Well, folks, it’s over. Kind of.
Time is up for movies to impress the Academy voters before the nominees are announced. The race is frozen now before nominations are announced early Thursday morning, January 10. So with nothing left to influence the nominations, I’ll be offering my final take on the race before we find out who gets to compete for the golden man, the Oscar.
Today, I’ll be discussing the writing categories, Best Original Screenplay and Best Adapted Screenplay.
Best Original Screenplay
I think this is probably the biggest no-brainer race of them all for 2012. It’s an extremely thin field, filled with several past nominees and winners. “Zero Dark Thirty” and “Django Unchained” will vie for the win; I think it’s Mark Boal’s to lose, but Tarantino could take it if they feel Boal’s win for “The Hurt Locker” in 2009 was too short a gap. Going through the two categories is tough to find gaps between wins, but I think Boal’s back-to-back wins would be unprecedented.
Even if “The Master” doesn’t score a Best Picture nomination, it is a sure bet to get a writing nod. The writers’ branch has always loved Paul Thomas Anderson, nominating him for “Boogie Nights,” “Magnolia,” and “There Will Be Blood.” I think the Academy respects him more as a writer than a director, and I’d hedge my bet that his first Oscar comes from the screenplay categories.
Though “The Master” is not unilaterally acclaimed, I think the fact that they nominated the challenging and polarizing “Magnolia” means they’ll nominate just about anything he writes. (Except “Punch-Drunk Love,” but that was just a terrible movie.)
Wes Anderson was recognized here for his work on “The Royal Tenenbaums” back in 2001, and his “Moonrise Kingdom” is playing a lot better on the precursor circuit than that one. Though it may miss out on a Best Picture nomination, it will at least have this prize to compete for. I doubt it has a shot to win, but it’s another feather in Anderson’s cap for an eventual win down the road.
As for that final slot, people (including myself) seem to have finally caught onto the fact that the writers’ branch sees foreign films and isn’t afraid to nominate them. Despite everyone declaring “A Separation” the winner for Best Foreign Film all year, very few seemed to see the Best Original Screenplay nomination coming.
“Pan’s Labyrinth” and “The Barbarian Invasions” had turned their goodwill from Best Foreign Film into writing nods. Not to mention “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly” and “City of God,” directorial triumphs recognized by the directors’ branch, were also recognized for their screenplays. Oh, I almost forgot to mention “Amelie,” “Y Tu Mama Tambien,” and “Dirty Pretty Things.”
And I nearly omitted Pedro Almodóvar’s “Talk to Her,” which WON in 2002. (Perhaps it’s the subtitles that remind them that they are reading a movie?)
The writers think global. Thus, no one wants to get caught off guard, and the smart money is on Michael Haneke’s “Amour.” While I think it’s much more of a director’s movie, I think it glides in simply on the weakness of the pool of eligible nominees.
Perhaps they will pull a “Margin Call” surprise and go with Nicholas Jarecki’s “Arbitrage,” a kindred spirit in its vilification of Wall Street big wigs. Or maybe they take original to heart and nominate Rian Johnson’s superb “Looper,” a critical favorite that has popped up sporadically throughout the precursor circuit. Heck, maybe John Gatins’ script for “Flight” shows up like it did on the WGA list.
But I’ll stick with “Amour,” in spite of my reservations.
Best Adapted Screenplay
“Lincoln,” “Argo,” and “Silver Linings Playbook” are locks. Inarguable. If they don’t get nominated … well, I won’t finish that sentence since it’s a waste of time. IT’S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
The last two slots are a mystery to me. I think it’s ultimately a decision of whether the writers go along with groupthink or go out on a limb for a script that they love. Will they make sure the heavy-hitter Best Picture contenders have a writing nomination to add to their tally? Or will they provide a lone nomination (or a high-profile one) for a movie not nearly as beloved?
Just as a reminder of how hard it is to predict, let’s look back at the past three years of the category since those reflect Best Picture moving to beyond 5 nominees.
Last year, it looked like “The Help” would ride the coattails of its Best Picture nomination to a screenplay nod. And “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo,” which most thought would be a Best Picture nominee, looked good too. The writers snubbed both of these, opting for the well-wrought “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy” and a lone nod for George Clooney’s “The Ides of March.” (“War Horse” and “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close” were two other Best Picture nominees that were not recognized.)
In 2010, the category was 5-for-5 with Best Picture nominees “Winter’s Bone,” “True Grit,” “Toy Story 3,” and “127 Hours” all scoring here. The eventual winner was – obviously – Aaron Sorkin’s visionary script for “The Social Network.”
2009 saw a surprising triumph for Best Picture nominee “Precious” over fellow nominees “Up in the Air,” “District 9,” and “An Education.” Only one other adaptation was in the Best Picture field, but it was “The Blind Side” – a nominee few saw coming. So unsurprisingly, an outside nominee charged the field – “In the Loop,” a British political comedy that came in from out of the blue.
So since there’s no clear precedent, what to do? Predict that the writers just go with the flow and nominated “Life of Pi” and “Les Misérables?” Or attempt to forecast a big passion play?
I think William Nicholson’s script for “Les Misérables” is a more likely nominee, despite many naysayers who think it won’t be appreciated because it was a musical. “Chicago,” the last stage-to-screen musical, was nominated here; you have to go so far back to see a movie musical in the Best Picture field that it isn’t worth looking for a pattern. We really have no idea whether it’s a contender, though, since it was ineligible at the WGA Awards. But it did miss out on a Golden Globe nomination, and that was a nod “Chicago” did pick up in 2002.
Basically, in my prediction of “Les Misérables” for Best Adapted Screenplay, I’m counting on the movie playing really well with the Academy (which it apparently has, in spite of the critics’ attempts to destroy it). There’s nothing but a gut feeling telling me to predict it, and a slight inkling that they love the movie enough to nominate it a lot.
There’s much more of a reason for me to predict “Life of Pi,” which has the WGA nomination to its credit. But a lot of people have criticized David Magee’s script for being the major flaw of the movie, and that gives me hesitancy. Could it be that it only scored a nomination because of all the ineligible movies?
I had similar hang-ups about “Hugo” last year, a movie that was visually impressive but took a lot of flak for its weak writing. Yet John Logan’s script for that was nominated for a WGA Award … and then received an Oscar nomination. Does “Life of Pi” have the strength of “Hugo,” though, which went on to win 5 Oscars in 2011? I don’t think it does, and Fox seems to have little confidence in it.
But if it’s not “Life of Pi,” what will it be? Does any film have the passion necessary to score an outside nod?
There’s an outside chance “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel” gets a Best Picture nomination, but I doubt it would get nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay for the same reasons “The Blind Side” missed out here. Its success is in its feel-good nature, not because of good writing.
Though I’d say it’s written like a sitcom, there are fans of Ben Lewin’s script for “The Sessions.” But the only heat that movie has lies with the performances of John Hawkes and Helen Hunt; love of the movie doesn’t go much beyond that. And if it was a serious contender, why wasn’t it nominated for a WGA Award in spite of all the ineligible movies?
Heck, maybe even John Logan’s script for “Skyfall” will show up. Some have suggested it will show up in the Best Picture field after a slightly surprising nomination for the Producers Guild’s prize. I’d say the script, though flawed, is the smartest part of that movie – but I just don’t see it happening. Other than “Toy Story 3,” I can’t find any franchise entry nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay.
A more likely nominee is “The Perks of Being a Wallflower,” which has been nominated for the WGA Award and the Critics’ Choice Award. It’s adapted by the writer of the novel, Stephen Chbosky, who also directed the film. I could definitely see it being 2012’s “The Ides of March” since it’s unlikely to be recognized anywhere else, and the writing is a major strong suit of the film.
But I just have a hard time predicting the movie since it flew under the radar all season. It didn’t do particularly well at the box office, and it doesn’t have much big name talent beyond Emma Watson. “The Ides of March” had 4 Golden Globe nods and a PGA mention. Likewise, “In the Loop” had popped up in a number of critics’ groups awards. I’d be surprised if the Academy stood up for “The Perks of Being a Wallflower.”
If any movie unseats “Les Misérables” or “Life of Pi,” I think it would be “Beasts of the Southern Wild.” It has been uniquely hard to gauge love for the film because it was ineligible not only for the WGA Awards but also for the SAG Awards. I considered it dead when it blanked at the Golden Globes, but I’m beginning to rethink my assessment after it shockingly popped up as a nominee for Best Picture for the PGA.
Had it been eligible for the guild awards, would we have seen a groundswell of support for the movie? And lest we forget, the HFPA blanked “True Grit” in 2010 – and that went on to received 10 Oscar nominations including Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay. Some say the HFPA doesn’t like quintessential American stories, and you could make an argument that “Beasts of the Southern Wild” is just that.
I think the movie’s biggest strength is its direction, not its writing. However, I have similar things to say about “Amour,” and it appears to be cruising towards a nomination. The writers may really admire this unconventional movie, adapted from a play and transmuted into something wholeheartedly cinematic.
Thus, the degree of difficulty gives me the confidence to say Benh Zeitlin and Lucy Alibar’s script for “Beasts of the Southern Wild” will knock “Life of Pi” (although it could just as easily be “Les Misérables”) out of the category. So, to answer my own questions from the beginning of the discussion, I believe the Academy will be part groupthink, part cavalier.
Check back tomorrow, January 6, for my take on the Supporting Actor/Actress categories!
Marshall and the Movies 
Recent Comments