The WAFCA (Washing DC area film critics) has announced their winners — and The Artist continues its run as winner – meanwhile, Martin Scorsese picks up Best Director. The Artist and Hugo are kind of companion pieces, I think. And something tells me watching Martin Scorsese and Michel Hanazavicius for a Q&A on movies would be something spectacular. They both pay homage to cinema, in every way, including how magical they both are to watch. A must-read is a piece by Bill Desowitz, who writes the blog Immersed in movies, called: It’s About Time: The Artist and Hugo:
The Artist and Hugo are truly miraculous bookends that should be studied in introductory film courses: Michel Hanazavicius pays tribute to Hollywood silents and the classical golden age in a very old school approach, and Martin Scorsese delves into the magical world of Georges Méliès while soaking up the experimental French sound films of the same period, only pushing 3-D to new depths of dynamic immersion with the latest digital tools.
But it’s not about technology or technique: it’s about the primacy and poetry of visual storytelling — pure and simple. Both directors and their crews return to square one to rediscover the past and reclaim the present. Their films are about loneliness and the search for identity, artistic expression, and the longing to lose oneself in the cinematic dream world of the movies to escape the harsh realities of life. They are also about the importance of dealing with change, which is timeless and timely, given the precariousness of our global situation. The Artist and Hugo are not unique but they are sustaining.
THE 2011 WAFCA AWARD WINNERS:
The Artist
Martin Scorsese (Hugo)
Best Actor:
George Clooney (The Descendants)
Best Actress:
Michelle Williams (My Week with Marilyn)
Best Supporting Actor:
Albert Brooks (Drive)
Best Supporting Actress:
Octavia Spencer (The Help)
Best Acting Ensemble:
Bridesmaids
Best Adapted Screenplay:
Alexander Payne and Nate Faxon & Jim Rash (The Descendants)
Best Original Screenplay:
Will Reiser (50/50)
Best Animated Feature:
Rango
Best Documentary:
Cave of Forgotten Dreams
Best Foreign Language Film:
The Skin I Live In
Best Art Direction:
Dante Ferretti, Production Designer, and Francesca Lo Schiavo, Set Decorator (Hugo)
Best Cinematography:
Emmanuel Lubezki (The Tree of Life)
Best Score:
Ludovic Bource (The Artist)
From a previous post last week: “Critics have studied film their entire lives. Every once in while, a well done movie about or rooted in film history appears and they love it – it’s what their lives are about. This year we have two excellent examples – The Artist and Hugo – and, bang, the first two honorees are…. It was a one-two punch. I think this may continue thru the critcs awards.”
We’re now 3 for 3.
Ok, I don’t mean to hijack every thread but seriously…the fuck is up with Bridesmaids winning best ensemble? A fucking comedy over a masterpiece finale full of British royalty? UGHHHHH!
though I’m not in favor of the winners, it makes me want to look forward more on the awards season. I consider this one of the most wide open season ever. War Horse and ELAIC can both sneak in. Spielberg, Daldry for director. On the acting races, are still wide open.
btw, I correctly predicted Pic, Director, Actor, Cinematography, Art Direction, Documentary, Adapted Screenplay
This is starting to look like a two horse race we got here. Let’s see what unfolds next week! Exiting!
First Meryl, then Tilda, now Michelle, that’s really fun!
I hope they keep it up and continue choosing all sorts of actresses as winners. I want the 5 Best Actress Oscar choices to be completely unpredictable and random, it would be the best part of the whole season
Great to see Albert Brooks with another win.
I dont quite get the The Descendants/ Clooney love. But I have never seemed able to connect with Alexander Payne. I find both Sideways and About Schmidt are overrated movies. Nobody is perfect
Scott: Bridesmaids has a very good ensemble, written by a woman, for women and acted by women. Its fun and feels new, to me at least. But I do agree with you Scott that the best ensemble this year may be Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Wrong Manuel, it’s Harry Potter and the Deathly Part 2 and the fact that Bridesmaids won over it is laughable.
Tinker Tailor wasn’t nominated for Ensemble actually.
@Scott: I have given up hopes for Harry Potter. Looks like EVERYBODY has taken the collective decision to snub the franchise (one last time), no matter what.
WOW, 50/50-screenplay wins again. If the film indeed has the industry support we did NOT think it had, to pull off a screenplay nomination, that would be great. And Albert Brooks now has New York AND Washington…
” A fucking comedy ” Says the guy who is always whining about genre bias.
Every fucking thread!! Lying and saying you don’t mean to hijack doesn’t matter cause you keeping it.
This year’s race is fascinating, and though it could change soon, for now it seems pleasantly open after years of boring sweeps.
And could it be ? Could ‘Old Hollywood’ sweep the Oscars this year ? Could a silen film win best picture, Hugo best director, Dujardin best actor, Monroe best actress etc. ?
Anyway, it’s nice to see that two films did not only pay tribue to cinema this year, both turned out to be excellent AND the industry seemed to take notice.
There’s no need for all y’all Harry Potter fans to get pissy. Scott, what is wrong with comedies? Is it also wrong that the award for Original Screenplay has, here, been given to a comedy? Or that, indeed, many of the winning films have strong elements of comedy throughout: The Artist, Hugo, The Descendants, My Week with Marilyn, The Help? And Macy, I don’t understand how you can reach the conclusion that EVERYBODY has taken the collective decision to snub the franchise no matter what when the NBR rewarded it with a Special Achievement award and a mention in their top ten?
I think it’s significant also that 50/50 now has two Original Screenplay awards to its name. The NBR has been known to make quirky choices in its screenplay categories, although it seems now that there is considerable support for this screenplay.
I am very happy that my hometown rewarded Bridesmaid! Such a funny movie and finally something for women to enjoy!
It seems like thing are starting to shape up a little, however in the acting categories there is still some murkiness. No signs of Close…pretty intersting.
Harry Potter lost because the movie isn’t good enough. It’s not a bias. Except against crappy movies.
I don’t understand the Harry Potter-outrage…as a fan of the books, I NEVER expected it to have a serious presence in the critics groups-phase, I always thought IF their time will come, it will start with the guilds-phase. Critics groups tend to ignore the tentpole-contenders, no surprise there. Avatar was a top2 player without significant critics groups behind it, and if my memory serves me well Titanic also pulled off that famous sweep without the critics groups. Not to mention last year, we had 2 (!) top5 players with bp/bd nominations (The Fighter, True Grit) without ONE single picture OR director OR screenplay win during the whole season. So I wouldn’t worry about HP…it is not supposed to be around this early in the season even if it were the frontrunner…which it is NOT.
Bottom line : It needs the guilds, not the critics groups.
I just don’t see the big deal about Octavia Spencer’s performance in ‘The Help’. Yes, she was very good. But what is so exceptional about the role or the performance? Isn’t it just another wise-cracking fun part? They’re a dime a dozen, aren’t they? Rachel Blake in ‘Sleeping Beauty’… now there’s a performance!
Scott, I’m a huge fan of HP&DH2 and it would have deserved to win Best Ensemble, but so did Bridesmaids. That one has british royalty and the other is a comedy are besides the point. The work was good and deserving in both.
Rufussondheim, your comment is idiotic. Since HP was nominated the DC critics obviously thought it was more than good enough. You think it’s crappy, fine, but the DC critics weren’t consulting your personal opinion when they made their choices. Nor were 96% of critics polled on RT. Frankly, with a comment like that you are offering nothing of value to the conversation here. You are just being an immature jerk.
Great to See Martin Scorsese with another win
hugo deserve best picture too
Mark Tuts
I can make the same argument for Melissa Mcwhateverhernameis in Bridesmaids and Carey Mulligan in Shame. Welcome to the land of subjectivity my friend. Buckle up, you are in for a bumpy ride.
Yaaay for Bridesmaids and Octavia! Richly deserved wins! I haven’t seen the others so I can’t judge.
Deena, Mark never claimed it wasn’t subjective…..I don’t see what your trying to say
Yes! Go Albert Brooks!
The last Harry Potter film is a mediocre film, just as all the previous ones.
I really don’t understand why people are referring to the need for rewarding something just because it has ended.
May I remind the audience that award groups are supposed to reward the best of the best?
None of the Harry Potter films have been in the Best of the Best category for any of the substantial categories, well in terms of acting and directing for sure.
Thank you.
GoOnNow should PissOffNow because the Harry Potter films will always be the best when it comes to fantasy films. It deserves to be rewarding because people love those films and the filmmakers worked hard to get those films made. They look spectacular and I’m sorry that there are those that still don’t get it. Glad to say for me that Harry Potter will always be my favorite movie franchise among all. Yes even more than Star Wars because at least Harry Potter never managed to screw up half of their movies (except the fifth one).
Ryman, I know that truth hurts, I know…
but there’s always going to be room for boyfans on this website, so everything’s fine.
Deathly Hallows part 1 was miles, a billion miles, better than part 2. I get the sentiment and understand why people want an award to honour the franchise but part 2 was an awfully slow and anti-climatic movie.
***SPOILERS***
The death of Snape and Beatrix? common! you have teased us the entire franchise with these formidably towering characters but then kill then off like they were extras? no tension, no build up, no nothing.
What about the rushed plot? the tepid action sequences? the under-used Emma Watson, Tom Felton and Rupert Grint? and the anti-climatic fighting scene between Harry and his nemesis? Nothing worked! absolutely nothing. The movie does not deserve a dime.
@ Deena, I think I practically agree with everything you say.
I too enjoyed “Deathly Hallows I” better.
You have to add underused Maggie Smith as well
This is definitely a horse race to the Oscars this year! I’m so happy Michelle Williams got a notice as did Albert Brooks, Bridesmaids and a few other great choices. Really excited for this season!
I wish they would start spreading the wealth around with the Actors the way they are doing with the Actresses. I’m disappointed in their choice in George Clooney. It was a fine performance but I think there are others out there that gave equally if not better performances than Mr. Clooney. One of those being Michael Fassbender in Shame. If I may dwell on the film and performance for a bit, for those of you who haven’t seen it and have the luxury of living either in one of the cities showing it please do yourself a favor and get thee to the theater.
A word of warning though – this film definitely earns its NC17 rating. So if you’re easily offended by nudity and an honest look at sex addiction then this isn’t the film for you.
Seriously, everything on this site tends to transform into a HP discussion forum, it is getting tedious. Please, someone (Sasha? Ryan? A magic device of some unspecified origin?) make me a kind of filter, so everything HP-related can get stuck OUTside the context of otherwise interesting posts…
Still Viola Davis nothing, but great to see Octavia Spencer, she looks a very safe bet in her category, instead Viola with Streep, Close, Swinton and Williams is having a hard time. Actually, i don’t see her winning nothing.
(Sasha? Ryan? A magic device of some unspecified origin?)
I’ve got this WarHorcrux thing, but it comes with pesky curses of its own.
GoOnNow
Silly me. How could I forget? Maggie Smith was indeed criminally underused. In fact, she was criminally underused in the entire franchise. Her brief but spectacular fight scene with Snape was truly a delight. Did you see her hip twist? the old lady still got it.
We have to suffer this year. There will be no more HP-movies in the near future at least. You would think that it was like this for ten years, but it’s only the finale that got Potter-fans excited. Where were they last year?
And someone called it the best fantasy series ever. Oh, really? LOTR is the more suitable answer there – all three movies were at least very good, if not great even. You can’t call – say – Chamber of Secrets a great film. Now, can you? To me, LOTR had soul.
But, yeah. It sucks that every thread becomes a Harry Potter thread, and by a loud minority of commenters. We call this trolling. TROOOOLLLL!!! (Potter-fans know what that means).
Deena, that was the best scene in the movie. Along with the very first seconds when the movie started before the WB logo.
We are able to give HP credit where it’s due. It’s not the second coming of Jesus, but technically it’s a very fine film. Too bad the whole series was not on the level of the finale.
Very happy for Michelle Williams.
HP was nominated by the DC critics in two categories. So it winning or not winning in these categories is relevant to the comment sections of this post. Simple as that.
I do wish people could differentiate their opinion from truth. When you state your negative opinion of a movie like HP&DH2 as truth and then even say “truth hurts” to those who don’t share that negative opinion, even if that same movie still remains one of the best reviewed movie of the year (by all statistical measures), it kinda makes you look ridiculous.
We could all chill a little and while being passionate about what we care about be respectful of other’s opinions and feelings. But I will always give more license for those who really like something to be passionate about expressing that like, even if a bit over-enthusiastically, rather than give credit to those who seem to find pleasure in just dumping crap upon what other people like.
…It’s getting to the point where I’d prefer to see comments from Afrika and Denna Jones’ Wig and heyilikefreeporntoocomevisitusattriplexlesbiansdotcom over Scott. Seriously.
Happy to see Rango winning. I’d like to see it triumph come Oscar time.
NOOO, A Separation lost!!! It is the BEST REVIEWED fiction of the year – in the WORLD. Fuck them.
Overall, really loving the four acting wins, as well as ensemble. I for one have not seen The Artist but find Hugo to still be a film for film junkies and few others, hence my lack of surprise on it ruling with film critics. I don’t think it has much of a chance at the Oscars though, especially with a weak box office, compared to its budget at least.
Really loving the attention for The Descendants and the 50/50 script though so far. I think George Clooney is taking home the gold, while Best Actress sure is getting interesting.
GoOnNow, Deena Jones, and whoever the fuck else are detractors of Deathly Hallows Part 2…so what do you have to say about the 100% Top Critics with an 8.8 average? Yeah, shut up.
Also Phantom, I get what you’re trying to say but doesn’t what I just pointed out(yet again, apparently people are too thick to realize) kind of invalidate it not supposed to be receiving support from critics groups? I mean it received far better critical acclaim then Avatar for instance.
This will be old fashioned oscar black and white picture. Vs. Color picture. Silent vs. Sights and sounds format.
Clooney 4 to 0, in the lead for best actor
Why were Africa and the Avatar guy banned and not Scott?? By the way he behaves, hijacking every thread and disrespectfully addressing other commentators, he is certainly heading for TROLL AVENUE…:(
Scott doesn’t go overboard and call individual readers ugly names.
Pushing the limits though, Scott. Please dial it down a little.
Well-deserved win for Bridesmaids. The ensemble was terrific.
Alexandra, maybe if the other commentators had a brain and didn’t blindly bash the Potter films I wouldn’t feel the need to be the voice of reason.
I mean as dfa said, whether you or I like it or not Deathly Hallows: Part 2 is still the most acclaimed film of the year by all statistical measure
Remember when these comment sections used to have a lot of intelligent discussions and contributors?
I need to remind myself to stick to the forums where the trolls are treated and dealt with more harshly.
It’s not trolling to point out FACTS…I hate people who ignore the facts. Sure, you’re entitled to your opinion but again, as dfa said it makes you look ridiculous when you blatantly deny the fact that the consensus is that it’s a great film.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II – the best film of the year. I don’t care what anybody else says. That is my opinion.
It is epic in scope, complex in its themes, and brilliantly executed by dozens of artists. Not to mention, perfectly acted by all involved.
I agree with the statement that it is going to take the AMPAS guilds to give the film its needed push come nomination time. I foresee 10 nominations: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Score, Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing, Best Sound, Best Visual Effects . . . and perhaps a nod for Alan Rickman or Ralph Fiennes for Best Supporting Actor.
I realize it’s a game of subjectivity and politics, but as an engineering student I prefer more analytical common sense sort of approach…shoot me
I am well aware of the positive critical notices that HP7.2 got. I’m also aware of the postive notices the last Indy Jones movie got (the Crystal Skull one.)
I think critics have a tendency to go ga-ga over these films upon their initial release for multiple reasons. Foremost, many are kids at heart and they recall their earlier days in liking the predecessors and then get caught up in the emotion and perhaps give these films better reviews than they would if they had time to reflect for longer periods of time, which would include a second or even third viewing.
What all of the Harry Potter films reveal on the second viewing is that they tell fun stories with good visuals. That’s an accomplishment that shouldn’t be diminished, but it’s not one that should be singled out either. What these movies had in common was a good starting point (the books) and a big budget. With that in mind it’s hard to do a crappy job on them as long as you always remember to honor the source material (as you had to because of the books rabid fanbase.)
Critics, when looking back at all of the cinematic accomplishments of the year, have time to reflect and put things in proper context. Films like The Artist that were assembled from nothing impress them more. A Film like Tree of Life which is dense and thought-provoking causes one to reflect on it and it stirs discussion. A film like Hugo, also with a big budget and a great source, that takes chances that Harry Potter didn’t have to will cause greater respect and admiration. A film like The Descendants that shows truths of human nature and causes one to reexamine where you are in life will touch them more deeply that HP7.2 does. These movies are more real, more lasting, than the Harry Potter films, and will therefore be remembered at year’s end.
I find this blind admiration for Harry Potter to be a bit disturbing. I am reminded of MTV’s The Real World and other similarly trashy reality shows. The people act like jerks to locals and when the locals get mad the reality “star” goes “Oh they’re just jealous of us.” No, that’s not the case. These people are so blinded by the sureness in themselves (“I was cast and they were not”) that they can’t looks at the situation with any sort of objectivity.
Yes, Harry Potter got great initial reviews. At the time there was unanimaous praise. And so some awards watchers want to cling to that moment and offer it as proof that the film is the best. And they blindly ignore every other factor that goes into determining what the best film of the year is. They have lost all objectivity. So now they invalidate everyone else who maintains that objectivity. I can hear the HP adherants say to themselves “Oh they’re just jealous that their film didn’t get the reviews HP did.”
No, that’s not the case. Those of us who are not championing HP over and over again, I firmly believe, are able to look at the situation with more objectivity. Great films are often not recognized as you leave the theater. If Rotten Tomatoes were around when 2001 was released, it would have gotten a low score. As would Citizen Kane and many other films that are part of the canon of great films.
Months have passed now, and people are making more rational judgments. And one of those judgments is fairly straightforward, Harry Potter, while entertaining, is not the best film of the year. It is not a bias, it is merely the opinion of the vast najority of critcs.
Also, people always talk about the themes of Harry Potter. Can someone explain to me what these themes are and how they are exemplified in the movie, paying attention to the specific choices the filmmaker made. Then please pick a second movie (such as Tree of Life or Meek’s Cutoff) that was considered a critical darling with mininal box office and discuss the themes of that movie and how the filmmaker exemplifies those themes. And then, please compare and contrast the effectiveness of theme exploration in both of the selected films. Please use examples.
Wow this season is feeling so good right now. No actress is sweeping, its all over the place. Picture seems to be a two horse race ….. maybe three. Loved the Bridesmaids ensemble win and hope they can pull off many many more. Comedy is so short changed during awards seasons. Critics and guilds alike forget how difficult comedy timing can be and when done greatly like Bridesmaids was, then they should get a shot at the glory too!!! Its about time comedies got a foothold back in the Oscar race if you ask me!!!
@rufussondheim – I don’t agree with your logic on the HP score. Why would critics go ga-ga over this particular film and not others on initial release. And why would they revise their initial opinion for this film and not others?
I’m not a fan of the series, and IMO find it laughable that it would receive any formal recognition for cinematic achievement, but I do think it will be remembered/watched years from now when the other films you mentioned probably won’t.
The HP score reflects a film that is hard to criticise. It’s not offensive, it’s light hearted and it’s straightforward.
Challenging films are divisive.
Mattoc, it’s the last one, and for many it’s the last of an era. Think of your high school graduation. You were probably happier on that day than you presently recall. Critics are people too and they get caught up in the emotion. (It shouldn’t be underestimated how much the love of the books is a part of the love of the movies.) Amongst my friends, the biggest fans of the movies are also the biggest fans of the movies.
While there are some people who have enjoyed the movies without reading the books, the love these people have for the movies is not even on the same level as those who have read the books.
(Full disclosure, I’ve read the books and enjoyed them very much.)
I would suspect that if one could dissect the most positive of the reviews for the movies, one would find a viewer who was also a big fan of the books.
@rufussondheim: Your challenge sounds very high school essay-ish, but here goes:
Harry Potter is a wonderful story about good vs. evil, and finding hope in dark times. It is about loss, family, and friends. It is about how fame is not always great (depending on the reason why) and how being ordinary can often be the best thing in a strange world. The character of Hermione exemplifies strength, intelligence, and cleverness. In the final installment, Yates and Kloves do a brilliant job at interweaving all of the scenes that involve the battle at Hogwarts and by inserting the occasional comic line, the latter of which shows the confidence and faith in each of the characters. It is a thrilling ride through the mind of “the boy who lived.”
The Tree of Life is a puzzling movie. It is about how family relationships can affect your life as an adult. It is about enjoying your childhood while it lasts. This movie shows how life is a strange, paradoxical thing by saying that it is small (from the perspective of one person) and large (from the way human life originated) at the same time. Malick includes beautiful images from nature to prove this point.
These movies are quite different, but they are dramatically stimulating films that deserve to be in the awards race. They are both about the “ups” and “downs” of life and how we should live long to experience them. The main difference is that Harry Potter conveys its themes through fantasy elements and The Tree of Life through more realistic elements. Both films will definitely be influential to filmmaking in the future.
@rufussondheim, I agree with everything you said, but I don’t think it’s isolated to HP. For critics especially, I think their first impressions for any film will change over time. They review too quickly.
What’s intriguing though is not only has the film received nearly all positive reviews, the rating is so high. One can only assume that if it doesn’t eventuate on all critics top ten lists then something is afoot…
GoOnNow and Deena Jones need to shut up and just admit they’re in a minority.
m1:
C-
I hope your papers turned in at school are better than that.
I’m not even going into the HP debate right now because I have ranted about this a dozen times before and I am not interested in people also calling me a troll. Scott is not a troll, for pete’s sake. I have seen real trolling and abusive behavior on this site before, Scott didn’t deserve to be ganged up on like that. In fact, I would say a clique of anti-campaigners against a film were trolling him. The HP debate has turned ugly. Some people think it deserves nominations and others do not. They will never like it or appreciate its depth because they never got into the franchise.
Nobody is going to write essay after essay defending HP because people go overboard to trash the movies. Any intelligent and unbiased person can see what the basic themes of HP are. Good triumphing over evil, overcoming obstacles, friendship, bravery, sacrifice, teamwork, what family is all about,coming of age, and etc. Those are just the basic themes and each sub-plot contains more angles & layers. There are multiple and multi-layered themes for each movie and book that are exemplified in dozens of ways. There are different depths to the characterizations of Harry, Hermoine, Rupert, Snape, Dumbledore, and even Neville. All of the characters have complex arcs with twists and turns. I am not going to analyze the films and books for people who hate it and think it doesn’t deserve any recognition because they continue to dismiss it as action-kiddie films.
I would say HP has a chance but I personally feel the awards race has been messy and not great due to certain movies taking over the hype and building up a bandwagon which is what the critics are gearing towards because these critics awards are being announced way too early. I have already ranted about this issue. It would be great if HP made the cut but I am not sure right now because it definitely seems like the critics are favoring certain movies. It makes no sense to me why certain movies are being ignored just because they have not had the same amount of time or opportunity to build up the campaign that The Artist and The Descendants has had.
Okay, enough about Potter. This entry was about the winners.
Most of the winners went along with my predictions or second picks. In fact, I was going out on a limb picking John Hawkes and they went in an even more inane or predictable direction.
I already submitted my review about The Artist and The Descendants on other entries as well as comment on this more on other sections but some of those pages are missing. I guess my request went ignored. That sucks. I would encourage the editors and owners to review my requests from other pages.
I know some later releases like War Horse, Carnage, The Dangerous Method, and Albert Nobbs have not had as much as screenings or time to build up a solid campaign as The Artist or The Descendants have. Even many earlier releases like HP, Moneyball, TOL, Midnight in Paris, and Jane Eyre have recently just ignited their Oscar campaigns in Dec but are being trounced by the zeigeist favorites.
This doesn’t have to be a weak or lame year but the early critics choice picks are treating it like it is by favoring two or three overhyped films. The acting categories are a disaster. I am going to contact the main award bodies because I think Dec.13th is way too early to start the official race by announcing the Critics Choice Awards or the GG’s subsequently afterwards. It might not make any difference but I am going to try. I know other people who are also upset about this because I think some of the movies that are dominating this way, why others are being ignored or being nitpicked on by critics absurdly is just a sick joke.
The only real surprises were Bridesmaids winning ensemble and Michelle Williams even though she was an early favorite earlier in the race.
I hated these picks. I think I have posted five times why I wasn’t impressed with The Artist or The Descendants. It just irks me that it appears to be the two frontrunners when better movies by acclaimed directors are being thrown under the bus because of a weaker campaign and not being able to build up momentum.
Good for 50/50 and Tree of Life. Hugo did have good art direction. As much as I loved Hugo, I just don’t think Scorsese will win the Oscar for Best Director so it wasn’t much of an indication for me.
This is shaping up to be the worst race ever, at least in my opinion. My worst fear is that The Artist, The Descendants, and The Help will dominate. God, I hope another awards body changes up the game or trends. Clooney seems to be the biggest lock but I just really hope the tide changes. The timing of the award annoucements needs to be postponed. I hope LA doesn’t follow the trend. Very disappointed so far.
for what it’s worth, I’d have happily traded Deathly Hallows for 6 of the actual BP nominees we got handed to us the past two years. (no, I’m not even talking about that one).
we could all name 5 or 10 movies every year that we think are more deserving and provide ample evidence to support our arguments. Just look at these first few critics’ Top 10s that have been published this week. They’re all over the map.
nobody needs to gang up on Scott or Tess — and I really don’t think too many readers are trying to. But it can seem that way when one person makes the same case for the same movie over and over. It becomes a self-imposed embattled position of one’s own creation.
Part of taking a stand for something when we feel a cause worth fighting for is being neglected is the feeling that it’s us against the world. We choose to take that stance though, so to find we’re alone and outnumbered comes with the territory, yes?
@m1: Your paragraphs on the basic themes on HP and TOL were very good and well-written.
Jesus, now it seems like certain people are posting just to heckle people who defend Harry Potter. Get a grip. Do you seriously hate these films so much? Do you seriously think it has no chance at all? @lazarus, you are the one who is trolling people. You are posting just to antagonize people who defended HP from the hate. It is a two-way street. Both sides are taking it too far.
I won’t comment about HP anymore on this entry but it is the anti-campaigning against HP that is going out of control, not the fans.
Ryan Adams,
I apologize. I didn’t read your post before I submitted that previous comment. It was directed towards Lazarus.
@Tero Heikkinen from earlier – technically A Separation didn’t lose. It wasn’t even nominated.
But as Sasha taught us yesterday, it’s still way too early in the game to make any sort of meaningful predictions.
>I managed to find one my of previous posts about The Artist. Some of it may appear out of context because it was from a different entry.
Oh, god. The Artist and The Descendants currently seem like the two frontrunners now. I seriously hope that changes. In fact, I think it will change and the tides might change. Personally, I felt Hugo was a much better ode to the magic of cinema before the tech age. I think The Artist mainly has novelty going for it. It was a well-made silent film harkening back to the past history of Hollywood. It was thin on plot, emotional impact, any deep performances, and character development for me. Singin’ in the Rain was SO much more exceptional. There have been better movies made about that era. I find the buzz behind The Artist to be maddening! I didn’t hate it but I do not think it is best picture material and I think the other contenders would wipe the floor with it if not for the zeitgeist. It keeps projecting itself as the hip choice for cinemaphiles to root for, well I am rooting for the true movies that expand upon the wheel. I found The Artist mildly entertaining but was not impressed by it.
The zeitgeist can be frustrating. Last year, The Artist would have been squashed by TSN and TKS. It would have been trounced by The Hurt Locker and Avatar. It would have been decimated by TCCOB, Milk, and Slumdong Millionaire. What is it with this year? Is it because there are no favorites and the critics are being tough on top directors like Eastwood, Spielberg, and Malick?! I would be fine if The Artist just fell off the radar.
I know Clooney and Payne have a strong fanbase here so I won’t go off on a long rant about this but I personally feel that The Descendants, next to The Artist, was the most overrated film of the year. I am baffled by its acclaim. I can handle it being nominated but the frontrunner for Best Pic, hell no. I expect Best Actor to slog it out btw Clooney and DiCaprio with Fassy or Pitt being the dark horses.
I hope the main awards circuit goes in a different direction. The academy likes to mix up trends, having The Artist dominate after TKS hijacked the awards race just seems urrrrgh. The academy likes to change it up. You had The Departed, NCFOM, Slumdog Millionaire, THL, and then TKS which were very different movies in tone and target audience. The Academy likes to shake it up.
I don’t think Moneyball will win anything except perhaps Best Adapted Screenplay. Though I still feel it will at least get nominated for Best Pic with five extra slots, Actor, and possibly supporting actor for Jonah Hill. Bennett Miller needs to get out there more for the Best Director nom.
I also think The Dangerous Method, J.Edgar ( even though it was panned),Carnage, Albert Nobbs, and Shame are not out of the running yet. I also feel good about adding Hugo and HPDH2 to my top ten list for possible Best Pic noms. I think Tree of Life will be a strong contender along with possibly War Horse.
Midnight in Paris just lost its traction and so did MMMM. I don’t think The Help will make the cut either besides a possible acting nom.
Tess says:
I also agree that The Artist flourishes as a gimmick and it is just an “easy watch”. It works and it is impressive only because it is a silent black and white movie with hype. If it had dialogue, it would be your typical flick about that time period which was much better re-done or imitated in the ’60s,’70′s. I also was not wowed with the acting. Dujardin doesn’t bring anything to the table that another actor couldn’t bring. I bet if a major star were cast, the critics would not be impressed or charmed because they would expect more out of an A-lister but Dujardin has chic novelty. I just didn’t feel true depth to the movie. It was fun the first time, but it just loses its appeal in repeat viewings.
It is December and there seems to be no mass media or public favorite yet, so it is still anybody’s game! This has been the most unpredictable race yet, but we need to wait until the Critic Choice Awards to see what the trend is.
> By now, The Artist, The Descendants, Hugo, and Clooney seem to be the frontrunners. 50/50 also seems to be getting recognition for original screenplay as well as the cast of The Help.
It’s ok, Tess.
I’m staying impartial. I see everyone’s point in this case. I’d be glad to see Deathly Hallows nominated, but this time of year I try to start building up my defenses against too many disappointments.
There’s a lot of genuine natural magic to be found in accepting a zen attitude about Oscar realities. Even on a purely mathematical basis, 7-10 slots isn’t enough to hold everybody’s hopes.
that Chinese proverb:
“When we’re full of opinions and speculations, we must empty our cup before accepting anything else.”
or, in Avatar terms:
Moat: It is hard to fill a cup that is already full.
I’m keeping my cup as empty as possible right now. But I can already see it getting filled against my will with nominees that will be hard to swallow.
[as I rise on a cloud and hover with hands in a gesture of vitarka mudra]
I just saw The Help and cried my eyes out. Manipulative film, but I fell for it. Hard.
Yes, Viola Davis is the “veteran” of the bunch and the narrator of the film, but categories again are a weird thing. Octavia Spencer has just as much (if not more) screen time than Davis. Spencer shared a lot of the scenes between Davis and Stone, she has all the scenes Jessica Chastain, and the Bryce Dallas Howard drama is surrounded by Spencer’s doings. And still Spencer is supporting to Davis. It’s an ensemble film and it’s weird to point out “lead”.
They were all heartbreaking. Stone, Davis, Spencer, Chastain, Janney. What an ensemble! I even liked Spacek and Howard, even though they could have taken the over-the-top down a notch.
Harry Potter is likely not going to happen. If they snubbed The Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2 and The Bourne Ultimatum in spite of the people involved AND the four star praises the films got, how could anyone expect Harry Potter to get in? Sequels NEVER get in, unless the Academy have been very kind to the previous films in the series.
They are rewarded (like Knight, Spidey and Bourne) with technical awards as make-up awards for not giving them a Best Picture nomination, although the reviews for the films should automatically have given them a place in Best Picture.
That’s how it’s always been. Why should THIS year be different? The ONLY difference is that this is definitively the LAST chance to award the Harry Potter series. Let’s see if it makes a difference… Let’s see how sweet the Globes and BAFTA are to the films. (But remember, the Globes nominated Dark Knight AND gave Best Picture to Avatar, so if it doesn’t happen THERE, it should be a clear sign that there’s no chance AT ALL with the Academy).
It would be a wild left-field U-turn if the Globes gave Best Picture to Harry Potter, just to make a point.
“This has been the most unpredictable race yet, but we need to wait until the Critic Choice Awards to see what the trend is.”
We’re not going to get any indication of an oscar trend form the critics’ awards – last year was a reminder of that. The oscar trend, if there is one, will come from the guilds’ prizes.
That said, it’s entirely up to the individual critics circles when they want to give out their awards. I would like to see them happen the last week of December, personally, but everybody wants to be first – by 2014, they will probably start around Labour Day. Maybe if they were scattered throughout the year we wouldn’t have to try and see 50 movies in 2 weeks, but could enjoy decent films all year round.
So the themes of HP are that if we all work together we can overcome obstacles.
Deep.
I’m sorry. I just don’t buy it. This is something that I’ve been wrestling with for years now. People always saying that the themes of Harry Potter are so complex, so deep. I just don’t buy it.
I’ve always seen it in rather simple terms. Harry Potter wins. All the time. Every time. He never suffers any real setbacks or defeats. He has to win. It’s his destiny. If he ever lost, he’d have been dead, the books would be over, we’d be sad.
Fantasy, the books are exactly that. Fantasy. Not just because the world in which they inhabit is not real, but because of the simple fact that the obstacles they always overcome with disturbingly consistent regularity never defeat him. He doesn’t know what defeat is.
Sure, his parents died, he longs for the parents he’s never known. And that is the emotional centerpiece of the franchise. His childhood and family were stolen from him and he overcomes these obstacles to forge ahead and create a new family and a level of happiness not known before. But the fact remains, in that journey he never suffers. In this fantasy world he always has the solution and when it comes down to it, he wins the battle of life vs. death, good over evil.
That’s all well and good, but it has no basis in reality for today’s youth (or the youth from any place or time) Kids struggle daily and none of their struggles are identifiable within the world of Harry Potter. Harry Potter always has an answer, destroy Voldemort, but us Muggles don’t have that easy goal. Good and evil in real life are not that easily defined.
And I think that’s what draws so many people to Harry Potter. It’s deceptively simple. Readers get drawn into the complexity of the universe Rowling creates, into the multi-generational lore. People think it’s way more complex than it actually is. Life isn’t simply “let’s all work together and we can overcome obstacles.” How quaint.
Compare this to a movie like Meek’s Cutoff. People are lost in the desert with limited resources. They are being led by a man in over his head but that man is still their best resources. Then the come upon an outsider who clearly know more, but can they trust the outsider. Meanwhile, the outsider is at the mercy of the group and is doing what he must to survive.
The group struggles with what to do, there are no clear answers and every possible solution has an outcome that’s less likely than likely. It’s impossible to work together because every one has a different opionion on what’s best. Everyone brings in different experiences and personalities and ideas on what to do next.
But they must act. Time (and supplies) are running out. Will they survive or will they succumb to the elements. Will they succumb to themselves.
These, to me, are far more interesting questions, and they are posed in a movie that’s less than 2 hours long, rather than a series of 8 movies that run approximately 20 hours.
Life is a lot more like Meek’s Cutoff than Harry Potter. ANd as a movie it’s far more compelling and interesting than Harry Potter. I wish life was as easy as Harry Potter.
So please, when discussing the merits of the Harry Potter franchise, leave out it’s so-called complex themes. They aren’t there.
These Potter fans can’t be serious LOL
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is at 84/100 on BFCA and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close dropped significantly to 75/100. Let’s see how these films will do in the next weeks. I have a feeling that ELIC will be a disappointment and TGWTDT will not be embraced by the Academy, except for nods for Editing, Sound and maybe Score and Actress. I don’t think it’ll score big in the big 8, though. No BP nomination or BD.
Concerning Potter, I’m not a big fan or anything, but I can see it happening. The chances are slim, but they might nominate it. The reviews are glowing, the audiences’ reaction is way too positive, it’s the third highest-grossing film of the year and WB campaign it a lot. But it needs the support of the BAFTAs, the BFCAs and nominations for Drama (Golden Globes) and Ensemble Cast (SAGs) in order to hold well.
Now, Potter is far from what you describe, rufussondheim. Except for the fantasy element, it has some rather interesting and deep messages concerning life, love, loyalty, sacrifice and death. The final film pretty much gets into the aforementioned topics during its emotional climax (those scenes with Snape and Harry Potter’s sacrifice and limbo state afterwards). But of course it’s a massive fantasy-oriented film, there’s no doubt about it. But come on, let’s be honest. Potter has far more depth than Lord of the Rings which swept the Oscars just because it was this grand epic trilogy. What did it have to deal with? Fights, wars and fantasy elements. Nothing else at all. Potter is not recognized as much as it should, because they consider it a ‘kids’ series. It’s a coming-of-age series, actually, and it’s talking about complex things that Tolkien, for instance, despite his jaw-dropping detailed work, never dealt with. And since they’re all talking about Hugo, a film that is worthy only for its final 20-30 minutes because of the whole homage to cinema history, while the rest of it is absolutely mediocre childish stuff, I don’t get why Potter should be an exception.
Anyway, a nomination for Potter might happen, but it’s a dark horse. But fans shouldn’t overreact, while haters should also realize that the story is much much more complex than ‘fantasy action’. It’s not a coincidence that all critics mentioned the very emotional scenes in Deathly Hallows Part 2 as being (some of) the best in the series, because of how subtly they talk about death and sacrifice. And I think it’s nice that our children learn a bit more about these things through this ‘fantasy series’. (cough Twilight cough).
For the love of god Ryan, is there nothing you can do about these guys hijacking every thread? It all starts with that Scott every time. He is the most single minded person I have ever seen. He has only talked about one movie for the entire season and isn’t gonna stop. You gave him a warning but that didn’t do anything. Also I have seen him call plenty of people names just because they aren’t as vile as some of the names Afrika would call people doesn’t mean its right. Calling everybody who doesn’t like this movie an idiot is horrible.
I tried to start a discussion about how this is looking like a two horse race now but all these people want to talk about is how this movie lost it’s only nomination. He doesn’t care what the topic is its alwas HP to this guy. I mean remember when he hijacked your reviews of Planet of the Apes and Moneyball.
Im beggin you Ryan as a very loyal reader can you try and do something to nip this in the bud? Im not talking about banning exactly but something?
re: The Great Dane, what is different this year? Well, for one we can have more than 5 nominees. Most Oscar watchers believe The Dark Knight would have definitely gotten in if there had been (up to) 10 nominees. The Bourne Ultimatum, possibly too, I’d venture. If this would be a traditional 5 nominee year, I’d have no expectations for a HP BO nom, but with this new system, I think it is possible. Neither a done deal nor an impossibility, but doable.
I think BAFTA is a more important precursor than the Golden Globes, when it comes to predicting Potter chances, because so many British AMPAS members are also BAFTA members. A SAG Ensemble nom would also be an excellent precursor (if not necessarily decisive in a negative sense should it not come through for HP.)
We’ll see what the season brings. The NBR threw two shout-outs towards HP and DC gave it two nominations, incl. best ensemble. Maybe those are outliers or maybe they are a sign of wider support, enough to push through more Oscar noms for the final HP movie than for previous ones and maybe even a BP Oscar nom.
J K Rowling nominated for an Oscar. How cool would that be? (Would surely help the telecast ratings…)
Neither a hater nor a fan, I have to say that Potter’s got a good shot at a GG nom, but not an oscar BP nom, especially given the new voting regs. I just don’t see it happening because it won’t get enough #1/#2 placements. Tech noms, sure, and maybe – big maybe – a supporting actor will sneak in, but that’s it. Just logistics, that’s all.
Not to quibble, John, but Deathly Hallows is the third highest grossing movie of all time worldwide and the biggest box office success of the year.
Since it’s the best reviewed film (by critics) of the year, I will be surprised if it doesn’t win a shirtload of BPs in end of year lists. If it doesn’t then they obviously gave it an incorrect rating. They’re the same critics aren’t they?
If I were an Olympian gymnast and they held up that score – I’d be suited up for a podium finish.
I’m neither a loather nor a hater of HP, but if collectively they say it the best reviewed film of the year, then logically that’s what will happen.
The oscars on the other hand…well, wherever the sentiment lies I guess. Christopher Plummer I think qualifies, as does Viola Davis, Glenn Close and Woody Harrelson. Hugo i believe will win as it transcends beyond the film itself Scorsese other conservation work and I think he will also get the BD. I think there is a lot of sentiment with so many directors in the running this year, but other the Payne, cannot see them going past Marty.
Steve50, I see what you are saying regarding the #1 and #2 votes. But if the voter’s #1 and #2 votes are spread over very many films (and this year seems to have very many films that could qualify as people’s #1 choice), I could see how #3 and even #4 and #5 choices could end up being counted in the 2nd and final round of ballot counting. Then HP&DH2 might sneak through. But I agree it looks like a bit of a long shot at this date. Right now I think that is more likely than the sup. actor nom, as much as I would love to see that too.
rufussondheim:
Now, I’m not exactly the biggest HP fan, so I initially liked your post about the simplemindedness of the HP universe, just as I like your assessment on why you find Meek’s Cutoff a much more interesting movie (me too), BUT I think that your denouncement of the complexity of HP overlooks one crucial thing: HP is fantasy and fantasy is kind of the modern literary equivalent to mythology or folklore. Now, you wouldn’t deem all myths simple and one-dimensional, would you?
The fact is that mythology (and in this case, fantasy) is structured within the framework of a set of archetypes, dualities and structures. The play on archetypes and the variations inside a scheme of structures is boundless, but the structure remains. I think HP is just as simple – or complex – as the New Testament or The Canterbury Tales or Oedipus. I prefer the literary qualities of the the last three, for sure, but is HP simple for its dualist worldview?
In modern times the use of narrative devices have switched dramatically (blame it on a succession of thinkers and artists ranging from Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Baudelaire, Joyce, Wittgenstein, Foucault…or Tarantino, for that matter), and the confusion, the ambiguity, the diffusion of meaning suddenly reigns supreme. Narrative becomes all about self-referentiality etc.
HP cannot – and should not – be judged on those terms. That is unfair and not very enlightening. HP is probably closer in spirit to a Russian folktale or the Enuma Elish than to, well, Pulp Fiction.
And sometimes the crux of the story is exactly that we need the light to win. All religious aspiration is based on that sentiment, that hope. Jesus suffered, but somehow he had to come out victorious, right? (otherwise there would not be Christianity, a curious quasi-cannibalistic, eschatological sect turning into a world religion…)
So “good and evil is not easily defined”, you say. Maybe not for you or me. And maybe our aesthetic judgments tend toward the ambiguous (I usually loathe happy endings in movies, for example – I much prefer an “open” ending with no resolution), but HP is not exactly simple for not entertaining that worldview (even though it is telling that the hero’s abilities are based on a personal tragedy, which makes his struggle and eventual victory somewhat dubious), rather it is simple within a set of very complex, deep-rooted human semiotics or “existentials”.
It is, ultimately, just another reflection in a long chain of reflections on the nature of Man, the nature of chaos and cosmos. If that is simple, then maybe we need more simple stories. And if Meek’s Cutoff is an interesting twist on the perception of truths (in plural), maybe we need more stories like that, too. But one kind of narrative doesn’t have to be more smart or, well, true, in order to captivate an audience or merit attention. The complexity of MC could be conceived as a simple way of stating an obvious “postmodern truth” (that “chaos reigns” as the fox screams at us in Antichrist, an anti-climactic scene exactly for its crudeness!), just as the simple formula of good vs. evil can be construed as a brilliant way of dealing with the most complex of questions, the meaning of human existence.
(And, to think, I was the one almost on the verge of a severe case of “HP overload” when Scott yet again brought HP to the fore of yet another thread…oh, the irony)
Rather boring and safe choices, I think.
I really thought Viola would have won with this group.
julian, thanks for your considered response. Sadly, I lack the literary background to have a good frame of reference for where HP fits in. I know that it can be construed from here that I am unimpressed with the HP saga. That couldn’t be further from the truth (although I was way more attached to the complexities of Neville’s situation far more than the relative simplicity of Harry’s. Neville didn’t have a clear roadmap over the course of the story, but I digress.)
I wish the movies captured the subtleties of the books. But they don’t. At times they do (especially the last third of HP7.1) but any of the early accomplishments of the films are thrown away as HP7.2 breathlessly hurdles towards its rushed conclusion.
HP7.2 is not a great movie. I don’t care what 100% of the critics say. They are wrong. It is a serviceble movie. Serviceable movies should not win awards for Best Picture.
——————
Lord of the Rings was crap, The first movie set up the tale nicely, but then it just became an action flick. How the third movie won Best Pic is beyond me. The CGI was so terribly done at times, it took me out of so many scenes that I wanted to get involved in. I think it’s the worst Best Pic of the 2000′s. And I hate Gladiator and Beautiful Mind a great deal.
——————-
On a related note, I watched Tree of Life for the first time tonight. I just finished a few moments ago. My initial reaction is pretty straightforward. It’s extremely ambitious which is good. It’s too early for me to tell if Malick’s talent is up to the task he gave himself.
I will say that my take on it is different than most of the reviews I’ve read on the film (but, I will say I don’t read reviews of movies I know I will see with any pretense of trying to remember what I read beyond a few seconds. So I could be wrong.)
I think Malick sets up a metaphor between religious faith and the child/parent dynamic. Pitt’s character is equivalent to God in the eyes of his children. The film sets up the notion that we reject the notion of authoritarian parenting but readily accept the notion of an authoritarian God.
But Malick does more than that. In the opening third he rejects that there is a god governing us and pleas that we reject him too. He starts with the common assumption that Nature is cruel and that God is benevolent (or “grace”) and then in the middle of the film through use of the metaphor he constructed shows us that the opposite is indeed the case.
But he even refuses to break it down that simply. He looks at some of the basic tenets of the Old Testament and examines the story, and lesssons, of Job. He shows that even if you believe in God that you should still live the same way as if you didn’t believe in God. In essence, Malick is ultimately saying that it doesn’t matter if God exists or not, the lessons of life are essentially the same either way.
Whether this is the Best Film of the year, I have no idea. I’ll make that determination ten (or more) years from now, if ever. But I’d toss it a #1 vote to say “Fuck You” to all of the people who want to shoehorn the film into the narrative box that holds 99% of the films that get released in any given year.
Way too early predictions:
A very tight race between The Artist and War Horse
Best Picture: The Artist
Best Director: Stephen Spielberg
Best Actor: Jean Dujeardin, The Artist
Best Actress: Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady
Best Supporting Actor: Christopher Plummer, Beginners
Best Supporting Actress: Octavia Spencer, The Help
Best Original Screenplay: Midnight in Paris
Best Adapted Screenplay: The Descendants
Ruffuss, it’s not that opinions change over time perse, it’s simply that other films that are released later in the year consume their focus and are at the forefront of their minds. Sure there are some films that have survived an early release date (ie Hurt Locker) but it’s an uphill battle, especially for a genre film. I fully believe that if Warner Brothers had flipped the released schedule such that Part 1 came out in July and Part 2 in November that it still would have received the nearly unanimous priase and be considered just as strong a contender as Hugo and the other films you listed off which are receiving all the attention now.
Mattoc says:
December 5, 2011 at 6:15 pm
Since it’s the best reviewed film (by critics) of the year, I will be surprised if it doesn’t win a shirtload of BPs in end of year lists. If it doesn’t then they obviously gave it an incorrect rating. They’re the same critics aren’t they?
If I were an Olympian gymnast and they held up that score – I’d be suited up for a podium finish.
I’m neither a loather nor a hater of HP, but if collectively they say it the best reviewed film of the year, then logically that’s what will happen.
EXACTLY! At least someone else has a sense of logic.
Wow! The Artist takes Best Film! Nice trend I’m seeing from the East Coast critics. Support for Michelle Williams performance and Albert Brooks in Drive! Interesting race so far.
Rufussondheim: God or no God in Tree Of Life, we can surely agree that the mother is Grace, right? That much is obvious to me.
And, yes, if I was an Academy voter I would pick Tree Of Life or Drive to make a point against Oscar-baity films, but then again, I would do that every single year.
I am very much with you on LOTR. I actively loathed part 2 and 3 of the installment. Turning a, yes, mythological narrative into a cheap action flick is never going to work out, except if you want to dumb it down a notch or two…apparently Jackson chose to do just that.
LOLLLLLLLLLLL
Deena, you hear? We’re a minority!
oh… and Deena!
The Metacritics say HP is a great film, so it is! OK?
(Tree of Life / @rufussondheim) “I’d toss it a #1 vote to say “Fuck You” to all of the people who want to shoehorn the film into the narrative box that holds 99% of the films that get released in any given year.”
Exactly my thinking. To me, the “best” film of the year is the one that sets the bar the highest and provides the viewer with new challenges. It can be flawed as long as the flaws don’t detract from the narrative or impression intended by the filmmaker. Tree of Life surpassed all other contenders by a lightyear or two this year.
I like the religious metaphors you and @julian point out, but I think Malick extends his reach beyond that. Religion is a human invention and references to it don’t really appear until the family story begins to unfold. We may interject them ourselves earlier, but that is the viewer – Malick is just showing us these grand events without judgement of any kind.
As the film progresses, the wonder of the universe he displays becomes smaller, more finite, and less important as evolution (or progress) takes hold, to the point that the environmental focus moves from stellar omnipresence to a scenic backdrop for our manmade glass towers. One of the most jarring realizations, to me, anyway, was the simple move from the outdoor world to the indoor environment as the lead character becomes an adult.
With each evolutionary step, something is lost, and I think that memory, both human and primal, are what drive the narrative, which to me is all about losing grace. It’s a remarkably ambitious film.
Also, it was refreshing seeing the discussion run in tandem with the HP nattering. I regret that I tuned out early and couldn’t help keep the ball in the air longer.
Actually GoOnNow, it’s not just Metacritic…it’s also the RT critics, the BCFA critics, and the general public (holds a spot in the IMDB Top 250 and highest grossing film of the year, 3rd all time worldwide)
Pretty fucking impressive. Sure, whether it’s a great film or not is a matter of subjectiveness, but by all possible quantitative measures so far the answer is yes, it’s a pretty fucking great film! So yeah, joke is on you. LOL
Steve50: How do you account for the ending of TOL, though?
To me, that is not just a “flaw”, but a complete miscalculation on Malick’s behalf. Cheesy new age imagery on a windy beach where people go around and hug each other…how could that ever account for the miracle of life?
Was Malick’s ambition so over-reaching, so all-encompassing, that he somehow lost sight of what would benefit his own creation?
The childhood sequences, though, are among the most impressive cinematic visualizations of human perception I have ever witnessed. A true marvel. And TOL is a more than worthy best picture contender on that score alone (and let’s forget about the dinosaur, ok…)
First of all I’d like to know how many critics comprise the Washington DC group. Secondly how many of them belong to other similar groups and will cast votes say in the BFCA where in some instances that could be called “double dipping”. How many of these critics are from morning or evening news show where their reviews are three minute commercials?
The fact that “critic” groups all over the country are now not submitting their top ten list with winners but are now submitting nominations is just such a joke. And we like a pack of sheep jump every time someone we “like” wins.
Bridesmaids wins best ensemble? That’s your first clue as to how valuable this list is. You give Octavia Spencer the best supporting actress award and then you give Bridesmaids the best ensemble piece? My guess is that Bridesmaids probably had a higher advertising budget.
These wins by critics groups are nice for the members of the film world cause they get a nice little plague or a little statue to put on their mantle but in the long run they don’t mean a thing cause they ain’t got that swing.
Is $98 million a lot for a campaign?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/arts/warner-forks-out-to-make-oscar-wild-about-harry/story-e6frg8n6-1226215559373
Also-
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2011/12/1/wb-considering-theatrical-re-release-of-deathly-hallows-part-2-in-nyc-and-la
http://theenvelope.latimes.com/awards/oscars/la-en-power-players-20111201,0,4893452.story
@julian
Yeah, the beach scene was a bit remincent of a late 60′s commercial, but I think Malick was trying to reference a particular feeling. The imagery he uses from that period may refer to some personal time when he first had this kind of revelation. We’re close to the same age, so I can only draw on what the imagery brought to my own mind.
I’m guessing the gathering of all the human characters on a windy beach has to do with relating those souls to grains of sand/drops of water/particles in the wind. The only element missing is fire and violence of creation which was prevalent in the opening of the film.
It’s not a strong sequence and probably does look cheesy without that era as part of one’s experience, or maybe some Buddhist tenets to fall back on. It’s a bold move that is probably too personal to be expected to translate across different generations and mindsets, making it a risky move. Who knows? Malick isn’t talking and I’m probably way off to try and second-guess his intentions.
(My first reply disappeared – as did the site – about an hour ago.)
The mother is definitely Nature and the Father is definitely Grace (at least that’s the way I see it.)
Grace, from a Biblical point of view (and I’m going to roll with the Bible here becuase the opening quote comes from Job), is God acting within you. His Grace is your sustenance. Catch this applicable verse from 1 Corinithians 15:10, “But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.” This verse implies that God’s Grace is what makes us what we are.
Think it’s easy to confuse Grace as we commonly definite it with how the Bible wants to define Grace. But evenso, Pitt’s Father character shows much compassion and Grace, especially towards the end of the narrative.
Not to get in too fine of a theological arguement here, it’s important to remember that God is not always a benevolent being. Recall the whole story of Noah and the Flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and so forth. If you are interested in a fascinating perspective on God and the Bible, I highly recommend God: A Biography by Jack Miles.
So going back to the original premise, Mother is definitely Nature and Father is definitely God in my view. That’s if you choose to view the world in this dichotomy, which I think Malick wants us to do in this segment of the film (notice that Mother is largely silent and let’s everything run its course for the most part)
———–
The final scene was a bit problematic for me too, although not for the way that you would think. It reminded me strongly of the final scene in Longtime Companion (which has been the answer to “what’s your favorite movie?” since 1998 or so) so I was a bit distracted with what the purpose of the scene was in that film and tried to make it applicable to this film. I doubt that was what Malick was going for.
There is a lot of symbolism going on here. Throughout the film there are many scense that take place at the water’s edge. Whether it be along a river or an ocean. Throw in the fact that the one scene of the kid drowning, I have to think that Malick was going for something here that at this point I don’t comprehend. (Heck even the Dinosaur scene that took place at the river’s edge plays into this) – I’m sure I’m wrong or just too simple here, but water seams to symbolize death and land seems to symbolize life. It will take subsequent viewings for me to make any determination, good or bad, about those final sequences.
Deathly Hallows part 2 was well reviewed because of the sentimental factor. It is the end of a franchise and critics saw it fitting to conclude the era with a nice comment or two. Critics have always had such inclinations. Look at Kingdom of the crystal skull…a truly horrendous movie but the critics welcomed it. Why? the sentimental factor. They were happy to see Indie’s whip again.
As I previously said, Deathly Hallows 1 was miles ahead of part 2. Part 1 kept on me on the edge of my seat. I remember leaving the theater going wow! they really pushed the envelope. The scene towards the end with beatrix and hermoine was shocking in a good way and very gritty. I expected part 2 to enhance the darkness and deliver a truly astounding finale. Boy was I wrong. What I got was a rushed plot, underused actors and anti-climatic fight sequences. Like WTF was that with the death of beatrix? you created this towering and malicious character and developed her brilliantly throughout the franchise only to have her die like an extra in the background? even the voldermont/potter showdown was a mess. The entire movie was a let down. Sorry Potter fans but Death Hallows 2 deserves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!!!!!!! ZILCH!!!!
steve50 – Yes, yoru perspective about the scope of nature getting smaller as the film progresses is a good one. I am struck by the scene of Penn getting some job from sliding his hands through a swatch of long grass that’s been planted in the middle of the concrete environment with which he presumably works.
——
Another aspect I found interesting that is definitely a part of the film that I’ve been unable to process fully is that after Pitt loses his job, he clearly gets a better job, or gains some wealth, because the house they are in when they learn of their son’s death is clearly of a much higher value.
I am also struck by the increasing number of windows in the houses as time progresses. Penn’s house (it appears briefly) is almost all windows. I assume this is Malick is trying to say that we all subconciously yearn to bring nature into our lives even though we conciously evolve into beings that are trying to conquer nature. (and yes, there are a lot of unexplained themes I’m alluding to here that I won’t get into because I really need to shower and eat some breakfast.)
I never thought I’d agree with Deena Jones’ wig. And I’m telling you I am off to breakfast now.
Um, those of you trying to evidence DH2′s magnificent reviews by pointing at Indy 4 are off your rocker…it’s a far cry from 77% to 97% and furthermore a 6.9 average to an 8.4 average. No, it’s not just simply the “sentimental factor”, lol. Give me a break…
“The final scene was a bit problematic for me too, although not for the way that you would think. It reminded me strongly of the final scene in Longtime Companion …. I doubt that was what Malick was going for.”
It reminded me most of Fellini’s finale in 8 ½, only Fellini used a completely man-made setting which made the scene into a celebration of the creative process. Malick went for a longer, more organic reach (maybe a celebration of existence in the midst of an evolving landscape?) but I don’t know if he defined it clearly enough for everyone.
Critics have always had such inclinations. Look at Kingdom of the crystal skull…a truly horrendous movie but the critics welcomed it. Why? the sentimental factor. They were happy to see Indie’s whip again.
I’m not saying the analogy I’m about to give is a direct reflection of critics’ reaction to Deathly Hallows.
But when I’m watching the Olympics, at the end of a complex gymnastics floor exercise or figure skating freestyle competition, I’m so relieved when the competitor makes it to the very end without slipping and falling on his or her ass. I’m overly thrilled to see that that they didn’t stumble and flub up years of devoted hard work. I don’t really care if they weren’t perfect — I just want to applaud them for not twisting an ankle. “hurray! thank you for not stabbing me in the heart!”
Now stop smirking about me choosing gymnastics and figure skating as my sports examples.
Mixing Tree of Life and Harry Potter discussions is giving me brain freeze. You could almost skate on it right now.
The Fellowship of the Ring was easily the worst of the Lord of the Rings franchise.
Scott, even if you bring the moon down and she says that HP number 18875 was great, it will still mean nothing to me.
Critics of all sorts have embarrassed themselves often enough.
I mean, if rankings, awards and opinions of people in the business should count for quality then we’re living in the wrong world…
Sandra Bullock has an Oscar, they keep nominating Clooney for playing himself and what not, so… it’s not about the joke being on me or you, it’s about letting quality be quality and letting boyfandomship be what it is.
Plus you’ve already embarrassed yourself far too much to be able to offend anyone, no matter how hard you’re trying.
You remind me of a little Afrika, let’s hope you don’t grow out of proportions.
Fine, then ignore the critics and listen to those that matter, the people. Afterall we’re the ones who fund the films…if we didn’t buy tickets then the films wouldn’t get made. But as you might have noticed the general public consensus is very much the same…maybe not QUITE as strong of praise as critics, but still being held in pretty high esteem
Here’s the Top 10 of the year according to the people (taken from flickchart, the least flawed movie rating/ranking site there is)
Drive
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Super 8
X-Men: First Class
The Tree of Life
Source Code
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Captain America: The First Avenger
Thor
Midnight in Paris
So that’s what it would be if the people got their way. Of course the end of year releases haven’t been seen enough yet to make the list but by the time the Oscars roll around if you want to see what the people’s preferences are check back in with this site.
http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?year=2011
For IMDB it’s
3. 8.5 Hugo (2011/II) 5,991
4. 8.4 A Separation (2011) 18,462
5. 8.2 Warrior (2011) 14,224
9. 8.2 Drive (2011) 65,579
10. 8.2 The Muppets (2011) 7,031
11. 8.1 50/50 (2011) 16,722
15. 8.1 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
16. 8.0 Moneyball (2011) 13,764
19. 8.0 The Help (2011) 20,968
23. 7.8 X-Men: First Class (2011) 132,291
25. 7.8 Midnight in Paris (2011) 44,561
28. 7.8 The Inbetweeners Movie (2011) 7,915
33. 7.7 The Skin I Live In (2011) 7,731
34. 7.7 The Adventures of Tintin (2011) 19,937
35. 7.7 Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) 92,760
36. 7.7 Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011) 5,548
39. 7.6 Delhi Belly (2011) 5,828
44. 7.5 Source Code (2011) 107,013
46. 7.5 Crazy, Stupid, Love. (2011)