We want more from "Michael Clayton" director Tony Gilroy.
(Credit: Warner Bros.)
From: Berkshire, Geoff
To: Pais, Matthew
Subject: RE: Oscars
I just have to note that force and passion flow through "Sweeney Todd" like blood from a freshly slit throat, and those qualities are more than represented in Depp's performance. (Did either of us imagine this conversation would involve comparing the relative merits of Johnny Depp and Jennifer Hudson?)
Anyway, does Tony Gilroy have a future? I hope so. "Michael Clayton" was one of the most exciting filmmaking debuts of the year and it's encouraging to see it get so much support. It's the sort of thoughtful, polished work you'd expect from an industry veteran like Steven Soderbergh or Sidney Lumet (at his best).
I'm actually pleased that Reitman made it in along with his film. He'd gone virtually unrecognized up until this point, and "Juno" wasn't such a tight, likable, moving little comedy because its director was asleep at the wheel. Plus, it's a huge step up on the maturity scale from his debut, "Thank You For Smoking."
That said, I'll agree that the Coens, Schnabel and Anderson are the true artisans in the race. I've enjoyed all of Anderson's work but was still stunned by the level of craftsmanship on display in "There Will Be Blood." I remain stunned that Oscar voters showered such a challenging, nihilistic movie with so many nominations. Schnabel's vision elevates "Diving Bell" above tear-jerking disease-of-the-week clichés. I wouldn't count him out from earning a second date with Oscar.
Not that he, or anyone else, should rightly expect to trump the Coens. Even if their film stumbles in a best picture upset, they're bound to win a long-deserved directing Oscar (Oscars?). Apologies to Anthony Minghella, but in retrospect we all know that "Fargo" deserved the top honors that "The English Patient" nabbed in 1997.
As for what could potentially topple "No Country for Old Men" for the biggest award of all? Wouldn't it be funny if the kinda-sorta "English Patient"-esque "Atonement" was the culprit?
Well, no, it wouldn't be. But I think we can safely assume the voters won't go there. "Atonement" doesn't have the majestic sweep of "English Patient" and its lack of a directing or lead performance nomination suggests only modest enthusiasm overall.
"Michael Clayton" seems too small, and "There Will Be Blood" is just lucky to be in the race (it'll slay the competition in AFI's Top 100 movie poll in about 50 years). So that just leaves "Juno," and a battle eerily similar to last year's showdown between "The Departed" (respected overdue veteran filmmaker) and "Little Miss Sunshine" (scrappy crowd pleasing indie).
In a twist from last year, "Juno" is the only movie in the race to cross $100 million—that's a plus historically—and parallels can be drawn with "Annie Hall," one of the few Oscar-winning comedies. (They both have trend-setting female leads.) But in the end it'll probably seem too youthful, too silly, too of-the-moment.
Even though a "No Country" win feels oh-so-predictable I actually think it's the best outcome for everyone involved. "Juno" doesn't need the inevitable contrarian chorus of "it's not that great" that begins immediately after the best picture envelope is opened.
Add a comment