Thursday
Jan072010
Thursday, January 7, 2010 at 11:21AM Bigelow, Cameron Top DGA Nominations
There is not a whole lotta shakin' goin' on with the Directors Guild of America nominations. If
you were hoping for Neill Blomkamp, you'll be disappointed, but four of the five were definitely expected to be
here, and for a long time during this awards season, so was contestant number five.
James Cameron - Avatar
Lee Daniels - Precious
Jason Reitman - Up in the Air
Quentin Tarantino - Inglourious Basterds No Eastwood, which might again signal some vulnerability for Invictus; more on that in a second. It was less likely that Lone Scherfig (An Education) would join Bigelow as the second woman nominated, and you always have to keep Joel and Ethan Coen on your list of possibilities. But really, outside of Blomkamp, this is the way it probably should be. I don't have any real issue with Lee Daniels in the group. He made a great film and you could argue that he snakecharmed remarkable performances out of a completely unproven cast and deftly handled tough material, which, among the nominees, maybe only Bigelow can also say. It's still a two-person race, though, and I think Bigelow probably has a small edge, even if just for historical purposes. About Invictus, we argued against it being in the Best Picture race on Tuesday, wondering what films would jump into the nomination pool if it departed and as Nine flees the scene. The only logical argument you can make for the film is based on the industry's respect for Clint Eastwood, and I think this tells us he'd be out in the cold in the traditional five-nominee race for Best Picture. But does it knock him out completely? Warner Bros. has plenty of money, of course, but it's still never wise to throw good money after bad. Invictus has failed to meet its goals. On the other hand, WB has The Blind Side, which is a Best Actress contender now and will be aggressively marketed for that, anyway. So why not hedge your bets and back off Invictus and try getting a more important Best Picture nomination for The Blind Side? The Diggies come out at the end of January, and they're usually the best indicator of an Oscar win in any individual category.
James Cameron - Avatar
Lee Daniels - Precious
Jason Reitman - Up in the Air
Quentin Tarantino - Inglourious Basterds No Eastwood, which might again signal some vulnerability for Invictus; more on that in a second. It was less likely that Lone Scherfig (An Education) would join Bigelow as the second woman nominated, and you always have to keep Joel and Ethan Coen on your list of possibilities. But really, outside of Blomkamp, this is the way it probably should be. I don't have any real issue with Lee Daniels in the group. He made a great film and you could argue that he snakecharmed remarkable performances out of a completely unproven cast and deftly handled tough material, which, among the nominees, maybe only Bigelow can also say. It's still a two-person race, though, and I think Bigelow probably has a small edge, even if just for historical purposes. About Invictus, we argued against it being in the Best Picture race on Tuesday, wondering what films would jump into the nomination pool if it departed and as Nine flees the scene. The only logical argument you can make for the film is based on the industry's respect for Clint Eastwood, and I think this tells us he'd be out in the cold in the traditional five-nominee race for Best Picture. But does it knock him out completely? Warner Bros. has plenty of money, of course, but it's still never wise to throw good money after bad. Invictus has failed to meet its goals. On the other hand, WB has The Blind Side, which is a Best Actress contender now and will be aggressively marketed for that, anyway. So why not hedge your bets and back off Invictus and try getting a more important Best Picture nomination for The Blind Side? The Diggies come out at the end of January, and they're usually the best indicator of an Oscar win in any individual category.
Reader Comments (16)
I'm glad that Kathryn Bigelow is being recognised because she is an awesome director.
I would recommend everyone to give The Weight of Water another chance because it is easily one of the most overlooked films of the past decade.
I am equally thrilled that James Cameron is being recognised for the mammooth task of putting Avatar together. This goes far beyond any normal sense of the term "direction" and is surely the most worthy winner on the 7th of March.
It is therefore a cruel twist of fate that when Bigelow comes up with her most acclaimed film, her ex husband defines the future of cinema.
But she might still win. Also, would not acknowledging a female director for the first time also define the future of cinema?
Yeah, I guess it's a win-win situation. I would be happy with both outcomes.
But James Cameron's achievement is far greater from an objective standpoint. Also, I think that Avatar has no hopes of winning best movie or any other major awards. I think that it'll win a technical award or so and that it may have a shot at best director.
The only thing that would really annoy me is if QT won it, then I'd boycott the event next year (not that it matters).
I don't think Tarantino pulls that off, no. I'm not debating who did the most directing, and I wouldn't even say she did a "better" job. However, I think given all the circumstances - from working completely outside the system to stretching about 1/100th of the dollars around to simply achieving what she was able to - it's not exactly a runaway.
To be honest, I was blown away by Avatar... but only for a while. After the visual feast kind of sank-in I realized how formulaic and often times heavy handed the storytelling and writing really were. It's still a great film, a defining film for sure, but only for its groundbreaking effects and stellar use of 3D (maybe the most subtle and therefore best in my opinion - it really did open up a whole new depth to the screen which I surprisingly didn't find to obtrusive but at times stunning). However as an overall film, which the director is in charge of, it is still inferior, in my humble opinion, to the work of Bigelow, Tarantino, Reitman and probably the unrecognized Blomkamp as well. Cameron is a genius and a true visionary but as original and groundbreaking his techniques were his film's dialogue and storytelling were equally unoriginal (Still, If Lord of the RIngs can win 11 Oscars this surely deserves 12 but not over its direct competition).
Pretty sure the race is between the TITANIC himself James Cameron & former wife Katheryn Bigelow...
I will also take either winning & be happy....It will probably be a close call..
But the 1st female director to win would be quite ground breaking I agree Colin
By the same token I am pretty sure that people will still be watching Avatar in five or ten years' time.
I don't think that applies to The Hurt Locker. It is much more of a moment in time kind of film.
Sure, because if there's one thing the truly great war movies have done, it's fade away.