April 25, 2024
BYOB
Triple Option on: BYO Oscar
Sideshow Bill on: BYO Oscar
Stella's Boy on: BYO Oscar
Pete B on: BYO Oscar
movieman on: BYO Oscar
movieman on: BYO Oscar
Stella's Boy on: BYO Oscar
Hcat on: BYO Oscar
brack on: BYO Oscar
iothereturned on: BYO Oscar
BYOB: 235 Years Of Relative independence
BYOB Weekend: Hop, An April Fool’s Gag?
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
I want to tip my coonskin cap to Fess Parker on the occasion of his passing today. I know most of you young’uns don’t know who I’m talking about, but what the hell. I’m feeling so sentimental right now, I’m ready to finally forgive Parker for that attempt to do Mr. Smith Goes to Washington as a sitcom back in the ’60s.
Joe,
Davy Crockett “King of the Wild Frontier” made it all the way across to this side of the pond. I remember as a kid watching the show and then racing out into the woods to re-enact the adventures. Obviously I had no real cultural or even historical context in which to place him, but the show was outdoors and exciting, we would sing the theme song as we jumped around like rampaging he-devils and I even seem to remember trying to make my own cap!
Thanks to the wonder of cable I was able to see those as a kid, loved them as well. Just saw it for sale at Target and it caught my eye.
Its funny that a few months ago we were argueing about what constitutes a cultural phenom and Crocket never crossed my mind but everything I’ve heard indicates that it was just as prevelant as Star Wars was in my youth.
joe — i still have my original coon skin cap and (kid sized) ‘davy crockett – injun fighter’ necktie….tonight’s cocktails are being served in the ‘fess parker winery’ glasses we picked up a few years ago……sometimes cheap sentiment is a good thing…..
Ok, I’m kind of caught up on movies for 2010 – over the past few weeks I have seen:
Hot Tub Time Machine – good raunchy fun
The Crazies – very effective horror, Eisner is somke one to watch as he has a great eye
The Ghost Writer – decent thriller, pulpier than most of the critics are giving it credit for and not as good as Shutter Island
Green Zone – wow, big disappointment from Greengrass, last 15 minutes was basically “duh”
Brooklyn’s Finest – Antoine Fuqua’s best film, solid crime drama with good performances
The Art of the Steal – good documentary with a capper that pushes a little too far a la The Cove
I am curious as to any one else who has seen The Art of the Deal – very well done, nice flow about it, beautifully shot, but man….. SPOILER ALERT….
They couldn’t find any one to interview who could defend opening up the Barnes collection to the public, really? I guess Ed Rendell could be considered the devil’s advocate on this, but there is so much talk of him as “the politician” that it just doesn’t give him a real chance. Look, I get the years of sleaziness that went towards eventually getting those paintings into the Philly Museum of Art and circumventing the man’s will. But I don’t know….there are worse places for great works of art to end up than a very accessible public museum.
There’s a good amount of discussion within the film about the appreciation of art and its exploitation – moreso than most films and I liked that. I don’t know, though – I could see taking my children to see these paintings and how gratifying it would be to go to a downtown art museum as opposed to driving out to upscale suburban neighborhood and waiting hours to get inside some one’s mansion. It’s a tough call and warrants discussion.
Also, as much as it was about the man’s will being respected, you can definitely deduce that this was mostly a personal grudge (however well deserved) between Barnes and Annenberg playing out.
I really liked the movie and found it compelling, but like The Cove, I just felt like the decks were stacked a little too much. Not expecting pure “balance” just a little more common sense. Definitely worth seeing and eager to hear what others thought of it.
One thing I have noticed about docs in recent years is that the production values have just increased dramatically – The Cove and Food, Inc were just beautifully shot with crisp images – and I also like how they are still much more economical in their screentime than all other indie/arthouse features. I was going to this arthouse theater to check something out that would fit my schedule, yesterday afternoon – Art of the Steal was about 100 minutes, just perfect – didn’t have 2 and a half hours to devote to A Prophet or White Ribbon, as much as I was curious to see them.
Can’t most films be under 110 minutes? It’s nice that most docs are.
Geoff I live right outside of Philly and The Art of the Steal is getting a lot of press here. The consensus is that it is incredibly one-sided and about as biased as a doc can get (I haven’t seen it). The reason one side is completely unrepresented is that they refused to participate because of the filmmaker’s personal bias. They never felt like they’d get a fair shake.
More on The Art of the Steal:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/04/AR2010030405778.html
http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/movies/20100226_Excellent_points__but_no_hard_questions.html
Stella, it WAS very one-sided, no doubt – that’s the difference between a solid doc and a great one. Same thing with The Cove.
I mean there is a legitimate discussion to be had about art and the best type of venue to view it within – a place where tourists are cluttered in MIGHT not be the preference of the artist, but that is barely brushed upon within the movie. And besides, I doubt Cezanne put much thought into where people could see his paintings 100 years after he created them – it’s kind of a.control issue.
I thought about this as I was leaving the theater, the upscale Century in Lakeview in Chicago – if I had seen it at a multiplex cinema among suburban families or out-of-towner tourists, would the filmmakers have disapproved? Somehow, I doubt that.
Still a good movie worth seeing – but it raises questions it really doesn’t care to examine. And boy, does it bash Philly – as if any other major American city would not have tried to get the Barnes collection in one of their museums.
If ever a doc was NOT about black and white, this certainly is it: all sides have their share of blame.
MINOR SPOILER
My take is that the breaking point was the collection ending up in the ONE place Barnes detested; had it gone to another museum, the blowback would probably have been a lot less severe.