Miramax reportedly badmouthing Oscar Frontrunners! (1 Viewer)

[Scott Weinberg]

http://www.zap2it.com/movies/news/st...-10569,00.html
Anyone think this report is accurate? It wouldn't really surprise me...

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I am out of that loop, Scott. While I enjoy Miramax getting kicked in the groin, I doubt they do anything too different from other studios in the hunt. They are simply more brazen about it. As their film (or films if you include The Shipping News) has very little chance this year, they got to do something I guess.

Take care,

Chuck

 

[Terrell]

Nothing would surprise me about Miramax. As far as I'm concerned, they should be banished for 10 years for all the ridiculous crap they've pulled. They need at very stern warning at the very least. Or how about this. How about doing away with the swaying of voters altogether. The voters get the DVD or the VHS of the film and that's it, period. And anyone who badmouths their competition gets booted.

 

[TerryRL]

This doesn't surprise me at all. Miramax is notorious for doing this. They've had a serious war-of-words thing happening with DreamWorks ever since the whole "Saving Private Ryan" vs. "Shakespeare in Love" debacle a few years ago.

And let's not forget, DreamWorks co-financed "A Beautiful Mind". The studio is looking to make it 3 Best Picture wins in a row and you know Miramax doesn't want that to happen.

 

[Brian Lawrence]

ever since the whole "Saving Private Ryan" vs. "Shakespeare in Love" debacle a few years ago

Don't blame Miramax just because Shakespeare in Love happened to be a better movie.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

Don't blame Miramax just because Shakespeare in Love happened to be a better movie.

Ah yes, but notice how much better "directed" SPR was.
Regards,

 

[TerryRL]

The debacle I was referring to was the campaigning that both DreamWorks and Miramax were doing before the Oscars that year. It originally started with Spielberg and the Weinstien brothers, if memory serves. Than it got pretty heated after "Shakespeare in Love" won the Oscar.

Since then, DreamWorks has been on a roll (winning for "American Beauty" and "Gladiator"), while Miramax has been taken to task for their campaigning practices. This year just adds yet another chapter to that ongoing feud.

 

[Michael Reuben]

People bad-mouth films all the time. Look around HTF, and you can find someone bad-mouthing every film that's considered an Oscar contender. Why should people in the industry be any different?

Just imagine a scenario where someone who works for Miramax is overheard at a party or in a bar expressing a negative (but genuinely held) view of a competitor's film. A Post reporter picks up the story, and suddenly there's a conspiracy.

Miramax's senior VP of PR is quoted as saying it's against company policy. I'm sure he's telling the truth, but that doesn't mean he can stop people from talking.

M.

 

[Terrell]

Michael, don't try and defend Miramax. They are pathetic. The aboslute worst at buying nominations and badmouthing their competitors. As for say it's okay because we do it, we're not a part of the process Michael. We are nothing more than movie fans discussing film. Miramax does not deserve being defended. They deserve a good swift kick to the nu**.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I don't think Michael is defending Miramax. And if he is, good for him! He can do as he wishes here. I am all for whacking Miramax, but keep our fellow members out of these discussions. Miramax doesn't deserve a defense any more than Lucas, but he has plenty of defenders here, right?
Take care,
Chuck

 

[Michael Reuben]

Terrell, Miramax doesn't need me or anyone else to "defend" them. They're extraordinarily successful, and I'm sure that will continue no matter what any of us says.

M.

 

[TerryRL]

Look, I have no problem at all with this ongoing feud between DreamWorks and Miramax. I think it's added a lot of spice to the entire Oscar campaign the last few years.

 

[Terrell]

God, I love how people always bring up Star Wars or Lucas in completely nonrelated discussions when replying to me. As if that's the only thing I care about.

 

[LisaH]

Perhaps the whole Dreamworks/Miramax fight will be moot and Moulin Rouge or LOTR will win making next year's antagonists Fox & New Line. At least it would be a change!

 

[Ryan Peter]

Dreamworks = the new Miramax. Shame on them for not pushing A.I. as an Oscar contender!

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

Don't blame Miramax just because Shakespeare in Love happened to be a better movie.

IMO, I dislike both films. Saving Private Ryan starts out great, but after that first battle sequence, the film lost all interest in me as the film was like all other war films. Also, they should've ended the film BEFORE the old man talked. But I will give props to Speilberg as he directed this film pretty damn well.
Now Shakespeare In Love is just a horrid movie all around. What was Ben Affleck thinking?
Now I hate Miramax (for many many reasons). I for one hopes out this "rumor" turns out to be true as I'd love to see Miramax socked right in the nuts.
Personally, I'd love to see either Moulin Rouge or LOTR take home best picture and fuck over both Miramax and DreamWorks.

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

Dreamworks = the new Miramax. Shame on them for not pushing A.I. as an Oscar contender!

Reading the industry trade magazine, Variety, DreamWorks DID push A.I. as an Oscar contender.

~Edwin

 

[Ryan Peter]

Edwin, don't you think A.I. would have been a stronger contender if they had released it this winter? Instead they tried to play it off as a summer blockbuster and that's not what it was and it wasn't financially successful.

 

[Steeve Bergeron]

God, I love how people always bring up Star Wars or Lucas in completely nonrelated discussions when replying to me. As if that's the only thing I care about.

That's because you're the "official" defender of all Star Wars-related things. It's a tough job, but someone has to do it!

 

[Ryan Peter]

Terrell also defends Russell Crowe as a sidejob.