Golden Globe nominations announced

For the films of 2012
nightwingnova
Temp
Posts: 396
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:48 pm

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby nightwingnova » Sun Dec 16, 2012 8:58 pm

I just finally got to seeing A Separation - and realized how great a year it was for film in 2011, and how unexcited I am with the current slate for awards this year.

To be fair, I haven't seen most of the year's "best" yet, but am not excited to do so.

A Separation is excellent social drama. The Artist distilled silent film aesthetics and nostalgia for an inspiring and beautiful celebration of it. My favorite film of 2011 was the powerfully introspective Melancholia. And, Hugo was simply an excellent, mature family movie, with its one black mark being its length extended by its indulgent film history lesson at the end. (I hated Tree of Life, an overly-indulgent and pretentious rumination.) I even thought Beginners was a gem.

So, this year? Zero Dark Thirty and Amour haven't opened yet here. I found The Master to be without much insight. Early reviews of Les Miserables seem to indicate that it is a bit overwrought. I got Beasts of the Southern Wild, Lincoln and Argo to see, but while the last two may be good...I've never gotten very excited about recreations of history.

I'm so bored, I'm looking forward to Die Hard 5!

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 2594
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Okri » Fri Dec 14, 2012 7:33 pm

Sabin wrote:
Okri wrote
Admittedly, I'm one of those that was really taken with Beasts of the Southern Wild and Wallis' ferocious energy (and I wasn't even drunk), but I don't get why Magilla's being so dismissive.

Y'know...you open up to some people... :P


I was more mocking Magilla's declaration after your admission than the admission itself, fwiw.

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12539
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby OscarGuy » Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:42 pm

I've seen the performance and were it nominated, it would be a disappointment. Wallis can glare at the camera just fine, but there's nothing in her performance that is of nominatable merit.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5816
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby flipp525 » Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:06 pm

Okri wrote:Admittedly, I'm one of those that was really taken with Beasts of the Southern Wild and Wallis' ferocious energy (and I wasn't even drunk), but I don't get why Magilla's being so dismissive.

What I find even more baffling is this strange insistence that such-and-such performance will not only be nominated, but will win the Oscar, 100% SIGHT UNSEEN by the prognosticator.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7364
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Sabin » Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:12 am

Okri wrote
Admittedly, I'm one of those that was really taken with Beasts of the Southern Wild and Wallis' ferocious energy (and I wasn't even drunk), but I don't get why Magilla's being so dismissive.

Y'know...you open up to some people... :P
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

User avatar
criddic3
Tenured
Posts: 2750
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:08 pm
Location: New York, USA
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby criddic3 » Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:12 am

Big Magilla wrote:
Okri wrote: Admittedly, I'm one of those that was really taken with Beasts of the Southern Wild and Wallis' ferocious energy (and I wasn't even drunk), but I don't get why Magilla's being so dismissive.


Ferocious energy is not acting. Any kid in that role, white, black, boy, girl, could have done the same thing. For most of the film her face isn't even to the camera when she's speaking. Were her lines dubbed afterward? She may be the greatest child actress since Peggy Ann Garner, but I'll wait until she does something more substantial to determine if I agree and so I expect will the Academy.


Having just watched this movie last night, I have to say I agree with this. I was skeptical of Wallis' chances beforehand because of her age, but now that I've seen the performance I know that there's nothing spectacular about it. There are some great images and a few affecting scenes, but she doesn't do anything that suggests much acting. This was all direction and editing, though she does display feisty attitude in several scenes. I have to say I'd be shocked to see the Academy nominate this performance alongside the names being mentioned. And I say that as someone who would like to see the Academy pay more attention to good juvenile performances in the lead categories. Six is a tricky age. Really tough to know how much the child contributes to the performance. A few years more should tell if she really can act.
"If you can't stand the nut on the left and you can't stand the nut on the right, go for the Johnson,” Jonathan S. Bush (10/21/2016)

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15660
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Big Magilla » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:08 pm

Okri wrote: Admittedly, I'm one of those that was really taken with Beasts of the Southern Wild and Wallis' ferocious energy (and I wasn't even drunk), but I don't get why Magilla's being so dismissive.


Ferocious energy is not acting. Any kid in that role, white, black, boy, girl, could have done the same thing. For most of the film her face isn't even to the camera when she's speaking. Were her lines dubbed afterward? She may be the greatest child actress since Peggy Ann Garner, but I'll wait until she does something more substantial to determine if I agree and so I expect will the Academy.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 2594
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Okri » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:21 pm

I'm not convinced that the film was ever gonna go over big with the HFPA. Small (they prefer big) and uniquely American (as opposed to generically so, or more internationally flavoured), I don't think the inveterate star-fuckers that are the Globes would go for a breakthrough child actress - they didn't nominate Aibigail Breslin from Little Miss Sunshine for example.

But more than that - the year is still really amorphous. After Lawrence, Chastain and Mirren there's a group of ladies that could be nominated. Italiano's pointed out the issues Riva faces. Cotillard gives a great performance and her film is quite good, but no one seems to be really embracing it (a shame). The Deep Blue Sea would be the smallest grossing major nominee that I can think of (even Tumbleweeds grossed more). [i]Anna Karenina seems to have more people talking about the gimmick (and Jude Law's performance) as opposed to Knightley. And even Mirren is the kind of default fifth slot nominee that manages to get nominated every year but never is in the conversation for a win (see also Morgan Freeman, Invictus). Dench and Smith are in the running, I suppose, but no one's even talking about their movies.

Admittedly, I'm one of those that was really taken with Beasts of the Southern Wild and Wallis' ferocious energy (and I wasn't even drunk), but I don't get why Magilla's being so dismissive.

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6428
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Mister Tee » Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:52 pm

The Original BJ wrote:I know we all make fun of them, but it's worth noting that (at least to me) the Broadcast Film Critics came up with a far more interesting list of nominees than either SAG or the Globes..

That was true last year, as well. They nominated Drive, Fassbender, Olsen, Theron, Mulligan, Woodley. It may be a function of their trying to cover all bases, but they include alot of the cooler choices along with the dreck.

Most bizarre fact someone elsewhere noticed: six cast members of The Hours (Streep, Kidman, Moore, Harris, Danes & Daniels) got nominated here today.

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15660
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Big Magilla » Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:41 pm

That's the kind of performance that needs SAG and HFPA support and it didn't get it. Of course, with SAG it was a union issue, but the Globes who have nominated numerous children in the past were not impressed.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5816
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby flipp525 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:37 pm

Big Magilla wrote:And they are not going to nominate that little girl from the Southern Wild any more than they nominated Shirley Temple in 1934 when she made eleven films, all of them box office hits, and became the no. 1 box office star.

I'm invoking The Original BJ's "bird in the hand" rule for "that little girl" from Beasts of the Southern Wild. Quvenzhané Wallis had the first buzz for Best Actress this year (of a performance that had actually been released). We bet against it every year and it always comes true. I also have a feeling that Riva will be nominated as well, if that's any consolation.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."



-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7436
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Sonic Youth » Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:36 pm

I wasn't doubting that he said it...
"What the hell?"
Win Butler

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15660
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Big Magilla » Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:27 pm

Sonic Youth wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:I think who was nominated or not nominated by SAG is more telling than who is or was not nominated by the Globes, bit neither are the Academy.

Let's not forget that the Globes always gravitate toward Harvey Weinstein and his films. I would take Django Unchained's nominations, in particular, with a grain of salt. The only Harvey supported thespian who wasn't nominated was Robert De Niro, which can largely be attributed to his insult at the HFPA last year when they gave him their life achievement award: "I'm sorry more members of the foreign press aren't with us tonight, but many were deported right before the show along with most of the waiters.''


Really, Magilla?

Yes, really. Per Lou Lumenick: "Bob really drew blood when he mocked the HFPA during his acceptance speech this year."
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7436
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Sonic Youth » Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:22 pm

Big Magilla wrote:I think who was nominated or not nominated by SAG is more telling than who is or was not nominated by the Globes, bit neither are the Academy.

Let's not forget that the Globes always gravitate toward Harvey Weinstein and his films. I would take Django Unchained's nominations, in particular, with a grain of salt. The only Harvey supported thespian who wasn't nominated was Robert De Niro, which can largely be attributed to his insult at the HFPA last year when they gave him their life achievement award: "I'm sorry more members of the foreign press aren't with us tonight, but many were deported right before the show along with most of the waiters.''


Really, Magilla?
"What the hell?"

Win Butler

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15660
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Golden Globe nominations announced

Postby Big Magilla » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:32 pm

I think who was nominated or not nominated by SAG is more telling than who is or was not nominated by the Globes, bit neither are the Academy.

Let's not forget that the Globes always gravitate toward Harvey Weinstein and his films. I would take Django Unchained's nominations, in particular, with a grain of salt. The only Harvey supported thespian who wasn't nominated was Robert De Niro, which can largely be attributed to his insult at the HFPA last year when they gave him their life achievement award: "I'm sorry more members of the foreign press aren't with us tonight, but many were deported right before the show along with most of the waiters.''

I have no idea how SAG's nominating committee is selected. If at random, it probably skewers younger, much younger than the Academy. SAG and the HFPA have never been too kindly toward foreign language performers, tending to nominate foreign actors and actresses who also make Hollywood movies. Most of their voting bodies probably have no idea who Emmanuelle Riva is. That is not the case with the Academy. And they are not going to nominate that little girl from the Southern Wild any more than they nominated Shirley Temple in 1934 when she made eleven films, all of them box office hits, and became the no. 1 box office star.

Nothing is settled. Nothing is going to be settled for a couple of weeks yet, so let's all relax, go to the movies and see if when it's all said and done whether we agree more with one of the critic's groups, the MTV skewing Broadcast Critics, SAG, the Globes or the Oscars because they are all going in different directions this year, something we should be very happy about.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire


Return to “85th Predictions and Precursors”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests