• Hollywood Elsewhere •

“The Lewis Black of Oscar bloggers” —Patrick Goldstein, “The Big Picture”, L.A. Times

"Dreamgirls" Shocker

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on January 23, 2007 at 05:54 AM

Dreamgirls, the musical that many, many people (David Poland included) said over and over would win the Oscar for Best Picture, hasn't even been nominated for Best Picture....double, no, triple-strength shocker!...an omission that will live in the annals of Oscar nomination history.

Eight Dreamgirls noms, but not for Best Picture

The gloom clouds hanging over the Dreamgirls camp right now are extremely dark and Cecil B. DeMille-y. For what it's worth, my sincere condolences to Bill Condon, Larry Mark, Terry Press, Nancy Kirkpatrick, David Geffen and the gang. I never hated Dreamgirls or campaigned for its demise, and while we all knew it couldn't win the Best Picture Oscar, I honestly thought it would be nominated this morning for Best Picture.

I think it's entirely fair to say in the wake of the Dreamgirls Best Picture wipeout that there is now a supportable cautionary assumption called the Curse of Poland. Phantom of the Opera, Munich and now Dreamgirls -- if David Poland pushes your movie early and hard for Best Picture during the final months of the year, the producers and publicists behind this film will have reason for concern.

Comments

And no Volver in the Foreign Language category? People considered a nomination for that film almost as much a lock as anything...

Posted by: boydatef at January 23, 2007 06:04 AM

Yep, I'm giggling like Snidely Whiplash right now. No Best Picture, no Best Director for the "unstoppable" DREAMGIRLS. If, deities forbid, Scorsese has to lose yet again, four of the five possible parties have earned their bones as worthy competitors (Frears, Eastwood, Innaratu, and Greengrass), and we won't get a repeat of the CHICAGO shanda.

I will be very p.o.'ed though if LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE takes the glittering prize, as much as I do like the movie.

Posted by: The Hoyk at January 23, 2007 06:13 AM

Well, there are a lot of happy haters out there because they brought down "Dreamgirls." I think it was more deserving than "Little Miss Sunshine", but I guess I'm not an old white male over 60. "LMS" was more of "their" movie, and as a black person, "Dreamgirls" was more of my type of film. (I guess I should make the NAACP awards my new Oscars).

And now, I'm sure that both Eddie Murphy and Jennifer Hudson will lose out to Alan Arkin and Abigail Breslin because, Breslin reminds the academy of their granddaughters and Arkin reminds them of...them.

I admit DG had some holes, but if everyone really wanted to, they could find the same if not more holes in the 5 that actually made it to Best Pic.

I'm sure DG was fourth or fifth on a lot of ballots and didn't have the fanatics that it needed to get over the hump. Oh well. Even if it was a racial gesture of good faith, I still think DG should have been in there. The Academy is 0-2 on black films. "Dreamgirls" :"The Color Purple" II. Not good.

Posted by: royalonemn at January 23, 2007 06:16 AM

I can't believe LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE got nominated for Best Picture and UNITED 93 didn't.

As for VOLVER, I've been saying this for the longest. It's one of Almodovar's weaker films.

Posted by: Mike Ock at January 23, 2007 06:16 AM

"Dreamgirls" getting shut out as Best Pic has to be the biggest omission since...I have no friggin' idea when. And now, the speculation over why this happened is going to be unbearable and all over the map (my gut's feeling a race card on the way). The strange thing is that almost every excuse imaginable for it right now would also apply to "Little Miss Sunshine", but that one's still in contention, so, hell, William Goldman's famous little chestnut sure is ringing loud and pround this morning. Maybe they should ask him what the hell happened.

So now "Little Miss Sunshine" has a perceived chance to win Best Picture, even though I think its probably still behind "The Departed" and "Babel", with "Letters From Iwo Jima" as a dark horse since it got the "Dreamgirls" slot.

Posted by: Hallick at January 23, 2007 06:23 AM

It's early...so maybe I'm a little confused: but how is Borat up for "adapted screenplay"?

Adapted from what?

Posted by: lesterg at January 23, 2007 06:26 AM

"And now, I'm sure that both Eddie Murphy and Jennifer Hudson will lose out to Alan Arkin and Abigail Breslin because, Breslin reminds the academy of their granddaughters and Arkin reminds them of...them."

If anything, the one positive thing the "Dreamgirls" camp can take away from this is that Hudson's chances got even better because she's where all the money and energy that would have been spent on the Best Picture campaign is going to go. Same with Murphy.

Posted by: Hallick at January 23, 2007 06:27 AM

"It's early...so maybe I'm a little confused: but how is Borat up for "adapted screenplay"?"

"Adapted from what?"

Da Ali G Show, since the Borat segments therein had the same basic premise, character, execution, etc?

Posted by: Hallick at January 23, 2007 06:31 AM

Maybe, Hallick...but that's a really questionable category selection.

Posted by: lesterg at January 23, 2007 06:37 AM

I'm probably being a bit thick, but can someone explain why Letters From Iwo Jima isn't nominated in the Best Film in a Foreign Language category?

Posted by: reaton at January 23, 2007 06:41 AM

Dobby's Oscar glass is half full: Of my top ten films:

Iwo Jima, Departed, Pan, Lives all get best pic noms.

Apocalypto gets three Oscar noms.

Venus gets actor nom.

Notes and Children get beaucoup noms.

Also on the positive side: Oscar shrewdly finessed some edgy performancess, ie Andrea, Rinko, Haley, Gosling to make this the most diverse line up I have ever seen, especially in light of Hudson, Murphy, Smith, Whitaker.

But they didn't buy the zeit geist of Dreamgirls. So these out of touch old people actually were VERY discerning in many ways.

Half Empty: Oscar bought Babel's babble and LMS's treacle and nothing for Dean Semler's stunning DP work on Apocalypto. Also think Damon was overlooked for his work in Departed.

Back to the positives: Thanks Oscar, for SOME SURPRISES!!!!!

Posted by: dobbsy at January 23, 2007 06:42 AM

Academy rules ... An American produced film is only eligible for Best Picture, although Foreign Film nominees due to a rule change can be made with another language other than that country's

Posted by: berg at January 23, 2007 06:45 AM

lesterg: There's not really any maybe about it. Borat is based on a character created for a TV show. Questionable nomination perhaps, but not category. It's "Adapted" Screenplay or, more traditionally, Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published. Any time a character from another medium has made it to the Oscars, this has been the case.

Posted by: Michael at January 23, 2007 06:52 AM

Jeffrey, this is entirely uncalled for, nasty, a testament to lack of class. Please, let's keep it out of the sand box. Some things should remain inner monologue.

Posted by: Kristopher Tapley at January 23, 2007 06:52 AM

Kris, it's uncalled for to call Poland out for being a smarmy know-it-all who was wrong and can't hide that fact with his stupid stats? I have my issues with Jeff, but he's completely in the right here.

Posted by: Noah at January 23, 2007 06:57 AM

Berg, you are incorrect. Non-American films (like The Queen) are eligible for Best Picture. Best Foreign Language films have to be submitted by their 'country of origin' and go through a shortlist nomination process before the final 5 are named.

Well-said, Noah.

Posted by: jeffmcm at January 23, 2007 07:00 AM

I think it's cute... but MUNICH did get nom'd for Best Pic last year. And Phantom of the "Paradise"... is that a joke or a typo?

Posted by: YND at January 23, 2007 07:00 AM

Wells is probably running on not enough sleep..."Paradise" indeed.

Posted by: jeffmcm at January 23, 2007 07:01 AM

Jeff has Poland dead to rights. It's hard to understand the tone of utter condescension and know-it-all-itude that pervades his every word, especially since half the time it's impossible to understand what on earth he's getting on a high horse about. And his predictive record is horrible. However, the movie Poland was sure was going to win was PHANTOM OF THE OPERA, not PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE, though the latter is certainly the better film.

Posted by: aperson at January 23, 2007 07:02 AM

Michael, that explanation makes sense. It's still interesting to have a screenplay nomination for a film that was (at least partially) unscripted.

Posted by: lesterg at January 23, 2007 07:07 AM

I totally agree, aperson -- Poland crossing the line between prediction and advocacy got tiresome for me around the time he kept flogging Jeff Bridges as Best Actor for The Door in the Floor. I swear he had Bridges on that list for months despite the fact that the only buzz out there for the performance was coming from Poland himself. I was reminded of that when I read the anecdote in the Oscar Bloggers article this week where Stone (I think) pointed out that Poland's big predix for IN AMERICA had more than a little to do with the fact that he'd buddied up to Jim Sheridan. He denies having any influence over the voting, but he clearly gets off on having one of the loudest voices in the room and he uses it to push his pets. That said, he WAS right about Munich last year and EVERYbody was wrong about DREAMGIRLS this year. (Although I came out of the movie saying I didn't think it would get nom'd for Best Pic because I couldn't imagine my parents sitting down and watching the whole thing -- too loud and overblown for homeviewing by the older folks. I guess from now on that'll be my criteria...)

Posted by: YND at January 23, 2007 07:10 AM

Wells to Tapley: A lack of class? Name me another big-name Oscar prognosticator who's matched Poland's Best Picture advocacy record over the last three or four years -- i.e., Phantom of the Opera, In America, Munich and now Dreamgirls. C'mon...give me a name. It's entirely fair to point this out.

Posted by: gruver1 at January 23, 2007 07:16 AM

lesterg: It is an interesting phenomenon. (Maybe even a developing trend?) I guess after the WGA gives Bowling for Columbine an award for Best Original Screenplay, that opens the door for a lot of interpretations (the next step being an "Adapted" award for another "unscripted" movie).

I guess Redford was right.

Posted by: Michael at January 23, 2007 07:17 AM

Puerile pundit pandemonium: Poland predicts Dreamgirls best pic victory and there's no nom and don't forget, he also announces Sundance is over just before a day of extraordinary dealmaking.

And lest Wells get too cocky, who's been pushing Children of Men like a fake Rolex?

Silly season of the wits.

Posted by: dobbsy at January 23, 2007 07:27 AM

Jeffrey, I don't disagree with the point your making. I just disagree with your making the point.

Posted by: Kristopher Tapley at January 23, 2007 07:28 AM

Dobbsy -- Unless I've been reading it wrong, Welles has been saying Children of Man SHOULD be nom'd. Poland's been saying Dreamgirls WILL get nom'd/win. Anyway, that's how it's read to me, which is why I generally prefer Welles' approach. By the way, what do you think "beaucoup" means?

Posted by: YND at January 23, 2007 07:30 AM

Not true. Munich WAS nominated. Poland has been right about a lot of movies he's "pushed" in the past - The Pianist, Letters, etc. I don't think you can act smug and self-satisfied over this one, that is unless you want the same treatment the next time you are wrong. Most of us were wrong about Dreamgirls - so? To use this opportunity to vent your anger at Poland is just...well...lame.

Posted by: bipedalist at January 23, 2007 07:31 AM

There's something kind of amusing about the best adapted screenplay category. Two of the nominees, Borat and Children of Men, have five credited writers. How often do you see scripts with that many writers getting nominated? Even though I'm sure at least a couple of the writers on both scripts were only credited because of Writer's Guild rules and really had nothing to do with the finished product, it's still kind of odd.

Posted by: alynch at January 23, 2007 07:31 AM

One has to wonder if the real reason that Dreamgirls wasn't nominated was a sort of backlash against David Geffen. Is he really that well-liked within the industry? Did his push to purchase the L.A. Times have a negative impact?

Posted by: NYCritic at January 23, 2007 07:31 AM

"Wells to Tapley: A lack of class? Name me another big-name Oscar prognosticator who's matched Poland's Best Picture advocacy record over the last three or four years -- i.e., Phantom of the Opera, In America, Munich and now Dreamgirls. C'mon...give me a name. It's entirely fair to point this out."

You mean like your Oscar balloon? Which is about as inaccurate as an Oscar predictor can get every fucking year.

Posted by: bipedalist at January 23, 2007 07:33 AM

I agree that some of Poland's prediction have been laughable but Munich doesn't belong among them. It was nominated in a very tight year, it's more than enough to be called a respectable call. Besides, his list of "sure winners" is too long to require an addition.

Posted by: Arrow77 at January 23, 2007 07:37 AM

Here's what I don't get:

Why is LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA's screenplay nom not in the adaptation category, when the credits clearly state that it's based on the book "Letters from Commander in Chief".

That's not an adaptation, but BORAT is?

Posted by: Dixon Steele at January 23, 2007 07:42 AM

Back to the task at hand, I wanted to echo an earlier sentiment (from one of these boards) -- it's a pretty good slate of noms. It seems like some are painting the fact that we've got a broad selection of films in the running like it's a bad thing. I think it's great to have a slate of noms that represents a pretty solid and varied film year. Would I have rather had Children of Men up for Pic and Director? Sure. But I'm happy it got three great noms. United 93 supporters get their Best Director nod, Pan's Labyrinth got some good lovin'... etc. etc. And come on, Freakin' A Ryan Gosling! That alone made my morning -- a great performance by a remarkable talent that didn't need to be pimped and PR'd for months to get noticed by the Academy. I'm more pleased with these noms than I've been in years. Almost restores my faith in the legitimacy of the thing...

Posted by: YND at January 23, 2007 07:43 AM

Wells to Tapley and Bipedalist: Yeah, most of us were wrong on "Dreamgirls" -- myself included, as I really thought it would at least be nominated -- but when egoisitc bullyish know-it-alls turn out to not know so much -- it's all on the record -- it's fair to call a spade a spade. Those who live by the sword...

Posted by: gruver1 at January 23, 2007 07:45 AM

Dixon: The book is actually "Picture Letters from Commander in Chief," which I'm guessing (I'm not sure about this) is just a reprinting of the actual letters.

If this is the case, then the screenplay is based on real-life events and not on another artistic representation, and wouldn't warrant inclusion in this category.

Posted by: Michael at January 23, 2007 07:53 AM

Can I be the first to predict Spielberg's Untitled Iraq Project for the Best Picture win in 2012? I still feel that one Dakota Fanning-Eric Bana scene was a little gratuitous.

They'll probably go with director to Eastwood though for the 8th time in 9 years. That's got to be some kind of record!

Posted by: milestogo at January 23, 2007 07:56 AM

Wow. What a shocker. I actually kinda feel bad for Poland because he may never live this one down.

All the filmmakers out there should hope like hell that he never starts touting one of their films as a "lock for best picture." Apparently it's the kiss of death.

Posted by: MASON at January 23, 2007 08:01 AM

At 7:37 pst Dave Poland wrote on his blog:

"I have no real answer to Dreamgirls missing Best PIcture after being nominated by the PGA, DGA, SAG and others. But Clint happens. I have been saying for weeks that I expect the nominees to have 15% of support each and that the fight was in the other 25%... not unlike presidential politics. And obviously, Dreamgirls lost on that level.

There is no tragedy here. I have been very supportive of 4 of the 5 nominees from the day I saw them, slotting in The Departed, The Queen, and Letters From Iwo Jima as Oscar nominees from the start. Little Miss Sunshine has been built into a phenom. And my issues with Babel are not disrespectful of Gonzalez Inarritu or Arriaga. In fact, I had an Oscar conversation with Guillermo yesterday and couldn't be happier for him.

For those of you desperate for me to say, "I was wrong," I was wrong.

If you think it's a big deal for me, you have missed my reality completely. "

Posted by: Michelle at January 23, 2007 08:21 AM

One thing is for sure: jaimie Foxx is fucking freaking out right now.

Seriously, though . . . if people talk about a movie the way they've been talking about Dreamgirls - we've been hearing it will win Best Picture since APRIL - then it sure as hell better be the best damn movie everyone has seen all year. The reality of Dreamgirls - good, but not great - ain't gonna cut it under that weight of expectations.

Posted by: caslab at January 23, 2007 08:24 AM

This from Dave Poland this morning:

"For those of you desperate for me to say, "I was wrong", I was wrong. If you think its a big deal for me, you have missed my reality completely."

What?? He's been blogging over this day for the last year and now has to wake up with egg on his face? What IS his reality--worrying about the increased troops in Iraq? Global warming? Illegial immigration? Had me fooled.

Posted by: snackyx at January 23, 2007 08:29 AM

DREAMGIRLS IS A V. BAD MOVIE. I AM DELIGHTED.

Posted by: sardine at January 23, 2007 08:42 AM

I know there's been hostility around here for LMS, a film of which I'm fond but obviously others aren't. At the very least, everyone should recognize that it's a victory for a small, non-pedigreed indie film to come out of nowhere, become a grass roots hit, and then snag a Best Picture nod over a big-studio, perpetually-Oscar-campaigning movie like Dreamgirls.

For the record, my response to Dreamgirls was lukewarm, but I understand why others like it.

Posted by: K. Bowen at January 23, 2007 09:04 AM

I guess they should have released Zodiac this year after all, huh?

Overall the noms are fine. I would have done this, I would have done that but ... thems the brakes.

I was, however, shocked about Volver. I'm ecstatic for Greengrass and Pan's showing. My reaction should be posted on the site soon.

poor Poland. First Germany, now this ... it can't matter THAT much to him, guys, can it?

and remember,

Little Miss Sunshine = Crash 2

Posted by: dre at January 23, 2007 09:54 AM

What I think is funny is that everyone's talking about how Dreamgirls was a sure thing and this is a shocker.

You want to know what a shocker is? It's Flags of Our Fathers getting ignored, and Letters From Iwo Jima getting a nomination.

Six months ago it was Flags of Our Fathers as a sure thing to win, and Letters From Iwo Jima was just the tail of the dog. Quite a turnaround there-- and entirely rightly.

Posted by: Mgmax at January 23, 2007 10:12 AM

As one of the people who's come down kinda hard on the adoration for LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE, you're right, K. Bowen, I feel pretty okay about it being nom'd for Best Pic -- not just because it's an indie success story (though that too), but because it's clearly nominated because people REALLY LIKE it.

The same seems true of the noms for Gosling, Pan's Labyrinth, Children of Men, Wahlberg... a bunch of the contenders. You know none of them had half the PR budget of DREAMGIRLS or FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS (okay, Wahlberg's film did, but most of that weight was pushing Nicholson, who got passed over), but the voters really seemed to vote their hearts this year.

(That said, if LMS WINS Best Pic, I won't be whistlin' such merry tune...)

Posted by: YND at January 23, 2007 11:04 AM

YND: Thanks for pointing out Wells as advocate, not prognosticator on COM.

As for "Beaucoup," I was talking about Notes and LITTLE Children, not COM and "beaucoup" means lottsa love from Oscar for these terrific, smart films, which makes me a happy kid.

Sorry there's no: Leo for Departed, Damon for Departed, Watanabe for Iwo Jima, Dean Semler/Mel Gibson/editor for Apocalypto, screenplay for Lives of Others, screenplay/director for Venus, DP for Little Children, Diane Lane/Ben Affleck for Hollywoodland.

And I guess I have to finally abandon my campaign for TIDELAND.

Posted by: dobbsy at January 23, 2007 11:06 AM

Dobbsy: Absolutely. I mean, is Welles actually supposed to be PREDICTING on here? I've always taken it as personal advocacy plain and simple, which is a lot more honest than hiding one's advocacy behind prognostication. The difference to me has always been that Wells will say "Here's a movie I think should be nominated" whereas Poland says "EVERYbody thinks THIS movie should be nominated. They're all talking about it!" One is a recommendation, the other is claiming to be reporting on "buzz" which seems to be, at least sometimes, fabricated. At least, that's how they've always read to me...

And yeah, I misunderstood which Children you were referring to. But I gotta say that's what I'm kinda digging about the noms this year -- you've got your Children represented and I've got mine. You know, the REAL honor is just to be nominated... (And yes, the Notes noms are nice as well -- I dug that film in pretty much the same way I dug The Departed -- kickin' it old school Hollywood.)

Posted by: YND at January 23, 2007 11:46 AM

"You mean like your Oscar balloon? Which is about as inaccurate as an Oscar predictor can get every fucking year."

Oh Sasha...(sigh)

(Heart is fluttering)

That was the most concise, eloquent and valid diss I've read in awhile.

Consider me in direct competition with Ian for your affections after that one.

Posted by: THX5334 at January 23, 2007 03:18 PM

"Jeffrey, I don't disagree with the point your making. I just disagree with your making the point."

I disagree with you're use of your, sir.

Posted by: Nick Rogers at January 23, 2007 04:20 PM

I always forget the Oscar Balloon is even there unless someone makes fun of it in the boards or my finger slips on the scroll wheel.

Posted by: cjKennedy at January 23, 2007 04:24 PM

I haven't seen Letters from Iwo Jima yet, but unless it's a really great film, then this is the weakest Best Picture lineup in many years, in my opinion. Especially considering the fact that 2006 was the year of Children of Men, Pan's Labyrinth, and United 93. But, whatever.

Posted by: alan at January 23, 2007 06:00 PM

Alan: You are so right, but as everyone here will point out - same as it ever was. Keep in mind that masterpieces of foreign language cinema have almost never played a part in the best picture race.

That said....

Of the final five we are stuck with, IWO JIMA is far and away the best film. Can the best film win? Stay tuned.

Posted by: dobbsy at January 24, 2007 11:29 AM