Glenn here.
You will no doubt have read – or least seen the headlines – that people are saying that Ridley Scott’s The Martian should be taken very, very seriously as a Best Picture contender. I’ve even seen people claiming it could win, which seems awfully bullish given its hastily rising status in Oscar circles is due almost entirely to the film’s overwhelming success at the box office in the face of a glut of underperforming Oscar players like Steve Jobs. But amid this new wind of blockbuster excitement and the snickers at (contractually obligated) Oscar campaigns for other big-budget, uber-successful movies, there’s one film that has so far gone under the radar in the conversation and ought to be taken far more seriously than it likely will be.
Yes, I mean Cinderella... more after the jump
I was surprised, too, Lily James!
Trust me when I say it’s entirely rhetorical asking “Why Isn't Cinderella an Oscar Contender?” Believe me, I am keenly aware of why without having to have it laid out point by point. But for all the reasons that people are chalking the Matt Damon sci-fi vehicle up as an Oscar player are the exact same reasons Kenneth Branagh’s ought to be as well. In the wise words of Melissa Leo:
Consider…
Both have big box office: Cinderella ended its March run with a positively magical $201 million. As we discussed in yesterday’s box office piece, The Martian, currently sitting at $183mil, will no doubt overtake the live action princess tale within a week or two, but that doesn’t stop Cinderella from being a remarkably big success. Disney can certainly afford a campaign based on those numbers. And as we know, money opens a lot of doors in Hollywood.
Both are surprise critical hits: Most didn’t expect Ridley Scott, he of bloated blockbuster flops like Exodus: Gods and Kings, Robin Hood and The Counselor, to make something as light and enjoyably old fashioned as The Martian. Especially since his last journey into outer space was Prometheus. Alas, that return to spark for Scott fuelled much of The Martian’s early buzz-filled press. Likewise, many didn’t expect yet another retelling of Cinderella to be quite as strong as it was. The latest in Disney’s effort to make live-action versions of its animated properties was certainly not all that anticipated coming off of Maleficent, but its gorgeous, jewel-encrusted effervescence was a welcome breath of fresh air, whisking many audiences away in delight. The pair of films are nice mirrors as lights amid the March and October doldrums post and pre award season glut.
Just to prove a point, and despite the ultimate silliness of using it as a gauge, The Martian is at 93% on Rotten Tomatoes, while Cinderella is at 85%. There will no doubt be multiple Best Picture contenders with lower scores than that.
Both are craft hot spots: Depending how well it really goes over with the Academy, it’s easy to see The Martian winning some extra tech category love beyond just visual effects. The production designers have long shown affection to sci-fi as recently as Gravity and Scott's own Alien, and I’d personally go to bat for Harry Gregson-Williams’ score, which graba you from its opening flurry of clarinet, synthesizers and timpani. But honestly, there’s no reason why Patrick Doyle’s lush score for Cinderella can’t fight for a nomination alongside its sure-fire costume nod (Sandy Powell!) and maybe production design (Dante Ferretti!). Isn't Haris Zambarloukos’ cinematography worth considering if for nothing else but the romantic, swooping camera shot as Cinderella escapes the ball and the way the light catches the evil stepmother’s chartreuse blouse ever so.
Both have a nominatable performance: Matt Damon will no doubt be a strong contender for The Martian, a lead role that uses his charms perfectly in a way that hasn’t been utilized in a long time. But to be perfectly honest with you, I thought people would be beating the drum of Cate Blanchett for Cinderella, too. She does campy evil far better than Jessica Chastain in Crimson Peak, but I guess she will already be heavily in conversation with Carol (Truth is likely an also ran now) so there's no need for her to be nominated. Still, she’s done a double nomination before so why not throw in her wicked performance as this deliciously evil villain? There aren’t many actors like Cate for whom an excess of nominations can quite easily be forgiven and after her exceptional 2015 who could blame them? And besides, it’s not like the Best Supporting Actress category is overflowing with obvious choices right now.
Cate, smash!
Both are good movies: The most important aspect of all. Yes, both The Martian and Cinderella are good. Great, even. That’s clearly working for Ridley Scott’s film as it rises and rises, but most seem to just be forgetting about Cinderella. Have people forgotten it was released in 2015? Is this why we can’t have nice things all year 'round?
Maybe if it were the ‘90s when both Beauty and the Beast and Babe could get nominated and Al Pacino could get in for Dick Tracy, Cinderella would stand a better chance? Who can ever know for sure?! But it will be a shame to see such a delightful film be little more than a footnote in the season while people gravitate towards the new and shiny especially since they have much in common. Many will say the box office is reward enough for the Disney flick, but can’t we say that about The Martian, too? Why isn't there room for two surprise, old-fashioned hits?
I guess if nothing else we will always have Richard Madden in his royal tights.
Readers? Would you let Cinderella go to the ball (the Oscars) or is the evil stepmother right?
Well, shall she?!?