Screenwriter »

  • Who nobbled Ricky Gervais?

    January 16, 2012 @ 8:03 pm | by Donald Clarke
    YouTube Preview Image

    Well, nobody. That’s who. I am not much at home to conspiracy theories and — whatever else you might think about Gervais — you wouldn’t say that he gives in to pressure. Having received more than a few outraged reviews for his first stint hosting the stupid Golden Globes, he redoubled his efforts and was properly rude the the following year. But his performance last night was extraordinarily insipid. We were back in Billy Crystal territory: I am pretending to be rude to you as a way of clarifying what great mates we are. A few media sources have tried to get upset at the fact that he seemed to suggest that Jodie Foster was a lesbian. Get real. It would be different if Ms Foster was in any sense gay, but, as she’s plainly straighter than a Roman road, nobody is likely to take such gags remotely seriously. I mean, really. (Will this do, m’lud?)

    The whole Gervais at the Globes story is most peculiar. Last year, the organisers made some huffing and puffing noises after he seemed to upset Robert Downey Jr. But, given that Gervais was the only thing that got the Globes mainstream publicity — well, that and their habit of nominating terrible films — it was always likely that they’d find a way for him to return. Do they really want a neutered Gervais? Probably. He does give the awards a distinctive identity. Apart from anything else, next year’s papers will, in the event of his return, be buzzing with stories about whether he can regain his mojo.

    I am reluctant to ponder any apparent crisis in Gervaisland. Quite understandably, he tends to snort noisily when unfunny pundits decide that he’s suffering from Viz Syndrome. (The creators of that comic argue that, as long ago as the mid-1980s, Mark E Smith was claiming it “wasn’t as funny as it used to be”.) But he is going through a rough patch. An Idiot Abroad, in which his pal Karl Pilkington travels the world, feels very much like an exercise in treading water. His last film, Cemetery Junction, was worryingly perfunctory. And Life’s Too Short? Oh dear. It wasn’t terrible. As mentioned here a few months ago, the cameo with Liam Neeson was genuinely hilarious and Warwick Davis confirmed that he is a very fine comic actor. But the series was far too reliant on beats devised for The Office and Extras. Davis’s character was, in fact, little more than a smaller version of David Brent. Woody Allen waited 30 years before hiring actors such as John Cusack, Kenneth Branagh and Owen Wilson to play variations on his stock character. Most worrying of all — and to my great surprise — the series featured one too many jokes that appeared to be laughing at Warwick’s shortness (the catflap gag, the ascent up the bookcase) rather than satirising foolish attitudes to his condition.

    I regret saying this. I met Gervais a few years back and found him an absolute charmer. I feel fairly confident that he’ll return soon with something worth laughing at. We need him.

  • A question about Ricky Gervais and the Globes.

    January 17, 2011 @ 9:17 pm | by Donald Clarke
    YouTube Preview Image

    You almost certainly had better things to do with your time than stay up to watch the Golden Globes last night. There were, however, some sources of entertainment during the shindig. Invited back after ruffling a few feathers last year, Ricky Gervais proved to be an impressively ruthless host. The opening monologue did not just take swipes at top Hollywood party-goers — notably Charlie Sheen — it rubbed up against a few of the controversies that have dogged the organisers this year. It was something to watch. There were as many gasps as there were guffaws. When Ricky actually used the word “bribes” his lawyers must have swallowed deep and hard.

    Here’s my question. How, exactly, do we judge the stars’ reaction? A piece by Mary McNamara, the LA Times’ TV critic, seemed to suggest that a few guests had publicly slapped Ricky down. As an example, Ms McNamara mentioned the comments by Robert Downey Jr. Ricky introduced the old rogue with this quip: “Many of you in this room probably know [him] from such facilities as the Betty Ford Clinic and Los Angeles County Jail.” The actor responded in kind: “Aside from the fact that it’s been hugely mean-spirited with mildly sinister undertones, I’d say the show’s going pretty good so far, wouldn’t you?”

    Ms McNamara suggests that the comment was meant as a sincere rebuke. Really? She also took comments by Tom Hanks and Tim Allen as angry put-downs. “We recall when Ricky Gervais was a slightly chubby and kindly comedian,” Hanks said. “Neither of which he is now,” Allen followed-up. What do you think?

    YouTube Preview Image

    Here’s the thing. To me, the actors’ comments seemed entirely innocuous. They were, surely, good-naturedly playing along with Gervais’ game. Has McNamara (along with many other pundits) had an irony by-pass or am I giving Hollywood A-listers too much credit?

    More fun was to be had from Sky’s predictably useless home coverage. I am not referring to the fact that Jessica Hynes took to crocheting throughout. That seemed rather charming. I refer to the interesting exchange following the news that Boardwalk Empire had triumphed in the best TV drama race. Jack Whitehall, that posh comic, noted that the series had not yet been on UK television and declared that he would be downloading it shortly. Alex Zane, the host, squirmed, but Whitehall continued to whitter about the joys of internet piracy.

    All very embarrassing. Boardwalk Empire is, you see, the flagship series on the upcoming Sky Atlantic channel. At the next break, Zane was forced to prostrate himself before the viewers and point out the unspeakable wickedness of unauthorised downloading. Har! Har!

  • Golden Globes aftermath and current Oscar standings

    December 19, 2010 @ 9:58 pm | by Donald Clarke

    A few posts ago, using my most facetious tone, I somehow found time to address the Golden Globes nominations. Some mild controversy ensued. Well, in the following days, a greater than usual amount of outraged muttering has burbled around this year’s shortlist. The main issue is the perplexing inclusion of the so-so The Tourist and the downright awful Burlesque among the nominations for Best Comedy or Musical.

    What about us? Huh? Huh? Huh?

    An article in today’s (British) Independent addressed the concerns in some detail. Guy Adams expressed himself thus:

    “Disbelief later turned to mild outrage, however, after it emerged that Sony, the studio behind the clunker Burlesque, recently flew Golden Globes judges to Las Vegas for an all-expenses-paid trip which included luxury hotel accommodation, free meals and a private concert performed by the film’s star, Cher.”

    The Independent article neatly summarises worries that have been aired throughout Hollywood since the nominations on Tuesday. The Hollywood Reporter, commenting on the acting nods for Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie, stars of The Tourist, found a high horse and climbed right upon it. Here’s that trade paper’s take:

    “To skeptics, the choices appeared to be a particularly blatant play to line the red carpet with celebrities — in this case, two of the world’s biggest — at the Golden Globes ceremony Jan. 16. Additionally, the movie was never marketed as a comedy; it was portrayed as a romantic thriller.”

    The most savage words came, however, from Betsey Sharkey of the Los Angeles Times. Both barrels were discharged in the following manner:

    “The Globe nominations have often been little more than a popularity contest among those who throw the best parties, but with its 2011 nominations, the HFPA has reached a new low.”

    Yikes, alive. There is, of course, every reason to believe that the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, the body that hands out the Globes, has behaved in an exemplary fashion. After all, wretched films such as A Beautiful Mind and Crash actually won best picture Oscars without anybody (well, anybody apart from me) kicking up any noticeable fuss. But this has, so far, not been a particularly golden year for the Globes.

    It hardly needs to be said that the Globes — never much of a pointer to Oscars, anyway — have had little effect on our predictions for the awards that matter. Indeed, unlike last year, I note no serious changes in wind direction since my first guess at the final 10. For the record — he would say that, wouldn’t he? — my smart-alec inclusion of Big Mommas: Like Father, Like Son (actually, a 2011 film) denied me the opportunity of placing Winter’s Bone in the list. I would guess that the first five here will also receive nominations for their directors and can, thus, be regarded as the real best-picture front-runners.

    With the usual provisos that these are not necessarily the films I like, here is the predicted list in order of likelihood:

    1. The Social Network

    2. The King’s Speech

    3. Black Swan

    4. True Grit

    5. Inception

    6. 127 Hours

    7.  Toy Story 3

    8. The Kids are All Right

    9. The Fighter

    10. Winter’s Bone

    Actually the more you stare at this the harder it becomes to imagine anything else breaking into the final shortlist. Another Year? Possibly. Blue Valentine? An outside bet. The Town? It could just about make it. At any rate, Oscar-haters (and that’s most of you) will be relieved to hear that I don’t  imagine there will be much reason to debate this issue further before nominations week.

  • Look away. It’s the Golden Globe nominations.

    December 14, 2010 @ 3:45 pm | by Donald Clarke

    Lord alone knows why people still pay so much attention to the Golden Globes. It has been demonstrated over and over again that these gongs offer only the loosest pointers to the Oscar nominations. The Hollywood Foreign Press Association, the dubious body that hands out the things, has yet to explain why it is qualified to judge anything more prestigious than a nobbly knees competition. And yet, here I am, cutting and pasting this year’s nominations.

    L to R: H Bonham-Carter, C Firth. Hang on a moment.

    The whinges above noted, all the early favourites for the Academy Awards are firmly in place. The King’s Speech, The Social Network and Black Swan all figure heavily. Bookies will continue to count Colin Firth (George VI in The King’s Speech) as favourite for the best dramatic actor award. Natalie Portman (mad ballet dancer in Black Swan) is in poll position for the best serious actress Globe. The Social Network looks like taking the best dramatic film award.

    The most entertaining aspect of any Globes list are the dodgy romps and genuine turkeys that turn up in the best comedy or musical category. Where else would Bulesque, The Tourist and Red figure in a best picture race? It wouldn’t altogether have been a surprise to encounter Grown Ups or Leap Year in this shortlist.

    At any rate, here are the main film nominations for your perusal. You can find the full list here.

    Best Motion Picture – Drama

    Black Swan

    The Fighter

    Inception

    The King’s Speech

    The Social Network

    Best Performance By An Actress In A Motion Picture – Drama

    Halle Berry – Frankie and Alice

    Nicole Kidman – Rabbit Hole

    Jennifer Lawrence – Winter’s Bone

    Natalie Portman – Black Swan

    Michelle Williams – Blue Valentine

    Best Performance By An Actor In A Motion Picture – Drama

    Jesse Eisenberg – The Social Network

    Colin Firth – The King’s Speech

    James Franco – 127 Hours

    Ryan Gosling – Blue Valentine

    Mark Wahlberg – The Fighter

    Best Motion Picture – Comedy Or Musical

    Alice in Wonderland

    Burlesque

    The Kids Are All Right

    Red

    The Tourist

    Best Performance By An Actress In A Motion Picture – Comedy Or Musical

    Annette Bening – The Kids Are All Right

    Anne Hathaway – Love and Other Drugs

    Angelina Jolie – The Tourist

    Julianne Moore – The Kids Are All Right

    Emma Stone – Easy A

    Best Performance By An Actor In A Motion Picture – Comedy Or Musical

    Johnny Depp – Alice in Wonderland

    Johnny Depp – The Tourist

    Paul Giamatti – Barney’s Version

    Jake Gyllenhaal – Love And Other Drugs

    Kevin Spacey – Casino Jack

  • It’s the Golden Globe$

    January 19, 2010 @ 11:14 pm | by Donald Clarke

    There were, for those of us who stayed up to watch the stupid Golden Globes, a few pleasures to make up for the depressing intelligence that Avatar has now been installed as the third most popular religion in the United States. Ricky Gervais’s turn as presenter was poorly reviewed in many places, but, in a peculiar way, the silence that greeted his sparkier quips could be seen as a sort of victory. It wasn’t an ordinary silence. It was the feet-shuffling, slightly furious silence you might encounter following a stoning or the dunking of a witch. When, come to think of it, has any line by a presenter on the Golden Globes achieved the sort of resonance accorded his quip about the world’s greatest Australian? “I like a drink as much as the next man, unless the next man is Mel Gibson,” he sniggered. Mel didn’t seem to mind. Good for him. He may be a right-wing religious maniac, but he can certainly take a joke.

    jennifer-aniston-gerard-gg-2010.jpg

    It’s Rachel from Friends and that bloke from 300.

    Elsewhere one could marvel at some of the worst speeches ever delivered at an awards ceremony. Mo’Nique was gushy and bible bashing. Drew Barrymore shamed herself yet again. Even Meryl Streep, invariably the most dignified figure in the room, made a raving twit of herself.

    Still, who could take an event seriously that so shamelessly tips its hat to the biggest money-makers in the room? If the Globes could have given an award to Warren Buffett (or Richie Rich) they would gladly have done so.

    Our predictions for the Oscars remain unaltered.

  • Golden Globessszzzzzz…

    December 15, 2009 @ 5:25 pm | by Donald Clarke

    aleqm5ierkkh0ymviuzrjht1fk9mmh-z4a.jpg

    I sense that awards fatigue is already setting in among readers, so I’ll just offer a brief paragraph on the announcement of the Golden Globe nominations this afternoon. There weren’t many surprises and our pointers towards the Oscars — for which the Globes are, despite what you might hear, no great predictors — remain largely unaltered. The big three are still The Hurt Locker, Precious and Up in the Air, all of which received nominations for best dramatic picture. Avatar, coming up on the rails, defies early bad buzz to become an awards player and Inglourious Basterds, boosted by the Weinstein’s goon squad, also secures an unexpected number of nods. The biggest surprise was, perhaps, Basterds beating Clint Eastwood’s Invictus to a best dramatic picture nomination. Is it all over for the great man’s study of South Africa’s attempt to win the Rugby World Cup? Not at all. Clint is nominated for best director and Morgan Freeman gets a nod for his turn as Nelson Mandela. The film will certainly be one of the 10 best picture nominees at the Oscars and could, erm, manage a scrum turnaround to score a late try-goal. (Could somebody tutor me on rugby metaphors before the blasted thing opens?)

    The big loser remains the poorly reviewed The Lovely Bones. After its kicking from the American press, nobody much expected Peter Jackson’s adaptation of the Alice Sebold novel to get a best picture nod, but our own Saoirse Ronan looked like a good bet for the best dramatic actress shortlist.  Sadly, the call did not come.

    The most outrageous exclusion is, however, A Serious Man in the best comedy or musical category. How to put this? The Coen Brothers latest is one of the very best films of the decade; Julie & Julia does not even deserve to pass water in the same lavatory. Stupid Hollywood Foreign Press Association! (Whoever the hell they are.)

    Ricky Gervais hosts the awards on January 17th.


Search Screenwriter