Golden Globe Nominations

For the films of 2013
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Okri »

I think Sonic Youth hit the nail on the head with that one, actually. And maybe it's just that Tee's reaction to both was underwhelming, but 12 Years a Slave is giving off a Pianist vibe at this point to me. What's making me reticent about full-bore predicting the McQueen film is that's it's getting no more than expected, and if you thought it would rampage through the critics awards, even less.

re: frontrunner - it might be semantics, but to me what Tee's describing is a lock, not a frontrunner. Granted, right now, I think three are in a dead heat.

Other thoughts

a) While this was obviously a big get for Bruhl and Abdi, was the latter ever thought to be out of the race? Even if Captain Phillips did it's slow fade from contention, I assumed he'd make it due to the amorphous nature of the category. I see Nathaniel had dropped him to 8th, though, which seems extreme to me (BJ's "Bird in the hand" theory works here).

b) Best director is STACKED. That category looks like predictions will change daily. I do find it slightly amusing that we have six previous nominees with legitimate shots (Coens, O'Russell, Scorsese, Payne, Jonze, Greengrass) but it's the two ones without a prior directing nomination that are (were?) in the lead.

c) So is best actor.

d) I do think The Butler was slightly hurt, actually - if only because the Globes do enjoy their stars
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8003
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Sonic Youth »

Mister Tee wrote: Actually, I'd say the answer to the question about 12 Years a Slave is still no -- unless you change it to "a" front-runner from "the". It's got everything it's needed, but so have American Hustle and Gravity, pretty much, and I think the three are in a fairly even race at the moment. Emphasize: I still think 12 Years will probably win in the end, but, unless it starts Slumdogging its way through the Globes and Guilds, I'm open to numerous scenarios.
Here's one, and it's the scenario I'm sticking with until circumstances prove me wrong. There may be no front-runner now, but American Hustle is going to change that all the way up to Oscar night.

I was looking at all the reviews for American Hustle published today, and it's one rave after another. And this movie - not Gravity, and not 12 Years a Slave - is going to be freshest on everyone's minds, and this movie - not Llewelyn and not Her - will be the 'prestige' film most people will choose to see this holiday season. It's going to be a hit, it's going to make more money than Wolf of Wall Street (and the entertainment media is sure to take note of that), and this ensemble will ensure the film has legs. Among all the enthusiastically received films this year, and there have been more than usual, American Hustle will be the one that pushes the pleasure button most. Whether it's the best film of the year or not is irrelevant. Entertainment of the highest quality, as opposed to art, will win out.

At least, that's the premonition I'm getting. I could be wrong, but go read those reviews, and see if you don't feel the same way.
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
mayukh
Graduate
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 1:34 am

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by mayukh »

Thank god Gerwig got in somewhere. She seemed this close to being a total casualty of this awards season.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Big Magilla »

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by The Original BJ »

Overall, quite an inspired list. In particular, the comedy categories are pretty dynamite, not something you can usually say about this organization.

Rush was the most baffling/worst inclusion of the morning. If anything, it suggests Brühl's candidacy has more oomph than many of us thought, though I still think he could be swept aside on Oscar nomination morning. (There was some talk that James Gandolfini -- the most likely candidate to usurp him, I think -- was eligible as lead here, despite being, to my eyes, a lot less of a lead than Brühl or Julia Roberts).

Will Forte hasn't had a very good couple of days, and the fact that he missed here even when Nebraska otherwise did so well seems troubling for him. If I have to have a lead actor nominated in support, Forte would be far preferable to Brühl in my book.

How amusing that Harvey (successfully) campaigned for August: Osage County to be considered as a comedy, to have an easier road to a nomination, when it might have actually stood a better chance in the much less competitive drama category this year.

Along those lines, it's rare that the total place-filler acting nominations -- Idris Elba and Kate Winslet -- came on the drama side.

Too bad about Exarchopoulos -- I predicted her for Winslet's spot, figuring this was her best chance for any major awards attention. On the other hand, yay for Julie Delpy!

A month ago, if someone told you Greta Gerwig would be nominated for EITHER the Indie Spirit or the Golden Globe, which would you have said?

Mister Tee, you were obviously right about Oprah not being so invincible. I think her omission was the most surprising exclusion, though as with True Grit, I wonder if The Butler's total shut-out is more a Globe-specific aversion than anything seriously indicative of its Oscar nom chances.

Magilla, obviously your Philomena dreams came true. I think the movie might stand a better shot than I thought at being one of the mid-level efforts that gets into Best Picture, especially if Saving Mr. Banks continues to slip. That seems like the movie that has suffered the most over the past two days. I guess if it becomes a hit, it could still crack the lineup (as of now, its precursor run is no different from John Lee Hancock's last Oscar vehicle, and that made it into Best Picture). But definitely it's no juggernaut, and I agree with Eric that now Thompson seems the most vulnerable to an Adams surge, should that scenario come to pass.

Monsters University is the obvious miss from the animated lineup. I assume with five Oscar slots, its chances are better there. Without The Wind Rises, the Globes' animated lineup is pretty dreary.

Foreign Film, on the other hand, seems pretty great. I liked the two nominees I've seen a lot, and am very excited to see the other three.

The music branch of the Academy obviously has the least cross-over with the HFPA, but there are still a couple things to note. This Best Song field feels really random, and I assume Oscar's list will be just as random, with many of these nominees replaced by other from-nowhere candidates. (Also worth noting that that Great Gatsby song I keep hearing is the frontrunner didn't place.) And in score, there had been talk of The Book Thief getting the annual John Williams default spot, and this mention solidifies its chances quite a bit. (Ugh, am I REALLY going to have to see that?!)

And that's all I got for now.
ksrymy
Adjunct
Posts: 1164
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by ksrymy »

I'm really hoping this gives Sally Hawkins the push she needs.
"Men get to be a mixture of the charming mannerisms of the women they have known." - F. Scott Fitzgerald
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Mister Tee »

Sabin wrote: it's very likely to win Best Dramatic Picture and Best Dramatic Actor, Director, Screenplay, and Score are also very much in the cards.
Well, there we differ. I think the group that picked Avatar could very easily go for Gravity -- and most especially Cuaron for directing. I'd also say screenplay as likely goes to Nebraska or American Hustle. And if Hustle emerges with C/M film & actress, screenplay, maybe supporting actress, IT could be the night's big winner.

If I had your confidence in 12 Years rampaing through, I'd share your rating. But I see a very split set of wins ahead.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Sabin »

I think that's retro-thinking about The King's Speech. There was only a very small camp of people who saw that train coming like it did.

To me, the front-runner is the movie that is most likely to win at this point. I think we of the Oscar prognosticative persuasive are prone to saying things like "Lock to win" later on in the game. 12 Years a Slave has 7 Golden Globe nominations, it's very likely to win Best Dramatic Picture and Best Dramatic Actor, Director, Screenplay, and Score are also very much in the cards. No idea how it does at the Screen Actor's Guild Awards, but it has four nominations and has won more Best Picture awards than any other film. To those who say it hasn't grossed enough, I say it's made exactly as much money as No Country for Old Men did at this point. The only thing working against it is if late in the game it turns out that voters like American Hustle or The Wolf of Wall Street more. I don't think either of those could be considered the front-runners (even if I have a hunch that American Hustle might do very well), so by definition that leaves 12 Years a Slave.
"How's the despair?"
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Big Magilla »

To me, front-runner means the film most supposed informed sources think will win.

Put in terms of this year's hopefuls, 12 Years a Slave is the front-runner with Gravity and several year-end releases (Her; American Hustle; The Wolf of Wall Street) poised to overtake it. Could be that the bulk of this year's voting will go to these five films with the hipster vote being split between the four runners-up and the more traditional Oscar bait historical drama taking it as originally expected. Could be, but we won't know for sure until the last envelope is opened and read.
mlrg
Associate
Posts: 1747
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by mlrg »

Sabin wrote:Here's my question: if the definition of "Front-Runner" is the leader of the race, then how is 12 Years a Slave not "The" Front-Runner. I think we're confused "Front-Runner" with "Winner" or "Done Deal". For example, The Social Network was absolutely The Front-Runner. Not "A" Front-Runner. "The" Front-Runner. I don't think 12 Years a Slave winning the Oscar is a done deal, but that's because I don't think this year has one of those. Right now, I would predict American Hustle or The Wolf of Wall Street just because they've barely begun to take off. But 12 Years a Slave is absolutely if not "The" Front-Runner than "A" Front-Runner.
I see your point but I don't necessarily agree.

I think we all on this board (specially on this board) are very much informed Academy history and the way they vote. I always thought The Social Network was much more of A front runner than THE front runner. The King's Speech was much more in the tradition of a best picture winner: british historic film with a light script that received the most nominations. The Social Network was a critics darling perceived as a movie about facebook.
ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by ITALIANO »

Mister Tee wrote:
Those of who went out to see Rush in September are at least semi-grateful it wasn't a complete waste of time/money. It should at minimum get the Grand Prix sound/editing nods, so if you do Oscar completeness, yes, you have to see it.
Yes, and also, absurd as it may seem (and for more than one reason), it's very possible now that it will get a Best Supporting Actor nomination. Barkhad Abdi, I can understand - and not only for political reasons. But Daniel Bruhl for THAT movie?!
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Mister Tee »

To me, "the front-runner" means it's so far ahead nothing else belongs in the same part of the discussion. Note this doesn't necessarily translate to winner, since Brokeback Mountain would unquestionably land in that category, and maybe Social Network as well (though that would be more post-Globes, which alot of us thought was its major hurdle). But otherwise I mean something like Return of the King -- where, sure, a meteor could hit and maybe change the race, but by and large it had it in the bag. For me, even though if I had to bet today I'd go with 12 Years, I don't see it as substantially ahead of other contenders. Hence, "a front-runner".

ON EDIT: I can think of one film with considerably less sway than Return of the King that I was willing to call "the" front-runner: The Artist. Not because I thought it was unbeatable (I always had doubts about it), but because there was no other film in contention that seemed to be on its level -- The Help was too corny, Hugo wast a box-office disappointment, The Descendants was second-tier Payne at best. I couldn't imagine any of them winning, so, whatever my doubts about The Artist, it had to be labelled the front-runner. Contrarily, this year I can easily imagine either Gravity or American Hustle winning best picture, so, whatever Slaves' strengths, it doesn't hold that position.
Last edited by Mister Tee on Thu Dec 12, 2013 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 6163
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by flipp525 »

Speaking of: when is Patricia Nell Warren's "The Front Runner" going to finally be made into a film?
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Sabin »

Here's my question: if the definition of "Front-Runner" is the leader of the race, then how is 12 Years a Slave not "The" Front-Runner. I think we're confused "Front-Runner" with "Winner" or "Done Deal". For example, The Social Network was absolutely The Front-Runner. Not "A" Front-Runner. "The" Front-Runner. I don't think 12 Years a Slave winning the Oscar is a done deal, but that's because I don't think this year has one of those. Right now, I would predict American Hustle or The Wolf of Wall Street just because they've barely begun to take off. But 12 Years a Slave is absolutely if not "The" Front-Runner than "A" Front-Runner.
"How's the despair?"
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe Nominations

Post by Mister Tee »

Sabin wrote:Even though I'll bet money that the majority of prognosticators could have predicted that 12 Years a Slave would be up for exactly 4 SAG nominations and 7 Golden Globes, that "Man, is 12 Years a Slave still the front-runner?" talk seems like a while ago.
....

The Horse Whisperer Award for Special Achievement in Being a Movie* goes to Ron Howard's Rush.

* Do I have to see this?
Actually, I'd say the answer to the question about 12 Years a Slave is still no -- unless you change it to "a" front-runner from "the". It's got everything it's needed, but so have American Hustle and Gravity, pretty much, and I think the three are in a fairly even race at the moment. Emphasize: I still think 12 Years will probably win in the end, but, unless it starts Slumdogging its way through the Globes and Guilds, I'm open to numerous scenarios.

Those of who went out to see Rush in September are at least semi-grateful it wasn't a complete waste of time/money. It should at minimum get the Grand Prix sound/editing nods, so if you do Oscar completeness, yes, you have to see it.
Post Reply

Return to “86th Predictions and Precursors”