MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Lumet Signs 3 Picture Deal

Another rather interesting e-mail…
Michael Cerenzie, producer of the awards favorite Before The Devil Knows You Are Dead, and producing partner Paul Parmarr today announced they have inked a three picture deal with acclaimed US director Sidney Lumet.
The first of the three movies will be Getting Out, which will start production in NYC in January 2008, and will unite the trio of Cerenzie, Lumet and Parmar.
Deal comes on the verge of the re-release of 12 Angry Men (shot 50yrs ago) and as Lumet receives the LA Film Critics Association’s Career Achievement Award thirty-one years after he took the organization’s first two directing awards.

Be Sociable, Share!

11 Responses to “Lumet Signs 3 Picture Deal”

  1. Joseph says:

    I saw the link on the main page and read “Sidney Lumet, 83…” before nearly having a heart attack. Thank God the rest spelled out a three-picture deal.

  2. L.B. says:

    I had the exact same response, Joseph. This is much, much better news. I love that he’s still out there swinging.

  3. 555 says:

    Me three. That was almost a terrible way to start the Holiday.

  4. Moniker Jones says:

    I was also momentarily shaken until reading the remainder of the headline. Speaking of Lumet, I was lucky enough to finally catch a screening of his latest in Dallas earlier today. My actual hometown isn’t playing it yet, so Dallas’ vastly superior cinematic variety is always a good enough reason to visit my wife’s family.
    Anyway, I’m thrilled to hear about Lumet’s new deal, though my nature leads me to worry what the near future might hold for the man and/or his upcoming features.
    I went on a major Lumet kick a few years ago, and I still haven’t come close to seeing all of his output. The man’s a legend, and I’m so happy to see him enjoying some late-in-life success.

  5. Cadavra says:

    Amen, brothers. What an incredible run he had in the 70s and 80s: ANDERSON, SERPICO, OFFENCE, ORIENT EXPRESS, DOG DAY, EQUUS, JUST TELL ME, PRINCE, VERDICT, DANIEL and the best film of either decade, NETWORK. Coincidentally, I just got back from DEVIL; one hell of a film, though it merits a personal mini-jeer for hiring the luminous Arija Bareikis and then giving her little more than a walk-on.

  6. Spacesheik says:

    Good for him, good for him, we need to enjoy our artists, our genius’, age is no reason for them being denied more, work, obviously Lumet still has it in him.
    It’s a pity that many filmmakers in their 80s never did complete some of their projects or keep shooting flicks (i.e. avid Lean’s NOSTROMO comes to mind).
    I can’t believe the great Billy Wilder wasn’t allowed to direct anything after 1981’s BUDDY, BUDDY.

  7. Moniker Jones says:

    One film that I don’t think was mentioned earlier is Running on Empty. Simple as it is, I’ve always loved that film and found it highly watchable. Certainly one of the best forgotten films of the 1980s. Similar to how I feel about Soderbergh’s (still not on DVD) Depression-era piece, King of the Hill.
    I’ll assume Long Day’s Journey and 12 Angry Men weren’t mentioned by that other poster because they’re so obvious, but I also saw Q & A for the first time a few months ago and admired it as well. I haven’t seen most of his 1960s stuff though, including Fail-Safe (i know, i know).

  8. Dog Day Afternoon is my favourite, but I’ve barely scratched the surface with Lumet, so…

  9. Joe Leydon says:

    Whie working on my master’s thesis about ’70s movies at Paramount, I recently completed a chapter devoted to Serpico. A great film. But I wish another ’70s movie by Lumet — The Offence — would also get released on DVD. If you’ve never seen this film, trust me, you’re in for a shock: Maybe Sean Connery’s best film performance of all time.

  10. Cadavra says:

    True dat, Joe. I was at MGM/UA Classics in the late 80s, and when it was obvious that Connery was going to win the Oscar for UNTOUCHABLES, I took the four prints of OFFENCE we had and got them booked in four major rep houses the Friday after the Oscars. Did okay business, too. And I totally agree it’s his Best. Performance. Ever.

  11. Cadavra says:

    D’oh! How could I have forgotten RUNNING ON EMPTY? A truly sublime film.
    I didn’t mention 12 ANGRY and LONG DAY’S because they predate the decades I cited. But that is not to denigrate them one whit.

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