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
Just finished watching “A Life in Pictures” without realizing the significance of the date. Such a spooky but wonderful coincidence. Spot-on post Noah.
I was going to watch Lyndon again in honour but I think I’ll wait until the bluray comes out (is there a more anticipated release this year? Not bloody likely!).
No matter how shitty the world seems to be these days we’ve always got Kubrick’s movies with us. The films themselves will never leave you feeling better about the world or humankind in general. But if you are a person who subscribes to the religion of the cinema, his films will always make you feel better about living in a world where watching these films is possible. And that is a valuable thing.
“The films themselves will never leave you feeling better about the world or humankind in general. But if you are a person who subscribes to the religion of the cinema, his films will always make you feel better about living in a world where watching these films is possible. And that is a valuable thing.”
Very well said.
Everyone in the world knows that Damon and Affleck didn’t fully write “Good Will Hunting”. The article in ‘Premiere’ by William Goldman was a joke, but a true joke. They wrote parts of it, and they got help. How many scripts in Hollywood actually remain intact when they are hitting the screen?
Damon is obviously the better actor, but was that ever a shock or a surprise to anyone?
Why do people care so much about what directors that actors work with as well? Mark Wahlberg was still Marky-Mark until he made “Boogie Nights”. But Paul Thomas Anderson was a nobody until he made that movie. There are a ton of directors and actors out there that make great movies, and they never see the time of day, because people in the movie industry sit around and complain about the careers of Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. Let me tell you-they don’t give a shit-so you probably shouldn’t either.
huh
every year another Kubrick film becomes my “the best Kubrick film” … for a few it was Paths of Glory, then Dr. Strangelove … then Clockwork Orange … then 2001 … then parts of Eyes Wide Shut .. then Dr. Strangelove, Then The Killing on a double bill with Killer’s Kiss, then … Dr. Strangelove ….
to go off on a Damon Affleck riiff during a Kubrick rant is like ordering a burger with stilton cheese well done with no mustard at a three star gourmet restaurant