As I was perusing the FYC Gallery today I was struck by something. Ron Howard's Frost/Nixon seems to be on the path to a Best Picture nomination, doesn't it? Well if that works out for the team behind the film they will have proven that one does not need a good FYC campaign to win a nomination. Oh sure, the movie has a large collection of ads appearing throughout Variety and The Hollywood Reporter, but this collage I made shows that the studio is obviously saving some coin by not hiring a art designer for their work this year.
The only ad in the film's arsenal so far that don't follow this layout is a Variety cover featuring a prominant image of Ron Howard. The phrase "I could do that!" springs to mind. I'm tempted to open up Photoshop and indeed make one myself just to prove it, but alas I can't be bothered. Aww.
I suppose they think they've already cornered the "omgfranklangellaisrichardnixon" type of voters and that there's no need to try and show off the similarities of Langella's portrayal, but poor ol' Michael Sheen getting routinely relegated to a small side box featuring him looking pensive. Why not use some images from the original theatrical production to show off how long these actors have lived with their characters? Or use images from the original Frost/Nixon tapes (now available on DVD) to show off the work that went into replicating them? Although I guess all those boxes gives off the illusion of televisual transference and speaks to the way one views life as opposed to... oh, I dunno. I can't keep up that amount of pretention for too long.
(A Tale of Bloody Violence in One Act):
ANGELINA:
Give me the statue or I'll eat your face off!
UNIMPORTANT CHARACTER ACTOR:
But please... I'm a character actor!
ANGELINA:
I feed off character actors and spit them out. I need that statue and I need it now!
U.C.A.
But, please, I don't have one and I don't have a hope of ever winning one if you big famous celebrities take all the acting spots for performances that don't deserve it. I've got a family to feed too ya know!
ANGELINA:
CCLLLIIIIIIIINNTT!!
*chomp* *chomp*
Angelina devours the lowly character actor in her destructive path for more Oscar glory and carries on her merry way.
{to be continued}
Posts
22 comments:
Oh my god! Thank you, this cheered my day!
Jason Butler Harner SO deserves a nomination for "Changeling". He (and the guy who played the main nasty cop) are the only things that made the film worthwhile to me. And since the Supporting Actor category is so empty this year, they could do with letting someone like him in instead of shoe-horning Phillip Seymour Hoffman in again.
May I change the story a bit?
Angelina: Kids? It's lunch time!!
*chomp* *chomp*
Branjelina's kids devour the lowly character actor while Angelina proudly and moved watches her little ones grow.
Jim
I think you forgot the moment where Angelina throws the leftover remains of said character actor against the wall and screams "I want MY Oscar!"
jason butler harner was phenominal, the type of preformance that would get any known actor a nomination. It's too bad this came out before Gran Torino, JBH, Jolie and the film itself would have a much better shot.
you're completely biased by your Eastwood's hatred, Nat, it's not even funny,
While I don't think she deserves the prize, she deserves the nom, along with Leo, Scott-Thomas, Hathaway and Hawkins.
ted I did not write this article
Got bawls, huh? While most of U.S. don’t know how to read the signs of the times (and between the lines), know Almighty God’s a concrete, kick-ass reality! I’m proof!! GOD BLESSA YOUSE -Fr. Sarducci, SNL --- May the Creator of the Cosmos bestow upon you discernment and wisdom this CHRIST-mass season.
Tedd, I wrote this not Nat and while I'm not exactly Angie's biggest fan I haven't seen Changeling (they haven't deigned to release it here yet) and was merely joking around about the image they used for the ad.
he was much btter than her infact i was surprised no traction came maybe if it was a bigger hit he would have more chance same with the visitors haaz sleiman
Wow.....Frost/Nixon does have one lazy ass campaign. Kind of makes me hope it doesn't get a nomination.
Very Funny. But Angelina does not want the oscar. Winslet does. She and Winsletnuts. Angie even lost her 1st oscar. So the next time be funny with Winslet too.
//So the next time be funny with Winslet too.//
Except the problem is, she's already taken care of that for all of us, with that brilliant Extras episode (and thank you, Ricky Gervais). Kind of hard to top that.
What being missed here is glenn's point, too, that "big name" A-list celebs have been hogging all the acting catagories. "Supporting" used to be the place for those less-well known actors to be rewarded. For that, I think the A-listers (including Kate, alas) do deserve a dinging, in that they could refuse to allow the studios to continue to perpetuate catagory fraud, or at least speak out against it.
Anyway, this WAS funny, and thank you Glenn!
Angelina Jolie was excellent in "Changeling." Get that Oscar nomination, Angie!
Jolie was NOT good in Changeling ... I guess if you go for amateurish acting, she was OK... Oscar? No way!!
she was ok servicable in the role but no more no less a it'll be a joan allen in the contender nom or charlize thern in north country!! one of those good but never ever a winner,she's never be in with a shout this year of she'd been nommed for a might heart instead of cate in that big pile of shit she was in.
I thought that Angelina Jolie was fine in "Changeling." I'd rather her second nomination had been for "A Mighty Heart," but this one is still worthy.
That graphic designer is pretty lazy.
On the other hand, do we really want voters swayed by glitzy advertising? Even though Frost/Nixon is totally middlebrow, isn't there something comforting in the fact that, if they go for it, it'll be because they liked it. Not because they thought, "Well, this movie had all kinds of pretty ads in Variety!"
Am I actually rooting for Frost/Nixon?
;)
steve. i love your train of thought there.
i have nothing against Frost/Nixon really but i just think it will be such a waste of a slot when there are so many more imaginative and more interesting and more likely to last that the Academy could stamp, you know.
ah well. They love what they love.
and i should say this too. it's interesting that they chose this moment for a big ad for ANGIE because I think it's one of the "problem" scenes in that Christine Collins isn't really a cohesive character beyond her slightly mousy voice for the first half of hte movie.
or maybe she's too cohesive. 'he's not my son' but i find the performance dull even in the scenes where she's doing better work. Maybe it's the lack of any character arc beyond "gets angrier"
I guess I liked Jolie's perf because
1) it's very different than her Mighty heart turn
2) it's intended to be an old school, 50's style performance
and i don't agree with people who thinks it's obvious casting : it's not a part that could be played by a cute actress. She needs to have a certain amount of toughness underneath her fragility, so Jolie definitely fits the part
@glenn: Angelina Jolie doesn't have "a certain amount of toughness underneath her fragility". The star persona she imports is "a certain amount of fragility underneath her toughness", which is the opposite of what the role of Christine Collins needed. A more believable jellyfish like, say, Amanda Plummer (Honey Bunny in Pulp Fiction) would have been a more suitable choice.
Post a Comment