What
Sorry, but this is not going to be an argument against Dreamgirls. I will probably write that in February sometime, but not today
The reason I am writing this is that I am finding myself deeply amused by this week
April 24, 2024
Awards
Susu on: The Letters From Iwo Jima review
Krillian on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Kristopher Tapley on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Kristopher Tapley on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Hallick on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Joe Parts on: Welcome To The Future
qbtqpidc on: Oscar Morning Coming Down
IOv3 on: 20 Weeks Extra: Could There Be One More Turn?
20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
20 Weeks Extra: Could There Be One More Turn?
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
Quote Unquotesee all »
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
Let’s all take a moment and consider what it says about the awards when the Oscar for Best Picture was predicted back in, what, August? Earlier?
Speilberg wasn’t nominated for the Globes, which was the one good call they made last year.
Munich was a poor film. Poorly constructed, poorly written, and all kinds of missed opportunities to bring weight to the events. It was a very hollow film, and i felt insulted as i left the theater.
It’s the mistake of the aging filmmaker: thinking your audience will understand the gravitas based on historical relevency, rather than showing the event unfold so that the audience can know of the impact of the moment…
Intercutting footage of the hostage situation in Munich throughout the entire film was a rookie mistake, and Speilberg fumbled throughout the entire movie painting his Jewish assasians as mopey, emotional hit men, rather than showing them as the relentless killers they were. He didn’t have the courage to make these characters real, and instead turned it into melodrama.
I thought the real opportunity was to show the similarities in the Israelis and the Palestinians was to show how remorseless both sides were. Their lack of humanity was what made them the same, and while committing unspeakable acts of violence, the facade is removed and you don’t see them as Jewish or Muslim, but as cold hearted killers.
The fact that no one learned that lesson in the movie was a real dissapointment.
But Speilberg doesn’t have the balls to make a movie that bold. He is air, and atmosphere, and spectacle. The film was too small for someone of his size, and it slipped through his fingers like grains of sand.
It’s failure at the box office and during award season wouldn’t have mattered to me, but to hear how angry he was, and what a fuss he made about the poor reception of the film made me almost happy the film got snubbed.
I’d like to think at his age and level of success, little gold statues that are bought and sold like cattle, or at least the golden calf at the base of Mt Sinai, wouldn’t matter to him. But sadly, the spores are well embedded in him, and all that matters is the cock stroking of his peers.
But how do you really feel about Speilberg, Anghus?
i’m a huge fan.
Empire of the Sun, The Indiana Jones Trilogy, Jaws, Close Encounters, Jurrasic Park, Catch Me if You Can, War of the Worlds
I own them all and enjoy them.
It kind of goes back to another thread here Dave, talking about the art and not the artist.
To hear a filmmaker you respect bitch about not getting awards, when he has 1. respect and 2. shelves full of awards… it just makes me sad that these people have attainted a level of success, and something as worthless as an Oscar nomination or lack thereof can drive them to distraction.
Munich was awful, though.
If Virginia takes it from Thelma, that’ll be a story.
Thelma has won too recently (unfortunately) but I’d give it to her (of course). I still can’t figure out what exactly is the point of this? That the Academy thought the “movie was not that bad?” And where are you suddenly hearing it’s not going to win best pic? From what I can tell, it is only getting stronger coming out of Christmas. I’ve been watching Oscars a lot long longer than you have and I can tell you this is one of the more unpredictable races I’ve ever seen.
Hmm…Dave I think you’re replying to my quote that DG won’t win…here’s my reason (and I’m an ethnic minority):
1) No black film in the history of the Oscars has ever won; maybe nom’d but not a win (think Color Purple)
2) Technically it’s stunning and it’s the most fun and entertaining movie this year. Technically, funny and entertaining doesn’t win Oscars – OFTEN (exc. Chicago, but when was the one before that one).
Now, I concede all that will change if indeed it becomes the BIG boxo they’re predicting, because I’m reading that people are going back 2-3 times to see it. They are really in love w/the movie. A little squeaker like United93 could be the winner because of sentamentality(sp?) and it had no-name performers and a small budget; when did we last see that?
I just don’t see DG making it to the finish line, being nom’d is one thing, winning is another.
I still can’t figure out why Leo Dicaprio isn’t winning anything, I thought he was sensational in both movies.
and I didn’t see Borat, but why??somebody please explain why it and he were even considered? Shouldn’t it be under “documentary” or docudrama? or comedy? but dramatic actor?? hello – ?
Hmm…Dave I think you’re replying to my quote that DG won’t win…here’s my reason (and I’m an ethnic minority):
1) No black film in the history of the Oscars has ever won; maybe nom’d but not a win (think Color Purple)
2) Technically it’s stunning and it’s the most fun and entertaining movie this year. Technically, funny and entertaining doesn’t win Oscars – OFTEN (exc. Chicago, but when was the one before that one).
Now, I concede all that will change if indeed it becomes the BIG boxo they’re predicting, because I’m reading that people are going back 2-3 times to see it. They are really in love w/the movie. A little squeaker like United93 could be the winner because of sentamentality(sp?) and it had no-name performers and a small budget; when did we last see that?
I just don’t see DG making it to the finish line, being nom’d is one thing, winning is another.
I still can’t figure out why Leo Dicaprio isn’t winning anything, I thought he was sensational in both movies.
and I didn’t see Borat, but why??somebody please explain why it and he were even considered? Shouldn’t it be under “documentary” or docudrama? or comedy? but dramatic actor?? hello – ?
“Who is Thelma”?
and I agree with Bipedalist – this is a very unpredictable year. I wonder if that will help the Nielsen numbers or not?
Sorry, Anghus, I thought MUNICH was excellent. But we hardly ever agree, so nyah.
There are films that win Oscars, and then there are films that become classics down the road, and in recent years those being the same are very few and very far between. I got no trouble with DREAMGIRLS winning Best Picture. I think it’s a terrific movie. But it ain’t the best of the year, and let’s face it, those movies don’t get nominated.
I know my top three ain’t coming within a whiff of Oscar this year, anyway (THE FOUNTAIN, UNITED 93, BRICK).
There is no “dramatic actor” category at the Oscars. The Golden Globes nominated Cohen for Best Actor in a Comedy/Musical.
I feel like so many journos were on Dreamgirls nuts for so long that it’s really, really tough for them to back off now that they’ve seen the film and it doesn’t live up to the hype.
Fact is, Dreamgirls doesn’t have a single tremendous performance – Beyonce is a dud plain and simple, Eddie Murphy’s performance is overrated and thin (though a lot of fun), Jamie Foxx’s is straight screw-up-the-movie wack, and Jennifer Hudson, as much as I love to hear her sing, can’t act her way out of a box.
Fact is, there aren’t any great songs. Listen and Hudson’s big number were easily the highlights, but after that…nada…
Where were the dance numbers? What made Chicago special was that Spectacle was Back, and yet Dreamgirls just titters on, with no great big numbers…that hurts…
Anyway, Dreamgirls ain’t even close to being the best movie of the year, and it’s got nothing to do with white men not digging musicals. It has to do with this particular musical not being a great one. Same thing with Brokeback, apologistas for that film can cry homophobia all they want, but that movie was Snakes on a Plane – once the Oscar hype CRASHed and burned, nobody spoke another word about it…because it was more political than a great lasting film. The fact that a piece of garbage like Crash took it down just goes to show how weak it really was to begin with…
And the cult of Clint Eastwood has to end – God hep us that the old bats in the Academy don’t give this guy another statue for the two lame films he came out with this year. The elevation of the cult of Eastwood over the mediocrity of his recent films is beyond disgusting…
In the end, the movie people liked most this year was THE DEPARTED. It’s also the best made, most exciting film with the best acting. I think this is Marty’s year…for picture and director…time to get on the bandwagon…
Alan,
i thought we covered this? We don’t agree on films because you are perpetually wrong about the movies you enjoy, where as i have a finely tuned cinematic sense, a member of the film elite who drives around los angeles in the back of a Rolls Royce asking people if they have any Grey Poupon.
Carpetmuncher, Dave will never get on that bandwagon. I think he Departed in the number 4 slot last time I checked…behind The Queen and Letters.
Have to disagree big-time about Dreamgirls. I found Hudson and Murphy’s performances wonderful. Foxx, too. Even Beyonce was effective considering it was a pretty thin role.
I don’t think it’s the best film of the year, but it’s up there. And it’s the kind of thing the Academy will eat up. Emotional, uplifting, big box office, lots of stars.
“Fact is, Dreamgirls doesn’t have a single tremendous performance – Beyonce is a dud plain and simple, Eddie Murphy’s performance is overrated and thin (though a lot of fun), Jamie Foxx’s is straight screw-up-the-movie wack, and Jennifer Hudson, as much as I love to hear her sing, can’t act her way out of a box.” You have to see it a second time as I did. Eddie Murphy is GREAT! the best he’s been since Bowfinger. Jamie Foxx’s facial expressions speak volumes, and Jennifer CAN act. Just watch her a little closer. She can do sassy, comedy (the Martin Luther King scene), drama, tired, and she sings in between that. (lol)
“Fact is, there aren’t any great songs.” Au Contraire, can you name one single song from Chicago? I can’t. How about from Rent? The Producers? But I can sing Listen (which is getting good radio rotation), AIATY, and Stepping on the Bad Side was a tremendously good choreographed scene and I remember the tune, my friend. [BTW, I have the cast album, so that’s cheating a bit on my part.]
The first half of DG was magnetic, perfect. The second part, granted gets very melodramatic, but it is still entertaining and holds attention.
Now – as for the best picture? Watch the Oprah. She’s called the winners for the past two years. Crash and Million Dollar Baby. She’s backing DG for the best picture ( I think she’ll be disappointed, but I’m wrong a lot) and she’s backing Will Smith or Forest Whitaker for best actor.
She didn’t “back” Million Dollar Baby” at all. She backed Hilary Swank, if anything. She backed Crash, no doubt about it. Her influence will help Dreamgirls but it won’t have any impact on how the Academy will vote, I don’t think. Not this year. This isn’t a Brokeback vs. Crash year.
“No black film in the history of the Oscars has ever won; maybe nom’d but not a win.”
IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT, a film specifically about black/white relations, won Best Picture, and it’s “blacker” than most Eddie Murphy movies. One might also make a case for GONE WITH THE WIND, as slavery was the undercurrent that drove the entire saga.
Is violence really an Oscar killer? We have “Silence of the Lambs, “Braveheart,” “Gladiator,” “Unforgiven,” even “The Godfather” movies to some extent. This list even leaves out the war movies such as “Platoon,” where the violence is generally forgiven as being essential to the subject matter. It seems to me at least that “The Departed” is the one movie that critics and audiences both agree on. Is the Academy too far removed from reality to see this? “The Departed” probably won’t win, but has it already been declared DOA?
Talk to Oscar voters about The Departed.
That’s all I can tell you.
I’ve asked this question before, DP, and you didn’t answer it: How is The Departed too violent and grindhouse for the Academy if Silence of the Lambs was able to sweep? Have they become more squeamish in 15 years? SOTL is even shallower than Scorsese’s film, and while there may not be as many fucks uttered or gunshots to the head, you had lines like “I can smell your cunt from here”, Lecter wearing ANOTHER MAN’S FACE, etc. The film was pretty grotesque and I’m sure made the people in question uncomfortable while watching it. By comparison, The Departed is a laugh-out-loud ride of a film, but measurably deeper in terms of theme and resonance (not that it’s an overwhelming amount).
Demme’s film was also much less of a prestige picture, and made Hopkins and Foster into the box-office draws they are now, whereas The Departed already has a ready-made pedigree. It wasn’t a tough sell to the general public or the critics, so why do you anticipate Oscar putting its foot down when it comes to Best Picture?
And guess who’s on the cover of Editor’s Guild magazine just arrived in today’s mail? Virginia. Sorry, not on-line yet. And the most recent quarterly of The American Cinema Editor with Scorcese and Jack on the cover had separate interviews with Marty and Thelma, also not on-line yet.
Jodie Foster had won the Oscar three years before for The Accused. The movie is told through her, not Lechter’s.
The film took itself far more seriously than The Departed does. The Departed is a violent comedy, in great part… which by the way, I remind you, I love.
Departed is a boys club movie… and God bless it for that. But it is not a drama in the way Silence was. It is far more like Cape Fear, which didn’t get nominated, than like Silence. And Silence is more like Unforgiven than like The Departed.
And again… talk to Academy members. Lots of them liked The Departed a lot. But it is not a movie that they seem to feel is presitgious.
Look… if I thought a movie I loved could win, I would be happy to jump on this train. But the truth is, if you listen to members, you don’t even get the feel that the film is a lock to be nominated. I think it will be… I think it will be #2 or #3 for a lot of people. But the winner? No.
I’m reaching here, but I think what DP is saying (and I wouldn’t want to speak for him, so correct me if I’m wrong) is that the Academy members he has spoken to are citing the violence in “The Departed” as too much to take home the big prize. A cynical person could read into that statement that the Academy resistence to the movie is more about Martin Scorsese than the violence. An Academy member citing violence as a disqualifier might be looking for something to justify the snub. Using violence is an easy out for them. But the Academy has a history of rewarding violent films, so it doesn’t hold up. The Academy also has a history of snubbing Scorsese. He’s never won an Oscar to my knowledge (but it’s good to know Phil Collins has). Please note that this post is blasting the Academy, not DP. DP is just serving as the messenger in this case. He’s telling us what he’s hearing. Finally, “Silence of the Lambs” also has semen slinging in it. Personally, I’d rather watch a little violence over semen slinging. But that’s just me.
Sorry, but could someone explain the Virginia and Thelma mentions? Huh?
David–so which film do the members you’ve spoken to really like? I can’t imagine Dreamgirls is LOVED either, though.
Oh, and Filmfan,
Virginia is refering to the editor of Dreamgirls, Virginia Katz. Thelma Schoonmaker is the editor of The Departed.
The way I see it, Dreamgirls not being a slam dunk opens up the entire Best Picture race and makes it anybody’s ball game.
That’s what happened last year and let CRASH in the door, because as much as sections of the media wanted it to be, BBM was never a slam dunk, but rather was the frontrunner because it was a fine film in a very poor year for movies.
Eastwood clearly is an 800 pound gorilla in an open Oscar race – it wouldn’t surprise to see him win again, but for the mediocre quality and like-ability of his films this year.
As much as I like The Queen, it’s hardly a shoo in to be nominated, and IMO has absolutely no chance to win Best Picture.
As much as I like Babel, I’ve taken to heart DP’s take on the film as being not well-enoughed liked or successful enough to move the Academy. Longshot.
Unless Clint’s mojo blinds voters again, it’s hard to see any film other than Dreamgirls getting more votes than The Departed.
And the Dreamgirls “glow” is gonna wear off soon…the hype was too much for the film to bear, which made it only half-satisfying…
I’m somewhat baffled that so many people think Dreamgirls is a lock. Among the academy voters I’ve talked to (which isn’t many I must admit) the reaction has been surprisingly lukewarm. The favorite? Sure. But a lock? I just don’t know.
Should be interesting to see how it all pans out. I imagine there will be some surprises when the noms come out.
No, Jonj. It is the violence.
Light, asian style, extreme, humorous violence.
The end of the film is what really kills it. That is what they leave the theater with. Not positive. Not hopeful. And it isn’t Silence, where the killer is more moral than the man he is about to kill.
P.S. These are the same people who will be voting Scorsese the Oscar for Best Director.
“Will be” this. “Will be” that. Come on…
“Talk to Oscar voters about The Departed.
That’s all I can tell you.”
You mean all 5,000 and some odd of them? I doubt even you can do that, DP. I’m not saying anything is for sure going to win (unlike you are doing WAY too early) — it’s still all speculation at this point. But to compare Departed with Cape Fear is like comparing Tara Reid to Marilyn Monroe. The two are so wide apart it’s almost frightening. I’ve seen Departed four times now and I can tell you, all my fangirl nonsense aside, it is a kick ass film, top to bottom. There is no weak link in it. It has the golden triangle of brilliance: writing, check. Directing, check. Acting, and fucking how. It’s got it all.
You’re going to tell me the Academy are really such a bunch of whiny little pussies they can’t handle a movie like The Departed? A thick, juicy steak of a movie that kicks ass from every corner and sinks the eight ball? Please. If you’re gonna say Departed gets screenplay, director, maybe supporting actor – and not picture too? Uh……and why is that exactly? Because of the violence? I say, it’s possible. Both my mom and my older sister were frustrated because (spoiler)
(spoiler)
(spoiler)
Leo dies. They both pronounced, “it’s not winning best picture.”
But in a year like this one, I say, it has just as good a chance as any of the frontrunners to win. I think it is between Departed and Dreamgirls, but now I think there’s a slight chance Little Miss Sunshine could be the surprise spoiler. We’ll see. Don’t count out any movie right now. Well, you can probably count out Letters. You can probably count out The Queen. But that’s it.
bipedalist, remember another film where (SPOILER)
(SPOILER) Leo died at the end of the film?
Big Oscar winner, that one.
I understand your point, DP, about The Departed not being as serious as SOTL. But I’ll remind you that American Beauty was almost as vile (guy jerking off in the shower, coming this/close to screwing high school girl, guy kissing other guy, etc.) and didn’t take itself too seriously either. Also, Hopkins, in addition to his Porky Pig-level of hamming it up, was practically winking throughout the entire film. Yes, Starling is the entry point for the viewer, and is taking it very seriously, but the audience was squealing in delight everytime Lecter was on the screen, with his exit line “Having a friend for dinner” is the equivalent of the rat at the end of The Departed.
Another thing about the end, how is it downbeat? Sure, there’s a very high body count, but the most likeable character for the audience is still alive, and the bad guys all go down! The rat is meant to be a wink, and I don’t see how that fails to fall under the positive column. The end of both Godfathers sure as hell weren’t hopeful, if that’s supposed to be some kind of requirement.
You can ultimately bend these exceptions (and rules) to support any hypothesis. And as unlikely a BP winner as The Departed may be, we can say the same thing about Gladiator (essentially a summer action film), American Beauty, SOTL, Return of the King, The French Connection, Annie Hall, etc. You just never know.
For the record, my point about Foster in my last post was that sure, she had already won an Oscar for The Accused, but people didn’t see SOTL because of her billing. It was a true word-of-mouth success, and is the film that made her a draw.
Just wanted to clarify that while discussing American Beauty, I didn’t mean to imply that Chris Cooper kissing Spacey was vile. I was trying to point out things in the film that would have potentially made Academy voters uncomfortable.
I hope shower masturbators weren’t offended either.
Again… I’d be thrilled if I thought The Departed could win. I seem to remember a lot of people questioing me when I first said it could get nominated back in September. Funny how things change. I expect it will be the highest ranked film on my Top Ten list that gets nominated this year.
But I just don’t see it winning.
And no, BiP, I don’t talk to 5000 people. But remember that the film is months old and the conversation has been going on. I have yet to met a single Oscar voter, other than Graham King, who has suggested they would vote for it to win Best Picture. Most of them agree that Scorsese will win the Oscar.
And so it goes…
Think of like this. Anyone ready to discount The Departed remember this much. The Academy is ruled by actors and directors. Think about the cast in this film. Think about how they are alphas. They lead their field. Then think about how many friends they have. Jack. JACK fucking NICHOLSON. Martin Sheen. Alec Baldwin. Matt Damon. Leo. How many pals do you think they have in the Academy? Think about it really hard. Come on, DP. #4 on your chart?
Laz, point taken re: Leo. LOL. I wish I’d thought of that.
Dreamgirls is a crowdpleaser and I know that’s a big thing. But in its own way, so is The Departed. So we have a real race on our hands.
From another message board:
Awards campaigners just seem to get cleverer and cleverer. The most recent intriguing move was made by Bill Condon, the man behind Dreamgirls.
Imagine my surprise when I recently opened my front door to find a special delivery packet containing DVDs of The Band Wagon with Fred Astaire, Cyd Charisse, Oscar Levant and Nannette Fabray, as well as a copy of A Star is Born with Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson. It was accompanied by the following letter:
Dear BFCA Member:
One reason I always thought Dreamgirls could work on screen is that it
The fact is that Departed has a great cast but every single one of them has done better in other movies… except for Foxx, I think Dreamgirls is showing off a lot of great new talent, which has to be more impressive than what the actors did in Departed. I think the latter’s more about the script and the direction.
Ed, no offense but you’re cracked. LOL. Departed works because there is no weak link in the chain.
That Bill Condon musical thing isn’t so bad – I’d love to get those movies. Hell, must be nice being a BFCA member. Right Kris?
EDouglas, if you think Departed isn’t about the actors you’re crazy. Everyone in the film is working at the top of their game. DiCaprio gives arguably his best performance to date, and you could make a case for Damon as well. Once you get past the “Jack’s just playing Jack” bullshit that you keep hearing and look at the actual arc and downward spiral of the character you can really appreciate what Nicholson has done as well. Even Farmiga does so much with the token female role. And did your audience not erupt with laughter at each of those money lines Wahlberg and Baldwin were given?
The screenplay is definitely a big part of its success as well considering the juicy dialogue, but I think Scorsese is a lot more restrained here (and less creative from technical standpoint) than he was on Gangs or The Aviator. What he brought to the table with The Departed was his sense of pacing and being able to ratchet up the tension. Still award worthy, but I would have rather seen him win for the visual fireworks of the previous two films.
I can’t speak for what DP has heard through the grapevine, and I’m not saying that his perceived buzz (or lack thereof) is without merit. But it’s quite difficult to take the pulse of that large of a group, especially when the verdict isn’t entirely out on Dreamgirls yet. The way they feel about these films when they see them and whe way the public feels about them contribute to what’s going to take the gold. Crash didn’t win solely because it struck a chord with the Academy members but because it slowly built up steam on the outside as well. If Dreamgirls fails to make enough of an impression, The Departed could win by default in a sense, because the other films don’t have enough of what it takes to win.
To be honest, as long as Marty wins I’m not going to sweat best picture too much. But if you see a shitload of acting noms for The Departed when they are announced it could be a harbinger of things to come. If Farmiga pulls a surprise nomination or you see Wahlberg and Nicholson show up, there could be a steamroller on the horizon.
So…which version of A Star Is Born is Bill Condon sending out?
Did somebody up there call “Gone With the Wind” a black film? That’s…wrong.
Anghus, I think Spielberg was more upset that his movie wasn’t a popular success than anything else; he’s won his awards. He’s building his legacy in this phase of his career; he could have made the movie you propose in his sleep, but he was striving for something less realistic and more interesting.
Well, after reading the positive feedback, I kinda WAS looking forward to seeing “The Departed”, until a certain poster decided to reveal the end of the movie. So, would anyone be so generous as to convince me that knowing the end will not lessen my appreciation of this film?
BTW, to bpedalist: Worst. Spoiler Alert. Ever.
Do you not know what the word spoiler means? I gave a full, long, fair warning. If you didn’t want to read it you shouldn’t have. It’s not like I didn’t give you warning.
I had seen “Infernal Affairs,” the Korean movie that “The Departed” is based on. Even knowing certain plot elements and the basic structure of the film ahead of time didn’t hurt it for me. It’s still worth seeing.
I’m also looking forward to the guild awards, if only for amusement as folks online shit a solid brick when the craft based guilds don’t do what they were preordained to do by said online folks.
There’s nothing wrong with Dreamgirls other than that a small group of people are just too damn tired of writing/hearing/anticipating it. And maybe some of them just don’t like musicals.
We may even get big surprises from the PGA and DGA, that’d be awesome.
What I’ve never gotten is how personally some people take it if their favorite film isn’t nominated or if a popular, entertaining film wins (why does the online world silently sanction virulent hate of popular movies? Gladiator is a superb piece of entertainment, for example).
To movielocks: Ditto. It’s all about the boxo anyway isn’t it. I mean the only reason to want DG or the Departed to get the major noms is because it helps boxo.
It’s true that the guild should shock people. Dreamgirls getting guild nods would not be a shocker, though. PGA will likely include Borat as the big surprise; DGA could surprise too. Every year, though, just when you think they are going to shock you, they end up picking what everyone else is picking. The reason? The date change is just too short. But who knows. I too suspect surprises coming. That’s why we always say there are really only two or three locks this year.
The problem with Dreamgirls is that it’s a phony mess. There’s no dramatic urgency to it other than the scenes with Jimmy and Lorrell. All of the other leading characters are either uninteresting or not well played. Every other line that Jamie Foxx has is either about how beautiful Deena is or how the music industry is about making money. He would drive the people around him to the point of frothing at the mouth insanity if he was a real person. Aside from Anika Noni Rose, Eddie Murphy, and some solidly filmed musical numbers there’s really just not much to care about. I would’ve much rather seen Condon just do his own take on the struggles of black singers of the 60s and 70s than this flat adaptation. However, not with most of these performers.
According to the mojo, “Night at the Museum” is up 83 screens as of Friday, putting it at 3,768. But don’t you think it’ll run out of steam before it outperforms those “Fockers?” In an unrelated note, “Children of Men” should hit more than 1,200 screens next Friday, again according to the mojo, so people can actually see what all the fuss is about.
Ignore my post above, I meant to post it on the box office estimates thread, but since I’m an idiot…
Ignore my post above, I meant to post it on the box office estimates thread, but since I’m an idiot…
“The reason? The date change is just too short.”
Same as it ever was.
Thank GOD for the shortened season. The issue of getting voters in various groups to see movies was ALWAYS (in the post-studio-system era) the biggest issue… ask anyone who dealt with all this a decade or more ago.
I hate how everyone changes their tune about what is happening from week to week. Getting people to want to see United 93 – which has been seen plenty to get traction if it was ever going to get it – is not an end of year issue. And the failure of Painted Veil to catch has nothing to do with its release date. The only movies that have not been widely available for over a month already are the two late entries by Weinstein… both of which have been held back. Dreamgirls and Letters From Iwo Jima will be both be seen by over 80% of membership before the end of this next week. People who aren’t critics hate Children of Men.
All this, “they don’t have time” shit is just an excuse for why movies that some people love are not getting nominated. We have 8 films in our Top 20 of Top 10s that are “hard to see” or “not seen enough.” Critics who complain about the crush somehow saw all of them.
And where do you place Half Nelson or The Illusionist? Unseen or not well liked enough.
The reason the guilds tend to go with the flow is because it is a flow. Ryan Gosling… Phyllis Somerville… Chivo… Milena Canonero… and others could “surprise” in guilds and eventually Oscar noms… but just as voters in the biggest branches hear about the “hot” films, people in guilds hear about what will inspire them and they go see those movies.
Of course, it all comes back to the absurdity of an annual set of “winners.” The work from the costume designer of Children of Men, for instance, was letter perfect. But it wasn’t as showy as, say, Dreamgirls. So which gets the nod?
This whole thing about the too-short season is bullshit. It’s been this way for years and everyone strategizes on how to play it every year. The idea that movies just happen to hit their release dates is Hollywood magic/bullshit.
Who does The Painted Veil have to blame for being so late to the party? No one but themselves and their arrogance in fighting the Chinese for an extra two months. Where has Miss Potter been? In Harvey
No, you’re wrong, DP. Take it from someone who has been around since they changed the date (you never listen to me so I’m wasting my time but…). Everything changed. The first wave happened where every movie and performer was winning everything across the board because there was no time for reflection. Now that Crash happened, it’s clear they have adapted and evolved past that. We are now entering unknown territory which is why it seems like it’s harder to predict this year. It might turn out that it’s just a whole lotta nothing and it will go as expected. But there’s a tiny chance it won’t. There is a chance that Devil Wears Prada could be one of the nominated pics, etc.
“The problem with Dreamgirls is that it’s a phony mess. There’s no dramatic urgency to it other than the scenes with Jimmy and Lorrell. All of the other leading characters are either uninteresting or not well played. Every other line that Jamie Foxx has is either about how beautiful Deena is or how the music industry is about making money.”
At least it’s an ENTERTAINING mess. (lol)
Re: DP’s last post, I wouldn’t worry too much about Chivo or Canonero’s chances. It seems to me that the real visual artsy departments (art direction, cinematography, costume design) are more likely to nominate outside the pack of frontrunners, unlike the Editors, a bunch of goose-stepping whores that always seem to carbon copy the BP lineup. Lubezki managed the sole nod for The New World, which probably wasn’t seen by as many who will wind up checking out Children of Men due to the raves,
You can look at Geisha, Sleepy Hollow, Girl With a Pearl Earring, Titus, Dick Tracy, Phantom, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Kundun, Priscilla, Lemony Snicket, Velvet Goldmine, and countless others for more thoughtful nominations that weren’t in the running for the big categories. Hell, what about that Wally Pfister nom for Batman Begins last year?
Of course, these selections don’t always win, but when they do it’s very refreshing to see.
Saw Dreamgirls last night. Fairly entertaining, but hardly ever joyous. In fact, I never felt a sense of exuberance until Eddie Murphy’s character did his riffing/rapping meltdown on stage. I was mildly annoyed by a few historical innacuracies — excuse me, Mr. Taylor (Foxx), but poltical/protest/social commentary music actually was commercial during the period you’re talking about — but that’s a minor point. On the other hand, I must admit: Idlewild is much more exciting.
The problem with the editors’ branch, Lazarus, is that it’s so difficult to discern good editing from the rest of the movie, as opposed to the other things you mentioned, costumes, cinematography. The best editing is often in the worst movies, too, keeping them at least watchable.
Bringing up “The Band Wagon” to Academy voters will only make “Dreamgirls” suffer in comparison.
BTW, United 93 wins BP.
There’s truth in what you say, jeffmcm, but if the sound, visual effects, and sound effects editing departments are able to extract the worth from those “worst” movies (I assume you’re talking about the big summer blockbusters), why can’t the editors do the same? I’m not saying I’d like to see an Best Editing roster completely filled with bubblegum, but it’s a little ridiculous when films like Finding Neverland and Million Dollar Baby are nominated simply because they’re BP candidates, or even worse, when something like Crash wins because, what, it had a bunch of different storylines? You’d think the fluidity, rhythm, and decisions of the cutting would reveal the merit, as opposed to the narrative form itself impressing the voters (though certainly The Constant Gardner was a brilliantly edited film with a deliberately fractured form).
Then again, what the hell does the average academy member know about editing? When you don’t have a clear winner in the running like a Schoonmaker, Murch, or to a lesser extent Kahn, the winner is often too arbitrary. The nominees, however, put forth by the editors, should be more varied than they normally are. Only rarely do you see something lower-profile but worthy in the mix, like when Dede Allen was oh-so-deservedly nommed for Wonder Boys.
What are you, 70 years old now?
BiP… I know you are The Godmother and all, but I was writing about the season for years before you had a website. That doesn’t make me right or wrong, but if you want to read about Miramax strategy circa 1996, its out there.
It was always unknown territory. Miramax was brilliant at manipulating things and had zero intention of In The Bedroom getting nominated. Shit happens.
You are so busy looking at the trees, you forget the forest. These races are races. They all have flavors. They all have moments of change. None of this happens in a vaccuum.
Million Dollar Baby took an opportunity in a season that had only one film that was remotely muscular (Aviator). Crash took advantage of BBM’s arrogance and fatigue from the other players. (I would guess we will see a similar situation this season.) Chicago would have won everything if it weren’t for the Holocaust movie and the Holocaust movie wouldn’t have been so impactful if there was a third strong candidate.
It goes on and on, year after year, back to when the studios just made it all up.
Do you think Gladiator benefitted from a longer season? American Beauty? Forrest Gump? Braveheart?
There is no big mystery this year. Three of the nominess are likely to be from before November. Two are likely big footstep December titles. Same as it ever was.
Crash is no more a surprise than Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan, Braveheart over Apollo 13, or The Last Emperor over Broadcast News and Moonstruck. Different years, different circumstances, the beat goes on. Just because you were surprised doesn’t make it all a toss up.
I’m not saying everything – or anything – is all locked up this year. But this has been the most static season I have seen in forever. And it is not because the season is so short.
You think it’s static because you’ve written the end already.
“Take it from someone who has been around since they changed the date”
That was, what, two years ago? Is that supposed to be impressive?
I wasn’t reading DP then, but Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan was pretty surprising at the time.
My recollection, dim as it is, is that although it was a surprise, it was only a mild one, and not at all a shock. As the Oscars approached it was suggested more and more that SiL could beat SPR for various reasons, including SiL’s later release date, and the Miramax campaign for it.
I agree with Jeff that it was regarded as surprising, even shocking. Miramax was even vilified by some afterward for the aggressiveness of its campaign. I came across it on Starz the other day and rewatched part of it again. It struck me that while it’s a fun, entertaining little movie, it really didn’t register high on the prestigious scale (at least to me) that the Academy seems to love.
Many were shocked, but those in the predictions game saw the Shakespeare win coming. It was a Denzel and Halle moment. Remember how at the last minute everyone knew Denzel would win. I predicted both to take it and it turned out to be right – truth is, it was just that weird buzz thing – if I’d been paying attention last year I might have seen Crash coming. Kenneth Turan once told me that he had to put in his LA Times predix a week before he knew, and everyone else knew, Shakespeare was going to pull a surprise upset. Many were surprised. But hey, the better film won that time. It was written with the idea of attracting to and appealing to Academy voters, the writer has admitted. SIL is the ultimate Academy movie – and since it had Harvey Weinstein on it (and Tony A. I might add) Ryan never had a chance. However, you can see how split they were as Spiely took director.
The whisper campaign, the big spending – all of those were cited as reasons why the frontrunner lost that year. But as a seasoned vet once told me, a frontrunner wakes up nervous. If you’re a political candidate you want to BE the frontrunner but you don’t want people calling you that; a frontrunner can lose. And underdog can’t.
Sayeth the Mighty One.
Happy New Year, DP and Laura – and everyone else.
p.s. the date change — with more time, The Pianist might have won BP; Hotel Rwanda might have made the best pic cut. Imagine if you still had a whole month (january) to campaign for your film after they’d been released. Imagine all that you could do without having to shove voting into those few weeks around and after the holidays.
But BiP.. imagine you do… imagine you don’t…
I haven’t written the ending. And unlike you and most other people I know, I don’t do – or try to avoid – reverse analysis of what did get nominated. The reality of the road doesn’t change because of what five films arrive. And what happens after there are five and not five hundred and five is critical as well. There are very few juggernauts and Dreamgirls is not one of them.
But your theory presumes that the shortened season was not taken into account by the filmmakers involved. The Pianist debuted at CANNES!!!! It’s release date was 100% strategy, not delivery date. I don’t disagree that more time might have pushed it past Chicago. But if Saving Private Ryan was released in December, it probably would have won best picture. These are all choices, not God’s will.
If Cynthia Swartz could have shortened this season another month for The Queen, she would have. If WB knew in Aug what they know now about The Departed and Blood Diamond and Iwo Jima, Departed would have been released last week, Blood Diamond in March (or Oct, if they had it available), and Iwo Jima in November.
Ironically, the problem I have with your notion is that my sense of the universe is that nothing is written, everything is strategy… and of course, the film.
With the Top Ten lists is, do ya think that Fox would have started a more serious push for Borat and Sacha in November? (yes.)
With it to do over again, don’t you think Par Vantage would have held Babel until right after the Globes noms? (yes.)
But my biggest point is that getting people to see the movies they weren’t all that interested in seeing has ALWAYS been an issue… short season, long season. The shorter season is a little less like political primaries leading to an election. The Globes influence has been mostly crushed out. That’s a blessing.
But movies, especially like Children of Men, have NO excuse for bitching about the timing. The movie opened at Venice and was in release in Europe in the fall. If they thought it could get awards, they had an open field of options. And if they didn’t get caught up in the ego of chasing awards that Academy members would never give them, they would have had much better commercial sailing in Feb or March.
All of this is tainted, BiP, by “But hey, the better film won that time.” That is your opinion. My opinion is that SPR was a film that, by design, was vulnerable to the “it was all about the beach sequence” attack, exacerbated by six months of stewing and a fairly arrogant laid-back approach by DreamWorks (see BBM).
Of course the frontrunner is paranoid. I would say it is fair to say that more than a third of the anti-Dreamgirls hum is about its frontrunner status. People, especially journalists, rebel against being told where a film is slotted. Someone whose name would be ugly to drop asked me two days before Return of the King won, “Do you really think we can win?”
Dreamgirls ain’t Return of the King. But The Departed ain’t Shakespeare in Love either. Nor is Little Miss Sunshine. United 93 ain’t Schindler’s List. The Queen ain’t The English Patient.
Crash was a Phase II phenomenon last year, spurred by an aggressive push to win, a frontrunner that a lot of people really didn’t like very much/want to vote for, and a very passive effort by the other three films.
Yes, Dreamgirls could become vulnerable in Phase II. But I don’t see the film that can take advantage of its vulnerability out there right now.
But first things first. At this time last year, Lionsgate has given up on the idea of Crash being nominated, much less winning. And THAT is what you need to be remembering, BiP.
Happy New Year to you…
In answer to the question: what’s wrong? Nothing so far. Boxo is $18,000 per screen this week.
Wow!
If Letters From Iwo Jima and Flags of Our Fathers were one single film, that’s probably the only movie that would upset Dreamgirls at this point.
The Queen is the kind of nominee whose chances aren’t anywhere near what them seem to be, which are humble to begin with. The Departed’s shot at Best Picture weirdly isn’t benefitting from all of the love for the performances and Scorsese. Babel’s a likely nominee, but it can’t hope to do anything but make the category look more Oscar’y (its the only “epic” nom). Little Miss Sunshine, United 93, or Volver would be winners for being DOA candidates for Best Picture and nothing more.
What’s really disappointing about the Oscars this year is how it looks like the Academy isn’t going to reach out and bestow an award on somebody who hasn’t been right there on their lap for months on end.
Hallick: I consider myself typical and actually besides the Departed and DG, none of those other movies motivate me to see them. I don’t want to see United 93, the Queen (too british), Babel(too “crash”), Letters from IwoJiwa (too Clint and too WWII), and I think most Americans feel that way. Thus, those movies haven’t made big boxo. The only two are Departed and DG.
I think most of us want to be entertained. And actually, the Oscars don’t really mean what they used to except for the actor. Think about it – how many best actors/actresses are actually making movies and opening up movies? Spacey has all but disappeared. Denzel & Tom Hanks are the only two I can think of that still draw audiences. Not even Russell Crowe can open a movie.
Foxx is making bad choices and hasn’t proved beyond Ray that he can pull in audiences. I don’t know, I just don’t see the Oscars being that relevant anymore exc. to the industry.
The Oscars never “meant what they used to”. Remember such best picture winners as The Greatest Show on Earth and Oliver! ?
Chicago48,
Gee maybe Eastwood should have toned down the references to WWII in Iwo Jima to make it more “entertaining”.
Pat – I’m just expressing my opin. as a consumer. I just don’t care to see another movie about WWII. I grew up on the old Gary Cooper-John Wayne War movies and to me, that genre and that part of history just doesn’t hold interest. And I think that’s why the American public isn’t beating down the gates to see it and Flags.
I’ve seen 4 back to back blood and guts movies, and I just want to smile and laugh for a minute. And that’s why Happy Feet is still in the top 10 and DG is hanging in there. People just want to be entertained.
I came back from Pan’s Labryinth and that was such a disturbing movie…I just don’t want to see more killing on the screen. I’ve done my quota for the year.
In response to the above, people don’t want to see Flags or Letters because it can only remind them that we’re in the middle of a war that most people would prefer to pretend never happened. I don’t know what Chi48’s 4 blood and guts movies are, but likewise.
I also saw Pan’s Labyrinth tonight, and thought it was largely excellent; if America doesn’t want to see such a movie, then America sucks.
Earlier in this thread people were discussing the PGA and DGA. Well, the PGA awarded both Moulin Rouge! and Chicago, and Moulin was nowhere near a frontrunner. The DGA gave their prize to Rob Marshall, too.
But, what the bet that if Dreamgirls wins them it’ll be because it’s the frontrunner and they’re going with the flow.
And, also, let it be known that Chicago didn’t exactly blow everybody away in the critics prizes. That film’s awards numbers came from the guilds and more populist groups (the globes, sag, etc.
But, still, it’s actually an exciting race this year because we know it’s tight (unlike last year where we thought it wasn’t and then, wtf?) and it could still go either way.
“I also saw Pan’s Labyrinth tonight, and thought it was largely excellent; if America doesn’t want to see such a movie, then America sucks.”
Jeff, that’s one of the most inane things ever said on this blog. Are you channeling Chucky in Jersey?
“I came back from Pan’s Labryinth and that was such a disturbing movie…I just don’t want to see more killing on the screen. I’ve done my quota for the year.”
Also, please notice what time it was when I wrote that post.
Spacey’s “disappearance” is the result of his being in London the past year-plus running The Old Vic.
He’s better off doing that than giving us more works along the lines of K-Pax, Pay It Forward, or Beyond the Sea.
“He’s better off doing that than giving us more works along the lines of K-Pax, Pay It Forward, or Beyond the Sea.” (lol)
He’s a better supporting actor than lead actor anyway, but he couldn’t lead me into a movie unless he was with a stellar ensemble.
“Braveheart over Apollo 13”
huh? Apollo 13 wasn’t even nominated for best director, so how was it a surprise that it lost?
DRIVING MISS DAISY won Best Picture without a Direcor nomination.
And it’s the only film to have done so after 1932. An anomaly like that occurring once doesn’t mean the director-nom-less aren’t still severe dark horses.
Didn’t say they weren’t! Just was responding to the specific instance of APOLLO 13.