St. Louis Film Critics Association

2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013

Best Film
Up in the Air
Runner-Up: The Hurt Locker

Best Actor
George Clooney, Up in the Air
Runner-Up: Patton Oswalt in Big Fan

Best Actress
Carey Mulligan in An Education
Runner-Up: Gabourey Sidibe in Precious

Best Supporting Actor
Christoph Waltz in Inglorious Basterds
Runner-up: Stanley Tucci in The Lovely Bones

Best Supporting Actress
Mo’Nique in Precious
Runner-Up: Marion Cotillard in Nine

Best Director
Kathryn Bigelow in The Hurt Locker
Runners-Up (tie): Jason Reitman for Up in the Air and Quentin Tarantino for ‘Inglourious Basterds

Best Screenplay
Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber for ‘(500) Days of Summer
Runner-Up: Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner for Up in the Air

Best Cinematography
Dion Beebe for Nine
Runner-Up: Eduard Grau for A Single Man

Best Music
Runner-Up: Crazy Heart

Best Visual Effects
Runner-Up: Where the Wild Things Are

Best Foreign Language Film
Red Cliff
Runner-Up: Treeless Mountain

Best Documentary
Capitalism: A Love Story
Runner-Up: Anvil! The Story of Anvil

Best Animated Film
Runner-Up: The Fantastic Mr. Fox

Best Comedy
The Hangover
Runner-Up: (500) Days of Summer

Most Original, Innovative or Creative Film
Runner-Up (tie): The Fantastic Mr. Fox and (500) Days of Summer

Favorite Scene
Up – the four-minute marriage montage
Runner-Up: Inglourious Basterds – the opening farmhouse scene

To be eligible for an award, a film must have been shown in St. Louis, by theatrical release, at a film festival or film series, or made available for viewing by the SLFC member film critics during the past year. This year, a few major film releases were not considered for awards because they were not made available to member film critics for awards consideration.

The St. Louis Film Critics association also presents annual awards at the St. Louis International Film Festival and St. Louis Filmmakers Showcase, both presented by Cinema St. Louis. The mission of the SLFC association is to promote appreciation of great cinema in St. Louis and St. Louis as an area that appreciates great cinema. The member film critics review films for a variety of media outlets, in print, on radio, television and Internet in the Greater St. Louis Area.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

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