In Contention

Tag: Kate Winslet

  • 2/12 Oscarweb Round-up

    (from left) Afa the Wild Samoan and Mickey Rourke on the set of The Wrestler(Kind of quiet out there…)

    • David Carr addresses the “some stars won’t walk the red carpet” talk, slams fashionistas as being “pilot fish on a big whale.”  Ooooooohhhhh. [The Carpetbagger]

    • Rebecca Ascher-Walsh talks to double nominee Kate Winslet. [The Envelope]

    • Dave Karger says it’s Harvey vs. Miramax in the ladies’ acting fields. [Entertainment Weekly]

    • Sasha Stone goes deep with “WALL-E” helmer Andrew Stanton. [Awards Daily]

    • David S. Cohen writes up “The Wrestler”‘s unsung hero: trainer Afa “the Wild Samoan.” [Variety]

    • Patrick Goldstein responds to the week’s “Reader” slams. [The Big Picture]

  • Is this a new strategy?

    I’ve been flipping back and forth between Leno and Letterman and so far I’ve seen four Oscar TV spots: two for “The Reader,” one for “Slumdog Millionaire” and one for “The Wrestler.”  Instead of the usual 30 second trailers, there is interview footage edited in.  Rourke from “The Wrestler,” Boyle from “Slumdog” and besting the lot, Daldry, Winslet AND Hare (dropping the names of Pollack and Minghella) for “The Reader.”

    Is this a new strategy?  I can’t seem to recall late night television buys in recent Oscar past, but I certainly don’t recall commercials such as this, bringing the talent out in the open so formally.  It’s kind of brilliant, really.  Now instead of watching Amy Adams giggle about how unprepared she is for her wedding, you’ll be treated to other interviews during the advertising break that you weren’t expecting at all.

    Adams is a good call for this moment, especially being in a race some perceive as wide open and others say is ripe for her taking.  But all things considered, Rourke could have brought it all home with an appearance here instead of in late December for the film’s release.

    Or does it all…really not matter?

  • 2/10 Oscarweb Round-up

    Jeffrey Dean Morgan in Watchmen• At least Ron Rosenbaum kind of gets it.  Though he apparently thinks he’s the only one a bit miffed at the redemption angle.  Do some more Googling, Ron. [Slate]

    • Joining the “Reader” bash, Noah Forrest pleads with the Academy not to hand the Oscar to Kate Winslet. [Movie City News]

    • Jeff Wells gets word that Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln” could be in theaters by the end of the year. [Hollywood Elsewhere]

    • David Poland scatters “Watchmen” gossip while apparently indicating that Warner Bros. owes him and others a look at the film a month in advance. [The Hot Blog]

    • Patrick Goldstein is big on foreign film contender “The Class.” [The Big Picture]

    • Brits pick the most memorable movie quotes ever. [Daily Telegraph]

    • Sasha Stone talks to Oscar-nominated “Frozen River” scribe Courtney Hunt. [Awards Daily]

    • Thank God Michael Bay didn’t have his way with this year’s Oscar telecast. [Rope of Silicon]

    • Pete Hammond jumps on the “Mickey might win” bandwagon, becomes, like, the 10th person to draw a parallel to last year’s Best Actress race.  He also points to a potential Viola Davis upset in the supporting actress category. [Notes on a Season]

    • David Carr, meanwhile, comments on Rourke’s “whale of a speech” at the BAFTAs.  But he rather insultingly thinks voters would be “picking the speech over the performance.”  Hardly. [The Carpetbagger]

    • Xan Brooks prays for a little spice and surprising variety at this year’s Oscar ceremony. [The Guardian]

  • Pretty brave

    Most people seem to be going along with the assumption Kate Winslet has this year’s lead actress Oscar in the bag for “The Reader.” But if anyone is nipping at her heels, it has to be Meryl Streep, whose performance in “Doubt” (however off the rails it went) has been right there, waiting to upset the whole year.

    In my daily Variety visit this afternoon, I came across the following Spartan advertisement for Streep’s performance. No words, no pomp, no circumstance. Just the face. Pretty brave in the face of what so many are chalking up as a sure thing. Maybe this kind of modesty is the right idea, the right level of, “Hey, that’s unique.” Or maybe not.

    Meryl Streep in Doubt

  • UK press forgives Winslet

    Good. After weeks of mean-spirited mockery for her admittedly messy Golden Globe acceptance speeches, it appears that Winslet-baiting has finally gone out of style in the British press. UK media can demonstrate a weird tall-poppy syndrome when it comes to homegrown successes, but judging by this Independent article, they obviously approved of her restrained, clipped acceptance speech at last night’s BAFTAs:

    Rushing to the stage with a whoop, she started her speech with businesslike briskness, thanking her family and friends with just the faintest of quivers to her voice, adding that if she looked in the direction of her parents “I really will burst into tears”. “To be given this award at home really means a great deal to me. Thank you, Bafta,” Winslet added. She paid tribute to the producers of The Reader, Anthony Minghella and Sydney Pollack, who both died last year, saying: “I can’t believe they are no longer with us. You are much missed today and you will be much missed for many years to come.”

    The Guardian, meanwhile, deemed her “a model of composure,” while the Telegraph adds that “it was a relief Kate Winslet has finally put her acceptance speeches behind her.” As I said last night, though, I couldn’t help feeling that Winslet appeared a little too browbeaten on stage; I wouldn’t mind a little more sponteneity from her when she (almost) inevitably wins on Oscar night.

    It seems the Telegraph’s David Gritten was particularly pleased with the BAFTAs overall, calling them “by far more interesting” than the Oscars — a curious and somewhat premature conclusion, given that the Oscars look likely to unfold very similarly in a fortnight’s time.

    (more…)

  • ‘Slumdog’ takes 7 BAFTAs as Rourke, Winslet triumph

    For an awards body renowned for its frequently contrarian bent, the most surprising thing about this year’s BAFTA awards was, well, just how unsurprising they were.

    As the evening unfolded, not a single result emerged that could be classified as a major upset, even if the winners (“Man on Wire” helmer James Marsh in particular) occasionally looked more astonished than anyone else. Yours truly got 16 out of 21 predictions correct (a personal BAFTA record, I think) and even then, most of those errors came from trying to second-guess their usually far less predictable tech categories, and slightly underestimating the across-the-board love for “Slumdog Millionaire.”

    For love it they did, awarding it 7 trophies in the biggest BAFTA sweep since “Schindler’s List” matched that tally fifteen years ago. There really is very little to say about the “Slumdog” phenomenon at this stage, other than to admire the grace, modesty and genuinely endearing excitement that Danny Boyle, et al, still manage to convey at these ceremonies, all the while concealing the fact that they can no longer be surprised when their names are called.

    The other major story of the ceremony, however, was Mickey Rourke, whose outrageous but nonetheless slyly self-deprecating speech was the evening’s clear highlight. (His hilarious shout-out to his agent for “telling me who to fuck” is surely a soundbite for the ages.) I think it was clear to anyone in the UK that Rourke would win this – “The Wrestler” appears to be attaining cult status here, while the buzz around “Milk” has been eerily quiet – but it does nevertheless prove that he’s still very much in the Oscar race. Taking his wonderful performance aside for a moment, Rourke has now twice proved that he makes for great TV – and assuming they can handle some salty language, his knockout speech tonight may well win over some undecided AMPAS voters.

    (More thoughts, and a full list of winners, after the cut.)

    (more…)

  • Predicting BAFTA, part two — main categories

    Continuing yesterday’s not-so-educated guesses at tomorrow’s BAFTA Awards, we move on the main categories. In many ways, they’re easier to predict than the frequently confounding technical categories, but that’s no reason to get complacent – as we saw last year with then-unexpected wins for Tilda Swinton and Marion Cotillard, BAFTA is more than capable of throwing a significant spanner in the works in the top races.

    By the way, be sure to tune in tomorrow, when I’ll be liveblogging the ceremony, beginning with the red carpet coverage at 11 a.m. PST (that’s 7 p.m. London time).

    BAFTA bizarrely issues a press release revealing the winners before the ceremony begins. (I told you they haven’t a clue how to organise the event.) I’ll be ignoring that, for my part – the ceremony can be dull enough without having every last drop of suspense extricated from the proceedings. But the info will be available. I leave the choice up to you.

    Moving on to the predictions…

    Best Film
    “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
    “Frost/Nixon”
    “Milk”
    “The Reader”
    “Slumdog Millionaire”

    There really is terribly little to discuss here. The truth is that “Slumdog” would likely be a BAFTA favourite even if it weren’t primed for Oscar glory – a true British success story, from a popular but largely unsung hometown filmmaker, featuring a British lead actor from a high-profile Channel 4 TV drama, it’s been a massive local box-office success, and has enjoyed nearly the same level of critical adulation here as in the States. BAFTA has celebrated homegrown product in this category for the last two years, and will do so for a third time running. If anything were to derail the Mumbai express, it would be the very British-flavoured “The Reader” … but it won’t.

    (more…)

  • ‘Dark Knight’ snub puts it in great company

    Christian Bale in The Dark KnightWhile I, too, am tired of the carping and griping about this years Academy Award nominations, I still have not been able to wrap my head around how this group could have snubbed “The Dark Knight” and Christopher Nolan. They obviously liked the film, something akin to “Dreamgirls” two years ago, landing many nominations but lacking best film and director.

    But “The Dark Knight” is in pretty fine company in terms of great films not nominated for the big prize. I have always found it incredible that a group of people so close to the industry (working within it, actually) could miss films that we as critics and audience members know to be great films.  How does that happen? Are the Academy Awards truly elitist? Are they wrong-headed? Or are they that political and so controlled by the studio campaigning system that they really can be swayed like the members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association?

    Yes I am still smarting about “The Reader,” whether it really was #5 or not, because I share Kris’s opinion of the film: sloppy, not very well put together, not particularly moving, and aside from Kate Winslet, in a SUPPORTING role, the film did not not seem to have very much going for it. Yes I have heard all those nasty rumors and theories about Holocaust films getting nominated, and until now, I have never put much stock in them, but I have to tell you, this one stunned me.

    Would I be so miffed if it was “Gran Torino” or “Revolutionary Road?” No, because with the former I would understand the Eastwood love, and with the latter I believe it should have been nominated, but “The Reader” has left me in a spin.

    Mr. Nolan, you made a great film, something the Directors Guild of America (God bless them) recognized, and legions of admirers anxiously await your next work, Batman or not. And rest assured you are in good company, here are some of the great films that the Academy chose not to nominate for Best Picture:

    (more…)

  • What about Melissa Leo?

    Yesterday, Kris pondered whether Kate Winslet’s Best Actress Oscar is quite the sure thing it appears to be on paper, or whether Meryl Streep can surf in on a tide of veteran goodwill and spoil the Brit’s party yet again.

    I’ve been saying since nomination day that I can’t imagine Winslet losing yet again, least of all for a performance in a Best Picture nominee (the first time she’s had that luxury since her non-starter nomination for “Titanic” in 1997). If she wins the BAFTA on Sunday, as almost everyone suspects she will, her campaign stays comfortably on course; if, however, Streep manages to pull off an upset, I may well change my mind.

    But allow me to play devil’s advocate for a minute. Why has the competition been reduced to two performances that are by no means necessarily the strongest in the lineup? Let’s perform a process of elimination. Streep’s performance has been polarising from the get-go, with the reverberations of Variety’s notably harsh review still being felt in the critical community. (As “Doubt” opens today in the UK, a number of critics find themselves bewildered, with the Guardian describing her work as “beyond absurdity.”)

    Of the competition, Angelina Jolie has drawn even less critical consensus than Streep, so it’s safe to say she’s out of the running. Anne Hathaway looked to be a frontrunner at one point, and barely anyone has a bad word to say about her performance, but judging from the tepid Academy reaction to her divisive film, I can’t help feeling that her ship has sailed. Kate Winslet’s performance has also been widely praised, and it’s clear that a large faction of the Academy appreciates “The Reader” — but it’s still a film with some notable detractors, and not everyone likes the way Harvey Weinstein muscled it into the race.

    And so we arrive at Melissa Leo. In many ways the odd woman out in this year’s star-heavy Best Actress race, she is arguably the one nominee whose performance — and film — have attracted the least criticism from any quarter. Critics have showered superlatives upon Leo’s raw, career-defining performance, with the venerable Roger Ebert singling her out as his favourite of the nominees.

    (more…)

  • NYT Mag’s Great Performers

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

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

    Kate Winslet

    Mickey Rourke

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • ‘Wrestler’ rules London crix awards

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

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

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

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

    Full list of winners below the cut.

    (more…)

  • 2/4 Oscarweb Round-up

    Angelina Jolie at the 72nd Annual Academy Awards• Patrick Goldstein reports on his self-moderated producers panel from last week’s Santa Barbara International Film Festival. [The Big Picture]

    • The Gurus o’ Gold pick their ones and twos. [Movie City News]

    • Angelina Jolie has, uh…misplaced her “Girl, Interrupted” Oscar. [Daily Telegraph]

    • Tom O’Neil, meanwhile, gives Meryl Streep shit for leaving hers in the bathroom back in 1980. [Gold Derby]

    • David Denby smacks “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” down for good measure. [The New Yorker]

    • Jeffrey Wells is amused. [Hollywood Elsewhere]

    • Mary McNamara talks to “five-time Oscar loser” Kate Winslet. [The Envelope]

    • Susan King does the same with first-time nominee Frank Langella. [The Envelope]

    • And speaking of Winslet, Tim Wilson writes up the box office symbiotism of her films across the pond. [The Guardian]

  • Nominees luncheon under way

    Taraji P. Henson at the 2009 Academy nominees luncheonToday is the big Academy luncheon for this year’s Oscar nominees.  The AP’s Sandy Cohen and The Carpetbagger’s Michael Cieply are filing from the event.

    This is one of the most fascinating aspects of the season for me because of the varying personalities you find mingling together.  Right now, M.I.A. is chowing down with Kate Winslet (assuming they both showed up).  An interesting picture.

    It reminds me of three years ago when I couldn’t help but ask the guys from Three 6 Mafia what they thought of the luncheon, rubbing elbows with everyone from Steven Spielberg to Reese Witherspoon.  The quote I wrangled didn’t disappoint:

    I was thinking, ‘What am I doing here?’ You know, you’re used to sitting in the studio with a bunch of guys drinking beer and smelling like something they shouldn’t be smelling like, and then you pull a switcheroo and you’re in Hollywood in a room with Steven Spielberg and Reese Witherspoon. And she’s sexy, man.

    I laugh every time I read that.

  • Standard crowns ‘Hunger’ best film

    I have to hand it to the Evening Standard Awards: they are a breath of fresh air in a suffocating awards season. While their choices can have a bit of an over-democratic, drawn-from-a-hat feel to them (Stephen Daldry for Best Director? On what planet?), they are never afraid to veer from the herd.

    And so they have done this year, justly and imaginatively handing their Best Film prize to Steve McQueen’s magnificent “Hunger” at last night’s London awards dinner. It’s a small but prestigious citation for the film, voted as it is by a panel of leading British critics, including Standard stalwart Derek Malcolm and the Telegraph’s excellent Tim Robey.

    If you ask me (which no one did, but I’ll say it anyway), they royally fluffed Best Actor, curiously settling on a tie between Michael Sheen and the admittedly very good Pat Shortt, which rather embarrassingly left Michael Fassbender — easily the most deserving nominee — the lone loser.

    They redeemed themselves, however, with an inspired choice in Best Actress. Bypassing the obvious Kate Winslet option, they instead honoured Tilda Swinton for her extraordinary, bruising work in “Julia,” which I’m beginning to think may well be the thesp’s finest performance to date. (No mean feat, that.) The fact that BAFTA essentially handed Swinton a nod for just showing up in “Burn After Reading,” but failed to even longlist her for “Julia,” is yet another reason why we shouldn’t even be paying attention to that particular shindig this year. (But hey, tune in for my BAFTA live-blog on Sunday!)

    Elsewhere, Martin McDonagh racked up another screenplay win, filmmaker Joanna Hogg deservedly took the Newcomer award (beating Dev Patel in the process), and the wonderful Sally Hawkins pipped co-star Eddie Marsan (now wouldn’t that have been a good tie opportunity?) to the Peter Sellers Award for Comedy. (I still wouldn’t quite call “Happy-Go-Lucky” a comedy, but let’s not split hairs.) Yep, the best performance of 2008 still won’t go away, no matter what the Academies on either side of the Atlantic think.

    Mike Leigh, meanwhile, bagged a career achievement award. Full list of nominees and winners (in italics) after the cut.

    (more…)

  • SANTA BARBARA: That’s a wrap

    David Fincher at the 24th Annual Santa Barbara International Film FestivalToday is the last day of the Santa Barbara International Film Festival, which I have had an absolute blast covering for the past nine days.  It was a great breather after the build-up to the Oscar nominations (which exhausts us all), but I’m back in Los Angeles and ready to round out the season properly.

    I didn’t catch as many films as I’d have liked, even though Santa Barbara isn’t your typical dusk-till-dawn film-watching festival.  I didn’t even see the majority of the films that won prizes (collected for you from the press release after the jump), but most of what I’ve seen, I’ve commented on.  There were a few I never got around to discussing, however, like the Jeremy Irons-narrated “Eye of the Leopard,” which was hardly the derivative nature doc I expected.  It was, in fact, an exhilarating experience, crafted with all the knowledge of what makes fine drama.  It’s also cool to hear Scar narrating a documentary about leopards.

    Staying in the nature vein, the PBS documentary “Lobo: The Wolf That Changed America” wasn’t exactly a good film, but it really piqued my interest to read more about Ernest Thompson Seaton and the lessons he learned hunting wolves a century ago in New Mexico.

    I briefly mentioned “The Informers” last night.  It’s a mind-bender that might be terrible, but like I said, I couldn’t stop watching.  And I want to see it again.  And “$9.99” is a stunning accomplishment in stop-motion animation that I expect we’ll hear about throughout the year.

    (more…)

  • WEEKLY WRAP: ‘Slumdog,’ Sundance, Santa Barbara

    It slipped my mind to do this yesterday, but here’s the week that was:

    • “Slumdog Millionaire” steamrolled through the week’s precursors, taking the Producers Guild Award…

    • … before landing top honours at the SAG Awards, which we live-blogged for your pleasure.

    • Still on “Slumdog,” a potential smear campaign against the film was duly foiled.

    • No surprise, then, that this week’s Off the Carpet column declared the race pretty much over.

    • The Academy settled “The Reader” producers’ dilemma by breaking its ludicrous “three-nominee” rule.

    • Meanwhile, some are wondering whether Harvey Weinstein’s tactics could harm the film’s chances, particularly in the Best Actress race.

    • Away from the Oscar race, gritty urban drama “Push” cleaned up at Sundance.

    • The Santa Barbara fest carried on, with an interesting screenwriters’ forum among the highlights.

    • Still at Santa Barbara, Danny Boyle, Kate Winslet and this year’s six Virtuoso stars were among those celebrated.

    • Could “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” really go 0-for-13 on Oscar night?

    • Finally, rounding off a very “Slumdog”-flavoured week, be sure to check out our interview with the film’s brilliant craftsmen.

  • In praise of Kate’s … feet?

    I’m not sure where I stand on David Thomson these days. He is surely one of the greatest film writers still at work today; few of his rivals manage such a fine balance of personal appreciation and critical insight, particularly in the area of performance. (As a prose stylist, Thomson at his best leaves Ebert for dust, in my opinion.) His “Biographical Dictionary of Film” is as essential as it is idiosyncratic, while last year’s “Have You Seen … ?” is a bedside-book delight, ideal for dipping in and out of at leisure.

    But in recent years, his work has grown increasingly sloppy and, in some cases, frankly unhinged. His further “Biographical Dictionary” entries for the Guardian have been spotty and back-handed of late, but the clincher was his factually malnourished and unavoidably creepy 2006 “biography” of his long-time cinematic crush, Nicole Kidman, which paid stomach-churning tribute to the Australian’s “commas of breast” and “gingery pubic hair.” An embarrassment for all concerned, it truly has to be read to be believed.

    It’s difficult to say, then, whether it’s good or bad news for Kate Winslet that Thomson appears to have set his sights on her instead, writing an extraordinarily generous tribute to her in today’s Guardian, calling the actress “the finest performer of her generation,” and waxing lyrical about her performance in “The Reader” (“easily the best and most disturbing film of the year”). It is, in fairness, a civil and intelligent appreciation for the most part, after an eccentric opening that focuses on her, er, feet:

    Near the end of The Reader there is a large close-up of two bare feet … The feet are less than lovely – mottled, calloused, the toenails out of shape, everything well-worn. My wife opined, “They can’t be Kate Winslet’s feet – must be a stand-in, a foot-in. Perhaps they are Sam Mendes’s feet, and he did the shot so she could have a lie-in.”

    Not to disparage the consideration and fondness between Mendes and Winslet, husband and wife, director and actor, I preferred to think that Winslet is too much the perfectionist to let false feet into her picture. “She’d have been up at four in the morning,” I said, “getting the make-up people to give her the opposite of a pedicure” … I assume that Winslet would take any trouble, from the tips of her broken toes to the proper split ends in her elderly German hair. “Would Meryl Streep entertain anyone else’s feet?” I asked my wife. She agreed not. And that is the standard here: Kate Winslet is the heir to Meryl Streep.

    (more…)