MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

BYOB: Is The Light Winning?


12 Responses to “BYOB: Is The Light Winning?”

  1. leahnz says:

    i’m more into ‘Murdoch Mysteries’ personally

  2. Amblinman says:

    Watching some corners of the internet go into hyper-whine mode because the series didn’t end with Cthulhu molesting a kid in a bathtub has been great.

  3. EtGuild2 says:

    So, early reactions are in for “Captain America” and “Noah” and they are fantastic for the former, and very good for the latter, though critics are warning that many conservative Christians will HATE “Noah.”

    Also, the two highest profile SXSW movies got very good, if somewhat disposable notices….the Favreau/Downey Jr. “Chef” and Rogan/Efron “Neighbors.”

    I’m a big fan of Warner Bros.’ recent run…but major props to Paramount for standing by Aronofsky’s vision, especially in the wake of WB’s abandonment of the Brad Pitt/Cate Blanchett production of “The Fountain.” This could flop hard. Aronofsky made “Black Swan,” “Pi,” “Requiem,” and “The Wrestler” for $26 million combined and has 5 times as much money to play with here. Anytime one of the majors puts art ahead of pre-screenings though, it deserves to be recognized.

  4. Hcat says:

    When Black Swan was released someone more astute than myself noticed that each DA release makes more than all the previous ones combined. That puts Noah at a completely doable $150 million.

  5. cadavra says:

    “many conservative Christians will HATE ‘Noah.'”

    Many conservative Christians will hate ANYTHING. Some have even attacked “Son of God.” There is no winning with these people. None.

  6. Hcat says:

    Conservative Christians are simply another stripe of fanboy who will never be pleased with hollywood interpretation of their beloved property. Just as there could never be a watchman adaption that will please the most rabid fans, there is never going to be a biblical movie that is up to snuff for a portion of those folks.

  7. SamLowry says:

    This is a joke, right?

    4 Reasons This New Movie Is Everything Wrong With Hollywood.

    Santa Claus versus the Vikings? Wasn’t Pia Zadora in that one?

  8. hcat says:

    So I am glad that television is better than it was (though this has always been the case), but articles like this one from the vulture drive me a little batty;


    Maybe the reason that Williams, Clooney, and Aniston got lead roles instead of the supporting ones offered to Cranston and Hamm is that the first group where household names that were watched by 30 Million people every week, while this new breed of crowned king if they hit three million viewers? The whole article reads like it was from someone in an insulated bubble where Taylor Kitsch and Benedict Kumberbatch are actual recognizable stars as opposed to good actors who where in strong quality marginally successful shows.

  9. YancySkancy says:

    The title of the Vulture article is absurd as well, since it seems to imply that Williams, Clooney, Aniston, et al, “needed” to have movie careers. Obviously, the networks would have been just as thrilled back then to keep TV stars on TV.

  10. cadavra says:

    Nothing wrong with being a TV star anymore. There are plenty of actors who’ve remained on TV (with an occasional movie role tossed in) and have maintained their popularity and stardom. Ted Danson, Tom Selleck and Betty White are three of the most obvious examples.

  11. SamLowry says:

    I wonder how many studios are trying to snatch up the rights to The Night They Took Miss Beautiful.

    Has anyone checked the manifest of flight MH 370 to see if it was carrying anything interesting? Wouldn’t it be a hoot if there was nothing thrilling on board and the hijackers just wanted to sell everyone into slavery?©

  12. SamLowry says:

    It’s always stunning when you read a piece like “The Sex Scene Is Dead”, you Google the writer and discover they’re not a kid.

    While slagging NYMPHOMANIAC and BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOR, this thirtysomething twit presents his thesis, which is that widely available internet porn has desensitized folks to the point where sex scenes in movies are no longer shocking, without realizing that a) mainstream directors put sex scenes in their movies even after porn was available at video rental stores across the country, long before wieners and clits appeared on the internet, and b) who said sex scenes are supposed to be shocking?

    It comes off as unintentionally humorous hand-wringing, like the assertion that 9/11 killed irony forever. Grow up, kid. Even after porn becomes tactile and fully interactive, sex scenes will still appear in mainstream movies.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog


Quote Unquotesee all »

“I run a movie for myself the first time, and if I can forget I had anything to do with the picture, and I’m halfway through the movie and I’m just the audience, then that is my litmus test for a film working. It doesn’t mean it’s going to work for anybody outside of myself, but when I lose the aesthetic distance between the screen and where I’m sitting, the first time I run a picture that I’ve directed for myself, if I’m aware to the very end that I’m the director, and all I can do is find things to fault, then I know I have my work cut out for me. And I have to roll up my sleeves and fix everything. But when I can watch a movie and I can forget that I made the movie, that’s the first sign that I’m going to be pretty happy with it, that I’m going to be able to live with it.”
~ Steven Spielberg On When He Thinks A Movie Is Working

“I was brought up on newspapers. I love newspapers. I love old-fashioned newspapers, but today I read them on the Internet because of time. And in New York, I read the morning papers, then I read the London papers on my iPad. But entertainment is very important. With broadband coming, everything is changing. People now spend four or five hours on their iPhones, their smartphones, which is changing the world totally. I found it with my young children. They are on their iPhones while they are watching television, doing two things at once. The fact that now we have 2.5 billion people with smartphones, with access to knowledge all over the world, with access to each other, government is going to change, the world is going to change. And it’s going to change very fast. We’ve only had smartphones for eight years, and now we have 2.5 billion of them. In another eight years, we will have 5 billion. The whole world will be on them… If newspapers have opinions, if they are really well-written, if they’re very reliable, people will pay for them. Then they are viable. We found [that] with the Wall Street Journal. You have newspapers on the Internet which are so good people will pay for them. There are people who steal things, rewrite them and put them out, like Google, but they are not reliable at all.”
~ Rupert Murdoch