MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

The Big Pile O' Oscar Stuff

Oscarstuffb Oscarstuffa

Be Sociable, Share!

38 Responses to “The Big Pile O' Oscar Stuff”

  1. PeppersDad says:

    Looks like the exact same picture I just saw on eBay for a lot being auctioned by a seller named DPsHotBooty.

  2. Josh Massey says:

    Show-off… 🙂
    So since you’re a completely ethical journalist, you’re going to want to give those away after you’re done with them? Right? RIGHT?!?!

  3. Razzo says:

    I forget – what Academy Award did Poland win?

  4. DP says:

    As you have read elsewhere, not only can’t I give them away, if someone gets one and puts it into circulation with my name on it, I get sent to the gallows.

  5. RP says:

    So what Academy Award categories does ‘Mean Girls’ expect to do well in?

  6. viktor says:

    Starting to feel the Oscar Burnout?
    “I gotta get in shape. Too much sitting has ruined my body.”
    “One of these days I gotta get myself organizized.”

  7. bicycle bob says:

    oh the mean girls line is supposed to be funny. what u were saying is its a bad movie and here u are talking oscar for it. oh my. thank u. what happend to the confessions of a teenage drama queen jokes? too easy?

  8. teambanzai says:

    The Mean Girls comment was funny, to send a screener out was incredibly pretentious for a throw away film like that. Do you feel better about your self now that you pointlessly put down some one elses post?

  9. Matt says:

    As DP has pointed out several times, “Mean Girls” is a very real contender in the adapted screenplay category, and would have winning potential were it not for “Sideways” having the category locked up. Likeable and well-known screenwriter, solid screenplay for a film that won’t be recognized elsewhere, and among the most quotable scripts of the year. A high “degree of difficulty” in adaptation doesn’t hurt either–remember that it’s adapted from a non-fiction book. The characters and storyline are wholly original, which makes it kind of an odd bird.

  10. RP says:

    While I enjoyed ‘Mean Girls’, I honestly didn’t consider it Oscar material when watching it and was wondering what they were “going for” in terms of the Academy Awards (especially since I didn’t find it all that different from any number of movies from that genre that would never get mentioned in the same breath as the Academy Awards).
    But, for all I know, Sony was sending out “The New Guy” screeners a couple of years ago.

  11. Stella's Boy says:

    Mean Girls is a terrible movie. There isn’t an original moment in it. Fey’s original screenplay, very much R-rated, was quite different from the finished product. The studio had it watered down and sanitized. It’s too bad we’ll never see it in its original form. All we got was another cliched high school movie. I was stunned by some of the positive reviews it got. Nothing but one-dimensional, annoying characters and very few laughs to be found.

  12. Mark says:

    Mean Girls makes the New Guy look like Schindlers List.

  13. martin says:

    I didn’t mind Mean Girls, I thought some of it was very funny. But it wasn’t anything special, certainly not Oscar material.

  14. David Poland says:

    They used to send out EVERYTHING. It didn’t mean much to the vote, but the kids were really happy.

  15. LifeAndDeathBrigade says:

    I love Mean Girls. One of the better films I have
    seen this year. If that film has any cliches in
    them, then I guess they are just the cliches of
    life. Like life could ever have any of those?
    And why should I care about the R-rated script of
    Mean Girls again? So you liked it Stella, and it
    tainted the Pg-13 verion for you? Nice bias you
    have there. Very quiant. Maybe you would like
    to knit it a sweater Boy?
    These studios give away the farmer for a possible
    nomination. Yeah. They are all doing it for
    a higher goal, a sticker they can put on the plastic
    wrap of their DVD or brag about for years, but they
    surely do pay out the ass. Yeah it’s probably
    factoured in, but an expense is an expense is
    an expense.
    Right now; I must watch Torque. They actually
    made this movie. It ranks right up there with
    Snow Dogs on the “How the RUTT did they greenlight
    this film?” scale.

  16. Josh Massey says:


  17. Stella's Boy says:

    I don’t know where you went to high school LifeAndDeathBrigade, but none of the characters in Mean Girls in any way resembles the people I went to high school with. The plastics were annoying beyond belief, and certainly not funny. Doesn’t help that they were played by a bunch of 30 year-olds either (at least in the case of Rachel McAdams). Lohan’s friends were about as one-dimensional as characters get. The goth girl and the gay guy. Give me a break. Talk about weak characters. And of course she betrays them. Blah, blah, blah. Lame. And I am not going to apologize for being upset that the studio wimped out and went for the sanitized, safe version rather than what they originally had. Is it possible for you to behave like a rational person? Or do you only know how to use insults and call people names and act like a child? You must be one unhappy person.

  18. D says:

    Go to Rotten Tomatoes and MetaCritic and see Mean Girls’ ratings. We talk then. +

  19. D says:

    In case everybody is feeling lazy I can post the results.
    Mean Girls’ rating in Rotten Tomatoes is 87% (more than Kinsey or The Aviator).
    So it’s not just one more crappy teen movie…

  20. Dan R% says:

    I knew a few people in high school like the plastics. At least they shared many similarities. I think it was a smart script (especially for a teen film). There were a few parts that weren’t necessary to the film, but by no means ruined it. I’m glad to know it’s in the running for best adapted screenplay. I think Sideways is the better picture by far, but Mean Girls is a guilty pleasure that I don’t have to feel guilty about.

  21. Dan R% says:

    …and did you get 3D glasses with ‘The Polar Express’?

  22. Stella's Boy says:

    And the rottentomatoes rating proves what? People always complain about how out of touch critics are, and how unreliable they are. But they’ll conveniently forget all that if they need to use rottentomatoes to support their theory. I don’t care what the reviews were. It’s a bad teen movie. Nothing will make me change my mind about that. I don’t care if the rating at RT is 100%. Mean Girls is crap.

  23. bicycle bob says:

    using rotten tomatoes to say a movie is good? now i have seen everything. mean girls is crap. if u can’t see that, maybe ur a 12 yr old chick.

  24. PeppersDad says:

    There goes Stella’s Boy dismissing all of the objective, empirical evidence again.
    The debate here has been to explain why the studio chose to send out Oscar DVDs for the seemingly questionable Mean Girls. The Rotten Tomatoes rating is objective evidence of the positive critical response to the film, which, among other things, may be of influence to Oscar voters.
    Stella’s Boy’s standard response: “It doesn’t matter to me what anybody else thinks about the movie. But I insist that you to hear what I have to say…”

  25. bicycle bob says:

    stella girl is a typical Lib. likes hearing herself talk and blather about god knows what. by the way, stella secretly loves mean girls.

  26. Mark says:

    Liberals like Stella always paint themselves into a corner with absurd premises. I see nothing new here. Mean Girls is a classic. Rotten Tomatoe’s says so.

  27. Martin says:

    Rottentomatoes means nothing as far as Mean Girls goes. The vast majority of critics review on a sliding scale. A cheesy looking teen movie with some cute Disney chicks is not a movie that gets the same review as a martin scorcese biopic of Howard Hughes. One is aimed at the teen girl market in the middle of the blockbuster summer season, the other is aimed at the awards/Oscars in a more adult marketplace of December. To say that Mean Girls 87% is comparable to Aviator’s 85% is completely insane.

  28. Mark says:

    The Matrix is at 88%. Return of the Jedi at 80%. Rushmore at 83%. Mean Girls is better than all of them apparently.

  29. Martin says:

    Yeah, it’s a shame that Ken Turan and A.O. Scott didn’t like the film, or it would be up there with Citizen Kane.

  30. LifeAndDeathBrigade says:

    Name calling? I asked if you wanted to knit your
    biases as sweater! On what realm does name calling
    exist when someone ask you to knit a sweater for
    a bias you have? I love how people jump to conclusions
    about one’s life, no less, from a post defending
    Mean Girls. If I am a sad person, then shouldnt
    the person calling me sad be the real sad person?
    Stop taking everything so seriously. You seemed
    to have missed the whole HYPERBOLE thing.
    And again; slagging a film for characters in the
    ways you are Boy. Would just about make every
    character in any teen film, or any film, appear
    pretty sorry. You have to suspend disbelief! Stop
    overanalyzing. You also still have not proven
    your opinions to be without biases for this film.
    You liked, or liked the idea of, an R-rated version
    of this movie. Still does not justifying you slagging
    a film based on something else. Do you even
    read the Hot Button? Didnt Poland cover this situation
    like 3 years ago?
    Oy to the vey…

  31. KamikazeCamel says:

    If I were in the Academy (keepingastraighfacehere) I know I’d be nominating Mean Girls if for nothing else than for this line…
    “People think I lie about being a virgin because I use jumbo tampons, but it’s not my fault I have a heavy flow and wideset vagina”
    Mean Girls is this generation’s Clueless.
    And please don’t tell me you’re gonna rat on Clueless as well. Cause if you do you really do have something wrong with you. They are good movies, well made. So what if it’s not entirely realistic, I don’t think girls that look like Lindsay Lohan and Brooke McAdams go to many high schools, so you’re meant to be suspending a bit of belief. Just like you’re meant to suspend your belief in something like “Sideways”. Do you really think those 2 guys would be friends in the real world…?

  32. LifeAndDeathBrigade says:

    Wow. I cannot imagine a camel hurling itself at
    someone at close to 30 knots. THE HORROUR! THE
    HORROUR! But good freakin argument Kamikaze Camel!

  33. bicycle bob says:

    wheres clueless’ oscar?
    a good movie? sure but it is what it is.

  34. Mark says:

    Every movie is about suspending disbelief. That is why we go to them and enjoy them.

  35. TheBrotherhoodOfTheLostSkeletonOfCadavra says:

    Listen, if Shaun (as in OF THE DEAD) can have a total plonker as a best friend, then the Giamatti/Church relationship is not that hard to swallow.

  36. Martin says:

    Kamikaze, just because your gay doesn’t mean you have good taste in movies. (you don’t)

  37. D says:

    Wow. So only a movie that has Oscars is considered to be a good movie? A movie doesn’t need to be made by Martin Scorsese or to be an Oscar bait movie with high drama to be considered good…

  38. bicycle bob says:

    call me crazy but i think theres a difference in quality between mean girls and taxi driver. call me crazy

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon