Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

That's 'Chicago': Richards Kindly Asks Miramax to Fucking Pay Him Already


According to the Associated Press, Chicago joined Crash Monday in the pantheon of Oscar-winning films whose producers want to rip each others’ throats out. Which would not really raise an eyebrow around Reeler HQ if two of those producers were not named Harvey and Bob Weinstein. And the aggrieved plaintiff were not badgering the Weinsteins’ old home base Miramax for low eight figures.
Gotham-based Marty Richards–whose own Producers Circle Co. shingle produced Chicago with the Weinsteins in 2002–claimed the film’s Best Picture prize on his own the following spring. But three years and $300 million in grosses later, Richards argues that he has the trophy in one hand, his dick in the other, and that is about it:

Richards says he and his company were victims of Hollywood-style accounting in which two types of accounting occur at the same time: One type is for financial reporting purposes, and the other is for calculating how much individuals will get.

Those who get “gross profit” deals earn huge sums while those who get “net profit” deals — money that is left after many deductions and expenses — generally get nothing from a film’s profits, court papers say.

The lawsuit says Miramax is trying to impose upon PCC a “net profits” deal that it never agreed to.

I am totally speculating here, but a seasoned producer like Richards seems about as likely to sign a net deal with Harvey Weinstein as Dakota Fanning is to “star” in a Roman Polanski film. Then there is the cut from DVD sales, cable deals, foreign distribution earnings, you name it–Richards says his partners owe it all.
Miramax would not comment, and word around town suggests the exiled Weinsteins are far more concerned whether Renee Zellweger is fuckable enough to play Beatrix Potter. I will let you know when they settle out of court.

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