Great to see David Fincher up on there. I bet this category in the oscars will be the same
Jan 9 - 12:40 PM
It will definitely be very close
Jan 9 - 07:11 PM
except cut david fincher and copy and paste terence malick
Feb 1 - 08:51 AM
Give David Fincher the Oscar already! He should have won it for Social Network!
Anyways...I hope he pulls through here.
agreed. tom hooper didn't deserve it.
Jan 9 - 08:25 PM
Which raises another question, is Tom Hooper going to direct another film since Fincher is a movie veteran of sorts!
Jan 10 - 11:57 AM
didnt quite understand your comment, but in case you were wondering , Mr Holland is directing Les Mis , I believe...
Jan 10 - 02:07 PM
I was just pointing out that Fincher's notoriety is quite well known here as opposed to anything coming out of Tom Hooper! Perhaps I should've word it better!
Jan 10 - 02:13 PM
Nicolas Winding Refn got snubbed again, though fincher's dragon tatoo looks amazing..
Jan 9 - 12:45 PM
Amen to that. Nicolas Winding Refn is a great director and Drive was a masterpiece.
Jan 10 - 12:51 PM
Jan 10 - 01:19 PM
yes. Drive deserves more recognition than this.
Jan 10 - 02:42 PM
Taylor Hackford is the perfect face for this guild. His films are tepid too. Yes, I hate on snubbing Malick. Woody Allen has admited that he doesn't really like his own films. It's always amusing to see his films consistently overrated. Fincher did an admirable job, not much more impressive than some others this year. Payne is paced for pedestrians. Haven't seen "Artist" yet, put it in more theaters. But of these choices, Scorsese is an obvious choice. But even he has admitted recently that Malick did a better job. I suppose I'll take some solace in the knowledge that Malick has effectively pissed off just the right people, those in the industry who have no faith in human spiritual facility. Scorsese was smart enough to suggest this facility without a representation of both evolution and an afterlife. Hollywood prefers easy dichotomies.
Jan 9 - 01:05 PM
I'm actually becoming quite perplexed about this "Tree of Life" Snubbing. You say there is a history between Malick and what I will refer to as "The business"? What exactly happened? I'm just glad The War Horse got Snubbed. Anything with War in the title is bound to be a bad Spielberg film. War of the Worlds anybody? Blech.
can I also complain about Brad Pitts nominations? I have not seen money ball but the best acting I've seen all year involved a Father expressing regret about his son and piano pages. It was Brad Pitt from The Tree of Life. Where is this nomination for best supporting actor? Reason why I bring this J is wondering if people in Malick films have been snubbed as well for being in a Malick film?
Jan 9 - 02:08 PM
I don't think there's a vendetta exactly, although people still seem to be stung by various actors cut from "Thin Red Line" (even though it was 3 hours as it is - I'd be the first to see an extended version). It's become well known that the film's 'boo's at Cannes were provoked by SPOILER (somwhat) the film's representation of an afterlife of sorts. I'm assuming this goes down the path of the petty atheist/religious squabbles currently so important to so many people. I've even heard some try to accuse Malick of making an 'episcopalian' movie, which is a cheap way of recognizing that he was raised an episcopalian. In fact, Malick is closer to a philosophical affinity for Eastern (Buddhist, Taoist) or Pantheist theology, and, likewise construed from his easily accessable past as a Heidegger translator, Existential notions of 'Being'. No doubt, that last sentence is probably getting 'boo's from people similarly disinterested in such matters. I've even heard some critics claim that the ending refers to the Rapture, which is idiotic, but I definately don't want to go into details on dispensationalism or more evangelical notions, but Malick is certainly not on that tip. It shows that there are more and more people who are frankly hostile to spiritual philosophies in general and who don't seem to be able to discern these things from other religious dogmas.
Anyway, the National Society of Film Critics have awarded Pitt for both films as well as the NY Film Critics Circle, and Toronto and San Francisco critcs have awarded "Tree of Life" as well as its Palm d'Or at Cannes. The film is not without its supporters, like me, so there is still some hope.
Jan 9 - 03:31 PM
The problem with Malick is that he makes films that look pretty, but are otherwise pointless and odd. If you like your movies to include a plot, he isn't your guy.
Jan 9 - 05:02 PM
"Pointless and odd". You mean - like Facebook?
Jan 9 - 05:53 PM
Janson, no matter how much you defend Tree of Life, you cannot deny the existence of a plot anywhere in the film. Watching it in Blu-ray, while gorgeous, is very hard to understand what the characters are saying, and, or, where the film is actually going. Directors are supposed to direct us. Directing the viewer into a series of shots where people stare aimlessly in the sky isn't directing, it's a music video.
Jan 10 - 09:27 AM
I've posted before that "Tree" does not have a narrative plot, so that those who find that unappealing should avoid it. But I'd argue that doesn't make it "pointless", just as I'd argue that we need more "odd" films. (I love Lynch, too!) "Tree"'s point and direction is a sequence of emotional themes rather than linear events. It's more of a poem than a story. I'll let that description stand, as the reader's reaction to it should be as helpful as any other description as to whether or not they'll have the tolerance for this kind of film. If that sounds like 'artsy-fartsy' pretension, then I'd say 'skip it'. If it sounds at all intriguing, then give it a chance.
Jan 10 - 12:43 PM
Damnit Janson, you always know what to say.
If you admit it's not necessarily a film but rather a poem then I would have to side with you. It is very, different. It's completely odd and out there. I just feel like there are still many ways to tell a story without having to completely change the way films are made. Which is what Mallick tried to do, some people enjoyed it, you, and most didn't.
Jan 10 - 01:43 PM
you can say what you want about the films merits it still comes down to who is stroking who's ego......and Malick has always been an outsider
Jan 10 - 02:16 PM
He has 'virgin lips', so to speak.
Jan 10 - 03:36 PM
The Tree of Life does have a plot. It's a character arc and character arcs usually have an internal conflict. The internal conflict being the lost of innocence.
Jan 29 - 06:28 PM
I agree, but most people think of a plot as a 'cause and effect' linear narrative of events. "Tree" avoids this and shows this inner conflict as evolving from humans' sense of separation from 'creation', like a child separated from his parents, through self and social awareness, much as Brad Pitt's father character became separated from his music (his muse) through his material expectations of success. Penn's reconcilliation is frequently discribed as an 'afterlife' sequence, but there's no evidence that he died in the film. 'Creation' continues daily, and one doesn't need to wait for death to reconcile with it.
Jan 31 - 02:27 PM
I think FIncher was only nominated for being Fincher and not really for Dragon Tatoo, but i don't care he should have won for social network.
Jan 9 - 01:07 PM
Dragon Tattoo was actually really great. It was so gripping, and the attention to detail was ridiculous.
Jan 11 - 12:07 AM
Just because Fincher didn't get an award for The Social Network means not his next film deserves it even more (cause it doesn't!). Have You guys even seen Midnight in Paris, Hugo or The Artist? Sure I only saw the former but at least I'm not generalising like your lot!
Jan 9 - 01:13 PM
I guess I meant I believe Fincher deserves it for Dragon Tattoo. Then again, I haven't seen the other four films here, but what I saw in Dragon Tattoo's direction, I believe it's deserving of the award. Of course I can't compare it to the other films here. But I can't stand silent films or Woody Allen films, so I probably won't see Artist or Midnight in Paris.
Jan 9 - 01:53 PM
Why not? They gave Scorcese the Oscar for The Departed when it was a dodgy remake. He DID NOT deserve it that year.
Jan 10 - 02:50 AM
Scorese may not have deserved to win, but he should've won for "Goodfellas" and it went to Dances With Wolves instead. Sometimes when someone should've won the year before can sometimes win after- so who knows what that person really won it for!
Jan 10 - 12:02 PM
While "Departed" is not Scorsese's best, or even the truly best film of 2006 (I'd go with Nolan's "Prestige" or - surprise! - Malick's "New World"), I wouldn't call it "dodgy". It's still a very impressive film about duplicity.
Jan 10 - 12:49 PM
the prestige was overrated; the twist was obvious and could be seen a mile away
Feb 1 - 08:54 AM
Was it? One question. Twin or Tesla? Regardless, it was a excellent production, Rain Man.
Feb 1 - 11:25 AM
midnight in paris is a good film, but there is nothing particularly striking about it from a directing standpoint. glad to see fincher get some due.
There are just certain directors that Hollywood seems to bend over and take it from ,over and over, and call it genius...its just too bad they all seem to be child molestors...you can guess who the other one is....
Jan 10 - 02:20 PM
Fincher gets his due all the time and The Kings Speech was much better than Social Network. Social Network had one of the most audience friendly endings I've ever seen. It's like he spent 2 hours dedicating a script and direction to interesting flawed characters and then in the last 10 seconds the curtain comes up and its the same typical love sick loser that plagues over 40 movies a year.
Jan 9 - 02:11 PM
Your blaming Fincher for a decision that wasn't his. He shot what was in the script which was consequently what was in the book that it was based on. Your complaint is with the screenwriter. What matters is did he execute what was in the script well. The answer (as a matter of opinion) would be a yes for me.
Jan 9 - 02:19 PM
And The King's Speech didn't? That whole movie was audience friendly.
Jan 9 - 02:29 PM
In my opinion, The King's Speech was nothing more than pleasurable entertainment as opposed to the 'The Social Network' which is 'more' relevent to current times especially about on-line networking. And although The King's Speech was slightly more pleasing than the Social Network, I thought it was less important and robbed of it's Oscar for Best Picture since Zuckerburg is one of the biggest dicks/ assholes whenever it comes to social media.
Jan 9 - 02:47 PM
Yeah I flew off the handle there, I loved Sorkins script (spelling?) and I enjoyed The Social Network even though the ending made me roll my eyes. They are my eyes and they don't belong to any body else. I forget that some times and I do come across as condescending when people appreciate something for a different perspective. I think The reason why Colin Firth and Thomas Hooper and THe Kings Speech all got the Oscar was for the simple reason that we all can relate to over coming something that would appear impossible. Not alone, but with true friendships that transcend the history books. Social Network was great, until the "Look he doesn't have Asbergers, he is just like everyone else!" ending. I couldn't help but notice Fincher shied away from Asbergers in his Dragon Tattoo adaption as well.
Jan 9 - 03:34 PM
Good point except that King Bertie was more important than the rest of us common folks!
Jan 9 - 04:04 PM
Just wondering. Was Zuckerberg actually diagnosed with Asperger's?
Jan 9 - 05:54 PM
If he was he got the lame, pasty version of it and not the badass cyberhacker version Lisbeth Salander got, oddly enough both got really rich off of it. Fictional Aspergers kicks ass, gotta get me some of that.
Jan 10 - 08:19 AM
If Zuckerburg has aspbergers then I don't see how is that relevent to the movie since he didn't really break any laws enough for him to get himself arrested on anything!
Jan 10 - 11:48 AM
For the record, I loved the last shot of "Social Network". It nailed Zuckerberg. Very refreshing!
Jan 10 - 12:50 PM
Jan 10 - 01:22 PM
Ugh The King Speech was one of the most standard Oscar winners in a long time. The movie is practically begging for an Oscar through the entire thing. The Social Network is a modern masterpiece.
Jan 9 - 08:56 PM
Save Colin Firth's performance, which I did think was quite extraordinary, I agree with you. TKS had a very Star Wars ending. Everyone nodding in approval at eachother after the speech. Quite ludicrous, really. It's highlights are Firth & Rush, that's all.
Jan 10 - 02:58 AM
Actually, The King's Speech is an old man's movie which is why it won over the Social Network- there were more older voters who still don't know what a computer let alone how to operate one which is why the voters didn't see it's significance!
Jan 10 - 11:56 AM
I liked Toy Story 3 more than The Social Network as well. For the Record.
Jan 10 - 01:23 PM
It's okay to enjoy Toy Story 3 than the Social Network most young adults have, but what about in terms of it's importance and it's relevance! How important is Toy Story 3 as opposed to the other nominations!
Jan 10 - 01:38 PM
Michel Hazanavicius deserves the award more than anyone else on this list, while the other directors took little risks, Michel Hazanavicius directed a silent movie in our time. You know what else, it's also one of the best reviewed movies of last year and that shows that it takes a great director to make a great silent movie in our time. Sure, he might not win against Martin Scorsese, but I doubt any these directors will ever have the ambition to deliver a movie like The Artist.
Jan 9 - 03:14 PM
I can't believe Refn got snubbed, but I'm glad Fincher is here! It's also great to see Payne. Thank god there's no Spielberg.
Jan 9 - 03:16 PM
Agreed, if not Refn or Fincher, I'm rooting for Payne.
Jan 10 - 02:59 AM
It'a actually a same that Refn is not nominated.Drive was a masterpiece and it's going to be a cult classic.Great movie and of course magnificent performance from Ryan Gosling.As far as this nominations are concerned i think it's going to be a battle between Allen and Hazanavicius.Allen made another Allen-ish movie but given the cast and the magic of old time and present day Paris makes this movie one of his best.The Artist is a true masterpiece.Michel Hazanavicius may not be as known as the other nominees but making a black and white silent film requires guts.My choice is Michel Hazanavicius.
Jan 10 - 03:13 PM
I do not think Midnight in Paris should be no there. I saw it and to me it was nothing special (also Woody Allen we know you hated Bush, so stop putting it your movies; the topic is getting really old now.)
Jan 9 - 03:47 PM
Jan 9 - 03:50 PM
Saw all of these and I'd have to give it to Hazanavicius or Scorsese. Only one I'd lose was Allen though I wouldn't replace him with Malick obviously as I believe him to be the Anti-Christ and his movies have caused me physical pain. Would love to see Tinker Tailor or Warrior get some love as they were both beautifully constructed works.
Jan 9 - 04:58 PM
what michel and martin have done is nothing short of spectacular... i;ll have to be xtremely hardpressed to pick either of them as best director
Jan 9 - 06:41 PM
Michel Hazanavicius is going to win the Oscar. And everybody will be pissed as the other four get screwed out of a win again.
Jan 9 - 06:52 PM
I think it will be Malick, instead of Fincher, when the Oscar nominations come up.
Jan 9 - 07:43 PM
I hope not. Not that I've seen Tree of Life(or an other Terrence Malick film for that matter), Fincher is one of my favorite directors, and Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is his best film since Se7en. If he didn't get it for Social Network, I really hope he gets it for Dragon Tattoo.
Jan 9 - 08:28 PM
Some movies are difficult to judge without seeing them for yourself. Nuff said.
Jan 9 - 08:42 PM
I never judged Tree of Life.
Jan 9 - 08:58 PM
You misunderstand me. You SHOULD judge "Tree of Life" - by seeing it.
Jan 10 - 12:14 AM
What if someone tried to see it and can't finish it then?
Jan 10 - 12:05 PM
Sounds like a judgement was made about turning it off. It's not a film for everyone. Good luck.
Jan 10 - 12:53 PM
You know, what I'm most curious Janson is, despite your knowledge of understanding and appreciating "Tree Of Life", I've often wondered whether you can see yourself making a film similar to it, despite fully knowing that it has less chances of making any money as opposed to making a different film using Joseph Campbell's hero mythologies such as Star Wars or The Godfather?
Jan 10 - 01:29 PM
I prefer a variety of films, so I wouldn't want to make such a strict choice. I tend to prefer films that are made as personal expressions (and hero myths, like any fundamental archtype, can be personal as well) as opposed to films that are designed top-down based on demographic economics. It's these calculated, commercially flagrant artifacts that I would be more likely to dismiss.
Jan 10 - 03:42 PM
Damn, you're good!
Jan 29 - 11:30 AM
Stars and Cars of Need for Speed
What are his Five Favorite Films?
Your 10 most anticipated
A trailer to kill for