Dirty tricks to tarnish Oscars

Roman Polanski

10 April 2012

It was no coincidence. Barely days after Roman Polanski had been Oscar-nominated for The Pianist, the real Best Director campaign began in a New York television studio.

There, Samantha Geimer appeared on the popular Larry King chat show to talk about the night 26 years ago when Polanski raped her in Jack Nicholson's house when she was just 13.

She wanted him to be shown forgiveness and even honoured for his film. Then, soon after her interview, court documents from the case mysteriously appeared on the internet describing in gruesome detail Polanski's despicable behaviour that night.

Immediately, conspiracy theorists pointed to a vicious studio battle. On the one hand, Focus Films (distributor of The Pianist) was suspected of pushing Ms Geimer onto TV screens to laud Polanski, something it has strenuously denied.

Then came the hugely damaging leak of the legal papers outlining just why the Polish director hasn't been allowed back in the country for nearly three decades. A rival studio perhaps, or someone with a longstanding grudge? Either way, the odds on Polanski picking up the coveted statuette are lengthening by the day.

It's the latest in a long line of dirty tricks synonymous with the film studios' desperate attempts to win an Oscar. "I really didn't think it could get worse than last year," says one Academy member, who insists on remaining anonymous.

Last year's Oscar race was marred by claims that the film A Beautiful Mind had ignored the alleged anti-Semitism and homosexuality of John Nash, who was played by Russell Crowe. That smear campaign may have cost Crowe the Oscar - or was it his own boorish and violent behaviour at the British Academy Awards?

"And this year, as part of an Oscar marketing campaign, they drag a woman onto TV to discuss how she was raped when she was a child," continues the member. "It made me want to burn my Oscar ballot. It's repulsive."

Academy members are also wondering who is involved in behind-the-scenes attempts to get the entertainment media to focus on whatever role Nicole Kidman may or may not have had in the marital difficulties of Jude Law and Sadie Frost.

But because there is no tabloid newspaper in Los Angeles, the story has had little impact on Academy voters. Kidman, nominatedfor her performance in The Hours, is however, taking no chances. With just a few days to go to Oscar day, her team of lawyers has been instructed to clamp down on the story linking her to Law. Any suggestion that there is some truth in the stories is a gross libel, they say.

Anthony Minghella - director of Cold Mountain, the film in which Kidman stars with Law - even made an unprecedented statement last week saying there was no truth in the rumours. He added: "Nicole deserves an Oscar. I think, at this moment, there is nobody better than her."

It's not surprising the campaign to win Oscars has become so dirty in recent years. Hollywood has become a ruthless industry, and studios are realising they can no longer get by simply on the quality of the film. The stakes are huge, for company bottom lines and for individual egos.

An Oscar win, especially for a film that is not obviously commercial, can mean tens of millions of dollars more at the box office and in sales of videos, DVDs and TV rights. It is not uncommon now for companies to spend upwards of $15 million on an Oscar campaign, more than $3,000 per voter. Some people have estimated that Miramax may end up spending $25 million on its campaign for Chicago this year.

"I can't turn on the TV without seeing one of Chicago's stars," said the Academy voter. "And I'm always getting invited somewhere to meet them. I feel I know Renée Zellweger better than my own daughter."

In the extremely unlikely event that the film doesn't win big on the night, Chicago's treasure trove of Oscar nominations has already paid off, boosting its American box-office takings to more than $125 million, a huge amount for a musical.

It was Miramax that mastered the art of the modern Oscar campaign when it engineered Daniel Day-Lewis's surprise 1989 Best Actor win for My Left Foot, following up with its successful campaign of The Crying Game, both low-budget non-American films.

"I think it all started getting out of hand in 1998 when Miramax moved heaven and earth to make sure Shakespeare in Love beat Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan," recalls the Academy member. "I never wanted to see Gwyneth Paltrow again. The money, the dirty tricks. It was ridiculous. There was a lot of bad blood after that."

But one Miramax ploy this year seems to have backfired and may end up costing Martin Scorsese his first Best Director win. The studio paid for an advert in which Herbert Wise, the respected director of The Sound of Music and past member of the Academy, urged people to vote for Martin Scorsese, director of Gangs of New York.

Such endorsements are strictly against Academy rules, and it caused an outcry, especially when it emerged that the letter had been written by a Miramax publicist. "The reaction among our membership has been real dismay, anger and outrage," said Frank Pierson, president of the Academy.

"You look at an ad like that and say, 'My God. Why don't we just give money to people and tell them which way to vote?'" adds Barry Levinson, the Academy Awardwinning director of Rain Man.

Some people think that's pretty much what has already happened. All the politicking and vote-buying has appalled even Meryl Streep, who has won two Oscars. She fears that her distaste for it could cost her a Best Supporting Actress win on Sunday.

"The whole campaigning thing seems kind of unseemly to me, so I haven't done that," she says. "I hope the work stands on its own, but I fear, like in politics, money wins."

MORE ABOUT

Jack Nicholson

Larry King

Roman Polanski

Dirty tricks to tarnish Oscars

Read More