You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Best Actor’ category.
Over the past two weeks we’ve been revealing our choices for most of the Oscar categories. Here is a handy recap of those picks! Refer to this page often during tonight’s telecast to see if you should be agreeing with the winners! (Hint: use the “John” column)
| Adam | Brian | Jared | John | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Picture | Hugo | The Artist | Midnight in Paris | |
| Director | Allen | Scorsese | Havanavicius | Malick |
| Actress | Mara | Mara | Williams | Streep |
| Actor | Dujardin | Dujardin | Dujardin | Oldman |
| Supporting Actress | Bejo | Bejo | Spencer | Chastain |
| Supporting Actor | Hill | Nolte | Branagh | Plummer |
| Original Screenplay | Midnight in Paris | Margin Call | The Artist | Midnight in Paris |
| Adapted Screenplay | Hugo | The Descendants | Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy | |
| Art Direction | Midnight in Paris | Hugo | Hugo | Hugo |
| Cinematography | The Tree of Life | Hugo | The Tree of Life | The Tree of Life |
| Costume | Anonymous | Jane Eyre | ||
| Film Editing | Hugo | Moneyball | The Descendants | |
| Makeup | Harry Potter | The Iron Lady | Harry Potter | The Iron Lady |
| Score | The Artist | The Adventures of Tintin | ||
| Song | The Muppets | The Muppets | The Muppets | |
| Sound Editing | Transformers | The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo | Transformers | Drive |
| Sound Mixing | Transformers | The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo | Transformers | Transformers |
| Visual Effects | Transformers | Rise of the Planet of the Apes | Harry Potter | Transformers |
| Animated Short | A Morning Stroll | A Morning Stroll | A Morning Stroll | Wild Life |
| Live Action Short | Time Freak | Time Freak | ||
| Documentary Short | Saving Face | The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom |
Well this look at the successful performance showcases, the complement to my earlier look at the failed ones, is ridiculously late. But it’s been sitting on my hard drive for a while so why waste it? Plus many of these are now available on DVD so you can go judge them for yourselves. Though you may as well leave the judging to me, right?
Animal Kingdom
There was a good chance that this one was going to land on the “failed” portion of these posts, but happily Jacki Weaver eked out a Supporting Actress nod for this very low profile film. Animal Kingdom is an Australian crime drama centered around a family of bank robbers. The opening credits made me think I was about to see The Town: Down Under with its images of bank heists. Instead, it’s a character-focused drama about the family unraveling as the crooked cops close in.
Weaver plays the family matriarch. She’s outwardly sweet and caring, but in reality is chillingly ruthless. Her daughter dies of a heroin overdose so her estranged grandson comes to live with her. Meanwhile, her son is hiding out from the cops while the Melbourne police become more brutal with their tactics. The cops begin killing off members of the gang, the gang retaliates, and the heretofore innocent grandson gets entangled in it all.
The movie is very good. I think some people may find the grandson character frustrating as he waffles between his family and the police and seems to willfully put himself in danger. But I think the film does a good job establishing the character and his passiveness. Weaver is quite memorable. I think it’s a role ripe for scenery chewing, but she dials it back and it makes her actions even more chilling. Hopefully her nomination will cause more people to seek out the film.
Rabbit Hole
This story of a couple mourning their recently-deceased son works in parts. Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart grieve in their own ways, which drives a wedge into their relationship. Kidman is prone to awkward public outbursts that can be quite uncomfortable to watch. The film is filled with these scenes and it can be hard to take.
But some scenes are just wonderful. Most of the scenes Kidman shares with her mother, played by Dianne Weist, are terrific and insightful. Eckhart has a nice scene in his son’s bedroom with a family looking to buy the house.
The film is a series of mostly successful individual scenes while some overall plot points fall a little short. I found the relationship between Kidman and a young man sort of contrived, but it yielded several nice moments.
I think your mileage may vary in a heavily dramatic movie like this. What rings true or connects emotionally for one will feel wrong to another. And that is fine, considering the film is about people who express their grief differently.
Kidman is very good and she grabbed the film’s one Oscar nomination for Best Actress. I enjoyed Eckhart, and he did land an Independent Spirit nod, though a few of his showcase scenes didn’t work very well for me. How much was him and how much was the writing, I don’t know. Finally, Weist is also very good and it’s too bad awards momentum for her stalled so early.
It’s a good film that I would recommend, but given its weight I’m not sure if there are many people I’d specifically recommend it to.
Biutiful
We all severely despised this movie. Javier Bardem landed a Best Actor nod for his role as a Barcelona black marketeer who is severely down on his luck. His illegal immigrant workers get deported and he has the heart to care about their families. His own ex-wife is unreliable, leaving him to worry for his children’s safety. He is sick. His dreams are full of tiresome artsy fartsy imagery.
The film received some critical malign for being such a downer. I contend that to be a downer a film must make the viewer care enough to feel the depression and Biutiful fails miserably at that. I wasn’t saddened by Bardem’s slog. I was bored. Very, very bored.
It severely drags. I started looking out for the ending, constantly expecting for the finale to be right around the corner and pondering if I liked certain developments as the denouement. In hindsight it turns out I started doing this about 45 minutes in. That is a bad sign.
Blue Valentine
I anticipated this being up my alley but it started losing me pretty quickly. Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams are a married couple with a young daughter. The film starts with their relationship in trouble and watches as it crumbles. Interspersed are flashbacks showing them meeting and falling in love.
It reminded me a lot of Revolutionary Road from a few years back. It could be a poignant look at the strains that are put on a relationship, but it’s really just about two people that shouldn’t be together. And at least one is a douchebag. It becomes pretty clear that there isn’t a lot of depth to their relationship and I began rooting against the pair because it seemed like they’d both be better off alone. By the end it was just tedious.
Williams got a Best Actress nomination but it’s surprising that Gosling was barely even in the picture. He didn’t even score any recognition from the Independent Spirits. Maybe the field for Best Actor was just more competitive. But I have a hard time imagining someone responding the movie and Williams’s performance but not Gosling’s.
Another Year
This one isn’t a successful performance piece but at least it did get some Oscar attention, receiving an Original Screenplay nod. Lesley Manville really should have been in the mix for Supporting Actress, but at least she was a contender.
My colleagues liked Another Year considerably less than I did and I understand why. It’s slow with a very understated plot. But it’s all in service of its themes. I’m not sure why, but I’m drawn towards films about the passage of time and the transient nature of lives in this permanent world and Another Year has these in spades. Four segments corresponding to each of the seasons follow English married couple Tom and Gerri as they host family and friends at parties and events over the course of a year. They are in love and appear to have a happy life, but the same cannot be said about everyone else in their coterie. Manville stands out as Gerri’s lonely middle aged coworker who drinks too much at the get-togethers and fancies her hosts’ much younger son.
The film does sacrifice plot for theme. In fact, it would be hard to claim there’s much of a plot at all as the action is all conversation. We do see the characters’ progression throughout the year though much of the action occurs between the seasonal meetings. Mary’s excitement to buy a car and subsequent troubles with said car later in the year is one more light-hearted example.
The slowness did get to me a little as some of the scenes aren’t the best at advancing the themes. I’m happy to accept subtlety when warranted, but sitting through some of the scenes that seemed pointless to me was harder to stomach. With a little tightening it could be more entertaining and packed a heftier punch.
We’re taking a look at Oscar categories in advance of tonight’s show. Now we’re on Supporting Actress. The nominees:
- Javier Bardem, Biutiful
- Jeff Bridges, True Grit
- Jesse Eisenberg, The Social Network
- Colin Firth, The King’s Speech
- James Franco, 127 Hours
John
Give me my award. Today, junior. Did I stutter? Oh, right.
This is a good crew, but Best Actor usually is. It’s Colin Firth in a walk for me, but that doesn’t reflect poorly on any of the others. What chance do they have against the charm, the grace, and yes the stutter of Firth? He’s so good all the time so I’m glad he’s getting his due, even though it does take a showy disability to get him the prize. Didn’t Tropic Thunder say something about going partial retard is Oscar gold…?
Franco is perfect for his role, both as a slightly off outdoorsy guy and the type of presence that can carry a movie when he’s the only one on screen. I didn’t give enough credit to Eisenberg when I first saw The Social Network. He gets some crap for playing the same character repeatedly, but I happened to see Network again soon after watching Zombieland and the differences were clear. This is also a performance that succeeds on a lot more than just line reading. I really like the way he carries himself.
I do think Bridges gets a boost just by being Jeff Bridges. It’s a memorable character that allows for some showy acting, but the type of role that I think needs a name to propel it to awards season. He’s still great, of course, but I do see a clear gap between him and those listed above. And Bardem is an interesting nod, displaying the kind of acting that I have not seen from him before. I just wish it had been in a better movie where his performance could have affected me more.
Snubs: As good as this list is, I would have had Robert Duvall for Get Low and Sean Penn for Fair Game. Maybe also Ryan Gosling for Blue Valentine.
Jared
Yeah, geez, how do you pick a winner here? It is a little odd that precursors have been so unanimous just because everyone here absolutely deserves consideration for the win. The Grouches closed out Oscars this year with a screening of Biutiful, which was was too long and didn’t give the view a chance to get emotionally invested in the characters enough. My expectations of Javier Bardem were maybe too high, because I’d that people just absolutely went gaga over his performance. He does a fine job, of course, but I think he’s hampered by the script here.
If an actor can get a nomination for a role that won John Wayne an Oscar, well, he must be doing something right. Even if Jeff Bridges took a note from the Marlon Brando school of acting and stuffed a handful of pebbles in his mouth before talking. If he didn’t get his career achievement Oscar last year, I have the feeling that we’d be hearing a lot more about him. It is still weird to me, as a devotee of Freaks and Geeks (OK, who am I kidding, as a devotee of Whatever It Takes), that James Franco is a highly-regarded thespian. But he’s unquestionably deserving. And in 127 Hours it takes some kind of screen presence to be the sole focus of nearly every shot of every scene.
John makes a good point above, Jesse Eisenberg definitely does not play the same character in every film. Are they similar? Sure. There’s the ever present joke about how he and Michael Cera fight over the same roles. But really, I can’t imagine Eisenberg as Scott Pilgrim nor I could see Cera as Zuckerberg. Sorkin’s Zuckerberg is a difficult nut to crack, but I think Eisenberg handles it quite deftly.
Like Mr. Darcy needed anything else to be a chick magnet.
But, of course, like everyone else in the world, I’m jumping on the Colin Firth bandwagon. And while he’s had an impressive career, this victory is certainly not just for his body of work. Doing the stutter is the obvious part of his performance. And he does do it in a way that (apparently) very close to reality, but also works on screen. That said, there’s so much more to his role. How he, as a prince and king, husband and father, handles his relationship with each one of the other characters. Part of that is Seidler’s script, naturally. But a lot of it is Firth working his magic.
Our build up to the Oscars on Sunday continues today with a look at Best Actor. Our choices of who we think should win have some nice diversity in this installment.
The nominees:
- Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart
- George Clooney in Up in the Air
- Colin Firth in A Single Man
- Morgan Freeman in Invictus
- Jeremy Renner in The Hurt Locker
Jared kicks us off:
The talent in this group is undeniable. Four of them have put up such consistently amazing performances, playing a variety of roles demanding depth and range, it is almost scary. And that’s no disrespect to Renner, who, this year at least, can hang with any one of them.
If George Clooney were the type of guy to hold a grudge, he’d probably be egging Mira Nair’s house about now. Because, as the story goes, after Nair’s Amelia tanked (honest-to-goodness, I typed “crashed and burned” before realizing how awful that would be to say), Fox Searchlight bumped up Crazy Heart‘s release date to get a horse in the Oscar race. And that’s how Clooney went from a front-runner to an also-ran. And one of the reasons I enjoy Oscar season. Oh, to get back to the point, this is just George Clooney doing the same thing he’s done in just about every movie over the past decade, right? He’s quite good at it, of course. But it is starting to feel a bit stale.
I tend to conflate actor with character. I think everyone does, to be honest. Except I thought Jeff Bridges’ character in Crazy Heart was about as broadly-drawn as they come. An alcoholic, down-on-his luck country singer who sleeps with any woman in sight? No way! He does as good a job with it as anyone could, but the buzz to me rings more of the Academy deciding it is time someone has paid enough dues to get a win (this is Bridges fifth nomination, and he hasn’t won in the past). The film is about as “good” as Crazy Heart, but Jeff Bridges in The Open Road is what everyone thinks he is in Crazy Heart.
Jeremy Renner was very very good in The Hurt Locker. Not really sure that’s up for debate. I think with an Oscar Scene (TM) or two, he would have had a great shot at taking this thing down.
I’m not sure I would have put Morgan Freeman this high at first thought, and I wrestled with how he compared to Renner. Ultimately, though, it is Morgan Freeman. I do believe I’d say I liked him more than Meryl Streep’s Julia Child. Sue me. Sure, it was partially an impersonation. But Freeman humanized Nelson friggin’ Mandela. That’s a job well done.
It is entirely conceivable that I have a man crush on Colin Firth, if the concept made any sense. I’ve watched four movies starring Colin Firth with 2009 U.S. release dates, and I’ll be darned if he doesn’t play entirely different characters in each one. Here, Firth is working from a mediocre script, yet somehow manages to breathe life into his character. Never flashy to begin with, Firth packs a ton of emotion into every movement of his character’s battle to let his reserve prevent emotion from coming through. It isn’t my favorite performance of 2009, nor is it my favorite Colin Firth role. But as always, he manages to be quietly fantastic.
Adam pulls for a guy who wasn’t nominated:
- Jeremy Renner
- Colin Firth
- George Clooney
- Morgan Freeman
- Jeff Bridges
Will Win: Jeff Bridges
Actually, I agree with Jared’s assessment of Bridges role and nomination. Go read his piece if you want more…
I Want to Win: Daniel Day-Lewis
Yes, I realize he’s not nominated, and the movie he was in pretty much flopped, but DAMN can this guy act. Jared talked about Day-Lewis earlier a couple months ago, and I agree with his assessment. The guy is a chameleon and the intensity and range he can bring to a role is staggering. However, since he can’t win, I’m rooting for Jeremy Renner. He did a decent job and I’d like to see a non-Hollywood-heavyweight win.
Dark Horse: Morgan Freeman (once again, not being racist)
I love me some Morgan Freeman, but the nomination is for Morgan Freeman being Morgan Freeman…not for his portrayal of Nelson Mandela (that, and they are petrified of Clint Eastwood – as everyone should be – and need to make up for no Directing nomination). I personally thought he put on a pretty great performance, but not necessarily Oscar worthy.
Ranking:
Grouches Critiques:
Unfortunately for the -3 people reading this, I have no comments for this section. At the time I am writing this, only Jared has written his post and, unfortunately, I completely agree with his assessment (as stated above).
Random Notes:
Strong talent, mediocre performances for most.
Brian has a similar take:
I too am rather impressed with this group — there’s not one nominee that causes me to scratch my head or ponder what the Academy was thinking or want to stab myself in the eye. This is an improvement. Even Morgan Freeman, who was quite good even while the script called for him to do his best impersonation of Yoda, is a reasonable nomination. A) He’s Morgan Freeman and B) He’s playing Nelson Mandela and C) He’s actually good at both those things.
Speaking of actors being very good at being themselves, George Clooney. He’s really good at doing the roles he does, and he seems to just be an awesome person in general. I liked Up in the Air, as did all the Grouches I think — and Ryan Bingham was a fantastic character that was tailormade for Clooney. I liked Jared’s gamesmanship analysis — but see, thats not how Clooney rolls. How awesome would it be if he played a vicious villain in a future role? Like what if he did Christoph Waltz’s character in Basterds — that would be fantastic. I too have gotten off point — Clooney is great, but just not enough for my nod.
Jared has a major man crush on Colin Firth. A Single Man is one of those instances when I have hard time separating his strong performance from a mediocre, dare I say subpar film. I have vague remembrances of his portrayal of a closeted gay man still mourning the tragic death of his lover — but the scenes that stick out in my mind are Julianne Moore’s failed Oscar-bait overacting, Nicholas Hoult’s monotonous cherubicity (yes, I made up that word) all blanketed by Tom Ford’s obnoxious direction. That was part of the point, too, I’d guess in having Firth as the stoic character (the “strong, silent type” as Tony Soprano would say.) But in a year with other, more enrapturing performances like Michael Stuhlbarg in A Serious Man and, of course, Matt Damon in The Informant, it doesn’t make the cut.
As for Bridges, Jared’s analysis is truly spot-on. I’m going to take the same cop out as Adam and tell you all to read that. If you read Mark Harris’ New York story on this year’s Oscar campaign, then you’ll get the fuller story on how this definitely is the Career Achievement award for Bridges. Which is too bad, as I’ve loved him in other things (The Contender, Big Lebowski)
If you’ve read this far, you’ll see that I’ll be pulling for Jeremy Renner. I can’t imagine anyone else in this role — he has the charisma and the badassery to pull off playing SGT William James. Considering he’s relatively unknown, I’m sure that other actors could have been considered — but no one, not even the modern everyday infantryman Matt Damon, would have brought the calm and coolness of Clooney with the internal pain/crazy that you’d see from a younger Daniel Day-Lewis. Really just a bravura performance that carried the whole film on its shoulders.
And John goes in an entirely different direction:
Let me first cast judgment on this category. 2009 was a strong year for actors. I highlighted some great ones here. It’s not uncommon for one’s favorite candidates to not get nominated, but it is a little interesting that so many of mine seem like they should have been in the conversation but weren’t. So this is a fine slate but it kind of leaves me thinking of what might have been.
Freeman is commanding in Invictus but I feel like he’s hampered by the material. He does a fine Mandela but he doesn’t get to do much but give cliched motivational speeches so he doesn’t get to exhibit much range. Speaking of hampered by material, I think the same can be said for Firth. At least we know he’s very good at long, boring conversations that try your patience. But I think it’s a performance that’s hard to buy into if you don’t buy into the film.
Renner is terrific in The Hurt Locker. I love his intensity, sometimes verging on insanity, contrasted with his level-headed leadership when dealing with an over-his-head subordinate. The film takes some weird plot directions that left me a little unsettled, but Renner sells them to the extent that they didn’t really bother me until the film was over.
Bridges is the best part of Crazy Heart. Is that saying a lot? Probably not much. But I think the picture is absolutely nothing outside of a good song without him. He gives a broadly-drawn character depth and empathy.
But there’s one very clear winner here, and that’s George Clooney. Yes, the suave, self-assured character he plays at the beginning of the Up in the Air is standard for him, but that doesn’t make it any less impressive. It’s in his subtlety where he really shines; compare this performance to the over-the-top smooth characterhe played in the Oceans movies. Here there’s a perceptible softening as the film goes on and a shift in the character that very easily could have been overplayed but was not. He also has the magnetism to really lead a film.
Jared says this is a character he plays all the time, but check out what he’s done in the last decade. Most of his roles are significantly more zany or animated. What this is like is his role in Michael Clayton. Which, by the way, was terrific and Oscar-nominated.
Snubs: Michael Stuhlbarg in A Serious Man at least got some traction. But Peter Sarsgaard in An Education somehow did not. And I’ll say it til the world goes deaf: Matt Damon gave the best performance of the year in The Informant!
Let’s talk Crazy Heart because we haven’t had much to say about it yet. But there’s a reason for that: there’s nothing interesting to discuss.
If there’s one word to use to describe the film it’s “superficial.” The story is just really thin. And the main reason is that it falls into one of my most-hated pitfalls in that the main relationship just doesn’t feel right.
Jeff Bridges is Bad Blake, a washed up country star doing the bar and bowling alley circuit in middle America. Maggie Gyllenhaal is Jean, a journalist and single mother who interviews him at one of his stops. They fall for each other, he wrestles his demons, etc…
Blake’s an interesting enough character but Jean is not particularly well-developed. And from what we know about both there’s no reason to believe these two characters would fall for each other. They also fall in love so quickly!
“You’re cute. Will you sleep with me?”
“You’re an old drunk so… yes.”
*night passes*
“So we’re in love now?”
“Agreed”
*handshake*
It’s a fine movie but I didn’t think it was particularly special. And, truth be told, Jeff Bridges didn’t blow me away either. He’s still the best part of the movie. He’ll win his Best Actor Oscar and that will be good for him. Gyllenhaal’s Supporting nod feels weak to me, but that might have to do with the weakness of her character. With material that made better use of her earnest expressions and Southern accent, perhaps the performance would have done more for me.
Really Crazy Heart needs to win Best Song, and I suspect it will. The writing of the song is a major plotline with the big performance coming in circumstances that I would call pretty perfect. And it’s a darn good song.
Actually, “The Weary Kind” is so good it diminishes the rest of the songs in the movie, which are generally standard country tunes that don’t particularly stand out. I knew “The Weary Kind” going in and expected a certain musical tone and those expectations were not met. Again, not bad, but underwhelming.
So that’s that. I imagine we won’t be talking about Crazy Heart much more.
John’s a good man and got this up before the nominees were announced. I’m gonna see how many categories I can get through before Oscars. Now, I’ve seen probably more 2009 movies than I should have, but I’m still slogging my way through some, so between that and the game theory of the ballot, I reserve the right to have my best of 2009 list look a little different, though ballots are due when ballots are due.
1. Stanley Tucci, Blind Date
A remake of the same-named Theo van Gogh film, Blind Date slipped into a few theaters rather quietly, and I have no idea how it came across my radar. Little more than Tucci, Patricia Clarkson, and a single room, it blurs the line between film and staged play. Revolving around a husband and a wife who set up blind dates with each other as they deal with a tragedy, the role requires tremendous range and depth, and I can’t really imagine too many actors pulling it off successfully.
2. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, (500) Days of Summer
He’ll have turned 30 around next year’s Oscars, so maybe he’ll finally be old enough for some Academy love. He’s certainly built an impressive resume. The male lead in a romantic comedy of this sort is difficult to play, in my opinion. It is very easy to veer off into sheer whininess, but Gordon-Levitt is eminently relatable.
3. Sharlto Copley, District 9
In traditional hands, this role is played by someone like Vin Diesel. Which would have been interesting, sure. But instead, one of the most unlikeliest action heroes turned in something quite memorable.
4. Daniel Day-Lewis, Nine
The movie wasn’t great, sure. But Daniel Day-Lewis was his usual crazy impressive self. If he had been billed as, say, Baniel Bay-Kewis, I would have had absolutely no idea that this actor was the same one who played Daniel Plainview. His ability to morph from role to role is just staggering.
5. Colin Firth, A Single Man
Another performance hampered by a subpar film. It tickled me pink to see Colin Firth get a nod, because he’s been so consistently great. Given about as much to work with as Jeff Bridges, for example, Firth creates a much more textured character, one who felt more like a real person than a caricature.
Just off the ballot: Michael Sheen (The Damned United) and Patton Oswalt (Big Fan)
Well this morning the Official Mistress of the Golden Grouches (c), Anne Hathaway, announced the nominations — and there were few surprises among the acting nods, a couple shockers in the Best Picture, but overall things went according to plan. Nonetheless, we still pulled together our thoughts for a short post.
Brian: My biggest disappointment is that with Penelope Cruz’ nomination, I now have to see Nine, something that I had been avoiding doing. No real desire to see it at all, but it can’t be nearly as bad as Lovely Bones, which fortunately, did indeed garner Stanley Tucci a nomination. It would have been tragic had we had to sit through that dreck for no reason whatsoever.
With the best pictures, I was quite happy to see District 9 get the nod there and in screenplay — I held out hope for director until getting slapped in the face by Lee Daniels name being read. As Jared says below, Blind Side is the only real WTF here, and even that it’s rather pointless since it has no shot at winning. This batch of nominations also has me quite excited to see A Serious Man when it comes out on DVD next week.
Other thoughts: disappointed that Damon got nominated for the wrong role and left Molina in the dust. Happy to see Moore get snubbed for A Single Man as her role was more or less the same as Susan Sarandon’s in Lovely Bones and was less funny. I had forgotten all about In the Loop until John started his well-deserved campaign for it, and I’m happy that John got something to gloat about. By far my biggest disappointment though was Marvin Hamlisch getting crapola for The Informant. His score was such an integral character in the great movie that it deserved to win the award, not just the nod.
Looking forward to stewing over these races in the “should win” discussions — especially the screenplays. Lots to ponder. And I think the 10 films for best picture was a wild success — good job…academy?
Adam: Editor’s Note: Adam did not submit anything so I wrote it for him. Inglorious Basterds: Yay. If only It’s Complicated were nominated, then I could make fun of Brian more. I’ll find other ways.
Jared, via iPhone in the DFW airport: Most surprising to me is the relative lack of true surprises. There were some, of course, but I’d guess most Oscar prognosticators did pretty well, especially if they stayed conservative.
People will hate on The Blind Side, and sure, it probably isn’t a top ten film. However, in my opinion it is miles better than Crazy Heart, Invictus, and The Messenger, all of which now appear to have been viable contenders. Like, it just isn’t close at all. So while I would have preferred Star Trek, The Hangover, or In The Loop, I can settle for the middle ground.
I’ve heard people claim this is the wrong year for ten nominees. But you know what? This a very strong lineup, and for me, stacks up against much of this decade’s best picture groups. And really, assuming the expansion got District 9 and Up into the group, I’m fully prepared to call it a success.
I’m a little surprised we didn’t see something crazy in Supporting Actress. Sorta seems like the Academy threw its collective hands in the air and gave up. There was definitely room for another film to have made a play here. No Basterds is a surprise, I guess, but there seemed a very unWeinstein-like unfocused campaign.
Finally, the screenplay categories were a general success. My efforts to not jinx them went mostly rewarded. In the Loop getting a nomination is such a good thing. But, of course, the one nomination I really really wanted to see, (500) Days of Summer, missed. Probably at the hands of The Messenger, which I interpret as a direct, intentional, personal slap in my face.
John: Before going to bed last night I nearly made a quick post amending my earlier “biggest hopes” declarations. But I decided not to and both of those hopes came true!
I had been surprised at the amount of In the Loop predictions prognosticators were making yesterday, which gave me hope for an Adapted Screenplay nomination, whereas before I thought of it as only a longshot. But then it happened! It was my big fist pump moment of the morning. It really has made my day.
My other hope was that Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs would get left off the Animated Feature slate in favor of some of the more interesting films that came out this year. When Coraline was announced first (nominees are announced alphabetically) it was obvious this wish had come true and it was fun to see what would take its spot. The Secret of Kells is an interesting choice, although not the one I would make.
A few other quick thoughts:
- A boring slate of acting nominees. Very by the numbers. Penelope Cruz was a surprise, but only because her long-presumed nomination seemed derailed by Nine‘s failure.
- No Avatar in Original Screenplay. Not a problem for most of the Grouches, but interesting that such a juggernaut would miss. 500 Days of Summer also missed and that had seemed like the indie that would break out in a writing category. I suspect not being in the picture for Best Picture hurt it.
- Hooray for Invictus not making Best Picture even though it appears to be supplanted by the awful The Blind Side.
- No Makeup nod for District 9 despite the film’s heavy use of prosthetics. Instead the aging makeup for Il Divo and the hairstyles of The Young Victoria get in, along side Star Trek.
- No Score nod for The Informant! excludes that gem of a film completely.
- I’m generally happy with the Best Song slate. Thankfully “See You” from Avatar was left off.
So it all comes down to this. Nominations come out tomorrow and the Grouches are staking their pristine reputations on their predictive powers! Brian, Jared, and John took a stab at the top eight categories while John and Jared went on to predict the rest of the non-short categories. There’s a lot of overlap, so any picks where we differ has been shaded.
The Big Eight:
And the rest (note we also predicted how many Best Song nominees there will be, since there can be 0, 2, 3, 4, or 5)
Who will reign supreme? We’ll declare a winner tomorrow!
Oscar nominations will be announced on February 2. We’re counting down to the big day by offering some hard-hitting analysis and incisive opinions on the toughest questions surrounding the nominees. We can be sometimes be pretty negative, but we like stuff too! What’s your biggest hope for nomination morning?
John: Matt Damon And Left Field
My biggest hope is fairly easy. I hope Matt Damon slides into the Best Actor race from the back of the bubble for his wonderful work inThe Informant! I’ve steeled myself for the likely eventuality that he won’t make it, but I’ll be holding my breath to see who comes after George Clooney in the alphabetical announcement tomorrow.
I’m also hoping that something entirely out of left field sneaks into the Best Picture nominations. With ten slots available, something with a fairly small amount of support can make it in. I won’t necessarily agree with the choice – I’d guess the most likely possibilities to be The Blind Side or Crazy Heart – but it’d make for some excitement to see something come out of nowhere. And imagine if it becomes something of an Oscar tradition! What film will shock everyone each year? That would be fun!
Brian: Directing District (and Dodgeball)
In Dave Karger’s list of slightly plausible shots in the dark for tomorrow morning, he posits that Lee Daniels of Precious will get pushed out for Best Director and Neill Blomkamp of District 9 will come in with the upset. I can think of no other switcheroo that would make me happier. Daniels nearly ruined my good feelings about Precious with the gratuitous use of verite camera shots, obnoxious fantasy interludes, and grotesque (and overused) zoom-ins of boiling pig’s feet. Blomkomp created a new world — based on the all-to-real world of the slums of South Africa — of aliens, super weapons, Michael Scott-inspired humans, and juiced up mercenaries straight out of Avatar that directors should be awarded for. I don’t see it happening, but man — that would be like what Gary Cole in Dodgeball calls a “two-person swing!”
Jared: Mo’ Mo’Nique, No Problems
When I first heard the Oscar buzz surrounding Precious, I immediately pictured the sheer ridiculousness of Mo’Nique getting a nomination. Which isn’t meant as an insult to the actress, I don’t think, I’m the first one to advocate the Academy getting outside their comfort zone. It is just that Mo’Nique doesn’t exactly fit the Oscar mold, and I still smile to think of her being mentioned in the same breath as, say, Jack Nicholson or Meryl Streep. That said, yowza. I don’t know what I can say about her performance that hasn’t already been said. And while it is an admittedly weak year for supporting actresses, it is instructive that there’s really zero momentum for any other contender. Rightfully so, because Mo’Nique just towers over everyone else. Sure, part of it is that everyone loves a villain (see Waltz, Christoph). But it would have been so easy to take Mary somewhere comic book over-the-top, making her an unrelatable, emotionaless automaton. Mo’Nique gives Mary depth and humanity, which just makes the character that much scarier.
The non-lock category is a little trickier. There’s definitely some fluidity this year, so while a lot of nominees are all but nailed down, there’s no one scenario that every single person is picking. So I’m happy there’s be some excitement. My biggest hope lies in the categories that may mean most to me: Adapted and Original Screenplay. I’m terrified of jinxing anything, because I think my favorites are on the bubble. I won’t name names, but it is probably obvious which movies have my backing. So here’s hoping some of my favorite movies of the year aren’t excluded at the expense of some of my least favorite.
Recent Comments