• Jeffrey Wells grills New York waitresses on their knowledge of the mere existence of “The Hurt Locker.” [Hollywood Elsewhere]
• Oscar hopefuls “Anivl! The Story of Anvil” and “Food, Inc.” among IDA Award nominees. [Hollywood Reporter]
• Tim Gray gets quotes making a case against The 10. [Variety]
As a recap from the last time we covered this field, the category of Best Sound Mixing (formerly known as merely Best Sound) rewards re-recording mixers — individuals who mix music, dialogue, effects and everything else into the soundtrack we ultimately hear — as well as production sound mixer — those responsible for capturing the sounds on set as they are recorded.
As we’ve noted, LOUD films tend to be rewarded here. Blockbusters, either science-fiction or action-based, are also cited frequently. War films and musicals also tend to show up, especially when they are in contention in the Best Picture race.
Two big contenders are still unseen: Rob Marshall’s “Nine” is very likely to score here, given the branch’s love of musicals. Barring the film being a disaster, I just can’t see it missing. Last year’s winner in the category, Richard Pryke, is on board.
The other big title that is still unseen is James Cameron’s “Avatar.” I’m still not sure how the film will ultimately perform. However, it cannot be denied that Cameron’s films have excelled here. I’m sure the film will have an interesting soundscape, and mixing legends Gary Summers and Andy Nelson are on board.
Harvey Weinstein’s publicity campaign for “Nine” was never going to be a subtle affair, was it?
Variety reports that The Weinstein Company has turned to Disney/ABC Unlimited for a cross-platform promotional pact that will see the Oscar-baiting musical saturating ABC’s programming, from “Dancing With the Stars” to daytime soap operas:
Under the arrangement, a themed dance number on the Nov. 17 episode of “Stars” will be set to the “Nine” song “Be Italian.” Dancers will also wear outfits from the movie.
Meanwhile, throughout the month of December, “Nine” will be written into episodes of “All My Children,” “One Life to Live” and “General Hospital.”
Also, on Nov. 22, a two-minute “Nine” trailer will run simultaneously “road-block” style on Lifetime, ABC Family, SoapNet, A&E and Bio. That same night, the trailer is set to run on ABC during the “American Music Awards.”
Seriously, I feel like Dion Beebe is going to walk away with this thing this year. The usual competition isn’t as apparent, even if there are more modest artistic victories throughout the contenders. Still, I think the annual list of the year’s greatest shots is going to be a bit of a menagerie this year.
More new shots (new to me, anyway) here.
Seeing as Kris was (delete as appropriate) brave/stupid/psychic/smart enough to predict who will win the Oscars four months ahead of the ceremony (and three weeks earlier than he did last year), I figured I’d follow up, as I did last year, with my own foolhardy guesses too.
Last year, Kris kicked my ass at this particular game, correctly guessing 13 out 21 categories, and forecasting “Slumdog” fever while I was still on the “Milk” train. (Ironically, the lone “Slumdog Millionaire” win I predicted — Best Song — was one Kris missed.) For my part, I called wins for Sean Penn and Kate Winslet (for the wrong film, of course) … though that hardly qualifies as visionary, does it?
This year, however, we are of a like mind in most of the top categories, though we part ways considerably further down the list. If you’re looking to take any of our predictions to the bank, stick with Kris. But, you know, a different perspective never hurt anyone.
My best (or worst) guesses after the cut, followed by your collective prediction culled from yesterday’s comment thread.
I don’t offer up predictions on a given year’s Oscar winners until November, generally speaking. And, well, it’s November. Which is still, of course, too early to be making calls like these, since we don’t even have a nominations slate to go by, but I like to take an early stab, revisit in early December and then one more time in early January before we get the nominees.
I asked over the weekend what readers thought would take the Best Picture crown this year, and the majority seemed to lean toward Lee Daniels’s “Precious.” It might be too easy to figure on that at this stage, but it’s difficult to argue with the early box office success and overall critical approval.
But there are certainly other spoilers lurking and the danger of peaking early (yielding more time for competitors to take you down) is always apparent with a film like this.
Keep reading to have a look at what I’m thinking. Rattle off your thoughts and predictions in the comments section if you like.
When I first addressed the race for Best Art Direction in August, I spoke of how the branch tends to favor period pieces and fantasy films. Considering the research involved in the former and the often showy creativity on display in the latter, this is hardly surprising.
That said, I often feel badly for exceptional contemporary films that have been slighted here in the past. Examples from this decade immediately popping to mind include David Wasco’s tremendously clever sets for “The Royal Tenenbaums” and Alex McDowell’s ultra-realistic airport design on “The Terminal.”
While many of the titles in contention are the same over two months later, the race has nevertheless undergone some significant changes. Primarily this is because many of the films have opened, been unveiled at festivals and/or revealed glimpses via trailers and other materials.
At the top of the list, still, is Rob Marshall’s “Nine.” John Myhre won this category on both of his previous two collaborations with Marshall. Dabbling in the world of Fellini seems like the perfect opportunity to grab his fifth nomination.
While the “Sherlock Holmes” trailer has been around for a while, the verdict is still out on the latest film from Guy Ritchie – a director whose work to date has hardly been typical AMPAS fodder. Nevertheless, Sarah Greenwood has been nominated twice before for capturing period England, Joe Wright’s “Pride & Prejudice” and “Atonement” doing the trick. She’ll be doing the same here, albeit on a much larger scale. A nomination seems a distinct possibility in my opinion.
• Documentary filmmaker whose work inspired the book “The Men Who Stare at Goats” seeks brutal vengeance for being “airbrushed” out of the film. [The Independent]
• Jeff Wells sings the praises of “A Single Man” actor Nicholas Hoult. [Hollywood Elsewhere]
• David Poland talks to honorary Oscar recipient Roger Corman. [Movie City News]
As I wrote in August, “Best Achievement in Film Editing” can be a difficult thing to define. Traditionally, we most notice film editing that is showy, usually in action films, musicals or movies that are not told chronologically. But does that make the editing better? If done well, it undoubtedly can add to the quality and innovation in a film.
At the same time, however, a well-paced and effective film is often one where the transitions are seamless and I maintain that the best editing is often that which you don’t notice. We will never know what “could have made it into the film,” which makes judging editing difficult at times. What is certain, however, is that in the absence of editors, our films would all be significantly too long, likely incoherent and/or tremendously boring.
Personally speaking, I’m intrigued by this category this year. he editing field has historically displayed a strong correlation to the Best Picture line-up. Last year marked a return to a typical situation which we had seen from the mid-90s until early this decade: four of the five films nominated for Best Film Editing were also nominated for Best Picture, with the fifth being an action film. However, from 2005 through 2007, only two of the five nominees crossed over to the Best Picture category. This raises the question…what to expect this year?
Some of the films I thought were contenders back in the summer have clearly fallen out of the running. Oscar winners Stephen Mirrione and Thelma Schoonmaker are now out the race as “Biutiful” and “Shutter Island” have been delayed until 2010. Allyson C. Johnson, on the other hand, is certainly not going to find herself nominated for “Amelia,” which is not getting near awards are far as anyone is concerned.
A few weeks ago in this space I took a dedicated look at the lead actress category. With little in the way of actual development (this season is curiously divided on the timeline as we’ve got maybe another month before more major titles begin screening), I figured it would be a good idea to keep things going on that front and take a look at the supporting actress race.
It’s a little difficult to ignore the fact that Mo’Nique stands way out ahead of the pack in this race for her work in “Precious.” Unless her reported behind-the-scenes drama-queen tactics somehow poison the cause, she should be holding a statue in four months’ time. She is fierce and focused in a monstrous role and when viewers get over the initial “she had this in her?” shock, they’ll also see it for the expert piece of acting that it is.
Mo’Nique is joined in her film, however, by what I’d call an awards-worthy turn from Mariah Carey. The singer-turned-actress has been lurking in Mo’Nique’s shadow throughout the film’s publicity and festival tour this year, and she also lost something of a diva battle with Mary J. Blige to have a featured track in the film. The poor girl can’t catch a break here, but I think she deserves a look from voters and, perhaps, even prognosticators.
A few weeks ago I mentioned in an episode of Oscar Talk that “Up in the Air” star Vera Farmiga would be pushed as a lead actress. Some things have changed.
“God, that thing’s just going to shit Academy Awards out of its ass next year, isn’t it?,” I overheard a journo behind me remark to his companion, as I made my way out of the “Up in the Air” press screening on Sunday. “It’s such an Oscar movie.”
Two things struck me as interesting about this throwaway remark, both relating to the lack of care with which both Oscar pundits and “serious” film lovers tend to regard the Academy Awards.
The first was that, isolated and in print, the guy’s words appear dismissive of “Up in the Air,” yet they actually capped a mostly enthusiastic response to the film. His tone dipped almost apologetically as he applied the “Oscar movie” label, as if it somehow sullied an otherwise fine effort.
More to the point, however, the remark seemed indicative of the transitive stage the Academy Awards seem to be in at the moment, as simultaneously resistant and vulnerable to industry change as the protagonist of Jason Reitman’s film – and facing a similar crisis of purpose. For 15 years ago – if not necessarily 15 years before that – “Up in the Air” wouldn’t have been decreed an “Oscar movie” at all.
Since I last analyzed the costume design category in July, a number of the contenders are still waiting to be seen, though several have opened and we’ve seen glimpses from others. While the number of movers and shakers hasn’t been enormous, there has still been enough movement – and more insight gained – to warrant another look.
One thing I do not think has changed since the summer is the category’s most likely nominee. While I’m doubtful that she will win, I’m quite confident that Janet Patterson will earn her third nomination for Jane Campion’s “Bright Star.” While the film did not catch fire to quite the extent I was expecting, I’m nevertheless confident the threads will remain in this branch’s mind until the end of the year.
In July, I was torn about whether Colleen Atwood could emerge as a double nominee this year. But “Public Enemies,” despite featuring fine period work, seems to have become a distant memory. Even so, I’d be very surprised if she failed to get nominated for Rob Marshall’s “Nine.”
The great Sandy Powell, on the other hand, has had her three potential nominees reduced to one. With “The Tempest” and “Shutter Island” moved to 2010, it’s only “The Young Victoria” that is keeping her in the race. Powell is a giant in the field. But is the film at all memorable?
It’s been interesting to note that many of the conversations concerning the Oscar race that I’ve had with people lately revolves around category placement for a number of the year’s contenders. It was a topic Anne and I addressed directly in Friday’s Oscar Talk, in fact.
There tends to be dueling ideologies on this, as well as what makes a performance a lead and what makes it supporting. But purely from a marketing standpoint, it’s understandable that sometimes studios might play the landscape of the picture for an array of acting shots on goal rather than perhaps be true to the realities (that are, again, subjective) of the role within the narrative.
We mentioned the anticipated classification of Marion Cotillard and Vera Farmiga in the lead actress category for “Nine” and “Up in the Air” respectively in the podcast, but as Pete Hammond points out in a recent Notes on a Season item, the category musical chairs are taking place elsewhere, too.
Brad Brevet at Rope of Silicon is reporting something I seriously thought had already happened. Maybe that says something about how predictable the move is, given that, ever since The Weinstein Company announced a November release for “The Road,” everyone has been expecting “Nine” to move further into the holiday season. And so it has.
Now is the time when everyone begins assessing the race at its beginnings, and the gist I’m getting is that no one really knows what to write about. Stabs at analysis end up being responses to other takes or rehashed arguments, and nothing really insightful is being brought to the table.
And let’s face it. As we dip into what looks to be the longest early-season lull in some time, there really is nothing insightful to offer. So let’s just spit-ball…
I think the Sony Classics acquisition of “The Last Station” is more significant than most seem to be aware right now. There are only a handful who have seen it (Telluride being the film’s only festival stop so far), so that’s understandable. And the film isn’t a knock-out, one that will be damned as merely efficient in some circles. But with Helen Mirren in the lead actress race, it’s worth noting that suddenly that category is further framed as the old guard versus the new.
And I may be wrong in my conviction, but I have to say it again: Mirren is VERY much in this race. As the fiery Countess wife of a literary titan, she brings equal parts passion and delicacy to a complicated, certainly flawed character. She’s afforded a number of moments that give her room to chew the scenery, and if Christopher Plummer happens to ride a wave of sentiment to a nomination as well, part of me feels that he will owe something to Mirren’s coattails.
My predictions for the leading ladies this week are Mirren, Meryl Streep, Carey Mulligan, Gabourey Sidibe and, my weak link, Marion Cotillard (who is expected to be a lead actress push for “Nine,” but things could change). In that collective we have three former winners, two legends of the form, two newbies and one performer shifting into the second gear of her career. I think that’s a pretty good balance.
Not me. And can we just give Dion Beebe his second Oscar now? Talk about a race virtually sapped of intrigue (if we’re being honest):
One more reason after the jump.