April 26, 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
Not to be nit picky, but the X-Men series has always had solid character actors and ‘real thespians’ in major roles. Heck, the first two actors cast in X-Men were Ian McKellan and Patrick Stewart. Beyond that, you’ve had Bruce Davison, Brian Cox, and Kelsey Grammar in major roles. I’d say Danny Houston and Liev Schreiber fits right in.
This seems to comment on something I’ve ascertained from the “Wolverine” trailers; I am very much looking forward to the movie and am only going by the ubiquitous trailer I see before every single movie:
But why does it look like it takes place almost entirely either in some backwoods laboratory, or in some overcast, UNCINEMATIC Missouri back yard? Where is the SCOPE?
It’s a problem I had with the X-MEN movies too: Good actors, good effects, good stories, but the production design and locales made them look like they were shot in somebody’s Canton, Ohio lower-middle class neighborhood.
Shouldn’t Wolverine be in some visually stunning Fritz Langian otherworld befitting the size and scope of the production? Why is he in the back yards from GUMMO?
Lex: that’s where Wolvie fights. Go pick up any Wolvie comic for the last 20 years, and I guarantee you he fights in the backwoods in most of them. It’s rare that he’s not in those locales. It’s his thing. So you cannot fault a film that represents the source material of the character is is based on.
interesting subject, dp. this must be the first time in hot blog history that i have actually seen both movies in question in ‘trek’ and ‘wolverine’ (and not 8-22 months after everyone else), i feel giddy as a school girl wearing her first bra!
‘The questions are, can a more visually intense Star Trek film than we have ever seen become a breakout for the franchise
Leah, my boss was one of those people who saw a “mystery screening” of Star Trek. He was looking forward to it and he enjoyed it, however he said about 50 people got up and left as soon as they realised what it was.
With Star Trek, I think they’re swinging for the fences because the future of the franchise depends on it. With Wolverine, the possibility of an ‘origin’ franchise is limited; Wolverine is by far the most popular character. Even if the movie is a smash, is there any other X-men origin story that will get people into theaters?
It doesn’t matter as long as there are comic books and franchises to be milked. Hollywood is interested only in easy money.
Danny Huston in a movie = guaranteed support from David Poland. Look it up.
Don’t forget Oscar nominee Ellen Page and Oscar winner Halle Berry.
i honestly think they could do a Origins: Gambit movie and make some sweet sweet action. seems like they could keep the number down and it would do pretty well. Magneto is NOT a draw. I don’t think anyone on the team could hold a movie up on their own. Deadpool would also work, but he’s not an X-Man
Can you find a bigger Trekkie/Vulcan lover than J. Lesher?!
Hope his invite to George Takei to be his date to the premiere is accepted
Live long and prosper Prop 8
Mystery, that hadn’t occurred to me, but you’re totally right– who else could carry an Origins movie aside from Wolverine? None of the other core X-Men from the movies is really solo material.
Like Keoki, my first thought was Gambit, if it was done right. I don’t know how they’ve handled him in the new movie though so I don’t know if they’ve ruined that possibility. Nightcrawler could have been interesting but they covered him pretty well already in X2.
I don’t see any of the characters, other perhaps than Wolverine, as popular enough to justify the cost of a summer movie. If Fox could make somewhat smaller-scale movies, and release them, say, every other year in March, they might be able to sustain a series.
Wow. Leah the Kiwi, after angrily insulting everyone who questioned the boxoffice potential of Star Trek, is now questioning the boxoffice potential of Star Trek. The hell?
“Up” and “Star Trek” are both great, and are both going to be huge.
when people walk out of Wolverine i think they’ll be talking about Gambit and Deadpool… both of which are underused. I doubt they’ll be talking about Will I Am or whatever his name is. They are the only two really cool things in the movie.
Danny Huston in a movie = guaranteed support from David Poland. Look it up.
DP was decidedly mixed/negative on Children of Men. Sure he’s only in one scene but your theory is flawed. I tend to think Huston ends up in a lot of pretty great movies myself.
kam: ouch!
good grief, wrecktum: you can’t seriously be that thick!
‘after angrily insulting everyone who questioned the boxoffice potential of Star Trek’
i most certainly did not insult everyone who questioned the BO potential of trek. i took umbrage with YOU (and aris p). two people. deux. dos. ni. hardly ‘everyone’. and at the time, i think i made it quite clear that my problem with you was not that you were dubious about trek box office – everyone and their dog is wondering about trek box office including the makers of trek, but they are obviously hoping that making a good flick will do the trick – no, i said very clearly, and i’ll say it again now just so any misunderstanding is well and truly put to bed: my issue with you, wrecktum, was that you made disparaging remarks about ‘trek’, trashing it sight unseen, calling it a ‘mess’ with a very snide tone, as if you had seen it AND YOU HADN’T. and i called you on it. then you had a little rant where you actually ADMITTED you were hugely prejudiced about trek, that you would never, ever give it a chance because you were born and some other such nonsense and shatner wasn’t in it, blah blah blah. snooze (gee, i wonder if you’ll like it?)
and i must say, dp is claiming not to play his hand and not to be giving anything away re: his opinions of ‘trek’ and ‘wolv’, but i’m getting the clear impression that he is dismissive of ‘trek’ and is going to defend ‘wolverine’ (lord, maybe danny huston is the reason cuz other reasons to defend ‘wolverine’ are thin on the ground), if anyone wants to take that bet
To be fair, if Leanhz’s theory is accurate, one could argue that DP saw Star Trek following waves of unanimously positive reviews, while he saw Wolverine following a solid month of ‘shh-don’t tell, but it’s terrible’ buzz. For what it’s worth, I found The Spirit to be far less terrible than I was expecting, and I’m relatively confident that it was the deafening negative buzz that caused said surprise. Certainly a reaction of ‘well, it’s not that great’ and ‘well, it’s not that terrible’ isn’t unreasonable when you have the critical consensus shoved down your throat prior to viewing.
i think that’s a reasonable theory, scott. and for the record, i said above that ‘wolverine’ is ‘alright’, i didn’t think it was terrible, it was just…ok. most movies are just ‘ok’.
While Leah may be on to something, it’s a bit of an oversimplification, not unlike the Danny Huston thing. (I am surprised how many movies he has been in that I panned or didn’t like, actually… including not being a real supporter of ivansxtc, though I appreciated his performance in the film.)
My general take is that both films achieved their goals… which is what this piece is about. I think the question for almost every critic in this situation will be how that critic feels about those goals.
Star Trek is not a situation, like Iron Man, where I would argue that two strong elements of the film overwhelmed the failure of the rest and that this was enough for most audiences.
Wolverine is not a situation, like Hancock, where it seems to me that predetermined expectations were not met, leading to a degree of rage. In fact, I think most of the Wolverine slamming has been a direct result of geeks taking up the cause of Gavin Hood (though he really didn’t need their help).
These are, as I wrote in this piece, vastly different films with very different strengths and weaknesses. Will I probably end up being a bit more critical of one and less so of the other in comparison to “the majority of critical opinion?” Yeah… probably. But I don’t think that either needs to be dismissed or defended, as such.
Isn’t the next X-Men Origins movie going to be “First Class,” i.e. young Cyclops, Storm, Jean, etc.? Cheap way to continue things by recasting all the stars with younger unknowns?
Fox may have to keep making X-movies simply to keep the rights from reverting back to Marvel. That certainly seems to be their plan with Fantastic Four.
I wear your umbrage as a badge of honor leahnz.
I hope Star Trek makes tons of money. Assuming it does though — is the next one going to be with these younguns? I assume so. In that case, these kids better be good.
And David, to answer your question about GI Joe — Zero dollars and zero cents is the right budget.
If this latest “Star Trek” makes tons of money it’ll require a worldwide day-and-date release. That’s the only way these ultraexpensive pictures can turn a profit.
Star Trek arrives in theater here on May 7th, Chuck.
Seeing this talk about other X-Men Origins, I just read this article about other possible origins story.
http://www.movieretriever.com/blog/314/beyond-wolverine-ten-other-movie-origins-wed-like-to-see
My personal fav. is Mal from Serenity. I love that film. Morpheus should make an interesting film too.
i’m late to this party but wanted to wait ’til i’d seen both movies before joining leah’s brigade…. ‘star trek’ is really good and lives up to the advance hype…if it can stand up to the inevitable back-lash, there is no reason it can’t do an incredible job at the box-office…. i agree with leah’s earlier evaluation so no need to parrot it…i talked with bana today and even he was amazed at the standing o reception down under…my gut feeling is that: a)- it’s gonna be huge and b)- i should have had more food and less drink at dinner……….
oh, yeah…’wolverine’….didn’t hate it…that said, i got the distinct impression that taylor kitsch’s gambit was given just the right amount of spotlight to test the waters for a story of his own….jus’ sayin’…..
scoot, i’m not sure one person qualifies as a ‘brigade’, but if you’re in we may be on our way to forming an extremely tiny ‘unit’, or a microscopic ‘battalion’
(that taylor kitch is a fine looking lad)
‘My general take is that both films achieved their goals… which is what this piece is about. I think the question for almost every critic in this situation will be how that critic feels about those goals.’
dp, thinking about ‘wolverine’, i appreciate that you may not be able to elaborate much because of embargoes and such, but isn’t the ultimate goal of films like ‘trek’ and ‘wolverine’, sci-fi and fantasy action adventures, to be somehow convincing while managing to thrill/entertain/take you on a wild ride/knock your socks off?
i feel comfortable saying ‘wolverine’ fell short of this goal. i don’t see how you could argue that the movie isn’t poorly written (the plot is silly and there are all these surplus characters that serve no purpose to the story, it’s a rather bizarre hodgepodge with no clear narrative) and the execution is pedestrian; comparing it to singer’s original ‘x-men’, it lacks coherence and effective pacing and a sense of purpose and urgency, and perhaps most importantly and elusively, heart.
this is your rodeo and i respect your opinion, i guess i’m just curious to hear what you think ‘wolverine’s goal was, and how you think it achieved that goal. because unless the goal was to be average verging on silly, i don’t see it and i don’t think i’m a lonely camper on this one.
It’s goal may have been to be average bordering on silly. You never know with FOX. Nevertheless, the Singer X-Men film are some of the more dated films of this decade. Which leaves me hoping someone will make an X-Men related movie in the future, and have it not look so bluish and gray. Wolverine seemingly failing on that part because it’s still TOO BLUISH AND GRAY! Stop using Singer’s color palette FOX! Sorry for rambling, but the X-Men deserve better than BLUE AND GRAYS!
IO, out of curiosity, what would you have preferred?
I thought the costumes in the first X-Men were a little leather-heavy– it was released in the wake of The Matrix, of course– but that they were definitely better than spandex recreations of the comics. (Imagine Wolverine in that bright yellow and black jumpsuit– it would have been ridiculous.)
I’m singling out the costumes because they were definitely a part of the visual palette. So while they could have been better, I can’t think of how. Thoughts?
“That’s the only way these ultraexpensive pictures can turn a profit.”
Re: Star Trek,
Remember though that Star Trek will be making a profit in ancillary markets beyond the film itself. By greenlighting a new Trek, they keep the market open for everything like action figures, books, posters, lunch boxes video games etc. Hence, even if Trek “loses” money on its initial theatrical window, I am more than certain Paramount has a much bigger picture in mind when they greenlight a new Trek feature and do not wait too long to relaunch the franchise. If it only does “ok” overseas, I am sure they are not concerned.
Box sets can be repacked etc. and the concept of Trek does not grow old or die, even if it is a mediocre film. Star Trek may not live long and prosper, but a new film franchise (even an underperforming one) guarantees at least another decade of Trek lore and merchandise.
“Remember though that Star Trek will be making a profit in ancillary markets beyond the film itself. ”
Yep, and far beyond just this new film. I was never a big fan of the old Trek show, and I just fiound myself buying the first season of it Blu Ray the other day. I’m sure I’m not the only one.
Just remember, kiddies, all it takes is one expensive flop and all that money goes down the drain.
Yes Chucky; the multi-national conglomerates that listen to moronic Gen-Y marketing execs, are going to be crying a river. Sure they are. Sure they are.
Eric: The X-Men comic has always been one of the more VIBRANT and COLOURFUL comics around. You can ignore the suits in those comics, and you would still have a comic with very little grey or blue going on.
I still feel that the X-Men costume design and look came from The Matrix. Which explain the need for the blue and the grey, but it’s 2009. Should the X-Men still be caught with an early century colour palette?
If they make a Gambit or Deadpool flick, that’s as dull looking VISUALLY as Wolverine. It will be a sad day for all of our eyes.