MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

BYOB 101010

Be Sociable, Share!

23 Responses to “BYOB 101010”

  1. Joe Leydon says:

    http://movingpictureblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/michael-caine-speaks-and-old-news.html

    For reasons I don’t entirely understand, I’m getting more hits for this blog posting than I’ve received for anything else I’ve ever posted. But even that doesn’t surprise me as much as the fact that this old news has become — in some areas of the media, at least — new news. And I’m genuinely puzzled. Why? Is euthanasia even more of a hot button issue than I’ve suspected? Or is this — pardon what may sound like a bad pun — media overkill? I’m actually going to ask my journalism students about this during the coming week. But I’d like to adress the question to David and everyone else here: Why do you think this story gotten so much traction?

  2. Foamy Squirrel says:

    Because.

    Next topic!

  3. Joe Leydon says:

    Actually, that final sentence should read: Why do you think this story HAS gotten so much traction?

    Does that make it more interesting, Foamy?

  4. Foamy Squirrel says:

    It’s interesting, but I’m not sure if there’s much I can contribute. I hit that posting because you told me other people were also hitting it. Perhaps that applies to everyone else too?

  5. anghus says:

    i watched You Don’t Know Jack recently. and the most interesting part of the story was how quickly many were to hoist him up and declare him a visionary. And yet when they turned on him, everyone turned their back.

    How many years did he rot in jail?

    Kevorkian failed to realize that change is never immediate. It happens gradually. Society needs people like Kevorkian to help bring light to an issue, but when they become more iconic than the cause they represent, the puritanical portion of our society unleashes the dogs of law. And we are rarely brave enough to stand up and say ‘seriously?’.

  6. Jake McClure says:

    ))((

    Craig’s list me.

    BYOB

  7. Jake McClure says:

    The middle can’t be written apparently so

    … “”= ))((=))><((+~))((~= 42.

    And as per CL requests the "B" in "BYOB" can really stand for whatever you want.

  8. sanj says:

    I’m really enjoying Children’s Hospital – a web series
    now on tv – each episode is only 10 minutes but much
    funnier than most 30 minute comedies on tv

    am i the only one watching this ?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childrens_Hospital

  9. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    When I saw Michael Caine’s name after reading the first sentence or two of your post, I thought it might be in reference to his politics and support of David Cameron. I’ve read about that lately, but I’m not sure why this is getting so much attention now. I didn’t think euthanasia was driving headlines these days. My first reaction is to blame media overkill, something they’re quite good at.

  10. anghus says:

    sanj, i like it as well. i pretty much watch everything on the adult swim lineup. venture brothers is king. children’s hospital is good. all sorts of talent. whenever i see the name ‘david wain’ i’m usually interested.

    I’m an old school state fan. so seeing wain, ken marino… those guys are always good for a chuckle.

  11. sanj says:

    David – your not a fan of huffingtonpost but do you want
    your dp30 videos on there ? do they ever link to them ?

  12. Tim DeGroot says:

    Last night’s Venture Bros. and Metalocalypse were both excellent. And Igor’s voice on Mary Shelley’s Frankenhole cracks me up.

  13. Hopscotch says:

    DP, Leydon, other critics reading this,

    When is True Grit going to start screening for critics?

    Just curious around when we can see if this an “awards movie” or simply a “well-made commercial one” or bad.

    I’m dying to see Inside Job.

  14. Hopscotch says:

    Sanj,

    I’m watching Children’s Hospital. Last night’s episode was easily the funniest of this season.

    the one that premiered in 2008 on the WB.com is still funnier.

  15. sanj says:

    i like how they balance the stories for like 8 characters
    for a show that lasts 10 minutes

    this show needs more promotion

  16. anghus says:

    the bit at the end of Childrens Hospital last night where they do the end credits to the the title sequence of Do The Right Thing.

    Love it.

    Because that sequence still makes me cringe. Possibly the worst title sequence to a great movie…. ever…

  17. sanj says:

    plus Malin Ackerman can really dance

  18. anghus says:

    I have a new idea to put forth to the blogging community.

    POST EMBARGOES!

    For example.

    I hear Warner Brothers is getting nervous about Green Lantern.

    POST EMBARGO UNTIL LATE NOVEMBER WHEN TRAILER HITS!

    Anyone who replies to this post will be breaking the embargo.

  19. storymark says:

    Gee, why would anyone think they were nervous. I mean, aside from showing nothing from the film besides some crappy posters.

    Oops, guess I broke embargo.

  20. anghus says:

    BROKEN EMBARGO! BROKEN EMBARGO!

    there’s always one…

  21. Hopscotch says:

    I expect the two Green movies (both Hornet and Lantern) to be a wash. I. DON’T. CARE. about them whatsoever. Iron Man won me over with Downey Jr. Reynolds and Rogen are about as charming as Billy Zane.

  22. leahnz says:

    for anyone interested, i was curious after all the talk of the horrible decline of the romcom in recent years (which seems to dial up in volume whenever a heigl flick comes out), so i decided to do a little experiment and take a few minutes to look up the romcoms from the last 10 years on the ‘imdb top one hundred’ list by year (the list can be somewhat useful for listing films and genres with a degree of viewer popularity that have received a more than three-theatre release, tho it’s by no means definitive and is american-centric in the extreme) to see if in fact the state of affairs in the genre is as dire as everyone seems to claim.

    lo and behold, it doesn’t really appear so. between 2000 & 2010 there were a great many films in the genre released, and while ranging from arguably quite mediocre to good to some real gems, it would appear that as usual the horrific state of the genre is being being overstated in the media, as defined by a few real stinkers with very specific formulas and marketing styles rather than an assessment of the genre as a whole across the board.

    one issue may be that most good romcoms also have a dramatic element by necessity, which can’t be discounted or extricated from the genre. most classic romcoms since year dot have used dramatic conflict as an essential element of the successful romantic comedy recipe, and this continues to be true today. it also helps if people actually see the films before passing judgement; for instance i happened to catch ’27 dresses’ on cable the other night and actually thought it was a light and silly and rather enjoyable little confection, an ‘always the bridesmaid’ tale about sisterly love/jealously/envy with nice chemistry in the leads (heigl, malin, marsden and whatshisdoodle), which surprised me after reading how the movie is the devil and was going to bring about the downfall of civilisation as we know it.

    anyway ftr these are romcoms from the last decade (i’ve left out the light smattering of outright stinkypoohs that get dragged into every discussion of the genre time and time again – stinkypooh being my subjective judgment call of course – such as ‘bride wars’ and ‘made of honor’ etc, but there actually weren’t very many, probably fewer than 10):

    high fidelity (00)
    amelie 01
    bridget jones’ diary 01
    the good girl 02
    blue crush 02
    tuck everlasting 02
    punch drunk love 02
    intolerable cruelty 03
    under the tuscan sun 03
    something’s gotta give 03
    love, actually 03
    eternal sunshine of the spotless 04
    sideways 04
    garden state 04
    the terminal 04
    along came polly 04
    jersey girl 04
    wedding crashers 05
    40 yr old virgin 05
    a lot like love 05
    hitch 05
    the holiday 06
    stranger than fiction 06
    the lake house 06
    a good year 06
    the break-up 06
    knocked up 07
    the heartbreak kid 07
    forgetting sarah marshal 08
    zach & miri 08
    27 dresses 08
    500 days of summer 08
    definitely, maybe 08
    marley & me 08
    how to lose friends 08
    nick & nora’s inf. playlist 08
    the invention of lying 09
    it’s complicated 09
    youth in revolt 09
    letters to juliet 10
    date night 10

    those forty or so are as far as i went in the time i had, and while much of it isn’t exactly sterling or special – esp. in recent years, which seem particularly sparse (and have also produced some of the tritest fluffballs like ‘bride wars’) – it’s hardly the horrendous doom and gloom scenario being bandied about at the moment, imho.

  23. anghus says:

    im looking forward to both green films. hornet because it’s gondry and i think even if its awful, it will be mental. the good kind of mental. the ‘who the hell cut the check for this bullshit’ mental.

    Green Lantern is such a big question mark.

    Next year has X-Men First Class, Thor, Captain America, and Green Lantern. To me, the box office goes like this

    Captain America
    Thor
    XMEN First Class
    Green Lantern

    But what if Captain America and Thor are horrible? What if audiences don’t embrace a 1960’s X Men film?

    Marvel has done something interesting by using different time periods for different properties. On one hand, it’s genius. A Superhero movie in the 1940s, a Superhero in the 1960’s, and a Superhero film set in modern times with an ancient God. It’s almost like avoiding the glut of ‘too much’ by placing them in different points in time. Not every marvel property will be the same in terms of size, scope, timeline, and production design.

    It makes the properties distinct enough to not be shilling out the same shit for 3 straight months.

    But Green Lantern. It’s big, epic, space opera. Hard to judge until you see a clip. And the 3D thing does not inspire me.

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