Oscar Update: 'Inglourious' Options, Best Actress Race, Scorsese Shuttered and More
Prediction charts have been updated!
Well, it's been almost a month since my last Oscar Update and a lot has happened in that time so along with the upcoming news bits and updates I have also updated the prediction charts in "The Contenders" section. So let's get started…
Very quickly I will just note for those of you that missed the news last week, Martin Scorsese's Shutter Island has been moved from its October release date to February 19, 2010. The move says nothing of the film's potential quality as much as it pretty much says Paramount doesn't see it as an Oscar contender so it will save its money in terms of an awards campaign and push it for a nice opening in February. This will make for the third Scorsese film to open in February following The King of Comedy in 1983 and Taxi Driver in 1976. With ten slots in the Best Picture race nowadays who knows what could happen?
Next we have this weekend's release of Inglourious Basterds and questions over what kind of Oscar potential it has. Until today, I had Christoph Waltz on the cut-line looking in at the other Best Supporting Actor nominees, but no longer. He is in the top five and based on the only two performances I have seen of the bunch on my current list, he is battling it out with Alfred Molina (An Education) for the early lead.
As far as other Basterds potential, I just don't really see any. As much as I love the film I look around reading some of even the positive reviews saying how Tarantino writes great scenes, but has no idea how to move from one to the next. This could speak to the quality of his script, his directing or the editing. I don't particularly have a problem with any of these details, but I would be willing to admit he opens his latest film extraordinarily strong, slows down and ultimately wins the audience over with a fantastic ending. Some find negatives here and they are negatives that could hold the film back. Then again, he already won an Oscar for a script that involved a man carrying a watch in his rectum. Oh, and wouldn't it be great to see Fassbender get a supporting nom for his performance as Archie Hicox?
The Academy can sometimes be hard to judge and I think categories such as Best Original Screenplay will be much easier to sort out as we move along, but I won't be writing off Inglourious Basterds anytime soon considering the news Inarritu's Biutiful may not be released this year and the fact Apatow's Funny People didn't do so well. But that still has Tarantino battling out with the likes of the following in alphabetical order:
- (500) Days of Summer – Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber
- Bright Star – Jane Campion
- Broken Embraces – Pedro Almodovar
- The Hurt Locker – Mark Boal
- A Serious Man – Joel and Ethan Coen
- Up – Bob Peterson
You tell me, do you see it fitting inside the top five with those names?
Photo: Sony Pictures Classics
Now I move to Roger Friedman's Best Actress piece at THR that has both Kris Tapley and Jeffrey Wells tapping out opinion pieces in response.
Friedman offers up the opening commentary:
We may be in trouble, folks. Even though the Academy has opened up Best Picture to 10 nominees, there seems to be a shortage of choices in another category.
There's an alarming scarcity in the Best Actress division. Not only has this been a pretty terrible year for movies in general, it's been worse for women. For some reason, no one's written them any good leading roles. There are plenty in the Supporting Actress category, but very few and far between in lead.
His selections of possibles include:
- Meryl Streep (Julie and Julia, It's Complicated)
- Renee Zellweger (My One and Only)
- Carey Mulligan (An Education)
- Hilary Swank (Amelia)
- Emily Blunt (The Young Victoria)
- Mimi Kennedy (In the Loop)
- Evan Rachel Wood (Whatever Works)
- Penelope Cruz (Broken Embraces)
- Rachel Weisz (The Lovely Bones)
- Natalie Portman (Brothers)
- Ellen Page (Whip It!)
Of that list I can tell you Streep and Mulligan are in, with Julie and Julia being the likely film to get Streep the nom, but like Wells I think it is Mulligan's to lose at the moment, she is brilliant in that film as I just moved her into the top slot ahead of Swank who is a shoo-in with Amelia, a film that has been Oscar bait since it's announcement and Swank is on familiar terms with the Academy. I don't think Weisz's performance in Bones is a lead one so I have her in Supporting and I don't think Wood has a shot with Whatever Works.
Tapley throws in a few extra names to Friedman's pessimistic piece such as Abbie Cornish in Bright Star (yup, she's my current #4), Gwyneth Paltrow in Two Lovers (a film I have yet to see but heard good things), Zooey Deschanel in (500) Days of Summer (good, but don't see it) and Tilda Swinton in Julia, which was released in May in only 4 theaters, but I have heard nothing but great things about Swinton's performance. Julia actually just hit DVD and is coming to Netflix Instant Play on September 18th, which is when I will be sure to check it out.
Tapley is also on the mark with mentions of Audrey Tautou in Coco Before Chanel as well as Helen Mirren in Julie Taymor's The Tempest, even though I have yet to receive confirmation of a 2009 release for Taymor's film. I also wouldn't count out Michelle Pfieffer for Cheri considering the Academy loves to shake things up and what better way to do it than by giving Pfieffer her first nom in 17 years?
Photo: Columbia Pictures
With all of this said, I have updated all six of my Contenders prediction charts. A couple of quick notes before you check them out:
- Meryl Streep's performance was previously listed as a Supporting performance and has now been moved to lead
- Javier Bardem remains in the Best Actor race but has been moved down due to the fact the film may not be released in 2009
You can click on any of the following links to check them out. Each opens in a new window so just close the window to return to this post.
In a bit of industry news, Tom Sherak was elected president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences last Tuesday, Actors Branch governor Tom Hanks was elected first vice president; Producers Branch governor Kathleen Kennedy and Writers Branch governor Phil Robinson were elected to vice presidents posts; Producers Branch governor Hawk Koch was elected treasurer; and Short Films and Feature Animation Branch governor John Lasseter was elected secretary. Ganis, representing the Public Relations Branch, will serve as immediate past president.
For those that like a little bit of insider information, word is Hanks was actually the first choice for president and was even nominated by Sherak who took the top spot. Nikki Finke has the story here.
Now remember, bookmark The Contenders or subscribe to the RSS Feed for continuous awards updates.
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 22 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
I believe Saoirse Ronan will definitely be nominated for leading role in Lovely Bones, while Rachel Weisz and possibly Susan Sarandon will find themselves in the supporting category.
As for Inglourious Basterds, I think the only nomination that's 100% secured is Best Supporting for Christoph Waltz. However, I hope the academy doesn't overlook the gorgeous cinematography, production design and costume design. I think the film still has a chance of being nominated for BP, Director and Screenplay, it's kind of 50/50 situation. On the other hand, I don't think I'll be shocked if the only Oscar it ends up nominated for is Best Supporting Actor. Really hard to tell right now.
Oh, and I really hope Waltz wins. He was mesmerizing. However, Alfred Molina and Stanley Tucci should provide a strong competition, so we'll see.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure Almodovar doesn't get nominated for Broken Embraces. I saw the film when it was released here in Russia and it was average at best, absolutely nothing nomination-worthy. That was the opinion of many our critics too.
Brad, I always get excited about Awards season, but I would be interested in your reply to the article below from Erik Davis at movies.com.
FROM BRAD: The problem with Erik's article is he is using a singular example to define the whole process. I agree, the so-called buzz around District 9 was stupid (which is why I never mentioned it) but it was also talked about on awards-related sites, which is exactly what they are going to talk about. In short, he is over-reacting.
Good deal on the mentioning of Fassbender's performance in IB. He hasn't been mentioned much, as Waltz really stole the show, thus all the props. Still, Michael's work is very strong in limited screen time. I wonder if the Academy could reognize such a performance. Not of course, based on screen time, I mean Judy Dench won for a sub 10 minutes of time if I recall for Elizabeth, but still, IB is not a movie that screams Oscars "notice me".
The Rake
http://thefilmnest.com
where is peter capaldi???
Two Lovers is wonderful. Great performances.
Renee Zellweger is amazing in My One and Only! A truly great performance! I would love to see her get a nomination this year.
@Rose: Funny, I was just paging down to say— how did Rene get on this list? I haven't seen the film, few will. on its limited release and almost fundless ad campaign.
I haven't been impressed with Rene for a while. For instance, I adored "Appalossa" but not her in it. She was so glaringly artificial next to Vigo Mortensen and Ed Harris who just oozed into their roles. Do you think she was that good here? I've watched the trailer and admit she delivers her lines well, but acting is surely more than that.
She reminds me a bit of the acting style from the bygone days where it was basically all style ala Anne Baxter.
I've heard nothing but raves about Abbie Cornish and Carey Mulligan's performances in Bright Star and An Education, respectively. In fact, one review out of Cannes I know called Cornish's a "career-defining" performance, so I can't wait to see that. Same with Mulligan, she's been one to watch for a few years now I think, especially after her recent theater work in The Seagull which was apparently phenomenal. The only one I somewhat disagree on is Meryl Streep, I mean, yes she's great, but her performance in Julie & Julia was by no means one of her best. It was charming and delightful, absolutely, and I mean, can she every do wrong? but this is not the Streep of Out of Africa or the like, this is more the Streep of Devil Wears Prada. That Streep wins Golden Globes, but not Oscars. I think people are getting too comfortable with the idea of just nominating her whenever she makes a movie.
I'm gonna throw Peter Sarsgaard into the best actor race for An Education. He's well overdue for a nod after a number of great performances in other films. And from the looks of the trailer he seems like he might have a shot at getting one of the top five slots.
What's with the total exclusion of The Lovely Bones in the best picture, best actress (Ronan-i think she'll be lead), and best director? Trailer looks pretty amazing.
Also, I wouldn't be upset if Joseph Gordon Levitt got nominated for 500 Days of Summer. He was so real in that movie, with such real emotions. He has more of a chance than Robert Downey Jr. for Sherlock Holmes in my opinion.
@Kate: I agree with almost everything you say here. Except Carey Mulligan has been flying under my radar so I've not been following her work. I remember her in "Pride and Prejudice" but she was just a child actor really. I agree that the little I've seen of "An Education" that she is very fine. But I've been a long time Abbie Cornish fan, so that where my loyalties lie.
I looked Carey up and do you know only three years separate her from Abbie Cornish's age? Yet Carey is still playing the child, and looks it, but Abbey is all woman. Just a thought, apropos to nothing.
@kate, how can meryl streep win by your estimation if you compare her julie&julia performance with her turns in "out of africa", "silkwood", "sophie's choice", etc.?
i thought these awards are for the year's best among those nominated? it's stupid to make streep compete against herself for her history of excellent performances, instead of the four others she may be nominated with for a particular year!
you are also reducing the "julie&julia" performance because it's not drama? by equating it with streep's performance in "the devil wears prada", you imply that it is less significant, or cannot be as great as the dramatic ones. then how about mulligan's bit? is that out and out drama?
your arguments really don't fly.
streep deserves every nomination she got and in fact deserves more oscars than she already has. it's just suddenly become cool for many people (like you) to dismiss her and take her for granted as a mere presumptive nominee and favor actresses just with much lesser talent because they got a break-out role.
but really, is there any other performer, male or female, young or older, greater than streep?
@alluhrey: Bette Davis, nominated as Best Actress and/or Best Supporting Actress 11 times, won twice.
Meryl Streep, nominated as Best Actress and/or Best Supporting Actress 15 times, won twice. It's not a matter of the greatest ever, but of whomever is also nominated. Taken over time, she is spectacular. But so are many others.
Streep lost to (in no particular order): Helen Mirren, Maggie Smith, Kate Winslet, Nicole Kidman, Kathy Bates, Katherine Hepburn, Shirley MacLaiine, Gwyneth Palthrow, Hilary Swank, Angelica Houston, Cher, Geena Davis, & Susan Sarandon.
I would say she lost to an excellent field. Meryl Streep is certainly an exceptional actress and able to assume almost any dialect with perfection. But if she didn't have such strong competition, where would the film industry be?
The problem with her assuming such a enormously famous and eccentric character such as Julia Child is that people will accuse her of merely being a good mimic. And in this case, they could possibly be right.
I agree with Matt, what's with the exclusion of the Lovely Bones in things. I don't think you are giving it enough props.
I also think that people are getting a bit too comfortable with nominating Meryl Streep everytime she makes a movie. I sometimes wish they would hurry up and give her the 3rd Oscar, so that she won't be nominated nearly as much. That being said, I can't really take much away from Meryl she is a great actress.
I've really been hearing about the buzz for Mulligan so I can't wait to check out her movie.
I am also a big Saoirse Ronan fan, so I am really curious to see how she does in the Lovely Bones and hopeful that she might get nominated.
I do NOT see Bright Star being a serious Oscar contender. The trailer was incredibly weak…Did not look promising at all. I'm a little confused as to where all the buzz is coming from.
@kelly: From people that have seen it.
On one site, Peter Sarsgaard was listed as a supporting actor, and judging by the trailer, that kind of makes sense.
@Matt: Just so you know, Downey Jr. also has a shot with The Soloist. But I agree with you; Gordon-Levitt was phenomenal in that film.
You need to see Sarah Michelle Gellar in Veronika Decides To Die she is brilliant in this movie
why nobody talking about the road for nomination people who have seen it saying it is such a good movie I will go and see it and what about were the wild things are will get nod
I think the road should get a few nomination like viggo for best actor and Kodi Smit-McPhee
best supporting actor, best movie now that they are 10 nomination for best picture,
best music by nick cave.
viggo better win this time.
Don´t forget Tilda Swinton in "Julia" it is a really smal movie but she is outstanding!
From now on, I´m hoping for Waltz to win because he was brilliant (and he is from vienna too, so I have to support him ;).