The NominationsDisclaimer: IMDB is often not very accurate about upcoming films - wasn't it them who reported all the utter bollocks about the Gneil Beowulf? - but I do trust it on the Oscars front...
In order to fulfil my Oscars-related
101 in 1001 resolution, I'd have to see all the best picture nominees. This year, these are:
Babel (I was so not intending to bother)
The Departed
Letters from Iwo Jima (I'd rather it was Flags of Our Fathers, that looks more interesting to me, still)
Little Miss Sunshine (yay, an excuse!)
The Queen (feel somehow remiss in not having seen this already anyway)
I do feel a bit disappointed that I haven't seen any of these already. On the other hand, that is the point of the resolution. I'm sure I can bring myself to sit through Babel and Letters and I think I will really enjoy Little Miss Sunshine. The only problem is getting hold of them. Two of those aren't out in UK cinemas yet (at least I don't think so) and I think The Departed might be in between cinema and DVD release limbo still.
So should I attempt to hold out for a more obviously entertaining spread next year, in the full knowledge that there are always going to be depressing films on the list, or should I get off my arse and see Babel even though I'm convinced I won't enjoy it much? Probably the latter.
I have nothing much to say about the acting nominations, because I haven't seen most of the films. Except this: was it last year or the year before that everyone was complaining about the lack of nom-worthy female roles? Because I like this year's list. Also, five actresses - three Brits, a Mexican and Meryl Streep. Score.
Also, squee, Pan's Labyrinth (or more properly El Labirinto Del Fauno) is up for best original screenplay (I missed it in the cinema because I'm completely rubbish, but I can still squee). Not just a fantasy, but a Spanish-language fantasy. Squee.
And Borat is up for best adapted screenplay, which, uh? Adapted from what? Or is it just there because it didn't have a script as such? In which case, is it just the fictional nature of the presenter that's disqualified it from being under documentary?
There's a Chinese film up for costume design I've never heard of. It's called
Man cheng jin dai huang jin jia., or Curse of the Golden Flower in the UK. (Interestingly, it's either Autumn Remembrance or The City of Golden Armour in Hong Kong English). The IMDB review says it's not a kung-fu movie, but an intense drama about Imperial politics. And there's a discussion thread I can't be bothered to read called BEWARE: Communist Propaganda. That just makes me more interested...
... huh? Achievement in makeup: Apocalypto, Pan's Labyrinth, and... Click? WTF? I didn't see Click, it looked like shite. It was a 'comedy' about a man with a remote control so he could pause and rewind and fast forward the universe. According the trailer he mostly used this to look up women's skirts*. Oh, OK - maybe there was aging/de-aging makeup effects.
*although the looking up women's skirts and making their boobs bigger gags were the bulk of the Bruce Almighty trailer and actually I rather liked that one. It is Morgan Freeman's fault.
Visual effects: Pirates! Damn right. Guess percentage of Davy Jones was makeup? None at all. The entire dripping, wriggling, crusty facade was CG. Oh, but it's up against Superman Returns. Hmm. And Poseidon, but, surely they can't give it to Poseidon.