Well, if you didn’t get the message after last night’s DGA result, SAG’s Best Ensemble award just underlined it for you — the Best Picture race is over. In the 16 years that the three Guilds have co-existed, only one film has taken the big prize from the DGA, PGA and SAG and not won the Best Picture Oscar — and “Apollo 13” was handicapped by its lack of a Best Director Oscar bid. No such obstacle in this case: “The King’s Speech” has it in the bag.
So, it seems, do a couple of other folks. It was a highly predictable night, as the de facto frontrunner prevailed in each of the four individual acting categories.
Colin Firth, of course, continued his march to the Oscar podium with another impeccably wry, self-deprecating speech — “I’d like to thank security for letting me into the building,” he quipped, earning the night’s biggest laugh. With his victory, “The King’s Speech” becomes the first film to take Best Ensemble and a lead acting gong since “Chicago” eight years ago; this time, however, it won’t lose the latter on February 27.
Meanwhile, Natalie Portman continued her smooth run in the Best Actress race. Some pundits, Kris included, have speculated that Annette Bening could yet be a spoiler on Oscar night, but I can’t see it myself: if a wave of sentimental affection for the older star is brewing, the peer-voted SAG Awards would have been the clear place for it to emerge. Portman continues to be the personification of charm at the podium, while her category is looking like the only viable place for Oscar voters to acknowledge the “Black Swan” phenomenon.
If a sweep mentality takes hold for “The King’s Speech,” I suppose one of the supporting categories could be vulnerable to an upset, but after tonight’s well-deserved twin wins for “The Fighter” co-stars Melissa Leo and Christian Bale — both repeating their Golden Globe and Critics’ Choice victories — there’s little reason to bet against them at the Oscars.
Both actors socked over their acceptance speeches, with Bale (shorn of the Jesus-like mane he sported at the Globes) continuing his genially goofy stage manner and sharing a sweet moment at the podium with the real-life Dicky Ekland. Leo provided the most emotional speech of the night, culminating in a rallying cry for unions.
No alarms and no surprises, then — but why should there be? It was clear from the reaction in the room (especially to the final category) that the winners are universally popular choices, spread across three of the most beloved films in the Best Picture race. “The Social Network” table, on the other hand, was a solemn-looking one: they know when they’re beaten.
No televised precursors until the BAFTAs, then, and I think we all know more or less how that’s going to go. Good night, all.
You can find the full list of film winners at The Circuit. And the TV awards, for those of you who are interested:
Best Actress in a TV Movie or Miniseries: Claire Danes, “Temple Grandin”
Best Actor in a TV Movie or Miniseries: Al Pacino, “You Don’t Know Jack”
Best Ensemble in a Comedy Series: “Modern Family”
Best Actress in a Comedy Series: Betty White, “Hot in Cleveland”
Best Actor in a Comedy Series: Alec Baldwin, “30 Rock”
Best Ensemble in a Drama Series: “Boardwalk Empire”
Best Actress in a Drama Series: Julianna Margulies, “City Island”
Best Actor in a Drama Series: Steve Buscemi, “Boardwalk Empire”
Best Stunt Ensemble: “True Blood”
[Photo: Reuters]
Comments
233 responses to “‘The King’s Speech’ takes top honors at SAG Awards”
One of the great things in The Social Network is that it didn’t require an excellent acting, but there’s excellent acting anyway, I guess it would have been equally praised.
Try to watch The King’s Speech without the great performances…
SAG and Oscars rarely see eye-to-eye. This might* be good for Annette Bening and bad for The King’s Speech. I really don’t care at this point because predictable, thy name is 2011. Everything is locked and all the fun has been sucked out of the race.
Meryl Streep best actresss 2012? I’ve read reports about Meryl visiting the Prime Minister’s Office to do some research about Madam Thatcher.
How is The Social Network “not an actors movie”? Great performances from everyone in the film, from small parts to large ones: Eisenberg, Garfield, Timberlake, Hammer, and Mara were all exceptional, and it doesn’t hurt that they’re all reading from the best screenplay of the year (which is, by a fucking mile, completely undeniable). The King’s Speech has Firth and Rush, but the bigger supporting players aren’t notable at all (Bonham Carter doesn’t deserve her nomination), and some of the smaller roles are almost cringe worthy (the aforementioned Timothy Spall). The Social Network has the better ensemble cast, and it’s not even kind of close.
F Harvey Weinstein. Eff him, and eff the guilds for being lemmings toward this glorified TV-movie rendering a third straight year of an Oscar race moot long before it was supposed to be. Two consecutive glorified tv-movies, if you count last year.
ABC execs must be tearing their hair out. Lowest ratings ever? Oscars 2012 on PAY PER VIEW, BAYBEE, since their descent into irrelevance is accelerated with each passing moment.
Could someone explain to me what was so revelatory about Firth’s performance? I liked it very much and I think it caught him at his most self-deprecatingly charming best, but I thought the character kind of lacked an arc. His arc is either his speech impediment.
I understand that it’s kind of suppose to be his relationship with Rush but frankly I don’t see that as a particularly meaningful arc or a particularly well-drawn one at least. I think he treats Rush’s character with little respect for the majority of the movie and does little other than standing up for him against Derek Jacobi to rectify this. He never made me feel a relationship with him either in terms of sympathizing with his struggle or or the content of his character. Frankly, I didn’t care for the character THAT much.
PaulPhilly-Given how King’s Speech is doing box-office wise I don’t think the telecast will be that much worse than it’s been in recent years. Maybe you’ll see the audience skew a bit older but that will be about it.
My prediction for Oscar’s ratings…34.7 million
155
How the hell is The Hurt Locker a “glorified TV movie”?
***… then we go back to 1951 – A Streetcar named Desire which won best actress and both supporting categories.***
You totally skipped over “Sayonara” and “From Here to Eternity.”
@ PaulPhilly
I’ve always found it funny when people rant about how dumb and pointless the oscars are… While on a website dedicated to them. And TKS is looking like it’s gonna go past TSN in box office.
Conor,
You know, and I know this is going to sound retarded, but I just get a vibe from her that I’m not too crazy about. I LOVED her work in Frozen River and really liked her work in The Fighter, but I just think maybe she comes off as a little too “entitled” to me? Like I said, great acting, but I just would like it if she came off a little more humble?? Though, I really would be a fool to pretend that there are very many actors who are TRULY humble left in Hollywood, and really thus is the nature of acting for the screen. But to me, she just comes off as abrasive and cocky.
If we all had one collective free commenter ban, can we all agree it ought to be used on PaulPhilly?
@Conor
That probably has something to do with timing. Could you imgine King’s Speech crossing that threshold if was released a month or two earlier. Probably not.
Dillon, you know, I was attempting to avoid discussing it, but I remember cringing after her Spirit Award win. However, I think she was just overjoyed to finally get a break.
Overall, I think she’s just proud, and that’s hardly a bad thing. People should be proud of their accomplishments, especially when they’re so impeccable. And actually, I thought her SAG speech tonight was a more humanizing and likable one–it was raw and flustered, w/ a hint of humor and some effusive peer praise. The Globes speech came across entitled, perfect word that was in my head as well. But her BFCA speech was more endearing. She’s a hardworking character actress whom I only became a fan of two years ago, and regardless of whether she wins the Oscar or not, it’s great to see someone like that rise to prominence and get their dues.
Guy, What Kris and you think of the Best Director race?
Is there a possibility for a BP/BD split or TKS has director locked as well?
Hurt Locker was pretty much an extended episode of HBO’s Generation: Kill. Worst BP winner in at least 35 years.
The Other James D.,
Rightly said. I also only became a fan two years ago, just after Frozen River, which was if not my favorite then ONE of my favorite performances of that year. She DOES have accomplishments to be proud of. She’s a very very hardworking actress and I really loved her shoutout for the working actors and the unions. Tonights speech did seem more humble and humanizing. And I think that will definitely help her for the Oscars; because, let’s face it, a la Eddie Murphy for Dreamgirls, some shoddy acceptance speeches that seem a little ungrateful can lose you the oscar. Sad, because it takes the focus off of the art, but true. So here’s to her eventual win, I believe :)
Though, I would really love to see Ms. Steinfeld up there. BADLY :)
Afrika, re: few hours ago
I dont feel Kings Speech is bad AT ALL. I think it’s a very good movie, driven by great performances and a well structured story. What i meant by setting the academy back, after rewarding The Departed, No Country, and Hurt Locker in the past few years, is that it’s swaying for the feel-good, oscar-friendy choice over the quality, challenging films. Black Swan, Inception, and TSN are the films from 2010 that people will remember IMO, not TKS.
This is going to sound a little strange, but Leo has done a lot for the working actors in my neck of the woods. So her win tonight is certainly something of a victory for the unions and the middle-class performers. At least that’s how I see it.
Max,
I agree. In part. I really liked the King’s Speech; It actually was my favorite movie of the year. But I do think people will remember other movies more. I just don’t want people to accuse TKS of being a bad movie. And like you said at the beginning, it’s NOT. I just KNOW that people WILL call it a bad movie because of it’s juxtaposition with all of the other movies from this year. Ditto on the specific three, Black Swan, Inception, and TSN.
Craig — hyperbolic much? Yes, it’s possible that some people just don’t like “The Social Network”, contrary to your claim that it’s “completely undeniable”.
I don’t want to ‘appeal to authority’ here, but among my colleagues, only a handful of us have liked it. And what are my colleagues and I? Film academics. Critics may have fell in love with SN, but for whatever reason, that praise just didn’t carry over to our particular department. In contrast, most of us really enjoyed “The King’s Speech” : is it groundbreaking? Good lord, no. But it’s handsomely made, well-acted and without gimmick or po-faced self-seriousness. (*ahem* “Inception” *ahem*) In fact, now that I think of it, I haven’t heard a single negative reaction to the film among anyone here.
Granted, the favourite of the Picture nominees among my colleagues is “Toy Story 3”, with a few of them adoring “The Fighter”, but we know that those aren’t winning. “Black Swan” got very mixed reaction, with some of them enjoying it and others declaring it self-indulgent crap. I’ve yet to see it. But ultimately, academics don’t really care about the Oscars. I’m the only fanatic in the department!
So I’m more than okay with a Best Picture win for “King’s Speech”, though I’m still calling for a Fincher win for Director — which I don’t entirely disagree with. A valiant effort on his behalf. The screenplay, on the other hand… ick. Not my cup of tea.
@Andrew F
What didn’t you like about the screenplay? Not trying to start an argument, just curious from a “film academic” point of view.
Andrew M, I would not deny the importance of your authority or diminish it, but when desribing these sentiments, is there anything beyond your personal experience, because you said you have not heard a single negative reaction, and I kind of doubt that every film academic is at least neutral. Just out of curiousity, is it just anecdotal or is there anything like surveys, lists, or organizations that reflects those feelings?
@Drew
Well, I have a couple of problems with it. (Excuse me if this doesn’t make a lot of sense, I’m falling asleep at the keyboard, and I’ve only seen the film once, when it came out.) First off, I’m just not that big of a fan of Sorkin. I find his style of non-stop, witty dialogue to work only in situations where it makes sense that people could actually speak like that: in “The West Wing”, I could believe it coming out of the world’s élite echelon of political types. But out of computer geek undergrads? It irked me. I know computer scientists with Aspergers and other social quirks, and *none* of them act like this. Blowing bubbles in an interview? No way. It comes off more as how middle-aged people think these young techies act, based off of their internet persona. Anonymous trolls may appear to be witty and cocky on these social networking sites, but in real life? Nuh-uh. The additions of sex, drugs and rock-n-roll also just didn’t sit well with me. I’m reminded of one of Zuckerberg’s own comments when the film was first released, when he said something along the lines of ‘I wish my time at Harvard was that interesting’.
How about the treatment of women in the film? I know people have brought this up before and been flamed, but it’s a worthy observation. We finally have a representation of Asian women in a mainstream Hollywood film, but then it quickly goes downhill from there. Why must this girlfriend be totally batshit insane and set fires in garbage cans? Why invent this character for the screenplay, and why must she be so extreme? And on the opposite polarity, we have the character of Erica, the pretty ‘objet-petit-a’ of so many Hollywood films (aka the One That Got Away). Why reduce the entire enterprise to Zuckerberg’s regrets about Erica, as the final scene seems to suggest? I rolled my eyes at the oh-so-tragic irony of him refreshing the page in a vain attempt to rekindle this long-lost connection, the root of his desires. But what about Zuckerberg’s longtime girlfriend, who doesn’t get a mention at all? And here we have the crux of my problem with the screenplay: the film is dealing with contemporary people and events, and it just doesn’t congeal. I can turn on any television or open any newspaper and see Zuckerberg for myself. The film ultimately presents itself as an unstable combination of over-the-top artifice and reality.
But is the screenplay TERRIBLE? No! Not at all. I can see why some people love it. But for my money, it came off as too-taught, too smug, and trying too hard to write a Tragic Story of the American Dream in the Age of the Internet. But if you liked it, hey! I can buy that.
@DarkLayers
My sample size is small, only around 25 people, in conversations in the hallway or at the Grad Club. Purely anecdotal. The point I was trying to make is that we need to be careful when we say something’s praise is “undeniable”. I’ve never come across a database that covers academic reviews. Then again, we’re generally not interested in saying if a film is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in our writings. I’m sure I could find someone in the department who didn’t like “King’s Speech”, probably the prof who also hates the Coens.
@Andrew F…interesting analysis of the screenplay. I agree with some of it, particularly in regards to the dialogue. I liked it, but I can see that it might lack a bit of plausibility from socially awkward college kids.
I don’t really buy the ‘it’s not representative of the real Zuckerberg’ line of argument though. It’s not a documentary. I think it was telling that the only part of the film Zuck has specifically addressed is the girlfriend thing. That seems to say something about the accuracy of the rest of the film.
About Eduardo’s Asian girlfriend, I heard an interview with Sorkin where he said that character was real, he changed her name, but she exists.
Anyway, I love the screenplay, but I think you’ve got some valid criticism there.
Steinfeld was superior to Leo in every way. I know she’s not in the right category but come on people.
Oh, I was just wondering, Andrew, that’s all. It was actually on the note you mention that I was compelled to ask: no work of art is beyond having detractors. Some have admitted to disliking Citizen Kane, because while they admire the technical and screenwriting achievement and influence, it ultimately leaves them cold. So, I was a little skeptical that film academics were unanimous in praising the movie.
But, I totally agree that no movie is undeniably praiseworthy. :)
@daveylow LOL…well put. The King’s Speech deserved it and it won it. And maybe it was mainly three performances, but so was The Fighter (let’s be honest, Mark Wahlberg wasn’t deserving) and Social Network (Eisenberg, Garfield, Hammer).
[…] Recent Comments FallGuy on: ‘The King’s Speech’ takes top honors at SAG Awards […]
Speaking English said…
***You totally skipped over “Sayonara” and “From Here to Eternity.”***
oooops, I totally did..and to think those two were amongst the 6 I was counting. It was 4am in the morning..bad excuse I know…thanks
[…] source […]
Meanwhile, Speakng English skipped over West Side Story.
By the way, I’m of course talking nonsense in no. 96. What I meant was that Apollo 13 is the only film to win DGA, PGA and SAG ensemble and NOT win the Oscar for best picture. Not that it was the only one that had won those three. But that Howard missed the director nod certainly hurt it. TKS doesn’t have that problem. So I don’t see how it can loose now. But I do hope we can get a split. Fincher deserves to win an Oscar and can you imagine how the internet will react if Tom Hooper wins an Oscar before Aronofsky, Fincher and Nolan who isn’t even nominated. The answer will be: total anarchy! :D
God, Melissa Leo bothers me to no ends. I’m hating her fake surprise look and melodramatic antics every time her name is called. Jesus God I’m praying for someone to pull an upset on Oscar night so I won’t have to hear and see her give another speech.
NOTHING is a lock. The King’s Speech is the favorite now, but The Social Network is still in the race.
Normally there is at least one surprise in the top eight categories at the Oscars, but at the moment I don´t see Rush or Bening pulling a surprise win. “The King´s Speech” is pretty much unstoppable now.
And I just wanna say: I appreciate the relaxed and balanced tone here on this site. It´s always embarrassing to see when someone takes an Award-decision against one´s favourite film as a personal affront. I just don´t get that attitude.
And Afrika, did you get asylum here? :-)
^
Hah!
Remember when it was so boring that TSN kept winning?
Anyway, I like TSN, The Fighter and Black Swan more, but I had a very enjoyable table at the movies watching TKS (especially considering my hangover that day), so I can try to be unhappy, but if Fincher and Sorkin win, TSN will be honored well enough.
Dull, but pleasant Oscar season, as I usually dislike one of the front-runners. Not so this year!
Um, time, not table. WTF? Maybe that hangover from five weeks ago is still going..
Michael W,
I have a feeling that if Fincher wins BD (he could and that would be well deserved award), then I am sure some people would try to make BD award look more important than BP award :)
As I said above, some people really take it very personal and then go nuts when their favorite does not win (I believe there is a psychological and personality related issues there, but i wont go there not to bore everyone here to death:)
As someone said above, any one of the 10 movies could win BP and i wouldnt have a major problem with that. I only wish I could see Blue Valentine among those 10 movies:)
How I see it:
I love both TSN and TKS. I prefer TSN, but am fine with either winning.
BD – I’m still thinking Fincher, but won’t be surprised by Hooper.
Actor – it’s Firth.
Actress – most likely Portman.
S.Actor – most likely Bale. He’s won everything thus far; gave great speeches. Rush has won before, and Bale IS British.
Which brings us to S. Actress again – I feel like Leo is the frontrunner. But very few, if any, Brits will vote for her. HBC will get many votes from them. Leo could split some with Adams (who I thought was primed 2-3 weeks ago, no more). And Steinfeld will get a large smattering, too. I think it’s a close three-way btwn. Leo (no Brits), HBC (Brit vote), Steinfeld (who seems liked, but Brits thought her Lead).
If it sounds like I put a lot of emphasis on the Brit vote, it’s because I do every year. And their presence/influence is felt in a lot of races every year (for me).
I also feel that: for as well-liked, admired, & respected Melissa Leo is … I also feel like she can be irritating.
Her speeches have been excellent; but teetering of ‘false humility’. I actually think she IS humbled, but it doesn’t always come across that way.
I do not think anyone can make an argument that KGS is not going to win all the awards we expect it to. The math is just not there.
I think that those of us who consider it a terrible decision (outside of Ferth which I think most would agree is fine) must now direct our attention to why this happened.
It is not because the Academy is choosing a film they do not like or feel like choosing a film that lacks any real depth.
I believe it is two things.
1. The Academy and this is where they are more like the public and less like the critics will occasionally be seduced by likable characters battling adversity with a great big happy ending. This has happened many times at the expense of movies that clearly have stood the test of time much better. These British costume dramas are particularly notable for being quickly forgotten and popular with Acadeny voters. Is there anyone out there who has seen A Man For All Seasons or Oliver or a Merchant-Ivory film showing up on anyone’s greatest films list. I never have.
2. There is a punishing vote split at work with the Academy because once you consider KS and the critics didn’t, it is the sole feel good film against a group of films that are all in a another category. That category has to do with complexity, ambiguity, uniqueness and a refusal to pander to audiences.
As for me I look forward to next year to see if the Academy is going to right itself or we are back to the horror of the 1980’s.
I remember that at the end of that decade it was hard to find a single Best Picture winner that made anybody’s top 10 list for the decade, never mind all time.
So at this point I say what all losers say,
“Wait until next year”.
People keep theorising about Melissa Leo “splitting” votes with Amy Adams, with nothing to back it up.
Didn’t happen at the BFCA Awards.
Didn’t happen at the Globes.
Didn’t happen at the SAG Awards.
When it comes down to it, they’re two separate, very distinct performances. That they’re in the same film isn’t a determining factor — even diehard fans of The Fighter can still distinguish between them. There’s nothing to split.
looks like all the whining about “Social Network winning everything” and this year’s race being “too boring and predictable” has paid off.
now an enjoyable, but extremely predictable and formulaic film, will be handed the Best Picture Oscar it clearly does not deserve. hip hip hooray.
it’s 1980 and 1990 all over again.
Kiel, I get your comparisons but I think Chariots of Fire is a better choice to compare to King’s Speech. I also think Oliver winning in a year that featured 2001, A Space Odyssey is another good one. What is it about the British? I think part of it is that they can’t quite make a film of current topical interest or lacks some historical or classical literary backdrop to give it a sense of importance.
I suppose when I mentioned 1980 and 1990 it was because Raging Bull and Goodfellas were films that had almost unanimous critical praise, not to mention a lot of the critics awards in their favor (especially with Goodfellas).
I will say, however, that both Chariots and Speech use the right kind of music at the right moments to really make an audience swoon.
In fact, I’d go so far as to say that the Vangelis theme is what really won Chariots the Best Picture Oscar.
“can you imagine how the internet will react if Tom Hooper wins an Oscar before Aronofsky, Fincher and Nolan who isn’t even nominated. The answer will be: total anarchy! :D”
Oh noes! Teh internets would be upset because everyone looooooves Fincher. Get real.
I do think, however, that it would be very funny if The Social Network will win the main awards at the BAFTAs.
What is it about the British? I think part of it is that they can’t quite make a film of current topical interest or lacks some historical or classical literary backdrop to give it a sense of importance.
Uh, you really need to see a bit more current British cinema before making such an asinine statement. Have you seen any British films in the last few years that didn’t get a Best Picture nomination? Doesn’t sound like it.
Why are you even mentioning Chariots of Fire that way? COF was from 1981 and won its awards in 1982.
I actually assumed you meant ’80 and ’90 as the awards years for 1979 and 1989; Kramer vs. Kramer and Driving Miss Daisy fit the criteria pretty well.