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
I hate myself for being so curious about what this story will be all about. Damn celebrity gossip. Sometimes I can’t help myself.
Since DP won’t spill the beans . . . let the guessing game commence!
Dave, stop being so glib. You don’t know the history of Tom Cruise, okay. There’s a history behind all this. You haven’t done the research. I have.
Now I’m curious too. Why bother posting this story at all, DP? Just to say you knew it before it hit? If that’s the case, break it here.
I’d love to hear it here but oh well….
On a side note I am looking forward to MI 3. Because of JJ Abrams. He is a genuis. Yes, a genuis.
What is this, Defamer? What’s up with the blind items, Poland Casablanca?
Damn.
I actually quite like Tom Cruise and to be blunt I think he is getting a bit of a bad rap (although I obviously do not know what is forthcoming). Is what he is doing ‘out there where the buses don’t run’? Sure.
Is it worse than any of the Kaballah-heads who seem to be getting off scott free?
Is it worse than any of the big stars who go onto foreign soil and bash America, call Bush Hitler or Americans stupid?
No. But of course, they too get a media pass (and Oscars to boot).
Unfortunately I think part of Tom’s problem is that to the public, for so long he came across as one of the ‘non-loco’ celebrity types who was grounded and down to earth. Why else would major directors want to work with him (Spielberg, Kubrick, Scorsese).
I hope this upcoming story is not too bad. I do like Tom and he has a great cinematic track record.
Finally:
“As I always have said about Ms. Lohan… “whore” is not a problem… “white trash” is a disaster.”
Of course…because in Hollywood, ‘whore’ connotes Democrat and ‘white trash’ connotes Republican.
Sorry…I couldn’t resist and think that subconsciously, there is probably a little truth in it.
Whores, Scientologists, rapists, kid touchers, mudereres they’re all accepted in Hollywood if they can make other people money. Once they can’t, they’re gone. They have no morals there. If OJ Simpson could open a movie, he’d be working today.
If some producer thought they could add a few million to their bottom line on his back, OJ would be working today.
You know, Nicol D, I’m not sure that politics are a very happy topic on these pages, but there is some truth to what you say, not quite as specifically though. “White trash” is “them” nd “whore” is “us” in this town. Of course, that is also way too simple. It really comes down to not wanting to be judged. People often defend their behavior by poining to others accepting it.
Sexualizing teens is the norm here. Being cheesey is horrifying. The irony of Paris Hilton is that she mocks “middle America” on her TV show while behaving like the personification of “trailer trash.” The Whore Debutant is soooo Hollywood.
But no, not really political. But I would argue that very little of politics – particularly left wing politics – is political these days, but rather very personal. The principles of the left are more mainstream than ever, but the failure of the movement as of late has been the focus on the personal, which can be very important, but is not good politics. With both parties moviing towards the middle, the Democrat focus on the fringe – especially in Hollywood – has allowed the Republicans to own the middle, which allows “them” to move their fringe issues closer to the mainstream.
This again speaks to why the NC-17 doesnt work… because the studios don’t really want it to work. It is fringe. Fringe is not good business. It is also where some great artists really stretch. And that is our deep, sad loss.
i have always enjoyed Tom’s movies…but of late, he’s been acting like a total butt-nut. I mean, jumping around on Oprah’s show and then tweaking-out with Brooke Shields…he’s got a screw loose…or maybe, just maybe, we all don’t know SHIT about his personal life and it’s all media garbage…but hey, one never really does know the absolute truth…still, I’m VERY curious to see what this new story is gonna be all about…
If they made Naked Gun 4 with OJ on board, I’d pay to see it. That’d be damned surreal, if anything else.
Naked Gun 444 1/4th.
Nordberg (OJ Simpson) is framed for the murder of his ex-wife. It’s up to the Police Squad (Leslie Neilsen and George Kennedy) to find the identity of the real killer.
Naked Gun CD (Cutting Device)
naked gun 4444. nordbergs evil twin did it.
Dave, it seems annoyingly coy and hypocritical for you to tell everyone there’s a story coming but not to tell the story. It would have been better for you to avoid the subject altogether if your intention was to stay above the fray, not to get everybody’s imaginations working overtime. What purpose was served by your non-story story?
Nicol D, project much?
I know from experience all you have to do is find a small town outside of any large city & you will “white trash” (for me, it was upstate New York when I went to school in NYC) and “whore” can bring to mind “Whore for oil buddies” and Shrub’s visage in my mind’s eye.
As to Tom Cruise, I’m just waiting for the day when he so self-destructs that the media goes back to calling Scientology a cult instead of a religion.
my guess: tom cruise going to perform sex change surgery on larry wachowski.
The purpose was to get some reactions. And it looks like its working.
You gossip whores.
Will this story be as huge as the Wachowski Brothers turning into a brother and sister combo story you “broke” a few years ago? What ever happened with that anyway…
I NEED TO KNOW THE ANSWER NOW!!!
I NEED MY $3.50 CUPCAKE NOW!!!!
If they don’t want OJ as Nordberg for another Naked Gun, maybe they could recast the role with Robert Blake, if Blake isn’t too busy.
Dave, who doesn’t have a Media Giant underwriting his contract/legal costs/insurance doesn’t have to (and probably shouldn’t) break stories about individual personages who have expensive litiginous teams behind them who scream libel at every press release. Whether it could even be considered libel doesn’t matter, it still can be expensive if Bert wants to make it so. Why bother. It’ll be on page six.
There are some people like Cruise, Spacey and a couple others who have long histories that could work against their careers as leading men. Maybe TC thinks he can’t be harmed by it at this stage. Guess again.
TC should have never given P Kingsley the heave ho. He’s having some gargantuan midlife crisis…
All the press who got screwed over by PMK are now loving the chance to attack Tom Cruise.
“Andy Dick must be straight because he was hitting on Katie Holmes.”
Does Tom even know hes doing more harm than good to his “religion”?
Dave, since no one else has asked: Am I correct in putting two and two together here, and that TC has allegedly made some critical remark where he placed LL and “white trash” together in the same statement?
It sure looks that way Chester. Otherwise, why mention Lohan, whore and white trash?
If that’s the case, you can already hear the damage-control spin: “Hey, I’m not criticizing anyone for acting like white trash. I come from what could be called white trash myself…”
That can’t be it. Him calling her ‘white trash’ is barely news and not worthy of this amount of speculation.
Lohan must have spurned his advances before he moved on to Holmes.
Of course it’s news. He would be engaging in yet another senseless dispute with a celebrity, and he would be using a derogatory term that happens to fit a large segment of his fan base.
It’s pretty weak, certainly not up to the level of the Wachowski sex change, not libelous or slanderous, and I don’t see if this is it why Poland would shy away from posting it. I don’t think Lohan is involved at all. I think she was a metaphor that Poland was cryptically using.
The Cruise-Lohan thing has been around for months now. EVer since he started dating Holmes. He had a list of actresses. Lohan was #3 on the list to date but was crossed off for being too immature. That was covered up by all the talk that she was going to be in MI 3. Or he used the MI 3 gig to gauge their interest in dating him.
It may be some kind of cryptic metaphor or not, which is why I asked in the first place. As for why Dave would shy away from posting it, Lota would be right about Dave very understandably not wanting to take the standard Cruise-missile legal heat for this, expecially not for something Dave probably heard secondhand.
You can’t be in the business and be afraid of some actors “legal heat”.
okay since this has turned into Defamer – I am sitting next to Willem Dafoe in the first class lounge at LAX. He has a totally shaved head (role?) – any questions from the class?
Did he notice you drooling on him and staring for three hours?
Ask him if it was more challenging to play Jesus or keep a straight face while acting alongside Ice Cube.
Live Celeb stalking. Marcia Gay Harden has just arrived with a cute kid – she’s brushing her hair on the seat opposite. Is this creepy or what? No response from Dafoe.
Well, Mark, I suppose you’re entitled to say “if you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen.” But like Lota said, that’s only realistic when you’ve got institutional legal support backing you up. As far as I know, Dave doesn’t have that (even though there’s a chance some First Amendment defenders might volunteer to fund his defense). Unless you’ve got that assurance, you’d have to be out of your mind to just assume the risk of a lawsuit like the one Bert Fields would rain on Dave’s head – especially if you can’t substantiate the story as your own knowledgeable firsthand account.
Ice Cube? What about Madonna?
Her too.
American Dreamz is filming in LA right now, and Dafoe is in it.
LIVE CELEB STALKING: Plenty of salmon and cream cheese at buffet. i’m going to ask him about the rumour of malkovich apparently taking over the direction on SHADOW OF A VAMPIRE… Harden’s kid just fell over and hurt her leg.
LIVE CELEB STALKING – Admirals Club – Entourage’s Jeremy Piven has just walked in and immediately made a joke about Harden’s kid, who’s running up and down the place. There’s astory about Anniston on the TV and everyone stopped to listen.
Congrats, Poland. You’ve made the gossip big time. A link to your Casablanckian blind item from Defamer.
Perhaps you can post pics of Jude Law’s cock tomorrow, just to complete the transformation.
This better be good or poor DP is going to make an ass out of himself for the 2nd time in little over a week.
Tom would tell you to respect the cock!, Wrecktum.
Stop the whining about gossip – you all read it and love it so stop being hypocrites. That being said, isn’t it weird how suddenyl all the PDA with TomKat has virtually disappeared recently – which goes to prove the whole relationsip thing is fake.
Speaking of top stories on Defamer, I’m wondering if Dave is going to bid on the Joel Silver internship that’s currently up for auction on eBay. Gotta be a prank…worth at least a $10 million bid…
Two weeks of being berated and insulted and screamed at by Joel Silver. Sounds like heaven.
You might as well be bidding to be a desk clerk at Russell Crowe’s next hotel stop.
Chester, I want that job. Haha. I need my 15 seconds of fame that badly.
Hey, at least the Crowe gig pays big dividends.
I think Chester just outed himself as Jeff Wells with those Crowe comments. Somebody make sure, bait him with some nice words about George Lucas…
…or Mr. and Mrs. Smith…
Hey Boam’s doctor. LIVE INNOCENT BYSTANDER STALKING & TORTURE is a better name for LAX. I pays my money, I sits there waiting for my flights, trying to think,read, edit, work on my mac, AND worry about plane crashes when Dudes start inane conversations that lead me to ask–“do I know you? Wha? Am I being Punk’D!?”
I find out later from other airport dwellers they are on a show.
LAX is
a)a live bacterial culture growing on time-lapse digitized film.
b)like being trapped in an episode of PUNK’D that doesn’t end.
c) B-C-D List stalkers’ shopping market
***d)all of the above.***
Why don’t these dudes just do what Tom does and have their agents get them a social life. Works for him!
Even Dave no longer believes I’m Jeff Wells. And for the record, I don’t agree at all with Wells’s mostly pro-Crowe stance regarding the whole hotel fiasco. Piss poor service at a ridiculously expensive hotel does not justify an act of assault and battery.
Now, I can tell ya a story about The DoubleMint Twins, Berlin Nightclub Atlanta, Sexual Confusion, A Catholic Priest with a Tampa Scientologist Best Pal, Brainwashing Program, and more, but I never tell it sober. It’s Risky Business.
Jefster,
Wells has twice your wit and a son that would make Hansel jealous.
I go to Defamer for gossip. I come here for cheesy comments that try to come off as witticisms.
Well… the public face of Cruise & Holmes is behind the walls of production right now. That doesn’t prove anything.
Dave if you’re not going to tell us anything juicy you could at least drop the plot to MI3. Give us something to read dammit!
if u want and crave that go to aint it cool news.
Be happy, DP. You made Defamer today and you’re fully quoted. Congrats. You have made the big time.
I had heard rumors (read lots of gossip sites, pathetic aren’t I:) awhile back that a huge rumor was about to break concerning Tom. So he made the girl list and picked Katie Holmes and made a public spectacle out of himself to help defuse and to be able to refute said rumor. I never heard what the rumor was but assumed it had something to do with his sexuality thus the big show of being in love with Katie. If true it makes sense why he was so public about his love for katie and making a spectacle out of himself. It has to be a really really good story if what I’ve read is true.
Dave P.
I agree with much of what you said in the abstact especially about how modern Hollywood is about ‘sexualizing teens’ etc. I won’t push any more political points however…even though I know how much ‘fun’ those discussions can be.
I note this though:
“This again speaks to why the NC-17 doesnt work… because the studios don’t really want it to work. It is fringe. Fringe is not good business. It is also where some great artists really stretch. And that is our deep, sad loss.”
I have had conflicting views about NC-17 in recent years. Obviously I believe there should be a workable adult rating. I think AMC not showing a film like ‘The Aristocrats’, while not censorship per se…is silly and pointless; although it is their right to be.
However, in the 17 odd years since NC-17, I have not encountered that many films rated as such that I think were genuinely brilliant and I always question the need of an ‘artist’ to ‘demand’ that extra 2 frames of ‘thrust action’ or ‘spattered blood’.
Counting frames or seconds may be silly on the part of the MPAA, but it also seems equally so on the part of the ‘artist’/director….especially when the modern R gets away with so much.
Would truly adult films like Goodfellas, Schindler’s List or The Passion of the Christ be any more effective with just a little bit more blood?
I saw Bertolucci’s The Dreamers in it’s uncut form and found it to be tedious, pretentious and juvenile. The amount of nudity did not help me think the filmmaker was ‘enlightened’.
I think modern filmmakers bang the ol’ MPAA drum just a tad too much nowadays and tend to want to use excessive sex or violence as a crutch.
I no longer equate graphic sex or violence with adult. PG-13 films like ‘In Good Company’ or ‘Million Dollar Baby’ are more adult than ‘Kill Bill’ or ‘Sin City’…which while most critics eat them up, are little more than cinematic exercises for the ‘Knowles crowd’.
I remember the fuss when David Lynch had to put smoke over 2-3 frames of Willem Dafoe’s head being blown up in ‘Wild at Heart’ to avoid an NC-17. I love that film and seeing two or three extra frames by that point is not going to sway anyone either way. Either the piece works as a whole or it doesn’t.
I’ve seen both versions of ‘Eye’s Wide Shut’ and also love that film. Seeing the extra frames did not make a difference. The film is a much bigger piece than those shots.
Modern director’s can get away with showing more now than at any point in film history and I think more often than not, they use it to the detriment of story and plot. They equate graphicness with adult and while sometimes that may be the case, it is not guarantee of it.
Apparently Atom Egoyan is currently counting ‘thrusts’ so that his new film can avoid the NC-17. I’m sure during the festival there will be plenty of rounds of ‘poor oppressed Atom is under seige by puritanical America’.
Now again, to be clear, I do think there should be more of an acceptance of NC-17 for films that genuinely are.
BUT…if the worth of a film is solely dependant on whether or not the director can have that extra second of some actor’s buttocks thrusting into a starlet on celluloid, I have to wonder if he really did his job.
That just set the record for longest post ever. Congrats on that.
Just post the rumor you have heard. It is technically news since Cruise is the biggest actor and also a big time producer in the industry.
Dave: seriously, either tell the news or don’t post. You come across like you want us to think you’re above all this, but can’t let go of desiring that everyone know that you knew it first.
Nicol, you’re missing the point. It’s not about how much graphic violence or nudity a filmmaker can add to put their film over the top, it’s that artists shouldn’t be restricted (no pun intended). I’m sure Bertolucci wasn’t sitting around thinking, “How hot can I make this thing and really stir up controversy?”
I thought with the release of 9 Songs we’d be past this crap. It’s not ALWAYS about titillation. With someone like Tarantino, yeah, a few extra blood spurts aren’t going to make a difference. But how can you watch Eyes Wide Shut and ignore the black bars each time? It’s ridiculous that someone of Kubrick’s status was forced (or contractually obligated) to mar his films in any way. Especially on the DVD. At least give us the raw version for posterity.
Does Last Tango in Paris have the same effect without Brando’s butter scene, or Maria Schnieder’s masturbation and subsequent sobbing? Perhaps you and others don’t feel these things make a difference, or that The Dreamers was “tedious, pretentious, and juvenile”. Some of us loved it. Some of us loved Henry and June as well, and countless other NC-17 releases.
You talk about Atom Egoyan counting thrusts and then point the finger at him. Yeah, it’s pathetic that he has to do it. But he IS the victim here, whether you like it or not. This society IS sexually repressed and gives much more leeway towards violence on the screen. That’s a fact, not a tired old cliche. And while the merit of a film shouldn’t rest solely on that controversial content, it is ALL part of the art. You can’t separate it, and shouldn’t have to.
Nicol D: I have nothing against Atom counting thrusts, if that’s what it takes to get it under NC-17. He’s an established director with quality films under his belt. While it is sad that he has to count the thrusts (does a few more really make a difference to anyone?), it’s not all that different from having to be aware of running time, swear words, cropping for television screens, etc. If someone’s going to give you millions to make a film, you’re going to have to give up concessions. Plus, better to count now than to have to digitally impose something over it later.
Anyway, that still won’t stop me from saying, “Poor Atom…” because he is being hampered by puritanical America. Let’s all cover up statues of naked Justice before her nakedness traumatizes our children. Just because something is smart business doesn’t mean it’s not also ridiculous.
Dave is just wetting our appetites.
Question. Has any A list star gotten as weird as Cruise has got and will it effect his career? I would have said no last week. But the more he goes batty, the more I think he may lose what he took so long to build.
Bruce –
Hate to have to tell you – since old media won’t – but MCN has more readers than any of the Gawker sites.
Nicol D –
We now live in a self-censoring film world. There are genuinely adult themes and images that are simply left alone because of the realities of teh amrketplace.
You are completely right. The addition or subtraction of a few “extreme” shots is not the difference between art and not-art. (You are wrong, however, about Eyes Wide Shut, whose “orgy” scene made clear that we were not dealing with real sex, as there were various fantasy elements included in the NC-17 images. The lack of these images helped to cause critics to misunderstand what would surely have made more sense had they seen Kubrick’s full vision.)
But the problem with censorship is rarely the specific piece that is censored. Many who disliked Quills were angered by the holding up of the Marquis de Sade as a great writer. But that missed the point. Fear of the “extreme” is usually far more dangerous than the thing that others are being “protected from.”
I doubt there are more than a dozen films a year that would benefit from a working NC-17. But is just one is a masterpiece, how can we be anything less than enraged by the right and entitlement of that opportunity being all but removed from the table.
If Dave doesn’t spill the beans then one can only assume that he wanted to be the guy that gets heat for mentioning that a rumour might be about to break – but didn’t want to follow through and actually state the rumour. Sorta like the guy who yells abuse from a passing train.
Dave,
I don’t doubt that for a second. Old Media/Mainstream Media is fading fast and they don’t even know it yet.
Never assume, JBD… it makes (see: the real Bad News Bears)…
If there was one movie that should never have been remade. The old one is more relevant now than this new one.
“Question. Has any A list star gotten as weird as Cruise has got and will it effect his career?”.
as weird maybe not but Angelina Jolie is a close second with her kissing her brother on the lips at the Oscars and wearing Billy Bob’s blood in a vial on a necklace, etc. but she seems to have survived all the notoriety. Halle Berry did a hit and run but people don’t seem to care or hold that against her. Hugh Grant getting caught with a hooker in a car didn’t affect his career much.
Jolie is too hot and sexy to be crazy. Her edge makes her cool. At least shes not sprouting off about some made up religion.
Dave P. Lazarus and Me.
First off, it is really odd addressing a post to Me.
Re: my comments about NC-17:
The point is, there is no ‘right’ to make films, graphic or not. This seems to be the position that most directors take. That they have a ‘right’ to be heard. Actually they don’t. There is no ‘right’ to make a film, and get it exhibited and distributed to be seen by millions. It is a rare privledge.
If the government clamps down on Egoyan (or any artist/director) because of his film, then he is the victim or censorship and of course I vehemently oppose that. However…the moment he takes millions of dollars from someone/a corporation to make his vision, he is forfeiting any ‘right’. The minute he signs a contract he is obliged to follow it if it requests an R.
Similarly, he can still make the film NC-17; the price is that it won’t be as widely distributed. If there was a ‘right’ to wide distribution (which is what we are talking about) then every indie director who ever picked up a camera would jump to the Heaven’s.
Too often artists forget that freedom of expression goes both ways. The private exhibitor also has the right to program what they wish. That is their right. Sometimes it makes for silly decisions, but it must be respected. Even Penn Jillette has acknowledged this.
Similarly, if one is going to make the argument about self-censoring…that some subjects are just not being dealt with because of the NC-17 being non-workable, then that is valid. But, then to be consistant one must also give creedance to the fact that many subjects are not touched for many reasons…not just because of the MPAA. There are many things going on in our culture right now that are much more taboo to discuss than sex.
Where is the serious film about censorship on university campuses? The serious film about the horrors of Stalinist Russia? The film about the life of Jane Roe? One wouldn’t need an NC-17 to produce these but no one is touching this subject matter and they are all extremely important for our times; regardless of ones ideological view.
Again, I fully agree with the comments that there should be a workable NC-17 rating. But I try to stay neutral and let the director prove himself…or buck up and take the financial hit. If they can’t they should not have signed the contract in the first place.
Dave, as a side note;
I have indeed seen both versions of EWS. I am not sure what fantasy sequences you are referring to?
The version I saw without the cloaked figures showed ‘fantastical’ sexual positions but within the context of the film they were not ‘fantasy’. They were really happening before the Tom Cruise character’s eyes.
Did I miss something?
If I did, please be specific…I certainly respect Kubrick as an artist and would not want to have mis-interpreted what he did. Similarly, according to Cruise, who I will take as a reputable source, Kubrick himself approved/cut the R version. Had it strayed too far from his vision, I would have assumed he would not have.
Radar Magazine cover story?
I agree completely that the idea that there is a right to spend millions of others money to indulge an artistic whim is an illusion.
And while it is true that the NC-17 is hardly the only boundary keeping may adult themed films from being made, it is one of them and it would be nice if it was different. One a year… one a year…
As far as Eyes Wide Shut, both days of Cruise running around town are dream sequences, not reality. The real sequences are at the Pollack party, scenes between the couple, and the final scenes. The orgy is not real, nor is the prostitute, the costume guy, the gay bashers, the jazz club, etc. All in Cruise’s character’s head as he tries to decide whether to maintain his fidelity to his wife.
What is the big deal? Maybe 1 movie a yr gets released NC 17. Filmmakers have a duty to release films that will reach the largest possible audience and NC 17 films don’t do that.
Labelling scenes in Eyes Wide Shut as ‘real’ or ‘fantasy’ imposes unecessary delineations on the movie. Since it’s fiction it’s all fantasy anyway. I think it suffices to say that Cruise enters a dreamlike/internal/psychological reality that may or may not correspond to actual events.
Filmmakers do NOT have a duty to reach the largest possible audience. Their relationship with their producers and financiers dictates the reach of their audience. Otherwise dozens of indie filmmakers would never work again.
When filmmakers sign a contract and get a budget and have investors and money behind them they certainly do have a duty to reach the widest audience. And anyone filmmaker that ever says he doesn’t want to reach the widest possible audience is out of their mind and lying.
I’m sure a producer would love to hear his director say he only wants the smallest possible crowd there. You have said some dumb things before Jeffrey but this takes the cake.
Jim Jarmusch is not expected to reach the same audience as Steven Spielberg. They wouldn’t turn the money down but they have realistic expectations. It’s called a diverse marketplace.
Thanks for calling me dumb, yet again.
Now your into semantics. What dumbass would ever give Jim J a budget of anything over 5 dollars? And Jim J usually uses his own money and is not beholden to anyone. So if he wants 7 people to see his money than thats fine.
But do you really think Jim J makes these movies just for himself and his 9 friends? You don’t think he’d like every moviegoer in the country to at least see the movie he spent all his time and energy and heart on?
Rethink your statement and get back to me. I’ll accept your apology.
It comes down to this. If its a directors own money. He can do whatever the F*&^ he wants to do. If its not your money? Then you better try to reach out and give people a show and make it worth the publics dough. Or you won’t be making picture #2.
It’s not semantics. Your statement from 1:09am, “Filmmakers have a duty to release films that will reach the largest possible audience” is sometimes correct, but is not universally true. There’s a scale from mass-audience Jerry Bruckheimer movies to tiny indies. It’s your blanket statement that needed correction.
I would only apologize, Joe, if there was ever a time when you were right and I was wrong, which has never happened.
I read an interview with Jarmusch last week. He said that he doesn’t make movies for a wide audience and has no desire to. He likes to keep his budgets low and make exactly the kind of movie he wants to make, with no interference. Keeping the budgets low allows him to do that. I’m sure filmmakers like John Sayles would say the same. Their goal is not to reach as wide an audience as possible. And thank God for filmmakers like that. Imagine if the main goal of every single one was to reach a wide audience.
Jeffrey you are wrong the moment everyday you open those bright eyes of yours. You see a different world. You live in fantasy land. Which is nice. Send us postcards sometimes.
Don’t backtrack now, Jeffrey. You’re just getting going. Your blanket statement of(let me quote you so I don’t misquote it and feel the wrath of Chester he he)”Filmmakers do NOT have a duty to reach the largest possible audience.”
It is inherently wrong. Movies are a business. And business’ have to make money. I know in your fantasy land its all about the art and doing what you believe in. That is all well and good but it misses the huge point.
I have met a lot of indie filmmakers. And not one of them would ever turn down the chance to have more money and get their visions shown to wider audiences. So wake up and open those great eyes of yours. Join us, Jeffrey.
joefitz . . . you are wrong in so many ways that it’s not even funny. But somehow I get the feeling you know you’re just being a difficult ass.
Yeah, the producers have a responsibility to the studio heads, who have a responsibility to the shareholders, etc. But would The Dreamers or Henry & June have made more money if they weren’t NC-17? They’re niche films anyway.
Something like Eyes Wide Shut is where it gets tricky. The film was released as an R, but still didn’t make a hell of a lot of money. I could make the case that if it HAD been released unrated or NC-17, people would have been even MORE curious to spy on the real life couple play-acting. I’m not saying it would have made more money, but would it have made much less? Would the overly-whetted appetites of some made up for the drop-off of the prudish?
And by the way, D.P., if those scenes are all fantasies, then where does the mask come from at the end? While I don’t believe that all those scenes are “real”, the guy had to have been doing something in the days following his wife’s confession. Is it possible that he did go to these places, but what happened there was exaggerated in his mind? The woman mourning her dead brother may not have come on to Cruise and professed her love, but it’s likely he did go to his deceased patient’s apartment. Maybe he did go to a private sex party, but imagined all the cultish atmosphere and humiliation in front of the audience.
something for another thread, I guess…from 6 years ago…
Joefitz, I post on here to communicate and share ideas. Most of the time if I disagree with someone we’re able to find common ground, but I have never argued with anyone on this page who had such a firm “I’m right and you’re always wrong” attitude as you, coupled with a general ignorance and lack of taste. I do not want to interact with you anymore.
If you’re a filmmaker why wouldn’t you want every person to see your movie? Regardless of money. Like a band. What band doesn’t want every single person to hear their music?
Joefitz… cut it out… stand down.. you’re just picking a fight, regardless of who is right or wrong…
As for EWS, no, it’s not realistic that he made his journey and just over-imagined. The two days are distinct. Every major event that occurs the first night is reversed on the second night. Every door that is open is then closed and vice versa. If you listen to the dialogue, it is all about him destroying his marriage. The dialogue is as laughable as some said if you think the orgy is in context. Every woman he fantasizes about has blue eyes and hair of a similar color to Nicole’s… the people who want him that he does not want do not. There is blue light in the windows and red drapes all over the place.
Break down the movie and ask yourself why certain scenes are there. If you have better reasons that that they illuminate the quesiton he keeps asking himself, let me know.
The mask at the end is not literal… it is him… the marriage has all become facade… and that’s why he cries. Notice that Alice is happily sleeping next to the mask, content. But he is not content. He needs passion back in his marriage. His confession is not of infidelity or near infidelity, but that he has had the same feelings she had confessed to him. Thus the word “fuck” at the end instead of “make love.” They need to – as they pass the Connex booth at FAO Schwartz – reconnect in a real way.
I need to find some of my earlier writing on this fllm and republish it. Every scene informs the idea of the film. And Fredric Raphael had no idea what Kubrick was up to, which is bizarre, but amusing.
I’ll have to rewatch EWS with those thoughts in mind. It’s been a while since I popped in the DVD. But that interpretation still doesn’t account for his visit to his dead patient. Kidman is there when he gets the phone call; he tells her where he’s going. Isn’t that meant to be a “real” scene, since his wife is in it? We have to assume he does actutally go to the apartment, and it’s just the sister’s breakdown and attraction to Cruise are fantasy.
I’m wondering if some people who were initially unimpressed with Kubrick’s swan song are coming around and beginning to appreciate it now. Let’s not forget how long it took many of his other classics to attain their current status.
I loved this one the first time I saw it, and was so hypnotized I saw it a couple more times in the theatre.
I’m with you lazarus. I loved EWS the first time I saw it. Found it completely mesmerizing, and I like it more every time I see it.
It’s interesting what you write about EWS David. A little while back I was flicking through Michael Herr’s rather beautiful little tribute book on Kubrick (originally published in Vanity Fair). In an extended chapter after the release of EWS, he mentions the same theory as you, in that it’s all dreamscapes, something almost all critics missed.
If possible I would love to see your original writings on the film if you can dig them up.
I am disappointed, bigtime. I come here to Dave Poland’s site to get info about films and for information about B.O. You can imagine my surprise when I saw a sensational gossip story about Cruise that hasn’t even been printed yet. Huh? WOW! I am sad. This is salacious GOSSIP, man! This is not what people here want to read here. This is bottom of the barrel gossip that the tabloids dish out on a weekly basis. Sigh… I respected you, Dave Poland. I’ve been reading you for years. But you have lowered yourself below THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER and STAR because you are actually known as someone who has integrity enough not to tease with stupid gossip. People actually trust what you say! You preach integrity all the time in your columns. WTF happened???
I don’t know what happened… it doesn’t seem like a big issue to me.
How do you know that this is salacious gossip? Do you know what the story is and disbelieve it?
I understand those who are upset that this is a tease… obviously, I am okay with that or I wouldn’t do it… but what are you so worked up about?
This is your respect threshold? Wow. I must have been awfully perfect until now!
Dave, we have to assume it’s so mindblowingly salacious of a story that not only were you afraid to report it, you couldn’t resist hinting at it, building anticipation. What’s Cruise up to? Gay sex? Baby eating? Selling military secrets? Who knows!?
I never said you were perfect. I just thought, as a writer, you had more integrity than this. You know these movie stars are up against inaccurate gossip constantly. You know that what is said is REALLY mostly crap. So why do you jump on the gossip bandwagon, so to speak, and tease something that isn’t even out there, about a guy that is being roasted in the press already? I mean, what in the world are you insinuating? It’s NATIONAL INQUIRER crap. Come on! Surely you understand that what is whispered and gossiped about behind closed doors is not true 99% of the time. It’s just freaking gossip.
Trust me, I don’t hold you up as some perfect person. None of us are. I just thought that you were above the tabloid trash that is sadly so prevalent in our culture these days. We all come to these sites to try to get something accurate about film stars, directors, producers, cinematograghers, Hell…you name it…something tangible about the whole film process. And this is what you are dishing out?
Like I said, I’m disappointed. That’s all.
Making an honest mistake about an Ebay bid is one thing. Consciously spreading gossip under a pretext of avoiding spreading gossip is something else.
cruise is gay??? i don’t believe it. whats next? andy dick comes out?
Dave didn’t make a National Enquire-esque statement. Obviously, there’s a story coming out and it’s significant. Whose to say, without knowing the story, that it’s pure gossip, and therefore, to be dismissed. Ridiculous comment to make before the story has even broken.
Dave, any idea when this story will hit? Sounds like a doozy!
is it the $5 mio contract and list?