The press release, in full:

Beverly Hills, CA (July 31, 2012) – Producer Hawk Koch was elected president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences tonight (July 31) by the organization’s Board of Governors. This will be his first term in the office.

Koch, who is beginning his ninth year as a governor representing the Producers Branch, has served as first vice president of the Academy during the past year. He previously served three one-year terms as treasurer and one term as vice president.

In addition, Public Relations Branch governor Cheryl Boone Isaacs was elected first vice president; Producers Branch governor Kathleen Kennedy was elected to one vice president post and Writers Branch governor Phil Robinson was re-elected to the other vice president post; Public Relations Branch governor Rob Friedman was elected treasurer; and Executives Branch governor Robert Rehme was elected secretary.

Koch’s producer credits include “Losing Isaiah” and “Gorky Park.” He recently served as executive producer on “Source Code” and is executive producer on the upcoming “Very Good Girls.”

Academy board members serve three-year terms, while officers serve one-year terms, with a maximum of four consecutive terms in any one office.

For year-round entertainment news and awards season commentary follow @kristapley on Twitter.

Sign up for Instant Alerts from In Contention!

For those of us still clinging to the illusion of youth – I”m 29, but humor me – this has been a mighty distressing summer. The reboot of “Spider-Man,” for example, seemed utterly superfluous to those of us who remember 2002 like it was yesterday; to the new generation of teenagers ogling Andrew Garfield”s more haunted-looking Peter Parker, however, Tobey Maguire”s first outing in the Spidey-suit is a kindergarten memory, if it”s a memory at all.

More alarming still is a new take on a film whose posters I can still remember adorning the cinema marquees of my childhood, but is now deemed so venerable as to be past the territory of sequels or spinoffs. Yes, “Total Recall” – which stood only 22 years ago at the cutting edge of FX blockbuster terrain – is now old enough to suffer the indignity of a remake, and “Underworld” director Len Wiseman is the man filling Paul Verhoeven”s shoes.

Just the other day, I watched with consternation as a trailer for the shiny new “Recall” played before a crowd gathered for “The Dark Knight Rises,” many of whom evinced no recognition of the film that came before it; “That looks clever,” a young woman in my row whispered to her boyfriend, while I saw my life flash before my eyes. (If this latest product of Hollywood”s recycling factory disconcerted me, spare a thought for my dear godfather, a concert violinist who does frequent film score work and has now played on both “Recalls,” scored by Jerry Goldsmith and Harry Gregson-Williams, respectively. “When I get given sheet music for a third version, that might be my cue to retire,” he remarked drily to me.)

Wiseman”s “Total Recall” – which underlines its remake status by cribbing the title of Verhoeven”s film, not the Philip K. Dick story at its source – opens on Friday. I haven”t seen it yet; for all I know, it”s terrific, though I have my reasons to be on guard.

That it”s a remake, however, isn”t in itself one of them. “Remake” is often regarded as something of a dirty word by cinema purists, one generally greeted with groans when it pops up in pre-production news snippets – but there are plenty of examples of remakes that don”t merely serve executives” most craven, conservative commercial instincts. Instead, they can also serve as courageous reinterpretations of porous works, heartfelt valentines to pristine ones or welcome reversals of past, potential-laden failures.

So it seemed an appropriate time to round up a list of 10 great remakes – ones that successfully revive, reimagine or reframe the films that came before them, reminding us that the “r” word needn”t necessarily be an “argh” one. As I combed my memory for good examples, considering everything from Philip Kaufman”s “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” to Christopher Nolan”s “Insomnia” and beyond, I encountered more choices than I”d initially expected.

Criteria become stringent, if not quite set in stone: the films had to be in conversation with their cinematic predecessors, not just the literary or theatrical source material that, in some cases, links them. And I settled on only one film per director: bad news for the likes of Steven Soderbergh and Martin Scorsese, both of whom had a pair of titles in my shortlist at one point or another.

Some of the films in my Top 10 comfortably exceed their initial screen treatments; others stand beside them as proud companions or homages. Some are still regarded in certain quarters as sacrilegious; others” reputations have so dwarfed the originals that many don”t know they”re remakes. I”m glad of them all. Check out my choices in the gallery below, and be sure to share your own in the comments.

Tomorrow night the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences will vote through a new president as Tom Sherak takes his leave after three years on the perch. The presumed favorite for the spot is producer Howard “Hawk” Koch, though Phil Alden Robinson and Gale Anne Hurd are strong possibilities, too. We’ll see what happens. In the meantime, here is Sherak’s farewell to the membership:

Dear Academy Members,

I am writing to you as I approach the end of my final term as president of our Academy – a position that I have been honored to hold for three years.

I remember how excited I was when I wrote to you back in 2009, as I neared the end of my first 100 days in office. Now I am humbled – humbled by what we have accomplished, by all that we represent, and by everything that we are.

To much of the world, we are the arbiters of excellence in motion pictures. We are also the guardians of their history, a voice that gives direction and shape to their future, and a global resource for anyone with a passion for movies.

This passion is at the heart of the Academy and of everything that we do – not only our Awards show and our year-round educational and outreach efforts, but also our day-to-day activities. The Academy is an organization that I have been proud to belong to since 1985, but for the last three years it has also been a place where I go to work. This has allowed me to see that passion in our staff members, every day, whether they have been with us for just a few months or for 35 years.

My own love of movies and of our Academy runs deep. Both have been so good to me, my family and our community. I hope that with the last three years, I have given something back.

I often say that being the president of the Academy is the best nonpaying job in Hollywood. But not being paid doesn”t mean that I haven”t been rewarded. The trust and friendship of our members and staff have only deepened my love for the Academy. I have always tried to support and protect our wonderful organization, as I hope you will, too – just as I hope you will always seek out opportunities to get involved. Because there are many. And because you will always get more out of it than you put in.

I leave office confident that the future of our Academy (and of our industry) is bright. Yes, challenges await us – and as leaders in the global film community, we have anticipated and begun to address a number of them. Others are much further ahead; we cannot predict them any more than the first silent film exhibitors could have predicted digital IMAX 3D. But wherever the industry and the art of moviemaking go, the Academy will be there. Our home is secure, our financial house is in order, and we are making the necessary changes that will help the Academy become the more modern, nimble and responsive organization that the future demands it to be – all while maintaining the mission and the high standards that have always defined us.

This is some of what I tried to accomplish in my time as our 31st president. And as I prepare to step away from the helm of our Academy, I keep thinking of a few lines sung by one of my heroes, Frank Sinatra: “I”ve lived a life that”s full…I traveled each and ev”ry highway…And more, much more than this, I did it my way.”

(I”m sure that some of you are thinking of a different part of the song, when Frank sings, “Yes, there were times, I”m sure you knew…When I bit off more than I could chew…” But this is my farewell letter.)

Of course, the truth is that I did not just do it my way. I did it our way: making the advancement of our mission part of every undertaking. This principle helped me stay focused during my tenure, as I know it will help the next president and the many who follow, into perpetuity. By remaining faithful to this idea, we can be as excited about our future as we are proud of our past. Thank you for giving me the privilege of looking after our Academy for three of the most meaningful years of my career.

Sincerely,

Tom Sherak

So, what did you watch this weekend? I’m betting that, for many of you, it wasn’t anything in the cinema. By and large, US and UK distributors (and I expect many others besides) steered clear of the dark Olympic shadow, knowing that the biggest release of the week may have come from a major filmmaker, but it certainly wasn’t a movie. Given the scale of the occasion, Danny Boyle’s opening ceremony for the London 2012 Games would have been deemed appointment viewing even if he’d done little more than plonk One Direction on a stage to mime for three hours. 

As it was, he did rather a lot more than that. So much more that viewing parties around the world — a greater total audience, one presumes, than has been enjoyed by all Boyle’s feature films combined — were left open-mouthed: some with bewilderment, some with delight, many more of us with both. Eschewing the kind of regimented, choreographed float-spectacle that is par for the course at such events — and was mastered pretty much to the point of unimprovability by Zhang Yimou at the 2008 Bejing Olympics — Boyle took a more avant-garde approach, wittily crafting an extravaganza that celebrated difficulty, damage and imperfection in place of the standard Olympic virtues of serenity and supremacy.

Astonishing rising smokestacks shattered verdant fields, sickly children were tended to by inelegantly terpsichorean nurses, the storybook figures of their nightmares met by a marauding army of Mary Poppinses. Bumbling comedians ruined orchestra recitals, lovestruck kids negotiated the pitfalls of modern communication, while a stoic awareness of loss — from the soldiers of WWI to the ill-fated commuters of 7/7 — tied down its more euphoric pop highs. When East End rapper Dizzee Rascal popped up at one point to yell his famed lyric, “Some people think I’m bonkers, I just think I’m free,” he may as well have been speaking for the entire show. 

Some might have found its rhythmic and thematic transitions disorienting, its grab-bag of remixed historical, literary and cultural reference points chaotic, but Boyle and writer Frank Cotrell Boyce’s point rather seemed to me that Britain has long thrived on chaos, and continues to do so. Cheering Britain as a kind of gleaming global nonpareil would have been tactless, given the country’s spotty imperialist history — even the Queen was lowered from her perch with that cheeky 007 gag. (Meanwhile, I appreciate that a left-field tribute to the country’s free national healthcare service, directly in the face of a craven Conservative government currently cutting it down at the knees, might not have registered with international viewers, but its moxie was much appreciated here.)

Constructing the show around Britain’s eccentricity, her humor and her mend-and-make-do resilience was a wiser and more arresting route, one perfectly suited to Boyle’s fizzy sensibility. Boyle’s never been a tidy filmmaker, and hiring him to do a fluttery, large-scale Cirque du Soleil ballet would have been pointless — though he still knows how to slather on the sound (Underworld’s musical contribution was a particular wow) and the pyrotechnics, as the dazzling forging of the rings and flame-lighting finale so deftly demonstrated.

All of which to say that while the ceremony wasn’t for everyone, that’s precisely what I liked about it: as Chinese artist Ai Weiwei astutely remarked in his review, “It didn’t pretend it was trying to have global appeal… Because Britain has self-confidence, it doesn’t need a monumental Olympics.” Bar a few tweaks here and there (the “Frankie and June” segment, with its naff onscreen SMS bubbles, was overlong and narratively fuzzy), it’s the most enchanting and invigorating Olympic opener I can remember. (Which is to go, admittedly, only as far back as Seoul 1988.) From a city that couldn’t even cobble together a presentable logo or appealing mascots for this year’s Games, that came as a delightful surprise.

I won’t say the next thought occurred to me during the festivities themselves themselves — I was too punch-drunk and, well, otherwise drunk for that — but as I replayed it in my mind the next morning, it became overwhelmingly clear to me: Danny Boyle is the man to produce the Academy Awards ceremony.

On the surface of it, that’s an illogical conclusion to draw: they may share the umbrella term “ceremony,” but the Academy Awards and the Olympic curtain-raiser are so vastly dispatate in scale, structure, environment and purpose that to equate handling one to the other is akin to saying Ellen DeGeneres should run CNN. But the idiosyncratic virtues that Boyle brought to the Olympics — his artful balance of stateliness and silliness, artifice and intimacy, the formal and the fantastic, and his fleet-footed alternation between these modes — are ones that could also benefit the Oscars, scaled down vastly to the confines of an indoor theater. (An arena, incidentally, that Boyle has already enlivened with typical cinematic brio in his inventive, award-winning stage production of “Frankenstein” — he’s an eagerly adaptable artist.)

Imagine, for example, the Oscars’ customary In Memoriam section treated with the hushed, expansive dignity that Boyle and singer Emeli Sande brought to the “Abide With Me” number at the opening. Or Boyle’s flexible multimedia projections applied to the Academy’s ubiquitous film montages. Or that Mr. Bean orchestra sketch playing out with Ben Stiller or Adam Sandler as Bill Conti’s troupe attempts to play the nominated scores. Obviously, none of these ideas could or should be transferred directly to the Oscars (though I personally wouldn’t mind seeing the Kodak stage inundated with a murder of Poppinses) but they’re plausible examples of the kind of sequences Boyle could dream up for the smaller ceremony — celluloid in spirit, but backed by a keen calculation of stage practicality and television potential.  

In recent years, the Academy Awards telecast has missed the mark either by attempting too cosy a supper-club vibe or too rushed and glib a variety-show routine, neither approach nailing the contemporary tone AMPAS have been striving for. With his one-off extravaganza on Friday, Boyle demonstrated that it is possible to meld crowdpleasing fireworks (literally so) with hip 21st-century irony without undermining the tradition that underpins that whole enterprise.

Finally, as a filmmaker — an Oscar-winning, in-the-club one at that — there could be no one with a greater affinity for the medium being celebrated, and the talent doing the celebrating. All that, and with more visual and sonic flair than Adam Shankman and Brett Ratner multiplied by each other. God knows if he’d want the job — rescuing the Oscars might seem too small a fish to fry after his Olympic triumph — but as of this week, Danny Boyle should go to the top of the Academy’s wishlist.   

For more views on movies, awards season and other pursuits, follow @GuyLodge on Twitter.

Sign up for Instant Alerts from In Contention!

Now that the first wave of festival announcements has hit, let’s take a look at things.

Toronto came out of the gate first with a typically stuffed program. The high marks that could easily figure into the awards race include Ben Affleck’s “Argo,” Roger Michell’s “Hyde Park on Hudson,” David O. Russell’s “Silver Linings Playbook,” Joe Wright’s “Anna Karenina,” Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski & Lana Wachowski’s “Cloud Atlas,” Juan Antonio Bayona’s “The Impossible” and Stephen Chbosky’s “The Perks of Being a Wallflower.”

Meanwhile, films looking for distribution that could come out of the fest with a buyer, staring at the season, include Robert Redford’s “The Company You Keep,” Mike Newell’s “Great Expectations,” Shari Springer Berman & Robert Pulcini’s “Imogene,” Derek Cianfrance’s “The Place Beyond the Pines” and Terrence Malick’s “To the Wonder.”

Then there are the usual holdovers from other fests that will look to keep some momentum going, such as Pablo Larraín’s “No,” Matteo Garrone’s “Reality,” Jacques Audiard’s “Rust and Bone” and Ben Lewin’s “The Sessions.”

Moving on to Venice, opening night film “The Reluctant Fundamentalist” from Mira Nair will hit Toronto after bowing on the Lido, as will “To the Wonder” and “The Company You Keep.” So we’ll have early word on those before they transition over to their North American premieres. Brian De Palma’s “Passion” will also show up, though he hasn’t had much luck with awards season in, well, ever.

The rest of the line-up seemed a bit overly curated to me, as if the fest is actively trying to dip out of the awards season spotlight it has basked in the last couple of years. That’s not a bad thing, mind. A lot of these line-ups start to look like Xeroxes of one another.

All that said, the promise of Paul Thomas Anderson’s “The Master” figuring in had attendees hopeful. It was finally confirmed as a Venice premiere today. But after that, the film could easily go a less traditional route rather than continue on to Telluride/Toronto. The possibility of a Fantastic Fest bow was dampened by the release date change, though I suppose it could still come to pass. Whatever else happens, these are shots Anderson is calling himself. (UPDATE: Toronto will indeed get the film after Venice. We’ll see if it ends up on the Telluride slate, too.)

The big mystery this time of year is always: What will play Telluride? The festival keeps its lineup a secret until opening day every year and gets away with scooping other fests on premieres by opting to call them “sneak previews.”

A few studios have a long history of playing Telluride, Sony Pictures Classics in particular. I think we could safely assume we’ll see Cannes carry-overs “Rust and Bone,” “No” and/or Palme d’Or winner “Amour” from Michael Haneke there. Other than that, I’d be curious to see if Amy Berg’s brilliant documentary “West of Memphis” makes the trip. With a December release up ahead, the film played Sundance and Santa Barbara in January and hasn’t shown up anywhere else since.

The Weinstein Company has also used Telluride to keep wind in its sails as of late, most recently garnering more audience love with eventual Best Picture winner “The Artist.” This time around, they have a much more varied slate. But nix two, as John Hillcoat’s “Lawless” will have already opened in theaters and Quentin Tarantino’s “Django Unchained” won’t be a festival play at all as it just wrapped last week and will likely be in the editing room for a while.

That leaves “Silver Linings Playbook” (which is set for Toronto but could certainly turn up in Telluride first), Andrew Dominik’s “Killing Them Softly” (which could pop up after playing Cannes in May), Dustin Hoffman’s “Quartet” and “The Master.” On the latter, it could be a bit of a chore to get the proper equipment in place to run Anderson’s 70mm opus. But it’s the perfect cinephile festival crowd for the director, so, fingers crossed.

Focus hasn’t been much of a Telluride player in the past, but Laura Linney’s connection with the town (she met her husband at the fest years back and is a regular attendee) could mean “Hyde Park on Hudson” makes an appearance. Or not. “Anna Karenina” would strike me as an odd inclusion; it’s set for Toronto, which makes more sense.

Others I’ve heard thrown around as possibilities are Deepa Mehta’s “Midnight’s Children” (which will be at Toronto) and the aforementioned “Reality,” but I’d keep my eye on one possibility in particular: Robert Lorenz’s “Trouble with the Curve” and a Clint Eastwood tribute to launch his Best Actor hopes for the film. Just a guess.

And perhaps some of the other films set for Venice and Toronto will make the trip. I’d personally love to see “To the Wonder,” of course. Malick’s financier Bill Pohlad brought “The Tree of Life” to the fest in 2010 when it was still for sale and screened it for Fox Searchlight brass. Having that and “Argo” would be a good excuse to fete Ben Affleck, but the latter feels more like a Toronto-only play. Then again, who knows? That’s the fun of the Telluride guessing game.

After that, there’s still the New York fest, which is a bit underutilized, I feel. But the last two years, films like “The Social Network” and “Hugo” have launched exclusively there to great response. Perhaps Fox takes “Life of Pi,” even in an unfinished form, to kick-start its journey? Or maybe films like Gus Van Sant’s “Promised Land,” Sacha Gervasi’s “Hitchcock” or Scott Cooper’s “Out of the Furnace” manage to slip out onto the 2012 landscape, see a hole to be filled amid the “big film”-heavy slate of year-end product and take a chance in the Big Apple?

I guess we’ll find out soon enough.

The 69th annual Venice Film Festival runs August 29 – September 8. Guy Lodge will be reporting from there.

The 39th annual Telluride Film Festival runs August 31 – September 3. Greg Ellwood and I will be reporting from there.

The 37th annual Toronto Film Festival runs September 6 – 16. Greg Ellwood and Drew McWeeny will be reporting from there.

And finally, the 50th annual New York Film Festival runs September 28 – October 14. I will be reporting from there.

The season is humming to life…

So how many times have we felt like we were on stable ground discussing Richard Gere’s place in an awards season? A handful? He deserved some real consideration for “Days of Heaven” way back when, no doubt. He was surrounded by lauded performers in “An Officer and a Gentleman.” Flirted with the Globes for “Pretty Woman” and “Chicago” (netting a SAG nod, too, for the latter).

The last time his name popped up was for Lasse Hallström’s “The Hoax,” in which he offered up typically solid work. “Solid” is really a pretty decent descriptor of Gere’s contribution to the screen all these years, I’d say. And every once in a while, he turns out something a bit more special.

I think “Arbitrage” is one of those special moments for him. The film played Sundance back in January to generally positive response and Gere was spotlighted, of course. But the more I chew on it after a recent screening, the more I think it might be on the top tier of the actor’s work to date.

The film on the whole is really a skillful, well-paced, taut piece of work from first-time director Nicholas Jarecki. Greg Ellwood called the script “convoluted” out of Park City, but I beg to differ. It’s pretty streamlined, really, and the mark of an efficient storyteller. It’s simplistic, even, but for all the right reasons, the same kinds of reasons that made, say, “Michael Clayton” pop for an audience eager to absorb rich character studies. I could even see the screenplay getting some love on the circuit.

And Gere makes everything count with his performance of a flawed, crooked businessman who you nevertheless find yourself pulling for to some extent (before, of course, catching yourself). That’s what’s so good about the film, that it’s so simple but still trades in complex characterization.

A movie like this thrives on nuance without standing on neutral ground, and as a result, it — like “The Company Men” or, indeed, “Michael Clayton” — has a little more to say about the zeitgeist than a film like last year’s Sundance-to-Oscar indie hit “Margin Call.” Susan Sarandon, Brit Marling, Nate Parker and especially Tim Roth (so good) fill out a well-chosen cast, but Gere is center stage and he delivers.

Roadside Attractions picked the film up out of Sundance and will surely be looking to build a campaign and capture some of that lightning it bottled with “Margin Call.” They found a good rhythm with “Albert Nobbs,” too, while in 2010 they got there with Javier Bardem in “Biutiful” and, of course, Jennifer Lawrence in “Winter’s Bone.” With little else on their slate looking like a real player, I suspect chances are we could be hearing more about the film and particularly Gere’s work throughout the season.

We’ll see how it goes.

It’s hardly a new complaint that the humble original screenplay is practically an endangered species in the current cinematic landscape. Multiple column inches have been spent bemoaning the dominance of sequels, remakes, reboots, retreads and other means of narrative recycling in our multiplexes: of the top 10 grossers at the US box office this year, a mere two (Seth Macfarlane’s “Ted” and Pixar’s “Brave”) are putatively original creations. Audiences like known quantities, studios like low-risk investments, original screenplays pile up on the back burner. And so on.

But while popular filmmaking routinely takes flak for its lack of initiative, the trend is no less prevalent in prestige cinema. This year alone sees a bevy of high-toned literary adaptations jostling for festival space and/or awards attention come wintertime, many of which have been filmed before. There at least 17 big-screen versions of “Anna Karenina” on record, but Joe Wright is bringing us another; Mike Newell is steering the eighth go-round of “Great Expectations” (not including last year’s high-profile TV miniseries); Tom Hooper, the sixteenth of “Les Miserables” (though, to be fair, the first of the beloved stage musical); Baz Luhrmann, the fourth of “The Great Gatsby”; Peter Jackson, the second of “The Hobbit.” The characters here may not wear Spandex, but they’re as overworked as any Marvel superhero.

Add to that any number of further high-profile adaptations — whether of novels (“Life of Pi,” “On the Road,” “Silver Linings Playbook”), plays (“Beasts of the Southern Wild, “Quartet,” “The Sapphires”), journalism (“Argo,” “The Sessions”), biographies (“Lincoln”), radio scripts (“Hyde Park on Hudson”) or just previously existing characters (“Knocked Up” spinoff “This is 40”) — and it seems this year’s Oscar race could be as light on major original contenders as last year’s, when the Best Picture lineup featured twice as many adapted screenplays (by the Academy’s rulings, at least) as original ones.

Of course, that didn’t stop “The Artist,” based on an original, albeit reference-laden, screenplay, from ruling the roost last year — indeed, the last three Best Picture winners have been original by Academy criteria. Perhaps their relative rarity gives them a leg up with voters; perhaps not. Either way, “The Master” could well be that special snowflake this year: currently the only original contender in Kris’ predicted Best Picture lineup, it’s also the only title I feel reasonably comfortable about betting on for a Best Original Screenplay nod, even sight unseen. In a field this unencumbered with heavily-buzzed competitors, Paul Thomas Anderson’s veiled Scientology study would have to disappoint on a pretty grand scale not to earn Paul Thomas Anderson a fourth Oscar nod from the writers’ branch. (From the year-end releases with original screenplays, only Quentin Tarantino’s “Django Unchained” looks an equivalent draw in terms of profile, though it remains to be seen whether it’s too pulpy for the Academy.)

Filling out 28 other slots on our Contenders page for the category, however, has been a trickier task — and a rather interesting one. “Once again, this category is weak,” our colleague Greg Ellwood emailed earlier this week, delivering the tip that Sundance favourite “The Sessions” was, contrary to our earlier impression, an adapted screenplay. That’s a common response, but I don’t think a lack of major prestige contenders equates to weakness: it just forces voters have to show a little more ingenuity when filling out their ballots.

That often makes for a category that is actually the strongest and most diverse on the nominee slate: with Oscar bait leaning more in favor of adaptations, that allows more room for the open-minded writers’ branch to consider foreign-language features, animation, indies and comedies. It’s thanks to the supposed “weakness” of the Best Original Screenplay race that both “A Separation” and “Bridesmaids” made the cut last year, that Mike Leigh has five writing nominations to his name, that such marvellous outsiders as “Y tu Mama Tambien,” “In Bruges,” “Do the Right Thing” and “Heavenly Creatures” get to call themselves Oscar nominees at all — and that’s just taking the last quarter-century into account. The industry’s dependence on adaptations has its upsides.

So, what are the left-field original screenplays that could slip onto the ballot while the bloodbath rages over in the adapted category? Michael Haneke, as unimaginable as this might have seemed even five years ago, looks as likely a contender as any. Following its rapturous Cannes reception, Palme d’Or winner “Amour” is bound to be one of the year’s most critically venerated titles: its medicine might be too strong for voters in the top races, but its painstaking, character-centered construction is just the sort of achievement the writers like to recognize, whether it’s submitted in the foreign-language Oscar derby or not. (If not, the resulting furore should all but guarantee recognition elsewhere.) 

Another Cannes title, Wes Anderson’s “Moonrise Kingdom,” is considerably lighter, but just as serious a possibility: reviews have been generally glowing, box office has been stronger than expected and even if it’s not one of Anderson’s most verbally intricate films (like, say, “The Royal Tenenbaums,” which earned Anderson his only previous writing nod), there’s no Academy branch friendlier to mellowly quirky Amerindie fare than the writers.

Ordinarily, a spring release like “Moonrise” would risk falling foul of voters’ short memories: in a less cluttered field like this, however, that’s not quite such a disadvantage. Indeed, several outstanding first-half releases will be hoping to benefit from this: there’s no breakout grown-up comedy to fill the shoes of “Bridesmaids” (sorry “Ted” — not happening), but a smartly written summer sleeper like “Magic Mike” could fit the bill instead. Even less popular early birds stand a chance. Two former nominees, Whit Stillman and Sarah Polley, haven’t gain much traction for “Damsels in Distress” and “Take This Waltz,” respectively, but if anyone’s likely to be remember their wonderful work at the end of the year, it’s the writers, who routinely have have to dig a little deeper through the release calendar than other voting branches.

In a less adventurous outcome, that could also come to the aid of “Brave”: it’s no one’s favorite Pixar feature, and it hasn’t matched the critical or commercial performance of the studio’s best work,  but in a category which has found room for six previous Pixar features, the chirpy family flick could be an easy default choice.

What else? The fall festival circuit will unveil the hopefully literate Kristen Wiig-Annette Bening comedy “Imogene,” and presumably Martin McDonagh’s “Seven Psychopaths,” which appears to hit the same black-comic vein that earned him a nod for “In Bruges” four years ago. “Imogene,” incidentally, boasts a solo woman writer in Michelle Morgan; other female-written comedies that could feasibly charm the writers are “Ruby Sparks” (Zoe Kazan) and “Your Sister’s Sister” (Lynn Shelton) — though I’d prefer Shelton to get out of her habit of bursting delightful character studies with cop-out third acts before the Academy cottons on to her.

I could go on simply running through our Contenders page, which also spans such offbeat options as Ira Sachs’s peach-delicate gay relationship drama “Keep the Lights On,” Drew Goddard and Joss Whedom’s zippy genre fondue “Cabin in the Woods” and whatever Terrence Malick has drawn up this time to accompany his exquisite imagery. Bottom line: more than ever this year, Best Original Screenplay is a category at once thin on contenders and rife with possibilities. What have you got your eye on? 

For more views on movies, awards season and other pursuits, follow @GuyLodge on Twitter.

Sign up for Instant Alerts from In Contention!

The 38th annual Saturn Awards, recognizing achievement in genre filmmaking, were held this evening. “Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, ” “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” and “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol” won across the organization’s three Best Film categories. “Super 8” also picked up a pair of statues, including Best Director. Check out the full set of winners below and look back on all the action of the film awards season at The Circuit.

Best Science Fiction Film: “Rise of the Planet of the Apes”

Best Fantasy Film: “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2”

Best Horror/Thriller Film: “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo”

Best Action/Adventure Film: “Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol”

Best Direction: J.J. Abrams, “Super 8”

Best Actor: Michael Shannon, “Take Shelter”

Best Actress: Kirsten Dunst, “Melancholia”

Best Supporting Actor: Andy Serkis, “Rise of the Planet of the Apes”

Best Supporting Actress: Emily Blunt, “The Adjustment Bureau”   

Best Performance by a Younger Actor: Joel Courtney, “Super 8”

Best Writing: “Take Shelter”

Best Costumes: “Thor”

Best Editing: “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol”

Best Makeup: “X-Men: First Class”

Best Music: “Super 8”

Best Production Design: “Hugo”

Best Special Effects: “Rise of the Planet of the Apes”

Best Animated Film: “Puss in Boots”

Best International Film: “The Skin I Live In”

The Venice Film Festival unveiled its lineup this afternoon, and it looks much as we expected it would — but lest we sound too blasé, who would ever have thought a few years ago that we’d see Terrence Malick debuting two new features in consecutive years? Wonders will never cease, if you’ll forgive the lousy pun. “To the Wonder” is obviously the film that most Lido-bound journos are salivating over, but festival director Antonio Barbera revealed that he has one title left to announce — and the smart money is on it being Paul Thomas Anderson’s “The Master.”

Anderson’s film, which hasn’t — yet — turned up in the Toronto lineup, would represent a major coup for the Italian fest. Venice can’t compete with Toronto for sheer star power, not least because it’s a much smaller affair, but that selectiveness, plus its longstanding jury awards, comfortably give it the edge in prestige.

Newly appointed festival director Alberto Barbera, who has deliberately slimmed the Venice programme down from previous years, took a sly dig at Toronto in emphasising his quality-over-quantity approach: “In preparing Venice I have very much admired and envied my friend and colleague who heads the Toronto Film Festival. He has an easy job: he can take 350 movies, and therefore accept almost anything. We have chosen a much tougher path, in which, after lots of discussions, we had to say ‘no’ a lot. And it was very tough.”  

That may be largely true, though it’s also a upper-hand alibi for any surprise omissions from the lineup. Joe Wright’s “Anna Karenina,” for example, had been widely expected to premiere on the Lido, not least because “Atonement” opened the festival in 2007 — did Barbera turn it down, or did the film’s handlers prefer to debut internationally in Toronto? The truth will seep out at some point.

Such omissions, as well as many of the inclusions, could be easily deduced in advance from Monday’s Toronto announcement: when “To the Wonder,” for example, was listed merely as a North American premiere, the writing was on the wall for a Venice premiere. Ditto Ramin Bahrani’s “At Any Price,” a father-son drama starring Zac Efron and Dennis Quaid, and Robert Redford’s “The Company You Keep,” a political thriller in which he stars opposite Shia LaBeouf, Susan Sarandon and Julie Christie — though the latter will unspool out of competition.

The biggest aces in Venice’s hand, of course, are the films that currently aren’t scheduled for a Toronto showing, and those include some big ones. “Something in the Air” is Olivier Assayas’s first feature since the mammoth undertaking that was “Carlos.” (It’s also his first to premiere on the Lido — he’s more used to the home soil of Cannes.) Brian DePalma’s “Passion,” an erotic thriller starring Noomi Rapace and Rachel McAdams, was always expected to show up here, given the director’s recent history with the festival — “The Black Dahlia” opened the fest in 2006, and he won Best Director the following year for his last feature, “Redacted.” (Incidentally, between DePalma and Malick, that makes two Venice dates for McAdams: if she’s good in either, or both, could she be one to watch for the Best Actress prize? Juries love hard workers.) 

Other (currently) exclusive gets for Venice include Harmony Korine’s “Spring Breakers,” starring James Franco, Selena Gomez and Vanessa Hudgens — now there are two names you wouldn’t expect to see on the red carpet there. Also: Filipino provocateur Brillante Mendoza’s “Thy Womb,” which will play in Competition not seven months after his last feature, the widely disliked (though rather good) “Captured” premiered at Berlin. (That film, incidentally, was turned down by both Venice and Cannes last year, so clearly no grudges have been held.) Mendoza’s excellent, still-unreleased “Lola,” incidentally, premiered as Venice’s annual surprise film in 2009. 

Another festival two-timer this year is Ulrich Seidl, whose frequently brilliant, frequently repulsive and inevitably divisive sex-tourism study “Paradise: Love” premiered in Competition at Cannes in this spring. The film was said to be the first in a trilogy, and true enough, part two — obviously titled “Paradise: Faith” — will show up in Venice. Neither “Love” nor “Faith” have shown up in the Toronto lineup, though perhaps they’re too prickly for that crowd. 

Presumably, Toronto would be more interested in getting their hands on Susanne Bier’s “Love Is All You Need,” which is also only on the Venice roster at this stage. Bier’s first feature since the Oscar-winning “In a Better World,” it’s also her second stab at English-language filmmaking — though it sounds a lighter effort than 2007’s “Things We Lost in the Fire.” An alleged romantic comedy starring Pierce Brosnan and Paprika Steen, it’s playing out of competition. Strangely, considering her status in Europe, she has yet to compete at any of the three Euro-fest majors — though maybe that’s a choice on her part.

There’s plenty else to whet the appetite — new works from Xavier Giannoli, Takeshi Kitano and Manoel de Oliveira, among others, as well as documentaries from Spike Lee, Jonathan Demme and Michael Mann, who, of course, is doing double duty as president of the Competition jury. That’s a lot to work with, whether or not we get Paul Thomas Anderson into the bargain. Roll on August 29, from which date I’ll be covering the full festival for the fourth year running.

Full lineup below: 

COMPETITION 
“Something In The Air” (Apres Mai), Olivier Assayas (France)
“At Any Price,” Ramin Bahrani (USA)
“Dormant Beauty” (Bella Addormentata), Marco Bellocchio (Italy-France)
“La Cinquieme Saison” (The Fifth Season), Peter Brosens and Jessica Woodworth (Belgium-Netherlands-France)
“Fill The Void” (Lemale Et Ha’Chalal), Rama Burshtein (Israel)
“E Stato il Figlio,” Daniele Cipri (Italy)
“Un Giorno Speciale,” Francesca Comencini (Italy)
“Passion,” Brian De Palma (France-Germany)
“Superstar,” Xavier Giannoli (France-Belgium)
“Pieta,” Kim Ki-duk (South Korea)
“Outrage Beyond,” Takeshi Kitano (Japan)
“Spring Breakers,” Harmony Korine (USA)
“To The Wonder,” Terrence Malick (USA)
“Thy Womb” (Sinapupunan), Brillante Mendoza (Philippines)
“Linhas de Wellington,” Valeria Sarmiento (Portugal-France)
“Paradise: Faith” (Paradies: Glaube), Ulrich Seidl (Austria-France-Germany)
“Betrayal” (Izmena), Kirill Serebrennikov (Russia)

OUT OF COMPETITION
“L’homme qui rit,” Jean-Pierre Ameris (France-Czech Republic) (Closing Film) 
“Love Is All You Need,” Susanne Bier (Denmark/Sweden)
“Cherchez Hortense,” Pascal Bonitzer (France)
“Sur un fil,” Simon Brook (France/Italy)
“Enzo Avitabile Music Life,” Jonathan Demme (Italy-USA)
“Tai Chi 0,” Stephen Fung (China)
“Lullaby to My Father,” Amos Gitai (Israel-France-Switzerland)
“Shokuzai” (Penance), Kiyoshi Kurosawa (Japan)
“Bad 25,” Spike Lee (USA)
“The Reluctant Fundamentalist,” Mira Nair (India-Pakistan-USA) (Opening Film)
“O Gebo e a Sombra,” Manoel de Oliveira (Portugal-France)
“The Company You Keep,” Robert Redford (USA)
“Shark (Bait 3D),” Kimble Rendall (Australia-Singapore-China)
“Disconnect,” Henry-Alex Rubin (USA)
“The Iceman,” Ariel Vromen (USA)

OUT OF COMPETITION — Special Events
“Anton tut ryadom” (Anton’s Right Here), Lyubov Arkus (Russia)
“Ya Man Aach” (It Was Better Tomorrow), Hinde Boujemaa (Italy)
“Clarisse,” Liliana Cavani (Italy)
“Sfiorando il muro,” Silvia Giralucci & Luca Ricciardi (Italy)
“Carmel,” Amos Gitai (Israel-France-Italy)
“El impenetrable,” Daniele Incalcaterra & Fausta Quattrini (Argentina-France)
“Witness: Libya,” Michael Mann (USA)
“Medici con l’Africa,” Carlo Mazzacurati (Italy)
“Witness:Libya,” Abdallah Omeish (USA)
“La nave dolce,” Daniele Vicari (Italy-Albania)

HORIZONS
“Wadjda,” Haifaa Al Mansour (Saudi Arabia-Germany)
“Khanéh Pedari” (The Paternal House), Kianoosh Ayari (Iran)
“Ja Tozhe Hochu” (I Also Want It), Alexey Balabanov (Russia)
“Gli equilibristi,” Ivano De Matteo (Italy-France)
“L’intervallo,” Leonardo Di Costanzo (Italy-Switzerland-Germany)
“El Sheita Elli Fat” (Winter of Discontent), Ibrahim El Batout (Egypt)
“Tango Libre,” Frédéric Fonteyne (Belgium-France-Luxembourg)
“Menatek Ha-Maim” (The Cutoff Man), Idan Hubel (Israel)
“Gaosu tamen, wo cheng baihe qu le” (Fly with the Crane), Li Ruijun (China)
“Kapringen” (A Hijacking), Tobias Lindholm (Denmark)
“Leones,” Jazmin Lopez (Argentina-France-Netherlands)
“Bellas Mariposas,” Salvatore Mereu (Italy)
“Low Tide,” Roberto Minervini (USA-Italy-Belgium)
“Boxing Day,” Bernard Rose (UK-USA)
“Yema,” Djamila Sahraoui (Algeria-France)
“Araf” (Somewhere in Between), Yesim Ustaoglu (Turkey)
“Sennen no Yuraku” (The Millennial Rapture), Koji Wakamatsu (Japan)
“San Zi Mei” (Three Sisters), Wang Bing (France-Hong Kong)

HORIZONS SHORT FILMS
“Las manos limpias,” Carlos Armella (Mexico)
“Bansulli” (The Flute), Min Bham (Nepal)
“O Afinador,” Fernando Camargo & Matheus Parizi (Brazil)
“Resistente,” Renate Costa & Salla Sorri (Denmark-Finland-Paraguay)
“La sala,” Alessio Giannone (Italy)
“Marla,” Nick King (Australia)
“Miracle Boy,” Jake Mahaffy (USA)
“Living Still Life,” Bertrand Mandico (France-Belgium-Germany)
“Frank-Étienne vers la béatitude,” Constance Meyer (France)
“I’m the One,” Paola Morabito (Australia)
“Luisa no está en casa,” Celia Rico Clavellino (Spain)
“Cargo,” Carlo Sironi (Italy)
“Cho-De” (Invitation), Yoo Min-young (South Korea)
“Titloi Telous” (Out of Frame), Yorgos Zois (Greece)
“Diamond Sutra,” Tsai Ming-liang (Chinese Taipei)  

“Mud,” the third feature to date from “Take Shelter” director Jeff Nichols, has been on my mind a fair bit recently — more than I’d customarily expect for a film I only kinda-sorta liked when I saw it two months ago. But I’m wearing my pundit’s hat rather than my critic’s one as I write this, and as the first rumblings of the fall festival season are heard in the near distance, one question about the film seems rather pertinent: put plainly, where the hell is it?

Of the 22 films that unspooled in Competition at Cannes back in May, 16 have already secured US distribution. The exceptions are, by and large, understandable ones: Carlos Reygadas’s “Post Tenebras Lux” is proudly impenetrable esoterica, with or without a Best Director award, “After the Battle” is politically remote and critically drubbed, while “Paradise: Love” is an explicit arthouse provocation that broaches touchy themes of race and female sexuality. Alain Resnais’s “You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet” may have more name appeal than any of these, but its concentric theatricality makes it a mighty hard sell to non-French audiences.

Why “Mud” is in the company of these films, however, is more of a mystery. It’s American, for starters, and boasts major marquee names in Matthew McConaughey and Reese Witherspoon. It has a hot director in Nichols: “Take Shelter” may not have lit up the box office last year, but it was a significant critical story that portended a larger breakthrough. More to the point: it’s his most mainstream and broadly accessible film to date, a blend of Southern-fried nostalgia and genre adventure that expressly calls “Stand By Me” to mind, alongside the literary spirit of Mark Twain.

As if all this doesn’t make it sufficiently sellable to high-end indie distributors, the film was a sizable hit at Cannes. It was always going to be too commercial (ironically enough) to impress Nanni Moretti’s jury, but I can testify that its press screening was one of the most enthusiastically received of the entire festival: applause over the end credits was long and loud, with several whoops thrown into the mix, while afterwards, a range of reputable colleagues, American and otherwise, declared themselves thoroughly charmed. (Pete Hammond, as reliable a barometer of popular appeal as any, told me it was his favorite film in Competition.)

“Mud” surely benefited from being the last film screened in the lineup: after 10 days of heavy-duty art cinema, even the most studious critic will be more receptive to a film that, if not quite lightweight, certainly plays a little more to the gallery. And several critics shared my reservations about it, particularly with regard to its tone-deaf, feel-good third act, which turns a delicate David Gordon Green-esque mood piece into something a shade closer to “Old Dogs.” As sometimes happens with festival films, the agnostics may grow in number as it travels further, but it’s always going to be well-liked.

No surprise, then, that the O-word was bandied about considerably in the immediate wake of “Mud”‘s premiere — with its blend of star power, auteur cred and timeless coming-of-age storytelling (it’s not a period piece, but it may as well be), it’s the most outwardly Academy-friendly title that screened on the Croisette this year. At the very least, a Best Actor push for Matthew McConaughey — currently having the best year of his career, and likely to be the focus of a twin supporting campaign for “Magic Mike” — seemed plausible, even if he’s slightly subordinate to the film’s teenage lead, Tye Sheridan. A Best Original Screenplay nod for Nichols looked an even easier get, particularly considering the category’s extreme sparseness this year. (More on that tomorrow.)

Why, then, has there been no noise from US distributors? It’s the kind of film that Fox Searchlight could well polish into a word-of-mouth sleeper and awards player — but they may have their hands full with other contenders. Sony Pictures Classics handled “Take Shelter” last year, and the director’s follow-up would fit neatly in their wheelhouse. They currently lack a Best Picture pony beyond “Amour” — which, Palme d’Or prestige notwithstanding, is a dark horse for any number of obvious reasons. What about “Mud” has prevented them from stepping in?

As Kris and Anne mentioned in last week’s Oscar Talk podcast, “Mud” is one of the titles that will be looking to get a second wind at the Telluride and/or Toronto festivals, where prospective buyers can have another look and reassess how it might fit into their slate. First, however, it has to show up in those festivals — and while there are further additions to be made to the Toronto lineup, “Mud” wasn’t in the first wave of selections announced yesterday. (Meanwhile, the news just landed that “Mud” has been selected as the opening film of the Deauville Festival of American Film next month.)

Of course, it could all fall into place before the festival season. “Mud” is hardly the first major Cannes title to be left in limbo through the summer: two years ago, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarittu’s “Biutiful,” which met with split reviews but shared the Best Actor gong for Javier Bardem, had to wait all the way until late August before finally finding a home with Roadside Attractions. Roadside probably wasn’t the outfit “Biutiful” entered Cannes aiming for, but they did well by the film, steering it through the festivals and ultimately landing it two top Oscar nominations. A similar outcome, with a similar company, might await “Mud,” but it shouldn’t be taking people this long to bite. 

For more views on movies, awards season and other pursuits, follow @GuyLodge on Twitter.

Sign up for Instant Alerts from In Contention!

Back during CinemaCon I was a little harsh on gun-jumpers quick to shout “OSCAR!” in response to footage shown from Ang Lee’s “Life of Pi.” Then when I caught the out-of-context flying fish scene in front of “Prometheus,” I was just left a bit cold, if curious.

Well, while I won’t outright offer a mea culpa (tossing that word around after 10 minutes is just too steep), I will say I understand why that footage must have been so captivating. Because the just-released trailer is full of scope, wonder, imagination and sheer cinematic passion. It signals what will at the very least be a singular vision, and knowing that vision is coming from Ang Lee has me very, very excited.

Based on the fantasy novel by Yann Martel, the film tells the spiritual story of an Indian boy (Pi) who survives 227 days after a shipwreck while stranded on a boat in the Pacific with a Bengal tiger.

The film bounced around, from M. Night Shyamalan to Alfonso Cuarón, before landing with Lee. Each director moved on to “Lady in the Water” and “Children of Men” respectively before getting their version off the ground.

Will the film have Oscar written all over it? Time will tell. Fox sure would like to be in the game again and this has all the pedigree you could hope for. Still, films with this high a profile crash and burn every season. I’m just interested to see what Lee has to say with this material. He rarely disappoints.

Check out the new trailer, courtesy of Apple, below. Tell us what you think in the comments section or feel free to rank it above.

“Life of Pi” opens everywhere November 21.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9Hjrs6WQ8M&w=640&h=360]

“The Dark Knight Rises” is here and lists are wildly en vogue this week. Lots of picking it apart here, sticking up for it there, etc. It’s turned out to be an unexpectedly divisive film, and after a second look yesterday, I certainly still have my issues. But I should be clear: I’m really appreciative of what Christopher Nolan has given us.

People will twist themselves into pretzels to discuss the zeitgeist elements of the new film and drawing over-inflated political parallels, etc., but I think most Batman fans — even those like me who were disappointed by “The Dark Knight Rises” — can agree on one thing. We’re glad there is a series of films built around this character that we can be proud of.

So while we will surely be talking about the new film for a number of months to come — perhaps into the awards season, perhaps not — I personally feel like I’ve had my say. And I’d rather leave it on a positive note.

Nolan’s Batman films have been under a microscope because of the intense fandom that circulates this character. He was never going to please everyone. But he got a lot of things right along the way, nailing the mythos in such ways that deserve highlighting. Because when it comes to Batman on film, nailing the mythos has been very much out of the equation.

Would I have liked to see spins on the Penguin or the Riddler, etc.? Yes, particularly the former, which could easily have been molded to Nolan’s universe. Would I have preferred a more epic nature than the year-and-a-half of Batman-in-action depicted by the films? Absolutely.

But this is Nolan’s Batman, and one he’s leaving behind for good. My hat’s off to him for finding a way to make a lot of this stuff work. Because, as a fan, I could only imagine.

Check out my picks for the best of what he and his collaborators got right below, and feel free to rate them as you go and/or offer up your own selections in the comments section below.

“The Dark Knight Rises” is now playing everywhere.

LOS ANGELES – Cinematographer Ben Richardson was living in the Czech Republic in 2003 working on an animated film with a friend when he moved into a building full of interesting, creative filmmaker types, a salon of sorts for like-minded film enthusiasts. One of those enthusiasts was director Benh Zeitlin, who was hard at work on his own animated endeavor. They hit it off over their love of animator Jan Švankmajer and a collaboration was born.

“I”d always wanted to be a filmmaker,” Richardson says, “but I had kind of concluded that I really wanted just to explore something unique. And animation is a great way to do something ambitious on an incredibly low budget. The only thing you really need is time and perseverance. You don’t need a lot of materials or equipment, you know, lighting-wise. You just need a sensitivity to light.”

Eventually his passion for animation bridged a gap to a passion for photography. He had played with dark rooms when he was younger and took classes in school, but he was mostly taken by theater at a younger age. Soon, though, he started to fall in love with the role of the camera in filmmaking and the way it related to the actors.

He eventually brought his work ethic to the short film “Glory at Sea,” which he shot for Zeitlin in New Orleans, where the seeds of another film were already sprouting: “Beasts of the Southern Wild.” The latter has been a life-changing experience, to say the least.

“I think one of the strengths that me and Benh had in putting this together from the camera and the production side was that we didn”t know what couldn”t be done, so why wouldn”t we try,” he says. “And the scale of the project didn”t seem daunting to me because I had accomplished so much, relatively speaking, with so little on my previous projects. And animation really was a huge learning experience for me in terms of an attitude to lighting and, you know, a focus on naturalism that I really enjoy.”

That necessity of the inexpensive was what had guided his instincts for so long that it was a natural fit on the production. The 16mm photography in the film is very observational, a lingering kind of visual attitude that is ultimately identifying and quite beautiful. But Richardson owes a lot of that, he says, to his muse on the screen: actress Quvenzhané Wallis.

“Without her, very obviously on every level, there wouldn”t be a movie,” he says. “What it was for me, I could sense this incredible energy in her performance, and she”s one of the most amazing humans I”ve ever met, irrespective of her age; she”s a remarkable human being. It really sort of made me step up my game in a way. The things that we feel when she”s standing in a room delivering these performances, I just don”t want my photography to be a reason that that doesn”t come across to an audience, you know? It really felt like I had this responsibility to what she was putting out into the world.”

And indeed, there is a real intimacy in the relationships between the characters in the film. Richardson’s task was to make the camera feel present in the moment. “I didn’t think it was handheld per se, I just felt that it was responsive,” he says.

Richardson naturally did a lot of stock testing in finding the visual approach to telling the story, and particularly he notes the correctional procedures on photography today and how that was something he didn’t think spoke to the material. “I just feel like somewhere along the line, some part of the magic connection to reality gets lost, you know, this connection that it”s real physical things happening in the physical world gets lost. And with the film stock we used, I was actually underexposing it and pull processing it so it was a very flat negative we had to begin with.”

Richardson and Zeitlin had a couple of touchstones and references throughout, but first and foremost was “Dry Wood,” a 1973 Les Blank short documentary detailing Creole life in the Louisiana delta. “A lot of what you could see in that was just the richness of the world, if you get it right, if you capture it right,” Richardson says. “There were rougher edges than I think would have been appropriate for the film, but there was a lot of stuff in there and Benh very much liked to look at that.” There was also Julius Avery’s short film “Jerrycan,” which was inspiring for the way the camera expressively connected with the performances in the film.

But ultimately, of course, “Beasts of the Southern Wild” has its own distinct visual signature. Elements like miniatures and lighting full environments rather than specific shots presented their individual challenges, but the film resonates because of its imagery and the spirit of discovery behind it.

“I just thought that it would be an adventure to make it,” Richardson says. “I really did. I thought that it would be this challenge, but I didn”t have any doubt whether it could be accomplished.”

“Beasts of the Southern Wild” is now playing and continues to expand throughout the country.

There is one element of “The Dark Knight Rises” that I think is more accomplished than anything else in the franchise, one thing I thought they got more right here than in either “Batman Begins” or “The Dark Knight.” And that was Hans Zimmer’s magnificent, epic score.

Zimmer was joined by James Newton Howard on the previous installments, Howard’s propensity for percussive propulsion serving them well. While it’s a shame he couldn’t be on board for the denouement, I think it’s also serendipitous, because the world of “The Dark Knight Rises” is a very different world than the other two films, a place less of decay and disaster than internal rot and melancholy.

So Zimmer’s haunting melodies were a fantastic contribution to the world of Nolan’s finale. There is plenty of thumping bombast when necessary, but for the most part, that has given way to measured elements, whether somber or just plain sinister.

The franchise’s history with Oscar has been an interesting one where the music is concerned. The first film wasn’t overly considered, though it should have been. When the second film rolled around, all the buzz it was stirring led many to believe Zimmer and Howard would have a fair shot at a nomination from the notoriously fickle music branch. Both scores were ultimately disqualified because of the number of composers listed on the cue sheet (one of the branch’s many arcane rules, which doesn’t apparently take into consideration affidavits signed by the named contributors stating that the score was primarily the work of Zimmer and Howard).

With “The Dark Knight,” Zimmer had had enough and he took his case up with the branch personally. And he got a reversal of decision. Still, as we all know, it wasn’t nominated.

I don’t know if the new film has enough gas to get the score there but I think it’s fantastic work that deserves recognition. And I was happy to read Christopher Nolan’s extended thoughts on Zimmer’s contribution to the series in the liner notes of the original score CD. I thought I’d offer them up here, in case you haven’t read it yet. It actually provides interesting insight into the “Star Spangled Banner” scene in the film:

“There is one musical contribution to ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ that clearly demonstrates the importance of Hans Zimmer as a creative collaborator. It explains why, eight years ago, as a first time tentpole filmmaker, I so needed his help with reinventing Batman. A fresh musical approach was going to be a key component, but beyond that I needed the help of a master- someone who had faced such huge odds and emerged unscathed. For me Hans Zimmer was the sound of contemporary movies and I was delighted when he agreed to talk about the project. I was less delighted with his initial thoughts – why make the music heroic? Why not play the tragedy and nobility of the tale, like an Elgar concerto? Fear provided a couple reasons right away, but then I started to learn the method to Hans” madness… an unerring ability to hone in on the one thought that cracks a project open. The darkly romantic, lush score, with its strangely minimalist core that he and James Newton Howard labored over with such passion brought new ways of tapping emotion and pathos within the context of relentless action. The sound was fresh, distinctive and has been mercilessly plundered by every action movie (or at least their trailers) since 2005.

“The score for Batman Begins dominated the direction of blockbuster movie music for everyone except Hans, who, when we came to revisit Gotham, insisted on moving in a completely different direction for the crazed, tortured sound of the Joker, and refused to let us put in our favorite cues from the first film, insisting on pushing further towards a destination that only he could hear. Hans has sometimes been accused (not within earshot) of taking the long way round, but what I”ve seen over the last eight years is that you have to take the long way round to find the new sound, the new approach. I have never worked with someone so dedicated to the idea that the real risk is in playing it safe. Hans taught me that you have to pull aggressively in the wrong direction to discover the possibilities- and that without discovering the possibilities you can never do anything exceptional. Together with his team of extraordinary collaborators, Lorne and Mel amongst others – Hans sets creative goals for a project higher than you ever thought possible or practical. He took the same approach with ‘The Dark Knight Rises,’ crafting a magnificent and totally unexpected suite for our new villain as we were just starting to shoot. Hans pinpointed our prison world as the seed of an evil spreading across the world, and we were able to incorporate that notion into the shooting of the sequences, leaning more and more on the significance of the sound of evil rising. Here you see the essence of Hans” approach. He is not playing along – his greatest thinking is not even done to picture – Hans sees through the screen to the dark beating heart of the story and is faithful to that and only that.

“But this is not the contribution to which I was referring.

“The musical contribution in /The Dark Knight Rises’ that most clearly demonstrates Hans” importance as a creative collaborator is not to be found on this record. He did not write a note of it. It is a hinge point of the entire film and it is the lonely fragile voice of a boy singing the National Anthem at the center of a massive, crowded football stadium. While we were considering how to stage this sequence I called Hans to ask what big draw artists we might convince to do a star spangled cameo. He threw out a few ideas, trying to get into the spirit of the thing. Then called me back a few minutes later, gently suggesting I might be betraying the spirit of our endeavor. He told me to make the most instinctive and unconscious connection with the lonely boy at the genesis of our story. It was the sort of priceless contribution that gives you goosebumps and reveals your dangerous dependence on a collaborator. I told him I”d think about it.”

– Christopher Nolan
June 1, 2012

“The Dark Knight Rises” is now playing nationwide.

It’s late July, that balmy time of year when everyone’s thoughts naturally turn to the Producers’ Guild of America Awards, due to take place on January 26 next year — a mere six months away. And as of today, we know who will be receiving at least one of them. Whether or not The Weinstein Company manages a three-peat with the Guild’s top prize — after “The King’s Speech” and “The Artist” were both named the year’s best by the PGA — their founding brothers will still take the stage, as Bob and Harvey Weinstein are to receive the Guild’s Milestone Award for “historic contributions to the entertainment industry.”

I know what you’re thinking. It’s about time these unassuming industry serfs received a little recognition for their tireless background work. But in all seriousness, an award for the Weinsteins from this guild isn’t quite as much of a sop as it initially sounds: while TWC, and Miramax before it, have been rewarded for various productions, the brothers themselves have never claimed a PGA trophy. Harvey has been nominated as a producer for “Shakespeare in Love” and “Gangs of New York,” as well as in the TV category for reality show “Project Runway,” losing on all three occasions. Bob hasn’t one nomination to his name.

You could argue that the PGA could have picked a more unsung honoree, but if the Milestone Award is intended the recognize the industry’s greatest movers and shakers — previous winners include Steven Spielberg, Walt Disney, Clint Eastwood and James Cameron — how many contemporary producers are more worthy than Bob and Harvey Weinstein?

Sure, many of us may associate them with crafty Oscar campaigns and cannily tooled awards bait, but the Weinsteins changed the way independent and specialist cinema was perceived, distributed and marketed in the US, from “sex, lies and videotape” to “The Crying Game” to “Pulp Fiction” to, yes, “The English Patient” — not to mention the more genre-oriented output of their offshoot company Dimension Films, peaking with the “Scream” series.

They may take some flak for steering the odd vanilla film to awards glory, but they’ve long fought the good fight for more challenging fare, be it Miramax’s “The Piano” or The Weinstein Company’s “Blue Valentine.” (And frankly, whatever you make of “The Artist,” what other studio could have made an Oscar juggernaut out of a silent, black-and-white French production?) They’ve even coaxed American audiences to the odd documentary or foreign-language title — not always the most highbrow ones, but their great strength lies in knowing what will play, and to whom. Truth is, they opened the door for a lot of films that might be outside their own wheelhouse these days.

Meanwhile, the prize pony for the 2012 awards derby — barring any surprise arrivals on the fall festival circuit — currently looks to be Paul Thomas Anderson’s “The Master,” which should hopefully fall on the more adventurous side of their slate. Assuming it receives the desired reviews, they’ll be pushing hard for a third consecutive Best Picture win — which means January’s PGA Awards could be a very Weinstein-flavored night indeed.

Edited press release:

The Producers Guild of America (PGA) announced today that legendary filmmakers Bob and Harvey Weinstein, co-founders and Co-Chairmen of The Weinstein Company, will be honored with the 2013 Milestone Award. The award will be presented to the Weinsteins at the 24th Annual Producers Guild Awards ceremony on Saturday, January 26, 2013 at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.

The Milestone Award is the Guild”s highest honor recognizing an individual or team who has made historic contributions to the entertainment industry. In the past, the Producers Guild has paid tribute to such industry leaders as Clint Eastwood, Jeffrey Katzenberg, Steven Spielberg, Walt Disney, James Cameron, Ron Meyer and last year”s 2012 recipient Leslie Moonves, among others.

“Beginning in the late 1970s with Miramax Films and continuing through today with The Weinstein Company, Bob and Harvey consistently seek out, nurture and help bring audiences the stories that others are often afraid to tell,” said Producers Guild National Board member and Awards Chair Michael De Luca (MONEYBALL, THE SOCIAL NETWORK). “Their passionate regard for the spectacular diversity and resolve of the human spirit has brought us such iconic and award-winning films as THE CRYING GAME, SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, PULP FICTION, THE ENGLISH PATIENT, GOOD WILL HUNTING, THE KING”S SPEECH and most recently, THE ARTIST and the courageous documentary, BULLY. Bob and Harvey”s brave dedication to emerging producers and other storytellers has virtually redefined the term ‘independent film,” making it possible for some of our culture”s most vital stories to break out from the shadows of smaller arthouse theaters into the bright light of large multiplexes around the globe. We salute them for their contributions to our industry, and we are so proud to recognize them with the Guild”s highest honor.”

“We couldn”t be more thankful to our fellow producers and the many predecessors who”ve inspired us and guided the independent film world to its present state,” said Bob and Harvey Weinstein. “It is easy to be dedicated to something you love. Without our peers who”ve joined us in taking chances on the first time director or the unknown talent, and without the curious audiences who take chances on the movie with subtitles or better yet, no sound or color, we wouldn”t be where we are today. We”re deeply honored and humbled for this recognition from the Producers Guild of America for our life”s work.”

For more views on movies, awards season and other pursuits, follow @GuyLodge on Twitter.

Sign up for Instant Alerts from In Contention!

Sunday afternoon is a strange time to drop a major press release in this business — there won’t be much competing for our attention, granted, but it also implies that it’s the kind of news that can wait until Monday. And that, I admit, was my reaction upon hearing that the 69th Venice Film Festival will open next month with Mira Nair’s “The Reluctant Fundamentalist,” a political thriller adapted from the Booker Prize-nominated bestseller by Mohsin Hamid, starring Kate Hudson, Riz Ahmed, Kiefer Sutherland and Liev Schreiber.

That shouldn’t be read as a pre-emptive knock on the film, which may well be strong — Nair has a reputation to salvage after the embarrassing artistic and commercial failure of “Amelia,” but this kind of independent, ethnically-oriented material plays more to her strengths than studio prestige fare. But it’s not the kind of highly anticipated A-list curtain-raiser that former Venice director Marco Mueller managed to secure two years ago with “Black Swan” and, to a lesser extent, with last year’s “The Ides of March.”

I’d put my hypothetical money on “Anna Karenina” kicking things off on the Lido, as Joe Wright’s “Atonement” did back in 2007. I still expect it to show up in the lineup, along with a couple of other shiny awards season prospects. But by opting for a lower-profile opener — lent a modicum of red-carpet appeal by Hudson — Mueller’s successor Alberto Barbera is making his presence felt, calculatedly or otherwise.

Either he’s signalling a more sober programming approach than Mueller’s daring blend of Hollywood pizzazz and younger-than-Cannes world cinema… or he’s struggling to persuade bigger draws that his new-model Venice fest, with a scaled-down programme and a newly added market, is the right place to reveal themselves. The opening night of any major festival is a notoriously tricky slot, and alongside his successes, Mueller also managed to fill it with such duds as “The Terminal” and “Baaria.”

Between Nair’s uneven record and widespread disdain for the underrated Hudson, we can count on some critics having their knives out for “The Reluctant Fundamentalist.” But whether it falls victim to the sometime opening-night curse or emerges as a pleasant festival-season surprise, its selection continues the Venice fest’s longstanding friendship with Nair, who first competed for the Golden Lion back in 1991 with her crossover sophomore feature “Mississippi Masala,” and won the prize ten years later for “Monsoon Wedding.”

Since then, she’s been to the Lido as a contributor to the 2002 portmanteau piece “11’09″01,” and was in Competition once more in 2004 with “Vanity Fair” — another starry prestige flop that, bookended with “Amelia,” has probably put paid to her chances of directing any future studio awards bait. (And hey, that’s no bad thing.) Interestingly, this is Nair’s first feature to play out of competition at Venice, and the festival’s first out-of-competition opener since the Coens’ “Burn After Reading” in 2008. Whether that’s caution on the part of the festival or the film’s handlers remains to be seen. 

Edited press release as follows: 

The Reluctant Fundamentalist, the new film directed by Mira Nair, will be the opening film at the 69th Venice International Film Festival (29 August – 8 September 2012), directed by Alberto Barbera and organized by la Biennale di Venezia chaired by Paolo Baratta. The Reluctant Fundamentalist is produced by Lydia Dean Pilcher and presented by Doha Film Institute.

Based on the best-selling novel of the same title, translated into 25 languages, The Reluctant Fundamentalist is a riveting international political thriller that follows the story of a young Pakistani man, chasing corporate success on Wall Street, who ultimately finds himself embroiled in a conflict between his American Dream, a hostage crisis, and the enduring call of his family’s homeland.

The director of the 69th Venice Film Festival, Alberto Barbera, has declared: “The Festival”s opening night will feature a film that provides much food for thought. It is a choice that intends to highlight the growing role of female creativity in all spheres of culture and contemporary society. Mira Nair has made ??an exemplary film adaptation of a novel that deals with the topical issue of fundamentalisms of any kind or nature. With great sensitivity, subtlety and remarkable sense of cinematic narrative, the director is never reluctant to take a difficult stand, inspired by profound ethical and moral reasons that, although choosing to face reality, still reject its compromises and aberrations”.

The Reluctant Fundamentalist which screens out of competition stars Riz Ahmed, Kate Hudson, Kiefer Sutherland, Liev Schreiber, Martin Donovan, Om Puri, Shabana Azmi, Haluk Bilginer and Meesha Shafi. The Reluctant Fundamentalist will have its world premiere screening on the evening of August 29th in the new Sala Grande (Palazzo del Cinema), following the opening ceremony. Adapted by William Wheeler, with the Screen Story by Mohsin Hamid, and Ami Boghani and produced by Lydia Dean Pilcher, The Reluctant Fundamentalist, the latest Doha Film Institute”s international financed film, is a Mirabai Films and Cine Mosaic production. The film was shot in the cities of Lahore, Delhi, Istanbul, New York and Atlanta.

The rich visual style is supported by the cinematography of Declan Quinn, production designer Michael Carlin, Costume Designer Arjun Bhasin and Editor Shimit Amin. The music includes both the old and new Pakistani cool sounds with the iconoclastic Michael Andrews scoring and a stunning new original song by Peter Gabriel.

Synopsis: Student demonstrations are raging in Lahore, as young Pakistani professor Changez Khan and a journalist, Bobby Lincoln, share a cup of tea and conversation. Princeton-educated Changez tells Lincoln of his past as a brilliant business analyst on Wall Street. He talks of the glittering future that lay before him and the beautiful and sophisticated Erica whom he was set to share that future with. But then 9/11 changes everything. Attitudes shift dramatically – his very name and face rendering him suspect. Returning to his homeland and the family to whom he is very close, he takes up a post as lecturer at the local university, a hotbed of radicalism and the new militant academia. The collegial pretense of the meeting in a Lahore teahouse, between Lincoln and Changez, slowly gives way to why the unlikely pair has gathered on a summer day — another professor has been kidnapped by extremists, and the clock is ticking toward a deadline for his execution. Changez’s family is being harassed and is in real danger. Bobby is there to listen, with an agenda of his own. As it is revealed that Lincoln is in the lions’ den with the CIA, we also learn that he has a personal stake in the immediate crisis at hand. Taking us through the culturally rich and beguiling worlds of New York, Lahore and Istanbul The Reluctant Fundamentalist is an exploration of prejudice and the phenomenon of globalization that is both exhilirating and deeply unsettling.

For more views on movies, awards season and other pursuits, follow @GuyLodge on Twitter.

Sign up for Instant Alerts from In Contention!

Welcome to Oscar Talk.

In case you’re new to the site and/or the podcast, Oscar Talk is a weekly kudocast, your one-stop awards chat shop between yours truly and Anne Thompson of Thompson on Hollywood. The podcast is weekly, every Friday throughout the season, charting the ups and downs of contenders along the way. Plenty of things change en route to Oscar’s stage and we’re here to address it all as it unfolds.

Two years ago we brought the podcast back for a special edition around the release of Christopher Nolan’s “Inception,” a highly anticipated movie. Well, here we are again, with “The Dark Knight Rises” hitting theaters and fans and fanatics alike eager to get a look. So it seemed a good time to pop our head back up. Let’s see what’s on the docket…

Does Nolan top himself with the new film? We give our somewhat similar yet interestingly divergent takes on the film. NOTE: THERE ARE SPOILERS!

Oscars? Hey, everyone’s been asking for years at this point, so let’s break it down. Best Picture? Best Director? Only crafts? We discuss.

Having crossed the year’s half-way point a few weeks back it’s a good time to see what has released so far and deserves to stay in the conversation (whether it will or not) throughout the rest of the season. We talk about that and the year’s two awards MVPs so far: “Moonrise Kingdom” and “Beasts of the Southern Wild.”

Comic-Con wrapped up last weekend. “Django Unchained” and “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” were among the potential awards films of the season to try and get a foothold with the geeks. Did they get a boost?

And finally, we take a brief look ahead to the upcoming fall festival circuit. What films will platform from there into the rest of the season? We take a modest crack at figuring it out, but it’s early yet.

Have a listen to the new podcast below. It’s a long one so strap in. If the file cuts off for you at any time, try the back-up download link at the bottom of this post. And as always, remember to subscribe to Oscar Talk via iTunes here.

“Here I Come” courtesy of Stuart Park

OMGIT’SHEREOMGOMG! Yes, “The Dark Knight Rises” has arrived. Midnight screenings are happening right now. The box office is bursting at the seams and a trilogy is wrapping itself up. With style? With class? Well, you tell us. And feel free to rate the film above. I’ll get to my thoughts in tomorrow’s special edition podcast, but I’ll be curious to see if anyone finds the film as structurally messy and thematically confused as I do.