Most years at the Academy Awards there are a bunch of people I am cheering for and I am happy to see them win. However this year I ended up unthrilled by their victories and these were people I have been a fan of for a long time.
I have seen every Coen brothers movie since I saw Blood Simple just because the title was stolen from Raymond Chandler (although now people often wrongly say Hammett) but surely No Country For Old Men cannot be the Best Picture of this or any other year. I enjoyed it, but by their standards it is a cartoon.
Javier Bardim. I have been a fan since I saw him in *Jamón, jamón * in 1992. He has consistently ben wonderful and should have beaten Russell Crowe in 2001 for his role in *Before Night Falls *, which I think is one of the most affecting performances of the last 20 years. Instead he wins for the cardboard cutout one note performance in the Coen brothers movie.
Tilda Swinton has been on my radar since a part in *Aria * over 20 years ago and somehow didn’t get nominations for Orlando or The Deep End and now she wins for a nothing role in a ho-hum movie.
Juno was a fairly amusing movie that I recommended to friends. However the script was seriously flawed. In the first 5 minutes every character speaks with the same voice, the one that is meant to show us how “special” Juno is. I thought the chances of it being nominated were similar to the chances of *Porky’s *. I was going to start a thread about how it is the worst script to ever win but a look back over the last few years shows that crap wins most years.
Best adapted script - the Coens again win ahead of Ronald Harwood who turned an unfilmable book into a wonderful movie.
It’s fairly typical that people win Oscars for movies other than their best ones, as if the Academy voters are saying, “Oops, we forgot to give so-and-so an award for their great work a few years ago, so let’s give it to them for this lesser work to make up for it.”
The way I overcome these feelings is to remember that the Oscars are a popularity contest, they really do not have much to do with what performance is best, rather what performances the Academy liked the best. Fine distinction, I realize, but many times it has less to do with the quality of the work and more to do with the “buzz” generated by that work.
That being said, I was shocked that Tilda Swinton won for BSA…I had heard minimal buzz about her performance in Michael Clayton. I think her award had alot to do with what Wendell Wagner describes above. I am happy for her, but I think they awarded the wrong performance.
Well, one assumes they think Tilda Swinton is too young for a Lifetime Achievement Award, and it’s not possible to give her an Oscar for every amazing performance because they need to give other people a chance every so often. Besides, her best movies aren’t big enough for the Academy to give a crap. You guys seen The War Zone?
I think people win sometimes because the votes are so split between other nominees. I don’t think the voters consciously thought I’ll vote for Tilda Swinton because she didn’t get one for Orlando. Although I can agree that they probably do decide to give it to someone for sentimental reasons but if they were doing that this year it would have gone to Ruby Dee.
It has been hard to get excited about the Best Picture winner for some time now. I agree that No Country for Old Men did not deserve Best Picture, but am still angry that Out of Africa won out over The Color Purple (1985) and Million Dollar Baby won out over Sideways (2005).
If some little turkey like “Juno” had won, that would be cause for outrage, but “Out of Africa” is an excellent movie. “Witness” was pretty damned good, too.
Now “Oliver” beating out “The Lion in Winter,” that was a travesty.
This year I thought the visual effects award fell way wide of the mark. Although it was a terrible movie, the third “Pirates” film had a lot better effects than the winner, “The Golden Compass.”
I feel bad sometimes when I root against people who maybe should win, but I don’t feel the movies deserve. Case in point, Rick Baker nominated for best achievement in makeup for Norbit. I didn’t see Norbit, I didn’t need to see Norbit, but by all accounts it was terrible. I saw the promos and the trailers, and you don’t have to eat the whole egg to know that it’s rotten, usually the smell is enough.
I am sure Rick Baker’s work was superb, as usual. I’ve been a Rick Baker fan since American Werewolf in London. Regardless of the quality of his work in Norbit, I didn’t want him to win an academy award for some craptacular movie. I was glad it went to the people from La Vie en Rose., whether they deserved it or not.
I haven’t seen the movie and maybe it films better than it reads but I did read the script for “Juno” and I’m absolutely shocked the movie was even nominated, much less won, a screenplay award.
Actually, no, let me change my statement. I’m not shocked it won, because it seems that, once again, people think that screenwriting means witty dialogue. It had witty, albeit tiresome, dialogue, and that often wins Oscars. But jeez, the best script of the year? “Hey, look, a wise-cracking teen!”
Besides, her best movies aren’t big enough for the Academy to give a crap. You guys seen The War Zone?