And the winner goes to. . .
The Academy Award Nominations were announced today, to the usual amount of fanfare we've come to love and expect with respect to the whole Oscar (tm) thing. Yeah, it's all a sham. Yeah, it's all a bunch of Hollywood politicking. But, well, people read this shit, so what the hell. Plus, as usual, there is more to all this than just the headlines are telling us.
First of all, let's get into which films and who wasn't included in all this. Well, one of the biggest names not on here is Michael Moore. His film Fahrenheit 9/11 made big headlines as political propaganda over the summer, but failed to get nominated for anything here. Mostly because he didn't submit it for Best Documentary category and decided, in fit of hubris fit for Icarus, only to submit for the Best Picture category, hoping his film would be loved enough by Hollywood and he could make another embarrassing speech at the Academy Awards presentation. Alas, he is nominated for nothing. Odds are, he blames the Bush family for making this happen. (BTW, you notice the man who complains most about them being wealthy and hating the wealthy in general makes more money off the Bush reign than Cheney does? Just a thought.) Also among the notable missing for Best Picture is The Passion of the Christ. Yes, it may have been anti-Semitic (varies depending on whom you ask). Yes, it was bizarre for being filmed in languages only a few thousand people speak. And, yes, Mel Gibson may be a bit of a kook for putting so much of his own money into a film about the final day of Christ. All this not withstading, it made a lot of money, provided an interesting look into the Gospels and was, as a film, technically well done. Yes, it was gory, but then so was The Godfather, and it got a lot of nominations in 1973. As was my favorite film Apocalypse Now in 1980. But really, what are the chances a movie with a predominantly religious theme is going to do well with Academy voters?
Well, there is a place that probably has odds on it. After all, they are showing that The Aviator is a favorite, by odds of 4/6, to win. Finding Neverland's odds don't look so good. Don't believe it? read it and weep. Want to see who will take Best Supporting Actor? Click here. And, of course, you can put some of your hard earned money down on all this. For a small fee, you can gamble on who will take home the most important Oscars. Of course, none of this betting actually covers who will be wearing what designers accoutrements to the affair. Now THAT could make for some interesting gambling. Maybe you could double down on whether or not someone was going to pop out of their attire.
Of course, none of this helps to fight the belief that this is all rigged anyway. Imagine if some entrepreneurial soul a la Arnold Rothstein came up with a way to make some REAL money off of all this. There are those who say Scorsese is due for a win simply because he has been nominated so many times. People said the same thing of Al Pacino when he was nominated for Scent of a Woman, without actually regarding for the fact that he was really good and gave one of his best performances of his life in that movie. And certainly the Liz Taylor story that she was unfairly snubbed for Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, but the Academy made up for it by giving her an Oscar for Butterfield 8 does nothing to stem the cliche. To many eyes, this is nothing but the Hollywood game paraded about for the commercial revenues.
At the end of the day, isn't this just all the cool kids in America strutting about and making us watch? Like some overblown, overpriced and overdone pep rally, we sit and watch while a bunch of people we like mostly only because we are some ways jealous of fight each other for a statue and recognition from peers. The rise of awards like The People's Choice Awards and others have given a stronger voice to the average man or woman in America about all this, but we're all supposed to love this one award show more than all others, yet it is the most rigged. A bunch of people sit around and decide whom they like best this year. While acclaim from peers is always nice, it just seems like it would mean more if it weren't surrounded by politics of all varieties. People wanting to use the podium to make pointles speeches. Performers doing everything they can and then some to get votes from the Academy. And all the Joan Rivers fashion politics about who wears what when and why. It would have more integrity if there weren't so much crap around it all.
Then the betting wouldn't seem to be out of place.
So it is written, so do I see it.
First of all, let's get into which films and who wasn't included in all this. Well, one of the biggest names not on here is Michael Moore. His film Fahrenheit 9/11 made big headlines as political propaganda over the summer, but failed to get nominated for anything here. Mostly because he didn't submit it for Best Documentary category and decided, in fit of hubris fit for Icarus, only to submit for the Best Picture category, hoping his film would be loved enough by Hollywood and he could make another embarrassing speech at the Academy Awards presentation. Alas, he is nominated for nothing. Odds are, he blames the Bush family for making this happen. (BTW, you notice the man who complains most about them being wealthy and hating the wealthy in general makes more money off the Bush reign than Cheney does? Just a thought.) Also among the notable missing for Best Picture is The Passion of the Christ. Yes, it may have been anti-Semitic (varies depending on whom you ask). Yes, it was bizarre for being filmed in languages only a few thousand people speak. And, yes, Mel Gibson may be a bit of a kook for putting so much of his own money into a film about the final day of Christ. All this not withstading, it made a lot of money, provided an interesting look into the Gospels and was, as a film, technically well done. Yes, it was gory, but then so was The Godfather, and it got a lot of nominations in 1973. As was my favorite film Apocalypse Now in 1980. But really, what are the chances a movie with a predominantly religious theme is going to do well with Academy voters?
Well, there is a place that probably has odds on it. After all, they are showing that The Aviator is a favorite, by odds of 4/6, to win. Finding Neverland's odds don't look so good. Don't believe it? read it and weep. Want to see who will take Best Supporting Actor? Click here. And, of course, you can put some of your hard earned money down on all this. For a small fee, you can gamble on who will take home the most important Oscars. Of course, none of this betting actually covers who will be wearing what designers accoutrements to the affair. Now THAT could make for some interesting gambling. Maybe you could double down on whether or not someone was going to pop out of their attire.
Of course, none of this helps to fight the belief that this is all rigged anyway. Imagine if some entrepreneurial soul a la Arnold Rothstein came up with a way to make some REAL money off of all this. There are those who say Scorsese is due for a win simply because he has been nominated so many times. People said the same thing of Al Pacino when he was nominated for Scent of a Woman, without actually regarding for the fact that he was really good and gave one of his best performances of his life in that movie. And certainly the Liz Taylor story that she was unfairly snubbed for Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, but the Academy made up for it by giving her an Oscar for Butterfield 8 does nothing to stem the cliche. To many eyes, this is nothing but the Hollywood game paraded about for the commercial revenues.
At the end of the day, isn't this just all the cool kids in America strutting about and making us watch? Like some overblown, overpriced and overdone pep rally, we sit and watch while a bunch of people we like mostly only because we are some ways jealous of fight each other for a statue and recognition from peers. The rise of awards like The People's Choice Awards and others have given a stronger voice to the average man or woman in America about all this, but we're all supposed to love this one award show more than all others, yet it is the most rigged. A bunch of people sit around and decide whom they like best this year. While acclaim from peers is always nice, it just seems like it would mean more if it weren't surrounded by politics of all varieties. People wanting to use the podium to make pointles speeches. Performers doing everything they can and then some to get votes from the Academy. And all the Joan Rivers fashion politics about who wears what when and why. It would have more integrity if there weren't so much crap around it all.
Then the betting wouldn't seem to be out of place.
So it is written, so do I see it.