
UPDATE: Nora Ephron & NY Times, Part 2
Everyone in Hollywood is talking about this. But I can’t do a better job than this emailer to DHD does by explaining the inexplicable.
(At last count, 15 mentions of Nora Ephron in The New York Times online and in the paper in just the past 30 days, including a piece written by the Culture Editor himself. And I recall that, when critics savaged her last Bewitched, Sony’s Amy Pascal told journalists that “the media hates Nora”.) Except to say I wish The Hurt Locker was receiving this much attention:
Does Nora Ephron own a large stake in The New York Times? In the weeks preceding the release of her new film about Julia Child, there has been a continuous parade of articles about the movie, the director, and the movie’s subject. Consider today’s (Sunday, August 2) paper:
1. A front page article on television reality cooking shows.
2. A front of the Arts & Leisure section on Ephron’s depictions of happy marriages in her movies.
3. A front of the Sunday Magazine article on Julia Child’s influence on American cooking.
4. A Maureen Dowd interview with Ephron on the op ed page.
In addition, last week there was an article about the food stylist for the movie and an Ephron recipe in The New York Times Magazine.
Okay, she’s a hometown girl. But let’s face it: Nora Ephron directs pathetic little romantic comedies that are successful at the box office about one-third of the time. Her last movie, “Bewitched,” was exceptionally bad. You wouldn’t think any newspaper would devote any coverage to anyone guilty of that atrocity. Does she really deserve all this coverage?…
Or take another example from the movies. Last year, Steven Soderbergh released a two-part, four hour plus epic about the military life of Che Guevara. Love it or hate it, it was a serious piece of work from a serious, Oscar-winning director (and one who lives most of the year in NYC). At the very least, it was a project which deserved [more] attention of the paper of record. Yet apart from reviewing the films, The New York Times published [very few] articles about the work, the director, or the films’ subjects. While the Times published SIX articles about Nora Ephron in the space of a single week, including a fucking recipe for meatloaf.
For the record, I have nothing against Nora Ephron. There’s room out there for all sorts of filmmakers, she seems like a lovely person, and she’s certainly well-liked in New York City. But I’m disgusted by The New York Times‘ coverage of her — coverage, I suspect, Tony Curtis’ character in “Sweet Smell of Success” would recognize: coverage bought and paid for by a press agent. The Times is usually less blatant about this business, but then times are hard for the newspaper industry.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
In addition, last week there was an article about the food stylist for the movie and an Ephron recipe in The New York Times Magazine.

I prefer to look on all this as a deserved paean to Julia Child (a personal heroine of mine) rather than a lot of praise lumped on Ms Ephron (a former employer).
Does this Julia Child film have the Ephron signature weepy Meg Myan Kleenex scene? If so, shoot me now.
Saw the movie at the premiere. And it’s like a Chinese meal. You forget it not only after you’ve eaten, but while you’ve eaten. And the schtick that Meryl does over and over. Lt’s nnot even speak about Amy adams and that whole storyline. The best thing about that movie is the SONY marketing dept. (as evidenced by the vast amounts of articles.)
I mean face it – if they could sell THE UGLY TRUTH – they can sell anything.
Mush
Or, if you can blame the fact there’s an epicurean trend in our culture right now. Just look at Food Network ratings (moving toward the roof). People are into cooking right now… just so happens Nora Ephron directed the only movie this year the matches that trend. If Ratatouille had been made this year, it would have received similar coverage. Maybe check out current American trends first before blaming Nora Ephron (and I’m not saying that because I’m a fan. I’m not at all). Because of the economy, people are cooking at home, and are re-discovering such treasures as Julia Child. I’m just saying, Nikki, ye who values the facts. Not to mention Bon Appetit and Food & Wine magazines have the highest circulations they’ve ever had…
Now, if only they’d got Tom Hanks to play Che…
I don’t think Nora Ephron’s had a hit movie during the entire span from my conception up until now.
Since the NYT has largely ceased critical publishing of national issues in depth for the last few months, this isn’t a surprise. After all, they know what everyone else does.. there are only two print papers that are actually growing, and everyone else is basically dying, and like it or not, the NYT is one of those in the dying category.
So, they chose to emulate one that succeeds.. and since the WSJ succeeds because of industry analysis and the NYT isn’t likely to replace that, the only other target is the McPaper, or USA Today.. so, if you’re going to emulate, get going.. with fluffy feel good stories. And Julia Childs is feel good fluff that they can latch on to.
Somehow, I think now is the time for an off-beat counter movie about “The Cookin’ Cajun”…. a little bit of sherry for the crawfish, a couple swigs a’ sherry for the cook.
People wanna believe in the Smart Old Woman. Nora comes close (despite some icky psychological shit that sometimes tarnishes her work)– but the real savior girls will probably arrive in the next generation. Getting away from “shrew” and “harridan” takes generations, irrespective individual genius, accomplishment. Sorry. History.
She is known for such modern classics as Bewitched, Lucky Numbers, You’ve Got Mail, Michael, Mixed Nuts, Sleepless in Seattle, and This Is My Life with Sleepless in Seattle being the only bearable one. Now you can add Julie & Julia to that list of masterpieces.
I’d be more inclined to blame an over-eating trend in American culture right now. I don’t know why more people don’t make more films about food for the bloated masses.
It’s August people. Lighten up.
Admit it though. There wouldn’t be a reflex of resentment toward Nora Ephron working regularly – many major filmmakers have worse box office numbers and keep on going – if she were a guy.
Brilliant woman. She should direct someone else’s screenplay that’s out of her immediate inter-personal comfort zone.
She’s capable of a “Jezebel,” “The Letter,” “Summertime,” “Norma Rae” – chick flicks with gravitas, whatever happened to them? Scarlett O’Hara didn’t hurt M.G.M. one bit. George Stevens directed “Alice Adams;” it didn’t keep him from directing “The Diary of Anne Frank.” Nichols too. I wish the same for Nora Ephron and I would bet money that she would succeed.
She’s great with stars – I hope “Julia/Julie” (is that the title?) makes tons of money – so that she can take an opportunity to stretch and the industry will deign to give it to her in spite of her gender.
In this regard WME isn’t (and Morris wasn’t) the place. Conan’s an over-produced D.O.A. If you’ve noticed, CONAN O’BRIEN – OF ALL PEOPLE – screwed Lorne Michaels and Broadway Video (no longer Conan’s co-producer) in order to lock in the Tonight Show way too soon; Sasha Baron Cohen’s in holding pattern quandary…the agency isn’t going to be a font of fresh ideas…a figurable pattern of Emanuel moves is emerging…
ummm… yeah… whatever… the only thing more boring than a bad ephron movie is obsessing about why a newspaper mentions her before her movie comes out… what are you kidding? there has to be better stories.
“I don’t think Nora Ephron’s had a hit movie during the entire span from my conception up until now.”
What a waste of a conception, then. “Sleepless in Seattle”, 1993, and “You’ve Got Mail,” 1998, were two. Actually, the only two.
Nora Ephron is about as relevant as something not very relevant. The amount of energy I used to create the sentence prior to this one is about the amount of energy I imagine Nora puts into writing one of her scripts.
I agree with here’s johnny. Also there is hype due to Meryl kicking butt at an age when most American female movie actresses cannot get work.
I want the movie to do well not because I’m big Nora fan but because in the era of jive talking robots and comic book films I want to see a diverse slate of movies.
Tell me one good movie she has directed.
She may not have had a hit movie lately, but her last book got great reviews and was a hit. Especially among New York Times’ female readers (who are older in general.)
Meryl Streep is also a darling of this demographic as she is one of them.
Not so shocking they’d cover the hell out of it.
I’m thinking all the press focus on the food is really all about the deep love foodie folks have for Julia Child. She was and is seriously adored by food folks – chefs, reviewers, critics, housewives, etc. I’m not saying it’s right that Nora Ephron is reaping the whirlwind but, I understand.
As much as I’d like for “deserving” films to get all the press and coin, most main-stream coverage devotes pages to such tripe as “Transformers” or “Twilight”. Pages upon pages will be devoted to these films. So mentioning a hope for the “The Hurt Locker” to receive such attention instead of Nora Ephron’ film, is comparing apples and oranges.
Still, it should be better than “The Awful Truth”, so there’s that…
How can you compare a move like this to Che? No one saw Che. No one wanted to see Che. It’s four fucking hours long and it’s about war. People will see Julia and Julia. Wake up film snobs.
A fierce-but-fair takedown of Ephron. Can we ever forget her awkward, awful attempts to “rewrite” the greatest political screenplay of all time? What a dreadful moron. William Goldman might forgive her, but no one else should.
It’s also the 40th anniversary of Julia Child’s “Mastering The Art Of French Cooking”, completely independent of any movie. Sure, they’re capitalizing on it, but there are other stories here than just the movie.
At least the articles on Nora Ephron haven’t contained seven errors about Walter Cronkite.
Six articles in a week? I bet you the Times has a back end deal on the flick. Although I have to admit it does look good.
Not to mention all the Meryl Streep articles, including the one in the Business section about how much money her films make.
Look forward to Thursday’s Home section where we’re sure to see Ephron’s or Streep’s kitchen, or dining room.
Strangely, there’s been nothing about Amy Adams.
Saw film. They would have been so much smarter to make a biography of Julia Child – the Amy Adams story leaves you empty – which is odd after a film about cooking. Even a biopic on Nora Ephron would have been more interesting – but only if she didn’t direct. When I think back to HOLIDAY (worst movie of her career – including that one about people that all commit suicide on Christmas) and I look at this film – all I can think of is – WHAT A WASTE. A partially good idea gone awry in the hands of the wrong studio and the wrong director.
I would have loved to have learned how Julia Child got into television, what she thought about her career, and those who parody her, and what happened in her marriage. THe only honest moment, for me, in the whole film was when she got a letter from her sister saying that she was pregnant and Julia cried. Don’t know why she couldn’t have kids, don’t know how the husband felt about it – etc. Now, I find myself wanting to. So, I suppose, there is a silver lining to Ms. Ephron’s shallow depictions.