But look at Braveheart. That was based on true events that no one was privy to, that I'd wager few had any idea actually happened (I for one certainly had no idea the Scots ever warred with England), and that no living person (except, perhaps, very patriotic, bitter scots) had any emotional connection to. But the film did a good job of stirring emotion via character, narrative and action, so by the end, you'd chosen a side and felt sorry for Gibson as he was gutted in public. People don't have to be attached to historical events to be driven to feeling something about them. You've just got to make a compelling, albeit manipulative, film.

Perhaps a better example would be Titanic. Fictional characters in love on a real-life catastrophe. By the end, what were most people crying about? The thousands of deaths, or Rose letting go of Jack Dawson to sink to his doom? Do you think it would have had the same impact if it was a cold re-enactment, never fleshing out any of the characters past the point where it might offend a living relative or anyone who might think a movie about the Titanic is "too soon"?

As Gullimont said, United 93 is a very cold, almost passive re-enactment of some very harrowing recent events. It derives most of its emotion from an overlong sequence of people talking to loved ones on various phones, and all of its tension from the knowledge that the plane's going to be hijacked at some point. To me, even the WTC being hit seemed blah. We see it from a distance and a few bad actors feign shock. Schindler's List is an emotional, hard hitting view of some very horrible events and it (rightly) takes a harsh narrative stance against the nazis. United 93 is crippled by its desire to not offend.

And the shaky cam's annoying.

Edit: All my opinion of course.

So the first 9/11 film should come approx. 2500?

Let me be straight up here.

I just saw Little Miss Sunshine.

1. I think it's brilliant. It's fantastic. I would love it to be nominated. Second best film of the year.

2. It won't be nominated for Best Picture. There's one frame that torpedos its chances. That frame is "Directed by Jonathan Dayton and Vallerie Farris". The film is dead to the DGA and the Oscar Director awards, where (someone correct me if I'm wrong) it's basically inelligible.

3. It has the funk of "indie". Meaning it's quirky. It's no Sideways, and it's not as straightforward or heavy enough as the dramas.

4. I could easily see this being passed over even at the Globes.

5. It COULD nab a SAG nomination, but it will be like The Station Agent.

6. The acting is fantastic... showy enough? I would say no. It will take a lot of thinking outside the box to get any of the actors from this film actually nominated. I'm hoping for the best however.

7. Original Screenplay... that I can see. Score... deserving? Yes. Will be nominated... no. Cinematography... great? Yes. Will be nominated, probably not. Editing, great! Will be nominated... no.

8. Fox Searchlight... *sigh*

9. On a plus, this should do very well for supporting actors at indish awards and being that United 93 is not an indie, could concievably do well at the IFC awards.

10. I am greatly doubting that this film will make $50 million. I would actually bet against that happening. Considering I saw the film in "film geek central" where even films like Serenity and such sell out normally, there was about 8 people in the showing I went to.

I'm confused there. Help me?


All this praise for LMS is killing me. Can't wait for its releaze over here.

I'm assuming it's the double director thing, they won't praise a pair.

Why didn't they just credit one for oscar purposes like City of God? That seems like a silly gaff to make.

As I understand it. Two directors cannot be (and never have been) nominated for the same film. Just like two musical score producers are inelligible for being nominated. Again, someone correct me if I'm wrong or if this was changed.

This was the controversy with City of God, where only Meiralles was nominated and Kátia Lund was listed as "co-director" and wound up being pretty pissed about it if I remember it correctly.

With Best Picture and Best Director being so tied together, I see it as a tough hurdle for any film to get through, and LMS isn't exactly frontrunner status as it is.

I have seen the film earlier today. I loved it. I agree that it is a "cold, almost passive re-enactment". That was what I loved about it. It is not sappy, not sentimental. You say it derives all of its emotion from people talking to their loved ones, but to be honest that was not even the part of the film that really did it to me. The moments when AA11 disappeared from the radar, the observation of the second plane hitting the WTC towers and the final frames of the film...those moments really did it to me. Would I like it just as much if it was based on fictional events? I don't know. This is something none of us can imagine because it did happen and it is hard to ask the question of "What if...". The film is a powerful story, with not an ounce of patriotism and very little of a message, other than its glorifying of human braveness. What Schindler's List does, it does it well. This is a different film. It does not try to villify anyone not because it would offend. I mean who would it offend to villify mass murderers and terrorists? It does not villify in order to keep the film as passive and distanced as it is. Which was so great about it.

In any case, my stance on its Oscar chances is the same it was before I saw the film.

Roo, I would need to research to see if any dually directly films have been nominated for DGA or Oscar BP, which in case one of the two directors would have to remove their names (I think).

I doubt that Dayton and Faris, who have built an entire career working together, would stoop that low to get themselves nominated.

It's not really their background.

I'm happy you saw the film Lect. Nothing bothers me more than people hyping or dumping on films they haven't seen.

You're still way off however.

Loyal, why do you think Rodriguez and Miller LEFT the DGA. Because they wanted dual directing credits.

Dayton and Faris are probably not even members of the DGA.

That was the only recent example I could come up with as well. Of course there's a flock of brothers (Coen for one) who direct together but I don't know off hand any noms.

Dayton and Faris are husband and wife in addition. Tight bond to break over credits.

Yeah. Overall though. I don't think it's going to happen.

Although I will state for the record, again, how much I enjoyed Little Miss Sunshine.

You've completely missed my point.

Two directors won for West Side Story, though I don't know what kind of rules the academy have then and now regarding the issue of co-directors (and I know Jerome Robbins was fired and Robert Wise completed the last third of the film)

I think it's more of the case that the DGA doesn't allow for multi-directors in credits, and the guilds have a lot of pull in the nominations.

Checked this morning, both are DGA members.

So how does this work?

And why was Rodriguez so pissed?

Wasn't it because that Miller actually didn't direct anything? And Rodriguez wanting him in credits for director out of respect or something. And that DGA didn't allow?

Just a thought about something I heard, maybe not true.

EDIT:

Here's more about it...



http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.04/sincity.html

Maybe it's because Miller is not a DGA member?

Two DGA members maybe can share a credit but not a DGA with a non-DGA member?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm........

Still don't think Dayton/Faris will get an Oscar nomination. I wouldn't hate it, but...

A bit interested more in this so went searching. Here's short excerpt from RR's interview with EW.



Must say, I'd be also confused about DGA interpretation of that rule. How can they become "a bona fide team" if they cannot even start filming together? As for Dayton and Faris, they made movies together before, maybe they qualify then as well. :-)

Little Miss Sunshine is their first theatrical feature film I think.

But they did a lot of music video work before that. I'd be surprised if they didn't qualify as a team under DGA guidelines.