Waltz is going to be a tough contender to beat come Oscar time in the supporting category. We’re probably looking at at least a two-man race, with Waltz and Stanley Tucci either for Julie & Julia (which is, I might add, looking a lot better as a Best Pic nominee) or for The Lovely Bones. Waltz is magnificent in Inglourious Basterds, arguably among the best performances of the year so far. The Fest also announces the Hollywood World Awards:
The Hollywood Film Festival and Hollywood Awards, presented by Starz, are pleased to announce that Christoph Waltz and Father Rick Frechette will be recognized for their outstanding achievements at the festival’s Hollywood Awards Gala Ceremony, as well as the nominees for the “Hollywood World Awards” — “Bright Star” (UK/Australia), directed by Jane Campion, “I Am Love” (Italy), directed by Luca Guadagnino, “Lourdes” (France/Austria), directed by Jessica Hausner, “A Prophet” (France), directed by Jacques Audiard, and “The White Ribbon” (Germany/Austria), directed by Michael Haneke.
28 Responses for "Christoph Waltz Honored at Hollywood Fest"
Since I have seen “Julie & Julia” I am a bit bewildered how on earth Stanley Tucci can be considered a frontrunner for best supporting oscar? Don´t get me wrong, it´s a nice role and all, but nothing spectacular, quite decent.
The same can be said about the whole movie “Julie & Julia”. I liked most part of it, but it is no “best picture”-material, I take every bet against it, really!
But I have to admit, I really liked Meryl Streep a lot – and I am not a huge Meryl Streep supporter. She deserves a nomination for this (much more than for Doubt last year, IMO).
I, too, am nonplussed over the best-picture buzz over J&J. Sheesh — it never really got off the ground for me though I did appreciate Streep and Tucci.
Tucci certanly is an Oscar-caliber actor, but not for this film.
I really liked Waltz in IB but still see it as a nominatable but not winning role. Go figure.
Dominik, I totally agree with you. I know Stanley Tucci and he’s a wonderful talent. But in “Julie and Julia” he was just a background, wallpaper,if you will to the powerhouse Streep.
He’s very much liked and respected by those in the biz and had given a lifetime of great performances. But this is merely as you said “OK”. Oscar does not nominate “OK.”
Yeah, for sure Christophe Waltz should win this in a walk.
For a performance that holds its’ own against a great leading lady, let me mention Alessandro Nivola’s smoldering star turn as “Boy” in “Coco,” opposite Audrey Tautou at her career-best in the title role. He puts a smile on the dour Chanel’s young face and lights up her life and the audience’s too. A performance entirely in French, a language he just learned from speaking it so perfectly in this film.
And Anthony Mackie should still be in the running for “Hurt Locker.” However it’s Jeremy Renner in lead, who’s the lock.
And will Woody Harrelson’s fine hard-boiled sergeant in “The Messenger” also get overlooked?
I have to also mention that all four of these fine actors, or five counting Austrian Waltz, have NEVER been nominated.
I’m curious as to what makes Sasha think that Julie and Julia is ‘looking a lot better as a Best Pic nominee’? Not that I doubt her wisdom, of course. Just curious…..
Not counting the 3 most profitable kinds of summer movies (animation, CGI, and crap) only 3 films have earned more than $90 mil this year:
Inglourious Basterds – $119 mil
Public Enemies – $97 mil
Julie & Julia – $93 mil
(and J&J’s budget was half that of either of the other two)
J&J’s profit is a measure of popularity that’s not driven by 14-25 yr-old boys.
That’s not a definitive deciding factor, but it’s a factor.
I’m on board with the first 4 comments.
“Julie & Julia (which is, I might add, looking a lot better as a Best Pic nominee)”
What makes you believe Julie and Julia has a snowballs chance. Tucci is even money for The Lovely Bones though. The Oscar should be either him or Waltz and the rest are gonna turn out pretty weak I think. Though I think we (AD readers) know that Peter Capaldi should be in this conversation as well.
Waltz, Haneke and Hausner?? Wow… Austria occupies Hollywood
I think Tucci has a real shot in Lovely Bones. He gave me chills in the trailer, and I haven’t read the book.
What about the gotham nominees? Maybe Christoph waltz gets nominated in a question of minutes!!!! Somebody knows the time when noms are announced?
‘Precious’ is gonna RULE this awards with 4 nominations (2 breakthru, 1 ensemble, 1 picture).
Supporting actor continues to be “best deranged psychopathic killer in a movie” for the third year in a row then
As of now, among the films that have actually been seen, i think Waltz is the clear frontrunner
I am not saying Tucci gives a better performance in J&J, as I have not seen The Lovely Bones yet. However, on the eligibility list it will list in this order
Stanley Tucci, Julie & Julia
Stanley Tucci, The Lovely Bones
Regardless, his nomination will be to honor his body of work. Since J&J hit it off at the Academy screening, and it a likely BP nominee, I suspect he will land the nomination for J&J.
Sean – What makes you think J&J is a likely BP nominee? Even Sasha, who has been a big proponent of the film, lists it 13th on her contender tracker, behind Inglourious Basterds, Capitalism: A Love Story, and District 9. And the tracker doesn’t even include films like Invictus, Nine, Lovely Bones that haven’t yet been reviewed.
I’m not saying J&J has no chance at BP, but it’s far from likely in my view.
You’re right – Waltz will be a VERY tough candidate to beat come Oscar time. I don’t think he’s unbeatable necessarily, but I don’t think he’s going to be out “psychopathically villain”-ed by Stanley Tucci this year, thus providing not much competition for him. If anyone challenges him it’ll probably either Damon or Molina (both similar body-of-work recognitions).
I…don’t think Tucci would be nominated for Julie & Julia.
in my Opinion… Waltz wins Globe and BAFTA but loses Oscar and SAG
Sorry, but UP is not making the BP top 10. They won’t waste a spot on that when there is the animiated category designed especially for UP. Same applies for Capitalism in Documentary. District 9 is too polarizing to make the cut. Sorry, but I strongly believe J&J has much better odds landing in the Top 10 then Bright Star, A Serious Man, and Where the Wild Things Are.
Great! Waltz is not forgotten and Tucci will be in on the strength of two great performances, most like for LB (playing against type).
Christoph Waltz owned Inglourious Basterds. I will be shocked, just shocked if he is not nominated for an Oscar.
If nominated, it’s his to win! He was that spectacular.
I can’t see any supporting actor performances topping Waltz’s in the coming months. He was by far the best thing about a very good film.
tuccis only chance at a win is with the lovely bones, end of story. and if tucci disapoints and i think we can hand waltz the oscar right now
Movies you find crap apparently: proposal, fast and furious, mall cop, taken, he’s just not that into you, madea goes to jail…and hangover.
I remember commenting on the prospects of J&J. Basically I feel that because of this yr’s oddly large # of films considered good with Best Actress contenders (usually BA’s films this decade aren’t up to par with the other 3 acting categories’ films), the Academy would want to nominate a Streep film to up her chances at winning; I think it certainly helped Winslet last year. It would be weird if she stuck out as the sole actress in a non-BP-nommed picture this year if, say, she was against some combo of Cornish, Mulligan, Sidibe, Cotillard, Farmiga, and Ronan, and then won.
I have a question: Does anyone know the longest supporting perf nominated ever? Because I was going over all the categories and making a wishlist of winners with Bright Star/Single Man dominating and Potter/Princess picking up techs, plus Streep, and couldn’t think of a supporting actor I feel enthused about. What if Whishaw committed so-called category fraud? He’s certainly not as much of a lead as Cornish and Plummer as Tolstoy in the Tolstoy movie seems to have gone supporting. Even last year, in Tropic Thunder I’m not sure Downey Jr. can be properly called supporting…
“Does anyone know the longest supporting perf nominated ever? “
Do you mean screen time, j?
Casey Affleck’s role in the Assassination of Jesse James was more important than Brad Pitt’s. Likewise Jamie Foxx was the main character in Collateral.
In retrospect it feels like Robin Williams’ scenes in Good Will Hunting were longer than the movie itself.
I guess it´s not about how long it is, it´s about how you use it!
No, Waltz DID give the best performance of the year, and it’s not even kind of debatable.
Ryan, what kind of box office figures are those? The xenophobic ones? Surely you’re not suggesting that the World Wide BO is irrelevant somehow? Give the real figures. Basterds is nearing $300 million with Japan and I think S. Korea still to open.
please, Mary B.
I’m always happy to tout worldwide box office but, whenever I do, invariably somebody will jump on me with a snark reminding us that the studio rarely sees a very high percentage of overseas earnings come back into the producer’s pockets. This is especially true for Inglourious Basterds, since Weinstein Co. only holds domestic distribution, having sold all rights to foreign markets to Universal UPI. Weinstein Co. doesn’t see a penny of ticket sales outside the US.
It’s typical to quote Domestic box-office as the primary tool for measuring dicks in the locker room, and it’s the most relevant number for the point I’m making — because global ticket buyers do not vote for the Oscar. Hollywood does, and the domestic numbers reflect American enthusiasm.
Besides, listing Inglourious Basterds as king of the mountain in the yearly tally of “serious” movies with high earnings was meant as praise, a badge of honor.
I think the worldwide box-office for IG is astonishing and it makes me tingle, but the global earnings simply are not relevant to this particular comment. (which was about Julie & Julia, and how it’s been embraced by a certain demographic that matches up nicely with a certain traditional AMPAS contigent.)
Sorry for stern comeback, but yeesh, “xenophobic”? Are you kidding me? You want to seriously label me as xenophobic? Do you ever read anything else I write about movies? Like when I say I expect 4 or 5 French films this year will be better movies than 4 or 5 of the eventual Best Picture nominees for Oscar?
If Lovely Bones doesn’t work out, Tucci looks like he could be good for Emmy: he “will star in an untitled HBO family drama about a politician rebuilding his life after a scandal.” (EW.com) Emmys love them some movie stars.
It’s typical to quote Domestic box-office as the primary tool for measuring dicks in the locker room
That’s a new one! I’m off to the gym — and pronto!
I suppose sarcasm is hard to detect on the internet. Next time I’ll add some thingies. Don’t take offense, Ryan.
But seriously, I do think that WW BO is relevant. Academy voters are not all domestic – there is a meaningful foreign voting contingent – and a film’s income isn’t all about how much it makes the principle studio, at least not in this case. It is also about how much a film benefits other elements of the industry. I don’t think anyone cares that the Ws had to sell off their rights because they mismanaged their company. The next producer or studio will just think about how much the movie generated and that those profits could have been his.
I think that a great WW BO also generates even more buzz and a greater sense of achievement. I don’t think that US voters are oblivious to that. So I wouldn’t discount it so fast. It really is how we should be thinking in today’s market. Maybe you could be the film analyst who leads the way.
Who cares what snarkers say.
I do get your point, Ryan, but for me I prefer to measure dicks in full blown mode just like I prefer to assess films.
Leave a reply