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
A very positive development…
Funny…Variety didn’t have this story up on their website at all until a few minutes ago, and the story ended up being nothing more than a reworded press release (with byline, natch).
Way to stay ahead of the news, Variety.
Sad for the people losing their jobs, not so much in other aspects because at least maybe it’ll mean Zemeckis will get back to making live action movies?
I, too, feel bad for those who would lose work because of this development. However, seeing as how Robert Zemeckis hasn’t made a good movie in 10 years (and merely produced the only mo-cap animated film that was good last decade in “Monster House”), I welcome anything that would return him to the live-action fold.
There is a sense of irony in this situation in that Zemeckis is still the second highest grossing domestic director.
The problem is, and I’ve said this before on here
when I questioned how long Zemeckis could get away with all this is that his movies are just too expensive.
And they do have their audience, let’s not try to marginalize him completely (and anyone who does is stupid) for the ma. But it’s not enough – he simply spends too much money on films that don’t deliever on that level (at least not immediately -Polar Express may stand the test of time).
And he continued to spend with little seeming bother AND without the “one for them” types of movies.
Even Spielberg’s “Tintin” is cheaper though with Steven movies always look many times better than the cost would lead one to believe.
It had to stop and when it did, it’s funny that it happened right before Yellow Submarine. I agree that style is a factor here, expecially after Disney saw the b.o. difference in Alice. But the style isn’t just the style but technology as well. Zemeckis is still one of the best and he could adapt for a different set of tools and I do believe that YS will be made using that because I Disney realizes that the potential for success is there and I do think they value Zemeckis’s expetise. YS could be the next “Mamma Mia” (don’t laugh) IF it’s done right. It could be “Across the Universe” too but I don’t think that it will. So this could be Disney’s way of nudging him.
In the meantime though, Zemeckis’s “driving privilages” have been taken away. I’d love for him to return to live action even as I’d hate for him to be forced to do it. But then I kind of liked what he did with Polar Express.
I’m not suggesting they don’t have an audience. I’m merely saying that, with the exception of “Monster House,” I never felt like a part of that audience.
Decent grosses or not, only one of his mo-cap endeavors has been profitable. Say what you will about the Disney upheaval, the new regime is displaying a Fox-like concentration on the bottom line after last year. Hopefully they won’t end up with a Fox-like lack of concentration as far as quality.
Concentration on the bottom line? Disney has made it clear they will only release movies that can be milked for money through corporate synergy and product tie-ins.
Yeah…exactly. Gone are risky projects like “Surrogates,” mo-cap and likely original hand-drawn animation (again) and here comes an endless parade of Marvel, Jerry Bruckheimer, Miley, franchises/potential franchises and 3D…and Pixar.
They even changed their upcoming Rapunzel adaptation’s title to “Tangled” this week to avoid a Princess and the Frog repeat..
I give Zemeckis credit for using his clout to go out on a limb for what he believed in.
Polar Express in 3D imax is still way more amazing than people give credit.
I think he will be viewed as a pioneer by film history, even if the individual films are not as well-liked as he’d hoped.