Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:53 AM
    Posts
    10,151

    Oliver Stone thinks Hollywood has gone crazy

    Oliver Stone thinks Hollywood has gone crazy
    10 July 2020
    By David Marchese

    Beginning in 1986 with the release of his films “Salvador” and “Platoon,” Oliver Stone kicked off a decade-long run of remarkable success. Many of the controversial and stylistically brash films that he made during this era were box-office hits and established Stone, who twice won the Academy Award for best director, as a bold generational voice. While films like “Wall Street” and “Natural Born Killers” didn’t have a particularly nuanced take on the rotten amorality at our society’s core, and the treatment of the country’s self-deceptions in “Born on the Fourth of July” and “J.F.K.” wasn’t especially subtle, no one could deny that Stone’s work spoke directly to America’s dreams and nightmares. Since then, though, the director’s standing as a finger-on-the-pulse filmmaker has been gradually subsumed by the image of him as a political provocateur, thanks to his documentaries about the likes of Fidel Castro and Vladimir Putin. But it’s the long lead-up to that golden year of 1986 that is the focus of Stone’s upcoming memoir, “Chasing the Light,” in which all his questionable bravado and self-admitted insecurity are on full display. “I never wanted arguments,” Stone says. “I never wanted to provoke. I was just seeking the truth.”

    You’ve made a lot of movies and documentaries based on other people’s lives. Did that experience help you tell the story of your own?
    Well, I thought of the book as having the structure of a novel. You set up a problem in the first chapter: The protagonist is in a box. He’s in New York City, 1976. He’s broke. He feels like a failure and has to take his whole life into account. Then the novel winds its way into the 1986 period. It’s a picaresque. It’s a bit like a Thackeray novel.

    Should I be reading into the fact that you’re calling your memoir a novel and referring to yourself in the third person?
    You can read what you want. It is “me,” but you have to distance yourself from yourself. That’s not to say you’re fictionalizing. If I write another book, which I hope to do, it’d be nice to get closer to where I am now. I’m not there yet. Making a film to close out your life? I don’t know. There might be a way. There have been some very nice farewell films. Mr. Kurosawa did “Rhapsody in August”1
    1
    This was the director Akira Kurosawa’s penultimate film, released when he was 81.
    — a very nice and gentle film.
    Would you close out your life with a nice and gentle film?
    You think I’m so ungentle? I don’t know if gentle is how I’d describe your sensibility. Fair enough. But even in “Natural Born Killers,” if you look closely there’s a tenderness there between Juliette and Woody.2
    2
    In the hyperstylized, hyperviolent satire “Natural Born Killers” (1994), Juliette Lewis and Woody Harrelson played the serial-killer couple Mallory and Mickey.
    Or the Bush movie that I did, “W.”3
    3
    Josh Brolin played President George W. Bush and Elizabeth Banks played Laura Bush in Stone’s surprisingly sympathetic 2008 biopic.
    — at the end, it’s very tender with him and Laura.
    I know you’ve felt marginalized by Hollywood in the past. Do you still?
    I don’t think they think about me. I don’t feel bitter about it. “Savages”4
    4
    Blake Lively, Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Taylor Kitsch starred in Stone’s 2012 adaptation of the novelist Don Winslow’s crime thriller about American marijuana dealers who run afoul of a Mexican drug cartel.
    was my last movie in the mainstream, so to speak. I thought it was mainstream, and Universal did too, up until they distributed it. They decided to move it at the last second from fall to summer. So they put us in the middle of a schedule that was pretty tough. “Ted”5
    5
    In which Mark Wahlberg played against a lewd teddy bear.
    was there. Remember that movie? It was hilarious. You don’t want to open against “Ted.” I do still get offered stuff, but I’m not inspired to make a movie. I don’t feel anything inside me, fire for going through that pain and misery. The last film I did was “Snowden.”6
    6
    Stone’s 2016 retelling of the Edward Snowden story to that point. It starred Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the N.S.A. whistle-blower.
    It was so difficult to make. We struggled to get financing — I believe — because of the subject matter. But I’m still keeping my hand in with documentaries. I am working on two right now. One is on J.F.K. Since the film came out in 1991, there’s been quite a bit of new material7
    7
    In accordance with the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, the Assassination Records Review Board released previously classified information and gathered new material between 1994 and 1998.
    revealed that people have basically ignored. It’s a hell of a story. “J.F.K.: Destiny Betrayed” is what we call it. Then I’m starting “A Bright Future,”8
    8
    Based on the book of the same name by Staffan A. Qvist and Joshua S. Goldstein. Stone is working with Goldstein on the documentary.
    which is about the benefits of clean energy, which includes nuclear energy.
    These are documentary subjects and aren’t necessarily going to be popular, but they’re important to me.

    Are you poking the hornet’s nest by going back to J.F.K.?9
    9
    Stone drew intense scrutiny and criticism for the alternate history of “J.F.K.” (1991), with detractors accusing him of conspiracy mongering and playing fast and loose with facts. The criticisms didn’t hurt the film’s performance. It earned $205 million at the box office and garnered eight Academy Award nominations.
    I’m not scared of that. I’m past that age. I don’t need to make a Hollywood movie. I don’t need to get the approval of the bosses.

    Do you think you’ve made your last Hollywood film?
    I would have no problem doing another one, but I don’t feel it right now. Frankly, I did 20, and I got worn out.

    You had about a 10-year period, starting with “Salvador” and “Platoon” and going up to “Natural Born Killers” or “Nixon,” when your films felt like these major statements on the country and the culture. When that zeitgeist-y period ended, which it inevitably does for artists, did it change how you approached your work?
    I recognize the impact I had, but at the same time I enjoyed doing the films I did afterward. In 1999 I did “Any Given Sunday.” I get so much attention for that. “World Trade Center” was one of my most successful films financially. So the parade continued. The problem is in Hollywood. It’s just so expensive — the marketing. Everything has become too fragile, too sensitive. Hollywood now — you can’t make a film without a Covid adviser. You can’t make a film without a sensitivity counselor. It’s ridiculous.

    Why is that ridiculous?
    The Academy changes its mind every five, 10, two months about what it’s trying to keep up with. It’s politically correct [expletive], and it’s not a world I’m anxious to run out into. I’ve never seen it quite mad like this. It’s like an “Alice in Wonderland” tea party.

    In what respect?
    Oh, David, don’t go there. That’s going to be your headline. You know, I just read something about how films are going to be very expensive to make now, because you need to take all these precautions, and a 50-day shoot becomes a 60-day shoot, and social distancing for actors. That’s what I’m talking about.

    Tell me more about your J.F.K. documentary. Is there a big revelation in it that you can share?
    I would be doing an injustice to say there’s one big one. There’s no smoking gun. It’s accretion of detail, David. Please watch the film when it’s out, and write me an email when you see it, and tell me if there’s cogency in it.

    Does it turn out that the bullet went back and to the right?
    We can make fun, but let me give you some quick points about what is in the documentary: There’s no chain of custody on the magic bullet,10
    10
    This is a reference to the finding that a single bullet fired by Lee Harvey Oswald caused multiple wounds to the president as well as to Gov. John Connally of Texas, who was riding in the same car as Kennedy.
    which is called CE-399. There’s also no chain of custody on this damn rifle, the Mannlicher-Carcano, which Lee Harvey Oswald was accused of shooting. I don’t want to go into the details, but we can’t account for who was in possession of the bullets and the rifle at various times. It’s a mess. Then we got more detail than ever showing that there was a huge back-of-the-head wound in Kennedy, which clearly indicates a shot from the front.11
    11
    Which would contradict the official verdict of Kennedy’s having been killed by shots fired by Oswald, which struck him from the rear.
    It’s also clear that the autopsy12
    12
    Another long-running conspiracy theory is that Kennedy’s autopsy was somehow tampered with in an effort to conceal the true nature of his wounds, and thus the location of the assassin.
    from Bethesda, Md., was completely fraudulent. And there’s Vietnam. No historian can now honestly say that the Vietnam War was Kennedy’s child.13
    13
    The implication here being that nefarious powerful forces conspired to kill Kennedy as a result of his desire to scale back American involvement in Vietnam.
    That’s crucial. The last thing is the C.I.A. connection to Oswald.14
    14
    This is also far from settled fact.
    We have a stronger case, not only for post-Russia but also for pre-Russia. In other words, he was working with the C.I.A. before he went and when he came back. Those are the main points. I don’t want to criticize your paper, but if it was honest, it would be doing this work instead of just saying, “It’s all settled.”

    But on some level you must know that we’ll never be able to tie up all the loose ends of the Kennedy assassination. So what do you want people to take away from your new work on this? Those who are interested will find it’s pretty clear that J.F.K. was murdered by forces that were powerful in our government.15
    15
    The Warren Commission concluded that Kennedy was killed by Oswald and that Oswald acted alone.
    We point the finger at a couple of individuals. But I don’t want to get into that here. Now, why do I have to do this? I’m doing the documentary for the record so that you can see for yourself what the evidence is. That’s all. We’re just finishing it and beginning to show it. It will be out. Even if it’s on YouTube. Or in Transylvania.

    So many of your movies, “J.F.K.” in particular, are about presenting counterevidence to the sort of officially sanctioned grand narratives that America tells about itself. Can you think of any areas where your belief in the importance of counternarratives might have been detrimental to your own political thinking? I’m thinking here about your series of interviews with Vladimir Putin,16
    16
    Stone’s “The Putin Interviews” aired on Showtime in 2017.
    where it seemed that you were more interested in letting him lay out contrary perspectives to the popular American view of him rather than really challenging him on anything.
    I don’t think President Putin’s views from the 1999 period to the 2016 election period were ever presented honestly to the American public. The documentary is a great work of scholarship. It can be studied because he’s saying a tremendous amount that was fluffed off: “Oh, Oliver Stone is an apologist.” I’m not an apologist. I’m always probing, and that’s why he liked me to the degree that he did. He didn’t think I was a patsy. He was a very patient man. He reads. He prepares. He’s not like so many of our fool politicians, and that’s why he has lasted for 20 years. But the American press has demonized him.

    Even though he benefits from American destabilization and therefore tries to foment it?
    I don’t think he thinks that way. I think he sees American destabilization as a dangerous thing because he thinks about the safety of the world. If anything, he would like a balance of power to exist and he would like to have a nuclear treaty with us. It’s very difficult to talk when America doesn’t talk. It hasn’t been dealing honestly with him in a long time.

    Putin is obviously a canny politician. What do you suspect he believed he had to gain by talking with you?
    I think his intention, as he forthrightly says again and again in the documentary, was: Let’s talk. Let’s be mature. Let’s be adults in the room.

    Could it have been something else maybe? There’s that term “the useful idiot.”
    First of all, you should just look at the documentary.

    I’ve seen it. Where is it clear that I’m an idiot?
    I think it’s a very articulate dialogue. I would also point out that when we started, which was in 2014 roughly, the relationship with the United States was not as bad as it would become. Things got much worse. In 2017, we went back to him, and you have on the record what he says about Donald Trump and the American election.17
    17
    When Stone asked Putin about whether Russia interfered in the 2016 American presidential election, Putin denied that his country did so.
    I don’t think Russia has the desire or the money to spend on “destabilizing” an entire election. And how can you even compare it to what we’ve done in other countries?

    But two evils don’t have to be equal for them to both be evil.
    We’re getting too much onto Putin. That’s not in this book.

    This is mostly related to the book: How present in your life is your experience in Vietnam?18
    18
    Stone served in the Army from 1967 to 1968, having volunteered to fight in the Vietnam War. He earned a Purple Heart with an Oak Leaf Cluster for his service.
    Is it still with you from day to day?
    It doesn’t disturb me. In the book I talk about everything that I felt over there and how strange it was. Vietnam influenced my work because of my feelings about war and peace in this country and militarization and where we are now. If I can do any good in this world, it would be to pass some of that message on to younger people so that they recognize where we’re going with continued militarization. But, no, the war doesn’t personally disturb me. I’ve reached an age of acceptance.

    I have a meta question for you: It seems, at least at this point in time, as though your political opinions have almost overshadowed your achievements as an artist.19
    19
    In addition to twice winning the Academy Award for best director (for “Platoon” and “Born on the Fourth of July”), Stone won an Oscar for best adapted screenplay for “Midnight Express.” He has also earned eight additional nominations across multiple categories.
    Does it bother you to think that your willingness to get into it about politics might ultimately obscure or distort your legacy as a filmmaker?
    I’ve negotiated my way, sometimes with great controversy, through life. My domain is wide. I enjoy give-and-take. I learn from people. I will continue not to run away from who I am. I’m going to own who I am.

    Oliver Stone Thinks Hollywood Has Gone Crazy - The New York Times
    Last edited by Klondyke; 13-07-2020 at 10:21 PM.

  2. #2
    Chinese spy
    sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:26 AM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    34,384
    An interesting bloke, and I like his films. His memoir will be worth reading.

  3. #3
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:53 AM
    Posts
    10,151
    Oliver Stone’s new JFK assassination doc is being ignored by the MSM… a sure sign he might be onto something

    20 July, 2021

    The establishment media is celebrating odd, sexually charged movies at the Cannes Film Festival – yet won’t even acknowledge Oliver Stone’s foray back into the troubling case of President John F. Kennedy’s murder. I wonder why?

    Last week, Oliver Stone premiered his new documentary about the Kennedy assassination titled ‘JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass’, at the Cannes festival.

    You’d think that Stone, the polarizing, two-time Best Director Academy Award winner, whose filmJFK created such a furor it led to the US government passing the JFK Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, premiering a controversial JFK assassination documentary at Cannes would be very big news. You’d be wrong.

    When ‘JFK: Revisited’ premiered on Monday, July 12, the mainstream media didn’t praise it or pan it. They pretended it didn’t exist.

    The New York Times’ vast coverage of Cannes consisted of 11 articles, most focusing on the more salacious content, such as ‘Benedetta’, a steamy story about lesbian nuns, ‘Annette’, a musical where Adam Driver sings while performing oral sex on Marion Cotillard, and ‘Titane’, where a woman has sex with a car and lactates oil. But not once has ‘JFK Revisited’ been mentioned in the supposed ‘paper of record’.

    The same is true of the Washington Post, Boston Globe, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, the Guardian, the Atlantic, the New Yorker and every mainstream outlet I searched, as none of them acknowledge ‘JFK Revisited’exists at all.

    The only media mentions I found were in trade papers likeVariety and the Hollywood Reporter, and in the British press, in the Times and Daily Telegraph. Their reaction to the film was split, with Variety and The Times giving negative reviews and THR and the Daily Telegraph praising it.

    Considering that Cuba, intelligence agency nefariousness, and conspiracy theories are making headlines, and that the small critical assessment of the documentary is split, it’s curious that the media is maintaining the status quo by endorsing sexual depravity at Cannes instead of pursuing truth by debating ‘JFK Revisited’.

    I’m kidding, of course. It’s no surprise that the American myth-making media who bequeath to us the official narrative from which ‘respectable’ people will never deviate, are tossing ‘JFK Revisited’ down the memory hole and lavishing praise on horny nuns and coital Cadillacs.

    You see, the establishment loves to distract the masses and hate conspiracies – except for the ones they love.

    ALSO ON RT.COM
    JFK almost ended Cold War and Cuba blockade in 1963, filmmaker Oliver Stone tells RT in EXCLUSIVE interview


    JFK assassination conspiracies are rejected outright as unserious, despite a plethora of damning evidence, because they indict the establishment itself. Half of the talking heads on cable news are former (wink-wink) intelligence community members, and the vast majority of journalists are lapdogs for the intel agencies, so they’re not going to bite the hand that feeds them in service to the truth about the JFK assassination.

    This same anti-conspiratorial press spent four years breathlessly belching up every half-assed Russia conspiracy story they could conjure – including Russiagate, claims of Russia using microwave weapons or hacking into power grids and voting machines – and shouted them from the rooftops 24/7 until they become presumed true despite a complete lack of evidence.

    As Noam Chomsky would say, this is how deceptive propaganda is effectively disseminated and consent is manufactured, through “controlled market forces, internalized assumptions and self-censorship.”

    ‘Serious’ people prove their seriousness by believing those absurd officially sanctioned anti-Russia conspiracies because they are deemed ‘serious’ and are propagated by other ‘serious’ people, while ‘unserious’ conspiracies like JFK and the Wuhan lab leak theory are ridiculed, and those believing them demeaned as ‘conspiracy theorists’.

    This is why the establishment loathes Stone so much, because he flipped the script in ’91 by using his considerable cache in the wake of his massive Hollywood success to make a movie about the JFK assassination that obliterated the official account of the Warren Commission and presented a compelling counter-argument.

    To get a taste of how much the establishment despises Stone, go read his ‘JFK: The Book of the Film’, which features 97 reactions and commentaries about the movie.

    Unlike his adversaries, Stone prints those who disagree with him, as evidenced by articles featured in the book such as ‘Does JFK conspire against reason?’ ‘Hollywood Wonders if Warner Brothers Let JFK Go Too Far’, ‘Oliver’s Twist’, ‘The Paranoid Style’ and ‘The Plot to Assassinate the Warren Commission’, to name but a few.

    The hysteria that ‘JFK’ triggered among the elites in ’91 is perfectly encapsulated in a tale told by the late film critic Roger Ebert, who claimed Walter Cronkite gave him a “tongue-lashing” and said he should be “ashamed” of himself for praising the movie.

    Stone became more of an establishment pariah when he interviewed Fidel Castro in 2002 and Russian President Vladimir Putin between 2015 and 2017. Stone spoke with America’s enemies instead of just mouthing the mindless official mantra, an unforgivable sin in the eyes of the media who believe there’s only one narrative, and we can’t complicate it by listening instead of yelling.

    Stone’s history of being a firebrand, and his loyalty to truth above the official narrative, is why ‘JFK Revisited’ is being intentionally ignored. Any press is good press; even a bad review spreads awareness of the product, so hitting the ignore button is the best way for the establishment to silence Stone and maintain the JFK status quo.

    And thus far the media blackout is working as intended, as ‘JFK Revisited’ has yet to secure a distributor here in the American market which is desperately hungry for content.

    I haven’t seen ‘JFK Revisited’, so I have no idea if it tells the truth regarding the JFK assassination. But I do know that the establishment media is addicted to lies and allergic to truth, which makes me think Stone might be onto something.

    Oliver Stone’s new JFK assassination doc is being ignored by the MSM… a sure sign he might be onto something — RT Op-ed

  4. #4
    Thailand Expat lom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:27 AM
    Location
    Trapped in an old mans body
    Posts
    11,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    JFK assassination conspiracies are rejected outright as unserious, despite a plethora of damning evidence
    Only one of all those conspiracies can be right and that's probably why the audience aren't interested.
    There are too many of them and there's no reason to believe that Oliver Stone's should be any closer to the truth than the others.

  5. #5
    Chinese spy
    sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:26 AM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    34,384
    Russian President Vladimir Putin between 2015 and 2017




    Said to be good viewing- I must get round to it.

  6. #6
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:53 AM
    Posts
    10,151

  7. #7
    Chinese spy
    sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:26 AM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    34,384
    Putin and Oliver Stone are insane. Joe Biden & The donald are sane. Go figure.



  8. #8
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    24,589
    Oliver would have a home here on TD as he is a massive drunk who has been convicted of drink-driving. A good buddy of mine used to work at a restaurant in Malibu, where he drank himself stupid almost every night.

    Nice to see that the TD idiot squad are on a runner.

  9. #9
    Thailand Expat
    Headworx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Jomtien
    Posts
    5,842
    He's been in Pattaya at least once, I remember him doing an impromptu interview from a stool outside a Taco stand that belonged to a friend and former bodyguard of his. He was well spoken, but was wearing a pair of those novelty glasses with 2 eyes on springs so he may have been pissed

  10. #10
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:53 AM
    Posts
    10,151
    Quote Originally Posted by Headworx View Post
    He was well spoken, but was wearing a pair of those novelty glasses with 2 eyes on springs so he may have been pissed
    Can you please explain more about the "novelty glasses with 2 eyes on springs"? I too would like to wear it, but I am now afraid to get pissed - as you say.

    How the glasses can contribute to getting "drunk oneself stupid" - as the poster before you suggested (my question about that is no longer there...)

  11. #11
    Hangin' Around cyrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    24,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    my question about that is no longer there..
    Probably too controversial, eh?


  12. #12
    Thailand Expat
    aging one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    20,346
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    (my question about that is no longer there...)
    A consequence of your new found love of trolling. My guess is its going to happen more and more.

  13. #13
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:53 AM
    Posts
    10,151
    ^Actually not. Just expected some arguments to his work instead of usual denigration when something discomforting...

  14. #14
    Thailand Expat Saint Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:21 AM
    Posts
    9,947
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    Can you please explain more about the "novelty glasses with 2 eyes on springs"? I too would like to wear it, but I am now afraid to get pissed - as you say.

    How the glasses can contribute to getting "drunk oneself stupid" - as the poster before you suggested (my question about that is no longer there...)
    too difficult to explain to the mentally impaired:

  15. #15
    Im bored AF Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    6,219
    Quote Originally Posted by aging one View Post
    A consequence of your new found love of trolling. My guess is its going to happen more and more.

    Im pretty sure he sincerely believes his worldview. Which means he shouldn't be accused of trolling

  16. #16
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:53 AM
    Posts
    10,151
    Originally Posted by aging one
    A consequence of your new found love of trolling. My guess is its going to happen more and more.
    Quote Originally Posted by Backspin View Post
    Im pretty sure he sincerely believes his worldview. Which means he shouldn't be accused of trolling
    Did you expect another "witty" answer?

  17. #17
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:53 AM
    Posts
    10,151
    Perhaps something like:
    I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It
    (Quite usual here, isn't it?)

  18. #18
    Thailand Expat
    aging one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    20,346
    Quote Originally Posted by Backspin View Post
    Im pretty sure he sincerely believes his worldview. Which means he shouldn't be accused of trolling
    Want to bet?



    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    Originally Posted by aging one
    A consequence of your new found love of trolling. My guess is its going to happen more and more.
    Originally Posted by Backspin
    Im pretty sure he sincerely believes his worldview. Which means he shouldn't be accused of trolling


    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    Did you expect another "witty" answer?
    If so you just lost.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •