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 #10: The Nightmare Before Oscar Night

Twas the night before Oscar,
And all through my head,
I thought of the picks,
That would make me wish I were dead.
Maybe my head wasn’t screwed on just right,
Or maybe it was that I wanted a fight,
But all the stars in Hollywood and all the –

Er, I’m a bit confused. Anyway, on Oscar Eve, I have decided to post my Nightmare Oscars. These are what I would least want to see win each Oscar. At least with this post online, I know that no matter what happens tomorrow…I can assure myself that it could have been worse. And, if I am correct…well, at least I’ve guessed all the right picks.

Best Picture “District 9″
Let’s face it: no one wants Blind Side to win. If that is victorious, I have legions of angry cinephiles on my side. Here, I have to deal with the fatuous masses praising the Academy for picking a really relevant action film or something like that.

Best Direction “Up in the Air” — Jason Reitman
I’ve already seen Ron Howard win once in my lifetime. I don’t need to see such a bland director win again. Daniels was a close second…but at least I could delude myself into thinking of it as an Aronofsky win.

Actor in a Leading Role Morgan Freeman in “Invictus”
I can’t stand Morgan Freeman. Nuff said.

Actress in a Leading Role Sandra Bullock in “The Blind Side”
See: my complaints about her back in earlier entries. Her win will just solidify that the Academy cares more about tracks of careers than singular performances.

Actor in a Supporting Role Matt Damon in “Invictus”
I had no strong feelings here. Damon rides my Freeman-hatred just as he rode the coattails of his performance to get a nomination.

Actress in a Supporting Role Maggie Gyllenhaal in “Crazy Heart”
In my own version of Hostel, I am just forced to watch Maggie Gyllenhaal’s performance in this movie over and over again. Eventually, someone takes pity on me and decides to instead drip corrosive acid on my balls.

Writing (Adapted Screenplay) “District 9” — Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell
I haven’t been quiet about my disgust with District 9’s script that was simultaneously cookie-cutter and heavy-handed.

Writing (Original Screenplay) “A Serious Man” — Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen

Animated Feature Film “Coraline”

Art Direction “The Young Victoria” — Art Direction: Patrice Vermette; Set Decoration: Maggie Gray
Only because I was most bored by its trailers.

Film Editing “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” — Joe Klotz
District 9’s was pretty bland, but Klotz lifted far too much from Requiem for a Dream to allow me to be comfortable with his victory.

Cinematography “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” — Bruno Delbonnel

Costume Design “Coco before Chanel” — Catherine Leterrier

Foreign Language Film
Can’t say in all fairness.

Sound Editing “Star Trek” — Mark Stoeckinger and Alan Rankin

Sound Mixing “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” — Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers and Geoffrey Patterson

Music (Original Score) “Avatar” — James Horner
Although I really want to say “anything that isn’t Up.”

Music (Original Song) “The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)” from “Crazy Heart” Music and Lyric by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett
Crazy Heart’s music felt so manufactured to me.

Makeup “Il Divo” — Aldo Signoretti and Vittorio Sodano
Just because I am not familiar with it.

Visual Effects “Star Trek” — Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh and Burt Dalton

Short Film (Animated) “Logorama” Nicolas Schmerkin
Yes, “French Roast” is the least of the picks, but “Logorama” just seems so damn smug when it does not deserve to be.

Short Film (Live Action) “Instead of Abracadabra” — Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström

(No opinion on documentaries)

See you on the other side of the tunnel everyone! Feel free to share your own Nightmare Oscars!

The BAH!scars #5: Best Picture?

Welcome back to another installment of the BAH!scars! This entry really requires no introduction...so I'll stop now.

Level 1 – the Other 3

These were the three films that were kind of the toss-up when it came to the Best Picture nomination discussion. Obviously, they all stand an Aronofsky’s chance of winning (despite Aronofsky’s films being able to wipe the floor with these pieces of poo).

The Blind Side

The one nominee I have not yet seen and, to be perfectly frank, have no interest in seeing. Anyone who I respect and who has seen it has nothing but condemnatory words to say about it. “Glorified TV movie.” “Bullock’s just okay.” “Boring then boring then racist then boring.” What can I say? I hate schmaltz, I hate sport movies, I hate mindless Oscar feel-good-inspiration bait. And I hate Sandra Bullock. I’d be miserable every step of the way and I’m not giving into the Academy by seeing this movie just because they threw two nominations at it.

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 10

Odds of winning: 1 to 1,000. This film was the surprise nominee of the year, bolstered only by the awards/reviews for Bullock, very similar to The Reader last year. In a five-picture year, the odds might be 1 to 100, but now there are nine other films to beat, all of which have more clout/support than this one does. Of course, bad Bullock movies that take a heavy-handed look at race have won before against all odds. But if it happens this time, film-nerds nationwide may have their own “Rodney King Verdict”-style riots.


District 9

Like I said in a prior entry, this movie snatched up Star Trek’s “Token Summer Movie Nomination/Let’s Keep the Plebs Happy” prize. Ironically, despite thinking Star Trek is a better movie, I am annoyed less by this selection. Possibly because at least this choice seems more in line with typical Academy thinking (Little Indie That Could, Important Issue, etc.). That being said, the fact that District 9 is a nomination for Best Picture is a complete and utter joke. The plot was incredibly cookie cutter (I dare say it may rival Avatar’s), the commentary was heavy-handed, and I really do not think I should feel so bored when watching people explode.

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 9

Odds of winning: 1 to 500. Note the “Token” in its prize. This nomination was an act of diplomacy by the Academy. Diplomacy is taking a few small hits to appease the other party. It’s not committing seppuku to show you were wrong.

A Serious Man

The more I thought about A Serious Man, the more it crumbled for me. Probably initially I was temporarily blinded by what so many people were blinded by: if a movie is that depressing, boring, dense, and contains no answers, it must be great stuff. It had a strong lead performance and a few good moments with the camera (and I did love the opening scene), but aside from that…it was a shaggy dog of a movie: a lot of hair that couldn’t attach itself to anything. While there have been great movies that have broken free of traditional norms of plot and character (e.g. Bunuel’s The Phantom of Liberty), this picture did not even have a single idea upon which to hinge itself, aside from the very tired Job one.

This nomination was probably a combination the aforementioned blinding with A) “Hey! We’ve nominated and awarded the Coen’s before!” and B) a desire for more cred among the film geeks who hate the Academy as much as the cretins.

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 8

Odds of winning: 1 to 150. In many’s eyes, this was a doubtful nomination. I thought it had a good chance of making it to the race of 10, but that’s about it. This movie is bland, but not Academy-Approved-Bland and will therefore not grab voters’ eyes come check-off time.

Level 2

“We’re so happy the Academy amped it up to 10!” These two were the ones that were pretty much guaranteed 2 of the 5 extra slots. They never would have gotten a real nomination, but they were also not a question when filling out the list. They have the slightest chance of winning, though a picture of that moment would have to go in the dictionary under “upset.”

Up

Oh, how I love this movie. Oh, how it’s refreshing to see the Academy’s need to nominate token films used for good instead of evil. Oh, how this movie does not have a chance of winning.

Amazing - Up is a film that delivers well-developed characters, clever humor, tears, an uplifting message about the human condition, and adventure…and because it’s computer animated, it has a pretty infinitesimal chance of taking home the gold. However, this nomination does cement what everyone already knew: that Up will win Best Animated Feature.

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 2

Odds of winning: 1 to 85. This nomination is almost as much of a token as District 9. However, this injustice has the benefit of having a more vocal, consistent, and intelligent group of complainers rallying behind it. There is a miniscule possibility that the Academy will try to appease the animated lobbyists in one foul swoop before returning to their usual antics. But it’s miniscule.

An Education

This film is a solid choice. The acting is phenomenal and the dialogue is top notch. Carey Mulligan deserves the Oscar, though she won’t get it, and a few of the other actors were quite snubbed. It by no means is a “Best Picture” film either in the Academy’s eyes (Ew! Girl sleeping with older man! Ew! Quiet British film!) or mine, but this film is a welcome addition to filling out the list, be it 5 or 10 films.

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 4

Odds of winning: 1 to 60. Like I said, it’s a good pick for filling out the list, but it is not flashy enough for the Academy. Only if there were an incredible vote split would it have a shot.

Level 3

We’re now on the movies that would have been the five nominees had the Academy not decided to make a desperate attempt to get more viewers and pander to the masses.

Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire

I will admit I went into this movie with some biases against it. I thought (and still think) that the title is as obnoxious as a neon yellow sweatsuit (and misuses quotations). All the trailers made it looks exploitative, predictable, and mindless Oscar-bait (let’s all think about race for two hours! Hurray for triumphing over adversity!). I did not like how certain critics/marketers were trying to guilt the American public into seeing the film by saying they were racist if they did not (when really, the American public will only see “indy”-ish film if they’re quirky and cute). And, I really did not want to see Fatty walk down the red carpet in a dress, trying to look attractive or at least not completely repulsive.

Now, little sidetrack. Sometimes, I see a movie that I expect I’m going to hate and it surpasses my expectations as to how repugnant it can be. I will then say, “Yes, it was indeed as horrible as I surmised...and then some!” and people will say that I went in prejudiced against it and did not give it a fair chance. I always argue with them that even if I go in with expectations, I still do not let those cloud my judgment. In fact, if the movie is even the slightest bit decent, it benefits from my bias. I often will think “Wow! This isn’t horrible!” and that will quickly transition to “This is quite good!” If anything, most movies find that my preconceived negative opinions ameliorate my final judgment, just as my excitement for a film has a tendency to lead to ultimate disappointment.

Upon reflection, Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire is still predictable (it's only a step or two up from Avatar), a bit exploitative, and nothing all that special. But the acting is mostly strong (Fatty in fact so exceeds with what her role requires that I lament the reality that she probably will not have a career after this movie), the script is just interesting enough, and the directio – er, I’ll describe my ambivalence towards the direction in my next Oscar post – that it won my over. I approve of Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire, as a movie. It may not deserve to be in the top 5, but it’s better than a lot of other nominees.

Of course, I may not have actually seen Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire since both my ticket and the marquis for the theater only said "Precious."



Where I rank it amongst the ten: 6

Odds of winning: 1 to 25. It’s the recipient of the “Little Miss Juno” Award. Part of the deal with that award is that the recipient has not all that great of a chance of getting any award past the “Little Miss Juno” Award.

Up in the Air

Back when this movie had a very good shot at winning, Entertainment Weekly ran this piece. It simultaneously interested and bothered me. Why did it vex me so? Because Up in the Air is not a triumph of witty dialogue and plot and great characters. It only thinks it is. It half-wants to be a modern day screwball comedy (as this article belies) but cannot bring itself to abandon its seeming-sophistication and unabashedly invite in the immaturity that allows such a pleasant juxtaposition. As a result, it drags. Furthermore, I simply did not find Clooney’s character as funny, sharp, distinct, roguish, or fascinating as the film expected me to. He seemed like a partially-formed idea that never fully took route into a person, and without that, the script continued its collapse. There are moments of greatness in this film, sure, but this is not a great film or anything close. There are just briefs flashes of what could have been one.

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 7

Odds of winning: 1 to 10. This movie was probably the favorite back at the turn of the year, but it has lost steam like a kettle taken off the stove. I think the problem was that people started actually seeing it and realized it really wasn’t all that special. It’s only true shot comes from the fact that it carries with it a very timely and Academic message: having loved ones >>> having money and a job.

Level 4

These are the ones that are really duking it out for Best Picture. Any other one will be some level of an upset. None of these three have a definite chance of winning and therefore there will be surprise no matter which one wins, but not too much surprise.

Inglourious Basterds

Forget about the year; I’d rank this film as one of the best of the decade. It’s a remarkably clever, incisive film masquerading as a mindless, frat-boy gorefest. Yet, it’s façade of Eli Roth controlling Quentin Tarantino like Brainiac puppeteering Lex Luthor only manages to enhance the film’s overall message and make it more brilliant (I may have to gush about this more in depth in a full-length entry). I walked away from this movie back in August not knowing what to think. I did not even know if I liked it. Repeated viewers and what probably amounts to hours of thinking and discussion have affirmed its place in film history in my mind (and probably also guaranteed that I’ll be writing a real academic essay on this at some point in the future)

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 1

Odds of winning: 1 to 4. On one hand, we have a director that has already been nominated, the SAG win, nominations in director, screenplay, editing, and cinematography, and general good buzz. On the other hand (SPOILER), we have a movie that ends with Hitler getting a machine gun to the face. The Academy may not look too favorably upon a film that exposes all other “good” WWII films for being as bloodthirsty as any slasher flick. However, this film may be able to rise above the rubble that will ensue in the Avatar/Hurt Locker brawl.



Avatar

I’ve already defended Avatar in this blog (read “Avatar’s Gross!” if you need a refresher). That being said, this movie is not Best Picture material. Too many necessary elements are lacking from the film to allow it to make the leap from “enjoyable” to “great” (by the way, I know I use the word “great” a lot when discussing films…I owe that quite a bit to Roger Ebert’s Great Movies. It’s more of a status than an adjective for me, hence why I don’t vary my vocabulary when it comes to that).

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 5

Odds of winning: 3 to 7. It will definitely eat up Technical Awards like they were white dots and it was Pac Man. And the Academy is really trying to appease the masses this year (see: ten nominations), so how better to do that than awarding the top grossing movie of all time the top prize? Hey, it worked over a decade ago! And then of course, there’s that whole Golden Globe thing and the fact that the last thing the director did was that movie where the boat sinks.

The Hurt Locker

The great paradox of the Oscars is that they make no one happy: not the masses, nor film nerds. The plebeians complain that the Oscars only choose prestigious, boring films that only a few people see. People who actually know about film bewail that the Academy only chooses films that tend to gross over $100 million and only give the illusion of being “small, independent films.” Yet, ironically, the plebs’ conception might finally be the case for a change. Up against the movie that everyone saw is the truly great film that only grossed about $10 million in its initial release in theaters.

Barely anyone saw The Hurt Locker this summer. Only a select few film nerds and friends of film nerds were lucky enough to enter the theater in July to see one of the tensest films in years and the best film about the Iraq war to come out so far. It was a film lover’s/thinking man’s action movie, one that delivered a few explosions but knew that the mere promise of an explosion is so much scarier and so much more thrilling.

While I prefer Inglourious Basterds to this movie, I will be more than happy if The Hurt Locker wins. This movie is the one that has the best chance of beating Avatar and it will be the first time in a while that I can really rally behind a Best Picture winner. Hurray for that.

Where I rank it amongst the ten: 3

Odds of winning: 1 to 2. This movie not only took home a lot of critic’s year-end awards, but has been catching up pre-Oscar awards like they’re Pokemon (what is with me and videogame similes?). By all means, it should be a hands-down favorite to win. But it’s a small movie. And therefore, it’s going to be a struggle. It has a slight advantage over Avatar, but that’s about it.

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!

The BAH!scars #1: Setting My Phaser to "Pissed Off"

Let me state the obvious. It’s Oscar season. I’m a (fledgling) pop culture blogger (not too fledgling if you count two years of column writing though). I’m going to be writing in excess about the Oscars. Might as well start now.

[Oh, by the way, I fully acknowledge the irony that I will continually call the Academy every iteration of "stupid" and "worthless" and yet still get infuriated by their every action. Just should put that out on the table early.]

This past June, the Academy created quite the buzz when they announced that there would be not five, but ten Best Picture nominees. Granted, I think this revelation ignited more sensation than it really warranted. Let’s face the truth (Hi, Truth!), even if ten are nominated, the race is still almost always between two or three films anyway. This superficial vicissitude only means an increase in token films that have as little of a chance of winning as a red shirt has of surviving a voyage to Deygon-7. Now, instead of simply the token “Little Indie That Could” (The Little Miss Juno Award), there will also be the token “Comedy” and “Animated Movie” and the like.

Before we go on, let’s just mention that this has now rendered the already questionable “Best Animated Picture” (The Pixar Award) to the status of utterly worthless (“Hmm…I wonder if the one animated picture nominated for Best Picture will win”). Hopefully it will just disappear. Let’s face it – all it ever did was fail to appease the people who were noticing that Pixar continually got overlooked for Best Picture. We doing that? Good. Oh, and anyone thinking they’ll dare nominate two animated films (like, let’s say The Fantastic Mr. Fox along with Up instead of just Up)…please check up on your idea of reality. Though I do indeed hope I have to eat my words on that last statement.

However, there is another genre of film that the querulous masses lament is constantly overlooked come Oscar time: the action film. Ever since the Academy made its proclamation, nerds nationwide have been in a constant rejoice over the fact that there may now be an action film among the best picture nominees. And what has been the favorite these past seven or so months? Star Trek.

It was mentioned when the press release first journeyed from the computer screen to the pupils of every geek in the world. Speculation over three films: Star Trek, Up, and The Hangover finally getting nominated. The first two have persisted as favorites all the way up to speculation over the ten in the past month. The third lost steam…though its Golden Globe may help it recover some. Now, I can’t comment on The Hangover. I haven’t seen it. I know, I know, I’m a pop culture blogger…but this ain’t a full time job. If any of you wish to change that so I may see The Hangover and weigh in quicker, I am more than willing to take you up on your lucrative and exceedingly generous offer. As it is, let me say that Up certainly deserves a nomination and is currently my runner-up for picture of the year (which I gave to Inglourious Basterds).

Then there’s Star Trek. I admit, I took a while to get to the meat of this entry. It’s like the first hour of Deer Hunter. Anyway, Star Trek. For a while, I’ve tried to deny it. I would think, “That’s just wishful thinking! Of course, they’re not going to nominate Star Trek!” But every day it seems that more and more critics are predicting it. And, to be honest, I’m beginning to think they’re right.

Star Trek in no way deserves to be considered as even a candidate (despite how token such candidancy may be) for Best Picture. It was fun, yes. It was enjoyable, had some humorous moments, and the acting was good. It was a solid summer blockbuster. Solid summer blockbuster does not translate into great cinema. Granted, I’m not ruling out such a possibility that an action film can be deep and meaningful or even simply just use the camera brilliantly or whatever prerequisite for a nomination. The Matrix certainly should have been among 1999’s candidates. Hell, I’d have to give 2002 another look, but I wouldn’t automatically rule out X2: XMen United being among ten nominees. But Star Trek? Just because a movie delivers a few thrills and somehow combines premiering in 80-degree weather with not turning my brain into Jujy Fruits doesn’t mean it’s among the year’s best films.

So Star Trek delivers a solid sci-fi romp. Good for it. I gave it a good review when it came out and even defended it against people who wanted a more traditional Star Trek film. Hell, I defended its summer-blockbuster-ness. It does accomplish what it sets out to do. That does merit praise. That does not automatically merit this type of praise. Jennifer’s Body (a wrongfully maligned film from this year) also accomplishes its intended purpose. It also felt like a worthwhile use of two hours of my time. Jennifer’s Body is thankfully not in consideration for the ten nominees. Not every film that fails to screw-up is automatically a laudable landmark of cinema.

Essentially, Star Trek being considered for such honors feels a bit like high school. The attractive, successful jock, the guy with all the girls and popularity and good looks, is not completely destitute in the smarts department. He doesn’t ace his algebra test. But he gets a B. He may have some plot holes and a predictable story line and some cheesy dialogue and – oops, back to my analogy. Suddenly, he’s a Renaissance man! Not only is he an Olympian Adonis, but his lack of flunking makes him a disciple of Athena as well! Helios be praised!

Are our expectations for summer movies really so low? Does a little quality in one suddenly make us desire to crown it with every laurel in sight? Or are we (and probably the Academy) so likely to rally around Star Trek because of another scorned son?

Now, any of you who know me personally or read my column back in the old days (P.S. I love you, new readers!) know I have nothing but contempt for Dark Knight. I was quite relieved to find it did not receive a Best Picture nomination last year. However, I also will freely admit that it did not get the nomination for the wrong reasons. What do I mean? Dark Knight was terrible, but it was also cheated. The Academy still apotheosized Heath Ledger. And, to be perfectly honest, of the five best picture nominees, one was worse than Dark Knight (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button), one was only a little better (The Reader), and two weren’t exactly stellar (Slumdog Millionaire and Frost/Nixon). Dark Knight was not nominated, but for the wrong reason – it was an action film. A summer blockbuster. (And yes, Gladiator won early this decade, but that’s because it was sword-and-sandal epic and that has a history, etc.)

Ironically, if Star Trek is nominated, it will be for the exact same reason: because it’s a summer blockbuster. And now the Academy owes a summer blockbuster some love. Yes, this film lacks the pretentions of Dark Knight, the Introduction to Ethics speeches, and the dead actor…all the things that would have been perfectly Academic reasons for Dark Knight to be nominated and all the things that deluded a people into believing it to be the second coming of Kane. For better or for worse, it’s a more run-of-the-mill action movie. It aims lower, but it hits its mark. Star Trek was just a good action movie and, aside from a few genuinely great movies, probably the best thing to come out in the four month span of mind-mush. But allow me to reiterate, that’s all folks.

But I suppose the time has come for awards to be more democratic. Good is the new great. Let’s more evenly disperse accolades among seasons, genres, and qualities. About time we keep the masses happy. I mean, it’s not like the actual film nerds were ever all that happy with the Oscar picks anyway.

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. But, in this case, I guess my advice would be, “If it’s broke, please don’t take a mallet to it and bang on it repeatedly until it’s pulverized to mere atoms.”