Roundup: The trouble with the artist biopic
Also: The foreign-language Oscar boost, and holding off the 'Les Mis' train
Helen Mirren and Athony Hopkins in "Hitchcock."
Are you a fan of In Contention?
Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.
It sure feels like a long time ago that Fox Searchlight announced it was releasing "Hitchcock" in 2012 and multiple Oscar pundits adjusted their Best Picture charts: the film's detractors keep growing in number, some offended, others merely bored. (I haven't had an opportunity to see it yet.) One of the best pieces for the prosecution I've read comes from Scott Tobias, who uses his issues with the film as a springboard for a discussion about the problem with artist biopics in general: they tend to be so much more conventional than the figures they're about, and "any scene that fails to illuminate the creative process is more banal than trivia." He cites "Topsy-Turvy" and "32 Short Films About Glenn Gould" as examples of films that successfully dodge the "Wiki-movie" pitfalls of the artist biopic; I'd add "I'm Not There" and "Before Night Falls," among others. [A.V. Club]
Always nice to welcome a smart new voice to the Oscar-blogging fray: the excellent Joe Reid is covering the season for Film.com and kicks off with column explaining why the awards slog is ultimately good for us. [Film.com]
Ian Sandwell looks into why even a nomination for the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar makes a world of difference to distributors and bean-counters. [Screen]
While others are going full steam ahead with Best Picture predictions for "Les Mis," Jon Weisman is a little more cautious: it can win, he says, but has "enough bumps and bruises to hurt it." [The Vote]
Also unconvinced is Steve Pond, and not just because he was personally left cold by much of the film: he remembers that "Dreamgirls" also premiered to a rapturous response. [The Wrap]
Meanwhile, with many of her colleagues reaching for newer, shinier toys, Sasha Stone restates the case for "Argo." [Awards Daily]
India will be next year's "guest country" at the Cannes Film Festival, following Brazil this year and Egypt in 2011. I was at Cannes both years and confess I have no knowledge of this tradition, but it sounds good. [Hollywood Reporter]
Mary Ann Skweres talks to editor William Goldenberg (who's shooting for two Oscar nods this year) about his work on "Argo." [Below the Line]
Amy Kaufman talks to Cheryl Cohen Greene, the real-life sex surrogate played by Helen Hunt in "The Sessions." [LA Times]
Empire magazine votes "The Avengers" the best film of 2012. I am an occasional contributor, but I had no part in this. [Twitter]
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
-
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
-
'Traumatized critics exhale.'Monday, May 20, 2013
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupLadesh
November 27, 2012 at 10:37AM EST Reply to CommentThat pretentious nonsense was one of the "best pieces for prosecution"?
"biopics... tend to be so much more conventional than the figures they're about."
And how does Scott Tobias know that the figures in question are, in fact, not rather conventional? The examples he cites, while artistic, are, well, artisitic.
Those films certainly have their place but the work people do does not necessarily equate with the people themselves.
I guess, had 'Hitchcock' involved the man prouncing around and randomly breaking into song it would have been justified.
Otherwise...
"what do we really learn about Alfred Hitchcock? That he was temperamental and uncompromising? That he possessed a mordant wit? That he was kind of a jerk to his wife sometimes?"
I guess this is supposed to be common knowledge for everyone.
Of course this is from someone who also wrote this:
"Hitchcock is about Hitchcock, and any minute we spend away from him in this movie is a minute squandered."
I'm sorry but that reads more like a Wiki-movie than the one that actually shows Hitchock in context.
And, Guy, stop reading negative pieces on the films you haven't seen. "Hitchcock" is actually pretty good.
Ladesh Just to be clear, I don't disagree that some biopics can be pretty boring and uninspired. Or too episodic. I actually don't even like the term.
November 27, 2012 at 10:50AM ESTI'm just picking up on this strange notion that the work and not the relationships should always be at the center of such films. The real issue could be the one of expectations.
And on the lighter note, that Empire list is not that much worse than the one by Cahiers du Cinéma :) .
daveylo When I used the word "universal" I meant that Les Miserables the show has found a devout following around the globe. I know not everyone likes it. I hate Andrew Lloyd Webber shows too. But I appreciate Les Miz.
November 27, 2012 at 2:28PM ESTI'm a lover of the classic American musicals and I much prefer them to the British bombastic blockbusters. But even the musical genius Sondheim can be pretentious.
Guy Lodge Should I not read positive pieces either? I assure you I have enough faith in my own critical judgement to read writers I enjoy without assuming I'll agree with them.
November 27, 2012 at 7:11PM ESTDylanS
November 27, 2012 at 11:01AM EST Reply to CommentThe reason I'm not there doesn't fall into the pit of Biopic banality is because it isn't a biopic.
daveylo
November 27, 2012 at 11:11AM EST Reply to CommentI think Les Miserables as a musical is a completely different entity than Dreamgirls. Les Miserables has had universal appeal after it opened two decades ago. I think it will do better at the box office than some other recent musicals and it will also do well abroad because it's so well known internationally. I have no idea which way the Academy will go. Spielberg is part of the Hollywood community. Hooper is well respected by Hollywood and TV directors. Ang Lee obviously is well liked in Hollywood as well. I wonder if Zero Dark Thirty will be considered an extension of The Hurt Locker and will fare less well with the Academy, despite its integrity. Where does this leave Argo? Or The Hobbit and Django Unchained for that matter. I don't get the hype for Silver Linings Playbook. It's good but nowhere near the other films being considered for best picture this year.
Paul Outlaw "Universal" is a stretch. Les Miz is the first Broadway musical I (a musical fan) ever hated. I found it boring, pretentious and long. And it belongs to the Phantom/Cats/Miss Saigon period that virtually killed the genre IMHO. Dreamgirls, despite any problems with its book and score, was always the more accessible (and more fun) of the two.
November 27, 2012 at 1:26PM ESTBut I am really looking forward to the movie of Les Miz. I doubt that I'm alone in this.
JJ1 Have to disagree with you there, Paul. But this really is only a subjective matter of opinion. I grew up on Les Miserables, Phantom, Cats, and Miss Saigon and have loved them from the moment I saw them and for many years since. I do understand the confusing thing and the length thing. But I disagree in that I think the film is pretty universal.
November 27, 2012 at 1:34PM ESTJJ1 Not film (haven't seen it) .. I mean the book/play
November 27, 2012 at 1:35PM ESTPaul Outlaw Growing up on Rodgers, Hammerstein, Hart, Sondheim, Hart, Kern, Styne et al., it's hard not to hate the Cameron Mackintosh/Android Webber era. Which is why "universal" is a word I would never apply to any of those late '70s/'80s musicals. But as I said, I am really looking forward to the film of Les Miz. I think the medium (and that cast) will make the material a lot more accessible.
November 27, 2012 at 1:46PM ESTPaul Outlaw Clearly, I'm a fan of Rodgers & Hart. ;-)
November 27, 2012 at 1:46PM ESTJJ1 Gotcha :)
November 27, 2012 at 1:48PM ESTGautam
November 27, 2012 at 1:25PM EST Reply to CommentGreat to know that India will be guest country at Cannes next year. It seems India is really flavor of the season as TIFF also had featured Mumbai in its City section. The problem though is that Indian film industry is completely a parallel universe with hardly anyone caring much about these festivals. Yes there are director like Anurag Kashyap and Dibankar Banerjeee who are leading an independent film movement but that's it. The sensibilities of Indian films are very different from rest of the world and there are very few directors who care to make films catering to world audience. Moreover, since India is a very self-sufficient market for films which doesn't need any outside or Hollywood help, there is no pressing need to make global cinema. It's really an irony with focus being on India, for better or worse, there are very few who care about it and India will continue to make larger than life musicals - commonly referred to as masala movies. Though having said all this, India also makes some great cinema and sadly those go unrecognized because of the preconceived notion that Indian films carry. Come to think of it, films like Slumdog wins 8 Oscars and frankly speaking, that's a kind of cinema that's bread and butter for Bollywood. Even A.R.Rehman will tell you that he has made atleast 20 better soundtracks than Slumdog. Even SLP this year, felt like coming from the same stable.
Any opinions, Guy ?
Guy Lodge I enjoyed your comment, but I'm not quite sure on what subject you're inviting my opinions. I'm afraid I don't see a broad enough spectrum of Indian cinema for my insight to be particularly valuable, though I'm grateful for an informed perspective.
November 27, 2012 at 7:14PM ESTGautam Guy, being a connoisseur of world cinema, you definitely must be having some opinion on why Indian films haven't made a breakthrough in the West inspite of the fact that it's the biggest film industry by viewership. Is it because of the difference in sensibilities [as I have mentioned above] or India actually doesn't make quality cinema enough to be recognized in the west ? This question has been intriguing me for a while since I myself, have been exploring world cinema for quite some time and feel Indian films have become victims of their own image. Obviously European sensibilities of film-making are quite different, but I have found Hollywood to be making and recognizing their own films which not very different from Indian sensibilities while completely ignoring Indian films.
November 27, 2012 at 9:22PM ESTJLPatt
November 27, 2012 at 7:41PM EST Reply to CommentBest artist biopic ever made: "Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters." Hands down. No competition. Pack your bags and go home. Surprised no mention of this one.