As the Oscars fast approaches I have been trying to educate myself on everything I can about the films, actors, and directors etc. who are nominated. One of my favorite websites to get my daily dose of Hollywood information (gossip) is Deadline.com.
To my delight, one post on the Deadline.com had a link to the script for the film “The Artist” which I have been dying to read. Since I’ve heard of “The Artist” I’ve been so interested in what on earth the script must look like since there’s no written dialogue.
The script is only 42 pages long and I adore it. I haven’t seen the actual film, but I have to say that if the film is anything like the script then I’m sure I would give it all the accolades it has been acquiring. For the most it cuts out all the sturm and drang that we writers have to deal with in terms of dialogue. And I’m aware that a version of this film was already nominated for short film at the Academy Awards previously which would probably give the impression that most of the work had already been done to make this film, but all I can say is…so what? It looks well written and it’s here in present day and it’s NOW.
This brings up an interesting point though that some people think the only reason that films like “The Artist” are getting so much attention is not in the fact that they have substance and talent, but because they have the gimmick: particularly the fact that “The Artist” is a (mostly) silent film. And that therefore the film is on its knees begging for the Academy to give it an award because it’s so “different,”
I have no idea whether that’s true or not, but I can tell you one thing: Most of the other films nominated for the Academy this year are kind of boring and the only reason that they are nominated is because they have *cough* George Clooney *cough* in them or *cough* Steven Spielberg *cough* directed them.
As much as I love Clooney and Spielberg I just hope EVERYONE analyzes their films with much more than they have been.