Slumdog About to Make History
Reader Andrew points out:
Slumdog is making history here. What are the only 2 other movies to win Golden Globe (Best Picture- Drama), Critics Choice, SAG ensemble, PGA and DGA???
Answer:
Lord of the Rings Return of the King and American Beauty, both of which also won BAFTA. Chicago won Golden Globe BP (Musical or Comedy) and the other awards but lost the BAFTA.
Probably Slumdog will, when all is said and done, win more than Beauty. Return of the King has to still top the charts with the most total wins across the board. Is anyone counting?
Let’s look at the year in campaigning and explore why Slumdog took the lead and triumphed so spectacularly.
The first thing is that, as we’ve always said, a good movie is a good movie is a good movie. It doesn’t matter what time of year it is released and it doesn’t matter which studio puts it out and it doesn’t really matter that much what kind of ad campaign it brings (although there is something to discuss here but we’ll get to that later). It will triumph because of there is nothing more powerful than word of mouth. No passionate blogger’s “early word,” no enthusiastic critic’s high praise, a winner like Slumdog is a film anyone can watch and respond to. What it is is right on its face. There is no symbolism to uncover, no fancy performance at the center, no attempt to add artistry – it is just a good story well told. And that makes it stand out from the bunch coming out of a phase in Oscar history where the Best Picture contenders were more intellectually challenging.
Slumdog has the benefit of being a general audience film dressed up in an art house package. Voters can feel that they are still choosing the little indie but all the while they’re responding to it on a different level. This isn’t a movie you watch with your brain engaged; this is a story that sweeps you up, carries you away to a far off land, and drops you safely back home with all of the ends tied up, where the boy gets the girl AND the loot and everything and everyone is in harmony with the universe.
That’s Frank Capra, that’s good old fashioned movie making for the huddled masses. This movie is prestigious because it was directed by the brilliantly versatile and quite artsy fartsy Danny Boyle and because it wears the Fox Searchlight label. No one is forcing anyone to like this movie. They just do. And it keeps winning because Seachlight is doing everything right. It might just keep winning anyway but there are some things the campaign has done to keep it on the right track.
Finally, what helps Slumdog this year is the political climate mixed with the economic disaster that surrounds us. This isn’t a time for naval gazing or deep contemplation of the human condition. This isn’t a time to meditate on violence or the darker sides of human nature. That might hurt too much when we are all hurting pretty badly, even those of us who aren’t hurt are feeling it all around us. Obama has brought a feeling of renewal and hope, Slumdog fits right in with that.
All of these things are why the film has a clear path to victory but the only reason it keeps winning is because it is a good movie. Top to bottom, this film, like all of Boyle’s work, is vivid and breathtaking. The music is so good and the actors he chose are perfect. I mean they are actors only a really smart director would find. This film would not have worked without Dev Patel as Jamal. And Frieda Pinto, in her own way, it perfectly suited to Latika. Latika has, throughout the film, a sad, dreamy expression on her face, even as a young orphan called into the tunnel to get out of the rain. That sweetness never leaves because that is what Pinto looks like all of the time. So, while she didn’t have to do much except look pretty the sadness to her expression is what makes us ache to have them be together; we need to see Jamal rescue Latika and he does. Technically she runs away but still, you get the idea.
What Fox Searchlight did this time was make it about the movie and not about the campaign. Both Juno and Little Miss Sunshine, in trying to look like a solid Best Picture candidate, both overdid it. If Searchlight had come on that strong with Slumdog voters would not have felt like they were discovering the movie and that is essential.
None of the Best Pictures in the last three years were “Oscar movies.” They weren’t made for nor designed to win Oscars, and certainly not the Best Picture Oscar. No Country was an early critics’ darling and it wasn’t exactly a general audience movie. In fact, that film won on the Coens’ name and the brilliance of the performances. The Departed and Slumdog made it through because they were good movies. One can argue that Martin Scorsese was due and that is what pushed The Departed through but the truth of it is that it’s partly that, but it’s also that The Departed was simply the best of the five nominated that year.
The worst thing a film can be is the frontrunner when the year starts. Not the season, but the year. That was the curse of Benjamin Button. It never had a chance to unfurl in the right way. It was set up, predicted everywhere as the frontrunner before it opened, and by the time it opened the critics had their claws bared. This is the position no film ever wants to find themselves in unless they are a movie like Titanic or Schindler’s List. And even then. No one had very high expectations for Titanic. It was getting bad press about being way over budget and being a runaway production.
I went back and read through some old archives at Movie City News and I found that David Poland wasn’t even talking about Titanic as an Oscar movie heading into the season. It opened first and then became an Oscar movie.
So the lesson here is that you have to have the goods. If you don’t have the goods you can maybe get a lot of nominations, maybe a win here or there but Best Picture could elude you.
This year, the Oscar movies were being held from Toronto, for instance, where Slumdog got such a clear green light, in hopes of dampening the chatter around them. This worked in a way but didn’t work in another way; no matter what time a film like Frost/Nixon or Benjamin Button is released, word will have gotten out long before and thus expectations risen sky high.
It gets back to the idea of big studio versus independent. Slumdog is a true independent, picked up after it got the high acclaim. The movies that have studios behind them make up the other four in the category so by sheer numbers, the studios are still winning the game.
And the Oscar predictors didn’t do half bad either, with Slumdog being the one major surprise; The Reader had always been on our radar but it looked, for a time, like it would get lost in the shuffle.
The Reader is really the year’s biggest surprise (by now, the Slumdog surprise has worn off). After there was a lot of bad press about the spat between Weinstein and Rudin over Sydney Pollack on his death bed, and Stephen Daldry protesting releasing it because it wasn’t ready, and the audience testing, and Kate Winslet torn between Weinstein’s movie and Rudin’s movie – that was a story worthy of a book. Or at the very least a long Vanity Fair article. It doesn’t look like, so far, anyone has picked it up but if you were writing a book about this year’s race, that would be the most interesting chapter, especially when you cap it off with the Academy allowing four producers to be acknowledged.
And so it is with this that 2008 comes to a close. It may not be over technically but it feels over. When Slumdog won the SAG it felt over to me. All that’s left is just how many Oscars will Slumdog win. Will it do what ROTK did and clean sweep this sucker? Or will another film squeak in in the 11th hour and steal screenplay? We’ll have to wait and see.
In the going through the motions category, we still have BAFTA, the Eddies and the WGA before the Oscar ceremony. At this point it doesn’t look likely that any film could derail the Slumdog train. But if I did it would be either The Reader or Button. Why not Milk or Frost/Nixon? I think the Academy remain largely homophobic. It makes me sad but it is, I think, a reality. It has nothing to do with the quality of the film. What hurt Milk the most was losing the SAG ensemble vote, which it should have won (and deserved to win, imo). It might not be homophobia at all; it might be just that everyone loves Slumdog more. Who can ever tell these things. And Frost/Nixon feels like Michael Clayton to me – a solid contender in its designated slot.
As Iggy Pop would say, “it’ll all be over soon!”
Other posts you might like
102 Comments
2 Trackbacks
-
[...] Stone points out a bit of sweep trivia that an Awards Daily reader passed her way. But I think it goes even deeper than a [...]
-
[...] Speaking up in defense of the movie is Sasha Stone, over at Awards Daily: Slumdog has the benefit of being a general audience film dressed up in an art house package. Voters can feel that they are still choosing the little indie but all the while they’re responding to it on a different level. This isn’t a movie you watch with your brain engaged; this is a story that sweeps you up, carries you away to a far off land, and drops you safely back home with all of the ends tied up, where the boy gets the girl AND the loot and everything and everyone is in harmony with the universe. [...]
Noah R. says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 10:30am
I don’t care what any of the haters say: Slumdog is the best of the five and you will never convince me otherwise. In a year as lame for cinema as 2008, I’m just glad a film by a real artist who doesn’t work within Hollywood’s standards is gathering all the goods. Plus Danny Boyle has been overdue since Trainspotting. It’s the only film in the five that wasn’t greenlit for the purpose of winning Oscars. That matters to me.
Is it the second coming? Of course not. But it’s better than average, and that’s more you can say for any of the other films. But hey, as long as The Reader doesn’t win, I’ll live.
Loyal Mehnert says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 10:42am
There’s little chance it sweeps. In fact, depending on the order of awards presented, it could lose several in a row which could provide some anxiety for some.
I find the PGA/DGA/SAG/CC/GG tally not so much impressive as it is irritating. When was the last time someone mentioned American Beauty in conversation? I sense the same fate for Slumdog.
Mitchell says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 10:50am
“There is no symbolism to uncover…no attempt to add artistry.”
I believe that there is rich symbolism hidden within the cinematography and many aspects of the film. The yellow and orange palate commonly represents the true, real world while the blue and purple palate represents the escapist world. Boyle explores the unique relationship between the two (and the differences between their natures) and personifies this topic within Jamal and Latika. Jamal=escapism and Latika=reality. Latika is almost always dressed in yellow, while Jamal in blues and greens. If you believe that this film does not hold artistic depth, than you are foolish.
Remy says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 10:55am
“When was the last time someone mentioned American Beauty in conversation?”
I mention it every time someone asks me what my favorite movie is. I think the last time was three weeks ago.
michael says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 10:59am
There are several reasons that I am happy for SM’s awards sweep:
1. I love that this is the first time this culture has been explored to the Oscars, et al… (no i will not acknowledge Ghandi)
2. There is no question that Boyle is one of the most interesting directors to emerge in the past 10+ years. Trainspotting and 28 Days Later are burned into my memory forever. And he strikes me as the type that will continue to get more interesting (more financial backing will hopefully just help more).
3. It’s been many years since an underdog story (re: the process not the actual film) has risen to the top of the pile. I love that this isn’t one of those career Oscar stories (re: The Departed).
4. And for sheer awards fan pleasure: Everyone involved in the film seems so incredibly surprised and grateful for every award they receive. This has got to (appear at least) as the most grateful group of people I’ve ever witnessed at a ceremony. Sweet, how can you not love it?
ajnrules says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:05am
It’ll be exactingly difficult for Slumdog to achieve a full sweep, since it was nominated twice in the Best Original Song category, so unless the Academy feels like awarding a tie, Slumdog will probably end up with only nine awards.
Loyal Mehnert says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:14am
Errrrr, what’s your #2 film of all time Remy?
Remy says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:17am
“Errrrr, what’s your #2 film of all time Remy?”
Not sure.
neil says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:20am
loyal…
i agree with Remy i mention “American Beauty” all the time… its my fave movie ever… and since you will ask.
my second favorite is the Graduate followed by Eternal Sunshine followed by Requiem for a Dream followed by Usual Suspects.
actually back to AB… i watched it last night bc i had some friends who had not seen it.
Tufas says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:20am
I have to agree with Loyal Mehnert.. I have been having that feeling about Slumdog for weeks now. Some movies grow to legendary status with their sweeps, other gain it by losing… While others end up forgotten, and not returned to ever again.
While I loved Slumdog Millionaire, I feel that it will, for me, end up in the same place Chicago and A Beautiful Mind and even Braveheart are now (forgotten and not that missed tbh..)
T.
Harolds Maude says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:24am
Sasha, Thank you for this analysis. Although Slumdog is in fact a ‘good movie’ awards and momentum are all about context.
This was interesting to read.
Loyal Mehnert says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:33am
Well Neil, 1 out of 5 ain’t bad.
Adam Smith says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:35am
Honestly, I will be surprised by a clean sweep (which, in this case, is 9 wins). For one, there is still the outside chance that “Jai Ho” and “O…Saya” will split the Slumdog base so that “Down to Earth” slips in and wins. However, I also get the distinct impression that “Jai Ho” is clearly the more popular of the two, so it should probably win with ease. It’s also a film of flashy and quick cuts, so Editing is in the bag. Because the Academy all too often associates Best Cinematography with “pretty colors”, Slumdog should win this, too (leaving Wally Pfister’s truly exceptional lensing unrewarded, unless the ASC makes the right choice, as they often do and as the Academy often fails). However, the one category I guarantee it will miss is Sound Editing. No matter how much love there is, this award belongs to WALL-E, plain and simple. I would argue the same about Sound Mixing, but Slumdog or Dark Knight could take it (though WALL-E deserves it).
Now, I’ve heard the rumors about whispers of Milk coming from out of nowhere to win, and I honestly don’t buy them. However, if Milk wins for Editing or Costume Design, I will take that as a sign that Sean Penn will win Best Actor, and Milk will win Best Picture. I say this for two reasons:
1) Having it win for some very subtle work in categories in which it is the underdog for a period that never gets recognized in the Costume Design category is a sign of widespread support for the film that will translate to wins in other major categories.
2) Because there’s no way Milk is winning for Editing or Costume Design. Slumdog has Editing in the bag, and Costume Design probably goes to Ben Button or The Duchess.
The Z says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:42am
Thankfully, “Slumdog Millionaire” can’t sweep – it’s competing against itself in the song category.
I’m not a hater (my favorite film wasn’t even nominated), but I just don’t see the fuss – yes, it was well-made (if not a bit contrived – or if your prefer, coincindental); yes, it was entertaining. But I left the theatre feeling “meh.” It didn’t do for me what it appears to have done for some others. I guess, personally, it lacked the emotional wallop I love and anticipate when I see a film.
I won’t be surprised, though, if there is a split in Picture and Director. I mentioned elsewhere that this race reminds me of 2002 and 2005 – plus, if you look at recent history (which, I know, shouldn’t be done, but yet we all do it) there have been more splits in the last decade than any other time in Oscar history.
And despite what I’ve seen others say about the apparent predictability of this year’s winners, I am very eager for Oscar night.
Rahulio says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:42am
A good Oscar telecast would have each film winning 2 or 3 awards and having a “spread the wealth” kind of situation. I don’t think that would happen.
But, come on, how awesome would it be for Milk to win Costume Design when they’ve previously ignored 1970s costuming?
One of my favorite movies is The Graduate, too! Although, my favorite movie ever is probably either Manhattan or Goodfellas or Beauty and the Beast. It’s hard to choose…
Ibad says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:44am
I’m not a big fan of American Beauty, but I must say, it is mentioned quite a bit. Just as Return of the King is. And since this is in the same tradition, I don’t really doubt that Slumdog will be a new member of that pantheon. I notice its the “cool” and “hip” thing from Slumdog haters attempting to be cinephiles and film historians by downplaying the legacy of Slumdog Millionaire in the future but they have literally NOTHING to back up what they say except their own personal distaste for the movie and bitterness over its success. The movies that tend to be forgotten, to me, are the big budget super sprawling oscar begging movies like A Beautiful Mind, Chicago, and probably The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. The ones that have a story, the ones that are successful due to how good people sincerely believe it to be, like Slumdog Millionaire, are the ones that leave marks on the industry.
Loyal Mehnert says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:46am
I was a cinephile and film historian previous to Slumdog.
Ibad says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 11:55am
Well, clearly you don’t pay much attention then if you must ask people when the last time they’ve heard about American Beauty was even though it is commonly cited as one of the greatest modern American films ever made, as much as you and I would disagree with that statement.
Afrika says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:08pm
Not SLumdog again…oh my god! can we talk about something else?
…and what is all this talk about American Beauty? I thought it was a mediocre film which tried to take itself too seriously and the worst part is, people fell for the scam and took it too seriously. IMO, underrated movies like “Savages” and “City of God” are by far more superior. Subtle yet majestic.
Ibad says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:09pm
Did you really just call City of God subtle?
nixon says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:11pm
Jai Ho should win.
Loyal Mehnert says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:12pm
Did someone just call American Beauty one of the greatest modern American films ever made?
My hyperbole detector just exploded, much like Lester’s brains.
Nick K. says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:20pm
Question: If a film is forgotten within five years of it’s release, does it really make history?
I really hope the Wrestler becomes a cult classic over the years. It was a truly stupendous movie. And I hope Aronofsky wins an Oscar someday. But this year, it’ll have to go to Boyle, which I’m not upset about at all.
In response to the Cinematography, I thought TDK’s cinematography was one of the many great things about the movie. Just watch the scene in the interrogation room, when Gordon’s talking to the Joker. It conveys the thematic atmosphere of the film so well, it gave me goosebumps.
P.S. I really would like to see American Beauty, but it seems that Loyal Mehnert has just given away the ending. Sort of. Oh well, I’m still gonna see it anyway. *sigh* I miss 1999. So many great movies (BJM, Magnolia, South Park).
rachel getting oscared says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:21pm
God help us!
red_wine loves Roger Federer to death says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:23pm
I forgot the Cinematographer’s guild, thats the only place where Slumdog might loose, but if it wins that too, we are indeed looking at an absolute flood of Slumdog wins. Cinematography according to me is deserved by TDK.
Loyal Mehnert says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:26pm
Nick if you haven’t seen American Beauty by now, you never were. LOL.
This just in, Slumdog Millionaire was voted the Greatest Film Ever Made Featuring Non-Native American Indians
And
Greatest Film Ever In The History Of The Universe That Features Street Urchins (sorry Oliver!).
Slumdog4Ever.
Ryan says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:28pm
I actually have problems with the Oscar campaign of Fox Searchlight. I mean every FYC is like the same damn picture as the movie’s official poster. And that’s it. I wanted so much more.
But like you said, maybe that WAS intentional to blunt its frontrunner status. If it works, bravo. I mean it’s a testament to the film that it has done SO WELL with critics, guilds, awards bodies, AND audience with not much of a campaign. It’s almost all word-of-mouth and that is just so fantastic when compared to all the others “Oscar movies” spending millions on a campaign and the cache of its big Hollywood stars.
Let’s hear it for the little movie that did it. Even if it loses Best Picture, which would be a monumental upset, it’s already done SO much like Brokeback Mountain. The movie to upset it will be this year’s Crash. Though how ironic would it be if that was Milk? BTW, Milk is the ONLY film I would want to upset Slumdog Millionaire. So go figure.
amanda says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:31pm
The fact that it won best ensemble is still horrific.
Afrika says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:44pm
Ibad
Yes! and I will say it a million times over and over again. Subtle in terms of delivery and not content. So much for thinking it was self-explanatory.
Paul Outlaw says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:55pm
Someone mentioned this recently in another thread: Slumdog‘s real claim to history will be that it is the first film since The Last Emperor (the first) to feature virtually no European (or of European descent) principal characters or actors and win Best Picture. And The Last Emperor had Peter O’Toole.
Haifa says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 12:56pm
Ryan, I definitely think Searchlight went out of its way to not really campaign at all for Slumdog. Didn’t they send out like freaking cupcakes or something for Little Miss Sunshine?
Craig says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 1:14pm
Slumdog is 3rd out of the 5 at best. I don’t understand why it’s killing everything else. ROTK deserved the clean sweep because it was the crowning film achievement of the decade (and so far, of the century). Slumdog is good, but it’s not even a quarter as great.
Roy says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 1:43pm
Yeah, I think once Slumdog won the S.A.G. ensemble things were more or less sewn up. I enjoyed Slumdog for what it was, but you had to feel for Milk, full of actors like Penn, Brolin and Hirsch, to lose to, let’s say face it, pretty amateurish performances in comparison.
Still keep fingers crossed for Fincher for director, but I wouldn’t put money on it.
Ben says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 1:44pm
Counting what??? SAG ensemble??? So what, its an acting prize, not a picture prize, even SAG says so. I’m counting the WRITERS GUILD, which is a writing prize, but Director Producer Writing is the historic threesome, not recent SAG ensemble that’s gone to Birdcage and Fully Monty and half the time non-Oscar Best Pictures and often non-contenders are nominated (see last year’s nominees).
Slumdog LOST New York and Los Angeles Film Crix, historically the two most important. American Beauty LOST New York and Los Angeles. Return of the King won New York but lost Los Angeles, and Return LOST the writers guild award!!!
So: name the ONLY films to win New York, Los Angeles, Golden Globe, Directors Guild, Writers Guild, Producers Guild:
BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN!!
Yes, it lost SAG ensemble, but thats it. And I find that more impressive than Slumdog’s, American Beauty’s and Return of the King’s sweeps. Slumdog is also not the most nominated of its year. All of these won the Broadcast Film Crix, which has become the #3 crix prize since it is televised. [The National Society has prestige but zero influence, matching Oscar best pictures only 4 times since 1966, plus they are always last and frankly try to be different most of the time].
In the end, Slumdog’s tally is obviously very impressive since it will also have an Oscar, just like Crash and Greatest Show on Earth and How Green Was My Valley and Ordinary People and Shakespeare in Love etc. Better to be prop 8 gay bash’d Brokeback, or Saving Private Ryan, which also won what a TON, and have New York and/or Los Angeles in the tradition of High Noon and Citizen Kane and Raging Bull and Do the Right Thing and Goodfellas and Fargo and many other more deserving greats.
JK says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 1:49pm
I really like Slumdog, but is nowhere near the “absolute” best in every category of awards in the world…..
ROTK was such an acomplished, Slumdog is great but once again not the absolute best….
My only hope is that any other movie wins something, because Slumdog need to get some reality that is not deserving of everything but only a few
Afrika says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 2:00pm
oUTLAW
Your argument on Slumdog having no cast member of European descent would have been more substantial if it wasn’t directed by a European. I mean, that alone defeats the purpose.
Doubt or Milk should have won Best ensemble at the SAGs. The performances were just stunning.
Ben says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 2:01pm
Sorry, this has me riled, I have to vent again. This is in no way a diss on Slumdog (not the best compared to Wall-E and Dark Knight, but a wonderful film), but a diss on the Academy.
The point is, with all those precursors Slumdog has, how on earth can it possibly lose??? Well, it can’t. No way. Nothing with those awards loses, except Brokeback. Brokeback had everything Slumdog has except SAG ensemble, but it had New York and Los Angeles Crix Best Picture prizes (and more critics Best Picture prizes overall). Yes, SAG ensemble is a bigger indicator, but in terms of prestige and prizes, Brokeback equals or tops Slumdog. Also, in terms of acting ensembles, Slumdog has no acting nods at the Oscars, and Crash had one. Brokeback had three nominations, for both its leads and for one of its two major supporting players. C’mon, that says something, doesn’t it??
And no diss on Philip Seymour Hoffman, a superb actor, but he had a model for Capote and admittedly nailed it, but Heath’s performance was so incredibly original, and for the ages, an all-time great performance. At the time, people were shocked that the star of Knight’s Tale could give such a towering performance, he was a starlet in the eyes of old Hollywood, not ready to win, but he should have. And if he had the star power that he has now, he would have.
So for the umpteenth time Oscar-watchers, look at Brokeback’s prizes compared even with Slumdog (no NY or LA, not the most nominations) and Return of the King (no writers guild or LA) and American Beauty (no major crix prizes, just guilds), realize that Brokeback (most picture prizes overall) was their precursor equal or even superior, and tell me how Brokeback lost. Look at Prop 8 and Ernest and Tony and you’ll have your answer.
P.S. Brokeback, like Slumdog and Beauty, also won the big 3 prizes at the Globes, Picture, Director and Screenplay, a very rare feat, something like 15 or 16 times since 1943. Those films usually win Oscars. Also, yes, Saving Private Ryan was a powerhouse that lost, but not quite as strong as these others in terms of precursors (since it won no writing or acting prizes at all throughout the entire season), but remember, Shakespeare was a true competitor, it had a Globe for Best Picture (Crash wasn’t even nominated!), the most nominations, several best picture prizes from crix, the most acting nominations, etc.
qwiggles says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 2:02pm
Hate to spoil the party here, but the claims are starting to get silly.
Ben makes a good point in that bizarre criteria are being used to call this “history” making. Using Andrew’s criteria, it is the third film to have managed this feat since 1996, when the SAG ensemble was first given out. Over 12 years, then, 25% including Slumdog have pulled this precursor collection off. If you start thinking a little harder and realizing that excluding best picture winners in comedy/musical at the Globes is just a neat way of counting out Chicago, which would’ve won no matter what category it was placed in, and revise accordingly, the stat for GG (c or d), SAG, PGA, DGA, Critics Choice becomes 4/12, or 33%. So in other words, this happens once every third year, and is supposedly historic every time.
Pardon me, but this sounds like an awfully high average, and history-making is not the first thing that comes to mind. Rather, it seems more like sweeps are pretty common.
Anyway, as Ben pointed out, why are we drawing the line in the sand here if not because we are retroactively tracing Slumdog’s victorious steps? Why are we including the Critics Choice but not LA & NY? Because Slumdog didn’t win them? Come on.
Paul Outlaw says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 2:35pm
@ Afrika
Wasn’t an argument, just a statistic.
No film directed by a director not of European descent has ever won Best Picture, fyi. And Ang Lee*, Akira Kurosawa, Hiroshi Teshigahara, Atom Egoyan and M. Night Shyamalan are the only directors not of European descent who have ever won* or been nominated for the Oscar for Best Director.
Erasmus says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 2:40pm
Couple of points;
1. Yes, Slumdog, much like Last Emperor, was directed by a European. However, can anyone name me a single Best Picture winner other than Last Emperor that didn’t feature a single caucasian or European actor? Crouching Tiger came pretty damn close to pulling that off, and with a Taiwanese director to boot. The film world is much more global these days.
2. I think one of the keys to Slumdog’s awards success is that it is possibly the only major contender that wasn’t specifically made with an eye towards Oscar. It’s the least self-consciously made film to make the Top 5 in a long, long, long time.
3. While everyone certainly should be mad at the Crash victory over Brokeback, do some of you actually believe that Slumdog is on the same low artistic and technical level of Crash?
Erasmus says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 2:43pm
Paul,
I suppose the last final frontier for Oscar would be either a fully animated film or a completely foreign language film winning Best Picture.
The fact that a movie with an all-Indian cast partially in Hindi might win BP is remarkable, and the fact that Danny Boyle was the director shouldn’t detract from that.
It’s pretty shocking that with all of its amazing film pedigree, Japan has only produced two Best Director nominations ever.
Nick K. says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 2:48pm
@ Erasmus
And none of those best director nominees has been Hayao Miyazaki.
Grrrr…. You forgot Documentary film. I don’t think a documentary will EVER win BP, let alone be nominated.
Paul Outlaw says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 2:49pm
Agreed, on all points, Erasmus.
Although the final frontier will be when the film adaptation of a novel by Samuel R. Delany or Octavia Butler directed by someone like Darnell Martin or Julie Dash wins Best Picture.
Loyal Mehnert says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 3:12pm
“2. I think one of the keys to Slumdog’s awards success is that it is possibly the only major contender that wasn’t specifically made with an eye towards Oscar. It’s the least self-consciously made film to make the Top 5 in a long, long, long time.”
I doubt the team at New Line could have ever dreamt that their New Zealand based fantasy franchise would be nominated for 30 Oscars.
Everyone has this weird view of Slumdog, that the production team made the film out of the kindness of their hearts and the cast and crew were paid in hugs. Fox Searchlight is one of the shrewdest Oscar campaigners around, with Best Picture nominations in 4 of the last 5 races.
Once Fox Searchlight got their paws on the film after WiP went boom!, that was it. All they saw was Oscar Oscar Oscar.
Ben M. says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 3:41pm
Slumdog is going through this awards season with ease, but I still think Schindler’s List is the more impressive award season run. Granted a lot of the guild awards (including SAG which would appear the next year) weren’t around, but it won the 4 major critics orgs best picture (even harder to do that the guild sweep IMO as LA Confidential is the only other film to win NBR, NY, LA, and NSFC since all 4 groups came into existence in the 70s), the globe, the PGA, the DGA, the WGA, BAFTA, the oscar, and plenty of other prizes.
brisdeservice says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 4:05pm
@ Ben
Bravo for your comprehensive diatribe! I agree with you completely, especially when you say: “The point is, with all those precursors Slumdog has, how on earth can it possibly lose??? Well, it can’t. No way. Nothing with those awards loses, except Brokeback.”
Even three years later, when one looks at the collection of precursor awards that Brokeback Mountain garnered prior to the Oscars, it is hard to believe that it ended up being toppled by a movie that had the lowest critics’ rating of all five nominees, the lowest box office, and that was not even nominated for BP at the Golden Globes. Last year, no one expected No Country for Old Men to lose at the Oscars, and of course it didn’t. How could it? …it had won all those precursor awards! Brokeback had also won the BAFTA and Golden Globes Best Picture awards (two very visible and important awards, to say the least), something even NCFOM didn’t do, and yet Brokeback lost!(?!). It seems like some people in Hollywood have problems with accepting gay cowboys on screen but not serial killers.
I also agree that the comparison with “Shakespeare in Love vs Saving Private Ryan upset” is unjustified. Shakespeare in Love was a very strong contender from the start for the reasons you mention, namely Golden Globes BP, most nominations, many acting nominations, …none of which apply to Crash. Shakespeare in Love’s victory didn’t really come as a surprise. In any case, I don’t really have much esteem for the Oscars anymore. If “Slumdog Millionaire” wins, so much the better, but no matter what happens (because anything can happen at the Oscars, there’s so much politics involved), it won’t change the fact that Slumdog is the surprise hit of the season both with critics and audiences.
daveylow says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 4:06pm
I suppose the last final frontier for Oscar would be either a fully animated film or a completely foreign language film winning Best Picture.
*****
I’m pretty sure Crouching Tiger came close to winning Best Picture the year it was nominated. If it had been released this year, it would have won.
Pierre de Plume says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 4:06pm
There is no symbolism to uncover, no fancy performance at the center, no attempt to add artistry – it is just a good story well told.
I agree with the thrust of this piece but do feel, as does Mitchell (#3) that symbolism — not to mention metaphor — are a big part of this film. That the story itself is so compelling, entertaining and well-told distracts us from the film’s deeper intellectual meanings and relevance.
One of the things that make this a good film is that you don’t have to watch it with your brain engaged; it’s solid entertainment on that level, and, for a film to be truly good, it must succeed at this level. To me, however, the people involved in creating this work have done some of the deep contemplation for us, weaving in a timely, deeply resonant message. For all its spareness, the screenplay, for example, is truly an accomplishment of expert writing.
They say an actor’s performance is good if you don’t notice it. The same holds true for a film. The excellence of this film is that we as an audience are not told by the filmmakers how good it is. It just is.
daveylow says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 4:09pm
If “Slumdog Millionaire” wins, so much the better, but no matter what happens (because anything can happen at the Oscars, there’s so much politics involved), it won’t change the fact that Slumdog is the surprise hit of the season both with critics and audiences.
*******
As soon as it was shown at Toronto, Slumdog was buzzed about as being an Oscar contender and huge audience pleaser. It’s not an overwhelming surprise hit.
mileshigh says:
Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 4:25pm
I think analyzing which movie won what Film Critic award is completely irrelevant. ”Slumdog Millionaire” is winning Best Picture. End of discussion.
Well, this is the Academy, so who knows!?!?!