Calling the Splits
Friday, February 25, 2011 at 9:40AM Serious Film's Michael C. here to ask an inconvenient question. As predictions are being finalized around the web it becomes clear that a large bloc, if not a majority, of pundits are predicting a picture/director split with The King’s Speech taking picture but David Fincher claiming the director trophy.
No doubt there is some wishful thinking at play by those still stinging from The Social Network’s flame out at the guilds awards. “Okay, maybe those Philistine voters will deny Social Network the big prize but how could they bypass an established master like Fincher in favor of Tom What’s-His-Name?”
The King Speaks. (The king being Fincher. His movies do rule.
I don’t mean to throw cold water on a plausible scenario that I would much prefer to a Speech sweep, but the burning question is this: When has a picture/director split ever been predicted? The answer: No time I’m aware of.
Here are the 6 times in the last 30 years picture director split along with the expected winners going into the ceremony:
2005 - Crash/Ang Lee
Brokeback Mountain was widely favored to win both prizes. There was, to be fair, an inkling of a Crash win here and there, but the vast majority called it for Brokeback early on.
2002 - Chicago/Polanski
The conventional wisdom that the only thing preventing a Chicago sweep would be the urge to give Scorsese an overdue win for Gangs of New York. Instead we got a Polanski win predicted by exactly nobody.
2000 - Gladiator /Soderbergh
Pundits thought they saw a spilt coming this year as most predicted DGA winner Ang Lee to repeat at the Oscars but popular favorite Gladiator to take top honors. They were half right. Traffic’s Soderbergh blindsided Lee.
1998 - Shakespeare in Love/ Spielberg
Do we need to go over this one again? Private Ryan was thought to be a lock for both prizes.
1989 – Driving Miss Daisy /Oliver Stone – The smart money was on Born on the Fourth of July to take Picture along with director. Miss Daisy pulled an upset.
1981 - Chariots of Fire/Beatty
If anyone was going to upset the epic Reds in the top category it was assumed to be box office hit On Golden Pond, not tiny, foreign Chariots of Fire.
And here are two more widely predicted splits that never happened:
2006 - Little Miss Sunshine or Babel /Scorsese
Many imagined that voters would be satisfied looking elsewhere for picture after finally giving Scorsese his due. Nope. They genuinely loved The Departed.
1995 - Apollo 13/Gibson
The prevailing mood was that DGA winner Apollo 13 would take picture and, since Howard missed a director nomination, the acting branch would carry Gibson to a directing trophy. Braveheart took them both.
Fincher supporters can take solace in the fact that splits appear to favor big name auteurs in the directing category, or that we're due for a split since they seem to occur about every five years. Other than that, history suggests either the most obvious of outcomes or a wild card that nobody sees coming.
My knowledge of what was predicted gets hazy before the 80's. Is there some precedent for a Speech/Fincher split I'm missing? Let me know in the comments.
Directors, Martin Scorsese, Oscar Trivia, Oscars (00s), Oscars (10)
Reader Comments (28)
I guess Michael Anderson was never favored to win Director although his film (Around The World In Eighty Days) was? Also, the In The Heat of the Night/Mike Nichols split was probably expected. I dunno, and really these are too long ago to be considered relevant precedents.
Fincher's my final prediction, but Hooper could easily win and it wouldn't be a surprise at all.
Did anyone know how Shakespeare in Love stole the BP that year? It's always been rumored that Gwyneth was invilved into that case. Did this BP thing (even Best Actress Win) really have something to do with the Paltrow family or some public relations thing?
It's been a big big big question in my mind....
I've always heard that the Shakespeare in Love thing is blamed on the Weinsteins' crazy campaign tactics, big parties, lavish gifts, and such, thus playing a big part in trumping up Oscar campaigning into what it has partially become today.
Of course, there's also the possibility that The Academy, like me, thought Shakespeare in Love was superior to Saving Private Ryan.
I'm predicting a split myself, but wouldn't it be great if we got a shocking result like Aronofsky winning or something?
Do we need to go over this one again? Private Ryan was thought to be a lock for both prizes.
I think we do, actually. I predicted Shakespeare in Love would take Best Picture that year, and while I guess I was a reasonably savvy 16 year-old Oscar-watcher, I can't have been the only person to make that call.
The giveaway with Shakespeare in Love back then was much the same as it was with The King's Speech this year -- as soon as it got the leading nomination haul, including nods in categories like Cinematography and Sound Mixing that few saw coming, it was clear the film was a major presence in the race. It was a tight scramble, no doubt, but it's not true that Saving Private Ryan was generally viewed as a lock going into Oscar night.
When "Entertainment Weekly" publishes its annual prediction issue, they always ask 3 or 4 anonymous Academy members how they are going to vote on various races, and it seems like a majority of them split their Pic/Dir picks. Don't have it right in front of me, but I am pretty sure at least 2 of the ones they interviewed, if not all 3, did so again this year.
No one's ever correctly predicted the picture/director split? That can't be right. There had to be some savvy guru that saw the late surge for "The Pianist" at least and thought to give it a bone in director over Marshall or Scorsese but stick with "Chicago" in picture. I'm predicting the "King's Speech"/"Social Network" split, just in the hopes that voters come to their senses and vote with their minds in director over sentiment in picture. A guy can dream.
Daisy was also widely, widely expected to take that Best Picture prize in 1989, even though Beresford's omission in the Best Director race was much moaned-over, and threw a little bit of cold water on the Picture forecasting. But not that much.
The only major bone I'd pick here is that Daisy was expected to take Best Picture so people knew a split was coming (since it wassn't nominated for Director). but overall I think y'all are being too harsh on what is an interesting topic.
while it's true that The Pianist was feeling "surgey" to some people, I don't recall a single pundit who called POLANSKI for Best Director.
Shakespeare in Love and Saving Private Ryan were considered neck and neck late in the game but I think many people were still a little suprised given that WWII is literally Oscar's favorite thing. I personally think it's better than Saving Private Ryan myself but most chalk up the wins to the Weinstein campaigning.
The "Shakespeare in Love"/Spielberg split - I wasn't posting about the Oscars on the Internet at the time so I don't have proof but I have been following the Oscars for a while and I can distinctly remember predicting the "Shakespeare In Love"/Spielberg split and found myself surprised in reading that it wasn't expected at Oscar pundits circles.
So if this year is like 2000, who might be the unexpected director to jump ahead of Fincher? I suppose they could do the Coens again, but that would be a sad thing. An Aronofsky win (my favorite of the group) or a Russell win (my least favorite) would certainly be the biggest shocker of the night. Nolan makes perfect sense though! Oh, wait...
Michael makes a great point though. Smart money should be on Hooper. I'll probably stick with Fincher though. *hopedicting
What I think probably happened in 1998 was very similar to what likely happened in lead Actress 1950. Two visually and thematically similar movies, in this case The Thin Red Line (analogus to Sunset Blvd) and Saving Private Ryan (analogous to All About Eve) were splitting the votes, allowing the deserving, but light, Shakespeare in Love (analogous to Born Yesterday) to come up the middle and take it.
Guy - With 1998 when I say lock I meant that the vast majority of predictors were in agreement that Private Ryan would win out. I don't recall any major source predicting a Shakespeare win, although it's entirely possible there was one that I don't recall. And even on years that feature runaway favorites in picture there still isn't 100% agreement. It any case it would still not be analogous to this year when a slim majority of predictors are calling a split.
I agree we'll know pretty early on what's going to happen.
Nat - Was Daisy predicted? I've always been under the impression that with its lack of a director nod and the DGA win for Stone(an award for which Daisy was also not nominated) that Born on the 4th was the favorite going in. Obviously its a lot tougher to verify the prevailing mood from that far back, and I confess my first hand Oscar memories only go back to the Silence of the Lambs sweep in 91.
Nate, have you seen this?
http://www.deadline.com/2011/02/snorefest-oscar-show-rundown-exclusive-spoilers-from-the-annotated-schedule/
Spoilers !!!!!!
amanda -- i'm not even gonna look. don't want spoilers and all of this "the oscars will suck" articles always strike me as negative nancying to drum up traffic.
i choose to believe the oscars will be super fun this year :)
(well they always are for me to a degree)
Michael C -- as far as i remember it was but because of stuff going on in my personal life in spring 1990 it was actually the least attention i ever paid to the Oscars.I was PISSED about Tandy suddenly surging and threatening my Pfeiffer but that's the only thing i vividly remember as paying attention to.
volvag -- that could be a theory that makes a sort of sense. although i wonder how many oscar voters really loved THE THIN RED LINE (such a good movie)
I'm predicting Tom Hooper for the win, even though he's an "unknown", and they usually go with famous name directors (last time an newcomer won was Sam Mendes for American Beauty).
What do David Fincher and Ridley Scott have in common? They both seem to find smiling hurtful. Even when he won the Golden Globes Fincher hardly looked pleased. You don't have to be Benigni, but show us some emotions!
What Fincher does have to his advantage (aside from a previous nomination and a line of fine movies) is that The Social Network is going to win for Editing - just like Traffic, Saving Private Ryan and Born on the Fourth of July. And with the expected Best Adapted Screenplay win, it follows the footsteps of Brokeback Mountain, The Pianist and Traffic.
How about 1972, when box office giant "The Godfather" was expected to sweep? Francis Ford Coppola won the DGA. Yet as the ceremony unfolded, "Cabaret" began winning awards left and right, including the surprise win for Bob Fosse as Best Director. Going into Best Director, the tally was "Cabaret" with eight Oscars and "The Godfather" with two, yet "The Godfather" won the top prize. The comparison to this year may be that Sunday's ceremony could be a surprising topsy-turvy. Also, with the new voting system for best picture, could it actually be possible that Tom Hooper win director and "The Social Network" win best picture? (It's just fodder for discussion :) )
I agree wholeheartedly about Line. I actually think it's better than Badlands and Days of Heaven. (A+ (61 films), A (171 films) and A- (235 films) respectively.)
classicfilmboy -- i sure hope so since BEST PICTURE is the only thing the masses seem to relaly care about even a year later.
it'll be interesting to see how this preferential ballot system plays out, or if we'll notice it at all in future outcomes.
yonatan -- but do they really expect directors to get emotonial? i doubt it. at least i hope not.
Nathaniel, let's just say we were wrong about Tom Hanks presenting best picture. Not that their choice ws a creative or surprising one, though....
eurocheese -- i had to give you comment du jour "HOPEDICTING" for the win - haha
Oh dear, wasn't the last time Spielberg gave out best picture the year of a sweep? Or maybe he's done it more recently.
I know everyone is expecting Fincher to win but is he really due? He isn't Scorsese after all.
I would actually love it if there a best director tie this year. That would be awesome.
Gabriel --i'm always hoping for ties just for the WTFness of it.
I'm still with The Social Network for Picture and Director, but this preferential system confuses me. What if Toy Story 3 wins BP?
cal roth --
I'm kinda hoping something like that happens sooner than later with this preferential ballot system in play. Can you imagine Toy Story 3 or even something with passionate fans like Black Swan winning? The collective gasp in the room would be amazing.
And I agree about ties, Nate. I'm always hoping for them for pure kicks.
Nat (and others), I just read this in the comments of a EW article:
"Are we supposed to feel empathy and compassion for this man? He was ROYALTY! Are we actually going to sit around and sob for a wealth, powerful man that was king of a good chunk of the world at one point? Looking around at the world in which we live, with all of the suffering, poverty and hopelessness, are we actually going to consider a king with a lisp as our new benchmark for compassion? I’d wager there are many people who would trade their current lives in a heartbeat if they could be a king with a speech defect."
I'm wondering what you think about it? Granted, this king had to lead his people in a time of crisis, and inspire them. But still, why do we care so much about him (because we do care, don't we?)? I can't quite put my finder on it.
Just wondering....