The Jeffrey Wells Thread

[domino harvey]

Based on that pic it’s time for Martin Sheen to play Wells in something

[pistolwink]

The last few days of his posts have basically been nothing but him ranting about his inability to use the Cannes virtual ticketing website, preventing him from attending a great number of screenings.

Hopefully that's a feature, not a bug.

[Maurice Micklewhite]

In "Hit and Run: How Jon Peters and Peter Guber Took Sony for a Ride in Hollywood", Wells pops up.

Wells reported on a supposedly disastrous - and entirely fictitious - screening of "The Last Action Hero", angering executive Mark Canton.

It turns out he was always a high-quality operator.

With disaster all around, Columbia looked for a villain to hold responsible. It found one in a freelance writer named Jeffrey Wells, who had already earned the studio’s disfavor by writing that Mark Canton had snoozed through a screening of The Age of Innocence. The same article said that, while Canton was at Warner Bros. he had been assigned to work on Franco Zeffirelli’s Hamlet and had asked for a plot summary.

But all that was merely a prelude to what Columbia would see as Wells’s unforgivable transgression. The piece speculated about a disastrous Hero screening that had allegedly taken place in Pasadena in late May, according to “varied sources, from actors, directors, and film industry executives to social workers, bodybuilders, and dental technicians.”

Canton’s headache worsened on Monday morning when En- tertainment Weekly arrived with a cover story billed: scHWARz- ENEGGER FINISHES “LAST”!! The article emphasized “the re- writes, reshoots and rumors,” reinforcing the idea that the film was troubled and out of control, with its budget soaring to $120 million. Jeffrey Wells was credited as a contributor to the story. In a rage, Canton had the offending issues of EW pulled from the shelves of the Columbia bookstore.

The movie was going down and somebody had to be blamed. At 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 15, a three-page letter was sent to editor John Lindsay at the Los Angeles Times. Signed by Mark Gill, it was a declaration of war: “Columbia Pictures will be out of business with the entire Los Angeles Times editorial staff as of noon on Monday, June 21 unless you guarantee that your paper will never again run a story written by Jeff Wells about (or even mentioning) this studio, its executives, or its movies.” If the newspaper failed to respond, all Times reporters would be barred from studio screenings and their phone calls would go unreturned. Columbia was also considering pulling its re- ported $5 million in advertising from the paper. “In my three years as Calendar editor,” Lindsay said then, “I’ve never seen anything like this.”

Such hardball tactics left the Times with no choice but to stand by its story and its reporter: The paper could not be seen as caving in to Columbia. Lindsay defended the “Phantom Screening” piece on the grounds that it reported on rumors of the screening and gave adequate space to the studio’s denials. Nevertheless, Calendar movie editor Claudia Eller called sources trying to verify that there had been a Pasadena screen- ing, while Wells desperately tried to get his original sources on the phone. But the “social workers, bodybuilders, and dental technicians” had either disappeared or recanted their stories.

Convinced that Wells had deliberately spread lies, Columbia executives tried to damage Wells’s reputation with prospective employers. One Columbia executive referred to him as “a cockroach in a nuclear war” that had to be destroyed.

Jeffrey Wells, meanwhile, finally gave up trying to nail down the confirmation he needed to salvage his reputation regard- ing that elusive Pasadena screening. His sources, like the screening, turned out to be phantoms. “My conclusion is that it didn’t happen,” he said, expressing “complete befuddlement” that people would fabricate such information.

[JabbaTheSlut]

The same article said that, while Canton was at Warner Bros. he had been assigned to work on Franco Zeffirelli’s Hamlet and had asked for a plot summary.

“varied sources, from actors, directors, and film industry executives to social workers, bodybuilders, and dental technicians.”

Hahaha. Genius.

[Maurice Micklewhite]

The same article said that, while Canton was at Warner Bros. he had been assigned to work on Franco Zeffirelli’s Hamlet and had asked for a plot summary.

“varied sources, from actors, directors, and film industry executives to social workers, bodybuilders, and dental technicians.”

Hahaha. Genius.

The "Age of Innocence"/"Hamlet" anecdotes truly are trolling on a genius.

Even if untrue, Canton couldn't explicitly deny them because doing so would give the stories further oxygen.

And he's subsequently trashed Canton on his website - referring him as one of the worst executives - without explaining or even addressing the necessary context behind his loathing.

No matter how much one learns about Wells, there is always new layers to unpeal.

[JabbaTheSlut]

Hear hear.

[pistolwink]

The thing that stood out to me about that piece was that Columbia Pictures once had a bookstore!

[colinr0380]

It is interesting that the studio letter kind of forced the LA Times to stand behind its reporter's spurious claims when they most likely would not have done so if they had not been threatened in such a manner.

Convinced that Wells had deliberately spread lies, Columbia executives tried to damage Wells’s reputation with prospective employers. One Columbia executive referred to him as “a cockroach in a nuclear war” that had to be destroyed.

That is an amusing mangling of a metaphor that inadvertently reveals that they may have known deep down that they could never truly, finally, absolutely destroy Wells!

[Maurice Micklewhite]

That is an amusing mangling of a metaphor that inadvertently reveals that they may have known deep down that they could never truly, finally, absolutely destroy Wells!

And we're all the better for it.

God bless you, Wells.

You beautiful son of a bitch.

[Maurice Micklewhite]

Hollywood-Elsewhere: come for the awards season speculation, stay for the gay panic (and Harry Styles obsession).

https://hollywood-elsewhere.com/can-sty ... n-his-own/

If I, Jeffrey Wells, were to suddenly be thrust into the living pages of Bethan Roberts‘ romance novel and thereby literally become Tom Burgess, a young British policeman in 1950s Brighton, I would not secretly fall in love with Patrick Hazlewood, a 40ish museum curator. I might find him excellent company and a good fellow, but no heavy breathing…sorry.

Primarily because (a) I’m not gay despite lifelong metrosexual tendencies, (b) because David Dawson (who plays Hazlewood) isn’t good looking enough, (c) because I’m more or less committed to being a good husband to Emma Corrin‘s Marion, even if she lacks the sensuality of Ingrid Bergman, (d) because I’ve never found men’s hairy legs the least bit attractive and (e) because I’ve always been profoundly fearful of or turned off by certain physical intimacies that would go with the territory. (Sorry but I don’t think I’m alone on that one.)

[Computer Raheem]

If I, Jeffrey Wells, were to suddenly be thrust into the living pages of Bethan Roberts‘ romance novel and thereby literally become Tom Burgess, a young British policeman in 1950s Brighton, I would not secretly fall in love with Patrick Hazlewood, a 40ish museum curator. I might find him excellent company and a good fellow, but no heavy breathing…sorry.

Primarily because (a) I’m not gay despite lifelong metrosexual tendencies, (b) because David Dawson (who plays Hazlewood) isn’t good looking enough, (c) because I’m more or less committed to being a good husband to Emma Corrin‘s Marion, even if she lacks the sensuality of Ingrid Bergman, (d) because I’ve never found men’s hairy legs the least bit attractive and (e) because I’ve always been profoundly fearful of or turned off by certain physical intimacies that would go with the territory. (Sorry but I don’t think I’m alone on that one.)

I got the vague hint of whatever nonsense he's spewing, but can someone translate this into actual English? Wellsenese is incomprehensible to my understanding of how average people speak.

Also, I wonder what would happen if someone told him that Emma Corrin is non-binary?

[colinr0380]

Methinks the metrosexual doth protest too much.

[Matt]

I got the vague hint of whatever nonsense he's spewing, but can someone translate this into actual English?

If I, Jeffrey Wells, suddenly found myself the main character in this entirely fictional book/film, I would simply not be gay.

I am definitely not gay (despite owning a comb and more than one pair of pants), and I know that I am definitely not gay because:
- David Dawson is not hot
- Emma Corrin is hot
- I don’t like leg hair
- Ew, butt stuff

Thank you anyway, Jeff. The straights are stuck with you (but we might consider a trade for Peter Thiel or Andrew Sullivan).

[Maurice Micklewhite]

Also, I wonder what would happen if someone told him that Emma Corrin is non-binary?

Wells knows.

He wrote a review of the Corrin-starring "Lady Chatterley's Lover" that she doesn't generate sufficient heterosexual heat for the role.

He's now put the piece behind the paywall.

https://hollywood-elsewhere.com/curious-blockage/

Then, apropos of nothing, he wrote another post about how hot Ingrid Bergman was as opposed to how not-hot Corrin is.

The closest thing you'll get to an explanation for Wells' thought process is the following comment on his site.

Huh. I guess that explains why they didn’t make MY POLICEMAN about Jeffrey Wells.

Though a time travel film about you bulldozing through 1950s Brighton while grumbling at guys, “I’m not gay! Plus you’re not hot enough!” would provide a certain entertainment of its own.

[Quote Perf Unquote]

Thank you anyway, Jeff. The straights are stuck with you

Bullshit we are, the dude's 85 years old and rides a scooter

[domino harvey]

No one thinks Wells is gay, literally the cringiest thing he or possibly anyone has ever done verifies it. Maybe he’ll use it as his next defense

[Computer Raheem]

If I, Jeffrey Wells, suddenly found myself the main character in this entirely fictional book/film, I would simply not be gay.

I am definitely not gay (despite owning a comb and more than one pair of pants), and I know that I am definitely not gay because:
- David Dawson is not hot
- Emma Corrin is hot
- I don’t like leg hair
- Ew, butt stuff

Thank you for the translation. This does beg the question: what would happen if Wells encountered a woman with leg hair?

Wells knows.

He wrote a review of the Corrin-starring "Lady Chatterley's Lover" that she doesn't generate sufficient heterosexual heat for the role.

He's now put the piece behind the paywall.

https://hollywood-elsewhere.com/curious-blockage/

Then, apropos of nothing, he wrote another post about how hot Ingrid Bergman was as opposed to how not-hot Corrin is.

The closest thing you'll get to an explanation for Wells' thought process is the following comment on his site.

Huh. I guess that explains why they didn’t make MY POLICEMAN about Jeffrey Wells.

Though a time travel film about you bulldozing through 1950s Brighton while grumbling at guys, “I’m not gay! Plus you’re not hot enough!” would provide a certain entertainment of its own.

Can't say I'm surprised. Old habits die hard, I guess, especially when that habit involves being an old, insecure perv

No one thinks Wells is gay, literally the cringiest thing he or possibly anyone has ever done verifies it. Maybe he’ll use it as his next defense

Please don't give him ideas. You know he'll do it

[Maurice Micklewhite]

Ernst Lubitsch's "Trouble in Paradise".

Wells saw "The Banshees of Inisherin" late, decided to hate it and has mentioned a falling-out with Sasha Stone over it.

https://hollywood-elsewhere.com/movies- ... e-affairs/

Everything’s cool now (I think), but for three or four days a close friend was giving me the cold-shoulder treatment because I’m not a fan of Martin McDonagh‘s The Banshees of Inisherin.

HE to friendo: “Banshees obviously has its virtues and charms and its pictorial beauty and whatnot, but the [afore-mentioned nihilism] is ridiculous. THR‘s Scott Feinberg isn’t demonic for sharing my reaction or vice versa. There are many sane people out there who’ve found this film mystifying. I really don’t think I deserve to be shunned or banished for feeling this way. I respect many things about it. It’s not ‘bad’ as much as infuriating.”

Here is Stone's response.

That isn't what happened. Here is how it went. My cat died a terrible death in the vet. I had wanted to bring him home after finding out he had lung cancer. But the vet told me I had to end his life that day because it was too cruel to make him suffer any longer. I was distraught, very very sad. He was a cat that was found on Mulholland as a kitten half dead. He had a hernia operation and then ate thread and almost died. He lived 12 years after that and it was hard letting him go. I told you how excited I was about you seeing Banshees. So on the day my cat died, which you knew, you chose that opportunity to SCREAM at me about how bad, how ugly, how DISEASED this movie was. On and on it went, text message after text message. I told you to stop. You wouldn't.

Then you said: I'm sorry about your cat. Shortly thereafter you sent me a letter someone sent you about the movie that they didn't like -- I asked you to stop. It was a movie I loved, a movie I thought you would love. BUT YOU COULD NOT HEAR THE MOVIE AND REFUSED TO ADMIT YOU COULD NOT HEAR IT. So you blamed the movie for that. See it again, I said. Listen to the dialogue I said. IT'S DISEASED you insisted.

This was not my fault. This was YOUR fault. And now you seem like loving a movie has to be a team sport. You have to find people to hate the movie to prove that it is worthy of your hate (because you could not hear a word of it). People loving movies is not a crime, Jeff. It is a gift. It is a wonderful thing. You didn't love it, so what. Watch it again. Try to understand it.

But if you came away with this thinking I blocked you because you didn't like the movie you have way too high of an opinion of yourself. I don't care what you thought about it - I would have loved it if you loved it. The problem was that you kept coming at me when I was in a bad way and sad and I didn't want to hear it.

Also: it doesn't matter to me who didn't love the movie. I loved Empire of Light and the critics killed it out of Telluride. That sucked. But they weren't texting me as a friend telling me how terrible the movie was even when I asked them to stop.

You know I have had your back so many times - defended you so many times. In so many different ways. It isn't that hard for you to extend a tiny bit of kindness on occasion.

And finally, if you find my behavior repugnant, you should get a look at yours.

[Never Cursed]

Well, if you're going to have a sudden and permanent rupture with one of your only friends over any movie, might as well be this one...

Ran into Wells recently at the big NYFF screening of Master Gardener (as ever, he paid his way in). There was no one in the crowd in a bigger or more indignant hurry to leave, not even Schrader, who exited through the front and practically had to beat off zoomer admirers with a stick.

[yoloswegmaster]

[Mr Sausage]

I’m sorry, is Wells says that he takes cialis, not for sex, but just so he can walk around doing his daily affairs with a full on erection? Like he used to do in his 30s? The fuck?!

[MongooseCmr]

No, he takes boner pills as an anti-depressant(?) and is surprised when he’s rock hard at the grocery store

[aox]

Every time I see this thread bumped I cringe.

[Mr Sausage]

No, he takes boner pills as an anti-depressant(?) and is surprised when he’s rock hard at the grocery store

I hope so, because I read “spontaneous combustion” very differently, and it authentically ruined my morning.

[Brian C]

That reads like a guy who's trying to lay the groundwork for a future indecent exposure defense. "Your honor, it just happens sometimes because of the medication I take. See, I even wrote about it on my blog!"