1/18/10

I haven't written a word about the Awards Season up until now, and the primary reason is that it's simply not been all that interesting to me.  I'll freely admit it:  after years of disgust with the Awards establishment's drift away first from commercially successful movies and then from niche movies that were great as opposed to ones that pinged their favorite issues or desire to adopt foreign children, last year pretty much did me in.  Going into the season with the year's top grossing movie (yes, I'm talking about The Dark Knight) having also been my favorite film of the year and universally acclaimed, it was time for Old Man Oscar to wake up and acknowledge a movie that people had actually loved rather than shake his walking stick at them demanding that they love something they'd never even heard of instead.  As you know, Hugh Jackman's cardboard batcycle in the Oscars' opening musical number was as close as Knight came to Best Picture at any major ceremony.  And it's not just the Academy that's out of touch:  all around the country, more and more random bodies of critics rise up and demand to be heard.  And what are they saying?  "Me too!"  Sigh.  It's enough to make a person, well, not give a damn.

But I am a creature of habit, and I have followed this Hurt Locker lovefest of an awards season, including fast-forwarding through the Golden Globes last night (sorry, Ricky Gervais, didn't hear a word you said, although you did look almost as drunk as Harrison Ford and awfully pleased with the quality of your own material).  Not that I believe what I saw will have any impact on what's coming on March 7 just as it did not reflect what we've seen so far, but somewhere between all those fast-moving celebrities and their poorly-scripted banter, I saw something like a phantom from the mid-90's:  people winning major awards for movies people who don't go three times a week had actually seen! The Blind Side?  The Hangover? Sherlock Holmes?  Inglourious Basterds?  Julie & Julia?  Forbid it almighty God, the year's top-grossing movie as Best Picture-Drama?  Wow.  Now THIS is something worth talking about.

Only three major awards went to movies that didn't either pass or some close to the $100 million mark at the box office, and only one (Jeff Bridges' win for Crazy Heart) to a movie that isn't close to the $50 million mark.  And Heart has yet to see much release:  I myself am dying to see it, and it looks like a movie audiences might embrace.  Did any of these awards move me personally?  The wins by Meryl Streep and Robert Downey Jr. were for performances that had meant a lot to me.  I like Sandra Bullock a lot, although I'm a bit puzzled by the timing of the massive lovefest gathing behind her the last month or so, and The Blind Side hardly represents her best work.  Christoph Waltz was wonderful in Basterds, and his personal story is great even if his speech last night demonstrated why you should try to "write" a speech for a major award:  nobody's in any shape to give it once they're caught up in the emotion of the moment.  Downey Jr.'s wild, off-the-cuff reverse speech about all the people he "wasn't" going to thank was a delight, and underscored once again that no movie star seems cooler.  I liked Avatar a lot, better than early award season darlings Locker and Up in the Air (not quite as much as Basterds), and I'm heartened to see a genuine sci-fi blockbuster win a major award like this.  James Cameron, of course, has everything he could ever want and the award doesn't mean a lot to him personally, but I do feel good for Avatar's many fans.  I just wish I'd liked it that little bit more so I'd feel like it could legitimately be called last year's best film.

So, with the Globes in the can, all eyes turn to the Academy Awards and their new 10-movie Best Picture comptition.  Do I feel like the Globes have turned the award season toward blockbusters?  Maybe yes, maybe no.  Avatar is more of a Globe-friendly spectacle (even the Guilds prefer blockbusters compared to the Sundance-enamored Academy), and while I think it is one of four films with a legitimate shot at being Best Picture (the others being Critics Circle faves Locker and Air and the wild card Basterds:  don't underestimate the value of emptying a machine gun into Hitler's face where the WWII-obsessed Academy is concerned), I don't know that I'm prepared to anoint it as front-runner.  Best Actress should go to a hit:  that's pretty much settled into a showdown between Bullock and Streep (rooting for Streep, who's given my favorite performance in back-to-back years now).  Bridges has pulled away in the Best Actor race, while the supporting categories are pretty much settled, with Waltz and Precious' Mo'Nique locked in.  Katherine Bigalow couldn't cross the finish line as the first female director to win the Globe, but I still rate her chances of taking home the Oscar as better than her ex-husband Cameron, even if Avatar ultimately takes home the top prize.

Pity that speculation has become the most entertaining part of the awards season, but I throw down the gauntlet to the Academy:  prove me wrong.

Oh, and how come there are no Pennsylvania film critic groups, anyway?