How about Riva is in a much-less-competitive category.anonymous1980 wrote:I just saw Amour (my review on the 2012 section under the Official Review Thread). I frankly don't get how one could vote for Emmanuelle Riva but not Jean-Louis Trintignant.
Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19336
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
I agree with the last part, but not the first, which is in its own way, intended or not, an attempt to influence the Oscars. By all means critics should bring attention to performances that moved them or in some other way caused them to champion a particular performance but they should not ignore a buzzed about performance that moved them more simply because it is likely to be nominated for an Oscar without their support. That is just as stupid as voting for something just to be able to they predicted the Oscars.rolotomasi99 wrote:If certain films and performance are going to be nominated for Oscars, then it makes no sense for the critics to waste an award on them. I think nominations for Rachel Weisz and Ann Dowd are perfect examples of what the critics awards can do best: encourage cineastes like us to check out films we might have missed this year. If the Oscars agree with the critics and decide to nominate these more obscure films as well, then so be it. However, it should never be the goal of a critics group to gain attention for themselves by predicting what the Oscars will vote, and then claim they in fact influenced the Academy voters. That is just stupid.
-
- Laureate
- Posts: 6384
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
I just saw Amour (my review on the 2012 section under the Official Review Thread). I frankly don't get how one could vote for Emmanuelle Riva but not Jean-Louis Trintignant.
- rolotomasi99
- Professor
- Posts: 2108
- Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
- Location: n/a
- Contact:
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
I agree with the general feeling regarding critics groups trying to predict/influence the Oscars. The Oscars and the guilds exist to celebrate the films Hollywood makes. The box-office in general no longer rewards well made films, so the Oscars exist to justify spending money on films people are less likely to go see. Being nominated or winning an Oscar can encourage folks to check out these movies they might have otherwise skipped over.
The critics groups on the other hand should exist to highlight the films and performances general audiences have not seen and will likely never see. If certain films and performance are going to be nominated for Oscars, then it makes no sense for the critics to waste an award on them. I think nominations for Rachel Weisz and Ann Dowd are perfect examples of what the critics awards can do best: encourage cineastes like us to check out films we might have missed this year. If the Oscars agree with the critics and decide to nominate these more obscure films as well, then so be it. However, it should never be the goal of a critics group to gain attention for themselves by predicting what the Oscars will vote, and then claim they in fact influenced the Academy voters. That is just stupid.
All that being said, if this is what the Oscar nominations looked like, I would not have a problem with it. I might swap out SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK with LIFE OF PI in Best Picture, but this is actually a pretty good line up. Still, the DC critics should be ashamed of themselves for picking such mainstream choices (yes, even the independent films they nominated are mainstream).
The critics groups on the other hand should exist to highlight the films and performances general audiences have not seen and will likely never see. If certain films and performance are going to be nominated for Oscars, then it makes no sense for the critics to waste an award on them. I think nominations for Rachel Weisz and Ann Dowd are perfect examples of what the critics awards can do best: encourage cineastes like us to check out films we might have missed this year. If the Oscars agree with the critics and decide to nominate these more obscure films as well, then so be it. However, it should never be the goal of a critics group to gain attention for themselves by predicting what the Oscars will vote, and then claim they in fact influenced the Academy voters. That is just stupid.
All that being said, if this is what the Oscar nominations looked like, I would not have a problem with it. I might swap out SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK with LIFE OF PI in Best Picture, but this is actually a pretty good line up. Still, the DC critics should be ashamed of themselves for picking such mainstream choices (yes, even the independent films they nominated are mainstream).
"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
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
It's not like these are necessarily less impartial than those who loved the musical and went to see the movie knowing exactly that they'd love it no matter what.Big Magilla wrote:Most of the negative reviews for Les Miserables that I've seen have been from a) people who didn't like the musical to begin with; b) don't like musicals period
Now, I'm sure that Les Miserables will be a big hit and that this will at least lead to many Oscar nominations and to some Oscar wins (including maybe a few in important categories). But even when this happens we are free, I hope, to agree with those who don't think that it's the ultimate work of art, as its fans are annoyingly proclaming for months now - without having seen it.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19336
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
Most of the negative reviews for Les Miserables that I've seen have been from a) people who didn't like the musical to begin with; b) don't like musicals period or c) have no understanding of the genre and no reference point against which to judge it. The latter group is really the most annoying, writing things like "they should have gotten real singers" and "Anne Hathaway will probably win the Oscar because Jennifer Hudson won for Showgirls (sic).
On the other hand, the one review I read from someone within the Broadcast Critics Association gushed all over it. Audience anticipation on Rotten Tomatoes is still at 99%. It's going to be huge.
On the other hand, the one review I read from someone within the Broadcast Critics Association gushed all over it. Audience anticipation on Rotten Tomatoes is still at 99%. It's going to be huge.
- OscarGuy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 13668
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
- Location: Springfield, MO
- Contact:
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
The reason all of the critics groups seem like they're trying to predict the Oscars is twofold in my eyes.
A) Any group with a large number of people will have individual critics submitting unique and interesting choices, but when those are all averaged together to get nomination lists, a consensus builds and the most commonly mentioned films get nominated. While there will always be outliers where a quirky nominee makes it through, group dynamics generally result in nominees that look like every other set of nominees.
B) There will always be critics who believe that their organization is a precursor (as we've all long decreed them) and thus will vote in a way that tries to predict the Oscars. Not every critic in an organization will do this and some groups have a higher propensity for such efforts (BFCA, I'm looking at you), but when you combine A with B, you'll see why you will seldom get a list that doesn't look like a list of predictions.
It's usually in the smaller groups (like Ohio or Utah) where differing opinions can prevail because the voting pool lends itself better to a small, but dedicated following can lead to a surprise. That isn't always the case, but...
And one more mitigating factor on the whole Les Mis thing. Can we also agree that some critics are still under an embargo and are very specifically waiting for that embargo to be lifted before posting. Metacritic averages typically include around 30 or so critics for standard releases. They currently have 7. Rotten Tomatoes currently has 19 whereas a standard release will frequently top 150. What I'm NOT saying is that I guarantee the numbers will go up; however, it is possible that the most vocal supporters are sticking to the embargo like critics should be (stupid trade papers get away with it because of publication dates, which I find asinine since they all have electronic or online versions), but I have no way of knowing. I'm probably posting mine on Monday, a day ahead of the embargo, but a lot depends on if I get it finished over the weekend. I had my review written, then after Peter proofed it, I realized it wasn't written the way I wanted it, so I started over.
A) Any group with a large number of people will have individual critics submitting unique and interesting choices, but when those are all averaged together to get nomination lists, a consensus builds and the most commonly mentioned films get nominated. While there will always be outliers where a quirky nominee makes it through, group dynamics generally result in nominees that look like every other set of nominees.
B) There will always be critics who believe that their organization is a precursor (as we've all long decreed them) and thus will vote in a way that tries to predict the Oscars. Not every critic in an organization will do this and some groups have a higher propensity for such efforts (BFCA, I'm looking at you), but when you combine A with B, you'll see why you will seldom get a list that doesn't look like a list of predictions.
It's usually in the smaller groups (like Ohio or Utah) where differing opinions can prevail because the voting pool lends itself better to a small, but dedicated following can lead to a surprise. That isn't always the case, but...
And one more mitigating factor on the whole Les Mis thing. Can we also agree that some critics are still under an embargo and are very specifically waiting for that embargo to be lifted before posting. Metacritic averages typically include around 30 or so critics for standard releases. They currently have 7. Rotten Tomatoes currently has 19 whereas a standard release will frequently top 150. What I'm NOT saying is that I guarantee the numbers will go up; however, it is possible that the most vocal supporters are sticking to the embargo like critics should be (stupid trade papers get away with it because of publication dates, which I find asinine since they all have electronic or online versions), but I have no way of knowing. I'm probably posting mine on Monday, a day ahead of the embargo, but a lot depends on if I get it finished over the weekend. I had my review written, then after Peter proofed it, I realized it wasn't written the way I wanted it, so I started over.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19336
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
Or they all really like the same things this year.
I haven't seen all the films yet, but when I have I expect my top picks will pretty much line up with these unlike last year when I had grave reservations about many of the choices sight unseen and liked them even less after seeing them. For the first time in years I might actually feel excited about this year's awards ceremonies.
I haven't seen all the films yet, but when I have I expect my top picks will pretty much line up with these unlike last year when I had grave reservations about many of the choices sight unseen and liked them even less after seeing them. For the first time in years I might actually feel excited about this year's awards ceremonies.
-
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4312
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
That's pretty much what EVERY critics organization except the majors is these days.dws1982 wrote:They should really just save the trouble, drop the pretense, and call this the "Washington D.C. Area Critics Oscar Predictions".
Re: Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
They should really just save the trouble, drop the pretense, and call this the "Washington D.C. Area Critics Oscar Predictions".
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19336
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Washington D.C. Area Critics Nominations
Washington D.C. Area Film Critics - who says critics don't like Les Miz?
Best Film:
Argo
Les Misérables
Lincoln
Silver Linings Playbook
Zero Dark Thirty
Best Director:
Ben Affleck (Argo)
Paul Thomas Anderson (The Master)
Kathryn Bigelow (Zero Dark Thirty)
Tom Hooper (Les Misérables)
Steven Spielberg (Lincoln)
Best Actor:
Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln)
John Hawkes (The Sessions)
Hugh Jackman (Les Misérables)
Joaquin Phoenix (The Master)
Denzel Washington (Flight)
Best Actress:
Jessica Chastain (Zero Dark Thirty)
Marion Cotillard (Rust and Bone)
Jennifer Lawrence (Silver Linings Playbook)
Helen Mirren (Hitchcock)
Emmanuelle Riva (Amour)
Best Supporting Actor:
Alan Arkin (Argo)
Javier Bardem (Skyfall)
Leonardo DiCaprio (Django Unchained)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (The Master)
Tommy Lee Jones (Lincoln)
Best Supporting Actress:
Amy Adams (The Master)
Samantha Barks (Les Misérables)
Sally Field (Lincoln)
Anne Hathaway (Les Misérables)
Helen Hunt (The Sessions)
Best Acting Ensemble:
Argo
Les Misérables
Lincoln
Moonrise Kingdom
Zero Dark Thirty
Best Adapted Screenplay:
Chris Terrio (Argo)
David Magee (Life of Pi)
Tony Kushner (Lincoln)
Stephen Chbosky (The Perks of Being a Wallflower)
David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook)
Best Original Screenplay:
Quentin Tarantino (Django Unchained)
Rian Johnson (Looper)
Paul Thomas Anderson (The Master)
Wes Anderson & Roman Coppola (Moonrise Kingdom)
Mark Boal (Zero Dark Thirty)
Best Animated Feature:
Brave
Frankenweenie
ParaNorman
Rise of the Guardians
Wreck-It Ralph
Best Documentary:
Bully
The Imposter
The Invisible War
The Queen of Versailles
Searching for Sugar Man
Best Foreign Language Film:
Amour
The Intouchables
I Wish
A Royal Affair
Rust and Bone
Best Art Direction:
Anna Karenina (Nominees TBD)
Cloud Atlas (Nominees TBD)
Les Misérables (Nominees TBD)
Lincoln (Nominees TBD)
Moonrise Kingdom (Nominees TBD)
Best Cinematography:
Les Misérables (Danny Cohen)
Life of Pi (Claudio Miranda)
The Master (Mihai Malaimare Jr.)
Skyfall (Roger Deakins)
Zero Dark Thirty (Greig Fraser)
Best Score:
Beasts of the Southern Wild (Dan Romer & Benh Zeitlin)
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (Howard Shore)
Lincoln (John Williams)
The Master (Jonny Greenwood)
Moonrise Kingdom (Alexandre Desplat)
Best Youth Performance:
Jared Gilman (Moonrise Kingdom)
Kara Hayward (Moonrise Kingdom)
Tom Holland (The Impossible)
Logan Lerman (The Perks of Being a Wallflower)
Quvenzhané Wallis (Beasts of the Southern
Best Film:
Argo
Les Misérables
Lincoln
Silver Linings Playbook
Zero Dark Thirty
Best Director:
Ben Affleck (Argo)
Paul Thomas Anderson (The Master)
Kathryn Bigelow (Zero Dark Thirty)
Tom Hooper (Les Misérables)
Steven Spielberg (Lincoln)
Best Actor:
Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln)
John Hawkes (The Sessions)
Hugh Jackman (Les Misérables)
Joaquin Phoenix (The Master)
Denzel Washington (Flight)
Best Actress:
Jessica Chastain (Zero Dark Thirty)
Marion Cotillard (Rust and Bone)
Jennifer Lawrence (Silver Linings Playbook)
Helen Mirren (Hitchcock)
Emmanuelle Riva (Amour)
Best Supporting Actor:
Alan Arkin (Argo)
Javier Bardem (Skyfall)
Leonardo DiCaprio (Django Unchained)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (The Master)
Tommy Lee Jones (Lincoln)
Best Supporting Actress:
Amy Adams (The Master)
Samantha Barks (Les Misérables)
Sally Field (Lincoln)
Anne Hathaway (Les Misérables)
Helen Hunt (The Sessions)
Best Acting Ensemble:
Argo
Les Misérables
Lincoln
Moonrise Kingdom
Zero Dark Thirty
Best Adapted Screenplay:
Chris Terrio (Argo)
David Magee (Life of Pi)
Tony Kushner (Lincoln)
Stephen Chbosky (The Perks of Being a Wallflower)
David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook)
Best Original Screenplay:
Quentin Tarantino (Django Unchained)
Rian Johnson (Looper)
Paul Thomas Anderson (The Master)
Wes Anderson & Roman Coppola (Moonrise Kingdom)
Mark Boal (Zero Dark Thirty)
Best Animated Feature:
Brave
Frankenweenie
ParaNorman
Rise of the Guardians
Wreck-It Ralph
Best Documentary:
Bully
The Imposter
The Invisible War
The Queen of Versailles
Searching for Sugar Man
Best Foreign Language Film:
Amour
The Intouchables
I Wish
A Royal Affair
Rust and Bone
Best Art Direction:
Anna Karenina (Nominees TBD)
Cloud Atlas (Nominees TBD)
Les Misérables (Nominees TBD)
Lincoln (Nominees TBD)
Moonrise Kingdom (Nominees TBD)
Best Cinematography:
Les Misérables (Danny Cohen)
Life of Pi (Claudio Miranda)
The Master (Mihai Malaimare Jr.)
Skyfall (Roger Deakins)
Zero Dark Thirty (Greig Fraser)
Best Score:
Beasts of the Southern Wild (Dan Romer & Benh Zeitlin)
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (Howard Shore)
Lincoln (John Williams)
The Master (Jonny Greenwood)
Moonrise Kingdom (Alexandre Desplat)
Best Youth Performance:
Jared Gilman (Moonrise Kingdom)
Kara Hayward (Moonrise Kingdom)
Tom Holland (The Impossible)
Logan Lerman (The Perks of Being a Wallflower)
Quvenzhané Wallis (Beasts of the Southern