MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Gossip Around The Reader

One detail missng completely from the sudden interest in old news regarding whether Harvey Weinstein will release The Reader against producer Scott Rudin’s will in December…
Kate Winslet decalred months ago that she will not do press for The Reader if Harvey releases it against her husband’s film, Revolutionary Road.
Game over.
Or so it should have been.
But Harvey is stubborn. And he must think that Rev Road is going to tank, awards-wise, or he would know that he was killing two birds with one stone by even considering pushing the two movies into battle without his best Golden Globe bait in Winslet.
Moreover, he is light on cash and sitting on The Reader until 2009 means, 1) giving up millions from the over-Dec-31-Showtime-pay-tv money that he still can grab under his MGM alliance, 2) sitting on the $40 million cost until the film is released, which pretty much precludes waiting until next Oscar season, not wanting to eat millions in interest on the budget.
The point is… it has nothing to do with Harvey’s will vs Rudin’s… it has little to do with the quality of the movie… like so many decisions made by cash-tight companies in this town these days, it is about the bottom line and everything else is a distraction. And the bottom line here is that Harvey is 80% on the way to NEEDING to release this film this year, even though he is completely concious of all the pitfalls (which include dealing with an already not-so-thrilled-to-be-working-with-Harvey 42 West, which works on all Rudin’s films and which will be 100% on Rudin’s side of any publicity fight)..

Be Sociable, Share!

8 Responses to “Gossip Around The Reader”

  1. LexG says:

    No offense to a fine actress, really, and totally understand her standing up for her husband’s movie (though no one should get married before 40)…
    but can’t help but feel kind of a “BOOOO-HOOOOO, Kate Winslet MIGHT POSSIBLY get cheated out of her FOUR BILLIONTH OSCAR NOMINATION” whine via this tactic.
    And really? WAHHHHHH, WAHHHHHHHHHH. I’m gonna lose some serious sleep over obscure upstart Kate Winslet missing out on a rare outside shot at a nom.
    Christ, she’s only nominated EVERY FUCKING YEAR and for EVERY FUCKING MOVIE already anyway. She could’ve waltzed into frame for a split-second at minute 47 of LOVE GURU, and she’d be tossed into the Oscar talk mix.
    I think she’s great, but what, is it etched in stone that she HAS to be on the ballot every single year? Not like she isn’t going to be nominated 5000 MORE TIMES anyway.

  2. People can get married before they’re 40, Lex. It just requires leaving the house and not being socially inept. And, besides, nobody’s asking you to lose sleep over Winslet. She’s probably sleeping quite comfortably in her nice house that is paid for by being a working actress in some of the finest films of the last 15 years and with five Oscar-nominations to her name. 🙂
    I must say though, I am far more interested in The Reader than Revolutionary Road (although I still really want to see the latter also) if for no other reason than Stephen Daldry.

  3. The Pope says:

    Let’s be honest here. I am sure they have the on set puff pieces. If they can get Feinnes to do the press and, with Daldry and Harvey doing his own bit, they can dance around and keep mentioning Kate and what a trooper she is… and no one outside of the industry will really notice.
    I think she is a wonderful actress and enjoy pretty much everything she is in but selfishly I do hope she does not win an Oscar for a while. Too often, actresses have won too soon and have gone off the boil. I’d much rather she have the longevity of Meryl Streep than have a statuette on the shelf and do a Julia Roberts/Reese Witherspoon/Halle Berry/Nicole Kidman etc.

  4. tjfar67 says:

    Just watched the first season of “Extras”. There is an episode were Kate Winslet,playing herself, does a WWII movie because it’s a sure fire way to win an Oscar. (She also notes another way is to play a mentally handicapped person. Sound familiar?)
    The best line in the episode spoken by Kate: “The whole world is asking, ‘Why hasn’t Kate Winslet won an Oscar yet?'”

  5. Krazy Eyes says:

    The Kate Winslet episode was definitely one of the best episodes of EXTRAS. She does the best job of satirizing herself without going too far into parody like some of the other guest stars.

  6. Ben C says:

    I like it best when the cameo-ing actor doesn’t even parody themselves, but, in the case of Patrick Stewart and David Bowie, gets to deliver killer lines and set-ups irrespective of their prior baggage.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg_cwI1Xj4M
    That there is just a funny ass scene.

  7. RoyBatty says:

    Considering the character she is playing in THE READER, if she pulls it off she might very well deserve an Oscar. Because I don’t think she can do it – Winslet just hasn’t aged yet. Great for her career and all, but not in the best interest of this character.
    It’s a shame the public knows fuck-all about the behind the scenes players, because otherwise the publicity behind the film would center on it being one of Anthony Minghella and Sydney Pollack’s final two films (MARGARET is the other) produced together.

  8. doug r says:

    Saw a trailer for Revolutionary Road before Ghost Town. At least Titanic had the ship sinking.

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” — 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