For a typical commercial series like "House of Cards," it was essential to avoid most common audience taboos. Murphy would not compromise with the market and profits, and it wasn't until after the New Year that he finalized the script. The preparation for the first season of "House of Cards" officially began.
Most of the behind-the-scenes staff who had worked with Paul Wilson on "Game of Thrones" would continue collaborating with Stanton Studio. The few vacant positions could be filled through recruitment, as Hollywood always had people eagerly awaiting opportunities.
With the new year, the crew was officially formed. Apart from some necessary tasks, Murphy largely handed over the preparatory work to Paul Wilson, and with Gal Gadot overseeing everything, there was no need to worry about unexpected issues within the crew.
As 2012 began, the new Oscar season approached, and on the last day of 2011, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences mailed the nomination ballots to nearly six thousand members. Naturally, "Diego Rose," having passed the registration review, was among the many contenders.
After the New Year, the screening scale of "Diego Rose" expanded to twenty theaters. Despite the continued excellent reviews from the media and critics, and the audience's consistent opinions, the careful management by Murphy and 20th Century Fox prevented any significant decline in reception. Especially the Daisy arrest incident had significantly increased the fans' goodwill towards Murphy, garnering positive reviews for the film.
However, the film's screening box office never saw a major boom. The latest weekend's screening revenue didn't even reach twenty thousand dollars. Despite the heavy praise from critics and being listed among the top ten films of 2011 by most critics' associations, it had little impact on the box office.
Facing this situation, Murphy truly felt the times had changed.
In today's era, professional film critics have little influence on audiences, mostly affecting the first week's box office. After that, audiences are more inclined to trust friends, family, and online fan review sites.
Murphy saw two types of film reviews in America: those aimed at the general audience and academic reviews. Most critics worked for mainstream newspapers, magazines, and TV stations, closely linked to the film industry, acting as Hollywood's mouthpieces.
Reports often emerged about critics praising films they received benefits from, which, being biased, had little value and could mislead audiences.
However, in recent years, Murphy noticed that professional critics' opinions had little guiding effect on audiences. Often, critics unanimously panned a film, but the audience ignored them, and the film's box office still did well. Conversely, films like "Diego Rose," with rave critical reviews but poor audience reception, were common.
This disconnect was related to the development of the times and the rise of the internet, as well as the commercial effects inevitably tied to the professionalization of critics.
For instance, TV show critics had to consider viewership ratings, making their reviews more entertaining than insightful. They had to adopt a positive attitude towards most films to attract viewers; constant negativity would turn the audience off.
To please the masses, critics often performed during their reviews, limiting their perspective to mainstream films. As long as reviews involved commercial interests and ties to the film industry, independent, calm, and objective criticism was impossible.
Academic reviews differed significantly but only circulated within intellectual circles or as educational material, holding no market reference value.
From mid-December until after the New Year, spanning three weekends and over half a month, "Diego Rose" received numerous accolades from the media and critics but only garnered a bit over $600,000 in box office from limited screenings. Among award season limited releases, it wasn't considered a poor performance but not stellar either, overall falling in the upper-middle range.
Meanwhile, CAA, Stanton Studio, and 20th Century Fox continued their promotional work for the award season. "Diego Rose" also began winning awards at various Oscar precursor events. At the Cinematographer's Guild Awards, announced at the beginning of the new year, Philippe Rousselot won the Best Cinematographer Award for his outstanding long shots in "Diego Rose."
Additionally, the film received nominations for Best Screenplay from the Writers Guild and Best Actor from the Screen Actors Guild.
The only regret was that, due to Murphy's earlier departure from the Directors Guild, the film was ineligible for the Directors Guild Awards. However, it did receive a Best Picture nomination from the Producers Guild.
As the promotion for the film continued, many media predictions listed it as one of the frontrunners for multiple Oscar nominations this season.
Of course, the media also widely believed that while Murphy might get another Best Director nomination, he would likely still be a runner-up.
Some professional media analyzed the reasons, suggesting that while Murphy deserved a nomination due to the quality of "Diego Rose," his youth (not yet 32) and the average age of Academy members nearing sixty made it unlikely for a young commercial director to win the Best Director Oscar.
Additionally, Murphy found it curious that Archbishop Marcos Costello, who was more patient than expected, hadn't publicly commented yet.
He soon understood why. Archbishop Marcos Costello, unlike Hollywood stars, was a traditionally esteemed regional religious leader who wouldn't easily appear in the media.
Long-time immersion in a field often led to habitual thinking, and Murphy was no exception.
Upon realizing this, Murphy quickly adjusted his strategy, instructing Grace and Bill Rosith to reach out to the media. He accepted his first media interview since the Oscar nomination voting began.
This interview served to increase his exposure, giving "Diego Rose" a final push towards securing an Oscar nomination, and also to remind certain individuals that Murphy Stanton was not someone who only took hits without fighting back.
The interview was held in the news hall of Death Star Tower CAA, with Murphy facing a reporter from The Hollywood Reporter, a highly influential media outlet during the award season.
The questions were jointly discussed and prepared by Bill Rosith and The Hollywood Reporter per Murphy's instructions.
The interview setup was simple: two chairs facing each other with a small glass table in between for recording equipment.
Due to limited time, the interviewer, Kelly Malratt, dove straight into the main topic.
"Given the controversy surrounding 'Diego Rose' and your attack incident, both in the media and online, do you regret choosing this subject matter?" Kelly Malratt asked, looking at Murphy.
"No!" Murphy replied without hesitation, "I am responsible for all the content I produce, to the audience and to the real-life protagonist of the film. Even if given another chance, I would still choose to speak with facts!"
Kelly Malratt included a personal question, "Do you believe that since films need to be responsible to the audience, their entertainment value or their thematic depth is more important?"
In other circumstances, Murphy would undoubtedly say commercial value was more important, but this interview targeted the award season, so the response had to be different.
Different situations warranted different answers, a skill Murphy found very simple.
Murphy paused briefly and replied, "Different directors will always make different choices. Even with strict regulations, various kinds of films will continue to emerge, each serving different purposes."
"When discussing with people online, the most challenging part is making them understand the intrinsic value of film as an art form, often overlooked because movies are widely seen as entertainment."
Murphy continued, mostly improvising, "The intrinsic value of films lies in elements like lines, colors, editing techniques, and camera use. They also reflect the values and viewpoints of the producers and directors, as well as the cultural and societal values of their country. These different values are intricately woven into films, sometimes not immediately apparent."
"Like 'Diego Rose'?" Kelly Malratt prompted.
"Yes!" Murphy nodded, "I believe that during the crucial moments of forming his most important values and worldview, Rose encountered significant misfortunes, which profoundly affected his future choices!"
"Including Catholicism?"
Murphy firmly nodded at this question. Kelly Malratt then asked, "Some media and online voices claim that the content you filmed about Catholicism is inaccurate and are calling for you to remove the controversial parts. What is your take on this?"
_________________________
[Check out my Patreon for +200 additional chapters in all my fanfics! $5 for all!!]
[w w w . p a t r e o n .com / INNIT]
[+50 PowerStones = +1 Chapter]