MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

What CameraPlanet are you from?: from the Observer & a reply

New York Observer’s Jake Brooks untangles one more spatty, bitter, litigious Manhattan indie collapse: “It must feel like déjà vu for Stephen Carlis. His former company, the Shooting Gallery, which he co-founded with Larry Meistrich, met its ignominious—and litigious—demise in the wake of the dot-com bust. Now Mr. Carlis finds himself on the brink of another legal struggle as his former employer, Steven Rosenbaum, the head of CameraPlanet—which closed its doors in December 2004—readies a civil lawsuit against him… Mr. Rosenbaum is also pursuing criminal action through the D.A.’s office. Among other financial improprieties, Mr. Rosenbaum alleges… Mr. Carlis… was using his relationships with filmmakers and producers to divert potential production projections… into third-party companies.. In legal terms, he was a faithless employee who breached his fiduciary duty… To say the least, Mr. Carlis sees matters differently… “This is probably one the sickest things anybody’s ever done. I really did a lot of wonderful things for this man. I befriended him. He told dozens of people that I saved his business after 9/11. Without me, he would have been out of business.” [Peter Gilbert, who directed one of the company’s visible results, With All Deliberate Speed (with the Discovery Channel’s “Discovery Doc” series), says a thing or two, including that he’s not been paid for making that doc.] [Mr. Brooks’ article states that “Mr. Gilbert was never paid by CameraPlanet for Speed.” In Comments, “steve@cameraplanet.com” offers this in turn: Peter Gilbert was paid his fees, his expenses, and in fact in some cases his expenses were paid twice. This is easily documented [by] cancelled checks. The issue was that Carlis had said—in writing—that Gilbert was ‘foregoing his fees’ to help cover the production[‘]s enormous overages. And Peter claimed that his emails with Discovery had given him permission to spend these overages. In the end, the only party not paid on With All Deliberate Speed was CameraPlanet (because Discovery paid Gilbert out of fees earned by other on-budget, well managed projects). This is call[ed] cross-collateralizing expenses. If anyone wants to check with Discovery, they’ll find that Mr. Gilbert has been paid the entirety of his fees and expenses.“]

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “What CameraPlanet are you from?: from the Observer & a reply”

  1. steve says:

    Peter Gilbert was paid his fees, his expenses, and in fact in some cases his expenses were paid twice. This is easily documented i cancelled checks. The issue was that Carlis had said – in writing – that Gilbert was ‘foregoing his fees’ to help cover the productions enormous overages. And Peter claimed that his emails with Discovery had given him permission to spend these overages. In the end, the only party not paid on With All Deliberate Speed was CameraPlanet (because Discovery paid Gilbert out of fees earned by other on-budget, well managed projects). This is call cross-collateralizing expenses. If anyone wants to check with Discovery, they’ll find that Mr. Gilbert has been paid the entirety of his fees and expenses.

Movie City Indie

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon