'Narnia' for best pic? 'Kong' for animation?
"The Chronicles of Narnia" as a potential best picture nominee? Is that movie's witch casting crazy spells to make Oscar watchers say such things?
"Go ahead and call us nuts, but we really think we have a possible contender for Best Picture on our hands," a rep for Disney told me last week. I resisted all temptation to scoff — or worse, snicker — while he made comparisons to "Lord of the Rings."
Sure, both are epic fantasy films based upon popular books. Both even have similar characters, special effects, monsters and, to some degree, plots. But the hobbit books were targeted to general audiences; C.S. Lewis wrote for kids. Oscar voters often care about that, thereby dismissing the latter as, literally, kids' stuff.
But — presto! change-o! — here comes an email from Thelma Adams of Us Weekly: "Just saw 'Narnia.' Slot it into one of five best pic noms. It's this year's 'LOTR.' Perfect. Maybe even Tilda Swinton supporting as the White Witch."
Wow. Very gutsy of you, Thelma! But here's a loopy, alternative idea that might have worked, if thought of earlier: "Narnia" as a nominee for best animated picture.
Photo: Forget king of the jungle! 'Narnia' wants to roar as ruler of Oscarland.
(Wal Disney Pictures)
Why not? Obviously, it missed the list of this year's contenders, which was issued today by the academy, but perhaps it should've been included. Nowadays so many movies rely so much on fake imagery that they could probably be categorized as "animated."
A few years ago Joel Siegel kvetched to me, "'Gladiator' shouldn't be up for best picture! All of those crowds you see in the Coliseum, like so much else in that movie, are generated by computer. Theoretically, 'Gladiator' could be nominated for best animated picture."
This year Entertainment Weekly reminds us of another top Oscar contender, "King Kong", noting that "more than 80% of the film involved major computer-generated elements." Doesn't that mean it's an animated film? In a way, yes. One academy rule notes that in order for a film to be classified as animated, animation must figure into 75% of its content.
"Defining an animated film has become the quest of the decade," admits Oscar spokesman John Pavlik. "The academy has been wrestling with it for some time and we don't have the final answer yet. Basically, much of the decision is left up to the producers. One of them has to submit their film in the animated race and that settles that.
"But there are guidelines," he adds. "An animated film must use a frame-by-frame technique, be at least 70 minutes long and have a significant number of characters that are animated. Basically, there's an unwritten rule, too. Was the intention to create an animated film? Or was it to imitate reality? If producers want their film to look like real life, then they probably don't consider it animated."
I dont think so, I think there many good pictures this year. Im not saying that Narnia is not good, but I think is not good enough.
Posted by: Sidney Scott | November 19, 2005 at 12:59 PM
I would love to see Narnia on the best picture list, but I just don't think it's going to happen. I would like to think that maybe LOTR has changed the academy, and it has turned over a new leef, and is looking more kindley on fantasy films. There is nothing want more then the academy to give Best Picture that people want to watch before it gets nominated.
Posted by: Patrick McGee | November 18, 2005 at 01:37 PM