Roundup: Have the Oscars reconnected with America?
Also: The sequels we need to see, and why Jessica Chastain is exhausted
"Django Unchained"
Are you a fan of In Contention?
Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.
The great Frank Rich has weighed in on the Oscar race with what is sure to remain one of the best pieces of the season, in which he celebrates what he sees as the Academy's return to relevance: "Whatever the explanation—and little in show business happens by design—the movie industry has reconnected with the country. It has produced no fewer than four movies that have provoked animated, often rancorous public debate: 'Zero Dark Thirty,' 'Argo,' 'Lincoln,' and 'Django Unchained,' a film that pushes so many hot buttons you can’t quite believe it was made." He goes on to make the case for why "Django" deserves the Best Picture award, and even if you disagree -- I certainly do -- it's an essential, exuberant read. [New York]
Why "Amour," for all its focus on senior citizens, may play better to younger audiences. [The Guardian]
Sasha Stone believes "Argo" vs. "Lincoln" is this year's David vs. Goliath awards narrative. Though with a star director, season-long hype and over $100 million in the bank, "Argo" is a pretty beefy David. [Awards Daily]
With "Before Midnight" still hot from Sundance, Nathaniel Rogers asks what kind of sequels are necessary at the movies. [The Film Experience]
In a tight race for Best Animated Feature, Glenn Whipp wonders if Academy members are actually going to watch all the nominees before voting. [Gold Standard]
How an exhausted Jessica Chastain has discovered the difficulty of balancing a Broadway show with the awards circuit. It used to be more common for actors with the same dilemma to opt out of the latter. [The Wrap]
Five reasons why Joaquin Phoenix should beat Daniel Day-Lewis to the Best Actor Oscar. [Jeremy Helligar]
Melena Ryzik listens in on a PGA panel in which producers of many of this year's Best Picture nominees spill production secrets. [The Carpetbagger]
Mark Boal on the scene he found hardest to write in "Zero Dark Thirty." [Vulture]
In a movie landscape where Abraham Lincoln has pierced ears, Rebecca Keegan investigates how faithfully our contemporary appearances can serve period pieces. [LA Times]
2012-2013 OSCAR PREDICTIONS
Best Picture
Best Director
Best Actor
Best Actress
Best Supporting Actor
Best Supporting Actress
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Original Screenplay
Best Cinematography
Best Costume Design
Best Film Editing
Best Makeup And Hairstyling
Best Original Score
Best Original Song
Best Production Design
Best Sound Editing
Best Sound Mixing
Best Visual Effects
Best Animated Feature Film
Best Documentary Feature
Best Foreign Language Film
Latest Posts
-
What's good and what's bad directly from the PalaisWednesday, May 22, 2013
-
Zal Batmanglij's latest hits theaters May 31Tuesday, May 21, 2013
-
Michael Douglas and Matt Damon excel in Soderbergh's witty Liberace biopicTuesday, May 21, 2013
-
The actor-director gets all the best close-ups in his Faulkner adaptationMonday, May 20, 2013
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupDylanS
February 5, 2013 at 11:19AM EST Reply to CommentI'm an admirer of Phoenix's work in "The Master", and I think his performance fits into the overall package of the film perfectly. But I disagree with that article in regards to the character of Freddie being more complex than any of the other nominated performances. Actually, I'd argue that Freddie is a pretty simplistic character, he's a disturbed drunk in search of meaning, that's really all there is there. I think Phoenix's physically in the role makes him far more distinctive than that, but I don't think that necessarily makes Freddie any more complex, just a unique persona.
If "The Master" were a novel, it would likely be written from Freddie's perspective, and that would be a fascinating read, with Freddie's intoxicated ramblings being our eyes through the character of Dodd. But in that sense, he's the more functionary character, where the ideas in the film stem much more from Dodd. I'd actually say Phoenix's biggest contribution to the film is the comic relief he provides, it helps significantly to lighten the tone of the film. That scene where he says "I wanna fart in your face." Hilarious!
i'm just kidding about that last part, but it did strike me on a second viewing that if this film didn't have Paul Thomas Anderson's name on it, it would probably get criticized by people for all of the fart jokes and broad comedy, of which there is a lot. Just think about that.
DylanS As a side note, I'd say the most complex character in the Best Actor category, with emphasis on character, is actually Bradley Cooper in SLP.
February 5, 2013 at 11:21AM EST/3rt How is Cooper more complex? He and Phoenix are playing mentally unstable people.
February 5, 2013 at 11:41AM ESTRichardZ Denzel in Flight is probably more complex.
February 5, 2013 at 11:44AM ESTTodd Oh, I must have read a different article. The one I read didn't compare the complexity of the characters but rather commented on the beats that Phoenix got to play in The Master, which combined major elements of three of the characters played by the nominated actors. I mean, was anyone really more complicated than Abraham Lincoln was?
February 5, 2013 at 2:04PM ESTDamned Martian I'd say Cooper's character SHOULD be complex. But isn't. Paper-thin writing prevent him from being, despite Cooper's efforts. On the other hand, Phoenix's character may not be as profound on page (debatable), but his acting does marvels to add layers of guilt, repression, angst, cowardice and frustration, among many other emotions that build a great portrait of post-traumatic stress and loss.
February 5, 2013 at 2:05PM ESTAnyway, I actually prefer Day-Lewis. But only just.
DylanS The writing is excellent in SLP, and people are entitled to disagree, but I think they are responding more to a disliking of the style of comedy and not really any fundamental flaws in the writing.
February 5, 2013 at 3:43PM EST/3RT: Different variations on mental instability. I don't know how to explain it, but Cooper's character provides a more challenging performance dramatically. That's my feeling, anyway.
/3rt Does one characterization feel more natural to you than the other? I could see you feeling more emotionally responsive to Cooper over Phoenix, but what it took to deliver either performance couldn't have been a cakewalk for either man.
February 5, 2013 at 4:19PM ESTDamned Martian Well, the script blatantly refuses to shed any light or to go any deeper in Cooper's traumas, behavior, obsessions, etc. or in the origins of his pathology, his relation with his father, his past, his marriage, etc. than what simply serves the plot to advance and create the minimum conflict. You may like or even love the result for how it mixes its pieces, but I don't see how anyone can think that it gets deep in the character's psychology or motivations besides the plot-driven traits.
February 5, 2013 at 4:31PM ESTIf we keep comparing it with The Master, PTA's film is more abstract and its plot is only the result of characters colliding and interacting, so the focus on the character's psychology runs systemically deeper. Again, you may say that the script misrepresent its characters, that the deepening in their psyche is imprecise or lame or badly written... I myself am not a particularly big defender of the film. But focusing on characters and their respective dark places is the very core of its nature, it's what it aims for.
DylanS /3RT: I definetly think there is an emotional component to it. As I eventually grew to care about Coopers character on some level in a way I never did with Phoenix, his character always just kind of seemed like a helpless fuck up to me, from start to end, whereas Cooper is playing a fuck up with Redeeming qualities, which I think is more challenging. I think what Joaquin is doing is less accesible, and I think people have a tendency to mistake that for being nuanced, but often making a character more accesible requires grounding them, which can actually provide more substance and humanity. And certainly neither performance was a cakewalk. None of the categories performances are a cakewalk.
February 5, 2013 at 5:58PM ESTMartian: The script doesn't blatantly refuse anything. It choses a very specific approach. It may bother you that the film is so unabashedly aware that its a romantic comedy, but that doesn't mean there's something wrong with the script. The script knows It can't make all those things you said a primary focus. It is certainly plot and formula driven, but Russell has worked some depth in there. Not really with the marriage, i'll give you that, but in little moments we get to understand the father/son relationship and Lawrence's husbands death, for example.
Damned Martian So we're basically on the ame page here: the script doesn't go deep, it chooses formula and plot over character introspection. The point is, that's what makes Cooper's character less layered. It just doesn't aims for that. It's perfectly respectable (I didn't like the film, but I even loved others that choose the same approach, so...).
February 5, 2013 at 6:25PM ESTWhat I'm refusing is the notion that Cooper's character is deeper than Phoenix's. And I don't think your argument that you were fond of Cooper's character and hated Phoenix's doesn't mean the first one is deeper. It's just a better human being overall, but not because of something profound or meaningful. It's just written as kinder and inoffensive. Different traits, not deeper traits.
Oh, and by the way, I liked Cooper a lot. He and Lawrence where great, more or less the only things in the movie I liked, even loved. So I'm not trying to attack him.
Damned Martian ^^EDIT: "same page"
February 5, 2013 at 6:26PM ESTDamned Martian EDIT 2, damn it: "And I don't think your argument that you were fond of Cooper's character and hated Phoenix's means the first one is deeper"
February 5, 2013 at 6:28PM ESTI should be reading my sentences before publishing, especially since english is not my first language.
DylanS quite alright about the edits, I often forget to double check what I type, and I don't have the excuse of English being a second language. haha
February 6, 2013 at 12:07AM ESTa) "So we're basically on the ame page here: the script doesn't go deep, it chooses formula and plot over character introspection."
Not entirely, no. I don't think SLP trades in character introspection for formula, as I don't think there's any reason they can't co-exist, I think there's plenty of character layering being done in SLP, but doing so in the context of a romantic comedy. I said nothing about abandoning character introspection in the process.
b) Yes, I am fond of Coopers character, at least more than Phoenix's. But I GREW into that fondness, It didn't start out that way, as I found him abrasive at first. The reason I grew to like him was because I started to see his layers as a person, I was able to connect, sympathize and even relate to him on some level. That NEVER happened with Phoenix for me, I think his character does evolve ever so slightly, but I don't think that amounts to a whole lot of depth, considering he's basically a filthy animal at the start. I wouldn't say i HATE Qwell though, that's simplifying it. I think he's pathetic and helpless, which is the point of his character, IMO.
And this is probably getting lost in the specificity of this conversation, but I like "The Master" more than "Silver Linings Playbook", and I also like Phoenix's performance a lot to. Not nearly as much as PSH, but I was immersed in what he was doing. There's nothing wrong with his performance outside of some indulgences, but I blame that on Anderson and not Phoenix.
Chris138 I also found Denzel Washington's performance in Flight to be more complex, and interesting, than Joaquin Phoenix's in The Master.
February 6, 2013 at 2:28AM ESTDamned Martian The 'hate' part was because of my vocabulary, didn't find a better word.
February 6, 2013 at 3:58AM ESTI give you one thing about Cooper: he added layers to the character than were extremely thin on the page. Many other actors wouldn't have done such a great work.
/3rt Martian, what's your first language?
February 6, 2013 at 4:22AM ESTDamned Martian I'm a Spaniard (I actually hate that word, sounds like a race of dog).
February 6, 2013 at 4:24PM ESTRichardZ
February 5, 2013 at 11:43AM EST Reply to CommentUp is down, mixed metaphors, and Writing 101! My head spun reading the AD piece. The top nominees made a lot of money in the box office, and none of the top nominees would be considered as the Little Miss Movie that could. Making Argo to be the David is like putting a square peg in a round hole. The David and Goliath narrative is not playing out this year unless we're talking about the Beast of the Southern Wild--a movie with metaphors that I still have not figured out.
Bradley
February 5, 2013 at 1:17PM EST Reply to CommentI took my mother to see Amour back in November. While I thought it was one of the best films I'd seen that year, my mum thought otherwise. While she appreciated it was well made and acted, she turned to me and said "I just don't think they should be allowed to make films like that." That I shouldn't take her to anything like that again, as quite frankly, she doesn't want to be reminded of what's coming down the line in her old age. She went on to state her belief that anyone who ENJOYS the film is morbid, akin to cinematic rubbernecking. She said a similar thing about The Impossible but that didn't stop her recommending it to her friend. So I went into work the next day and my boss, an Academy Award Nominated Producer in her late 40's, told me that she's seen Amour 3 times, and can't wait to watch it again. Not only did she find it impeccable on a technical level, but it moved her. It's her favourite film of the year. The director we're working with, a two time Academy Award Nominated director in his early 70's... he refuses to watch the film. For reasons similar to that of my mother. And since then I've wondered if Amour might suffer from Brokeback-Syndrome where older members of the Academy just won't watch it because of their thoughts on the subject matter.
Oh, and I think Joaquin is more deserving than Day Lewis. Just.
Damned Martian So... Stephen Frears doesn't want to see it but it's one of the favorites of Tracey Seaward? ;)
February 5, 2013 at 2:02PM ESTBradley Who ARE you?!
February 5, 2013 at 9:11PM ESTDamned Martian Well, you have been VERY specific. There's only one "two time Academy Award Nominated director in his early 70's", so...
February 6, 2013 at 3:53AM ESTSorry if I've said something inappropiate.
Jonnybon
February 5, 2013 at 1:42PM EST Reply to CommentPhoenix, Hoffman, Riva, and Hathaway would satisfy me. And I certainly agree with Frank Rich about Django. Masterpiece.
scottish_punk
February 5, 2013 at 3:03PM EST Reply to CommentWell, the Oscars sure as hell haven't reconnected with me. Negative as that may sound, it's just my personal opinion. Very happy for DJANGO, though.