a.k.a. "The Oscar Messenger"

Woody Allen Fires Back

You just never WHAT turn the Oscar Race is gonna taken and that’s one of the reasons I find it so endlessly fascinating. But this left turn is one that really saddens me. That Cate Blanchett might lose an Oscar for the performance of her career in “Blue Jasmine” is just awful. I don’t think she will, but…you never know…and the godawful confused performance of Amy Adams might win instead in Best Actress for the execrable “romp”i.e.,” American Hustle” is too much to bear or even think about.

This probably isn’t going to happen. The Academy has a history of ignoring alleged bad behavior in favor of great work. And AMPAS, if any body, is made up of a jury of Woody’s peers, if ever there was one. I’m predicting that Cate the Great will still win and that this controversy might even win, in a surprise, and garner Allen yet another Best Orginal Screenplay Oscar. It’s a better screenplay than “Her” OR “American Hustle” now that I think about it.

But Woody came out firing on all guns in the New York Times no less and here’s what he had to say, in full. over at http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com. Jeff Wells’ take is instructive and scroll down to “My Feelings Exactly” to read the entire statement.

Jeff Wells by the way is in Berlin for the Berlin Film Festival and isn’t liking it one bit.


Comments on: "Woody Allen Fires Back" (3)

  1. Wells writes: “perversion of that intensity seems likely to have manifested itself either before or after in his life; and, as he writes, there’s been no evidence brought to light of such pathology.” Umm, what about the fact that he had an affair with and then married his longtime partner’s daughter Soon-Yi? He apparently began sleeping with her when she was still a teenager. He found nothing wrong with this. Yes, he’s creepy. That said, I don’t think it is relevant to his artistic achievement. If we banned all works by morally suspect men, there wouldn’t be much left in the canon.

  2. Dredging up old bones is a macabre thing to do. Funny how one has to do this after 20 years. Why now? Why not five years ago? Why not ten? Because maybe we didn’t have a friend working at the New York Times then. It’s a PR scheme to create controversy for the masses. Ho hum. This will fade until another comes along. Roman Polanski anyone?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: