Resolution, justification, redemption and an impulse to play it safe define this year’s Best Picture nominees. All five of them are safe choices, which could mean progress in certain areas – a Bollywood-esque movie, a film where two men openly kiss in the first few scenes and no one really freaked out about it? Not only did they not freak out about it but most of the time it wasn’t even mentioned. The love story was not controversial but perfectly normal; at least in the circles I visit. Maybe in some regions of the country, it is still considered quite scandalous. Even still, Milk is a traditional biopic the way Slumdog is a traditional fairy tale. There is nothing particularly new about Frost/Nixon. Benjamin Button is modern technology but a traditional love story, albeit a fantastical one. And The Reader is like stepping into a comfortable pair of shoes. This is not to say the films aren’t spectacular, memorable, life-affirming or even Oscar-worthy, it’s just to say that this year, voters decided not to take the big risks.
One thing that is hard to accept about Oscar season but is as real as the sun coming up every morning is that the best picture race isn’t really about the five best films of the year. It’s the five best campaigns of the year. And for that, you really have to hand it to the professionals who delivered these five nominations. These people, the shadow figures in the background, are who drive the Oscar race. The voters might think they are really voting from their heart, but I’ve come to realize that it’s not unlike my favorite Citizen Kane line, “people will think…” “What I tell them to think.” These are beautifully orchestrated campaigns by very smart, driven and passionate people who never get credit. Harvey Weinstein gets some credit but even he is only part of what has driven the Weinstein films this year.
They are rarely thanked at the podium because no one wants to admit that the man (or woman, most of the time woman) who helped usher their project to the Oscars was a mastermind at targeting the right people at the right time. I marvel at what they do. They are required to remain stealth or else they lose their credibility. They are the main players in the Oscar race and most people have no idea. The collection of nominees at the end of the year are there because they are, in effect, corralled in. They are the choice horses, if you will, separated from the pack early because they look like winners.
To that end, it is like a horse race, even though people will tell you that’s insulting. Even Slumdog Millionaire, which really did come from nowhere, was put into that coral. It was a late-comer but those legs, there was no mistaking them for speed and stamina.
It isn’t necessarily that the films are chosen out of the gate (sometimes they are; four of the five nominees this year were), or chosen after they dazzle the public, it is what kind of run they are given once that choice is made. No one knows this but the publicists are the most interesting and hard-working people in the Oscar race. You saw a little bit of it when Mickey Rourke thanked his publicist for telling him what to say, what to do, what to fuck.
Once you know this about the Oscar race, though, a bit of the impossibility of things rubs away. For me, these days, what excited me after ten years of covering this stuff is when an impossibility hovers on the edges, like the potential for a comic book movie to be nominated for the first time, or the potential for a black lead actor and a black lead actress to win in the same year. Perhaps, though, that is a misguided passion – after all, the Oscar race is a business. It isn’t a form of entertainment.
What has been frustrating this year is that The Dark Knight and Wall-E didn’t make the Best Picture cut. Evolution, it seemed, had been cut at the knees. Both films seemed to have much to say about our world but especially Wall-E. Perhaps the popularity of The Dark Knight and Wall-E resulted in a weird sort of canceled vote; anyone not willing to vote for the more standard fare, those who wanted to go out on a limb, either chose Wall-E OR The Dark Knight. If there had been less division on those two films maybe one of them would be in the Best Picture race.
But what do we have now and where do they fit in to our modern world?
Slumdog Millionaire – a film that started out the year as the most shaggy underdog you’ve ever seen. But it was immediately apparent out of Telluride and Toronto that Slumdog was already leaving viewers breathless. It was helped by the odd turn of events that took many of the Oscar contenders out of Toronto. So much momentum for a contender can be deflated on one bad screening at the fest, so in effect, Slumdog had an empty track with no other horses racing against it. The only other strong contender at that time was The Wrestler, which was also gaining strong buzz early on.
Slumdog Millionaire is not, I don’t think, a film that is about hope and optimism against all odds. It isn’t about that at all. It is about fate. It is about keeping one’s fantasies alive. There is nothing realistic about the way that film tells its story; it is a fairy tale all the way. Why? Because it is written. Fate takes hold of Jamal and lifts him up out of poverty. This is, I believe, a Bollywood necessity; the way it was a necessity for us during the Depression. And now we need it too. It isn’t that the public has gripped tightly to Slumdog, because most of them haven’t seen it yet. Once they do, you can bet they will agree with the small circle of people who decide how these film awards will go. Although the times are good Slumdog, this is a film that would probably be in the Oscar race no matter what year it was released. Why it’s a winner is because it has no true formidable challenger.
One of the reasons is that, if you go by the theory that the Oscar best picture race is about the director, Danny Boyle’s time has come. The versatile director has been just outside Hollywood but has been developing a following for decades. Remember, he as once hailed as the Second Coming but then he did The Beach with Leonardo DiCaprio, it flopped, and it was back to square one for him. He has never done anything stale or unoriginal. This is part of what makes this film a winner. Little Miss Sunshine would have been a winner if its directors had been as revered as Danny Boyle. It is the key ingredient. Sometimes a film can win without the director being the star but most of the time, we need to celebrate the person (usually the man, the white, straight man) behind the vision.
That man might have been David Fincher if Danny Boyle hadn’t directed such a vibrant, popular film. Benjamin Button was in line to be this year’s big winner. It was hurt early on by being the so-called frontrunner. Therefore, the publicists on that movie had the year’s hardest job by far. Not only is the frontrunner used for target practice always but it is the movie voters usually say, “okay what else is there to root for?” No one likes to be a foregone conclusion. The films we vote for, root for, cheer for define who we are. And thus, you have to figure which film do voters want to be associated with? This year, no other film took a beating like Benjamin Button did from the chattering class. It was as thought they took all of their collective hate for Forrest Gump, Brangelina, and the Oscar race and heaped it on this movie. I have never seen anything like it in the ten years I’ve been doing this, which is odd considering David Fincher is like a God to many of the net geeks out there.
Ryan says that Benjamin Button will be the one film rediscovered and appreciated because it will need more time. I don’t think anyone could have predicted the kind of venom certain people would have for this film – and most of the complaints are twofold – it’s too much like Forrest Gump and it’s too long. The first one is irrelevant since most writers revisit similar themes in their work and no one says a damned thing about it (they just hate Forrest Gump that much), and if it’s too long for them, well that just makes them look bad. One needs the attention span of an adult to sit for three hours, it’s true, but if you’re paying attention to this film, it is anything but boring. Most people, most men let’s face it, were left untouched by it, perhaps because they couldn’t quite get into Brad Pitt as this character. But time will vindicate Benjamin Button, I have a feeling. And maybe the Academy will ignore the chattering class, after all, they nominated the thing for 13 Oscars, for chrissakes. That shows that in the moment they saw it, they loved it.
Milk is probably the film that could win if there was more time between now and ballots being turned in. I feel certain that the two true underdogs in this race are Milk and The Reader. Milk needed to find its way out of being an agenda movie and into its own artfulness. Funnily enough, I feel the buzz building for Milk in an organic way. I know it must sound funny to read this while ads for the film flash at you on top of the page but the truth is that those ads would probably be there anyway, no matter what film was up for this award and it’s probably true that no blogger will really trash a film that an advertiser has paid good money for — but I’ll let you in on a little secret; I don’t like publicly trashing movies. I never have, even before I was getting advertising. I don’t really think it’s my job nor my role in this race. You can certainly lodge that complaint against me if you’d like but I try to maintain the rule that I am not here to knock out any contender. I would never want to be that person. Too much is on the line. But back to Milk — though the film was professionally delivered into the Oscar race and was handled by one of the best in the business, it is also gaining momentum through word of mouth. But I feel it would need more time to overtake Slumdog and I’m not sure it could anyway.
What I loved about Milk was Sean Penn’s performance, for one thing. But also the natural way the love stories unfolded. This is a year where activism of that order is appreciated. We now know, because we’ve seen it in the Obama race, that one person really can make a significant difference in the world. Milk seems to be celebrating someone who’d mostly been forgotten. Whether the film wins big or not, Harvey Milk has been resurrected. People will know his name.
The Reader is the movie that has taken the most heat for taking The Dark Knight or Wall-E slot. The truth is, the film is strong because it was produced by Anthony Minghella and Sydney Pollack. It really is just the fact of the matter. Also, as I said, it was going to be a movie Academy members wanted to see because it featured Kate Winslet in the altogether having sex (quite erotic sex) with a 15 year-old. Think of what a slog it must be to be a voter. Half the movies sitting on the pile are too exhausting to contemplate watching, let alone actually watching. But The Reader was one, as opposed to depressing fare like Revolutionary Road, which offered the year’s only true eroticism. And there is always one in the bunch, isn’t there? The only other one that was close was Vicky Cristina Barcelona, a movie far too irritating to really be a strong contender. Kate has been naked and sexy before heading into the race, like in Little Children, but the eroticism factor is just one advantage to a film that had other strong advantages, like Minghella and Pollack, like Harvey Weinstein, like the Holocaust as subject matter. It is driven by Winslet’s remarkably strong performance. And it’s beautiful to look at. Finally, it’s one of the few of the five that is a potential tearjerker. But it isn’t really a movie for our time. It is a good old fashioned Oscar movie.
Frost/Nixon, speaking of good old fashioned Oscar movies, this is one. This film was like Michael Clayton, it just had its spot in the race and nothing was going to move it out. A friend of mine said to me, “the only two movies I want to see this year are Slumdog Millionaire and Frost/Nixon.” I think most people want to see Frost/Nixon and when I played the films for my family at Christmas the two they most liked were Slumdog and Frost/Nixon. Is it the most original movie ever made? No. Is the director well-liked and a star this year? Yep. The film is driven by Frank Langella’s brilliant incarnation of Richard Nixon. If it weren’t already celebrated on Broadway it would be celebrated now.
The five Best Pictures this year, admittedly, are nothing to write home about, meaning, none of them will really set the world on fire in ten year’s time. Most will fade in memory because the Oscars are a snapshot in time. This is where we were in 2008 (minus two very big films).
61 Responses for "The State of the Race: Happy Endings"
It´s not really about the five best campaigns, as you say. “Dark Knight” was campaigned like hell.
It is, as always, about the movies that appealed the most to the members. And they hardly ever take a risky choice. They are a pretty conservative group.
I agree about your appraisal about the film historic relevance of the five nominated pics- they won´t be remembered for a long time, maybe 1-2 years.
There have been races I was more enthusiasted about.
Being Brazilian, I have seen many movies just like Slumdog Milionaire in my country, set in the slum, poor children, etc… It didn´t have the effect on me that I thought it would. I was expecting something else, I guess.
I really wanted to see The Dark Knight nominated, but now, as it was left out, The Reader is the one that I like the most. I liked Benjamim Button when I saw it, but it seems to be fading in my mind already. The reader, on the other hand, is growing on me. Froxt/Nixon is good, but just that. I haven´t seen Milk yet. I´m looking foward to watching it.
Yep… its true.
But most of the movies that charm the entire world for long are never Oscar Winners, right from Citizen Kane to City of God.
So basically, whenever any film is awarded so many medals it causes people to take an aversion to it. They become overrated and when a viewer watches the movie – rating determines his judgement more than the filmi quality should.
So – if a film needs to stay at the minds of the people for long award it as less as possible.
My Bet: If TDK or WALL-E had been awarded like Slumdog has been, they would have been termed overrated and forgotten in a few years to come.
So finally here is the equation:
Less Awards = More Love from Fans! (Coz we always love the underdog, right!)
PS: My favourite movie of the year is TDK, and I am happy that it was not awarded much because now it will be cherished for years to come!
Danny Boyle has been my favorite director for years so I simply cannot believe he’s on the cusp of winning on Oscar. SO FREAKING WEIRD. The man who made quirky, inventive films like Millions, Sunshine, 28 Days Later and Trainspotting. It doesn’t seem real.
Hopefully David Fincher gets one soon, for a better movie than the one’s nominated for this year.
“The first one is irrelevant since most writers revisit similar themes in their work and no one says a damned thing about it (they just hate Forrest Gump that much), and if it’s too long for them, well that just makes them look bad.”
I know plenty of people who love Forrest Gump but hated Benjamin Button all the same. It’s not just the same themes being revisited, it’s the entire structure right down to the hummingbird standing in for the feather. Martin McDonagh revisited several themes of his when he made In Bruges (particularly the dysfunctional family/friendship) but it was still able to stand on its own. I could listen to the two characters without filling in lines from The Lonesome West, for instance. But with Button, I could close my eyes and add “Life is like a box of chocolates” and I seriously wouldn’t know the difference.
It’s also true that all five films have non-linear plot structures. They are all either being told in flashbacks, whether it’s through diaries or interviews or late night tape recordings or just good old fashioned flashbacks.
“The best picture race isn’t really about the five best films of the year. It’s the five best campaigns of the year.”
That line is gold.
Campaigning wise the films which were most prominent
Revolutionary Road (months before the movie landed)
Benjamin Button (months before the movie landed)
Milk (months before the movie landed)
TDK (did its bit when the buzz was high)
Slumdog (it did not really need to spend money I think)
The Reader (though it joined in late)
Biggest Winner – The Reader
It joined the race late but the only reason for the existence of this film was Oscar, there was not a chance in heaven it would make money, nude Kate Winslet or no. And they got the nomination, in that respect, the most successful Oscar film last year.
Biggest Loser – Rev Road
Again specially tailored for Oscars but it failed with the Academy big time despite splashing with ads everywhere.
Most Honorable Nominee – Frost/Nixon
You’d be hard-pressed to realize that a campaign was even going on, the 1 movie which had the fewest ads running.
Worst Campaign – Wall-E
Blame it on Pixar. It seems they honestly didn’t want the nomination. Look at TDK, once they knew that the critics were backing, they started a pretty good campaign. But nothing at all from Wall-E, they knew critics had a love affair with it since Summer but they couldn’t be bothered. Almost too complacent to think like ‘we know we have made a classic, if they want to award us fine, but we wont beg for it.’ They missed the nomination anyhow.
Campaign whores(almost begging)
Rev Road (1st because did not succeed inspite of all the begging)
Benjamin Button (went too hard even though it was not exclusively Oscar, there was chance for box office which was proven correct, it was a sleeper hit)
Milk (not quite as bad as the other too but still excessive)
I love the slate of films this year. I expected this type of whining from the Batman fans, but remember that you are the only people who think this year’s mix of films is stale. I do feel bad for you, but perhaps you shouldn’t have put so much hope in an action movie where the superhero suddenly flies to Hong Kong to kick some ass. What was the explanation for this? I believe it was something to do with Asian marketing, but it was totally unnecessary to the convoluted plot. The film is also a sequel that assumes, erroneously, that all viewers are familiar with the world of Batman, that they know the Joker will die in a subsequent film, that they know Batman’s personal history, that they can pick up all the references to previous films. This shows it was a film designed not for the average moviegoer, but for Batman FANS.
WALL-E was brilliant, but I am tired of hearing nearly every year that an Animated film should be in the Best Picture race. It is not fair for live action films to have to compete with animated films, because an exciting animated world is so much easier to create! It’s just cheating! Could a fantastic underwater fish journey have been shown to us in live action? Or rats running a restaurant? Or robots dancing in space? Or a fat, middle-aged family man being a superhero? (Actually, the last one could have been shown in live action, and then we might have seen what an incredibly dull film The Incredibles really was.) Let’s just accept once and for all that they created the Best Animated Category for a reason. The great animated films can have their moment of glory, and there doesn’t have to be an uneven competition between two entirely different artforms.
Of the four Best Pic nominees I’ve watched plust TDK & Wall-E, I have to say The Reader left the deepest impression on me. You just feel the emotions expressed or hidden all the way through till the very end. It’s not a movie without flaw but it’s the ONE I’ll vote for if I have the chance to vote for my favorite film of 2008. I know there are lots of subject matters that really bugs people. I urge you to put everything aside and just feel with the characters be it Hannah or Michael then you’ll appreciate the beauty of this film.
A few words on other potential best films
Slumdog Millionaire: People tend to focus on the bright side of it but I felt rather sad at the end. But thanks to Jai-Ho which lights everything up. It’s probably the most entertaining of all those potential best film but a rather simple-minded one/unrealistic. Slow motions that appear from time to time looks silly.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button: A beautifully shot film. Excellent techs but the storyline is not intensive enough. To make things worse, it’s not that great if you realize its similarity with Forrest Gump but still not a bad one.
Milk: Well… it’s a biopic film. I think the writer/director tried to squeeze in too much stuff and there’s really no central story line. It could have been a great film if it’s more focused.
The Dark Knight: Seriously… I don’t understand why many people are crazy about it. It’s an okay superhero movie. For me, it’s all about Heath Ledger!
Wall-E: Well… Well… It’s a cute animated film but again fail to capture my heart. I just can’t stop thinking about Space Odyssey 2001 when they arrived at the mother boat. I think pixar needs a really creative script or fewer and fewer people will be anticipating their films.
Why We Still Watch The Oscars…
Because we hope against hope that the Academy will get it right again, like back in the late ’60s and into the ’70s where the little gold man went to films like The French Connection, Annie Hall and Midnight Cowboy. These may seem like obvious choice now, but back then it was shocking to have a gritty and unrelenting cop drama, a comedy and an X-rated pic take the gold.
But of course that was then and this is now. Since the ’80s the Academy has fallen back into their safe and dubious ways, awarding films that seem respecable enough but hardly qualify as the best film of the year. Does anyone really think that Ordinary People was the best film of 1980? Especially when it was up against Raging Bull. Or Chariots Of Fire? The English Patient? Shakespeare In Love? A Beautiful Mind?
They all seem so pedigreed and safe. This year we have Slumdog leading the pack, which isn’t the safest of the lot (hello Reader), but it doesn’t push any boundaries either – something The Dark Knight did.
I know that Oscar-bashing is de rigeur and nostalgia is a dangerous game, but I can’t help thinking that one day The Oscars will again be about quality, excitement and innovation (like the Foreign Film and Documentary categories!!!)
“It´s not really about the five best campaigns, as you say. “Dark Knight” was campaigned like hell.
It is, as always, about the movies that appealed the most to the members. And they hardly ever take a risky choice. ‘
You hit the nail in the head. It`s all about the target group and this particular target group votes for particular kind of movies. That won`t change. They`ll always prefer Holocaust, biopics, long suffering wives, physical and mental disabilities, hookers with hearts of gold over movies and roles that don`t fit their comfort zone. Heck, I wouldn`t be surprised if Inglorious bastards got a nod next year because it has sbadass Jews killing Nazi`s in inventive ways or something. I mean, borefest like Munich (OK, maybe the movie was better than sedating presence of Eric Bana but I couldn`t keep my eyes open for long) made the cut, and they must`ve realy liked Defience since it got a score nom or something (but probably was overshadowed by Holcaust movie du jour The reader – better campaigning of you like, and naked Winslet certainly justifies multiple viewings).
IMO, all 5 nominess are forgettable and this is from a Slumdog fan. I love this movie but I know i`ll forget about it. Still, it`s the best Momentum Movie or Best Picture Nobody Will Remeber that they voted for in years.
Everyone knows The Reader is a sloppy made film that has no idea what it is trying to say right? Like I’m not the only one who was laughing by the end at parts of it?
To Londoner:
Are you an Academy member by chance?
Because the reasons that you give above for TDK’s and WALL-E’s ‘deserved’ (in your eyes) exclusion from the Best Picture list respectively are the exact kind of narrow-minded biases that many suspect the Academy harbour.
Do you seriously think that visuals are all an animated movie has to offer in comparison to a live action movie even when critics and people who actually watch ALL films with an open mind have no problem in placing great animated movies alongside their overall favourites, live action or otherwise? Tell that to the LA critics that they were wrong in bestowing WALL-E their best film award. Heck tell the AFI that they were bonkers in allowing the people who voted to place SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS in the top 100 American films of all time.
Your point on TDK would be fine if it wasn’t known that the Academy had nominated action movies before including those with a number of ‘implausible’ action scenes (RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, THE FUGITIVE). It may have been flawed but that had nothing to do with it’s snub and you know that (whether you liked the movie or not).
I agree with you Londoner in everything you’ve said/write.
About the Academy sometimes I think they are conservative as you say but when I see films like No Country for Old Men winning and There Will Be Blood nominated for best pic (two violent and dark films critized by a lot of the general audiences because of the endings) I think that we can’t clasified them so easily and that each member vote according to their tastes each year without thinking about what people think.
This year, no other film took a beating like Benjamin Button did from the chattering class. It was as though they took all of their collective hate for Forrest Gump, Brangelina, and the Oscar race and heaped it on this movie.
Still mystifying to me because
a) I hated Forrest Gump and found the similarities so superficial that they had to be pointed out to me before I even noticed them;
b) Brangelina means absolutely nothing to me, one way or the other; and
c) I love the Oscar race,
yet I managed to love The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
“About the Academy sometimes I think they are conservative as you say but when I see films like No Country for Old Men winning and There Will Be Blood nominated for best pic (two violent and dark films critized by a lot of the general audiences because of the endings)”
What I really ask myself: If the critics and the guilds wouldn´thave praised such films as “No country” or “Blood”, would they have had a chance for the best picture-nominees they finally got?
Or, to put it that way: Aren´t the Academy members more likely just follow those critics darlings than discover them on their own?
An edgy film like “No country” or “TWBB” without all this immens precursor-support = almost certainly no best picture nominee!
Ryan Hoffman – I, too, laughed at parts of “The Reader”, much to the distress of some crying woman sitting a few seats from me. It was the dialogue – some of it was so terrible, particularly when Hannah insists on calling the boy kid, I couldn’t help but gaffaw.
And Londoner – This year’s list of films is stale – terribly, terribly stale. Admitedly, I am comparing them to “There Will Be Blood” but still – what a mix of (with the exception of slumdog) humdrum films.
baertt: I myself would place WALL-E at the top of the list of films for this year. Did you notice that I said it was brilliant? I just don’t want to see two different artforms competing in the same category. I wouldn’t want to see an animated short film competing in the documentary short or live action short categories either.
I don’t know what you think I know, but I did think the flaws were the reason TDK was snubbed. It was also a sequel, which other action films, e.g. Raiders, Star Wars, The Fugitive, were not. Therefore it can’t claim to be as original as them.
There Will Be Blood is my favorite film of the decade, and it isn’t fair to compare it to this year’s films. I believe the slate this year holds up well when compared to all other years this decade, except the last. (Btw, a film doesn’t have to be “edgy”, i.e. “violent”, to leave an impact in my mind).
I just have to say that I did not enjoy No Country or TWBB last year. And the fact that they took up 17,18,19 nominations last year (can’t remember), it took it’s toll on me while watching the telecast. They may be ‘masterpieces’ to lots of people, but not to me. They bored me.
I’ve loved so many more films this year, and lots of them are nominated. So, I’m quite pleased.
Londoner, a film is a film, animation is not a different art form, its a different technique and very frankly live action & animated movies are coming closer together with CGI getting better and better. The level of photo-realism that Wall-E managed was high. And about the ease of making animated films, Wall-E was seven years in the making, with almost 3 years work on the script and cost 180 million dollars to make. It was without a doubt the hardest film to make this year.
About the overall slate of nominees, it is dismal and Sasha is right when she says that no film will last, least of all Slumdog, which you can be sure would disappear from people’s memory faster than you can open the envelope and scream out ‘Best Picture goes to’. Milk which I believe to be the best of the lot, is also not brilliant and ground-breaking and might have a following as a decent best Best Pic nominee. The Reader I couldn’t say since very few people have seen it/want to see it, but it might find a niche to last as a well-made middle-brow picture. Frost/Nixon is forgotten even now, its almost like it doesn’t exist, nobody talks about it, nobody cares. Button might find a place in preposterous movie annals but I’m not sure.
The one film that I believe will last the longest and will be still seen after a decade’s time is Wall-E. It is truly one for the ages.
In order for campaigns to succeed, they need to connect with people.
For example: Obama did, McCain didn’t.
Hollywood wasn’t going to give due recognition for a Batman movie or a Pixar film, but did for a pretentious, so called prestige Holocaust film.
Quote: “it’s not a different art form, it’s a different technique”. You can split hairs as much as you want, but I call this different technique “cheating”. Just as athletes who use steroids are cheating. Of course, works of art should not have to compete with each other in the first place, but since they do, we should try to stick to some rules and make this as fair as possible. An “anything goes” attitude just makes the whole competition ridiculous. And CGI should also be frowned upon in live action films if it is used gratuitously.
I don’t disagree that WALL-E is a superb example of its craft. It should be pleased to join the ranks of Nemo, Ratatouille and especially Spirited Away. I’m glad we have a category to recognise these films, which might otherwise have been overlooked.
Always interesting to read your thoughts, Sasha.
The thing I keep going back to is that the Oscars seem to be aimed at the mainstream. A generalization, to be sure. I believe that Oscar voters as a whole represent mainstream views and taste and, in their choices, implicitly or even explicitly indicate what’s on people’s minds — or what they feel should be on our minds.
Quality filmmaking is only occasionally what Oscar is primarily about. Although we hear stories about ballots being filled out quickly or by the relatives or employees of AMPAS members, Academy voters as a whole seem to take their roles seriously and usually end up taking a centrist point of view. Because of this, those of us whose views are not centrist, or those who prefer to evaluate films in primarily cinematic terms, risk being disappointed with Academy choices.
The ad campaigns, then, in most cases merely serve to heighten the ironies and absurdities of this particular awards phenomenon.
In another thread, Paul Outlaw said he views the Oscarcast as a social event. To me, that’s the best approach and provides the best chance for a “happy ending.”
“I just have to say that I did not enjoy No Country or TWBB last year. And the fact that they took up 17,18,19 nominations last year (can’t remember), it took it’s toll on me while watching the telecast. They may be ‘masterpieces’ to lots of people, but not to me. They bored me.”
If John is an example of a large group of people then this year isn’t that diferent from the last one, five “boring” films with no connection with the general audiences.
What can I say, Londoner? You’re just plain wrong. Did you know that Sergei Eisenstein regarded Walt Disney as the only true filmmaker? That’s Sergei friggin’ Eisenstein, one of the single most significant filmmakers and theorists the art form has ever known. Your absurd categorization makes as much sense as separating cinema verite from film noir. It doesn’t matter how the world in the picture is created, all that matter is how good it is. And if WALL-E is one of the best films of the year, it should be treated as such. Don’t treat it like Shirley Temple by giving it a “special Oscar.” That’s just patronizing.
And red_wine, Slumdog will last as part of the canon of Danny Boyle, one of the most dynamic and interesting filmmakers working today. Even if it isn’t regarded as highly as Trainspotting. Likewise Benjamin Button, a film I disliked made by another contemporary filmmaker I have enormous respect for. Both will certainly live longer than The Reader and you know it.
By the way, to add to my above post, the question of why the Oscars seem to be suffering from lack of public appreciation would entail another, much longer discussion.
I don’t know how many of you are film makers, I live in Lima, Peru and I have made 3 short films (I’m 26 years old). I respect animation a lot and I respect Eisenstein opinion and I think Wall-E is a great film but you can’t compare the merits for doing a live action film and animation because in the latter you do almost everything in the computer, you don’t really direct actors or set the lights or do the number of takes necesary to have your scene right and you don’t have the factor of time (the trauma of loosing the light of day in a day of filming).
So, in my position of an aspiring film maker I do think there is a difference between the two of them.
Also, I agree that it’s appropriate to evaluate an animated film with live-action films. A film is a film is a film. . . .
Just as a documentary or foreign-language film can transcend its manmade, arbitrary classification, so too can a cartoon.
Quote: “You’re just plain wrong. Did you know that Sergei Eisenstein regarded Walt Disney as the only true filmmaker?”
This means that even Sergei friggin’ Eisenstein can sometimes be plain wrong.
Quote: “Your absurd categorization makes as much sense as separating cinema verite from film noir.”
Now you’re being absurd. It is perfectly clear that cinema verite and film noir both belong in the live action category and do not have to be separated. Make more sense, please.
Obviously, I am not the only person who thinks this way. If you think the live action and animated shorts should be thrown into one category, please argue with the Academy about it, not with me.
“That’s just patronizing.”
It’s a matter of perspective. I would argue that the existence of these two (no, three) separate short categories allows for more shorts to be recognised. Similarly, the Best Animated category certainly allows many more animated films to be recognised alongside films containing, you know, live actors.
Perhaps you would be happier if this category was presented closer to the Best Picture announcement, maybe just before it. You can argue with Sid Ganis about that. I would support you.
“This is where we were in 2008 (minus two very big films).”
You said it. 10 years down the road, most people may not remember “Button” or “Frost/Nixon” (and DEFINITELY NOT “The Reader”), but I’m sure many will remain baffled at how neither “WALL-E” nor “The Dark Knight” managed best picture nominations.
“a documentary or foreign-language film can transcend its manmade, arbitrary classification”
Pierre, I know you love film, but I do believe it’s not just the classifications that are “manmade”, but also the films themselves…
But the main problem I have with your sentence is that you say “a” film can transcend… In other words, one really good film can break its boundaries. But unlike other sports, deciding whether a film is good or not is purely arbitrary. That is why this competition needs to lay down some strict rules and boundaries. All animated films should belong in the same place, regardless of how good they are. Reduced vagueness will hopefully lead to fewer complaints about the arbitrary nature of the competition every single year.
I was delighted when they created the Best Animated category some years ago. I hoped people would then stop complaining about the unfortunate omission of Animated films from the ceremony in most years, but no, some people will never be pleased.
P.S. Let me reassure people that I am not a member of the Academy. I have no idea if they share my “prejudices” (as one poster put it) about the Best Film category. I do know, however, that they share my prejudices in the Best Short categories.
Londoner…you’re an idiot. Thank you.
Great comeback Red, well done.
Live action and animated are not the same. There is not going to be best actor or actress nomination for an animated film, or editing or cinematography. Read my post above please. The merit in doing it is diferent.
Sooner or later, people will have to accept that if even Wall-E, Ratatouille and Spirited Away didn’t make the list, no Animated film will. Similarly, when was the last time a Doc Feature broke out of its category and got into the Best Picture race? My memory is hazy.
It makes perfect logical sense to me that the Feature Films should be categorised the same way as the Short Films. Cut out the vagueness of this competition as much as possible.
Red: Thank you, too. I was worried some hothead would call me a “bigot” for my “prejudice” against Animated films, but I’ll be satisfied with “idiot”. Phew.
Red: Thank you, too. I was worried some hothead would call me a “bigot” for my “prejudice” against Animated films, but I’ll be satisfied with “idiot”. Phew.
Bigot, bigot, bigot!
(First time I’ve been obliquely referred to as “some hothead.”)
Nothing wrong with being a hothead! Passion makes this competition more entertaining. Sometimes I’m just too logical for my own good. *sigh*
I see some of these films as my best friends as well.
Films are people too, you know…
First, Londoner, I do not think you’re an idiot, and I think I understand where you’re coming from. I’d much rather see a separate category for animated films than run the risk of having them get swallowed up by feature films.
In a perfect world, the best animated films would stand on equal footing for consideration next to the best films of all kinds — foreign, documentary, whatever.
Just wanted to say, Sasha, that this is my favourite of your season updates. Kudos.
It seems that no one is a film maker here or no one gives a damn about my post
buuuu
@ Londoner,
was there ever one Doc Film nominated for Best Picture?
im not sure if there is one…
hopefully somebody will find it out… that would be interesting…
Londoner: The official titles of the Short categories are:
Best Live Action Short Film
Best Animated Short Film
Best Documentary Short Subject
Thus, the shorts have no choice but to be categorized by medium.
The better analogy for animated films competing in the Best MOTION PICTURE Of the Year category would be the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film. Both WALL-E and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon were eligible for Best Picture as well as their respective genre categories. Thus, if WALL-E had truly been one of the best films of the year (I think it was), then it should have rightfully earned its spot in the BP lineup.
Alfredo, I do care, I really do!
You’re right, live action and animation are not the same. They each have their respective challenges and benefits. I would add that, even within the area of live-action or feature-length films, there exists debate regarding the relative worth and difficulties in producing dramas vs. comedies.
It just never stops. . . .
There are only three genres:
1) Musicals (live action, animated, documentary and short subject)
2) All About Eve
3) Everything else.
I don’t dispute that films like ‘No Country’ or ‘TWBB’ are technical masterpieces. I acknowledge the craft that went into them, for sure. I just didn’t like the movies as movies; wasn’t entertained by the stories, and their masterful craftwork didn’t pull the wool over my eyes. I was not bowled over or “enriched”.
But I FELT that from several films in the Top 5 this year.
Can’t explain emotions, I just feel them. Everyone is different.
“Batman fans” – what a term. Lord save us.
it’s ‘curious’…i think there have been many people who were astonished with Fincher’s movie…first, it’s not a traditional love story…it’s an art and essa movie made with a big budget and an amazing visual craft…it’s something has happened with Fincher’s movies since Seven, and so nobody has recognizez, or a few have seen the underlying sight…Like in the past with Hitchcock…Second, as the writer was Roth, and the structure was similiar to Forrest gump people got blind…this one soften the dark points of the story,it’s a ‘nice’ picture (but not bad), TCBB is dark and melancholic as tender and understanding (the attitude reflected in that deeply emotive sequence helping to his dying father to watch the twilight in the sea: ‘let the anger go’)…it tears the heart, at least mine, it’s a very complex film…the feeling you can be touched with if you leave apart your panic rooms, your games, and you accepted there will always be a zodiac killer without face in a life you can control at all…here in TCBB you can touch that naked vulnerability…
Well-written, Alex. I agree with a lot of your post.
SASHA STONE, THIS SITE OF YOURS IS UNBELIEVABLY BIASED TOWARDS THE READER. THANK GOD THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY OF BEST PICTURE, DIRECTOR, SCREENPLAY AND SO ON FOR THAT. HOWEVER, YOUR BIASED ATTITUDE TOWARDS KATE WINSLET IS LIKE A WINSLET FANBOY AND YOU SHOULD BE PROUD OF THAT WHEN SHE TAKES THE AWARD ON OSCAR NIGHT WITHOUT DESERVING IT. EVERY SINGLE SIDE IS COVERED WITH THE READER ADS AND YOU ARE PROBABLY ONE OF THEM WHO TAKES MONEY FROM HARVEY WEINSTEIN TO SUCCESSFULLY THROW IT IN THE EYES OF THE VISITORS OF THIS SITE.
I don’t care that Benjamin Button is similar to Forrest Gump and I don’t care that it’s long. The film absolutely refuses to engage in any penetrating character development, keeping us totally outside of Ben’s head, but I don’t think it necessarily needed that either. What it needed was something. Something to give the film a point. Something to make me feel like I was watching a film that had a reason for existing besides a director saying, “Look at all the pretty images I can think up and put on screen!”
This film is constantly overrated on this web site, and ultimately, I personally doubt that anyone will go back and discover its depth in the future. Because there’s nothing to discover. The film just feels weightless.
This film is constantly overrated on this web site
What, by four (at most) people commenting? Do you actually read this site? Benjamin Button is the most reviled film of the season here.
I love the slate of films this year. I expected this type of whining from the Batman fans, but remember that you are the only people who think this year’s mix of films is stale. I do feel bad for you, but perhaps you shouldn’t have put so much hope in an action movie where the superhero suddenly flies to Hong Kong to kick some ass. What was the explanation for this? I believe it was something to do with Asian marketing, but it was totally unnecessary to the convoluted plot. The film is also a sequel that assumes, erroneously, that all viewers are familiar with the world of Batman, that they know the Joker will die in a subsequent film, that they know Batman’s personal history, that they can pick up all the references to previous films. This shows it was a film designed not for the average moviegoer, but for Batman FANS.
WALL-E was brilliant, but I am tired of hearing nearly every year that an Animated film should be in the Best Picture race. It is not fair for live action films to have to compete with animated films, because an exciting animated world is so much easier to create! It’s just cheating! Could a fantastic underwater fish journey have been shown to us in live action? Or rats running a restaurant? Or robots dancing in space? Or a fat, middle-aged family man being a superhero? (Actually, the last one could have been shown in live action, and then we might have seen what an incredibly dull film The Incredibles really was.) Let’s just accept once and for all that they created the Best Animated Category for a reason. The great animated films can have their moment of glory, and there doesn’t have to be an uneven competition between two entirely different artforms.
That was utter bollocks.
Better The Dark Knight or WALL-E than the same old, same old Oscar-bait crap over and over again.
very nice Annie Leibovitz’ pics of the nominees and the directors at Vanity Fair…
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/fe…ortfolio200903
Unbelievable. Yet another shameless plug for a film that was totally overhyped, and lazily-written, but the Kool-Aid drinker just won’t stop campaigning for the movie, or maybe just for herself.
Hey Sasha, why not try actually addressing the numerous other complaints about The Curious Case of Benjamin Button instead of setting up stawmen and spewing patronizing crap like, “Oh, only an adult can sit through its running time and understand this movie.”?
Ugh, it’s sickening.
Very disappointing piece Sasha. Slumdog would have been there without a campaign, The Reader maybe not, but you cant lump all 5 films in one basket because you wanted 2 others in the group
And I take offence about Button. it was BORING. Now, i CAN sit through a good 3 hour movie- its not about the length, dont be so patronising. Cant you accept that many dont like this film? Not because of the venom (I went with very positive feelings and high expectations) but because of the film…
I hate to go off topic here, but has anyone ever counted the number of times that a Best Actress winner has come from either a Best Picture Winner (or nominee) compared with the amount of times a Best Actor has come from a BP Winner (or nominee)… it would be interesting to see as the impression is that the Best Picture contenders tend to be more male-driven…
Thank you Sasha for this piece. I think people are tired of defending Benjamin Button and there have been many, many posts on this site
offering intelligent rebuttals to the extreme level of unfounded hatred against that movie. You were spot-on about pinpointing where this venom comes from. I respected and appreciated certain aspects and elements of the movie but I can’t say I loved the movie.
This is coming from a supporter of not just Brad & Angelina…but the
deeper truth which came from complex moral analysis..by resisting the brainwashing and insanity that came from a false accusation that would so profoundly poison the minds of the masses. It has everything to do with the collective hatred for Brad & Angelina, the similarities to another picture which has become disparaged over time Forrest Gump, and etc. I can understand why it may not be everybody’s cup of tea but the dislike for this movie is over the top and outrageous. Considering the crap Hollywood dishes out and the lesser movies that have been nominated in the past, I find this dislike of Benjamin Button and the level of insults quite bizarre except I know where it comes from. I hate to bring this another point up again, but my friends and I were right about an important matter.
Brad denied cheating once again or attempted to. Of course, his words were again distorted and edited to prevent the complet message from coming out. The media misportrayed, attacked, and created a negative spin once again because their plan for framing them over a false confession using misquotations and fabrications inserted in their interviews didn’t work. In fact, Brad had been out of the loop for months so he wasn’t even fully aware of the false premise of a confession and his ex’s role in that. He was conned again into thinking they had made peace over that false accusation.
I hope he discovers the full extent of the truth as soon as possible
but he knows he is powerless against the world who has become too brainwashed and corrupted by a wrong viewpoint created by a piece of gossip that clashed with reality. As time goes by, more and more idiotically believe and spread the lies, contradictions, and misconceptions. Who benefits and profits? The media, his ex, and the devil.
Benjamin Button is by far the most hated Oscar contender and one of the most hated movies this year. Benjamin Button and The Changeling have been the target of the most insults. The personal hatred has everything to do with that. Back in 2006, Babel was the movie who had the worst bandwagon against it. Every release of theirs has to suffer from a backlash. I know it is more complicated than that because I am a fan of theirs but I don’t like all of their movies but I can separate my professional and personal perspectives.
People will always be harsher towards their films and performances
and it is not fair considering the source of their contempt. They did not victimize nor did they mistreat your “sweetheart” and your darling who earned that title and popularity through Brad is nothing but a monstrous opportunist, fraud, and liar. This pseudo-scandal has elicited pseudo-morality and self-righteousness. Most of the real scandals especially related to that specific sin never caused that hysterial reaction because the truth is that most of the world is not offended by it unless it happens to them. I can’t stand charlatans and
corrupt people who pose as pious. Fans of the films and most of the people who understand where this bias is coming from are too scared of the rabid haters to speak out. Jesse James escaped some of that because it received a lower critical rating and it didn’t receive the Best Pic, Best Director, and Best Actor noms.
I also don’t have the time to explain the nominations for Benjamin Button were an evil calculation designed to feed into the backlash. It seems like good recognition but it is a curse in disguise. Their nominations are slot-fillers. Even I have to admit, their performances were fine but not Oscar-worthy. Another excuse to not just intensify the backlash, get the extra publicity towards the Oscar blitz, but to also throw out nominations so they will have an excuse to snub them in the future for more worthy performances. I knew they would have been better off if they had gotten snubbed. Benjamin Button shouldn’t have received all of those major nominations. It is not reflective of either Pitt or Fincher’s best work or talent.
The bandwagons on the web are getting out of control and are becoming more uncivilized and irrational. Why should the Londoner have a clique of posters attacking it because it is not on The TDK and
Wall-E bandwagon? I can give an example of different bandwagons
on every thread for every article. I see this every time, where a mob mentality develops against one or two people for a diffference of opinion and for not following the crowd. The insults towards that person are ruthless and are just crossing the line. I was secretly happy that TDK was snubbed though I would have preferred it to The Reader. The Slumdog backlash has also been disturbing. I know this was one long, disorganized rant going off in different tangets.
It will probably piss people off but I just want to bring attention to a few points.
More worthless strawmen. Personal hatred towards Brangelina? Spare me the ridiculous excuses……..
More worthless strawmen. Personal hatred towards Brangelina? Spare me the ridiculous excuses……
Robert Hamer, Sasha is posing a few reasons why some people might not like Benjamin Button. That doesn’t mean those are the only possible reasons.
You don’t think some people hate the movie because thay can’t stand Brad Pitt? You should meet my brother-in-law. He’s a real person; not a straw man.
Spare me your reactionary hissy fits.
[...] Stone, a bit of den mother in the Ninny Kingdom, lavishes praise on all five films this year, but then finishes with this: “The five Best Pictures this year, [...]
Leave a reply