Features
Headlines
Search
Loading ...
Archives
Pete Hammond has gone ahead and written the column I was going to write today, but you snooze you lose.
Recently there was some discussion about the animated feature film category in our comments section. The number of potential submissions is right on the edge. By my count in the Contenders section, there are 16 films listed, which is the magic number that would yield a five-nominee slate.
The field was widened recently with a planned qualifying run from Disney for “Tinker Bell and the Lost Treasure” at the El Capitan prior to DVD release. To me, that smells like a studio trying to inflate the number of qualifying titles in order to get a wider field of contenders, because “Tinker Bell?” Really? One would expect it to just hit shelves as an afterthought.
Anyway, there is one other title that could possibly be submitted: Zeitgeist Films’ “A Town Called Panic.” I called Zeitgeist yesterday to find out whether the company had run the film or would attempt to do so to qualify it, and the gist I got was that they just weren’t interested. I expect a phone call if things change on that front, but for now, it’s unlikely.
So that could put us back at 15, and one film holding the key (potentially) to the category: Robert Zemeckis’s “A Christmas Carol.”
Zemeckis’s quote about his process not being animation has made the rounds frequently enough at this stage. “To call performance capture animation is a disservice to the great animators,” is what he said at a 2007 convention. His film “Beowulf” was in the fray that year, and was ultimately submitted to (and approved by) the Academy as animation.
This year, however, the decision has been left to Zemeckis himself. And given his perspective, one would think it unlikely that the film will be submitted as animation, but who knows. Maybe Zemeckis will just buckle and not fight something like this based on principle. After all, two extra slots means more hope for “The Princess and the Frog” and “Ponyo,” too, so maybe Disney can convince him otherwise.
All in all, its tight. And there’s no guarantee everyone is planning to submit. Because after all, if there’s no way you expect to win, why bother? We’ll keep an eye on the situation.
Print This Post
22 responses so far
1 10-07-2009 at 7:58 pm
Stephen Mergele said...
I think everyone is missing the obvious by not counting the “technically” animated films in the running. Remember that both Stuart Little 2 and the first Chipmunks movie were both submitted and accepted as animated films despite their mostly live action content. The rules only call for a majority of the main characters and the running time to contain animation. This obviously includes the new Chipmunks movie opening this Christmas. I doubt they’d submit, but Avatar may even qualify.
2 10-07-2009 at 8:13 pm
AmericanRequiem said...
o please please give us 5, o boyyyyyy. ha, maybe the animated 5 will be better then the other 10, if we go 5 this year i wouldnt be suprised if it was always 5 here on out
3 10-07-2009 at 8:39 pm
Cde. said...
The animated 5 probably will be better on average than the BP 10.
4 10-07-2009 at 10:06 pm
Jeremy said...
I have a better idea. Instead of expanding the number of nominations from three to five, how about reducing the number from three to zero? I know I’ve moaned about this before, but the existence of this category — and the way it marginalizes animated films by giving them their own “special section” — utterly infuriates me. It would be like if Major League Baseball created an award for “Best Latin Player”. They might as well call it “Best Animated Feature That We Refuse to Seriously Consider as an Actual Movie”.
Sorry. End rant.
5 10-07-2009 at 10:32 pm
david said...
Jeremy: I hear where your coming from, but couldn’t you make the same argument about the Best Foreign Film category??
Should the Academy just do away with that category as well??
I think some recognition is better then none at at all, and that the Best Animated Film category should automatically have five films every year. Period.
Kris…thanks for taking the art of animation as serious as you do the live action films in your columns. A number of other people in your position might consider it just “kiddie” stuff, and not give the genre it’s proper due. But you seem to have a genuine love and appreciation for the art form.
6 10-08-2009 at 1:31 am
Glenn said...
Why should the animation category have film nominees every year? As I said in the other entry, not every year is like 2009 for animation. A lot of the time they can barely come up with three classy nominees.
7 10-08-2009 at 1:40 am
Jeremy said...
David: That’s a fair point. I guess my argument would be that the Foreign Language Film category does serve a function in that it helps raise awareness of high-quality foreign films (assuming the nominations are of sufficient caliber), allowing American audiences to get turned onto some movies they might otherwise ignore. Frankly I wouldn’t mind eliminating the category on principle, but I recognize the consequence would likely be an even more insular slate.
I guess I think of it in terms of cost-benefit. For Animated Feature, the benefit of singling out one particular film in the medium seems minuscule compared to the marginalization in the Best Picture field. For Foreign Language Film, I think the tradeoff is a little less severe and that the marginalization isn’t present to as great a degree.
To wit, I think the existence of the Animated Feature category sends a message that, “These movies and different — and thereby lesser — than ‘normal’ films”. I don’t sense the same stigma attached to foreign language productions. But I suppose I should be wary of trying to enter into the mind of your average AMPAS member.
8 10-08-2009 at 2:11 am
Loyal said...
Tinker Bell? Well, whatever opens the field to 5 I guess.
9 10-08-2009 at 2:37 am
Jonathan Spuij said...
Five is risky, certainly with the 10 BP nods paving the way for Up getting a nod there and with the Animated category, might they feel with 4 other nominees it already got enough attention with a BP nod?
10 10-08-2009 at 3:00 am
Chris said...
I mentioned this in the other post already, Sylvain Chomet’s “The Illusionist” is scheduled for 2009. He might widen the field, and also grab a nod.
11 10-08-2009 at 3:18 am
Cde. said...
I doubt The Illusionist will be released this year, but if it is it almost certainly won’t be submitted for Oscar consideration for this year. I imagine it will be a contender next year after it gets big US distribution, as happened with Ponyo, which is a 2008 film.
12 10-08-2009 at 4:16 am
red_wine said...
I think this move is purposeful by Disney so that they could push up the number to 16 to make way for a nomination for The Princess And The Frog, the most high profile Disney(Non Pixar) title of the past few years.
And I agree with Stephen Mergele, Avatar will 100% qualify for Animated film if it is submitted, it meets all the criteria. But I’m also 100% certain that Cameron will not submit it.
13 10-08-2009 at 6:30 am
Dave V said...
Jeremy,
I think you would have more of a point if before the category was created earlier this decade that quality animated films were receiving nominations for Best Picture, and now it’s stopped. But in all the years before the category only one, Beauty and the Beast, got a nomination. The Academy has always marginalized animated film. At least now, great animators have a chance of winning an Oscar for their work, instead of waiting 70 years to get a nomination.
14 10-08-2009 at 8:26 am
"Julianstark" said...
I completely agree with red_wine about the Disney thing. They can’t honestly think that a Tinker Bell spin-off of all things actually has a shot at Best Animated Film!!!
And I don’t think that Avatar will go for Best Animated Film, despite meeting the criteria… that’d be an awkward situation haha
15 10-08-2009 at 8:55 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
The “Disney thing” was mentioned in the copy of the piece, FYI. It’s obviously a ploy to make the 16.
16 10-08-2009 at 9:13 am
Luke Gorham said...
It may seem like a plot, but everyone seems to be forgetting (or ignoring) the fact that these films have to first be shortlisted by way or a rating system, which is a major reason why 5 nominees has never happened before (we have had 16 animated films in a year before). There is no way a film like “Tinker Bell” would score high enough, so don’t get too excited. There have to be a certain number of shortlisted animated films, not simply a certain number of animated films released.
17 10-08-2009 at 9:26 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
Five nominees happened in 2002, actually. And I’m certainly not ignoring that. It’s the main reason I keep saying “Wait, let’s see what happens.” I expect three for now.
I wouldn’t be so sure about Tinker Bell not making the shortlist, by the way.
18 10-08-2009 at 9:31 am
Luke Gorham said...
Yeah, my fault about 2002. Mental lapse. As far as “Tinker Bell,” films from the past few films have been omitted that have been bad, but “Tinker Bell” bad? Really? It just seems that based on the inevitable shit animated films, you need more than 16 to have a fighting chance. In my estimation, anyway.
19 10-08-2009 at 9:48 am
John said...
I still think 5 is a good choice, in general. And the category is a necessity because I don’t think animated films would get intot he top 5/10 anyway (though, his year could be different).
Animated films make a TON of money. People of ALL ages go and see them. And it could bring in ‘some’ young viewers.
Why the Hell NOT make it 5 slots?
20 10-08-2009 at 10:01 am
AdamL said...
Yeah go to 5. Every animated film released this year then gets virtually a 1 in 3 chance of getting an Oscar nom. That’s exactly how it should be. ONE IN THREE chance. Brilliant, brilliant idea.
21 10-08-2009 at 10:05 am
The Other James D. said...
I haven’t seen the majority of 2002 animated flicks (except the incredible Spirited Away), but many aren’t too pleased with the inclusions that year.
However, animation has been taken to new levels, and there’s such a strong crop this year that I hope people can petition the studios to submit there films for the good of the category.
2006 had such a strong year, too, so I hope they don’t let this process repeat. Why 16, I wonder….
22 10-09-2009 at 5:34 pm
JP said...
Unfortunatelly, 2002 (that was not the strongest year in terms of animation) was the only year with 5 nominees. Many deserving films missed the cut – The Polar Express, Walking Life, Walts with Bashir, Horton Hears a Who!, Bee Movie….