The funny thing about the guy who reviewed the Lopez/Ben
Afleck movie is that he actually wasted that much of
his time not only viewing the film, but writing far
too much about it. I couldn't even get through the whole
If it were me, I would have never gone either, I would
have stayed home and watched one of the films I rented
I think sometimes you just know what to expect from
certain things like and apple is going to taste like
and apple, unless it is an orange, and this film is
destined to be a lemon. There is no need to to even
wasting your time watching it or reviewing it.
my basic feeling toward nearly every film made in the
last twenty years. People ask me, well don't you need
to know what's out there? No. I know what a shitty movie
is and I don't need to see anymore of them.
I'm new to your site and your work. I just spent several
enjoyable hours here looking around and reading. If
you can please take a few minute's and let us know your
thoughts on the following.
Would you consider taking a great story idea and co
writing it into a script?
What would you charge to work up a rough budget estimate
for a low budget film, and what would you need to see
to do so?
Would you consider directing an independent low budget
film and how would you charge for your services?
Is Becker Films an independent film production company
that does outside production work for other companies.
don't know what you have in mind, but on a work-for-hire
basis I'd only work through the DGA, which sets the
rate at $8,150 a week, with a guaranteed two weeks prep,
eight weeks shooting, and one week of cutting, and that's
for a theatrical motion picture budgeted at $500,000
or less. At a budget of $500,000-$1,500,000, the weekly
rate goes up to $9,263 a week with a guaranted two weeks
prep, ten weeks of shooting, and one week of cutting;
over $1,500,000 it goes up to $12,969 a week, also with
two weeks prep, ten weeks of shooting, and one week
of cutting. I don't have the Writer's Guild rate cards
on hand, but those are the numbers and contracts I would
be working with, too. I assume this is all a lot more
money than you had envisioned.
Do you ever talk to Lucy Lawless? Have you talked to
Ted R. lately? Are you glad to be back in Michigan?
very glad I'm back in Michigan. I like it a lot here
and feel at home, which I never did in LA. I spoke with
Ted very briefly about two weeks ago and he was just
on his way out to shoot "Spider-Man 2" and
didn't really have time to talk. I email with Lucy occasionally,
but I haven't spoken with her in quite some time.
Your friend J*** worked with Spielberg for years at
Amblin, did she ever say why he is so unhappy? When
you lived in Santa Monica, did you ever attend Hollywood
never met him, but from what she's said he's just a
naturally unhappy guy, particularly when he's not on
a set shooting. And I certainly was never being invited
to star-studded Hollywood parties. Some of Sam Raimi's
and Rob Tapert's parties had famous people attending,
like the Coen brothers, whom I sat next to at one party
and couldn't think of what to say to them -- they're
both kind of glum guys, too. I spent most of one evening
gabbing happily with Frank Miller and his wife, who's
from Livonia, MI. I've hung around a bit at Rob's parties
with Ahmed Zappa, who would never shut the fuck up.
Also I've been around various high-end agents, directors
and execs, but so what? When you get to the high-end
folk of Hollywood they're all so afraid of saying the
wrong thing and having the wrong person hear it that
it's all very stifled. Jane went to a party not too
long ago of the very, very high-end Hollywood folk and
she said the fear was palpable. Of course, once you're
at the top you've got nowhere to go but down. I'd much
rather go to a party here in Detroit among the regular
folk who say and do what they want.
On the subject of asshole republicans, I'm starting
to wonder if the media is as liberal as it's critics
claim. The media gave Clinton way more grief over his
scandal than Bush has received since he entered the
white house. I am starting to believe that the conglomerates
that own various media companies are run by conservatives
because they want to keep their money, and as far as
I'm concerned Bush should be tried for international
war crimes, for starting a ficticious war. Did you read
Michael Moore's most recent letter to Bush? It was absolutely
great. Its on his webiste, and blatantaly insluts Bush
for not covering up his reasons for bringing us to war.
He said at least Johnson, and Nixon tried to cover up
their scandals but got caught, Bush didnt even try.
He should have planted weapons, but by not putting in
any effort it proves that he thinks we are stupider
than he is. Anyway check it out if you have the chance.
I really hope someone like Dean wins the nomination,
unfortunately it may turn into a McGovern like situation.
check it out. That's Michaelmoore.com,
I noticed that you are no longeer with AOl as the e-mail
I just sent to got bumped back to me. How are you??
:) I just had to send you this review from the new (Gods!
Help me!) Jennifer Lopez/Ben Afleck movie Gili....this
review could have been written by you!.....
Tuesday, July 29, 2003
By Roger Friedman
It's not so easy to make a great howler of a bad movie.
In recent years, Madonna 's made more than her share:
"Shanghai Surprise," "Swept Away,"
"Who's That Girl," among them.
In 2001, Mariah Carey starred in "Glitter,"
which has only aged badly since its laughable premiere.
And then there's "Showgirls," "Striptease,"
"The Postman," "Waterworld," "Ishtar,"
and the perceived king of kings, "Heaven's Gate."
Now add to the very top of the list, "Gigli"
- directed by Martin Brest, who actually has another
title on the list already: "Meet Joe Black."
Witless, coarse, and vulgar, "Gigli" is worse
than its advance buzz could have indicated. Starring
real-life tabloid lovers Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez,
the film - if you can call it that - is a total, mindless
disaster. Sitting in a screening last night with reviewers
and feature writers, I could only think of one word:
As many who were there muttered on the way out: "What
were they thinking?"
First, the acting: Lopez and Affleck may have chemistry
at home, but they have none here. Affleck comes off
the worst. As hitman Larry Gigli, Affleck seems to be
doing a bad imitation of James Gandolfini as Tony Soprano.
A thuggish Brooklyn-esque accent comes and goes, and
Affleck never figures out whether he's a good guy or
a bad guy. While these gears are turning in his head,
you can't help notice that he's a hitman wearing a luxurious
Gucci leather jacket and gorgeous silk tops. He also
appears to be wearing Ted Danson's toupee from "Cheers."
J-Lo does a little better, but not much as a lesbian
hitwoman who is nonetheless smitten with Affleck. She
makes her first appearance wearing a midriff-revealing
halter-top to show off her abs and rear end, and it
just keeps getting better.
At one point Lopez is featured in a yoga position called
"the crow," which is photographed as if she
were a kangaroo hoisted on its hind legs and ready for
mating. As I once heard Anna Wintour say of Clint Eastwood
with matted hair in a rainstorm scene, "It's not
a good look for you."
Like Ben, who actually says the word "heart-throb-a-rama,"
J-Lo is saddled with ridiculous, offensive, unfortunate
dialogue, much of which can't be quoted in proper publications.
Herewith some of her declarations: "It's turkey
time. Gobble, gobble." "A penis is like a
sea slug or a long toe." "I thought you wanted
to be my bitch."
There's a fourth line, but it can't be repeated here,
concerning her offer to perform a sex act on Affleck
for 12 hours. Another character, doing an unintentional
Joe Pesci imitation from "Goodfellas," later
describes Lopez's lesbian with a term that should have
women's groups on both sides demanding a recall vote
on the screenwriter.
Trust me, the dialogue in "Gigli" is so awful
that the groans just come faster and faster. It is also
unnecessarily vulgar. I counted the "f-word"
no fewer than 15 times in the first 10 minutes and then
Lopez also makes a long speech to Affleck in which she
draws analogies between her female anatomy and one's
mouth, ending in a particular vulgarity that sent at
least two New York Times writers right out of the theatre.
There are other actors in the film. Sadly, newcomer
Justin Bartha , who plays a "Rain Man"-like
autistic character stolen directly from that movie -
but without the manual - makes a very bad first impression.
Will he turn out to be a "thumbless, bleeding halfwit,"
as Lopez's character posits? It's hard to say since
Bartha, not getting any direction from Brest, slips
from autism to Tourette's Syndrome to ADD to simply
But the "Rain Man" lifts are painful to watch.
Instead of being obsessed with "Wapner," for
example, this character only wants to see "Baywatch."
Again, what could Brest, who wrote and directed this
junk, have been thinking?
Al Pacino, whom Brest directed to an Oscar in the very
bad "Scent of a Woman" 11 years ago, appears
in one interminable scene as a New York crime boss.
This one bloated moment may completely unravel Pacino's
esteemed career from "The Godfather" to "Insomnia."
His expressionless, frozen face - though included in
the film's trailer as a big deal - appears about three-fourths
of the way through the film. It's not clear even if
Affleck and Lopez, who Brest cuts to occasionally for
stupefied reactions, were even on the set when Pacino
delivers his numbing monologue. The fact that it ends
in his character committing a sudden act of bloody violence
The only performance worth seeing in "Gigli"
(which rhymes, Affleck says often, with "really")
is another cameo, this one by Christopher Walken as
a police detective. When Walken steps into the film,
"Gigli" suddenly becomes full of color and
oxygen - two things that Lopez and Affleck lack.
Unfortunately, Walken's scene is meant to explain the
plot. But it's pretty clear that the actor has no idea
what he's saying; he just says it so wonderfully that
it doesn't matter. Watch the pause he takes at the end
of the scene. It's a brilliant comment on the nonsense
set before him.
sounds so awful I couldn't even finish reading the review.
The only difference between me and the reviewer is that
I would never watch that film under any circumstances.
A couple of comments on Bruce's accident...
Firstly, I'm VERY glad to hear Bruce is okay-and I hope
Mr. Ditz's wife gets better. As to the driver of the
other vehicle-what an asshole.
To be blunt-the only reason I would care about this
"person" surviving is if he has relatives
that depend on him. Otherwise, I could care less if
he passed away or not. Brutal POV-but there it is. And
I'm sticking to it. I'm VERY hard-line when it comes
to things like this.
I happen to drive a school bus for a living-and have
been for quite a few years. I live in New Jersey. The
amount of morons I see on the road is frightening. In
fact-this state hands out driver's licenses like candy.
Any idiot can get them.
I know-because I was one of those idiots. I got my license
back in 1983. My road test involved driving around the
parking lot of a stadium-and parking between two cones.
At the time-if you made two mistakes, you failed the
test. It was a frigging joke.
Amazingly, I even saw someone fail this test. The person
was parking between two cones. Hitting one cone counts
as a mistake. This man had a pretty big car. He shifts
it into drive and floors the pedal-knocking the car
in front of him a few feet away. Then he goes into reverse
and does the same thing to the cone behind him!!
The examiner got out of the car and pretty much ripped
this guy a new asshole. And frankly-he deserved it.
Luckily, my late dad knew better. He wouldn't let me
take the car unless he was ABSOLUTELY certain I could
drive it WELL. In a lot of ways, he was like a drill
sergeant when it came to teaching me about driving.
The road test for commerical vehicles is more thorough-they
put you out on the road with traffic. And I'm mystefied
as to why they don't do that for CARS.
Anyway-I'm rambling here. Bottom line: it pisses me
off to no end that jerks like the one who hit Bruce
are on the roads. And if it isn't due to alcohol/drugs,
it's due to carelessness behind the wheel. Look at Sam
Kinison's death. The goddamn kid who killed him was
more concerned with the damage to his pick-up than the
fact that he took a life. And the little shit got off
with a slap on the wrist, if I recall correctly.
I hope to be getting out of this line of work soon.
It sucks and it pays shit-and it's very dangerous. It
was all right while I was taking care of my sick father-but
now that he's gone, I've got to find something else.
Have a good one.
see you have a hot button on this topic. I don't like
bad drivers, either, and I really can't stand people
who talk on the phone while driving. I can now be fairly
certain if someone is driving like a complete idiot,
weaving across lanes, they're on the phone. That can't
ban those things quick enough for me.
In response to your little critique of President Bush;
I am convinced of two things. First, President Bush
believes absolutely that the ends will always justify
the means. That's why I think he is completely unconcerned
about lying to whomever about whatever. The second point
of which I am convinced is that Bush is, by inclination,
an oligarch. He belives that a handful of very wealthy
Americans know what's best for the world. Oddly, I think
he considers himself to be one of those, but not ideologically
the first among them. Eisenhower was entranced with
American big businessmen, but his fascination pales
by comparison to Bush. Eisenhower had the sense to see
the potential conflict of interest when business and
government get too close. Such an idea will never be
seriously contemplated by Bush.
The Democrats, on the other hand, have never gotten
over the failure of the "Great Society". Its
failure clearly demonstrated that extending services
indefinitely deprives people of the incentive to improve
their lot, or even maintain it. When their big idea
didn't work I think the Deomcrats have only "anti-Republicanism"
to resort to. Personally, if I were a Democratic strategist,
I would be focusing on improving primary education,
particularly in urban centers. This whole Michigan admissions
fiasco is a sideline issue. Improve the elmentary, middle
and high schools in those regions and the college admissions
will likely rise. For what its worth (little, I admit)
I think that limiting school size, as opposed to simply
class size, would be a step in the right direction.
agree, they can't put enough money into education. If
they put 1/1000th of the money they're blowing in Iraq
into the American education system things would improve
greatly. But that's not the Republican's priority. Ass-kicking
and shows of strength are. And the fact that people
are acting surprised after the 9/11 report that all
of the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia is ludicrous.
We knew that two days after the attack. And I've actually
heard Republican friends of mine (I have a few) say
that the world is safer now since our uninstigated attack
on Iraq. Well, Al Qaeda hasn't stopped functioning.
Eight Americans were killed in Saudi Arabia recently.
Hello! Has everyone already forgotten that we were the
aggressor in this war, and this was entirely rationalized
by the WMDs, which don't exist. We have entirely lost
the moral high-ground. And as for Ike, he was certainly
fascinated by big business, but he was still a poor
Kansas farmboy that had spent his entire life in the
army. And nobody knew what political party he was in
until about a year before the election. His reasoning
for running for president, oddly, was because Truman
kept cutting military spending. When Ike became president
and saw what the situation was, he cut military spending
even more than Truman. Ike also coined the term "The
military industrial complex," which he was totally
against, and here we are.
For those who don't know, Bruce Campbell was in a car
accident Saturday night but is OK.
Here is a link to a newspaper report that has more details
than the Associated Press version.
Ditz was also in the car along with a woman who's name
I don't recognize.
I am glad they are OK.
The driver who hit them isn't as lucky and is in critical
woman in the car is Mike Ditz's wife, Jennifer, and
she broke her sternum. The driver of the other car was
not wearing a seatbelt. Bruce is doing fine, but both
of his hands were smashed into the windshield by the
air bag -- which he was highly thankful for -- and had
broken glass in them. The other driver is in very serious
god, that's at least 2 people here that have no idea
what the term, "politically correct" even
means. It doesn't belong to the the liberals, leftists
or queers. It belongs to language. Politically correct
attitudes are generally false, uniform ways of expressing
absolutely nothing worthwile. It's about forcing people
to play nice when they'd rather make racist jokes, bash
gays and burn forests.
Calling you, Josh, "PC" is like calling Mother
Theresa a selfish priss. All because of that Santorum
essay. There are plenty of conservatives who also take
issue with Rick Santorum's insane comments, it's not
just a Leftist Agenda issue. It's about decency. Homophobia
is simply indecent.
Anyone who has read just a few pages of this Q &
A and still believes you are Politically Correct needs
to go back to Remedial English or Remedial something.
PS I showed If I Had a Hammer to my husband, who generally
likes inane comedies and action movies, he really liked
it. He loved Phil's "song" at the Hootenanny
and basically liked Phil and the Buckley's a lot. So,
the movie isn't just for arthouse geeks.
I could just get the arthouse geeks I'd be happy. Anything.
Thanks for the nice comments, it's good to know someone
is seeing it now and then. There may only be 200 copies
extant in the entire world and I have 50 of them. I've
got it out at the American Cinematheque in Hollywood,
but no word back as yet.
Okay, no PC, Floyd, or drug related questions, I promise.
I've seen you recomend Steven Katz's book "Film
Directing Shot by Shot", and John Alton's "Painting
With Light" for us budding film-maker types (and
found them highly instructive!). I was wondering if
there was an industry periodical for cinematography
you thought was particularly worthwhile.
Thanks for your time!
P.S. Did you hear that the British gov't is trying to
screw the Gurkhas out of their paychecks?! Apparently
the MoD feels that because the cost of living is lower
in Nepal, Gurkhas warrant a much lower salary, despite
the fact that they do the exact same job. Sounds like
the Brits are getting quite a deal - bad-ass soldiers
at a fraction of the usual price. It's sad and telling
that any government is taking their cue from corporations
and outsourcing to impoverished countries...
it's called American Cinematographer, and it's the official
publication of the American Society of Cinematographers,
or A.S.C., as you see after their names in the credits.
It's the DPs union and fraternal order. It's generally
pretty technical, but after a few issues you get how
DPs talk. I don't get it regularly, but I've always
enjoyed reading it. And old issues are particularly
interesting. I read an interview with the great Gregg
Toland after he completed shooting "Citizen Kane,"
but before it was released. He keeps saying, "This
kid, Welles, had all kinds of crazy ideas . . ."
Nice reply on the PC thing. I am with you there. The
problem with Republican minds is that they think just
because someone isn't a Republican then they are a PC
liberal democrat. This makes me laugh.
I don't care for the Democrats either, but I will look
for anything better then letting Bush stay in office
for another 4 years. Did everyone forget that he has
the dubious distinction of possibley not really winning
the election last time around becuase of the Florida
This kind of shit happens in third world countries,
however, as we can see it happens here too.
As to Cynthia's comment on "Revisonist History",
this seems to be the new buzz word now.
I never said that Rock musicians do not do drugs, since
the majority of musicians do, I have been around the
music business and musicans long enough to know this.
However, I have also had the fortune of meeting both
Roger Waters and Peter Gabriel, and I can say that without
question Gabriel never dabbled in drugs when he was
in Genesis or afterwards.This is rare indeed in Rock
music, but as Josh would say, "Them's the facts".
As for Floyd, they may or may not be telling the truth,
but I don't really believe that any of them has anything
to lose now? Waters has never been the PC type.
That is a funny story about the South Park Guys. only
in America would they ban them from speaking in universities.
I think we should blame the Republicans for that one.
just want to know why we're letting Bush and the rest
of those assholes off the hook? They wanted to impeach
Clinton for a blow job. Bush misrepresented all of the
facts and hoodwinked the country into going to war.
As a little historical note, U.S. forces invaded the
Philippines in 1900, and after over 250,000 Filipino
deaths and 4,000 U.S. deaths, we finally got out of
there in 1947. Given those numbers we could be in Iraq
until 2050. At the low, low price of only $40 billion
Youve stated a couple of times in reply's that there
are a lot of cheap 16mm cameras available on the market,
what id like to know is are they blimped, crystal sync
cameras at that kind of price? I used to own an Eclair
NPR which was both but cost about £1500. I sold
it for a Canon XL1s which Im not entirely happy with.
Also, What is the main reason for paying loads of money
and getting a 35mm answer print (apart from being able
to screen it in a cinema), is it simply to present yourself
and your film in a professional way, when you can screen
it for thousands less on a DV or Betacam SP tape for
I'm referring to MOS 16mm cameras, like the Bolex, the
Filmo, or the Krasnogrosk. The Canon Scoopic I used
rather extensively had a crystal synch motor, but it
didn't work worth a shit. Regarding 35mm answer prints,
if you're going to a 35mm film finish, meaning you intend
to make 35mm release prints to show in theaters, then
you must go through the 35mm answer print stage to get
all of your color-timing correct. If you're not going
to a film finish then you certainly don't need to do
answer prints. We shot 35mm on Herc and Xena, but all
of the color-timing was done in the film-to-tape transfer.
However, on "Hammer," I shot 35mm and brought
it to a film finish, so we did do answer prints to see
what the colors looked like. Does that explain it?
love your website and your fresh take on story telling
and the gutless (or comfortably brain-dead) takes most
writers have today. Bravo for your rabble rousing! Now
the criticism. Why is it that creative and insightful
people often have politically-correct left-liberal politics
that come straight from the factory. Of course I disagree
with your Santorum bashing, but sadly I could have predicted
this column from yet another Hollywood writer. In the
interest of full disclosure, I am often surrounded by
gay people, I have stopped two instances of violent
gay bashing and I have visited five gay clubs in my
life. Few staight guys know the gay life as intimately
as I do and I also know this: I love gays, it's just
organized homosexuality that I can't stand. Sound familiar?
Just substitute the word "religion" for gay
and you'll get an argument often made by people of your
political orientation. My reasons for my opinions are
varied and often contradictory but as a former Marine
I believe in freedom of association and of speech. I
can tell you horror stories of gay activists and their
sympathizers run amok during my days at the UCLA film
school. Stalin would have been proud of the superstition
and fear the left-wing engenders on our college campuses
today. But not to pick on just gays, I have a broader
contempt for the liberals and their enduring quest to
force the rest of society to embrace their morals. First,
there is tolerance (always a good thing) and then there
is the push for coercion and forcing dissenters to endorse
the left's social values, gay and otherwise.
Writers are commanded to not engage in stereotyping,
however, few readers or executives are registered Republicans,
therefore crude or ignorant characterizations of small
businessmen, gun owners or religious folks is tolerated
by the wealthy liberal folks who run this town. And
everyone is compaining about how predictable and boring
storytelling has become- maybe a little diversity of
political opinions would prove to be an intriguing experiment.
is the second time of recent days I'm being attacked
for being PC. I assure you, and everyone else, that
I haven't got the slightest interest in political correctness.
When I state an opinion it is my considered opinion
and I honestly don't believe I'm bowing to anyone else's
concept of right, wrong, fairness, or unfairness. I
haven't got the slightest interest in what other movie
people or what anyone else thinks. I have no doubt that
there are some reasonable Republicans out there, I just
have yet to ever meet one. For the most part I believe
that the Republican agenda is deny poor people services,
start wars whenever possible, lie to the American public
at every possible turn, make the poor poorer and the
rich richer. But maybe I've got it wrong. Did this Republican
government flatly lie to the American public about the
"imminent danger" of Iraq, their hordes of
WMDs, their fleet of unmanned planes ready to drop nuclear
weapons on the U.S., as well as their whole nuclear
arsenal, etc. etc.? Did Colin Powell get on TV and lie
for 90 minutes straight about all this crap? Have we
spent hundreds of billions of dollars on Bush's paranoia
and utterly faulty intelligence? I think George Bush
should be impeached, and all his evil cohorts with him:
Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Powell. If other liberal-minded
folk are thinking the same way, that's great, but my
views have nothing to do with anyone else. And quite
frankly the Democrats embarrass me, but they're the
only other choice and I HATE the Republicans. If that's
PC, then so be it.
curious, how did you get to morocco in 1973 and why
did you go? What other countries have you visited?
Any other zany adventures to tell us about?
was visiting the Canary Islands with my parents. The
travel agents were really pushing the Canary Islands
that year and giving these huge discounts, so we went.
None of the hotels were finished being built yet, however,
and the weather during Christmas there is gray and cool.
At our hotel there elevator hadn't yet been installed,
and there were pieces of string tied to little posts
to indicate where the pool and the tennis courts would
eventually be. So everyone sat in the bar all day and
all night planning a group lawsuit. I took a two-day
side trip to Marrakech, which was certainly the highlight
of that vacation. I really haven't traveled all that
much. Mainly just to New Zealand and to Amsterdam.
E-mail: already sent a million times
A few questions regarding film stock.
Fairly familiar with 16mm prices, but can't for the
life of me figure out Kodak's darn web site...(Where
are the prices?)
How much would you count on spending on 35mm stock?
I assume one would want 1,000 f.t. rolls? Also, other
than lenses, what does one need to know when planning
to shoot widescreen, 2:35?
I'm totally ignorant with anything involving 35mm, but
have recently found a break and the opportunity to shoot
with some free Panivision equipment has presented itself...But
the window of opportunity is a small and fast fading
one. Any other obvious info would also be greatly appreciated...Probably
more questions to follow as I think of them.
Thanks, and have a good one, as ususal.
don't have to shoot 2.35 just because it's Panavision
equipment. You can still shoot 1.85 if you want, just
don't use the anamorphic lenses. But if you do, then
you'll have to make use of the wide frame which is somewhat
difficult to compose. Generally, though, it's mostly
an issue of throwing things, like close-ups, all the
way over to one side of the frame or the other. As for
film stock, there are several other places to check
that are cheaper than Kodak, which are Steadi-Systems
and Studio Film and Tape, both located in Hollywood
on Highland Ave. around the block from Kodak. They both
carry new stock, plus unused stock that's been sold
back to them (Kodak won't take unused film stock back,
which is how these places exist). They also sell re-canned
film stock, which is when someone has only shot a hundred
or two hundred feet of a 1,000 foot roll. It supposedly
all tested and fine, but I've never used re-canned stock.
I don't remember the prices, but I think it was about
$125-150 a 1,000-foot roll. The choices of lenses is
up to you. I like having as many prime lenses as I can
afford, although I generally skip having a zoom. Let
me know how it goes.
Cynthia E. Jones
In case your readers are interested, the trailer for
"Bubba Ho-Tep" can be seen here:
Cynthia E. Jones
Uh...you won't like "All About my Mother."
That's just a guess, but I saw it, I didn't like it,
and I generally have much more love in my heart for
Pedro Almodovar than I believe you have. Just my two
Wow, I'm so excited that my offhand Floyd comment got
you guys riffing on them...I'd heard rumors that "Echoes"
was written for 2001, then scrapped...but anyone who
has anything to say about Pink Floyd who wasn't in the
band just can't be believed, as far as I'm concerned.
Hell, if the members themselves are lying, how can we
say we knew what they did or whatever?
Revisionist history: No drugs in the 60s (not the Beach
Boys!), no coke in the 80s (or today!), Pamela Des Barres
never slept with the Mothers of Invention or any other
rock star (see "I'm with the Band," her groupie
memoir, if you want the true version of "Almost
Famous."). We live in a world where Paul McCartney,
once arrested for marijuana possession, has been knighted
(while 750,000 people a year get arrested for possession
and are still in jail).
I may have already told you this, but I think it's funny.
Matt Stone and Trey Parker (the co-creators of "South
Park") used to be invited by colleges to come speak
to the student body from time to time. When it came
time for audience Q & A, students would always ask:
"What was your inspiration for (insert South Park
character, moment, or joke here)?"
The answer would pretty much invariably be:
("Oh, yeah, we thought of a talking poo while we
were on acid in the Colorado mountains." )
They are no longer invited to speak on college campuses.
It appears as though college teachers, while valuing
truth, didn't want it shared with their entire campus.
All right. That's enough about drugs for today.
wasn't written for "2001," although it may
well fit at the end. This is a phenomenon called "random
synch." We used to score all of our super-8 films
with scores from other movies, and time and again we
were astounded at how amazingly well music synched up
with action it wasn't written for. But Pink Floyd just
liked to do what they called "long things,"
which they'd already done a few of by "Echoes."
And I'm sure you're right about the Almodovar film since
I haven't liked any of his other pictures. And if everyone
wants to believe that rock bands were really boy scouts
in the '60s, '70s and '80s, then God bless 'em.
Just a quick note on "Jack of All Trades"
- it's presumably not being rerun anywhere in the US,
but is turning up all over the world. I've run into
people from Brazil, Russia, the Ukraine, and the Czech
Republic who have seen it. Currently, I believe that
Jack and Cleo are being shown on the Norwegian channel
TV3 each Saturday at 4:00 pm, and in Sweden on TV3 on
Sundays at 2:30 AM.
Do US directors get royalties for overseas reruns? And
was that the deal w/ the NZ directors on XWP, HTLJ,
et al., that they didn't get anything from U.S. reruns?
for the info, it's good to know because, yes, DGA directors
do get residuals (not royalties, that's for musicians)
from overseas showings. The NZ directors don't get any
residuals at all because they weren't DGA members, which
is mainly why they were being hired. They didn't have
to be flown in, nor put up, nor did they get per diem.,
nor residuals, either. But they ended up getting a lot
more work than the U.S. directors.
sence you were at the filming of the first evil dead
film...if you had directed it what would you have done
have fucked it up.
Well, you can go ahead and say it - you were right.
The 48 hour project was a lesson in too little time
to pre-produce. We thought it was a good excercise,
though. Our biggest handicap was the fact the we only
make features and short story development was new to
us. Our director's cut was 18:53 running time - well
over the 10:00 max. We ended up throwing away a 60'
crane shot, a dolly shot through Union Station, an entire
scene in the Bourbon Street Bar (which we had filled
with extras for a 'writer's night' show). We cut gags
and performances until we had what amounted to a long
trailer for an otherwise decent movie. We are going
to go ahead and put the cleaned up director's cut on
the web for everyone that put in a tough 48 hours for
us. If you want a good laugh, I'll send you a VCD of
it - it's a mockumentary about Beethoven trying to break
into the country music industry.
better to have done it than to have not done it. All
experience is good experience. I had my own little version
of that when I was doing the re-enactments on the first
season of "Real Stories of the Highway Patrol"
in 1992-'93. I had either one day or one night to shoot
a 5-10 minute action story with bank robberies, shootings,
chase scenes using multiple police cars, all kinds of
stuff, using cops in all the parts, and the crew was
me, the producer, the cameraman, and a sound man. You
do what you have to do and make it work somehow.
I agree with Andres "Y tu Mama Tambien" is
not a very good film, not becuase I think it was porongraphic
beciase it really wasn't, but it just wasn't as great
as everyone made to be. As usual.
You might also consider getting two Pedro Almodovar
films from Netflix: "Talk to Her", and "All
about my mother". These are both excellent films.
"Talk to her was just in theaters here last autumn,
but I know both films are on Netflix and they are far
better than "Y tu Mama Tambien".
I've never been all that impressed with Almoldovar,
but I'll give it a try.
I really do appreciate your advice, but I'll be okay
buying my own camera. I've contacted a couple local
colleges' film departments about borrowing equipment,
and they haven't returned my calls or e-mails anyway,
so f**k 'em. I have about $600 saved up right now, and
I figure I can raise another thousand in the next month
or two if I eat nothing but ramen noodles. :-) The cameras
I'm looking at are around that price range ($1500-$2000).
I'm actually losing interest in the Canon Scoopic because
I've read that it has an automatic exposure meter. I
wanted to experiment with colorful, artsy, fartsy lighting.
Wouldn't I have problems with that if I use a camera
with an automatic exposure meter?
One more quick question I hope you won't mind answering:
You've mentioned before that zoom lenses don't have
the picture quality of prime lenses. Would the picture
quality be even worse if there's more range to the zoom
lens? For example, would a 10-150mm zoom lens have lesser
picture quality than a 12-120mm zoom lens? Or is that
pretty irrelevant. And in 16mm you probably won't even
notice too much of a difference between the primes and
the zoom, although there's definitely a loss of quality.
The Scoopic has an automatic light meter built in, but
you can over-ride it as I always did. I just saw a perfectly
good 16mm camera for sale in a camera store here in
Detroit, a Bell & Howell Filmo with three prime
lenses for $350. The Filmo is the 16mm version of the
35mm Eyemo, which is what the military used for years
and what they still use to put in crash-boxes when they
drive a car over a camera. You can pound in nails with
these cameras. If you bought one of those, you'd still
have money left to make a movie with.
years ago in maroco i go with the truck on thefery boat
and in the bar i begin to talk with one driver from
irland.and he ask mi if i won´t one drink he mean
wotka and i say thanks i don´t dring alcool and
tell him, i was in all my life only 3 times drunk, and
then he open hes ayes wide and he tell mi, oou very
strange i was only 3 days not drunk ha ha ha.but drogs???i
say NEVER, ONLY SOMETIMES ONE GLAS WINE FROM KRETA giasou.GEORGE
good for you. When I was in Morocco in 1973 I ate about
four grams of hashish and got so stoned I could barely
am a actress/musician in the states and I had sent all
of my credentials to P.R.Pictures a couple of years
ago. I love your company. Xena is my favorite T.V. show
and I want to work for you in some capacity. Please
email me and let me know what I can do.
Garrison Bailey (female)
not my company, I was just an employee. It's Renaissance
We are seemingly becoming like the two characters in
your film script for "Ballbreakers".
Floyd's acid days were primarily due to the influence
of Syd Barrett, and yes I am sure they all experimented,
but they also got their shit together after Syd's decline
and they were not doing anything while recording "Darkside",
but you will never believe that, so it is mute point
to your ears.
I agree that Waters is quite an eqomanic(what artist
isn't to some extent), however, even Gilmour admits
to the fact that nobody wanted to take responsibility
for who was going to motivate the band and lead them.
Gilmour also admits that he was a pretty lazy musician
and they needed Roger's energy to move the band along
and write the lyrics, so Waters ego was an essential
part of the band.
I agree that Wright's contribution was big in the early
years to the band faded away over time, but that was
partly because of him and he even admits that for a
longtime he was in a creative slump beginning with "Animals"
all the way through "The Wall".
I think "Animals" is a brilliant album and
Wright had very little input into that one. It was all
about Water's lyrics and Gilmour's great guitar playing.
Also, with regards to the "Final Cut", the
reason it was titled this way is because the album was
orginally intended to be a Water's solo album and some
of the cuts were canned songs from "The Wall",
however, Gilmour and Mason wanted to continue with Floyd,
but Gilmour admited that he had not come up with any
new material. He also admited that Water's approached
the both of them and said that he would do this as a
solo album if they felt more comfortable with that,
but Gilmour said that since neither him nor Mason had
any ideas at the time, they agreed to release it as"a
"Pink Floyd" album.
I don't think "The Final Cut" was a great
album, but it definitely wasn't the worst under the
"Pink Floyd" name, I think that distinction
would have to go to "A Momentary Lapse of Reason"
which was Gilmour, Mason, and a bunch of studio musicians.
It wasn't "Pink Floyd".
The comment by George Pilalidis is a good example of
the fact that while Roger may be an egomaniac, he was
also raised with a very socialist upbringing by his
mother and he has donated and given a great deal of
his time and money to charities, so that has become
the possitive side of his egomania.
In the interview I read, he said that he had a hard
time with the success of the album:" Before you
acheive that much success in your life, you have all
these ideas of what you will do with the money like
give it away to charity, but in the end you keep the
money, and that was difficult for me to grasp groing
up in a socialist environment.
My mother used to volunteer for all sorts of charities,
so when I started to receive the revenues form the album,
I opened a charitable trust which I still have today.
1/4 of my earnings from the album go into this trust.
The nice thing about being a captialist is that you
can be a philanthropist."
let's drop the whole drug issue. And yes, we do sound
like the two guys from "Ball Breaker." Nevertheless,
I must continue this at least one stage farther. I think
"A Momentary Lapse of Reason" is a better
album than "The Final Cut," simply because
it has one good song, "Learning to Fly," and
"The Final Cut" hasn't got any. I also don't
think that "Animals" is a great album, but
it has one terrific, very long song, "Pigs (Three
Different Ones)." I actually like "The Division
Bell" better than "Animals, "A Momentary
Lapse of Reason" or "The Final Cut."
Did you see "Behind the Wall," which was a
VH-1 show about two years ago? They interview all of
Pink Floyd, all seperately, and it was very interesting.
They all agreed that "Dark Side" was the peak
of the band and "The Wall" was trying to get
to the peak again, and failed. And there's still clearly
a lot of animosity left in Rick Wright toward Roger
josh, waters like i rememer two or thre years ago,have
give 120.000.000 $$ help to the people withaout selter
in UK??? all the members from pink floyd was good in
songs writhing there have look 30 years in the future,
but wy drogs ????i'am 45 and don't even smoke,i never
aundarstand this. god i have like marvel comics and
don´t have left money for malbboro giasu.
if you could afford drugs you'd take them.
Not all projectionists are morons...lazy, but not morons.
youve been one yourself and must know how incredably
boring the job is and how badly paid it is too. I can
imagine how easy it is for them to screw up important
screenings, but i never screwed up anything important.
Plus you know that those projectors just fuck up and
go out of focus at any time and for no reason...
Id say that in all multiplexis, something goes wrong
on a screening about twice a day, so if you vacate the
cinema often youre bound to see a screw up quite frequently..
Its not always our fault.....honestly =)
like to commisserate with you, really, but I can't.
Way too often the film begins out of focus, and that's
entirely because the lazy motherfucker projectionist
turned it on and walked away. The most important moment
of their whole job, particularly with the advent of
the platter system, is right at the beginning, and if
they're not paying attention then, as they generally
aren't, then they're worthless pieces of shit. When
I was projecting you had to pay attention at the beginning
of every reel, which could be five or six times a film.
Now it's only mandatory once, and most projectionists
won't do that. They are a truly worthless, lazy group
-- except you, of course. But when I spend years making
a film, go to great difficulty to set up a screening
and fill the seats, then some knuckleheaded projectionist
ruins it due to sheer apathy, that's about as close
to violece as I've ever feel.
I strongly recommend you watch "Amores Perros",
since it is the only film out of those three that actually
deserved the international attention. You can find it
on any video rental store...but I beg of you to watch
it, just watch it, as a favor to me....It would mean
a lot to me. "Y tu Mama Tambien" is an excuse
for a Pornography film, and a bad story overall. Alfonso
and Carlos Cuaron's idea of character development is
saying everything about this character through an anonimous
voice over also known as narrator, while we watch him
pee, it is disgusting and an insult on cinema. This
anonimous narrator will actually sometimes say things
that are completley irrelevant to the story, just to
show the audience just how screwed up Mexico really
is, talk about sucking the fun out of a film...worst
of all, the Cuaron's idea of artistic expresion is showing
the audience things other directors do not show...like
floating semen on a swiming pool....and, just plain
old irrelevant pornography, it shows how they both lack
so much immagination, they shouldn't be in the film
industry in the first place. Father Amaro is a good
film, but it is no masterpiece, and definately not worthy
of all its awards. But "Amores Perros", the
reinassance of Mexican Cinema, and the most awarded
film worldwide of 2001, became a classical film not
only in Mexico, but worldwide. It seems strange how
last summer I showed this film to a bunch of teenagers
who weren't too excited about it, and halfway into the
film, they didn't mind the subtitles at all...two hours
later they were all out at Sam Goody buying their own
DVD copies of the film...most of them giving it their
personal "favorite film" title. I never saw
a foreign film do such an impact especially since most
americans are too lazy to read subtitles (and teenagers
more than anyone). I strongly recommend you to watch
this film, as a fellow film buff, and a friend. I agree
with you since the golden years of Mexican cinema were
driven by two figures...Cantinflas, and Luis Buñuel...but,
as I always say, you should never underestimate modern
culture and modern art....since most people think all
things modern are crap, and all things old are masterpieces....and
that is a human condition. Promise me you will watch
this film....just make that promise. Thanks
put it on my Netflix list and when it comes I will watch
it. And I will tell you what I think.
am an aspiring film student and I took a look at your
list of favorite films. Noting your feelings on story
structure, I was particularly surprised to find "Monty
Python's The Meaning of Life" and the film "M*A*S*H"
on your list. The Meaning of Life, for me, seemed to
be a bunch of separate (funny) sketches put together
into the length of a full movie. MASH, which I have
seen just recently, also seemed very disjointed (due
in part to the great deal of improvisation) and not
at all fitting into your rigid ideals of story structure.
The character "Hot Lips" Houlihan was also
very uneven. Besides the obvious "absurdity of
war" theme, the movie also didn't seem to have
much of a "point" either.
I enjoy both of these comedies, but I was wondering
how they fit into the ideals of "good storytelling".
Also, what do you think of Monty Python in general?
"The Life of Brian" is fast becoming one of
my favorite movies.
love Monty Python and "The Meaning of Life"
slaughters me. In a comedy, far more important than
story structure, is being funny. Python was never any
good at writing stories, but they were brilliant at
being funny. That's all I ask of a comedy. And I probably
quote "The Meaning of Life" more than any
other film. I just said to someone, "Bloody Catholics
with all their bloody children." As for "M*A*S*H,"
well, I could almost remove it from the list, but it
was so important of a film when it came out, and seemed
so fresh and original, and I remember that feeling so
clearly, that it remains. I don't think it holds up
very well at all, and I don't like most of Altman's
films, but a few of them in their day were sort of revelations,
like "M*A*S*H" and "McCabe and Mrs. Miller,"
and for me, "Brewster McCloud." "McCabe"
is one of those films that if you could just remove
the dated, droning, dull Leonard Cohen songs and replace
them with a real score, it would be an actual great
You don't have to buy what Water's says, but I do and
I don't believe that you can generalize that all the
baby boomers lie because they sold out.
Before the "Darkside of the Moon", Pink Floyd
were not making a great deal of money, however, after
that album, they became millionaires almost overnight,
but they did not do it by saying "I am going to
sellout and make this really good album which will make
me lots of money". They just were doing what they
did and it came out that way.
In Fact, Waters is the last person you could say sold
out. He never was the one touring and recording under
the name "Pink Floyd" after they ran their
shelf life. He knew better, and it's definitley not
about the money to him. He doesn't need it.
That period of Rock and Roll was the most creative and
productive of the genre and eventually someone is going
to be successful if they are making good music, and
I don't find anything wrong with that.
As I said before, what on earth would be the reason
that Waters would have to lie now? What does he have
to prove? The answer is nothing.
Richard Wright was kicked out of the band during "The
Wall" sessions by Waters basically because he was
so coked up all the time, he could not even play his
parts which led to arguments and Wright finally leaving
I have been around a lot of drugs in my time. I worked
in a record shop for about 5 years, and almost everyone
in the place smoked pot every night after we closed
the store (some smoked it like you everday on a regular
basis). I have been also been around otehr drugs as
well and I never did any of them.
I did not try pot until I moved to NYC about 5 years
ago. I only got high the third time I smoked it and
it wasn't anything special for me.
First, I had to get over the fact that it burnt the
shit out of my insides when I inhaled it and that wasn't
pleasant at all. I smoked joints and from a bong. I
wanted to try it to see what it was all about, but it
did nothing for me. I never had the urge to do it again
I have seen two of my friend completey ruin their lives
for a longtime with drugs.
One went from smoking and selling pot and progressed
over the years to getting addicted to crack. The other
enjoyed smoking pot all the time, then developed a fondess
for heroin not too long ago and overdosed, flatlined
in the hospital and nearly died there. luckly he was
revived and survived.
I think the problem I have with your argument of this
issue is that you are not very different from some of
my friends who feel that every musician and artist does
drugs to spark their creativity, although I believe
this to be true with some artists, it is definitely
not true with all artists.
Of course all sorts of drugs were always around in the
entertainment business, but just because they are there
doesn't mean that everyone takes them, but a lot of
I think it also has much to do for with that fact that
some people just have addictive personalities and you
can either deal with it in a healthy way or an unhealthy
one, and most people have to go through something as
bad as being dead for a couple of minutes before they
Personally, I think sex is a great creativity booster
and i don't have an addiction with it, but it has done
much more for my creativity than drugs could ever do,
but that is just me.
I was asked once why I never did drugs because I listened
to all the progressive rock of the 70's and I like Pink
Floyd and bands like that so much?
My answer was pretty simple, I told the guy that the
music is like the drug to me and it takes me to places
in my own imagination and I find pleasure in that without
doing drugs. I am a pretty decent guitar player and
a good drummer. If anything, I am addicted to music.
all great and I'm glad for your own sake you don't do
or like drugs. All I'm saying is, drugs were completely
ubiquitous in the music industry throughout the 1960s,
'70s and '80s, Pink Floyd was one of the first acid
bands, and they didn't get that way by faking it. Drugs
were an integral part of the scene. I'm not saying they
needed them for creativity, I'm saying everyone in rock
& roll did them at that time. Period. No exceptions.
I will happily accept that some of them, like Roger
Waters perhaps, got their shit together pretty early
in the game, but I have no doubt they still all went
through an extreme drug phase with Syd Barrett. And
I wouldn't even be slightly surprised if Waters was
doing a lot of cocaine throughout "Dark Side of
the Moon" through "The Wall" phase of
their career, he certainly acted like an asshole taking
a lot of coke. And like Ziggy Stardust, "he made
love with his ego and sucked up into his mind."
He tried to fire Rick Wright during "The Wall,"
but he didn't have the power to fire him and Wright
stayed. Certainly, Wright, Gilmore and Mason all thought
Waters had become the biggest asshole of all time during
"The Wall," and by "The Final Cut"
the billing had become: "A requiem for the post
war dream by Roger Waters, Performed by Pink Floyd."
And the bottom-line is, Waters' ego-driven ascendancy
destroyed the band and made some of their worst music.
Back when they used to legitimately collaborate, like
on "Meddle" and "Dark Side of the Moon,"
and a lot of the music was written by Rick Wright, they
were a far better band. Drugs were absolutely part of
rock & roll at that time and there was no escaping
them, except in people's contemporary revisionist memories.
haven't returned to your site for a LONG time, I don't
think you remmember me or my questions so I'm not even
going to try to remind you of them. I just want to ask
your opinion on the new wave of Mexican Cinema slowly
gaining power internationally, mostly in the United
States.....Your opinnion on "Amores Perros",
"Y tu Mama Tambien" and "The Crime of
Father Amaro"? I just want to know what you think
of these films as an american, out of curiosity. Thank
I haven't seen any of them. I did just recently watch
Luis Bunuel's "Simon of the Desert," which
he made in Mexico, and I liked that.
have noticed that every time a good clean fun show comes
on the TV that it doesn't last long. I am so sick of
watching shows like ER, NYPD BLUE and other shows of
that nature. There's just too many of them out there
and they have run them through the dirt and beyond.
That's all they ever put on the TV. I enjoyed watching
your show The Jack of all Trades. 1. What are the chances
of getting the show Jack of all Trades back on the air?
2. How would someone go about getting the show put back
on the air? 3. Is there a TV sation that you know of
that aires re runs of the show?
show dropped dead and I'm sure it won't be revived.
I haven't seen it listed anywhere, nor am I getting
residuals on it, so I'd say it's not being shown. And
they're not making those kind of shows anymore. Sorry.
I have read too many candid interviews with Waters to
believe otherwise about his lack of drug use. He was
deeply affected by Syd Barrett's decline partially due
to his extreme use of LSD. Shit, the whole premise of
the album "Wish You Were Here" is partly based
on Barrett and his decline directly related to his use
I don't think it is re-writing of history at all. Water's
has never been a guy who hides much of anything even
if he has kids (which he does).
What does he have to lose? Nothing. The series of interviews
I read were as candid as can be. That is always how
he has been.
I met him once a few years back and he was like this
when I talked to him. I was fortunate enough to talk
to him for a while, since I was doing an editing job
at Sony Studios here, and he came up for some business
when he was touring in 99'. My friend who worked there
tipped me off, and I was able to meet him.
Water's has stated many times his personal feeling about
drugs and his first and only acid trip. He wasn't drawn
to them, but he also has stated that he doesn't pass
judgment on those who do them. It is their choice.
Of course they experimented in th 60's along with Syd,
but with the exception of Syd, the rest of the band
moved on and didn't continue the practice, although,
Glimour smoked pot for a time, then gave it up after
Even though I don't use them, I personally have nothing
against other people doing drugs, and I also feel that
pot should be legalized. Drugs go hand in hand with
Rock and Roll, however, I feel that many people who
do them such as yourself, feel that all Rock bands from
that era where doing them all the time, and this is
simply not true whether you believe it or not.
I think your bias on this issue is just as bad as Cameron
Crowe ignoring the drug theme in "Almost Famous",
however it is the opposite extreme.
Sure the Beatles did them, Brian Wilson did a lot of
them, but as for Waters, I don't belive he did, and
I know for a fact that Peter Gabriel never did LSD or
anything else for that matter, and look at the creative
things he did with Genesis and beyond.
In the end, I think drugs work for some, and they don't
work for others, you just have to live with that, and
I am sure you do.
may be the case with Roger Waters, but I still don't
believe him. I think all of those guys were doing plenty
of hallucenigenics in the mid- to late-sixties, and
if they didn't like LSD, then they were doing coke and
speed and anything else they could get their grubby
paws on. Waters may well have stopped by the time of
"Dark Side," but I just doen't believe he
wasn't partaking before that, as well as all the rest
of the band. And all other bands of the time. By the
mid-seventies coke was so prevelant you couldn't go
into any recording studio or post facility without being
offered lines. All the baby-boomers, who are for the
most part, the sell-out generation, will say whatever
they have to to keep their good names intact now.
read that there is nowhere for you to go to see old
films on the big screen anymore. I count myself very
lucky here in Melbourne that we have a "rescued"
old-style cinema that still has the guts to show them.
How's this for a list of up-coming films:
Lawrence of Arabia
The Fountainhead / Mildred Pierce
Rear Window / Vertigo
It Happened One Night / Lost Horizon
The Party / Some Like It Hot
Ragin Bull / Network
The Good, The Bad and The Ugly
Gone With The Wind
The Matese Falcon / To Have and To Have Not
and last but not least...
Robot Monster / Plan 9 From Outer Space.
Not a bad selection. Mind you, they also show a lot
of crap to cater for the mindless youths. I'll mis it
like hell because I'm moving to Bangkok in 8 weeks.
Oh well, you can't have everything.
a standard revival theater it's an okay line-up. I've
seen all of them so it wouldn't inspire me that much.
For years there in the 1970s and '80s in LA, there were
about ten revival theaters, USC, UCLA, and the LA County
Museum showing old films all the time. You could catch
a program of twenty films of Luis Bunuel at one theater,
while at another they were showing about fifty silent
comedies, while at another they were showing Louis Malle's
six-part "Phantom of India, while at another they
were showing all of The Beatles' films. And people used
to fill the theaters. The good old days. Now we all
sit alone watching TV.
I do agree that Kubrick's decision to go with the classical
score was a good idea.
I don't think the film would have held up so well with
Floyd's music as the backdrop, although the anomaly
thing with the Floyd song "Echoes" and the
film is quite interesting.
The Floyd minutia to which I spouted in my last post
was straight from Water's mouth from an interview I
read not too long ago. He has been scoring an opera
for the past 4 years and I think it is going to be released
I enjoyed your Halifax story it sounded like a good
adventure even if you were told to leave Halifax. You
mentioned you were smoking dope and listening to "Darkside
of the Moon".
Here is some more Floyd minutia which may shatter the
view of the album of all the dopeheads out there. Though,
The band were not on anything when they conceived and
recorded the album which is considered one of the greatest
stoner albums of all time. (except in Australia where
the band says it was voted the best album to have sex
It was Richard Wright the keyboard player who said in
a recent interview for the albums's "35th anniverary:
"We could have never made that album if we were
on anything, it had taken far too much focus and it
would have been impossible if we were all doped up".
In fact, Waters was never a "druggie", however,
he did smoke cigarettes for a longtime. The rest of
the band dabbled, but never did it on a consistent basis.
Waters said that the only thing the band did during
breaks in the studio was "have a few pints(beer),
watch 'Monty Pyton's Flying Circus', and play a little
cricket and football (soccer) with the crew from Abbey
He also agreed with Wright, "It would have been
impossible for me to put as much as I did into this
album had I been on any kind of Halucingenics. We all
saw what it did to Syd and we all stayed away from it,
although later on during the Wall sessions, Richard
built up a fondness for cocaine which almost ruined
his life and his career.
I took LSD once in my life, and it scared me so much,
I could not even walk across the street, I just stood
there frightened out of my mind, unable to move. Drugs
like that never worked for me, however, cigaretttes
were a different story."
do believe there's some rewriting of history going on.
I've heard this same tripe from a number of old rockers
and I just plain-old don't buy it. I think it's because
they have to fess up to the children and grandchildren
now and don't want to set bad examples. The next thing
we'll hear is that Keith Richards and Ozzie Osborne
never did any drugs, they just had a few pints now and
then. And like in "Almost Famous," the groupies
didn't really have sex with the rock stars, they were
just friendly companions. The bottom line is, once The
Beatles started taking acid and made "Revolver"
and "Sgt. Pepper," every other rock &
roller followed suit hopping to come up with their masterpiece.
And all these people, including The Beatles, were really
inspired by Brian Wilson taking acid and making "Good
Vibrations." And let's not forget one of the great
acid-heads of rock & roll, Jimi Hendrix, who used
to eat LSD by the handful. I have friends my own age
that I tripped with back in the early '70s who have
admitted to recently lying to their children because
they couldn't own up to the sheer amount and diversity
of drugs they took back then. The cop-out response is,
"Well, I smoked a little pot back then, but everybody
did." Since I have no kids I guess I'm allowed
to be truthful and own up to it. I probably took acid
and mescaline about three hundred times. I began smoking
pot seriously in 1973 and haven't stopped since. I should
have bought myself a gold-plated roach clip for my 30th
anniversary. It's not that I'm proud of it necessarily,
but those are the facts.
no mister brian.c.iAm real exist like you and like josh
and like sam .bud iám only a truck draiver with
some good ideas???And josh, for mi any one from this
world have two ayes two hands and one hard and sam make
not exepsion .bud i don't say nothing any more because
i have make you head ful with ideas. ONLY THIS:FROM
THE BEGINING OF TIME UNTIL THE BIGERST GRIME ONE MAN
STANDING IN BETWEEN (ORESTIS THE KING OF JUSTICE:GEORGE
Sam has only two ayes, two hands and one hard [on?].
But he's still the Great Oz. And remember, pay no attention
to the little man behind the curtain.
I looked back over the last couple of pages of answered
questions to see where the *@$# the idea that you were
being "politically correct" came from. Given
your typical bluntness and honesty, I think that would
be about the last thing anyone would ever call you.
Weird. But the notion of directors having a mission
to uplift the morals of the audience is pretty scary
- sound like what all those Hitler Youth training films
were trying to do. Yeesh.
A couple of observations on recent discussions. You
had mentioned "It's A Wonderful Life" as an
example of something that was not copyrighted. Any idea
why? I've read that that was one of the reasons that
it gained popularity over the years - every local station
in the country could run it at Christmastime as much
as they wanted, and so a whole generation grew up getting
used to it. I gather someone (Turner? NBC?) managed
to finally get exclusive rights to it by laying claim
to the copyright on the *music* used in it, and so now
it's just run once a year, on that one station.
And on the ongoing "2001/Close Encounters"
discussion. I was just a little too young to see 2001
n the theatres, so for me it was "Silent Running"
that blew me away with the special effects. By the time
"Close Encounters" had come along, I'd already
been appropriately impressed by "Star Wars."
And while the science in SW was ridiculous to non-existant,
I was basically seeing it as a big fairy tale (lifted
in part from Tolkein and E.R. Burroughs) and so in my
mind I was imaginging all the great sci-fi novels that
could now be brought to the screen using this new technology.
Like you and several here, I was much more interested
in the first part of "Encounters" - the old
guy blowing everyone else's credibility when he announces
"I seen a Bigfoot" still cracks me up. By
the time Dreyfuss starts building the scale version
of Devil's Peak and pissing off his wife, I was beginning
to lose sympathy for him.
And on Kubrick and "Clockwork Orange" - I
assume you know that Walter Carlos, the "Switched
On Bach" guy who did all the synthesizer Beethoven
stuff, later became *Wendy* Carlos?
PS - I'm going to hear a lecture featuring Vilmos Zsigmond
(sp?) and Lazlo Kovacs in about 2 hours. In the remote
chance you read this by then, anything I should ask
very recently, unless you displayed a copyright notice
on your film it was not copyright, even if you had registered
it with the copyright office. "It's a Wonderful
Life" was the only film ever produced by Liberty
Pictures, a company started right after WWII by Frank
Capra and William Wyler that never really took off.
Wyler ended up taking the script for "Roman Holiday"
from that deal and making it later. Anyway, there's
a shot of a bell ringing at the beginning and it says
"Liberty Pictures," but there's no copyright
notice. It was strictly an oversight. The way it used
to work was if there was no copyright notice and you
showed the film in public, it was automatically in the
public domain. That's what happened to "Night of
the Living Dead," too. BTW, Turner Pictures was
only able to copyright the colorized version of "It's
a Wonderful Life," the original black and white
version remains in the public domain.
just curious as to your story about Nova Scotia and
being kicked out? I'm from NS and I'm a big fan of this
site (been reading the Q&A for 3-4 years now) and
find it cool you've been to where I grew up.
PS: I hope your experience didn't sour you on Canadians
from the East. I'm currently in Manitoba and help run
a video store. I advocate and recommend all your films
and made a nice little section to the customers.
to you. No, I have no problem with any Canadians. I
really like Canada, and I've seen more of it than most
Canadians. I've been in every Province but New Foundland,
and one of the two Territories -- The Yukon, I haven't
been to the Northwest Territories. My two buddies and
I were driving across eastern Canada in 1974 in my VW
bug. We stopped in Halifax and were at a laundromat
one evening washing our clothes. We were sitting outside
waiting for the clothes to come out of the dryer, smoking
cigarettes and one of us was playing the guitar (not
me), when two Swedish sailors strolled up and indicated
using international hand signals, that they wanted to
get high. We nodded and went with them back to their
ship, a big freighter down in the harbor. My buddy brought
his guitar with him. We hung out in their quarters smoking
dope, listening to "Dark Side of the Moon,"
drinking Swedish sodas and having a swell time. When
we left the ship and drove about thirty feet, our path
was blocked by the Halifax Harbor Police. They put us
against the wall, frisked us, then asked, "What's
in the guitar case, eh?" My friend answered, "A
guitar." The cop opened the case and in fact found
a guitar, then searched inside it and didn't find anything.
We were then told to get out of Halifax, which we promptly
did. Very lucky for us the cops didn't check the car,
too, because we had a half-pound of weed in there.
E-mail: you got it
you are my soulmate! You got an 'AMEN!" and a "Testify!"
from me, my brother, when I read about you getting just
as irritated as me over talkers at the movie theatre.
Did I ever write in and tell you the following? At an
R-rated flick- a mother, father, and I-swear-to-god,
a toddler.maybe 4 yrs. old tops, were chit-chatting,
babbling and fussing through the 1st half the movie,
and when my "shhhing" didn't get any results,
I turned around and spewed the most venomous "shut
the fuck up!" rant that would've made Satan blush,
all in front of the damn kid. Yes, I said the F-word
at the little one, but I mean really, who brings a kid
to an adult movie? Another time I shhh'ed and shhh'ed.
went out and got the usher to try, no results- then
I complained to the manager- and got free passes to
come to another movie, but the experience was ruined
by that time and the offending guy wasn't thrown out.
While I'm at it, I'll steam publicly here about the
increasingly sloppy presentation of films in the theatres
too. Almost *always* it seems to me they are poorly
focused (I shout out "Focus!" during the previews
and then occasionally see them fiddle with it and land
on it being no better), and the screens have smudges,
tears, or handprints across them from dust. I complained
once about a stain from a big splash of a cola, and
got a shrug.
Hey, I noticed you used "LOL" in a response!
Look at you, so hip. Letting a little online jargon
slip into your vernacular, are you?! Watch out, pretty
soon, you'll be offering those smilie faces for posting!
I still vote that we have an EZ BoardT message board
for conversations here. That way visitors can respond
more fluidly to each other's comments as well as to
yours. But the topics would clip along faster probably,
and drift, which you may not want. EZ Boards is also
handy for posting pictures which may be fun with the
topics that come up here. But I don't want to push.
<insert razzing smilie here>
Regarding the Bill Mahar topic-did you know that Lucy
Lawless was a guest (quite a while ago now) on his "Politically
Incorrect" show? I have to wonder what she thought
of him. Did she ever mention anything to you?
p.s. I tried your AOL email addy recently and it came
"undeliverable". Did you ditch it? Just wondering.
I went to a high-speed internet connection and finally
dumped AOL, who were worthless, obnoxious pricks. Trying
to cancel their service was like trying to leave a communist
country. They kept demanding to know why and kept offering
me more and more free months. But I'm always available
the talking-in-movie-theaters-front, I no longer say
"Shhh" or "Could you please be quiet,"
which never works anyway. I go straight to "Shut
the fuck up!" This immediately indicates that I'm
not kidding and I am aggressive. Of course, I then spend
the next ten minutes with my heart pumping overtime
and adrenaline flooding my system, but that's kind of
a kick, too.
are a horrible group. They have a very easy job and
never do it properly. I can't tell you how many screenings
of my own films have been ruined by moron projectionists.
Sam had a horrendous early screening of "Darkman"
that was all based on bad projection, and he went up
to the booth afterward and ripped the guy a new asshole,
which I really admired.
believe it was Alex North who wrote the original score
for '2001' (though Goldsmith wrote the liner notes on
the CD release). North, who had worked with Kubrick
earlier on 'Spartacus', was left uninformed of the omission
of his music and only discovered it upon attending the
premiere. He was rather disappointed. But Kubrick was
never famous for being a 'nice guy'. Until next time....
Mr. Know it All
that's my nickname. You are correct and I am wrong.
Thanks for the correction. It was the liner notes that
threw my fading memory. I have heard the score, and
I liked it, but I'm glad Kubrick dropped it. As a little
piece of trivia for everyone of this subject, the co-effects
supervisor on "2001" was Wally Veevers, who
had done the visual effects for Kubrick on "Dr.
I stumbled upon your site, I can't exactly remember;
but I have to admit, some of your opinions and reviews
I disagree with vehemently. Still, I'm not going to
be one of those who go into some tirade like "What
the fuck is wrong with you?!?" or things of that
nature. Hell, your inclined to your opinion just as
I am to mine. I remember six years ago how I hated The
English Patient, thought it was a long, overblown piece
of self-indulgent crap, and my friends were saying that
i was an idiot and they had lost some repect for me.
All over a friggin' movie. It's like politics, there
are some things people can't have an intelligent debate
said, let me ask you something rather general. I am
a writer and aspiring director, and I'd be intruiged
to hear a piece of advice or opinion about making film.
Something indespensible. Something, in working yourself,
you adhere to as a rule, and that you would think is
important to pass on to others. A credo, if you will.
I've probably rambled your ear off, I know, but anything
would be appreciated.
And yes, I wouldn't be surprised if this is covered
somewhere else on these boards, but I couldn't find
it specifically. Also, I might be a bit lazy dealing
with the internet. Welcome to the microwave society,
here goes: To thine own self be true. I just made that
up, BTW. As Bill Cosby once said, "I don't know
the secret of success, but I do know the secret of failure
-- try to please everybody." How's that?
I must clarify my statement about Pink Floyd attempting
to do the score for "2001". They were interested
in scoring a version to send to Kubrick, and Waters
has said many times that it his biggest regret that
he never did that.
They were going to approach Kubrick with the music,
since they ran into him quite often in the same circles
in and around the London scene at the time.
Waters admits to never reading much science fiction,
but he was a big fan of Arthur C. Clarke.
Waters was told by Kubrick that he was doing the film
adaptation of a script that he and Clarke had been working
on and that is partly what sparked Waters interest in
doing the score for the film.
They were never approached by Kubrick for the use of
their music until 1971 after he was interested in including
parts of Floyd's "Atom Heart Mother" in "A
Clock Work Orange", however, the band turned down
his offer for vaious reasons.
This backfired on Waters much later in his career when
he asked permission to use some snippets of HAL and
heavy breathing from "2001" on his 1992 release
"Amused to Death".
Kubrick's people refused Waters permission to use the
snippets, So Waters dubbed in his own breathing effects,
and recorded a backwards message to Kubrick in one of
the songs. It was quite funny actually.
When he toured here a couple years ago, he used the
HAL snippet live, so he somehow garnered the permission
after Kubrick passed away.
As for the Floyd being "nobodys" in 66/67,
that was true in the rest of the world outside of the
UK and parts of Europe, however they were big in London
and in fact, they did start making trippy music along
with their early singles penned by Barrett before the
Two songs on their first album which was released in
1967 were quite trippy to most people let alone the
rest of the album. "Astronomy Domine", and
"Intersteller Overdrive" were both songs which
captured the essence of what Pink Floyd sounded like
live at the time.
Their early shows consisted of long "space"
jams which went over well with the tripping audiences.
"Intersteller Overdrive",an instrumental,
was used in the 1967 counterculture film "Tonite
Lets all make love in London".
Pink Floyd minutia. I love it. But honestly, even if
Waters was interested, that doesn't mean there was the
slightest chance in hell that Floyd was ever going to
score "2001." As I said, Jerry Goldsmith was
hired to score the film, and did, then pretty late in
the game Kubrick dropped Goldsmith's score to go classical.
And there was a stroke of brilliance in using classical
music that would have been lost with an actual score
or trippy Pink Floyd music.
mentioned you had 20 non-fiction books lined up. i have
a set lined up as well, and tend to buy more books than
i have time for. just wondering what they were...one
wouldnt happen to be lance armstrongs book would it?
not literally lined-up. I have thousands of books and
they're all in their proper sections. But some of the
books awaiting my perusal are: Miles Davis' autobiography;
a bioghraphy of Chesty Puller, the most decorated U.S.
marine officer of all time; "Theordore Rex,"
which is the second part of Edmund Morris' biography
of Teddy Roosevelt (part one was great); and "Dance
With Demons," a bio of Jerome Robbins. Right now
I'm re-reading Alan Jay Lerner's autobiography, "On
the Street Where I Live." I recently finished "Movies
& Money" by David Puttnam, which was very interesting.