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
“Poetry, a movie that I would venture to guess has been seen by fewer than 200 people reading this, aside from LAFCA members.”
Er, so we should assume that, by and large, you believe your readers are not as sophisticated and/or venturesome as LAFCA members? Not necessarily saying I disagree, but damn. That’s kind of judgmental, David.
“Christopher Plummer wins for being Christopher Plummer”
I wasn’t aware Plummer was gay, or delirious on meds. What do you know that we don’t?
Yes, I am 1 oft he 200 people who have seen Poetry! Do I get a prize or something?
Seriously, it’s an interesting choice by LAFCA, didn’t they do the same thing last year though?
Me too! Poetry is in a tussle with Drive and Take Shelter to be my favorite of the year.
Joe – I underestimated the box office of Poetry… probably more like a cap of 400.
Luke… you know what I meant… no?
Peter – I’m fine with the choice. It’s just funny how it does “contrarian… by the book… contrarian…”
I’m #2 of the 200 to have seen Poetry.
And I’m sure I’ll get slammed for this…but I don’t really get all the Christopher Plummer love…yeah, he’s been in a shit load of movies (many of them TV movies and Madeline voice overs)…and yes, he has has some small roles in some important films…but I’ve never thought of him as a brilliant actor who is long overdue for an Oscar. And I don’t really get the sense that he’s beloved in Hollywood…everyone I know who has worked with him or come into contact with him says that he’s kind of an arrogant prick…and most importantly…I thought he was just ok in Beginners…a film that I didn’t even care for.
So basically this is one of those years where every critics group declares their own king?
“Luke… you know what I meant… no?”
Maybe? But I feel like it’s an unfair dismissal.
“Being yourself” on camera is a challenge in itself, but that’s not the issue. Portraying someone finally coming out, and being high on meds while dealing with mortality — that isn’t simply “being yourself.”
I voted for Plummer among other options because I believed the way he portrayed those things. I assume based on what I know of him that he isn’t simply mimicking real life.
Glamourboy – I don’t know if he’s a prick or not. Does it matter? Roman Polanksi’s a rapist, but still a great director. I thought Plummer deserved awards love for The Insider.
I wasn’t saying that he didn’t deserve it because people I know said he was a prick…I said I wasn’t understanding all the love for him…and that I didn’t get the sense that the Hollywood community really loves the guy (based on how he is to work with), (the other extreme is Hugh Jackman…where I keep hearing from people that he’s an awesome guy to above the line and below the lines)..that’s what I’m sayin’….
Not sure that matters with critics awards…critics don’t necessarily ever have to interact with people personally.
In my case, I work for a website that has “geek” in the name, and I only interview folks who fit that mold…but I vote for everyone.
I have never heard of POETRY and I steadfastly refuse to watch any Asian bullshit, the poster alone (which I just looked up) is the most boring thing I’ve ever seen.
THERON is the ONLY game in town for best actress– even over Dunst, even over Olsen. THERON ONLY PLEASE.
‘Poetry’ is currently streaming on Netflix, for those who fall above that cap.
Chang-dong Lee is amazing with actresses; in a better world, each of the lead performances in his last three films would have been among that year’s Oscar contenders.
Big fan of the “Poetry” acting award, too. And it seems odd that, while the awards for Fassbender and Chastain mentioned everything they’ve been in but the Plummer one doesn’t. His part in “Dragon Tattoo” is not big but he has a moment — a look, really — that blew me away and that makes the biggest emotional impact in the film.
Poetry aside …. how many people will see A Separation, no matter how many accolades it achieves; and it’s a damn good film by the way …. I would say 200 – 400 (per city, per blog)
Isn’t it kind of a LAFCA trademark to give an acting award every year to a Korean film that hardly anyone’s seen?
It seems like Kirsten Dunst’s performance in Melancholia has been totally forgotten. It seems like she will be lucky to be nominated for an Oscar when it seemed she actually had a chance to get a win. I think everyone is judging this film with Von Trier’s politics instead of it’s merit. Just my thought !
David, do you see Alexander Payne winning anything for his direction? I mean he’ll get a few noms from the random critics groups that post noms (from Wichita or wherever) but at this point it is obvious that Malick, Scorsese and Hazanavicius are going to split every directing award (Spielberg won’t get any critics awards but is in with the academy) Malick would be at risk, usually, for missing the oscar, but I feel it’s such a ‘directors’ kind of film that he will probably be in at the DGA which will get him in at the Oscars as well.
That’s four slots taken up by legends and the hot young undeniable talent. That leaves one slot open for a more modest directorial effort.
Why is Payne considered so solid for that slot? He’s competing directly with Allen, Miller, Reitman, Daldry for that style of direction and there are two more ‘showy’ films competing for the last spot, one of those was the director many feel was unjustly snubbed last year and will get some ‘makeup sex’ support as a result and the other will have the support of the British bloc.
I just think that the path to nomination for Payne is extremely difficult. Why does no one else see it? Is it because critics love it so much that they’re blind to the possibility it won’t make it in? This category is absolutely extraordinary this year, overflowing with talent, legends, rising stars and stolid ole Payne.
Don’t think Dunst nor Theron will get a nomination this year, they played unlikable characters that don’t really redeem themselves, which is something the academy don’t really care for, especially with actress.
If it’s up to me, both of them would get a nomination.
I would say that, fairly or unfairly, Payne is considered more of a writer than a director. When most people think about his films or talk about them, it’s usually by referring to a memorable line of dialogue (i.e. the wine conversation between Giamatti and Madsen, “Dear Ndugu”) rather than a stunningly composed visual (his most-remembered purely visual bits are probably Kathy Bates naked in a hot tub and Matthew Broderick with a bee sting, neither of which screams Oscar).
For me, “ELAIC” finally exposes Daldry once and for all as the arthouse hack he is.
If he scores his fourth directing nomination in January for his fourth (and worst) film, they’ll be able to hear my screams all the way to Beverly Hills (or wherever it is they make those A.M. Oscar nomination announcements).
LYT, I do agree with you to an extent, that Payne’s co-screenwriting may blind some Academy members and others to the good work he does as a director. But I have to say, both Sideways and The Descendants — both of which are, on the whole, well-directed based on performances and compositions and tone and all that — have a little bit of a weird pokiness to them that makes them feel a little less tight and sharp than Election and About Schmidt. Some of it is the less comedic, less satirical take on the material, but both of those movies, I felt a little jarred by the semi-frequent lapses into picturesque montage-y driving shots, where you’re seeing wide shots of the characters traveling on a pretty landscape, sometimes with dialogue dubbed in over it, in kind of an awkward, patchy way that reminds me of slapped-together comedies (albeit with prettier visuals). Payne’s movies used to really snap and now they amble a little more. Sometimes that’s fine — I like the slower pace of The Descendants a lot — but it does make me less gung ho about him as a director, even though it’s a small thing. Reitman, by contrast — who I’d offhand say is less innately talented than Payne — shows little to no fat in Young Adult; even the montage-y parts feel more purposeful than Payne’s (though obviously it’ll be lucky to get a Theron nomination if that).
Agree that Dunst and Theron should be in the Best Actress race but probably won’t be. Theron might get in; I mean, she got in for North Country, which didn’t resonate with many people… but it was also more of a traditional Oscar movie (Theron and McDormand are two GREAT actors but I still found it weird that they both made it in for that movie). Dunst falls into the twenty-and-thirty-something category of “don’t bother unless you are doing classic MOR awards-bait.” As much as some people bitch about Paltrow winning for Shakespeare in Love, that kind of performance from that kind of actress is not the norm in terms of what wins those awards.
As the US distrib of Poetry, we were pleasantly stunned at the LAFCA award for Yun Jung-hee (as well as Best Foreign Film for our City of Life and Death) and grateful to you guys for talking it up!
Why Christopher Plummer, you ask? Here’s a short list of actors, most over 60, who won the Supporting Actor Oscar – often for playing a version of themselves, or because they are national treasures and deserved some Oscar love, or maybe simply because they gave the Best Supporting Performance of the Year: Walter Brennan (3), Thomas Mitchell, Donald Crisp, Charles Coburn, Barry Fitzgerald, Edmund Gwenn, Walter Huston, Burl Ives, Melvyn Douglas (2), Ed Begley, Jack Albertson, John Mills, Ben Johnson, John Houseman, George Burns, John Gielgud, Don Ameche, Jack Palance, Martin Landau, James Coburn, Michael Caine (2) and Alan Arkin. Plummer fits right in there, even if it is for a rather mediocre film. Just tic off his name and pretend it’s for his brilliant performance in THE INSIDER.
Hey… I have been pushing Plummer for years. He deserved a nom for playing “Shitty.” (look it up). And Mike Wallace. And others.
And I am fine with this nod. I just don’t see this as one of his great turns.
I don’t see how you can say Michael Caine won his two Oscars for playing some version of himself. Hell, in Hannah and Her Sisters, he was playing Woody Allen.
btw, I don’t buy into the “he’s playing himself” notion. Movie stars are almost always “playing themselves.” My take on Plummer was that a part of the enthusiasm is that it’s Chris Plummer and he’s a golden god who has it coming.
It’s irritating that great performances get overshadowed by great actresses who turn in good work consistently. I agree Dunst should get a nod and so should Elizabeth Olsen and Carey Mulligan (for SHAME). But I’m not really all that sold on Close in NOOBS and she’s guaranteed a slot. I also think Chastain had a helluva year quality wise but didn’t really explode in any one performance.
“Playing himself” was only one of the choices molly’s dad offered; he didn’t say that all those listed fell into that category.
And I know it seems like Walter Brennan was born old, but he actually won all 3 of his Oscars by age 47 or so.
Mr. Leydon – just to make something clear about Michael Caine. For HANNAH, he falls into the “he gave the best supporting performance” category. The “national treasure” part is the only explanation for his winning the Oscar (CIDER HOUSE RULES) over Haley Joel Osmond in 6TH SENSE. And Yancyskancy – thanks for the defense and for the info about Walter Brennan. Three Oscars before he was 50 – wow!
Only bad thing about Brennan winning so many Oscars so early is that he was snubbed for some of his best later roles, in TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT, MY DARLING CLEMENTINE, RED RIVER and RIO BRAVO.
Three Hawks and a Ford. You’re a man of outstanding taste, Yancy.