Indiana critics go with…do I have to say it?

Posted by · 7:40 pm · December 12th, 2010

Check out The Circuit for the list of winners.

UPDATE: The St. Louis critics have announced their nominees.  I won’t bother with a separate post.  Check them out here.




→ 40 Comments Tags: , | Filed in: Daily

40 responses so far

  • 1 12-12-2010 at 7:42 pm

    DylanS said...

    Steamrollin’ through the awards season!

  • 2 12-12-2010 at 7:43 pm

    JJ1 said...

    Kris, I loved The Social Network. I know you did. So I’m curious …..

    …. do YOU find it monotonous/annoying when one movie (like TSN, and No Country, Slumdog, Hurt Locker) dominates a critics awards season?

  • 3 12-12-2010 at 7:44 pm

    JJ1 said...

    Sorry, to clarify … The Social Network is my 2nd favorite film of the year (still have a couple to see), and I find it’s constant wins monotonous/slightly annoying; which is why I’m asking you. :)

  • 4 12-12-2010 at 7:47 pm

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    JJ: Yes. Because it’s patently lazy.

  • 5 12-12-2010 at 7:58 pm

    forts said...

    Is this the first time Toy Story 3 didn’t get Best Animated film? Nice to see some variety although I wish there was some Tangled love

  • 6 12-12-2010 at 8:06 pm

    sosgemini said...

    The geeks shall project their superiority onto the world via Critic awards. :giggle:

  • 7 12-12-2010 at 8:08 pm

    Andrej said...

    Despite the fact the winners are within Oscar contention boundaries, there is a bit of novelty thrown around. Inception and How To Train Your Dragon winning is kinda refreshing.

  • 8 12-12-2010 at 8:22 pm

    Speaking English said...

    Seeing as how “The Social Network” was the best reviewed film of the year, I don’t see how it’s lazy for the critics to be handing it awards they feel it truly deserves.

  • 9 12-12-2010 at 8:31 pm

    AmericanRequiem said...

    Whoever said Tangled, yes yes and yes. I am hoping this film has a strong showing, god i loved it

  • 10 12-12-2010 at 8:35 pm

    Hans said...

    My problem with the monotony of awards season sweeps like this is, if I’m looking at this from a philosophical perspective, is it really possible that bunches of different groups of people with different tastes and likes and dislikes can really arrive at the same objective conclusion regarding the best film of the year over and over?

    And add me to the Tangled pot of love. It’s sitting above Toy Story 3 for me right now.

  • 11 12-12-2010 at 8:41 pm

    Speaking English said...

    I think it’s very possible different groups of people can come to a (somewhat) objective conclusion. For instance, a year in which “The Godfather” is in competition. Or “Citizen Kane.” I’m sure most, if not absolutely all, critics would pick those films. Not saying “The Social Network” is along those lines, but people clearly feel passionately for it.

  • 12 12-12-2010 at 8:47 pm

    SpidermanUpdate said...

    Update: I just came on the ceiling (again!).

  • 13 12-12-2010 at 8:50 pm

    red_wine said...

    ” Seeing as how “The Social Network” was the best reviewed film of the year, I don’t see how it’s lazy for the critics to be handing it awards they feel it truly deserves. ”

    Its not as simple as that. In 2007, Ratatouille was the best reviewed film of the year, Wall-E in 2008, The Queen or Pan’s Labyrinth in 2006. None of them won everything. Infact between them they won quite few.

    The Social Network lost best Director! No that absolutely ruins its perfect record. Um.. somewhat.

    And who would know that critics would show more bias against animation than even the Academy. I see Toy Story 3 now regularly failing to make the Top 5 in critic awards when they have nominations. While Inception is the one film that is nominated each and every where.

  • 14 12-12-2010 at 9:11 pm

    Kevin K. said...

    Nolan for director, Franco, Portman, Bale, and Steinfeld for acting, and HTTYD for animated film. I’m kind of in love with Indiana right now.

  • 15 12-12-2010 at 9:13 pm

    The Dude said...

    I don’t find it surprising that TSN did not snag director (I was waiting for somebody to throw Nolan’s name in)…what I am surprised about is that Fincher didn’t even get runner-up despite his film getting BP.

    I know some prognosticators were wondering about Portman’s Oscar chances considering that, before today, she wasn’t really making any headway in the critic’s circles. Well, she had a VERY good day today, so I think that will change the tune of some people.

    And I think that it’s safe to say that, if Sorkin loses the Oscar, it may be one of the biggest Oscar upsets of all time.

  • 16 12-12-2010 at 9:15 pm

    Filipe said...

    Speaking English, if you don’t want to see anyone regretting The Social Network winning everything and turning the race boring and boring and see someone who does say it’s getting boring, you should go to Awards Daily.
    People there seem to worship Sorkin, Fincher, Eisenberg, even Timberlake.

  • 17 12-12-2010 at 9:18 pm

    Hatter said...

    I won’t say the critics are lazy though…
    Surely these associations are not adopting a wait-and-see voting system to name the best film, no?
    More importantly the winner must represent (one of) the best that year.
    And hopefully when one looks back from three years ahead, it would still be relevant and deservingly so.
    “The Social Network” does seem as a fit, hence I personally don’t have a problem seeing critics acknowledging that.

  • 18 12-12-2010 at 9:30 pm

    cecil said...

    Filipe, I am one of those people who worship at the altar of “The Social Network,” and I’m proud of that. Still I am open to other films winning the BP other than TSN. Won’t be shocked or upset if NY will go for something completely different. They can go which way the want to, it’s their power as critics. Personally I’m torn between Inception and TSN this year as BP.

  • 19 12-12-2010 at 9:40 pm

    Speaking English said...

    Filipe, thanks, but I know AwardsDaily is infamous for that kind of stuff, and frankly I find that far more irritating than the cynicism here. ;)

  • 20 12-12-2010 at 10:20 pm

    sosgemini said...

    Wait, are we really trying to classify all of these critic groups as diverse? Seriously? What’s makes up the majority of these groups? White males, right? And don’t even try to tell me they (geeky writers) are not projecting their own lives into these wins? Sure they are…commonality is a B-word. I find it hilarious that not as single awards watch group is reporting on the inappropriate if not racist comments made by David Rusell when he calls one of the characters in a film, a black guy, and now we are refusing to acknowledge the apparent demo bias in The Social Network winnings this weekend. Come on people!!! It’s not a bad thing to point out the obvious. TSN is speaking to a lot of people within these groups. But is that going to translate to an Oscar win when a truly diverse group (with a heck of a lot less white male geeks will be voting) makes the call? Only time will tell….

  • 21 12-12-2010 at 10:25 pm

    Filipe said...

    I’m white and I liked Precious. So, why can’t black people like The Social Network?

  • 22 12-12-2010 at 10:33 pm

    sosgemini said...

    ^^^ I knew someone was going to make that comment. LOL I dare not say that is the sole reason TSN is getting all the praise but it’s got to be a factor (one that is missing in this weekends reporting). Interestingly enough, when Precious was on it’s award circuit wins, there was reporting on “white man’s guilt” as a reason. Not sure I buy that . It could have been the quality acting, the unique story. All I am saying is that there is some serious relate-ability biases at play that can explain/cloud why TSN would win within all these critic awards that are not being reported. Especially when you consider that an incident like the before mentioned comments by Russell would not be ignored if all the Oscar-watch bloggers were black folk. So why is it being ignored? Cha know what I mean?

  • 23 12-12-2010 at 11:06 pm

    Rob said...

    You’re an idiot.

  • 24 12-12-2010 at 11:17 pm

    Paul8148 said...

    Hailee Steinfeld finally wins something, hopefully the start of a march to Oscar Sunday…

  • 25 12-12-2010 at 11:41 pm

    sosgemini said...

    Who me? For having a different perspective on things? Isn’t that the point of Oscar watching? To bring ones perspective? It’s not a science. It’s just a bunch of sharing of ones mind.

  • 26 12-13-2010 at 12:40 am

    Guy Lodge said...

    is it really possible that bunches of different groups of people with different tastes and likes and dislikes can really arrive at the same objective conclusion regarding the best film of the year over and over?

    Okay, for starters, calling any critics’ award an “objective conclusion” is nonsense. There are no objective conclusions in the evaluation of art. And yes, it kind of makes sense that “The Social Network” keeps winning despite the diverse tastes of the people voting — it’s the film that the most people can agree on. They may have other favorites that they vote for in earlier rounds, but ones with more scattered support that eventually don’t figure in the final result.

    To use another example, “The Social Network” recently topped the Sight & Sound critics’ poll, but only received votes from 22 of the 85 critics participating. That’s a significant minority, but with other votes going to a vast range of different films, it’s still the most unified band of support for any film in the poll. Never mistake a collective vote for individual unanimity.

  • 27 12-13-2010 at 12:59 am

    SJG said...

    St. Louis has a “worst movie” category? That’s ballsy. I like it.

    Also, it does feel like a bit of a stretch I think for all critics to uniformly consider only one movie the absolute best of the year (although Guy’s comment does put things in perspective a bit). I love the Social Network and I technically agree with its winning every time, but I just don’t know that I buy that everyone who’s voting for it in these critics’ circles really believe it’s the best. Surely there’s more variety in opinions, but no one wants to rock the boat.

    And I’m so glad to see How to Train Your Dragon win something. It’s definitely the best animated picture of the year, but it doesn’t have the panties-throwing magic of the Pixar brand to propel it to awards-sweep height.

  • 28 12-13-2010 at 1:24 am

    SJG said...

    Hey, I posted comments on this thread and the last one that seem to have disappeared for some reason! Grr.

  • 29 12-13-2010 at 2:28 am

    Hans said...

    I’m still holding my breath on Inception. TDK was doing about as well up to this point in the precursors, even moreso considering Ledger was sweeping the Supporting Actor awards. The Globes were a bellwether to the eventual Oscar fate of TDK, so I’ll be anxiously awaiting Tuesday.

  • 30 12-13-2010 at 3:53 am

    Andrew M said...

    Great to see “Waking Sleeping Beauty” on the St. Louis list. It’s a really good doc. about Disney animation in the early 90’s and defiantly a movie that people should seek out.

  • 31 12-13-2010 at 4:16 am

    Graysmith said...

    Neither one’s winners/nominees are all that bad. Very interesting to see St. Louis critics giving some love to Javier Bardem and several noms to Scott Pilgrim. Both are certainly way above the Washington D.C. critics, who are currently in the Razzie position in terms of critics awards this year for their utter lack of imagination. Although the BFCA rival them.

    Anyway, always nice to see John Hawkes’ name popping up. I’m glad all the critics aren’t forgetting him, even if most are.

    Oh, and what about How Do You Know getting a worst film nomination?! The last holdout of the year.. I guess there’s your reason why they never screened it early, ha.

  • 32 12-13-2010 at 4:46 am

    Graysmith said...

    As for The Social Network’s dominance, if you look at the reviews it got it’s kind of in a league of it’s own. Here are the Rotten Tomatoes percentages and more importantly average rating for the Best Picture contenders (save for True Grit), sorted in order of the latter:

    The Social Network
    96% 9/10

    Toy Story 3
    99% 8.8/10

    The King’s Speech
    94% 8.6/10

    Winter’s Bone
    94% 8.4/10

    127 Hours
    93% 8.3/10

    Black Swan
    87% 8.2/10

    Inception
    87% 8/10

    The Kids Are All Right
    94% 7.8/10

    The Town
    94% 7.7/10

    The Fighter
    85% 7.6/10

    I know, I know. This is Rotten Tomatoes, bla bla bla. But The Social Network’s average rating of 9 is extremely high, and the top two films following it are not really the type of films that generally get picked as the critics darling, one being animation (same bias against it the Academy has, basically) and one being a “safe, Oscar movie”. So that leaves Winter’s Bone, and 8.4 versus 9.0 is a big difference.

    That said, I agree with what’s been said. It’s still lazy, unimaginative and utterly boring that all these groups seem to collectively arrive at the same thing.. But I can understand why because The Social Network really is in a league of its own.

  • 33 12-13-2010 at 4:50 am

    Graysmith said...

    ^

    Compare it with 2007, when No Country for Old Men had an 8.5 average rating on Rotten Tomatoes versus There Will Be Blood’s 8.4. Much tighter competition for the affection of the critics that time.

  • 34 12-13-2010 at 4:55 am

    Graysmith said...

    ^

    And of course, last year. The Hurt Locker dominated, and looking at the reviews it had an 8.4 rating, versus 8.1 for Up in the Air and 7.7 for Inglourious Basterds, to name a few.

    And The Social Network has an average rating of 9.0! Just think how much of a favourite The Hurt Locker was, and it “only” had 8.4 on Rotten Tomatoes.

    Okay, now I’m done.

  • 35 12-13-2010 at 6:07 am

    ScottC said...

    St. Louis really likes Scott Pilgrim – and it’s interesting to see Hereafter show up on a Worst Film list.

  • 36 12-13-2010 at 7:20 am

    McAllister said...

    I love that they chose “Lebanon” for foreign language film. Great film.

  • 37 12-13-2010 at 8:21 am

    Keil Shults said...

    Have people taken notice of the fact that How Do You Know made St. Louis’ Worst of the Year list?

    Also, I don’t fully agree with the remarks that a critics group is being lazy for awarding the film that seems to be winning the top award from most of the other groups. Obviously, it’s a very strong film that a lot of people love and admire, not to mention that it has a certain level of hipness and social relevance. Sure, some people may love Black Swan or Carlos more than TSN, but neither title is likely to be an overwhelming favorite among an entire group.

    Again, TSN is a great film and if released later in the year as a surprise Oscar entry, or if released in another year with a different pool of nominees, we would not be getting qutie as much whining as what seems to be going on here. All these people labeling it a boring choice need to consider that it’s a Sorkin-scripted Fincher film with a young, relatively star-free cast that’s witty, intelligent, fast-paced, relevant, expertly crafted, and isn’t the typical crowd-pandering Oscar bait that normally dominates the awards season. We should be thrilled that a film like this (probably still my #1 pick for 2010, though there’s quite a bit I haven’t seen) is getting so much praise and attention.

  • 38 12-13-2010 at 8:34 am

    Maxim said...

    Keil, in the year of some real turkeys I bet you that St. Louis critics are not just wrong but are just trying to stir a controversy. People were making similar statements about “Spanglish” – a film I quite enjoy.

    I’ll be seeing “How Do You Know” soon as I can.

  • 39 12-13-2010 at 8:44 am

    Keil Shults said...

    I was just surprised that few (if any) seem to be discussing that choice. Then again, I’ve been out of the loop for the past day or so, but that Worst Of mention is the first official news I’ve heard regarding the film’s quality.

  • 40 12-13-2010 at 9:10 am

    Keil Shults said...

    One other thing regarding The Social Network…

    I’ve been consuming movie reviews and industry news since 1990, when I was 11 1/2 and I happened upon the first few issues of this new magazine my uncle was getting called Entertainment Weekly (back when Gremlins 2 and Bill Cosby wearing a Bart Simpson t-shirt could make the cover). Anyway, in 20 years of reading about film, I’ve rarely come across a film that was as critically lauded across the board as TSN. Even films like Sideways, Pulp Fiction, No Country for Old Men, and Saving Private Ryan have their fair share of detractors. The Social Network does too, but its RT stats make it clear that not only do an overwhelming percentage of people who see it love it, but the average rating suggests that they REALLY love it. It is extremely rare for a widely released film (especially a non-Pixar release) to fare that well with the critics, especially once the number of reviews enters triple-digit territory. And while I realize that some real idiots and nobodies are allowed to post their reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, the site can still be a valuable indicator of sorts. Looking at it now reveals that the number of TSN reviews is up to 256, only 9 of which have been deemed “negative.” That is impressive in its own right, but pales in comparison to the staggeringly high 9 out of 10 average rating that the film possesses, despite having been evaluated by over 250 different people. Many of these reviews were posted well after the initial hubbub surrounding the film’s release, which suggests that even though a critically adored film about the birth of Facebook would seem prone to backlash, the latecomers still felt strongly enough about the picture to rate it very highly. It truly is remarkable, not to mention evidence enough that people have no business being surprised or outraged by its numerous critics group awards. Obviously, if you hate the movie, you’ll be annoyed that it’s winning a lot of prizes, but you have to be mature enough to concede the fact that it’s obviously loved by a vast majority of critics.