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
Wouldn’t it be neat if they actually just voted for the person they felt gave the best filmed performance in a given year?
Then they should vote for Daniel Craig!
Certainly the ball-smashingest performance of the year (take that, Borat).
I don’t like what O’toole is doing. He needs to go back to England and live with the fact that he’s an 8 time loser. His agent probably got to him and told him to fight fight like hell.
Peter O’Toole is Irish, not English He wouldn’t have needed an agent to tell him to fight.
I was at the Letterman taping on Wednesday and was overcome with sadness watching O’Toole struggle out there. I think he came off as best as could be hoped for when the cameras were on, but in the break he was clearly exhausted and barely mobile, nearly taking a spill trying to go shake Paul’s hand. This is a frail, ailing man who should not be doing live or live-to-tape television, but is pushing his limits to make the appearances because he knows it’s his only shot at the gold.
I don’t begrudge the man his desire to win a Best Actor trophy. But this is one of the times when reality sets in and it becomes bothersome that this legendary actor can’t win the prize simply by excelling in the particular field that the award is supposed to represent. He has to perform in an arena in which he holds an extreme disadvantage. Again, it’s nothing we haven’t known about this game all along. But still, it’s a shame.
Do you know what a gentleman is, Dunderchief? Let me enlighten you. A gentleman is a man who would never have written your last post.
If a gentleman is someone who lacks compassion for another human being and turns a blind eye to the absurdities that the publicity machine puts a great talent to, then you are correct, Ian.
Jeff, a gentleman is a man who would not share in public their witnessing of someone else’e distress. The word to describe the person you are talking about is “agent.”
While I agree with you in terms of the abstract principle, the truth is that O’Toole is a public figure and his distress on Letterman was already suspected as per DP’s origial posting; Dunderchief is merely confirming what was suspected by many. Personally, I would rather know the full truth, sad though it be, than have a fiction perpetrated by the media-industrial complex.
An ‘agent’ is someone who would cover up the truth for the advancement of his own career using any tool at his disposal, including feigned discretion.
There are few nudities so objectionable as the naked truth, as Agnes Repplier said. And you are again incorrect, as the correct term for “someone who would cover up the truth for the advancement of his own career using any tool at his disposal, including feigned discretion” is “publicist.”
Agent, publicist, that’s splitting hairs.
Again, I agree with you in principle but in practice, if O’Toole is going to put himself into the public spotlight, he has to be prepared for how he will be seen. Also, Dunderchief, as an audience member of the show, is perfectly within his rights to report on what he saw. If he was a crew member on the show, he would have a professional obligation to remain discreet. But he was merely an eyewitness to small glimpse of what, again, was already fairly obvious.
Let us please never associate Peter O’Toole with the Jaywalking segment on Jay Leno ever again.
I guess there’ll be a lot of sympathy votes for O’Toole but for me the film was totally underwhelming, and the performance was whatever. It would be a total shame if O’Toole gets a token nod over Ryan Gosling’s amazing performance, which I imagine even the old man would admit was a revelation. It would be especially ashame if it was the result of campaigning, as DP implies, but I guess that is the way game works.
“Lawrence” is still one of my top three movies of all time, so anytime I hear about an interview in print or live etc I try to catch it, but I was feeling bad/guilty to see what a hard time he was having.
If the Drink didn’t kill him this interview circuit will. The lighting alone is debilitating him!
He was already passed over for better perfs than what is on the table at present, but i’ll be shocked if he isn’t nominated.
Just checking in after my initial post and seeing the comments from Ian and jmc. Obviously my initial thinking when posted was along the lines of jmc’s perspective rather than Ian’s. It was really a reaction to the idea that O’Toole should be making more appearances like his stint on The View. My feeling is that he shouldn’t be making ANY appearances. But unfortunately, if he wants this trophy, he can’t affort to not make them.
As for the accusation that I was in someway undignified by recounting my observation of the Letterman taping, would it have made any difference if there were no cameras rolling? If this was just an appearance by O’Toole at a theater filled with 300-plus audience members, and he seemed to be ailing, would it be ungentlemanly if I were to recount what I saw?
Year after year I watch the campaigning process in advance of the Academy Awards and brush it off as part of the game. It was a real shock to see first hand how unfair and cruel that game is, particularly when it is could be detrimental to the health and well-being of a much-loved public figure.
Isn’t Peter O’toole a little late campaigning. The nom ballots were out last week. I don’t like him as an actor, I’m not too warmed about a lot of Brit actors (exc Daniel Craig and Michael Cain). Richard Burton and Olivier were overrated and inconsistent in their performances IMO. I like the Aussies better.
The previous blogger should kindly note that Peter O’Toole is Irish, not British. He was born in Ireland; his father was an Irish bookie. I believe O’Toole still lives in Ireland. Any person with a drop of Irish blood does not want to be mistaken for a Brit. As for his performance this year, it was quite lovely and certainly deserving of an Oscar given the Academy’s sorry and inconsistent history in granting these awards. Anyone who doesn’t think Peter O’Toole is a great actor must have never seen LAWRENCE OF ARABIA. Didn’t Premiere magazine vote it the greatest performance of all time on film??!!