MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Oscar Morning Coming Down

It’s still dark in Park City. There are a few surprises from the Oscar nominations, but they are limited.

Roadside Attractions is the happiest group this morning, scoring for Winter’s Bone in Best Picture and getting in not only the expected Jennifer Lawrence nod, but John Hawkes too. And the even bigger get… Bardem. Academy members should be thankful that Roadside kept pushing so hard for him and that he spend the holidays telling his story at screenings. Had he not been nominated, it would have been a black eye for the organization. Still, a real big deal, given how scared people were of that film.

Perhaps the biggest single surprise is one that was left out. Christopher Nolan NOT getting nominated for Inception when some (confused) people actually thought he could be an upset winner is a shocker. It also dampens the WB hopes for the film winning Best Picture.

Nearly as surprising… no nod for Effects for Tron Legacy, which got pushed out by Iron Man 2 and Hereafter.

All the talk about The Academy getting younger remains comedic, give or take 4 years on the median age. The Illusionist is one example. How did it get in ahead of Despicable Me? Old people. I would also attribute the failure to hand Robert Duvall a deserved nomination to the same thing. His character in Get Low seemed to put older voters in a sad place. A shame.

Also left out was The Town for Best Picture, supplanted by 127 Hours, which had lost steam with weak box office. (That should change this weekend.) Actor non-nods included Julianne Moore, Andrew Garfield, and Aaron Eckhart (all of whom will be back many times in future years). Plus a late surge of Mila Kunis expectation was not met… nor were any of the other Swan co-stars nodded. It’s all Natalie, all the time.

Nominations for I Am Love (costume), The Tempest (costume) are one-off surprises, as is the make-up nod for Barney’s Version.

Sond Mixing nods for The King’s Speech, True Grit, and The Social Network define the range of legit candidates for the win. But True Grit‘s lack of an editing nom is a very bad sign for that film. So it looks like a 2-film race to the end… kinda. I don’t think Social ends up getting close to Speech at the end.

The King’s Speech, 12 nods. True Grit, 10 nods. The Social Network, 8 nods. Inception, 8 nods. The Fighter, 7 nods. 127 Hours, 6 nods. Black Swan, 5 nods.

Here is the current gross list… this weekend’s number and the current domestic total. I think it’s more than fair to say that King’s Speech will be accelerating up this list starting this weekend. But it will have some challenges from Fighter and Swan, which should pass $90m and $100m respectively in the next 12 days (probably sooner). Speech will likely pass $100m and Social Net within 12 days. Expect Grit to hold onto the #3 slot firmly, with an outside shot now of getting with shouting distance of $200m domestic.

True Grit
$7,330,092 $137,963,519
The Social Network
$444,086 $95,408,473
Black Swan
$5,869,744 $83,250,375
The Fighter
$4,164,504 $72,680,740
The King’s Speech
$7,854,910 $57,313,881

And there you have it. A few surprises, but pretty much as expected.

Be Sociable, Share!

169 Responses to “Oscar Morning Coming Down”

  1. IOv3 says:

    Let’s just think about this for a minute: Christopher Nolan got a freaking BEST WRITING NOM over a BEST DIRECTING NOM! Apparently he can write worth a shit but his direction is trash? The fact that the Academy went against the DGA, pretty much demonstrates how fucking old and tired these folks can be with their taste and gives me another reason… TO HATE THE COENS (Yes, I know this is not their fault but really, the Academy are more geeky for the Coens than geeks and that just plain weird.)!

  2. Bardem, Hawkes, THE ILLUSIONIST — yay!

    NEVER LET ME GO (a girl can dream) — boo!

  3. LarryGopnik says:

    Thrilled for Jacki Weaver.

    Wow, third time Nolan’s gotten the DGA nomination, but been snubbed for the Oscar.

  4. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    I haven’t seen The King’s Speech, but for those who have seen both, is Tom Hooper’s direction truly superior to Nolan’s?

    I need to see Winter’s Bone ASAP. Just awesome news for John Hawkes though.

  5. IOv3 says:

    What the hell happened with Never Let Me Go? Seriously? Oh yeah, Batman, Hawkeye, and The Incredible Hulk were all nominated for Best Supporting Actor or as I like to call it; “All of these guys are awesome!”

  6. IOv3 says:

    Paul, the Coen’s shouldn’t be there. The DGA nominees should be the Oscar Nominees but as we all know, the Coens are better than Nolan. Sure they are, but Hooper does a lot of great scene composing in The King’s Speech. It’s just a cool movie to look at due to direction alone.

    ETA: David, not nominating Nolan for Best Director is that black-eye. The Academy just can’t help themselves with the Coens and it’s cost them some serious credibility today.

  7. Rob says:

    While lamenting the lack of supporting actor nominations for The Social Network, Ben Lyons just referred to Armie Hammer as his “brother from another mother.”

  8. Gotta love that SALT and UNSTOPPABLE will now, and forever after, be known as Oscar nominees (assuming they don’t win…).

    And that they tied with THE TOWN for number of noms.

  9. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    I see IO. I should have known it was about the Coens and not Hooper for you. Figures.

  10. Joseph says:

    “Inception” also didn’t get a film editing nomination, which many say is key for a best picture win. I don’t think it’s simply the Coens are favored higher than Nolan. (Both “Inception” and “True Grit” didn’t get film editing nominations.) “Incpetion” just didn’t have as much love as other films.

  11. IOv3 says:

    Paul, look at the DGA list and the Academy list, and you can infer the difference rather easily. The guy who most likely directed the best picture of the year and he did it with a shitload of flare earned his nom. Seriously, if you want to ignore that the Coens stick out like a sore thumb in all of this, then go right ahead.

    Joseph: true, neither got best editing, but the Academy picked their darlings over Nolan. That’s how they roll and do not even get me started on the possible lunacy of the whacky old folks giving Nolan a MAKE-UP NOM with TDK-R!

  12. Pete says:

    I don’t get this idea that somehow the Coens are on par with Stephen Daldry (make a film, get a BD nomination). Hell, they were nearly a dozen years into their directing careers before they even scored their first nod.

    I’m still not convinced King’s Speech has retaken the Oscar lead, it’s more like Benjamin Button to me…

  13. chris says:

    Wait, what? “Seemed to put older voters in a sad place?” That is peculiar evidence of your point. Older voters failing to nominate an old actor (instead of, presumably, Bardem) seems to me to be an example of the academy genuinely getting younger. (And I’d also argue “Illusionist” is not only immeasurably better than “Despicable Me,” but feels like a younger, hipper choice than going straight box office winner.)

  14. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    I’m not ignoring anything IO. We have a difference of opinion. So it goes.

  15. hcat says:

    Nolan was the only big shock, I thought he was going to take director while something else got picture. Other than that happy with the nominations, pleasant suprise with Bardem, and nice to see the winters bone love (especially for Hawkes).

  16. Sam says:

    David: You don’t think Inception has a chance to win Sound Mixing? Or do I misunderstand?

    As averse to blockbusters as the Academy is in the bigger categories, the sound ones are exceptions.

  17. IOv3 says:

    Paul, it’s not a difference of opinion because you are stating implicitly that directing a western is similar to directing a movie about DREAMS AND DOING IT EFFECTIVELY. The Academy are just old, they have their gold boys, and once again picked them over… THE REAL GOLDEN BOY! Seriously, this is the biggest black eye the Academy have given themselves since the last time they fucked him over.

    Pete, go read Poland’s TRUE GRIT IS THE FRONTRUNNER Oscar column before thinking The King’s Speech is in a Ben Button situation. Apparently the old fogies loved The King’s Speech and that’s why it got the 12 nom love today.

    ETA: One more thing, WAHLBERG IS THE WEAK LINK IN THE FIGHTER? Oh for fuck’s sake, that dude gives another nuanced performance that’s just out and out ignored. Everyone around him do a great job but he’s the weak link? Bullshit.

  18. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    I am not allowed to believe that the Coen Brothers directing of True Grit is just as good as Nolan’s directing of Inception? That is not an opinion? Directing dreams is automatically better than directing a western?

  19. chris says:

    Not worth arguing, Paul MD. Has the dude even seen “True Grit,” the movie he can’t abide, yet?

  20. Pete says:

    IOV,

    So, the Coens get the first BP/BP nominations for a Western in 20 years and you attribute that solely to old fogies lovin’ them some oaters?

    The same old fogies we hear about every year gave the last couple of BP wins to Hurt Locker, Slumdog Millionaire, No Country for Old Men, and Departed. Oh, and they completely snubbed Get Low, no?

  21. IOv3 says:

    Paul, believe whatever you want, but facts are facts. What Nolan did is amazing and on it’s own level. What the Coens did, John Ford did countless times, and did it better. Seriously, be a Coens fanboy all you want like the Academy, but ignoring Christopher Nolan for Inception is an out and out fucking disgrace to this Academy and all those who voted in this category.

    ETA: Pete, who gives a fuck about Westerns get BP nom? Seriously, something like Inception only happens fucking once, and this Academy has chosen to fuck over it’s director by giving another nom to the fucking Coen brothers. I hope the fuckers who voted for the Coens enjoy the reaming they get today on twitter, facebook, and on every show that discusses the Oscars. They fucked up… period.

  22. NickF says:

    John Hawkes, yes!

    Jeremy Renner getting a supporting nod is actually a nice surprise.

    The biggest snub is no editing for Inception. Then again, if it confused voters on first viewing I guess it makes sense to not be there.

  23. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    So only you are entitled to the facts IO?

    I like True Grit and Inception. Imagine that! I think the Coens and Nolan did an exceptional, Oscar-worthy job.

  24. Eric says:

    The Coens directed their western better than Nolan directed his dreams. I’m not upset about the director noms. Inception might have been my favorite movie of the year but nominating Nolan for his writing rather than his direction seems right to me. He’s still shaky when it comes to shooting action.

    I suspect True Grit might have been more likely to get that editing nom if the Coens didn’t use that goofy pseudonym again. The Academy doesn’t want to give it to a made-up person.

    As far as Wahlberg goes, I agree with IO. He’s underrated in The Fighter. It’s easy to overlook him when you’ve got Bale by his side, but Wahlberg gave a heartfelt, subtle performance.

    The King’s Speech has an exceptional lead performance (and Firth deserves what’s coming to him) but the film itself is merely very good. I can’t be upset if a decent movie like this takes the big prize, but it’s kind of a shame when there were so many more lively movies this year.

    I think Aronofsky deserves the director statue for Black Swan, I’ll be happy if it goes to Fincher, and I’ll be kind of dumbstruck if it goes to Hooper.

  25. IOv3 says:

    Paul, you can only pick one in this, and you picked the Coens. Obviously, you chose… poorly. I just love that you tried to deflect this onto the awesome Tom Hooper. Downright god damn shameful.

    I do love that you always try to start some shit with me in the most passive aggressive way imaginable. It’s rather funny and makes me laugh. Nevertheless, The Social Network and Inception have the same amount of nominees. I am sure the freaking critics did not see that one coming.

    ETA: This tweet is for Eric:
    “BurtRandom VV
    by cerraazizi
    Really disappointed that Chris Nolan didn’t get nominated for best director – original creative cinematography is dead.”

    Seriously… word.

    Oh yeah merely good? MERELY GOOD? Seriously, the downplaying of the awesomeness of the King’s Speech is about as annoying of the downplaying of the awesomeness of the Fighter. Seriously, the Fighter is easily in the top three of all-time great boxing movies. It’s that tremendous.

  26. David Poland says:

    Sam… Sound Mixing is often a BP indicator early in the evening. It’s not that I don’t think Inception is deserving there or could win, but the fact that King’s Speech is nom’ed there is about BP, not sound.

  27. David Poland says:

    Forget it, IO… it’s Oscartown.

  28. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    I am not trying to start anything with you IO. I am trying to discuss movies and Oscar nominations. I am not dissing Tom Hooper either. His directing may indeed be Oscar worthy. Of course someone can pick the Coens and Nolan and believe that both did exceptional work.

    I also believe Wahlberg’s Fighter performance is being unjustly overlooked. He’s just as good as Bale.

  29. Krillian says:

    Would’ve liked The Town in there, but hard to complain. I’ve seen 9 out of the 10 and liked all of them.

    Can’t believe Nolan keeps getting snubbed for Director. And yet Stephen Daldry gets nominated for every movie he makes…

    Glad I Am Love wasn’t nominated for Best Foreign Film. Overrated, but Tilda’s really good in it.

  30. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    While I didn’t like The Town (outside of Renner), I’m surprised it didn’t get more nominations. Also wish Matt Damon could have snuck in there.

  31. IOv3 says:

    David, eventually the Academy is going to have to do something with the OLD PEOPLE. Seriously, people are turning on the Boomers left and right, and the biggest award show around needs to do the same. Nice of you to think that not giving an ALREADY OSCAR WINNING ACTOR a nom would be a black-eye while not nominating Nolan barely irks you.

    Paul, that’s how you roll, but you can’t pick both in this situation. There’s one spot and obviously the Academy believe Nolan to be an anti-semitic asshat, who rapes dogs, and beats women. There is no other reason for them to not give him the spot he earned and that his fellow directors nominated him for with the DGAs.

  32. torpid bunny says:

    “I hope the fuckers who voted for the Coens enjoy the reaming they get today on twitter, facebook, and on every show that discusses the Oscars. They fucked up… period.”

    Vintage IOIOI right there. This thread is really bringing the laffs, it could be a special one.

  33. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    In this situation I can unequivocally say that I think Nolan and the Coens both deserved an Oscar nomination. They all did truly exceptional work. I have not seen The King’s Speech so I will not pass judgment on a film I have not seen. You actually dragged yourself to True Grit?

  34. Sam says:

    “Really disappointed that Chris Nolan didn’t get nominated for best director – original creative cinematography is dead.”

    I am also disappointed that Nolan didn’t get a Best Director nomination, but this tweet is hilariously off-base. Inception DID get nominated for “Best Cinematography,” which sort of by definition means that its “original creative cinematography” was recognized and appreciated.

  35. IOv3 says:

    Paul, I keep try to see the damn thing, but shit gets in the way. I will try to see it this week but I decided to see it last for obvious reasons.

    Sam, so the CINEMATOGRAPHY is worth a shit, but the DIRECTING IS SHIT! MORE FUCKING BULLSHIT! This is like stating Mad Men is the best show on TV, while not rewarding one ACTOR ON THE FUCKING SHOW!

  36. Sam says:

    David: Ah, thanks for clarifying. I hadn’t thought about Sound Editing being an early sign, but now that I think about it, you’re right. Gonna have to go back and look at the past choices now. It tends to go for EITHER the BP winner or the loudest blockbuster, right? So the winner of that category will either be Inception or the BP, whether that’s The King’s Speech or The Social Network. Slick.

  37. sanj says:

    Toy Story 3 got best pic and animation … change that to another film ..like Scott Pilgrim for the comic con nerds.
    won’t somebody think of the comic con nerds ?

    DP – your favorite movie Never Let Me Go didn’t get anything ..are you mad ?

  38. IOv3 says:

    If only Sanj. In only.

  39. merkin muffley says:

    So wait?! IO REALLY hasn’t seen True Grit?!?!? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!

    please IO! Tell me its all lies! Tell me you haven’t been attacking a movie you haven’t even seen??

    Talk about creating your own narrative based on incomplete information.

    Dude, if you can find a way to be more conservative, fox news might have an opening.

    Wow! just wow!

  40. IOv3 says:

    Again, IT’S A FUCKING WESTERN THAT’S A REMAKE (that I have tried to see but it’s losing screens and the show times just aren’t lining up for me)! Seriously, get over it, because some of us don’t bend over and let the Coens’ give us a good rogering! Seriously, The Coens or Aronofsky, Hooper, or O.Russell. I will take the other 3 before the FUCKING COENS!

    Seriously, you named yourself after a PUBIC HAIRPIECE, and have never ever gotten that it has nothing to do with the fucking movie. It has everything to do with the fucking directors and all of their… fans and the marks they have at the Academy.

    ETA: I am even more pissed off about JOHN QUESDA AND HIS FRAT BOY DOUCHEFUCKS KILLING OFF JOHNNY STORM! FUCK YOU MARVEL! YOU 3.99 CHARGING ASSHOLES!

  41. Geoff says:

    IO, you’re half-right again (my opinion, of course;)

    The Academy DOES seem to have a real bug up its ass about Nolan, no way it can be ignored at this point. Ok, Memento was a smaller indie hit, but that film was a masterclass in writing – structure and dialogue – and it lost to fucking Gosford Park!

    The Dark Knight thing has already been discussed ad nauseum…..him not getting nominated for Inception is a big disappointment. That film did not deserve the second tier for Best Pictures. It’s about as much a director’s movie as anything out there – I really thought it had a shot at BP, but guessing not.

    However, what’s this deal about the Coens? Where is this history of the Academy cow-towing to them – when Fargo won Best Picture? (It was better than anything else nominated that year.) Maybe all of the nominations that Millers Crossing got? The supporting nods for Big Lebowski? All the technical nods thrown at Hudsucker Proxy and O’ Brother Where Art Thou???? Exactly, because NONE of that shit ever happened! Just a weird argument, IO – the Coens remain about as idiosyncratic as any other filmmaker out there. Seriously, their films typically have a smidge more mainstream appeal than Mike Leigh – True Grit happens to be their big commercial hit and it came out at JUST the right time.

    Nolan not getting Best Director is the biggest disappointment, but beyond happy that Hans Zimmer got nominated for Best Score – it’s the score of the year! And I still loved Reznor’s work for The Social Network – by the way, don’t you just love that NOBODY even acknowledges Atticus Ross when they talk about TSN’s music? You would think that EVERY ONE and their mother listened to NIN back in the day.:)

    Very excited that Exit Through the Gift Shop got nomatined for Best Doc, that is awesome! It was probably in my top three for the year for all movies, can we get it on Blu-Ray now! Curious as to every one’s thoughts – any one think it actually has a shot of winning?

  42. IOv3 says:

    Geoff, A SERIOUS MAN GOT A BEST OSCAR NOD! COME ON! Seriously, this has nothing to do with the Coens in the past and everything to do with the Coens now. The Academy old folks are in fucking love with the Coens to the point where they once again FUCKED OVER CHRISTOPHER NOLAN for them. It’s a disgrace but since the FUCKING COENS got the nom, people like Ebert and Poland will not get pissed about it, because the FUCKING COENS get a FUCKING PASS!

    One more thing: DAFT PUNK PRODUCED THE SCORE OF THE YEAR! I own those other scores, they are fantastic, but no where close to approaching Tron Legacy Score awesomeness.

  43. chris says:

    It would have been tough for (the great) “I Am Love” to be nominated for foreign film, Krillian, since Italy didn’t submit it and it wasn’t eligible.

  44. Geoff says:

    A Serious Man was awesome! And this is coming from some one who has not been enamored with half of what the Coens have put out. Sorry, there is absolutely no rivalry between the Coens and Chris Nolan – just absurd, I don’t see how the Academy made a conscious choice to choose one over the other. You want to get pissed about the Weinsteins machine and how they OWN the Academy, that’s a better argument. Remember, when The Reader took the BP nod from TDK?

    And yeah, forgot to mention Tron Legacy – how the hell did it not get nominated for Visual Effects??? I did love the Daft Punk score and have it on my iPod, but not terribly surprised they got passed over. But effects, really? And some Clint Eastwood CGI crap got chosen over it???

  45. IOv3 says:

    Geoff, the DGA put out a list. The Academy looked at that list and decided to replace Nolan with the Coens. That’s what they did because they are marks for the freaking Coens. Obviously, Nolan apparently fucked all of their daughters, beat up all of their sons, and did so why merrily singing “Frère Jacques” in Swahili to be replaced by the… FUCKING COENS on that list!

  46. Bob Burns says:

    TKS was the early fave, but was eclipsed by TSN’s wins. My read of human nature is that when people lose something they think they possess they get angry or afraid. Harvey used that emotion to motivate the Brits…. something like, get of your butts and turn out your vote cause TSN is gonna take it if you don’t.

    when do get an American block vote?

  47. shillfor alanhorn says:

    DP: While, yes, I would normally agree with you that TRUE GRIT’s Best Pic chances are diminished somewhat by not getting an editing nom, don’t forget the fact that the editing noms are voted on by editors and they may have rather tapped one of their own, as opposed to the two directors hiding behind a cutesy pseudonym. More surprised that INCEPTION didn’t get an editing nom than anything, though absolutely tickled pink that the arrogant Nolan was snubbed once again. (Countdown to IO rant in 3…2…1…).

  48. IOv3 says:

    ARROGANT NOLAN? ARROGANT NOLAN? BAT CREDIT CARD! [randomly shoots gun in the air]

  49. sally in Chicago says:

    me again. Wow, all the sourness on here because Chris nolan was snubbed. Was I the only one that fell asleep on inception? I thought the acting was comparable to TV acting. No one stood out, not even DiCaprio although he gave it his best.

    As for predictions, this could happen:
    Colin and Bridges share the best acting award; it’s been done before
    Leo and Amy split the vote and Hailie takes it. She gave the most physical portrayal of all the actors.
    Nicole Kidman steals it from Natalie. Do you REALLY think that the Black Swan will win anything? I predict a shutout.

    I would like to see True Grit take best pic, but it won’t happen. It’s the Brits time this year.

  50. sally in Chicago says:

    @Geoff….Yep, Hollywood loves the Coens because they make INTERESTING MOVIES, WITH GREAT ACTORS doing great work.
    hollywood also loves Westerns — get over it.

  51. IOv3 says:

    TV ACTING? TV ACTING? BAT FUCKING CREDIT CARD? You are just another fan of THE FUCKING COENS and that alone is reason to dismiss you but insulting TV ACTING while hoping Melissa Leo loses just pisses me right off.

    Fell asleep during Inception. Oh I would love to be so mean right now.

  52. jchilds@fas.harvard.edu says:
  53. David Poland says:

    IO… seriously… enough screaming… happy to read salient thoughts… but the cap show is getting boring.

  54. Joe Leydon says:

    David: At first glance, it appears to me that, among all the first-tier categories, there is only one mortal lock: Best Adapted Screenplay. Would you agree? And would that make this the most wide-open Oscar race in several years?

    (BTW: I am still upset about Get Low. Not only did Robert Duvall get hosed — Bill Murray was unjustly neglected as well.)

  55. Telemachos says:

    I also think Nolan deserved a Directing nomination, but it was a tough field this year. With the Coens already snagging a win, I would’ve thought that would be enough to get Nolan in — and surely anyone who liked INCEPTION at all would think that direction was one of the film’s strengths (in fact, I think Nolan did a stronger directing job than writing — there was some ugly exposition packed away in all those one-dimensional side characters). But then again, I would’ve loved if Danny Boyle had gotten a directing nod too — I thought he did a freakin’ fantastic job with 127 HOURS. So… oh well.

    Nolan’s snub will help him, down the road. Not for TDKR, but whatever original film he directs after that.

  56. Melquiades says:

    I’d love to think this race is wide-open, but I suspect Bale, Firth and Portman are mortal locks. I’m holding out for a Steinfeld upset of Melissa Leo, though.

    As for Best Picture, I’m still thinking The Social Network will pull it out, despite the quick shift to The King’s Speech by most this morning. And Fincher will win Best Director regardless (perhaps in an echo of Ang Lee’s win when Brokeback fell to Crash).

  57. yancyskancy says:

    Yeah, the Academy sure hates Christopher Nolan. They only gave his film 8 nominations, including one for his script. He probably missed a Best Director nod by a hair.

    I’m always interested in how the Academy treats Mike Leigh films. When you don’t expect anything much, he scores a surprise directing nod (VERA DRAKE), but much-buzzed performances get snubbed (Hawkins in HAPPY-GO-LUCKY; Manville in ANOTHER YEAR). But his scripts often get in, when you might think the writers branch would penalize him for his non-trad method that involves so much input from the actors.

    Now excuse me, somebody should go and comfort Mila Kunis. I volunteer.

  58. cadavra says:

    “hollywood also loves Westerns — get over it.”

    Really? Then how come they’ve hardly made any in nearly two decades? We’re lucky to get one a year, and even those tend to be independently financed (e.g., APPALOOSA, OPEN RANGE). If TRUE GRIT’s success gets some greenlit, that would perhaps be its most enduring legacy.

    Apart from Nolan and maybe Duvall, I didn’t see a lot of surprises either. (I think I pegged all ten BPs, but I’m too lazy to go back and hunt for that post.) I’m most overjoyed that some of the top categories seem to be wide-open this year, a real rarity in an era where all the critics’ awards usually take most of the surprise out of the proceedings. This could actually be fun for a change.

  59. Jerry says:

    Though I hate the fact that Nolan didn’t get nominated and True Grit didn’t make my top ten, everybody should remember that a remake that wasn’t as good as the original, “The Departed”, recent won best picture.

  60. IOv3 says:

    If you take the… F’N COENS out of that Best Directing category. You have a Best Directing Category for the freaking ages. Nice of the Academy to screw that up!

  61. Triple Option says:

    Sally in Chicago – I’ve had this discussion w/IO in a different framing before but I felt like Inception was the big risk taker as far as pre-Oscar fav films went but I also thought it failed, relatively speaking. Nolan not getting the directing nod I would take as a numbers game not a snub. However, and I’ll say this realizing it’s a good chunk of my own projection, as opposed to a reasoned theory, the lack of an editing nod for the film I think was more deliberate in that that film was a good (bad?) 20 mins too long!! Old people have better things to do than sit in a theater all day. Well, actually they don’t, but they get really cranky if you keep them someplace longer than need be. A film that idly spins its wheels for 20 mins, regardless of looking cool as a van falling over the side of a really high bridge, is a Filmmaking 101 unpardonable sin that someone at their level should understand.

    The bore for me was that Nolan spent way too much time examining the what and the how, while failing to address the who and the why. I couldn’t get caught up in the “thrill ride,” to me it was just minutia. It’s like when you check yourself out of a long, repetitive joke. OK, the first salesman’s not sleeping with the farmer’s daughter, we know the 2nd one’s certainly not going to either, can we just jump ahead to the 3rd guy and the punch? Instead of seeing Leo or whoever float bodies down a hallway like balloons from the Macy’s Thanksgiving parade, can we just skip to level 3 and see if they’re able to save the day???

    Other random comments: I thought Never Let Me Go was a little light in the butt overall but I thought it was a much better told story than Winter’s Bone and surprised it got a writing nom. And certainly Carey Mulligan was better than Bening, who I really fear is gonna sneak away with the win. Where Bone got boned was in the supporting acting roles. Dale Dickey needed some love. Which begs a bigger question, Helena Bonham Carter?! It’s like a restaurant hostess getting written up in Bon Appétit. She’s one of my all-time favorites but hers reminds me of Cal Ripken Jr going to an All-Star game while batting under .270 and single digit home runs.

  62. Samuel Deter says:

    IO you can scream all you want but the fact that you haven’t seen True Grit makes me (and I’m guessing most people here) not really care about your rants.

    I’m actually glad to see that the Academy didn’t kiss fanboy ass by nominating Nolan. Yes, it was a good direction but he’s not good with action, had many failed comedic-relief moments and a “coldness” or “lack of heart” that unlike Kubrick (yes, I’ve heard people ridiculously compare Nolan’s coldness to Kubrick’s) is not an artistic choice but a flaw.

    The screenplay was different and unique and gets points for that… but half of it was merely disguised exposition that worked well only on first time viewing… for me at least.

  63. IOv3 says:

    Samuel, unlike the guy who runs the site, I saw The King’s Speech coming… so… face. The fact that the lot of you are Coen fanboys who lack the good sense to understand the awesomeness that is Inception, pretty much makes me dismiss you right out of hand. Seriously, you only get one Inception, but you get two True Grits.

  64. leahnz says:

    yay:
    hawkes
    restrepo
    michelle w

    interesting:
    second-most noms for ‘the grit’
    no fx nod for TRON

    awkward:
    best actor nominee as host

    dumber than a sack of hair:
    hailee in ‘supporting actress’ category (who is she supporting, her own self as the lead? shameful nonsense)

    not surprising:
    no editing nom for “roderick”
    no editing nom for ‘inception’ (shockingly bad editing in places – incoherent, repetitive, overstuffed, messy)

    kinda thought it might sneak in:
    art direction for ‘shutter island’ (i’m not a fan of the film per se but it was stylish and compellingly designed in camera, certainly of a higher standard than some of the actual nominees)

  65. IOv3 says:

    Shutter Island really is a piece of trash apparently. That movie got the shaft. Something else to be mad about :(.

  66. movieman says:

    How in **** did “Dogtooth” get a Best Foreign Film nomination over “Of Gods and Me” (which, shockingly, didn’t even make the short list–to the dismay and profound irritation of Gallic cineastes everywhere)? Don’t get me wrong: “Dogtooth” is a weirdly fascinating little film, kind of Lars von Trier Lite. And I’m all for this notoriously middlebrow category being a tad more adventurous. But if they were really serious about finding something, uh, outre to fill out the fifth slot, wouldn’t
    “Uncle Boomnee” have made more sense? At least it has the Palme d’Or seal of approval. Does this mean that GG winner “In a Better World” is the favorite? Or will “Outside the Law” win just to piss off the French even further?
    That said, I’m very much relieved that pedestrian-at-best “Waiting for Superman” didn’t get a nod in the documentary category, particularly since it seemed like the front-runner even before it was released. Sorry that “The Tillman Story” and “Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work” didn’t make the cut, though. Along with “Restrepo” and “Gift Shop,” they were my favorite docs of the past year.
    Sad to see Ryan Gosling, Julianne Moore, Leo Dicaprio and Aaron Eckhart get left out of the party. And not sure how Jacki Weaver received a nomination over, say, Lesley Manville (or Mila Kunis for that matter).
    Otherwise (Javier Bardem notwithstanding), not a whole lot of surprises.
    And really not a whole lot to talk about.

  67. IOv3 says:

    Double M, what’s to talk about is the lead up to Oscar and the nominations are the climax. While the award ceremony is anti-climax.

  68. leahnz says:

    my bad, someone far more oscar savvy than i has just pointed out to me that “roderick” has been oscar nom’d for editing previously, so another nod for ‘true grit’ would not have been out of order for the editing branch

  69. Daniella Isaacs says:

    I wonder why IO really cares. IO, you don’t seem a player in the studio world, or a publicist or whatever, so what’s it to you? It hasn’t hurt the reps of Hitchcock, Welles, or Kubrick that they never won a competitive Oscar for their directing. On the other hand, Frances Marion is hardly a household name, even though he did win one. I bet you’re more angry about this than Nolan, or his mother, or his agent, IO. Maybe the person in charge of his Oscar publicity push is more angry… maybe.

  70. IOv3 says:

    Daniella, that’s a fucking pithy comment but it’s the type of comment that’s PURE AND UTTER BULLSHIT. It’s the OSCARS and for better or worse, they pretty much establish what the best films are of a year. This is not like music where the year end list mean more than Grammy’s. This is film and that bald motherfucking hunk of gold means a lot to what’s best for a year. The fact that INCEPTION WAS TOO FUCKING LOUD FOR THESE MOTHERFUCKERS says so much about the flaws of letting old people vote on current film, that it’s staggering.

    The fact that you think Nolan didn’t get pissed is also funny. Hell his mom probably got pissed because the god damn Academy once again told her son that he sucks. Seriously, the fucking pithiness of some people, but good for you. GOOD FOR YOU!

  71. Daniella Isaacs says:

    Er, so “How Green Was My Valley” is considered better than “Citizen Kane”? “The Apartment” is considered better than “Psycho”? Try again.

  72. leahnz says:

    io, i can tell you’ve only just begun to work up a wearisome head of steam in this regard but just to point out two quick things:

    – inception did get a best pic nod

    – did it occur to you that nolan might have just narrowly missed the cut in a close nomination race in the direction category, and it’s not actually a case of ‘the academy’ as a monolithic ledger-as-joker-esque entity maniacally laughing as ‘it’ crossed nolan off the list with a giant red crayon and replaced his name with ‘the coens’ in an act of unparalleled cartoon-like villainy and senility?

    for your consideration

  73. Daniella Isaacs says:

    You know, IO, my point is, that after three or four years… Nobody cares. Any film history text book you pick up isn’t even going to mention who won what Oscar in a given year, unless it’s to make some totally parenthetical point. You pull up any list of “great movies”–AFI, BFI, hell, even IMDB rankings–they’re not going to line up with the Oscars very well, with a few exceptions like THE GODFATHER or CASABLANCA. The fact that you give this one group such power to make you crazy year after year is really something else.

  74. IOv3 says:

    Again, this all started when they just couldn’t reward SUNRISE BY ITSELF! You are also making a straw man fucking argument that has more holes in it than swiss cheese. If it has the gold, it’s the best, but you it can still be questioned in retrospect. WHY? IT’s AN OPINION! DUH!

    Seriously though, you are giving me shit for caring about Oscars on a blog that has a 150 week to Oscars column, and the dude who runs the blog has his entire career based around this time of year. Seriously, you are giving me shit about Oscars here? Here’s one middle finger, here is the other, and KACHOW!

    ETA: Leah, it’s about being fair and let’s be fair here. Nolan got screwed and he got screwed by people who seemingly have a fucking crush on the Coens. Seriously, look at the DGA list, look at the Academy list, and it’s rather easy to figure out what happened. Nolan got COENED and it pisses me off.

    Also, Inception never had a shot at best picture, but Nolan had a shot at best director. What did they do to him? They pretty much stated in large numbers that; “Hey, you are a shit director but you wrote the movie pretty good.” The fact that they did that is easily one of the BIGGEST FUCK YOUS TO ANY TALENT IN THE HISTORY OF THESE AWARDS. It’s disgusting that a majority of them did what they did but that’s who they are.

  75. christian says:

    “they pretty much establish what the best films are of a year.”

    Only to those dedicated to that idea.

    Or in other words: AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS.

  76. anghus says:

    other than io’s misplaced anger, there’s not a lot of passion in this year’s nominees.

    i don’t think there’s a single film in the list that anyone will be talking about this time next year. there’s nothing legendary or lasting here. there’s some great performances, and some great work being done but is there a movie that will make people list 2010 as a year of great cinema.

    I liked Inception. Didn’t love it. But it is the most likely to be remembered a year down the road, or ten. Does that mean it deserves the best picture nod…. no. But it is the film that will have the most fervent following and be referenced years down the road.

    Can you say that of any other film in the list?

    the only other film even close is Black Swan. And it’s not that close.

    127 Hours, Winter’s Bone – Hardly anyone saw it
    True Grit – The annual Coen nominations. It will only be referenced as “the most successful Coen film”.
    Social Network – It won’t seem that special 10 years from now when were talking about facebook like myspace.
    The King’s Speech – no different than every other british film of the same ilk. Practically indistinguishable from the light dramas coming from the UK.
    Toy Story 3 – embarrassed that this was nominated. historically, it will be grouped on with all the other Pixar films.
    The Kids Are All Right – light, frothy, doubt anyone talks about this film years from now.
    The Fighter – Above average boxing flick with some great supporting performances.

    So, the argument here for me isn’t what The Best Picture is, but the film we’ll be talking about 10 years from now.

    I’m guessing Inception.

    Not exactly a ringing endorsement for an Oscar, but interesting.

  77. IOv3 says:

    HOW DARE YOU INSULT AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS!

    Again that’s the dedicated idea but if we can change it to be like music then that would be great except the assholes who review movies in EW would screw it all up :D!

    ETA: Anghus, you are missing the boat with The King’s Speech. It’s no where close to being like other Brit dramas because of it’s direction and the performances. Seriously, Tom Hooper can beat Fincher and I will be fine with it because that film is amazing to look at. Everything about it, is just awesome, and that’s why I will at least not be an embarrassment as a Best Picture winner.

    The fact that you are in the Nick and Devin HATE TOY STORY 3 camp, is pretty funny.

  78. leahnz says:

    hey io, go tell it to valerie faris, randa haines, streisand, penny marshall and lone sherfig. bruce beresford will drive you. you might find a sympathetic ear.

  79. zemblan says:

    “the apartment” may be better than psycho. legitimately. i know i like it more and would choose to watch it over psycho on most occasions.

    everyone should ignore the oscars anyway— it’s fun and everything, but in reality it is basically a country club member ceremony. who cares. dullsville.

  80. Krillian says:

    What movies that came out 10 years ago are we still talking about?

    Almost Famous, O Brother Where Art Thou, Traffic, Cast Away. Gladiator maybe? Crouching Tiger doesn’t really come up anymore. Chocolat? Nope. Quills? Nope.

    So regarding these ten nominees and prognosticating 10 years from now, hard to say. But if Jennifer Lawrence’s career takes off, people will always come back to Winter’s Bone. 127 Hours will always highlight the career of James Franco, should it remain one worth following. Social Network is Fincher and therefore will keep getting rattled off with Seven, Fight Club and Zodiac, even if below them in tier. Inception is Nolan, so yes. Fighter? I love that this is the one that’ll get Bale his gold, but I can see it fading the way Cinderella Man did. Black Swan? Yeah, milestones for Portman and Aronofsky. True Grit joins the Good Movies side of the Coen list.

    King’s Speech? I can see this fading the way Gosford Park has. Toy Story 3 is Pixar so will always remain relevant. Kids Are All Right will fade.

  81. Krillian says:

    BTW – Methinks all four acting awards are locked. Firth, Portman, Bale, Leo.

  82. anghus says:

    Toy Story 3 is no different than Toy Story or Toy Story 2. Same movies. Same emotional beats. Stories might differ a little, but it’s the same movie times 3.

    i didn’t hate Toy Story 3. I just don’t think it deserves to be considered for best picture. the love for Pixar is obsessive and all encompassing. The films and the content doesn’t matter. “Pixar Presents” is all that’s needed to get a gushing load full of critical bliss.

    they are nice cartoons. the stories are well written and interesting. they are not best pictures….. at all. The first half of Wall E… maybe.

    io, i liked the King’s Speech and i think there’s a fondness for the kind of classic storytelling approach… it’s quaint. i guess that’s good enough this year. I agree with you that it looks phenomenal. Hand it every cinematography and design award. totally deserving.

  83. anghus says:

    krillian, i think you’re right on the acting noms.

    as for 2000, the only films i can think of that still comes up is Requiem for a Dream and Memento.

    10 years on…. it’s still Nolan and Aronofsky…

    Funny that the 2 i picked this year as the ‘memorable’ ones are Inception and Black Swan. I didn’t even realize when i started the ’10 year’ argument that requiem and memento were 2000 releases.

    But it does a great job of validating my point.

  84. Triple Option says:

    From the 5:08 PM comment on, I think IO has his tongue firmly planted in his cheek and only half serious in his ranting over the “snubs,” Much like his insistence that Santonio Holmes didn’t hav both feet down in his Super Bowl winning catch against the Cardinals. Sorry to drudge up the past, mate.

    For the most part I don’t care but I have to admit every once in a while someone will win or get snubbed and a little volcano of ire will boil up inside of me “What?! How’d that get in there?! Who paid these people off? Are you seriously telling me you liked that over this?! Wow! I just – I just don’t have words for how jacked up your perception of reality must be!” But as long as it doesn’t cost me any money, unlike say Penn St’s Matt McGloin throwing 5 picks in one game, I generally forget about it by the time I leave the room.

  85. cadavra says:

    Daniella, as a woman, you of all people oughta know that Frances Marion was a “she.”

  86. IOv3 says:

    Kril, The Fighter should easily become one of those sports movies that people watch incessantly for years. It’s literally as close as anyone has come to making a BASED ON TRUE STORY Rocky. It also has that great ending with Dicky telling Mickey what beating Shea Neary would mean to his family and that sort of thing resonates for a long time.

    Now, comparing The King’s Speech to Gosford Park is literally like comparing an apple to an orange. The King’s Speech is wonderful just because it’s a story of a guy, helping another guy, but how those two becoming friends helped an entire country. That movie is amazing and if people forget it, it’s because they just don’t get how fucking awesome it truly is.

    Finally, Anghus, I could not disagree more. Pixar tell stories that cut to the bone. Toy Story 1 is about coming to terms with life, Toy Story 2 is about middle age and realizing you need to make the most of the time you have left, and Toy Story 3 is about dying. Those toys literally face the fires of hell and they accept their fate. They enjoyed their time together and if they have to go out, they go out together. That’s a powerful fucking message and to discount that, to state all three movies are the same, is pure and utter bullshit.

    Seriously, Pixar have some of the best writers on earth. They make some of the best movies in the history of the medium. Stating they make GOOD CARTOONS dismisses such amazing beauty and wonder that it’s sort of freaking sad.

    ETA: Triple, to most almost every non-Stealers fan, you’ve still only won FOUR SUPER BOWLS. Oh I take that back, you cheated back in the 70s as well. YOU WON THREE. CONGRATS :P!

  87. anghus says:

    i can’t discount Pixar. too many people like them for me to just call it all trash.

    but the people who love pixar, the ones who gush that everything they do is legendary, are the ones who are duped by manipulative, button pushing same ol’ same ol’ storytelling. I can write them off as ‘good cartoons’, because for the most part that’s all they are. Should Toy Story 3 really be considered in the same league as The Fighter… as Black Swan… as the King’s Speech.

    No. I don’t think so. at all. I’m not against animated films being considered among the best, but they have to be the best before being considered.

    Toy Story 1, 2, and 3

    Personified toys dealing with real life issues of abandonment and transitioning into a new role, featuring screwball comedy, fantastic visuals, and a score from Randy Newman.

    Yup, they’re all so different. Alarmingly so.

  88. IOv3 says:

    Again, same characters, different stories. You are also discounting them because to you, they are only good cartoons and Toy Story 3 is one of the best films of last year. It tells an amazing story that is lost on you, Nunziata, and Farci. The fact that you think their storytelling is button pushing is just infuriating.

  89. Monco says:

    Just had to post an opinion. Nolan not getting nominated is a fucking joke. The Academy is embarrasing. I’m done watching. The man has made the movie of the year twice (The Dark Knight and Inception)and failed to receive a nomination both times.

  90. IOv3 says:

    Monco, high five?

  91. anghus says:

    Io, they tell stories with cute things. toys. fish. bugs. monsters. cars.

    so right off the bat, they’re using cute little characters to tell their stories, which is a button pushing tactic.

    they make fun little movies with similar themes and a carbon copy tone for almost every film. what they do is cool, but it’s a formula brother.

    you try to lump me into the hater crowd. not me. good cartoons, like i said. Am i a hater because i think including Toy Story 3 in the Best Picture category is kind of embarrassing? It’s not in the same league as the other nominees, not by a country mile. liking pixar is one thing. giving them a yearly best picture nomination…. kind of depressing. There’s a real movie that could occupy that spot. Not an animated screwball comedy with 20 minutes of heartfelt moments. I won’t fault anyone who likes Pixar, or even those who love them.

    But your inner child might not be the best compass to use when navigating the Best Picture category.

  92. cadavra says:

    Well, he did get noms for Picture and Original Screenplay, so it’s not like he was totally ignored…

  93. Derek Leidig says:

    I though the most interesting category today was, of all things, Best Makeup. You had two small films few saw (Barney, The Way Back) and a big movie relatively few saw or remembered that it came from 2010 (Wolfman). It’s also notable that 2 (or 2 1/2) of the films dealt with human beings and not monsters, demons, or aliens. Maybe CGI has replaced latex for good?

  94. IOv3 says:

    He got ignored WHERE IT COUNTS, Cad. That’s the point. All of those other films were not as dependent on the director and his vision as much as Inception, and they snubbed him for the director’s of a fucking Western. Again, I don’t care how good or bad that film is, but it’s not INCEPTION. The fact that they got his spot will bug me for a long long time, so I apologize to all you for the rant I give toward the Coens some time in the Fall.

    Anghus, so they used a rat and he’s a cute character? An old man? A beat up robot? An overweight superhero? An ant? Do I have to go on? Their movies are no where near being the same and it’s not my inner child that appreciates them. It’s the humanity in those films that’s as equaled to any of the other films nominated for best picture. Seriously, your dismissals are once again my fave thing found on the internet: PROJECTING! It’s more about you than the films themselves.

  95. Triple Option says:

    Sorry, but I can’t let one person go to the grave thinking I’m a Steelers fan. I was glad Tomlin got his ring. I think he’s done an amazing job shifting through the distractions and injuries this year so I won’t be too mad if he gets another. Overall, I’m right there with you, they’ve won enough! Most years I’m rooting they don’t even get to the big game.

    As for Toy Story 3, I thought it was pretty different than 1 & 2. I’ll agree there were some theme similarities depending on how you slice it but I thought it did a fairly remarkable job standing up on its own. Not once was I thinking “we’ve seen this before.” Unlike X-Men 3 or Spidey 3 where nothing was brought up that either was a retread or nothing I felt needed to be resolved. I would argue that the emotional apex for TS3 wasn’t manipulated and came away from the story climax, which I think deserves points for difficulty. I think the real thing that hurts TS3 is that there were two before it. What gripped people so much the first time was the novelty. That gone, plenty of people are discarding as old hat and generic. Others of course can have their own reasons for discounting it. Seriously though I think if Toy Story I came out like 2-3 years ago and been the set up for TS3, like Batman Begins was to The Dark Knight, people would be wanting to champion this film more. I realize TDK didn’t get a nom but I don’t think TS3 would’ve carried such a ho-hum response.

  96. cadavra says:

    Funny, but ever since Pixar was bought by Disney, the sentimentality quotient (or Disney-ish-ness, if you will) seems to have skyrocketed. MONSTERS INC., THE INCREDIBLES, CARS and RATATOUILLE have nowhere near the heart-tugging tone of WALL-E, UP! and TS3. Not a complaint, mind you, just an observation.

  97. Baggio says:

    Besides Inception not getting BD nomination, Im disappointed it didn’t get the nom for Editing. I mean it’s a movie about dreams within dreams within other dreams, and It was donde masterfully.

  98. IOv3 says:

    Cad, I just think all of the writers and directors from those earlier films have aged and kids have made them a bit more sentimental. However, Ratatouille is a more recent film and has a crap load of sentimentality for food. Which is pretty trippy.

  99. Samuel Deter says:

    IOv3 says:

    “Seriously, Tom Hooper can beat Fincher and I will be fine with it because that film is amazing to look at.”

    So a good looking film means it’s well directed? No wonder you think Nolan got snubbed.

    Directing is storytelling, and though Inception is a huge technical achievement, it doesn’t mean Mike Leigh’s subtle, beautiful and mature work in Another Year isn’t a lot better. Yes, mature.

    Sometimes, it’s not about the impressive technical stuff, sometimes it’s about the characters and the story (no, not plot– not dreams within dreams).

    Let’s just be glad your Nolan and my Leigh got noms for their original screenplays.

  100. IOv3 says:

    BE GLAD? BE GLAD? BE FUCKING GLAD? Get out of here with that bullshit. You also make another lame argument that misses that I have expanded on why I would be happy with Tom Hooper winning an Oscar. Seriously, people, if you all want to come at me, at least pay attention when you do. It would be appreciated.

    Nevertheless, Nolan directed one of the if not the best films of last year and apparently we should be happy he gets a writing nod. Not only do I hope he skips the Oscars. I hope he gets the DGA for no other reason to shed even more of a light on the lunacy that the Academy pulled yesterday.

  101. Samuel Deter says:

    HAHAHAHA I just wrote the last part because I knew you’d react that way.

    Honestly, who are you? why are you so upset about this? who the fuck cares!

    Besides, like it or not, Nolan is a better screenwriter than a director. And if you are a fan (as I have a feeling you are, not sure why, just a hunch) then you should be glad his work is recognised.

    If there was anything special at all about inception it was the screenplay, not the direction.

  102. yancyskancy says:

    Cad: Daniella also erred in claiming that Ms. Frances Marion won an Oscar for Best Director. Though she did direct three silent films in the pre-Oscar days, her claim to fame is as screenwriter, for which the Academy honored her twice (THE BIG HOUSE and THE CHAMP).

  103. IOv3 says:

    Sam, if someone getting pissed off about the Academy continuing their DUMB SHIT streak bothers you, then go somewhere else. This is the god damn HOT BLOG and this fucking happens here. What I don’t get is that two random people come out of the woodwork and give me shit for being pissed off that the greatest living director alive is getting shit on… AGAIN!

    Sorry, but that fucking writing nom is one of the biggest back-handed compliments ever given by the Academy to anyone. I doubt he will stay home because he’s a producer of Inception but I wish he would. That writing nom is such shit. God damn it’s such a disgusting slap in the face to a guy who provided the world with one of the most original movies in years and directed the ever loving shit out of it.

  104. leahnz says:

    io, since this this thread has weirdly devolved into a running commentary about you and your epic nolan hissy-fit, let’s have a quick little reality check re: the conspiracy against “the greatest living director alive”:

    first off and just to get it out of the way, anyone who thought nolan and a movie about a crime fighter who dresses up as a giant costumed bat based on a comic book had a snowball’s chance in hell of getting nominated for the big directing/best pic oscars was living in a dream world tripping on shrooms, and obviously hadn’t met the rather conservative, notoriously sci-fi/fantasy/horror-averse academy (arguably this is exactly why the best pic category was expanded, to include a more diverse range of popular audence-favourite blockbustery-type flicks for people to root for, within reason. but in a field of five pics, ‘TDK’ and nolan were NEVER going to get there with a straight-up comic book adaptation)

    with that out of the way, let’s have an actual look at nolan’s career in respect to the academy, nolan who’s directed just six major feature films to date:

    memento – weird little backwards crime mystery, snags nolan an original screenplay oscar nom for his break-out flick, pretty nifty

    insomnia – decent, stylish remake but not exactly oscary

    bat begins – comic adaptation action fantasy crime, about as far from directing/best pic bait as one can get, but still manages a prestigious photography nom in nolan’s film

    prestige – decent magic and mystery pic snags photography & art noms, again quite good for the type of film, not the sort that ever earns directing/pic nods

    TDK – comic adaptation action fantasy crime drama, earns several art/tech noms and receives acting/editing wins, terrific stuff for a comic adaptation, with practically no chance in hell of best pic/direcing noms because of the type of material and well-known academy biases that extend far beyond some narrow vendetta against nolan; would likely have gotten in with the 10 noms system.

    inception – sci-fi action brain bender, a slew of prestigious noms including best pic and another writing nom for nolan, terrific for nolan and the notorious sci-fi averse academy. no directing nom puts nolan in the same company as hoards of directors who’ve come before him, whose films have been nominated for best pic but missed out on a nom from the directing branch. it happens on a regular basis.

    so i ask you, where is this systematic slight against nolan you’re so lathered up about? do you think all nolan’s films have deserved directing/pic oscar noms? i’d say nolan, given the material he has chosen to direct, has done very well for himself thus far with the academy.

    receiving directing/pic noms, even for a cut-above quality comic adaptation, was NEVER going to happen with the academy, not because it’s nolan but because of the type of film TDK is. and now he’s missed out on a directing nom for his thoughtful sci-fi actioner in a wide field of decent flicks – yes, it happens ALL THE TIME to directors, year in, year out. but building two instances – one entirely predictable and the other always possible – into some grand academy conspiracy against nolan in your mind, and subsequently going ballistic about it on the blog, is just silly.

    (i’m sure that was a complete waste of my time but it was barrel of laughs typing out at 1 in the morning. if it’s error-ridden, that’s why)

  105. Whether you liked them or not, JAWS, THE CONVERSATION, FIVE EASY PIECES, TAXI DRIVER, THE RIGHT STUFF, THE COLOR PURPLE, BROADCAST NEWS, DRIVING MISS DAISY (which won Best Picture that year!), THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, APOLLO 13, LOTR: THE TWO TOWERS, MOULIN ROUGE, and SOUNDER (fucking SOUNDER!) didn’t direct themselves either. Yet none of their directors were nominated though each of the films was. It happens.

    Plus, there are four other films whose directors weren’t nominated either. Why aren’t we worried about Lisa Cholodenko’s mom?

  106. IOv3 says:

    Yeah, TDK is the best film of 2008 and it’s not a straight up comic book adaption. That’s why it’s the best movie of 2008 because it’s so much more than almost any other comic book movie not named Scott Pilgrim… ever. Seriously, the guy is the best there is at what he does and he created Inception all on his own. How does the Academy repay such originality? More of these fucking people (I really never get tired of typing “fucking people”) nominated him for a FREAKING WRITING AWARD THAN A DIRECTING AWARD! I doubt it’s intended but that’s such a fucking slight, it’s hilarious.

    ETA: Kevin, those directors were hosed as well and he’s Christopher FUCKING Nolan. When she becomes Lisa FUCKING Cholodenko, then we can bring her mom into this.

  107. arisp says:

    leahnz – IO is not that upset about it – he just likes writing (and channeling Lex in a weird way).

  108. Daniella Isaacs says:

    IO, most the people on this blog are industry professionals with some sort of stake in the awards, or they’re fans who have a little fun talking about a pop cultural event. You seem to be some sort of Oscar obsessive with an anger management problem. Nolan is likely embarrassed about his most characteristic fan base: Godard’s are guys in coffee shops holding cigarettes, Bergman’s are guys taking everything VERY seriously, Woody Allen’s are guys trying to use charm and humor to overcome the fact that they don’t do so well at sports. Nolan’s, like Kubrick’s before him, are exemplified by angry men going online screaming in all caps that THE GREATEST DIRECTOR OF ALL TIME IS NOT GETTING THE RESPECT HE DESERVES!!!!! But, hey, if it makes you angry, I mean happy, keep posting away.

  109. JB Moore says:

    Kevin – I’m sure Coppola would have been nominated for The Conversation had he not been competing against himself with Godfather II that same year.

  110. Agreed, JB. Just having fun with Oscars.org.

    IO: I’m sure to Mrs. Cholodenko, she is Lisa FUCKING Cholodenko (you can get a hundred free business cards with that moniker on vistaprint.com if you act now).

    Get back to me when your next film is up for an Academy Award. Until then, leave Mr. Nolan’s, [ahem], Mr. FUCKING Nolan’s righteous indignation alone. It’s his and you didn’t ask to play with it.

  111. torpid bunny says:

    Nolan is very talented and still young, but for me he has yet to produce a single “Holy shit this is happening right here right now” moment-something all the directors Daniella mentions have done-despite apparently trying very hard. I attribute this to a basic lack of either ethical or aesthetic seriousness. He’s biggest achievements are a men-in-tights soap opera that was also badass, and a very fun but basically silly sci-fi confection.

    Where this places him vis-a-vis the directors who were nominated is totally irrelevant to me. I don’t care. From the standard of industry achievement he may well deserve multiple oscars. Mel Gibson, that inspired infantile whacko, has multiple oscars. Who cares.

  112. christian says:

    “The greatest living director alive is getting shit on… AGAIN!”

    His film got eight oscar nominations – including one for his screenplay. That sounds like good shit.

  113. Daniella Isaacs says:

    Yancey, Cad…. Let me wipe all this egg off my face and get back to you later. (That’s what I get for trying quickly to pull a name of a largely-forgotten filmmaker off a list as an example.)

  114. IOv3 says:

    Daniella, who the fuck are you again? I have been posting here since day one and you are once again giving someone shit for being pissed off by something. Fuck you for thinking you have the right, no matter your fucking job, to tell me… figuratively, how to feel. The fact that you show up out of nowhere to give me crap for being rightfully pissed like the countless people on twitter and on sites around the net yesterday, is bullshit. It’s pure and utter bullshit, so fuck you very much, but I will feel what I want to feel and do what I want to do. Fucking noob showing up and stating how I should be as a poster. Fuck off noob!

    Kevin, you suck at the internet. Please: go to your local library and learn how to use the internet. Until then, fuck off noob!

    Torpid, he transcends genres but that’s a great way to pigeon hole him. The fact that Inception was basically sold on his name makes me happy that the people at least feel differently than you do.

    C’tian: Which again is a weird unintended back-handed compliment. Seriously, Mad Men is the best show on TV but not one person on the show can win a fucking Emmy for acting on said show in a year it’s apparently THE BEST! This is the same situation to me. “Sure he can write but he can’t direct for shit”; said Academy offical Old Man Wilkerson. Who was later seen talking to a tall man with exposed chest hair and telling said man that Inception was TOO LOUD and RATTLED HIS FILLINGS. Both men got in a town car and traveled roughly one mile up the road to In and Out.

    ETA: Arisp, you do realize I was here first right? Before Lex ever showed up, I was here. Keep that in mind the next time you think I am ripping off MY OWN FUCKING STYLE! You… people.

  115. yancyskancy says:

    IO, I tracked down Old Man Wilkerson for a chat. Here’s the transcript:

    YS: So what’s the deal with this Nolan snub?
    OMW: Christopher Nolan? That Jew-hating, dog-raping wife-beater? He’ll never get a Best Director nod while my pals and I draw breath. We decide these things in secret meetings, you know.
    YS: But, the ballots…
    OMW: For show. We toss ’em.
    YS: But if you all hate Nolan so much, why nominate him for screenwriting and producing?
    OMW: Well, we don’t want to be obvious about it. Plus, he has no chance of winning in those categories, and we love to see him lose.
    YS: Why give 8 nominations to a movie you hate?
    OMW: Who said we hate the movie? We love it. We just hate Nolan. If he weren’t a producer/writer on INCEPTION, we’d let it win Best Picture, just to twist the knife, like we did with Beresford. God, that was sweet! “Hey, asshole — even your shitty direction couldn’t ruin this movie!” Made people think it was saved in the editing.
    YS: It all seems so petty though. What do you get out of this?
    OMW: Personally, I love going on the blogs and forums and seeing the Nolan fanboys pop a blood vessel. It never gets old. So you can count on seeing lots more Best Picture and Screenplay nods in Nolan’s future. He may break a record — most nominations ever without a win. If I have to get five more triple bypasses, I’m gonna live to see that. (diabolical laugh)

  116. cadavra says:

    Daniella, IO doesn’t speak for all of us. We welcome your presence here.

    If THB had existed in 1969, people would be screaming about how a visionary, ground-breaking film like 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY got screwed because it didn’t get a BP nomination. Get this through your heads: genre pictures almost never get major nominations. Period. The End. -30-.

    I’m Cad FUCKING Avra!

  117. Yancy FTW. That was outstanding.

    (I literally learned that at my library internet class so I can literally stop sucking at the internet. Literally.)

  118. JB Moore says:

    Wasn’t Old Man Wilkerson in Batman Begins? Did he and Nolan have a falling out?

  119. brack says:

    Surprised about Andrew Garfield’s snub along with Christopher Nolan’s. Oh well, I hope The Social Network wins BP, but now I’m not so sure it will. The King’s Speech might get a Shakespeare in Love-type buzz going for it and win.

  120. hcat says:

    Wouldn’t Mann be a better comparision for Nolan than Kubrick. Kubrick went from genre to genre bringing his signatures to each. Nolan seems to be specializing (quite well), but is nowhere in Kubrick’s league.

    As for TO’s thought:
    “Seriously though I think if Toy Story I came out like 2-3 years ago and been the set up for TS3, like Batman Begins was to The Dark Knight, people would be wanting to champion this film more. I realize TDK didn’t get a nom but I don’t think TS3 would’ve carried such a ho-hum response.”

    What ho-hum response? That film was trumpeted to the heavens since its release. Its been mentioned as a guarenteed nom in every Oscar conversation. I don’t get the rabid love, I thought its themes were covered conclusively and beautifully in the song in the second film.

    And however good The King’s Speech is, I will be sad to live in a world where Lionsgate, Summit, and The Weinstein Company have best pictures before Focus and SPC.

  121. IOv3 says:

    http://blog.moviefone.com/2011/01/26/black-oscar-nominees-2011/

    Yeah this is going to be a problem for a few years.

  122. anghus says:

    “Why Are There No Black Oscar Nominees This Year?”

    Holy shit was this article terrible. My first answer was this.

    “Because the nominated actors were better and by coincidence, white”.

    But when you read the article, it’s so sad. They throw up the cast of For Colored Girls as an example of potential nominees that didn’t show up on the list.

    Seriously?

    You take a movie with like 8 black performers as if to say “couldn’t you have nominated ONE of these black ladies?” Like there’s a slot that has to be filled.

    Christ. At this point, is there any real belief that a black actor couldn’t step up, give a killer performance and NOT be nominated?

    I love that article, because it’s such a fucking annual tradition. The scream of WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE MINORITIES? for the award season. Thank you Gary Susman for filling a shitty journalistic politically correct mandate. I wish the shitty writer of this shitty piece had went one further and actually claimed that a minority actor or actress was snubbed in favor of a white one. No one ever goes that far.

    it’s this passive aggressive racist argument where none needs to be made.

    What a waste of words, and time. Fucking sad for what passes for journalism.

  123. IOv3 says:

    so where are the minorities Anghus :D?

  124. anghus says:

    well, morgan freeman was in red. don cheadle was in iron man 2. denzel was in 2 movies, neither with a prayer of acheiving nominations.

    so, the black actors were busy getting paid good money to do shit.

    i don’t know what halle berry was doing.

  125. IOv3 says:

    She’s busy being a mom but you get all pissed off at something, that has a point. Sure they are getting paid but where the hell are the Oscar worthy roles for minorities? Seriously, what the fuck is up with that?

  126. Krillian says:

    Halle Berry was in Frankie & Alice that got one screen in December to make it qualify but apparently those handful who saw it weren’t wowed enough to generate this thing we call “buzz.”

    When I saw the acting nominees I wondered how many hours it would be before I’d see “white people!” laments, as if everyone’s forgotten over the past 9 years and 36 possible acting winners, 7 went to African-Americans (I think. I’m not googling it, but Denzel, Forest, Jamie, Morgan, Halle, Jennifer, Mo’Nique, did I miss anyone?)

    Hm. How’ve Latinos done lately? Del Toro, Bardem, Cruz have won in the past decade. Anyone else?

    Asians?

  127. anghus says:

    i don’t know mate. sometimes movies are put out over the course of the year that don’t feature minorities in award caliber performances.

    the very problem with the article, and your question for that matter, is the assumption that there is some kind of appropriate number of minority nominations, rather than recognizing the best of the year regardless of race creed or color.

    specious reasoning.

    the article isn’t about ‘minorities’. it’s about black actors. the writer doesn’t seem to give a fuck if Latino, Asian, Indian, or any other American minority is being represented.

    In an ideal world, people would look at the nominees and judge them based on performance, not on the color of their skin. This is what Gary Susman has done. He has looked at the nominees and decided that their performances are less important than the color of their skin.

    And i found a flaw in the article. The question posed is this.

    Why are there no black oscar nominees?

    There is.

    Black Swan.

  128. Daniella Isaacs says:

    In terms of the lack of black nominees, I don’t think the Academy can be blamed–just no standout performances in the kind of films they go for. The issue does point out that it was a bad year for serious cinema with African-American characters, which suggests a more systemic problem of representation this year on the screen.

  129. IOv3 says:

    Anghus, seriously, that post is written like a dude who has a nice life in the burbs. If you don’t understand why it’s hokey then that’s you but over here where we wonder about such things. The fact that you think it’s pointless is just weird and adds another level of weirdness to you as a poster on this forum. Whatever happened to the anghus that posted on geek chat? Where did he go?

    Danielle that’s exactly the problem. All of the best African American actors have been pushed towards Tyler Perry movies and that’s just going to lead to a lot of representation problems with award worthy performances the longer that goes on.

  130. anghus says:

    it’s not even a systemic problem.

    it’s race baiting. it’s the kind of story generated from a 24 hour news mentality.

    how can it be a systemic problem? does the system not make enough movies with black characters? or does the system not make enough ‘award caliber’ movies for black actors?

    the first assertion could at least be argued with a degree of seriousness. the second one is a joke. read Gary Susman’s article if you don’t believe me. As if someone at a studio would make a movie based on the sentence “we need to put out a movie with award potential featuring a black actor”.

    People in the industry don’t work this way. Maybe the Weinsteins, but replace ‘black actor’ with ‘british actor’

  131. IOv3 says:

    Yeah the system does not make enough movies with minority characters period, and that most of the movies they do make are not seen to have OSCAR-WORTHY is a problem. Again, it’s not racist, but it’s fucking weird. The fact that you completely dismiss it and don’t get the total fucking weirdness of this situation, is just… plain… weird.

  132. anghus says:

    ‘over here where we worry about such things’

    What’s weirder is that you are so worried about it.

    Why are you worried? What about it ‘worries’ you.

    me, i could give a fuck. and it has nothing to do with my ‘nice life in the burbs’. the fact that you wrote that shows that you’ve turned this into some kind of judgmental argument over political correctness. fuck political correctness in the ear.

    it has to do with having seen just about every movie released this year and agreeing that the nominations were pretty spot on, regardless of race. it has to do with understanding that every year is different. the films are different, the performances are different, and sometimes Morgan Freeman is going to be in ‘Red’ instead of ‘Invictus’.

    This is a not a problem my friend. It’s an observation turned into a problem by shitty writers.

    but since you’re the know it all, tell me how to fix it. tell me the fundamental changes that will help bring more minority roles into the film industry. then tell me the appropriate percentage of nominations required for black actors that will make everything fine.

  133. IOv3 says:

    Anghus, that’s about the funniest thing you ever posted. Seriously, you are the bitter old fucking man that you have been posting as lately. Fuck political correctness in it’s ear? I am so sorry that us tolerant folks don’t like hearing prejudiced shit from people like you.

    Seeing as you don’t get why this worries me. I won’t answer your question because you don’t give a shit. You are fine with the nice white view of the world Hollywood is putting out there, so who gives a shit if there are probably so many stories not featuring white people out there that just never get a chance since you know, they aren’t about white folks.

    Now why don’t you go sit on your deck, insult whomever you want, and realize that Pixar is so much better than the likes of you could ever understand.

  134. torpid bunny says:

    you missed Cuba

  135. anghus says:

    man, io… what you don’t know could fill a bus. you won’t make the argument because you can’t. you lack the capacity to intelligently answer.

    here’s the top movies of 2010 (omitting animated films)

    2 Alice in Wonderland
    3 Iron Man 2
    4 The Twilight Saga: Eclipse
    5 Inception
    6 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1
    11 The Karate Kid
    12 Tron Legacy
    13 Clash of the Titans
    14 Grown Ups
    16 Little Fockers

    Show me the lack of minority presence. feel free to cite specific examples. Where are the opportunities here to include more minority roles?

    and io, i could waste sentences in defense of another knee jerk comment. who i am, what i do and the nature of your ludicrous assumptions. but i don’t care enough about you to try.

  136. IOv3 says:

    Anghus, you are an intolerant asshole. If you think I give a fuck about you anymore as well, especially that you are most likely some offensive NC hick, then you would be sadly mistaken. Nice of you to omit animation. Apparently PIXAR and DREAMWORKS are just not INTOLERANT enough for you!

  137. yancyskancy says:

    Old Mr. Wilkerson told me that racist mofo Christopher Nolan could have easily cast Columbus Short and Anthony Mackie instead of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Tom Hardy.

    Yeah, clearly this race “problem” is the Academy’s, not the studios’. The studios fund what they think will make a profit. Such films rarely have “award-worthy” roles for anyone of any race. So, ultimately, of course, the blame lies with the public. If there were a perceived decent-sized audience for character-driven films, more would be made, and more would be touted for awards.

  138. christian says:

    For once I’m inclined to agree with IO (irony given his rage issues) but Anghus you seem really angry for somebody who doesn’t give a shit. Enough that you’ve wished unemployment on critics or bloggers, what have you. That takes a lot more energy than telling IO he shouldn’t care about real race issues in film production.

  139. leahnz says:

    i think to deny institutional racism exists in the system is naive.

    even when there ARE roles for minorities, time and time again they are given to whites. whitewashing has been big business in the movies since year dot. movies, particularly big studio pics, are largely financed, written, directed and produced by white men, the flicks are notoriously a white boy’s game. if and when this ever changes and the ‘universal white man’ is no longer the default of the industry, the paradigm may shift and real diversity ensue (i’m not holding my breath, personally; women, half the population of the planet, are still treated like ‘minorities’ in the movie industry and struggle to get projects outside of the nice, comfy box the industry likes to keep the womenfolk in. know your place, dammit)

    i could give examples ad nauseum, but quickly just recently, as roy batty would say, “questions”:

    why were most of the native/asian roles in ‘last airbender’ cast lily white? was this m. night’s choice? not a chance in hell.

    in ‘the social network’, why were the parts of actual real people whitewashed? saverin is a hispanic non-american (brazilian) and narendra a very dark-skinned indian-american. why not cast two good up-n-coming minority actors to portray these people somewhat realistically? the tired old ‘but we just wanted good actors to play these parts, skin colour doesn’t matter’ excuse is nonsense and well all know it; if that’s the case, why not cast some crack young black or hispanic actor to play zuckerberg? oh, because that’s not realistic? but having whites play the parts of minorities IS somehow more acceptable, naturally…

    why has the role of ‘bane’, one of the few (or the only? i’m not a comic book aficionado) obviously and overtly hispanic villains in the comic universe just been cast white?

    the only possible answer: because the powers that be are paranoid of ‘alienating’ their traditional big-bucks white audience, and since money talks and bullshit walks, the more this ‘safe’ practice is accepted/tolerated the more it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and default of the industry and the validity of the paradigm is never actually tested. perception is accepted as reality and never challenged so change can take root. and round and round we go, where it stops, nobody knows.

  140. IOv3 says:

    Leah, Bane is Cuban and outside of Hardy being able to grow a bitching thin mustache, it makes no sense to go freaking Eli Wallach with him. Nevertheless, the white washing of stuff bothers the shit out of me and the fact that the best African American actors and actresses are pretty much limited to Tyler Perry movies is a problem.

  141. leahnz says:

    crap, i forgot to say that if the newly-instituted ’10 best pic’ nominees sham at the oscars continues on its merry way, at least 5 directors will have their pics nominated each year without a corresponding nod from the director’s branch and the floodgates will have opened in earnest to become a directorial ‘snubbee’, just another day in the trenches without such a sting in the tail. dilution complete.

  142. leahnz says:

    i think bane is from a fictitious south american dictatorship or something of the sort and hardy is a white boy from white boy ville. why doesn’t that bug you io, the whitewashing of bane? he could be an epic hispanic villain. just because it’s nolan it’s no biggie? be righteous, man, don’t be a hypocrite

  143. anghus says:

    “Anghus, you are an intolerant asshole.”

    Every sentence should start this way.

    “you are most likely some offensive NC hick”

    bullseye.

    “Nice of you to omit animation. Apparently PIXAR and DREAMWORKS are just not INTOLERANT enough for you.”

    I omitted them because i was trying to have a discussion about minority roles in film. including animation would have been stupid.

    “Old Mr. Wilkerson told me that racist mofo Christopher Nolan could have easily cast Columbus Short and Anthony Mackie instead of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Tom Hardy”

    Yancy for the win.

    “but Anghus you seem really angry for somebody who doesn’t give a shit.”

    anger doesn’t enter into it. i have a strong opinion, but i never get angry. not over film debate. that would just be stupid.

    “Enough that you’ve wished unemployment on critics or bloggers, what have you”

    oh sure. absolutely. i read a lot of websites and have spent 12 years reading various websites. and to see all these clone sites pop up that do nothing but link to stories from other sites… i think a good cleansing would do wonders for this industry. ad rates plummet. the good writers and sites maintain audiences. the shitty ones go away. it’s nothing personal. i just think there’s so much carbon copy content online in entertainment journalism coasting by because the studios are too afraid to change the status quo and just blindly spend for online ad revenue that doesn’t materialize into box office dollars.

    a good house cleaning ain’t a bad thing. it also keeps people competitive. what about that is bad?

    oh, and leah, thanks for the intelligent response.

  144. IOv3 says:

    Leah; “Leah, Bane is Cuban and outside of Hardy being able to grow a bitching thin mustache, it makes no sense to go freaking Eli Wallach with him.” What part of that seems like I am being a hypocrite? Seriously? Outside of making Bane a white guy from Britain (and let’s be honest about Hardy… the dude has the ability transform himself to just about anything and that may be why he got the role), the casting is still weird. Nevertheless, Bane is fucking horrible and I am just hoping Nolan can make him interesting because really, he’s fucking lame, outside of the SECRET SIX!

    Anghus, you dislike fucking political correctness because it gets in the way of your anger, and you think I am stupid? Really? Seriously, I spent years dealing with you in geek chat and you never ever came across this dicky, so excuse me for taking any fucking statement from you about me with about zero fucking grains of salt.

  145. anghus says:

    i try not to form personal opinions about people i discuss film with online. you naturally pick up a demeanor about someone based on their opinions, but as for who they are, what their motivations are, or what kind of person they are, i don’t know or honestly care.

    you’ve spent the better part of 6 months posting about how i’ve ‘changed’ or how i ‘used to be’. if you’ve spent 10 seconds thinking about me, that’s too much.

    my problems with you io are this:

    you spend a lot of time analyzing my moods, my intent, and my character when you know zero about any of it.

    you very rarely address a point. you will call out a person, you will name call, but rarely if ever do you actually address a point.

    not once have you ever made a response about the topic. you’ve gone political and made me a target rather than actually responding to the issue that some of us are trying to discuss. i posted ten of the most popular films of the year. i counted half of them that had minorities in significant roles. I made a point and then tried to back it up with examples.

    and yet, you don’t respond to those. you have nothing to bring to the table other than noise. danielle, krillian, leah… they all had something to say and articulated it well. you just blather on endlessly and yet, say nothing to the very topic you introduced.

  146. aframe says:

    There was one performance that under different circumstances would at least be a solid example for these articles: Idris Elba in LEGACY, but (1) small UK-produced indie whose (2) theatrical release in October had zero support from the distributor, who (3) couldn’t be bothered to submit the paper work to get the film in the eligibility pool.
    When the diversity subject inevitably comes up post-nominations, I always have to remind people that contrary to the idealized notion of what the Oscars are (to the average person, not film savvy folk like those here) as a true bellwether of quality, it is indeed a political race and as such is driven by hype and the money to properly campaign. And honestly when it comes to films predominantly featuring casts of color, it takes that much *more* hype and money to get things rolling. This year, though, there were neither any plausible candidates that had the strength of a studio push behind them (a la Dreamgirls and Ray) nor had any mainstream-generated buzz to use (Precious, which had the Sundance indie cred). When For Colored Girls is the oft-cited example of what could’ve been recognized, it’s problematic given the Tyler Perry baggage (and with it the less than glowing reviews), not to mention it was a commercial underachiever that got a wildly mixed reaction from even his devoted fan base. And however good the performances may be (and there are indeed some solid ones in that film), good luck getting a nomination for a good performance in a film that’s overall perceived as a bad/unsuccessful one–which is something that applies to actors of any color.
    So, to sum up… there simply weren’t any plausible contenders to play in the field this year. (Kind of says it all when even the NAACP Image Awards go so far as to nominate Justin Timberlake for best supporting actor, Conviction for best independent film, and The Kids Are All Right for best picture–it’s a tacit admission that it was a lackluster year and even they had to stretch)

  147. IOv3 says:

    Too damn easy to be mean to you anghus. Even you deserve some empathy. Nevertheless, I answered your question but it’s not the answer you wanted. Again, it’s not about those films but about diversity and apparently 2010 was a shit year for diversity on film when it came to minorities. Once again excuse me for having an opinion and you only get called a name when you act like that name.

  148. David Poland says:

    The notion of a snub is simply wrong, whomever is not nominated.

    You don’t vote against people you don’t like. You vote for people you do.

    The Academy skews older and it leans towards what they perceive as significance.

    Not only is it extremely rude to claim that this person or that person deserves a nomination less than Nolan or anyone else, it paranoid to see conspiracies everywhere.

    Nolan will get his due, as Fincher is now getting his. He is NOT the greatest living director. But he is amazingly skilled and may someday be the best living director. But he has a number of distinct limitations, which he has clear ambitions to overcome, and will hopefully get better in those areas in time.

    The Academy is not THE ANSWER. It is a group with a certain kind of taste and, most often, an unwillingness to embrace certain genres. (District 9 was quite a change of pace last year.)

    Move along… not much of a story here.

  149. IOv3 says:

    1) I am not sure Fincher gets his due this year. Seriously, if Nolan wins the DGA that cannot bold well for Fincher or it does. If it does, are we going to have a split with Fincher winning and The King’s Speech winning Best Picture?

    2) Please name me another director who can sell a movie like Inception on his name alone? Seriously, those trailers gave nothing away at all and the only thing people had to go on was it’s a Chris Nolan movie, and they went and saw it in droves. You might have a problem with his direction but no other director on earth could have pulled that off at such a high grossing level. Seriously, you can disagree but to a lot of people, there is no one better. Knowing you, you’d probably go with someone like Iñárritu. We just agree to disagree on this.

    3) Extremely rude? Extremely rude? Yes you vote for people you like but more people voted for him as a WRITER than a DIRECTOR. It’s not like his writing is for shit but really? Of all the movies and all the years the Coens edged him out in the DIRECTING category? BY DIRECTING A WESTERN?

    Come the fuck on David, you’re not going to get a fucking entire issue of CineFex dedicated to True Grit. Seriously, it’s sort of rude and insulting to vote for a guy more for writing than directing, when he’s pretty much one hell of a director. It’s not a conspiracy as much as it’s just fucking weird he got a writing nomination over a directing nomination.

    and

    4) After Heath Ledger dying, this GET HIS DUE shit does nothing for me. The folks might not be here forever and might not always have a chance at these awards and let’s be honest here: no matter how awesome TDK-R is… he’s not going to get a nom because it’s a COMIC BOOK movie and outside of keeping the fucking industry fucking alive, the Academy simply can’t reward big awards to COMIC BOOK films unless one of the stars died. Hobbits walking around. Sure. Batman… FUCK NO!

    PS: Thank god for the edit button.

  150. Samuel Deter says:

    IOv3

    1) Why is Nolan winning the DGA not good for Fincher? It’s not like Nolan can win the Oscar anyway. A split between King’s Speech and Fincher is the most likely thing to happen at this point and not because of Nolan. Get over it, he’s not in the race and he doesn’t affect it all.

    2) Other directors who on name alone can sell a film like Inception? well, I’m not entirely sure the name Nolan made people go to the cinema. If I recall correctly, his name wasn’t even on the poster… he was merely “the director of The Dark Knight”. At least that was the case in France, England, Mexico and Spain.

    Also to imply that “SELLING THE FILM ON NAME ALONE” makes him the “greatest living director alive today” makes me think you are fifteen years old. Are you? If not, are you serious?

    3) You are aware that your opinion may differ from others right? I mean, just read the entire blog.

    4) You are funny.

    5) I’m so drunk. Who wants to come with me and lend a shoulder to poor Mila.

    6) I’m drunk. Did I mention that already?

  151. yancyskancy says:

    IO, What the heck does “DIRECTING A WESTERN” have to do with anything? Are you dismissing the entire genre just because the Coens made one?

  152. christian says:

    “you’re not going to get a fucking entire issue of CineFex dedicated to True Grit.”

    True, because it’s a magazine devoted to special effects but you might get an issue dedicated to MY FAVORITE MARTIAN.

  153. torpid bunny says:

    No no, Twitter has spoken.

  154. Joe Leydon says:

    “Please name me another director who can sell a movie like Inception on his name alone?”

    Uh, Steven Spielberg?

  155. IOv3 says:

    Yancy, figure it out for yourself. It’s pretty self-explanatory. That aside, Bay is closest to Nolan the other two have the name recognition but their grosses are hit or miss. Again, think about INCEPTION for a minute, and you should again be able to work it out for yourselves.

  156. Triple Option says:

    Hcat, I could’ve said that much better. I saw a lot of “ho hum another Pixar movie. Yeah, yeah, it’s great, it’s brilliant, blah, blah, blah, what else is new.” It’s mainly by comparison but what I suppose it all boils down to was the righteous indignation that trumpeted for Up or a few others, I didn’t see for Toy Story 3. I just wondered if circumstances, not the movie itself, could’ve changed that.

    As far as themes and story points go, there were similarities among the Godfather trilogy, Omen trilogy and first batch of Star Wars movies. Of course I already stated examples of how redundancy can render 3rd installments into useless overkill, and maybe I need to go back to watch Toy Story 2 but I thought TS3 was worthy of its own acclaim.

    Sorry to digress…

  157. christian says:

    Quentin Tarantino?

  158. hcat says:

    I doubt they would have had the same opening weekend if it had been “Tim Story’s Alice in Wonderland.”

  159. leahnz says:

    james cameron

  160. christian says:

    Peter Jackson.

  161. christian says:

    And John Waters.

  162. IOv3 says:

    Come on… the only other guy is Cameron. Seriously, he has the skills of Fincher, the box office clout of Cameron, and the whole BEARD thing going on. That is why he is the GLDAT!

  163. Krillian says:

    Is Michael Bay’s Transformers 3 not the biggest letdown of a trailer? 1969. Neil & Buzz on the moon. They go dark, they hop over the ridge. It’s a space ship! “We are not alone.” They zoom in. Oh, it’s just a Transformers sequel. Shoot.

  164. IOv3 says:

    Now you are bad mouthing ALPHA PRIME? Just watch it Krill. [points to his eyes then to the screen]

  165. monkeys texting says:

    wasn’t there this unknown actor named di-capri-something that had a small part to do with the selling of inception?
    you know,
    that dude on the poster with his name in big bold letters at the very top?

  166. IOv3 says:

    What dude on the poster? You mean the little tiny dude in the middle? Seriously, none of you can win except for Leah because she’s Leah, so fucking let it go already. Ready? 1… 2… LETTING IT GO!

The Hot Blog

Geoff on: BYO Post-JOKER

Geoff on: BYO Post-JOKER

SideshowBill on: BYO Post-JOKER

Stella's Boy on: BYO Post-JOKER

Bulldog68 on: BYO Post-JOKER

Hcat on: BYOFall

Stella's Boy on: BYO Post-JOKER

palmtree on: BYO Post-JOKER

Stella's Boy on: BYO Post-JOKER

Bulldog68 on: BYO Post-JOKER

Quote Unquotesee all »

“But okay, I promise you now that if I ever retire again, I’m going to ensure that I can’t walk it back. I’ll post a series of the most disgusting, offensive, outrageous statements you can ever imagine. That way it will be impossible for me to ever be employed again. No one is going to take my calls. No one is going to want to be seen with me. Oh, it will be scorched earth. I will have torched everything. I’m going to flame out in the most legendary fashion.”
~ Steven Soderbergh

I feel strongly connected to young cinephile culture. The thing about filmmaking—and cinephilia—is that you can’t keep hanging out with your own age group as you get older. They drop off, move somewhere. You can’t put together a crew of sixty-somethings. It’s the same for cinephilia: my original set of cinephile friends are watching DVDs at home or delving into 1958 episodes of ‘Gunsmoke,’ something like that. The people who are out there tend to be young, and I happen to be doing the same thing still, so it’s natural that I move in their circles.

In terms of the filmmaking, there was a gear shift: my first movies focused on people around my age, and I followed them for three films. Until The Unspeakable Act, I was using the same actors, not because of an affinity for people at a specific age, but because of my affinity for the actors. I like to work with actors a second time, especially if I don’t feel confident casting a new film. But The Unspeakable Act was a different script, and I had to cast all new people. Even for the older roles, I couldn’t get the people I’d worked with before. But when it was over, the same thing happened: I wanted to work with Tallie again in the worst way, and I started the process all over again.

I think Rohmer did something similar around the time of Perceval and Catherine de HeilbronnHe developed new groups of people that he liked to work with. These gear shifts are natural. Even if you want to follow certain actors to the end of their life (which I kind of do) the variety of ideas that you generate makes it necessary to change. And once you’ve made the change, you’ve got all these new people around.”
~ Dan Sallitt