Stormy Weather in New Vernon

This morning on Facebook a New Jersey woman named Joy Whitnack (from the leafy suburb of New Vernon, a bit southwest of Morristown) spoke of an argument she had with her boyfriend last night after they watched the Stormy Daniels interview on 60 Minutes.

“[I’m] feeling very sad this morning. Last night…my significant other had to go on and on about Stormy Daniels. I said she was a bimbo and he said ‘what does that make Trump?’ End result a few minutes later I was told that I’m a dumb-ass! I should not be called nasty names just because I have different political views, should I? We haven’t spoken since then and he walked around the house this morning as though I did something wrong. Unbelievable.

“I try every day to make our home pretty, cook nice meals, etc. I’ve constantly said we should not discuss politics because he constantly calls our President every bad name imaginable. Am I wrong to expect an apology for being called a dumb-ass last night? Am I the one that is wrong? I love this person. Just don’t think I need to be called names for my views on politics or anything else.” She closed with a frown face.

My reply: “You’re not a ‘dumb-ass'” — I was trying to be gracious — “and if I were your husband or boyfriend, I would apologize and let it go. (Does he drink?) But you’re 100% wrong in calling Donald Trump ‘our‘ president. He’s ‘your‘ president. Only his base (35% of the electorate, give or take) is loyal and admiring — every sane person outside this community regards Trump as a racist, sociopathic nightmare — the most ill-informed, ethically deplorable person to ever occupy the Oval Office, hands down.

“With the cat out of the bag Stormy Daniels is out for what she can get, of course, but every fibre and instinct tells me she’s not lying.”

Spanking, Goon, DVD Proof, etc.

The three things that came out of last night’s 60 Minutes chat with Stormy Daniels (aka Stephanie Clifford) were (a) there was no “affair” with Donald Trump in ’06 — they did the deed only once at Harrah’s Lake Tahoe, (b) at Daniels’ suggestion Trump dropped trou and took a couple of playful ass-whacks with a rolled-up copy of Forbes magazine, (c) not long after sitting down for her 2011 In Touch interview, Daniels/Clifford was approached by some guy in Las Vegas and told to stop talking about Trump or else. It was also reiterated in a separate interview that Clifford’s attorney Michael Avenatti has a DVD that contains evidence proving that his client indeed had it off with Fuckface Von Clownstick.

Read more

I’d Be More Impressed If…

It would be better if George Clooney could trade a line or two with Smokey and the Bandit‘s Burt Reynolds, talk about Venusians with Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper, deliver a Steve Martin-ish tirade at Planes, Trains & Automobile‘s John Candy, or exchange thoughts about madness and fate with Janet Leigh in that Bates Motel parlor. Cool as far as it goes, but simple CG substitutions aren’t enough these days. Given the state of CG art these days, we have a right to expect a bit more. (Note: This spot premiered six months ago.)

The State of Things

The weekend’s top ten performers are, in this order, Pacific Rim Uprising (wouldn’t see it with a gun to my head), Black Panther (the final hour is quite good, guaranteed Best Picture nominee), I Can Only Imagine (Christian flick, no thanks), Sherlock Gnomes (no fucking way), Tomb Raider (“A third-rate, totally-by-the-numbers, CG-propelled exercise in female adventurer myth-building“), Love, Simon (“Antiseptic but half-decent, intensely suburban gay teen romance“), Paul, Apostle of Christ (another Christian flick, 35% Rotten Tomatoes rating), Game Night (should’ve seen it by now, obviously my fault) and Midnight Sun (romantic tearjerker with 21% RT rating).

Twenty years ago the big March earners were Mike NicholsPrimary Colors (opened on 3.20.98), John McNaughton‘s Wild Things (ditto), Joel and Ethan Coen‘s The Big Lebowski (opened on 3.6.98 although the cult-hit status took a while to germinate), Randall Wallace‘s The Man in the Iron Mask, Robert Benton‘s Twilight (Paul Newman, Susan Sarandon, Gene Hackman), Stuart Baird‘s U.S. Marshalls and Richard Linklater‘s The Newton Boys.

While Milchan Slept

Warren Beatty‘s Rules Don’t Apply was the biggest financial bust of his career. The oddly farcical Howard Hughes dramedy opened and died a year and a half ago, pulling in a grand total of $3,652,206 domestic and $233,136 foreign.

I enjoyed aspects of it (why can’t I find that hilarious argument scene between Beatty’s Hughes and Matthew Broderick‘s Levar Mathis on YouTube?), but there was never any doubt that Rules was going to sink like a stone. It had a sign around its neck that said “can’t possibly appeal to under-35s, and will probably only connect with long-of-tooth industry types who know Beatty well enough to say ‘hi’ at industry gatherings, but even those guys are going to be mezzo-mezzo behind his back.”

Nonetheless the producers of this $30 million calamityArnon Milchan on one side of the table, and an investment group including Brett Ratner, Ron Burkle and Steve Bing on the other — are suing and counter-suing and basically saying to each other, “This movie was supposed to make money and it didn’t so it’s your fault!”

Three months ago Milchan’s Regency Entertainment sued Beatty and the investment group guys for $18 million, claiming some kind of breach of contract (i.e., “why wasn’t this movie funnier and better and less constricted in its editing, which would have made it more profitable?”). Now the I.G. guys, who reportedly put up $27 million of the $30 million production costs, are countersuing Milchan for $50 million.

Five years ago Milchan and the I.G. guys “entered into an oral contract” that Milchan “would actively function as lead producer of Rules Don’t Apply” — bullshit! Milchan is strictly a high-end finance guy, never does hands-on with anything — “along with supervising its marketing and distribution while staying in regular and meaningful consultation with Beatty throughout production and marketing/distribution.

Read more

“Ugh…Here We Go”

Whatever Stormy Daniels tells Anderson Cooper on 60 Minutes this evening, it can’t get any better than the transcript of her 2011 In Touch interview, which was given five years before she accepted $130,000 in hush money from Donald Trump attorney Michael Cohen.

The best parts can be summarized as (a) hair, (b) junk, (c) shark and (d) nose.

We all know they met in 2006 in Lake Tahoe, at a party for the American Century Celebrity Golf Tournament. And that their first “date” happened at Trump’s penthouse suite at Harrah’s Lake Tahoe. Apart from a general fascination with Trump, Daniels was lured by his seemingly earnest suggestion that she’d be a great choice for an Apprentice contestant.

1. Hair: “I asked him about his hair,” Stormy says. “I was like, ‘Dude, what’s up with that?’ and he laughed and he said, ‘You know, everybody wants to give me a makeover and I’ve been offered all this money and all these free treatments.’ And I was like, ‘What is the deal? Don’t you want to upgrade that? Come on, man.’ He said that he thought that if he cut his hair or changed it, that he would lose his power and his wealth. And I laughed hysterically at him.”

2. Junk: “I had to use the bathroom and I went to the restroom, which was in the bedroom. Like I said, it was a big suite. I could describe the suite perfectly. When I came out, he was sitting on the bed and he was like, ‘Come here.’ And I was like, ‘Ugh, here we go.’ And we started kissing. I actually don’t even know why I did it but I do remember while we were having sex, I was like, ‘Please don’t try to pay me.’ I remember thinking, ‘I hope he doesn’t think I’m a hooker.’ Not that I have anything against hookers. I just personally have never done it. Still, I have no idea why I did it. Honestly, I really don’t.”

Asked if she was attracted to him, Stormy answers, “Would you be? I was more like fascinated. I was definitely stimulated. We had a really good banter. Good conversation for a couple hours. I could tell he was nice, intelligent in conversation. The sex was nothing crazy. He wasn’t like, chain me to the bed or anything. It was one position. I can definitely describe his junk perfectly, if I ever have to.”

3. Shark: “The strangest thing about that night…this was the best thing ever. You could see the television from the little dining room table and he was watching Shark Week and he was watching a special about the U.S.S. something and it sank and it was like the worst shark attack in history. He is obsessed with sharks. Terrified of sharks. He was like, ‘I donate to all these charities and I would never donate to any charity that helps sharks. I hope all the sharks die.’ He was like riveted. He was like obsessed. It’s so strange, I know.

Read more

Favorite Girlfriend/Wife Thing

You suggest a certain film for the evening. “What’s it about, who’s in it, when was it made?” etc. You give her all that. She has a problem with overly theatrical acting styles and believes that only films made in the ’80s and beyond have genuine, real-deal acting behavior, so you assure her that the acting isn’t fake. And then maybe mention the music or the cinematography or your history with the film, etc.

“How many times you see it?” I don’t know, five or six times, ten or twelve times, more than a few. “And you want to see again?” I can see great films over and over, it doesn’t matter, besides it kinda makes it new in a way when you see it with a virgin. “And what’s the title?” You give her that and after endless skepticism and vague reluctance she says “okay, let’s go.”

And then you insert the Bluray into the tray or you go to the American Cinematheque Egyptian (or the Aero in Santa Monica), and then the movie starts and five or ten minutes later she says, “Oh, I’ve seen this!”

Bailey Story Changes

On 3.16 I wrote about a same-date Deadline story that said the Motion Picture Academy had received “three harassment claims” about AMPAS president John Bailey.

Three separate harassment claims surfacing at the same moment struck me as odd, and so I asked if the three persons (women, I presumed) had “come forward as a group, or did the harassment complaints surface of their own volition and time clock, and just happened to arrive at roughly the same time?”

In an in-house memo sent yesterday (Friday, 3.23) to Academy staffers, Bailey stated that the whole magillah is about one woman — not three apparently — complaining about a single incident that happened more than a decade ago. It concerns his having “attempted to touch a woman inappropriately while we were both riding in a transport van on a movie set,” according to Bailey’s memo. He added, “That did not happen.”

Bailey may or may not have inappropriately touched (or attempted to inappropriately touch) a woman during a ride to a movie set in a van more than a decade ago. I wasn’t there. I know nothing. And it’s possible that something more than touching actually went on, I realize.

As I said in an 11.1.17 piece called “Past Predators,” I was inappropriately touched once at age 19. After a night of drunkenness I woke up in bed with an old fat guy — bald, blubbery, smelling of booze — in a New Orleans hotel room. I bounded the fuck out of bed and got dressed in a hurry, going “jeez” and “good God” and mostly feeling icky rather than assaulted. Definitely distasteful, but not exactly a case of lingering traumatic shock.

Read more

Was Pablo Picasso A Bad Man?

Genius is the title of a National Geographic anthology series. The first product of this anthology was a feature about Albert Einstein (popped on 4.25.17); the second (due to air on 4.24.18) is about Pablo Picasso. But the title is so bad. A Picasso biopic could be theoretically called Picasso or, if you insist, Genius, but calling it Genius: Picasso sounds like the musings of a drooling moron. Exec produced by Ron Howard and Brian Grazer, pic costars Antonio Banderas, Alex Rich and Clemence Poesy. Picasso was quite the salivating hound, as we all know. Every day his ghost kneels and gives thanks to the Gods for having been spared the wrath of #TimesUp and #MeToo.

Less Than Meets The Eye

This morning I happened to re-read a nearly six-year-old essay titled “Ways In Which Jaws Faintly Blows.” And I was saying to myself “whoa, this isn’t half bad!” I know I should wait until the summer months to repost stuff like this, but I’m not a wait-for-the-right-season type of guy. If something’s good, it’s good. Here it is:

I’m not calling Jaws a problem film. It obviously isn’t and never has been. But it’s the movie equivalent of a lightweight beach read. Engrossing, highly accessible, fun to follow, entertaining. It’s like a great dinner — zesty, well prepared, exhilarating in a sense — but like all great dishes it fades upon reflection. And it may not even be that.

It’s actually more like a great dessert. Made with confidence bordering on swagger (young Spielberg was as good as it got in this realm) and summer-movie attitude, but all you remember at the end of the day are the bits, the tricks, the cherry and the whipped cream.

Add up all the parts and you’re left with a collection of parts. There’s no real muscle tissue, no wholeness, no gravitas, no “things that are not said” and no metaphor other than “uh-oh, life can be occasionally scary or threatening because of the existence of predators…wooooh.” It has several great bits (the severed leg, the fake-looking dead guy’s head, the chumming and the Bruce pop-out, “you’re gonna need a bigger boat”) and that one great moment when Robert Shaw‘s Quint talks about being in the sea with the survivors of the sunken U.S.S. Indianapolis.

It’s just a summer movie that made a lot of money and played a seminal role in the ruining of the great era of Hollywood achievement that began in the late ’60s and ended in the early ’80s. (It took a while.) If you want to buy the Jaws Bluray to have and hold, fine. If it still works for you, fine. I just don’t hold with calling it a great or even an especially sturdy film. It’s merely an effective one.

I never believed the opening scene. I’ve always been impressed by it, sure, but only as a movie bit. I never believed that a shark would pull a naked girl back and forth across the water’s surface so she can shriek and scream for our delectation. (I suspect that shark death is probably much worse and a good deal less cinematic than this.) Again — I’m not putting it down. I’m just saying that like almost everything Spielberg does, it’s unreliable and manipulative.

Read more