Interim Thoughts

For the films of 2019
Post Reply
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Sabin »

High end is likely eight or nine: Picture, Director, Score, Cinematography, Production Design, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, and maybe Visual Effects if it uses any (these films usually do). Matching Dunkirk’s eight sounds about right.

Low end and it’s First Man/Blade Runner 2049/Interstellar territory as the respectable tech achievement territory with four-ish noms
"How's the despair?"
dws1982
Emeritus
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by dws1982 »

Even if the reviews are less enthusiastic than the Twitter reaction, 1917 at least seems well-positioned to strongly contend for Sound and Sound Editing, like Dunkirk, as well as Cinematography. I would say Editing is less likely, since it apparently only has around six visible cuts.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Sabin »

Mister Tee wrote
Based on the tweets that have emerged the last 24 hours, 1917 is going to be a VERY big thing.
I'm waiting for more reputable sources before I allow myself to feel confident.
"How's the despair?"
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Mister Tee »

Sabin wrote:
Okri wrote
Sabin, what is your full hand?
I just want to say before I reveal it that last year I had The Favourite, Roma, and Crazy Rich Asians and I won by almost 50 points.

This year, I have The Irishman, 1917, Honeyland, Diane, Her Smell, Dolemite is my Name, Long Shot, Luce, Monos, and Where’s My Roy Cohn?. If 1917 is a big deal, I’m in a five-way race. If not, it’s just over.
Based on the tweets that have emerged the last 24 hours, 1917 is going to be a VERY big thing.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Sabin »

Okri wrote
Sabin, what is your full hand?
I just want to say before I reveal it that last year I had The Favourite, Roma, and Crazy Rich Asians and I won by almost 50 points.

This year, I have The Irishman, 1917, Honeyland, Diane, Her Smell, Dolemite is my Name, Long Shot, Luce, Monos, and Where’s My Roy Cohn?. If 1917 is a big deal, I’m in a five-way race. If not, it’s just over.
"How's the despair?"
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Okri »

Sabin wrote: ADDITIONALLY:
This past Sunday, I participated in my now-annual tradition of the "Oscar Draft" where me and some friends bid on a series of movies like fantasy football to see whose "team" picks up the most precursor nominations. Last year, I nabbed The Favourite and Roma and I just cleaned house. It wasn't even close. I got hosed this year by bidding $57 on The Irishman (out of $100) and $27 accidentally on 1917. I was trying to drive up the price and I got stuck with it. The rest of my hand is virtually nonexistent. The best I can hope for is ending up in third place. While 1917 hasn't screened yet, I have a hard time imagining it does well with the critics or SAG.

After a truly dull Oscar season last year where I couldn't muster up much enthusiasm for Green Book vs. Roma but I just cleaned up in my competition, I am going to be treated to an exciting Oscar season of three films vs. four films... and I'm gonna get crushed.
Sabin, what is your full hand?

ETA: Fix the quote error
Last edited by Okri on Sun Nov 24, 2019 11:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10031
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Reza »

Sabin wrote:It also plays to the Wes Anderson crowd.
Yes unfortunately it does.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Sabin »

Reza wrote
You are absolutely right but please tell me that you disagree with this absurd method of voting for their best picture.
I’m not sure i know what you’re asking, but considering that i made the charge pejoratively i would imagine I made my intentions clear.

Reza wrote
But why? What's so special about this film? Maybe I'm missing something. Do young people in America find it funny? Are they moved by it? Most of the characters are obviously and intentionally over the top but come off annoying, repetitious and unfunny. What is this film trying to say?
Well, I already wrote my somewhat positive review of it where I lay out my biggest problems with it, so you can just do read those but to answer the bulk of your questions I think there’s something cathartic about being able to laugh right now especially at such subject matter and this film provides that. It also plays to the Wes Anderson crowd.
"How's the despair?"
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10031
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Reza »

Sabin wrote:The one thing that both millennials and boomers agree on these days is Jojo Rabbit. I haven't met a young person who didn't like it and everyone in my immediate family loves it. And we are all descendants of Holocaust survivors.
But why? What's so special about this film? Maybe I'm missing something. Do young people in America find it funny? Are they moved by it? Most of the characters are obviously and intentionally over the top but come off annoying, repetitious and unfunny. What is this film trying to say? If you want to lampoon the Nazis you need to be consistently funny. Instead the jokes all fall flat. The film is a plea against racism but presents it in such a dull way completely diluting the point Waititi is trying to make. And let's not even discuss his grotesque and unfunny Hitler with the corny "Heil Hitler" joke which is repeated ad nauseum.
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10031
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Reza »

Sabin wrote: I certainly could be wrong but if there's one thing I know about the Academy these days, it's that they like to have their sensibilities flattered.
You are absolutely right but please tell me that you disagree with this absurd method of voting for their best picture.
User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4453
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Precious Doll »

Thanks for the right up Mister Tee.

The only thing I've got to add is that I really think at this stage Parasite has the Best International Film award in the bag - its box office performance in the U.S. has been exceptional and is clearly receiving excellent word of mouth. Neon are to be commended for their handling of the release.

Pain and Glory has no hope against the Parasite juggernaut and there is nothing else with even a thread of hope in this category.
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by Sabin »

Mister Tee wrote
But such a victory depends on a lackluster field; in a higher-calibre competition (like 2013 or 2017), there’s some expectation of critical standard that Jojo doesn’t quite meet.
Here's my question: do we know that? Year after year, the Academy rarely picks the best film. In fact, most years they pick the most milquetoast or least offensive to everyone. Is it that difficult to fathom a year where the Academy nominates nine great films... and honors the one mediocrity? If anything, that's what I would bank on.

Work has kept me away from The Irishman. I just haven't found the three-and-a-half hours but I just don't think it's going to win. I certainly could be wrong but if there's one thing I know about the Academy these days, it's that they like to have their sensibilities flattered. The one thing that both millennials and boomers agree on these days is Jojo Rabbit. I haven't met a young person who didn't like it and everyone in my immediate family loves it. And we are all descendants of Holocaust survivors.

I would say working against it is a low nomination total. Green Book only mustered five last year. I think Jojo Rabbit has a floor of two nominations (Picture and Screenplay) and a ceiling of Picture, Director, Supporting Actress, Adapted Screenplay, Film Editing, and Production Design. I'm a bit uncertain about Scarlett Johansson's chances until I remembered a weird similarity between her year and Kate Winslet's year back in 2008. Both were actresses long overdue for Academy favor (in Winslet's case a win, in ScarJo's a nomination). A marriage drama seemed like her best bet but she ended up in for a Holocaust film. To Johansson's credit, both of her films are better than Winslet's.


ADDITIONALLY:
This past Sunday, I participated in my now-annual tradition of the "Oscar Draft" where me and some friends bid on a series of movies like fantasy football to see whose "team" picks up the most precursor nominations. Last year, I nabbed The Favourite and Roma and I just cleaned house. It wasn't even close. I got hosed this year by bidding $57 on The Irishman (out of $100) and $27 accidentally on 1917. I was trying to drive up the price and I got stuck with it. The rest of my hand is virtually nonexistent. The best I can hope for is ending up in third place. While 1917 hasn't screened yet, I have a hard time imagining it does well with the critics or SAG.

After a truly dull Oscar season last year where I couldn't muster up much enthusiasm for Green Book vs. Roma but I just cleaned up in my competition, I am going to be treated to an exciting Oscar season of three films vs. four films... and I'm gonna get crushed.
"How's the despair?"
anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 6377
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts

Post by anonymous1980 »

Mister Tee wrote:Can anyone possibly care whether it’s Toy Story 4 or Frozen 2 for animated feature? Is there anything out there to relieve us of such a tedious choice?
The French arthouse animated feature I Lost My Body seems to be a good candidate for that. Early word has it that it's great. Critics may push hard for it.

Great writeup as always, Mister Tee!
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Interim Thoughts

Post by Mister Tee »

I don’t have the energy to draft a full Where the Race Stands thread, and, anyway, we’re only (god help us) two weeks from the first critics’ prizes, so this is strictly an interim moment. But developments continue to roll forward, so, in abbreviated form, some observations:

Remember how, last year, Oscar-friendly films were so scarce, we kept hoping something would turn up, but nothing ever did, so we ended up with a bunch of critical duds with best picture shots, a Spanish-language art film for best director, and frickin’ Green Book winning the top prize? This year is…kind of the opposite.

Once The Irishman triumphed at the NY Film Festival, we had a more-than-solid best picture roster, with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and Marriage Story firmly in place, Parasite a hot-shot art candidate, a strong second-tier effort in Jojo Rabbit, already-critic-certified The Two Popes on the horizon, and, whatever you want to do with it, Joker. We didn’t NEED additional candidates.

But, as DJs used to say, the hits just keep on coming. I’m talking about Little Women and Bombshell, which haven’t technically haven’t had their review embargoes lifted yet, but about which so many Metacritic-certified names have tweeted rapturously that it’s hard to imagine either failing to make a splash. And 1917, which is still at the “critical murmurs” stage, but has had such consistent top-line buzz that most think it will qualify. Even Todd Haynes’ Dark Waters, though probably too small scale for awards attention, has been quite favorably received. And we don’t know yet about Clint Eastwood’s latest Oscar-crasher Richard Jewell.

I have no idea what to make of this embarrassment of riches (including some additional films I’ll get to below). More specifically, I don’t know how to try and pick a front-runner from such a varied pack. If this were a quarter-century ago, The Irishman would be the easy choice, as it has the heft that was then considered the sine qua non of best pictures. But I’m not sure that’s the era we live in, anymore (though I could be surprised). I will say I think it’s less likely Jojo Rabbit would emerge from such an illustrious group. I LIKE Jojo Rabbit, and I think it might have won last year. But such a victory depends on a lackluster field; in a higher-calibre competition (like 2013 or 2017), there’s some expectation of critical standard that Jojo doesn’t quite meet.

As to the lower-tier contenders: the folks at AwardsWatch (recently rechristened AwardsWorthy) have been downplaying The Two Popes of late because, according to them, “it’s lost its buzz” – something hard to quantify, since the film is weeks from release. They’re offering the same glib take on A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, though it doesn’t open till Friday and seems to be coming in on a wave of praise. I think what they’re really saying is “No one in my (pretty young) demographic cares about these films” (Joker, on the other hand, is a juggernaut in their world). You’d think they’d be more careful about pronouncements like these, since a film they’ve similarly been brushing off – Ford v. Ferrari – just opened to a stellar $30 million weekend, and is now a clear candidate for best picture nomination (especially since its Metacritic score jumped 10 points since Toronto and now sits at an awards-territory 81).

The lead actor category stands roughly where it did after Toronto, with an overflow crowd of candidates that’s going to be hard for latecomers to crack. Even if leads from 1917 or Richard Jewell give exemplary performances, they’re going to need to shove aside at least one of Adam Driver, Joaquin Phoenix, Robert DeNiro, Jonathan Pryce, Antonio Banderas or Leonardo Di Caprio (that’s if you discount Eddie Murphy and Christian Bale, who some are touting). Can we retroactively nominate one or two of these in 2015 or 2016?

Best actress has changed a bit since Toronto, in that two people I cited as to be watched – Saoirse Ronan and Charlize Theron – can now be safely bumped up to confirmed prospects. They’re likely to qualify, alongside Renee Zellweger and Scarlett Johansson, for the ultimate ballot. The fifth slot remains an anybody’s – Harriet got the mediocre reviews anticipated, but the film’s headed for a respectable $45 million or so, meaning Cynthia Erivo is still in the game; Awkwafina is very much alive for The Farewell; and Lupita N’yongo will try to break the horror curse with Us. This is probably the one category where we COULD use a late breakout.

Supporting actor is like best actor, except maybe a bit moreso. Genuine supporting players – Tracy Letts in Ford v. Ferrari, John Lithgow in Bombshell, Alan Alda in Marriage Story – are getting excellent notices; Timothee Chalamet, as well, for Little Women. But can any of them compete against the slate of slumming stars: Brad Pitt, Al Pacino (maybe paired with Joe Pesci), Tom Hanks, Anthony Hopkins? (Willem Dafoe, by virtue of Lighthouse’s box-office flame-out, is probably off the boards.) The 2015 supporting actor finalists seemed to indicate an advantage for best picture contenders – but what if all those films make the best picture ballot?

Supporting actress, like its lead counterpart, is thinner than the men’s side, but two hypotheticals from September – Robbie in Bombshell, Florence Pugh in Little Women – can be bumped up to serious candidates, joining Laura Dern and JLo. Zhao Shuzhen and Scarlett Johansson (in Jojo) are contenders, and people seem to be buzzing Kathy Bates in Richard Jewell, but that remains to be seen.

I’m too weary to extensively cover other categories, but a few stray thoughts: Original screenplay looks fierce – Marriage Story, Parasite, Hollywood, The Farewell, Pain and Glory – and will get tighter if the opening weekend gross for Knives Out is anything like the vernal projection of $22 million… I don’t have much thought on the design categories, except, those Little Women costumes look tough to beat… Is there any serious candidate for visual effects? The last decade has shown a voter preference for as legit a contender as possible – Hugo and Interstellar over the Apes movies, First Man over The Avengers – but what would be such an entry this year? Ad Astra, which topped out at $50 mil?... Can anyone possibly care whether it’s Toy Story 4 or Frozen 2 for animated feature? Is there anything out there to relieve us of such a tedious choice?
Post Reply

Return to “92nd Academy Awards”