As we head into awards season, it’s a good time to start talking about the consensus vote. In case you’re new to awards season, or you haven’t been following the drama these many years, we’re still in the “seeing movies/critic reviews/Twitter gauntlet/faux controversies” phase. After that, the critics will submit their top ten lists, which start showing up in early December, then they start immediately voting on their awards for the year. This happens in the first week of December.
We’re still a month and a half away from that and we have a lot of movies left to be seen. The critics, like the industry, like you and me out there in the dark, react to the buzz, the perception and the zeitgeist. Awards are about punctuating the right now, not really about finding the best of the year. That is something no one can really know until years later when we dig up the fossils of our past and decide which ones have stood the test of time and which ones haven’t. Where the Academy Awards are concerned, not many of their top choices do stand the test of time. Not many stand the test of even one year later.
Part of that has to do with how we define and redefine what we think of as great. And some of that has to do with how we think of the people over time as years wear on. Do people still think about Roman Polanski and Woody Allen the same way as they did in the 1970s? Martin Scorsese and Steven Spielberg have honored their legacies by continuing to grow as filmmakers, making their current work respectable so that their past work can continue to thrive in memory.But if you’re an artist who keeps making the same movies over and over again, might your original ones fade as a result? It’s tough to say. Some things last, some things don’t. We change. Our perceptions change. Our definitions of what is acceptable and what isn’t changes. We are currently in an era where younger generations are viewing entertainment through the prism of political correctness of social justice. I had a conversation with a teenager about Fast Times at Ridgemont High and she was saying how racist it was because of Forest Whitaker’s character. I had to sit her down for a chat, shall we say.
But in any given year the Oscar race is all about managing expectations. When I started in 1999 one of the things that motivated me to start an Oscars site was to find out why certain films that won were simply forgotten or downgraded by critics in the years that followed. After being nose deep in the race for as long as I have I now know the answer to that. The Oscar race is about Ms. Right Now, not Ms. Right.
You can watch the way perception changes as the season begins. The earliest film critics groups that vote are the New York Film Critics and the National Board of Review. Both groups have the power to launch a film squarely into the Oscar race. There is a sense that each group either wants to go with the consensus or against. When they go against the consensus for the sake of being original they fail at their job, in my opinion. They should be choosing what they think is best regardless of what everyone else is voting for.
The New York Film Critics choosing American Hustle last year over Gravity, 12 Years a Slave and Wolf of Wall Street was an example of this – they saw it first so they wanted to be the first to hail it as the year’s best. The funny thing about that was that their voting was mostly done in a vacuum without the cloud of perception hanging over it. What they knew already was this: they had to pick the best from among a very narrow list of titles. They knew that most everyone else already thought three films were the year’s best: Gravity, 12 Years a Slave and Inside Llewyn Davis. They were the ones toppling the top ten lists at Movie City News. So New York, being first, went against that consensus and picked American Hustle, which helped launch that film into the race big time.
The National Board of Review is one of my favorite voting groups in the whole race because they, like the HFPA, have this kind of stigma attached to them. They are always accused of being bought and paid for by the studios and no one knows who they are and yet they have that label — the National Board of Review that gets slapped on a film ad and voila, respectability, prestige, awards consideration. They carry equal weight as the New York Film Critics vis a vis the awards race, funnily enough, though voting members of the NYFCC would scoff at this. From my perch, I see little difference in the way people vote from New York on down to the Academy awards. They are all still fishing in the same small pond.
After the New York Film Critics and National Board of Review there isn’t really any other major critics group that can launch a film into the Best Picture race with the possible exception of Los Angeles but Los Angeles comes a bit later, a week or so (which can feel like an eternity during the heat of the season). By the time Los Angeles votes they are already reacting to the consensus, reacting to the trends – and occasionally you can hear them talking about this. I recall one member of the LA Film Critics tweeting that they were definitely not going to vote for Zero Dark Thirty in 2012. That’s because Zero Dark Thirty was launched into the race by the New York Film Critics who saw it first and named it best before anyone else had seen it.
Los Angeles resisted that urge and ended up picking The Descendants. Argo went on to win Best Picture but that is a story for a different time. As you can see by the following chart – there ain’t a huge gap of difference in tastes between these groups with the possible exception of the National Board of Review having MORE daring picks than the New York Film Critics (see chart below).
Once the major groups weigh in with best of the year, the rest of the WAY TOO MANY film critics group begin announcing. They either go with the consensus or they go against it. The only way they can impact the race is if they go with the consensus and help stack the deck. But if they go against the consensus it’s interesting but it doesn’t have much impact simply because there are so many groups and by this point the critics awards are mostly tuned out.
The next big thing that shifts the consensus in one direction or another are the Golden Globe awards. They have the potential to launch a film, or a contender, into the race because they get a lot of publicity. They get a lot of publicity because all of the stars show up to their telecast – it exists unto itself, beyond the Oscars. It can’t always make the difference but the show itself, the Golden Globes program can make a huge difference when it comes to the Academy picking winners.
After the Golden Globes the Critics Choice ring in. But they, like the many critics groups, don’t effect the race at all, not right now. They only stand out insofar as they end up matching the Oscar nominations. But so far I’ve yet to see their nominations really impact the race in any significant way.
In 2012, the Critics Choice did have some impact because Ben Affleck made that “I’d like to thank the Academy…” joke at their show and since it occurred before the Golden Globes it set up a chain of momentum that, when Argo won the Golden Globe, could not be stopped.
But right afterwards, you see the even bigger shift. The giant guilds. The massive consensus votes that can SOMETIMES tell you what can win on a consensus vote and what can’t. When 12 Years a Slave and Gravity tied the Producers Guild that was one of the most unpredictable things I’ve ever seen go down. Usually it’s a straight line from Producers Guild on to Oscar.
That’s because, generally speaking, a consensus is a consensus. When there is conflict, as there was last year, the Best Picture race is interesting and can be difficult to predict. But much of the time the awards are in step with each other because voters tend to vote at the same time.
In the old days, when the Oscars were held in March, there was time to shift the consensus before the Oscar voters had their ballots. But now they have their ballots at the same time as the producers, the directors, the writers and and the actors. The PGA and the DGA clearly have the most weight of all of the major groups.
2012 | DGA | PGA | SAG | EDDIE | Oscar |
2013 | Gravity | Gravity | American Hustle | Captain Phillips/American Hustle | 12 Years |
12 Years | |||||
2012 | Argo | Argo | Argo | Argo/Silver Linings | Argo |
2011 | Michel Hazanavicious, The Artist | The Artist | The Help | The Artist/Descendants | The Artist |
2010 | The King’s Speech | The King’s Speech | The King’s Speech | Social Network | The King’s Speech |
2009 | The Hurt Locker | The Hurt Locker | Inglourious Basterds | The Hurt Locker | The Hurt Locker |
2008 | Slumdog Millionaire | Slumdog Millionaire | Slumdog Millionaire | Slumdog | Slumdog |
2007 | No Country for Old Men | No Country | No Country | Bourne | No Country |
2006 | The Departed | Little Miss Sunshine | Little Miss Sunshine | Babel/The Departed | The Departed |
2005 | Brokeback Mountain | Brokeback Mountain | Crash | Crash | Crash |
2004 | Million Dollar Baby | Million Dollar Baby | Sideways | Ray/Aviator | Million Dollar Baby |
2003 | Return of the King | Return of the King | Return of the King | Return of the King | Return of the King |
2002 | Chicago | Chicago | Chicago | Chicago | Chicago |
2001 | A Beautiful Mind | A Beautiful Mind | Gosford Park | Moulin/Black Hawk | A Beautiful Mind |
2000 | Crouching Tiger | Gladiator | Traffic | Traffic | Gladiator |
1999 | American Beauty | American Beauty+ | American Beauty | Matrix | American Beauty |
1998 | Saving Private Ryan | Saving Private Ryan | Shakespeare in Love | Saving Private Ryan | Shakespeare in Love |
/Shakes | |||||
1997 | Titanic | Titanic+ | The Full Monty | Titanic | Titanic |
1996 | English Patient | English Patient+ | The Birdcage | English Patient+ | English Patient+ |
1995 | Apollo 13 | Apollo 13 | Apollo 13 | Braveheart | Braveheart |
So, what do we talk about when we talk about the consensus? We talk about the film that thousands of people will like best. This is the main reason why divisive films have a hard time winning. They split the consensus and the the one everyone CAN agree on slides into home base.
You might be inclined to think, as I have over the years, that the Directors Guild or the Producers Guild or the Screen Actors Guild surely should know what determines cinematic greatness. But the truth is that the DGA is full of all sorts of different types of people in the field of directing and only some of them direct feature films. Many are associates or assistants who work in television. The Producers Guild has the same kind of loose requirements. They are actively trying to diversify, always, and the DGA has their first openly gay black president now. They didn’t have a woman president until 2002 (Martha Coolidge) and has not had one since.
The tricky part is perception and buzz. These large groups are really a lot like you and me and everyone we know. They are influenced by critics and by perception but at the end of the day they can’t help but to vote for what they like best. They like to be moved and entertained but in lieu of that they will take other motivators like making history.
Really, though, where the Oscar race is concerned, there really is NO THERE THERE. It is built upon puffy clouds of perception that can be manipulated either on purpose or accidentally. If a film gets caught in the crossfire of a massive society debate it can be Zero Dark Thirty and it can go from the highest place to the lowest over a couple of weeks. It’s probable that Zero Dark Thirty wasn’t going to win anyway but still, had it come out a couple of months earlier that fervor might have died down and voters could have regained their like for the film. As it was, it fell at the same time as Affleck and Argo’s star was on the rise and the rest is Oscar history.
Which is the better film now? It’s tough to say. Argo still is a wildly entertaining film that you could put anyone down in front of and they will like it, if not love it. The script is funny and the characters sharp. The direction is breezy and sure-handed. But Zero Dark Thirty is by the far the more challenging, socially relevant and masterful cinematic masterpiece. And so it goes. But people will always love Argo. The two better films than both – Life of Pi and Lincoln are two unforgettable masterpieces by two masters of the form. 2012 was a major year for great filmmaking.
To woo a consensus it’s important to fly under the radar and really look like the “little movie that could.” Human nature seems to dictate that people want to feel their vote is doing good for someone or something. If they don’t, on some level, feel sorry for you or pity you or want you to overcome all odds and win (think: impoverished Indian children) then it’s harder to rally a win in a competitive year.
There simply has to be a rooting interest or voters will not turn up. Will this year be competitive? It’s hard to say. Right now, it’s Boyhood’s to lose. It could just start winning and then never stop. As Mark Harris says – every other film coming out right now has to surpass it in terms of reviews and affection. It’s too early to see which film that will be but one thing I do know – it’s harder to rally a massive consensus of thousands of voters when you come in late. There are too many variables. Too many things that can go wrong with not enough time to recover.
But so far, it looks like an exciting year to come.
Here are the numbers of votes we’re talking about per group.
LAFCA | NBR | NYFCC | ||
1935 | The Informer* | The Informer* | Mutiny on the Bounty | |
1936 | Mr. Deeds Goes to Town* | The Informer*Mr. Deeds Goes to Town* | The Great Zeigfeld | |
1937 | Night Must Fall | The Life of Emile Zola+ | The Life of Emile Zola | |
1938 | The Citadel* | The Citadel* | You Can’t Take It With You | |
1939 | Confessions of a Nazi Spy | Wurthering Heights | Gone with the Wind | |
1940 | The Grapes of Wrath* | The Grapes of Wrath* | Rebecca | |
1941 | Citizen Kane* | Citizen Kane* | How Green Was My Valley | |
1942 | In Which We Serve* | In Which We Serve* | Mrs. Miniver | |
1943 | The Ox-Bow Incident* | Watch on the Rhine* | Casablanca | |
1944 | None But the Lonely Heart | Going My Way | Going My Way | |
1945 | The True Glory | The Lost Weekend | The Lost Weekend | |
1946 | Henry V* | The Best Years of Our Lives | The Best Years of Our Lives | |
1947 | Monseiur Verdoux | Gentlemnan’s Agreement | Gentlemen’s Agreement | |
1948 | Paisan | The Treasure of the Sierra Madre* | Hamlet | |
1949 | Bicycle Thieves | All The King’s Men | All the King’s Men | |
1950 | Sunset Boulevard* | All About Eve+ | All About Eve | |
1951 | A Place in the Sun* | Streetcar Named Desire* | An American in Paris | |
1952 | The Quiet Man* | High Noon* | The Greatest Show on Earth | |
1953 | Julius Caesar* | From Here to Eternity+ | From Here to Eternity | |
1954 | On the Waterfront | On the Waterfront+ | Elia Kazan, On the Waterfront | |
1955 | Marty | Marty+ | Delbert Mann, Marty | |
1956 | Around the World in 80 Days | Around the World in 80 Days+ | Around/World in 80 Days | |
1957 | The Bridge on the River Kwai | Bridge on the River Kwai+ | Bridge on the River Kwai | |
1958 | The Old Man and the Sea | The Defiant Ones* | Gigi | |
1959 | The Nun’s Story* | Ben Hur+ | Ben Hur | |
1960 | Sons and Lovers* | The Apartment+ | Billy Wilder, The Apartment | |
1961 | Question 7 | West Side Story+ | West Side Story | |
1962 | The Longest Day* | none | Lawrence of Arabia | |
1963 | Tom Jones | Tom Jones+ | Tom Jones | |
1964 | Becket* | My Fair Lady+ | My Fair Lady | |
1965 | The Eleanor Roosevelt Story | Darling* | the Sound of Music | |
1966 | A Man for All Seasons | A Man for All Seasons* | A Man for all Seasons | |
1967 | Far from the Maddening Crowd | In the Heat of the Night+ | In the Heat of the Night | |
1968 | The Shoes of the Fisherman | Lion in Winter* | Oliver | |
1969 | They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? | Z* | Midnight Cowboy | |
1970 | Patton+ | Five Easy Pieces* | Patton | |
1971 | Macbeth* | A Clockwork Orange* | The French Connection | |
1972 | Cabaret* | Viskningar och rop | The Godfather | |
1973 | The Sting+ | La Nuit Americaine | The Sting | |
1974 | The Conversation* | Armacord | Godfather II | |
1975 | Dog Day Afternoon* | Barry Lyndon*Nashville* | Nashville* | One Flew Over/Cukoo’s Nest |
1976 | Network* | All the President’s Men* | All the President’s Men* | Rocky |
1977 | Star Wars* | The Turning Point* | Annie Hall+ | Annie Hall |
1978 | Coming Home* | Days of Heaven | The Deer Hunter+ | The Deer Hunter |
1979 | Kramer Vs. Kramer+ | Manhattan* | Kramer Vs. Kramer+ | Kramer Vs. Kramer |
1980 | Raging Bull* | Ordinary People+ | Ordinary People+ | Ordinary People |
1981 | Atlantic City* | Chariots of Fire+Reds* | Reds* | Chariots of Fire |
1982 | E.T.* | Gandhi+ | Gandhi+ | Gandhi |
1983 | Terms of Endearment+ | BetrayalTerms of Endearment+ | Terms of Endearment+ | Terms of Endearment |
1984 | Amadeus+ | A Passage to India* | Passage to India* | Amadeus |
1985 | Brazil | The Color Purple* | Prizzi’s Honor* | Out of Africa |
1986 | Hannah and Her Sisters* | A Room with a View* | Hannah and Her Sisters* | Platoon |
1987 | Hope and Glory* | Empire of the Sun* | Broadcast News* | The Last Emperor |
1988 | Little Dorrit | Mississippi Burning* | The Accidental Tourist* | Rain Man |
1989 | Do the Right Thing | Driving Miss Daisy | My Left Foot* | Driving Miss Daisy |
1990 | Goodfellas* | Dances with Wolves | Goodfellas* | Dances with Wolves |
1991 | Bugsy* | The Silence of the Lambs+ | The Silence of the Lambs+ | Silence of the Lambs |
1992 | Unforgiven+ | Howards End* | The Player | Unforgiven |
1993 | Schindler’s List+ | Schindler’s List+ | Schindler’s List+ | Schindler’s List |
1994 | Pulp Fiction* | Forrest Gump/Pulp Fiction | Quiz Show* | Forrest Gump |
1995 | Leaving Las Vegas | Sense and Sensibility* | Leaving Las Vegas | Braveheart |
1996 | Secrets & Lies* | Shine* | Fargo* | The English Patient |
1997 | L.A. Confidential* | L.A. Confidential* | L.A. Confidential* | Titanic |
1998 | Saving Private Ryan* | Gods and Monsters | Saving Private Ryan* | Shakespeare in Love |
1999 | The Insider* | American Beauty | Topsy-Turvy | American Beauty |
2000 | Crouching Tiger* | Quills | Traffic* | Gladiator |
2001 | In the Bedroom* | Moulin Rouge!* | Mulholland Drive | A Beautiful Mind |
2002 | About Schmidt | The Hours* | Far From Heaven | Chicago |
2003 | American Splendour | Mystic River* | Return of the King | Return of the King |
2004 | Sideways* | Finding Neverland* | Sideways* | Million Dollar Baby |
2005 | Brokeback Mountain* | Good Night, and Good Luck* | Brokeback Mountain* | Crash |
2006 | Letters from Iwo Jima | Letters from Iwo Jima* | United 93 | The Departed |
2007 | There Will Be Blood* | No Country for Old Men+ | No Country for Old Men+ | No Country |
2008 | Wall-E | Slumdog Milionaire+ | Milk* | Slumdog Milionaire |
2009 | The Hurt Locker | Up in the Air* | The Hurt Locker | The Hurt Locker |
2010 | The Social Network | The Social Network* | The Social Network | The King’s Speech |
2011 | The Descendants | Hugo* | The Artist | The Artist |
2012 | Amour | Zero Dark Thirty* | Zero Dark Thirty | Argo |
2013 | Gravity/Her | Her* | American Hustle* | 12 Years a Slave |
Full breakdown details after the jump.
Actors Branch: 1,176 members (19.51%)
Casting Directors: 54 members (0.90%)
Cinematographers Branch: 228 members (3.78%)
Costume Designers Branch: 108 members (1.79%)
Designers Branch: 262 members. (art directors, production designers, set decorators) (4.35%)
Directors Branch: 377 members (6.25%)
Documentary Branch: 210 members (3.48%)
Executives Branch: 450 members (7,47%)
Feature Animation and Short Films Branch : 366 members (6.07%)
Film Editors Branch: 230 members (3.82%)
Makeup Artists And Hairstylists Branch: 135 members (2.24%)
Members-at-large: 217 members (3.60%)
Music Branch: 240 members (3.98%)
Producers Branch: 479 members (7.95%)
Public Relations Branch: 377 members (6.25%)
Sound Branch: 418 members (6.93%)
Visual Effects Branch: 323 members
Writers Branch: 378 members (6.27%)
Total Voting Members: 6,028 (up 172 from 2012)
Just here to say Fury ended up with 80% fresh at RTomatoes xD
I recall one member of the LA Film Critics tweeting that they were definitely not going to vote for Zero Dark Thirty in 2012. That’s because Zero Dark Thirty was launched into the race by the New York Film Critics who saw it first and named it best before anyone else had seen it.
Los Angeles resisted that urge and ended up picking The Descendants. Argo went on to win Best Picture but that is a story for a different time.
You’re getting your years mixed up, Sasha.
In 2012, the Critics Choice did have some impact because Ben Affleck made that “I’d like to thank the Academy…” joke at their show and since it occurred before the Golden Globes it set up a chain of momentum that, when Argo won the Golden Globe, could not be stopped.
I’d forgotten that. Now I hate Ben Affleck again.
Which is the better film now? It’s tough to say. Argo still is a wildly entertaining film that you could put anyone down in front of and they will like it, if not love it. The script is funny and the characters sharp. The direction is breezy and sure-handed. But Zero Dark Thirty is by the far the more challenging, socially relevant and masterful cinematic masterpiece. And so it goes. But people will always love Argo.
Is it tough to say? Is it rly?
Right now, it’s Boyhood’s to lose. It could just start winning and then never stop. As Mark Harris says – every other film coming out right now has to surpass it in terms of reviews and affection.
Nah, I don’t think it’s the Academy’s cup of tea, actually. Every other film coming out right now just has to be up their alley. I’d like to shove my boot right up the Academy’s alley.
Very good points on Interstellar, guys. Maybe it’s not too soon… Tough call. But I’m rooting for it. Just hope you guys aren’t getting my hopes up for nothing! Well, it’s all kind of moot, really, as we’ll very likely (although I did say that last year too, and then we didn’t, and spectacularly so) know 100% after the guilds if it’s winning, sci-fi or no sci-fi. We can debate endlessly before then, but if the guilds give it nothing, it’s out, and if they give it everything, then it’s winning regardless of pretty much any other arguments, genre-related or otherwise… and those are by far the two most likely outcomes for any contender when it comes to the guilds.
“THE HOBBIT : THE BATTLE OF FIVE ARMIES is the last chapter of a multi-billion dollar trilogy and the last time the director had one of those, his film swept at the Oscars. Clearly that won’t happen now, but a BP nod is still a possibility IF the reviews are there. Thoughts ?”
Fingers crossed…
“Haha. I’ve been telling people all summer Fury wasn’t gonna do squat in the Awards race.”
I had that feeling as well, though no fully-formed arguments to back it up, like you. I’m not saying it’s NOT good, by the way – just saying I always felt like it wouldn’t be a big hit.
“I don’t think Boyhood will win because it’s too small and intimate.”
There you go… again, like all of Linklater’s films, which is what I’ve been saying.
Correlation does not equal causation. Critics don’t launch anything into the race that wouldn’t have been a contender already. I don’t think Boyhood will win because it’s too small and intimate. The late contenders this year look formidable. I don’t think we’ll have a clear idea of a winner until January.
GG had a great hold Friday… only down 39%. Gonna be a box office smash.
CIRKUS, I personally thought End of Watch was brilliant. That’s one reason I had Fury pegged for a BP nomination all year. I was hoping Ayer would hit another one out of the park. Thinking more about it now though Fury was always going to be a big question mark. Regardless of the films oscar chances i’m still looking forward to seeing it.
@nick. No I didn’t care for End of Watch even though I’m a cop in a decently sized city. And maybe that’s why I was too critical of the film but nothing seemed realistic. Harsh Times was a let down too. I liked Training Day, but Ayer only wrote that and didn’t even bother watching Sabotage. I’m telling you, Ayer tries for gritty realism but it backfired when his stories become so ludicrous. He is also naturally mean spirited as are his films.
^ I was just watching that a few minutes ago!
Count me in, too
Come along!
By the way, First CITIZENFOUR trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiGwAvd5mvM
Raw, episodic, unsentimental, gruelling…
Sounds like it takes the romance and glory right out of war – for shame. Count me in, too.
CIRKUS, so I take it you didn’t like End of Watch?
“As in Sam Peckinpah’s Cross of Iron (1977) and Samuel Fuller’s The Big Red One (1980), any Hollywood gloss has been scoured away: the plot is raw, episodic and wholly unsentimental; a gruelling onward rumble from one brush with death to the next.”
“Pitt’s performance has more in common with his stern, authoritarian father-figure in The Tree of Life than Inglourious Basterds’ gregarious Lt Aldo Raine” http://bit.ly/1qAfyV9
I am in!
David Ayer? Logan Lerman? Michael Peña? Steven Price? Brad Pitt? Jay Cassidy? That’s too many great people to bail on because of a MC score. I see the trailers and I still like what I see. I will be seeing it next weekend and find out by myself.
Haha. I’ve been telling people all summer Fury wasn’t gonna do squat in the Awards race. David Ayer is a hack writer and an even worse director. He’s like the John Milius of the new generation. Why did people think it was gonna be good?
🙁
if I listened to critics instead of my own intuition I’d miss 25 great movies every year.
I know. I know. “Big” and “fat” is somewhat redundant. But I bet it’s an accurate description! Just WHO are THESE people?
“Come clean about what “members-at-large” includes — there’re a lot of them!”
Bryce, you are not harsh. You are correct in all of your suggested reformations. I agree totally.
That members-at-large branch designation has always bugged me.
I wonder . . . does it mean the branch consists of big fat slobs who don’t fit into any other category but are rich enough to buy their way in and want to hobnob with the Hollywood elite? I wonder . . .
I don’t want to sound harsh or ignoramus, but it needs reform and these would go a long way:
*Less actors. Nothing drastic, but a few less. Easy: Stop inviting people like Adam Sandler.
*Abolish PR
*Less “executives”
*Significantly more Directors
*A couple more writers too, not that many either.
*More Cinematographers, more editors.
*Come clean about what “members-at-large” includes — there’re a lot of them!
Kane
Yes, that’s what makes this year MUCH more interesting than the recent ones….and since I have the flu and it’s a Friday night (=I’m bored), here is my borderline ridiculous idea : let’s try to make educated guesses of how those 10 unseens will fare with critics (Metacritic) and audience (US + Overseas Box Office = Worldwide Total). My guess
INTERSTELLAR – 91 / 410M + 660M = 1070M
UNBROKEN – 77 / 160M + 120M = 280M
AMERICAN SNIPER – 71 / 130M + 120M = 250M
EXODUS – 66 / 140M + 300M = 440M
BIG EYES – 64 / 30M + 50M = 80M
A MOST VIOLENT YEAR – 82 / 20M + 20M = 40M
SELMA – 75 / 110M + 60M + 170M
INTO THE WOODS – 68 / 150M + 180M = 330M
ANNIE – 62 / 120M + 100M = 220M
THE HOBBIT : THE BATTLE OF FIVE ARMIES – 74 / 320M + 710M = 1030M
Yeah, I know, I predicted all 10 will reach the green zone on Metacritic, but oh well, the present is the only time one can be optimistic about the future, right ?
HOW DID YOU BECOME SO VERY CLEVER? Can’t keep up with you, Ryan
(The exchange took place a few years ago. No matter . . . or perhaps it was another AD columnist?)
Whatever the case may be, I’m glad to see we’re on the same page about this branch, or at least considering the VOLUME of people in the branch. Sheeesh..
While I’m mentioning branches of AMPAS, I do think it was a wise move for the Academy to include casting directors this year as its own branch. Nice to see the recognition which goes into the craft of choosing the right people to work on a project (so much different than the FYC publicists). Don’t get me wrong. I’m not against PR people: they often perform a much-needed effort to promote film. But promotion should have no place in AMPAS. The artistic merits of the people involved in a production should stand on their own, without the PR guys. Or to put it another way, why should a snake oil salesmen have the same vote as composer John Williams, director Martin Scorsese, actress Meryl Streep, cinematographer Robert Richardson, costume designer Sandy Powell, film editor Michael Kahn? The people I have just listed have very much earned the right to be involved in the AMPAS award decisions. PR people? Nah, don’t think so.
@Ryan Adams HAHA thats very clever.
I’ll get on my soap box again regarding one Academy Branch:
Public Relations Branch: 377 members (6.25%)
That is outrageous. Ryan and I have gone head-to-head over their inclusion as a branch in past years. I still feel PR has NOTHING to do with the creation and production of film. Most branches earn the right to be members because they are involved in the creation and production of specific films. All the PR guys do is try to sell it to an unsuspecting public . . . kind of like a streetwalker, only with a suit and tie. WHen AMPAS becomes only about money, I find It cheapens the organization. Sorry, Ryan. I still feel that way.
“Ryan and I have gone head-to-head over their inclusion as a branch in past years.”
I have no recollection of this. Unless by “gone head-to-head” you mean that we’ve put our heads together about this and performed a coordinated smfh.
seriously, Academy? You have the same number of FYC-peddlers who get coveted Oscar ballots as directors?!
Isn’t that a little like making Karl Rove honorary Senate Majority Leader?
Phantom, it’s interesting to think that usually by this time of the year we’d still have maybe 3 (my guess) at most that we’d be waiting on reviews for and haven’t been seen by almost anybody. This year has been a glutton for Oscar players.
One down (Fury), 10 more still to go : Interstellar, Unbroken, American Sniper, Into the Woods, Big Eyes, Selma, A Most Violent Year, Annie, The Hobbit : The Battle of the Five Armies. Those remain the big question marks of the season.
Why did Angelina Jolie get that “watever-t-is”? anyway? Am reading Sasha below while posting this: “Sasha asks why a frontrunner hasn’t before token gold home as an oskar?”
Some of the reviews for Fury are now up….and it doesn’t look good. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fury_2015/?adid=home_list3a
Some of the reviews for Fury are now up….and it doesn’t look good.
Don’t worry. I have a plan.
“We need a few more contenders out in the megaplexes. Until then, we’re marking time.” – YES and anyone who says otherwise is spitting in the wind. It is simply an educated guess at best and that’s like playing poker. It does not an expert make. Sorry.
Dan – Ouch! On your SAG comments re:CRASH and in general!
But, it DOES help explain how actors seem to have gotten more than their fair share of awards for Writing and Directing – Billy Bob Thornton, Ben Afflect/Matt Damon, Kevin Costner – etc.. Since actors are the biggest branch in the Academy, they seem to be ‘Amazed!’ and ‘Surprised!’ at what one of theirs can do.
Bryce, agree with Empire of the Sun and about Gaghan teaming with Bigelow. As a matter of fact, I just want Gaghan to write something again! I remember when he was linked to that book Blink for a very long time and if I remember correctly DiCaprio was attached as well. This might go back as far as 2007. I don’t think he’s done anything since Syriana. I’ll never forget seeing Clooney’s picture over a decade ago. I got excited. Then I saw the trailer with “God Moving Over the Faces of the Water” by Moby playing and I was hooked. I had to see it. Sometimes I still play that trailer, a perfect example of using beautiful music to show chaos in conversation.
More than other films having to surpass Boyhood, Boyhood has to endure the onslaught of newcomers to the field. That was Mark Harris’s point, I believe. As you know yourself, Oscar voters (and Oscar pundits and fans, I’ll add) let what’s shiny and new distract them from what’s quality.
I consider Syriana’s screenplay to be first rate, always felt that way.
Ugh so do I. I really want Stephen Gaghan to hook-up, professionally speaking, with Kathy Bigelow. They’d be a perfect, if not too obvious, match and would steer away that American trailblazer from bad companies. But for now let’s hope this series materializes at AMC because it sounds ridiculously good http://bit.ly/1EDn5gb
But I also agree with your larger that quite a few choices by NBR have been brilliant and memorable. Their boldest and my favorite of all time remains awarding EMPIRE OF THE SUN Best Film and Best Director.
The NBR is such a body that I admire at times. They pick winners that are truly amazing and some that would never have made the Oscars. Examples being Will Forte and Octavia Spencer in supporting, those are two winners that I fell in love with. Syriana winning adapted screenplay is one of the most justified wins in any body of awards groups in my opinion. I consider Syriana’s screenplay to be first rate, always felt that way. Lars and the Real Girl, 50/50, Looper…these are great winners that should have made it to the Oscars but didn’t and they are really great choices. But there are some left field choices that make me scratch my head but in some ways I admire them just as much as the others…included are screenplay winners for The Painted Veil, Gran Torino and (one of my favorite winners that gave me a big grin when I read the announcement) Buried. Anne Dowd, Lupe Ontiveros, Catherine O’Hara, Philip Seymour Hoffman (for Magnolia and Talented Mr. Ripley), Todd Field, Michael Mann and Spike Jonze all had great wins here that weren’t recognized the way they should have been.
As I also stated in another post, the Golden Satellites are also very fun to watch and make some great picks for nominations/wins.
It’s hard for me to be bullish on Into the Woods, because–no offense, Rufus–I’m not a big fan of the show. Now’s not the time for a full breakdown of why, but suffice to say, I don’t put it on the level of A Little Night Music or A Funny Thing Happened. I’m still not sure quite what I think of Sunday. I probably saw it when I was a couple years too young to fully appreciate it.
God, I don’t even know what to make of this race anymore. With some initial contenders not panning out (Men Women & Children, The Judge, Kill the Messenger, and to some degree Rosewater come to mind), one has to wonder how many more coming contenders will fail. Will Unbroken be a palpable hit? Will Selma be the stirring epic we expect? Will Interstellar thrill? We don’t know yet. And as time grows shorter, and the number of films to be considered outweighs the number of slots to fill, one begins to feel a little overwhelmed. I find myself trying to make time for all the films I want to see, along with the films I feel I need to see. And I do not have infinite time, or money.
I’d like to get paid to do what y’all do, but the truth is, I want to MAKE movies.
Updated the pie chart and bar chart for the Breakdown of Academy Branches.
Oh wait now I read more. Both songs are cut. Oh well.
And it’s clear that Rapunzel has a different fate, but it’s still not a happy one, so that makes me happy.
Dan, I’ve heard different things about that controversy and have come to the conclusion that it might be much ado about nothing. I’ve watched the show with those changes in mind. When it comes to the “adultery” there’s nothing explicit about it on the stage. They just role and kiss. Nothing past first base. And when you hear the lyrics of the song after, there’s no reason to interpret them any differently. So they take away the rolling and leave the kissing. I don’t think it changes anything.
But when it comes to Rapunzel’s fate, It would alter the character arc of a major character and everything that follows after that moment would make no sense. For that reason, I don’t think they changed it. If they did, all bets are off and the film will fail. Well, at least fail enough. But if you are to believe Sondheim’s comments, it’s been reworked and replotted. So maybe it will work. You gotta trust Sondheim and Lapine. You just have to.
(and after reading about this again, it appears that Sondheim wrote two new songs, one called Rainbows and another for Streep. As reported the Streep one was dropped. But the article said nothing about the Rainbows song. So that might still be in the film. Which might make for yet another nomination possibility!
In 1979 I was eleven and to pass time after school I would watch either Merv Griffin or Mike Douglas. Sure there were cartoons, but I was 11! I was too old for cartoons. (Yes, even then I was pretentious). And one day, Len Cariou was on I think the Mike Douglas show. I’d never heard of him, but he was on to promote his latest role, the demon barber in Sweeney Todd, a new Broadway Musical. I was utterly fascinated. I had liked musicals, at least the ones we did in church, so this one, about a murderous barber who fed the meat of his victims to unsuspecting pie patrons seemed amazing. Well, I had to see it!
And then I completely forgot about it. Until 5 years later when in Study Hall in the theater teacher’s room I discovered a copy of the libretto. I asked the teacher to borrow it. He was shocked I even knew what it was. So I read it and I fell in love with the story.
And then I completely forgot about it. And then suddenly I noticed in the TV Guide that it was going to air on PBS with Angela Lansbury and George Hearn (yes, it was a repeat). We had just gotten a VCR so I taped it, and I wore out the tape over the next years watching it weekly if not more often. I was mesmerized by the macabre details of the story, the darkness of the themes, the glorious highs and lows of the orchestra and vocals.
And then, a couple of years later. I noticed that another work by the same composer was going to air on American Playhouse. It was Sunday in the Park With George. And again, I recorded it. I would watch it daily. It was my soul captured. I was troubled at the time, I didn’t understand my soul. And I was captivated by these characters who were searching for completeless in the same way I was. At times, it was far too abstract for me with lyrics like “Pretty is what changes, what the eye arranges is what is beautiful.” going way over my head., But for every moment that was too abstract there was one I could hold onto forever such as “I’ll draw us now before we fade.” It was so fucking romantic. It was everything I pictured I wanted to be. It was me.
And it opened a whole new world as I consumed every Sondheim music I could. I didn’t understand most of it, but it pushed me to consume music and lyrics and art and literature and cinema and theater in ways I never had before. I saw unrelenting beauty in what artists gave us. And while I see much beauty in the world, nothing is more beautiful than the artist capturing it and revising it just for us to consume and to embody and to make them our own. In many ways I owe everything I am as a consumer of art to Sondheim and Lapine. Without them, I wouldn’t be who I am.
28 years have passed since I first saw Sunday in the Park With George, and nothing I’ve encountered has surpassed its genius. The works of David Foster Wallace (Infinite Jest) and Michael Cunningham (A Home at the End of the World) come close, but, man, that final song, that bow, at the end of Sunday. It’s so stunning and complete and perfect. I’m coming to the conclusion that nothing will ever surpass it in my mind.
And that is why I have perhaps unrealistically high hopes for the film version of Into the Woods. With this project, so many of my heroes are so close to the epicenter of my artistic birth. How can I not proceed with such great anticipation, with such deep trepidation?
With Cunningham’s artistic decline, with Wallace’s suicide, with Sondheim not producing new work, this could be my last best hope. And it has to be good. It just has to be.
Into the Woods already has MAJOR strikes against it with the critical establishment because of the dumbing down and excising of some of the more “controversial” content in the show. Sondheim, for the record, initially railed against the changes and then amazingly did an about-face. Perhaps some money showed up on his doorstep. Their efforts to make the movie more “family friendly” I find nothing less than offensive and regressive. That being said, I hope to be proven wrong, as I don’t have a dog in this fight and I always hope for good movies.
We need a few more contenders out in the megaplexes. Until then, we’re marking time.
I’m not hot on Unbroken simply because of the unproven director. Sure, many unproven directors go on to win Best Pic (The Artist, The King’s Speech) but not until after the films are seen. Rarely does an unproven director get on the Oscar radar and go on to win. And that is why it’s kinda early to buy into the Unbroken hype, even if the subject material is right up the Academy’s alley. Sure Jolie has the mildly respected In the Land of Blood and Honey but when you compare that film to the best films of the majority of the last decade’s previous Best Pic winners it pales.
(And thanks All – I know Marshall is a bit of a wildcard. And I know Disney isn’t in the Oscar game too often. But with the involvement of James Lapine a lot of that fear has been mitigated for me. Yeah, I go on and on about how great Sondheim is and I’ve never really praised the work of James Lapine before. But Lapine wrote the book and directed the original stage version of Into the Woods. Not to mention the two collaborated on the greatest work of all time (in my opinion) whether that be on stage, on film, on TV, or the written word. Sunday in the Park With George is daring, complex and innovative. It’s an unparalleled work of genius that only grows in my estimation every time I see it. In many ways, I see Lapine as the creative driving force behind this film since he adapted his own work for the screen and he likely provided a strong assist to Marshall. Between Marshall, Lapine and Sondheim, there is a great deal of talent here and all have done a considerable amount of work on stage and on screen (Many here probably don’t know that Sondheim wrote the screenplay for The Herbert Ross film The Last of Sheila). These are not hacks for hire. And throw in the fact that Disney put out a ton of money, I just trust this group of talented people far more than the talents of many of the other films in contention this year.
(And thanks, everyone, for the kind words!)
I see where your coming from Josh. Unbroken to me just feels like it has everything going for it. We just don’t know if its any good. I’m thinking it will be. But then again it might not be able to live up to its oscar expectations. We will all know what to make of it come December.
I am sure I’m alone in this, but I just don’t think Unbroken will end up being a huge contender to WIN in the end. Can’t put my finger on why quite yet. Very well could be wrong but that’s the ‘frontrunner’ I think will fade down the stretch a la Les Miz and The Butler.
Its starting to feel like Unbroken vs Interstellar with American Sniper perhaps playing the spoiler. All three look damn good. This is a great year for cinema.
Josh
Long story short, we should buckle up because it does feel like the best is yet to come 🙂
Linklater will win one Oscar.
You also forgot A Most Violent Year. 🙂
I totally forgot to add SELMA to the list of potential late entries.
Have to agree on Into the Woods – the only variable is Marshall. Virtually everything else is in the film’s favour, and if Sondheim is happy (Stephen, not our buddy, Rufus 🙂 ), and by all accounts he is, then we’re in for something great.
Interstellar and Unbroken are the two hottest expectations right now, sight unseen, and I believe Boyhood will hold on and get new life injected into the campaign when the critics awards start coming out in Dec.
As for the rest, I love that so many contenders are NOT your usual Oscar bait that it’s almost a sure thing that 3 or 4 very quirky/edgy films could be on the roster for BP. That will be some kind of record in itself. What will be telling is how many best director noms don’t get a BP nod, and vice versa. The era of them going hand-in-hand is officially broken – twice in a row.
Impossible to tell right now, the consensus monster won’t even raise its head for a couple months.
I remember rufussondheim calling Lupita’s win A WHOLE YEAR before it actually happened and ANYONE has ever even heard her name. Yep, he is THAT good. As I said, Into the Woods is brilliant source material so I hope Marshall will have a rare hit with it.
I will always think that Extremely Loud got the nomination just because it was buzzed about all year and it was seen so late. I suspect it made people’s ballots without being seen. Do recall that was the year that the November lists of predictions were more accurate than the December/January Lists. It was like Buzz was more important than quality.
I’m laying off the Into the Woods diatribes for now, there’s not much new for me to say. But I really hope I won’t look like a fool later. I think I am so adamant because so many so readily discount its chances because Marshall failed with Nine. As if Nine and Into the Woods are equivalent. Only a fool would think that! It appears from the trailer that a ton of money was spent on it, and knowing James Lapine (who wrote and directed the original play and has directed at least one major feature film – the great and unappreciated Impromptu, if you haven’t seen it you simply must) has adapted the screenplay for the screen, I have to think that the major stage to screen problems that affect other screen adaptions might be overcome here. Let’s hope!
Fury is coming out next week and I have yet to see a review. Could it possibly be any good? I doubt it at this point.
Whiplash seems to be getting a high enough percentage of 100’s on Metacritic that it should be more than a Dark Horse for a Best Pic nomination. Throw in the fact that it’s about the artistic process and I think it has a realistic shot. I put it at #8 right now.
At number nine I have the Chris Rock film Top Five. Most years there is a nomination for a film with a largely black cast. This year it looks like this or Selma are the two main options. Sure, Selma’s subject material is right up Oscar Alley, but maybe it’s too soon after 12 Years to choose a Black History option (yes, I know that sounds racist, but I think the Academy is full of them) so maybe they will go with something a bit more hip and current.
But I really hope I won’t look like a fool later. I think I am so adamant because so many so readily discount its chances because Marshall failed with Nine. As if Nine and Into the Woods are equivalent. Only a fool would think that!
Only a fool would ever think that rufussondheim is a fool. 🙂
It was rufussondheim and steve50 who told this site to watch out for 12 Years a Slave — months before 12 Years a Slave even began filming.
Your feelings and best instincts about Into the Woods are on record. Only a fool would hold anyone and his fine instincts responsible for circumstances beyond that person’s control.
I don’t know who would ever think that Nine = Into the Woods. You have absolutely instructed us about the reality that they are not equivalent. You have convinced me of that.
But Rob Marshall = Rob Marshall. That’s the unknown for some of us. The unknown of a director who is sometimes in complete command of his movie. But at other times, if the movie is too unwieldy, for whatever reason, he can seem at times to loosen his grasp on the reins.
We ALL hope that Into the Woods is one of the times when Rob Marshall is in complete command. Only a fool would hope that a movie with such brilliant potential would fail.
Excuse me, I meant ABOVE 80.
PHANTOM
OCTOBER 9, 2014
What makes this year particularly interesting, that we may not have the usual one or two late entries in the race, hell, it’s October already and for all we know, the top5 (BP+BD) may have yet to come :
That seems very true PHANTOM; from what I can tell there’s only 5 “front-runners” so far that have scored in the 80’s on Metacritic, though obviously in recent years the Metacritic measure has fallen by the wayside a bit (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close anyone? what a joke, got a 46)
Also, I doubt either could be strong contenders (=no shot in Best Director), but I think there are two films none of us are talking about though in my opinion, both have a shot to score filler BP nominations : if ANNIE is well-received and charming enough (Will Gluck did well with Easy A, and Emma Thompson did write the script (or at least one of the drafts) and this Quvenzhane Wallis follow-up to Beasts of the Southern Wild) the inevitable HFPA-love may translate to minor Academy love,as well, and THE HOBBIT : THE BATTLE OF FIVE ARMIES is the last chapter of a multi-billion dollar trilogy and the last time the director had one of those, his film swept at the Oscars. Clearly that won’t happen now, but a BP nod is still a possibility IF the reviews are there. Thoughts ?
What makes this year particularly interesting, that we may not have the usual one or two late entries in the race, hell, it’s October already and for all we know, the top5 (BP+BD) may have yet to come :
INTERSTELLAR (An epic sci-fi tearjerker ? As I said…could be EASILY Nolan’s year.)
UNBROKEN (The amazing true story of a beloved American legend, directed by a female superstar ? That winning Oscar-narrative pretty much writes itself.)
AMERICAN SNIPER (Cooper is on a roll and Eastwood is bound to make a creative comeback sooner or later…this could be it.)
FURY (The trailer was very promising, the Academy loves war films and Pitt’s star power shouldn’t be underestimated, either.)
EXODUS (Ridley Scott back in Gladiator mode ? Well, that very well could be the case.)
INTO THE WOODS (Rob Marshall is more ‘miss’ than ‘hit’ for sure, but the source material is so great he may just score a rare hit with this one.)
BIG EYES (The Burton-Adams-Waltz pedigree is very exciting and Weinstein knows his stuff, so if he scheduled it for December, he must have high hopes.)
Sure, it is unlikely all these seven films will be strong contenders, but right now, they all very well could be and THAT prolongs the early excitement phase before that unpleasant herdvotingbullshit takes all the fun out of the game of oscarwatching.
Hitting on what Bryce is saying, this article was released last year after Gravity nearly won the big prize and it’s regarding Interstellar…
http://www.hypable.com/2014/03/03/interstellar-best-picture-gravity/
“A lot of things will have to go right in between now and then, but last night’s Oscars may have set the stage for Interstellar to take the top prize next year.
It’s been known for years that the Academy doesn’t usually recognize science fiction, but with Gravity losing Best Picture, the chatter will now be louder than ever. Gravity was probably the closest any science fiction film has ever come to winning Best Picture, but the Academy looked elsewhere, again.
Only eight of the 512 films that have been nominated for Best Picture in the history of the Academy Awards have fallen under the science fiction genre. The eight films are A Clockwork Orange (1971), Star Wars (1977), E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982), Avatar (2009), District 9 (2009), Inception (2010), Gravity (2013), and Her (2013).
With two of those nominations coming in the past year and over half of them coming in the last five, it seems that there’s a growing sense in the Academy that it’s time.”
I already predicted INTO THE WOODS months ago and I plan to stand by it — but like phantom says, it’s starting to sound like INTERSTELLAR will be just too damn formidable. Even…even I may say, if it doesn’t get an acting nomination, though it looks like it will. Forget about last year’s best, GRAVITY, being “sci-fi” therefore this one coming “too soon” in AMPAS time. Word is that INTERSTELLAR is hugely engaging, emotional, epic, easily understood to be profound (which is as close to “important” as Nolan will ever get), and deeply satisfying. So that might do it.
Clint is back and strong so expect him to take NBR. WB should wise-up HUSTLE style and let “voting bodies” like NYFCC and NBR be the first to see AMERICAN SNIPER because I don’t think it’s like Sasha suggest that they do what they do to go “against the consensus” or “be original”. They’re just feeling extra special in late November/early December because they’re being shown the “hottest movies of the moment/big deals of the season” for their especial consideration, so they will tend to fancy one of those hot shiny potatoes as “the best of the year” forgetting about AMOUR, THE MASTER and such. BOYHOOD might be in that precarious position come December. They’re only human.
Back to SNIPER and assuming this good Clint, which we haven’t seen in a while. I think they’re missing a chance to make a whole lot of Box Office noise during the nominations ballot window by not releasing wide around Christmas time. That Eastwood trailer has been all the rage on my Facebook feed since it dropped, and whenever that happens the result is a Box Office beast (e.g., WOLF, DJANGO, TRUE GRIT, LONE SURVIVOR even SHUTTER ISLAND if I remember correctly). Civilians don’t get excited about movies very often. They just see them because they were always going to in the first place (THE AVENGERS), or they don’t because they were never going to in the first place (CLOUD ATLAS). But excited in masse? Rarely.
While I don’t think Crash should have won Best Picture, I think its SAG win is justifiable. The performances in that movie are terrific. Either Brokeback or Capote should have won the Oscar, though.
Also, I don’t see how Arquette and Boyhood are comparable to Oprah and The Butler. The critical success of Boyhood is staggering and far outweighs that of The Butler.
I would like to make note that Whiplash is getting some pretty strong raves from critics, standing at 88 on Metacritic and 97% (8.5 average) on Rotten Tomatoes. If SPC plays this right I could easily see it surprisingly sneaking in for Best Picture like Dallas Buyers Club or (to a lesser extent) Beasts of the Southern Wild. Personally I can’t wait to see it myself.
I’d already forgotten about Argo… It was really the tipping point when I stopped taking the Oscars (and awards season) seriously.
Thank you for this article. I had no idea how it worked but I had many doubts about how some movies (low quality) could be indicated. An amazing article. You told the truth about what happens in the world of Hollywood out of photographic lights.
I have a feeling this will be Christopher Nolan’s year. That’s all.
You took it easy on the big guild in the fight, SAG. I look at one row on that graph and get angry. CRASH. It was the actors who pushed that empty See’s Candies box of a film to victory. It was big and stupid – grossly offensive even – but it sure was emotional! Actors, by and large, are not the most astute film critics in the world. Nor the brightest bulbs in general (I marvel whenever I attend a SAG screening and hear even one insightful – hell, coherent – question asked from the audience). And I say all this as a proud member of the guild and an actor myself.
Boyhood is not happening. Period.
And Patricia Arquette is not happening either. She’s peaking too soon. Just like Oprah did last year. And you now how the story goes…