Building a Best Picture Slate, Through Directors and Scripts

[Big Magilla]

Woman in the Dunes was a cultural phenomenon from the get-go. It had a theatrical run in New York beginning September 16,1964 immediately following its showing at the Second New York Film Festival. It didn't open in Los Angeles until February 1965.

It had been nominated for an Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film at the 1964 Academy Awards, losing to Italy's Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. Masaki Kobayashi's Kwaidan (a July 1965 release in L.A., a November 1965 release in N.Y.) was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 1965 Academy Awards, losing to Czechoslovakia's The Shop on Main Street.

With both Woman in the Dunes and Kwaidan eligible for Best Director nominations in the same year, it's noteworthy that it was Teshigahara who became the first Japanese director to receive the distinction ahead of Akiri Kuorsawa. two years after the death of Yasujiro Ozu.

But, getting back to the question, no the nomination wasn't expected. David Lean (Doctor Zhivago) and William Wyler (The Collector) were expected over Elliot Silverstein (Cat Ballou) and Sidney J. Furie (The Ipcress File) who shockingly stole their slots at the DGA, but Teshigahara's nomination over Sidney Lumet (The Pawnbroker) was unexpected.

[mlrg]

a) The Internationalization of AMPAS: Or will Hamaguchi and Drive My Car get nominated or are the critics entirely powerless?
Okay, so first thing is that I’m a little annoyed at myself. Drive My Car was playing here, but only three screenings. I already did two movies in a row (Belfast and The Humans) and was hungry, so I decided to skip it. This was before it swept the critics awards. So now I haven’t seen it (should see it soon), but I’m coming in a little blind to just how AMPAS friendly it actually is. So, is its sweep of critics awards because it’s just an undeniable masterpiece (the way we were told other sweepers were) and if so, will AMPAS be forced to follow? We’ve had more acclaimed foreign language films with “public support” in the past ten years barely make a dent – A Separation and Son of Saul couldn’t make a dent in the best picture races with the critics – and they couldn’t break a slate that eventually included Everything Loud and Incredibly Close and Bridge of Spies (and had literal empty spots). Amour, Roma and Parasite got two out of three and of course made their picture/directing line-ups. I don’t think it was a great year for English filmmaking (when critics tend to look foreign, particularly New York. LA and National are a little more egalitarian). You could imagine a slightly different scenario where Licorice Pizza and The Power of the Dog battle it out with critics, but it does feel like a slightly underwhelming slate of English films AND the relative sui generis nature of these past two years aided it’s sweep.

This is an interesting point that has been singled out recently. Neverthless, 55 years ago Hiroshi Teshigahara got nominated for best director for Woman in the Dunes.

For those who were following the race at the time, was this nomination expected? Was the directors branch of the Academy "international enough" to notice this film (although it did compete at Cannes)?

[OscarGuy]

I have 7000 words going up tomorrow on my final predictions. Three hours and I'm sick, so I'm going to bed and hoping it all doesn't sound like gibberish in the morning.

[Okri]

I wanted to look at this through a different angle. I linked to this article last year and we’ve commented on some of it’s verities below and before.

a) The Internationalization of AMPAS: Or will Hamaguchi and Drive My Car get nominated or are the critics entirely powerless?
Okay, so first thing is that I’m a little annoyed at myself. Drive My Car was playing here, but only three screenings. I already did two movies in a row (Belfast and The Humans) and was hungry, so I decided to skip it. This was before it swept the critics awards. So now I haven’t seen it (should see it soon), but I’m coming in a little blind to just how AMPAS friendly it actually is. So, is its sweep of critics awards because it’s just an undeniable masterpiece (the way we were told other sweepers were) and if so, will AMPAS be forced to follow? We’ve had more acclaimed foreign language films with “public support” in the past ten years barely make a dent – A Separation and Son of Saul couldn’t make a dent in the best picture races with the critics – and they couldn’t break a slate that eventually included Everything Loud and Incredibly Close and Bridge of Spies (and had literal empty spots). Amour, Roma and Parasite got two out of three and of course made their picture/directing line-ups. I don’t think it was a great year for English filmmaking (when critics tend to look foreign, particularly New York. LA and National are a little more egalitarian). You could imagine a slightly different scenario where Licorice Pizza and The Power of the Dog battle it out with critics, but it does feel like a slightly underwhelming slate of English films AND the relative sui generis nature of these past two years aided it’s sweep.

But beyond the merits of the sweep remains the sheer fact of it. It should be a lock for a best picture nomination of if critics have any weight. In the first 65 years of New York, their best picture winner only missed a corresponding nomination five times. In the next 21? Also five (little concerning, but we know why). I do think the divide between critics and Oscar pundits has blurred and that blurring is disappointing. When critics act like critics, they get assailed (witness the recent meltdown over Dargis and Scott’s personal ballots)

And this is where I wonder exactly how impactful the internationalization will be. We’ve spoken about the number of foreign directors that have cracked the final five for directing. And while it’s certainly notable, I do go back to the fact that all these directors mentioned either had previous AMPAS success or worked in English language filmmaking. Hamaguchi’s track record is much smaller. I would be genuinely surprised if 1% of AMPAS had seen a film of his prior to this season. While that number might be higher for the directors with the new international slate, it’s going to live or die on the strength of voters’ response to it. And I genuinely wonder if enough voters have bumped the screener link up to actually watch it. I think if it does get picture or directing nominations, I believe we’ll have seen the biggest impact of the internationalization thus far. And if it misses, well, I think we’ll see the clearest indication of just how limited critical influence really is.

b) The expansion of AMPAS
In the aforementioned article, the author posits that we’ve reached the point where there are more people in AMPAS who’ve been invited in the past ten years then who were already in the organization. As we know, bigger tends to mean more palatable. As heard in a podcast about the critical echo chamber, you get everyone in a room to decide best pizza, you’re gonna get pepperoni or cheese. 2019 saw the first time four films got double digit nominations. It’s not quite that we’re seeing fewer films get nominated, exactly (that trend is true above the line, but not below) but I am curious how the expanded AMPAS plays out this year and in future years

c) The shifts within AMPAS
According to that article, the actors and writers have seen their relative voting power decrease. While the expansion of best picture has somewhat countermanded the potential impact of that, I suspect we’ll start seeing it actually play out in different ways. The groups that saw the biggest increase in influence were documentary filmmakers and animators, intriguingly (and persons at large). Since 2011, we’ve seen documentaries crack the finalist list in foreign film as well as get nominated; this is also true for animated films. In 2019, we saw a film get nominated for both documentary and foreign film (Honeyland). And of course, the animated category has always been kind to foreign entrants. This year, a film could conceivably be nominated for documentary, foreign film and animated (Flee). I do genuinely wonder if that expansion with those voting blocks, along with “there must be ten” could play out in Flee’s favour and actually sneak it in best picture.

[Sabin]

Great analysis, Tee!

I wrote a much longer post and then deleted it. As I write out my final predictions, I've been noticing that I have more films than end up with four or less nominations than usual. I took a glance back and noticed what a rare occurrence four nominations for a Best Picture nominee was from when I started watching the Oscars (1995) to when the Best Picture roster was expanded. Since that happened, there's routinely one or two films that wind up with four nominations per year (if any). But fewer than four is still an infrequent occurrence. It's happened a little more than a handful of times since the roster expanded and in all but one case it was Best Picture + Acting + Screenplay (The Tree of Life had Picture + Director + Cinematography).

Right now, there are 6-7 films that I could see getting in the Best Picture lineup that seem to be strongest in the running for four nominations or fewer: Being the Ricardos, CODA, Don't Look Up, Drive My Car, King Richard, Licorice Pizza, The Lost Daughter, and Tick, Tick... Boom! Obviously, not all of these films are going to make the cut. Some like Don't Look Up, King Richard, and Licorice Pizza have a clear path to a higher total. I don't bore you with dissections of all of their chances but a few observations:

Don't Look Up feels like the easiest to predict: Picture + Screenplay and then perhaps its song (which factors centrally in the film, but is still a parody) and I think editing is its other best shot. McKay's other two films were up for editing and perhaps came up runner up for winning. Four seems about right. I'm not much considering Leonardo DiCaprio but it wouldn't astonish me.

CODA looks like a perfect example of a Best Picture nominee with three nominations: Picture + Acting + Screenplay. Just like An Education and Brooklyn. Not to minimize but all three were women's coming-of-age stories. All three picked up nominations for Best Actress. I wonder if this might help Emilia Jones in a truly scattershot Best Actress lineup where we are eyeballing a full lineup of contenders without accompanying Best Picture nominations, especially when we have to ask how many voters are going to watch The Eyes of Tammy Faye when pressed for time. There's another precedent to CODA picking up four nominations, Picture + Actress + Supporting Actor + Screenplay: Winter's Bone.

Licorice Pizza is a weird one because I truly don't know if it's going to end up with Best Picture + Director + Screenplay and then some acting plaudits but zero out down-ballot, or zero out on acting and pick up down ballot awards. Either scenario seems just as likely, as down pulling in both OR neither and becoming the first Best Picture nominee of the recent era to get three nominations for Best Picture, Director, and Screenplay but nothing else.

Tick, Tick...Boom! I have no idea how this fucking thing is going to do. I keep wanting to delete it from my predictions and pick out an alternate for Andrew Garfield even, with memories of James Franco in my head. But this one is different. Franco was doing an impersonation while Garfield is going for broke with a very heartfelt performance. Working in support of Tick, Tick.. Boom! in general is that it's one of the few things in my life that Boomers and Millennials both agree on. The older crowd and younger crowd generally loves it. It also did pretty well with the precursors, showing up for screenwriting (benefiting a lot from absences), editing (benefiting a smidge from category shuffling), and sound. I honestly can't evaluate its chances because it doesn't seem like a Best Picture contender. It seems more like a Netflix movie. I can't tell if I'm overrating or underrating its chances. I also can't tell if I'm underrating Netflix's chances. They push hard year after year and they've got a wide open slate. Is there any reason why they can't run the board if nobody else is really playing?

[rolotomasi99]

Good analysis Mister Tee.

What I find interesting is how even with up to 10 Best Picture nominees possible, some highly nominated films can still miss out. Since the switch-over in 2009, the movie with the most nominations not nominated for the top prize is CAROL (6 nominations). This is my second favorite film of 2015 so it is quite surprising to see it not have the support necessary to cross the BP threshold. Unlike say THE FORCE AWAKENS and INTERSTELLAR (5 nominations each), this film's nominees included two actors and the screenplay. You would think at least 5% of the Academy would put it at number 1 on their ballots.

I bring this up simply to point out how a movie like THE TRAGEDY OF MACBETH could be admired and receive multiple nominations but still be passed over in Best Picture for something like DON'T LOOK UP, whose only other nomination may be its screenplay.

I wish the Academy voters made a little more sense in their choices, but sometimes the movies they select for Best Picture are not ones they recognize in their own branch.

After how well VICE did when I thought it was all-but dead, I think DON'T LOOK UP is guaranteed a Best Picture nomination. I would love to be wrong, but Adam MacKay clearly has a strong fanbase at the Oscars.

[Mister Tee]

Having covered the four acting categories a while back, I figure I should make a stab at the other four above-the-line categories: film/director/two screenplays. These categories have often been inter-related; it makes sense to consider them together.

The wrinkle this year is wondering what (if any) difference the return-to-obligatory-10 will make. How many of our assumptions about predicting (start with PGA, subtract 1-2/add 1-2) were peculiar to the sliding scale standard used to create the slate? How related will directing/screenwriting nominees be to the ultimate 10? In the two previous years with a rule of 10 (2009-10), 17 of 20 eventual nominees also had screenplay nods…and 2 of the missing 3 were nominated by the directors (the only unaccounted-for entry: The Blind Side). But in 2011 –- the first year of the sliding scale –- only 6 of 9 candidates had either screenwriting or directing nods. Was there something in the sliding scale rules that made that more likely? It didn’t happen all that often -- in most of the 9 years since, all or all-but-one best picture nominees had one of those primary back-up credentials. But 2017 and 2018 both saw exceptions. So, maybe there was something in the formula that invited variation.

Anyway…I’m opting to build my best picture slate from the bottom up: constructing the directing and screenplay slates first, and extrapolating my field of 10 from there.

It’s easiest to start with the directing category. There’s the DGA 5, about which we can say with (almost) complete confidence, all 5 will make the best picture slate -– since the expansion in 2009, only one DGA nominee (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) failed at best picture nomination. (Even in the directors’ massacre of 2012, the three DGA nominees who missed AMPAS saw their films best-picture nominated.) Of course, this isn’t remotely to assume they’ll all make the directing slate; likely the opposite: people year after year predict the DGA 5 to carry over, but it’s happened only 5 times in 50 or so years since the DGA set their 5-nominees standard. It’s easy to find alternatives that might appeal to an auteur-inclined branch: Joel Coen for Macbeth, Maggie Gyllenhaal for The Lost Daughter…and, above all, the foreign-language guys. The recent drive for diversity has, as side effect, substantially increased the number of overseas members in the Academy in general, and this branch especially. This surely had something to do with the Vinterberg nomination last year, and the Pawlikowski nod 3 years back – as well as the more widely shared Roma/Parasite/Minari designations. This year, Ryusuke Hamaguchi is the logical candidate for such a spot -– the critical acclaim for Drive My Car is directing branch catnip. But I’d say also don’t rule out Pedro, a late-ascending candidate.

Of course, then there’s the Rubik’s cube-like process of trying to figure who of the DGA’s choices could be pushed aside for any interlopers. Sometimes it's just the one you’d expect (Garth Davis in 2016, Sorkin last year), but, other times, it can be a surprise (Eastwood 2014, Greengrass 2013). The folks at AwardsWorthy are trying to will Branagh into that ousted position; I’ve warned for weeks that Spielberg has some history with that unlucky spot, and the BAFTA results underline this. Truthfully…no one but Jane Campion can really feel secure in her status; we’ll, as always, listen to this category with great interest.

My stab at the five: Campion, Villeneuve, Anderson, Hamaguchi, Branagh in roughly that order -- with Spielberg, Coen, Almodovar and Gyllenhaal in the wings.

The Screenplay categories are more complicated still, with a lengthy list of candidates on each side, and the complicating factor of WGA exclusions.

Best Original Screenplay is somewhat the simpler of the two, with Belfast the only clear top-tier candidate kept from WGA consideration. We know we have to find a spot for that on the AMPAS ballot; it’s also pretty clear Licorice Pizza will be there alongside. Beyond that, it gets murkier…but I’m inclined to say King Richard is closer to a certainty than the rest. After that, however…

A lot of people think Don’t Look Up is a dead-sure shot, for reasons of Netflix popularity, AFI/PGA/WGA nominations, plus McKay’s AMPAS history –- all this apparently enough to obscure its dismal Metacritic score. The (to me, surprise) best picture showing at BAFTA only underlines this. The general reasoning: it’s going to be up for best picture, therefore it has to be nominated for screenplay (because, honestly, where else could it be cited? Best song? Score? After yesterday, I suppose actor.) I came into this week thinking there was at least a possibility it’s omitted entirely -- is a big Nominations Day shut-out –- and I still wonder if the BAFTA showing is indicative of Europeans somehow being more impressed by the film’s political stance than most Americans. But it’s hard to see it missing with such strong support from the British wing.

Two oft-nominated writers –- Aaron Sorkin and Wes Anderson –- made the WGA ballot for less than most-hailed work; it’s likely one benefitted from the Belfast disqualification. Being the Ricardos has obviously been cited more places this season (notably PGA), and seems to be the one most are carrying over…but I’m not sure The French Dispatch isn’t more likely to be chosen by the writers’ branch. The fluke of Molly’s Game aside, Sorkin’s mostly picked up nods for films firmly in the best picture mix, and missed for marginal contenders like A Few Good Men, The American President, Charlie Wilson’s War, and Steve Jobs. Anderson, contrarily, has picked up solo nods for The Royal Tenenbaums and Moonrise Kingdom, in greatly competitive years. In the end, it’s quite possible neither will make it.

An oddity: despite a general Academy trend toward foreign-language nominees in recent years, the writers’ branch –- which pioneered such voting as far back as the 1940s, and was, for decades, by far the sector that most honored films not in English -– has not really kept pace. They’ve gone for the best picture contenders (Amour, Roma, Parasite, Minari), but didn’t echo the directors’ nods to Cold War or Another Round (despite having matched almost all such directing nods for half a century), and passed over such possible strong choices as Blue is the Warmest Color, Son of Saul, and Pain and Glory. Still, one can’t help hoping for a return to their traditional favoring of foreign efforts -– meaning Parallel Mothers, A Hero or The Worst Person in the World could show up (none competed at WGA, so we can’t assess their strength).

A few smaller indies were also WGA-excluded: Pig, which would have the most hipster/critical support, and Mass, which has been an online enthusiasm all year, but has so far failed to turn up much of anywhere. But I’m not sure the branch is apt to make such an un-forecast choice these days; Margin Call is the last I can remember.

I think there’s room for variation with this slate; I can envision everything from the dullish -- (WGA)(-French Dispatch)(+Belfast) -- to a lively mix of foreign and indie titles alongside Belfast/Licorice. My current (fungible) compromise slate: Belfast, Don’t Look Up, French Dispatch, King Richard, Licorice Pizza – with Parallel Mothers/Ricardos/Pig fully within-range alternates.

Best Adapted Screenplay is that much crazier, because nearly a full slate -– including the almost-certain winner -- could be constructed from the WGA blacklist.

The Power of the Dog, despite that absence, is getting a nomination. That’s the only definitive thing I can say about this category.

CODA is, by all indications (SAG/PGA/WGA/Internet grapevine), second most secure. This despite the fact that the film is a blind spot for me and, I have to assume, some voters, who haven’t sprung for Apple TV. (I know: I’ve got to sign up for that free trial and zip through it –- plus all of Ted Lasso -– before my 7 days are up. I’m waiting till after nominations, in case something else from there slips in.) It’s weird to have a seeming Oscar sure-shot so barely-accessible, but all the pundits who matter assure me it’s happening.

Beyond those two seeming certainties, there are two basic fields: the other four WGA nominees, and the nearly-as-large group of films that were ineligible.

I think of Dune, West Side Story, and tick, tick…Boom! as occupying the same position -– strong-enough best picture hopefuls, WGA nominees, but normally apt to be passed over by the writers' branch for genre reasons (epics and musicals have often been nixed, as not “written” enough). Dune, I think, is actually a fairly solid adaptation, and BAFTA has endorsed it, but I can still easily see it being bypassed. West Side Story at least has the Kushner imprimatur, and the publicity over the new story elements he provided. And tick, tick…Boom! has the advantage of being less familiar to many branch members, plus a smaller/more intimate project –- it can feel like a sleeper the writers would want to encourage, rather than a big Hollywood product that doesn’t need their help.

The last WGA nominee, Nightmare Alley, doesn’t strike me as a real contender. I think it simply benefited from all the exclusions.

I know what I said above, about the branch not being as there for foreign films as they once were, but it’s hard for me to imagine them ignoring Drive My Car –- though the film is also exquisitely directed, it’s very much a writer’s piece; so much great dialogue, and such powerful climactic scenes, should make this a sure nominee.

When I first noticed how many of the year’s strongest films were either originals or in genres not historically noted by the writers’ branch, I figured both The Lost Daughter and Passing would get slots here. Now I think there’ll only be room for one at most, and I imagine, given the desire to acknowledge Gyllenhaal’s ascension to the creative team, The Lost Daughter will be more likely.

One last just-for-the-record: The Tragedy of Macbeth. It’s not an obvious candidate but 1) I expect it to be overall popular with voters; 2) the ’96 Branagh/Hamlet nomination offers precedent; and 3) the Coens have surprised us in this category on more than one occasion.

So, what’s my final call on the category? Power of the Dog, CODA, Drive My Car, The Lost Daughter, tick…tick…Boom! –- though very iffy on that last one. Alternates in order: Dune, The Tragedy of Macbeth, West Side Story (that last one fading fast).

So, finally, on to best picture.

As I say, I start with the DGA five –

Belfast
Dune
Licorice Pizza
The Power of the Dog
West Side Story

Because they keep showing up, and feel the likeliest sort of second-tier candidates, add in –

CODA
King Richard

Two foreign-language films (Cold War, Another Round) have recently had directing nominations, but have not carried over to a best picture nod. But every single foreign-language film that’s had screenplay along with directing has made the best picture cut. Since I say it’s getting both those nominations, I add --

Drive My Car

My general observation of the sliding scale years is, the good years get 9 nominees, the bad get 8. Since I think this year, like last, is pretty lackluster, I’d normally stop here. But, since we have a guaranteed 10, I needs must press on.

The BAFTA tick…tick…Boom! shut-out gives pause -– maybe it’s simply too American/NY a story? -- but I think the film has had many more positive signals (PGA, ACE, WGA). Since I’m all in, predicting it for screenplay nomination, I say it joins this list --

tick…tick…Boom!

For the 10th slot…I was fully ready to declare The Tragedy of Macbeth my hill to die on -- but BAFTA has given me cold feet, and made me retreat to Don’t Look Up. Even though I still think McKay’s film has a pretty thin best picture resume, the possibility it gets actor/screenplay/song/score could be just enough to support a best picture showing --

Don't Look Up

So, the full list --

Belfast
CODA
Don't Look Up
Drive My Car
Dune
King Richard
Licorice Pizza
The Power of the Dog
tick…tick…Boom!
West Side Story

But I want to highlight Macbeth as a film that might way over-perform its non-showing at BAFTA. I could see it turning up in actor, director, screenplay, cinematography, production design, costumes, score –- even missing one or two of those, it could easily slip into the best picture group. It kills me to leave it out.

I see people are already posting full predictions, some of which agree with me here and some of which diverge. This is simply my current thinking, a bare four days before our first set of questions get answered.