Gurs of Gold weigh in
MCN’s Gurus of Gold (Scott Bowles, Pete Hammond, Eugene Hernandez, Peter Howell, David Karger, Glenn Kenny, Jack Matthews, Mark Olsen, David Poland, Sasha Stone, Sean Smith, Anne Thompson, Susie Woz, Glenn Whipp) have put up their first Best Picture rankings, and the top five are Joe Wright‘s Atonement, Joel and Ethan Coen‘s No Country For Old Men, Mike Nichols‘ Charlie Wilson’s War, Ridley Scott‘s American Gangster and Sean Penn‘s Into the Wild.
This is is the very first time that a group has gotten together this year and said, “Okay…these five.” The game from here on will be to nip away at the weak wildebeests in the herd until one or two stumble and fall to the ground and are torn apart and consumed, which is what happened last year to Dreamgirls despite wildlife park ranger David Poland trying to keep away the lions and the cheetahs and the wild dogs with his .22 Derringer.
I’m totally agreed on Atonement and No Country. Charlie Wilson’s War is obviously a strong maybe but nobody knows anything at all. I saw American Gangster last night and totally agree — it’s a very likely Best Picture nominee. And due respect to Into The Wild, which I quite admire, but I don’t think it’s quite Olympian enough to be a top-fiver (although it’s Penn’s best ever).
The two vulnerables, I believe, are No Country for Old Men (the old-fashioned crowd is going to have problems with the ending) and Into The Wild (although Emile Hirsch is a very safe bet for Best Actor). Atonement is, I believe, a total Best Picture lock-down. American Gangster ought to be a nominee and probably will at the end, but I know some are cool on it so I’m not 100% sure. And we’ll see what happens with Charlie Wilson’s War.
The challenge from this end of the cage is to try and wake everyone up, or as many as possible, to the greatness of Sidney Lumet‘s Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead. The fact that only Howell, Whipp and Woz have listed it among their top ten indicates this won’t be easy.
Thank god no one’s trumpeting Tim Burton‘s Sweeney Todd as a top-fiver sight unseen (not that it has the slightest chance — Burton doesn’t “do” Academy films), although right now it has the #6 slot.
Jason Reitman‘s Juno is #7 as we speak, but it may fall away as things move into late November and December. It’s not as sharp and true as Little Miss Sunshine, and it sort of needs to be to play in this game.
Julian Schnabel‘s The Diving Bell and Butterfly is #8, but it hasn’t a prayer.
Although Paul Thomas Anderson‘s totally unseen There Will Be Blood is #9, it could obviously surge forward if the movie is great and Paramount Vantage plays its cards the right way.
Nobody I know has seen Marc Forster‘s The Kite Runner, which has the #10 spot but has recently had its release date pushed back to December.
Michael Clayton is #11, Hairspray is #12 (a show of politeness is requred), Eastern Promises is #13 (forget it), Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead (just wait) is #14, and In The Valley Of Elah is #15.
I’ll be there opening night for American Gangster with everyone else, and I know Ridley Scott is long overdue, but after The Departed’s domination last year isn’t this going to seem very been-there-done-that? East coast crime drama with big acting heavyweights?
It may squeeze into the Top 5 somehow (I doubt it by the time the year’s over), but a BP win? No fucking way.
Yes, I concur, though I can see Scott winning director, especially with that deluxe director’s cut of Blade Runner being released in December to nudge memories of his ouvre.
Blade Runner won’t help him with Academy voters.
The other day, my son was asking which Best Picture winners actually deserved to win. It’s an interesting question. Which winners stand the test of time as not just the best of the nominees that year, but have a decent case for being the best picture that year. Off hand, I’d think true best pictures were Casablanca, Lawrence of Arabia and The Godfather.
If MCN is right, those are fairly strong choices and the Best Picture might really be the best picture.
20 bucks says Charlie Wilson’s War and Juno don’t get nominated for Best Picture. No clue how the latter can even be in the discussion, regardless of all the incredibly positive things I’ve heard about the film. Haven’t seen either film but my script sensors told me right away- absolutely not. I know gold when I read it and neither of those was worthy of being up for the Academy’s highest honor. Seeing No Country Friday night… can’t wait. The big question mark for me is There Will Be Blood. If that turns out to be the masterpiece I’m expecting, it’s gotta be considered a dark horse in the Best Picture race. No clue why Howell wastes a vote on Hairspray, which doesn’t have a chance at anything besides a Golden Globe.
And Jeff, Before the Devil… was great but that’s gonna be an uphill battle. I’d love to see Vantage push Emile. He was truly fantastic.
Oh and one other long shot that can’t be ignored is Control’s Sam Riley. Obviously there’s a .1% chance he’ll get nominated but he was absolutely magnetic as Ian Curtis. A breakout performance if there ever was one.
Do you think the Academy really respects him enough to feel they OWE him a directing Oscar? I agree with jeffmcm in that the stuff that geeks love him so much for (Alien, Blade Runner) aren’t exactly what builds academy rep. I imagine they still view him as a bit of a stylized action director, and it’s telling to me that he couldn’t beat Soderbergh in 2000, who was nominated for 2 potentially vote-splitting films, especially when his Gladiator took BP and a make-up acting Oscar.
I’d put money on Mike Nichols winning again (it’s been 40 years!) than Scott winning his first, all things being equal.
I can see Mike Nichols winning, too, lazarus, but my dark horse is Zemeckis.
Jeff, when does ‘Charlie Wilson’s War’ start screening? I’m reading the book know and can’t wait to see Hoffman’s work – the part he’s playing should be a goldmine for him. As for ‘Eastern Promises’ having zero chance, I think you’ve got that right – unlike ‘The Departed’, it just doesn’t have the star power to offset the effect the violence will have on many people….that barber shop scene at the beginning should kill its chances with the old fogies right off the bat. And the poll has Viggo has a ‘lead actor’ – I’m guessing he’ll get thrown into the Supporting category pretty quickly, although he certainly qualifies as a lead in the flick. Finally, what a depressing film climate we live in that ‘Zodiac’ & ‘Once’ get one vote apiece for the Top 10, and yet both of these showings are almost certainly entirely accurate predictions re: their Best Picture chances (i.e. slim and none). (Sigh)….
See some love for Once for sure…but I doubt a best Pic nominee.
I’ve heard from a friend of mine at Universal that American Gangster rocks. Nods for Denzel for Actor, Crowe for Supporting Actor.
She also said no one’s seen Charlie Wilson in completed form yet. and the trailer will probably be in front of the Kingdom this week.
the trailer to Lake of Fire:
http://media.movies.ign.com/media/957/957507/vids_1.html
And, I remember this time last year people were laughing off “Little Miss Sunshine” for best pic.
And I’d put down “NO END IN SIGHT” for Best Doc.
Little Miss Sunshine had 3 former Oscar nominees in it: Kinnear, Colette, and Arkin. That’s a lot more than what Once has going for it, which is essentially a shot at Original Song.
A little perspective here. This is only September. It’s foolish to think any group can predict the top five this early. Last year, for instance, Dreamgirls was where Atonement is. People have seen Atonement and loved it but the fact that it’s number 1 right now almost guarantees it won’t win (but who ever knows). In fact, thinking outside the box this early is probably the best medicine. There is no way these people are going to be right. Last year, in the PRE TORONTO Gurus, the top five were:
http://www.moviecitynews.com/awards/2007/gurus_060802.html
I mean, everyone thought The Good German would go all the way back then. Although post-Toronto, October 31, had mostly good picks except for Dreamgirls, which was still holding strong in the no. 1 slot. http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/archives/gurus_o_gold/
Three out of five made to the end. The year before the earliest it started was November — and those were:
Brokeback Mountain
Munich
Walk the Line
Memoirs of a Geisha
Good Night/Good Luck
Two of those made it. Crash, let it be said, was number 5 on Jeff Wells’ list at that time. Whatever happened to Thelma Adams anyway?
American Gangster seems very different from The Departed, so I don’t think that will hurt it’s chances. Looks fantastic…
There’s absolutely no telling with Into the Wild until it opens wide across the country… if people love it, it has a solid chance, if people just think it was pretty good but not great, it has no chance at all.
On another note, all of these Oscar lists so far in advance are just as absurd as all of the Christmas crap they’re putting up in September.
“American Gangster”? But it was so…rote. Even Denzel seemed to be sleepwalking. And did you really buy blond, strapping Russell Crowe as a New York Jew that people would hurl ethnic slurs at?
“Indiana Jones and the Gurus of Gold”
Hell, I’d see it.
Jay T., obviously there are differences between The Departed and American Gangster. But they are both (a) directed by veteran directors, (b) crime/mob films, (c) set on the East Coast, and (d) feature big turns by actors who are over the top (Nicholson, Washington) and more internalized (DiCaprio, Crowe). My point is that to an Academy voter, they’re going to feel they voted that way last year, and may be looking for something a bit more fresh. I’m not saying there won’t be any nominations. But I find it hard to believe that’s the statement the overall body is going to wind up making when the envelopes are opened.
Don’t know what the hell the Oscar voters will decide, but as to James Leer’s comments, I bought the whole package of:
Steve Zaillian’s remarkable script; the political subtext; the milieu; the performances, the dichotomy of gangsters who think they’re moral and cops who think they’re honest; the poison of Viet Nam creeping into the streets via a guy who kill his own family and extended family and not even see the evil in his own path (or care about seeing it).
I went home last night and read everything I could online about Frank Lucas and it only deepened my admiration for Zaillian’s work as he built a mythic heroic journey for Richie Roberts through the man-made hell of the heroin trade and it’s victors and victims.
The film is an unpretentious kick-butt cop actioner, but it’s way more than that. I’m afraid critics may only see the former and miss the latter.
Tomorrow. Our first look at “There Will Be Blood.” Closing night film at Fantastic Fest.
It’s pretty much confirmed all over the place. Now we just have to wait…
“I imagine they still view him as a bit of a stylized action director, and it’s telling to me that he couldn’t beat Soderbergh in 2000, who was nominated for 2 potentially vote-splitting films”
this theory never made sense. being nominated twice increases, not decreases, your chances. they like soderbergh, they really do. and they like scott.
There Will Be Blood must have screened for select critics at NYFF. Mike D’Angelo has seen it:
http://www.panix.com/~dangelo
How does it increase your chances by being nominated twice? Some people are going to prefer your work on one film, some on the other. The fact that both films were nominated for BP as well as other big awards meant it was carrying some weight as well. Correct me if I’m wrong, but going in wasn’t Ang Lee more of a favorite than Soderbergh, especially after winning the Golden Globe?
Also, I wouldn’t say that they LOVE Ridley Scott. He’s been nominated three times, and as I said before, even when his film won Best Picture he still wasn’t able to win. As he’s pretty far from an “invisible” director like Bruce Beresford or Hugh Hudson (directors who failed to win an Oscar when their films won BP), there must be something voters just aren’t connecting with. Perhaps he’s seen as too much of a stylist, I don’t know. I will say that it’s hard to find much of a thematic thread running through his films, and although he appears to initiate many of his own projects, I wonder at times exactly how he fits in with the auteur theory. Not that you need that to win an Oscar.
At any rate, I would have been onboard for him winning had he been nominated for the extended cut of Kingdom of Heaven. But I think the notion of him taking home something for American Gangster is far-fetched.
the movie pundits might have predicted lee, but not me. i knew it was soderbergh all the way. and said so repeatedly. yay!
and i didn’t say they LOVED scott, i said they like him. enough to nominate him three times. i don’t think that’s exactly a dis. tho he shoulda been nominated for ALIEN…
I’m seeing Atonement, Control and The Savages at the VIFF this weekend. Quite looking forward to all three…
And I really hope that PTA’s There Will Be Blood is a homerun and that he gets some Oscar love. It looks fan-fricking-tastic.
Meh – American Gangster is good but no cigar – a nod for Washington should be forthcoming though. I’m interested to see that there’s no love for Lions for Lambs – are the pundits worried that it’s too liberal?
Speaking of Lions for Lambs, I can’t believe some of you folks aren’t salivating over the news Robert Redford is going to direct Against All Enemies (the Richard Clarke film).
Well, I should say, is slated to direct it. When Lambs fights to gross $30 million, I’m sure it will be quietly removed from the drawing board.
Okay, here’s my prediction and I encourage everyone to hold me to it when the time comes:
I predict these guys have only named two of the five final Best Picture nominees correctly.
I have no idea which two, I just bet that’s how far off a prediction this early will turn out to be.
God, I would love it if you turned out to be right, Mgmax. Nothing more boring than a predictable Oscar season.
“The other day, my son was asking which Best Picture winners actually deserved to win. It’s an interesting question. Which winners stand the test of time as not just the best of the nominees that year, but have a decent case for being the best picture that year. Off hand, I’d think true best pictures were Casablanca, Lawrence of Arabia and The Godfather.”
Absolute, best pictures of their year in my opinion: All Quiet on the Western Front, It Happened One Night, Casablanca, All About Eve (at least I can’t say Sunset Boulevard is definitely better), On the Waterfront, The Apartment, Lawrence of Arabia, The Godfather, Godfather II, The Deer Hunter, Unforgiven, Schindler’s List.
Given that Hollywood would never give, say, Detour Best Picture, and that some things age better than others (e.g., in 1946 The Best Years of Our Lives would have genuinely seemed better than It’s a Wonderful Life), movies which might be a notch below something else to our eyes but are nevertheless completely defensible Best Picture winners: Sunrise, Grand Hotel, Mutiny on the Bounty, The Best Years Of Our Lives, From Here to Eternity, The Bridge on the River Kwai, West Side Story, A Man For All Seasons, Midnight Cowboy, Patton, The French Connection, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Annie Hall, Platoon, The Last Emperor, The Return of the King, Million Dollar Baby, The Departed.
I loved The Departed, and it was my favorite film from last year, but in 50 years will it seem like a worthy BP winner? Not sure. Don’t know about Million Dollar Baby either.
I would add The English Patient to that list, and for me personally it belongs in the first list of titles. There are obviously big Fargo fans but the film is certainly defensible, as you put it, especially in such a weak year.
I N T O T H E W I L D may not be Olympian enough from your vantage (!) Wells, but I suspect and predict it will have the endurance required to get a nom. Many, if we are counting beyond BP. See it again.
‘Into the Wild’ has a big advantage. The actors in the academy love to give Best Director Oscars to other actors.
“He’s been nominated three times, and as I said before, even when his film won Best Picture he still wasn’t able to win.”
The flip-side of this is that they like him so much that they have nominated him twice even without nominating the movie, and the only time one of his movies was nominated for Best Picture, it won even though few people seem to think it was the best movie that year.
“How does it increase your chances by being nominated twice?”
Because you will get people saying, “Well, he must be doing something right to get nominated twice.”
And nobody but nobody was saying, “Well, Erin Brockovich, that’s a director’s picture!”
And I’ve been saying this since May; Best Director is Scott’s to lose this year. If the movie is good enough, he’ll win, even though it will surely not be better than the Coens’ masterpiece. Lumet at his best would represent competition — but nobody’s going to see that movie, so it won’t have any push. And the Coens deserve to be in the running, it’s a masterpiece, but it would be a pleasant surprise if it got any serious Oscar buzz besides Bardem (a lock) and Adapted Screenplay.
Hey Mgmax,
Good lists.
I’d agree that Unforgiven, Schindler’s List, On the Waterfront and The Apartment belong on the Absolute Best Picture list. I would say Sunset Blvd does keep Eve off my Abosolutes. The Blue Angel might squeeze out All’s Quiet on the Western Front. I don’t think The Godfather II is even the best picture directed by Francis Ford that year, but it might be the second best film that came out that year. I thought The Deer Hunter surely couldn’t have been the best film that year, but when I looked it up….Animal House?
And Lazarus, I’m in the Fargo should have beat The English Patient list.
Films from 1978 better than THE DEER HUNTER:
DAYS OF HEAVEN, COMING HOME, AUTUMN SONATA, MIDNIGHT EXPRESS, and indeed ANIMAL HOUSE.
Oh also HEAVEN CAN WAIT and THE BRINK’S JOB (not a fan of THE DEER HUNTER except for Streep and Walken).
I just rewatched Broadcast News the other day, and got pissed all over again that the overwrought Last Emperor beat it. What a phenomenal film.
To think, if only The Right Stuff had (justifiably) beaten Terms of Endearment, the Academy would have probably given James Brooks the award for News, and then all would have been right in the world.
Womens Christian Loubotuin Leather Butterfly Bootie Wedding Shoes Christian Louboutin Banana Cork-Heel offered Christian Louboutin Fifi 85 patent on the Christian Louboutin pumps on sale market now can get a good price the first attractive Louboutin shoes all the features. Repeat all the original brand includes exciting features. Womens Wedding Shoes on Sale are louboutin the only Christian Louboutin Lady Glitter Slingback Gold one recognized by Christian Louboutin Mater Claude Nude the shiny red signature mark.
About Christian Louboutin No Prive Slingback Metallic Fabric? Christian Louboutin White Python Christian Louboutin Bianca Cork Pump BLACK Leather Pumps Christian Louboutin was founded Christian Louboutin Lady Glitter Slingback Gold in 1992,France but it rapidly became a cheap Christian Louboutin pumps worldwide famous brand. Christian Louboutin shoes trademark glossy red soles give an platform wedges
instant stamp of fashion Christian Louboutin Lady Glitter Slingback Nud excellence.The designer’s ethos is to Christian Louboutin New Decoltissimo 85 patent pumps “make shoes that Christian Louboutin Rolando Hidden-Platform Pump are like jewels” and each unique Christian Louboutin Simple Pump Nudedesign demonstrates unparalleled quality and an innate sultriness.Ladies are crazy about Christian Louboutin shoes. If you want keep the same pace with the trend.Cheap Christian Louboutin could be Christian Louboutin Very Prive Satin Platform your best choice Christian Louboutin Very Prive Patent Pump .Though the Braun GmbH is not Christian Louboutin Very Prive black suede famous as the ghd Christian Loubotuin Leather Butterfly Bootie straighteners before, it bought out Christian Louboutin Bana 140 patent Pump a revolution of protecting your hair Christian Louboutin Banana Cork-Heel in the hairdressing industry several days ago.On the conference of Christian Louboutin Banana Cork-Heel"Healthy Shine",Braun GmbH put forward the solution of protecting own our hair, that is the change every modelling into a process of hair care. Braun GmbH own the IONTEC technology,with it the hair Christian Louboutin Lady Glitter Slingback Gold straighteners can create louboutins57 proper ion. Besides that with strong ion transmission system will Christian Louboutin Mater Claude Nude be delivered each hair conditioner ions in particular, repair the damaged area.Ion Christian Louboutin No Prive Slingback Metallic Fabric can remove hair accumulated ceaselessly, reduce the charge of the friction between the hair silk fiber, make hair farewell short-tempered and tangles, restore Christian Louboutin Rolando Hidden-Platform Pump health luster. To be honest, this idea is totally new to all of us.However it Christian Louboutin Simple Pump Nude really can do some favour to hair.No matter which brand you choose the both are nice.Both casual messy feeling or lively sense, the air healthy glow and simple sense, make your hair with Christian Louboutin Very Prive Satin Platform rich and changeful modelling, blinding aura and vivid. They let out electric charisma moments of modelling,Christian Louboutin Very Prive Patent Pump let women enjoy modelling more.