Gurus o’ Gold Archive for January, 2012

Gurus o’ Gold: 1st Ranking Of Oscar Nominees In All Categories (Pt 2 of 2)

As they offer 13 more Oscar categories (everything but shorts), The Gurus are predicting that The Artist will win three big prizes on Oscar night… but Hugo will dominate the evening with 5 Oscar wins. Is it likely that Best Picture, Director, and Score will stand alone?

Can The Help score Best Actress and Supporting Actress and nothing else?

These and more questions… as The Gurus turn.

Read the full article »

Gurus o’ Gold: 1st Ranking Of Oscar Nominees In All Categories (Pt 1 of 2)

The Gurus have their first group of post-nomination projections. (The other categories will be published tomorrow.) There is a tie at the top of one category, and two categories out of these 8 that are unanimous.

Read the full article » 19 Comments »

Gurus o’ Gold: Post-Globes/Pre-Oscar Nominations

It’s all over but the nominations announcement. And then we start again.

A lot has changed in the last few months. But the battles at the tops of the charts will look pretty familiar. Perhaps the biggest change in this week’s charts – all 8 of the “top” categories – is Scorsese, who was not named by a single Guru in their Top 6 a couple of months ago and is now… well, you’ll see.

The Gurus also offer an opinion about who might have benefited from their Golden Globes appearance.

Read the full article » 7 Comments »

Gurus o’ Gold: Welcome To 2012

The Gurus are back for 2012… and in this special edition, the latest Best Picture chart (the Gurus welcome some more women into the Top Ten)… and a guess at the DGA nominations that are coming tomorrow morning. Better late foresight than hindsight!

Read the full article » 13 Comments »

Gurus o' Gold

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