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” ā 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 ā 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 ā he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” ā and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging ā I was with her at that moment ā 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 namedā” “Yeah, sure ā 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 Iām on the phone with you now, after all thatās 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 didnāt seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. Thereās not a case of that. He wasnāt using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had ā if that were what the accusation involved ā 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. Iām not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, āYou know, itās not this, itās thatā? Because ā let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. TimesĀ piece, thatās what it lacked. Thatās 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
Ever since it premiered at Cannes, I have been checking to see when it is going to be released. October, Stateside, but no date for UK/Ireland. Anybody know?
Looks like the feel-good movie of the year.
I’m starting to become SHOCKED! and OFFENDED! by all these chicken little shock docs. Can’t wait for the oil spill ones to hit. Not to demean the work done here but jeeeez…..there’s like, 7-8 of these things a year now. It’s getting ridiculous.
I don’t know Don. Is it not more ridiculous that these catastrophes continually happen? I can understand fatigue; I too feel a bit of it (or is it dread of having to face up to the wretchedness of human behavior) but I don’t think indifference is the healthiest response.
this kind of thing doesn’t stop until you raid the buildings, murder the perpetrators and drag their bodies into the streets.
and even then, it’s only a matter of time before things calm down and it happens again.
why didn’t we just let people bludgeon Bernie Madoff to death? Why didn’t we let the Enron employees heave stones at Ken Lay until his unrecognizable corpse was strung from the giant “E” logo for all the world to see?
We think we’re civilized because we let people do awful things and take great liberties, but since there’s no bloodshed and people do not grasp the depths of their crimes, we just continue to talk about it.
I once suggested installing a Guillotine in the park across from the White House. Maybe we should put some gallows on Wall Street.
That’s kinda my point, Don.
This is not a Chicken Little doc and it’s not comparable to every other film on crisis that lands.
I’d like to see The Expendables go after white collar criminals. Maybe not as exciting as South American dictators, but even more vital to the country they so lovingly serve.
It looks like the same ole to me, David. And that being said, I’ll still see it. I enjoy the investigative work these doc filmmakers are doing, it’s real journalism and I support it. But…
These things aren’t really inspiring people to DO ANYTHING though. The only doc that’s really provoked a change was THE COVE. I don’t know if it’s typical American malaise or what but everyone gets suuuuper pissed about these things for a day or 2, posts “OMG this is outrageous!” on their facebook page and then goes off to watch “Jersey Shore.”
I think films like “The Yes Men” are great because they show HOW you can affect a change. Stuff like this film (and “Collapse”) just tell you how screwed we are now because no one was paying attention.
**Note: I may be wrong as I have not seen “Inside Job.” This is all perception by me, admittedly.
I think Don makes a great point. The reason why people are not out with their pitchforks is because… Jeez, did anyone see that some guy tried to break into Paris Hilton’s apartment?
Who coined the phrase, WEAPONS OF MASS DISTRACTION?
Food Inc. may not inspire revolution, but it works as a primer on why and how you, the individual, can and should make changes in choosing the kinds of food you eat. As for Don’s point (which is valid), I think that speaks more to the difficulty in getting these documentaries seen by a wider audience. A Magnolia-distributed documentary is all but guaranteed to be seen by 90% ‘the converted’ at best.
Sorta, Scott…but “Food Inc.” didn’t cover how lower class families are supposed to be able to afford organic foods. Farmers markets are nice and all, but pricey as hell.
From the maker of ‘No End in Sight’, narrated by Matt Damon, with shots of Carl Levin & Barney Frank, with pull quotes from NYTimes and Roger Ebert, along with the same old documentary tricks of ad hominem attacks (this in just a couple minute trailer!); something tells me this will be about as even handed and instructive as the rest of the doc’s out there that wallow in fallacious argument styles in order to make interesting cinema.
Who knows though, it could be an incredibly fair documentary, but judging from the trailer, it looks like the same tricks, different topic.
Love that accent Allison Janney’s doing @ 0:25!
i haven’t seen this yet, but a while back i was channel-surfing and came across a show on the crime channel that takes an in-depth look at infamous crimes/criminals from the criminal psychology perspective (for the life of me i can’t remember what the programme was called), in which criminals are evaluated/rated according to their abnormal behaviour by a group of criminologists/phycologists.
anyway, this particular episode i caught evaluated some of the men who perpetrated these despicable acts, and overwhelmingly they were diagnosed and rated by the experts as classic sociopaths exhibiting severe narcissistic personality disorder. what was particularly interesting, tho, was the observation that it’s no coincidence these type of men climb to the top of the heap in the world of high-flying, high-stakes, high-pressure wheeler-dealer finance, where their their dangerous sociopathy is a distinct advantage rather than a hindrance in doing their jobs. the programme posited that this culture of high-stakes excess and fraud will never change under the current paradigm, where the very characteristics that help people climb into positions of power also predisposes them to they very types of despicable, fraudulent behavior (presumably) examined in this doc.
punishing the behaviour won’t fix the problem, because it’s like putting a band-aid on cancer; nothing will ever change in the world of high-stakes finance until the paradigm governing that world and how it operates shifts away from favouring sociopaths.
There’s nothing ad hominem in the trailer Kleamon, check your logic textbook. I do agree however that the doc looks weak. And the music is the lamest kind of up-tempo muzak.
I would say the arguments that these guys do cocaine and get high priced strippers is an ad hominem attack. Let alone attacking them for what they make and spend. What does that have to do with anything except as a personal attack? These guys are BAD, they do drugs and rent prostitutes that cost A LOT!
I think I saw George “527” Soros in there, probably to add some additional objectivity. š
I wonder if the next doc the No End in Sight crew makes will be called, No Winter Olympics in Sight.
Because as we all know, George Soros is the only human on Earth to use 527 groups.
I’ll give you the strippers and coke thing. The main thing is national-calamity ponzi scheme, however I could see the strippers/coke thing being legitimate if it was characteristic of an industry dominated by self-entitled testosterone junkies (pigs) aged 25-50.
ftr re: the trailer, it’s prostitution that is mentioned in conjunction with cocaine, not strippers. they are not one in the same.
and how exactly is pointing out illegal activity in the context of this documentary an ad hominem attack (cocaine use and prostitution are illegal in the US – except for certain counties in nevada – irregardless of what your personal opinion on such matters)? would it be an ad hominem attack if it was management of the boy scouts of america engaged in the same illegal activities? ‘hookers & blow’ may be a boring cliche in this arena’s culture of excess, but pointing out illegal activity is entirely pertinent to examining the matter at hand, one of many indications of a gross sense of entitlement and a cavalier attitude to flaunting the law inherent to the culture of excess under scrutiny.
In terms of $, Soros is likely the king of 527s. No matter. I was just taking a playful dig. Jeff, your contribution is invaluable, as always. š
Leah – ‘hookers & blow’ may be a boring cliche in this arena’s culture of excess, but pointing out illegal activity is entirely pertinent to examining the matter at hand, one of many indications of a gross sense of entitlement and a cavalier attitude to flaunting the law inherent to the culture of excess under scrutiny.
So if I finance a docu about Hollywood, and all I do is focus on Don Simpson as the poster boy, that’s fair to all?
Yeah, defend these sociopathic masters of the universe that have been fucking us for decades.
Drugs, prostitutes, taking huge risks with other people’s money, and high priced yachts; are we talking about Congress or are we talking Wall Street Bankers? Or are we talking about a general world of CEO’s or film producers or…
The point being, these charactistics may give us detail about the personalities and private lives of those behind Wall Street, but it doesn’t give us insight into the financial collapse. To me, it’s a personal attack. It’s the equivalent of saying, “The Germans lost World War II because they were power hungry, testosterone fueled, sexual deviants, who thought they owned the world. And they spent a lot of money on private villas too.”
Two other points
– Is it not ironic that Eliot Spitzer is one of the first talking heads here and he also was caught using high priced prostitutes?
– Why point out that these guys paid lots of money for prostitues? If you had millions of dollars why wouldn’t you use high priced prostitues? You pay more for everything when you have more money. “They hire personal chefs too!”
Christian stared into the abyss and the abyss stared back.
It’s a basic point. I could hand you a docu about a dozen Wall Streeters who have nothing in common with these people and deal with massive amounts of wealth. Some of them are the financiers of the studio system and that’s the irony; these people are keeping a majority of employed industry people, working. If they walked away the system becomes more dependent on foreign money, like Abu Dhabi Media and the Sauds.
my impression is that this doc (haven’t seen it which i already stated) focuses on a specific group of the major wall street players/self-appointed demigods who gambled dangerously big and royally fucked over the public with their sociopathic entitlement and greed – and the one man on record on camera specifically says ‘they’ in relation to the use of drugs and prostitutes, indicating more than one man – so i’m not sure how an analogy to a doc about one man in hollywood as representational of all hollywood is apt.
not that long ago i read a piece about several women who were trying to break into the smarmy boy’s club of wall street, in which the everyday, routine practice of making deals in strip clubs, offering women as playthings and drugs to overwhelmingly male clients as commonplace incentives provided a seedy glimpse into what would appear to be one of many systemic problems with the way wall street operates on a routine basis.
“Why point out that these guys paid lots of money for prostitues? If you had millions of dollars why wouldn’t you use high priced prostitues? You pay more for everything when you have more money”
are you for real?
I’ll light a candle for Wall Street tonight.
The doc is not about those other people — it’s about the ones that wield great power and abuse it. Which affects our economy. You included. There’s no cap on their greed or power. Must every story be qualified with, “Oh but not everybody does this. Just these few bad apple giants of Wall Street…
Bullshit. Doesn’t affect me WHATSOEVER, don’t give a shit. More power to ’em. Couldn’t care less… I’m not locking my car doors because I’m worried Bernie Madoff’s gonna jack my 1990 cassette player.
Plus drugs and hookers as currency = AWESOME.
THE AMERICAN DREAM. You’re all making HIGH FINANCE sound a lot more awesome than the boring shit I think of… Anywhere where they’re swapping hookers and coke for favors = YEP YEP. GOOD IDEAS.
If my FUCKING JOB would pay me in hookers and coke, I’d never issue a single complaint.
RICH PEOPLE RULE. And HONESTLY? POOR PEOPLE cost any and all of you MORE MONEY than any Wall Street swindlers. 30% of your paycheck going NOT TO BAILOUTS, but to a bunch of welfare plans and BULLSHIT that you’ll never see a penny of.
TEA PARTY POWER.
OH, and HOLD ON TO YOUR SEATS (usage of ON TO not ONTO verified via Chicago Manual Of Style), because I’M ABOUT TO DROP THE HOOK:
Go ask some actual poor people if they want equality and fairness and Socialism. Go ask some ACTUAL POOR PEOPLE if they want their wealth capped, or if they aspire to be MIDDLE CLASS.
FUCK NO. They want to be rich. Poor people are the biggest Capitalists in America.
It’s only privileged white college kids of all ages who want to EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD.
GET RICH OR DIE TRYIN’ YEP YEP.
LITTLE CAESAR POWER.
How come you don’t drop that TEA PARTY POWER over at HE? Oh, we know why.
Because it’s disingenuous, and because you don’t post at HE (least not above board, “animal bones”), and it was mainly for your benefit.
For me? So you are a socialist!
That makes no sense whatsoever.
Also you seem to have this fevered obsession about my posting stylings here vs HE. Like I have the secret handshake with Wells or something. My inbox and countless emails RANTING at me about how I should never mention feet again, ever, say otherwise.
(Seriously, of the ZILLIONS of stupid things I rant about here, HE, Twitter, Kenny’s, your blog, anywhere, that could conceivably annoy JW, really the only complaint I ever get from him is DON’T TALK ABOUT FEET!)
I’m a pretty liberal guy, but I just can’t get all that excited about a 90-minute greatest hits of the worst of the greedy financial industry dudes. I feel like I’ve been reading all about this for at least a couple years now. I’m already mad.
“these people are keeping a majority of employed industry people, working. If they walked away the system becomes more dependent on foreign money, like Abu Dhabi Media and the Sauds.”
Martin S are you saying they might…go Galt?
And is that a nice whiff of islamophobia I detect in there? Money is money, if the towel heads want to move in on hollywood I’m sure they’ll be welcomed with open arms.
“Martin S. Laughed.”