As promised, here are the nominees for the 2011 Academy Awards.
Scroll down for knee-jerk, armchair analysis below.
| BEST PICTURE 127 Hours Black Swan The Fighter Inception The Kids Are All Right The King’s Speech The Social Network Toy Story 3 True Grit Winter’s Bone BEST ACTOR BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR BEST ACTRESS BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS BEST DIRECTOR BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY BEST SCORE BEST SONG BEST ANIMATED FILM BEST VISUAL EFFECTS |
BEST ART DIRECTION Alice in Wonderland, Robert Stromberg, Karen O’Hara Happy Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 1, Stuart Craig, Stephenie McMillan Inception, Guy Hendrix Dyas, Larry Dias, Doug Mowat The King’s Speech, Eve Stewart, Judy Farr True Grit, Jess Gonchor, Nancy Haigh BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY BEST COSTUME DESIGN BEST DOCUMENTARY BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT BEST EDITING BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM BEST MAKEUP BEST ANIMATED SHORT BEST LIVE-ACTION SHORT BEST SOUND EDITING BEST SOUND MIXING |
Okay… so looking at these nominations, what am I most struck by?
Well, I was certainly pleased to see Toy Story 3 among the Best Picture nominees. Are they trying to round out the category to meet the 10-nominee criteria the Academy set forth last year? Maybe, but I don’t care.
Up was similarly nominated last yet, but it wasn’t coming into the category from a position of strength like Toy Story 3 is.
Toy Story 3 was the best reviewed, highest grossing film last year. It’ll be interesting to me to see if that colors the opinion of Academy voters.
Also, I think this is the only “threequel” to be nominated for a Best Picture Oscar since The Lord of The Rings: The Return of the King. Will the Academy give Pixar a “gold watch” Oscar for their achievement in animation for the last 15 years? Hear’s hoping!
The King’s Speech leads the pack this year with 12 nominations, which kind of surprised me after The Social Network scooped up so many awards at the Golden Globes last week. I’m not upset about it because I happen to think The King’s Speech is the better film – stronger performances and more entertaining. I think The Social Network is very much a film of the moment and notable for that reason. But The King’s Speech is more old-school Hollywood entertainment and is much more satisfying.
I’m kicking myself now that I didn’t write a review of the film after seeing it. If you haven’t checked it out yet, do yourself a favor and get caught up!
Aside from that, my strongest reaction is reserved for the Best Director nominations. It is absolutely CRIMINAL that Christopher Nolan wasn’t nominated for Inception. A richly layered, technically complex and nuanced narrative WRITTEN BY Nolan… and he isn’t recognized. That’s a sin, man. The worst Oscar snub in years.
Apparently the Academy has some kind of axe to grind with Nolan because they locked Nolan out of Best Director a few years ago for The Dark Knight.
Both Inception and The Dark Knight have been nominated in several technical categories. But apparently the Academy thinks of Nolan like some kind of James Cameron figure – an effects hog that dresses up his direction with technology.
I can think of nothing further from the truth.
Here’s my reasoning behind why this was such an egregious snub: Among the directors nominated, David Fincher and MAYBE Darren Aronofsky have the chops to direct a film as complicated as Inception. But Nolan would have no problem directing films like Black Swan, True Grit, The Social Network, The King’s Speech or The Fighter – all films nominated for direction. Nolan could direct those films with one hand tied behind his back.
Nolan was nominated for Best Original Screenplay. If the Academy doesn’t give him AT LEAST that, it would be a damn shame.
The Academy is setting themselves up for another Scorsese-level bout of public humiliation for not recognizing Nolan’s talent sooner. It’s disgusting.
Alright, now that I got that out of my system, what’s your take on these nominations? Was there anything I left out that you wanted to discuss? Leave your comments below!
I’m kinda disappointed to only see TRON: Legacy up there once (and not even in a catagory i care about). I’m not saying it should be up for best picture but it definitely could have gone up for one of the visual effects ones or even best costume design.
Agreed. Weaving light into the costumes of Tron: Legacy was a cinematic first. It should have been recognized.
Glad to see Waste Land up for Documentary Feature. I very much liked that film. I don’t know if it should win, because I haven’t seen any of the others.
Also, I know there is some unwritten rule that kids don’t get best actress nods, but calling Hailee Steinfeld a supporting actress in True Grit is a bit strange. She owned the part of Mattie Ross.
I don’t really like this expanded Best Picture list. I really don’t think there are 10 films truly worthy of that award. But the Oscars have really gone downhill for me lately, anyway.
Giving Christian Bale a best actor nod doesn’t help.
I am glad to see The Illusionist up in the animated category; I haven’t seen it yet, but it looks amazing, and I’m glad to see something unconventional in there.
You mean Best Supporting Actor?
Why are you down on that nomination in particular?
Oh best supporting. Whatever. The point being, Christian Bale doesn’t deserve a “Best” anything award.
It sounds like personal feelings are clouding your judgement on his role in The Fighter.
Why? Because he yelled at some dude on the set of a Terminator movie and it got leaked to the internet?
I’ve often found Bale’s performances to be very thorough and effective. I consider him one of the best A-list character actors working today.
Agreed (with Tom, that is).
Christian Bale is one of the best (and arguably is the best) movie actors of his generation. He always delivers strong performances, whatever the role.
Oh, wow. Clearly I’m in the minority on this site in thinking he’s an awful actor. “Arguably the best”? Wow. Sorry, but there are plenty of better actors out there.
I didn’t even know he blew up on the set of some movie. I just think he’s a bad actor. I’m not familiar with the other guys, but Christian Bale shouldn’t ever be in the same category as Geoffrey Rush; they’re not even remotely in the same league.
Well, to be fair, Geoffery Rush has a few years of experience over Bale. 🙂
It’s fine if you think he’s a lousy actor, I’m just trying to get at the core of what informs your decision. What about his performances do you find disagreeable or unconvincing? What other performances would you have have nominated in his stead?
And when Peter O’Toole was Bale’s age, he was already a master. Bale is…36 now? O’Toole was 30 when he made Lawrence of Arabia, one of the best performances in cinematic history (followed up by another amazing performance in Becket). He was practically a newbie. That O’Toole has never won an Oscar is also one of cinematic history’s biggest insults.
Michael Caine was 33 in Alfie. Dustin Hoffman was 30 in The Graduate. Marlon Brando was 27 in Streetcar Named Desire (followed quickly by another amazing performance in Julius Caesar). Brilliant actors in their 30s already, so I can’t buy that Bale can’t compare to Geoffrey Rush just because he’s “less experienced.”
He’s just not that great an actor. My husband says all he can do is “clench his jaw.” I’m a bit more forgiving. I enjoyed him in Little Women, but that movie was rather mediocre all around, really, so he didn’t stand out and wasn’t overshadowed. But when you throw him in Batman with Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, and Heath Ledger’s incredible performance in Dark Knight…you can really start to see that he’s not all that great. Put a mediocre actor into a film with great actors, and it just makes them look worse.
It seems I avoid many of the movies he’s been in. I haven’t seen American Psycho, though I recall my husband hating him in it. Batman Begins was awful, and Dark Knight is only good because of Ledger’s performance. The Prestige was…meh. (The Illusionist was better.) Public Enemies…I want to say I saw a little bit of it. OOOH. Oh wait yeah. He sucked in that, too. But then, it’s hard to get out from under Johnny Depp’s shadow.
I’ve seen Captain Corellie’s Mandolin, but I don’t even remember Bale from that at all. I forgot he was in that pretty goofy Midsummer Night’s Dream film; another forgettable performance.
As for who else would have the dedication to change their body around for films…I can think of several. That doesn’t make them good actors.
I think you’re picking and choosing to support your argument. You think The Illusionist is a better film than The Prestige – that’s fine. But it’s not because of Bale’s performance. Bale sucked in Public Enemies? He was hardly in it!
I also think judging him based on his performances in the Batman movies isn’t fair because Bruce Wayne/Batman isn’t that complicated to portray.
Is Bale a bit of a “jaw clencher?” Yeah. He’s a bundle of rage and nerves. He’s basically what Tom Cruise would be if Cruise were an actor and not a celebrity. But that doesn’t make him a bad actor. It makes him a very good actor within a certain range and he has a dedication to the craft that I personally find admirable.
I’m sure you’ll argue that a good actor should be able to reach several different performance ranges. I can agree with that. But I also don’t think there’s anything wrong in finding your strengths and playing to them. There’s a reason Bale is in demand for emotionally charged and physically demanding roles.
Watch American Psycho, Rescue Dawn, The Machinist and 3:10 to Yuma. I think you’ll find a different side to him.
I was actually picking from the films that Andre had offered below.
I actually do think that The Dark Knight could have been a brilliant film, if not for Christian Bale, and the awful editing. Because everything else was pretty great. So I do think that Bale hurt The Prestige.
Bruce Wayne/Batman is a great character. Michael Keaton did well with both aspects. Bale…not so much. Part of it may be the directing. That dumb ass gravely voice he constantly speaks in is absolutely awful. But he’s not that great a Bruce Wayne either.
Sure there’s nothing wrong with playing to your strengths. But it helps if you’re actually good at them. Orlando Bloom makes for a good pretty boy, and he keeps playing pretty boys, but that doesn’t mean he’s good at acting them (though his acting has been getting better).
Anyway, too hungry to delve into it further. The argument isn’t really going anywhere anyway. 🙂
I think Keaton was a better Bruce Wayne than Batman.
I agree that Bale’s gravel-voice as Batman was ridiculous. Especially in the second movie.
Watch American Psycho, Rescue Dawn, The Machinist and 3:10 to Yuma. I think you’ll find a different side to him.
Agreed, other than his roles in The Fighter, those were definitely his next four best roles.
And my personal opinion is that Bale’s batman/Wayne is the best of the last 20 years… Clooney, Keaton, whatever. They all played the role like Batman’s a big clown that’s full of joy.
I’m sorry, but nobody can objectively say that Christian Bale is an ‘awful actor’. Did he sleep with your sister or something? Why all the hate for the guy, seriously? He’s arguably been the most consistent actor over the last 10 years with not a single bad performance during that period. He also makes excellent movie choices with American Psycho, Equilibrium, The Machinist, the Batmans, Rescue Dawn, The Prestige, 3:10 To Yuma, Public Enemies and now The Fighter. Okay, Reign Of Fire and Terminator Salvation weren’t the greatest movies ever, but he certainly wasn’t to blame in those.
In my opinion, he deserved a best actor nod for Batman Begins (not sure if he got one or not), and it’s finally time he gets recognized for his performances and incredible dedication he puts into each of his performances. Who else would’ve done what he did to his body to go from Equilibrium, to The Machinist and then to Batman Begins. The man was a pack of bones in The Machinist! That’s incredible dedication to his work.
Without a doubt, he’s one of my very favorite actors at the moment.
couldn’t agree more /w your take on the Nolan snub. In sheer terms of originality and complex ideas being displayed and communicated, I didn’t see a film this year that matched the art that Nolan crafted. And while i’d LOVE to see Toy Story 3 win Best picture(although I doubt it’d happen), I’d have to go with how to train your dragon over TS3 and the illusionist(admittedly, didn’t see it) for Best animated film.
Disagree with King’s speech as Best Picture. It certainly deserves to be in the conversation, but it felt a little too straightforward and a little too…safe? I’m not sure that’s the right word for it, but I think Social Network is the better film. At the very least, if Aaron Sorkin doesn’t get Adapted Screenplay then there’s no justice in the world.
I think the Academy is still wrapping their heads around the idea that an action movie can say something on a deeper level (LotR notwithstanding), which is why Nolan isn’t getting more recognition. A shame, but the way it is.
That’s a fair assessment of The King’s Speech. The Social Network essentially asks you to root for the villain in a room full of villains.
Of course, we all know what film should win everything:
http://www.cracked.com/video_18156_a-trailer-every-academy-award-winning-movie-ever.html
I will throw my hat in the “ten is too many” ring on the best picture debate. It may bring more people to the party but in the end it is just five more dissapionted people/movies at the end of a night when most viewers have gone to bed. Cynically it seems that the idea of a nomination motivating people to see a movie they may have otherwise dismissed could be twisted into a cash grab for five more movies due to the expansion.
There is only one winner no matter how many movies are nominated. Now if there was a “second best picture category” that they could present half way through the ceremony then ten nominations might mean something.
Honestly, while I really enjoyed Toy Story 3… I don’t know if I think it deserves best picture or really even to be nominated. Up was a MUCH stronger movie; Toy Story 3 just has the momentum of two movies prior to it to build up interest.
Also, I remember how many people were skeptical of the idea of a house floating with balloons from the get-go. People are accepting of revisiting a fantasy world but try and do something new and they have problems with their suspension of disbelief.
In terms of it’s economic success, sure Toy Story benefited from the two movies before it. But it’s just as powerful – if not more powerful than Up. And I would argue more entertaining.
Everyone remembers the first :20 minutes of Up. They’re heartbreaking and an excellent example of cinematic storytelling. But people tend to forget about dogs that can fly biplanes at the end.
Don’t get me wrong. I love Up. I think it’s a wonderful film. I’m willing to accept dogs with collars that allow them to talk. But dogs that fly bi-planes? Only if they’re Goofy.
what about Gromit in Curse of the Wererabbit.
or for that matter, Truman.
Hmm, personal tastes then. I enjoyed Toy Story 3 but it just seemed… distant? I don’t really know how to say it. It could be because I’ve “matured” since the first one came out but I was heavily invested into the Toy Story series since it grew up with me.
It does deal with things the imaginative mind of kids have very well. Personally, I think if the little girl knew her bear had been switched out she would have freaked. That could just be me projecting though, haha.
In retrospect, saying it shouldn’t be nominated is a bit harsh on my part. However, Up got to me emotionally like Toy Story 2 did, while the third didn’t. Not saying that it didn’t have its parts to it, just that it was significantly less.
Wow. Toy Story 3 didn’t grab you emotionally? Not even when the toys were in the incinerator, facing certain death but accepting of it – so long as they had each other? Not in their redemption at the end?
The Toy Story movies – for me – have always been about facing your fears of obsolescence. No one wants to be forgotten. Everyone wants to make a mark. Toy Story 3 imparted on me the very small window we have to make that possible.
In other words, life is short.
Hey now, I said that it did impact me… just not to the same extent as Up. I think with the incinerator I was more caught up in the action/suspense than the emotion. Perhaps if I watched it a second time I’d maybe catch it a bit more.
Fair enough!
In total agreement re: Nolan. They should’ve left out David O. Russell. The Fighter was, to me, an average movie in almost every way. Christian Bale and Melissa Leo were the best and only reasons to see that movie. Any number of directors could’ve made it. Inception, on the other hand, could only have been made by Nolan.
Well Amy Adams did a good job too, and Whalberg was decent. But I agree, the direction was nothing to write home about. I really liked the movie though, mostly because I knew nothing of Ward’s story and because of the supporting cast around Whalberg.
Having seen 127 Hours this afternoon, I now understand why Franco is nominated for best actor and the movie itself for best movie. It’s surprising how engaging one guy mostly talking to a video camera can be for such a long period… it felt like a much better way of letting us know what he’s going through than ‘Wilson’ in Cast Away that felt like a cheap trick, IMO. I’m not sure Franco or the film itself has a chance to win either awards, but I’m glad they both were nominated, at least.
I watched The King’s Speech yesterday, and thought Colin Firth was excellent. The movie itself was okay, but felt a little too simple with not much going on… no intrigue, very straight-forward story. I hope The Social Network wins best movie over it.