« Screen It 2k+9 | Main | Not Sure Why, But... »
November 19, 2009
20 Weeks To Oscar - 17 Weeks To Go
The Drip, Drip, Drip
The main variation in the 2009/10 Oscar season that keeps getting discussed is the change to 10 nominees.
And it's not insignificant.
But as the Chinese curse goes, "May you live in interesting times."
As the Academy made this change, the economy of the film business started to bottom out. (Sadly, I don't think we've quite reached bottom yet, though many businesses have started 12-step.)
The Dependents went from being seven strong (as MGM is still officially a major, according to its membership in MPAA) to three divisions really in business (as opposed to being a placeholder for loose end projects and Home Entertainment libraries).
The True Indies continue to be in the game, though there is a real question of what Lionsgate and The Weinstein Company will look like when next year's season rolls around and Summit hasn't yet shown itself to be more than the sum of its vampires. Overture, Magnolia, Freestyle, Roadside Attractions, IFC, Apparition, and Oscilliscope (in order of 2009 domestic box office grosses) all continue to show interest in the season and an inability to get a hold of the voting imaginations of the Academy ... at least in the top categories.
Media noise - amplified by a combination of ad budgets being slashed thus making publicity more important again, a wave of new online businesses trying to sell themselves and their ads, and old media flailing about, trying to get attention, also in fear of their own demise - is more relentless and less thoughtful than ever.
Posted by dpoland at November 19, 2009 04:05 PM
Comments
Is the Oscar buzz for the various ladies of NINE based on anything other than the assumption that their roles must be pretty strong to have attracted such major names? I presume Cotillard touted for Best Actress because her role is the largest?
Posted by: yancyskancy ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 19, 2009 06:24 PM
Re the above, I've seen only the Fellini original, and all the female roles there struck me as supporting. I haven't seen the musical, or, of course, Marshall's film.
Posted by: yancyskancy at November 19, 2009 06:33 PM
Even in the realm of abject speculation, having "Sherlock Holmes" on the chaser list for the Best Picture race is baffling to me. I generally enjoy Guy Ritchie's stuff, but even his best movies are equal parts cool and inept. Every other minute of "Snatch" is out to drag itself down. Sometimes even the same minute is tearing into itself like a drunken, self-mutilating prodigy.
Posted by: Hallick at November 19, 2009 07:41 PM
Sometimes the Academy like the December blockbuster crowd-pleasers.
(That's all the explanation I've got, because judging by the trailer the movie looks awful.)
Posted by: Eric at November 19, 2009 07:46 PM
Yancy, Pene's buzz is based on that fact that's Penelope Cruz playing a sexy woman in a role that has won Tonys. Cotillard is lead because she indeed has a larger role (most songs out of all the women I believe) and I guess they figured "why not?"
I find it strange how anyone can out an animated film at #1. Are you saying it would be a certainty nominated if there were only five slots? Hardly.
Christopher Plummer is going Supporting, btw. Or do you think it's going to be a Whale Rider type of situation there?
Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0 at November 20, 2009 02:56 AM
David, I thought this was a great piece. Well done, sir.
Posted by: The InSneider at November 20, 2009 03:51 AM
Based on the changes in Nine's rankings this week, it seems that David has seen it, wasn't particularly thrilled with it or Day-Lewis, but still thinks Cotillard and Cruz are well-positioned in their respective categories.
And yeah, the Sherlock Holmes thing is a head-scratcher. I take it as an item of faith that Guy Ritchie will retire from filmmaking without ever having directed a Best Picture nominee.
Posted by: Rob at November 20, 2009 09:52 AM
I don't think the Sherlock Holmes thing is a head-scratcher at all. The script, like the one for Inglourious Basterds, was widely available online, and it's a terrific period adventure that is remarakably faithful to Conan Doyle. The trailer is misleading. Guy Ritchie may have screwed up the script, but Warners are said to be over the moon with the picture, so perhaps he hasn't. Fingers crossed.
Posted by: Hunter Tremayne at November 20, 2009 10:34 AM
With David's description of Nine as "B-Italian" I'd say he wasn't impressed, and that is pretty clever DP.
Posted by: Hopscotch at November 20, 2009 11:23 AM