While I'd like to think I watch a lot of movies, I definitely don't watch enough to make a definitive judgment on what I feel should and shouldn't win at the Oscars for most categories. I think there's been a lot of criticism regarding the Oscars and the awarding of Oscars, and many films haven't stood the test of time - even ones I really like (Gladiator is a modern example). So I'll comment on the movies I've seen and the awards they did or didn't win.
Overall, I'm disappointed with the awards The Departed won. I will accept that Martin Scorsese finally received his long-overdue Oscar. But I feel that, in the Best Picture category, all of the other films nominated (Babel, Letters From Iwo Jima, Little Miss Sunshine and The Queen) were better than The Departed. Maybe I'm biased, but I just don't feel that a remake of a foreign film can be that big of an achievement. Granted, I've only seen Letters From Iwo Jima, but I've heard great things regarding Little Miss Sunshine, The Queen and Babel. Babel I would consider second-weakest in the category. I would have guessed either Little Miss Sunshine or The Queen for the win.
I was very happy with the awards Pan's Labyrinth took home. I really felt the movie raised the bar on the average quality of movies released in recent years and I thought it was great to see it take home trophies for makeup, art direction, and cinematography.
I was hoping Children of Men would be able to take an Oscar home, especially to upset The Departed in adapted screenplay (although I've read the movie's plot is not quite as close to the book as I would prefer). I also would have liked to see Curse of The Golden Flower take home its nominated trophy for costume design, although Marie Antoinette was probably as deserving (but I am getting a bit tired of seeing European historical dramas win for something that the industry has down pat now).
I'm not a big fan of documentaries, but wouldn't be opposed to start watching them. After all, I can see them in the theater now! While a couple of the documentaries sound interesting, I don't know enough by title alone to know if I'd want to watch them or not.
From the list of nominees, I've seen a few, heard good things (or bad things) about a few and haven't heard of the rest.
Of the nominees I haven't seen, I'd like to see the following eventually:
The Black Dahlia (which I heard isn't good, but I'm a sucker for noir)
Blood Diamond
The Devil Wears Prada
The Good German
Little Miss Sunshine
Marie Antoinette
The Pursuit of Happyness
The Queen
United 93 (I'm very against the idea of glorifying 9/11, but I'm interested in seeing the movie)
Volver
All other nominees I didn't mention, I either didn't know enough about the film to want to see it, didn't want to see it for any random reason, or have already seen it and didn't consider it noteworthy enough to mention in my review of the Oscars.
I was disappointed that The Fountain didn't get any mention at the Oscars. After reading through several message boards, the best theory seems to be the "present" timeline being the "real" timeline, the "past" timeline being the book Rachel Weisz is writing, and the "future" timeline being Hugh Jackman's consciousness. Yes, the trailers were hokey, but the movie was brilliant and breathtaking. Special effects in the film were alone worth a mention, at least in terms of creativity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I didn't agree with the Melissa Etheridge award. I didn't think that song was so great. Having said that, it kind of reminded me of an Audio clip I heard of Robert Altman I think it was, who said that it didn't make sense to have a competition to judge artists. I tend to agree with that.
I haven't seen any of the films. It's cool to know what you thought, as you review so well. I usually don't find Dicaprio believable.
I would have liked to see Pan's Labyrinth win even more, specifically the Best Foreign Language Oscar ... I haven't seen The Lives of Others yet, but it really must be one tremendous movie to have beaten del Toro's work
In the press, there was a lot of attention given to Eddie Murphy's loss to Alan Arkin for best supporting male. I've heard a couple of sources say that Murphy didn't "campaign" for the award. Made me wonder what else is involved in winning an Academy Awards.
Thanks for the post. It was good to read "Your Take."
"but I'm a sucker for noir"
You like Mulhulland fall? One of the better "modern" film noir movies. Of course my view is that nothing gets closer to perfection then Chinatown.
I only watched the last 45-or-so minutes of the broadcast; from Best Original Song to Best Picture. I was surprised how many songs from Dreamgirls were nominated. Now that Don mentions it, it doesn't make sense to judge songs either. Music is so subjective.
I would have liked it if Pan's Labyrinth had won for Best Foreign Language Film, but as I also haven't seen The Lives of Others yet, I don't want to pass judgment just yet.
There seems to be a weird black box approach to winning an Academy award, but remember that the great Peter O'Toole has yet to win a "real" one, and John Wayne won only one Oscar (Best Actor for True Grit), even though I feel he made an incredibly valuable contribution to the movie industry. Clint Eastwood has yet to win an Oscar for acting, and with the recent love he's been getting from the Academy in recent years, I doubt he will ever receive one. (This is also why he didn't win for Best Director this year)
The formula seems to be part popularity at-the-time, part marketing, part how well the rest of the world takes you seriously,
and part how well you get along with everyone. It's that last reason why Russell Crowe will have to wait a while before winning his next Oscar.
Now that I think of it, I'm shocked that Brad Pitt has yet to win one. A lot of people think he's all beefcake, but I'd like to think he has a huge degree of talent (Legends of the Fall is the one that comes to mind, but there are others).
Gunner, I haven't seen Mulhulland Fall yet (nor Chinatown, for that matter). I'll have to check them out!
Post a Comment