In Contention

Category: Daily

  • Berlin fest gets under way

    As far as press coverage goes, the Berlin Film Festival tends to get a bit drowned in the flurry of Oscar season, so you could be forgiven for failing to notice that it actually kicked off last night, with the world premiere of Tom Tykwer’s corporate thriller “The International.”

    Sadly, as I suspected, the film doesn’t seem to be much to write home about. Screen International describes it as “ploddingly talky,” describing stars Clive Owen and Naomi Watts as “leaden” and “struggling,” respectively. Variety is no more enthusiastic, deeming it a “mostly ho-hum” exercise. As a fan of both stars and the director, it’s disheartening to see them all punching so far below their weight; Owen, in particular, needs to have a word with his agent. (Why is one of the best actors of his generation stuck in a rut of identikit thrillers? Is “Inside Man 2” really called for?)

    Anyway, onwards and upwards. Tonight sees the premiere of “Ricky,” the new one from François Ozon, who is always interesting even when he misses the mark. (And I must admit that, after the unholy mess that was Ozon’s recent “Angel,” I don’t have the greatest of confidence in this new fantasy-comedy experiment.)

    The weekend will shed some light on two very intriguing titles. Sally Potter’s “Rage,” which features (amongst other things) Judi Dench, Eddie Izzard and Jude Law in drag, promises to live up to the batty eccentricity of Potter’s best work — check out Nat Rogers’ illustrated preview here. Meanwhile, Lukas Moodysson’s “Mammoth,” a seemingly “Babel”-flavoured story of families in crisis, stars Gael Garcia Bernal and Michelle Williams, and has long been one of my most anticipated films of the year. Fingers crossed.

  • 2/6 Oscarweb Round-up

    Richard Jenkins• David Poland is probably wrong on two counts at the top of his recent Oscar column (certainly plkenty of us had our sites set on Davis and Shannon going into this awards season), but we’ll give him some slack. [Movie City News]

    • David Carr, via video, talks about Bill Condon and Larry Mark futzing with the traditional Oscar show format. [The Carpetbagger]

    • Dammit.  I thought something was fishy when I had to shell out money hand over fist for some Boss tickets Monday. [The Big Picture]

    • Getting to know Oscar nominee Courtney Hunt. [The Guardian]

    • Dave Karger bangs the drum for Oscar underdog Richard Jenkins. [Entertainment Weekly]

    • The annual “how the Oscar statuette is made” feature. [Daily Telegraph]

    • Was “Waterworld” an “eco-parable” ahead of its time? [Slate]

    • Claufia Puig reviews the Oscar shorts.  High marks for “Toyland,” “The Pig” and “Manon on the Asphalt.” [USA Today]

    • Andrew O’Hehir also digs in. [Beyond the Multiplex]

  • Define ‘upset’

    Let’s get this straight: an upset and an injustice are two very different things. When a nominee that isn’t widely expected to win beats one that is, that’s an upset. When a highly deserving underdog loses to a less deserving favourite, that’s an injustice. The latter arguably happens more frequently in Oscar history than the former, but that’s no reason to blur the line.

    I mention this in connection with a poll that Sasha Stone spotted yesterday, in which the following were named the biggest Oscar upsets of all time in the Best Picture category:

    1. “Shakespeare in Love” over “Saving Private Ryan” (1998)
    2. “Crash” over “Brokeback Mountain” (2005)
    3. “Dances With Wolves” over “GoodFellas” (1990)
    4. “Rocky” over “Taxi Driver” (1976)
    5. “How Green Was My Valley” over “Citizen Kane” (1941)

    Now I remember the 1990 awards clearly — I was 8 years old, and it was the first Oscar season that I followed keenly from beginning to end. And even I, at that tender age, knew that “Dances With Wolves” was a gimme, a slam-dunk, a no-brainer. However critically acclaimed Scorsese’s masterpiece was, it hadn’t a prayer against the film that swept the Guilds and the Globes — Kevin Costner enjoyed as great a stranglehold on the Oscar as Danny Boyle does today. “GoodFellas” winning would’ve been the upset, not the other way round.

    (more…)

  • ‘Young Victoria’ surfaces

    A lavishly mounted biopic of the eponymous British monarch that boasts Martin Scorsese among its producers, “The Young Victoria” seemed primed for Oscar consideration last year. Sandy Powell’s typically elaborate costumes were an apparent shoo-in, and some pundits had star-in-waiting Emily Blunt as a dark horse on their Best Actress lists — until the film was unceremoniously yanked from the 2008 schedule.

    Now, ahead of its UK release on March 6, the Telegraph offers an extensive profile of the film, declaring it “a vibrant celebration of a joyous and passionate Queen.” The film certainly has an interesting pedigree, pairing a quintessentially British writer (Julian Fellowes of “Gosford Park” fame) with a very adventurous choice of director, French-Canadian auteur Jean-Marc Vallée. Vallée’s last film, the funky gay-oriented family drama “C.R.A.Z.Y.,” has become something of a cult item, so it’ll be interesting to see what he brings to the table here.

    The cast, as you would expect, is mighty impressive, with Paul Bettany, Miranda Richardson, Jim Broadbent, Mark Strong and Rupert Friend (soon to be seen in “Chéri”) supporting Blunt, whose lead turn Fellowes describes as “one of those wonderful meetings of part and actress that doesn’t happen very often.” The trailer below is, I think, a little dourly cut, but with the level of talent involved, this could be one to watch.

  • NYT Mag’s Great Performers

    The New York Times Magazine has launched a sweet set of slide shows, “Great Performers,” narrated by journalist Lynn Hirschberg featuring Oscar nominees Frank Langella, Sean Penn, Brad Pitt, Mickey Rourke, Penelope Cruz (saucy shots!), Kate Winslet and Robert Downey Jr.

    These shots of Winslet and Rourke are definitely my favorites.  Loky has become a star in his own right this year:

    Kate Winslet

    Mickey Rourke

  • Winslet’s win a done deal or is there more to consider?

    Kate Winslet in The ReaderWhen Kate Winslet surprisingly popped up in the lead actress category for her performance in “The Reader,” most of us immediately jumped to the conclusion that she’ll win the Oscar walking away.  That is still probably the safest bet, but some folks are disturbing the waters, starting with Winslet herself in a recent AP story:

    Kate Winslet says she is prepared to leave this year’s Oscar ceremony as she has five times in the past — without a golden statue.

    “I’m so used to it, having gone through it before and having lost so many times,” Winslet says. “Being in that losing state is something I’m much more comfortable in, in a funny kind of a way.”

    David Carr, meanwhile, points out that Ray Richmond considers Winslet’s category switcheroo to be a “snag”:

    Winslet’s previous wins for “Reader” came in the supporting category. For reasons known only to its acting branch, the Academy decided to give her more votes in the lead category. Winslet is untested here. While the odds still favor her, don’t rule out the chance of a loss.

    What do you think?  Is the Oscar already in her hand or is Meryl Streep most likely to swoop in and grab statue #3?  (Personally I don’t think Anne Hathaway is going to figure in here.)

  • POLL: Who deserves it? — BEST FILM EDITING

    You know the drill.  Sidebar poll.  Let us know.

  • Oscar might go for “Button”

    Cate Blanchett in The Curious Case of Benjamin ButtonThere is no good reason for me to think this, of course.  Call it a gut feeling, but I have a sneaking feeling the Academy might ignore “Slumdog Millionaire,” despite its countless awards, and go for homegrown studio product this year.  Let’s face it, the Academy has proven they march to their own drummer over and over again.

    “Slumdog” has already become a pop culture phenomenon around North America and Britain, making far more money than the filmmakers ever thought it would. Hell, before the festival season started the film was doomed, set for direct-to-DVD distribution.  Yes, Danny Boyle has won the DGA award, a solid predictor, but I’m not convinced.  Hollywood loves to congratulate itself, which we saw in 1997 with “Titanic” somehow winning a record 11 awards over the vastly superior “L.A. Confidential.”  David Fincher’s “Button” has been around for years, waiting for the right director, the right effects, the right time.

    So often in the past the Academy has gone for a film that is conservative and offends no one, ignoring the better work.”Driving Miss Daisy” over “Do the Right Thing” (which wasn’t even nominated), “Gandhi” over “E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial,” “Oliver!” over “2001:A Space Odyssey.”  The list goes on and on.  “Button” is a handsomely mounted project, beautifully shot, meticulously crafted, with strong performances from the cast,and rock solid direction from Fincher.

    “Slumdog” may well prevail, but as a devil’s advocate, I am throwing it out there that “Button” could surprise, taking wins for both Best Picture and Best Director.  Am I crazy?

  • He’s just not that f***ing into you

    Okay, so Kris promised there would be no more Bale-related posts. But as the guys at Vulture pointed out, this is too good to ignore. In any case, it’s about another movie altogether.

  • Curiously human

    Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight

    I expect the late Heath Ledger to win the Oscar for best supporting actor for “The Dark Knight,” but I’m not choosing his performance as the “most elevating” out of sympathy. It was elevating for an entirely separate reason: He transformed the character of the Joker, who we thought we knew so well, into a suffering, haunted being, stripped of all emotion except for ruthless self-pity.

    Exactly what wounded the Joker is hard to say (he tells conflicting stories, neither one necessarily true), but something certainly did. His role as the Joker is not performed to entertain himself, but as a necessary acting-out of turmoil. Its function as a deliberate performance is underlined by his makeup, deliberately cruder and messier than previous Jokers, as if he slops it on with anger. His laugh is maniacal.

    These feelings are a tribute to Ledger, to director Chris Nolan, and to the screenplay by Nolan and his brother, Jonathan. This Batman film, while still an over-the-top comic book extravaganza, is curiously more human than before, giving greater weight to the characters as if they actually were, however impossibly, human beings.

    From Roger Ebert’s recent article on the “most elevating” performance of the supporting actor contenders.  More “elevated” picks can be viewed here, best-of choices including Mickey Rourke, Melissa Leo, Viola Davis and “Milk.”

  • You’ve already seen it, but…

    …Jon Stewart really ripped into “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” the other night, as if that’s somehow novel at this stage.  Seriously — Wells, Defamer, Poland, Carr, the vitriol is tired and largely unfair.  The sad thing is, most of the sniping comes — shocker — free of any reasoned debate about WHY “Button” is problematic, a conversation I’d love to have if any of these schoolyard bullies would be willing.  Sadly, none of them seem to be, but it’s not Stewart’s job to be reasonable.  He’s a comedian, after all.

  • 2/5 Oscarweb Round-up

    New Boy• Patrick Goldstein, in a well-reasoned piece that even I — a dedicated Boss fan — can’t disagree with, says Bruce Springsteen “had to stoop to conquer” Sunday night. [The Big Picture]

    • Jeffrey Wells bizarrely reviews Best Live Action Short nominee “New Boy.”  Beware careless spoilers. [Hollywood Elsewhere]

    • Michael Cieply, reports on the on-going discussion of how to handle the Best Original Song performances, from a cost stand-point, of course. [The Carpetbagger]

    • David Carr, meanwhile, in addressing the Christian Bale situation, takes another swipe at “The Dark Knight.”  But he should really watch the film again and understand that the ending isn’t “unsatisfying,” but merely poorly integrated into the whole. [The Carpetbagger]

    • Speaking of Bale, Tom O’Neil wonders if the actor threw away his Oscar hopes for “Public Enemies” by shooting off at the mouth. [Gold Derby]

    • Dave Karger previews Saturday’s WGA awards.  “Milk” and “Slumdog” have it in the bag, right?  Anyone expecting an upset? [Entertainment Weekly]

    • Three weeks in the life of an Oscar ballot. [Little Gold Men]

    • David Fincher: “‘Benjamin Button’ was a semi-confection that became resonant.” [The Guardian]

    • Treading waters we were swimming through back when the film was set for a 2008 bow, Brad Brevet wonders if Stephen Frears’ “Chéri” is an Oscar contender.  Considering it’s Miramax’s best bet, then yeah, it probably is a contender. [Rope of Silicon]

  • Weinstein + Garland = Oscar?

    OK, so some actress just won an Oscar. We don’t know who she is yet, or when exactly she’ll receive it, but is there anyone willing to bet against the lucky thesp who winds up getting cast in the Harvey Weinstein-produced biopic of Judy Garland that has just been announced?

    It seems the Brothers Weinstein have just optioned “Get Happy: The Life of Judy Garland,” the bestselling, apparently definitive biography by Gerald Clarke (who, incidentally, also wrote the volume from which “Capote” was adapted). No director or cast are attached yet, but this is surely an awards-season gimme.

    A grim childhood, drug and alcohol abuse, multiple unhappy marriages, singing, performing, drastic premature aging, mental instability … Garland’s story is essentially “La Vie en Rose” minus the subtitles, plus the allure of Hollywood legend. It represents everything the Academy swoons over in a performance. If some actress knocks it out the park, backed by Weinstein’s apparently renewed campaigning muscle, woe betide the other four ladies nominated alongside her.

    Some of you may remember that Judy Davis nabbed every TV award going for playing Garland in miniseries form a few years back. It’ll be interesting to see what age range Weinstein looks toward for the casting here. One actress or two? Anne Hathaway seems like a neat fit, but is she too young? Is Cate Blanchett too old? If Kate Winslet loses again this year, I suggest she gets on the phone with Weinstein immediately.

  • Jenkins, Cruz make the talk show rounds

    I can’t find a clip of “The Visitor” star Richard Jenkins on Letterman last night, but here’s a look at the actor’s visit to the couch of “The View”:

    And Penelope Cruz doing her duty on Leno:

  • Thank you

    Since I was talking about original screenplays earlier today, I was interested to see that Jeff Wells is also on the topic. He offers a brief rundown of the nominees for Saturday’s WGA Awards, and offers this theory on why Jenny Lumet missed out on both Guild and Oscar nods for “Rachel Getting Married”:

    Lumet’s screenplay didn’t render enough bombast and sword thrusts in the big-money confrontation scene between Anne Hathaway and Debra Winger. They start to get into the “why did you leave me with him?” issue, Winger freaks and slaps and then Hathaway runs out — not satisfying!

    I’m not sure ‘bombast’ is the word I’d use (I rather think more subtlety was called for), but I’m glad to see that scene singled out — for me, it was a lazy, artificial bit of dramatic shortcutting that caused the film’s whole emotional construction to fall apart somewhat. Anyway, old news and apropos of nothing really, but I’m glad someone else said it.

    As for the WGA, we all know Simon Beaufoy is taking the adapted category. Does Dustin Lance Black win original by default, since he’s the only Oscar nominee of the bunch? I guess so — barring a surge of peer affection for four-time winner Woody Allen. But if Black does lose — not likely, of course — I wouldn’t fancy his Oscar chances much. Just an idle thought.

  • ‘Wrestler’ rules London crix awards

    The London Film Critics’ Circle have just announced their winners, and I have to say they’ve done a pretty terrific job. (I discussed the nominations here.) The really heartening news is that “The Wrestler” finally has another Best Picture award to its credit, five months after taking the Golden Lion at Venice — who would have thought that it’d be left to the Europeans to give this quintessential piece of Americana its due?

    Naturally, Mickey Rourke took the Best Actor award too, while Kate Winslet added yet another trophy (awarded jointly for both her 2008 films) to her crowded mantlepiece. David Fincher was a somewhat surprising winner of the Best Director award, and “Waltz With Bashir” took yet another foreign-language gong.

    If you’re wondering where “Slumdog Millionaire” features in all of this, it ruled the roost in the British Film categories, taking Best British Film and Director, and also landing Screenwriter of the Year for Simon Beaufoy. In the British races, the Londoners like to have their cake and eat it — for example, Kristin Scott Thomas took a richly deserved award for Best British Actress, but beat Best Actress winner Winslet in the process.

    Meanwhile, I’m thrilled to see Michael Fassbender getting some hardware for his staggering work in “Hunger” (which also took the Breakthrough Filmmaker prize), while in the supporting race, Eddie Marsan is another thoroughly deserving victor. Good work all round, London critics.

    Full list of winners below the cut.

    (more…)

  • Is the Oscar schedule too short?

    The Academy AwardsFive years ago, the Academy whittled a schedule some complained was too long down a bit, chopping off a month at the end of the process and bringing the annual Oscar ceremony into late February rather than late March.  It was something of a significant event, if you didn’t happen to be watching back then, and the question has circulated ever since: did it really help?

    A bevy of reasons was dished out by the organization at the time: “It’s for the films,” “It’s for the ratings,” etc.  But a lot of folks in the industry, certainly those who cover this racket, have since belly-ached over how much of an exhausting sprint the season seems to be now.

    For me, I used to hate how drawn out the process was.  It seemed to go on for too long and the next year’s crop was REALLY in our face before you knew it.  But I will admit that the new schedule has been equally problematic.  I begin to crash right around this time of year, because the entire awards schedule shifted to accommodate the Oscar move, of course.  There are a lot of shows, a lot of key dates crammed into one really tight space, one already dominated by the holiday season.  I long for the end nowadays for different reasons than before: it puts you on the verge of collapse.

    Well Variety’s Tim Gray has written a piece addressing this issue.  The unsurprising verdict: he doesn’t like the shortened schedule.  I say unsurprising because an outlet that just laid off a chunk of its workforce and found itself struggling for the expected advertising revenue would like nothing more than another month of ad sales this time of year.

    (more…)

  • Digging into the Oscar nominated shorts

    La Maison en petits cubesThis year Magnolia Pictures and Shorts International are partnering up once again to distribute the 10 Oscar nominated short films, both animated and live action.  The package is set to release this Friday, Feb. 6 in select cities and you can also download the films via iTunes.  Check out Shorts International’s official site for the films here.

    I always like seeing what the world’s filmmakers have cooked up in these categories, so I took an hour or so earlier in the week to have a look at the films in contention.  I have to say, it’s a more impressive collective than we’ve seen in recent years — especially on the live action side of things, where interestingly enough, all the entrants hail from overseas.  I’ll start there.

    Best Short Film (Live Action)
    “Auf der Strecke (On the Line)”
    “Grisen (The Pig)”
    “Manon sur le bitume (Manon on the Asphalt)”
    “New Boy”
    “Spielzeugland (Toyland)”

    The German film “Auf der Strecke (On the Line),” from director Reto Caffi, has racked up an impressive tally of festival awards.  But for me it brings up the rear.  It’s a somewhat derivative study of love and guilt, and there’s a nice enough twist mid-way through to really drive the point home, but the film drags on a bit and, despite a captivating final image, didn’t have the impact it might have.  I can’t say it’s not a competent piece of narrative filmmaking, however.

    (more…)