MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Bootleg Art?

“Almost nobody owns a print of their favorite Hollywood movie. But pre-recorded, studio-issued sell-through videotapes feed the home viewer’s illusory sense that they own and are watching a film. In reality what they’ve paid as much as $40 for is a small, cheap conversion of celluloid frames into video fields. Bootleg videos make no claims to be the film itself. They are commercial Video Art first, and a record of a film second. Each bootleg represents a limited-edition record of a movie from the subjective POV of an anonymous auteur, the man with the camcorder. The “worst” bootleg — a blank tape — is the ultimate minimalist video. And then there’s the Holy Grail: the bootleg in which the surreptitious camcordist is recording at the moment that he’s busted by a multiplex security guard and kicked out of the theater — an inept studio movie that abruptly shifts gears to become a first-person surveillance documentary. Be assured that it’s out there somewhere, and you can own it.”
The Whole Article

Be Sociable, Share!

4 Responses to “Bootleg Art?”

  1. Martin says:

    that’s some of the dumbest shit I’ve ever read, and I’ve read alot of dumb shit.

  2. Joe Straat says:

    I sense some of this is tongue-in-cheek, but I like how in the author’s universe, bootleg DVDs or downloaded movies don’t exist. Apparantly, he’s never been to Chinatown in NYC….. or browsed eBay…. or done much with his computer besides post articles.

  3. bicycle bob says:

    go to any corner in midtown manhattan and u can get any first run movie on dvd. u take ur chances with quality and its really not worth it but pirates have a huge market

  4. dfx says:

    What is the point of this article? Is the author seriously claiming that bootlegs are an emerging form of visual art? Is the author complaining about the low quality of bootlegs? You can’t get into the top rung of the bootlegging industry unless you’re Muslim???
    This article seems to have been written in 2001. Is there a reason why it was resurrected today?
    (And why is this guy paying good money for bootlegs? Hell, he could go buy the original DVDs of most of these films for less than $15 at Wal-Mart or Target.)

The Hot Blog

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