The Hot Blog

"Well, it already seems that there is some strong pushback against Australia, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Doubt, and Revolutionary Road..."

Occam's Razor thought: Maybe it's the content of the movie that prompts people to dismiss its Oscar chances, rather than some insiders' backlash to other insiders' prognostication?

Haven't seen any of the above, just throwing it out there as a hypothetical.

But maybe the studios invite this on themselves by positioning some movies as awards contenders even before they've finished principal photography. That such behavior is taken seriously at all is just kind of proof of how empty the Oscar game is.

(I tell myself every year that I don't care about the Oscars and still they get under my skin.)

P.S. Just had my first encounter with this TypePad monster, and it really is a nightmare.

I don't disagree in principle, Eric. I think that there is too much made about prognostication.

However, there is a very real effect of raising expectations that make it nearly impossible for a film to reach them. Conversely, the thrill of discovery with an underdog is a massive advantage.

This is one of the problems with the agonizingly-protracted year-long march to the Oscars. 'Frontrunner' status for a lot of those movies listed up top were based on, what exactly? Pedigree of material and some talent, and WAYYYYY too much hype. Like a speculation bubble, until it finally pops.

And of course, that gives people something else to write about, in a neverending cycle of further hype.

Also, I'm kind of skeptical that all of those titles were ever _really_ frontrunners.

I like to add MUNICH to that list. Granted it did get a Best Picture, Director and other key nominations so no it doesn't count. But that was a movie everyone was ready to chomp at upon its release. I'm not going to feel sorry for a billionaire, but I always felt there were many ready with guns to take down a "serious" Spielberg movie and just analyzed it as a "how it will play with the Academy" then really analyzing the film itself. And I don't think the movie is a misunderstood masterpiece, but it's much better than people gave it credti for.

Big Fish should be up there too.

I've seen Doubt. It's a GOOD movie, but yes it doesn't really satisfy in that WOW, Sock'em! "I left the theater glowing" type way. To it's credit I saw it a week ago and am still chewing over it in my mind.

I think Frost / Nixon is the front-runner honestly. Ron Howard is a very, very well-liked and respected guy in this town. And as horrible as some of his movies are, people love showering him with praise.

David: Oh yes, I agree that the expectations game is a problem. It seems that the Oscar Hype Machine is an arms race-- it could only be stopped when all the studios agree to disengage in at the same time. But if even one were to cheat, the others are at a severe disadvantage, so there's no way for any one to trust the others.

(Sidenote: it's very depressing that the surefire way for a studio to win the Oscar is not to simply make the best picture.)

Jeff: Spot on.

I decided immediately after I clicked Post that my sidenote is a very stupid thing to say, because quality is of course utterly subjective. But the underlying point remains: quality is not the sole determinant in the Oscar race, which is what makes it so absolutely galling.

The whole thing with the Oscars is a racket. Hollywood piles on with trailers/ads/posters that include "Academy Award Winner" and "Academy Award Nominee". Even summertime fare like "Mamma Mia!" is tarnished by such crap.

Remove those phrases from all promotional material, then the movies involved would do substantially better -- even in a recession.

Why would you think so? That sounds wrong and a little crazy to me.

Dave:

I'm not sure I agree that Cider House Rules was a pre-ordained favorite that limped into Oscar season. The film only received 2 Golden Globe nominations and entered the Oscar race as the smallest profile film of the bunch. Its inclusion in the final 5 struck most people as a shock (I think Being John Malkovich was widely considered the 5th nominee that year). And whether it was spin or reality, the perception was that only CHR presented the threat of an upset to prohibitive favorite American Beauty.

Now Green Mile on the other hand spent the better part of a year building its legend as THE FILM to beat and was lucky to get the 4 nominations it did receive...

I agree with the above, TCHR was one of those Weinstein blitzes from the era when they still knew how to market their releases and squeeze every drop of awards-publicity out of them, whether the movie was any good or not (that is, 1998-2002)

If you go back and read his hot buttons or post on this blog, Jeff. They were frontrunners for DAVID! Once again... you sir... are left out in the cold. THE COLD I FIGURATIVELY SAY!

Typekey erased my response, but it's too inconsequential to write it again except to say that IOI, I think you missed my point.

No Jeff; you missed my point. Again... no fun... no fun... no fun from you :D!

IOI, I'm very selective about who I have fun with (also, there are many times when you just plain don't get my jokes).

Before I saw it, I assumed voters would go for/nominate Eastwood's performance in "GT" at least. Now, I wonder...

Have we determined for 100% sure that IO and Lex are not the same person? Or at least, step-brothers?

Martin: I find countless actresses beautiful. Outside of stating that I agree with Lex about Kristen Stewart. I have never brought it up. If you think we are the same person. You really need to read Lex and I's posts, and note the differences. Seriously; I would never post "MEN SHOULD BE KINGS" on any forum or blog. Why? I like James Brown. He has a song with a title that is better suited for that theme. It's a man's world works better than anything Lex has ever posted in his "WE ARE KINGS" posts.

Jeff: I would imagine neither you or I get one another's jokes. Huh. We seem to have a kiwinky-dink on our hands. How about that?

Thus, the folly of anointing movies with greatness, sight unseen. In this arena, I have a pet peeve for the ones adapted from novels, since this "genre" almost NEVER pulls it off, and the prognosticators forget this fact time and time again. The average reception for a film like that is always what? Lukewarm at best? It never fails though. Instant prestige project, instant Oscar rumblings, instant disappointment.

'a kiwinky-dink'... is that a coincidence in new zealand?

hey, i just had to sign in 8 times to post that, which might be amusing if it weren't so bloody annoying

Chucky, Mamma Mia! is the big chink in your theory's armour about "Academy Award Winner"-baiting movies. $140mil in America plus another $425mil worldwide. Yeah, big curse on that movie.

Eric, any movie studio that goes about making a movie such as Revolutionary Road or Benjamin Button and sprouts crap like "we never thought about winning Oscars" are lying and why wouldn't they want to win Oscars? Without the Oscars we wouldn't have movies like them.

Having said that, the studio (was it Dreamworks?) behind Sweeney Todd were idiots for ever linking it to Oscar so early on.

i don't picture chucky with armour. i picture him sitting around in jersey with all the made dudes with their 'above ground swimming pools' in 'copland' (i have mental pictures of everybody)

oh, theory's armour...scratch that last

I picture Chucky in a Members Only jacket waiting for Wopner.

(A) Mamma Mia made $565 million? Fuck!

(B) I think it should be well-established by now that Chucky is a lunatic. The only question is, what kind: Asperger's or some more general derangement?

(C) Sweeney Todd was never going to be an Oscar contender. Solid, well-known material, but Tim Burton simply will never direct a film in an 'Oscar-y' manner - and he shouldn't, either, because that's not where his strengths are.

i have no fucking idea what that means but it made me laugh (judge wopner?)

Rain Man.

ah. i'm not much of a fan.

I think it's spelled "Wapner," but great line nonetheless.

Not to threadjack, but I just saw a "Benjamin Button" ad with the Arcade Fire's "My Body is a Cage" as musical accompaniment. Not complaining - great song, perfect complement to the visuals. But I thought Arcade Fire were sticklers for not letting their songs be used in conjunction with other media in any way (apparently, Fox had no permission to use "No Cars Go" during an NFL bumper and Paul Haggis had wanted to use a song during "The Black Donnellys" but couldn't get permission). Anyone read about why they might have relented this time?

Fincher agreed to make a video for them?

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: