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” â 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 â 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 â he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” â and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging â I was with her at that moment â 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 namedâ” “Yeah, sure â 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 Iâm on the phone with you now, after all thatâs 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 didnât seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. Thereâs not a case of that. He wasnât using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had â if that were what the accusation involved â 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. Iâm not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, âYou know, itâs not this, itâs thatâ? Because â let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, thatâs what it lacked. Thatâs 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 was happy to see Dexter get some love. The recent season finale was pretty awesome. Enjoyed Lithgow’s work a lot as well.
I really like these picks, think they did a really good job – despite all the back and forth on these blogs, there’s no reason why you cannot rewards Hurt Locker, Avatar, Inglorious Bastards, Precious, AND Up in the Air – liking those films is not mutually exclusive. I’ll be seeing Avatar on Friday for sure.
That said, if they were going to put A Serious Man in the comedy category (which it kinda was, let’s face it), it should have gotten a one of the big five nods – I get The Hangover hype, but come on, now. And I have little doubt that A Serious Man will be funnier than It’s Complicated, as well. That said, fantastic to see Stuhlberg get recognition.
The one big ommission I found was to be in television – Parks and Recreation has become the best comedy on television with truly the best ensemble, and it was completely shut out??? You can’t give Amy Pohler a nod? And I like The Office, but that show is on a downturn and P&R has definitely surpassed it, this season.
And another thing – that animated category looks truly competitive. I’m sure Up is the front-runner, but Coraline, Princess and Frog, and Fantastic Mr. Fox all have their share of hard-core fans. Didn’t see Frog or Coraline, yet, but I would put ‘Fox at the top.
Delighted to see all the love bestowed upon “Glee.”
And the recognition for Thomas Jane and Jane Adams in HBO’s terrific “Hung” was richly deserved as well.
I totally agree with Geoff about Parks and Recreation. I was so-so on the 1st season but this season has easily passed both The Office and 30 Rock as my favorite sitcom on TV.
..on a completely unrelated note, I’m a little surprised to see Streep scoring a nod for “It’s Complicated” (“J&J” was a given); and Meyers getting a screenplay mention as well.
Three nominations for the movie and Alec Baldwin (the best thing in the movie) doesn’t rate a supporting nod? WTF?
Don’t get me wrong: “IC” is fun and seems destined to be a giant hit, but it’s not an “awards-style” movie anymore than, say,
“Couples Retreat” (which, of course, it’s vastly superior to btw).
I was a little disappointed that Sigourney Weaver didn’t land a supporting slot for “Avatar” (especially since she’s a GG favorite).
And it was interesting to see Mirren and Plummer jump back into the game after being snubbed by everyone else. Maybe “The Last Station” isn’t dead after all.
P.S.= Totally agree about “P&R,” Geoff. That’s quickly becoming my favorite NBC Thursday nite sitcom.
One note of significance: no love for the director of PRECIOUS: BASED ON THE NOVEL PUSH BY SAPPHIRE (I love that stupid title).
..I’m guessing Clint took Daniels’ slot, Chris.
And for a movie (“Invictus”) that didn’t even rate a “Best Picture (Drama)” nomination.
GG sure does love their living legends, don’t they?
Seeing A Serious Man this week and I am shocked that it did not get a nod based on all the love its gotten. Especially since it was nudged out by incredibly unimpressive Julie and Julia. Streep was good but not anything special and the Adams portion of the film was terrible.
Ummm…”A Serious Man” seriously sucks. I’m glad Stuhlbarg got a nod but as a whole, that movie gets attention solely due to the fact it’s the Coen’s. And they seem tog et a pass whenever they make anything, good or bad. Just because “A Serious Man” makes no sense and appears deep doesn’t make it good. Nyahh đ
A script nod for District 9, a movie in which no script was actually followed when it came to dialogue. Brilliant. Like when Mike Leigh movies get nominated for Best Screenplay.
I bow to NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, but A SERIOUS MAN drove me crazy. One-note and one-minded.
“A SERIOUS MAN drove me crazy. One-note and one-minded.”
Uh, I think that was the point.
Anyhow, I feel like Daniels will probably get a nod over Tarantino on the Oscar ballot, but we’ll see.
Was it really the point to sledgehammer home one note characters and situations? I’ll take your word.
The usual mix of cronyism and corruption not unlike D.C. The Financial Times — written for the rich and powerful — got confused about the marketing tie-in Harvey Weinstein had with Disney.
Speaking of Harvey, his penurious studio had to co-produce “Inglourious Basterds” with Universal, so he can’t claim all the glory for himself.
Chucky, what are you on about my man?
Since christian has forgotten, Weinstein Co. cut a deal with ABC to have a tribute to “Nine” as part of “Dancing with the Stars”. Who owns ABC? Disney — which fired Harvey Weinstein from Miramax.
Chucky, that the financial times is written for people with money is no less scandelous than Pet Fancy being written for people with Pets.
While Universal did get a rare hit this year with IB I believe their input was only financial, so when it comes to awards TWC does get the crowing rights.
And I am saddened to hear people didn’t like Serious Man, I hadn’t heard or read anything negative previously. The Coens are my favorite but I found Burn after Reading a little light so I was hoping for a nice Man who Wasn’t There turn-around.
And while I am sure it would not win, Serious Man was Focus’ only contender in the Oscar race. Something is not right in a world where Lions Gate has a best picture win while Focus and SPC have never taken home the prize.
The Man Who Wasn’t There was indeed great but hardly a turnaround. It was preceded by O Brother Where Art Thou, which was a near-perfect mix of the Coens’ humor and technical prowess.
Think about the Coens’ 1996 – 2001 run– Fargo to Lebowski to O Brother to Man Who Wasn’t There. How many directors have an unbroken four-movie streak of greatness like that?
Their only serious rough patch was the Intolerable Cruelty / Ladykillers years, and even those weren’t entirely worthless.
Aside from funny performances and an incredible soundtrack, “O Brother Where Art Thou” is not a good movie I don’t think. It’s scattered/unfocused, way too long and like many Coen Bros movies, the ending is totally anticlimactic. I like “The Man Who Wasn’t There” for the sake of homage but it’s a really bad movie as a free standing “movie.”
I would say the run goes all the way back to Raising Arizona with only slight dips for Hudsucker (and there is so much to love about that movie) and Oh Brother. I know I am in the minority but I think while Brother is anchored by great performances and the soundtrack it does have pacing problems and only really comes alive once Clooney is reunited with Holly Hunter and his girls.
They still remain my favorites with Raising Arizona being one of my signature movie experiences along with the likes of Star Wars and Aliens. It is weird to think of them being considered the established filmmakers.
The Coens have been the most consistent filmmakers from the 1980s indie generation.
The Coens have made many excellent movies, very few poor movies (Serious Man is a recent nadir for them, unless you’re jewish, apparently) and two great movies, Miller’s Crossing and O Brother Where Art Thou? the latter is far and away their finest achievement and absolute perfection on every level.
Of all the filmmakers that came out of that decade, would you have guessed that they would become some sort of industry standard bearers? Not just of the indies (between blood simple and Fargo they were all studio releases)but out of all of their peers.
Levinson, Kasden, Reiner, Stone all at one time seemed to be invincible, destined to become a part of the conversation along with Hawks, Wilder, Coppola, Scorsese et al. You can make a case for Stone still being around and that his existing films have earned a place in history but he never really achieved the Kubrick, Scorsese level that he seemed destined for.
Well, Movielocke, I’m Irish Catholic, and I think A Serious Man is pretty damn terrific, so that shoots your theory all to hell.
His theory about A Serious Man may be shot to hell but otherwise his taste is superb.
Yeah, I’m an atheist and I adored “A Serious Man” (my wife, however, is Jewish and speaks Hebrew and Yiddish and was able to tell me when things switched from one to the other).
That said, Best Screenplay nod to “It’s Complicated?” I get all the Rudin-ing and inside moves of the Globes, but that’s an insult to so many other movies this year that even had functioning screenplays. Hell, I’d give it to the first half of “Funny People” over “It’s Complicated.” Heck, the new “Harry Potter,” “Observe & Report,” “Zombieland,” “Public Enemies” – all better screenplays. “An Education?” “Moon?”
Globes are simply invitation right? No one is buying tables like some of the other groups. You can see the wheels turning as far as getting maximum red carpet fodder, but since they aren’t selling a table to Universal and no one is tuning in to catch a glimpse of Nancy Meyers they must have somehow thought it was well written.
Now I get why Universal sent out a screener for It’s Complicated, and nothing else.
Nah, they shipped “Public Enemies” and “Bruno,” too.
Oh, and “Funny People.”
Dammit! Not to LAFCA, they didn’t! Only “It’s Terrible”
Not that anyone is obliged, but it’s just weird to get only the worst movie in the bunch.
Wouldn’t they figure that most of LAFCA would have seen the other titles already since they were in wide release and out on dvd?
I recently watched “Blood Simple” and “Raising Arizona” again. Made me wish Barry Sonnenfeld would quit directing and go back to cinematography.
hcat – Public Enemies came out on DVD about three days before the vote, when we were all averaging three new screeners a day in the mail. Not really time to go get it. And yes, I missed it in the summer, because it opened during LAFF when I was busy fest-blogging.
I don’t know who Ricardo Autobahn is, but this Golden Age of Video compilation kicks ass:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne1JKI_PnoQ
LYT, you may have missed the opening but it played for six or seven weeks. I’m not trying to be snarky but if you were averaging three screeners a day would another have been helpful? Given the theatrical release date, the time in theaters and just the basic demographics the film played to (older, film fans), its reasonable to think that Universal thought they had already reached saturation on the title.
Damn, LYT! I know how difficult it is to keep up with the hundreds of new releases every year, but how could you have possibly missed “Public Enemies”?
As much of a drag as it is, I regularly haul my sorry butt off to anything/everything I may have missed–or that wasn’t screened prior to opening day. While that means suffering through a litany of commercials and trailers (most of which I’ve already seen dozens of times) at multiplex matinees–not to mention bottom-feeder junk like “Boondock Saints 2” and “Transylmania”–I feel duty-bound as a working critic to catch as many films per year as humanly possible. Hell, I’m currently enduring “Eating Out 3: All You Can Eat” (thnx, Netflix).
And though it’s perfectly understandable that you may have missed something eminently worthwhile because it never made it to your neck of the woods (a consistent problem for me since I live in NE Ohio), you live in frigging LA! Plus, we’re talking about a wide release, major studio film by one of America’s leading auteurs that was surely available city-wide for most of last summer.
Yowza.
I can’t believe they waited for the 3rd film to subtitle it All You Can Eat. What was Eating Out 2 called?
Not to break up the inside ballgame here, but Dave, would you clarify your point on this:
“As usual, our happy band of freeloading friends go along to get along, doing what they must to try to mimic Oscar and to get some extra special stars on that red carpet.”
You have a link to their nomination list that supports your own site ads! And they’re ‘freeloaders’? If you’re that ‘anti-HFP’, why not choose to not post their nominations at all? I don’t see the ethical line here….
“Eating Out 2: Sloppy Seconds”….what else?
Are these movies about cunnilingus, by any chance?
Its just like Candyman, we typed “Eating Out” three times and Joe appears.
Lets try it with someone else.
Skidoo, Skidoo, Skidoo
LOL.
if joe puts his money where his, uh, mouth is, that wife of his must walk around with a big grin on her face
The Checkered Demon just smiled.
The Post just reported that Roy Disney died.
What he did at Disney was probably the greatest company turnaround in media history. Not that he did it single handidly but if he didn’t force a change of direction, the Disney name would simply be a cog in the Time Warner or Newscorp machine now.
“I’m not trying to be snarky but if you were averaging three screeners a day would another have been helpful?”
Yes. I would have prioritized it. What I was not going to do was go out and rent something — as for Netflix, I’m on the one at a time plan, and still haven’t watched the one I have. I actually had the chance to watch PE on an international flight recently, but even at top volume, half the dialogue was inaudible so I quit.
“you live in frigging LA!”
I do NOW. At the beginning of the year I lived in Santa Ana, and spent about a month finding a new place to live and moving to it. Also, LA is full of releases even more minor than Transylmania, and those are what the Weekly sends me to. Are you caught up on Strongman, Creating Karma, Fall Down Dead, Oy Vey My Son is Gay, and Eggshells? [Strongman is worth it]
As a freelancer drawing unemployment, I really don’t have the income to pay to see lots of things above and beyond the screenings I’m invited to. I used to, and back then I did try to see everything. Now I just do my best to catch at least one screening a day.
“I know how difficult it is to keep up with the hundreds of new releases every year, but how could you have possibly missed “Public Enemies”?”
Couple reasons. One, LAFF was going on around the time it came out. It played there as a gala that I wasn’t invited to, and festival stuff took up all my time. Another, the reviews weren’t that great that I read, and heard from others. After LAFF, I took a vacation to go take care of my dad in rural Virginia for a while. Then Comic-Con happened.
And three, I was absolutely, positively CERTAIN that it would for sure be one of the awards screeners, and that thus I could prioritize my time with movies that were less likely to be so. The past two years, Universal has sent everything.
The point is not one of entitlement, but consistency, as David often goes on about. If I have reason to believe, based on an existing pattern, that I will get something, it throws me off when I don’t. Had I known for certain I would not get a screener, of course I would have gone out of my way to catch it while it was in theaters. I will rent the DVD eventually.
Hey, Leah: Anybody you know?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091216/ap_on_fe_st/us_odd_distracted_driver
holy shit! (nah, that was waaaay down south in invercargill, joe, they’re even weirder than us down there. high class all the way!)