MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

BYOB Friday of the Hood

Be Sociable, Share!

9 Responses to “BYOB Friday of the Hood”

  1. Stella's Boy says:

    A few reviews claim that Robin Hood is a tea party love letter. Fair? Or just the lamestream liberal media at it again? I find it interesting that (allegedly) conservative-friendly blockbusters have been released back-to-back now. I guess the great Satan Hollywood isn’t so bad after all for the people in Real America.

  2. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Of course they are “conservative-friendly”. They were developed during the second term of W.
    Incidentally ,”conservative” has become a weasel word for right-wing and fascist.

  3. The Pope says:

    Stella’s Boy,
    I don’t think RH is in any way a love-letter to the tea party.
    SEMI SPOILER ALERT (it is only dialogue)
    Early on RH chastizes Richard the Lionheart for not only the Crusades but also for the manner in which they were fought. Also, Richard is depicted as pillaging his way back to England, laying siege to castles to plunder their gold. In addition, King John has the people by the throat, raising taxes (ouch, maybe that’s where people get confused)… but he raises the taxes to keep the money for himself. RH (as history also tells us) rails against the Church.
    But I reckon like so many films today, the politics are spread in such a way that both the left and the right can see what they want to see.

  4. jeffmcm says:

    Chucky, the first Iron Man came out in the summer of 2008, when the Presidential election was in full swing and Bush was a full-fledged lame duck with approval ratings in the high 20s. I don’t understand how your comment could possibly make sense unless you think there was some federal bureau of Film Development to which Bush had appointed a director, who was then replaced by Obama.
    Similarly, the inspiration for Robin Hood is clearly Gladiator and Braveheart, which were both about loner individuals fighting against an oppressive, powerful government, and both of those movies were ‘developed’ in the Clinton years.
    I just can’t understand why you insist on being so dumb.

  5. Blackcloud says:

    Jeff, if you’ve got a tinfoil brain, does it matter if you take off the tinfoil hat? That’s just Chucky’s Weltanschauung. It just so happens he lives in a different Welt than most of the other people on Earth.

  6. Stella's Boy says:

    The guy running this site is a total nutjar isn’t he? Anyway, apparently Machete is aiming to incite “race wars.” Good times.

  7. jeffmcm says:

    Yes, because as we all know, Fox News and the Texas state government are heavily infiltrated by La Raza agents.

  8. Yeah, Stella…he’s NUTS. Next to Michael Savage Alex Jones (of infowars) is the scariest shit-disturber the masses haven’t really heard of. I actually think those 2 guys don’t believe a word they say but just love being pushy bullies who see how far they can push the dumb and ill-informed.

  9. chris says:

    I think the Pope is right about possible interpretations, but it is pretty clear that the film is way more sympathetic to and interested in the landowning class and could give a crap about the poor or serfs.

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