Still Anybody's Game
Moving into October and out of the festival frame, the film awards landscape still looks to be a wide open skirmish. The only two films left unseen are Dreamworks’ “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street” and Universal’s “Charlie Wilson’s War,” but questions are finally being answered in other quarters as studios show their non-Toronto product.
Universal pulled “American Gangster” out and into the open two weeks ago, and though I found some considerable fondness for Ridley Scott’s effort, I have to say my opinion of the film has slipped a few notches in the interim. I’m also hearing an interesting amount of dissent that has me curious as to whether it can transcend the “commercial” label and make it into Best Picture contention like “The Departed,” “The Silence of the Lambs” and “The French Connection” before it.
Paramount Vantage, meanwhile, unveiled Paul Thomas Anderson’s “There Will Be Blood” to uproarious reception in Texas last week. “Citizen Kane” comparisons from more than one source have many believing it could have the stuff. Vantage has also been showing “The Kite Runner” here and there, which could still be their big awards hopeful as “There Will Be Blood” is reportedly a pretty dark experience. And there are still those at the studio who have a passion for Sean Penn’s “Into the Wild” and will likely see it through to the end of the season come hell or high water. But a Sophie’s choice might be in the mix.
But while all our attention is squared on these potentially obvious, “big” candidates, what about the little fish swimming deep that could poke through with the right amount of passion?
Sidney Lumet’s “Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead” has a couple of performances front and center that could be argued as career bests for Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke. Hoffman is also on fire in Tamara Jenkins’ “The Savages,” a heart-felt effort that could strike a certain chord with the Academy demographic and tear Fox Searchlight’s attention away from their bevy of product somewhat.
“Lust, Caution” got some nasty early word of mouth before it went on to grab the top award in Venice. But the central performance from Tang Wei is one of the very best of the year and worth consideration to say the least. While Miramax is bowed up with “No Country for Old Men” – a film that has pulled the wool over the critical community’s eyes – they’re still allowing lots of attention for Julian Schnabel’s “The Diving Bell and Butterfly,” which has pulled considerable praise in various quarters and could be something to watch.
And as the butter of the season continues to be spread so thin and fair, what about early year hopefuls that still have a fighting chance? One could go all the way back to David Fincher’s “Zodiac” and Lasse Hallstrom’s “The Hoax” to find potential awards efforts poking around in a 2007 where all comers are apparently equal. Fox Searchlight is also more than aware of what could be made of Jon Carney’s “Once” and Adrienne Shelley’s “Waitress,” while early performances from Julie Christie (“Away from Her”), Marion Cotillard (“La Vie en Rose”) and Angelina Jolie (“A Mighty Heart”) are still more than in play.
Speaking of performances, Tom O’Neil has reported that Helena Bonham Carter will be campaigned as a lead in “Sweeney Todd,” which strikes me as a little foolish considering the Best Actress race was stacked heading into the season and looks to stay that way with the addition of Ellen Page (“Juno”). The supporting races, however, are woefully vacant of competition, a veritable playground for any studio to tease an otherwise questionable possibility (Hal Holbrook, Casey Affleck, Amy Ryan, Max von Sydow, etc.). Perhaps they’ll take note.
Elsewhere (literally), Jeff Wells broke the news that I teased here last week. I was going to wait a little longer before I dropped it, but oh well. I’ll get into it in a couple of weeks. Enjoy the chart update in the meantime.
(And I’m trying to make room and get to reviews of “Lust, Caution,” “Michael Clayton,” “No Country for Old Men” and “The Savages.” Bear with me.)
Main Category Charts
Technical Category Charts
The Contenders (by category)
2007 Films-by-Studio Rundown
Oscar Predictions Archive
Previous Oscar Columns:
09/17/07 - "Post-Toronto Update"
09/10/07 - "Notes from the Eye of a Storm"
09/03/07 - "Launching the New Season"
08/03/07 - "August Update"
07/01/07 - "The Silence is Deafening"
02/26/07 - "Forging Ahead: In Contention's Year in Advance Oscar Speculation"
Comments
Juno for Best Picture? That's a bit of a stretch for me.
Posted by: Hardy | October 1, 2007 10:51 AM
I really can't understand such a dramatic dropoff for American Gangster after you said how the film would figure well into the oscar race last week. Don't you think the film would at least be a sure thing for Film Editing, after you mentioned how pacing Pietro Scalia's was?
And the more I think about it Juno seems like a best picture nominee, but it only seems like it could get those three nominations. Not enough of a tally to get a nomination in my opinion, but it has happened before.
Posted by: bblasingame | October 1, 2007 12:57 PM
Yeah, what happened to AG, Kris? Your review was pretty glowing, only half a star away from perfect. And from what I've heard about Juno, it is a strung together series of corney lines and cliches, mediocre aside from Ellen Page's performance. I think you slightly underestimate the power of two of the greatest actors and one of the greatest directors of our time. But hey, that's my opinion, you have yours, you run the site, which one of the best in the biz by the way. Just looking for a little feedback.
Posted by: DariusVIII | October 1, 2007 06:10 PM
Most of it has to do with my perception of the film's response. There's a reason there are only two U.S. reviews out there. People seem to be keeping their personal, negative opinions to themselves.
I still very much enjoyed the film, but it has structural issues that can't be ignored. Russell Crowe's performance is fantastic, but in a role that feels like a wasted opportunity. Washington is good - but he's reached that Clooney stage where every performance is the same as the last - but the Academy responds to that and might with this film.
Basically, I felt like my Best Picture lineup was too...heavy. And something light needed to muscle its way in. Hence "Juno," and I felt AG was the weakest of the field until that addition.
Thanks for the compliments.
Posted by: Kristopher Tapley | October 1, 2007 07:42 PM
I agree there are a lot of heavy films out there--and entertaining always wins out over important at the oscars, unless it's Schindler's List.
Say what you will about Braveheart, Forrest Gump, Dances with Wolves, Shakespeare in Love, Gladiator or Departed those movies are a Hell of a lot of fun to watch (and really fucking well made too), in the sense that movies like Casablanca, Mrs. Miniver, Bridge on the River Kwai and All About Eve are a hell of a lot of fun to watch.
Posted by: movielocke | October 1, 2007 08:42 PM
Yes, no problem, I really appreciate the feedback. I was really pulling for AG because I love Ridley, Russell, and Denzel, and as you said, Scott's tech teams are always flawless. One other question though. I was under the impression that the editing was one of the, if not the strongest points of the movie. Yet you say there are some serious structural problems? Could you shed some light on that?
Posted by: DariusVIII | October 2, 2007 04:08 PM
I think you are grossly underestimating Hal Holbrook at this point Kris. The academy flips for great veteran performances, espcially of the comeback variety. As of now, I feel it is the best supporting performance of the year, and I can't see how the Academy could not respond to it.
Who knows though, maybe i am misreading the whole situation.
Posted by: Jordan Minnesota | October 3, 2007 05:39 PM
Considering I'm the first guy on the net who posited Holbrook as a possibility, I'd hardly say I'm "grossly" underestimating him. He's still on the chart, in any case.
Posted by: Kristopher Tapley | October 3, 2007 09:55 PM