OVP: Cruella (2021)

Film: Cruella (2021)

Stars: Emma Stone, Emma Thompson, Joel Fry, Paul Walter Hauser, Mark Strong

Director: Craig Gillespie

Oscar History: 2 nominations/1 win (Best Costume*, Makeup & Hairstyling)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 2/5 stars

What is the most important element in a film?  And what makes a film great?  Can a movie be great if it suffers in one or two key elements, or can those elements take the entire film down?  These are the questions I felt myself asking while watching the recent Disney release Cruella, which has been advertised for months and is one of the first films to come out in a while that felt like it was genuinely taking up a place in the cultural zeitgeist at large.  The latest in a long line of films either directly borrowing from Disney's animated canon, or at least giving us background on it, and yet another "prequel" story of an iconic figure in films (looking at you Joker), Cruella offers up a lot of things to really enjoy...and two specific elements that nearly destroy the movie from within.

(Spoiler Ahead) The movie is about Estella Miller (Stone), a precocious young girl with a flare for design, who as a young woman watches her mother die, initially assuming it's from her accidentally releasing a pack of dalmatians at a party.  Orphaned, she meets two young street toughs Jasper (Fry) and Horace (Hauser), who become her surrogate family.  A chance encounter with Baroness von Hellman (Thompson), a celebrated fashion diva who needs fresh young talent in her design house, gets Estella a job, but eventually she sets her sights on retrieving a locket her mother had as a child from the Baroness, and after realizing that the Baroness killed her mother (by sicking the dogs on her), she vows revenge, and gets in the guise of Cruella DeVil, a vigilante fashion icon whose impressive gowns far exceed the talents of the Baroness.  As the story continues, we figure out that Estella is actually the Baroness' daughter, and also that Estella has become Cruella, far more monstrous than the sweet Estella we knew at the beginning of the picture.  In the end, she frames the Baroness for Estella's murder (essentially "becoming" Cruella forever more), and takes over her home, renaming it Hell Hall.

The movie uses a lot of the iconography from the original movies if you look hard enough for it.  Anita is, indeed, an old school chum of Cruella's, and Roger is a struggling musician (and also the Baroness' attorney, a deviation from the original story).  If you're devoted to either the 1961 or 1996 films, though, there are anachronisms that will drive you batty.  Cruella genuinely likes dogs in the film (she has two pet ones), and literally gifts the dogs she eventually will try to kill in the future film to Roger & Anita (Pongo & Perdita are presents in a mid-credits scene), and she seems like an (at-core) good person who has a villainous streak.

That's one of the problems that Disney struggles with here.  They can't make a character like Arthur from Joker, where they create a villain that is humanized, but ultimately watches that humanity stripped away.  Cruella is fun, but it also doesn't know how to land the conversation about the title character's villainy, because it needs to remain cute & friendly.  We can't have Cruella essentially sidle into outright cruelty to her friends Jasper & Horace, even though that's what's required of her to be the "bad bitch" attitude we're promised in the film's final moments.  This juxtaposition makes the movie too long, because it literally feels like the writers can't decide how bad to make Cruella, and it also gives you a bit of an eye-roll that they made the film in the first place since they are fully-capable of making a proper cartoon villain (the Baroness), but they can't do it with the central figure (the same exact problem plagued the Maleficent movies).

The picture's other real problem is the soundtrack.  This is lazy bad, and far too sporadic.  It's a great series of 1960's British pop, but it also infiltrates every corner of the movie, serving as a way to cover up one-too-many montages, and it gets a bit cringeworthy how little the writers seem to have to say about a movie that is stretching to make sense.  This is a case where less is more, and without moderation, the movie suffers, feeling like it can't pinpoint a motif.

That said, there are two marvelous aspects to the movie, that make it easy for me to understand the love for the film, even if I can't share in it because the movie itself strains credulity.  Both of the Emma's, but particularly Stone, are great.  Stone is giving a world-class bit of acting, better than I can remember seeing in any Disney live-action film in recent memory (she's better, by a longshot, than Joaquin Phoenix as the Joker), understanding the gaps in the script and painting over it by truly making Cruella deliciously evil, even if the writers can't bring themselves to do it.  And she's accompanied by a bevy of costumes from Jenny Beavan that will demand an 11th Oscar nomination (and possibly a third trophy).  When you have a figure who is the "new voice in fashion" you need looks that match, and this picture does that with aplomb, the best being the train effect of Cruella's garbage dress.  Stone, Thompson, and Beavan are operating in an entirely different league than the picture itself, and as a result we get a juxtaposition of strong & weak elements...for me the latter outweighing the former when it comes to the collective picture.

OVP: Treasure Planet (2002)

Film: Treasure Planet (2002)
Stars: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Brian Murray, David Hyde Pierce, Emma Thompson, Martin Short
Director: Ron Clements & John Musker
Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Animated Feature Film)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

On a total whim this weekend, I decided to start plugging away at not only some upcoming OVP years, but also with a bit of a lens on the Animated Feature Film race.  I saw three of the movies (one more review coming out later this week, the other one you've hopefully already seen but here's a link if you didn't).  With this viewing, I can now count on one hand the number of Animated Feature films I've seen (and still have a finger or two to spare), and weirdly, I am now officially done with every Disney-Pixar film that has ever been nominated in the category.  I don't have a great excuse for why I didn't see Treasure Planet when it came out (I was still living with my parents as I was just a teenager, and we made something of a point of seeing every Disney film, though like most families around this era we'd kind of moved on to Pixar).  Regardless, this movie, which I always thought looked fantastic in posters, has finally been watched, and today you're going to join me on my weird sojourn into animated films past.

(Spoilers Ahead) The film is a loose retelling of the Robert Louis Stevenson novel Treasure Island, though set in space.  We have Jim Hawkins (Gordon-Levitt), a young man obsessed with pirates as a child who as an adult is always getting into trouble, to the point where toward the end of Act I, he destroys his mother's inn.  When he does this, a dying pilot gives Jim a golden sphere which turns out to be a map that will lead him to buried treasure, a whole planet of it.  Along with one of his mother's nerdy customers Dr. Doppler (Pierce), Jim sets off on a voyage to this planet.  The ship is captained by the disciplined (but morally sound) Captain Amelia (Thompson), but her crew is a group of pirates in disguise, led by John Silver (Murray), who takes a shine to Jim, but is still intent on winning the treasure.  Once they get to the island, they discover the planet is in fact real, but a mutiny stakes Jim, Amelia, and Doppler against the pirates & their crew, including John Silver who doesn't want to hurt them, but take the gold for himself.  However, the planet is booby-trapped, and as a result the treasure disappears, with John Silver forced to choose between getting the treasure and saving Jim, and being that this is a Disney movie, he saves Jim.  He thus avoids prison time, and Jim uses some of the treasure to fix his mother's inn...with his eyes still focused on the stars & adventures he might have in the future.

The film on original release didn't do well.  While box office numbers are always rough to get at (studio's pad their grosses and under-report their expenditures), the film is generally considered to be a flop, one of a string of movies at the time from the Mouse House that made everyone think that Disney's reign was being superseded by Pixar.  However, nearly twenty years after-the-fact, I both understand why it didn't do well and am perplexed, since the formula for a good Disney movie is there, even if it doesn't always gel.

The film's best attribute is the animation.  The movie uses a winning combination of 2-dimensional drawing atop 3-dimensional computer animation, and it's gorgeous.  There's very few shots in the film that aren't frame-worthy, and some (like the one I picked for this article), stand out as some of the most beautifully-drawn scenes of this era of animation, where the transition was happening into entirely computer-animated animation.  If you're an animation enthusiast, this is worth checking out simply because it's so pretty, and honestly was enough for me to give the thumbs up regardless of the plot.

The plot is mixed.  I liked Murray's interpretation of John Silver, and his adorable sidekick Morph is super cute and would be a bigger deal if this movie had been a hit (I could see the animated shorts from here).  That said, Jim isn't as well-defined of a main character as I'd usually hope given Disney had just gotten off riveting front-line characters like Belle, Pocahontas, and Mulan, and that Joseph Gordon-Levitt was about to become a very seriously-considered actor.  He's better than some of the side characters, though.  David Hyde Pierce & Emma Thompson had been doing this schtick for years at the time, and honestly are still doing some version of it, and Martin Short's BEN (a robot that they find on Treasure Planet) stands apart as one of the most annoying, unnecessary sidekicks in Disney's annals (and I love Marty Short).  These keep me at about a three, but don't confuse that with a bad movie or one where you'll just enjoy the scenery-it's a fun film.  It's just never going to be Beauty and the Beast, and there's a reason this was a disappointment so soon after the Disney Renaissance.

OVP: Missing Link (2019)

Film: Missing Link (2019)
Stars: Zach Galifianakis, Hugh Jackman, Zoe Saldana, Stephen Fry, Timothy Olyphant, Emma Thompson
Director: Paul Michael Glaser
Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Animated Feature Film)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

We don't normally do double reviews on the same day, but considering that tomorrow is Oscar nominations morning, I figured it made sense to get a second review out for one of the films that seems likely to be competing for a trophy in a few weeks (and should get its first round of good news tomorrow).  Missing Link is an odd film to be going for Oscar's good graces, though its pedigree is high.  Laika has made four feature-length films, and to date all of them have competed for the Academy Award, though none of them have actually won.  Missing Link, though, was a box office disaster earlier this year, not coming close to taking back the movie's $100 million budget, and this is a category that values its hits.  Still, in a year that is brimming with sequels (and to date only Toy Story 3 has won an Oscar for Best Animated Feature as a sequel), this is one of the few critically-celebrated movies to be in contention for Oscar, not to mention its recent Golden Globe victory, and so I suspect Missing Link will continue Laika's tradition of Oscar nominations.  But the question remained for me as I finally caught it on DVD (I was part of the box office problem)-was it any good?

(Spoilers Ahead) The film centers on Sir Lionel Frost (Jackman), a man who wants desperately join an adventurers' club headed by Lord Piggot-Dunceby (Fry).  However, unlike most of the adventurers who hunt big game in Africa, Frost is more interested in proving the existence of mythical creatures.  In the hilarious opening scene, we see him and his over-his-head assistant try to capture the Loch Ness Monster with little success.  He makes a bet to finally gain acceptance into the club if he can provide proof of the Sasquatch, which Frost has received inside information on how to discover.  Turns out the creature actually wrote the letter and goes by the name Susan (Galifianakis).  Frost makes a second deal to Susan that if Frost finds Susan's cousins, the Yeti, in the Himalayas, Susan will provide proof of his existence to get Frost into the club.  As they adventure to the Himalayas, they come across Adelina (Saldana), a beautiful former flame/rival of Frost's.  When they get to the Himalayas, but they find the Yeti to be hostile and not welcoming of Susan, and he then realizes that Frost is the family he always wanted.  In the end, they become an adventuring duo, and both don't care about creating an identity when the one they already have is worthy enough.

It's pretty easy after seeing this movie to understand why the film was a box office bomb.  While Missing Link has at its center a cute, adorable sidekick, it doesn't have an entry point with a child protagonist for younger audiences like some of its past pictures (Coraline, ParaNorman, Kubo) that often countered some of the more mature and grotesque (beautifully so) imagery that the characters are bringing out.  In many ways this feels like something from Aardman, but even then it'd be filled with cuddly sheep and not old men dressed like a Robert Louis Stevenson character.  The movie has a rather traditional animated plot (unlikely friends, valuing your true self, etc), but its motif is unusual for such an audience, and really has only succeeded in recent years with a movie like Up (which is Pixar, and which also has a child as the sidekick, not to mention two adorable animals to latch onto).

But if we live in a world where animation isn't just for children, Missing Link has a lot to offers.  I loved the color palette (green & orange is a good combination), and Galifianakis' act works better in animation than it does in some real-life pictures (for that matter, so does Jackman's).  The movie is repetitive and occasionally drives home the same message over-and-over again (and the Adelina role feels too rife with cliche, a pity as it's the only major female character in the movie), but it's funny and has some solid sight gags (particularly the opening Loch Ness sequence).  Oscar has done worse than this with Animated Feature, and if this is what it finally takes to get Laika its long overdue trophy, so be it.

Men in Black International (2019)

Film: Men in Black International (2019)
Stars: Chris Hemsworth, Tessa Thompson, Kumail Nanjiani, Liam Neeson, Rafe Spall, Rebecca Ferguson, Emma Thompson
Director: F. Gary Gray
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 1/5 stars

I have always had a soft spot for the Men in Black films.  The first one was delightful, the second messy, the third convoluted, but Will Smith's performance in them remain the best thing he's ever done.  He can play a serious, biopic role as much as he wants to, but inevitably I'll prefer him here as a smart, star charisma superhero because that's what he's best at (Smith is one of those dramatic actors who thinks drama means less personality, and feels washed out-Jennifer Aniston is another actor who struggles with a similar condition).  I was curious, though, what this franchise would look like without Smith (or Tommy Lee Jones, for that matter) there to bring some sort of natural star charisma.  Still, if there's another actor working today who can match Smith's natural, likable star persona it's Chris Hemsworth, so I was willing to give this movie a pass.  Unfortunately, the movie continues the steep decline of the franchise since the delicious 1997 film, and considering the picture's box office, might well point to the end of a series that is clearly running out of ideas.

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie focuses not on Smith or Jones's agents (they are never mentioned, though there is a wink to their existence in Neeson's High T's office where they have a painting of them from the first film), but instead on two newer agents, a recent recruit called Agent M (Thompson) who finds the MIB after looking for twenty years, and Agent H (Hemsworth), a good-looking rogue who has started to indulge in alcohol and bad judgment.  The two are assigned to investigate two Twin aliens (Laurent & Larry Bourgeois, well-known French dancers who barely speak in the film), but discover as they're going that there might be corruption coming from within Men in Black headquarters.  All of this is happening while M is hiding a weapon she got after an assassination attempt that can harness the power of a star, literally blowing up planets with the click of a button.

The film's plot is ludicrous and unnecessarily repetitive, particularly since it's obvious from the get-go who the betrayer is.  Liam Neeson, other than Emma Thompson (the only human character that is featured from the initial franchise, and therefore, is above suspicion), is the only actor famous enough to make the double-cross work in a movie that is telegraphing a double cross almost twenty minutes in.  As a result, you're more than aware he's the bad guy, and so distractions involving the Twins or Spall's Agent C are pedestrian at best.  If you can't make the audience invest in a twist that's crucial to the plot of your film, you've already failed at like 70% of being an action-thriller, and MIB International decidedly can't sink this basket.

The other problem, though, is that the main characters aren't as compelling as the first three films.  Tessa Thompson & Chris Hemsworth are both fun movie stars, and have exhibited chemistry before, but it doesn't work here.  They banter, and it's fun because they're unnaturally beautiful and effortlessly cool, but it doesn't elevate the film and oftentimes feels forced.  Thompson's Agent M contradicts herself too often, being as John Mulaney puts it in his stand-up act "a busy businesswoman who only loves business" which you know the writers are going to say doesn't matter (despite it being the core ethos of Men in Black...there's at least one good joke between the two Thompsons about the organization's name that was by-far my favorite moment in the film).  Hemsworth is just doing more Thor here, with him trading on his supernatural human beauty and rakish demeanor, but not giving us anything concrete or distinctive about Agent H.  Making films rely upon the talents of movie stars is what made this franchise work in the first place, but the writers wrote a Will Smith movie for two actors who (while talented) are not Will Smith.  As a result, we get a snooze of a (probable) ending to this franchise.  At least Thomspon & Hemsworth have Marvel to rely upon to keep their careers afloat.

Late Night (2019)

Film: Late Night (2019)
Stars: Emma Thompson, Mindy Kaling, John Lithgow, Hugh Dancy, Reid Scott, Denis O'Hare, Amy Ryan
Director: Nisha Ganatra
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 2/5 stars

In a summer brimming with bloated sequels and remakes, it's nice to see an original movie starring talented women that didn't appear to be some sort of extension of an existing universe.  That was at least my thought when, after a several week hiatus from going to see new movies in the theaters (busy few weeks at my real-life job), I decided it was time to get to the cinema.  With a cast of solid comedians (Kaling, Scott), and of course two acting legends (Thompson, Lithgow), it felt like the perfect summer flick to relax & just enjoy.  While the movie has its elements that are clearly worth cheering about, the picture is unfortunately so similar to The Devil Wears Prada my idea that I wasn't seeing a remake is, at best, only technically not true.  The film borrows so heavily from that celebrated 2006 film that you wonder if Lauren Weisberger is going to get residuals.

(Spoilers Ahead) The film follows Molly Patel (Kaling), a young woman who manages to use a company essay contest to win an interview at a late-night comedy show (in one of the film's cleverer bits, she used the seismic monopoly aspect of, say, General Electric at one point owning NBC, as a way to gain access to an entertainment field she otherwise would have no way of entering).  She gets the job, quite clearly, as a diversity hire (something she learns late in the film), but she still has the talent to succeed despite her boss initially only viewing her as a checkbox.  She's also incredibly earnest and has a confidence that others find off-putting, particularly her new boss Katherine Newbury (Thompson), a TV legend whose once classy-and-polished television show has fallen on hard times in the ratings, and is being replaced by a Dane Cook-style comedian.  She's also suffering in her personal life, trying to cover up an old affair with a writer (Dancy), who is also having a relationship with Molly, and is doing so because she loves her husband Walter (Lithgow), who is slowly dying of Parkinson's Disease.  Molly's ideas start to reinvent the show, giving Katherine a new lease with gimmicky ideas that still feel authentically funny, and it seems like she might be able to save her show, but then the affair is revealed, and we see the glee the press has in tearing down an icon.  Katherine eventually saves the day & gets her show back, but not before she has to have heart-to-hearts with both Molly & Walter, begging their forgiveness for the way she's treated them.

The movie's best asset is Thompson in the lead.  While most of the side characters are vastly underwritten (at one point we're led to believe that Lithgow's Walter is a legend, but we don't really find out what he's a legend in, just one of a number of loose ends in the film), and one could even say this about Kaling's Molly (it frequently feels like her lack of a social life is just a plot point because the screenwriter couldn't think of a way to fill out her back story while still keeping the picture at 100 minutes), Thompson's Katherine is a fully-baked creation.  Borrowing from David Letterman, Ellen Degeneres, Barbara Walters, and Dick Cavett (frequently two or three at a time), this feels like an authentic, true creation, and is the best part of the flick.  Thompson has shown a great proclivity for comedy in interviews, but oftentimes is forced to trade on her thespian roots to class up children's films & comedies-beneath-her.  Here, though, we see her organically fit into this world, resistant to it but we understand why Katherine became a comedic hero to a generation of young performers.

But the film cannot be saved by one good performance, and this is due to the overstuffed plot. The movie has talent in front of and behind the screen (Kaling, also the movie's writer, knows funny as she wrote some of the best episodes of The Office), but trying to stuff in too many references and not really knowing what to do with Molly as a person rather than just using her as a device to focus more on what the introverted Katherine is thinking, fails.  Dancy's Charlie, for example, is literally used just to have sex with Molly & Katherine, without us understanding anything other than he's handsome and a jerk, while Scott's Tom is handsome and seems like a jerk, but is actually a good guy (apparently).  The characters feel interchangeable, and since the movie is essentially The Devil Wears Prada, one could say there are too many "Emily's and Nigel's."  This feels like the producers' way of hiring too many talented comedians for one picture, but it also makes the movie be crowded & clunky, and dilutes the funny in the second half when we've "gotten to know" the characters, but we don't actually know much about any of them except Katherine.  The movie has a great premise, but where Prada succeeded in making a humanizing version of Miranda Priestley and filling us with enough funny side action to not have the movie die whenever she's not onscreen, Late Night only flourishes on the former, with the latter failure making it empty by comparison.

OVP: Beauty and the Beast (2017)

Film: Beauty and the Beast (2017)
Stars: Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Kevin Kline, Josh Gad, Ewan McGregor, Stanley Tucci, Audra McDonald, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson
Director: Bill Condon
Oscar History: 2 nominations (Best Production Design, Costume)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 1/5 stars

I'm going to admit I'm a little bit perturbed at Disney right now, so perhaps this isn't the best day to be writing a review of their biggest hit of the year, but I did give them a (very rare) 5-star review yesterday for the first time in seven years, so I suppose tackling Beauty and the Beast in the same weekend makes sense.  This movie, largely borrowing the same motif as their classic 1991 Oscar winner, is one in a succession of live-action adaptations of Disney's favorite animated adventures; after all, we've already seen Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, The Jungle Book, and Sleeping Beauty brought to the big-screen (with Dumbo, Aladdin, Mulan, and Peter Pan all on their way), so it made sense that arguably their second-wave Disney high-water mark should be brought to life.  Unfortunately, life is what is missing in a dreary, over-produced spectacle that is heavier on getting people to buy merchandise than making an actual movie.

(Spoilers Ahead) The film is a tale as old as time, and so really, you don't need a spoiler alert.  If you've seen the original, there's almost nothing new here, other than the implication that the characters are becoming less human as the enchantment continues, rather than it just changing with the fall of the last pedal.  Otherwise, the only newness is a trio of Alan Menken songs, and of course getting to see the animation brought to life by the magic of visual effects.

That's it-there's nothing particularly fresh to the story, which means it's kind of pointless; if you don't add anything, people can watch the original.  It's hard to knock the film entirely, as it's a good story, but there's no heart here, there's no soul in this movie.  Emma Watson is a fine actress, I'm not one of the people who totally are against her as a performer (I particularly liked The Bling Ring and The Perks of Being a Wallflower), but she is badly miscast here as she doesn't have the voice of Paige O'Hara.  Really, though, other than Audra McDonald (who is such a better vocalist than the rest of the cast it's kind of distracting) no one here is a particularly compelling singer, or at least giving their all (not even McGregor, who as Moulin Rouge! indicated, has the ability to sing well, though that was admittedly 16 years ago so he might not be in the same vocal prowess).  Even though this is a musical, the sound mixing is poor and the singing mediocre, and as a result it frequently feels like we're seeing a cheap knockoff version of the movie, except there's movie stars in literally every corner of the film.

This gaudiness resounds throughout the picture.  I texted my brother during the iconic dance sequence, and said "it seems strange that the worst dress Jacqueline Durran puts on Belle is the yellow ballgown," and I stand behind that.  Durran, one of the best costume designers in motion pictures today, is usually so on-point, but feels saddled here by trying to live within the memory of our childhoods, rather than giving us something unique like Sandy Powell did in Cinderella.  It makes the film feel clunky, like a commercial more than its own product.  Even the wonder of the library scene or the occasional flourishes outside the confines of Disney feel stretched (literally the only non-animated part I liked was Dan Stevens' tiny growl at the end).  Menken's best new number (probably "Evermore") is considerably worse than the least of his original numbers, and no one in the film finds the right tone in their characters.  I tried really hard to see if I was just judging this movie against the original too harshly, as it's one of my favorite films, but even objectively, this movie is dreck, and combined with The Jungle Book is proof that Disney needs to stop trying to force nostalgia down our throats because eventually even the originals are going to feel lukewarm.

Also, before I go insane-did anyone else notice the weird microsecond editing choice of flashing Audra McDonald before the credits of the movie, or was that just my Netflix glitching?  I can find no discussion of this anywhere, so giving my sanity a rest would be greatly appreciated.

2015 Emmy Predictions: The Miniseries

And now we transition from the shows you watch religiously to the TV movies that you have heard of starring the people you know as movie stars.  Yes, it's the miniseries/TV movie categories, which frequently feature the likes of HBO and PBS, though it's worth noting that at least a couple of other channels have snuck in with their own brand of worthiness.  Let's start, shall we?

Best Miniseries

American Crime

American Horror Story: Freak Show

The Honorable Woman

Olive Kitteridge

Wolf Hall

The Lowdown: I think now that Ryan Murphy has admitted that the seasons are interconnected that it might be even more questionable whether or not American Horror Story should be considered legal here, but even so it won't be interrupting the clear winner here.  HBO may not have had what one would consider a stellar miniseries season this past year, but without much competition (and boy howdy is this season generally pretty weak for Mini/TV Movies) I don't think that will matter as Elizabeth Strout's critically-acclaimed novel will surely end up at the top of the mountain.

My Prediction: Oliver Kitteridge

Best TV Movie

Agatha Christie's Poirot: Curtain, Poirot's Last Case

Bessie

Grace of Monaco

Hello Ladies: The Movie

Killing Jesus

Nightingale

The Lowdown: Really?  We really needed six in this category which managed to bring together Bill O'Reilly, a spinoff movie of a TV series no one watched, and a movie considered so bad that it couldn't get a theatrical release despite starring Oscar-winner Nicole Kidman?  I don't throw Poirot in there mostly because it's a swan song and I'm still bummed that David Suchet didn't score a "life achievement" sort of nomination in a pretty paltry season, but you know in a normal year it wouldn't have stood a prayer.  Either way, this is clearly between Bessie and Nightingale, and considering it had the higher-profile and Nightingale has an easy trophy to hand out as a consolation prize in acting, the blues singer is one of the simplest picks of the night.

My Prediction: Bessie

Best Actor in a Miniseries/TV Movie

Adrien Brody, Houdini

Ricky Gervais, Derek: The Final Chapter

Timothy Hutton, American Crime

Richard Jenkins, Olive Kitteridge

David Oyelowo, Nightingale

Mark Rylance, Wolf Hall

The Lowdown: I like to imagine the Emmys and the Oscars have a little bit of a rivalry, with the Oscars being the star older brother to the Emmys shy, under-performing sister (their cousin Tony is the guy whom everyone looks nervously around when Grandma Peabody says "I wish he'd find a nice girl").  As a result of this, I think that the Oscars clear snub of David Oyelowo and the backlash against them will only strengthen his hand in trying to take home a different trophy this year.  Richard Jenkins theoretically has a chance if Olive is a blowout, but I doubt it will come to that.

My Prediction: David Oyelowo

Best Actress in a Miniseries/TV Movie

Maggie Gyllenhaal, The Honorable Woman

Felicity Huffman, American Crime

Jessica Lange, American Horror Story: Freak Show

Queen Latifah, Bessie

Frances McDormand, Olive Kitteridge

Emma Thompson, Sweeney Todd at Lincoln Center

The Lowdown: An extremely prestigious affair, with all six women sporting Oscar nominations to go with their Emmy nods, though I suspect most of them don't have a prayer.  The best bets here are on Latifah, McDormand, and Lange (Gyllenhaal did win a surprise Golden Globe, and theoretically could score but I suspect not with the Emmys who aren't as likely to surprise on TV as the Globes).  McDormand has the most lauded program and doesn't have an Emmy (unlike Lange, who has three), and as a result I think that may be enough for her to seal-the-deal and get the Triple Crown, but don't entirely discount the other two women if you're being ballsy in your predictions.

My Prediction: Frances McDormand

Best Supporting Actor in a Miniseries/TV Movie

Richard Cabral, American Crime

Damien Lewis, Wolf Hall

Bill Murray, Olive Kitteridge

Denis O'Hare, American Horror Story: Freak Show

Michael Kenneth Williams, Bessie

Finn Wittrock, American Horror Story: Freak Show

The Lowdown: In a perfect world, this would be an easy win for Finn Wittrock, who created the most iconic performance of this bunch and had a "star is born" year in general (plus, the women on AHS always get all of the love).  However, the Emmys like their winners a bit sturdier than that, and Bill Murray hasn't won an Emmy award in 38 years.  He's also starring in the much buzzier miniseries, and doesn't have a costar to compete with (one has to assume that Denis O'Hare has Emmy fans considering he keeps getting nominated for these nothing roles).  As a result, expect Murray, if he shows up, to give a speech social media goes gaga over.

My Prediction: Bill Murray

Best Supporting Actress in a Miniseries/TV Movie

Angela Bassett, American Horror Story: Freak Show

Kathy Bates, American Horror Story: Freak Show

Zoe Kazan, Olive Kitteridge

Regina King, American Crime

Mo'Nique, Bessie

Sarah Paulson, American Horror Story: Freak Show

The Lowdown: After four nominations a lot of people seem to think this is Sarah Paulson's year, and indeed she did have a truly showy spot this past season as a two-headed woman (which had to have gained notice from voters).  Her competition, though, isn't a bunch of slouches, particularly Regina King (who has been a TV trouper for years and just got her first Emmy citation) and Kathy Bates (who won last year and is gunning for a third-never discount the Emmys ability to add yet another trophy to a shelf).  Paulson's biggest threat, though, is Oscar winner Mo'Nique, who likely isn't campaigning too heartily (it's about the performance, not the politics), but is universally regarded as an acting titan after her bravura work in Precious.  Considering the struggles she's had to make movies since then, one wonders if the Academy's acting branch will stand tall with her.  She's the underdog, but not by much.

My Prediction: I'm going to go with a rare upset (I don't usually do that since awards shows have gotten considerably more predictable in the past five years) and predict Mo'Nique.

And there it is-who do you think is taking the trophy?  Whom are you cheering for?  Share in the comments!

What Happened With Oscar?

I'm aware that it's been, what, five days, and suddenly the entire world has moved beyond the surprises and the snubs and everyone suddenly predicted The Grandmaster for Best Costume Design and Christian Bale for Best Actor.  However, I thought it would be worth looking a little bit more into five of the biggest snubs of this year's Oscars and trying to figure out, mathematically, which was the biggest head-scratcher.  Here's my homework:

What Happened with...Tom Hanks?
Precursors: BFCA Awards, SAG Awards, Golden Globes, BAFTA
Oscar History: During the 1990's, he could do no wrong at the Oscars.  Hanks won back-to-back trophies in 1993 and 1994, and was nominated for Big (1988), Saving Private Ryan (1998), and Cast Away (2000).  He's also on the AMPAS Board of Governors.
Why This Makes No Sense: Well it's certainly not the precursors-Hanks is the first person EVER to miss at the Oscars in Best Actor after getting nominated for all four of the previous televised awards shows.  It's also not due to Hanks over-performing historically with these awards bodies: he has always turned a BAFTA citation into an Oscar nod (ditto the SAG Award) and while he's made it with HFPA without making it with Oscar, it's never been for a drama.
Why This Makes Sense: Hanks has a history of watching his films get Best Picture nominations while he misses for acting.  Apollo 13, The Green Mile, and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close all three landed Best Picture nominations without Hanks scoring for acting, and Catch Me If You Can and Road to Perdition both scored multiple Oscar nominations without Hanks making it.  Perhaps the clincher here is that all five of these films, plus Captain Phillips have something else in common: a Best Supporting Actor nomination.  It's not a perfect theory (damn you Gary Sinise!), but the odds seem to oddly be against Hanks if one of his costars is getting nominated.  Perhaps he's too generous on the campaign trail?

What Happened with...Emma Thompson?
Precursors: BFCA, SAG, Golden Globes and BAFTA
Oscar History: Over the course of four years, Thompson managed to win two Oscars and gain five nominations, one of the most impressive counts during the 1990's.
Why This Makes No Sense: Unlike Best Actor, it's not unprecedented (Marion Cotillard, Tilda Swinton, and if we discount BFCA since it wasn't doing nominations, Jane Horrocks all have had a miss after hitting every major precursor), but it's still extremely rare-only the fourth time it's happened in twenty years.  Thompson oddly doesn't over-perform at the BAFTA Awards relative to the Oscars (only one other film prior to Saving Mr. Banks didn't get her to Oscar), so it's not that.
Why This Makes Sense: This makes sense when you view it through the lens of Amy Adams and Meryl Streep and two odd facts about them.

First Adams-it is extremely rare for Oscar to nominate a film with a female star for Best Picture and not nominate the film for Best Actress.  While there have been a few films with multiple female leads and only one got in (The Kids Are All Right, The Help, The Hours), there are only four films that I can find in the past twenty years that scored with Best Picture but not Best Actress (Cate Blanchett and Benjamin Button, Keira Knightley and Atonement, Toni Collette and Little Miss Sunshine, and Andie MacDowell and Four Weddings).  Conversely, there were thirty films that pulled off both.  Adams was going with 88% odds, not a bad place to be for someone the Academy has already nominated as many times for acting as Thompson.

Secondly, we have Meryl.  Everyone knows that Meryl has seventeen Oscar nominations (...now 18), but one of the more underreported aspects of Meryl's career is that it has very few coattails that don't benefit her first.  Looking just at films where Meryl was the lead actor (like August Osage County), only one film she's ever made has received an acting nomination without her being nominated: The Hours.  And Meryl received an Oscar nomination that year for Adaptation, which everyone knew she would be scoring, putting less pressure on the Academy to cast off Salma Hayek.  That wasn't the case this year with Meryl only having one film to carry her, and with Julia Roberts looking strong in the supporting category.  A near perfect track record for Streep wasn't something Thompson was going to be able to top.

Add onto this that Dench and Bullock were also in Best Picture nominees, and no one would quibble that Thompson was more likely than Blanchett, and you have your explanation.

What Happened with...Oprah Winfrey?
Precursors: BAFTA, BFCA, and SAG Awards
Oscar History: Winfrey received an Oscar nomination for her first film role in The Color Purple, and is a recent recipient of the Jean Hersholt Award.
Why This Makes No Sense: Multiple reasons-this one for some reason seems the oddest to me.  Winfrey is a huge celebrity, scoring a major comeback in a critical (and perhaps more crucial) commercial hit, and had Harvey Weinstein plugging her.  It'd be one thing if she wasn't any good in the film, but she's even that-she acts circles around June Squibb and I'd put her above Julia or Sally.  So why, Academy, why?

It isn't the lack of the Globe nomination, oddly enough.  In fact, in the past ten years, the actress who missed at the Globes but made it with the SAG Awards got Oscar-nominated 60% of the time (the reverse is only 40%, and that's including Hawkins).

Why This Makes Sense: About the only explanation I can think of is The Butler missing in all other fields, while Blue Jasmine, August Osage County, Nebraska, American Hustle, and 12 Years a Slave all came with not only more nominations, but also acting nominations.  In the past twenty years, 70% of the nominees for Best Supporting Actress also came with another nominated actor.  I think that's probably the best explanation here-Cate Blanchett's coattails carried Sally Hawkins across the finish line.  If Forest Whitaker had only been stronger, Oprah would have made it.

What Happened with...Paul Greengrass?
Precursors: DGA, BAFTA, BFCA, and HFPA, plus a Best Picture nomination
Oscar History: Greengrass was the odd-man-in, the role now taken by, let's say Marty Scorsese, for United 93.
Why This Makes No Sense: That's a LOAD of precursors to miss on.  Plus, people who traditionally miss with AMPAS and score with the DGA Awards do it multiple times (Christopher Nolan, Cameron Crowe, Rob Reiner) and never score in this category, which Greengrass already has done.
Why This Makes Sense: This is the first one that I have to become objective on-there's no mathematical evidence for Greengrass missing with this many precursors without going to subject matter analysis.  It's not to say this doesn't happen (Ben Affleck and Kathryn Bigelow both did it last year), but quite frequently, the more standardized films frequently get ousted for edgier fare: Haneke over Affleck in 2012, Greengrass over Bill Condon in 2006, Mike Leigh over Marc Forster in 2004, and Fernando Meirelles over Gary Ross in 2003.  While few would argue that Scorsese isn't establishment, his film is far edgier and more catered to this branch than Captain Phillips.

What Happened with...Hans Zimmer?
Precursors: HFPA, BFCA, and BAFTA nominations
Oscar History: Zimmer won an Oscar for The Lion King and has ten nominations for scoring.
Why This Makes No Sense: Zimmer is one of the biggest names in music in one of the most clique-oriented branches of the Academy (witness Alexandre Desplat making it when few thought he would).  And he got snubbed for Arcade Fire-first time nominees in a rock band...that may fly with the Globes, but the Oscars?  Doubtful.
Why This Makes Sense: Unlike, say, John Williams, Zimmer goes in spurts with the Academy.  Zimmer has missed on two Best Picture nominees (Driving Miss Daisy and Frost/Nixon), something unfathomable for several composers.  Sometimes the Academy runs cold with him-considering he also had a shot with Rush, his prolific nature may have cost him as well.

Anyway, those are some of my theories-what are yours?  How do you think these five missed with Oscar?  And which is the biggest surprise?

25 Thoughts I Had About the Oscar Nominations

Chris Hemsworth & Cheryl Boone Isaacs

So, it’s the day after Oscar nomination day, and I have gone through a few different iterations of what I want to post.  I will be covering all of these more in-depth when I have more access to the thirteen unseen films for the OVP (the vast majority of which are foreign or animated).  Instead, I’ll go with 25 random thoughts I had while perusing today’s nominees, in no particular order (except they’re kind of in order).

1. I promise that this won’t be a full American Hustle bashing session, but how did Bale get in-the other three I can see based on competition, precursors, and performance-but Bale over Tom Hanks?!?  Are you serious here?  I’m not even going to complain about how someone like Joaquin Phoenix or Oscar Isaac or Michael B. Jordan or Ethan Hawke (all significantly better than Bale) should have made it, but Hanks is Oscar-beloved.  Two-time winner.  Staging a major comeback.  In a Best Picture nominee.  Come on Academy-you can do better than this.

2. Robert Redford is probably the snubbed actor who cares the least that he was snubbed.  I have a feeling that Redford’s Oscars are in an attic somewhere.

3. I should have made the jump and predicted Emma to lose-it seemed so obvious in hindsight (the film was losing steam, she hasn’t been an awards presence in years), but I just couldn’t see beyond the Julie vs. Julia narrative.  Anyone think Adams might be able to win?

4. How much better is Michael Fassbender than all of his other nominees?  It’s not even close, and yet he’s probably in third place to Leto (who else is dreading this season’s series of random nonsense speeches) and Cooper (Hustle mania!)

5. I totally predicted all five of the Best Supporting Actors right.  I knew it would be Hill.

6. Two-time Oscar nominee Jonah Hill

7. The real sad thing about Oprah missing is that of the “six” potential nominees, I’d put her in third.  They should have cut Roberts, who is the worst case of category fraud since Casey Affleck.  And how is it that Sarah Paulson, Octavia Spencer, Melissa Leo, and Emma Watson somehow managed to miss all of the major precursor awards in this ridiculously rich year for Supporting Actresses?

8. I wish I could have seen The Wind Rises and Ernest and Celestine before this morning’s nominations.

9. Note to all striving cinematographers: shoot your film in black-and-white.  You’ll get an Oscar nomination.  Even if the film's look is hopelessly generic.

10. I cannot get a grasp over whether Patricia Norris can finally break her streak here-both Catherine Martin and Michael Wilkinson have a shot to upset her and send her into the all-time losers book.

11. It says something about how much I hate Nebraska that David O. Russell will not get last place in the OVP.

12. Stories We Tell I understand missing (it’s so unconventional), but how did the socially relevant Blackfish get trounced for Dirty Wars, possibly the least publicized Documentary on the shortlist, and one that I’ve heard is severely underwhelming (Addendum: I haven’t seen it).

13. Don’t you hate when people complain about a film getting nominated and they haven’t seen it?

14. I wouldn’t have nominated Wolf of Wall Street for Best Editing (…probably), but Thelma deserved it more than Dallas Buyers Club.

15. First Time Nominee Cambodia!!!  I love when a country gets its first nomination.

16. I am done with the Makeup branch-seriously.  Perhaps the only category I was rooting for American Hustle in outside of Lawrence, and they skip it.

17. Some may complain about how Thomas Newman, John Williams, and Alexandre Desplat got yet another Oscar nomination, but Arcade Fire beat out Hans Zimmer (who was doing a Best Picture nominee, no less)-they were thinking ever so slightly outside the box.  Also: Oscar Nominee Saving Mr. Banks (barely).

18. Alone Yet Not Alone gets the title for film I’ve never heard of that somehow got nominated for an Oscar.  And looking at the trailer, it also gets the title of "OVP movie I'm least looking forward to seeing," and that's in a year that Bad Grandpa is nominated.

19. Spike Jonze got three Oscar nominations-anyone else notice that yet?

20. Somewhere Harvey Weinstein is looking into a magic mirror, saying who is the most Oscar-nominated of them all, and seeing Megan Ellison pop up in the reflection.

21. The Hobbit had the best Art Direction of the year.  I don’t care that they’ve gone there before.  I don’t care at all-it’s still the best, and possibly the best of the series since Fellowship.

22. So The Hobbit misses in Best Art Direction and Best Makeup, but somehow lands a nomination in both Sound categories?  Huh?

23. How is it that there’s always one film that splits the Sound categories, and the other four go to the same films…and how was Rush not nominated?  For anything?

24. The Lone Ranger takes out Pacific Rim in Visual Effects, proving that no one knows anything…and attending the Visual Effects bakeoff would really help my Oscar predicting.

25. Dallas Buyers Club beating Inside Llewyn Davis for the final slot in Best Original Screenplay makes me want to cry.

And those are the first 25 thoughts I have looking at the nominees from this year’s Oscars!

OVP: Saving Mr. Banks (2013)

Film: Saving Mr. Banks (2013)
Stars: Emma Thompson, Tom Hanks, Colin Farrell, Paul Giamatti, Jason Schwartzman, B.J. Novak, Bradley Whitford
Director: John Lee Hancock
Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Original Score)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 4/5 stars

I sometimes feel like I should take Prozac right before Oscar season, considering the complete depression that is about to set in from all of the movies.  I mean, just look at last year’s Best Picture lineup: hurricanes, slavery, strokes, mental illness, terrorism, and constant death.  It’s rough out there for an OVP-writer.  I also have to admit that I occasionally have trouble in my writing finding the greatness in a small or pleasant film-the crowd-pleaser was such a jovial part of Oscar’s history in the 1940’s through the 1960’s-films like It’s a Wonderful Life, An American in Paris, Gigi, The Sound of Music, that it’s worth celebrating a bit when a fun film like Babe makes it into the Oscar race.  Of course, for every excellent Babe, there’s an awful Seabiscuit, so I will say that I was nervous headed into Saving Mr. Banks, this year’s feel-good Oscar contender.

And yet, I totally buy into it.  The cross-promotion with Disney crossed the line into obscene during Emma Thompson’s hotel scene, and we still had an hour’s worth of the happiest place on earth, but it works.  Disney is fun-I have no problem with it at the movies.

And this movie is fun-genuine, complete fun.  There’s nothing wrong with that, particularly when it’s filled with strong performances from everyone involved.  Emma Thompson, who has received the bulkload of the hosannas, is deliciously watchable-this is the Thompson we always see in interviews but rarely get the chance to enjoy on-screen.  She’s full of vigor, candor, wit, and as the film goes on, deep substance.  Thompson’s Mrs. Travers (never Pamela, and we eventually learn why), is someone who has been disappointed by life.  She had a deeply traumatic childhood, which unfolds in flashbacks throughout the film.  This device threatens to be cloying (telling multiple stories is always a risk, because the film rarely gets the balance right and one of the stories is generally more interesting than the other), but since we are well aware of the endings of both, the balance seems quite right.  Toward the end of the film, when the clearly depressed and traumatized Thompson has to deal with her demons, Mrs. Travers’ hard-earned tough exterior melts in a scene that again, should be cliché, but isn’t.

That might be the battle cry of this movie, which improves in your memory the further you get from it: “it should be cliché, but isn’t.”  Tom Hanks, playing a jovial, uncomplicated Walt Disney, should be grating and saccharine, but he comes from such a genuine place that I found myself rooting for him just as much as Thompson (after watching this film, one of the great mysteries of this year’s Oscar race remains how he never got any traction considering he is very much her equal in terms of quality).  The scene where he puts his hand on her shoulder while she is weeping, watching her on-screen father walk away during the Mary Poppins premiere-it’s practically perfect in every way.  Only Hanks has that sort of instant warmth and resonant tenor to pull off such a moment without risking hokum.

Honestly, though, the casting director of this film deserves a reward of some sort (is there a Casting Directors’ Guild Awards?  If so, someone nominate Ronna Kress for it).  B.J. Novak and Jason Schwartzman sink right into their fraternal composers effortlessly and Rachel Griffiths has exactly the right dose of magic to inspire a beloved children’s character without ever stretching believability.  And, though he doesn’t have the prestige that Thompson or Hanks inspire (despite the fact that he probably should considering his work in In Bruges), Colin Farrell as young Mrs. Travers' drunken, magical father is so strong.  It’s not quite fair to say that he’s been ignored (every review I’ve read adds in the same caveat that “no one is talking about Farrell, but he’s quite good”), but in terms of talking about him in the Oscar conversation, he is unfairly being skipped over in favor of Hanks, and they both should be in the discourse.

In terms of Oscar, I don’t know where this ranks (I try not to discuss too much with Oscar chances because it so horribly dates a review, but they’re less than two weeks away so I’m going there).  If the Weinsteins were behind a film like this we’d already be calling it a theoretical spoiler for the Best Picture race, but Disney isn’t a major player with AMPAS when it comes to their live-action fare (worth noting, the original Mary Poppins lost to My Fair Lady in the Best Picture race).  I do think that if they see it, Thompson will make it, and I wouldn’t be stunned if Hanks managed dual nominations, but we shall see.

And speaking of seeing-have you (with Mr. Banks, that is)?  What were your thoughts?  Were you surprised how much you enjoyed the film?  Share in the comments!

I've Got a Globe, I've Got a SAG...I've Got a Problem!

Mila Kunis: Always the bridesmaid with Oscar?

Earlier today, I made a list of the ten actors who didn't score a Globe or SAG nomination that were most likely to still manage to make it with Oscar.  Now, I think it's time to do the inverse.  It's of course worth noting that a Golden Globe nomination or a SAG nomination without an Oscar nod is nothing to scoff at; after all, these are still large platforms and ones that an actor will be able to gain work from for years.  However, this is an "OVP" sort of blog, and getting an Oscar nomination is a part of that, so let's take a look at the actors that were nominated for both but couldn't cut it with Oscar.  Here's a look at the past ten years:

2012: 4 (John Hawkes, Marion Cotillard, Helen Mirren, Nicole Kidman)
2011: 2 (Leonardo DiCaprio, Tilda Swinton)
2010: 1 (Mila Kunis)
2009: 0
2008: 1 (Kate Winslet)
2007: 2 (Ryan Gosling, Angelina Jolie)
2006: 1 (Leonardo DiCaprio)
2005: 2 (Russell Crowe, Ziyi Zhang)
2004: 1 (Paul Giamatti)
2003: 2 (Evan Rachel Wood, Maria Bello)

You would think that 2009 (the year we're discussing at the moment) was a variety of nominees which caused it to be the only exemption, but actually 19/20 of the actors that were nominated at the Globes and SAG Awards also made it at the Oscars (only Maggie Gyllenhaal pulled a come-out-of-nowhere to best Globe nominee Julianne Moore and SAG nominee Diane Kruger), so write that one down as just bizarre.

Otherwise, we have very similar stats to our other list-one actor who made it with both the Globes and the SAG Awards is likely to miss with Oscar.  Looking at this list, you see a few patterns.  For starters, people who managed to get in twice with the Globes/SAG Awards (Kate Winslet, Leo DiCaprio) can't pull it off with Oscar.  Actors who made it for films that received middling/poor reviews suffer quite a bit.  Bizarrely, the bulk of these actors were Oscar nominees at the time (only five weren't).  And all but three of the nominees were in films that didn't get a Best Picture nomination (chalk Leo up to category fraud-there's no figuring out the Giamatti and Kunis's snubs as they don't fit into any bucket I just listed and somehow still missed).  Therefore, I'm making the list below based on both these findings and gut instinct:

(It's worth noting that there are seventeen actors that received a Globe/SAG nomination this year, and a number of them I cannot fathom missing with Oscar.  They are: Chiwetel Ejiofor, Matthew McConaughey, Cate Blanchett, Sandra Bullock, Michael Fassbender, Jared Leto, Jennifer Lawrence, and Lupita Nyong'o.  I honestly think that 90% of the below nominees will probably make it as well, but these eight seem tattooed in place with Oscar).

8. June Squibb and Bruce Dern (tie)

Why They Would Miss: While Dern is the more famous of the two, both actors are relatively low on the fame scale and this is a pretty small film.
...Then Again: As illustrated above, it's rarer to miss with Oscar if you've never been nominated, and both of these two actors are hitting the campaign trail hard.  Plus, this is going to be a Best Picture nominee, and Dern in particular is doing everything he can to make it through.  These are the only two actors listed here that I see as having an outside shot of winning the Oscar, as well, so their snub would be particularly jarring for the race.

7. Julia Roberts

Why She Would Miss: The role is clearly a lead, and category confusion has cost people before in a similar situation (Leo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet both got sacrificed for such an issue).  The film doesn't have spectacular reviews, she's got internal competition, and it's been a long time since she was in Oscar's good graces.
...Then Again: Honestly, with the exception of the category confusion (which does seem like a legit issue for Roberts), those other reasons seem less important.  Roberts is a superstar, and Oscar isn't going to turn her down when she has a Globe and a SAG nomination-this would be a truly surprise miss, and the competition trying to push her out (Sally Hawkins, Sarah Paulson, Margot Robbie, Octavia Spencer) isn't daunting enough to get there.

6. Judi Dench

Why She Would Miss: The film is quite small, and despite an oddly effective Globes campaign (they do love British films and international travel), it probably won't pop up too many more places.  Dench is an Academy favorite, yes, but has missed out a few times when she could have scored in recent years (Nine, Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, Skyfall), so perhaps she's not as beloved as she once was?
...Then Again: While there's at least a hint of Dench-fatigue, they've never gone against her with this much support, and there are more likely candidates to skip in this race.  If Philomena is the Best Picture nominee that Harvey lands (some think it will be), Dench is that much more secure.

5. Meryl Streep

Why She Would Miss: The film's reviews are middling, and she's been losing a bit of steam on the campaign trail (some people are still tsk-ing that questionable third Oscar).  Could Meryl Streep be the one who scores with both the Globes and the SAG Awards and miss with Oscar?  Stranger things have happened, I suppose...
...Then Again: Meryl doesn't miss with Oscar.  While the Globe Awards do love her more than AMPAS, she's only once scored with both HFPA and SAG and missed with Oscar (for The River Wild, which happened to be the first year of the SAG Awards).  This is more likely than Dench, but still a pretty tough sell.  AMPAS hardly wants "Meryl Misses" as their headline on the 16th.

4. Tom Hanks

Why He Would Miss: Best Actor is a five-man race with six men competing.  With McConaughey, Ejiofor, and probably Dern all locked up, it comes down to Hanks, Redford (who bizarrely missed with SAG and therefore isn't on this list), and Leo DiCaprio to fight it out for the final two slots.  While the Globes helped the film tremendously, this film still feels a little bit "yesterday's news."
...Then Again: We're talking about a Tom Hanks comeback here-he's not only a two-time winner, he's also a longtime member of the AMPAS Board of Governors.  Plus, Leo is always over-rewarded by the Globe awards and seems a pretty solid bet for the miss here.

3. Emma Thompson

Why She Would Miss: We're now making the jump from "theoretically possible they'll miss" to "genuine possibility they'll miss."  On paper Thompson doesn't make a lot of sense, as she checks most of Oscar's boxes: great campaigner, former winner, comeback of sorts, biopic, British.  However, the film hasn't caught fire like anyone expected it to, and there's a good chance she's the only nomination for the movie come Oscar morning.  She doesn't have quite the fame that Streep and Dench do to cause a "STUNNING MISS!" uproar and her spot in Drama with the Globes means that she's not going to take a trophy to help her cause.
...Then Again: Those attributes listed above are really good for her-unlike some other people on this list, she's willing to go the distance and is clearly pushing hard for a sixth Oscar nomination.  Adams, Larson, Exarchopoulos-they're all going to have to campaign ferociously to make this thing happen.

2. Barkhad Abdi

Why He Would Miss: No one has heard of him.  A screen debut, a non-professional actor-this occasionally works, but it's almost always in the female categories.  Someone like Dwight Henry from last year is a good reminder that critical praise in a Best Picture nominee doesn't always sit well if you're a first-timer.
...Then Again: It's a weird conundrum.  On paper, he makes the most sense for a miss.  Can you name the last time an actor got in for a screen debut?  I believe it was Edward Norton, and he had major work that year in People vs. Larry Flynt and Everybody Says I Love You (both films the bulk of the Academy would have seen) to go along with his nominated work in Primal Fear (if there's a more recent male example, the comments are right there).  However, people don't usually miss for a Best Picture nomination and most people (myself included) think this is more likely to take than the Number One.

1. Daniel Bruhl

Why He Would Miss: Honestly, it feels very Leo in J. Edgar here-an actor who was a strong contender throughout the fall manages to make it into both races despite momentum for his film ebbing and disappearing right before awards season.  Unlike Saving Mr. Banks and Captain Phillips, this doesn't seem like appointment viewing for AMPAS.
...Then Again: The only thing truly helping Abdi and Bruhl is that this category has only two "locks": Fassbender and Leto.  There's still a wide-open fifth slot (James Gandolfini and Bradley Cooper split the fifth slot with SAG and the HFPA and neither of them seem "lock-like") and AMPAS doesn't like to get adventurous with multiple slots in the same category.  Otherwise, Bruhl seems the most likely to miss of the seventeen.

Those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Which of these actors misses this year, or are we in for a year like 2009 where everybody's a winner? Share in the comments!

State of the Race: Oscar Updates

There are other precursors (most notably BAFTA, which is an honor in and of itself, as well as the BFCA’s, which might as well be an Entertainment Weekly prediction article because they have all of the prestige and half the class of it), but the SAG Awards and the Golden Globes give us 90-95% of our big six nominees each year.  Since both are now announced, I thought it would be the perfect time to start looking at where we’re at for each category (I’ll revisit Best Director at a later date when we have the DGA nominees, but I’ll throw in Animated Feature to make up for its absence):

Best Picture

Golden Globe Nominees: 12 Years a Slave, Captain Phillips, Gravity, Philomena, Rush, American Hustle, Her, Inside Llewyn Davis, Nebraska, The Wolf of Wall Street

SAG Nominees (technically it’s Best Cast, but I’m counting it here until ): 12 Years a Slave, American Hustle August Osage County, Dallas Buyers Club, Lee Daniels’ The Butler

Other Names We Should Remember: There are thirteen movies listed above in what is likely an 8-9 film wide list.  This is probably it, though Saving Mr. Banks and Blue Jasmine oddly couldn’t score at the Globes and SAG Awards, respectively.

The Lowdown: We’ll tackle who will win it all when we get the actual nominees, so in terms of nominations, Gravity, 12 Years a Slave, American Hustle and Captain Phillips all feel pretty locked in place by now.  I’m also going to assume that Inside Llewyn Davis (the new ten-wide favors the Coen Brothers), Nebraska (prestige film from a director who has scored here before) and The Wolf of Wall Street (everyone loves Marty) make it as well.  That leaves us with three hypothetical slots-I’m going to assume that most years are going to have nine, so I’ll go with Dallas Buyers Club (it clearly has support from the actors’ branch, a key component to a nomination here) and August Osage County (That cast! Harvey!) to make it in the final slots.  If there were a tenth, I’m leaning toward The Butler (That cast! Harvey!) over the less showy Her.

My Nominees (in order of likelihood): 12 Years a Slave, Gravity, American Hustle, Captain Phillips, Nebraska, Inside Llewyn Davis, The Wolf of Wall Street, August Osage County, Dallas Buyers Club

Best Actor

Golden Globe Nominees: Chiwetel Ejiofor, Idris Elba, Tom Hanks, Matthew McConaughey, Robert Redford, Christian Bale (American Hustle), Bruce Dern, Leonardo DiCaprio, Oscar Isaac, Joaquin Phoenix

SAG Nominees: Bruce Dern, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Tom Hanks, Matthew McConaughey, Forest Whitaker

Other Names We Should Remember: Poor Michael B. Jordan, too sexy and too independent to gain any traction this year.

The Lowdown: Our five Best Actor nominees are most certainly one of these eleven men, and we can throw out Idris Elba (who saw that coming?!?), but that’s about it.  Honestly, while there are a lot of locks in this race (McConaughey, Dern, Ejiofor, and probably Redford despite the weird miss with SAG), any of these men could make the cut and you wouldn’t bat an eye about it.  However, Isaac is too young, Phoenix is too out-there, Bale is too over-shadowed by his female costars, and Whitaker is too bland.  That leaves DiCaprio and Hanks, the Catch Me If You Can duo, battling it out for the last slot.  A week ago I would have assumed that Hanks would be cut since he has a supporting consolation prize, but with the nose dive for Saving Mr. Banks, they’ll want him somewhere and so I’m tentatively cutting Leo, as the Academy has been lukewarm on him considering the amount of Globe nods he has compared to Oscar.

My Nominees (in order of likelihood): Chiwetel Ejiofor, Matthew McConaughey, Bruce Dern, Robert Redford, Tom Hanks

Best Actress

Golden Globe Nominees: Amy Adams, Julie Delpy, Greta Gerwig, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Meryl Streep, Cate Blanchett, Sandra Bullock, Judi Dench, Emma Thompson, Kate Winslet

SAG Nominees: Cate Blanchett, Sandra Bullock, Judi Dench, Meryl Streep, Emma Thompson

Other Names We Should Remember: While Oscar pundits will continue to keep Adele Exarchopoulos and Brie Larson on their charts, it seems very unlikely that the nominees won’t be one of the ten above women (and really only six of them).  Also, though she never had a shot at the Oscar nod, what is with the Globes and Melissa McCarthy?  Seriously-name me another performer in a recent memory that starred in back-to-back $100 million comedies, got an Oscar nomination for acting, and won an Emmy that couldn't even muster a single Globe nod?  I don't think there is one; the HFPA clearly does not like Melissa McCarthy.

The Lowdown: Congratulations to Kate Winslet, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Greta Gerwig and Julie Delpy on your Golden Globe nominations-I hope you have a terrific night and get sauced and maybe get into a drinking contest to live stream on YouTube (where’s that Kickstarter account, because I have $100 ready and willing).  However, none of you will be nominated for the Oscar for Best Actress in a few weeks, as that is between the six remaining women.  Honestly, aside from Blanchett and Bullock the other four women appear to be relatively easily matched.  Yes, Adams is the only one that isn’t on everyone’s predicted lists and she missed at the SAG Awards, but she’ll still be at the SAG Awards (Best Cast nominee), there’s a good chance she’ll win the Globe (her first significant acting trophy ever) and she’s starring in a major Best Picture contender.  Add in the fact that she’s the youngest contender (a major factor with Oscar) and that she’s the only one of the women never to win and I suspect she’s going to make it.  Of the other three, while I reserve the right to change my mind, I think that Emma Thompson may be the one that gets cut-her film hasn’t gained traction anywhere, she’s the least “right now Box Office” of the six, and she’s the only one in her 50’s (a rough time of life for Oscar and actresses).  Plus, Disney isn’t strong at campaigning for Oscars and Meryl/Judi have Harvey behind them.  Any of those four women could be cut, but right now I’m leaning toward Emma.

My Nominees (in order of likelihood): Cate Blanchett, Sandra Bullock, Judi Dench, Meryl Streep, Amy Adams

Best Supporting Actor

Golden Globe Nominees: Barkhad Abdi, Daniel Bruhl, Bradley Cooper, Michael Fassbender, Jared Leto

SAG Nominees: Barkhad Abdi, Daniel Bruhl, Michael Fassbender, James Gandolfini, Jared Leto

Other Names We Should Remember: Every year there’s at least one actor that makes Oscar’s list without a SAG or GG nomination-this seems like the most likely category considering the relative weakness of a few of the nominees.  Tom Hanks (Saving Mr. Banks), Will Forte (Nebraska), or Jonah Hill (The Wolf of Wall Street) all could be that name.

The Lowdown: Oh what a difference a week makes.  This time Monday we had all written Daniel Bruhl out of the race and were assuming that Barkhad Abdi was going to go the way of Ann Dowd (remembered but not really).  Then came a double nomination.  While I would believe an argument that counts one of them out, it’s impossible to see them both missing, so one of them is about to get his first Oscar nomination.  I’ll assume that Fassy and Leto both make it (ugh-I have a feeling that Jared Leto is about to pull a sweep at awards shows), and because I can’t predict between the two, I’ll predict Bruhl and Abdi.  Bradley Cooper makes more sense on paper than Gandolfini (Oscar doesn’t do posthumous very often…certainly not as much as other awards shows), but I’m sticking to my guns and assuming a non-ordained nominee skates in with Oscar.  Tom Hanks makes SO MUCH more sense, but vote-splitting and the lackluster response to Saving Mr. Banks has me going toward Jonah Hill by a hair.

My Nominees (in order of likelihood): Jared Leto, Michael Fassbender, Barkhad Abdi, Daniel Bruhl, Jonah Hill

Best Supporting Actress

Golden Globe Nominees: Sally Hawkins, Jennifer Lawrence, Lupita Nyong’O, Julia Roberts, June Squibb

SAG Nominees: Jennifer Lawrence, Lupita Nyong’O, Julia Roberts, June Squibb, Oprah Winfrey

Other Names We Should Remember: Oscar charts will recall Margo Martindale and Octavia Spencer, but let’s be honest-they’re too well-known to have missed twice and not score with Oscar.  That leaves Margot Robbie as the only other name I could see sneaking in this late in the game, as her film’s momentum is still growing and Scorsese is oddly good with this category (he’s scored five Oscar nods for supporting actresses over the years).

The Lowdown: No matter what happens on Oscar nomination morning, it is difficult to fathom something as stunning as Oprah Winfrey not being nominated at the Globes.  I was positive she would win the thing, and now she won’t even be nominated.  Her chance for winning the Oscar went down the tubes this morning as well (that’s Lupita Nyong’O’s to lose at this point), but I still think she manages to make it with AMPAS.  Along with her will be the other doubly-nominated actresses, and Sally Hawkins/Margot Robbie will have to treasure the reviews for their films and the extra exposure their roles gave to their careers.

My Nominees (in order of likelihood): Lupita Nyong’O, June Squibb, Jennifer Lawrence, Julia Roberts, Oprah Winfrey

Best Animated Feature

Golden Globe Nominees: The Croods, Despicable Me 2, Frozen

The Lowdown: Aside from Oprah missing, the biggest snub of the morning was Pixar and Monsters University­-this is the first time EVER that the studio has missed out on an Globe nomination (it was even nominated for Cars 2) and that could be a sign of things to come in what is basically a 6-7 film race.  I suspect that Oscar stays five-wide (though that would be a curious question and would reshape this race dramatically) and that Frozen, The Croods, and The Wind Rises (ineligible for the Globe here, but it was nominated for Best Foreign Film, so it was definitely endorsed heartily) are all three nominated.  The final four films are Despicable Me 2, Monsters University, Ernest & Celestine, and Epic, which is feeling more and more like a Pirates: Band of Misfits situation (both films had Oscar-nominated/winning directors to add some cred with the animators’ branch).  I feel like Epic is being underestimated and Despicable Me 2 should probably be more obvious than it is, but I’ll stick (barely) with Monsters U and Ernest & Celestine, knowing that both could quite easily fall.

My Nominees (in order of likelihood): Frozen, The Wind Rises, The Croods, Monsters University, Ernest & Celestine

Also, while I linked to one of our past Golden Globe articles (you can find the others here and here), I did want to note some of the movement on the list.  No one broke onto the "most honored without a single Oscar nod list," though Michael Fassbender and Sally Hawkins now have two without an Oscar nod (though both could obviously make it in with AMPAS in a couple of weeks).  Leonardo DiCaprio would move into fifth place if he doesn't make it to the Oscars with The Wolf of Wall Street and Meryl would be second only to Shirley MacLaine if she gets skipped for August Osage County.  And though the math isn't quite with her for a tie-break, Julia Roberts would hit the threshold of five nominations to at least tie Al Pacino if she can't get in for August Osage County.

And there you have the nominees-what are your thoughts?  Do you agree/disagree?  And what were your thoughts about the SAG and Golden Globe nominations?  Share in the comments!