Fences (Denzel Washington, 2016)

[Roscoe]

Two big contenders in the Best Actress race this year:

20th Century Women
Fences

After losing to the Inevitable Meryl a couple years back, I'd say Ms. Davis is a lock for nomination and win for FENCES.

[domino harvey]

She'll def get the nomination, but has to face Portman, Stone, and Adams with three strongly-regarded perfs, so I wouldn't go calling the race

[Ribs]

Apparently at least *some* circles are considering moving her to supporting where there's not really any clear competition so far so as to guarantee it as a win (not just for her, but for a POC in a major category). It's the first rumblings of category fraud that have circled this year and won't be the last.

I desperately want to believe this is somehow going to be Annette Bening's year, though.

[Werewolf by Night]

It's the first rumblings of category fraud that have circled this year and won't be the last.

In the original run of the play, Davis' role of Rose Maxson was considered a "featured" (or supporting) role for both the Tony Awards and Drama Desk Awards, not a lead role. So there's precedence there, even though Davis was nominated for the Best Leading Actress in a Play Tony for the 2010 Broadway revival.

[Roscoe]

Davis won Best Actress for the revival -- the others mentioned are possibilities, of course, but I think the surprise loss to Streep and the desire for a "POC" to win will carry her to the statue.

One never knows, of course.

[Salamanca]

How is Washington as an auteur? Never saw Antwone Fisher or The Great Debaters, so would be a disappointment if great material such as this is mishandled. August Wilson deserves better since it's a first. Then again major plays usually disappoint in the transition esp recently, thinking of The Crucible. Maybe why Death of a Salesman hasn't had definitive treatment

[Kirkinson]

You don't have to be an "auteur" to make a great film. And how can you say August Wilson "deserves better" if you admit you've never seen Washington's previous directorial efforts? Washington won a Tony for playing this part in the Broadway revival (as did Davis) and knows the material as well as anyone alive. I'm not saying it's definitely going to be a great film, and sure, it could be a misfire, but there's scarcely any reason to expect that.

[Ribs]

I don't think it'd be an uncommon opinion to say that Denzel Washington would need to really screw up to not walk away with several Oscars; so long as the movie is just in the vestiges of good to great it should become an immediate front runner in most categories.

The Great Debaters (which I have seen) is fine; like most actors that direct, it's not terrible or particularly impressive but at least has a basic competence so as to not offend anyone's sensibilities severely.

[domino harvey]

He's not the front runner for either of his categories at prediction sites, I wouldn't get ahead of yourself with claims like that. I suspect he will be easily nominated for Director and Actor unless this is another high profile misfire (though I think we already found out this year's with Lee's film)

[Ribs]

I think he's not the frontrunner based on the whole not-premiered-yet thing; there is still a modest risk given this (and Silence) are pretty much the big high-profile titles that haven't played anywhere yet (I'm maintaining hope that somehow Rules Don't Apply will swing into the mix somewhere along the line as well). GoldDerby and the other sites have a strange bias towards titles the most people have seen which I understand but honestly listing stuff like Hell or High Water as more likely to get nominations than some of the down-ballot stuff that nobody's seen yet is ludicrous.

The two categories I think he's likely to win are Picture and Actor; Director seems likely to go elsewhere if this film is good but not great given the whole actor-makes-workmanlike-film thing. Actor is an especially weak category this year, so I can very much imagine him being able to break through there once again.

Also I don't know if the reception to Billy Lynn has quite reached "misfire" - I'd more liken it to something like Steve Jobs last year that premiered to okay to good reviews but failed to meet the very high expectations, resulting in few nominations come January.

[domino harvey]

I think given the new Oscar Best Picture voting structure we will see the most broadly-liked film win again, which right now is already La La Land. But, as you say, we shall see what happens once people actually see this, as we are both armchair predicting an unknown quantity

[Salamanca]

You don't have to be an "auteur" to make a great film. And how can you say August Wilson "deserves better" if you admit you've never seen Washington's previous directorial efforts? Washington won a Tony for playing this part in the Broadway revival (as did Davis) and knows the material as well as anyone alive. I'm not saying it's definitely going to be a great film, and sure, it could be a misfire, but there's scarcely any reason to expect that.

Never suggested auteurs only make good films. I misspoke. Meant Washington as a director and August Wilson deserves excellent treatment.

[The Narrator Returns]

Viola Davis will be campaigning for Supporting Actress for this

[domino harvey]

Smart move on her part (though poor Michelle Williams!)

[Ribs]

This screened for SAG membership yesterday, so there's no proper reviews, but buzz out of that is super positive, with raves for pretty much all the main people involved.

[Luke M]

Fences was pretty good. The biggest criticism I can give it as that it probably worked better as a play -- it's almost entirely dialogue. The performances are there. Denzel Washington reminds us why he's one of the greats but Viola Davis is the real star here. It's the best performance of her career. The movie has great acting throughout with a number of powerful scenes, however, I found it altogether forgettable. One of those films people won't think about again until Oscar night and then forget about forever.

[Brian C]

I think, sadly, that this is a pretty mediocre film. It has some nice performances, but Washington really goes all in on the filmed-play staginess in a way that'll make it a top choice for in-class viewings by unimaginative high school English teachers for decades to come.

And Washington himself gives a performance that feels like an impression of Jay Pharoah's impression of him; it's completely at odds with the sensitive, naturalistic performances of everyone else in the movie. It frankly feels like a really selfish move on his part as the director of the film to indulge himself this way as an actor, especially given the dull way it's staged ... all the better to show himself off as an actor, I guess. He's always had a bit too much of a self-conscious movie star vibe to his acting for my tastes, but here he's so obviously mugging for his own camera that I really resented him for it.

[dda1996a]

How theatrical is this film? If it a filmed play I'll probably lose all interest

[Brian C]

Its roots as a play are so obvious that, if you had never heard of a "play" and had no prior conception of what one was, you would watch this movie and have the idea to invent it.