The problem with the front runner.

Remember last year, when "Dreamgirls" was considered the winner of Best Picture back in May '06? Well apparently the critics did not agree and the Academy followed suit.

Such an early front runner status can really harm a film, especially (in the case of "Dreamgirls") when the film is not that good to begin with. The hype for that film only carried Jennifer Hudson to a win, and that had a lot to do with her American Idol back story and her genuine humbleness in public.

This year the film that was considered the winner back in August was "Atonement". The main difference between that and "Dreamgirls" was that "Atonement" is actually a brilliant film (IMHO) and deserves a shat at the gold. However it being declared a frontrunner so early on had probably cost it a few critics awards, even runner up mentions.

This is most apparent in the critic awards for Best Supporting Actress......no mention of Saoirse Ronan at all...even in runner up. I know there are a few of you out there who consider her performance heads and tails above Amy Ryan, but she had nary a mention. In fact only the Golden Globes have bought this film rearing back to life. It seemed that up till now, the precursors were wanting to stray so far from the Oscars that they were purposely nominating films like "There Will Be Blood" because they knew the Academy were not likely to warm to it, making their choice seem more important.


Perhaps next year we should all just talk about potential nominees, and not mention possible winners until the actual nominations are announced. All bloggers should write about the films that have the most traction, and get the best reviews. Single out praised performances, but don't crown them the winner until much later into the race. This way, if an amazing film comes out early...we can perhaps save it.

This brings me onto "Zodiac". Now, I know "There Will Be Blood" is shocking and 'important' and "No Country for Old Men" is shocking and brilliant, but dear critics....how the f*ck could you forget David Fincher's brilliant film????
That is shocking on so many levels, considering how it has made almost EVERY top ten list. You dear critics should have picked your films to praise more carefully. If you wanted to differentiate your picks from the Academy so much, you should have gone with "Zodiac"....perhaps then it might have received at least one award.

I mean it only came out in May.......Please do not tell me you are getting all
I am not knocking "There Will Be Blood" at all, I have not seem it. I was just so surprised with the lack of mention of "Atonement". Perhaps some of my fellow bloggers were right....the film was just far too British for alot of critics. I am sure the Merchant Ivory films would disagree.