THE AWARDS EDITION 2011-2012

By MikeFlemingAwards Honors Are Great, FoxSearchlight Execs Say, But FilmsThat Matter Are Their Real RewardOf all the major studio-affiliated indie-focused divisions to start up in the last 20years, Fox Searchlight has arguably been the most successful, both at the boxoffice(Slumdog Millionaire) and during awards season (Slumdog Millionaire, again, plusBlack Swan, Crazy Heart).38 The Awards Edition 2011-2012 Issue 07Under the guidance of Co-Presidents Stephen Gilula and NancyUtley, Fox Searchlight is in the Oscar ® hunt again this year, with twobest picture finalists – director-writer Alexander Payne’s TheDescendants and acclaimed, inscrutable filmmer TerrenceMalick’s The Tree of Life. In a wide-ranging interviewwith Awardsline/Deadline Hollywood Film Editor MikeFleming, excerpted here, the two executives explore their approach topicking films, their approach to the awards season, and why they thinkthey have two films deserving of best picture honors.AWARDSLINE: Fox Searchlight got eight nominations, two of them inthe best picture category. Make a case why Alexander Payne’s TheDescendants makes a worthy best picture winner.UTLEY: Well I think that The Descendants is a remarkablybeautiful and accomplished film that is in the sort ofvein of some of the other Oscar movies from a little bitfurther back, like Kramer vs. Kramer, Ordinary People, Terms ofEndearment, even On Golden Pond or To Kill a Mockingbird. It isin the sort of subtle character based, humanistic, realisticstory-telling tradition. Sometimes it’s a little frustratingbecause our movie isn’t flashy, it doesn’t have a lot ofshowy or bling elements in it. It’s highly naturalistic. ButI think those kind of movies are important to movie goersbecause they show a reflection of their lives and theirissues, and I think this is a movie that is going to standthe test of time. People will be watching this movie in 10years, 20 years, in 30 years.GILULA: It’s also a film that has really resonated all the wayfrom the rarefied world of the film critics and journalistsout to the mainstream: the public. I think that the publicin this case has really connected with the film across thecountry in a very deep way. Because the simple elegancethat Alexander was able to do with George [Clooney],and the way he built the extraordinary ensemble aroundhim … these are very, very empathetic and relatablepeople. I don’t think that everyone relates with having todeal with inherited land and the wife, but the fathers andchildren around America, you know, they are so real, andas Nancy said, the subtlety of it, you know, harkens to thegreatest American acting and directing through time.The major studios are making almost none of those kindsof films anymore and it’s not easy for us either. But thefact is that the material is so good, and you have one of thevery best directors and some of the best actors in the worldtoday combining to tell this story, which on paper is a verysimple story. But it’s achieved at the highest level of the art.A|l: What do you think George Clooney did to get outside his owncomfort zone and turn in a performance that really has him as afrontrunner for The Descendants?Alexander Payne, left, with nancy utley and stephen gilulaUTLEY: I think that just by his amazing good looks and charmand outward appearance, George still can represent anEveryman in the movies, in the way of a Paul Newmanor a Jimmy Stewart, to Jack Lemmon, Gregory Peck, aswell as Cary Grant. The honesty of his work and theseriousness with which he goes about doing it, and thecraft that he has developed over the years, put him in thispantheon of the very finest of American actors.GILULA: In spite of his extraordinary public and celebritypersona, the public has really embraced him as an actor’sactor. He’s not afraid of challenging his own image.A|l: Well now, I saw The Tree of Life at Cannes and I just feltlike I was immersed in this wonderful dream almost. Give me a senseas to how that film stacks up as a best picture candidate here.UTLEY: Tree of Life has a developed a group of verypassionate advocates. This film is daring in a sense thatit’s not a traditional three-act narrative. And not everyoneappreciates the movie. But those who do, and we areclearly strongly among them, are absolutely evangelicalabout it, highly passionate about it. I’ve talked to peoplewho have seen the movie 10 times because the movieunfolds in a way that every time you watch it you findsomething different in it. And I think its originality and,in a way, sort of audacity, is really sort of rattling people,getting attention and gaining fans.GILULA: In the context of it being one of nine filmsbeing nominated for best picture, I think that there is asignificant and important voice of those, in particularthe Academy, which places a high priority on originalityof vision. There’s an incredible appreciation for TerryMalick, who after all these years, can put a film togetherthat challenges convention and that is so original andthat is extraordinarily moving. He’s not pandering andhe’s not willing to compromise his vision to fit within theconventional film expectations.Froma Searchlight point of view, it’s a source oftremendous pride for us to take on a film like this. It’sincredibly challenging. But we do feel that it is part of ourrole in terms of maintaining a significant support for abreadth of voices in film. It’s very important that we havediversity of creative vision, and I think that it’s energizingfor the whole art, and craft, and business of movies thatthese films can be madeA|l: When you got a chance to look at this film, did you see this asthe Palme d’Or winner? With all these Oscar ® nominations? Whatwas your visceral reaction at first?