“Let me try and be as direct as I possibly can with you on this. There was no relationship to repair. I didn’t intend for Harvey to buy and release The Immigrant – I thought it was a terrible idea. And I didn’t think he would want the film, and I didn’t think he would like the film. He bought the film without me knowing! He bought it from the equity people who raised the money for me in the States. And I told them it was a terrible idea, but I had no say over the matter. So they sold it to him without my say-so, and with me thinking it was a terrible idea. I was completely correct, but I couldn’t do anything about it. It was not my preference, it was not my choice, I did not want that to happen, I have no relationship with Harvey. So, it’s not like I repaired some relationship, then he screwed me again, and I’m an idiot for trusting him twice! Like I say, you try to distance yourself as much as possible from the immediate response to a movie. With The Immigrant I had final cut. So he knew he couldn’t make me change it. But he applied all the pressure he could, including shelving the film.”
~ James Gray
By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com
Raising Kael: What’s In A Title?
PAULINE KAEL is set to join the ranks of the esteemed litterateurs of the Library of America (alongside her peer Manny Farber), and there are new collections of Philip Roth and Kurt Vonnegut in the next batch of releases as well. The volume’s edited by Sanford Schwartz, and coming from the critic who wrote “I Lost It At The Movies,” “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang,” “Going Steady,” “Deeper Into Movies,” “When The Lights Go Down” and “Taking It All In,” what sweetly skeevy double-entendre of a title has the august press arrived at? “The Age of Movies: Selected Writings of Pauline Kael.” Whut? What opportunity has been missed here? “The Tender Age Of Movies”? Nah. “The Underage of Movies”? No. “The Long And Short: Selected Movie Writings By Pauline Kael,” that wouldn’t be half-bad. Why is an appropriately inappropriate title so hard?