MCN Blogs

By DP30

DP/30: Scorsese on The Wolf of Wall Street

Be Sociable, Share!

8 Responses to “DP/30: Scorsese on The Wolf of Wall Street”

  1. lazarus says:

    I imagine getting Marty has been near the top of DP’s want list since this series began. Congrats on making this happen, and nice work steering the conversation.

    One could easily listen to another hour. Great stuff. Especially the quiet defense of his position w/r/t Wolf’s morality without sounding like he’s obligated to.

  2. The Pope says:

    Congratulations David. An interview long awaited, much anticipated and gratefully received. And fittingly, one of your best! Downloaded it from YouTube. One for replay and replay and replay. Molte, molte, molte grazie!

  3. jon says:

    So good.

  4. EtGuild2 says:

    Amazing. Bravo.

  5. Pcchongor says:

    This is definitely the best sit down interview with Scorsese that I’ve ever seen. Sundance is nuts for missing out on DP/30 this year.

    As a side note: Attaching a short, “Thank you for watching and here’s where to donate/support the channel” bit onto the end of every video would probably work better than putting up an entirely separate Kickstarter page.

  6. djiggs says:

    Congratulations on this DP30 accomplishment!!! I love how the interview illuminated the inner workings of Scorsese’s thought process outside of his usual referencing of film lore. I knew his age in life and the fact that he has a young daughter influences his work ethic now but to see how his height can still affect his level of comfort with big budget filmmaking was both hilarious and endearing. If I had an vote for best Director Oscar, my mind goes with McQueen but if Mr. Scorsese wins his his 2nd Best Director Oscar I would be very happy because that is where my soul is. P.S.-Did you let him know about seeing the early workprint of Gangs of New York from 2001 with Mr. Wells? I asked about you previously on 2011 DP30 chat with Thelma Schoonmaker and you said no at the time. Congratulations again!

  7. djiggs says:

    Happy 50th Birthday to Nic Cage and congratulations to 2013 DGA Nominees!

  8. arisp says:

    Great stuff DP.

The Hot Blog

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