- BEST EDITED FEATURE FILM (DRAMATIC) – Boyhood, Sandra Adair.
- BEST EDITED FEATURE FILM (COMEDY OR MUSICAL) – The Grand Budapest Hotel, Barney Pilling
- BEST EDITED ANIMATED FEATURE FILM – The Lego Movie, David Burrows & Chris McKay
- BEST EDITED DOCUMENTARY (FEATURE) – Citizenfour, Mathilde Bonnefoy
- BEST EDITED DOCUMENTARY (TELEVISION) – The Roosevelts: An Intimate History: Episode 3 / The Fire of Life, Erik Ewers
- BEST EDITED HALF-HOUR SERIES FOR TELEVISION – Veep: “Special Relationship”
Anthony Boys - BEST EDITED ONE-HOUR SERIES FOR COMMERCIAL TELEVISION – Sherlock: “His Last Vow”, Yan Miles
- BEST EDITED ONE-HOUR SERIES FOR NON-COMMERCIAL TELEVISION – True Detective: “Who Goes There”, Affonso Goncalves
- BEST EDITED MINISERIES OR MOTION PICTURE FOR TELEVISION – The Normal Heart, Adam Penn
- BEST EDITED NON-SCRIPTED SERIES – Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown: “Iran”, Hunter Gross
- STUDENT EDITING AWARD – Johnny Sepulveda
- GOLDEN EDDIE CAREER ACHEIVEMENT – Frank Marshall
===
Beverly Hills, January 30 – “Boyhood” (edited by Sandra Adair, ACE) and “The Grand Budapest Hotel” (edited by Barney Pilling) won Best Edited Feature Film (Dramatic) and Best Edited Feature Film (Comedy/Musical) respectively at the 65th Annual ACE Eddie Awards tonight where trophies were handed out in ten categories of film, television and documentaries.
The black-tie ceremony was held in the International Ballroom of the Beverly Hilton Hotel with over 1,000 in attendance to celebrate the year’s best editing.
“Lego Movie” (edited by David Burrows & Chris McKay) won Best Edited Animated Feature Film and “Citizenfour” (edited by Mathilde Bonnefoy) won Best Edited Documentary (Feature).
Television winners included “Veep: Special Relationship” (edited by Anthony Boys) for Best Edited Half-Hour Series for Television, “Sherlock – His Last Vow” (edited by Yan Miles) for Best Edited One-Hour Series for Commercial television, “True Detective – Who Goes There” (edited by Affonso Gonçalves) for Best Edited One-Hour Series for Non-Commercial Television, “The Normal Heart” (edited by Adam Penn) for Best Edited Miniseries or Motion Picture for Television, and “Anthony Bourdain – Parts Unknown: Iran” (edited by Hunter Gross) for Best Edited Non-Scripted Series. In the Best Edited Documentary (Television) category and “The Roosevelts: An Intimate History: Episode 3 / The Fire of Life” (edited by Erik Ewers) took top honors.
The Student Editing Competition winner was Johnny Sepulveda of Video Symphony who beat out hundreds of competitors from film schools and universities around the country. Oscar® nominated director of BOYHOOD Richard Linklater presented the award to Sepulveda.
Award-winning filmmaker Frank Marshall received the ACE Golden Eddie Filmmaker of the Year honor presented to him by Chris Pratt. Marshall joins an impressive list of filmmakers who have received ACE’s highest honor, including Norman Jewison, Francis Ford Coppola, Clint Eastwood, Robert Zemeckis, Alexander Payne, Ron Howard, Martin Scorsese, George Lucas, Kathleen Kennedy, Steven Spielberg, Christopher Nolan and Richard Donner, among others.
Career Achievement Awards went to industry veterans Diane Adler, ACE and Jerry Greenberg, ACE. Their work was highlighted with clip reels exhibiting their tremendous contributions to film and television throughout their careers. The Robert Wise Award, which has only been presented a few times in the organizations history, was presented to journalist Carolyn Giardina of The Hollywood Reporter. The Robert Wise Award is presented to a journalist whose work has helped illuminate the craft of editing.
Among the evening’s presenters were Matt Damon, Chris Pratt, Rene Russo, Allen Leech (DOWNTON ABBEY, THE IMITATION GAME), Robin Leach, NIGHTCRAWLER director Dan Gilroy, Jeff Garlin and Amanda Fuller (LAST MAN STANDING). Serving as Master of Ceremonies was actress/comedian Mary Lynn Rajskub.
===
AMERICAN CINEMA EDITORS (ACE) is an honorary society of motion picture editors founded in 1950. Film editors are voted into membership on the basis of their professional achievements, their dedication to the education of others and their commitment to the craft of editing.
The objectives and purposes of the AMERICAN CINEMA EDITORS are to advance the art and science of the editing profession; to increase the entertainment value of motion pictures by attaining artistic pre-eminence and scientific achievement in the creative art of editing; to bring into close alliance those editors who desire to advance the prestige and dignity of the editing profession.
ACE produces several annual events including EditFest (an international editing festival), Invisible Art/Visible Artists (annual panel of Oscar® nominated editors), and the ACE Eddie Awards, now in its 65th year, recognizing outstanding editing in ten categories of film, television and documentaries. The organization publishes a quarterly magazine, CinemaEditor, highlighting the art, craft and business of editing and editors.
To their credit, the NAACP Image Awards call attention to a lotta African-American films and performances that the 94% white Academy probably never sees. But I agree: Ironically, its nominations could use more diversity, too. 😉
WW – I know about the NAACP awards. I know they sometimes nominate non-Black actors but they exist mostly to bring attention to Black artists, which is fine but doesn’t leave too much room for other non-Black artists to win.
Daveylow, the nominees for the NAACP Image Awards are predominantly African-American, but not necessarily exclusively so. Past Image nominees have included Suraj Sharma (”Life of Pi”), Ziyi Zhang (”Memoirs of a Geisha”), Penelope Cruz (”Volver”) and Zoe Saldana (‘Columbiana”), as well as white actors in movies with minority co-stars: Sandra Bullock (”The Blind Side”) and Emma Stone (”The Help”).
When I mentioned non-white actors I did not mean just black actors.
When we talk about Best Picture we talk about personal tastes. There’s no right answer to the question: which is the best picture of the year? But when we talk about editing it’s a bit different. Just a bit, but anyway different. Editing is something more specific, like directing. Editing is about fluidity. The less you note the editing the better it is. Birdman is clearly the best edited movie of the year because its editing is invisible. But the Average Editor is a person, like me and you. And every person wants to be praised for his or her job, it’s human. We want our job to be visible, not invisible. That’s why the Average Editor hates Birdman and does not vote for it.
Actually, there IS a prize that recognizes actors of color: The NAACP Image Awards, now in its 46th year.
http://www.naacpimageawards.net/nominees/
”White Hollywood doesn’t watch the BET Awards or actually think about them.”
Based on what the 94% white membership of the Academy has and HASN’T nominated in the past, I’d have to agree. Last year, they finally picked a movie about black people to win Best Picture for the first time in 86 years. But even when it’s been called to their attention, critically acclaimed movies about people of color, like ”Fruitvale Station” (2013), repped by Harvey Weinstein, or ”Eve’s Bayou” (1997) just didn’t make their radar. And I doubt they watched them, just as I doubt they saw ”Get on Up,” ”Top Five” or ”Belle” (or even possibly ”Selma”). Last year, various movie pundits claimed to run into Oscar voters who had yet to view ”12 Years a Slave.”
”Boyhood is not flashy enough to win, and take out the 12-years narrative and it would NEVER happen.”
This is such a specious argument: ”If ‘Boyhood’ hadn’t been shot over 12 years, it’d be nothing special.” But it was. And that’s the reality and essence of its DNA. That’s what makes it unique. We haven’t seen this before: A fictional, coming-of-age narrative about 1 boy, shot over 12 years, with the same leads, in one nearly 3-hour movie. You can debate the results, but it’s been one of the most acclaimed movies of the year and racked up awards left and right, so it’s hit home with a lotta viewers (if not all of them, but what movie does?). And who says it HAS to be ”flashy” to win? Maybe the ACE voters chose to recognize it for other reasons: not just for Sandra Adair’s one-of-a-kind challenge in handling 12 years’ of footage, but for its subtle way of marking the passage of time in this boy’s life and giving all its episodic moments their own weight. Good editing doesn’t have to be the MOST editing.
For me, the difference between Birdman and American Hustle is that Birdman is actually a good movie!
Still it’s true that good movies sometimes go home empty handed like True Grit. The Imitation Game could go home with nothing this year.
The difference between Birdman and Hustle is that Hustle was not the frontrunner in any of its category comes Oscar time, whereas Birdman has at least a couple (thought not huge ahead)
I’m wondering if Birdman will be this year’s American Hustle: a well-liked movie, with lots of nominations, especially for acting, but in danger of going home empty-handed on Oscar night. (At this point, it’s not my prediction, but I think it’s quite possible.)
@Ryan Adams
Interesting observation about if there were only one Actor category for men and women.
Maybe there should be Best Acting categories for white and non-white actors. Of course that would never happen — but it would force the Academy to watch performances by non-white actors and actually think about them.
Maybe there should be Best Acting categories for white and non-white actors. Of course that would never happen
except, well, the BET Awards try to rectify that…
but it would force the Academy to watch performances by non-white actors and actually think about them.
and, nope, white Hollywood doesn’t watch the BET Awards or actually think about them.
(Daveylow, you and I are going to catch some hell for these comments, I bet you anything.)
Swap out Cooper for Simmons and that’d be a convincing list. On that note, Sniper is being overestimated. And the true flashiest editing of the year to me was Whiplash. I won’t dispute Boyhood being the MOST edited film of the year, not in a Moulin Rouge! deliberately overedited way, but in a ROTK supreme undertaking way. Though it’s not like much was left on the editing floor from what I heard Arquette say. So I’m sorry, but the editing of Boyhood is not flashy enough to win, and take out the 12-years narrative and it would NEVER happen. They would go with Whiplash or, sigh, Sniper. And maybe they still will.
But I won’t argue against not awarding Birdman if it really was a series of single takes. I thought it was brilliantly orchestrated and easily the most striking-looking film of the year. But that doesn’t mean the guild was going to award it just because it’s Birdman, just like how the Academy wasn’t going to nominate Selma’s starter script just for the hell of it.
The difference in the ACE Drama category is that Boyhood is the only Best Picture frontrunner that’s a drama.
Very funny, Ryan. Yeah, there’s just no appropriate way to award arts. Awards industry is about promoting itself, highlighting and giving recognition to “higher quality” works. But it has great purpose. The nominations are good enough because it distills choices for the public. But awarding the best also better encourages viewers to seek out these films because they want to see if their personal best would match with an award body. Everybody loves a race even if there’s really no such thing as an objective best in art.
And now we look to DGA…
“While BP winners don’t necessarily need acting wins I can point out at four recent films that had three or more acting nominees that fell short for picture and director.”
Pretty good point, I’ll admit. 3+ nominations with no wins does not bode well. But how many of those had won the PGA (or even the DGA)? Meaning: how many of those were strong BP contenders?
Plus, since when is Keaton out of the running? That SAG streak’s gotta be broken at some point – seems as good a time as any…
“But to analyze the race, the Boyhood win shows that there are love for the film in the guild”
I generally agree, as my previous posts indicate, but one should also probably point out that the same conclusion might have been drawn by everybody when The Social Network beat The King’s Speech at the Eddies, and that one turned out to just be a sign of it being the favorite for Best Editing (which it won), not Best Picture. And another thing that’s similar is that Fincher was still clearly the favorite to take the DGA in 2010, even after the PGA/SAG double by The King’s Speech – at least as big a favorite as Linklater is deemed to be right now.
Corvo, Boyhood is the best edited film of the year .
So happy about Boyhood win. I thought they might have given it to Whiplash. I think Oscar voters might still go for Whiplash or AS (because the overall body of voters might not have an understanding for the type of subtle editing of Boyhood).
But to analyze the race, the Boyhood win shows that there are love for the film in the guild and stop the bleeding it got from the Birdman defeat at the PGA (not at SAG). It faced stiff editing competitions in its category (whereas GBH had very little competition in comparison) and it still prevailed, the little movie that could.
Speaking from a non-stat perspective, at this nor any moment do I feel that Birdman will have The King’s Speech trajectory. TKS was released much later in the year (limited in late November, wide in January). It had that Million Dollar Baby late comer surprise strategy. People were discovering a new movie and they were elated at having a warm fuzzy alternative choice to a critics’ favorite of the cynical TSN (a quality that Boyhood doesn’t possess). Birdman has been around and contending before the awards season began. It can’t qualify as a newly discovered alternative. And like TSN, it too is alienating and also a critics’ favorite. Between the two movies, it’s Birdman that is considered “high brow”, not Boyhood.
I can under that there are pundits out there who are not convinced by Boyhood’s early frontrunner status, but rarely do they agree on ONE alternative. Tariq champions GBH, Kris Tapley Birdman, and Pete Hammond The Imitation Game. Because of the PGA win (again, not the over-estimated SAG Ensemble win), Birdman might seem to be THE alternative, but the reality might be that there are several other alternatives including the surging Sniper. When you have not one but up four alternatives, wouldn’t the original frontrunner prevail?
Ryan, that was impeccable editing or should I say complete overhaul (pun intended by the way). It’s like I’m a literate person all of the sudden. I’ll try to organize my rags next time.
“I have a question. Is there a difference in the way you edit a drama and a comedy? Or did they just feel like having two categories?”
Yes. I just think that they like to have the comedy/musical categories to spread the wealth. Yes, comic timing is pretty distinct from dramatic timing. But there are differences in editing for ALL genres of movies, so if they wanted to be fair, they should also have other categories like action… And why are musical and comedy together? I don’t see the necessary similarity between the two. Some musicals can be downbeat and morose. If they want to two categories, they should have one for “realism” and one for “whimsical/fantasy”.
Although I prefer “Birdman” to “Grand Budapest Hotel”. Part of me is glad “GBH” won because it makes the Oscar race in this category more interesting.
It’d be a little lame if a movie that isn’t even nominated against “Boyhood” is it’s only “competition”.
”I confirm what I said. Boyhood is not the best edited movie of the year, we all know that. Even the professional editors know that. They voted for the movie thay want to see winning best picture at the Oscars.”
Funny how we can take any awards result and rationalize it to make ourselves look right, huh? So if ”Boyhood” had LOST the Eddie, you would’ve said that that ”proved” you were right and that even professional editors know how horribly edited it is. But since ”Boyhood” WON, these professional editors, who apparently don’t know their own profession, only voted for ”Boyhood” because they want it to win Best Picture. So, the ACE members really were rooting for previous ACE winners in drama like ”The Bourne Ultimaturm,” ”The Descendants” and ”Captain Phillips” to take the top Oscar? Ridiculous!
The other day, I predicted that the flashier editing in ”American Sniper” would beat ”Boyhood.” Glad I was wrong. But I’d really like to hear the feedback and insight from Alan of N.Y., someone who’s actually edited movies. … I’m so happy that ”Grand Budapest Hotel” won; pacing is important to every movie, but I especially loved the screwball comic nature of it. The downhill skiing chase sequence, for one, is brilliant.
Meantime, chalk up another shutout of ”Imitation Game.” This is on the heels of SAG, PGA, Broadcast Film Critics, Golden Globes. Can it win ANYTHING major? I’m still predicting Adapted Screenplay at the Oscars, but who knows?
Finally, bravo to Sandra Adair and Barney Pilling, but didn’t ANYONE from the movie press COVER the event? I went to the usual showbiz sites, but so far have found zilch. I would’ve loved to have heard what Adair and Pilling had to say. If anyone sees anything, can they share it? I posted an interview with Adair the other day, so here’s one at TheCredits.org with Pilling on the art of editing ”The Grand Budapest Hotel”
http://www.thecredits.org/2014/12/the-grand-budapest-hotels-editor-barney-piling/
While BP winners don’t necessarily need acting wins I can point out at four recent films that had three or more acting nominees that fell short for picture and director.
DGA will determine just how close or wide the PGA result really was.
“I confirm what I said. Boyhood is not the best edited movie of the year, we all know that.”
And it won ACE over other nominees. We all know that?LOL. No, only you pretend you know that, and you are in denial.
How do you prove it is all “POLITICS” that the ACE editors just voted for it because it is the best picture? Or you are just trying to save face??LOL. I think it is the latter? “Professional editors” know that? Know what? You know nothing about editing, obviously. Stop trolling.
ugh
we need an edit button
or maybe just proofread by ourselves
I did a rough proofread to smooth out a couple of things for you, Bryce. Let me know if I disrupted any of your intentions and we’ll take another swing at it. 🙂
Ok. Thanks. 🙂
“I have a question. Is there a difference in the way you edit a drama and a comedy? Or did they just feel like having two categories?”
Short answer: Absolutely. There are numerous ways to edit a movie to create subtle tonal differences — this applies to all genres and most movies (every movie?) I mean LINCOLN and SELMA are both serious “historical fiction” dramas but, to put it in brief and vulgar terms, the way they were put together to achieve their “effects” is significantly different. I think every movie that works — even “a comedy” — is essentially a drama. How you pigeonhole a film as reflexive, tragic, thorny as THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL as a “comedy” is beyond me. Is it because you laugh many times during he movie? Those final moments alone were the most precise, tactful and fragile “prelude to a cataclysm” that I’ve seen dramatized in film since final scene of A MOST DANGEROUS METHOD, maybe even THE WHITE RIBBON itself. Hey, I guess it makes sense, so don’t mind me, plus you have to market yourself one way or another to get some well-deserved recognition.
I don’t know if this changes things as far as the race goes and I don’t know how to judge editing either.
I have a question. Is there a difference in the way you edit a drama and a comedy? Or did they just feel like having two categories?
I have a question. Is there a difference in the way you edit a drama and a comedy? Or did they just feel like having two categories?
Here’s my slant. To begin, I’ll take the point that both Bryce and Alan brought out: (paraphrasing) There are a multitude of ways to edit all kinds of movies.
What I take from the answers Bryce and Alan offered is this: Not all dramas are edited the same way, not all comedies are edited the same way. Personally I’m unable to discern a “dramatic” style of editing or a “comedic” style of editing, because each of these genres has numerous examples that employ so many varieties of editing methods.
Likewise, I don’t feel that musicals have an exclusively “musical” style of editing, nor do documentaries have any designated “documentary style.” And nope, animated films do not have a specific “animated” style of editing.
Strawman: “But Ryan, then why are there different categories for documentaries and animated films?”
Me: I think it’s because genre bias has conditioned us to elevate narrative dramatic feature films to be the predominant film genre. And from the very beginning of film awards in the 1920s, many organizers of awards events felt it was too much “apples and oranges” to make Chaplin compete with Murnau, or for Flaherty to compete with Wellman and with Disney.
All those genres can have any sort of pacing and rhythms. Sure, naturally, a screwball comedy has a recognizable rhythm — but the rhythms of The Front Page are not unlike the same rhythms in some sequences of The Social Network, right?
So back to the question, Antoinette, which I think you answer yourself: “Do they just want to have more categories?” I think: yes.
But why would they want that? Obviously to help ensure that all the year’s best work is honored, regardless of genre bias.
Guilds must be acutely aware that many of their members get tagged as ‘specialists’ in different genres. Edit a couple of successful comedies, studios will know you as an editor of great comedies and that’s all you’ll ever be hired to do. Write a couple of great thrillers, studios will continually turn to you as their go-to thriller guy — or blockbuster guy, or Oscar-friendly guy, etc.
But we know from 90 years of movie awards that comedies and animated films have always been regarded as the “less serious,” “less substantive,” and therefore “less important” genres. So if a brilliant drama is put in the same category as an equally brilliant comedy, the comedy is already at a disadvantage.
You can all come up with dozens of examples. Being John Malkovich was never going to defeat American Beauty but the reason is not because Being John Malkovich is a lesser movie. It’s because comedy is perceived to be a “lesser” genre, yes? We all know this.
So Being John Malkovich wins “Best Comedy Editing” at the 2000 ACE Eddies, and The Matrix wins “Best Drama Editing.” (As further evidence that there is no such thing as any exclusively “dramatic” style of editing, The Matrix was up against American Beauty. What “drama style” of editing do those two movies have in common? None.)
So I think it’s less about “is there a different way of editing Drama, Comedy, Animated or Documentary” and much more a matter of guilds and most every other awards group try to make sure that people who specialize in all kinds of genres will get recognized for their outstanding work.
(and I don’t believe filmmakers ‘specialize’ because the skills or techniques or philosophies are that different from genre to genre. They specialize because of their individual dispositions or the luck and fate of their personal career trajectories).
Strawman 2: But Ryan, doesn’t this sort of pigeonholing only serve to systematically perpetuate the genre bias by putting filmmakers in ghettos?
Me: You think? Alright, let’s do away with categories like Adapted and Original, let’s dissolve the categories of Comedy and Drama. But if you’re REALLY SERIOUS about erasing the ghetto boundaries, then we will need to do away with splitting Best Actor and Actress into two categories.
Let’s rephrase your original question, Anoinette.
“Is there a difference in the way a male actor acts from the way a female actor acts? Or did they just feel like having two categories?”
Answer: You nailed it. They wanted to have different categories. So that way Men and Women performers will have an equal opportunity for recognition.
Because, you know why? If there was a gender-free category for Best Person Who Played a Role in a Movie, then this year’s nominees would look like this
Bradley Cooper
Benedict Cumberbatch
Michael Keaton
Julianne Moore
Eddie Redmayne
You know I’m right. You know it. And it would be like that every year. 4 men vs 1 woman vying for Best Person Who Played a Role in a Movie.
But people who organize awards know that’s not fair. Just like it wouldn’t be fair to combine all these Oscar categories in one combined Best-Movie-of-Any-Kind category: Animated Films, Documentaries, Foreign Language, Narrative Features. … because the Narrative Features would ALWAYS win, no matter how much better the movies of other types might be.
So that’s my long rambling answer.
The shorter version is what you already said, Antoinette. They want to divide the year’s best work into various arbitrary subsets in order to reward as many people as possible for their great work — even if the editors of The Grand Budapest Hotel worked on a film that fits in a “lesser” category like Movies That Put A Smile on Your Face.
I’d say they got both main “categories” right, so bravo!
I do not agree with the idea that Oscar voters vote with the idea that awards must be spread around. That’s what caused people to pick American Hustle for screenplay and costumes: the fact that it had ten nominationss and would go home empty-yhanded. Both were wrong, obviously..
I see Birdman’s screenplay like American Hustle last yr: the actors’ movie that will lose to the more original vision (Her). Or that’s at least how I HOPE it will turn out. I liked “Birdman,” but the fact that it can take Picture and Director over Boyhood annoys me.
So pleased that Boyhood won Editing. I’m hoping DGA goes Linklater and Boyhood takes home 4.
Corvo, your assertions seem off base. “We all know” that Boyhood was not the best edited? No, I thought it was the best edited. I also think there’s little evidence that the musicians and editors were “threatened.” That’s an interesting, though laughable, spin on it.
My point is that if Boyhood wins the DGA, It’s Boyhood and not Birdman the picture that looks more like an Argo, a Hurt Locker or a 12 years–actually it would look in better shape than those movies.
No Larry, I confirm what I said. Boyhood is not the best edited movie of the year, we all know that. Even the professional editors know that. They voted for the movie thay want to see winning best picture at the Oscars. Editors and musicians hated Birdman because they felt threatened by it. It’s a childish but comprehensible reaction, I was expecting that.
Correction: AS is the case for cinematography etc.
There’s no correlation between Best Actor and Best Picture. I assure you, if Birdman does win BP, it’ll find other Oscars too, including Best Screenplay (for which it’s the favorite, in case you NEED it to be the favorite somewhere, is is the case for cinematography, as well). It doesn’t need acting Oscars, just like Argo, The Hurt Locker, Slumdog Millionaire, The Departed and others before it.
The scenarios, as far as key nominations (minus the editing for Birdman, which I specified) and major precursor wins in Best Picture and Best Director go, for 2010 and 2014, are absolutely identical so far (TKS vs. TSN, Bird vs. Boy). Of course, if you want to nitpick, there are many small differences in what was nominated for what exactly, and what exact awards certain movies were/are favorites to win. But none of those (like the acting example you give) are key, like editing, director, screenplay. I’m talking about stuff that we know directly impacts the BP race, not unrelated details.
The fact that Boyhood pulled off a win with the editors over flashier nominees says volumes. It appears that the film most deserving of the BP Oscar is in safe waters.
Unless the DGA has a collective stroke, Linklater should take it, then it’s home free. Cannot be denied.
”the King’s Speech – Social Network precedent is further confirmed (The King’s Speech also lost the ACE, while The Social Network won, except they, of course, were in the same category), their trajectories are still nearly identical to those of Birdman and Boyhood (again, except for the editing snub).”
Except for one crucial detail: we already knew that Colin Firth was going to win the Oscar. We’ll have to wait for the DGA, but if González-Iñárritu doesn’t get it, Birdman is looking more like a ”Gravity” without best director, instead of a ”King’s Speech”.
OK, I wrote some weird things there – I think as a result of poor editing. I want to edit the end of my 2nd paragraph to say this:
“If Birdman wins DGA (and I just have no idea here, once more, since now we HAVE seen guild love for Boyhood), it’s got to be the slight favorite until the end, possibly even if Boyhood wins BAFTA, though then it’s still very unclear, of course. And if Birdman loses the DGA and also loses the BAFTA, to anything else but Boyhood (like one of the British pics), again, it’s chaos…”
Funny, 3 of my top 5 movies of the year, won. “Boyhood” (#4), “Grand Budapest Hotel” (#5) and “The Lego Movie” (#2). SO happy to NOT see anything like “Birdman” or “American Sniper”, winning. But I have to acknowledge that probably the best film editing of the year, was “Whiplash”‘s, even if the film is a big “meh”, to me. It’s saved by Film Editing.
Boyhood winning everywhere else (except SAG) would just be too much proof that the PGA result was very close (or an anomaly due to only producers voting), and unlikely to be repeated with a different voting body. I’m not sure there’d be a precedent that had come even close to winning as many things as Boyhood will have won in that scenario and not won BP as well – since The King’s Speech won both BAFTA and the DGA. I will almost definitely (pending specific analysis of all the stats and precedents) go with Boyhood then, but it’ll still be nowhere near a lock, of course.
Corvo, where are you? You said Boyhood is the worst edited film of the year, and you lied and said that even Boyhood fans agree, now what are you going to say? The professional editors disagreed with you. You just look really stupid now,lol
OK, pretty much expected – stats-wise, Budapest was the big favorite to win here (I don’t know about the stats in Boyhood’s category, but it, too, was a big favorite). And the King’s Speech – Social Network precedent is further confirmed (The King’s Speech also lost the ACE, while The Social Network won, except they, of course, were in the same category), their trajectories are still nearly identical to those of Birdman and Boyhood (again, except for the editing snub).
If Boyhood wins the DGA AND the BAFTA, like I said before, I’ll probably have to predict it to win (but still not with a lot of confidence). If It only wins the DGA, but loses the BAFTA, then it’s very hard… unless Birdman is the one that wins BAFTA, in which case I will likely go with Birdman. If Birdman wins DGA (and I just have no idea here, once more, since now we HAVE seen guild love for Boyhood), but loses the BAFTA to Boyhood, then I guess Boyhood is the correct bet. But if it loses to anything else (like one of the British pics), again, it’s chaos…
It’s SNAFU Central this awards season…
I literally have no idea where all this is going. I only know that I’d still bet on Boyhood winning Best Picture.
You’d have to think that if there is a split, that the film winning best picture would need some major wins as well. If Birdman loses actor and director would it need at least a script win to bolster the split chances? Could Sniper take the path of sound awards, adapted screenplay, and Cooper to take BP in a split. Poor Budapest might end up winning six or seven and still miss out.
DGA DGA DGA
Hmmm… Yet another twist in the race (sort of). Boyhood regains some of the momentum it lost at the PGAs, while Birdman loses momentum to The Grand Budapest Hotel. If the DGA goes to Linklater, I’m tempted to leave my Boyhood prediction for Best Picture alone, though the AMPAS could do another Picture/Director split.
Boyhood stays alive for another week. Birdman losing either makes the Oscar snub more understandable or mutes the idea that it’s surging. Sniper really could have used a guild win here.
DGA really is the last stand for a lot of contenders.
YAY!!! So happy for 2 of my favorite movies of the year!!!!
Go Boyhood!
Go The Grand Budapest Hotel!
I feel like this is a juggling show between Boyhood – Birdman – The Grand Budapest Hotel. Fantastic. I’m so happy. 🙂
Okay, it’s nearly 3:00 a.m. here in Gotham. I stayed up just to see if Boyhood would win ACE/Drama. It did. I can go to bed now and dream the dreams of the content.
Yay Boyhood!
Best Edited Feature Film (Dramatic)
Boyhood
Sandra Adair, ACE
Best Edited Feature Film (Comedy or Musical)
The Grand Budapest Hotel
Barney Pilling
Ryan, you’re welcome!
Best Edited Animated Feature Film
The Lego Movie
David Burrows & Chris McKay
Winners so far:
Best Edited One-Hour Series For Non-Commercial Television
True Detective: “Who Goes There”
Affonso Goncalves
Best Edited One-Hour Series For Commerical Television
Sherlock: “His Last Vow”
Yan Miles
Best Edited Half-Hour Series For Television
Veep: “Special Relationship”
Anthony Boys
Best Edited Miniseries or Motion Picture For Television
The Normal Heart
Adam Penn
Best Edited Non-Scripted Series
Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown: “Iran”
Hunter Gross
Best Edited Documentary (Feature)
Citizenfour
Mathilde Bonnefoy
Best Edited Documentary (Television)
The Roosevelts: An Intimate History: Episode 3 / The Fire of Life
Erik Ewers
Student Editing Award
Johnny Sepulveda
Robert A! thanks for the assist.
CitizenFour won documentary ACE.
Gonna guess Boyhood and Birdman are the big winners for the Best Edited Film Awards.
Finally, something I’ll be able to understand… 🙂
I don’t know…but I have a feeling that Guardians of the Galaxy will win Best Comedy/Musical Editing. Alice inWonderland did win over The Kids are All Right a few years ago, but the former isn’t at all in the BP conversation.