One of the big awards shows, among many, inserted into the awards race now is the BAFTA, the British Academy of Film and Television Awards.  When I first started, in 1999, no one in the Oscar race paid any attention to the BAFTAs because they were held after the Oscars.  This put a healthy divide between the two groups and really did seem to mean — this is what THEY thought, rather than they trying to influence or match the Oscars, as most groups now do.   But they switched their date in 2000 to be held before the Oscars and now they’re just one of the precursors on the road to Oscar.

The British invasion is a notable strain that runs through the Oscars and always has done.  While America has, I think, produced some of the best film directors in the world, the Brits really influence the actors branch, the biggest voting block in the Academy.  They used to be known for not so much matching Oscar as being able to push through movies like The Pianist, or an acting contender like Marion Cotillard.  But once Oscar shifted its date from March back to February, and all of the awards shows then shifted their dates back, you had near-uniform voting across the board.   You have to go back to 2008 to find a year that didn’t match up with Oscar’s Best Picture when Atonement won.

There are two things the BAFTAs tell us about their awards — they really really REALLY REALLY loved Argo enough to give Ben Affleck an acting nomination, and they seemed to prefer Ang Lee who is the only director who has gotten every director nomination in the race, from Globe to DGA to Oscar to BAFTA. Every other director is missing one of those.  That has led some to believe that Ang Lee and Life of Pi could be the surprise winners at the BAFTAs, thus throwing the race into even more equal flux.  Even without a Best Director nomination (note how when Spielberg didn’t get a BAFTA nod everyone said huh? what? But when Affleck didn’t get an Academy nod we had a panic on our hands on the 4th of July). Even without a director nomination, Lincoln still led the BAFTA nominations.

The BAFTAS, unlike Oscar, do not use the preferential balloting, either for the nominees or the winners.  Here is how they changed their voting:

Following extensive discussion, consideration and research over several years, the Film Committee has confirmed a move from a three-round voting system to a two-round system. This will be implemented in time for the 2012/13 voting period.

As per previous years, members will vote for both the nominations and the winner in the Best Film category and the four performance categories. Members will have the opportunity to opt in to chapters to vote for the nominees and winner in Animation, Documentary, Film Not in the English Language, and Outstanding British Film.

Individual chapters will now decide the nominees and members will vote for the winner in Adapted Screenplay and Original Screenplay, Cinematography, Costume Design, Director, Editing, Make-Up & Hair, Original Music, Production Design, Sound, and Special Visual Effects.

Since this is the first year they changed their voting, we have no precedent to go on.  Mucking things up even more is that the BAFTAs history can really only be counted from the year 2000 on. Many people make the mistake of searching out Oscar and BAFTA history but in fact, the only reason to ever look at history is to see pattern and influence of voting.  So in many ways they aren’t reliable, or as reliable, as some.  For instance, they are no help in seeing how they sided with Apollo 13 and The Color Purple vis a vis Ben Affleck.  The only time we’ve had a major split vote since the BAFTAs was when the Ang Lee and Brokeback mountain won there – so that was really no help.

The BAFTA membership is slightly larger than the Academy’s, at 6500.

Some stats:

  • Most of the time, the film with the most nominations wins, but not always.  Brokeback Mountain and The Pianist were the two post-date change that won without leading noms.  Atonement, Return of the King, The King’s Speech, Slumdog Millionaire, The Hurt Locker, The Artist all led or tied for lead for most nominations.
  • The only film to win Oscar’s Best Picture in BAFTA/Oscar 12 year history that wasn’t nominated for a BAFTA in either Picture or Director was Million Dollar Baby.
  • BAFTA BP winners always had a Best Director nomination.
  • All BAFTA winners for Best Director have been nominated for Oscar’s Best Director (that leaves only two this year, Haneke or Lee).
  • 8 BAFTA Best Actress winners in 12 years have gone on to win the Oscar. Only one wasn’t nominated, Scarlett Johansson for Lost in Translation.
  • 7 BAFTA Best Actor winners in 12 years have gone on to win the Oscar, all have been nominated.
  • The BAFTA Picture and Director have matched roughly 50% of the time.  When they matched, picture and director went on to win the Oscar except for three times.  Twice, the director only went on to win — Roman Polanski for the Pianist and Ang Lee for Brokeback Mountain. Once, neither did – Peter Jackson, Fellowship of the Ring.

You can check out our current predictions over at Gold Derby.


Load More Related Articles
Load More By Sasha Stone
Load More In BAFTA
  • Christophe

    “While America has produced some of the best film directors in the world, the Brits really influence the actors branch.”

    hmm hmm I agree about the greatness of certain American directors but Britain has also produced some of the best directors in film history: Alfred Hitchcock, Charlie Chaplin, David Lean, Tom Hooper… only to name a few of those very fine gentlemen!

  • Tom Hooper… ew…

    They used to be known for not so much matching Oscar as being able to push through movies like The Pianist, or an acting contender like Marion Cotillard.

    I think we see similarities between the tastes of AMPAS and BAFTA each year because their memberships are from largely similar backgrounds. But BAFTA make at least one utterly ridiculous decision each year (like Ben Affleck for Best Actor), so they’re never going to be taken as seriously as the other major precursors. So yeah, things like The Pianist, and Marion Cotillard and Tilda Swinton in 2008 are probably just signs that the two groups think alike. I think we’ve seen that this year with Amour. I’m pretty sure that Oscar’s Best Picture list wouldn’t have included Amour had there been five, and thus would have matched with BAFTA in relation to Amour.

    Marion Cotillard and Tilda Swinton was the year of the writers’ strike. There was no Golden Globe ceremony. The BAFTAs became the big event of the pre-Oscar awards season, all the celebs turned up, and they had their biggest tangible influence perhaps ever.

  • bettekate

    No offense, Christophe, but to list Tom Hooper with Hitchcock, Chaplin and Lean is, well, to put it as politely as I can, premature, at best.

    Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger were an amazing British directing team. Two of their films, A Matter of Life and Death (a/k/a Stairway to Heaven) and The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp, both nowhere on Oscar’s radar in their respective years, both made the Sight & Sound top 101 films. The only other British films to rank that high, in the top 101, were The Third Man, Barry Lyndon and Lawrence of Arabia.

  • daveinprogress

    •BAFTA BP winners always had a Best Director nomination

    This stat is potentially worrying for Lincoln’s chances at BAFTA.

    Again history can change and new precedents set. That omission I think is more resonant for BAFTA’s Best Film than Affleck’s omission for Argo at Oscar’s BP. The different voting system, and BAFTA’s stats suggest Lincoln may not win Best Film. I can see them rewarding Life of Pi with the big 2. Now that would really put the tiger among the pigeons.

  • •BAFTA BP winners always had a Best Director nomination
    This stat is potentially worrying for Lincoln’s chances at BAFTA.

    No way Lincoln wins the BAFTA. It’s just about the biggest foregone conclusion of the year: Argo will probably win here. Yeah, they might pick Life of Pi, but I think BAFTA are a little more conscious of trying to be as relevant as possible with their main award (evident across the board this year with their voting procedure changes). They rock the boat a bit more in the minor categories, but that’s more out of oddness than a desire to influence a shift in the race.

  • Christophe

    Wow! I actually like the voting rules for the baftas very much:,2464,BA.html

    it’s clear and leaves a lot of freedom to members as to how they want to allocate their votes. I wish the oscars would do the same, but unfortunately the acad takes pride in its own unique convoluted and controversial process.

  • daveinprogress

    I’ve just noticed that BAFTA is giving its 2013 fellowship to Alan Parker – one of my all time favourite directors.

  • JP

    Stephen Frears, Michael Winterbottom, Mike Leigh, Ken Loach, Christopher Nolan, Danny Boyle, Ridley Scott, Stephen Daldry, Alan Parker, Sam Mendes, Paul Greengrass, Tom Hooper… x Steven Spielberg, Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, the Coens, George Lucas, David Fincher, Clint Eastwood, Paul Thomas Anderson, Quentin Tarantino, Steven Soderbergh, Spike Lee, Terrence Malick, David Lynch, Darren Aronofsky, Ron Howard, Alexander Payne, Jason Reitman, Julian Schnabel, David O. Russell, Gus Van Sant

    As a whole, just the quartet of Spielberg-Allen-Scorsese-Coppolla kills any kind of comparison between American and British directors alive.

  • sandy

    Julianne Moore was the favorite to win best actress for far from heaven. The baftas sided with Nicole kidman for the hours. Ampas followed suit and awarded kid an instead of Moore.

  • Houstonrufus

    Swoon. I forgot how dreamy Dujardin is.

  • JP

    @ sandy

    Julianne Moore was the frontrunner only after the critics awards. After that, it was clear it was a toss-up between Nicole Kidman and Renee Zelwegger with Kidman slightly ahead. Kidman took the Globes and BAFTAs. Zelwegger took the SAG. I preferred to see Julianne winning. Nicole deserved it for Moulin Rouge so it was sort of compensation.

    Julianne Moore and Ed Harris coincidentally were together in Game Change and represent how the Academy might get things wrong when they keep postponing an award to a certain actor. If you like a performance and an actor, award it at that time. Glenn Close is another example. Nominated dozens of times in the 80s and only once since then. Harris should have won for The Truman Show. Moore should have won for Boogie Nights and Far From Heaven and even supporting for The Hours would be ok. In the late 90s and early 2000s, Harris and Moore were nominated many times and they weren’t able to award them. It’s 10 years since they received their last nominations… really hope they win some day.

  • keifer

    For my money, I would rather see a film directed by David Lean (on the big screen, that is).

    Nobody can compare to this master. Well, maybe Hitchcock. Glad to see their legacies have survived.

    Generally speaking, I think Spielberg fans are generally of the younger generation anyway.

  • The Dude

    I think Lee will take Best Director, but I’m not sure who wins BP- I could see it going to any of the movies, except maybe ZDT.

  • rufussondheim

    I would take the Frears, Winterbottom, Boyle, Greengrass quartet over the Coppola, Spielberg, Scorcese, Allen quartet any day of the week. Yeah, I realize the American Quartet is more important in film history, but the British Quartet would be much more prevalent in my top 100.

    But then if I were to take the best American Quartet I would probably take Malick, Reichardt, the Coens and Payne over the four you listed. And then it would really be a race between the British 4 and the American 4.

    But then I would probably choose von Trier, Trier, Haneke and Refn over either quartet, I think these four have some great films in the pipeline and I wouldn’t miss them for the world.

  • OT – The Image Awards were really good. Anyone who can still watch it in their time zone should check it out. NBC

  • Bette

    PADDY: “I’m pretty sure that Oscar’s Best Picture list wouldn’t have included Amour had there been five, and thus would have matched with BAFTA in relation to Amour.”

    On what possible basis can you make that statement? Amour is nominated for Director and Screenplay. Something like 80% of films with those two nods also get a Best Picture nomination. Les Miz had neither. Yes, the xenophobic Academy typically shuns foreign language films from their final 5 or even 10, but in naming their top 5, one typically picks the 5 with director nominations. Now sure, Argo, is a rare exception where it is clearly in the top 5 based upon the precursors and momentum, but there is no more reason to knock out Amour than Beasts of the Southern Wild (in my opinion, the true best picture of the year). And on what basis do I omit Silver, Lincoln and Pi? Simply based on their other nominations…precisely why you SHOULD assume Amour would have made the top 5. And certainly over Les Miz, no screenplay nod there either.

  • Andre

    “Alfred Hitchcock, Charlie Chaplin, David Lean, Tom Hooper”

    sorry, I try to stay positive when I comment here, and I have no dislike for Hooper at all (I still think “Longford” is AMAZING and I like his non-Les-Mis work a lot), but he does NOT belong in that list. at least not before folks like Carol Reed, Alexander Mackendrick, Joseph Losey, Lindsay Anderson, Karel Reisz, Tony Richardson, Ken Loach, Ken Russell, Mike Leigh and many other british filmmakers who precede him.

  • Andre

    Peter Weir (might be one of the living greatest, IMO) and Paul Greengrass should be added to that list.

    Danny Boyle, though not always my cup of tea, should be there too. and Andrea Arnold.

    Hooper is gifted, but I think all the people I’ve mentioned above stand head and shoulders above him.

    sorry, I care A LOT about british cinema =P

  • Andre

    and, of course, they should all be preceded by Mr. Alexander Korda.

  • daveinprogress

    Andre, i would throw in Terence Davies as well.

    Oh,, and nice pic, buddy! 🙂

  • KJBacon

    House of Cards – on episode 7 – addicted

  • Yvette

    What I don’t get – and someone needs to explain it to me – is this:
    I keep reading about how Lincoln won’t translate overseas….
    Audience in the US embrace all those anglophile things whether its Downton Abbey on TV or Sherlock Holmes etc…or The King’s Speech, The Queen, The Iron Lady – Americans eat that s*** up. The films may not make as much as your standard Twilight movies, but we appreciate and respect them. Most of us seem to get the historical context and find it exotic and fascinating.
    What is it about a film like Lincoln that they can’t ‘get’ or respond to?
    Are they that arrogant?

  • Yvette

    To clarify, I’m specifically talking about the UK.

  • steve50

    Hurray! Lists!

    My ideal British Quartet would have to be John Schlesinger, Lindsey Anderson, Stephen Frears and Steve McQueen.

    David Lean would be included, but I don’t think he would cooperate and has a special universe all to his own, anyway.

    It’s a good thing I’m leaving out American ex-pats who chose Britain because Joseph Losey, Stanley Kubrick and James Ivory would throw a wrench into it.

    “Are they that arrogant?” (Yvette)

    No. Perhaps they aren’t that interested. Sort of like Remains of the Day / Howard’s End redux (they didn’t play well in Iowa, I imagine).

  • All I know is Close, Moore and Harris deserve their Oscars now! (And where’s Sunset Blvd movie)?
    I also know Hugo > The Artist
    Oh, I also know Tom Hooper is a piece of shit.

  • JP

    Close, Moore, Laura Linney, Amy Adams, Annette Bening and Viola Davis are the most overdue actresses in my opinion.

    Ed Harris is definitely among the most overdue actors. Sir Ian McKellen (should have won twice), Joaquin Phoenix, Gary Oldman, Ralph Fiennes, Johnny Depp and Leonardo DiCaprio are among the most overdue man.

    Peter Weir is the most overdue director a live. A truly living legend as someone wrote. And VERY VERY underrated. Should have, in my opinion, two Oscars: Witness and Dead Poets Society. And The Truman Show was the best film of 1998 and totally robbed at the Oscars. Should have easily been nominated for Picture, Actor, Score, Editing, Art Direction.

  • steve50

    Fabinho – in 2011, Webber, in an interview, said that he wants to film version made with Madonna in the title role. Best to let sleeping dogs lie. I saw the stage version and wasn’t impressed. Stick with the original.

  • JP

    Peter Weir is Australian. If he was british, he would be the british director alive with the most impressive body of work.

  • steve50

    JP – Peter Weir is one of the best. He’s the one who is closest to Ang Lee in that he doesn’t leave his fingerprints all over his films. You would never know that Fearless, Witness, Master & Commander, Gallipoli, Truman Show, Dead Poets and Year of Living Dangerously were all directed by the same person. He’s amazing.

  • daveinprogress

    Steve, thanks for the spotlight on Peter Weir. We lost one of our Australian film pioneers ironically on Australia Day (Jan 26) – Patricia Lovell – Peter’s producer on Picnic at Hanging Rock and Gallipoli (she produced several other features for other directors). I couldn’t resist the chance to honour her online.

  • steve50

    What a shame, Dave. She and Weir worked magic together. I loved Picnic at Hanging Rock and could hardly walk out of the theatre after Gallipoli. Sad news. Thanks for sharing that.

  • daveinprogress

    Thanks Steve, you are both a gentleman and a scholar. I’ve meant to convey that to you, after so many of your comments. They are always respectful and insightful. I always enjoy reading them.

  • steve50

    The new avatar is for Pat.

  • steve50

    trying again

  • rufussondheim

    Shit, forgot to include McQueen. It’s still a little early on him to be sure, but with two films he’s pretty amazing. But I think he ranks behind Joachim Trier who also only has two films (Reprise and Oslo August 31st for the uninitiated)

    Either way I’m gangbusters for both.

    And let there be another quadrant for far Eastern directors – Peter Weir, Ang Lee, Wong Kar Wai, and Zhang Yimou.

    This reminds me of a game we used to play on the message board of Salon back in the 1990’s. Someone would come up with a mini-tournament, they’d list 8 thematically linked items and they’d compete against each other until a champion was crowned. How it worked was everyone voted for a winner in each pairing until the pairing got nine votes – the winners were announced and new pairings formed and so forth until the winner was announced. When it was all done, someone proposed a new set of 8. It was always great fun and it sparked a lot of discussion.

  • rufussondheim

    Oh, and Steve, I used to know a theater queen that would practically throw a tantrum when someone called him Webber. Apparently it’s uncouth to call him anything but Lloyd Webber. Who knew? Right? Anyway, I tell you this because I would hate to see you needlessly slaughtered if you made that error when a roving pack of theater queens was afoot. You’re just too valuable to lose around here!

  • JP, agree whit every word.
    Harris, DiCaprio, Norton and Fiennes deserve all too.
    And Peter Weir is a Master. He deserves everything. Dead Poets Society and The Truman Show deservea all awards in the world.
    And Ridley Scott is on same team too.

    Sunset Blvd Musical whitout Close?

  • steve50

    Fabinho – hopefully.

    Rufus – Ha! Thanks for the warning. I’m no spring chicken, but I know how to out-maneuver that gang. “Hey! Isn’t that Lupone over there?” Then run like hell the other way.

    Important quadrant: Meirelles, Salles, Inarritu, and Cuaron They are a force.

  • Andre

    sorry for the misplacements… totally forgot Weir was australian and honestly did not know Losey was an expat!!

    and should have put Terence Davies in there, obviously!! thanks for the suggestion and the compliment, Dave!

    and, of course, Steve McQueen, who is one of my favourite working directors right now.

    cheers everyone

  • Andre

    and thanks steve for citing my fellow brazlilians Meirelles and Salles. though their latest films were disappointments, I still feel proud to have them as representatives of my country’s cinema. =)

  • daveinprogress

    Central Station was my favourite film of that year, Andre, with that exquisite performance by Fernanda Montenegro.

  • Yvette

    Steve 50,
    Those films did relatively well with audiences..I’m going by word-of-mouth…. ‘hey-have-you-seen-The-King’s-Speech? I’t’s about King George who stuttered and Colin Firth is great…’
    Everybody I know saw The King’s Speech, The Iron Lady, The Queen etc… – in its first run in the US. It played very well in mainstream theaters, yes, even, I imagine, Ohio.
    I’m honestly asking:
    What is it about a film like Lincoln – historical, political – that would not translate to intelligent audiences in the UK?
    I mean, if it doesn’t, why?

  • Andre

    dave, I have had the amazing honour of being Ms. Montenegro’s english teacher twice in my life. I must say, the woman is undoubtedly the most intelligent person I have ever met.

    sweet as a sugar cube, as well. just an amazing human being all around

  • daveinprogress

    Lovely reference, Andre – sounds like a really great lady.

  • Andre

    and it wasn’t even my first experience meeting and Oscar nominee/winner!! =) but definetly the nicest one!!

  • SeattleMoviegoer

    i’ve always had great respect for the BAFTA’s ever since they honored my favorite Woody Allen film as Best Picture of 1985. THE PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO. great pick on their part. the Oscars hardly noticed it. also, they awarded one of the great supporting performances with the BAFTA…Paul Scofield as Rev. Hale in THE CRUICBLE. again, the Academy wasn’t looking.

  • Sammy

    BAFTA has made some really good picks over the years and this year is no exception.

    @Paddy – They have given Amour director + screenplay + best actress nominations and this shows it is clearly on their top five list. It is ineligible for best film and that is the reason it is not there.

  • Alexander

    “hmm hmm I agree about the greatness of certain American directors but Britain has also produced some of the best directors in film history: Alfred Hitchcock, Charlie Chaplin, David Lean, Tom Hooper… only to name a few of those very fine gentlemen!”

    I kept looking at this comment over and over, trying to see if I was misreading it. Tom Hooper?!?!

  • rufussondheim

    Yvette, I think the main problem with Lincoln in the overseas market is the film’s lack of focus. It doesn’t follow one story arc completely enough and the lack of narrative focus.

    But then I think you’re a bit misguided here. The Queen and The Iron Lady were hardly blockbusters and if you compare box office results of those films in the US and Lincoln in England, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn if Lincoln did the best.

  • Deniz

    I believe Alfred Hitchcock finishes this debate about British vs American Directors. He is by far the greatest director of all time.

    As for BAFTAs, it looks like it will be Argo but it just sucks in a year that had so many great films, one mediocre film takes all the awards.

  • steve50

    Yvette – from the Guardian on Tuesday, when Lincoln debuted in 3rd place and ZDT in 5th. Les Mis and Django are 1st and 2nd, and Life of Pi holding remarkably in 4th place after a longer run than the others:

    “American historical dramas have often proved a tough sell to British cinemagoers, but the same might be said of contemporary US films set in the troubled Middle East. The result – £1.66m for Lincoln, £1.05m for Zero – should be reasonably satisfactory to respective distributors Fox and Universal.”

    Lincoln will be appreciated and do well, but it won’t be Skyfall. Political dramas, which is what Lincoln essentially is, are generally more successful in their countries of origin.

  • Thanks, Sammy, I wasn’t aware that it was ineligible for the Best Film BAFTA.

    Bette, I leave Amour off what I predict was the Academy’s top five mostly because I don’t think enough of the Academy would have voted for it. The same for Beasts of the Southern Wild. Were this a five-nominee year like they used to be, I think Lincoln, Life of Pi and Silver Linings Playbook would have made it alongside Argo and Les Mis. A 3/5 match between Picture and Director. It has happened: 2001, 1995, 1989, plenty of years (note 1995 and 1989, two years we’ve been discussing a lot lately). Just a hunch, that’s all.

    It doesn’t make a lot of sense to base one’s predictions of what would have been their top five on the directors list, as they rarely match exactly. There’s normally one difference. And the directors branch only accounts for a small percentage of the entire Academy. Last year, I think The Help would have been nominated were there five Best Picture nominees, and The Tree of Life would not have been.

  • The Dude


    Yeah, but Les Mis failed to get nominations for writing, directing, cinematography and editing, I don’t see it making the top 5. Same for The Help last year- acting alone isn’t enough. When was the last time a movie with none of those 4 nominations made the Best Picture list when there were only 5 nominees?

    Since Django and ZDT clearly wouldn’t be strong enough, I think one out of Amour and BSW would have gotten in.

  • The Dude, as this year has shown in so many instances, stats are useless. I doubt Academy members particularly care about whether a film has nominations for directing, writing, cinematography or editing. The Two Towers made it without directing, acting, writing or cinematography. Four Weddings and a Funeral made it with just a screenplay nomination. If Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close can beat PGA, DGA and WGA-nominated The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo last year, Les Mis can beat Amour, Beasts of the Southern Wild and Zero Dark Thirty this year.

    Amour and Beasts of the Southern Wild won nominations in directing, acting (one) and screenplay (Amour also has foreign language, although that was a given, and achieved differently from the others, also Beasts wasn’t eligible for it). Five years ago, The Diving-Bell and the Butterfly was a much stronger contender than either of those films. It had a Globe for director, PGA, DGA and WGA nominations, and BFCA nominations in Picture and Director. It looked like one of the top three contenders, alongside No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood. It won Oscar nominations in directing, writing, cinematography and editing, and not in Best Picture.

  • Zach

    This is going to be such an unpredictable year for BAFTAs. I could see Affleck, Haneke, or Lee taking Director, even if Argo will probably win Picture. I think Riva will win at BAFTA, cementing her strong chance of an upset on Oscar night, but I don’t know what will win Original Screenplay. Amour has a great shot, but they love Tarantino, and Amour isn’t the kind of film that wins a screenplay award over a non-BP-nominee just because it’s up for Picture and Director. They also liked ZDT more than the Academy, so we could see Mark Boal going two-for-two with the WGA and BAFTA. I’m guessing Waltz takes it over Jones, Les Mis over Skyfall and Marigold for Best British Film, and Frankenweenie over Brave, but what a crapshoot that is. I will be impressed with whoever wins the BAFTA prediction pool!

  • Zooey

    @ Paddy,

    your argument is flawed because you compare the outcome in a year of five and the outcome in a year of five. Actually I bet that even in a year of ten EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE wouldn’t have made it. It’s the new voting that allowed the film to get nominated.

    And LES MISERABLES would have followed in the footsteps of Dreamgirls. Even Dreamgirls had better reviews.

    To me it would have been:

  • Zooey

    I believe Haneke has a real shot at directing here. And it would help his Oscar prospects.

  • The Dude

    Paddy- In 2007, all the nominees had either directing noms as well, except for Atonement, but who had writing, editing and cinematography, as well as an acting nomination. And most people were NOT predicting it to make Best Picture.

    A good example to the Les Miserables situation (and applies to The Help one) is Dreamgirls, that had the most nominations in the year, however they were concentrated in acting and songwriting, and the movie didn’t made the BP list.

    Having love of only one or two branches won’t help you- Four Wedding and a Funeral had only a writing nomination, but was very much an actors movie, even if none made the list.

    This year, both Amour and BSW would be ahead of Les Mis. And last year, Moneyball would have been ahead of The Help too.

  • Zach

    The Help would have beaten Moneyball. The Help had the actors behind it. Moneyball getting the screenplay nomination instead of The Help wouldn’t have meant that much.

    This year, it would have been Lincoln, Argo, Silver Linings, and Life of Pi, for sure. That last spot could have gone to either Beasts or Amour, and though people feel passionate about Beasts, I’m leaning toward Amour–and I’m not sure either would have filled that last spot over Les Mis over ZDT. Les Mis in particular was riding a lot of early-frontrunner momentum and is typical Oscar-bait. It could have gone the route of Cold Mountain or Dreamgirls, but when those films lost out on Best Picture, the replacements were Seabiscuit, a big hit from a big studio, and Letters from Iwo Jima, an acclaimed, important film from the American legend Clint Eastwood. I’m not sure either Beasts or Amour had that kind of sway, but Les Mis had DGA, SAG, and PGA nominations, and the love for Hugh Jackman as well as Anne Hathaway. It wouldn’t have been the first Best Pic nominee without either Director or Screenplay nominations — Moulin Rouge, a film that similarly inspires passion among its fans, was never expected to get a screenplay nomination anyway. Baz Luhrmann’s miss was a surprise, and yet the film still got a nomination over the auteur’s film, Mulholland Dr., and the politically important but not groundbreaking or sufficiently inspiring Black Hawk Down. Les Mis could have been the Moulin Rouge to Zero Dark Thirty’s Black Hawk Down…but Amour is more like In the Bedroom than Mulholland Dr. And Beasts is a different beast. Too bad we’ll never know.

  • Zach

    Yeah, Diving Bell is a good comparison for Amour. Les Mis is Atonement, ZDT is Into the Wild, and I don’t know where Beasts would have fit in. In the old days, the more obscure indies usually didn’t have the support to crack the top 5, but the Academy has let in so many younger voters that it might have Beasts over Amour, Les Mis, and ZDT. Who’s to say?

  • I believe Alfred Hitchcock finishes this debate about British vs American Directors. He is by far the greatest director of all time.

    yay! hurray for American citizen Alfred Hitchcock!

  • Yvette

    That makes sense… and Lincoln is actually getting mostly positive reviews in the UK.
    I just kept reading these generalized statements about how Lincoln ‘would not translate overseas’ and wanted a reason why. Obviously its not going to be Skyfall…. but I think intelligent audiences appreciate intelligent film regardless of nationality.

  • Winston

    Voting for the Oscars stops on February 8th. The Baftas are held February 10th. So beyond maybe being a possible indicator, the winners will not pick up any momentum.

  • steve50

    “generalized statements ”

    No shortage of those, Yvette. Wait until it heats up in a week or so.

    Winston – aren’t the final ballots sent out on Feb 8th? That means the voters will have them in their hot little (or cold dead) hands when the BAFTAs hit. This may be one of the few times that they might play a small role.

  • Como assim Andre?

    Vc foi professor de Inglês da Sra. Montenegro?


  • Winston

    Look at that. Ballots sent out Feb. 8th. Due Feb. 19th.
    So maybe. I think the bafta voters have their own particular priorities.

  • JP

    “I believe Alfred Hitchcock finishes this debate about British vs American Directors. He is by far the greatest director of all time.”

    So… The tennis land of the world is Switzerland because, basically, Roger Federer was born there. Doesn’t matter if America has Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Serena Williams, BJ King, Chris Evert …

  • Christophe

    Beyond nationality, all the greatest directors are human beings, that’s enough for me, I don’t care where they come from or where they live. Thank God greatness in any given field is not limited or predetermined by such petty circumstances.

  • Hi, I believe your web site could possibly be having web browser compatibility problems.
    Whenever I take a look at your blog in Safari, it looks
    fine however, if opening in I.E., it has some overlapping issues.
    I simply wanted to give you a quick heads up! Apart from that, wonderful site!

Check Also

The State of the Race: Why the Oscar Demographic Matters and Why it Doesn’t

If you’ve been watching the Oscar race for as many years as I have, and indeed dove …