First 2009 predictions - It's time...

[Greg]

In the same vein: it seems an especially inauspicious year to have opened the best picture race to ten contenders. With studio specialty units shutting down left and right in the face of the recession, the field is ominously thin. Realistically, what's out there as yet unscreened? -- Invictus, Lovely Bones, Avatar and Nine. Under the old system, you'd expect 2-3 of them to fall short and be left off the best film slate. This year, this format, each would have to fail on an Amelia level not to qualify.

Do you think this will lead to the possibility of a film that is mostly hated, but with a very small band of die-hard supporters, actually sneaking in to get a Best Picture nomination, even something like Antichrist?



Edited By Greg on 1256758890

[OscarGuy]

I think Holbrook's probably going to suffer the way many others have in recent years. That it's a small distributor makes it sound like they are going to face the same difficulties that faced Local Color and the push for a nomination for Armin Mueller-Stahl, who is admittedly good; or like Starting Out in the Evening failed to earn a nomination for Frank Langella; but perhaps not as weak as the push for Christopher Plummer in Man in the Chair.

Older actors seem to be struggling to earn recognition these days. The only reason Holbrook is even being talked about now is because he had a late-life resurgence and Oscar nomination for Into the Wild. Had that film not shown up, I don't think That Evening Sun would even be in the mix. the film reminds me a little of A Love Song for Bobby Long or maybe distantly like Love and Death on Long Island. Neither earned recognition for their stars despite the latter's huge support among film critics.

And, with Amelia a dud with critics (yeah, I know, as most predicted) and Tree of Life cut down from the 2009 forest, I need to revise my predictions. Holbrook will probably end up in the list, but not as a nominee as I don't think his film will be strong enough to earn him a nod.

[Mister Tee]

Early reviews for Holbrook have been very strong, and the trailer looks promising. I think the distributor is very small though, so I'm not sure if they'll be equipped for an Oscar campaign.

It would really be nice if they could manage it...or some other entry along those lines. Because otherwise you get the sense that, here in late October, the year's races have already been pre-digested, and the possibility of surprise is all but gone.

In the same vein: it seems an especially inauspicious year to have opened the best picture race to ten contenders. With studio specialty units shutting down left and right in the face of the recession, the field is ominously thin. Realistically, what's out there as yet unscreened? -- Invictus, Lovely Bones, Avatar and Nine. Under the old system, you'd expect 2-3 of them to fall short and be left off the best film slate. This year, this format, each would have to fail on an Amelia level not to qualify.

Same with best actor. People are putting Freeman and Day-Lewis on the list sight unseen because otherwise, beyond Clooney, Damon and Firth, who is there? (As I say, I'd be happy to see Holbrook slip in, the way Geraldine Page did in '85)

Best actress has a decent core group -- Streep, Mulligan, Sidibe -- that will make for respectability, but the bench there is woefully thin. What happened to that Annette Bening vehicle? I don't see it on any release schedule. Are we going to end up with the only five candidates getting nominations by default?

[dws1982]

Early reviews for Holbrook have been very strong, and the trailer looks promising. I think the distributor is very small though, so I'm not sure if they'll be equipped for an Oscar campaign.

[FilmFan720]

Has anyone seen the preview for That Evening Sun? Could Hal Holbrook be a dark horse for a Best Actor nomination?

[Zahveed]

Is it time for a new prediction thread?

[Eric]

Not that, I think, anyone needs convincing at this point, but Nat R. (though he has yet to see Nine) says that Mo'Nique is a lock for a win.

"Someone somewhere will try to pretend it's a contest when 2010 rolls around but they'll only be trying to sell magazines or boost page views. Done deal."

http://filmexperience.blogspot.com/2009/10/precious-bleeding-over.html

[Precious Doll]

I was surprised too at how good Rupert Friend was in The Young Victoria particularly as I had seen Cheri, in which he was terrible, just a few weeks prior. I had always written him off as another Orlando Bloom type. It will be interesting to see what he does over the next few years.

[Big Magilla]

It's Jim Broadbent. The only reason he's included.

???
Jim Broadbent being nominated for an unimpressive performance in a film that will likely not even register on the radar of most Academy members is likely, but Meryl Streep being nominated for a critically acclaimed performance in a lightweight-but-successful film is iffy at this point?

He may be Jim Broadbent, but I swear his performance was unimpressive. Not bad, just barely made you notice he was on the screen.

Actually Jim Broadbent is quite good but his role is little more than a cameo. The one who has a shot, a long one, but a shot, is Rupert Friend as the young Prince Albert if he's positioned in what is a very weak category this year.

I thought he was the best thing about the film but hadn't even considered him because I had thought of him as co-lead with Emily Blunt who is good, but adds nothing new. Friend, however, is a revelation with his pitch perfect German accent as the bookish, shy, reluctant suitor who slowly emerges as the force behind the throne that turns the headstrong young queen into the beloved monarch she became.

As I said, I hadn't even considered him, but then I came across this little tidbit in Dave Karger's rundown of the category:

"Can anyone stay awake through Apparition’s The Young Victoria for long enough to notice Rupert Friend’s film-stealing effort?"

The answer is yes, but will it be enough?

[OscarGuy]

I'm really beginnig to think this will be Bening's year. I think there will be enough people who hear about the Swank/Bening competitions that even a decent performance could win her the Oscar.

Of course, it's too early to tell, Bening could flop horribly and result in someone else winning (Saoirse Ronan would be an interesting win), but we won't know more until December.

[flipp525]

I like her but three Oscars? I don't think so.

The write-up are fun enough reads, but they need someone to proof read their copy before they publish. Check out their summation of Nine in which they refer to Showgirls instead of Dreamgirls as the Oscar front-runner for much of 2006.

Did you mean: "proofread"?

Look, Hilary Swank can be great. Her performances in Boys Don't Cry and Million Dollar Baby were fantastic and deservedly won her Oscars. In hindsight, I'd prefer that Kate Winslet had won for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, if only to prevent The Reader debacle that occurred last year (what a dreary performance), but that's really tangential to this discussion.

I agree that Amelia Earhart is a role that would seemingly fit Swank like a glove. And given the whispered-about dearth of Best Actress contenders this year (still not sold on that, by the way), she's also a very safe bet for a possible nomination. However, let's be honest, three Oscars is something I think even she'd be embarrassed about. Unless her performance in Amelia jaw-droppingly astounding, it's simply unwarranted.



Edited By flipp525 on 1254409796

[Big Magilla]

I like her but three Oscars? I don't think so.

The write-up are fun enough reads, but they need someone to proof read their copy before they publish. Check out their summation of Nine in which they refer to Showgirls instead of Dreamgirls as the Oscar front-runner for much of 2006.

[rolotomasi99]

I never heard of the "Oscar-meter" before, but I read the whole article and can't say I found out anything new or enlightening.

Quote: "Could Hilary Swank win a third Oscar (for Amelia)? Sure!"

Yeah, the predicting part is pretty rote, but the irreverent tone is what I love about the AV Club. The sentences before the one you quote perfectly capture their snarky sense of film criticism--

"Then there's Swank, who...How to put this delicately? When Swank plays feminine women, she can be pretty good. When she plays sexually confused or simply tomboyish roles, she's great."

I know many folks here pretty much loathe Swank, but you have to admit her appearance, manner, and past performances make her perfectly suited for the role of Amelia Earhart.



Edited By rolotomasi99 on 1254405031

[The Original BJ]

I meant Juno, not Smart People.

[Jim20]

Ellen Page was the best part of Smart People, thus she made my should-a-beens list for Best Supporting Actress.