Box Office and Oscar: Bespectacled Wizards Break Bank
Sunday, July 17, 2011 at 10:01PM Harry Potter and Woody Allen, those short bespectacled movie magicians who both apparate into movie theaters constantly, each broke box office records this weekend, bookending the top ten chart.
What kind of curriculum would Professor Woody Dumbledallen bring to Hogwarts?
The eighth and final film in the Potterverse sent walking papers to Batman (who had previously held the all time best first weekend record with The Dark Knight) and it even staged a bank robbery as its opening setpiece! Meanwhile, Woody Allen broke his own records. If you don't adjust for inflation, Midnight in Paris just became his highest grossing film in US dollars toppling the exquisite Hannah and Her Sisters which Nick and I were just chatting about. (Midnight in Paris is still trailing Match Point by a little and Vicky Cristina Barcelona by more than that in terms of global box office.)
01 HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART TWO [review] new $169.1
(here's a fun article on the top ten US openings)
02 TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON $21.3 (cum. $302.8)
03 HORRIBLE BOSSES $17.7 (cum $60.1)
04 ZOOKEEPER $12.3 (cum $42.3)
05 CARS 2 $8.4 (cum. $165.3)
06 WINNIE THE POOH new $7.8
07 BAD TEACHER $5.1 (cum. $88.4)
08 LARRY CROWNE $2.6 (cum. $31.7)
09 SUPER 8 $1.9 [thoughts] (cum. $122.2)
10 MIDNIGHT IN PARIS $1.8 [group thoughts] (cum. $41.7)
Apocalypse Now: Zookeeper fell only 38% in its second weekend indicating that it pleased its TGIF loving audience last weekend. Make of that what you will.
Oscar Buzz: I realize that a good cross section of TFE readers are Potterheads -- that's a given when something is that popular -- so I mean this with all due respect but I personally suspect that the Oscar hype is fan-fever rather than prophetic buzz. The conversation, such as it is, suggests that AMPAS will want to reward the entire series with a Best Picture nod for #8. As ever with punditry, I could be horribly wrong, but it seems to me that sentiment, which everyone is correct to assume is a hugely powerful campaign tool, won't necessarily play in to this degree. Sequels, as a general rule, don't get nominated unless their ancestors were also nominated.
Here is the Oscar record for Harry Potter.
Sorcerors Stone: 3 nominations, 0 wins (art direction, score, costumes)
Chamber of Secrets: nothing.
Prisoner of Azkaban: 2 nominations, 0 wins (score, visual effects)
Goblet of Fire: 1 nomination, 0 wins (art direction)
Order of the Phoenix: nothing.
Half-Blood Prince: 1 nomination, 0 wins (cinematography)
Deathly Hallows Part One: 2 nominations, 0 wins (art direction, visual effects)
That equates to roughly 1.2 nominations a picture with no statues and these are the kind of nominations that are generally given to ubiquitous blockbusters that are considered solid entertainments (scattered techs) but aren't truly beloved or considered Serious Art by the voters. Potter has never been nominated in any big ticket category... not even in screenplay where blockbuster adaptations of best-sellers can sometimes find footing. Potter's Oscar history thus far should given everyone who cares reason to hope that they'll want to reward the series with a goodbye statue for art direction (and even the haters wouldn't have much to complain about there given Stuart Craig's huge series-long achievements) but otherwise no branch within AMPAS has taken a consistent shine. On the other hand, last year after an already exhaustive seven films had passed it was still getting some attention so who knows...
If sentiment does move Academy voters, I suspect it will only move the film onto more ballots than usual but not necessarily in those crucial #1 "i can't live without this" positions. My take: if there's a Best Picture nominee already in theaters at this writing, it's either Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life (ONLY if its hardcore devotees stay faithful but that all depends on whether another Film as Art / Auteurist favorite arrives before December 31st) or Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris (which has two enviable campaign angles to work with: "comeback" and "nostalgia") and the list ends there.
What did you see this weekend? Or did you stay in and weep over the Friday Night Lights finale?
What do you make of the Oscar buzz for Midnight and/or Deathly Hallows? The real thing or just impatience to get the golden party started?
Reader Comments (42)
I could see Alan Rickman maybe getting a nod for Supporting Actor. He does have a few great scenes that have gotten other movie villains nominations before. Plus, he gets that great scene (no spoilers for me), followed by another that explains a lot of the past with crying, et al. I can't see it getting any other major nods, maybe film editing or cinematography again, along with the usual visual effects and makeup nods.
That Woody Allen/Dumbledore graphic is amazing.
Keep him away from Cho Chang...
I don't believe Harry Potter's going to get a BP nod, unless Warner Bros. leads a HARDCORE campaign for the film, but there still needs to be genuine love for the film and I don't think there's the necessary amount of passion and loyalty for the franchise amongst AMPAS voters (reflected in the number of nods). Lord of the Rings garnered 30 nominations with only 3 films and they all had BP nods. I don't think it's likely.
Going off on a tangent, I just came back from Transformers: Dark of the Moon...what a horrible film. Everything about that movie is so excessive: the gimmick music, the action sequences, the heavy use of slow motion, the acting, etc. Michael Bay really needs to see some james Cameron movies. But what I really hated about the movie was the lack of one uniform tone, a fault with the script mostly, which jumbles comedy, tragedy, action, and end-of-the-world theme in such a careless way. Hated it.
As a Potter enthusiast, I agree. HP 7.2 is not getting a BP nomination. As much as ppl may like it, it is not getting number 1 votes. This is fine. HP movies were never made for Oscar so I don't understand why ppl are forcing the idea that Potter will factor there.
I don't see it getting into the top-tier categories, but I do see it cleaning up a few tech categories. Remember The Bourne Ultimatum? The first two films got zero nominations, and then the third film came along, got three tech nomination and won all three. I know the Harry Potter have gotten nominations along the way, but it's the last film in this series, so I find it feasible that this is the HP film that will finally win a few statues (even if its not in the top-tier categories). I'm thinking Art Direction, Visual Effects, and maybe an overdue Original Score statue for Alexandre Desplat (of course, that will depend on how the Academy feels about all the John Williams put in at the end, but I think Desplat's work is magnificent). Alan Rickman was great as always, but I don't think he'll get nominated because he didn't have as much to do, and I think the true scene-stealer is Ralph Fiennes. Still, that won't matter, because an acting nomination for this film would have required a Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight-level performance (don't bring up Ian McKellen, because The Lord of the Rings trilogy was loved by AMPAS from the very beginning). Those are my two cents.
That graphic is great, but will give me nightmares tonight. Thanks. In any case, I saw the film as everyone else did it seems this weekend and definitely enjoyed it. Oscars? Who knows? I'm interested if the film will have support from the mythological British contingent in the Academy that supposedly helps Brit-flicks make the top tier so constantly. I mean every British actor was in the film, no?
Harry Potter isn't getting anything beyond techs. Fanboys need to simmer down.
Nate --LOL. Poor Cho Chang, first she gets dumped by Harry...
James -- editing would really surprise me since that's usually connected to BP nods
BVR -- but at least for what transformers is always doing, it's acctually doing it. I surprisingly didn't hate it. but everything you say is true :)
I also believe HP 7.2 is not getting a BP nominationYes, the reviews are excellent and the box office is on fire... But, with the new change in BP and the 5% of passionate vote, it isn't likely anymore
-Like BVR said, a HARDCORE campaign from Warner Bros. Yet, WB has another Oscar/awards prospects (Contagion, J. Edgar and maybe Crazy, Stupid, Love).
-The British support is really important. Unfortunally, after Goblet of Fire, the BAFTA didn't really care the saga anymore with just a few noms.
-Only the first film (Sorcerors Stone) got better luck with the precursors awards. Even got a PGA nom.
-Finally, the 5% of passionate votes. This year is really heavy with big prospects...
After that, I agree Richter Scale, this could be another Bourne Ultimatum. More techincal noms even wins with not bigger chances in the biggest categories. I'm thinking:
-Cinematography
-Art Direction (Likely winner)
-Original Score (Or maybe "The Ides of March" could be Desplat's nom)
-Sound Mixing
-Sound Editing
-F/X (Likely winner)
-Make up
Each day, I tend to believe "Midnight in Paris" is an stronger contender for a BP nom. The elements are right: excellent reviews, even better box office success -Who thought Woody Allen will win at box office instead two stars like Roberts and Hanks?-, nostalgia effect, strong cast (Big contender for the SAG and BFCA) and Woody Allen in his best form since "Bullets over Broadway". But again, "the tree of life" has one of the biggest and smartest studios for an Oscar campaign like Fox Searchlight...
The Bourne Ultimatum argument is interesting and proves that there is precedent. Plus isn't it common knowledge that WB skimped on the DH1 ad campaign so they could not waste money and put all their effort into the DH2 campaign? Did I dream that or is that an actual rumor/fact that was going around last Oscar season? Assuming I'm not crazy and DH1 managed 2 nominations without a big ad campaign then DH2 should have no problem racking up at least 5. If the rules didn't change this year I would say it'd definitely be getting a BP nomination, we do have the open Pixar spot after all. However with the rule change it's not as definite as it once was.
I love Midnight in Paris. It deserves Actor (Wilson), Director, Screenplay (Allen), Picture and Editing.
I have the same reservations for both Harry Potter 7.2 and Midnight in Paris's chances in Best Picture: I just don't see people naming either of them their #1 film of the year. MiP is a film that a lot of people really like, but I'm not sure they love it. And for me, it would seem if you wanted to 'reward' the HP series, you'd put it at the bottom of your list-- not in the #1 spot. That's an awfully big 'reward' to call it the best movie of the year.
In addition to the aforementioned reason that it doesn't have much of a chance at earning 5% of the #1 votes, I think Harry Potter also has its chances hurt because of the director situation. Obviously, it's a well directed film, but it's not considered a "director's movie," if that makes sense. In other words, whatever Best Picture buzz it may be getting right now isn't translating whatsoever into Best Director buzz for Yates, and that's what will hurt it. It's considered an achievement as a production and a franchise, but not so much as a piece of filmmaking. Of course, plenty of movies have gotten Best Picture nominations without making it in for Best Director, but they've all at least been in the running for Best Director. If Yates can't gain any traction (and make no mistake, he WON'T), I honestly don't see how the movie can continue to be taken seriously as a potential Best Picture nominee.
I'll jump on the bandwagon that says they'll go all-out in the tech categories, but they won't nominate it for any of the "major" awards. I foresee at least 3 nominations, and most 7 (and that's only if they REALLY love it).
I think it's pretty much a lock for:
-Best Visual Effects
-Best Art Direction
-Best Makeup (they've ignored it for too long in this category, and the abundance of Voldemort screentime in this one just makes it all the more ripe for a nod)
I think it's likely but not definite for:
-Best Original Score
-Best Cinematography
And then, only if they REALLY love it:
-Best Sound Mixing
-Best Sound Editing
All in all, I predict 5 nominations, with wins in 2 categories (Art Direction and Visual Effects).
The only "british royalty" actors who were not part of the potter franchise are colin firth, judi dench, helen mirren and kate winslet-who the producers wanted for DH part 2 but her agent turned it down before she could even consider it.
Everybody else has been a part of it!
Oh julie andrews was not in it as well.
I see Art Direction, Visual Effects, Makeup and possibly a sound category or two.
Cinematography was beautiful in DH2, but not as showy as DH1 or the impeccable Half Blood Prince, which received a nod. This will be a big year for photography, so I don't know if it could squeeze it out, even with a two-time nominee behind the lens.
Although that "sequels don't get nominated unless an ancestor was" rule got broken last year with Toy Story 3, I think we all know it was a different case. Especially now that the BP works in a different way. I think, though, that it will get more than a few technical nods, as a way of honouring the entire franchise and also because, well, what else could they nominate? This summer has been very disappointing in that regard.
And speaking of Midnigh in Paris, didn't Vicky Cristina Barcelona grossed like 90 mil? Or are we just counting US box office?
I agree that HP 7.2 doesn't stand a chance in Best Picture. It will almost certainly get Best Visual Effects and Art Direction nods, though.
I suppose a nod for Desplat wouldn't really bother me, but a win would be annoying because (1) John Williams OWNS the Harry Potter soundscape and (2) Desplat has done (and will continue to do) better work in other films.
I don't see any nominations for the acting-- a critical consensus would have to coalesce around one particular actor, saying that "OMG so-and-so is the standout". I haven't seen that groundswell at all. In all likelihood, Maggie Smith, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman, etc. will all be cutting into each others' buzz.
I may be inclined to agree with everyone, IF the reviews weren't so good. As of this moment, this is the best reviewed film of the year. I know that won't necessarily translate to year end accolades, but it's bound to show up more than a few year end lists. I think the techs will be there, something tells me that those star whores at the HFPA won't hesitate to have a Potter table up front for the broadcast, and SAG could even be in play (they've shown their star love too- hello Nine). Director love aside, it feels a lot like an Inception type deal to me, only with a different set of fan boys.
I’m okay if this last Potter movie is not nominated for BP, but it’s the senior supporting act that should be rewarded, especially our loverboy, Snape.
I think it’s very necessary to reward Alan Rickman for his grand finale performance and I must say I was always impressed by Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix, especially when she acts as hermione who pretends as her. Very nice.
The scene where Snape escapes from Maggie Smith’s character is the best for me this year. So stylish and so elegant. BOOM.
I'm a hardcore fan of Harry Potter and no, it's not going to get more nominations than usual.
Most of the people shouting for a nomination actually don't know much about Oscars or awards in general. That sounds terrible, but I have no idea how much I've seen "Alan Rickman should get an Oscar or Emmy or whatever these awards are called!" on various tumblrs and blogs. It may have a universal appeal but the fact remains that it's firmly in the "kids' fantasy" category and has even less chance than the first Narnia movie.
I mean, it's not even taken seriously by its own actors. That pains me, but I've seen countless interviews with the actors, and the thing about British royalty is that they've spent their lives doing Shakespeare and find it hard to take Harry Potter seriously. Half of them have admitted that they haven't touched the books. Most don't even know the history of their own character accurately, bother to come to the premieres, and there's only about a handful, like Alan Rickman and Imelda Staunton - usually the ones who bothered to bring any gravitas to their roles - that love the entire series sincerely. When you remember that the entire cast of LOTR knew the books front to back and were borderline experts on the series, you realize that the majority of the filmmaking world just considers HP to be a teenage fandom and a cash cow and not much else. :(
That photo!
Dying. Dead. Deceased.
I think you're totally right about HP7.2, it's not gonna get in. It just didn't WOW the non-fans and that would've been the smoking gun. Gross, be damned! And yeah, it's either Midnight in Paris or Tree of Life for now but I think this'll be one of those years where all the five nominees (or however effing many) come from the fall movie season.
Oh but I'd LOVE to see the amazing Eduardo Serra back in the race for Cinematography. I thought he should've gotten in last year (they even made use of his best moment in the DH-P1 poster) and was kinda surprised when he didn't but his work on P2 was just as good (but not as showy) so I'm still holding out for him more than any other recognition for this film.
Midnight in Paris will be nominated for Best Picture. Count on it.
I love Eduardo Serra. I can't believe he didn't win for Girl With a Pearl earring. His work in The Wings of The Dove and Unbreakable was top-notch, too, and all his collaborations with Chabrol. I am rooting for him.
I actually did see Midnight in Paris this week-end. I liked it, the film was charming and whimisical, though IMO it's Woody Allen lite.
-@Amanda, I believe Daniel Day Lewis, Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy, and Liam Neeson weren't in any of the Potter films. Though I suppose some consider Lewis, Murphy, and Neeson as Irish and not British. Hardy's a brit, but I guess he wasn't considered a big enough "name" to pursue back when the movies were being filmed. Same thing with James McAvoy, though he's Scottish.
Eduardo Serra, John Seale, Roger Pratt, Michael Seresin, Slawomir Idziak, Bruno Delbonnel... I think Harry Potter deserves a reward in cinematography.
Mark -- i gift you the resurrection stone. and apologize to anyone else i traumatized with Professor Woody Dumbledallen.
John-Paul --- what i'm about to say feel free to ignore since the Make-Up nominations and rules never make ANY sense whatsoever in practice (so inconsistent) but I believe one of the rules involves *new* work, in which case you can't really nominate it for voldemort because the make up team has been doing his unique look for years.
everyone... which is why i tend to think it's going to get an art direction nod and a visual f/x nod for sure and MAYBE a couple of others. I can't imagine it getting more than 4 nominations. the sound branch isn't interested in it. the makeup branch isn't. the music branch has other --many other -- ways to reward both Desplat and Williams this year. the costumes are basically t-shirts and jeans for the students and all the old costumes again for the teachers. I just don't see what would be motivating the awards.
Fielding -- what makes you so certain? I'm curious.
Val - I don't think the Inception comparison is really a valid one, only because Inception was completely the work of Christopher Nolan from its genesis (he wrote, produced, and directed it), so if nothing else there's a very clear creator's vision there. David Yates on the other hand, was basically a director for hire, not unlike the directors that Marvel studios have hired for their latest two films, with only minimal creative input.
"Keep him away from Cho Chang."
Damnit, you stole the joke I was going to make.
Val - Actually John Paul and Kyle made really good points. Yes, the reviews are excellent and even they could nominated them at HFPA (Comedy Category). But the biggest differences between Inception and Harry Potter are notorious even for the genre and support for the guilds. Also, Nolan was considerated from the beginning as a likely contender for Director.
Finally, for Toy Story 3, we must remember Lee Unkrich was part of the crew for the other two films (Editor for the first film and co-director for the second), so it wasn't a Yates situation
I think Harry Potter is going to get in for Art Direction and Visual Effects. If there's any sentimentality to toss about, they'll give it to one of the older cast members with a supporting nomination. I think that would be it.
Midnight in Paris will get in for screenplay, for sure. Costumes seem like a safe bet because of the vast array of styles the film covers. If enough Academy members are passionate about 1920s Paris and all the art movements around then, it could get a Best Picture nomination. The box office success is becoming a very compelling narrative to give a small indie film a Best Picture nomination. It's not Winter's Bone where it seems just enough Academy members saw it to nominate it; it's actually a box office success story.
I should clarify that I think the biggest nominations Harry Potter will get won't come from the Academy, but rather from the guilds. I can easily see it getting a PGA nomination, especially since it appears as though they're still working with a 10-nominee system. In fact, assuming they won't change their rules again, I'd be surprised if it weren't nominated by them. In addition, I think a SAG nomination for Best Ensemble could be in order. I wouldn't count on it even being in the running for DGA or WGA nods, but still, PGA and SAG are something, and I think that's where it will find its biggest nomination success.
As for Midnight in Paris, I've been saying this for a while now, but Best Picture won't happen. Like Harry Potter, this is another film that would have had a real shot in a field of 10 nominees, but even the people who want to nominate it won't put it at #1 on their ballots, and that's why it doesn't have much of a chance. It's no longer enough for a lot of voters to consider it one of the best movies of the year; there has to be a substantial number of voters who think it's THE best movie of the year, and I doubt that will happen. Original Screenplay, yes, and possibly Costume Design, but that's it.
Which is why I still think that if any movie released so far will get a Best Picture nomination, it's The Tree of Life. It's the only one that is likely to have enough people who consider it to be the #1 best movie of the year rather than just one of the best. It will have less overall votes than either Midnight in Paris or Harry Potter, sure, but it will also have considerably more #1 votes than either of them, I think. I also think even a lot of people who don't place it at #1 on their ballots might vote for Malick in the Best Director category just on the perception that he made a daring, visionary film unlike anything else.
Posting a graphic of a perverted, exploitative, incestuous disgusing sociopath mixed with a children's movie is SICK. Woody Allen is a rotting corpse; it's impossible for corpses to "make movies."
Kell -- oh so it's a "children's movie" now? what about being a movie for everyone. I guess it won't get nominated for sure. what was the last non-cartoon "children's movie" to make it in? BABE? Oh god, Babe (1995) was just wonderful.
John Paul -- but how do you explain nominees like FROST/NIXON and THE READER getting #1 votes? I've said many times and iwll continue to say that if enough people like a movie, there are people putting it at #1 even if by most standards we wouldn't think someone thought it was *the* best of a year.
On and John Paul -- the SAG thing i hadn't thought of but yeah, i guess i could see that now as a "thank you". I hope it doesn't happen because honestly I don't think the ensemble work is that much of a revelation but i could see it.
Nathaniel -- I think I'm a bit confused now. I didn't realize there was a requirement for #1 votes back in 2008. Did it only go by the amount of #1 votes? I'm under the impression that it just went by overall votes, but I could of course be wrong. I thought preferential voting wasn't introduced until the following year when they started the 10-nominee system. If my assumptions are right, then Frost/Nixon and The Reader wouldn't have had to earn 5% of the #1 votes in order to be nominated. You're obviously welcome to correct me on this. I can't find a link to the old rules right now, but I'm sure one exists. In any case, I would like to think that both Frost/Nixon and The Reader were nominated on the strength of having lots of overall votes rather than being placed at the tops of ballots...surely WALL-E and The Dark Knight would have earned more #1 votes, even if they weren't on as many ballots overall. One would think, anyway.
John-Paul -- preferential voting goes further back than 2008. much further. But #2 and #3 votes could theoretically count under the old systems. it was all very complicated and still is (despite the #1 placement percentile cutoff that people are talking about) but there's always been this "instant nominee if you get enough 1st place votes in first counting round" factor. and then -- to make a complicated process too simple -- the second round would look at ballots that didn't already produce nominees on the first round (and so on). and then remaining uncounted ballots are counted again if there's still open spots after the first round. i don't remember how exactly it worked but there've been number crunching articles posted every year somewhere for many years :) i specifically remember a voter quote on IN AMERICA from 2003 and being upset that they didn't understand that placing it at #1 would have helped it make the shortlist.
Well that's a scary picture.
Can you imagine the 2001 versions of Harry, Hermione and Ron doing the classroom flashback from Annie Hall?
I think everyone who's saying HP will get a BP nod should just remember this is JULY. I remember Best Picture chatter around Deathly Hallows part 1 a year ago, and that wasn't close to happening. Even in November/December people (including fans) had stopped predicting it. We just get carried away by the enormity of things, let's wait for the dust to settle and look back more objectivly in a couple of months.
I am a major- MAJOR- Potterhead. LOVE the books, the movies, not so much, but I am ok with them- eventually came to terms with it.
I dont think this movei will get a BP nome. And it doesnt deserve to.
You all write like if you had already seen a glimpse of the future.
Anything can still happen.
The only truth is that Potter is the best reviewed and major box office hit of the year, and both of those wont change.
I dont really think WB has to make such a big work to make the movie get some noms, even maybe a best pic one. Old or younger, voters look at the internet and know all about each of the mvoies, even if they dont actually see them.
Im just sayin there is still a BIG room for surprises. At least until December, when HFPA begins the season.