(Thanks to Todd Jorgenson)
Top Ten Films of 2008
1. SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE
2. MILK
3. THE DARK KNIGHT
4. THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON
5. THE WRESTLER
6. THE VISITOR
7. FROST/NIXON
8. DOUBT
9. WALL-E
10. HAPPY-GO-LUCKY
runners-up: David Fincher, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON; Christopher Nolan, THE DARK KNIGHT; Gus Van Sant, MILK; and Ron Howard, FROST/NIXON
runners-up: Mickey Rourke, THE WRESTLER; Frank Langella for FROST/NIXON; Brad Pitt, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON; and Richard Jenkins, THE VISITOR
runners-up: Meryl Streep, DOUBT; Sally Hawkins, HAPPY-GO-LUCKY; Kristin Scott Thomas, I’VE LOVED YOU SO LONG; and Kate Winslet, REVOLUTIONARY ROAD
I like seeing the first four runners-up. Wouldn’t it be fun if the Oscars showed us the rankings too? But the lists here are lengthy, so we’ll continue with the rest of the winners after the cut.
- Best Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger, THE DARK KNIGHT.
runners-up: Josh Brolin, MILK; Eddie Marsan, HAPPY-GO-LUCKY; Philip Seymour Hoffman, DOUBT; and Robert Downey Jr., TROPIC THUNDER - Best Supporting Actress: Viola Davis, DOUBT.
runners-up: Penelope Cruz for VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA; Marisa Tomei, THE WRESTLER; Taraji P. Henson, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON; and Rosemarie Dewitt, RACHEL GETTING MARRIED - Best Foreign Language Film: TELL NO ONE
runners-up: WALTZ WITH BASHIR, LET THE RIGHT ONE IN, I’VE LOVED YOU SO LONG, and GOMORRAH - Best Documentary: MAN ON WIRE
runners-up: WALTZ WITH BASHIR, YOUNG AT HEART, STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE, and DEAR ZACHARY: A LETTER TO A SON ABOUT HIS FATHER - Best Animated Film: WALL-E
runner-up: KUNG FU PANDA - Best Screenplay: Dustin Lance Black, MILK
runner-up: Simon Beaufoy, SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE. - Best Cinematography: Wally Pfister,THE DARK KNIGHT
runner-up: Claudio Miranda,THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON - WENDY AND LUCY won the Russell Smith Award, named for the late Dallas Morning News film critic. The honor is given annually to the best low-budget or cutting-edge independent film.
36 Responses for "Dallas-Fort Worth Film Critics"
Looks very much like the DFW Critics’ Oscar picks to me…
“Wouldn’t it be fun if the Oscars showed us the rankings too?”
The Oscar statuettes could be Gold, Silver, Bronze, Iron, and Wood.
And excellent Oscar picks they would be, too, Paul.
I’d be very happy.
I think Kristin Scott Thomas needs a boost. Quickly.
“The Oscar statuettes could be Gold, Silver, Bronze, Iron, and Wood.”
Actually Ryan, 4th place is Pewter. I have never found out what 5th place is.
Wally Pfister! Good choice.
Anne Hataway just won Toronto, Houston and Dallas. At last !!!
The race or best leading actress is now more open than i thought.
The race or best actress will be between Sally Hawkins and Anne Hathaway. Great !
The race for best actor will be between Sean Penn and Mickey Rourke. Great !
Slumdog and Danny Boyle, Heath Ledger, Wall E (animated movie), Man on wire, Penelope Cruz and Viola Davis are locked in.
Kate Winslet is probably out, they cannot nominate her in either category without giving her an Oscar this would be meaningless.
Another day, another Best Picture for Slumdog. I haven’t seen it yet but I’m wondering if its THAT good.
I just saw Milk and would not mind at all if it won Best Picture.
I woke up in the middle of the night, couldn’t sleep. Instead of counting sheep I decided to find out how many members some of the various critics associations have. Herewith:
Dallas/Ft. Worth Film Critics Assn: 33
Toronto Film Critics Assn: 34
Houston Film Critics Society: 18
Austin Film Critics Assn: 8
Phoenix Film Critics Society: 37
San Diego Film Critics Society: 12
Detroit Film Critics Society: 20
San Francisco Film Critics Circle: 24
St. Louis Film Critics Assn: 36
Southeastern Film Critics Assn: 50
I just thought it would be helpful to know a little more about the people behind these awards. If just a few critics really champion a film, they may have an effect.
Now I’m off to bed — goodnight.
Austin Film Critics Assn: 8???
That explains Dark Knight’s win.
Good point, Pierre (and great research!)
While all these groups no doubt have their own methods of voting and determining winners, we can see from the Dallas-Fort Worth results this morning that apparently not all critics associations require a majority to agree on a movie or performance before it can win top honors. The DFW critics offer an interesting transparency to their process by naming the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th place finishers. There’s no reason not to assume there could be 6th, 7th, and 8th place candidates too — they’re just not named by the DFW critics.
So (and this is pure speculation) it’s conceivable that Slumdog Millionaire was named the #1 movie by this group with perhaps no more than a dozen area critics choosing it as their favorite film. (with the runners-up receiving perhaps 7, 6, 5, 4 votes respectively. 12+7+6+5+3 = 33.
With this method, it’s not a like murder trial where all the jurors have to agree and need to be convinced by a foreman. The winner doesn’t even need more than half the votes — winners only needs a greater number of votes than any other rival.
Every group is bound to have its own rules and methods. We know the New York and LA critics use a system of 2nd and 3rd ballot elimination to gradually pare down the selections so that individual critics have to give up on their low-scoring favorites and throw their support behind the movies that survive each round of balloting (or something like that.)
Hey, I’m just in awe of cities like St Louis and Phoenix that have 3 dozen critics writing and broadcasting about movies. Impressive. But as Pierre has said, it seems likely that there’s a king of the mountain in each of these cities, top-dog critics whose seniority and esteem hold sway over their less famous peers.
Anne Hathaway!!!
Boooooooooooooring…!
Sorry, but I just feel kind of uncomfortable the indian fairy tale is sweeping nearly everything. C´mon, we need some competition, otherwise it will be the most boring awards ceremony since “The Return of the King”!
Just so you guys know (maybe you already do), the Dallas-Ft. Worth Film Critics always rank their Top 10 List from 1-10, It’s not really clear in this post, though. So, I believe Milk is #2, Dark Knight #3, and Button #4 and so on…
So my question is how many of these critics actually think Slumdog Millionaire is the best movie of the year and how many of them just agree that it’s one of the best?
Thanks Chase. When I put this post together, the Top 10 were formatted to display as numbered list, but the published article didn’t show up as intended. I’ve fixed it to show the ranking properly.
The runners-up in each category are also listed in order of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th place.
Too much Slumdog love!!!
Harry, we’ll never know how many. But theoretically it might have been as few as 10 or 11 out of 33. Or it could’ve been as many as 25.
All we know for certain is that more DFW critics voted Slumdog #1 than did for any other movie.
But it’s not Slumdog Millionaire’s fault. These Top 10s and Best of’s are rolled out in a set order, one right after another. We know this. There’s bound to be repetition. But I think each should have a right to choose what it feels is “best” and shouldn’t be denied that simply because it’s 10th to release its picks versus the fresh 1st. DFW is no more stale than the NBR. Yeah, it may be boring(ish) to some watchers, but should some other film get picked simply to mix it up? I don’t see how that’s fair. To the critics circle, the film(s), directors and actors.
And personally, what’s disappointing to me is seeing Danny Boyle’s film getting slammed (by some), simply for winning. How’s that?
Jen1,
I’m not going to slam the movie because I enjoyed it. I just think it’s kind of a light weight ultimately. Not in my personal top 10, not even in my top 15. And I don’t really consider this all that strong a year.
It’s good to see the movie succeed where it easily could have fallen off into obscurity and gotten lost in the mix. I just don’t see it being so head and shoulders above everything else to nearly every critic award out there.
Many people no doubt were a bit taken aback some years ago to learn that the Hollywood Foreign Press Association — a relatively small group compared with the hoopla of its awards presentations — has members who are relatively marginal (freelancers, part-timers, etc.). While wading through the websites of the various cities’ critic groups (see #10 above), I noticed a phenomenon that invites comparison: a significant presence of bloggers, freelancers, and critics for neighborhood newspapers and small local radio stations.
This is not to say that the views of such commentators aren’t worthy or relevant. After all, more than a few of those writing for major media outlets are woefully full of baloney. What I am saying is that, with these critics association awards, idiosyncratic and sometimes uninformed opinions can take on an aura of “weight” when shaded by the umbrella of “so-and-so film critics association.” At least with AMPAS or SAG there’s a larger pool of voters.
Of course, group-think can occur anywhere and anytime. I guess one of my points is that one would best be cautious whenever the voice of authority takes the podium.
Yes Slumdog is doing well, but most of these small crix prizes are unimportant. It lost New York to Milk and Los Angeles to Wall-E. And many films have been winners this year, like the aforementioned, plus Benjamin Button, Dark Knight and Wendy and Lucy. Slumdog does not have Saving Private Ryan or Brokeback Mountain or No Country for Old Men dominance, so the race is far from over for the Oscars. In fact, as we know from Ryan & Brokeback, it ain’t over til its over, the Academy somehow often manages to find ways to shoot itself in the foot even in the most fool-proof years. They’ve been getting it wrong since the beginning with Wings and Cimarron (over The General and City Lights) and thru the middle (Kane, Singin’, Searchers, 2001, Network, Apocalypse among many others losing) til now. At least they are consistent.
Very large pool of voters = many people without any more expertise than any average moviegoer, less knowledge of film in general among those masses of voters, more prejudices, more room for popularity contest.
Give me the New York or LA or San Francisco or Boston or even Broadcast film critics any day. These are people who actually see EVERYTHING, year in, year out, who have studied film, write about film, and understand film. Sure one can argue in the Guilds its the people who actually make the films, but, for example, with SAG, there are over 100,000 members, do you really think all that many work consistently or have the breadth of knowledge about film as critics and historians? No way. Friends who are actors discuss film with me in a very different way than critics, and, to be blunt and admittedly snobby, it generally just isn’t on the same level. Same with some of the Academy members I know, they vote with their hearts, not their heads, and even admit their prejudices and desires to vote for their friends. It therefore should be no surprise that these critics organizations thru the years have honored great work thru the years like Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, Grapes of Wrath, Kane, Treasure of Sierra Madre, Streetcar, High Noon, Cries and Whispers, All the President’s Men, Raging Bull, Reds, E.T., Do the Right Thing, Goodfellas, Pulp Fiction, Leaving Las Vegas, Fargo, LA Confidential, Saving Private Ryan, Traffic, Mulholland Drive, The Pianist, Brokeback and Letters from Iwo Jima & United 93, while the Academy chose, instead lesser films like The Great Ziegfield, How Green Was My Valley, Hamlet, An American in Paris, Greatest Show on Earth, The Sting, Rocky, Ordinary People, Chariots of Fire, Gandhi, Driving Miss Daisy, Dances with Wolves, Forrest gump, Braveheart, English Patient, Titanic, Shakespeare in Love, Gladiator, Beautiful Mind, Chicago, Crash and The Departed. Many more examples abound. And with imdb, the fanboys are gaining more influence than ever. Size does matter, usually in a negative way.
Ben, I hope you don’t feel I’m deemphasizing the value of critics groups relative to AMPAS or SAG, for example. I’m not. Looking back, as you have, at films favored over the years by critics, it’s clear that they tend to choose films both you and I value more than those chosen by AMPAS as representative of the best.
First, I’m saying that we should be cautious about what we hear and read from groups and organizations that attempt to define quality for us. Next, I feel it’s particularly important for us to realize that organizations with big-sounding names — especially those that are few in number — can easily make idiosyncratic, off-the-wall choices that nevertheless are made to have the look and feel of credibility. In a small group of arbiters, strong-willed individuals, particularly those whose podium may be bigger than the others, can exert a powerful influence regarding matters of quality and taste.
I hope I’m not the only one who seems to think that THE WRESTLER is a late bloomer and will get a flourish of awards?
A lot of these lists look like conceivable Oscar nominees. But, where is Melissa Leo? I think that maybe, just maybe, she can knock Winslet out for the fifth spot. I just hope she is not put in in favour of Scott Thomas.
Is Anne Hathaway really THAT good in Rachel Getting Married?
The more and more I analyze these awards this year, the more Slumdog Millionaire has a lop-sided chance to take that statuette award for best picture. Danny Boyle deserves some credit. 28 Day Later, 28 Weeks Later, Trainspotting are all great low-budget pictures.
Ben: I agree in general that crit groups tend to have the better slate of BP winners than the Academy. Heaven forbid I should stick up for AMPAS, an organization that has driven me crazy with its choices so many times, but I will point out that they have occasionally chosen some works that have withstood the test of time. All Quiet on the Western Front, It Happened One Night, Gone With the Wind (sorry Sasha!), Casablanca, All About Eve, On the Waterfront, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia, Midnight Cowboy, Godfathers I and II, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Annie Hall, Silence of the Lambs, Unforgiven, Schindler’s List, No Country for Old Men…
And crit groups sometimes make odd choices or choose works that age badly as well. NYFC never chose one of the Godfather movies for BP. (this was in the early 70s when NYF crits were on their foreign film kick, so Godfather lost to Cries and Whispers, and Godfather II lost to Amarcord–not bad choices if the Godfather movies had to lose, actually). But NYF crits also picked dreck like Going My Way, Around the World in 80 Days, and Kramer vs. Kramer as their BP winners (Kramer won over Apocalypse Now with the NYFC as well as the Academy).
I guess my point is that all groups that give out awards are going to have choices that age well over time, and choices that age badly over time. I will admit, however, that the Academy seems to have a longer list of questionable BP choices than most groups… unless you want to talk the Grammys!
Don’t get me started.
Alex – YES Anne is that amazing in ‘Rachel Getting Married’ and completely worthy of all the accolades, and is my favorite to win. I have not seen any of the other big films but I will this weekend. I am dying to see Rev Road and The Reader, and maybe Kate Winslet, who should have 2 Oscars in her possession by now, can persuade me Anne should not win. I also want to see Wendy and Lucy, and am surprised Michelle has not gotten much traction from the critics since they loved her performance. I am not happy that The Dark Knight has not gotten more Best Pic awards! My #1 of the year so far.
@ Jen1
You took the words out of my mouth.
A lot of the slamming, at least on this board, seems to be that Slumdog is winning a lot of BP’s with differant critics group. I doin’t get either how that’s fair on the film. It should be resented for being enjoyed? I mean granted not everyone has to like it, every film has its’ share of detractors, but to blame the predictability of the awards on a film is unfair. And quiet frankly, there is more versatility this year then there was last year. Milk and Wall-E have both provided some variation and the new wins fro TDK and Ben Button are also on their way. So Slumdog is far from sweeping anything. It’s only in the lead right now, and one film was going to come up on top one way or the other.
Also, there’s a lot of talk about how these smaller critics groups awards are not as relevant. And while that may be true, they are very telling. They show what movies and performances resonate with the audience. And at the end of the dya all voting parties are audience members. And even those voting members with extensive knowldge of film, still will vote for those films that resonate the best with them. And these smaller critics circle awards are showing that Slumdog is resonating the best with audiences. It’s an undeniable fact. I’ve said it before, a movie building this kinda of steam isn’t going to falter all of a sudden. There are detractors, but there are clearly people rallying behind it as well. The AMPAS is close to 6000 people, many of which know their craft and not film itself. Those people are not going to examine movies for their ingenuity or what have you, they’ll simply vote for the movies they enjoyed the most. How else do you explain Juno getting anything last year? Or Brokeback loosing in 05.
In short, while these critics awards are less significant, they are very important in pointing us in the direction things are going.
I really want to see Milk. There is nothing like watching great actors like Sean Penn praticing their craft. Josh Brolin and Emile Hirsch are damn good too. I can’t help but wonder where they all studied. A good acting school is worth it’s weight in gold. The key is to find one that caters to your individual needs. Not only do you need the basic tools for auditioning, scene study and the like, but you need a curriculum that works with whatever your schedule may be. Whether you work all day, go to high school or care for your kids, not everyone can study in the traditional way. Another acting program that works this way is Film Connection. http://www.film-connection.com/Acting.html The Film Connection’s acting program is affiliated with Joe Anthony studios and features valuable one-on-one mentoring. The best part is that they teach you the “business” part of show business. They are also available to anyone living in the United States and have financial aid assistance.
Hey Robert, thanks for the reply. Of course you are right that no group is perfect, but my point is that the Academy is inferior to the finer critics groups. You have chosen the absolute best of the Academy in order to defend them, but truth be told, if they have a 25% “accuracy” percentage, that is high, and that is poor. Also, even if you examine the very fine works you chose, not all are still considered the finest of their respective years. All About Eve is one of my all-time favorite films, but Sunset Boulevard is considered the greater movie. On the Waterfront is not considered as cinematically innovative as Rear Window (and somehow Cahiers du Cinema just chose Barefoot Contessa over both from 1954, wow!). Bridge on the River Kwai’s luster has faded due to its very-dated dialogue, and now 12 Angry Men, Paths of Glory and Sweet Smell of Success are all considered finer from 1957. Wild Bunch is considered better than Midnight Cowboy by international film critics. Barry Lyndon and Nashville are considered finer than One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. It is too early to tell with No Country for Old Men, but I suspect There Will Be Blood will eclipse it on the international stage fairly quickly. A so for the Godfathers, admittedly what I am about to say is a minority opinion, but while fine movies, I think they are probably the most overrated ever made, so I give kudos to New York for chosing Cries and Whispers and Amarcord (plus the Globes chose Chinatown, which is pretty much dead-even on the opinion scale with Godfather II, AFI rates Chinatown higher). And if you add international films like the critics rightfully used to, forget All Quiet on the Western Front, it loses to M; forget Silence of the Lambs, it loses to Raise the Red Lantern and Double Life of Veronique (and it is overrated to begin with, people elevate the film on account of Hopkins’ unique 25 minute performance). Even Gone with the Wind is at risk of not being “Best” Picture against Rules of the Game (and it is already ranked below Wizard of Oz and Stagecoach in international polls, which I think is unfair, GWTW has become underrated). Lawrence of Arabia is challenged by Jules and Jim. It Happened One Night (also overrated) doesn’t hold a candle to L’Atalante. Perhaps this doesn’t sound fair, but 8 times the Academy has nominated foreign-language films, and they are eligible, so it is fair. How Grand Illusion lost to You Can’t Take It With You is beyond me.
You are absolutely right about NY picking some bad ones, you chose some of their worst, and rightfully so. My point, however, is that overall the critics have much better track records than the Academy.
In fact, to be fair, in addition to the films you mentioned, I’ll name the other instances where the Academy chose great films: Best Years of Our Lives – but the winner should have been non-nominee Notorious (and AFI will say Its a Wonderful Life); The Apartment – but the winner should have been non-nominee Psycho (with runner-up Spartacus); The Sound of Music – that probably deserved it over Doctor Zhivago; The Deer Hunter – but world cinema consensus is more with non-nominee Days of Heaven (although Cahier just threw an unexpected bone to Deer Hunter); The Last Emperor probably deserved it; and that’s it, you named the rest of the best. Its a pretty poor percentage considering we’re talking 80 years. And its pretty poor when you consider all the great films that weren’t even nominated and often should have won. Cahier just picked Night of the Hunter as the second greatest film in world cinema, just behind Kane, but ahead of Rules of the Game. Wow. Not even nominated. Both the Academy and New York got that one very wrong by giving it to glorified TV film Marty, which should not have even been nominated against 5 other non-nominees: Hunter, Bad Day at Black Rock, The Ladykillers (#13 at BFI), Rebel without Cause, and the Globe’s Best Picture winner, East of Eden.
What’s also interesting is how much better the Academy could have done had they followed their directing choices. In all instances where there has been a split, the choice of the film that won Best Director is always better than the choice of Best Picture, which reveals how political the Best Picture choice often is – throw a bone to the most artistic film with Director, but protect public relations and give Picture to the film the audiences will be most pleased or impressed by. The sole exception to that rule since 1932 (since prior is difficult to judge) is The Godfather, which lost Director to Bob Fosse for Cabaret. Personally, I think Cabaret should have won Picture too, but I realize I am in the distinct minority, so I lose on that one. However, look at the rest, director/picture: Informer/Mutiny on the Bounty; Mr. Deeds Goes to Town/The Great Ziegfield (Modern Times totally ignored); The Awful Truth/Life of Emile Zola (pretty even there but Awful is more beloved); Grapes of Wrath/Rebecca; Treasure of the Sierra Madre/Hamlet; Letter to 3 Wives/All the King’s Men; A Place in the Sun/ An American in Paris (Streetcar & African Queen ignored); The Quiet Man/Greatest Show on Earth (High Noon & Singin’ in the Rain ignored); Giant/Around the World in 80 Days (Searchers ignored); The Graduate/In the Heat of the Night (Bonnie and Clyde ignored); Reds/Chariots of Fire; Born on the Fourth of July/ Driving Miss Daisy (another close one, both totally unworthy, Do the Right Thin ignored); Saving Private Ryan/Shakespeare in Love; Traffic/Gladiator; The Pianist/Chicago; Brokeback Mountain/Crash. The Academy truly disgraced itself with many of these selections. Some director winners even also won screenplay, so how do you lose picture?? I HATE the Oscars!!
Sorry, but I saw Slumdog tonight and was bored to tears.
What a complete snooze.
Overhyped to the nth degree.
Wall-E or The Wrestler will win best picture.
Slumdog is a pretentious bore.
Ben, you are an elitist and have no taste in movies.
You don’t think The Godfather should have won best picture huh?
There goes your credibility.
Truth
Here’s an article from the L.A. Times that states the D/FW Film Critics have picked the eventual Oscar Best Picture winner 4 out of the last 5 years. It’s an old article though and they have since gone on to pick 5 out of last 7.
http://tinyurl.com/4rb29a
Leave a reply