The lost boys that crowd Oscars 2015 have no real qualities to be leaders or heroes. They are fumbling around trying to avoid failure at all costs. That failure claps through the canyon like a falcon’s cry — who are we now? It’s an important question to ask. The country is more divided than it’s ever been. Hollywood feels the pull of international box office threatening to transfigure domestic product. Liberals put their faith in Obama only to then see their idealism thwarted. Terrorism, mass murder, random and frequent gun violence. Giant masses of trash floating around in our oceans, large percentage of wildlife destroyed in the past 40 years. How could anyone feel hopeful about the future? Is that why our cinematic heroes must either dwell in a past where hope did spring eternal or in the fantasy realm where our imaginations can take over and real life isn’t real at all but an irrelevant point in the workings of the plot? All the while a mishmash of social justice and political correctness working its way through the way we talk, the way we make movies, the way stars are built up then torn down. We are our political beliefs, our well chosen words, our Apple products, our environmental footprint. We’re powerless.
We’re not ready to give up on our ubiquitous male protagonists, however. Because they can’t be heroes, they flail around not being heroes — preserved in the 1970s model of Five Easy Pieces where there is nowhere left to go except inward. The present-day hero is a lost boy, a diminished manchild, incapable of being a leader in what feels like a world gone wrong.
The film of 2014 that lies outside the insular world of critics and pundits, outside the fanboy culture of comic book and superhero movies is the one audiences have been flocking to, talking about, reading about, wondering about, arguing about, breaking up over – and that’s David Fincher’s box office phenomenon, Gone Girl. That pundits aren’t even talking about this film as potential Best Picture winner, or even nominee, shows that we’ve failed in our industry. To second-guess Oscar voters, thinking they won’t nominate a film like that is absurd. And yet, that’s because we live in that world. We have a list of what Oscar voters will like. We have numeric measurements of such – and there are those pesky Academy screenings where a few dismissed the film outright, which does nothing more than prove that they’re the ones who have lost touch with what audiences want to see from a major studio that is aimed at adults. Remember that kind of movie?
What a thrill to watch Gone Girl’s opening scenes – flash cards depicting a decaying world. Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross set the mood, Jeff Cronenweth’s camera puts the chilly world on display where something is just not quite right. Finches’ gift as a director is to deliver dual worlds. There is one thing on the surface. There is a whole other thing underneath. His expert collaborative team sends the message that you are in capable hands of a master at the top of his game. The criticisms ranged from men saying the film wasn’t Zodiac-y enough to women uncomfortable with the negative aspects of the female anti-hero. It’s a mistake to trap a filmmaker in what you define as his or her style. Fincher’s range as a director is impressive. Zodiac is a masterpiece, no question, but so is Gone Girl. It may take a woman to know it.
Watch from the first frame to the last a director at the top of his game, with such an assured hand – no one makes films that deliberately anymore, where every note of music, every article of clothing, every reflection in every piece of glass, even the seemingly random sounds have all been specific choices. It is rare to have any film come close to that level of exactness. Flynn’s and Fincher’s Amy Dunne emerges like a monster of that forgotten sex and lays it to waste with the “cool girl” monologue, which is more about what men want from women — what almost every film in the Oscar race has helped perpetuate — the myth that women are only here for men. Amy Dunne had a better idea.
The other definitive modern film about a lost boy is Bennett Miller’s Foxcatcher, which works as both a somewhat fictional account of the DuPont murder, as well as an insightful commentary on how the 1% has screwed the middle-class. In this case, Channing Tatum plays a hopeful protagonist just trying to work hard and succeed within the confines of the American dream. He is usurped and manipulated by the tragic DuPont, who is so cut off from everyday life he has created his own ecosystem. Foxcatcher, like Gone Girl, depicts a haunting of a kind of American life — what once was and never can be again. They speak the truth, however, even if both dwell in the realm of black comedy.
The auteur in the Oscar race still surges. At the top of that list has to be Richard Linklater and Boyhood. Boyhood represents the film that no one hates, and the one that stands apart from all others because it took 12 years to make. The only negative anyone can come up with, and it’s blurted out from time to time by lazy thinkers, is that it’s “only a gimmick.” It isn’t a big moneymaker but it was made on the cheap with a lot of heart and dedication to the craft of filmmaking. It represents a smaller but thriving Hollywood independent film industry, but more than that, it represents the auteur as the singular force that drives cinema. Written by. Directed by. One person’s thorough artistic expression. Boyhood’s success is not simply that it was made by Richard Linklater and is about the passage and the meaning of life, but that it connects on some universal level to those who have grown up, had children, and felt first hand the swiftness of time. Boyhood beautifully illustrates that one of the best special effects can simply be to show how fast time slips away from us and why the memory of a sunset view with a pretty girl at the beginning college might be delicious enough to carry us on through the ravages of time and aging.
The auteur is also alive and well with Dan Gilroy’s sleeper hit Nightcrawler and Damien Chazelle’s Whiplash. They are both tightly written and directed and neither loses site of its film’s main point. If you went to film school you would recognize these as the kinds of films students are taught to make. They are precise, exacting and never deviate from their goal. They are also satisfying and entertaining films overall. Though it must be noted that even in the world of the modern auteur women are sidelined as supporting characters, though way more colorfully handled in Nightcrawler than in Whiplash. This won’t matter to Oscar voters, as it hasn’t mattered to critics. You can add J.C. Chandor to the auteur list, although his film isn’t as structured as the other two films and will have a harder time being placed neatly into the Oscar race.
The flipside of the precise auteurs would be the freewheelers like Paul Thomas Anderson who quietly made one of the best films of the year with Inherent Vice. No one will know what to make of it but it is one of the most fascinating, brilliantly rendered cinematic experiences of the year. It’s just that there’s no box to put it in for the Oscar race and, like Gone Girl, perhaps it’s better for it.
Even Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar feels like freewheeling auteurism, just with $165 million to spend. Though Nolan, like Alfonso Cuaron last year, is playing with state-of-the-art visual effects, he has earned the freedom to make exactly the movie he wanted to make. His fans have stuck with him through this, helped to understand his movie by wanting to understand him. To love an auteur’s work is to love the auteur. Thus, Interstellar isn’t just the one movie – it is all of Nolan’s work taken into consideration leading to this. The most divisive of his films and certainly the one the critics have been most harsh with, almost everyone is giving him a major pass for ambition and effort; how many big budget films in Hollywood would have dared to be as convoluted and daring as this? Is it a success? Who’s to say. It will be measured by the money it makes, by the awards it wins but none of those can compete against the fans who got exactly what they wanted.
But convoluted storylines are harder to place than exacting ones, which helps Nightcrawler and Whiplash and hurts Inherent Vice and Interstellar. It could be argued that both protagonists in these films are lost boys who then must be found. They are boys haunted by memories of women. Interstellar represents the oddly old-fashioned view of love — no sex. While Inherent Vice is one of the few films in 2014’s race to have any sort of sexuality present. That is because Paul Thomas Anderson’s world view includes sex, thank god. It is absent almost every other drama this year.
Wes Anderson has invented his own genre and it is built entirely on auteurism. The Wes Anderson oeuvre has reached its apex with The Grand Budapest Hotel – a delightful, odd romp that could only have come from the mind of Anderson. But as with all auteurs, to love the work it’s important to first to love the auteur — and many do. Just not many Academy members so far. That is neither here nor there. Though this film dwells in the past where finding heroes was much easier.
Alejandro Inarritu’s Birdman is the critics darling of the year so far, and it’s no wonder. A perfect movie from start to finish, Michael Keaton’s Birdman is about a lost boy too. A fading actor whose only success that can be measured was his turn as a superhero. He really can’t move forward because he has nowhere to go except back to playing a superhero (he’d rather die) or reproducing a once in a lifetime stunt that goes viral on the internet. It’s a lose-lose. Probably too many film critics (save for dearly departed Roger Ebert) see film’s future as a lose-lose. No one wants to be stuck writing about superhero movies either. In Birdman they see their martyr for the cause, standing up for the roots of drama and organics of filmmaking. Only a few critics were insulted by the portrayal of the film critic. But that one bit in the film will have professionals in Hollywood cheering.
It is bravura filmmaking by an unrewarded director. The funny thing about Birman is that its so-called “gimmick” is the least memorable thing. Sure, the film seemingly shot in one take with the solo drumbeat score is kind of cool, but what you remember about Birdman is Michael Keaton’s face. His face and the dialogue so vividly rendered is equal to the camera work making for one of the most exciting films to watch this year. But Birdman is the antidote to what many industry professionals are lamenting about modern Hollywood. It is the one tiny protest against the wave of change, the dominance of superhero movies that no one can really stand except fanboys and ticket buyers. Many who work in Hollywood as actors or writers or directors did not get in the business to massage the inner 13 year-old of the American psyche, nor dwell in the realm of masked avengers. That has its own whole industry. Birdman is, therefore, a fist waving rallying cry, even if it seems futile.
But the Oscar race, as defined by pundits in 2014 is based on their recent history, which has rewarded films about heroes that took place in the past, a past we can all understand better. 12 Years a Slave, Argo, The Artist, The King’s Speech. 2009’s The Hurt Locker was the last film to win that took place in present day. That puts The Imitation Game immediately in the winner’s circle. The People’s Choice winner in Toronto, and the most liked on the festival circuit, the film is being rolled out by the Weinstein co. That means it’s most likely one of your top three contenders this year, along with Birdman and the frontrunner, Boyhood.
In keeping with them is The Theory of Everything, about the life of Stephen Hawking, a surefire Best Picture contender and possibly Best Actor winner. In the same genre — Biopics, old-fashioned and British — you have Mr. Turner. Though this film is about a reluctant hero — a mad genius, in fact — whose painting was inexplicably full of light and hope where his personal life and personality was anything but.
If you take Oscar punditry out of the equation and look at the race for Best Picture of 2014 you are looking at three movies: Boyhood, Birdman and Gone Girl. When you factor in Oscar pundits, however, the Oscar race is still down to Boyhood, The Imitation Game (which hasn’t opened yet) and Birdman. Tonight, American Sniper and Selma will screen. They will either alter the dynamic or they won’t. Unbroken is still being held up by many as a potential frontrunner though it hasn’t yet been seen. A Most Violent Year and The Gambler are films that could have benefited from being seen earlier in the race as it takes time for opinions to be shaped. Out of the gate they aren’t going to get the kinds of reviews they need but sometimes films need the public to help shape their narrative. Though the Oscar race is decided behind closed doors long before the public even sees the films, sometimes audiences can make all the difference, as they maybe have with Gone Girl.
We are headed for darker days — the darker they get, the more Academy members seem to dig their heels in and reach for the films that signify the hero, the guy who can still overcome obstacles and succeed, the guy who makes life seem almost worth it.
Finding directors to make those kinds of movies, however, is getting harder. Most of the best of them are more fascinated by what confounds us and torments us, what makes our present day so hard for heroes to bloom and why those heroes can’t move forward but are thwarted, stuck back in some different time, preserved as boys who can’t ever become men.
Predictions
Best Picture
1. Boyhood
2. Birdman
3. The Imitation Game
4. Gone Girl
5. Whiplash
6. The Theory of Everything
7. Mr. Turner
8. Foxcatcher
9. The Grand Budapest Hotel
10. Interstellar
Haven’t been seen:
Selma
American Sniper
Into the Woods
Unbroken
Dark Horses:
A Most Violent Year
The Gambler
Fury
Best Actor
1. Michael Keaton, Birdman
1. Eddie Redmayne, Theory of Everything
1. Benedict Cumberbatch, Imitation Game
4. Steve Carell, Foxcatcher
5. Timothy Spall, Mr. Turner
6. Jake Gyllenhaal, Nightcrawler
7. Mark Wahlberg, The Gambler
8. Oscar Isaac, A Most Violent Year
9. Matthew McConaughey, Interstellar
Special mention favorite who won’t be considered: Joaquin Phoenix, Inherent Vice
Unseen: Bradley Cooper, American Sniper, Jack O’Connell, Unbroken, David Oyelowo, Selma
BEST ACTRESS
1. Julianne Moore, Still Alice
2. Rosamund Pike, Gone Girl
3. Reese Witherspoon, Wild
4. Hilary Swank, The Homesman
5. Felicity Jones, Theory of Everything
6. Shailene Woodley, The Fault in Our Stars
7. Anne Dorval, Mommy
8. Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Belle
Unseen: Emily Blunt, Into the Woods
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
1. Patricia Arquette, Boyhood
2. Jessica Chastain, A Most Violent Year
3. Keira Knightley, The Imitation Game
4. Emma Stone, Birdman
5. Laura Dern, Wild
6. Carrie Coon, Gone Girl
7. Jessica Chastain, Interstellar
8. Kristen Stewart, Still Alice
9. Jessica Lange, The Gambler
Unseen: those from Into the Woods, Selma, American Sniper
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
1. JK Simmons, Whiplash
2. Ed Norton, Birdman
3. Mark Ruffalo, Foxcatcher
4. Ethan Hawke, Boyhood
5. Josh Brolin, Inherent Vice
6. Tyler Perry, Gone Girl
7. Tommy Lee Jones, The Homesman
8. John Cusack, Maps to the Stars
9. John Goodman, The Gambler
BEST DIRECTOR
1. Richard Linklater, Boyhood
2. Alejandro G. Inarritu, Birdman
3. David Fincher, Gone Girl
4. Damien Chazelle, Whiplash
5. Mike Leigh, Mr. Turner
6. Morton Tyldum, The Imitation Game
7. Bennet Miller, Foxcatcher
8. James Marsh, Theory of Everything
9. Dan Gilroy, Nightcrawler
10. Wes Anderson, Grand Budapest Hotel
Unseen: Angelina Jolie, Unbroken, Ava DuVernay, Selma, Clint Eastwood, American Sniper, Rob Marshall, Into the Woods
Special mention favorite who probably won’t be considered: Paul Thomas Anderson, Inherent Vice
![2025 Oscars: Can a Late-Breaker Still Win Best Picture? [POLL]](https://www.awardsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/gladiator-350x250.jpg)
As more and more reviews/reactions trickle in for Selma and American Sniper, I have to ask: How do we reconcile the sentiments of pundits who immediately after Foxcatcher, The Imitation Game, Birdman and The Theory of Everything screened exclaimed “Best Actor nomination is locked up” for Carell, Cumberbatch, Keaton and Redmayne?
Similar reactions are being posted by the same pundits for both Cooper and Oyelowo now. So if we were to have trusted the sentiment that 4 spots were already locked, how now do we fit in 2 more locked nominations when there are only 5 available slots? Which nomination suddenly became unlocked? And if one did, why should we have ever trusted the pundit in the first place?
When a pundit says “locked” I would like to assume that they don’t plan on ever changing that prediction up through nomination day. If they’re going to unlock them then I prefer they never use the term in the first place. If we’re going to argue, as Sasha does now, for pundits to only call the shots for films that they have seen then we need to be better about the boundaries of the language that they use when making their predictions. “Locked” seems like a phrase they shouldn’t be using until they’ve seen every performance/film in the competition.
But that’s just me, the nitpicker.
Reviews are out for American Sniper and it looks like Cooper will be nomed. I think this will knock Spall out. Also it seems a Best Pic nom is likely and maybe a Best Director.
Selma had a big evening last night and will probably make its way into BP, BD (taking Leigh’s spot in my predictions), Actor (taking Spall,Cumberbatch or Cooper’s spot in my predictions–can’t decide which), Costumes, Cinematography, Original Screenplay (possibly taking Interstellar’s spot, or A Most Violent Year’s) and Editing. American Sniper didn’t do itself any favors by premiering immediately after Selma to mostly the same crowd of journalists, but I think it’ll get better reviews by those people that see it independently.
Into the Woods is going to show up in Costumes, Production Design, Hair/Makeup, Supporting Actress, Sound Mixing and probably Song (is there an original that’s been added for the film?). It could also factor into Adapted Screenplay. With that many nominations, BP isn’t a longshot. And if it scores big with the HFPA then the Golden Globes could only help its Oscar campaign. Pundits ignoring its chances are taking a big risk.
Im also feeling good vibes this morning for Selma (6-7 noms, perhaps). And have we heard the Into the Woods song clips yet, people? Meryl and crew sound pretty fantastic. I wonder how Into the Woods could shake things up(espesh if it gets decent reviews and great box office).
I still think movies like The Imitation Game (with reviews less impressive, though still impressive, than the likes of Boyhood or Birdman) can still hit big with the Academy because … Hey … It (and The Theory of Everything) look like well-made, stirring films with great acting in it. They look like “movie movies”. They look “normal” yet “great” whereas The Boyhoods and Birdmans are “mercurial” “a bit different” but also “brilliant”.
“You can have all the cool ideas and ambition you like, but in terms of film craft I found it to be horrendously sloppy.”
Ruth, the craft of Interstellar is exactly what’s being praised about it. The cinematography, the art direction, the visual effects, the sound work, the editing, all of the technical achievements are nearly second to none as a whole. The script has issues and is probably the weakest thing in the entire movie. But the “film craft” is meticulous.
I was dubious about all the talk about Whiplash. I was dreading seeing a film about … jazz drumming???!!!! I saw it yesterday and I loved it. Hugely entertaining, beautifully sustained over its 109 minutes — it feels like an elastic band getting stretched tighter and tighter, to the point when you think it just has to snap. The plot is a little implausible, but the movie is supremely well done. JK Simmons is good, but it was Miles Teller who was dazzling for me in the film. I wonder if the love that this film is getting will propel him into that mysterious nomination in the Best Actor race, with Keaton, Redmayne, Cumberbatch, and Carrell. Teller has been amazing in every film I’ve seen him in — his big scene in Rabbit Hole was, for me, one of the most powerful scenes I have seen in a film in a long time. I’d love to see him nominated this year, and I honestly can’t imagine that any of the other contenders are BETTER than he is in Whiplash.
looks like Paramount got its contender last night. not a lost boy either.
Even though, I’d much rather see Timothy Spall, Jack O’Connell or any of the Brits win, I think Keaton has it in the bag. He’s got the perfect story: tour-de-force comeback performance from a staple Hollywood actor who’s long overdue.
Same goes for Julianne Moore, except her film is not a BP favorite, that could be her downfall.
Victor: Keaton looks strong, yes, especially since he’s mainly up against three Brits, and the homegrown talent will find a way to outmaneuver them (or rather they will outmaneuver each other), so I think the biggest threat will be a late-breaking performance, and the most ‘dangerous’ candidate in that sense is clearly David Oyelowo as MLK. If he delivers (and if the film is any good, and early word says it more than good…) he could be a force to be reckoned with. I don’t think ‘the established top five’ (the three Brits plus Carell and Keaton) will remain in place all the way up until nomination day, there is too much going on in the Oscar race for that to happen. So why not predict Oyelowo not just for a nomination, but a possible win?
I just can’t see Eddie Redmayne winning Best Actor. Yes, he has the nomination in the bag, and he might win some awards along the way, but not the Oscar. He just doesn’t have the frontrunner-ness one needs to have a chance of winning (and I say this considering the last surprise winner in this category was Adrien Brody). You could already predict nobody will top Keaton by now, but since nothing is for sure, I would put Cumberbatch as the alternative winner, not Eddie.
“Amy Dunne had a better idea.”
Yes, and what a great idea that was: turning into a caricature of a psychopath. That’s the future of womanhood. Right there.
I can’t see any way Nolan gets nominated for Best Director after Interstellar’s reception. Sure there are some great moments, but while the movie’s successes are so characteristically Nolanesque, so are its failings. Most of his annoying directorial and writing tics are there and accounted for, wrapped up in a somewhat woo woo sci-fi plot that makes the huge mistake of explaining way too much. 2001 demonstrated that if you are going to shoot for the cosmic, leave a little more mystery or else it just seems silly and dumb. If the Academy didn’t go for Dark Knight or, especially Inception (which held together a bit better than Interstellar and had the benefit of being the film that started to reveal Nolan’s problems as a filmmaker as opposed to the follow-up to that reveal) in Best Director, there’s no way they are going for Inception.
Two performances that are under the radar and won’t even get a sniff come Oscar time:
1. Gerard Depardieu Welcome to New York best actor
2. Najarra Townsend The Toy Soldiers best actress
“There is a great beauty in a film that is about more than what is onscreen: that is about what is NOT there. Hitchcock, Dreyer, Haneke, etc…”
I know what you’re trying to say here, but I can’t help but be snarky. What’s in the film is what’s in the film. What ever you want to project onto it later has more to do with you.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the “cool girl” section was pretty much the only interesting idea and redeeming thing about the book, but it’s left stranded and unexplored. AND as the book (and movie, almost moreso) turns Amy into a complete psychotic monster and NOT an insightful piece of social commentary, Flynn invalidates her own interesting premise.
Hi Sasha,
I haven’t read every single response in this thread, so not sure if someone else has mentioned this, but think that Miyavi should be cited as a possible “unseen contender”.
I’m actually tired of the “Gone Girl is trashy fun” and “not nuanced” barbs. The film is smarter than that, it’s about what isn’t on screen. It’s about the dots we connect later. And not about the plot – about how it is making people ask questions and have discourse about the world we live in today. There is a great beauty in a film that is about more than what is onscreen: that is about what is NOT there. Hitchcock, Dreyer, Haneke, etc…
Foxcatcher currently has a 92% on RT which is higher than Miller’s Capote (90%). And I would imagine Foxcatchers rating on RT and Metacritic will continue to increase (or perhaps decrease) throughout the week. Given the fact that Millers two previous films have been nominated for best picture I fail to see why some many people are dropping Foxcatcher off their lists. Or have it so low, just because it’s too gloomy? Amour wasn’t exactly the cheeriest film ever made yet look at the huge nominations it received. Granted Amour was a film about love and Foxcatcher is a film about murder. But still, if the academy is seriously going to snub Foxcatcher just because it’s to “dark” I’m going to be very upset.
It’s time to stop underestimating Gone Girl. Everyone will still be talking about GG in January. It’s going to have some big nomination presence. It reminds me of how heated the conversations were with No Country For Old Men. When a film is still being discussed over a month later it means something.
“and, on a completely different level, what determines what will have legs beyond that, which is seldom the same thing.”
Steve, exactly! As much as I like to speculate what will do well at the Oscars, I’m still more interested in which movies will go on to become the great ones.
Each year’s Oscars are a moment in time, but the films will last forever.
“had, say, Emma Thompson and Any Other Male been the leads, it would have easily gotten the nomination”
Well, considering Depp got a Best Actor nomination it’s pretty clear his performance was not the main reason for the Academy snubbing it for Best Picture.
“Flynn’s and Fincher’s Amy Dunne emerges like a monster of that forgotten sex and lays it to waste with the “cool girl” monologue, which is more about what men want from women — what almost every film in the Oscar race has helped perpetuate — the myth that women are only here for men.” <— Really well put, and I agree this is a very powerful aspect of the film. But I just don't think the plot allows this idea to be the central idea of the movie. Quite simply, I don't think the movie–by the time we've reached the end–is about the ridiculous standards of "what men want from women" or "the myth that women are only here for men." In many parts, these ideas come out powerfully. But the movie then turns into something else, something, frankly, less nuanced.
To me, it’s a sign of a very weak year that Gone Girl looks plausibly in the top five. I know Sasha is a Fincher advocate and is going to keep pressing this one, and good on her for celebrating the movie she loves. I really enjoyed the film and of course it’s deliciously slick and tight filmmaking, but to me (and not only me) it essentially turns closer to trash than to think-piece, and I find it gets worse and shallower the more I think about it. Further, I think its portrayal of “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” who stops at nothing to destroy lives is, to put it lightly, touchy and off-key in today’s cultural climate. I realize I’m a man saying this, and it’s a woman who wrote the script, and a woman who is advocating very passionately for the movie’s merits. But I am much more persuaded by woman critics who find that the plot turns towards increasingly simplistic, caricaturish, and disconcerting notes around gender, rather than finding that it turns towards interesting, provocative, and challenging questions. I tried to see it the latter way, but I could not. I think that will also provide a lot of hesitation among Academy viewers at large, even as it’s an enjoyable and very well-made movie. I liked the movie more than Manohla Dargis or Wesley Morris did, but what they have to say certainly resonates with me more than the advocacy pieces.
Your opening paragraphs, Sasha, are what sets AD apart from other blogs. Context. It’s the context in which movies are made and the context in which we view them, and you’re probably the only blogger that recognizes this, or at least, addresses it head-on. It is precisely what sets the stage for what is anointed during award season and, on a completely different level, what determines what will have legs beyond that, which is seldom the same thing.
Good stuff.
“NON-SPECIFIC SPOILERS AHEAD. There is murder, accidental death, starvation, blindness and for lack of a better word, suicide. And most of these involve major characters. END OF SPOILERS.”
Wow! I had no idea all that will be in the movie, is in the play. That does sound dark also. This year is just one of those years where these darker films could dominate the Oscars, or at least the number of nominations:
Dark:
American Sniper
Exodus: Gods and Kings
Foxcatcher
Fury
Gone Girl
Into the Woods
A Most Violent Year
Nightcrawler
Whiplash
Not Dark (or at least Not as Dark):
Big Eyes
Birdman
Boyhood
The Grand Budapest Hotel
The Imitation Game
Inherent Vice
Interstellar
Selma
The Theory of Everything
Unbroken
Wild
Keep in mind, I’m guessing which film goes into which category. How “dark” a film is of course lies in each viewer’s opinion.
Al, Into the Woods ain’t the ray of sunshine you may think it will be. While it has somewhat of an upbeat ending, you have to remember it comes after quite a bit of destruction and despair. Even with the potential studio-forced changes, there is too much tragedy for the film to be considered a ray of sunshine. NON-SPECIFIC SPOILERS AHEAD. There is murder, accidental death, starvation, blindness and for lack of a better word, suicide. And most of these involve major characters. END OF SPOILERS.
So, yes, the first half is all smile and giggles. Not the second half.
As for its Oscar chances, I do think a BP nomination is pretty much a foregone conclusion if the film gets at least a 75 or so on MC. I think it’s weighty enough and the direct involvement of Sondheim gives it a weightiness that many won’t ignore. Sure, Sweeney Todd didn’t get the nomination, but I think it would have had there been more than five nominees. Throw in the fact that there were substantial changes to Sweeney Todd and the bad casting and it’s not surprising it didn’t get the nomination (had, say, Emma Thompson and Any Other Male been the leads, it would have easily gotten the nomination).
But I don’t think Into the Woods will be the winner. I think the musical’s greatness is too low-key for most Academy Members to notice it. The lyrics are complex, the musical motifs are subtle and the themes are too below-the-surface to be completely understood in the first viewing. People will see it as a “what happens after the happily ever after.” rather than a complex fantasia on how we pass down morality from one generation to the next.
I mean check out one of the closing lyrics (which I;m not sure how they will incorporate into the film) Note: While “spell” here can be interpreted literally, it’s important to note that’s not the primary way it should be interpreted.
CAREFUL THE SPELL YOU CAST,
NOT JUST ON CHILDREN.
SOMETIMES THE SPELL MAY LAST
PAST WHAT YOU CAN SEE
AND TURN AGAINST YOU…
CAREFUL BEFORE YOU SAY
LISTEN TO ME.
I’d be happy with a nomination for best original screenplay for Nightcrawler.
Nice to see Watermelons. But Divergent was such a piece of crap. I don’t know why Kate Winslet was in it. She must have hit her head.
I’ll say it again — everyone is underestimating “Into the Woods.”
Well, I’ve only seen 25 movies this year. And they’re mostly not those. From what I’ve seen I’ll say what I consider nomination worthy for fun.
Best Picture
Interstellar
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
The Lego Movie
Gone Girl
[b]Best Director[/b]
Christoper Nolan, Interstellar
David Fincher, Gone Girl
Doug Liman, Edge of Tomorrow
Best Actor
Andy Serkis, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Chadwick Boseman, Get on Up
Tom Hardy, Locke
Jake Gyllenhaal, Nightcrawler
Ralph Fiennes, The Grand Budapest Hotel
Best Actress
Scarlett Johansson, Lucy
Anne Hathaway, Interstellar
Best Supporting Actor
Nelsan Ellis, Get on Up
Best Supporting Actress
Tilda Swinton, Snowpiercer
Carrie Coon, Gone Girl
Score
Interstellar
Best Song
“Everything is Awesome”, The Lego Movie
Costumes
Magic in the Moonlight
Interstellar in my opinion will not get a nomination for best director and it will probably miss a best picture nod too. I always hear people speculating about the age factor within the Academy: Interstellar script is a mess, in my opinion, but in the best case scenario it will come across to a number of Academy members as convoluted. Films with messy or difficult to follow storylines never win BP, never.
I am troubled by these lists’ absence of Kate Winslet, cinematic icon & Oscar winner. The Academy overlooked Labor Day (Kate Winslet, Josh Brolin) but will not repeat this buffoonery by snubbing Kate “the GREAT” for her small yet vital role as Jeanine in Divergent (Shailene Woodley, Kate Winslet).
-Watermelons
I really hope the distributors of Grand Budapest make a hard push the next few months because that movie stands out to me as one of the top few best of the year. Just a few weeks ago not many thought it had a chance but given some positive but not overwhelmingly great reviews of Theory of Everything and Imitation Game and Interstellar, a movie like GBH could make some noise…and should.
blah blah blah, Gone Girl, blah blah blah…
I saw Boyhood again at a screening this weekend. It remains an unquestionably great movie. A masterpiece, really. And after being initially being disappointed in Arquette’s performance the first time I saw it (probably in large part due to the hype I’d heard), I came away impressed this time. The nature of expectations! So many times in the movie she surprises you with her reactions to certain things – different than you expect, then in hindsight superbly honest and right. Honestly I think it’s a pretty weak Oscar field this year. We all keep expecting something to naturally come along and dethrone Boyhood (or at least threaten it, a la Hurt Locker and Avatar), but it hasn’t happened. Unbroken has a chance, I suppose, if it has unanimously strong reviews (though that’s something I don’t see happening from a first-time director). Foxcatcher is probably a little too dark to have a chance. I’ll report back on that one this weekend.
I continue to be surprised by some of the negative or mixed reactions to Interstellar. But that’s ok. You can’t account for taste! The science is above reproach, and I found it extremely moving. However, I’ll admit I am the father of a young daughter and have certain sentimental vulnerabilities.
Inherent Vice – a much anticipated film from my favorite director. I saw it on Friday. It is very good. Maybe even great. But prepare yourselves: this will undoubtedly be viewed as a “lesser work” in the PTA canon, at least for a while. The masses will ignore it, and the critical establishment will probably mostly be confused. It does not wear its themes and its soul on its sleeve like There Will Be Blood did, or The Master, or really any other Oscar-y movie. So lower your expectations in the awards arena. I could see Josh Brolin getting some love in supporting actor categories – MAYBE an adapted screenplay nomination depending on how competitive that category is this year – but that’s it. None of this is to say the movie is not interested in larger themes and ideas – it is. It’s got very interesting things to say about America for one. But it’s all handled very subtly. For the first 30 minutes or so of the movie I thought I didn’t like it, an astonishing feeling for a PTA movie for me. It felt a little flat, episodic, and (shock of all shocks) uninspired. But a funny thing happened. As the movie progressed, I began to really care about the characters, and I began to see though-lines of emotion and thought that weren’t obvious at first. It washes over you as a cumulative experience – much in the great way Boyhood does – and you’re left with a funny, kind-of sweet feeling at the end. What a wild, strange, funny, surprising ride.
I read the novel this weekend after seeing the movie, and I have a better feeling now for why I think PTA fell (a little) short at least compared to all his previous home runs. It’s too faithful an adaptation. With the exception of some excised scenes, streamlined plot points, and an altered ending – he’s way too reverential of Pynchon. With almost ANYBODY else in the world trying to adapt Pynchon I would say heed the words on the page and don’t muddle. But this is Paul Thomas Anderson, a man whose voice and storytelling ability rival Pynchon’s. I wish he had set himself free to adapt the book however he saw fit; we might have gotten a funnier, deeper, and ultimately more affecting film. Hell, he took the first 30 pages of Upton Sinclair’s (no slouch) Oil! and discarded the rest, and we got a modern masterpiece out of it. This was the first PTA movie that didn’t startle me in some way. But I hope to re-visit it very, very soon, because being a lesser movie in the PTA canon is really not much of a knock.
Benutty, you’re right about the “passion vote” helping something get a nomination. But that doesn’t help a nominee actually win. Passion helps for a nomination, consensus helps for a win.
That’s why I think Interstellar will most likely get a BP nomination in an expanded field. There will probably be enough Interstellar passion voters for it to make the list. But I don’t think it can get the consensus necessary for a win. For me the bigger question is if there will be enough passion voters to get Nolan a director nomination. I’m not so sure. Everyone was convinced back in 2010 that Nolan would get nominated for Inception based on “passion” and we remember how that turned out. And with Interstellar’s reception actually falling a little short of Inception’s, it seems a little weird if Nolan gets a director nomination for Interstellar when he’s fallen short with his other movies.
But we’ll wait and see. I haven’t completely dismissed the idea of Nolan getting a director nomination, actually. I’m just, for now…skeptical.
I think that a pure and unique masterpiece like Boyhood will prevail at the Oscar this year in both Best Picture and Best Director.
It’s the only one among the major worthy contenders (so far) that is not divisive.
Also, after two months, I still think about the movie a lot, and I’ve heard other people who feels the same about it. It’s a film that sticks with you and that’s important when you are in front of a ballot to vote.
It’s such a brilliant piece of cinema and so evocative. It’s by an American director ( after four years of foreign winners it’s a plus) who is telling a very American yet universal story. Without gimmicks, never overwritten, Linklater avoids any razzle-dazzle or false note: Boyhood is a perfect mix of non fictional cinematic approach and fiction material, it’s masterful and unprecedented. I don’t see how any other film can beat all that.
“Don’t you mean Unforgiven AL”
OMG!! How did do that?! I’m so not paying enough attention. Hahaha!! WOW! 🙂
Yes, I meant Unforgiven. 🙂
Robert, that score thing is exactly why I don’t understand why people are dismissing Interstellar! What many have said, Sasha included, is that the way voting is currently handled all it takes to get nominated is a really strong group of voters who are passionate about your film–Interstellar has that in spades! The fact that it is so divisive actually works in its and Nolan’s favor because the supporters will be even more passionate about putting them at the top of their rankings.
But I’m sick of defending my opinion on this matter anymore. Nominations will come out and we will see who had the correct perspective on the race.
“Clint Eastwood (American Sniper) – Four (Unbroken, Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby, Letters from Iwo Jima)”
Don’t you mean Unforgiven AL 😉
“The top 3 contenders for Best Picture and Best Director right now are and will remain throughout the season: Boyhood, Birdman and Interstellar.”
Interstellar is pretty much out of the running for winning Best Picture and Best Director. Opinion on the movie is too divided for a win. I still think Interstellar stands a good chance for a BP nomination in an expanded field. Not so sure about Nolan even getting nominated in director, much less winning. He could get nominated, I suppose, but I doubt he wins.
I don’t think The Imitation Game’s MC score is that big of a deal. It’s presently at 68 with eleven reviews in. When more reviews come in, the score could go higher (although I kind of think if the scores do climb, they won’t be by all that much). Still, Inglourious Basterds had a 69 MC rating. The Reader had a 58, and Harvey still helped that get a BP/BD nomination in a field of only five. The Imitation Game is Harvey’s main pony this year and he’ll ride it for all its worth. The movie will most likely get nominated in actor, supporting actress, adapted screenplay, and picture, at the very least. If it becomes one of the Top 3 contenders, as Sasha suggests it might, it could also get a director nomination and an editing nod. Score too. I still have doubts that this movie can actually win the whole enchilada, but it’s probably going to get 6-7 nominations.
And just as a reminder–The Imitation Game’s score isn’t all that much lower than the score for Interstellar!
I don’t care how you feel about the quality of Interstellar or Nolan’s work on it, but what kind of pundit can say in the same breath that it’ll contend in and possibly win 5+ below-the-line fields and not contend in BP and BD? The last 5 effects-heavy films of their year (Avatar, Inception, Hugo, Life of Pi and Gravity) all made waves in the tech fields and were major threats in the top 2 fields. Inception of course is the outlier there and it’s problematic that it, too, is a Nolan film, but when you balance that with the fact that both Lee and Cuaron took the BD prize for their films you cannot deny that there is a LOT of momentum for the effects-driven films and their directors that Nolan is working with this year. I’m sorry, I just can’t trust the judgment of a pundit that ignores such clear trends.
Here is a breakdown of the number of times this year’s best picture contenders’ dierectors have been previously nominated for Best Picture:
Clint Eastwood (American Sniper) – Four (Unforgiven, Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby, Letters from Iwo Jima)
David Fincher (Gone Girl) – Two (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, The Social Network)
Bennett Miller (Foxcatcher) – Two (Capote, Moneyball)
Paul Thomas Anderson (Inherent Vice) – One (There Will Be Blood)
Alejandro González Iñárritu (Birdman) – One (Babel)
Rob Marshall (Into the Woods) – One (Chicago)
Christopher Nolan (Interstellar) – One (Inception)
Ridley Scott (Exodus: Gods and Kings) – One (Gladiator)
Jean-Marc Vallée (Wild) – One (Dallas Buyers Club)
Wes Anderson (The Grand Budapest Hotel) – Zero
David Ayer (Fury) – Zero
Tim Burton (Big Eyes) – Zero
J.C. Chandor (A Most Violent Year) – Zero
Damien Chazelle (Whiplash) – Zero
Ava DuVernay (Selma) – Zero
Angelina Jolie (Unbroken) – Zero
Richard Linklater (Boyhood) – Zero
James Marsh (The Theory of Everything) – Zero
Morten Tyldum (The Imitation Game) – Zero
As great as it is, INTERSTELLAR just didn’t catch on. I doubt it’ll be nominated for Picture, and Sasha nailed it by not even including Nolan.
oh… amazing still of Coltrane.
first rate writing in those opening paragraphs. thank you.
The top 3 contenders for Best Picture and Best Director right now are and will remain throughout the season: Boyhood, Birdman and Interstellar.
The only thing anyone is talking about when it comes to both The Imitation Game and The Theory of Everything is that there are two outstanding central male performances. No to few positive mentions of the below-the-lines or screenplays. Add to that their lower-than-the-others scores on aggregate sites? Please. The only people that think either of these films are contenders are festival-goers that saw them early and want desperately to be tastemakers (this is TIFF every year) and the pundits still embarrassed that they didn’t see The King’s Speech beating The Social Network.
American Sniper is the only wild card I can see sneaking into contention. Unbroken and Selma may grab nominations, but I don’t think either will contend for the wins.
Damn, Christopher Nolan is not even in your best director list. Sigh
Sasha, I think “Imitation Game” or “Theory of Everything”‘s chances have diminished, if their Metacritic scores are any indication (68 and 70 respectively). Come on. Imitation Game with a 68!? Critics really don’t seem to like these films….
Predictions
Boyhood
Birdman
Unbroken
Loved Nightcrawler, Gone Girl, and Birdman(saw it this past Saturday and can’t get it out of my mind. Want to see it again). Looking forward to Interstellar. Really want to Whiplash, Foxcatcher, A Most Violent Year, and of course Inherent Vice. Birdman might be the film I’ll championing this season. It’s bold, strange, funny, and moving. That boldness might hurt it in the long run regarding the race, but there’s plenty of aspects the Academy might enjoy.
I have a strong feeling this year’s best picture winner will come from one of the sight unseen films like the 4 I mentioned above. I haven’t seen Boyhood yet but it just doesn’t feel like a best picture winner to me. I picked Birdman partly because it sort of feel’s like this year’s the Artist. With the exception that Birdman is probably a great film (didn’t much care for the Artist). Also it has an all star cast. I’m gonna say it’s going to be Birdman vs one of the 4 sight unseen films.
“Would be cool if you refrained from writing about Gone Girl like it caused cancer for one day.”
Sasha thinks Gone Girl causes cancer that lasts for a day? Wow, I must have completely misread the article.
Finally you included into the woods:)
“Alejandro Inarritu’s Birdman is the critics darling of the year so far and it’s no wonder.” Sasha, does that mean that even though there were no negative reviews from critics for Boyhood, Birdman is the one they’re more passionate about?
—
“If you take Oscar punditry out of the equation and look at the race for Best Picture of 2014 you are looking at three movies: Boyhood, Birdman and Gone Girl.” Agreed. 🙂
—
“When you factor in Oscar pundits, however, the Oscar race is still down to Boyhood, The Imitation Game (which hasn’t opened yet) and Birdman.” Hmm… yes and no. (I can’t believe I’m saying this, because I don’t want it to be true), BUT, if, I repeat, IF Into the Woods is terrific, I think it’s just the kind of film that could take the prize. Rob Marshall back in 2002/03 best some classics in The Pianist and The Two Towers. It’s been long enough since he won that I think in a year full of dark films, Into the Woods could be that ray of sunshine that the voters will be attracted to.
BOYHOOD is going to fall down hard if the critics’ groups don’t award it come mid-December. Its early release (compared to the rest of the field, save for GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL) will be quite an obstacle to overcome.
Personally, BOYHOOD doesn’t even make my Top 10 for the year so far, so I’m not going to be optimistic and hopeful for its chances during the awards season.
Dang it!! I forgot Selma. Ugh.
I will re-state with Selma included:
As for Boyhood, I really need to see it again to have my true feelings for it. Until I do, I will leave it out of the discussion. What I’m most looking forward to that I haven’t seen:
1. Unbroken
2. Foxcatcher
3. American Sniper
4. Inherent Vice
5. Selma
6. Whiplash
I agree with most of Sasha’s predictions except for Mr. Turner. Three British biopics in the same year? Has that ever happened? I certainly think the academy will go for the more American Foxcatcher over the more British Mr. Turner. And in all honesty Foxcatcher just looks like a better movie. Of the films that have been seen I’d say that it’s going to be:
1. Birdman
2. Boyhood
3. The Imitation Game
4. Gone Girl
5. The Theory of Everything
6. Foxcatcher
7. Whiplash
And then we have the films not yet seen. Ranked in order of their nomination likelihood I have:
1. Unbroken
2. Selma
3. American Sniper
4. Into the woods
We will find out a lot more tonight once Selma and American Sniper get screened.
I think it is by far Nolan’s worst film, I actually like the rest of his films to varying degrees.
For the time being, I’m going to stop listing my predictions. I learned my lesson from the last State of the Race post.
I do want to add thought that I “finally” saw Interstellar on Sunday evening, and I thought it was the best movie-going experience I’ve had since first seeing The Wolf of Wall Street last year. I tried reading all the criticisms people have had here and else where about Interstellar, and I just couldn’t do it. I didn’t want to ruin my feelings on the film. My current opinion is that for the rest of the movies to see, it will be very hard to beat Interstellar. I have the most hopes left for Foxcatcher, Inherent Vice, American Sniper, and the most for Unbroken. I think that no matter what critics and everyone else thinks of Interstellar, I think it should be nominated for Best Picture, because its one of the most important films released in 2014, and people will be talking about it for years to come.
For the record, I don’t care about the science of it, and whether it makes any sense. I’m not sure the science of 2001 makes any sense either, but 2001 is one of THE greatest cinematic experiences in history.
My current “Best Picture” 5:
Fury
Gone Girl
Guardians of the Galaxy
Interstellar
Nightcrawler
As for Boyhood, I really need to see it again to have my true feelings for it. Until I do, I will leave it out of the discussion. What I’m most looking forward to that I haven’t seen:
1. Unbroken
2. Foxcatcher
3. American Sniper
4. Inherent Vice
5. Whiplash
Interstellar was a bit of a trainwreck for me, it’s one of the worst 2014 films I have seen to date. You can have all the cool ideas and ambition you like, but in terms of film craft I found it to be horrendously sloppy. I cringed several times and even contemplated walking out, the screenplay is so disagreeable.
Sasha, I’m finding your choices of films to really get behind this year to be interesting, mostly because each paragraph you write, in a silo, makes it seem like you have a different favorite. Is it Boyhood? Gone Girl? Birdman? It seemed for so long like it was Boyhood, but I just don’t know anymore. It reminds me of Wolf of Wall Street vs. 12 Years a Slave last year.
With that said, I think it might be time, given your love of Boyhood, to start taking your own advice and not referring to it as the frontrunner. We all know that is only going to hurt its chances.
I would add Wild and Still Alice in the Dark Horses category.
For real male heroes: Go Unbroken! Also, I’m still holding out hopes for Big Eyes and Exodus, not writing them out just yet…
I just saw Interstellar yesterday, and this year is shaping up to be quite diverse. Of the predicted contenders I’ve Seen Gone Girl, Boyhood, and BIrdman as well, and I personally love when you have old school story telling, noir, and effects-driven dramas in the mix. I’m most anxious to catch Foxcatcher and Selma – two movies I hope don’t get overlooked.
Not to knock Imitation Game or Theory of Everything, but I’m really hoping the film to take Best Picture isn’t just another white dude struggling movie… (well Birdman would be the exception – that can win).