David Cronenberg started making movies before the Oscar machine morphed into what it is today. There have always been great movies and “Oscar movies” and the market for “Oscar movies” has always existed. But there was a time that I can actually remember, back in the 1980s for instance, when great directors were celebrated for their work and no one cared whether they won an Oscar or not. Or maybe I should say, I never cared. It felt good not caring.
Now, it seems as though the Oscar race is a validation process to determine artistic worth: it never has been and it never should be. I should also probably say — to me — because there are still many out there who have long since dismissed the Oscar race and would laugh at the notion that anyone would have ever judged cinematic greatness by that barometer.
This year, there are already two directors whose work will be written about for years to come but will have probably no chance at shimmying up the Oscar pole. The first is Terrence Malick, whose Tree of Life won’t hold the attention of even twenty Academy members probably — the film would do best hanging on a big wall at MoMa where art lovers could gaze upon its beauty but no movie goer would have to try to figure it out to the tune of $20.
And then there is David Cronenberg, a director whose work has never shied away from the extreme but whose work consistently pushes the bounds of normalcy while digging down deep into his characters. Like the other Davids, Lynch and Fincher, Cronenberg takes care how each shot fills the frame. But Cronenberg’s films aren’t even in Lynch of Fincher territory with the Academy; as in, they give them the obligatory Best Director nod on occasion to show that they still care about visionary cinema. But Cronenberg? Totally and completely ignored.
(NSFW)
<iframe width=”600″ height=”480″ src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/glkthdozo8s” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>
They were never going to acknowledge films like Scanners, Naked Lunch, The Fly, or even Crash. But The Dead Zone, Dead Ringers, A History of Violence and Eastern Promises were certainly worthy of consideration. So what is the problem? Why is Cronenberg not on their radar? Is it because his films aren’t reliably emotional with a traditional narrative and payoff? Is it because his films are too cold? The old standby: warm and fuzzy is the way to go to woo Oscar. Or is it that they’ve just written him off as someone in the horror genre and therefore unworthy — lest we forget the era when the Academy DID have balls and they nominated The Exorcist for Best Picture.
I am going to go for the genre discrimination with this one. Although it is bothersome to use the term, as it immediately categorizes the thing and therefore deselects it from consideration. We do know that two genres specifically are often ignored — horror and comedy. Horror could include The Silence of the Lambs, though some think that it’s simply a thriller. It definitely includes the scariest film of all time, The Exorcist.
<iframe width=”600″ height=”371″ src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/eJfXfMmbh4o” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>
Can the film have a “human element” if it dwells in the supernatural? It absolutely can. Strictly speaking about Cronenberg, both The Dead Zone and Dead Ringers are quite moving. Did Martin Sheen not deserve a Best Supporting Actor nomination for having delivered one of the most memorable villains in film history? Did Christopher Walken not deserve one? That film was given the short shrift undeservedly, as it has managed to retain its greatness still, after all of these years.
Melancholy, haunting, sweet – The Dead Zone is probably my favorite Cronenberg film. The supernatural elements are driven by the film’s well drawn characters, and the performances Cronenberg got from the actors.
<iframe width=”600″ height=”480″ src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/3CdKuLRmg8k” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>
Moreover, although it really is asking too much, there is much empathy and emotional catharsis in The Fly – and only a really great and intelligent voting body would have recognized Goldblum in that role — of course they never would. To their minds there is something infantile about horror — it’s movies for kids and teens and not adults. Finally, Viggo Mortensen was nominated for Eastern Promises and William Hurt got a nod for A History of Violence, which shows the Academy is edging a smidge closer to recognizing Cronenberg.
Mortensen teams up once again with Cronenberg for A Dangerous Method, which looks to be Cronenberg’s most Oscar friendly film yet — on paper anyway. With a screenplay by Christopher Hampton (based on his play The Talking Cure, which was based on the book, A Dangerous Method), Viggo and Oscar darling Keira Knightley, we might see the first big play for Oscar in Cronenberg’s long career.
I dug up an old review for Hampton’s play, and with all of that sex talk it looks to be right up Oscar’s alley — http://www.curtainup.com/talkingcure.html:
<blockquote>The Talking Cure seems to skate over the intellectual issues. It is a potted, encyclopedic and ultimately unsatisfactory guide to psychoanalysis. The discussions between Freud and Jung are either intentionally humorous as Freud has a rather jokey manner or it’s because dreams about huge logs, which Freud says represent Jung’s penis, inspire laughter. The early scenes between Jung and Spielrein are good, the wordless love scene is lyrical and erotic but later scenes are so sentimental, almost melodramatic that I felt a bit as if I were watching a bad version of Jung with the Wind. Ultimately, the play tells us more about Jung’s affairs than his ideas, the freedom he searches for in his sexual affairs. This sexual history has to be the least interesting aspect of Jung’s bequest to the science of understanding the mind. </blockquote>
I couldn’t find a good review of the play, but that doesn’t mean much. Hampton had a crack at fixing things for the screenplay and with Cronenberg’s help, it could turn out to be something wholly different.
In the end, I am hoping for another great work from Cronenberg. If Academy members are open-minded enough, perhaps they too will start recognizing films and directors who have been kept out of the Oscar race for far too long simply because they aren’t in the right genre. If so, A Dangerous Method, if it’s good, should see nominations for Mortensen, Knightley and here’s to hoping, finally, Cronenberg.
Magnificent beat ! I wish to apprentice even as you amend your web site, how can i subscribe for a weblog web site? The account helped me a appropriate deal. I were tiny bit familiar of this your broadcast offered bright clear concept
Magnificent beat ! I wish to apprentice even as you amend your web site, how can i subscribe for a weblog web site? The account helped me a appropriate deal. I were tiny bit familiar of this your broadcast offered bright clear concept
Great article on David Cronenberg, Sasha.
It was only the only day that i watched “The Dead Zone” again. That movie is riveting to me in its incredible acting
by C. Walken and M. Sheen. It’s pathos and
suspense is always there, viewing after viewing. It holds up so well. Cronenberg’s
“horror” films are extreme and not for everyone, though. His “risks” in them are not for most. Yet, his range from these type to Dead Zone, Hitory of Violence and the great (in my opinion)
“Eastern Promises” is amazing. What range from one director. I will be looking forward to his newest, esp. with
Viggo Mortensen starring. Like Terence
Mallick, Cronenberg just keeps getting better, more seasoned and more humanely
passionate. Who says great MALE directors cannot dig deep into their
hearts and souls, as they get older.
Great article on David Cronenberg, Sasha.
It was only the only day that i watched “The Dead Zone” again. That movie is riveting to me in its incredible acting
by C. Walken and M. Sheen. It’s pathos and
suspense is always there, viewing after viewing. It holds up so well. Cronenberg’s
“horror” films are extreme and not for everyone, though. His “risks” in them are not for most. Yet, his range from these type to Dead Zone, Hitory of Violence and the great (in my opinion)
“Eastern Promises” is amazing. What range from one director. I will be looking forward to his newest, esp. with
Viggo Mortensen starring. Like Terence
Mallick, Cronenberg just keeps getting better, more seasoned and more humanely
passionate. Who says great MALE directors cannot dig deep into their
hearts and souls, as they get older.
The reason Cronenberg gets ignored is because his films tend to be polarizing. As out there as Lynch is his movies that have had some degree of success at the Oscars were either been fairly accessible (Elephant Man, The Straight Story) or critical sensations. Mulholland Drive did have plenty of naysayers but they weren’t enough to drown out the lavish praise being heaped upon it. On the other hand many of Cronenberg’s film weren’t initially loved by critics. He’s one of those directors who has plenty of admirers in academia and serious film criticism but just doesn’t appeal to the Academy set. A History of Violence was probably his best bet for getting nominated but the film’s rather ruthless nature and somewhat controversial sex scene probably damned it. The only positive out of this ongoing snub is that David probably doesn’t give two shits about being nominated.
The reason Cronenberg gets ignored is because his films tend to be polarizing. As out there as Lynch is his movies that have had some degree of success at the Oscars were either been fairly accessible (Elephant Man, The Straight Story) or critical sensations. Mulholland Drive did have plenty of naysayers but they weren’t enough to drown out the lavish praise being heaped upon it. On the other hand many of Cronenberg’s film weren’t initially loved by critics. He’s one of those directors who has plenty of admirers in academia and serious film criticism but just doesn’t appeal to the Academy set. A History of Violence was probably his best bet for getting nominated but the film’s rather ruthless nature and somewhat controversial sex scene probably damned it. The only positive out of this ongoing snub is that David probably doesn’t give two shits about being nominated.
One last thing: Viggo not winning in 2008 (and not even getting nominated for “The Road”) proves that the Oscars are not a thermometer for good movies/performances. Really.
One last thing: Viggo not winning in 2008 (and not even getting nominated for “The Road”) proves that the Oscars are not a thermometer for good movies/performances. Really.
Cronenberg is my #2 favorite director (Scorsese is #1) and I think that the one missing out on something is the Oscars. Their loss. It’s like Brazil’s soccer team losing the 1982 World Cup – it’s the World Cup’s loss.
What a wonderful article. One of the best I’ve read here.
Cronenberg is my #2 favorite director (Scorsese is #1) and I think that the one missing out on something is the Oscars. Their loss. It’s like Brazil’s soccer team losing the 1982 World Cup – it’s the World Cup’s loss.
What a wonderful article. One of the best I’ve read here.
And yes, I know Let the Right One In is not a Cronenberg film, like my post makes it sound like. Just another example.
And yes, I know Let the Right One In is not a Cronenberg film, like my post makes it sound like. Just another example.
If the Academy wants to recognize “best achievement in direction,” it needs to open it’s eyes.
Sasha – you mention genre discrimination (I hate the term, too), but you would think it should be a bit of reversal, right? There are so many BAD “horror” films that get released, why is it that the Academy refuses to recognize the rare times when a horror film is done correctly?
Cronenberg’s films that were even remotely recognize by the academy weren’t even horror films, which is the biggest indicator of all. Take “Let the Right One In” (which I still can’t bring myself to recognize as a ‘horror’ film exactly) – easily one of, if not THE best film of 2008, and it didn’t even garner a foreign language nomination.
Remember – The Exorcist was Friedkin’s next film after The French Connection, the best picture winner. Maybe Cronenberg just has to win one, then his subsequent work would get some accolades. But, in the end, who really gives a shit, right?
If the Academy wants to recognize “best achievement in direction,” it needs to open it’s eyes.
Sasha – you mention genre discrimination (I hate the term, too), but you would think it should be a bit of reversal, right? There are so many BAD “horror” films that get released, why is it that the Academy refuses to recognize the rare times when a horror film is done correctly?
Cronenberg’s films that were even remotely recognize by the academy weren’t even horror films, which is the biggest indicator of all. Take “Let the Right One In” (which I still can’t bring myself to recognize as a ‘horror’ film exactly) – easily one of, if not THE best film of 2008, and it didn’t even garner a foreign language nomination.
Remember – The Exorcist was Friedkin’s next film after The French Connection, the best picture winner. Maybe Cronenberg just has to win one, then his subsequent work would get some accolades. But, in the end, who really gives a shit, right?
Zooey:
Very well observed, regarding Fincher. He is certainly a different kind of filmmaker than the others mentioned in this post. ‘Precision’ is the perfect word to describe what seems to be his creative goal. I think his direction can actually be rather cold. He’s probably as far away from an auteur as one can get, while still maintaining relevancy.
Sasha:
you seem so certain that The Tree of Life will be ignored come Oscar time, but it’s already too late. The film’s reception has been overwhelming, and Fox Searchlight seems fully committed to the push.
Do you really think it matters whether it will “hold the attention” of certain academy members? I hardly think that academy members dedicate themselves to watching all of the relevant films, especially during the initial nomination process. The academy members already know to vote it through, even before having seen it. That’s how the process has come to work.
Then again, I feel like your MoMa comment suggests that maybe it is your own perspective of the film that is influencing your stance on The Tree of Life’s eligibility.
Zooey:
Very well observed, regarding Fincher. He is certainly a different kind of filmmaker than the others mentioned in this post. ‘Precision’ is the perfect word to describe what seems to be his creative goal. I think his direction can actually be rather cold. He’s probably as far away from an auteur as one can get, while still maintaining relevancy.
Sasha:
you seem so certain that The Tree of Life will be ignored come Oscar time, but it’s already too late. The film’s reception has been overwhelming, and Fox Searchlight seems fully committed to the push.
Do you really think it matters whether it will “hold the attention” of certain academy members? I hardly think that academy members dedicate themselves to watching all of the relevant films, especially during the initial nomination process. The academy members already know to vote it through, even before having seen it. That’s how the process has come to work.
Then again, I feel like your MoMa comment suggests that maybe it is your own perspective of the film that is influencing your stance on The Tree of Life’s eligibility.
I really don’t see what is so special about History of Violence. It feels so rushed
I really don’t see what is so special about History of Violence. It feels so rushed
Wow, I forgot about Spider. I loved it when it came out. Two amazing performances.
I think with AHoV and EP, Cronenberg got some real Oscar heat and this one should really get him a nomination. Hope it’s as great as it looks.
By the way, Amazon has Eastern Promises and The History of Violence Blu-rays at the lowest prices ever — $8.99 and $9.99.
Wow, I forgot about Spider. I loved it when it came out. Two amazing performances.
I think with AHoV and EP, Cronenberg got some real Oscar heat and this one should really get him a nomination. Hope it’s as great as it looks.
By the way, Amazon has Eastern Promises and The History of Violence Blu-rays at the lowest prices ever — $8.99 and $9.99.
Be great if Cronenberg could lock his first nomation. He arguably has the most interesting career of any filmmaker. I just rewatched A History of Violence the other day. Terrific film. Props to Mortensen too for giving a dramatic performance that has appropriate comedic touches.
Be great if Cronenberg could lock his first nomation. He arguably has the most interesting career of any filmmaker. I just rewatched A History of Violence the other day. Terrific film. Props to Mortensen too for giving a dramatic performance that has appropriate comedic touches.
I finally watched Dead Ringers not long ago. I admire Jeremy Irons performance very much. That was work that seriously deserved a nomination from the academy. Nuanced and carefully constructed, he made those character distinguishable enough from each other while still making them feel related and without much distance from themselves. As for the film, good lord was that thing a fucking chore to sit through.
History of Violence is probably my favorite of his. Deliberate and stoic in it’s pacing and delivery while offering much to say about Violence in American culture. And it boasted hugely memorable performance from Hurt who had spent a decade molding himself into a finely dependable character actor.
I do have yet to see Spider and Existenz,
I finally watched Dead Ringers not long ago. I admire Jeremy Irons performance very much. That was work that seriously deserved a nomination from the academy. Nuanced and carefully constructed, he made those character distinguishable enough from each other while still making them feel related and without much distance from themselves. As for the film, good lord was that thing a fucking chore to sit through.
History of Violence is probably my favorite of his. Deliberate and stoic in it’s pacing and delivery while offering much to say about Violence in American culture. And it boasted hugely memorable performance from Hurt who had spent a decade molding himself into a finely dependable character actor.
I do have yet to see Spider and Existenz,
i’m sorry but i got to say this… and i know in a site like this it’s suicide but it’s what i really feel: Tree of life feels like a pretentios piece of “filmmaking” by a filmmaker trying to hard. I like some of Malick’s work, not all, as well as Cronenberg’s… as well as almost every filmmaker i follow. Some work of them i like and some i don’t. I just feel like Film Fans like to sometimes grab a particular filmmaker (or various) and put them in a pedestal. It’s as if they can do no wrong. I’m sorry but sometimes they miss the mark and somebody got to say it. I don’t feel less like a fan of anybody if i don’t like a particular movie. For me that’s what being a fan means… it means you being there and supporting someone wether you like the work or don’t. But it is really important to me to be true to myself no matter what anyone thinks. If i don’t like a particular film, no matter who made it, i am going to express what i really feel about it. People i know and i bet a lot of bloggers out there don’t do this because they think are not going to respect them because they don’t “know” good cinema. I was pretty sure everyone here was going to love tree of life but i just don’t get it. I respect everyone’s opinion but we also should respect the taste of people who didn’t like it. I don’t feel dumber or ignorant because i didn’t like it. I believe i understood it perfectly and still i just didn’t like it. Like i said before, it felt very pretentious. One thing i will give Mr. Malick is that i don’t believe any other filmmaker out there would get away with raising the money to make a story with such a personal view. So for that, my hat’s off.
i’m sorry but i got to say this… and i know in a site like this it’s suicide but it’s what i really feel: Tree of life feels like a pretentios piece of “filmmaking” by a filmmaker trying to hard. I like some of Malick’s work, not all, as well as Cronenberg’s… as well as almost every filmmaker i follow. Some work of them i like and some i don’t. I just feel like Film Fans like to sometimes grab a particular filmmaker (or various) and put them in a pedestal. It’s as if they can do no wrong. I’m sorry but sometimes they miss the mark and somebody got to say it. I don’t feel less like a fan of anybody if i don’t like a particular movie. For me that’s what being a fan means… it means you being there and supporting someone wether you like the work or don’t. But it is really important to me to be true to myself no matter what anyone thinks. If i don’t like a particular film, no matter who made it, i am going to express what i really feel about it. People i know and i bet a lot of bloggers out there don’t do this because they think are not going to respect them because they don’t “know” good cinema. I was pretty sure everyone here was going to love tree of life but i just don’t get it. I respect everyone’s opinion but we also should respect the taste of people who didn’t like it. I don’t feel dumber or ignorant because i didn’t like it. I believe i understood it perfectly and still i just didn’t like it. Like i said before, it felt very pretentious. One thing i will give Mr. Malick is that i don’t believe any other filmmaker out there would get away with raising the money to make a story with such a personal view. So for that, my hat’s off.
I have long had a dream of Cronenberg giving Cate Blanchett, or, BETTER YET, Kate Winslet (The Reader, The Holiday) a daring, bizarre leading role in one of his films. I want Winslet to throw down some uneasy brilliance a la Fiennes in Spider.
I have long had a dream of Cronenberg giving Cate Blanchett, or, BETTER YET, Kate Winslet (The Reader, The Holiday) a daring, bizarre leading role in one of his films. I want Winslet to throw down some uneasy brilliance a la Fiennes in Spider.
Sasha, I have a question : isn’t this new Oscar-rule helping the case of The Tree of Life big time ? For me, it looks like exactly the kind of film that could easily have 5% No1 even if not much else overall.
Sasha, I have a question : isn’t this new Oscar-rule helping the case of The Tree of Life big time ? For me, it looks like exactly the kind of film that could easily have 5% No1 even if not much else overall.
I think we should emphasize, that it looks Oscary ON PAPER : sure, it is a tragic period romance/biopic ON PAPER, but I’m sure as hell it will be kinky/edgy/unique like no other ‘tragic period romance/biopic’ before…otherwise Cronenberg probably wouldn’t have touched the material.
I think we should emphasize, that it looks Oscary ON PAPER : sure, it is a tragic period romance/biopic ON PAPER, but I’m sure as hell it will be kinky/edgy/unique like no other ‘tragic period romance/biopic’ before…otherwise Cronenberg probably wouldn’t have touched the material.
Great piece, Sasha, I agree, ADM definitely looks like his most ‘Oscary’ to date and who knows, maybe that’s all the Academy needs to FINALLY cross him off their ‘wearegettingalotofcrapfornotgettinghimsoletspretendwesuddenlygethim’ list.
And though The Tree of Life is definitely divisive enough, critics still LOVED it and it IS doing decent art house-business at the moment. So taking all that into account, the Academy might give in after all.
OT : Could Glenn Close FINALLY pull it off ? Albert Nobbs gets US-distributor.
http://awardscorner.blogspot.com/2011/07/finally-albert-nobbs-gets-us.html
Great piece, Sasha, I agree, ADM definitely looks like his most ‘Oscary’ to date and who knows, maybe that’s all the Academy needs to FINALLY cross him off their ‘wearegettingalotofcrapfornotgettinghimsoletspretendwesuddenlygethim’ list.
And though The Tree of Life is definitely divisive enough, critics still LOVED it and it IS doing decent art house-business at the moment. So taking all that into account, the Academy might give in after all.
OT : Could Glenn Close FINALLY pull it off ? Albert Nobbs gets US-distributor.
http://awardscorner.blogspot.com/2011/07/finally-albert-nobbs-gets-us.html
Maybe he doesn’t get Oscar noms because he doesn’t have enough support to get any noms from really any major orgs.
Maybe he doesn’t get Oscar noms because he doesn’t have enough support to get any noms from really any major orgs.
Thanks for writing this Sasha. Cronenberg (and others like Malick who don’t make oscar friendly films) need recognition and i’m so glad you and Ryan give them their props here on the website. The reason i check this website every day is because i love film- and good films- not because i care about who is going to win the oscar or has the best chance at oscar.
Thanks for writing this Sasha. Cronenberg (and others like Malick who don’t make oscar friendly films) need recognition and i’m so glad you and Ryan give them their props here on the website. The reason i check this website every day is because i love film- and good films- not because i care about who is going to win the oscar or has the best chance at oscar.
And actually I completely disagree about David Fincher. Let’s face it – to a large portion at the Academy and to me as well he isn’t in the same league as David Lynch, Terrence Mallick and David Cronenberg. He actually got nominated by the Academy only twice – for The Social Network and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. He isn’t a David Lynch, who really gets nominated from time to time. And speaking of auteurs, I wouldn’t call David Fincher that. To me he’s a very intelligent, educated and precise craftsman. But I wouldn’t call him a great artist. He hasn’t done anything that really changed me in a way. When I see a Fincher movie, I expect well crafted entertainment. That’s all. When it comes to The Tree of Life, I think many people will be shocked in December when critics go ga-ga over it and then the Academy nominates it for best picture. Mallick has a lot of good will and if the press helps (and I believe it does), the film could very well become the film that got in against all the odds…
And actually I completely disagree about David Fincher. Let’s face it – to a large portion at the Academy and to me as well he isn’t in the same league as David Lynch, Terrence Mallick and David Cronenberg. He actually got nominated by the Academy only twice – for The Social Network and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. He isn’t a David Lynch, who really gets nominated from time to time. And speaking of auteurs, I wouldn’t call David Fincher that. To me he’s a very intelligent, educated and precise craftsman. But I wouldn’t call him a great artist. He hasn’t done anything that really changed me in a way. When I see a Fincher movie, I expect well crafted entertainment. That’s all. When it comes to The Tree of Life, I think many people will be shocked in December when critics go ga-ga over it and then the Academy nominates it for best picture. Mallick has a lot of good will and if the press helps (and I believe it does), the film could very well become the film that got in against all the odds…
And I think the biggest contender for A Dangerous Method won’t be Mortensen, but Michael Fassbender.
Like the other Davids, Lynch and Fincher, Cronenberg takes care how each shot fills the frame.
And that careful framing gets as little respect on DVD as Cronenberg gets from the Academy.
Many of his films were shot and meant to be seen with the matte opened up to a roomy 1.66:1 screen ratio, but most of the DVD crop the top and bottom of the frame to make it fit a standardized 1.85:1 rectangle. Result: claustrophobic compositions.
Dead Ringers, for example. Currently available editions chop it down. The Criterion edition got it right — but it’s out of print.
Don’t even get me started on the ice-box color timing. There’s warmth in the original intention. The shoddy DVD lowers the temperature..
I am going to go for the genre discrimination with this one. Although it is bothersome to use the term, as it immediately categorizes the thing and therefore deselects it from consideration.
Good to use the term though, as a reminder that some of best movies of the ’40s and ’50s got overlooked at the Oscars and now we have dozens of classics that went unrewarded. It shows the Academy missed the boat then, and will continue to miss the boat. The genre designation should be worn proudly — those genres are an American legacy as important as jazz music.
I can think of 2 or 3 movies already this year that will probably be overlooked because of their genre. (Hanna & Source Code.) The bias extends to foreign language submissions too. Will Korea and Japan dare to offer two amazing movies, I Saw the Devil or 13 Assassins, as their Oscar candidates? Or will they go with the safer blander fare they know the Academy sips with a soup spoon? (Departures? …ooph)
As much as A Dangerous Method looks like one of Cronenberg’s Oscar-friendliest offerings ever, I love that it has at least one subversive thing in common with Dead Ringers; girls who beg to be spanked.
And I think the biggest contender for A Dangerous Method won’t be Mortensen, but Michael Fassbender.
Like the other Davids, Lynch and Fincher, Cronenberg takes care how each shot fills the frame.
And that careful framing gets as little respect on DVD as Cronenberg gets from the Academy.
Many of his films were shot and meant to be seen with the matte opened up to a roomy 1.66:1 screen ratio, but most of the DVD crop the top and bottom of the frame to make it fit a standardized 1.85:1 rectangle. Result: claustrophobic compositions.
Dead Ringers, for example. Currently available editions chop it down. The Criterion edition got it right — but it’s out of print.
Don’t even get me started on the ice-box color timing. There’s warmth in the original intention. The shoddy DVD lowers the temperature..
I am going to go for the genre discrimination with this one. Although it is bothersome to use the term, as it immediately categorizes the thing and therefore deselects it from consideration.
Good to use the term though, as a reminder that some of best movies of the ’40s and ’50s got overlooked at the Oscars and now we have dozens of classics that went unrewarded. It shows the Academy missed the boat then, and will continue to miss the boat. The genre designation should be worn proudly — those genres are an American legacy as important as jazz music.
I can think of 2 or 3 movies already this year that will probably be overlooked because of their genre. (Hanna & Source Code.) The bias extends to foreign language submissions too. Will Korea and Japan dare to offer two amazing movies, I Saw the Devil or 13 Assassins, as their Oscar candidates? Or will they go with the safer blander fare they know the Academy sips with a soup spoon? (Departures? …ooph)
As much as A Dangerous Method looks like one of Cronenberg’s Oscar-friendliest offerings ever, I love that it has at least one subversive thing in common with Dead Ringers; girls who beg to be spanked.
The nominees were William Hurt for A history of violence and Viggo Mortensen for Eastern Promises.
The nominees were William Hurt for A history of violence and Viggo Mortensen for Eastern Promises.
Mortensen surprisingly was not nominated for A History of Violence, by the way neither was Maria Bello who must have been one of the most disappointed oscar contenders in recent memory.
Mortensen surprisingly was not nominated for A History of Violence, by the way neither was Maria Bello who must have been one of the most disappointed oscar contenders in recent memory.
I don’t believe Viggo Mortensen was nominated for History of Violence?
“there are already two directors whose work will be written about for years to come but will have probably no chance at shimmying up the Oscar pole”
^If this is the case, then why do we care? If Cronenberg and Malick will be written about for years to come, I’m sure they’ll be very proud and won’t care about an irrelevant gold statue.
I don’t believe Viggo Mortensen was nominated for History of Violence?
“there are already two directors whose work will be written about for years to come but will have probably no chance at shimmying up the Oscar pole”
^If this is the case, then why do we care? If Cronenberg and Malick will be written about for years to come, I’m sure they’ll be very proud and won’t care about an irrelevant gold statue.