I think I'm leaning towards Captain Phillips as well, especially after watching it yesterday. It's very well-assembled, with action-movie elements and suspense elements that both should go over pretty well with voters.
I've kind of had similar feelings to Mister Tee about Gravity's presumed frontrunner status here--a lot of what people talked about were scenes and sequences that were known for not editing. It could win, especially if it sweeps the tech awards, but I think they go for something more traditional like Captain Phillips.
Categories One-by-One: Film Editing
Re: Categories One-by-One: Film Editing
I think I'm going to predict Captain Phillips for one reason: there's no reason for it not to. Gravity's editing is more reminiscent of No Country for Old Men, a movie that lost that Oscar to another Paul Greengrass film. And The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo's Editing Oscar screams out that truly the film with the most editing wins (Moneyball wuz robbed).
My Choice - 12 Years a Slave.
My Choice - 12 Years a Slave.
Last edited by Sabin on Thu Feb 13, 2014 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"How's the despair?"
-
The Original BJ
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4312
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm
Re: Categories One-by-One: Film Editing
Mister Tee articulated a lot of my thoughts, but I will say that I'm very interested to see how this category shakes out vis a vis Best Picture.
If 12 Years a Slave wins here, I find it hard to imagine it NOT winning Best Picture. As Mister Tee said, it's not ostentatiously edited...but I will say that I think the movie overall is very technically well-made, and I'd salute the editing on those grounds for strong pacing and emotionally impactful set pieces. (In contrast, Dallas Buyers Club, which is the one candidate that seems to have zero chance at a win, just isn't doing much with its cuts at all.) But I can't see a scenario where 12 Years is singled out here, for one of its less singular elements, but not up top.
In contrast, a very possible win for Captain Phillips here would not suddenly shoot it into Best Picture consideration. It's hard to get a read on how much voters overall responded to Phillips -- obviously, six nominations including Best Picture is nothing to scoff at, but given the precursor attention for Greengrass and, especially, Hanks, its haul has to be considered a slight disappointment. And yet, Black Hawk Down and The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo did about as well overall, and managed to prevail in this category simply on the basis of lots of flashy cutting, so I still rate Captain Phillips a very strong possibility.
American Hustle and Gravity are the interesting cases, though. Both movies have very strong work -- time-jumping/lots of characters/energetic pacing for the former, and edge-of-your-seat suspense for the latter. And a win for either could easily suggest Best Picture strength. But I could also see this being a category where American Hustle prevails sort of as a consolation prize without winning the top prize, or one that Gravity wins as part of a tech sweep that only goes as far as Best Director.
I also think it's interesting to think about how what wins might affect OTHER movies' Best Picture chances. Which is to say, if Captain Phillips prevails, I wouldn't think Gravity's Best Picture chances were in jeopardy, whereas if 12 Years or Hustle won, I'd probably think that was bad news for Gravity.
And if Dallas Buyers Club prevails, well, who the hell knows what will happen next.
If 12 Years a Slave wins here, I find it hard to imagine it NOT winning Best Picture. As Mister Tee said, it's not ostentatiously edited...but I will say that I think the movie overall is very technically well-made, and I'd salute the editing on those grounds for strong pacing and emotionally impactful set pieces. (In contrast, Dallas Buyers Club, which is the one candidate that seems to have zero chance at a win, just isn't doing much with its cuts at all.) But I can't see a scenario where 12 Years is singled out here, for one of its less singular elements, but not up top.
In contrast, a very possible win for Captain Phillips here would not suddenly shoot it into Best Picture consideration. It's hard to get a read on how much voters overall responded to Phillips -- obviously, six nominations including Best Picture is nothing to scoff at, but given the precursor attention for Greengrass and, especially, Hanks, its haul has to be considered a slight disappointment. And yet, Black Hawk Down and The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo did about as well overall, and managed to prevail in this category simply on the basis of lots of flashy cutting, so I still rate Captain Phillips a very strong possibility.
American Hustle and Gravity are the interesting cases, though. Both movies have very strong work -- time-jumping/lots of characters/energetic pacing for the former, and edge-of-your-seat suspense for the latter. And a win for either could easily suggest Best Picture strength. But I could also see this being a category where American Hustle prevails sort of as a consolation prize without winning the top prize, or one that Gravity wins as part of a tech sweep that only goes as far as Best Director.
I also think it's interesting to think about how what wins might affect OTHER movies' Best Picture chances. Which is to say, if Captain Phillips prevails, I wouldn't think Gravity's Best Picture chances were in jeopardy, whereas if 12 Years or Hustle won, I'd probably think that was bad news for Gravity.
And if Dallas Buyers Club prevails, well, who the hell knows what will happen next.
-
Mister Tee
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8648
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
Categories One-by-One: Film Editing
As BJ noted, this is one of the more competitive categories. It may play an important role in signaling the ultimate best picture choice. Or it may take a pass on the main competition altogether.
The nominees:
American Hustle
Captain Phillips
Dallas Buyers Club
Gravity
12 Years a Slave
It’s hard to figure the point of having Dallas Buyers Club on this list – except I guess to indicate how well liked it was by voters in general. There’s nothing in the way the film is cut that would normally get it a slot like this, and I simply don’t see any argument for it being a contender for the actual prize.
The actual competition:
I’ll confess that, prior to the nominations, when it looked like 12 Years a Slave was going to rack up double-digit nods, I’d idly considered that it might be shockingly left off by this branch. As with Dallas Buyers, there’s really nothing in the film that meets the classic criteria of the editing branch – no multiple storylines requiring cross-cutting, no action sequences or chase scenes, no significant movement between time-frames. Despite this, in the end I left it in my predictions, for the sole reason that it was a best picture contender, and therefore MUST be nominated under editing. Which turned out to be the correct calculation. The problem for the film now is, that’s where it still sits: with no real elements to make it a likely editing winner. I assume many would offer the proviso that if it, like Gandhi, should turn into some best picture juggernaut, it could sweep up this prize in the bargain. But it’s been a while since a best picture winner took this prize without editing credentials over and above front-runner status. Remember, two years ago, a lot of folks were touting The Artist on the basis of its being the best picture favorite, and it lost to the mostly-unforeseen (and best picture non-contender) Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Seems to me you have to go back a long way – Unforgiven, by my calculation – to find a film that won editing essentially because it won best picture. So, I rank 12 Years fourth-likeliest.
American Hustle seems, at the moment, behind 12 Years in the best picture hunt, but I’d rate it ahead in this arena, because Hustle DOES have some of the qualities that characterize editing winners – a lickety-split pace, for one thing, and, beyond that, the fact that it juggles multiple story-lines/points of view. The sequence juxtaposing Bale/Lawrence at dinner with Renner and his wife, and Adams/Cooper at the disco, is precisely the sort of cross-cutting that often appeals to voters in this category. The fact the film itself is (if barely) in the top tier of best film contenders makes it a very live possibility for the editing prize (something the editors’ guild has acknowledged, if under the lesser comedy rubric). It’s strange that all the people who’ve kept asking “So, what awards is American Hustle going to win, huh?” have never seemed to give this category a thought.
I suppose one reason for that is, for a month or so, there’s been widespread assumption that Gravity would take this award in a walk. I found this assumption a bit weird from the start, and now the guild has confirmed my doubts. Sabin mentioned, in the sound editing thread, that Gravity was a wonky front runner for that category, because a lot of what it did was to emphasize the absence of sound -- as counterpoint to its moments of sudden noise, to be sure, but still providing more moments of silence than one would expect for a sound editing winner. Doesn’t Sabin’s observation apply tenfold to this category? Gravity ostentatiously AVOIDS editing for much of its running time – holding single shots for times that must seem excruciating for some raised on MTV. Cuaron and company call our attention to the editing by mostly not providing it. They do this in an extremely effective way, and in a sense change the rules for what’s considered standard editing. Maybe there are voters excited about honoring something fresh in the category – the way they felt when, say, they cast their votes for the music from The Social Network.
Or maybe, in the end, they’ll go back to something perfectly traditional, in which case Captain Phillips is a fairly obvious choice. The fact that Rouse working for Greengrass has already won one Oscar (and was nominated for a second) was enough to tip most of us to the idea they’d compete again, but one look at Captain Phillips confirmed the notion. The film is not as editing-dependent as The Bourne Ultimatum – nor, I think, as completely successful – but, as the guild has confirmed, it’s a movie where the editor has lots of opportunity to shine. The hour or so after Barkhad Abdi has boarded the ship, and crew members are hiding throughout the ship, is extremely well cut – we keep travelling to various spots around the ship, and never lose track of where we are. Without razor-sharp editing, it could have all been a confusing mish-mash. The latter portion of the film is not, I’d say, as effective, but it offers lots of cross-cutting -- between the lifeboat and the assorted American warships closing in on -- that clearly qualifies under the Academy’s editing standards. I found this film’s guild win utterly unsurprising, and I don’t know why people would be dismissive of an Academy follow-up.
The best thing about this category is, wins by any of the contenders would tell us different things – or, contrarily, might mislead us. An unlikely 12 Years win could signal a big night for McQueen’s film. An American Hustle victory would silence the “Hustle’s going home empty-handed” crowd, and give it a shot at best picture. A Gravity win might signal voters are going all in on Cuaron’s film – or might just mean they’re giving it a bunch of techs but will stop short in the main categories. And a Captain Phillips win – like the Black Hawk Down one in 2001 – would say “If you’re looking for best picture hints, go elsewhere -- we’re picking fast cutting, and screw you if you don’t like it”.
The nominees:
American Hustle
Captain Phillips
Dallas Buyers Club
Gravity
12 Years a Slave
It’s hard to figure the point of having Dallas Buyers Club on this list – except I guess to indicate how well liked it was by voters in general. There’s nothing in the way the film is cut that would normally get it a slot like this, and I simply don’t see any argument for it being a contender for the actual prize.
The actual competition:
I’ll confess that, prior to the nominations, when it looked like 12 Years a Slave was going to rack up double-digit nods, I’d idly considered that it might be shockingly left off by this branch. As with Dallas Buyers, there’s really nothing in the film that meets the classic criteria of the editing branch – no multiple storylines requiring cross-cutting, no action sequences or chase scenes, no significant movement between time-frames. Despite this, in the end I left it in my predictions, for the sole reason that it was a best picture contender, and therefore MUST be nominated under editing. Which turned out to be the correct calculation. The problem for the film now is, that’s where it still sits: with no real elements to make it a likely editing winner. I assume many would offer the proviso that if it, like Gandhi, should turn into some best picture juggernaut, it could sweep up this prize in the bargain. But it’s been a while since a best picture winner took this prize without editing credentials over and above front-runner status. Remember, two years ago, a lot of folks were touting The Artist on the basis of its being the best picture favorite, and it lost to the mostly-unforeseen (and best picture non-contender) Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Seems to me you have to go back a long way – Unforgiven, by my calculation – to find a film that won editing essentially because it won best picture. So, I rank 12 Years fourth-likeliest.
American Hustle seems, at the moment, behind 12 Years in the best picture hunt, but I’d rate it ahead in this arena, because Hustle DOES have some of the qualities that characterize editing winners – a lickety-split pace, for one thing, and, beyond that, the fact that it juggles multiple story-lines/points of view. The sequence juxtaposing Bale/Lawrence at dinner with Renner and his wife, and Adams/Cooper at the disco, is precisely the sort of cross-cutting that often appeals to voters in this category. The fact the film itself is (if barely) in the top tier of best film contenders makes it a very live possibility for the editing prize (something the editors’ guild has acknowledged, if under the lesser comedy rubric). It’s strange that all the people who’ve kept asking “So, what awards is American Hustle going to win, huh?” have never seemed to give this category a thought.
I suppose one reason for that is, for a month or so, there’s been widespread assumption that Gravity would take this award in a walk. I found this assumption a bit weird from the start, and now the guild has confirmed my doubts. Sabin mentioned, in the sound editing thread, that Gravity was a wonky front runner for that category, because a lot of what it did was to emphasize the absence of sound -- as counterpoint to its moments of sudden noise, to be sure, but still providing more moments of silence than one would expect for a sound editing winner. Doesn’t Sabin’s observation apply tenfold to this category? Gravity ostentatiously AVOIDS editing for much of its running time – holding single shots for times that must seem excruciating for some raised on MTV. Cuaron and company call our attention to the editing by mostly not providing it. They do this in an extremely effective way, and in a sense change the rules for what’s considered standard editing. Maybe there are voters excited about honoring something fresh in the category – the way they felt when, say, they cast their votes for the music from The Social Network.
Or maybe, in the end, they’ll go back to something perfectly traditional, in which case Captain Phillips is a fairly obvious choice. The fact that Rouse working for Greengrass has already won one Oscar (and was nominated for a second) was enough to tip most of us to the idea they’d compete again, but one look at Captain Phillips confirmed the notion. The film is not as editing-dependent as The Bourne Ultimatum – nor, I think, as completely successful – but, as the guild has confirmed, it’s a movie where the editor has lots of opportunity to shine. The hour or so after Barkhad Abdi has boarded the ship, and crew members are hiding throughout the ship, is extremely well cut – we keep travelling to various spots around the ship, and never lose track of where we are. Without razor-sharp editing, it could have all been a confusing mish-mash. The latter portion of the film is not, I’d say, as effective, but it offers lots of cross-cutting -- between the lifeboat and the assorted American warships closing in on -- that clearly qualifies under the Academy’s editing standards. I found this film’s guild win utterly unsurprising, and I don’t know why people would be dismissive of an Academy follow-up.
The best thing about this category is, wins by any of the contenders would tell us different things – or, contrarily, might mislead us. An unlikely 12 Years win could signal a big night for McQueen’s film. An American Hustle victory would silence the “Hustle’s going home empty-handed” crowd, and give it a shot at best picture. A Gravity win might signal voters are going all in on Cuaron’s film – or might just mean they’re giving it a bunch of techs but will stop short in the main categories. And a Captain Phillips win – like the Black Hawk Down one in 2001 – would say “If you’re looking for best picture hints, go elsewhere -- we’re picking fast cutting, and screw you if you don’t like it”.