Sunday, 18 October 2009

February 23, 2009 An Oscar Review from the last 10 years, by Unesco Nobel

Only seen Milk and Slumdog, but Milk is 10 times the film Slumdog is.

All four other films are worthier winners than the empty and vapid blandity of No Country For Old Men. Seen it three times, first time I fell asleep, other times I wish I had.

Have not seen Iwo Jima. The Queen and Babel are only solid films, but still better than the festering pile of shite that is The Departed. A 5 year old could have written that film. Little Miss Sunshine is the stand out piece of genius from that list.

Fell asleep during Capote, and have not seen Good Night and Good Luck. That said Munich is a good movie with one of the most amazing and powerful pieces of cinematography I have ever seen (the sex/kidnap juxtaposition scene), and Brokeback mountain is an excellent film. Both tower above Crash, which suffers from the Pulp Fiction "we don't really need a story, just chuck in a load of (not at all) interesting characters and people will care" syndrome.

It literally hurts my soul that Million Dollar Baby won an Oscar. This was the start of the malaise, the current bad streak, and what a start. I wish I had fallen asleep - oh, for the comforts of the land of nod that Capote and No Country For Old Men provided, rather than the stale and fetid turd of canned manipulative emotion and shitty, unengaging dialogue and action that characterise this film. Ray was passable, though still not Oscar worthy, and I can't claim to have seen The Aviator, Finding Neverland or Sideways, but I find it hard to believe that none of those three is better than Million Dollar Baby...

2000-2003 marked a good streak for the Academy.

American Beauty is a very good film. In most years, I would not have contested its place as an Oscar winner. But the Green Mile is a work of absolute cinematic majesty, and all those involved can feel justifiedly robbed, even if by such a staunch contender as American Beauty.

However much love I harbour for Shakespeare, Saving Private Ryan is one of the finest war movies ever made. Shakespeare in Love is an above average rom-com. The difference in comparison to the rest of their respective genres alone should make Saving Private Ryan the clear choice, let alone the direct comparison between the films. I haven't seen La Vita E Bella all the way through, but, by reputation alone, it may well also be a challenger.

From 1998-2007, the Oscars are 4 from 10. We can only hope for better form this time round...
Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. Jimmy K18 October 2009 at 06:39

    James Kent

    I hate being right >.<

    There’s not a single category where Slumdog actually deserved to win:

    Best Picture – Milk is just better.

    Best Director – van Sant did a better job than Danny Boyle (Trainspotting = another massively overrated film).

    Best Adapted Screenplay – Haven’t seen any of the others, but I highly doubt that none of them is better…

    Cinematography – I’m sorry, what? You’ve actually got to be kidding me to say the cinematography in Slumdog is better than the Dark Knight.

    Sound mixing – see cinematography

    Film editing – see sound mixing

    Best Original Score – how the hell was Dark Knight not nominated for this anyway? I found the Slumdog score poorly chosen, grating, overbearing and cynical. Wall-E’s score is simply superior, perfectly evoking senses of wonder, amusement, danger, sadness, isolation or anything whenever it wanted to.

    Best Original Song – no Mamma Mia track nominated? The Wall-E song isn’t great, but it’s better than anything in the Slumdog soundtrack.

    23 Feb 2009, 12:14

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jimmy K18 October 2009 at 06:43

    Sam Foxman
    Just a brief comment, I'm not convinced that Mamma Mia tracks are likely to qualify as original songs.
    23 February at 18:12

    Sami Kent
    You have used Unesco Nobel's name in vain - mistake.
    23 February at 20:12

    Jimmy Kent
    In vain how? He is reviewing the reviews (that's what Oscars are, after all)...
    23 February at 21:04

    Sam Foxman
    He's not really reviewing the reviews though. He's reviewing the films themselves and suggesting alternative winners. He is, in effect, simply reviewing. Seems out of character.
    23 February at 21:22

    Jimmy Kent
    But in reviewing the reviewers, he must show how they have erred, and how, had they reviewed correctly, they would have chosen :P
    23 February at 21:58

    Sam Foxman
    No. That would be re-reviewing the reviewed. He deals only in meta-review, so he reviews a review. If he were looking at the Oscars he might hand out an 'award for the best Oscars Ceremony' or he might judge the judges of the academy. But he wouldn't go back to the films, I don't think. It's not relevant. It's not meta.
    23 February at 22:00

    Jimmy Kent
    Except that the best Oscar ceremony would be the best in virtue of choosing the right films, at least in part, as would be the judgement of the judges. Them getting it right is part of the performance. It is relevant, because in reviewing the meta, the original thing reviewed is logically relevant...
    23 February at 22:06

    Sami Kent
    Ok, yes, but really no.

    Simply, you are not Unesco Nobel.
    23 February at 22:08

    Adam Kent
    Unesco won't like this, not one bit.

    Also, why are you falling asleep through so many films? And what is the real difference between a film like the Departed and Saving Private Ryan? The setting? The emotional side is pretty similar, really.

    And the Green Mile fits perfectly into your description of Million Dollar Baby. Ohhh, the magic negro is Jesus! What an original and not hackneyed idea!
    24 February at 22:16

    Sami Kent
    I didn't really want to get involved but whatever.
    Clearly, you have not seen enough of the films here to make a solid judgement on each of the years.
    But more importantly:
    If you think that the Oscars are handed out by the votes and judgments by whoever the voters and judges are, then essentially you're asserting your opinions on an art form over others'. If you do not agree with the prize-winners, then clearly your film taste is not mainstream and you therefore should not care enough to write a facebook rant about such a mainstream event as the Oscars.
    Or if you believe that the whole thing is a bit corrupt and the winners of the prizes in no way reflect the quality of the work, then the conclusion is the same, and you shouldn't care about the Oscars.... Read more
    An event like this is only as legitimate and prestigious as the people want it to be, so stop caring and start pitying the people involved who so long for some superficial recognition of their work.
    24 February at 22:46

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jimmy K18 October 2009 at 06:44

    Jimmy Kent
    The difference between Saving Private Ryan and the Departed? Stronger performances, better dialogue, writing, and characterisation, better cinematography, better music... Need I continue?

    And I didn't mention the premise as part of my dislike of Million Dollar Baby, nor part of my like for Green Mile, but, while we're on it, setting the magical ... Read morenegro on death row, accused of murder, that's not a fusion you see every day (even if the Jesus negro and the innocent man on death row are more common). Furthermore, the emotion in Green Mile, while somewhat arguably maipulative (though I don't find it so), is not canned, nor undermined by awful performances from Swank and Eastwood. Nor is the dialogue poor or the action unengaging.

    Million Dollar Baby and this year are the only years when I haven't seen at least all but one of the films on offer, so how is that not enough to make a solid judgement?
    25 February at 00:40

    Jimmy Kent
    Your logic is based on the idea that the Oscars are consistent in their choices, either consistently mainstream or consistently corrupt. The fact is they do sometimes get it right, and even if you're right about my opinions lining up with the mainstream, I don't see why that entails that I shouldn't care, nor that I shouldn't want the Oscars to ... Read morealign to my tastes. Yes, I'm asserting my art opinions over others - that's what the majority of aesthetic discussion is. It's equally true of the Oscars as they are now - if they were just based on popularity, ticket and DVD sales would be the only judging criterion. By picking a particular film, the Oscars are saying "you should like this film more than any other this year".
    25 February at 00:43

    Sam Foxman
    That's not what they're saying though. The 'Best Picture' Oscar is not awarded to the one that people will like the most. That's not the criteria of bestness. That's also not the criteria of bestness that you're using.

    Doesn't the fact that the majority of aesthetic discussion is the assertion of opinions make such discussion pretty valueless?
    25 February at 01:46

    Jimmy Kent
    I said should, not will - it's a normative claim.

    And objective no, but not pointless or valueless. I still enjoy aesthetic discussion (obviously, given my module choice) despite it's obvious subjective difficulties.
    25 February at 01:59

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)