The Academy Award nominations were announced this morning and I have a few thoughts on them. Here they are.
This is the second year that there were 10, count them, 10 nominees for Best Picture. All the other categories have five or less nominees, but in an obvious ploy to get more people to see more movies, they have 10 nominees for this category. I think I saw maybe two movies in the theater last year. I did see True Grit recently and I again swore I would never go to another in a movie theater. People just do not understand they are in a public place and not their living rooms.
In this instance, Shane and I got to the theater early so that I could claim my favorite seat--back row center. It prevents me hearing people behind me chit chatting or whatever. Anyway, even though we were among the first ones in the theater, it filled up enough so that someone ended up sitting right next to me. This lady constantly popped her gum and occasionally talked to movie. It drove me crazy. I would have said something, but her gentleman friend looked like he could have possibly been a professional football player. I didn't think it was worth a brouhaha. Anyway, my point is that I will not be going to the movies to see the other nine films nominated against True Grit.
The other movie I saw from last year was Harry Potter. Poor Harry has never been an Oscar darling, but he did manage to wrangle two nominations this year--Visual Effects and Art Direction. Luckily, Harry does just fine without the Oscar buzz other films seem to need.
My favorite thing about the nominations is how, out of all the movies released in the year, the technical awards also seem to also go to the films that end up being the best picture even when it doesn't make any sense. For instance, True Grit got nominated for Costume Design. Costume Design? It was a western! The costumes were barely designed. I liked the film very much and the costumes seemed very appropriate, but the best of any picture for the whole year? That seems odd to me.
Also, I would like someone to explain to me the difference between sound editing and sound mixing. How is it that some films were nominated in one of those categories and not the other? You would think they would be dependent on each other. Also, is there someone out there that is convinced to see a film based on these nominations? "I wasn't very interested in Salt, but I see it got a sound mixing nomination, so perhaps I will see what all the buzz is about."
My only complaint about the nominations is that Matt Damon did not get included in Best Supporting Actor for True Grit. He should get a special award for schooling Glen Campbell on how the role should have been played. Campbell in the original version was so bad, that he nearly ruined the movie. I know Campbell is not an actor and he just got the role because he bought the ladies into the theaters, but my God he was bad. Damon wasn't anything more than adequate in the role, but when you compare it to how it was played previously, it was quite an accomplishment.
I used to be very into the Oscars, but lately I can't seem to be that interested in them. Why do I care what films when awards? It doesn't really affect my life. I get an occasional award for working in the Government, but millions of people don't want to watch my performance appraisal. I probably would work harder if it was televised. I would dress better.
