Producers Guild Winners

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

I will add one more group to Mister Tee's list of those of influence. The Chicago Film Critics, at least during the years in which Roger Ebert wielded considerable influence, was a factor. It was they who championed Crash.

But Awards Daily has become even more obnoxious than Tom O'Neill's site in pushing an agenda. I almost want to not like The Social Network because of the way they and Hollywood Elsewhere insist there must be something wrong with you if you don't think it's far and away the best film of the year - that and Natalie Portman's performance in Black Swan.

I like The Social Network despite, not because of, the hype but nothing can persuade me to like Black Swan. I think Portman's performance, and maybe the costumes, are worthy of nominations but that's about it.
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Post by rolotomasi99 »

Mister Tee wrote:
rolotomasi99 wrote:I just was not getting why folks acted like THE HURT LOCKER had some sort of sweep of the critics group when if we just go by the IMDB tally it was obviously very close.
Except no one with any real influence on the Oscars -- honestly, no one outside of Awards Daily -- gives a damn what the East Bumfuck Critics vote. When we say "the critics", we mean the groups that have traditionally meant something: New York, LA, National Society.
Then there is my mistake. It was not revisionist history or sour grapes against the film (because I freaking loved it), but because I swear I saw something on AwardsDaily which had more critics awards listed for UP IN THE AIR than THE HURT LOCKER. Now that people have set me straight on the hierarchy of critics groups, I will stop saying UP IN THE AIR did “well” with “the critics.” It really was nothing more than me not realizing some group’s award meant more than others.
"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
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by Mister Tee »

rolotomasi99 wrote:I just was not getting why folks acted like THE HURT LOCKER had some sort of sweep of the critics group when if we just go by the IMDB tally it was obviously very close.
Except no one with any real influence on the Oscars -- honestly, no one outside of Awards Daily -- gives a damn what the East Bumfuck Critics vote. When we say "the critics", we mean the groups that have traditionally meant something: New York, LA, National Society. If we're in a generous mood, we MIGHT consider adding Boston, largely because it goes early and its choices are not generally borg-like. (We also look, amused, at NBR, for the more reactionary end of the scale) But we don't care what one of these endlessly proliferating Oscar-mongering groups thinks, any more than we would about a straw poll of a table at Starbucks. And there's zero evidence anyone with an Oscar vote does.

And that's the context in wich we say The Hurt Locker dominated the critics -- becoming the first film to sweep NY/LA/National since LA Confidential, and taking Boston to boot. It was this focused attention that caused Oscar voters and their enablers (beginning with the ever-opportunistic Broadcasters) to take a look at what would otherwise have been brushed off as a flop.

This context is also why your contention that Slumdog was heavily pushed by the critics is nonsense. It was, indeed, endorsed by the critics of no significance. But it won none of the classic three, and only took Boston in a tie with Wall E. It was only the omnipotent Southeasterh Ohio Critics and their ilk who lined up behind it. Slumdog was, in fact, alot more like the King's Speech of its year, not The Social Network.

And, for the record, that scene you reference in Crash, the manipulative threat to the little girl, was far and away the worst moment in the film...the one moment I hated the movie as much as Eric did. If this indeed is representative of what made Oscar voters go for the film in the end, it confirms my worst fears about the hideous sentimentality of which they are capable.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

Ain't no filters on mine. Here they are:

* The Hurt Locker (15) - BSFC, LAFCA, NYFCC, SFFC, AFC, HFC, SAT, CFC, OFCS, NSFC, BFCA, PGA, OFTA, BAFTA
* Up in the Air (6) - WAFCA, NBR, SEFCA, InFC, DFWFCA, FFC
* Inglourious Basterds (3) - TFC, SDFC, SAG
* Avatar (2) - NYFCO, GG
* The Hangover (1) - GG
* Hunger (1) - TFC
* Nine (1) - SAT
* Precious (1) - ISA
* Un Prophète (1) - LFCC
* Up (1) - DFCS
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Post by rolotomasi99 »

The Original BJ wrote:Now, I'm sure there are some podunk critics groups that I've overlooked
Basically that is what I am thinking about. I do not argue the 11-8 tally from IMDB, but I remember seeing a tally on I think AwardsDaily which listed every freaking critics group right before Oscar nominations were announced, and UP IN THE AIR was ahead. For some reason the adult filters on my work computer will not allow me to open OscarGuy's link (is there something naughty there?), so I do not know what it says the final tally is.

I just was not getting why folks acted like THE HURT LOCKER had some sort of sweep of the critics group when if we just go by the IMDB tally it was obviously very close. It was not until the Guilds stepped in that it became clear what actual filmmakers (as opposed to just critics) thought was the best film of the year. This is why I think THE HURT LOCKER will live on years from now. It has so much to offer aspiring filmmakers. The little budget war film that was a piece of art.
"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
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Post by OscarGuy »

Just to settle the argument regarding which film won more:

http://www.cinemasight.com/Oscars/Annual/82nd/Tallies.html
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Post by The Original BJ »

rolotomasi99 wrote:
The Original BJ wrote:
rolotomasi99 wrote: I am happy the critics preferred UP IN THE AIR for the most part, so when little THE HURT LOCKER won it was (for me) a pleasant surprise.
Huh? The Hurt Locker won all three major critics awards.
UP IN THE AIR won more. A majority of the critics thought UP IN THE AIR was the best film of the year.
Can you cite your sources on this? I don't mean to push this, but to me this is like trying to argue that Up made more money last year than Avatar. Any way you try to angle it, the argument falls apart.

The Hurt Locker won ALL THREE of the big three critics prizes. Of the majors, the only one Up in the Air won is NBR, which TECHNICALLY isn't even a critics award, but for argument's sake, it could count as one. So, by 3-1, Hurt Locker comes out majorly ahead.

Tossing in those minor prizes...which I find less than significant, but to go through the motions...well, the race tightens a bit, but by my eyes, The Hurt Locker still comes out ahead. Perusing my records from last year (and the IMDb Awards pages), I see Hurt Locker has Austin, Boston, Broadcast, Chicago, Houston, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, National Society, New York, Online, and San Francisco. For Up in the Air, Central Ohio, Dallas-Fort Worth, Florida, Kansas City, London, Southeastern, Vancouver, and Washington D.C. That's 11-8, The Hurt Locker. Now, I'm sure there are some podunk critics groups that I've overlooked and I'm sure you'll be able to cite, but even with a margin of error, I see no way you can argue that Up in the Air was the dominant critical choice.

And as much as I loathe to bring up these sites, because I don't think they paint a full picture of a film's reception, Metacritic has The Hurt Locker at 94 and Up in the Air at 83, an ELEVEN POINT lead by Hurt Locker. And Rotten Tomatoes has Hurt Locker at 97 and Up in the Air at 90, a SEVEN point lead by Hurt Locker.

Perhaps I'm just being a bit defensive toward my beloved Hurt Locker, but what data am I missing here that points to Up in the Air as the year's top critical favorite? I'm genuinely curious.
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Post by rolotomasi99 »

Mister Tee wrote:I find it telling that any number of people are gleeful, not because they love The King's Speech, but simply because they don't love Social Network and want to see its outsized praise stop. Some of you won't want to hear this, but I think that's precisely the syndrome that killed Brokeback Mountain's best picture shot. I realize it's accepted wisdom that it was "Ernest Borgnine in the Library with his Homophobia" that killed Ang Lee's film. But I always felt it was disappointment many felt over a film that was solid and moving but not the modern masterpiece the unanimity of critics promised that set up the shocking defeat. (My brother, an ACLU liberal, said he thought it one of the most over-rated movies he'd ever seen) People who think they're being hustled in one direction can move the other way from pure spite.
Oh please! If that were true, why the hell did people not band together to stop SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE. Both FROST/NIXON and MILK were great movies to turn to if everyone was so sick of one movie winning. MILK won two major awards that night so it clearly had its supporters. If people really get into this mob mentality against another film, why did they not turn against SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE.

As I said before, never underestimate the power of a film which can bring audiences to tears. While homophobia clearly had something to do with BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN's loss, I think CRASH won because it packed more of an emotional punch. I actually saw CRASH several times with audiences. Every single time the little girl jumps in front of her father to protect him from being shot, the whole audience is blubbering like babies. I think that scene alone won it Best Picture.

I did not cry during the final speech, but I would say a great deal of the audience I saw THE KING'S SPEECH with were in tears. BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN also had two lead characters who were not the easiest to like. They were selfish and sabotaged whatever happiness they could have had. I know plenty of gay people who hated BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN because they felt Ennis and Jack were unpleasant people. If THE SOCIAL NETWORK loses Best Picture at the Oscars, it is going to be because they hated the character of Mark Zuckerberg…not because they wanted to punish the movie for being so successful.

How did PRECIOUS beat UP IN THE AIR in the adapted screenplay category? By making the Academy cry.
"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
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Post by rolotomasi99 »

The Original BJ wrote:
rolotomasi99 wrote: I am happy the critics preferred UP IN THE AIR for the most part, so when little THE HURT LOCKER won it was (for me) a pleasant surprise.
Huh? The Hurt Locker won all three major critics awards.
UP IN THE AIR won more. A majority of the critics thought UP IN THE AIR was the best film of the year. Which is why it was shocking to me when it was shut out come Oscar night. Sometimes the critics really like something, but for whatever reason those who make films may not embrace it as much.

I just appreciate THE HURT LOCKER's success moved slowly. The critics liked UP IN THE AIR, the Globes liked AVATAR, the Guilds liked THE HURT LOCKER, and the Oscars liked THE HURT LOCKER. It made for a much more interesting race than if one film dominated, even if it was a film I really liked.
"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
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by Mister Tee »

Eric wrote:
Mister Tee wrote:People who think they're being hustled in one direction can move the other way from pure spite.
Happens on this board on an annual basis.
Touche.
User avatar
Eric
Tenured
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:18 pm
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Contact:

Post by Eric »

Mister Tee wrote:People who think they're being hustled in one direction can move the other way from pure spite.
Happens on this board on an annual basis.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by Mister Tee »

Sabin wrote:I see this less as a victory for The King's Speech and more as a loss for those of us who loathe Dave Karger.
Don't forget David Poland. He'll dine out on this for decades.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Post by Sabin »

I see this less as a victory for The King's Speech and more as a loss for those of us who loathe Dave Karger.
"How's the despair?"
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

Damien wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:I always thought it was Vangelis' score that that made Chariots of Fire seem better than it was. The King's Speech has an excellent, old school type of score, but it's not really inspiring the way Vangelis' score was, or magnificent, in the best sense of the word, as the scores of Erich Wolfgang Korngold were for Captains Blood; The Adventures of Robin Hood and The Sea Hawk or even John Barry's score for The Lion in Winter were, and if thsoe scores couldn;t proel their films to Best Picture wins, neither will The King's Speech.
Yes, but The King's Speech also has Beethoven.
Yes, and Black Swan has Tchaikovsky...in droves!
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by Mister Tee »

Damien wrote:Tee, some of us are delighted that The King's Speech won the PGA because we actually do like The King's Speech.

Absolutely, and more power to you. What I was referencing were the "Good! -- I'm sick of hearing about The Social Network" crowd.

I'd suggest the split you cite -- critical vs. how regular movie-goers felt -- applied equally to the notorious upsets I mentioned below. Of course, they also applied to The English Patient vs. Shine and No Country for Old Men vs. Juno, so it's not necessarily fatal.




Edited By Mister Tee on 1295818148
Post Reply

Return to “83rd Predictions and Precursors”