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
I suspect the LA Times insists on PG buying his own lunch (a minor point, admittedly).
My understanding is that the former rules about that were rescinded last year.
Off Topic, I apologize.
DP, did you see the Madagsacar 2 number for Veteran’s day? $9.8 million. Over half of Sunday.
I looked back at other early November openings to see the Veteran’s Day pop for kids movies and this looks awfully big compared to anything else.
Then again I am not sure it is comparable as the approach of school district’s towards Veteran’s Day has changed with more and more taking the actual day off over the years.
Curious if you have any thoughts. As you know, I follow this form a Wall Street perspective and DWA shares have traded off with the market this week despite what looks like a film that will exceed the Street’s domestic box office expectations of $200 million.
BTW, I hope all is well. I have not posted here much lately as the market crash has me preoccupied. I decided to attend Sundance despite my need to shave costs. My son who is an aspiring composer interested in movie scores and a junior at NYU is going to accompany me. Hope to see you there again.
And thanks for the Obama coverage. I am from Chicago, met him a few times back in 2003 and happy to see the outcome.
Between this and the Luhrmann interview, Fox successfully spun the Times this day.
“But why is anyone beating the drum on this a week out? How desperate are we to fill blog inches?”
This from the man who originated the “20 Weeks To Oscar” feature to make the studios up their “For Your Consideration” ad dollar spending earlier than they normally would.
Boltbucket, take it from personal experience: when all you do is bash David Poland, you lose credibility fast.
I’m not “bashing” anyone. I’m just making an observation.
Is that a distortion or just a lie?
Yes, Boltbucket… I invented the 20 week Oscar season… I am just THAT powerful.
Measley humans, RUN from my lightening bolts!!!!
(For the record, 20 was a round number and meant starting in October, which is not September, which is when the drama really starts. It was not created with advertising in mind, though it has made a neat package.
In fact, this year we created a pre-October package at the direct request of two studios. Our awards package does start earlier than some studios have awards ads ready, but we will run non-awards ad for those studios in their slots. And frankly, we are cheap enough that some studios don’t even care that they burn off the first month… the pricing still works for what they get in the second two months. Trying to find an excuse to attack the least aggressive ad sales effort in the business is a little lame.)
The reason they needed to “spin” in the first place Kris was because most of the Internet Mob and quickly followed by the Mainstream Media didn’t bother to check the validity of the original source and its content. Either by getting a comment from Luhrmann or Fox, or by just doing a simple review of the already available information on this film on the web. It was more important to be among the first, than to provide perspective or accurate reporting. It seemed like most merely reposted the item and said “Damn Fox! Film’s in trouble.” rather than adding anything to it. The original article was from a Mainstream Media pundit, but it was pretty poorly put together and should have rung alarm bells. He selectively quoted from test screening reviews posted on the web months ago. Then made his claim about the forced ending change happening the week before. Any film buff reading EW (of the week or so before) could have told you already that Luhrmann had chosen to alter his first ending and his reason why. Also, the author didn’t Quote anybody on the supposed studio enforced change, so why was this article picked up? Because there is no new information out there on this film, it suited the vibe of a last minute dash to the finish line for the film, and yeah, to fill blog inches. So when bloggers write about the “buzz” or the “spin” just remember that you’re a part of creating it, not independently reporting it.
Why is there someone named boltbucket? Totally copying my bucket idea for a screen name. I feel violated and not the good kind like from my professor.
Lots of paranoia there, Kat.
“Bullshit. Just bullshit”
Who gives a shit what “unnamed,” hardy har har, people think anyway? At the very least, I don’t.
Waterbucket: HIYYYYYYYYYOOOO!!! YES SIR!