In Contention

Category: The Long Shot

  • THE LONG SHOT: A little bit of English

    Rosamund Pike in An EducationYesterday, while talking with one of my sane friends whose thoughts drift to film awards perhaps one day a year, the conversation turned to the BAFTAs, which announce the nominations for their 2009 film awards tomorrow.

    “The BAFTAs, they’re like the Oscars for British films, right?” she asked.

    “Not quite,” I replied. “They’re open to all films.”

    “But the British films always win, right?”

    “No, not always.” I stared into my pint. “Well, a lot of the time, yeah.”

    “Why not just make them for British films, then?”

    “Because they want to be like the Oscars.”

    “So why do they keep rewarding the Brits?”

    The conversation could have circled this way for some time, but fortunately, it was time for another round – and by the time I returned from the bar, the topic had shifted to Pat Robertson.

    My friend’s innocent but pertinent questions only grazed the surface of the peculiar identity crisis suffered by the BAFTA Awards, a longstanding institution, kindly regarded by many, that only joined the pack of Oscar precursors nine years ago. Since they did so, it’s become increasingly difficult to ascertain who they are, what they stand for in awards season.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Hollywood fights back

    Sharlto Copley in District 9I may be looking out at my snow-caked garden as I write this, but it was in the spirit of spring-cleaning that I revised my nomination predictions this morning, ridding myself of most of the clinging personal hopes and hunches that lingered when I last updated them a month ago.

    It wasn’t the most drastic of revisions (rather to my surprise, I found I’d already predicted a robust haul for “District 9” before the Guilds made it such a strong bet), but it was my most detached one to date, anticipating a race that looks set to be rather passionless on my part.

    Rarely have so many of the leading players in the Best Picture race left me so cold – as “Avatar,” “Invictus,” “Precious,” “Inglourious Basterds,” “Up in the Air,” “Star Trek” and even “Up” all failed to arouse any particularly warm feelings in me, I began to wonder if I should just retreat to bed until March 8.

    (Unfortunately, for those of you wishing I’d do just that, a healthy precursor run for “The Hurt Locker,” one contender I love without reservation, is keeping me invested.)

    Still, my individual response to the films in question isn’t the only reason I’m feeling a little distanced from this year’s competition. As it currently stands, Hollywood looks set to enjoy its most homegrown Oscar race in some time.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Four to the floor

    Daniel Day-Lewis in Nine“It might as well rain until September,” wrote Carole King in her jaunty 1960s ditty of that title, an ode to summertime breakup blues that may as well have been composed for the autumnally-activated awards season. Swap September for December, and you have an apt description of the approach many studios and Oscar-watchers alike take to the race — a short-memory mentality that I argued against in a column almost three months ago.

    Back then, I appealed to specialty and independent studios to release smaller titles earlier in the year, before the holiday-season crush of studio prestige titles – citing “The Hurt Locker,” amongst others, as a title that would likely benefit from the head start.

    With the year up and the full field revealed, I take the robust awards-season performance of the former film, as well as the surprising durability of “Inglourious Basterds,” as evidence that more offbeat contenders often benefit from a longer lead – not least when even hefty studio ponies are currently struggling to keep their heads above water, despite the visibility afforded by December release dates.

    Which leads us to the quartet of studio titles long labeled the “Big Four” by awards-watchers – the “Big” speaking not of the most enthusiastic anticipation so much as the longest delay. Months ahead of their respective press premieres (the earliest of which came in late November), “The Lovely Bones,” “Nine,” “Invictus” and “Avatar” crafted an aura of importance around themselves by sheer virtue of being the last seen, hogging four slots on many predicted Best Picture lineups on theory and expectation alone.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: The next best thing

    Diane Kruger in Inglourious BasterdsAs the season hits its stride, and precursors turn murky perceptions of pack leaders and stragglers into harder realities, I find myself wondering how I would fill out my ballot if I were an Academy member.

    That’s not the same as wondering what I would fill my ballot with – as Kris just did today. Unlike many voters in the Academy and precursor ranks alike, who seemingly run out of ideas two slots in (“Hmm, did I see ten movies this year?”) and then reach for the names they’ve heard everyone else mention, I have no shortage of worthy suggestions for inclusion, whether people are talking about them or not.

    No, I’m referring to the how, the method, the strategy. Is it as simple as jotting down the films and individual achievements one admired most over the past 12 months? In a perfect world, yes. But do considerations of which of one’s favorites – and, indeed, least favorites – pose a threat in the race necessitate some compromise?

    Were I an Academy voter, in other words, would I give “35 Shots of Rum” one of my Best Picture slots, knowing full well it doesn’t having a snowball’s chance of a nomination? Or would I be a little craftier, and give the slot to “The Messenger” – a fine film that I love less, but that has slightly more hope of knocking something truly undeserving from the Oscar lineup?

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Cartoon network

    Mary and MaxAs the year winds down, and critics and entertainment journalists search for neat blanket tags with which to label the year that was, “the year of animation” is a phrase that is getting increasingly bandied about – some going so far as to declare 2009 the greatest year of all time for animated product. (Certainly, TIME magazine has fed that narrative, by naming a trio of ‘toons the year’s three greatest films.)

    It’s up for debate whether such talk is a result of extraordinary across-the-board quality, or sheer numbers. Make no mistake, this year has turned up more visible animated titles, in a broader range of artistic formats, than any in recent memory.

    Confirmation of this deluge comes in the Academy’s official listing of 20 titles in the hunt for the Best Animated Feature Oscar – the largest number since the category’s inception in 2001, and one that ensures the first five-strong slate of nominees since 2002.

    Of course, 2002, despite the higher-than-usual proportion of contenders, was hardly a banner year for the medium: “Spirited Away” may have taken a well-deserved Oscar, but the amount of filler it had to beat in the process – including such already forgotten snoozes as “Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron” and “Treasure Planet” – was proof positive that quantity doesn’t equal quality in this particular race.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: The more you know

    Abbie Cornish in Bright StarHere’s something I’ll bet a lot of you wouldn’t have guessed: once upon a time, when my pants were short and my South African accent heavy, I was a very good Oscar pundit. I won every pool going. I beat the lame TV critics’ guesses and laughed in their televised faces. When that got old, I entered a radio “predict the Oscars” contest and won ZAR200 in mall vouchers. (Okay, that’s $26 – it was worth more in the 90s.)

    Since those heady days of glory, however, things have changed. The internet came along, for starters, and proved to be a hell of a lot smarter than me. But my own predictions – particularly at the nomination stage – got more wayward by the year; gone were the days of going five-for-five in one category after another.

    When it comes to picking the winners, meanwhile, I’ve begun losing Oscar pools to my brother, a mostly disinterested architect with an uncanny knack for calling the Academy’s most gauchely sentimental instincts. (He nailed the Best Foreign Language Film upset by “Departures,” for example, simply by reading a one-line plot synopsis of each nominee. I can learn much from him.)

    Why the lapse in form lately? It’s simple, really: I’ve started seeing the movies.

    That is to say, I’ve started seeing the movies in time. Back in the days when I had no access to press screenings or festivals, I was wholly at the mercy of South African release schedules, which usually meant I was lucky if one of the Best Picture nominees landed before Easter.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Popular mechanics

    Chris Pine in Star Trek“My God, they’ve thrown in everything but the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.”

    Quoted by writer Anthony Holden in his gossipy history “The Oscars,” this was one publicist’s dismayed response to the 1990 Academy Award nominations, which included such unusual concessions to popular (as opposed to critical) opinion as a Best Picture nomination for “Ghost” and a Best Actress nod for Julia Roberts in “Pretty Woman.”

    I remember this year well – I was eight years old, and it was the first Oscar race I followed in detail from burbling Christmas hype to the ceremony itself, digging up and scrapbooking all the press and TV coverage I could find.

    And from what I recall of my fledgling research, the unnamed publicist above wasn’t alone in her discontent. In particular, the “Ghost” nomination attracted levels of critical scorn even higher than those usually reserved for the Oscars – the common line being that the Academy had sold out to commerce rather than art, and that the sky would be falling at any given moment.

    Does this situation sound at all familiar?

    It should do. Though it was a response to an outcome rather than a possibility, the kvetching over the 1990 nods more than slightly resembles the panic that set in among certain pundits and fans alike (including, admittedly, yours truly) when the switch to 10 Best Picture nominees was announced in June.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Consider this

    John Malkovich and Jessica Haines in DisgraceThere’s nothing like an Oscar season to prove what a small number five (or even ten) is.

    We may only be in November, but already, months of conversation, covering a broad canvas of Oscar sure-shots and long-shots alike, have devolved into a ruthless mathematical elimination process, as previously five-wide categories fill up with safe bets. Before you know it, scores of previously fancied contenders are jostling for a mere one or two supposedly “free” slots on the ballot, and with each week that passes, the pool of possibles is culled further.

    This is, of course, hardest on independent or leftfield contenders. Having fought mightily even to enter the discussion in the first place, they must then rely on a flaky combination of precursors, DVD screeners and prayer to stay afloat.

    Miracles do happen, of course, thanks largely to the Academy’s weighted ballot system, where a number-one vote is all. (Nobody was talking about Tommy Lee Jones to take the last Best Actor slot in 2007, but there he was nonetheless. Ditto the recent likes of Michael Shannon, Samantha Morton and “City of God.”)

    With that in mind, I’d like to spotlight one contender in each major category that deserves a similarly happy outcome. Many of them are names I’ve championed before. Most of them are sitting on the furthest reaches of the sidelines. All of them deserve better.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Don’t look back in anger

    Jake Gyllenhaal in Brokeback MountainFor all the movement in the awards game this week – Jeff Bridges leap-frogging into contention, the animation race swelling to five nominees, “Precious” continuing to gather momentum – my head hasn’t really been in it this week.

    That’s partly because we’re all still making blind prognoses until four unseen juggernauts – “Nine,” “Avatar,” “The Lovely Bones,” and “Invictus” – finally deign to show their faces. And partly because I’m only looking forward to one of those titles with sincere movie-fan enthusiasm, as opposed to professional curiosity. Sometimes you just get the wholly subjective feeling that it isn’t going to be ‘your’ Oscar season – and while I’m not there yet, the fear is setting in.

    So, with no current awards developments getting me particularly enthralled or incensed, I’ve spent most of my time lately in a reflective state. With ‘best of the 2000s’ lists already coming thick and fast, and my DVD trawl through the decade’s leftovers for my own list in full swing, Oscar’s own performance over the last 10 years has been on my mind.

    As I discussed in this space a few weeks ago, it’s been a slightly schizophrenic decade of Oscar winners, one that has blurred long-held definitions of “Oscar-bait.” One does have to wonder about the identity or cultural relevance of any group that can alternately celebrate such disparate achievements as “Slumdog Millionaire,” “Gladiator” and “No Country for Old Men.” Who are these people, and what do they know?

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Critical condition

    Gabourey Sidibe in PreciousAhead of its U.S. release this week, there is a wave of mild surprise in the blogosphere over the fact that “Precious,” the film deemed by some (yours truly included) to be the present Best Picture frontrunner, is currently sitting on a lowly Metacritic score of 57. Fitting neatly with the largely media-fabricated talk of a backlash against the film, some commenters are citing this rather arbitrary number as a debit against the film’s chances.

    As much as I’d personally like that to believe that — and as relieved as I am to see that I’m not the only person who didn’t respond to the film – such talk will doubtless be short-lived, given the paucity of reviews making up the current score and the likelihood of raves to come. If anything, public support is more crucial than critical consensus to this film’s campaign – if audiences don’t turn up to see this grim, minority-oriented indie, many Academy members won’t feel compelled to either.

    That said, it looks increasingly possible that “Precious” (I refuse to use that lumpy subtitle all season, by the way) could turn out to be a more critically divisive item than might have been expected following an ecstatically received festival run.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Mind your language

    (from left) Niels Arestrup and Tahar Rahim in A ProphetYou might not be aware of it, but the competition is already formally under way in Oscar’s most perennially problematic category, Best Foreign Language Film.

    For almost two weeks now, official Academy screenings of the longlisted contenders in the race have been in progress, and will continue through January, until all 65 titles have been subjected to the foreign-language committee’s scrutiny.

    Pete Hammond has details of the screening schedule and voting rules, as well as some gossip on audience reaction to the screenings thus far: Mexico’s “Backyard” and Switzerland’s “Home,” starring Jimmy Smits and Isabelle Huppert respectively, have apparently gone down well; Croatia’s “Donkey,” thanks to incomprehensible subtitles, not so much. Add a pinch of salt to taste.

    Coincidentally enough, courtesy of the London Film Festival, I’ve been simultaneously working my own way down the contenders list, though my personal tally has stalled at eight titles. (It could have been 11, if scheduling and admin obstacles hadn’t kept me away from the Australian, Colombian and Serbian entries. I am but one man.) Only 57 to go, then.

    I will offer a more detailed assessment of the films in another post, but by and large it’s been a pleasure making their acquaintance. Of course, my own selection has been filtered through that of the fest’s generally thoughtful programmers, safeguarding against any real horrors – but I don’t mind saying that an unembarrassing list of nominees could theoretically be assembled from just my scant sampling of the longlist.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: What is an “Oscar movie” these days?

    George Clooney in Up in the Air“God, that thing’s just going to shit Academy Awards out of its ass next year, isn’t it?,” I overheard a journo behind me remark to his companion, as I made my way out of the “Up in the Air” press screening on Sunday. “It’s such an Oscar movie.”

    Two things struck me as interesting about this throwaway remark, both relating to the lack of care with which both Oscar pundits and “serious” film lovers tend to regard the Academy Awards.

    The first was that, isolated and in print, the guy’s words appear dismissive of “Up in the Air,” yet they actually capped a mostly enthusiastic response to the film. His tone dipped almost apologetically as he applied the “Oscar movie” label, as if it somehow sullied an otherwise fine effort.

    More to the point, however, the remark seemed indicative of the transitive stage the Academy Awards seem to be in at the moment, as simultaneously resistant and vulnerable to industry change as the protagonist of Jason Reitman’s film – and facing a similar crisis of purpose. For 15 years ago – if not necessarily 15 years before that – “Up in the Air” wouldn’t have been decreed an “Oscar movie” at all.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Minority report

    PreciousWhen the Academy Awards roll around in March, it will have been precisely two decades since the unlikely figure of Kim Basinger blasted Academy voters’ conservatism on air at the 1989 ceremony, with specific regard to their sidelining of “Do the Right Thing,” Spike Lee’s groundbreaking study of urban interracial tension.

    “We’ve got five great films here, and they’re great for one reason – they tell the truth,” the star opined before presenting a clip from one of that year’s Best Picture nominees. “But there is one film missing from this list that deserves to be on it because, ironically, it might tell the biggest truth of all.”

    As if in response, later that evening, the Academy handed their top prize to “Driving Miss Daisy,” as quiet and uncontroversial a portrait of the American racial divide as you could ask for. Let it never be said that the Oscars have no sense of irony.

    20 years on, much has changed. (Basinger has become an Oscar-winning actress, for starters. No one saw that coming.) More to the point, the amount of black Oscar winners in acting categories has trebled. And just two years after Basinger’s outburst, the Academy named 23 year-old John Singleton their first black Best Director nominee.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Post early for Christmas

    Jeremy Renner in The Hurt LockerLondon is in the midst of a postal strike. No mail, be it far-flung postcard or electricity bill, has popped through my front door for over a month. I recently had to stroll into Soho to pick up my London Film Festival accreditation pack by hand. And rather discouragingly, my local post office today put a hastily scrawled sign in the window: “Post NOW for delivery by Christmas.”

    If you’re wondering why I’ve started this week’s column with this fascinating tidbit from my domestic life – apart from the fact that, as Kris noted, the crickets are chirping in awardsville this week – it’s because, as I stared disbelievingly at the sign, it occurred to me that a similar memo should be sent to several specialty studios hoping for a stake in this awards season. (Yes, my mind works in curious ways.)

    In short: you have a little package that needs to deliver in time for Oscar consideration? Don’t wait until December. Send it out now.

    This may seem like crazy advice given Oscar voters’ ever-growing love affair with winter releases. Just last year, no pre-November release made the Best Picture cut. And Harvey Weinstein has proved time and again that substantial rewards can be reaped if you spring a film upon the Academy without giving them too much time to think about it – from “The Cider House Rules” to “Chocolat” to “The Reader,” he knows which films won’t survive a few months of critical and industry scrutiny.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: What are precursors for, anyway?

    Anne Hathaway at the 2009 Critics Choice AwardsI didn’t time my holiday to coincide with the sleepiest week of awards season, but that’s how it panned out anyway. While I spent 10 days drinking my way along the canals of France’s Burgundy region, divorced from my computer screen and, I admit, any thoughts of Oscar whatsoever, the industry, too, took a collective siesta.

    As people assimilated the minimal revelations of this year’s festival run (Gosh, people like “Precious?” Who knew?) and steeled themselves for the annual madness ahead, the Producers Guild of America clearly aimed to take advantage of the lull by announcing the expansion of its feature film nominees to 10. The blogosphere stirred briefly, dutifully posted the press release, and went back to sleep.

    The PGA was probably hoping for more of a reaction than it got, but that’s what happens when you ape a larger organization’s move three months after the fact…as everyone suspected you would, anyway.

    The truth, however, is that the news was as dispiriting as it was unsurprising. Because for all the organization’s feeble claims that the copycat move was made purely in the interests of artistic diversity, all it does is expose a serious identity crisis that afflicts many of the season’s precursors.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Making the 10 work for you

    Coraline*This is the first installment of “The Long Shot,” a new weekly Oscar column from Guy Lodge here at In Contention.

    At some point last week, I snapped at a commenter for rather benignly suggesting that, with the clarity granted certain contenders by the festival season, we could now call 7 of the newly expanded 10 Best Picture slots securely filled in mid-September, thus leaving us a full four months to find another three.

    Going by that rationale, less than one new contender a month could emerge — roughly keeping pace with the film-going habits of many Academy members.

    It was a fair enough theory, I suppose, and I shouldn’t have responded with as much snark as I did — though I will always adhere to the no-fun theory that a film cannot be decreed a “lock” before it is seen.

    (Is “Invictus” a “Million Dollar Baby” or a “Space Cowboys” waiting to happen? Can “Nine” possibly match its ostentatious pedigree? What in the name of God is “Avatar?” Such are the tensions that make the season worth following.)

    But I think the main reason the theory got on my nerves had nothing whatsoever to do with the commenter’s reasoning, and everything to do with the dispiriting possibility of it actually being true. Because if all the much-ballyhooed widening of the Best Picture category amounts to is a catch-all solution to ensure that every frontrunner gets its due — thereby handily making the Oscars more predictable and less particular into the bargain — then I’ll regretfully turn my back on the annual institution that has fascinated me since the second grade, move to Paris and track the Cesars instead.

    (more…)