Flim-Flammers Back Down
This morning I tried again to get a response from Lionsgate’s New York-based home video senior publicity exec Jodie Magid about how and why Amazon.com’s Apocalypse Now Bluray page lists “Eleanor Coppola‘s Hearts of Darkness” among the special features. The 1991 doc was co-directed by George Hickenlooper and Fax Bahr, which I explained yesterday in a piece called “Stunned.” “Surely the Amazon team posts whatever info is provided by the distributor,” I wrote Magid, “so it would seem that you and/or your office passed along this erroneous information.”
A few minutes ago Magid wrote me the following message: “All appropriate legal credits are included in the billing block of the packaging. Amazon is in the process of correcting their information.”
I wrote back with the following: “Thanks, but just to be double clear, by ‘appropriate’ legal credits you mean that the names of co-directors Hickenlooper and Bahr will be stated on the Bluray packaging?” Magid hasn’t responded to this as I post.
I’m also not satisfied by Magid’s 22-word response because she hasn’t addressed how the idea of Hearts of Darkness being “Eleanor Coppola’s” — an error that has been sitting on the aforementioned Amazon.com page for an undetermined amount of time — might have arisen in the first place. Somebody at Lionsgate or American Zoetrope must have sent this information along to begin with. Because the people at Amazon don’t make this stuff up as a rule.
An Apocalypse Now Bluray press release sent out by Magid’s office states the following: “INCLUDED ONLY ON THE FULL DISCLOSURE EDITION: Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse, including optional audio commentary with Eleanor and Francis Ford Coppola — first time in 1080P High Definition.” So at the very least Magid’s release didn’t inform that the co-directors of the doc are Hickenlooper and Bahr.
It’s not provable but I’m fairly persuaded that Francis and Eleanor Coppola allowed if not encouraged a misunderstanding about the true authorship and creation of Hearts of Darkness to be included in the Bluray publicity materials. In their heart of hearts I think they’d be more or less content to see the names “George Hickenlooper” and “Fax Bahr” expunged from the record entirely.
(l.) George Hickenlooper; (r.) Eleanor and Francis Coppola.
Hickenlooper wrote the following on HE yesterday: “I think the more appropriate way to look at it is that Hearts of Darkness is Eleanor Coppola’s story. It’s not her film. Hardly. It’s her story. But that’s because I decided to make it her story.
“When I got involved with this project 20 years ago, Showtime was going to make it a one hour TV special called Apocalypse Now Revisited. It was going to be basically an hour-long special about how they did the war pyrotechnics. It was going to be dull and stupid.
“At the time I told Steve Hewitt and my partner Fax Bahr. “Nobody cares about a making of movie, especially one that is 14 years old.” I argued that the film had to have an emotional component. At the time, no one was familiar with Eleanor’s diary ‘Notes.’ My father had purchased it for me on my 16th birthday. I devoured it up.
“When I got involved with HOD, I advocated using her diary as the narrative thread. I got incredible resistance from Showtime, and I got initial resistance from Eleanor. Not much, but some.
“Once I was able to convince everyone that the film would best be told through her narrative voice, it was then and only then it became HER STORY.
“Eleanor did shoot the footage in the Philippines back in 1976, but she only stepped twice into our cutting room on the back lot of Universal. Twice. For a total of eight hours.
“I was there for a year, 15-18 hours a day. So it’s not a film by Eleanor, but I guess it’s sexier from a marketing angle to make it look that way.”
Hickenlooper elaborated upon the Hearts of Darkness history in a 2007 interview with laist correspondent Josh Tate.
In a followup this morning he also informs that “the reality is that Fax Bahr hardly had anything to do with HOD. He was writing for the show In Living Color at the time. He spent a total of about three weeks out of the entire year in the editing room. Eleanor spent two days. It was me and the two editors for an entire year.”
Someone has to say it, so here goes:
“THE HORROR!! THE HORROR!!!!”
Yeah, it’s pretty funny, I agree. Just a little comic diversion, hah-hah. Those nutty Coppolas!
Can we get a little perspective here? This is about a mention on Amazon and Lionsgate said they are correcting it. How often are films credited to their subjects and/or stars instead of their makers? Um. All the fucking time. So while I see the injustice here, and I understand that GH is a friend of the court, it is a little hard for me to understand the huge issue and yardage of copy this injustice is taking up when such kinds of short hand and exclusion and assumption are the stock and trade of this site and most entertainment writing. And now to further the domino injustice effect you print GH taking credit AWAY from his partner and quantifying the hours that Bahr spent compared to his which is highly subjective and profoundly self serving and certainly not an accurate reflection of the credits
fences is right – you should be spending time on something, y’know, interesting. This hardly seems like a grand injustice worth crusading for and having multiple posts a day on.
Saturday Night Live’s legendary Apocalypse Now parody with Martin Sheen and Bill Murray as Coppola
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xaqhr4_snl-martin-sheen-in-apocalypse-now_shortfilms
Wells to fences: First of all, who are you and what exactly is the basis of your perspective? Because you seem to either have an agenda to serve someone’s interests (or some company’s) or you’re just pulling assumptions & conclusions out of your ass.
You’re trying to make this thing into a simple misprint or misunderstanding by some typist at Amazon.com. Trust me, this didn’t happen by accident.
The film is owned by the Coppola’s. This entire matter flows from this fact and their resultant ability to pull strings.
The line about Hearts of Darkness being “Eleanor Coppola’s” was signed off on by Lionsgate and probably (I’m guessing) American Zoetrope. Someone high up in the loop decided to write this, and in so doing create an impression of Eleanor being the auteur. It wasn’t like, “Oh, gee…I must have typed the wrong words by accident…sorry!”
Jodie Magid’s press release about the Apocalypse Now Bluray, as I stated above, didn’t include Hickenlooper or Bahr’s name, which is whacked in itself. NO ONE IN THE VIDEO P.R. BUSINESS EVER LISTS A FEATURE DOCUMENTARY IN A PRESS RELEASE WITHOUT STATING THE NAME[S] OF THE DIRECTOR[S] — IT’S JUST NOT DONE.
History is not just written by the winners. It’s also written by people who have the money and power to massage the printed record. The Coppolas tried to rewrite history by allowing Eleanor to have a vague possessory credit in marketing materials, and then — this is also a big thing — by recording a commentary track on the HOD Bluray disc.
Honestly — when was the last time you heard a commentary track for ANY film in which the director wasn’t heard? I’ll tell you the last time. It was when you listened to a commentary track for an older film directed by someone who was DEAD when the recording took place. Directors are always first in line when it comes to recording a DVD/Buray commentary. Except this time.
You guys don’t seem to get what they tried to do here, and have in fact done to some extent. The Coppolas tried to market and p.r. their way into persuading the home video community and the film industry to accept the idea that it’s Eleanor’s film. And your response, fences and Larry Gopnik, is to say, “Hey, what’s the biggie”? Obeisance before power much?
The Paramount Home Video DVD of HOD (which included Eleanor Coppola’s Coda, a backstage doc about Francis’s Youth Without Youth) apparently fostered the impression with many that she had directed HOD. Hickenlooper told me he once had a long argument with Keanu Reeves who was insisting that Eleanor, not George, had directed it.
Amazon.com is not about “entertainment writing.” It’s not about writers interpreting facts. It’s about information supplied to Amazon by the distributor.
If Fax Bahr worked on HOD for three weeks, as Hickenlooper claims, and Hickenlooper worked on it for a full year, your advice would be to…what, hide this information? I’d appreciate a straight answer here. If you had worked for a full year on a project, an and your partner had worked three weeks, would you do your level best to cover this history up for his/her sake?
Hey, my comment sounds more flip than I intended.
I thought Glenn Kenny would be impressed if I quoted Conrad instead of Huston.
In this biz, your credits are your career. If you are Reggie and you hit one out of the park, you don’t want Dave WInfield getting the stat, right?
If you are fortunate enough to make a film that makes a lasting impression and is a major critical and financial hit, you shouldn’t have to hire the Scientologists or Rogers and Cowan to run around insuring the historical record stays that way.
George shouldn’t have to chase Bezos Bozos or anybody just as Frank Gehry shouldn’t have to fight to make sure he’s credited with the Music Center or Dylan with “Like A Rolling Stone.”
I mean, isn’t Francis the guy who made sure it was titled BRAM STOKER’S Dracula???
The amazon.com editorial review for Apocalypse Now (on the same page) might be the worst offender. Although the author is to blame here rather than Zoetrope/FFC/Paramount/Lionsgate/alloftheabove:
“Coppola’s obsession (effectively detailed in the riveting documentary Hearts of Darkness, directed by Coppola’s wife, Eleanor) informs every scene and every frame, and the result is a film for the ages. –Jeff Shannon”
The sad truth is, this just makes whoever signed off on the possessory credit look bad. This is the Information Age and anyone can find out the truth after spending less than thirty seconds online.
“Eleanor spent two days. It was me and the two editors for an entire year.”
Sorry, HIckenlooper sounds like a myopic dick here, IMO. So she spent 8 hours in the editing room. Fine. How many did he spend on the set of the AN recording the majority of the HOD’s content. Give him his due credit, but it is her film too. It’s not just her “story.” She didn’t just hand off a one-sheet synopsis. She handed off the bulk of the film’s running time.
Jeff,
for as long as I can remember I always thought the doc was directed by Eleanor. Is it because I didn’t pay much attention to the credits? Probably. But along the line I must have read that somewhere. I didn’t just make it up in my head.
And as George himself says, from a marketing perspective it’s way more exciting to say that Eleanor made the film. That’s probably what I first read before watching it on video back in like ’99 or something.
So I’m willing to believe that many people out there have made the same mistake and it’s not some kind of conspiracy pushed forward by a powerful family. More realistic is the idea of false advertising for monetary gain.
Jeffrey. I have no agenda besides the fact that I enjoy reading you site — but I have seen that your objectivity tends to fly away with all matters Hickenlooper. I have nothing against him and I completely support the notion that Directors should have an opportunity to do a commentary but alright already. There is a dedicated DVD for the film he and Bahr made, a DVD in which the doc is the main content, unlike the bluray of which you speak in which it is an extra. It still would be preferable to me that Hickenlooper AND Bahr get to speak on the track — as we as Coppolas. Cause lets get real.
What do you really think is more interesting to film fans of the AP NOW? — GH musing about how he cut the doc, or Eleanor and Francis ruminating on their marriage and ambition and process with the perspective of so many years? I personally say the Coppolas… and maybe just maybe that’s why they are appearing instead of Hickenlooper.
Also, Jeff– regarding the issue with Bahr. It seems to me to undermine your outrage that you can reving that the real credited “author” of this Doc has been shafted and then blithley publish the GH’s assertion that one of the two credited authors of the film (the one who isnt a regular contributor on your site) is undeserving of credit.
Finally, it seems to me that we should all acknowledge that because the film is made up of footage and recordings made by the Coppolas (regardless of whose idea is was to use these elements) that is is natural in the current shallow media environment that people might reassign authorship (wrongly) to the Coppolas. Is that wrong yes. As wrong as GH taking shots about how many hours people spent in a cutting room.
apologies for typos.
@Accountname
“So I’m willing to believe that many people out there have made the same mistake and it’s not some kind of conspiracy pushed forward by a powerful family. More realistic is the idea of false advertising for monetary gain.”
False advertising for monetary gain that benefits….Hickenlooper or the Coppola’s? If a powerful family is sidelining a key member of the film’s team, for the sake of money, then wouldn’t it, then, be easy to assume some level of conspiracy is at play? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe that’s part of Hickenlooper’s underlying/between the lines complaint. This whole situation is a mess. If the Coppola’s were paying George a considerable sum of money or allowing a courteous profit share for the sake of having his name downplayed, then…well, I’m not sure how George would respond. Maybe he wouldn’t make the fuss he’s making now? Is Hickenhooper getting screwed artistically AND financially or just artistically?
For the record:
The more I think about this, the more angry I get. I had this fight with the Coppolas two years ago when they released HOD on Paramount. No one was interested in listening then. Now with this Bluray thing, no one seems to give a shit now. The reality is THIS IS NOT Eleanor’s movie. It’s just not. It is a lie and it is infuriating. I have contacted my attorney about this. And though I don’t think there is a conspiracy here, I just think is a pathetic reflection of the state of things. No one really gives a shit when they put out these DVDs. They don’t know movies, they don’t like movies, they put them out to make a fast buck and they’re too fucking lazy to do the research. It is well documented that I directed this thing. That I share credit with Fax Bahr, that we both won Emmys for it. They slap Eleanor’s name on their because they figure it will sell more units and they just don’t give a fuck about the truth. I shrug my shoulders because I raised hell two or three years ago and no one gave a shit. There’s only so much you can get beaten up or ignored by an 800 pound gorilla. After a while, you have to just top fighting it and hope people are smart enough, or have the desire enough to want to educate themselves and know the truth. That’s it. Here is my rant from two years ago in the New York Observer.
http://www.observer.com/2007/apocalypse-cash-cow-coppola-takes-doc-about-his-magnum-opus-dvd-its-director-pouts
I am amazed at how many people are seeming to crap on Hickenlooper or diminish him here (or make things out like this is not a big deal).
Hearts of Darkness is a brilliant film, everyone seems to agree on this point. The structure of the film and the decision to use Eleanor Coppolla’s audio tapes was Hickenlooper’s decision. Though he had a co-director, Fax Bahr, Hickenlooper did virtually all of the editing.
Is there anyone out there that disagrees with any of these points? Because if you agree with these points, then you should be upset that Eleanor Coppolla is getting credit for directing this movie.
Notice I didn’t say “claiming credit.” She’s getting credit, and it is incumbent upon her and her husband to set the record straight. The fact is that she didn’t make this movie, it was a movie made about her.
Do you remember when Al Gore used to get all the grief for supposedly saying he “invented the internet”? I used to defend him and point out that he never actually said this. Then I saw him interviewed several times last year and each time he was introduced as having “won an nobel peace prize, and oscar…” Well Gore did NOT win an Oscar, Davis Guggenheim won an oscar for the move that Gore starred in. My point is that Gore NEVER corrects the hosts; and this is the same sin that the coppolla’s are guilty of.
Honestly, this is important stuff. If you HE readers, appreciate art and the artist’s sensibility, then proper credit is really really important.
And Mark; when you accuse Hickenlooper of being “a myopic dick”… dude, is possible to say that nicer? What is it about the internet that makes people say such hurtful things? As near as I can tell Hickenlooper generally DOESN’T bring this stuff up except when it’s been forced upon him; two years ago with the release of the original DVD and now with this version. People ask him question and he’s just trying to set the record straight. I don’t think that he’s trying to diminish the importance ot Eleanor coppolla in the project; I’ve never ever gotten that sense. He just seems to be trying to make clear the specific effort involved in making his specific movie. I mean Ken Burn’s Civil war was essentially 100% the narration of various soldiers. Ken Burns never, ever diminishes their contribution to his film. But is there really an argument that it’s not a Ken Burns film?
Despite all of this crapola dumped on him, it seems pretty big of Hickenlooper to continue to praise Coppolla and describe her role; his film is “her story” told by her. Is that so bad?
I guess what is so shocking or sad about some of these reactions is that Hickenlooper, with both Bahr and E. Coppolla, created a real masterpiece. Yet the vibe he gets 15 years later is a clear drumbeat of negativity. Can’t the guy bask in any adulation for her work?
Clearly, in documentary there is confusion over authorship, particularly when a high profile subject is featured. But those making the argument that Eleanor is the author or co-author of the film because she’s the cinematographer of the archival footage are way off the mark.
Is Timothy Treadwell the director or co-director of Grizzly Man? Is Kim Roberts the director or co-director of Trouble the Water? There is/are innumerable examples of documentary subjects being responsible for some of the content of the documentary, but this in no way qualifies them as the author.
Documentary is all about taking raw materials of real life (sometimes existing, often times not) and fashioning them into a narrative. It’s been years since I’ve seen Hearts of Darkness, but it’s clear that George and Fax (in whatever split of responsibility) took Eleanor’s diaries and raw material and made a terrific film out of it. And it was clear when the film came out in theaters (and Siskel and Ebert wildly praised it) that the film was authored by George and Fax, focusing on Eleanor’s never-before-seen material.
Clearly, at some point, it became of interest to the Coppola’s to reframe the creative force behind the film. And as owners of the film, they had the power to do so. Some might want to make this about Jeff and George’s friendship, but the artistic ownership issues raised by this situation are not small – neither for filmmakers generally nor documentary filmmakers specifically.
Hah! Freudian slip!
“any adulation for her work”
Of course I meant HIS work…
lazespud. I may be out of line. wouldn’t be the first time, but it’s somewhat tiresome here to continually hear how Billy Bob, Harvey, Francis, and just about everyone else in Hollywood got together and decided to punish Hickenlooper for eternity. You hear it so much, that you eventually just want the guy to take some accountability or at least not be so combative every time he feels a slight.
Eleanor handed him an absolute gift. There is no movie without her footage. Why spit in her face?
Movie review from the New York Times
Hearts of Darkness: A Film Maker’s Apocalypse Written and directed by Fax Bahr and George Hickenlooper; documentary footage by Eleanor Coppola; director of photography, Vittorio Storaro; edited by Michael Greer and Jay Miracle; music by Todd Boerlelheide; production designer, Dean Tovoularis; produced by George Zaloom and Les Mayfield; released by Triton Pictures. At Film Forum 3, 209 Houston Street Running time: 96 minutes. This film is rated R. With: Francis Ford Coppola, Robert Duvall, Dennis Hopper, Frederic Forrest, John Milius, Martin Sheen and others.
http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9D0CE0D91530F934A15752C1A967958260&scp=1&sq=george%20hickenlooper%20hearts%20of%20darkness&st=cse&pagewanted=print
I don’t want to diminish Fax Bahr’s contribution to the film. It was a sore subject at the time, and I probably should not have opened my mouth. It only brings back bad feelings. Zaloom hired Fax Bahr as the original director but he was basically unable to really begin the job because of his TV show obligation. I was brought on board because Zaloom had seen my Bogdanovich doc in unfinished form. In the end this DOES all sound petty and self serving and it’s really not that important. We share credit and that’s that. Fax is a talented, good guy. And the one oversight that I am guilty of is that I think the two most important names that should be credited are Michael Greer and Jay Miracle. Greer, in particular, was on from the beginning and both he and Jay really gave shape to the picture like no other editors I had worked with before. Don’t forget I was a mere 25 years old at the time but I did have a strong vision of the picture, and I believe my strongest contribution was making it Eleanor’s story. It was something I truly had to fight for. I do agree with Jeff. It’s frustrating when you work so hard on something, and then the politics of it all ends up smothering the truth. Yes, the truth is subjective, but then again all we have is our subjectivity, right?
Is Timothy Treadwell the director or co-director of Grizzly Man?
Good point, but I doubt that Herzog would start trashing Treadwell had Amazon omitted his name on the Amazon page. “Do you know how much time Treadwell work on his postmortem interviews???”
“Hearts of Darkness,” written and directed by Fax Bahr and George Hickenlooper, is based on documentary footage that Eleanor Coppola shot at the time, and on recent interviews with both Coppolas, plus Milius, Lucas and actors Martin Sheen, Frederic Forrest, Robert Duvall, Dennis Hopper, Timothy Bottoms and Larry Fishburne, who incredibly was only 14 when he played one of the patrol boat crew.
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19920117/REVIEWS/201170301/1023
Lastly, the one single person who really is responsible for the existence of HOD at all is Producer George Zaloom. Zaloom is a remarkable guy who gave so many young filmmakers a chance. He is a true producer of vision and it was his idea alone to find the footage and convince the Coppolas to turn it over. He loves films, he loves filmmakers, and he started so many young careers including mine, Fax Bahr, Peyton Reed, John Schultz, Shawn Shepps, and numbers of others. I will always credit Zaloom, along with Roger Corman, for giving me my big break.
Lazespud– part of what set me off was Jeff’s printing of GH’s assertions that both Bahr (his own partner!) and Coppola spent no wortwhile time in the cutting room and thus are relatively unworthy of credit for the masterpiece you speak of. I didnt think that was very classy.
So. Okay. I am willing to go along with the idea that Coppola’s contributions to the cutting were minimal (taking GH’s word– and despite the fact her contributions to the content were huge) but when he throws his partner under the bus, my respect and trust went away.
Any of us who have been in cutting rooms know that time in a cutting room is not the sole arbiter of authorship. First of all, very important authorial ideas can happen in an instant, secondly, if authorship was based only upon putting in the most time in cutting rooms then editors would be doing commentaries, not directors.
I am sorry that people are unhappy. This is a cruel business.
@Mark
Who are you? Your arguments are perplexing, to say the least. I guess Spike Lee should thank Katrina and the lazy government officials for the shit storm that was Katrina and the aftermath?
“Thanks for setting the stage for such a devastating tragedy!! Let’s work together again soon!”
Baffling. Utterly baffling.
Hearts of Darkness, a documentary about the shooting of Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now (1979), is the most spectacular inside look ever offered into the ineffable process of filmmaking. Codirected by Fax Bahr and George Hickenlooper, the movie, which is playing theatrically in selected theaters (it was first seen last year on Showtime), is an assemblage of behind-the-scenes footage shot by Coppola’s wife, Eleanor; recent interviews with Coppola, his associates, and the principal actors; and on-the-set audiotape recordings Eleanor Coppola made of her husband without his knowledge.
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,309361,00.html
Hickenlooper wins.
I find nothing perplexing about what Mark is saying. An no its not the same as using general news footage in a doc about a generalized disaster.
HOWEVER if Spike had decided to fashion a doc about one woman’s journey through Katrina, and that woman had already published her journals abut the storm and they had caused a cultural stir. And that woman had already shot footage of the storm and handed it to Spike. And if that woman were married to one of the most important citizens of NO. And if in his entire career, Spike Lee had not made a single film that even came close to the power of the one film he made with this woman’s footage and journals, THEN maybe your analogy would be correct.
Fences:
Disagree with you. Cutting documentary film is all about time in the cutting room. That is authorship. You write the films there. They do not write themselves. Narrative filmmakers use screenplays, doc filmmakers use editors. There is no other way to do it. So yes, authorship, is about time in the cutting room when it comes to docs. I spent four years in the cutting room cutting Mayor of the Sunset Strip, so don’t tell me what constitutes authorship when it comes to editorial.
Why do you think issues like FINAL CUT are so hot button.
@Fences,
If this is your overall basis of logic and argument then please, go through every documentary and defend your bizarre position. Shooting footage isn’t directing, especially if said person never bothered to piece together the footage in the first place. Christ, with that logic, then every local news cameraman is, technically, the director of that respective news segment. After all, they were the ones that collected the footage, right? If mother Coppola wanted to do something with the footage she had more than enough time and opportunity to do so. Period.
Of course you make docs in the cutting room, George. But I would suggest it is about ideas in the cutting room, not merely one person’s self serving recollection of time spent. You (and Bahr) are the primary authors of this film. I have always known that. I am certainly not challenging that. Merely saying that you should let this go and make another film. Mark has a point– we all have behavior patterns and your feelings of victimization are becoming one. Best way to make everyone know its your film? Make another one that’s just as good without any of these others around. ANything else is just whining.
Lastly– I never would have commented if this injustice and conspiracy had not taken up so much real estate. I agree and always will that the two writers and directors should be the dominating credit.
George: Don’t let this go!
It’s your credit, you made it, you earned it, why the eff should you “let this go????” Sheesh.
Folks, if you have never made anything, please recuse yourself from advising a filmmaker on “letting go” of something he has made and his credit for same. It’s all filmmakers got, in the long run and there is no clouded title on this property.
To suggest otherwise is just, in the words of Stuart Smalley, “stinkin’ thinkin’!”
The question was asked as to when a living director failed to provide a commentary for his/her film? Two instances come to mind:
Brian DePalma is nowhere to be found on the commentary for Mission to Mars, a Disney flick from 2000. I always suspected he was just a hired-gun and a little embarrassed by the movie. The DP, Stephen Bhurum, and Visual Effects Supervisors John Kroll and Hoyt Yeatman, and Production Designer Ed Verreaux ended up doing the yak-track, and it ended up being pretty interesting.
More puzzling is 1999 DVD of October Sky; the initial DVD release had cover artwork indicating a commentary by Director Joe Johnston. When I popped in the disc, no such commentary existed. Subsequent boxes removed the mention of Johnston’s commentary, so something happened along the way. Universal never published an explanation, but I know Johnston recorded one. The 2005 re-release DVD added a commentary by author Homer Hickam, but the Johnston commentary is still notably absent. What gives?
As for HOD, strikes me as strictly a marketing move by Lionsgate; the Coppola name slapped on ad copy will move more units. As long as Bahr and Hickenlooper are still credited on the box and film, all is as it should be, but Lionsgate should have acted with more class than this…
Um. I have made things. Many movies. In a very “authorial” position. And wouldn’t have commented had he not thrown his writing/directing partner under the bus. My advice to GH (as expressed) would be that the energy he is burning up with this outrage is important creative juice he should to put in another film. After all, the HOD does have his name on it and there are many instances (think about WGA arbitrations) where people who made huge authorial contributions are entirely erased. there are far more times when our creative efforts are over shadowed by “stars” who suck up all the credit and whose names and pictures obliterate the real authors. the only cure is for the authors to become important so the press and marketing people see a value in maintaining our names.
@Fences
If you’re speaking from first hand experience, do share. You’re taking mass liberties of tone assumption regarding George. It is, yes, bizarre. If you’ve never created anything through any artistic medium, then it’s likely more difficult for you to understand where he’s coming from. If you have, then…wow. Just, wow.
This is a great thread. Ownership, credit, and tact are fascinating and obviously emotional issues. It’s one reason I’m shocked that people here are ho-humming the Social Network, as probably lacking drama with a general “who cares” attitude.
I went to a documentarians panel a few years ago that included Hickenlooper, Les Blank and Jonathan Demme. Those guys had no problem giving George the respect he deserves, specifically for this film. I’ve seen, and occasionally contributed to, some stupidity on these boards but this really takes the cake, if only because we all supposedly love film. Hickenlooper’s director credit on this film is indisputable.
@Fences,
Again, why are you assuming as much? Has George stated that he can’t focus on anything else until this issue resolved? Has he stated he doesn’t feel compelled to work on another film until this is finalized? Your arrogance is off putting, to say the least.
Sorry I seem arrogant. I was pissed when GH put down his partner and Jeff happily printed it cause I thought it was a case of responding to an omission or worse with the same.
Truth is– I like George and the ambition of his films and I think the reality of this situation (as stated by Monument) is a non issue as the thinking world knows this is George’s movie. We even know its his more than Bahrs. So I made an assumption from his behavior that he is not satisfied with that– that the credit he has gotten is not enough. And I found it disappointing.
@fences, the fact that the “thinking world” knows George directed HOD is nice but it doesn’t negate the disrespect being shown to him by the Coppolas. Marketing the film as Ellen Coppola’s HOD is incorrect and Hickenlooper has every right to say so publicly.
Oops…Eleanor
And I never once denied him the right to say he’s unhappy about that. And If he had stopped there, without putting down his collaborator, then I never would have commented.
I believe you are mistaking my position as one that says that film maker credit doesn’t matter. Of course it does. I was criticizing the slash and burn response in which others work was belittled to pump up one person. And also trying to take Jeff to task or getting on such a high horse as even a film making fan such as he sometimes refers to films without mentioning key creatives only stars.
I think Carl Deal and Tia Lessin need to jump into this discussion because Spike Lee is now getting credit for Trouble The Water.
I have two questions.
1) Have they actually re-edited the film and changed the credits? Because everybody is talking about Hick being denied credit, based solely on the *marketing*. Do you guys get this bent-out-of-shape about every faux director’s cut they put out on DVD too? Because that’s basically the same thing.
2) Is there anybody who would actually care that Hick directed this movie who will be fooled by this? I think most people who are aware of the film would be the type of cineastes who know who the director is (or, I should say, directors are). I mean, okay, Keanu Reeves thought it was a lie — but has anybody ever turned him down for a job because he was trying to claim credit for directing ‘Hearts of Darkness’?
Because, yeah, if either of those is yes, then this is a great injustice. Otherwise, it just seems like an obvious marketing thing that means nothing to anybody except George himself.
Oh, and I definitely agree with fences that I’m not sure how publicly claiming sole authorship of the doc and denying that the co-director had anything to do with it is all that different from what the Coppolas are doing, other than the fact that they haven’t publicly said that George didn’t direct it (to my knowledge).
Hickenlooper: Now you know how Ringo Lam and Roger Avary feel.
George Prager: Looks like Porklips Now is finally on DVD.
@Carl La Fong,
To my knowledge, Brian De Palma has never recorded a DVD commentary track. Someone prove me wrong…
I can’t believe people are giving Hickenlooper so much shit for simply wanting credit where credit is due.
George, the most important thing for me is this:
You made an amazing documentary, an amazing film. Sometimes, I even think you made a better film than the one your film documents, and I say that as a MASSIVE fan of Apocalypse Now.
The first time I saw your film I was about 15 years old, and I remember it was possibly one of the first times I realized what could actually be done (and what I had been missing) with a documentary film.
Never struck me until now that I can easily take the opportunity to thank you for your film.
Thank you.
Wells to AJ Schnack, lazespud: Well said by both of you. Thanks for weighing in.
@ Gaydos: You know and work with Monte Hellman, so I was already impressed. Plenty.
Hey, whatever happened to that restoration of “Iguana” that Allison Anders and a bunch of other Friends of Monte had been clamoring for some years back, anyway?
Glenn: Thanks for the shoutout to MH. He’s the real deal, an artist unbroken and unbowed by the U.S. movie biz nonsense, no ounce of rancor, pounds of ardor for his art. (And sense of humor intact! Imagine!)
I am not aware of any new restoration of ” Iguana” except for the terrific Anchor Bay DVD release of some years ago. That was a true “restoration” in the sense that the film materials were in fine shape, but outside of Quentin Tarantino (when he worked at the video shop and saw/LOVED the micro release on Imperial Home Ent VHS) I think you could really count the number of people who had seen the dang thing in the dozens.
Anchor Bay got the picture out there and it was really seen and reviewed properly for the first time and I think it got a generally fair shake, compared to the critical anger/disdain/disgust/avoidance in 1988.
Of course Venice was there for Monte in 1988 and the film won an award in their Horizons section, so it’s good to be back on the Lido, this time in Official Competition, with “Road to Nowhere.”
What does Fax Bahr say? Seems like he’s really the one getting left out in the cold! He’s credited as codirector, after all.
“To my knowledge, Brian De Palma has never recorded a DVD commentary track. Someone prove me wrong…”
Wikipedia claims there’s one on ‘Body Double’.
I don’t think that’s right.
Wells: when was the last time you heard a commentary track for ANY film in which the director wasn’t heard?
Murphy= League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Director went out to lunch and never came back. Similar case? Only you know Jeff, only you ….
There’s no De Palma commentary on BODY DOUBLE.
SIDEWAYS just has a commentary with Paul Giamatti and Thomas Haden Church.
Well, now I have no reason to buy the ‘Body Double’ one, replaced by a perverse curiosity to hear ‘Extraordinary Gentlemen’.
I think wikipedia is wrong about commentary on the “body Double” order an ipad