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
Looks like it’ll finish smack between IM2 and AVENGERS. A bit surprised, as opening day is 7 million below TDKR despite 3D, but it should finish a little ahead due to Aurora.
Yikes, everything but 42 and CROODS got slammed. Remember when a massive opening meant better holds due to people picking another flick due to sellouts? (only one film in the top 10 fell more than 50% when PIRATES 2 opened for instance…2 did for SPIDER-MAN) I guess so many people know to buy tickets online now that they don’t bother to go to the theater if it’s sold out.
Actually not, Etguild. There are very, very few sellouts anymore for movies like this. They accordion the theaters so there are so many seats available on opening weekend that pretty much everyone who wants to go can go on opening weekend.
Right now, there is not a single hour at The Grove, which is a hugely successful mid-town theater here in LA, in which you cannot get tickets to Iron Man 3. Yes, some shows may sell out as you get within an hour of showtime. But not many.
There era of the sellout ended around Star Wars/Sith, which is – not coincidentally – when $100m openings became a norm.
Really want to see The Iceman more than the Iron Man, but it’s nowhere close to me (unless it’s playing in Chicago, but I don’t want to drive 90 minutes to get there. I did so a couple weeks back for the Redd Kross concert…hate driving in Chicago). I guess I can look forward to a quick home-viewing release June/July?
I think it depends on the area David. Yesterday, Tyson’s Corner here in the DC area had 25…yes, 25 afternoon and evening showings and only a few were sold out, as you’d expect when you have that many screenings. On the other hand, my uncle who lives in Richmond, VA could not get a ticket, period yesterday, but had no such trouble today. Those who live in mid-sized cities, and non-high density sprawl still experience sellouts frequently. I travel back frequently to Virginia Beach, a city that boasts 4 first-run theaters for nearly half a million residents, only one of which has more than 12 screens. Christmas season moviegoing is a nightmare.
TDK was the last movie I had trouble getting to see in the first couple days here in Northern VA. I think it’s a combination of staggered showings and online ticketing that’s contributing to the holdover crashes we’re seeing against mega-openers.
Yeah, shows may not sell out round the clock, but in Manhattan, where online and advance ticketing is pretty normal, stuff still sells out, especially in the evenings.
Everything sold out here in Wilmington, but since a massive chunk of the movie was filmed here there’s a lot of local interest and coverage pumping up the numbers.
Considering that this is actually the fourth film featuring Robert Downey Jr. coming out in barely five years, this is a very impressive opening – you would think there would be some fatigue with the character by now…..
That said, a lot of franchises can gross pretty big but create their ceilings….the Twilight movies were amazingly consistent getting up near $300 million, but only one barely busting through. Kind of the same thing with the Harry Potter movies. If the ceiling for Iron Man films is around $325 million, that’s a pretty high ceiling….and if it doesn’t get swallowed too much by the ridiculous level of competition this month (jeez, even Will Smith is now opening the last weekend of May now!), then this could break through that.
Geoff, even if the opening comes in at around $165m, $330m will be the low point. Even Twilight managed to double it’s opening weekend gross. I don’t foresee Iron Man dropping that precipitously, so we’re looking at a low of maybe $350, and if it has any legs $375 – $475m. TDKR opened at $160 and legged it out to $448 last year, and thus far this Iron Man is proving to be a crowd pleaser.
As Geoff mentioned Will Smith, and I looked at the worldwide charts, it’s interesting to note that outside of Avengers and Spiderman, Hancock, with no built in history or fan base has out-grossed every other superhero film released thus far, with the exception of the also ironic but not necessarily apples to apples comparison original property The Incredibles.
IM 3 is the BEST MARVEL MOVIE by a zillion miles, unless you count the Punisher movies.
I guess the drops for OBLIVION bear out the so-so word-of-mouth– disappointing, ’cause I thought it was really awesome; It’s sort of amazing how much spectacle or visuals or obvious engagement filmmakers put into NON-franchise movies like that or Pain and Gain or Trance or Side Effects or WHATEVER, and the audience Cinemascore-type response is almost always a collective “meh.” Then the most middling half-baked superhero movie (not Iron Man) will at least do an easy hundred just on name recognition. It’s no wonder NON-COMIC stuff is such a bad investment.
I think it’s a drag to see Oblivion underperform like this too. I really enjoyed it and though it admittedly took more than a few ideas from other stories I found it really well executed. Also, GOD CRUISE, etc.
Punisher War Zone really is a fantastic piece of trash. I’ve probably watched it a half dozen times. There are few movies that have made me laugh to the point of tears: Punisher War Zone is one of them.
Iron Man 3 was such an average, flat mess of a movie. Wasn’t anybody else giggling at the end when they tried to turn Gwynnie into an ass-kicker with absolutely zero logic behind anything she did? Or when Guy Pearce shows up at the beginning of the film channeling Jim Carrey from Batman Forever? Or when the world’s smartest man brings out 40+ suits of armor that cant do anything but tackle and punch? Was it weird that Iron Man 3 featured the least impressive technology of all three movies?
Again, not bad. But all the people calling it the best of the three need to go back and watch the first one again which provided 1. a complete story arc 2. a coherent story and 3. no ridiculous scenes set in china to appease the chinese government.
by far the best comic book hero adaptation in many a year is ‘DREDD’ (karl rules) — people complain that there are no good balls-to-the-wall high-octane hard-R tight action movies with heart being made anymore and then when a well-designed stunner like ‘dredd’ comes around, nobody goes to see it. but people flock to see crapola ‘action’ like flies on shit. and therein lies the rub. (not sure what that has to do with anything but the iron man/superman talk made me think of it)
Karl Urban: Australia’s greatest actor
Anghus, I’m guessing you have not seen “Star Trek Into Darkness?” He could not suck harder in it.
Urban isn’t Australian, is he? Pretty sure he’s from NZ. Leahnz would surely know.
He’s also FUCKING AWESOME in just about everything, although admittedly I haven’t seen the new ST. But he was amusing in the first one.
anghus is intentionally being a jackass, either that or he’s an imbecile, or needs his dementia medication and a new pair of glasses and a globe. i’ve heard karl’s role as bones is much smaller in this new trek – which is a bummer because he was the best thing in the first one – but i find it hard to believe he couldn’t suck harder in it, maybe chris has extremely bad taste.
“anghus is intentionally being a jackass, either that or he’s an imbecile, or needs his dementia medication and a new pair of glasses and a globe”
If i were a gambling man, i’d go with 1 or 2.
Eh….my problem with DREDD….it isn’t bad, but it came out in the states within months of the bone-crushingly awesome THE RAID: REDEMPTION. I can only take so many movies about scaling a miles high apartment complex full of drug-fueled baddies I guess. I will say, the scenes of “Slo-Mo” in DREDD are beautiful.
I’d put IM3 ahead of HULK and IM, but behind AVENGERS, IM1 and CAP. It’s about on par with THOR for me.
i’ve heard that about ‘the raid’ but really, the movies aren’t that similar at all beyond the basic premise, Dredd’s sci-fi/fantasy elements set it apart (the raid was released march/april, dredd september/october, not exactly back-to-back – one must have a very low tolerance for fucked-up action flicks if two hard-core skyscraper drug den movies in a year do your head in, surely there’s room for both incarnations… i guess it’s been long enough since ‘die hard’ for you when it comes to the premise and comparisons) — apart form the fact i found ‘the raid’ a huge snooze in between set-pieces, way over-hyped – overhyping is the devil
Haha maybe you’re right. I also saw CITADEL (possessed demons in a massive run-down apartment complex) and finally got around to ATTACK THE BLOCK around the same time….so perhaps it was a bit much at once for me. Saw RAID on DVD so all 4 were within maybe 60 days.The only one I actively disliked, to be fair, was CITADEL.
Etguild2: Curious about why you disliked Citadel. I thought it was pretty damn terrific. I wonder — and please don’t take this as a dig at you, I’m just thinking out loud — if one’s response to that film is at all affected if one is (or isn’t) a parent? As I said in my original review: The movie “will be especially nerve-wracking for any parent who’s ever doubted whether he or she could overcome immobilizing fear and spring into action to defend an endangered offspring.”
Just read your review, and I think you might be partially correct. After a while I found the main character’s psychological paralysis grating–but given that I can’t relate to the situation, perhaps that’s unfair.
However, I’m also really over the trope of “mysterious, ass-kicking priest” as the instrument of a protagonist’s salvation…and I found the death of Tommy’s friend in the alley strangely contradictory to the message of projecting strength instead of fear. I guess secularism was her downfall?
Also, gotta say, the movie came dangerously close to stereotyping the poor as soulless animals, though I choose to believe that wasn’t the intent…
Etguild2: Actually, as I understand it, some critics (here and in the UK) did interpret the film as a reactionary attack on what Shaw called “the undeserving poor.” I strongly disagree with that take — but I can understand why some people might see it that way.
As for the friend: I took it as the film’s way of saying that’s it’s not enough to project strength — you have to project that you’re willing to be strong. And, yes, willing to kick ass. The friend was a lovely character, but didn’t understand evil. At least, that’s my take.
I saw Dredd a few nights ago and thought it was surprisingly well done. One of the better action films I’ve seen in a while.
I thought it was miles better than the similar THE RAID which started off strong but after the bullets ran each successive fight scene brought the momentum of the film to a standstill. I was hugely disappointed.
I’ve always been heavily predisposed to choreographed violence versus CGI violence…so I’m pretty biased. RAID had some of the best choreographed fighting I’ve seen in years outside of Tony Jaa films so it scored with me. I suspect critics overrated it, because it’s a dying art and they wanted to draw attention to it which is unfair. The Metacritic rating is about 10 points too high, RT about 15 too high. To me it was a slight difference, but RAID came on top due to the physical effort.
I need a second look @ DREDD, admittedly, and yall convinced me to take it.
@Joe I did hear there was a class argument against CITADEL. And I agree with you on that….it wasn’t my intent. However, I think there was also a clear agenda of faith over secularism…the friend did not understand evil because she lacked faith, and died because of it despite her inner strength. Tommy’s attempts at strength fell short…till he got religion.
As for “kicking ass” the final solution was to NOT kick ass but to project faith. Like Tommy’s secular friend…who died.
I’m not out to censor film. This film, to me, had a clear pro-faith message that resonates with many. It doesn’t with me. Hence my dislike.
“I also saw CITADEL (possessed demons in a massive run-down apartment complex) and finally got around to ATTACK THE BLOCK around the same time….so perhaps it was a bit much at once for me. Saw RAID on DVD so all 4 were within maybe 60 days.”
well that makes sense, Etg (I haven’t seen CITADEL but I’d like to)
i’m sort of glad to hear someone else was a bit disappointed by ‘the raid’ (KrazyEyes), sometimes i wonder what planet i’m on when i seem like the only one who’s not all gaga about a movie (i’d much rather be gaga), i feel like a lonely camper.
one thing i found surprisingly effective in ‘dredd’ was the rather sweet chemistry between judge dredd and anderson (i like thirlby), given that dredd is always helmeted and such a straight-arrow by-the-book badass — i was pleasantly surprised at how thier relationship subtly develops (kudos to karl for achieving a bit of nuance within his character without having eyes/a face to do this – your mouth is your face, very weird – after a time i completely forgot about the lack of dredd’s face, and of course it’s a handy device for setting up anderson as the emotional heart of the story).
Thirlby and Headey in DREDD each demonstrating two entirely valid disparate forms of hotness.
Team Thirlby, though, of course. And, yeah, every BRO I know swears up and down THE RAID is better, and I had a BLAST at it… but Raid is kind of a sausage fest, it’s in 1.85, and though I like Gareth’s militantly charcoal-purple mise en scene just fine and the fights are AWESOME? Movie’s kind of a one-and-done for me, in that there’s no real sex to the movie, literally or figuratively. It’s a procession of fights, all of which are brutally entertaining and OTT and “awesome” in that bro-fuck-yeah UFC way… But idk, somehow Dredd had a little more personality or commentary or hit more notes. It feels more like a real movie. No one I know agrees with me…
Just seems like RAID is essentially Trespass or Assault on Precinct 13 but without the shadings or subtext of either, so when it comes up in the “DREDD RIPPED IT OFF!” discussion, it’s not like it was some BLINDINGLY ORIGINAL work (plus the production timelines seem to either disprove the copycat notion or point to Dredd being way further along than people realize). I’m nitpicking because I think they’re both A-/B-plus as far as action cinema goes, just seems like Dredd would have more Cinemax rewatch value.
well obviously i agree about ‘dredd’ vs ‘the raid’ (and seemingly KrazyEyes, though i wouldn’t like to speak for him/her) – i was bored with ‘the raid’ between the martial arts/action sequences, the action was hard core but there was nothing particularly special or compelling about it as far as complete cinema or design goes, whereas ‘dredd’ was artistically designed and executed yet also lean and mean, sort of pop-arthouse ultraviolence meets low-budget sci-fi creativity, it doesn’t look like every other movie and is written with a bit of panache by alex garland, a far more memorable adrenaline/film experience for me than ‘the raid’ (great in 3D too – though probably as good in 2D, i saw it both ways – but 3D seems like a bit of a dirty word around here).
Hur hur… Leah got it both ways…
(This Moment of Smut brought to you by Bored Foamy)
I thought Dredd was okay – I’ve never hugely been a “HARD R? FUCK YEAH!” action guy, as I’ve always preferred the actual character and plot beats stuff of, say, a Die Hard rather than the blood splattering and the “Motherfucker”ing. And Dredd (the character) is always hilariously over the top in his gruffness (rumour is that Dredd was started as a satire of Dirty Harry-esque ultraviolent cops, with the twist that he always worked 100% within the rules rather than as a loose cannon. When his popularity skyrocketed due to his ultraviolence, the writers were just like “Fuck it, let’s just have it both ways”. Hur hur… again…)
The slo-mo was cool, but I probably didn’t get the full impact because I watched it as an in-flight movie (so I have no real idea if anything was edited out either). Overall it was okay, but certainly I didn’t get the love for it that other people did (and I love me some cheesy low budget action – Highlander is one of my all time favs).
Team Thirlby all the way too.
Yeah, I have to say, I had a great time at The Raid and probably prefer it to Dredd overall (both, really, are pretty one-and-done for me), but I was a little confused by the LOVE for that movie. It’s a really cool series of exciting and well-staged fights. It doesn’t overstay its welcome. But there’s not a whole lot going on in it, either. I wasn’t all that excited hearing that the director might do this or that big franchise movie next because while he can certainly direct action, there’s not a whole lot of personality to that movie.
Dredd has a weirdly opposite problem: I find the actors and characters way more interesting (yes, Thirlby) and the 3D stuff was actually pretty excellent, at least in the drug sequences, but it’s not all that exciting as a movie. There aren’t really full-fledged action sequences; there are just parts where people get killed. Which is fine, I guess. I liked it well enough. But both movies very much seemed like half of the pie: The Raid gets the killer incentive action sequences; Dredd gets the interesting characters and 3D flash. A movie that had all of that stuff together could’ve been one of my favorites of last year, and while I enjoyed both movies, I didn’t really need to sit through 3+ hours of that stuff just to piece together the elements of a really terrific action movie.
The Raid bored me silly. It’s so redundant. I felt like I watched the same action scene 15-20 times in 100 minutes. They’re well-staged but so what when they are so repetitive. I’ve yet to see Dredd. As soon as it’s on Starz I’ll check it out.
Citadel has a great beginning, super creepy and unsettling. The setting is good and it has some effective moments. Overall I’d say it’s good-but-not-great. Wasn’t the director attacked by a group of teens on hoodies? I thought I read that an incident like that inspired the movie.
I fell asleep twice during The Raid. Great choreography, but I never could really give a fuck about anyone in it.
Man, I LOVED The Raid! Insane fight scenes, some really solid tension and even a couple of Wile E. Coyote stunts thrown in.
I have not seen Dredd but now will consider checking it out.
I’m waiting for someone to rank the Iron Men movies. Was it at least better than th 2nd one??
I’m surprised by all of the talk of whether Iron Man or Iron Man 3 is the best one ever, setting them both as vastly superior to 2. For me, this is the most even-handed superhero trilogy ever. All three of them are fine. None are what I’d call exactly inspired; Iron Man 3 comes the closest and takes the most chances, but it wouldn’t really have made a lot of sense without the first two movies there.
The first one has one of the more detailed and better-told superhero origin stories and the revelation of Downey in a comics movie.
The second one does have a little too much Avengers set-up and lacks the freshness of the first movie. But I just rewatched it prior to seeing #3, and it’s a lot of fun. Maybe I just forgive a lot when Sam Rockwell is hamming it up opposite Mickey Rourke and Scarlett Johanssen is kicking ass. But I dunno, I like the loose, goofy ensemble vibe. You have Rockwell playing off of Downey, and then Rockwell playing off of Rourke, and then Paltrow playing off of Downey, and Sam Jackson turns up to glower and play off of Downey and Johanssen. It’s silly, but not really that much less EXCITING or action-packed than the first one.
And then the third one has some substantial Shane Black cleverness and generally better action sequences — though it does feel a little bit to me like the very strong cast was sort of shooting a couple of days at a time, save Downey. The way Paltrow and Cheadle sort of disappear from the movie for long stretches, it feels like they each had a couple of days on set and tried to make the most of it. But like the other two, it’s a lot of fun.
None of them really have amazing bad guys. And while Iron Man 3 is getting a lot of praise for taking him outside of the suit more, ALL of the movies do this. Iron Man 2 plays for about 35 minutes before you see Iron Man actually do anything. The first one, obviously, doesn’t have him in the suit right away either. Iron Man 3 plays around with that stuff a little more with the partial suits and the robo-suits… but again, the other two movies aren’t exactly lacking scenes with Downey on his own. None of the three are wildly action-packed. They each have a couple of big action sequences, which is fine. I haven’t done a count, but it feels like The Avengers has some of the most sustained Stark-in-Suit action.
It’s not like the Nolan Batman movies, where most people seem to agree Dark Knight is the best with a few passionate Batman Begins fans thrown in (though I love all three and don’t find the third one as uneven as others do). Right now you’ll probably get a lot of people saying Iron Man 3 is the best of the lot, but my guess is that in five or ten years, it’ll just be the Iron Man movies and general feeling that the series is pretty damn good.
Oh, except for the tendency toward backlash; maybe in five or ten years, it’ll be all “nobody likes those movies,” the way that “nobody” likes Iron Man 2, the movie that got a whopping 4% lower score on Rotten Tomatoes than Iron Man 3…