Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Kang Moves Out of 'Motel,' Onto 'West 32nd' with Korean Giant CJ Entertainment


South Korea’s monolithic CJ Entertainment has been flirting with a stateside operation for a while now, and according to Variety, the relationship is now official: Production began Monday on the $2.4. million Koreatown gangster film West 32nd, with The Motel filmmaker Michael Kang getting the directing call and Teddy Zee (Saving Face) producing.
“So far, so good,” Kang told The Reeler this morning from the set. “We’ve got a great cast and a great team putting this together. Teddy is producing, and John Cho [Harold and Kumar] and Grace Park [Battlestar Galactica] are in it, along with some Korean actors you probably don’r know but who are really well-known in Korea.”
Which is perfect for the gang at CJ, who plan an early 2007 distribution date in both the US and South Korea Kang said he has been developing the project with the studio since last March. “They read the script, and Teddy Zee made the formal introductions,” Kang said. “We went out to Korea and met with them. It just seemed like a perfect fit, and I’m really excited to direct their first American production.”
Terrific news all around. Best of luck to Kang on the shoot and to CJ on its American bow.

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “Kang Moves Out of 'Motel,' Onto 'West 32nd' with Korean Giant CJ Entertainment”

  1. EDouglas says:

    Wow, that’s great news for Michael Kang and for Korean-American cinema!

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