MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Friday Estimates by Klady – D9 Flies

friest081509.png
Opening District 9 as a aliens-in-your-backyard action movie worked rather well and looks like it will be Sony’s #2 opening this year, behind only the sequel, Aliens & Demons. After a not so thrilling first quarter this year (The Pink Panther 2, The International, Fired Up, Not Easily Broken) that was salvaged by Paul Blart: Mall Cop, things have been better ar Sony, especially in marketing. Year One and The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 both had $20m range openings that didn’t seem to offer the hope of better starts, just stronger legs. Julie & Julia opened fine, but not quite as explosively as one might have hoped, given all the great publicity. And there were clear wins with a $28.6 start for Obsessed, a $27.6 start for The Ugly Truth, and now, an over-$30m launch for District 9.
Only Disney has had a run of films in which every opening wast $20 million ($19.6m to be precise) or better since March 1. And that will end for Disney this weekend with Ponyo, though that is an anomaly for them too. For others, it is wide-release movies with big intentions like Land of the Lost, Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, My Sister’s Keeper, Aliens in the Attic.
The evolution at Sony from Valerie Van Galder alone as marketing chief to she and Marc Weinstock as co-chiefs to next year’s transition to Val as hands-on, globe-hopping consultant with Marc taking the full responsibilities of the day-to-day in that job seems to have worked out as a legitimate success for the company and for the two of them. Congrats to them both and to Marc in particular, as he heads off to his honeymoon with his brainy and adorable bride on a note of success with the D9 launch, which indeed, was really his baby.
The Time Traveler’s Wife is another movie that New Line wasn’t so thrilled about that is having nice opening thanks to the holdover New Line marketing team working with/for the Sue Kroll’s WB marketing team. The film could match the Julia & Julia opening, which has to be a thrill for WB, as it was a little disappointing for Sony. What does it mean? There is a “chick flick” market that is loud and strong… and Rachael McAdams, as a brand from The Notebook, means something, even if she continues to fight the superstardom that seems to be her destiny.
The Goods is a dump, desperate enough in the end to put what is probably Will Ferrell’s entire cameo in ads, so squeezing out $5 million isn’t bad, considering. It could end up being the biggest opening weekend in the history of the now-deceased Par Vantage, though obviously, many of those openings could have been better, but were rolled out in limiteds or exclusives on opening weekend.
The Fri2Fri drop on GI Joe isn’t shocking… and not because the movie sucks (or doesn’t, if you feel that way). The real tale will be told over the rest of the weekend and into next week. The weekdays didn’t show a massive drop either, but the question will be whether the movie has shot its load or if it will start to be the movie to return to for kids.
At 31 days, HP6 is still the fastest Potter out of the gate. It will probably be the #2 Potter all-time domestically, though $300m is still pretty far away.
Spread did a shockingly bad $400 per screen. Really, Ashton could have just written himself a check. So much for Twitter-power. And the really odd part? The movie is good enough to have found a commercial audience. But Anchor Bay doesn’t have the money to push that movie out and they completely abandoned the real story of the film… Kutcher as American Gigolo, Jr. and the unpromoted, high-potential starlet Margarita Levieva (the object of lust in Adventureland who still makes a point of acting on stage) as the gigolette who does it better and harder than him. It’s a dark little movie with Anne Heche throwing her naked body around like nobody’s business. She hasn’t looked that good in years and is unlikely to again. It’s not a great movie… but it was a movie with some commercial potential… certainly more than 400 a screen on 101 screens.
And Bandslam, which I haven’t seen, did about the same # going wide… and from what people who have actually seen it… not so bad. Sounds kinda like a hipper, indier Josie & The Pussycats. Kind of a shock for Summit, which has shown it can do better. One wonders whether the movie was intentionally booted… even with this screen count. But as I say… critics seem to think it’s better than this.

Be Sociable, Share!

49 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Klady – D9 Flies”

  1. matro says:

    Goddamn, sucks to be Funny People and Bandslam.

  2. EthanG says:

    Excited for Rachel McAdams’s comeback even if the movie is blah. Bullock, McAdams, Rainbow Killer and the Streep/Adams duo all opened movies to 20 million+ at the box office this summer..you could argue as ACTORS, female leads have been bigger draws this summer than male leads…yeah I said it.
    Bandslam=biggest wide release bomb of the year??? I wonder how much Hudgens’s boobs and pubes pictures last week put a dent in the box office? Anyway this proves studios don’t need to waste time making quality films for tweens as the reviews clearly didn’t help period…
    District 9 might hit 37 or 38 million depending on word of mouth….and a passable result for Ponyp.

  3. christian says:

    Lex continues his cultural winning streak!

  4. FTY – Harry Potter 6 just took a $300,000 lead over Transformers 2 as the worldwide champ of 2009.

  5. Direwolf says:

    I saw D9 at my usual spot, Century Theaters in Evanston, IL. Also, at my usual time of Friday afternoon, 3:45 in this case. The theater was very crowded and I noticed an unusually high number of African-Americans. I see at least one movie at this theater every week and have never noticed many African-Americans despite the fact that Evanston has a high minority population.
    I know the film plays on South African Apartheid but I am wondering if the film was marketed at all to African-American audiences?
    FWIW, I liked the film very much but found it took me awhile to get into it. I liked it more from the point at which it became a buddy story.
    Plenty of sequel setup. I hope they don’t overproduce and overspend on the inevitable sequel.

  6. chris says:

    Aside from its not-badness, wasn’t “Bandslam” supposed to benefit from a “New Moon” trailer? Is it just wishful thinking that “Twilight” fever may have died down (other than at EW, where it’s on the cover twice a month)?
    Ferrell’s part is more than a cameo, actually. He has two good-sized scenes, both of which are all about his character.

  7. jennab says:

    District 9 was not top of mind for my kid…till no fewer than 5 friends texted and said it was “sick,” so now he’s @ the 2:30 show with three other friends…there may not be a “twitter effect,” but word of mouth does spread faster in the electronic age.

  8. EthanG says:

    Even if Bandslam is a dump…you need to at least generate $2,000 per theatre over the course of a film’s run just to cover the cost of prints….this movie will do that but still is going to lose money. Again Im wondering if Hudgens’s kiddie porn pictures from last week didn’t scare away parents.
    Speaking of aberrations from Disney…they’re going to have another one next weekend as they are dumping a documentary about the X-Games into 1,200 theatres for apparently no reason. Wtf???

  9. Wrecktum says:

    The X-Games documentary is 3D only. Disney has made a commitment to aggressively supply 3D content, and this is an example.
    Disney is far and away the distribution leader in digital 3D, no matter how Jeffrey Katzenberg has sold himself.

  10. Moviezzz says:

    Just a note, THE HURT LOCKER seemed to go its widest this weekend, at both of my area multiplexes. It doesn’t look like it made the list.
    I finally saw it. The hype is deserved. I loved the film.
    BUT, it was playing on the smallest screen in the theatre and, other than me, there was just one person in the theatre.

  11. doug r says:

    There was a trailer for Zombieland before our showing of District 9. Looks like fun.

  12. Mr. Muckle says:

    “Aliens and Demons?” Ha ha ha ha ha. Good one. What’s that about, religion on Mars?

  13. jbf81 says:

    An open letter to Rachel McAdams:
    Please, don

  14. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Harry Potter 6 made its money the smash-and-grab way. In the Hamptons it was 4 weeks and out — the UA East Hampton dropped it this week to pick up “Adam”.
    Disney farked up on “Ponyo” by (1) promoting it as routine product, (2) opening it in too many theaters and (3) not releasing the Japanese version in the bigger cities. Subtitles should trump Academy Award references every time.
    @Moviezzz: Most New Jersey theaters that had “The Hurt Locker” dropped it to open “Bandslam” and/or “Ponyo”. I saw “The Hurt Locker” last Sunday on a matinee and it was a decent-size turnout.
    @Direwolf: The Century Evanston is a megaplex that plays a lot of arty product. If there was a large black turnout on any movie it may have been an aberration.

  15. chris says:

    I don’t quite get this Rachel-McAdams-ducking-stardom thing. Yeah, she made a couple indie films, but the woman is in three star-filled studio wide releases this year alone. Seems like she has embraced attempting superstardom with fervor.

  16. LYT says:

    I’m sure Comic-Con had nothing whatsoever to do with District 9’s success…

  17. Nicol D says:

    I find McAdams curious. No one really hates her. Those who love her love her a lot and the rest seem indifferent. My partner loves her. I am indifferent.
    Looking at her Box Office Mojo, a case can certainly be made that she has been in some movies that are both good and hits (Wedding Crashers, Red Eye, Note Book, Mean Girls).
    However, a case could also be made that none of these films were a hit because of McAdams alone. Certainly she was not a factor in Mean Girls and I do not even remember who she was in Wedding Crashers.
    Notebook was a hit with older people due to concept and no competition and I would argue for that crowd James Garner was as much a factor as McAdams (yes, I wrote that even if Hollywood does not see it that way).
    I remember Red Eye’s campaign being more about the return of Wes Craven to the thriller genre and being vaguely promoted as a werewolf movie. It is not, but they tried to make people think it was horror. McAdams is not even on the poster.
    She still may become a superstar, but until she toplines a string of hits that are marketing solely on her (like Julia Roberts or Meg Ryan in the 90’s), I will remain in the indifferent camp.

  18. Joe Leydon says:

    Actually, I have said the same thing, here and elsewhere, about the under-valuing of James Garner regarding the success of The Notebook. (And, no, not just because I did a cover-story profile of Garner for Cowboys & Indians Magazine tied to the opening of that film.) And yet, IMHO, because of that film, Rachel M probably sold a lot more tickets for Time Traveler’s Wife than many other actresses her age might have.

  19. Nicol D says:

    I know my only interest in The Notebook when it came out was Garner. Same with my mother. I know I am not the only person, but there must be at least some others like me.
    Similarly, why no credit to Bana for Time Traveler? I have talked to two females this weekend alone who both said he was the reason for them wanting to see the film. I actually think Bana is underrated as an actor and the same criteria that is used to make McAdams bankable (been in popular hits) can also be used for Bana.
    Perhaps put me in the category that says McAdams is good but gets too much credit…Bana is great and gets nowhere enough.

  20. Joe Leydon says:

    I think Rachel is a bigger draw, if only because The Notebook — a movie aimed at the same target audience/demographic as Time Traveler — has been a cable TV staple for years. Seriously: There was a period when it practically was a running joke with me and my wife. She watched it just about everytime it aired on TV, to the point where I think she memorized whole swaths of dialogue.

  21. Bana seems to finally be achieving some success on your side of the ocean. Sure, Funny People isn’t the hit people thought it was going to be, but he probably got more fans from it and Wife is gonna be a nice little money maker, surely. Add that to appearing in Star Trek and hopefully he can now forget about the stink from projects like Lucky You. Also, he looks smokin’ with the gray in his hair. Bless him.
    Nicol, how on earth was Red Eye promoted as a werewolf movie? Vague or not. Are you mixing it up with Cursed?
    In regards to McAdams being in movies that were hits but not because of her, I think that’s what more actors need. As has been proven time and time again audiences do generally not respond to an actor being forced upon them as a star and as the next big thing. They like to “discover” somebody and claim them. That is exactly what happened with McAdams. They thought she was a riot in Mean Girls, did the kick-arse chick thing in Red Eye, got a big weepie out of The Notebook and had a supporting role in a big comedy hit with Wedding Crashers. She has slowly been appearing in movies people LIKE, which goes a long way towards endearing her to the public than being cast as the lead in a huge blockbuster purely because she’s “hot” (ahem).

  22. Nicol D says:

    Kami,
    No, I remember Cursed and they both came out in 2005. The commercials for Red Eye I remember went out of their way to connect the film to Wes Craven’s horror past and ended with an image of a pupil dilating and turning into red against a black sky…I am probably not describing it well…but at the time, the plot was not disclosed and I remember thinking that this was definitely giving off a werewolf vibe and thinking it odd since Cursed was released the same year.
    Again, maybe just my interpretation, but the commercials I saw certainly wanted the viewer to think this was some sort of man/beast sort of film with little to no references made to the whole 9/11 subtext.
    I like Red Eye a lot but when I finally realized what it was about, I was surprised.

  23. Nick Rogers says:

    Nicol: I remember those ads, too, for “Red Eye,” now that you mention them. They also struck me as odd.
    On a different topic that someone mentioned above, that happened to be the redband trailer for “Zombieland” shown before “District 9.” That movie looks wonderful.

  24. Nicol, I obviously don’t remember them, but I guess I can see how you go that. Although it would’ve been odd for a werewolf movie to not be advertised as much.
    Ponyo is a trending topic on Twitter! Does that mean it’ll experience some 800% growth on Saturday. omg the twitter effect!!!! :/

  25. Hallick says:

    I think “Red Eye” is a great B movie that deserves just as much constant love as something like “Breakdown”, but I don’t get the feeling that many people even remember the film. If this one had been Rachel McAdams’ movie debut, she WOULD be that superstar Dave believes she should be right now. And the Cillian Murphy/McAdams pairing is actually much better than her chemistry she had with Ryan Gosling in “The Notebook”.

  26. IOIOIOI says:

    While I want to see The Goods. I am so fucking happy it failed. Hearing Neal Brennan slam Used Cars on the BS REPORT, when he basically RIPPED IT OFF TO MAKE HIS MOVIE! Pretty much made me want this film to fail, and to have Brennan go back into obscurity where he belongs. Do not fuck with Used Cars, Neal. DO NOT FUCK WITH IT, OR YOUR CAREER WILL GO BOOM LIKE A MERCEDES!

  27. Joe Leydon says:

    Or like a Ford Pinto Station Wagon.

  28. a_loco says:

    Speaking of Red Eye…
    What happened to Cillian Murphy? I can’t remember him being in anything since Wind That Shakes The Barley (the cameo in Dark Knight doesn’t count).

  29. Wrecktum says:

    Red Eye was laughably bad.
    “Disney farked up on ‘Ponyo’ by (1) promoting it as routine product, (2) opening it in too many theaters and (3) not releasing the Japanese version in the bigger cities. Subtitles should trump Academy Award references every time.”
    Since Ponyo will have the biggest domestic opening for a Miyazaki movie and will probably end up having the highest domestic gross when all is said and done, I think your whining is baffling.

  30. Agreed that Red Eye is swell B fun ala Breakdown.
    As for Cillian Murphy, apart from Hippy Hippy Shake and Inception I don’t recognise any of the titles he has coming up nor any of the films he has had since Edge of Love and his cameo in The Dark Knight.

  31. jeffmcm says:

    I give thumbs-up to Red Eye as well. For what it’s worth, I have it on good authority that the filmmakers found the original ad campaign (Cillian Murphy with literal red monster eyes) stupid and harmful.
    “I find McAdams curious….My partner loves her. I am indifferent.”
    Nicol, hopefully without irritating you, who is this person and why do you insist on referring to him/her as ‘your partner’ and not ‘your wife’ or ‘your business partner’ or ‘your writing partner’ or whatever? It strikes me as really just odd and unexplainable. And it’s not that I don’t like you – you just really have me baffled.

  32. Dr Wally says:

    “What happened to Cillian Murphy? I can’t remember him being in anything since Wind That Shakes The Barley (the cameo in Dark Knight doesn’t count).”
    Sunshine was a great movie that not enough people saw. Boyle’s Oscar-hoovering Slumdog should have led people to check out his previous (and arguably superior) flick.
    Oh, and props to whoever posted the open letter to Macadams. I bloody love that woman. No-one seems to have brought up The Lucky Ones – another winning performance from RM, too bad that only about twelve people saw it.

  33. jesse says:

    I do think McAdams helped with Red Eye getting to $60 million or so, and moreover, her big movies in 2004-5 all sort of built on each other to get her what is now, I’d say, a pretty decent fanbase, as Joe basically said. Notebook and Mean Girls have become DVD/cable favorites which made her somewhat more recognizable when she was female lead in Wedding Crashers. Which wasn’t sold on her, obviously, but there was sort of a base already with her when she was super-likable in that well-liked movie. Then Red Eye a few months later had her in the lead, and while it was more of a minor hit, her face was all over the ads (if not the poster — but the oft-played trailer started like it was going to be a romantic comedy/drama, featuring all kinds of McAdams from her POV until it kicks into thriller mode. Kind of a great trailer, actually). Then that winter she was pretty visible in the campaign for Family Stone, another $60 million grosser. Again, not money purely made from her, but I have to think it helped, and even those who may not have gone for her probably came away from the movie liking her.
    So I think it’s arguable (if not particularly provable) that Time Traveler’s Wife, after a couple of art movies that didn’t work and the supporting bit in State of Play, is her real Rachel McAdams movie (albeit several years later than most actors would’ve had that out). As such, I’d have no trouble giving her credit for the $24 mil or whatever opening this is gonna be. The book may be a brand-name of sorts, but it still matters who’s in the movie, and my guess is that it will make more money with McAdams than it would’ve with a lot of other actresses her age.
    Also, this is totally anecdotal, but I know a lot of women my age (late twenties) who just love her. Bana does have some support as a sensitive hunk or what-not, but I think just as many people sort of regard him as an also-ran due to Troy and The Hulk being movies that a fair number of people saw and not many liked much (though The Hulk is underrated). He’s a good actor and probably helps a little in a movie like this (and he’s made smart choices with this, Star Trek, and Funny People), but really, I think the movie will help him more than vice versa.

  34. The Big Perm says:

    Breakdown is a great movie, I thought Red Eye was basically okay but kind of dull.
    As much as you could say a McAdams move has never been a hit due to her, the same could be said for Bana. The Hulk, Troy, Star Trek…he’s in huge movies constantly but I don’t know if the average person really knows who he is. I think his main problem is he tens to get cast as “the boring guy.” They need to let him cut loose, he can be a wild man and you’d never know it watching the movies he does. I’d like to see Funny People, I hear he gets to be funny for once.

  35. EthanG says:

    Erica Bana almost as big a draw for this type of movie as McAdams? Hah! This film is going to make almost as much as “The Other Bolyn Girl” on its opening weekend…yes that was a period piece but it had Scarjo and Natalie Portman.
    Also ever heard of “Lucky You,” with Drew Barrymore? Exactly.

  36. EthanG says:

    Forgot to add: as far as McAdams’s shunningsuperstardom, it’s been pretty well reported that she turned down quite a few roles…Eva Green’s role in Casino Royale, the lead in “The Last Kiss” (thankfully), Pepper Potts In Iron Man, and possibly Storm in Fantastic Four among others.
    And Wes Craven had more cachet in pulling in people to “Red Eye?” Boy he sure did wonders doing the same for “Cursed,” and “The Hills Have Eyes 2” didn’t he? C’mon…

  37. The Big Perm says:

    Yeah, Bana may be a draw for friends of people on the board or whatever, but out there in the world, I don’t think he is at all. I don’t think he’s a draw for ANY movie.

  38. Joe Leydon says:

    Sometimes I wonder if its the precise combination of actors that will make a movie a hit… or not. I think Brain Dennehy is a terrific actor. But would The Notebook had been as big a hit if he, not James Garner, had been cast in it?

  39. The Big Perm says:

    I think a lot of times you can take a couple of actors who are so-so audience wise and put them together and it works. Like the new Stallone movie…who cares about Dolph Lundgren? But you put him in a movie with Jet Li and Mickey Rourke and now I’m into it.

  40. chris says:

    I know that’s part of the conventional wisdom on McAdams “shunning superstardom,” EthanG, but I don’t buy it. Those are all parts she SHOULD have turned down.

  41. jennab says:

    Re: the Zombieland trailer…this is the movie my son & his friends CAN’T WAIT to see! They watch the trailer every time someone comes over, they laugh, proclaim it “sick” (highest praise), and will definitely be there opening weekend. Sleeper hit…?

  42. christian says:

    Gee, I thought everybody was over zombie films…and everybody loves Piven!

  43. jeffmcm says:

    Joe, I think you’re right – but I think a big part of that is that Garner has more of a track record for playing romantic leading men than Dennehy ever had (I tend to think of him as playing tough guys, coaches and dads)?

  44. Chucky in Jersey says:

    “The Notebook” played upmarket/arthouse, which explains in part the love for Miss McAdams.
    @Wrecktum: The draw for Miyazaki is seeing his stuff in Japanese. Treating it as routine product and releasing only a dubbed version in the States hurts his credibility.

  45. Hallick says:

    “Forgot to add: as far as McAdams’s shunningsuperstardom, it’s been pretty well reported that she turned down quite a few roles…Eva Green’s role in Casino Royale, the lead in “The Last Kiss” (thankfully), Pepper Potts In Iron Man, and possibly Storm in Fantastic Four among others.”
    If true, every one of those was a smart decision. Has Eva Green’s career gone anywhere after Bond? And has ANY Bond girl really seriously been catapulted into stardom since the 70’s?
    Nothing more needs to be said about “The Last Kiss”.
    McAdams would’ve been a better foil for Downey in “Iron Man”, but it’s still a shitty role for the actress that’s looking to do actual acting.
    And playing Susan Storm in the Fantastic Four is something a Jessica Alba is made for, even if a McAdams/Gruffydd pairing makes more sense.

  46. Wrecktum says:

    “@Wrecktum: The draw for Miyazaki is seeing his stuff in Japanese. Treating it as routine product and releasing only a dubbed version in the States hurts his credibility.”
    In your opinion. 250 Miyazaki fanboys and you might stamp your feet in disgust, but the rest of the U.S. doesn’t want to see kids movies with subtitles.
    Surely the final weekend gross proves my point???

  47. Red Eye, Hills Have Eyes, and Hills Have Eyes II all opened in the $15 million range, give or take a million. So yes, I think you can credit Wes Craven with being a draw. As for the Red Eye campaign, the first teaser was a standard romantic comedy meet-cute that turns into a ‘this guy’s actually a very shady, possibility supernatural character’. Great teaser, and I was lucky enough to see a test screening of the film before the next trailer came out (I was in the odd position of seeing Cillian Murphy in Red Eye before I saw Batman Begins). Point being the full trailer (which was first attached to a paid sneak preview of The Island) was one of the worst trailers I have ever seen. In that it revealed every, single dramatic or suspenseful beat in the picture, from the actual outcome of the whole evil plot, to the very climax of the picture. No twist was left unspoiled as the only thing that would have remained a mystery was the opening and closing credits. A truly shameful trailer that still pisses me off to this day.

  48. Blackcloud says:

    Jeff, Nicol referring to his significant other as his “partner” could be a Canadian thing. I know someone from Quebec who refers to her BF as her “partner” and has also referred to her BF’s brother as her “brother-in-law” even though they’re not married. I thought about calling her on it but decided not to because she’s a trendy, bien pensant, leftwing academic type and it would not be very sporting hitting such an easy target.

  49. Cadavra says:

    “In your opinion. 250 Miyazaki fanboys and you might stamp your feet in disgust, but the rest of the U.S. doesn’t want to see kids movies with subtitles.
    Surely the final weekend gross proves my point???”
    Um, no. Are you saying that it would have done MORE with subtitles?
    And BTW, “fanboys” is hardly a proper term for people who want to watch a subtitled film. And it would NOT have killed them to allow for one theatre playing it that way in major cities. If anyone were stupid enough to release a new Almodovar or Zhang Yimou film dubbed, would the howls of protest come from geeks?

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