While Zero Dark Thirty, admittedly a brilliant, troubling film, has taken two of the major Best Picture and Best Director Awards, I am still a firm believer that Lincoln will take the Academy Award for Best Picture. Steven Spielberg I am less sure about, though the members of the Academy will acknowledge that his brilliant decision to allow the actors and the screenplay to shine was a superb directorial decision, the stuff of Best Director indeed. Audiences use to his stunning visuals, (and who isn’t?), instead found a film that focused on character, thereby performance, on words, and atmosphere, something he accomplished with Schindler’s List (1993) which won him his first Oscar for Best Director.
In 2010 The Social Network (2010) swept the major critics awards, dominated them totally, yet the Oscar went to The King’s Speech (2010), a well crafted biography of King George overcoming his stammer before taking Britain to war against Germany. Though I admired The King’s Speech (2010) I remember sitting there thinking…really? While watching the awards in 1982, before many of you were born I suspect, I sat stunned as Gandhi (1982) an old-fashioned film at best (at best!!!), took most of the awards over LA Film Critics winner E.T. : The Extraterrestrial (1982) which I suppose only to those who did not think Gandhi (1982) was the masterpiece it was declared to be. Today it is regarded as what is was then, an old-fashioned Hollywood biopic that plays like Gandhi’s greatest hits rather than an honest portrait of an important man.
Lincoln is a superbly crafted film, with a performance from the ages from Daniel Day-Lewis as the sixteenth President of the United States. Going on gut feeling, I think Hollywood wants to honor this film as Best Picture, though they may go with Kathryn Bigelow for Best Director or Ben Affleck for Argo. I truly cannot see Bigelow winning so soon after her first win, but John Ford won back to back Best Director Oscars in 1940 and 1941. Let’s not forget Spielberg won his second for Best Director just five years after his first, so Bigelow could win, I just do not believe she will. Best Director seems to be headed to Ben Affleck, and I struggle with that because his achievement as a director was, for me, less than either Bigelow, Spielberg, or Tom Hooper. Argo is a terrific film, a fine entertainment, but it is not the years best film, it might not even make my top five, but it is without doubt among the ten best of the year. Hollywood likes Affleck, they want to honor him because they consider him a comeback, and I suppose to a degree he is. There was a time he was a laughing stock as an actor, and those days are long forgotten and forgiven.
Biographical films usually score well with the Academy, they always have, even when they were not very good, case in point Gandhi (1982). Lincoln reminds me of Patton (1970) a biography that had the courage to show the character warts and all, to explore his failings along with his strengths, and for me this is the hallmark of a great biography. But then again, is it fair to call Lincoln a biography given that it deals with a very specific time in the Presidents life?
Tough call, but since seeing the film for the first and second time, I am convinced it is the years best film, and the Academy will honor it as such. Could be wrong, certainly was last year…thoughts?
Related Stories:
Tags: American film directors, Ben Affleck, best picture, Cinema of the United States, Daniel Day-Lewis, Director, Director Oscars, Entertainment/Culture, Epic films, Film, first Oscar, Gandhi, George, John Ford, kathryn bigelow, Lincoln, Movie Release, Oscars, Patton, President of the United States, Schindler's List, Steven Spielberg, the Academy Award, The King's Speech, The Social Network, Tom Hooper, United Kingdom, United States
23 Comments
I also believe Lincoln will win. As for comebacks, isn’t the film considered one for Spielberg, after years of good but not great work? I mean I loved War Horse(much more than either The Artist of Hugo, frankly), and enjoyed Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, and thought The Terminal, Munich and Minority Report were great. But these films do not hold a candle to his past work – Schindler’s List, Saving Private Ryan, E.T, Jaws, Raiders and such. But Lincoln can now stand proudly among their ranks. For one, it features the best performances in a Spielberg film. I’d even go so far as to say it is one of the best-acted films of all time. he cast was flawless. Also, I believe Kushner’s screenplay is the best script Spielberg has ever had to work with. Production values are top-notch. John Williams subtle score may not be on par with Star Wars or Schindler’s List, but compliments the films beautifully. What more could you want from a film to name it Best Picture?
On a side note, I think we can count Les Miz out of the Best Picture race. Reviews have been lukewarm(69% on RT and 59 on metacritic). It’s now between ZD30 and Lincoln.
Max(Quote) (Reply)
On Les Mis: yes, but with 16 reviews and an average score of 7.9 to contrast. Give it some time.
UBourgeois(Quote) (Reply)
i also would like to see lincoln win, and think it very well might get a late push once love for zero dark thirty and les mis die down. but i’ve gotta wonder, is it even possible for john to write an article without mentioning Gandhi’s win over ET? I mean, we get it, the man loves spielberg and ET… but i swear, every single thing you write seems to find a way to bring it up
slater(Quote) (Reply)
I don’t think Lincoln is winning best picture or director this year. While yes, the academy is filled with old white Spielberg fanboys, I’m pretty sure they’re tired of selecting irrelevant best picture winners like The King’s Speech and The Artist (with Hugo close behind). They know it’s time to get relevant again and they are not afraid to do that every once in awhile (The Hurt Locker won over fanboy directors like Tarantino and Cameron who also directing the highest grossing film of all time that year).
I’m also sure that Spielberg’s direction will not win an Oscar. His direction and the film Lincoln are way below the quality of his best films and, because he’s already won twice, I don’t see how they would feel content giving him director for, in Mr. Foote’s words, not doing anything particularly memorable but letting the screenplay take over.
Plus, a best director win for Affleck? If anything the Academy doesn’t want to embrace him based on the nominations his last two films got. Also, the last movie that swept the critics awards was The Social Network and it lost basically everything to The King’s Speech, which everyone knows shouldn’t have happened hence the critical backlash of Les Mis. I’m pretty sure the Academy doesn’t want to do that again so soon after that debacle. The Academy would feel safe giving picture and director to The Hurt Locker team because they have won before and, let’s face it, an edgy movie needs to win again.
And I hate to sound mean, but this article sounds like a more of a reassurance for Mr. Foote’s favorite director to win picture and director rather than a accurate prediction. If anything, I think the race will be tightest between ZDT and Silver Linings.
George(Quote) (Reply)
If we assume that the Academy decides not to reaward two of its three most recent winners, a reasonable but far from assured stance, I agree that Lincoln will win Best Picture with Affleck winning director, though it’s still too early to say. I just think they’ll take notice of how tightly directed the film is and how much of a comeback Affleck has made (and with a baitier film like Argo this time) and reward him over those who already have an Oscar.
Also, am I the only one who enjoys Gandhi? Like I understand that most people think ET ought to have won but I’ve never held issue with it. I’ve seen the movie like five times and never grown tired of it.
UBourgeois(Quote) (Reply)
I’m dubious about Lincoln’s chances, agreeing with George that, after two decidedly old-fashioned winners in a row, a return to something meatier and more topical will be considered desirable. ZD30 seems increasingly like the film to beat, and if there is to be a spoiler…why not Django Unchained? Why not finally give Tarantino some love?
Also, while I think Lincoln is a good film, I can’t really put it alongside his best work. Compared to Patton, it doesn’t have enough bite (aside from James Spader’s scenes, easily the best in the film), and honestly, I don’t think the acting is THAT exceptional.
JamDenTel(Quote) (Reply)
I agree 99%. There´s absolutely nothing exceptional about Lincoln. And it would most definitely be the most traditional, conventional (and maybe boring) choice. I just don´t think that Django Unchained stands a chance… At all. Argo, Les Miserables or Silver Linings Playbook are all much ahead, I would think.
Mikael(Quote) (Reply)
To call The Artist “old-fashioned” is to miss its whole point, I suggest? The King’s Speech perhaps, though more as the ‘old-fashioned’ light entertainment that it was intended as… it never attempted anything more heavy-weight, and ultimately surprised itself with it garlands.
billdale(Quote) (Reply)
The King’s Speech was a British biopic with the Weinsteins behind it. The only real surprise there was that it actually won the big one over The Social Network. But it was a contender from the start.
The Artist, even if you’d rather not call it old-fashioned, is certainly a throwback, an homage, a nostalgic portrait. It’s a good film, but the year’s best? I didn’t consider it so.
JamDenTel(Quote) (Reply)
I really liked Lincoln and parts of it I loved.
But if they don’t want to reward a previous winning director (although really, why not?), why would Affleck be considered first in line?
Why not Tarantino who has made movies that are more groundbreaking, more entertaining, and have made more money? Or Wes Anderson, an original? Or Haneke, a classic? Or PT Anderson? Or (your choice here)?
Caddie(Quote) (Reply)
Lincoln was not good enough to win and im about 90 percent sure it wont. It is looking more and more likely that ZD30 will take it this year. I wasn’t much a fan of The Hurt Locker a few years back, but it was a good movie. I expect better things out of Zero Dark because of Chastain. In all honesty, I see Zero Dark taking Picture and Director fairly easily. I also don’t see how Django Unchained isn’t crashing into the nominations for any (few) of the staff members. Sure, it more than likely wont win (even though it will probably be the audience favorite of the year, like Basterds was a few years back), but I honestly don’t see any scenarie whereit doesn’t score at least 5 nominations with one being the biggy. What do I know though? I think Seven Psycopaths is the best film of the year by far (so far) and should sweep many of these categories. That’s why I love the AWARDS CIRCUIT though, we get to have a great community of flm lovers have their own awards. I’ve been more impressed with the ACCA (and even Academy Idol) the past few years than the Oscars.
Phill(Quote) (Reply)
I too think Gandhi gets a rough ride, and not just from Mr Foote. It was in many ways a remarkable effort from Attenborough… not least in his perseverence over 20yrs to get it made, but also in his bold and brilliant casting conclusion and some remarkable set-pieces. Yes, it is linear and plodding at times… but I too re-watch it from time to time and can appreciate it (though perhaps not all the way through at any one time!)
I actually think it holds up very well against many films of its year… excepting ET, of course, and perhaps Newman’s tour-de-force in The Verdict. Possibly because it was already so ‘dated’, in conception and execution, when it first came out? In retrospect, a split vote with ET taking Best Film but Sir Dickie still holding Best Director would look historically valid to me… but each to his own, of course!
The message seems to be, “autobios” are most effective when the character is illuminated by a single, strong story arc, over a necessarily limited period… hence the success of Lincoln, and indeed King’s Speech before it, each spanning a mere few years in the lives of important, ‘familiar’ characters. History can fill in the blanks on either side. Maybe it wouldn’t have worked so well with the less-known Gandhi…. ?
Then again, with the daddy of all ‘bio-pics’, Lawrence of Arabia, back in 1962 (roughly when was Sir Dickie was first plotting his Gandhi path), Lean told his story in the space of 2-3 years. There is MUCH of interest and intrigue in both TE Lawrence’s earlier and later lives, but Lean resisted the temptation to stretch it, other than the brief, prefacial flash-forward. You suspect, if Lean hadn’t told his story, Attenborough would’ve done… I won’t try to argue it would have been better!
FWIW, with much scope for vote-splitting and a near-certain (!?) Film/Director division of the spoils, I can easily see Lincoln taking it this year, unless Les Mis rallies soon after a somewhat shaky start. With Affleck probably a nose in front for BD, if only by default (less need to reward Spielberg, Hooper or Bigelow).
billdale(Quote) (Reply)
Ok, OK, I get it about Gandhi, never again — my reasons are simple, I believe that the Academy chose to honor the man rather than the film — on his way to accept both his Oscar and DGA awards Attenborough stopped and whispered to Spielberg, “this should be you” — for me, loud and clear, OK, for me, a biopic should have the courage to show the character warts and all — Attenborough did not do that, his Gandhi virtually walks on water — his poor treatment of his wife was well documented to the point he would not allow life saving medication when she lay dying, and of course the business of sleeping between teenage girls to test his celibacy — he was not perfect, and by showing his flaws, they would have shown his humanity — by allowing him to be human we could connect to him.
1982 was a great year for movies, from ET, Tootsie, The Verdict, Diner, Blade Runner, Sophie’s Choice, Victor Victoria, and Missing there was much to choose from — for those that got attention later like Shoot the Moon or The World According to Garp, the list can be longer — for me however, Elliott bading farewell to his alien friend remains the most iconic and moving image of that entire decade — I agree with the tenacity with which Attenborough set out to make his film after David Lean decided it was not going to happen, but would you have not rather seen a film about Gandhi directed by Lean who had the audacity and immense courage to show Lawrence of Arabia, flaws and all…now that would have been a film. Kingsley is wonderful, no argument, but he is not really a person, but an entity, in the same manner so many actors played Christ.
But you folks are right, I do gripe about it far too often (an indication of how much it annoys me)…never again, maybe.
John H. Foote(Quote) (Reply)
A fair criticism, and not a minor flaw… Hollywood Hagiography, rather than balanced biog. But as you concede, there are no rules against it! Maybe we would have got something different had Anthony Hopkins stayed in the lead role?
Still for me, it’s a solid 8/10… now, on most reasonable perspectives ET is probably a 9, it is just that not a few BP winners over time would, for me, be scoring 7/10, and some less. Gandhi earns this score for sheer effort and scale, for Kingsley, for the half a million extras in the salt scene, for most of the supporting cast.. and, of course, for Daniel Day-Lewis stealing the film in his first, great screen role! (Well, maybe not quite… that WOULD be retrospective revision of cinema history!)
But it takes us back to Lincoln… which I have yet to see, for it’s not out here in the UK until late January. Annoying, and a bit strange, in this day and age… any idea why?
And we keep hearing about the “Brit vote” in the Oscar ballot (usually in a pejorative context)… any chance that this could hurt its chances in any way?
billdale(Quote) (Reply)
Even though I wouldn’t pick Lincoln as best picture, I agree that it will win. Argo, Les Miserables, and Zero Dark Thirty will all have their moment in the sun for a few weeks but Lincoln is lurking in the backgound and for some reason the voters will pick it in the end. Also, you mentioning the whole Ghandi over ET thing doesn’t bother me. We all probably have those best picture years that we disagree with that really annoy us.
Jeremy DC(Quote) (Reply)
BP, BD and BA are Lincoln’s to lose.
russel(Quote) (Reply)
“Lincoln” is a well-crafted film that is impeccably acted – but it’s certainly not the best of the year and honestly, I don’t think this is a Spielberg film that would age well.
A film like “Lincoln” has not won Best Picture since, which you are correct to mention, “Gandhi”. That film has not aged well either – and ironically, one of Spielberg’s most humble and masterful film lost that night.
I believe Bigelow’s “Zero Dark Thirty” may appeal to the critics more than the voters – and they are surely to change their mind for some emotional fare. But, “Lincoln”? I don’t think so.
I have to strongly disagree with you. “Argo” is still one of the best of the year – and I can assure you it will be on many top lists. It’s still a key contender and frontrunner – it has the thrill and wit that audiences cheer for. It’s also more of a film one would tend to have more interest in watching instead of ‘Lincoln” on a regular night.
Word of advice, you keep mentioning how Affleck is the frontrunner to win. Are you suggesting that Best Directing will be the only win for “Argo”? Since “The Graduate” is the last film to meet this feature, I believe “Argo” has a great shot at Best Picture.
“Zero Dark Thirty” seems to be the strongest contender as well. “Les Miserables” has so far generated mixed reviews from early critics – regardless of it’s “wowing” during the first screenings. And quite simply, I can’t see the Academy making the mistake of rewarding such a film like “Lincoln”. It may be wonderfully acted and scripted, but it’s simply nothing else than that. And it’s not Spielberg’s best – that statement is getting very, very overrated.
Eric M.(Quote) (Reply)
Mike Nichols and The Graduate was the last time Picture and Director didn’t match? It’s happened three times since 2000 (Steven Soderbergh for Traffic, Roman Polanski for The Pianist, and Ang Lee for Brokeback Mountain).
UBourgeois(Quote) (Reply)
No. The Graduate was the last time it only took Best Director. Since many are suggesting “Lincoln” is snagging Screenplay and Zero Dark Thirty perhaps editing…that leaves Ben Affleck with Argo?
Eric M.(Quote) (Reply)
Ahaa. My mistake.
UBourgeois(Quote) (Reply)
I will continue to root for PT Anderson to get an Oscar for Directing this year. Spielberg, for me, has been going through the motions for a while. And the fact that this movie is carried by performances is, in my opinion, more because of the actors and not the director. I like Lincoln, and the work Kushner did is pretty fantastic and entertaining, but I think that’s as far as I could go with my praise. I’d even be ok with DDL not winning at this point. A year full of surprises would be nice.
steve(Quote) (Reply)
Sally Field will get the attention for Lincoln. They like to spread the wealth.
Kenny(Quote) (Reply)
I have a feeling Spielberg is going to win this year, while a different film (Argo, Zero Dark Thirty, Les Miserables) will win Best Picture.
missionstatement1224(Quote) (Reply)