“Hooray, Javier!” & Other Oscar Nom Reactions
Obviously the 12 Oscar nominations gathered this morning by The King’s Speech (and congrats to everyone concerned) suggests that the Spirit of 1993 is alive and well among Academy members. Usually any film with that many nominations tends to be considered the Best Picture frontrunner. But is it? Is The King’s Speech a skilled surfer riding a perfect wave, or is it a boogie board coasting along on whitewash? Is there a way to spin this, or should I just face facts and give up?
I need to accept and deal wiith what’s happened but…but…wow, I don’t feel so good. I like and admire The King’s Speech — it’s a very stirring and well-made film — but at the same time I feel like Milan Kundera did when the Soviet tanks rumbled into Prague. And standing next to the turret on the tank at the head of formation are Dave Karger, Anne Thompson, Peter Howell and their allies, all wearing Soviet military uniforms and beaver hats.
Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay wins for David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin aside, is the Social Network actually going to get attaboyed-but-no-cigared by the rank and file? Maybe I should take a walk or do a half-hour on the treadmill and work off some of the gloom.
Congrats all the same to producer Scott Rudin for the 18 nominations that his two films have gathered — 8 that went to The Social Network and 10 collected by True Grit.
Who would’ve predicted last summer that Inception‘s Christopher Nolan would get shafted on a Best Director Oscar nomination? That film was such a stunning vision, but I guess too many people were just confused by it. I understand what happened and don’t dispute the nominating of Black Swan‘s Darren Aronofsky, True Grit‘s Joel and Ethan Coen, The Fighter‘s David O. Russell and The King’s Speech‘s Tom Hooper. But it just feels unjust on some level. Is it because Nolan, a somewhat dry and circumspect fellow, didn’t schmooze around?
HE’s hearty congrats to Javier Bardem for his Best Actor nomination, just announced, for his highly exceptional performance in Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu‘s Biutiful. (I did what I could to push for this, and so did Steve Pond, Dave Karger, Julia Roberts, Ben Affleck, etc.)
And to Inarritu and the Roadside Attractions team for their Best Foreign Language Feature Oscar nomination.
And I need to say it again — poor Lesley Manville. We all knew weeks ago that the Another Year costar wouldn’t make the Best Actress cut, but I still feel badly for her. If she’d been put into Best Supporting Actress contention, I think she might have beaten out The King’s Speech‘s Helena Bonham Carter . But slaphappy hugs for The Fighter‘s Amy Adams and Melissa Leo for their nominations in this category. And to True Grit‘s Hailee Steinfeld and Animal Kingdom‘s Jacki Weaver.
Wait…Amir Bar Lev‘s The Tillman Story, Alex Gibney‘s Client 9 and Davis Guggenhiem‘s Waiting for Superman didn’t get nominated for Best Feature Doc Oscar? And Lucy Walker‘s Wasteland (a.k.a. “the garbage movie”) and Josh Fox and Trish Adlesic‘s Gasland did? Along with Tim Hetherington and Sebastian Junger‘s Restrepo?
But congrats to the Exit From The Gift Shop guys (Banksy, John Sloss, Jaimie D’Cruz) for their nomination in this realm, and especially to Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs‘ Inside Job, which will almost certainly win now, I think.
Get Low‘s Robert Duvall was denied a Best Actor nomination. The Social Network‘s Andrew Garfield was stiffed in the Best Suporting Actor category. And Mila Kunis didn’t make the Best Supporting Actress list.
There’s now certainly a creeping suspicion that the momentum has shifted back over to The King’s Speech, which would be a crime if it came to fruition and would completely refute all of the “Academy is getting younger and hipper” trends.
I think I would still bet Social Network if my life depended on it.
And then you have Toy Story 3…
It is a 3 picture race now, so all you Fincher fanboys need to smell the coffee.
TSN got a few dents in its juggernaut this morning, momentum has definitely shifted to TKS, and True Grit could do the end around on them both, even without the requisite editing nom…
I can definitely see Fincher winning director, and TKS winning for picture.
Snubs? Minor snub for Kunis, I guess, but I thought all the acting noms were good. “Black Swan” will win only one Oscar, for Portman, and today’s noms sealed that fate.
The old guard in the Academy wins again. The King’s Speech is a fine film, but completely traditional, MOR, and “safe.” Same with the choosing True Grit for major noms despite a very clunky third act. Meanwhile Nolan gets shafted for trying something radical and different and largely succeeding.
Thrilled for John Hawkes. Not a lot of surprises. Happy for Restrepo. Would’ve liked The Town to get more nominations than Alice in Wonderland, but at least The Tourist and Burlesque were snubbed.
Already chimed in with most of my general Oscar thoughts in the other thread, but the Oscar prognosticator-Russian military analogy is a gas, baby.
Can just see Poland driving the Dozor full of Gurus of Gold now.
Wasn’t there a film just a few years ago — or maybe more than that (?) — that had like 10+ noms and walked away with nothing? Kind of drawing a blank here (I’m no Academy historian), but if I’m not mistaken, I’m sure someone else here will remember.
Nombulations:
Here’s to this morning’s happiest people: The folks who worked on “Wolfman,” “Barney’s Version” and “Country Strong.”
No movie over $50 mil budget got directing nom and three of the five were under $30 mil budgets. That tide must have drowned Chris Nolan.
Surprised about Diane Warren not in song category and I’m sure someone will wring another Ronni Chasen story out of this.
I’m trying to sort out how many of our VARIETY TEN TO WATCH alumni have films in the mix. I spotted Melissa Leo, Inarritu and Nolan, though Nolan in best pic, not director slot. Wlll figure out after caffeine kicks in.
Huge day for Roadside Attractions and the “Bone” folks, ditto the “Grit” team and the “Fighter” teams.
Happy for Lucy Walker who’s a brilliant documentarian and “Inside Job” which should be taught in high schools across America. “Gasland” another story people need to hear.
And then there’s the reaction of the Sundance Kid:
Not sure how a $13 million dollar indie film from the UK about a stuttering king, written by a 73 year old guy who didn’t have an agent in September and directed by a relatively unknown dude becomes the Soviet tanks and a $50 million studio picture by Rudin, Fincher and Sorkin, three of the most celebrated and powerful dudes in their fields becomes the Czech peasantry but what the hell, let’s celebrate films this morning and have some good coffee.
John Hawkes thrilled me as well, but with the bitter taste of pushing Garfield out.
Nolan and Daft Punk being snubbed are the biggest shocks for me.
To sum up my thoughts in the other thread:
1) Hailee Steinfeld – hooray, awesome, but absence in lead is one of the biggest acts of category fraud in memory. Kidman or other lead actress X may be great, but no one will remember their performance in 10 years compared to Steinfeld. The indelible perofrmance in the popular hit from major directors should take precedence.
2) John Hawkes nom is awesome. Happy generally with the WInter’s Bone recognition.
3) Much prefer the 10 noms. Maybe 8 would be ideal, but would rather have everyone have something to root for than end up repeating of the 2008 “I haven’t seen The Reader” field where no one cares.
4) One of the higher box office fields in memory. Did a good job hitting the high-profile critical consensus films. WIsh Somewhere, The Ghost Writer or .The Town had made the field. Not a huge fan of 127 Hours or TKAAR, but can take or leave their noms. Not a huge fan of Black Swan, either, but it ought to be in the field.
5) Jackie Weaver apparently does set the screen ablaze.
6) We needed Jeff to tell us whether Lesley Manville failed to get a nomination for Lead or Supporting. Apparently now we have that verdict.
Kaned:
Are you thinking of Benjamin Buttons? I know it got a ton of noms (like 13) and it only won some craft awards, maybe 3, for makeup, etc.
Not a good omen for Fincher, eh?
I’m glad someone finally stood up to all the nonsense and released nominations erecting a totem to the Power of the Middlebrow. Everything’s coming up Oscar!
Wow, Shutter Island didn’t even get a nomination for Art Direction or Cinematography.
Kaned & JRL Gangs of New York had 10 and was shut out.
I still can’t believe it didn’t at least win Art Direction.
Roger Ebert tweets that he’s leaning toward True Grit in his prediction.
What were the noms in 1993, Jeff? I want to say the field included Schindler’s List and The Piano. How about Spirit of 1988, instead?
“In the Name of the Father”, “The Remains of the Day” and “The Fugitive” were the other three.
Wells to Gaydos: The Soviet tank metaphor is apt. “Order” has been restored. Marcus Licinius Crassus is leading the republic back to the tried and true. Enough with that 21st Century, forward-looking, new-mode stuff! Up the British and Masterpiece Theatre! We all need to accept what has happened, myself perhaps most of all. Prague Spring has been crushed, Eugene McCarthy is on the sidelines, Bobby Kennedy is dead, and the Movie Godz are stunned. To quote Crassus: “Oscar is an idea in the mind of God. And God, this morning, is listening to the Archbishop of Canterbury.” And congrats to Bill Clinton, our new president.
No Kunis isn’t a snub, it’s just good taste. Shame about Garfield; ditto Nolan for director and Tillman. But I gotta love the Banksy nom and OMGWTF Dogtooth got in!
Haven’t seen much talk about the Julianne Moore ‘snub’….
How much does this hurt Natalie Portman, I wonder? How much of Portman’s chances were riding on the “Kids” pair having their vote somewhat split.
@Gaydos – it’s not the players that makes The King’s Speech the soviet tanks. Yes, Tom Hooper is the underdog to Mighty Fincher if we’re going on filmmaking personalities. It’s the form. British Royalty PLUS Lead Actor with a Malady? It’s not just traditional Oscar-formula(TM) it’s DOUBLE formula. And, as Robert Downey Jr once proscribed, he did not go “full retard” and is therefore a guaranteed winner. Social Network on the other hand, is the risky, unconventional choice to make a film – how many times as the trailers were playing did we hear some variation of “they made a movie out of facebook?!? why?”….
Good grief, Jeff, it’s time for you to grow up.
Hooray for ME! I called True Grit as the sleeper movie – 10 noms! Wow! And I also said that Jeff could win the acting and Hailie could win best supporting – how?
Imagine a Split between Firth and Bridges for True Grit? It’s been done before.
Imagine that Leo and Amy split the best supporting and hailie sneaks in — it could happen.
I think Javier is a political vote, and won’t win. Because he’s won before.
Surprised by Hawkes, thought Damon would get in.
Surprised by Nicole, she could steal it from Natalie — yes she could!
sweet for unstoppable getting a sound nom
“I like and admire The King’s Speech — it’s a very stirring and well-made film — but at the same time I feel like Mila Kundera did when the Soviet tanks rumbled into Prague. And standing next to the turret on the tank at the head of formation are Dave Karger, Anne Thompson, Peter Howell and their allies, all wearing Soviet military uniforms and beaver hats. ?”
That’s just great writing, Jeff.
I like and admire The King’s Speech, too. But continuing to nominate the British film industry for royalty porn is like taking an alcoholic cousin on a yearly three-day bender in Vegas. Do the British make movies that aren’t about kings or literary adaptations?
Nevertheless, that seems to be the film that adults love this year.
I love that Mila Kundera, man. She’s hot.
Jeff’s “Soviet tanks” analogy is, for all intents and purposes, his General Ripper water flouridation rant.
Carry on.
I’m with Roger….the Academy loves the Coens and they love Westerns. I can see the Coens taking it again and even Jeff Winning again.
Possible:
Colin and Bridges “share” the acting award. Shutout Javier.
Possible:
Leo and Amy split and Hailie gets it.
Possible:
Nicole wins over Natalie.
Just to get the whole King’s Speech Oscar Bait Litany laid out:
It’s a movie about a (1) British (2) royal who overcomes (3) a disability and a (4) bad childhood to (5) lead the nation in (6) WWII and defeat (7) the Nazis.
The Wachowskis got shafted in 1999. Cameron got shafted in 1991. Nolan got twice recognized in 2010. The first two had to wait until the MTV movie awards for the chance to give a speech for their sci-fi actioneers. I will not cry for Nolan today.
GoNY may indeed be what I was thinking of (momentarily forgot that DDL didn’t end up winning Actor…Whoopsie Daisy, Adrien!), but it seems like it was more recent.
Wasn’t Ben Button, either, was some flick that got entirely shutout…
No way Firth won’t win. Many felt he should have won last year, is a veteran, and is well liked. I just hope Deakins wins.
About Nolan …. how many of the director nominees have films that feel like they have the personal stamp of the director? Does The Fighter really feel as much like Russell’s film, for instance, as Inception feels like Nolan’s? I would say no.
“The Color Purple” received 11 nominations – curiously Spielberg didn’t for Best Director – and was completely shut out. I’m not going to tip my hand on the regurgitating “Social Network” – “King’s Speech” debate, but I will say this: very few of my friends have seen – or even want to see – “Social Network” – and I don’t hang around with eloi level dummies. They’re movie-loving fanatics for the most part. But many of of them have seen “King’s Speech” and love it. I don’t know if that is a harbinger of what we’ll see at the Oscars, and the ever omnipresent well-done but staid establishment verses the hip, in-the-moment crowd, but there you have it. And as for Nolan getting snubbed – don’t assume it’s because people were confused by “Inception”. Some people actually didn’t like it, and I’m not talking just about Rex Reed and Armond White.
Gangs of New York went 0-for-10.
My young, hip 20 year old daughter preferred The Kings Speech over TSN. As an early adopter of Facebook she was uncomfortable with the story because it revealed how manipulated her generation was/is by the service. Perhaps TSN is not the “young, hip” choice after all?
Old guys need to eventually stop trying to be young and hip. We’re not.
@paul_kolas
we’ll take your word that you don’t hang w/ “eloi level dummies”…
But, to call a group of people who *didn’t* see The Social Network “movie-loving fanatics” is quite a stretch….
Amen to that, milton.
“As an early adopter of Facebook she was uncomfortable with the story because it revealed how manipulated her generation was/is by the service. Perhaps TSN is not the ‘young, hip’ choice after all?”
Well, I’m not exactly convinced that’s a very “hip” reason by your daughter for not liking that movie. Just sayin’.
I guess I must have been thinking Up in the Air (0/6) got as many nods as GoNY, for some reason. Or Frost/Nixon or Doubt. Or something.
Within fucking minutes the ad banners on movie sites, promoting TKS, read: “some movies you see, other movies you feel.” FUCK. THIS. SHIT.
The next time a person says that THE SOCIAL NETWORK is cold and THE KING’S SPEECH is warm and fuzzy i’m going to accuse them of being fucking hacks for Harvey Weinstein’s PR machine. At this point that’s all it is. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fucking slogan.
When did the movie peeps become bitches to the fucking Weinsteins?
P.S. The tide can very easily turn back in favor of THE SOCIAL NETWORK by Sunday. If TSN wins the DGA on Saturday, which it should; and then wins the SAG award on Sunday, which it very well can, then what?
This feels like 1991 all over again; Bugsy lead the way with nominations but The Silence of the Lambs won all the awards that matter. I still think Social Network will take it.
One last thing…
Paul Kolas has to work for the Weinstein company, because to say that anyone who loves films wouldn’t be bothered to watch THE SOCIAL NETWORK, even though everyone was raving about it, is completely absurd.
Jeffrey-
You shouldn’t be too bummed by the possible triumph of the lesser “King’s Speech” over TSN. This was always a clear possibility. Missing the final score on that championship match is no reason to be crestfallen if it does come to pass…
What you should be bothered about is the fact that your biggest Oscar-Prognosticator failure of the year has already happened.
Your total dismissal of TRUE GRIT – that’s your big miss for 2010-2011. I think at some point you were even dismissing its chances to crack the top-10 to snag a BP nomination, but here it is the 2nd-most-nominated film of the year.
When you enter the offseason and hit the weight room and eat your Wheaties and review the game film, it is the Grit oversight that you should scrutinize from every angle.
It was obvious that Kings Speech would get more nominations than Social Network or did anybody expect TSN to be nominated for costumes or art direction? Those two plus the two additional actor noms (which are also hardly a surprise) and there you go. No big deal, nothing to whine about…
@CitizenKaned4Life
I didn’t say she didn’t like it. If a movie makes you uncomfortable, your going to have a biased view of it’s merits. It was enough to tilt her towards TKS.
Incidentally, her circle of friends had a similar reaction.
citizenmilton…thanks for giving me the benefit of doubt on the eloi issue, but I will also temper the “moving-loving fanatics” label with the observation that I’ve been somewhat baffled by the fact that many of those I know who have avoided seen “TSN” are doing so because they aren’t interested in the subject matter. A lamentably poor excuse of course. Those few I know who have seen it have admired it, but one of my friends put “Fish Tank” at the top of his best of the year list. I’ll remove the word “fanatic” from the equation.
Bummer Blues for Nolan and Garfield.
Still think TSN will win but I loved The King’s Speech. and Colin.
Wins: Colin, Natalie, Christian, Melissa, TSN for best pic, screenplay, director.
Why don’t they just drop the Best Song? At least they didn’t resort to Burlesque.
Another pic that was shut out:
The Turning Point – 77/78
dogcatcher, for the record, no, I don’t work for Weinstein, and I’m nobody’s bitch. Settle down. Notice that I kept my personal opinion about this never ending debate out of my original post, but just so you know, I would be just fine with TSN winning Best Picture.
@dogcatcher:
TSN wins SAG ensemble? You have got to be kidding me. The acting categories have been the Achilles heel for TSN all along.
I’m with Dogcatcher, the “some movies you see, other movies you feel” tagline for The King’s Speech makes me want to puke in my fucking hat. I thought The King’s Speech was well acted but dull and uninvolving. I didn’t care if Bertie overcame his stutter not and wasn’t move by it at all. When you walk into the mall/entrance to the Kodak Theater they have the names of past BP winners on the building’s support columns. It’s interesting to look at them and see how many films have won Best Picture that nobody even watches any more — especially over the past 20 years or so. If The King’s Speech wins, it will be the next Beautiful Mind, a film that will be irrelevant in 10 years.
Three points:
1) Completely agree with Kit Sung – going by (or caring about) total amount of nominations is silly and pointless in any kind of “who got the most love?” argument between TKS and TSN. TKS gets nominations in categories TSN just couldn’t (art direction, costume, etc)
2) Anyone who considers themselves a “movie-loving fanatic” on any non-Eloi level and hasn’t seen TSN isn’t really a fanatic. Which is fine. I’m not a movie-loving fanatic. Just don’t consider yourself one if you haven’t seen it by now.
3) The Facebook-movie-is-hip! meme HAS TO DIE. Who does this get propagated by? Older men like Wells. It’s so pathetic – a movie written and directed by comfortable older white men, and it’s soooo hip because omg Justin Timberlake is in it! And because it’s…it’s..it’s like, about, the zeitgeist, you know? Facebook – the kids love it! Social networking is, like, a really big thing in culture now!
It’d be like going back to watch a movie about the record industry in the 50′s and thinking it was completely “revolutionary” because it was about how young white teenagers suddenly had a big say in pop culture! TSN is a movie about very,VERY privileged kids playing Masters of the Universe. Big deal. This has happened since time immemorial. There’s nothing “hip” about it, except in the minds of old people.
And even then, remember that when Wells was inspired to go on Facebook recently…..he didn’t like it. Perfect symbol.
K. Bowen, Nolan is mostly a plotter. Not a dramatist. This was evident ten years ago with Memento. So it’s no surprise that the Academy continues to dismiss his slick but empty directing style.
Anyway, The King’s Speech vs The Social Network is interesting in the sense that it forces the Academy to once again define itself drastically. Will they gesture to the general culture or to the awards niche culture? The choice of hosts this year indicates a desire to be the former. But the TV producers aren’t necessarily the voters.
A win for TSN — the zeitgeist movie of the century — makes Oscar look relevant to the world. Something it really wants to be again. But a win for TKS makes them look relevant to the movie awards process… something the insiders/bloggers are more turned on by.
Garfield was better than Eisenberg in TSN, but the bigger snub was no Gosling in best actor an no Nolan in best director (honestly, Nolan should have gotten in over the Coens although I like True Grit). Otherwise, I felt like Matt Damon was as much a snub in BSA as Garfield if not more so.
I just can’t get on the TSN bandwagon. It’s a fine film, an interesting story but at the end of the day it’s not particularly relevant. Facebook is a nice tool and the fact that Zuckerberg figured out how to monetize it is commendable. But, at the end of the day, it’s a fairly standard issue bio/business story elevated by the talent involved. Again I say, I just can’t get over the feeling that it’s nuts were cut off in the third act by legal restrictions on what they could show and not show.
Young people who use facebook a lot – in my experience – seem less impressed by it as well probably because they know that there’s nothing revolutionary about facebook. It’s just another tool for wasting your time and sending messages to friends. It’s not the Guttenberg Bible, the A-bomb, or even the PC itself.
Come on, you cowards! TAKE SIDES! This is WAR!
“The Social Network” vs. “The King’s Speech”.
You can’t merely think that they were both excellently realized films and that either one would be worthy of an Oscar win. You can’t even slightly favor one over the other.
You MUST decide that one RULES! and the other one is BULLSHIT!
Man up, you pussies! Do you not realize how much depends on this?! Possibly no less than the future of movies itself!
(Oh, and K. Bowen – Laughs for your #5)
I’ve talked to a number of 20 somethings lately who thought TSN was okay, but didn’t get what all the fuss was about (many of them drama or film students). As I explored their likes/dislikes, it seemed they preferred films where they had a rooting interest for one character or another. TSN had no character that they felt compelled to side with and so they didn’t develop any emotional attachment–it was kind of a history lesson docudrama for them. It just didn’t connect at an emotional level for them.
Bluetide just made my point beautifully. Not two posts after mine, Coxcable calls TSN “the zeitgeist movie of the century”. He can literally, absolutely not be under the age of 40. Impossible.
Facebook isn’t even that revolutionary, and it’s CERTAINLY not seen as such by younger people. It’s just the non-ghetto version of Myspace, which came before it. It’s just another in a long line of new forms of (mostly teenage) young people communication tools that is used mostly to insult your friends and plan parties. IN WHAT WORLD IS THIS A SOCIO-CULTURAL REVOLUTION?
Hell, I think text messaging is way more “revolutionary”. Make a standard biopic about the inventors of that and you have something!
@shanes5:
That is exactly what I have heard from my many 20 somethings contacts about TSN.
“The King’s Speech” is now the front runner, but the king better be looking over his shoulder for True Grit – TG is right smack in the middle of the best picture race now, undoubtedly pushing Black Swan and The Fighter to the next tier.
But if The Fighter can win SAG this weekend, the best picture race will get a little more crowded.
“K. Bowen, Nolan is mostly a plotter. Not a dramatist. This was evident ten years ago with Memento. So it’s no surprise that the Academy continues to dismiss his slick but empty directing style.”
Yet embraces his (according to your so-called logic) “slick but empty” script?
Look, Fincher and the Coens (who took Nolan’s spot this year) had gotten the exact same rap for years until recently. What’s the difference? They’ve just hung around long enough to beat it?
I’m not really sure that’s a sufficient explanation, either; I’m not really sure one exists. It’s just a serious snub, almost any way you cut it.
The Wachowskis got shafted in 1999.
That’s relative. Compared to what they did to Michael Mann and, especially, Russell Crowe it was nothing.
Well it’s obvious that not EVERYONE is raving about TSN…maybe if Sorkin had supplied a poetic license stammer to Zuckerberg, and had Saverin cure him of it, we’d have ourselves a movie EVERYONE could unanimously agree on.
OT, to reduce some pretty relevant visionaries in TSN to “privileged kids” is grating. Even the Winkelvi, who were privileged, are among the top 99.999% of hard workers. Unless you think all kids from money are olympic athletes, while holding down Harvard workloads, while coming up with $50B ideas.
Ok, Rush Limbaugh. I won’t argue the “all rich people are just hard workers” thing, don’t have the energy for it.
It’s the use of the word “visionary” that I’m arguing. It’s nonsense. I remember when Facebook came out – it was seen as the Myspace for upper-middle-class white people because Myspace had gotten too ‘dark”. There is simply nothing visionary about this.
“That’s relative. Compared to what they did to Michael Mann and, especially, Russell Crowe it was nothing.”
They were both nominated, wtf are you talking about? That was one of the best years in the history of cinema. They were lucky to even be recognized in ’99.
Truly shafted that year = RUN LOLA RUN, THE LIMEY, EYES WIDE SHUT, THREE KINGS, TOY STORY 2/IRON GIANT (no animated category), FIGHT CLUB (only 1 nom), BEING JOHN MALKOVICH (no BP Nod).
JR,
You’re talking to your “twenty-something contacts.” How fresh of you. You must really have your finger on the pulse of the American youth.
I wonder how Shane5, ErrantElan and JR feel being hacks for Harvey Weinstein though? I’m not totally convinced that Harvey isn’t creating false accounts all across various movie sites with the purpose of creating this meme.
No more of this “cold” bullshit. I’m on to your game. But otherwise, by all means, lets all help Weinstein get TKS over $100 million.
P.S. The reason TSN will win the ensemble award at SAG is because it’s basically a Best Picture Award and rarely, if ever, is about individual acting performances.
This year SAG will tabulate its winners through an internet voting system EXCLUSIVELY. Thus, advantage TSN.
By Sunday, the situation will be back to where it should be, TSN with a commanding position in the Oscar race. It’s absurd to consider TKS the frontrunner based on ONE AWARD VICTORY.
SAG is far more important than PGA as a precursor because the largest number of members of the Academy are actors, they outnumber the producers 5-to-1.
I don’t make the rules, I just report the news.
Nolan being snubbed is a joke. Same for Inception’s Editing.
Tron – no score or f/x? Come on
The Town or Shutter Island should be there over The Kids Are Crap
No Cinematography nod to Shutter Island?
Renner and Hawkes are great surprises. Hawkes should win
Inception won’t win, but I’m pulling for True Grit or TS3. I think Grit is more likely to win than The King’s Speech
I think your concern is unwarranted Wells. The only reason TKS got more noms than the TSN were the acting noms. I never saw TSN as having any real Oscar contenders in the acting categories outside of Eisenberg. Chill. TSN is a great film, while TKS seemed more like an excuse for important English actors to act importantly. Also, congrats to Reznor. Agreeing to score your first film and getting an Oscar nom 6 months later must be exhilarating.
“the Coens (who took Nolan’s spot this year)”
I think the Coens should be nominated. It’s Hooper and Russell that bug me most of all.
Dogcatcher, I haven’t even seen TKS. I’ve never even liked Colin Firth, which is one reason. I barely know who Harvey Weinstein is. I’m not a movie geek and have no dog in this fight. I saw TSN and liked it as a well-made film, as it goes.
ErrantElan,
I have half joking (yet half serious).
Um, that should read I WAS half joking. Sorry.
@ErrantElan — I am a 30 something Gen-Xer. But TSN is about the values of Gen-Y. This is not me defending my zeitgeist.
As for Facebook itself… I could end up wrong, but I really would put it up there existentially with the invention of the computer & the atomic bomb. For the first time in history human beings can locate virtually anyone from their past. Connections that would have normally been broken as years progress can now be kept with a few keystrokes. This is unprecedented. The social version of penicillin. You can see the effects it’s having on relationships and communication. And the side-effects.
To fashion the story of its invention INSIDE the story of a young misfit looking to connect INSIDE a youth culture marked by emotional disconnectedness is quite brilliant in and of itself. That the results are so great is really something special.
@CitizenKaned4Life — Inception, like The Usual Suspects, is a clever script. Nolan is a brain in a time of brainlessness. But his understanding of the messy emotions of human nature is almost on par with Michael Bay’s. He is a stylist first.
Russell definitely deserves his spot. A lot of talk about how directorial “stamp” isn’t on the film the same way as Aronofsky or Fincher’s is on their movies. But if you hear the backstory about what The Fighter was going to be before he came on board, it’s clear he had a huge say in shifting the tone entirely and coming up with a masterpiece.
Aronofsky’s version was going to be a dark look at drug addiction and focus purely on the two brothers. Requiem for a Dream meets Raging Bull. Russell lightened the tone, yet let the drama remain intact, boosted the female roles and then pulled the whole thing off expertly.
I still haven’t seen Speech, so can’t say whether Hooper deserves his spot yet, but of the other four, I’d say the Coens are definitely the ones that should have made way for Nolan.
The other frustrating thing about Nolan’s snub is that, beyond the dizzying spectacle and sheer technical achievement of Inception, it also boasted a range of terrific performances from a brilliant ensemble cast. He ticked all the boxes for what a Best Director should surely be. Baffling snub, can only be explained by his lack of schmoozing and the Coens being Oscar royalty now.
That TKS “Some Movies You See — Some You Feel” tagline has been running for weeks. I’ve seen it in numerous TV spots and find it annoying and pretty condescending.
Dogcatcher:
I am pretty sure that the PGA winner has been a more reliable predictor of the Oscar BP winner than has SAG ensemble winner over the last decade or so – SAG has only been doing this for about 15 years anyway.
Look it up, and then get back to us.
“It’s the use of the word “visionary” that I’m arguing. It’s nonsense. I remember when Facebook came out – it was seen as the Myspace for upper-middle-class white people because Myspace had gotten too ‘dark”. There is simply nothing visionary about this.”
Not a fan of Facebook but you’re just wrong. It is the single biggest social media site in the world, has the highest ad click through rate and it’s worth a literal shitpile of money and it ain’t going away. Maybe it’s not exactly ‘visionary’ but it is a big deal.
coxcable, you simply can’t be serious. First of all, there would be no Facebook if it weren’t for computers. There would be no Facebook if it weren’t for the internet. Both, therefore, are more important inventions.
Also, Facebook wasn’t even the first of it’s kind. There was Friendster, then Myspace, etc.
As for linking people with people from their past, that’s only really possible for this first generation of users. And is that really that big a deal anyway? As Wells even pointed out in a post he made about Facebook, all the people he tried to talk to ignored him, more or less. That’s not what Facebook is used for. Come on, don’t be disingenuous.
You even conceded it might not be visionary, so what are you arguing?
Licentious, did I ever say it wasn’t a “big deal”? It’s a HUGE DEAL. That’s not what people talk about it as – they have awed tones of reverence for this “revolutionary tool of mankind”
But “highest ad click rate”? Revolutionary on the level of the printing press! Come on, dude. It’s a big moneymaking huge deal. I don’t deny that, never did.
Sigh… same old tired game every year. Why on earth are you letting it get you down, Wells? You should know better.
Apparently to most people, COUNTRY STRONG must have been a better movie than most released last year. THE WOLFMAN was also better. Why? Because they both got an Oscar nomination each! Ergo, they are both one nomination “better” than any movie that didn’t get a nomination.
It’s just the way things shook out — TKS is not two nominations “better” than TRUE GRIT, or four nominations “better” than TSN. I doubt the Academy sees it that way either, and neither should you, esp. in light of the previous examples.
The bottom line is: you think TSN is a better movie than any other from last year. And that’s what counts, no matter what anyone else says.
I’ll take it a step further.
Inception was more relevant than TSN. And a better film to boot.
TSN is a fine film, but the only scene that really gets under the skin of the story is the early “Facemash” creation scene. The rest of it is just rich kids screwing over other rich kids. The rest of it is really talented filmmakers and actors telling a pretty rote story exceptionally well.
It’s not about TSN being cold. It’s that rich, selfish, and smart equals interesting but not necessarily compelling. Aaron Sorkin, David Fincher, and the cast deserve enormous credit for taking an very boring story and turning it into something not only watchable but enjoyable. But I’m not going to act as if it would be some huge travesty for facebook not to win this year. All ten films nominated this year are better than the usual Weinstein pap like “The Cider House Rules” or “The Reader” and Jesus Christ everything in there is exponentially better than “Crash.” But TSN is not the Godfather. It’s not Silence of the Lambs. It’s not even Fight Club or Seven (although it’s much, much better than TCCOBB). It’s a really solid film. If it wins, it won’t bother me. But it won’t be a travesty if it doesn’t.
“But “highest ad click rate”? Revolutionary on the level of the printing press! Come on, dude.”
In an era when the print media is dying because it can no longer generate ad revenue, and websites often struggle to get the kind of ad revenue needed to stay afloat, it’s revolutionary. Sorry. It just is.
I like Social Network but would have liked it better if Zuckerberg had worn an eyepatch.
No, I just don’t think you know what the term “revolutionary” means. We’re thinking on different levels, and using different words. The printing press was revolutionary. The internet/computers was revolutionary. Telephones. Automobiles.
Not Facebook, especially since you can offer no other reason than “it makes a lot of money where other things fail”. So does Target.
Besides, you’re making a false analogy. It’s the INTERNET that is harming print news media, not Facebook. It’s a literal tit-for-tat: people who used to buy newspapers and magazines no longer do, because they read the same information online, but not on Facebook. Hell, they often read the same stuff from the print media, just on the print media’s own websites themselves.
It’s the internet, not Facebook.
Ain’t It Cool was more revolutionary than Facebook.
Lots of comments here. I think Wahlberg should have been nominated. I haven’t watched the Oscar telecast in years, and don’t know if I will. The debate about who should have been nominated, and who should not, will go on for awhile.
Agreed, Rashad. So is Twitter, for that matter.
“Not Facebook, especially since you can offer no other reason than “it makes a lot of money where other things fail”. So does Target.”
For something to be revolutionary, it must be successful. To say the internet is killing the print industry is too broad. Specifically what is killing the print media is inability to generate ad revenue.
Wahlberg absolutely deserved a nomination, but sadly probably became overshadowed by the showier performances of Bale and Leo. Both excellent, of course, just a lot more obviously visible than Wahlberg. A shame for him, as he was excellent.
Bale, though, is as worthy a lock as you’ll ever see. One for the ages – stunning performance.
There are so many logical fallacies with what you just said, it’s obviously pretty useless to go on with this. Think out the implications of everything you just said for awhile. Plus, Facebook has nothing to do with any of what you just said, I might point out. “Jersey Shore” is “successful”, after all.
My mother is not on Twitter and has no idea who Harry Knowles is. She’s not a geek or a narcissist.
But my mother, who barely has the brainpower to check her email, is on Facebook. Every single day.
And so are 75% of the people I call friends and family.
That’s huge.
Take a look at the Internet World Map…
http://www.flowtown.com/blog/the-2010-social-networking-map?display=wide
Again, missing the point completely. Yes, Facebook is extremely popular. Approximately 39-40% of all Americans have a Facebook page, according to statistics.
So it’s popular. It’s “huge”. It’s massively, giantly, amazingly successful.
So? I never argued it wasn’t.
Christopher Nolan needs to direct a movie where Mark Wahlberg plays a troubled dream cop, and Mila Kunis plays a hot chick wearing a CUTE HAT with a sexy back tattoo, and they go on an adventure where they break into all the snubbed nominees’ subconscious to implant a reminder that the Oscars are TOTAL IRRELEVANT BULLSHIT for hens who like catting about who’s wearing what.
The Oscars are a gossipy fashion show. That’s all.
No Kunis = guess I’m going Team Steinfeld in that category.
Popularity ! = “Revolutionary.”
Revolutionary is not even a subset of Popularity; some of the most revolutionary inventions in the world were never even popular. There are probably a million distinct possible reasons for this, but I think the human brain would probably just file most of them as “bad timing.”
Are you really going to guarantee me that if MySpace came along a few years later, we wouldn’t have a movie about that right now? I dunno…
The voters drank the Oscar ad Kool-Aid and made the lead actress of TRUE GRIT a supporting actress. But she’s terrif anyway.
I just want to say the following:
Facebook = Revolutionary
Also, for extra credit:
Glee is Death Metal for gay people.
Class dismissed.
This just proves yet again that Dave Karger is the very best of the best when it comes to not only predicting the winners but the Oscar nominees as well. All the others (Tom O’Neill, Pete Hammond, Kris Tapley, etc.) are pretenders to the throne. If you want to win your office Oscar pool you just need to read Karger.
Maybe from now on Jeff and Sasha won’t scoff at people like Karger, Poland and Anne Thompson. People who actually talk to Academy members and listen to what they’re saying.
Having said all that, Jeff and Sasha have no reason to hang their heads. It’s not over yet and there’s no shame in believing that the best film of the year should actually win Best Picture. Why does the Best Picture winner almost always have to be the movie that no one will want to watch five years from now? When’s the last time anybody popped Million Dollar Baby into the DVD player?
I thought this was a semantics issue, but actually it’s simple hating/discounting on rich nerds. In terms of vision, Zuckerberg is his generation’s Ray Kroc, except way better with code, and his company is actually a much bigger deal. There’s absolutely no denying this, and no point in trying.
I think a Zuckerberg/Ray Kroc comparison is quite apt, on the surface of it, yes. Neither were “visionaries”, but just very smart men who took advantage of large gaps in a market that was ready to boom. I suppose Sam Walton would be comparable.
Facebook is a bigger deal than McDonald’s? Not really something you can quantifiably measure (apples and oranges), but I’d say not. Let’s see where Facebook is in 30 years. Hell, 10 years. I think it’s going to fade, personally.
And when I say they WERE privileged, I’m not discounting or attacking their riches NOW. Fine, they deserve the money they have now, whatever. It’s about the fact that they were all very, VERY privileged kids from birth (especially the Brazilian, who “invested $300,000 in oil companies as an undergraduate at Harvard”). Doesn’t mean they didn’t achieve something genuine, but read Malcolm Gladwells “Outliers”. It’s much, much, much easier to succeed if you have such a background.
Lesson of Oscar 2011:
The person who initiate the “South of the Border”action didn’t get a single nomination(Gosling, Stiller, Kunis). While the recipient got a 66% chance of being nominated. (Williams, Gerwig, Portman).
Always better to receive than to give.
True Grit winning Best Picture won’t happen without an editing nomination. Weird trend that’s happened for awhile now. Still between TSN and KS…TSN might be another “Traffic” when it took Editing, Screenplay, Director, but not Best Picture.
David – that comparison doesn’t totally work; ‘Gladiator’ managed to have a bunch of smaller awards besides Best Actor. In your scenario, it would get, what Best Actor and Best Screenplay and maybe Best Costumes? It’s tough to imagine that adding up to a Best Picture. Best Picture tends to go to the movie that has the most Oscars [though I don't think that's as causal as I'm making it sound], or at least the second-most. I think King’s Speech would need to win Director to win Picture. I also think, if it wins picture, either Rush or Carter wins.
Jeff: You got your dog, TSN, and we all know you love him. (We’ll get back to your tanks and modernity metaphors later.)
But…Here are my dogs: YOU WILL MEET A TALL DARK STRANGER, TAMARA DREWE, NEVER LET ME GO.
Guess what: None of them are in this fight.
So may I say this with complete objectivity: this wonderfully dramatic contest between four terrific films has nothing to do with “zeitgeist” or some fearsome shock of the new that the Zimmer-frame crowd of Acad voters are tut-tutting about and fleeing as fast as their walkers can take them away from the social change embodied by Mr. Zuckerberg’s nefarious and life as we know it upending cyber-schemes.
That’s a cleverly manufactured sales strategy that is supposed to make a case for why everyone should vote for the Sony product instead of the Paramount product(s) or the Weinstein product.
And it’s not simply about sentimentality or the nobility of the human spirit or the wonderful comeback of the Western.
Those are nice sales pitches for the products in competition with the Sony product. The first two just happen to be better matches with what generally wins the trophy.
That’s the dogfight we’re covering here.
So here’s what it is, in a nutshell that everyone here knows by heart:
9 times out of the 10, the Oscar goes to the movie that the Academy feels embodies the “best” of what the (mostly) American movie business can be about.
It had better have strong performances. It had better not be satirical. Or too political. Or too controversial.
It had better connect with viewers on some emotional level and it had better make some reassuring point about our better angels.
Some damn great movies fit the bill and some pretty moderate ones as well. But they have those characteristics in common.
Caveat:
The Academy must be changing, otherwise I would not have been completely wrong about “Lord of the Rings 3″ winning and making it ok for fantasy films to finally get recognition from the Academy voters.
But these core components of the typical Oscar best picture remain in place. It sure explains “Crash” and it sure explains “Slumdog.” To some extent it explains “Hurt Locker” but it admittedly doesn’t explain the exceptions such as “Silence of the Lambs” or “The Departed” or “No Country.”
We’d have to look at those races and competition to find answers to why those films got the top slot, but in a way, with 10 best pic noms, the game has begun anew all over again.
But I strongly suspect those core principles of What Makes Best Picture will probably prevail.
So strip away the talking points and hype fed to the blogosphere and critics and guilds by Oscar consultants and ask yourself which film best matches that description above.
Chances are, that will be the film that wins. I can think of two this year that match this description well, two not as well. I’m guessing that’s the logic driving Karger, Thompson and associates.
It’s not irrefutable but it’s pretty stong mojo.
There’s four dogs in this fight.
None of them are as dark, edgy, socially-critical, satirical or provocative as my three dogs.
That’s why God invented BluRay.
Woodman, Frears and Romanek forever!
They are the REAL Prague Spring, Mr. Wells!
Tamara Drewe was “dark and edgy?”
Wh-wh-whaaaaaaaaaaat?
Other than that baffling little nugget, that was a really great post.
“Who would’ve predicted last summer that Inception’s Christopher Nolan would get shafted on a Best Director Oscar nomination?”
Oh, well. At least now Chris knows what it feels like for Kon not to get nominated for Academy Awards he should’ve easily been due.
I would literally piss myself if Nolan somehow wins Best Original Screenplay (which I think still has an outside shot at that category, even though that will likely be embraced as the opportunity to recognize TKAAR), comes up to the podium, and promptly thanks Kon. What on earth would our good friend have to say about that?
Of course, we all know he’d just find a different way to bitch about it (“figures he would only admit to ripping off someone else after being honored for it,” etc.).
Kane: “comes up to the podium, and promptly thanks Kon. What on earth would our good friend have to say about that?”
Well, like I said earlier, I have a chance to pre-emptively ask him next week at the Egyptian for Memento-assuming his appearance doesn’t get canceled for some reason. But if he said that, then he’d have two things Darren currently lacks in this situation: integrity and honesty. So that’s definitely something I’d appreciate, not criticize. Though I’d still stand by being bored by Inception and TDK, and only liking Memento and Batman Begins. And actually, he allegedly indirectly acknowledged Paprika already, so this would just basically be him confirming it. So I’m fine in that regard. It’s Darren who’s pissing me off more, because at least half of his success is due to PB, so he owes Kon a lot more than Nolan. But he’s acting like he came up with the material, even though he begrudgingly acknowledges everyone but Kon.
I see more Dark City than Paprika
Rashad: It’s there. That’s all that matters.
CitizenKaned:
I may have gotten a little carried away on my love for TAMARA DREWE. But I figure a film that has a central female character who (SPOILERS!!!) shags not only the handsome rock star but the disgusting gross old writer dude and said dude also gets a bit of the old bovine comeuppance and so forth might edge onto that edgy list.
Certainly in comparison to BEACH PARTY WEB PAGE and THE WINDSOR WHISPERER.
Mark Romanek and Woody Allen challenged the religion of the time and paid for their sins, but time will be kind to their art, even if ardent defenders amongst the Consensi were scarcer than Oscar noms for the cast of Hot Tub Time Machine.
What the whole dang year needed more of?
More Jeremy Renner channeling James Cagney.
A movie where all of the actors are Jack McGee real.
An action version of Inside Job set in Mexico starring Gig Young, Robert Webber, Warren Oates and Isela Vega.
Ah, I remember edge…it was abundant and growing like a wild fungus in the DGA, just before Reagan was elected and Hollywood made it punishable by loss of points and a bad table at Mortons.
But I digress….
Kaned – I think Nolan has a shot at screenplay, but I acknowledge that my main reason for thinking it is the Cameron Crowe precedent. If the Academy overall likes him and his achievement more than the branch of directors apparently did, he might have a shot.
However, I agree with you that ‘Kids Are Alright’ is more likely — but ‘The King’s Speech’ is also a strong possibility. Nolan is behind both, I think — but there’s almost always one strange screenplay award in any given year (usually the one that doesn’t go to the Best Picture).
Every NFL fan has a favorite player , Someone that they admire, look up to, and wish they could even be. That is exactly why Cheap NFL
Jerseys are perfect for the NFL football fan whether youth or adult. With current team colors of Midnight Green, Charcoal, Black, Silver and White, the professional
football team known as the Philadelphia Eagles Jerseys have a popular jersey to
share with fans.
sex shop |
vibradores |
vaginas |
pomada chinesa |
sexyshop |
sexshop |
loja virtual erotica |
prazer/a> |
catalogo erotico |
renda extra |
I’m a wholesome diet regime fan, I am positive the Best Diet Plan is the best, I prefer it really significantly. If you’d like to turn into more slender fine? So hurriedly action! The Acai Berry Diet retailer possess a lot of healthful diet program products for you to pick. Such as China Meizitang Slim.