MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

BYOB Thursday 3-12=-09

Sunshine Cleaning cleans up… my house.

Be Sociable, Share!

32 Responses to “BYOB Thursday 3-12=-09”

  1. lazarus says:

    So you have to provide the dead body yourself?
    Sad to see the economy affecting promo swag as well.

  2. Wrecktum says:

    Publicity depts are still sending out garbage like this? I can’t even expense lunches anymore and won’t get an increase this year, yet marketing depts continue to throw good money after bad. Gaa.

  3. Martin S says:

    Quick Vent…
    I love going to AICN and seeing a write-up for shit that we’ve been batting about for months on this blog. This reads like someone’s son.
    The funny thing is that he’s wrong about the Fox remakes. They don’t have to enter production, just stay in development and the rights are retained. They’re doing it with the X-Men and Silver Surfer now.
    As for the Avengers stuff, we’ve chewed on that for over a year. I said eons ago that everything Fav’s was doing was about overseeing the entire Avenger’s property. As for the money issue, really? You mean they don’t have a billion in production funds to cover four movies? Please…
    And Hayter’s write-up is classic…
    I give him credit for being straight-up and admitting that Watchmen is going to crimp a lot of projects. I now might actually buy another ticket this weekend.

  4. lazarus says:

    Is there a magic number for this weekend, or is it still about the final tally? Will he write another letter a week from now? “Listen guys, third time’s the charm. Trust me.”

  5. Noah says:

    I think my favorite thing about Hayter’s letter is that he says in it that he’s seen it two whole times. Really? You’re trying to sell my on how complex the movie is and how it needs to be seen multiple times and yet you actually worked on the film and only saw it twice? He only saw a rough cut the first time, so he’s seen the finished film a grand total of one time, a movie he’s been “working on since 2000.” So all that time spent working on this movie and he sees the finished film one whole time and then decides, “you know what, I should write a letter telling other people to see this film more times than I have!”

  6. Lota says:

    Even though it isn’t high end swag it’s a bit in poor taste on the studio’s part, with people losing their jobs right and left.
    Sending out a movie poster or a set of cardboard coasters might be more in tune with the second great Depression.

  7. Martin S says:

    Noah – that’s a hell of a point. That makes it seem like he’s actually saying “I can’t stand being around the damn thing for one more day”.
    Lazarus – I think the average drop is about 55-60%. If it stays in that range, then it can be argued as typical. If it’s around 70, then you’re in Ang Hulk territory, the de facto litmus for “bust”. Hayter’s hoping for it to be around 50, then he can make his fanboy-loyalty argument for whatever pitch he’s worried about going up in smoke.

  8. mutinyco says:

    Don’t you think he pretty much knows what’s in the movie? Because, like, he wrote it…
    The point of his letter was to encourage people to go see it on its second weekend because the movie’s success will be judged on it. And if this movie is seen as a failure, then studios will think twice about making similar movies in the future.
    That said, he’s a syphilitic penis for having such grandiose dreams that this movie could be Kubrick’s equal.

  9. mutinyco says:

    Changing the subject. I’m posting this to torture you all. Because I’m evil.

  10. scooterzz says:

    did anyone else notice radioman’s appearance on 30 rock tonight….. and that’s why we love show-biz!

  11. Noah says:

    Yes, exactly, Mutiny, he wrote the film and worked on it for 9 years, which makes him exactly the wrong person to be able to tell whether or not somebody could digest all the material in the film in one setting. Could he not get it all the first time? Because, if he couldn’t, having worked on it for 9 years, then that’s kind of sad. Otherwise, he’s not seeing the film with the eyes of someone who doesn’t have an attachment to the film, therefore his opinion on whether or not someone can grasp everything the film has to offer in one sitting is not really a genuine opinion.
    And I just find it odd that someone who has poured his blood, sweat and tears into a film for nine years would see the finished film once and decide, “yeah, that’s enough for now.” Would you see that thing in theaters, with a real audience, at least once or twice?

  12. lazarus says:

    Re: 17 Again
    THAT’S where Burr Steers has been?
    As someone who really liked Igby Goes Down, this is rather sad news.

  13. Joe Leydon says:

    So what happens when Race to Witch Mountain earns more this weekend than Watchmen did last weekend?

  14. Noah says:

    Laz, I’m with you. After Igby, I figured Steers and Culkin would be poised for great things, but it seems as if they disappeared for the next seven years.

  15. jeffmcm says:

    What does Hayter have to do with Kubrick?
    I expect Race to Witch Mountain to do quite well this weekend, but I don’t expect it to do over $40m well.

  16. IHeartThatCurtis! says:

    Hippie Santa: if you want to go out on that limb. I will try to not laugh as you fall, and your life is saved by discounted 21 blu-rays.
    Mutiny: Kubrick had a problem with a few of his films. So you have no idea how he would respond to a comic book film that tried to achieve Kubrick-level greatness. I just wish the guy lived long enough to see all of this GENRE filmmaking. It would have been trippy to see him make a comic book film, and you know damn well he would have done one by now.
    Mr. S: do you have any clue as to why Marvel would want to cast a tiny shoulder 6’4″ guy to be Thor? If they want to go YOUNG, then they are being as stupid as the DC casting of Green Lantern. This is THOR. He’s a freaking GOD, and casting a skinny tall guy as a GOD. Seems might stupid to me.
    Noah: you are giving an artist crap for not wanting to stare at his art more than twice. Really? It’s this type of shit that bugs me about you. Some people only need once. Others need twice. A few more might need multiple viewings, but he wrote the film. He knows where it’s going, he knows every motivation of every character, and he knows how they go to the end. Do you really believe he has to see it more than twice to get it? If so; you are so outfield. The Outfield are like; “DAMN MAN! He’s like WANG CHUNG to us.”

  17. Noah says:

    Okay, but Curtis, if Hayter didn’t need to see the finished film more than once, then why would he think that others need to? And if he spent that long working on a film, I would think he’d like to see the finished product more than once, but that’s just me; I know if I wrote a movie that I’d worked on for so long, I’d be dying to see that film with an audience every single day.
    I don’t really believe that anyone has to see that movie more than once to get it, but clearly he thinks that people do and I don’t really understand why, since he didn’t care to see it more than once.

  18. IOIOIOI says:

    Noah: the way you put it in that post is a lot less harsh, then the earlier one. You convey your sentiment a lot clearer, but he’s the writer. He did see it twice, but believes the novel should be read more than once. Why not see the movie more than once?
    Heck. One of those times could have been with the audience. Not everyone loves to see their films with an audience. There are countless people who get smoke blown up their asses on a semi-hourly basis out there in the Southland, and they avoid seeing their films with an audience like the plague. So it’s the person, and you are one of those who would want to see your film with a lot of people. While I am not. Thus explaining why we disagree, but Solid Snake has another point.
    His point seems to be this; “There are other great graphic novels, and they deserve a chance to get made with some what of a budget. So please see this film again, prevent a 70 percent drop-off, and almost guarantee another genre-defying graphic novel has a chance to be turned into a movie.” Above all else, that seems to be his point. Which is a solid.
    Also, seeing a movie like this again, is not a bad thing. You might not glean anything more from it, but you might. That’s the good thing about film: there’s always something more in there to discover, and it’s not like a Watchmen film happens everyday. We should celebrate moments like these. Not condemn them and be a total dick about it *coughdavidpolandthisweekcough*

  19. Kambei says:

    Noah: Surely, potentially, he saw the finished/nearly finished film many times over as it was nearing the end of production. I got the impression he was talking about seeing it twice with a paying audience–who knows how many times he’s seen it.
    And the film was pretty great. Watchmen and Spidey 2, although completely different, are the only comic book movies that have truly captured the spirit of the comic, I believe. Haley was so excellent emoting from behind the mask, he need to give lessons to all other superhero-actors. I was blown away by the performance and it seems a shame that it is going to be overlooked by most people, because he makes it look so easy.

  20. Martin S says:

    IO – Re: Thor. I’ve thought the same thing, but then I remember it’s Branagh. As good as he can be, this is still the guy that thought putting DeNiro in a Frankenstein movie would work.
    If this dude gets the role, he’ll hit the weights ala Bale. But he’s not going to be Conan-size, which is what we’re thinking. If his reasoning for Hartnett is his Iago in O, then that’s a good sign to me, because that’s his best performance yet, IMO.
    Wasn’t there a re-write that moved a chunk of the story to Earth instead of keeping it all in Asgard. If not, the budget has to be huge. Like Cap, there’s no way it can be under 150Mil and not look cheap. Asgard doesn’t have the LOTR/Conan benefit of wild open areas. It’s Dino’s Flash Gordon envisioned by Ridley.

  21. Chucky in Jersey says:

    All that swag for “Sunshine Clearing” must mask the stench from the name-checking and Oscar-pimping in the adverts.
    Name-checking and Oscar-pimping does serve a purpose. In footy that would be 2 yellow cards, which equal a red card. In basketball that would be 2 technical fouls, which means you get thrown out of the game.

  22. Noah says:

    Kambei, he makes it pretty clear in the letter that the first time he saw it was a rough cut and the second time he saw it was at the premiere. So neither of those times was a paying audience. Either way, I just felt the letter would be more genuine if he said, “listen, see the movie again because we don’t want to be embarrassed by the drop-off and we don’t want to look foolish.” Instead, he sounds a little pompous saying, “you probably didn’t get it all the first time around.”

  23. christian says:

    “So what happens when Race to Witch Mountain earns more this weekend than Watchmen did last weekend?”
    We’ll have to assume that parents would prefer to take the little tykes to see The Rock over The Dong. But is that a fair comparison in any way Joe?

  24. My dog is named Igby….just saying.
    And here’s a serious issue with “The Avengers”…..the remaining heroes they have to roll out SUUUuuuuuuck. Thor SUCKS. Captain America is a great icon, but when you have Iron Man and Hulk (and even though he sucks) a God….what’s Cap gonna bring to the party? What….there’s danger so he’s going to throw a shield at you? In a movie?? That crap might fly in a comic but if he throws a frigging SHIELD in a movie, the LOL’s will fly faster.
    Plus…Ant Man? “Cap…throw your shield and this ant sized man will bite the bad guys ankles!!” Come on.
    “X-Men” work because of their plots and because they have a common enemy. “The Avengers” (who I LOVED as a child btw) are just kind of….there.
    I await the geek/Avengers backlash that points out several crappy villains (like Red Skull) no one gives a shit about.

  25. christian says:

    Geek alert! Red Skull a “crappy villain”? He’s cool, creepy and he has a RED FUCKING SKULL!

  26. leahnz says:

    what is that triangular piece of what looks like wood veneer shaped like a roof on the near side of the ‘sunshine cleaning’ cart?
    (hope ‘sunshine cleaning’ does alright so that christine jeffs keeps getting work)

  27. Lota says:

    since it is BYOB, I picked up and finally watched the pink panther cartoon collection DVD volumes (MGM). First time I have seen all of them as they were a little before my time, but saw a few old ones in Europe on satellite. Love the cinderella episode with the drunk witch and Pink P playing the fairy godmother.
    I wish Watchmen did better for one reason only–poor sales mean less work for artists. Coraline doing well is good news, however.

  28. leahnz says:

    the boy and i are psyched for ‘coraline’, t-minus 55 days and counting

  29. Lota says:

    I have been waiting for Coraline since Bill mechanic’s co got the rights. It is not for very young children, there is scaryness/dread re. mummy separation issues. I could tell in showings that kids over 8 loved it, kids under that age seemed upset–especially about the button eyes and losing Mummy. Some people brought toddlers which was Dumb, night terrors for sure. But then many assholes bring small children to stuff like Watchmen (I think that shouldn’t be allowed).
    Is Gaiman particularly popular in enzed? I’d figure Gaiman would be with the popularity of the often dour, sometimes fanciful Gothic Nick Cave (I’ve seem him & bad seeds four times).

  30. Blackcloud says:

    Leah, go see it in 3D. You must.

  31. leahnz says:

    done and done, blackcloud! (we’ve got a terrific 3D projection cinema here in the city, thankfully)
    my boy is all about the scariness and dread – i can’t IMAGINE where he gets that from – so no worries there, lota

  32. leahnz says:

    sorry, re: gaiman, i’m not aware of any particular popularity here, lota, but nick cave hails from across the ditch (he’s austraaaaain) so you never know (cave is a madman, that’s for sure)

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