In Contention

Author: Guy Lodge

  • Tom Hooper wins DGA Award

    Even after “The King’s Speech” surprised at the Producers’ Guild Awards and took a dozen Oscar nominations, I held on to the notion that critical favorite “The Social Network,” a film more in line with the Academy’s recent choices, would emerge victorious on Oscar night.

    However, Kris called it right. When the former film’s comparatively inexperienced director can beat a heavyweight field of Darren Aronofsky, Christopher Nolan and the Davids Fincher and O. Russell to the Directors’ Guild prize — and for a film that’s widely been deemed, rightly or wrongly, an actors’ showcase more than a director’s one — it’s clear the tide has turned. It pains me to say it, folks, but the stammering-royal drama is your Best Picture winner.

    That said, I’m not willing to hand Hooper an accompanying Best Director Oscar just yet. Although the Academy and the Guild have parted ways in this category just six times in 64 years, their last such disagreement strikes me as a pertinent one.

    (more…)

  • Predict the SAG winners

    This weekend completes the trio of Guild awards with the most bearing on the Best Picture race, as the Directors’ Guild of America and the Screen Actors’ Guild dish out their prizes on Saturday and Sunday, respectively.

    Following the Producers’ Guild’s surprise coronation of “The King’s Speech” last week, the next two days could help level the race — most are favoring “The Social Network” to fight back with a DGA gong, but the SAG Awards are more of a wild card.

    A couple of SAG categories, of course, barely require discussion. In the lead acting races, there’s no reason whatsoever to suspect that Colin Firth and Natalie Portman won’t continue their joint march to the Oscar podium on Sunday. (If Annette Bening were to pull off a shocker, she’d be the first two-time Best Actress winner in the 17-year history of the awards, which somehow makes it seem even less likely.)

    (more…)

  • Westcott opens up on ‘Black Swan’ costume controversy

    For me, one of the most disappointing below-the-line Oscar snubs on Tuesday morning was that of “Black Swan” in Best Costume Design — not only because Amy Westcott’s intelligent contemporary design work was thoroughly deserving of notice (more so than “The Tempest,” on which the great Sandy Powell had something of an off-day), but because of the concern that a credit controversy, over which she had no control, might have cost her votes.

    If you missed the story, fashion house Rodarte worked on the film’s stage costumes but weren’t eligible for joint awards consideration due to Guild rules — and voiced their dissatisfaction with the situation in a manner that led to some accusing Westcott of taking credit for their work.

    Now, in a detailed interview with the website Clothes on Film, Westcott openly expresses her own dismay at the Rodarte tangle, and explains that theirs was a more collaborative partnership than has thus far been implied.

    (more…)

  • Not one pundit?

    Thanks to reader Graysmith for pointing out this Hollywood Reporter piece, in which Tim Appelo poses the semi-annual small-beats-big argument about the Oscar nominees. To this end, he points to the Best Animated Feature category, where bijou art film “The Illusionist” beat out major money-spinners “Tangled” and “Despicable Me,” and gets this quote from understandably overjoyed Sony Pictures Classics chief Michael Barker:

    The Illusionist won against those big studio pictures. Not one pundit predicted it. This is animation done the old-fashioned way, without CGI, like Disney did.

    Ahem. And just so I’m not tooting my own horn, Steve Pond, Nathaniel Rogers and Sasha Stone, among others, saw it coming too. Make no mistake, Sylvain Chomet’s film was an underdog — and that narrative suits it nicely — but it didn’t exactly fall from the sky either. I’m really happy for you, Mr. Barker, and immalitchoofinish, but give us pundits some credit.

    [Image: Sony Pictures Classics]

  • Catch up with Oscar nominee ‘Dogtooth’

    For those of us who like to make wholly informed decisions when entering our Oscar pools, the Best Foreign Language Film category can be a bit of a thorn in the side. Unless you’re a particularly well-travelled festivalgoer, it’s mighty difficult to see all five nominated films ahead of Oscar night.

    This year is no exception, as two of them — the arguable frontrunners, “In a Better World” and “Incendies” — aren’t opening Stateside until April, while double-nominee “Biutiful” continues to creep out in limited release. The other two have been and gone in US theaters, but unless you’re lucky enough to live in one of a select few cities, chances are you didn’t see “Outside the Law” or “Dogtooth” either.

    Thankfully, for the latter film, Nexflix has come to the rescue. Yorgos Lanthimos’s disquieting adult fable, which has received perhaps the most significant publicity boost in the wake of its eyebrow-raising nomination, is already out on DVD, but curious awards-watchers can now watch it instantly on the streaming site — simplifying at least some of your homework in that category.

    (more…)

  • Young stars speak out on ‘The Social Network’

    Newly minted Oscar nominee James Franco caused a bit of a ripple in the blogosphere the other day by casually slighting “The Social Network” — claiming the film fails to deal with the communication revolution that (to his mind) it’s supposed to be about, and further suggesting that its approach is too “classical” (read: conservative) for the subject.

    Naturally, given that he’s the star of one of the film’s Best Picture rivals, he couldn’t resist drawing comparisons to his own baby, declaring “127 Hours” both “perfect” and “the most innovative movie this year.”

    I’d take issue with both halves of Franco’s argument — as much as I (and I suspect Franco too) would like David Fincher’s film to focus on the politics of social networking itself, that isn’t its intent. Neither am I convinced that “127 Hours,” which uses familiar, even dated, formal flash to enliven its minimalist narrative, is as innovative as the actor claims it is.

    (more…)

  • Debating historical hiccups in ‘The King’s Speech’

    Unless you really haven’t been paying attention, you’ll have noticed by now that a few people have taken issue with the history lesson given by “The King’s Speech.” Or more specifically, with the one not given: that George VI supported British PM Neville Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement towards Adolf Hitler, while his brother Edward VIII was an outright Nazi sympathizer, none of which is acknowledged in the film.

    Writing for The New Republic, Isaac Chotner took the film to task both for “grossly misrepresenting real events and people” and for shortselling its own dramatic potential through these omissions, while none other than Christopher Hitchens raised the same issue in a recent Slate essay, damning the film as “a major desecration of the historical record.”

    Whatever my own issues with the film, its historical filleting hasn’t been high on the list. As much as I think the gray political alliances of the Royal Family would make for a far richer narrative, the bottom line is that screenwriter David Seidler was more interested in George VI’s personal struggles — as a dramatist, it’s his right to frame the story as he wishes, free of the obligation to furnish the audience with every historical detail.

    (more…)

  • Ruffalo finally gets the nod

    Amid the assorted geeky stat-studies I made in the wake of yesterday’s Oscar nominations, I noticed that it hasn’t been a vintage year for first-time nominees in the acting categories. Of the 20 actors selected, 12 are repeat nominees — the highest number since 2002. But among the eight thesps making their Oscar debut are some very gratifying choices indeed.

    The unusually robust Best Supporting Actor category is particularly pleasing in that regard. It’s always cheering when a long-serving character actor identified by most moviegoers as “oh, that guy” finally gets the spotlight, so amid the range of reactions to yesterday’s news, I haven’t heard a single person who isn’t happy for John Hawkes — an actor who deserved more individual plaudits than he got for his 2005 lead turn in “Me and You and Everyone We Know.”

    And Christian Bale’s high-end choices and hard-graft technique placed him on many an Oscar-watcher’s “overdue” list, so I’m glad he finally got the nod for what I regard as his finest hour.

    (more…)

  • Oscar nominations: the good, the good and the good

    Even when they aren’t being read out with gale-force enthusiasm by Mo’Nique, the Oscar nominations tend to attack you with breathless speed that you need at least half an hour to decide how you feel about them at all. As usual, this morning’s announcement found me bouncing from one split-second reaction to another: Yay! No! What? That? Why? Who’s missing? What did she say? That? No! Did I call that? Yay!

    As Kate Winslet would say in such situations: “Gather.” And now that I’ve stepped back, gathered and taken into account that no Oscar nomination slate in history has been without its disappointments, I can honestly say that I’m more happy than not with the list in front of me.

    Some of the day’s biggest surprises didn’t elicit much of an emotional reaction from me. My eyebrows rose as high as anyone’s over Christopher Nolan’s latest failure to secure a Best Director nomination — is he the first man in Oscar history to fall three times at this hurdle after being DGA-nominated? — though I always said he couldn’t be regarded as a sure thing.

    (more…)

  • FINAL final nomination predictions

    Just so it’s on the record. I wavered back and forth in Best Visual Effects, but I’ve finally landed on “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” scoring one for the underdogs. My final forecast here.

  • Class of 1993

    There are a lot of reasons I wish I was 10 years old again — the free food and lodging, the still-tempered cynicism, the safe knowledge that there were only three Indiana Jones movies — but chief among them on this Oscar Nomination Eve is that if I was, I’d have the 1993 Academy Award slate coming my way.

    If you’ve forgotten that Oscar year — or if it was before your time — refresh your memory here. Seriously, has the Academy ever cobbled together quite such an impeccable lineup across multiple categories?

    Start at the top, with a Best Picture lineup that balances top-flight Hollywood prestige (“Schindler’s List”), daring international arthouse (“The Piano”) and peerless populism (“The Fugitive”). Move down through those hard-earned semi-surprise acting nods for the likes of Laurence Fishburne and Stockard Channing, down to the Best Supporting Actor race that I’ve already cited as the strongest in the category’s history.

    (more…)

  • Razzies aim typically low

    The Golden Raspberry (aka Razzie) Awards irritate me on an annual basis, largely because they’re such a joyless, unimaginative and, worst of all, cowardly execution of a neat idea: singling out the worst cinematic achievements of the year for a bit of a ribbing.

    Except they aren’t about genuinely failed artistry nearly as much as they are about piling on whichever easy celebrity targets happened to have a film out in the past 12 months. They’re intended as a bit of fun, obviously, but how fun is it really to beat up on tween idols like Miley Cyrus and the “Twilight” team? “The Expendables” isn’t that ineptly directed — but hey, it’s Sly, so it must be bad!

    Wouldn’t it be more subversive to aim at some higher targets who flubbed in 2010? (You’d think a “Worst Use of 3D” award would have been invented for “Alice in Wonderland,” but no — works from prestige directors are above the law here, apparently.)

    (more…)

  • My dream Oscar ballot, part two

    Yesterday, I began my very far-fetched (and in some cases, frankly impossible) wishlist for Tuesday’s Oscar nominations with my favorite achievements in the technical categories. Today, I offer up my picks in the top races, and I don’t mind telling you things got pretty agonizing in some categories.

    “Why can’t I have 15 nominees for Best Supporting Actress?” one half of my brain asked earlier this morning, as I once more marvelled that any pundits could once have deemed that particular race “weak.” Cooler instincts prevailed, but it bears repeating just what a staggering, and pleasingly varied, year it’s been for female performances on both sides of the category divide. I was also surprised to see how many performances stood tall from films that weren’t necessarily on their stars’ level — I like to think there aren’t too many coattail picks here.

    I’ve veered from Academy format in one respect: I’ve dispensed with a Best Foreign Language Film category. Not only do I dislike the award in principle — it’s a different language, not a different medium — but my general picks are heavy enough on foreign fare that a ghetto category seemed superfluous. Check out my picks after the cut, and share your thoughts in the comments.

    (more…)

  • My dream Oscar ballot, part one

    For the past two years running, I’ve celebrated Oscar Nomination Eve by assembling my own ideal (and, usually, incredibly far-fetched) ballot, so here we go again. As well as a kind of last-ditch prayer to the Oscar gods, I also look on it as a salute to the worthy contenders who haven’t a hope in hell of hearing their names read out on Tuesday morning.

    At the request of some readers, I’ve bent the rules to accommodate several titles unfairly ineligible for Oscar consideration in any category: most of you are aware of the arcane ruling that has denied “A Prophet” the chance to ever compete in a non-ghetto category, while the TV airings of “Red Riding” and “Carlos” keep them out of the game too. I’m less clear on why the likes of “White Material” and “Fish Tank” aren’t on the Academy’s list of eligible titles, but they aren’t, and I must make my peace with that.

    Anyway, screw ’em: this ballot represents what I found most awards-worthy from all the theatrical features released in the US last year, and you can’t get fairer than that. I’ll begin, as usual, with the ten technical categories — in which I was pleased to end up with a healthy spread of 33 films across 48 slots. Jump in after the cut, and share your own thoughts in the comments. (Also, check out Kris’s very different ideal ballot here.)

    (more…)

  • ‘Of Gods and Men,’ ‘Ghost Writer’ lead César nominations

    The film may be smarting from its widely (if not, ahem, entirely) unexpected omission from the Oscar foreign-language shortlist earlier this week, but Xavier Beauvois’s sombre religious drama “Of Gods and Men” found more love in its home country, where it scooped a leading 11 nominations for the César Awards.

    The so-called “French Oscars” also unsurprisingly took a shine to Roman Polanski’s “The Ghost Writer,” which has dominated the European awards circuit and is angling for a surprise Oscar nod or two on Tuesday. Expect these two films to battle it out for the gold; I’d bet on the weighty prestige veneer of Beauvois’s film winning out, but sentimental loyalty to Polanski shouldn’t be underestimated — he is, after all, a previous winner for both “Tess” and  “The Pianist.”

    Beyond those two frontrunners, I’m pleased to see a strong showing for Mathieu Amalric’s scrappy burlesque comedy “On Tour,” though their other choices suggest the Césars can be as frustratingly MOR as their US counterpart.

    (more…)

  • Evening Standard Award nominees, take two

    A couple of weeks ago, we reported on the nominations for the London Evening Standard Awards — a juried critics’ honor devoted to British films and talent. As it turns out, that “nominee” list was a bit of a false alarm; rather, it was a rough longlist of names considered by the jury that the Standard released prematurely.

    The official nominations for the awards were announced today, and I have to say, it’s my favorite such list I’ve seen all season. This year’s jury can’t be accused of playing it safe: it’s certainly ballsy to omit “The King’s Speech” in the top race.

    In its place, I’m thrilled to see my #1 film of 2010, Sylvain Chomet’s “The Illusionist,” as well as Peter Mullan’s riveting youth drama “Neds,” which I reviewed back in October. Add in due respect for Mike Leigh, and I don’t think the field could better represent the year in British film.

    (more…)

  • Costume confusion

    Gerard will address this category in tomorrow’s Tech Support column, but I did want to say something about Best Costume Design — partly because the Guild dropped some rather interesting nominations today, and partly because it’s the technical category that’s still prompting the most head-scratching as I work towards my final predictions.

    We all know the Academy favors lavish period productions with corsets and hoop skirts a go-go in this category, but 2010 served up remarkably few possibilities in this vein. Even “The King’s Speech,” the year’s default well-dressed prestige title, is hardly a sartorial showcase in the vein of “Marie-Antoinette” or “The Duchess” — Jenny Beavan’s crisp 1930s wardrobe is functionally stylish rather than spectacular.

    As if to illustrate the lack of conventional historical options, the Costume Designers’ Guild found only three films to nominate in their period category, instead of the usual five — and one of them, I’m thrilled to say, is the 1990s-set “The Fighter,” whose threads I was plugging just the other day.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Don’t let ’em catch you caring

    (Updated Oscar predictions here. They’ll likely be tweaked once more before Tuesday.)

    Following the Academy Award season is a little like watching a particularly low-rent TV soap: just as the mindlessness and predictability of the enterprise escalates to a point where quitting seems the only credible option, some or other narrative curveball will lure you back in.

    So it was with me this week: after my column last week expressed a weary indifference to the race two weeks ahead of nomination day, along came the Academy to throw me a bone and re-pique my interest.

    The bone was, admittedly, a small one — a wishbone, if you will — but it did the job. By shortlisting Greece’s disturbing, tar-black adult fable “Dogtooth” for Best Foreign Language Film, the Academy sent out a reminder to bleary-eyed awards watchers not only that it is still capable of surprising us, but that good films can sometimes endure on their own merits — even if some of them do need an executive committee vote to help them along. (Hey, anyone else starting to think an executive committee for the Best Picture category would be a fine idea?)

    (more…)