ones who gave us script reviews and advanced looks at flicks such as STARSHIP TROOPERS etc – they had their golden age, the rebels are now mainstream, but whats infuriating is they keep trying to act like they are still outside the fringe.
Moriarty has done some good writing, the one that comes to mind is his review of the unmade John Milius CONAN THE KING script, that was brilliant, among other pieces, and his stance on SUPERMAN RETURNS script (claiming it was talky and lacked action setpieces was ultimately *spot on*) – the man has done good in AICN, I certainly trust his reviews more than I trust Harry-I-loved-GODZILLA-INDIANA JONES 4-ARMAGEDDON-Knowles…
But his statement on the CLONE WARS fiasco was a load of bollocks – very sad to see AICN which used to thumb its nose at conventional Hollywood tactics – abide by such an embargo, especially for such a wretched kid’s flick.
As for EPISODE ONE, we all paid to see it, suckers spent 6 months on a sidewalk camping theatres to see it, it made 430 million or so but it doesnt make it a good film.
And 300 million plus doesnt make INDIANA JONES AND NUKE THE FRIDGE a better film either.
(although it is)
As far as the STAR WARS flicks perceptions work both ways, remember reports of Spielberg and especially Kevin Smith enthusiastically touting REVENGE OF THE SITH as the second coming – I’m sure Smith feels differently about the flick now.
Who can forget Richard Shickel’s about face concerning MINORITY REPORT, stating it was the best action flick since RAIDERS – gimme a fucking break.
Guys, not only did Moriarty like the last two prequel films a lot, he (along with many other amnesiac critics) gave a mostly positive review to The Phantom Menace when it came out, calling it a much more “complete” film than Return of the Jedi. By the time of Sith’s release, he was saying it was the only one that deserved to be mentioned alongside the originals. I pointed this out in the talkbacks but I was only told that people were blinded at the time of TPM’s release. I call bullshit.
As somewhat who’s seen Episode 1 many times, the glaring flaws don’t grate as much with repeat viewings, and his about-face on the film and the prequels themselves says more about his own issues than anything regarding quality. And udterp is right about Harry’s stance; similar to Moriarty in the way he writes about Star Wars, although there’s no way he’d say he didn’t own the DVDs.
Interjecting again – so much good stuff in this thread – re: Owen.
He was pretty solid and quite entertaining in ZOOLANDER. He needs to work more often with Stiller and Vaughn.
I’m sure he’ll bounce back. He’s got that roguish, Californian-surfer-dude charm.
For the record, I love all six Star Wars films equally. They all have their issues, their flaws, and their warts, but they are all quite special. I liked Phantom Menace, Attack Of The Clones, and Revenge Of The Sith when I saw them in theaters, and I still like them. Oh, and I liked Indiana Jones 4 too. It’s not as good as parts 1 and 3, but it’s more emotionally involving than part 2 which makes up for its genuine flaws. I rather liked Shrek 2 as well. I actually think that the first two Shrek films are some of the more adult romantic comedies to come out in this decade. You can keep the alleged Disney spoofery and pop-culture references, but the films work as romantic comedies (Shrek remains the only romantic comedy in history where the third-act misunderstanding actually makes perfect sense).
Point being, you don’t have to diss the popular stuff that you liked when it came out just because its popular. $20 says this time next year we’ll all be pretending that we only kinda liked The Dark Knight.
Spacesheik,
the “thanks you, George” line is from his Episode III review. Straight from it.
His Episode II preview was all about how his recently deceased friend would have loved the movie. Then, in the run-up to Episode III with the Jedi Council geek sessions, he acted like the series had petered out. Most of the guys he got together, outside of one or two, acted like they were too cool for the room, desperately trying to work in painfully unfunny jabs at Lucas etc.
His Episode II and III reviews just boil over with praise.
Does the guy who wrote of Attack of the Clones: “I could, but all this great stuff keeps crowding it out, and I feel like the Grinch, like my little black heart is just so full of rediscovered STAR WARS love that it
Sometimes you can feel the enthusiasm in a theater – the anticipated excitement, the clapping, the camarederie among the audience – just *die* before the end credits.
Saw EPISODE ONE at the Uptown in DC on opening day – largest and best DC theater , with fans, they were going crazy at the opening titles, by the end of the film, no one, absolutely no one clapped – you could sense the dissapointment, the denial.
I see similar reactions to many flicks which begin with hearty goodwill that dissipates pretty fucking quickly with each frame – WAR OF THE WORLDS and the recent INDY 4 come to mind.
We might all feel differently about flicks and I agree with Mendelson, next year we will probably find faults with the GODFATHER of all comic book flicks: TDK. But you cant erase initial audience reactions from the mind either, especially to bad flicks.
Well, I saw The Phantom Menace with a bunch of coworkers firs showing, opening day (at the now-defunct Cheri Theatre in Boston, if anyone wants to verify or deny this), ages between 21-30. We all liked or loved it, and the audience applauded enthusiastically afterwards.
But maybe the people in DC were just keeping it real.
D.C. guy born and raised here, shiek. Love the Uptown, the AFI Silver and the Senator up in Baltimore where i now make my living.
I felt what you felt with Indy, but really liked it nonetheless. But, I know what you mean. Spider-Man 3 at the nation’s busiest theater, Muvico 24 in Hanover, MD at midnight is the best example.
When I saw the first one, the energy was from start to finish with that flick in the audience. Halfway through 3, you could feel everyone lost. I hate geeks who impose their own reactions on audience members, but people were laughing at delivery and openly mocking deaths of characters by the end of it. It was beyond bizarre.
The biggest problem with geek properties are people making them their own, investing more than the $20-30 bucks of a ticket and concessions. Just digest the movie, be a fan and spread the good or bad word. Don’t let it dictate your life or professional choices, like Drew did.
These comments read kind of odd. Some people are calling it amateurish bullshit, others are railing on Drew for lacking that rebel spirit that AICN once had.
The thing is, that article is exactly the kind of fuck you AICN used to run. Personally, i loved it. Whether he liked the last prequel films or not doesn’t invalidate his opinion of embargo stuff, in my opinion.
Personally, i think what causes this kind of conflict is that ever moving line i’m always going on and on about. The line doesn’t move, but people move it to best suit their stance on the issue. I agree that embargos are pretty much crap but if you agree to it, you agree to it. It’s fine to break an embargo as long as you use an anonymous name.
I don’t know why people don’t like this piece. I wish more film website personalities would be as honest as Drew was. To be fair, those who play by the rules are rank and file who fall in line and their opinions become lost in a sea of same day reviews.
You’d think this kind of shit would get old after awhile. People still knock Harry around, but they guy hasn’t been a relevant voice on the site in years. He has vanished and chimes in every so often with a review here and there, but the site is no longer his voice and his views. Drew kind of runs things now, and although i don’t agree with every opinion he has, he still is an interesting and entertaining writer and gets people talking.
Drew tiptoes across the line from time to time, but it’s those very pieces that usually end up being his best work. Banned From the Ranch is a great read, as are his Abrams Superman script review. Drew at his most honest is an incredibly entertaining writer. This piece reaks of honesty, and when he wants to he can stir it up with the best of them.
The response is over reaction of the highest caliber and i think that people are too prone to hit him from both sides.
You can’t fault the guy for the site not being like the irreverant old days and groin punch him for not maintaining some sort of professionalism that no one else abides by either
Both Minority Report and War of the Worlds are masterpieces.
I don’t think it wreaks of honesty at all. If anything, his stance on this is making him intellectually dishonest. When the movies came out, he was out there leading the charge with Harry about how great they were. Now that they get shoved around, or had the same rule applied to them as most (not all) critics, they cry foul and badmouth the same product they were calling masterpieces and saying they were going to watch over and over again.
Whether Drew wanted to or not, he crossed over into being a critic of sorts as he grew in esteem on the site. He was no longer just a fan waxing philosophic (when he does, it can be fantastic as you said), but someone getting set visits and critic screening passes. He’s part of the institution (both with the site and as a screenwriter), even if he’s rolling with the renegades.
Here, something was imposed that didn’t go the way he liked. So, he took his opportunity to be a critic through the screening pass he was afforded, and wasted it. That’s what he did. Next time he wants to get into a screening, you think the studios are going to want to play ball? You don’t think this changes the way a fellow critic looks at him?
People go there for film news and criticism. It’s not about the writer. It’s about the films.
^Minority Report – aye.
War of the Worlds – nay.
My favorite AICN years were when Harry was running everything and it was basically a couple days a week he’d have some super secret script review or very early test screening, all presented with Harry’s style. These days the site still has some personality, but the content feels more commercialized and really no different from other movie news sites. Honestly, these sorts of things likes with Clones are what AICN does best.
udterp,
well said, but i disagree.
i don’t think it’s all about the films. you can find opinion free information on a thousand different sites running the same dozen pieces from variety and hollywood reporter.
Personalities are the only difference from site to site. The subtle differences is what makes a site like AICN get traffic and is why every other film site kind of fell apart when they sold out to businesses and media companies and the personality got whitewashed away in a sea of pop up and banner ads.
Oh, I agree it’s a throwback. It’s just that they crossed the line of “never going back” a while ago. They became part of the established culture with critics over the years and lost the daredevil routine as they were corralled by studios.
To borrow a line from Dark Knight, they’ve changed things.
I read them every day and, like I said, enjoy them. By as a 30-year-old man, i look at these other guys in their 30s stomping around like Cartman after getting Ants in the Pants and think it’s kind of sad.
You can’t demand respect if you’re not going to accept the rules being dished out. If you want to attend a free critic screening and are given rules, even late, follow them. Who cares if it’s personal? Just review the terrible looking cartoon filler already!
But Udter, part of the appeal is AICN is that they take all that crap seriously. If they went all snarky on Clones, I’d be less inclined to visit the site. The web is littered with snarky movie blogs, but you just know that AICN is going to hold an animated Star Wars movie to a high standard.
What for all this hatred- is because career of self not suffices? Think I, that this clone war comedy for childs entertainment and valuble.
Drew has great idea that they use to speak and let us know. Great shame on your house for saying different about.
You need to dislight fuse on tampon, for the period you have emmense! Try to kind with words- stab NOT.
Mutinyco: “Both Minority Report and War of the Worlds are masterpieces.”
Yes.
MR and WOTW are both very good films with substantial flaws (mostly in the conclusions).
That was a response to Blackcloud.
Moriarty comes off as a sanctimonious dumb, particularly when he’s like, “OH RAPED MY CHILDHOOD IS UGLY”
To be honest, “[so-and-so] raped my childhood” is a hideous saying and I wish people wouldn’t say it. I’m sure anyone who has been raped wouldn’t enjoy having that experience equated to George Lucas making a bad movie.
Or maybe that’s just me.
Also, LexG’s latest stunt it already tired.
War of the Worlds and Minority Reports are masterpieces? My name is Paul, and this explain his bollocks y’all :D! I like Report, but World is a negative piece of garbage with more Deus Ex Machina than Seven. That aside; I could give a crap about what AICN thinks about any Star Wars even this filler flick I have no interest in seeing.
Seriously; these fucking guys have been flogging this proverbial horse for close to 10 years, and I have had enough. I have had enough of their bullshit quips, their lame attacks, and their constant BITCHING about this or that referring to Lucas. If all of AICN — especially that Merrick fucker — can figuratively shut the hell up about Star Wars. My reading experience at that site will be better for it.
Nevertheless Mendelson; I will take your 20 bucks and spend it on PIZZA! If anyone talks smack about TDK in a year. They will be called out on it like they are now.
You do not get or like the film… Mendelson. So only someone like you would make such a preposterous statement. Hell, only this blog seems to be full of denizens that lack the ability to embrace this film. So it really does not surprise me that you would make such a leap.
All this Minority Report love is freaking me out. Beyond the fact that I don’t like the movie… Wouldn’t you rather live in a place where there is no crime but .01 percent of the population is wrongly convicted rather than a place where .01 percent of the population is wrongly convicted AND there is crime AND 30 percent of the crimes are unsolved? And don’t get me started on the old lady.
For other site i participates, say checking certain “IP home address” phenomenon, and for this to say that I- Daina is LexG, not correct. I Invite to verify with “IP home address” system- for you use.
Also, when I do think that LexG is God mongst mortal, I also do fear i lack understand of terms he apply. Example for: When he say that “Dane Cook Owns”, I not know- but I ask- what he own? LexG never finish complete the sentence of structure. I bad at ESL, but LexG not even complete a sentences! Does he apply that Dane Cook own multimillion dollar career of comedies? Or does he apply that Dane Cook own certain “bone”? I know not. Please advise.
Minoroty report has a star in it I not likes, the Tom Cruz- satanist! He does not know that torture of children by denial of medical complete and totally childs neglect? Will not his daughter raise to be just as freaky as the likes of someone who loves the lady business sex like Ellen Degenerous? I fear for life of Tom small child. Do not his religion of Science scare the urine tract of all you as wells?
But I admit to I must- that the movie rocked out with a cock out.
Thank you for every word you reads.
-Daina
People need to stop throwing the word “masterpiece” around for starters. Just throwing that out there.
udterp – “i look at these other guys in their 30s stomping around…”
That’s exactly the point I believe Lucas is trying to make. I never paid attention to Drew’s standoff with Lucasfilm, but after reading that piece what really sank in is was “this guy is almost forty and has two kids”. They are not the demo, not by a long shot. While I still find the forced embargo a screwjob, I can see the Lucasfilm dislike. The decisions made as far back as the re-releases showcased that he was aiming at twenty and younger.
IMO, AICN is in a tough place. The site demo has unquestionably skewed older since social networks took over. Why they never jumped years ago into independent production, I cannot fathom. They’ve had the access, and at one point the name recognition, to turn it into a brand. AICN could have easily been the new AIP with Harry as Arkoff. But they’ve had a studio-as-legitmacy obsession for a long time. It would be easy to pin that on Drew since he’s been the most apparent, but it has to have resided with Harry from just as early. They could still do it, but they better not be waiting for someone else to pick up the tab.
martin, no question about it. What’s interesting is, the Gen X’ers who have massive disdain for the selfishness of the Baby Boomers politically, are exhibiting it in film and the pop culture they were on in the 70s and 80s.
It all comes back to “me.” Our generation is having a hard time coming to grips with the reality that Lucas is moving on. It’s no longer us he wants to please. He’s got a whole new generation to entertain and line his pockets.
No matter how good we think we are, there’s always someone better waiting to take our girlfriend. Always keep the ego in check.
This whole “Oh yeah, well I’m going to talk about you in public either” is bull. Who cares? Either do your job or someone else will imitate you on another site and talk about it.
We’d rather the real McCoy do it, though, because when Drew gets down to business, he transcends that site.
I used to like Moriarty, but that article made me cringe. Taking his ball home over a silly little cartoon filler, i mean come on. As far as i can tell, Star Wars is one of the great fictional properties in the culture, akin to Sherlock Holmes, James Bond, Mickey Mouse, and Winnie the Pooh. And like those other properties, there are many ways to carry on the banner of the brand name in other media, even though there hasn’t been an entry in the ‘proper’ canon for years. And not all those ways are going to appeal to the same demographic (for instance, i couldn’t care less about this Clone Wars movie, but am excited about The Force Unleashed on console next month). Do you see the audience for Die Another Day rushing out to buy that Sebastian Faulks novel? Do devotees of the writing of A.A. Milne get worked up because of The Piglet Movie?
I think you missed the point of my comments, IOIOIOI (by the way, just curious, where does that user name come from?). I rather liked The Dark Knight as did most of the people on this blog. But, mark my words, within a few months or maybe a year, the arbitrators of cool will be nitpicking the film to death. Maybe it’ll be a slew of unexpected Oscar noms, maybe it’ll just be time to take down something huge. ‘Oh, people only pretended to like it cause Ledger died!’ or ‘People only liked The Joker stuff!’ or ‘It really wasn’t that good, it was just the hype!’.
Fair enough, but these statements will be made by people who absolutely raved about the film when it came out. And they really won’t remember that they were among the ones to make it oh-so-cool in the first place.
It’s something called “Blockbuster Backlash”. Sometimes months later, sometimes a year or so later, any huge movie will eventually start to lessen in the eyes of fans and critics, simply because no one wants to admit liking the popular, mainstream entertainment, no matter how good it was and is.
Be it Titanic (oh, it was just all those teen girls seeing it, says those who cried their eyes out on opening night and saw it three times it theaters), the first Shrek, Independence Day (which really is still terrific entertainment, and the 9 min on the directors cut do wonders for the overall dramatic arcs), or Batman (oh, the Nolan film are so much better than that Burton crap, says those who gave the originals 4 or 3.5 stars back in the day), the Harry Potter films (oh, the first two stunk, says those who justifiably raved about the first two), hugely popular films will inevitably fall out of favor, simply because people don’t want to admit to liking that which was popular and loved by all kinds of people, critics and audiences alike.
Even The Lord of the Rings have fallen victim to this (it’s only about the special effects, says countless audience members who balled like babies at Return Of The King), and I’d imagine that Pixar movies are next to suddenly become uncool.
This also seems to apply to well-loved smaller films, as the charge is always that a well liked, creative smaller film was merely a ‘gimmick’. I watched Memento the other night, and the film is incredibly moving not even talking about the storytelling structure. And The Usual Suspects pulled me in with great acting, fun dialogue, and an overwhelming sense of tragedy and doom. The ending was just gravy (as any good twist ending should be… gravy, not main course!).
Their loss, I still love watching Titanic, Independence Day, Lord of the Rings, Batman Returns, Sixth Sense, etc. And no matter what the taste arbitrators say, next year, I’ll still enjoy The Dark Knight (and, for the record, I’ll still hate Spider-Man 2).
I await with eager anticipation the day when the arbiters of taste declare the first two Spider-Man movies uncool. Then I can say I was in the vanguard, well ahead of the times.
Scott, perfect example of re-judging a movie retroactively is BATMAN (1989). At the time, it was a cultural phenom with universal praise and some buzz for a Nicholson best supporting nom.
Now that movie is terrible in the eyes of fanboys, Nicholson is too hammy and the movie is not dark enough. In ’89, it was viewed as too dark, as was its sequel.
I still love Batman (in its morbidly humorous way, it’s actually more violent and darker than The Dark Knight) and I still love Spider-Man (the first one, where Willem Dafoe brings up everyone else’s game and the action looks real because a lot of it is), but I yearn for the day that Spider-Man 2 suffers the same fate as the film that it ripped off: Superman II. Also containing one stunningly great for its time action sequence, that also was obscenely overrated in its day, and now is correctly put behind the original in the quality cannon (even the Donner version of II falls well short of Superman: The Movie).
There’s another cause of “Blockbuster Backlash.” When a film becomes a cultural event, it inevitably draws a ton of people who otherwise would have little to no interest. “Let’s go see what the big deal is about this Dark Knight thing.” Those folks are probably more likely to be underwhelmed.
Another funny trend… when a film becomes a surprise hit, all of the critics that panned it forget that they did, and they’ll often slam that filmmaker’s next movie comparing it unfavorably to the ‘new classic’ that they didn’t like in the first place (see Me Myself And Irene reviews for the best example of this). Also, in those cases, whenever an Entertainment Weekly critic pans a movie that goes on to become a smash, the video critic invariably likes it (Something About Mary, Rush Hour, etc).
“You need to dislight fuse on tampon, for the period you have emmense! Try to kind with words- stab NOT.”
No, I’m going to print that on a t-shirt. If it fit.
How does SPIDER-MAN 2 rip off SUPERMAN 2? Besides the number “2” in the title.
It has a very similar general plot and story structure. Belabored superhero gives up his powers (or gives up his mantle) to get the girl he loves. Then, almost immediately afterwards, a lurking menace resurfaces and causes public havoc and kidnaps or attempts to kidnap said object of affection, starting a massive superhero brawl which results in the hero being defeated. After a brief moment of regrouping, hero then tracks the villain for a final showdown.
It’s not identical (the girl learns the hero’s secret identity at different points in the story, for example), but I did get a major feeling of deja vu. Maybe ripped-off was too strong a term. As much as I dislike Spider-Man 2 for its idiot-plot issues (ie – every problem that Parker has could be solved if he applied logic and reason to them), it is a better film than Superman II, which hasn’t aged well at all (either version, in my opinion).
I liked Spider-Man 2.
There’s something to be said for sitting in a theater and watching a movie and really getting into the whole experience. It’s easy to get caught up in it and, maybe, enjoy the movie more than you would have had the overall experience been different.
I watched “The Phantom Menace” on opening day with a crowd that was seemed really into it. I was very excited to be seeing a new Star Wars film for the first time since I was 11 years old, and I let it suck me in.
And then when the DVD came out, I watched it again at home, and it just didn’t hold up. I don’t hate it, but I don’t have the same feeling watching it as I did the first time in that full theater in Fort Worth.
The movie was the same, but the circumstances surrounding my viewing of it had changed. So, if I talk about the movie now, do I say I loved it because I did very much enjoy the experience the first time I saw it, or do I say it was “okay”, which was my opinion the second time around?
It seems to me that a movie should hold up on second viewing (and a lot do). There are a bunch of movies I can watch over and over again and have essentially the same feeling I had the first time (there are some that are better after I’ve seen them because I anticipate a part that I loved). And there are others that I can really enjoy the first time through in the right circumstances and then find so-so or worse on second viewing.
And since that happens to me, I can imagine it happens to someone like Drew, too. And therefore, I am not willing to hold that against him. If I had written a review of Phantom Menace the day I first saw it, that review would’ve been a lot better than the one I would’ve written after watching the DVD a few months later.
This has been a great thread to read. Would love to see a more indepth look at the aging geek boomers and that the dawning realization that the end is nigh for them.
I read the Drew piece and although it comes across like foot stamping in the playpen, it is honest and unedited. It is Drew to a tee and I wonder why DP has such an issue with it. Drew is still the same guy he was at 20. Why the shock at this latest piece? He’s a rampant geek first. Fan critic second.
AICN as long as the stats are good will continue to stay as is. Wondering why they haven’t parlayed into indie production is a no-brainer. Their early championing of sure-fire indie cult hits like SIX STRING SAMURAI shows that they might have been a bright light before fading very fast. Claiming that they could have been an AIP shows no understanding of the market. They might have been the new AIP though which is all direct-to-video fare. I’m more surprised that they have stuck to their knitting and not deviated at all. Then again its the safer road. If you’d seen the Comedy Central pilot you know that AICN is doing what it does best. A movie site. Anything else attempted would be teetering on a cliffs edge. I have noticed that there’s been very little word from Harry about his producing work. And that the projects he has lent his name to have all gone into the black hole of never ending development.
By the way, some of us hated ‘hot’ flicks like USUAL SUSPECTS and MEMENTO from Day one. No backlash, just found them both showy poor films with no heart. Exercises in style, calling cards for future comic book blockbusters. The writing was on the wall with both of those directors.
SPIDER-MAN 2 is a comic book pop masterpiece.
And it’s plot comes from the 60’s comics, which had more depth than SUPERMAN in the day. Zod has no empathy or shading, unlike Doc Ock (and Molina nails his every onscreen moment), and in general, the two films only connect on the general “superhero coming to terms with his power” theme.
And SUPERMAN 2 is pretty terrific too.
Although The Usual Suspects and Memento are, for my money, the best film either director has yet made.
I agree about blockbuster backlash, but no one was ecstatic about the first two Harry Potters.
Everyone forgets that first X-Men picture for some reason. While putting a movie like Memento over the Prestige or even TDK is a strech for me, but it’s not like I dislike Memento. It’s good stuff.
JBDr – “Claiming that they could have been an AIP shows no understanding of the market. They might have been the new AIP though which is all direct-to-video fare.”
AICN at its peak had access to everything above and below line that an indie needed, plus a built-in audience, name recoginition and self-made publicity. Film Festival play followed by distribution would have been attainable, and from there, they should have been able to build a dvd acquisition company along the lines of Tartan. Why they didn’t go this path, I have no idea, but the fact that people even know Six-String Samurai bears out my point, and that goes for a lot of other indie films as well.
As for the TV show, yeah it was a badly executed, but the idea made sense. Find G4 and watch Attack of The Show, just once. Same core idea, different approach, better execution.
I had my rows with them, mainly Drew, so me defending AICN is very strange, but you’re just looking to kick a dog when its down.
Spider-Man 2 was my #3 of 2004. Absolutely brilliant. I had the reaction to that movie that many had to The Dark Knight. When I got it on DVD I watched it three times in one day.
Having said that, I don’t care much for Spider-Man – haven’t rewatched it since the cinema. I never liked Shrek or especially Shrek 2. Was never on side with The Usual Suspects and I think the original Batman is kinda boring. I never liked the first two Harry Potter films either, but think Prisoner from Azkaban is the series’ best and I’ve rewatched it on DVD many times. I rewatched Independence Day last year and didn’t like it as much as I did back when I was much younger. Aah, the days when I would spend hours weighing up which movie was my all time favourite: Independence Day or Mars Attacks! I still say Attack of the Clones is the best of the new Star Wars movies though. Always have. Always will.
However, Batman Returns, Titanic, The Lord of the Rings and The Sixth Sense are all still amazing films that deserve their place in history.
But Scott is right. There are plenty of movies that, if you search Rotten Tomatoes, got great critical reception yet now are seen as poor or vice versa. It’s just how critics work. I mean, lots of horror/genre titles from the ’70s and ’80s were reviewed very poorly, but now a lot of them are hailed as classics.
Boam – defend your “understanding of the market”. I really want to read what was and was never possible for AICN beyond some platitude. What you’ve listed already is pure conjecture.
KC: much dap for the Clones love. This makes two of us. That aside; I think this whole “YEAR LATER” thing has more to do with the person than the films.If you moved on from Spidey. You moved on from Spidey. ]
You also are describing a crush on Spidey II. While most people love TDK in ways that will stick with them for years to come. How this site is immune to the greatness of the film still eludes me.
Nevertheless; people move on from films. The films stay there. I know there are like a good 30 to 50 films that I could watch at anytime, and they would still move me as they did the first time. Why people can be down right fickle and dicky with film, is really one of those reasons the internet exist. So people like me can call people like that… dillholes :D!
Oh yeah; sorry for all the mistakes in the above post. If you want to try and figure out the missing words or letters above. You can turn it into a game, play it with friends, and pretend it’s something witty Nintendo came up with to sell on the Wii. NINTENDO: “Fuck you. That’s right, FUCK YOU. If you want to buy a Wii at a store. Good luck. If you want some overpriced CABLE from COMCAST. Sign up, and HERE YOU GO! That’s how we roll.”
I saw two Wiis in stock at the local Target last week. Two! Wiis! That took only what, 21 months?
Martin. Comparing AICN to Nicholson/Arkoff and AIP showed a complete misunderstanding of the distribution game, past and present. It would take more time than I care for to go into detail.
You ask why AICN didn’t go Tartan route.. gee maybe cos Harry didn’t want to go broke? And do you think Harry would ever spend one cent of his own on anything apart from collectibles? He’s not dumb. An AICN label funded by AICN would have seen Harry selling his poster collection after only one release. So then who would’ve fronted them the cash to start a label? Well why would you front AICN when you could back your own label and OWN it. You’d still get the hype from AICN by advertising (buying) them and you’d still own it all.
Apart from countless differences I’ll use the one you brought up as an example against my argument. SIX STRING SAMURAI was known to some of us before AICN even knew about it. AICN then harped on about the title giving it the privileged title of AICN’s first ever ‘overhyped title’. The results speak for themselves. AICN is actually not a ‘trusted’ brand by its own readers. It’s well liked and adored but that doesn’t exactly translate into trust. Because the site has always played the ‘fan’ card it has actually worked as deterrent towards anyone wanting to use them as a serious releasing entity. Others will exploit what they see is useful on AICN to them, initial awareness but they’d never use their brand to release product. Never the twain shall meet.
You simply state ‘festival play followed by distribution etc’ like candy from a baby right? If only….
JBD – you seem to be referring to a present-day sense of AICN when I’m talking about AICN of a decade ago. Yeah, they would be in a much tougher position today if they tried what I suggested, but to say they were never trusted is bullshit. The level of blowback they’ve received from their own base belies how trusted they were, something I don’t think industry people have ever understood. Like you said, “others” have used it to exploit what is useful to them, and that in turn diluted the site’s credibility, because the exploiters were apparent. So to claim they never had the trust, works against the idea of anyone wishing to exploit in the first place. You can’t exploit an untrusted brand.
As for Six-String, what you said disproves nothing. You knew about. Really? You mean someone industry-related knew about a film garnering buzz? Wow. And how the F does the distributor’s theatrical release decisions have any bearing on AICN? I’ve specifically mentioned an AICN DVD line, so what’s Six-String’s home video numbers? They were early and heavy on Blair Witch, why doesn’t that count? What about The Faculty, where they were directly involved.
I don’t know what is or is not true about Harry’s financials, so I can’t discuss them. But to assert “poster money” is meant more to demean than anything else. In regards to fronting AICN, yeah, it was more than possible. Numerous financial veins could have been tapped in ’98, especially VC money with the level of web recognition they had established. Maybe it passed you by, but there was this thing called the 90’s web-boom where crazy levels of seed money were floating about to established and unestablished web brands. Couple that with the concurrent rise of DVD’s in the pre-Amazon/Ebay era of dominance, and it was an easy sell. And development of an indie film could have been funded, based on certain conditions. AICN was out front and didn’t capitalize. Harry has admitted as such. So to assert otherwise is, a lack of what?
We could go round and round.
But for you to think AICN was pivotal in the success of Blair Witch means I can’t win this argument. That was a brillaint ‘grass roots’ campaign that was actually made to look like fans created it. Well they helped a long with other geeks but a massive smart marketing spend is what really turned a sundance buzz into a phenom. Not Harry raving about it. Oh come on. Just because Harry says he missed out doesn’t mean they would have been pushing shit up hill. Film Threat video anyone?
Next….
that is “wouldn’t have been pushing shit up hill”
“AICN is actually not a ‘trusted’ brand by its own readers.” Word. This goes all the way back to 2000 with that Corona nonsense, that people harped on about until 2003. This started the ball rolling in the whole trust issues with AICN, and they have persisted until right this very second.
The only person on that entire website that may be trusted by the AICN audience is Hercules, and the bust on him for loving Joss Whedon. People at least trust the guy. That’s something!
IO, what makes you think I only had a “crush” on Spider-Man 2? Especially after I called it brilliant and my #3 film of 2004 (after Birth and Dogville fyi). I still think it’s brilliant and have routintely called it the greatest superhero movie ever during all the Dark Knight talk. The love that you have for The Dark Knight isn’t some mysterious thing that nobody else has experienced before for any movie. Geez.
I “trust” Herc to have the worst taste from anybody at AICN, true.
Geez KC; you really miss the point again. It has nothing to do with me. It has to do with you, and what you stated being nothing more than a CRUSH. Seriously; stop thinking it’s about me, when it’s about you, and we will be alright.
Christian: He has moments, but he’s still the only person that has any credibility on that website.
IOI, you’re still suggesting that when somebody agrees with you on a movie, they’re having the natural and appropriate reaction to that movie, but when somebody disagrees with you, “it has to do with you” and that person is having an inappropriate reaction of some kind.