MCN Blogs

By MCN Editor


Be Sociable, Share!

17 Responses to “BYO YO-YO, YO”

  1. Sideshow Bill says:

    Under The Silver Lake. Liked it. Been on my mind. But I don’t know what it is yet. It’s a puzzle movie about…puzzles?

  2. Stella's Boy says:

    I like an interpretation I came across that says it’s making fun of dudes who are obsessed with puzzle movies. I just wish I liked it more. Found Garfield incredibly dull. Not a good protagonist a la Lebowski, Doc, etc. Pretty pervy, too, and I think it misses an opportunity to wrestle with toxic masculinity.

  3. Sideshow Bill says:

    Yea he slept with anyone he could. It held my attention but I didn’t feel much afterwards. High Life puzzled me too but for some reason my emotions were moved. Something there got to me.

    I like that theory though Stella. He was in conspiracies and crap all the stuff he considers clues were so random. But not a real successful movie at getting at what it wanted to. Liked the music though.

  4. palmtree says:

    Yesterday was great although the ending felt a little off somehow. But overall, a lovely time at the movies with lots of fun performances. Feels like a movie I’m gonna be returning to.

  5. Stella's Boy says:

    [Under the Silver Lake SPOILERS] That and there are so many naked and scantily clad women. Women are constantly ogled. There’s a naked dead woman in slow motion. And maybe I missed it but it didn’t seem to me like Mitchell was trying to say something about the male gaze or toxic masculinity.

    I agree the music is good. And it certainly has its moments. I did laugh quite a bit. But overall I don’t think it’s very good.

  6. Pete B. says:

    Gee Stella, you say that like it’s a bad thing. 😉

    And since I haven’t seen it mentioned in the blog: RIP Rip Torn.

  7. Hcat says:

    I’ll have a salty dog in rip’s honor.

  8. Stella's Boy says:

    Ha yeah Pete I mean I’d be lying if I said no part of me enjoys it but my 39 + 1 self looks at it differently than I used to.

  9. Sideshow Bill says:

    What did you think of the new Claire Denis, hillaryyy69 bot? How about that “fuck machine.”

  10. Sideshow Bill says:

    Early Lion King reviews. Uh oh.

    It should still take in the cash though.

  11. movieman says:

    I was going to say the same thing (about “LK”), Bill.
    Variety was wildly effusive, but the other major critics, pretty meh.
    I’m sure it’ll still rake in huge bucks.
    $4-500-million domestic?

    Seeing “Crawl” tonight.
    “Stuber” can wait until the discount house.
    Everything is pretty in a much holding pattern for me until Tarantino arrives.

    Currently reading Tom O’Neill’s “Chaos” which got a lot of pre-pub buzz for its revelatory take on Manson, et al.
    The funny thing is that NBC’s late, great “Aquarius” beat O’Neill’s “scoops” by several years.
    While watching “Aquarius,” I thought it was an imaginative revision of the oft-told (i.e., “Helter Skelter”) saga. I hadn’t realized that much of it was actually fact-based.
    Only makes me love “Aquarius” more.
    Speaking of which, why hasn’t Grey Damon become a star yet?

  12. Sideshow Bill says:

    My Tarantino tix are booked. Man I love AMC A-List. Great investment this Summer

  13. Stella's Boy says:

    I’m seeing Crawl on Tuesday. Fingers crossed. Some seem to really like it but I don’t 100% trust the sources. Looking forward to what others here think.

    Holy shit Annabelle Comes Home is fucking terrible. Like laughably and incompetently bad. Has to be the worst movie I’ve seen this year. I figured at worst it would be an OK matinee with a few decent set pieces. Nope. There’s slow burn and then there’s no burn. 90% is people walking around a house or hiding in a chicken coop. It’s painfully dull. And how in the fuck did this end up rated R? It is toothless and almost totally gore and blood-less. No body count. All those things come to life and never once did I actually believe anyone was in danger. No scares or suspense. No tension. Bland characters. Comical overuse of fog. Terrible pacing. Horrible lighting. Some real howlers like “she’s a beacon for spirits.” Wastes potentially cool creatures/beings like the werewolf (blink and you miss it). It is so, so bad. Just totally and completely inept. Everyone involved should be embarrassed. Rant over. My truck, my rules.

  14. movieman says:

    “Annabelle” is another one that can wait for second-run/discount ($3.50).

    Funny you mentioned the inexplicable “R” rating, SB.
    I’ve felt that way about every “Conjuring” movie (and spin-off) to date (e.g., last fall’s el-lamo “The Nun”).
    Almost makes me think it’s a marketing ploy…if
    “PG-13/Screen Gems/YA” horror wasn’t such a “thing.”
    None of the movies in the franchise(s?) have merited an “R.”
    Certainly not when you consider that every “Saw” movie squeaked by with the exact same rating.

  15. Sideshow Bill says:

    Nice Stella. I have completely forgotten Annabelle Comes Home. It took me a few minutes to ever remember the plot. It’s garbage

  16. movieman says:

    Speaking of “R” ratings that seem a tad excessive, I’m not sure why/how “Crawl” missed out on a “PG-13.”
    Certainly compared w/ earlier Aja movies (e.g., my beloved “High Tension” and his 2006 “Hills Have Eyes” remake), it’s pretty tame.

    “Crawl” IS fun (and refreshingly fat-free at 88 terse minutes), but definitely not deserving of an “R.”
    Gore is minimal–like “Jaws,” it’s mostly left to the imagination–there’s no sex/nudity (duh) and just one, spoken-in-a-moment-of-panic/fear “f**k.”
    “PG-13 horror” all the way.

  17. Stella's Boy says:

    Garbage it is. Time for a timeout on Annabelle movies.

    Yeah I don’t get the ratings at all sometimes. I think about Annabelle Comes Home and it’s lack of sex, language, and graphic violence getting rated R while say something like Taken is PG-13. Supernatural shenanigans merits harsher rating than nonstop shooting and beating and killing?

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