:00:32. > :00:39.It's that time of year again as the Oscars approach, The Review Show's
:00:39. > :00:44.the acting awards, will it be a golden statue for the Iron Lady?
:00:44. > :00:48.Will George Clooney be cheered up by another win? Behind the camera,
:00:48. > :00:55.it's a Clash Of The Titans, Scorsese, Malick and Woody Allen
:00:55. > :00:57.all hotly tipped. Will The Artist bag best picture or could
:00:57. > :01:02.Spielberg's War Horse steel the academy's hearts. What does it
:01:02. > :01:06.matter in I way? What does it really mean to win an Oscar. Die
:01:06. > :01:11.secting the art of the silver screen tonight are movie veteran
:01:11. > :01:17.and Bourne villain, wowing audiences in his performance
:01:17. > :01:23.Coriolanus, the actor Brian Cox the writer columnist and comedian
:01:23. > :01:32.Natalie Haynes. Mark Millar, the graphic novelist the creator of
:01:32. > :01:35.Kick-Ass. And Karen Krizanovich. Good evening. Welcome to The Review
:01:35. > :01:40.Show's yearly flirtation with the glitz and glamour of Hollywood
:01:40. > :01:45.albeit from a studio in windy Glasgow. Tonight, in Bryan, Natalie,
:01:45. > :01:48.Mark and Karen, we have a verityable treasure trove of movie
:01:48. > :01:55.knowledge. We like to hear what you think. Feel free to e-mail or tweet
:01:55. > :01:58.us during the show. As we embark on our celluloid dreams we start with
:01:58. > :02:03.possibly the sexiest categories of them all, best actor and Best
:02:03. > :02:08.Actress.? The boys corner, two Hollywood heavy weights fight it
:02:08. > :02:13.out with a trio of French, British and Mexican talent. Oscars regular
:02:13. > :02:19.George Clooney plays down the looks with his role in The Descendants as
:02:19. > :02:23.a work aolic lawyer. When his wife goes into a coma secrets haunt the
:02:23. > :02:26.family. It's 20 years since his Thelma and Louise debut for many
:02:26. > :02:32.critics it's taken that long for Brad Pitt to mature into what's
:02:32. > :02:36.described as his best role to date, playing a radical baseball manager
:02:36. > :02:42.in Moneyball. Their professional ball players. Just be straight with
:02:42. > :02:49.them. Pete, I've got to let you go. Of course the big noise has the
:02:49. > :02:53.surprise hit The Artist with Jean Dujardin captivating artists --
:02:53. > :02:57.audiences, channelling icons as diverse as Valentino and chaplain,
:02:57. > :03:04.Dujardin plays the older movie veteran whose career goes into
:03:04. > :03:08.decline with the Advent of the talkies. More surprisingly Mexican
:03:08. > :03:14.born actor buechbuechbuech beat off competition from Micheal Fassbender
:03:14. > :03:24.and Ryan Gosling to be nominated as Carlos, a Mexican immigrant worker,
:03:24. > :03:35.
:03:35. > :03:39.That's not funny. I didn't say that. And last but not least, British
:03:39. > :03:46.stalwart, Gary Oldman turned in a complex but subtle turn as George
:03:46. > :03:51.smiley in the classic Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. He's been helping us
:03:51. > :03:55.Peter. He's been telling us all about his adventures. For Best
:03:55. > :03:58.Actress, Meryl Streep who's already bagged a BAFTA for her portrayal of
:03:58. > :04:08.Margaret Thatcher in both her prime and more controversially as she
:04:08. > :04:08.
:04:08. > :04:13.struggles with dementia. Where? bombings, mummy, today. Michelle
:04:13. > :04:17.Williams portrayed another female icon, Marilyn Monroe in My Week
:04:17. > :04:25.With Marilyn, Chris Clarke's account of his brief time with the
:04:25. > :04:31.troubled star. Larry tells me you are quite superb. Eddie Marsan took
:04:31. > :04:41.on the challenge of -- Rooney Maria took on the girl with the dragon
:04:41. > :04:42.
:04:42. > :04:47.tattoo. Viola Davis is persuaded to reveal the service of white
:04:47. > :04:52.families to an aspiring author. And finally, in Albert Nobbs Glenn
:04:52. > :04:55.Close plays a woman forced to disguise herself as a man in 19th
:04:55. > :05:02.century Ireland in order to obtain work. You're not thinking of taking
:05:02. > :05:05.a wife, are you not? So the smart money says Streep will outstrip the
:05:05. > :05:11.rest and Jean Dujardin will silence the competition, what does our
:05:11. > :05:16.panel think? We're honoured to vai member of the academy with us now,
:05:16. > :05:20.Brian Cox. I want to begin with looking at actresses and one of the
:05:20. > :05:24.favourites is Meryl Streep, for the range of her performance I suppose
:05:24. > :05:29.in Iron Lady. I mean, she's phenomenal. She happens to be one
:05:29. > :05:34.of the greatest actresses ever. It's unquestionable. I used to say,
:05:34. > :05:38.I met her on occasion, I once said to her, I hated her. I said "I
:05:38. > :05:44.really hate you. When I was younger I used to hate you. But I didn't
:05:44. > :05:49.really hate you, I was incredibly jealous of you. You're always so
:05:49. > :05:56.good." She is. She's rather a remarkable woman, apart from being
:05:56. > :06:02.a remarkable actress. This is a phenomenal performance. Truly is.
:06:02. > :06:06.It's in the a very phenomenal film. It's a mental film, but I love
:06:06. > :06:11.abbey Morgan she's a great writer. Shame was my favourite film in the
:06:11. > :06:14.last 12 months. It was like the comic strip presents. What about
:06:14. > :06:18.Meryl Streep herself? She was brilliant. That's the thing that
:06:18. > :06:22.saves it. I'm almost, I think she must almost feel embarrassed in the
:06:23. > :06:27.rest of the film, the guy from buffy is Geoffrey Howe and the
:06:27. > :06:35.weird casting. But it was a master class. Was it more than just
:06:35. > :06:39.mimicry? Absolutely, yeah. Philida Lloyd is taking a lot of flak about
:06:39. > :06:43.this film. It is fiction really. It's not documentary. I think
:06:43. > :06:47.Streep is amazing in it. I don't have animosity towards Margaret
:06:47. > :06:52.Thatcher. I wasn't here when she was in power. I saw it as pure
:06:52. > :06:58.performance. I liken it to people who don't like the performance, I
:06:58. > :07:01.say do you like Bruno Gantz playing Hitler, if you did, you're
:07:01. > :07:05.basically saying that Margaret Thatcher is worse than Hitler.
:07:05. > :07:09.have Michelle Williams also playing real life character Marilyn Monroe.
:07:09. > :07:12.When it's a real-life person that we're talking about, there's a
:07:12. > :07:16.distance, you don't engage so much in the character, you're thinking
:07:16. > :07:20.is that really like Marilyn Monroe. Yeah there's always the risk that
:07:20. > :07:26.it becomes karaoke, what you're doing is admiring a really good
:07:26. > :07:32.imitation. I think it's a little unfair, certainly unfair to suggest
:07:32. > :07:36.that of Meryl Streep performance, which is genuinely impressive.
:07:36. > :07:42.Michelle Williams gets a little closer to the kairk yokey, not just
:07:42. > :07:45.because she sings an dances. The thing she does really well is walk
:07:45. > :07:49.that very fine line where Monroe walked where people couldn't work
:07:49. > :07:53.out if she was really smart or really dumb. I don't think it's a
:07:53. > :07:57.great film again. But I think she's good in it. And captures the
:07:57. > :08:01.vulnerability of being an actress. I think she's remarkable. I've
:08:01. > :08:07.watched this girl over the years. She did a great film with Ryan
:08:07. > :08:12.Gosling last year called Blue Val inTyne -- Valentine. She's got
:08:12. > :08:18.better and better. She's lick a young Meryl Streep. She's how
:08:18. > :08:22.mayoral was 25 years ago. She has a quality of work and depth. She
:08:22. > :08:28.gives this film, which is quite a slight film, enormous credibility.
:08:28. > :08:33.It was ironic that she won the best actor in a comedy prize for the
:08:33. > :08:43.Golden Globe, because actually it's a very deep and rounded performance.
:08:43. > :08:45.
:08:45. > :08:52.Now with the girl with the dragon tattoo and Rooney Mara she was
:08:52. > :08:55.playing Lisbeth Salader. It was a terrific film. If you remake a
:08:55. > :09:00.European film, you're seen as not worthy to see it. If that was in
:09:00. > :09:06.English, I don't think they'd have that impressed. It seems to have
:09:06. > :09:10.dignity because of the foreign language. The American ones were
:09:11. > :09:14.far superior. Viola Davis? I've been following her career every
:09:14. > :09:17.inch of the way. She's a consummate actress. It's wonderful to see
:09:17. > :09:21.she's finally got a leading role. And do you think because of the
:09:21. > :09:26.kind of part that she's playing that's going to appeal to members
:09:26. > :09:30.of the academy? Yeah, I don't think, I think she is a fantastic actress.
:09:30. > :09:33.I don't think this is seeing her at her best. She's always wonderful. I
:09:33. > :09:38.have a problem with this film because of the pace fgt film. It's
:09:38. > :09:42.far too slow. It's far too self- regarding.S too sentimental. I
:09:42. > :09:46.think it's a great story, but it needs from the director, it needs
:09:46. > :09:53.much more gritty and the actors should have been told move it
:09:53. > :09:59.through more than they did. I don't think it's her best work. Let's
:09:59. > :10:08.move on to the men now. Brad Pitt in Moneyball? Your face lights up
:10:08. > :10:14.just Atkins name. My face lighted up from Thelma and Louise. Remember
:10:14. > :10:19.being a teenager going "Who is he?" He's very good. He's grown up from
:10:20. > :10:26.the pretty boy of Thelma and Louise and he's pretty good in The Tree Of
:10:27. > :10:30.Life. But he's unbelievably good in this. I love this, he is a
:10:30. > :10:34.compulsive chewer in virtually all films. He chews so well in this.
:10:34. > :10:41.There's like the energy of this character is so much that he has to
:10:41. > :10:44.with his jaw the whole time. It's compelling. It was an amazing
:10:44. > :10:48.script by Aaron Sorkin. Does he bring more to it than the lines
:10:48. > :10:53.have delivered to him? He has a stillness now. He's been in the
:10:53. > :10:57.indstr I for quite some time. I think he's maturing. I believe he
:10:57. > :11:01.had producing credits on that, I'm not sure. He eats in all of his
:11:01. > :11:04.films just to make us hate him. In a way he doesn't need his looks now,
:11:05. > :11:10.which sounds a bill shallow. think he's happier in his skin.
:11:10. > :11:14.I've worked with Brad. He's a tremendous individual. He's a
:11:14. > :11:19.wonderful man. But I so wonderful to see him in this because all of
:11:19. > :11:23.that is in the movie. The fact he's grown up in the industry and he's
:11:23. > :11:27.learned how to be an actor, yet he's not, he's no longer a movie
:11:27. > :11:31.star. He's become a consummate actor. That's what this performance
:11:31. > :11:41.shows. Moving from somebody who sin credibly well known to a much less
:11:41. > :11:42.
:11:43. > :11:46.well known actor relatively obscure Ambuccia in a better life. This was
:11:46. > :11:50.so understated. Yes and incredibly moving portrait of what happens
:11:50. > :11:54.when you force people to live outside the law and then punish
:11:54. > :11:58.them for that. He is genuinely a man caught in a situation where he
:11:58. > :12:02.cannot win. He's an illegal immigrant. He's in Los Angeles. He
:12:02. > :12:07.has a son who is born in America. His son has the right to stay in
:12:07. > :12:11.America, but he does not if he is caught. It sounds like, I'm making
:12:11. > :12:14.it sound tragic from start to finish, but it isn't. It's humane
:12:14. > :12:18.and beautiful. His relationship with his son is lovely. Does he
:12:18. > :12:22.stand any chance winning? I think it's just going to belong to The
:12:22. > :12:26.Artist this year. Economic bad times we like to retreat into the
:12:26. > :12:30.past. I think The Artist will clean up. What did you think of this?
:12:30. > :12:36.He's already won the Mexican version of the Oscar. This guy
:12:36. > :12:38.really doesn't have much to prove. I thought it was an amazingly
:12:39. > :12:44.balanced really wholesome, beautifully paced, even though it's
:12:44. > :12:50.quite slow, film. It was like the bicycle thief. I was enthralled.
:12:50. > :12:55.It's worth seeing. I think some of the good guys were overlooked. The
:12:55. > :13:00.best performance came from Micheal Fassbender and Ryan Gosling. And
:13:00. > :13:06.even X-Men, that shouldn't be overlooked. Ryan Gosling had an
:13:06. > :13:09.amazing film. To be totally overlooked. A film that may have
:13:09. > :13:13.been overlook sd Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy but not nominee for
:13:13. > :13:18.best actor. Gary Oldman is up for that. It's great to see Gary. It's
:13:18. > :13:22.wonderful to see him in his stride. Again I work with him in the mid-
:13:22. > :13:28.80s in the theatre and I've just watched him go through the
:13:28. > :13:32.difficulties of this profession. Gary is one of the most courageous
:13:32. > :13:39.young actors that was, he's not young any more. I always think of
:13:39. > :13:45.him as young. He really has taken his career and turned it round big
:13:45. > :13:51.time. This is a remarkable, fine performance. I couldn't help
:13:51. > :13:54.comparing him with Alec Guinness. did enjoy it. He does channel Alec
:13:54. > :13:59.Guinness, the glasses, it looks like whoever plays the part has to
:13:59. > :14:04.have them on. Secretly, I know it's a slow film, I very much enjoyed it
:14:04. > :14:06.as a slow burner. If you like a faster paced film, may I recommend
:14:06. > :14:10.Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy trying to work out, including Gary Oldman
:14:10. > :14:14.thinks they have the lead. I think it's six people. I think six men
:14:14. > :14:20.are walking round going yeah, I'm in the film and I'm the star.
:14:20. > :14:24.Descendants that's George Clooney. Was he outside his range? I don't
:14:24. > :14:29.think there say role that's really outside his range. I think he's
:14:29. > :14:32.quite good. Again, we tend to think, handsome leading guy, he doesn't
:14:32. > :14:39.have to be that good. It's very interesting, George Clooney is very
:14:39. > :14:42.good at comedy, as we know from other movies. He's very well
:14:42. > :14:46.balanced in this. It's a slow burn film. I didn't like it the first
:14:46. > :14:51.time I saw it. I watched it the second time and liked it better.
:14:51. > :14:55.I'm a big fan of Alexander Payne. Even a Hawaiian shirt is not
:14:55. > :14:59.outside his abilities. Or a paunch indeed shockingly. Don't worry if
:14:59. > :15:03.you think we've forgotten about Jean Dujardin, we will talk about
:15:03. > :15:07.The Artist later on. If the glamour and good looks mainly reside in
:15:07. > :15:12.front of the camera, this my pal tonight, directors like to argue
:15:12. > :15:22.that the real talent resides behind it, just like my producers. So next
:15:22. > :15:24.
:15:24. > :15:33.up it's the nominees for best This year's nominees for Best
:15:33. > :15:37.Director include a plethora of Hollywood royals. The first time
:15:37. > :15:40.nominee is probably the favourite. The Artist is his third feature
:15:40. > :15:50.film, and momentum has been gathering behind the French
:15:50. > :15:55.director. The Artist is also hotly tipped for Best Picture. Seldom in
:15:55. > :16:01.the history of the Academy Awards have both awards been given to
:16:01. > :16:08.different films. But this could be one of those times, with Martin
:16:08. > :16:15.Scorsese's nomination for Hugo. He took on and mastered the challenge
:16:15. > :16:21.of 3D to illustrate his own passion for early cinema. This is
:16:21. > :16:28.Scorsese's eighth not for the Academy. Hugo has been hailed by
:16:28. > :16:38.critics as the film Four film lovers. Alexander Payne is also in
:16:38. > :16:39.
:16:39. > :16:44.the race, receiving his first nomination since 2005. But there is
:16:44. > :16:52.are very different kind of film from Sideways. The Descendants has
:16:52. > :16:57.been guessing positive reviews. Also a hit with the critics, Woody
:16:57. > :17:05.Allen's Midnight In Paris has given him his 7th director Oriel
:17:05. > :17:13.nomination. But a victory is unlikely, a comedy rarely gets the
:17:13. > :17:20.top award. Woody Allen is notorious for not showing up at the red
:17:20. > :17:28.carpet, failing to turn up on three occasions he has won before. If
:17:28. > :17:38.Terrence Malick wins, he may repeat the trick. He has been recognised
:17:38. > :17:41.
:17:41. > :17:45.for The Tree Of Life. With the last ballot papers handed in on Tuesday,
:17:45. > :17:49.will it be Michel Hazanavicius's name which is getting engraved on
:17:49. > :17:56.the award? Let's begin with Woody Allen, and we have been waiting
:17:56. > :18:01.long enough, haven't we, for a decent film?! Is this a return to
:18:01. > :18:05.form? It is a return to some form, it is not Woody Allen at his most
:18:05. > :18:10.funny. It is a return to an examination of culture, the things
:18:10. > :18:15.that people love, is the past better than the present? And he
:18:15. > :18:21.actually answers that one. And also, it takes the audience somewhere the
:18:21. > :18:28.audience wants to go. It is not hilarious, but I think it is a
:18:28. > :18:32.return of some sort for Woody Allen. It feels like a 1970s Woody Allen,
:18:32. > :18:37.but may be almost too much, it is like somebody doing Woody Allen.
:18:37. > :18:45.But I really like him, I even like the ones that everybody hates.
:18:45. > :18:51.does make one every year, so... what about this one in terms of
:18:51. > :18:54.Best Director? What he does beautifully is to fall in love with
:18:54. > :18:59.the City and make you feel the city is more beautiful than you could
:18:59. > :19:04.ever have imagined. I'm sure he gets up in the morning and thinks,
:19:04. > :19:08.I would like to make a beautiful film, which never fulfils his dream,
:19:08. > :19:12.because he is so critical. Then he thinks, I want to go and play in my
:19:12. > :19:22.they're tonight. I don't think the awards matter to him very much,
:19:22. > :19:24.
:19:24. > :19:33.which is why he does not go. I have acted with Woody Allen. Is there
:19:33. > :19:38.anyone you have not acted with? Anyway... I think Woody Allen has
:19:38. > :19:42.realised what he wanted to do, but I think this is a bittersweet film,
:19:42. > :19:48.like Woody Allen having a debate with his younger self. It is like
:19:48. > :19:53.his own struggle, in a gentle way, with his own nostalgia, his own
:19:53. > :20:02.sense of where it he is as a film- maker. So, there are these elements
:20:02. > :20:12.in the film. One film which really does have a huge range of elements
:20:12. > :20:16.
:20:16. > :20:20.and innovation is bunch of Cseh which's The Tree Of Life. -- bunch
:20:20. > :20:26.of CEO's The Tree Of Life. This is one of my favourite films of the
:20:26. > :20:35.year. Not only is it interesting, in the way that it looks at Texas
:20:35. > :20:40.in the 1950s, but it has dinosaurs. It is a terrific movie, which of
:20:40. > :20:44.course is notorious for having some people come out -- coming out and
:20:44. > :20:50.wanting their money back because it was too slow and too long.
:20:50. > :20:56.certainly polarised the critics. Yes, sorry, I was so bored by it, I
:20:56. > :21:00.get bored very easily. It was very pretty, which is fine, but I like
:21:00. > :21:08.the story way more than I like pictures. It had dinosaurs, come
:21:08. > :21:14.on! Yes, my theory is that he lost the Oscar to Steven Spielberg that
:21:14. > :21:23.year, and I think, he went, damn you and your Jurassic Park, Steven
:21:23. > :21:28.Spielberg! The minute an art-house movie has a mother dinosaur weeping
:21:28. > :21:36.over her baby, I thought, this is brilliant. Did you find the rest of
:21:36. > :21:40.it just as brilliant? I kind of like how pretentious it is. It was
:21:40. > :21:47.like God was editing somebody's home movie. Just when you were
:21:47. > :21:53.thinking, this is too much, he pulled it back, it was touch and go,
:21:53. > :21:58.but I came out of it satisfied. Thinking about Martin Scorsese's
:21:58. > :22:08.Hugo a now, he decided to do this one in 3D, was it successful, do
:22:08. > :22:09.
:22:09. > :22:14.you think? Well, he is a truly great film-maker, no question. I
:22:14. > :22:23.don't know, and had a problem with Hugo. I did not see it in 3D, I saw
:22:23. > :22:30.it on a screen, but I think there is an element with all of these
:22:30. > :22:40.films, a kind of cynicism about, oh, he is going to do this in order to
:22:40. > :22:42.
:22:42. > :22:49.create that... And I feel with this film that at the end of the day, I
:22:49. > :22:59.feel that it is not engaged, it is full of wonderful shapes and looks,
:22:59. > :23:02.
:23:02. > :23:10.but there is something which, indie Terence Malik film, he is still at
:23:10. > :23:15.the centre of it. I saw this one in 3D, and I thought it was amazing. I
:23:15. > :23:20.loved the use of the 3D. In two dimensions, I would tend to agree
:23:20. > :23:30.with you. But there were some wonderful shots which I found
:23:30. > :23:32.
:23:32. > :23:37.drilling. You know when guys hit a certain age, they just want to win
:23:37. > :23:43.awards, I felt like that. That's what I loved about Hitchcock, he
:23:43. > :23:50.did not do that, as he got older. He made films which a 25-year-old
:23:51. > :24:00.could have made. It just felt like a guy who was playing to the
:24:01. > :24:04.
:24:04. > :24:10.gallery. I just mean for Spielberg, both War Horse and Hugo, both of
:24:10. > :24:15.them. I think they both suffer from the same problem. I did like the
:24:15. > :24:20.render, but exactly as Karen says, I thought it was beautiful in 3D,
:24:20. > :24:29.but in two dimensions, I did not get the same reaction. But it is
:24:29. > :24:37.worth bearing in mind, that Martin Scorsese's documentary about the
:24:37. > :24:47.American humorist which he did... The George Harrison film is
:24:47. > :24:48.
:24:48. > :24:52.absolutely superb. And finally, Alexander Payne, what about him?
:24:52. > :25:01.don't think it is his strongest work, I have to say. I liked it
:25:01. > :25:06.more the second time, but I still cannot get Sideways out of my mind.
:25:06. > :25:10.Now, what about the big one, Best Picture? It is a controversial line
:25:10. > :25:16.up this year, with some notable absentees and some questionable
:25:16. > :25:20.appearances. Until last year, only five films made it to Best Picture
:25:20. > :25:27.nominee. Now, in the second year of having 10, there's a much wider
:25:27. > :25:32.range, everything from a 3D children's story to a silent movie.
:25:32. > :25:35.Oscar watchers will know that films involving loss, race, struggle and
:25:36. > :25:43.depravity tend to appeal, especially when set in America's
:25:43. > :25:47.more troubled times. The Help fits that bill, a story about black
:25:47. > :25:57.maids set during the most turbulent civil rights era in American
:25:57. > :25:57.
:25:57. > :26:06.history. Then there is that tear- jerker War Horse, set in World War
:26:06. > :26:16.1. In a similar vein, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close addresses
:26:16. > :26:24.
:26:24. > :26:29.the aftermath of 9/11. Then there is The Tree Of Life. The Hawaiian
:26:29. > :26:33.drama of The Descendants also boasts several winning ingredients,
:26:34. > :26:40.including strong child performances. But then maybe this is the year for
:26:40. > :26:45.something different. Moneyball is a clever, witty approach to the
:26:45. > :26:54.perennial film topic of baseball. And Woody Allen's Midnight In Paris
:26:54. > :27:04.is a whimsical stroll down artistic memory lane. This is a writer, Gil
:27:04. > :27:05.
:27:05. > :27:15.Pender. Hemingway. Hemingway? liked my book. I loved all your
:27:15. > :27:16.
:27:16. > :27:20.work. Nostalgia is certainly a big theme among the nominees. The
:27:20. > :27:30.Artist pays homage to American silent films in early Hollywood. It
:27:30. > :27:35.
:27:35. > :27:39.has been a runaway success at every awards ceremony this season. So,
:27:39. > :27:44.should the Academy play it safe this year with all the standards,
:27:44. > :27:49.or will it uncharacteristically take a more radical option? So,
:27:49. > :27:57.finally, we come to talk about The Artist. This is a pretty brave
:27:57. > :28:00.thing to do, a black-and-white, silent film. I got a call from my
:28:00. > :28:06.brother who said, I have got a pirate copy, it is the worst I have
:28:06. > :28:11.ever had. Tell me he was kidding me. But am waiting for the 3D version.
:28:11. > :28:15.I am surprised how much I enjoyed it. I thought it might be fun for
:28:15. > :28:23.short movie, I did not know if they could sustain it, but they did. It
:28:24. > :28:29.is charming, and in bad times, it is lovely to go back to the past.
:28:29. > :28:33.loved this. I know there is a backlash against it, I am lucky
:28:33. > :28:38.because I saw it last year for reviewing purposes. They are the
:28:38. > :28:43.most likeable film couple in such a long time. He has a face you just
:28:43. > :28:47.want to see crack into a smile. And she is beautiful. It is not a
:28:47. > :28:50.particularly strong year, but if this were to win Best Picture on
:28:50. > :28:58.Sunday night, it would be my favourite Best Picture for as long
:28:58. > :29:03.as I can remember. Is there any depth to it? It is entertaining, if
:29:03. > :29:09.there is any depth, it is the fact that perhaps we want something
:29:09. > :29:17.which is wholesome entertainment, and we like to see a nice actor who
:29:17. > :29:22.will work for sausages. But no, I would not say there is any depth.
:29:22. > :29:26.We all work for sausages, we have to. I don't think you expect depth
:29:26. > :29:32.from a film like this. There are other films which will do it. This
:29:32. > :29:40.is wholesome, it is nice, and this film has been promoted for long,
:29:40. > :29:47.long time. I saw the trailer for it more than a year ago. It has had a
:29:47. > :29:51.lot of marketing. I think it is more than that, I think it is an
:29:51. > :29:56.astonishing achievement, to make a silent film in this day and age. I
:29:56. > :30:01.think the bravery of it is astounding. If you had seen that
:30:01. > :30:07.script...? I would have given it a lot of consideration. I would have
:30:07. > :30:11.thought it was an art-house movie. We have all taken it a bit too much
:30:11. > :30:16.for granted. I think it is a remarkably good film, a film which
:30:16. > :30:21.has a lot about film, a lot about the state of film, and the kind of
:30:21. > :30:29.film which we have come to expect, and it reminds us of something
:30:29. > :30:34.which was really rather special about film. I keep thinking about
:30:34. > :30:38.singing In the Rain, Gene Kelly, it has got all of that, the dog and
:30:38. > :30:46.the girl and the story, and the fall from grace and the recovery,
:30:46. > :30:56.it is wonderful. There is a theory that for a really good film, you
:30:56. > :30:56.
:30:56. > :30:59.should be able to watch it with the Should we have done that War Horse?
:30:59. > :31:04.Yeah, here's the thing the narrator of the book is the horse and that
:31:04. > :31:09.is fine. On screen you lose that. I don't know why, he's psychic. He
:31:09. > :31:17.can understand what everyone says. Why he could not chat I don't know.
:31:17. > :31:23.He could just go the Mr Ed route. So that's, it just becomes so eped
:31:23. > :31:28.soic, because the horse is the focus of the thing, and the horse
:31:28. > :31:32.is not super exciting to watch and you can hear what it says, it never
:31:32. > :31:39.compels you. OK it's Devon. Now it's Germany. The war scenes are
:31:39. > :31:47.great. OK, now it's, now it's a French girl. Now she's gone. You
:31:47. > :31:52.can't invest in it at all. What you mean the horse is not working for
:31:52. > :31:55.sausages. You have said how disappointed you are with Steven
:31:55. > :31:59.Spielberg because it's too sentimental for your taste. I don't
:31:59. > :32:06.know what it is. Maybe you hit a certain point in your career and
:32:06. > :32:14.you don't hit the mark as often. I think he's been inconsistent for a
:32:14. > :32:19.decade-and-a-half. If I was Duncan Jones with Planet Of The Apes or
:32:19. > :32:25.Vaughn with X-Men, there are so many films overlooked. Shame is one
:32:25. > :32:29.and Limitless. None of the films I liked were nominated. And a film
:32:29. > :32:34.that was nominated Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, last week our
:32:34. > :32:39.panel slated that film, all of them. I'm probably in a minority. I
:32:40. > :32:46.actually loved this film. I really D I think this is, I mean, I just
:32:46. > :32:49.don't think people get this film. They, because of 9/11, but 9/11 is
:32:49. > :32:53.not really what it's about. It's about a little boy's journey. It's
:32:53. > :32:56.about a boy trying to make sense of something. The little boy suffering
:32:56. > :33:04.from Asperger's and he's annoying, but he's supposed to be. Then he
:33:04. > :33:08.becomes extremely moving. It's a wonderful film. I think Stephen
:33:08. > :33:14.Dolbry is a fantastically good director. I suppose it might appeal
:33:14. > :33:20.to the academy. I suppose so. They will need a longer wick. He was so
:33:20. > :33:23.annoying with his tambourine. is what really annoys me, I'm sorry,
:33:23. > :33:29.this annoys me about the attitude towards this little boy. There are
:33:29. > :33:34.kids like this and they are like this, who have this obsession,
:33:34. > :33:39.Asperger's kids... Then it should have the courage to say that. He
:33:39. > :33:43.says he was tested and it wasn't difintive. It's clearly about that,
:33:43. > :33:47.clearly. They should man up and say so. No, it's not. That would be
:33:47. > :33:51.saying we want you to bear this in mind in order to like the film.
:33:51. > :33:54.bring it up if you don't want me to bear it in mind. Because the
:33:54. > :33:59.audience has to dot work. That's one of the problems. You're going
:33:59. > :34:05.to agree to disagree. Another film based ond a very difficult time in
:34:05. > :34:09.America's history is The Help a best selling book. We have talked
:34:09. > :34:12.about Viola Davis's performance, but best picture? I wouldn't say so,
:34:12. > :34:18.no. There are strong performances. I think there's a pace problem with
:34:18. > :34:22.this. I've read the book and I don't usually like to compare the
:34:22. > :34:27.two, but it's, it's an important book and I think it's an important
:34:27. > :34:31.film. I think it's an important film primarily, for me, as a critic,
:34:31. > :34:35.to see wonderful actresses and actors that don't generally get
:34:35. > :34:41.that kind of format. More about performances than the film itself?
:34:41. > :34:48.To be honest, I was drunk when I watched it. I wan out on a night
:34:48. > :34:53.out, and I came in and watched it, so I don't think I can really
:34:53. > :34:58.comment. There is a problem with it. It's very slow paced. It's charming
:34:58. > :35:01.and likeable and everyone in it is brave and nice or properly
:35:01. > :35:07.villainous and the lines are clearly drawn. It's fine. But it's
:35:07. > :35:11.kind of a little simplistic. There was a very good set of fake Oscar
:35:11. > :35:17.posters built and shown on Facebook over the last few weeks and the
:35:17. > :35:24.spoof caption they gave this was "white people solve racism - you're
:35:24. > :35:27.welcome black people." That sums up this film too accurately I'm afraid.
:35:27. > :35:31.Those are our predictions. We take no responsibility for any losses
:35:31. > :35:34.you may incur at the bookies on Sunday. When the red carpet is
:35:34. > :35:38.rolled up and the frocks are back in the shops, what difference does
:35:39. > :35:44.an Oscar make? Still viewed as the summit of movie making success, it
:35:44. > :35:48.seems the results of winning are, well, variable actually.
:35:48. > :35:52.For big studios the Oscars are the focus of the entire year. Millions
:35:52. > :35:56.are poured into well honed promotional campaigns. They get it
:35:56. > :35:59.right it means big bucks. Warner Brothers, extremely lud and
:35:59. > :36:06.incredibly close was playing in six theatres on the weekend of release.
:36:06. > :36:11.Now it's playing in over 2,500. The Weinstein brothers made millions,
:36:11. > :36:17.lost them and made them again through successfully and sometimes
:36:17. > :36:27.personally promoting films like The King's Speech and The Artist. Hugo
:36:27. > :36:27.
:36:27. > :36:31.and My Week With Marilyn also makes the grade this year.
:36:31. > :36:34.For the smaller indie films you might think an Oscar would make
:36:34. > :36:40.even more of a difference. This year the benefit of nomination for
:36:40. > :36:45.art house film Pina is questionable. It's only added a modest $600,000
:36:45. > :36:51.to its US domestic growth since the 24th January nominations, compared
:36:51. > :36:57.to a yield just shy of $3.5 million added to The Artist's coffers which
:36:57. > :37:00.is backed by the Weinsteins. Do smaller companies lack the
:37:00. > :37:04.distribution power and marketing thrust to break through the glass
:37:04. > :37:10.ceiling and capitalise on their Oscar success? Well, there's no
:37:10. > :37:13.hard and fast rule. Crash in 2006, which usurped the favourite
:37:13. > :37:17.Brokeback Mountain for the best picture award made just over $9
:37:17. > :37:24.million in its opening weekend. However, following its Oscar wins
:37:24. > :37:27.that year, it managed high returns grocer short of $1 billion
:37:27. > :37:32.worldwide. While an Oscar or two might look nice in Clooney cln's
:37:32. > :37:37.loo, it isn't always the case that an Oscar can lead to better and
:37:37. > :37:42.bigger job offers for actors and film makers. Linda Blair, more or
:37:42. > :37:48.less exorcised herself from her own career following her nod for Best
:37:48. > :37:53.Actress. Roberto Benini has disappeared from public view after
:37:53. > :37:58.life is beautiful. And Michael Chimino who won best director for
:37:58. > :38:06.the deer hunter in 1978 never sustained the success of his iconic
:38:06. > :38:13.film. Oscar does sometimes spot talent early on. Angela Land sbury
:38:13. > :38:20.was nominated in 1944 for her first film Gas light. If the economic and
:38:20. > :38:30.career benefits of an Oscar is dubious does the kued os come from
:38:30. > :38:31.
:38:31. > :38:39.A report disclosed that Oscar voters are nearly 94% kau caution
:38:39. > :38:45.and nearly 77% male and with a median age of 72. Why then, if
:38:45. > :38:49.there are a bunch of white middle aged men making predictable choices
:38:49. > :38:53.dot Oscars continue to grip hod wood? Is it the joy of industry
:38:53. > :38:57.recognition, the hope they might be one of the lucky ones for whom an
:38:57. > :39:01.Oscar means a fortune or is it just the glamour of the timeless glitzy
:39:01. > :39:06.ceremony? Mark, it seems that getting an
:39:06. > :39:11.Oscar isn't always a game changer. You have Halle Berry following her
:39:11. > :39:15.Oscar with cat woman, it's a curse as well. There's so many bad career
:39:15. > :39:21.moves that come after an Oscar, maybe you get stage fright. It is a
:39:21. > :39:26.game changer in your price. We are talking to a guy who we're going to
:39:26. > :39:31.have to wait if he wins the Oscar will pay five times the amount if
:39:31. > :39:35.he didn't win. On one hand it would be great to have an Oscar winner on
:39:35. > :39:39.the poster. Who is it? I'll tell you upstairs. There's a reason why,
:39:39. > :39:42.I probably shouldn't speak ahead of Bryan, a lot of these films are not
:39:42. > :39:47.making a lot of money with the films that they're nominated with.
:39:47. > :39:50.If you win, it's time to actually pay your mortgage and put your kids
:39:50. > :39:56.through school. We think that stars make all this money, they don't
:39:56. > :39:59.always. They don't, that's true. I think the Oscars has become a very
:39:59. > :40:04.cynical exercise frankly. I think the whole thing is they kind of
:40:04. > :40:07.squeeze all these films through a tube that comes out usually between
:40:07. > :40:12.Christmas and January. They try to get all the films out then. A lot
:40:12. > :40:15.of films fall by the way. A lot of films don't manifest. You don't see
:40:15. > :40:19.them, especially with the screeners. I get loads of screeners at this
:40:19. > :40:24.time. I think it's not what it used to be, which used to be the work
:40:24. > :40:28.over a period of a year. The -- The Artist is ironically, part of that
:40:28. > :40:34.over the year. As you say it was showed in Illinois way back. It
:40:34. > :40:39.does mean that you earn more money as an actor. But the studio system
:40:39. > :40:43.is forcing it. We still love them don't we? We do. It focuses
:40:43. > :40:48.everyone's attention on film and on a particular kind of film for a
:40:48. > :40:52.certain period of the year. For the rest of the year you go OK it's art
:40:52. > :40:55.festivals time, it's Cannes, Berlin or Venice or London. You get a
:40:55. > :41:00.different kind of film, an interesting film. Yeah, why not
:41:00. > :41:04.have fun at the Oscars. Loads of people get lots of extra money, not
:41:04. > :41:08.just actors, caterers and people who park cars. Let's get some of
:41:08. > :41:13.your predictions. What do you think for best actor and actress? Best
:41:13. > :41:17.actor will go to Jean Dujardin and I would like it to go to Jean
:41:17. > :41:22.Dujardin with a tiny bit of Brad Pitt. Best Actress to Meryl Streep.
:41:22. > :41:32.I would like it to go to oh, God they're all terrible films. I would
:41:32. > :41:32.
:41:32. > :41:40.like women to get better films next year. Best director, I don't know.
:41:40. > :41:43.I think it's The Artist all the way. And Jean Dujardin. Meryl. Though I
:41:43. > :41:49.think Rooney Mara gave an extraordinary performance in the
:41:49. > :41:54.girl with the dragon tattoo. say the same thing. The Artist will
:41:54. > :41:59.sweep the board. Meryl Streep is unbeatable. Who can stand against
:41:59. > :42:06.that? Who would you like to win? think Streep deserves it. I think
:42:06. > :42:12.it's obvious, but she's great. can be beaten. That's by Viola
:42:12. > :42:17.Davis. I think it will be a sweep with the The Artist. For the major
:42:17. > :42:21.categories any way. Jean Dujardin for best actor? Yes, that's right.
:42:21. > :42:28.It's too novel and delightful and people are too excited about it.
:42:28. > :42:38.And it's never happening again. I think this is one time. It's the
:42:38. > :42:43.
:42:43. > :42:49.first silent movie sints 1929 to be We hope you get sent one of those
:42:50. > :42:54.scripts. Please send me a silent movie. That's us finished with
:42:54. > :42:58.Oscar for another year. See whether our panel got it gloriously right
:42:58. > :43:03.or royally wrong on the live Academy Awards broadcast on Sky
:43:03. > :43:05.movies in the middle of Sunday night. Thanks to my panel, Brian
:43:05. > :43:09.Cox and Natalie Haynes Mark Millar and Karen Krizanovich. Remember you
:43:09. > :43:13.can find out more about tonight's show and what's coming up soon on
:43:13. > :43:20.our website. You can always get in touch by e-mail and Twitter. Next
:43:20. > :43:26.week, Kirsty's here to discuss a new book from John Lanchester, and
:43:26. > :43:30.on his 70th birthday, can't believe, that the life and work of Lou Reid.
:43:30. > :43:36.It's only been two weeks since we last played you the Muppets on The
:43:36. > :43:40.Review Show, but it went down so well, we thought we'd do it again.
:43:40. > :43:50.Here a nominee for Best Song, it's Man or Muppet.
:43:50. > :43:50.
:43:50. > :43:54.# Am I a man or am a Muppet? # If I'm a Muppet, well then I'm a
:43:54. > :43:58.very manly Muppet # Am I a Muppet... #
:43:58. > :44:03.I always believe in other people. Sooner or later you've got to
:44:03. > :44:07.believe in yourself. # If I'm a man that makes me a
:44:07. > :44:10.Muppet of a man # That's what growing up is, becoming
:44:10. > :44:16.who you want to be. # Here I go again
:44:16. > :44:22.# I'm always running out of time # I think I made up my mind #
:44:22. > :44:32.I don't care what anybody says. I believe in you.