« Review: Lie to Me | Main | Comment Confusion »

Oscars and Why I Don't Care

I think I officially stopped caring about the Oscars when Ellen Burstyn didn't win Best Actress for Requiem for a Dream. Maybe it was before that when Al Pacino beat Denzel Washington's Malcolm X for Best Actor. Either way, I'm always stunned that people get so upset when Oscar nominations come out and their faves get snubbed. People didn't see "The Reader" getting so much love but Harvey Weinstein called it; he knew he could get the film some noms based on the film's producers, Anthony Minghella and Sidney Pollack, both who passed away recently. While that seems crass, and it is, it's also how the Oscars work. People expected "Gran Torino" to get noticed, pretty much because it was Clint Eastwood. But really, "Changeling" always looked like the better Oscar contender. Just because it wasn't that good shouldn't make people forget about it.

And while people can complain all they want, sometimes you have to give Oscar voters credit for the insight.

The aforemention Pacino vs. Denzel made sense; Al Pacino's career has gone into steady decline since the Oscar and the voters were right to think that that would be the last time they'd be able to give him an even mildly legit trophy (while Denzel had his whole career in front of him). Similarly, Hollywood gave Roberts the award because they wanted to crown their favorite leading lady and when else was she going to get a real shot.

For this year, that could give David Fincher, the man Ed Norton once compared to Stanley Kubrick ("Kubrick didn't die, he just moved to Silverlake"), a shot at the gold for direction. Heath Ledger's tragic death will battle Robert Downey Jr's thrilling comeback for supporting actor. Mickey Rourke's return vs. a vote for Gay Right, I mean, Sean Penn in Milk?

Hollywood-types also like to think that they are above commercial fodder and, you know, being entertainment so they often overlook the more popcorn films. People can point out that light hearted fare and crowd pleasers got noms in the past but that's also because there were fewer films out back then. Now that more than 600 films come out a year, there's enough art house material to choose between.

And in the end, aren't we all just usually caught up in the hype? In high school, the question was "Pulp or Gump" but the picture with the most lasting appeal (and now the one I'd dub best picture) was "The Shawshank Redemption". 

If there's one person who should really be upset about the results, it's whatever network is airing the show. With no Dark Knight, the broadcast just lost its main draw and I doubt Hugh Jackman will be able to save the declining ratings.

Hosting by Yahoo!

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

QotMarcus.gif

FilmRank021112 lineblue.jpg
PLEASE CLICK ON THIS AD...

SO I CAN MAKE SOME DOUGH!
lineblue.jpg