April 24, 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
‘There is popular error (repeated enough to be bordering on a lie)
Didn’t say what you are saying. Very few movies get into profit from theatrical alone. Been that way for decades.
But the idea that the theatrical is a marketing platform for video is not simply true.
Yes, sometimes studios cut their losses when they don’t expect to win by cutting marketing and distribution to the bone. That’s a different issue altogether.
Yes, theatrical isn’t only a marketing platform for video, but the fact remains that people know films will be released on video in 4 months.
I agree that the article takes theatrical for granted, considering these movies couldn’t be profitable on DVD sales alone.
“people know films will be released on video in 4 months.”
yes. and it has messed up the windows, which studios have now realized is working against their bottom line. the answer to spending a fortune marketing DVD was to stop spending a fortune marketing DVD, not to shorten the window. the answer to healthy quarterlies was to be consistent and to plan better and not to shorten the window.
they have become aware of this only because the cash machine slowed down and now they have this overfed beast to put on a massive diet. but they have figured it out… for now.
I get snooty when the dependents seem to be slumming it as well but these examples are stretching it.
Miss March was a holdover from Fox Atomic and was not conceived as a Searchlight film.
And while the marketing for Adventureland might make it look like a teen romp it was produced by Ted Hope’s This and That productions which made 21 Grams, Eternal Sunshine, Dirty Shame, Devil and Daniel Webster and many others so it should be granted whatever indie cred Mr. Barnes is looking for.
Another angle not comment can be found if you start comparing population growth with box office returns.
Plus, this isn’t just slowing. The same forces that are decimating TV viewing are at play here, shrinking the market as people become “distracted” by other diversions.
Is TV viewing actually shrinking or just becoming increasinly fractured due to the vast number of channels? I know the internet has cut the younger demographic down but I didn’t think it was at a significant level (say over 10%)