In Contention

Tag: Chicago

  • LIFE WITHOUT OSCAR: 2001 and 2002

    Catch up with the idea behind this series here.

    After being overlooked in 1995, Ron Howard finally got a pat on the back from Oscar in 2001 for “A Beautiful Mind,” which was Russell Crowe’s second Best Picture winner in a row. If that wasn’t bad enough, the inaugural Best Animated Feature award went to the unwatchable “Shrek,” making this one of the more dubious overall years in Oscar history.

    In my opinion of course. “Chicago” isn’t much better but 2002 at least threw us a nice curveball when Adrien Brody became the youngest Best Actor winner in history and Roman Polanski became the oldest (and fugitiviest) Best Director for “The Pianist.”

    At four hours and 23 minutes, the 2001 ceremony is the longest ever, made worse by the fact that Whoopi Goldberg was in charge of it. At least they got Woody Allen to show up for the first time ever for a post-9/11 tribute to New York. I’d suggest the entire ceremony be relocated to New York if it meant Woody would host.

    Steve Martin came back in 2002 and trimmed things up by almost an hour. Way to go, Steve! He also delivered what might be my favorite Oscar joke ever- “In “About Schmidt,” Jack Nicholson plays a retired insurance executive who climbs into a hot tub with Kathy Bates. But hey, who hasn’t?”

    Also, Eminem!

    (more…)

  • Check the figures

    Russell Crowe in A Beautiful MindA few things puzzled me about this Variety piece in which Iain Blair takes on a familiar chestnut of a topic: the box-office divide between public favorites and Oscar contenders.

    The first is that he considers the “disparity between art and commerce” to be “accelerating” — a curious argument to make at a time when “Avatar,” “Up” and “Inglourious Basterds” (none of which Blair mentions) look likely to feature on the Best Picture list. Blair’s argument is well-tailored to last year’s Oscar race, but reads somewhat stale now.

    The second is, well, this entire paragraph:

    Sure, “Titanic” grabbed a ton of Oscars and racked up the biggest box office in history. But more recent critically acclaimed best picture winners such as “Shakespeare in Love,” “A Beautiful Mind” and “Chicago” did middling to poor business. And “Crash” and “The English Patient” simply crashed and, well, burned at the box office.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Don’t look back in anger

    Jake Gyllenhaal in Brokeback MountainFor all the movement in the awards game this week – Jeff Bridges leap-frogging into contention, the animation race swelling to five nominees, “Precious” continuing to gather momentum – my head hasn’t really been in it this week.

    That’s partly because we’re all still making blind prognoses until four unseen juggernauts – “Nine,” “Avatar,” “The Lovely Bones,” and “Invictus” – finally deign to show their faces. And partly because I’m only looking forward to one of those titles with sincere movie-fan enthusiasm, as opposed to professional curiosity. Sometimes you just get the wholly subjective feeling that it isn’t going to be ‘your’ Oscar season – and while I’m not there yet, the fear is setting in.

    So, with no current awards developments getting me particularly enthralled or incensed, I’ve spent most of my time lately in a reflective state. With ‘best of the 2000s’ lists already coming thick and fast, and my DVD trawl through the decade’s leftovers for my own list in full swing, Oscar’s own performance over the last 10 years has been on my mind.

    As I discussed in this space a few weeks ago, it’s been a slightly schizophrenic decade of Oscar winners, one that has blurred long-held definitions of “Oscar-bait.” One does have to wonder about the identity or cultural relevance of any group that can alternately celebrate such disparate achievements as “Slumdog Millionaire,” “Gladiator” and “No Country for Old Men.” Who are these people, and what do they know?

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: Critical condition

    Gabourey Sidibe in PreciousAhead of its U.S. release this week, there is a wave of mild surprise in the blogosphere over the fact that “Precious,” the film deemed by some (yours truly included) to be the present Best Picture frontrunner, is currently sitting on a lowly Metacritic score of 57. Fitting neatly with the largely media-fabricated talk of a backlash against the film, some commenters are citing this rather arbitrary number as a debit against the film’s chances.

    As much as I’d personally like that to believe that — and as relieved as I am to see that I’m not the only person who didn’t respond to the film – such talk will doubtless be short-lived, given the paucity of reviews making up the current score and the likelihood of raves to come. If anything, public support is more crucial than critical consensus to this film’s campaign – if audiences don’t turn up to see this grim, minority-oriented indie, many Academy members won’t feel compelled to either.

    That said, it looks increasingly possible that “Precious” (I refuse to use that lumpy subtitle all season, by the way) could turn out to be a more critically divisive item than might have been expected following an ecstatically received festival run.

    (more…)

  • THE LONG SHOT: What is an “Oscar movie” these days?

    George Clooney in Up in the Air“God, that thing’s just going to shit Academy Awards out of its ass next year, isn’t it?,” I overheard a journo behind me remark to his companion, as I made my way out of the “Up in the Air” press screening on Sunday. “It’s such an Oscar movie.”

    Two things struck me as interesting about this throwaway remark, both relating to the lack of care with which both Oscar pundits and “serious” film lovers tend to regard the Academy Awards.

    The first was that, isolated and in print, the guy’s words appear dismissive of “Up in the Air,” yet they actually capped a mostly enthusiastic response to the film. His tone dipped almost apologetically as he applied the “Oscar movie” label, as if it somehow sullied an otherwise fine effort.

    More to the point, however, the remark seemed indicative of the transitive stage the Academy Awards seem to be in at the moment, as simultaneously resistant and vulnerable to industry change as the protagonist of Jason Reitman’s film – and facing a similar crisis of purpose. For 15 years ago – if not necessarily 15 years before that – “Up in the Air” wouldn’t have been decreed an “Oscar movie” at all.

    (more…)

  • The song, not the singer

    Penelope Cruz in NineIt’s a few days old, but I only just found this nugget buried at the tail of a (rather good) David Poland rumination on the potential demise of The Weinstein Company — and since many of you seem to be hungry for details of Rob Marshall’s “Nine,” I thought it worth sharing. Poland has been casting “Nine” as a “problem movie” for a while now, but here he elaborates slightly on his concerns:

    It has test screened… results were mixed… they face a problem with hardcore theater types being unhappy with a majority (all but 7) of the show’s songs being cut… but as “The Producers” showed, loyalty to a stage version is not necessarily a good bet.

    The film is still in post and you can be sure that all kinds of jiggering is being done, just as it was with “Chicago.” Just like “Class” in that show, there is a song on the bubble that may or may not make it. They added 3 brand new songs for the film and seriously reworked a 4th. The film is running good bit longer than “Chicago” (about 30 minutes at the last screening), though fixing that is a big part of what makes Harvey Harvey.

    (more…)

  • Rob Marshall and ‘Pirates’ … why not?

    Rob Marshall It seems I’m one of the few people who isn’t particularly bothered by the admittedly surprising prospect of Rob Marshall directing the fourth go-round of “Pirates of the Caribbean.”

    Variety first floated the news yesterday that the Oscar-nominated choreographer-turned-filmmaker is in talks to take the reins of Disney’s megabucks franchise from Gore Verbinski, prompting a stream of “what is he thinking” remarks around the web.

    While sideswiping Marshall’s upcoming “Nine” as a “problem movie,” David Poland rather melodramatically suggests that it might be “the single worst idea in history.”

    Jeff Wells, meanwhile, foresees this damaging Marshall’s Oscar prospects for “Nine.” (Not that the stench of the “Da Vinci Code” franchise turned the Academy off Ron Howard. And I doubt Marshall will be a contender for the win anyway, but that’s another discussion.)

    (more…)

  • The new millennium Oscars?

    Viggo Mortensen in The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the KingLooking back over the previous Oscar winners for Best Picture since 2000, the start of a new century (and a new millennium), I find myself wondering sometimes what the hell the Academy was thinking.  It’s no secret I disagree with the Academy a lot, but I can also admit that when they get it right, they get it right.

    But since 2000, their Best Pic choices have run the gamut from incredibly ridiculous, “Gladiator” and “A Beautiful Mind” being just goofy, to bang on, with “The Departed” and “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.”  I am told the Academy is moving in a more progressive direction, willing to take more risks, and I suppose some of these winners do just that.  But they could have gone further.

    Year by year, here’s a quick look, with some thoughts about who might have won, and who should have at least been nominated…

    (more…)

  • Day-Lewis in line for ‘Nine?’

    OK, so the dream cast potentially just got dreamier.

    Nothing has been confirmed yet, but Variety reports that none other than Daniel Day-Lewis (one almost feels that should be preceded with a Sir, no?) is in talks to play the lead in Rob Marshall’s film version of “Nine” — the Broadway show that is in turn based on Fellini’s “8½,” and is arguably one of the artiest musicals out there.

    If he boards, Day-Lewis will be joining a cast already sagging under the weight of its riches: Marion Cotillard, Penelope Cruz, Judi Dench, Nicole Kidman and (wow) Sophia Loren.

    It is a fascinating casting prospect for a number of reasons, and not just because we know so little of Day-Lewis’ abilities as a song-and-dance man. (And for those unfamiliar with the show, it’s a full-on, virtuoso musical role — no getting away here with shuffling and speak-crooning, a la Rex Harrison.) Of course, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that a great voice and great moves are merely two other weapons in the man’s well-stocked arsenal of actorly gifts; given how selective Day-Lewis is with his projects, I sense he wouldn’t take the part if he wasn’t sure he could pull it off.

    (more…)