The BAH!scars #11: 25 Thoughts on the 82nd Oscars Ceremony

25 Thoughts on the Oscars:

1. The Oscars amuse me so much. Just think of the concept of all those actors gathered in one studio, all just sitting next to each other. The whole image is sort of hilarious when you take a step back.

2. I am sick of Neil Patrick Harris. I know, I know – he’s the gay ambassador to straight people, which makes him Ellen without a penis. But his whole schtick of “I’m gay and I sing but I’m more or less castrated and it’s funny that I’ll dance with lots of girls because you know I won’t make out with them and if I do I won’t enjoy it,” is just tired. Can someone take him out to pasture already?

3. Though, it was nice of the programmer to give Rob Marshall a job choreographing that number, considering Nine may have destroyed his career.

4. I dug Martin and Baldwin’s monologue for the most part. Particularly how it showcased why I want to be best friends with Meryl Streep. I really feel like I could say anything about her and she would just laugh merrily.

5. What the hell was up with the stoic George Clooney?

6. I’m relatively certain that the wife of Peter Docter has been crying since she first saw the opening 5 minutes of Up.

7. John Hughes so won the Dead Person Popularity Contest. And Karl Malden came in a clear second. Roy Disney and Budd Schulberg were tied for third. I was incredibly wrong. Also I wish the cinematographer for The Red Shoes and the writer for La Dolce Vita, La Strada, and 8 1/2 had gotten more applause.

8. The guy behind “Music by Prudence” was 1,000 types of fabulous. Why couldn’t the ceremony have opened with him instead of Neil Patrick Harris?

9. I can’t believe that "The New Tenants" won! I was so proud of the Academy for a brief moment. Then they started just playing winners off very quickly and I knew they were back to normal.

10. Maybe instead of playing those guys off so quickly, they should have cut that stupid tribute to horror, which only managed to showcase how much the genre has gone downhill. And I love how they said that it hadn’t been honored since The Exorcist, then proceeded to show clips from Best Picture Winner Silence of the Lambs. It accomplished, though, proving the point that the only horror music ever is from Psycho (apparently).

11. And why the hell did they not play Jeff Bridges off-stage after minute 3 or so of his incredibly staccato speech?

12. In things that would have been better than the prior two points: maybe showing some clips for cinematography? That might have been nice.

13. I am so sick of “I see you.”

14. The winner for Best Costume gave a pretty classy, small speech. Good on her.

15. Oh man, the scores. That was the dumbest, most Oscar-y, pretentious thing I have ever seen. Particularly when they did The Robot during Up. That whole display really defies commentary. I just feel ashamed for everyone who has ever danced right now. Ever.

16. While I liked Michael Giacchino’s speech in theory, I was wondering if he was wasting his time a bit with that video camera. After all, he didn’t win for anything visually. Womp-womp?

17. I thought the editor for The Hurt Locker was pretty ballsy when he brought up how the movie was a small, unfocused group movie and how he thanked the Academy for still choosing it. It seemed to reiterate the point brought up by the producer about how this is not the $500 million film (which got him banned from the ceremonies).

18. Man, they were not even subtle about cutting away from the guy with the “text Dolphin” sign. Love that the Academy will give an award to the movie, but won’t actually care about its entire message/point.

19. Was Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire really all that much of an underdog? I mean, it may have had typical “indie movie” woes in the making, but after that, it had Oprah behind it and was a story about a poor child overcoming adversity with every “hot-button, but not controversial” issue imaginable? It had HIV, rape (but only really dealt with the victim for most of the movie), abuse, poverty, illiteracy, etc. Hell, the stereotypical “Oscar winning speech” (as evidenced in Wayne’s World) culminates in “I never learned to read!” It felt as normal for an Oscar contender as they come.

20. Furthermore, what was with Mo’Nique’s speech about the politics? Yes, the Oscars are political, but I don’t see how the politics were against her. It felt awfully entitled. Though it was incredibly soulful.

21. The Best Actor presentation was spectacular…in that it was overdrawn and hilarious. And it sounded like everyone on stage wanted to jump the bones of the actor to whom they were talking. Sadly, that did not happen on camera. I would have loved to see some Colin Farrell/Jeremy Renner action.

22. Having Oprah talk to Fatty just made my life. And yes, I did giggle a bit whenever they would cut to Fatty.

23. The two huge upsets of the night: Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire beating Up in the Air for screenplay and neither A Prophet nor The White Ribbon winning foreign film. What the hell? to the latter. To the former, at least we got to see the director cut to EVERY black person in the audience.

24. This also meant that Up in the Air walked home completely empty handed. Pretty sad for a film that, back in December, was the favorite to win Best Picture.

25. Hurt Locker! Hurrah! This win may is the first time in a while I was happy at the end of the Oscars. This film was the real underdog that pulled ahead (unlike Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire). But the best part of the entire win was watching the intense bromance between the three stars going on behind Bigelow & crew.

The BAH!scars #7: Getting Some Direction

Time for me to finish off my predictions and ranting. Well, sort of. I have a few more crazy things in store for the BAH!scars before the big night...but before I get to those, time to do my good duty as a blogger and weigh in on the rest of the big categories.

Best Direction
“Avatar” — James Cameron
“The Hurt Locker” — Kathryn Bigelow
“Inglourious Basterds” — Quentin Tarantino
“Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” — Lee Daniels
“Up in the Air” — Jason Reitman

I'm a tad ambivalent about Lee Daniels's job as director of Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire. I found some of the techniques interesting and effective at conveying what I imagine to be the feel of Sapphire’s prose. I appreciated how the camera really changed its style to fit each scene. However, the whole time, I was being irritatingly reminded that this was all just a trope on a much better director and a much better movie: Darren Aronofsky and his masterpiece, Requiem for a Dream. Lee Daniels does well because he has chosen the right guy to copy. Furthermore, I cannot help but be vexed by the fact that Aronofsky has directed three better films than this (I have to reevaluate Pi), but has not gotten a single nomination. Daniels of course gets it by making a movie that is almost textbook Academic.

About Jason Reitman, I barely have anything to say since I found Up in the Air’s direction unimpressive. As for feel, I’ve reiterated on numerous occasions how he went the completely wrong direction (see: Devin likes screwball comedies). As for camera, with the exception of two scenes, it conveyed the idea that Reitman would be more comfortable just directing a play with an innumerable amount of sets. The two scenes are the opening credits, which were horrendously obnoxious, and first scene of George Clooney making his way to his plane, which might have been a bit too flashy, but was just good enough to work.

James Cameron clearly accomplished what he set out to do in Avatar, but I’m not sure where to draw the line between director and visual effects and I’m pretty sure it veers towards the latter.

The Hurt Locker is a director’s movie. It’s a good, but not great script, that is buoyed by a phenomenal camera and well-done performances. Bigelow perfectly captures the right feel, where you are nervous even after you would be in a typical narrative (like when the bomb is already diffused). She does shaky cam right which nowadays almost seems worthy of some laurels in and of itself.



Finally, there’s Inglourious Basterds. Like I’ve said earlier, I think this might be one of the best films of the decade. As you may have guessed, Tarantino’s direction is definitely responsible for a good chunk of that. But, like Best Picture, this is ultimately a race between Bigelow and Cameron – the gritty vs. the pretty. While Best Picture seems tougher to call, I can say that Bigelow has a more noticeable lead here. Not so much that Cameron taking it from her is unthinkable, but as I see it, either the Academy will split the vote or give director and picture to the same film (okay, that’s a bit of a tautology). If they give it to the same film, it’ll be more on quality and therefore The Hurt Locker will get both. If they split it, they’ll do so to appease more people. They’ll give Avatar the big prize to really appease the masses and give Bigelow the slightly less important Best Director to appease the film geeks.

Who will will: Kathryn Bigelow
Who should win: Quentin Tarantino, though I’m quite fine with Bigelow



Writing (Original Screenplay)
“The Hurt Locker” — Written by Mark Boal
“Inglourious Basterds” — Written by Quentin Tarantino
“The Messenger” — Written by Alessandro Camon & Oren Moverman
“A Serious Man” — Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
“Up” — Screenplay by Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson, Tom McCarthy

Aside from A Serious Man, I would not be too upset over any of these choices. The Hurt Locker in my opinion is a bit weaker in the script department than acting or direction, but not so much that I would find its winning a grave injustice. The Messenger is probably in a similar category but I would simply be amused by the oddness of such a small, not-known independent film winning over 4 Best Picture nominations. Up would be a perfectly suitable winner, though the Academy’s anti-animation prejudice is far reaching. Finally, there’s Inglourious Basterds. This movie will probably not take home too many awards in March (aside from Waltz’s), but it has a strong likelihood of winning this award. Despite bouts of extreme violence, this movie is all about dialogues between characters in the way that only Tarantino can deliver it (along with some great mini-monologues). The Academy may tend to lean towards a sweep (as is their habit) and go with Hurt Locker, but they might also try to throw Tarantino his bone. Ultimately, this is probably one of the closest races of the year, and I myself go back and forth on who will win day after day.

Who will win: The Hurt Locker or Inglourious Basterds – too close to call. If forced at gunpoint, I’d choose Basterds, if only because that’s what I want.
Who should win: Inglourious Basterds

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
“District 9” — Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell
“An Education” — Screenplay by Nick Hornby
“In the Loop” — Screenplay by Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche
“Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” — Screenplay by Geoffrey Fletcher
“Up in the Air” — Screenplay by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner

The great irony here is that the surprise nomination (and the one that has not the slightest hope of winning) is clearly the best of the five screenplays. In fact, it may be one of the best of the ten. But sadly, In the Loop is too clever, too rude, and far too problematic to dream of ever taking home a little gold man. After seeing the film, I was even surprised that the Academy deemed to nominate it.

Also, little aside: I keep going back and forth on whether or not this script deserves to be in the Adapted category. While the scenario is based on a television show and one of the characters comes from that show, the story, dialogue, and majority of the characters are original. So yes, while this is not 100% from nothing…how could this be Adapted when Milk last year was under original screenplay?

An Education is the only other film I would be reasonably fine with seeing win this award. The dialogue is great, dramatic (and at times melodramatic) without losing itself (it constantly remains aware that the characters are prone to overreacting) and at other times just hilarious. Nowhere near as good as In the Loop’s, but very few screenplays this year are.

I’ve already gone into depth about my hated of District 9’s script and my warm to lukewarm about Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire. As for Up in the Air, I still do not get the love for this film’s “cleverness” or “wit” or “originality” or what-have-you. I mean, all of that love makes this the clear frontrunner and has guaranteed this film at least one prize…I just don’t see from where the love grows.

Who will win: Up in the Air.
Who should win: In the Loop.

Animated Feature Film
“Coraline”
“Fantastic Mr. Fox”
“The Princess and the Frog”
“The Secret of Kells”
“Up”

Neither The Secret of Kells or Coraline stand a chance. This is a symbolic race, between computer, stop-motion, and cell-animation. The Secret of Kells winning will mean nothing since nobody has seen it (including yours truly) and Coraline is not as emblematic (or good) an entry as Fantastic Mr. Fox when it comes to stop-motion animation. Yeah, I did not really like Coraline all that much. It was…good, but that was about it. I imagine how I felt about its style is akin to how many felt upon watching (and disliking) Juno with all its hipster affections. I love Nightmare Before Christmas, but all the Hot-Topic-Girl’s-Jerk-off Fantasy, semi-Tim-Burton-esque, mainstream-alternative style of Coraline bothered me. It wasn’t quirky or disturbing or whatever the designers were going for, but instead felt like a computer’s reaction if you fed it the past two decades of designs that met that description and asked it to make one itself. It felt artificial and forced and a bit bland and ultimately quite irritating. All of this is also an apt description for the character of Coraline. I’m sorry to all of you who felt that a girl who moves into a new town where she just doesn’t fit in and her parents don’t understand was such a breath of fresh air in the canon of cinema. The second half did a decent job with the final execution…but all that did was make me give it three stars on Netflix instead of a damnable two.



Now for the big three. If The Princess and the Frog wins, it will win purely because the Academy wants to see more 2-D animation. While the story was good and cute, the problem is that the mere evocation of the Disney movies of the late 80s and early 90s (as the trailer did try to summon up) only serve to highlight that while the story was good and cute (and Shadow Man was a fun villain), this movie is nowhere near the caliber of Beauty and the Beast or Aladdin. It’s a standard-good entry into the world of cell animation. In 1991, it would be pretty forgettable. Now, it’s Oscar-nominated.

Finally, it’s Up vs. Fantastic Mr. Fox. Now, we all know my adoration of Up. I think it was the second or third best film of the year. It’s a better movie than Mr. Fox. But, I would be completely fine if Fantastic Mr. Fox won. The fact that of the five nominees, only one is computer animated is refreshing enough. To see such a wonderful showcase of stop-motion animation and all its quirks and differences from real life win would be a lovely boost of energy for animation as a medium. It might even help stop the onslaught of Despicable Me and similarly subpar, mass-produced 3-D animated films. Granted, the chance of that happening is as small as the chance of Mr. Fox winning. Up has the award in the bag like it’s Lock, Shock, and Barrel and the gold statue is Sandy Claws. And if there is any upset, symbolic win, it’ll be The Princess and the Frog.

Who will win: Up
Who should win: Up

The BAH!scars #3: Nominational Debt Pt 1

Note: This (two-part) entry is just my roundup of the nominees, what was picked, what was snubbed. I’ll get more specific on each category (what I want to win, what I think will win, what I don’t want to win) over the next month.

Every year the Academy manages to out-stupid itself. This year is no exception to the rule.

Best Picture
“Avatar”
“The Blind Side”
“District 9″
“An Education”
“The Hurt Locker”
“Inglourious Basterds”
“Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”
“A Serious Man”
“Up”
“Up in the Air”

Most of these are not all that surprising. Some people thought A Serious Man was not going to get it, but the film’s morose, seemingly intelligent, and from a team with enough clout that I knew it would get the nomination regardless of box office performance and quality. Then there’s District 9 and The Blind Side. I regret now posting that Star Trek entry…since about two months ago, when I was certain Star Trek wouldn’t get nominated, I was right. Back then, when I was wiser, I was saying that District 9 would get the Trek-spot. It had everything: it was a sci-fi blow-em-up flick to appease the fanboys still “so serious,” it was a little-indy-that-could, and it had a “very important” message that made us all think more about being nicer to each other and brushing our teeth (even if they are turning into acid-spitting tentacles). It’s like Star Trek while still being a typical Academic movie.

As for The Blind Side, last night I was talking to my friend, worrying that Crazy Heart would be this year’s The Reader. You know, the movie that has so much hype for the performance of one thespian that it manages to sneak into the Best Picture category. Well, I was close. That did happen. But it seems that accolade-laden actresses hoisting their subpar flicks to Best Picture nominated-status may soon be a perennial habit of the Academy.

To be fair, I haven’t seen The Blind Side. Or Precious. Correction, Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire. I have seen Precious: Based on "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkein and Precious: Based on "Barb Wire" Which is Based on "Casablanca" Which is Based on "Everyone Comes to Rick’s". I may have to see The Blind Side to fully justify criticizing it…but dear god, that movie looks like excruciation on nitrocellulose.

BIG SNUB: The White Ribbon. Hollywood’s hubris really is unfathomable. The idea that the Best Picture nominees were almost always American films when there were five films was egotistical enough (because, you know, directors like Fellini and Bunuel were only good enough to throw the token “Foreign Language” award to). Now, Hollywood has the gall to say that it makes not five, but ten films better than any other country can. Hell, they threw in a token animated film. They could at least now have the token foreign one every year. Though, I do not know if I could take seeing The White Ribbon lose to Avatar or District 9…



Best Direction
“Avatar” — James Cameron
“The Hurt Locker” — Kathryn Bigelow
“Inglourious Basterds” — Quentin Tarantino
“Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” — Lee Daniels
“Up in the Air” — Jason Reitman

No surprises here. The top three nominees are the true race…and that’s being extremely generous to Tarantino (who only has a shot if people don’t want to take sides in an ex-lovers’ quarrel).

BIG SNUB: Wes Anderson, “The Fantastic Mr. Fox” and Michael Haneke, "The White Ribbon." Up was a better animated movie, but Mr. Fox was a visual feast and a love letter to everything that computer animation is not (a welcome and rare message nowadays). And not every director can take his idiosyncratic style and make it not only work in stop-motion, but possibly work better in stop-motion.

I could probably labor the point that White Ribbon was better than almost every other film this year and that it deserves to be in most categories, but I'll stop after this category. Probably. We get the idea Hollywood: you don't play well with other children.



Actor in a Leading Role
Jeff Bridges in “Crazy Heart”
George Clooney in “Up in the Air”
Colin Firth in “A Single Man”
Morgan Freeman in “Invictus”
Jeremy Renner in “The Hurt Locker”

I swear, Morgan Freeman can take a poop on screen and somehow people will find it Oscar-worthy. But what can I say? I’m not a Morgan Freeman lover. Maybe because he always plays the same roles, none of which are all that interesting. I thought all buzz around Invictus was dead, but I suppose Freeman’s Faustian contract got him this, and Matt Damon just hitched along for the ride. As for Bridges, I’ll wait for my actor post to tear him a new one.

BIG SNUB: Peter Sarsgaard, “An Education.” He played such a good villain/anti-hero/love interest...hell, can I just sum it up as "seducer?" He made love not only to Carey Mulligan, but to the camera and us and made us all want to go along for the ride no matter how horrible we could predict the inevitable crash to be. Mulligan is the breakout star of that movie, but Sarsgaard deserves formidable praise as well. I would have preferred to have seen Michael Stuhlbarg or Daniel Day-Lewis in Clooney’s, Bridges’ or Freeman’s spots, as both did a great job playing men having breakdowns in lackluster films.



Actress in a Leading Role
Sandra Bullock in “The Blind Side”
Helen Mirren in “The Last Station”
Carey Mulligan in “An Education”
Gabourey Sidibe in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”
Meryl Streep in “Julie & Julia”

Trick for getting nominated (and probably winning) Best Actress: act like shit for years in dumb chick-flicks. Then play a serious role and don’t completely mess it up. You may even get your picture nominated for Best Picture. Hey, it worked for Julia Roberts! And I think I see a repeat here. In theory, with enough time and devotion, any not-horrendous actress can get a Oscar nod! Because the only thing superior to excellence is turning crap to halfway-decent.

I was hoping for the (unlikely) Meryl Streep duo. Pity. No huge surprises here.

BIG SNUB: Apparently Tarintino was pushing for Melanie Laurent in Inglourious Basterds to be nominated for Best Actress instead of Best Supporting Actress. This sadly may have been her undoing. I think her role was about as big as Waltz’s, but maybe Quentin just really enjoyed her feet. If this is the case though, I think she deserved a nomination for her performance that acted as one of the only emotional anchors in an otherwise anarchic (but brilliant) film.



Actor in a Supporting Role
Matt Damon in “Invictus”
Woody Harrelson in “The Messenger”
Christopher Plummer in “The Last Station”
Stanley Tucci in “The Lovely Bones”
Christoph Waltz in “Inglourious Basterds”

See prior entry about Waltz. See earlier paragraph about Damon. I haven’t seen most of these movies (only saw The Messenger and Basterds, and Tucci in Julie & Julia, which he seems to be half-nominated for in spirit here), but again, none of that matters since Waltz will waltz home with it. No, that doesn’t really count as a prediction.

BIG SNUB: Anthony Mackie, "The Hurt Locker." He and Renner played brilliantly off of each other, and I would have a hard time nominating one without the other. Also, I would have loved to see more An Education presence with a Molina.



Actress in a Supporting Role
Penélope Cruz in “Nine”
Vera Farmiga in “Up in the Air”
Maggie Gyllenhaal in “Crazy Heart”
Anna Kendrick in “Up in the Air”
Mo’Nique in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”

Knock-knock.
Who’s there?
Best Supporting.
Best Supporting who?
Best Supporting Actress Nominees.
I don’t get it.

I don’t either. But these nominees are indeed a joke. (Apparently Mo’Nique is great, and if so, good for her, she’s about it). Farmiga was blandly good in Up in the Air (which is a fitting description for the entire film actually). Kendrick was probably the strongest part of that whole movie, but she only accomplished that by not acting in tone with the rest of the film. I have said repeatedly that Up in the Air would have been better if written, directed, and played as a screwball comedy. Kendrick does that in her breakup scene (which is very reminiscent of a part in My Man Godfrey).

Let me say this about Nine: Nine is a film where the whole is superlatively less than the sum of its parts. The movie is one where many things are going right and many people are doing a good-to-stellar job, but ultimately are stuck with an absolutely ill-conceived and flat-out heinous concept (let’s remake one of the most personal movies ever filmed!). Thus, the movie itself is just bad. As for Cruz, she did a good job…but if you are to pick a supporting actress from the movie, she is definitely the wrong one. She certainly hits the proverbial ball out of the equally proverbial park with her one song…but her acting scenes are only good. Marion Cotillard, however, was able to convey such pain, sorrow, anguish, frustration, and rage both in her songs and her performance. Even when the Academy went and picked a bit of a long shot (an actress from a much-criticized film), they still managed to be quite Academic. They go for Cruz because of short-term memory (hey! We nominated her for the same category last year!) and she’s…exotic!

Maggie Gyllenhaal…

I don’t want to relive her performance. Asking me to do so is like telling a guy from Nam just to think back to how it felt being woken up by machine gun fire. It’s not fair! I won’t go back! Every moment that Gyllenhaal was on-screen in Crazy Heart was a violation of the Geneva Convention and the 8th Amendment and probably some treaty they established at the end of a Justice League episode. That she got nominated for this instead of a Razzie belittles not just category, but this entire year of Oscars. I don’t know how Bridges doing a “great” job somehow caused Gyllenhaal to get Academy love…but that’s what it looks like. Last time I checked, these acting categories were for singular performances, not spill-over praise.

BIG SNUB: Uh, everyone. The aforementioned Cotillard, Julianne Moore for her incredibly nuanced (albeit short) performance in A Single Man, and Samantha Morton’s powerful, multi-faceted, yet deceptively simple role in The Messenger had more skill in a single frame than Maggie Gyllenhaal has had in her career.



Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
“District 9” — Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell
“An Education” — Screenplay by Nick Hornby
“In the Loop” — Screenplay by Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche
“Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” — Screenplay by Geoffrey Fletcher
“Up in the Air” — Screenplay by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner

District 9? Really? I must have seen District 9 ¾, because the film I saw was pretty much Standard Sci-Fi Flick #7 with a dash of overly heavy-handed commentary. Jeez, the writers didn’t even have the brains, the balls, or the trust of the audiences’ brains to move an allegory about apartheid out of South Africa.

BIG SNUB: Fantastic Mr. Fox for turning Dahl’s children’s book into only Act II of a three-act madcap adventure that somehow also managed to be a meditation on lost youth and dreams, middle age, and the eventuality of mortality.

Also, A Single Man, because anytime you can turn that internalized of a novel into something that works on screen, I think you deserve a nomination. I’m probably going to mention A Single Man a few more times next entry, so I’ll just get my conspiracy theory out of the way now: I think it was too gay for the Academy. Yes, I know people call the Oscars “Gay Superbowl” (or at least one of my friends does), but the Academy does not really tend to take risks with what it picks. It will give the illusion of being open-minded/liberal…but only so much as to still not isolate Red America. Hence, the queer as a three-dollar cliché A Single Man got the Aronofsky treatment.

ANYWAY, I know no one wants to read 10 pages in a row of Oscar stuff…and I need to get to sleep. Tune in Thursday (probably) for the rest of the categories! Yes, I could have done Original Screenplay now to get all the major ones out of the way…but I need to give you all a reason to tune in next time!