MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Gomorrah Rubbed Out

The Foreign Language Short List is in and the one real surprise on it is that absence of Gomorrah. The new set up has an executive comittee with 3 selections aside from the straight committee votes on the other six candidates. The Italian mob movie was expected to be an exec committee lock. It wasn’t.
From here, there will be more screenings for a group who will choose 5 from the 9 after seeing all of them.
I still expect Waltz With Bashir to win the Oscar.
(For more info on the films that were in the chase, check out Nathaniel R’s excellent pages on all the contenders.)
Headshaker to come… doc nods.

Be Sociable, Share!

13 Responses to “Gomorrah Rubbed Out”

  1. Jeffrey Boam's Doctor says:

    There’s a lot of real heat about GOMORRAH at the moment due to one of the stars real world crimes. A shame it missed out but maybe, just maybe its more admired than liked. I admired the film and thought it really captured a sweeping (and interesting) story brilliantly but in the end it didn’t engage me emotionally. It had energy, humour but very little poignancy. This possibly was intentional by the filmmakers but its the reason why I never would return for a second viewing.

  2. LYT says:

    I’m rooting for Waltz…think The Class has a shot though.

  3. No “Let the Right One In” either. Weirdness.

  4. a_loco says:

    I have the feeling that Waltz will win FL and not get nominated for Animated, which will be the exact opposite of Spirited Away.

  5. Mikkel says:

    Well, the Academy can’t be blamed for not shortlisting “Let the Right One In” as Sweden decided to submit Jan Troell’s “Everlasting Moments” instead (which is indeed shortlisted after also being nominated for a Golden Globe).

  6. Aladdin Sane says:

    Gomorra was frickin’ brutal but awesome. It’s too bad that it missed out on the short list. It’s ten times the movie Bashir is.

  7. Mikkel-
    I kinda figured that was the case. But since Sweden seeminglt dissed “Let the Right One In,” why aren’t the filmmakers and distribution company jumping all OVER the praise being heaped on the film and putting it out in more theaters…or at least jumpstarting the campaign. They could be raking in the cash.
    Reminds me of when OLDBOY hit theaters and they never pumped it by showing all the love it garnered on the net.

  8. a_loco says:

    Because LTROI would bore mainstream audiences to death. Hell, it bore me half way there.

  9. chris says:

    The Swedish “Oscars” just split the top prize between “Moments” and “Right One,” so apparently the Swedes like “Moments” just as much. (And, given that it’s Troell, it probably would have a better shot with Oscar voters.)

  10. lazarus says:

    While I haven’t seen all the films that beat out Gomorrah to the shortlist, I’m not going to cry over it. Saw it a couple weeks ago, and while I was impressed to an extend, think it’s a bit overrated. I found it far inferior to City of God, which it resembled a lot.

  11. Triple Option says:

    I saw The Baader Meinhof Complex and thought it was pretty impressive. I’d been hearing quite a bit about Gomorrah and it was on my short list to see next. I think Bashir will prolly move into first position. I’m wonder if it’s like 2006 when I thought the foreign language films had it all over the best pic nominees & especially winner. ,
    The sad thing is never getting a chance to see some great films if they don’t make the final cut.

  12. Bob Violence says:

    Let the Right One In wasn’t eligible because it opened in Sweden on October 24th, which makes it a 2009 film under the Academy’s rules. It’ll be eligible next year.

  13. Bob Violence says:

    Triple Option: If you liked The Baader Meinhof Complex, definitely see United Red Army if it swings through your area (or comes out on subtitled DVD). It’s an absolutely overwhelming work (in a good way) and frankly makes the Edel/Eichinger film seem thin and dilettantish by comparison. Naturally it had no chance of being submitted by the Japanese, much less acknowledged by the Academy.

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