Upcoming
Youth in Revolt
January 15
January 22
Drool
The Girl on the Train
Frost/Nixon Scuffle
MCN's David Poland and L.A. Times columnist Patrick Goldstein got angry earlier today about not being invited by Universal to see Ron Howard's Frost/Nixon in time to run reviews concurrent with Variety's Todd McCarthy review, which was posted today, as well as a review by the Hollywood Reporter's Kirk Honeycutt.
In fact Goldstein and particularly Poland were miffed that they weren't invited to a specific screening held two days ago (Monday, 10.13.08) that McCarthy and Honeycutt were invited to and attended.
Poland makes some valid points in criticizing Universal's trades-first Frost/Nixon screening policy. However, he also went off on In Contention's Guy Lodge by calling him a "non-pro" and his review an "AICN-style" type deal. It didn't read that way to me. Here's what In Contention's Kris Tapley had to say, and I've pasted here his final two graphs:
"In a nutshell, David was just left out in the cold, without the chance to anoint (or disassemble) Frost/Nixon before anyone else. End of story. Additionally, despite his insults, he is as 'non-pro' as the next guy. We're all making a place at the table for ourselves. For some that means offering film coverage via global contribution. For others, it means muscling studios with inflated Oscar ad rates" -- he's talking about what Poland is charging per ad space -- "based on the aggregation of other names and sources for the purposes of Oscar coverage.
"It is what it is. But like I said, I felt compelled to step in and defend Guy here, because nothing warranted this (but hey, we appreciate the link)."
One HE observation: I think it's fair to say, given what people in London and Los Angeles have written, that in the space of the last 12 to 18 hours Frost/Nixon has been shown and at the very least been diminished as a Best Picture contender with any kind of real heat. It might become one of the five nominees anyway -- the play was more than sturdy, and the film relies on the same basic bones -- but there's no disputing that Ron Howard's film has been dinged, bruised, shelled and even torpedoed today, and that it may be out of hot-and-heavy competition in the Best Picture race as a result. Maybe.
Frank Langella is a different story -- at the very least he's looking okay for a Best Actor nomination. Maybe. He was great in the play, that's for sure. A landmark performance of its type.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on October 15, 2008 at 7:07 PM
comment #1
Zimmergirl
says ...
Oh dear. I'm so sure. Tapley is right: Poland is as much a "non-pro" as Guy Lodge. I disagree that Frost/Nixon is down for the count, though. Just because a few critics said so? Uh...are we really going to get on that ship that says we all must walk alike, talk alike and think alike? Can we all just think for ourselves and keep the hissy fits to a minimum? LOL, though, lol.
Posted by Zimmergirl
at October 15, 2008 8:39 PM
comment #2
Mr. Muckle
says ...
As I've said before, no actor (because actors are inherently attractive and glamorous) can possibly equal the weird, robotic, narcissistic, freaked-out venality of the real Nixon. This is one of the disadvantages of cinema, to be sure.
Posted by Mr. Muckle
at October 15, 2008 8:51 PM
comment #3
TheJeff
says ...
"he also went off on In Contention's Guy Lodge by calling him a "non-pro" and his review an "AICN-style" type deal."
The irony is that Lodge's review is more coherent than anything Poland has ever written. What a crybaby. Does anyone take him seriously anymore? Not the studios, apparently.
Posted by TheJeff
at October 15, 2008 10:06 PM
comment #4
doobiedoo
says ...
Poland: diddums. Go cry to mummy.
In Contention is a terrific site - power to Kris.
Posted by doobiedoo
at October 15, 2008 10:14 PM
comment #5
diesel
says ...
hope this means benjamin button is the first contender.
Posted by diesel
at October 16, 2008 12:06 AM
comment #6
Kristopher Tapley
says ...
Cheers guys. We actually took down the post because it was too much of a headache, but no problem with it being copied here in part.
Posted by Kristopher Tapley
at October 16, 2008 12:32 AM
comment #7
Guy Lodge
says ...
Jeff and commenters: Thanks for the words of reason (and, as ever, for the linkage).
My feeling on coming out of the theatre and doing a bit of eavesdropping was that the reaction was pretty muted -- many people like it more than me, sure, but I couldn't gauge much excitement over it. Best Picture contenders generally need to be loved by a certain faction -- I'm not sure who's going to love this.
Posted by Guy Lodge
at October 16, 2008 1:00 AM
comment #8
actionman
says ...
David Poland is a functioning illiterate with zero sense of writing style. He's a cry baby. I try reading his stuff and I get a headache; the typos, the slips in grammar, his overall inability to write coherently is just a joke. He's no more of a "professional critic" than anyone else around here, including myself. Tapley and Lodge are two fellows who know how to write; Poland should take notes.
Opinions are like assholes -- everyone's got one.
I am so sick of hearing about all of these bloggers whining and crying when they aren't shown a particular film and someone else is. You'll end up seeing the film sooner or later. Just be patient.
And Wells -- completely agree with you about the damage done to Frost/Nixon, but I have to say, why was anyone even considering it for best picture anyways? This should be a solid historical drama, but from everything have seen, it never struck me as the kind of film that was going to be rewarded with tons of Oscar noms. Sure, Langella is a shoe-in for best actor, Sheen maybe for supporting. Maybe it gets a screenplay nod. But it's not epic or grand or genre transcending in the way that many best picture nominees are. I think it looks good and I am looking forward to checking it out, but not every film needs to be an Oscar contender in order to have merit.
Posted by actionman
at October 16, 2008 6:24 AM
comment #9
Zimmergirl
says ...
"it never struck me as the kind of film that was going to be rewarded with tons of Oscar noms"
Um. Er. Uh.
Posted by Zimmergirl
at October 16, 2008 6:42 AM
comment #10
actionman
says ...
It hasn't. Benjamin Button, Revolutionary Road, Milk, Changeling, Australia, The Dark Knight, The Reader, The Solist, The Wrestler -- all of those seem more "Oscar" to me than Frost/Nixon. Maybe it gets in there in the Good Night, and Good Luck spot.
It looks dependably solid but nothing spectacular.
Posted by actionman
at October 16, 2008 7:14 AM
comment #11
Rusty-James
says ...
"David Poland is a functioning illiterate with zero sense of writing style. He's a cry baby. I try reading his stuff and I get a headache; the typos, the slips in grammar, his overall inability to write coherently is just a joke. He's no more of a "professional critic" than anyone else around here, including myself. Tapley and Lodge are two fellows who know how to write; Poland should take notes."
Couldn't agree more with this. I've never understood why anyone pays a whit of attention to anything Poland writes. I'd defy anyone to quote ONE single memorable observation or critique he's made about a film. Just one.
L.A. is full of know-it-all windbags. But he's the biggest.
Posted by Rusty-James
at October 16, 2008 7:16 AM
comment #12
Sean
says ...
I don't understand why there tends to be such a dramatic split between Poland people and Wells people, but I think Poland, while as ever in critical need of an editor, is perceptive about movies and unusually knowledgeable about the business side of the industry. Granted that he tends to flub right there at the intersection -- predicting how well a given movie is going to do -- but I think his combination of critic's eye and business savvy makes him a fairly important player in the 'sphere.
Posted by Sean
at October 16, 2008 8:23 AM
comment #13
tjfar67
says ...
'I am so sick of hearing about all of these bloggers whining and crying when they aren't shown a particular film and someone else is. You'll end up seeing the film sooner or later. Just be patient.'
I second that. Really when the f... is that movie coming anyway? I'm sure he'll get to see it before it comes out. David and someone named Roman were being a couple of douche bags towards Guy Lodge because they got their feelings hurt because they weren't first. What make them more worthy than anyone else. They better never ask a person they date about the people they 'been with' before them....their heads might explode.
Poland should take a stand and refuse the 'for your consideration' ad money that will becoming his way.
Posted by tjfar67
at October 16, 2008 10:55 AM
comment #14
great scott
says ...
Poor Opie Cunningham. He desperately wants to make a great movie but is simply unable to free himself from his own mediocrity Anyone else totally unsurprised by this? Even the "critically acclaimed" Cinderella Man was panned by both the New York and L.A. Times.
Posted by great scott
at October 16, 2008 1:47 PM
comment #15
great scott
says ...
Maybe Ronnie should stay away from film festivals. Da Boring Code and Dull and Away were both critically slaughtered before their world premieres in Cannes, and now he must attend the world premiere of Frost/Nixon after reading its disappointing reviews. Oh well. At least he already has his (undeserved) Oscar for An Overrated Mind.
Posted by great scott
at October 16, 2008 1:54 PM
comment #16
frankbooth
says ...
Poland's blog is fun, but he's a very bad writer, and he always has been.
And I don't just mean he lacks flair. Sometimes I have to read his sentences two or three times just to figure out what they mean.
Posted by frankbooth
at October 16, 2008 7:48 PM
Post a comment