By Ray Pride

James Wan Hires Michael Clear to Head Production Company Atomic Monster

James Wan today announced the hiring of Michael Clear to head his Atomic Monster production company.  Clear will oversee day-to-day operations reporting directly to Wan.

“Michael is a great addition to the Atomic Monster team,” said Wan.  “Michael is a savvy decision-maker and a dynamic executive.  He and I have a similar taste in films and I’m looking forward to working with him to jump start our production slate.”

Clear added, “I am excited to have the opportunity to work with and learn from James, whose keen instincts, resourcefulness and creative vision have consistently won over audiences around the world.”

James Wan’s most recent movie as director was Furious 7, which grossed over $1.5 billion in box office revenue worldwide.  He serves as producer on Insidious: Chapter 3 which was released on June 5.  Wan will next direct THE CONJURING 2 for New Line.

Michael Clear most recently served as a Vice President at Scott Stuber’s Bluegrass Films, where he worked on projects including Safe House, A Million Ways To Die In The West, and the upcoming Matthew McConaughey starrer The Free State Of Jones.  Clear is also no stranger to genre films, having set up and developed Bird Box, the highly-touted psychological thriller adapted by Eric Heisserer, which Andy Muschietti is attached to direct at Universal.

About Atomic Monster

James Wan set up Atomic Monster to develop and produce branded film and television projects across all genres and budget ranges. Annabelle was the first film produced under the banner and grossed over $252 million worldwide.

\In addition, Atomic Monster has a production deal with New Line through which it will develop and produce modestly budgeted films from thrillers to science fiction, action, horror, and comedy.



Be Sociable, Share!

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