'Babel' rises, threatening 'The Queen's' Globe throne
It's a nice surprise that "Babel" did so well, reaping the most Globe nominations, thus revitalizing its kudos cache. That great, little, heroic film — the first under the new Paramount Vantage shingle — struggled at the box office and didn't, strangely, trigger universal critical acclaim when it debuted in theaters in late October. I don't know why. It's even better than Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's magnificent "21 Grams," although not quite as amazing as "Amores Perros." It earned Inarritu the best-director prize at Cannes and all of the journos I saw it with, when it screened for the first time in L.A. in September, seemed to be knocked out by its brilliance.
But over the past month or so its award prospects waned. That was the buzz around Hollyweird anyway, which, hallelujah, can quickly change when a new wind blows like the release of Golden Globe nominations. Now it's back in the game, making us wonder: could it even beat the movie that was considered to be the likely winner of best drama picture on Globes night — "The Queen"?
"The Queen" has enormous support among Yankee media types. It was a close runner-up to win best picture from the New York and L.A. film critics over the past week, who ended up opting for "United 93" (Gothamites) and "Letters from Iwo Jima" (Angelenos). But Globers have their own mindset and their awards have enormous influence over the Oscars, of course, so a big "Babel" win on Globe night will change the Oscar scenario.
Other Globe observations:
Voters are usually star-struck, but this time doubly so, literally. What's with those dual noms in a single category for Clint Eastwood, Leo DiCaprio and, over in the TV races, Helen Mirren (in addition to her nom on the film side)? They got so carried away with fawning over Clint that they forgot to nominate Bill Condon, who wrote and directed this year's awards-sweeper "Dreamgirls."
That's the worst Globe sin among the list of nominees. Shocking. Sad.
Don't listen to "experts," by the way, who look at those double noms and say, "Oh, they'll cancel themselves out during the final vote."
Not so. In fact, the opposite is true. Statistically speaking, nominees of showbiz awards have double the chance to win if they have dual bids. And not because the double listing carries over a mathematical principal. Rather, it has something to do with a quirk of human reasoning and we witness it al all showbiz awards. When a voter sees a double nominee, they tend to think: hmmmm, that person is really important, so I should vote for him . . . I just need to figure out for which film.
Usually, voters tend to pick the same choice. Look at Steven Soderbergh's two bids for best director at the Oscars a few years ago. It was obvious that voters should check off "Traffic" over "Erin Brockovich." In Clint's case, it's obvious that "Letters from Iwo Jima" is the one to pick. It's nommed for best foreign-language film while "Flags" got snubbed. In Leo's case, things are a bit more complicated. "The Departed" is up for best drama picture, "Blood Diamond" isn't. That suggests that voters should prefer "Departed," but Leo's role in "Blood Diamond" is much showier. He's got that thick, convincing South African accent. And Globe voters, I hear, really liked "Blood Diamond" a lot. I'm surprised they didn't nominate it for best drama picture.
Especially over "Bobby," which snobbish media wags have been pummeling over the past few months. Undeservedly. Maybe it's not one of the greatest films of the year, but it's a good one that should've done better at the box office and with film critics. Do Globe voters agree? Or have we just witnessed one more amazing kudos miracle from master kudos schemer Harvey Weinstein?
Photos, clockwise from top left: "Babel" director nominee Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu with Gael Garcia Bernal; supporting actor nominee Brad Pitt; supporting actress nominees Adriana Barraza and Rinku Kikuchi.
(Paramount Vantage)
Can't voters just ignore Clint Eastwood this year and give the nomination to someone else who would be deserving? He already has two oscars. He's a brilliant filmmaker but it just does not seem fair that now he has two films in contention and he is taking away a nomination from someone who is also deserving. Spread the wealth.
Posted by: tom | December 17, 2006 at 08:07 AM
Does anyone think that THE QUEEN is so overrated? What is the degree of importance of this film and what makes it the best -- it says nothing about anything on a subject matter that is very English. Is Helen Mirren really the best actress of the year? The only one who would be deserving of a nomination is Michael Sheen but if the choice is between Babl and the queen, I choose Babel without question. Babel was very moving and had you coming away from the theater feeling something. I just hope that the best movie of the year LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE does not get lost in the sea of these depressing films and makes the top 5.
Here's my pics:
Little Miss Sunshine
Dreamgirls
The Departed
Babel
United 93
Posted by: Jenna | December 17, 2006 at 08:02 AM
Mark Wahlberg is better than Jack Nicholson, who is doing basiclally the same role as he has done in the past. When Oscar nominations come out, I would rather see mark over Jack:
Alan Arkin, Little mIss sunshine
Brad Pitt, Babel
Mark Wahlberg, The departed
Eddie Murphy, dreamgirls
Ben affleck, hollywoodland
Posted by: jamie | December 17, 2006 at 07:56 AM
Leonardo dicarprio is the actor of the year and there should be no reason why he shouldn't win. He should have won for the aviator but saw powerhorse Jamie Foxx take virtually everything. Must we see the smae thing again this year when like Sean Penn a few years ago has two great and very different roles?
Posted by: jake | December 17, 2006 at 07:53 AM
How soon people forget Tim Robbins' dual nominations in the Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture - Musical/Comedy category for "Bob Roberts" and "The Player" back in 1992.
By the way, like the late, great Jack Lemmon, Robbins won. For "The Player," by the way.
Posted by: Mack | December 16, 2006 at 06:26 PM
I don't see what you mean by Dreamgirls being an "awards sweeper." It has hardly won any pre-Oscar awards, and it is dropping in buzz. In fact, it has slipped to 77% on rottentomatoes, and "The Departed, and "The Queen" are doing better in the kudos awards so far. I think you're letting your bias for "Dreamgirls" show a little too much. As for "Babel" on the rise again, I agree, but I don't think "The Queen" was the favorite to win the Drama category.
Posted by: Jeff | December 15, 2006 at 04:07 PM
He means double nominations in the same category. Though it didn't work for Dennis Hopper Blue Velvet and Hoosiers! Supporting actor.
Though Look at Jack Lemmon-Winner best actor for Tuesdays with morrie over The evolution trial.
Posted by: Brian | December 15, 2006 at 11:54 AM
Oscar Predictions:
Best Picture: Babel, Dreamgirls, The Queen, Letters from Iwo Jima, The Departed
Best Actress: Helen Mirren, Kate Winslet, Judi Dench, Penelope Cruz, Meryl Streep
Best Actor: Forest Whitaker, Peter O'Toole, Ryan Gosling, Leo DiCaprio, Will Smith or Matt Damon
Best Supporting Actor: Alan Arkin, Eddie Murphy, Michael Sheen, Jack Nicholson, Brad Pitt or Ben Affleck or Jackie Earle Haley
Best Supporting Actress: Jennifer Hudson, Adriana Barraza, Rinko Kikuchi, Cate Blanchett, Catherine O'Hara
Best Director: Clint Eastwood, Martin Scorsese, Bill Condon, Stephen Frears, Alejandro Gonzalez Innarritu or out in left field Mel Gibson or Fabulous Pedro!
Posted by: Frankie R. | December 15, 2006 at 08:44 AM
I agree with the critics who think Babel is a mess. This is as an inplausible movie like
last year's Crash.
Posted by: Dan Russel | December 15, 2006 at 07:16 AM
How can you say "They got so carried away with fawning over Clint that they forgot to nominate Bill Condon, who wrote and directed this year's awards-sweeper "Dreamgirls" when it is the Eastwood film which has been sweeping awards while Dreamgirls hasn't won anything at all???!!
Posted by: musealien | December 15, 2006 at 12:13 AM
In reference to your statement about showbiz award nominees having double the chance to win, I looked through the history of the Golden Globes in the motion picture and television acting categories and motion picture director category. I found six instances where someone was nominated for two awards in the same category. Only one of the six won a Golden Globe.
For the record:
Jack Lemmon (1964)
Motion Picture: Actor, Comedy/Musical
"Irma la Douce" and "Under the Yum Yum Tree"
(Winner: Alberto Sordi, "To Bed...or Not To Bed")
Francis Ford Coppola (1975)
Motion Picture: Director
"The Godfather, Part II" and "The Conversation"
(Winner: Roman Polanski, "Chinatown")
Barbara Harris (1977)
Motion Picture: Actress/Comedy or Musical
"Freaky Friday" and "Family Plot"
(Lost to Barbra Streisand, "A Star is Born")
Jane Seymour (1989)
TV Miniseries/Made for TV Movie: Actress
"The Woman He Loved" and "War and Remembrance" (Parts I-VII)
(Winner: Ann Jillian, "The Ann Jillian Story")
Jack Lemmon (2000)
TV Miniseries/Made for TV Movie: Actor
"Inherit the Wind" and "Tuesdays With Morrie"
(Lemmon won for "Inherit the Wind")
Steven Soderbergh (2001)
Motion Picture: Director
"Traffic" and "Erin Brockovich"
(Winner: Ang Lee, "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon")
In my opinion, I do not believe Eastwood, Di Caprio and Mirren will win Golden Globes because of vote spliting and the competition within the categories. However, I do believe Mirren has the best chance out of the three to win in her category.
Posted by: Gary | December 14, 2006 at 11:32 PM
I am thrilled with the nominations Babel received.....especially the wonderful supporting actresses and the great Innaratu. The two gave brilliant performances......whereas Pitt was highly overrated in my opinion and does not deserve the nomination.....but then again the Globes are about the star power they can get to the show anyway.....and I am sure the idea of Brangelina coming up the red carpet was too good to pass up. I am very disapointed the brilliant Catherine O'Hara got passed over as well as Alan Arkin.....these were two big surprises. And why nominate DiCaprio twice as well as Eastwood? There were other deserving people and they should have spread the love a little.
Posted by: nancy | December 14, 2006 at 06:21 PM
I can't believe the Foreign Press snubbed United 93. It is such an amazing film and epitomizes the heroism that people are capable of doing. Such a shame. I know people are scared to see the film for fear of bad memories, but it is a great tribute. In fact, the film gave me a sense of closure.
Posted by: Phil | December 14, 2006 at 05:38 PM
Bobby is one of the year's worst films - so forced and heavy handed. The use of musical cues made me gag and I find it inconceivable that two young men in 1968 would sit around discussing whether Anne Bancroft used a body double, since that phrase and concept wasn't yet part of the common vernacular. Demi Moore and her doofus husband ware AWFUL in the film. Hated, HATED this movie.
Posted by: I,Claudius | December 14, 2006 at 05:01 PM
The HFPA proves once again just how insular they are (not that the Academy can't pull the same stunt). But excluding Condon from the Best Director noms, and giving Eastwood two, is laughable. It's laughable. I hope the Academy rectifies this misguided slur.
Posted by: rbyronp | December 14, 2006 at 04:48 PM
The HFPA proves once again just how insular they are (not that the Academy can't pull the same stunt). But excluding Condon from the Best Director noms, and giving Eastwood two, is laughable. It's laughable. I hope the Academy rectifies this misguided slur.
Posted by: rbyronp | December 14, 2006 at 04:46 PM
Tom, I don't know where you're getting "The Queen" as the frontrunner to win the Globe, but I just don't agree. As Kevin notes in an earlier comment, "The Departed" seems to be leading -- it has only one nomination less than "Babel", and only because it wasn't nominated for score. While "The Departed" actually get EXTRA nominations than it was expected to get (Wahlberg), "The Queen" wound up with a likely supporting actor nominee snubbed (Sheen). I think Kevin's right -- the winners here will set up a "Departed" v. "Dreamgirls" showdown, but I'll go one further and throw "Letters" into the ring since it wasn't able to compete in the top categories here. I think we'll go into Oscar night with a race more wide open than any in years.
Posted by: OscarFYC | December 14, 2006 at 04:35 PM
I wish these writers would stop comparing United 93 to World Trade Center. United93 was universially lauded.
World Trade Center got middle to bad review across the board ( Meta-crtic 90 vs 60)
Paul Greengrass created a work of art. Oliver Stone drecked up the same old formula for a mediocre piece of Cinema. The fact that "Bobby" got a nomination over something like "United 93" or "Volver" shows you the insanity of the Golden Globes.
But, at least the public will get to see Lindsay Lohan show up drunk for the red carpet.
Posted by: Karen Parsons | December 14, 2006 at 04:26 PM
"Awards-sweeper Dreamgirls?" What planet are you on??
Posted by: malevolentmuse | December 14, 2006 at 03:42 PM
Yes, let's be honest. Babel is the only epic piece in contention. Babel deserves the attention it is FINALLY getting. Bravo, HFPA!
Posted by: Sherlyn Naomi | December 14, 2006 at 02:54 PM
Of course Babel is a GREAT GREAT movie!!! Alejandro Gonzalez Iñarritu won the Palm at Cannes for a reason!!!! And the people there give like a 15 min ovation to the movie. And Guillermo Arriaga is a great Writter I don't know why last year he wasn't nominated for The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada!!!
But let's se!! I hope it wons!!! :D
Posted by: Karlo Carrillo | December 14, 2006 at 02:48 PM
But double noms have hurt others before. What about Sigourney Weaver? She got double noms one year (Gorrilas in the Mist/ working Girl) and came out with nothing.
I think marty Scorcese has to look at this carefully, and see what to do now. I really want him to win...
I still think everything is up in the air, the snubs we see now may change come January. Remember Gyllenhall and Braveheart, two different things however, but both were overlooked by the HPFA and then came crashing in on Oscar night. (With the latter doing better than the former)
Posted by: Seth | December 14, 2006 at 02:28 PM
Let's not forget two other nominees who got double noms:
* Beyonce for Best Actress and Best Original Song for Dreamgirls (she'll win the latter).
* Emily Blunt for Best Supporting Actress in two categories. Did ANYONE see her nom for The Devil Wears Prada coming? Delicious!!! :)
Posted by: Postsoviet | December 14, 2006 at 02:18 PM
Let's be honest here..."Babel" is not a great movie. A good movie - yes. Overrated, overhyped - definitely. The HFPA voted for it, but can you really imagine the average Academy voter making it all the way through two and a half depressing hours? Hardly. I don't even think it'll win the Globe. They'll vote for "The Departed" and "Dreamgirls" thus setting up the true Oscar showdown. "Babel" will win a supporting award, "The Queen" will win Best Actress (and perhaps screenplay) and the wealth will be shared. HFPA has to know that "Babel" will not be a Best Picture nominee at the Oscars...will they want to vote for a win for a potential Oscar zero?
Posted by: Kevin | December 14, 2006 at 02:06 PM
Okay, these a majorly surprising:
Ones I expected:
Abigail Breslin - Little Miss Sunshine
Sharon Stone - Bobby
Adam Beach - Flags of Our Fathers
Catherine O'Hara - For Your Consideration
Emma Thompson - Stranger than Fiction
Alan Arkin - Little Miss Sunshine
I didn't expect the Michael Sheen nom to become apparent at the Globes, but lack of Breslin, Arkin, Thompson and Beach is way too shocking for my tiny brain to handle
But Definitely Not:
Chiwetel Ejiofor
Toni Collette (she didn't deserve this nom, it's probably makeup for her Japanese Story snub)
Emily Blunt, but I'm glad she got a nod
Mark Wahlberg, another undeserving candidate. He was the single most irritating supporting act of the year
YAY for the Katharine Heigl love!!!
There's lots of double nominations this year...
Posted by: Slayton Myers | December 14, 2006 at 01:26 PM