WARNING!!!! SOME MOVIE SPOILERS!!! ( Basically about Million Dollar Baby )

We’ve come to expect year-round insane decisions from those studio lunatics, like the fact that sources tell me Warner’s at first refused to fund what became its best hope in eons for a Best Picture Oscar. But it’s that loathsome time of year again when the inmates take over the asylum, so we’re stuck ranting against our own Hollywood lunatics who came out with this week’s sanity-defying Oscar nominations. So before we get to my projected winners, I have to ask: What the hell is wrong with you people?

Eleven nominations for a mess of a movie like The Aviator and a monster of a man like Harvey Weinstein is just incomprehensible, as is the snubbing of The Motorcycle Diaries, Fahrenheit 9/11, and even The Passion of the Christ. You hypocrites pretend that the Academy Awards honor motion-picture artistry, while always keeping an eye on popularity to stay in step with Main Street. Yet you overlook the year’s three most talked-about movies that had the vision thing. And don’t even try to argue that daring subject matter like humanizing commie icon Che Guevara or turning Dubya into a war criminal and Jews into the killers of Christ was too hot to handle, when you were willing to praise films about abortion (Vera Drake), euthanasia (Million Dollar Baby, The Sea Within), genocide (Hotel Rwanda), drug addiction (Ray), paranoia (The Aviator), pedophilia (Finding Neverland) and wild, monkey sex (Sideways).

That said, it’s not just that passing on Passion (only three nominations, and only in the non-marquee categories of Art Direction, Makeup and Original Score) flew in the face of everything the Academy is supposed to reward. No other movie this year, rightly or wrongly, was as risky an endeavor, even if it did pay off. (Talk about arty. Much of the movie was made in the Aramaic and Latin languages, with few subtitles. Remember when Dances With Wolves won Best Picture because of its use of Sioux Lakota dialect?) Irony of ironies, because of its prejudice against Passion, Hollywood will have in its arsenal even less ammunition to fend off those anti-Semitic bigots complaining how America’s entertainment industry is controlled and contaminated by “The Jews.”

As for Weinstein, he appears to have been the beneficiary of an Oscar pity party after getting kicked to the curb by Disney. But I predict Harv’s humiliations are only just beginning. (And I’m not only talking about the inevitable lawsuit with Disney over any realistic valuation of Miramax.) Recent history has shown that, while Weinstein can certainly score an Academy nomination, he can’t steal the awards anymore. His movies, such as The Talented Mr. Ripley, The Cider House Rules, In the Bedroom and Cold Mountain, have come up virtually empty on Oscar night. I predict that same fate awaits The Aviator this time around. As for Harvey, he may have to rethink his moviemaking formula, which depends heavily on his amply demonstrated ability to sweet-talk talent into working for him for bupkis in exchange for Academy gold. Here’s hoping the stupid stars wise up.

Meanwhile, Marty Scorsese deserves this year’s Dumb and Dumber award, and I don’t mean Best Director. You’d think he would have learned his lesson in 2003 when Gangs of New York was nominated, and he and Harvey were bitch-slapped by the Academy for not only dragging poor old Robert Wise into their over-the-top Oscar politicking, but then deceiving voters by having a Miramax publicist ghost-write a praiseful column on Scorsese that appeared under the beloved wrinkly’s byline. (Kudos to John Horn of the Los Angeles Times for busting them on it.) Now, all of a sudden, Robert De Niro is talking publicly that Taxi Driver 2 is in the works with Scorsese. Sources tell me that Raging Bull 2 is also being considered, and that Harvey is going to eventually join Bobby and Marty in this sick joke, along with financier Graham King. (For the record, a Miramax mouthpiece played coy about Weinstein’s involvement.)

I’m told this sequel mania is intended to remind Academy voters of all the great movies in Scorsese’s body of work. But I think it will have an unintended effect: to remind Academy voters what disgusting moneygrubbers both De Niro and Scorsese have become in recent years, culminating in their even thinking about revisiting two great classic American films just to score a coupla bucks. It’s Francis Ford Coppola all over again, and look what happened to him after the critical and commercial failure of Godfather 3. In Scorsese’s case, this kind of overreaching is committing Oscar suicide.

I’ve reported in the past about people on the Miramax payroll launching verbal salvos against Saving Private Ryan and A Beautiful Mind. This year’s badmouthing war is targeting Million Dollar Baby, which is up for Best Picture against Miramax’s The Aviator. Granted you gotta have steel balls to take on Clint over anything, much less his movie and its euthanasia subplot, especially if you’re a dickwad like Michael Medved and the rest of those right-wing wackos. Far more interesting than the usual mudslinging is that word from inside Eastwood’s production company is that Warner’s did not want to underwrite Million Dollar Baby. (But watch the studio gang preen come Oscar night.) That, more than any heavily financed campaign, should help the movie clinch Best Picture, since it makes Clint’s project seem almost indie.

Now, for my peek inside the twisted mind of the Academy.

BEST ACTOR

This ain’t Johnny Depp’s year, no matter how much we love him. That Leo scored a nomination, undeserved, since it robbed Liam Neeson of a spot for Kinsey, is reward enough for the Miramax machine. In a perfect world, Don Cheadle would win. But he ain’t as cool as Clint or fine like Foxx. Now, about that upset. Foxx is expected to win. But who in hell really thought Eastwood could chew up the scenery when most of his contemporaries are gumming their food? Talk that it’s the performance of a lifetime is Hollywood code for We’d better give it to the guy now, before he croaks. Foxx has struck just that right ass-kissing “I’m not worthy” chord wooing Oscar voters. I still think Jamie will win in this category, but if he doesn’t, he won’t come away empty-handed. Keep reading.

BEST ACTRESS

In that same perfect world, the dumpy English broad from Vera Drake would be the winner, just like Judi Dench before her. But it’s not Dame Imelda Staunton — yet — so forget her. No one on the planet saw Maria Full of Grace. Kate Winslet would have been a shoo-in for supporting, but not in this category. So the contest is between Annette Bening and Hilary Swank. Bening has the sympathy vote down cold. After all, she plays house with a has-been. But hers is a good performance in a lousy movie vs. Swank’s good performance in a great movie. Besides, Hilary dies.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Paul Giamatti deserves this hands down, but he wasn’t even nominated, because the category isn’t called Best Annoying Actor, now is it? Alan Alda is best known as the new Huell Howser of PBS, not as a movie actor these days. With so many good American performances this year, no one’s gonna give Oscar to Clive Owen, a Brit. It’s between Thomas Haden Church, best known as a dreadful TV actor, and Morgan Freeman, who’s played God, the U.S. president and Nelson Mandela. Only idiots would deny him the Oscar. But if that big upset we spoke of earlier happens, Foxx wins for his work in the wrong film, Collateral.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

No one plays blind or deaf, although there is a lot of hair dyeing. If the Academy decides to pull a Marisa Tomei, it’s Natalie Portman. But I doubt they can overlook her near-career-ending woodenness in Star Wars. This isn’t Cate Blanchett’s year. And Sophie Okonedo doesn’t stand a chance. Laura Linney is Meryl Streep with a nicer nose. But Virginia Madsen will win, because Hollywood loves ex-sex-symbol survivors who, when their careers grew cold, had the good taste to avoid suicide.

BEST DIRECTOR

There’s a reason “hack” is part of his name, so don’t consider Taylor Hackford for Ray. Alexander Payne is on the way up and Mike Leigh on the way down. What’s needed is middle ground. The East Coast is pulling for Marty. The West Coast is clamoring for Clint. If the Academy trends to Eastwood for Best Actor, they may give Best Director to Scorsese as a sop. If not, Clint wins.

BEST PICTURE

Not in my lifetime will a movie about wine win the Oscar. Finding Neverland should never have been nominated. We’ll never know when the Academy will be ready to vote for a black film like Ray, or a blacker film like Hotel Rwanda, for Best Picture. (That’s right; I’m saying racism is rampant in Hollywood.) C’mon, this town hated Howard Hughes — there are still actresses who won’t admit they slept with him — plus, his Nixon slush-fund contributions make him non-P.C. The voters will cry Million Dollar Baby.

Damn,she likes to bitch a lot.You would think the academy killed her baby or something.

edit.

She has some good points though. Mostly about Freeman in supporting, which I still think is the only shoe-in thus far.

I actually have to agree Aviator is mediocrity and upsetting for such recognition. it didn't suck, it just wasn't a GREAT movie. It was good, that's about it. Look at my top ten list, even Sideways has been knowcked off by now, and Aviator is down around 15th. 15th isn't bad out of 50, especially since I only look at movies I know I'll probably like (discount Fockers and Phantom, that I supported my mother in going to see).

I don't agree with her on the acting sweep of Baby though. Really, a film hasn't done that since Network and won't again. I think Clint was the weakest of the three in Baby. He doesn't get it. That is the Foxx comment she made. It won't be an upset, according to some here, but Leo still looks like Aviator blind sided them. So for me, its between Foxx and Leo, not Foxx and Eastwood. I'm sticking to Leo because Cheadle and Foxx split the minority vote (hey, she mentioning it so will I. There is a 1973 precedence for this comment).

Best actress is between Bening and Swank, she hit that on the nose.

I already said supporting actor is Freeman, and yes, in part its because of an entire life spent doing excellent and note-worthy roles, plus he was damn excellent in Baby, better than even his co-actors.

Supporting actress, I have no clue, I'll get back to you on that. I will be dissappointed if Madsen gets it though. She did ok, but nothing standout, I could pretty much see every single decent actress interpreting it the same way she did. No flare at all. Sophie gets a nod, that's enough, I have to see the other ones. But actually, I do think Natalie gets it despite her Star Wars dissing.

Director I would love anyone except for Scorsese...and this ocming from someone who has GONY on her top 100 list. If he gets rewarded now its for the totally wrong project. Its not even his, he got pulled onto it when a former director (forget which) dropped it. It doesn't have the same feel or agenda as other Scorsese films, and it kind of, just, yeah. Judging by the pass-up in Baby of all acting except Freeman, I actually think director might go to Clint. Hey, it is an excellently directed movie with flare. Regardless of if you are bored by the content, think its a tear-jerker, or predictable. It is still very well executed, which is the director, just not best picture.

This will be the first split from director to picture. I still see Aviator getting best picture.

Mann. And Spielberg before him. Apparently, The Aviator has been the hot potato since the 1970's.

Personally, I think any film a director didn't nurture should automatically be disqualifed.

edit.

On that note, wasn't Schindler's List Scorcese's first, and then Spielberg's?


I obviously disagree with your policy \:D/


As for this commentator, 2 things:

1. The Passion wasn't snubbed; it got 3, which is an amazing number. That's three more than I expected. I think they hit it in the nail. I'm still catching up on 2004 releases, but I'm sure that there are 5 films out there that are better, in the same way that I'm sure that Ray is not among the 10 best films of last year. The Academy's picks of nominees does not equal the best films of any given year, and neither quality or controversy are requirements for nominating a film.

2. She's taking this way too seriously; this is just an Awards show most people don't care about. It's biggest audience was 1998, because of Titanic, and that was not even 1/5th of America's population (55m viewers). This year's will hover around 40m. And I doubt too many viewers give the Oscar as much value as it is made out to be. How successful have Jolie and Berry been? And how successful has Tom Cruise been without an Oscar? Etc.

Just lay back and enjoy it for the self-aggrandizing love-fest that it is.

If I remember correctly, Marty suggested Spielberg take over the project because of his Jewish background.

Spielberg had the rights first in 82, and when it lapsed, Marty took over. He then gave it back to Spielberg in exchange for Cape Fear.

I agree with her about Aviator being a mess.

MDB is just a better film on all fronts then Aviator. The Aviator had good acting, good direction, cinemetography etc, but had an apparent lack of editing because of the lagging script. I believe Aviator wasn't truly about anything. MDB played with the ideas of finding strength in yourself, hope in others, and gaining reconciliation, whereas The Aviator never really played with any of the 'big ideas', and therefore didn't find a common theme and a final lasting point. It was just plain glitz and glamour, and the poorly done, not well explained downfall to insanity of Howard Hughes.

I have a feeling that if Scorcesse didn't direct it most people wouldn't be praising this movie as much as its been praised now ( this is coming from a Scorcesse fanboy ). The movie repeats the same thing over and over. Hughes flys a plane, dates a famous actress, goes a little nutty, repeat. By the end of the near 3 hour mess you don't know anything more about Hughes then you did in the first hour.

Just my 2cents

Wow... we saw different movies.

I mean... talk of pedophilia is like, 2 lines? in Finding Neverland.

I'm interested in this monkey sex movie though.

Yes, so Marty nurtured the project for a while. Somethin of a babysitter waiting for Spielbergo to get back at it, no?

Anyways, I think that if the director properly nurtures it from the moment that he becomes involved in the project to the completion, he's on equal footing with anyone else.

Sandra Oh was getting it good.

God, I would make fine monkey love to her until Paul Giamatti won an Oscar.

Why didn't he get the nomination? Is he too ugly?

I obviously rigged it so I could make love to Sandra Oh for longer.

Guess what sound she makes in bed????

I think that may have something to do with it.

I loved Sideways, I cried, I felt Miles.

I'm a writer, and though I'm nowhere near his age or body type, I have a lot of the same issues.

Hey, it's better than:

Does it rhyme with Ai-a Ai-a Ai-a Ai-a Ai-a Ai-a?

Seriously though,

I always thought the Oscars should have an Orange Award (see below) or a Viewer's Choice award. Almost everybody else does it... so why couldn't the Academy? It could bring so much to the spectacle of the Academy and would allow "normal movies" a big prize. Air them in the evening right before the actor/screenplay awards and be done with it.

http://www.orange.co.uk/entertainment/film/bafta/

Then they could have a list of films like:

Viewers's Choice Award for Best Motion Picture:
Fahrenheit 9/11
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
The Passion of the Christ
Shrek 2
Spider-Man 2

They should also be assembled outside the main AMPAS voting body to avoid pigeonholing a certain picture like Passion as a Viewer's Choice nominee and ejecting it from competition from Best Picture (because there are high grossing and popular films like Titanic which deserve recognition in a Viewer's Choice and Best Picture situation).

This alone is good reason for them to never, ever contemplate having such a category.

You changed my quote... that's libel! (or slander?).

Not that I care, Paul Giamatti is kinda sexy too.

Personally, I think she's right. I like her honesty- it's refreshing to see someone in Hollywood not kissing the Academies ass. I couldn't agree with her more on the whole steroetypical nominations front. I guess I can be the outsider and say she's right.

What kind of Moron is this woman? First of all POTC and MCD wasn't snubbed. Secondly: Does she really think POTC and F 9/11 are better than Aviator? If yes, someone should quickly fire her...

As Mike said earlier on that topic, that would mean that Home Alone would have won an Oscar.