OVP: Best Costume (2009)
The Nominees Were...
Janet Patterson, Bright Star
Catherine Leterrier, Coco Before Chanel
Monique Prudhomme, The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus
Colleen Atwood, Nine
Sandy Powell, The Young Victoria
My Thoughts: If there was a year where you could tell that the Art Direction and Costume branches needed to split for their voting, it was this one. Three of these five nominees ended up being nominated in the other field, and at least one of those I seriously question making it into both lineups. However, we'll get there...actually, let's start there.
Colleen Atwood is a goddess amongst costume designers-between she and Sandy Powell, there's little room to tell who is the bigger Oscar star, but both have become such titans that perhaps they can dually rule the kingdom. Whenever one is nominated the other frequently follows, and this was the case in 2009. Atwood gets a costume designers dream in Nine, a film with seven beautiful actresses (well six actresses and Fergie) to dress and use as muses. In theory, there's so much to highlight from this film, particularly the psychotically sexy lingerie sported by Penelope Cruz in "A Call to the Vatican" (every time I see that scene I question my sexuality), but I just can't help but feel a bit blase about the whole thing. There's no "wow" moments except that scene (and a blind man could find a way to make Cruz look hot in her underwear), and I just can't help but feel, like the entire film, that this is pretty underwhelming Atwood.
Her fellow Costume Queen (I'm going to refer to them by this title from now on, and I suspect that there won't be objections) Sandy Powell does exactly what the Oscars seem to have invented this category for: made a period film. In fact, I remember just loving her speech that year to death (I can't find a clip, but essentially she shamed the Oscars a bit for always giving this trophy to period films rather than contemporary).
The question of whether she deserved the Oscar is called into question, of course, in this context, as despite what some may say, period film doesn't automatically equal great quality in this category (I have a friend who basically picks the most costumes as the winner here every year and shoots down when I suggest perhaps it isn't always about the prettiest dress). The dresses in the film are all beautiful and elegant, and I particularly liked the cut of men's clothes (Powell, a longtime collaborator with Martin Scorsese, is the best mainstream designer for men in movies currently working). I specifically picked the above picture of Rupert Friend to illustrate the way that she balances color with practicality, and though the film never has a dress or moment to rival, say, Jacqueline Durran's Anna Karenina a few years later, one can hardly fault the Academy for siding with some strong work from one of their favorites.
Catherine Leterrier's Coco Before Chanel is the most recent film I have encountered in this list, and probably the one that I have the most complicated feelings toward. For starters, it calls into question the purpose of this category. If the question is regarding simply the beauty of the designs, then brava, job well done. Few designers in the twentieth century had the sort of panache, elegance, and near perfection when it comes to symmetry that Coco Chanel did, and the suits and hats of this film are divine. However, they all seem to be either directly inspired by Chanel or exact copies of dresses that Chanel herself made. When you're comparing this to original works like those of Prudhomme and even Powell, that's just not a fair fight-Leterrier does a fine job of recreating, but doesn't lend enough originality to her work. I see where the Academy was going giving this nomination to a film that so thoroughly celebrates this branch and its art, but I'm just not having it.
Monique Prudhomme had the unenviable job of figuring out how to hold together a semblance of balance when four actors took over a role that was supposed to be played by just one actor. The Tony's, though, all work well, with the same outfits and a bit of a blink to catch the differences with each actor. I loved the way that Prudhomme's costumes seemed to fill the claustrophobic excess of the film. The art direction is really swell in this movie (it gives the film atmosphere), and Prudhomme designs dresses as if they've just been pulled out of an old trunk-elegant, magical, but still wrinkled and aged. It's a small miracle that such a tiny film got cited for the Oscar, but it's surely a miracle for the better.
The final nomination comes for the other major period biopic, that of Jane Campion's Bright Star. In the long line of films from Campion, this film doesn't seem to stand-out, which is a pity as it's breathtaking in terms of its color and cinematography. Patterson uses the naturalism of the woods (so appropriate for a film about a poet) and contrasts it greatly with vivid teals, pinks, and lilacs. If Sandy Powell has a point about period films being favorites of the Academy, they tend to enjoy it more when it's on a royal or an Elizabethan Court, so I'm quite frankly surprised that they remembered this tiny, tiny film amidst the heaps of different contenders. Also, while I frequently comment on how much this branch loves dressing Keira Knightley, it's worth noting that Abbie Cornish isn't far behind-in the past six years she's been in three of the nominated films, and two of them (Bright Star and W.E.) were hardly slam dunks.
Colleen Atwood is a goddess amongst costume designers-between she and Sandy Powell, there's little room to tell who is the bigger Oscar star, but both have become such titans that perhaps they can dually rule the kingdom. Whenever one is nominated the other frequently follows, and this was the case in 2009. Atwood gets a costume designers dream in Nine, a film with seven beautiful actresses (well six actresses and Fergie) to dress and use as muses. In theory, there's so much to highlight from this film, particularly the psychotically sexy lingerie sported by Penelope Cruz in "A Call to the Vatican" (every time I see that scene I question my sexuality), but I just can't help but feel a bit blase about the whole thing. There's no "wow" moments except that scene (and a blind man could find a way to make Cruz look hot in her underwear), and I just can't help but feel, like the entire film, that this is pretty underwhelming Atwood.
Her fellow Costume Queen (I'm going to refer to them by this title from now on, and I suspect that there won't be objections) Sandy Powell does exactly what the Oscars seem to have invented this category for: made a period film. In fact, I remember just loving her speech that year to death (I can't find a clip, but essentially she shamed the Oscars a bit for always giving this trophy to period films rather than contemporary).
The question of whether she deserved the Oscar is called into question, of course, in this context, as despite what some may say, period film doesn't automatically equal great quality in this category (I have a friend who basically picks the most costumes as the winner here every year and shoots down when I suggest perhaps it isn't always about the prettiest dress). The dresses in the film are all beautiful and elegant, and I particularly liked the cut of men's clothes (Powell, a longtime collaborator with Martin Scorsese, is the best mainstream designer for men in movies currently working). I specifically picked the above picture of Rupert Friend to illustrate the way that she balances color with practicality, and though the film never has a dress or moment to rival, say, Jacqueline Durran's Anna Karenina a few years later, one can hardly fault the Academy for siding with some strong work from one of their favorites.
Catherine Leterrier's Coco Before Chanel is the most recent film I have encountered in this list, and probably the one that I have the most complicated feelings toward. For starters, it calls into question the purpose of this category. If the question is regarding simply the beauty of the designs, then brava, job well done. Few designers in the twentieth century had the sort of panache, elegance, and near perfection when it comes to symmetry that Coco Chanel did, and the suits and hats of this film are divine. However, they all seem to be either directly inspired by Chanel or exact copies of dresses that Chanel herself made. When you're comparing this to original works like those of Prudhomme and even Powell, that's just not a fair fight-Leterrier does a fine job of recreating, but doesn't lend enough originality to her work. I see where the Academy was going giving this nomination to a film that so thoroughly celebrates this branch and its art, but I'm just not having it.
Monique Prudhomme had the unenviable job of figuring out how to hold together a semblance of balance when four actors took over a role that was supposed to be played by just one actor. The Tony's, though, all work well, with the same outfits and a bit of a blink to catch the differences with each actor. I loved the way that Prudhomme's costumes seemed to fill the claustrophobic excess of the film. The art direction is really swell in this movie (it gives the film atmosphere), and Prudhomme designs dresses as if they've just been pulled out of an old trunk-elegant, magical, but still wrinkled and aged. It's a small miracle that such a tiny film got cited for the Oscar, but it's surely a miracle for the better.
The final nomination comes for the other major period biopic, that of Jane Campion's Bright Star. In the long line of films from Campion, this film doesn't seem to stand-out, which is a pity as it's breathtaking in terms of its color and cinematography. Patterson uses the naturalism of the woods (so appropriate for a film about a poet) and contrasts it greatly with vivid teals, pinks, and lilacs. If Sandy Powell has a point about period films being favorites of the Academy, they tend to enjoy it more when it's on a royal or an Elizabethan Court, so I'm quite frankly surprised that they remembered this tiny, tiny film amidst the heaps of different contenders. Also, while I frequently comment on how much this branch loves dressing Keira Knightley, it's worth noting that Abbie Cornish isn't far behind-in the past six years she's been in three of the nominated films, and two of them (Bright Star and W.E.) were hardly slam dunks.
Other Precursor Contenders: The Costume Designers Guild is one of the only guilds to separate their nominees into not one or two categories, but three: contemporary, period, and fantasy. Considering the Oscars almost always forget about them, let's go through the five (un-nominated) contemporary contenders: we have the assless chaps of Bruno, the office casual of (500) Days of Summer, the goodwill easy wear of Precious, the tailored suits of Up in the Air, and the (winning) cowboy hats of Crazy Heart. The other two categories frequently go for films that translate to Oscar, and so it's no surprise that Monique Prudhomme picked up the win for Fantasy (over Avatar and Star Trek) and The Young Victoria was joined by Nine and Coco Before Chanel in its path to victory. The other two period films (usually the best guess for the sixth place nomination) were two Academy-favorites: Ann Roth with Julie and Julia and Jenny Beavan's Sherlock Holmes. I know that the two leads were men (usually a no-no here), but I'm quite frankly stunned that Beavan, a nine-time Oscar nominee, wasn't able to score for Sherlock Holmes over a first-timer like Leterrier. She almost certainly was in sixth place and I'm a bit stunned that she wasn't in fifth or even fourth. Then again, Beavan also missed with BAFTA (the only swaps were Imaginarium and Nine in favor of An Education and A Single Man), so who knows-perhaps I'm projecting.
Films I Would Have Nominated: There's a lot of things to be said about Tom Ford's A Single Man, which was a film I personally loved that year, but one thing no one can argue with is that it certainly looked stylish. Perhaps it was a bit too Gucci Vintage, but Oscar-nominee Arianne Phillips, who two years later got a bizarre citation for designing another celebrity director's film (Madonna's W.E.) would have been better served with a nomination here than for the Wallis Simpson biopic.
Oscar's Choice: Oscar can't turn down a film this perfectly suited for its tastes-The Young Victoria easily bested Nine and probably Bright Star to win.
My Choice: The eye-popping color and symmetry of Bright Star cannot be ignored. I'll easily give this one to longtime-Campion collaborator Patterson, followed by Prudhomme, Powell, Atwood, and Leterrier.
It's that time again-what did you think of our costuming roundup? Did you agree with me that Young Victoria should go down a slot in favor of Patterson, or are you Powell all the way? Were you as surprised as I that Beavan didn't make it for Sherlock? And of all of the films of the year, who deserved Best Costume of 2009? Share in the comments!
No comments:
Post a Comment