MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by Klady

9 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Klady”

  1. movieman says:

    Is that a typo on the “Spring Breakers” gross??
    If not, YOWZA!
    Really, really liked the movie: it’s Korine’s best since “Gummo” and a sensational piece of filmmaking.

  2. chris says:

    Might not be. The New York Times devoted seemingly the entire Sunday arts section to “Spring Breakers.”

  3. Uh says:

    SPRING BREAKERS is a masterpiece.

  4. movieman says:

    If those figures are indeed accurate, I’ll be very curious to see how it performs in next weekend’s expansion.
    They’ve already increased the screen count from 550 to 600.
    I wonder how wide a Harmony Korine movie can possibly go…

  5. etguild2 says:

    What a muted response to “Poppy Hill” and “Upside Down,” both of which are doing very well overseas…

  6. chris says:

    Too bad about “Poppy Hill,” but “Upside Down” richly deserves obscurity.

  7. jesse says:

    What on earth is everyone seeing in Spring Breakers that I didn’t?

    There’s some great stuff in it, at least 30 or 40 minutes’ worth, but as a whole movie it’s so repetitive and shallow and self-satisfied, replaying the gun-cocking noise and Franco going spring break forEVAH every five fucking minutes!

    I get that Korine did this on purpose, trying to make the movie hypnotic or whatever; that doesn’t make it interesting to actually watch. Are we supposed to be super psyched that he made a movie where we don’t know anything about any of the characters except the token religious one, and Franco (who I did think was pretty excellent)?

    I wish it had been a masterpiece. I wish it was as good as the best bits of it (the two different Britney songs, that robbery scene, Franco’s “look at all my shit” monologue) but Korine’s so self-consciously uninterested in movies that he wound up making an attractive but empty art installation piece.

    More bitching by me about this here:

    But so many reactions I’ve heard about this one have been over the moon!

    You want a movie about young people that doesn’t play by normal studio cliche rules and actually says something without just sneering about what an awesome subversive art project it is? Gondry’s The We and the I is playing in a few theaters. Go see that.

  8. Lex says:


  9. cadavra says:

    They went art-house on POPPY HILL–in a dubbed version.

    They. Still. Don’t. Get. It.

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