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
Well sure, what’s WB going to say? “Yeah that’s right. No more lady movies.”
Anyway, whatever…back to business as usual…
And that, Andrew, is why gossip is so dangerous. True or not, it puts the accused on the defensive and makes any denial suspect.
Kinda sucks… unless it’s not about you.
its funny when these stories creep out of the industry sites and hit the mainstream.
i heard at least a half dozen people talking about it today, including my wife who said ‘did you hear what that guy at Warner Bros. said’
she read it on Perez Hilton.
I’m of the opinion that even if it’s true, it’s not actually big news –a studio releasing two films starring 40-ish female movie stars in the same quarter is the exception, not the rule–but I haven’t seen WB’s rebuttal anywhere. A Google news search turned up nothing. Do you have a link, David?
It was on the CBS Early Show this morning.
http://www.showbuzz.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/09/home/main3347604.shtml
You can watch the video on the right of the page.
DP – Nikki reported that 3 producers told her Robinov’s new policy. You said Amy Pascal made the same decision a few years ago, but didn’t go public with it, and then you pointed out the success of Pascal’s decision, saying that “she had two great box office years since.” You said Robinov’s decision was “hardly a shocker” and “should-never-have-been-said-out-loud.” You also mentioned a history of this decision in Hollywood.
As I said before, I was responding to the issue because your statements backed it up as a de facto policy by Pascal and probably by Robinov, also. I trusted your take on it, and if that makes me irresponsible, then consider the source.
I’m not defending NF, but I’m not understanding your remarks. You seem to be saying the whole thing is fabricated, that Robinov was slandered. I would agree with you that this is quite malicious if it is a complete fabrication. So do you now have evidence that Robinov never said this? You’re calling her an irresponsible liar – which seems pretty malicious to me. If you have proof that she is, spill those beans. I’m sure there’s a lot of women in Hollywood that would like to hear of it.
Yet via your CBS link, you’re quoted as saying “The fact that he may have said it out loud to an agent was probably indiscreet and stupid…” So once again, you don’t seem to be denying it was said at all, just saying it was indiscreet.
And if you are right, and it was an indiscretion, then OF COURSE Robinov is going to say he never said it. OF COURSE the PR reps are going to clean it up – that’s what they get paid for. And OF COURSE Allred is going to cover her bases and say “if that’s what he said.” You weren’t born yesterday, DP – you know that’s the way it works. It sounds like the issue now stands at an unprovable stalemate. (at least the PR reps hope so, whether it is true or not.) Maybe Robinov will quickly put a nice fat film into production with a female lead, to prove his virtue (or further cover his ass).
Either way, please don’t put me as monkey in the middle between you and NF. I wanted to talk about issues regarding women in Hollywood today, not get drawn into a cat fight. I hope you’d feel the same.
sorry – i should have posted the above on the other blog comment.
Just a minor point in the counter-story:
“Silk Spectre leads Alan Moore’s ‘Watchmen.'”
Uhhh, no she doesn’t, not unless it’s been radically rewritten (and Zack Snyder claims he’s being faithful). Silk Spectre actually has less influence on the events of the story than any of the major male heroes. Her most significant act is to break up with Dr. Manhattan early on, causing him to leave Earth; after that, she’s little more than a love interest for Dan.
I didn’t put you in the middle, seenmy… you did.
And you did defend Nikki. And I have no idea what Robinov actually said, which is the glory of editing. Nor does Nikki. Nor do you. What we do know is that there is a bigger issue than Jeff Robinov, but Nikki prefers throwing shit to actually engaging ideas.
My rules are simple… gossip is gossip and news is news. If Nikki – or anyone else – wanted to report something, there is a story. But it’s not a blind inflammatory quote. Get it?
And mind you, none of this kept me from taking a shot at Variety for being too easy on Robinov in their story tonight and showing Nikki and the web and the LA Weekly disrespect – and letting the traditional alt media off the hook – by not even naming her. Bad choices.
If you are going to write a story, do the story. If you want to chase gossip, don’t do what Nikki did and don’t respond to it as softly as Variety did. Neither serves readers.
Whoa…you are freaking CREEPY, whatnokiss…
Wow… that was completely incoherent and insane.
You’re right. We all do expose ourselves in the breadth and width of these exchanges.