MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland


What can one say?
The town drunks are at it again.
The hard part about smacking the HFPA roundly about the head and shoulders is that they sometimes do something smart

Be Sociable, Share!

35 Responses to “Globes”

  1. Triple Option says:

    Should I start the obvious (topic of debate) about The Dark Knight snub? I thought it would’ve been more likely that it would’ve gotten gg noms and maybe left off the oscars. I haven’t seen most of the best pic noms so I’ll reserve judgment on if I agree w/Dark Knight not making it there. I don’t know how logical it would be to separate best pic and best director but I gotta give Nolan his props for keeping that thing together, look, music, tone…I think I’m more surprised about him not getting in there.
    Part of me feels Batman Begins was a stronger film than Dark Knight but considering that this wasn’t a 1994 or 1999 in terms of quality releases, I thought Dark Knight had a really good shot of making the best pic category.
    Has a film ever been excluded from the globes that’s gone on to win Academy Award for best pic?
    In Bruges suckt out loud!

  2. lazarus says:

    Triple Option: In answer to your question, yes. It was called Crash (SHUDDER).
    Whatever, these aren’t any more embarrassing than the BFCA nominations.
    While the absence of Milk (at least for Penn) is odd, these guys get A LOT of credit from me for nominating Kristen Scott Thomas and Rebecca Hall, as well as all the In Bruges love.
    I’m also relieved that they’re not drinking the Clint Kool-Aid this year, and the song nomination is a funny little backhanded compliment.
    I’m not sure why there’s all this shock about The Reader getting nominated. Maybe it’s Harvey, but maybe it’s the pedigree? They gave Best Picture to The Hours so it’s not surprising they’d embrace Daldry and his big stars again.
    Also, The Dark Knight was never going to score big with the HFPA.

  3. “In Bruges” is an outstanding film! Both youse 2, pipe down. Seriously, Triple…have you seen it?? It certainly does not suck.
    And although as usual, the GG noms are whacky, I get more excited to see them than the Oscar ones because you never know who will pop up. Plus the TV ones are always cool to see too.

  4. Joe Leydon says:

    I must admit: I was hoping to see a little Hancock love from the Globers. Also: Am I the only one who’s mildly surprised (and, yeah, disappointed) that there hasn’t been any sort of Best Support push anywhere for either Bette Midler in Then She Found Me or Jim Broadbent in When Did You Last See Your Father?

  5. brack says:

    I thought you’d be more surprised that “21” didn’t get any nominations.

  6. hcat says:

    Thinkfilm is broke so I can’t see them spending any money for a supporting role in a film that is already out on video. SPC has their hands full with trying to land three of the five best actress nominations.
    I saw Father last week and was not very impressed. The ending was effective but none of the performances reallly struck me as exceptional though I really like the three leads. Broadbent is always a joy to watch but is used better in Topsy Turvy, Moulin Rouge, Bullets over Broadway and Iris.

  7. doug r says:

    You know I’m loving 60% of the Supporting Actor noms 🙂

  8. Joe Leydon says:

    Brack: Hey, what can I say? Kevin Spacey was robbed of a Best Supporting Actor nomination.

  9. Rob says:

    I agree that the In Bruges noms are a fun surprise – it’s my favorite crime comedy since Grosse Pointe Blank.

  10. DarienStyles says:

    “Milk”‘s snubbing was ridiculous. Good box-office numbers and rare reviews, yet not enough to garner a nomination for best picture. And Ralph Fiennes for “The Ducchess” ? I never saw that coming.

  11. YND says:

    As I understand it, when the HFPA instituted their Best Animated Feature category a couple years ago, it made animated films ineligible for either Best Picture category. Otherwise I have to believe WALL*E would’ve been able to bump out the likes of MAMMA MIA.

  12. Triple Option says:


  13. The Big Perm says:

    In Bruges wasn’t supposed to be a laff riot…a lot of the humor was sort of subtle and small. THat’s why I liked it. But it still had a lot oflaugh out loud moments for me. One of my favorites of the year. And Two Days in the Valley isn’t a movie I’d want it to be like at all, since that was terrible as I recall.
    And Falling Down wasn’t supposed to be a straight up comedy either. You seem to want gut busting coemdy where it’s not supposed to be, or intended.

  14. Jeffrey Boam's Doctor says:

    They maybe the town drunks but they were sure sober enough to ignore the geek chorus surrounding TDK. There’s a picture of Bale in some bat suit under ‘overrated’ on Wiki.
    Comic books and animation are for kids. That is their intended goal. Period. I will never take someone with underwear on the outside as serious adult fare. The reign of geek power will end in three years. When a Dice Clay-like prophet comes back and slaps the piss out of nerds worldwide, and suddenly its okay to be cruel, homophobic and to be a bully.
    And films like MILK will be appreciated like other PHILADELPHIA and other comedies .
    When that happens we know the balance of the world is back on track and that things are back to normal.

  15. jeffmcm says:

    We have creeping Lexism on the blog – the absurd, old-fashioned, limited idea that ‘animation is for kids’ is spreading like a virus.
    I agree with the pro-In Bruges folk. Also, what the hell is “Last Chance Harvey”?
    And I was watching Tropic Thunder again this week and it just seemed self-evident to me that Downey deserves whatever Best Supporting awards he can get, his performance is that good and I don’t get why DP doesn’t care for it, outside of his disdain of the movie as a whole.

  16. Jeffrey Boam's Doctor says:

    When you say ‘spreading like a virus’ it has such a negative connotation jeffylube. How about ‘spreading like a labia’ instead…
    OOOOOOOOOOOO! [crooks neck, lights cigarette]

  17. Triple Op-
    Dude, watch it again. You’re totally entitled to your opinion but I think you must have been hungover or in a shitty mood when you saw “In Bruges.” There’s also the inevitable Colin Ferrel backlash but I dunno if that applies to you. Your reading and feelings above just seem off from what the film presents. If you see it on DVD and still hate it, I’ll buy you a beer.
    Speaking of “Two Days in the Valley;” Every year when we cover CineVegas we stay at Planet Hollywood. This last year they were finally done with the redecorating which entailed each room being a theme room for a certain movie.
    Our room was the “Two Days in the Valley” room which featured a movie poster, some B/W stills and this table with a glass case. In the case was Charlize Theron’s ripped open lingerie, a gun and a dog collar. We were like….”dude….what…the….helllll.” I mean, I got that they were props but jeez, who kept that stuff around?
    Then we called Chris Gore’s room and his was the “Robocop 3” room so we felt somewhat better.

  18. Jeffrey Boam's Doctor says:

    DP says Cruise’s turn is a potential oscar nom.
    I agree and so should Meyers for his work in The Love Guru.

  19. yancyskancy says:

    Cruise’s TT stunt was okay, but it’s much further down the comedy evolutionary scale than Downey, Jr.’s. And Downey has the richer role and more screen time, allowing him to transcend the stunt aspect of his character in a way that Cruise can’t.
    Nice to see Franco get in there for Actor in a Comedy/Musical, but I’d have put him in Supporting and bumped Cruise.
    My pet peeve of the season: no room for any of the brilliant performances in Cadillac Records. Can’t imagine anyone who’s seen it would really think Cruise deserves that slot over Columbus Short, Eamonn Walker or maybe even Mos Def (and no, I’m not kidding myself that any of them had a scintilla of a chance, even though it appears enough of the HFP saw the film to grant that Best Song nod — actually, no, they probably just heard the CD). I am kinda shocked they didn’t include Beyonce, if only for star-f’ing purposes.

  20. yancyskancy says:

    Addendum: I guess HFP figured Beyonce’s song nod would be sufficient star-f’ing. No need to double up.

  21. jeffmcm says:

    JBD, I’m assuming your last post was a joke…right?
    Cruise was stunt casting and screaming. Downey is really delivering comic brilliance.

  22. jeffmcm says:

    And by the way – does DP have “What can one say?” set as the default header on his blog posts?

  23. Triple Option says:

    Big Perm: Normally I don’t make clarifying points to posts but I think you’re concentrating on trees and missing the forest of what I was saying. I’ll take full fault in not articulating clearly but that really wasn’t what I was driving at. At all.
    Don Lewis – I’ll try to get to it sometime over the holiday season and not immediately after getting soaked in one of the bowl games. I may’ve had other beefs w/it but I may also find it enjoyable 2nd time around.

  24. Cool man, lemme know if you changed your mind…happens to me frequnetly if I was in a crap mood or crappy screening (ie; chatty people, bad print, etc.).

  25. Malone says:

    How come nobody’s talking about CHE?

  26. David Poland says:

    Hee hee.

  27. brack says:

    You never go full retard, but if you go full ugly, you might get a nomination.

  28. leahnz says:

    wait, is that first name listed in the ‘best supporting actor’ category supposed to be a joke?
    remember THAT sign john mcclain was forced to wear in harlem in ‘dh with a vengeance’? the members of the hfp who somehow finagled cruise a ‘best sup actor’ nom for that mildly amusing shock-value joke of a perf in ‘tropic thunder’ – alongside other worthy turns – should have to do that exact same thing. his dancing was hilarious, but until they institute a monty pythonesque ‘best supporting silly dancing’ category…blech. what an insult to the others actors

  29. leah…lay off the big cans of Fosters lager, mate. WTF?

  30. jeffmcm says:

    “Hee hee.”
    Hey, DP: which of your loyal followers and constant readers are you snidely dismissing this time around?
    I’m just asking for, you know, informational purposes. My guess is, both of us.

  31. leahnz says:

    was that too much, don? leah asks sheepishly :-/
    damn, i thought i pitched my outrage just right…
    (and no self-respecting kiwi drinks fucking FOSTERS LAGER, mate! i’d just as soon choose death by suffocation from flies up my nose. i’ve said before i’d marry beer if they let me, but i’m currently enjoying a beautiful nz-made limoncello that kicks citrus ass, just so you know)
    and typepad IS the spawn of satan

  32. yancyskancy says:

    Okay, minus the “deserve” semantics then: Does anyone think Cruise’s TT perf is BETTER than anyone in Cadillac Records or any number of other non-nominated thesps? I mean, if so – fine. I realize there’s an apples-and-oranges aspect to the entire enterprise, and I’m the first to cry foul when great comic work is deemed unworthy for awards consideration. And I liked Cruise, but his role was much more of a stunt than Downey’s, and it overstayed its welcome a bit.
    Did TypePad test this shit at all before making the switch?

  33. LexG says:

    YAYYY = Rebecca Hall, CRUISE, and Rourke.
    Dominic West in WAR ZONE = Better than Downey. I’m not kidding.

  34. leahnz says:

    just to put on my caring and sharing hat for a mo re: my cruise nom rant above – which was aimed at those who nominated him for the award, not cruise himself – i don’t view cruise with disdain or think of him as as a joke like many people seem to, i just happen to think his silly, foul-mouthed turn in ‘tt’ was amusing but nothing more than one-note fluff, esp. compared to downey jr’s performance, which was actually well considered and skillful. that, and the plethora of other fine supporting actor performances that were overlooked for nomination, just serve to make cruise’s nom appear that much more dodgy

  35. movieman says:

    Did anyone else notice that “The Brothers Bloom” got pushed back again–this time to (I shit you not) May?!
    Guess I’ll just have to wait until 2009 to put it on my 10-worst list.

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