|
What to Expect
and What to Dread about Steve Martin, Chicago, and the
Fact that Scorcese Will Probably Get Screwed Again
By
Jimmy O
Normally, this is the time of the
year where I post the Oscars Night Drinking Game for
the enjoyment of our readers. It's something the Filmsnobs
have been doing since the pre-site days when Roberto
Benigni still deserved to be awarded for his work. If
the reader can't recall the game from last year, the
Drinking Game is a laundry list of goofy things that
were inevitable to occur during the festivities. Here's
an example: 1. Drink every time a Mirimax film wins
an award. 2. Drink for every Best Documentary nominee
that's subject is the Holocaust. Pretty funny, yes?
And I would like to say that I'm not posting the Drinking
Game this year out of respect for the fighting men and
women being used to help Dick Cheney's stock valuation
risking their lives at the same time as the ceremony.
But my intentions are not that noble as you probably
know. This year, I'm so aggravated by the nominations
that I don't want to wait for a predecided list of conditions
to stop my constant flow of alcohol. But, embedded in
the previous statement indicates that I'm not boycotting
the broadcast. And that's because you can never get
too pissed about the Oscars. For no matter how bad or
wrong the nominations or the subsequent wins may be,
there is something almost sacred about the status of
the Academy Awards. In the grand tradition of the awards
I'm about ready to trash, I'm going to list my nominees
for Biggest Disappointment of This Year's Academy Awards.
1. Steve Martin Bringing Down
the Auditorium. Based on Martin's performance
a few years ago, the Filmsnobs were beyond excited
about his return to the hosting gig. He brought a sense
of highbrow humor and class to the proceedings. But
that was before Bringing Down the House, a film
that seemed as though it should have been another project
to supplement his playwrighting. Who knew it would end
up qualifying as one of the most offensive films ever
made. (Please see Jimmy
O's review) How will anyone be able to enjoy
his jokes with the awareness that there's a multiplex
somewhere that is showing Martin making fun of the Chinese
and wearing Fubu-knockoffs as he takes Joan Plowright
clubbing. It certainly doesn't help that his Bringing
Down costar, Queen Latifah, will be in the audience
since she is nominated for her pimp role in Chicago.
Which brings us to the next nominee.
2. The Harsh Chill of the Windy
City Sweeping. I understand why people want
to see a renaissance of film musicals. They used to
be big hits and surefire wins at major awards ceremonies.
And now, we have Chicago. Chicago has now made
over $100 million at the box office. And with 13 nominations
and sweeps at almost every other awards show, it is
likely to walk away big on Sunday night. But it's still
very bad. I've already made my peace about the singing
and the acting (Both not very good here.), but no one
has been able to argue favorably for the substance of
the film. What does this film say about the celebrity
status and criminal behavior that hasn't already been
said by Natural Born Killers or Fifteen Minutes?
I'm not saying that every great film has to say something
totally unique but this film adds nothing to that whole
idea. But now, Mirimax has the marketing finesse to
get everyone to believe that this is the real resurgence.
Even though it really happened last year with Moulin
Rouge!, but that was way too risky to be considered
Academy material.This tame and bland yet popular film
will probably end up winning a load of awards. That
probably includes...
3. Rob Marshall Beating Out
Martin Scorcese. Martin Scorcese has been making
ass-kicking flicks since the late 1960's and he has
never won an award. He was nominated in 1980 for Raging
Bull but ended up losing to Robert Redford for Ordinary
People. That wasn't so bad. Then, Scorcese was nominated
in 1990 for Goodfellas but ended up losing to
Kevin Costner for Dances with Wolves. Not as
respectable, but understandable when placing the two
films up to Academy sensibilities. But this year, Scorcese
crafted Gangs of New York as a sprawling, exciting
epic about the emerging socioeconomic and personal politics
of our nation. The sets and the costumes, the three-hour
time span, and the gritty yet nicely filmed piece should
have been a shoe-in for Best Picture and Director. But
there's a possibility that Scorcese will get beat out
by another first-time director, this time it is Chicago's
Rob Marshall. No matter what you think about Marshall
or about Gangs of New York, one must admit that
Scorcese and his career merits a political win at the
very least. If he doesn't win, then I suppose Scorcese
can join company with the likes of Hitchcock as genius
directors who do not get their just rewards outside
of Lifetime Achievements. I am stubborn and I still
think he may win, but history is not on his side.
4. Nicole Losing to Renee for
Best Director. Even if I found The Hours
to be mastabatory literary hooey, it's hard to deny
the power of Nicole Kidman's performance as Virginia
Woolf. I guess it's easy to say I'll be disappointed
also on the merits of the fact that I wanted to see
Nicole win last year over Halle Berry. Or maybe I'm
still mad because Nicole wasn't even nominated for one
of the best performances of the 1990's: Her Suzanne
in Gus Van Sant's 1995 To Die For. Or maybe I'm
just totally in love and just hope that she stumbles
upon this one day and decides that we could get married.
That's one of the big problems with analyzing these
awards: It's always very easy to allow personal feelings
to get in the way of these kind of predictions. That's
probably explains why I haven't got any of the major
categories tagged since 1990. Oh well, we still love
you Nicole and we can't wait to see what you're wearing
on Sunday night.
5. I'll Actually be Watching
the Whole Thing. Yes, we all bitch and moan
about the Oscars. I've found myself doing it a lot this
year, mainly for the reason listed above. But everyone
watches it because they're exciting and funny and...because
they're still the best standard we have to measure the
year's view on cinema. The ceremony will no doubt be
subdued this year (Or maybe not even broadcast at all)
as a result of the Operation Freedom Iraq but they will
still be something that we'll be talking about all the
way into next year. Sure, we didn't all agree with Denzel
or Halle or Mr. Broadbent, but all of those nominations
let us remember what was going on in film and society
at that moment in history. I'll argue that the MTV Movie
Awards are becoming more of a reflection on current
trends, but they still have a lot more cleaning up to
do. And we'll still be making our predictions. Here
now are the major categories, and who will win is in
bold lettering and who should win, according
to the Filmsnobs, will be in italics. Remember,
the Filmsnobs are not liable for any lost bets in any
office pools:
Best Picture:
Chicago, Gangs of New York, The Hours, The
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The Pianist
Best Director: Rob
Marshall, Martin Scorcese, Stephen Daldry,
Roman Polanski, Pedro Almodovar
Best Actor: Adrian
Brody, Nicolas Cage, Michael Caine, Daniel Day-Lewis,
Jack Nicholson
Best Actress:
Salma Hayek, Nicole Kidman, Diane Lane, Julianne
Moore, Renee Zellweger
Best Supporting Actress:
Kathy Bates, Julianne Moore, Queen Latifah, Meryl
Streep, Catherine Zeta-Jones
Best Supporting Actor:
Chris Cooper, Ed Harris, Paul Newman,
John C. Reily, Christopher Walken
Best Song: "Burn
it Blue", "Father and Daughter", "The
Hands That Built America", "I Move
On", "Lose Yourself"
|
