In Contention

Tag: Brad Pitt

  • Last minute thoughts

    Anne Hathaway in Rachel Getting MarriedLike I said, I’m on the record.  I’ve given some left-field choices (as have you).  But here are some lingering thoughts bouncing around inside my tired old head this evening:

    1) I think we’re going to see tomorrow, finally, that “Rachel Getting Married” is nothing more than a critical fave.  Personally, I liked it enough, but all the “one of the year’s best” talk was dubious to say the least.  A SAG ensemble nod would have kept me quiet.  Talk about a place it could have made a stand.  And that WGA snub was just one more smack by the industry, in my view.  Maybe it’s just like one voter told me: “I couldn’t stand these people.”  Anne Hathaway, step up for the film’s consolation nod.

    2) “Gran Torino,” “Gran Torino,” “Gran Torino.”  I can’t say it enough…this film is creeping up.  It’s possible it came on too late and Clint missed the timing this time out, but, like I’ve said…watch it.  Personally I think it’s a bigger threat than “The Reader.”  A bad-ass white guy kicking kids off his lawn or a porno about a sympathetic Nazi.  Which film is going to resonate more with the Academy?  You tell me.

    3) Everyone says, in varying degrees, that everything from “The Dark Knight” to “Frost/Nixon” to “Milk” are on the bubble.  But here’s a radical idea: what if the weak link is the film many have called cold and removed?  “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” sure does have a lot of guild support…but so did “Dreamgirls.”

    4) Could one of the biggest stories tomorrow be the snubbing of Brangelina?  Some think he’s out, some think she’s out…but what if they’re both out?  Eesh.

    5) Better yet, might the biggest shock of the day be a “Man on Wire” snub in the documentary feature category?  All I’m saying is films dominated by preexisting footage can struggle here sometimes.

    Then again…maybe I’m off my rocker.  But there you have it.

    I’ve only made one prediction alteration, FYI, and that’s swapping “Slumdog Millionaire” for “Quantum of Solace” in the sound editing field.  The latter was just an arbitrary choice to reflect the mixers’ feelings, but I’m thinking of a sweeper possibility there and I like the advenurous choice of “Slumdog” more than “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.”  But really, that category lately?  Flip a coin.

    Enjoy the morning.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    (more…)

  • If nominated, will Clint win Best Actor? I think so…

    Clint Eastwood in Gran TorinoThough it ain’t over till it’s over, I think the five nominees for best actor have all but been decided.  Come nomination morning, I expect to hear the names of Clint Eastwood, Sean Penn, Frank Langella, Mickey Rourke and Richard Jenkins.

    Of course I have no way of knowing if this is how things will end up, but I have a pretty good feeling (which means nothing). Left off the list will be Brad Pitt in “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” which will garner the most nominations of any film, and Leonardo DiCaprio for “Revolutionary Road,” a brilliant, dark and troubling masterpiece, destined to be re-discovered in years to come as perhaps the best film of the year and certainly DiCaprio’s best work to date.

    Eastwood is in partly because he is Eastwood and partly because he does fine work. The role is tailor made for him in the manner Rooster Cogburn was written for John Wayne in “True Grit,” which won The Duke his only Oscar back in 1969. Eastwood gets to growl, cuss and throw out all sorts of racist comments in portraying a nasty old son of a bitch who turns out to have a heart. For anyone who has ever met or spoken to Eastwood, they will realize this character is light years away from the man, making it a startling performance.

    I am so tired of reading that he is playing himself. Sure he is portraying an extension of himself.  All actors do that (and always have), but Eastwood is also portraying a variation on the sort of role that made him famous. Could Walt be “Dirty Harry” after retirement? Damned straight he could and perhaps this is why the film has been greeted so warmly in some quarters, because the reviewer sees Eastwood’s character as an older version of Harry, a much loved character from years gone by, and a reimagination of his screen iconography.  It is sort of like seeing an old friend again.

    Well…sort of.

    If nominated, Eastwood will be a major threat to win the award. In fact, no, I’ll just say what Kris has been saying for a few months, now that I’ve gone back to the film a third and fourth time: if nominated, Clint WILL win.

    (more…)

  • Pitt, Fincher do Charlie Rose

  • Blast from the past

    Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel review the first Fincher/Pitt collaboration in September of 1995:

  • 45? Holy…

    Brad PittI never really keep up with actors’ ages or anything, but jeez, Brad Pitt is five years away from the half century mark?  Amazing.

    Anyway, Reed Johnson recently profiled the actor for the Los Angles Times regarding his role in David Fincher’s “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.”  Here’s a bit from the actor on growing older:

    “Once you hit 40, you start reexamining the math of it all,” says the actor, who turned 45 on Dec. 18. So far, he indicates, the pluses and minuses are adding up just fine. “I’ll trade wisdom for youth any day,” Pitt says.

    And digging at the heart of the film’s thesis:

    “[The film is] a tragedy in the sense that any love involves loss, and that’s the risk you take,” Pitt responds. “And the greater the love, the greater the loss. I certainly feel that now with the woman I’m with, and the children that I have. But whatever the course may be, this time together is extraordinary.”

    A nice piece.  Check out the rest here.

  • Brad Pitt on Larry King

    Brad Pitt went on Larry King Live recently to talk “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.”  I’m just now getting around to it.  Have a look:

  • McPaper catches up with Pitt and Fincher

    (from left) Brad Pitt and David Fincher(I use the Mcmoniker with love, Scotty.)

    Scott Bowles caught up with David Fincher and Brad Pitt, the respective director and star of “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” over the weekend.  It’s a typical profile piece in many ways but I thought Bowles did a nice job digging into the relationship these two guys have.

    Up around the top he offers:

    Since Pitt and the director met 15 years ago, they have become close friends — and crucial components in each other’s professional lives.

    Fincher provides Pitt gravitas. He may have received an Oscar nomination for his role in Twelve Monkeys, but Pitt is the first to acknowledge that his dramatic chops are more recognized in Fincher’s Se7en and Fight Club.

    Pitt, in return, bestows Fincher inordinate clout. For a guy who has never made a blockbuster, Fincher is able to make the movies he wants, glum endings and all, thanks in part to his friendship with the most famous actor on the planet.

    (more…)

  • ‘Button’ reviews run hot and, well, cold

    UPDATED: Slow on the uptake again, the Hollywood Reporter finally offers the unqualified rave we’ve been awaiting. Gushing praise in all departments, including a big thumbs-up for Pitt (“his most impressive outing to date”). Blanchett, meanwhile, “illuminates the screen.” No issues with digital or emotional aloofness to be found.

    EARLIER: A couple of days ago, in the midst of his generally positive take on “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” Kris mentioned that the work felt “strangely cold.” It was an observation rather than a criticism, and Kris suspected he may be in a minority.

    Well, reading the first few reviews, it would appear that he isn’t. Todd McCarthy’s near-rave for Variety describes the film as “richly satisfying” but also “emotionally cool,” blaming the film’s extensive CG work for a slightly distancing effect:

    Fincher spends 13 minutes short of three hours telling this unique man’s life story, and the time goes by easily, with no sense of dawdling, waste or indulgence. The film evinces a sure hand that maintains narrative confidence, steadiness of tone and a mature awareness of the temporal nature of life’s opportunities and the fleeting quality of happiness.

    Still, for what is designed as a rich tapestry, the picture maintains a slightly remote feel. No matter the power of the image of an old but young-looking Benjamin, slumped over a piano and depressed about his fading memory and life; it is possible that the picture might have been warmer and more emotionally accessible had it been shot on film.

    McCarthy also appears to share Kris’ view that Cate Blanchett is the more dominant presence in the film:

    In all his physical manifestations, Benjamin is a reactor, not a perpetrator, and Pitt inhabits the role genially, gently and sympathetically. Blanchett’s Daisy is the more volatile and moody one and, after bluntly revealing the selfish impetuousness of Daisy’s youthful self, the thesp fully registers both the passion and insecurity of the mature woman.

    (more…)

  • ‘Button’ drops (UPDATED with audio)

    Taraji P. Henson in The Curious Case of Benjamin ButtonUPDATED (5:30 p.m.): Alright, now that I’m home and away from the shuffle, I can unfold some further thoughts on this.  Judging by the mood of the room — mostly guild members and industry types, a lot of press folks have decided on the 6:00 screening — the verdict is a big thumbs up.  Lots of positive thoughts dished about all around.

    I spoke briefly with Kathleen Kennedy, who has seen this project go up and down, back and forth for 18 years.  We talked about the visual effects in the film and how refreshing it is that this innovative work came within such a cerebral and affecting story.  “Jurassic Park” (which she also produced) has held the industry effects crown for 15 years, and now, a new leap forward.  Though director David Fincher has said from the start that he and his crew weren’t particularly sure whether they could pull it off, Kennedy took solace in her filmmaker’s professionalism.

    “When you bring in a director like Steven [Spielberg] or David [Fincher], you trust their instincts when it comes to that stuff,” she said.  “They come along with this giant tool box and they know which tool to use for this or that.”

    I also chatted with Eric Roth for a good while, screenwriter-to-screenwriter type stuff.  He really did work wonders with this story, and picking his brain for the reasons behind this decision or that can be a lot of fun.  One of the odd reactions I took away from the film, however, was that the work felt strangely cold.  I wasn’t sure whether I meant that in a good way or a bad way, and surely, people were crying their eyes out over this thing, so I might be in a minority.  Perhaps it’s my youthful cynicism, who knows, but I thought Fincher brought an arm’s length approach to the emotions in the film and I wanted Roth’s reaction to that.

    Of course, Roth doesn’t particularly agree with my take.  Indeed, he was right in the middle of telling me how the bathroom was filled with sobbers after the screening when a beautiful young lady walked up to us and told him how much the movie had affected her.  But he took my comment in stride.

    “Fincher is the kind of director that brings you right up to the point of sentiment and then brings it back,” he said.  “There’s something to be said for that I think.”

    (More, plus audio of tonight’s Q&A, after the jump.)

    (more…)

  • Karger predicts paydirt for ‘Button’

    A couple of weeks ago, Dave Karger revealed that he’d seen “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” offering a single “wow” as his response. He now feels able to expand on that slightly, though “wow” is still his general gist:

    “Button” is an Oscar movie with a capital O, with jaw-dropping production values, a soaring romance, and terrific performances, particularly from supporting-actress candidate Taraji P. Henson as Benjamin’s de facto mother. Even if Brad Pitt doesn’t make it into the tough Best Actor race (the likes of Clint Eastwood and Leonardo DiCaprio may squeeze him out), I still can see “Button” racking up as many as 11 nominations, which could very well be the highest tally for any film this year. Once the film opens on Christmas day, I guarantee we’ll all be talking about one thing: whether or not “Benjamin Button” made you sob.

    Nothing that most of us weren’t suspecting anyway, but nice to see it in black-and-white. I’m interested to see that he confirms the chances of presumed contender Henson, after some vague whispers elsewhere that Tilda Swinton might be one to watch in the category. And I agree that, even if his film is a frontrunner, Brad Pitt is up against it in the Best Actor race. (After all, an Oscar juggernaut needn’t always pull its leading man with it — just ask Joseph Fiennes or Leonardo DiCaprio.)

    To me, it looks increasingly as if all “Benjamin Button” has to do is be merely good, and it will likely score at the Oscars by sheer default in this weird season. (Incidentally, why stop at eleven nods? I count thirteen, excluding Best Actor. I’m not saying it will get them all, but surely the possibility is there.)  I’m really looking forward to Kris’ thoughts once he — finally — sees the whole picture.

  • Oprah talks ‘Button’

    So, Oprah tried to work her magic last week on “Australia” — today she’s turning her attention to “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” with Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett both appearing on today’s show.

    I guess you can expect a lot of Brangelina talk if that floats your boat, but hopefully, they’ll find some time to talk about the movie between all that. Tune in if you’re interested.

  • ‘Departed’ sequel sorta, kinda, maybe mooted

    As far as these sort of rumours go, it’s not completely fabricated, but it’s hardly solid either. Still, Mark Wahlberg (perhaps looking towards brighter things than “Max Payne”) has been dropping vague hints concerning a potential follow-up to 2006’s Best Picture. The Guardian tells it like this:

    “They were talking about bringing in a couple of new guys like [Robert] De Niro, maybe Brad Pitt or someone like that playing the bad guy, a corrupt politician or something,” Wahlberg told Digital Spy. “Then, like the Hong Kong trilogy that the movie is based on, come back and do a prequel and bring everyone else back who was in the first.”

    Indeed, “Infernal Affairs,” the Hong Kong thriller from which Scorsese’s film was adapted, inspired both a prequel and sequel, so it’s hardly an outrageous notion. Wahlberg did add that he’d only be on board “if we can make it better than the first,” which is a pretty tall order. I won’t start holding my breath just yet, but it sure sounds like a fun idea.

  • Downey, Jenkins among EW’s Entertainers of the Year

    It’s interesting to note that, in addition to citations for the respective casts of “The Dark Knight” and “Sex and the City: The Movie,” only five film actors made EW’s recently unveiled list of the 25 Entertainers of the Year. (Six if you count their #2 pick, Tina Fey — which I don’t.)

    Perhaps it chimes in with the widespread feeling that 2008 isn’t a vintage year for cinema, perhaps the worlds of TV and music simply had more to offer, or perhaps I’m simply over-analysing. It’s curious to see arguably the year’s two most overexposed stars, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, absent from the list — make of that what you will.

    Nevertheless, the list was topped by a movie star: Robert Downey, Jr. Even with the bumping of “The Soloist” from the 2008 slate, it’s difficult to deny what a great year he’s had — between “Iron Man” and “Tropic Thunder,” he really found his popular touch, and even the most elitist critic had a kind word for him. Whether or not that unlikely Oscar campaign for the latter film takes flight, he has, as EW aptly puts it, “pulled off one of the smartest second acts in showbiz history.”

    Other names present on the list include Meryl Streep, James Franco and Elizabeth Banks — but the most surprising and delightful inclusion is Richard Jenkins. I can’t imagine that the humble 61 year-old character actor ever thought he’d appear on a list alongside the likes of Leona Lewis and The Jonas Brothers, but good for him. It’s an appropriate recognition for a year that saw him supplement a career performance in “The Visitor” with cunning appearances in two mainstream crowdpleasers. Here’s EW’s take:

    Richard Jenkins has had a colorful career, but he never seemed like an actor who’d get interrupted during dinner. After growing up in De Kalb, Ill., he became one of those ubiquitous character actors whom only a few know by name: the gay federal agent in Flirting With Disaster, the psychiatrist in There’s Something About Mary, the deceased patriarch in HBO’s Six Feet Under, and on and on. This year, Jenkins played Will Ferrell’s stepdad in Step Brothers and a gym manager in Burn After Reading. Though Jenkins has worked with just about every big-name filmmaker and actor in Hollywood, The Visitor writer-director Tom McCarthy was still considered brave for elevating him to leading man. ”There was never a question about whether he could do this,” he says. ”Richard has proven himself.’

    Indeed he has. That Best Actor nomination for “The Visitor” looks more and more likely to me.

  • Rousing Best Actor race shaping up

    Brad Pitt in The Curious Case of Benjamin ButtonIn a year I maintain to be disappointing, I must confess that the sprint to the finish is looking more and more exciting all the time, with an exceptional crop of actors vying for Best Actor nominations. This could very well be the year that Clint Eastwood wins an acting Oscar, or that the previously washed-up Mickey Rourke wins for “The Wrestler.”

    At this writing I have 12 actors who could potentially land in the field of play, though in fairness, four of the films have not been widely seen and I am going on the buzz and speculation within the industry right now.

    There seems to be a lot of belief that Richard Jenkins, a wonderful character actor who has been around forever, could land a nomination for “The Visitor.”  He came back into the public eye as the dead father in HBO’s critically acclaimed “Six Feet Under” and has been working consistently ever since.  This year he did a nice job as the heart and soul of the Coen brothers’ “Burn After Reading.”  If the studio can mount a decent campaign and keep him in the minds of the voters, he may nab a nomination.

    But he could easily be left out. Remember Michael Douglas in “Wonder Boys”? After the film’s November re-release for awards consideration helped him win the Los Angeles Film Critics Association award for Best Actor, everyone was stunned when he failed to land a nomination with the Academy.

    (more…)

  • ‘The Soloist’ moves into 2009

    Jamie Foxx in The SoloistWell, I made my calls (since that Nikki is a kook), and yep, it looks like “The Soloist” is being pushed to March of 2009.  Opening the film there is “more fiscally sound” I’m told, but that’s to be expected.  With “The Road” looking to move to 2009 as well, this has become the best week of news for Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, Clint Eastwood, Josh Brolin and Benicio Del Toro, all fringe Best Actor hopefuls that have a fighting chance now that Robert Downey Jr. and Viggo Mortensen have exited stage left.

    It’s probably for the best on one hand, since Downey’s shooting schedule for “Sherlock Holmes” in London was going to interfere with the junket dates for “The Soloist” and he wasn’t expected to be here.  Kind of hard to launch a Best Actor campaign if your lead actor can’t participate in the major press exercises.  The possibility is still floating for an Oscar qualifying run, but it doesn’t look good.

    Also reported, “Defiance” will get a shift into late December for an Oscar qualifying run with a wide bow held for January 2009.  Makes sense.  Lots of Christmas drama to contend with this year: Pitt, Will Smith, Keanu Reeves.

    Both films will still play the AFI Fest next month.

    Boy…the charts sure are gonna get a work-over on Monday.

  • What does early (and excessive) Oscar hype do to a film’s chances?

    Cover of Entertainment Weekly featuring The CrucibleIn 1996, a fall movie preview of Entertainment Weekly arrived in my mailbox, the cast of “The Crucible” staring back at me on the cover, making clear to me this was going to be THE film of the fall. There were rumors floating within the industry that the film, based on the Arthur Miller play, could conceivably be nominated for 12 or 13 Academy Awards, and it seemed a cinch for at least a Best Picture nod.

    Having directed the play twice, studied it at length in university and being a huge Arthur Miller fan, I was thrilled that the film was finally going to get the intense big screen version it deserve. The 1959 French adaptation was okay, but not enough people had actually seen it. Here was a chance for one of the greatest dramas of the 20th century to make the transition to film with a superb cast, including Daniel Day-Lewis, Joan Allen, Paul Schofield and Winona Ryder.

    Somewhere along the way Fox panicked and released the film late in December, and though Day-Lewis finished second in balloting for the New York Film Critics Awards, the picture never caught fire as it had been predicted to do. Instead it was a dismal box office failure, nabbing only a supporting actress nomination for Joan Allen and an adapted screenplay nod for Miller.

    “The Crucible” is a great film, with powerhouse performances from Day-Lewis, Allen and Ryder, though many critics attacked the latter. But was the film a victim of over hype, or were audiences simply too familiar with the story? What happened?

    The same sort of thing almost happened to Steven Spielberg’s “Munich,” which at this time in 2005 was being touted as not just an Oscar nominee, but the likely winner for Best Picture and Best Director, sight unseen. It opened and was very good, but it wasn’t the searing masterpiece everyone had been hoping for.  And somehow “Crash” won the Best Picture prize.

    (more…)

  • Best Actor race looking tight as always — expect surprises

    Leonardo DiCaprio in Revolutionary RoadThe Best Actor category tends to be one of the more crowded categories come Oscar time, and 2008 looks to be no exception. To be sure, there are a handful of frontrunners as usual, but hovering behind them are another group, more than eight who could easily sneak in and nab a nomination. Last year Tommy Lee Jones was nominated for his powerful work in “The Valley of Elah,” a richly deserved nod, but completely unexpected by the majority of prognosticators.  I remember smiling when I heard his name read, but it was a huge surprise.

    I would expect something similar this year, as we have some of the great  actors and potentially stunning performances in contention.

    The obvious frontrunner at this point is Mickey Rourke, basking in the attention being given to “The Wrestler.”  His performance is nothing short of miraculous, an astounding piece of acting, and it is great to see him back in the fold.  But when it comes to winning the award, I have to say: not a chance. Rourke is intensely disliked in Hollywood.  He’s seen as someone who basically spit on the industry to walk away and become a boxer. As a friend close to Rourke said, “A lot of people were happy when he left and don’t want this guy back.”

    Frank Langella looks to be terrific in the trailers for “Frost/ Nixon.”  He has always been a great actor, better known for his stage work than film, though in the last few years he has become a formidable presence on the big screen. I remember seeing him as “Dracula” both on stage and on film in the late 1970s and hoped he would go far. He did, just not in the movies, until recently.

    Kris has Michael Sheen down as a lead actor possibility as well, and I agree. It’s one of those “Amadeus” situations where one performance cannot exist without the other. There is a strong chance that if the film and the actors are terrific, both of them will be nominated, though Langella certainly has the showier role of the two.

    (more…)