Words uttered years ago by the great Sarah Miles, when asked about the BAFTA Awards. I’m just quoting. Not saying anything at all.
Blog
-
‘Slumdog,’ ‘Button’ lead BAFTA pack with 11 nods each
Each year, the BAFTAs never fail to find new and frustrating ways to surprise me.It wasn’t hard to guess that “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” and “Slumdog Millionaire” would come out on top here — though even as a fan of the latter film, I do wonder whether nominations for Best Production Design and Best Supporting Actress are pushing it a little. (Sure, Freida Pinto is gorgeous, but… )
But look closer and the oddities come thick and fast. Who would have guessed, come nomination morning, that “Changeling” would land 8 nominations (including mentions for Best Director and Best Original Screenplay), while “Happy-Go-Lucky” gets zilch? I was aware that Mike Leigh’s delightful film has played better with critics Stateside than it did over here in the spring, but failing to even nominate Golden Globe winner Sally Hawkins is a blatant — and in my opinion, unforgivable — slap in the face.
As I predicted, despite the film’s mixed reception, BAFTA voters responded well to “The Reader,” which lands in the Best Film derby alongside four of the Oscar favourites in the category. While I thought “Milk” might miss with the Brits, it was actually “The Dark Knight” that came up short — and while I’m not entirely surprised that it proved too genre-oriented for their top category, their failure to nominate Brit helmer Christopher Nolan is pretty stunning.
Bar the Hawkins snub, the acting categories name most of the usual suspects, though there’s still room for typically BAFTA-esque eccentricities. Brendan Gleeson is an pleasant surprise in the Best Supporting Actor category, and while I anticipated Brad Pitt’s appearance in that field for “Burn After Reading,” Tilda Swinton’s Supporting Actress nod for the same film is the kind of out-of-nowhere hometown favoritism that only BAFTA can come up with. The real headscratcher in that category, however, is Amy Adams’ inclusion at the expense of Viola Davis — one has to wonder whether voters actually watched “Doubt,” or voted on name recognition alone.
(More thoughts, and the full list of nominees, below the cut.)
-
Reel Geezers on ‘Torino’
I think these things have kind of run their course, but I thought it worth pointing to the Reel Geezer review of Clint Eastwood’s “Gran Torino.” I can’t help but wonder whether Lorenzo’s opinion is going to be shared enough within the Academy to warrant that Best Picture nomination I hinted at earlier this week (a possibility others have picked up on ever since). But personally, I think Marsha nailed it on the head with her thoughts on the film early in the review.
Sigh…anyway, have a look:
-
When will they learn?
In the gloomiest piece of awards-related news I’ve heard this week, it turns out that this year’s BAFTA awards will be hosted, once again, by the smug talent vacuum that is Jonathan Ross. (“Who?” I hear you American readers asking. Answer: you’re better off not knowing.)
I understand that BAFTA hasn’t the budget or the resources to compete with the Academy Awards when it comes to putting on a show. However, if they want to be a truly international ceremony — as they claim they are — it might be worth hiring a host who can potentially draw an international audience.
You know, someone who is actually known outside of Britain. Someone who has a halfway credible industry profile. Someone who is actually funny. Not that I’m not naming names, of course.
Chances are Ross will perform no better and no worse this year than he has previously. (Which is to say, he’ll be as reliably excruciating as always.) But in a year when the Oscars have really upped the ante in their choice of host, BAFTA’s resistance to change is all the more embarrassing.
-
BAFTA predictions
The BAFTA nominations drop tomorrow, and while I hardly covered myself in glory with my foreign film Oscar forecast yesterday, I’m going to wade into the murky waters of prediction once more.On the one hand, it’s a fool’s errand trying to predict the BAFTA nods, as they can frequently be the most perverse and contrarian awards voters of the lot. On the other, they make the task a little easier for us pundits by releasing 15-strong longlists in each category ahead of the voting.
As I wrote back in November, the BAFTAs can be inconsistently parochial in their voting, frequently handing multiple nods to middlebrow homegrown product, while simultaneously sidelining the most acclaimed British films of the year. A look at this year’s longlists confirms that trend, as relatively mediocre Brit flicks like “The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas,” “Mamma Mia!” and “The Duchess” all received multiple mentions, while critical darlings “Hunger” and “Happy-Go-Lucky” landed in a paltry three categories each — Best Film not among them.
The BAFTA voters’ provincialism is most shamefully evident in the Best Supporting Actress longlist, which features such bizarre inclusions as Judi Dench for “Quantum of Solace” and Rebecca Hall for her arm-candy role in “Frost/Nixon.” As for the Best Adapted Screenplay citation for “Mamma Mia!,” well, the less said the better. Of course, it’s a mistake to read too much into these lists. The idle frequency with which certain titles pop up — “Frost/Nixon” and “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” lead with 14 mentions each, but more surprisingly, a lightweight contender like “Burn After Reading” managed a staggering 11 — suggests the voters weren’t thinking too hard either.
Which films will fare best tomorrow is another matter — it’s not uncommon for a film to feature strongly in the longlists only to go MIA on nomination morning. Below the cut are my best guesses, together with some thoughts on the top categories.
-
INTERVIEW: Amy Adams
Amy Adams has arrived. No “doubt” about it.Sunday she was sitting at a table with Meryl Streep, Viola Davis and John Patrick Shanley at the Hollywood Foriegn Press Association’s Golden Globe Awards where she was nominated for Best Supporting Actress, one of five nods the film received. Surrounded by major artists such as Ron Howard, Frank Langella, Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Clint Eastwood, Kate Winslet, and so many others, she looked comfortable and right at home.
But seven years ago she was struggling to find work. And the actress says she was ultimately stunned to land a plum role in a major film being directed by Steven Spielberg, two time Academy Award winning director and starring Leonardo DiCaprio.
“It’s been fantastic,” she explains by phone, “surreal, but I am loving it. ‘Catch Me If You Can’ was a huge break for me and Steven was just so generous as a director, so enthusiastic and positive all the time. Going to the set was a constant pleasure.”
The actress says she is “trying to just experience things right now, to let them happen and see where we go with it — take everything as it comes to me.” She’s somewhat overwhelmed by the attention she is getting these days. I liked Adams within seconds of speaking with her: soft-spoken yet talkative, forthright, honest, and modest.
-
Michael Chabon to receive Scripter prize
The USC Scripter awards go down next Friday, Jan. 30 (right in the middle of the Santa Barbara Film Festival…I’ll be driving back down for the show). The USC Libraries introduced a new award last year: the Literary Achievement Award, which went to Steven Zaillian in 2008. This year, the group has tapped “Wonder Boys” scribe Michael Chabon for the award.Here’s a bit from the press release:
“I am delighted to have been singled out for this honor,” said Chabon. “I consider myself fortunate to be able to share in the great tradition that the Scripter Award both recognizes and exemplifies.”
Dean Catherine Quinlan and the Friends of the USC Libraries established the Scripter Literary Achievement Award in 2007 to recognize writers who have made a significant and lasting impact on the art of cinematic adaptation…
“Michael Chabon works with equal measures of inventiveness and emotion,” Quinlan said. “His fiction is intellectually playful and transforms history into new worlds. The USC Libraries are proud to honor Mr. Chabon’s ingenuity, his accomplishments in many literary forms and his clear respect for uncovering new ways of knowing.”
Also remember, this will be the first year the Scripter winner is revealed at the show rather than via press release beforehand.
-
The top 10 shots of 2008: part one
I’m hoping to make this an annual tradition here at In Contention. It’s no secret we have a lot of respect for below-the-line talent around these parts, but it’s nice to have a visual way of showing that appreciation. I sat down to write this piece for the first time last year, taken by the caliber of cinematography we had to bask in throughout the year and, indeed, the awards season. The unusually high number of lensing achievements in 2007 left a slew of images to choose from and it was difficult whittling it down to 10.This year the challenge was of a different sort. The field was curiously thin. It wasn’t that the talent wasn’t on display. God knows, a number of the greats were lining up behind the camera this year. But the images weren’t as instantly iconic or as viscerally gripping as they were in 2007, which might have left me a bit disappointed on one hand. Then again, it just made searching for my favorites all the more involved and interesting, and I’m happy to offer my findings to you in this space, even if it meant doubling up.
Yes, in one instance (an undeniable one, really), a certain film found two shots popping up on the list, and nearly three. Another film also found itself close to a second mention, but I tried to keep a balance of honesty and fairness in place as much as possible. If a film has two of the year’s best shots, it has two of the year’s best shots, right?
This year, things are slightly different. Last time around, I got a few arbitrary quotes from lensers throughout the season and plugged them into the piece where they fit best. This year, I sought out the various directors of photography to get their opinions on the specific shots in question. Their insight, as always, makes for a better story and, indeed, more context for the reader. I hope you enjoy reading their thoughts as much as I did collecting them.
So, I look forward to doing this each and every year I’m cranking out copy for your reading pleasure (or displeasure). In my view, it is one of the best ways I can commemorate the technicians that so often find themselves overlooked this time of year.
So let’s get on with the list…
-
What if they made a ‘Dark Knight’ NES game?
Well, I’m guessing it would look something like this:
Can I just say: that’s one of the coolest things I’ve ever seen in my life? You might recall my boyish reminiscence of the original “Batman” NES game a few months ago (I finally beat the Joker recently, by the way), which was fun and all, but I’d love to see the guys that cooked this thing up go all out and generate some game play.
And hey, why don’t we get some new NES games on the market anyway? I’d buy them. The best graphics in the world can’t substitute the glee I feel after 30 minutes of kicking the alien queen’s ass in “Contra,” that’s all I’m sayin’. (Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, start, baby.)
(Courtesy: /Film)
-
‘Gomorrah’ doesn’t deliver, says AMPAS
Kris has already given the philistines on the Academy’s foreign-language film committee a deserved telling-off for sidelining Italy’s astonishing entry “Gomorrah,” but I feel compelled to add my voice to his — not least because, if I had my way, Matteo Garrone’s cinematic gut-punch about the Camorra crime syndicate would be in line for a Best Picture nod, not just a puny ghetto-category citation.I could be here all day if I decided to go through the innumerable landmark films, from “City of God” to “The Celebration” to “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days,” that have been similarly mistreated by this ever-disappointing branch of voters, so I shouldn’t have been surprised when they failed us yet again, right?
And yet I was, because the newly formed executive committee, which added an extra three titles to the list of six elected by the main body, was specifically designed to avoid such travesties. I can believe that they may well have used one of their slots to save France’s masterpiece “The Class” from exclusion, and if that’s the case, I’m most grateful. (Though I still wouldn’t put it past the boneheads to omit it from the final five.) Hell, it’s not inconceivable to me that they coud have stepped in on behalf of a popular favourite like “Waltz With Bashir” — the ignorance of the larger committee knows no bounds.
But even given that worst case scenario, and speaking as someone who has seen 8 of the 9 shortlisted titles, I can’t fathom how the executive committee didn’t deem “Gomorrah” worthy of their company. What was the rule change for, if not to protect challenging, relevant, widely acclaimed works like Garrone’s film?
Well, Jeff Wells has done some digging, and seems to have found the explanation. He spoke to a member of the committee, who had this to say:
Voices in the foreign branch’s executive elite committee just didn’t think Gomorrah “delivered in the way it could or should have,” he said. “It’s not a matter of it not being heart-warming. It’s a matter of our respecting the film without believing that it really brought the goods home.”
-
1/14 Oscarweb Round-up
• Stop the presses, Tom O’Neil meets the Carpetbagger at the Globes. [Gold Derby]• Scott Foundas on the “Gomorrah” foreign committee snub. [LA Weekly]
• David Poland talks to Mike Leigh and Sally Hawkins. [The Hot Blog]
• David Carr is stoked about the “new kind of prom queen” Danny Boyle’s “Slumdog Millionaire” represents. [The Carpetbagger]
• It’s likely to become a tired (if true) trend: David Gritten calls the film “the first film of the Obama era.” [Daily Telegraph]
• Patrick Goldstein considers “Gran Torino” reason enough to warrant a Clint Eastwood class on acting career management. [The Big Picture]
-
Claude Berri (1934-2009)
Claude Berri, who passed away on Monday at the age of 74, may not have been the most gifted or prolific of French filmmakers, but I owe him an awful lot — not least the fact that I speak French in the first place.
At a very young age, I saw “Jean de Florette,” Berri’s exquisite 1986 adaptation of Marcel Pagnol’s classic story of corrupted rural power games, and was thoroughly enraptured — by the painterly textures of the Provençal landscape, by the iconic melancholy of Jean-Claude Petit’s Verdi-interpolating score, by the masterly interplay of three generations of French acting talent (Montand, Depardieu and Auteuil), and by the rhythms and poetry of the language itself.
“Florette” (and its follow-up, “Manon Des Sources”) triggered a fascination with French culture and cinema that has stuck with me to this day, and as Xan Brooks points out in today’s Guardian, I wasn’t the only one claimed by its influence. In Britain, in particular, the film represented a milestone in crossover arthouse cinema, generating near-blockbuster figures, nabbing a BAFTA for Best Film, and chiming into a renewed public interest in the Continent.
Nothing else in his directing CV quite stands up to that mammoth achievement (though he actually won an Oscar for his 1962 short “Le Poulet”), but it’s really as a producer that he made his largest, and most lasting, contribution to global cinema: among the numerous arthouse projects he shepherded to our screens are such landmarks as Polanski’s extraordinary “Tess,” the hit bodice-ripper “La Reine Margot” and last year’s delightful critics’ darling “Couscous” (or “The Secret of the Grain,” depending on your side of the Atlantic).
For most film buffs, however, it’s the gorgeous strains of the music below that will forever spring to mind first when Berri’s name is mentioned. Qu’il repose en paix.
-
Reminder
The top 10 shots of the year kicks off with part one of two tomorrow afternoon. Be on the lookout.
-
Bagger: Rourke passes the PR test
Given the newly compressed awards calendar of recent years, with a gap this year of only one day between the Golden Globe awards and the deadline for Oscar nomination ballots, the former has little impact on the latter anymore. However, that’s not to say that what happens on Globe night has no effect on the winners’ Oscar campaigns.For actors in particular, the Globes are the most visible Oscar-night audition a contender can ask for. A memorable Globe moment can play into Phase II of Academy voting: Jamie Foxx’s canny Golden Globe acceptance speech in 2005 pretty much sealed his Oscar win there and then, while Eddie Murphy’s indifferent one two years later hardly galvanized Academy members into voting for him.
So, trivial as it may sound, it’s worth taking into account the press and public reaction to Sunday night’s victors. Kate Winslet’s manic gushing may be earning her no end of criticism in the British press, but I suspect her evident gratitude at winning could go over well with Academy members. Meanwhile, Sally Hawkins’ emotion-drenched near-breakdown on stage can only raise her profile if she garners an Oscar nod.
However, the Carpetbagger seems to feel (and I’m inclined to agree) that the real PR champ on Sunday was surprise Best Actor winner Mickey Rourke — whose eccentric acceptance speech, complete with tributes to canines past and present, was as memorable as it was oddly touching. (I don’t mind admitting I teared up, but then I did lose a dog myself last year. Cut me some slack.) While the Bagger confesses he was hoping for some trademark Rourke controversy, he was thoroughly won over by the star’s openness — and crucially, thinks his peers were too:
But there is another part of the Bagger that watched hopefully, wishing that Mr. Rourke would keep it between the lines. His candidacy for best actor took a huge step the other night and the audience of his peers at the Beverly Hilton nearly jumped in his lap. “Everyone in that room has had their ups and downs,” said Aaron Eckhart, who was at a party held last night for Mr. Rourke hosted by LA Confidential. “We all felt good about what happened on that stage.”
-
Foreign film shortlist revealed, ‘Gomorrah’ snubbed
This is the most vile of all Academy committees. They prove their disdain for truly great cinema year in and year out (let’s not forget last year’s snubs of “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days” and “Persepolis” early on), and they’ve done it again this year, skewering Matteo Garrone’s blistering “Gomorrah,” leaving it for the dogs, cast aside, abandoned.
The almighty foreign language film committee has chosen the following to proceed to the next stage of the season:
“3 Monkeys” (Nuri Bilge Ceylan — Turkey)
“The Baader Meinhof Complex” (Uli Edel — Germany)
“The Class” (Laurent Cantet — France)
“Departures” (Yojiro Takita — Japan)
“Everlasting Moments” (Jan Troell — Sweden)
“The Necessities of Life” (Benoit Pilon — Canada)
“Revanche” (Gotz Spielmann — Austria)
“Tear This Heart Out” (Roberto Sneider — Mexico)
“Waltz with Bashir” (Ari Folman — Israel)Turns out Guy correctly foresaw only four of these in his post this morning. From these, I’d anticipate “3 Monkeys,” “The Baader Meinhof Complex,” “The Class,” “Everlasting Moments” and, the likely winner, “Waltz with Bashir” to make the final five.
(Thanks to Blake for passing along the list, and kudos to him for anticipating the “Gomorrah” shaft. I just wanted to disregard all that talk about the committee having an issue with the film’s violence, but you can’t give these bozos the benefit of the doubt, I guess.)