Where The Wild Rumors Are
From WB –
Below please find a statement from director, Spike Jonze regarding Where The Wild Things Are in response to a clip that is being posted recently online.
April 19, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
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
Okay, now that we got that cleared, maybe we can find out why the movie got pushed back to next year and why Drew on AICN is hinting at Spike being replaced as director.
I, for one, really liked the tone of that clip. It’s refreshing to see something that subdued and but at the same time still fascinating.
I really like Jonze’s work and I’m really looking forward to this one.
I never said Spike was being replaced, and don’t put words in my mouth.
There are several schools of thought on WTWTA right now behind-the-scenes, and we’ll see which of those schools of thought prevails in the next year or so of post-production.
All I’ve ever said is that Warner may want more reshoots than Spike feels like doing. Again… we’ll see.
Drew, you had said on another board that when the movie is released there’s a good chance Spike’s name wouldn’t be on it. So, if that doesn’t mean he’s going to be replaced, then at the very least it sounds like the film is being taken away from him.
Also, I’m sorry…I didn’t mean to put words in your mouth, just trying to figure out what’s going on here. You seem to have a lot of knowledge and you’ve been just a teensy bit vague about it.
Why this movie has been pushed back remains the question that needs to be answered. If the Wachowskis can make something like SPEED RACER in a reasonable amount of time. It stands to reason that freakin WTWTA should not take as long as SCANNER DARKLY to get to the theatres.
Speed Racer is massively crunched for time. They have over a dozen FX houses working to get the movie finished at something close to on-time.
He’s vague because that’s how AICN supports itself, no matter if it gets one or one-million unique U.S. visitors a month.
I’m vague because they haven’t made their decisions yet.
That’s all.
And at least I’m coherent, T. Holly, which is more than I can say for you.
Drew,
T Holly doesn’t need to be coherent. You, however, write for one of the most read websites on the internet so throwing around vague illusions to rumours is just frustrating.
Noah, Drew knows a thing or two about writing figuratively about chances. KC, I want soft hard-facts too, like hit figures.
Again… please let’s stick to the issue.
Fair enough to question why Drew’s piece was vague. Not really an open door to start attacking AICN and their “hit figures,” etc.
If you want to discuss what the history and future of AICN are, I will be happy to start a thread toward that end… if people really want to have a serious discussion about it and not just piss all over Drew and that site, which I really don’t want to be party to.
I have had, as you all know, plenty of issues with AICN over the last decade, but really, I think the site has settled into its maturity and there is not a lot of debating left to do about it and its actions.
And I don’t really want to spend space here with people attacking Drew as a personality, as opposed to discussing his public statements, anymore than I want to have it done to me.
Drew, I appreciate the bits of information that you’ve been able to throw our way. I don’t really understand the barbs being thrown your way, as I’ve always found your pieces on AICN to be top-notch. I guess if I were to read between the lines, I could guess that there is a power struggle going on between Spike and the studio about the editing and perhaps some threats.
My only hope is that studios learn from the mistakes of the past and release the movie that the auteur wanted to make. All the Pretty Horses, Factory Girl, and various other Weinstein products should prove the point that you’re better off sticking with what the director intended than to rip the guts out of a movie and dump it.
there’s no reason to attack Drew, or anyone for that matter. Discussion and debate to me should always be encouraged, but it’s damn hard to keep it civil.
I didnt start out as a fan of Aint it Cool. But slowly i got won over, mostly by the fact that i was not polished, but a site for fans by fans.
Over the years, it seems like it has changed a lot, where the luster has kind of worn off. I think once people stopped claiming the site could make or break films, and the spotlight moved off the site, it became better. To me, the best thing about the site is Harry moving into the background. He’s a passionate guy and it’s nice to see him post a piece or two now, but putting Drew in a sort of editorial drivers seat makes a lot of sense.
I haven’t always agreed with Drew on every issue (The Memflix Fantastic Four 2 review thing comes to mind), and we’ve had heated discussions before. but i still like the guy and his perspective on the movies he sees.
If the internet boom and bust taught us one thing, it’s that so many sites are fueled by hype, and once the hype is gone, so are most of the sites. But if you read a piece by Drew, you can see how much thought he puts into the films he watches.
I think the rest of the site is pretty uninteresting. 99% of the reason i read the site is for his articles. The impact of the site can’t be denied, but now, years later, without all the hype, you can just enjoy the columns if you so choose.
I think what a lot of people do is take every sentence uttered on aint it cool and assume there’s some kind of secret financial or professional agenda. Just read the Format War talkback where a handful of people accuse Knowles of taking large cash payouts for supporting HD DVD. I suppose you can either read the pieces with an eyepiece looking for conspiracy, or read the articles and hope to learn something or just be entertained.
“drew being intentionally vague” or whatever was said seems kind of zany.
It wasn’t a hit figure attack, it was a question posed as a statement. I’m not really a whackjob savant following movie website traffic, but did you see the corroboration?