Edit
Marshall Herskovitz Poster

Biography

Jump to: Overview (2) | Mini Bio (1) | Spouse (1) | Trade Mark (1) | Trivia (2) | Personal Quotes (19)

Overview (2)

Date of Birth 23 February 1952Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Height 5' 10" (1.78 m)

Mini Bio (1)

Marshall Herskovitz was born on February 23, 1952 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. He is a producer and writer, known for The Last Samurai (2003), Love & Other Drugs (2010) and Special Bulletin (1983).

Spouse (1)

Susan Shilliday (? - ?)

Trade Mark (1)

Constantly works with director Edward Zwick

Trivia (2)

BA, Brandeis University, 1973
Has produced half of Edward Zwick's theatrically released films, and has also contributed to the screenplay of two of them as of October 2009. The two of them also work extensively on television together.

Personal Quotes (19)

The notion that moving toward renewable energy will kill jobs is an absurdity on its face. The notion that we have to live smaller lifestyles; not have the American way of life or give up the American Dream is just ridiculous. It is the opposite of the case; a new energy paradigm will create opportunity.
Even the most brilliant accomplishments on the Internet are essentially cold. Google has changed the world, but you don't snuggle up to it. YouTube is a giant carnival, filled with freaks and mountebanks, a place to gawk and laugh and get bored. Certainly not a place to feel anything.
The pilot system in television is utterly broken. It's a huge waste of money.
The producer is at the center of entertainment. The producer is being forgotten, and producers must seize the center of activity.
After I graduated from Brandeis, I took all the money I had in the world, which was $5,000, and I made a short film. I made every mistake you could possibly make. It was a total disaster as a piece of work, and yet, you know, it was ambitious in some way.
In my personal belief, the big problem with climate change is getting people to understand the magnitude and scale that we're dealing with. If you buy a vehicle that gets 35 miles to the gallon, that means nothing; it's not enough. We need to make changes across society and in every piece of the energy pie.
Our founding fathers could not have foreseen that freedom of the press might eventually be threatened just as much by media consolidation as by government.
OK, I have to admit that I go on TheSuperficial.com. That guy is so funny, he's just so funny... you know, I'm a news junkie, so I regularly flip between HuffingtonPost.com, CNN.com, and a site that's called MyWay.com, which shows me six different news feeds. And I go on DrudgeReport.com about once a day.
It's interesting: I went 25 years without watching a single television show. I was one of those people, because I was so inside how a television show was made, if I would turn on somebody else's show, I would sit there and analyze it, like, 'Oh, so they had four hours in this location and had to get out and the number of set-ups, etc.'
Hollywood is the perfect conduit for the urgent message about climate change. We raise awareness all the time. We routinely take a film that nobody knows about and get 80 percent of the public to know about it in just 30 days. That's called marketing. We need to harvest Hollywood for climate change awareness.
The only thing that warrants restriction in films is that which children would not otherwise see. When smoking is fully illegal, and the majority of children have never seen it - don't see ads for it in magazines or people doing it on the street - then it will be appropriate for the Ratings Board to restrict its depiction in films. And not before.
Remember: the ratings system is a voluntary infringement of First Amendment rights, an uneasy bargain between the needs of parents, the needs of artists, and the needs of large media corporations to make profits. Any time we chip away at the First Amendment, we should at least do it with some reverence.
The further I've gotten into the Internet, the more I've become convinced that we've explored only a tiny corner of what it can mean and what we can feel there.
The world is filled with terrible things that can influence children, and movies have depicted them since time immemorial. Should every terrible thing warrant an R-rating?
If there is a public perception at all, they see the producer as a big old guy who smokes a cigar and has lots of money and lots of power. That's not what a producer is and, if it ever was what a producer was, it certainly hasn't been for a long time.
For reasons we don't have to get into, climate change has become an incredibly polarized issue in the United States. I think that is sad. My own personal view is that we're in a planetary emergency such has not been seen in 600,000 years.
Even those who don't believe in climate change believe we should develop renewable energy. Americans get it: it's time. This is not controversial. It's actually right in the wheelhouse of American business.
Producers are now employees, not creators.
Hey, if I had my choice for social engineering, I'd declare an automatic R-rating for any movie that depicts television commercials. There's a truly dangerous influence on our children.

See also

Other Works | Publicity Listings | Official Sites | Contact Info

Contribute to This Page