Ok. Now that's over with. I don't have to pretend like it's a race or something. Barring some strange upset, Argo will win. It's virtually swept all the precursor awards (BAFTAs, Critics, Guilds). I'm pretty bored by now looking at this like a question. But, like I did last year, and as I've done in depth for the years before that, I want to look at how credentialed the best picture nominees are.
Last year, The Artist was the obvious winner no matter how you looked at it. This year is a bit less obvious.
FACT: Directing, Acting, Screenplay, and Editing. It's safe to say that a movie needs at least three of those to win.
Going back 78 years to the first year that Editing was a category (before that, things were a little screwy) it has only happened once that the winner had any less than three of them (Hamlet in 1949, by the way, which probably missed out because adapted screenplay wasn't a category. Last year, this criteria narrowed the list of reasonable picks down to 4 movies. This year, is only narrows it to 7.
Once again, Argo will win, so let's look at some numbers and start handicapping from most to least likely to win.
First, let's look back 78 years and see which of the big four categories the eventual winner had at least one nomination in.
| Years | Directing | Acting | Screenplay | Editing |
| 2001-2011 | 11/11 |
9/11 |
11/11 |
11/11 |
| 1991-2000 | 21/21 |
18/21 |
20/21 |
21/21 |
| 1981-1990 | 30/31 |
27/31 |
30/31 |
31/31 |
| 1971-1980 | 40/41 |
37/41 |
40/41 |
38/41 |
| 1961-1970 | 50/51 |
47/51 |
49/51 |
45/51 |
| 1951-1960 | 60/61 |
53/61 |
59/61 |
54/61 |
| 1941-1950 | 70/71 |
63/71 |
67/71 |
63/71 |
| 1934-1940 | 77/78 |
70/78 |
74/78 |
68/78 |
Now, here is the nominee breakdown:
| Directing | Acting | Screenplay | Editing | |
| Amour |
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
| Argo |
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
| Beasts of the Southern Wild |
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
| Django Unchained |
X
|
X
|
||
| Les Miserables |
X
|
X
|
||
| Life of Pi |
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
| Lincoln |
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
| Silver Livings Playbook |
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
| Zero Dark Thirty |
X
|
X
|
X
|
Only has two nominations in the two least important categories.
The only other nominee with less than three of the nearly required four nominations.
That means that seven others looked to be serious players on nomination day. That's pretty impressive parity which is why this has been a fun Oscar season in my book.
Next cuts:
The nomination it is missing is the [normally] all-important directing field.
Now, this is where I would normally eliminate Argo for the same reason, but Fuck the statistics.
No Foreign movie has even won best picture. It's sort of an embarrassing fact but it's true nonetheless.
It lack an Editing nomination. These days, that's the kiss of death.
Here's where I have to start getting creative.
It's a comedy. I haven't broke down the numbers, but comedies don't or rarely win. The shocking thing is just how much love it's gotten so far.
True, Silver Lining Playbook had acting nominations that Pi lacks, but I'm looking at it from a 2003m Return of the King prism. When a movie rack up so many technical nominations, it means that no matter how good the acting, the cinematography outshines it.
Or, we could look to Slumdog Millionaire and say that the Academy is scared of Indian people.
That means the runner up in my judgment is...
Box office + Powerhouse acting + Directing nomination + Screenplay and Editing to boot + a ton of other nominations = a movie that has every reason to win.
But, of course, because reason plays no part in this, the winner will be...
...wait for it...
The only thing that makes sense is that people like the movie but hate Ben Affleck and I don't say that as a joke. It got the Editing and Screenplay nominations and looks poised to win them. The sole acting nomination goes to Alan Arkin's limited role. Meanwhile, Affleck the director and only lead goes without personal recognition. It's bizarre, and after this movie wins, I assume Affleck will have a Directing Oscar for a lesser movie in a make-up call, much like Ron Howard (a name heard time and time again this season).
Personally, I don't really care which movie wins. I have no horse in this race. I keep looking for a movie that I like more than the others but can't find one.
I missed the bandwagon for Beasts of the Southern Wild and was not all that impressed.
Amour is a well crafted film, but felt like some blatant "Cry Olympics".
Silver Linings Playbook is a refreshing change of pace from standard romantic comedies, but didn't add much more depth to the genre.
Life of Pi is pretty but I just plain didn't care for the story itself.
Lincoln is a bunch of speeches albeit amazingly delivered speeches.
Les Miserables is an impressive production but drained the hell out of me while watching.
Django Unchained feels a little stale after Tarantino did the same thing with Inglourious Basterds but in a different setting and is needlessly long. You're seriously telling me that movie needed to be three hours long. Really?
Zero Dark Thirty is interesting enough for two hours to get me to the stellar final act and I am absolutely perplexed by Bigelow not being recognized for her direction, but I have a hard time not seeing this movie as completely disregarded in about 5 years.
1,2,3...6,7,8...fuck. I guess that leaves Argo, a perfectly accomplished little movie, that does little to offend while also failing to sit with me for longer than a few minutes after it goes to credits.
I liked all these movies more than I've stated above (except Bests. I really don't get the big deal about that one). I'm just making a point. I didn't love anything here. Had something I love like Looper, for instance, made the cut that'd've been nice. As is, indifference and I suppose joy that nothing I truly disliked (like The Artist last year) made it this far.
No comments:
Post a Comment