Z
MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Up On Review – Passion Play

8 Responses to “Up On Review – Passion Play”

  1. Proman says:

    So, alright suppose the movie really is bad. But don’t you feel it’s a little unfair to label someone who only ever directed one film as “not that kind of director”?

  2. LexG says:

    THE FOX. Still a MUST-SEE for Megan, Murray and Rourke.

    Dug the fortuitous Scorsese red-light on Poland’s face at 1:50!

  3. qwiggles says:

    I think this is going to live on as some kind of bizarro world terrible version of Lost Highway once it ends up on cable.

  4. IOv3 says:

    Dude, I know you are busy but you can’t neglect the blog like this all weekend. If you are not going to post BO reports or even add a BYOB, then let your administrator do it. If not, then changing everything right before TIFF was a bad freaking idea.

  5. Peter says:

    Saw it at TIFF. It was bad. Wild Orchid level bad. LexG, you might like it though since Megan is pretty hot in it, but she needs an acting coach…

  6. LexG says:

    All I needed to hear!

  7. Pitt says:

    I think some people are going to love it and some people are going to hate it. It’s more a film for film school students I think.

  8. nate says:

    I’ve read the script. I almost consulted on the film. They had budget problems before shooting started and apparently it came through. Actually, the script was pretty bad too when I read it. I knew it would be a flop.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Chad Harbach spent ten years writing his novel. It was his avocation, for which he was paid nothing, with no guarantee he’d ever be paid anything, while he supported himself doing freelance work, for which I don’t think he ever made $30,000 a year. I sold his book for an advance that equated to $65,000 a year—before taxes and commission—for each of the years of work he’d put in. The law schools in this country churn out first-year associates at white-shoe firms that pay them $250,000 a year, when they’re twenty-five years of age, to sit at a desk doing meaningless bullshit to grease the wheels of the corporatocracy, and people get upset about an excellent author getting $65,000 a year? Give me a fucking break.”
~ Book Agent Chris Parris-Lamb On The State Of The Publishing Industry

INTERVIEWER
Do you think this anxiety of yours has something to do with being a woman? Do you have to work harder than a male writer, just to create work that isn’t dismissed as being “for women”? Is there a difference between male and female writing?

FERRANTE
I’ll answer with my own story. As a girl—twelve, thirteen years old—I was absolutely certain that a good book had to have a man as its hero, and that depressed me. That phase ended after a couple of years. At fifteen I began to write stories about brave girls who were in serious trouble. But the idea remained—indeed, it grew stronger—that the greatest narrators were men and that one had to learn to narrate like them. I devoured books at that age, and there’s no getting around it, my models were masculine. So even when I wrote stories about girls, I wanted to give the heroine a wealth of experiences, a freedom, a determination that I tried to imitate from the great novels written by men. I didn’t want to write like Madame de La Fayette or Jane Austen or the Brontës—at the time I knew very little about contemporary literature—but like Defoe or Fielding or Flaubert or Tolstoy or Dostoyevsky or even Hugo. While the models offered by women novelists were few and seemed to me for the most part thin, those of male novelists were numerous and almost always dazzling. That phase lasted a long time, until I was in my early twenties, and it left profound effects.
~ Elena Ferrante, Paris Review Art Of Fiction No. 228

Z Z