May 19, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
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
Even if GATSBY is barely profitable, it’s great to see Baz finally translate his style into domestic revenue. Hard to believe this will be DiCaprio’s #2 opening behind INCEPTION, especially seeing as he’s had seven 100 million+ grossers.
Sarah Polley’s masterpiece opens with a thud. BOO.
Lionsgate is looking at its 2nd worst opening ever in 2,000+ theaters. Even Tyler Perry’s name couldn’t help a black female director finally succeed:( Especially sad, because it’s a better film than anything Perry’s directed in the last few years.
it’s a better film than anything Perry’s directed in the last few years.
I’d go one further, Et.
“Peeples” is better than anything Perry has ever directed.
Those “Gatsby” numbers blow my mind. After seeing it earlier this week, I knew that it “played” w/ audiences and was more accessible (and considerably more entertaining) than I imagined it would be going in.
But $19-million seemed like an (optimistic) opening weekend cume number, not an opening day figure. Stunning.
@Etguild2
I imagine it’s hard to sell a Sarah Polley film that’s a documentary. I’ll admit I’m personally a fan of Polley’s work, but the fact that she had a new doc out barely registered, whereas I’m sure a non-doc would have grabbed my attention.
…and those are some mighty putrid numbers for “Aftershock.”
Is Weinstein really serious about releasing the new Gosling/Refn collaboration (and “Lovelace”) via their VOD/dump label Radius?
“Peeples” is better than anything Perry has ever directed.”
I have a soft spot for “I Can Do Bad All By Myself” but I’m a big Taraji Henson fan.
“I imagine it’s hard to sell a Sarah Polley film that’s a documentary.”
True, but given the almost over-the-top exuberant reviews in virtually every NYC publication and on NPR, I thought there’d be somewhat more interest than this.
I thought Gatsby would do 100 million or more just based on talking to women who seemed very interested in the film. If my eight month pregnant wife is asking me to take her to the movies to see something, I’m betting there’s interest from that quadrant.
This is a book that everyone has read or heard of-it sells 500k copies a year, and sold 500k in the first 3 months of this year alone. Not saying I would have predicted it going toe to toe with IM3, but it obviously had interest and an audience.
Gatsby proves why Ang Lee won the Oscar last year.
Don’t have Tobey Maguire do voice over narration, and if you do, just fire him and recast.
Performance wise, he was fine. Nothing wrong with him when in-scene playing the gay guy in love with Gatsby, but wow, he has a voice for silent pictures. I’d say his voice/voice over drops the film from a low 8 down to mid 5. Yikes, what a grating experience every bit of VO was in that film.
It’s just astonishing that Gatsby will double the opening of Battleship, which opened two weeks after Avengers, supposedly giving it enough time to breathe. I thought $30m plus at best.
I hadn’t realized “Gatsby” still cast a spell w/ anyone under 50.
Every time I’ve mentioned it to my (college) class…crickets.
You’d swear that not only hadn’t they read it in high school, but had never heard of it or Fitzgerald before.
Gatsby is this summer’s Sex and the City. Every woman wanted to see it. Beautiful outfits, hot soundtrack, romantic trailer, Leo….should hold well too, as Star Trek isn’t going to cut into that demo any.
I wonder if there will be many high school field trips to see Gatsby. Might give a boost to the weekday numbers. I remember seeing Romeo+Juliet in theatres as part of English class. Sure beat having to do a table read of it in a stuffy classroom.
Disagree about Star Trek not cutting into the female demographic. I know more females who want to see Trek than Gatsby.
Uh, so I was the only MAN who wanted to see “The Great Gatsby”? Are those 500k copies a year of the book sold only to women?
“I know more females that want to see Trek than Gatsby”
That maybe true Jason but I do find it amusing how people on this blog continually use their small circle to make a sweeping generalization (I’m a teacher and my students…..). From my POV no film’s aroma is more powerful to women this summer than Gatsby. It’s practically oozing male pheromones.
if you talk to a group of women and more want to see Trek, those possibly aren’t women. They’re probably girls. Geek girls
Exactly what JBD said. It stands to reason that the girls that you know that want to see Star Trek aren’t really Gatsby girls, so that’s not cutting into it’s audience at all.
So you’ve got all these women that are clamoring to see the glitz and glamor, but unlike Sex and the City, it’s something that has an appeal to men as well. I’m not really surprised by this opening at all.
I don’t know about sweeping generalizations, but I do think there is pertinent info (some of it surprising) to be gleaned from polling my college students in regard to what they want to see, what they’re familiar with, etc. Whether it be movie knowledge or awareness of history. Especially when you swap notes with colleagues to discover what their students are thinking. For example: I think some people on this site would be shocked to discover how little many (most?) students really know about ’80s and even ’90s movies.
Joe your students are film students correct?
I’ll leave it there.
If we could monetize what our sphere of influence thinks we’d all be millionaires overnight. A bunch of students, a few co-workers, some drinking buddies – all of these things should never be used as a basis for depth of mainstream appeal. see Scott Pilgrim etcetera
I wouldn’t be shocked at how little any student knows these days Joe.
Actually, not all are film students — not by a long shot. Many take film courses as liberal arts electives. And I also teach journalism and mass communications courses.
“I wouldn’t be shocked at how little any student knows these days Joe.”
As opposed to the golden age of WASP dominated classrooms? That statement is just as subjective as any other anecdotal thoughts in this thread. I was extremely pleased with the knowledge and thirst of my fellow (mostly)freshmen in Intro to Film Studies, (taught by the wonderful former Wash Post critic Desson Thomson), the vast majority of whom weren’t film/AV majors, but who appreciated movies like “The Rules of the Game” far more than I would have expected. Each situation has to potential to be different…
Personally, GATSBY was tough for me to gauge because it had broad consensus as a “must see” among friends, but movies like this often throw me off thanks to the Georgetown/Nova bubble I live in.
Part of me wants to see Gatsby. I always like the idea of what Luhrman is selling. But most of the time the execution is just so painful. And i think i’d be more interested if they’d cast anyone other than Tobey Maguire. It felt like when i see JUDE LAW or EWAN MCGREGOR as the lead of a movie these days. I know exactly what im getting, and it feels like they went with something safe and convenient instead of finding a more inspired choice.
Now that I’ve seen it, gotta say that I agree with movielocke about the voiceover problems. It constantly reminded me that I should be spending my 2 hours rereading the book. DiCaprio is as close as anyone is going to get to Gatsby though, and I enjoyed it more than anything else Baz has done. Is DiCaprio now officially the biggest movie star of his generation? This doesn’t open without him.
” Is DiCaprio now officially the biggest movie star of his generation?”
I think so. At one point i think you had a three way tie between Affleck, Damon, and Dicaprio.
Affleck fizzled out of the leading man game and intelligently moved behind the camera where he became something so much more than just an actor.
Damon left Bourne behind and has turned in several years of questionable picks and box office disappointments. He’s still well respected but he’s not exactly a box office champion anymore.
Dicaprio is still a) picking good material and b) can still open a movie. Just start working in reverse with Dicaprio from 1997 when Titanic launched him into superstardom.
The Great Gatsby
Django Unchained
J. Edgar
Inception
Shutter Island
Revolutionary Road
Body of Lies
Blood Diamond
The Departed
The Aviator
Catch Me If You Can
Gangs of New York
Don’s Plum
The Beach
Celebrity
The Man in the Iron Mask
Titanic
Lots of hits in there. The only real box office disappointments are Body of Lies. J Edgar underperformed. The less we talk about The Beach, the better. But the bulk of it are big iconic roles in well received films. Take a look at Damon since 1997 when Good Will Hunting launched him to superstardom:
Promised Land
We Bought a Zoo
Margaret
Contagion
The Adjustment Bureau
True Grit
Hereafter
Green Zone
Invictus
The Informant!
Che: Part Two
The Bourne Ultimatum
Ocean’s Thirteen
The Good Shepherd
The Departed
Syriana
The Brothers Grimm
Ocean’s Twelve
The Bourne Supremacy
Stuck on You
The Bourne Identity
Gerry
Ocean’s Eleven
All the Pretty Horses
Finding Forrester
The Legend of Bagger Vance
The Talented Mr. Ripley
Dogma
Rounders
Saving Private Ryan
Good Will Hunting
Look how many more movies Damon has been in. And i trimmed out voice work (Tiaan A.E., Happy Feet 2) and appearances on stuff like 30 Rock.
Dicaprio seems a lot pickier about the material and has a significantly higher percentage of hits to non hits.
I think hands down Dicaprio is the biggest star of his generation.
Err…what’s the cutoff for “his generation?” Will Smith and DiCaprio came of age around the same time…Matt Damon is closer to Smith’s age than DiCaprio’s. Then again, if “After Earth” does as poorly as people expect, perhaps DiCaprio has surpassed him.
good point. i was trying to think if there was anyone i missed in that group. Will Smith hit it big in 96 with Independence Day, so he’s totally in that grouping.
Men in Black 3
Seven Pounds
Hancock
I Am Legend
The Pursuit of Happyness
Hitch
I, Robot
Bad Boys II
Men in Black II
Ali
The Legend of Bagger Vance
Wild Wild West
Enemy of the State
Men in Black
Independence Day
Smith is interesting, because when you look at his filmography, there’s some big hits. And Smith hasnt oversaturated the marketplace with his presence. However, what i think separates Dicaprio and Smith and what will ultimately make Dicaprio the more iconic and revered actor of his generation is what Smith is now doing to his career. Look at Smith’s future project list:
Bad Boys 3 (announced)
Hancock 2 (announced)
I, Robot 2 (announced)
The American Can (pre-production)
Winter’s Tale (filming)
After Earth (completed)
And if i recall, Sony just hired a writer for Men in Black 4. Now who knows if I Robot 3, Bad Boys 3, or Hancock 2 will ever make it to production. But this is a guy who looks like he’s going back to the well with frightening regularity. And after passing on Django, the perception of Smith is that he’s a guy uninterested in engaging material. He just wants to be the star. There’s little risk in Smith’s choices. I think that’s what will make Dicaprio the more iconic actor of his generation.
I agree. There was a time you could slap Smith’s head on a poster, and the movie would make money…case in point, SEVEN POUNDS, a mediocre melodrama that no one who just saw trailers could say what the hell it was about, that managed to outgross DiCaprio’s BODY OF LIES and REVOLUTIONARY ROAD combined.
What’s interesting, as you point out, is that DiCaprio may well end up as the most iconic actor of his generation thanks to the choices of Will Smith. And if Smith has his way, he’s paving the road for his son to be the most iconic actor of the current teen generation.
I will say, AMERICAN CAN is a risky choice for Smith though. The most political film he’s done.
I think a lot of this depends on what you mean by “star.” In another era, a star would make 2-3 movies a year — the very sort of work pace that, today, many actors get criticized for.
in 2013, the actors appearing in the most major releases would be either Bruce Willis or Dwayne Johnson with 4.
But for me, i think the modern definition is an actor who can do both mainstream films as a box office draw and picks roles that are diverse and challenging.
Jason Statham seems to be in 2 – 3 movies a year, but none of them are huge hits or very diverse in terms of his performance.
I think Joe is right to a degree. All that matters to be “a star” is to be a draw at the box office and consistently sell tickets. However, i do think nowadays the perception of your worth as an actor is weighed into it all, which is why Dicaprio would be perceived as a bigger star than Will Smith given that Smith willingly turns down quality roles because of his desire to be a star.
Ironically, his need to be perceived as a star is the very thing that makes Smith less star-like than Dicaprio.
DiCaprio is also the finest screen actor of his “generation;” the same way his “Titanic” costar (Kate Winslet) became the greatest screen actress of hers.
But as much as I’m in awe of Leo–I think he deserved Oscars for “Gilbert Grape” (nominated, but lost), “Catch Me if You Can” (not nominated), “The Aviator” (nominated, but lost), “Revolutionary Road” (not nominated) “J. Edgar” (shockingly not nominated) and/or “Django” (even more shockingly not nominated)–Damon’s prodigious body of work puts a huge smile on my face. His ability to consistently work w/ interesting and/or auteur directors, box office be damned, is why I made the (controversial, lol) comparison w/ Jeff Bridges a few years back on this blog.
Will Smith may have bigger b.o. hits on his resume (“Titanic,” of course, excepted), but Smith’s ferocious protection of his “brand” at the expense of seeking out challenging, risky, perhaps even unpopular material could very well bite him in the ass someday.
“DiCaprio is also the finest screen actor of his “generation;”
That’s quite a proclamation of support, and while it seems clear that Edward Norton has vacated the field of that claim, I personally haven’t gotten enough of a dose of Michael Fassbender, Tom Hardy, Casey Affleck, or Michael Shannon to go that far. Also, Christian Bale, on superhero/Terminator hiatus for most of a decade.
“The same way his “Titanic” costar (Kate Winslet) became the greatest screen actress of hers.”
I certainly won’t argue there:)
Well, i think if we were talking “best actor”, the conversation would change dramatically.
And if we’e talking strictly “movie star,” DiCapio’s perfs in “Titanic” and “Catch Me” are the equal of any Golden Age H’wood luminary in terms of sheer mega-watt star power/charisma/magnetism.
They’re the stuff legends are made of.
And considering how, for example, Cary Grant was routinely snubbed by the Academy, I guess it’s not surprising Leo wasn’t nominated for either of those performances.
When I was asking the question, I was thinking Damon was the only real opponent. Without a doubt though, Smith can pull people to the movies, but like everyone has noted, mostly safe material. Damon is a risk taker, but doesn’t seem to get the consistency.
And Damon nearly doubled Smith and Dicaprio in the number of film projects he has appeared in.
The difference can also be directors. DiCaprio clearly wants to work with the best (Scorsese, Eastwood, Nolan, Spielberg). Smith seems to prefer non-entities he can control. The proof is in the pudding, as they say.
I think Pitt is an interesting addition too as he mixes compelling directors into almost everything he does but has been able to help some of those said directors have their biggest financial hits ever while maintaining his film integrity… for lack of a better term.
2012 – Killing Them Softly
2012 – Moneyball
2011 – The Tree Of Life
2009 – Inglourious Basterds
2009 – The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
2008 – Burn After Reading
2007- The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
2007- Ocean’s Thirteen
2006- Babel
2005- Mr. & Mrs. Smith
2004- Ocean’s Twelve
2004- Troy
2002- Confessions of a Dangerous Mind
2001- Spy Game
2001- The Mexican
2000- Snatch
1999- Fight Club
1998- Meet Joe Black
1997- Seven Years in Tibet
1997- The Devil’s Own
1996- Sleepers
1995- Twelve Monkeys
1995- Se7en
1994- Legends of the Fall
1994- Interview with the Vampire