By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Gilt Home to Sell Authentic Props from Ang Lee’s “Life of Pi”

Posted Tuesday, November 20th, 2012 - Comments Off on Gilt Home to Sell Authentic Props from Ang Lee’s “Life of Pi”
Be Sociable, Share!

NEW YORK, November 15, 2012 – Gilt.com the innovative online shopping destination, and Twentieth Century Fox Film have collaborated to offer fans a chance to own a piece of cinematic history. On November 19, 2012, starting at noon ET, Gilt HOME will exclusively sell authentic props from Academy Award®-winning director Ang Lee’s highly anticipated film, Life of Pi.

With Life of Pi, director Ang Lee creates a groundbreaking movie event about a young man who survives a disaster at sea and is hurtled into an epic journey of adventure and discovery. While cast away, he forms an amazing and unexpected connection with another survivor…a fearsome Bengal tiger.  The film takes us through a young man’s incredible adventure – at turns thrilling and spiritual; harrowing and triumphant; humorous and inspirational. Mr. Lee’s vision, coupled with stunning 3D visuals, has turned a novel long thought un-filmable into a thrillingly audacious mix of grand storytelling and powerful and provocative themes.
The sale will feature over 37 props from the set including:
Pi’s 25-foot lifeboat, $40,000: The lifeboat sets the stage for most of the film, as Pi, played by actor Suraj Sjarma, spent a total of 227 days at sea with it.
“The Making of Life of Pi” Hardcover Book signed by Director Ang Lee, $200: Get the inside story of how renowned Academy Award®-winning director Ang Lee brought the Yann Martel’s international bestseller to life as a 3-D film. The books are signed by Ang Lee himself, and are beautifully illustrated with 275 stunning photographs and illustrations.
Saris & Jewelry, $400-$1,200: In Pi’s flashbacks, the women are draped in the jewelry and saris in rich vibrant hues from purples and golds to bright reds, magentas, oranges and deep turquoises that are worn by various characters throughout the film.
Faux Turtle Shell, $3,400: When out at sea, struggling for survival, Pi uses this hollowed out (faux) sea turtle shell offering some sense of civilization to his experience.
Tiled Stool, $1,200: This intricately tiled stool/table is taken from Pi’s home in India.
In addition, Ang Lee has chosen to donate the proceeds from the authentic prop sale to the Orangutan Foundation International, after his inspirational experience visiting the facility while doing research for the film, Life of Pi (http://www.orangutan.org/). To become a member of Gilt.com and access these special sales, please log onto www.gilt.com/lifeofpi
***
About Gilt 
Gilt, www.gilt.com, is an innovative online shopping destination offering its members special access to the most inspiring merchandise, culinary offerings, and experiences every day, many at insider prices. Gilt continually searches the world for the most coveted brands and products, including fashion for women, men, and children; home decor; artisanal ingredients; hotels and travel experiences on every continent; and unique activities in a growing list of cities and destinations. We believe that every day is an opportunity to inspire and be inspired.
About Fox Filmed Entertainment
One of the world’s largest producers and distributors of motion pictures, Fox Filmed Entertainment produces, acquires and distributes motion pictures throughout the world. These motion pictures are produced or acquired by the following units of FFE: Twentieth Century Fox, Fox 2000 Pictures, Fox Searchlight Pictures, Fox International Productions, and Twentieth Century Fox Animation.
Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in Movie City News, Press Releases | Comments Off on Gilt Home to Sell Authentic Props from Ang Lee’s “Life of Pi”

Comments are closed.

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