In Contention

Author: Guy Lodge

  • Frears’ ‘Chéri’ to premiere at Berlin

    New works from Costa-Gavras, Bertrand Tavernier and Andrzej Wajda are among the 14 titles that have just been added to the Competition programme at next month’s Berlinale, meaning 25 of the 26 slots have been confirmed.

    The most high-profile inclusion, however, is Stephen Frears’ period romance “Chéri,” which was at one point mooted as a 2008 release with an eye on awards season, before getting bumped. It’s a film I’ve been excited about for some time, not least because it’s something of a “Dangerous Liaisons” redux, reuniting the director, writer (Christopher Hampton) and star (Michelle Pfeiffer) of that 1988 Oscar-winner, again within the context of a French-set costume drama.

    An adaptation of Colette’s novella about an affair between a young man and a decades-older woman in 1920’s Paris, it strikes me as an ideal proposition for both director and star. A new Frears film is always worth noting, but I find his work rather more interesting  when he’s visiting themes of taboo and desire (the aforementioned “Liaisons,” “Prick Up Your Ears,” “The Grifters”).

    Meanwhile, Pfeiffer — still, I think, arguably the greatest of her generation — hasn’t had a project equal to her gifts in over 15 years. Could this be one to keep an eye on for next year’s awards derby? It’s ridiculously early to be thinking about such things, but don’t forget that one of the big winners at last year’s Berlinale was a certain Ms. Sally Hawkins. However oddly positioned, it’s always a festival worth paying attention to.

    Among the other intriguing titles set to bow at the fest, which will be opened by Tom Tykwer’s “The International,” is “Rage,” the latest from avant-garde UK auteur Sally Potter, with an eclectic cast including Jude Law, Judi Dench and Steve Buscemi. Another impressive ensemble (Robin Wright Penn, Alan Arkin and Julianne Moore, to name but three) features in Rebecca Miller’s “The Private Lives of Pippa Lee,” while Lukas Moodysson’s “Mammoth,” starring Gael Garcia Bernal and Michelle Williams, has long been one of my most eagerly anticipated films of 2009.

    For a complete list of the Competition entries so far, check out the press releases here and here.

  • “The Oscar is the only award that carries any weight. Ours is just a lot of shit.”

    Words uttered years ago by the great Sarah Miles, when asked about the BAFTA Awards. I’m just quoting. Not saying anything at all. 

  • ‘Slumdog,’ ‘Button’ lead BAFTA pack with 11 nods each

    Each year, the BAFTAs never fail to find new and frustrating ways to surprise me.

    It wasn’t hard to guess that “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” and “Slumdog Millionaire” would come out on top here — though even as a fan of the latter film, I do wonder whether nominations for Best Production Design and Best Supporting Actress are pushing it a little. (Sure, Freida Pinto is gorgeous, but… )

    But look closer and the oddities come thick and fast. Who would have guessed, come nomination morning, that “Changeling” would land 8 nominations (including mentions for Best Director and Best Original Screenplay), while “Happy-Go-Lucky” gets zilch? I was aware that Mike Leigh’s delightful film has played better with critics Stateside than it did over here in the spring, but failing to even nominate Golden Globe winner Sally Hawkins is a blatant — and in my opinion, unforgivable — slap in the face.

    As I predicted, despite the film’s mixed reception, BAFTA voters responded well to “The Reader,” which lands in the Best Film derby alongside four of the Oscar favourites in the category. While I thought “Milk” might miss with the Brits, it was actually “The Dark Knight” that came up short — and while I’m not entirely surprised that it proved too genre-oriented for their top category, their failure to nominate Brit helmer Christopher Nolan is pretty stunning.

    Bar the Hawkins snub, the acting categories name most of the usual suspects, though there’s still room for typically BAFTA-esque eccentricities. Brendan Gleeson is an pleasant surprise in the Best Supporting Actor category, and while I anticipated Brad Pitt’s appearance in that field for “Burn After Reading,” Tilda Swinton’s Supporting Actress nod for the same film is the kind of out-of-nowhere hometown favoritism that only BAFTA can come up with. The real headscratcher in that category, however, is Amy Adams’ inclusion at the expense of Viola Davis — one has to wonder whether voters actually watched “Doubt,” or voted on name recognition alone.

    (More thoughts, and the full list of nominees, below the cut.)

    (more…)

  • When will they learn?

    In the gloomiest piece of awards-related news I’ve heard this week, it turns out that this year’s BAFTA awards will be hosted, once again, by the smug talent vacuum that is Jonathan Ross. (“Who?” I hear you American readers asking. Answer: you’re better off not knowing.)

    I understand that BAFTA hasn’t the budget or the resources to compete with the Academy Awards when it comes to putting on a show. However, if they want to be a truly international ceremony — as they claim they are — it might be worth hiring a host who can potentially draw an international audience.

    You know, someone who is actually known outside of Britain. Someone who has a halfway credible industry profile. Someone who is actually funny. Not that I’m not naming names, of course.

    Chances are Ross will perform no better and no worse this year than he has previously. (Which is to say, he’ll be as reliably excruciating as always.) But in a year when the Oscars have really upped the ante in their choice of host, BAFTA’s resistance to change is all the more embarrassing.

     

  • BAFTA predictions

    The BAFTA nominations drop tomorrow, and while I hardly covered myself in glory with my foreign film Oscar forecast yesterday, I’m going to wade into the murky waters of prediction once more.

    On the one hand, it’s a fool’s errand trying to predict the BAFTA nods, as they can frequently be the most perverse and contrarian awards voters of the lot. On the other, they make the task a little easier for us pundits by releasing 15-strong longlists in each category ahead of the voting.

    As I wrote back in November, the BAFTAs can be inconsistently parochial in their voting, frequently handing multiple nods to middlebrow homegrown product, while simultaneously sidelining the most acclaimed British films of the year. A look at this year’s longlists confirms that trend, as relatively mediocre Brit flicks like “The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas,” “Mamma Mia!” and “The Duchess” all received multiple mentions, while critical darlings “Hunger” and “Happy-Go-Lucky” landed in a paltry three categories each — Best Film not among them.

    The BAFTA voters’ provincialism is most shamefully evident in the Best Supporting Actress longlist, which features such bizarre inclusions as Judi Dench for “Quantum of Solace” and Rebecca Hall for her arm-candy role in “Frost/Nixon.” As for the Best Adapted Screenplay citation for “Mamma Mia!,” well, the less said the better. Of course, it’s a mistake to read too much into these lists. The idle frequency with which certain titles pop up — “Frost/Nixon” and “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” lead with 14 mentions each, but more surprisingly, a lightweight contender like “Burn After Reading” managed a staggering 11 — suggests the voters weren’t thinking too hard either.

    Which films will fare best tomorrow is another matter — it’s not uncommon for a film to feature strongly in the longlists only to go MIA on nomination morning. Below the cut are my best guesses, together with some thoughts on the top categories.

    (more…)

  • ‘Gomorrah’ doesn’t deliver, says AMPAS

    Kris has already given the philistines on the Academy’s foreign-language film committee a deserved telling-off for sidelining Italy’s astonishing entry “Gomorrah,” but I feel compelled to add my voice to his — not least because, if I had my way, Matteo Garrone’s cinematic gut-punch about the Camorra crime syndicate would be in line for a Best Picture nod, not just a puny ghetto-category citation.

    I could be here all day if I decided to go through the innumerable landmark films, from “City of God” to “The Celebration” to “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days,” that have been similarly mistreated by this ever-disappointing branch of voters, so I shouldn’t have been surprised when they failed us yet again, right?

    And yet I was, because the newly formed executive committee, which added an extra three titles to the list of six elected by the main body, was specifically designed to avoid such travesties. I can believe that they may well have used one of their slots to save France’s masterpiece “The Class” from exclusion, and if that’s the case, I’m most grateful. (Though I still wouldn’t put it past the boneheads to omit it from the final five.) Hell, it’s not inconceivable to me that they coud have stepped in on behalf of a popular favourite like “Waltz With Bashir” — the ignorance of the larger committee knows no bounds.

    But even given that worst case scenario, and speaking as someone who has seen 8 of the 9 shortlisted titles, I can’t fathom how the executive committee didn’t deem “Gomorrah” worthy of their company. What was the rule change for, if not to protect challenging, relevant, widely acclaimed works like Garrone’s film? 

    Well, Jeff Wells has done some digging, and seems to have found the explanation. He spoke to a member of the committee, who had this to say:

    Voices in the foreign branch’s executive elite committee just didn’t think Gomorrah “delivered in the way it could or should have,” he said. “It’s not a matter of it not being heart-warming. It’s a matter of our respecting the film without believing that it really brought the goods home.”

    (more…)

  • Claude Berri (1934-2009)

    Claude Berri, who passed away on Monday at the age of 74, may not have been the most gifted or prolific of French filmmakers, but I owe him an awful lot — not least the fact that I speak French in the first place.

    At a very young age, I saw “Jean de Florette,” Berri’s exquisite 1986 adaptation of Marcel Pagnol’s classic story of corrupted rural power games, and was thoroughly enraptured — by the painterly textures of the Provençal landscape, by the iconic melancholy of Jean-Claude Petit’s Verdi-interpolating score, by the masterly interplay of three generations of French acting talent (Montand, Depardieu and Auteuil), and by the rhythms and poetry of the language itself.

    “Florette” (and its follow-up, “Manon Des Sources”) triggered a fascination with French culture and cinema that has stuck with me to this day, and as Xan Brooks points out in today’s Guardian, I wasn’t the only one claimed by its influence. In Britain, in particular, the film represented a milestone in crossover arthouse cinema, generating near-blockbuster figures, nabbing a BAFTA for Best Film, and chiming into a renewed public interest in the Continent.

    Nothing else in his directing CV quite stands up to that mammoth achievement (though he actually won an Oscar for his 1962 short “Le Poulet”), but it’s really as a producer that he made his largest, and most lasting, contribution to global cinema: among the numerous arthouse projects he shepherded to our screens are such landmarks as Polanski’s extraordinary “Tess,” the hit bodice-ripper “La Reine Margot” and last year’s delightful critics’ darling “Couscous” (or “The Secret of the Grain,” depending on your side of the Atlantic).   

    For most film buffs, however, it’s the gorgeous strains of the music below that will forever spring to mind first when Berri’s name is mentioned. Qu’il repose en paix.

  • Bagger: Rourke passes the PR test

    Mickey Rourke in The WrestlerGiven the newly compressed awards calendar of recent years, with a gap this year of only one day between the Golden Globe awards and the deadline for Oscar nomination ballots, the former has little impact on the latter anymore. However, that’s not to say that what happens on Globe night has no effect on the winners’ Oscar campaigns.

    For actors in particular, the Globes are the most visible Oscar-night audition a contender can ask for. A memorable Globe moment can play into Phase II of Academy voting: Jamie Foxx’s canny Golden Globe acceptance speech in 2005 pretty much sealed his Oscar win there and then, while Eddie Murphy’s indifferent one two years later hardly galvanized Academy members into voting for him.

    So, trivial as it may sound, it’s worth taking into account the press and public reaction to Sunday night’s victors. Kate Winslet’s manic gushing may be earning her no end of criticism in the British press, but I suspect her evident gratitude at winning could go over well with Academy members. Meanwhile, Sally Hawkins’ emotion-drenched near-breakdown on stage can only raise her profile if she garners an Oscar nod.

    However, the Carpetbagger seems to feel (and I’m inclined to agree) that the real PR champ on Sunday was surprise Best Actor winner Mickey Rourke — whose eccentric acceptance speech, complete with tributes to canines past and present, was as memorable as it was oddly touching. (I don’t mind admitting I teared up, but then I did lose a dog myself last year. Cut me some slack.) While the Bagger confesses he was hoping for some trademark Rourke controversy, he was thoroughly won over by the star’s openness — and crucially, thinks his peers were too:

    But there is another part of the Bagger that watched hopefully, wishing that Mr. Rourke would keep it between the lines. His candidacy for best actor took a huge step the other night and the audience of his peers at the Beverly Hilton nearly jumped in his lap. “Everyone in that room has had their ups and downs,” said Aaron Eckhart, who was at a party held last night for Mr. Rourke hosted by LA Confidential. “We all felt good about what happened on that stage.”

    (more…)

  • Foreign film shortlist to drop soon

    Waltz with BashirI believe the 9-title shortlist for Best Foreign Language Film is due today, but details on the announcement are oddly hard to come by, so I could be wrong.

    In any case, it’s one I’m having a tough time calling. The new voting system should ensure that some of the year’s most acclaimed contenders are spared the indignity of being left off the shortlist (as happened, notoriously, to “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days” and “Persepolis” last year), so it’s difficult to see favorites “Waltz With Bashir” (fresh from its Globe win) and “Gomorrah” missing the cut. 

    I’d like to say that the best film of 2008, “The Class,” is similarly assured a spot, but it’s a risky, tough-minded docudrama, and I’m not sure how the committee (even the executive panel created to keep things in check) will respond to it — especially with “Gomorrah” and “Bashir” also occupying contemporary, genre-spanning territory. Fingers crossed. 

    Beyond that, my predictions get shaky. I think my projected list is a little heavy on European entries, but it’s hard to predict which one/s will miss. The Academy invariably throws a few less-heralded curveballs into the mix, but with 67 entries to choose from (and many of them fairly unknown quantities), it’s anyone’s guess which obscurities have caught the committee’s eye.

    (More thoughts, and my predicted shortlist, below the cut.)

    (more…)

  • Gimme five

    I was contemplating writing a post bemoaning the stultifying consensus that has been reached in the assorted guild nomination lists this past week. But now Nathaniel Rogers, tack-sharp as ever in his assessment of yesterday’s ACE nods, has spared me the trouble by saying everything I needed to say:

    I’m so confused right now. I swear that I saw 113 movies in 2008 and I’m beginning to think that I imagined 108 of them. Did I? Are these the only 5 movies that came out in 2008? It sure seems like it. Who knew that movie theaters were so empty all year? I specifically remember being in movie theaters and in all kinds of places and weather, too. Am I losing my mind?

    Nah, Nat. They’re just losing their memories. Or their imaginations. Or both. Do something about it, Academy.

  • Golden Globes: Feeling the love

    Sally Hawkins at the 66th Annual Golden Globe AwardsAs I curled on the couch in the wee small hours of the morning, watching last night’s Golden Globes telecast with only a hot toddy and a handful of chatty IC commenters for company, it occurred to me that I was hearing an awful lot of one word as the evening unfolded. And that word was ‘love.’

    Of course, it’s a ubiquitous word in any awards show, weepily applied as it is to innumerable family members, lovers and colleagues as winners rattle names off thank-you lists longer than most films’ scripts. But this struck me as slightly different: the love here was being directed towards film and art itself.

    Sally Hawkins, the night’s most endearing (and overwhelmed) winner, set the tone, describing her film, “Happy-Go-Lucky,” as being about love both on and off the screen. Surprise (to some) winner Colin Farrell followed her lead, celebrating cinematic adventurousness with the elegant soundbite: “Curiosity is love.”

    Meanwhile, Danny Boyle picked up above all on the affection his awards-sweeping film has garnered within the industry, while Kate Winslet paid tribute to a long-standing love cultivated with her co-star, refracted very differently in two films, eleven years apart.

    It struck me as an appropriate motif for an awards ceremony that seemed less calculated and more sincere than usual. Perhaps a year away the Globes has made me –- or them –- soft, but for an institution that takes sustained criticism for being overly susceptible to campaigning muscle and star power, it seemed to me that, in almost every category, the HFPA members had voted with their collective hearts, singling out the performers and films that they themselves loved.

    (more…)

  • Golden Globe winners, as they are announced

    If you feel like hanging out here and pondering, kvetching, bitching or (here’s a novel idea) enthusing over the results, we’d love your company.  For those wanting to watch the show live, catch the stream here.

    OK, that’s a wrap, guys. Sorry for the delay in posting those last results, but your generous and frenzied readership meant the server was a little tricky to handle this past half-hour. I’ll offer more ordered thought and commentary tomorrow, but for now, let me say I’m pretty thrilled with how the evening panned out overall. Right now, however, it’s 4:30am where I am, and my bed looks like a pretty inviting place to be. See you in the morning.

    Best Picture – Drama: “Slumdog Millionaire”

    It is written.

    Best Actor in a Drama: Mickey Rourke, “The Wrestler”

    Yes, yes, yes and yes again. I knew if Rourke could score anywhere it would be here, but still, I didn’t trust the Foreign Press to be that cool. Congratulations, HFPA members, for getting it right where most of the major critics’ groups got it wrong. Are you paying attention, SAG?

    Best Drama Series: “Mad Men”

    Well, duh. Nice to see Matt Weiner get his Globe moment after last year’s win went unseen, though.

    Best Actress in a Drama: Kate Winslet, “Revolutionary Road”

    Wow. I mean, just… wow. Who saw that coming? Unprecedented, I should think. (EDIT: Not quite. Sigourney Weaver accomplished the same feat in 1988. My bad.) In any case, a fair reward for a fine performance — so was that undeserved supporting award really necessary, HFPA?

    (More winners after the jump.)

    (more…)

  • Guessing the Globes

    UPDATE: That pesky Best Actor (Comedy/Musical) category has been running through my head all day, and I’m still not happy with my conclusion. So I’m making a last minute switch to Colin Farrell. I’ll probably be proved wrong in a few hours, but hey — there’s gotta be a surprise somewhere. Right?

    EARLIER: Well, hello there. After laptop theft has left me in the offline wilderness this past week, I’m back, albeit on borrowed facilities. (Thanks Alec, if you’re reading!) And not a moment too soon – any longer, and you’d have been deprived of my uninformed, inconsequential and in some cases wildly guessed Golden Globe predictions. Whew.

    The Globes come at a delicate point in awards season, just as consensus, or even a sense of inevitability, is building around certain prospective Oscar victors – but their timing, especially in the condensed awards season of recent years, means they don’t always catch the wave. So, while they frequently hop on an Oscar-bound bandwagon, as bellwethers, they can also be left behind – as in 2005, when they missed the momentum shift from “The Aviator” to “Million Dollar Baby.”

    Of course, their distinctive taste can also be a complicating factor, as we saw last year, when they bypassed long-established favourite “No Country for Old Men” for the rapidly cooling “Atonement.” And who can account for what happened in 1993, when they bizarrely crowned “Scent of a Woman” ahead of “Unforgiven,” “Howards End” and “The Crying Game?”

    What I’m saying, in a long-winded fashion, is that I’m finding this year’s Globes harder to call than they may appear. “Slumdog Millionaire” may be the obvious frontrunner, but I can’t shake a nagging suspicion that it’s not really an HFPA sort of film, that as with “Atonement” last year, the more stately, romantic “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” may be more to their taste. It’s a toss-up to me, but I’m ultimately playing it safe, and guessing that Danny Boyle’s Mumbai fable has too much momentum to overcome.

    (more…)

  • BAFTA announces foreign-language nominees

    I remain perplexed as to why they announce these separately from the main field of nominees (why further ghettoise a ghetto category?), but oh well. The BAFTA nominees for Best Film Not In The English Language are:

    “The Baader Meinhof Complex”
    “Gomorrah”
    “I’ve Loved You So Long”
    “Persepolis”
    “Waltz With Bashir”

    Hardly surprising, though you’d think the dismal UK reviews for “The Baader Meinhof Complex” might have put them off a bit. Better options out there, folks… I’m just sayin’. (I’m not sure whether “The Class”‘s late-February release date made it ineligible, but in any case, why has this masterwork been so sorely overlooked this awards season?)

    Can’t really complain about the rest. You know where I stand on two of them in particular, while I’m glad to see “Persepolis”‘s distant UK release date hasn’t caused the film to slip their minds.

  • Daylight robbery

    Thanks to some living, breathing piece of shit who thinks it’s somehow acceptable to break into people’s houses and help themselves, I have been relieved of my laptop. So I’m afraid I’m going to be pretty scarce around here for a little while. See y’all soon.

  • Fitzgerald biopic gets an upgrade

    I must admit my heart sank last year when it was announced that Nick Cassavetes was slated to direct “The Beautiful and the Damned.”

    The story of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s unhappy, alcohol-fuelled marriage to the Zelda Sayre, the schizophrenic socialite who became the embodiment of Flapper glamour, it should, by rights, make for pretty powerful cinema. With “Benjamin Button” on everyone’s minds at the moment, and the intriguing possibility of Baz Luhrmann filming “The Great Gatsby,” the moment is ripe for a Fitzgerald study on film.

    Cassevetes, however, was hardly a safe pair of hands for the project: his first two features were patchily promising enough, but “John Q,” “The Notebook” and “Alpha Dog” inspired little confidence in his abilities. So I’m thrilled to hear that he is out, and that John Curran, a far more interesting (and suitable) filmmaker, is now on board.

    Curran’s last two films, 2004’s searing “We Don’t Live Here Anymore” and his exquisite 2006 follow-up, the Maugham adaptation “The Painted Veil,” were both among the most undervalued films of their respective years. The latter, in particular, demonstrated a fine grasp of the period, and literary sensibility, that is necessary to take on Fitzgerald as a subject.

    Keira Knightley is still attached to play Sayre; there may be grumbles about the young Brit beauty doing yet another period piece, but it strikes me as smart casting, and a formidable challenge for the actress. If she pulls it off, it could bear more fruit than her recent attempts at Oscar-chasing. No word yet on who’s playing Fitzgerald, but if anyone’s listening, might I suggest Ryan Gosling?

  • Pre-PGA housekeeping

    I hadn’t realized I’d let my predictions linger, unattended, since November — I revised them in my head and guess I thought that would somehow magically appear on the site. Anyway, I thought it best to do some cobweb-clearing before the PGA announcement later today (for the record, I’m going with “Button,” “Knight” “Milk,” “Slumdog” and “WALL-E”) sends the guessing game into a new dimension. You can find my revised nomination predictions here.

    I’m still playing with some quirky, no doubt foolhardy, notions, but I like to keep things fun before the Guilds force us to get serious. Many categories still look like a complete crap-shoot to me: in the confounding Best Actress race, for example, I’m experimenting with a Kate Winslet snub, while dipping (reluctantly) into the Angelina Jolie pool for the first time. It doesn’t feel good.

    In the top race, I’m still banking on “WALL-E” leapfrogging “The Dark Knight” as the populist choice, though I wouldn’t be surprised to see both in there. I’m happy with four of my Best Picture runners, but couldn’t settle on a fifth: “Revolutionary Road” is freezing over, “Frost/Nixon” has ticked all the boxes but doesn’t seem to be anyone’s favourite, and the other most-mentioned contenders are a pretty passionless bunch too. Instead of flipping a coin between them, I decided to go a little crazy and try “Happy-Go-Lucky” on for size.

    Below the cut, for the hell of it, some winner picks to accompany Kris’s last week. In the top race, I’ve moved on from my earlier prediction of a “Milk” victory (seeing the film helps sometimes), but something still doesn’t feel right about “Slumdog Millionaire” to me — it seems like the kind of film that would benefit from going into the Oscar race as an underdog rather than the favourite. I honestly have no idea, so I’ll take that as an excuse to go mental again until I get a clearer sign.

    (more…)

  • For the completists

    Over at Gold Derby, Tom O’Neil lists all the runners-up (with points tallies) from yesterday’s National Society of Film Critics awards, along with other gossipy tidbits from the days proceedings. (Most stupid/amusing nugget: Eve, the eerily Applesque female robot from “WALL-E,” garnered a lone Best Actress vote.)

    The full list is below the cut, but here are a couple of bits and bobs that jumped out at me. It’s interesting to see that Sally Hawkins and Sean Penn won their respective categories by a landslide, in a single round of voting. (Seriously, what does distant runner-up Mickey Rourke have to do to gain some traction?)

    Meanwhile, “Waltz With Bashir” pulled off its stunning Best Picture victory in the second round of voting, after its animated cohort “WALL-E” led in the first round. Talk about a good day for the animated medium. What a second Best Picture citation from one of the ‘big three’ critics groups could have done for “WALL-E”s chances is a matter for contemplation, but it’s still very much on the radar — I’m still betting (naively, perhaps) it’ll make the Academy’s top five.

    Elsewhere it’s nice to see Michelle Williams’ extraordinary work in “Wendy and Lucy” at least appearing in the mix, while “Synecdoche, New York” and “A Christmas Tale” (narrowly behind “Happy-Go-Lucky”) make the NSFC’s Best Screenplay table a very classy one indeed. An interesting oddity in the Best Supporting Actress category is that Viola Davis actually tied on points with winner Hanna Schygulla (a truly inspired choice, for my money), but was placed second as she appeared on fewer ballots.

    Finally, can I just say how much I love these guys for giving Eddie Marsan some props? Finally.

    (more…)