Bigelow Filming The Hurt Locker
For our second round, we have a few different voices. The aim this time around was to address the added tension this year of a great many women really in the game for the first time. There have been one here, another there before. But rarely have we had so many real contenders for Best Picture that were helmed by women, especially where it doesn’t even seem to be about whether they are women or not.
Also in discussion here the role of the Oscars in our culture now. Do they still matter?
The participants are:
Damien Bona, Inside Oscar
Edward Douglas, Coming Soon
Scott Feinberg, And The Winner Is
Pete Hammond, The Envelope
Pete Howell, The Toronto Star
Craig Kennedy, Living in Cinema
Tom O’Neil, The Envelope
Kris Tapley, Incontention.com
Anne Thompson, Indiewire
Melissa Silverstein, Women & Hollywood
Susan Wloszczyna, USA Today
Q& A’s after the cut.
Since no woman has ever won Best Director because it seems impossible to imagine any woman being admired as much as any of these five directors at any time. The question is, what would it take for a woman to finally win one of these?
Damien Bona: The problem is not a systemic antipathy towards women filmmakers by the Academy, it’s that the percentage of pictures made by female directors continues to be so low. Thus, by definition, the percentage of films deigned to be Oscar-worthy by women will remain smaller than those made by men just because the overall their pool is smaller. As more and more women direct films, eventually one of them will win an Oscar, not because she’s a woman but because the Academy will think her work is the best. It’s the way people now vote for or against female politicians with little regard to their gender (unless one is silly enough to pay heed to Emily’s List). No one without advance knowledge would look at The Hurt Locker and say, “Oh, a woman made that film.” Now, I certainly don’t think that pointless little bore of a movie deserves Oscar recognition, but I am heartened by the fact that its admirers like it for what they deem its attributes, and not because Bigelow happens to be a woman. And, hell, if there hadn’t been a Schindler’s List that year, Jane Campion certainly might have won Best Director in 1993 (and some of us think that, even with a Schindler’s List, she deserved to win).
Edward Douglas: Clint Eastwood to get a sex change…which I’m not sure is possible at his age.
Scott Feinberg: I disagree with the premise of the question. Today, at least, the root cause of the dearth of Oscar nominations for women directors is the dearth of directing opportunities for women directors, not some sort of bias on the Academy’s part. (Indeed, the Academy has recognized increasing numbers of women in its screenplay categories in recent years, to give just one example of progress.) With the exceptions of Dorothy Arzner, Ida Lupino, and maybe one or two others, women simply were not given opportunities to direct major American films until the last 20 years or so, and even now the number is still low. That said, it appears to be growing, and this is certainly a breakthrough year for women directors, including Kathryn Bigelow (”The Hurt Locker”), Lone Scherfig (”An Education”), Nora Ephron (”Julie & Julia”), Jane Campion (”Bright Star”), Mira Nair (”Amelia”), Nancy Myers (”It’s Complicated”), Anne Fontaine (”Coco Before Chanel”), and Andrea Arnold (”Fish Tank”). So I don’t think it’s “impossible” for a woman to win; I think it’s just going to take the right kind of film. Sofia Coppola was probably close for “Lost in Translation” — indeed, the film was nominated for best picture and best actor, and she won best original screenplay. It’s really just a matter of time. Heck, don’t even count out Bigelow — she made a great film that is more a “guy movie” than a “chick-flick” — plus she’s very good-looking, which, fair or not, never hurt anyone’s chances.
Pete Hammond: She needs to make a movie that looks like it was directed by a man. Kathryn Bigelow has done that with “The Hurt Locker” and it will go a long way in breaking that glass ceiling in the mostly boys club of the directors branch.
Pete Howell: I think the Academy should do an education program promoting films made by women. It should host something in L.A., where most of the voters live, and encourage people to turn out. I think if more people were aware of the disconnect between the growing number of films made by women and the rare instances of Academy recognition, good things would result. This year is interesting because three women (so far) have a solid shot at director noms: Kathryn Bigelow, Lone Scherfig and Jane Campion.
Lone Scherfig
Craig Kennedy: Rhetorical question to which I don’t have the answer, but I think it’s more a matter of there being a critical mass of women with the right projects. This might be that year. Not only are there several strong films from women, I don’t think you can really fit any of them into the women’s picture ghetto. Much has been made (way too much if you ask me) of Bigelow’s handling of manly action-oriented The Hurt Locker, but it’s a Bigelow film through and through. The male/female distinction is outmoded. The hero of Lone Scherfig’s An Education is a woman of course and issues uniquely related to being a woman in that place at that time obviously give it an extra layer of resonance, but what struck me about it is how identifiable I found Jenny to my own life. Who at a certain point hasn’t felt smarter than everyone around them only to find in the end they weren’t quite as smart as they thought? Campion’s Bright Star is a delicate, literary romance, but again its appeal is universal. Finally there is Mira Nair’s Amelia – by the look of it, a classic biography of the kind that always seems to get awards attention. I’m going to say that not only will there be more than one female nominated for the best directing Oscar this year, one of them will win. In order of likelihood for the Oscar: Bigelow, Scherfig, Campion, Nair. Maybe next year boys. Wait, what was the question again?
Silverstein: I think the fact that we are even having a conversation about the best director award including a woman – or even the possibility of multiple women- is a HUGE step forward. I think that for a woman to actually make the step beyond the nomination to an actual win will take serious momentum from men and women young and old. That’s why I think Kathryn Bigelow probably has the best chance. The movie was well reviewed, has been going since summer and Bigelow is getting noticed as a director, not a woman director because she has directed a film that seems to not be a typical “woman directed” film. I think that Bigelow has really changed the conversation about women directors with The Hurt Locker and the irony is that she has not deviated from the type of movie she has directed in the past. This one is just far superior on many levels.
Kris Tapley: I think it’s as simple as a film directed by a woman capturing the collective heart of the Academy. It’s possible. Certainly An Education and, to a lesser extent, The Hurt Locker proves that it is.
Anne Thompson: f the women who are vying for this nomination, Kathryn Bigelow and Jane Campion fit the bill. Bigelow is more of an insider. And The Hurt Locker is more of a winner at this stage–and gets credit for having overcome the Iraq curse–than Bright Star, which has stumbled in initial release. Campion is the respected outsider, from Australia. She has a great deal of credibility. No one can doubt the quality of the Bright Star production. But it does play better to women than men, and men dominate the director’s branch. Bright Star could come back strong with critics’ ten best lists and year-end voting. Assuming these two women get nominated, do they have what it takes to win? Both films are small-scale. Neither film has epic scale and scope. And The Hurt Locker needs to build up some year-end momentum and come back into voters minds and hearts. Finally, The Hurt Locker is so rigorously masculine, with action and tension to spare, that it might do the trick. Lone Scherfig’s An Education has a shot at a best picture nomination, especially with the ten slots, but it will be tough for her to win a nomination as director 1) because the field is so competitive, 2) she is a newcomer, 3) a woman and 4) an outsider, from Denmark. As assured and excellent as the movie is, I suspect Nick Hornby will get credit for adapted screenplay and Carey Mulligan, Peter Sarsgaard and Alfred Molina will get credit for their performances. Scherfig could be left out. We still haven’t yet seen what Mssrs. Eastwood, Marshall, Jackson et al. have to offer. On the face of it Invictus, Nine and The Lovely Bones are bigger, more expensive films. I need to see It’s Complicated before I can judge Nancy Meyers’ chances of a nomination. What I see from the materials speaks to a very commercial holiday release that is probably too comedic to impress Academy voters.
Jane Campion
Susan Wloszczyna: This has actually been an amazingly fruitful year for women directors. Julie & Julia, The Hurt Locker, An Education, Bright Star, perhaps It’s Complicated. Though The Proposal isn’t perfect, Anne Fletcher knew what to do with a middle-aged Sandra Bullock in a way that many men couldn’t even fathom. I think it isn’t a case of admiration as much as having the opportunity to be trusted with the freedom as well as the budget to do what one needs to do to realize a vision. None of these films save for It’s Complicated probably have much of a budget but one gets a sense that the filmmakers were allowed to see their ideas through to the end with little interference. And some one was willing to back them. This year might therefore provide a good test case. I predict as many as three of the best pic slots could be filled with films directed by women. And I would guess at least one or two could make it into the best director race despite there not being a corresponding number of opportunities. Will they win? Maybe not. But it would be a welcome change and a hint of advancement.
2. Much has been made of the trivial nature of paying any sort of serious attention to the Oscars at all. It is easy to dismiss them as a silly group of people who have bad taste, for the most part, and who vote only for what they like with no regard to film history or cultural importance. On the other hand, when President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize win was announced, the only other award anyone could come up with to compare it to was the Oscar. Do you think the Oscars still matter?
Bona: When Mason Wiley and I set out to write Inside Oscar 25 years ago, it wasn’t because we thought the Oscars were the end-all in terms of defining quality films. Quite the opposite. We were fascinated by the Academy Awards because of the way they’ve reflected popular culture in any given year. For instance, while The Greatest Show On Earth winning Best Picture is objectively indefensible, its win at the 1952 Oscars made perfect sense given the political and cultural climate of the time. And that’s what makes looking at the Oscars so interesting. But anyone who takes seriously a prize that went to Marty in the year of Night of the Hunter, Kiss Me Deadly, Rebel Without A Cause and It’s Always Fair Weather (and the fact that none of them actually stood a chance only emphasizes the silliness of the Oscars), or to Ben-Hur rather than Imitation Of Life, Some Like It Hot and North By Northwest has severe deficiencies in cinematic appreciation. And what can you say about an award that has gone to Delbert Mann, John G. Avildsen, George Roy Hill and Mel Gibson, but not Alfred Hitchcock or Howard Hawks or Hal Ashby or Otto Preminger, with Nicholas Ray, Douglas Sirk, Paul Mazursky and Blake Edwards never even being nominated.
But the Oscars remain important as a cultural touchstone, a reflection of what’s going on both in Hollywood and America at large. Academy members tend to be politically liberal and artistically conservative, and the fact that a mediocrity like Crash could beat the critically-beloved Brokeback Mountain indicated that if Hollywood embraced risibly melodramatic kumbaya racial pablum rather than sexy gay cowboys, then homophobia is a more deep-seated problem in this country than many of us realized.
Milos Forman once said, “The Academy Awards are a wonderful game. But if you take then seriously, you are in trouble.” He was spot on. It’s great fun to analyze and predict the Oscars, but one should never lose sight of the fact that we’re talking about the collective taste of (mostly) rich middlebrows, few of whom have little claim to artistic credentials. Though I was aware of it previously, the night that A Beautiful Mind was deemed the best thing released during the calendar year really hit home the fact that these people are not to be in any way taken seriously for their taste or judgment. Your opinions and mine are just as valid (correction more valid, and I doubt that my two favorite pictures from last year, Paranoid Park and Flight of the Red Balloon were in the top 50 of Oscar contenders.) And so one should analyze the Oscars as one does a pennant race. Look at the players, the possibilities, the potential surprises,the track records. But for God’s sake, don’t think the Oscars have any real meaning as a signifier of artistic excellence. Despite all that, yes the Oscars still matter.
In short, the Oscars are important because they are an ingrained part of popular culture. And people do take them seriously, And they’re fun. And they add millions to a film’s grosses. They’re just not important beyond that.
Douglas: Absolutely they matter… they matter to the filmmakers and actors and technical people who are being honored by their peers first and foremost. It is an honor even to get nominated especially considering how many movies are produced and released every year. They also act as a symbol of the times because what is going on in cinema reflects society as a whole and one can see the differences in Hollywood as a society from their selections over the years and how they’ve changed.
Feinberg: Of course the Oscars still matter, and they always will. Along with presidential debates, the Super Bowl, and perhaps “American Idol,” they are one of the last remaining “television events” that can still bring together a large segment of the nation and the world. Like most people, I don’t always agree with the entire list of Oscar nominees and winners — but I, for one, am glad that there’s still an awards show that at least strives to celebrate not only the most popular movies (People’s Choice Awards, etc.) or stars (Golden Globes, etc.), but truly the best. PS: I’m glad that President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, not least of all because it serves as a big middle-finger to the haters who only a week earlier said the world “rejected” him by denying Chicago the Olympics (and who seize every opportunity to denigrate him). He is the president of all Americans and all Americans should be proud that he received this great honor — which, mind you, he did not seek.
Hammond: Of course they do. It’s a brand name for excellence around the world. People who win them die with the line “Academy Award winning….” as the lead to their obit. You can’t kill the Oscars even if you try.It’s ingrained in our pop cultural DNA.
Howell: The Oscars still matter, just like an Olympic medal and a Pulitzer prize still matter. They are historical benchmarks that society uses to determine excellence, not matter how imperfect they may be. I’m starting to wonder about the Nobels, though, which seem to be handed out like Crackerjack prizes. The Oscars telecast may be another story. This year’s overhaul was a step in the right direction, as long as the Academy doesn’t stray too far from the “and the winner is…” basics.
Kennedy: I’m a reformed Oscar basher myself. Pick a snooty anti-Oscar pose and I’ve probably struck it at one time or another. I got over it though. Sure, Oscar’s idea of the best is rarely my own idea of the best, but it turns out Oscar doesn’t care what I or any other non-voter thinks. As long as people pay attention, Oscar matters. That’s really all there is to it. The purpose is to draw attention to Hollywood and while it might not work in the masses it once did (what does?), it’s still one of the biggest things going. It’s the one time of year when people who don’t obsess about movies for a living or a hobby are abuzz and in the know about them. Attention is focused on 5 movies – or 10 this year I guess…another reason I’m not a fan of the 10 noms: lack of focus). They may or may not be the best, but it’s a great time to say: “Hey, you liked A, B and C? You should check out X, Y or Z.” People are engaged and thinking and talking about movies. As a movie lover, what’s not to like about that?
Silverstein: I think the Oscars matter because it is a way for regular moviegoers to relate to the industry. As a culture we love awards and competitions (ie all the reality shows) and when a movie wins or is even nominated that matters to busy people who are trying to figure out what movie to spend their money and time on. Remember the average person sees very few movies a year. They want to see something worthwhile.
Tapley: They matter as a pop culture reference point, I think, not an artistic beacon.
Thompson: The Oscars matter. The Oscar itself is an icon that represents quality all over the world. And the Academy voters are 5800 professionals who sincerely vote for what they consider to be the best each year. Are they all rigorous, see every movie and vote with their hearts? Perhaps not. But most of them do.
Wloszczyna: They matter because despite the expanded best picture category, it is still incredibly hard to win one since only a handful are given out each year compared to the Grammys or Emmys. Plus, they are voted on by your peers, not an oddball group of foreign journalists like the Golden Globes. Yes, sometimes the voters get it wrong, but often they get it incredibly right. Plus probably better than other entertainment honors, their are a fairly reliable gauge of where our national mindset was at during that era. Until they expand every category, they still do matter.
3. The directors can only name five. Who has the best shot? Choose up to five. Jason Reitman
Spike Jonze
Kathryn Bigelow
Tom Ford
Joel and Ethan Coen
Lee Daniels
Michael Haneke
Steven Soderbergh
Neil Blomkamp
Quentin Tarantino
Jane Campion
Lone Scherfig
Bona: I hate to wimp out, but it’s still way too early to make credible predictions. October front-runners often fall by the wayside come January. One has to wait for critics awards to get a better gauge. But I do suspect that Kathryn Bigelow and Jason Reitman will still be in the mix come February.
Douglas: Jason Reitman, Joel and Ethan Coen, Lee Daniels, Quentin Tarantino, Lone Scherfig (I’d alternately replace Tarantino with Bigelow which would make it the first year with two female representatives helping the odds, though I think Reitman will win based on having seen all the movies)
Feinberg: Even though we haven’t yet seen “Invictus,” the clear favorite is Clint Eastwood — he is a living legend; he is immensely popular; he has consistently demonstrated an ability to make great films that appeal to Oscar voters; he is going to be eligible for a film about an important and moving subject that he made with other major talents who will sing his praises; he has a major studio that will be supporting his campaign; and this might be his last go-around. Yes, he didn’t go anywhere with “Changeling” and “Gran Torino” last year, but the last two times he teamed up with Morgan Freeman (”Unforgiven” and “Million Dollar Baby”) he won both best picture and best director, so I wouldn’t bet against him. It seems likely that the rest of the field will be filled out by Jason Reitman (”Up in the Air”), Rob Marshall (”Nine”), Lee Daniels (”Precious”), and Kathryn Bigelow (”The Hurt Locker”), but James Cameron (”Avatar”) and Peter Jackson (”The Lovely Bones”) — both past past winners coming back from long absences — are obviously big wild-cards.
Hammond: Kathryn Bigelow, Clint Eastwood, Rob Marshall, Jason Reitman, Quentin Tarantino or Lee Daniels
Howell: Jason Reitman, Kathryn Bigelow, Lone Scherfig, Jane Campion and Tom Ford.
Kennedy: Bigelow, Reitman, Coens, Scherfig, Jonze (I know I mentioned Campion above as a possible winner, but I’m hedging my bet here)
O’Neil: The five nominees for best director will be James Cameron (”Avatar”), Lee Daniels (”Precious”), Clint Eastwood (”Invictus”), Peter Jackson (”The Lovely Bones”) and Rob Marshall (”Nine”). “Avatar” and “Nine” are both grandly ambitious productions that will probably be appreciated by fellow directors for their scope. “Precious” is this year’s “Slumdog Millionaire,” so Daniels goes along for the ride. Jackson and Clint get automatic nominations just because, well, they’re Jackson and Clint. Sad to say, but it looks like women will be slapped down again this year by the ole boyz in the directors’ branch. Only thing that can change that is “Amelia” flying higher than current expectations.
Tapley: Jason Reitman, Kathryn Bigelow and Lee Daniels have the best shot of those listed here, I think.
Thompson: Kathryn Bigelow, Joel and Ethan Coen, Peter Jackson, Clint Eastwood, Jason Reitman
Wloszczyna: Of this group, Jason Reitman, Kathryn Bigelow, Lee Daniels and Lone Scherfig
54 Responses for "Virtual Oscars Roundtable: The Directors"
Interesting that Damien Bona mentions Marty as an example of the siliiness of the Oscars. I’m sure he realizes that Marty also won the Golden Palm at Cannes and the Best Picture awards from the National Board of Review and the New York Film Critics. Kind of goes to show that all awards can look silly at times. I thought Susan Wloszczyna summed up the importance of the Oscars pretty well.
Hey, Sasha… you told us to pick five from that specific group… looks like we have some cheaters who just decided to pick whichever directors they wanted. I’m talking about you O’Neil!
I think the academy has unconscious biases, but as soon as these are pointed out to them they are desperate to destroy them. I think unconscious homophobia drowned Brokeback Mountain, but then this was criticised, and so last year they were more keen to consciously support Milk. I think the academy are desperate to pick a woman for BD, they are just waiting for the opportunity. Bigelow is that, and that’s why she WILL win. (Precious will win best film in a split)
Man would that be amazing if the Coens were nominated. They certainly deserve it. And I can’t imagine Original Screenplay going to anyone else this year.
I’m still thinking that Up in the Air is the favorite.
Clint Eastwood I primarily doubt because the total number of Best Director & Best Picture awards movies he’s directed have won is 4; only Wyler with 6 and Ford/Capra with 5 have more. If Invictus wins BD/BP that would be a 3 out of 5 record for his nominated films which feels ridiculously high to me. I do think he’ll get a nom though and be the oldest nominee ever, along with youngest double nominee ever Reitman, first female director who didn’t write her movie Campion, second black director Daniels. I think the most likely 5th nominee is either Marshall or Scherfig, but I want it to be Tom Ford or Jane Campion…well I want them both to get in somehow. I do wonder if an animated film’s director will ever be in the conversation…the closest is Chicago last year’s Stanton nom. Though I’m guessing that could help him get a nom for his first live action-er.
Hmm, looking at the years when females were nominated, based on precursors/noms/wins, I think the female directors placed about 4th, 2nd, and 3rd place in chronological order…As for original screenplay I will Campion to win and if not Bob Peterson to finally get an animated win; out of the 10-ish most likely, I’d only prefer Coens to Basterds and that horrible 500 Days.
I just saw “A Serious Man” this afternoon. I must say that while the writing was brilliant and the acting was top-notch, I would not watch it again if you asked me to. One of the most cynical, angry comedies I’ve ever seen.
Oops..
Interesting…
I´ll keep my eyes over this ladies.
I thing Bigelow and Scherfig ARE the frontrunners among ladies in directing.
I think only one female director will be nominated, and that will be Bigelow, although I prefer Campion.
I see the Coens, Tarantino, Reitman, Daniels in the other slots.
I don’t understand the lack of enthusiasm for Bigelow here. She’s still the frontrunner for me, and rightly so. I have a feeling either or both Marshall and Cameron are out of the BD race, along with the Coens.
Bigelow
Reitman
Daniels
Jackson
Scherfig
My best guess right now:
Kathryn Bigelow (winner, in a BP/BD split)
Lee Daniels
Michael Haneke
Peter Jackson (BP winner)
Jason Reitman
“Only thing that can change that is “Amelia” flying higher than current expectations.”
LOL at everyone who thinks this movie is gonna be good.
BEST DIRECTOR predictions
Kathryn Bigelow
Lee Daniels
Jason Reitman
Clint Eastwood
Rob Marshall
bigelow crafted something quite brilliant. as someone who has little interest in war films (from any period), i found myself riveted by the hurt locker and it will probably remain on my 10 best list.
however, i think jason reitman really deserves the award.
and i would love to see tom ford nominated (and that has nothing to do with the giant crush i have on him).
Tarantino is NOT well-liked in H’wierd, folkx…
A screenplay nom and yes, a BP in the Year of the Ten…But QT himself has a harder fight…
K.Big is all set up to get nominated AND win. BUT if Clint E does it up right with “Invictus” he may be unstoppable…
He always holds his films back to the last minute…
It SEEMS like a great topic ON PAPER…but it could be another “Amelia” which is looking to be v. D-U-L-L…
And the 20 mins I saw of “Avatar” were just goddawful…It’s a cartoon. A big cartoon. “Up” has a better chance at a nomination.
Yikes, I love how O’Neill states, “it looks like women will be slapped down again this year by the ole boyz in the directors’ branch. Only thing that can change that is “Amelia” flying higher than current expectations”, when there are clearly way more likely and deserving female nominees than the obvious Oscar bait Amelia (which looks horrible). What about Bigelow (probably the frontrunner right now, and deservedly so), Campion, Scherfig? Do they all really have less of a chance than Mira Nair? Come on, man…just ridiculous
After oddsmaking *OSCAR 27 years, as you know in general the annual Pre-OSCAR Film Critics awards mostly vote small, where in the AMPAS loves big cinema & I have a feeling the former will likely choose “The Hurt Locker” for the most part this year.
(NOTE: Did anyone read Stephen King on it in “EW’ mag. He thought it superb moviemaking & very rare thesedays)
& it’s across the board already in that K. Bigalow will likely make the BD cut, but I wonder if she’ll go all the way vs. Rob Marshall & “Nine?”
The very type they adore
Strangely hardly anyone is including *James Cameron though this time out?
I’ve not yet even seen the trailer for “Avatar” but just found it strange & maybe early buzz is not so strong for it.
Thank You
P.S. To Sasha, great site & as I previously wrote, you really improved all over the past 8yrs!
Still hope you’d reconsider though on updates sent out again.
A woman should have won the Best Director Oscar decades ago ……. Barbra Streisand for Yentl! That was clearly the year of full on discrimination by the Academy …. shame on them!
Jane Campion is from Australia, Anne Thompson? I suppose she lives there now, but she’s still a kiwi!
K-Big, K-Big, K-Big! She made amazing movie, not some chick flick tripe but awesome suspense and action military one. Plus she looks fantastic. Like, wow, look at that picture!
Directors locked and loaded: K-Big (she`s not going away as various industry awards given to her and Renner show), Jason Reitman (his movie is a current front-runner tied with Presh) and Lee Daniels (imagine racial aproar if he is snubbed and his movie and ladies get in). So it`s two more spots to fill. Tarantino and Ford would be sweet but the former is not going to happen, sadly. Ford might surprise for they love first-timers. However, the two spots will likely go to veteranzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz such as the Clint, Jackson, Cameron and Marshall. The Clint is self-explainable. Jackson`s movie is a sweet, optimistic feel-gooder with some 5 hanky-moments. AMPAS eats up those and Jackson is master manipulator and extractor of high emotions. Marshall has super star-studded cast and Harvey. Cameron is in the toughest position because his chances depend on the boxoffice number (if we assume the movie is excellent). But, if it`s an obcene hit and real game-changer, than sky is the limit.
Eastwood
Marshall
Bigelow
Jackson
Reitman
With Haneke and Campion waiting in the wings
“Jackson and Clint get automatic nominations just because, well, they’re Jackson and Clint. ”
LOL. That didn`t help The Clint to get acting nom for what was called his finest work in Gran Torino. Also, the movie got better rating than The Reader and was a boxoffice bonanza. yet zilch noms for BP and BD. As for Jackson, the mess that was KK didn`t fly in any category save effects and he didn`t get BD nom for supremely uneven TTT (Jackson can`t juggle parallel story-lines to save his life but he`s great with linear narrative like FOTR, I`ll give him that). So just because someone is someone doesn`t mean they are automatically in. Perhaps even AMPAS can be bored by multiple nominees (unless they are Meryl).
Directors nominate directors and I always find them the MOST DIFFICULT group to understand. Having been an actor myself for a large part of my life I understand all too well how they feel.
But they don’t nominate the directors. Directors do.
And I could see K.Big getting a nom but not Presh director Lee Daniels.
It’s become the year of the WOMAN. And “Hurt Locker” is so far out in front of any film this year, it’s ridiculous. And wonderful! Loved that movie!
I could see them leaving out Lee Daniels and then the actors nominated Morgan Freeman and he wins there. For Clint E.s “Invictus.”
Yeah, Morgan’s got an Oscar already for working with Clint and his win plus Mo’Nique’s in SUpporting would make this year’s Oscars seem VERY cutting edge in terms of race.
But I bet Lee Daniels gets snubbed by the directors branch.
I have to agree with the assertion that Jane Campion would have won if there hadn’t been a Schindler’s List. Campion created an incredibly moving story with performances that across the board were simply enthralling.
What’s interesting is that we tend to forget the first woman who snagged an Oscar Nomination back in 1977 for a very edgy film called Seven Beauties. A woman working in Italian Films where women do not usually get to the other side of the camera. That woman had a body of work that we all took note of because she did exactly what someone else stated a bit earlier. She made films that were not what the critics like to label “chick flicks”. She made very edgy political critiques and her work was competitive with what her male counterparts were producing.
Lina Wertmueller is the one who shattered the glass ceiling. Sadly her work after a certain point seemed to be cartoon characterizations that never went beyond those satires Swept Away and Seven Beauties.
I don’t really think anymore that anyone thinks of male female when it comes to directing. What we usually see are the “actresses” who after years of working on one side of the camera then move behind it and usually the work created by them is unsatisfying.
It’s good too see that finally women have found their own voice and are creating projects and films that resonnate with the public. I wouldn’t be surprised if you see Bigelow and Campion nominated.
Lovely Bones is a small book which will probably be a “small” movie. The Academy prefers “epic.” So Jackson is probably not in the mix for one of the top five in such a crowded year. Even though Tarantino is the outsider, “Inglorious Basterds” looked bigger. I think he might get that fifth spot. Remember, he didn’t win for Pulp Fiction. He won screenplay. That’s sort of a “major” omission. The musical “Nine” when compared with a Fellini film? That’s big shoes to fill! I don’t know…
Women have to be twice as good as a man to be considered “half” as good. Otherwise several other Oscar-worthy movies would have been at least nominated that were directed by women (let alone probably should have won). “Frida” was directed by Julie Taymor and was flawless. Same with “Boys Don’t Cry”, directed by Kimberly Peirce. Both of those films were way better than what won. But as good as those films were, they were also somewhat “less epic” than the typical Academy picks. So was it “just” because they were directed by women or because they were small “intimate” pictures?
The Academy is also filled with actors (a voting majority that dictates who wins). Actors love to vote for… (surprise!) actors. This is why Ron Howard, Kevin Costner and basically any actor who is half-way talented who gets behind the lens has a better shot at winning “best director” (unless you are talking about poor Mel Gibson, sadly). The only major female director who was an actor is Penny Marshall and while she is talented, the films she has picked have not been “epic” enough to make the cut. Streisand was too “early.” Yentyl should have been nominated though. Sophia Coppola likely got more love than her small indie film deserved because the director branch respects Papa Coppola and because she was… an “actor. So she hit on two quadrants and probably didn’t win because, again, the picture was “small.” A man can win for directing a “small” picture though, especially if he is an actor! “Million Dollar Baby” and “A Beautiful Mind” are good examples.
So whichever women, if any, get nominated this year, they will have to know that they are really the third or fourth woman that “should” have won the award and that the odds are stacked against any director, male or female, who isn’t an actor. Also each group votes for their own interests. Brits nominate and vote for Brits. Women vote for women. Latinos vote for Latinos. So nominations play out that way and someone has to hit across multiple “groups” to win. Women have a harder time doing this because their films are not typically studio films (smaller indie productions) which don’t have big marketing campaigns or the voting blocks that studio films have built in which vote their own interests.
As much as I’d love to see Christopher Plummer receive a nomination for The Last Station, I wish it was in the Best Actor and not Supporting Actor category. How many times can James McAvoy be passed over when he gives consistently strong performances?
Okay, I guess you can point to Christopher Plummer as a perfect example of this, but still…
Hopefully, McAvoy won’t need to wait as long. Maybe next year for The Conspirator!
Sizematters, are you kidding? The Lovely Bones spans years and spends much of its time in an elaborately-created heaven. That’s more epic than all but one of last year’s BD nominees.
I do enjoy seeing this muted enthusiasm from cautiously optimistic fans of The Lovely Bones. And just like that lone Best Director nominee from last year whose epic vision had his disciples quietly chanting the mantra all year, I think The Lovely Bones could make good on its promise, delivering something stranger and more beautiful than anyone has any right to hope for. Despite any stumbles or off-key chords its likely to strike, I think the overall orchestration is going to knock us out.
I agree whit Glenn.
Streisand not noms for “Yentl” and “The Prince of Tides” was a shame!
A great and serious shame!
(And the one whit real chances of victory, except for Sofia in a year whitout “TLOTR: TEOTK”)
Ronan’s turn in The Lovely Bones is my most anticipated performance of the year. I can’t wait to see what she does with it.
I really feel Jane Campion deserves a nomination. I loved Bright Star, it’s not just girls who love this film! There were so many shots I loved and the closing scene is amazing, perfect ending to a imo perfect movie. I’ve heard/read about people saying they found this film to be slow, but I have to strongly disagree. I’ve seen quite a lot of slow films and this is not one of them. I think some people mistake the overall silent and calm feeling of the film for slowness.
Abbie Cornish gives such a beautiful peformance I almost feel it’s too good for Oscar as I feel Oscar worthy performances are often far more dramatic, almost over the top, whereas she was so soft and subtle. This was probably my most fulfilling and satisfying movie experience I had since watching The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford at the cinema for the first time. Cornish performance came close to the way I felt about Casey Affleck who I thought was a revelation. Unless the other directors really appear to be better, Campion should be in!
I think Jason Reitman has a good chance of winning especially if Up In The Air is very well received and earns lots of nominations. A lot of people felt he should have been nominated for Thank You For Smoking, he did get a nom for Juno and now if he receives his second one he might win.
I agree with some of you who say that Lee Daniels might not get a nom even if Precious will be well received by the Academy resulting in a possible BP nom. Shadowboxer was far from being well accepted and I wonder if people will take that in cnsideration when voting. Had Precious been his debut, perhaps he would have had a bigger chance.
“I do enjoy seeing this muted enthusiasm from cautiously optimistic fans of The Lovely Bones. And just like that lone Best Director nominee from last year whose epic vision had his disciples quietly chanting the mantra all year, I think The Lovely Bones could make good on its promise, delivering something stranger and more beautiful than anyone has any right to hope for. Despite any stumbles or off-key chords its likely to strike, I think the overall orchestration is going to knock us out.”
OK, Ryan, you read LB script and you say this is the movie to beat. I believe you and this scares me because you said right of the bat that Funny People would not deliver (based on the script) and it didn`t. Now, is there any hope that, even if LB wins and shit and we have to sit through those stoned women`s fashion disaters all over again, that Ronan won`t upset anyone? I really don`t like her and think she is overrated beyond belief, so based on the script, how would you rate Ronan`s role vs Sidibe`s, Mulligan`s, Meryle`s,etc? Any, any hope that win will not be hers? :chanting”City of Amber bombed” to feel better:
ah, youtube, global repository of all the beautious contingencies.
Five, Ten, Fifty-fold
I’m not ready to say The Lovely Bones is the one to beat, bambi. I’m just saying it’s one we shouldn’t dismiss.
Don’t despair! There are a million ways to FAIL.
Back to the Directors Nominate Directors situation.
Um, how many women directors are their in the Academy to nominate a woman, any woman OR women?
Tom O’Neil may be on to something here. As startlingly retro and misogynistic as that sounds, but…
The 99% male (rich, white, old, straight men) have to nominate the five directors. NOT the actors branch who can of course nominate the actors in all four categories…and the more I think of the make-up of the Director’s Branch…the more I think that Tom O’Neil may be (unfortunately for the great women working this year)right.
But they DON’T like QT.
Kathryn Bigelow’s tiring, repetitive, droning war film? Really? Over Campion’s gorgeously assured and pin-perfect direction? I’ve already seen 10 movies this year better than Bigelow’s. If she won that would be a disaster.
Slightly off topic, but have just noticed that Ebert has posted his review of The Road. Not sure if it has been there since Toronto or if it is a recent post but he only gave it a passing mark of 2.5 stars.
Too many people counting out Tarantino. He’s made the best film of 2009 so far.
No, the Coens have.
#35 “Slightly off topic, but have just noticed that Ebert has posted his review of The Road. Not sure if it has been there since Toronto or if it is a recent post but he only gave it a passing mark of 2.5 stars.”
All I care is what he says about Viggo. I`m still pissed that he didn`t win for Eastern Promises. It`s for me what Blanchett`s loss to Platrow and SPR`s loss to SIL are for the rest of the world. That said, The Road`s BP and BD noms aren`t looking good but Viggo seems like a solid almost-lock (whatever that is,lol).
#32 ”
I’m not ready to say The Lovely Bones is the one to beat, bambi. I’m just saying it’s one we shouldn’t dismiss.
Don’t despair! There are a million ways to FAIL.”
Well, when I think of it, I don`t wish it failure. I want Tucci nom for something since he`ll have two different roles and is already acclaimed for one. I just don`t want more sales for the hack Sebold and I can totally live without Boyens&Walsh`s Motley Crue groupies from 80s time machine couture and I really don`t think that teenage Irish-Catholic actresses should get too much too soon for they always go Ho-han.
Dark Horse: Spike Jonze
Man’s taken perhaps the biggest risk of his career and divided viewers across the country. And the fact that he’s stayed true to himself and the book is a remarkable feat in and of itself, especially when you consider how easily Warner Bros. could have destroyed it. And I think he’s made a children’s classic that will resonate through the ages, much like the book has done. But in a very different way.
1. Coppola probably would have won BD if Lord of the Rings hadn’t been her competition.
2. Before you go slagging Fran Walsh’s hippie outfits, reread her and Jackson’s script for Heavenly Creatures. IF Lovely Bones has that kind of quality writing, it will be a major contender.
3. Not seeing QT getting a huge amount of awards love. His ego and attitude makes Robert Altman seem like a kindly gentleman in comparison.
4. I don’t see Bigelow winning BD unless Hurt Locker really surges in the precursors.
bambi, I thought Ronan was the best thing about City of Ember – she practically saved it from a lackluster co-star, a sub-par Bill Murray, a vision that went too comic when it could have gone a bit darker, and an idiotic mole.
Kathryn has to be a lock for a nomination at this point. It would basically be a huge error if she did not get in.
I think it sucks that a woman director has to make a manly film in order to get noticed.
It’s too early to tell, but I think this sounds good:
Bigelow
Reitman
Daniels
Jackson
Eastwood or Cameron
I just don’t get the love for Hurt Locker. Did I seriously miss something. Nothing special, it was an OK movie to watch but I really don’t know where all this love is coming from for film and director. I seriously suspect the film will slide once the real contenders release their films over the next 2 or so months.
… and now the nominees are Amenabar, Jackson, Almodovar, Eastwood and Cameron and all this conversation gets futile, hahaha. Just kidding. But seriously, I stopped reading halfway through this PC bullshit in which so many people are so glad to have met themselves (not all of them of course) and are talking banalities forgetting that, in the end, the most marketed directors will be the nominated ones. And I haven’t seen anything so shamelessly promoted fo Oscar as this year’s “An Education” or “Precious” (and I remember last year we had this kind of film sweeping the Oscars… will lightning strike twice? Well, unless An Education or Precious have a secret deal with Bollywood or similar… “computer says no”).
It’s interesting how many people is forgetting James Cameron’s Avatar and Peter Jackson’s The Lovely Bones are still to be released.
This might end perfectly with Cameron, Eastwood, Jackson, Marshall and Reitman nominated and all the girls demanding for a separate “female directing” cathegory. LMAO.
And then, having 3 cathegories: straight male, straight female and gay/lesbian directors. THAT would be fun.
#40 “Before you go slagging Fran Walsh’s hippie outfits, reread her and Jackson’s script for Heavenly Creatures. IF Lovely Bones has that kind of quality writing, it will be a major contender.”
Outfits deserve slagging but I have enromous respect and love for HC. So much so that I`m still reeling from Winslet and BP snub. Linskey was magnificent too. However, HC was Jackson/Walsh collaboration whereas LB has Boyens on board and that changes things. And not in the good way, IMO. Some of the worst parts of KK and LOTR were Boyens (Jimmy, Sam`s cheesy speech in TTT,etc). So it may be one cook too many. We`ll see. As long as they stray from Sebold vision and follow their own, which seems to be the case based on what Jackson says about it, the better for the movie. It can only be better than the book, not worse.
#41 “bambi, I thought Ronan was the best thing about City of Ember – she practically saved it from a lackluster co-star, a sub-par Bill Murray, a vision that went too comic when it could have gone a bit darker, and an idiotic mole.”
Haven`t seen it but will give it a go because I want to be fair to Ronan fans. It`s wrong of me to base my opinion of her solely on creepy kid appearance in Atonement, so I`ll see this. I find it more impressive when actor is good in a crap because it`s harder to pull off, IMO. Like Michael Sheen in UW:ROTL. I`m more wowed by that performance than anything else he did in good movies. So I`m totlaly seeing CoA.
#46 “This might end perfectly with Cameron, Eastwood, Jackson, Marshall and Reitman nominated and all the girls demanding for a separate “female directing” cathegory. LMAO.”
Actually, one that may upset catfighters (Bigelow, Schefig, Campion), blacks (Lee) and one of the past nominees/winners may be la gay fashionista Tom Ford. His movie and directing are getting raves accross the board and if campaign is done right, he may be a major and most pleasent surprise.
Jesus, I specifically tried to make the discussion about movies that are out now. An Education has not been marketed to death – it just happens to be a great movie. Precious, same thing. Precious in specific wasn’t marketed until it was already winning awards and abuzz with positive feedback. I think it’s even more ludicrous and scary that so many are already predicting Eastwood to win this thing when no one has even seen the movie – have we learned nothing in the past few years? It’s an immediate curse. Reitman and Bigelow are the two locks right now. That could change.
I would be so delighted to see Spike Jonze get nominated again. But alas, it looks like he won’t get the critics’ push he would need to get there.
i have a feeling where the wild things are is going to be the surprise contender. people are losing their marbles over it and people are showing a large amount of respect for what jonze has done. i’m so excited to see it tonight!
as for the bigelow vs. campion debate…bright star is usually the kind of movie i would adore and hurt locker one i would avoid. LOVED hurt locker, fought to stay awake during bright star. i actually thought a lot of scenes were oddly cut and too short. it looked nice but there was an odd inconsitency with it.
reitman deserves the win.
“Bright Star” has something “The Hurt Locker” totally lacks: unfettered beauty and a real perfect sense of scene progression and character development. Bigelow’s film plays like a serious of redundant, somewhat bloated incidents happening one after the other, without much cohesion or interest. Campion’s film is absorbing and poetic, never once losing its footing or focus.
John Hillcoat?
Am I the only one who has seen The Road, or the only one who loved it?
Blomkamp should get mentioned, because whatever District 9 is, its direction is terrific.
Sasha, thing is, I have “deja vus” this year on certain aspects – specially re: An Education and re: women directing – on the blog/awardsphere that remind me of campaigns that ended with Halle Berry and Denzel Washington winning lead at once, A Beautiful Mind being considered a serious film about schizophrenia (Lol, I can’t even say that with a straight face) and some others. Not genuine, serious Oscarwatching like when we all had the agreement – giving reasons, facts to back our opinions – that Return of the King was going to win BP and BD and might even sweep or that Marty wasn’t going to be waiting more than with The Departed. It itches me how people is actually focusing in that this year should be a % of women nominated rather than actually focusing in that maybe that would be at the prize of leaving some other director out. And I’m all for having Nair, Campion, Bigelow, Scherfig all nominated at once, but that’s unreal and we all know it, deep inside. Aren’t we, actually, desperately trying to “indicate” the AMPAS the way they “should” vote or actually predicting a tendency? Sometimes it looks more the first than the latter. We already had the year of african americans, the year of gays, the year of Bollywood… all so PC, all so unfair. I don’t know, but I like to see deserving winners rather than compensations.
Streisand a nomination for Yentl? The only nomination Streisand should have had for Yentl was in the category of completely destroying the original material.
Leave a reply