MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Seattle Day II

It’s so beautiful in Seattle that no one seems to be able to talk much about anything else.
That is, except for Anthony Hopkins, who we chatted with tonight for almost 2 hours before a screening of Remains of The Day as part of his tribute here. He couldn’t have been a more gracious or forthcoming guest. And where else will you get a world-class James Ivory imitation, Ismail Merchant to boot, and acting insights from Hepburn to Gielgud to Alec Baldwin, who shut down production on The Edge in order to get Hopkins to the hospital as Hopkins tried to soldier on. Sir Tony even has the distinction of having developed a relationship with Bart The Bear over two films. (He tells a great story about one take when Bart didn’t get his treat after doing his bit… and how he could see Bart’s face turn from domesticated animal to wild bear in a flash.)
Because of the Hopkins schedule, I have only had a chance to see his Slipstream at a theater last night and a number of films on DVD. Unfortunately, a couple of the docs I’ve seen have been minor versions of previous docs, like Rock School and King of Kong (which is here) and Darkon. I also viewed a rather wacky, but not-sticky-enough-for-me (not literally) Korean teen sex comedy called Dasepo Naughty Girls that was almost a grrrlpower episode of The Monkees… but not quite that good… at least for me…
The first film I watched was The Life of Reilly, which was a videoed version of Charles Nelson Reilly’s one-man touring show. Obviously, losing him this last week made the urge to watch all the greater. And he was funny and tough and insightful and even understated. I wish the filmmakers had been a little less concerned with trying to make it look like more than it was, shooting a great deal of the film from the backstage, which meant seeing too much of the back of a man whose expressive face was all an audience might ask for. But when he underplays moments, like being told by the head of casting at NBC in the 50s that “They don’t put queers on TV,” and somehow not being disturbed by that verbal aggression, there is enormous power.
The new wave of documentary… what really is being changed by the availability of cheap, good quality cameras… is about cataloging every little thing. And some day, the way we surf the web now, we will surf video history. If you want to learn about actors, you will catch a little of The Life of Reilly and a little of Special Thanks To Roy London, and so on.
And after a couple of hours of great stories tonight, I would feel it was really a shame if we didn’t get Sir Anthony Hopkins to sit down for 4 or 5 hours just to tell his stories. He tells them with love and with humor and self-deprecation. But mostly, he carries in his mind a big part of the history of film. He’s worked with so many of the great directors. He’s been on top and he’s been slogging along. But how many people can give you a first hand opinion about the work of Coppola and Spielberg and Cimino and Stone and Lynch and Attenborough and Ivory and Parker and R. Scott and Demme and Lester and Wise and Schlesinger and Zemeckis, whose Beowulf he is in this fall. And that’s just scratching the surface.
And come tomorrow… I’ll be able to just go to the movies and enjoy the spirit (and sun) of Seattle. Yay.

Be Sociable, Share!

2 Responses to “Seattle Day II”

  1. Krazy Eyes says:

    Does Seattle still do that super-secret, spill-the-beans-and-never-get-another-ticket-again mystery screening each year?

  2. Me says:

    I adore Anthony Hopkins. There was a point there where he was the greatest actor working. Unfortunately, he seems to have been on the downward slide for a little while, going for the paycheck rather than the material. Hopefully he’ll still have a few more good roles in the comin years. Any word on if Slipstream is any good?

The Hot Blog

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