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” ā 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 ā 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 ā he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” ā and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging ā I was with her at that moment ā 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 namedā” “Yeah, sure ā 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 Iām on the phone with you now, after all thatās 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 didnāt seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. Thereās not a case of that. He wasnāt using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had ā if that were what the accusation involved ā 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. Iām not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, āYou know, itās not this, itās thatā? Because ā let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. TimesĀ piece, thatās what it lacked. Thatās 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
I recognized the quote too. That’s pretty funny.
Out of curiosity, what is the daily site traffic for just this blog? Are those of us that post only representing a small faction of people reading?
yeah, when i was a kid superman was all ‘i’ll save the day and stop the bad guy’. that may be old fashioned, but today, this superman is all ‘how do i feel about that’. at least that’s the way the campaign plays.
‘gay’ may be a bit too convenient a term, but it’s certainly ‘touchy-feely’ for a superhero movie. this movie could be called ‘superguy’.
I’m torn here, because while I agree with Poland about the basic issues and the fact that TheManWho goes overboard more often than not, I don’t think it’s a good idea for DP to, apparently, make fun of his bloggers by singling them out, front-and-center, for all to see. What benefit does this serve except humiliation?
I never felt that the poster was “gay” and I thought a lot of that was people imprinting Bryan Singer’s sexuality onto the movie he made, which is bullshit, considering how few people had actually seen the mvoie. The poster did seems to show Superman as a softer hero, because he was just hanging there in space rather than seeing him in action, stopping a locomotive or a bullet. I think the media was more detrimental to the movie than the actual marketing, since I’m not sure anyone would have read “gay” into that poster unless it was thrown around everyone online (including here).
Incidentally, the damage has probably already been done. I’m hearing early reports of it making around $18 million yesterday, which would point to a weekend under $60 million… not Batman/King Kong bad, but bad nonetheless. It’s really going to have to make up the difference internationally, though I don’t think that will be a problem… they liked Da Vinci Code after all. š
Ya gotta pay to play, Jeff. If we can rail against him for something he wrote, he should be able to do the same.
And are commenters really “bloggers,” by the way? I was never sure of that.
“It was always about the advertising and the lack of edge, which as I keep reminding people, I felt WB turned the corner on – as regarded appealing to young men – a few weeks ago.”
Great, now all they have to do is turn the corner regarding everyone else.
I think you’ve already lost the debate if you’re defending the movie as “the most heterosexual” you’ve ever made. Because you’re arguing on your opponents’ terms, not yours. But maybe that’s just me.
g
Jeff, he can single me out all he wants. Poland, I have found you to be out of touch recently. It’s no big deal. September will arrive, you will head to Toronto, and get your groove back. That might be a bit presumptious of me, but I am throwing it out there anyway.
While I find being misquoted by the GUARDIAN too damn funny. I am at a loss at how the GUARDIAN has a reporter that cannot tell the difference between what’s ME and what’s other PEOPLE’S OPINIONS that I am referencing in that post. Since, clearly, I used quotes around that part of my post, because I was referencing the “SUPERMAN IS GAY” fervor at the time. If anything, the Guardian, really needs to rethink those people who visit blogs looking for FAIN OUTRAGE. Especially when the OUTRAGE was an overly dramatic rif on those freaking out about SUPERMAN BEING GAY at that time.
Yes, Superman Returns featured some rather homoerotic images and a poster. However, maybe, the BULGES had the desired effect on the audience they were going after. Who were not heterosexual teen boys.
jeff, you’re being way over sensitive if you think that singling out a pseudonym on a blog is wrong in any way. By writing here, you’re putting your comments in the public eye for better or worse. And with the use of pseudonyms, you’re completely anonymous.
The Guardian writer is being disingenuous:
“Some online bloggers, then still to see the film, were not convinced: “Gay director, gay outfit, gay Superman, and now GAY POSTER!” wrote one. “What teenage boy wants to see the movie attached to this poster?” jeered another.”
He makes it seem like the online community was in an uproar. But it was only one comment by one anonymous poster who made both statements. Pretty lazy reporting, if you ask me.
For the record, I didn’t feel the shout out was in any way negative about TheManWho… or I wouldn’t have done it.
On the flip side, I think THW is trying to pull a bit of revisionist history now. Nothing wrong with changing your mind, THW, but your post was clearly taking the side that the ads were running gay… no indication of sarcasm there. You seem to have liked the movie, but that doesn’t change the way the ads were.
As for me being out of touch… you’re right… I seem to have overestimated the appeal of Superman Returns.
And Wreck… the gay conversation was all over the web. And on the cover of The Advocate.
That’s why a month after it got hot, there was an LA Times story that missed the point. All the ducks were in order.
Btw… another quote from TMW in the same entry:
“On the Batman Begins Two-Disc DVD, there is a poster gallery with posters that put the FINAL Batman Begins poster to shame. I wonder, if this film, will also have countless better posters. That the WB decided to go against for this piece titled; “NUTSACK FROM THE HEAVENS WITH FLORIDIAN SCHWANTZ IN THE DISTANCE.” Nevertheless, it’s just a crap poster. It might establish the theme of the film but gayness or no gayness–this poster fails on every level.”
Can’t believe they didn’t quote that.
The only objections I have to the Guardian pulls are, 1) Commenters on a blog are not bloggers… well, maybe, kinda and 2) suggesting the quotes came from two different people is iffy. Espeailly with so many comments to choose from.
Poland, you really, have the worst nickname giving abilities. Unless you were using a blackberry, and the THW was a bit of business. The following might not be warranted, that has never stopped me before. Nevertheless, from hence forward, Golide Lookin Chain it is, and I am not revising history. Due to TYPEKEY SUCKING, I had to write that post a couple of times, but I will reiterate for you–Goldie Lookin Chain. I still believe that the final poster and the early images had a high level of homoeroticism to them. However, in retrospect to the movie, they make perfect sense (Thanx for pointing that I figured this out in May, Poland.). It would seem the folks at Warners wanted a more direct ad campaig, that oddly enough had a lot of homoeroticism throughout it. Even if, again, the posters and the images fit perfectly in regard to the film they are hyping.
Still, after thinking about this some more, I have a hard time with being misquoted in an article, that clearly was written by a person who lacked the ability to denote a change in VOICE in that post. Not only that, but my quote was used as if I saw the film. When, clearly, I had not. To whomever from the Guardian used my words in the wrong context, to be blunt, nah. You arent worth my insults. Since you, as a reporter for a much ballyhooed and respected ENGLISH NEWSPAPER cannot be counted on to report even entertainment news correctly (Do not even get me started on the possibility of you saying that to Singer). You and your rag, then, are nothing more than those entertainment hacks Goldie Lookin Chain rails against (rightfully so) all the damn time.
Finally, Goldie Lookin Chain, you did not overestimate the appeal of Superman Returns. From your own words the next post over; you have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE what this film is about. The way you discuss THE AMERICAN WAY and Richard White, represents this in spade. The AMERICAN way has no reason to be there. Since the AMERICAN WAY should be about doing, more so than a catchphrase. That you and others that are FAINING OUTRAGE ABOUT THIS, seemingly miss that Perry White says it, and not Superman. Well, never let a little thing like WHAT HAPPENS IN THE MOVIE slow your outrage down. In this century, the American way should not be some forced proclamation on the cover of some rag in a film. It should be what Supes represents in that film more than anything else. Which seems to be; wherever you are…I am always around to help. Is there anything more AMERICAN than that?
With Richard White, he will be the adopted father to Jason, as Jonathan was the adopted father to Kal-El. A good man, who will instill values in his son, that will lead to him being a great man. It’s not like this stuff is rocket science, but it’s easy to miss from certain points of view. The point of this film is totally lost on you and others. No big deal really, it’s rather difficult to ever get a consensus, even on Superman. However, one cannot overestimate anything. When one does not get what’s being overestimated in the first place.
Got to love that first paragraph:
“Never has American public morale been so low. More than 2,500 US soldiers have died in Iraq, and support for the war is waning as fast as that for the least popular president in decades.”
Geez, is it a requirement that the Guardian includes anti-war talking points in every article?
That is a rhetorical question, right?
Okay, ManWho, I’ll bite. In what way does Dave resemble a Brit novelty rap act?
I think we’ve all pondered that over the years. It’s basically as powerful a question as ‘What is the meaning of life?’