Previous: Papa Manoel Turns 100
Next: Sundance, R.I.P.?

How Do You Say "Oscar Scandal" in Italian?

by Scott Foundas
January 13, 2009 12:40 PM
STILL4.jpgOne year ago this week, I wrote with astonishment and anger about the omission of Romanian director Cristian Mungiu's Cannes-winning abortion drama 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' nine-film "shortlist" for the 2007 Foreign Language Film Oscar. That article, entitled "How Do You Say 'Oscar Scandal' in Romanian?", went on to become one of the most viewed and commented-upon entries ever posted on this blog. It was also among the first of many similarly outraged essays that held the feet of the Academy's Foreign Language nominating committee to the fire for what was widely seen as an unconscionable oversight by an organization that prides itself on its dedication to the art of cinema.

Of course, as I noted at the time, the history of the Oscars in general -- and the Foreign Language Oscar in particular -- is written in such blunders, which is why it becomes increasingly difficult with each passing year to afford the awards any serious consideration. Many of the best movies produced around the world never even stand a chance of being recognized by the Academy, either because they don't receive commercial distribution in the U.S., or because they fail to play the political shell game that often determines which films are submitted by their respective countries for the Foreign Language Oscar in the first place. Still, because the Foreign Language Oscar is one of the few Academy awards that can actually have a tangible impact in terms of distribution and box-office (even a Foreign Language nomination is usually enough to guarantee a film's U.S. release), it deserves particularly close scrutiny, and, when necessary, to be called out as a sham.

As it happens, producer and Foreign Language nominating committee chairman Mark Johnson would seem to agree. During his tenure, he has helped to champion several significant rule changes regarding how foreign films are screened and nominated, including a 2006 reform that split the nominating process into two phases -- one in which the entire Foreign Language committee (comprised of several hundred Academy members from all branches) determines the aforementioned "shortlist" of nine Foreign Language finalists, and another in which a blue-ribbon panel featuring ten members from the original committee plus 10 more Academy members hand-picked by Johnson vote to determine the five nominees.

Following last year's affair Roumain, the Academy announced that the Foreign Language nominating process was to be further modified for 2008 so that the "Phase 1" nominating committee would now be responsible for determining only six of the nine shortlisted titles, while the 20-member "Phase 2" committee would select the three additional titles, after first learning the choices of the Phase 1 committee. This, it sounded all but certain, would prevent any such grievous omissions in the future.

And yet, and yet, and yet...here we are on the day of the announcement of the Academy's 2008 Foreign Language Film shortlist, and the news is far from joyous. While one can take consolation in the fact that French director Laurent Cantet's widely admired, Palme d'Or-winning The Class and Israeil director Ari Folman's extraordinary animated documentary Waltz with Bashir are safe for now (along with Austrian director Gotz Spielman's superb revenge drama Revanche), nowhere to be found is Italian director Matteo Garrone's Gomorrah, a blisteringly intense, multi-faceted portrait of the Neapolitan mafia that is not only one of the year's most widely acclaimed films from any country, but has been credited with single-handedly returning Italian cinema to the world cinema spotlight.

Meanwhile, earning a spot on the shortlist was German director Uli Edel's The Baader Meinhof Complex, a docudrama about the titular 1970s terror cell dismissed by our own Ella Taylor (echoing the sentiments of many international critics) as "a cheesy action picture" that "doesn't have an interpretive thought in its event-packed head."

In many ways, the path taken by Gomorrah is uncannily similar to that of 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days. Like the Romanian film, it too premiered in Cannes to a torrent of instant acclaim and, ultimately, a major prize (the Grand Jury Prize) -- making it the first Italian film to do so since Nanni Moretti's The Son's Room in 2001. By last fall, Garrone's film (based on author Roberto Saviano's international bestseller) was an official selection of the Telluride, Toronto and New York film festivals and, by early December, had repeated 4 Months' triumph at the European Film Awards, where in addition to being named the best European film of 2008, it took prizes for direction, screenplay, cinematography and actor Tony Servillo. More recently, Gomorrah was nominated for Best Foreign Film at the Golden Globes (where it lost to Waltz with Bashir) and the upcoming Independent Spirit Awards (where Waltz isn't in the running), and received glowing notices upon its one-week, awards-qualifying run in a single Los Angeles theater back in December.

At the time, Ella Taylor wrote, "The five interwoven narratives in this visceral but disciplined and beautifully acted movie show to devastating effect how ordinary men and women -- and especially vulnerable boys desperate for masculine role models -- get caught up in the seductive violence and are ruthlessly destroyed by the network's hardened henchmen." And in the Los Angeles Times, Kenneth Turan (who went on to include the film on his 2008 top 10 list) praised Gomorrah as "a vividly panoramic film about a pitiless world of criminality." I would only add that, to my mind, Garrone's film does nothing less than rebuild from the ground up one of the most exhausted of movie genres -- the mob movie -- and does so with such deglamorized authenticity that it hardly comes as a surprise to learn that Saviano (who also co-authored the screenplay) has been repeatedly threatened with execution by real members of the Naples mafia.

Writing a few decades ago in the pages of the L.A. Weekly, the critic Michael Ventura proposed that it was the great lie of The Godfather (and, by extension, most mob movies) that they made mafiosos appear to be elegant, dignified, even introspective people, when in fact all one needed to do was look at photos of real-life gangsters to see that most of them had the vacant, dead-eyed expression of people motivated by one sole factor: money. In that respect, Gomorrah may be the most honest mob movie ever made, because it is money that links all of the movie's characters and multiple storylines together in one infernal pact. Everyone in the film lives, as John Guare wrote of the posh Upper East Siders in Six Degrees of Separation, "hand to mouth on a higher plateau." Only, in the case of Gomorrah, that plateau is more often than not a noisy, overcrowded apartment building or a small, ramshackle house on the outskirts of town. Nobody has very much, but what they do have is never enough, and so begins a vicious cycle of debts accounted for in blood and corporate downsizing facilitated by semi-automatic firearms that reverberates from the bowels of Naples to the runways of Paris fashion and the rebuilding of the Twin Towers.

Gomorrah isn't the only notable omission from this year's Foreign Language shortlist; it's merely the most galling. Also MIA are Chilean director Pablo Larrain's singularly disturbing Tony Manero, about a sociopath obsessed with John Travolta's character from Saturday Night Fever, and Kazakh director Sergei Dvortsevoy's magnificent Tulpan, a simple tale of a young sailor who dreams of becoming a shepherd, filmed with no special effects on Kazakhstan's imposing Hunger Steppe. But those movies' Oscar fates were far from foregone conclusions, whereas Gomorrah seemed a veritable shoo-in, particularly given that Italy is second only to France in terms of total nominations and wins in the history of the Academy's Foreign Language category. Perhaps, in the end, Garrone's vision of mob life was simply too violently realistic and lacking in Hollywood romanticism for a group of voters who have time and again showered nominations on the glossiest of Hollywood gangster fare.

Reached for comment on Tuesday afternoon, Foreign Language committee chair Johnson said that he considers this year's roster of finalists "by and large a very strong list," singling out both Revanche and Turkish director Nuri Bilge Ceylan's 3 Monkeys as "difficult, challenging movies [of the sort] that our committee hasn't necessarily embraced in the past." Johnson also points out, rightly so, that while a case can be made for Gomorrah, the real scandal of last year's shortlist wasn't just the omission of a single, high-profile film, but rather of several such films, including France's Persepolis and Germany's The Edge of Heaven. In order for 2008 to rival that particular clusterfuck, The Class or Waltz with Bashir -- or both of them -- would have had to join Gomorrah on the reject list. Whether or not those titles benefited from the Academy's revised rules is a matter on which Johnson understandably declined to comment.

STILL9.jpgI suspect that's all little comfort for Garrone, though perhaps the fact that he's recently been signed by a major Hollywood agency (ICM) will soften the blow. That, and the decision of none other than Martin Scorsese to lend his name as "presenter" for Gomorrah's U.S. release. Thus, from one Oscar bridesmaid to another.
Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBacks (0)
 

Trackbacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://mt.laweekly.com/mt-tb.cgi/100596

 
Comments

There are 11 comments posted for this article.

Scott, I'm gonna disagree with you that this is as glaring an omission as "3-2-1." I think it's just possible that Academy voters found Gomorrah as snooze-inducing as I did.

I'll quote Andy Klein's CityBeat review, which sums up my feelings perfectly:

"Garrone may be trying to give us a panorama of Camorra activity and the ways it twists everyone’s lives, but a little more focus would have helped. It takes forever to learn to distinguish the characters and to figure out what minor characters fit into whose story. But, even if the actors hadn’t included so many lookalikes, the constant intercutting would still have made the film hard to follow. Add to that Garrone’s realistic, faux cinema-verité style, and there’s nothing here to draw us in – nothing particularly interesting or engaging about the stories or the characters."

Agree or not, I think the fact that he and I feel so strongly against the hype on this indicates that it's not entirely a cut and dried case.

An absolutely archaic method. What the hell is wrong with the Academy? Why is the country honored and not the film director? And why only one entry per nation? This is lunacy.

I don't think "Gomorrah" would have deserved to be nominated. Different strokes.

I hope "Waltz with Bashir" wins.

Yes, this is bizarre; I would have expected Gomorrah to be nominated and go on for the win. Granted, I do believe that, as far as foreign language films go, Gomorrah is a strong enough film, and relatively accessible enough, that it has the potential to sell itself in the US market, far more than Three Monkeys or Revanche. I do agree that it's a glaring omission, but still, this year's list is a less egregious collection of middlebrow tripe than last year. It's getting better. And hey, at least they didn't select Zift.

I saw both Gomorrah and Il Divo at Cannes last year and vastly preferred Il Divo. How many Mafia films do we need?

Oscar- schmoscar...
say no more

I, too, was surprised that "Gomorrah" wasn't nominated, but calling "The Baader Meinhof Complex" a "chessy action picture" is ridiculous. The film is fascinating and beautifully done. I appreciated Gomorrah more than I liked it, though in retrospect it's growing on me. But quite a few critics found it emotionless and without focus. So no big scandal here, just a matter of taste. I think this year's list is a huge improvement.

I agree completely - gamorah is a great film and has great cultural significance. It truly deserves academy recognition

Gommorah's brilliance really comes through the second time you see it. It's an easy movie to write off as boring, but I think challenging is a more appropriate word. Gommorah became my favorite movie of last year after watching it a second time and taking time out to really think about every aspect of the story. If you want something easily digested and immediately accessible, try Marley and Me.

The annual awards season is a joke, anyway. The discussions of what should win and why is always over some "for your consideration" ad campaign instead of artistic merit. I gave up on the Academy after what happened with Hoop Dreams.

Just because Gomorrah won't be nominated for an Oscar doesn't make it any less of a cinematic achievement that a group of very talented people risked their lives to make.

How many more mafia movies do we need? None after Gomorrah. We needed this mafia movie to say what the others haven't and de-glamorize these horrendous people. The last shot has no important dialogue in it but speaks volumes about everything we've seen leading up to it.

I have to say that I find "Gomorra" to be one of the most overrated films of 2008. I found it hard to keep track of, or care about, the characters. I fell asleep at some point for a few minutes, but I don't think I really missed much. Of the foreign films submitted for the Oscar, the one I'm missing on the short list is Norway's entry "O' Horten."

Scott Foundas is one of these people who presumes that his taste in movies is better than the rest of us. The fact is that I saw Gomorrah and I hated it for its lack of any character depth and its obscene length. It was also poorly received by the audience in the theater I was in, so it wasn't just me. I don't think that film has any appeal to anyone outside of Naples, so it appropriately was voted out of the short list, thank God. Baader Meinhoff was infinitely better. You shouldn't dismiss it so fast, and I am hoping it gets nominated this morning. Finally, a foreign language film receiving distribution or not in the US has NOTHING AT ALL to do with its Oscar chances, as the committees must attend the majority of ALL submitted films. Why didn't this author bring up "The Band's Visit" from 2007 as being the true scandal? It was deemed ineligible because it had too much English. If you saw the film, you would know why it had to have English. Instead, Israel was forced to submit the inferior Beaufort, which after being nominated, ultimately lost the Oscar to Austria's The Counterfeiters, which would never have beaten out The Band's Visit in the first place! I heard that the filmmakers of Beaufort were behind the drive to get The Band's Visit out of competition, because they wanted their film submitted instead. Now there is a scandal! I predict that Waltz with Bashir will win, because Israel got screwed over last year!

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
All reader comments are subject to our Terms of Use. By clicking "Post", you acknowledge that you have reviewed and agree to these Terms.