I watched the Academy Awards from a Miami hotel room without internet access. These things happen. I am ready, however, to make my predictions. I know it’s unexpected, but I’m really thinking that Marion Cotillard can pull off an upset. And probably Tilda Swinton, too. You heard it here first.
Actually, the Academy did a good job this year. No Country actually was the best picture. When was the last time that the movie which deserved to be nominated and to win actually did? The Godfather Part II? One could make the case for The Departed last year, but that was essentially a make-up call for denying Scorsese repeatedly in the 70s, 80s and 90s. It’s hard, too, to dispute the acting choices. Daniel Day-Lewis is, well, Daniel Day-Lewis (or as my coworker watching with me called him: “Who?”), and Javier Bardem deserved to win the Best Supporting Actor Presented by SuperCuts Award.
As for the actress awards, I can’t really say if they are deserved as I do not believe women should be allowed to work. I am, after all, a freedom-hating Communist (as are Jon and Steve). If I was forced to comment, though, I would say that Tilda Swinton has been among the most underrated actresses around. From Thumbsucker to The Chronicles of Narnia she has had a knack for picking great characters. Her work in Michael Clayton was a highly original take on a character that most actresses would have played as a two-dimensional stereotypical “bitchy boss”.
Jon, any comments on the art direction and/or sound editing awards?
6 Comments
February 26, 2008 at 3:09 am
Can I just be disappointed that Darjeeling didn’t even get nominated for Best Screenplay–the category that tradition has shown to be Wes Anderson’s “gimme” category, and the Academy’s way of back-handedly complimenting all of his other movies? And giving it to Diablo Cody–a lowly blogger–just makes me think that they really wanted it to hurt.
Also disappointing was that with two nominations for two beautiful films, Roger Deakins couldn’t get any Oscar love for No Country For Old Men or The Assassination of Jesse James. He is the most talented Director of Photography in the business and deserves more.
And can’t I be a little disappointed that Jon Stewart’s 2nd time as host made Ellen look really talented?
Because I am disappointed about all of those things.
No complaints about the biggies: Best Film, Best Director(s), Best Actor. I do think that the Best Supporting Actress category was weak this year–Tilda Swinton did not do a spectacular job as the corporate attorney with big shoes to fill and anxiety about filling them, to no fault of her own; it was a poorly written part that consisted of long mannered monologues overlaid with images of her getting dressed and showing a bit of her belly roll. I felt that this was a pity Oscar because as Jeff said, she really has been the more angular-looking, riskier Streep in the past few years. My suspicion is that the Academy liked Cate Blanchett better, but feels bad about giving her award after award because of her great impressions of famous people. Maybe they were trying to discourage that Frank TV guy from starting a film career.
As a final note… I saw The Bourne Ultimatum at a drive in and they were missing a reel, but I didn’t notice until after the film when I looked at my watch, so yeah, I guess it did deserve Best Editing.
February 26, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Jon Stewart did a great job, though I hold nothing against Ellen.
February 26, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Disappointment is for when “Shakespeare in Love” beats out “Saving Private Ryan”. Honestly, I usually feel fine as long as the Academy just gets the nominees right. Because everyone gets to vote in the final round, non-cinematographers may be less appreciative of Deakins or non-screenwriters may not “get” Wes Anderson. Thus, sometimes the more obvious candidates win out. This helps a movie like “The Bourne Ultimatum” win a Best Editing Oscar because most people can watch the film and see that the editing is everything (with so much movement, action, etc). But, in actuality, most every movie relies upon solid editing. “Bourne” wins because there are more edits, just as Diablo Cody wins because “Juno” has more snappy one-liners. Nuance is out when it comes time to hand out the awards, but I’m okay with that. In both of these cases, I think the awards were deserved.
February 27, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Although I agree with inertnomad that dissapointments should be saved for when “Shakespeare in Love” beats “Saving Private Ryan”, I would have loved to see The Darjeeling Limited nominated for Best Screenplay. I applaud Diablo Cody for referencing bands such as The Stooges, The Runaways, Melvins and Sonic Youth, injecting them with some newly found relevance – but unfortunately all we end up with is an increase in itunes sales, which in my head means nothing.
When I think about Wes Anderson films I think about a quote by philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson (which is referenced in a book I recently read): “A man lives for culture. He does not live for what he can create, but rather what can be created in him”. I like to live for the feeling of “Holy shit! That was perfect” I get when I see movies such as The Darjeeling Limited, even if it doesn’t lead to hamburger phones being sold-out on eBay or “Oh My Blog” printed on t-shirts.
February 28, 2008 at 12:23 am
Totally agree with the Anderson vs Cody argument, and the difference between creating pop culture references vs just making them.
That said, I really wanted a pair of those white and blue Zissou Adidases a few years ago. Consumerism can’t be separated from the art that we enjoy–anything we form close connections with can get fetishized, which is what I expect is happening in the 12-17 market with those hamburger phones.
The real tragedy will be if Cody convinces an entire generation to appreciate Mott the Hoople.
February 28, 2008 at 9:57 am
And I prefer Shakespeare in Love.