MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Posted Wednesday, September 5th, 2007 - Comments Off on Sometimes I do love Mark Cuban: Calling bull on Bill
Be Sociable, Share!

Sometimes I do love Mark Cuban: Calling bull on Bill

tell2a.jpg“”I got this question from Mr OReilly’s producers,” Mark Cuban posts at his BlogMaverick site (the typos, as always, are Mr. Cuban’s own).
From: “Watters, Jesse”
To: Mark.Cuban@dallasmavs.com
Cc: mark@hd.net
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 13:14:55 -0400
Subject: o’reilly factor request
> Mr. Cuban,
>
> The Factor will be doing a segment this evening on Redacted…which, as
> you know, depicts US atrocities in Iraq. The director says the the
> depicted rape is “the reality” of what is happening in that country.
> Of all of the schools that are being built, the medical care being
> supplied, and the security that our soldiers have been providing to
> Iraqi neighborhoods…do you agree that a few random and horrific
> crimes represent the norm of what is going on in that newly liberated
> country? and what exactly was it about the film that made you want to
> produce it?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jesse Watters
> The O’Reilly Factor
> Fox News
> 212-xxx-xxxx
From: “Mark Cuban”
To: “Watters, Jesse”
Cc: mark@hd.net
Date: 09/04/2007 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: o’reilly factor request
No, it doesnt represent the norm and the movie doesnt say it represents
the norm. Seperate the self promotion of Brian Depalma from the movie. The
movie is fully pro Troops. The hero of the movie is a soldier who stands
up for what is right in the face of adversity.
Maybe Bill can attempt to be fair and balanced and actually see the movie
before he thinks he knows what he is talking about.
And this is one of many movies we produce. I actually have seen it and
think it is an amazing movie. But to answer your question, I didnt read
the script or know all that much about it before we greenlit it. As we do
with several big name directors, we give them carte blanche in producing
their movies.
And to pre empt some of the stupidity coming from bloggers, I am fully Pro
Troops, Pro America. I think that the concept that the enemy will see
these films and use it as motivation is total nonsense. We have no plans
of translating these movies to arabic or other middle eastern languages.
Nor will we provide batteries or electricity for them to watch bootleg
DVDs as some zealots have suggested online.
And no , I am not involved in Loose Change. No I didnt finance it. No I
didnt plan to have it translated to multiple languages as Mr Oreilly
claimed on air. His command of the facts is truly abysmal.
What other lies has Bill spread that I can dispel ?
…
Oh, and I dont know how bill feels about No End in Sight, but we
distributed that movie as well.
Thats my feedback for Mr Bill
m
…
Which leads to my position on the Iraqi War. I hate that thousands of our troops have died. It sickens me to think of how their families must feel and every single day I wake up I say thank you to them, as I thank all those who have come before them for their sacrifices to make this country so great and to give me the opportunity to live the life I have and enjoy my family. I have never, nor will I ever take for granted the liberties we have in this country
That said, I don’t agree or disagree with the war because I don’t know enough. There isn’t enough information available to me to take a position beyond hoping that it runs its course very very quickly and our troops return home safely as soon as it is viable.
And to anyone who has ever questioned my patriotism or love for this country, fuck you. [Photo from DePalma’s Telluride Q&A conducted by Larry Gross © 2007 David Poland.]

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments Off on Sometimes I do love Mark Cuban: Calling bull on Bill

Comments are closed.

Movie City Indie

Comments Most Recent Archives

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