MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

BYOB – Jan 31

It’s yet another travel day… here is some room to roam…

39 Responses to “BYOB – Jan 31”

  1. Just a completely random thought. I wish that whoever is in charge of putting profile images up on IMDb would do a major overhaul.
    Not only are a lot of them incredibly bad, but well-known actors don’t even have one! I mean, it’s the IMDb! That place should be right on the money. And if it’s these actors publicists who need to get their act together then so be it, but Ewan McGregor having his profile image still as Obi Wan Kenobi is a tad ridiculous, no?
    Also, why doesn’t Linda Cardellini have a career?

  2. JBM... says:

    I know DP head-over-heels about Tony Gilroy at the moment, so I’ll mention that I had the chance to read two drafts of his next film, Duplicity. Let’s just say Gilroy better hope that A) the strike’s sewn up soon or B) Universal offers him Bourne Four.

  3. Chucky in Jersey says:

    OMG there’s gonna be a sequel to “Cloverfield”. Get out the barf bags!

  4. brack says:

    [i]Also, why doesn’t Linda Cardellini have a career?[/i]
    She’s a regular on the television show ER.

  5. brack says:

    I guess those tags don’t work here?, huh.

  6. JBM... says:

    You have to do it HTML style, angles instead of brackets…

  7. hendhogan says:

    kami,
    imdb charges for placement of photos on their site. i guess famous people don’t see the point as everyone knows what they look like anyway.

  8. brack says:

    ah, thanks JBM.

  9. Hopscotch says:

    Cloverfield could very well be on the short list of most polarizing movies of the decade.
    I’ve heard two opinions on it (I haven’t seen it)
    a) Lots of fun! or
    b) I @#$%*&! hated it!
    Of all the top 6 Academy Awards categories, I say there is one Wild Card: Best Supporting Actress, and the rest I think are pretty much figured out.
    My pic for it: the girl from Atonment who’s name I can’t pronounce correctly.

  10. RoyBatty says:

    Since you bring it up, Hopscotch (and “pic” is only short for “picture”) it does seem that it has become a toss-up for Best Supporting Actor in a female role since Ruby Dee came out of fucking nowhere. Poor Ryan, on track to get the one award the pretty consistently avoids the urge to star fuck except when it does (and always does badly).
    Too bad you can’t get a drunk Sean Young in the front row for that win to yell out: “Lifetime Achievement Award!” and “Hey, it’s a gold Oscar for a dead Ossie!”
    That was a horrible scene in AMERICAN GANGSTER, when if felt like Denzel Washington had accidentally wandered onto the set of a USA movie.

  11. RoyBatty says:

    ABOUT THAT DOWNLOADING STORY:
    Funny that it took them to admit they were wrong when media herd failed back in 2005 to ask the most fundamental question for all such things: how the fuck did you get that number? There is almost never any methodology listed.
    It’s like when they do a story about anything involving illegal activity – bet your last dollar that the number is inflated at least 100%. That load of pot is supposed to have “a street value” of $6M? It ain’t a dime over one million. Hollywood loses $5 billion a year from bootleg DVDs? More like $20M.

  12. LYT says:

    Why does David think the Michel Gondry “Sweded” trailer is “Craptastic”? Watching it made me think Gondry could be a pretty funny character actor if he wanted to be.

  13. IOIOIOI says:

    Cloverfield 2 should be titled CLOVERFIELD TWO: WE STILL CANT KILL THAT OBLIVIOUS BITCH OF A MONSTER! What a stupid bloody film. Good lord. The balls of Mahooney that flick. Nevertheless, Camel, you love Paris and may have not seen Freaks and Geeks. That may answer your question.

  14. jeffmcm says:

    ‘The Balls of Mahooney’?
    My question is, will Cloverfield 2 be the adventures of a second group of video-camera-wielding morons in New York, or will they move the monster to Washington to have it face off against an all-new creature a la the Godzilla movies? Rip out the Washington Monument to use as a club?
    It’s a rare movie that would be improved by a worse director.

  15. doug r says:

    Cloverfield 2 will be directed by James Cameron and will feature multiple monsters and make tons of money and be one of the best action pictures ever.
    Hey, it’s what he does.

  16. David Poland says:

    Why does Luke assume DP wrote that headline?

  17. brack says:

    I’ll definitely check out a sequel to Cloverfield. I loved it.

  18. IOIOIOI says:

    Brack — WE KNOW ALREADY :D! Jeff; the monster was successfully killed. Of course you have to visit the cloverfield site to notice the pictures of a smoldering hunk of Cloverfield flesh to know it die. Yet they killed the fucker off in New York. This leaves me to assume Cloverfield 2 would be about more people in the city surviving the monster’s attack, or maybe an even more insulting movie towards the military. Which seems more likely than more idjits runnin around with a 100,000 dollar HD camera.

  19. IO, you’re an arsehole, so just shut the fuck up and don’t direct messages towards me, okay? I’m sick of you.
    Dave, one question about your new Oscar column:
    How do you figure “So if the inevitability of No Country is said enough, it will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.”? Do we not remeber Brokeback Mountain?

  20. David Poland says:

    Brokeback was always a problem movie, even if the studio was in denial. I ate a lot of shit for saying it, but there was always a large group – and it grew – who simply didn’t feel the way about the film that so many passionate people did.
    Brokeback was always vulnerable and the only movie that fought for the win was Crash, which won.
    In this case, No Country is not being arrogant or assuming. They are just plowing along. This strategy hasn’t always worked, but the circumstances of this season seem to be going its way.

  21. Huh huh…you ate shit?

  22. jeffmcm says:

    IOI, if it wasn’t in the movie, it didn’t happen. They can put whatever they want on the website and they cna change their minds a week later.
    To be fair to DP, Brokeback was the frontrunner in a way that No Country isn’t right now. It’s not a social-issue message movie that people can rally around or be repelled by, and it’s not a simplistic, easy-to-digest message movie that others can coalesce around.

  23. Well then he should’ve worded it differently. I thought it was that inevitibility that was what lead to it’s loss. Or, at least, partly.

  24. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Latest sign of the Apocalypse: “Over Her Dead Body” opens today with print ads that reference a picture nominated for Razzies.

  25. David Poland says:

    There is no question that Brokeback is in a different position than No Country. But what I keep telling you and everyone else is that the perception of Brokeback’s front-runner status was ALWAYS greater in the media than in reality. Always… especially after people started actually seeing the movie in December.
    And Brokeback was neither a simplistic message movie or just a social issue movie. Crash was. But I’m not sure what your point is.

  26. IOIOIOI says:

    Camel, I’m an asshole for pointing out how fucking bogus and lame it is to bag on Linda Cardellini when you love a no-talent gism bucket. Keep your pikey nonsense to yourself.
    That aside, Jeff, the website can be as canon as the flick. Again it’s not like the military would not figure out after about 12 hours how the freakin monster could be killed. So the next flick could be about a regular family dealing with surviving the monster’s attack.

  27. storymark says:

    Sure a website “can” be as canon as the film. But it can also be tantamount to fan-fic. If they don’t want the moster dead in a sequel, no one will give a second thought to contradicting a website.

  28. jeffmcm says:

    Chucky: so that means we should all see it then, right? That’s the corollary of your standard ‘if it references an Oscar campaign it’s crap’ theme, right?
    DP: You got my point mostly right; Crash was the simplistic message movie, Brokeback became the social issue movie as touted in the media which meant that people could fall into pro- and anti- camps relatively easily. No Country is neither of those things and therefore isn’t as polarizing, except for maybe the ending.
    Re: Cloverfield, Storymark hit my point. Also, IOI, was your family killed by monsters or aliens?

  29. IOIOIOI says:

    Awww. Jeff tried to make a funny. Awwwww.

  30. jeffmcm says:

    No, not really. I’m trying to understand why you go bugshit on apocalyptic attack movies.

  31. Jeff, it’s best not to question anything IO says. Because he is right. He is always right and everybody who disagrees with him (or who he misunderstands for that matter) is clearly wrong and is a worthless pathetic human being.
    Geez, Jeff! What were you thinking?

  32. jeffmcm says:

    HE’S NOT MY DANCING MONKEY!!!

  33. doug r says:

    Jeff, he’s referencing “The Host”.

  34. jeffmcm says:

    And I’m referencing Spielberg’s War of the Worlds.

  35. jeffmcm says:

    If Stella’s Boy is out there: Saw Rambo tonight. It’s your basic orgy of violence, justified by a white man’s burden pretext of war crimes in Burma. Pretty much what you would expect. Anybody who says they hate torture porn movies but liked it is a hypocrite.

  36. movieman says:

    “NCFOM”‘s front-runner status reminds me of the “inevitability” of “The Departed” last year. It’s a solid, artfully crafted genre film by industry veterans (the Coens/Scorsese) who have never won the big kahuna. They’re overdue–just like Scorsese was–and the consensus seems to be, just like it was in 2007, that it’s finally time to honor them.
    Can’t say that any of the other nominated best pictures have that sort of heat going for them. If “Michael Clayton” somehow manages to sneak in (which I don’t think it will), it’ll be like the “Chariots of Fire” upset in 1982 when “Reds” and “On Golden Pond” looked like the presumed favorites.
    Until the backlash started, I actually thought that “Juno” had a legitimate shot at being the spoiler. Now I’m not even so sure about Cody Diablo winning for original screenplay: that could be the crumb tossed to “MC” if “NCFOM” does what seems preordained.

  37. Stella's Boy says:

    Thanks Jeff. I figured as much.

  38. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Jeff, stop being so goddam literal. You know with the Razzies you can’t buy the award — you’ve got to earn it.
    Maybe Mrs. Longoria Parker will get a Razzie nomination next year.

  39. jeffmcm says:

    You’re the guy who insists on judging a movie by its ad campaign and you’re calling _me_ literal?

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