MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Not So Indie Spirit

The winners?
Sony Classics

Be Sociable, Share!

11 Responses to “Not So Indie Spirit”

  1. Josh says:

    Can we write the eulogy for Crash yet?

  2. joefitz84 says:

    I am very surprised at the lack of best feature or anything else besides actor for Hustle and Flow.

  3. Josh says:

    Hustle and Flow. The most overrated movie of the year.

  4. Sanchez says:

    Terence Howard deserves an Oscar nom for that. No doubt in my mind.

  5. joefitz84 says:

    I expected at least some nods for Hustle and Flow just based on rep and the fact that it might be the best independent movie of the year. To shut it out almost completely is a big story.

  6. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    i made my comments over at the awards blog.
    Still, these awards are quite possibly some of the most pointless out there. So easy to not give a crap about, to be honest.

  7. bicycle bob says:

    pointless to u maybe. but not to the filmmakers and the producers. this is their chance at some glory and maybe at some academy momentum. small yes. inconsequential? no.

  8. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Oh, for the films such as You & Me…, Nine Lives, etc I’m sure it is valuable. But a lot of the film’s they are allowing some glory will indeed be finding glory at many other awards shows.
    And what about the people who deserve glory in the areas of sound? editing? effects? animation even. they have a cinematography category category for some random reason yet no other technical ones.

  9. bicycle bob says:

    well i can’t defend them not having more categories. but awards like this do reward peoples hard work and get the films known. a hot streak and a few wins at shows like this and then some oscar buzz gets started. all part of the game.

  10. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Let me guess which films win in the main categories. Capote, Brokeback, GN&GL. Just a hunch on that one.

  11. Chucky in Jersey says:

    “Asylum” was good in its way. It came out in August and thus should have been in more theaters, but its US release was by Par Classics, thus no national release.
    Par Classics got what it deserved on “Mad Hot Ballroom”: No mainstream bookings, thus little audience, thus no end-of-year attention.
    The Weinstein Company must have bought its awards. Looks like they used the money saved by keeping ads out of the Village Voice.

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