“AFI” announced the organization’s Top Ten today and like so many other fake awards – this one is all about having Oscar nominees come to lunch and offer their authority to AFI for the price of a red carpet perp walk – it comes down to some nice, smart people deciding what seems to be an ORGANIZATION’S voice, over lunch.
“The selections were made through a 13-person jury process involving scholars, film artists, critics and AFI trustees. Two juries
Susu on: The Letters From Iwo Jima review
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?
Joe Parts on: Welcome To The Future
qbtqpidc on: Oscar Morning Coming Down
IOv3 on: 20 Weeks Extra: Could There Be One More Turn?
20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
20 Weeks Extra: Could There Be One More Turn?
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"]
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’m sorry, but did they actually put The Hangover in their top 10? That’s a serious vote–not just a joke? Really?
DP, I can fit around your dining table. Under it too for the right price (ba-zing!)…
At least they honored Party Down and Sugar!
DP, I can fit around your dining table. Under it too for the right price (ba-zing!)…
At least they honored Party Down and Sugar!
The fact that they put Coraline in their top ten automatically gave them cred with me. Easily the best 3-D film I have ever seen.
Their list, also including great films like A Serious Man and The Hurt Locker was not bad at all.
As more lists come in that do not include Avatar I am getting a better sense of the answer to my original question as to whether or not its die hard supporters are giving it a pass for perhaps…ahem…alterior reasons.
Will see it in less than a week and find out for myself.
The AFI list is its own thing. It’s not meant to be “weighty.” It’s about honoring the full spectrum of the year in movies… the best blockbusters to the best under-the-radars. To me it’s the most interesting year end list.
The only serious problem they have is screwing up December… often under or overpraising the month’s releases before the films get a real reception. I really wish they would hold off until January.
And yes, for them to NOT include The Hangover this year would have shocked me.
Since this seems to be a pretty constant refrain this time of year, I would be interested in hearing DP explain what his dividing line between “fake awards” and “real awards” is (if there are, indeed, ANY “real awards” or if every single awards group only exists to lead to the Oscars, and are they “real” or “fake” themselves?).
Nicol, the word is ‘ulterior’.
Another key correction: The truth is there is NO red carpet “perp walk”. One of the key selling points of this luncheon is that other than a brief pose for photos and a quick question or two from an AFI crew, it’s designed to be a “non-work” event where the creative ensembles behind these films and television shows can get together and enjoy the company of each other without press around.
I know this because I’m the one trying to get the okay for more press to be allowed at this event (even to simply attend).
I have to assume that Dave is confusing it with another event since he was one of the very few press members I got in to the luncheon last year.
“Who is AFI?” The usual batch of cronies and coatholders.