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
Was anybody’s Oscar prospects made or dashed at this year’s fest?
As Picturehouse made sure to remind me… The Women is Picturehouse… Slumdog Millionaire was Warner Independent and then picked up by WB when the former shut down. I guess you could say that Slumdog was “dumped by the same company” when you’re talking about the overall parent company Time Warner, but I don’t think it was dumped as much as being ported over to Fox Searchlight for distribution and marketing in the U.S. because Warner Bros. might not feel it’s capable of marketing that movie in the States and think Fox Searchlight can do a better job. They’re probably right but WB are still distributing it in foreign markets where it’ll probably do as good or better business. (It’s similar to Kite Runner last year, which was produced by DreamWorks but distributed by Paramount Vantage, except of course, SDM is crossing corporate studio lines.)
“Was anybody’s Oscar prospects made or dashed at this year’s fest?”
Maybe Keira Knightley’s in The Duchess.. i thought she was great and her best performance but I guess most people felt it was just more of the same in terms of period costume dramas so she’ll probably be forgotten/ignored by Oscar time.. they should have released it later in the season.
ED… yes, The Women was Picturehouse… which doesn’t exist anymore. It was big WB that decided to spend at least $10 million more in marketing than Bob Berney had decided to spend in order to release a film that Berney had decided to dump.
And Slumdog? Bullshit. Big Warner, which controls all of the product that WIP paid for, decided to dump Slumdog… didn’t want to make the investment of marketing to release the film. The notion that they gave up financial interest because they “think Fox Searchlight can do a better job” is just not true, especially since the movie was up for grabs all over town.
No studio gives up financial interest on a movie they can make $1 of profit on, whether domestic or foreign.
Within companies – like Paramount, where DW’s options for releasing The Kite Runner was to have the big studio team market it or the specialty division market it – strategic choices are made. Absolutely. But “ported over” is a figment of your (and the studio publicists’) imagination. Money is not that forgiving on rhetoric.
Next, we’ll be talking about how the Weinsteins “ported” their movies over MGM because MGM is a major… when the reason was always simple… dollars from pay TV… period.
Follow the money, ED… follow the money.
Warners CHOSE to release The Women widely, at a massively inflated cost. Warners CHOSE to sell domestic on Slumdog Millionaire to Searchlight because they didn’t think they could have a success with it. If you don’t think they are kicking themselves after the response at Toronto, you would be wrong… even if they really have abandoned the marketers who would know what to do with a film like this.
Moreover… what non-US territories do you think WB has? As far as I know, WB has none, with Pathe taking all international when WIP took domestic.
I’ve never walked out of a movie at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) before, not even Golden Turkey Hall of Shame bow-wows like “The Human Stain” or “Revolver.” The sheer investment of time and energy that it takes to get into any TIFF screening–upwards of two hours for the really hot titles–discourages auditorium-hopping.
But when you see people fleeing in the middle of a brutally bad flick (and there were plenty to choose from this year, trust me), your mind begins to play tricks on you. Do they know something you don’t?
As it turns out, nobody knows anything at TIFF. Everyone is capable of (repeatedly) making the same boneheaded decisions that you are. Some folks are just better at playing movie russian roulette. I’m sure that it was possible to have had a great time at the recently concluded 33rd edition of the Toronto Film Festival. That just wasn’t my experience this annum. Sure, there were plenty of good films to see, but even the best ones were overshadowed by the soul-crushing disappointments and flat-out stinkers, many of which, ironically, were the most difficult to get into.
The few “big” studio films to premiere at TIFF (Spike Lee’s WWII epic “The Miracle of Saint Anna;” Oprah-endorsed “The Secret Life of Bees;” “Pride and Glory” with Colin Farrell and Edward Norton; Ed Harris’ oater “Appaloosa;” supernatural rom-com “Ghost Town;” Greg Kinnear’s Oscar wannabe “Flash of Genius,” et al) sank without a trace, leaving the Great White North without the requisite bounce they were hoping for; and that many desperately need to make any sort of commercial inroads.
Toronto’s reputation for being the official launching pad for the upcoming awards season took a serious beating in 2008. Conspicuous by their absence were such heavily touted Oscar contenders as “Milk,” “The Road,” “The Soloist,” “Revolutionary Road” and “Doubt.” The official line was that they weren’t ready in time, but conspiracy theorists like me spent the entire festival debating the veracity of that claim. Anything to keep our minds off the (generally) underwhelming movies that did manage to show up.
With his shot-in-Pittsburgh rom-com “Zack and Miri Make a Porno,” former Sundance whiz kid Kevin Smith officially became culturally irrelevant. Like John Waters whose shock-at-all-cost modus operandi became pass
“Warners CHOSE to release The Women widely, at a massively inflated cost.”
David, I should put you in touch with the Picturehouse publicist who contacted me after finding last week’s column on Google Alerts, asking me to remove any mention of Warner Bros in connection with “The Women.” I had noted that it was getting a wider release than any Picturehouse release due to WB’s involvement in distributing and was asked to remove said statement and any other reference to WB.
Oh, and to respond to the other bit (re: Slumdog), I think Warner International has been growing…they made a BIG SHOW at ShoWest this year to show off their success in places like Japan and Europe, although most of it seemed to be about their productions rather than distribution. From what I understand when I asked Fox Searchlight, they’re only doing America and Warners is handling the rest of the world similar to the way Beowulf was split up with Paramount handling America and WB doing everywhere else.
EDouglas, Armond White called. He wants his crankiness back.
I know Armond White and he is probably one of the LEAST crankiest New York critic I’ve ever met…. though I’m not sure how either of my posts can be read as “crankiness.” I just didn’t see the connection between WB getting a studio like Fox Searchlight to take some of the risk on marketing/distributing a difficult film was being connected to the final release of Picturehouse.
I was being snarky about your long post on how TIFF jumped the shark this year because it didn’t have a Juno or a No Country or an Into the Wild.
If White is one of the LEAST crankiest critics, then who is cranky? (Rex Reed doesn’t count.)
I’m guessing Lou Limenick might be considered crank, seeing as he likes assaulting members of the press at press screenings.
BTW: Even if you didn’t recognize the guy behind you was Mr. Ebert, I don’t think whacking someone is ever acceptable.
Jimmy: EDouglas didn’t write the long cranky TIFF post – movieman did.
Ed Gonzalez HAS to be a crankier NYC critic than Armond White.
White comes off as a loon beyond belief with his contrarian bullshit, but taken at his goofy word, I get the sense he at least has fun coming up with his ridiculous opinions and needling bullshit.
Ed Gonzalez, I don’t even know why that guy’s a film critic. Yeah, yeah, I get that “SLANT MAGAZINE” is an “edgy” site that filters their opinions through a prism of both snark and supreme touchiness about sociopolitical issues, but I’ve always felt, if you see 100 movies a year and you hate 90 of them, you’re not an interesting read or a “discerning critic,” you’re just kind of an asshole. At the very least, you don’t really like movies very much, so you’re insulting your readership.
It’d be like having a “football critic” who doesn’t like football, doesn’t like sports, and finds any mere discussion of the game to be an in-road to discussing issues of racism and homophobia. The writing might be mildly attention-grabbing in a “HEY MA LOOK AT ME” kinda way, but it’s ultimately condescending and worthless as any sort of reportage or critism.
movieman, you deserve to relax at the pub with a nice, cold beer after that terrific ‘tiff’ summary! (sorry to hear you were a bit underwhelmed, though; i enjoyed your insight into the films on offer, as always)
My apologies to EDouglas.
To quote Nicholson in A Few Good Men: “Don’t I feel link the fucking asshole.”
Lex, like yourself, I think Armond White actually believes in the ridiculous bullshit that he occasionally spews forth. I have no idea what he’s like in person. but in print he definitely comes off as someone who is crazy and has a huge chip on his shoulder. Maybe that doesn’t equate to ‘cranky’ but it’s not far off.
…glad you enjoyed the read, Leahnz.
I’m still decompressing from my TIFF experience, and furiously scratching the beyond-itchy bites I got from the bed bugs at the Comfort Hotel on Charles St. W. (in a room that I paid $200 a night for in U.S. dollars!)
I guess that was TIFF’s parting gift from a year to forget.
Armond White is one entertaining crank though. Sometimes I’m absolutely flabbergasted at the claims of quality he makes for things like Torque or You Got Served. But he may have the last laugh — yesterday’s critically dismissed B movies often hold up better than Oscar bait.
Yes ED… those people are afraid to call me…
I have worked happily with Picturehousers and Fine Liners before that… and anyone who called you is just trying to do what they are being forced to do. Bob Berney is out there starting a new company, not finding money to wide-release The Women.
It was a horrible choice by Jeff Robinov to bend to Nikki Finke’s accusations (which genuinely scare him, I am told) and secondarily, the potential of S&TC, spending more on P&A than any Picturehouse movie in history.
Pubs do what pubs do.
And as far as Warner Int… yes… they are very, very good… but again, they don’t own international on Slumdog as far as I know. Pathe does. The only interest they have left is the domestic that they held onto when Searchlight didn’t cover WIP’s entire investment.
And movieman… you aren’t planning on billing me for that feature story there, are you?
No worries, Dave.
I just wanted to make sure that it ran somewhere in an unexpurgated fashion.
…since you never know what even a “well-meaning” editor will do…
Yancy, as much of a fan of dance movies as I am, You Got Served is quite possibly the worst movie I have ever seen. I felt my braincells rotting away as I watched it.