MCN Columnists
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

24 Days To Oscar: Racers, Stop Your Engines

It’s an interesting moment in the Oscar race. There is a lot of activity… and not much at all that anyone can do to change their fate.

This is not to say that one should not be out there shaking hands and kissing babies (or just reminding people that you are in the race and you would graciously accept a trophy). But with few exceptions, the die is cast.

Ever notice how when there are real surprises during the ceremony, they are rarely the possible upset that many anticipated. Something like The King’s Speech winning Best Cinematography over (in alphabetical order) Black Swan, Inception, The Social Network, and True Grit may happen if there is enough wind in Speech’s sails to make it a 7-Oscar night for the film. But with due respect to Danny Cohen, the other four candidates are all better known here and have left so deep marks with their work this year. Deakins has never won and is one of the most revered shooters alive and perhaps made the most beautiful western ever. Wally Pfister has been with Chris Nolan from the first feature, making images that have scorched audiences. Jeff Cronenweth is now working repeatedly with Fincher to make images whose combination of complexity and seeming simplicity is magical. And Matthew Labatique and Aronofsky have delivered a low-budget spectacle that rivals Inception for complexity, the secrets of the film folded into the imagery throughout.

But because The King’s Speech seems to be The Movie Of Choice, excellent work by Danny Cohen may win over all of these more likely candidates.

And there ain’t nothing they can do about it.

Well, again, there is a little. All of the cinematographers have made themselves more available to media this last few weeks as one of the best races for this particular honor in my memory has come to a head. And you can make a strong argument for voting for any of them… including Danny Cohen, since he may have shot the movie you most love.

Personally, I love editing. And after getting up off the floor from the lack of a Thelma Schoonmaker nomination, I started asking for editors to talk with for DP/30. By the end of next week, I expect we will have chatted with 2 or 3 of the candidates for Oscar. But it’s one of those categories that is seen as being part of the season sweep and not something that, in the final voting, gets analyzed in detail by the voters.

This is not to say a single thing bad about Tariq Anwar’s work on The King’s Speech, your likely winner. It’s very hard to compare really good work in really good films and to, without being in post with the editor(s) and director, what you really should embrace as “best.” Jon Harris was dealing with a piece that was almost impossible to make work, with one man in a space for 75% or more of the 127 Hours. Flip side, Andrew Weisblum was dealing with every magic trick Aronofky could conjure in hundreds of Black Swan mirrors, an art film with more than 300 effects shots. And how much shaping happened in Pamela Martin’s cutting room with David O. Russell shooting in as much a verite’ style as he could in The Fighter? What affect does Fincher’s precision have on Wall & Baxter in their Social Network cutting room? And indeed, with Tom Hooper doing some unsubtle stuff with the camera in The King’s Speech, how did Tariq Anwar’s edit keep it smooth and accessible at all times to its audience?

But back to the categories filled with names that People Magazine readers remember…

Aside from Colin Firth, there is a feeling out there that the months-long frontrunners in the other acting categories could be upset… but probably won’t be upset.

Annette Bening is well-loved in The Academy, but has just arrived to ask for her Oscar… probably too late after a run of wins by Ms. Portman in the first $100 million grosser (in the lead) of her career. I would have said that Nicole Kidman had a good chance of upsetting the duo, but flaccid box office and a new baby to take care of has made one of the year’s best stories – Kidman initiating and co-producing her own starring project – a non-story.

Hailee Steinfeld arrived to “will win” acclaim for True Grit, but as the focus of Paramount has been on The Fighter more than Grit and the focus of the film’s master producer, Scott Rudin, has been more on The Social Network than Grit and Melissa Leo has taken home statues, the steam has gone out of that engine. And that’s with the advantage of being the lead, really, of the movie and the movie grossing roughly twice as much as The Fighter. And what of Helena Bonham Carter, receiving (shockingly) just her second nomination with no wins? How can she be in “The Movie” and barely been talked about for the win? Melissa Leo has both veteran status and the showiest of the roles… but most of all, Paramount has believed in that performance and its ability to win and positioned Melissa as the frontrunner early and often.

Then there is Christian Bale’s Supporting Actor Oscar. The season started out with a bang with that Esquire Magazine article. But since then, it’s been a kind, gentle, generous Christian Bale. And his refusal to do press specifically for awards season has probably helped. We have only seen him winning. And he’s give The Academy no reason not to vote for him. Geoffrey Rush is the only one who is really in striking distance. He is in “The Movie.” But he’s been working in Australia and while is role in Speech is beloved, it is not a wall-bouncer like Bale’s.

And thus goes the Best Picture thinking… if King’s Speech isn’t strong enough to get wins for Bonham Carter and Rush, is it really that strong in Best Picture?

If Speech isn’t as strong as it seems to many in Best Picture, can The Social Network come back to win?

If Social Network isn’t that strong and King’s Speech is a bit of a mirage, can True Grit split the pair and shock with a win?

So goes the balance of the awards ceremony. If Geoffrey Rush upsets Bale early on – that is, if Supporting Actor remains, as it has traditionally been, an early category – then you can assume there will be a near-sweep for Speech. And if Bale wins… you can assume nothing.

If Helena Bonham Carter upsets Melissa Leo in Supporting Actress, you can also bet on a Speech night. But if Leo wins, no real info there. If Hailee Steinfeld upsets, then you can look forward to a really interesting evening.

All in all, I don’t think there is a lot of mind changing going on out there. It’s a time for reminder cards – “we’re out here… you love us… remember…” – and celebration. No one is waiting to be reminded that they loved Geoffrey Rush’s performance in The King’s Speech or that Annette Bening was sensational (and should have won) in The Grifters or that The Social Network has a DVD.

Personally, I can’t think of a group of nominees that were any more deserving as a group or more pleasant as a group of individuals. No one has been more accessible than Colin Firth and Tom Hooper… but both have made it feel like grace under circumstances bigger than themselves and not like they have ever been out selling their wares. In fact, aside from some people counting dollars spent, there really hasn’t been anyone out there who has made it feel like they really, really needed to win this award.

In the end, some will be disappointed not to have won. And I feel for them. Brokeback Mountain may have won the modern award for Most Bitter, but if you’re The Social Network and you’ve been being told “yes” for months, only to be upset by a late-charging intimate Brit royalty piece, it can’t be fun.

But we’re awfully late in the game to be trying to get voters to change their votes away from the momentum. Regardless of your personal politics, can you imagine many people shifting to McCain late in that race, with the Hopey, Changey thing surging late? What percentage of Americans do you think though Mubarek was a problem two months ago… and what percentage do you think believe he should get out now?

The tide is strong. If you swim with it, you don’t have to swim very hard at all. If you are swimming against it, you could get where you want to go, but it won’t be anything short of a miracle. But mostly, what we tend to forget is that we – not the press, not the publicists, not the studio chiefs – do not control the tide. Through a long season, we can choose when to get into the water, knowing that we will have to deal with those ebbs and flows. But now, at the end, 24 days away… just 19 until the polls close, there aren’t so many options and nature takes its course.

My advice? Get in the inner tube and enjoy the ride. Do the things that seem fun. Pick the dress or tux you like. Talk about sports with people who want to ask about acting. Be seen being human. Enjoy that luncheon on Monday… being in that room with those shared conspirator artists.

It is, indeed, an honor just to be nominated.

Be Sociable, Share!

5 Responses to “24 Days To Oscar: Racers, Stop Your Engines”

  1. Freddy Ardanza says:

    I’d love to see a chart of the best picture contenders.

  2. movielocke says:

    I’d love to see charts of all the craft awards. Calling cinematography or editing or score is pretty much impossible. Calling Art Direction and costumes and makeup and song is pretty damn tough too. Documentary is a tight race, as is foreign film. Then there are the sound categories, which include BP films that are not Inception, which means we could have a very No Country type of year (where an atypical film in the sound categories takes the awards due to being the frontrunner film).

    Really the only craft category that seems clear is Visual Effects, and even then, I remain unsure.

    The above the line races may already be set in stone (excepting, perhaps Supporting Actress) but the below the line races are fucking crazy competitive this year.

    Or they may not be competitive at all and King’s Speech will take home every Below the Line category it is nominated in. Hard to say, a very tough year to call.

  3. David Poland says:

    Take a look at Gurus, guys.

  4. Jonathan Ara says:

    I miss Poland’s charts, especially for the comments.

  5. Stephen Holt says:

    Melissa Leo just blew it at Deadline Hollywood shooting off her mouth to Pete Hammond, who is clearly not her friend, and La Finke, of course, blasting this all over the internet. Hammond has been looking for a major story this season and now he’s got it.

    Poor Melissa! Those ads that blind-sided Paramount were ONE thing, but then shooting off your mouth against the studio execs AND THEIR PUBLICISTS is career suicide.

    Melissa, you needed that Paramount voting block behind you! They’ll just switch their votes(and their is a substantial Paramount block in the Academy) to Amy or Hailee. You don’t bite the hand that hypes you.

    She was probably upset by the EW cover, which she WAS NOT ON, but Amy and HAILEE were!?!

    Oh, Melissa, what have you done?

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