MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Apple juices Errol

At Think Secret, which keeps its eyes on all things Apple, Ryan Katz rumors that Apple dumped its pricey new iPod campaign shot by Errol Morris, “before the first ads even hit television… Apple had selected 60 individuals for the campaign out of thousands who had responded to the company’s call on its Web site for iPod-catalyst Switch stories. Those 60, which ranged in age from about 18 to 35 and spanned a diverse number of cultures and professions, were flown to Los Angeles in early May to shoot the ads with Moxie Pictures and Errol Morris… Of the 60 flown to L.A., Moxie and Morris settled on 30 who would be the new faces of the Switch campaign. Switchers were interviewed from ten minutes to over an hour by Morris, who asked them a wide variety of questions. According to sources, that’s where problems started to arise. “So few people could speak into the camera,” one source said, adding that — almost with a sense of futility — those too nervous ended up being spoon-fed lines…. With members of Apple corporate overseeing the filming, it became apparent to a number on set that tension between Morris and Apple over the direction and execution of the campaign was building…. “An unbelievable amount of money was invested in this campaign, you wouldn’t believe it…” Like the original campaign, the new Switch ads were destined for television, print, billboards, and buses. Switchers were paid $3,100 for their day’s work.” At Morris’ site, he’s posted another in a series of clever if doomed ads, for a Quaker “weight control” oatmeal.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

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