Hot Button – Taking A Knife To A Gun Fight With Fox
Goldstein uses the most petty journalist trick in the book, selective box office information. He writes;
May 18, 2024
The Hot Blog
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"]
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
I wonder what Goldstein’s problem with FOX is. He’s been gleefully ticking off every movie of their’s that comes in below 50% at Rotten Tomatoes.
Knocked Up and What Happens in Vegas. Two extraordinarily successful movies. Both movies received favorable reviews from Joe Leydon in Variety. Both of those reviews were mocked by Jeff Wells on his blog. Both movies were under-rated — and their b.o. prospects under-predicted — by David Poland here.
Coincidence? You decide.
(Now let me slip out of here real quick before David brings up how off I was regarding Saving Sarah Marshall… Meet Dave… Semi-Pro… 21… oh, wait, I was right about 21…)
Except re: quality.
Says the half-wit who wrote:
“I’ve been trying to figure out something intelligent and erudite to say about Ugetsu or Sansho the Bailiff, which I saw lately, but I honestly don’t know what I could add beyond “they’re very good”, and I need to get to Wall-E, Hancock, and The Dark Knight at some point, but for right now I’ll just deal with something easier and more fun, the latest piece of Eurotrash that I watched over the weekend.”
Sad. Truly sad. Pathetic, really. It’s always a bit dispiriting to see someone actually reveling in his own simple-mindedness. Perhaps one should grant such a lightweight a few points for honesty: If you’re incapable of fully appreciating genius, I guess it takes a certain amount of courage to admit that you’re simply not up to the challenge. On the other hand, it is ever so tedious to find yourself constantly hounded on line by a stalker who would need to attend remedial school to be capable of ripostes that might quality as sophomoric.
Fortunately, I can usually count on brainier types such as LexG and IO to provide more in the way of intellectual stimulation.
Remind me not to get on your bad side, Joe.
Joe, I don’t know what your problem is. While part of me wishes that we had the same cordial relationship that we used to, before you went irrationally apeshit one day a year ago, the more sensible part of me is grateful to get ample weekly evidence for who you really are: you have officially crossed the line from “lovable middle-aged grump” to “mean old man”.
And it’s especially unfortunate because, when you’re not exercising one of your colossal grudges, you’re an intelligent and interesting writer. But the ratio of one mood to the other appears to be dwindling.
So basically, please either argue with me rationally, or ignore me completely, but this constant vindictive name-calling ultimately does you more harm than it does to me.
“My name is Rumpelstiltskin, I’m a mean old man…”
Hold on, wait a minute. Uh-oh. Just got this note from Jeff’s mom, giving me hell because her little precious cried himself to sleep last night. Well, Mrs. McMahon, tell the little brat to stay away from me, and I won’t hurt his feelings anymore. What’s that? Yeah, he can get his ball out of my backyard.
You’re predictable, Joe. My mother’s last name isn’t McMahon, by the way, but if you want to hassle my grandmother that’s okay.
The point is: debate or ignore or retain your title as having the greatest disparity between physical age and mental age in these parts.
Hey, lady, your little brat is getting all mouthy again. Didn’t you ever warn him about staying out of the kitchen if he can’t stand the heat? What’s that? Ignore him? Because that’s what works for you whenever he has a tantrum? Well, OK. I guess mother knows best.
Joe, I am sorry you are hungry, but I do not wish to feed you.
If that were true — and we both know it’s not — you would never again address me, either on this blog or anywhere else. But your ego is such — you pathetic desire for attention is such — that you cannot resist. You cannot help yourself. I go for months without acknowledging your existence, and that makes your desire burn even more intensely. You continue to hurl comments my way, yearning for my response. And when I do respond, finally, in the harsh manner that you know I will, you whine and piss and moan and cast yourself as an aggrieved victim. I have become your fixation. I am what you desire.
Am I wrong? Prove it.
Joe, if I ignore your frequent provocations, falsehoods, and insults, the terrorists have won.
Let me elaborate: Joe, I refuse to back off from my attempts to have a rational, adult conversation with you, or to point out when you’re incorrect or misleading. Your burning rage, however, is completely within your own control.
Ladies and gentlemen, the prosecution rests.
No, _I_ get the last word. Jinx!
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant has just incriminated himself. Really, there is nothing more I need say to prove my case. Indeed, common decency dictates that I leave the wretch in peace. I move for a directed verdict of guilty. The prosecution rests.
Boring day in Texas, eh Joe?
Whenever you’re ready to behave rationally again, I’ll be waiting.
This is a result of their failing to fully create a franchise wheel. They set it up nicely in 99 to be Star Wars, X-Men, and Apes rotating each summer. But while Apes did major box office it failed to win over the public and Fox has had to scramble to fill that empty slot each third year.
The same thing has happened with Warners wheel. Potter, Batman, Superman revolving in a line up with at least 500 million WW. But Superman suffered the same fate as apes and next year the stories are going to be about Warners lack of an established tentpole.
Didn’t 20th have an anti-tentpole strategy 10 years ago? Films made on a strict budget and targeted to a particular audience. If one crossed over, so much the better.
20th that summer had Bulworth, X-Files, Dr. Dolittle, Something About Mary and Stella Got Her Groove Back. One major hit, lots of sizable hits, all but one film make substantial money.
The very next year Fox had Star Wars Episode 1 and with it the end of the anti-tentpole strategy.
Can it be a strategy if it’s only for one year? In 1996 Fox had Independence Day, in 1997 they tried Speed 2, and then to Star Wars.
Late to the game here…
I’ve been a vocal critic of Fox here, simply because they release more trash than any of the other majors by quite a wide margin. The fact they shrewdly release mostly moneymaking trash is correct though.
My only criticisms with the article are in your opinions of their director hires: have you seen the trailer for Pierre’s new film, Taken? It’s garbage. The film was already released overseas and was a failure.
John Singleton??? Have you seen any of his recent flicks? He’s like a C-list Antoine Fuqua…
You really think Kenan had anymore to do with Monster House than Zemeckis??
The majority of the directors you name (other than Cameron and Baz) have some nice credits to their name but either 1. haven’t done more than one good feature or 2. are on quite a losing streak…though that’s just the majority opinion when it comes to Anderson.
Anyway…nice article overall. As far as quality goes though, lets hope WSJ isn’t headed the way of the studio in terms of content…
How important are summer tent poles for Wall St? How much does perception play a role in all of this? If you’re not doing summer tent poles then what distinguishes you from being a mini major?
I mean I know there’s your facility and lot and distrib arm for studios but aren’t summer tent poles what kinda separates those houses that are only in the filmmaking “business” and the big boys that are broader in maintaining/developing the filmmaking “industry” (and all the multi revenue stream trappings therein)?
How important is it that a success like Horton in the spring is all but forgotten by late summer? I’m sure a studio can have a profitable year w/out a summer tent pole but aren’t they necessary at some point? Of course the studio game (model) has kinda seemed to change but isn’t a big issue the studio’s library? Packaging the tent poles would elevate run of the mill films studios throw out over the course of the year. Although the amount of smaller-mid sized projects seem to have decreased. In a crowded marketplace it seems like the studios would want to use their leverage any way possible. Constantly feeding the pipeline I would think would be made considerably more profitable if you have established tent poles clearing the way.
This just seems like a town where if you offer anyone a million dollars worth of gold vs a million dollars worth of silver, people are going repeatedly take the gold. Not based on any future inflation hedge but strictly believing that gold is “better.” It’s one thing to quietly build up a large portfolio under the radar but I don’t know if a studio w/summer tent pole won’t become the $1M silver company. And then, where does it go from there?
Last line should’ve read “without” a summer tent pole.
The problem is that this summer Fox has made 70 Cents worth of copper. Their tentpole this year was to be the Day the Earth Stood Still, I believe it was to be release in late June but got delayed. If that had pulled in $150 million this article wouldn’t have been written. It just goes to show the feast or famine mentality along with the short attention span of some outlets.
If the numbers were reversed and the summer numbers were all made in the first four months and Fox was releasing Jumper (80) 27 Dresses (76) and Horton (154)it would be seen as underpreforming but certainly not news.