'Sweeney Todd' is the best pic of 2007, but can it win best pic?
You know that a movie wows an audience when nobody stirs during the closing credits. That's what happened at the end of "Sweeney Todd" tonight at the first critics' screening in Manhattan. Finally, three-fourths of the way through the credits, I stood to exit, but my neighbors in the dark did not and I had to climb over them.
Viewers were either utterly spellbound by this film or else struck dumb and numb in shock. A movie that begins with small riverlets of blood flowing during the opening shots ends with red showers so intense that New York Times Carpetbagger David Carr said to me afterward, "I felt like I should've watched that movie wearing a raincoat."
An embargo surrounding this film prohibits us journos from reviewing it, but we're permitted to discuss it in general terms, so let's try to tread that fine line so I can inform you about the most important movie of 2007. Certainly, it's the best I've seen all year, although, of course, I'm a bit biased as a diehard fan of the Broadway show.
Everybody whose opinion I pooled after the screening tonight said they thought the movie and Johnny Depp were brilliant. And everybody thought it was outrageously bloody and grisly. Many said they didn't think it could win best picture because of that. Yes, there was widespread belief that it'll be nommed for best pic, director and actor — maybe even best actress (Helena Bonham Carter), too — and that MAYBE Johnny could win, but not the film. Not because it doesn't deserve it. But because of all the blood, they say.
But is that true? Hold your derby horses, naysayers! Didn't lots of Oscarologists say "The Departed" was too violent to win last year? Didn't "Silence of the Lambs" break the taboo against horror flicks winning? Hey, are we all such a nation of wimps that we'll let a little blood — OK, a lot of it — get in the way of the year's best picture winning best picture?
After tonight's screening, I asked a number of journos the same questions: Do you think "Sweeney Todd" is going to have huge megabuzz and a high Cool Factor when it comes out? Yes, they all agreed. Is it going to be one of those Gotta-See Pix? Unanimous answer: yes.
If that's true — and it clearly is — then those factors may be enough to help it float the blood biz. And, frankly, the red stuff is handled in such an outlandish, cartoonish way that it often doesn't feel real.
But the movie does. In fact, it makes viewers feel so deeply in profound emotional and psychological ways, that it will haunt you, on many levels, long afterward. Director Tim Burton has created a masterpiece for the ages. If namby-pamby Oscar voters are too squeamish to give it the best picture award it deserves, Sweeney Todd would be entirely justified to give them all a close shave.
But many of them are definitely going to be squeamish and this question of whether or not it's too violent is going to be — get ready right now — discussed over and over and over again all Oscar season.
If "Sweeney" becomes a box-office hit — which I think is inevitable — all could be forgiven, of course. If it just succeeds modestly, its Oscar hopes may drown in the red stuff.
I think it'll be nominated for best picture and it's going to have a large percentage of the largest voting bloc behind it: those chaps who Harvey Weinstein calls "the steak eaters." As Harvey sees it, they really decide who wins Oscars — the cinematographers, sound mixers, visual effects guys — not the actors' branch. The tech guys far outnumber everyone else and they're a testosterone-driven gang who, I suspect, might really delight in Burton's gorefest because he so artfully adapts a revered classic. And because Johnny Depp is so damn cool.
Now let's look around at the other movies that might be able to beat it for best picture. "Atonement"? Maybe. People do love it, but, to get catty for a sec, it's really just "The English Patient" with a trick ending. "No Country for Old Men"? Talk about bloody violence! Yikes! And its depiction is not cartoonish at all. Furthermore, to get catty here, too, it's really just an art-house twist on Freddy Krueger.
"The Kite Runner"? Great, yeah, but it has no Hollywood celebs, so forget it. "Juno"? It might be nommed for best pic, but it skews too female for the dude-heavy academy.
"Diving Bell and the Butterfly"? Too foreign. "Charlie Wilson's War"? Forget it. Now that we've seen it, "Charlie" just fell off most pundits' top five. "There Will Be Blood"? People admire it, especially Daniel Day-Lewis' performance, but they're not passionate about it. "American Gangster"? Might get nominated, but it doesn't seem like a winner. "Into the Wild"? Excitement seems to have ebbed a bit.
Hmmmm. So what can beat "Sweeney"?
There's one movie in this year's derby that I should probably take more seriously. Frankly, I didn't buy the initial hype behind "Michael Clayton" in the best-pic race — but it keeps popping up in conversations while early frontrunners like "Charlie Wilson's War" stumble. I promise to stop pooh-poohing it because it's so ridiculously over-rated. But, oh, come on -- do you think it could actually beat that masterwork "Sweeney"? Hmmmmm again . . .
Basically, I see all of the obstacles facing "Sweeney," but I don't see what can beat it. Being a fan, am I just blinded?




I assume you must have asked some critics about The Kite Runner, because it's this year's Crash or Babel in that critics will automatically feel the need to trash it because it tugs at their heartstrings, and as we all know, critics have no heart. :)
Posted by: Edward Douglas | November 30, 2007 at 03:25 AM
Thank you for this insightful and intelligent column on "Sweeney Todd. . " and Depp's performance. I predict that Sweeney will be nominated for Best Picture and Burton for Best Director. Whether it wins or not will depend on whether academy voters can stomach surrealistic blood and are courageous enough to take a progressive vote.
I do predict that Johnny Depp will win for Best Actor. The academy respects Depp's work tremendously, his masterful range and interpretation of character. Johnny is also very well liked by the many cast and crew members he's worked with over these years. Actors who have never worked with Depp also truly admire his work. Voters reward colleagues who push past their comfort zones on screen. Sondheim's music is tough for the most seasoned vocalists. . .the fact that Depp challenged himself and pulled it off with style, heart and poignance will not go unnoticed. Then there's this reality: Depp's brilliant creation of Capt. Jack Sparrow at the helm of the POTC trilogy brought in literally hundreds of millions of dollars in box office, internationally. Voters reward actors whose hard work keeps the film industry vibrant. Finally, the fact that Sweeney Todd is a riveting, Tony-award winning musical means that Burton and Depp made a film with a built-in audience. An audience that understands the dark story of loss and how one man's desperate love for his family sent him literally insane.
Posted by: Leslie Donovan Shore | November 30, 2007 at 01:03 AM
Probably it deserves to win, I'm convinced but hey wake up, it's not going to happen not in this Hollywood.
Posted by: Sweeney | November 29, 2007 at 11:59 PM
You forgot No Country for Old Men in your contenders. So far my best movie of the year.
Posted by: Diane Lynn | November 29, 2007 at 10:40 PM
It's not even gonna get nominated, kiddo.
Posted by: Kristopher Tapley | November 29, 2007 at 10:38 PM
This was a review. Admit it and sleep better tonight.
Posted by: Al | November 29, 2007 at 09:24 PM
Do you know you are my hero? No, really, thanks so bloody much for posting this -- really, sincerely gracious you stayed up to write this. I absolutely cannot wait for this film (yes, I am a diehard as well. Loved the Gunton/Fowler revival at Circle in the Square back in the day as well:) THANK YOU!
Posted by: james | November 29, 2007 at 09:12 PM
Ohhhh yeah, man!!!
Posted by: SILRONE LIMA | November 29, 2007 at 09:09 PM
any oscar nod worthy supporting acting from any of the supporting players?
Posted by: ace60 | November 29, 2007 at 08:53 PM