 |
| A mosiac of Oscar bridesmaid Leonardo DiCaprio made out of Oscar winners. (Source) |
The wedding party of Oscars 2013 boasts a familiar pack of
Oscar bridesmaids. At least three nominees should wear seafoam to the awards,
since they were on this list last year and they will likely be listed again
given their chances in this year’s race. (Those nominees are Roger Deakins,
Thomas Newman, and Wylie Stateman.) Few of this year’s Oscar bridesmaids
actually stand much chance at winning, so cross your fingers and wish them many
happy returns!
Leonardo DiCaprio – 4th
and 5th nominations (Nominee for Best Actor and for Best Picture, The Wolf of Wall Street)
Last year’s post ended with a joke about wishing Leonardo
DiCaprio luck on his campaign for The Wolf of Wall Street after his Best Supporting Actor bid for Django Unchained lost out to the film’s
co-lead, Christophe Waltz. DiCaprio’s flirtation with Oscar might have
ballooned into more whispering of “pity the Oscar bridesmaid” than any
contemporary actor. He wants it and his fans want it, but Oscar won’t give it
up.
DiCaprio, however, has only lost three times (for What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, The Aviator, and Blood Diamond), which is fairly low compared to other actors.
DiCaprio, on the other hand, has seen more snubs than most actors of his
calibre have, especially since he’s given award-worthy performances and shown
no qualms about kissing babies to get the prize. Add to the list of losses his
failed bids for Marvin’s Room (but
even Meryl Streep wasn’t nominated for that…), Titanic (which saw a decent effort for a write-in nomination by love-struck
fans), Catch Me If You Can and Gangs of New York (both films in 2002), The Departed (blame the campaign for
putting him supporting), Revolutionary
Road (his best work pre-Wolf),
the double-whammy of Inception and Shutter Island (the popularity of former
might have eclipsed his stronger performance in the latter) and J. Edgar (which almost seemed close
enough to taste), and Leo’s sum of snubs must sting badly. His performance in J. Edgar seemed like the culmination to
bring about a long overdue Oscar, but all he got was a good razz by
Funny-Or-Die:
It’s almost become a mania to read the past decade of
DiCaprio’s work in terms of Oscar snobbery. Every performance he gives allegedly
has him seeing the Oscar. Just look at the picture above, or at the collage
portrait of Leo made out of other people winning Oscars. No serial loser has
inspired so many theories,
essays,
or memes.
He’s a good sport about it, at least, joking
that he now has a special card for losers, but it must be frustrating to be
shut out so often when so many of his films are endorsed by the Academy.
That card might come in handy this year, though, since the
current race seems unlikely to bridge the gap between the admiration for
DiCaprio’s work from fans/critics/peers and from the Academy. DiCaprio is the
dark horse of the Best Actor race for sure. The late release of The Wolf of Wall Street prevented
DiCaprio’s performance from receiving the same level of attention that Matthew
McConaughey, Bruce Dern, or Chiwetel Ejiofor received from the precursors. Only
one race—the BAFTAs—really put DiCaprio head-to-head with frontrunner Matthew
McConaughey and they both lost to Ejiofor. Add to this competitive year the
controversy surrounding The Wolf of Wall
Street, and DiCaprio seems likely to be a bridesmaid once again. DiCaprio,
however, could benefit from the fact that he was consistently defending the
film on the awards circuit: Leonardo DiCaprio surely won’t win a Best Picture
Oscar for The Wolf of Wall Street, but
a Best Actor prize could be the Academy’s way of acknowledging the popular film
without seeming to endorse its subject.
Amy Adams doesn’t have the same novelty surrounding her
history of losses as Leonardo DiCaprio does. Adams offers a different kind of
Oscar bridesmaid: she’s the quiet, modest, consistently likable candidate who
is politely awaiting her turn. Her nomination for American Hustle certainly marks an upward step after four
nominations for Best Supporting Actress (for The Master, The Fighter, Doubt, Junebug), since she’s a leading-quality star who has had a
surprisingly slow move out of supporting roles. She’ll win one day.
March 2nd might not be that day, though, since
Cate Blanchett seems like a virtual lock to win for Blue Jasmine. Alternatively, Adams might present one case in which
an overdue candidate benefits from a desire to share the wealth. Adams is the
only one of the four Best Actress nominees without an Oscar (as Blanchett,
Sandra Bullock, and Judi Dench all have one while Meryl Streep has a
well-deserved three). The last time something like that happened was for the
2002 Oscars when The Pianist’s Adrien
Brody pulled a surprise win by besting heavy favourites Daniel Day-Lewis (Gangs of New York) and Jack Nicholson (About Schmidt), plus strong contenders Nicholas
Cage (Adaptation.) and Michael Caine
(The Quiet American). The Academy
clearly loved The Pianist, which
might have been more of a factor than the Oscars held by the other nominees
were, especially since Brody’s career hadn’t brought him to the awards before.
The Academy seems to love American Hustle, though, since they gave it four acting
nominations, and one of them marks Adams’ inclusion over presumed spot for Emma
Thompson. Factor this tidbit in with the obvious fact that Adams’ work has gone
un-Oscared, and her support could gain a needed boost. Cate Blanchett seems
unbeatable, but American Hustle has
to win something big, right?
This could be the year that Brad Pitt finally wins an Oscar,
but virtually nobody is noting it. This fact seems inconsequential in
comparison to the significance of 12 Years a Slave, so kudos on the team at Fox Searchlight for sticking to the
better story. One should also note that the Oscar campaign omitted Pitt’s name
from the list of actors to consider for Best Supporting Actor, thus avoiding a
push of the film as a “Brad Pitt movie”. (Pitt’s name, however, was on the list
of producers.) Slave marks Pitt’s
second nomination in the Best Picture category (his first was for Moneyball), although he also produced
the Oscar-winner The Departed and the
nominee The Tree of Life. Bringing
his tally up to five nominations are his performances in Moneyball, The Curious Case
of Benjamin Button, and Twelve
Monkeys. Pitt remains one of the most underrated actors today despite his
heavy star status, but his increased efforts as a producer suggest that he’s
more focused on making films that matter than he is on collecting awards.
Either factor could work in his favour come Oscar night. George Clooney won
Best Picture last year, so why not Pitt this year?
Emmanuel Lubezki should have at least two Oscars by now. I’d
have given him the prize for The Tree of
Life and Children of Men. The
latter loss for the Alfonso Cuarón film was especially surprising if one
remembers that extraordinary long take of an action
sequence that whirled around a car. (The long take in Gravity is just as stunning.) His loss for Tree of Life, on the other hand, could account for the same reason
that he will win this year. Tree of Life
lost to Hugo, which wowed audiences
with 3D visual effects and green screens. Hugo,
like fellow winners Life of Pi and Avatar, suggests that Oscar voters might
not see much of a distinction between virtual wizardry and cinematographic
skill.
Gravity might be
driven by special effects, but Lubezki’s cinematography seems like the
culmination of his work. The stunning fifteen-minute long take that opens the
film realizes 3D space unlike any film and it is easily the best special effect
Gravity has to offer. Moreover, Gravity suggests that the work of a
cinematographer in the digital age can extend far beyond the shooting stage, for
a DP can take an active role in the overall visual execution of a film by
working alongside the VFX team and the director to plan shots and blend digital
cinematography with visual effects. (See this article in American Cinematographer for a breakdown of Lubezki’s work on the film.) The
difference between Gravity other
nominees like The Grandmaster or 12 Years a Slave hints that it might be
time to create a new category to honour the different branches of
cinematography. The Academy made separate prizes for colour and black and white
cinematography when colour films become more prominent, so why not offer a
prize for Best Cinematography and one for Best Cinematography in a VFX film? Oscar
fans can decry the conflation of visual effects and cinematography all they
like, but there’s no denying that Lubezki’s ability to harness the space,
scope, and atmosphere of the project merits an Oscar long overdue.
I’ll feel really bad for Roger Deakins if Bruno Delbonnel
wins the Oscar for Inside Llewyn Davis. Delbonnel
stepped in to shoot Davis when
Deakins was away shooting Skyfall and
the Coen Brothers needed someone to take over for their long-time collaborator.
Any of Deakins’ collaborations with the Coen Brothers, likewise, could easily
point to the significant role a DP plays in the creation of a film’s overall
artistic vision, as could his work on Skyfall, which transformed a James Bond film
into art.
Perhaps the best example for how voters are neglecting the
old ways of the camera may be seen in the seemingly endless string of losses
for the great Roger Deakins. Nobody quite captures light the way Deakins does.
It seems criminal that he has never won before, especially when his past
nominations are for his striking work in (deep breath): Skyfall, True Grit, The Reader, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, No County for Old Men, The Man who Wasn’t There, O Brother, Where Art Thou?, Kundun, Fargo, and The Shawshank
Redemption. Deakins probably came close with Skyfall and he might have cancelled himself out with two
nominations in 2007 (for Jesse James
and No Country). It doesn’t help
matters that Deakins’ status as a talent long overdue coincided with the boon
of 3D. Perhaps voters take such work for granted. The excellent cinematography of Prisoners seems unlikely to bring Deakins his first win since it is less showy than Deakins' previous work and the
film hardly factored into the awards conversation at all this season, but his
nomination suggests that some contingent of the cinematographers’ branch
still recognizes traditional work.
Thomas Newman – 12th
nomination (Nominee for Best Music – Score, Saving
Mr. Banks)
Thomas Newman joins Deakins as two of Oscar’s back-to-back
bridesmaids. (They both lost for Skyfall.)
Newman has a tricky bid to win, for Saving Mr. Banks didn’t go over well with the Academy at all. The actors didn’t like
Emma Thompson or Tom Hanks; the costume designers didn’t like the mix of period
work; the writers didn’t like its insider’s glimpse of the movie biz;
therefore, the voting body might not give a second thought to the music. The score
of Saving Mr. Banks is lovely and
characteristically Newman with its sprightly swelling strings and piano notes
that hit all the right emotional keys like the composer’s nominated scores do
in films like Finding Nemo, Road to Perdition, and American Beauty. The score for Saving Mr. Banks is a highlight of the
film and it draws the audience into the Disney magic. It might be the one
element of Saving Mr. Banks that
anyone can appreciate regardless of whether one likes the film. However, one
might also have said the same for Emma Thompson.
Alexandre Desplat – 6th
nomination (Nominee for Best Music – Score, Philomena)
Golden Globe winner Alex Ebert didn’t make the cut for All is Lost, so the frontrunner in the
category could be BAFTA and Critics’ Choice winner Steven Price for Gravity, but I wouldn’t underestimate
the long-overdue Alexandre Desplat to score a win for Philomena’s skillful subtlety. I said in my “Memo to the Academy”
that Desplat deserves to win Best Score for Philomena.
A win for Philomena would finally
bring him to the stage after his nominations for Argo, The King’s Speech, Fantastic Mr. Fox, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and The Queen. His delightfully understated composition could pull
an upset, since Philomena seems like
a wild card in the Oscar race. People love it; it’s a crowd-please; and it
appeals to the exact demographic that forms much of the voting body. Judi Dench,
however, seems unlikely to win, while the screenplay by Steve Coogan and Jeff
Pope has an outside chance. Best Score seems like Philomena’s best shot,
for it could bring support for the film and support for the outstanding
composer to the portion of voters who recognize the music as simply a lovely
and effective score.
It’s been 35 years since Patricia Norris received her first
Oscar nomination for Days of Heaven.
She’s back in the running after a long hiatus from competition and her
impressive period work on 12 Years a
Slave could easily bring a win. Norris faces stiff competition from The Great Gatsby’s Catherine Martin, but
the 82-year-old veteran reportedly created the film’s detailed costumes through
exhaustive research and artistic intuition. An interview with Vanity Fair notes how Norris had little to work with, aside from a few sketches,
and extended the realism of the project by looking back to the decades of the
fashion prior to Solomon Northup’s story to devise some well-worn hand-me-downs
to dress the slaves. 12 Years a Slave
offers the kind of work that the Academy tends to favour, so Best Costume
Design could give an early indicator in the broadcast for whether Slave will sweep the show.
Other Oscar bridesmaids in the wedding party include
double-nominee Skip Lievsay, who could win Best Sound mixing for either Gravity or Inside Llewyn Davis; the aforementioned Wylie Stateman is a dark
horse for his seventh bid in Best Sound Editing for Lone Survivor, and VFX nominee Daniel has his sixth nom, although
he probably won’t win for Iron Man 3
if he didn’t win for Iron Man or Iron Man 2. There is such a wealth of talent
in this roster of un-acknowledged artists, though, that one must remember that
an Oscar hardly defines the greatness of a career of outstanding work.
