Gold Derby

Tom O'Neil has the inside track on Oscars, Emmys, Grammys and all the award shows.

« Previous Post | Gold Derby Home | Next Post »

National Board of Review puts 'Iwo Jima" in the Oscar derby

December 6, 2006 |  2:10 pm

Lettersfromiwojima_pic2a

By choosing "Letters from Iwo Jima" as best picture, the National Board of Review is telling kudoswatchers that we've been looking at the wrong Clint Eastwood movie. As "Flags of Our Fathers" droops, "Iwo Jima" rises and there's a battle of Clint vs. Clint. A minor battle. Clearly, "Iwo Jima" has the high ground after claiming the first big victory of awards season.

To see a full list of winners, CLICK HERE!

As "Iwo Jima" screened to media over the past week, it's been clear that it's also a serious Oscar threat, but some gurus think it may be hampered by its Japanese dialogue with English subtitles. However, the Oscars have often included foreign-language films in the best-pic lineup ("Life Is Beautiful," "Il Postino") as well as Clint flicks, of course ("Million Dollar Baby," "Mystic River," "Unforgiven").

The National Board of Review sees its job as championing underdogs in the Oscar race, so it's probably no surprise that it hailed a (relatively small) artsy film with a big political message. That's what NBR did last year by picking "Good Night, and Good Luck," which went on to be nominated in the Oscar High Five. Some of NBR's past choices didn't achieve the same, though. Over the past 10 years 2 failed to be nominated in the top Oscar category: "Quills" and "Gods & Monsters." However, "Gods & Monsters" benefited from NBR recognition by going on to win the screenplay Oscar for Bill Condon, whose newest film, "Dreamgirls," is notably missing from NBR's list of top 10 films of 2006.

"The Queen" is also snubbed in that lineup, but producers of both films shouldn't be alarmed. "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" and "Amadeus" didn't make the Top 10 lists of their years either and they both won the top Oscar, of course. That's good news to "Little Children," which was also shunned.

Proof That Irony Isn't Really Dead in a Post-9/11 World, At Least Not in Hollywood: the victory of "For Your Consideration" star Catherine O'Hara in the supporting race is delicious because it recognizes her role as an insecure actress who suddenly becomes Oscar greedy when she hears that there's some minor chatter on the Internet that she might be nominated.

The other NBR choices such "King" and "Queen" lording over the actor and actress domains — Forest Whittaker ("Last King of Scotland") and Helen Mirren ("The Queen") — aren't surprises, but "Iwo Jima," Catherine O'Hara and supporting-actor champ Djimon Honsou ("Blood Diamond") get a significant boost from winning the equivalent of the New Hampshire primary of the Oscar race.

Mildred_pierce

The National Board of Review has had strong influence on the Oscars dating back to the 1930s when it forced the academy to take comedies seriously when NBR picked "It Happened One Night" as best pic. In more recent years, it helped to put "Moulin Rouge!" in the top Oscar race and Halle Berry ("Monster's Ball") in the actress running.

Its organization title makes NBR sound like a film critics' group, but it's not. It's really an Enlightened People's Choice Award, being bestowed by a group of lawyers, teachers, journalists, dentists, publicists and other professionals who work in New York and love films. A few hundred of them pay several hundred dollars per year to belong and they're obliged to fill out monthly reports with their reactions to films they've seen. But general members only have a partial vote when it comes to determining award winners. The final say belongs to its mysterious politburu comprised of about 13 members of its Exceptional Photoplay Committee. The identity of panel members is kept secret, but I've met more than a half dozen of them through the years. They seem like serious, solid folk, but they're hated, mocked and ridiculed by film critics who are jealous of NBR's clout, which comes from NBR being the first awards group out of the gate with its winners' list every year.

But that's always been the case, even before the New York Film Critics Circle began bestowing awards in 1935. NBR started up a few years earlier and just soon after the Oscars launched, aiming to be an east coast equivalent. NBR's awards were also a shrewd PR move because the group was trying to counter its reputation as a censoring organization, which it was.

The board's beginnings date back to Christmas Eve, 1908, when New York Mayor George B. McClellan Jr. (son of the Civil War general and failed presidential candidate) shuttered 500 penny arcades and nickelodeons because "movies tend to injure the morals of the community." Films of the day were tame by modern standards, but their suggestive titles are evidence of how hard they tried to titillate film viewers: "The Bigamist," "Old Man's Darling" and "Beware, My Husband Comes!"

Moulinrouge

Terrified that New York officials would censor films like the Chicago police started doing one year earlier, the local People's Institute tapped 10 civic groups to form an org that would do the censoring itself — the National Board of Motion Picture Censorship. In 1916, the group got PR savvy and switched its name to the National Board of Review of Motion Pictures in an effort to emphasize its role as heralding movies' merits.

NBR screened hundreds of movies each year and endorsed most of them with viewing-age recommendations: "M" for mature audiences (18 years old and older), "F" for families (12 and up) and "J" for juvenile (under 12). Its legend — "Passed by the National Board of Review" — can still be seen in the opening credits of such classics as "Wuthering Heights" (1939). The board sustained itself by charging studios a fee to review their pix: $6.50 per reel (or 1,000 feet of celluloid) totaling $2,000 to $3,000 per studio per annum.

By the 1950s, NBR was no longer much of a factor in the censorship game. It's lingered on since as a film-appreciation society and awards group.

Top photo: "Iwo Jima" star Ken Watanabe is coming on strong as a serious contender for a best actor nomination at the Oscars. Middle photo: When the National Board of Review announced its award winners of 1945, Variety reported on the "the eye-opening selection of Joan Crawford as Best Actress" in "Mildred Pierce." The win certainly opened the eyes of comeback-craving Crawford, who saw her big chance to nab academy gold, quickly hired a PR agent to handle her tub-thumping and she was off to the races. Bottom photo: It's doubtful that "Moulin Rouge!" would've been considered seriously for top awards of 2001 without its NBR victory as best picture.
(Warner Bros.)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Comments

There is no jealousy involved when I call the National Board of Review a total joke. Although I admire their choice of Iwo Jima as a film, that still doesn't hide their agenda, which is to give Warner Bros, more credit than their due.

You can't also not count the National Board of Review as a real award. The award this year was bought by WB,

if you look at the awards, the only ones that a studio not WB won were the ones where the entire membership got to vote. Actor and Actress,

But for the top ten films; a WB producer conspired with his lover, the head of the NPR to make sure that Dreamgirls, The Queen, Little Children, United 93 were left off the list, cause they consider those films strong potential to win Best picture and they belong to other studios.

(If you notice their list is also made up of movies that got good reviews but not Best Picture raves like the ones listed above. Hoping to give WB movies an edge.)

for more information:

check out MovieCitynews.com

and

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,235259,00.html#2

As far as I'm concerned these awards are meaningless, chosen by fans who don't know a thing about movies; they have very few legitimate members, and are sold out to Warner Brothers for sex.

Anyway, what lowlife movie producer would have sex with an NBR head to get this award, Oscar votes maybe, but a National Board of Review award... Pluhease!!!!

Nice to see “Stranger Than Fiction” surviving the “but-it’s-not-Charile-Kaufman” comments in the reviews -- not least because it’s Kaufman enough, right down to the female character (Gyllenhaal here, Winslet and others elsewhere) who acts a bit more like a fella would like her to act than how females generally do. A slight guy-ishness in the love story aside, the movie was intelligent, Dustin Hoffman really made me laugh, and it was so nice to see Emma Thompson and Hoffman in a movie together, with the bonus of Ferrell and Queen Latifah and Linda Hunt (who has a v. good quiet scene with Ferrell). We’re not asking for Shakespeare, Hollywood, just give us something we can work with.

Am I the only one that doesn't understand why United 93 hasn't garnered the critical attention it so deserves this year. I was completely surprised when it turned out to be not the least bit exploitative. Not only the film but Paul Greengrass' direction was a wonder to behold. The film has a genuine power that grips you until the very final fade-out. Why is it being ignored?



Stay Connected:


Advertisement


About the Blogger


Pop & Hiss



Categories


Archives