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
Ray shouldn’t be anywhere near the top 10 let alone in the Oscar field. Same with Neverland. Its a three horse race.
The absence of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is a travesty.
I broke up with someone once who wanted to argue that one movie or another was clearly and OBJECTIVELY bad or good. “THE DISCREET CHARM OF THE BOURGEOISIE is bad. There’s no plot, no point to it, it has no sympathetic characters; it’s just bad. Can’t you see that? Let me explain in another way why it’s bad then, and maybe you’ll understand….” I was like “don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out of my life!”
If there’s anything about movie opinions that’s moronic, it’s claiming that such and such a film or director is bad (or good) and that “anyone who isn’t a moron will have to agree!”
I feel pretty safe in saying that if you’re voting for Finding Neverland for Best Picture, you’re a moron.
Can I get a witness?
A moron or, maybe you’re my wonderful grandma, and I’ll thank you very much to not call her a moron. She worked heroically as a Rosie the Riveter all through the big one (WW II) and knows more about this cockeyed cavalcade called life than you and all your fancy- pants hoohah friends down in Hollywood!
I was under the impression we were talking about Academy voters. Aren’t they supposed to put personal preference aside and vote for what they thought was “the best”? You know that all the people that give screenplay to Sideways won’t necessarily be big fans of the film.
And I’ll stick with what I said. An Academy member who thinks Neverland is the best film of the nominees is a moron.
It’s hard to slam someone for personal pop culture
taste. Everyone loves to do. Professionals LOVE
to do it. Hell. It seems to be a national obsession
to slam someone for singing a song out of key or
for the movie they made, and even the person they
choose to marry. We are a bunch of judgemental
assholes. Does anyone else see a problem with this?
So some voters like Finding Neverland. Good for them.
Have not seen the movie, but I doubt it could
bore me like Sideways. Again, that’s just me.
We love slamming other nations for slamming us
when we go abroad. Yet their seems not harsh
critics of US, than US. Again, we have a problem.
Just because someone does not like something you
do. Does not make them a moron. It seems simple,
but the kids just do not give a damn. Shockingly
enough.
And David; do the nominees know that they did it
for ART but they will be shown on TV like a bunch
of REALITY TV contestants? Someone needs to talk
Gates out of all those ruttin changes. They easily
are the most ridiculous ideas ever to come out of
a town that greenlit SON OF MASK, SNOW DOGS, and
PAINT YOUR WAGON!
Some big press outfit has to put a story out that
slams them, guilts them, into changing these before
the event takes place. Just cut down on the video
montages, and that saves all sorts of time. There
can be nothing more embarassing in my mind than
having all of the best actress or actors standing
on the stage looking like a bunch of goobers
waiting to win a prize.
Why people mess good formulas always the most baffling
bits of pop culture business. Not that all change
is bad, but messing with the Oscars? Come on.
Finding Neverland was pretty horrible but I can easily see how someone could like it. I don’t really see how anyone could think it was the best movie of the year (but then again, Dogville, Eternal Sunshine and Before Sunset were my favourites so…).
However, I can easily see how The Aviator, Sideways or Million $ Baby could be considered the best.
I don’t, however, see how Hilary Swank’s performance can be seen as the best. It’s strange that it’s so widely LOVED because it doesn’t seem like anything particularly remarkable to me. Gimme in Kate Winslet (Eternal), Kidman (Dogville and Birth), Delpy (Before Sunset) or Staunton (Vera Drake) any day of the week over Hilary’s white-trash cum redeemed wonder woman.
“Aren’t they supposed to put personal preference aside and vote for what they thought was “the best”?”
That’s a ridiculous comment… personal preferences are *exactly* what makes you think a movie is “the best.”
If a movie affects you on a deep level in part because it hit some nerve based on your own life experiences, you shouldn’t ignore that in the search for some phantom objectivity.
Exactly, although (yet again) I really doubt anyone finding anything particularly personal about Finding Neverland.
Thanks, David, for being so magnanimous as to NOT think someone who votes for ‘Finding Neverland’ is a moron, despite the fact that the limits of your imagination cannot begin to comprehend such an act. Very generous of you. However, you’ve never missed an opportunity to indirectly telegraph your distain for ‘Finding Neverland’ and give it the ‘glass is half full’ back hand. So maybe calling you generous is a bit of an overstatement.
But as you can read here and there and everywhere, its not enough to have favorites, its also imperitive to vilify those nominated movies that are deemed undeserving and denegrate those who love them. And, God forbid, might actually vote for them. So you and everyone with access try to dissuade them any old way you can…..so you helpfully suggest you don’t think they are morons (just a peg or two above morons)…..hey maybe you swayed a few voters!! Good for you!!!!!
I suppose its a time honored tradition, but I find it insulting and ridiculous. But maybe I should give it a try!! Here goes: I’m fed up with all the whining about the snub that mopey Paul G recieved for his one note portrayal of slub Miles, and the high pitched wailing about Marty ‘being owed’ an Oscar, and the flop sweat about Clint’s masterpiece of gritty emotional cliched movie.
Say!! That felt good.
Anyway, David, you’ve got a few more weeks of hammering away at ‘Neverland’. Good luck.
L&DB wrote:
“So some voters like Finding Neverland. Good for them.
Have not seen the movie, but I doubt it could
bore me like Sideways.”
To L&DB:
Beware. Do not underestimate the power of boredom contained in Finding Neverland! It could put you to sleep at 10 AM after 3 cups of coffee.
The thought that some people consider it one of the five best movies out of the (literally) hundreds released may jolt you back awake like the worst nightmare though…
There’s a difference between liking something and appreciating it. I don’t care for the work of Picasso, but I can look at a Picasso painting and understand its artistic and historical significance, its technical brilliance, and why others might respond so strongly to it. You don’t have to personally relate to a work of art in order to perceive its worth.
The morons are those who say, “I don’t like this, therefore it’s worthless.” Or those who refuse to allow that others might have valid reasons to enjoy a work that they despise.
“That’s a ridiculous comment… personal preferences are *exactly* what makes you think a movie is “the best.”
Ding, ding, ding, ding! Exactly!
how neverland beat out eternal sunshine i’ll never know. dumb. dumb and dumb.
All of the “Neverland” bashing here is beyond ridiculous. I don’t think it’s a better movie than “Million Dollar Baby” or “The Aviator,” but I don’t think it’s a whole other universe, either. (And I was more happily surprised by it, whereas “Sideways” was a mild disappointment, though I also enjoyed it.)
I know my way around undeserving Best Picture nominees and winners, and Finding Neverland just isn’t in the same “league” as The Cider House Rules, A Beautiful Mind, Chicago, Chocolat… it’s a lot better than any of those. Smarter, more affecting, and better-acted.
Is it just ’cause it’s a Miramax movie? Cause it’s a tearjerker? Because, sure, it is, but one of the best things about the movie is the way it actually deals with a child’s reaction to death with Freddie Highmore’s character, instead of just milking it for easy tears (see something like Stepmom). That scene where he puts on the play he wrote and lashes out at his mom… extremely well-played. And the film dramatized an artist’s “inspiration” as well as anything since Shakespeare in Love (a wonderful movie that has become underrated in the years since its “undeserved” best picture win). FN isn’t as good as SiL, but I can absolutely see how someone could like it the best of those five. Did it deserve a nomination over Eternal Sunshine or The Incredibles? No. But if that’s the standard, then neither did The Aviator. Or Sideways.
While I wouldn’t vote “Neverland” for best picture, I’d probably put it in my personal top 5 of last year, and think it’s overall better than “The Aviator.” Yes, it’s manipulative and somewhat cloying, but it does it well and skillfully, not clumsily, and the performances and design are stellar.
David, you’ve made it more than clear that you dislike Finding Neverland from the get go. You never passed up a chance to bash its quality, its sentimentality and yes, even the box office take, despite the fact that the film has done quite well considering its modest budget. Sure, Sideways, MDB and Aviator are higher profile but I, for one, think that Neverland is as touching and emotional as any of your favorites. I’ve never seen you have such a slanted, negative view towards any other movie all season long, except maybe Fahrenheit 911.
Damn R, that’s a boring movie. Poland obviously
wanted to state that he disliked the movie, but
the voters are not morons if they see different.
Again the guy goes out of his way to be considerate.
Go figure.
if ur gonna defend neverland, at least come up with some credible facts on why its a top 5 movie or why u loved it. just mentioning the bashing isn’t working
I didn’t love Finding Neverland and I don’t think it’s one of the year’s best movies, but I did enjoy it. I was entertained. I do think the hatred some seem to have for it is overblown. It’s a story well told, and the cast is good. A nice little movie that shouldn’t be nominated for Best Picture.
It isn’t one of the top five movies of the year. A bone was thrown to someone with that nomination. Shows theres not a following for it since the director got passed over.
It’s easy for those of us that like movies to have a clear reason for liking one and hating another to the point of disliking the hated films fans as well. The academy on the other hand has always been a different monster. A perfect example would be the year that the Last Emporer won. That was a horrible movie, it was epic in scale had a great cast but was just pointless in the end but good old politics srung up and everyone voted for that film to show support for Bertolucci.
If Finding Neverland were so intent on showing the reactions of a child dealing with the death of a parent Kate Winslet would have died half way through. Man, Freddie Highmore was annoying. One step backwards for kid actors. The movie wasn’t a complete loss though, technically it was very nice. It was just… a whole lot of nothing.
One thing that I’ve seen a couple of time on here is Miramax bashing. And… I still find it sort of hilarious that the same company that bought us all those great movies is STILL getting bashed because it makes 1 or 2 movies a year that the Academy like and they are marketed well.
I don’t seem to remember anyone congratulating them for continuously marketing City of God in 2003, which resulted in 4 Oscar nominations including Director and Screenplay.
Bizarre…
I would prefer RAY to win best picture more than THE AVIATOR. Its leading actor is better; its supporting characters are more real (all of them, including the omelett guy) not like Kate Beckinsale ; The flashbacks on the main character in the aviator suck and in the end are used as manipulation for us to admire howard hughes (though we still leave the theater with an emptyness); On the other hand Ray´s childhood flashbacks are not only necessary to the whole narrative line but some ere really heartbreaking, very well acted and directed scenes ; And finally both, the blindness and drug adiction are better done than the germs thing in The aviator, and the way charles changed the music is better , also, than the way Hughes changed aviation.
Something to remember while mourning Arthur Miller (who died too soon Thursday night at age 89): For two or three generations of American high school students, Miller’s “The Crucible” was their first lesson about the Blacklisting Era of the 1950s. Just as, for many years, American students got their first lesson about the Holocaust from Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett, the veteran Hollywood scriptwriters (“The Thin Man, “It’s a Wonderful Life,” “Father of the Bride”) who adapted “The Diary of Anne Frank” for the stage. Wisdom is where you find it.
Amen to you, Mex. Finally someone who isn’t a blind member of the cult of Scorsese or a sucker for all “The Aviator” hype.
I find all this hatred for Finding Neverland very odd. I think it is a terrifically well-made film with lots of care and expertise in every level. One thing that I hardly ever see mentioned is that the film is a good movie about the writing process itself. We meet the main character at a cross roads in his writing career. Up to now his plays have been very staid, and the character has lost his passion. Through meeting this family he is able to regain his passion for life, love and writing. We expertly see how the Peter Pan story forms in his head. As a screenwriter, I can tell you that the process that he goes through is well-drawn.
I’d also be curious to see how many people thrashing this film on this board are men (I’d even venture further to say young, straight men). For some reason this particular group gets very uncomfortable with films that enter the territory of emotion. Many guys I know who fit into that category say things like, “Man, I never cry”, almost as a badge of honor. A film that challenges that emotional stiffness brings up a certain amount of…well, I guess anger. And interestingly enough, anger is what this film seems to be getting on this board. I can understand someone not liking a film…but this amount of disdain is odd. You may not like Finding Neverland…but it is not terrible. It is a very well-crafted film that succeeds in what it sets out to do. But to hate the film…hmmm, might be time to look at that a little closer boys.
I’m with you on the tribute to Arthur Miller, Joe. I hope audiences will continue to appreciate his work and his style of playwriting. Given some of the negative reactions I’ve read here about “Million Dollar Baby,” I wish I could say I was more hopeful.
I wish some people weren’t blind members of the cult of Eastwood and weren’t such suckers for all the M$B hype.
I don’t think any member of the Eastwood cult is blind. Hes a great actor and becoming a great director. What other director in the past 20 years has Unforgiven, Perfect World, Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby on their resume?
Stella, while others will not be able to see it, I recognize that you are cheaply trying to throw my own words back in my face with regard to virtually identical comments I’ve made about Scorsese. The difference is that most of the arguments made here on behalf of “The Aviator” come down to love of Scorsese and some of the technique he put on display, not on the film as a complete, self-contained work. If “The Aviator” had been directed by Richard Attenborough, nobody would be arguing so passionately about its merits.
On the other hand, I am not a devoted Eastwood follower. I hadn’t been a huge fan of any of his films since “A Perfect World,” including “Mystic River” (although I admit enjoying the surprisingly well-adapted charms of “Bridges of Madison County”). But I found “Million Dollar Baby” to be pretty extraordinary. And I think it is all too sadly appropriate for us to be discussing it today, because I truly believe a humanist playwright like Arthur Miller would have been proud to view it as part of the outgrowth of his dramaturgical legacy.
“What other director in the past 20 years has Unforgiven, Perfect World, Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby on their resume?”
Well, none, because he was the director of those movies.
If you mean what other director has a string of really good movies to his credit (and that’s assuming those were really good movies — something I disagree with in the case of Mystic River), I’d say:
Wes Anderson
Richard Linklater
Paul Thomas Anderson
Pedro Almodovar
Alfonso Cuaron
Steven Spielberg
John Sayles
Spike Lee
Quentin Tarantino
Peter Weir
Alexander Payne
Zhang Yimou
The Coen Brothers
Just to name a few…
Chester, you have made blanket statements and broad generalizations about all defenders of The Aviator. Simple as that. And for the record, I am a great admirer of Unforgiven, A Perfect World and Mystic River. I’m just not crazy about M$B.
No, Stella, your baseless dismissal is not “simple as that.” You and all the other regulars here know that I have made informed arguments based on having read every single comment posted on this Web site about “The Aviator.” Really, how can you say I make blanket statements and broad generalizations when you know that so many of my postings address in extensive, specific detail cited quotes from contributors here?
Sorry to be the one to tell you this, Stella, but, with all due respect, you ought to stop posting in such a reactionary way. Simply proclaiming unfounded, underdeveloped conclusions all the time doesn’t cut it. Your “quickie” statements tend to read like a vote, not an interesting, informed analysis—and I don’t think anyone here is taking a poll. That makes their unnecessary public presentation here as infuriatingly dull and pointless as those of the churlish people with whom you argue almost daily.
Is it me or does Chester just like hearing himself talk? I can see disliking The Aviator but to try and discredit a great director? Shameless.
Am I wrong? Did you not basically state that everyone who admires The Aviator only feels that way because of Scorsese and their blind adoration of the director? If you never said that and I am mistaken, I apologize. All I intended to do was counter that statement and let you know that some people are fans of the movie and not fanatics about Scorsese who can’t see the movie for what it truly is because they worship him so much. I am not trying to bicker or get into a silly back and forth argument with you.
Stella, I honestly don’t think there is anything the least bit wrong with anyone who admires “The Aviator” and feels it is the best film of the year. There is also nothing wrong with anyone who has the exact same feelings for “Finding Neverland.” Or “Spider-Man 2.” Or “Alexander.” Or “Boogeyman.” I may not agree, but to each his or her own.
But since this is supposed to be a discussion board, for a couple of weeks I have tried to get certain people here to back up what to me is their incomprehensible support of “The Aviator” because, admittedly, I just plain don’t get it. The responses have tended to be along the lines of “I just like it” (i.e., yours); “It may not be Scorsese’s best, but it’s better than anything else in the field”; “Who are you to criticize it, and why do you have a chip on your shoulder against Scorsese and DiCaprio?”; or “You have to view it in the context of Scorsese’s body of work and you’re a fucking idiot if you can’t see that.” Well, la-dee-dah. Anyone disagree that those responses are quite shallow and, especially upon constant repetition, infuriating? (Imagine asking a question in school and getting those types of answers from your professor.) If those are the best critical analyses anyone here can offer, then pardon me for continuing to maintain that the film is as trivial and hollow as I perceive it to be.
I can’t believe I’m honestly reading someone try and bash Marty S. Out of all the things. When you finish watching Mean Streets, Goodfellas, Taxi Driver, Casino, Bringing Out the Dead, etc then you can write about how much we’re all blind to him. I think the supporters or defenders of The Aviator have been pretty solid in their remarks. If you don’t like the movie, thats terrific. You have your views. But at least back that up if you’re going to try and knock down Marty.
Mark, I’ve watched ’em all. Per your instructions, that means I now have your permission to write about how blind you are.
The bigger unresolved issue is how and when to deal with your dumbness.
You’re absolutely right Chester. In an effort to refute claims that it is only being heralded because of the cult of Scorsese fans and their blind devotion to him, I completely neglected to mention why I liked the movie. To be clear, it is not my favorite movie of 2004 and isn’t even in my top 5. However, I did enjoy it from start to finish and was never bored. For starters, I think DiCaprio gives an outstanding performance and easily carries the movie. The supporting cast is excellent. It looks great (Robert Richardson is quite the DP) and is extremely well-made. Hughes led a fascinating life, and even if John Logan’s screenplay isn’t exceptional, it does manage to effectively document portions of that life. I found certain scenes to be riveting, particularly the showdown with Alda. I hope that clears things up a little bit. Again, not my favorite movie of the year, but I liked it a lot and left the theater satisfied that I got my money’s worth.
Chester, Amen to you really. Mark you don´t like chester because he didn´t like The Aviator, and his opinion is obviously very different from yours. And you think its stupid from him to not like it because the director has made great movies, Am i right?
God that is so stupid, I bet you don´t even know why his movies are soo great as you say.
Sorry, mex, anyone that does not like Marty S or does not respect the fact that he is the best director of the past 25 yrs has something wrong with them. Bash him all you want but Marty is in a league of his own. At least back up what you bash him on. If you can’t, then don’t go out of your way to do it. Thanks.