Art Directors Guild: Period, Fantasy, Contemporary
Wednesday, January 5, 2011 at 1:32PM The power of eye candy at the movies is greatly underestimated. Whole star turns can be elevated with the right costuming choices and entire films can be propped up with meaning, beauty, authenticity or imagination with the right production design decisions and set creation and decoration.
love the dilapidated dioramas of The King's Speech
So congratulations to the nominees. The ADG chooses them in three separate categories.
Period
Jess Gonchor for TRUE GRIT
Eve Stewart for THE KING'S SPEECH
Dante Ferretti for SHUTTER ISLAND
Arthur Max for ROBIN HOOD
Geoffrey Kirkland for GET LOW
Most of these will probably show up on Oscar's list. They don't have separate categories so they tend to favor period work.
Disappointed to see Eugenio Caballero's fine work on the 70s rock biopic THE RUNAWAYS (pictured left) snubbed here. We knew it wouldn't figure in (see griping at the end of this post for why) but still...
Contemporary
Therese DePrez for BLACK SWAN
Donald Graham Burt for THE SOCIAL NETWORK
Judy Becker for THE FIGHTER
Sharon Seymour for THE TOWN
Suttirat Larlarb for 127 HOURS
Disappointed to see Albrecht Konrad's work on THE GHOST WRITER left off the contemporary list. That film is a perfect example of how crucial art direction can be for a movie. So many of those scenes just bounce off the walls of that coldly enticing house with all the sharp angles. Everything feels both rich and sinister. Plus that little hotel room Ewan stays in? Perfection.
Fantasy
Robert Stromberg for ALICE IN WONDERLAND
Stuart Craig for HARRY POTTER AND DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 1
Guy Hendrix Diaz for INCEPTION
Darren Gilford for TRON LEGACY
Barry Robinson for THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER
still the best set in the Harry Potter series, don'cha think?Now that we've congratulated all these talented people we have to bitch a teensy bit. It's always a little odd that the various guilds still name all the movies that are the popular ones heading for "best picture" citations when their awards should be focusing very specifically on their own profession. It doesn't make any sense at all that all of the best work in each field each year would be done only in the movies that have overall 'I love this movie' popularity.
For instance, does 127 Hours really depend on its art direction? This is not to discount the cohesive color palette and all the other things that a production designer must judge but the bulk of the film takes place in a tiny crevice where James Franco carries the movie. That's a performer/directors movie if I've ever seen one. And then there's the matter of Stuart Craig. There's no question that he's done fantastic work on the Harry Potter series, movies that do rely heavily on their art direction for and we don't begrudge him his Oscars. But, more than most of the films in the series, this current installment doesn't actually ask him to add significantly to the look, design or sets. Huge portions are set within Hermione's magic vaguely non-descript tent and some of the other sets we've seen before. It begs the question: how many times can you reward someone for work that you've already rewarded them for?
These films are popular for a reason but we always hope that the various branches would think about their own profession first and only later consider which films they most loved for tiebreakers.
see also: Art Direction Oscar predictions
Art Direction, Harry Potter, precursor awards
Reader Comments (18)
I agree with you that "The Ghost Writer" should have gotten a nomination. That beach house was worth an award on its own!
thanks Bill. I always find the guild awards so strange. Like they don't watch movies either but just watch some of their FYC screeners of the movies that are hyped.
You'd think people in HOllywoood would see more movies ;)
What a pity that they didn't go for 'Scott Pilgrim vs. the World' in the Fantasy category, instead of, say, 'Tron Legacy'. It is so much more original in creating a quirky virtual world. Its editing and visual effects will probably go unrecognized as well *sigh*. Here is to originality!
It's hard to give credit to who's actually responsible for the mise-en-scene in 127 Hours. I'm reading the new American Cinematographer right now, and Boyle and crew actually recreated the crevice on a studio. Then there's the couch that Aron conjures via hallucination. And lots of CGI.
I'm down with the 127 Hours nom, because that entire space was created on a soundstage. Having to make something that can accommodate a film crew *and* be claustrophobic *without* looking like someone built it is hard, man!
I'd say the snubbed are The Runaways and Scott Pilgrim, the former because it looks like old photos of my parents' places while also informing character, the latter because...*sigh* because Scott Pilgrim is just so visually splendiforous.
Can anyone tell me what (besides sets) is included in art direction?
If special effects are, I imagine the first cut into the arm scored '127 Hours' a lot of points.
Dan, it's actually a confusing award because, though it's called "art direction" at the Oscars, the award is for the production designer (and the set decorator) and sometimes the terms art director and production designer are switched around but most films have both with the art director reporting to the production designer :)
The production designer overseas the visual look of a film -- so everyone like the costume designers and set decorators and prop people are reporting to them while they collaborate with the director & the cinematographer on the "look". so it's a huge job.
but mostly people think of it as "the sets" and "everything in the sets" because it's easier to think of it in that way.
also i should note: arguments about whether an art director is worthy if sets are existing buildings/locations (famous example: MARIE ANTOINETTE which wasn't nominated) seem to crop up all the time but I don't think they're necessarily unworthy because you still are responsible for the color palette, the props, and all the set dressing which is still a lot of stuff. Plus, in many cases, since they're responsible for the look, i'm assuming they have a say in which locations and buildings and whatnot are selected.
I'm also sad that "The Runaways" missed. That movie is easily in my top 5 for art direction and costumes.
I'm still not convinced that this is Nathaniel Rogers... but some impostor!
I think I'm just having some transitioning issues.
oh no Anthony. tis moi. I shall prove it.
MICHELLE PFEIFFER PFOREVER!
Proof accepted.
So Dan asked a question I've been having. To clarify with an example: the crazy lighting in specific scenes of Shutter Island: is this a production designer's doing, a cinematographer's doing, or visual effects' doing? Aron Ralston's first cut into his arm- production designer or visual effects person?
Congrats on the new site. Good to see it up and running :)
I thought the art direction for the latest Harry Potter was gorgeous. And though Stuart Craig may get nominations, he very rarely wins, poor guy.
Why was The Fighter nominated if we're going to get picky about this? Or The Town?
Evan -- lighting is the domain of the cinematographer. Basically the cinematographer & the production designer are the two key people in the overall look (under the director's vision of course)
as for visual effects. i dunno. it's getting more and more confusing as to what is lighting and what is post filming computer tinkering these days.
the snub for THE GHOST WRITER is incredibly frustrating.
These guilds rarely go for anything outside of the accepted Oscar-bound titles. Even in the "contemporary" categories they favour whatever contemporary films are on Oscar's radar and don't actually think about it. I mean, yeah, "The Ghost Writer". How about "The Joneses"? A film that absolutely, 100%, without a doubt needed its art direction to be perfect (and it was) and yet it's kicked out by "The Town"? Nothing for the stage halls of "Burlesque"? The multi-coloured rooms of "Fish Tank"? How about "Daybreakers" from all the way back in January. Of course not. They just give it to whatever films Oscar will like, even if the work isn't as unique. Boring and a little bit insulting.