Gurus o’ Gold Archive for November, 2012

Gurus o’ Gold: At The End Of November…

By The Gurus of Gold - Friday, November 30th, 2012

The Gurus are going for it in all of the Top 8 categories this week, having seen all of what seem to be the top BP candidates. And for the first time this week, Original and Adapted Screenplay. The game changers are, as you might expect, Les Miserables and Zero Dark Thirty.

Read the full article » 15 Comments »

Gurus o’ Gold: Thanks, About To Be Given The Last 4 Films

By The Gurus of Gold - Thursday, November 22nd, 2012

Coming up this weekend, Les Miserables and Zero Dark Thirty come out to be seen by the media and guilds. Next week, Django Unchained and The Hobbit. And at that point, all the mysteries will be unfolded and voting for many groups will begin. So to give you a proper “before” and “after,” one last spin with the Gurus’ Top Ten lists for Best Picture…

Read the full article » 35 Comments »

Gurus o’ Gold: Week Two

By The Gurus of Gold - Tuesday, November 13th, 2012

This week The Gurus return, as always to Best Picture, this time picking a Top 12. Also, with three major contenders still unseen by human eyes, The Gurus tell you which one they think is most and least likely to leap into the Best Picture picture.

Read the full article » 8 Comments »

Gurus o’ Gold: The First Returns Are In!!!

By The Gurus of Gold - Thursday, November 8th, 2012

No, we’re not calling Florida. But The Gurus are back and will be here every week between now and the bitter end.

This week, Picture, the 4 Acting categories, and Director. But with just three more movies presumed to be in the running for the big awards left to be seen, things haven’t changed much from the post-TIFF poll.

Read the full article » 12 Comments »

Gurus o' Gold

Most Recent Comments Archives

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