Inside the L.A. film critics' awards

The big surprise of the L.A. Film Critics Assn. awards, which were announced today, was that the critics group gave its best picture award, along with the best picture runner-up, to two of the biggest-grossing movies of the year, "Wall-E" and "The Dark Knight." The move should drive the clown-suit clad Oscar pundits crazy, since "Wall-E," despite being a huge critical favorite, has no chance at an Oscar best picture nomination. (No animated film has ever won that Oscar.) Passions run high at any critics gathering, the LAFCA being no exception. This year's meeting was held at LAFCA President Lael Loewenstein's house, with 39 critics on hand to vote (along with four critics voting by proxy).

With Sean Penn winning best actor, Sally Hawkins winning best actress and Danny Boyle winning best director--Variety has the entire list here--the awards raised some hopes and dashed some others. There was good news for "The Dark Knight" (with Heath Ledger winning best supporting actor and Chris Nolan winning runner-up for best director), "Milk" and "Slumdog Millionaire," which my spies say came in a close third in the best picture race, but bad news for a host of films looking for a critic award boost, notably "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," "Revolutionary Road, "Doubt," "The Reader" and "Che."

Here's a few highlights from my spies in the room: They say that "Slumdog" sparked the most divisions of any film. Its partisans praised its filmmaking energy and social consciousness. But its scrum of detractors said they wouldn't vote for it under any circumstances, with some critics claiming it was too derivative, coming off like an amped-up Satyajit Ray film. The only slam dunks in the voting were Penelope Cruz, who won best supporting actress for "Vicki Cristina Barcelona" and Ledger for "The Dark Knight." The voting for best picture was extremely close, with the joke being that whether the vote went for "Wall-E" or "The Dark Knight," that it was still a thumbs-up for an animated film, since "Dark Knight" is loaded with computer animation effects.

The biggest loser was probably Kate Winslet, who is considered a big academy favorite for her roles in "Revolutionary Road" and "The Reader" but got no love at all from the critics. The best actress runner-up was Melissa Leo ("Frozen River"), with the remainder of the voting going to Kristin Scott Thomas ("I Loved You So Long"), Meryl Streep ("Doubt") and Angelina Jolie ("Changeling"). Penn and Mickey Rourke dominated the best actor voting, with some critics expressing surprise that Frank Langella didn't poll higher. Left out in the cold were "Revolutionary Road," "Doubt" and "The Reader," which all need strong critical support to find an audience, along with "Benjamin Button," which too many critics said left them cold. "Milk" and "The Wrestler" earned raves for their acting performances, but were not viewed as best picture material.

It's not the end of the world for any movie, since critics awards are not an especially great predictor of Oscar riches, but I found it surprising to see the LAFCA so eager to embrace the commercial mainstream. Maybe it's a fluke, but maybe it's a sign that critics aren't as out of step with audiences as they've been in years past.   

"Wall-E" photo from Disney / Pixar

Comments

[MoroccoMole]

Cruz was also cited for her performance in "Elegy."

[Sean O'Connell]

Why would you suggest WALL-E has "no chance" for a Best Picture nod? Has it been disqualified? Could it not get Best Animated and Best Picture? I know no other animated film has done that since the introduction of the Animated category, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. Especially when a group you belong to names the the year's best picture! Perhaps you meant "little" chance, or "a slim" chance. Saying "no chance" seems foolish.

[Christian Toto]

Good behind-the-scenes info. And I think this was a rare year where artistic and commercial sensibilities collided ("The Dark Knight"). It would be a shame if voters looked down on "Knight" for that reason. That said, I'd never want to see a commercial smash like "Transformers" up for any major awards solely to attract a bigger Oscar night audience.

[Ron]

Indeed, I hope this is indicative of a future where commercial and artistic films are no longer mutually exclusive. A future where the "kid stuff" of the past can finally grow and mature into thought provoking, challenging and all the more entertaining cinema (with big explosions, men in strange costumes, and talking robots). A future where my overpriced movie ticket actually seems worth admission and less of a gruesome reminder of a two-hour plus lobotomy I was duped into paying for.

"Wall-E" and "The Dark Knight" are two of my all time favorite movies as they are speaking to my mature self and inner child in a new engaging dialog. If either work can bring greater legitimacy to like endeavors, I'm all for it. It's time to grow up Hollywood, clearly there is money in it for you and satisfaction for the rest of the viewing public.

[polomoche]

I must be in the minority to believe that Wall-E was not a particularly good film. The first 15 minutes were admittedly beautiful, but it quickly degraded into the familiar banal story arc/endless chase sequence. Then we were mercilessly clubbed over the head with a "save the planet" message that didn't really amount to anything more profound than when the pageant queen smiles and says "whirled peas". And certainly, while the R2D2 beeps and chirps were cute, they were just as cute when R2D2 made them 30 years ago.

Why not throw in Space Chimps and Kung-Fu Panda while you're at it!

[caroline]

I hope WALL-E ends up on the Best Picture Nod. If it doesn't, I will not watch the oscars. Unlike Ratatuiolle and the Incredibles, WALL-E had a wonderful allegorial story.

WALL-E costed 180,000,000 to make, just as much as the Dark Knight. So many people worked so hard on it. Ben Burtt did amazing voice design, Stanton wrote his most daring script, the computer graphics were realistic (with the exception of the human characters), Newman did a beautiful themed score (WHY DID HE NOT GET A NOD FOR BEST MUSIC AT THE ANNIES?!), etc.,etc.

WALL-E is not one of the bloated romance films like the great, but overrated Titanic. Titanic did nothing but circled around Jack and Rose romance. There were many things going on beside WALL-E's and EVE's romance- There was a lethargic society, a polluted Earth, and machines discovering life. And WALL-E romance with EVE affected humanity.

WALL-E is certainly better than Kung Fu Panda. Kung Fu Panda only took 130 million to make. Kung Fu Panda is certainly funnier, but comedy is not enough to define a good movie. Kung Fu Panda had a excellent storyline, but it is what it is, it was only meant to make children laugh and enjoy it. Kung Fu Panda is not of the universal. Young children will love the cuteness of WALL-E, and teens and adults will love the allegorical story.

Dreamworks may be funnier, but Pixar suceeds in mixed comedy with out-of-this world storylines. Storylines matter more than comedy.

If you think comedy defines how good a movie is, you are one of those inconsiderate people who give no damn toward the hard effort.

What use is an Annie Award to WALL-E? WALL-E is no animated movie, it's a romance made by animation. Saying that WALL-E is an animated movie is discriminating.

If WALL-E doesn't show up on the Best Picture category, I will never watch the Oscars again. Mark my words.