« BYOB - Wednesday | Main | More Raddon Stuff »
December 10, 2008
What It Means
Why is there so much variation in the critics groups?
Well, there are often all kinds of competitive politics involved. And, as we are sure to see tomorrow, with the Golden Globes nods, a lot of managing of votes in some groups.
But my basic instinct this season is that LAFCA and NYFCC and others just don’t have a long list of movies that really raised passions – in a positive way - to choose from. It’s not that these movies aren’t good or even great. But more than I ever remember, there is a nearly balanced group on either side of virtually every movie, loving, hating, and mostly, being ambivalent.
I love that Wall-E is embraced as the best film of the year… but really? Wall-E and The Dark Knight? From a critics group? Likewise, you can be sure that there were some members in NY and plenty of people in LA who would rather cut their wrists than see Milk honored as Best Picture. (I am a fan of the film.)
I do think that if Slumdog Millionaire was seen as an underdog on the level of Happy-Go Lucky that we would have seen a much bigger push for it in one or both of the groups. But it is not. And so, as an overdog, all the urges to take it down a peg get indulged.
But it’s really the entire list. Are they overdogs or underdogs? Ask me today… then ask tomorrow. Who knows what answer you will get each day?
Posted by dpoland at December 10, 2008 01:36 PM
Comments
Not to harp on the Oscar predictors again buuuuut...do you think the variation is in direct relation to the predictor sites all stepping in line and jumping on the "expected" nominations?
I mean, if as a critic you really truly love a smaller film and the predictor sites are all up on Eastwood/Button/Slumdog, etc., then you should use your voice to draw attention to a film that's not getting notice. If these Oscar prediction sites would go away then critics could hash it out amongst themselves like they used to and the real cream would rise to the top. Instead, we get these token oddball votes from all over the U.S.
Posted by: don lewis (was PetalumaFilms) ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 10, 2008 08:41 PM
Out here in the real world nobody knows about Slumdog. I just went to a free screening and have been recommending it to everyone, and they have no idea what I am talking about.
Posted by: Mahtigwess at December 11, 2008 07:28 AM
Does the Golden Globe snub pretty much end all the loose talk about a possible Best Picture nomination for The Dark Knight? Or not?
Posted by: Joe Leydon at December 11, 2008 07:32 AM
Not.
Posted by: David Poland at December 11, 2008 10:52 AM
Joe's Question: NOT
How about Eastwood / Gran Tarino?
But Maht, I disagree completely, the Slumdog curiousity is through the roof from the people I speak with. I know many who are dying to see it.
Posted by: Hopscotch at December 11, 2008 10:57 AM
Post a comment
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.)