THE BOSTON ONLINE FILM CRITICS ASSOCIATION ANNOUNCES FOURTH ANNUAL AWARDS

2011 | 2011 | 2011 | 2011 | 2011 | 2011 | 2011 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2013 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | | 2012 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2014 | 2014 | 2014 | 2014 | 2014 | 2014 | 2014 | 2014 | 2014 | 2014

THE BOSTON ONLINE FILM CRITICS ASSOCIATION ANNOUNCES FOURTH ANNUAL AWARDS

December 5, 2015 (Boston, MA) -The Boston Online Film Critics Association have chosen their winners for 2015. Awards were selected via a system of online voting and announced on their website at www.bofca.com.

After spirited and competitive voting, the recipients of the Fourth Annual BOFCA Awards are:

BEST PICTURE:

MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST DIRECTOR:

George Miller, MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST ACTOR:

Michael B. Jordan, CREED

BEST ACTRESS:

Saoirse Ronan, BROOKLYN

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR:

Sylvester Stallone, CREED

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS:

Kristen Stewart, CLOUDS OF SILS MARIA

BEST ENSEMBLE:

SPOTLIGHT

BEST SCREENPLAY:

Tom McCarthy & Josh Singer, SPOTLIGHT

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM:

SON OF SAUL

BEST DOCUMENTARY:

AMY

BEST ANIMATED FILM:

INSIDE OUT

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY:

John Seale, MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST EDITING:

Margaret Sixel, MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE:

Junkie XL, MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

THE TEN BEST FILMS OF THE YEAR: 1. MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

2. CREED
3. BROOKLYN
4. CAROL
5. SPOTLIGHT
6. CLOUDS OF SILS MARIA 7. BRIDGE OF SPIES
8. THE MARTIAN
9. ANOMALISA
10. TANGERINE

Next week, BOFCA will publish their membership’s individual ballots at www.bofca.com for readers interested in how final decisions were made.

Founded in May 2012, the growing membership of BOFCA fosters a community of web-based film critics. It provides a supportive group of colleagues as well a professional platform for their voices to be heard. Each week they collect and circulate links to their reviews at their website. The site also promotes film in Boston through
a monthly podcast. BOFCA presents its members’ film articles and essays throughout the year on its own website and via social media on Twitter and Facebook.

By widening professional membership to writers working in new media, BOFCA aims to encourage more diversity in the field and amplify their voices.

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