How “Argo’s” Best Picture Win Voids any Purpose the Academy Awards Had

There’s got to be a morning after, and so ends the 85^th Academy Awards.  The prizes have been given out; there was a lot of heartbreak, and now its time to gear up for the next show.  Last night the top Prize went to Ben Affleck’s “Argo,” which was the frontrunner going into the race because of all the predecessor awards it racked up.  The Producer’s Guild of America, the Director’s Guild of America, the Screen Actors Guild of America, and the Writer’s Guild of America all gave “Argo” the top honors in each of their awards shows.  So of course it was only natural that “Argo” would be the favorite going into the race.  There was just one thing wrong: “Argo” didn’t receive an Oscar nomination for Best Director.

I sense the movie wasn’t even loved by the Academy all that much because not only did it fail to secure a nomination that is practically essential to win the top prize, it came in fifth place in terms of nominations with a measly 7 (the movies leading it had 12, 11, and two films got 8).  So what does this mean?  Well, it means that the Academy Awards officially made themselves irrelevant.  Even more so than they already are to most people.  And this isn’t because “Argo’s” a bad movie.  On the contrary, I gave the film the full five stars and put it at number three on my Best Films of the Year list.  So why I say that “Argo” winning made the Academy irrelevant?

To start this story let us look back to late last year when the Academy announced that they would have the voters turn in their ballots before the guilds announced their nominations.  There had been a lot of criticism that the Academy voting body was just a group of sheep that would follow the guilds wherever they went.  Granted, the Academy has leaned on the guilds for years, but now that we have bloggers and Twitter people can follow them and the race becomes rather boring as one film wins everything.  So the Academy decided they would cast their votes for the nominees before the guilds announced theirs, and would open the real voting up after the guilds had ended.

The point of this was to allow the voters to have more time to reflect on the awards without just following the crowd.  Once Ben Affleck got snubbed for Best Director though, the guilds got a little prissy with them.  Three of the Best Director nominations weren’t close to what the guilds had predicted.  Where was Kathryn Bigelow?  Where was Quentin Tarrentino?  What about Tom Hooper?  And where was Ben Affleck?  The actor who reinvented himself as a great director.  How DARE they snub him?!  He’s the golden standard all actors should look to.  When the dust settled, the guilds decided the Academy had done a great wrong in the world and set out to fix it.

Now the Golden Globe “Argo” won was irrelevant because the Globes aired the night of the Oscar nominations, so their choice of “Argo” probably had more to do with the fact that they could get Ben Affleck on stage that night instead of spiting the Academy.  The rest of the guilds buckled down though.  They were going to prove to the Academy that they had made a mistake, and they were going to push their underdog through to the big prize.  And so one after another the guilds gave “Argo” their top spots in the awards.  The PGA gave “Argo” Best Picture of the year.  This is the one award no one really complained about though because the nominees were so good anything could win.

But then the SAG gave “Argo” the award for Best Ensemble Cast.  This was an award that appeared to be a lock for “Silver Linings Playbook,” which had several actors up for individual awards at the SAG (and the Oscars, becoming the first film since “Reds” to have acting nods in all four categories).  In contrast, the only actor singled out as being award worthy for “Argo” was Alan Arkin for Best Supporting Actor.  We figured that could have been a fluke though since the actors especially took it hard when Affleck was snubbed, so this could have been their way of getting even.  But then the Scribbler and WGA gave “Argo” the award of Best Adapted Screenplay.  What was going on?

It had strong competition from “Silver Linings Playbook” and “Life of Pi,” sure, but how did “Argo’s” screenplay beat “Lincolns” brilliant screenplay.  Then Affleck won Best Director at the DGA.  At this point I could see what was happening because Ang Lee and Steven Spielberg were competing for that award.  And with the “Argo” train picking up these awards most of us knew better than to guess his win was the result of a split vote.  Then the British Academy Film Awards gave it Best Picture and Director.  The train was speeding up and nothing could stop it.  The industry was making its point, and they were making it loud.

Now it came down to the Academy, the one awards show in town that liked it but didn’t love it.  They hadn’t been casting votes yet and now they were open.  What would they do?  Would they go their own way, prove to the guilds that they didn’t run them?  Or were they going to shake their heads in disappointment and let themselves be bullied?  Again, I want to take this moment to remind you that “Argo” is NOT a bad film!  Now that it’s part of film history people will be blessed to be watching it for years to come.  But what was at stake here, whether people realized it or not, was that the Academy’s independence was on the line.  They could have followed the crowd or done their own thing.

When they gave Ang Lee Best Director there was that sense that they were going their own path.  Sure, Affleck couldn’t win this award anyway, but “Life of Pi” was a movie the Academy loved very much.  They showered it with 11 nominations when most of the guilds were shunning it.  At this point it had won four Oscars compared to “Argo’s” two.  If “Life of Pi” was given Best Picture it would have been the Academy looking straight at the guilds and (to quote “Argo’s” most popular line) telling them “Argo f**k yourselves!”  It was their moment to shine.  To prove that they still had a voice in an industry that got carried away with the Ben Affleck pity train.  The movie has Best Director in the bad and the film had 11 nominations, so surely they wouldn’t go with “Argo” now…right?

Well, Michelle Obama opened the envelope and said the word we had all been preparing ourselves for: “Argo.”  That was it.  In moment the Academy cowered out and made themselves irrelevant.  That moment proved that regardless how they spaced the voting out, they would always follow the guilds even if they didn’t have passion for the film that was winning.  And now the Academy will have some explaining to do.  They’ll have to explain why they caved in the endgame of the show.  They will have to explain how a movie with so few wins and nominations could have been named Best Picture over “Lincoln,” “Silver Linings Playbook,” and “Life of Pi” (which , if last night was any indication, was in a position to win).

Now the question remains though: If the Academy lets the guilds tell them what to award, what is the point of an Academy Awards?  Why do this circus?  How can you claim to be leaders in quality films when you’re too afraid to follow your own heart in the face of lots of peer pressure?  And why should people care anymore if the winner goes to whatever the PGA says (fyi, the PGA is the first major guild to give out their awards)?  Though we’ll have to see if I’m right, the Academy may have just squashed what little respect they had with the film community.  If they are to continue to be relevant, they will need to make plans to distance themselves from the guilds as much as possible.  Show people that they reflect on the movies regardless of what the guilds say.

And they need to do it soon, because the clock is ticking…

Sizing Up The Directors 2011 (Midyear Predictions)

Well, it's time for our annual tradition of sizing up the directors and which ones stand a chance of getting a Best Director nomination.  Though the Academy has kind of/sort of reduced the Best Picture nominees down to five again, it could STILL go as high as ten, which makes the Best Director race all the more complicated!  There are so far NINE directors who (thus far) have a good chance at a nomination.  I'm going to discuss the first six whose films I've seen and tackle the last few in the next article

Name: Woody Allen
Current Film: "Midnight In Paris"
Nominated Before?: Yes, for "Annie Hall," "Interiors," "Broadway Danny Rose," "Hannah and Her Sisters," "Crimes and Misdemeanors," and "Bullets Over Broadway"
Won Before?: Yes, for "Annie Hall"

Going For Him/Her:  Woody Allen is one of Hollywood's best directors. He's directed many classic comedies and dramas, and has been nominated for this award even when some of his films aren't nominated for Best Picture.

Going Against Him/Her:  With a potential ten nominees, there's a chance the direction nominations will lean once more towards spectacle rather then acting.  Except for the picture and the screenplay, there's not a whole lot to suggest this is a directors film.  Has won this award before.

My Verdict:  I'm going to say yes, but Allen could easily lose his footing in this race as more films open.

Name: George Clooney
Current Film: "The Ides of March"
Nominated Before?: Yes, for "Good Night, and Good Luck"
Won Before?: No

Going For Him/Her:  Clooney composes of the entire package of his film.  This makes his film more of a directors film than all the others.

Going Against Him/Her:  Some people feel "The Ides of March" says nothing new.  Visually his film is the least exciting potential Best Picture nominee.

My Verdict:  Unless other films just drown him, he's in.

Name:  Terrence Mallick
Current Film:  "The Tree of Life"
Nominated Before?:  Yes, for "The The Thin Red Line."
Won Before?:  No.

Going For Him/Her:  "The Tree of Life" is one of the most visually stunning films of the year.  He's one of the most acclaimed directors who have never won an award. He's riding high on his win of the Palm d'Or.

Going Against Him/Her:  The movie has - for lack of a better term - been received lukewarmly.  Some love it, some hate it.  Most are confused.  He refuses interviews.

My Verdict:  I think he's in.  Even if "The Tree of Life" isn't an awards favorite the direction can not be ignored.

Name:  Bennett Miller
Current Film:  "Moneyball"
Nominated Before?:  Yes, for "Capote."
Won Before?:  No

Going For Him/Her:  "Moneyball" is a critical hit.  This movie has that "whole package" feel that voters love.

Going Against Him/Her:  It's not a flashy or stylish film compared to other movies this year.  Of all the things discussed, the direction is not one of them.

My Verdict:  Miller may have directed a great movie, but I don't think that will translate to a Best Director nomination.

Name: Nicolas Winding Refn
Current Film:  "Drive"
Nominated Before?:  No
Won Before?:  No

Going For Him/Her:  "Drive" is one of the most visual films of the year.  It's critically acclaimed for creating a new form of action genre.  He came out of nowhere.

Going Against Him/Her:  He came out of nowhere.  Is a relative unknown.  "Drive" has not caught on with audiences.  Film is very dark.

My Verdict:  He's in.  Of this I'm pretty confident.

Name:  David Yates
Current Film:  "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II"
Nominated Before?:  No
Won Before?:  No

Going For Him/Her:  "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II" is the most successful film of the year.  It's one of the best reviewed.  It ends the most successful movie franchise on a high note.

Going Against Him/Her:  It's Harry Potter.  Not to be mean but...well, that's kind of a tough sell to the Academy no matter how good the direction is.

My Verdict:  No.  Just...no.

The Double Hitter Oscars?

Never before in all the years I've been watching the Oscars have I seen anything like the potential number of double nominees this year. We have not one, not two, not three, but FOUR actors who are battling themselves in Oscar potential!

George Clooney is the one who stands to get the most Oscar nominations next year. He's a strong contender to be nominated for Best Actor in “The Descendants” and Best Supporting Actor in “The Ides of March.” He also is favored to get nominations for Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay for “The Ides of March,” and that film is looking like a Best Picture candidate (of which he is one of the producers). Left untouched, Clooney could be looking at FOUR Oscar nominations next year!

Another actor who could pull off a double nomination is Brad Pitt, who is getting rave reviews in his starring role for “Moneyball” and his supporting role in “The Tree of Life.” I think he's got a better chance at winning Best Actor, but a renewed interest in “The Tree of Life” could give this film an unexpected come awards time (and Pitt a Best Supporting Actor nomination).

Philip Seymore Hoffman is also on a role as he delivers two stand out performances in “Moneyball” as a skeptical coach, and in “The Ides of March” as a campaigner who values loyalty above all else. Since both these performances could be run in the Best Supporting Actor category, he can only be nominated for one. If it comes down to it, I think his performance in “The Ides of March” is the juicier role (and Jonah Hill is getting more praise for his supporting role in “Moneyball”).

The true wild card in all this is Ryan Gosling though. He delivers two star making performances in “Drive” and “The Ides of March.” While I believe his performance in “Drive” is the better performance, both performances are so loved that he might split the vote and wind up getting nominated for neither film.

 

There's some talk that Jessica Chastain could be nominated for Best Supporting Actress for either “The Tree of Life” or “The Help,” but I'm not completely buying it. Her performance in “The Tree of Life” is poetic, but since its silent the Academy could rule that Terrence Malicks direction is giving the real performance there. As for her performance in “The Help”...its more likely, but Octavia Spencer is running away with the Oscar talk here, so I'm skeptical. Either way, its going to be VERY interesting to see how this all plays out!

Sizing Up The Directors: Part 1

When the Academy announced earlier this year that the Best Picture nominees would be give five additional nominees it changed many things about the race this year.  However no race has been affected by this as much as the Best Director race.  With only five nominees here a Best Director nominee could really boost a films chance to win the top prize at the Oscars.  Not only that, but with ten nominees directors will likely get their nominations more on spectacle and interesting camera movements, and intimate acting may not factor in the directors favor as much.  Right now there are 12 people that I can think of who have people talking "nomination" around them.  I'm going to look at these people and dissect which ones have the best shot at making the nominated five (in my opinion of course).

Name: Lee Daniels
Current Film: "Precious"
Nominated Before?: No
Won Before?: No

Going For Him/Her:  Lee Daniels is easily a front runner because he's made one of "the" movies of the year.  "Precious" is riding a wave of good press and public love that is rarely seen in independent films these days, and his unusual casting choices work wonderfully in this film despite sounding like complete misfires on paper.

Going Against Him/Her:  With ten nominees there's a chance the direction nominations willlean more towards spectacle rather then acting.  Voters might vote on acting quality by voting for the actors even though directors have a huge role in this process.

My Verdict:  I think Daniels has a great shot of getting a nomination.  He has little going for him, though I doubt his direction will actually win even if the movie is the big winner.

Name: Steven Soderberg
Current Film: The Informant
Nominated Before?: Twice.  For "Traffic" and "Erin Brockovich."
Won Before?: Yes, for "Traffic"

Going For Him/Her:  Soderberg is always experimenting with film.  He makes experimental films and Hollywood successes with ease.  "The Informant" feels experimental but is widely accessible to most audiences.

Going Against Him/Her:  Some people feel Matt Damon is the real reason this movie works.  Soderberg has won before.  There's not a whole lot of obvious "directorial touches" in the film.

My Verdict:  I think praise for "The Informant" has come and gone and only Damon is talked about now, so I think he's out.

Name:  Michael Mann
Current Film:  "Public Enemies"
Nominated Before?:  Yes, for "The Informant."
Won Before?:  No.

Going For Him/Her:  "Public Enemies" was a mild summer hit.  It was a summer film that was intelligent for once.  Interesting use of digital film making.

Going Against Him/Her:  The movie isn't talked about much.  Some felt the digital camera was used poorly.

My Verdict:  I think he's out.  If Johnny Depp is looking shaky then Mann is certainly in trouble.

Name:  James Cameron
Current Film:  "Avatar"
Nominated Before?:  Yes, for "Titanic."
Won Before?:  Yes, for "Titanic."

Going For Him/Her:  Cameron aims big.  His movies are visual wonders to behold.  Has a good track record of taking financial gambles and turning them into money making hits.  "Avatar" has too much pizazz to be ignored.

Going Against Him/Her:  Some feel Cameron is indulgent.  Science fiction is rarely nominated and has never won.  Has won this award for a movie many people feel was never good in the first place.

My Verdict:  I think if "Avatar" is even half as good as the hype claims it is he's in.  Cameron is one of the few mainstream film makers the Academy loves mainly BECAUSE he's mainstream!

Name:  Peter Doctor
Current Film:  Up
Nominated Before?:  No
Won Before?:  No

Going For Him/Her:  "Up" has a good possibility of being the first animated film since "Beauty & The Beast" to get a nomination for Best Picture.  Two of the most memorable scenes of the year are in this film.  He's directed the most memorable film of the year (thus far).

Going Against Him/Her:  The Academy feels that animation contains no real direction (or acting or production for that matter).

My Verdict:  Though it would make the race VERY interesting I don't think this is going to happen!  The chances are pretty slim.

Name:  Kathryn Bigelow
Current Film:  "The Hurt Locker"
Nominated Before?:  No
Won Before?:  No

Going For Him/Her:  "The Hurt Locker" has stuck around since it's spring release to be noticed as one of the years best.  The direction is so solid more people are talking about the direction over the movie itself.

Going Against Him/Her:  The movie came out in spring.  The picture itself is not favored to be nominated in the Best Picture category anymore.  A woman has never won this award.

My Verdict:  I think she's in.  Even if "The Hurt Locker" isn't nominated Bigelow's direction has been praised too much to ignore.

Stay tuned for part 2...

Polanski's 'Ghost' In Limbo

Due to the recent arrest of Oscar-winning director Roman Polanski ("Chinatown," "The Pianist"), his almost-finished-but-not-quite film "The Ghost" has been put on hold.  From what I understand most of the film is in the can.  Polanski was practically done with the editing with only a few more scenes to go, but most of the postproduction work involving the sound is not.  Sound mixing, editing, and scoring still need to be done.  Of course this could all be done without Polanski's involvement, but chances are he'd rather not have the movie released then have someone else touch it.  Obviously production will not go forward until we know for sure whether or not Polanski will be extradited to the United States.

One things for sure though: If Polanski is extradited and forced to serve a jail sentence then the movie will most likely have to be completed without him.  Sorry, but as much as I'd love Polanski to finish this film there's too much at stake to drop it just because he can't finish it.  The movie is practically done at this point, and too much money has been spent on it to let it stay in limbo.  Ghost writers finish uncompleted book series when authors pass away suddenly, so I have on doubt the movie will be finished.  Who knows, maybe in a pity vote Hollywood would give Polanski a second Best Director Oscar (seeing how many Hollywood stars want him released, this movie could be very important next Oscar season depending on how this situation pans out).

Another thing we have to keep in mind is whether or not this situation will help sell the movie or hurt selling the movie.  On one hand he could go to jail and there could be interest in it because it's his last film.  If he goes free people might not be interested in seeing a movie made by someone who got away with rape.  Such a very, very interesting situation.  The movie stars Pierce Bronson and Ewan McGregor and was set to be released sometime in 2010.

5 to 10 (What A Way To Make A Living)

Today the Academy made a startling announcement: the number of films eligeble for Best Picture will be bumped up form 5 to 10. There will still be 5 nominees in all the other categories, but 10 films will now be up for Best Picture, the first time since 1943. No doubt this is in response to "The Dark Knight" and "Wall-E" just barely not making the top five last year. The Academy received a lot of flack for that and deservingly so. Chances are they are doing this to hopefully get the publics latest critical darling, "Up," into the Best Picture race. This still might not happen as Academy voters could still vote for more 'Oscar friendly' films that are of lesser quality. Movies like "The Soloist" may not be great films, but since that movie is more in line with the Academies tastes we could be looking at more mediocrity getting nominated.

If that happens you can be sure the Academy will get Hell from the public. But before we jump all over the cons lets look at some of the pros:

1. Movies like "Up," "Watchmen," and even "Star Trek" have decent shots at getting into the Best Picture race. There's no telling whether they will or not, but they have a shot.


2. The Best Director award may be forced to stand seperate from the Picture category. Seriously, I know the director is important, but just because you made one of the best films of the year does NOT mean you are a great director! "The Queen" was one of my favorite films of 2006, and even I wouldn't say Stephen Frears direction was anything special.


3. Foreign films, animated films, and even documentaries have a better shot at getting Academy recognition that is normally overlooked in favor of more "dramatic" fare.


4. Now with 10 nominees, studios have more freedom to spread out their Oscar over the year.

I'll talk about the cons in another post, but for now I feel this is great news. I can't wait to see how this plays out next year when it's time to announce the nominees.

Set Phasers To 'Stun'

"Star Trek" is officially a hit. It has a unpredicted 96% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. It has a high Metacritic score of 84. It has made over $30 million on the first day and could very well cross the $300 million mark in a few weeks. Casual fans and hardcore fans love it. The production on the film is universally acclaimed. Frankly, the only thing that might not be in "Star Trek's" court is Roger Ebert (who gave it a lukewarm 2 and a half stars in his review). With a film this critically acclaimed combined with a strong box office usually leads to gold from the Academy. The question is how many Oscar nominations will it garner? 2? 4? 8? Will they all be tech awards or will one of the big five sneak in there? Who knows at this point. Right now I'm only willing to bet on some tech awards. The boldest prediction I'm going to make is Best Director for J.J. Abrams, as the Academy will usually honor the movies overall quality in this category more then anywhere else.

I'm not sure about the rest though. Makeup, sound, and visual effects seem like a given right now, but I don't forsee any acting or writing nominations. Chances are it won't even come close to touching Best Picture. Best Director though...that I have a funny feeling about. I'm going to be keeping an eye on that one for personal reasons. I'll also share my full review sometime with you next week (right now there are some legal issues with a former employeer that is eating up my free time).

Boyle Wins DGA

And the 'Slumdog' train continues full speed ahead with Danny Boyle winning the top prize at the Director's Guild America.

A Few Thoughts On Gus Van Sant

Gus Van Sant is one weird director. It seems like only he would make an Oscar nominated film like "Good Will Hunting," and then use his new found fame to do a remake of Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho" (shot by shot mind you). Since then he's made lots of films, mostly art house films that audiences just didn't connect to (his turn at directing "Gerry" alianated many people). When I heard of "Milk" earlier this year I felt it would have Oscar written all over it. I was right, though the film wasn't quite the masterpiece I was expecting. What surprised me most was how subdued it felt for a Van Sant film. With the exception of a few choice shots, most of the direction was very straight-forward and predictable. Anyone could have made this film, which is not something I usually get when watching a movie from him. I left it on the Oscar list though, simply for a lack of better films to list.

Well, all that's changed now. More movies have been released. "Milk" seems to be losing it's grip on the "lock" it had for an Oscar. Worst of all, Van Sant has been outdirected by Ron Howard, Mike Leigh, Steven Soderberg, Danny Boyle, etc, etc...you get the point. This basically means his shot at Best Director is looking more slim. So while I'm not going to remove "Milk" from the BP lineup yet, I'm going to remove Van Sant from Best Director. I think his direction is fairly weak, and the actors make most of the movie work anyway.

"Rachel Getting Married" Trailer

I must say it's nice to see Jonathan Demme's name attached to something that's not a concert film. I mean this guy won a Best Director Oscar for "Silence of the Lambs" and seeing him direct concert films seems like a huge waste of talent. I don't know if "Rachel Getting Married" is going to be a great return for the director, but Anne Hathaway is the first person who looks to have serious potential for a Best Actress nomination.

I Wonder What Warner Bros. Plans To Do With All That Money

"The Dark Knight" is going to pass the $500 million mark this weekend. That much is a given but that's not what I want to talk about. No, I want to talk about the movie as it's seen in IMAX. As with most IMAX theaters, my local theater didn't get this movie until today. I had seen it three times already so this would be my forth. I knew that twenty minutes of the movie was shot with IMAX camera's. What I didn't think of was how this could potentially affect the Best Director race. Right now everyone is talking about what Oscars "The Dark Knight" will be nominated for; Best Supporting Actor, Best Picture, Best Makeup...everything. And though Christopher Nolan is predicted to get a Best Director nomination I think he's going to actually win it.

Integrating the IMAX scenes in with the regular cinemascope was pure genius. Not only are the scenes edited together in ways that they aren't distracting, but they made the movie a THEATER experience above all else! In a world where plasma TV's and bright texting is hurting the theater, the direction of "The Dark Knight" actually makes the IMAX experience the best way to see this movie. I saw the movie with about ten people last night. Four had not seen the movie and of those four two had never been to IMAX. Well, once they saw this movie on IMAX they were sold. Not only did they plan to see it again, they started asking what the next films would be on IMAX. They were actually excited about this theater, and they knew the DVD would never match up to what they just saw.

As of right now Christopher Nolan has made the theater experience more profitable and more exciting then it's been in years. We know this movie is likely going to get a Best Picture nomination. We know Heath Ledger will win Best Supporting Actor. Well count me in on betting that even if the movie doesn't win the top prize, Christopher Nolan WILL win Best Director! Unless, of course, the Academy gives the award to Spike Lee as a way of apologizing for not nominating "Do The Right Thing" for Best Picture.

Christopher Nolan filming a scene with an IMAX camera.