MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Shear gall: Caryn James cuts-'n'-trims the latest styles

new world or k_jpg.jpg“The commonsensical view that an audience might actually have a better experience if the film were tauter is rare among directors, especially this season when some of the most prominent movies are needlessly long,” writes noted, lauded filmmaker Caryn James, adopting a condescending tone hardly heard since a certain past critic would recast movies to his tastes in his reviews. “These films achieve their bloated status for different reasons: the old New World and Brokeback Mountain… take too much time getting started. If the audience knows that the English settlers will land and the cowboys will turn out to be gay, the movies shouldn’t waste 15 minutes getting there. Both Peter Jackson’s popcorn movie King Kong” … and Steven Spielberg’s ultraserious Munich… seem slacker than they should, probably because their powerful directors can do whatever they want… As Mr. Malick realized, the issue is not length itself, but what works on screen.” The original version of The New World, Ms. James coyly suggests is filled with what “others might call travelogues: pretty pictures of birds flying, water flowing, trees growing… Those preliminary scenes, which slowed things down, have been trimmed, and the voice-overs—interior monologues in which Pocahontas and Smith meditate on their lives—are less likely to accompany picturesque views of nature. Instead, [co-producer Sarah] Green said, the voice-over “pulls you into the next scene.” The editing was the kind of snipping that, like a good face-lift, should be inconspicuous if it works. Besides, Mr. Malick can put it all back (and more) in the DVD.” [Ultraserious. Shit! Who wants to see that? Yes, and it’s lonnnnnnng. And it’s full of… Nature. Yike-ums.]

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