Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Weinsteins Send Broken 'Promise' Back to China


Bad news for stateside fans of Asian cinema who have been waiting for, like, ever to see Chen Kaige’s The Promise released in some sort of dignified fashion: The Weinstein Company has reshelved the picture–on someone else’s shelf.
According to The Reporter (via Reuters):

In preparing for its U.S. release, Harvey Weinstein retitled the movie Master of the Crimson Armor and trimmed it by 19 minutes to 102 minutes. According to (producer Etchie) Stroh, the filmmakers agreed to the edits and restructuring, though they had reservations about the title change, feeling that it emphasized the movie’s male-oriented martial arts aspects at the expense of its other qualities.

But the main disagreement came over how widely to distribute the film in the U.S. The producers argued for a broader release a la Zhang Yimou’s Hero — which Miramax opened in 2,031 theaters in 2004 — while Weinstein was opting for a more limited release.

“It was a question of strategy,” Stroh said. “They had a pretty full slate and other films they had prioritized for activity. On the other hand, for me, this film is a labor of love, and we wanted it to be a centerpiece. But they were very helpful, and the split was amicable.”

The film–China’s entry in the Best Foreign-Language Film Oscar race–will still get an L.A. release tomorrow to keep itself eligible for other award categories. But keep in mind that once upon a time (like, right after Cannes), this was a can’t-miss epic smash along the lines of Hero and House of Flying Daggers. Nevertheless, The Weinsteins–who were evidently twitchy enough to bring in Anthony Minghella for a partial rewrite–cut, cut and re-cut, pushing back The Promise‘s early December wide release to 2006.
And now, even after a ginormous opening (despite some sniffy reviews) in China, Harvey hit the eject button. But at least he did it politely:

“We have thoroughly enjoyed working together for the past seven months and have reached an amicable decision to part ways on Master of the Crimson Armor,” Harvey Weinstein said of the decision. “That said, we have tremendous respect for Chen Kaige, Etchie Stroh and (China Film Corp. managing director) Han Sanping and are all rooting for them as they go forward releasing this film.”

Indeed, a Reeler spy sends word that Harvey, Bob and TWC staff are planning a weekend waving signs in front of the Laemmle Fairfax, pulling in street traffic with handpainted signs and Harvey’s secret-weapon Daisy Duke shorts, eager to see the film take off without them. Real team players, those guys.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

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