MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

The Quick Version

The Globes, as usual, found a way to discount their significance.
Not only did they choose 7 dramas to reward with nominations, they didn

Be Sociable, Share!

37 Responses to “The Quick Version”

  1. djk813 says:

    I didn’t think that the Golden Globes allowed foreign films in their Best Film categories (see: Letters from Iwo Jima last year) unless they changed that. It’s a weird rule considering they allow those films to be eligible for other categories, just not Best Film.

  2. David Poland says:

    You are so right.
    The perils of 5am

  3. adorian says:

    How many people are going to be upset that John Travolta got a supporting actor nomination, but Hal Holbrook didn’t?

  4. David Poland says:

    Fewer than will be upset that Casey Affleck did and Holbrook didn’t.

  5. waterbucket says:

    lol, 7 dramas. It has to be some sort of joke.

  6. lazarus says:

    I don’t think there was a three-way tie for the 5 spot with Best Picture, but it’s possible that 7 films all received a certain amount of votes above the rest of the field, and that the number was small enough for them to say, “well, it’s a virtual tie so let’s just add them in”. I can’t see it as starfucking or trying to appease various marketers/studios, because why wouldn’t they have done this before? I think they should be applauded for recognizing Eastern Promises, for one thing.
    And DP, you’re in no position to criticize them on this point when your own organization goes so far as to whore itself out so it has a Best Picture field of 10 (and STILL has a separate Comedy and Family film category), unless you’re going to publicly rail against them as well.

  7. They’re trying to become the HFPA! (I kid, I kid). That seven nominees thing is ridiculous. Such is the perils of small memberships, I suppose.
    Holbrook really shouldn’t be upset. He didn’t really do much.
    I did really good on my predictions with 5/5 or 4/5 in almost all categories, bar the music ones – I did correctly predict they’d nominate Clint Eastwood again, though!
    I also predicted bad luck for Into the Wild (although that’ll surely be like Crash in 2005, no love at the globes, big love at the Academy) and Once (not even a song nomination!). Predicted John C Reilly too.
    But you’ll, of course, make a belittling comment and flush away my pleasant mood. Good thing I’m going to bed now (it’s 2:15am).

  8. movieman says:

    I can’t believe “The Great Debaters” got a Best Picture slot but “Into the Wild” didn’t….duh!!!!!!!!
    …Or that “ITW”‘s only nomination came in the Best Song category (deserved, yes, but so were the film, Penn, Hirsch, Holbrook and Keener).
    Relieved to see “TWBB” get a BP slot, however, even if PT Anderson got screwed out of a B. Director nomnation.
    And how the **** did Blanchett and Foster get nominated over Laura Linney in “The Savages”? (Nice that PS Hoffman got nominated twice, though.)
    “Debaters” won the Producer Guild’s Stanley Kramer award; how appropriate.
    Methinks that’s the only industry-sanctioned award this creaky, abysmally edited “message movie” is going to win…unless Oprah starts her own awards show just to honor her movie.
    The “Mad Men” nominations were cool, though, since it’s the best non-HBO dramatic series on television.

  9. MarkVH says:

    Re: The Great Debaters – The Globes love movie stars. Denzel is a movie star first and foremost, and directed the film. That’s got to be the only reason why he could wrangle nominations for the movie as well as the mind-blowingly mediocre American Gangster (Ridley Scott? Are you SERIOUS?)
    Either way, not worth getting worked up about.

  10. Rob says:

    The Savages was categorized as a comedy, so Linney got pushed out of the far more competitive Actress in a Musical or Comedy race. She might have had a better chance over Foster or Blanchett in the drama heat.

  11. David Poland says:

    Sweet that some of you still harbor the illusion that the movies and not the consultants who specialize in delivering Globes noms are the key to the seven…

  12. bobbob911 says:

    Can I just take a moment to say how fucking Blah the TV nominees are?

  13. Joe Leydon says:

    Only if I can take a moment to say I’m glad Roger Clements took steroids while he was with the Yankess, and not while he was with the Astros.

  14. movieman says:

    The fact that “The Savages” was in the “comedy or musical” category instead of “drama” speaks volumes about the Globes, doesn’t it?
    Oh yeah, I totally believe that the “GD” nomination was typical GG sucking-up-to-the-movie-stars b.s. (Denzel, Jodie and Blanchett’s–for “Elizabeth” at least; she deserved her “INT” nod–acting nominations were just more of the same.)
    Did Ridley Scott really get nominated as Best Director??? Yikes; I somehow managed to miss that.

  15. movieman says:

    Funniest nomination?
    Shakira’s song from “Love in the Time of Cholera.”
    Star-____ing again, eh?

  16. Joe Leydon says:

    Yes, but you have to admit: Some stars are more ——-able than others

  17. jesse says:

    Movieman, I often feel that the Globes go too far the other way — I remember About Schmidt being categorized as a “drama” purely because (I assume) they wanted to put Nicholson in with the other acting heavyweights as he would be in the Oscar race, rather than a lighter category. I remember Nicholson saying something to the effect of, gee, I thought we made a comedy. If I remember correctly, Sideways got the same treatment … hmm, so maybe it’s just Alexander Payne’s movies. Still, I remember hearing complaints that some of this year’s movies — Darjeeling, Margot at the Wedding — would be considered in the comedy category, and I remember thinking, but aren’t those movies actually comedies, albeit “serious” ones? If you’re going to categorize anything with even remotely serious bits as a drama, you can eliminate pretty much anything but the broadest of broad. So in that sense, I don’t think it’s ridiculous to put The Savages in the “comedy” category.

  18. brack says:

    “Funniest nomination?
    Shakira’s song from “Love in the Time of Cholera.”
    Star-____ing again, eh?”
    But are there really that many original songs in movies today?

  19. Rob says:

    I almost want Jodie to win just to see if she uses the P word in her speech (“partner,” that is, not the other one).

  20. adorian says:

    Does this mean that if “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” or “Lion in Winter” had been released in 2007, they would have been classified as comedies?

  21. pchu says:

    Amen Joe, Amen.
    For some reason, I can’t get excited about the Golden Globes. Is it relevant anymore?

  22. jeffmcm says:

    So we can look forward to seeing the consultants’ names listed in the next Gurus of Gold update? “Karen Fried had a good year but the Academy feels that Tony Angelotti is overdue” or something like that?

  23. lazarus says:

    So DP, if the consultants are responsible for the 7 noms, and not the films, as you say, why didn’t this happen last year, or the year before? It’s not as if this game is new? Why aren’t there 7 Comedy/Musical noms, then?
    I’m certainly cynical to an extent about this group (though I’ll remind everyone that they nominated Mulholland Dr and The Man Who Wasn’t There for Best Picture), but they’re not a bunch of tasteless fiends. I still feel that over the last 10 years, their choices are just as legitimate (if not more) than the Academy. And let’s not forget, it was AMPAS who blinked and gave Best Picture to Crash, when the HFPA had no problem recognizing Brokeback.

  24. Armin Tamzarian says:

    I know these things are silly, but really have to wonder aloud why HBO’s The Wire gets no love when it comes to awards.

  25. ployp says:

    “But are there really that many original songs in movies today?”
    Le Festin?

  26. Lynch Van Sant says:

    They also have 7 nominees for TV Actress Drama and all are well-known…and so the starf__king goes on. Glad to see Michael C. Hall in there for Dexter but the dull tv nominees goes to show how bad network tv series are right now. Why include Edie Falco and nothing else for The Sopranos?

  27. Kambei says:

    No love for “Extras”? I’m glad it got two noms…

  28. THX5334 says:

    I’m not trying to sound Snarky, but, The Hot Button hasn’t been updated in three weeks. Is that column Ghandi?
    I ask, because if it’s not going to continue and this is now your main forum, I’m gonna delete it as one of my start-up tabs on my Mozilla. Need all the bandwith I can get, etc…

  29. brack says:

    “Le Festin?”
    Exactly, not many.

  30. USA Today wasn’t first with the song nods. I forget where I saw them earlier this morning (around 6:30), but it wasn’t there.

  31. lazarus says:

    The Golden Compass & Beowulf=ZERO critics awards or nominations.
    Elizabeth: The Golden Age=ZERO critics awards, 2 nominations for Blanchett.
    Ian Sinclair=Missing for over a week.

  32. Andrew says:

    Rob wrote : “I almost want Jodie to win just to see if she uses the P word in her speech (“partner,” that is, not the other one).”
    What other one? P*s*y? I’d prefer that actually.
    Too bad about Linney though. It’s gotta sting that PSH gets one.
    The Globes broadcast is going to be horrible anyway, I doubt any of the liberal actors (all of ’em right?) are gonna show up to cross the WGA pickets.

  33. Armin Tamzarian says:

    Hey Lazarus, let us not forget that whats-his-name also predicted awards love (a best pic nomination!) for Love in the Time of Cholera.

  34. lazarus says:

    Yeah. Hopefully the shame will be enough for him to never come back here, although I imagine he’d just take on another pseudonym because he can’t get enough of his trolling ways.

  35. JohnBritt says:

    Yawn! This awards season is just so hard to get excited about. I am the awards nut around my circle of friends, endlessly talking about who won what, blah blah blah. I just can’t get excited this year? Why is that? The only real awards contenders I have made an effort to see is Into the Wild and Hairspray. I almost made it to Eastern Promises, but alas no. I watched Enchanted but I never saw that as an awards contender. I thought Ratatouille was boring. I am excited about Sweeney Todd, though, and curious about There Will Be Blood. What’s going on here? I am usually hyped to see these films. Is the marketing department failing these films? If you can’t motivate a die hard movie buff, how can you motivate the general hard-to-please public?

  36. Stella's Boy says:

    Ebert states that Juno’s screenplay is “uncommonly intelligent.” The rottentomatoes rating, out of 110 total reviews, is 94%. Is Cody just the recipient of excessive hype, or is it possible that the vast majority of critics out there truly believe that she has written an excellent screenplay? Nicol?

  37. Cadavra says:

    “How many people are going to be upset that John Travolta got a supporting actor nomination, but Hal Holbrook didn’t?”
    Travolta, the one weak link in the picture, is bad enough, but not nominating Dano for TWBB is a genuine crime.

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