Monday, July 18, 2011

Could Harry Potter be a Best Picture contender?

Possibly, according to E! Online:

Harry Potter was very, very good to Hollywood this past weekend.

Will Hollywood finally be very, very good to Harry Potter at the Oscars?

"Hopefully, it will be given the attention it deserves," Warner Bros. exec Dan Fellman told us Sunday.

The first seven Potter films combined to earn nine nominations and zero wins. More than that, not one of the movies was seriously in contention for Best Picture.

But if the history-making opening weekend of the franchise's finale, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, isn't enough of a game-changer, then the film's critical reception may be.

Said Fellman: "The reviews are sensational."

True enough, HP8 has a 97 percent rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the highest of any of the series' films, and higher than any of last year's Best Picture nominees, save Toy Story 3.

On the downside, the last film to burst out of the gate (nearly) as big and acclaimed as Deathly Hallows: Part 2 was The Dark Knight, which, of course, did not get nominated for Best Picture.

On the upside, Harry Potter is no Batman.

For one thing, post-Dark Knight, the Best Picture field was expanded to include 10 nominees (though since revised to include as many as 10 nominees).

For another thing, the ailing Hollywood of today owes the boy wizard more than the booming Hollywood of 2008 owed the Caped Crusader.

And then there's this: Per a tweet Sunday from Entertainment Weekly's Dave Karger, Academy members have seen Deathly Hallows: Part 2, "and loved it."

So, yes, it's plausible, if not possible: Potter has one more trick up his sleeve.


  1. I still have my doubts about the film's Oscar prospects, thought its status as a cultural phenomenon cannot be denied.

  2. In a field of 10, it gets in. The new system...I highly doubt it. Which is a shame...because as pure cinema, it is fantastic in its execution...

  3. I think it's as good a movie as The Return of the King. And it's also the conclusion of the biggest thing to happen to movies in a long time.

    It might suffer from the fact that the first few films were "childish and naive", which might have influenced som people's perception of the later movies, but this is as "grown up" a movie as there's been all year. It's not, as many other fantasy movies (like LOTR), about the evil ones and the good ones, as much as it's about the good and the evil in all of us. It's about fear, loss, sacrifice and so on. Not really subjects suited for children.

    I think (and hope) the Academy will honor this movie. Not only is it one of the best of the year so far, but no movie franchise have ever meant so much to so many people.

  4. I agree with Hr. Cules. The movie is very advanced and touches on many issues our world has faced. It touches on themes that compare with Nazi Germany. The Nazi's are like the deatheaters and the Mudbloods are like the Jews. This is such a powerful film that explores the good and evils of humanity, but sadly people choose to ride it off as a children's film about witches and wizards. This film not only was perfectly adapted from brilliant source material but also has phenomenal performances from it's supporting cast. If Alan Rickman does not get a nomination for this movie it will be a true travesty.

  5. Helena Bonham Carter and Ralph Fiennes are also brilliant