April 18, 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
Capital Letters At The Beginning Of Every Word Is Cool! And I Hate Periods
lmao
It’s a headline, Josh
From the Congressional Record (May 25, 2006):
Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.
The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.
I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.
– Senator John McCain
And yet nothing happened. Sounds like weak leadership.
“It’s a headline, Josh”
A headline for an ad? Either way, AP Style agrees with me.
/Journalism school, represent!
“And yet nothing happened. Sounds like weak leadership.”
Actually, it was opposition from – among others – Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama that stopped it.
My argument is, if McCain was a stronger bipartisan leader, he would have gotten it done. Ka-pow!
(Yes, that’s not meant to be taken seriously.)
mccain looks like the dude in ‘scanners’ whose head is about to explode…or gary oldman in ‘gross dracula mode’ (someone mentioned that once before so credit where it’s due, frankbooth perhaps), but yikes, it’s true! i bet cindy mccain gets a LOT of headaches around bedtime
So was McCain’s campaign manager taking $30k a month or $15k a month from Fannie Mae at that time, mystery?
McCain wasn’t campaigning for president at that time, David. Look at what Franklin Raines is doing for Obama NOW. You are avoiding the topic at hand. Another “Oh ya? Well, what about this OVER HERE?” The point is, McCain tried to get something done years ago. His opportunity has finally come. He’s not the devil, David.
“And yet nothing happened. Sounds like weak leadership.”
Is this a joke? McCain cannot bulldoze a bill through committee and force a vote on the floor.
“Actually, it was opposition from – among others – Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama that stopped it.”
While those two have resisted other efforts to address the issue, the bill I cited didn’t make it out of committee. They didn’t get the opportunity to vote up or down.
Round and round we go. Obama never does anything wrong. McCain never does anything wrong. Someone takes a shot at a candidate, and rather than comment on its validity or accuracy, someone else says “well your guy did this” or “your guy is going this” or something along those lines. No one can/will admit that Obama/McCain does anything wrong. Obama supporters get criticized for blindly supporting him and everything he does but I see the same stuff coming from McCain supporters.
I do believe McCain was campaigning for president a month ago.
From the NYT, 09/11/03:
“The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.”
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print
“These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
From the NYT, 09/11/03:
“The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.”
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print
“These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
Sorry for the double post.
Stella’s Boy-
You may have been typing your post at the time, but I JUST excused H. Clinton and Obama from any responibility for McCain’s bill getting stuck in committee (yes, I know McCain was just a co-sponsor).
“I do believe McCain was campaigning for president a month ago.”
That’s not the time period David and I were referring to.
I know you did mystery, but that doesn’t change the fact that (generally speaking) it sure feels like we’re going in circles here.
Also, I for one am not blaming a person or political party for the financial crisis. I am reading as much as I can to better educate myself about it, but the subject is not my area of expertise. I would however like to see the debate happen tonight. I think now is the perfect time for these two men to talk about the economy. The election is only 39 days away now.
Mystery… Franklin Raines has NOTHIING to do with Obama campaign and NEVER has. Obama met the man once for 10 minutes.
You remind me of the guy in the Washington Times (Tony Blankley) who insanely writes about how the media isn’t doing its job because when Obama went to Columbia, Bill Ayres lived “within a quarter mile” of him in NY… and then – cue scary music – Obama moved to Hyde Park… where Bill Ayres has his house!!!!! GOTCHA!!!!
Huh?
I am not defending Barney Frank or The Democrats re: regulation. I have always said that Clinton was responsible for the bursting of the tech bubble, which led to an economic dip just before Bush came into office. A better managed bubble – in which there really was growth – would have served this country much better… but Clinton was too busy bathing in the bubble sunlight and talking about all the growth he lucked into… which also happened to erase the choulda-benn-disasterous Reagan deficits.
But in this case, McCain has mostly called himself a deregulator. That is the Republican position. Even yesterday, the insane right wing response to a troubling bail out plan was to call for a 2 yer stoppage on capital gains tax… so the middle class and poor can pay for the bailout alone… as they always want.
And sorry, McCain’s campaign manager’s company was still getting $15k a month from Fannie LAST MONTH… for doing nothing… except being in McCain’s camp.
Not all that unusual. Bill Clinton’s post-presidential ties should have eliminated Hillary on their own. No one is pure, including Obama. And even the crazy Bill Ayers smears are okay, when the are honest.
The truth is, Ayers is part of the Hyde Park community, which is made up primarily of lefties who grew up in the late 50s and 60s and wish WU hadn’t killed anyone, but believe(d) in their cause and accept Bill and Bernadine as part of their community.
If anyone wants to take issue with the left accepting 40 year old bad behavior in the name of ending a war everyone agrees was a low point in our national history, go for it. That is a reasonable argument. “Obama is pal’s with a mad bomber and is dangerous as a result” is simply ignorant bullshit.
Meanwhile, McCain is not clean… and not close to as clean as he claims. Worse, he is acting like a drunken sailor.
I read that Stanley Kurtz piece earlier this week, the one that supposedly shows all of the nefarious activities Obama and Ayers participated in together. He uses the word radical like a thousand times. What he fails to do is make a compelling argument. Almost every time he says radical, the proof he uses to support his claims include phrases like “fighting poverty and oppression” and “ending war.” As if those are the most radical things he has ever heard of. It’s a remarkably desperate and insubstantial article.
DP- “You remind me of the guy…”
I gave an example of a campaign having a questionable association, with no actual evidence of impropriety. I remind you… of YOU!
Franklin Raines himself said that Obama called him for advice on housing and the economy. That shows poor judgement. But it doesn’t really go further than that. McCain’s campaign manager taking a salary(?) from Fannie Mae, and not disclosing the reason also shows bad judgement. But it doesn’t really go further than that.
This is, however, the first time I’ve seen acts of (domestic) terrorism described as “bad behavior”. And the Unibomber was just mischievous.