anonymous wrote:I think if anyone can upset Mo'Nique, it could be Julianne Moore if for no other reason than the "due" factor since if nominated, it would be her fifth nomination.
I'm not sure that many people really much care that she doesn't have an Oscar anymore. She kind of flamed out after he double nominations in 2002, so I'm not sure she has the due factor in her favor like she might have if she had been nominated in the years right after 2002.
Funny, I'm hearing the exact opposite concerning Invictus. Todd McCarthy, for one, gave it a rave review.
Glenn Kenney placed it on his top 70 of the decade list. But not wanting to violate the review embargo as others have done, he didn't go into much detail on it.
I didn't include The Cove because Roadside Attractions has a shitty track record with politically-oriented documentaries. Sure, neither IOUSA or Road to Guantanamo picked up many critics awards, so that could save The Cove, but their promotional capabilities haven't been that great so far.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
I think if anyone can upset Mo'Nique, it could be Julianne Moore if for no other reason than the "due" factor since if nominated, it would be her fifth nomination.
Funny, I'm hearing the exact opposite concerning Invictus. Todd McCarthy, for one, gave it a rave review.
NONE of the closely guarded year-end behemoths are looking like winners any more with the possible exception of the still largely unseen Avatar, and that one I'll believe when I see it.
The Lovely Bones is getting so heavily trounced by the critics that I've taken it out of my predictions altogether. I should have known when the best Harry Knowles, Peter Jackson's biggest ass kisser, could come up with was that the film was "lovely" that it was probably a stinker. That's like saying Up in the Air is "up", A Serious Man is "serious" and Where the Wild Things Are is "wild".
Nine is said to be a collection of musical numbers with nothing much going on between numbers and is hurt by a horribly miscalculated performance by Daniel Day-Lewis, though Penelope Cruz and and especially Judi Dench are getting high praise and remain strong contenders for Supporting Actress nods though it seems no one will overtake Mo'Nique for the win.
Invictus is getting mixed reviews - those who think Clint Eastwood can do no wrong will keep the film in play through awards season but it isn't likely to win anything. Morgan Freeman's performance is said to be its greatest asset. Matt Damon's role is not likely to generate much buzz. He's a more likely candidate for Best Actor for The Informant!
The huge box office success of The Blind Side, which keeps climbing, all but guarantees Sandra Bullock a nomination and maybe a win so keep scoffing all you naysayers, stranger things have happened.
I think The Cove is a lock for at least a nomination in the Best Documentary Feature category.
And I think Kodi Smit-McPhee and Robert Duvall are more likely Best Supporting Actor candidates from The Road than Guy Pearce, based solely of what I know from their roles in the books.
OscarGuy wrote:The point is, Rolo, that people are throwing a fit saying that they shouldn't have made it. So, basically, no matter how real a story is, if it plays on stereotypes it shouldn't be made, which would suggest we never have another Holoacust film, because it plays on Jewish stereotypes (yeah, a lot of people would have no problem with that). I mean, Woody Allen, could never make another film if that were the case. Nor could Spike Lee. Each have built careers on stereotypes, though Lee gets a pass because he used those stereotypes in an effort to break down the stereotype, but the point remains.
A filmmaker should not feel limited in what he can do just because his story happens to have strong sections of stereotype. It isn't like we're talking about a film that was a fictional story written as a series of stereotypes (like Crash). We're talking about a film that is based on a real situation that obviously impacted this football player very strongly if he allowed it to be filmed. Would you have supported a re-write of the story, even if it changed the truth, so that the family that took this poor black kid in, was also black? It would have erased the stereotype, but would it have been any less stereotypically carried out? Probably not. And I'm not defending the film, if it sucks, it sucks, but the point is that the film is being eviscerated for playing on stereotypes when it's not playing on stereotypes, but is telling a story from real life that just happens to feel stereotypical.
And who's to say that the filmmaker doesn't recognize that and hasn't taken pains to create real depth in the characters? Or do a Spike Lee and make it about breaking down stereotypes in spite of its origins. Now, it's going to be up for interpretation regardless (and it's in my pile of screeners to watch, so I'll see it eventually), but I think those who have lashed out so strongly against the story are allowing the absolute worst and extreme views of political correctness dictate the reception of the film.
They've villainized it because they think that by doing so, they are somehow drawing attention to some great wrong perpetrated on the black community because the film was made. But, the real question that should be asked and considered is: "Did the football player on whose life the film is based, find it an accurate and effective portrayal of the situation". If the answer to that is yes, then who are we to criticize that effort?
That's entirely my point on this matter. Should we lash out at this film because of some misplaced feeling of white guilt? Or should we look at it empirically, examine the real situation and then take the film as it is and ignore whether it is based on stereotypes or not? Now, before everyone goes and lashes out on this, I haven't seen the film.
For all I know, the film glorifies the stereotypes, ignores any potential narrative device that could be used to draw attention to this and specifically wallow in those cliches in order to make it palatable to white audiences. That could be entirely the case, but the few snippets of the enraged reviewers I read made it sound like they didn't even consider that possibility and just attacked it based on the aforementioned belief that all stereotypes are bad.
I do hope my tiny posts weren't included among this analysis. All I was referring to were the anachronistic portrayals of the characters in the story (from what I've seen in the trailer) as filmed, not the story or even the characters themselves. There's a significant difference. "Cry Freedom" and "Mississippi Burning" happened too, but in the former the white people are the protaganists and the black people are supporting players in their own story; and in the latter, the black extras are dependent upon a white cast in order for the film to exist at all. And what implicit message are we to take from them? What I mean is, there's the story on the one hand, and the telling of it on the other.
To be clear, I also haven't seen the movie. I was only going by what I saw in the trailer, and made a response based only on that viewing (or rather, thirty viewings). If the film is different from what was portrayed in the trailer, all well and good.
I suppose the term "white guilt" can be used in any old way, but that sure ain't how I've come to know it. As I've known the term, "White Guilt" isn't what repels white people from this sort of film. "White Guilt" is what compels white people produce and then embrace this sort of film in order to assuage their feelings, which then leads to black columnist David Ehrenstein to write an article entitled "The Magic Negro", about the image of black men as filtered through the eyes of well-meaning white people (filmmakers and audiences both).
Maggie Gyllenhaal's Crazy Heart performance works for everyone and then some, but is it leading or supporting? I saw it as supporting from the get-go, which didn't strike me as a problem in the least. The Fox Searchlight guys were feeling differently about this a week or two ago, but maybe they've come around.
All mentions I've seen elsewhere of Maggie Gyllenhaal in Crazy Heart have her as a best actress contender. It does seem (from what I know of this film) that it's one of those borderline cases which are usually pushed into supporting to increase chances of a nomination, but it would be refreshing if she's being more correctly positioned. And with a still pretty weak field beyond Mulligan, maybe Mirren and whatsername from Precious (is Meryl Streep really such a sure thing for a role this lightweight? Ronan seems out and none of the Nine ladies seem to have weighty enough roles to be considered lead) I think Gyllenhaal is in a good position for a best actress nod.
Some last minute thoughts before the official year-end awards start coming out Monday.
Of the largely unseen and unreviewed year-end releases, Invictus looks strong. Morgan Freeman will likely receive a Best Actor nomination, but Matt Damon's supporting nod is still iffy. Alec Baldwin could still be a contender for It's Complicated in his place.
I've not been impressed with any of the material leaked from Nine. Daniel Day-Lewis looks sullen when he should look enigmatic. My crystal ball is telling me a younger actor, either Matt Damon (The Informant!), Sam Rockwell (Moon), Ben Foster (The Messenger) or Tobey Maguire (Brothers) will sneak in in his place.
My worst fears about The Lovely Bones appear to be coming true. It's beginning to look like a cross between Little Children and What Dreams May Come. I think Saoirse Ronan's tenuous hold on Best Actress is gone with Sandra Bullock (The Blind Side) the lucky recipient of her slot. I'm not even sure about Stanley Tucci. Given the choice between this film and Julie & Juia they may pull a Dennis Hopper. Hopper, as you will recall, was expected to be nominated for his strong performance in Blue Velvet but was nominated instead for the safer Hoosiers.
Avatar still looks like crap and will be lucky to grab a few technical nods.
Up is still a big unknown. Everyone loves the movie, but with its guaranteed spot in Best Animated Feature will voters be willing to give it two slots?
In the acting categories, aside from those I've already mentioned, I'm thinking voters will want to make room for Maggie Gyllenhaal (Crazy Heart) and Samantha Morton (The Messenger) in support, probably at the expense of the Nine ladies who have gone from the most likely nominees sight unseen to the weakest links currently in most people's predictions.
(500) Days of Summer (Fox Searchlight) Mason Novick, Mark Waters and Jessica Tuchinsky, producers.
An Education (BBC Films/Sony Pictures) Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey, producers.
The Hurt Locker (Kingsgate/Summit Entertainment) Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal and Nicholas Chartier, producers.
Inglourious Basterds (Universal/The Weinstein Company) Lawrence Bender, producer.
Invictus (Warner Bros./Malpaso) Clint Eastwood, Robert Lorenz and Mace Neufield, producers.
Nine (The Weinstein Company) John DeLuca, Rob Marshall and Marc Platt, producers.
Precious: Based on the Novel Push By Sapphire (Applause Entertainment) Lee Daniels, Gary Magness and Sarah Siegel-Magness, producers.
The Road (Dimension Films) Paula Mae Schwartz, Steve Schwartz and Nick Weschler, producers.
Up (Disney/PIXAR) Jonas Rivera, producer.
Up in the Air (Paramount Pictures) Ivan Reitman, Jason Reitman and Jeffrey Clifford, producers.
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN DIRECTING
Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
Quentin Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds
Clint Eastwood, Invictus
Rob Marshall, Nine
Jason Reitman, Up in the Air
BEST ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE
Jeff Bridges, Crazy Heart
George Clooney, Up in the Air
Colin Firth, A Single Man
Morgan Freeman, Invictus
Viggo Mortensen, The Road
BEST ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE
Marion Cotillard, Nine
Helen Mirren, The Last Station
Carey Mulligan, An Education
Gabourey "Gabby" Sidibe, Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia
BEST ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Matt Damon, Invictus
Alfred Molina, An Education
Kodi Smit-McPhee, The Road
Stanley Tucci, The Lovely Bones
Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds
BEST ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Penelope Cruz, Nine
Vera Farmiga, Up in the Air
Anna Kendrick, Up in the Air
Mo'Nique, Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
Julianne Moore, A Single Man
BEST SCREENPLAY WRITTEN DIRECTLY FOR THE SCREEN
(500) Days of Summer
Written by Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Webber
The Hurt Locker
Written by Mark Boal
Inglourious Basterds
Written by Quentin Tarantino
A Serious Man
Written by Joel Coen and Ethan Coen
Up
Story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson and Thomas McCarthy.
Screenplay by Bob Peterson and Pete Docter.
BEST SCREENPLAY BASED ON MATERIAL PREVIOUSLY PRODUCED or PUBLISHED
An Education
Screenplay by Nick Hornby
Based on the memoir by Lynn Barber.
Invictus
Screenplay by Anthony Peckham
Based on the book Playing the Enemy: Nelson Mandela and the Game That Made a Nation by John Carlin.
Nine
Screenplay by Michael Tolkin and Anthony Minghella
Based on the musical book by Arthur Kopit and Mario Fratti and the screenplay by Federico Fellini, Tullio Pinelli, Ennio Flaiano, and Brunello Rondi.
Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
Screenplay by Geoffrey Fletcher
Based on the novel Push by Sapphire.
Up in the Air
Screenplay by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner.
Based on the novel by Walter Kirn.
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN CINEMATOGRAPHY
Barry Ackroyd, The Hurt Locker
Andrew Lesnie, The Lovely Bones
Dion Beebe, Nine
Javier Aguirresarobe, The Road
Lance Acord, Where The Wild Things Are
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN FILM EDITING
Eric Steelberg, (500) Days of Summer
Chris Innis and Bob Murawski, The Hurt Locker
Sally Menke, Inglourious Basterds
Joel Cox and Gary D. Roach, Invictus
Claire Simpson and Wyatt Smith, Nine
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN ART DIRECTION
Avatar
Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg (art direction) & Kim Sinclair (set decoration)
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Stuart Craig (art direction) & Stephenie McMillan (set decoration)
The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus
Anastasia Masaro (art direction) & Monique Prudhomme (set decoration)
The Lovely Bones
Naomi Shohan (art direction) & George DeTitta Jr. and Meg Everist (set decoration)
Nine
John Mhyre (art direction) & Gordon Simm (set decoration)
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN MUSIC - ORIGINAL SCORE
James Horner, Avatar
Marvin Hamlisch, The Informant!
Randy Newman, The Princess and The Frog
Michael Giacchino, Up
Carter Burwell and Karen O, Where The Wild Things Are
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN MUSIC - ORIGINAL SONG
"All Is Love", Where The Wild Things Are; music & lyrics by Karen O.
"Take It All", Nine; music & lyrics by Maury Yeston.
"Trust Me", The Informant!; music by Marvin Hamlisch & lyrics by Alan and Marilyn Bergman.
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN COSTUME DESIGN
Janet Patterson, Bright Star
Odile Dicks-Mireaux, An Education
Anna B. Sheppard, Inglourious Basterds
Colleen Atwood, Nine
Sandy Powell, The Young Victoria
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN SOUND MIXING
Christopher Boyes, Andy Nelson, Juan Peralta and Gary Summers, Avatar
Paul N.J. Ottoson, The Hurt Locker
Robert Fernandez, Mike Prestwood-Smith and Richard Pryke, Nine
Paul Massey, Andy Nelson, Anna Behlmer and David Giammarco, Star Trek
Tom Myers, Michael Semanick and Ronald G. Roumas, Up
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN SOUND EDITING
Christopher Boyes, Addison Teague and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle, Avatar
Brent Burge and Chris Ward, District 9
Paul N.J. Ottoson, The Hurt Locker
Alan Rankin and Mark P. Stoeckinger, Star Trek
Tom Myers and Michael Silver, Up
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN VISUAL EFFECTS
John Bruno, Jonathan Rothbart, Eric Saindon and Guy Williams, Avatar
Roger Guyett, Paul Kavanagh, Kelly Port and Russell Earl, Star Trek
Volker Engel, John Kilshaw, Mike Vezina and Mohen Leo, 2012
BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN MAKEUP
Sarah Rubano and Leon von Solms, District 9
Sarah Monzani, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Rocky Faulkner and Jennifer Santiago, The Road
BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM About Elly (Iran) Asghar Farhadi, directors. Max Manus (Norway) Joachim Ronning and Espen Sandberg directors. Un Prophete (France) Jacques Audiard, director. Refractaire (Luxembourg) Nicholas Steil, director. The White Ribbon (Germany) Michael Haneke, director.
BEST ANIMATED FEATURE Coraline (Universal/Focus Features) Henry Selick. Fantastic Mr. Fox (20th Century Fox) Wes Anderson Ponyo (Studio Ghibli/Disney) Hayao Miyazaki The Princess and The Frog (Disney) John Musker and Ron Clements. Up (Disney/PIXAR) Pete Docter and Bob Peterson.
The point is, Rolo, that people are throwing a fit saying that they shouldn't have made it. So, basically, no matter how real a story is, if it plays on stereotypes it shouldn't be made, which would suggest we never have another Holoacust film, because it plays on Jewish stereotypes (yeah, a lot of people would have no problem with that). I mean, Woody Allen, could never make another film if that were the case. Nor could Spike Lee. Each have built careers on stereotypes, though Lee gets a pass because he used those stereotypes in an effort to break down the stereotype, but the point remains.
A filmmaker should not feel limited in what he can do just because his story happens to have strong sections of stereotype. It isn't like we're talking about a film that was a fictional story written as a series of stereotypes (like Crash). We're talking about a film that is based on a real situation that obviously impacted this football player very strongly if he allowed it to be filmed. Would you have supported a re-write of the story, even if it changed the truth, so that the family that took this poor black kid in, was also black? It would have erased the stereotype, but would it have been any less stereotypically carried out? Probably not. And I'm not defending the film, if it sucks, it sucks, but the point is that the film is being eviscerated for playing on stereotypes when it's not playing on stereotypes, but is telling a story from real life that just happens to feel stereotypical.
And who's to say that the filmmaker doesn't recognize that and hasn't taken pains to create real depth in the characters? Or do a Spike Lee and make it about breaking down stereotypes in spite of its origins. Now, it's going to be up for interpretation regardless (and it's in my pile of screeners to watch, so I'll see it eventually), but I think those who have lashed out so strongly against the story are allowing the absolute worst and extreme views of political correctness dictate the reception of the film.
They've villainized it because they think that by doing so, they are somehow drawing attention to some great wrong perpetrated on the black community because the film was made. But, the real question that should be asked and considered is: "Did the football player on whose life the film is based, find it an accurate and effective portrayal of the situation". If the answer to that is yes, then who are we to criticize that effort?
That's entirely my point on this matter. Should we lash out at this film because of some misplaced feeling of white guilt? Or should we look at it empirically, examine the real situation and then take the film as it is and ignore whether it is based on stereotypes or not? Now, before everyone goes and lashes out on this, I haven't seen the film.
For all I know, the film glorifies the stereotypes, ignores any potential narrative device that could be used to draw attention to this and specifically wallow in those cliches in order to make it palatable to white audiences. That could be entirely the case, but the few snippets of the enraged reviewers I read made it sound like they didn't even consider that possibility and just attacked it based on the aforementioned belief that all stereotypes are bad.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
OscarGuy wrote:Although I haven't checked out my screener for the film yet, I'm dumbfounded when I read a review of the film that criticizes it for being the "white wealthy woman saves poor black child" cliche, yet it's based on a real life story?
Well, cliches and stereotypes are usually based on a kernal of truth. Like the flamboyant gay hairdresser or the sassy black woman.
It just becomes annoying when it is applied to everyone in a certain group or no other type of image exists.
I am not commenting on the quality of Bullock's film, just pointing out why this shit just seems so old.
"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
Big Magilla wrote:Besides which, Oscar voters in their infinite wisdom might want to balance their bad mother supporting actress award to Mo'Nique with a good adoptive mother lead actress award to Saint Sandra.
If that happens, look for the NYT editorials about how the Academy is sending the message that black mothers are evil while white mothers are saints. Much hand wringing and white-guilt will ensue, than someone will say the Academy is just reacting to this post-racial Obama world we live in. :p
Edited By rolotomasi99 on 1259099862
"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
That's assuming Nine wins Best Picture and director, an event I'm not sure will occur. I think it's quite likely that The Lovely Bones can still end up winning Best Picture and Best Director. But, it's still too early to tell.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
