4 January 2000

THE CHAT: Next week, Magnolia chat will rule the roost. Keep an eye out for more info.

RADIO RADIO: Last time I checked, I had directors Anthony Minghella and James Mangold scheduled for this Saturday's show. But check the column again Friday for a clearer update. Who knows what Y2K nightmares have done to my bookings.

MORE CRITICS AWARDS: More days, more awards. This weekend, the Online Film Critics Society announced their award winners. American Beauty took four awards, including Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Director and Best Ensemble. Being John Malkovich took a Supporting Actress award for Catherine Keener and shared screenplay honors with Election, which featured the Best Actress winner, Reese Witherspoon. Haley Joel Osment took the supporting award, Run Lola Run took Best Foreign Film and The Buena Vista Social Club took Best Documentary. I object only to Sam Mendes and Catherine Keener, neither of whom I have a problem with in the execution of their duties, but simply with the suggestion that either excelled above all others this year.

Which brings us to the Broadcast Film Critics and their Best Film of the '90s list. Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, L.A. Confidential, Forrest Gump, GoodFellas, Fargo, Silence of the Lambs, The Shawshank Redemption, Pulp Fiction and Unforgiven were the Top Ten...yes, in that order.

Someday, there will be an award that represents you, the on-line movie lover. It will show respect for the many great Websites that cover movies, but ultimately, it will be about you. Just a pipe dream? Stay tuned.

JUST WONDERING: Did I miss the New York Times' loving exit tribute to Janet Maslin?

READER OF THE DAY: First, thank you all for your letters about the Best, the Worst and the Didn't Get It lists. Great stuff. The most recurring of the themes were: 1) The Sixth Sense is truly great because..., 2) Why wasn't American Beauty higher? and 3) Thanks for fighting for Fight Club and Eyes Wide Shut.

Jeff wrote: "I wanted you to know that I haven't even seen one of the 22 films mentioned on your Worst 10 list, nor did I ever intend to! Do I win anything for that? How about free passes to a Supernova screening? That'll be some irony for the new year! Ho ho ho!"

Steve The Weng writes: " Dear David: Happy New Year! After I recalled Toy Story 2, Toy Story and Star Wars Trilogy, I get another amazing theory: I think John Lassiter and George Lucas are the same person. Why? Let me tell you why:

George Lucas loves to cut off the characters' hands, so does John Lassiter. Luke Skywalker lost his hand in Empire Strikes Back, the same thing happened to Darth Vader in Return of Jedi. Buzz Lightyear lost and recovered his hand in Toy Story, then this time it's Woody.

'Your darkest enemy is one member of your family.' We heard Darth Vader to Luke 'I am your father', and this time its Zorg told Buzz. Darth, Luke, Zorg and Buzz are characters from Sci-Fi. Besides, we were never told where Andy's father is, it must be a big surprise in Toy Story 3.

Luke discovered the history of his family in 'Trilogy', Woody knew he belongs to 'Woody's Roundup.'

'Fat Guys are Always Evil Guys.' Jabba The Hutt and Al are both extremely fat!
'Short Guys are Always Great Supporting Actors.' R2D2 and Mr. Potato have their own character and style, very easy to be angry.
'Tall Guys are Always Gut-less Guys.' C3PO and REX are tall but no guts.
'Hairy Guys have no lines.' Chewbacca, Sid's dog and Andy's dog only bark but not talk.
George Lucas used lots of CGI effects and Computer Animation in Star Wars Trilogy Special Edition and Star Wars Episode One, so does John Lassiter in Toy Story 2.
'Non-Human characters are always key-point in the plot.' Jar Jar Binks and Toys are not human after all.
Since Toy Story and Star Wars have lots of things in common, the only reasonable reason is, George Lucas is John Lassiter. The Biggest Hollywood secret ever lives!"

And B.S. writes: "When does how much money a picture opens or makes, be it good or bad, have any weight in regards to its real importance or intrinsic worth? Why the hell do people go and see movies because they heard "oh, well, they spent 100 million on it" or "I heard the cgi was great" or my favorite "Leo's in it" or crap like that. You know, great directors such as Scorsese and Kubrick never got the appreciation or Oscars (like we really care about those!) they deserved. And by doing so year after year, the so called Academy unknowingly degrades itself and slits its own throat every year when they do the things that we have all seen to be commonplace year after year:

1. Nominate the most popular audience pictures with big pull year after year.
2. Nominate those in generally Caucasian roles with the yearly almost pity nod going to minorities, as if By some swell, they'll be thanked to include them. What gives? This always pisses me off. I'm a white guy in my early twenties, and I can't believe the racial injustice year after year.
3. Spend hundreds of thousands honoring those with egos, money, and status. When a lot of film (if you consider it art) goes untouched because of unknown acting, low budgets, and independent productions and associated views.

What the hell, David? Do you give a sh** either? I know that you stand for a lot more. And don't really care for the numbers game. But what you should do is take a stand and not talk about the numbers. A true critic of art never worries about the numbers. That's why directors have producers and accountants. Are you a critic and cinema lover, or writing a production column? If you are a film critic, which by the way I enjoy reading when you do it, print more on the movies themselves.

Print this, ask your readers what they think... still enjoying most of the column..."

E ME: Okay...what do you think?