Best Picture
This category goes to the film that bests upholds stagnant art and the status quo of cultural and socioeconomic divide; however, don't be deceived in thinking the award is balanced. They always sneak in one or two art films to make you think "art" matters. The best films don't get nominated anyway because they don't have millions to waste on campaigns; and ironically enough, the American government works the same way.
Nominees:
"The Artist"
*Review Rending*
Mandatory Art Film. It has a chance to win because Hollywood films are so bad that industry execs rather glorify the past, instead of forging into an unknown, undiscovered future with stories, styles and genres by "outsiders."
Definition: Hollywood Outsiders - Non-westerners, People of Color, Poor People, Artists
"Tree of Life"
*Review Pending*
Mandatory Art Film. Terence Malick is too smart for the Oscars, so this film probably won't win. His films will always get nominated because his biggest supporters are smart actors (Brad Pitt, Sean Penn) who keep his work financed through attaching themselves. If not for major star support, Malick would be in the realm of David Lynch's self-distribution and DIY maverick filmmaking.
"The Descendents" *
Quick Review: Elitist, racist, inconsistent direction, screenplay and boooring performances. I've been to Hawaii and I swear there are more than 3 native Hawaiians . . . Does it fill some kind of ethnic quota if all of the Caucasian characters in the film claim their .0000001 % Hawaiian hertiage?? This was like watching the wealthy ancestors of John Smith and Pocahontas wallow in melodrama while barbecuing mahi mahi and wearing cargo shorts, flip flops and tropical shirts.
"The Help"
*Quick Review: You're supposed to think it's subversive and progressive, but it's actually just reinforcing the aforementioned "status quo of cultural and socioeconomic divide" in all facets of cinema and "the real world," as well. Do you ever wonder why Don Cheadle can't get his Miles Davis film produced and the Angela Davis story does not get produced, funded or even read. Why? The only facet of African-American history that is perceived as marketable to wide audiences has to involve racism, or else it's not authentic. But of course.... That explains why Tate Taylor was hired to adapt and direct the film. His previous short film is called, "Chicken Party," so of course he was the best choice to direct "The Help." Of course.
"Hugo" *Can we stop awarding subpar films by established directors just because they're still alive? " Are the voters still feeling guilty over not awarding "Taxi Driver" I promise you there are new films by daring directors out there. I promise you.
"Midnight in Paris."
*This falls into the same category as "Hugo." Old director with new faces and people get nostalgic and guilty for the classics made 20 years ago that were snubbed. See Allen's "Crimes and Misdemeanors."
"War Horse"
*Spielberg owns the Oscars. If he shat on a napkin and scanned it into 3D, it would probably get nominated for an Oscar. Last watchable Spielberg film? "Munich." Last good Spielberg film? "Schindler's List."
"Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close"
*Review Pending*
"Moneyball"
*Review Pending*
For our next meeting:
Remember, whatever should win Best Picture usually wins for Best Screenplay. That's the category to watch.
Quick Examples:
"Citizen Kane" lost Best Picture, but Won Best Original Screenplay in 1942
"Pulp Fiction" lost Best Picture, but Won Best Original Screenplay in 1995
"L.A. Confidential" lost Best Picture, but Won Best Adapted Screenplay in 1998
"Traffic" lost Best Picture, but Won Best Adapted Screenplay in 2001
Also . . .special thanks to Madonna for the pop culture resurgence of the word "reductive" and for dressing as a Baphomet for her Super Bowl performance. YVHV.
jce
