“DEEP VOTE” LIVES — AND OPINES ABOUT TWO FILMS!
29 Dec
Last year, as you may recall, an Oscar-winning screenwriter/member of the Academy agreed to help peel back the curtain on Oscar voting by sharing his (a) thoughts about the major awards contenders as he saw them, and (b) rationale about his ultimate selections on his nomination ballot and final ballot as he filled each out. This year, because a busier schedule will prevent him from corresponding at length like he did last year, he has agreed to periodically share his thoughts over the telephone instead. We had our first converstaion of the 2009-2010 awards season last week, during which he shared his reactions to “Inglourious Basterds” and “Precious.“ I suspect that you will be — as I was — somewhat surprised to hear which he loved and which he hated…
“Inglourious Basterds”
- Says he “fervently despised” the film, describing it as merely the latest example of “Quentin Tarantino‘s cheap idiocy”
- Says he is “offended” by films like this and “Life Is Beautiful” (1998) because, he feels, they make light of the Holocaust; moreover, he says watching it “enraged me in the way that ‘JFK’ enraged me, because there are a lot of people young enough not to know how historically inaccurate it is”
- Says he thought Brad Pitt was “awful” and was not particularly impressed with Christoph Waltz, either, despite having high hopes at the start — “the opening scene led me to believe I was going to see a realistic movie,” he says, but feels Waltz “overacts more and more outrageously” as the film goes on
- Says that friends have told him to “lighten up” and appreciate it for what it is — namely, an enjoyable revenge fantasy — but that he simply “hated everything about” it
- Despite his own strong feelings, he says, with an air of defeat, “I think the whole thing could win”
“Precious”
- Says “I liked it very much” and “I would vote for it for best screenplay” (referring to the adapted screenplay category in which it is eligible)
- Feels “all of the acting in that movie was excellent,” but was especially impressed with Gabby Sidibe, who he felt was “amazing” — “I’d vote for her,” he says, adding, “I’d love to see her go up on the stage to get it”
- Believes that Mo’Nique‘s “role is a stereotype” but that her performance is “very good,” noting, “I would vote for her, too”
- Says his biggest surprise was finding out from the end-credits that Mariah Carey played the social worker, as he “did not recognize” her but felt throughout the film that the actress playing the part was “magnetic” and “had a wonderful voice” with the “right kind of accent and right kind of poise”
Photo: Gabby Sidibe in “Precious.” Credit: Lions Gate.
So he hates Tarantino’s “idiocy”? Could it be envy, Mr Goldman?
I enjoyed Deep Vote last year but can’t recall whether his opinions matched up with the eventual winners last year.
Reckon he’s hard on Waltz. Thought he got better as the movie went on, tracking perfectly how the flick went more camp.
Deep Vote lives I love that guy from last year.
I’m secretly hoping that Waltz loses Best Supporting Actor
to Christopher Plummer.
I so enjoyed Deep Vote’s superb writing last year and hope he will write for your blog again. Keep up the great work you do, Scott – love it. Kriegs
This guy seriously needs to lighten up
This was the same guy who said that he would have voted for Rachel Getting Married in the category of Best Visual Effects had it been nominated. He (or she for all I know) exemplifies the cinematic cluelessness of AMPAS members that I’ve long suspected.
“He (or she for all I know) exemplifies the cinematic cluelessness of AMPAS members that I’ve long suspected.” — Robert
Agreed. He/She is the problem when they could praise a lame duck film like Precious but denounce Basterds. It sounds more personal to me and that has been the problem with the Academy for the past 10 years. What a douche bag this Deep Vote person is.
Unlike that guy (I believe), I have read the script of
Precious and I could say right here, right now – it’s
totally not deserving of a nomination. I have so many
issues with the script (especially considering the nature
of the V.O.). In terms of the direction, I really had
problems with Lee Daniels’ simplistic visual approach,
for example in the rape scene. Anyway, Sidibe and
Mo’nique gave very good performances. (Actually, the film
that impressed me the most in terms of writing – from the
adapted line-up – is AN EDUCATION. It was such a touching
and beautiful read. It’s better than the actual film. And
yes, I’m no fan of Mulligan in the role.)
On BASTERDS: I disagree with him, but it’s true that the
first scene of the film is the very best thing about it.
I remember thinking: Wow, this is fantastic! Like a play!
The rats monologue, the visual approach. The acting. It
had the mood, the rhythm, the tension. From then on it was
a highly entertaining film, but there’s something about the
rhythm of the film (and the last few scenes) that really
stop me from really loving the film. But Waltz was
hilarious. And I loved Laurent. The weak ones: Pitt
and Kruger. Her charcater didn’t work for me.
I’m really looking forward his/her reaction to Up in the
Air: it’s my least favorite of the films this year. It’s
a well told story, but it’s such an unhonest, manipulative,
programmed piece of film. But I bet, he/she is gonna love
it.