MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

The Oscar Thread That Should Have Been Up Five Hours Ago

How was Rock?

Why can’t Best Actor/Actress winners shut up?

What worked about the telecast for you?

Was this the most “nothing” Oscars ever?

94 Responses to “The Oscar Thread That Should Have Been Up Five Hours Ago”

  1. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    Very predictable. Missed scoring on 2 tech awards only. Rock was surprisingly tepid, running on half cylinders. Possibly the numerous mentions in the media of gags he was trying out didn’t help. Sean Penn’s defense of Jude Law was strange and awkward. R. Williams toned down a previously tried act as well but at least it showed moments of brilliance. Brando/ Fudd. Didn’t even squeeze a tear during IN MEMORIAM for the first timke in years.. Hollywood got off lucky in 04, cos 03 was a shocker. Swank was awful. White trash? Gimme a break.. refer to that for your first award not your second. Foxx was overkill.. enuff already. Crocodile tears for grandma. Weird staging of guests didn’t help either. Overall a lacklustre affair.. only Lumet provided some old Hollywood class. What a career.. phenomenal. I’m off to watch Serpico. What the rest of youse tink?

  2. Joe Leydon says:

    I know I’ve said this elsewhere, but… Jeremy Irons was my favorite presenter, mainly because (a) he acknowledged Rock’s jokey introduction, and joked back, and (b) his witty ad lib (when a noise like gunfire sounded) reminded me of David Niven’s aplomb when dealing with a streaker during an Oscarcast many years ago.

  3. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    Irons can present in his in sleep. brilliance. plus his nod to Cronenberg will never be forgotten. Just remembered fave clip. Walken in Anderson Tapes! Marty will be honored in due time. He will go back to basics and be rewarded for something small and intimate. Aviator was robbed and yet I’m happy for Clint.

  4. Joe Leydon says:

    Dr. Jeff, I know what you mean. I’m torn between my great admiration for “The Aviator” and my emoitional response to “M$B,” but I’m generally pleased by Oscars this year. I wonder how much Eastwood’s Best Director award (however well deserved this year) was partially a make-up for last year (when he should have won for “Mystic River”). Also, I wonder if, 20 or so years from now, “Aviator” will be remembered as one of Scorsese’s very best. Consider this: If Scorsese were to die just 2-3 years from now, would “Aviator” be mentioned in first paragraph of his NYT obit? (Hate to say it, but if Easwtood were to pass 2-3 years from now, “Dirty Harry” and Spaghetti Westerns likely would get more play in first paragraph than any specific film he’s ever directed, even if his status as “Oscar-winning director” got mentioned.)

  5. Zachary says:

    Woohoo! My personal #1 of the year won the big ones. I was afraid at the beginning of The Aviator winning, but I reassured myself.
    I can’t wait for the conservatives to start blasting the Academy for awarding it’s top prize to the best film of 2004 IMHO.

  6. Joe Leydon says:

    Zach: Yeah, as much as I hate to admit it…. Well, wait, that’s a lie, I have no trouble admitting it at all… One reason I’m glad to see “M$B” win is that it will piss off Medved and Limbaugh. Of course, they’ll also get pissed off because a movie about Che Guevera got 2 Oscars, and “Passion” got zilch.

  7. lazarus says:

    I’d like to send a big FUCK YOU to all the critics and journalists who propaganda’d Million Dollar Baby to all these awards. Thanks for writing article after article about it.
    I thought critics were supposed to be fans of CINEMA. Moving pictures. Not tearjerking filmed plays.
    Fellini, Welles, Kubrick, Hitchcock, Scorsese. What kind of art form would film be without these names.
    Again, FUCK ALL OF YOU unimaginative sentimentalists.

  8. Chester says:

    Pretty dull show.
    I thought Chris Rock was a fairly smooth host. I didn’t love his opening monologue, but it was par for the course. His bit about Jude Law did strike me as too wounding, but Sean Penn’s later defense only made matters worse. Substantially better was Rock’s filmed bit at the Magic Johnson cineplex — now, that was priceless! It will be interesting to see if the Academy is going to want to invite Rock back. It may depend on how all of Rock’s hilarious reverse race-baiting routines play out in the public discourse.
    As far as the winners, all I can gleefully say is “Hail ‘Million Dollar Baby’!” Sorry to see how sore some of the postings on this site have been. IMHO, I suspect the opposite of what has been predicted here will emerge over time: “Million Dollar Baby” will be looked at years from now as a great film of mature subtlety and depth, while “The Aviator” will be dismissed as a shallow triviality in the Scorsese library. (That’s all I’m going to say about that. Believe me, I’m not looking to get into another heated debate about this with the Scorsese gang members here.)
    Different issue: What did everyone think of the format revisions? I thought they were OK, not the disaster some predicted. The only thing I found distracting about them was that I couldn’t figure out why nominees were brought up onstage for certain “lesser” categories while other “lesser” categories were presented from the audience itself. It just seemed very arbitrary. If they were testing both approaches for future ceremonies, I’d say the presentations with the onstage nominees worked far better.

  9. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    Joe – agreed. Even while I was choking on my sweets from some of the hackneyed dialogue and M$B’s other faults, it got me in my gut and held firm. AVIATOR was just exhilirating filmmaking period that needed some restructuring. How about some of the choices they used for IN MEMORIAM – like Fanny Hill for Meyer.. I mean I own a print of it but I think VIXEN or anything else would have been more apt. There were some other sub-editorial choices that made me wonder who chooses these things? Some kid from UCLA? I can’t remember who the major star was but I do remember the look on his face when the clips they chose summed up every poor decision his agent ever made for him. Do you remember who this was?

  10. GGP says:

    Is it okay to give away the twist now? I must’ve waited two years before I gave away the twist to The Crying Game.
    Overall, you hope for more and it doesn’t come. The true highlight of the night was Limet; simply gracious. His thanks to the movies sounded truly genuine, as well it should.
    Chris Rock had all the jokes down but none of the poise. Oddly enough, I would put money down that if they ask him to host next year he could nail it.
    After Sean Penn’s first sentance at the podium, I couldn’t stop cringing. There’s nothing wrong with loosening up. ‘Oh look, Jude Law is a Sportscenter top 10 Play!’ or something like that. I guess some are built in another part of the factory.

  11. Joe Leydon says:

    “Fanny Hill” was kind of an odd choice for Meyer, I agree — what about “Harry, Cherry & Raquel,” eh? I was disappointed by lack of clips for Spalding Gray and Sandra Dee, but hey, that’s life. (Or death.) Don’t know what actor you’re talking about, but it struck me as odd that Eastwood seemed to talk more than Swank in the clip that was supposed to showcase Swank as Best Actress.

  12. Chester says:

    Joe, I share your ecstatic feelings about the big “fuck you” to Limbaugh and Medved that the “Million Dollar Baby” rout represented. Truth is, just like it was claimed that “Fahrenheit 9/11″ energized conservatives and helped win the election for Bush, I think Limbaugh and Medved galvanized the Academy members to lean toward “Million Dollar Baby.” Revenge is so sweet.

  13. Joe Leydon says:

    Oh, and BTW: Do you think Penn may have been touchy because he’s currently working with Law right now (they’re filming a new version of “All the King’s Men” in my home state of Louisiana)?

  14. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    possibly. but with friends like Penn who needs enemas?

  15. Joe Leydon says:

    Dr. Jeff: That was awful. Terrible. Tasteless. I’ll steal it and use it as my own, of course.

  16. L&DB says:

    Chester, unfortunately for you, I can get in a debate
    in a dream about the way I point at something in
    real life. If the bollocks of M$B got you in the
    gut, then go see the Natural. Go watch any other
    sports film which actually RESPECTS the sports
    the films want to represent. Hell, why dont you
    take your obvious need of a course direction
    over to http://www.espn.com/page2/ and look
    for Skip Bayliss’ article on M$B. The film is
    simply about as worthy of an award as my own
    fecal matter if it were nominated for best sound
    editing.
    If that got you in the gut, then your guts disgust
    me. Lazurus pretty much nailed it. What kind of
    art form would reward mediocrity as much as this
    Academy has? M$B winning Best Picture ranks right
    up there with Pia Zadora winning a Golden Globe.
    One of the total JOKES in the history of award
    shows.
    Again, they are just award shows, but if you care
    about this stuff in anyway. They are some kind
    of a barometer, but barometers can get broken. On
    nights like this, the damn thing has been stepped
    on, peed on, and burnt.
    Just remember kids; EMINEM in the eyes of this
    Academy has contributed more Oscar-worthy material
    than Scorcese. Farce, would be too nice a word
    for this years Oscars.
    PS: Could someone please move all the Oscar post
    out of the Tyler Perry thread into this one? If
    so, thank you very much.

  17. David Poland says:

    My personal #1 for the year won also… Born Into Brothels.
    Did you notice… only 3 ad libs all night! Irons, P-Diddy and Penn. The good, the bad & the ugly.

  18. Cullen says:

    Awards fatigue hit hard tonight. Jamie Foxx has gone to the well (of tears) once too often for my taste and Hilary Swank should not still be playing the trailer trash card while receiving her second Academy Award.
    The most interesting part of the night was when Jorge Drexler went up to accept his award and felt the need to sing his song the right way. Clueless nitwit Antonio Banderas was beaming and crossing himself and completely unaware of being dissed by Drexler but it seemed as if it was sinking in for Carlos Santana when they cut to a shot of him.
    How seriously should we take this thing when the guy who hands out the Best Picture award takes the stage drunk?

  19. L&DB says:

    Not that seriously since you can apparently get
    an Oscar for hosting parties, hanging with old
    folks, and reminding people “Im Clint Eastwood. You
    might remember me from films like Blood Work, A
    Perfect Crime, and Pink Cadillac. If I were you
    elderly Academy member. I would vote for me, Clint
    Eastwood. Since a vote for me is a vote for the
    Hollywood establishment! Look at Scorcese! He
    does not even live in LA, except every fourth
    weekend, but that doesnt count! Come on, vote
    Eastwood! A vote for me is a vote for the continuing
    mediocrity and guaranteed low ratings for ABC!”

  20. GdB says:

    I think Rock deserves more credit than he will probably get. It was pretty evident (and smart on his part) that the monologue was being played directly to middle-lower class America. While he might not have been getting the audience laughs (no part in doubt to the real jibes he threw at Hollywood. Especially his “in the club” remark.) I have no doubt many people watching at home were laughing their asses off. Rock got away with hosting and still not coming off like a sell out to the “street” community/culture/etc..
    I also feel the Magic Johnson theatre sketch was brilliant. I didn’t get Rock’s comeback to Sean Penn though. I wonder if it was an inside dig?

  21. Chester says:

    GdB, Rock’s comeback to Sean Penn was something along the lines of “My accountants want to talk to you after the show.” If you recall, he brought out a couple of burly tough guys as the representatives from Oscar’s accounting firm of Price-Waterhouse. Hope that clears it up for you.

  22. L&DB says:

    But as we all know; Sean Penn knows the ancient
    art of Paparazzi beating. Which entails he can
    defeat multiple foes, and would have no problem
    taking down to large me. He’s crazy. Thus the
    reason he rules.

  23. pynchon99 says:

    I missed Rock’s opening monologue so I didn’t get the Jude Law reference.
    Nor did I grok Rock’s accountant rejoinder to Penn’s admonishment. Was it about poor box office showing for all those arty films that nobody really watches?
    Enlighten me please.
    Chris Rock’s lack of poise (as ably pointed out by GGP) made him look a bit pained even dare I say minstrelly at times, a kind of slow death by a thousand lame (and apparently paid for) jokes. He also seemed to insist on trotting out his homies and big mofo accounting people to add some gangsta’ culture to these otherwise august proceedings. His piece on the Street vs Academy disconnect at the local Johnshonplex was subversively funny however. On the other hand the Sandler / Rock thing was puerile and getting all the ‘minor’ nominees up on the stage like some weird Miss Amerika pageant seemed slightly fucked, like all the hired techno help obviously needed to use the trades entrance and be stockyarded for the pleasure of the Academy. The big players only have to come on down if the price is right. But looking for truth and justice from the Academy is a bit like expecting the current Attorney General to defend the US constitution: Looks good on paper, but welcome to the real world. The awards definitely needed a Billy Crystalectomy but bring back Steve Martin any day.
    I haven’t seen M$B but I thought Winslet did an amazing job in ESSP and l Kaufman got the scripting nod, so all is not lost. Benning is Hollywood’s equivalent of Florence Foster Jenkins, so I found it highly amusing that she was even in the running (A pythonesque performance in Richard the Three comes to mind) but enough Benning banter. I mean if G.W. can be president, anything’s possible!
    All the ladies were wearing gloopy “bull semen” hair styles, must’ve been some product placement thing.
    Ray as a movie didn’t need a tenth of the pedantic flashback stuff and was remarkably puritanical about his drug use (maybe heroin actually did
    help his creative spark, god forbid). The whole movie was basically saved by
    Jamie Foxx’s preternatural performance. I was genuinely moved by his
    Oscar speech and if it was fake, he deserves another 20 Oscars.
    The necrology was brief but significant and as you get older a little spooky. Perhaps the same could be said of the Awards.

  24. SamoanJoe says:

    Chris Rock “ministrelly”? Dare you say it pynchon99? Dare I say you a po’ white cracker who needs to git out more? Yessum, indeedy, I do.

  25. SamoanJoe says:

    …and can someone please tell all future presenters NOBODY CARES about their whoever’s birthday. yes, julia roberts, i’m talking to YOU…

  26. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Acting awards followed the usual Academy mindset . . .
    Actor: Play a junkie, win an Oscar.
    Actress: Play a cripple, win an Oscar.
    Supporting Actor: Play a cripple, win an Oscar.
    Supporting Actress: Look sexy, win an Oscar.
    Once again Miramax tried to buy awards and came up short. That’ll be nice to know as the Weinstein Brothers are set free by Disney.
    Best Picture: Mixed messages — Fahrenheit 9/11 not nominated for anything (pleased the Bushies), Million Dollar Baby cleans up (angers liar/druggie Limbaugh and Paramount flack/Pat Robertson crony Medved).
    OTOH you will be pleased to know that F9/11 won 3 Razzies. Unlike the Oscars you can’t buy a Razzie — you’ve got to earn it!

  27. Joe Leydon says:

    L&DB: I’m sure Marty appreciates your continued support, but I think he’d like it even more if you spelled his name correctly: S-C-O-R-S-E-S-E. And by the way: Eastwood never directed a movie titled “A Perfect Crime.” He did direct one titled “A Perfect World,” however. Shenanigans on you for not knowing the difference.

  28. Lota says:

    really happy with Motorcycle diaries and born into brothels wins and the score for Finding Neverland.
    Loved Depp & Paradis’ nerd goth look. very cool.
    Sean Penn is such a pain in the ass.
    Pacino’s hair needs its own condo.
    Prince’s dark blue hair rinse may have matched his wee suit but it was scary nevertheless. Kinda Jane Jetson.
    Felt very sorry for Marty, and all the predictable boring perfs won the acting except I did think Swank was very good (in the movie, not her acceptance speech). Aviator won more awards but it seemed like a slap in the face.
    I liked Rock. He probably couldn’t totally let loose becasue of all the brou-ha surrounding his comments before the Oscars. The Magic J theatre bit was very funny. White chicks wuz robbed.
    I didn’t like the new format. The three tiered system isn’t cool. Rock is right. Next year parking lot drive through is the next step. It’s only once a year, why be in such a hurry?

  29. SamoanJoe says:

    sean penn is a humourless little rich boy who needs to get over himself.
    and i agree, Lota, the magic J theatre bit was inspired. i’m also glad CR didn’t drudge up the drudge smudge. why bother? it was such a non-story from the get go.

  30. Joe Leydon says:

    This just in: According to Drudge — and you just know this has to be a lance to his heart — last night’s Oscarcast ratings were highest since 2000.

  31. bicycle bob says:

    if i could have watched past 5 minutes i’d have more to say. a yawner.

  32. L.J. says:

    Joe Laydon: “L&DB: he’d like it even more if you spelled his name correctly: S-C-O-R-S-E-S-E. … Eastwood never directed a movie titled “A Perfect Crime.” He did direct one titled “A Perfect World””
    I’ll bet there are a lot of proof readers in the world who secretly wish they were film critics. Joe Laydon seems to be the only critic out there who secretly wishes he were a proof-reader.

  33. Joe Leydon says:

    L.J.: Don’t knock proof-readers, looks like you could use one. It’s L-E-Y-D-O-N. As for L&DB’s error: Go back and look over all his posts on this thread and other threads regarding the Oscarcast. If you’re going to defend your fave director, it might be nice to spell his name correctly at least once or twice. You get something that simple so wrong that many times, you kind of lose your credibility. Besides, he ain’t Jude Law, and you ain’t Sean Penn.

  34. Nick says:

    Hey folks…
    If you loved M$B (which I did), do yourselves a favor and stop bashing Rush & Medved. They were not the only folks who campaigned against it. You do a disservice to your credibility by scapegoating them, and ignoring the legitimate complaints of the disabled community.

  35. Nick says:

    Chris ROCKED.
    I laughed my ass off. Loved the monologue: (on Russell Crowe) “Russell Crowe should be cast for every period piece. He does research. Even if he’s playing three weeks ago. When you see the movie and you hear him talk, you’re like ‘Damn that sounds like three weeks ago!”
    Sean Penn needs to stop being such a humorless asshole. It makes the stuff in Team America about him that much funnier.

  36. Lota says:

    There were legitimate lauds by the disabled community which I work with on a regular basis re. M$B in that the wishes of the disabled herself (Swank in the story) were adhered to, not the wishes of interfering relatives etc. and others trying to impose their moral stances & judgements on her life, her life or lack of one that she had to endure. She may have not made the right decision but it was HER decision.
    Why should anyone stop bashing a critic who slams a movie because of personal moral problems with it, rather than its merits as a movie? Medved and Limbaugh being such non-talent meat puppets probably secured the win for Clint, who is so well liked by the older academy members that the votes are his “defense”.
    I wasn’t so keen before, but I hope M$B sells 100 million DVD copies to prove that pill-popping hypocrite has less influence than he ever could have imagined.

  37. Nick says:

    LOTA!!!
    YOU JUST SPOILED THE MOVIE FOR ME. HOW DARE YOU!!
    😉
    Nick

  38. Terence D says:

    Rush and Medved never campaigned against Million Dollar Baby. They said what everyone else said. The ending stunk up the room. Who wants to respect a quitter? Like every bit of life shouldn’t lived? Just because its hard you should die? Thats bullshit and pardon my french. My father is in a wheel chair. Does he want to kill himself? No. Its a tragedy but life goes on.

  39. Rob C says:

    I loved how mean Chris Rock was, especially when introducing the presenters. You gotta figure these actors go through their daily lives without ever hearing anything but the usual kiss-ass bullsh!t, so how cool is it to get nailed by Angry Black Man at the biggest night of the year? At least Tim Robbins had the good sense to be amused by it. Sean Penn needs a humor transplant, stat!

  40. Dan R% says:

    Rock was good.
    The nominees on stage was sadistic.
    It was fairly predictable overall. Now I wish I’d entered some contests, because there were no surprises. At all.

  41. L.J. says:

    How do you know who I am, Lonesome Joe Laydon? We do know who you are on the other hand: a third rate critic who seems to have no personal life and no flesh and blood friends to talk to.

  42. Joe Leydon says:

    L.J.: Well, if you ARE Sean Penn, you need to lighten up a bit. Maybe watch some of those Three Stooges retros they program at Eastman House now and then.

  43. thedoom says:

    All I can say is
    Clint Eastwood’s mom is still ALIVE? I agree with him, I hope he has her genes…

  44. Carter Breslen says:

    Who was it, Kant, Nietzsche, Homer Simpson, who said: “people obsessed with always showing they’re right do so because they know they’ll never be anything else”? Maybe it was Milan Kundera, come to think about it.

  45. L.J. says:

    Didn’t William Burroughs say something along the lines that being a nitpicker about spelling is the absolute proof of absolute stupidity? 😉

  46. bicycle bob says:

    shes like 200 yrs old

  47. L&DB says:

    Oh god forbid! Hey not like that name is easy to
    spell or anything, but I chalk it up to a big ol’
    “I convinced myself in 1993 the name was spelt like
    that” and never changed. Sorry. Still does not
    change the fact that the man, SCORCESE, suck it,
    SCORSESE was robbed again. Just goes to show that
    the Academy really does have it in for him.
    And Leydon, he’s not my favourite director (Joss
    Whedon and Amy Sherman-Pallidino take those honours,
    and those names are REALLY HARD TO SPELL!) but I
    apparently, even with spelling his name wrong,
    respect him more than the Academy.
    But for now on Joe I now call you, LAYDON!

  48. Filipe says:

    The night ended being very similar to the Unforgiven win. Eastwood film entered it with a slight favoritism over a more prestige film (Howards End). The night doesn’t look like it’s going well with only 2 out of 7 wins previously to the last two (and with editing in place of best actress while HE had 3 including actress and script) and then the director and picture awards confirm the early favoritism (Streisand gave Eastwood the award that time too). Also, the minute the award ended there were many people talking about how ridiculous that the western film win would look in a few years. Of course Howards End reputation suffers badly thanks to the progressive insignifiquance of Marchant/Ivory, while Unforgiven is often mentioned as one of the best films to win the academy awards.
    I do think is a little ridiculous trying to predict now which films will be remember in the years to come. There’s no way to now what will happen and films reputation aren’t only based own their quality (Rocky may be a mediocre film, but the sequels and Stallone’s career hurt it more than it’s quality, for example). There were plenty of complain about The Godfather win over Cabaret back in the day. And I do agree with Joe Leydon that if you’re really wanting to start a guessing game you should all be open to the idea that a film that gets little respect to day may very well be a favorite in some 30 years. Maybe blockbusters start to get nominated more often and people will complain about how Spiderman 2 didn1t even goet nominated. Maybe something that’s usualy despised today (let’s say The Village) will be regard as classic. How about the 2027 re-release of The Terminal being so popular that people will start to call us fools for not geting that it’s one of Spilberg bests?

  49. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    lets end this diatribe with the most wry and observant comment of the Oscars, Rock paraphrased:: “you ever go back and watch those movies you were in love with?”
    Exactly my sentiments. Don’t ripple the pond of the past, things can get blurry.

  50. L&DB says:

    Laydon, I must go an correct myself even more. I
    meant to reference Absolute Power not a Perfect
    Crime. Oy to the vey, why did I not go with an
    automatic FIREFOX reference? Shenanigans upon me
    indeed.
    Anyone not wanting put see where these films line
    up all-time. Apparently miss the very real
    correalation between this and sports. When the
    Pats won the Super Bowl. Immediately ESPN and
    sportwriters across the country began to ponder
    their place in comparison to other DYNASTYS.
    It is only natural to wonder where a movie as subpar
    as Baby will rank as an Oscar winner in years to
    come. It should easily be the James Buchanan to
    Braveheart’s Andrew Johnson for years to come.
    Why the Academy gets so caught up in the present
    remains their biggest downfall.

  51. jon s says:

    Joe, you’re making a gratuitous swipe at the Eastman House… why, exactly? Did I miss something?
    Was I hallucinating, or didn’t Roger Mayer thank the Eastman House in his acceptance speech last night for their contributions to American film preservation? Could it be that you’re upset that an Oscar ceremony came and went without anybody thanking “Variety” or members of the film criticism profession yet again?

  52. TheBrotherhoodOfTheLostSkeletonOfCadavra says:

    Another new Academy rule:
    Eastwood + Freeman = Oscar.

  53. teambanzai says:

    Didn’t anyone else notice Lou Gosset Jr. sleeping two seats over from the Academy President? He was out cold.
    After reading the piece in the LA Times about Jorge Drexler I really wanted him to win, it seemed obvious he would do something to show his displeasure with not being asked to sing his own song, and he did not disapoint, as another post already pointed out Antonio didn’t even realize he was being dissed.
    Defamer’s live blog had the best discription of the strange new format pointing out that having the nominees on stage resembled some sort of firing squad and after the winners were anounced the rest were shot in the back of the head and dropped through trap doors into a pit below. I thought there was at least one good reason they did it, normally when they anounce the nominees for the lesser catagories the camera’s have a hard time finding them in the audience so in the new format at least they got their chance to be seen.
    Also did anyone else notice the balcony was mostly empty for a good part of the show? Either they were all doing shots with Dustin Hoffman or maybe the complaint that the Kodak Theater not having enough seats was bs

  54. Chester says:

    Jon S, yes, you most certainly missed something. Joe Leydon wasn’t taking any kind of swipe at the Eastman House. If you’d dig just a little deeper before taking yet another in your ongoing cheap, cowardly shots at Joe, you would have seen that L.J.’s e-mail address is actually at The Eastman House and that Joe was just suggesting the guy lighten up by watching some of that distinguished institution’s comedic fare. If you want to continue smearing the career path of a generous, respected film writer like Joe Leydon (a career that most of the opinionated film lovers here would FUCKING KILL for), you’d better first identify yourself openly and publicly, like Joe has, then tell us what’s so superior about your job and why anyone should give a rat’s turd about anything you have to say.

  55. GdB says:

    I’m curious as to where the hell Poland’s THB Oscar “Day After” column is. Even Wells got his up already. That must be some bitch of a hangover.

  56. GdB says:

    I’m an idiot. I just found it at MCN 😉

  57. spiderdan says:

    I noticed the empty balcony, too. Kinda hard not to. Also, what was up with those super-tall amazon women they had on stage at all times? In what forbidden city did they find them? I know Travolta’s not a giant, but he looked like Ejiah Wood standing up there.

  58. bicycle bob says:

    lets face it. morgan freemans best role was joe clark in lean on me
    might be the last time he hasn’t played a best friend, wiser, etc guy

  59. Jon S says:

    Why should I identify myself when everyone who seems to do that here gets harassing emails sent to them by one or more of the Neanderthals who regularly haunt this blog (maybe you, Chester? Fess up!) I still feel bad about poor Peppers being harrased at home to the point where he stopped coming here. Joe and you just prove my point by trying to find out where people work in order to intimidate the bloggers you disagree with. If Dave wants to change the rules and make us register under our real names, then fine. I’ll play by those rules.
    And by the way, I’ve done business with the George Eastman House over the years. Their e-mail suffix is “@geh.org,” not “@eastman” which seems to be LJ’s suffix. Maybe he’s with the Eastman School of Music. How about some nice insults about them now, Joe?
    In other words, for no good reason, Joe has been insulting a great organization, which makes him not much better than bicycle bob, frankly. (Clearly Joe was trying to insult the Eastman House by suggesting they regularly show Three Stooges films in their cinematheque. Last time I noticed, however, they were doing a Fassbinder retrospective.)
    As for you saying Joe deserves respect because of his job, that a bit like people saying Joe McCarthy deserves respect because he was a Senator and many people WOULD FUCKING KILL to be a US Senator. Sorry, but it doesn’t work that way. I have notice that you’ve assumed the role of Joe’s foul-mouthed pit bull, Chester. In the spirit of full disclosure, what’s your relationship to him? Lover? valet? Joe’s other blog name? Your yahoo e-mail account is hardly any indication that you’re using your real name. I could call myself Chester, too, and set up a yahoo account. How long does that take again? About two minutes?

  60. Joe Leydon says:

    Jon S: OK, I think you’ve crossed a line here. Insult me all you want — hey, I give it, I better be able to take it — but accusing Chester (who, frankly, I don’t know, or at least I don’t think I know) of being my “lover” is stooping to the worst kind of juvenile homophobic crap imaginable. Mind you, I don’t take it as an insult to be called gay. I take it as inexcusable that you seem to think accusing someone of being gay is an insult. I think you’ve revealed your true colors, sport. And I don’t bother dealing with people like that, either in real life or on-line conversations. Consider yourself permanently ignored.

  61. Mark says:

    Jon S, you really need to relax. Maybe its time for that Prozac to kick in.

  62. Chester says:

    Jon S., you are nothing but a pure hypocrite. I perfectly understand why many (if not most) people don’t reveal their true identities here. Hell, mine is concealed as well. That is precisely why I have maintained that it was grossly inappropriate for you to resort to attacks on Joe’s real-world life and career just because we all know who he really is. My point was that it’s disgustingly cheap and dirty for a schoolyard bully like you to take aggressively real, personal, slanderous potshots at a contributor here, then cowardly hide behind your own pseudonym.
    I can honestly say that I have absolutely no relationship with Mr. Leydon outside of this forum. We’ve never met and wouldn’t recognize each other if we collided in an empty room. I have spoken in his defense because I think anyone getting unjustly maligned here by the likes of you deserves our support. Your filthy, reprehensible comments should not go unaddressed, and I assume either Joe’s been unavailable or is simply too much of a gentleman to give you the public disembowelment you deserve.
    And, again, if you knew how to read with any degree of comprehension, you would have understood after my last posting that Joe Leydon never insulted the George Eastman House. I admit that I don’t follow their schedule, but, despite your elitist preferences, it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if that respected institution at some point has screened some work by The Three Stooges.
    Finally, if someone’s entire argument against the despicable Joseph McCarthy consists of nothing more than labeling him as a U.S. Senator, you’d better believe I’d call them on the carpet for that. You can openly disagree here with Joe Leydon’s viewpoint all you want, but the fact that your entire attack on him is based on his position as a critic for Variety proves that you employ the exact kind of cheap, loathsome tactics you claim to despise when used by your conservative foes here. Shame on you.

  63. Mark says:

    Chester, you do take the cake for most boring, ponderous, long, and drawn out posts. So you got that going for you. No one wants to sit through your War and Peace epics.

  64. Chester says:

    Sorry, Mark. I forgot about your A.D.D.
    (Was that short enough for you?)

  65. Joe Leydon says:

    I’ve been reluctant to bring this up, for fear of making a bad situation worse, but…
    Please consider this a shout-out to everybody, even people who haven’t been active in the current conversation: Have you noticed a dramatic uptick in the amount of Spam you receive since you’ve been leaving messages on this blog? I have all kinds of filters, firewalls, virus-checks, etc. to protect me from sabotage. But it’s not a practical solution for me to limit incoming mail to folks I know. (I get too much stuff from publicists, filmmakers, students, bill collectors, deadbeat relative who need bail money, etc.) But I have noticed that, ever since I started participating in this room on a regular basis, I’m getting more e-mail for porn. And not just porn, but the really skanky porn. I know some website actually post warnings for participants. Like Romenesko on Poynter.org: “WARNING: Spammers grab e-mail addresses off this page.” Should Dave maybe do something similar?

  66. Jon S says:

    You guys just keep getting things wrong, don’t you? First I’m gay. Queer as a three dollar bill. As such, it seems perfectly logical for the thought to have occurred to me that Chester’s over-the-top hysterical defense of the often belittling and smug Joe Leydon might have a romantic motivation to it. Methinks it’s your own homophobia that has caused you to be so upset at that remark. (Yes, even the kind of person who gives “Straight-Jacket” a good review can have eruptions of homophobia, as I’ve experienced all too well.)
    Secondly, there’s still the fact that you literally have looked at someone’s given e-mail address on this blog and then replyed to them in a way to suggest “I’ve figured out who you are and I know where you work.” (I’m still reeling over seeing that happen here.) So you’re Three Stooges comment was both an insult to the Eastman House and a subtle threat to another blogger.
    If, as Chester suggests, you were just trying to suggest that L.J. should lighten up and watch a comedy at the GEH, you could have said Chaplin, Tati, Sturges, or any other comedy filmmaker whose work gets screened at cinematheques. Instead you point out the fact that they’ve apparently (or so you say) shown at some time or another a Three Stooges fest, something all film museums probably do but something that is nonetheless undeniably considered the lowest example of film humor in order to discredit him/them.
    Here I hadn’t posted anything for over a week, and the second I come back to this blog I see you’re still insulting people for making small innocent errors (and I HAVE seen people point out others’ errors here in completely non-offensive ways, something you two seen constitutionally unable to do.)
    Finally, if you’re going to constantly refer to your job as a film critic, Joe, that fact becomes fair game in any response we might have. If you want to take bragging rights to that fact, you have to suffer the responses from people who don’t really respect the “Show Business Bible,” “Variety.”

  67. JPritchett says:

    http://www.eastmanhouse.org/calendar/index.asp?month=2&year=2005
    The Eastman House on February 6:
    “The Best of Curly: A Stooges Celebration
    – Event Description –
    By popular demand, we’ve assembled an all-new program featuring more classic knuckleheaded antics from Moe, Larry, and Curly. First, the boys play their own “Stupor Bowl” in THREE LITTLE PIGSKINS (1934); Curly’s boxing talents are revealed in PUNCH DRUNKS (1934); the boys pose as Confederate officers Dodge, Duck, and Hyde in UNCIVIL WARRIORS (1935); Curly takes on a bull in WHAT’S THE MATADOR (1942); and the Stooges are the new darlings of society in HOI PALLOI (1935).”

  68. Joe Leydon says:

    JPritchett: Oh, a wise guy, eh? Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck.

  69. Jon S says:

    Fine. Still, in Joe’s context it seems pretty clear to me that he was using that example to insult a blogger who supposedly works at the Eastman House. Notice he didn’t say anything about the Jewish documentary festival, or the Cathrine Brillet films on the same calander at Eastman.

  70. Jon S. says:

    Oh, and like so many others before me, Peppers, Gombro, etc., etc., I am SO out of here!!! Have fun with your “big fish in a small pond” act, Joe.

  71. JPritchett says:

    Jon S: Why WOULD Joe have said anything about those films? His post was “L.J.: Well, if you ARE Sean Penn, you need to lighten up a bit. Maybe watch some of those Three Stooges retros they program at Eastman House now and then.” He’s telling someone to have a sense of humor–hence, a reference to COMEDIANS. I don’t consider Breillat or the Holocaust too funny.

  72. Joe Leydon says:

    Actually, if L.J. really does work for Eastman House: Could you please, L.J., get me in to see the current “Law & Order” exhibit? I understand there’s a section that serves as a tribute to Jerry Orbach, who was IMHO a very classy guy. (Glad he got included in the Oscar tribute last night.)

  73. ggp says:

    I don’t know. . .is it okay to tell people the twist to M$B without those silly prefaces. WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD!! DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU DON’T WANT TO KNOW.

  74. L&DB says:

    You go away for a few hours and more shenanigans
    break out. This time involving a gay guy who works
    for Eastman house. Did not see that one coming.
    Nevertheless, may we all be afraid of THE STOOL
    OF PARAPLEGIA! Again, a movie where a woman BOXER
    becomes paralyzed by hitting her head on a stool
    just won best pictures. My god, that Academy sure
    does suck.

  75. KamikazeCamel says:

    Okay, so I skipped most of the replies because they were annoying. I find it strange that there is so much Million Dollar Baby Vs. Aviator. I prefered The Aviator (9/1) to Baby (8.5/10) but I’m not gonna complain. I wanted Scorsese to win but… i can deal.
    What I can’t deal with is Hilary winning. My god, GO AWAY NOW. At least we can be happy with the knowledge that she will never win another Oscar ever again. If it does then… well, they’re saying she’s a better actress than EVERYONE ACTRESS IN THE HISTORY OF FILM (other than Hepburn of course) and, really… HILARY SWANK? But then it’s not even that Swank won, it’s that she’s so… ugh. We know she came from a trailer park, we know you wanna fuck Clint Eastwood and sprout babies (why wasn’t she so in love with her female director or Boys Don’t Cry, ya know… the movie that LAUNCHED HER CAREER?!?!?). Seriously, her speech was boring and she copied her own speech from every other award show she has won at.
    And the second horrible part of the night was the worst speech of the night (if that makes sense). And that honour goes to… JAMIE FOXX.
    Seriously. Just like Hilary, he copied his speech from every other award show. Sing. Thank cast/crew. Talk about Grandma. Cry.
    Seriously. Give. It. Up.
    The icing on the rotten cake for Foxx however was when (if you taped it and can watch in slow-mo it helps) he bowed his head down in a release of “tears” he actually, for a split second, looks up at the audience with a slight smile on his face, and then he goes back down to crying. Just pathetic. My friends all thought so too (about everything I’ve just said about Jamie).
    And, seriously, anyone who says Cate Blanchett doesn’t deserve the Oscar because she “mimmicked Hepburn” must also demand that Foxx’s oscar be taken back. Just because he walked like Ray Charles and had the manurisms of Ray Charles doesn’t make it any less of mimmicky. Infact it’s more so.
    Whatever, the acting catagories (apart from Blanchett) were the most boring in years. Only Blanchett’s do I actually care about. The real winners should have been Cheadle/Staunton/Owen and, well, Blanchett.

  76. bicycle bob says:

    blanchett winning was the biggest joke. madsen deserved that award

  77. L.J. says:

    I DON’T work at the Eastman House, Joe Leydon You act like there’s only one organizaton in the country that has Eastman in it’s name. Nice assumption but untrue.
    I’d say if you want to go to their “Law and Order” exhibit, show up, pay your $5 bucks or whatever they charge and walk on in.
    And since you just called a Hong Kong film trilogy a Japanese film trilogy on another thread, does that mean it’s fair for someone to say, as you have in the past, “Well, that just proves we can never trust anything Joe Leydon ever says again!?!” 😉

  78. Carter Breslen says:

    L.J. Don’t you know that as a critic, Joe most likely hasn’t had to pay to see anything since he first got the job?

  79. Terence D says:

    Oswego? Still have the Shed up there? The Nuthouse? Good times on Water St.

  80. L.J. says:

    Is there a “nuthouse” in Oswego? Or is that the name of a bar or something? To be honest I’ve never been to Oswego or even know where it is exactly. The fact that so many of you seem to think these listed e-mail addresses have any relationship to reality is kind of charming. Hey, I lie, but at least I don’t get pornography sent to my real e-mail account!

  81. Carter Breslen says:

    Just a follow up to my earlier post (much ado about nothing, of course.) Not that I’m saying Joe would do this, but I’ll always remember one of my first contacts with an “industry VIP.” I was working at a movie theater in a medium sized mid west city, and someone came up to me with some sort of guild card or other saying that should get them in free to the film. Since we didn’t really have many Hollywood people coming through Ohio, our theater didn’t have any policy about this (and I was only 18 and pretty inexperienced). Anyway the guy through a fit when I wouldn’t let him in for free TO A $4 MATINEE! I always remember thinking: “if he’s so important and connected, why’s he so hard up that he can’t afford s four dollar ticket?” I guess it was just incomprehensible to him that his important card wouldn’t just impress everyone in “flyover country” to the point where the waters would part for them. LOL

  82. Joe Leydon says:

    Carter: Actually, I have to buy tickets all the time, usually for movies that aren’t press screened. Most recently, for “Candy Land: The Great Lollipop Adventure” and “Bogeyman.” Fortunately, I have an accountant who finds ways for me to deduct these expenses on my income tax returns. (Unfortunately, even he can’t figure out a way for me to deduct popcorn purchases.)
    L.J.: I’m glad to see you got the joke I was making (or at least TRYING to make) about your faux Eastman address, even if, ahem, certain other folks didn’t. And your story about the “Industry VIP” in “flyover country” (a place, BTW, where I have lived and worked all my life) is funny and, alas, all too familiar. Trouble is, the reverse is true: In NY or LA, you’re constantly running into people who think you’re either a cowboy, a redneck or a Beverly Hillbilly if you’re from “flyover country.” Several years ago, while I was covering the NY Film Festival, I tried to set up an interview with Jean-Luc Godard. And this is, I swear, the response I got from the guy’s publicist: “Oh. Do they show Godard’s movies in Texas?” Mind you, she wasn’t being funny, or ironic, or even (I think) condescending. She literally couldn’t comprehend that people in Texas might go to a subtitled movie. I wanted to tell her, “Yeah, we see his movies all the time at the drive in, on double bills with pictures by that Frankie Truffaut character,” but I decided to quit while I was behind.
    And yes, as I admitted on the other thread: I misidentified “Infernal Affairs” as a Japanese film. That was not just a mistake, it was a STOOPID mistake. (As my Korean-born son might say, “You round-eyed white devils think we all look alike, don’t you?”) Worse, it was a LAZY ASS mistake, because all I had to do was get up from my chair, and look at the “Infernal Affairs” DVD I have on a shelf in my closet. But I didn’t. And, yeah, I agree, making that one mistake does cast doubt on the veracity of anything else I had to say in that posting. Consider me abjectly humiliated. For my penance, I will do something absolutely distasteful, like read an entire op-ed column by Ann Coulter. For this sin, and all the past sins of my life, please forgive me.

  83. L.J. says:

    I got your joke. I can see how someone might think there was an insult there (I can’t stand the stooges), but I didn’t. On the other hand, I’m a bit shocked that you would have taken that comment about Chester being your lover as a homophobic insult. That would be like thinking that calling poster named Christy “your wife” is hetero-phobic. Anyway, a lot of misunderstandings here, but can’t we all just get along!!!
    As long as we can all go a bit easy on each other for making SOOPID mistakes , I’m happy to thrust and perry with a knowlegeable and witty guy like you Joe Leydon.

  84. bicycle bob says:

    u should read ann c. maybe u would learn something.

  85. Joe Leydon says:

    LJ: Yeah, maybe I did over-react there. And my only excuse is hyper-sensitivity: Not only do I have gay friends who have told me about being hassled on line (and in real-world situations), but I’ve had to deal with morons (once again, on line and in real-world situations) who make “queer-baiting” remarks because I’ve given a favorable review to a gay-themed movie, or have participated in an AIDS charity event. (Because of my newspaper and TV work in Houston, I am a minor celebrity — an extremely minor celebrity, to be totally honest — and I’ve had to deal with really nasty hate mail when, for example, I’ve been photographed at a AIDS Walk for Life fund-raiser by a local gay newspaper.) Whenever someone starts referring to another guy as my lover, or sweetheart, or blow buddy… well, I automatically assume I know where that person is coming from. And sometimes, I’m wrong. I know Jon S. said he’s never coming back here, but in the unlikely event he reads this, I’m sorry.
    In fact, I’d like to take this opportunity to apologize to everybody I’ve offended at any time in my life. I’m sorry, Bicycle Bob, for calling you Bi-Bob. I’m sorry, Gombro, for being nasty to you. I’m sorry, President Bush, for saying… well, wait, let’s not get too carried away here.

  86. L.J. says:

    I get what you’re saying Joe. Normally, I’d agree with you about gay-bating comments, but in his context, Jon was just openly speculating as to why Chester was being so quick to defend you sooooo tooth-and-nail over and over again: are you lovers, does he work for you, etc? Assuming he’s not lying (and who knows) the fact that he turns out to be gay himself just proves one shouldn’t be too quick to jump to conclusions. Anyway, I’m sorry for all my crotchety comments too! Since you can’t see facial expressions on the people posting misunderstandings are much more likely. Someone may be happily smiling as they send something but in cold print, it comes across as a hostile comment.

  87. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    I’m not sorry for calling Bicycle Bob; Bi-Bob. This love-in atmos from Joe is starting to give me the heebie jeebies. And in the end, I think Bi-Bob would prefer it that way too, rather than a quick faux kiss and make-up. Lets sometimes agree to disagree, its far healthier and a truer indication of the world that we live in.

  88. Joe Leydon says:

    Dr. Jeff: OK, how about I stipulate that it’s just a brotherly kiss, no tongue?

  89. bicycle bob says:

    jeffrey u should probably be seeing that shrink. u seem to have a lot of anger of ur sexuality. why the hostility?

  90. Mark says:

    When did this turn into Love Fest 2005??? I guess we can thank Jon S for it with his winning charm.

  91. Jon S says:

    C’m on, Mark! Why ruin everyone’s homo-social cordiality with your silly sarcasm?

  92. bicycle bob says:

    thanks jon s. i have liked the love in thread

  93. JimmyConway75 says:

    Leydon wrote, re: tax reimbursements: “Unfortunately, even he can’t figure out a way for me to deduct popcorn purchases.”
    Potential solution: go to movies with a flack or other professional colleague, and classify the popcorn purchase as “entertainment,” like a business lunch or dinner. :)

  94. snoop says:

    I thought Robin Williams was funny. Jay Z was too cool to be at those wack awards. I’m sick of Beyonce though, more overexposed than Jamie Foxx.
    Charlie Kaufmann is a strange looking mofo. Looklike Snowwhite and the seven dwarfs.
    Jude Law sucks as an actor.
    I wish Prince had peformed.
    P. Diddy does not give a fuk what you or anyone has to say. He is like Don King, teflon.
    Were there too many black people at the Oscars, seems to be what David Poland and critics are saying. I think there is a backlash against blacks. Whatever.
    Jamie Foxx deserved his Oscar, screw the haters.
    Hilary Swank was in Buffy The Vampire Slayer Movie. Hope for us all.
    Cate Blanchett was dissed by Chris Rock, hahahahaha.
    I lost respect for David Poland. Is it me, or does he continually whine about shit. He does 20 wks to OScar then says he doesn’t care. Er, right. He says about CR EW interview that he felt Josh Wolk asked bad questions cause he felt Chris was trying to say something about being an outsider in Hollywood, almost like David was showing compassion, but after The Oscars he’s now crying about “black” jokes are played out. I think David has schizophernia or something to be honest.
    Did you see the standing ovation Rock got, those b-list actors were scared to death to offend him. Thats power baby.
    Poll. Best Oscars Host Ever.
    1) David Letterman
    2) Chris Rock
    3) Richard Pryor ( shared duties)
    4) Johnny Carson
    5) Steve Martin

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

This is probably going to sound petty, but Martin Scorsese insisting that critics see his film in theaters even though it’s going straight to Netflix and then not screening it in most American cities was a watershed moment for me in this theatrical versus streaming debate.

I completely respect when a filmmaker insists that their movie is meant to be seen in the theater, but the thing is, you got to actually make it possible to see it in the theater. Some movies may be too small for that, and that’s totally OK.

When your movie is largely financed by a streaming service and is going to appear on that streaming service instantly, I don’t really see the point of pretending that it’s a theatrical film. It just seems like we are needlessly indulging some kind of personal fantasy.

I don’t think that making a feature film length production that is going to go straight to a video platform is some sort of “step down.“ I really don’t. Theatrical exhibition as we know it is dying off anyway, for a variety of reasons.

I should clarify myself because this thread is already being misconstrued — I’m talking about how the movie is screened in advance. If it’s going straight to Netflix, why the ritual of demanding people see it in the theater?

There used to be a category that everyone recognized called “TV movie” or “made for television movie” and even though a lot of filmmakers considered that déclassé, it seems to me that probably 90% of feature films fit that description now.

Atlantis has mostly sunk into the ocean, only a few tower spires remain above the waterline, and I’m increasingly at peace with that, because it seems to be what the industry and much of the audience wants. We live in an age of convenience and information control.

Only a very elite group of filmmakers is still allowed to make movies “for theaters“ and actually have them seen and judged that way on a wide scale. Even platform releasing seems to be somewhat endangered. It can’t be fought. It has to be accepted.

9. Addendum: I’ve been informed that it wasn’t Scorsese who requested that the Bob Dylan documentary only be screened for critics in theaters, but a Netflix representative indicated the opposite to me, so I just don’t know what to believe.

It’s actually OK if your film is not eligible for an Oscar — we have a thing called the Emmys. A lot of this anxiety is just a holdover from the days when television was considered culturally inferior to theatrical feature films. Everybody needs to just get over it.

In another 10 to 20 years they’re probably going to merge the Emmys in the Oscars into one program anyway, maybe they’ll call it the Contentys.

“One of the fun things about seeing the new Quentin Tarantino film three months early in Cannes (did I mention this?) is that I know exactly why it’s going to make some people furious, and thus I have time to steel myself for the takes.

Back in July 2017, when it was revealed that Tarantino’s next project was connected to the Manson Family murders, it was condemned in some quarters as an insulting and exploitative stunt. We usually require at least a fig-leaf of compassion for the victims in true-crime adaptations, and even Tarantino partisans like myself – I don’t think he’s made a bad film yet – found ourselves wondering how he might square his more outré stylistic impulses with the depiction of a real mass murder in which five people and one unborn child lost their lives.

After all, it’s one thing to slice off with gusto a fictional policeman’s ear; it’s quite another to linger over the gory details of a massacre that took place within living memory, and which still carries a dread historical significance.

In her essay The White Album, Joan Didion wrote: “Many people I know in Los Angeles believe that the Sixties ended abruptly on August 9, 1969, ended at the exact moment when word of the murders on Cielo Drive traveled like brushfire through the community, and in a sense this is true.”

Early in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, as Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt’s characters drive up the hill towards Leo’s bachelor pad, the camera cranes up gently to reveal a street sign: Cielo Drive. Tarantino understands how charged that name is; he can hear the Molotov cocktails clinking as he shoulders the crate.

As you may have read in the reviews from Cannes, much of the film is taken up with following DiCaprio and Pitt’s characters – a fading TV actor and his long-serving stunt double – as they amusingly go about their lives in Los Angeles, while Margot Robbie’s Sharon Tate is a relatively minor presence. But the spectre of the murders is just over the horizon, and when the night of the 9th finally arrives, you feel the mood in the cinema shift.

No spoilers whatsoever about what transpires on screen. But in the audience, as it became clear how Tarantino was going to handle this extraordinarily loaded moment, the room soured and split, like a pan of cream left too long on the hob. I craned in, amazed, but felt the person beside me recoil in either dismay or disgust.

Two weeks on, I’m convinced that the scene is the boldest and most graphically violent of Tarantino’s career – I had to shield my eyes at one point, found myself involuntarily groaning “oh no” at another – and a dead cert for the most controversial. People will be outraged by it, and with good reason. But in a strange and brilliant way, it takes Didion’s death-of-the-Sixties observation and pushes it through a hellfire-hot catharsis.

Hollywood summoned up this horror, the film seems to be saying, and now it’s Hollywood’s turn to exorcise it. I can’t wait until the release in August, when we can finally talk about why.

~ Robbie Collin