MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Spielberg's Wished

I sat on Laura Holson

19 Responses to “Spielberg's Wished”

  1. mutinyco says:

    It should be noted that the only true ‘blockbuster’ Spielberg has directed in the SKG era was War of the Worlds. And even that was hardly a popcorn movie. He doesn’t seem interested anymore in making movies solely for profit. Though he knows the terrain well enough that he can still pull $100-million out of smaller, edgier fare. His films will continue to be profitable, but I would be surprised to see him chasing after the big one again.

  2. Hopscotch says:

    I’ll bet him making the decision of turning down Harry Potter and Spiderman will be seen as his lack of interest in blockbusters for the rest of his career. I’m not saying he’s the “right” director for those movies, but each of those would have been a personal fortune for him had he said yes.
    And I don’t think he wants to make Indy IV anymore. He might reluctantly do it, but I don’t think his heart would be in it.
    Most aspiring filmmakers, like myself, have a love/hate relationship with Senor Spielberg. We all wish he keeps doing great things.

  3. Mark Ziegler says:

    You have to pay for talent. And Spielberg is certainly worth the investment.
    My thought back when they created Dreamworks was that Spielberg would concentrate everything he did with that company. And that hasn’t been the case.

  4. PandaBear says:

    I’m just stoked he loves to work. What movie lover can complain about his output lately?

  5. Angelus21 says:

    Dreamworks needed a studio lot. They should have realized that from Day 1.

  6. Wrecktum says:

    ^ They did. That’s why they were deeply involved in the failed Playa Del Rey development.

  7. Angelus21 says:

    They should have had it secured before they started. Would have cured a lot of ills for them.

  8. Wrecktum says:

    I don’t disagree.

  9. joefitz84 says:

    Spielberg. The man is an industry.

  10. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Stvn Splbrg did more than “bring Mimi Leder to film”. She was the director for the first DreamWorks release, “The Peacemaker”, back in the fall of ’97.
    Two corrections:
    (1) Steve Ross became co-chairman of the merged Time Warner in 1989 when Warner Communications merged with Time Inc. He died in 1991.
    (2) “Capote” was released by Sony Pictures Classics because United Artists’ parent company (MGM) was acquired by Sony.

  11. Josh says:

    Bringing Mimi Leder was a good thing?

  12. Cadavra says:

    Well, yeah, if you believe in the concept of “Pay It Forward.” 😀

  13. Blackcloud says:

    We’ll know someone has succeeded Spielberg when this article is written about them.

  14. David Poland says:

    I’m not sure what you are correcting, Chucky.
    According to where I found it, he died where I wrote. But willing to concede and will check again. Still, he was WB in the Spielberg period.
    I know why SPC has Capote, but that was kind of the point.

  15. jeffmcm says:

    According to Wikipedia, Steve Ross died in 1992. You’re both wrong, ha ha ha.

  16. Terence D says:

    I forgot where Chucky was the editor. Ha.

  17. mysteryperfecta says:

    Spielberg is the best “known” director today? Are you saying that there’s someone you think is better than few know of? Who?

  18. BluStealer says:

    Well, who is better than Spielberg working today?
    David Lean? He’s unavailable.

  19. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    At the present time, there are quite a few directors bringing out better work. He doesn’t seem to have a groove right now.
    How Spielberg Got His Groove Back will be a box office hit.

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