The prediction updates are complete --did some minor and major reshuffling. At this point every year the awards gurus all think they know more than they do (I include myself in that mix of know-lessers): some films will rebound or gain unexpected momentum, some will stumble awkwardly. Box office results, media pets, good and bad campaigns, top ten lists --everything goes into the pot to make that Oscar season stew. For tonight at least I've lost my appetite. Must sleep. (Pssst. The Foreign Film pages will arrive this week. Sorry for the long wait)
*
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
13 comments:
I really can't see Knightley being nominated for Atonement. Her character's seriously underwritten and she has a lot less screentime than the hype suggests. Still, she's serviceable and looks great, so if it's a weak year...
Those who know the classical methods of acting will know that Knightley's performance for what it is - and its more than just 'servicible'. She conveys alot simply through her tone and body language, that very few actresses today are capable of (especially younger ones). Even Celia Johnson is sometimes written of as mediocre by post-medern critics, but these people clearly dont know this genre very well. As for screen time - Anthony hopkins won his oscar for male lead after only appearing on-screen for 16 minute in silence of the lambs. Theres no limit to screen time.
I dont think i agree with your Best Picture predictions, i cant see both 'there will be blood' and 'no country for old men' nominated. And i completely dont agree about Micheal Clayton - i think Juno has a better shot since it did recieve a standing ovation from the press screening.
Oh and i think Atonement will get a sound nomination as well. It had an incredible effect in creating the tension and environment - the underwater scenes, the birds, the bees everything.
Casey Affleck should be MUCH higher.
I really can't share your analysis on Visual Effects. I don't think "The Golden Compass" is assured at all - it's VERY tricky material to pull off and the crew is virtually unseasoned, especially compared to the "Pirates" and "Spidey" crews which are seasoned. I wouldn't underestimate the return of both of the old standbyes.
Anon 9.10am - you're so right about Knightley. There's so much going on in that performance - both with the whole pre-Lee Strasberg style of speech that's rightly adopted, and the compensatory way in which she uses her body to convey for what's being left unsaid.
65 minutes of screentime - more than enough to merit her a lead nomination. That's more screentime than Reese Witherspoon, Nicole Kidman and Frances McDormand in their recent lead Oscar-winning roles.
The scenes in the tea room and in the Balham flat will alone get Knightley and McAvoy their lead Oscar nominations. Acting masterclasses.
The Van Sant, Auburn, Chabrol and Greenaway (didn't even know he of A Zed and Two Noughts genius had a new one coming) sound amAzing.
gerard, you may be right. i know you study that category more than I. But I think GOLDEN COMPASS has a definite shot at WOWing more than those old standbys simply because it'll be offering new pleasures (unless of course it falls flat)
Were people all that excited about Venom? or the crabs in Pirates? what are they offering that's new (incidentally I thought Sandman looked spectacular... but this category like many others tends to vote on what movies they like so if they're as turned against Spidey as so many in the media are, it might have an uphill struggle.
anon 9:20 i am really excited to see Affleck's performance. I think he's a strong actor. But i'm not sure how he could be higher at this point. The film is divisive and he couldn't even beat Pitt to the Venice win despite winning more raves for the role.
it'll be interesting to see how that movie fares. I can't wait to see it.
What about all the buzz i have been hearing for Sean Penn's movie and Emile Hirsch and Hal Holbrook?
If Knightly is nominated, it really should be in the supporting category. Though Antonement is well acted throughout, none of the actors are on the screen long enough to merit a lead actor nomination.
I thought Hirsch and Holbrook were both fine in Into the Wild but I have no idea they'll receive nominations.
The Sandman effects in Spider-Man 3 were good but the rest were sort of crummy, comparatively.
i read 3 reviews on imdb all 3 say weaver is oscar worthy & her best perf in years and v v good plus a great screen prescence is she too late.
Post a Comment