The Hot Blog Archive for June, 2005

Early Box Office Analysis

1. Mr. And Mrs Smith – 18.6 m
2. Madagascar – 5.0m – off 38% Fri-Fri
3. The Longest Yard – 4.4m – off 49% Fri-Fri
4. Star Wars: III/R-Sith – 4.0m – off 44% Fri-Fri
5. Shark Boy & Lava Girl – 3.9m
6. Cinderella Man – 2.9m – off 51% Fri-Fri
7. Sis, Traveling Pants – 2m – off 44% Fri-Fri
8. The Honeymooners – 1.8m
9. Monster-In-Law .- 9m – off 53% Fri-Fri
10. Lords Of Dogtown – .7m – off 70% Fri-Fri
Number 1 With A Hail Of Bullets – Mr. & Mrs. Smith

99 Comments »

Hello From Seattle

I came up here on Tuesday… still a big laggy from London and yet another hotel room… but beginning to feel a bit more in the zone.
Nothing has been so exciting in the last few days that it has screamed “Blog Entry” in my ear.
The idea that a major paper was once used again by a studio to push its agenda on closing a deal forward by falsely telling the paper that it was considering not doing the deal – all top secret sources, of course – wasn’t enough to rile me up.
Mr. & Mrs. Smith wasn’t bad enough to make me crazy (or to respond to the crazy guy who tried to get himself into a righteous furor over it). Haute Tension isn’t good enough for the opposite. The Honeymooners was kept at an appropriate distance. And though Mir-ly-a-facade/Dimension was generous with Lava/Shark screening opportunities, I travelled through all of them.
Anne Bancroft’s passing is sad in many ways. Mr. Brooks has been suffering with it in silence for a long while and they kind of informed friends a few weeks back. One wonders whether her exit from Spanglish, which was rumored in some quarters to be memory problem based, was directly connected to the illness… costing us one last bit of her magic.
Anyway… films here are good… festival good… mornings in the market good… sleep, not so good…
I’ll try to visit more often this weekend.

22 Comments »

Casino Entries

It looks like we may have to go to “registration only” for commenters so we can lose the spammers. If anyone has any objections, let me know.

9 Comments »

Marketing Dollars

On Slate, Edward Jay Epstein writes:
“Consider the perverse logic of Hollywood: In 2003, the six major studios

100 Comments »

Dear Hot Blog Research Team

I

82 Comments »

Question of the Day

Is there a worse director in Hollywood to take over the reins of X-Men 3 than Brett Ratner?
And what will Salma Hayek play?

152 Comments »

Jessica Alba in The Fantastic Two

Paging Tara Reid!!!!
jessica_alba.jpg
Thanks to Reed Richards’ genius, Sue Storm has a uniform that dissapears when she does… but apparently, it doesn’t always reappear when she does.

39 Comments »

This Is Why I Rip The NY Times

It is not A.O. scott’s Job to be a box office analyst, but thanks in great part to poor reporting in his own paper, his Sunday column leads with a fact that is, in truth, a misstatement.
“For the third spring in a row, the box-office grosses and the number of tickets sold for first-run theatrical releases had fallen, data that provoked concern and speculation in Hollywood and in the industry trade papers.”
The fact is that Jan – April 2005 is down from Jan – April 2004 by $205 million… or about 8.8%.
Jan – April 2004 was up $232 million from Jan – April 2003… or about 11%.
Jan – April 2003 was down $144 million from Jan – April 2002… or about 6%.
But the perception remains because of journalism that finds the answers that fulfill the hypothesis instead of asking the questions that simply offer the truth.
Don’t get me wrong. It’s not all great news. But now we are on to the really dangerous part. Tony Scott, a good and honorable man, is left spinning an opinion that is flawed in many ways, the biggest of which is the simple misstatement of the reality of the box office… led there by no less a source than the New York Times.
“From where I sit, not bad is very bad indeed. The commitment to meticulously engineered mediocrity suggests that the American movie industry, in its timid, defensive attempts not to alienate the audience, is doing just that.”
Using the arbitrary

86 Comments »

Early Box Office Analysis

More excitement for those Star Wars boo birds!!!
Third place!!! The horror!
Meanwhile, Star Wars: Episode III

207 Comments »

The Latest In Tourist Attire or Eyes Wide Shut II?

trafalgar1.jpg

68 Comments »

Bootleg Art?

“Almost nobody owns a print of their favorite Hollywood movie. But pre-recorded, studio-issued sell-through videotapes feed the home viewer’s illusory sense that they own and are watching a film. In reality what they’ve paid as much as $40 for is a small, cheap conversion of celluloid frames into video fields. Bootleg videos make no claims to be the film itself. They are commercial Video Art first, and a record of a film second. Each bootleg represents a limited-edition record of a movie from the subjective POV of an anonymous auteur, the man with the camcorder. The “worst” bootleg — a blank tape — is the ultimate minimalist video. And then there’s the Holy Grail: the bootleg in which the surreptitious camcordist is recording at the moment that he’s busted by a multiplex security guard and kicked out of the theater — an inept studio movie that abruptly shifts gears to become a first-person surveillance documentary. Be assured that it’s out there somewhere, and you can own it.”
The Whole Article

4 Comments »

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