‘The Holdovers’ Accused of Plagiarism by ‘Luca’ Screenwriter

The story includes an embedded document (almost 33 pages long) listing all of the similarities between the two screenplays, and also let's not forget there's evidence that Payne had been shown the screenplay for Frisco.

If anybody comes out looking shady from all of this, it's Alexander Payne.

Clearly you aren't familiar with the debating tactic of just repeating something until it's true. Or everyone else gives up.

He filed the complaint on January 12th....guess when the nomination voting began....January 11th.



Like I said...this is shady as hell.

Again:

You just moved the goalposts. Have you read the article provided by the link?

Again:

I believe these lines from the article were the meat of the accusation put forward (for the people who aren't reading the entire article).

Oh. I didn't notice the embedded document. In my defense, I read the article on my phone and the visual real estate taken up by ads were aggressive. So it kind of blended in, looking like one big one at the end.

Because much like this discussions nobody is getting into specifics. I just skimmed through the allegations and frankly I'm not impressed.

Comparing Anatomy of a Fall/Staircase and Holdovers/Frisco one seems to be much closer tied than the other.

Finally this seems to happen every year where certain people and films are targeted.

Several of us went into specifics, citing the article. The issue was you were just brushing aside the claims as if it was sown ulterior motive other than the person seeking proper recognition.

The comparison to Anatony of a Fall and staircase isn’t even applicable here.

Every year? Can you cite other examples? I don’t k ow of films being targeted for anything like plagiarism unless you mean something else. Regardless, own should look at why the film is being “targeted”, because screen writing credits is a huge thing.

If you were really interested in the specifics, you would have read the embedded document, it has all the specifics any reasonable person could possibly want, and more.

But I will bet you won't read it, because you aren't really interested in any of it, you keep saying the same thing over and over, as though it was a very edgy thing to say, and frankly I'm not impressed.

"I just skimmed through the allegations and was not impressed"


Exactly the kind of person whose opinion we need to hear!

Well remind me of these specifics between the two films of Frisco/Holdovers. I see references to the allegations but no specifics.

Well that's your opinion, I disagree. I think comparing the two stories one seems like it lifted much more than the other. From what I gather from Frisco it's just a road movie which was submitted to a guy that makes road movies.

[/quote]

1998 - Saving Private Ryan, Havey Weinstein started the campaign of sending out mass mailers to older viewers and bad mouthed the picture.

2001 - Black Hawk Down, one of the soldiers was a child rapist

2004 - Crash a film with ties to Scientology beats the favorite in Brokeback Mountrain

2012 - Life of Pi wins for cinematography...people campaigned against it because it was a CGI film, the film lost Best Picture to Argo. The company that made Life of Pi went under and we have garbage CGI now.

2013 - Best song nominee gets rescinded because the Academy was emailing voters the song.

I would like to see some specifics from any of you...because you are all ducking that part of the argument. Why is it my job to fact check something that seems like BS. Isn't this America shouldn't the accused be given the benefit of doubt.

what?

what?

Yeah that's what I thought. You guys are wasting my time...I'm done with this thread.

What?! We’re ducking specifics? You won’t even properly read anything regarding the allegations and instead hand waved it away as some agenda. You won’t even engage in good faith.
Again…,what?!

The specifics are obviously reported and several people have pointed them out to you. If you’re going to dispute a claim, yes, it is your job to back it up with specifics. That’s how a discussion works.

Oh, I didn't even notice the document linked in the article. Reading through it, it does seem like a pretty clear case of plagiarism. Oh well. I'll probably just treat it like Black Swan where I'll still enjoy the film but disapprove of the ethics of those who created it.

As usual, I don't know what Siddon is on about, but then again, I don't think anyone else does either.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd