J. Edgar reviews and fall-out

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by ITALIANO »

Mister Tee wrote: So...what do we think are the chances Phyllida Lloyd has mounted a best picture contender?
Zero.
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Greg »

jack wrote:
Greg wrote:If Dujardin wins, does that mean for a 2011 film he will become the first Best Actor winner for a silent film?
What about Emil Jannings.
Yes, I checked and Jannings two films were both silent. So, if Dujardin wins, he will be the second for a silent film.
jack
Assistant
Posts: 897
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 4:39 pm
Location: Cape Breton, Nova Scotia

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by jack »

Greg wrote:If Dujardin wins, does that mean for a 2011 film he will become the first Best Actor winner for a silent film?
What about Emil Jannings.
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Greg »

If Dujardin wins, does that mean for a 2011 film he will become the first Best Actor winner for a silent film?
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Mister Tee »

Moneyball is the dramatic hit of the Fall -- it's going to end up with double the gross of Ides of March or J. Edgar. As Sonic says, it's lingered in the top ten a long while, indicating audiences like it. I think Brad is a very likely nominee and, given his fine overall year with Tree of Life, plus good will amassed over the past few Jesse James/Benjamin Button/Inglourious Basterds years, he could be considered as much due for a win as DiCaprio.

I agree pretty much wth the names BJ and Magilla have thrown out as competing for best actor this year -- maybe add Michael Shannon and Woody Harrelson. Someone deserving's going to be left out, and BJ correctly notes that being associated with a film not critically well-received is a handicap. Not to go strictly by the numerizing sites, but someone elsewhere pointed out that only one lead acting nomination in the past decade has come from a film with lower "scores" on Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes than J. Edgar, that being I Am Sam. This makes DiCaprio seem a fairly weak candidate for nomination, let alone a win.

But if you want to make that argument, The Reader is the strongest precedent. A few caveats, however: first, The Reader surprised many by getting best film and director nominations, in a five-film year. Like BJ, I don't see much chance of J. Edgar pulling that off, even with the expanded field. Also, The Reader had double-barreled Academy Special Sauce -- it was a Holocaust film promoted by Harvey Weinstein. You can just about picture Harvey going chair-to-chair at the nursing home making that one happen. Again, J. Edgar isn't in the same ballpark. I have no idea who's going to win best actor this year, but pronouncing DiCaprio some sort of prohibitive front runner seems wildly optimistic.

Let me say, by the way, that I'm delighted we've hit mid-November and things are still so utterly murky. Last year at this time, Oscar bloggers were going on about True Grit being "the last piece of the puzzle". This time out, we've got half a dozen major possibilities largely unscreened for critics, and every major category feels crowded and unsetlled. The very fact that mostly unseen efforts (War Horse for picture, Streep for actress) are being touted as front-runners tells you how uncertain the terrain is. God knows the Broadcast Critics will do everything they can to spoil the fun, but, this minute, anyway, it's a race up and down the ballot.

And here's something to think about when weighing Streep's shot at another Oscar this year: Ingrid Bergman in Anastasia. What about her? She is, as far as I can tell, the only person ever to win a second lead Oscar for a film that wasn't nominated for best picture. Various people who'd previously won in support managed a lead win for non-nominated films (Lemmon in Save the Tiger, Streep herself in Sophie's Choice, Denzel in Training Day). But in those cases there was some sense the earlier prize was junior class, and the second award represented promotion. The second lead Oscar has been more difficult to come by, and in all cases but Bergman it has been associated with a best picture nominee (recently, Million Dollar Baby, Milk, There Will Be Blood). So...what do we think are the chances Phyllida Lloyd has mounted a best picture contender?
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Big Magilla »

George Smiley not an awards magnet, Sabin? surely you jest. The character twice won BAFTAs for Alec Guinness and a nomination for James Mason - his charavter in The Deadly Affair went by a different name in the film, but he was Smiley in the book.

The Academy is not going to nominate a slate of pretty boys. Clooney, DiCaprio, Pitt, Fassbender seems a less than likely group.

Clooney is probably secure but something tells me that one or more of the others will fail to make the cut. Today I'm thinking that one is Fassbender, but tomorrow is could be Pitt or Dicaprio. Does Pitt's "I'm going to retire in thee years" sound like awards baiting to anyone besides me?

I'm thinking Dujardin and Oldman pretty much have the older membrs' votes in the bag unless, of course, they go for Christopher Plummer's one-man show in Barrymore.
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8003
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Sonic Youth »

OscarGuy wrote: Moneyball has quietly faded from memory.
I beg to differ on that one. It was a hit, it was in the box office top ten for about 2 months, it was very well liked. I don't see how it would fade from the Academy's memory, especially when the SAGs and Golden Globes will jog it all over again.
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by OscarGuy »

You guys have cited numerous contenders this year and we all know how the Academy tends to overlook quiet performances at the Oscars. A few slip through, but I have to agree with Sabin's assessment, I think the Academy's not going to pick this moment to celebrate Oldman. Look at Johnny Depp. He had plenty of more subdued performances, but what did he get his first nod for? Pirates of the Caribbean, the most out-there character you could imagine getting an Oscar nomination.

If Oldman picks up some steam with critics groups, he has a shot, but I think the fact that it's a fairly common genre thriller may also hurt its chances. I think the lion's share of critics prizes will go to Michael Fassbender in Shame followed by a few for Jean Dujardin (I'm thinking NYFCC) and a few more fuddy-duddy groups may go with DiCaprio. I think Brad Pitt may also face an uphill battle to a nomination. Moneyball has quietly faded from memory. I still have him slotted for a nomination, but I'm also prepared to dump him just as quickly.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8003
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Sonic Youth »

Sabin wrote:I'm very dubious about Gary Oldman's chances for a nomination. I'm biased because my friend A.A. Dowd has already seen the film and describes it as interesting but genuinely strange in the insular nature of the La Carré narrative, but that acting nominations are doubtful. And we shouldn't be surprised either! This is George Smiley after all. He's a resoundingly quiet character. Renewed interest in Oldman's career might generate some interest, but from what we know an actor needs to win, why would one think George Smiley would have what it takes?
My theory: his M.O. is playing overly-intense, edgy characters the Academy has been too nervous to acknowledge. Nominating him playing an elderly man, with all the edges of his personality muted, is a safe way for the Academy to honor him.
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Sabin »

I'm very dubious about Gary Oldman's chances for a nomination. I'm biased because my friend A.A. Dowd has already seen the film and describes it as interesting but genuinely strange in the insular nature of the La Carré narrative, but that acting nominations are doubtful. And we shouldn't be surprised either! This is George Smiley after all. He's a resoundingly quiet character. Renewed interest in Oldman's career might generate some interest, but from what we know an actor needs to win, why would one think George Smiley would have what it takes?
"How's the despair?"
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by The Original BJ »

rolotomasi99 wrote:
The Original BJ wrote:
rolotomasi99 wrote: Anyone who bets against Dicapario winning is a fool.
I wanted to wait until I saw the movie until I responded to this, but I find it VERY difficult to argue that DiCaprio has some kind of iron-clad lock on the Best Actor trophy for a film that isn't inspiring much excitement. I'm not even sure he's a certain nominee. Given the festival enthusiasm for The Descendants, The Artist, Shame, and Tinker Tailor Solider Spy, plus the established critical/popular success of Moneyball, I think DiCaprio is, at best, in the running for a nomination against what appears to be a fairly solid group of candidates (performance-wise, as well as career-wise.) I could see Oscar nominating DiCaprio, but in no way do I think he's suddenly become some kind of Jamie Foxx juggernaut.
Are you basing this just on your opinion of the performance or your understanding of how the Academy picks winners in the acting categories?
Probably a bit of both. It's clear we just have a very different idea of J. Edgar's overall Oscar prospects -- to me, Picture and Director nominations seem completely out of the question.

I think the main point upon which we disagree is your statement that "the performance itself just hits all the right Oscar notes." I think there's a pretty major note you're overlooking, and that's the film that contains this performance. By my eyes, J. Edgar is a classic example of failed Oscar bait -- the kind of film that looks unstoppable on paper, given the subject matter and talent involved, but fails to provoke any excitement from critics or audiences upon its release. Even the best reviews of J. Edgar seemed like damning with faint praise. I find it hard to believe that a CERTAIN Best Actor winner would come from such a vehicle. Add to this my personal opinion that Leo's performance isn't exactly a tour de force -- I think he has solid enough moments in a dominant role, but it's a role for which he's fundamentally unsuited -- and I come to the opposite conclusion you have: that the deck is hardly stacked in his favor.

Plus, I see no way one can so easily cast aside the rest of the Best Actor field. Moneyball earned strong reviews, and was a solid popular hit, which could propel the much-liked Brad Pitt to an Erin Brockovich-type Oscar. Festival buzz for The Descendants is major, and I have no doubt that Hollywood would have any problem bestowing a second, lead Oscar on George Clooney. Jean Dujardin is unknown in the states, but early word on The Artist is ecstatic, and the film seems poised to become a holiday crowd-pleaser. Toss in long-respected Gary Oldman (for another film that has earned strong notices), and Fassbender, awaiting his welcome-to-the-club recognition, and yes, like Magilla, I could absolutely see a situation where Leo is left off the nomination list. I DO think he is in the running for a nomination, and very well may get one, but I maintain that he just isn't a strong enough candidate to start engraving his name on the trophy just yet. And I don't think anyone considers him THAT overdue either.

But I'm curious to know what others think.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Big Magilla »

I think the bloggers who are predicting a tight race between Leo and George Clooney are walking up the wrong path. Leo is not "owed" at this point in his career. He's not likely to win for a film that has critics as split as they are on this one.

I kind of think EW's Holiday Preview issue out now has it right with Clooney (The Descendants); Jean Dujardin (The Artist) and Brad Pitt (Moneyball) the front-runners, although I'm not sure Pitt is any more likely to take the prize than Leo this year.

EW's "other contenders" are Leo; Michael Fassbender (Shame); Ryan Gosling (The Ides of March); Woody Harreslon (Rampart) and Gary Oldman (Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy), Long shots are Demien Bichir (A Better Life); Matt Damon (We Bought the Zoo); Ralph Fiennes (Coriolanus); Thomas Horn (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) and Michael Shannon (Take Shelter).

If Clooney, Dujardin and Pitt are truly the front-runners, then the next tier would have to include Fassbender and Oldman as well as DiCaprio and that makes six - one of them will have to be left in the cold and that could well be Leo.
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by rolotomasi99 »

The Original BJ wrote:
rolotomasi99 wrote: Anyone who bets against Dicapario winning is a fool.
I wanted to wait until I saw the movie until I responded to this, but I find it VERY difficult to argue that DiCaprio has some kind of iron-clad lock on the Best Actor trophy for a film that isn't inspiring much excitement. I'm not even sure he's a certain nominee. Given the festival enthusiasm for The Descendants, The Artist, Shame, and Tinker Tailor Solider Spy, plus the established critical/popular success of Moneyball, I think DiCaprio is, at best, in the running for a nomination against what appears to be a fairly solid group of candidates (performance-wise, as well as career-wise.) I could see Oscar nominating DiCaprio, but in no way do I think he's suddenly become some kind of Jamie Foxx juggernaut.
Are you basing this just on your opinion of the performance or your understanding of how the Academy picks winners in the acting categories?

Like I said, I do not believe anyone should receive an Oscar because they are "due", but the Academy clearly does. As much as I love Kate Winslet, you cannot tell me part of her winning for THE READER had nothing to do with the fact that some felt she was due an Oscar after such a stellar career and so many nominations without a win. Now of course, Winslet had five nominations previous to her win compared to DiCaprio's three.

However, this performance itself just hits all the right Oscar notes as I listed in my original post. That does not mean it is the best performance of the year, but it still has so many things going for it outside of just the performance itself. I would never use the vile L word (lock) this early in any race, but the odds seem stacked in his favor just like Colin Firth last year.

From what I have been hearing, Michael Fassbender gives the greatest performance of the year in SHAME and he has had a pretty good year from blockbusters like X-MEN FIRST CLASS to working with legends like David Cronenberg. Also, everybody is falling in love with Jean Dujardin in THE ARTIST and with Weinstein behind him we could have another Benigni moment in the making. There are plenty of people who could take the award instead of Leo, but to suggest he might not even be nominated seems like a silly contrarian position since even the critics who disliked the film gave praise to DiCaprio's performance.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by rolotomasi99 »

Sabin wrote:What do you think are its best chances for nominations or wins?
I am not sure if you are asking someone in particular or that was open to everyone, but I think nominations breaks down like this:

*Very Likely*
Lead Actor - DiCaprio
Set
Costume
Cinematography
Make-up

*Likely*
Supporting Actor - Hammer
Screenplay
Best Picture

*Possible*
Director

*Longshot*
Editing
Sound
Last edited by rolotomasi99 on Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: J. Edgar reviews

Post by Sabin »

What do you think are its best chances for nominations or wins?
"How's the despair?"
Post Reply

Return to “2011”