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 #4: Nominational Debt Pt. 2

And, we’re back! Ladies and gentleman, what you are about to witness is the gradual descent of a blogger from rage and indignity to exhaustion and apathy. Thankfully, by the time he gets there, we’re talking about “Best Make-Up” and really, no other emotion is proper for such discussion.

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

Well, let’s all breath a collective sigh of relief that Avatar at least did not get a nod for Best Original Screenplay. That nomination seriously would been the epitome of the Academy’s tendency just to fill out most categories with aspects from the best picture front-runners, regardless of actual quality.

A Serious Man I’m less than thrilled with, since I don’t think it’s too hard to write a script and just fill it up with a lot of bad things happening to one guy, some Jewish stereotypes, and a couple of shaggy dog stories. But at least (500) Days of Summer didn’t get nominated. Especially since, were it to get a screenplay nom, it should be under “Adapted” since the movie is essentially Hipster Annie Hall.

The Messenger however was a nice surprise and hopefully will get more people to see one of the stronger pictures of last year. Pity the academy though didn’t go all out in impressing me and add it into the Best Picture nominations as well…

BIG SNUB: Is it beating a dead horse (that may have tripped on a hidden wire) to say The White Ribbon for its haunting, enigmatic script that seems to scream for repeated viewings and hint at gems hidden under the surface of the initial viewing?

Fine then, The Brothers Bloom for being as quirky and original as people claimed (500) Days of Summer to be. In this witty script, lines between reality and fiction, acted emotions and genuine ones, personae and personalities, theater and crime, and play and lies are completely, joyously, and ominously disassembled. Add in a few healthy dashes of literary references and you have one of the cleverest, most rewarding screenplays of the year.



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

Let me begin with the question that was on everyone’s mind Tuesday morning, “What the hell is The Secret of Kells?” Apparently, it’s foreign and has been circulating the globe for the past year or so but only will get released in the states now, since it has a nomination. That being said, the film will probably only play in a few theaters in the country, because, well, it’s a foreign, animated film that takes place in the 9th century and is called “The Secret of Kells.”

Aside from that, no real surprises. One of the healthiest showings this category has had yet. Too bad we all know that there isn’t even the semblance of a genuine contest since only one of these is Up for Best Picture.

BIG SNUB: Er…is there one? I have yet to see Ponyo, but I’ve heard it’s not Miyazaki’s best. I’ll see it whenever it comes out on DVD…but right now, I think I can say that it seems that this category is the one that the Academy got right. Despite being a fake category.



Art Direction
“Avatar” — Art Direction: Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Kim Sinclair
“The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” — Art Direction: Dave Warren and Anastasia Masaro; Set Decoration: Caroline Smith
“Nine” — Art Direction: John Myhre; Set Decoration: Gordon Sim
“Sherlock Holmes” — Art Direction: Sarah Greenwood; Set Decoration: Katie Spencer
“The Young Victoria” — Art Direction: Patrice Vermette; Set Decoration: Maggie Gray

This assortment is an odd one. A bunch of movies that seem from the Island of Misfit Films and then there’s Avatar, just because it has to get a bajillion nominations. I tend to complain that these other categories are very often not “Best X” but “Best X that was in a movie we already liked.” This year the case seems to be a bit different. Well done Academy, I guess?

BIG SNUB: Are animated movies eligible for this award? They have art directors. If they are, Up for its absolutely breathtaking, fanciful, and thrilling environments, from the lush Paradise Falls to the elegant yet ominous dirigible of Muntz. Also, The Fantastic Mr. Fox would have been a worthy contender (but then again, most Anderson films are). If they are eligible, these are the snubs. If not…these are still the snubs and the Academy needs to do something about their rules.



Film Editing
“Avatar” — Stephen Rivkin, John Refoua and James Cameron
“District 9” — Julian Clarke
“The Hurt Locker” — Bob Murawski and Chris Innis
“Inglourious Basterds” — Sally Menke
“Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” — Joe Klotz

The presence of the incredibly average District 9 upsets me (I remember the camera/cuts being interesting for the first 20 minutes before completely not caring). But aside from that, this seems like we’re getting into the Oscar-nominee rut of the same few contenders over and over again.

BIG SNUB: The White Ribbon. Sigh. Blah blah blah this film was visually stunning in every way blah blah blah Oscars don’t like foreign movies blah blah blah. I know, I know, I’ll shut up now.

Cinematography
“Avatar” — Mauro Fiore
“Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” — Bruno Delbonnel
“The Hurt Locker” — Barry Ackroyd
“Inglourious Basterds” — Robert Richardson
“The White Ribbon” — Christian Berger

First off, hurray for the slightest bit of The White Ribbon recognition outside the Foreign Film category! Secondly, Harry Potter?! Okay, this isn’t as egregious of a choice as my knee-jerk reaction led me to think. The movies do have a nice, distinct lighting tone to them and tend to be awfully pretty to look at. The problem is when Daniel Radcliffe opens his mouth (or Emma Watson opens her tear-ducts). A strange fifth candidate, but not horrendous. Overall, this seems a pretty decent showing, but I’m probably still just basking in The White Ribbon glow.

BIG SNUB: The White Ri – waitaminute! I can’t this time! Hm, this is tough. Do I go with Nine, which just has some beautifully, almost masterfully done shot interspersed with lots of average ones, or A Single Man, which had some very interesting techniques only to undercut them by overuse? Okay, neither of these are extraordinarily deplorable, though I would have liked to have seen A Single Man up there. It’s a snub, not a BIG SNUB.



Costume Design
“Bright Star” — Janet Patterson
“Coco before Chanel” — Catherine Leterrier
“The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” — Monique Prudhomme
“Nine” — Colleen Atwood
“The Young Victoria” — Sandy Powell

Another case of Island of Misfit Movies. This time even odder as there’s no Avatar and instead we have some of those odd late summer/fall movies that are sort of Oscar contenders but a bit too small and forgettable to count. None of these five have a Best Picture nomination or a best screenplay. In fact, were it not for Cruz, they would have been completely shut out of every major category.

I was actually surprised when people were not mentioning Bright Star as a possibility for this category. Face it: it’s a movie that centers around a woman who designs elegant and extravagant clothes in the Victorian era. It was made to be nominated for this award. As was The Young Victoria. And Coco before Chanel. Okay, a lot of movies were made just for this award, but that often does seem the case, doesn’t it?

BIG SNUB: An Education. The movie does a great job of encapsulating the outfits from a time period without rubbing your face in “HEY! THIS TAKES PLACE 50 YEARS AGO!” Also, there is a perfect contrast of the slightly flashier (and much more elegant clothes) of the David-world vs. Jenny’s school world, all which help enhance the overall seduction in the film.



Foreign Language Film
“Ajami” — Israel
“El Secreto de Sus Ojos” — Argentina
“The Milk of Sorrow” — Peru
“Un Prophète” — France
“The White Ribbon” — Germany

Sadly, I’ve only seen The White Ribbon. But I’m very happy I’ve seen that. I don’t even remember any of the other movies playing anywhere near me (I know for a fact that A Prophet has not even been released in the states yet). I am a bit surprised that there was no Broken Embraces, as Pedro Almodovar just seems like one of those safe-bets. Though, I’ve heard the movie is just okay.

BIG SNUB: No comment.



Sound Editing
“Avatar” — Christopher Boyes and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle
“The Hurt Locker” — Paul N. J. Ottosson
“Inglourious Basterds” — Wylie Stateman
“Star Trek” — Mark Stoeckinger and Alan Rankin
“Up” — Michael Silvers and Tom Myers

Sound Mixing
“Avatar” — Christopher Boyes, Gary Summers, Andy Nelson and Tony Johnson
“The Hurt Locker” — Paul N. J. Ottosson and Ray Beckett
“Inglourious Basterds” — Michael Minkler, Tony Lamberti and Mark Ulano
“Star Trek” — Anna Behlmer, Andy Nelson and Peter J. Devlin
“Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” — Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers and Geoffrey Patterson

I really don’t get the difference between Sound Editing and Sound Mixing. People have explained it to me and I understand it to an extent, but I don’t really know how you can judge it all that separately. Granted, I don’t think 95% of the viewership (at least) is any more informed than I am. Thankfully, neither does the Academy, as year after year, they nominate almost the exact same films for both categories. They probably do all five initially, then realize that people will catch onto the fact that the Academy is as unable to distinguish between the two categories as the average viewer is, they change one or two. And only give the award to the same movie about 50% of the time. It’s a conspiracy I tell you!

BIG SNUB: While I had many problems with District 9, it did have very nice sound. I think. I often don’t walk out of a movie and immediately comment on the sound, but what I remember seems to hold up pretty well. I know…this isn’t this blog’s proudest moment.



Music (Original Score)
“Avatar” — James Horner
“Fantastic Mr. Fox” — Alexandre Desplat
“The Hurt Locker” — Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders
“Sherlock Holmes” — Hans Zimmer
“Up” — Michael Giacchino

Can I make this one “Choose Your Own Adventure?” I have absolutely nothing to say or add that doesn’t venture into “predictions and what I want to win” land.

Music (Original Song)
“Almost There” from “The Princess and the Frog” Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
“Down in New Orleans” from “The Princess and the Frog” Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
“Loin de Paname” from “Paris 36” Music by Reinhardt Wagner Lyric by Frank Thomas
“Take It All” from “Nine” Music and Lyric by Maury Yeston
“The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)” from “Crazy Heart” Music and Lyric by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett

I found none of the music from Crazy Heart all that memorable. To me, it sounded very much like “written for a movie” music, where we just have to assume that for this reality, that is amazing music. There is always a problem when a screenplay calls for good music. Only Simon Cowell can manufacture a hit. Though, at least Jennifer’s Body explains it away with some good old Satanism.

I think the Academy chose two of the more boring songs from The Princess and the Frog. “Friends on the Other Side” was by far the best song. But there are two facts about Disney villain songs: they’re always the strongest or pretty darn close, and never ever ever will get an Oscar nomination. Of course, it was also undone by the long talking parts. So I guess it’s not too grave of an injustice. Maybe it’s just a better scene than song. However, “Dig a Little Deeper” is all nice and Oscar-y and is still better than the two nominees.

But let me at least commend the Academy on choosing the surprising and right choice for Nine. “Cinema Italiano” got all the attention when Nine was coming out, but ultimately “Take It All” (when listened to on its own and not after two excruciating hours of boredom) perseveres as a great song. It’s powerful, angry, heartfelt, and violent. And there’s a line about “pasties.” I do so hope that when it’s performed at the Oscars, it’s done as a striptease. Not going to happen, but one can dream.

BIG SNUB: I would have loved to see “Petey’s Song” from The Fantastic Mr. Fox among the nominees, for its sheer oddness and how much it would have implanted some real life and genuine confusion into the ceremony.



Makeup
“Il Divo” — Aldo Signoretti and Vittorio Sodano
“Star Trek” — Barney Burman, Mindy Hall and Joel Harlow
“The Young Victoria” — Jon Henry Gordon and Jenny Shircore

I tried and tried but I can’t think of anything to say about this category. I think I may have blogger’s exhaustion. I could labor the Single Man point and talk about Julianne Moore’s eyes in that movie, but even I’m getting fed up with myself.



Visual Effects
“Avatar” — Joe Letteri, Stephen Rosenbaum, Richard Baneham and Andrew R. Jones
“District 9” — Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros and Matt Aitken
“Star Trek” — Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh and Burt Dalton

I think this is the one category movie buffs (or buffs-in-training like me) are not allowed to complain about. It’s essentially the “who threw the most money at their movie” award and the “let’s give the dumb movie an award” award. Except, right now, we have a 30 million dollar flick and two best picture nominees, along with another one that was very close.

BIG SNUB: I'm not allowed to complain, but I feel like I should throw something in. Fine. Julie and Julia, for making Meryl Streep look the size of a giraffe.



Now for the rest:

Documentary (Feature)
“Burma VJ”
“The Cove”
“Food, Inc.”
“The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers”
“Which Way Home”

Documentary (Short Subject)
“China’s Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province”
“The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner”
“The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant”
“Music by Prudence”
“Rabbit à la Berlin”

Short Film (Animated)
“French Roast” Fabrice O. Joubert
“Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty” Nicky Phelan and Darragh O’Connell
“The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)” Javier Recio Gracia
“Logorama” Nicolas Schmerkin
“A Matter of Loaf and Death” Nick Park

Short Film (Live Action)
“The Door” — Juanita Wilson and James Flynn
“Instead of Abracadabra” — Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström
“Kavi” — Gregg Helvey
“Miracle Fish” — Luke Doolan and Drew Bailey
“The New Tenants” — Joachim Back and Tivi Magnusson

As I haven’t seen any of these, I’m not going to weigh in.

BIG SNUB: Granted, I can’t juxtapose this against the nominees, but I’m sad there is no shout-out for Anvil!: The Story of Anvil for Best Documentary. I heard it wasn’t even on the short list, pre-nominees. Yes, on one hand, it seems a very unAcademic movie: all about metal bands and there’s a part about playing guitar with a vibrator. On the other hand, it is a film about the power of friendship and how one should never give up on one’s dreams, no matter the adversity. That message seems to have “Oscar nominee” written all over it.



Coming soon, I take a nap. Coming a little bit after that, I post a lighter, fluffier, and not 7-page entry on something unOscar related. After that, predictions!

The Princess, the Frog, and the Mixed Message

Last month I, like many 20-somethings attempting to reclaim some Rosebudian piece of their childhood, saw Disney's The Princess and the Frog. This was it: the return to animated glory, to the days of The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, and, hell, I'll even throw in The Return of Jafar because I always had a soft spot in my heart for that sequel.

(Be warned, this blog is not above spoilers)

I must say I liked it. It was cute, fun, and felt much stronger and classic than anything else that has come from Disney animation (Pixar excepted, of course) in the past decade and a half. The Shadow Man was a bad-ass villain, I was impressed at the choice to off the comic relief, and Tiana was a far cry from the man-obsessed, whiny bitches like Snow White or Ariel (coming soon: "Why all Disney characters are whiny bitches"). She was independent, career-minded, and did not want to get around in life by wishing on stars or flowers or teapots or whatever it is every other princess feels the uncontrollable urge to wish upon instead of just getting of her ass and doing her own dirty work.

Then I made the mistake of going to Disney World. Don't get me wrong; I love everything about Disney World (well, except Epcot). I love the forced kindness from the "cast members." I love that people can walk around with Donald Duck's rear or Goofy's mouth on their heads without reservation...in fact, they’re almost expected to look so asinine. I love the angry lesbians who are always in charge of crowd control when characters come out to sign autographs. But my sojourn to the second happiest place on earth (first being my local Chevy's) also reminded me what Disney is all about: wishes. Tiana (the Princess half of The Princess and the Frog) may say that wishing on a star is not what you need. She may try to convince little girls all you need to prosper in life and get that great art deco restaurant is a lot of hard work, some delicious southern cooking, a manic, overweight rich white friend, and a lot of hard work, but she's lying through her teeth.

Yes, I will admit Tiana is more of a busy bee than most Disney princesses. Aurora sings and sleeps her way through her film, and Cinderella only really does any domestic labor because she's forced to, and even then she mostly outsources to various mammalia rodentia. Tiana saves like a miser, works 20 hour shifts at most dining establishments in New Orleans, and has thrown her biological clock out the window all to get her dream restaurant.

But none of that makes a bit of difference.

When the real action of the movie begins, Tiana has just learned that years of toiling have gotten her nowhere. Her dream building for her dream restaurant will remain just a dream and her money just isn't enough to become Paula-Dean-before-Paula-Dean.

And so she wishes on a star.

Enter the Frog Prince. She kisses him, has many lovely adventures, falls in love with him, and then, voila, she eventually gets her restaurant! With money she got from her wonderful prince. Not money she saved up. In fact, she probably could have spent that money on a good bunch of Hurricanes and Mardis Gras beads and gone out with every Tom, Dick, and Charming in the town and as long as she seduced that prince, she still would have gotten her dream fulfilled (come to think of it, she could've sold out to Shadow Man and gotten it anyway....man, so many ways to skin a catfish that rely much more on magic and wishes than on hard work).

Now, you could argue that Tiana's sedulous nature that she built up over the years of her ascetic lifestyle was what got her and her prince through their ordeal so she could eventually get her dreams. However, that wasn't enough. She needed the wish. She needed the star to give her her prince. Snow White or Cinderella or Sleeping Beauty wouldn't have gotten their man if they were butt-ugly. Hell, Ariel couldn't get laid until she could talk. Tiana may need her work ethic, but it ultimately becomes just an accessory to the main catalyst: the wish.

Of course, this situation is in a way indicative of every fictional plot. No matter how industrious or good a character is, no matter how much she saves up or brushes her teeth, she has no control over her fate. Or his fate. The star, the godlike figure, the writer has to grant his or her wish regardless of how talented or untalented he or she is. In fact, Tiana's tenacious hold on her aspirations is really just as much a gift of fate as any deus ex machina that could be devised. She was not naturally a hard worker. She got that when the screenwriter was laying down the script; possibly the same moment he or she decided that Tiana would be saved by cosmic intervention. All magic could be extirpated from this movie and she would still have as little credit for the ultimate outcome and her inevitable prosperity as she has now or as any Disney princess has ever had. Well, unless we changed this movie to Darren Aronofsky's The Princess and the Frog.

So, I suppose this leaves us in a bit of a pickle. I started this first blog entry hoping to denounce Disney for using the illusion of "keeping one's nose to the grindstone" to mask its stereotypical reliance on magic, fate, love, and everything that a most people never really attain in life. But I may have just condemned most Hollywood cinema as equally flawed.

I refuse it! Damn metafiction! Rick Blaine deserves more pats on the back than Briar Rose ever will. So I'll wrap up with this line.

All movies are Disney movies. But some movies are more Disney movies than others.

Tiana and the Princess and the Frog may be taking a baby step away from the Jiminy Cricket and his doctrine, but in the end, I can still see them suckling at the teat of the Blue Fairy and hoping for a miracle, as much as Disney may want to deny it.