Oscar can be counted on for certain trends.
An affinity to docs that aren't commercially successful.
Honouring an actor for a lesser role to make up for a great role they overlooked.
Period films usually take awards for costume and art direction.
Oh, and the film that wins Best Picture almost always goes hand in hand with the award for Best Director.
But every once in a while, things take a turn and there's a split...which is what I believe we're headed towards this year. I'll get into the Best Picture side of the split tomorrow, but today take a look after the jump where I get into the nitty-gritty of this year's award for Best Director.
Right off the opening tip, David O. Russell is done. He does deserve a lot of credit for coming into THE FIGHTER as a hired gun and working a bit of alchemy to elevate it above its pedestrian trappings...but that's all the credit he'll be getting this year. This nomination should do a lot for a guy who was quickly getting a reputation in Hollywood of being wickedly difficult to work with. Maybe this will help him get his stalled auteur project (nailed) out of hock.
Any other year, I'd wager that The Coen Brothers could play spoiler, especially after tapping into the audience at large in a way they haven't done in a long time. But as anxious as Oscar is to award visionary directors, it actually takes a lot of doing to turn the trick twice. That's not to say that they won't nab another directing award eventually, but this won't be the year.
If there's a spoiler in the bunch, I believe it could be Darren Aronofsky. Should the two front runners in the category split the voting body, the support for BLACK SWAN could translate into an unexpected victory. Odd things have happened in the category before...think Polanski in 2002, or Soderbergh just two years before that. At the very least, the nomination affirms this vanguard director's place in Hollywood's elite and promises more support for his vision going forward.
Tom Hooper has to be the favorite at this point thanks to his DGA win and the wicked amount of support for THE KING'S SPEECH. (I wonder how many times I've typed the words "support for KING'S SPEECH" this week?) To be crystal clear, in the last 25 years the DGA Award winner has gone on to take the Oscar all but four times. If there's a statistical knock against Hooper, it's that he's a relative newcomer. KING'S SPEECH is only his third feature, and historically this tends to be a category that likes to reward a filmmaker for a body of work...or entire legacy if your name is Martin Scorsese.
The subtlety of Hooper's directing, combined with his new arrival on the scene could pave the way for a split. Whether or not Oscar "gets" THE SOCIAL NETWORK, it seems as though everybody is impressed by David Fincher's vision for the story. Like Aaron Sorkin's contribution to the film, Fincher's direction undeniably elevates the film to being so much more than "The Facebook Movie". The project seems to bring together all of the very best tricks Fincher has learned over his career, and patched them together in an unforgettable way. What it adds up to might be just enough to give Fincher the award in what would be a minor upset. Hooper might already have a DGA Award in hand, but now the voting will be up to more than just directors...and you gotta believe that there are quite a few of the younger Academy members wanting to give "The Director of SE7EN" the gold.
The Hatter's Pick... Fincher makes for a minor upset.
Whaddaya think folks? Leave comments with your own thoughts on possibilities and predictions of the Best Director race.
Friday, February 25, 2011
The Headmaster Ritual (Oscar Predictions - Best Director)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
Funny how Fincher and The Social Network has gone from a clear front-runner to a "minor upset" in such a short amount of time...
If Aronofsky blazed past both Fincher and Hooper, I would be too happy for words. But I seriously doubt that'll happen, so I'm hoping for Fincher to up that DGA stat to 5.
Unless everyone wants to do a write-in for Nolan.
Off topic, I see you just watched Empire of the Sun, which makes me jealous, as I've been trying to get it from Netflix for 2 weeks now but they keep skipping over it in my queue.
I hope you're right about Fincher, but I don't think you will be...
I just saw King's Speech last night (and 127 Hours as well - a 1-2 punch) and I liked it a good deal. Flawed in parts I thought - some clunky scenes, not many surprises and a jittery arc of the story - but pretty darn entertaining. I don't quite see any subtlety to Hooper's direction - it's fine and I rather like the framing aspects of the characters, but I don't see to many hints of little Hooper-esque tweaks that give a spark to scenes or add something to the actors performances.
I'll be fine with it winning the Oscar (which it obviously will) even though I think Social Network towers above them all, but would certainly prefer Fincher getting director. He won't though.
I'm actually rooting for the completely implausible Aronofsky upset here and Social Network taking best picture. I really don't care much for what Hooper did, and in all honesty, he should have won best director for the mini-series John Adams 2 years ago instead of here. I really hope the Academy steps up and remembers Best Director is not equal to Best Picture.
@ CBlaze... Guess that's why they don't hand 'em out in November, eh?
@ Rachel... Wouldn't that be amazing? Stranger things have happened, so keep the faith!
As for EMPIRE, I grabbed it off the right-hand shelf of awesome. If you lived closer I would totally loan it to ya.
@ Bob... I was going to make a joke about that thin mountain air getting to your head...but then I just realized you're usually wrong so it's just par for the course.
@ Univarn... I must disagree. While I am pulling for a split, I find them annoying. Filmmaking is so very much a director's medium, that giving one without the other seems absurd.
Looking back over the years that the splits have happened, you could easily make the case that the films that nabbed Best Director were better than the ones that took picture.
@Mad I agree with your second sentiment , but I do disagree with the first. There's no denying that without a solid director, the film isn't going anywhere. However, even great directors don't go far without a talented supporting cast. And I do believe there are cases where great writing and acting can cover up mediocre directing.
Let's go Fincher! All the way!
I will say, out of all the major categories, this is the one where the nominees most disappoint me. Of the five, I'd say only two or maybe three (Aronofsky, Fincher and maybe The Coens) deserve to be there. Scorsese, Nolan and either Boyle or Polanski would be my alternates.
@ Univarn... Give me one example of great acting and writing making up for spotty directing. (You can even turn that into a full post if you want)
@ Tom... On the one hand I agree with you, but on the other hand I'm happy to see some new blood in the category. Boyle, Scorsese, and Polanski all have Oscars - recent ones too! Let's give the new class a chance, no?
@Mad I take it by your 'request' that you don't believe there has ever been a case of writing and/or acting saving the quality of directing? Well, in the game of maintaining relevance, I might argue that this year's The King's Speech is a good example. Same could be said for The Fighter. Yet in both cases, it could be said the natural uplifting nature of the stories helps cast a shadow over the rest. And I'm not harping on either director. I think O. Russell is great, and have loved some of Hooper's previous work, but here they seemed almost entirely obsolete.
@ Univarn... I disagree. In each case while I believe the direction is subtle, I can definitely see it being a huge part of why those films work. Matter of fact, in each case the stories are so pedestrian, that were it not for effective direction, they'd be complete afterthoughts.
The direction in THE FIGHTER and THE KING'S SPEECH might not be sexy - but it's certainly solid.
What's your next suggestion?
@Mad I don't think we're going to get far on this one. Knowing when to be subtle can be a crucial component of directing, but I don't believe it makes the director more important than the sum of the rest of the parts. Nor do I believe it makes the director more crucial to his film's success than another director who may have had less to work with. My main stipulation in all this is that just because something wins Best Picture, doesn't mean it should win Best Director - nor vice versa.
Not that I'm happy about Hooper beating out Fincher, but I do have documented evidence showing that I can say "I told you so". Followed by you telling me I'm wrong...B-) Or had you forgot that? Don't worry, I'll be happy to remind you...
Post a Comment