Okay so we have 10 best picture nominees and they couldn't have split that category more perfectly into the 'popularist' titles and the 'Oscar fodder' titles.There can be only one logical reason to have 10 nominees - its a ratings getter. Sure it boosts flagging 'for your consideration' ad revenues with 10 films to vie for Best Picture. But ultimately Oscar show ratings have been flagging and since Lord Of The Rings win back in 2003 (a foregone conclusion after all that walking for three years) big name, big money making movies needed some attention at the Oscar table. Theory being... that'll get viewers. Well let's look at the 10 Best Picture nominees... yup, 5 of the ten are clear 'popularist' votes. Avatar - highest grossing film of all time, $2bn worldwide and counting. The Blind Side - over $200m domestic. Inglourious Basterds - QT's most successful film with over $300m worldwide. District 9 - a sci-fi break out that cost $30m to make and grossed over $200m worldwide. Up - the latest piece of genius from animation powerhouse Pixar which floated off with over $720m worldwide.
Then we have the more typical ‘Oscar fodder’ movies that do low to middling money and most audiences never get around to seeing that are terribly “worthy” but don’t pull in viewers: Up In The Air, Precious, An Education, A Serious Man and The Hurt Locker.
No I’m not saying they don’t all deserve their place at the table. District 9 is a stunning piece of work and a film like this, usually discriminated against because of its genre (see Dark Knight last year) is exactly the reason the type of movie this expanded category should exist to aid. Equally a couple of the “worthy” titles (An Education and A Serious Man” would almost certainly not have made the list had it been 5 as Tarantino and Cameron had those sown up.
So maybe it helps everyone. What’s interesting is how many nay-sayers thought we’d just see Avatar and 9 of the worthies. That a list of 10 would almost certainly allow for “good but not outstanding” films like Crazy Heart and Invictus (from Oscar favourite Clint Eastwood) in there. I don’t exclude myself from those assumptions. If anything I would say that while it didn’t deserve a place the lack of Invictus in the 10 – purely for being an Eastwood movie – is one of the bigger surprises amongst today’s nominations. That’s like Meryl Streep making a movie and not getting an actress nomination. It’s unthinkable! Perhaps the voters are getting more fair with the expanded category.
So who has it sown up? Is Up’s presence in Best Picture a certainty of Best Animated Film – you’d think, no? Can Mo’Nique or Christoph Waltz fall at the final hurdle? – surely not, but then it has happened before. Avatar is one big effect so it must have Visual Effects sorted right? Well presumably but then District 9 looked like a $200m movie with a total budget of $30m so…! Nick Park’s never lost (well once, for A Grand Day Out, but that was to himself with Creature Comforts so surely doesn’t count) so he’s got to win by default right?
Something funny is going to happen somewhere – it almost always does – but where?
And what were the surprises. There weren’t many but the inclusion of Maggie Gyllenhaal and exclusion of Julianne Moore in the Best Supporting Actress category has to be one of the bigger ones. Personally this makes be both very happy and desperately sad. I thought Moore was superb in A Single Man. It wasn’t a huge role but it was incredibly memorable for all that and she deserved her place on this list. That said I’ve been arguing (and voting) for Maggie Gyllenhaal in Crazy Heart from the off – worried (as most awards bodies have done) that she be overlooked as she was in a film with such a powerful central performance that is kind of eclipsed everything else. But I think the always good Gyllenhaal did some of her best work in Crazy Heart. Without her to ground Bridges performance the movie would have not been half what it was. Personally I think both performers deserve a spot in this category more than Penelope Cruz or either of the (still excellent) Up In The Air actresses. But then Cruz is there by default because she won last year. There’s nothing remarkable about her in the tedious musical Nine and had this film come the year before Vicky Cristina Barcelona I guarantee this nomination would not exist. As for the Up In The Air pair who wouldn’t you vote for? That is clearly why they are both there. They are both great in the movie. They are both completely different. They are both undeniably supporting. There’s no way to choose between them so I suspect most voters (as I and several people I know did) voted for both of them simply because that was easier. It’s also why neither of them has a hope in hell of winning.
The other big surprise for me was In The Loop’s nomination for Screenplay. I always assumed it would get a Bafta nomination, but an Oscar nomination?! I never saw that coming.
It’s an interesting mix. There’s a few things I simply don’t get. Things I didn’t vote for on the BAFTAs on principal. But I’m clearly wrong. I just wish someone could explain them to me.
First Avatar – Best Cinematography. It’s basically one big created effect so surely the beautiful vistas and lighting are created in the computer so shouldn’t that just all come under the VFX category? I’m obviously in a minority here but as beautiful as Avatar was to watch I just never saw that as cinematography.
Secondly Coco Before Chanel – Best Costume Design. So it’s a movie about a world renowned costume designer, so surely the costumes in the movie are just Coco Chanel designs, no? Were these created for the film? In which case presumably there’s no truth to the biopic at all.
Personally I’m hoping all the “obviousness” of Coco Before Chanel, The Young Victoria, Nine and Bright Star’s show-off period costuming will cancel each other out and Monique Prudhomme’s beautiful, exciting work on Gilliam’s The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus will win out. Not a ridiculous dream, surely?
I’m pleased to see the, expected, nominations for young actresses Carey Mulligan (woo hoo!) and Gabourey Sidibe as for me they gave the real stand-out performances of the year. It’s a shame the voters will most likely consider their nominations (each for their first lead roles) as good as a win and hand the award elsewhere.
It’s also nice to see the always superb Stanley Tucci finally get an Oscar nomination. Bad year for him to get it though as after years or delivering brilliant, scene-(often movie)stealing performances and never getting a nomination he’s come up against one hit wonder Christoph Waltz. I don’t mean to belittle Waltz, he is great in Basterds and I loved the film, but I give him 5 years max before he’s making Steven Seagal DTV movies. I hope Tucci gets another chance soon.
Beyond that all I have to say is “no Ponyo!!!!!!!” in animation. That’s appalling. They nominated Fantastic Mr Fox but not Ponyo? I can’t comment on Secret Of Kells as I haven’t seen it, and I’m glad that Princess And The Frog (a hugely enjoyable, old-school Disney movie) got in. And of course Up and Coraline had to be there (I’d have liked to see Coraline get a Best Picture nom too to be honest).
So come March 7 we’ll know the outcome. Will exs Cameron and Bigelow come to blows? Will there be an almost traditional acting upset? Will the film I want to win Best Foreign Film actually win for once (I’m not saying what, don’t want to jinx it!) Hmmm!
No comments:
Post a Comment