1/24/12

Yes, last year's Academy Awards broadcast was a debacle, as no one would dare question even if they were that lonely soul who found James Franco's Cigar Store Indian act to be the height of comic inspiration.  But the show is always secondary to me to the history it's writing, and the 2011 Oscars delivered the most on-the-money set of nominees and winners since that golden 1998 when the fearsome foursome of Titanic, As Good as it Gets, Good Will Hunting and LA Confidential dominated the proceedings.  As such, I was due for a down decade or so, and the 2012 nominations announced today certainly get that process rolling.  

As I've mentioned before, it's hard for me to get that interested in the proceedings pro or con because there's just so little here I've seen.  The Help, Moneyball, War Horse, The Tree of Life, The Artist... lots of stuff on my "Um, I guess if I have the time..." list.  I have to say I kinda object to the love showered on Moneyball, though.  I'm not unbiased, as the Oakland A's of that era routinely beat up on my beloved Texas Rangers and I've never been a fan of the real-life Billy Beane's self-promoting tendencies (I honestly think he's not only not a genius, but kinda an idiot, believing his own hype to the point where he trades the entire team almost every year because of that silly "You're either contending or rebuilding" mantra:  but I digress, this isn't a baseball blog).  But more to the point, everything I've read about the movie suggests it's a total fantasy, denying the fact that the A's of the time not only enjoyed the services of some of the league's most talented players, but also a great many All-Stars who would later be revealed to be among the leading offenders in the game's scandalous Steroid Era.  Instead, writers Steven Zaillian, Aaron Sorkin and Stan Chevin would have us believe those teams were akin to the one in Major League, comprised of journeymen Jonah Hill's mathematical formulas figured out how to use.  Which also brings us to the notion that I'm to believe that not only has Hill given a Best Supporting Actor-worthy performance in a year when so many top talents were excluded from the category, but that he's done it as a geek with a mathematical formula to win baseball games.  I haven't seen the film, of course, and I'm sure it's a rousing enough little fantasy for people who either don't know baseball or haven't watched a game in the last 15 years.  But usually, worthy films that stray too far from the historical record get hammered by the Academy.  I guess Miguel Tejada's A) existence and B) steroid-enhanced MVP award don't count as facts you shouldn't cover up.

But rather than bitch and moan all day about who got nominated sight unseen, let me bitch and moan instead about who got passed over.  Take Shelter and Young Adult, for instance, although one can argue that Jessica Chastain's Supporting Actress nomination for The Help is at least as much for Shelter and The Tree of Life as for the ubiquitous blockbuster I still expect to pull a Best Picture upset.  But star Michael Shannon and writer/director Jeff Nichols were left empty-handed, and the extraordinary original song "Shelter" that plays over the end credits was omitted from a race that includes just TWO songs, one from a movie about Muppets (at least they picked the clever "Man or Muppet" rather than that dreadful "Life is a Happy Song" that's gotten so much awards season love) and another about animated parrots.  Then you have Jason Reitman and Diablo Cody's triumphantly misanthropic Adult, which packed not only their excellent work, but two of the year's best performances from Charlize Theron and Patton Oswalt, both left off the ballot (and, no, I'm not open to the possibility that Hill's performance was even in the same zip code as Oswalt's:  I've seen clips).  But then the year's single best performance was also left at the alter:  Leonardo DiCaprio's triumphant turn as J. Edgar Hoover was clearly not going to win, but its failure to even elicit a nomination?  An outrage.  I suppose DiCaprio will follow in the footsteps of Paul Newman and Al Pacino and finally pic up his acting award when he's in his 60's for some random movie in which he's not particularly good.  In a word, lame.  And Armie Hammer was snubbed for the second year in a row for the same movie:  they'll owe him a nomination next year for Mirror, Mirror just to catch up on all these oversights!  And don't get me started on Andy Serkis...

What was good?  Obviously, I'm very happy about Hugo scoring the most nominations, making it a legitimate contender for Best Picture even if it didn't score a single acting nomination (which didn't stop The Lord of the Rings:  The Return of the King from winning Best Picture and just about everything else that didn't involve reading lines a few years back).  George Clooney's lead performance, and The Descendants in general, was much deserving.  And while Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is far from his best work, I was happy to see Gary Oldman remove his name from the list of best actors never to be nominated.  Very happy about Rooney Mara's Best Actress nomination for The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, ditto Michelle Williams for My Week with Marilyn, even if she's really more of a Supporting Actress.  Her co-star Kenneth Branagh is one of several nice nominations in the Supporting Actor field, including Nick Nolte for the underappreciated Warrior and Max Von Sydow for surprise Best Picture nominee Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (my review of that one will be up in a few days).  J.C. Chandor's screenplay nomination for Margin Call was also a pleasant surprise.

So, yeah, not much I'm excited about.  I still hope to get to The Artist, although its crash-and-burn upon expanding to 600 screens last week puts that in doubt.  It's not that I think it looks all that great, but it's certainly a lark, and it just might win Best Picture, with those 2nd most nominations and the Producers Guild trophy in their favor.  Of course, if I'm right about The Help, maybe I should rent that before Oscar night.  Or not.