comment #1

Chinaski1 says ...

"stood up like persons of principal and backbone "

Which just means they agree with you. If they had nominated him you'd be calling them cowards and wimps.

comment #2

JR says ...

"War Horse is all but finished as a Best Picture contender. This was confirmed this morning, I believe, when the Directors Guild of America stood up like persons of principle and backbone and declined to nominate Steven Spielberg for Best Director. That's it, game over, throw in the towel."

Then the same goes for your beloved Moneyball, right?

Sasha has been right on with Fincher and Marty, it now seems.

comment #3

Rashad says ...

Now that War Horse has been spared further condemnation, can you please unleash the Hugo take down that's been bubbling? Turn it up Jeff.

comment #4

Jeffrey Wells says ...

Scorsese was put in as a nominee to round out the pack. He's not a serious contender. The industry is so caught up in their default Scorsese response -- "we love you, Marty, for being our reigning cardinal of film lore & film love! And for being 70 years old and plugging away since the '60s!" -- that it's all but meaningless when he gets a nomination of this sort.

comment #5

C.C. Baxter says ...

"Scorsese was put in as a nominee to round out the pack.

Um, no. Scorsese was likely the number one or two vote-getter along with Hazanavicius. Payne was close too, I'm sure. Your reigning cardinal who's been at it since the 60s nonsense might apply to the Allen nom though.

comment #6

Mr. F. says ...

"The industry is so caught up in their default Scorsese response -- "we love you, Marty, for being our reigning cardinal of film lore & film love! And for being 70 years old and plugging away since the '60s!" -- that it's all but meaningless when he gets a nomination of this sort."

But can't the same thing be said about Spielberg? Especially over WAR HORSE, which is a throwback to the sentimental hits of yesteryear?

And to adjust your analogy: if Scorsese is the Pope of film lore and film love... then Spielberg is the highest Cardinal under him. So what's the difference? HUGO is seen as a departure for Marty, and is thus worth rewarding, whereas WAR HORSE is just another Spielberg sentiment-fest? I'm genuinely curious.

comment #7

the sandwich says ...

I just love the contrast between the vitriol and the banner ads.

comment #8

Jeffrey Wells says ...

It's not unheard of for rank-and-file to agree with the online seers and essayists as far as determining the most deserving Best Picture finalists and directors, but it seems to happen rarely. Mostly there's outrage on this end, and there certainly was today when it came to Bennett Miller's omission from the DGA nominee slate. But the rank-and-file manned up in a very unusual and commendable way when they said "no" to Spielberg's whorish sentimentality.

In all fairness and with no malice In Contention's Kris Tapley has to own up to his early-bird projection that War Horse would probably go all the way. He said it in his column and/or on his "Oscar Talk" podcast with Anne Thompson right after the first screening[s]. I'm not trying to rub it in or be an asshole -- I'm just saying Tapley needs to quietly man up and take responsibility for having said this.

This is one of those unmitigated Days of Victory that are few and far in between for Hollywood Elsewhere.

comment #9

Blore says ...

The rank and file do not give a fuck what you have to say Jeff. Not one ingot.

comment #10

Rashad says ...

Mr. F, how can the same be said? He only had one DGA nom since SPR.

comment #11

Tristan Eldritch2 says ...

Knew nothing whatsoever about the source material going in, and wound up enjoying the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo a hell of lot more than Social Network. Seriously, Mara, Craig, and Plummer were a hell of lot more fun to watch than any of the performances in SN, and there was actually something more at stake in it than which rich kid will be the richest by the end. Ficher's cut-glass perfectionism has never been as crisp and precise, and the set-piece in the killer's house was a masterclass in sound-design, editing, and suspense. I dunno, I really enjoyed it, although knowing next to nothing about the story probably helped a lot.

comment #12

RobbyH says ...

''This is one of those unmitigated Days of Victory that are few and far in between for Hollywood Elsewhere.''

awh. Between the Spielberg gone and add in Fincher, you and Sasha are having a good ass day. Go Celebrate!

comment #13

Kristopher Tapley says ...

Where's your bitching about the overspending and length of Dragon Tattoo?

comment #14

Kristopher Tapley says ...

"In all fairness and with no malice In Contention's Kris Tapley has to own up to his early-bird projection that War Horse would probably go all the way."

Own up to expecting an Oscar bait film to go all the way? WHAT WAS I THINKING???

comment #15

Mr. F. says ...

"Mr. F, how can the same be said? He only had one DGA nom since SPR."

Sorry -- I wasn't trying to equate them by implying"Marty gets a DGA nomination every other year and so does Spielberg." I was wondering how the DGA could be throwing Scorsese a bone with a nomination for HUGO... when the reasons that Wells cites in Comment #4 above (passionate about movies, fights for film preservation, knows his film history, has been considered a talented and popular director in the business for decades now, etc.) apply equally to Spielberg.

If that is all in fact the case, my rhetorical question was "Why would Scorsese be given a token (knowingly undeserved) nom by the DGA... while they skip over Spielberg even though he checks off all those same boxes?"

(for the record: I loved HUGO and think Marty deserves that nomination; haven't seen WH yet)

comment #16

Alboone says ...

Say what you will about Tree of Life, but on an aesthetic level "holy shit" pretty fantastic. I felt like a ghostly spirit eavesdropping on a family.

comment #17

Travis Actiontree says ...

(Wells, after being confidentially told by a 74 year old woman that, as a member of the Academy, she plans on voting for "War Horse" as Best Picture) - "Curl up and die, you ignorant, soulless, old fucktard, before I punch you in the throat."

comment #18

Krillian says ...

I thought Spielberg's directing was better in Tintin than War Horse. That chase scene with the bird was one of my favorite sequences of the year. Not that War Horse was bad. It wasn't boring, but the first 15 minutes or so are so cloying that it's easy to bag on it. And I wish I hadn't seen that YouTube clip about the "Spielberg face" becuz I was acutely aware of it every time he did it. And he did it a lot. And I disagree about the sanitizing of WWI. Just because blood isn't splattering on the camera doesn't mean it hid from the horrors of war. You see bodies fly from bombs, dead bodies everywhere after a battle, people in hospital beds who've just lost limbs....

"M'lord, Kris has not repented of his sins. Shall we apply him to the rack til he confesses?"

Bottom line thought is War Horse wouldn't make my top 20 so I'm okay with it not getting a Best Picture nod.

comment #19

Kerry Frey says ...

Has the number of Best Picture nominations been determined yet? I think I remember reading it will not be 10 this year, but does that mean that it will automatically be 5?

comment #20

JR says ...

No less than 5, no more than 10, and with the rules tweak, most are expecting 7, maybe 8 films total in BP...it is one thing to declare War Horse won't win BP, and another to suggest it is now out of the running for a nom.

comment #21

great scott says ...

Wonder how many times Sasha Stone came when she heard Fincher's name this morning.

comment #22

shefhammer says ...

I'm not a big fan of the film, but I think you're being pretty uncharitable to suggest Scorsese was nommed just to round out the pack. Anything that improved upon the 3D in Avatar deserves recognition. It was brilliantly directed.

comment #23

Dan Revill says ...

I enjoyed War Horse for what it was, but yeah, not in my top 20 either. It's minor Spielberg for me. If he was going to get a DGA nom, it should be for Tintin. As a (most of the time) Spielberg fan, this "omission" doesn't bother me. Can't disagree with that pack of five. Good on Woody!

comment #24

J. Ho says ...

I have the DVD screener of War Horse and just watched the first 20 minutes before i gave up. Let me just say I was stunned at how awful it is. Does it get any better? Because i'm honestly considering not finishing it.

comment #25

Alboone says ...

@greatscott -- smooth move, real class there...moron.

At least Miss Stone has taste and isn't afraid to flaunt it.

comment #26

beerbelly burl says ...

great scott says ...

Wonder how many times Sasha Stone came when she heard Fincher's name this morning.

Man thats put a real hot pitchure in my brain. I bet Sasha Stoner is fiddlin with herself just like that girl was in that picthure that Jeff put up the other day

comment #27

great scott says ...

Wonder how many times Alboone came when he typed that comment.

comment #28

Eloi Wrath says ...

J. Ho: The first 20 minutes are by far the worst bits of the film. I was pretty worried, too. But it gets better. It is, however, minor Spielberg, and you have to wonder if the Academy are already assuming that Spielberg will get a nomination next year for Lincoln, so they can afford to leave him out this time.

comment #29

Kakihara says ...

Not sure why anyone would wanna reward Moneyball, when it's just The Social Network meets Bad News Bears. As for Tree of Life, it does not say anything about anything, and just seems like a male-centric version of The Hours. I'm surprised Tattoo got in, though, considering that didn't even happen with Seven.

comment #30

Errol Flynnn says ...

DeeZee's aspergers is hitting new heights.

comment #31

QfT says ...

Spielberg's best work, his creme de la creme, all came prior to his '95 - '96 directorial hiatus. ET, Close Encounters, Jaws, Raiders, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List... pure cinematic gold, enduring, vital, important; as close to celluloid perfection as any man can get.

Since then; minor works, as part of a near 20 year run of poor form. How many other professionals can produce so much mediocre work for so long and still remain so celebrated? And yeah, you heard me Munich and AI and Private Ryan - even the high points of this slump pale next to the majesty of his very best work.

The War Horse snub, long overdue to a faults ring director long since past his peak, won't be any great loss to the world; merely Spielberg. Our great tragedy is the loss of Spielberg himself, and artist lost is time and seldom seen since the middle 1990s.

We miss ya fella.

comment #32

Cerulean says ...

Kris Tapley said Warhorse is going all the way and I believe him. It will be one of the BP nominations. He is also right that Dragon Tattoo like Hugo was too expensive and long. But we all play favorites don't we. Doubt Fincher will make it to an Oscar nomination. This was just the DGA wanting to suck his tool for a bit and apologize that someone else won last year instead of their precious.

comment #33

George Prager says ...

LexG_III LexG
DeeZee says "So basically MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE is a remake of LITTLE DARLINGS?"
7 Jan

comment #34

Rashad says ...

The first 20 minutes isn't anywhere as bad you guys are making it. Nor is it sentimental either. Thewlis rocks, Mullan is very good, it builds the horse-boy relationship fine, sets up Albert's naive outlook of his father's war efforts (which comes back to play), and Emily Watson is utterly delightful. "I may hate you more, but I won't love you any less" - awwww.

comment #35

Gaydos says ...

All I can say is, "Roland Emmerich, you got robbed!" "Anonymous" FTW.

comment #36

Gabe@ThePlaylist says ...

Neveldine/Taylor didn't make a movie this year, so I don't care.

comment #37

the400blows says ...

"But the rank-and-file manned up in a very unusual and commendable way when they said "no" to Spielberg's whorish sentimentality."

And you don't think Scorsese wasn't being "sentimental" in HUGO?

IMO Bennett Miller should've been nominated instead of Fincher or Scorsese. Essentially, Fincher did a remake, which was too long. And to me Scoresese's film was uneven and also too long.

Good for Woody!

Alexander Payne for the win.

comment #38

Carl Kolchak says ...

The whole premise of this post is impossibly silly. Let me explain it to you: these awards aren't decided by a pack of guys in a smoke filled room, coming to an agreement about the "message they want to send". People simply vote for their top five, and the numbers are tallied. Spielberg might have lost out to Fincher by one vote, no way to tell. There is no "message" sent.

comment #39

Chinaski1 says ...

If the Oscars are ever as important to me as they are to all of the bloggers, remind me to kill myself. Quick, who won the oscar for best actor four years ago? Who won for best director eight years ago? Best supporting actress three years ago? Best movie six years ago? Best screenplay seven years ago?

Nobody remembers. No true fans of movies give a shit. It's only meaningful to the people making the films.