Oscar thoughts/predictions

[mattkain]

Similar to Ken's NBA thread, here are my thoughts and predictions on this year's Oscars. Feel free to add or comment.

Best Picture:
It's such a weak year for HW pics that I'm pretty dispassionate about this category. ETERNAL SUNSHINE deserved a nomination over the dreary and formulaic FINDING NEVERLAND, but who's counting? SIDEWAYS is definitely superior to AVIATOR, but Scorsese is due. It's almost unreal to think that movies like RAGING BULL, TAXI DRIVER, and GOODFELLAS were all snubbed. Anyway, the academy is dying to make up for their past mistakes and doesn't want another Hitchcock, Bergman, or Kubrick fiasco (none won best pic). Hell, they almost gave him best pic for GANGS OF NEW YORK, an uneven, yawn-fest at best.
Prediction: AVIATOR
Who I'm Rooting for: SIDEWAYS

Director:
Again, all too obvious. Still, the academy better be careful with Payne. This will be his third film (SIDEWAYS, ELECTION, ABOUT SCHMIDT) that deserves a major award. It might not be too long before they have another Scorsese on their hands.
Prediction: Scorsese, AVIATOR
Who I'm Rooting for: Payne, SIDEWAYS

Actor:
Depp and Cheadle's performances are overrated (not to mention their accents belong in a High School drama class). DiCaprio struggled through the last hour of AVIATOR (he just cannot pull off a crazed man in his 40s). Eastwood makes for an exciting dark horse, but I'll swallow my shoe if Foxx doesn't win for his dead-on rendition of Ray Charles.
Prediction: Jamie Foxx
Who I'm Rooting for: Jamie Foxx

Actress:
Everyone is jazzed about the Benning/Swank rematch (AMERICAN BEAUTY/BOYS DON'T CRY in 2000). Swank won round one and is still probably the favorite, but I won't be surprised if they hand this one to Benning. Catalina Sandino Moreno's turn as a drug smuggling border horse in MARIA FULL OF GRACE is nothing less than powerful, but she has no chance in hell starring in a movie that a majority of voters probably haven't seen.
Prediction: Hilary Swank
Who I'm Rooting for: Catalina Sandino Moreno

Supporting actor:
CLOSER cleaned up at the Golden Globes, and I'm fully expecting a repeat. Alda is brilliant but too understated in AVIATOR. Voter's are loath to hand out awards to one actor in two categories, so Foxx has no chance. As much as I hate to admit that the former star of Wings deserves an Oscar... well... Church really is excellent in SIDEWAYS. Still, drama always wins out over comedy at the Oscars.
Prediction: Clive Owen
Who I'm Rooting for: Thomas Haden Church

Supporting actress:
Again, expect a repeat from the CLOSER gang. Sadly, I hardly consider Portman's forced tears and excessive diatribes to be "good" acting (no matter how much of her ass we get to see). Blanchett is unreal as Hepburn, and every scene from AVIATOR without her seems totally eviscerated. Nonetheless, her performance is too excessive and baroque for the academy.
Prediction: Natalie Portman
Who I'm Rooting for: Cate Blanchett

Adapted Screenplay:
The academy loves feel good, art house muck so expect FINDING NEVERLAND to win at least one category. BEFORE SUNSET is as much a tribute to French films of the 60s as it is to modern indies like Hartley and Jarmusch. Sadly it's a bit too cinema verite to come across as anything but pretentious and soporific to many voters.
Prediction: FINDING NEVERLAND
Who I'm Rooting for: BEFORE SUNSET

Original Screenplay:
Hollywood loves Charlie Kaufman. Don't expect the love affair to end this year. He's a cinch no matter how derivative ETERNAL SUNSHINE might be of his earlier films.
Prediction: ETERNAL SUNSHINE
Who I'm Rooting for: ETERNAL SUNSHINE

Foreign Film:
With HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS, MARIA FULL OF GRACE, and MOTORCYCLE DIARIES out of the way, the SEA INSIDE is going to march over the rest of the noms. They might as well hand Amenabar the award now.
Prediction: SEA INSIDE
Who I'm Rooting for: none

Documentary:
Liberal agitators may not have fat, greasy Michael Moore to cheer for in this category, but at least they'll have fat, greasy Morgan Spurlock. No brainer - SUPER SIZE ME tapped into the year's diet craze with an almost scary precision (timing is everything). Watch out for Evan Coyne Maloney and the rise of the conservative documentary in the next 2 years!
Prediction: SUPER SIZE ME
Who I'm Rooting for: none

Art Direction:
I'm so torn here and almost want to root for Jeunet (one of the most exciting visual designers in modern cinema), but ultimately I've got to hand it to LEMONY SNICKET'S - it really is a gorgeous film. Anyway, America still has a hard-on for Audrey Tautou so expect A VERY LONG ENGAGEMENT to clean up.
Prediction: A VERY LONG ENGAGEMENT
Who I'm Rooting for: LEMONY SNICKET'S

Cinematography:
Snubbed in best foreign pic, but HOFdagGers still has a chance here. Christopher Doyle, the BEST cinematographer since Raoul Coutard, was looked over for HERO so I have a feeling the same will happen with HOFdagGers, and in all honesty Zhang's redundant color symbolism got old back in the days of Gong Li. Still, it's a dandy to look at. How COLLATERAL and KILL BILL 2 (2 straight years of rejection for Robert Richardson) were missed is beyond me. It makes you wonder if the academy knows what "cinematography" means.
Prediction: AVIATOR
Who I'm Rooting for: HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS

Editing:
Great editing in a category that rarely has much to offer. One of the most daring formal movies of 2004, COLLATERAL deserves at least 1 technical award.
Prediction: COLLATERAL
Who I'm Rooting for: COLLATERAL

[zachatree]

wow u know all that stuff?!?!?!?! thats CRAZY i wouldnt EVER beabule to have a converstation on this subject....



Sorry really stupid post, any one else feel the same way ?

[lightningbolt]

Yep. Same here.

I haven't even heard of half of these moives/people. I lead a deprived life, I guess.

[mattkain]

More thoughts on the documentary category.

Later this year film viewers should see the return of Michael Moore with his latest propagandamentary, SICKO, a film that will take a look at the American health care system (a movie which I am sure Moore will adamantly claim as being nothing less than "scathing"). With a bit of luck, a feature length version of Evan Coyne Maloney's conservative BRAINWASHING 101, an insightful and sometimes surprising look at political correctness and liberal bias in American academia, should also see some serious screen time later this year. Anyway, although Moore seems to be veering towards safer ground in the form of a less divided polemic, this could set up the ultimate blue state/red state showdown in the documentary category at next year's Oscars.

Anyway, I'm also shocked that TOUCHING THE VOID didn't get a nomination for best documentary this year. Kevin Macdonald's story about 2 mountain climbers' near death experience in the Peruvian Andes is easily one of the most intense films I've seen in years, and yet it was somehow slighted so the academy could nominate a movie about a sick camel? There truly is no justice.

[carl winslow]

Passion of the Christ should win for best makeup, that blood looked real.

[mosher]

"Joe Kulacz - Look what you've done" will take home 3 oscars, I am calling it.

[mattkain]

Passion of the Christ should win for best makeup, that blood looked real.

I actually read some comments on another discussion board where someone claimed that PotC's makeup nomination was "blasphemous." Instead of paraphrasing, here's the quote:

"One of the chief criticisms I remember of the film was directed at its almost sadistic obsession with the beating and whipping and flagellating and whatever else comes under the heading of "scourging" of Jesus. To me, to watch the onscreen spectacle of the near-beating-to-death of one of the most revered figures in western culture and see the blood seeping out and the skin being torn off all over his face and body and say, "What great makeup!" is tasteless and/or insensitive. Now, it may in fact BE great makeup, but I doubt that if I was involved with the production that's what I'd want it to be honored for. My reaction would be: 'But you're missing the POINT!'"

Interesting thoughts. Still, there was more to PotC's makeup than just oozing blood and festering wounds. Jim Caviezel wore rather convincing facial prosthetics throughout the film to appear more "Semitic." Personally, I’m surprised HELLBOY didn’t get nommed in this category.

MK

[C-Fan]

Cinematography:
Snubbed in best foreign pic, but HOFG still has a chance here. Christopher Doyle, the BEST cinematographer since Raoul Coutard, was looked over for HERO so I have a feeling the same will happen with HOFG,
Who I'm Rooting for: HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS

HOFG= House of Flying daGgers?

I used to be real excited to watch the Oscars, but at some point I realized... I don`t really respect the opinions of a lot of actors, and think that lots of people in Hollywood are shallow dumbasses, so why should I care who they vote for? I think this was compounded when `Shakespeare in Love` and `American Beauty` won in successive years.

Personally, I know a good movie when I see one, and all that matters to me is that I liked it. Just because Ashton Kutcher, Brittany Murphy, and a bunch of other beautiful morons in Hollywood liked some sappy, hackneyed p.o.s. more than *insert good, not-so-famous movie name here* doesn`t mean anything to me.

I think the only Oscars which are really worth anything, are the ones given in technical categories, like `sound direction` and `make-up` where Hollywood technicians who know their shit actually vote.

The Academy is kind of like BAP. Whether or not BAP thinks you are worthy or not to join them, and subsequently vote/don`t vote you in, shouldn`t have any impact on how you play footbag, or how much fun you have. Whether or not the Academy tells me `Ernest Stays Home` is a good movie or not, doesn`t mean I will enjoy it or hate it any more or less.

All that said, I hope my folks tape me this year`s Oscars and send them to me for 2 reasons:
1. Chris
2. Rock

[max]

On a similar note to Ken's, I personnaly avoid ANYWATHING even cited at the Cannes Film Festival.

[mattkain]

HOFG= House of Flying daGgers?

Oops... apparently my attempt at a time saving acronym only confused things. HOFD. Sorry Kenji.

I used to be real excited to watch the Oscars, but at some point I realized... I don`t really respect the opinions of a lot of actors, and think that lots of people in Hollywood are shallow dumbasses, so why should I care who they vote for?

Let me be the first to say that I agree entirely, but this by no means takes the fun out of it. I think most basketball players are overpaid jerks, but I love watching the NBA (I'll respond to the basketball thread when I have more time. Go Bucks!). I think most baseball players are overpaid fatasses, but I love watching MLB. I think most footbaggers are underpaid stoners, but I still love watching footbag. Part of the fun IS realizing the inherent flaws in the Oscar system (and there are many - don't get me started on the joke of a category known as "Best Foreign Language Film") and being able to bitch and moan about what "should have been nommed." I don't think there is a single legitimate individual in the world of film studies, history, theory, or practice that takes the Oscars very seriously or uses them as the benchmark of what constitutes a "good" or aesthetically superior film. But isn't this what makes it so great? The disagreements? The how-could-that-win diatribes? Comparing your tastes with those of others? And heck, isn't it fun to play the game for one night of the year and try to guess what the "shallow dumbasses" will vote for? I sure like to. If it's not your cup of tea, don't watch.

Just because Ashton Kutcher, Brittany Murphy, and a bunch of other beautiful morons in Hollywood liked some sappy, hackneyed p.o.s. more than *insert good, not-so-famous movie name here* doesn`t mean anything to me.

Not quite right. I'm sure you're just making a point, but neither Ashton nor Brittany are in the academy. The academy began as 36 members. Each year anyone who wins an Oscar is allowed entry into the academy. As great as DUDE WHERE'S MY CAR? and THE BOSS'S DAUGHTER were, I don't believe Ashton won an Oscar for either.

I think the only Oscars which are really worth anything, are the ones given in technical categories, like `sound direction` and `make-up` where Hollywood technicians who know their shit actually vote.

Not quite right. Each individual category is "nominated" by members who previously won the award, but the entire academy (something like 6,000 voters) votes on the final winner in each category. So, although past winners of the "Sound Design" category (and ONLY past winners) decide what 5 movies get nominated for "Best Sound Design", the ENTIRE academy (including Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, and Whoopi Goldberg. In other words, ANY past winners in ANY category) votes for the final winner. Just one more reason for you to hate the Oscars.

The Academy is kind of like BAP. Whether or not BAP thinks you are worthy or not to join them, and subsequently vote/don`t vote you in, shouldn`t have any impact on how you play footbag, or how much fun you have. Whether or not the Academy tells me `Ernest Stays Home` is a good movie or not, doesn`t mean I will enjoy it or hate it any more or less.

I agree entirely. Some of my favorite films of 2004 include OLDBOY, BREAKING NEWS, GOODBYE DRAGON INN, KILL BILL 2, SADDEST MUSIC IN THE WORLD, COFFEE AND CIGARETTES, INTIMATE STRANGERS, and TEAM AMERICA. Did any of these get nominated? No. Will it change the way I think about them? No. Do I care? No. Am I upset? No. Why? Because I understand the system. Then again, I also loved THE INCREDIBLES, SIDEWAYS, and MARIA FULL OF GRACE, all of which were nommed this year, and I am going to keep loving these movies no matter how many awards they win (be careful not to be the jaded elitist who hates anything popular… a common trait among 17 year olds worldwide). For me the Oscars aren't a guide to which movies I need to see (I think I've already seen all but maybe a half dozen of the nominated films anyway) or which movies I need to "start liking", but rather they're simply an interesting window into the popular tastes of people involved in the industry. And as much as you hate to hear it, I'm just as curious to find out what movies Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, and Whoopi Goldberg like (and more importantly I’ll have buckets of fun trying to predict what those movies are) as I am to find out what movies you like. I mean, come on, in terms of cinematic aesthetics the Oscars are little more than a survey of pop connoisseurship and mainstream film penchants (which I personally find very interesting).

As for the BAP analogy, I think it's quite apropos. You're right, who cares what the BAP says? It should never have an "impact on how you play footbag, or how much fun you have." We all know you're a free thinker that hates BAP, but does that mean you have stopped following what moves BAP players hit or watching videos of BAP players?? I assume you have not. If BAP told you that every one of your runs had to include a knee bump or you're no longer guiltless, would you listen? Probably not. But would you stop watching BAP videos or playing in BAP circles for fear of having to be around the dreaded knee bump? Probably not. Same thing with the Oscars, we don't have to believe every word the academy says or agree with every (or any) award they hand out at the Oscars, but it's still fun to watch.

Anyway, I follow the Oscars not for aesthetic edification, but rather to try to predict and understand what political, cultural, and social beliefs and assumptions go into deciding the winners. Honestly, take a long look at the movies that win at the Oscars, you might be surprised as to how revealing they are of mainstream American values.

MK

[mattkain]

I think this was compounded when `Shakespeare in Love` and `American Beauty` won in successive years.

Don't hide from the truth. Try BRAVEHEART, ENGLISH PATIENT, TITANIC, SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, and AMERICAN BEAUTY winning in successive years. Ouch! Talk about a wretched, motley crew.

MK

[C-Fan]

Not quite right. I'm sure you're just making a point, but neither Ashton nor Brittany are in the academy. The academy began as 36 members. Each year anyone who wins an Oscar is allowed entry into the academy. As great as DUDE WHERE'S MY CAR? and THE BOSS'S DAUGHTER were, I don't believe Ashton won an Oscar for either. MK

Cool, you learn something new everyday. I find that somewhat reassuring; that not EVERY hollywood dumbass can vote. But then again, with some of the questionable oscars handed out, I still don`t care about most of the opinions in the Academy. Incidentally: have you seen The Butterfly Effect? Cheesy, yes, but Ashton was actually pretty good in it I thought.

I think the only Oscars which are really worth anything, are the ones given in technical categories, like `sound direction` and `make-up` where Hollywood technicians who know their shit actually vote.

Not quite right. Each individual category is "nominated" by members who previously won the award, but the entire academy (something like 6,000 voters) votes on the final winner in each category. So, although past winners of the "Sound Design" category (and ONLY past winners) decide what 5 movies get nominated for "Best Sound Design", the ENTIRE academy (including Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, and Whoopi Goldberg. In other words, ANY past winners in ANY category) votes for the final winner. .

No shit...I never knew that. Man, that makes no sense at all to me. Stupid Ocars! Ken Smash!

I am going to keep loving these movies no matter how many awards they win (be careful not to be the jaded elitist who hates anything popular… a common trait among 17 year olds worldwide). .

Good call. I hate people who automatically dismiss stuff because its popular. Are a lot of people hopping on the Suns bandwagon because they are winning a lot this year? Undoubtedly. But I think a lot of people are genuinely happy to see a fast-breaking team in the NBA again! Oh wait, wrong thread.

Anyway, I follow the Oscars not for aesthetic edification, but rather to try to predict and understand what political, cultural, and social beliefs and assumptions go into deciding the winners. Honestly, take a long look at the movies that win at the Oscars, you might be surprised as to how revealing they are of mainstream American values.

MK

I agree. Then, I got sad when I remember you also wrote:

Try BRAVEHEART, ENGLISH PATIENT, TITANIC, SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, and AMERICAN BEAUTY winning in successive years. MK

Man... what does THAT say about the state of America?

Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful posts. I haven`t had a chance to see ANY of the movies you have listed in this thread (except Kill Bill2, and some of Collateral on a plane... but nothing nominated) so its cool to hear something about them.

Oh yeah, and I thought I`d ask you, since you`re more likely to know than anyone: does Bollywood have an equivalent to the Oscars?

[mattkain]

Good call. I hate people who automatically dismiss stuff because its popular. Are a lot of people hopping on the Suns bandwagon because they are winning a lot this year? Undoubtedly. But I think a lot of people are genuinely happy to see a fast-breaking team in the NBA again! Oh wait, wrong thread.

Yeah, I'm having a hard time not jumping on that bandwagon too. My only credible excuse for liking the Suns is that I have family in Phoenix, but realistically I'm just going to have to suck it up and stick with my boys, the Milwaukee Bucks, who are really struggling this year. Anyway, as much as I like Phoenix's high-powered offense, I'd really enjoy seeing the Mavs take the West. I'm a big fan of Finley and Harris (both are UW alums), and you'd have to be a sucker not to love Dirk (who SHOULD be a Buck!!).

Oh yeah, and I thought I`d ask you, since you`re more likely to know than anyone: does Bollywood have an equivalent to the Oscars?

Yes they do, although I don't follow them too closely as I'm not a very big fan of Bollywood films - 3 hours of singing and dancing can be fun, but it gets old (although I am excited to see India's uber sex symbol Aishwarya Rai's attempt to cross over into Hollywood with BRIDE AND PREJUDICE). Anyway, I believe they're called the National Film Awards, and I think they're handed out each May in India. They've actually been around for over 50 years and are really similar to the Oscars only they have several additional categories. I'm pretty sure they have more awards that focus on film music (a very central component of Indian cinema) and give out some rather interesting awards like, "Best Movie that Deals with a Social Issue." Actually, quite a few countries have Oscar analogues. A few that I follow include the Hong Kong Film Awards (my favorite) which have been around since about 1980 and take place each Spring (they're predated by the HK Critics Awards which are also pretty interesting), Taiwan's Golden Horse awards which honor both local films and Asian films in general (these are a great barometer for current trends in East Asian cinema), Korea's Blue Dragon awards and the Korean Film Awards, and the various festival winners (Cannes, Berlin, Venice, Toronto, Vancouver, etc.).

Matt Kain

[ted]

Matt,
I really liked THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS. That should be up for foreign film, no?

[mattkain]

I really liked THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS. That should be up for foreign film, no?

Hi Ted,

Yeah I really liked THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS too. I'm keeping my fingers crossed in hopes of someone releasing Jorgen Leth's PERFECT HUMAN on DVD - from the clips they played in THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS, it looks like it's a pretty interesting film. As it turns out this was in fact Denmark's submission for best foreign language film. It's too bad that it didn't make it to the final five. Anyway, just to clarify, for the best foreign language film category, each country is allowed to submit one film (with anomalies such as Hong Kong and China submitting separately). Of these submissions, each country needs to prove that citizens of their country acted as the primary artistic force behind the film. Sadly, this results in some brilliant foreign language films being disqualified. For example, this year Columbia submitted MARIA FULL OF GRACE as their representative film. However, the film was a Columbia/US co-production, and the academy felt that the film's driving artistic force wasn't "Columbian" enough, hence the film was disqualified. What's also strange is that although the category is "best foreign language film", the qualifying country rule automatically eliminates many films that one would think would qualify for eligibility. PASSION OF THE CHRIST is obviously a "foreign language film" (I don't hear too much Aramaic in the States these days), but it was made by a US production company and was therefore automatically ineligible. Another problem is that many years a single country may have more than one film that, based on artistic merit, should probably be eligible (yup, sometimes those little third-world countries actually make more than one movie a year). This year Spain had to choose from THE SEA INSIDE and Almodovar's BAD EDUCATION. France had to pick between A VERY LONG ENGAGEMENT and THE CHORUS. Again, what this means is many films get screwed over right out of the gates based on submission rules.

Anyway, to make a long story short, it's too bad that THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS didn't make the cut, but realistically the film is probably too daring and requires too much thought for most. I also think Von Trier really damaged his image with last year's DOGVILLE, a lengthy exercise in misogyny that he somehow tried to peddle off as anti-American avant-garde theater. Oh well.

Matt Kain

edit: I just did some quick research and it appears that THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS DVD contains Leth's original PERFECT HUMAN film from 1967! I'll have to get that!

[ted]

Yeah, it's on there as a special feature. It only runs 12 minutes or so but quite entertaining.

[Jackbag]

To go back to your comment about the "wretched, motley crew"...
I found this article today on cnn.com: http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/ ... index.html
It seems that "no one" has seen the five films up for best picture this year. There's no major blockbuster-front runner like previous years. Do you think the balance between major and minor films has tipped the other way? Or is this just a reflection of the films made this year?

Amelia

[carl winslow]

howd you all like chris rock?
i thought he was kinda funny but after his monolgue he wasnt in it that much.

[C-Fan]

Hey Matt, Oscar write-up? Summary? The New York Times thought the whole thing was very stale and predictable.

Is Jude Law really `one of our finest actors`?

And seeing how this is the only real movie thread on Modified, I just wanted to tell Carl Winslow that I thought he was great in Die Hard. It`s always good to have more minorities in the sport.

[carl winslow]

thanks buddy i'll send a signed 8x10 glossy your way if you want one