Cinematical Seven: Boneheaded Academy Decisions -- 2007 Edition
Filed under: Awards, Cinematical Seven
For me the most entertaining part of the annual Oscar schpiel is not seeing which films get awards and what actors earn the most respect; it's scratching my head through the boneheaded decisions that seem to come a) out of nowhere and b) from a bunch of people who really ought to know a little better. Here are my picks for the seven biggest pieces of silliness regarding this year's Oscar nominations:7. Borat for best adapted screenplay? Whaaaaat? Did we see the same movie? Don't get me wrong: I absolutely LOVED this movie -- I called it "one of the funniest movies ever made" and I stand by that opinion today -- but didn't most of the funniest bits come from moments best described as "off the cuff," "reaction-driven" and "semi-improvised"? I understand that more of the flick was scripted than one might expect, but c'mon. Unless all of Borat's interview subjects were given lines to read, I really don't see how this nomination makes any sense. I love seeing the movie get some respect, but what a silly way to do it.
6. Click gets nominated for best makeup ... but Pirates of the Caribbean 2 does not? What the hell? Did any of the Academy members see this movie? Yeah, I know that most of the more dazzling FX were full-bore CGI, but heck; the makeup used on Naomie Harris was more impressive than anything in freakin' Click! Fat suits and really lame "old man" makeup is all it takes to get an Oscar nom these days? Sheesh. Plus I just don't like living in a world that calls Click an Oscar nominee.
5. Nominating The Devil Wears Prada for Best Costume Design is like nominating Talladega Nights for Best Product Placement. Welcome to the world of Home Shopping Cinema.
4. I understand that probably 91% of all animated films are of the "family friendly" variety, but how is this particular medium supposed to gain any respect if films like A Scanner Darkly can't even get a nomination? I don't even think it's all that excellent of a movie, but surely the Academy could be a little more forward-thinking than handing three meaningless nominations to three more kiddie flicks. Their arbitrary rules that dictate why only three films can get nominated make no freakin' sense at all. And if the voters really think Cars is one of the best animated films of the year, they're just coasting on the fumes from Pixar's past.
3. Philip Glass' Notes on a Scandal overwrought tinkling nets a nomination for Best Score ... and Clint Mansell's phenomenal music for The Fountain goes completely overlooked. Sad.
2. Love the guy to death, but I can't believe the Academy fell for Will Smith's blatant tear-jerking panderism in The Pursuit of Happyness. (Fortunately, the award will go to Peter O'Toole ... and if it doesn't then there's something seriously wrong with this system.)
1. The fact that Children of Men was not nominated for Best Picture is complete and absoloute proof positive that the Academy voters are lazy, clueless or both. Here's a film that is very intelligent, entertaining, creative and audacious, packed with amazing cinematography, special effects, sound design and editing tricks, boasting a handful of truly excellent performances and a screenplay that has something fascinating to say ... yet never stoops to preaching or handing out empty platitudes. People will still be talking about Children of Men in 20 years, but apparently it's not good enough to be considered one of the year's five best films. Oh, but Babel is. Puh-leeze.
Where do you think the Academy went wrong?
Robert Pattinson Talks 'Breaking Dawn' & 'Unbound Captives'
Gwyneth Paltrow Joins Nicole Kidman in 'The Danish Girl'
Discuss: The Movies That Haunt You_thumbnail.jpg)
'Yogi Bear' Will Cry Me A River With Its Cast
Watch This: Movie Titles That Slip Into the Dialogue
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-24-2007 @ 12:23PM
M Bartyzel said...
The Proposition. How it could get NOTHING is beyond me.
It would've been a much better film to slide into Borat's screenplay spot.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 3:31PM
Peter Hall said...
Children of Men's absent nomination is an absurd oversight.
Little Miss Sunshine? Best Picture Quality?
Aside from the aforementioned Children of Men, the biggest offender is that Perfume: Story of a Murderer didn't get a nod for best cinematography, art direction or sound editing. How it could be passed in any of those categories is baffling to me. It was the best _looking_ film of '06, hands down.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 2:34PM
Alex said...
Children of Men got slighted because Universal decided to push United 93 for the Oscars instead. Or at least that's my guess. In any case, I can't understand how more people aren't absolutely in love with this movie.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 2:51PM
joey peeps said...
Forrest Whittaker most definitely deserves best actor honors for "last king of Scotland" don't get wrong peter was great, but Forrest's performance comes once a lifetime.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 2:53PM
Nathan Ziarek said...
I've not seen Pursuit of Happiness, but I assumed it was a pretty formulaic, down-on-his luck story of a man turning the corner. I'm always amazed when these are nominated for anything. Yes, some turn out to be good movies, but the Oscar's are about excellence, and those movies typically are just good.
I disagree completely on Children of Men which was all idea, no execution. The direction was fairly standard, with the exception of the long cut near the end (which was probably done digitally). The idea was intelligent, but much of the story was absurd (Clive Owen always narrowly escaping death, the assembly-line journey, her baby renaming, etc). I liked the movie, but the praise it's received is simply not deserved.
That said, I don't get to see a ton of movies, so I can't recommend any in its place. If it is the best movie o the year, though, I'm happy I saved my money and didn't see many others.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 3:03PM
Porcalina said...
Totally with you on the Clint Mansell snub. Boo.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 3:15PM
misterbleu said...
Improvised or not - see this fascinating article about the uncredited writers: http://www.wga.org/writtenby/writtenbysub.aspx?id=2274 - Borat gets a pass for the 'adapted' category becuase the character was created for television previously...
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 4:22PM
Brandon said...
Borat to me was the best film of the year. Comedy films don't have balls like that anymore. The best kind of comedy is the kind that isn't afraid to offend. That being said I do think the best
screenplay nod for this film is a joke. It is another attempt of the academy to hide it's snobbery of comedy. They always give them a best
screenplay nod & just forget them (anyone remember the same thing happened to A Fish Called Wanda & I'm sure it's happened to others I can't name offhand). Every once in a blue moon they get it right
(Annie Hall), but most of the time it's as if Oscar is too good for comedy. Little Miss Sunshine just got lucky. Who wants to bet it won't win anything?The other nod that is a travesty: Leonardo
Dicaprio. He got snubbed for one of the best performances of the year in The Departed, yet he is nominated for one of the worst performances
of the year for Blood Diamond. Why isn't anyone talking about this? That accent he had was horrible & laughable. I am not a Leo basher. Actually I look forward to seeing him in films, but this was not a
career high point.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 5:11PM
Josh said...
I was so dissapointed and could not figure out why Children of Men did not get the nominations it should have. This movie is amazing and one reason it is because of Alfonso Cuaron the director. He should have got a nod for best director. I think that Michael Caine did an amazing job in his role and he should have got a nod for best supporting actor.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 6:36PM
Nick said...
First off: The Fountain deserved a music nod, if not a win.
Second: M Bartyzel, I agree, I LOVED the Proposition, that said, it was released in Australia in WIDE release in late 2005... unfortunate but true.
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 8:19PM
Shelley said...
What about Matt Damon in "The Good Shepherd"? And nothing for "The Painted Veil"?
Nick: Even if "The Proposition" had a wide release in Australia in 2005, if it wasn't released in the U.S. until 2006, wouldn't it still be eligible?
Reply
1-24-2007 @ 9:14PM
alex . said...
I second to what everyone said about Children of Men. I saw Babel in Telluride and it blew my socks off. However, I saw Chidren of Men and can't stop thinking about it. I even returned to the theater another time and looking to go see it yet again. The Academy are clearly idiots.
Reply
1-25-2007 @ 12:13AM
GhaleonQ said...
http://www.azcentral.com/ent/celeb//articles/0121borat-ON-CR.html
Er, "Borat..." had a huge script, both for situations and for lines.
Reply
1-25-2007 @ 1:33AM
GhaleonQ said...
"And if the voters really think Cars is one of the best animated films of the year, they're just coasting on the fumes from Pixar's past."
If you think that that's bad, look at the shorts. Also, why disqualify "Arthur And The Invisibles," but accept "Monster House" and "Happy Feet"? Techniques and the contribution of animation to the overall film should both be considered, I think.
"yet never stoops to preaching or handing out empty platitudes. People will still be talking about Children of Men in 20 years,"
*milk squirts out of nose*
Reply
1-25-2007 @ 5:32AM
jared meadows said...
Dead on with Will Smith and Borat. The academy has become a joke. People's choice have just as much credibility. Nicholson I thought was a shoo-in for best supporting. Congrats to Gosling for coming out of nowhere. Surprised to see Iwo Jima in the Best and not foreign category, missing out on a sure oscar, and stealing votes away from Departed.
Reply
1-25-2007 @ 1:07PM
Mary said...
It's well documented that Warners had a full slate of high-profile films this fall - "The Departed," "Blood Diamond" and (with the help of Paramount/Dreamworks) "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima."
"Painted Veil" came out of Warners (though via Warner Independent) but when it comes to the marketing costs to mount an Oscar campaign, the funds may all come out of "big Warners." Studios push the films they want for their own reasons. It's a good guess that execs at Warners went with marketing "Blood Diamond", "The Departed" and "Letters" for Oscar nods in order to nurture/secure their relationship with DiCaprio, Eastwood, and maybe Scorsese.
"Children of Men" will find itself in category of "Best film that got shafted for the Oscars" - much like Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" did in '85
Reply