I warned you that I was going to have a lot to say about stuff you only remotely cared about and you didn’t believe me, so here is your proof. Scroll down and see it all. Keep scrolling. Keep scrolling. You to the bottom of the entry yet?
….
Okay I gotta go do some stuff so just let me know when you reach the bottom. And then scroll back up.
….
You’re back?
Okay great, welcome back. Well, as I was saying I have prepared a little Oscar preview/prediction entry here for your amusement/lack of amusement. I covered the Big 8 categories, which I know is usually the Big 6, but the writing awards are pretty major these days too, so the Big 8 it is. As you’ll notice my predicted winners match up most of the time with whom I would like to see win. That is a good thing. This entry is like 1,000 hours long. That is a bad thing. You can take breaks as you like, if, you know, you have a life and stuff.
Read at your own risk.
BEST PICTURE
As I have mentioned elsewhere previously there is a difference your favorite movie of the year and the best movie. And there is a difference still between the best movie of the year and the “Best Picture” of the year. The Academy Awards are a very specific thing and that is what many people don’t get when they complain about why certain things out of the mainstream don’t win or get nominated. It’s because they shouldn’t. The Academy Awards aren’t really about what is the best movie of the year. They are about what movie is most deserving of the Academy Award for Best Picture. For example I would say Almost Famous was my favorite/best movie of 2000 but Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon should have been Best Picture. In 2002 I thought Gangs of New York was the best movie but I was rooting like crazy for Chicago to win Best Picture. It’s sometimes a subtle difference but there are criteria to help you make the distinction.
1.) For starters, it’s always a good idea to try and picture 20 years from now how that movie will look on a list of Best Picture winners. Will people rent it and watch and think “what the hell were they thinking that year?” or “that must have been a weak year for movies” or will it hold up fine and represent that particular year well in the annals of history? So it should be something that has a timeless quality about it.
2.) Does it feel like something that the average person might potentially like if they were forced to watch it? And remember: the average person is stupid. This isn’t to say the Best Picture should pander to the lowest common denominator, but instead that there is a difference between the Indie Spirit Awards and the Academy Awards. The Academy Awards are the universal film award of record so its Best Picture should be something accessible.
3.) Is it important? This isn’t to slight comedy or genre films, but whatever it is, it must feel like it has weight and importance and it cries out to be recognized as great.
4.) And most importantly, it must FEEL Oscar worthy. This is the hardest thing to define but in reality it’s the most important. Does it feel like a movie that when it is released on video seems like its cover should say “Best Picture Winner” across the top? Does the thought of hearing its name announced at the end of the night seem awkward or does it seem fitting? Does it feel like when they were making the movie they knew they were making something great? More than anything else though, it’s just a gut feeling.
Million Dollar Baby feels like a Best Picture winner whereas The Aviator just doesn’t. I enjoyed The Aviator more. If I had to watch one of them again I would pick The Aviator no contest. The Aviator is bigger in scope and much more epic. But it doesn’t really have an ending. It doesn’t seem to be that important. And I cant shake that feeling that if it won people would look back 10 years from now and think “how the hell did THAT win”. It’s a movie that is easy to like but hard to really love. And although I didn’t love it, Million Dollar Baby has inspired a lot of passion in a lot of people. Mostly older people, but technically old people are still people too. Plus it feels important and seems like a movie that should have the words “Best Picture Winner” on its box. I can’t imagine ever thinking naming Million Dollar Baby Best Picture would be viewed as a mistake. So while Sideways might have been by far my favorite of the nominees and The Aviator is the grandest, Million Dollar Baby is the most Oscar-worthy and so I’ll be pulling for it come Oscar night. Which is fortunate because it will be winning whether I’m pulling for it or not.
Will Win: Million Dollar Baby
Would Win If I Were In Charge: Million Dollar Baby
BEST ACTOR
Jamie Foxx is such a lock here they should just start engraving the trophy while we speak. In fact you could make a case that the other 4 nominees shouldn’t even be nominated. If I was in charge, the other non-Jamie Foxx nominees would have been Paul Giamatti, Jim Carrey, Javier Bardem and maybe Liam Neeson, although Leo isn’t a bad pick for the last slot either. But nevertheless, 3 of the other 4 nominees shouldn’t be anywhere near nominations so there’s no way they are winning. Plus none of the non-Jamie Foxx performances really stand out. Which is ironic considering a few months ago all the talk was about what a good year this was for male actors. But once you take Paul, Jim and Javier out of the picture, it really doesn’t look that way. In fact people in the future will probably look at the list of nominees, see their performances on video and think “that must have been a pretty weak year for Best Actor candidates”. That is if anyone other than myself actually did such things. But at least we will have a worthy winner to redeem the rest of the sorry nominees. And I’m sure the Oscar people are glad Jamie is winning because then we will get to find out whether his speech will kick massive amounts of ass or gargantuan J. Lo sized amounts of ass. And really, it’s all about the speeches. For people like Michael Moore, Adrien Brody and Cuba Gooding Jr. their speech was arguably more beneficial to their career than the actual winning of the award was. Denzel gave a great speech a few years back too. In fact I think every few years they need to give an Oscar to an excitable black man just to keep these shows interesting.
As a side note, I find it interesting that almost all of the memorable Oscar speeches have been given by men. I mean if you take away Julia Roberts and Cher, than the two most memorable Oscar speeches given by females in the past 25 years are Hallie Berry sobbing uncontrollably and Sally Field making a fool of herself. And I don’t mean to imply anything by that observation; I just thought it was worth noting.
Will Win: Jamie Foxx
Would Win If I Was In Charge: Jamie Foxx
BEST ACTRESS
Speaking of a weak year for acting candidates, check out the Best Actress category. It’s lucky that they only have to pick five nominees and not six because then they’d be screwed. I know some people have said Catalina Sandino Moreno doesn’t deserve a nomination (I disagree) but really whom else would you pick instead? Name someone. Anyone. Bueller? The only name that you could even remotely attempt to get by me would be Uma Thurman for Kill Bill: Vol. 2 but there are several problems with that. 1.) She already got a nomination for Pulp Fiction and one Oscar nomination is already one too many for Uma Thurman. 2.) More importantly, it’s not an Oscar worthy part or performance. Some times no mater how good things are they just aren’t Oscar material. For example see Denzel Washington in Training Day. Better yet, don’t…
This isn’t to say people like Sigourney Weaver can’t get nominated for something like Aliens, it’s just to say someone like Uma Thurman cant get nominated for something like Kill Bill. And I say that as a HUGE Kill Bill fan. But Uma just doesn’t display a great level of acting ability in a movie that already just doesn’t feel like it should be within 100 yards of the Academy Awards. I mean everyone points to the buried alive scene as great acting but I guarantee you if bury 100 halfway decent actresses alive, 80 of them could give performances equal or better than what she did in that scene. (Go ahead, try it.) There’s nothing particularly unique or exciting about her performance and I hate to break it to ya’ but anger and physical pain just aint two of your harder things to portray. So anyway, 50 words later, the point is that since you have to have five nominees, Catalina Sandino Moreno should be there either based on talent or by default depending on your viewpoint, but definitely based on one of the two. But as for who should win, well there shouldn’t be any debate over that. Catalina is just lucky to be here so she’s out. Kate Winslet is great but isn’t even the best actor in her own movie (that would be Jim Carrey). Imelda Staunton is fantastic, but if five minutes of crying is powerful, 40 minutes of nonstop crying is decidedly less so. Plus no one even knows who she is. That brings us (and Oscar) down to two: Hilary Swank and Annette Bening. Now of course Hillary Swank will win because everyone saw and loved her movie and Being Julia feels too slight and too unknown to have the Best Actress winner come from it. But if I said earlier that actors from artsy action films or mainstream popcorn flicks don’t deserve Oscars, I don’t include in that category period dramadies based on W. Somerset Maugham novels. So I don’t think the quality or audience size of the movies should be a factor in this race, but yet it will be. So be it. But here are what SHOULD, in an ideal world, be the deciding factors in the race:
1.) If Hilary Swank were to win it would be her second Oscar and thus put her in the same company as Katherine Hepburn, Tom Hanks, Marlon Brando, and Ingrid Bergman. On the other hand it would also put in the same company as Sally Field, Shelly Winters, and Walter Brennan, so maybe the two Oscar thing isn’t such a big deal after all…
2.) But then again she would have two Oscars and have only ever appeared in 2 & ½ movies (I only count Insomnia as half a movie because I doubt anyone even remembers she was in it. And I don’t count any of her other movies because they don’t count.). And rewarding someone so young with such a barren resume the highest prize possible twice in five years just doesn’t seem right.
3.) In contrast, Annette Bening has been around for years has already been nominated twice before and even already lost to Hilary in 1999. She is a big star who is overdue for some recognition.
4.) And, oh yeah, one last minor thing: ANNETTE WAS FREAKING AMAZING. Outside of the Jennifer Connelly/Naomi Watts duo from last year she gives the best performance by a lead actress of the millennium. Remember how they gave Hallie Berry an Oscar three years ago for switching from laughing hysterically to crying in the matter of half a second (and having explicit sex with Billy Bob Thornton. And being “black”)? Well, Annette does that probably no less than 10 times in Being Julia (the switching from laughing to crying thing. Not the explicit sex with Bill Bob Thornton thing. Or the black thing.) In addition to switching instantly between laughing and crying many, many times, Annette goes through the entire rest of the emotional range too. She is powerful and yet vulnerable. Funny yet deadly serious. It is a performance so rich, unique, and varied that I can’t possibly imagine anyone else doing it. It also makes me feel like I was learning too much about Annette Bening as a person, as I left the theater thinking she was undoubtedly emotionally unstable in real life because there’s no other way she could have given her performance. But I think that’s what’s called being given a glimpse into someone soul. And that seems like a pretty good goal for any actor to strive for. Especially Hilary Swank.
Will Win: Hilary Swank
Would Win If I Was in Charge: Annette Benning
(PS- Remember that time Nicole Kidman won. Yeah, neither do I.)
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
I really don’t have much to say here. Natalie Portman shouldn’t be nominated, Sophie Okonedo is in Hotel Rwanda so she is disqualified, and Laura Linney is Laura Linney. So that means it’s a battle between “the scene outside the door” and “the scene with the speech about the wine”. Because when it comes to the supporting races its all about who has the best big scene. Which was helpful to people like Beatrice Straight in 1976 for example, as she was only in one scene. But this year is the exception to the rule. Clearly the scene where Virginia Madsen gives the speech on the porch about wine is the better scene. In fact if they gave an Oscar for Best Scene that would be your runaway winner. But. Cate Blanchett’s scene outside the screening room door is almost as good. Plus she’s a bigger star than Virginia and is overdue for an Oscar. Plus her performance is better overall and the way she becomes someone so well known and distinct without ever descending into mere imitation (well except for the first sequence at the golf range) is nothing short of amazing. It would be like 30 years from now someone who is well known in their own right playing Jack Nicholson in a movie and making it heartfelt and utterly believable without ever seeming like a caricature or an imitation. And when that movie is made that person will win an Oscar as well.
Will Win: Cate Blanchett
Would Win If I Was In Charge: Cate Blanchett (barely)
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Since I cant make up my own nominees I’ll be fine with it when Morgan Freeman wins, but since this is my personal Oscar rantings and since this category is boring and already locked up anyway, allow me to rant some more about Freddie Highmore. I don’t think the world has seen anyone this obsessed with a young boy since the mid 90’s at the Neverland Ranch. But I don’t care; the kid was AMAZING! Here I am spending valuable years of my life getting all this training on how to act and then I go see some little kid blow every grown up this year out of the water and I wonder what the hell I am doing with my life. All I know is he must have had some amazing objectives and tactics. His beat breakdown must have been intense. I bet he was really feeling it in his ass-kicking chakra. Him, Dakota Fanning, Haley Joel Osment, and that kid from Love Actually need to start an acting troupe. And their first order of business can be kicking Jonathan Lipnicki’s ass. They should rough up that kid from About A Boy while they’re at it. Perhaps steal his lunch money or something. And they should also find some way to travel back in time and kill Anna Paquin circa The Piano too. The world would be a much better place if they did.
Will Win: Morgan Freeman
Would Win If I Was In Charge: Freddie Highmore (except for the fact he isn’t nominated)
(PS- I’m thinking about testing out a theory I have. I’m going get Morgan Freeman to do voiceover narration for my home movies and see if they can get a Best Picture nomination as a result. Maybe if I kill Ashley Judd he’ll be so desperate for work that he just might do it.
But then I’d have to kill Ashley Judd…
Decisions, decisions….)
BEST DIRECTOR:
They shouldn’t give it Martin Scorsese just because he hasn’t won it before. If he didn’t win for Raging Bull then it doesn’t seem like he should be winning for The Aviator. And since they’ve already waited this long they might as well wait until he really deserves it. On the other hand Clint Eastwood really DOESN’T deserve it. He may have made the Best Picture but as far as I could tell the direction consisted of him setting up a stationary camera and telling people “now stand in front of it and do stuff”. Plus he already has an Oscar for directing. Plus what’s the big deal with Clint Eastwood anyway? He’s an old boring guy who used to be Dirty Harry. But people for some unknown reason act like he’s Jesus Fucking Christ. I mean, outside of Unforgiven what has he ever been involved in that was so great? That movie with the monkey? Space Cowboys? Dirty Harry Part 8? This really just baffles me completely.
Will Win: Too close to call, but while logic says Clint, my gut says Marty
Would Win If I Were In Charge: Martin Scorsese
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:
Now that Sideways has fulfilled the promise of Election it really makes you wonder what the hell happened with About Schmidt - or as the lovely Chris Maddox dubbed it About Schit (a nickname I don’t 100% agree with but that the 93% of me that does agree with it finds highly appropriate on multiple levels). Hopefully it was just an aberration because looking back, it now seems like it’s the other side of very thin line than Alexander Payne likes to toe. Stay on the good side Alex; stay on the good side. More humor, warmth, and accessibility, and less needlessly slow pacing, postmodern detachment, and Kathy Bates naked in a hot tub. If you ever forget that again we get to take away your Oscar. Just like we only wish we could do with Roberto Begnini…
Will Win: Sideways
Would Win If I Were In Charge: Sideways
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Most things are matters of taste and opinion. I might think one thing, but I always respect the opinions of others and can usually see where they might be coming from. For example, in every category listed here you could think that any one of the nominees deserved to win and although I might disagree I would respect your opinion as a valid one. All the categories except one. This one. Liking Eternal Sunshine is not a matter of taste. It is a fact. If you do not think Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is a good movie then you are wrong. You don’t have to think it is the most brilliant thing ever but you DO have to think it is good. And there aren’t too many movies I can say that about. In fact, of movies that have come out in the past few years, this is the only one I can think of off the top of my head that that statement applies to. There is no valid compliant you can have with Eternal Sunshine that would be big enough to prevent you from liking it. So therefore it should go without saying that it should win this category. Everyone is up in arms this year about the fact that Martin Scorsese has never won an Oscar, but I think it’s a bigger travesty that Charlie Kaufman doesn’t have one. And that’s saying a lot seeing as how Martin Scorsese has made over 20 feature films, is an American icon and a big enough celebrity to star in his own commercials, whereas Charlie Kaufman has only four produced original screenplays, is unknown to the average movie-goer, and even I wouldn’t recognize him if I fell on him on the street. But Charlie Kaufman’s screenplays are to screenplays what “Baby Got Back” is to Sir Mix-A-Lot songs - so much better than everything else that it seems unfair that it’s even in the same category as them. But Charlie’s not only in a different league; he’s playing a different game. And Eternal Sunshine is his greatest work yet. If the writings of Charlie Kaufman aren’t the very definition of “Original Screenplay” then I don’t know what is. So explain to me how he doesn’t have an Oscar yet because I’m a little confused.
Will Win: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Would Win If I Were In Charge: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Top 3 & 1/2 of the Week:
1.) Sleep or lack thereof
2.) Jonathan Marc Sherman
3.) Primary Colors
3 & 1/2.) Ethan Hawke movies
No comments:
Post a Comment