MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

B&D: DePalma on the dearth of politipix

Brian DePalma muses on the lack of political films in the US of A to the Guardian’s Steve Rose in Deauville: “I’m astounded there aren’t more American political films,” he says, apropos of nothing. “I’m amazed, when you can make movies for nothing, there are not people out there making these incredibly angry anti-war movies. How come?” lieasll-5489.jpgI nearly choke on my coffee. Brian De Palma bemoaning the demise of political film-making? That’s like a wolf crusading for sheep rights… David Thomson even compares him to Leni Riefenstahl, so morally vacant does he find De Palma’s oeuvre. In fact, De Palma did start out making politically minded counterculture films in the late 1960s and early 70s in the Manhattan streets outside – Godard-influenced, anti-Vietnam fare… So why isn’t he out there making anti-war films now? “Well … ,” De Palma says, with a sigh. “Of course, I can do it because I still have the same feelings now that I did then. But you’d have to make it for no money and you’d probably have to make it in Europe and get it independently financed. I’m just amazed you don’t see them… I’ve always had the inverse quote to Godard: film lies 24 times a second… And anybody that’s used to using moving images like a film director, when we see stuff on TV, it’s all positioning and public relations, there’s not an ounce of truth to any of it. I always look behind the image and say, ‘why are we seeing children with flies on their eyes this week?’ Those images are always out there. Like the war in Iraq. If you think Americans are ignorant, it’s because we’re not seeing anything. We’re constantly being manipulated by images. They’re lying to us all the time. We have no idea what we’re doing!” And he laughs his short, desperate laugh again. “I’ve been screaming about this stuff since the 60s, but it doesn’t seem to have had any effect.”

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “B&D: DePalma on the dearth of politipix”

  1. mheister says:

    Can someone forward Mr. DePalma links for the works of Michael Moore and Robert Greenwald???

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