Towering Masterpiece "The Tourist" Given Its Due by HFPA

HOLLYWOOD, Calif. - Joining the ranks of such tours de force as "Bobby," "Nine" and of course Tom Shadyac's seminal "Patch Adams," the comedic spy thriller "The Tourist" was given the most prestigious and least ludicrous honor in the film industry this morning, garnering a Best Picture nomination from the Golden Globes.

The Hollywood Foreign Press Association on Tuesday announced its selections of the best the film industry had to offer in 2010. While several high-profile films made the cut - among them "Black Swan," "Inception," "The King's Speech" and That One About Boner Pills and Parkinson's Disease - the one that seemed to leave all of them in the dust was "The Tourist," directed by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck ("The Lives of Others"). As anyone who follows the film industry can attest, "The Tourist" was the defining film of an otherwise underwhelming year, and perhaps a generation as well. Deftly exemplifying the concerns of a world in tumult, the film was most definitely not savaged by critics and audiences alike, no matter what its 20 percent Tomatometer rating might suggest. In other words, rumors of it being a complete piece of shit have been greatly exaggerated.

One member of the HFPA put it another way: "Look," voting member Günther Henckel von Donnersmarck said, "if you combine ze Tomatometer ratings of 'Ze Tourist' und deine fellow Best Picture nominee 'Burlesque,' you almost have a Fresh rating. Look at it zat way, ja? Wir haben sehr sehr viel integrity."

Still, despite the self-evident qualities of "The Tourist" as both a great work of art and an entirely new way of looking at the medium, many philistines questioned its inclusion on the final slate of nominees. No one questioned the fact that it turned a mirror around on society and forced us to ask the most challenging questions about ourselves, our values, and of course our bodies; rather, it was the decision to designate the film a "comedy," rather than as the piercing human drama that it really is.

HFPA representatives scoffed at such criticism. Said voting member Sebastian Henckel von Donnersmarck: "We have ze highest possible standards here at ze HFPA. In 'Ze Tourist' we saw a film zat deserved to be placed alongside zat movie where Robin Williams played a psychopath who stole children's medicine und zen put on a fake red nose und made everyone laugh until zey all died of terminal diseases."

Added fellow voting member Matthias Henckel von Donnersmarck: "That movie was both a great drama and a hilarious comedy! Ich liebte es!"

There are those in the critical community who supported the film and no doubt are overjoyed at its inclusion in the year-end awards race. Rolling Stone's Peter Travers said of "The Tourist": "It's a knockout! It'll have you begging for more! It's a whiz-bang action crackerjack! Wow! ****! Irresistible! You'll love it! Jaw-dropping! This is why we go to the movies! Spellbinding! It sneaks up and floors you! Dazzling! It's a dazzler! Wow!"

And Armond White of the New York Press effusively praised "The Tourist" thusly: "'Black Swan' sucks."

But the majority of bloggers and film critics can't see a timeless, ahead-of-its-time masterpiece like "The Tourist" for what it is and simply accept that it's getting exactly what it deserves, and so continue to pan the selection, pointing to so-called "more deserving" comedies and/or musicals such as "Greenberg," "Toy Story 3," "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World," "Please Give," "Date Night," "Tangled," "Tamara Drewe," "How to Train Your Dragon" or "pretty much any other movie that came out except that one with Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp."

Many have claimed that the selection further de-legitimizes an award show that has a reputation for questionable selections and an over-emphasis on star power - "The Tourist," starring arguably the two biggest stars in the industry, being a classic case in point. Some might even wonder if anyone in the Hollywood Foreign Press Association has even seen the fucking movie.

"Ja," said voting member Wolfgang Henckel von Donnersmarck, who wishes to remain anonymous. He added: "But OK, OK, ve admit ve never saw 'Bobby.' Es tut mir leid!"

The Golden Globe Awards will be presented sometime in January when you'll probably be busy doing something else and forget about them and then end up just looking for all the funniest Ricky Gervais bits on YouTube.

One prominent HFPA member, Maximilian Henckel von Donnersmarck, insisted that the association has nothing but the greatest artistic integrity in mind when putting together its nominations. "Wir haben nichts aber die grösste künstlerische Vollständigkeit im Verstand, wenn wir unsere Nennungen zusammenfügen," he said, adding, finally, "Können Sie mir sagen, wo der Bahnhof ist?"

bxAv110 bxAv110 bxAv110

Brawlers, Bawlers and BASTERDS: The Golden Globe noms are in

Since Jeremy was too much of a pussy to stay up til 6:30 in the morning to see the juicy announcement of the always-curious Golden Globe nominations, I get to take it upon myself to issue a full report. And by "full," I mean "half," since about half of these movies haven't even been released yet. (You know what HAS been released, Hollywood Foreign Press? "You, the Living." Shit yeah it has. And it's foreign, just like you.)

The most deserving honors went to Quentin Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds," which DID, in fact, get nominated for Best Picture and Best Director despite falling a bit out of the awards-season consciousness in recent weeks. In the process, it settled a gentlemanly wager between myself and Jeremy, which he won. Bravo, Mr. Mathews - your faith in the HFPA served you well. Tarantino's dizzyingly inventive bit of cinematic ecstasy will be going up against expected nominees like James Cameron's "Avatar" (which we'll see Thursday night and review shortly thereafter), the Oscars' newest cuddly favorite, "Up in the Air," Lee Daniels' overwrought but well-acted awards-bait "Precious" (I'm not typing that full fucking title, even if what I'm writing in these parentheses is significantly longer) and Kathryn Bigelow's excellent "The Hurt Locker," which has been cleaning up this awards season. Critics and award-givers just can't get enough of it. It's like a drug or something. (You know what else is like a drug? WAR. WAR IS A DRUG. That's what "The Hurt Locker" told me, anyway. It was very subtle.)

The big wild card coming into December was whether or not Cameron's well-documented risks (financial, technological, etc.) on "Avatar" would pay off, either in box-office receipts or end-of-the-year prestige. We'll see the numbers a few weeks from now, but early acclaim has been rolling in, and the Golden Globes lend added credibility. What will be really interesting to see is whether or not it can break the Academy's unofficial embargo on nominating science-fiction films for Best Picture. You wanna know what the last sci-fi movie to get an Oscar BP nod was?

I'll give you a second to guess.

...

It was "E.T."

That was 27 years ago. No sci-fi in the top category since then. No "Children of Men." No "Minority Report." No "Brazil." No "Dark City" or "The Matrix." No "Terminator 2." No "Being John Malkovich" or "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." No "The Iron Giant" or "WALL-E" or "Akira." No "Gattaca" or "12 Monkeys" or "Solaris" or "Aliens" or, yeah I'll say it, "Primer." Not even something barely sci-fi like "The Truman Show." (And yes, I'm differentiating between sci-fi - which is science-based - and fantasy/horror like "Lord of the Rings," "Field of Dreams," "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," "The Sixth Sense," "Benjamin Button," "The Green Mile," "Babe," etc.) With ten nomination slots open this year, you'd have to think "Avatar" could finally end that streak.

Or they could just nominate "Precious" ten times.

Personally, I've been awaiting "Avatar" with equal levels intrigue and apprehension - because, as great and consistent as Cameron was in his sci-fi, pre-"Titanic" days, I wasn't sure if this was going to be an honest-to-God comeback for him, or just two-and-a-half hours of wanking off to his pet technologies. I've been burned by George Lucas and Robert Zemeckis one too many times over the last decade to be blindly optimistic. But let's hope for the best, shall we?

Anyway, back to the task at hand. This year's Globes did not disappoint when it came to a pair of charming traditions. The first - and my favorite Globe tradition - is to always nominate at least one movie for Best Picture that no one particularly likes, or at least that no one loves, but which may come with some imaginary prestige. (Or not.) Often, these are very, very bad movies. It's almost like the HFPA dares itself to fuck with those silly Americans by seeing what random movie they can get away with nominating. Case in point: "Bobby," the recent remake of "The Producers," "The Phantom of the Opera," "Man on the Moon," "Across the Universe" (even though I personally liked it), "Legends of the Fall," and, yes, "Patch fucking Adams."

This year, the HFPA actually outdid itself in this regard, nominating both "Nine" (whose existence I find philosophically absurd considering the source material) - directed by Rob Marshall (ugh) - and Nancy Meyers' "It's Complicated" in the BP Comedy/Musical category. The two movies, unseen by Jeremy and I as of yet, have scored a robust 26 percent and 33 percent, respectively, on the Tomatometer. Other nominees for Best Comedy/Musical are "The Hangover" (though, unfortunately, no supporting actor nod for Zach Galifianakis), "(500) Days of Summer" and "Julie & Julia."

The HFPA, of course, overlooked the most hilarious movie of the year, "Death in Love."

(What? That was a serious drama? Rats!)

The second Globe tradition continuing this year is that, due to an amendment in the HFPA's bylaws, it must give Meryl Streep an acting nomination for every movie in which she appears. (Think I'm kidding? She was nominated for "Mamma fucking Mia.") This year, that means she's going head-to-head against herself in Best Actress - Comedy/Musical for "Julie & Julia" and "It's Complicated" - which also, I must add, beat out the Coen Brothers' "A Serious Man" (among others) for a Best Screenplay nod. Hey, I'm not making a value judgment for a movie I haven't seen - I promise. I'm just presenting the facts here, folks.

Other nominations of note include the great Jeff Bridges for Best Actor in the upcoming "Crazy Heart," Carey Mulligan for lead actress in "An Education," relative unknown Michael Stuhlbarg for Best Actor (Comedy) in the Coens' stunning "A Serious Man" and Matt Damon in one of his most fascinating performances in "The Informant!" - which also features my favorite score of the year, for which Marvin Hamlisch was given a Globe nod as well.

And, as expected, Christoph Waltz is up for supporting actor - and an almost certain win - for his diabolically brilliant performance in "Inglourious Basterds."

And, as if it even needed to be stated, the Golden Globes once again overlooked one of the four greatest dramas in the history of television, LOST, in the Best TV Drama category. But hey, at least a daringly original and rapidly evolving show like "House" got honored. (Man, that crazy doctor keeps me on my toes. I never know what he's going to do next!)

Only 49 more days til LOST!!

Click here for the full slate of Golden Globe nominations.

bxAv110 bxAv110 bxAv110