MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by InKladiant

Friday Estimates 2015-03-21 at 8.50.34 AM

Be Sociable, Share!

8 Responses to “Friday Estimates by InKladiant”

  1. Kevin says:

    No GUROV & ANNA numbers?

  2. EtGuild2 says:

    Anyone seen JAUJA? I haven’t…I know it was a passion project for Viggo, but was it really so challenging as to deserve this dumping?

    TRACERS is practically a masterpiece next to ABduction. I guess Lautner’s star has fallen far enough where Lionsgate decided not to take the risk of giving it a push.

  3. movieman says:

    It’s the box-office blahs again.

    But who doesn’t think “FF 7” won’t open to at least $100-million in two weeks?
    With the possible exception of “Paul Blart 2” (I’m assuming somebody must want to see it), that’s probably the last sure thing until “Generic Marvel Comic Book Sequel” #248 hits on May 1st.

  4. YancySkancy says:

    EtGuild2: Bilge Ebiri has a rave for JAUJA at He’s seen it four times already. He says he still can’t claim to understand it all, and makes it sound like it is pretty challenging. He calls it “rapturously bizarre” and says the final scenes are a “what-the-fuck of epic proportions.” I doubt it will come anywhere close to where I live, but I’ll keep an eye out for VOD.

  5. Smith says:

    EtGuild2: Cinema Guild picked an especially bad weekend to open Jauja – Lincoln Center (where Jauja is playing on the smallest of their three screens) and MOMA are putting on the annual New Directors/New Films showcase, which I’m sure is drawing the vast majority of the arthouse crowd that might otherwise show up for Jauja (case in point – I spent last night at a ND/NF screening of White God).

  6. EtGuild2 says:

    Thanks guys. “White God” looks amazing.

  7. palmtree says:

    Promos for F7 have been great. I’d put money on it opening 100.

  8. Chucky says:

    NCAA Final Four + Easter Sunday + Passover will put a crimp in any big opening for the latest Fast and Furious money grab.

    [And it ain’t just mainstream fare; arty picture “Woman in Gold” had its release moved up to 4/1 to avoid Passover.]

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