Z

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

National Society Of Film Critics 2012 Awards

National Society Of Film Critics

Best Picture: Amour
Best Director: Michael Haneke
Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis
Best Actress: Emmanuelle Riva
Best Screenplay: Tony Kushner
Best Supporting Actor: Matthew McConaughey, Magic Mike and Bernie
Best Supporting Actress: Amy Adams, The Master
Best Cinematography: Mihai Malaimare, Jr., The Master
Best Nonfiction Film: The Gatekeepers
Best Experimental Film: This Is Not a Film
Film Heritage Prizes: Laurence Kardish; Milestone Film and Video

2 Responses to “National Society Of Film Critics 2012 Awards”

  1. Daniella Isaacs says:

    Hummm. Well, I have to say they’ve had the best track record (in terms of my taste, anyway) of all the awards giving groups in the past, though I wouldn’t give prizes to Kushner or McConaughey this year. I guess I have to see AMOUR as soon as it comes my way.

  2. Al Alexander says:

    Amour is incredibly overrated. And Amy Adams, really? Almost as nonsensical as McConaughey choice. Spots should have gone to Sally Field and Alan Arkin

Leave a Reply

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Chad Harbach spent ten years writing his novel. It was his avocation, for which he was paid nothing, with no guarantee he’d ever be paid anything, while he supported himself doing freelance work, for which I don’t think he ever made $30,000 a year. I sold his book for an advance that equated to $65,000 a year—before taxes and commission—for each of the years of work he’d put in. The law schools in this country churn out first-year associates at white-shoe firms that pay them $250,000 a year, when they’re twenty-five years of age, to sit at a desk doing meaningless bullshit to grease the wheels of the corporatocracy, and people get upset about an excellent author getting $65,000 a year? Give me a fucking break.”
~ Book Agent Chris Parris-Lamb On The State Of The Publishing Industry

INTERVIEWER
Do you think this anxiety of yours has something to do with being a woman? Do you have to work harder than a male writer, just to create work that isn’t dismissed as being “for women”? Is there a difference between male and female writing?

FERRANTE
I’ll answer with my own story. As a girl—twelve, thirteen years old—I was absolutely certain that a good book had to have a man as its hero, and that depressed me. That phase ended after a couple of years. At fifteen I began to write stories about brave girls who were in serious trouble. But the idea remained—indeed, it grew stronger—that the greatest narrators were men and that one had to learn to narrate like them. I devoured books at that age, and there’s no getting around it, my models were masculine. So even when I wrote stories about girls, I wanted to give the heroine a wealth of experiences, a freedom, a determination that I tried to imitate from the great novels written by men. I didn’t want to write like Madame de La Fayette or Jane Austen or the Brontës—at the time I knew very little about contemporary literature—but like Defoe or Fielding or Flaubert or Tolstoy or Dostoyevsky or even Hugo. While the models offered by women novelists were few and seemed to me for the most part thin, those of male novelists were numerous and almost always dazzling. That phase lasted a long time, until I was in my early twenties, and it left profound effects.
~ Elena Ferrante, Paris Review Art Of Fiction No. 228

Z Z