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
Wow. The studios need to release films, that will something make some serious money with the quickness. Also, Entourage had something of an audience, for like two minutes. These things happen, because some people view those characters are rich entitled douchebags. It is what it is, but Melissa McCarthy and Paul Feig aren’t looking to hot right now either. Sure. Insidious probably peaked on Friday, but if it doesn’t? Not good. Not good at all.
Am the only one who thinks SPY is overrated? It’s fine for what it is, good cast, some amusing bits, surprisingly effective action scenes… But 95% on Rotten Tomatoes?
I really liked it, but it’s not as good as BRIDESMAIDS. And this opening is quite good JS. Right in between THE HEAT and BRIDESMAIDS. $150 million seems like a good bet for the 3rd straight Feig/McCarthy movie.
The INSIDIOUS opening is also very good for a movie that felt like a money grab with Wan/Wilson/Byrne departing. Better in terms of quality than I expected….better than #2.
And the Love & Mercy opening is okay! We’ll just have to see if it can leg it to $10 million given the arthouse stampede about to happen.
TESTAMENT OF YOUTH….really good.
Definitely not as good as BRIDESMAIDS… But much better than THE HEAT, so there’s that.
LOVE & MERCY is amazing. Paul Dano and John Cusack deserve Oscar nominations.
I was actually pleasantly surprised by “Spy.”
Thought it was easily Feig’s best to date (including “Bridesmaids” which I thought was a tad overrated, and “The Heat” which I flat-out loathed).
For the first time, I experienced a glimmer of hope that Feig’s “Ghostbusters” reboot might not be as godawful as I’d feared.
Agree that “Chapter 3” was much better than it needed to be.
Of course, I don’t remember a thing about the two previous chapters, so I’ll probably forget I even saw this one before Labor Day, lol.
“Love + Mercy” deserves all of its critical huzzahs. Hope it evinces some decent legs as the summer progresses.
Anxious to see “Testament”–it doesn’t open here until mid-July, though.
Having (mostly) enjoyed “Entourage” during its HBO run, I’m guessing my ehhh reaction to the movie is another instance where something that worked just fine in half-hour increments loses something (a lot actually) expanded to feature length.
Methinks its best days are already behind it b.o.-wise.
BRIDESMAIDS had a lot of the same qualities, for me, of recent straight female comedies until the final act in which it became a surprisingly workable zeitgeist statement on inequality and trying to keep up with the joneses that elevated it a bit. Wiig’s work since then (Hateship Loveship, Skeleton Twins, Welcome to Me) continues to have those tinges of commentary that THE HEAT lacked. That was also a feature of Apatow circa 8+ years ago with KNOCKED UP and SUPERBAD before subtlety became a thing of the past for him.
SPY you can read as a gleeful feminist send-up of CIA-centric comedies so it kind of falls in the middle.
Kinda happy with Spy underperforming. Sure it’s alright. It’s got some laughs but only reason it is 95% on RT is political issues.The people have spoken and it’s no different then Identity Thief.
I worried there might be somewhat limited appeal for “L&M.”
Hell, “Entourage”‘s per-screen was nearly identical yesterday, despite being on 2,600+ more screens.
Roadside should have really platformed it on the coasts first to create some buzz.
Guess it’s too late now.
Why is any one surprised about Entourage….was there really a clamor for this movie??? I had been thinking that Warners was cannibalizing themselves with all of these back-to-back-to-back releases and it looks like this one was the biggest victim. Of all of the HBO-to-movie adaptations, I don’t get why this received priority…..they unfortunately missed their window on The Sopranos a couple of years back and I hope this does NOT deter them from moving forward with Game of Thrones because THAT needs to happen. Seriously just watch that last episode – I know the show gets some pretty hefty financial support, but it’s just SCREAMING out for a bigger budget and a feature-length version. Maybe in 2017 after the supposed last season has aired?
Spy is a damn funny movie as was The Heat….I don’t get the rapidly brewing backlash against McCarthy. Is this really THAT much different from the late ’80’s run of Eddie Murphy, the mid ’90’s run of Jim Carrey, or the mid 00’s run of Will Ferrell??? They had a few years to ride their shtick and collect some big steady paychecks….why are so many folks faulting her for doing the same? Spy is probably underperforming a bit but it will likely clearly $120 million domestic and probably gross more overseas than her other recent films.
Any predictions on Jurassic World? Iffy sign that early reviews haven’t been allowed with barely a week before release….but the marketing has been top notch. I can see $110 million opening hopefully clearing $300 million domestic – $1 billion worldwide is what Universal is hoping for and it’s going to be hard to spin if they go far below that.
I am a little surprised at Spy underperforming. I haven’t seen the demographics breakdown but it seems like this movie needed 25+ males to show up and maybe not enough of them did.
Warner releasing three guy skewing films in 4 weeks seems like its insane and self sabotaging. ENTOURAGE should have been a fall movie and MAX could have used some space before SAN ANDREAS.
P.J.- No director has benefited more from H’wood’s (and male movie critics’) guilt over perceived misogyny in the film industry than Paul Feig.
While I think he was (wildly) overpraised for “Bridesmaids” and (especially) “The Heat,” he does good work here.
Maybe it’s a case of diminished expectations. I went in expecting a lame 007 spoof like the ones that proliferated in the mid-to-late 1960s, and was pleasantly surprised.
Yeah, it’s 15 minutes too long and could have certainly done without the projectile vomiting and rodents (flying and otherwise), but I had a much better than than at any of Feig’s previous films.
If if had actually been made in the ’60s, Totie Fields would have played McCarthy’s role (w/ Rod Taylor and David McCallum as the male spies), lol.
Yeah, Entourage should have been bumped. The next 2 weeks only see 2 wide releases – Jurassic Park and Inside Out. Either one of those weekends would work better. How come nobody is trying to counter-program either of those two? Put Man from UNCLE on the 19th or something.
Wish ‘Pigeon’ were heading to a theater near me.
Wasn’t “Entourage” originally slated to open opposite “Jurassic”?
Now that would have been a bloodbath.
But opening opposite the Pixar on the 19th? Might have worked (a little) better on that date.
Really strange how there are so few movies opening in June, and way too many in July and (especially) August.
@dino, DOPE is counter-programming, and I’d expect a fast and dirty expansion for “Me and Earl” if it performs as expected.
@john, Warners is opening MAX at the end of this month. Oh wait, you meant MAD MAX, not the doggie/kiddie film dropping a week after INSIDE OUT speaking of WB cannibalizing itself;)
I think the 95% on RT thing is very interesting because it doesn’t mean it’s great, but just that 95% of critics thought it was okay or better.
The actual meaning of something like RT vs perception is fascinating.
Michael Sragow posted a rave for SPY on filmcomment.com that whet my appetite for it even more than the McCarthy/Statham/Byrne combo already had.
“I can see $110 million opening hopefully clearing $300 million domestic” (re jurrasic world)
“hopefully” why geoff? it’s the devil (if satan was very middling remakes made with all the soul, creativity and storytelling flair of a box of sugar cereal)
‘spy’ is a hoot
Entourage opened about as well as expected. It’s a pretty funny comedy, by it has a limited audience, and the last two seasons were so-so. It wasn’t a cultural phenomenon like Sex and the City was.
I don’t get all the Paul Feig hate. “The Heat” was a funny movie. “Bridesmaids” was a funny movie. I’ve probably laughed out loud during 10 movies in the last 10 years and I just named two of them above. With comedies he’s one of the few directors even fucking trying? Who else is doing better really? If Spy underperformed it was the stiff competition from similar date movies. I do’t think the trailer did a good job selling what the movie was about either.
JS– what happened to Entourage being some huge hit? It was the “it” show after all, right?!