Categories One-By-One: Editing

1998 through 2007
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Post by rolotomasi99 »

i thought this was an interesting little video to help us understand the merits of all the nominees. i think NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is going to win editing (along with everything else it is nominated for). i think its slower, tension raising editing is similar to ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN. very beautifully done. i think this might be one of the few years where all the nominees are equally deserving, no turkeys among the bunch.

http://link.brightcove.com/service....6312971




Edited By rolotomasi99 on 1203704480
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8003
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Post by Sonic Youth »

Aw, you just want to win the pool!

I get what you're saying now. All I can say is, stay hopeful and always keep 2003 in mind. And it's not so bad. At least we have real races in the Actress categories this year. (Magilla may think Christie is a given this year, but I don't. Her "lock" status feels tenuous to me.)

In any event, I have a related question. Is there a correlation between Guild/Oscar award matchups and Guild size? It would seem to me that the smaller the guild, the less likely AMPAS is going to award the same film the Guild honored.

And besides, if Bourne DOES win the Oscar for Editing - which I also think it might - it'll at least keep the Best Picture race suspenseful for another 30 minutes.




Edited By Sonic Youth on 1203613332
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by Mister Tee »

Sonic Youth wrote:If I suggested you wean yourself off of the precursors for one year, could you do it?
Not without going into hibernation. Never mind I'd have to stay away from the Internet for a month -- I'd have to skip CNN, which runs winners on their crawl half the time.

Of course the Oscars needn't necessarily match up with the Guilds, and I'm not suggesting the races are over. I'm just saying that the proliferation and accuracy rates of guilds over recent years has taken a lot of the spark out of it. To play my usual old-timer's card: many of these guilds didn't exist as prize-givers in my youth, and some that did, like the Writers' Guild, often didn't match on any high percentage basis -- in '73, they didn't vote for either The Sting or The Exorcist; in '84, it was The Killing Fields and Broadway Danny Rose, not Amadeus and Places in the Heart. I'm not sure if the change is because Guild members have creeping-Broadcast-Critics-itis, and are making more effort to match the Oscar choices. What I do know is, many people now wait out the guilds and simply enter their choices on the ballot in, now, almost literally every category, expecting to get a certain number right automatically (many of Dave Poland's Gurus of Gold switched overnight from Transformers or Bourne to No Country in sound after the guild selection). What's become dull is the lead-up to the awards: people's ballots are often predictable top-to-bottom, and it's not based on reasoning -- which was interesting to follow -- but "buzz".
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8003
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Post by Sonic Youth »

Mister Tee wrote:
Hollywood Z wrote:Now, The Bourne Ultimatum has just won the ACE award, so I'm giving that the edge for editing now. In the past 20 years, the Eddie winner has gone on to win best film editing 17 times.

And this is why, if I had the magic power, I'd wipe the guild awards from the face of the earth. Three weeks ago, we had wide open races in virtually every tech category; now, it seems like everyone's going to insert the various guild winners in each spot (except costumes). And even if some don't win, we'll get the 17-out-of-20 statistic thrown at us, and people will pick the same way next year.

This used to be a guessing game. Now it's stenography.
You're probably right. But can we at least wait until AFTER the awards before we determine this? If we're going to follow the Oscar race so closely, we're bound to take some of the surprise out of the race. If I suggested you wean yourself off of the precursors for one year, could you do it?
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
Akash
Professor
Posts: 2037
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:34 am

Post by Akash »

I totally agree that the Guild Awards have made the award season much less fun. The PGA is fine because their choices have been hit or miss -- same with the Globes -- but the DGA, WGA and especially SAG, have taken all the fun out of the Oscars. Just think how much more surprising (whether you like them or not) wins for Roberto Benigni and Halle Berry would have been without SAG. And certain two horse races (Blanchett vs. Paltrow in 1998 for example) wouldn't have been easily cleared up by SAG either.
HarryGoldfarb
Adjunct
Posts: 1071
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 4:50 pm
Location: Colombia
Contact:

Post by HarryGoldfarb »

Hollywood Z wrote:That is what it has boiled down to, unless the academy starts to award films away from what guilds vote for.

Call me a traumatized guy, but then we have the countarpart... At some point I even thought this was one of the issues surrounding Crash victory. It was like the Academy was saying "we'll award a different film, we don't depend on other groups choice" and then tried to be original or different and they got it wrong...

And about the editing, haven't seen all the nominees but Bourne is great. If it wins, it won't be outreagous or something. It will be very deserved.
"If you place an object in a museum, does that make this object a piece of art?" - The Square (2017)
Hollywood Z
Temp
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 1:07 am
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Post by Hollywood Z »

You're right, you're absolutely right. That is what it has boiled down to, unless the academy starts to award films away from what guilds vote for. I remember when I first started getting into the awards, before the internet, I would usually have to guess at the films I had no idea were even released based on what I had seen and heard. But it is what it is and that is awards have become: predictable, but still fun to see to the end and try to either prove yourself right or prove your eccentric choices the bell of the ball.
"You are what you love, not what loves you." - Nicholas Cage; Adaptation
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by Mister Tee »

Hollywood Z wrote:Now, The Bourne Ultimatum has just won the ACE award, so I'm giving that the edge for editing now. In the past 20 years, the Eddie winner has gone on to win best film editing 17 times.
And this is why, if I had the magic power, I'd wipe the guild awards from the face of the earth. Three weeks ago, we had wide open races in virtually every tech category; now, it seems like everyone's going to insert the various guild winners in each spot (except costumes). And even if some don't win, we'll get the 17-out-of-20 statistic thrown at us, and people will pick the same way next year.

This used to be a guessing game. Now it's stenography.
Hollywood Z
Temp
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 1:07 am
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Post by Hollywood Z »

Damien wrote:What is classy editing? Clothes, cars, manners. production design can all be classy, but I've never heard editing referred to in this manner. Do you mean "classical"?
Classy as in it's the cleanest of the editing. Not showy, not in your face MTV style, but more of the classic style of organization. So, yes, it would be classical, but in a way, classy as well by being editing that doesn't draw attention to itself, which a lot of the old school people like.

Now, The Bourne Ultimatum has just won the ACE award, so I'm giving that the edge for editing now. In the past 20 years, the Eddie winner has gone on to win best film editing 17 times.
"You are what you love, not what loves you." - Nicholas Cage; Adaptation
Akash
Professor
Posts: 2037
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:34 am

Post by Akash »

Exactly Damien. And either way, "A Beautiful Mind" would hardly qualify.
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Post by Damien »

What is classy editing? Clothes, cars, manners. production design can all be classy, but I've never heard editing referred to in this manner. Do you mean "classical"?



Edited By Damien on 1203314003
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
Akash
Professor
Posts: 2037
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:34 am

Post by Akash »

Hollywood Z wrote:for having the classiest editing, much like A Beautiful Mind.
??
Hollywood Z
Temp
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 1:07 am
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Post by Hollywood Z »

I think we all agree that Into the Wild should be called Out of the Running in this catagory. It's lack of support among the other catagories shows that there's no way this film will win. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is a very well crafted film, but it's lack of a Best Picture nomination does hurt it's chances a bit (the only two winners the past fifteen years to do so were The Matrix and Black Hawk Down). There Will be Blood was more than likely awarded here for having the classiest editing, much like A Beautiful Mind. However, like A Beautiful Mind, it's chances are slim to none.

That leaves only two serious contenders: The Bourne Ultimatum and No Country for Old Men. The Bourne Ultimatum is one of the flashiest and stylistically edited films to have come out in recent years. Completely embodying the director's style as well as crafting the flashbacks and multi-leveled action scenes, there was so much at work here and so much to award. Bourne's success as an action film completely relied on it's editing and it not only succeeded on a grand scale, but also up the standards for the way that other films will be edited.

Then there's No Country for Old Men, which applies both the "classy" style of editing with the intensity of it's action scenes. Top it off with three different storylines that intersect in their own existential way and you have a film that appeals to the fans of classic editing and the admirerers of genre editing. Top it all off with the fact that it's also one of the two Best Picture nominees in this catagory, so it has a very strong chance. As far as the name of the nominees go, I don't think the academy has a problem with funny names for nominees. Let's not forget this isn't the first time Roderick Jaynes was up for film editing. Let's not also forget that they allowed a nomination for Donald Kaufman as well.

I think No Country for Old Men has the slight advantage, since I think this will be just one of the Coen Brothers' three oscars, but as I'm typing this, the ACE winners are being announced, so I might be stepping in my words soon enough. Bourne could sneak in, but for now, I'm giving the advantage to No Country.
"You are what you love, not what loves you." - Nicholas Cage; Adaptation
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Post by OscarGuy »

The point's moot anyway. Bourne Ultimatum's a far more likely victor. And it doesn't matter our opinion. What matters is how the Academy views it. If they give them credit for 4 in terms of their own statistics, then so be it. If they don't, then they don't.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Akash
Professor
Posts: 2037
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:34 am

Post by Akash »

What??

It's THEIR pseudonym, so it's THEIR trophy. Madonna wasn't born "Madonna" but if she says that's her name, then that's her name. If the Coens win, yes THEY will be the ones to win four Oscars whether or not "Coen" appears on the trophy, and whether or not one likes that outcome. This isn't an existential question.




Edited By Akash on 1203140486
Post Reply

Return to “The 8th Decade”