MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Posted Monday, October 24th, 2005 - Comments Off on Cuban, freely: controversy outside The War Within
Be Sociable, Share!

Cuban, freely: controversy outside The War Within

“Mark Cuban has spent so much time pushing boundaries and rattling status-quo thinking that he is nearly numb to the backlash that seems to accompany his every move, writes NY Times sportster Howard Beck. “In nearly six years as the Dallas Mavericks’ owner, Cuban has drawn hefty fines from the commissioner’s office, curious glances from other owners and acerbic broadsides from columnists and talk-show hosts… Cuban has been called irresponsible, foolish, crazy, an immature imp and a bigmouth. By now, those labels must sound kind. Cuban has acquired … in the blogosphere … a newly derogatory description: unpatriotic and un-American. Those accusations stem from Cuban’s role as the executive producer of The War Within, a film that depicts the inner struggle of a would-be terrorist. Even for Cuban, who practically breathes controversy, this is uncharted territory.
warwithin.jpg
“One incensed blogger labeled Cuban a “jihadist propaganda producer.” [Googling the phrase will provide a link to the writer who said this, as well as the imperious assertion that “No film should ever have a homicide bomber as its “protagonist.” Period.”] Beck continues a new Times tradition of relying on bloggers and previously published web material rather than wasting pricey shoe leather: “How are we ever going to understand what’s going on right now if we don’t see these people as human beings?” the director, Joseph Castelo, said on the film’s Web site.” … Cuban first read the War script two years ago, while the horror of 9/11 was still fresh. “I thought it was timely, I thought it was interesting, I thought it was scary as hell,” Cuban said. “I’m the type that thinks if you don’t learn from history, you’re doomed to repeat it.” … Cuban said making the film was an act of patriotism… “If we can make a movie that reminds people over and over again that you always have to be vigilant or 9/11 can happen again, then it’s the most patriotic thing I could ever possibly do.”

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments Off on Cuban, freely: controversy outside The War Within

Comments are closed.

Movie City Indie

Comments Most Recent Archives

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