Posted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:18 am
It's been an hour. Only five replies?
It's clear who the biggest winner is today: Inglorious Bastards. Except for Waltz, it's been all but invisible from the precursors. This could presage smoother sailing from here on.
The other big winner is The Hurt Locker, which is having a golden streak so far for a movie that really WAS invisible up to now. If the Globes, fer cryin' out loud, nominate it for Best Picture-Director-Screenplay*, then there's momentum going on here which won't stop until they re-release the film. And then, once again, no one will want to see it. But who knows? An acting nominee would have been nice, but this is an ongoing breakthrough.
*Wait! Did I say screenplay? Here it is in the screenplay category, with no "A Serious Man" to compete along side it. On the other hand, we do have "It's Complicated." I'm intrigued! I'm gonna go out tonight to see "It's Complicated", and discover what mysteries of the universe it conceals in that romantic-comedy format which "A Serious Man" lacked.
On the surface, "Nine" did very well. Best Picture, three acting nominations, and a song. But for this group, you'd think it would do better, no? With such a huge cast, wouldn't you have thought there'd be a multiple nod in the Supporting Actress category, maybe, considering the nature of this starstruck organization? Instead, that privilege is bestowed upon "Up In the Air", which is another proof of strength for that film by the "loser" director. But, back to "Nine", there's also no Rob Marshall nomination, and that's the killer. It's muted showings with the precusors so far is confirmed here.
What other musical was recently nominated at the Globes for Best Picture Comedy/Musical with several acting noms, but denied a Best Director nom? I'm sure Italiano could give us the answer.
As it is with "Precious". Best Film and two acting noms, but again: no director and no screenplay, which are crucial for low-budget films dependent upon them in the absense of Hollywood star glamor or large budgets. "Precious" will still be nominated for Best Film at the Oscars, thanks to the 10 nominees rule. Were we back on the older-better system, I'd say it's chances were slim and getting slimmer.
One more thing. I may have been a little hard on Reitman when I said he doesn't seem to be getting anything close to the love his film has received. True, he's not being honored as much as his film or the cast, and he's not being honored anywhere nearly as much as Katherine Bigelow has been. But, c'mon. At this point, that's as much as anyone else (other than Bigelow). With the exception of Clint Eastwood - whom, it's safe to say, is not going to win the Directing Oscar this year - he's on equal footing with all the other candidates.
A Best Picture and Director nod for "Avatar" is positive, but the lack of acting nods means this is no "Titanic". 2009 belongs to "Up in the Air".
Edited By Sonic Youth on 1260891326
It's clear who the biggest winner is today: Inglorious Bastards. Except for Waltz, it's been all but invisible from the precursors. This could presage smoother sailing from here on.
The other big winner is The Hurt Locker, which is having a golden streak so far for a movie that really WAS invisible up to now. If the Globes, fer cryin' out loud, nominate it for Best Picture-Director-Screenplay*, then there's momentum going on here which won't stop until they re-release the film. And then, once again, no one will want to see it. But who knows? An acting nominee would have been nice, but this is an ongoing breakthrough.
*Wait! Did I say screenplay? Here it is in the screenplay category, with no "A Serious Man" to compete along side it. On the other hand, we do have "It's Complicated." I'm intrigued! I'm gonna go out tonight to see "It's Complicated", and discover what mysteries of the universe it conceals in that romantic-comedy format which "A Serious Man" lacked.
On the surface, "Nine" did very well. Best Picture, three acting nominations, and a song. But for this group, you'd think it would do better, no? With such a huge cast, wouldn't you have thought there'd be a multiple nod in the Supporting Actress category, maybe, considering the nature of this starstruck organization? Instead, that privilege is bestowed upon "Up In the Air", which is another proof of strength for that film by the "loser" director. But, back to "Nine", there's also no Rob Marshall nomination, and that's the killer. It's muted showings with the precusors so far is confirmed here.
What other musical was recently nominated at the Globes for Best Picture Comedy/Musical with several acting noms, but denied a Best Director nom? I'm sure Italiano could give us the answer.
As it is with "Precious". Best Film and two acting noms, but again: no director and no screenplay, which are crucial for low-budget films dependent upon them in the absense of Hollywood star glamor or large budgets. "Precious" will still be nominated for Best Film at the Oscars, thanks to the 10 nominees rule. Were we back on the older-better system, I'd say it's chances were slim and getting slimmer.
One more thing. I may have been a little hard on Reitman when I said he doesn't seem to be getting anything close to the love his film has received. True, he's not being honored as much as his film or the cast, and he's not being honored anywhere nearly as much as Katherine Bigelow has been. But, c'mon. At this point, that's as much as anyone else (other than Bigelow). With the exception of Clint Eastwood - whom, it's safe to say, is not going to win the Directing Oscar this year - he's on equal footing with all the other candidates.
A Best Picture and Director nod for "Avatar" is positive, but the lack of acting nods means this is no "Titanic". 2009 belongs to "Up in the Air".
Edited By Sonic Youth on 1260891326