MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Too Hard?

I have now heard from a number of people who felt last Friday’s Hot Button was “a personal attack” on Gerry Rich and too harsh about his past and future.
I need some slightly less vested opinions. Please tell me your thoughts. Don’t feel obligated to sound off if you don’t have a sense of perspective on the story.
I acknowledge that Rich has had four #1 openings in twelve openings at Paramount and that Sahara was an especially strong achievement (even if they cribbed National Treasure). I also acknowledge that some of the strongest candidates for the job he eventually took have been taken off the field as potential near-future hires, by Paramount or anyone else, so the comparative threat has lightened.
That said… what say you?

12 Responses to “Too Hard?”

  1. Martin says:

    who gives a fuckin shit about Gerry Rich. Sounds like an asshole to me.

  2. bakednudel says:

    I’m one of those who reads you for the movie reviews, etc. When you write about the business, I have no idea what or whom you’re talking about.
    I wonder if I’m the only one.
    Your Friday column was one of the ones I skimmed because I really did have no idea what you were talking about.

  3. bicycle bob says:

    please don’t tell us ur going to be pulling ur punches dave.

  4. Martin says:

    it’s like inside baseball here, maybe 10 people recognize who DP is talking about.

  5. Terence D says:

    I didn’t know who he was talking about but since he wrote about I learned who it was. Keep it up David and do not worry about what people think.

  6. Joe Leydon says:

    Have to agree with TD on this one, and go one step further: Like it or not, it’s these behind the scenes people who decide what we get to see, and whether we’re adequately informed and/or alerted about it. Ultimately, somebody like a Gerry Rich (or his counterparts at other studios) has more long-term effect on U.S. pop culture — nah, make that GLOBAL pop culture — on a week-in, week-out basis than a dozen film critics or a university’s worth of Phds.

  7. bicycle bob says:

    dave really why would u censor what u write? ur a journalist. independent one. who writes what he feels and wants people to know and what interests u. keep it up

  8. Dan R% says:

    I didn’t see anything wrong with what was written. You’re just calling it as you see it. Like Martin said some of us are learning about people we never knew of and how it all works. It’s cool to know.

  9. Mark says:

    Why don’t you post their responses to what you wrote? We’ll be the jury.

  10. Zube says:

    Why is it that i cannot get to the linked hot button article?

  11. Filmmakers beware of Mike Broder and Small Planet Pictures. They have been in breach of contract Ie they havent paid for the film Rockets Redglare and have ignored their contractual obligations since November of 2004. Small Planet Pictures are financed in part by Palasades Pictures. Mike Broder is a THIEF.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I don’t really think, Sean, that you need to know about my various sexual liaisons. Or that anyone else needs to. I did write about them. I filled a hundred pages of Moleskine notebooks with my one-night stands, my affairs. But I decided they didn’t belong in a professional memoir. First of all, these are real people we’re talking about. Many of them were enjoyable. Some were abject failures. My wife said to me when she read the pages, ‘Of what purpose is this in a memoir? Of what purpose is this other than to titillate?’ The point is, I never see them. It’s because I have nothing in common with them, frankly. And probably didn’t at the time. I could not provide a sensible reason why I married these women. The thing is, in the case of my marriages, it takes two people to fuck up a marriage. It wasn’t simply the fault of these women that I lost interest in them and realised they were insignificant relationships. Which is how I look at them right now–as being insignificant. I see them as blips.”
~ William Friedkin On Cutting Interviewers Off At The Sass

“I have to imagine from Mr. Spielberg’s point of view, the paradigm shift in the 1970s was just the new “normal,” a “halcyon era” from which we are straying in the 21st century–because theatrical exhibition is tenuous (as it has been since the 1940s), the home video market has dried up and people are watching pirated movies on their phone. Spielberg’s coming-of-age era was for him the halcyon period that the 21st century “implosion” will cause to go “crashing into the ground.” But he is wrong. The market for movies is actually diverse and highly segmented–although from the top-down movie industry vantage point and media punditry you would not think this to be true.  Would we really mourn for Mr. Spielberg or ourselves if Lincoln would have been made for cable or had played on public television?  Is it bad for humanity that cable television is creating wonderful, resonant stories in long-form series that people want to watch at home on TV (or streamed onto their computer)? I don’t think so, but it is a paradigm shift and it might affect people’s theatrical moviegoing habits. Televisions in people’s homes have had that effect for seven decades–it is not a new phenomenon. As Art House cinema impresarios we need to focus on what WE can do at our theaters and in our communities. It is not productive for us to fret over what pundits say or about what well-meaning filmmakers like the Stevens–Spielberg and Soderbergh–say. We should fret about what we can do in our communities. What we can do to support filmmakers.”
~ From A Response By Russ Collins, CEO, Michigan Theater – Ann Arbor And Director, Art House Convergence, To Mr. Spielberg