MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

BYOB 2/16/11

Be Sociable, Share!

15 Responses to “BYOB 2/16/11”

  1. movielocke says:

    no gurus part 2?

  2. LexG says:

    In boring movie talk news that no one will care about:

    Why does Universal CONSTANTLY do shit like opening TWO MOVIES ON THE SAME WEEKEND? Is that a good policy? Does any other studio so regularly do that? ADJUSTMENT BUREAU and TAKE ME HOME TONIGHT on the same day? Why? Why? They’ve both been on a shelf for forever… why not space them out? UNI does this ALL the time, though usually one is Universal proper and the other is usually Focus/Rogue. But still… MY SOUL TO TAKE/CATFISH, FOCKERS/SOMEWHERE… I know, not like the movies are usually direct competition, but it seems counterproductive.

    MARCH looks PACKED. I was thinking RED RIDING HOOD was gonna be the biggest thing EVER… till I realized that BATTLE LOS ANGELES comes out the same day; This weekend UNKNOWN and I AM NUMBER FOUR drop the same day. Who plans this shit so badly, so there’s always always two movies I want to see with equal ferocity released on the same day all the time?

    How does Michael Fassbender get to see 130 MOVIES PER YEAR IN THEATERS when he has to be on set in foreign countries all the time?

    Obviously he doesn’t, much like most working actors and directors can’t make it out to the movies on a regular basis. Some of you guys work in the production end of the biz… Doesn’t that SUCK?

    I’m always reminded of Quentin Tarantino’s heartbreaking realization from his acting class days, when he said it drove him nuts that all these assholes in his acting classes didn’t know shit about movies, didn’t love movies anywhere near as much as he did.

  3. leahnz says:

    foamy, i was gonna ask how you even come across such a thing, what sort of bizarro internet jaunt lead you to that…but perhaps some things are better left unsaid :-O

  4. jesse says:

    I think Take Me Home Tonight may not actually be from Universal anymore? I was under the impression that Relativity, which was releasing stuff through Universal for awhile, has actually spun off into its own entity now (I guess they’re aspiring to be, what, the new Summit? Good luck with that). I don’t know if Universal is still distributing or what, but its press stuff didn’t seem to be handled through the usual Universal channels.

    April looks pretty packed, too, at least in terms of stuff I really want to see: Source Code and Insidious on the first weekend; Hanna and Your Highness the weekend after; and, hell, maybe Scream 4 after that will be fun.

    Also, those Fast and the Furious movies… I only really enjoyed the first one, and did skip the Tokyo one theatrically… but they’ve gotten really good at cutting trailers to make them look completely awesome. I was totally excited about #4 and disappointed to find that apart from a couple of sequences, it was the same dull undercover-cops bullshit from the first and awful second. But that trailer kicked ass. And now there’s a Fast Five trailer that makes it look totally fucking awesome, too — once again implying it’s less undercover cop/street racing bullshit and more, you know, actual action and chases and stuff. And I’ll probably see it. What is wrong with me?

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

    I know it’s an easy and obvious target, but how bad does Big Momma’s look? I feel bad for Brandon Jackson. He does good work in Tropic Thunder only to be cast as a high school nerd in Percy Jackson and now sidekick to Martin Lawrence in the third Big Momma’s movie. Sure he’s working and paying his bills, but I figured he’d get better roles than this after Tropic Thunder.

    I think Battle: Los Angeles looks pretty cool. I want to see The Adjustment Bureau as well but its delay can’t be a good sign. I love werewolf movies but I have little hope that they can make a good PG-13 one these days.

  6. sanj says:

    lots of comments about Big Momma movie / Martin Lawerence

    most are negative

  7. hcat says:

    I was getting interested in Battle Los Angeles until I noticed that it was from Original Films. Perhaps this one will transcend their track record but their action movies usually turn out quite slim (XXX, Stealth).

  8. LexG says:

    Big Momma 3 looks FUNNY AS HELL. I don’t care, it must be my roots as a young black man who grew up watching BUSTIN’ LOOSE and WHICH WAY IS UP, and Jeffersons and Sanford and spent my 20s watching The Wayans Brothers on WB (WITHERSPOON POWER)… but I ALWAYS think that kind of absurdist, broad black comedy is the funniest thing ever.

    Every time I’ve seen the BIG MOMMA trailer, it’s met with STONE SILENCE… except for me howling like Max Cady. It’s kind of the same thing with how white critics were so mystified by NORBIT. White people in general don’t appreciate or understand broad black humor. They’re very uptight about it, worried that somehow it’s buffoonery. Instead, it comes from a very particular tradition of black comedy.

    That said, Brandon T. Jackson’s LAST starring vehicle, LOTTERY TICKET, was the least-funny hood comedy EVER. I’m still not even sure it wasn’t supposed to be a drama.

  9. JKill says:

    Really? I like Lawrence, love his two stand-up movies, like him in both BAD BOYS movies, and found him refreshingly different and even low-key in the DEATH AT A FUNERAL remake (which was actually really funny and well made), and I think BIG MOMMA 3 looks like one of the worst experiences one could possibly sit through in a movie theater. I find the trailer, for the two or three minutes it’s on to be so excruciating that I contemplate leaving the theater every time I’ve seen it. Especially because of Brandon T. Jackson’s presence, it makes me think of the fake TROPIC THUNDER trailers every single time too.

    Man, comedy is subjective.

  10. aframe says:

    Some Rogue releases are handled through Universal and some handled through Relativity themselves. TAKE ME HOME TONIGHT is one of the Relativity in-house releases like THE WARRIOR’S WAY, SEASON OF THE WITCH, and the upcoming LIMITLESS.

  11. LexG says:


    Thanks for the info!

  12. sanj says:

    ND TV India is covering the oscars

    DP – get your DP/30’s on there …

  13. sanj says:

    the power of Lady Gaga –

    The YouTube video of 10-year-old Winnipegger Maria Aragon singing a cover of Lady Gaga’s Born This Way has gone viral — from 3,100 to 1.5 million views in less than 24 hours.

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