By David Poland

Exclusive MCN Clip – The Lottery

Be Sociable, Share!

3 Responses to “Exclusive MCN Clip – The Lottery”

  1. I am not opposed to Charter Schools. I am opposed to using testing as the criteria for determining what makes a “good school”. All of these kids should have the right to a free excellent Public Education. Charter Schools are great if they are small, and focus on the needs of each individual child. A school that neglects play, the arts, and free choice is not “a school” it is a factory, teaching to a test. Go to the model schools – both public and private – and make all of our schools work for each student. Don’t bring in private “for profit” groups, who have no experience in teaching or Child Growth & Development. These are not the State’s Children, they are our children, and parents need all the support we can give them. No Child Left Behind was never funded properly. It made many promises, but never delivered the funds. The text books, made by BIG CORPORATIONS, are full of lies and inaccurate Science. Why must they be used??? The children are our future – it is criminal that they must be in a lottery to get a good Education.

  2. Tim says:

    Actually the higher performing charter schools are generally run by experienced educators, and most are non-profit. What seems to work well is when states have strong authorizing procedures that close down the schools that are not performing well – this ensures that only the high-performing ones remain open.

    Hopefully some day The Lottery will be irrelevant because there are so many great schools that we don’t even have lotteries! In the meantime, it’s awesome that a film tells the story of real families dealing with this problem.

  3. Jessica Rodrigues says:

    It’s awesome to see an independent film like The Lottery as an awards contender!! Especially alongside some bigger budget films. I saw it mentioned here too:

    I’m torn about the political side of things but at least these films are starting some really important discussions..

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