MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Gurus Go Regal

With 9 of the 15 Gurus voting so far, every single one is picking The King’s Speech for the win…

Be Sociable, Share!

7 Responses to “Gurus Go Regal”

  1. cadavra says:

    What is with you people? Don’t you know Jeff Wells has decreed that SOCIAL NETWORK will be the winner? Get with the program!

  2. The Pope says:

    I love The Social Network but it looks like The King’s Speech has the momentum now… which makes the persistence of He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named all the more questionable. Like so many bloggers, he mistakes belligerence for intelligence. He kinda reminds me of a line we heard a lot a couple of years ago.

    “I’m saying that when the President does it, that means it’s not illegal.”

  3. zemblan says:

    ugh. franco over gosling? out-of-touch—STILL. but hawkes snuck on their, so i can’t be too unhappy.

  4. movielocke says:

    Since Dave is the leading person saying that True Grit is still surging, it’s clear it needs one thing to happen this week to make it possible to upset The King’s Speech.

    that one thing is for Christopher Nolan to win the DGA.

    If Nolan does that, it takes all the steam out of Social Networks sails–and right now, only Social can beat King’s Speech. Social only missed out on one nomination it was aiming for, Garfield, The King’s Speech hit every nomination it wanted and picked up a coattails sound nomination for good measure, at the moment it is impossible to beat.

    But if Nolan wins the DGA, that means that Social Network will only win a single guild award this entire awards season, WGA. It is possible Social can pick up ACE, but I think unlikely. The Fighter will take SAG and Deakens or Libatique will win the ASC. Right now Social is counting on winning the DGA to keep it alive in the big race.

    so doesn’t that strengthen King’s Speech stranglehold on winning half a dozen awards? Yes, of course. Nolan doing that would deal a death blow to Social Network’s momentum, which would also advantage True Grit. Both True Grit and King’s Speech are surging at the box office and will stand to benefit from another one of the top three stumbling, but with Social Standing firmly in the number two spot, True Grit first needs an opportunity to open up for it to have a chance at nabbing the top prize. True Grit can make a run for an upset, but it won’t be successful unless Social Network stumbles badly. Even then it’s a hail mary.

    Russell or Aronofsky winning the DGA will mean the awards season is in total disarray, Hooper winning means we may as well not even tune in to the ceremony because King’s Speech is winning double digit oscars.

    So far, of the top contenders, Kings Speech is the only one that showed strength, consider:

    King’s speech – every nomination it aimed for, plus sound
    Social Network – Missed on Garfield
    True Grit – Missed on editing
    Black Swan – Missed on Screenplay
    The Fighter – didn’t miss, but didn’t show strength by getting a costume or Wahlberg nomination
    Inception – big misses on Director and Editing

  5. cadavra says:

    Pope, I was being facetious. But it really is a horse race now.

    As for Nolan: I wonder if the DGA will vote for him just to stick it to the Academy a little…

  6. musealien says:

    Wow, you just don’t understand the Oscar race at all, do you? Even after all these years. The Social Network wins, that’s what happens.

  7. cadavra says:

    Not sure if that was directed to me or not, but I’ll answer, anyway: Yes, SOCIAL is still the front-runner, but it’s not as much of a lock as it was before.

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