MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland


Not actually. Going to a funeral. But that doesn’t sound like much fun. (In lieu of flowers or donations, do yourself a favor and see Get Low.)

I’ve scheduled some DP/30s to post while I am gone. I may check in, but really, I’m going to try not to until I get back home on Friday morning. MCN will be fully functional without me, so there will be plenty to chew on. Beat each other up respectfully while I am gone, please.

Be Sociable, Share!

94 Responses to “BYOB”

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

    Condolences DP.

  2. Joe Leydon says:

    Sorry for your loss.

  3. Keil Shults says:

    Will we see an Awards Scoreboard in the near future? Also, this newly formatted Top 10 scoreboard seems to have issues on certain computers. Will you eventually return to the large grid format that the site has used in past years?

  4. Samuel Deter says:

    Is it possible that being snubbed by the Globes could be True Grit’s blessing in disguise?

    People are going to see it and realise that it has been relatively and unfairly absent this awards season. A wave of love can come its way.

    We’ll see.

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

    Not too long ago some of us were lamenting the lack of Westerns in film these days. Looks like AMC’s next new show will be a Western. Sounds promising.

  6. IOv3 says:

    True Grit is a Coens film. The Coens are not exactly box office, so this flick could either draw or not. Getting some Oscar noms will help but I can easily see it getting 127ed until those nominations are released next month. So, yeah, it could have used the pub from the Globes.

  7. Don R. Lewis says:

    Didn’t A SERIOUS MAN get an Oscar nom for best pic? That thing is minor Coen’s all the way…they get a pass for nearly everything so why not TRUE GRIT as well? (I haven’t seen TG yet, I’m just sayin’)

  8. anghus says:

    I liked A Serious Man. Best ending to a movie i’ve seen in ages. Haven’t seen True Grit or Black Swan yet, but out of all the films i’ve seen, my “Best of” this year would be Four Lions.

  9. IOv3 says:

    Don, I am not putting past the film getting noms but getting box office is a completely different situation.

  10. movieman says:

    “TG” should have no trouble becoming the Coen’s top grossing film to date (which was what? “NCFOM”?) It’s also the first to go mega-wide on opening day.
    …still think it’s probably going to be–along with “Fockers 3”–the consensus choice for family “holiday” outings.
    I just realized something kind of bizarre: “TG” is the first time my initial viewing of a Coen film was on dvd rather than at a movie theater.

  11. DiscoNap says:

    TRUE GRIT is second-tier Coens, but it’s going to do huge business. It’s their family-friendly adventure film.

  12. IOv3 says:

    An R-rated film revenge western is a family-friendly film? You are funny Disco. You are… FUNNY! True Grit will be lucky to be number five next weekend but it should legs, depending on the Academy going ga-ga for it.

  13. Blackcloud says:

    IO, all the commercials I’ve seen say it’s PG-13. I didn’t believe it at first, but after the 12th commercial, I figured it wasn’t a mistake. I too assumed it was R, but it’s not.

  14. anghus says:

    True Grit Poster
    More at IMDbPro »
    True Grit (2010)
    PG_13 110 min – Drama | Western

  15. Donger says:

    Is there any hope for a Never Let Me Go screener? The initial reviews were so good and then they ended up with 68 on rotten tomatoes.

  16. sanj says:

    finally saw The Town – i don’t get the best picture oscar – seems like a good tv movie with higher quality camerawork
    and some better acting from Jeremy Renner but the biggest
    surprise was the crazy amount of face closeups of Rebecca Hall.. the Blake Lively character wasn’t really needed at

  17. LexG says:


  18. Nick Rogers says:

    Having seen True Grit, I wouldn’t call it family friendly. Well, not EVERY family. Mine probably wouldn’t mind going to a movie where you see a man’s fingers chopped off, one skull dashed against a rock and another one blown onto the wall.

  19. Krillian says:

    The SAG nominations have probably helped put True Grit back into the conversation. Not to win, but at least be one of the ten.

    Still suspense for Best Pic and Actress, but Firth, Bale, Leo, and Fincher seem to be solid front-runners for the other major awards.

  20. a_loco says:

    Re: True Grit

    I’m trying to think of a gnarlier PG-13 movie from recent memory. I’m thinking maybe Dark Knight, but even that didn’t have so much blood.

    Either way, calling it a “family-friendly adventure film” is doing it a huge disservice. I’m also unsure about its chances at legs. It’s very good, but it’s very, um, Coen-y for a mainstream movie, and you can’t understand what Bridges is saying half the time.

  21. Nick Rogers says:

    a_loco: It’s probably the quickness of all the stuff I mentioned and the lack of a lingering camera. But still, it’s there, and you see it. I, too, wonder about its legs. I can see a lot of fair-weather fans / general population getting weary of the chatty first act (which I actually preferred to the second or third). The scenes with Dakin Matthews and Hailee Steinfeld are the best in it.

  22. sanj says:

    the academy should punk everybody

    best picture – twilight eclipse
    best actor – Bruce Willis – Cop Out
    best actress – Jennifer Aniston – Bounty Hunter

  23. arisp says:

    Good point about not being able to understand what Bridges was saying. I missed at least half of what he said. Also it’s definitely not a family film – it’s a western revenge movie. Not sure what kind of family film that is.

  24. sanj says:

    the end of Larry King tonight … does anybody care ?

  25. Nick Rogers says:

    Factory workers who make replacement parts for Larry King probably care.

  26. torpid bunny says:

    So are people saying that Tron isn’t even visually interesting?

    Doesn’t it seem like Angelina and Johnny look exactly like their non-film selves in The Tourist? Jolie in particular has practically the same look at premieres. This seems like a poor choice for the film. Like, we can tell already that Jolie and Depp are in the movie.

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

    The Tourist had better make some major bank overseas. Unless it performs unexpectedly well over the holidays it will be lucky to end up north of $50 million. That’s pretty terrible.

  28. hcat says:

    Blake Edwards passed away. 88 is a good stretch but still a bit sad. Good or Bad he pretty much wrote the template for the modern studio comedy. The Hangover, Its Complicated, and all the Apatow films would have easily fit into his oeuvre.

    The single biggest belly-laugh I ever let out watching a movie was in one of the Panther films where Sellers is playing around on the Parallel bars and dismounts down the staircase. Absolute perfection.

  29. Hopscotch says:

    Go to, check out the interview on The Fighter. Christian Bale, Marky Mark and David ORussell.

    I enjoyed it for one solitary reason: I’m pretty sure all three of these men hate each other. Seriously. There is an underlying tension through the whole thing. They all clearly can’t stand each other. MUST WATCH!

  30. cadavra says:

    Yes, Edwards’ death, whil not unexpected given his fragile health, is still a horrible loss. In his era, no one was as funny and prolific. And we shouldn’t overlook that he was just as talented in the dramatic world, giving us EXPERIMENT IN TERROR and DAYS OF WINE AND ROSES back to back.

  31. Monco says:

    I saw them on Charlie Rose. I felt that tension too but I thought it was Marky Mark and David O kinda teaming up on Bale. Bale seemed to be respectful but they seemed to enjoy mocking him. Maybe they resent that Bale is the one that is gonna get any love from the Academy.

  32. LexG says:

    I watched the Charlie Rose too, and sensed no tension.

    It was three awesome dudes being awesome.

  33. anghus says:

    after Charlie Rose taped, Bale told O’Russell that they were done professionally.

    Then O’Russell slammed through a door and screamed that they he had been working on the script for 3 years and that he was being unprofessional.

    Mark Wahlberg just sort of stood there and acted like nothing was happening.

    It was fucking epic.

  34. JKill says:

    I don’t get a chance to see THE FIGHTER until this weekend, and I’m so excited for another Whalberg/O’Russell collaboration and just another O’Russell movie in general. I HEART HUCKABEES has such wonderful rewatch value, and Whalberg is really incredible in it, and should have been nominated.

    “Jesus is never mad at us if we live with Him in our hearts!”

    “I hate to break it to you, but He is – He most definitely is.”

  35. Jeffrey Boam's Doctor says:

    What the hell is with Bale’s accent on Rose?

    He’s so far gone into so many characters he’s lost his original voice. It’s this weird affected amalgam of like 10 different accents.


    ps – Zero tension noticed.

  36. yancyskancy says:

    I wonder if David O. Russell ever regrets using his middle initial, since even most of the people who dig him seem to think his last name is O’Russell.

  37. IOv3 says:

    Today is the day. Where do you folks see the Tron number? Apparently geeks like Dellamorte think it’s in the 40s. I am going with 50s to 60s because it just seems like the kids have caught onto it. Not teenagers in this regard (they will probably go as well), but little kids who see those toys and want to see this film. Could be wrong and have Christian hold it against me forever but geeks underselling the film because they totally lack the imagination to understand how a COMPUTER WORLD WORKS, is pretty freaking hilarious.

  38. leahnz says:

    in that charlie rose interview david o. russell is tripping me out without his trademark long, lanky richard linklater-esque hairdo, he doesn’t look like himself at all (rather he looks like whatshisdoodle now, matt lauer. freaky, so square. maybe d. o. r. figured with bale’s locks now so long and luscious he had to create balance in the universe by chopping his off)

    there does seem to be a bit of underlying discord or some such going on in that manage-a-trois of bale, d. o. r. & wahlberg; bale seems super-keen and manic and weird as usual (so good just to see him out of ‘grim-and-utterly-humourless-onenote-emphysema-gravel-voice’ mode)

  39. sanj says:

    How do you know movie doesn’t have any critic quotes in
    newspaper ads ..

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

    Well Time and The Village Voice liked How Do You Know, so quotes are out there.

    I think Tron’s number is hard to predict. Will Yogi Bear (kids/families) and/or The Fighter (younger males) provide serious competition? Has the marketing successfully sold younger viewers? I’d like to see it, but when I have the chance to see a movie next week, my dad and I will be checking out True Grit.

  41. arisp says:

    I didnt see any tension. 3 massive egos in one room perhaps gives that impression.

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

    LA Times says Tron is expected to open with about $50 million. Yogi Bear heading for $20 million. The Fighter and Black Swan both could beat How Do You Know, which could open with as little as $10 million. Not good.

  43. Krillian says:

    A group of co-workers and I (I being the youngest at age 37) are seeing an afternoon Tron Legacy in IMAX 3-D showing. $50 million sounds right. It has broad appeal.

  44. Telemachos says:

    Super early whisper guesstimates say TRON did about $3 million in midnights, which probably means an opening weekend in the 40s.

  45. IOv3 says:

    Tele, I would agree with you if those midnight shows were everywhere and they sure as snot were not. 3 million from midnight shows in select market has more of a 55 million feel to it.

  46. hcat says:

    Doesn’t everywhere have midnight shows now? I live in the sticks and the theaters have thursday midnight shows of all new releases, not just tentpoles. I thought this was common practice now.

    And I am guessing 43 for the weekend.

    And I read that Fockers is clocking in around 90 minutes and change. Weren’t the others closer to two hours? Just another sign of weakness.

  47. According to Arclight, Little Fockers is 98 minutes. It’s not a terrible sign per-se. Meet the Parents was 108 minutes, and Meet the Fockers was 115 minutes. Arguably, less set-up and less meet-and-greet (everyone knows each other this time around) equals a slightly shorter running time.

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

    The 30 second TV spots are all I need to see of Little Fockers. Wow does it look painfully awful. About a Boy and In Good Company seem like a lifetime ago.

  49. Hopscotch says:

    When O. Russell said “we had 11 million below the line. THAT’s what we had to make the movie with.” that seemed like a clear swipe at someone who I guess didn’t the salary low enough.

    From my understanding, a lot of these repeat actor/director teams really can’t stand each other. But they are aware their collaboration could incite interest or get a movie greenlit, so they do it.

  50. hcat says:

    Fully ashamed to say I really dug the FastFive trailer. Adding the Rock in is pure b-movie genius.

  51. sanj says:

    how many more focker movies can Robert De Nero do ?

    shouldn’t he pick some projects that can win some oscars ?

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

    “And whatever you do, do not let them get in the cars.” Isn’t a F&F movie kind of like a Saw movie? You know exactly what you’re going to get, and those that like them usually leave satisfied.

  53. Joe Leydon says:

    Hopscotch: “From my understanding, a lot of these repeat actor/director teams really can’t stand each other. But they are aware their collaboration could incite interest or get a movie greenlit, so they do it.”

    Well, as some news accounts are reminding us this week, Blake Edwards and Peter Sellers sure as hell weren’t bosom buddies.

  54. christian says:

    “Could be wrong and have Christian hold it against me forever but geeks underselling the film because they totally lack the imagination to understand how a COMPUTER WORLD WORKS, is pretty freaking hilarious.”

    More hilarious than you screaming at folks in 1982 that TRON was bigger and better than ET?

    That said, I’ll be scoping out TRON 3D on the biggest screen imaginable.

  55. Hopscotch says:

    I have on good authority Russell Crowe and Ridley Scott similarly are at odds personally, but if someone paid $10million to work with an asshole, i’d probably do it too.

  56. sanj says:

    fun picture of Ashton and Demi …

  57. hcat says:

    Now you are veering over the line Sanj.

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

    Yeah that isn’t fun at all.

  59. al says:

    Yeah was wondering on the other byob if Fav had left IM3 because he no longer got along with RDJ.

    Deniro is doing The Irishman with Scorcese, Pacino, and Pesci. I think they should get an Oscar just for all agreeing to do the damn film.

    Tron is dividing the geeks. Maybe that bodes well for the bottom line…

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

    Are the geeks all that vital to Tron’s box office? Isn’t it more important that families and young males see it in large numbers?

  61. yancyskancy says:

    “fun picture of Ashton and Demi …”

    Are they taking off or landing?

  62. Hopscotch says:

    I hear the tension was between Favreau and Marvel. Budgets, developing story lines with The Avengers and stuff like that.

    I’m very proud of myself for not seeing Iron Man 2. I’ve heard nothing but horrible things. Never saw Spidey 3 or Pirates 3 or Transformers 2.

  63. al says:

    well the geeks going feral over a film (kick-ass, scott p) seems to indicate that it’s going to play niche. But no, I don’t think they matter that much in this case

  64. storymark says:

    In regards to Iron Man 3 – I assume that Disney/Marvel has folks in mind, but I really need to throw this out there:

    Shane Black.

    Get that guy to write/direct IM3…. pure awesomeness.

    Anyone know if he and Downey got along on KKBB?

  65. leahnz says:

    or you lucky ducks could go see ‘and soon the darkness’ if it’s playing at a cinema near you because there couldn’t be anything better out there to watch than karl with blonde highlights and a smirk in ‘is he or isn’t he?’ stalking mode

    edited to say because i didn’t see story’s comment before posting:

    i like the shane black idea (esp if there is never going to be the long awaited ‘kiss kiss’ sequel chronicling the further misadventures of harry and perry i cry out for in my sleep and which was so deliberately set up at the end of the movie; if only shane could somehow bring back gay perry to tell tony stark what a moron he is…)

  66. IOv3 says:

    Christian, if you can’t get the point of a anecdote then do not comment on it. The fact that you were so eager to insult me on something that I never wrote, speaks volumes about you. VOLUMES!

    You aside, Tron Legacy fucking rules. If Scott Mendelson wants to have a fight about it. I will have a fight about it because god forbid little kids are not told early on that TYRANNY in ANY FORM is a bad thing, and that taking a stand against that TYRANNY is what one must do.

    People insulting this story are obviously once again living the chubby white boy dream. GOD BLESS THEM, AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

    Oh yeah Hopscotch: GOOD FOR YOU! You didn’t see movies. WOW! DO YOU WANT A BADGE FOR IT? Seriously, I can make a badge if you want it.

  67. storymark says:

    Why fight about it? How about, just a thought here… accept that other people have different opinions!

  68. IOv3 says:

    Story, go read the TRON LEGACY reviews over at CHUD and you will get why I am pissed. Go read Mendelson’s review and realize why I am pissed. I am staggered that people can refer to a movie as STUPID, while making stupid comment after stupid comment about said film.

    This is not new really. I love countless films that people give shit to for reasons that stem from them having an axe to grind with those films. Yes Speed Racer, Reloaded, and Revolutions I am looking at you.

  69. Hopscotch says:

    Badges? I don’t need no stinkin’ badges!

  70. IOv3 says:

    Damn it. Now I’ll never get to use this badge making kit. Son of a bitch.

  71. Debating the merits of a film that I loathed against someone who genuinely liked it is a losing battle, akin to debating religion. If you found what I was hoping to find on Monday night, then I certainly won’t judge you for it. I didn’t hate the film as much as I did because I thought it was ‘stupid’. I hated it because I feel that it failed to deliver the audio/visual razzle-dazzle and action spectacle that would have excused the other flaws in the film, leaving the film (in my opinion) with little to justify its existence. I can give a ‘dumb film’ like GI Joe a recommendation because it entertained the hell out of me, giving me 110 minutes of uber-colorful Joes and Cobras killing the crap out of each other in high-style. If GI Joe didn’t work for you, then you probably know how I felt about Tron: Legacy. But at least GI Joe seemed to be trying, while I detected a strong lack of effort and/or laziness about Tron, something akin to ‘eh, if we market this thing enough, they’ll all show up anyway’. That’s where my anger comes from, what separates it from something like Transformers or even Iron Man 2.

    I loved Matrix Reloaded, liked Matrix Revolutions (specifically loved the first and last respective thirty minutes), and picked Speed Racer as my favorite film of 2008. Hell, I’ll even defend the Star Wars prequels, as I’ve done here and there over the years.

    I’d argue that many, if not most, fantasy films are about the fight against tyranny (Star Wars, Matrix, the Pirates sequels, X-Men, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, etc). Doesn’t mean we give the bad ones a pass.

  72. LexG says:

    Can someone just answer yes or no:

    Do I HAVE to see this in 3D? So sick of 3D, plus it’s playing on some bigger, more convenient screens in the 2D version.

    And I’m just 3D’d out. Is it 100% crucial?

  73. IOv3 says:

    Scott, again, what you expected and what is remains my problem. If you just reviewed what’s there and not what you EXPECTED TO BE DELIVERED, then we would not have any problems. TL, for some reason only known to you and other people who agree with you, is getting kicked in the nuts for the most ridiculous of reasons. (Apparently the people over at RT like it much more than the critics, which means, it’s CRITIC GROUP THINK COLUMN TIME! That’s if David liked this film, which is doubtful, but to act as if this film is not getting jobbed for reasons mention below, is just plain dumb.)

    Seriously, it’s a movie set in the world of THE GRID. What did you want? You have the great twist of one of the villains, you have a great bit of business of an avatar gone mad, and you even have a large group of people believing their destiny is to cleanse the unpure. To eliminate the imperfections. Hell, the reasoning for why there is no perfect system may be one of my fave bits of business in a movie all year. Oh jesus, TL brings up the problems of a creator but god help us if our critiquing brain-trust had the ability to catch that over their ridiculous quibbles.

    The fact that you bring up marketing, pretty much sums up my point. It’s not about the film, it’s not about what’s in the film for you, but it’s about some other perceived thing in your head that has nothing to do with the movie. If that floats your boat, if you feel that to be a valid criticism, then we are in total disagreement about what’s criticism.

    Oh yeah, you know why people debate religion a lot of the time? Gaining perspective about the other side. You also prove my point about how very few people on the net care about anyone else’s opinion but their own. That’s a shit way to have a discussion here or out there.

    Finally, Lex, it’s one of the few great 3D movies as in the 3D is fucking awesome. It’s seamless and really adds to the beauty of the GRID.

  74. Telemachos says:

    IO, stop tilting at windmills. While there are definitely those who loveloveLOVE Tron: Legacy (you’re not alone!) word of mouth is pretty mixed even on sites where you’d expect a lot of love: AICN, BOM, etc.

  75. I wasn’t as taken with the 3D as others, but if you’re going to see it, than at least see it on a big 3D IMAX screen for the one major set piece that genuinely works.

    I make a point never to review the film that I had in my head, which is something that DOES happen quite a bit in the critical community (see – the Matrix sequels, the Star Wars prequels, and the Pirates sequels). The problem is I didn’t find much there on an entertainment level. You’re right, it’s not a completely empty film, but the way the story was told was not to my liking. Which again, wouldn’t be a problem if the film had delivered on certain purely visceral levels, which I felt it did not. I had no idea ‘what the film I expected to see’ was, and in fact I was more than a little excited to see it due to no real expectations. I had read a few reviews, some negative and some positive, but I went in expecting nothing more than to be entertained and perhaps a little wowed. Alas, I was not. Maybe that’s my problem, but I can only call it as I see it.

    FYI – You’re right about the ‘no one’s opinion but my own’ problem, but I was more referring more to the fact that religion is something that most people can’t be moved on to any large degree. I hated the film, you obviously rather liked (loved?) it. We can hash out our respective reasons, but it the end we’re just two panelists on Crossfire. Still, at least we agree on Harry Potter…

  76. IOv3 says:

    Scott, I loved the damn thing and I wonder if that’s just my gamer/technology loving nature? Whateverthecase, while your review pissed me off, it’s not a CHUD LEVEL RAGE because at least you are not a complete and utter dick about it, and because of that I give you dap.

    Now, seriously, CROSSFIRE? CROSSFIRE? Man I do miss me some CROSSFIRE. Big fan back in the day… during the dark times when I was a lot more… REPCONIAN!

  77. IOv3 says:

    Again… THIS IS HOW THE INTERNET WORKS. IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE INTERNET WORKS. Your fandom points are pretty low and seeing that FS has only seen one film in the theatre this year, his fandom dropped 15 points from the start of this year XD!

    Another trope of the internet: assholes stating what a trope on the internet is!

  78. shillfor alanhorn says:


  79. Don R. Lewis says:

    The greatest trick the Disney ever played was making you think you ever gave a shot about TRON. Aside from the actual video game.

  80. Joe Straatmann says:

    Really, all I wanted from TRON: Legacy was the Daft Punk soundtrack. If the movie was good as well, cool. And TRON: Legacy is solid. It’s not moronic and it manages to fix my two major issues with the original: The digital chase scenes that were completely uninvolving because it’s just watching computer images do things with things, and the really really really poor attempts at humor. Not that there are big laughs in Legacy, but there are some chuckle. Gerrutt Hedlund comes from the Chris Pine factory of kind of bland leading men who can at least deliver a good one-liner when they get one. And the world is more glass and steel and tangible that make it feel real and dangerous when there’s action going on. The story is standard, but it succeeds on small levels.The references to Nazism needed an extra level of horror a PG Disney live-action couldn’t give me, but it works. It’s a good movie. I liked it. Not something really worth going to war over on one end of the spectrum or the other.

  81. jesse says:

    Lex, and others thinking of seeing Tron 2, I would say see it on a REAL IMAX screen if you can find it. Less for the 3-D (though it’s cooler-looking for this movie than most) than for the seemingly marginally publicized fact that there are long sequences of this movie that use the NEAR-FULL (real) IMAX screen. Real IMAX hasn’t gotten much attention since The Dark Knight since everyone’s been busy getting excited or backlashing about 3-D, but for my money it’s the most spectacular and underused of visual upgrades. The movie itself is kind of silly and sometimes poky, much like the original, but I didn’t really care because a large portion of it actually filled that gigantic screen and it just looked awesome. I haven’t had this much fun simply *looking* at a movie in ages.

  82. torpid bunny says:

    I appreciate the reasonable comments on Tron. I love Daft Punk but I’m not sure I can talk myself into a silly effects extravaganza. 2012 was kind of amusing to watch on Starz but spending time/money in a theater? I’ll probably just spend my money on True Grit.

    Hedlund is comparable to Chris Pine? Really? Pine is a terrific actor so that’s a high bar.

  83. Al says:

    Always thought of Pine as his generation’s Brad Pitt, potentially

  84. sanj says:

    Macros Efron – he directed And Soon the Darkness Movie

    he hasn’t directed any huge movies – 1 short movie called
    Common Practice

    he’s also done music videos and commercials

    so could he be a big director in the next 2 years ?
    mostly action films ..

    i haven’t seen any interviews on most of the bigger
    movie blogs

  85. movieman says:

    …finally caught “How Do You Know” and, huge bummer: it’s Brooks’ weakest film to date.
    For a writer-director whose screenplays are usually models of wit, razor-sharp characterization and craftsmanship, it’s kind of shocking that Brooks’ script is the single weakest element of the entire movie. I kept thinking that it needed an add’l polish….or four. And as much as I love Owen Wilson, the film might have worked better if his character had been dropped altogether (which might have given more room to beef up Rudd’s too-wobbly story arc).
    The bottom line: you know that a rom-com’s triangular romance isn’t working when you don’t care who the heroine winds up with (Wilson was an inveterate Peter Pan who couldn’t keep his dick in his pants; Rudd was uber neurotic thnx to his myriad daddy issues). It’s lose/lose either way.
    I’d like to think that Brooks will rebound his next time out, but maybe not. Could he have lost his passion/aptitude for the whole arduous filmmaking process? On the basis of this and the only marginally better “Spanglish,” maybe so. Perhaps he’d be happier–and more creatively successful–returning to his sitcom roots and creating a new half-hour comedy for, say, HBO.

  86. IOv3 says:

    Torpid, comparing TL to 2012 is like comparing a literal apple to an orange. TL actually tells a story and does not spend two hours making you watch the world fall apart. It’s worth your money no matter what the critics say, who according to the people in this case, are just flat wrong.

  87. torpid bunny says:

    There’s a lot going on in 2012. Biblical quotations, political-economic critique, the normative survival of the (alienated) nuclear family unit, sublime welters of the world’s oceans. A lot to chew on actually. But it’s basically ludicrous and vastly complacent and would be quite unpleasant to sit through, addled by coke and popcorn probably, in one of my few free afternoons, having had to figure out a way to make time for an expensive visit to some Imax on the other side of town.

    I’d rather watch it in bits and pieces on my samsung at home and still be able to watch the kid. Then I can enjoy all the little angles in the story and not be pissed off by it’s basic gratuitousness. But I could still be talked into Tron.

  88. Joe Straatmann says:

    Well, obviously, I don’t think as much of Pine as some of you do. I think the guy who played Kirk’s father in the Star Trek reboot would’ve made a better Kirk, and Pine just does the job and not much else. Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban steal the show in my mind. The only reason I bring it up is because Pine and Hedlund essentially play the same character in Star Trek and TRON: Legacy, at least at the beginning (Orphaned kids whose rebellious tendancies are on the verge of being self-destructive).

    But to Pine’s credit, he is being selective when choosing roles, which I think wil lserve him well.

  89. I liked 2012 far more than I expected to. I can take or leave the epic scenes of massive destruction. But any popcorn picture that gives starring roles to Oliver Platt and Chiwetel Ejiofor and lets them spend 2.5 hours debating the morality of what’s occurring, while refusing to give either of them the moral advantage, earns by money.

  90. IOv3 says:

    2012 is still stupid, disgusting, and pointless. I had to sit through it on cable just to see it and my god, I wish I could unsee it. Seriously, that Russian Billionaire deserved better!

  91. On that we agree… the ‘crowdpleasing’ scene of the Russian guy’s mistress leaving him to die was not a little unpleasant, as she always theoretically condemned his children to death as well. Having said that, I liked how arbitrary the film was about who lived and died.

  92. sanj says:

    2012 was about blowing huge things up in crazy ways.

    also DP mentioned that social network can’t win best picture – is David losing his chances for future interviews ? don’t actors / directors feeling get hurt by this ?
    the movie has won enough awards – maybe they don’t care ? Will Andrew Garfield not do a DP/30 for Spiderman because David said something bad ..

    just wondering how much power internet movie critics have vs tv critics vs print critics ? does it even matter
    cause people just spend 1 minute at rottentomoatoes anyways ?

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