MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Gossip Wrangling

So Page Six is now all after Steven Spielberg and has gone as far as printing a soft version of the spiked story of about a month ago, citing souces on Munich who are clearly and completely full of shit. There is no one who has actually worked with Spielberg who believes a word of the “maestro” story of a few days ago.
Bert Fields shut them up regarding the Cruise-related story the last time – and his aura probably explains why they pulled the punch a little on the story they did run – but Marvin Levy didn’t get into the mud with them.
My question is, “Why now?”
My best guess is that Munich, now just a week away from being finished production with no major effects shots to keep the film from being completed on schedule, is the Oscar front-runner right now and the tarnishing of Spielberg has begun in earnest.
There was another stupid Munich rumor being floated, which I will not repeat, by an “Oscar expert” who is a bit of a con artist, but which allegedly started with a top awards consultant.
This could be more backstage gamesmanship by Roger Friedman, still trying to pay Spielberg back from not screening War of the Worlds for him before everyone else when he was due to start his vacation. (Old whores have long memories.) It would not be an unusual occurance for a gossip who can’t run their story for political reasons dropping it into the Page Six inbox.
As far as I can tell, Page Six has done no additional work since “August, when PAGE SIX started researching this story.” It just became time to run it for whatever reason. And make no mistake, whether I have happened upon the correct one or not, there is always a reason why stories run or don’t run.

Be Sociable, Share!

34 Responses to “Gossip Wrangling”

  1. EDouglas says:

    I still don’t understand why a movie that isn’t even finished and no one’s even seen a frame (or read a script most likely)…is considered the Oscar frontrunner. Just because Spielberg is directing and the subject matter? This is like all the talk of Cinderella Man being an early Oscar candidate before it came out…

  2. bicycle bob says:

    thats why its the front runner before its even finished. just for spielberg.

  3. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Exactly. When it’s released it might slide down the predictions like Cinderella Man did.
    But I’m not holding out for Munich to be a great great movie considering I’ve had major issues with all of Spielberg’s movies as of late.

  4. Amblinman says:

    Spielberg + Drama will ALWAYS = Oscar bait. Or at least Oscar hype.
    As someone who has LOVED Spielberg’s films, his run over the last few years is begining to take on echos of Sickboy’s “losing it” speech in Trainspotting. THe guy had it, lost it, regained it for a while…and now seems to have lost it again.
    War Of The Worlds was awful, pure and simple. (Will Steven Spielberg successfully create a good climax to one of his films ever again?)

  5. Josh says:

    The Amblin man bashing his meal ticket???
    Say it ain’t so.

  6. Nicol D says:

    I doubt that there is some sort of backstage rangling to get Spielberg during awards season. I suspect it has more to do with the fact that one of the most influencial men on the planet has a film coming out on a serious subject and gossip sells.
    Is any of it true. Who knows? If it was, his people would never admit to it. The Maestro stuff seems unlikely…the Cruise stuff possible.
    I’ve always been a fan of Spielberg although the older he gets the more of a cypher he does seem to become. I no longer feel I have a handle on who he is anymore…what he believes. That’s not necessarily a bad thing or a good thing…I suspect though that this is why some of these stories are getting a bit more traction about him and Cruise (whom I also like).
    Both of their reps were made on been solid down-to-earth guys who were very logical and not typical Hollywood types. Now…I’m not so sure. I still root for them both but no longer believe I have a strong handle on who they are as people.

  7. Josh says:

    Anyone who is big is an easy target for lazy and pissed off gossip columnists.
    Lets see. The gossip really hurt War of the Worlds BO right?

  8. Joe Straat says:

    A.I. was bad, but Minority Report was excellent, Catch Me if You Can was pretty good, The Terminal was VERY enjoyable if you could accept some logical flaws, and The War of the Worlds was solid entertainment with a killer middle 40 minutes that will probably never be seen the same way again after New Orleans. I don’t think he’s losing it at all. There’s still very few people with the sheer craftsmanship Spielberg has. He just seems to be in some kind of transition phase.
    By the way, what was that second huge story on Cruise that was supposed to come out that was supposed to be more career crushing than the whole TomKat fiasco?

  9. Wrecktum says:

    1) The “maestro” comment. This is the unfounded rumor coming out of Europe that Spielberg has lost his mind and is forcing everyone to call him Maestro, right? Since, in 30 years, no one has even hinted that he works this way, why would anyone take this rumor seriously?
    2) The Cruise comment. I had to dig for the Page Six story (what, no links, Poland?) but, from what it says, it looks plausible. Spielberg is so mad at Cruise for making a Scientology mockery of the War of the Worlds publicity tour that it’s ruined their personal and professional relationship. Sure, I buy it. Is this the story you sat on in July, Poland? Did Fields get to you?
    Do you really think that this is just a ploy by Oscar consultants to throw some negative press Spielberg’s way? I doubt it. It’s much to early in the Oscar season to be floating rumors like this. Hell, Munich hasn’t even screened yet. If this were a dirty trick, it’d happen during the marketing buildup to or after the release of the movie.

  10. Bruce says:

    If he has people calling him Maestro I find it very funny.
    Stealing from Seinfeld, Mr Spielberg???
    Maybe he has a sense of humor.

  11. Amblinman says:

    “A.I. was bad, but Minority Report was excellent, Catch Me if You Can was pretty good, The Terminal was VERY enjoyable if you could accept some logical flaws, and The War of the Worlds was solid entertainment with a killer middle 40 minutes that will probably never be seen the same way again after New Orleans.”
    A.I. was a shitsandwhich.
    Minority Report was “The Fugitive” with jetpacks. The ending was conventional and boring.
    Catch Me If You can was a lot of fun, but holy crap does it never end.
    The Terminal was a waste of everyone’s time. Honestly, it was sweet film but it wasn’t overly romantic/funny/heart-warming. Who needs “cute” from Spielberg for 2 hours? Also, who’s idea was it to release a Holiday film during fucking July?
    War of the Worlds – mixed feelings. There’s a lot of good stuff there, but I don’t know if it’s overshadowed by the downright offensive 9/11 visual nods and the painfully bad ending. Yes, I”m aware how the book ends. That doesn’t mean the guy who’s considered the best director on the planet for this kind of stuff can’t do better.

  12. LesterFreed says:

    I liked Catch Me, Minority Report, and even the Terminal. Weren’t great but I enjoyed them.

  13. bicycle bob says:

    senor spielbergo has been hit and miss lately. but his misses are always interesting to watch and are must sees.

  14. jesse says:

    I say Spielberg is on a roll. A.I. is great, underappreciated, funny, beautiful, sad, disturbing. Minority Report — a great sci-fi movie. Catch Me if You Can and The Terminal are both a lot of fun, especially Catch Me. War of the Worlds is spectacular.
    Yes, some of his endings are a little weak (Catch Me is too long, War of the Worlds just sort of dies off… like the tripods!), but I think this is the most exciting sustained phase of his career since the late 70s/early 80s. And he’s done all of these movies in just about five years! Whereas some of the newer talented directors are taking that long *between* movies.

  15. Mark Ziegler says:

    AI funny? Were we watching the same movie?

  16. Wrecktum says:

    A.I. had some very funny scenes in it. It’s a modern masterpiece which will be fully appreciated in the decades to come.

  17. Angelus21 says:

    AI was terrible and is a scourge on Spielbergs career. The last 45 minutes was some of the worst he’s ever put to film.

  18. jeffmcm says:

    I agree with Jesse and Wrecktum. The last 45 minutes of A.I. are sublime. I have high hopes for Munich.

  19. joefitz84 says:

    Sublime? If that means sleep inducing and ponderous. Then yes. You are spot on.
    AI needed to be directed by Kubrick. Spielbergs sensibilities ruined it.

  20. jeffmcm says:

    Oh, now I remember why I haven’t been to this blog lately.

  21. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    My feelings towards Spielberg’s recent work almost exactly corrispond’s (er, that’s spelt wrong) with Amblinman. Escpecially “Catch Me If You can was a lot of fun, but holy crap does it never end.” So true.
    I was up with AI for most of the way but it just kept going and going and what kept coming and coming was awful.
    Minority Report also had me for a long time but I eventually became disinterested and yes the ending sucked.
    The Terminal was one of those movies that when I was watching it (in a cinema) I could see the DVD box with lines such as “delighful” “fluffy” and “nice”. I didn’t like it at all. A really poorly worked romance subplot, a totally uninteresting main plot (For such a serious film maker where were the serious topics?). The only bits I liked were with the supporting characters (Zoe Saldana, Diego Luna, et al)
    And War of the World? Well… I hated that. In fact, just go read Roger Ebert’s review of that because I agree with him 100% per cent.
    Plus, if I wanted to see a WW2 movie I’d go watch something else!

  22. Bruce says:

    Spielberg, or the Maestro as I call him, has fallen into the trap a lot of directors do when they have final cut. They don’t know where to end and what to edit. They think more is better. Thats true. If the movie is The Godfather. But not The Terminal.

  23. BluStealer says:

    I don’t mind long movies if the story flows. Catch Me was good. I wasn’t bored at any time. Same with Terminal. AI bored me. War bored me.

  24. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    The Terminal was merely mediocre for most of it but then it started to tick over 1 hour 40 (basically the maximum for a movie with, essentially, no conceivable plot) and it went in a (pardon the pun) a tailspin.
    Same goes for Catch Me If You Can. Well, sorta. That movie WAS good for the majority and then it just kept going and going. And it’s annoying because it’s sapping the life out of the movie. And now whenever I think back on CMIYC I remember it as a fun movie that was really long and I wouldn’t want to watch it again… because it’s too long.
    And WotW was just shit filmmaking let alone too long.
    He really an editor who will tell him what’s what.

  25. Kambei says:

    I think the audience has become complacent in watching Spielberg’s recent films. If one rewatches Minority Report with a more careful eye, I think an excellent case can be made that the movie “ends” when Cruise’s character is put into the hybernation punishment. The rest of the movie is the dream of justice his character has when “asleep”. To think of it as an “upbeat” ending is to not be paying enough attention. Or this could just be my opinion! šŸ˜‰

  26. Eric says:

    Kambei, I’ve heard others saying the same thing about Minority Report’s ending, but I’ve never really gotten that from the movie itself.
    What sort of clues are you seeing in it that would indicate that it’s a dream? Other than the “happy ending”-ness of it.
    I remember having this discussion with a lot of friends after Michael Douglas jumped off the roof in “The Game.”

  27. Dr Wally says:

    I’ve heard the debate about Minority Report’s ending sinc it was first released. The theory is that everything that happens after the point where Tom Cruise’s character is ‘haloed’is a dream, based on some throwaway dialogue from the jailer played by Tim Blake Nelson – ‘they just dream their cares away’ ‘they say all your dreams come true’. Plus the fact that the movie’s color scheme in the last 15 minutes subtly changes from metallic blue/gray to a more honeyed golden brown. Even if you don’t buy it, i still don’t see how Minority has an upbeat ending – after all, by movie’s end the precogs are still in isolation, precrime has been abandoned leaving the public at greater risk, and the Cruise character hasn’t found his missing son. I find it amusing that the poster above described MR as ‘The Fugitive with jetpacks’ as that to me is just about as high a compliment as an action thriller can get (don’t forget that the magnificent ‘The Fugitive’ belongs on the very short list of movies that achieved the triple slam of box-office, critical and Oscar love). Indeed, i think MR, rather than Saving Private Ryan, deserves to be Spielberg’s latterday classic the further away we get from it. It’s certainly the one Spielberg movie that, while well liked, doesn’t get anything like the props it deserves. Exciting, visually stunning, gritty, plotted so hard you could sing it, beautifully designed to create one of the most convincing futures ever put on film, and with scarcely a single shot or line that isn’t needed. The greenhouse scene, the ‘eye doctor’ sequence, the car factory chase, the opening hunt for Howard Marks, the LA Confidential ‘homage’, the Cyber Parlor (‘take her to Radio Shack’), the Spyder search, the Leo Crow confrontation – all superbly done. Awesome film, at least in my book.

  28. knowitall says:

    I agree. MInority Report was awesome. At first I didn’t love it but as you watch it and as you say it recedes into the past a little you come to realize how smart it is and also btw the dp, (janus kaminski? I believe ) did an amazing job..

  29. Kambei says:

    In addition to Dr. Wally’s points, I believe there is a giant close-up of Cruise’s closed eyes while the dialogue about dreaming is spoken, followed immediately by a cut to the plot beginning to be unraveled. Going to rewatch it tonight to re-check my theories…either way, i thoroughly enjoyed the movie and don’t understand the indifference to it.

  30. Mark Ziegler says:

    I think the last scenes are a dream. But I like the happy endings to some movies.

  31. Krazy Eyes says:

    If Spielburg jut hadn’t included all that “there’s so much love in here” claptrap near the ned it would have been an excellent picture. One more film torpedoed by over sentimentality.

  32. Angelus21 says:

    He does get overly cute and sentimental at the end of his movies. Sometimes I like it. On MR I didn’t. I did really think Catch Me If You Can was a great picture. Best I’ve seen Leo.

  33. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    It’s fine to be sentimental if the movie warrants it. E.T. warrants it. War of the Worlds does not.

  34. Eric says:

    Thanks for the posts on the dream-ending stuff– I’m more convinced than I was yesterday.
    I remember reading that there was additional text at the end of Minority Report that Spielberg ultimately removed. It was something along the lines of “The pre-cogs retired happily. The following year, there were 200 murders in Washington, DC.”
    That’s not verbatim, obviously, but you get the idea.
    That would have been a stunning finish. It would have left the ending more ambivalent, more in line with the underlying philosophical conflicts of the rest of the movie.
    And knowing that he did that is just another example of the way Spielberg often sells out his own work to provide the ostensibly happy ending. So disappointing.

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” ā€” 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 ā€” 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 ā€” he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” ā€” and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging ā€” I was with her at that moment ā€” 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 namedā€”” “Yeah, sure ā€” 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 Iā€™m on the phone with you now, after all thatā€™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 didnā€™t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. Thereā€™s not a case of that. He wasnā€™t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had ā€” if that were what the accusation involved ā€” 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. Iā€™m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, ā€œYou know, itā€™s not this, itā€™s thatā€? Because ā€” let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. TimesĀ piece, thatā€™s what it lacked. Thatā€™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