By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

“Three weeks ago I looked at it with Wong Kar-wai. We restored it a little bit, and we were laughing all the time. We had wonderful memories of the process. We shot it fast and in a way that has a big energy to it. It was ad hoc and improvised in many situations. We were shooting in the middle of the busiest part of Hong Kong. We had to get what we could and not what we wanted sometimes. Every time we shot a scene with Faye, she would just walk off set and get into her car. Because she thought she’d done her job. But that is not how films works. We’re not Stanley Kubrick. We don’t do 50 takes for everything. But sometimes you need to have another look at what’s going on. But to Faye it was like, ‘What do you want? I’m here. I’m Faye Wong and this is what you get.’ I thought it was quite refreshing. Like, ‘Fuck you! You want me? This is what I can give you.’ Sometimes that is the right attitude. Instead of getting obsessed with this and that.”

Posted Friday, July 26th, 2019 - Comments Off on “Three weeks ago I looked at it with Wong Kar-wai. We restored it a little bit, and we were laughing all the time. We had wonderful memories of the process. We shot it fast and in a way that has a big energy to it. It was ad hoc and improvised in many situations. We were shooting in the middle of the busiest part of Hong Kong. We had to get what we could and not what we wanted sometimes. Every time we shot a scene with Faye, she would just walk off set and get into her car. Because she thought she’d done her job. But that is not how films works. We’re not Stanley Kubrick. We don’t do 50 takes for everything. But sometimes you need to have another look at what’s going on. But to Faye it was like, ‘What do you want? I’m here. I’m Faye Wong and this is what you get.’ I thought it was quite refreshing. Like, ‘Fuck you! You want me? This is what I can give you.’ Sometimes that is the right attitude. Instead of getting obsessed with this and that.”
Be Sociable, Share!

“Three weeks ago I looked at it with Wong Kar-wai. We restored it a little bit, and we were laughing all the time. We had wonderful memories of the process. We shot it fast and in a way that has a big energy to it. It was ad hoc and improvised in many situations. We were shooting in the middle of the busiest part of Hong Kong. We had to get what we could and not what we wanted sometimes. Every time we shot a scene with Faye, she would just walk off set and get into her car. Because she thought she’d done her job. But that is not how films works. We’re not Stanley Kubrick. We don’t do 50 takes for everything. But sometimes you need to have another look at what’s going on. But to Faye it was like, ‘What do you want? I’m here. I’m Faye Wong and this is what you get.’ I thought it was quite refreshing. Like, ‘Fuck you! You want me? This is what I can give you.’ Sometimes that is the right attitude. Instead of getting obsessed with this and that.”

 

 

Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in MCN Curated Headlines, Movie City News | Comments Off on “Three weeks ago I looked at it with Wong Kar-wai. We restored it a little bit, and we were laughing all the time. We had wonderful memories of the process. We shot it fast and in a way that has a big energy to it. It was ad hoc and improvised in many situations. We were shooting in the middle of the busiest part of Hong Kong. We had to get what we could and not what we wanted sometimes. Every time we shot a scene with Faye, she would just walk off set and get into her car. Because she thought she’d done her job. But that is not how films works. We’re not Stanley Kubrick. We don’t do 50 takes for everything. But sometimes you need to have another look at what’s going on. But to Faye it was like, ‘What do you want? I’m here. I’m Faye Wong and this is what you get.’ I thought it was quite refreshing. Like, ‘Fuck you! You want me? This is what I can give you.’ Sometimes that is the right attitude. Instead of getting obsessed with this and that.”

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