“blood meridian” was rumored to be a ridley scott production for awhile, which i was iffy about. the director of “alien” “blade runner” and “thelma and louise” had a chance of doing it well, but maybe not the director of “gladiator” and “hannibal”. anyway, now imdb is reporting it as in production under the helm of todd field. i haven’t seen enough to know how i feel about him. loved “in the bedroom”, haven’t seen “little children” (one of those divisive modern novel adaptations starring kate winslet, much like “the reader”).

and finally a tangent that will end up somewhere close to relevant. are there any non-fiction writers you like? how do you feel about non-fiction narratives centering around the creative process and showbiz itself? i really enjoy peter biskind. he’s definitely non-objective. he likes to write era-spanning epic books about the movie business that are way overheated, full of personal bias, caricature, and tall-tale telling. they are to me, nonetheless, engrossing, as he finds big themes and satisfying, if depressing, story arcs to attach a series of mini-dramas (and outright tabloid dirt) to, and typically picks a few central real-life characters to develop into almost elizebethan tragic figures. his masterpiece is definitely “easy riders to raging bulls” which charts the new hollywood golden age from 1967-1981, starting with the emergence of new hollywood in the wake of the studio system collapse in the late-60s to new hollywood’s own collapse under its own hubris and the emergence of the blockbuster age in the late 70s and early 80s. he also wrote a pretty great psuedo-sequel called “down and dirty pictures” covering the rise and fall of american independent film culture from the early 80s to the early aughts. while detailing many of the diverse players throughout this period, he does a wonderful job of tethering it all to two main plotlines and contrasting oversized characters and ideologies. one has robert redford, hollywood golden boy with a social conscience developing the sundance institute and the film festival that emerged from it. his tragic flaws are an inferiority complex (redford never finished college and struggled with a perception as a prettyboy vacant movie star) and mercurial, pathological inability to follow up on his promises or hand over control. this is interestingly contrasted with the saga of the weinstein brothers, tough jew concert promoters turned shrewd art film flippers turned moguls and the biggest producers on the independent scene as heads of mirimax (the studio that released all of your favorite movies in the ’90s). their tragic flaw (mostly harvey’s) are insatiable appetites on every level and a desperate need for control and recognition and power to the point of obsessively butchering their own productions and acquisitions.

anyway, one of the most fascinating stories in the book is that of the first mccarthy adaptation, “all the pretty horses”. there are tons of similar stories in the book, but this one is particularly memorable due to the scale of both the production and the characters involved. harvey weinstein’s particular brilliance has to do with publicity and promotions, and he managed to make many of his trademark hits in the ’90s more than movies, but mythic human interest stories about the filmmakers. two you probably remember were the legend of matt and ben, which led “good will hunting” to big money and a slew of oscar nominations, including the mainstream coronation of gus van sant (the mirimax oscar machine in the ’90s was legendary). another myth was billy bob thornton and “sling blade” (amusingly, biskind seems to have utter contempt for thornton, one of the most talented actors of his generation and the creator of iconic performances in “the man who wasn’t there” and “bad santa”, but depicted in this book as a frothing violent redneck who speaks in phonetic redneck threats). “all the pretty horses” was, according to this book, matt and ben’s favorite book ever at the time and matt was willing to throw all of the star power he gained behind it. billy bob was just as passionate, and they threw their hearts into adapting it. this turned out to be, very usual for harvey, one of those abusive spouse battering and butchering scenarios you accuse hollywood of doing to books. it was a bitter and vociferous battle, clearly something star matt damon and director billy bob thornton cared about more than anything else in their lives, and the 3-hour-plus epic that they made was mercilessly and viciously sliced repeatedly by harvey weinstein into a moribund, thematically muddled, and unappealing western that was short enough to cram another daily showing in. so at least “no country” wasn’t that compromised. who knows if the epic original cut of “all the pretty horses” was good enough to compare to the book, but this is one case where hollywood adamantly stepped in and said “we’re going to fuck up your vision and make this movie suck.”