Ignore the Academy
The whole idea of MCN’s Gurus of Gold and The Envelope prognosticators (who will be assembled in good time) trying to predict which films and filmmakers will be honored by Academy nominations next January is a waste of breath, space and influence. Or at least, it is at this stage of the game.
October and November should be set aside as ignore-the-Academy months. Or at least about downplaying suspected Academy beliefs, prejudices, allegiances and tea leaves. There’s plenty of time for that drool in December, January and February. And the repetition from stirring that drool over and over becomes sickening after the New Year. The nausea sets in every year around that time. Going to Sundance and getting away from the awards-prediction game is a huge relief in mid-January. Why? Because Oscar handicapping has been going on for three, three and a half months by this point.
I say delay the clock and inject a little nobility into the process. The next eight weeks should be about giving a little spotlight action to those films and filmmakers who truly and fully deserve to be honored (the Sam Riley‘s, the Once‘s, the Zodiac‘s) without considering the sentiments of a sometimes ignoble body that — no disputes, please — often gets things wrong, in part because of small, selfish, territorial factors.
Keep the Academy/industry predictions if you must, but at the very least they should be given minor attention until at least the passing of Thanksgiving. The Gurus and the Envelopers should spend the next seven or eight weeks primarily championing the right movies and the right stuff, and not in some elitist, off-in-their-own-realm Village Voice sense of that term. The Gurus and the Envelopers are fairly conscientious and grounded and not, as a rule, on the anal-obsessive side. (You know what I mean.)
I know the Gurus and the Envelopers, and I know they’re more particular, more impassioned and far less provincial than the Academy and the guilds about the best of the best. No brag, just fact. And it’s a sin –a dereliction of duty — to waste an opportunity to possibly influence the shape of things in favor of trying to predict or second-guess what the industry pack mentality (which each and every industry person feels and responds to, and sometimes goes along with) will be down the road.
This all started last night when one of MCN’s Gurus of Gold responded to my having written two days ago that the Gurus “should be ashamed of themselves” for blowing off Control‘s Sam Riley as a potential Best Actor candidate.
I suggested that “each and every Guru needs to go outside, light a cigarette (even if they don’t smoke), take a 20-minute walk and ask themselves why they failed to even mention one of the absolute finest performances of the year by an actor of either gender. For this oversight alone, this team needs to be regarded as the Gurus of Shame.”
The guy’s response was perfunctory. “Surely you can’t have forgotten, having been a Guru once yourself, that we’re not voting for who or what we personally think should get Oscar noms,” he said. “We’re trying to think the way an Oscar voter thinks and make our choices accordingly, and I suspect very few Oscar voters have heard of Joy Division or Ian Curtis or Sam Riley. [Predicting] is the whole purpose of the exercise. What critics think and what Academy members think are often two very different things, as you well know.”
“I strongly disagree,” I wrote back. “To hell with the Academy and the guilds at this stage. The Gurus and the Envelopers have a golden opportunity to put certain titles and names into the hat. You can play that dull, dispiriting ‘how the Academy dullards will vote’ game starting December 1st, or maybe after Thanksgiving. But October and November should be about history, callings and visions, and not industry politics.
“People have said time and again that Academy voting choices are sometimes a joke, and sometimes embarassing in hindsight. Let’s be honest — they sometimes have been. That’s because of persuasions, attitudes and prejudices that come out of a kind of laissez-faire corruption. Well, I believe the Gurus of Gold and The Envelopers are just as corrupt if they devote their time and energy entirely to predicting how these chowderheads will think, feel and vote.
“It’s banal and boring — the word is actually ‘destructive’ — to focus on this crap for four and a half months. Please, please — the basic format and the attitudes need to change.”
I realize that my “ignore the Academy and the guilds” will be laughed off by some. (Milquetoast mentalities always laugh off anything new or different.) So the compromise would be for the Gurus and the Envelopers to at least run two charts in each category — call one “pure” and the other one “political.” Go ahead — explain to me how this is a bad or unworkable idea. Because it’s not.
Hear, Hear!
You make a lot of good points. The fact is, the guessing game is just that – a guessing game. It has no more or less impact on the actual awards than anything else. You are very much a who “should” and who “shouldn’t” win as opposed to who will and won’t. Different strokes for different folks but your readers will appreciate your playing it your way. I personally get irritated at all of the “should wins” out there because there are many and they vary wildly across the board and everyone has their own idea of what constitutes great. That’s what top ten lists are for and the critics’ awards to decide. The Academy has always and will always do it their way.
what’s the point of trying to match the taste of the Academy? The best way to get a sense of the front runners is to bribe an orderly at the Screen Actors Home.
It is a major shame that everything now has been reduced to “predicting Oscar” rather than praising that which was stellar. I was shocked to hear one pundit on a cable news show trash a local critic groups awards because last year they didn’t include all the nominees nor did they “pick” the winners.
While guessing the Oscars is a fun parlor game, it should not ruin a critic’s ability to celebrate performances and movies that were the best of the year.
Great suggestions. And as soon as you pop “the Oscar balloon” at the bottom of the page, I’ll start believing you mean it.
How about focusing on the Awards potential of films we’ve already seen? Would be a good way to keep attention on worthy films from earlier in the year, like BREACH, YOU KILL ME, THE NAMESAKE, WAITRESS, and especially ZODIAC and ONCE.
Does this mean we’re not going to get an Oscar Balloon as prematurely as we did last year? Wanna go on the record about it?
Wells to Noel Murray: What I’m going to do is start my own “pure” Oscar Balloon above it with a different color backdrop, and keep the same-old same-old Oscar Balloon below it.
jeff: i find i’m agreeing with you too much lately. something has happened to one of us.
anyway, this is absolutely the manifesto that is needed at this point. let’s talk about movies and debate their merits and let the season develop a bit more.
that’s my point about american gangster; i don’t care what the academy thinks or how they vote and i honestly done care about 95% of the critics, except how they can hype into life some big doggies and completely miss some beautiful puppies.
virtually every critic in this country dismissed “to live and die in LA” as a “miami vice” ripoff when it came out. so it had no critical support and died at the boxoffice. i suspect the audiences will be there for ridley’s latest, even if the critz aren’t. (or aren’t there as much as they are this year for some real dreck that will remain unnamed.)
isn’t this why we’re all here on this site? to debate and discuss the merits of films and let the critz do their thing and to let the “gurus” prognosticate us all to sleep?
I might agree with Jeff if he weren’t one of the ones posting Oscar stuff over a month ago, even before Toronto and before having seen any of the movies. Sam Riley doesn’t stand a chance because the Weinstein Company is doing very little to nothing to promote him. when they showed the movie to the NBR, was Sam Riley anywhere in attendance for the Q ‘n’ A? Nope…and that’s the hard facts about how the Oscars and awards season works. Those involved need to know how to play the game and how they get across to the Academy and it has very little to do with quality or what’s really good or bad. (How else do you explain Leo being nominated for Blood Diamond and no actor besides Mark Wahlberg being nominated for Departed even though it was deemed “Best Picture worthy”?)
Sorry, Jeff, but you can’t make half a dozen posts about your Oscar predictions and then when others jump in with their thoughts, say “Oh, it’s much too early.” just because they don’t agree with you.
I’ll sit back and see if this means you’ll be pulling the obviously “going for Oscar awareness” ads from your website…
Wells to Tapley: Oh, for God’s sake, Kris…get off it. That has nothing to do with anything I wrote.
Wells to Douglas: Yes, I can — I CAN say this because prognosticators and big-mouths like you and me have a role to play — a mission — and that’s to do what we can to stand up for the right stuff in the early stages of things, or at least isolate the stuff we care about and believe in from the stuff we “think” will play with the Academy. Yes. I. Can. It’s a simple matter of apples & oranges double-tracking.
Jeff, your proposal is great if a bit unrealistic, though I like what you’re getting at. I agree, I don’t think the Gurus know how much power they hold, and that’s why it’s frustrating for guys like you and me when they make such safe choices. Oscar voters take their cues from critics, pundits and prognosticators like the Gurus. If someone tells Academy voters what films and performances to look for, they will seek them out. How many Academy members do you think saw La Vie en Rose when that came out in theaters? Probably not many. But they all know they should see it before they vote because that’s what the critical consensus tells them. I agree, it’s disheartening to see the Gurus play it safe and mention the obvious choices. And it’s a true shame to see the lack of support for Sam Riley. Because really, with those 10 picks, the Gurus could choose to use the first 5 on those they expect to get nominated, and the other 5 to drum up support for those who would get the recognition they deserve, like Riley. I mean, his portraya of Curtis belongs right up there with Foxx and Phoenix as Ray and Johnny. It’s a pitch-perfect performance, and the manic energy Riley conveys during those concert scenes, flapping his arms in defiance, is simply brilliant. He’s not just acting like Curtis, he seems to be channeling the late singer himself.
That said, I agree with Kris and others here that it seems to be a bit hypocritical to bash all the prognosticating and stuff while the Oscar Balloon is beneath every post and you bite the hand that feeds you by accepting advertising from all the Oscar awareness ads, but hey, you’re allowed to say whatever you want and in this particular instance, I wholeheartedly agree with you. I think the chart should have two columns, what should get nominated and what will get nominated, so we can at least get a feel for the tastes of the Gurus, rather than their predictions on how others will vote. I also liked the stand Anne Thompson took on the chart by not choosing anything she hasn’t seen a lick of footage from, like Charlie Wilson’s War. Seems silly to annoint Charlie Wilson as a surefire Oscar lock right now, so why not focus on all the great stuff that’s been released.
And yes Burma, I’m surprised by the lack of attention being paid to Zodiac and Once. I’ve found issue with almost all of the prestige pictures this season and think that Zodiac may be the closest thing to a masterpiece that I’ve seen all year. But I haven’t heard squat about it with regards to the Oscar race. In fact, I was talking to some friends about the Oscars and when I mentioned Zodiac they asked, Did that come out this year? It’s already faded from memory for most people, which is a true shame, perhaps even more so than Riley’s snub on the Gurus chart. Let’s hope the Gurus realize their infliuence and amend their mistakes, or revise the purpose of the chart.
Jeff, do you think the Academy really cares what you or I think? Well maybe they care what you think cause they robbed Eddie Murphy of his only chance of ever getting an Oscar.
I tend to tell Tom O. the movies/performances that have the biggest impact with me and back them up with historical reasoning why they might be considered, but there’s plenty of times that I’m impressed with a performance (Hugh Jackman in The Fountain is a classic example from last year) which doesn’t stand any chance of striking a chord with Academy voters who just don’t get weird movies… and Children of Men was kind of the same in that respect.
I thought Sam Riley was amazing in Control and he’ll definitely get a couple noms for me in my group (but do I want to pick him for breakthrough over Glen Hansard?) but how many Academy members have ever heard a Joy Division song or know what an amazing thing it was for Corbjin to turn Riley into Curtis the way he did? Probably very few.
And speaking of the likely to be forgotten.. we have to hope they don’t forget Julie Christie and Gordon Pinsent in Sarah Polley’s Away from Her and Marion Cotillard in La Vie en Rose. At least there doesn’t seem to be that many strong female leads from Toronto and beyond to make it hard for them to get in with the right campaign.
If I were in a Critics group, I would be lobbying hard for Gordon Pinsent. As good as Christie was, it was his movie. He was glorious.
I am amused that critics and pseudo critics alike think that anything they say, do or advocate has any effect whatsoever on Academy voters. I guess it is hopeful and self delusional all at the same time since the Academy is not a homogenous voting bloc and has all of the disparate elements of, say, a critics association. And I doubt very many of them are interested in the opininions of the bulk of self appointed critics on the Web any more than they care about those who reside in print. Nice blog though.
Wells to SHR: Don’t kid yourself — the combined opinions/consensus of the Gurus of Gold and the Envelope brigade getting behind this or that film or filmmaker would definitely have an impact on the thinking around town, including Academy members.
Wells to Douglas: “…how many Academy members have ever heard a Joy Division song or know what an amazing thing it was for Corbjin to turn Riley into Curtis the way he did? Probably very few.” Exactly. Which is why it’s dispiriting for a group of journos who tend to know and care a good deal more about the various contenders than the average Academy member….not just dispiriting but borderline humiliating to try and second-guess how Academy-ites are probably going to vote, especially Academy-ites who haven’t a clue about Joy Division (even with “24 Hour Party People” around to give them a tutorial) even though the group peaked 23 years ago during the Jimmy Carter administration…I mean, good God.
The “Gurus of Gold” (blech! What a risible handle!) and the “Envelope brigade” might influence the half-dozen or so Oscar voters under the age of 50 who subscribe to Entertainment Weekly who read Dave Karger’s blog summaries but that’s about it. As for critics, no critics group has ever, ever, EVER affected the Oscar race. What DOES affect the Oscar race are Academy screenings and screeners, trade ads, TV ads, social gossip and word of mouth. Of course, Jeff has to be economical with the truth here as he gets pais to run ad campaings for would-be nominees on his site.
Reposted after editing:
The “Gurus of Gold” (blech! What a risible handle!) and the “Envelope brigade” might influence the half-dozen or so Oscar voters under the age of 50 who subscribe to Entertainment Weekly who read Dave Karger’s blog summaries but that’s about it. As for critics, no critics group has ever, ever, EVER affected the Oscar race. What DOES affect the Oscar race are Academy screenings and screeners, trade ads, TV ads, social gossip and word of mouth. Of course, Jeff has to be economical with the truth here as he gets paid to run ad campains for would-be nominees on his site.
discount Louboutin Christian Louboutin heels are on the Christian Loubotuin Leather Butterfly Bootie top of the fashion footwear trend.
Christian Louboutin pumps black louboutin outlet, to meet the needs of each woman
Christian Louboutin Wedges To clean the whole look is so Christian Louboutin unique. Increasingly who are investing in styles hot off the catwalk
open toe slingbacks and more sympathetic, the better. Cheap Christian Louboutin Heels,Christian Loubotuin Leather Butterfly Bootie Christian Pumpswant their friendsChristian Loubotuin Leather Butterfly Bootie , act now, by yet. Christian Louboutin Lady Glitter Slingback Gold see what magic Christian Louboutin Mater Claude Nude? shoes will be displayed on the heels you
Christian Louboutin salesand more sympathetic, the better.Christian Louboutin Bianca Cork Pump BLACK Cheap Christian Louboutin Christian Louboutin Lady Glitter Slingback Gold , Christian Pumpswant their friends, act now, by yet. Just see what magic Christian Louboutin No Prive Slingback Metallic Fabric shoes will be displayed on the heels you
CL shoes a great Christian Louboutin Lady Glitter Slingback Nude number of louboutin sale stars are fond of the fever Christian Louboutin Rolando Hidden-Platform Pump Louboutin boots as well other
discount Louboutin top designers shoes for Christian Louboutin New Decoltissimo 85 patent pumps instance jimmy choo and manolo blahnik. You can certainly louboutins57 pick it out and say
pink Christian Louboutin pumps
Women who want trend. If you find the shoes for more shoes for the casual player,Christian Louboutin Simple Pump Nude or take a yarn,
Christian Louboutin Sale
cannot ignore Christian Louboutin Very Prive Satin Platform the retailing of shoes by Christian Louboutin Very Prive Patent Pump discount Christian Louboutin Christian Louboutin you. Nobody, the survival of Christian Louboutin high heelsTory Burch Coralee leather ballerina flats in the world of taste.Christian Louboutin Bana 140 patent Pump The infamous Red High Heels sole, the specifics of Christian Louboutin Very Prive black suede how Christian Tory Burch Coralee leather ballerina flats Louboutin. If you have a red one, is anodyne to say that shoes from Christian Louboutin. Red shoe with the logo.Christian Louboutin Banana Cork-Heel However, never disregard Christian Louboutin Fifi 85 patent the beauty, Christian Christian Louboutin Lady Glitter Slingback Gold Louboutin shoes with you.
Christian Louboutin UKIn Europe and America, many of stars chasing the mouths of Christian Louboutin heels Christian Louboutin Mater Claude Nude There are plenty of reasons out of which Christian Louboutin No Prive Slingback Metallic Fabric few can be figured out quite easily. Another thing that matters is the body structure Christian Louboutin Rolando Hidden-Platform Pump . One thing might highlight a good feature for one and a not so good or some other Christian Louboutin Very Prive Satin Platform good feature for another. Imagine a Christian Louboutin high Christian Louboutin Simple Pump Nude heeled try it might show good pair of long legs for one or the skin tone for another.?Christian Louboutin Very Prive Patent Pump So different individuals outline
This web site is really a walk through for all.The Quick News Update | Book Teraget Quick News | Book The Quick News | Social The Quick News | Buku The Quick News | Links The Quick News | Post The Quick News | Submit The Quick News | Child Pro Tech | Alpha The Quick News | Beta The Quick News | Gamma The Quick News | Delta The Quick News | Epsilon The Quick News | Zeta The Quick News | Eta The Quick News | All The Quick News | Theta The Quick News | Iota The Quick News | Kappa The Quick News | Lambda The Quick News
This web site is really a walk through for all.The Quick News Update | Book Teraget Quick News | Book The Quick News | Social The Quick News | Buku The Quick News | Links The Quick News | Post The Quick News | Submit The Quick News | Child Pro Tech | Alpha The Quick News | Beta The Quick News | Gamma The Quick News | Delta The Quick News | Epsilon The Quick News | Zeta The Quick News | Eta The Quick News | All The Quick News | Theta The Quick News | Iota The Quick News | Kappa The Quick News | Lambda The Quick News
very nice post i certainly love this website keep on it.Factors Thought of Bonus coupon codes | Issues Recalled Voucher codes | Items Valued Online codes | Points Appreciated Online coupons | Things Remembered Coupon codes | Affordable wedding invitations | Budget wedding invitations | Invitations for Wedding | Wedding invites | Wedding invitations | Marriage Thoughts | Marriage ceremony Concepts | Wedding party Tips | Wedding ceremony Suggestions | Wedding Ideas | Stunning wedding dress Models | Bridal gown Variations | Bridal dress Types | Wedding gown Designs | Wedding dress Styles |
very nice post i certainly love this website keep on it.Factors Thought of Bonus coupon codes | Issues Recalled Voucher codes | Items Valued Online codes | Points Appreciated Online coupons | Things Remembered Coupon codes | Affordable wedding invitations | Budget wedding invitations | Invitations for Wedding | Wedding invites | Wedding invitations | Marriage Thoughts | Marriage ceremony Concepts | Wedding party Tips | Wedding ceremony Suggestions | Wedding Ideas | Stunning wedding dress Models | Bridal gown Variations | Bridal dress Types | Wedding gown Designs | Wedding dress Styles |