Bloggers Note (08/31) – UPDATE: It has been confirmed that Steve Carell will be campaigned for in Lead Actor not Supporting. Therefore, he comes out and James Franco goes in.
Continuing on with my earliest 2017 Oscar predictions, we move to Best Supporting Actor. If you missed my post on Supporting Actress, you can find it here:
In 2014, 2015, and 2016 – my initial projections yielded two of the eventual five nominees. For the last two years, the first predictions have named the winner (Mark Rylance for Bridge of Spies, Mahershala Ali in Moonlight).
Let’s begin with some confusion – there are three potential nominees where it’s uncertain as to whether they’ll be campaigned for in Lead Actor or this race. They are: Steve Carell (Battle of the Sexes), Willem Dafoe (The Florida Project), and James Franco (The Disaster Artist). The Best Actor race already looks incredibly competitive this year, so I’m currently operating on the assumption that all 3 will find themselves campaigned for here.
There are no sure things yet in this category, but festival season could easily change that. Here is my first blush take:
TODD’S FIRST PREDICTIONS – BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Willem Dafoe, The Florida Project
Laurence Fishburne, Last Flag Flying
James Franco, TheDisasterArtist
Armie Hammer, Call Me by Your Name
Mark Rylance, Dunkirk
Other Possibilities:
Idris Elba, Molly’s Game
Richard Graham, Phantom Thread
Woody Harrelson, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Ed Harris, mother!
Garrett Hedlund, Mudbound
Ben Mendelsohn, Darkest Hour
Jason Mitchell, Mudbound
Michael Stuhlbarg, The Papers
Christoph Waltz, Downsizing
Predictions for the Lead Acting Races are on the way…
Blogger’s Update (09/19/17) – What Venice giveth, Toronto and Telluride taketh away. Since my original writing of this post on 08/30, Oscar prospects for Downsizing have dimmed due to mixed reaction from the aforementioned festivals.
A major piece of the 2017 Oscar puzzle has come into focus today with the debut of Alexander Payne’s Downsizing at the Venice Film Festival. This picture has been circled on the calendar of Academy Awards prognosticators since it was announced. Why? For starters, this is Payne’s seventh directorial feature and his previous five efforts have all received Oscar attention. For 1999’s Election, Payne received a nod for Adapted Screenplay. 2002’s About Schmidt landed two nominations in the acting races for Jack Nicholson and Kathy Bates. 2004’s Sideways nabbed five nominations, including Picture, Director, and a win for Payne and writing partner Jim Taylor for Adapted Screenplay. 2011’s The Descendants also received five nominations, with Payne winning once again for Adapted Screenplay. His last film, 2013’s Nebraska, garnered six nominations including Picture, Director, and Original Screenplay. His last five movies have resulted in a total of seven acting nods.
So yeah… pretty much anything Payne puts out is an automatic Oscar contender. That does not look to end with Downsizing, his science fiction comedic drama that has drawn rave reviews out of the gate. It’s not out until December 22, but trade reviews are up and they’re glowing with praise. The Hollywood Reporter: “Big and beautiful” and arguably his best film. Variety: “playful, spectacular, mischievous, and audacious”. Interestingly, both reviews reference it as like as a live-action Pixar feature.
Downsizing has a highly recognizable cast that includes Matt Damon, Kristin Wiig, Christoph Waltz, Alec Baldwin, Neil Patrick Harris, Laura Dern, and Jason Sudeikis. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Damon in the mix for Best Actor, based on early word. Yet it’s a name you probably haven’t heard that you’ll soon become familiar with. Playing a Vietnamese refugee, Hong Chau has been singled out for her work and I’d venture to say she will be receiving a Supporting Actress nomination here.
Before today, Dunkirk was the only picture that I feel confident saying will receive a Best Picture nomination. Downsizing is now the second and it will probably land Payne directing and original screenplay (along with Jim Taylor) recognition. Beyond that – Cinematography, Editing, Production Design, and even Visual Effects categories are all feasible.
Bottom line: Downsizing just announced itself as a potential force this awards season. My Oscar Watch posts will continue…
Blogger’s Note (08/25): The reported theater count of only 600 screens has caused my revision to be lowered to $1.9 million.
There’s only new picture opening over the long Labor Day weekend and it’s unlikely to blossom into any sort of hit. Justin Chadwick’s Tulip Fever finally makes it to the big screen with a cast that includes Oscar winner Alicia Vikander, Dane DeHaan, Jack O’Connell, Judi Dench, Christoph Waltz, Zach Galifianakis, Matthew Morrison, and Cara Delevingne.
The reported $25 million production from the Weinstein Company has had a long and delayed journey to the silver screen. Tulip was shot over three years ago and was originally slated to debut in theaters last summer before the studio’s financial woes got in the way. It was then rescheduled for February of this year. Finally, it was supposed to debut this coming weekend before the Weinstein Company chose to release it wide (with little fanfare) just days ago as the sole release over the holiday weekend.
This does not bode well for its chances stateside. Even though there’s little competition, I’d say its best scenario is earning the $6.1 million captured by last year’s Labor Day release The Light Between Oceans (also starring Vikander). However, I’m not convinced it even manages that (a theater count when released will help). For now, I’ll say a debut between $4-$5 million is my diagnosis.
Tulip Fever opening weekend prediction: $1.9 million (Friday to Monday estimate)
Well folks – summer is winding down and on the movie calendar, that means fall ushers in Oscar contenders, film festivals, and all kinds of other eagerly awaited releases! Today on the blog, I bring you my 10 most awaited pictures of the season. Getting the list down to that number wasn’t exactly easy, so I’ll cheat a bit and mention some that just “missed the cut”. They include sequels (Kingsman: The Golden Circle, Thor: Ragnarok), star vehicles like American Made with Tom Cruise and Roman Israel, Esq. with Denzel Washington, and Academy contenders like Battle of the Sexes, The Greatest Showman, Suburbicon, Darkest Hour, All the Money in the World, and The Disaster Artist.
Yet here are the ten that my personal movie calendar is most looking forward to (listed alphabetically):
Blade Runner 2049
Release Date: October 6
35 years after Ridley Scott made his landmark sci-fi pic, Sicario and Arrival director Denis Villeneuve enters this visually stunning world with Ryan Gosling, Jared Leto, and Robin Wright and Harrison Ford returning as Deckard.
Downsizing
Release Date: December 22
It may not be out until Christmas, but buzz will be out soon for this Oscar hopeful as it screens in Venice in just days. Alexander Payne’s fantastic filmography includes Election, About Schmidt, Sideways, The Descendants, and Nebraska. His latest is a sci-fi comedy/drama starring Matt Damon, Kristin Wiig, Christoph Waltz, Alec Baldwin, Neil Patrick Harris, Jason Sudeikis, and (get used to hearing this name) Hong Chau, who’s already garnering Supporting Actress talk.
NO TRAILER AT PRESS TIME
It
Release Date: September 8
Fall essentially kicks off with this adaptation of one of Stephen King’s greatest works. Trailers for It looks scary as hell and it could compete for both biggest September debut ever and highest horror opening of all time.
Justice League
Release Date: November 17
DC’s version of The Avengers has been the subject of shaky buzz, but I’m curious to see how Batman, Aquaman, The Flash, and others meld together. Oh… there’s another one in the form of Gal Gadot’s Wonder Woman, who just happened to headline the summer’s unexpected largest domestic hit (beating out other superheroes like the Guardians and Spidey).
mother!
Release Date: September 15
Darren Aronofsky’s latest looks to be in the vein of his Oscar nominated Black Swan and that’s a very good thing. Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris, and Michelle Pfeiffer star and if this trailer is any indication, we’re in for something very intriguing.
Murder on the Orient Express
Release Date: November 10
Michelle Pfeiffer makes another appearance on this list as she’s part of an impressive ensemble embroiled in this adaptation of Agatha Christie’s famed novel. Kenneth Branagh directs himself in the lead as Hercule Poirot. Other familiar faces include Johnny Depp, Daisy Ridley, Penelope Cruz, Judi Dench, Willem Dafoe, and Josh Gad.
The Papers
Release Date: December 22
As in the Pentagon Papers and the Washington Post‘s battle with the Nixon administration to release them. You think this one has Oscar bait potential? It’s directed by Steven Spielberg and stars Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks.
NO TRAILER AT PRESS TIME
Phantom Thread
Release Date: December 27
Here’s how little is really known about this project… we’re not even sure Phantom Thread is its title. What do we know? It’s master filmmaker Paul Thomas Anderson’s latest and reunites him with his There Will Be Blood star Daniel Day-Lewis.
NO TRAILER AT PRESS TIME
The Shape of Water
Release Date: December 8
Visionary director Guillermo del Toro’s latest looks to be a visual and potentially dramatic winner judging from its trailer. Sally Hawkins and Michael Shannon star in this 1960s set tale of a woman’s friendship with a strange creature.
Star Wars: The Last Jedi
Release Date: December 15
Last, but oh so far from the least. Rian Johnson takes over directorial duties for the year’s most anticipated release with Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) gaining significantly more screen time and Carrie Fisher making her final bow as Princess Leia.
And there you have it, folks! Let us look forward to a hopefully glorious autumn season…
Another “re-imagining” of the Tarzan tale? Could this work at all?
YOU…
might be surprised by how some wise choices contribute to David Yates’s TheLegendofTarzan being a fairly satisfying experience.
The first solid choice is not to make this an origin story like we’ve seen repeatedly with franchises in recent years. When the proceedings begin, Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgard) is settled in London as Lord Greystoke with wife Jane (Margot Robbie). His childhood of growing up in the wild and being able to communicate with the jungle creatures is told as backstory and it doesn’t take up much screen time.
Of course, we know a plot point must return Greystoke to his native grounds. It involves bad guy Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) collecting some precious diamonds from a tribe led by a Chief (Djimon Hounsou). In exchange for the stones, the Chief only wants Tarzan in return. You see – our title character had a run-in with the Chief’s only son years ago.
To the jungle we go with lots of CG animals that look fine, though maybe not quite as exquisite as in TheJungleBook or the revamped Apes franchise. Joining Big T on the adventure are his wife and American envoy George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson).
The second welcome choice here is Robbie, who’s radiance has permiated everything she’s been in. Beyond her top-notch work, the screenwriters succeed in making her more than a Damsel in a White Dress. She’s tough, feisty, funny, and equal to her man.
Tarantino stalwarts Waltz and Jackson give you pretty much what you’d expect. Jackson gets a couple decent one-liners and Waltz could play the conniving villain role in his sleep (and has with superior writing). Skarsgard’s performance will be remembered more for his muscle tone and vine swinging than much else (he looks the part though).
Even though this legend has been around forever, you may find yourself recalling this year’s live-action version of Kipling’s JungleBook from time to time and not just because of the CG. A scene where elephants are bowed to and treated as mystical creatures? Check. Overtones of colonialism that the filmmakers don’t really know how to deal with? Little bit. That said, we’ve got hungry hippos in Tarzan and they weren’t in Jon Favreau’s movie!
So while this may feel a bit familiar, the aforementioned pluses make this frequent return to this legend an entertaining enough time.
Remember three summers ago when the mega-budgeted The Lone Ranger made just $29 million in its first weekend and was a huge disappointment? I give you what could be this year’s Ranger: Warner Bros The Legend of Tarzan, which swings into theaters over July 4th weekend with an estimated $180 million budget. I’m not convinced it’ll reach half its budget domestically when all is said and done.
Based on the iconic character created by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Tarzan is directed by David Yates – the man responsible for the last four Harry Potter pics and this fall’s Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Alexander Sarsgard is in the title role with Margot Robbie as Jane and Samuel L. Jackson, Christoph Waltz, Djimon Hounsou, and Jim Broadbent among the supporting players.
The biggest hurdle here could be the considerable competition for a family audience. Finding Dory will still be earning a lot in weekend #3 and Steven Spielberg’s The BFG opens the same day. There just doesn’t seem to be much excitement for this and it could get a bit lost in the shuffle. Luckily for Yates, his Beasts project is likely to be a smash. Luckily for Robbie, she’s a just over a month away from Suicide Squad probably doing bang-up business.
I’ll predict a three-day debut in the high teens and a low 20s four-day for the holiday frame. Considering its price tag, that’s bad news at Warner.
The Legend of Tarzan opening weekend prediction: $17.5 million (Friday to Sunday), $22 million (Friday to Monday)
Three years after the triumphant box office performance of the 23rd 007 entry Skyfall, Daniel Craig is back for the fourth time as James Bond in Spectre, out next Friday. The big question is whether or not it will manage to top the franchise high debut of its predecessor. It could come close or surpass it, as I see it.
Let’s take a little trip down memory lane with Craig’s 007 filmography. His first, 2006’s Casino Royale, started with $40.8 million on its way to a $167M eventual domestic gross. The second, 2008’s Quantum of Solace, earned $67.5 million out of the gate and just edged its predecessor’s haul with $168M. Then – 2012’s Skyfall was a game changer. It made $88.3 million for its astonishing opening weekend and ended with $304M. Worldwide, it took in a cool $1.1 billion, easily setting the high bar for the now 53 year old series.
The studio clearly has employed the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” rule as Skyfall director Sam Mendes has returned. Christoph Waltz joins the fray as the main villain with Ralph Fiennes and Naomie Harris returning as M and Moneypenny, respectively. Spectre has already set records in the United Kingdom, where it was already released this week. Reviews have been mostly strong and it stands at 79% on Rotten Tomatoes, though it’s worth noting that critics generally have stated it’s not quite at the level of what preceded it.
This 24th official Bond pic should debut with Skyfall like numbers. On the high end, it could possibly gather over $100M in its first weekend. It could also earn $75-$80M and that would certainly be on the lower end of expectations. My feeling is that it’ll be within about $5M of what the last one made on the same November weekend in 2012 and that Spectre will just manage to outdo it for the largest 007 premiere in U.S. history.
Spectre opening weekend prediction: $91.3 million
For my prediction on The Peanuts Movie, click here:
It’s been a little while, but this evening on the blog – we continue with my ongoing series of Oscar History posts and we’ve arrived at 2009. That year’s Academy Awards are notable for a couple of reasons. First, this was the year where the decision was made to expand the list of Best Picture nominees from five to ten. It’s likely not an accident that this occurred just one year after 2008’s commercial and critical smash The Dark Knight failed to make the five pic cut. This was the Academy’s way of including more commercially successful ventures. After all, there’s a direct correlation between hit pictures being nominated and the ratings of the telecast itself. Secondly, the real battle of nominated entries came down between the efforts of a couple that was married and divorced – James Cameron for his smash hit Avatar (which demolished all box office records) and ex wife Kathryn Bigelow for her war drama The Hurt Locker.
It would be Bigelow who would come out on top as The Hurt Locker would take Best Picture over her ex-husband’s blockbuster. The other eight nominated features: The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, Inglourious Basterds, Precious, A Serious Man, Up, and Up in the Air. The success of Hurt Locker would relegate Avatar to winning only the tech categories.
Up would mark the first animated flick nomination (and first and only Pixar one) since 1991’s Beauty and the Beast and it hasn’t happened since. Basterds would mark Quentin Tarantino’s second pic nod after Pulp Fiction fifteen years prior.
As for movies that might have made my personal cut, I advocate for Steven Soderbergh’s underrated and hilarious The Informant! And if the Academy wanted to include high profile pictures, why not consider the acclaimed Star Trek reboot or comedy smash of the year The Hangover? I’m also a big fan of Zack Snyder’s graphic novel adaptation of Watchmen.
Bigelow would go onto make history by becoming the first female Best Director winner in Oscar history over Cameron, Lee Daniels (Precious), Jason Reitman (Up in the Air), and Tarantino. I may have found room for Neill Blomkamp’s impressive work in District 9.
Beloved actor Jeff Bridges would score his first Best Actor win for Crazy Heart, beating out George Clooney (Up in the Air), Colin Firth (A Single Man), Morgan Freeman (Invictus), and Jeremy Renner (Hurt Locker). Firth would go onto win the prize the following year for The King’s Speech. Once again, my Informant! love would have meant an inclusion for Matt Damon’s terrific work in it.
Sandra Bullock would receive her first ever nomination and a win for her hit football drama The Blind Side. Other nominees: Helen Mirren (The Last Station), Carey Mulligan (An Education), Gabourey Sidibe (Precious), and Meryl Streep (Julie & Julia). Two names I would’ve considered: Alison Lohman’s great scared crapless work in Sam Raimi’s horror tale Drag Me to Hell and Zooey Deschanel in the rom com (500) Days of Summer.
Quentin Tarantino’s knack of finding the perfect actor in the perfect role landed an at the time unknown Christoph Waltz a win in Supporting Actor for Inglourious Basterds. Other nominees were Matt Damon for Invictus, Woody Harrelson for The Messenger, Christopher Plummer in The Last Station, and Stanley Tucci for The Lovely Bones. As I’ve mentioned in these posts before, the Academy usually ignores comedies and this race would have given them an excellent opportunity to nominate Zach Galifianakis in The Hangover. Also, I may have included Jackie Earle Haley for his work in Watchmen.
Mo’Nique would win Supporting Actress in Precious over previous year’s winner Penelope Cruz (Nine), Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick (both nominated for Up in the Air), and Maggie Gyllenhaal (Crazy Heart). I would have given consideration to either Melanie Laurent or Diane Kruger for their roles in Basterds.
And that’s 2009 for you, my friends! I’ll get to 2010 at same point in the future…
Early on in Tim Burton’s Big Eyes, Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz) pontificates that art is not about quality when it comes to whether it sells. It’s about being at the right place at the right time. For many years, Walter’s words couldn’t ring more true for himself. And he could’ve added meeting the right person.
That person is Margaret (Amy Adams) and she’s a recent divorcee in the late 1950s (when it was quite uncommon) with a talent for painting portraits of her young daughter. Her signature look is our movie title on the face of her work. When she meets Walter, he seduces her with his plentiful charm and they’re soon married. He presents himself as a fellow painter, but his Paris landscapes don’t interest anyone. Margaret’s, on the other hand, begin to capture some attention and soon a confluence of circumstances lead Walter to claim credit for her work. Those circumstances (most completely Walter’s doing and some not) additionally lead his wife to go along with the deceit for a long time. As the years roll by, Walter becomes a renowned and celebrated figure, while conflicted Margaret paints their fortune in her secret studio in homes that grow in size.
Big Eyes is based on true events and the art filled subject matter is right up Burton’s alley, though with a majorly smaller budget than he’s used to. The 50s and then 60s San Francisco setting provides a vibrant look to the proceedings. Unlike most of the director’s recent efforts, the only special effects is some big eyes superimposed on human faces from time to time. The focus is on the relationship of Walter and Margaret. Recognizable faces like Danny Huston, Jon Polito, Krysten Ritter, Terence Stamp and Jason Schwartzman pop up in small supporting roles. Truth be told, the relationship dynamic between our two leads is often treading familiar territory. Margaret lives in an era where challenging her husband’s word is not easy. She even attempts to tell her huge secret during confession and the priest basically tells her to obey him.
The work of primarily Adams is impressive, as it almost always is. Creating a sympathetic character who still is not totally innocent in all her actions, the actress is fascinating to watch. Waltz is an exciting performer who’s earned two Oscars for his mastery of Tarantino’s dialogue. The role of Walter is a tricky one. He is painted in broad strokes in the screenplay and the filmmakers insist they actually downplayed him from real life. It may all be the truth about Walter’s world of non truth, but it is difficult to view him as anything more than a caricature on occasion.
Adams’ work and the legitimately interesting real life tale we see here are enough to recommend Big Eyes. It is also refreshing to see Burton doing commendable work without a $200 million budget remaking something, like he did 20 years back with Ed Wood. Speaking of that effort, Big Eyes comes from the same writers (Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski). This isn’t as memorable as that fine picture about a terrible director, but it’s a good film about a talented artist who is directed into a heckuva big scheme.
2011’s Horrible Bosses was a better than average raunchy comedy that will most be remembered for showing a whole new side to Jennifer Aniston, which assisted in achieving some shock value. It helped that it was headlined by three highly talented comedic leads – Jason’s Bateman and Sudeikis and Charlie Day. When it turned into a surprise blockbuster with a $117 million domestic gross, the bosses at Warner Bros decided we needed a sequel.
We didn’t.
Horrible Bosses 2 contains only hints of what the original a reasonable success. The sequel pines to remind us of what we dug about its predecessor. Kevin Spacey and Jamie Foxx reprise their roles but their parts aren’t as humorous as the first go round. Aniston is back, but that aforementioned shock value is long gone. The three leads have an undeniable chemistry which again isn’t as strong as when they were dealing with their original nefarious employers.
It’s actually Chris Pine who turns in the most unexpectedly winning performance. Captain Kirk hasn’t had much opportunity to show his comedy skills and he has them. He plays the spoiled son of a rich investor (a totally wasted Christoph Waltz) who bilks our trio out of their new business venture called The Shower Buddy (not really worth explaining). He is really the only new and worthy addition to the proceedings. The rest is primarily stale sex jokes. Lots of them.
The contrived plot (you can bet a sequel for this was never planned) involves the leads setting up a scheme to kidnap Pine. Their plans necessitate conspiring with their old foes Spacey and Foxx and Aniston because star power is key. Yet those three contributed a lot to the 2011 pic and the same cannot be said now.
Even a less than desirable follow up is bound to have laugh inducing moments with this cast. The ratio isn’t horrible, but it’s not impressive either.
All My Life... I Wanted To Be A Blogster 