MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

9 Weeks To Oscar: Let The Narratives Begin!

Here we are… ballots are out… Phase One will be over in a couple of weeks… and the battle for The Big Win has begun. The primary weapon is in the process of changing from the movies themselves (central to The Great Settling™… c/o Mr Condon) to The Narratives.

The Narratives are the big perspective ideas, almost always instigated by someone with an ax to grind or a bonus to earn. Narratives should not be confused with Dirty Pool, which is when some personal or oddball issue comes to the forefront for no other reason than to tear this film or that film down. The media, of course, can come up with stupid ideas on its own as well… like the notion that Natalie Portman’s pregnancy is somehow a strategic event in support of her potential Oscar nomination and win.

The Narrative for The King’s Speech goes something like… “It’s a movie about humanity and humility… one of the most powerful men in the world is really just a broken child and with the help of a commoner, he can be healed… it’s about a woman who is so strong and wise that she can change her husband’s life and never lose her dignity… it’s about a commoner whose principles are strong enough to withstand the pressures of the monarchy, back when the monarchy meant something… so do you really want to vote for a movie about a rich jerk or some crazy mixed up girl or a violent western that the filmmakers admit they dumbed down to make more money… or do you want to vote for an epic story of courage and overcoming obstacles?”

The rest…

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “9 Weeks To Oscar: Let The Narratives Begin!”

  1. Geoff says:

    You know, the Weinsteins get all of this hype and they certainly get the nominations, every year…..The Reader, Inglorious Basterds, wow….these guys know how to use WWII to get nods.

    But, how long has it been since they actually won the big prize??? You would know better than me, Dave, but do you think the Academy folks might be wise to the Weinsteins’ annual parade and maybe pre-disposed to NOT vote for their film for the big prize? I know, I know – the Academy is not monolithic, but they ALL know the Weinsteins, right?

    Maybe, it’s just wishful thinking, but I have a feeling that Inception still has a shot. All this stuff about the loudness – Gladiator was a REALLY loud movie, from what I remember and so was LOTR:ROTR.

    It’s a really well-liked movie, hugely successful, and the big backlash is months over at this point – the film reeks of respectability with that cast, Nolan, and it’s very easy to not look at it as sci fi or action. This is NOT The Dark Knight or even Avatar in that vein – it’s not based on a comic, doesn’t feature blue aliens, and is purely original. And HUGE point – it is not particularly violent and no sexual content.

    Nolan is pretty well-liked and respected – probably moreso than Fincher or Boyle was, just a couple of years back.

    Heck, you can even talk about the summer release date, but The Hurt Locker came out about the same time, last year.

    And you could say was the movie too successful? Well, it was big, but not ABSURDLY successful like The Dark Knight or Avatar.

    Really, I can see very few caveats for this movie – not based on true events, so it’s completely impervious to any of the “is it really true” stuff that is sure to come out against The Kings Speech and The Social Network when things get heated, next year.

    I think the big battle is Warners getting that nomination – with 10 pictures, they are looking good. But I thought they would get one for The Dark Knight a couple of years back.

    Not saying it’s going to win, but I don’t see many true stumbling blocks. Yes, True Grit is doing really well, is well liked, and playing well to the older crowd – a couple of years ago, you could have said the same about Gran Turino and that got ZERO nominations.

    Do not underestimate Inception – it’s daring and a safe choice at the same time!

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