MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Trailer: The One 3D Movie You Might Want To See In 2011

Be Sociable, Share!

8 Responses to “Trailer: The One 3D Movie You Might Want To See In 2011”

  1. Pete B. says:

    So how pissed are John Cho & Kal Penn that Neil Patrick Harris gets as much face time as they do in this trailer?

    They should name it A Very Harold, Kumar & Neil Christmas.

    I’ll still be there opening day.

  2. Joe Leydon says:

    I want to see this movie now. Right now.

  3. Bennett says:

    I usually catch these films on DVD with low expectations. But that is a pretty good trailer. I might have to go check this out. But with all the 3D movies coming out this holiday season, I doubt that it will still be playing in 3D on Christmas.

  4. palmtree says:

    Finally, a 3D movie that makes fun of 3D.

  5. It’s no secret that I think Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle is the best comedy of the last decade, and my favorite film about ethnic/race relations made in my lifetime. And it’s no secret that I loathe Harold and Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay with a fiery passion. Short version – it’s not funny, it dabbles in cliches that the original avoided, and it basically boils all of the post-9/11 government abuses to ‘one bad apple’ and lets George W. Bush off the hook while selling the ‘he’s just a regular guy’ myth. So it says something that I actually laughed out loud while watching this trailer, and the actual 3D played well (and was funny) during the pre-Final Destination 5 trailer reel.

    By the way, Final Destination 5 had some wonderful 3D work and it’s arguably the first must-see 3D film since Coraline (I love How to Train Your Dragon, Avatar, and the 3D work in Transformers 3, but they work just as well in 2D). It’s also a FAR better film than the last two sequels and may be the best since the original.

  6. Monco says:

    Wow, that looks awful.

  7. storymark says:

    I just want an NPH movie.

  8. cadavra says:

    Yeah, not gonna happen…even if a free hooker was included with the ticket.

The Hot Blog

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