I'm gonna say this response doesn't necessarily mean anything but reviews are going to start to pour out within the next day so we'll know then.
I've written elsewhere that I'm pretty dubious about Ridley Scott's chances of "finally" winning an Academy Award. When I look over his work over his recent career, it might not be that far fetched of a notion. Every few years, Ridley Scott generally gets a movie in the conversation a bit, like The Martian or American Gangster. But they all just sort of... fade. Like, completely. Black Hawk Down did fairly well with Academy voters and at the time I remember thinking if it had a little more time to pick up traction it might have done better. In retrospect, I think if it was released earlier it might have done worse. Ever since Gladiator, his movies are faders.
But having two movies in the conversation is going to do *SOMETHING* for him, especially considering that he is 83 years old. He's going to get interviewed.
But I am very torn. In my heart, I just can't imagine a movie where Ben Affleck and Matt Damon play medieval knights that have to duel each other is going to be anything less than totally goofy. I have a hard time imagining one of them as a medieval knight, but two?
Jodie Comer? Sure. Adam Driver? Fine. But Ben and Matt?
House of Gucci is different. I have no idea how that is going to do. Scott has been trying to make it for some time but it sounds like a Netflix series to be honest. When I see the trailer, I get American Hustle vibes where it feels like the filmmakers are inviting us to a big party... that ultimately might have script problems. And when I looked a little deeper into the development I noticed a worrisome presence: Becky Johnston wrote it. She of Under the Cherry, The Prince of Tides, Seven Years in Tibet, something called Arthur Newman, which I've never heard of (20% on RT).
Thinking about this film reminds me though: when was the last time a film about rich people won the Academy Award? Every film that has won Best Picture for the last few years has centered around a protagonist that was some kind of working class or broke. I guess Spotlight was the last time. They're all Boston reporters. I guess Birdman was about privileged actors, so that would be the last one.
mlrg wrote
Apparently the new PTA film will be called Licorice Pizza. I have a feeling that awards wise it will be more of a Inherent Vice than a Phantom Thread.
Why do you say that? From what I've heard, it's a coming of age story in the 1970s. It sounds pretty accessible by his standards.
Dreadful title though.
mlrg wrote
Speaking of trailers, the trailer for C'mon C'mon is delightful.
I looked at A24's lineup and C'mon C'mon might be their movie. We still have to screen The Tragedy of Macbeth but Mike Mills has been inching closer and closer to the Academy stage. This might be a bigger hit with audiences than with critics. The Robbie Ryan cinematography looks gorgeous.
mlrg wrote
The Last Duel was screened in the last hours and apparently Ridley Scott might be in the running. I would say that at this time he feels much more an Honorary oscar winner than a best director winner.
I can't find any hint of it online. Can you provide a link.
mlrg wrote
Apparently the new PTA film will be called Licorice Pizza. I have a feeling that awards wise it will be more of a Inherent Vice than a Phantom Thread.
Why do you say that? From what I've heard, it's a coming of age story in the 1970s. It sounds pretty accessible by his standards.
Dreadful title though.
mlrg wrote
Speaking of trailers, the trailer for C'mon C'mon is delightful.
I looked at A24's lineup and C'mon C'mon might be their movie. We still have to screen The Tragedy of Macbeth but Mike Mills has been inching closer and closer to the Academy stage. This might be a bigger hit with audiences than with critics. The Robbie Ryan cinematography looks gorgeous.
mlrg wrote
The Last Duel was screened in the last hours and apparently Ridley Scott might be in the running. I would say that at this time he feels much more an Honorary oscar winner than a best director winner.
I can't find any hint of it online. Can you provide a link.
Apparently the new PTA film will be called Licorice Pizza. I have a feeling that awards wise it will be more of a Inherent Vice than a Phantom Thread.
The teaser trailer for Don't Look Up left me with mixed feelings. It really could go be a big hit or a real stinker. Both Leo and Joanh Hill seem to be reprising their Wolf of Wall Street schtick.
I saw the King Richard trailer yesterday for the first time. I would say that Will Smith might have his oscar on the bag.
Best actress race seems much more interesting than best actor. Lost Daughter is getting mixed reviews but apparently Colman is great in it, as always. Of the films making the festival tour it's the only one we still don't have a trailer yet. I'm inclined to say that Chastain will finally get nominated again and possibly win. I was a bit distracted by the heavy make up while watching the trailer though. The movie premieres in the US next week so we'll know. I really really liked Jackie so I'm very much looking forward for Spencer.
Speaking of trailers, the trailer for C'mon C'mon is delightful.
The Last Duel was screened in the last hours and apparently Ridley Scott might be in the running. I would say that at this time he feels much more an Honorary oscar winner than a best director winner.
Jane Campion never really hit with the academy after The Piano. I remember Portrait of a Lady being highly anticipated and then flopping really hard. Reviews for The Power of the Dog are strong but apparently the film has pacing issues and might be to cold for the academy.
Macbeth and Nightmare Alley are still sight unseen but on paper seem like big oscar contenders.
I disagree with Tee (great initial post by the way, as always. Such a privilege to have him around...) when he says that this feels as much as an oscar year as 2020. We have much bigger names this year and a group of films that might be remembered the following years. Does anyone still remembers what Minari is?
Okri wrote
But, to be honest, I legitimately don't understand how Green Book and Parasite won back-to-back with the same group of voters.
The short one is this: why wouldn't they? Neither one of them have anything upsetting to say about white liberal voters. Green Book is a movie that shows how people of different races can get along. More so, how they can both learn from each other. Parasite may be about class warfare but it's a fun movie about class warfare and it's halfway around the world. Neither film is threatening.
Beyond that, I think that every year there's only a certain number of films that an Academy voter can envision as a Best Picture winner. Like what Lee Atwater said about that little boat that the American people have. There's only a certain number of people that they can imagine as President. George H.W. Bush was closer to being in the boat than Michael Dukakis. At the end of the day, why Green Book and not Roma? Because Green Book was in the boat and Roma wasn't. The next year, Parasite was more in the boat than 1917.
I know money has a lot to do with it but there's also just this intangible zeitgeist quality that voters respond to. If it's not there, they'll invent it to hold something up as best of the year.
anonymous1980 wrote:I am kind of confused why some Oscar bloggers and pundits are saying King Richard and Belfast are more "Academy-friendly" than more auteurist films like The Power of the Dog and Spencer. In this past decade, due to the changing demographics of the Academy (more international, more diverse and younger), artsier, more daring films stand about an equal chance as the conventional "Oscar-y" films. For every Argo, Spotlight and Green Book, there's a Moonlight, Parasite and Nomadland. So I think the question of what will "work for the Academy" is becoming more and more unpredictable every year.
Honestly, I think that's why.
One thing I see is that prognosticators have an overwhelming need for narrative in the awards race (and I don't necessarily find that a bad thing and/or think it's wrong). That could boil down to over-promoting Hollywood stars the moment they can (Bullock, Smith this year) - because obviously stars need Oscars (and I think Ridley Scott fits that bill). Tee points it out when pundits complain about races NOT being predictable - "I don't want to be in suspense. I want to be right." And I think that extends to how we imagine AMPAS' imagination(s). If we have the expand the boundaries of "Oscar bait" then we have to think...well, inside a bigger box. Which is just harder. The other thing, of course, is that "Oscar bait" is something we denigrate and parody. If we have to expand that to include films we genuinely like, well, that makes it all the harder to diminish AMPAS choices.
But, to be honest, I legitimately don't understand how Green Book and Parasite won back-to-back with the same group of voters.
Big Magilla wrote:
Hmmm. I don't know whether this was a typo, or like me, the last thirty years are are starting to blur for you, but The Piano was 28 years ago.
The damn millennium wreaks havoc on my age calculation math skills.
Sabin wrote:
I thought Don't Look Up was about a comet striking the earth.
It is. The comet is supposed to be a metaphor for climate change.
Great write-up, as always, Mister Tee! Here are some random post-festival thoughts of my own:
- I am kind of confused why some Oscar bloggers and pundits are saying King Richard and Belfast are more "Academy-friendly" than more auteurist films like The Power of the Dog and Spencer. In this past decade, due to the changing demographics of the Academy (more international, more diverse and younger), artsier, more daring films stand about an equal chance as the conventional "Oscar-y" films. For every Argo, Spotlight and Green Book, there's a Moonlight, Parasite and Nomadland. So I think the question of what will "work for the Academy" is becoming more and more unpredictable every year.
- Rachel Morrison is still the only female cinematographer to get an Oscar nomination to date but next year, that number could double, triple or even QUADRUPLE because there's a very real possibility of as much as THREE female cinematographers getting nominations. The Power of the Dog, Spencer and The Hand of God all have female cinematographers.
- Here's also a cool piece of trivia: If at least TWO of the actors from The Power of the Dog gets nominated, Jane Campion will have the record for directing the most number of acting nominations by a female director. Currently, the record is held in a tie by both Barbra Streisand and Greta Gerwig who directed 4 each.
Mister Tee wrote
Also with extremely strong chance is the (to me, surprising) King Richard. Doubts arise when you hear pundits compare a film to The Blind Side -- like that was a good thing -– but a substantial number of legit critics (plus, by tweet, Barry Jenkins) have offered substantial praise, and it looks like the film might be the rare needle-threader: mainstream-engaging enough for general audiences, nuanced enough to satisfy the more demanding. With what looks like a very strong Get-Will-His-Oscar campaign to propel it, I can see this movie being a substantial box-office success, and a solid overall contender. The only small element to hold it back: it doesn’t seem the sort of film that normally yields a directing nomination, especially for a relative unknown like Reinaldo Marcus Green. Time was, a strong enough best picture presence could push a film to such a nod –- films like Juno or The Cider House Rules come to mind. But, of late, the directing category has been more auteur-friendly, dominated by brand names and visual stylists. And, Green Book aside, a directing nomination is still important for an actual best picture win. But that’s really the only negative I can find for this film, which looks to be one we’ll be hearing lots about from here to March.
I had never heard of Reinaldo Marcus Green until this trailer. I looked him up. He's pretty prolific. He's directed three films over the last three years. Monsters and Men screened at Sundance, got modest reviews, and made about a half million dollars upon its release. Joe Bell -- which somehow was the first film written by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana since Brokeback Mountain! -- screened at Toronto, got even more mixed reviews, and... well, y'know, COVID. This is a strong career for a new filmmaker if not one that resembles that of a guy who instantly helms a Best Picture winner.
I remain a little agnostic about the film's overall chances. It looks a little too heartwarming and conservative to go all the way. Listening to Will Smith's Richard talking about how family is the only thing keeping his little girls off the street, I thought to myself "This is a very different temperature from the films about race that we saw last year." The Blind Side was a long time ago.
Nominations? Sure. Will Smith wins? I guess. A Best Picture win? I doubt it.
Your final two paragraphs tackle a few filmmakers on a roll.
Mister Tee wrote
Two Oscar-ed screenwriters not especially popular around here will be along with high-profile projects: Adam McKay’s star-studded Don’t Look Up –- apparently a climate change satire -- and Aaron Sorkin’s Being the Ricardos, delving behind the scenes at I Love Lucy. Supposedly the latter’s test screenings haven’t been wildly successful.
I thought Don't Look Up was about a comet striking the earth.
Regardless, Adam McKay is one of the few filmmakers whose films I don't really like but whose work I'm generally pretty excited about. The only thing we know about this film is that it's absurdly star-studded and it appears as though he's abandoned his pseudo-doc style. Unless it's an absolute turkey, this could easily be a contender. His tastes are clearly in line with the Academy.
Aaron Sorkin has a slightly spottier track record with the Academy, but what holds me back is that it just sounds so Sorkin-y: Takes place over the course of a week during production of I Love Lucy, which sees Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz encounter a crisis that could jeopardize their careers and marriage. I can already see the screaming matches and the walk-and-talks. I'm inclined to say I'm holding out until we see Nicole Kidman as Lucille Ball.
Mister Tee wrote
Finally, Paul Thomas Anderson’s latest project, apparently not actually titled Soggy Bottom (given that Phantom Thread was considered an only-while-shooting title and then became the real one, a lot of us were concerned there). Of course, one never knows with Anderson, but I remain ever hopeful that his next project will be his Big One.
You're right. We can't know. Or can we? The story of Untitled Soggy Bottom Picture sounds pretty straight forward. A coming of age story set during the 1970s. That means it's probably going to be some kind of accessible. If it's some kind of accessible, it should be capable of breaking through. Paul Thomas Anderson is in the club now. Phantom Thread picked up a surprising six nominations. But here's a question: if the Academy had as long a window as they did this past year, who's to say it wouldn't have done better? Would Best Actress, Original Screenplay, and more be in the cards as well? I think it's absolutely possible.
We're in for an interesting trend of auteurs chronicling their childhoods. This year, we get Paul Thomas Anderson showing us Los Angeles in the 1970s. Next year, we get Steven Spielberg giving us the Phoenix, Arizona (my hometown) of 1950s.
Mister Tee wrote:
Based on its strong critical following, one most likely candidate is The Power of the Dog, Jane Campion’s well-regarded comeback feature, which, 18 years after The Piano, may well make her the first woman to get multiple nominations for directing. The film doesn’t arrive till December, and has the Netflix handicap, but there’s no reason to doubt it’s in the best picture hunt.
Hmmm. I don't know whether this was a typo, or like me, the last thirty years are are starting to blur for you, but The Piano was 28 years ago.
I think Campion could easily become the third woman to win Best Director behind Bigelow and Zhao, but we'll have to see how she does in the precursors.
Mister Tee wrote:
Supporting actresses are somewhat more plentiful. Aunjanue Ellis got reviews fully the equal of Will Smith’s in King Richard, and seems a sure nominee. Jessie Buckley and Dakota Johnson were both singled out supporting Colman in The Lost Daughter. Kirsten Dunst, long a blogger favorite, might finally make the nominations list for The Power of the Dog. Speaking of long-time favorites, Ann Dowd has been heavily touted all year for Mass –- though it remains to be seen if the film will break out. Magilla could have yet another chance to root Judi Dench home (for Belfast). And, once again, we have all those as-yet-unseen films, any of which might yield a performance to join this list.
This is, as usual, the toughest acting category to predict.
I have two longtime sentimental favorites in the race, and neither of them is Dench.
I have been a big fan of Dunst since Interview with the Vampire and Gillian Armstrong's version of Little Women, both in 1994 when she was just 12 years old. The other is Toni Collette, who always seems on the verge of doing something great but never quite does. I think the Joan Blondell role in The Nightmare Alley might give her the opportunity to receive her first nomination since 1999's The Sixth Sense. Those two plus Anjanue Ellis in King Richard seem like sure bets with Dench, Sally Hawkins (Spencer), and both Ann Dowd and Martha Plimpton in Mass fighting it out for the remaining slots.
The biggest surprise of the festival hits for me was Cyrano which has earned rave reviews not only for Dinklage, but for Haley Bennett and Kelvin Harrison, Jr. as well. It's entirely possible that all three will be nominated, a first for the actors playing Roxanne and Christian.
Belfast, I don't know. It's in black-and-white for no apparent reason. That screen shot in which Dench is shown with her mouth open in utter amazement is from her joy at watching the car take off in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. I mean, a six-year old kid you might expect that reaction from, but an old lady who has presumably seen it all?
Bennett, Colman, and Cruz seem at this point to be the most likely Best Actress nominees playing fictional characters with Bennett edging out both Chastain and Gaga who will compete with Hudson for a playing a second real-life character after Stewart. That the bloggers are coalescing around Stewart for the win seems a bit premature at this stage, but who knows.
In some ways, 2021 doesn’t feel that much more like a “real” movie/Oscar year than 2020 did. Here it is September, and many of us have barely stepped inside a movie theatre. Studios are still holding back releases, or hedging their bets with day-and-date streaming -- making top Hollywood talent unhappy in the process (I’ll see your Scarlett Johansson, and raise you a Denis Villeneuve). There was no point to writing the usual Lead-in to the Festivals article -- aside from Cruella’s costumes and make-up, and The Mitchells vs. the Machines in animation, there hasn’t been any Oscar activity…there’s barely been movie activity. It’s all coming in the next 18 weeks; it feels a lot like we’re getting what would have been the second part of the truncated 2021 (Chapter 2: the Big Names).
Still…Cannes sort of happened (albeit late), Venice and Telluride went off close to as-per-usual, and we now have a bunch of titles to throw around, most of which we hope to get to see before prizes are given next March. Barring unseen catastrophe, there will be an Oscars this year, and it’s time to start talking about them. (Note: I usually don’t post this analysis till Toronto is at least well underway, but Toronto’s premiere roster continues to shrink -– as far as I can see, Eyes of Tammy Faye, Dear Evan Hansen and The Humans are their only notable first showings -- and it doesn’t feel worth waiting. I might amend this to include developments as the week goes on.)
Based on what we heard out of Telluride and Venice, there are a number of films likely to figure in this year’s best picture race. I break them out into three categories: those that would have qualified in a year of five; those broadly popular enough to likely make an expanded slate; and those with quirks that may or may not keep them off in the end, but which have to be considered possibilities in a year of absolutely-10.
Based on its strong critical following, one most likely candidate is The Power of the Dog, Jane Campion’s well-regarded comeback feature, which, 18 years after The Piano, may well make her the first woman to get multiple nominations for directing. The film doesn’t arrive till December, and has the Netflix handicap, but there’s no reason to doubt it’s in the best picture hunt.
Also with extremely strong chance is the (to me, surprising) King Richard. Doubts arise when you hear pundits compare a film to The Blind Side -- like that was a good thing -– but a substantial number of legit critics (plus, by tweet, Barry Jenkins) have offered substantial praise, and it looks like the film might be the rare needle-threader: mainstream-engaging enough for general audiences, nuanced enough to satisfy the more demanding. With what looks like a very strong Get-Will-His-Oscar campaign to propel it, I can see this movie being a substantial box-office success, and a solid overall contender. The only small element to hold it back: it doesn’t seem the sort of film that normally yields a directing nomination, especially for a relative unknown like Reinaldo Marcus Green. Time was, a strong enough best picture presence could push a film to such a nod –- films like Juno or The Cider House Rules come to mind. But, of late, the directing category has been more auteur-friendly, dominated by brand names and visual stylists. And, Green Book aside, a directing nomination is still important for an actual best picture win. But that’s really the only negative I can find for this film, which looks to be one we’ll be hearing lots about from here to March.
Those are my only two “would compete in any year” contenders. The rest are mid- to down-ballot.
Some initial snarky tweets had me thinking Belfast would be a real Jojo Rabbit – disdained by critics, boosted by sentimentalists. But published reviews to date are decently favorable. It still may be that the film is over-inflated by pundits because “it feels like an Oscar movie” (as okri has pointed out, when people use that phrase, they only mean The King’s Speech/Green Book, not Moonlight/Parasite), but I can see this being at worst a mid-range contender, maybe better.
Reza’s dismissal aside, I think Dune has the potential to make the best picture/director ballot. Its Metacritic numbers are, though higher, a bit Joker-like: a number of critics just tuned out on it, but those who like it REALLY like it -- which bespeaks enthusiasm to help make the list. Villeneuve has already scored one best director nod, and his subsequent film got five nominations plus two wins. If the film is as visually sumptuous as even some detractors acknowledge, I could see him making the directing list again.
I confess I don’t know quite where to put Cyrano, largely because my own distaste for Joe Wright is pretty strong, plus I have no idea how audiences will respond to the effort. But it does seem to have evoked some enthusiasm, it will have the Dinklage performance as a big selling point…and Wright has, we shouldn’t forget, already scored two best picture nods (though both sans directing).
Spencer got a number of enthusiastic reviews, but so did Jackie, and we saw how that wilted as nominations drew near. Stipulate that Stewart will be a best actress nominee, but can this film slip its way onto the picture/director lists? Apparently Larain’s style is a major factor for those who like the film, which might lead, counter-intuitively, to its having a better shot at the limited-to-5 directing category than the 10-wide picture list. (Foxcatcher, Cold War and Another Round have proven lone directors are still possible.)
More problematic are movies like The Card Counter and The Lost Daughter. The former got way better critical response than initially expected, and might bode well for Oscar Isaac in lead actor…but it’s just as possible this is simply a critics’ thing, like, in the end, First Reformed was. The latter is likely stronger, as Colman’s performance seems close to a sure bet, and Gyllenhaal might at least get a screenwriting nomination out of it. But its apparent acid tone might keep it off the ultimate best picture list – though, at the moment, I’d describe it as “in the running”.
In a category all their own are the two overseas entries from veteran Best Foreign Film winners -– Pedro’s Parallel Mothers and Sorrentino’s The Hand of God. Both got solid enough notices, but, as Uri would tell us if he were still speaking to us, non-English-language films generally only get spots if the domestic slate is thin, and, even then, their chances of victory are miniscule. The two films will be competing with one another over the small piece of available terrain, and both will be facing off with the already-hailed The Worst Person in the World. We’ll have to see which of the three emerges as the dominant critics’ pick –- as Pedro’s last film demonstrated, the pickings for the second-most-liked foreign film can be pretty slim.
Mike Mills’ films always get some sort of consideration, but it feels like the best you can say about C’mon C’mon re the festivals is, well, it also played here –- nothing embarrassing, but no particular enthusiasm, either.
Which is better than you can say about The French Dispatch, which of course had been reasonably well-received at Cannes, but, in a kind of reverse-Nebraska, was flayed by a number of critics (and most of the Oscar pundits) after its Telluride showings. I’m not sure it’s fully dead in the water, but I can guarantee it’s not going to get any help whatsoever from the blogging team.
A fairly large number of films remain to be screened, even beyond Toronto. Thoughts on the most prominent:
The Tragedy of Macbeth is the Coens with Denzel and Frances -– but it was apparently turned down by more than one festival, which sends up warning signals.
The Many Saints of Newark is a prequel to The Sopranos, and that rehashed-from-TV aspect makes me doubt it’ll go over big with voters -- but, of course, who knows?
Cry Macho, which is opening very soon with no advance screenings to date, looks more like Gran Torino/The Mule Eastwood than Mystic River/Million Dollar Baby.
The Harder They Fall has a great cast, but is a western, and may be more a commercial play.
Chloe Zhao or no, I’ll take Eternals seriously when someone gives me good reason, not before.
Some in the blogging community seem to have decided Ridley Scott needs to win an Oscar -– the directing equivalent of “How has Annette Bening not won yet?”, an obsession I’ll never understand. Scott’s resume has a few obvious high points, but far more stinkers, but bloggers latch onto what they latch onto. They’re especially on the case because Scott has two entries this year -- The Last Duel and House of Gucci, both with big marquee names. If one hits, you can expect the Oscar Industrial Complex to go into high gear.
Two Oscar-winning directors are coming along with prominent remakes: Del Toro’s Nightmare Alley and Spielberg’s long-deferred West Side Story. I don’t honestly see the point of either, given that perfectly good originals remain easy to access. But I thought that about Little Women, as well, so surprise is certainly possible.
Two Oscar-ed screenwriters not especially popular around here will be along with high-profile projects: Adam McKay’s star-studded Don’t Look Up –- apparently a climate change satire -- and Aaron Sorkin’s Being the Ricardos, delving behind the scenes at I Love Lucy. Supposedly the latter’s test screenings haven’t been wildly successful.
Finally, Paul Thomas Anderson’s latest project, apparently not actually titled Soggy Bottom (given that Phantom Thread was considered an only-while-shooting title and then became the real one, a lot of us were concerned there). Of course, one never knows with Anderson, but I remain ever hopeful that his next project will be his Big One.
To the performances:
Loath as I am to surrender to early buzz, I have to say it’s a genuine possibility the best actor race is over and done with. Oscar voters have given plenty of homage to indie actors in recent decades, but, given the chance, they still love their big stars, and Will Smith very much qualifies. As I said in the reviews section, the first legit chance they had to cite Julia Roberts and Sandra Bullock, they grabbed at it, and they might well do the same for Smith. He of course had two earlier nominations, but they were filler mentions for failed Oscar bait; this time around, he’ll be fronting a likely best picture nominee (as Roberts and Bullock did), and there’ll be a whole lot of people rooting for him to take to the stage.
Currently, it looks like that scenario would be at the expense of Benedict Cumberbatch, who has received the best film reviews of his career for The Power of the Dog. Last time around, he wasn’t really in the race (paling next to the OTHER British genius); this time, I think he’s likely to have some critics’ awards in his pocket (I’m thinking NY/National Society). But Smith will likely romp through those podunk groups, and, you never know, could even win LA (Julia Roberts did).
Peter Dinklage is widely liked, but he probably wouldn’t be able to threaten for a win in that context. He is, however, nicely set up for a nomination from Cyrano. And he would be the third different actor to be nominated for the role over a 70-year stretch. Is that some kind of a record? (It could have been four, had Oscar followed up the critics’ choosing Steve Martin in Roxanne.)
Oscar Isaac, for now, seems positioned to contend for one of the other slots, but much will depend on how The Card Counter fares commercially -- judging box office this year will be a major challenge, but a true flop is still easy to sniff out. There’s some chance the film is DOA by this time next week, but, for the moment, he’s in the discussion.
There are, of course, other heavyweights to come, many of them former winners: Javier Bardem as Desi Arnaz, Leonardo DiCaprio in McKay’s film, and Denzel as Macbeth. Bradley Cooper in Nightmare Alley and Adam Driver in House of Gucci are the ones on the haven’t-won-yet on the list; their fates will, naturally, rest with the overall reception for their films. And, of course, it’s still early-ish; you never know if a sleeper might pop up. But this race seems the most apt to be set in place right now.
Best actress, post the festivals, is a fairly bountiful group, with veterans, new faces, and multiple foreign ladies comprising the landscape. Two names stand atop the heap for right now: Kristen Stewart, apparently finally really breaking through as Diana, and Olivia Colman, impressing once again with a role that got her outstanding personal notices. The temptation is to say Colman’s recent Oscar would make her a less likely winner, but we have last April’s result to suggest otherwise. Something to remember when it comes to critics’ awards: Colman hasn’t ever won in NY -– but Stewart has.
And there’s more. Caitriona Balfe has been singled out in the Belfast cast, even by some lukewarm on the film. Penelope Cruz, always a threat, scored well with Pedro’s film, joining Cannes winner Renate Reinsve in the subtitled gang. Magilla, in another thread, cited Jennifer Hudson in Respect, but I have my doubts there: her acting reviews (as opposed to singing) were pretty tepid, and the film hasn’t done much at the box office. If there’s an early-year candidate, I’d think it might be Tessa Thompson, whose Passing was well-regarded at Sundance.
And there are those big names to come: Jessica Chastain in the seemingly meaty role of Tammy Faye Bakker; Frances McDormand as Lady Macbeth; Nicole Kidman as Lucille Ball; Lady Gaga in The House of Gucci; and both Cate Blanchett and Jennifer Lawrence in the McKay film (Blanchett is also in Nightmare Alley).
Supporting actor seems the less-populated category at present, though I’d say Kodi Smit-McPhee of The Power of the Dog is clear leader for now -– his notices surpassed even Cumberbatch’s. Others I’ve heard mentioned are Jon Bernthal for King Richard, Ciaran Hinds for Belfast, and Timothy Spall for Spencer. If anyone knows someone I’ve missed, feel free to add. And of course, plenty more could emerge from the still-unscreened titles.
Supporting actresses are somewhat more plentiful. Aunjanue Ellis got reviews fully the equal of Will Smith’s in King Richard, and seems a sure nominee. Jessie Buckley and Dakota Johnson were both singled out supporting Colman in The Lost Daughter. Kirsten Dunst, long a blogger favorite, might finally make the nominations list for The Power of the Dog. Speaking of long-time favorites, Ann Dowd has been heavily touted all year for Mass –- though it remains to be seen if the film will break out. Magilla could have yet another chance to root Judi Dench home (for Belfast). And, once again, we have all those as-yet-unseen films, any of which might yield a performance to join this list.
The directors I’ve already more or less covered -- Jane Campion, Denis Villeneuve, Joe Wright, Pablo Larain, with rookies Reinaldo Marcus Green and Maggie Gyllenhaal hoping to crash the party. As for the remainder of the year, it’s like a who’s who: Paul Thomas Anderson, Adam McKay, Guillermo del Toro, Ridley Scott, Steven Spielberg.
I don’t have the patience to track down the adapted/original split of the screenplays at this point (I presume we’ll have the usual tiresome argument of Spencer and King Richard passing themselves off as Originals, despite our being familiar with most of the story details).
Below the line, I presume Dune will figure heavily in almost all categories, with The Power of the Dog fighting it for at least cinematography. Macbeth, The French Dispatch and Cyrano should also compete for the costume/design techs. Jonny Greenwood seems to be having a banner year, being attached to both Spencer and The Power of the Dog, with PTA’s movie still to come. Hans Zimmer of Dune will fight him all the way. And Beyonce has written a song for King Richard.
That, at exhaustive length, is where we stand today. Much more to come as the season progresses.
