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 »

“To be a critic is to be a workaholic. Workaholism is socially conditioned: viewed favourably by exploiters, it’s generally ruinous to a worker’s mental health. When T.S. Eliot said criticism was as inevitable as breathing, he failed to mention that, respiratory problems notwithstanding, breathing is easy. Criticism is reflexive before reflective: to formalise/industrialise an involuntary instinct requires time, effort and discipline. The reason we seek remuneration, as opposed to the self-hatred of being a scab, is because all labour should be waged…

“Criticism, so the cliché by now goes, is dying. None of the panel discussions on its death agony, however—including those in which I’ve formally participated—come at it from the wider perspective that the problem surely needs. They defend the ways in which criticism functions in relation to the industry and to the public, but they fail to contextualise these relationships as defined by ultimately rotten and self-harming imperatives.

“Criticism was a noble profession so long as only a few could practice it for money; when the field expands, as it has with a so-called ‘democratisation’ of our practice, those few lose their political power. Competition grows and markets are undercut: publications are naturally going to start paying less. Precarity is both cause and effect of a surplus workforce: the reason you’re only as good as your last article is because there are plenty of other folks who can write the next one in your place. The daily grind is: pitch, or perish.

B”ut criticism, so a counter-cliché goes, is not dying. An irony: this is an elite sport that is no longer elite in terms of who is able to practice it, but in economic terms it’s clutching to a perverse and outmoded hierarchical structure. It’s more meritocratic than ever, now: which is to say it isn’t meritocratic at all. That’s a paradox in bad need of a resolution…”

~ Michael Pattison Manifestoes Film Criticism

“It’s easy to forget when you’re reading a critic every single week or multiple times a week, that most of us who do this job, and have been doing it for a long time, understand that this is basically a parasitic profession. I don’t mean in the sense that we’re evil bloodsucking creatures, but we couldn’t exist if we didn’t have something to analyze. And I’m always conscious of that. So whether I like or don’t like a particular thing you do, my point of view is always that of an appreciator. I just like to be in the world that you create.”
~ Matt Zoller Seitz To Sam Esmail

Z Weekend Report