Golden Globe nominations announced

For the films of 2012
bizarre
Assistant
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by bizarre »

Riva and Wallis would make a nice story being, respectively, the oldest and youngest nominees ever in their category (Riva would be the oldest acting nominee in history - I think Justin Henry and maybe Jackie Cooper still have Wallis beat, although she would probably have been the youngest at the time of her film's shooting). But I think both of them are scraping for a nomination now.
ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by ITALIANO »

Greg wrote:
ITALIANO wrote:Plus, there's room for only one French-speaking lady, and nobody will be surprised when they pick the one who's young, beautiful, famous in America, and familiar to the Oscars. (Talented, too - but that isn't the point).
Cotillard is 37, just like Cooper.
But still young, and definitely younger than 85.
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Greg »

ITALIANO wrote:Plus, there's room for only one French-speaking lady, and nobody will be surprised when they pick the one who's young, beautiful, famous in America, and familiar to the Oscars. (Talented, too - but that isn't the point).
Cotillard is 37, just like Cooper. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by ITALIANO »

OscarGuy wrote:Fernanda Montenegro placed with the Golden Globes. They may be star-whores, but they've gone outside the box for an aging, noted actress in small foreign language entry before and I think Montenegro would have been the best comparison to Riva (though it was 14 years ago).
Yes, it's an acceptable parallel - and, sadly, Amour is a movie more for the critics than for the Academy. (It's even possible that it will lose Best Foreign Film there). Central Station itself was much more audience-friendly. Plus, there's room for only one French-speaking lady, and nobody will be surprised when they pick the one who's young, beautiful, famous in America, and familiar to the Oscars. (Talented, too - but that isn't the point).

Also, it's true that Amour is about old people and that the Academy is composed of mostly, if not old, mature voters - but it's exactly the kind of portrayal of old age that many old people could be quite unconfortable with.
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by OscarGuy »

Fernanda Montenegro placed with the Golden Globes. They may be star-whores, but they've gone outside the box for an aging, noted actress in small foreign language entry before and I think Montenegro would have been the best comparison to Riva (though it was 14 years ago).

Re: Arkin. What does he do in Argo that's so great? He plays Alan Arkin, jokes, talks dirty and grows nowhere with his character. At least John Goodman has a few good, milder scenes that make his the better performance in the film. Hell, everyone stuck in that house gave a better actual performance than Arkin. His comic relief that's amusing for sure, but isn't delivering much of a performance. I love Argo, but Arkin is not a Best Supporting Actor contender to me.

As for Bardem in Skyfall, I'm going to state two things that have me angry with Skyfall. The first deals with the finale in the house on the moor. It pissed me off for reasons many of you can guess (who've seen the film and at all know my feelings about one of the individuals involved). There were dozens of missed opportunities with that and later finding out who I have to deal with the the near future makes me further upset. Bardem's first scene in the film is one of limp-wristed villainy, the kind of performance we would have chastised a few years back as being another case of Hollywood using a fag as a villain. Today, it's considered avant garde? Really? It's the same kind of performance to me...and they can't fix that with a single amusing line by Daniel Craig. They played the whole scene in a way to make the audience uncomfortable. I was uncomfortable because it was creepy. He reminded me of a gay child molester. I'm sorry, but that's not the kind of "winning" role that impresses me. To make matters worse, other than a tinge of extra emotion, this isn't terribly far removed from his No Country for Old Men performance. And I thought his performance there was a one-note performance that was entirely undeserving of the praise it was getting.

Anyway, those are my thoughts for those who are chagrined my comments against Arkin and/or Bardem. That doesn't mean I'm ignoring their chances of nomination, it's just that I get to feel relieved when I don't see them mentioned. Arkin seems like a solid bet for a nod, but Bardem is at least fading (I'm more disappointed that the always-reliable Judi Dench isn't the contender from Skyfall that continues to get mentions).

Back to other issues:

At this point, I think Harvey has a conundrum. his release release strategy for Silver Linings Playbook is awful. The guy tried to kick the can down the road and missed. It was supposed to widen long before now, but was held off. This would be the perfect week to expand, building off the incredible buzz from strong nominations performances this week. Django Unchained will likely be a hit, but if he puts all his eggs in the Django basket, he's going to get burned, regardless of how popular the film is. Would he have pushed Inglourious Basterds, I could have seen him winning a lot more easily than with Django. We may finally see a rare Harvey failure this year, but we've still got a few weeks to go before we can be assured of that.

Re: Moonrise Kingdom. Everyone seem surprised that it's getting mentions at year's end. But why? First, the Broadcast Critics recognized it and then the Globes. You know why: this is Scott Rudin's horse this year. If there's a major power player in Oscar glad-handing other than Harvey, it's Rudin. Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, Moneyball, True Grit, The Social Network, No Country for Old Men, The Queen. As he proved with Extremely Loud last year, he can turn a turd into a Best Picture Oscar nominee. Rudin has Moonrise Kingdom as his lone Best Picture contender this year. He may not have the success of Weinstein, but he's one of the best salesmen around.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Big Magilla »

[quote="Mister Tee]Magilla, you seem unusually resistant to the reality of what's happening with Les Miz. For Hooper, a celebrated director coming off an Oscar win, to miss entirely on a directing nomination suggests the film isn't winning over even a bunch of softies like HFPA. [/quote]

Let's wait for these year-end films to open before we declare them dead. Les Miz is not Dreamgirls. It's a timeless story with a built-in audience, not a largely forgotten musical with one well-known song. It's practically critic proof. Large box office numbers could/will? make it an event which could translate into a truckload of Oscars. On the other hand, with no clear favorite among the various critics' award, anything can happen. The ultimate winner could be one of five or six films. ]Isn't that the kind of open Oscar season we've all been looking for?
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Big Magilla »

Sonic Youth wrote:
flipp525 wrote:The Nominations

Best Actor, Drama
Jessica Chastain - Zero Dark Thirty
Marion Cotillard - Rust and Bone
Helen Mirren - Hitchcock
Naomi Watts - The Impossible
Rachel Weisz - The Deep Blue Sea

Best Actress, Drama
Daniel Day-Lewis - Lincoln
Richard Gere - Arbitrage
John Hawkes - The Sesssions
Joaquin Phoenix - The Master
Denzel Washington - Flight
Now that's what I call category fraud.
Fixed at CinemaSight.com
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by The Original BJ »

I know we all make fun of them, but it's worth noting that (at least to me) the Broadcast Film Critics came up with a far more interesting list of nominees than either SAG or the Globes.

Not a lot of surprises -- this is the point in the season where groupthink really starts to set in, but some thoughts:

As everyone has said, Django made its first real dent in the race in a big way, though whether or not DiCaprio or Waltz is the supporting actor standout remains an unanswered question.

Amour seems like the biggest loser today -- some are arguing that the two leads were never going to place with such star-whorey voters, but I'd thought the foreign press would go for both of them. I don't think Riva is totally out of the race -- a lot of those Best Actress candidates still seem vulnerable to me -- but obviously the past two days didn't help.

I wonder if the "Les Mis is the CERTAIN winner" people will at least acknowledge the film took a decent hit today. I still think the movie wins the Best Comedy/Musical Globe (as Evita, Dreamgirls, and Sweeney Todd all did, en route to stumbling with the Academy), but I just don't think you can remotely argue that it's in prime position for the Best Picture Oscar, as some have been doing, even up to today.

I think the nominations (today and yesterday) for Nicole Kidman for The Paperboy but the exclusions of Matthew McConaughey in Magic Mike represent classic awards body sexism. Both are films with low-brow subject matter (though Soderbergh's is FAR better than Daniels's movie, IMO), and feature a scene-stealing supporting turn from a big star in a sexually objectified role. But Kidman gets nominations, and McConaughey doesn't.

Beasts of the Southern Wild, with its non-professional cast, is basically the anti-Globes movie, so its shut-out isn't shocking. But I still have a lot of doubt that this movie is going to get major Oscar nominations -- it just seems too small and arty in a year with so many successful mainstream options, and its precursor run isn't really helping it any.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Mister Tee »

In the voice of a not-too-long-ago president: don't forget Argo! Very good reviews and $100 million at the Us box-office makes it a quite legit contender, and all the early nomination signs confirm that.

Assuming Zero Dark at least achieves strong initial grosses, we could have the rare wide-open race, one whose focus it will take the kill-joy DGA to really narrow. Last year we had trouble finding any film that fit the usual best picture criteria; this year we have a few.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Sabin »

At this point, the only film that I think can beat Lincoln (and I still think it likely will) is Zero Dark Thirty for one simple reason: it inspires passion. The people who have seen it are ecstatic about it. It is apparently an insanely gripping film that ends in a satisfactory manner. Lincoln could end up the movie people like, and Zero Dark Thirty the one that they love. It's clearly going to take Zero Dark Thirty a moment to pick up any revenue but for the past five years the eventual Best Picture winner could be accused of having too soft a gross to win.

I also think you're right to say we have to wait to see which films wins the DGA, because the Producer's Guild of America seems likely to pick Lincoln and at this point so does the Screen Actor's Guild for Best Ensemble. Funny how a month ago, many (including myself) were talking about this being a Les Miz vs. Silver Linings Playbook horserace.
"How's the despair?"
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8003
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Sonic Youth »

Django's reminding me of True Grit, another late-releaser that got off to a very slow start, was left for dead, then ended up with 10 nominations including Picture and Director and a huge box office (which must've been a factor). We all know it didn't end happily, but it showed that a very late release date can hide a film's potency with AMPAS. Django's already doing better than TG, which the Globes ignored entirely. But about that category placement... isn't Django supposed to be more of a comedy?
Lincoln - is this the front-runner? It's Steven Spielberg's Lincoln starring Daniel Day-Lewis as Lincoln. A year ago we all said "Yes!" After seeing it, we weren't so sure. Admittedly, Lincoln was just going to get nominated in more categories than anything else, but it's a big grosser, everybody seems to like it if not love it. If it wins, it's going to a bummer even though it will be better than three of the last four Best Picture winners.
Despite some misgivings about certain Spielbergian touches, both tonal and technical (when will he stop pointing the camera directly into the sun?) and the overall message it brings across (it reminded me of the acrimonious fights Mister Tee and I had during Obama's health care passage, and the film takes Tee's side for the most part), I enjoyed the hell out of Lincoln. And yes, it's looking like the favorite horse that may not shoot out of the gate immediately, but makes its slow advance to overtake the rest of the field. I want to see two things: who wins the DGA, and how strong Zero Dark Thirty's box will be.
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Sabin »

Taking the contenders one by one...

Argo - continues to solidify its standing one of the locks of the year. Five was pretty much the most it could get and that's what it got. Desplat may end up with at least two nominated scores this year.

Beasts of the Southern Wild - they clearly didn't like this one. I'm not ready to disregard its chances (or Wallis') just yet.

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel - will join the ranks of other illustrious productions as Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and My Week with Marilyn as Oscar movies I will never see. Its globe nomination seemed like a solid bet, its ensemble nomination understandable but a little less likely. Not sure if it will get in, but there doesn't seem to be a reason why not.

Django Unchained - big boost, and Best Supporting Actor is an open field this year! I think this is the kind of thing that gets Django in the nominations realm, but maybe not much farther. It seems like foreign press candy.

Life of Pi - obviously, not chance of a SAG nomination but it did about as well as it could have at the golden globes. Since watching this film, I've not really gotten the hype around it as a contender. It just seems kind of flat. As I'll mention a little bit later, it's not unheard of for the directing nominations to just rank and file follow the dramatic nominations, but right now Ang Lee for virtue of being Ang Lee directing an Oscar contender has to be considered in. Picture and a slew of technical nominations are assured, but directing and writing seem shakiest.

Lincoln - is this the front-runner? It's Steven Spielberg's Lincoln starring Daniel Day-Lewis as Lincoln. A year ago we all said "Yes!" After seeing it, we weren't so sure. Admittedly, Lincoln was just going to get nominated in more categories than anything else, but it's a big grosser, everybody seems to like it if not love it. If it wins, it's going to a bummer even though it will be better than three of the last four Best Picture winners.

Les Miserables - yeah, not a great week. Three SAG noms? That's awesome. But if any movie was supposed to do better with this group, it was Les Miz. Dreamgirls parallels abound. Jackman might not beat Cooper.

Moonrise Kingdom - congratulations on Wes Anderson's first Golden Globe nomination. I hope it continues its unlikely path to an Oscar nomination if only so we can watch a Best Picture montage set to "Cuckoo!"

Silver Linings Playbook - all in all, a good week. Not incredibly concerned w/r/t Russell's lack of a directing nomination. I think he's still a good bet for an Oscar nomination considering that it's not uncommon for the Foreign Press to rank and file around the directing nominees. De Niro's lack of a nomination is a little weirder. Alan Arkin didn't get in for playing a weary weirdo patriarch in Little Miss Sunshine and it worked out just fine for him. My vision of Silver Linings Playbook possibly winning out against the competition, just ain't going to happen. Standing at $14 million, it hasn't been effectively marketed by the Weinstein company (it's still in only 371 theaters!). But it does have a better shot at beating Les Miz for the Golden Globe win than it did last week.

Zero Dark Thirty - did pretty great. It's having an awesome month. I'm not sure it's going to beat LIncoln, the biopic with the most nominations, but it seems like a decent bet for (let's see) oh! Best Actress and Best Director!...just like Million Dollar Baby.
"How's the despair?"
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10031
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Reza »

Does this nomination for Rachel Weisz mean she might sneak onto the Oscar list? I hope she does.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Mister Tee »

A lot of year-end feeling was that Zero Dark Thirty, being a more impressive/serious film on a similar subject, had stolen Argo's thunder. But Argo is quietly scoring everywhere it needs to, and might be a stealth contender to win best picture.

Magilla, you seem unusually resistant to the reality of what's happening with Les Miz. For Hooper, a celebrated director coming off an Oscar win, to miss entirely on a directing nomination suggests the film isn't winning over even a bunch of softies like HFPA.

Meantime, Life of Pi makes its first noise of any kind this season. I'd been seeing that as a bad-luck movie -- its reviews/grosses would have been plenty in most years, but it was getting squeezed out by an unusually bountiful crop. I still mostly feel that way -- it may make an Oscar list of ten, but I doubt Lee in the more competitive directing slot. But I'm no longer as sure about that.

The nods for Zero Dark Thirty seem perfunctory -- nothing glaring missing, but no "extras" to indicate special enthusiasm. It's worth remembering this was one of the few places Bigelow didn't triumph in 2009.

The Master at least got all its actors back on track, but resistance to it as a film continues. I'm less likely to think Anderson will score the equivalent of the lone director slot (though that slot in the past has offered from-nowhere-in-the-precursors surprises, like City of God and Vera Drake).

Silver Linings Playbook is also a somewhat iffy proposition -- missing director was explainable; dropping DeNiro was not. It's still got a shot at beating Les Miz for comedy/musical film, although the Globers have favored musicals over the years.

So, do we have to take Nicole Kidman seriously? I'm still finding that hard to believe, but two appearances in two days says something.

Is Django for real?
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Post by Greg »

It looks like Lincoln is moving into front-runner status to win the Oscar for Best Picture.
Post Reply

Return to “85th Predictions and Precursors”