I’ve been watching the Oscars for a long time, and my parents always made me go to bed before all the good awards when I was younger.
The first year I saw the presentation of Best Picture live was in 2006 when “Crash” upset “Brokeback Mountain.”
The first year I got to watch the entire show was 2008 when “No Country for Old Men” reigned supreme.
It’s here.
By this point, the ballots are in, and all the campaigning is over. The politics of the Oscars are over, and now we are just left with the scripts, the performances, and the movies. Rather than do one big post discussing and analyzing all of the categories, I want to use this week to honor the films and performances themselves.
Penelope Cruz in “Nine”
IN MY OWN WORDS: “Cruz is absolutely mesmerizing from the first instant we see her traipsing around on some pink fabric.”
She’s here because … she was the highlight of a pretty disastrous movie, pulling off one of the year’s sexiest performances.
Vera Farmiga in “Up in the Air”
IN MY OWN WORDS: “Vera Farmiga walks a very thin line between “feminine and agressive,” according to Reitman, and she never gives us any hint that she will lose her balance.”
She’s here because … she is a delightful female counterpart to George Clooney, and her performance illuminates Clooney’s character as a whole.
Maggie Gyllenhaal in “Crazy Heart”
IN MY OWN WORDS: “It’s a performance very much in Gyllehaal’s comfort zone, and she’s pleasant to watch.”
She’s here because … she holds her own against the renowned Jeff Bridges, and she has a lot of respect amongst actors (not unlike her co-star).
Anna Kendrick in “Up in the Air”
IN MY OWN WORDS: [Kendrick] doesn’t show promise as a star; Natalie Keener has made her one.
She’s here because … she is a brilliant discovery, making uptight lovable and reminding us of the happiness and pain that comes with having real human relationships.
Mo’Nique in “Precious”
IN MY OWN WORDS: “Mo’Nique delivers a performance that is absolutely harrowing.”
She’s here because … this is the most emotionally gripping performance of 2009, and it’s equally shocking to think that it comes from the actress who headlined “Phat Girlz” three years ago.
Marshall’s “Oscars”
The Academy did a pretty good job this year. My top five match 4/5 with their list.
I would replace Maggie Gyllenhaal with Rosamund Pike for “An Education.” Both played relatively simple characters: Gyllenhaal the devoted single mother and Pike the dumb blonde. But the distinction arises from what they do with it. Gyllenhaal seems complacent with sticking to the stock character; on the other hand, Pike does fascinating things with Helen. I didn’t feel like I was watching the ten millionth air-headed rich blonde because Pike made it feel refreshing and new.
In my review, I said about Pike:
“The performance that will probably go criminally unheralded is Rosamund Pike as one of David’s companions. She is the typical ‘dumb blonde’ stereotype, but she brings her own flair to it in a way that makes the tired stock character seem brand new. When she is on screen, you can’t help but grin.”
So, at Marshall’s Oscars, the nominees are…
Penelope Cruz, “Nine”
Vera Farmiga, “Up in the Air”
Anna Kendrick, “Up in the Air”
Mo’Nique, “Precious”
Rosamund Pike, “An Education”
In case you don’t realize this, my favorite is revealed in the “should win” listed below.
Predictions
Should win: Mo’Nique, “Precious”
Could win: Anna Kendrick, “Up in the Air”
Will win: Mo’Nique, “Precious”
No way in hell anyone other than Mo’Nique wins. She’s just too good.
An Oscars tradition at my house: my mom always makes pizza, and we eat it while watching the red carpet arrivals on E!
Don’t know how it got started, but it stuck.
UPDATE: Turns out that I am a bit of a factoid repeater. Oh well, it was bound to happen sometime.
At the Screen Actors Guild Awards, they call it “Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role.” At the Golden Globe Awards, they call it “Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture.” But at the Academy Awards, the most celebrated show of them all, they call it simply “Best Actor.”
This distinction is important because at the Oscars, it is not just the performance that is rewarded. It is the actor themselves. The Academy elects four actors each year to become the face of quality of their industry to the world. These actors can forever affix the title “Academy Award Winner” to their name on any poster or trailer they so desire. Thus, they vote not only for a great body of work but also for a face and a personality that represents them well.
The performance gets a select group of actors some attention. Their name and reputation gets them to the next step: consideration. Then, a few big groups take a leap and select one of them. At this point, the part of the voter is done. It is up to the actors to let us know where they stand. With their acceptance speech, it is their job to convince us why they deserve the highest honor that their craft has to give. It is their job to show voters what a vote for them really means.
Let’s take a look at the five actors who have won top prizes from the Golden Globes and the Screen Actors Guild.
In 2007, I bought a book in New York City called “Oscar Season” by Mary McNamara. It was at a random little shop in the city, and I was struck by seeing the golden statue concealing a gun.
Ever since that fateful day, I have told myself that I will read the book during awards season one year.
2007 came and went, “The Departed” won Best Picture, and I hadn’t read it.
2008 flew by, “No Country for Old Men” won Best Picture, and I still hadn’t read it.
2009 was fine, “Slumdog Millionaire” won Best Picture, and it continues to garner dust on my bookshelf.
Now, in 2010, barring some freak occurrence, yet another year will pass where “Oscar Season” has gone unread. There’s always next year…
**UPDATE 3/21/10: Please see Random Factoid #236.**
And now, the moment you have all been waiting for … it’s MAAAAAAARCH (as if Oprah were screaming it)!
The poll results yield four one-vote getters: “Green Zone,” “She’s Out Of My League,” “The Bounty Hunter,” and “Hot Tub Time Machine.”
However, with three votes, the most anticipated movie of March 2010 is…
Sometimes, when thinking about factoids, I have to go search for influence from outside sources. Today, my inspiration comes from old faithful, IMDb.
The poll question of the day: Has a movie ever made you feel physically ill?
Answer: Yes. “Cloverfield” made me feel sick at my stomach because of the shaky camera.
Whenever I wrote about “Crazy Heart” back in December in an Oscar Moment, I lampooned it for its obvious similarities to last year’s “The Wrestler.” Turns out, I was right.
But “The Wrestler” was a killer movie. And so is “Crazy Heart.”
Sure, it loses some originality points, but that doesn’t make the character study any less effective or entertaining. It also doesn’t suffer because it adding elements of another great movie, “Walk the Line,” with its background in country music and some very catchy songs.
“Crazy Heart” follows washed-up country singer Bad Blake (Jeff Bridges) trudging through an increasingly insignificance as a performer. He has gone from packing in crowds in Nashville to empty bowling alleys in Santa Fe. He certainly isn’t doing himself any favors with his raging alcoholism and his refusal to churn out any new material. But over the course of the film, he realizes, although somewhat reluctantly, Bad Blake begins to change his ways. The main impetus comes from a younger journalist (Maggie Gyllenhaal) who looks beyond the singer for her interview.
Dear Readers,
Thank you for visiting my site and making me a part of your life in some small way, be it by observing my neuroses or taking my advice about what movie you should see tomorrow.
By reading, you have made an impact on my life. On Thursday, Marshall and the Movies got its ten thousandth hit. This may seem like just a number, and indeed it is. But it reminded me again to be thankful for this wonderful outlet I have to share my thoughts and insights about one of the things that I love the most, and it wouldn’t succeed without you. I don’t write these just for my own pleasure; I write for you.
So here’s to 10,000! This is only the beginning; I plan on racking up many more tens of thousands and celebrating each and every one of them with you.
Thanks again!
Until the next reel,
Marshall
“Shutter Island” is director Martin Scorsese’s first movie since he floored the Academy (as well as one semi-notable movie blogger) with “The Departed,” which only serves to set the bar sky-high to clear. It would take another modern classic to surpass “The Departed,” and this isn’t that. However, this is high-octane, heart-pumping Hollywood entertainment that delivers the chills and thrills.
Keep in mind, though, this is Scorsese we are talking about here. “Shutter Island” is no Michael Bay movie. It succeeds largely because of that unique Scorsese vision which has been the driving force behind two of my all-time favorite movies. It’s important to know that he isn’t trying to make a “Taxi Driver” out of Dennis Lehane’s novel; this is an homage to the classic horror films of Hitchcock and the like. If you get déjà vu at all, it will probably more to “The Shining” than to “GoodFellas.”
The movie explores the line between insanity and reality as two federal marshals (Leonardo DiCaprio and Mark Ruffalo) investigate the disappearance of a patient at an asylum. As Teddy Daniels’ (DiCaprio) observations progress, we come to two important realizations. The first is that Teddy has something more on his mind than merely investigating a missing patient. The second, and by far the most important, is that there is something more than just lingering seasickness affecting Teddy’s mind.
In my “documents” folder on my computer, there is a folder called “Screenplays.”
In this folder, you can find 51 screenplays that I have downloaded off of the studio FYC sites in the months leading up to the Oscars.
So, studios, consider this my thank you note. You are awesome for giving me fodder. Make more movies like those.
Love, Marshall
Another movie-going pet peeve, inspired by seeing “Crazy Heart” tonight:
There was a skinny line that scaled the height of the screen, and it was incredibly distracting and annoying.
I don’t know if it was on the film or the projector. Heck, I don’t even know if you understand what I’m talking about. Do I make sense?
I set a lofty goal to see every Academy Award-nominated performance of the ’00s by the final ceremony of the decade. I’m not going to reach this goal, but along the way, I have seen some great movies and great acting. This week’s “F.I.L.M.” (First-Class, Independent Little-Known Movie – refresher on the acronym), “The Contender,” is one of those movies.
“The Contender” received two acting nominations in 2000. The first was for Joan Allen, who plays Senator Laine Hanson, a nominee for the vacant vice-presidential position. She is a Republican-turned-Democrat and a safe pick for a second-term president looking for his “swan song.”
However, she has strong opponents in her former party, led by the aggressive Shelley Runyon (Gary Oldman). He and a select group begin to execute an elaborate smear campaign, designed to block her confirmation. After a comprehensive investigation, they dig up dirty details from her past, designed merely to distract from the real issue and engrain the image of a harlot in the American minds. One can’t help but see the movie a little differently after Sarah Palin’s vice-presidential candidacy in the 2008 election and her subsequent defamation by the media.
The other nominated performance came from Jeff Bridges as the president looking to polish his profile for the history books. It’s brimming with typical Bridges precision and poise, but it’s a fairly reserved role up until the rousing climax (more on that in a second).
“The Contender” stood out among similar political dramas for me because of its emphasis on ethics. Christian Slater’s character, a young and honest politician who joins with Runyon’s crew to take down Hansen, represents the morals that so many of the old Washington cronies seem to have lost. The movie ends with a killer monologue by Jeff Bridges’ president, and it is an inspiring piece of patriotism that makes us proud in the democratic process that we have. Maybe the president should start hiring screenwriters to write his speeches…
Some friends and I who share a common obsession with the movie “(500) Days of Summer” have been messing around on Facebook, setting our profile pictures to the movie’s characters. Tom and Summer are covered – but not by me. Who am I, then?
Rhoda, the greeting-card worker who is seen trying to roll out a new line of cards with her cat, Pickles. She is an obscure character, but I remembered her. Mainly it was because I actually felt bad for her because there she was, just trying to unveil a cute and sweet new line of cards with her cat who she probably loves dearly. Then depressed Tom comes along and just decides to tear her down while he is feeling especially horrific. Her response is a simple frown, and I just wanted to go and give her a hug.
(In case you don’t remember her, this should jostle your memory.)
I’m one of those people who is extremely easily distracted from doing a simple shopping task.
Case in point: back in January, whenever I was shopping for travel books before my trip to Argentina, I found myself in a section filled with books about the history of Texas.
Of course, there just HAD to be a book about the history of movie theaters in the city of Houston. I lost well over 30 minutes to it.
Marshall and the Movies 
Recent Comments