And the Nominees Are...

A Jumbled Mess

Hey everyone!  I'm back after my normal 11-month hiatus.  Still in NY (though I spent loads of time in CA this past year); still at Dickstein; James is somehow still with me (you'll have to ask him how he does it); we're still taking Radar to the vet every 5 minutes (latest was potential bladder stones.  Frenchies might not be the soundest of financial investments, but we wouldn't change our little nugget for anything!).

But enough about me.  Let's dish about this year's nominees.  After leaving a rather challenging swim practice a tad early to rush home for the live noms (and being tagged as the gayest person in a pool full of queens for doing so), I experienced a number of emotions as they were read.  I was very excited to hear that last year's Oscar-nominated, and normally gorgeous Jennifer Lawrence, would be reading off the nominees for the major categories...I was less excited when she showed up looking like she made her outfit in 8th grade home ec - in 1987.  Thanks, Jennifer, for the rare opportunity for me to weigh in on bad fashion on Noms Day!  Anyway....on to the nominees!

Best Supporting Actress
Berenice Bejo, "The Artist"
Jessica Chastain, "The Help"
Melissa McCarthy, "Bridesmaids"
Janet McTeer, "Albert Nobbs"
Octavia Spencer, "The Help"

As usual, we start with one of my favorite categories.  This year's list has the perennial faves and a couple of surprises - perhaps the biggest surprise of all being that one year ago, the only one on the list with some name recognition is previous nominess McTeer....and even THAT was a surprise nomination in 2000 for "Tumbeweeds," a movie almost no one has seen!  Let's analyze - we'll go from least likely to win to most likely....

I'm giving fifth place to Jessica Chastain.  Despite it being an amazing year for her (only Brad Pitt is also in two Picture Nominees...not to mention her turns in "The Debt" and the little-seen but critically adored "Take Shelter), she simply is not the one to beat from this film.  I believe this nomination was a consolation prize for her accomplishments this year...I also believe that she would have been better served by a nomination from "Tree of Life" if she wanted to attract actual votes.

Next up is McTeer for her work in "Albert Nobbs."  Mostly billed as an Oscar vehicle for star Glenn Close, it has been McTeer's performance that really blew critics away.  I say "critics," cuz I don't know a single person who has seen it yet!  Unfortunately, add the fact that she's too unknown here in the States to the aforementioned, and it's not going to happen.

Now we start to get close.  I'm going with Bejo in third place.  Normally, one might assume that an unknown French actress from a silent, black and white film would be in 5th place out of 5...those people have not yet seen her charming turn in "The Artist."  There's a slight chance that she could ride a wave of "Artist" popularity to a win...it's certainly happened before (I'm thinking of an unknown French actress named Juliette Binoche who won for "The English Patient," which was a huge shocker at the time).  I just don't think that will happen....

We're down to two.  And you know what?  Supposed "surprise" nominee Melissa McCarthy is definitely coming on strong.  I write "surprise," because virtually every blogger and entertainment reporter is gleefully patting themselves on the pack for including her on their list.  Um, if you are ALL so pleased with yourselves, perhaps it's not a surprise?  They keep saying that the Academy doesn't reward comedy performances so they didn't think she'd make the cut.  Maybe if they focus on the fact that she stole "Bridesmaids," which is perhaps the most successful film of the year, they'll see that this was no surprise at all.  Unfortunately, McCarthy won an Emmy earlier this year for her work on the terrible "Mike & Molly" on CBS - most likely a DIRECT result from her success in "Bridesmaids."  So basically, it's not going to happen.

That's right then - the award will be going to Ms. Octavia Spencer for her work in "The Help."  Loved her - it's hard not to, especially if you first got to know the character from the novel on which the film is based.  (You read that correctly - I read a book this year!)  Anyway, took me until three weeks ago to remember that I first saw her as one of Drew Barrymore's hilarious co-workers from personal fave "Never Been Kissed."  I'd give her the award for that work alone.  Seriously though - she's won everything leading up to this year's Oscars, and I don't see anyone being able to overcome her at this point.

Should and Will Win:  Spencer

Any snubs?  Biggest snub was probably Shailene Woodley for her work in "The Descendents" - she's about the only thing in that film that I actually liked.  Otherewise, not really.  I've heard chatter that perhaps Sandra Bullock would get a nom for work in "Extremely Loud..." but her role was just too small.  I was honestly more moved by Viola Davis' performance 7 minutes in that movie than I was with Sandra's 10 minutes.

Best Supporting Actor
Kenneth Branagh, "My Week With Marilyn"
Jonah Hill, "Moneyball"
Nick Nolte, "Warrior"
Christopher Plummer, "Beginners"
Max Von Sydow, "Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close"

Wow.  A bunch of surpises here.  How?  Well, this is almost always the most boring of categories.  It's the inverse of the Best Supporting Actress category - for every young, unknown Best Supporting Actress-nominated ingenue, we have one old, craggy, he's still alive? Best Supporting Actor ol' bastard.

The biggest shocker was definitely Nolte for "Warrior."  NO ONE had him on their radar.  In fact, I've heard of this movie but didn't even know he was in it.  Well, congrats from getting past this - http://www.mugshots.com/Celebrity/Nick+Nolte.html to getting back to Oscar glory.  But you're not winning.

Next up we have another surprise nominee, Max von Sydow for "Extremely Loud..."  I thought his performance was actually extremely effective, but just didn't care for the movie.  Oh well - at least the nomination didn't go to the annoyid kid actor who lead the movie.  His nomination is definitely a combo of sentiment for the movie and sentiment for him being a million years old.  Not going to win - too bad he didn't get Plummer's role in "Beginners" - but we'll get to him later.

In the middle of the pack we have Kenneth Branagh.  He's been an elite actor (and director) in Hollywood and the U.K. for more than two decades, directed a very popular and successful comic book film this year ("Thor"), and his circled Oscar on many previous occasions.  Unfortunately, I really think that he's going to be left Oscar-less yet again - just not enough support for this film OR his role in it.

Again, we are left with an actor mostly known for his comic roles as Oscar's bridesmaid...this time, it's Jonah Hill.  Some voters will probably hand him votes for his amazing weight loss over the last year.  Hell - I'd consider voting for him for his hilarious starting turn in personal television fave "Campus Ladies!"  If you've seen "Moneyball," you know that though he had a small role, he was incredibly effective and worthy of the praise he's received.  But he just has no shot at all.

Mostly, that's because of the truly moving work that Christopher Plummer gave us in "Beginners."  I'm going to say this once - ok, probably more like 17 times - "Beginners" was my favorite movie of the year, hands down.  James and I finally caught this one via On Demand this past weekend, and I am ashamed we didn't see it in the theaters.  Seriously - rent it now.  Back to Plummer - some will say this is a career award, but I really think he deserves it for his amazing work in this heartbreaking (yet equally heartwarming) film.  See it now.  Plus, his biggest pre-nominations competish, Albert Brooks from "Drive," wasn't even nominated.  I, for one, will be excited when the Captain picks up his award.

Should and Will Win:  Plummer

Any Snubs?  Again, Albert Brooks was widely considered a shoe-in for a nomination and would have been tough competition for Plummer.  Others thought that Andy Serkis, he of green-screen acting genius for embodying so many CGI characters, might squeek in for his work on "Planet of the Apes."

Best Actress
Glenn Close, "Albert Nobbs"
Viola Davis, "The Help"
Rooney Mara, "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo"
Meryl Streep, "The Iron Lady"
Michelle Williams, "My Week With Marilyn"

YAY!  Always always always my favorite category, and this year we have a real scorcher.  I almost wish they'd dump the Best Actor category and figure out a way to give two equally glorious Best Actress awards.  Work on that, AMPAS.

Probably the biggest surprise was Rooney Mara's nomination for "Dragon Tattoo."  We saw this one, and it was pretty damn good.  It's just such a dark film, with a dark character - AND, let's not forget that it's already been done before (quite effectively) by Noomi Rapace in the Swedish original.  I almost wish they waited on this one, as I'm eager to see her in the 2nd film in this series where her role is larger...if they even make one.  Word is they're not sure that this first was successul enough to warrant making two more.  Check it out peeps - it's certainly better than "Extremely Cheesy and Incredibly Sentimental." 

Next up we have Glenn Close for her work in pet project "Albert Nobbs."  This time last year, everyone was all a-buzz about how Close would be battling with La Streep for this award - any many thought she would win.  SO...what happened?  Well, as I've already said, it doesn't help that no one has seen this film yet.  She probably should have released this in October before the rest of the field got so crowded.  Also, I keep hearing that she's, um, just not that good in the role and got upstaged by McTeer.  Regardless, nothing can save her now...too may powerful ladies and performances in front of her.

I'm going with Michelle Williams in third.  I'll admit that I haven't gotten around to seeing this one - I've heard good and bad about the film, but only the highest of praise for her work in it.  I'll definitely catch it between now and Feb. 26.  Regardless, I just don't think she can tackle the one-two battle of Davis vs. Streep, unless there are enough voters who elect to vote for anyone NOT named Davis or Streep.

So....who is going to lose this epic Oscar battle?  Sadly, I think Viola Davis will be the loser.  Look - she was really good in "The Help."  She's been previously nominated, everyone loves her, and she's enormously talented.  I just don't see her beating Streep.  Perhaps if she had considered running in the Best Supporting category - and I think a STRONG argument can be made that there is either only one lead role in this film (Emma Stone's) or, more likely none, so a supporting run could have been justified.  Just sayin.

So that means we have two-time winner, and record SEVENTEEN TIME NOMINEE, Meryl Streep taking home her third Oscar for her work as villainous Maggie Thatcher in "The Iron Lady."  Unfortunately, I cannot hink of a highly touted film that I hated more in 2011.  Look - she's as amazing as ever in this role, and is clearly the best actress of many of our lifetimes.  Despite this, she hasn't won since 1983.  1983!  Take a look a the roles she lost for, and you'll likely agree that she is more than overdue to be recognized.  Now - please don't pull a Taylor Swift/Kate Winslet and act all surprised when you win, Meryl.  Your IMDB page proudly announces that you have won 100 awards in your lifetime...if you're not used to giving a speech by now, don't even bother showing up!  Also, for the love of all that is gay please hire a stylist who can help you dress yourself...I'm at a my wit's end with your matronly fashion choices.  Helen Mirren always seems to wow the universe...see who helps her or at least consider raiding her closet.

Should and Will Win:  Streep

Any Snubs?  Meh.  Some people certainly thought that Charlize would get nominated again for "Young Adult."  I never saw that one happening.  I did think Kristen Wiig had a decent shot for "Bridesmaids," but she got compensated in the Best Original Screenplay category.

Best Actor
Demian Bichir, "A Better Life"
George Clooney, "The Descendants"
Jean Dujardin, "The Artist"
Gary Oldman, "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"
Brad Pitt, "Moneyball"

Look - I've made my thoughts on this category pretty damn clear.  For the most part, I just don;t care.  I'll give each of them the most bare bones of attention here.

Last place goes to Demian Bichir, this year's overwhelming winner of the "who? what? when? how? why?" award for biggest surpise nominee.  I remember seeing an ad for this movie and assuming that it was a Lifetime Original or on that Hallmark channel.  I re-wacthed the ad today, and it looks good enough, I guess.  Not gonna win/would have rather seen Ryan Gosling for "Drive" even if only to ensure that he'll show up at the awards.  Book him as a presenter NOW.

Next up - Gary Oldman in "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy."  Haven't seen it yet, and I bet most voters won't bother either.  He's a good actor who will probably win Best Supporting Actor in 24 years.

Third place - Brad Pitt.  He is really good in this film, but there's just not enough to his performance to warrant a Best Actor Oscar.  I mean, if the role went to anyone NOT named Pitt or Clooney, they might not even warranted discussion at all.  Alas, he deserves a nom but not seriously consideration in my estimation.

I think we once again have a two person race, and I am sad to say that Jean Dujardin will lose.  He'll definitely get some votes - "The Artist" just has too much steam for him now to.  Unfortunately, he is still too much of an unknown to allow him to walk away with Hollywood's biggest prize - think Roberto Benigni from 1997's "Life Is Beautiful," who might as well have fallen off the face of Hollywood's earth since then.  I mean - I just can't imagine a world in which Clooney loses to a French guy.

So yeah - Clooney will win.  Which is a sham - most overrated actor in the most overrated film and the most overrated role in the film.  Nuff said about that.

Should Win:  Dujardin

Will Win:  F-ing Clooney

Any Snubs?  Def Gosling for "Drive."  Maybe Leo for "J. Edgar," though his performance (and the film) have not been overly praised.  Personally, I would have added Ewan McGregor to this list for "Beginners."

Best Picture
"The Artist"
"The Descendants"
"Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close"
"Hugo"
"Midnight in Paris"
"The Help"
"Moneyball"
"War Horse"
"The Tree of Life"

Best Director
Woody Allen, "Midnight in Paris"
Michel Hazanavicius, "The Artist"
Terrence Malick, "The Tree of Life"
Alexander Payne, "The Descendants"
Martin Scorsese, "Hugo"

Nine Best Picture Nominess this year - very interesting.  This reflect a new voting system, that mandates at least 5 nominess but allows for anywhere between five and 10 with some very complicated rules associated with how the process is finalized.  Anyway, the biggest snubs were "Bridesamaids," "Harry Potter 47," and "TInker Tailor."

Anyway, I'm not going to waste any time on films that don't have a Best Director Nominee.  Ok - I'm also not going to spend time on "Midnight in Paris" because neither the film nor Allen have a chance.  I will, however, spend a second on Terrence Malick.  I actually think he's got a GREAT shot of taking Best Director, even if "Tree of Life" has not shot at Best Picture.

In third is Alexander Payne, and overrated "The Descendents."  No more to say about that.

That leaves us with "Hugo" and "The Artist" battling it out.  Had Scorsese not recently won for "The Departed," I definitely think he would have a shot.  Unfortunately NO ONE has seen this movie except ofr critics and Brian Moylan.  I just don't see it happening.

So that means this year's Best Picture, in my opinion, will undoubtedly be "The Artist."  See this move now - I've already seen it twice!  It was definitely my second favorite movie of the year, so I would more than happy to see it win.  I don't think the film's charming director, Michel Hazanavicius, has a prayer though.  Hence my upset pick of the year - Terrence Malic to win Best Director, "Artist" for Best Picture. 

That's it people - if you've made it this far, KUDOS!  You've probably noticed that I coudnn't even do that, hence the multiple spelling errors I didn't catch.  Enjoy the show on Feb. 26th, and see you all on Feb. 27th!

The King's and Queens Speeches

Well, the final night of the 2010 Year in Film has come and gone, and we are left (once again) with few surprises, a couple of absolutlely ridunkulous speeches to make fun of, and mostly well-dressed starlets to gab about.  Enjoy my poor grammar and spelling mistakes...if you'd like to apply for an editing internship with me, I'll gladly give you rights to fix all the mistakes you are about to read!

Overall, I think that was the problem last night...the show was tightly wound and executed, we knew who was going to win (I mean even I picked 5 out of the 6 big winners the day the nominations came out...I actually prefer to be wrong - it's more fun!) and there was nary a Bjork swan dress nor Uma Thurman lederhosen contraption in sight!

Let's start with the hosting.  Meh...especially James Franco.  Anne Hathaway did her usualy "Gasp!  I.  Am.  So.  Honored.  To.  Be.  Here." schtick that I, for one, completely expected.  I'm surprised she didn't take a picture of the audience to capture the moment for the "Hollywood Dreams" scrapbook you know she keeps under her four-post princess bed.  Overall, though, she freaking CARRIED to hosting duties.  Franco stumbled through most of his words, wasn't funny at all, and seems to have disappeared to the bong room for the middle hour and a half or so.  Their opening was good - not great, Hathaway's odd Les Mis tribute to Hugh Jackman would have been mildy amusing at the Tony's but was unfunny and out of place at the Oscars...I don't know...I guess James in drag for 3 seconds was the highlight?  The only other hosting item of note were Hathaway's 7 outfit changes - all posted here.  My favorite was the red dress - I really liked the way it made the normally rail thin, boringly bodied Hathway look at least somewhat va-va-va room.  Least favorite was a tie....the plasticy looking electric blue number just didn't work for me - it looked like what you'd get if a Lady Gaga outfit produced a child with my 1997 VW Jetta (I miss you Judy the Jetta!  So sorry James was too tall for you!).  I also hated the tux outfit....I just think women in tuxes is weird - I've never seen anyone pull it off (remember this one!).  I never thought I'd say this, but we really need Billy Crystal to come back.  Stat.

Ok - onto the awards.  Again, no real surprises here.  The first "major" went to Melissa Leo, after what I thought was an extremely painful presentation by Kirk Douglas.  I appreciate that the man is 94 years old and a stroke survivor - I really do - but it was difficult to understand him, he clearly went way off script (which was even more difficult to understand) and then he grandstanded for what seemed like 10 minutes after naming the nominees before saying who won.  I actually thought it was mean....if I were one of the four losers, with a camera on me that whole time, I woulda rung his neck.  Anywho, I'm sure everyone will be talking about how amazing and courageous he was to get up there...I thought he was mostly just selfish.  Ok, so he presented the Best Supporting Actress Award to Melissa Leo, who everyone knew would win (despite her BEYOND tacky self-paid "For Your Consideration" ads that many thought would ruin her chances) for her perfectly decent performance in "The Fighter."  I was slightly disappointed-  maybe it was actually bored - with her win, until she got on stage and made an absolute idiot out of herself while accepting the Oscar.  She dropped an f-bomb, was not even remotely genuine about being shocked, flubbed her words, had her eyes open as wide as a Biggest Loser contestant at the Cheesecake Facotry - in short, it was amazing.  She even grabbed Douglas' cane from him and limped off the stage....so weird!  Definitely the kind of speech that people will be making fun of FOR YEARS.  Unfortunately, Leo's speech was the high point of the low points for the night.  The rest were pretty much standard.

Next major went to Christian Bale, also for "The Fighter."  He joked about NOT dropping an f-bomb like Leo did, a clear jab at Bale's infamous/delicious to the ears on-set tirade a couple of years ago on the set of the cinematic masterpiece "Terminator:  Salvation."  Otherwise, meh.

Next major was the night's only surprise.  Unfortunately, Tom Hooper's win for Best Director for "The King's Speech" ruined all of the suspense surrounding whether "Speech" or "The Social Network" would win Best Picture.  Conventional wisdom had Best Director going to an honestly more deserving David Fincher for "The Social Network," with Best Picture going to "King's Speech."  With Hooper winning, however, there was no way "Network" would take the biggest award of the night.  I have to say that I definitely disagree with this one - there just wasn't anything remarkable about the direction of "The King's Speech" - especially compared to Fincher's work in "The Social Network" or especially Christopher Nolan's non-nominated work from "Inception" (which took home many of the lesser awards throughout the evening).

On to the two biggest acting awards - and back to no surprises.  Despite a rising tide for Annette Bening's hopes to take Best Actress last night, Natalie Portman won for "Black Swan."  Honestly, there's no question that Natalie's role and ensuing performance was the most deserving in the category...I found the film very difficult to watch BECAUSE of the harrowing performance Portman gave.  I was hoping for a repeat of her extremely awkward Golden Globes speech, but she was mostly sensical and genuine....she should have sent Melissa Leo up there for her.

Next up was Firth's annointment to Best Actor, which every single person in the world knew was going to happen.  Nothing exciting from him - slight British humor during his speech, but not as self-deprecating as one might have thought.  Then the aforementioned win for "The King's Speech" and the night was over.  Or was it?  Fortunately, the producers had one more visionary delight for us...a public school choir from Staten Island singing "Over the Rainbow."  Sounds treacly, until you looked at the actual kids, who sounded fine but looked like individual Hellen Kellers and Stevie Wonders as they all were staring in different directions while swaying around to their own made up beats and making homemade sign language gestures throughout the performance.  FINALLY - something to make me freaking laugh!  The night fully ended with the little Ray Charles' and Jeff Healy's at the front of the stage, and then all of the evening's Oscar winners coming to stage front from the backround, which I actually thought was a nice touch.

Now....the fashion!  Liek I've already said, there were just too many hits and not enough misses this year.  Those damn Rachel Zoe's are getting too good at scouting out gowns that actually look good on the red carpet and on the tellie.  Damn - they're ruining it for us bitches that love a good red carpet takedown!  I'll just have to do the best I can here.  Before I get started though, a HUGE thank you to my own personal field reporter, Ms. Amy Karwan, who won bleacher seats and was sitting second row on the red carpet last night.  Her 762 texts and e-mails from 12pm to 12am provided a unique insight while keeping me posted for who ws coming up next.  Unfortunately, we agree on one of my best dressed and disagree....she liked a dress that I thought was a major miss.

So many good ones to start with.  I'm going first with someone who normally looks hideous at these sorts of shows, but really turned it out last night.  That's right - ze greatest singer in ze worl - Celine Dion - was one of my best dressed last night!  She undid so many wrongs last night in this fit-her-like-a-glove white number which was perfectly styled from head to toe.

Another singer (and part0time actress), who looked amazing last night was the queen of Weight Watchers herself, Ms. Jennifer Hudson.  I don't know what Weight Watchers is paying her, but they should quadruple her salary.  She chose a perfect tangerine orange (her words, not mine) color for her skin, her hair was dead-on, and she said about 81% less "likes" when being interviewed...she really just continues to surprise.  Unfortunately, I couldn't giver her best dressed because I found the side-boob action to be a little floppy and therefore distracting.  Amy reports that it was stunning in person, so yay for JHud!

In overall second place, I'm going with Michelle Williams.  She is just such a throwback to movie stars from 40 years ago - Audrey Hepburn, Mia Farrow in particular come to mind - but she has a way of showing up every year in a dress that is decidedly Michelle.  PLUS, she came with the evening's best accessory - personal fave Busy Phillips.  I LOVE HER and am really glad she's found a home for herself on "Cougar Town," which is actually an extremely funny, poorly titled show that you should check out if you get a chance.

So who gets best dressed for the night?  Hands down, the winner for me was Jennifer Lawrence.  She may have commited a cardinal sin by being pretty much the first starlet to hit the Red Carpet (Jennifer - we usually wait until Virginia Madsen, Kris Khardasian, and Sally Kirkland are whisked away before we let the limo stop - please take this note, as I hope to see you on the red carpet for years to come!), but she left an indeliable image that I just couldn't shake for the rest of the night.  Well done, senorita.

Ok - on to the part of this blog that 97% of you skip down to without reading...worst dressed.  Let's get the dress that Amy and I disagree about over with first...Annette Bening.  I just don't get it.  Amy thought it looked stunning in person, but I gather she might be a slightly biased source (think me and Julianne).  My friend Boj, perhaps more aptly, thouht it was very "Kiss of the Spider Woman," which I don't think he meant as a comment based on the snarky tone in which his one-liner was delivered.  I think she looks like some sort of 70's curtain from the old Tonight Show.  Either way, um...her hair looked good?

More disappointing, though, was Mila Kunis' attempt at high fashion.  I actually think this one photographs better than what we saw from her on television/at the show.  I found all of the cut-outs very distracting and borderline sluzzy.  I don't know...there's something that I love to hate about her...she's cute as a button, but that voice is GRATING - especially after years of listening to her voice Meg from "Family Guy."  Any way, she's done much better for us before, so I'm sure she can turn it around if she ever makes it back to the red carpet again.

Next up is the evening's most controversial dress...the normally tradionaly stunning Cate Blanchett.  This is probably going to end up being the most talked about dress of the evening...a real love it or hate it event.  I, for one, hated it - as did everyone else I have talked to.  James thought it looked like a homemade frame without a picture.  I thought it looks like a faberge egg with an STD.  And yet other commenters throughout the pre-shows were gasping for air - in a good way - when seeing it.  Amy agreed that she didn't think it was a winner in person...not sure why ANYONE would like it at all.

In second place for the coveted award for Worst Dressed, I have to go with Scarlett Johansson.  Let's start with her head - the slammed in the alley hair, combined with heavy eye make-up, made her face look at best like a Jenny from "Gossip Girl" knock off.  Not a complement.  As for the dress, I liked the color, but the lace pattern was dated, the length was off, and the cut out above her chest was just weird.  She is clearly struggling from her sad break-up with Ryan Reynolds, but that doesn't excuse this mess.

Fortunately, someone outdid her in a big time way.  Before I get there, what the hell was up with Hollywood Wives last night?  I have to show you what Mark Wahlberg's wife was wearing, as well as Hugh Jackman's wife.  I mean, ewww - just, ewww.  Oh yeak - Florence of Florence and the Machine looked weird, but I'll give her a pass cuz I love her AND she changed into something much better when she performed during the show.  Same goes for Amy Adams, whose dress was hideous enough without the horrible necklace choice - looked like when people put a rug on to of a rug, or a rug on top of a clearly bald head for that matter.

Nope - worst dressed has GOT to go to Best Worst Speech Award Winner, Melissa Leo.  The dress bombed on all levels if you ask me.  Fit was off.  Doily pattern was WAY off.  Mirrored effect filling in the cut-outs from the doily pattern.  Just terrible.  Somewhere, a stylist is getting fired as I type this.  Perhaps a career at one of those decorate your own pottery places would be a better choice for that sad soul.

So, that's it.  Another year gone.  See you next January!

The Nominations Network

Hey everyone!  Welcome to another year of interesting film and a highly varied nominations pool.  What makes this post different from just about any other?  I give my "day of", instant opinions and reactions on who will win and who should win BEFORE Hollywood PR agencies/the Weinsteins kick it into overdrive to start telling people who they should vote for!

This year's nominations, announced this morning at 5:38.30 PST by Mo'Nique (I was hoping for Geena Davis...she's the BEST at announcing), certainly had some surprises mixed in with the expected slew of noms for "The King's Speech," "True Grit," and "The Fighter," and "The Social Network."  But I'm getting ahead of myself...let's start, as always, with Supporting Roles, Lead Roles, Best Director/Picture, and finally some bits and bobbins about some of the other nominations.

Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role

• Amy Adams in “The Fighter”
• Helena Bonham Carter in “The King's Speech”
• Melissa Leo in “The Fighter”
• Hailee Steinfeld in “True Grit”
• Jacki Weaver in “Animal Kingdom”

A very interesting array of performances indeed!  Again, as always, we'll start with who I believe is least likely to win, and end with who I believe will be awarded the award.

Least likely (i.e., most lucky to be able to say "it's just nice to be nominated") has got to be little known/little seen Aussie, Jacki Weaver.  Yes, her performance was probably the most buzzed about for the first six months of the year..unfortunately, not many have seen the film even though it's been out for so damn long, those who have seen it indicate that it's ALL about her performance and that the rest of the film is "meh" at best, AND she's simply up against too many special ladies who the Academy is more likely to WANT to give an Oscar too.  Lo siento, Jacki.

From there, much like every pair of pants that Snooki wears, the race is actually shockingly tight.  Really - any of these women could legitimately win, which makes this perhaps the most exciting category in years!  I'm going with my girl Amy Adams for fourth place.  She does what the Academy loves the most - makes herself fat and ugly AND affects an accent - but the role just is not showy enough to beat out her fellow castmate, Melissa Leo.

Equally "un"-showy (for once) is Helena Bonham Carter in "The King's Speech."  A definite nominee for my personal favorite picture of the year, her role is just not quite big enough to substantiate the award.  Some may feel that her chances are bouyed by the "career award" sentiments (especially compared to her fellow nominees) but for what?  "Alice in Wonderland?"  "Planet of the Apes?"  [INSERT EVERY FREAKING TIM BURTON MOVIE FROM THE PAST 10 YEARS HERE?!].  I mean, her brilliant turn in "The Wings of the Dove" from 1997, when even I had a full head of hair, can only carry her so far.  I just need more from her than crazy hair and horrifically hilarious Red Carpet outfits to bequeath her an Academy Award.

That leaves us with just two...in second place, I'm going with Hailee Steinfeld from "True Grit."  This is the ONE out of ten Best Picture Nominees that I have not seen yet....guess what I'm doing this weekend!  Anyway, Steinfeld has been left mostly out in the cold this season, but her performance has been picking up MAJOR steam in the last four weeks.  Many feel that she SHOULD have been nominated in the Lead Actress category, as her role is equal to co-star Matt Damon and co-nominee Geoff Bridges.  Regardless, she has a good shot at taking this one if the incredibly positive buzz continues for the nest several weeks.

I am personally of the opinion that the buzz will die down, leading Melissa Leo to carry this category.  Ms. Leo is one of those success stories that Hollywood just loves - 80's soap actress turned career character actress, gets a big break in an indie called "Frozen River" that leads to a surprise Oscar Nomination, and then shortly follows that up with another excellent role.  Look - NO ONE plays trash quite like Melissa Leo does, and her turn in "The Fighter" may just be her trashiest, brashest role yet.  To say she's entirely believable as the matriarch in this family is, well, an understatement.

WILL WIN:  Melissa Leo

SHOULD WIN:  You know, I've gotta go with Adams here.  I love a ginge - what can I say?  Seriously though...I love watching performances like hers...like Julianne Moore in "The Kids Are All Right," she is the quiet, understated heart of the film despite not getting as much buzz.

SURPRISES:  Throughout this awards season, Barbara Hershey and Mila Kunis have been trading nominations, both for performances in "Black Swan."  Both were good in the film, though you just know the Academy was pulling for veteran Hershey to eek out a nomination in what many are seeing as a comeback film for her.  She has Steinfeld to blame for that one!

Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role

• Christian Bale in “The Fighter”
• John Hawkes in “Winter's Bone”
• Jeremy Renner in “The Town”
• Mark Ruffalo in “The Kids Are All Right”
• Geoffrey Rush in “The King's Speech”

A couple of surprises here compared to the more populist Golden Globe nominees, but this list mirrors the SAG nominees in this category to a T.  Doesn't matter - AT BEST this is a two-man race at this point.

Least likely to win, i.e. "Who?!  In what?!" is John Hawkes in "Winter's Bone."  I'll say this about ten more times in this posting..."Winter's Bone" was hands-down the best American Film of the year.  The best part of this film, like previous "faves" of mine - think "District 9," "The Savages" and "Pan's Labyrinth" for starters - is that there's nothing "Oscar-y" about it.  And yet ALL of the acting was dead-on from top to bottom....and Hawkes was certainly no exception.  RENT THIS MOVIE NOW.  Unfortunately, the "who?  in what?" factor puts him ina  solid, distant 5th place.

Next up is Mark Ruffalo, whose last name my mother INSISTS on pronouncing as if he just got off the boat from Sicily (think ra-FAL-o instead of surname that rhymes with Buffalo), but I digress.  I LOVED him in this adorable little indie, but let's be honest here...he basically plays a version of his character from another oft-mentioned fave of mine, "You Can Count on Me," which makes me wonder if he's just playing a version of himself.  Regardless, the nomination is deserved but a win would not be.

That leaves us with three, and bottom of that pile would definitely be Jeremy Renner.  I actually believe that this nomination was more about carry over from his work in last year's "Hurt Locker" - I mean, he was good, but not THAT good.  Plus, he got the movie's only nomination (I guess Pete Postlethwaite didn't die early enough to garner a posthumous nomination).  Plus, someone else in this category has him beat for affecting a Boston accent in a much showier role.  No dice for Renner.

That leaves us with the aforementioned two-man race, but even with just two left it seems so clear who will win.  And it WON'T be Geoffrey Rush.  Look - I loved him in this movie...which I loved.  He is spot-on perfect in his role as King George VI's speech therapist.  He continues to turn it delightful performances in just about every movie he's in - comedies, dramas, period pieces...this guy is unstoppable.  Unfortunately, he's already won an award (Best Actor for "Shine") and the votes will go towards his screen mate, Colin Firth.

So that means that enfant terrible Christian Bale, king of the younger generations Method Actors, will definitely win for his performance in "The Fighter."  I mean, he just has everything going for him in this role.  Accent?  Check.  Drug addiction?  Check.  Overcoming drug addiction?  Check.  Lost massive amounts of weight?  Check.  Made himself ugly/showed thinning hair?  Check.  In one of the most nominated films of the year?  Check!  I WOULD suggest that I only thought he was ok, but have you ever heard how he lambasts anyone who gets in his way?  Let's just say the gifted actor has quite a temper...hmmm...it WOULD be entertaining to watch his expression/read his lips if this award slips away from him.  Alas, it won't.

WILL WIN:  Christian Bale

SHOULD WIN:  If I was voting, I'd go with John Hawkes...I mean, he has ALMOST as many "checks" as Christian Bale, albeit in a much smaller role...I'm begging you...give this movie a shot.

SURPRISES:  Andrew Garfield received his fair share of nominations throughout the season for his role in "Social Network."  Some even suggested that Justin Timberlake, playing a slightly more cocky version of himself in the same movie might have scored a nomination as well.  But it's really Postlethwaite that many wanted to see in here for his role as the Florist for "The Town."  And no, he most certainly was not that kind of florist in the event that you haven't seen that one yet

Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role

• Annette Bening in “The Kids Are All Right”
• Nicole Kidman in “Rabbit Hole”
• Jennifer Lawrence in “Winter's Bone”
• Natalie Portman in “Black Swan”
• Michelle Williams in “Blue Valentine”

Can you believe that yet another year is going by without an Academy Award for Julianne Moore?  Maybe that's why so many people are predicting that the world will end in 2012...

Least likely to take Oscar home for her performance would have to be slight suprise nominee Michelle Williams.  James and I caught this EXTREMELY depressing film a couple of weeks ago, and...well, what can I say?  Williams continues to devastate me on screen in a way that I thought only Julianne Moore could.  Unfortunately, like her role in last year's (non-nominated) "Wendy and Lucy," this poor thing continues to star in movies that are just really hard to watch.  I'm not suggesting that she go the Sandy Bullock route or anything, but it might behoove her to lighten up at least a little bit!

Equally difficult to watch/unseen was Nicole Kidman's performance (and newly moving forehead!) in "Rabbit Hole."  Also like Williams (who shared top billing and rave reviews with Ryan Gosling in "Blue Valentine"), ir twas interesting that the Academy nominated Kidman and not her equally brilliant co-star, Aaron Echkart.  Either way, this little film, based on a play for which Rojo Caliente's wife Cynthia Nixon won a Tony, just is not enough to carry Kidman to her second Oscar victory - no matter how many tears she cries.

Down to three, and it is (sadly) time to discuss virtual unknown Jennifer Lawrence and her role in "Winter's Bone."  She plays the unconventional matriarch of a hillbilly family in the wilds of Missouri who fiercely defends her family and their home from a wide array of shockingly evil predators.  I really loved this movie so much that I don't want to give anything else away about her role or the film itself.  Let's just say I am VERY excited to watch her career trajectory, and praying she doesn't take Reese Witherspoon/Meg Ryan romantic comedies to follow up her well-deserved nomination.

Runner-up has got to be proverbial Oscar runner-up, Annette Bening.  As in previous years, La Bening had this award virtually wrapped up all year long until someone else came along and stole it from her clutches.  Positives?  Well, at least the "someone" wasn't Hilary Swank, to whom she surely placed second behind TWICE before.  Honestly - and I mean this as an admittedly biased but somewhat knowledgeable source - I thought she was good but that Moore was better in this film.  Bening bening-fitted from the juicier role - she gets to be the temper tantrum-throwing, "wronged" half of the Moore/Bening partnership in the film...hence the Academy overlooking Moore. 

Unfortunately, Bening is going to have to settle AGAIN for being this closeto being able to say that she's Academy Award winner Annette Bening, because this award is ALL Portman's.  I mean, did you see her in "Black Swan?"  It's hard to not be amazed by her performance, regardless of what you think about her oeuvre or the film as a whole.  She's in virtually ever second of the film, and her story arc is perfect Oscar bait.  Hopefully, Portman will take some speech delivery courses between now and then - her Golden Globes speech was just weird and painful to watch AND listen to.  YouTube "Natalie Portman Laugh" and you'll know what I'm talking about.

WILL WIN and SHOULD WIN:  Julianne Moore!  Just kidding...I'm going with Portman here.

SURPRISES:  As previously mentioned, some though Hailee Steinfeld belonged here.  I had pipe dreams of Julianne Moore appearing in this category, but it would have just lead to another loss for her.  Otherwise, not much to be surprised by quite frankly.

Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role

• Javier Bardemin “Biutiful”
• Jeff Bridges in “True Grit”
• Jesse Eisenberg in “The Social Network”
• Colin Firth in “The King's Speech”
• James Franco in “127 Hours”

A surprise nominee in a poorly spelled, foreign film that virtually no one has seen?  Exciting!  One of the ceremony's co-hosts garnering his first nomination?  Yay!  For the first time in a LONG time, a Best Actor category to be excited about!

Let's start with Javier Bardem's nomination for "Biutiful."  Rumor has it that he can thank Julia Roberts for this one, who singlehandedly raised the profile of this film from nothing to a nomination.  I've read some reviews - both in Spain where they actually HAVE been talking about it and here - and while his performance has been praised the movie is considered just Ok.  Regardless, he won't be winning Oscar #2 this time around...

Neither will Jesse Eisenberg, who normally annoys the living crap out of me and was therefore PERFECTLY cast as Facebook creator/stealer/general slimeball Mark Zuckerberg.  A well-deserved nomination, in what is surely a top contender for Best Picture...unfortunately, he's too young and untested, and the film is more likely to sweep other high-end categories such as screenplay, direction, etc.  I'd really love to see him step outside of his comfort box and do something different going forward.

In third place is last year's winner in this category, Jeff Bridges.  Again, I'll admit to not having seen this one quite yet, but have only heard amazing things about his turn in this heavily nominated film.  Hollywood proved that they adored and respected him last year when he stole Oscar away from Colin Firth...it's not happening this year.

Runner-up status is therefore bestowed upon James Franco.  Just the cache of giving the award to one of the co-hosts alone lifts Franco's profile.  And for those who have seen his riveting performance in "127 Hours," it will be hard NOT to vote for him.  I'll admit that when I caught this film, I had major doubts that ANYONE could carry 90+ minutes with their arm stuck in a rock.  Not only did Franco succeed, he absolutely SOARED.

In any other year, this award would be his.  And yet, Colin Firth in "The King's Speech" is just about guaranteed to win.  Like Christian Bale before him, Firth's role just has too much going for it to lose this time around.  Plays royalty from England?  Check.  Has a physical default?  Check.  Works to overcome said physical default?  Check.  Lost last year and turned it OUT again this year?  Check!  I've really enjoyed him in, well, EVERYTHING - even stupid Bridget Jones' stupid Diary - so I'm very happy to say that he will win this one!

WILL and SHOULD WIN:  Colin Firth

SURPRISES:  Some thought Robery Duvall would be rewarded for his role in "Get Low," but the film and his role just didn't have enough drive at the end, allowing for Bardem's nomination.

Direction

• “Black Swan”Darren Aronofsky
• “The Fighter” David O. Russell
• “The King's Speech” Tom Hooper
• “The Social Network”David Fincher
• “True Grit” Joel Coen and Ethan Coen 

Best Picture 

• “Black Swan”
• “The Fighter”
• “Inception” 
• “The Kids Are All Right”
• “The King's Speech”
• “127 Hours”
• “The Social Network” 
• “Toy Story 3”
• “True Grit”
• “Winter's Bone"

Well, we can start by discounting the films from contention that don't have a corresponding nomination for director.  In order of LEAST likely to MOST likely from that list of nominees, that means no Best Picture Oscar for "Toy Story 3" (which will win for Best Animated Feature), "127 Hours," "Winter's Bone" (what I would have voted for), "The Kids Are All Right" or "Inception" (which should win director Christopher Nolan a much deserved and overdue writing award).

From there, I'd say fifth place would go to "Black Swan" - to me, it was almost more of a psychological horror film than a traditional drama, though Aronofsky will get his fair share of votes for Best Director.  Some day, he'll win.  Just not this time around.

Fourth place has got to be "True Grit," if only because it's a remake AND these guys just won two years ago.  Year after year they turn out film after nominated film, which leads me to believe that they will win another in the near future if they continue on their blistering pace. 

Third place goes to "The Fighter" - a good film about a subject Oscar just loves ("Raging Bull," "Rocky," "The Hurricane," etc.).  Interestingly, the film DIDN'T garner a nomination for the title role, played by Mark Wahlberg, but I digress.  The film has been picking up some steam of late, but I just don't see it overtaking the top two contenders.

Just two to go, and it's turning about to be a neck and neck race between "The King's Speech" and it's director, and "The Social Network."  Two weeks ago, post Golden Globes, I would have said that there was no way to stop "The Social Network" from winning this one.  Lately though - and by lately, I mean the last week or so - "The King's Speech" has been rising from a solid second place contender to winning some of the big ones.  I'm going unconventional here, and picking "King's Speech" for Best Picture but David Fincher for "The Social Network" for Best Director.

That's it for now, folks, though there were a couple of other surprises...aside from what I've already mentioned, I was REALLY surprised that Daft Punk was ignored for their work in "Tron: Legacy."  Look - the film was crap, but their score was AMAZING.  No "I Am Love" for Best Foreign Language film also took me by surprise.  The biggest shock though was that "Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work" didn't even make it to the final cut for Best Feature Documentary.  I caught this one last week, and just can't believe that it wasn't as highly regarded as it should have been.  Check it out for yourself!

That's all for now.  See you on February 28....this year, I have a reporter from the bleachers, as my good friend Amy Karwan will be a "Bleacher Creature" on the Red Carpet and has vowed to provide some live analysis of the dresses that most of us will only see on E!, People, and the Internet.  Until then....enjoy the show on February 27!

The Oscar Locker

In all of the years that I've been writing my annual post-Oscars post/e-mail, I'm finding this year's to be the toughest of all to get started.  Why, you ask?  Maybe because the show was so predictable and boring, that there just isn't that much to write about.  Thank GOD that there were still some hideous dresses to mention, or this posting, much like Lindsay Lohan's career, would be an unmitigated disaster!  As always, I'll wrap up the show first then move on to the fashion.  Full disclosure, btw...I took today off, so I'm writing this while the dog battles for lap time AND Tyra tries to wrestle my attention away with a marathon of ANTM on Oxygen.  The somewhat weak season that McKey won, with annoyingly french Marjorie who constantly reminded us that Europeans aren't confident like American girls, amazingly ghetto Sheena, Trannie Isis, and the girl from Alaska that made Sarah Palin look tolerant/tolerable as she explained why even being in the same room as Isis was freaking her out.  Wow.  The post's first digression in paragraph one.  Wow.  Anywho, here we go!

THE SHOW

Did you actually watch last night?  It's absolutely fascinating to think that the number of people who watched the show was probably 20x that of those who actually saw the Best Picture Winner.  Anywho, my opinion of the overall show mirrors what everyone says just about every year - too long, too many misfires, too few surprises....with the year-round Oscar prognosticating, the actual event seems like it's written the day the nominations come out.  In fact, I just read an article in the NY Post about the early front runners for next year!  CRAZY!  I, of course, am hoping that Julianne Moore will FINALLY win for her work in an indie called "The Kids are Alright."  CRAP.  I'm now officially part of the problem.

But seriously...look at some of my past posts, and you'll notice that SOME of my "Day of Nominations" picks are right but some are way off.  This year, and ONLY this year, I went 6 for 6.  How boring.  Believe it or not, I actually WANT to be wrong.  For example, I wanted Gabourey Sidibe to come from out of nowhere to take the prize from Sandy AND Meryl last night.  I mean, have you SEEN that girl on the Red Carpet?  In person, she sounds more like Alicia Silverstone's Cher in "Clueless" than Precious.  But I digress.

So back to the show.  I thought that the idea to have Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin co-host was great, but the result was underwhelming.  With the exception of their hilariously off-color opening (their race and Nazi jokes were indeed a surprise), the two barely appeared on stage for the rest of the show, much less on stage together.  Add in the somewhat odd song & dance opening number by the usually spot-on Neil Patrick Harris, and the hosting gets the same B- that I struggled to obtain in freshman year Calculus with the world's worst math professor at Dickinson College.

As usual, the show didn't REALLY get started until the Best Supporting Actor Award was presented to unsurprising (get used to that word) Christoph Waltz for his role in "Inglourious Basterds."  The award was deserving and the speech was surprisingly lucid (did you see him at the Globes?  Language barrier or not, I STILL don't know what the hell he was talking about).

Several boring awards later, they finally got to Best Supporting Actress.  Now, if you had told me 6 years ago that Mo'Nique was going to be the overwhelming favorite to win anything other than an eating contest, I would have laughed in your face.  After seeing "Precious," however, there is NO doubt that she can not only act, but that she had THE performance of the year - combining all nominated performances, hers was the one that we will be talking about 10 years from now.  Her speech was gracious, her legs were unshaven (seriously...the woman refuses to shave her legs, which I guess I'm supposed to say is brave but it still makes me tummy hurt a little to think about) and she showed a classy side that I think few would have expected from a bawdy stand-up comedian.

Between the two supporting and leading acting awards, a couple of (again, mostly predictable) awards were given out, mostly to "Avatar" and "The Hurt Locker."  In effect, "Locker" picked up double what "Avatar" did, so we pretty much knew what was coming.  Um...."Up" won for Best Animated, though I liked "Coraline" more.  "Precious" won for Best Adapted Screenplay, which was a minor surprise, and the shocked winner forgot to thank the woman who actually wrote the book.  Oops.  Ooh - and there were two montages to complain about.  I actually liked the John Hughes In Memorium, if only because it was an excuse for Molly Ringwald and Ally Sheedy to be on stage (ok - let's be honest..it was an attempt to have at least SOME part of the show speak to the Gen X crowd).  The Horror montage was ridiculous...at least half of the supposed "horror" movies were thrillers and mysteries more than vintage horror films.

Somewhat controversial was the other In Memorium montage.  Usually the emotional high point, however this year's committed sins to both the hetero- and homosexual communities, by leaving out Farrah Fawcett and Bea Arthur, respectively.  Yes, both were primarily TV actresses, but they were in more movies than Michael Jackson and had more of an impact on pop culture than Brittany Murphy, so they each deserved to get 5 more seconds of recognition on the big show.

FINALLY, Best Actor Award.  The presentations to the Best Actors AND Best Actresses started with what has become a favorite of mine these past two years - mini-speeches by friends and former co-stars of each of the nominees that give us a little behind-the-scenes insight into relationships between stars.  I'll be the first to acknowledge that 99% of people I know HATE this part and find it utterly self-indulgent.  I LOVE it.  PLUS, it was an excuse to get to see Julianne Moore on the stage that she should OWN by now, even if her speech on behalf of Colin Firth was somewhat odd (and would have been GREAT if given by, say, Emma Thompson).

Anywho, Jeff Bridges unsuprisingly won for his very good performance in "Crazy Heart" - let's face it, this was the annual "career" award that we've all gotten used to.  If you saw all the roles, you would agree that Colin Firth's performance was arguably the best of the year, but he doesn't come from Hollywood royalty, he didn't play The Dude in "The Big Lebowski" 12 years ago, and he didn't have 4 previous noms either, so he lost.  So he gets up on stage to accept the award that we ALL knew he was going to win, and gave one of the worst, most incoherent speeches of the night.  I, for one, was too distracted by the manner in which he continuously Hepurned (verb meaning "to shake profusely, without control or abandon) the award throughout his speech to notice whatever was spewing out of his mouth.  Whatever - he made Mo'Nique and later Bullock look like Rhodes Scholars, so at least someone owes him for that.

Next up, one of two actual showdowns of the night.  Would it be Sandra Bullock or Meryl Streep (or, please please please, Gabby Sidibe!).  Sean Penn, looking like he sucked so many lemons back stage, came out to present, and made a comment that I just HAD to google as soon as I woke up this morning (interestingly, I typed in "what was" and THE FIRST thing that popped up was "What Was Sean Penn talking about last night?").  Anyway, he made a comment about how he and the Academy both forgot to give due to a certain woman in the past year, which bloggers are saying was an homage to him forgetting to thank (now ex-wife) Robin Wright when he won last year while commenting on her lack of recognition for this years "Private Lives of Pippa Lee," co-starring the incandescent Julianne Moore.

Back to the award.  Much like my previous comment about Mo'Nique, if you had told me 16 years ago that Sandra Bullock would win an Oscar, besting Meryl freakin' Streep, I would NEVER have believed you.  Alas, some brilliant PR person decided it was "her turn," and so she now won half as many Oscars as La Streep.  I can't complain too much though.  After accepting her Razzie for Worst Actress the previous night IN PERSON for the horrid "All About Steve," she opened with another self-deprecating comment just to prove to everyone why she is so adored.  She then gave the most gracious comments about each of her fellow nominees (i.e., the losers) and ended by tearing up when talking about her mom.  Basically, everything one wants in an Oscar acceptance speech.  Damn you, Sandy.  You just gave a better performance in 120 seconds than you have in 20 years!

The night's final two showdowns were between directors (and ex-spouses) Kathryn Bigelow and James Cameron and their respective films, "The Hurt Locker" and "Avatar."  Unfortunately, as I wrote earlier, everything throughout the show pointed towards wins by Bigelow and her film, and win they did.  Bigelow becomes the first woman to win Best Director, which is interesting considering that I bet not more than 1% of the population had even heard of her this time last year.  Likewise, her film made history by becoming the least viewed film to ever take home Best Picture.  I was lucky enough to see it back in August in the theatres (early buzz had it as a POSSIBLE nominee at the time, but only because of the decision to have ten nominees...no one thought it would actually win at that time).  I thought it was good, but not Best Picture of the year.  Oh well...what do I know?  I know enough to know that it's time for the fun part....the DRESSES!

THE FASHION

Finally...the part of this posting that 76% of you skip down to without even reading the first half.  Not offended in the least.  Really..I love spending 5 hours on the first half of this just so none of you can read it.  Just kidding!

This year was all about 30's glamour.  Unfortunately for us, that meant few absolute hits and even fewer misses.  No Bjork swan dresses (perhaps THE most famous Oscar dress of all time?), no Uma Thurman leiderhosen, no Cher in revealing Bob Mackie...but don't worry.  I've gone through ALL of the pics to bring you the very best and worst.

First, the men.  Yawn, as always.  Taking a risk this year meant wearing a long, skinny, Jonas Brothers tie instead of a bow tie.  Or, in the case of George Clooney, forgetting to get a haircut beforehand and showing up with a midgi mullet.  Eew.  Anywho, the only buzz for the boys seems to be about whether or not you loved or hated Tom Ford's self-made tux.  I loved it, but others seem more lukewarm.  Take a look for yourself:

Tom Ford, wearing Tom Ford, directed and written by Tom Ford

On to the women.  Before we get to Worst and Best dressed, let's start with a couple of "in the middle" women - people who will neither on the Best OR Worst Dressed lists, but should be discussed anyway.  I'm going to start with Mo'Nique. Her outfit seemed like not such a big deal, until I found out that, from head-to-toe, she picked a look that was an homage to Hattie McDaniel - the first African American to win an Oscar (whom she also mentioned in her speech).  Now, it also turns out that Ms. 'Nique is angling to make a feature based on Ms. McDaniel, so the move may just be brilliantly calculated.

A Vision in Smurf Blue

Also interesting was the dress that Demi Moore wore last night.  First of all, she really needs to give the name of her plastic surgeon out to every other 40-something in Hollywood.  Maybe s/he can undo the horrors formerly known as Nicole Kidman and Renee Zellweger (as if anyone could undo Zellweger!).  Anyway, I really liked the structure of her dress but found the color to not have the oomph it should have for the Red Carpet/Kodak Theater stage.  James thought it looked like it was made out of ace bandages, but I liked it nonetheless.

And the Merit Badge for Best Dress Made Out of First Aid Materials Goes to...

Lastly, let's take a look at Kathryn Bigelow's dress.  Was it pretty?  Sure.  Was it a good color?  Sure.  But it really left me wanting for more.  Now, some may think that it's unfair to grade the fashion of a behind-the-camera person, but I still felt like she could have ramped it up a wee bit.  As it turns out, this dress should be reproduced en masse for mothers of the bride around the country.

Eew...I just heard someone refer to her as "K Biggs"

One more...real quick.  Let's applaud Maggie Gyllenhaal for trying and mostly succeeding with a printed dress that fit her AND her personality.  Prints, in general, don't usually go over so well at the Oscars but I thought this was a decent attempt by someone who usually looks very odd on the red carpet.  Too bad the bottom 7% of her dress looks undone.

I STILL think you stole Julianne's nomination...

Ok...on to the Worst Dressed, aka, the reason that most of you are here.  I like to pick three worst dressed...think of it as two supporting Worst Dressed flanking the night's biggest fashion loser.

The first flunkee this year has to be the oft-equine Sarah Jessica Parker.  Um, I liked the color, but it was shapeless, her spray tan was Michael Kors-esque, and those knotted buns upon buns of faux hair bounding off the top of her mane were hid.  Oh - and did I mention the tin foil detail in front and back?  Looks like something that I saw on a heroin-influenced episode of "Intervention."  Anyway, the best aspect of her look was that it served as a reminder that French Toast is best served with Challah bread.  Holla!

SJP's Night(gown)mare

Flanking our West Dressed on her other side is the normally gorgeous Diane Kruger.  I'm glad that she took a risk - too bad it just didn't pan out.  Her outfit was like a story told in three parts...one that starts classy, (the top), goes WAY off kilter (in the middle), and then ends gracelessly and painfully after dragging out the ending for too long (the bottom).  I'd like to think it was at least a calculated risk to get someone talking about her this long after her breakout role in "Inglourious Basterds."  Looks like THAT worked, at least!

Heads, shoulders, ruching and bows, ruching and bows

ALMOST time for Worst Dressed, but WAIT!  WIthout warning, Charlize Theron and her rosetted boobs have burst onto the scene and simply MUST be mentioned!  So you KNOW it's bad when your dress most resembles the famous Janet Jackson Rolling Stone cover from the early 90's.  Poor Charlize...maybe she'll do something relevant in the next 4 years to make up for this one.

Even the make-up is bad, but (let's be honest) - who's looking at her face?

That leaves us with just one worst dressed.  Hands down, this dress was THE disaster of the night for me.  That's right, Zoe Saldana, your dress was def the worst!  Like Kruger's dress, we have yet another fashion disaster being told in three parts; unlike Kruger's, NONE of them make any sense at all.  Zoe is a VERY pretty lady, and may not actually have a career - that remains to be seen.  At least if she keeps showing up in these types of outfits, people will still talk to her.  At least the bottom serves to make the viewer reach for a bowl of Fruit Loops...

Toucan Saldana

On to the Best Dressed ladies of the night, and I'm happy to say that there were plenty to choose from.  Let's start with the Fourth Best Dressed, Ms. Queen Latifah.  I continue to be amazed at how she shines on the Red Carpet, despite her usual low key, more LGPA-inspired look off the red carpet and her harder to dress body size.  No stranger to my Best Dressed commentary, she really knocked it out of the softball park last night!

Lookin' GOOD, Khadijah!

Next up, let's discuss Best Actress Winner Sandra Bullock.  Like Latifah, Bullock tends to give off more of a tomboy vibe than high Hollywood glamour.  Last night, however, she took a dress that would normally be worn by a Nicole Kidman or Gwyneth Paltrow, and totally aced it!  Her outfit was actually perfectly completed with the Oscar she went on to win that night...good thing she was the front runner, because without that bald, 8.5 pounder in her arm it might have looked a bit much.  Oh - and as much as I liked the dress, the 'ho red lips and limp hair did not do her justice.

Shimmering Sandra

Ok - so I'm going to go SLIGHTLY controversial for my Best Dressed Runner-up.  I think it may just end up on some of the worst dressed lists, but the more I look at Vera Farmiga's red, coffee filter-inspired ruffled number, the more I like it.  Personally, if edited just a LITTLE above the waist (maybe one less ruffle at the best line?), I think this would have been THE stunner of the night.  Aside from one ruffle too many, her make-up might have failed her just slightly...I think of her as one of the more natural women in Hollywood - more of Kate Winslet who always look more gorgeous to me when her face is painted with a more natural look.  Anyway, I think we're going to be seeing a lot more of this lady over the next several years...

Farrrrrmiga's rrrruffles have rrrridges

That leaves just one for the title of Best Dressed.  And let's just say, this woman has really turned me around over the course of the 12 years I've been writing this, from many, many mentions to likening her to a lemur with a difficult-to-understand accent, to a deserving win last year in the Best Supporting Category, to her career highlight as my Best Dressed.  That's right!  NO ONE outshone, outdid, or outplayed Penelope Cruz last night.  From the color, which likened to a perfectly aged Spanish Rioja, to the way it fit her like a glove, to her hair and make-up - just WOW is about all I can say.  It's probably all she can say as well - STILL can't understand her when she's doing anything NOT in Spanish.

Va Va Va VOOM!

Ok - that's it.  No empty promises to update this thing anytime until 2011 this time, though please do continue to e-mail me throughout the year if you have questions about anything film- or Oscar-related.  So until next February, enjoy your year at the movies!

Up in the Precious Inglourious Hurt Avatar

And we're baaack!  Apologies for the lame title of this year's Annual Oscar Nominations Day posting, but none of the films really lend themselves to parody the way previous entries have.  Either that, or I am officially getting less creative with every silver hair that appears on my head.  At the rate I'm going, I should be happy that there are any hairs there at all!

But I digress.  For, during this most magical time of the year, it's somehow not about me.  Shocking, I know.  Even in somewhat of a "down" movie year (more on that later), we must focus all attention away from TV gold like "The Inbetweeners" on BBC, "RuPaul's Drag Race" on LOGO and "Be Good Johnny Weir" on the Sundance Channel, and on fine films like "Crazy Heart," "District 9," and "Avatar."  Oh, and apparently not-so-fine cinematic flare, like "Up in the Air" and "The Blind Side."

As usual, we shall progress from Best Supporting Actress up to Best Picture.  So without wasting anymore of your time...

Performance By an Actress In a Supporting Role

Penélope Cruz in "Nine"

Vera Farmiga in "Up in the Air"

Maggie Gyllenhaal in "Crazy Heart"

Anna Kendrick in "Up in the Air"

Mo'Nique in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"

One HUGE surprise, three not-so-big-surprises, and a definite winner (you'll notice a theme, as I progress to the other nominations...) in this category.  Let's go in order from who I think is least likely to win to the hyphenated woman who will def be taking home some gold.

Least likely is going to have to go to surprise nominee Maggie Gyllenhaal.  She's been nowhere on the major awards scene for her role in "Crazy Heart" yet this year, so this stolen nomination (should have gone to my beloved, Four-time Academy Award Nominee Ms. Julianne Moore) is going to have to be her prize.  She was good in the film, but the film belongs to Jeff Bridges, not Maggie.  Looking forward to seeing what she will be wearing - it's usually a train wreck that mostly succeeds in making me feel larger-breasted than she is.

In second-to-last place, we have Penelope Cruz in "Nine."  I will confess to NOT having seen this yet, for reasons ordinary (it got freaking PANNED by the critics and every friend I know who saw it) and extraordinary (my hatred for the evil Daniel Day-Lewis, who starred in the film, somehow continues to grow faster than the rift between Tila Tequila and reality).  Anywho, she won last year, no one likes this film, and she's about 37 x pi better at Spanish-speaking roles, so, um, no.

Next up, we have the women of "Up in the Air."  Vera Farmiga gets my third-place vote, in a role that is doesn't get past being one-dimensional until the not very surprising conclusion of the film.  It's a shame, actually, because for most of the film I REALLY enjoyed her performance.  Unfortunately, the writing wouldn't allow her to take it to the next level - there is just no defining scene in the role, who we all know is a requirement for an Oscar win.

Anna Kendrick comes out higher than Farmiga for exactly that reason.  Her story arc has her young, overachieving corporate exec laughing, crying, drinking, full-on temper tantruming - a delectable little role that truly defines "Best Supporting Actress."  PLUS, we all know how much Oscar loves a newcomer in this category.  Unfortunately, it's not quite her year, but expect big things to come from this talented young actress.

The year belongs to Mo'Nique.  Now, if you had told me 11 months ago when I was wrapping up my post-Oscars recap that I would be writing about Mo'Nique's "sure" win in ANY category (other than perhaps an eating competition), I woulda laughed in yo face.  See "Precious," however, and you will understand what the hype is all about.  She is transcendent in this film - even for those who only know her from "The Parkers" (that would be you, Rajeev) or "The Queens of Comedy" (that would be anyone who went to JR's in DC at any point from 2002 - 2007).  This is a role that sticks with you long after the credits have rolled, and she is truly worthy of her win.  Now, if someone could get her to Nair her legs, that would be purrrrfect.

Will Win AND Should Win:  Again, Mo'Nique

Should Have Been Nominated:  I would be remiss if I didn't further acknowledge my beloved, for her role in "A Single Man."  Early predictions for 2011 indicate that she has a shot for "The Kids Are Alright," which just screened at Sundance and killed it.  Oh, and long-time readers will not be happy without at least ONE mention of the old bag from "Titanic," who now makes her record 12th appearance in this vaulted space.  My annual check of her IMDB page, which will single-handedly raise her popularity stats on that page by 100% this week, indicate that she is still with us and turning 100 this year.  Her last role is still listed as "Old Lady" from some film no one saw in 2004.  You just can't make that stuff up...it's like, sometimes that's how you KNOW there's a higher power, you know?

Performance By an Actor In a Supporting Role

Matt Damon in "Invictus"

Woody Harrelson in "The Messenger"

Christopher Plummer in "The Last Station"

Stanley Tucci in "The Lovely Bones"

Christoph Waltz in "Inglourious Basterds"

Probably the toughest for me to recap, considering I've only actually seen two of the movies and even those were not viewed in the movie theater.  I'll do my best, and considering the winner is once again all but a lock, I think I'll come out ok.

So it should come as no surprise that 5th place goes to Woody Harrelson.  Yes, this is the weakest category of the four acting categories, which is how everyone's favorite pothead snuck in.  Expect to never actually see his performance in this small, rentable-only-if-all-copies-of-"Drop Dead Gorgeous"-are-checked-out-of your-local-Netflix film.  Whatever...it leaves us with having to refer to Mr. Harrelson as "Two-time Academy Award Nominee" Woody Harrelson, so far that we should all be angry.  Maybe not Prop 8 angry, but at least having to wait until April for new eps of "Glee" angry.

I'll go with Matt Damon in 4th place, if only because the film is a tremendous disappointment.  I mean, how could they screw up an inspirational Nelson Mandela biopic (of sorts)?  Oh yeah - make it about rugby, a sport that only the more insane and/or brutish American cares about.  Now if they had somehow fudged the details to make it about roller derby or the Jersey Shore...just sayin.

Christopher Plummer - so attractive 429 years ago in "The Sound of Music."  And now, well, he's still alive so that counts for something, including this Oscar nomination which puts him in third place.  Plummer gets his nomination in the annual british film about someone important that 99% of the American public haven't seen film.  In this one, he plays Tolstoy.  Heard it's quite the little gem of a film and will hopefully catch it between now and the big night.  Which, btw is March 7 (can't believe it took this long just to mention the date of the show!).

Now is when one would normally think that the heat would be on between the top two contenders.  Unfortunately, no one has seen Stanley Tucci's work in "The Lovely Bones" either, so there goes that race.  This is one of the two performances I have seen - maybe that's why I'm giving it second place.  Tucci is good in the film, and has LONG been overlooked (ever see "Big  Night?"  SO GOOD).  He plays a creepo in this popular novel that turned into an unpopular film, and does it well.

Just not well OR creepy enough to beat out Christoph Waltz's virtuoso work in "Inglourious Basterds."  Never heard of him?  Perhaps that's because 99% of his film's start with "Die," "Der" or "Herr."  Despite his Austrian-born heritage and his continued lack of name recognition in this country, he is a sure bet for Oscar.  Acting classes really should consider showing the manner in which his performance effortlessly flows from German to French to English and back, all while simultaneously fascinating and freaking out the viewer.  Plus, he's the only actor from a Best Picture Nominated film, as if he needed any more ammo.

Will Win AND Should Win:  Again, this is an easy one.  It's Waltz all the way, though let's hope he gives better speech than his meandering Globes speech.

Should Have Been Nominated:  So only one of four came from one of the TEN best picture nominees.  Strange, eh?  One could perhaps make arguments for Anthony Mackie or Brian Geraghty from "Hurt Locker," but that film definitely belongs to Best Actor Nominee Jeremy Renner.  Same goes for Peter Sarsgaard in "An Education," which belonged to Carey Mulligan.  So I guess we'll keep things they way they stand, even with Woody Harrelson.

Performance By an Actress In a Leading Role

Sandra Bullock in "The Blind Side"

Helen Mirren in "The Last Station"

Carey Mulligan in "An Education"

Gabourey Sidibe in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"

Meryl Streep in "Julie & Julia"

OMG, people.  We now have to refer to Sandra Bullock - yes THAT Sandra Bullock, not a similarly (yet oddly so) named newcomer as "Academy Award Nominee" Sandra Bullock.  Scary,  Scarier though, might be her somewhat solid chances of winning in what will be the tightest category in the acting bunch.

So even is this category, that going with Helen Mirren in 5th place seems somewhat crazy to me.  I mean, we all know she can act, she's a previous winner here, and she's in a prestige indie...yet I just don't see her surpassing any of her four competitors here.  Just not enough buzz for the film yet, though there are SLIGHT chances it could pick up steam in during the next 3 weeks of voting.

Harder yet is capping the chances of the 4th and 3rd place finishers in what looks to be a two-woman race.  Just because I haven't seen the film yet, I'm going with Carey Mulligan in 4th place.  She has been LOADS of buzz for her portrayal in this film, and Hwood LOVES a british ingenue.

Unfortunately, the film suffers from not having anywhere NEAR the buzz that "Precious" has (and no, I will not be referring to it as "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire" anywhere else in this post.  Ridonkulous.).  As previous candidates for the American presidency, at home "psychiatry," overly chipper 30 minute-meal cooking, and gay home decorating can tell you, get a little Oprah on your side and you are gonna go a LONG way.  Good thing she has so much to give.  Anywho, Sidibe is amazing in this film - it's hard to hear her being interviewed and not be amazed at how un-Precious she actually is in real life.  Unfortunately, she's just too untested to take home Best Actress.  It will be very interesting to see how such an unconventional-looking actress will transition into other roles. 

So now we're down to two ladies for one Oscar, and

So now we're down to two ladies for just one Oscar, and it really is almost too tough of a race to call.  Both are portrayals of "real" women; one very well known to the world and one hardly known outside of her community.  One actress has been nominated more than any other in the history of the Oscars, the other is simultaneously nominated for a "Razzie" for Worst Actress for her work in last year's cinematic masterpiece "All About Steve."  Who to go with?  I'm going with Betty White.

Betty White?!  Well, Meryl Streep has never shared screen time with our Rose Nyland, so she's NOT getting the nod for her work as Julia Child in "Julie & Julia."  Truth be told, the film just isn't good enough because only half of it is about Julia Child!  In a true biopic of Ms. Child, we might have been able to get more invested in Streep's amazing (as usual, snorrrre) work.  Unfortunately, the film is too light and the role is not snazzy enough - just not the role to break Streep's long drought at the Oscars.

That means that Betty's "The Proposal" co-star, Sandra Bullock, will join a long line of pretty women who are just ok actors as Best Actress Winners (see Roberts, Julia or Berry, Halle).  Look - despite the aforementioned "All About Steve," Bullock had a sensational "comeback" of a year this year, which Hollywood finds irresistible.  Plus, the film is nominated for Best Picture, it's got the requisite make-you-laugh/make-you-cry/it's better than "Cats" moments, AND it's an inspirational, based-on-a-true story about a woman whose determination singlehandedly saves another person from a life of misery.  Unless her handlers f this campaign up, I'm thinking this is her year.

Should Win:  You know, of the 5 nominees, I'm going to have to go with Gabourey Sidibe.  No one else completely melted into the role like she did.  I mean, even with solid performances from Streep and even Bullock, I never got past it being them on screen.  Sidibe WAS Precious, and Precious was heart-breaking.  The one role that still lingers from what I've seen.

Will Win:  Still going with Bullock here, though Streep might win 4 out of every 10 coin flips.

Should Hae Been Nominated:  The only slighted woman here is probably Emily Blunt.  Her turn in "The Young Victoria" is usually just what Oscar is made of.  The film would have benefited from an earlier release, as it just never gained traction in the "Avatar" and "Blind Side" lead late fall.

Performance By an Actor In a Leading Role

Jeff Bridges in "Crazy Heart"

George Clooney in "Up in the Air"

Colin Firth in "A Single Man"

Morgan Freeman in "Invictus"

Jeremy Renner in "The Hurt Locker"

No surprises at all here, and only one person who could be considered a slight snub, in what is basically another two-person race.  Needless to say, I couldn't be happier about his no-nomination but more on that at the bottom.

Starting at the end of Best Actor Oscar likelihood, we have the man I honestly find most deserving this year.  Mostly unknown, Jeremy Renner carried "The Hurt Locker" to such great heights this year (and last...the film actually came out in 2008 but is eligible for Oscars this year for complicated reasons).  Although I ultimately am not as huge a fan of the film as the many, many critics who listed it in their Top Tens for the year, I challenge anyone to find fault with his dead-on work as a bomb detonation specialist dealing with work and isolation in Iraq.  But he won't win.

Neither will Morgan Freeman for his work as Nelson Mandela in "Invictus."  As I've already mentioned, it's somewhat shocking that Freeman won't be more highly considered, as this is normally the role that the Academy just can't help but honor.  Damn you, rugby!  Why couldn't they just play American Football in South Africa?

In third, we have the performance that I personally enjoyed most.  Colin Firth's turn in "A Single Man" is breathtaking, though way too subtle and quiet to garner the sort of attention it deserves.  SEE THIS FILM, people.  Unfortunately, he doesn't have a shot because the film has been otherwise ignored.  Oh well - it was billed all year as "Better than Brokeback" and the "next big, important, gay film," but has been largely ignored by award givers.

So that leaves us with two, and I am happy to say that Clooney is going to get second place.  Am I the only one who realizes that he plays the same role in EVERY freaking movie, yet we still fawn over him like he's the second coming of Jimmy Stewart.  This role, in particular, is nothing but a re-hash of his performance in "Michael Clayton" only this time he's firing unsuspecting people while learning more about himself.  Look, he's fine in this film, which (like "Hurt Locker") was a film that I didn't like as much as the (paid) critics.  But he really shouldn't be this highly considered for an Oscar until he stretches his wings and does something juicy and villainous.  Oh, and maybe if he'd stop self-congratulating for his Haiti work, that might help too.

That leaves one man at the top - a very deserving Jeff Bridges.  The guy has been in movies since he was two - TWO - and continues to pump out quality work.  This is his fifth nomination, and arguably a role for which he will be remembered.  So don't let anyone fool you into thinking his portrayal of a down-an-out country singer who never quite made it will be awarded as a "career" Oscar.  Nosireebob - he's the real deal.  I'm guessing that most of you have not yet seen the film - it's worth your while for his performance and singing alone.

Will Win:  Jeff Bridges

Should Win:  My vote would go to Colin Firth.  I just found that his performance was more transformative than Bridges' was.

Should Have Been Nominated:  The Academy probably got this one right, particularly by NOT nominating Daniel Day-Lewis in "Nine."  Though many considered him a lock back in November, he film was really his to carry and he BOMBED.  Drink that milkshake, Lewis.  Drink it up.  Erstwhile, I would have substituted the overrated Clooney for the underrated performance by Sharlto Copley in "District 9."  In fact, if Copley were a nominee he'd get my vote over Firth.

Best Motion Picture of the Year

"Avatar"

"The Blind Side"

"District 9"

"An Education"

"The Hurt Locker"

"Inglourious Basterds"

"Precious"

"A Serious Man"

"Up"

"Up in the Air"

TEN FILMS?  That's right...unless you've been living under a rock, or in Delaware, we have ten nominations for Best Picture this year.  After years of arguments about certain "types" of film that never got their due in this category, the Academy thought they'd experiment.  Results are mixed...comedies (like the wonderful, Golden Globe winning "The Hangover") still didn't make the cut, neither did "light" fare (like the extremely enjoyable "500 Days of Summer).  Those films will have to continue to enjoy the Golden Globes I guess.  More successful were Sci-Fi (the absolutely brilliant, probably my choice for Best Film of the Year, "District 9") and animated film (the surprisingly moving "Up").  The rest of the films are all critical darlings that had little to no impact on the bottom line, save for "Avatar" and "The Blind Side" for the most part.

Let's take a swipe at the five films that have no chance.  These are the ones who do not have correlating nominations for Best Director, so must have been considered numbers 6 to 10 on the ballot.  Of this bunch, I have not seen "An Education" or "A Serious Man," but neither has anyone else.  So go away, in that order.  I'm giving "The Blind Side" 8th place, only because it made bank and Bullock has such a great chance at Oscaring for it. 7th goes to "Up," because, well, there's a category for Best Animated Film and this movie doesn't do anything to make me consider it for a higher honor than that.

I'll give sixth place, and some more considerate paragraphage, to "District 9."  A somewhat small South African film, this movie stole all of the thunder away from "Invictus" as THE South African film of the year.  I personally went to the movies with somewhat low hopes for this one, and could not have been more pleasantly surprised - particularly by the aforementioned Copley's gripping performance.  Rent it ASAP, and get ready for the inevitable "District 10."

Five down, five to go.  I'm giving fifth place to "Inglourious Basterds."  I finally saw this one on a flight, and it was well worth my time.  Actually, it was the rare time when I I saw something on a plane and actually wished that I had seen it on the big screen.  Definitely somewhat typical Tarantino fare, yet he manages to mature just enough to reach a wider audience without losing his touch.  Unfortunately, the film's buzz peaked in the summer, though it will will for Waltz's performance and has a chance for a second writing win for Quentin.

Fourth place goes to "Precious."  At one time, this was the "little film that could, featuring much-buzzed about performances.  Then it turned into much-hyped-by Oprah and Tyler Perry.  I definitely agreed with most of the hype, and the film carries an important and empowering message, but it just wasn't quite all there for me.  I'm glad to see that it will bring much attention to its openly gay and black director, Lee Daniels.  This should lead to more work for him, which can only make Hollywood at least a slightly less homogeneous place.

Third place begrudgingly goes to "Up in the Air," which I will admit to thoroughly enjoying 90% of.  Like some of the other nominees, it's a good film that's just not "Best Picture of the Year" worthy.  With that said, well-directed, well-acted, and a solid piece of work from Jason Reitman.  Definitely rentable/an ironically good choice for an in-flight film.

That's leaving two films to battle it out for Best Picture.  At this point, I'm going with "Avatar" for second place.  I much as I cannot STAND director James Cameron, its hard to deny that this film is a visual, stunning, masterpiece.  If you haven't seen it yet it's worth a trip to your local IMAX.  See it in 3-D as well.  It's a real game-changer for the industry.  Sure, the story is a little weak/been done about a million times before.  Who cares though...it will blow you away regardless.

So yeah, I'm going with "The Hurt Locker" as the Best Picture of the year.  The film, which came out in Europe in 2008 but not in the U.S. until June 2009, has managed to maintain its "Best Picture" buzz for 7 months.  That's definitely saying something.  Directed by Kathryn Bigelow, it could become the film that finally breaks the gender barrier for women in the Best Director category as well - though some think that Cameron will take that award again regardless of how the vote for Best Picture goes.  It's another film that I would recommend renting - not nearly a "perfect" film, not one that will probably stand the test of time very well, but a solid choice nonetheless.

Will Win:  Again, toss-up between "The Hurt Locker" and "Avatar."  I'm going with "Locker."

Should Win:  My personal choice here would have to be "District 9."  Who would have known that I'd support a Sci-Fi movie?  Maybe I like Sci-Fi after all?  Hmmm...maybe I like a drama that just HAPPENS to have aliens in it.  Yeah, I'm going with that instead (for now).

Should Have Been Nominated:  As I mentioned before, I really would have liked to have seen an out-of-nowhere nomination for "The Hangover," particularly with 10 films to choose from.  I'm very curious to see if the Academy sticks with this experiment next year!

So that's all from me for now.  Thanks for reading, and looking forward already to recapping the big show, which will be co-hosted by the hilarious Alec Baldwin and the less-then-hilarious-these-days Steve Martin.  See you in early March!

Slumdog Oscarnaire

Wow....another year, another Oscar Ceremony.  As in years past, the show was on the boring side, the major awards offered few surprises, and the show's consistently pointless montages made sure that it ran well over three hours.  Why bother writing?  Well, mostly because I get to rip apart some fashion missteps.  As usual, I'll start with the show first and move to the fashion afterwards.

The Show

For the two of you who live under rocks, last night's show was hosted affably by Hugh Jackman.  In my opinion, he did what he was asked to do, and he did it well.  Unfortunately, what he was asked to do can be categorized as either unbelievably predictable (Song & Dance Loving Jackman does TWO Song & Dance numbers?  SHOCKING) or just dumb (Jackman narrated throughout the show under a "this is how a movie is made scenario...it was PAINFUL). 

As for the dance numbers, the first was Billy Crystal-esque, yet it managed to update what Billy did 17 years in a row by going with a "low budget due to these economic times (I know I'm not the only one who has had it with those three words) homemade look.  Think cardboard cutouts of Oscars and pizza boxes taped to look like television monitors.  Kind of like every holiday celebrated at local gay establishment Pieces in the W. Village, if you ask me, but funny nonetheless.

Unfortunately, the other musical number was ridunkulous...a complete waste of time.  Jackman kicked it off with perhaps the lamest "reason" for a big musical number by indicating that "Mamma Mia! has officially outsold Titanic in the U.K. - the musical is back everybody!" before launching into a pointless mash-up of songs from musicals along with Beyonce, that girl from Mamma Mia! that reminds me of an even uglier version of Miley Cyrus, and Zac Efron and his beard.  It was weird, and ultimately a lame reason to allow Jackman to do his Broadway thing.  Hmm....and there I was thinking I was watching the Oscars, not the Tonys.

All in all, I give him a B, with a suggestion for the Academy...if you really want to shake things up...and I know this will never happen...hire Kathy Griffin!  James and I caught La Griffin last night (that's right....I bought tickets to see Kathy Griffin on the same night as the Oscars!  What a bonehead maneuver!  Thank goodness for DVR and a well-planned personal day off from work!) with our friend Steff, and I just could not stop thinking about how amazing it would be to see the stars holding their collective breath for 3.5 hours with Griffin handling the hosting duties.  Alas, the fact that she was at MSG instead of the Kodak Theater last night makes it unlikely that she will either be allowed to attend, much less host!

One absolute A+, in my opinion, was the manner in which the acting awards were handed out.  This year, the Academy asked 5 previous winners from each category to address each individual nominee and give a first-person account of their performance.  I LOVED it - corny, yes, but a heartfelt way to catch up with recent and not-so-recent former winners.  My only peeve was that certain winners from last year (DANIEL!  DAY!  LEWIS! and Javier Bardem) couldn't clear their schedules to take part in the event.  Boo.

One last comment on the show before I get to the awards...another way to spice things up would be to take a cue from the Independent Spirit Awards.  That show, always held the day before the big show for Indie films only, is ALWAYS ten times more entertaining...whether it's the guess celebrity sung Best Feature ditties that are performed every year, Mickey Rourke referring to his co-stars from The Wrestler as "Melissa and the gap tooth girl" (Marissa Tomei and Evan Rachel Wood, naturally), or the freely flowing booze, that show manages to get it turned out in just over 2 hours without commercials, with swearing, and not a montage featuring "Space Chimps" or "Don't Mess with the Zohan" anywhere in sight!

Before I discuss some of the awards, allow me to digress.  I'm actually at home writing this with Oprah on, and the dog is driving me nuts.  Ope has all of last night's winner on, and the pooch literally stopped her annoying behavior and started staring at the TV as soon as Slumdog's Frieda Pinto came on the screen.  Even Radar can't take her eyes off of the beauty with the yellow scarf!

The Awards

Every year, one movie seems to dominate the awards.  This year, that film was undoubtedly Slumdog Millionaire, which took home 8 awards including Best Picture and Best Director.  Personally, my favorite film of the year was The Wrestler, though without a nomination in either of those categories, I was happy to see the 'dog win.

Interestingly though, Slumdog's popularity could not garner an acting nod for any of it's leads or supporting roles.  This lead the acting categories WIDE open - and, for the fourth straight year, lead to four winners from four different films.

The night's first winner went to a shockingly deserving Penelope Cruz, as Best Supporting Actress for her role in Vicky Cristina Barcelona.  Admittedly, I still have not seen the film, and she had the somewhat unfair advantage that has helped so many before her take Oscar home (the supporting role in a Woody Allen film), yet I was still happy for her.  Long time readers may be surprised by my support of her, as I was obsessed with my disdain for her for about 5 years.  Alas, the combination of her incredible performance in Volver, along with her increasingly understandable English in roles that require her to speak our language have really turned my opinion of her around.  She looked great on stage, she made sure to thank the one person who always believed in her (Spanish Director Pedro Almodovar) and she was sincere without going overboard.

The next acting award provided the night's "emotional high," when Heath Ledger's family accepted the Best Supporting Actor for his take on The Joker in The Dark Knight.  Wow....I'm going to get really unpopular in about 5 words or so...I just wonder if he would have won for this role if he hadn't overdosed a year ago.  That's not to say that he wasn't deserving....indeed, his stiffest competition may just have been Robert Downey Jr's comedic performance from Tropic Thunder, and comedic roles are only slightly more rewarded that comic book villains.  I just think that the Academy wanted this moment, and perhaps wanted to reward him for the Oscar he should have received for Brokeback Mountain.  Anywho, the moment was touching, though I still don't know why it took his non-elderly parents and sister 47 minutes to get from their seats to the stage to accept the award, except that the show is the culmination of this experience for his family, and probably means that they must focus on moving on now that he's gone.

Best Actress time...YES!  I thought for sure that there would be an upset here....Kate Winslet was just primed to lose for her performance from The Reader to, say, underdog Melissa Leo (Frozen River) or maybe Hollywood darling Anne Hathaway (Rachel Getting Married).  Alas, when Marion Cottilard finally ready Winslet's name, I was elated.  LOVED her speech, loved the shout-out to her parents, and loved (most of all) that she didn't slip up the way she did when she accepted her two Globes earlier this year.  Academy Award Winner Kate Winslet just sounds right...doesn't it?  SO much better than, say, Academy Award winner Reese Witherspoon or Academy Award Winner Helen Hunt....right?

Lastly, in what was likely the closest race (would LOVE to see the results or to have been a counter on this one...), Sean Penn beat out Mickey Rourke for his title role performance in Milk.  Look - I liked his speech, and I thought he was good in the movie, but I really just need the Academy to stop giving awards for impersonations...k?  Mickey Rourke deserved the Award over Penn in my opinion, though perhaps the voters just aren't ready for Academy Award Winner Mickey Rourke.  It does sound kind of weird I guess.

There were some other fun moments...the Japanese guy who won for Best Animated Short, whose struggles with the English language lead him to close with a nice "Domo Arrigoto, Mr. Roboto," the fun win for Best Song for "Jai Ho" (happy to see that win over Bruce Springsteen's un-nominated, would have been a shoe-in sing from The Wrestler)....ok, not much else to report on here, so let's go on to..

The Fashion

As usual, let's pay little to no regard to the men here.  Sure, Rourke looked predictably Rourkey in his white Gaultier get-up and Philip Seymour Hoffman looked like a bloated, high idiot in his brown skull cap.  And I suppose I could take some time to discuss bow tie vs. skinny tie vs. wide tie vs. no tie, but I can't think of one reader who would care.  (In fact, I think that may be the longest I've ever discussed men's Oscar fashion!).  Anywho, on to the ladies.

There was much discussion about how the dreaded three words (these economic times) might impact last night's clothing and jewelry.  In my opinion, it forced many to simplify the jewels (with some notable and oft-disastrous exceptions) and turn to the more prosperous 1950's for gown inspiration.  Ultimately, last night's fashion was quite the roller coaster...almost all peaks (A's) and valleys (F's), with one or two fashion loopdyloops (grading still tbd).  Links to each dress are brought to you courtesy of (mostly) NY Magazine this year.

Peaks

It's always less fun to write about the nice dresses, though I would be remiss if I didn't at least comment on some of the real highs from last night.  Let's start with Alicia Keys - I mean, how could I NOT mention my girl from Hell's Kitchen?  Anyway, I am happy to report that she has officially gotten over the braids and really seems to be coming into her own.  Her light purple gown really made her look like a star, despite not exactly being much of an actress per se.

Lovin' U

Speaking of non-actresses, I thought Natalie Portman looked pretty damn fine in purple last night as well.  Yeah, I went there.  Anyway, her color choice was similar to what Alicia wore, so maybe I'm just responding to the manner in which that particular shade reads in photos, on the carpet, and on the tellie.

Seriously...what has she done for me lately?

I guess I'll give them a tie for third place.  In a neck-to-neck battle, second place goes to Taraji P. Henson's beautiful white, ruffled gown.  Usually, I find ruffles to be a big turn off, but I just can't help but feel that the look works for her.  Too bad her hair was so Tootie from Living Single - she may just have taken first place had she done something with it...

Lookin' Good Out There For a Pimp

So that leaves just one winner in my Best Dressed book.  Ok - I have admitted over and over again that I have a soft spot for her, so maybe there is a touch of subjectivity here...but Marisa Tomei was head, boobs (did you SEE her (all of her!) in The Wrestler?) and shoulders above the rest of last night's ladies.  From the side swept 'do to the very simply stated jewelry to (most importantly) the gorgeously origamied dress, my favorite three-time Academy Award nominee triumphed despite her loss last night in the Best Supporting category.

Mona Lisa Vito Smiles 

The Loopdyloops

If we have learned one thing from Tilda Swinton, last year's Best Supporting Actress, it's that her sense of style is definitely one to discuss.  More often than not, she is definitely on the Worst Dressed list - she takes chances, but too often her selections are beyond kooky.  Given that somewhat wordy set-up, I am interested in hearing what y'all think about last night's number.  I *gasp* think I like it!

Hideously Pretty?

The other dress I'm just not sure about is Kate Winslet's.  Much like Tomei, I will always have a soft spot in my heart for her, so I'm not sure if I am giving her more credit than she is due for this one-sleeved number.  Thoughts?

Am I So Pretty?

The Valleys

None of the following can, unfortunately for the ladies and their soon-to-be-fired stylists, be categorized as questionable.  That's because these dresses are just plain fugly.

Let's start with Whoopi's beyond misguided Cheetarah get up from last night.  Really Whoopi - is that the best you can give us?  I get that you're not someone who has ever been, nor ever will be known, for your sense of fashion, but that doesn't mean you have to go and do this.

Thundercats....HO!!!!

Every year, a little known or too-long ignored actress is nominated for a big prize and given the opportunity to make a splash at the Oscars.  In past year's Diane Lane, Virginia Madsen, and even Shohreh Aghdashloo have benefited from dressing their best on the big day.  Unfortunately, Melissa Leo (nominated for Best Actress for Frozen River) did no such thing.  See for yourself...

Like the Color of the Crayon You Never Used

Not to beat up on the "older" generation of actresses, but I would be remiss if I didn't go there with Sophia Loren.  Aside from continued insistence on wearing her sunglasses at night and indoors (is she high or something?), this nightmare of a dress is nothing short of a ruffled nightmare.  Add those gloves, and you have this:

At least Meryl looks good for once...

Three more and I'm out...stay with me here, or you will miss out on Third Worst.  I'm going with Reese Witherspoon, who somehow seems to often make her way to my list of the worst.  This year, her ensemble (much like Paula Abdul on any given Tuesday night) is all over the place.  Straps and cloth everywhere, shiny bits here and there, bad make-up and bad hair...

Gross

Tied for Second Worst this year are Beyonce and Jessica Biel.  Two very different dresses, same disastrous results.  Beyonce's is just tacky - she needs to get rid of her mother's House of Derrion frocks and start seeing an actual designer.  As for Ms. Biel, she definitely going for something here (maybe the look that J Hud ACED (for once) at this year's Grammy's?) but there's just too much fabric here on a woman who should know (based on her roles) that less is best.

I don't like it - you shouldn't put a ring on it

Miss - you left your Red Lobster napkin tucked in to your top...   

So who gets worst dressed?  I can't believe I am doing this to a teenager, but her quest to seemingly dominate the world FORCES me to do this to none other than Miley Cyrus.  All I can say is that James and I went to a Christmas Party and someone made a cake in a funky bunt pan and then coated it with powdered sugar.  The cake was very tasty.  The dress is very ugly.

It's Miley!

That's it everyone...until next year (when we can hopefully, FINALLY celebrate an Academy Award for four-time Academy Award Nominee Ms. Julianne Moore)!  Again...I'll do my best to keep this thing updated, but no guarantees!  Thanks for reading...now get thee to the theater! 

 

The Curious Case of This Year's Nominations

Another year, another 11 months of broken promises.  Since I last wrote, WAY back in February 2008 (back when our country was still (mis)lead by the evil Bush regime), I have not posted a single item to this blog.  Not one.  I have excuses….new (old) job – I'm back at Dickstein, but this time in NY; new puppy (check out the multiple pics of Radar on my Facebook page), um….yeah – that's about it.  So rather than make a promise that this time, for reals, I am going to be good about maintaining the page as I see films, I'm gonna go with the good old "I'll do my best."
 
Seriously though – one of the major problems I have is finding movies to see.  From February – May there's almost nothing, Summer is usually full of blockbusters that I'm generally not interested in, and then by the time fall/winter rolls around, James and I are too busy doing double features to see the films that are actually worth our $13 for me to come home and write about them!
 
With that fantastic whine, let's get to the reason you're actually here….this year's nominees for Academy Award greatness (or is it infamy?).  As usual, I'm only going to recap the "majors," though I may throw in some extra commentary about other nominees that I'm psyched about.  In addition, I will give my "day of nominations" predictions, which are often hilariously wrong…needless to say, don't use these to complete your Oscar pools.  I begin this post immediately after the 8:37am EST announcements…the next two weeks will be full of campaigning that may just lead to an upset winner, on par with last year's surprise Best Actress Winner (Marion Cotillard) or the previous year's Best Supporting Actor Winner (Alan Arkin).
 
I think you'll see that there weren't too many surprises here.  "Benjamin Button" lead with 13 nominations, followed by "Slumdog Millionaire" with 10 and 8 each for "Dark Knight" and "Milk."  Ok – so maybe one or two films got seriously snubbed.  With that said, And the Nominees Are….
 
Performance by an actress in a supporting role
Amy Adams in "Doubt"
Penélope Cruz in "Vicky Cristina Barcelona"
Viola Davis in "Doubt"
Taraji P. Henson in "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"
Marisa Tomei in "The Wrestler"
 
Wow…first category, and already two surprises.  More for me to dish about, I guess!  I'll discuss each in the order of likeliness to win the award, from lease likely to most likely.
 
Taraji P. Henson (thank God for the middle initial there…wouldn't want to confuse her with all of the other Taraji's Henson) is my vote for least likely in this category.  The caveat here is that Best Supporting Actress is always the hardest to predict.  Ms. Henson turned in a solid performance in a film whose awards show popularity is perplexing to most moviegoers.  I thought it was a decent film, many MANY others I have chatted with feel nothing for it.  Any way, I do hope to see more of her in the future.
 
Next up we have Amy Adams from "Doubt."  Again, a solid turn here, but nothing earth-shattering.  In an odd way, her turn as the innocent/naïve nun in the film is really not that different from, say, her innocent turn as the Princess in "Enchanted," or her naïve, Oscar-nominated role in "Junebug."  I'm looking forward to seeing her stretch her acting chops in the upcoming dark comedy "Sunshine Cleaning," followed hopefully by something that allows her to stretch her Minnesota Dinner Theater trained chops a little more.
 
From here it starts to get much tighter.  I'll give third place to one of my sentimental faves, Marisa Tomei.  SEE THIS MOVIE.  Ms. Tomei gives yet another brilliant performance in this role, as a stripper whose career is on the decline.  Much like the way Rourke infused his own life experiences into his role in the film (more on that later), it's hard not to imagine what it must have been like for Tomei to face the reality of aging in Hollywood as she spun her naked body around the pole (lots of booby shots in this one, and they're real!).  Unfortunately for her, the film is really Rourke's – her character just doesn't have enough of a story arc to garner her a second award.
 
Down to two, and somehow Penélope Cruz is still around?  How did that happen?  Seriously though...one can NEVER count out a supporting woman from a Woody Allen film (Mira Sorvino, anyone?).  I have to admit I have not seen this one yet, but the buzz is good on her performance.
 
Not good enough, however, to topple Viola Davis from "Doubt."  I'm even surprising myself for picking her here, as she will certainly lose votes to co-star Adams, not many have likely even seen the film yet, and she has the smallest role of all 5 women nominated.  That's right – only one scene, but what an incredible scene it is!  The raw emotions that she evokes while out-acting Amy Adams, Philip Seymour Hoffman AND La Streep will astound you.  In addition, this is a role that Oprah herself openly campaigned, but was turned down for due to the strength of Davis' screen test.  PLUS, she totally played Fantasia Barrino's mother in the made-for-TV "Life is Not a Fairytale:  The Fantasia Barrino Story," and the only acting award for that gem went to Kadeem Hardison (Dwaye Wayne from "A Different World") – the very balance of the world is in your hands, AMPAS.
 
Will win:  Viola Davis, "Doubt"
Should win:  I'm going with Marisa Tomei here….love her.
Should have been nominated:  There are some surprise omissions….Kate Winslet won the Golden Globe in this category for "The Reader," but she was more correctly nominated in the Best Actress category this time.  Another surprise was that Henson got the nomination over awards fav Cate Blanchett from the same film, though I did not care for Blanchett's role or performance at all.  Lastly, had "Rachel Getting Married" been a "bigger" film, we may have seen a nomination for Rosemarie DeWitt or Debra Winger in this category.  At least the old bag from "Titanic" didn't make any movies this year….no nomination for Gloria Stuart, who will turn 99 this year.  Yes, she's still with us and even making an unprecedented 11th consecutive appearance in my post-Nominations post!
 
Performance by an actor in a supporting role
Josh Brolin in "Milk"
Robert Downey Jr. in "Tropic Thunder"
Philip Seymour Hoffman in "Doubt"
Heath Ledger in "The Dark Knight"
Michael Shannon in "Revolutionary Road"
 
This one, as with last year's win for Javier Bardem, is by far the easiest to call.  In fact, the hardest part is handicapping the 4 eventual losers, but I'll give it a shot.
 
Michael Shannon is the single biggest surprise out of all of this year's acting nominations – the gasp in the crowd when his name was read was by far the loudest.  Almost entirely ignored by the other annual awards (Globes, SAGs, etc.), in a film that was almost entirely ignored in all other categories, co-starring three actors with profiles MUCH larger than his (DiCaprio, Winslet and Kathy Bates)…shocking indeed.  He won't win, and in 10 years someone will be looking back at the nominees and surely go "WHO?"
 
Onto four more accomplished actors…fourth place goes to everyone's favorite non-Chunk Goonie, Josh Brolin.  His nomination is likely a "do over" from last year, when he was inexplicably overlooked for "No Country for Old Men."  He's good in "Milk," though the role is a little too faux nuanced for my tastes.
 
Down to three, and I'll give third place to Philip Seymour Hoffman.  As usual, he is excellent – his performance in "Doubt" really made me understand a little more about the mentality of priests in the mid-50s, and how some priests got away with horrible improprieties while the powerless nuns and powerful church stood by.
 
Second place goes to Robert Downey Jr., for what was a truly courageous performance in the comedy "Tropic Thunder."  Virtually everything about this role is offensive – he appears in blackface for the majority of the film while spewing one offensive remark after another – and yet he still gets nominated for the highest honor in film?  It will be interesting to see what groups like NAACP have to say about the nomination – somehow, the role was more derided for his character's opinions on the mentally challenged than on the heavy make-up used for the role.
 
Speaking of heavy make-up, we have this year's inevitable (and extremely deserving) winner, Heath Ledger in "The Dark Knight."  Exactly one year ago, we learned of his tragic overdose and just started to learn about what an amazing swan song performance he gave as the Joker.  That Ledger could elevate a common "comic book movie baddie" role into what he did is amazing.  I truly believe that this award would be his even if he had not passed away, though some may attribute his win more to his untimely death than his virtuoso performance.  Side note – my cousin's cousin, John Caglione, Jr., is nominated for doing the make-up in the movie.  This could be his second Oscar, as he previous won for "Dick Tracy."  
 
Will and should win:  Heath Ledger 
Should have been nominated:  Some thought that James Franco might get the nod here for his role in "Milk," though I agree with Brolin's nomination.
 
Performance by an actress in a leading role
Anne Hathaway in "Rachel Getting Married"
Angelina Jolie in "Changeling"
Melissa Leo in "Frozen River"
Meryl Streep in "Doubt"
Kate Winslet in "The Reader"
 
Finally some surprises here, in what is always my favorite category!  None are total shockers, as the category is a virtual mirror of the SAG nominees (where Winslet was nominated for "Revolutionary Road" instead of "The Reader).  In fact, the SAG voters and those who vote for Acting nominations for the Oscars are pretty much the same, so maybe I shouldn't be surprised at all. 
 
And yet, Melissa Leo's nomination in "Frozen River" still comes as a shocker.  Yes, she has been racking up critical acclaim and even some other nominations (Independent Spirits comes to mind) for her performance in this extremely strong film (haven't seen it yet…will be renting it before the show, of course) since it came out early last year.  I guess it's just that this role went largely ignored, while other "small" roles have been more praised (see below).  Alas, she does not have a prayer here.
 
Also hopeless is Angelina Jolie in "The Changeling."  Another film I have not yet seen, though I just don't hear good things about it.  She seems to have a habit of taking showy roles in films that do not live up to the hype (see last year's "A Mighty Heart," for example).  Unfortunately, what seem to be excellent performances by her get overshadowed by these disappointing reviews.  She's lucky to have been nominated here.
 
In third place we have La Streep.  Did anyone "doubt" (hardee har har) this inevitable nomination as soon as she signed on to this film adaptation of the Tony Award winning play?  I personally would rather have seen Cherry Jones (the Tony Award Winner for the role) get her chance at bringing this to the big screen, though it was probably Streep's name that landed the all important funding that was needed to get it made at all.  I found her performance to be too much – not in an Al Pacino "HOO HAH!" kind of a way, mind you, but a little too much nonetheless.

Alas, it is really a two woman race.  Many early prognosticators think this may be Anne Hathaway's year for "Rachel Getting Married."  She's had an interesting year, what with her supporting role in "Get Smart," her dark turn in "Rachel…" and her current performance in "Bride Wars" – not to mention the scandal surrounding her money-stealing ex.  Look – she was good in this movie – not great, but good.  The film itself was good – again, not great, but good.  It's just NOT an Oscar winning role.  And, much like the timing of "Norbit" killed Eddie Murphy's chances of winning for "Dreamgirls" two years ago, I suspect that the critically bashed "Bride Wars" (12 % on Rotten Tomatoes, well behind "Paul Blart:  Mall Cop," "Beverly Hills Chihuahua," and "Hotel for Dogs") may take precious votes away from her.  Which all the more for….
 
KATE WINSLET!  That's right, perennial Oscar loser Kate Winslet will finally lose the tag of "Best Actress to never have won an Oscar" for her portrayal of a mysterious loner in "The Reader."  I am so glad that the Academy chose this role over her (perhaps more showy) turn in "Revolutionary Road," as this a role that we can look back on and really say, "Of COURSE that's what she won for" instead of "I guess this was a career award…"  See the movie, people (more on that later).  In the meantime, let's make up for her previous five losses, to such cinematic stalwarts as Mira Sorvino and Helen Hunt for goodness sake, and make sure that she wins this time around! 
 
Will and should win:  Duh.
Should have been nominated:  Aside from the aforementioned Winslet in "Revolutionary Road" snub, I was somewhat surprised that Kristin Scott Thomas was not nominated for the requisite foreign film nominee (she speaks in French) for "I've Loved You So Long," or perhaps Sally Hawkins for the requisite "quirky" nomination for "Happy Go Lucky."
 
Performance by an actor in a leading role
Richard Jenkins in "The Visitor"
Frank Langella in "Frost/Nixon"
Sean Penn in "Milk"
Brad Pitt in "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"
Mickey Rourke in "The Wrestler"
 
Much like the Best Actress category, this year's nominations for Best Actor are an exact replica of the SAG nominees.  So again, we'll call the surprises minor at best.
 
The least likely winner would be my personal second pick….Richard Jenkins in "The Visitor."  I was lucky enough to review this firm for Next Magazine, and it I EXACTLY the kind of movie that I love love love.  Jenkins (most famous has the deceased patriarch from "Six Feet Under") takes his first leading role (after decades of supporting turns) and knocks it out of the ballpark.  He plays a weary UCONN (go Huskies!) professor who visits his NY apartment after not venturing out of rural Storrs, CT for several years.  SEE THIS MOVIE.  It's out on DVD – you will love it to!
 
Unfortunately, Jenkins has about as much of a prayer as Frank Langella from "Frost/Nixon."  Those of you who are loyal readers know that I am just not a fan of portrayals of "real" people, so despite the fact that Langella seemingly turns it out as Nixon (haven't seen it yet), I am in general just not interested.  The movie has strong buzz, though I know of very few who have bothered to see it yet.  Perhaps it's Best Picture nomination will change that.
 
In the meantime, Brad Pitt is most likely to garner the third most votes for his role as the titular Benjamin Button.  Personally, I don't get it.  He barely acts at all in this movie…I don't write that to say that his performance was poor, rather that there was shockingly little for him to do in a three-hour movie that he starred in.  Very strange.
 
So we basically have a two-way race.  I'm giving second place to Sean Penn.  Again, I'm never as interested in those who play real people – I'm far more fascinated by seeing how someone can create a role from scratch.  Given that caveat, Penn really does melt right into this role that could have become an easy caricature but winds up being nothing short of brilliant.  His chances have suffered from an "early" release (pre-Thanksgiving, when most of the buzz doesn't start until mid-December), but the tides seem to be a changing.  Will it be enough?
 
Perhaps, but only if Mickey Rourke implodes over the next couple of weeks.  As long as he can keep his mouth shut (note to Mickey – lay VERY low for three weeks), his performance from "The Wrestler" will shine through.  It is my absolute fav performance of the year.  The manner in which he pours his personal struggles and experiences into the role is amazing.  I simply cannot think of a more soul-bearing performance in recent times, on par with Haing S. Ngor's winning performance from "The Killing Fields" in 1984.  Again, SEE THIS MOVIE.  In additional to two of my favorite performances, it is my favorite film of the year.
 
Will and should win:  Mickey Rourke
Should have been nominated:  Leonardo DiCaprio was definitely hurt by the lack of support for "Revolutionary Road;" I thought he was ok, but wouldn't personally substitute him for anyone above.  Many thought that Clint Eastwood might take a nomination in what just may be his last performance on the big screen in "Gran Torino."  That film was completely snubbed though.
 
Achievement in directing
"The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," David Fincher
"Frost/Nixon," Ron Howard
"Milk," Gus Van Sant
"The Reader," Stephen Daldry
"Slumdog Millionaire," Danny Boyle
 
Best motion picture of the year
"The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"
"Frost/Nixon"
"Milk"
"The Reader"
"Slumdog Millionaire"
 
A couple of surprises here, indeed.  First of all, there is almost always one director whose film is not nominated, leaving one film without a nominated director.  That this year's films are an exact correlation is therefore a surprise – in fact, I can't remember the last time this happened.
 
Other than that, the films that were nominated all come to us with many Globe, Directors Guild, and Critics Association nominations between them.  With that said, I am still somewhat surprised to see "Frost/Nixon" on the list, so I'll give it fifth place.  It just has not had the buzz of other films that did not make the cut – I'm thinking "Revolutionary Road," "The Wrestler" and "Doubt" in particular.  I'll definitely catch it in the next month so that I can be a better judge, however I just don't see it beating any of the other four contenders.
 
Fourth place goes to "The Reader," though it was my 2nd fav of the year.  Again., it's a small movie that just not enough people have seen.  I say SEE IT people.  It is much more than it appears to be from the commercials that I have seen.
 
I'm giving third place to "Benjamin Button" – sure, it somehow made it's way to the top of many a Top Ten list, but how?  The movie is too long, there are many flaws in the story, and the acting is so-so.  It's as if everyone voted for it because they were supposed to, rather than because they actually liked it.  Must be how Daniel Day-Lewis won last year for that dreck of a performance in "There Will be Blood."
 
That leaves two, but I am sad to say that I just don't see "Milk" taking it.  In another year, perhaps this film would have taken off.  Personally, I find the timing of it's release very curious -  had it come out in October, it would have been the only "major" film out there and moviegoers around the nation would have flocked to it; had it been released later, perhaps it would have received the critical attention it deserved.  Alas, the Thanksgiving timing worked against it, and it just got too lost in the shuffle.
 
So that leaves this year's indie darling, "Slumdog Millionaire," as this year's Best Picture.  Get ready for the inevitable backlash, people.  Look, this is a very good film – my third fav, behind "The Wrestler" and "The Reader," just slightly ahead of "Milk."  It's been getting ALL of the attention lately, and was the Globes winner for Best Drama.  If you haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend that you do so.  I defy you to NOT like it.
 
Will win:  "Slumdog Millionaire"
Should win:  From what's nominated, I would probably go with "The Reader."
Should have been nominated:  As previously mentioned, "The Wrestler," "Doubt," and "Revolutionary Road" could be considered surprise snubs here.  Some thought that "WALL-E," which was actually one of the best reviewed films of the year, might get some attention here, though it will have to settle for what is an easy win in the Best Animated Film category.  Lastly, there was a lot of sentiment for "The Dark Knight," both for Best Film AND Best Director...alas, it will have to settle for Ledger's nomination plus the many technical nominations it received.
 
Before I end, there are a couple of more surprises to mention.  The lack of a nomination for Bruce Springstein in the Best Original Song category (for "The Wrestler") is one big surprise, leaving room for either Peter Gabriel from "WALL-E" OR one of two songs from "Slumdog."  No "Wallace & Gromit" nom in the Best Animated Short.  Ok - I'm grasping at straws here at this point...

 

So with that, I am signing off for now.  I'd love to hear from you all, so post your comments.  In the meantime, I'll report back in a month after the Feb. 22 show! 

 

The White Party

Welcome back everyone!  Last night's ceremony was fantastic - some surprises, lots of red dresses, some touching moments (even for a sarcastic jerk like me!), and even a couple (just a couple, sadly) of dishy fashion disasters to sink our snarky teeth into.  Ooh - and let's not forget the near devouring of Laura Linney and Jennifer Garner (to whom I am JUST starting to warm up) by Gary Busey and his size 17 chompers on the E! Red Carpet show.  I guess Garner doesn't watch "Celebrity Fit Club," nor has she seen any of the fine, fine films he has been making for the last 20 or so years (um, he actually was in a movie called "The Hand Job," and it was not rated XXX), because she clearly thought he was an insane, blithering idiot who meant her potential harm. Which, he is.  Allegedly (to steal from Kathy Griffin).

Before I get started, I know it appears as if I have not posted my latest reviews as I had promised to do between my last post and now.  This is not exactly the case, as there has not been a single film out there that has been worth my 12 NY dollars (plus the $1 pre-order fee...one can't expect to just go to the theater in NY and get a ticket from a person any more) since my last post.  We have rented three damn good films that never found the audience they deserved, so I suppose I could have written about those at some point.  I PROMISE to type those up in the next week or so.

One more "before I get started" - I am actually a published Oscar freak now.  I suppose it's good to have friends in high places, as one of our closest NY friends has recently taken the reigns at NEXT Magazine, NY's premier gay weekly.  Indeed, the Bij gave me the opportunity to write a quick article that was published just this past week.  If you're in NY, you can pick up a copy at your local gay or gay-friendly establishment.  Otherwise, check me online here (um, some of the ads in this publication are def NSFW, you have been warned.  Also, you'll need to click on the "back" button to get back to my blog):

Jack's "Next Magaine" Article

Ok, enough about me already.  As usual, I'll discuss the show first, fashion second.  ENJOY!

The Show

Let's chat about the title of this particular entry.  No, I am not blogging about the annual Circuit Party held in Miami, though I bet some of the supposedly hetero guys might have preferred to be there than at last night's ceremony (Travolta).  Nope, "The White Party" is my personal response to the ad nauseam comment of how "diverse" this year's Oscars supposedly were.  Sure, none of the acting winners were American, however they were still all given to shades of white, from the olive-skinned Javier Bardem to the porcelain Tilda Swinton.  Of the other winners, we had a white former stripper winning Best Original Screenplay (Diablo Cody, for "Juno"), an array of white nerds winning for sound, sound mixing, special effects, etc. for a variety of films about white people, and white people from Austria winning Best Foreign Film about persecuted white people.  Thank goodness that "Freeheld," about a woman who fights NJ state law as she is dying of breast cancer so that her lesbian partner can collect her pension benefits, won for Best Documentary Short or last night could have doubled for the upcoming Republican Convention!

As host Jon Stewart, I thought he did a capable job. His political jokes were expected and yet still somewhat funny, and some of his other stuff was pretty decent too. I particularly enjoyed him ragging on Cate Blanchett for being such a versatile actress and saying that she played one of the pit bulls in "No Country for Old Men" and was actually playing the part of Jon Stewart during the ceremony last night.  If I have a complaint (and seriously, when don't I?  Try working and/or living with me), it was his need to validate each of the winner's after they left the stage.  His "wasn't that a great speech?" and "isn't she a deserving winner?" commentary starting to get a little annoying, as I am very capable of making my own damn opinions.

One area I was admittedly less impressed with was the crowd itself.  Yes, it's always fun to see the host as well as the young male stars cower to Jack Nicholson and George Clooney in the front row.  I also enjoyed the somewhat surprise award for "most reaction shots" of the night, which went not to Nicholson but to my girl Laura Linney.  They must have showed my girl 30 times last night, including a Laughing Linney, a Dewey-eyed Linney, and a Contemplative Linney - bitch can emote, I tells ya!  Unfortunately, the rest of the crowd was not exactly star-filled - no visible Julianne Moore, Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes, Sean Penn (pissed he didn't get enough noms for his "Into the Wild," I gather), etc.  "Hollywood's Biggest Night" has turned into a ceremony you go to if you're nominated or presenting, and then "Hollywood's Biggest After Party."  Come on, sour grapes stars and starlets who shouldn't need the presenter's gift basket in order to check out the show...bring the glamour back!

As for the awards, the predictable winners were most certainly Daniel Day-Lewis (thank God I don't have to see that freaking vein popping out of his "I ABANDONED MY BOY!" head ever again), Javier Bardem (great speech), and the Coen brothers for Best Director(s), Best Adapted Screenplay, and ultimately Best Picture for "No Country for Old Men."

As for less predictable, I guess I should have seen Marion Cotillard's win for her performance in "La Vie en Rose" coming.  The pundits are feigning shock, however she WAS portraying an actual person (French singing legend Edith Piaf), she is, erm, French, so we can feel more cultured about her win, and she won the Golden Globe and BAFTA awards.  Plus, her closest competition was Julie Christie, in a role that was pitch-perfect but just too tough for many to watch.  I have not seen "La Vie en Rose," but it's going to be hard to convince me that upstart Cotillard was truly better than Julie.  I predict we never see her again.

Even less predictable was Tilda Swinton's award for "Michael Clayton."  The film was heavily nominated and went home otherwise empty-handed, so perhaps she got the "we have to give it something" award.  Either way, I enjoyed her performance, I continue to enjoy her work, and I thought she gave a great speech.

As for my "moment" of the ceremony, there were two this year.  I thought the moment was Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova's MUCH deserved win for Best Song from "Once."  I just can't say enough about that film...I feel like it's a secret that only I, and a few others who also saw the film, know about.  RENT THIS MOVIE, please.  Put "Transformers" or, God love ya, "Wild Hogs" down and check this one out.  The fact that they picked "Falling Slowly" over some other decent songs (mostly from "Enchanted") ALMOST undoes the horror of Aimee Mann losing to Phil Collins (PHIL COLLINS?!) in this category almost 10 years ago (we Portuguese-Italians know how to hold a grudge, Academy).  Great victory.

But an even better moment came quickly afterwards.  After Mr. Hansard said his pretty quick thank you's, the ever-obnoxious orchestra played them off before Ms. Irglova could say her piece (um, I know they're trying to save time, but couldn't they have skipped like three of the montages and still let people speak?).  Anywho, after a commercial break Jon Stewart brough Marketa back out on stage and gave her time to say her very sweet thank yous and "everyone should have a dream" speech.  Well worth it indeed, and quite classy.  Now if only Stewart didn't have to ruin his triumph immediately afterwards by telling us how great her speech that he allowed her to make was...

Not much else to say about the awards, really.  SO...

The Fashion

The consensus is in...last night was kind of a yawner in the fashion department.  Overall, approximately 80% of the ladies were in red or black.  Boring.  There were a couple of preg-o purples, a green or two, one scaly mermaid, and one all out disaster.  Ooh, and this year I am throwing one of the guys onto the "official" worst dressed list.  Let's dish.

The Good

I gotta say it....it's really tough for me to pick a Best Dressed this year.  Though there were many dresses I liked, there just weren't two or three dresses that all out wowed me.  Seems to me that the most talked about "thumbs up" so far has been the chatter on Katherine Heigl's throwback red dress.  I don't know....she's a pretty lady who looked predictably pretty.  Not overly impressed, but she looked good.  (Click on the links below each comment for a view of the outfits - and make sure to click the "Back" button on your browser after viewing the picture to be brought back here)

Katherine's 40'a Siren Look

So that's what they say..what about me?  One surprise for me (though she definitely played the role of arm candy at best last night) was Calista Flockhart's soft blue gown.  Maybe it's my growing obsession with "Brothers and Sisters" talking to me more than the dress, but I thought she looked great.  Well, at least the dress looked great.  Her hair is a little out there, but I'll forgive her for now.

Who woulda thunk it?

Probably the second best dressed of the evening, as I am forcing myself to pick, would be Felicity Keri Russell.  I thought she was WAY too slender (especially for someone who popped out a kid in the past year), but the fit, the color, the hair, the bling, it all just worked for me.  Plus, I really enjoyed "Waitress" so I'll throw her a bone.

Feliticious is delicious

So, who gets best dressed?  I flirted with naming Heidi Klum, but she's not even an actress.  So while she looked great, I just can't do it.  Instead, I am totally shocking myself and going with Hilary Swank.  I mean, she actually looked like she had a vagina last night, which in itself is newsworthy!  Add great hair, a perfect dress, and Gary Busey's teeth, and she looked fab.  Maybe I'm just scared she's going to beat me up...

Looks like you CAN take the girl out of the trailer park....

The Bad

You know, the more I gleaned through the photos, the worse some of these dresses got.  Still, only a couple of them were all out horrors - no swan dresses, tutus, or Diane Keaton this year leaves me with only a few choice dresses that made me barf in my mouth a little.

Probably the dress causing the most indecision is Marion Cotillard's white "mermaid" dress, with a number of critics applauding her for taking a risk in a rather unrisky year.   I thought it looked good up top but was just WAY too much on the bottom.  Kind of like a mullet of a dress, fish double entendre unintended.  The dress photographs ok, but watching her move on the red carpet made me just hate it.

Throw that dress back in the water!

Another fashion risk taker is newly minted Best Supporting Actress Tilda Swinton.  Her black, sack of a dress reminded me of Terence Stamp's General Zod wear in Superman II.  Yeah - anytime you are a lady being compared to Terence Stamp you've got issues.  I know I'll get crap for this, but I do love her flame of red hair - it's her thing, and only she can pull it off.  She could really take it to the next level (tasteful?) if she could learn to complement the hair with a dress that was avant garde yet beautiful...think virtually anything that Cate Blanchett pulls off.

Recycled Garbage Bags?

Oh - and just because I am feeling rather naughty, click here for the even more horrendous dress she wore to the BAFTA's.  To add insult to injury (and my misery), she was not only seen in public in this disgusting dress, but she was in this disgusting dress next to Cuba Gooding Jr.  Eew.

Worst throwback outfit goes to Cameron Diaz, who really needs to start reading this blog.  Cam - you are an amazing looking woman, with an awesome body.  Why do you do this to yourself year after year?  What's up with your consistent refusal to comb your mane before coming to these shows?  Add a dress that looked like something from a Miami Vice extra, and she is 3rd worst dress this year.

Like the curtains in a cheap Ft. Lauderdale Motel

On to 2nd worst dressed, and we have a tie.  Luckily, they are married.  No, I'm not going with Daniel Day-Lewis and Rebecca Miller.  Even though I probably should call him out for his nasty tux, I am sick of talking about him.  Nope, to me the worst dress twosome was John Travolta and Kelly Preston.  Preston's marigold dress probably looked great on the hanger, but it was too tight on her, looked awful on her skin, and popped in all the wrong ways on the red carpet.  As for Travolta, his tux was fine but he lands on the list because of his hair.  Seriously....what....was...that on top of his head?!  He's gone from the long-haired summer plugs to some sort of snap on plastic piece.  It was ridunk. 

Colonel Mustard, on the red carpet, with the hair plugs

Let's end, however with the dress that is causing the most derision this year.  Yes, I know that Rebecca Miller (wife of Daniel Day-Lewis, daughter of Arthur Miller) is not an actress.  She is a screenwriter, so I'm sticking with her as Worst Dressed any way.  Let's start down south and work our way up on this one.  The shoes are zebra-striped, which only looks good on zebras (and even then, the stripes only look ok at best...I mean, it's a bit much even on them, don't you think?).  Moving up, the bottom 3/4 of the dress would look beautiful - as wallpaper on an accent wall somewhere in a New England parlor room.  The top is, I believe, made out of velvet (VELVET!) and festooned with a huge plastic-y looking gem that would give Luigi 10,000 points on the latest Super Mario Bros. game.  Finally, the nastiness is held up by bright red ribbons that match, well, nothing, and you have yourself the perfect recipe for red carpet nightmares.

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

And that's all he wrote on this one.  Thanks for sticking with me, and I will definitely be keeping this blog up to date.  Looking forward to hearing from all of you...come on up to NYC for a visit soon!

There Will Be Nominations...

…but will there be an Oscar Ceremony?  Damn Writer’s Strike!  I write this posting every year and no one pays ME any residuals!

BREAKING NEWS!  I cannot believe that Heath Ledger was found dead in an apartment (owned by Mary-Kate Olsen) here in NYC.  So strange how these things work, with the media obsessing over whether Britney or Amy Winehouse or Lindsay will die first.  He was definitely a talented guy - check out "Brokeback Mountain" to see him at his best.  imdb lists the upcoming Batman movie as his next film, and he was in the middle of filming something called "The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus" with Christopher Plummer.

Any way, welcome back to my somewhat defunct blog everyone!  As you can all very easily tell, I have not lived up to my 2007 promise of posting reviews of the many, many movies that James and I see.  Well, readers, that is going to change in 2008. 

This time I super promise to post reviews as we see movies.

In other news, we have moved to NYC since my last posting from lovely (but ultimately, very boring) New Haven, CT.  Basic reaction is DUH! – why the hell didn’t we move here sooner?  We are loving the city so far – especially the much easier access to every artsy fartsy movie that only comes out here and LA that no one else wants to see.  We’ve seen a couple, which I am lucky enough to mention due to their nominations this year. 

In particular, I was excited that “Persopolis” was nominated for Best Animated Film, though it will get crushed by “Ratatouille” – the Academy will just not know what to do with a black and white, 2-dimensional, autobiographical cartoon about a young woman’s experiences growing up in Iran.  My other personal “small” favorite is “Once” which is now out on video.  It was nominated for Best Original Song.  The film is about an Irish street performer who befriends and winds up recording an album with a wayward Czech woman.  It was AWESOME and it’s out on DVD.  You might wind up buying the CD the way we did immediately after seeing the movie!

And with that brief diatribe about lesser categories, on to the nominations!

Performance by an actress in a supporting role

·      Cate Blanchett in "I'm Not There"

·      Ruby Dee in "American Gangster"

·      Saoirse Ronan in "Atonement"

·      Amy Ryan in "Gone Baby Gone"

·      Tilda Swinton in "Michael Clayton"

As usual, this category has an assortment of nominees, from young (Saoirse Ronan) to old (Ruby Dee).  As expected, the quality nominees lie in between.  As is my usual custom, let's digest from least likely to most likely.

Saoirse Ronan is the annual nominee whose name is unpronounceable.  Thanks Saorirse - way to give Billy Bush nightmares for the next 6 weeks.  I wonder if she’s related to the great Mary Ronan, who is currently wandering around China somewhere.  Mary – you still with us?  Any way. Saoirse was good in "Atonement" - all precocious and freakishly emotive and all - but not going to win.

Ruby Dee is the emotional choice, i.e., the oldest candidate who is nominated precisely because she's old.  Remember the old bag from "Titanic?"  She's still alive by the way, unless imdb just doesn't bother updating her profile cuz know one cares.  Back to Ruby - she has like three lines in the movie...I vaguely remember her clapping at one point and maybe slapping Denzel Washington (she plays his ultimately disappointed mother in this ultimately disappointing film).  Not exactly the scenes Oscar is made of.  Don't bother crossing the strike lines to come to this one, Ruby.

Finally - on to the quality.  Firm dorks like me have loved Tilda Swinton for YEARS.  "Orlando" and "The Deep End" were both entirely driven by her brilliance.  She was pretty damn good in "Michael Clayton" as corporate counsel with questionable (at best) morals, but she is definitely choice number three.  I'll be pulling for her, however...

Amy Ryan has a much better shot at winning.  She has taken roughly 45% of the pre-Awards for what I'm told is a blistering performance in "Gone Baby Gone."  Sadly, my parents have seen this one yet James and I didn't even consider it.  Apparently, she plays a white trash, drug addicted, bad mom.  Hmmm...wonder who she's channeling there.  She also employs a spot-on Boston accent...big deal.  Anyway, she has a shot but likely will lose to Cate Blanchett.

That's right.  Cate Blanchett turns in yet another amazing, transformative performance in "I'm Not There."  Ok - so we haven't seen that yet either, but can we be blamed?  It's a movie about Bob Dylan in which different actors play Dylan at different times in his life...including Blanchett when Dylan was in his 'fro, leather jacket and sunglass days.  (I wasn't aware that he ever left that era, but what do I know?)  Anyway, anytime a lady plays a man (in a serious movie) or vice versa, the win is all but theirs.

Will Win:  Cate Blanchett

Should Win:  Tilda Swinton

Should have been nominated:  I guess one could make arguments for Helena Bonham Carter in "Sweeney Todd" had her singing voice been a tad stronger.  I’d advocate for two “Juno” ladies – Jennifer Garner for being the surprising heart of the film; Allison Janney for being freaking hilarious.

Performance by an actor in a supporting role

·      Casey Affleck in "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford"

·      Javier Bardem in "No Country for Old Men"

·      Philip Seymour Hoffman in "Charlie Wilson's War"

·      Hal Holbrook in "Into the Wild"

·      Tom Wilkinson in "Michael Clayton"

How the hell is "Michael Clayton" getting all of these nominations?  Seriously - the Academy must LOVE Law & Order more than my mother, because that movie was nothing more than a very special episode of L&O.  Anyway, I'm giving Tom Wilkinson the least likely to win award, despite his excellent turn as an attorney who either loses his sanity or finally finds clarity.  Let it be noted that my least likely to win last year was Alan Arkin, who then went and won for "Little Miss Sunshine."  If you really like him, rent "In the Bedroom" - a film that I have mentioned in this e-mail/blog post every year since it came out.

In 4th place, we have Philip Seymour Hoffman for "Charlie Wilson's War."  Three reasons here - no one saw the movie, he just won Best Actor two years ago for "Capote," and his best work this year was in my favorite movie of the year, "The Savages."

Finally - an Affleck that can act!  Next up is Casey Affleck's breakout performance in that movie with a hella long title.  Again, a movie that no one saw, though those who DID see it kept talking about how freaking good he was in it.  He portrays the unlikely man who assassinated the first celebrity criminal, Jesse James.  This will be a definite rental for us when it comes out.  James is looking forward to the shut eye already.

A distant second goes to Hal Holbrook for another movie that no one saw (anyone catching on to the common thread with the nominations in this category?).  From what I'm told, he is gives a great performance but does not even enter the film until 2/3 of the way into it, and this one is a LONG one.  I think he basically plays an old guy who encounters the young traveler in this film – doesn’t seem like a stretch to me!

They might as well just give the award right now to Javier Bardem.  His villainous assassin is one of those roles that haunts the viewer for weeks afterwards.  In addition, the film has a shot at Best Picture AND he is a previous nominee.  See this movie, and you will see one of the best performances in any category this year!

Will and Should Win: Javier Bardem

Should have been nominated:  I would substitute Tom Wilkinson for Josh Brolin, from "No Country for Old Men."  Some may argue for John Travolta in "Hairspray" but I thought he was awful!

Performance by an actress in a leading role

·      Cate Blanchett in "Elizabeth: The Golden Age"

·      Julie Christie in "Away from Her"

·      Marion Cotillard in "La Vie en Rose"

·      Laura Linney in "The Savages"

·      Ellen Page in "Juno"

As usual - Best.  Category.  Ever.  Only one "WTF" nominee leaving for GREAT choices.  There is a clear favorite already, but I'm holding out for a miracle!

Least likely is probably Blanchett.  "Elizabeth 2" is the worst reviewed film to ever receive a nomination for Best Actress ( a fact I admittedly stole from another blog...I'm not THAT dorky).  I'm sure she was excellent in this crappy move that never should have been made.  Her Oscars for "I'm Not There" and "The Aviator" should keep her nice a warm though.  Side note - how is it that Cate Blanchett will now have TWO Oscars and Kate Winslet, 4-time Academy Award Nominee Ms. Julianne Moore and Laura Linney have none?  I mean, she's good but I have yet to see her lead a great film (other than the original "Elizabeth") the way the aforementioned have, time after time.

Unfortunately, Ms. Linney should win for her brilliant work in "The Savages" but she won't.  Let me say it again - Best Movie of the Year.  I hope it finds an audience on DVD!  Anyway, she plays one third of an incredibly dysfunctional father-daughter-son trio that deals with the aging process in hilarious and heart-breaking ways.  SEE THIS MOVIE, and you may be praying for the same miracle I am!

Ok - enough (for now...I will never give up!) about Laura Linney.  On to next least likely, who actually has a shot.  Ellen Page was great in “Juno,” this year’s little engine that could.  I fear that her role, as a sarcastic, pregnant teenager who is considering adoption, may be one dimensional, though.  I really don’t think she’ll take it unless “Juno” really starts to take off.

Page lost the Golden Globe for Best Actress Comedy/Musical to the requisite foreign nominee, Marion Cotillard from “Ma Vie en Rose.”  Anyone who tells you that they paid to see this movie is a liar.  I’m sure it’s good, and I have no doubt that she is amazing.  She will get votes, as the people who vote get free screeners of the films and will want to feel smart by nominating a French film.  Alas, the award is guaranteed to go to Julie Christie.

What a story Ms. Christie is.  She last won in 1965 for “Darling,” and has not been relevant since 1997’s “Afterglow.”  Amazing to think that she still has it and more importantly that there are still roles of this quality being written for women at her age (thanks to the director/writer of this film, Sarah Polley, who is a talented actress in her own right).  Christie plays an Alzheimer’s patient slipping into complete dementia.  Definitely the stuff Oscar is made of!

Will Win:  Julie Christie

Should Win:  Laura Linney – duh!

Should have been nominated:  Lots of great female performances this year, including Angelina Jolie in “A Mighty Heart,” Amy Adams for her dead pan portrayal of a Disney Princess in “Enchanted,” Nikki Blonsky in “Hairspray,” and Keira Knightly in “Atonement.”  LOVE that there were so many great roles this year for the ladies!

Performance by an actor in a leading role

·      George Clooney in "Michael Clayton"

·      Daniel Day-Lewis in "There Will Be Blood"

·      Johnny Depp in "Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street"

·      Tommy Lee Jones in "In the Valley of Elah"

·      Viggo Mortensen in "Eastern Promises"

Definitely the most interesting category, with the widest array of performances ever.  The best news is that we don’t have a single male nominee who is playing an actual person, so no more Idi Amin’s, Truman Capote’s, or Ray Charles’ to muck the category up with a masterfully mimicked performance.

I’m going with Tommy Lee Jones in last place.  “Elah” was supposed to be the Iraq war movie that we would all appreciate, yet we just were not willing to give it a shot.  Maybe on DVD.  Anyway, he is supposedly wonderful as a father investigating what happened to his son in Iraq.

Fourth place goes to my favorite male performance in the category, Viggo Mortensen in “Eastern Promises.”  Had this movie been released in December, more people would have been talking about his great work as a Russian mobster who may just be up to good instead of evil (instead of what they’re STILL talking about, the rather floppy full frontal nude fight scene Mortensen “bravely” filmed for the role).

Gotta give 3^rd to George Clooney for “Michael Clayton.”  If you ask me, this is the least deserving of all nominations – Clooney phoned it in to play the “fixer” at a law firm with personal problems of his own.  At the same time, the freaking Academy AND Hollywood just can’t get enough Clooney…wouldn’t be surprised if he gets enough votes from his friends to snatch this one away.

Second place goes to the long overdue Johnny Depp.  He turns in another great performance in a role that would never even remotely be considered for award show honors in lesser hands.  His wronged barber seething with revenge is just too out there to ultimately take Oscar, however he does have a Golden Globe win AND the actor-learns-how-to-sing for the role going for him.  Wouldn’t be such a shock, except…

…Daniel freaking Day-Lewis is nominated.  Personally, I am not a fan.  He is basically this generation’s Al Pacino – lots of yelling and over-acting, all “I live as the character for three months before shooting – who is Daniel?” and shit.  In this overdone role, he plays a ruthless turn-of-the-century business man who does so many unscrupulous things throughout the course of this tortuously long film that I stopped caring (except to laugh at some of the ridiculousness) about halfway through.  PRECISELY the stuff Oscar loves, for some reason!

Will Win:  I!  AM!  DANIEL!  DAY!  LEWIS!

Should Win:  Viggo Mortensen

Should have been nominated:  Would have LOVED to have seen Philip Seymour Hoffman for “The Savages” here – he matched Laura Linney note-for-note yet was somehow ignored.  James McEvoy in “Atonement” was also good, though I would have though he would be up for Best Supporting rather than Best Actor (which, I suspect, ultimately killed his chances here). 

Best Director

·      "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," Julian Schnabel

·      "Juno," Jason Reitman

·      "Michael Clayton," Tony Gilroy

·      "No Country for Old Men," Joel Coen and Ethan Coen

·      "There Will Be Blood," Paul Thomas Anderson

Best motion picture of the year

·      "Atonement"

·      "Juno"

·      "Michael Clayton"

·      "No Country for Old Men"

·      “There Will Be Blood”

Look – I have a real job and stuff so I am going to keep this one short.  Plus, I’ve at least touched on most of these films.  The ones I have not are “Diving Bell and the Butterfly” and “Atonement.”  Both are dead in the water due to a lack of crossover nominations between the Director and Best Picture categories.  “Atonement” is particularly screwed, as the Academy just doesn’t like to give Best Picture to a film that could have directed itself.  As for “Diving Bell,” I’m told it is quite an achievement, so it will get some votes but will not win.

That leaves two long shots and two nominees in a dead-heat.  “Juno” is the “fun” film of the year – its win is its nomination.  “Michael Clayton” is an even more surprising nominee – cannot believe it got so many nominations, but I believe it will come away entirely empty handed.

So we have one movie that I really liked (but admittedly did not “get” all of) with “No Country for Old Men” and one that I just did NOT like with “There Will Be Blood.”  Both are modern takes on the Western, a genre that usually leaves me extremely annoyed.  Neck and neck at this point, but I’m going with my heart on this one and hoping that “No Country” will take it.

Will Win (and should win, with these nominees):  “No Country for Old Men”

Should have been nominated:  “The Savages,” “Persepolis,” “Pan’s Labyrinth” – ok, that one came out in 2006 but I still loved it!

SO I may or may not be back with a wrap-up on February 25 – there is talk that the ceremony may (GASP!) be cancelled a la this year’s Globes ceremony or pushed back into March, so who knows at this point.  Until then, I hope to post some more reviews on the latest in the theaters.  I’d love to hear your comments – feel free to post a response if you are so inclined!

One of these Queens is not like the others...

Wow – what a show. Let me start off my writing how very wrong I was about this show. I have been telling everyone for weeks how predictable this show was going to be…how wrong I was For the first time in a long time, we had some major surprises in some major categories – sometimes lovely surprises, sometimes disappointing.

Also for the first time since I can remember, we did not host an Oscar party this year. After hosting Oscar night parties for the past ten years in locales as diverse as Carlisle, PA and Washington, DC, this year James and I watched the big show solo from our lovely apartment in New Haven. Nice, but I think I prefer to have some peeps over to celebrate the big night and get bitchy with us.

Anyway, on to the show. Per my usual, we’ll cover the show first and then the fashion. Holla.

The Show

First of all, let’s discuss Ellen. I thought she was GREAT. Her opening was typical Ellen humor, which definitely worked for the event in my opinion. Her velvet maroon suit with white shoes (WAY pre-Memorial Day, I might add) was DIE-sgusting, but whatever. No “ANTM” (America’s Next Top Model, for those of you are straight men and/or over 32) for Ellen, but hopefully a return engagement for future telecasts.

Overall, I have to say that I enjoyed some of the new additions to the show. I really liked how they started by having all of the nominees stand – I enjoyed watching the nominees cross aisles to congratulate each other. It seemed oddly genuine for Hollywood. Other new additions to the show that I liked included the dancers that worked behind a screen to form silhouettes of an Oscar and “Happy Feet” penguins, and the original song number by Will Ferrell (btw…“Stranger than Fiction” was hella good), Jack Black, and John C. Reilly.

What didn’t I like? Well, there were the usual miscellaneous clip packages that clogged up the show. One program claims there were 45 minutes of clips packages…ridiculous. Also, why they had Celine on to sing a song that’s not even from a movie was beyond me. The show reminds me of a quote that my cashier at Shaw’s Supermarket said a couple of weeks ago to the woman in front of me in line…“Take your time….but hurry up.” This from the same 60+ year old woman that told me she was excited to watch the Super Bowl so that she could “watch me some hot ass.” Awesome.

Anyway, we finally got to an award that I actually cared about, we had our first big surprise of the evening. You see, Best Supporting Actor was supposed to go to Eddie Murphy. Everyone has been talking about how this award has been his to lose since December. Well, lose he did - to Alan Arkin, from “Little Miss Sunshine (hereby referred to as “LMS”).” Alan Arkin? Just five weeks ago, I gave him the 5th most likely chance of winning the award….out of five nominees. What happened? Two things….first of all, it looks like releasing “Norbit” when the ballots were still out may have been good for box office, but not so good for Oscar. I’d say, “maybe next year, Eddie,” but sadly this was probably his only shot. Second of all, “LMS” has been doing nothing except gaining steam since December, while “Dreamgirls” hit its high on premiere night. Personally, I was gunning for Djimon Hounsou. Whatev – the surprise was fun.

Several more awards later (what was the “wo”man who accepted Best Costume Design wearing? Yeesh!) we finally made it the next notable surprise. Unfortunately, this time, the surprise sucked because it was in the Best Foreign Film category. After two lesser wins for “Pan’s Labyrinth” it seemed unstoppable. Unfortunately, some German movie that I’d never heard of until last week somehow beat it. Scheisse! Maybe the German movie was good, but there’s NO WAY it was “Pan’s Labyrinth” good. Germans ruin everything….

So now with two surprises under its belt, we came to the Best Supporting Actress category. And I am telling you, this one has had Jennifer Hudson’s name written on it since she was cast as Effie a year ago. It’s no secret that I’ve been pulling for her as well, however I was definitely concerned that one of the Babel biotches or maybe little Abigail Breslin might slip in there. Luckily for all of us, Ms. Hudson is now Academy Award Winner Jennifer Hudson. Her speech was one of genuine surprise (maybe she was feeling the heat from all the surprises too?), which may be why she pulled a Kelly Clarkson and forgot to thank “American Idol” (despite telling Barbara Wawa before the show that she would). She DID, however, get out a last second shout out to Jennifer Holliday, who originated the role of Effie on Broadway 20 years ago.

Best documentary – “An Inconvenient Truth” won. Sadly, I didn’t see any of the nominees this year, though I would like to catch both the winner and “Jesus Camp,” a film that flirts with the concept of the evangelical brainwashing of our youth. Interesting concept indeed. I was also psyched for Melissa Etheridge’s win for “I Need to Wake Up,” her original song from “An Inconvenient Truth.”

7 hours later, we finally had another award. Ooh – interesting debate topic. During the annual “In Memoriam” clip package of Hollywood folks who have passed away this year, do you think Anna Nicole Smith should have been featured? I vote yes, the Academy voted no. Discuss.

Ok, so the awards. Best Actress to Helen Mirren/Best Actor to Forest Whitaker. The only surprise there was Forest Whitaker’s amazingly coherent speech, after 429 “ums” and 583 “you know’s” during his Golden Globes speech.

Best Director? Martin Scorsese for “The Departed.” Look – the guy is a great director, or at least WAS a great director. I’ll agree that he should have one an award a long time ago…like 30 years ago. I will NOT agree that he should have won for directing a remake of a film called “Internal Affairs” that was made in Hong Kong in 2002.

Furthermore, I was even more dismayed at “The Departed’s” win for Best Picture. Though not the strongest list of nominees this year (where was “Pan’s Labyrinth?”), I just don’t like that a remake won. Plus I don’t understand Hollywood’s (and my mother’s) fascination with mobster movies. Whatever…move to Staten Island if that’s what you’re looking for….

Enough about the show….time for the fashion!

The Fashion

Look kids – this isn’t easy. I spend all day watching the E! Pre-coverage, follow that with the “official” 2-hour “Live from the Red Carpet” on Oscar night, and then combed through the online pictures all night…all to prove to you that what I’m writing is so well-freakin’ researched that it’s practically fact.

So about that E! coverage…when in the hell are they going to hire Joan and Melissa back? Seriously…with the exception of giving Kathy Griffin a shot at the job (and the firing her for what? Being too funny?), E! continues to bring out its cavalcade of idiots to attempt “serious” interviews with the stars. Seacrest is Ok, but just try and tell me that you prefer him over Joan’s hilariously fumbled attempts at talking to stars. One to def lose for next year is Debbie Matenopoulos. She is disgusting inside and out…her proud admission of never eating, just to look like that, has officially set the women’s lib movement back at least 10 years - something I thought only Ann Coulter was capable of. Thanks Debbie! I hope you’re making 70 cents to every Seacrest dollar.

Enough about the coverage…onto the dresses!

This year’s fashion themes seemed to be weird hair (J Lo, Elisabeth Shue (didn’t know she was still with us, but always love to see her!, Rachel Weisz, Cameron Diaz – I could go on and on), tackily shiny fabric (Jennifer Hudson’s Erin Alderette-fashioned bolero comes to mind, as does Emily Blunt’s 1997 Jack Martins Jetta Blue nightmare). Check out the color on Emily’s, and then just try and tell me it doesn’t remind you of my old car:

**Note - after clicking on the links, please click on the "Back" button on your browser to be brought back to this blog. Thanks!**

Emily's " 97 Blue Jetta" mis-step

Anyway, let’s do some of the best dressed before I move onto the the bitchalicious Worst Dressed ladies.

Best Dressed

Rough year here – VERY few stood out. What we had is basically an extremely mediocre year in my opinion, but I’ll do what I can. As usual, I’ll skip the men and focus solely on the ladies.

Let’s start with Penelope Cruz. Now, I’m not saying that she was a best dressed, but I have to give her props for trying. I’ve heard many differing opinions, from stating that she was best dressed, to hating the stucco swirls on the top but loving the feathers on the bottom, to hating the feathery mess on the bottom and loving the corseted top. My opinion? Loved the bottom, hated the top but it’s grown on me. Check it out for yourself:

Penelope - hot or not?

Now that we’ve gotten that over with, let’s talk about third best dressed. This year, I’m going with Reese Witherspoon. James doesn’t like her bangs, but I think she is banging in this one. Seems to me that the whole point of this particular number is to say to the world, “Ryan who?” Kudos Reese.

Reese's rrrruffles have rrrrridges

Runner-up in this category has got to be Kate Winslet. Why? Because I love her. Yes, I admit that I’m totally biased here, but I still thought she looked smashing. Loved the color on her – sea green on but ass English white just looks classy (interestingly, the same color also looked good on Beyonce’s slightly overcooked ensemble). The shape, the fit….marvelous!

Will someone PLEASE give this woman an Oscar already?!

Finally, best dressed of the evening. Was it even a contest? As usual, no. I’m not sure how she does it, but once again Cate Blanchett has come shining through with quite an outfit indeed. Let’s face it – neither Kate W. nor Cate B. fit the typical mold of Hollywood beauty, but damn if they both don’t use what they momma gave ‘em better than anyone else. Cate’s one shouldered, metallic, beaded delight was far and away the winner in a very weak night.

Cate shines as the Belle of the Ball

Now onto the fun stuff….Worst Dressed!

As usual, many, many ladies apparently have lost their damn minds this year. I mean, come on…is it THAT hard to just look average instead of idiotic? Seriously folks, though we have no Bjork swan dresses or Uma Thurman lederhosen, we continue to have more misses than even a Fundamentalist Mormon could handle.

Let’s start off with who I WOULD have listed a Worst Dressed. Unfortunately, Kelly Preston’s outfit was so hideous that I couldn’t find a shot of it anywhere on the entire world wide web. Let’s just say that it was freaking leopard print from heads to toe…think of something that only Pizazz of the Misfits (you know, the “evil” band from Jem and the Holograms) might wear. Or maybe a 73 year old widow in Boca who still thinks she’s got it. Seriously, it was the drag to her husband John’s queen. Gross. BUT, since there is no photographic evidence of this fabrically tragical event, Kelly cannot win the honor of Worst Dressed this year.

BREAKING NEWS (3.8.07) - many of you have sent pics of Ms. Preston in her Boca, blue plate special worst.  She is now WORST DRESSED!

Someone kill this dress now

So who else was in the running? Well, 10 or not, Abigail Breslin’s outfit was a disaster. I’m all for a 10 year old dressing appropriately and not trying to look like an adult. That doesn’t mean I can support this vile Easter basket gone wrong. Seriously, she looks like a waffle with flower barfed all over it. Back to the stylist, Abigail. As for you, readers, no comments on me picking at a 10 year old. No one forced her into show business, save her likely moneygrubbing stage parents. Now, because she’s not even a teenager yet, I will spare her from the top (or is it bottom) three list this time. No guarantees going forward.

Abigail's Easter Massacre

Ok, so third worst dressed has got to be Jennifer Hudson. SUCH a disappointment – I mean, we’re talking about the “IT” girl of the night, and she shows up wearing this? Let’s start with the aluminum foil wrapped around her shoulders. Worst accessory at the Oscars since Ellen last brought Anne Heche. STILL hate her, but I digress. Anyway, the rest of the dress was blah. Not a fan of pocketed dresses on the runway, not a fan of poo poo brown anywhere…just a miss from La Hudson. She should have stuck with something more like what she performed in later, or ANY of the outfits she wore at the other 482 awards shows she went to this year.

Jennifer's Gum Wrapper Disaster

Second worst dressed has got to be James’ girl, Anne Hathaway, Regular readers, and/or anyone who has ever talked to James about Anne, will know that he can’t stand her. What I couldn’t stand is this dress. Why, oh why would ANYONE older than 7 or younger than 207 wear a doily in public? Maybe Anne was making her First Communion yesterday or something, though it seems odd to try and do that on Oscar Night. Anywho, had she stopped there I might have been able to ignore it entirely. But. She. Didn’t. Nope – she chose a dress that had a huge clack bow sewn into it. Why? Who the hell knows. Along with some of life’s other great mysteries (How many licks to the center of a tootsie roll pop? Why is “According to Jim” still on TV, and who in their right mind has ever watched it? Will Miss Julianne Moore finally win the Oscar she deserves?), this black bow can only be described a phenomena that knows no answer.

Anne's Doily Bowed Failure

So now to worst dressed. Oh, how the once mighty have fallen Kirsten Dunst. How ironic, that some of our worst dressed lasses (Hathaway, Emily Blunt, and now Dunst) come from the two most fashionable films of the year (“The Devil Wears Prada” and “Marie Antoinette”). Kirsten probably should have snagged something from costuming, rather than pick out this horrendous disaster. NOTHING works on this…not the bib-like top that might as well have a huge red lobster printed on it, nor the color contrasted with her pasty skin tone/bleachy hair/ho red lipstick combo, not the wispy feathering towards the bottom….nothing. Kirsten babe – love ya, but you are the official loser of the night. Better luck next year!

Kirsten's Interview with a Bad Dress

Ok – so that’s all from me. Hope you enjoyed. Ooh – my goal is to keep this going as I catch new movies throughout the year. Stick with me ladies and gents…instead of “see ya next year,” how about “see ya next movie” instead?!