Andy Warhol, Union-Buster?

|

Who said it?

He was the anti-Hollywood," said [XXXX]. "You didn't have to go to school or work your way up through Hollywood unions. You could just grab a camera and do your own thing."

First hint: It's a Canadian yapping.

Second hint: It just mounted a show of Warhol's "dark side"–paintings and films from '62 to '64 (though I can't tell from this news account whether the show specifically includes any of Warhol's "death pictures" done between '63 and '67).

Third and final hint: It's a movie director who forever changed the way the world–or at least the two dozen people who actually saw this film–thinks of James Woods' stomach.

Whole Warhol-show story here. (Via Drudge)

NEXT: The Light at the End of the Tunnel as Oncoming Train (Iraqi Weekend Edition)

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. MMMMM

    IDEODROME!

    Mighty Tasty

  2. My hint would have been “he killed off Nicole Kidman in To Die For.” or “he was the villain in NightBreed.”

  3. Well, my hint would have been something about parasites getting in people’s brains and turning said people in to sex-crazed maniacs, but I’m probably the only person here who owns a DVD of Shivers.

  4. Videodrome! Debbie Harry, nipples, and cigarettes!!

  5. It’s a Canadian yapping.

    And then it puts the lotion on its skin.

  6. I disagree, Ed.

    It puts the lotion in the basket.

  7. I’m a little lost at why Gillespie would write that only two dozen people would have ever seen VIDEODROME? That’s like saying the two dozen people who actually saw Linklater’s DAZED AND CONFUSED. Does he have an axe to grind with Cronenberg?

    And seeing as we’re taking Linklater’s A SCANNER DARKLY to task for it’s psuedo-indie street cred (which I agree with), I would think that he’d have a little more respect for a seasoned vet who worked his way up in many independent productions with imagery and ideas not seen in most genre pictures. Plus he pretty much gave Canada a commercial film industry.

    May I suggest reading Cronenberg on Cronenberg?

  8. Plus he pretty much gave Canada a commercial film industry.

    Bob Clark gave Canada a commercial film industry before Cronenberg, though there may have been other pioneering canucks before Clark.

  9. Fuzzy,

    No axe to grind, it’s just that in my experience, Videodrome was a movie more cited than actually viewed.

  10. Cronenberg-SHIVERS (1975)(Fully Canadian funded).

    Everything fully Canadian funded up to VIDEODROME. Pretty much most everything after partially funded by Canadians (except DEAD ZONE and M. BUTTERFLY and HISTORY OF VIOLENCE).

    Clark’s first film partially financed by Canadians is DEATHDREAM. (1974).

    Everything he did after that was partially funded by Canadians.

    Clark starting with RHINESTONE (1984), no more Canada. Except for Kim Cattrall and Art Hindle.

    Technically, they’re starting to direct features around the same time in the early 70’s.

    But Cronenberg had Canadian TV shows going. Fully funded by Canadians. Leading up to SHIVERS.

    Clark’s first four films were filmed in Miami, Florida, which is where he went to college at the University of Miami. He’s also from Louisiana.

    Cronenberg went through Canadian schools, Canadian Film Commissions, Canadian TV, filmed everything in Canada, everything Canadian.

    And Clark didn’t actually have a boffo hit until PORKY’S (1982). Which is one of my favorite films of all time.

    Cronenberg’s films consistently performed in North America being that they were horror films. Pretty much up until FAST COMPANY, and then VIDEODROME which was mishandled by Universal. But still was an incredible early video and cable cult hit. Which goes back to my questioning of two dozen people knowing what VIDEODROME is. That remark seems to either be Gillespie dismissing Cronenberg because he doesn’t like his films (which I would find hard, there’s something for everyone) or he is not familiar with him.

    I love Bob Clark. And I’ll agree he helped with Canada’s commercial industry. But he’s more of an outsider while Cronenberg did every thing “in house” and became the face of Canadian filmmaking.
    Plus the b.o. numbers would probably back me up.

    Clark is directing a remake of his 1972 classic CHILDREN SHOULDN’T PLAY WITH DEAD THINGS with Victor Solnicki, Cronenberg’s producer on SCANNERS and THE BROOD, producing.

  11. No problem, Nick. I just like arguing about movies. And I love me some Cronenberg.

  12. The video screen is the retina of the mind’s eye.

  13. I saw Videodrome in first run, at a downtown movie palace, back when our downtown still had such. I went with a buddy of mine who brought his girlfriend (and eventual wife.) We were all Blondie and Debby Harry fans. The friend’s wife-to-be couldn’t take it and wanted to leave in the middle of the picture. They are now happily(?) divorced.

    It was the 80s, you had to be there.

    Debby was a Warhol hanger-on, so it all comes around.

    Andy is, of course, on my shit-list for trying to pass off Curt Swan and George Klein’s work as his own.

    Kevin

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.