 |
| Dan's Oscar Picks |
| BEST PICTURE: Clearly, mouths dropped all over Hollywood when Chocolat was announced as the fifth slot Best Picture contender, making it this year's Green Mile (mixed critical reception, picked seemingly at random over more deserving films). Chalk it up to the Miramax machine. Erin Brockovich and Traffic make Steven Soderbergh look like this year's golden boy- but he isn't. Both his noms here and for direction will cancel each other out. EB, the less stellar of the two is an unfortuante nom because it pushes Traffic out of the running. Traffic is hands down the best picture of the year and the most important social/political contribution to the world of cinema since 1994's Natural Born Killers. Absolutely brilliant and unflinching in its bleak message. No winners and never preachy. That leaves the two battlebots of the year; Crouching Tiger... and Gladiator. CTHD is a beautiful movie and would make history for the foreign film by winning this one. However, looking at its lack of acting nominations, it is clear that Hollywood really isn't that ready for the subtitle yet(Roberto is the exception). Definitely riding a wave right now, though, without a doubt and could very well steal the prize from current favorite...Gladiator. Gladiator is a more obvious choice than people realize. Bemoaning the lack of substance at the cinema this year, people have generally pointed to Gladiator as the popcorn movie that seemed to represent that Hollywood couldn't produce anything better than a run-o-the-mill blockbuster. I challenge those people to get a copy of Gladiator and really watch it again. I, myself, was one of those thinkers, but upon a recent viewing- almost a year since it premiered- I have to admit that I'm not as sad about this state of affairs as I was. It is very pleasing to look at with beautiful cinematography and, bolstered by great bravura performances, esp Joaquin Phoenix, is a masterfully crafted epic for the postmodern crowd. While, I still believe Traffic is being robbed, I am not as naive as to not predict that Gladiator will take home this award- unless of course CTHD has something to say about it. |
| BEST ACTOR: Fifth slot, previous winner Geoffrey Rush can put this on his resume already and forget about it. Full frontal won't help his chances this time around. Javier Bardem should be very happy with his nomination, which is rightly deserved for his first American performance. This marks a new point in his career, where he will undoubtedly receive many challenging scripts-in English- and more money along with fans on both sides of the Pond. (Witness: Penelope Cruz and Antonio Banderas) Next, in the year's biggest surprise, Ed Harris, in his not-even-released-yet directorial debut, garners his first nomination for a lead role. In this case, it truly is an honor to be nominated. A real actor's actor, Harris is well-respected in Hollywood circles and this is their collective praise and best wishes for his new venture into the world of directing. The showdown, of course, though, is between Russell Crowe, Hollywood playboy extraordinairre (Meg Ryan! Courtney Love?), and the Golden Boy himself, Tom Hanks. Having said what I said about Gladiator earlier, let me now amend by saying that anybody could have played Russell Crowe's part. This nom has to do with LA Confidential and The Insider, not with Gladiator. In fact, other actors have played this epic hero part time and time again. This is nothing special for the otherwise-ubertalented Crowe. Go rent Romper Stomper and The Insider, now that's acting! This leaves Oscar's go-to guy, Mr. Hanks. In what is honestly his most daring performance to date- Bosom Buddies, aside- I think he may very well deserve this one. Plus, everybody loves Tom Hanks and after the world suffered through watching him grow that beard, it seems we all kind of want to see him get some kind of reconciliation for having to look so hideous so publicly. The only thing hurting his chances are still those back-to-back wins 7 years ago and his seemingly endless stream of awards ever since. The guy's just too good for his own good, I guess. Watch for his speech to further emphasize how he spent the last "x" years on this project in order to make sure once and for all that people know his movie had nothing to do with Survivor. |
| BEST ACTRESS Juliette Binoche and Joan Allen, what can I say? Juliette was probably a shoo-in for her nom thanks to the power of Chocolat (read: Miramax), but, really, one or both of them is taking away a nom from a more deserving performance. Namely Bjork is the most deserving snub of the year in any category. I challenge you to think of a more lived-in or natural performance in recent memory. Her absence in this race, esp. with the inclusion of these two instead, is upsetting. Another deserving actress would be Gillian Anderson in The House of Mirth, which proves, without question, that there is life for her after the X-Files. Laura Linney, like Javier Bardem and Ed Harris should really be very thankful for this career-launching nomination. It is not for nothing, either. I actually had the |
| pleasure of speaking with Ms. Linney while she was traveling with You Can Count On Me and she was, indeed, very humble in response to her praises. The performance is a very honest and nonironic one, which is You Can...'s real distinction as a picture. Also notably absent from the pool of nominees is her costar, Mark Ruffalo. Then is Ellen Burstyn. Like Burt Reynolds, Gloria Stuart, Richard Farnsworth and Lauren Bacall in recent years, Ellen Burstyn is soon to join those esteemed legends, whose unnaturally late-in-the-game kudos go ultimately unrewarded. Her work with boy-genius Darren Aronofsky is certainly frightening material that you'd never see this year's shoo-in, Julia Roberts accepting (the film had to be released as "unrated" just to give a hint). If you missed Requiem, I'm sorry. It was the single most terrifying and amazing cinema-going experience of my entire life- and I promise this is not exaggeration. I suppose you could catch it on video, but it won't be the same as having people throwing up and running out all around you while the Kronos quartet blasts you into your seats with their ominously pounding score. When Julia Roberts takes risks like this, then maybe she'll truly deserve the Oscar she'll be taking home. |
| BEST DIRECTOR The year's most interesting race. No real clear winner with a lot of special cases at work and it certainly leaves many deserved contenders by the way side. Snubbed would-be contenders thought to have a real shot include, but are not limited to, Stephen Frears, Mary Harron, Darren Aronofsky, Cameron Crowe, Lasse Hallstrom, Julian Schnabel, the Coen Brothers, Doug Wright, Ed Harris, Sofia Coppola, and Julian Temple. Ok, so, most of those guys had no chance in hell, but Crowe and Zemekis, come on! Where are those guys? Let's start with Stephen Daldry. He is the reason none of those guys above are nominated. Why is he nominated? Who the hell knows? His young star Jamie Bell was ignored, is this a consolation prize? I don't know. Now, things get interesting. This year's golden boy, Steven Soderbergh. Two noms for two movies, it's only been done once before. That guy lost, so will Soderbergh. It's a sad case when a genius spreads himself thin like this. He really deserves something for Traffic. His time will come again, though. Ridley Scott, his movie is the favorite, which automatically gives him dibs on this one. However, as I mentioned before, Gladiator is a Russell Crowe movie, not a Ridley Scott movie. While the direction is powerful, he is going to have to settle for this weekend's positive box office receipts for Hannibal. Unfotunately when his gladiators do battle, they don't also fly, like in CTHD, whose director, Ang Lee, will win this one in the upset of the night. A one-two-three punch (Best Director, Best Foreign Film, Best Picture) would be the ultimate victory and would certainly shake up the record books. Part of me wants to say it will happen for sure, but most likely Lee will have to settle for two out of three. |