MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland


Be Sociable, Share!

45 Responses to “BYOB”

  1. Martin S says:

    That better be for real, Poland!

  2. David Poland says:

    I don’t remember when it came up, but someone in here recently accused me of changing my position on Star Trek. I had occasion to look at my original review today and object to the suggestion that I have moved off of this position…
    This is all very clever. And the navigation of known Star Trek history is, for the most part, smartly done. (The argument that the time warp of the overall story both excuses changes and allows for a different future for these characters is both facile and an overreach at the same time. The film is too slavish to claim it

  3. Martin S says:

    That better be for real, Poland!

  4. Martin S says:

    Sorry, no idea why that went up twice.

  5. Biscuits says:

    In regards to this discussion:
    You should check out this video, if you haven’t already:
    Now. You certainly don’t owe me or anybody else an apology or anything like that. But I am hoping you will at least address some of the issues I raised with my last few posts in the above discussion, and do it without resulting to your standard “rage” and insult-spewing.
    Mainly my question to you is this, David: what’s the purpose of this blog? And I don’t mean that as an insult — it certainly has a purpose, and it’s certainly evolved over the years — but what is it now, exactly? And what are you? Do you still consider yourself a journalist? Because what you did in that post is certainly not journalism, I think we can all agree. You provided your opinion without doing any research, without gaining any scope or context, and without speaking to anybody with knowledge of the situation. You’ve shown, in this instance, to have not only a tenuous grasp on the actual economics of the circumstances you chose to weigh in on, but worse, you’ve shown a complete failure to understand the personalities and motivations behind those circumstances.
    Which is fine. This is the internet. Anything goes. But it’s not journalism.
    So what is it you’re doing here? Because if you’re capable of doing all that, without acknowledging your mistakes or engaging in a discussion about them, then what else are you capable of? This is all harmless enough — unfairly maligning Joe Adalian’s journalistic integrity (in a separate post) is about the worst thing that came of it. But your accusations against Marc Graboff that I raised in the same other post (that you also failed/declined to respond to) aren’t so harmless. Other accusations that you toss around freely aren’t so harmless — so what I’m asking is, David: what standard are you holding yourself to before you toss out those accusations? It’s your blog, obviously, and you’re free to do what you want with it… the only issue, as I’ve raised before, is that you’ve in the past chosen to call out other “journalists” for doing the exact same thing that you did in the above post. You’ve cast yourself in the role of grand journalistic ombudsman… but in my opinion you fail to hold yourself to the same standards you hypocritically hold others to. Who’s watching the watchman, David?
    I’m not raging against you. I’m not insulting you. I’m simply criticizing you. Hopefully you’ll respond accordingly.
    Funny trademark in the title, by the way.

  6. Rothchild says:

    When you’re Team Leno you view everything from that perspective. It was clear from the night it aired that Leno didn’t see any of that coming.

  7. David Poland says:

    Biscuits, if I thought there was any reason I needed to answer to an anonymous, usually malicious person about “my purpose,” I would be an idiot. And when I respond to people like you, I usually am.
    As for the Kimmel/Leno thing… nothing either guy has said has been remotely surprising. Some people – people who like to – think that everyone is an idiot and what is on the surface is real. These people are victims of the media and their complacency.
    As Kimmel noted… as was obvious… he was asked on the Leno show after an entire night of attacking Jay. What do you think that he really expected? Do you think he invited Jimmy on to bury the hatchet on a live-to-tape TV show?
    What is the end result? Jay gets to say he was “sucker punched.” He is a victim. He is willing to take a punch. Etc, etc, etc. That is exactly what I was writing about.
    You want to believe that Jay expected Kimmel to talk about his favorite snack foods? Fine. But it is as smart as believing that Conan O’Brien bought a Maserati and Kentucky Derby winner on NBC’s tab. Or, for that matter, that a guy who walked away with a $35m payout is a victim. Or that NBC paid that money because they are just a bunch of bumbling idiots.
    People don’t survive the way these people survive in this business by being complete idiots. They absolutely make big mistakes. They absolute can be vain and weighted down by insane ego. And many of them – like Ben Silverman – are dragged down by their public arrogance as well as their weak game in jobs they probably never should have had.
    But the comfort that some people get out of the idea that people more powerful than them are fools and that if they listened to us, they would be in great shape – the absolute thrill that someone like Nikki Finke shows in espousing this idea – is pathetic… on top of being wrong.
    Seriously… you still watch people on TV and assume that what they are saying is truthful? Are you a 6-year-old?
    I don’t know who you are, Biscuits. You really do show up most of the time to attack me or to ask rhetorical questions like, “What is your purpose?”
    I am a lot of things. One of them is a journalist. I happen to be extremely experienced and extremely knowledgeable. I also happen to write a blog on which I most often offer my opinion and usually back it up with facts. I also invite others to respond with their opinions. I am not afraid of being challenged with ideas.
    YOU are watching the watchman, Biscuits. The industry is watching the watchman. And when someone feels aggrieved… or often, even tweeked… I hear about it from them. It’s not a mystery for me. And I have no obligation to make you privy to my phone and e-mail logs.
    You also have no idea of half of what I do, see, hear, and know. I do not post everything I find out. I use my editorial judgment. And I am quite open about the kinds of judgments I make.
    And sometimes I am make real errors or report bad information… but not often.
    And when I do, I am pretty generous about admitting it. I don’t erase what I was wrong about. I make my correction or change clear.
    And I am not talking about typos or being “wrong” about an idea – Avatar is good – but wrong on a fact.
    I have noted, in the past, how much I like Joe Adalian. I think he is The Wrap’s #1 asset and he might, on his own, keep that thing alive for a while longer. But when the gossip sourcing on Leno/O’Brien turned, you could see it. Nikki stopped running scoops and Adalian started running two a day. And the tone of Adalian’s reporting went right into the gossip-monger toilet. Was that his choice or Sharon’s? I have no idea. But the lack of journalistic integrity for the next week was dirt low… trawling for page views… TMZ low.
    I’m sure he’ll be back to his normal kick-ass self soon enough.
    You believe what you like about the “actual economics of circumstances” or the “personalities and motivations.” You think I am wrong about them and that I am some example of the wild internet? Great. Another anonymous people who thinks they are right about everything. Why would I care?
    I’m a grown man. I have been around this block a lot of times. I understand how all of this works. And I understand, for the most part, what I do know and what I don’t know.
    I don’t know if you are selling something. I don’t know if you are just a fool. I don’t know if you really believe what you write in here? You are not a reliable source… you are an anonymous commenter. And I value your insight as such.
    If you aren’t Nikki, you are somehow connected to Nikki, if just by fandom. And I have to tell you, if you don’t understand how Nikki operates, you really don’t know Thing One about this business. The Nikki Handlers are not shy about having handled her. And it’s clear in almost everything she writes. She is a shill who covers for being a shill by doing the angry madman schtick. She has Endeavor so deep in her gullet that she needs a break on Sundays to have her proctologist remove them so she can consume them again on Monday. Ron Meyer, Amy Pascal, Brad Grey, Jeff Robinov, etc, etc, etc line up to give Nikki their “news” because she, more than anyone else, will do their bidding by not only spinning in their favor, but by attacking their enemies.
    You know, some of my favorite people are Nikki Whisperers. And they turn beet red and stutter a lot when I call them out on it. They almost always blame their bosses. And true enough.
    I am not the ombudsman for journalism. I just know what I know. The NYT gets it wrong too often and suffers the arrogance of thinking they can’t be wrong. The trades are done, sadly for the individuals, but also a victim of mighty hubris and lack of perspective. LAT is actually getting better as things get more desperate over there.
    I don’t write about every bad story or every Nikki ego self-stroke or anything close to everything I think or think about. I only really take up the fight when I see something that is wrong and that I think might become sticky.
    Mostly, the same thing is true now that was always true. This is not a major news business. It is almost all press releases disguised as news. Nothing new. Nikki is just the louder version of what the trades trodded out for decades, combined with relentless paranoia and malice. Her first priority is protecting herself and she does it really well, however horribly. So you have a bunch of people – many smart and accomplished in journalism – in a mosh pit, fighting for position with very little real meat on the table. Desperate times lead to desperate measures.
    You still don’t get – at all – what happened on Leno/Conan. It was always about the numbers of The Tonight Show, first and last. The affiliates were the second issue. Leno’s numbers at 10 were the third issue. And no question, NBC fucked up the transition… and the choice to move O’Brien into Leno’s slot with a hard in date. Follow the money, not your rage. You may think I am a fool, but believe me, it will serve you better than what you offer up as your current mode of thinking.

  8. David Poland says:

    And that “Team Leno” thing. Seriously… aren’t you embarrassed to believe that there is a Team Leno and a Team Conan? You often seem smart in here, Rothchild, but you should be embarrassed.
    Real Santa Claus stuff.

  9. LYT says:

    Ummm…assuming “Team Leno” and “Team Conan” mean the same thing as the obvious Twilight allegory might suggest…all that refers to is people who would prefer one over the other to win the prize, i.e. the Tonight Show, which is the metaphorical heart of K-Stew in this case.
    I’m not gonna say you should be embarrassed for not knowing how it works with “Team Jacob” and “Team Edward,” because not watching Twilight is something to be proud of, IMO. But the reference is to fans rather than actual, literal teams.

  10. LexG says:

    Team Bella 4 LIFE. Team Kristen. K-STEW POWER.
    Also: Check out awesome Poland bringing the thunder like Mad Mel up there. Biscuits is on Team Lex so nothing against him at all, but I don’t know why so many people take shots at DP, or get that upset over his take on certain things and scrutinize his every word looking for some “aha!” moment.
    Poland rules, plus he’s a pretty nice dude. Why the anger?

  11. Biscuits says:

    Wow. Amazing.
    Listen, I get it. I chose an anonymous handle a long time ago because everyone here except for, what, Joe Leydon and occasionally Don Murphy have anonymous handles. So you have the ability to dismiss what I say as anonymous internet trolling.
    But please. Please. When you’re in a hole, stop digging. Again, I beg you: make a frickin phone call. Do some actual reporting. I don’t need to be privy to your email and phone logs on this subject, because when you say things like “As for the Kimmel/Leno thing… nothing either guy has said has been remotely surprising. Some people – people who like to – think that everyone is an idiot and what is on the surface is real. These people are victims of the media and their complacency,” I know for a fact that you are talking out of your ass. I know this because unlike you I’ve spoken at length to people involved in the situation, and because unlike you I have an understanding of what really happened that goes deeper than TiVo’ed talk shows and youtube clips.
    I can call bullshit on you because I know more about this than you. Simple as that. I should have just told you who I am and what I do a long time ago. But now this is too much fun. Now when you say things like “You still don’t get – at all – what happened on Leno/Conan” I can chuckle to myself, and enjoy it all that much more. Because when you say “It was always about the numbers of The Tonight Show, first and last. The affiliates were the second issue. Leno’s numbers at 10 were the third issue” you reveal how little you understand what really went down. But go ahead. Explain your thinking. Back it up with actual numbers. If you really want to debate it, I’m up for it. Just give me facts I can combat with other facts, don’t give me half-cocked opinions and insist they’re right just because you “understand how all this works”.
    And just for the record — again — you consistently try to insist somehow I am associated with Finke. Look back at any post of mine — I’ve criticized her just as much as I’ve criticized you. I’ve called her journalism shoddy and her ethics corrupt. Just because I am not on Team David (at least as far as this issue is concerned) that doesn’t automatically place me on Team Nikki. The only thing I have said to give you that impression, I guess, is that I think you are completely, bizarrely obsessed with her — a statement that only gains water when you accuse someone like me of being either a) Nikki herself, b) a Nikki associate or c) a Nikki fan. I am none of the above.
    The only team I am on is Team Lex. He doesn’t know it, but we are mutual admirers of each others work. Lex, I know you love David. He gave you a column that I really liked (whatever happened to that by the way?). I’m glad you think he’s a pretty nice dude. But I’m not taking shots at him and I’m not angry at him. I’m simply critical of his work and his hypocrisy in this instance.

  12. PastePotPete says:

    You know how you can tell Biscuits hit a nerve? Poland started up the paranoid accusations against him. Like when he implied once that I was IOIOIOI.
    Poland is a smart guy and an entertaining read, but he turns *vicious* when he’s proven wrong. About anything.

  13. HoopersX says:

    For the record, I am Team Lex, all the way. That being said, I think Biscuits sounds like he/she is taking this whole thing incredibly personal.
    Back when this whole thing got started, I believe, I was the first person to engage David on his point of view. I think there are some very valid points to be made on the “Pro-Conan” side of this issue. My major complaints to David were that he was comparing apples to oranges. The truth is that there is no way to know whether Conan would have maintained or came close to maintaining Leno’s numbers because Leno didn’t go away. If Conan had the same situation Leno did when Carson retired, and Leno had just rode off into the sunset, who knows what would have happened? But that is all conjecture on my part and I am far from connected enough to speak intelligently on the subject. I was just making an educated guess.
    But here’s where I think Biscuits’ is going overboard. You said “I know for a fact that you are talking out of your ass. I know this because unlike you I’ve spoken at length to people involved in the situation, and because unlike you I have an understanding of what really happened that goes deeper than TiVo’ed talk shows and youtube clips.” How the fuck is Poland supposed to defend himself against that? You claim to have firsthand knowledge of the situation and know far more about things than David does but then you continue on with this “I can call bullshit on you because I know more about this than you. Simple as that. I should have just told you who I am and what I do a long time ago. But now this is too much fun.”. How is that even remotely fair? How is Poland supposed to disprove what you say when you hide behind your anonymity and refuse to state facts? At least Poland is owning his own opinion and isn’t trying to claim he “knows the truth”. You, on the other hand, claim to be all knowing but won’t come out from behind the curtain and own your own remarks/claims.
    If you want to be taken seriously, then stop being such a pussy and defend your position with factual statements. That last comment

  14. LexG says:

    “The only team I am on is Team Lex. He doesn’t know it, but we are mutual admirers of each others work.”
    Please be Kristen Stewart, please be Kristen Stewart…

  15. Biscuits says:

    Yeah, Hooper, I’d like to argue with you… but I agree with most of what you’re saying, in principal. I’m just not sure we’re talking about the same thing.
    This isn’t about Leno vs. Conan, and it’s not about whatever side of that particular cagematch you or I are on. Did you read the entire link I posted at the top of the page regarding the earlier discussion?
    Specifically, I was calling David out on misinterpreting Kimmel’s appearance on Leno’s show, and then continuing to insist his interpretation was correct without doing a shred of reporting or providing a shred of evidence. He was just providing us his “read” without understanding the context. I called him out on it.
    Then, in another thread which I didn’t link to (so I understand if you’re not up to speed) I called him out on something he did six months ago, which was to spuriously accuse Marc Graboff of being Nikki Finke’s source at NBC without a shred of evidence. If you are really interested (and I can’t imagine too many people being interested in any of this) here you go:
    Both are instances of shoddy reporting, plain and simple. I was accusing him of the same things you are now accusing me, which is refusing to state facts, cite sources, or back up his opinion in a journalistically sound manner. So… you know. I don’t really know what to say about that. The wheel in the sky keeps on turning, I guess.
    You say the burden of proof is on me, but I say it was on him first. Because with all due respect — I don’t need to engage you personally. I don’t need you to reveal yourself to me. I have no beef with you. I’m not criticizing you, I’m criticizing him, and David doesn’t need you to defend him. He’s a big boy and he knows what he’s done. That’s why he won’t respond to the Graboff thing and why he’s burrowed into such a deep hole on the Kimmel thing that he can’t even see any light at this point. I criticized his journalist integrity on both counts, and I did it semi-publicly, I guess, the same way he criticizes others (see Adalian, Joe, five entries above).
    So, yeah. If you want to pick an argument with me about one of those points, go ahead. I just want to make sure we’re arguing about the same thing.

  16. Foamy Squirrel says:

    Holy Wall of tl;dr Text!
    All I got out of that (from all 3 parties) was “Hey, I’m just doing my job. And Lex has a Secret Admirer(tm)”.

  17. Martin S says:

    Hooper is exactly on point.
    Forget the feint to Adalian and stick the topic you started with – Leno/Kimmel and Dave’s position.
    Dave says Leno was smart enough to know Kimmel would take some potshots and Leno was fine with that because it would allow him to be paint it as a blindsid. What does that do for Leno? It allows him to not look like a manipulator of all events.
    But where’s the evidence?
    Well, until you linked to Kimmel’s clip, it was more an educated guess. But when you actually pay attention to what Kimmel said, you see there’s justification.
    Kimmel says he informed Leno’s prepper that all he wanted to talk about was the late-night fight. Do you really think that wasn’t passed along? The night before, all Kimmel did was mock Jay. Do you really think Jay wasn’t expecting to take a potshot or two? If you want to argue Kimmel’s shots were more personal than Jay expected – mainly the no kids comments – fine, but even Jim Norton, a Leno regular, said Leno expected to take a hit or two because that’s what comics do…which was Kimmel’s beef about Leno complaining to Oprah.
    Kimmel is saying Jay knew by his vocation what was coming so why is he bitching about it? That’s why Kimmel claims – at the end – he was suckerpunched because Leno’s gripe paints Kimmel as breaking some code of ethics. In other words, Kimmel feels like he was now being set up, which gores to Dave’s original point.
    So what’s Biscuits answer? Nothing. You claim to know better, but that’s all it is – a claim.
    I know who you are biscuits, but I’m not going to divulge it because I get great amusement in watching you blow yourself up into someone more knowledgeable that you actually are. That’s my claim and it has as much validity as yours.

  18. anghus says:

    Biscuits. For the record, i do not use an alias.

  19. aris says:

    Neither do I.
    Also, if anyone has SUCH a big issue with what’s being written in a BLOG, then they need to get some perspective on life.
    And claiming to be someone in-the-know in an anonymous forum holds no validity in anyone’s opinion.

  20. Sam says:

    “I should have just told you who I am and what I do a long time ago. But now this is too much fun.”
    Spoken like someone without a leg to stand on but afraid to admit it.
    Put up or shut up.

  21. Biscuits says:

    Martin S, you’re parsing language like a politician.
    “Dave says Leno was smart enough to know Kimmel would take some potshots and Leno was fine with that because it would allow him to be paint it as a blindsid.”
    No, that’s what Dave adjusted his stance to post-Oprah appearance. Reread the original debate. Dave originally said that Leno invited Kimmel on to allow himself to eat shit and look like a fool on national tv. Then he drew a specious comparison to Hugh Grant’s mea culpa appearance on Leno’s show. Then he declared the whole situation was orchestrated as the first step of Leno’s public relations rehabilitation.
    “What does that do for Leno? It allows him to not look like a manipulator of all events.”
    Huh? I don’t understand what that means… but so now you’re saying that according to Leno’s master plan, he invited Kimmel onto his program, took an orchestrated verbal beating on television without so much as providing himself one prepared comeback, then took the full abusive press cycle that followed… all so he wouldn’t “look like a manipulator of all events?”
    “The night before, all Kimmel did was mock Jay. Do you really think Jay wasn’t expecting to take a potshot or two?”
    Sigh. As I said in the original thread. Leno invited Kimmel onto his program because he thought their relationship was one of mutual respect. He expected a couple of friendly good-natured potshots to show he was in on the joke. He didn’t expect to get abused. THAT was not orchestrated. THAT was not something he was prepared for. And THAT was not the first step in rehabilitating his PR image — in fact, it was exactly the opposite.
    Aris — you are right on both counts. I apologize. I shouldn’t have gotten into an anonymous pissing contest and I shouldn’t have used “trust me, I know more than you” as any sort of argument. I was using it to bait David, because he is truly wrong here and I want him to admit it, but that’s not going to happen and I let myself get baited in the process. I guess whoever said I let it get personal earlier was right. Hypocrisy bugs me and I let it get to me. Please strike all my cheap posturing from the record so we can get back to discussing what is really important here: that David is totally wrong. And also — Marc Graboff. Come on David. Defend that post.
    But you’re right. Blog. Perspective. Deep breath.
    I will do better next time.

  22. Biscuits says:

    Sam —
    You’re right also. I will shut up, not put up — but mainly because this has devolved into an embarrassing pissing match and I should be above this stuff.
    Martin, I don’t know how you could possibly know who I am, but whatever, it’s not that big a deal. You can reveal it if you want, if only so I can make my NBC connection clear, but I’d rather you didn’t. I should have stayed on topic and not made any of this about me.

  23. Cadavra says:

    I’m starting Team Cadavra. The principal requirement for membership is that you couldn’t care less about the personal woes of multi-millionaires. We’ll have membership cards, a secret handshake, and a dance in the spring.

  24. torpid bunny says:

    I’m totally in. But I won’t be active in the group, sorry.

  25. The Big Perm says:

    Biscuits is a bore. You insinutate great gossip, and give nothing up. So who cares what you think.
    And if you’re mutual admirers with Lex, meaning that you must be a Hollywood guy, why don’t you hook him up with a job?
    And to make sure none of you think any less of me, I will use my real name to sign this post:
    The Big Perm (I had it legally changed).

  26. Foamy Squirrel says:

    This totally looks like an opportunity for me to offer my services as a Team Member for Hire ™.
    For a small fee, you can burden the team of people you don’t like with a pseudo-intellectual blowhard. Much wailing and gnashing of teeth will ensue (even for those without teeth, as false teeth will be provided gratis).
    Bids will be starting at one 6-pack of beer.

  27. EOTW says:

    Anyone else psyched for the return of LOST? I don’t think I’ve EVER been this excited for anything filmed in my life. really a rabid fan here and am really looking forward to this season. Can’t wait!!!

  28. LYT says:

    My team actually has merchandise. And did so long before TWILIGHT.

  29. Foamy Squirrel says:

    Look out big-j! She knows how to use IEDs now!

  30. yancyskancy says:

    I am forced to assume that Biscuits is Jimmy Fallon. Possibly John Melendez. He is definitely not John Krasinski.

  31. leahnz says:

    foamy, maybe she’s tucking a grenade into his coat pocket on the sly there. jesting aside, from the sounds of it big-j is genuinely proud of the ex-missus, he’s been campaigning for her hard enough
    (i think biscuits is burt young)

  32. Foamy Squirrel says:

    Random bomb-related anecdotes for the weekend:
    During World War 2, the Allies experimented with training animals for use as suicide bombers. The Russians trained dogs to run underneath tanks by placing their food in the treads, while the US made waistcoats filled with napalm for bats (with the intention of releasing them over the Japanese mainland just before dawn so that the bats would shelter in buildings to sleep and explode).
    In both cases poetic justice prevailed. In the case of the Russian dogs, the dogs promptly ignored the German tanks and ran straight for the Russians – recognizing the same type of tank that they had been trained with. Meanwhile, the US were testing the bats at an abandoned town in New Mexico when the wind changed – causing the bats to fly straight for their own military base instead.
    The Japanese had slightly more luck. They created a type of paper balloon known as “fugo” which took advantage of the Jet Stream currents to travel long distances. One fugo successfully crossed the Pacific and detonated at a church picnic, causing the only war fatalities on US soil. This may have upset the fugo makers – who were schoolgirls unaware of the use to which their creations were put.
    However, the prize for unlikeliest bomb makers goes to the Marx Brothers. After filming Duck Soup, Zeppo Marx set up an engineering firm and designed the release clamp used by Fat Man and Little Boy during the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

  33. LYT says:

    I think Foamy Squirrel might just be Paul Harvey, Junior.

  34. leahnz says:

    hmm, i have a sudden hankering to watch ‘day of the dolphin’…

  35. Hallick says:

    “During World War 2, the Allies experimented with training animals for use as suicide bombers. The Russians trained dogs to run underneath tanks by placing their food in the treads…”
    And thus was born the first American Armored Squirrel Division in response to the threat…

  36. Hallick says:

    “hmm, i have a sudden hankering to watch ‘day of the dolphin’…”
    And now I have a hankering for a tuna fish sandwich. Damn you leah! ;P

  37. Sam says:

    EOTW: I’m right with you on that one.

  38. David Poland says:

    Biscuits –
    First thing is, you’re wrong about Leno. If you want to argue degree of expectation, great. But the reality is, going against the wave is always how you start a rehab. And it is never pretty.
    You don’t make much of a case for insider status by using Oprah clips. If you want to argue that the effort was ineffective, that is your prerogative. But like my opinion, it is your opinion, not a fact.
    Second, first rule of being a journalist in this town is knowing that whatever interested party is feeding you info – multiple times so when a professional chooses to make a TV appearance – has a goal in offering the insight. It can be an enemy, a business friend, or a stranger. Less that 1% of what is offered up comes from people who are showing their real hands… and rarely do those people get written about… they are protected because they are diamonds.
    Nikki, and in the case of Mr. Adalian here, chooses to pretend otherwise… likely to themselves as well. They play(ed) along with the spinners. And Adalian not only reported it, he started to revel in the hype of it all. Not journalism.
    In the end, this whole thing was about Conan’s numbers on The Tonight Show first. Want to argue that those numbers were dragged down by Jay at 10. Okay. Television history does not suggest this is true, but at least it is a conversation of, again, opinions. Meanwhile, the numbers sucked and NBC was losing a lot of money compared to where they were. Leno, in the meanwhile, was meeting their ad numbers… no one expected him to do double digits in that slot, though they hoped he someday might.
    Follow the money, Biscuits.
    And one more homily… the side in an argument screaming the loudest almost always has the weaker case. Conan’s Team was selling their line from start to finish… hard. They found more of an audience for it than they did for the show.
    Finally… I have dealt with the Graboff thing with a number of people inside the organization… none of whom asked for anything like a retraction. I’m not rehashing for your amusement. Sorry.

  39. aris says:

    Watching A.I. — man, no one makes movies like this anymore. Least of all Spielberg. And it wasn’t even that long ago. How sad. What are the chances we’ll see a “mainstream”, big-budget sci-fi film like this again? Unless it’s spielberg, scorcese (now THERE’S a thought) etc… never.
    On that perfect note, I leave this business and this city. So long all.

  40. leahnz says:

    wow, you sound so bummed, aris, i hope you’re just drunk
    (you can still blog even if you’re serious about packing it in, as you know this internet thingee is accessible from practically anywhere)

  41. christian says:

    Yes, A.I. for all its flaws is incredible.
    Hopefully you’ll come back to visit, aris. It’s a great place to visit.

  42. Triple Option says:

    Cadavra, can I join your club? I like dances! Will there be plenty of single ladies there or are we expected to find our own dates?
    Sorry to see you go aris.

  43. LexG says:

    Who cares about this shit Poland put up a thread about the new VANITY FAIR HOLY SHIT you have to BOW.
    Look. At. THEM:
    BOW. SO MUCH HOTNESS IN ONE ROOM, this is the greatest assemblange of humanity that humanity has ever offered.
    This is better than the Founding Fathers.

  44. LexG says:

    K-Stew and Mulligan sit on the same chair and are touching.
    You should be bowing. Oh my GOD I cannot wait to BUY THIS ISSUE.
    Then something else will be ISSUED if you know what I mean. BEST LINEUP EVER.
    K-STEW 4 EVER.

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