By Jenny Boulden
My jaw dropped a few times on Oscar nomination morning. We always know there will be snubs, just a matter of who and which ones, but this year was different. What most surprised me was the inclusion of films and names that had been all or mostly off my Oscar-watching radar all season. Namely, all the foreign nominees showing up in categories outside of foreign film.
As an American living far from either coast, despite my best efforts to seek them out, I don’t see or hear a lot about foreign films before they become available to stream in my home. During the race, in film journalism and the Oscar blogs I read, the foreign film category often gets treated as an afterthought. Few people have the resources to know much about the 80+ films submitted each year from across the globe, so it’s hard to come across more analysis than names of the top contenders and maybe their trailers. We treat them as their own thing, separate from the acres of words written about all the English-language Oscar hopefuls.
Because of my geography I’ve made peace with the fact that every year there are always a number of reportedly brilliant arthouse and foreign films that show up on critics’ top 10 lists that I’ve often never heard of, let alone seen. I expect to see them there. Where I hadn’t expected to find them was spread throughout the Oscar nominations this year. While I think it’s a wonderful thing, and about time we start highlighting the best of world cinema on equal footing with English-speaking films, I fell into the trap of assuming the voters would once again relegate the foreign works to “their category,” failed to realize today’s Academy voters might consider them competitive in all the categories. I don’t think I was the only one.
It happens sometimes, of course. There was the fabulous year Pan’s Labyrinth got six nominations, the year of City of God came out of nowhere to earn four, Amour’s five nominations in 2013, and of course Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon’s record-breaking 10 noms in 2001. We get a foreign-speaking nominee every so often in the acting races (Marion Cotillard, Isabelle Hupert, Emmanualle Riva), and they show up in the less Hollywood-dependent doc and the shorts categories with regularity. There’s often a foreign and/or arthouse nominee in animated with the big studios. Often, these have made a big enough splash in the precursors that I’ve seen them coming. But it’s also taken me aback before, so I scolded myself for my ethnocentrism again this year. Then I started wondering if this was another anomalous year, or if things might be changing for good.
Going in, we knew Roma would have a strong showing, its Netflix roots notwithstanding. It’s been dubbed a masterpiece of artistry, has been on every awards list. It was made by a celebrated auteur who is a household name among film fans, at least, one of Best Director’s Three Amigos. Its 10 nominations, though, tied for the lead with the British-made The Favourite. That showing surpassed most prognosticators predictions for a black-and-white foreign art film about a quiet maid in 1970s Mexico, made by the threatening new studio on the block, Netflix. It had been expected to do well in the noms, but maybe not quite that well. I don’t know that I’d seen anyone predict more than eight nominations.
But this goes beyond Roma. Cold War, the black-and-white entry from Poland, was a film I’d heard praised in passing and in scanning some top 10 lists. I am sure I have missed some high-profile discussions of it, and I’m enough outside the film industry that I don’t see many For Your Consideration ads, so I don’t know what kind of campaign it had. But where I didn’t see it showing up was in the precursors like the DGA, or in anyone’s predictions beyond the foreign film category. Yet Cold War got not only an expected foreign film nomination, but Cinematography and Best Director for Pawel Pawlikowski.
I’m embarrassed to say I did not realize The Lives of Others director, Florian Henkel von Donnersmark, had a new film out, and did not recognize it by name when Never Look Away was announced in Foreign. But when that same film showed up in Cinematography, I did a double-take. What was going on?
Then I didn’t recognize one of the Best Makeup nominees, Border, so I took a look: Swedish. In Documentary Feature, two films with the biggest heat, Won’t You Be My Neighbor and Three Identical Strangers, had to make room for Fathers and Sons, a documentary about radical Islam made by a celebrated Syrian filmmaker living in exile in Germany.
Even with Roma, acting nominations for Yalitza Aparicio and Marina Tavira seemed a longshot–they had been largely missing from some key precursors. Neither are well-known names. It seemed unlikely someone who had been a non-actor until Roma could make it into Best Actress, blowing past Nicole Kidman, Julia Roberts, Emily Blunt, Rosamund Pike and Viola Davis and the much more nominated first-timer, Elsie Fisher. Aparicio’s biggest precursor was a Critics’ Choice nomination. Marina De Tavira, who unlike Aparicio was already a working actor in Mexico, I’d seen on prediction wish lists only. According to IMDb, she has two nominations for her role as the mother in Roma: one from the Latino Entertainment Journalists Association, and one for the Academy Awards. How does that happen? Roma momentum (Romentum?), of course. But is something else at play?
The Brits and Canadians have always been a strong faction at the Oscars, and remain so, but this year they are joined by I suspect (**but have not confirmed**) more international filmmaking colleagues than at any previous awards. The majority of the Cinematography and Best Director nominees are foreign-born; three for foreign-language films in Cinematography, two for foreign-language films in Director. Did anyone predict Alfonso Cuaron, Yorgos Lanthimos, and Pawel Pawlikowski would all make the cut? By my cursory accounting of the list, almost every category has either a foreign-speaking or international nominee (I think Visual Effects, Adapted Screenplay, Song, and Costume are the exceptions).
That’s excellent inclusivity, but why now?
Here in America, we tend to focus on the films everyone’s talking about, the ones in those big shiny lights at the theater. But in the meantime, the Academy is no longer so Hollywood-centric. For all the articles on the Academy’s recent diversity pushes to include more women and people of color, and younger voters (and each group could themselves be more open to stories from international voices), often overlooked is a more widespread diversity: the spreading globalism of the Academy itself.
The L.A. Times reported that members from 57 countries were invited in 2017, and from 59 countries in 2018. That first year of the diversity initiative 283 of the invitees were international. In 2018, the new internationals invited numbered 460, nearly half of the new members. Oscar campaigners have been frustrated at this globalism, they report, as it makes getting FYC swag distributed across the globe significantly more expensive and logistically complex.
It stands to reason if the more global voting body is going to affect the nominations this much, it also has to have an effect on the winners. Where the old Academy was firmly entrenched in celebrating the familiar English-speaking films, that’s no longer true of a nice chunk of its membership. I have to think that for a voter in Germany or Brazil or Japan, a film like Roma being in a foreign language is not a mark against it at all. Nor is Netflix. International filmmakers keenly understand the challenges of U.S. theatrical distribution; will they not be the first to embrace studios like Netflix and Amazon that give their films an instant, global audience?
I always say that the Oscar race gets at least a 50 percent reset after the nominations are announced. Many races will go the way the rest of Oscar season has, often from sheer momentum or a towering performance that dominates the season. But after all the campaigning and nominating and prognosticating has been winnowed down to five names on a ballot, the season begins anew. I think it’s even more so when the categories contain some fresh names, or omit big ones. All previous contenders and ballots cast become irrelevant. In Supporting Actress, for instance, Regina King has won all season for her work in the lovely If Beale Street Could Talk, but missed SAG. Now, for the first time all season, she’s competing against Marina de Tavira, who’s in one of the Academy’s favorite films of the year. That changes the calculus considerably, even before taking the influence of global current affairs and border controversies into the mix.
We’ve seen a lot of talk about the popular film category and how clearly the Academy is embracing populist, big-office movies again. It’s interesting that even the biggest of them, Black Panther, is set in Africa and is full of themes of globalism, as the Wakandans debate their role in embracing or rejecting the world beyond their insular, protective dome. There’s a wider world, out there; should we participate in it?
That question may point to one of the most interesting competitions on Oscar night: the tension between the acclaimed American blockbusters with the big Hollywood budgets, big marketing, big screens and the big multiplexes, and the emergence of accessible worldwide distribution channels and growing appreciation for the countless smaller films that come from the great big world beyond our borders. Perhaps it’s time to turn our minds, and our predictions, outward.
Like the Disneyland song goes, it’s a small Academy, after all.
To jenny ….I sincerely hope they you received my combined apology..that I sent both you and Pierre..at end of day my initial reaction was in the clearly misunderstood context of you actually being a true academy member…rather than an ” academy member” as in one who engages but is not an actual academy member itself…geez Ryan you had me fooled some clever clever ( and confusing ) marketing my friend there.
Had it not been for the aforementioned misunderstanding jenny I would take a more informed educated measured and of course honest reaction in my response to your initial post.
Given you had the courtesy to challenge and clarify your points and reply to.mine point by point , I will graciously do the same.
Learning that you guys were the key prior to ryan and Sasha’s promotion well that does radically alter thankfully my views of you to understand where you come from as a contributor and human being but as founding member in pre- awards day era.
I will say jenny, that your views of Roma reinforce my long held suspicion of actual.academy ( clearly not yourself ) settling for mediocrity and best picture winner all too often in last 5-7 yrs being stained by unpleasant black mark of political interference or ideology. If not by filmmakers than by Oscar members instead imposing their divisive agenda ….
Don’t you think? But more than that as u pointed out u highlighted the mega flaws glaring flaws for a film like Roma. That while dramatically may be on the Mark it editing, pacing and execution I’d below par. So I’d this film .wins that truly disappointing for us more informed educated Oscar watchers.
Though I made wrong assumption which I show u my utmost contrition , I confess despite making assumption initially albiwt with a twisyin my language you actually ARE type of academy members Oscar need. Both you and Pierre I mean it cos u given me clarity to bring perspective to me on what u both about .
I hope hear from u jenny esp as I conceded my misunderstand ing to you..not done yet..I will take time as u did so thoughtfully to my otherwise judgemental assumptions on where u views came from, while I feel.I didn’t deserve u explanation that u did u earnt my respect …you really have. That and fact your a mentor to Ryan and Sasha well omg fantastic influences u and Pierre have been and mentors too!
Now when I have more time ( I just finished my routine look after love of my life – she was victim of a hit and run before I came to her life…chronic back , neck and leg pain since n ATM till I get right job we can’t afford advanced treatment therapy give help she deserves ) –
me sharing this with u is sign of my level of respect I show to both u and Pierre , and so my admiration for your willingness to take stand what u believe in share it with us reply direct to me so measured so coolly ( I am truly relieved neither u nor Pierre took my remarks too personally I certainly hope not ). So I owe u that too.
So allow me time and I reply to your points in u reply to me point by point once I done usual.
…play catch up on my own needs dinner, relax, etc then help my love I’n morning.
Then I reply point .by point gratefulto have meant you ( regardless course whether y democrat or Republican voter that not what concerns me but I do maintain there is mounting suspicion far left and far right agendas have arrived in academy . wjetge or not they be allowed big enough voice let hope not to influence Oscar best PIC contenders now and in future remains to be seen).
Kind regards Aaron
Thanks for this, I couldn’t agree more with the sentiment. Cinema truly is a global art and to see this reflected on nomination day made my heart soar.
What would help globalization at the Oscars? Change the damn thing to a Saturday. There are people around the world that have to work in the morning and can’t be up until 4 or 5 am too know who won… If they change it to Saturday I guarantee quadruple viewership numbers.
Good point! Not a problem for me, personally, most of the time, but I imagine it is for most others.
My universe is not enough of course but I know at least 20 people that would watch it live if they could sleep a while longer the day after. I would. I usually watch the condensed version Monday night, but unless you stay off line, off TV, off everything really, it’s not the same as watching it live without knowing who own beforehand. Oh well… Maybe next year or if I get fired, that works too 😉
🙂
Before the ceremony in 1999 (Shakespeare in Love year), it was on a MONDAY if you can believe that!
” proud to be a academy member” is this an idea of a joke? Of division and dysfunction u mean? How naive can one get. Pfffffft.
The biggest flaw with ms. Boulden attitude is she presents a argument for internationals based on trend from 2000’s see to the left socialists , overall history does not matter. No. If people have stop being so naive here: the information/ digital age on net is unregulated , mostly filled with pretentious insincere opinions on specifically “moral” issues diluted and bookended by manner in which ruthless terrorists and all g- d forsackdn criminals abuse cyberspace and yet some naive souls like ms.Boulden are suggesting recent history all that matters and internet age takes precedent as our guide to future of society of a institution in academy that outlasted her narrow view / blatant misinterpretation what academy REALLY ought to stand for? As it used to for 75/90 yrs so far it existence?
See the far left socialists in this world have u believe they spin on overall human history …all that matters are moral challenges to redefine our cultural institutions…never mind decades and decades of abiding by key guiding principles fuk that they say, what we,say goes we don’t respect history of institution …recent trend in our uneventful life…that what matters.
My g-d pple wakethe bloody hell up realise the internet is the LAST moral example for academy to embrace …until it regulated until checks and balances are in place it MUST not be legitimised by the academy ….for it legitimising the far left ideals over rational traditional big screen movies…
Errrrr. If Jennifer boulden is the new breed of academy member then the academy is in SERIOUS trouble.
Frankly it an absolute cop out to suggest art house foreign films have not been recognised much.
Ms. Boulden hasn’t the foggiest..the point is not about globalisation ( an utterly overated ” excuse” justify international inclusion for sake of it) the point is…has a certain Oscar contender done something that hasn’t been done before,?
Roma has been done before and frankly I question the extent the foundation public – namely the united states can relate to this particular framed story that drives Roma.
The globalisation. Of the academy to their credit was resisted in the Vietnam era , post wwII., and through the 1972 Munich Olympics , and a host of other world shaping events.
At every turn academy the key central thing they did right is speak for majority of traditional industry.
Arguing for change for sake of change just cos of the digital age is just an excuse , frankly by , as this article professes and confesses the left to impose forcefully forms of globalised social inclusion in ANYTHING and EVERYTHING that pre- existed frankly long before they were born. That right, I referring to you ms. Boulden.
Ms. Boulden only makes a fleeting nod to Oscars history but like these invading apologists determined to force change that clearly I’s against the traditional voter base and audience base wishes? Through her failure to recognise the academy long resisted till today through the historic global events I outlined in this article, fact it one educated and enough individual like myself that clearly understands the true virtue value of academy to public as it used to be as it always should be ….knows that a globalised academy will greatly diminish the core traditional audiences that one cared about Oscar.
If you follow ms. Boulden complete and utter ignorance to full value and guiding principles if academy..the issue is not foreign vs. English…such stereotypes is the type of bullshit frankly that academy membership ought to reject.
Ms. Boulden asserts dangerously recklessly that “social inclusion ” through the academy means independent obscure art house should be at war with English speaking nominees.
Oh and fact she floats the delusional unworkable fateful to heart and soul of hat academy trukt stands for a ” new popular” Oscar category, is irrefutable proof type of new naive breed of Oscar members invading Oscars sacred space.
It not issue of ” us vs. Them ” it issue of natural evolution ( embracing genres that never won before vs. Forceful evolution ( Netflix) . it also a most pressing issue of left radical agenda ( fact majority twitter sphere with which Netflix most ” premiere” content derives issues based themes for it own produced series and movies lit more than say pay TV is driven by far leftist free radicals pressing issues of race etc in irresponsible reckless ways).
Ms. Boulden views will therefore take academy down shit creek without a paddle. Think of it like this…she is suggesting to use an analogy that this ” new breed” of academy membership…fresh, naive completely disrespectful to Oscars preceding decades of history before they were even born …this analogy being.
” I want to bring this patient back to life…without it heart put something new in the patients chest ..something alternative that can substitute a beating heart”.
In other words, the beating heart of academy lies in respecting its precedents resisting globalisation and prioritising embracing big screen movies I. Cineplexes .to evve tradition you need to understand respect type of films on balance over several decades academy embraced.
Netflix arrival and foreign language films making mark in best picture frankly only occurred in under 1/4 of a century of Oscars 90 yr plus years.
Given how long it taken still doesyo embrace other more significant co structive steps then embracing overblown film like Roma , ( black and white look good in any film but not all filmmakers truly understand when use black and white a film in 1970’s in Mexico is NOT of global significance when u take out of equation that it a foreign film.
Labels aside, fact is ROMA is neither innovative nor anywhere near a masterpiece ….and it frankly curious an academy member ” blogger” clearly spend more time inventing her own fiction. Online rather truly understanding or respecting what Oscar stands for as it always has always should. But this is catastrophic for future if academy which was never founded or envisioned by founding forefathers as institutional tool to embrace globalisation…it was always should be to embrace true best film of year both foreign and English speaking not one over the other .
A utterly reckless irresponsible shallow rational by this academy member geez I hope but don’t expect other members don’t see things her way.
Aaron, my word, man! Chill. First off, you’ve got it all wrong. I’m not an Academy member. I’m a freelance writer from Little Rock who has been hanging around Sasha’s blog since the late 1990s, contributing from time to time. Lol. Wow.
Things I did not say:
1. That I was in any way associated with the Academy of Motion Pictures. I’m a 45-year-old film fan who loves to watch the Oscar race when I’m not balancing a number of writing and consulting jobs. Oscarwatching is a hobby. That image of the “New Academy Member” at the top is simply an illustration Sasha and Ryan added to my text to pretty it up and indicate who this post was about: namely, a block of new Academy members from across the globe
2. That arthouse and foreign films have not been recognized much. What? I’m saying that I noticed more of them breaking into the major categories than usual and think it might be correlated to having about 1,000 new members from other countries. And I could be wrong.
3. Any opinion of my own on Roma’s worth, since my own opinion of that film is 100% not the point here. (For the record, though, since you care, my personal opinion is it’s gorgeous to look at, constant dog turds aside, but largely left me flat and frustrated with the pacing.I felt the peak emotional moments were not earned, I felt most of the characters were ciphers despite doing the best they could with the material, and that Cuaron is brilliant in many ways but not the best at understanding women and that despite his clearly heartfelt intentions he fell into the trap of dramatizing the silent, noble poor instead of fully realized individuals with fleshed out personalities and interior lives. But 90% of people seem to disagree with me and I’m totally okay with that. It’s a beautiful film. Except for the dog mess everywhere.)
4. That I was sweeping over all academy history before my lifetime. Perhaps I should have been more explicit, but my points specifically relate to recent Oscar history. I find Oscar’s storied history and the many shifts and trends within it fascinating. As much as I would imagine the current Academy members respect Oscar’s past, I doubt many current Academy voters are considering how members in the 1950s voted when casting their ballots this year. My thoughts pertained to this year and the trends since 2000. Again, apologies for not stating that outright.
5. Anything regarding “us vs. them” or “radical left agendas.” (??) Really at a loss here. I love arthouse, foreign, indie, and blockbuster films all in their own ways.
6. Apparently most of the rest of what you write here, but frankly, your writing is so disjointed and in need of an editor I honestly can’t always follow your sentences. I’m thinking that English may not be your first language, and if so, you certainly right better than I do in another language, so I’ll give you a pass on that. But aside from wrongly thinking I’m an Academy member who has contempt for Oscar history and that I am illustrative of the impending collapse of the institution, I really don’t understand what you’re going on about. You completely misread my post, top to bottom.
I wish you well and understand your passion, even if I literally don’t understand what you are saying. Cheers.
That’s right, Aaron. Ms. Boulden is a stain on humanity and she should be imprisoned so that your rambling expertise can take center stage and preserve cinema art for the ages. 🙂
No offence but way your country going down gurgler with crazy over the top anti- establishment protests and near complete systemic breakdown of social services ranked by division I honestly think u not in a position to judge . sorry…unless u know Boulden better than me I bet u don’t then just drop it…I don’t need lectures from countrymen of type of countries that. Are so divided dysfunctional it not funny …finally you don’t realise I taking aim at bouldens attitude as Oscar member not her personally. But way I respond to you is cos of u moronic sarcasm nobody likes that. Constructively disagree u get more respectful response or were u trying be funny?
“sorry…unless u know Boulden better than me I bet u don’t then just drop it…”
Aaron, When I first found Sasha’s OscarWatch in 2007, it was Pierre du Plume and JennyBee who gave me the warmest welcome, took me under their wings, and taught me what it meant to be part of the community here.
I’ve known Jenny and “Pierre” online and offline for 12 years. We all know one another intimately. We’re as close as cyber-friends can possibly be.
Aaron, you know I back you up when you’ve been unfairly attacked by anyone here who doesn’t have the patience to look past your typos and see that you often have a lot of interesting things to say.
Please believe me when I say that you’re misreading what Jenny has written for us.
My only regret is that I didn’t see this clash sooner so I could nip it in the bud quicker.
Thank you, Ryan. I’ll take it from here: Aaron, in answer to your question, no, I wasn’t trying to be funny — I was trying to be sarcastic.
Wow…..I sooo sorry I had noooo you idea…..I wow…I was not aware that whatsoever of whom preceded your arrival on awards daily.com
Context is everything and cos I grateful to awards daily , whom u treat me well, Especially ESPECIALLY cos it online , no context or background then of course I have no bloody idea whom I talking to.
I very appreciative on the context, and I took bait of your slick advertising with icon attached to article.
You Ryan have very nicely and rightfully taken me to task I deserve that. You were gentlemanly indeed given the extent of my ramblings, when I probably deserved u be a bit blunt.
I am glad you nipped it in the bud.
Now allow me please to state my most sincere contrition and apology to your predecessors of this great site ..
I know when I wrong …if someone tells me…and clearly minus historic context had I known that I….would have altered my tone dramatically.
I take my hat off definitely to your predecessors in Pierre and jenny, and congratulate them both on the foundations that they taught u that lead to awards daily.com being powerhouse ultimate democratic site on film it is today…
You’re a good guy, Aaron. You and I go way back, yeah?
I’ll always stick up for my friends. And you’re a friend.
Pierre de Plume and JennyBee and a couple of other good buddies were the original core group at OscarWatch. I wish you had know us back then. Simpler times! All movies, no politics. Cool heads and warm hearts.
This was a rocky introduction today, but I knew you would be a gentleman and be eager to patch things up. Cheers!
It means a lot u say this especially learning where your influences came from damn I say patchy big time but it OK it way things line work..now..if only all of us and train/ mentor educate Facebook founders and twitter sphere to treat pple with respect they deserve …
Hit nail square on head you have ” simpler times before politics ” but biggest question we must ask ourselves are: what point where politics decided to corrupt integrity of best picture race? What era was tipping point ?
Wait till u see my fullest apology direct to Pierre and jenny
Update I flagged my own msg…that how contrite I prepared to be even admonish myself before your mentors here…the msg to Pierre…I reported my own remark as inappropriate how many users u know DOB themselves in ? I felt it was ultimate gesture of respect …
Just to point out user ” Chung fang” conduct in conversation …took my rational conversation. To the extreme suggested I was ” racist” I look at history of this user including I quite sure u own feedback and past word of caution to him…frankly he confused me bringing passion to my views with form of bullying which u know me I never do. But for someone to brand me if all pple racist cos they can’t handle difference of opinion when all I was doing is constructive debate I ask u explore investigate this persons atrocious conduct out of most reckless misinterpret action of my comments I come across. Not as u know I tolerate appct those disagree with my views but to label me racist or anyone cos other person in this case ” Chung” as form of bring ” racist” I quite sure potentially break u code of conduct doesn’t it? I like to think it only time in my ten years that I raise this type of concern. I quite sure what i looked into I. Users history of conversation. U warned him before. Have u?
Dear Pierre and jenny I owe u this
I hope but not sure Ryan explained to you nature of my passions , and I should explain I so busy on go…dealing with vast array of very challenging life issues esp for my partner of 3 yrs.. That I don’t always have time to process ” autocorrect” on my phone. It frustrating and especially when I write to those who been around since well before I arrived in 1999- at time site became awards daily.com
I do to those who are rational to me I will do so back. I do respect value if agreeing or disagreeing in a constructive way.
I admit to being very disenchanted with the academy …why do I care? Same reason you do in general I guess..we want academy to not only live with the times but restore its cares and appeal to the broader public …..balancing out with what critics think.
I think also politics should only become a primary consideration by film itself…where it content and material is well…about politics. but politics should not must not drive and propel the processes that academy use to consider eventual Oscar nominees and eventual winners.
I believe pre- late 1990,s Oscar did bring along cinemagoers…along with critics in their combined choices for best picture …more often than not until fateful dual of saving private Ryan ( unquestionably one of best films made in my time and most significant in cinematic innovation ( look at same film technique being employed in any battle scene in most realism driven movies today) vs. Shakespeare in love . of course we know how that went down
( and in my view how recent events around Weinstein have forever raised black mark in history of majority if past films that Oscar chose to back Weinstein – well they inadvertently backed a form of corruption – maybe not intentional but who knows).
But I opening up to you and through that jenny as well as my most sincere way of apologising, how best to than give both u and jenny insights into my own rational perspective with you.
As you are mentors to Ryan I take my hat off to you. As you were part of the pre- awards daily era I bow down to you …and above all I sincerely respect and accept things you may not agree with in my views. ..in my 5- yr ( minimum) long growing fatigue of Oscars reckless sacrifice of film goers tastes in pursuit for choices for best PIC that ever increasingly divide public from critics and I still strongly suspect among more traditional vs. Progressive Oscar members.
And for your passion your constructive views your case of bigger picture where you both believe academy should be headed ( obviously I never in my heart would intend to be racist …my reference was to political problems in some countries that tarnished it’s image to outsiders – like me…not suggesting NoR intended in anyway to suggest Pierre you have no idea cos well..whichever country u come from.
You taught both you and Jenny to Ryan and Sasha value of tolerant democratic expression of freedom of opinions…and reminded us all how to get balance to respect each other differences and to appct point of disagreement. So long as it rational largely by most pple warm friendly place to discuss movies…for all of us are on same size that matters…we are all warriors anyone comments in this site…esp. Chief mentors here I find myself talking in the footsteps of giants here and I truly sincerely hope that you.lend both you jenny and Pierre your calm rational wisdom in your approach to other future blogger sites in film and beyond ( though for film hard see anysite topping awards daily.com)
So one more time I truly sorry for poor assumptions , immature judgement and drawing all these strings way I did through massive misunderatanding of everyone’s motives…
I am one of the original members in the awards daily.com era.
But now I know just where original influences came from I saying I signalling I willing learn from Ryanand Sasha esp cos they learned from you..even your input too.
Sincerely, remorsefully kind regards Aaron
Still amazed that City of God managed four nominations, and then wasn’t nominated for Foreign Language film.
Nice article.
I can’t remember who pointed this out, but in the 60’s and 70’s, international films routinely showed up in Best Director and multiple acting categories. Cuaron and Pawlikowski are the 31st and 32nd directors of international films to score nominations since 1960. Yet some people are losing their minds in outrage that Cuaron might actually break through and win.
Great points, Pete. It’s fascinating seeing how trends shift through the decades. Cuaron winning seems pretty likely from here. I’m not a fan of Roma, but his talent is clear. And people are always outraged about something (see above threads, lol).
I feel like this is why phantom thread got the nominations it got last year. It’s a very European feeling film and there are more international members. Things like this will only continue
Interesting, I can definitely see that being an influence. (Though it’s also a beautiful film with A-list talent through and through, so it was not completely out of left field.)
It’s Regina King not Regina Hall
But a good reminder that Regina Hall should’ve been nominated.
That was an unfortunate snub.
Thanks for catching that! Ryan went in and edited it with the correction after you brought it up. I *keep* mixing up the Reginas, and I know the difference! They’re both talented actresses.
Nice piece — but, I’ll believe things have REALLY changed IF this continues beyond this year. After all, Cuaron made the billion dollar grossing GRAVITY and HARRY POTTER III. Pawlikowski won for IDA just a couple of years ago (and it too got a Cinematography nom). NEVER LOOK AWAY not only came from a previous Oscar winner, but, the nominated Cinematographer is Caleb Deschenel who has been nominated 5 times in the past, and is a big honcho with the ASC.
ALL very much appreciated and earned. But, I’ll believe the worm has turned when unknown quantities continually show up in categories outside of Foreign Language.
It better bloody not continue
?? American films only need apply?
Thanks for the compliment. Pawlikowski and Deschenel are definitely not outsiders to the industry, and I probably should have acknowledged it. Already having that respect definitely greases the wheels. Time will tell if things are really turning, but I’m betting so.