BYOB Friday
And check out Google’s first search page… which is set up to search only what it searched when it debuted, 10 years ago.
April 19, 2024
BYOB
Triple Option on: BYO Oscar
Sideshow Bill on: BYO Oscar
Stella's Boy on: BYO Oscar
Pete B on: BYO Oscar
movieman on: BYO Oscar
movieman on: BYO Oscar
Stella's Boy on: BYO Oscar
Hcat on: BYO Oscar
brack on: BYO Oscar
iothereturned on: BYO Oscar
BYOB: 235 Years Of Relative independence
BYOB Weekend: Hop, An April Fool’s Gag?
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
Quite a few disapointments this weekend…is it really October? Hopefully “Ballast” and “Rachel Getting Married” will get extra attention due to the shower of sludge Hollywood is raining on the public this weekend. (the highest score of any of the 8 films expanding or opening wide or semi-wide on metacritic is 63 by “Nick and Norah” and “Appaloosa”)
At least people can see (again) that Simon Pegg is nothing without Edgar Wright and Nick Frost.
Making her mark, way back when…
http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=%22sarah+palin%22
It was mentioned a few days ago but I haven’t gotten around to bitch about it until now, but after Marvel came up with this amazing franchise strategy they seem to be willing to piss it all away by having Branagh helming Marvel’s Thor movie. Wouldn’t Thor be the most CG heavy of all the planned Marvel films? Has Branagh shown he can direct action or special effects in any way?
Sure Brian Blessed would make a great Odin but otherwise Branagh brings nothing to the table.
“Has Branagh shown he can direct action or special effects in any way? ”
Action, yes: Henry V
Effects? I like his FRANKENSTEIN, but I realize a lot of people don’t. Still I don’t think you can fault the effects in it.
I see that Ebert hates Blindness and it doesn’t seem to be too popular, critic-wise.
Oddly enough, Ebert’s review doesn’t really go into detail about what was bad except that it was “loud” and “unpleasant.” And then he turns around and gives three and a half stars to How to Lose Friends and Alienate people…talk about unpleasant.
Making her mark, way back when…
Pretty funny. What *do* we really know about Sarah Palin and why didn’t she seemingly exist 10 years ago?
And to save all you wingnuts some wasted time, yes, there were a ton of references for “Barack Obama.”
Cool… when I googled my own name, the first thing that came up was my review archive on Rotten Tomatoes. Granted, none of those links work anymore (all the newsgroup stuff is broken since this summer), but it was nice to not have to wade through body building stuff.
LYT: You are absolutely right, sir. Mind you, I’m still not ready to forgive you for Wicked Lake, but when you’re right, you’re right. And you’re right.
To be picky, the index is from 2001, not 1998. That’s 7, not 10, years ago.
It’s the last index they still have a record of. But you are correct, sir.
GO SEE RELIGULOUS AND GET OWNED.
MAHER IS YOUR GOD. BOW TO THE GREATEST MAN ON THE PLANET.
Then go see that fuck-ass looking Simon Pegg movie, even though it looks like shit, because MEGAN FOX HAS THE POWER TO CONTROL MEN’S BONERS.
MEGAN FOX = WHOLESALE FUCKING OWNAGE.
GET HARD, FUCK YEAH.
OJ Simpson guilty of all 13 counts.
Karma’s a bitch eh OJ?
This just made my month.
won’t there be appeals on this?…effectively keeping him out until he can flee to a golf course in dubai?
All this time, I thought Megan Fox was a girl who just happened to have been born looking like a plastic-surguried-up-Real-Doll-supermodel. Now, thanks to some tabloid magazine, I understand she once looked like a normal person and since has become a victim of plastic surgery insanity. So now I feel much better in looking down at her.
Joe, to quote Ed Wood: “My next one will be better.”
Two weeks in Texas and New Mexico having a blast, getting paid for it, and becoming SAG eligible as a result is worth a bit of unforgiveness.
I finally saw “Miracle at St. Anna” – a film so heavy-handed, one-dimensional and just poorly written that it makes the Vietnam War play at the end of “Rushmore” feel like “Come and See.” And even though the audience started at about a couple dozen, over half walked out. Even after all those walk-outs, there was applause from two very elderly people at the end – go fig.
Not sure if “She Hate Me” is the worst Spike Lee movie anymore.
I guess, if there’s anything nice to say about it, “Miracle at St. Anna” might be useful at film schools as it manages to be a repository for every single last war film cliche of the past fifty years, so that’s something.
So I guess Lex is looking forward to Jennifer’s Body?
http://www.reserveresult.com/2008/05/megan-fox-shoots-jennifers-body.html
LYT: Hard to argue with that. Getting paid is good. And to repeat: You’re spot-on about Branagh. Now, I wonder if he’ll cast himself as the doctor who transforms into Thor (who’ll presumably be played by someone else)?
Speaking of ownage, we recently brought Scott Mendelson on-board over at Film Threat and he’s been doing a bang-up job on the blogs. Make sure y’all check it out….
Just looked at Klady’s Friday estimates. Youch! Is it my imagination, or is everything across the board — yeah, even the cute doggie movie — performing below expectations? And at the bottom of the list: Can we say carnge?
As something like $40 million was spent on the “Nick and Norah’s” ad campaign, that’s definitely not what was hoped for.
But if anything, I’d say “Appaloosa” exceeded expectations – nice solid per screen there.
And even though I’ll readily admit that “Fireproof” and “An American Carol” are not meant for me as an audience member, it’s pretty damn cool to see them both in the top ten. It takes a lot of pluck, ingenuity and guts to get an indie on a whole bunch of screens and then market them to an audience that’ll then show up at the theater. When it succeeds, I just think it’s cool.
Er, of course, that should read: Can we say carnage?
Specifically: How to Lose Friends & Alienate People and Blindness and Flash of Genius?
I wonder if Flash of Genius and Blindness would’ve been better served with gradual roll-outs. Granted, that still wouldn’t have done anything for the quality, but it might’ve gotten a few dollars.
How to Lose… should’ve been a March-April release.
I saw Nick & Norah at a 10:00pm show that was pretty packed. I have a feeling WoM will be good. I can see it dong $50 million.
Miramax was going to handle “Blindness” like an arthouse pic — big cities first, suburbs second, mainstream venues last. Instead it opened like a mainstream movie and got blindsided.
Of course all the name-checking and Oscar-Whoring out there tells me most pics are a P.O.S.
Flash of Genius should have been a TV movie. There’s nothing compelling enough about it to induce people to pay.
“Of course all the name-checking and Oscar-Whoring out there tells me most pics are a P.O.S.”
This makes me just want to grab your lapels and shake, shake, shake. If you’re so deadset that most movies are garbage, STOP COMING TO A MOVIE BLOG! You are wasting your time.
“I see that Ebert hates Blindness and it doesn’t seem to be too popular, critic-wise.”
True enough, though I happen to be in the minority on this one (as are all the MCN critics, interestingly). I wasn’t crazy about the cut of the film that showed at Cannes, but gave it a second chance with the recut at TIFF; the latter is a much better film.
It’s an allegorical story with a pretty negative view of human nature, but I thought Meirelles did a solid job of translating a film about blindness to a visual medium, and there were some excellent performances in there.
It didn’t have the same impact on me that Children of Men had, it won’t be on my top ten at the end of the year, but the recut’s a decent film, though probably largely over the heads of the mainstream audience (in terms of capturing their interest, at least) and perhaps the tone is a bit more depressing than people are up for right now. Can we blame the success of the Chihuahua flick on the economy?
Do they cut to black for blind POV’s? Just kidding. Minority is fine, we trust you.
That’s why I traded a friend’s spare copy of the extended Sex and the City with her for a spare copy of Zizek! I had. I’m just mentioning this because she’s not only a huge fan of the show, she knows the guys had nudity riders and didn’t get naked in the theatrical cut. I have nothing to report though, haven’t watched it yet, but a Google search reveals no new nudity that I can find.
wow, gnarly vibes around the hot blog at the mo!
speaking of blind POVs, my fave blind POV movie (or partially blind, anyway) would have to be ‘blink’. sexy, sexy, sexy! stowe and quinn sizzle plus it’s spooky to boot, my cup of tea.
i can’t get casey affleck’s face out of my head after finally catching ‘gone baby gone’ on dvd. with a hectic schedule and trying to be a good single parent, i’ve been spread thin and haven’t been able to get to the cinema as much as i’d like (at least once a week keeps me sane so i’ve been going a bit batshit struggling to manage even that). much to my chagrin i missed ‘gone baby gone’ on the big screen, but having now seen it on the dinky screen, i think a good alternate inside-joke title would be ‘an ode to my brother’. ben’s handling of the story is solid and his portrayal of boston and its less than glamorous working class characters is both unflinching and loving, but it’s his spotlight on the magnificent casey that really stands out for me.
for a character that displays a limited range of emotion, casey portrays patrick with tremendous depth and empathy (i’d like to see it again to study the finer nuances of his performance), the movie belongs to him (and ryan to a lesser extent, who’s also outstanding. i wanted to throttle michelle – she was far too one dimensional and the bug up her butt was so deep it could have flown out her nose – but whatever, she didn’t ruin it for me). ultimately, though, it was the many lingering and lovingly framed shots of casey’s rather beautiful face – him talking, listening, thinking, reacting – that make the film unique; ben’s trust in and adoration of his brother is abundantly clear (and well-founded); it must be strange for ben to see a younger, more lithe and finely-featured version of himself through the lens, but by the looks of it he’s more than happy to let his bro do the talking.
You want hot? Rent Gerry.
Gone Baby Gone OWNS.
and speaking of great accents (other thread, i know), i’m not sure if casey’s boston brogue is accurate, but hell, it sure is great to listen to (if there was an emoticon for leering, i’d insert it here)
‘gerry’ is one weird-ass movie! (i’m pretty certain van sant is one weird-ass guy) i didn’t know anyone else had even seen ‘gerry’, nobody ever talks about it…
(and yes, i do like me some scruffy sun-blistered bleach-tipped casey…yum)
The Afflecks are very much from Boston.
Ever say things that surprise you? Like “I’m looking forward to the next film Ben Affleck directs”? It’s a strange and unpredictable world.
“michelle was far too one dimensional and the bug up her butt was so deep it could have flown out her nose…”
Yeah. If I hadn’t seen Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang, I’d have thought her a total dud. I found myself wondering if her character had more to do in the book.
Moral: never act opposite the director’s brother.
Saw Gone Baby Gone again this weekend streamed over the computer through Netflix’s new deal with Starz. I was also suprised at how strong Ben was behind the camera. It always seems whenever I write someone off completly (I wasn’t as impressed with his performance in Hollywoodland as others) they always come back to prove me wrong.
And was the role changed to fit Casey? Throughout the film people kept referring on how young or skinny he was and that fit with him in the role, but I was just wondering if that is how the charector was written in the book.
someone must have read the book…
(no wonder casey’s accent sounds so good, jeff!)
will ben’s next effort behind the camera be as assured without the benefit of casey as the lead (unless little bro does a two-for), and the comfort and familiarity of filming in his old stomping ground of boston? i hope so.
frankb, michelle was far more appealing in ‘kiss kiss’; i wish downey jr and kilmer would reprise their roles of harry and perry, i thought they were priceless together.
just to touch on heat’s comment re: netflix…. i have become addicted to the streaming netflix ‘play now’ feature… last night, watched ‘roadhouse’ w/ ida lupino and cornell wilde while doing work stuff on the other ‘puter…it was amazing… good resolution, good sound…no buffering….. i have no connect with netflix but i sure do endorse it to friends…..
t.holly’s mention of ‘gerry’ (and i see noah makes brief mention of it as well in his piece on leigh) got the gears in my head turning, thinking about van sant’s strangest film to date (and possibly one of the most unique films ever made): the almost complete lack of dialog yet esp-like communication between gerry/matt and gerry/casey, the endless walking, the palpable thirst/hunger and feeling of being hopelessly lost, the steady physical and mental breakdown, and of course the unexpected finish. i borrowed the movie from a friend to watch again and now i can’t stop thinking about gerry and gerry. to anyone who’s seen it, i want to ask:
.
.
.
.
——— SPOILERS ————–
.
.
.
.
.
.
what is your take re: the out-of-the-blue murder at the end. was it a mercy killing? gerry/casey says, ‘i’m leaving’ like he may be dying, so did gerry/matt simply put the weaker gerry out of his misery? or was it just a psychotic impulse brought on by extreme thirst/hunger, possibly because gerry perceived the other gerry to be holding him back?
or, were there two gerries? perhaps gerry was a split personality with two manifested identities, and the trek through the desert symbolised a reckoning with the strangulation at the end the act of the two personalities merging back into onto one in an ‘identity’-esque fashion, with the stronger gerry prevailing.
or, did one gerry lure the other gerry out there with the intention of killing him all along?
i think i’m partial to the split personality theory, but what is your take? i’d love to know. wow, what a surreal journey.
Yes I am also in hunt of Flash tutorials, since I would like to learn more concerning flash, thus if you have please post it at this place.