Best Picture and The Oscars. Same As It Ever Was?

In the end, didn't we basically end up where we always do with Best Picture: a mix of message movies, epics, dramas and war films. Same as it ever was only more diversely populated. We definitely did not end up where we usually do with Best Director: a woman, white men of different generations, a gay black man? It's still kind of amazing, right?


Things that got AMPAS all hot and bothered this year: the color blue and/or flying (Avatar, Up, Up in the Air), race (Avatar, Blind Side, District 9, Precious), thinly disquised allegories (Avatar, District 9, The Hurt Locker), young girls coming-of-age (An Education, Precious), existential crises (A Serious Man, Up in the Air), war (The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds) and illiteracy (Precious, Blind Side, Basterds).

Things that AMPAS dated but couldn't commit to: race dramas that didn't star aliens, Sandra Bullock or illiterate black kids (Invictus with 2 big nominations), stage bound musicals about cinema (Nine with 4 nominations)

Things that turned AMPAS off: literacy (Bright Star), manboy comedies (500 Days of Summer, The Hangover) the apocalypse (The Road) and live-action children with animated imaginations (Where the Wild Things Are, The Lovely Bones).

Predictions? I did pretty well on my complete predictions scoring 86% correct in the big eight categories, 77% if you count the technical categories. And if you include the shorts and the docs which most people aren't foolish enough to try and predict, it falls to a less impressive but respectable 72%. But I got the two hardest ones: The Blind Side and Maggie Gyllenhaal in Crazy Heart. So uh, "yay me!" he said sheepishly.

I am less concerned with statistics than most pundits because what I love best is trying to catch the weird detours or catching things really early. You have to take risks if you hope to do that. While I'm still proud that I never predicted and always doubted Daniel Day-Lewis making the Actor list for Nine (I took a lot of heat for that one), I was shaking my head today looking at my "year in advance" predictions. I totally fell for ALL of the majors that didn't pan out: Invictus, The Lovely Bones, Nine and Public Enemies. Oy. This is my way of saying that it was one of my least impressive "year in advance" showings so that either means I've lost it (possible) or the year was a bit hard to predict before it really got going (equally possible).

At least I never bought that weird media meme that 'ANYTHING could be a Best Picture nominee' (The Hangover! Star Trek!) as if there were 35 spots open and they had replaced the entire Academy membership with randomly selected moviegoers of mystery tastes.

Release Dates.
It's a quirk of mine that I care so much about these. Many movie addicts are content to just wait until December to see movies that hope to wow adults with a mix of subject matter, ambition, and big stars. I prefer to see that type of movie intermingled with all the other types of movies all year long. Can you imagine eating food the way movies are released: you may only eat grains in the spring, vegetables in the fall, desserts in the summer and sandwiches in the winter! BO-RING. So I thought I'd break down the release dates and how they're reflected in the Oscar nominations.


The chart to the left clearly shows that you don't need to be a December release to win the highest honor (a best picture nomination). In fact, you could argue that December is the likeliest time to fail if you have gold statues on your mind. The Lovely Bones, Nine and Invictus were all somewhat crushed by the weight of expectations implied by their release dates. But unfortunately, the chart to the right reiterates why the studios cram everything into one month. Even though December isn't hogging the best picture spotlight at all (The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds and Avatar lead the race and they're spread out:June, August, December) you're still more likely to win nominations in random categories if you come out late in the year. Even if people aren't that into you (see the three December failures again). Would The Young Victoria or Crazy Heart be up for 3 Oscars each if they'd been released in May? Would Bright Star be up for the tech prizes it definitely deserved had it opened in December?

Just about the worst news for we devout year-long moviegoers is that the dread "qualifying release" -- wherein a movie only pretends to come out but doesn't -- actually worked this year. It had been failing in recent years but I fear it'll be back with a vengeance after these successes. The Last Station managed two major nods, despite that "f*** you moviegoers!" tactic. The Secret of Kells, the surprise animated feature nominee, also refused to let you see it before seeking Oscar's seal of approval.

Why did it take me so long to speak to you today? Real life interfered. Plus, in more related news, today marked my first ever live news interviews which were broadcast somewhere in London and Canada respectively. If you saw or heard me, I apologize! You see, I do a lot of talking. And I have a head. And but I am still learning to combine the two... don't call me for your documentary just yet!

Actor and Actress Trivia? You know you want it.
The Oscar Map. Find out which actors and movies you're closest to.

Now that you've had a few hours to think about the nominations, what's still bothering you? Or do you think the Academy basically done good?

"An Education: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire"

What exactly would An Education: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire look like, Mr George Clooney? One can only imagine. Just last week at my own blog, Stale Popcorn, I imagined Mo'Nique's "Mary Jones" as a twist on James Cameron's Terminator T-1000 character, but I think transplanting Lee Daniels' tale of Claireece "Precious" Jones to 1960s England is a little bit out of my reach, but I'll give it a try.


Perhaps instead of Jenny Miller's (Carey Mulligans) parents being the class-struck doters that they are they are instead evil and monstrous as personified by Mo'Nique. That would certainly push Jenny into the arms of Peter Sarsgaard even further, even once she realised his hidden secrets. Or maybe Jenny, instead of being a smart and talented musician, she is an illiterate and morbidly obese teen who steals fried chicken and gets impregnated by the creepy, but "light-skinned", Sarsgaard. The possibilities are... well, not exactly endless, but it's fun to play around.

Makes me want to play musical chairs with the other films from the season. How about a musical about the existential crises that befall a United States Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal crew in the Iraq war? Throw in some of The Last Station and Jeremy Renner can sing his big number "War, What Is It Good For?" to Leo Tolstoy and you know Elaine Benes would be a fan! Maybe George Clooney can catch the wrong plane and end up flying to Paradise Falls with a crotchety old man and annoying child in tow. What about a movie in which aliens land in Johannesburg, South Africa, and instead of waging war they challenge the Springboks to a game of rugby. It can be called Distvictus! Or Inglourious Avatars? You'd have to make up your own story for that one.

Do you have any mix-and-match movies you'd like to see brought to life out of the embers of this awards season?

Michael Haneke, Supreme Confounder

A mssg received from my friend 'txt critic' today.

Lincoln Plaza is the WORST! Half of my audience was literally snoring through "The White Ribbon" -- in unison! -- and one half-deaf woman bellowed an hour in, 'I THOUGHT THIS HAD TO DO WITH THE HOLOCAUST.'

I swear UWS seniors ruin more movies than anyone.

I wasn't there but I can attest to this phenomenon. You will always get a perturbed earful when you see a Haneke picture on the Upper West Side. Should we presume the AMPAS members on the foreign film nominating committee will feel just as impatient with its mysteries and its implicitly projected "25 years later..." horror? AO Scott certainly didn't boost this Cannes Winner's Oscar cause with his recent review either.

But then I'm not currently speaking to AO anyway. He disses Haneke's always provocative direction just two weeks after raving about Clint Eastwood's work on Invictus??? What a world... what a world... [argh] don't make me talk about Invictus, AO. don't make me. I can't. I can't. It's just so ham-fistedly unworthy of discussion... [argh!]
*

Invictus yay or nay? Maybe a bit of both.

I talked to a friend who'd seen Clint Eastwood's Invictus this week. He's much more of an Clint fan than I am (I know that describes 90% of the population) but he wasn't too impressed. He sees a mixed Oscar response coming... although a big hit. He calls it "super commercial" but thinks it's rather clunky with exposition and lots of “I just showed you, but in case you didn’t get it, now I’ll TELL you” moments. Morgan Freeman's star turn he describes as "oratory and noble" and also "pretty boring". Ouch.

"Let's keep on making pictures with Clint." "Shake on it!"

Despite his reservations about the quality of Invictus he still thinks it'll sneak in as a Best Pic nominee because there’s ten slots. He capped off our conversation with the following confession

I didn’t think it was very good, but maybe I cried a couple of times...don’t judge.

Hee. Hey, I'm never judging tears in a movie. I choked up once during My Sister's Keeper and I thought it stunk. My best friend cried buckets at Casper (1995) of all things. And we were at a drive in! We still tease him about it 14 years later... but in a loving way.

Do you have faith that Oscar will want Eastwood back in a big way this year after the muted awards response last year. Or are you doubtful? Either way there's always next year. The iconic actor/director is already filming his next project Hereafter scheduled for (YOU GUESSED IT!) a December 2010 release. Matt Damon stars in that one, too.
*

For Your Consideration in All Categories, INVICTUS

Clint Eastwood is coming. Hide your Oscars!


I suppose you've already checked out the trailer for Invictus in beautiful Quicktime. Soon it will be embedded everywhere in crappier looking formats. The movie, based on this true story, is about Nelson Mandela's efforts to unite a divided South Africa through rugby. The trailer and synopsis suggest that it's a two-lead film as Morgan Freeman (as Mandela) and Matt Damon (looking athletic as Francois Pienaar) work together towards making this happen. Freeman is the mastermind, Damon acts as vessel. But since Invictus is another December Eastwood Oscar lob (oops, that's a tennis term. What do they say in football?) Matt Damon will obviously be demoted to supporting for the pursuit of Oscars.

I'm not quite buying the accents they conjure for Invictus but it is only a trailer and Freeman and Damon are both hugely talented fellows. It's hard to tell about actor's voices in 150 seconds of ittybitty clips anyway. When I first saw the Amelia trailer I was nearly sold on Swank's vocal work but stretched out to 120 minutes it made me ca-razy with its strenuous affectations.

Here are the beloved stars...


It's more and more obvious that there's more community and discussion revolving around movie trailers on the web than there is on actual movies themselves. This is one of the many reasons conversation seems to die on opening weekend. So trailer madness is fitting for any Oscar discussion, unfortunately, since you know that many of the ballots are cast through a complex combination of buzz factors, hype power, the power of suggestion (sometimes literal -- like the precursor awards), industry schmoozing, the general tone of reviews... and film clips! (Yes Virginia, not every AMPAS voter watches all of their screeners, dutifully.)

Check out this random tweet about the trailer.

I think this happens more and more with trailers. Instant love. I can't say I've never experienced that. I remember falling head over heels for Milk in its 2 minute form. I mean there was no movie in sight! It was just a commercial.

Movie trailers are like frozen Buzz Concentrate. Just add water eyeballs. But, that said, it is a bit horrifying that we decide whether we love movies in their larval stage now -- we don't even wait until we get to the theater to see what's emerged from the pupa. At least that how it feels lately, buzz and hype and expectations trumping actual experience.

So I shan't say anything qualitatively about the movie (haven't seen it and a trailer is still just a trailer) except that it looks right up Oscar's alley: inspirational with an overlay of "important!" Best Picture nominee fer sure. Plus, there's the Eastwood factor. Gran Torino aside, he is, to steal from this trailer, the 'master of the Academy's fate, the captain of their soul.'

[editors note: Speaking of Clint Eastwood. The next episode of Best Pictures From the Outside In is coming up next week! "Casablanca and Unforgiven"]


And Morgan Freeman isn't without his own faithful voting block in AMPAS either. With four Oscar nominations and one win, he's pretty far up the hierarchy of the Academy's favorites. Useless trivia alert! One more winning nomination and he's actually tied with Denzel Washington as their favorite black actor of all time.

But what about you? "This trailer made me ___________" -- complete the sentence in the comments.
*