MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Would This Commerical Have Helped 2 Weeks Ago?

Snakes On A Plane… for girls.

Be Sociable, Share!

10 Responses to “Would This Commerical Have Helped 2 Weeks Ago?”

  1. Tofu says:

    Still processing?

  2. Tofu says:

    Oh, and thanks for skipping the embedding. Nice feature that isn’t so nice to a few browsers from time to time.

  3. Tofu says:

    Alright, now it’s playing.
    Would it have helped? Naaahhhh… SoaP needed a money shot or two, simple as that.

  4. Aladdin Sane says:

    Tofu, it’s just too bad the money shot was a snake hanging off a surgically enhanced breast…that woulda guaranteed a few more dollars in the coffers. 😉

  5. blythecummings says:

    Won’t help. It’s too late to polish this turd. Outside of message board fanboys, word is out that SNAKES is pure crap.

  6. palmtree says:

    I agree with Tofu. Taking Mr. Poland’s advice, this commercial should be selling one thing and that one thing should be the thing mostly likely to interest people. Well, making snakes seem really terrifying is boring. How about watching Sam Jackson decapitate one or a badass line reading? Where is the fun other than reading quotes of people claiming that it is?

  7. jeffmcm says:

    I don’t think the ‘pure crap’ thing is quite accurate. The movie is what it is, and everyone who was into that came out last weekend. I’m thinking a 70% drop this weekend. Why anyone would treat this like any other movie, to be debated in terms of plot and character, or spend as much thought on it as Armond White did this week, is beyond me.

  8. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    The fact of the matter is, the people who wanted to see Snakes didn’t need convincing and pretty much all of them LOVED it. And then there were those that always thought it looked silly and didn’t go.
    And then are those who didn’t think it looked good and still went and then they complain that the acting was bad, the writing was terrible and the effects were fake.
    The movie is definitely the funniest I’ve seen all year. That bit where they lift the plane up at the very last moment literally made me fall off my chair with laughter.

  9. hatchling says:

    Girls don’t want to see a movie about snakes.

  10. kerrigan says:

    yes, totally. that first tv spot blew

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