MCN Blogs
Kim Voynar

By Kim Voynar

SXSW Preview

With so many potentially good films on the slate, what to see?
Spotlight Premieres looks to be one of the more promising categories at SXSW if you aren’t looking to take much of a chance on getting stuck with a bad film. There are quite a few Spotlight films I’d recommend (and several I’m trying to squeeze into my own cramped schedule): Fest opener I Love You, Man, starring Paul Rudd and Jason Segal looks promising, and fest-goers can get an early peek before it opens on March 20. I missed 500 Days of Summer at Sundance and have been kicking myself ever since; the film stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel, and reports from Sundance were very positive. Fox Searchlight picked the film up, and it comes out in July, but why wait?
Read the rest of this column …

Be Sociable, Share!

3 Responses to “SXSW Preview”

  1. djk813 says:

    Go see Make it with Violence. It also won the Grand Jury Award for Best Feature at the Atlanta Film Festival when it premiered there last year. I’d compare it in a way to Donnie Darko in that it’s a high school movie but it’s basically unclassifiable because it’s such a mix of genres. One of the most exciting truly independent films I’ve seen over the past few years.

  2. Kim Voynar says:

    Agreed, Make Out With Violence is great and one of the very few films I’ve seen where I walked out thinking, “Wow, now THAT was completely original in every way.” Good original, too, not crap.
    I expect it will play very, very well at SXSW — I’m hoping it ends up with a sweet distrib deal with a distributor who would know how to market it. It could be a huge cult film.

  3. Definitely agree about “Make-Out With Violence.” It’s one of my favorite SXSW films I’ve screened so far.

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