MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

COLD Trailer… But Brilliant… For Killing Them Softly

If they had used this trailer, the film sure wouldn’t have been slapped in exit polls… many of those people wouldn’t have gone… but others would have and they would have seen this terrific movie.

(trailer tweeted by Megan Ellison, producer)

Be Sociable, Share!

13 Responses to “COLD Trailer… But Brilliant… For Killing Them Softly”

  1. Captain Celluloid says:

    This trailer IS better than the one they used.

  2. McRaj says:

    I agree this trailer is better and represents the film more accurately. However, I just need to ask: how the hell did this film make so little money in any case?

    It doesn’t matter if the movie is horrible (which it wasn’t, I too think very highly of it) if you have a gangster film starring Brad Pitt you should be able to OPEN it to much more than this grossed in total otherwise you suck major balls as a distributor.

    Weinsteins buried this, no doubt about it. I do remember Harvey mentioning how stubborn Andrew Dominik is, maybe that had something to do with their attitude toward the film.

  3. spasky says:

    “suck major balls”

    is this an industry term, or something?

  4. Keil S. says:

    Phenomenal film.

  5. Don R. Lewis says:

    Love this movie. Scoot McNairy should have been nominated for an Oscar. Also- that scene where Ray Liotta gets his ass kicked is by far the most relistic version of a genuine ass kicking ever put to film.

  6. Matt says:

    Best trailer I’ve seen in a long time.

  7. GG says:

    This trailer is great, less rockstar. I like it better.

  8. Jen says:

    Wow! This is a really sharp, provocative piece. Couldn’t agree more, it’s absolutely more in-tune with the film than the other trailer was…not surprising that it’s from Mark Woollen and Associates.

  9. Anthony C. says:

    Definitely sells me more on the film. Love that song in the second half too.

  10. anghus says:

    great trailer. sad to see all that work for nothing.

  11. berg says:

    thought this film was great, recommended it to people at work and one loved it, another absolutely hated it //// “they just sit around and talk” was one response …. perhaps not ironically I watched a copy of The Friends of Eddie Coyle (based on a novel by the same author) this weekend that I got from my local library …. Richard Jordan in particular was aces with his line “April Fools mother fucker.”

  12. Etguild2 says:

    All of Dominik’s films have gotten rough treatment. CHOPPER and ASSASINATION OF JESSE JAMES are both phenomenal.

  13. Captain Celluloid says:

    . . . . and it shows Megan Ellison has great taste . . . . and the cash and tenacity to back it up

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