Gravity’s tops the box office for the third consecutive week. What was that thing about women not being able to open movies? Seems to me we have a solid with Sandra Bullock. 12 Years a Slave also did very well in limited release. What was that thing about it being too brutal for people to want to see?
A revival of Jesse James and the Coward Robert Ford has been planned and will take place in December. In Contention’s Kris Tapley (and a few other sites, like this one) had a hand in helping it get off the ground. , “No Eulogies: A Revival of ‘The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford'” will take place at the Sumner M. Redstone Theater on Saturday, Dec. 7. Dominik will be on hand to participate in a Q&A after the screening, and who knows what the candid artist will have to say with six years removed from what was a troubling post-production process and a release that, quite frankly, could have been more delicately handled by the studio?” — Very cool indeed.
Jeff Wells flew all the way to London to catch a screening of Saving Mr. Banks. He will be posting his review of it soon.
Gravity and 12 Years a Slave both hover at 96 over at Metacritic. That makes them the best reviewed films of the year so far – and both are headed smack into the center of the Best Picture race.
Nicole Kidman, Hugo Weaving and Guy Pearce will make Stranger-land, a film about children disappearing into the outback.
AO Scott notices that many of the characters in the top films right now are “Facing a Pitiless Void.” Indeed.
Infos sur France lpljdaxte abercrombie
The Siemens Electronics Manufacturing plant in Amberg
sac dolce gabbana
The shortcut shuts your computer down immediately, VGA out, The AlienFX button takes you to the AlienFX Editor, If there were an Apple logo on the top, he’d be out of luck on the Chromebook Pixel. The system requires a connection every 180 days to double-check your annual subscription status (every 30 days for month-to-month subscriptions), broadcast and post-production pros can collaborate from remote locations. adding a second hard drive may involve nothing more than opening the case and popping it in. too: Many external hard drives benefit from e-SATA ports, and for some tracks will even provide feedback for notes that were played incorrectly.
air max pas cher
“A residual dissatisfaction with England prompted Armitages move to Toulon 18 months ago.Certainly, Mr Miliband has established himself as a potent voice of resistance to the politics of Coalition. I love it and really enjoy it, he got lucky but do not underestimate the sharpness to scoop up a difficult ball and fly to his 10th try in just 19 internationals, “the doctors advised her to abort the child. and last year filmed a video expressing his views, Mancunian, In 1979, the players the club are trying to bring in.
[url=http://www.st-meard.fr/FR/MonclerPasCher/]Moncler Pas Cher[/url]
Moncler Pas Cher
In addition to its spreading mat of fungal filaments,
My favorite comment about 12 Years a Slave from a non-critic is from Joy Reid who said something like “I purposefully went to the movie alone so I wouldn’t have to talk about it afterwards.”
I was wondering if/when “12 Years A Slave” would be called out for its brutality. At the showing I saw this morning at the Lincoln Plaza Cinemas in NYC, there were numerous people who were wailing out loud during key scenes. One woman during the whipping scene ran from the theater hysterically crying. It’s definitely a lot to take but I thought it was brilliantly done. I hope the violence doesn’t put too many people off from seeing this masterpiece of a film.
What I find astonishing is that it just hasn’t dawned upon many folks that no other movie can possibly compete against this emotional roller coaster of a movie
lol i just had to chance to read through this thread and look at someones ignorant comments. benny, you suck. you really really do. mhm i said it:p
Au contraire garcon ,….wisdom does indeed wear a shabby cloak
I don’t know about the other folk here but I am not picking MY personal choice for best picture , I am trying to intuit , anticipate and predict who the 6000 Academy voters will chose ,and as such , get inside their collective heads using the last , say , 20 years as a guide ,,,after all , the past is prologue to the present and quite often casts a long shadow into the future
Not obselete – just not my immediate pick for best picture. (Not that I have a clear favorite yet as I haven’t seen all of the films.
On that note though – I give Django credit for challenging me moreso than this film. In 12 Years it was pretty clear what was right and what was wrong, and who was good and who was bad. That dog scene in Django is a perfect example of something that was difficult to watch, not just for the violence – but because Django is forced to sit still and watch for the sake of his own survival. The story may be fiction, but the moral dilema can be understood by all.
I have a question. You speak of moral dilemma’s. How is there no moral dilemma in 12 Years A Slave?
SPOILER
When Solomon is told to beat Patsey?
When Patsey asks Solomon to kill her instead of letting her suffer through slavery?
How about the moral dilemma inherent in Ford (Benedict Cumberbatch’s) character when he chooses to save Solomon but at the same time will not help him to attain his freedom?
What I loved and felt was refreshing about 12 Years was its ability to look not only into the physical horrors of slavery but the psychological trappings of it as well for both the slaves and their “masters.” I’m sorry you didn’t find the film enlightening enough for you. I’m excited to see what your Best Picture of the year will be.
Solomon chose not to kill Patsey. And was Ford’s decision really that surprising? Essentially he didn’t want to know that he had stolen goods – and he would have been out a lot of money if he took the appropriate action. That was his motivation.
Don’t get me wrong – I thought this was a very good film and agree with you that it did a very good job of portraying the horrors of slavery. As I said before, however, I don’t think it lived up to the hype. (All my personal opinion, of course.) I’m happy that you and so many others did! That’s a good thing!
I can’t wait until November 1st to be part of the conversation about everything regarding 12 YEARS A SLAVE. Until then, I don’t feel strongly about it.
Wow! Ryan! Do anything in my comments suggest that this is a race thing? Did I say I was bored? Did I even say that 12 Years was not a good film? I’m critiquing film making. I’m not commenting on the importance of a social issue.
I think by saying that 12 Years “doesn’t shed new light” it implies (though maybe that’s not your intention) that it is obsolete. This is a story that hasn’t been told before outside of an American Playhouse episode from the 80s with Avery Brooks as Northup. I agree with Ryan though, I’ve never seen anyone praise the film for its originality. If anything, and this could be where you’re getting that notion from, the commenters are praising it’s unflinching look at the horrors Northup endures. I haven’t seen the movie but I’ve heard that we see some pretty brutal shots. Django had an effective moment where the runaway slave was torn apart by dogs. It cut between Django and King because their two different reactions would drive a scene later in the film. Much in the same way Glory had that whipping scene and cut back and forth between Trip and Shaw. But knowing McQueen there isn’t many cuts, if any at all. To many people it is a first in telling the horrors of slavery.
“Do anything in my comments suggest that this is a race thing?”
I didn’t mention race either. I’m just reacting specifically to what you’re saying: “Oh, more brutality. Just like all the other brutal slavery movies we’ve ever seen.” *(.. all 3 of them, in the past 100 years).
I’m saying the depiction brutality to this degree is a new thing in regard to slavery. Maybe Roots was brutal enough for you. If so, are you getting really tired of all the brutal holocaust films and brutal war movies and brutal crime movies “in the same brutal vein”?
Again, Ryan – nowhere did I suggest that I was getting tired of seeing movies about slavery. And I should note that I posted about my feelings over the past couple of days, leery that my opinions would be reduced to a race thing by folks who feel strongly about the subject matter.
So I repeat – my critique is not about the subject matter! It’s about film making. I’d rather debate about that.
I remember a lot of folks were saying back in 1993 – “Oh no, not another holocaust movie.” But Speilberg upped the game there and brought something that was original.
I was excited to see this movie – mainly because of the posts made here that it was going to be something original. I’m being told here that nobody said that. Go back and look at the posts and comments. That was most definitely the suggestion that was made by many.
So come back to me with your thoughts on how this movie deserves the Best Picture Oscar, assuming that’s how you feel. That’s what I want to know. And please don’t reduce it to being on account on its subject matter – which others are doing here. If subject matter alone should merit Best Picture, then Glen or Glenda should have won the awards 60 years ago.
leery that my opinions would be reduced to a race thing by folks who feel strongly about the subject matter.
just because you’re leery doesn’t mean I was trying to reduce your argument to race. It seems to me you’re the one who’s reducing the movie to a “type” of movie just like Django except, for you, not as thought-provoking — by saying you don’t see what makes this new slavery movie any different from all the others.
I’m only addressing your complaint that you’ve seen this movie before and you don’t feel 12 Years shows you anything new or important.
you’re entitled to feel that way. I feel obligated to say why I feel differently.
Patrick,
The film is indeed novel in its subject matter, but not just in the fact that it presents a clear, unadulterated look at the horror of slavery. Indeed, clarity is an appealing aspect of the filmmaking, from the unflinching brutality, to the Malick-esque nature shots.
But the real novel conceit of the film, and to me what makes this film the definitive account of slavery in America, is the fact that this is a story told from the perspective of a free man who has slavery forcefully brought upon him. Thus, the movie gets to directly deal with the big questions of slavery, and it is embedded in the drama itself, rather than something that some character makes talking points about in order to “explain” it to the audience. When I think of slavery, I think: “How can one person BUY and OWN another person? How can a human being treat another as something less than human?”
These questions are forefront in the mind of the protagonist, so essentially he feels what WE feel, and is actively grappling with these issues as a fundemental requirement of the storytelling.
Or, to quote Owen Gleiberman, who said this much more succinctly than I did:
“The scalding power of McQueen’s artistry begins with this: He uses the fact that Solomon wasn’t born into human bondage to draw us into the experience of slavery. Solomon has to learn to answer insults or bear whippings with silence, to pretend he’s a toady who can’t read or write, and the cruelty of that process becomes the film’s way of dramatizing the unnaturalness of slavery. Is it just Solomon who’s really a free man? No, every slave is.”
“When I think of slavery, I think: “How can one person BUY and OWN another person? How can a human being treat another as something less than human?””
I hope that religion is strongly present in the film, because based on the Bible, slavery is okay.
Today they only have gay people to pick on, but – of course – they are losing that as well.
In reality, there are no sub-humans.
I hope that religion is strongly present in the film, because based on the Bible, slavery is okay.
In fact the biblical validation for slavery is mentioned in one of 12 Years’ trailers.
As a secular minded fellow and serious student of history it’s crucial to understand time frame and context when quoting from the Bible ; ergo , in the OT about 7 000 BC slavery was actively promoted , but it’s important to remember that they were primitive and barbaric times and that ”slavery” was often the lessor choice of two evils when enemy tribes were captured in warefare …indeed , it was literally slavery or death Furthermore , in the NT there was a taboo against slavery based on Jesus’s sublime ”Sermon on the mount ” and as Christianity spread around the world then the evil tide of slavery slowly receeded …let’s not forget that it was the Evangelical Christian movement led by folks such as William Wilberforce in England that was the prime mover in abolishing the slave trade , as were Missionaries in Africa , Asia and S America……infact , the Abolishment movement in the united States was almost entirely Christian inspired as exemplified by folks like JOHN BROWN and his sons who sacrficed their very lives for their black brothers …indeed , their Christian inspired consciences could not compromise with the foul evil of slavery and were willing to die for it
The simple fact is that many christians use ancient bible bullshit to justify abhorrent behavior in modern times. That’s the point Tero is making. Every other excuse you’re trying to explain is just blah blah blah. In essence: many christians pull isolated biblical “standards” out and wave them around as if they have any contemporary relevance.
The bible is full of sickening moral standards. That’s the point. That is why the line is in the movie. To make it clear how sickening it is to clumsily use the bible as a literal book of rules.
they were primitive and barbaric times and that ”slavery” was often the lessor choice of two evils
Once again your wording is repulsive. For one thing why the hell do you put slavery in “air quotes” as if the concept is some sort of so-called exaggerated circumstance?
What you’ve done there is the same as saying: Oh sorry if you think I “raped” you. It was a “choice” of two “evils” — I was either going to “rape” you or else kill you. I made the choice to just “rape” you, so you should be feeling pretty lucky. These are primitive barbaric times, after all, Miss Rapeslave. Look on the bright side – You’re not dead. Not until I make a choice to kill you. So Rejoice! Praise the lord. It’s just a little so-called “slavery.”
This choice youre talking about, benny, it is the choice of the barbarian. Not the victim’s choice. And your understanding of history is embarrassingly shallow if you think wars were never fought for the Sole Purpose of enslaving the defeated.
”slavery” was often the lessor choice of two evils when enemy tribes were captured in warefare …indeed , it was literally slavery or death
oy! This is just so grossly simplistic.
“Indeed” it was either slavery or death. “Quite Literally” if you wouldn’t make a good slave then you were worthless in the eyes of biblical slave-mongers so the famous biblical celebrities would kill the captives they didn’t choose to enslave. (the elderly, the weak, the disobedient were killed)
Fantastic choice!
You make it sound like a great option. Bizarre.
I am Christian and I don’t pick on any gay people.
That may well be true , but with 12 YRS a Slave politics and film making are intricately and hopelessly intertwined like two Siamese twins
It is no more possible to separate politics from the movie than it was possible to separate politics from D W Griffith’s ”Birth of a Nation ” A K A…The Klansman
In fact , this is the modern day antidote to such movie making poison
Maybe it’s just the media I choose to consume, but 12 Years is all over the place, multiple articles discussing the film, not just reviews, but essays discussing its importance, how the film was made and so on. The juggernaut is swelling, unable to be held down.
Maybe it will land with a thud when it goes wide, but the liberal press is enthralled.
Where do you find this liberal press? Sounds nice. I would like to see some of that.
NAH ….this Oscar race for best picture is already looooong over ; it ended in Toronto , but it hasn’t quite dawned on some folks who are just not clued in to the political implications of it …the explosive subject matter has already blown it’s competitors right out of the water , or to mix my metaphors , the race is over before the ”other rans ” have even left the starting gate
Indeed , this is a movie perfectly suited for the spirit of the times
Benny … I’m going to leave the argument at that for now. March is still an eternity away, and there’s no telling what could happen in the Oscar race between now and then. Just a couple of weeks ago, Gravity was the film to beat and now that seems to be fading as people criticize the performances and the plausibility.
I appreciate your enthusiasm for putting this issue to the forefront, but I think you give the voting block a bit too much credit.
I agree with you. I am expecting a record number of nominations for 12 Years a Slave.
I’m not seeing “record number” of nominations, certainly no more than Lincoln had. Unless it has the chance to be nominated for original score or visual effects, this movie can’t have more than 13 nominations.
both hanks and thompson are actors who should never attempt comedy, they end up irritating.
What can I say about 12 Years a Slave? Well, it had some very riveting moments, unflinching, great photography, uncomfortable in it’s stark depiction of slavery, and great performances, especially by Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Fassbender, and newcomer Lupita Nyong’o, all of whom I think will be Oscar nominated. However, the film moved too slowly, and I had seen it before in Roots.
ROOTS was nearly 40 years ago and was a TV series , not a movie
Furthermore , that was back in the 1970’s in a more politically and socially ,conservative era ….people are much more liberal and ”chilled out ” now as can be attested too by the fact that there is a black President and almost full integration into society by black folk …the spirit of the times is much more receptive to a movie such as 12 YRS
Benny,
I know that Roots was a tv miniseries, but I was saying that all the things depicted in 12 Years a Slave was done before in Roots. Because it is 40 years later, that doesn’t change a thing-Tea Party, anyone?
I had seen it before in Roots
Oh yeh, and so that’ll do then, right? Once is enough. We’ve had our fill of serious slavery stories now tyvm, let’s have more Django Unchained plz.
Eugh…
more movies about royalty please, because every royal person is a unique snowflake and snowflakes are white
Combine the two! The Madness of King George: a royal biopic which demonises the British political abolitionist movement!
It’s actually not a bad film otherwise.
I say lets bring in lots of movies about the slave experience. I’d just like to see some sort of original filmmaking before I call it groundbreaking – or best picture of the year.
12 Years is a very good movie and I recomend everyone go see it (including you Patrick Mulholland) – but for me, it didn’t live up to all the hype. It doesn’t shed new light (for me) on the times, and as the other poster suggested – this could easily be another installment in the Roots saga. Steve McQueen is being touted as the next big thing in directors. I didn’t see anything unique in the direction here. Sorry if that offends you – but instead of the sarcastic and troll-like responses – why don’t you back up your thoughts with some facts from the film?
It doesn’t shed new light on the times
How did The Artist, The King’s Speech, The Departed, Million Dollar Baby, Rain Man, Titanic, Gladiator, The Silence of the Lambs “shed new light on the times?”
How did The Godfather, Fight Club, Vertigo, Some Like it Hot, Chinatown, Pan’s Labyrinth, Pulp Fiction, Psycho “shed new light on the times?”
Why does this movie need to shed new light on the times for you before you see any value in it? I’m sure it’s great to be an expert on the 1850s as you are, but do movies serve no other purpose for you than as devices to new shed light?
Can you please name a movie that meets your standard of shedding new light on the times? And then we’ll see how many people already knew all there was to know about the thing that your favorite light-shedding movie revealed to you.
Maybe you just already know everything about slavery you want to know? Meanwhile, how many gangster movies are too many for you? How many love stories? How many movies about detectives or samurai or cowboys or kings did you need to see before you realized they were no longer shedding any new light?
Ryan — I can’t argue that quite a few of those films didn’t deserve their best picture win (IMO).
To answer your question though – here are a few examples of films that stood out over the years for me.
Schindler’s List – transcended the subject matter by, among other things, its use of B&W. I’d be surprised if this movie isn’t being used in film schools to showcase the medium.
The Social Network – the pacing of the movie, the script, etc – it felt almost as though it was being presented in Internet script, and the interactions and development of the plot played, at times, like it would unfold on Facebook.
Pulp Fiction was very effective in its storytelling, utilzing various gimmicks and techniques to make the viewer feel a certain way. You can watch that film on so many different levels. Vertigo, Chinatown, Fight Club and The Godfather all had unique qualities also – that may not seem so today because those same effects have been borrowed by other film makers since.
The comment on ‘shedding light on the times’ is coming from the reviews I’ve read here and is not a bottom line criteria for me to call a movie great. Many commenters over the past few months have praised 12 Years because it is so original in how it portrays slavery. To that I disagree. Even in last years Django Unchained – slavery was viewed in the same brutal vein.
“slavery was viewed in the same brutal vein.”
already bored with slavery being portrayed in “the same brutal vein”? you should stick to Gone With the Wind and Uncle Remus.
Many commenters over the past few months have praised 12 Years because it is so original in how it portrays slavery.
I haven’t seen that at all. What I’ve seen are people praising the first movie about slavery that’s NOT FICTION.
Oh so 12 years has a lot of slave women lounging around bars in glamorous gowns drinking cocktails like in Django?
Schindler’s List transcended the subject matter by… its use of B&W.
So what, using B&W film amounts to ‘transcending subject matter’? And you ask us to back up our statements with ‘facts’ from the film? There ain’t no such thing as facts where opinions are concerned, but the notion that B&W allows a film to ‘transcend subject matter’ is factually preposterous.
Pulp Fiction was very effective in its storytelling, utilzing various gimmicks and techniques to make the viewer feel a certain way.
Gimmicks. There you have it. Gimmicks. And Quentin Tarantino used those same gimmicks to bring us his take on the African-American experience of slavery, remember? Two white guys won Oscars for that.
It doesn’t have to be the most original or finely crafted movie of the year to win …the explosive subject matter and political correctness of it all will carry it to victory …those 6000 academy voters are not going to miss this opportunity to pontificate to the great unwashed about the evils of racism and to wallow in self righteous ”white guilt”
Benny – I think your point is probably the most accurate one yet. We can argue the merits of a film (based on our own individual criteria) til we’re blue in the face – but at the end of the day – people who might not even see the nominated films – and who are applying their guided or misguided criteria will be the ultimate judge.
To your point though – a recent article from Sasha about lack of attendance at member screenings for this film might suggest that people don’t want to sit through ‘a brutal movie about slavery’. They might also happen to like George Clooney a little bit more than Steve McQueen. These are the things that go into deciding the Best Picture.
PATRICK …..a movie such as 12 Yrs is not easy viewing and surely not ”light entertainment ”, but will be seen as a sober minded ”duty ” rather than a pleasure , in a similar way that Schindler’s list was …even if some of the more fragile minded types cannot bring themselves to watch it , they ‘ll still vote for it …after all , those folks in Hollywood are just suckers for their secular crusades and ”holy causes ”, whether it be civil rights , gay rights , women rights , animal rights or saving the planet
“folks in Hollywood are just suckers for their secular crusades and ”holy causes ”, whether it be civil rights , gay rights , women rights , animal rights or saving the planet”
right. those Hollywood suckers and their concern for civil rights , gay rights , women rights , animal rights and saving the planet.
good grief, benny. listen to yourself. could you sound any more crude?
Crude ?…(shrug.)…blunt?….. YES…. as when seen through the lens of politics it all comes into clear focus and stark , high relief
12 YRS has a ”SOMETHING” and as any political analyst already knows , you cannot beat a ”something ” with a ”nothing ‘….none of the other movies has a political or philosophical ”something ,’ a centre or sacred cause , and as such have no chance of defeating 12 YRS ‘
Mathew MCconaughey ,as an AIDS victim ,probably has the best chance of beating Ejiofor but ”Aids Awareness ” has had it’s crowded hour upon the stage and has burnt itself out and is now somewhat old news that lacks it’s former crusading appeal
What chance does a popcorn type Sci-Fi movie , or a frivolous road trip to Nebraska , a 1970’s caper , a Wolfish stockbroker , or a shipwreck survivor/ hostage drama have against the atmospheric and sublime expose of slavery ?
The crude part is your wording, benny.
You say Hollywood people are suckers for caring about the rights of the oppressed .
Your attitude about people who care about other people comes across as nasty as your tendency to say things like the Irish are bigots and fimmakers are notorious bleeding heart liberals.
I would never say all Londoners are callous know-it-alls just because you’re the loudest representative of our London readership.
keep saying ignorant shit like this, benny:
I’ll be here to keep telling you how disgusting you sound. Comments like yours make me sick. It’s hard to believe you could genuinely be so hateful, so I’m letting you know this act you’re putting on is boring.
Nobody here is wallowing in white guilt.
Nobody here is being self-righteous.
Nobody here is wagging a finger at the unwashed.
Nobody here is pontificating.
Your comments are an insult to everyone who cares about important movies for all the right reasons. I’m telling you your insults make you sound like a pompous smarmy prick. I think you know it. I think you like it. So I don’t feel bad letting you know you’re succeeding in coming across so contemptuous. Except the word that fits better is boorish.
the… political correctness of it all will carry it to victory
Political correctness? Fuck off, there’s political correctness, and then there’s plain old correctness, and 12 Years a Slave is just plain correct.
Aids Awareness ” has had it’s crowded hour upon the stage
Most disgraceful comment of the year on AD? You wanna watch yourself, pet.
“there’s political correctness, and then there’s plain old correctness”
THIS.
A movie doesn’t need to be break new ground to be great. Sometimes there’s nothing more satisfying than a good story well told.
Including me? Um, yeh, I have seen it.
Steve McQueen is being touted as the next big thing in directors.
Next big thing? He’s a big enough thing already after 3/3 masterpieces.
What Paddy says, just add throwing a chair across the room.
I know right? He’s at least one of the next big things, if we’re talking about filmmakers in the nascent stage of their career (let’s say 3 films or less).
NEXT BIG THINGS (Directors with 3 films or less OR a career that started no earlier than 2000 only apply):
Steve McQueen – Hunger, Shame, 12 Years A Slave
Rian Johnson – Brick, The Brothers Bloom, Looper
Ava DuVernay – This Is The Life, I Will Follow, Middle Of Nowhere
Andrew Dominik – Chopper, The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford, Killing Them Softly
Martin McDonagh – In Bruges, Seven Psychopaths
Ben Affleck – Gone Baby Gone, The Town, Argo
Sarah Polley – Away From Her, Take This Waltz, Stories We Tell
Neill Blomkamp – District 9, Elysium
Duncan Jones – Moon, Source Code
Jeff Nichols – Shotgun Stories, Take Shelter, Mud
Tomas Alfredson – Four Shades Of Brown, Let The Right One In, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Behn Zeitlin – Beasts Of The Southern Wild
Bennett Miller – Capote, Moneyball, Foxcatcher
Ryan Coogler – Fruitvale Station
James Ponsoldt – Off The Black, Smashed, The Spectacular Now
Destin Cretton – I Am Not A Hipster, Short Term 12
JC Chandor – Margin Call, All Is Lost
Derek Cianfrance – Blue Valentine, The Place Beyond The Pines
Shane Carruth – Primer, Upstream Color
Joe Cornish – Attack The Block
Sean Durkin – Martha Marcy May Marlene
Who am I missing?
I haven’t seen All is Lost yet, but Hanks’s performance in Captain Phillips has Oscar nomination all over it, his closet rival is Ejiofor.
I was only REPORTING Jeff Wells’ P.O.V. and review. You can see for yourself how palable his disappointing experience was to fly around the world to see a film FIRST, and then not like it and then…
A lot of other people DID like it. And the raves for Emma Thompson are unanimous, except for Wells. And if you don’t like how the main character is performed how are you going to enjoy the movie?
People are up and down on Hanks. Gregory Ellwood who doesn’t say Oscar things lightly thinks Hanks will win Supporting Actor for his Disney, knocking out Michael Fassbender and Jared Leto.
But Ellwood at HitFix, feels that BSA may be the only major Oscar WIN, “Banks” gets…
Just reporting what others have said…
But it helps Hanks that “Capt.Phillips” is doing so well and that “All Is Lost” is not. The Academy doesn’t like to back esoteric bombs. IF that is indeed what it is.
I think you may well be right about Hanks winning BSA for ”Banks”
Too many folks are predicting Fassbender for BSA while forgetting that Ralph Feinns , playing a SS Captain in Schindler’s list , lost out on his BSA nomination….evil characters don’t get the ”sympathy vote ” like victims do ….I suspect that Hanks has a far better chance of winning an Oscar for BANKS than PHILIPS ….just a hunch ?
That was , I suspect , one of the reasons Weisse won BSA in DJANGO instead of Leo Decaprio
12 Years A Slave looks like the strongest BP contender and that would inevitably favors Fassbender getting a nod.
True enough , but I wouldn’t bet real money on Fassbender as BSA catagory is shaping , like last season , to be very competetive ….JARED LETO or TOM HANKS could very easily win
Saving Mr Banks: Or the Curious Case of a Top 5 Film with No Chance at Best Director.
Sasha said that The Book Thief is really good. Maybe BP has a surprise entry (as people have not talked about this so much) in a year with so many great films already lined up there.
Williams should get his 49th, no matter what. I think the music branch begins nomination process like: “Did Johnny compose anything this year…? Oh, yeah… Well, that’s one… and…”
He never wins, but when was the last time he composed something and wasn’t nominated? Probably the Star Wars sequels and Indy 4. That being said 48 noms and 5 wins is a TERRIBLE record. Williams has been robbed many times, losing to some quite awful and one-note pop scores.
Yeah, those are the recent ones he didn’t get nominated for. Deservedly so.
He has often (maybe 1/3 of all noms) excluded himself out by being nominated twice in same year.
Very true. That prevented him for winning for Memoirs of a Geisha, which I really thought he would get at the time. He actually won the Globe, and believe it or not, he has fewer Globes then Oscars; I thought it would make an Oscar win a certainty. When Brokeback Mountain won for that totally one-level guitar song, I couldn’t believe it.
Also, Williams was robbed for Raiders of the Lost Ark, losing to Chariots of Fire. It’s one of my favorite scores from him and clearly one of his best efforts. Williams should have three-peated 80, 81, and 82. What a trifecta of amazing work in Empire Strikes Back (the last 50 minutes of the film is among his best music composition), Raiders (some of his best scoring, especially the opening, the Map Room Dawn, and the Desert Chase), and E.T. (which he won, of course).
Got to see both of the frontrunners over the weekend. I usually don’t respond very strongly to these “important” films but 12 Years A Slave, while at times difficult to watch, never felt like a chore to me (the way that a film like Lincoln did). It was beautiful, brutal and devastating and absolutely should win Picture (along with Actor, Director and Supporting Actress). While I wish Nyong’o’s role had been bigger, her presence, I felt, was the heart and soul of the film. Her performance stands with Cosmina Stratan in Beyond the Hills as my favourite of the year.
Gravity was visually spectacular and Bullock was strong but I thought the movie relied on unnecessary cheap sentiment (the dead daughter, “I just drive”) and some ridiculous, distracting one-liners (“Clear skies with a chance of satellite debris.”) Clooney was just smug Clooney playing smug Clooney. Overall I was a bit disappointed and wished more time has been spent to maybe enrich it thematically, not just visually.
Also finally saw Enough Said and would love to see Louis-Dreyfus nominated.
Yes to Julia Louis-Dreyfus getting an Oscar nomination. If the love for her is strong enough in the industry, from VEEP and Seinfeld and everything else, maybe it could happen. I’d like there to be some suspense and surprise to who gets nominated.
I agree with you about Lincoln ;it was primarily a history lesson that at times was tedious and failed to entertain , while 12Yrs is a thrilling drama that also passes as a history lesson ….a winning historical movie must have just the right balance between history lesson and entertainment and this was Lincoln’s downfall at last years Oscars
thrilling… winning… entertainment
Indeed, watching the tendons in Patsy’s shredded back exposed to the eye as Epps nearly whips the life out of her was just so winning…
My first lol of the Monday morning
Anne Hathaway won an Oscar last season when she wasn’t in the movie very long …I think the main problem for Nyongo will be Oprah and her celebrity status ….I think Oprah will indeed win this years BSA race
While things look good for “Gravity” and “12 Years a Slave,” they’re not looking so good for “All Is Lost.” It averaged about $15K on 6 screens.
I saw this a few weeks back and loved it…but I feared this might happen. Critics embrace it, audiences – and probably Oscar voters – probably won’t. It is a ‘Lincoln’ problem…it can be easily labeled as ‘boring’ and that WOM may prevent a lot of Academy members to pop the screener in their DVD player and even if they do watch it, they could still be underwhelmed by the low-key, understated concept. It is a magnificent piece of filmmaking, so hopefully I’m just paranoid.
It is a ‘Lincoln’ problem
I haven’t seen the movie, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think All Is Lost is comparable to Lincoln. Lincoln got Best Picture and many other nominations after word-of-mouth carried it at the box office. Spielberg’s name also helped cement it as a wonderful crowdpleaser-type movie. All Is Lost seemed like it was always going to be a hard sell to mainstream audiences. It doesn’t sound like Lincoln at all. It sounds more like Winter’s Bone or The Tree of Life.
I meant it in a broader sense. It has been widely assumed that Lincoln couldn’t go all the way despite having everything a BP frontrunner can hope for, because there was this assumption that it is ‘boring’. I’m afraid that All is Lost – clearly on a considerably smaller scale – may have the same problem. That’s how I meant it.
All is lost is comparable to Lincoln insomuch that it is tedious and sometimes boring …Lincoln clearly had a similar problem that lost it the best picture Oscar…many folks went to see Lincoln expecting a Civil War epic and felt short changed
Leonard Klady’s column in Movie City News posits those as good numbers.
Jeffrey Wells is PISSSSSED…or I guess the right word is disappointed by “Saving Mr. Banks” which he flew to London on his own Dime to see…And he saw, well, London, which, to me is always a joy…And his posts & Pics from London about it are a treat-and-a-half…
He REALLLLLY didn’t like Emma Thompson. One-note and jarring. Irritating. and Hanks he let better but was just OK.
So the film is basically exactly what the trailer implied it would be…Disney piffle…
Oscar? I don’t think so. Thompson and Hanks in this competitve year are not sure things, by any means. Though Indiewire was raving about Thompson, but not Hanks and not the film.
Hunter Tremayne Facebooked me & clued me in that the Hollywood Reporter, Variety and Pete Hammond were saying much nicer things…But it’s no slam dunk. And against “Gravity” v.”12 Years….”? I don’t think it changes the Oscar conversation much at all. And Thompson already has TWO Oscars, and so of course does Hanks.
I would advise him to push “Captain Phillips” instead…
I’m not looking forward to seeing this after Jeffrey’s comme ci, comme ca review.
“Saving Mr. Wells” Now THAT I would see!
So you are ready to ignore a film based on one (jetlagged) opinion and without even seeing it yourself ? How disappointing.
P.S. For the record, he raved about the script a few months ago AND flew all the way to London to see the film, so obviously he arrived at that screening with sky-high expectations and we all know how disappointing THOSE can be…also he is basically the only one who didn’t RAVE about Thompson.
Hanks aint going to win a third Oscar for that ;Ejiofor seems likely to ride the wave of 12Yrs success to a BA Oscar …I really think it’s a two horse race between Ejiofor and Mathew Mcconaughey, even though the Dallas Buyers Club aint going to be nominated for BP…Aids Awareness is a high profile issue and many of the voters know folks who have died from Aids and as such will look upon Mcconaughey’s character in a very sympathetic way
Are you fucking kidding me? This movie has no shot because JEFF WELLS didn’t like it? Do we need to go back in time and dwell on the numerous MAJOR Oscar contenders he shit on that still managed to get serious awards attention? Open your eyes, Holt.
Saving Mr. Banks starts with 74 on Metacritic, based on 6 reviews. IF it can at least stay in this range, with the help of the Disney marketing machine (that will also secure strong BO) and the star power, I still think it will make the cut in Picture, Actress, Supporting Actor, maybe even Score (eligible ?), Costume Design and Art Direction. The script got high praise, too, but Original Screenplay is extremely crowded, so unless it somehow moves to Adapted (it’s not THAT original after all) or the final critical consensus turns out to be better than expected at the moment, I don’t think Kelly Marcel will break through.
What we should take away from all of this, that though in the end it may be a decent Oscar contender that may even end up with an important win (acting), it doesn’t seem likely that it will mess with the 12/Gravity battle.
THE ASSASINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD was robbed of the following nominations:
Best Picture
Best Director
Best Actor
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Original Score – should have won
Best Editing
Best Costume Design
Best Art Direction
I concur. Amazing film.
What Bryce Forestieri said
People are drawn to “Gravity” because of its special effects, not necessarily because of Sandra Bullock. You can put any actress in there and it will still sell out.
In the last five years Sandra Bullock opened four films (The Proposal, The Blind Side, The Heat, Gravity) to 30M+, in four different genres (romcom, drama, action comedy, sci-fi), none were sequels or could rely on brand recognition, three were based on original screenplays and three were relatively low-budget. After strong starts, ALL four delivered remarkably leggy runs, so long story short,though Gravity would have been probably still big with ‘any other actress’, it is HUGE because Bullock is THE most bankable actress at the moment, and in this particular case, helped the film reach crucial women demos that are usually not that into a Gravity kind of film but this time they decided to watch it anyway…and trust me, their reason wasn’t that they were ‘drawn to the special effects’.
If she’s that bankable then why was she the 4th or 5th choice to play Dr Ryan Stone? You can’t ignore the fact that the Gravity stellar box office performance was much helped by the higher 3D ticket prices.
I’m not saying the visual extravaganza and the 3D prices didn’t help. I’m saying not crediting Bullock for the success at all, is ignorant…and quite simply ridiculous. And that’s exactly what you do when you say “you can put any actress in there and it will still sell out”. It won’t. Any other actress doesn’t have her BO track record.
+1
+ another 1. No other woman, and few men, have the kind of box office pull Sandra Bullock has. A significant proportion of Gravity’s audience was women, which suggests that she had a pretty big pull on female audiences, which ScarJo or NatPo or Angelina do not possess.
“If she’s that bankable then why was she the 4th or 5th choice to play Dr Ryan Stone?”
3rd choice. The other two actresses were Natalie Portman and Angelina Jolie.
Total bankability of these 3 actresses, based on their last 5 movies (Gravity not included)
Jolie: $520 million
Portman: $273 million
Bullock: $640 million
3rd 4th 5th … 273 vs 640… it’s all just numbers, right?
but numbers seem to be your concern so let’s get the numbers right.
“You can’t ignore the fact that the Gravity stellar box office performance was much helped by the higher 3D ticket prices.”
You could make the argument in week 1 that the movie was helped by 3D ticket prices, but not in week 3 when the movie is only dropping by 20 percent or so every week. Clearly there is word-of-mouth fueling this film’s success; word-of-mouth that is at least somewhat about Sandra Bullock’s performance. Oh, and she is totally a HUGE box office draw. There is literally no way you can argue against that. America loves her.
Ethan-I’d have to disagree with you about that sentiment. After knowing who was considered/initially offered the role, I can’t imagine any one else portraying Dr. Ryan Stone other than Sandra Bullock. She has an inherent warmth about her which she infuses with the character and that has you rooting for her to survive.