MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

The Rest Of The Story, 2005…

The lost portion of The Scarlett Johansson 911 Transcript follows:
“I’m Scarlett Johansson, an actor… no, The Island was not my fault… do you know how much press I got for fondling Benecio del Toro in an elevator and they couldn’t open that movie… yes… no, just fondling… he had a sore… exactly! if I’m not a big enough star to open The Island, why are these paparazzi following me to Disneyland… okay, but only if you send the police now… ‘What am I, Scarlett Johnasson, doing after personally shutting down Steven Spielberg’s studio? I’m going to Disneyland!’… thanks… are they on the way?… yeah, I got special passes from Jeffrey… yes, they’re real… are you still recording this?”

28 Responses to “The Rest Of The Story, 2005…”

  1. The Premadator says:

    Is the way you spelled 911 (here 9/11) on purpose?
    Anyway… this is hilarious. I’ve now gone from Johansson-Friendly to downright Johansson-Enthusiastic!
    What a cutie.

  2. BluStealer says:

    This is why Scarlett is a star. For great quotes like this.

  3. David Poland says:

    Actually, 9/11 was completely subconcious… and then when you pointed it out, I thought it was irony funny… and then I thought it could be offensive… so I changed it… thanks…

  4. BluStealer says:

    I did think it had something to do with 9-11 from the headline too. I was expecting to read some wacky 19 yr old actress stuff. But we got much better.

  5. The Premadator says:

    Given this town’s E Channel obession with celebrity, the 9-11 thing was spot on.

  6. Josh says:

    Good summer article. I can’t wait to see what they say next May when those films are all blockbusters. Business booming?

  7. Terence D says:

    Alright I’ll ask it. Why are there people following Scarlett Johansson?

  8. Mark Ziegler says:

    She must be a huge star now. Journo’s are following her around town and to Disney.

  9. Angelus21 says:

    If Miss Johansson really wants publicity she should go clubbing, spend a lot of time doing coke in the bathrooms, and hangout with Paris Hilton.

  10. PandaBear says:

    Whoever got chosen to follow her really got the short end of the stick.
    He couldn’t get a cool gig like flying to the islands to stalk someone or get shot at in front of Britneys house.

  11. Wrecktum says:

    I have a massive crush on Scarlett Johansson. I’d risk my very stable and happy marraige to be with Scarlett Johansson.

  12. PandaBear says:

    It ain’t that stable if you’d risk it with an affair with a 20 yr old.

  13. Richard Nash says:

    My wife would let that happen. Be the first to congratulate me. That is if SJ won an Academy Award. Or The Island opened at #1. She wouldn’t let me slum it.

  14. joefitz84 says:

    You guys have mighty cool wives if they let you take a starlet into the bedroom.

  15. Sanchez says:

    Too bad they didn’t pull these kinds of antics BEFORE the big blockbuster movie opened.

  16. sky_capitan says:

    The 911 operator didn’t ask her about those pics of Tom dressed as Dorothy from The Wizard Of Oz? I was looking forward to her insight on the subject.

  17. Sanchez says:

    Watch out, Cap. You can get sued by the Scientologists with that kind of gossiping.

  18. Eldrick says:

    did she really say that, or did David make it up. I like Johansson, a lot of people are bitchy about her, not me.

  19. bicycle bob says:

    she just may be the best actress out of this under 25 bunch. not saying much but she does bring it.

  20. BluStealer says:

    I’d much rather watch her in a movie than the Lohan’s and the Duff’s of this world. She just chooses really interesting projects. All these other girls would kill for her career right now even with The Island on the resume.

  21. LesterFreed says:

    I like my ladies a little more mature and older. Give me a Kidman. Give me some Angela Basset. Someone with some experience.

  22. RoyBatty says:

    Might be just me, but doesn’t say a helluva lot about the slate of movies that were given to us this summer that at the end of the season we are discussing an actress who starred in the most noteable flop trying to blame her bad driving on paparazzi? (and I love Johansson, but this has sounded like an excuse from the moment I heard about it)
    So far, the most compelling moment of fictional narrative I have experienced was the last 15 minutes of the Six Feet Under finale.

  23. RoyBatty says:

    Doesn’t this say a lot about the slate of summer films we were given that here at the end of the season we are not discussing the films themselves, but an incident involving an actress who starred in the most noteable flop of it?
    The most fulfilling moment I had involving fictional narrative happened on the small screen, watching just the last 15 minutes of the Six Feet Under finale versus every film that came out this summer.

  24. LesterFreed says:

    I’d rather have root canal than watch Six Feet Under. What a bore. Give me Rescue Me. Give me Entourage.

  25. PandaBear says:

    Entourage has gotten a lot better in Year 2. Surprisingly so because I didn’t think it had it in them.

  26. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Nobody better talk about the Six Feet Under finale without five kilometres of warning! We haven’t even been given the first episode of the final season let alone be anywhere near the finale.
    BTW, Lindsay is in the new Robert Altman movie alongside Meryl Streep and co. I’d say that’s a great move.
    Scarlett’s great though. She just needs to wear better clothes.
    (hi, I’m back now)

  27. PandaBear says:

    No spoilers should be given on this anyway. To anything unless a big chunk of time has gone by. We can all be a little classy here.

  28. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Oh, you’d be surprised Panda. Some people think everybody sees everything the day they see it in America.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

This is probably going to sound petty, but Martin Scorsese insisting that critics see his film in theaters even though it’s going straight to Netflix and then not screening it in most American cities was a watershed moment for me in this theatrical versus streaming debate.

I completely respect when a filmmaker insists that their movie is meant to be seen in the theater, but the thing is, you got to actually make it possible to see it in the theater. Some movies may be too small for that, and that’s totally OK.

When your movie is largely financed by a streaming service and is going to appear on that streaming service instantly, I don’t really see the point of pretending that it’s a theatrical film. It just seems like we are needlessly indulging some kind of personal fantasy.

I don’t think that making a feature film length production that is going to go straight to a video platform is some sort of “step down.“ I really don’t. Theatrical exhibition as we know it is dying off anyway, for a variety of reasons.

I should clarify myself because this thread is already being misconstrued — I’m talking about how the movie is screened in advance. If it’s going straight to Netflix, why the ritual of demanding people see it in the theater?

There used to be a category that everyone recognized called “TV movie” or “made for television movie” and even though a lot of filmmakers considered that déclassé, it seems to me that probably 90% of feature films fit that description now.

Atlantis has mostly sunk into the ocean, only a few tower spires remain above the waterline, and I’m increasingly at peace with that, because it seems to be what the industry and much of the audience wants. We live in an age of convenience and information control.

Only a very elite group of filmmakers is still allowed to make movies “for theaters“ and actually have them seen and judged that way on a wide scale. Even platform releasing seems to be somewhat endangered. It can’t be fought. It has to be accepted.

9. Addendum: I’ve been informed that it wasn’t Scorsese who requested that the Bob Dylan documentary only be screened for critics in theaters, but a Netflix representative indicated the opposite to me, so I just don’t know what to believe.

It’s actually OK if your film is not eligible for an Oscar — we have a thing called the Emmys. A lot of this anxiety is just a holdover from the days when television was considered culturally inferior to theatrical feature films. Everybody needs to just get over it.

In another 10 to 20 years they’re probably going to merge the Emmys in the Oscars into one program anyway, maybe they’ll call it the Contentys.

“One of the fun things about seeing the new Quentin Tarantino film three months early in Cannes (did I mention this?) is that I know exactly why it’s going to make some people furious, and thus I have time to steel myself for the takes.

Back in July 2017, when it was revealed that Tarantino’s next project was connected to the Manson Family murders, it was condemned in some quarters as an insulting and exploitative stunt. We usually require at least a fig-leaf of compassion for the victims in true-crime adaptations, and even Tarantino partisans like myself – I don’t think he’s made a bad film yet – found ourselves wondering how he might square his more outré stylistic impulses with the depiction of a real mass murder in which five people and one unborn child lost their lives.

After all, it’s one thing to slice off with gusto a fictional policeman’s ear; it’s quite another to linger over the gory details of a massacre that took place within living memory, and which still carries a dread historical significance.

In her essay The White Album, Joan Didion wrote: “Many people I know in Los Angeles believe that the Sixties ended abruptly on August 9, 1969, ended at the exact moment when word of the murders on Cielo Drive traveled like brushfire through the community, and in a sense this is true.”

Early in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, as Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt’s characters drive up the hill towards Leo’s bachelor pad, the camera cranes up gently to reveal a street sign: Cielo Drive. Tarantino understands how charged that name is; he can hear the Molotov cocktails clinking as he shoulders the crate.

As you may have read in the reviews from Cannes, much of the film is taken up with following DiCaprio and Pitt’s characters – a fading TV actor and his long-serving stunt double – as they amusingly go about their lives in Los Angeles, while Margot Robbie’s Sharon Tate is a relatively minor presence. But the spectre of the murders is just over the horizon, and when the night of the 9th finally arrives, you feel the mood in the cinema shift.

No spoilers whatsoever about what transpires on screen. But in the audience, as it became clear how Tarantino was going to handle this extraordinarily loaded moment, the room soured and split, like a pan of cream left too long on the hob. I craned in, amazed, but felt the person beside me recoil in either dismay or disgust.

Two weeks on, I’m convinced that the scene is the boldest and most graphically violent of Tarantino’s career – I had to shield my eyes at one point, found myself involuntarily groaning “oh no” at another – and a dead cert for the most controversial. People will be outraged by it, and with good reason. But in a strange and brilliant way, it takes Didion’s death-of-the-Sixties observation and pushes it through a hellfire-hot catharsis.

Hollywood summoned up this horror, the film seems to be saying, and now it’s Hollywood’s turn to exorcise it. I can’t wait until the release in August, when we can finally talk about why.

~ Robbie Collin