Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Reeler Pinch Hitter: Jamie Stuart, Filmmaker


[Note: Reeler editor S.T. VanAirsdale is taking the week off, but the blog is in the good hands of trusted friends and colleagues; click here for other entries in the series. Jamie Stuart is a New York-based filmmaker. His series Mutiny City News appeared on MCN in 2005, and his current site is www.mutinycompany.com.]
All right. Never wanted my own blog. Never wanted to blog at somebody else’s blog. So when The Reeler e-mailed me in a sweaty, clammy panic and pleaded for me to sub one day while he jetted off to Fiji or St. Tropez or wherever, I decided I’d take him up on the offer just so I could write about how much I don’t want to blog.
Funny thing that creative process. As I sat down to write my nuclear treatise, which was to run complete with half-naked MySpace photos taken with Photobooth on my Mac (using the stretch effect), I decided there was too much goddamned negativity already out there. And as I’m anything but a conformist, I decided instead to make this argument:
In terms of quality output, the period ranging from roughly 1999-2003 will go down as one of the most significant in film history, not unlike the late 1960s/early 1970s. This era featured a convergence of generational shifts, millennial angst and the adoption of digital both professionally and in the consumer spectrum. Most observers still point to the ’90s indie revolution as the last great period, however, I’d argue that it was already over by the time the media jumped on it–Pulp Fiction was the end, not the beginning. Even though by nature I prefer the concept of independence, the ’99-’03 phase that saw the rise of the dependents was more dynamic–and with that, idiosyncratic filmmakers who had emerged independently (Paul Thomas Anderson, David O. Russell) or via music videos (David Fincher, Spike Jonze) were able to further their creativity by having modest budgets to play around with. The energy created by these new talents was met with the returns of Terrence Malick, George Lucas and Stanley Kubrick, and it also sparked the second golden era of Steven Spielberg, whose films best illustrated the immediate impact of 9/11 (he formally led the charge to reinvigorate movies with ideas after accepting blame for getting ’em kicked out in the first place). Meanwhile, with the releases of The Lord of the Rings, The Matrix and Harry Potter, the modern FX blockbuster serial was born.
Book-ended by Wes Anderson’s Rushmore in late 1998 and Michel Gondry’s Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind in early 2004, we received: The Thin Red Line; Fight Club; Minority Report; Elephant; Bowling For Columbine; Eyes Wide Shut; Lost In Translation; The Matrix; The Lord of the Rings; Being John Malkovich; Magnolia; Election; The Blair Witch Project; Donnie Darko; Requiem For A Dream; The Royal Tenenbaums; O Brother Where Art Thou? ; All About My Mother; Amelie; Three Kings; Mulholland Drive; 28 Days Later; City Of God; The Shape Of Things; The Sixth Sense; One Hour Photo; The Limey; Y tu mama tambien; Catch Me If You Can; Adaptation; The Fog Of War; Kill Bill; Ghost World; 21 Grams; Dancer In the Dark; American Splendor; Touching the Void; Punch-Drunk Love; Spider-Man; About Schmidt; Talk to Her; 25th Hour; The Pianist; Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon; Traffic; Far From Heaven; In the Bedroom; The Man Who Wasn’t There; Waking Life; Auto Focus; A.I.: Artificial Intelligence; and American Beauty — not to mention Apocalypse Now Redux and a 70mm re-release of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
I’m sure I missed more than a few. But you get the point. The good news is it happened. The bad news is that it’s over. And so is my anomalous blog attempt.

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “Reeler Pinch Hitter: Jamie Stuart, Filmmaker”

  1. Anonymous says:

    So, Mr. Stuart, in your educated and insightful opinion when, if ever, is the next great step forward—or are we still taking two steps back? I”l take Movies for $50, Alex, and hold the malaise…
    Anon.

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