Live-blogging the 2010 Oscars
UPDATED FREQUENTLY -- SEE BELOW. (Also, follow me on Twitter, where I'm providing additional snarky comments.)
I used to be a committed Oscarologist, seeing most of the nominated films in the theater and then really getting into the whole Oscar thing.
Then I grew up.
I used to be a committed Oscarologist, seeing most of the nominated films in the theater and then really getting into the whole Oscar thing.
Then I grew up.
Well, sort of.
I had kids. And now I have to wait for the films to come out on video and to catch up as quickly as I can.
I've seen quite a few of this year's Oscar-nominated films, but by no means even most of them. I haven't even seen Avatar -- though that may actually be for the best.
No surprises yet: Christoph Waltz for Best Supporting Actor for Inglorious Basterds. Which I saw. And, yes, deserving, though his performance descended into parody at times. It was over-the-top, but, then, so was the movie.
I'm happy that Up! won. It's not Wall-E, which I considered one of the very best films of the last decade, but it was still remarkably good. But, then, I haven't seen Fantastic Mr. Fox yet.
Original screenplay for The Hurt Locker. Excellent film, one of my favourite of the year. To me, it was either that or Tarantino's for Basterds.
Just now, Adapted Screenplay for Precious. (I won't write the movie's full title, which is one of the stupidest (and most unnecessary) ever.) Oh, please, stop being so freakin' serious, guy who just won Oscar.
Okay, you know, I wasn't going to live-blog this tonight. Instead I was just going to tweet. (Which I've been doing, so go there if you so desire.
Example tweets:
-- "Nice John Hughes tribute. He wasn't a great filmmaker, but he was, in his own way, quintessentially American, especially to my generation." (Oh, yes, I wrote a Hughes obit last August.)
-- "Wait... is Ben Stiller actually being funny? That's even rarer than a Meryl Streep Oscar win -- just twice in, what, 16 nominations?" (Please, please, please, let her win for Julie & Julia. Please, please, please, don't let Sandra Bullock win. Streep was amazing in an otherwise somewhat enjoyable movie -- her part was great, the other part, with the usually lovely Amy Adams, er, wasn't.)
Why is Robin Williams giving out the Best Supporting Actress award? Odd. Maybe he really likes Mo'nique, who is as much of a shoe-in as Waltz. (Oh, right, because it was Heath Ledger last year. Oops.)
Before they give it to Mo'nique, can I just say that Penelope Cruz is unbelievably hot? I know, I know, that's hardly an original thought. But she is. Just awesome.
And I really like Maggie Gyllenhaal, too. Especially in Stranger Than Fiction (with Will Farrell). I'll admit it, I've got something for her. I really do.
And the winner is... Mo'nique in that movie with the stupid title. Great. This could be one of the most annoying acceptance speeches ever... And yet, it wasn't. Minor miracles.
**********
So far, my favourite movies of the year (in order):
-- Adventureland
-- Adventureland
-- District 9
-- The Hurt Locker
-- A Serious Man
-- Star Trek
-- (500) Days of Summer
-- Funny People
-- Up!
-- Taking Woodstock
-- Sunshine Cleaning
-- Star Trek
-- (500) Days of Summer
-- Funny People
-- Up!
-- Taking Woodstock
-- Sunshine Cleaning
I'm not sure about A Serious Man, though. I need to see it again. I think it's my Synecdoche, New York of 2009. Could be a masterpiece, could be self-indulgent overkill.
Okay, more in a few moments...
**********
Oooh, an award for Avatar. Here's what I tweeted a while ago:
-- "Just for the record, I don't consider James Cameron a Canadian. He's in my Celine Dion category of national embarrassments."
**********
By the way, Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin are pretty good, with the former quite a bit better than the latter. But, then, the former is a hosting pro.
That opening number with Neil Patrick Harris? Not so good. Is that really the best they can do?
Otherwise, isn't it amazing how awkward so much of the ceremony is? I realize there probably isn't much, if any, rehearsal time for the presenters, but why do they almost always seem so awkward? Is it the ridiculously bad script, the unfunny or faux serious lines they have to read?
**********
I'm bored.
**********
Hold on, the Canadiens just scored two goals in the last two minutes to tie up the Ducks. It's in OT. At least that's a guaranteed point.
I'm excited.
**********
But there's Sandra Bullock. Ugh. It's not that I have anything against her, except her acting inability.
James Taylor. Nice. This is a pretty good way to do sad and sentimental.
**********
Habs-Ducks in a shootout. I hate the shootout. It's exciting, yes, but hardly a way to decide a game. It's just a breakaway contest.
Habs need to score... Brian Gionta... just trickled in. Wow. Really? They're reviewing it.
Flipping back... J-Lo looks good, as usual. She should stick to acting: The Cell, Out of Sight. She was really good, once upon a time.
The goal counts. Now we're in OT on the SO. Or whatever. Here's my favourite player, Tomas Plekanec, to win it... and... he wins it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a comeback for the greatest hockey team in the universe! Okay, not this year, but the greatest franchise ever.
Back to the Oscars... where there's dancing going on. I need to get a refill on this lovely '08 Malbec I've been drinking this evening... ah, it's interpretive dance. Good times.
Are we in the homestretch yet?
**********
Visual Effects for Avatar? No, really? Hey, is James Cameron a god or just a Nietzschean superman? Hard to tell. I haven't even seen the movie and yet I despise it.
George Clooney looks vaguely bemused.
And here's Matt Damon with Best Documentary. Too bad no one has actually seen any of these yet. I'm sure they're great, but shouldn't nominees be movies that actually came out in theaters, like the great Man on Wire last year? I have the same problem with the Best Foreign Film category. Why are the contenders only films nominated by their countries of origin (and only one per country)? Besides, what's a country of origin when so many movies are produced across borders? Shouldn't the foreign films under consideration only be films that were released in the U.S. during the year, as with the feature film categories? Why the different rules? Seriously, this is one of my biggest problems with the Academy Awards, and that's saying something.
Is Tyler Perry the unfunniest man in America? He's up there, that's for sure.
And here we are, with the overrated Tarantino and the wonderful Almodovar handing out Best Foreign Language Film, or whatever they're calling it this year. Look, maybe there's something as good as The Lives of Others here, but how would we know? I've heard of The White Ribbon, but not the others -- and I do pay attention to these things. And... it's some Argentine movie. (Did I mention I'm drinking a lovely Argentine wine this evening? How fitting.) Great. I'm sure it's wonderful. But change the freakin' rules! Foreign language films come out in American theaters just like English language films do. So what's the problem? (See above.)
Alright... the homestretch.
Best Actor: It'll be Jeff Bridges, of course. But do we need this too-personal nonsense. Come on, are we awarding performances (and the performers for a single performance) or personalities (and the performers for their careers)? Well, Pacino's undeserving Oscar for the horrible Scent of a Woman was a career recognition award, so there you go. I know Clooney is a humanitarian and a "foxy fox," but I don't care right now. I only care about the performance. Stop it! Stop it! Stop it! Why do we need to be told that these stars are such amazing people? Who cares? It's such typical up-with-Hollywood bullshit.
And here's the always-so-self-promotional Kate Winslet, whom I can't stand (and who shouldn't have won for the loathsome The Reader last year). And it's... Jeff Bridges. Fine. At least there's a good chance he'll give a good speech... And it's okay. I haven't seen the movie yet, but it certainly seems like a career recognition award of sorts. I mean, he's The Dude. And he seems to be well-liked in Hollywood. And he's a pretty good actor -- very good, for example, in The Contender, where he plays a fine POTUS.
Best Actress: Some drama here -- Bullock vs. Streep. I haven't seen The Blind Side yet, but I have a hard time believing that Bullock is anywhere near as good as Streep, who is simply amazing as Julia Child. But you know what? I've got to go with Bullock here. Which brings me no pleasure whatsoever. As I said above, it's not that I have anything against her. She seems like a very nice person and has given decent performances in a few movies -- I just can't think of any at the moment. But come on, she's hardly a great actor. Not that the Oscars are always about great acting, but doesn't Streep, probably the finest film actress of our time, deserve a third award after all these years? Besides, her Child is transcendent. (More of the "these-are-such-great-people" crap. Are we supposed to worship these people or just admire them as demi-gods? Stanley Tucci tells us that Streep is "kind." Great. And? Although, he and Streep were fantastic together in J&J.)
Sean Penn emerges... He was wonderful in Milk, wasn't he? And the Oscar goes to... Bullock? Yup. There you go. A Sign of the Apocalypse if there ever was one. Well, perhaps not. A Melanie Griffith win -- she's the Keanu Reeves of actresses, among the worst ever -- would be far worse. At least she's giving a laudable speech. She probably did wear everyone down with her ubiquitous Oscar PR campaign. Whatever. Let's move on...
Best Director: Babs gives out the award... I'm going with Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker. She'll get this, then Cameron will get Best Picture. Make sense? And the winner is... Bigelow. Awesome. She's truly a deserving winner. The shameless and massive ego known as James Cameron seems genuinely happy for her, but who knows? Although, you know, I think the Coens did extemely well with A Serious Man, as did Neill Blomkamp with District 9.
Best Picture: Tom Hanks? Really? Is his main job now to give out Oscars?
Wait... that was abrupt... It's The Hurt Locker? Really? Wow. I'm stunned. I thought it was Avatar for sure. Amazing. I read somewhere that THL has made something like one-fiftieth what Avatar has made. Hopefully it'll start getting some post-box-office recognition now on video.
But I really am surprised. Small movies rarely ever beat out huge box-office smashes (as TNR's Chris Orr explained the other day -- who also had the 1/50th stat, I remember). Bigelow looks shocked, shaking her head in disbelief. But it had emerged, in some circles, as the favourite, so there you go.
Well, that's it. Done. It always seems so anti-climactic, with the hosts emerging briefly at the end to wrap it up.
Which I will now do with this post.
Good night, everyone.
I'm bored.
**********
Hold on, the Canadiens just scored two goals in the last two minutes to tie up the Ducks. It's in OT. At least that's a guaranteed point.
I'm excited.
**********
But there's Sandra Bullock. Ugh. It's not that I have anything against her, except her acting inability.
James Taylor. Nice. This is a pretty good way to do sad and sentimental.
**********
Habs-Ducks in a shootout. I hate the shootout. It's exciting, yes, but hardly a way to decide a game. It's just a breakaway contest.
Habs need to score... Brian Gionta... just trickled in. Wow. Really? They're reviewing it.
Flipping back... J-Lo looks good, as usual. She should stick to acting: The Cell, Out of Sight. She was really good, once upon a time.
The goal counts. Now we're in OT on the SO. Or whatever. Here's my favourite player, Tomas Plekanec, to win it... and... he wins it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a comeback for the greatest hockey team in the universe! Okay, not this year, but the greatest franchise ever.
Back to the Oscars... where there's dancing going on. I need to get a refill on this lovely '08 Malbec I've been drinking this evening... ah, it's interpretive dance. Good times.
Are we in the homestretch yet?
**********
Visual Effects for Avatar? No, really? Hey, is James Cameron a god or just a Nietzschean superman? Hard to tell. I haven't even seen the movie and yet I despise it.
George Clooney looks vaguely bemused.
And here's Matt Damon with Best Documentary. Too bad no one has actually seen any of these yet. I'm sure they're great, but shouldn't nominees be movies that actually came out in theaters, like the great Man on Wire last year? I have the same problem with the Best Foreign Film category. Why are the contenders only films nominated by their countries of origin (and only one per country)? Besides, what's a country of origin when so many movies are produced across borders? Shouldn't the foreign films under consideration only be films that were released in the U.S. during the year, as with the feature film categories? Why the different rules? Seriously, this is one of my biggest problems with the Academy Awards, and that's saying something.
Is Tyler Perry the unfunniest man in America? He's up there, that's for sure.
And here we are, with the overrated Tarantino and the wonderful Almodovar handing out Best Foreign Language Film, or whatever they're calling it this year. Look, maybe there's something as good as The Lives of Others here, but how would we know? I've heard of The White Ribbon, but not the others -- and I do pay attention to these things. And... it's some Argentine movie. (Did I mention I'm drinking a lovely Argentine wine this evening? How fitting.) Great. I'm sure it's wonderful. But change the freakin' rules! Foreign language films come out in American theaters just like English language films do. So what's the problem? (See above.)
Alright... the homestretch.
Best Actor: It'll be Jeff Bridges, of course. But do we need this too-personal nonsense. Come on, are we awarding performances (and the performers for a single performance) or personalities (and the performers for their careers)? Well, Pacino's undeserving Oscar for the horrible Scent of a Woman was a career recognition award, so there you go. I know Clooney is a humanitarian and a "foxy fox," but I don't care right now. I only care about the performance. Stop it! Stop it! Stop it! Why do we need to be told that these stars are such amazing people? Who cares? It's such typical up-with-Hollywood bullshit.
And here's the always-so-self-promotional Kate Winslet, whom I can't stand (and who shouldn't have won for the loathsome The Reader last year). And it's... Jeff Bridges. Fine. At least there's a good chance he'll give a good speech... And it's okay. I haven't seen the movie yet, but it certainly seems like a career recognition award of sorts. I mean, he's The Dude. And he seems to be well-liked in Hollywood. And he's a pretty good actor -- very good, for example, in The Contender, where he plays a fine POTUS.
Best Actress: Some drama here -- Bullock vs. Streep. I haven't seen The Blind Side yet, but I have a hard time believing that Bullock is anywhere near as good as Streep, who is simply amazing as Julia Child. But you know what? I've got to go with Bullock here. Which brings me no pleasure whatsoever. As I said above, it's not that I have anything against her. She seems like a very nice person and has given decent performances in a few movies -- I just can't think of any at the moment. But come on, she's hardly a great actor. Not that the Oscars are always about great acting, but doesn't Streep, probably the finest film actress of our time, deserve a third award after all these years? Besides, her Child is transcendent. (More of the "these-are-such-great-people" crap. Are we supposed to worship these people or just admire them as demi-gods? Stanley Tucci tells us that Streep is "kind." Great. And? Although, he and Streep were fantastic together in J&J.)
Sean Penn emerges... He was wonderful in Milk, wasn't he? And the Oscar goes to... Bullock? Yup. There you go. A Sign of the Apocalypse if there ever was one. Well, perhaps not. A Melanie Griffith win -- she's the Keanu Reeves of actresses, among the worst ever -- would be far worse. At least she's giving a laudable speech. She probably did wear everyone down with her ubiquitous Oscar PR campaign. Whatever. Let's move on...
Best Director: Babs gives out the award... I'm going with Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker. She'll get this, then Cameron will get Best Picture. Make sense? And the winner is... Bigelow. Awesome. She's truly a deserving winner. The shameless and massive ego known as James Cameron seems genuinely happy for her, but who knows? Although, you know, I think the Coens did extemely well with A Serious Man, as did Neill Blomkamp with District 9.
Best Picture: Tom Hanks? Really? Is his main job now to give out Oscars?
Wait... that was abrupt... It's The Hurt Locker? Really? Wow. I'm stunned. I thought it was Avatar for sure. Amazing. I read somewhere that THL has made something like one-fiftieth what Avatar has made. Hopefully it'll start getting some post-box-office recognition now on video.
But I really am surprised. Small movies rarely ever beat out huge box-office smashes (as TNR's Chris Orr explained the other day -- who also had the 1/50th stat, I remember). Bigelow looks shocked, shaking her head in disbelief. But it had emerged, in some circles, as the favourite, so there you go.
Well, that's it. Done. It always seems so anti-climactic, with the hosts emerging briefly at the end to wrap it up.
Which I will now do with this post.
Good night, everyone.
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
10:03 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home