December 15, 2012 at 2:30 pm #78674
Paul Thomas Anderson
The top 3 seem locked. Spielberg has won the DGA before many times, Bigelow and Affleck are both acclaimed and have popped up all over Directing awards.
Although i think Ang Lee will miss out an Oscar nod, I can’t see him being snubbed-unfilmable book, 3D, his peers respect him
Hooper would get in, but the critical reception of Les Miss is lukewarm, many claiming his direction is to blame. He missed the Globe, but if the film does well at the guilds, the previous DGA and Oscar winner is in, especially if Les miss regains its frontrunner status.
That leaves the 3 Weinstein boys: O Russell, Tarantino, and PTA. DGA usually goes for genre-Nolan for Inception, Fincher for Dragon Tattoo, so QT has an advantage. Russell missed the Globe, and some may say the film is more of a screenplay/actor deal. PTA won at Venice, many peers will be supporting him like Michael Mann did, but it really hasn’t maintained a lot of buzz minus the Los Angeles prize.
So what do you think?
December 15, 2012 at 2:33 pm #78676
Paul Thomas Anderson.December 15, 2012 at 2:52 pm #78677
This is Spielberg’s to lose, but if he comes up short, who’s going to take his spot?
I dont wish to go there.December 15, 2012 at 3:00 pm #78678
Spielberg, Bigelow, Lee, Affleck, Russell
I’d be surprised if Hooper makes it – the DGA membership is huge, very few members are feature film directors, most are TV or assts or production managers. They need to vote soon, have to see films (I think they finally dropped their screener prohibition), Bigelow likely still makes though late, but b/w the reviews saying the Hooper’s direction is the biggest complaint about the film, the straight male (and somewhat younger) base of the membership, and the lateness of the release, I think he has an upward struggle.
Tarantino also would have a better chance except for the lateness.December 15, 2012 at 5:30 pm #78679
DGA……Spielberg, Bigelow, Affleck, Lee, Tarantino
Oscar noms…..Spielberg, Bigelow, Affleck, Anderson, HooperDecember 15, 2012 at 5:41 pm #78680
Oscars – in order of likelihood for me
Spielberg, Bigelow, Lee, Affleck, Haneke, Russell, PT Anderson, Tarantino, Mendes, W. Anderson, Hooper
From what I hear, I expect Hooper to get very few of the #1 votes he needs even if he gets some votes down ballot. I’d be surprised, maybe even shocked, if he’s nominated. Haneke is going to get a lot of #1 votes, far more I’d suspect than anyone than Spielberg and Bigelow, which I think will be enough to get him in. Lee and Affleck most likely to get enough #1 + other votes to make it in as consensus choices.
The Oscar director nominations usually are the most critic parallel/serious-minded set among all groups who nominate for director. I can’t Hooper not getting a DGA nom and then making it into the OscarsDecember 15, 2012 at 5:47 pm #78681
Most of the years…either 3 or 4 of the DGA nominees
translate into the actual oscar 5….very rare for it
ever to be 5 for 5…so there is room for 1 or 2
to be forgotten in favor of 2 others…December 15, 2012 at 5:48 pm #78682
Whers the HFP GG love for AMOUR…??
I am so surprised they didnt nominate Riva or Haneke there..
I think the best chances for AMOUR are Riva for actress and Haneke getting an orig screenplay nom…
Foreign film of courseDecember 15, 2012 at 5:59 pm #78683
Sony Classics traditionally fares less well at the GGs than Oscars; the GGs for foreign language Oscars almost always nominates only those who are already known in the US for English language roles and kiss HFPA ass – neither of which happened for Amour actors
Amour chosen best film by LAFC and named best film by Kenny Turan/LA Times is vastly more important than what the (for the directors’ branch) irrelevant HFPA does.
And yes, the Oscar director lineup is usually a bit different than the DGA. But when it is, I doubt you’ll find many, if even any, when a choice was a director whose film got worse reviews than the one he is replacing. When they are different, it is usually for a more critically acclaimed film. That is why Hooper is in trouble, even if (as I doubt will happen) he gets a DGA nomination.December 15, 2012 at 6:39 pm #78684
Last 20 years, when AMPAS/DGA different, listed by film, AMPAS first
Tree of Life instead of Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
True Grit instead of Inception
The Reader instead of The Dark Knight
Juno instead of Into the Wild
Vera Drake instead of Finding Neverland
City of God instead of Seabiscuit
Talk to Her instead of Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
Mulholland Drive and Gosford Park over Memento and Moulin Rouge
Billy Elliot over Almost Famous
Being John Malkovich over The Green Mile
Full Monty and The Sweet Hereafter over Amistad and As Good As It Gets
The People Vs Larry Flynt over Jerry Maguire
Babe over Apollo 13
Red and Bullets Over Broadway over The Shawshank Redemption and Four Weddings and a Funeral
In the Name of the Father and Short Cuts over The Fugitive and The Age of Innocence
Scent of a Woman over A Few Good Men
That’s 20 years – though not entirely one sided, it gives a strong hint that the Academy, when they are different, goes for the smaller, more director-centric, less-audience friendly film
Amour is the film that this year would be most like The Tree of Life, Vera Drake, Talk to Her, City of God, Mulholland Dr., Being John Malkovich, Red, Short Cuts – all critically acclaimed films, niche items, critics’ groups awards. The Master also falls into line with some of the difference selections. The sole case I saw where a director was nominated where his film had less acclaim than its DGA alternative was The Reader (vs The Dark Knight), so it has happened, but it is very rare, and so far, Les Miserables’ reviews are worse than even The Reader’s. The only musical to have an Oscar director nomination in 20 years was Chicago, which won best picture. Throughout Oscar history, there have been many best picture nominees that were musicals that didn’t have a best director nomination. From 1945 (when BP went back to 5 nominees) I count 10 out of 20 times when a musical was nominated for best picture that its director wasn’t nominated for best director – a 50% incidence, way, way higher than the normal discrepancy b/w those categories usually.December 15, 2012 at 6:42 pm #78685
Scott, I’m confused. Which one you prefer, Amour or Zero Dark Thirty?December 15, 2012 at 6:51 pm #78686
They are both terrific films. I slightly prefer ZD30, though I have seen it once and Amour twice, so slightly different experience. Bigelow is a near lock for both AA and DGA, so didn’t factor into my analysis – I am explaining why I have Haneke as 5th most likely Oscar nominee, which for me history provides a strong case for.December 15, 2012 at 6:58 pm #78687
Scottferguson was that a jab at Cotillard the kissing ass thing, she was amazing in rust and bone from what i am hearing the academy does not like amour but they really like rust and bone i think Cottillard is a lock a foreign language performance nominated at SAG is an automatic lock for an oscar nomination i don`t care who the name is.December 15, 2012 at 7:02 pm #78688
It was a general over the years comment. I wasn’t specifically think of Cotillard this year (who does I think give her best performance in Rust and Bone, and the first one I’ve seen – and I’ve seen most of her French films – where I think she deserves a nomination.
Among contenders this year, though, I prefer Riva, Weisz, Chastain to her.December 15, 2012 at 7:09 pm #78689
I didn`t think Chastain was anything special she`s a good actress but never elevates the material, Weisz good the movie dreadfully boring, Riva great although too much of a knock off of away from her and julie christie.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.