I'll leave it to Christopher Orr at The New Republic to sum up my feelings about the Oscar noms. He does it very succinctly and accurately. I would only say that I'm happier with the Best Actress noms than he is. I think it's a case of his preferred picks getting left out. I like all those noms. Hathaway is probably my favorite. I haven't seen The Reader, but Winslet was a revelation is Revolutionary Road. The more I think about Streep, the more I think she so dominated the film that Hoffman got lost. Melissa Leo, I haven't seen, but I've loved her since back to Homicide. Jolie is the mess. Yes, indeed, you can cry your way to an Oscar nod.
About The Dark Knight snub - as I've argued elsewhere around the Web, it was that rare opportunity where the Academy could have nominated a popular and critical uber-success. They chose middlebrow forgetability, instead. If this were last year and TDK were left out in favor of No Country, Zodiac, Jesse James, Once, and There Will Be Blood, I would understand. But this year? Makes no sense.
2 comments:
The choices this year are just so "safe," so buttoned-down. They all feel like "Oscar movies," plain and simple. Films that seemed to be made to win Oscars.
The last two years, AMPAS had a curious case of good taste. Looks like that is ending.
That said, I agree with you about Best Actress. Jolie and Leo aren't going anywhere, but the three-way war between Winslet, Streep and Hathaway--which will probably quickly become Winslet vs. Streep, period--should be fun to watch, in any event.
Well, again it's all personal perception, taste and value judgement. I pose that apart from the unforgivable WALL-E snub (and for K Bowen, THE DARK KNIGHT omission) the nominations in the major categories were quite good.....OK, Jolie's nom was laughable with Hawkins and Scott-Thomas rebuffed....but THE READER, BENJAMIN BUTTON and SLUMDOG in the Best Pix lineup is a very good thing.
Again though, just my opinion nothing more. I understand and respect the other side too.
Post a Comment