It is always a good thing when the best writers are attracted to, or forced to write about, the Oscar race. It automatically elevates the material. When the New York Times’ David Carr tripped into the Oscar race it changed everything. For a minute. But then it was back to business as usual – who can you trust, is anyone level-headed? Well, now Mark Harris is on the beat and, as most legit journos do when thrust into our clusterfuck, he takes a bit of a bemused tone to it all. Perhaps, to the outside world, our crowded little conclave of Oscar watching does sound weird and confusing, with premature calls being hurled right and left — but the trick to writing about the Oscars is to write about them as if you care about them because otherwise no one is going to want to read what you write. I think Harris walks a healthy line between bemusement (Manohla Dargis, for instance, who gives no attention to the race unless pressured to do so) and genuine interest; I happen to know he does have a real interest in the race and that is, perhaps, what makes him an engaging read.
Why am I writing about the 2012 Academy Awards race a full 181 days before the ceremony? If you have to ask, it means you’ve missed the news that when it comes to the Oscars, obsessive overkill is part of the fun. Also, because this post-Labor Day moment is the last opportunity to weigh in before things get complicated, and because in the minds of the people and companies that are spending money on it, the race has not only begun, it has already descended into tragicomedy. (Exhibit A: The mailed invitation that some Academy members have already received to attend a screening and mull the question of whether this year’s pantheon of Best Picture nominees should include Transformers: Dark of the Moon.)
Over the next six months, I will try to sort through the combination of need, ambition, competitiveness, insecurity, ego-stroking, undermining, strategizing, and — not to get inappropriately high-minded — genuine movie love that fuels an Oscar season. And this is going to be a good one, because it includes the desperately welcome element of surprise. To recap: Two years ago, the Academy decided to expand its Best Picture roster from five films to 10, largely as an act of populist atonement for failing to nominate The Dark Knight. This had two tangible results: a lowering of the bar (there is literally no way to undo the phrase “Best Picture nominee The Blind Side” from now until the end of recorded time) and a demolition of suspense. In last year’s run-up to the nominations, the measly list of contenders felt so predetermined that bloggers and handicappers were, for months, reduced to trying to drum up some excitement about whether The Town was going to get a nomination. (It didn’t, and outrage failed to resound throughout the land.)
Not for nothing but The Town remains one of the best movies of last year. It is one of the few I can watch over and over again.
At any rate, this week he’s looking at why Contagion isn’t being thought of as more of a Best Picture contender. I think it might have been but it’s only good, not great, and therein lies its problem. Harris goes on to clarify the only acting contenders he believes are in the race — he is mostly in line with our line of thinking in terms of the only sure bets right now (and even they aren’t totally sure) would be The Help and Midnight in Paris. I’m going to add The Descendants to that list. He has added Tree of Life. I am not so sure the Malick film will result in a nomination – but what it has going most for it is that it will be a #1 movie if it’s anything. That is its biggest blessing — conversely, Harry Potter isn’t a #1 movie for adults and that is its biggest problem.
Harris lists Brad Pitt for Tree of Life, Viola Davis for The Help and Christopher Plummer for Beginners as the only solid contenders right now. Again, I have to add George Clooney for The Descendants.
One has to try hard to be conservative about this – otherwise there is no logical discernment. I think Harris does this very very well. It’s like being good at refusing that unhealthy dessert: it’s so easy to dive right in, so much harder to say “no thank you.”
Anyway, good stuff – I look forward to reading more of Mark Harris’ work on Grantland. You can also follow Harris on Twitter, @markharrisNYC
What about “Drive?” Brilliantly directed (won the award at Cannes) and generally well-received… is it too stylized for AMPAS? I have a hard time believing that it will not be one of the year’s ten best. It is my #1 so far.
What about “Drive?” Brilliantly directed (won the award at Cannes) and generally well-received… is it too stylized for AMPAS? I have a hard time believing that it will not be one of the year’s ten best. It is my #1 so far.
@ christiannnw
remember the new voting for best picture this year… every nominee has to get 5% of the first place votes to be counted amongst the 10… likeable but not loveable films like “127 Hours” or “the blind side” will not get in now. “Tree of Life” has a real shot. If it wins the critics compiled year-end top 10’s (which it has a fantastic chance to) it would get enough of first place votes to make up for not getting a more well-rounded/box office approval and push.
hopefully that’s not all wishful thinking on my part!
@ christiannnw
remember the new voting for best picture this year… every nominee has to get 5% of the first place votes to be counted amongst the 10… likeable but not loveable films like “127 Hours” or “the blind side” will not get in now. “Tree of Life” has a real shot. If it wins the critics compiled year-end top 10’s (which it has a fantastic chance to) it would get enough of first place votes to make up for not getting a more well-rounded/box office approval and push.
hopefully that’s not all wishful thinking on my part!
I’m happy to see a few bloggers still promoting “The Tree of Life” despite it’s chilly audience reception. Yes, it won the Palme d’Or, but i’m not sure that backing is enough in a year that includes “The Help” as well as unreleased projects from industry heavies (Spielberg, Fincher). Malick’s latest is definitely one of the best films i’ve seen this year (“Certified Copy” is my favorite so far”), and if it were to secure even some critics groups citations it would be a major step towards more (for lack of a better term) artsy films earning widespread recognition.
I’m happy to see a few bloggers still promoting “The Tree of Life” despite it’s chilly audience reception. Yes, it won the Palme d’Or, but i’m not sure that backing is enough in a year that includes “The Help” as well as unreleased projects from industry heavies (Spielberg, Fincher). Malick’s latest is definitely one of the best films i’ve seen this year (“Certified Copy” is my favorite so far”), and if it were to secure even some critics groups citations it would be a major step towards more (for lack of a better term) artsy films earning widespread recognition.
Tree of Life will probably just garner more support for Pitt as a lead in Moneyball. It’s a much easier film to get behind.
Tree of Life will probably just garner more support for Pitt as a lead in Moneyball. It’s a much easier film to get behind.
@ Beth Steven
I completely agree on both “tree of life” and “ljesse james”… I agree that “moneyball” doesn’t look like its going to be as good as those two but the early reviews are good, and Pitt has been just fantastic in recent years so i’m going to believe until i see it and see otherwise!
@ Beth Steven
I completely agree on both “tree of life” and “ljesse james”… I agree that “moneyball” doesn’t look like its going to be as good as those two but the early reviews are good, and Pitt has been just fantastic in recent years so i’m going to believe until i see it and see otherwise!
from what i’ve seen so far this year (which still has a while to go), pitt should get a nomination for tree of life for best supporting. if that does happen and he also manages a nomination for best actor with moneyball, i think he has a good chance for winning with tree of life, which i think would be more deserved. members could see him nominated for both categories, which happens rarely, and will give him a vote for best supporting instead of best lead, given the strength of the category this year.
like Roorda said above, he stole every scene he was in and played the scary, yet very loving father very, very well. i don’t think people would be unhappy if he won for it.
from what i’ve seen so far this year (which still has a while to go), pitt should get a nomination for tree of life for best supporting. if that does happen and he also manages a nomination for best actor with moneyball, i think he has a good chance for winning with tree of life, which i think would be more deserved. members could see him nominated for both categories, which happens rarely, and will give him a vote for best supporting instead of best lead, given the strength of the category this year.
like Roorda said above, he stole every scene he was in and played the scary, yet very loving father very, very well. i don’t think people would be unhappy if he won for it.
I wish Pitt could get nominated in supporting for Tree of Life. It’s one of his deepest, most nuanced performances, along with Jesse James. Haven’t seen Moneyball yet, but in the trailer he seems to be simply playing himself and using his natural charisma, rather than creating a memorable character.
I wish Pitt could get nominated in supporting for Tree of Life. It’s one of his deepest, most nuanced performances, along with Jesse James. Haven’t seen Moneyball yet, but in the trailer he seems to be simply playing himself and using his natural charisma, rather than creating a memorable character.
Yeah, but it was a cute way of saying it.
Sure, they are taking it out cause theaters can’t keep it anymore. They have to make room for new releases that have more viewers.
Yeah, but it was a cute way of saying it.
Sure, they are taking it out cause theaters can’t keep it anymore. They have to make room for new releases that have more viewers.
If Corey Stall should get a nomination, it should be for best cameo appearance or something. He is on screen, for what? Three minutes?! (doing a very fine job, indeed!)
I think you are probably right, stephen holt, Sony Pictures will make a huge effort on behalf of this film, but will it be enough to secure nominations for minor parts, like Cotillard and especially Stall? I highly doubt it.
MIP is old age Woody. Sweet, tender and a bit complacent. There is no real bite to this movie. I miss that extra ingredient that I usually associate with a Woody Allen picture. This is just a little too picture perfect in its design, a little too calculated in its story line and Owen Wilson is not that convincing as a Woody-esque lead character.
As popular as Midnight in Paris has proven to be, I can’t really see it getting nominations other than Best Original Screenplay and Best Picture. That’s pretty impressive. It’s something to be quite proud of, right? But let’s not go nuts forecasting that it will be nominated across the board. Its achievement in all the tech categories is solid but merely serviceable. The supporting roles are too thinly drawn and there are no Big Moments. (though Corey Stall impressed me most with the little he was given to do.)
I’m happy to accept that the Best Picture and Best Screenplay nominations look fairly secure.
They are taking it out of theatres now, so that it can be released on DVD in time to flood everyone in the Los Angeles, er, the Screen Actors Guild, and ALLLL the guilds.
Not to deflate the description of this grand strategy, but Midnight in Paris is leaving theaters because it’s exhausted the natural life of its theatrical run, like every other movie that opened 5 months ago. The timing is fortuitous. Retail DVDs do make nice screeners. But that’s a normal function of any movie with a Spring release date.
If Corey Stall should get a nomination, it should be for best cameo appearance or something. He is on screen, for what? Three minutes?! (doing a very fine job, indeed!)
I think you are probably right, stephen holt, Sony Pictures will make a huge effort on behalf of this film, but will it be enough to secure nominations for minor parts, like Cotillard and especially Stall? I highly doubt it.
MIP is old age Woody. Sweet, tender and a bit complacent. There is no real bite to this movie. I miss that extra ingredient that I usually associate with a Woody Allen picture. This is just a little too picture perfect in its design, a little too calculated in its story line and Owen Wilson is not that convincing as a Woody-esque lead character.
As popular as Midnight in Paris has proven to be, I can’t really see it getting nominations other than Best Original Screenplay and Best Picture. That’s pretty impressive. It’s something to be quite proud of, right? But let’s not go nuts forecasting that it will be nominated across the board. Its achievement in all the tech categories is solid but merely serviceable. The supporting roles are too thinly drawn and there are no Big Moments. (though Corey Stall impressed me most with the little he was given to do.)
I’m happy to accept that the Best Picture and Best Screenplay nominations look fairly secure.
They are taking it out of theatres now, so that it can be released on DVD in time to flood everyone in the Los Angeles, er, the Screen Actors Guild, and ALLLL the guilds.
Not to deflate the description of this grand strategy, but Midnight in Paris is leaving theaters because it’s exhausted the natural life of its theatrical run, like every other movie that opened 5 months ago. The timing is fortuitous. Retail DVDs do make nice screeners. But that’s a normal function of any movie with a Spring release date.
Nominating The Dark Knight as Best Picture would have been insane. Mind you, this is the organisation that put Babe up for Best Picture the year Heat was completely ignored.
Nominating The Dark Knight as Best Picture would have been insane. Mind you, this is the organisation that put Babe up for Best Picture the year Heat was completely ignored.
Let me say that the Academy, remember the Academy, the people who we’re trying to guess. Or second guess. Just LOVES “Midnight in Paris”! And they are craz-zee in love with 77 year old Woody Allen and his great comeback story. And it’s his GREATEST box-office success of all times! And Sony Pictures Classics second highest grosser! And boy, are they going to campaign for it! In ALLLL categories.
They are taking it out of theatres now, so that it can be released on DVD in time to flood everyone in the Los Angeles, er, the Screen Actors Guild, and ALLLL the guilds. And a la the early release of “Crash”” and Lionsgate’s tsunami of DVDs that swept it in to the win that year. Plus, of course, the deep-seated homophobia of the Academy at that time(not so far away)
I predict we are going to see A LOT of Marion Cotillard and Corey Stall in the coming weeks and months. And Owen Wilson, too!
SPC is inspired and they won’t stop. The might even get Woody to make an appearance.
Let me say that the Academy, remember the Academy, the people who we’re trying to guess. Or second guess. Just LOVES “Midnight in Paris”! And they are craz-zee in love with 77 year old Woody Allen and his great comeback story. And it’s his GREATEST box-office success of all times! And Sony Pictures Classics second highest grosser! And boy, are they going to campaign for it! In ALLLL categories.
They are taking it out of theatres now, so that it can be released on DVD in time to flood everyone in the Los Angeles, er, the Screen Actors Guild, and ALLLL the guilds. And a la the early release of “Crash”” and Lionsgate’s tsunami of DVDs that swept it in to the win that year. Plus, of course, the deep-seated homophobia of the Academy at that time(not so far away)
I predict we are going to see A LOT of Marion Cotillard and Corey Stall in the coming weeks and months. And Owen Wilson, too!
SPC is inspired and they won’t stop. The might even get Woody to make an appearance.
I agree that the kid, from the Tree of Life is the worthiest performance of the bunch. He just stole the scene whenever he was onscreen, just like Cotillard in MIP. BTW, I think the 20s fit her really well, I keep always remembering her so gracious in the screen. No complicated over-thought performance, just raw star power.
I agree that the kid, from the Tree of Life is the worthiest performance of the bunch. He just stole the scene whenever he was onscreen, just like Cotillard in MIP. BTW, I think the 20s fit her really well, I keep always remembering her so gracious in the screen. No complicated over-thought performance, just raw star power.
I agree with you, paddy m. I think Pitt stands a better chance at this point with his Moneyball performance (but let’s wait and see how it does box office-wise). Having said that, I admire him for his powerful turn in The Tree of Life (even though I still firmly believe that Hunter McCracken is the most nominations-worthy out of the stellar TTOT bunch).
I agree with my compatriot (?), The Great Dane, that MIP will suffer from a lack of number one votes. Therefore I find Tero’s assessment that Cotillard or Stoll could secure the film supp actress/actor nominations rather unlikely. They are both good, don’t get me wrong, but both lack efficient time on screen to really leave a big impression. With other likely contestants considered, I have a hard time picturing the MIP cast getting any nominations (and if it happens, it will be due to Allen’s history of being represented in these categories more than the actual staying power of the performances themselves)
I agree with you, paddy m. I think Pitt stands a better chance at this point with his Moneyball performance (but let’s wait and see how it does box office-wise). Having said that, I admire him for his powerful turn in The Tree of Life (even though I still firmly believe that Hunter McCracken is the most nominations-worthy out of the stellar TTOT bunch).
I agree with my compatriot (?), The Great Dane, that MIP will suffer from a lack of number one votes. Therefore I find Tero’s assessment that Cotillard or Stoll could secure the film supp actress/actor nominations rather unlikely. They are both good, don’t get me wrong, but both lack efficient time on screen to really leave a big impression. With other likely contestants considered, I have a hard time picturing the MIP cast getting any nominations (and if it happens, it will be due to Allen’s history of being represented in these categories more than the actual staying power of the performances themselves)
I disagree with Mark about Brad Pitt. It’s looking increasingly likely that The Tree of Life might have an uphill battle on its hands come awards season, as buzz for it has unfortunately died down somewhat. Furthermore, with Pitt being praised for Moneyball recently, I don’t see him being highly considered for two performances. It does happen, yes, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Pitt in The Tree of Life is one of the three most solid contenders at this point.
I disagree with Mark about Brad Pitt. It’s looking increasingly likely that The Tree of Life might have an uphill battle on its hands come awards season, as buzz for it has unfortunately died down somewhat. Furthermore, with Pitt being praised for Moneyball recently, I don’t see him being highly considered for two performances. It does happen, yes, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Pitt in The Tree of Life is one of the three most solid contenders at this point.
And I still have a hard time believing that several hundreds of the Academy will end up putting MIDNIGHT IN PARIS as their no. 1 movie of the year. Even if it gets 5000 #3 votes of the Academy, it won’t get nominated. It HAS to get 250 no. 1 votes to get in. And isn’t it really a TOP 5 movie, not a TOP 1 movie? Under 2009-2010 rules, sure it would get in, but the game has changed and a film has to get THE top placing on the ballots to get in, and I just don’t see MIDNIGHT IN PARIS as “The Best Picture Of The Year” for so many people.
And I still have a hard time believing that several hundreds of the Academy will end up putting MIDNIGHT IN PARIS as their no. 1 movie of the year. Even if it gets 5000 #3 votes of the Academy, it won’t get nominated. It HAS to get 250 no. 1 votes to get in. And isn’t it really a TOP 5 movie, not a TOP 1 movie? Under 2009-2010 rules, sure it would get in, but the game has changed and a film has to get THE top placing on the ballots to get in, and I just don’t see MIDNIGHT IN PARIS as “The Best Picture Of The Year” for so many people.
Still can’t believe that Cotillard was out-nominated for (the horrendous, yes) Nine by Penelope Cruz. I understand WHY (winner’s afterburn), but the category confusion (was Cotillard lead?) killed her chances. She was the best thing about that piece of crap. Never have so many Oscar winners resulted in such a big mess – and that Cotillard came away from it giving a heartbreaking performance is even more of a wonder!
Still can’t believe that Cotillard was out-nominated for (the horrendous, yes) Nine by Penelope Cruz. I understand WHY (winner’s afterburn), but the category confusion (was Cotillard lead?) killed her chances. She was the best thing about that piece of crap. Never have so many Oscar winners resulted in such a big mess – and that Cotillard came away from it giving a heartbreaking performance is even more of a wonder!
Woody Allen films are good for supporting actresses (even for the wins), so I would say that Marion Cotillard will get a nomination, but won’t win (due to her very recent trophy).
If I counted correctly, there have been 5 supporting actresses without wins from a Woody Allen picture, and 4 that have won (one year with two nominees where the other one won, from Bullets Over Broadway). 9 nominees total (from one director) in one category is pretty good.
Woody Allen films are good for supporting actresses (even for the wins), so I would say that Marion Cotillard will get a nomination, but won’t win (due to her very recent trophy).
If I counted correctly, there have been 5 supporting actresses without wins from a Woody Allen picture, and 4 that have won (one year with two nominees where the other one won, from Bullets Over Broadway). 9 nominees total (from one director) in one category is pretty good.
I’m curious to see that if Midnight in Paris really does start to gain Oscar buzz throughout the fall, will Sony Pictures Classics start campaigning any of the film’s actors? My guess is that Marion Cotillard and Corey Stoll would stand the best shots at nominations, although neither are sure things.
I’m curious to see that if Midnight in Paris really does start to gain Oscar buzz throughout the fall, will Sony Pictures Classics start campaigning any of the film’s actors? My guess is that Marion Cotillard and Corey Stoll would stand the best shots at nominations, although neither are sure things.
But Kevin, anyone with a sound mind (and a fleeting interest in the Oscar race) could determine the 10 nominees last year weeks in advance. Only probable question mark was The Town or 127 Hours. Not much of a race, huh? With only five nominees, it’s more interesting who is going to be selected (alas the curious omission of The Dark Knight and the curious inclusion of The Reader, just to name two recent examples).
But Kevin, anyone with a sound mind (and a fleeting interest in the Oscar race) could determine the 10 nominees last year weeks in advance. Only probable question mark was The Town or 127 Hours. Not much of a race, huh? With only five nominees, it’s more interesting who is going to be selected (alas the curious omission of The Dark Knight and the curious inclusion of The Reader, just to name two recent examples).
I completely disagree that expanding the BP nominees to 10 removed suspense, because it expanded both the number and types of movie eligible. Even if AMPAS didn’t make that silly “between five and 10 depending on votes” rule this year, we would probably still have a wide race of contenders that seem able to fill up 10, if not more, slots.
I completely disagree that expanding the BP nominees to 10 removed suspense, because it expanded both the number and types of movie eligible. Even if AMPAS didn’t make that silly “between five and 10 depending on votes” rule this year, we would probably still have a wide race of contenders that seem able to fill up 10, if not more, slots.