April 26, 2024
20 Weeks
Krillian on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Kristopher Tapley on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Kristopher Tapley on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Hallick on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
PastePotPete on: 12 Weeks To Oscar: The Battle Of Black Swan
David Poland on: 15 Weeks To Oscar: Don’t You Forget About Me
cadavra on: 15 Weeks To Oscar: Don’t You Forget About Me
Brian on: 15 Weeks To Oscar: Don’t You Forget About Me
johnbritt on: 15 Weeks To Oscar: Don’t You Forget About Me
20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
12 Weeks To Oscar: The Battle Of Black Swan
15 Weeks To Oscar: Don’t You Forget About Me
26 Weeks To Oscar: The Year Of… Patience
20 Weeks To Oscar – 16 Days To Go.
20 Weeks To Oscar – 11 Weeks To Go
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
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
I sincerely hope that Best Pic chart is out of date because you have to be cracked in the head to have Atonement in front of Into the Wild and There Will Be Blood, not to mention Diving Bell. Into the Wild has now a CAS, a WGA, leads the SAGS and most importantly, a DGA. That is wide ranging support. Atonement has zip. NOTHING. Not a single thing.
Put Atonement and Juno below the other four and you have something. This is truly mind-boggling, sorry. WAY WAY WAY off where the race is headed. Your own prediction, perhaps, but in now way an accurate indicator.
I think DP did this list before the WGA noms, but you’re right, Sasha. He should have had them both in front anyway. And I love how Hairspray is still floating above the “slim chance” group, in Picture and Actress. Old delusions die hard, apparently.
I still think Atonement will get the nod. It got a script, directing and drama nomination from the Golden Globes. I know the HFPA is not always the most reliable indicator, but I think a lot of folks in the Academy might opt for the flick that seems most Best Picturey. It would be insane if No Country, Blood, Into the Wild, Clayton and Diving Bell were the top five. Not that I would be complaining, but I just don’t see it.
Obviously, I bow to your expertise Sasha, but I still think the race is wide open and Atonement could easily slip in there.
What Atonement has is that it looks like an Academy Award nominee, with its Britishness and costumes and wartime setting and pedigree. I know that sounds simplistic and reductive but hey, this is the Academy.
Diving Bell seems like the biggest longshot to me, personally. For one, we forget that even though all the main actors have done English Language roles before, this is a foreign language film. That’s a big impediment. Also, it’s a visually gimmicky film that might appeal to a smaller percentage of Academy members, regardless of how moving the film is. It’s still somewhat experimental.
I think you’re more likely to see Atonement in a BP slot, with Joe Wright’s directing nom going to Schnabel. Focus is pretty good at getting their favorites recognized, and they don’t have anything else to push besides Atonement, other than Viggo and some techs for Lust, Caution.
Noah, I don’t think it won’t for sure be nominated but right now it is in the long shot category. It’s possible but there are so many movies trying to push through that fifth slot…I don’t know how he can have There Will Be Blood and Into the Wild dropped down with the other long shots. I know nothing is ever for sure but to put Sweeney Todd and Atonement, two films that have been shut out everywhere for everything (except the Globes) on equal footing with those two movies is just plain nuts. And you know how much I hated There Will Be Blood.
Haha, I know. But as you are well aware, “nobody knows anything” so David’s guesses may well turn out to be prescient. I think, based on the track record of the Academy, it’s not far from the realm of possibilities that TWBB gets snubbed (despite the critical support) and Atonement gets the nom. It’s such a wide open race this year that literally nothing would surprise me (okay, maybe if Zodiac got a nomination I’d be a bit surprised).
If anything on that last 2 slot “candidates” list is a shoe-in, it’s THERE WILL BE BLOOD.
I hate to engage in schadenfreund, but ATONEMENT seems to have it’s true colors showing with the WGA leaving them out. Bummer.
So I guess Lars and Juno wouldn’t qualify for best Foreign picture?
Can people stop talking about Atonement as if it’s just an accepted fact that the movie is shit. Cause it’s not. Okay? it’s fine for people to dislike it, but the way people are coming out of the woodwork all but going “duh!” is just really irritating.
anyway, Into the Wild is surely a lock by now, right? I’d count on it more than freakin’ Michael Clayton and Juno!
Oh, and on the best director chart:
“A complete, powerful, classic movie with a real sense of directorial style”
REALLY? Honestly. Hmm, oh well.
Also, Tim Burton would be the “Scorsese of 2019” if they would ever nominate him.
As if Burton is anywhere near as important or accomplished as Scorsese is. I don’t get that one at all.
Classic. WGA will not effect the Academy nods at all and are wrong in at least 3 cases pretty much every year.
I don’t think Atonement is anyone’s juggernaut at the moment, but it does have a hard core of support that likely voted before the media turned on the movie. It could certainly miss, but it could also get in. I have always said that it could never win.
As for Into The Wild, I hope it gets in over either Atonement or Blood… but it is way to easy to over-read precursors.
No doubt, it could be Wild and Blood. But this blood-curdling scream over Atonement is way too shrill. And you’re after Juno too?
Talk to Academy voters. They are not the same as the media. Precursor obsession is overrated. That said, Atonement is in trouble. But neither YOU nor I know how much, really.
“Plain nuts?” Perspective, please.
I played the “something’s gotta give” game. Here are the ones that lost: “Sweeney Todd”, “Attonement” and “Michael Clayton”. Then I repeated it again on this list and got “Michael Clayton”. Draw your own conclusions.