MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

BYOB… Sundays with Anghus…

44 Responses to “BYOB… Sundays with Anghus…”

  1. Wrecktum says:

    So did LexG end up commiting grievous bodily harm to himself or not?

  2. Wrecktum says:

    Guess not.

  3. anghus says:

    i hope not. despite contrary opinions or disagreements, i would hope everyone here walks away from the computer without spite, malice, or the intent to harm.
    it’s the one thing i can say about online debates/arguments/angry snits. More than likely, i’ve forgotten it in an hour.
    As we roll into June, i’m already wondering if this summer is already dissapointing. No film has taken off as a clear cut winner. Star Trek is the perceived winner, though gross vs cost will always leave question marks. Do Harry Potter and Transformers both make 300 million? It doesn’t feel like there’s a lot of anticipation for it. Maybe i’m misreading it, but May was so top heavy with sequels, remakes, and re-envisioning that a lot of the momentum feels spent.
    Maybe it’s just me.

  4. Blackcloud says:

    Alright, Dave, you need to slam that NYT bullshit about “Princess and the Frog.” You gots to do it.

  5. anghus says:

    what bullshit would this be in reference to.

  6. LexG says:

    I can *never* gauge the Harry Potter enthusiasm. With each new HP, I’m always kinda thinking to myself, “Eh, another one of these? Surely this is played out by now, didn’t it peak with the Cuaron one, aren’t they all pretty much the same, does anyone still care, etc.” Then it drops and makes like the same exact amount every single time. Funny, even though I remember it being a big story when they pushed this one last November to summer, it’s the one “big” summer movie I can never remember is coming. I almost never see trailers or spots for it.
    Might be that it’s just a blind spot for me… I never saw the original HP and thus never checked back in for any of the sequels, even though 3 seemed like it would be awesome. But at 2:45 each, kinda hard to play catch-up five movies in, especially when they’re so obviously designed to be seen in a theater and not on a 36-inch TV.
    SORORITY ROW cannot come soon enough. Briana Evigan. Jamie “Real World” Chung. There will be many boners. Looks HOT and AWESOME.

  7. anghus says:

    The series has taken a weird turn. 1-2 were kids stuff with no resonance. 3-4 i found really entertaining.
    Order of the Phoenix was utterly forgettable. The trailer looks good, but at this point, what film doesn’t LOOK good. The visuals should be the easy part at this point.

  8. Blackcloud says:

    Anghus, the story’s right at the top of MCN right now.
    Phoenix felt like a TV movie version of Harry Potter. I’m not happy they kept Yates around for the last three flicks, but hopefully his direction will improve from the pedestrian level it had there. And at least Kloves is back to write a decent script.

  9. leahnz says:

    ‘And at least Kloves is back to write a decent script.’
    i heard that, blackc

  10. Blackcloud says:

    Er, I can see that, Leah. You like OotP?

  11. Wrecktum says:

    Brooks Barnes’ NYT piece is a hit-job, but that’s to be expected from the Times. Their coverage of Disney through the years has more often than not been uncomplimentary.

  12. leahnz says:

    ‘Er, I can see that, Leah. You like OotP?’
    oh, i’m not sure what you mean, blackc (i’m less than fresh today so my brain is set on ‘stupid’) but i was agreeing with you. and no, i don’t care for ‘order’ at all. i felt annoyed with and let down by both goldenberg and yates (‘ootp’ was a great honk of a tome that needed a good editor and should have been a couple hundred pages shorter, so i don’t envy anyone endeavouring to adapt it for the screen, but still), who completely failed to capture the flavour of the book imho, missing the boat entirely on the rather nasty undercurrent of the story: the sheer toad-like malevolence of umbridge, the chaos, helplessness and despair within the ‘order’, harry’s burgeoning anger and frustration – learning that his father could be a cruel, senseless bully was seminal to his character development in the book and yet it was inexplicably glossed over in the film. instead we were given a dull, watered-down, half-assed muddle with little imagination or zest or evil or emotion or heart. blech.
    plus, ‘order’ felt so out of sync with the rest of the series (‘azkaban’ is still one of my all-time fave flicks i’m slightly embarrassed to admit), which had matured somewhat and come into its own while still maintaining a sense of magical wonder, all but lost in ‘order’. as someone who read all the potter books out loud to my son, i must admit i care what happens to harry and the gang, and if yates fucks up the rest of it i’ll hunt him down and stab him through the heart with my BIC ballpoint.
    well, not really, but i think my stance is clear(and i am a bit worried for ‘half-blood prince’ after seeing the latest preview in the cinema; my boy turned to me and said sadly, ‘it doesn’t even seem like harry potter anymore’. i hope like hell he’s wrong)

  13. Blackcloud says:

    Just a miscommunication, Leah. Since you posted right after me, I thought perhaps you were rushing to defend OotP’s honor. Whereas, in fact, you were rushing to grab some dirt from my pail and join in throwing it on OotP. In fact, you grabbed it from my hand and proceeded to dump it right over OotP’s head. As it is now empty, let me grab my shovel and fill it up again.

  14. anghus says:

    I think Susan Boyle is literally the future of celebrity.
    Warhol told us everyone would be famous for 15 minutes. He didn’t tell us it would be a complete cycle.

  15. LexG says:

    Anyone catch the picture of the fans’ sign in that Susan Boyle link?
    HOLY SHIT, how many grammatical errors can be made in ONE fucking sentence?????

  16. IOIOIOI says:

    Phoenix is the best film by a country mile. The fact that anyone disagrees about this, is pretty much smashed in the face by the realities of six and seven. Yates got them for a reason. He made the best Potter film. Feel free to love Azkaban, but Phoenix is where it’s at in real life and at the movies. HOLLA IF YOU HEAR ME!

  17. leahnz says:

    io: the armond white of the hot blog

  18. Wrecktum says:

    Armond White is an annoying prick??

  19. martin says:

    IO: I’m right, you’re wrong. Oh, you’re so fucking wrong, how can you live with yourself. I have nothing to back up my argument, but that doesn’t matter because obviously you suck. My narrow point of view is the only valid point of view. Uppercase, exclamation.
    The shame here is that typepad doesn’t have an ignore feature.

  20. leahnz says:

    armond white IS an annoying prick, plus you can add on pompous, delusional contrarian with all the good humour of a hangman (hell, i actually ADORE io compared to white, come to think of it)

  21. IOIOIOI says:

    Martin, only assholes on the hot blog feel that way. This is the blog for the would-be banned. All of you take almost everything out of context, and this does not even include me. You lack the ability to put two and two together, but the facts are the facts. Phoenix is a movie that a lot of Potter fans see as being above and beyond as the best Potter. Why do you think people — outside of Warners — wanted Yates to come back to do the TDH? Seriously, stop being a chicken shit, grow a fucking pair, and realize you might have an opinion. This does not mean that reality cannot smack you the fuck right in your honkey face, then stomp of your shriveled bat balls.

  22. We should all just give up and listen to whatever IO says because, apparently, nobody elses opinion matters or, hell, is even worth making light of.
    In regards to Potter and Transformers, I’m thinking that the current blahness of the box office could help them. Time will tell though, obviously.

  23. martin says:

    Haha Kam, I can imagine what IO’s Hot Blog utopia would be.
    IO: This movie is great. I knew it would be since before I saw it, and as usual I was right. Everyone who disagrees with me? Oh yeah, you’re WRONG.
    Everyone else: Oh IO, I am so thankful to you for showing me the errors of my ways. So ARE so right! How could I think any differently, you’re right, you’re always right! I wish I could be right all the time like you, if only I had your amazing taste in film. Maybe… someday…

  24. chris says:

    Warners asked Cuaron — who I bet more people regard as the director of the best Potter film — to come back, too, IO, but he didn’t want to. If he had, we might never have heard from Yates.

  25. Monco says:

    I agree with Leah that ‘Azkaban’ is the best Potter movie by far. In my opinion it is the only movie of the series that transcends the book it was adapted from and becomes better than the book. The scenes with Harry saving sirius from the dementors captures what “fanatsy” should look like in movies. I don’t want to see the real world when I watch a Harry Potter movie, I want to see fantasy. It is a very watachable movie in the same way IO mentions Batman Begins. It is the only Potter movie I watch when I see it’s on tv. I don’t dislike OotP or think it is the worst of the series, that would be Goblet of Fire. I don’t like how the movies have shown Voldemort though, it’s not how I pictured him at all.

  26. Wrecktum says:

    The facts are the facts. Order of the Phoenix is the best. Fievel has commanded. So let it be written, so let it be done. Pharaoh Fievel has spoken.

  27. The Big Perm says:

    I don’t know, I’ve seen all of those Harry Potter movies and they seem about the same to me. Cuaron’s was fine and good, but I reckon the one after it was just as good. I saw the last one in the theater but I can’t remember a thing about it.

  28. Columbus’ films are rightly forgotten about, but while I do like Yates’ films, Cuaron’s is indeed the best to me. Everything from the look of it, to the humourous winks (Harry “playing” with his “wand” under the bed covers, anyone?) Although I also think it has the best story of any of the movies so far. I can’t judge how it worked in the book, but I get a big kick out of all that sort of puzzle solving and the time travel and such. It’s the only HP film I’ve seen more than once and by “more than once” I mean “at least five or six”. It’d rank in my top ten for that year, I reckon.

  29. LexG says:

    Sorry ALISON LOHMAN your brief reign as #1 GIRL lasted eight hours; Welcome to the TWO SPOT because K-STEW IS BACK WHERE SHE BELONGS.

  30. LexG says:


  31. jeffmcm says:

    Azkaban is the only one that I’ve wanted to watch multiple times.

  32. LexG says:

    Come on, David, give me a Drunken Lex Watches the MTV Awards thread so I can make all these observations in real time (catching the first hour on rerun)…
    – That TRANSFORMERS CLIP fucking RUUUUUUUULED; Holy shit, even Bay Haters must have to admit that was THE FUCKING REAL DEAL. FUCKING AMAZING SHIT…. BAY IS GOD. Does Michael Bay read this blog? If not, Don Murphy, tell him that was the BEST CLIP EVER. The man is a GENIUS. NO ONE can direct like that. NOOOOO ONE.
    – Samberg is funny.
    – HOLY FUCK, Eminem is MY AGE?????? EMINEM IS 36 GOING ON 37?????? Dude looks 17 if he’s a day, which kinda gives lie to his whole badass shtick; To look THAT YOUNG at *36*, dude must be the biggest teatotlin’, non-drinking, non-drugging, healthy-eating health club motherfucker on the planet. Fuck, BURT YOUNG WAS THE SAME AGE IN ROCKY AS EMINEM IS TODAY.

  33. jeffmcm says:

    I have this feeling that Don Murphy and Michael Bay have never been in the same room or talked on the phone.

  34. IHeartThatCurtis! says:

    Martin: nope. Sorry, try again later. Seriously, trolls like you ruin this board. You are at least not as bad as that fucking spaz. Who believes wanting to watch again is the same as WATCHING AGAIN! What a fucking spaz.
    KC: Uh no. I simply refuse to puss and boot around with these things, and you folks get very sensitive when anyone disagrees with you in a certain way. All of you do it. All of you. So excuse me for giving two bags of David Poland’s piss from his oversized kidneys about what you believe about what’s happening. You guys really think the people reading this blog come here for you? For me? Nah. They come here for Mr. David Poland’s inane ramblings towards all those evil things out there that bump in the dark like Nikki Finke’s vibrator aka “HAAS’S UNIT!”

  35. LexG says:

    ANY of you out there who are still younger or are still blessed with GOOD HAIR, it is your civic fucking duty to GROW IT LONG. It’s fucking PAINING ME watching this to see BEN STILLER and BRADLEY COOPER with AWESOME LONG HAIR, knowing that I can never GO LONG AGAIN thanks to male pattern baldness, or at least on paper I shouldn’t but I pathetically try to grow it out for six months at a time only to have a fucking ditch at the crown and down the middle.
    I can barely even remember what it was like to have a FULL HEAVING COIF OF STALLONE AS DEKE DASILVA HAIR in my teens and early twenties. It is a CRUEL HOAX in life to lose hair prematurely, and I can’t do a fucking thing with my hair. So ANYONE HERE who can still GO LONG needs to rock the MICHAEL BAY, ZAC EFRON, SNAKE PLISSKEN, CRUISE IN LEGEND, KEANU IN THE WATCHER head of hair that is AT LEAST SIX INCHES LONG. OTHERWISE you are WASTING HAIR.
    GROW IT LONG. SHORT HAIR is the MOST BORING SHIT EVER and KURT RUSSELL’S 1981 is the BEST HAIR EVER. Any man who CAN have long hair but keeps it short is a straight-up dick.
    THAT’S RIGHT, POLAND, I expect you to straight fucking Billy Connolly that salt and pepper action. DO IT.
    Short hair is for FUCKING ASSHOLES.

  36. leahnz says:

    i got a weakness for guys with longish hair (and serious scruff, a la bale&butler in ‘reign of fire’. oh baby)

  37. IHeartThatCurtis! says:


  38. LexG says:

    I had the hair of JEFF BRIDGES IN EIGHT MILLION WAYS TO DIE when I was 18.
    Now I look like CHRIS BAUER from 8MM and THE WIRE. Fucking TRAGEDY.
    Was on Rogaine for three years and it never grew a single fucking hair. Worst part is I still got the hairline like a regular guy, but when I put the head down, it’s that off-putting ROBERT FORSTER/AL GORE/JAMES CROMWELL shit where you can see scalp.
    NO WOMEN will EVER be able to look beyond that. Cue me going WIG SHOPPING yesterday for when I make my YouTube “Sasha Grey rant” video. YEP. GOOD IDEA.

  39. IHeartThatCurtis! says:


  40. LexG says:

    MICHAEL BAY, hire KRISTEN STEWART and light her up all GOLDEN and ORANGE with RED nail polish in an ASIAN PRINT DRESS and BLACK HEELS with RED LIPSTICK and you will MAKE EVEN MORE MONEY.
    BAY = MY PERSONAL JESUS. If my dream of being the NEXT BYRON ALLEN ever did come true, my junket with the BAYMAN would be the best episode of CHRIS FARLEY SHOW EVER.
    BAY STAKED HIS CLAIM TONIGHT. ****NOTHING**** this summer looks like that. NOTHING.
    You heard it from me first. NOT A SINGLE DIRECTOR in this town can put together images, effects, cinematography and MEGAN FOX HOTNESS like that where YOU WANT THAT TO BE YOUR LIFE.
    BAY IS BETTER THAN HITCHCOCK. Not a shtick, that’s for REAL.

  41. The Big Perm says:

    Oh good, IO is trying to become the new Lex. IO, do you want a column too?

  42. christian says:

    This is like Dueling Banjos with two…well, you get the point.

  43. IOIOIOI says:

    It’s better than anything else on this blog in 15 years. Seriously, get with it, or get gone. You geezers.

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