The Academy Awards Roundtable

I have to admit I love the Academy Awards and nothing can dampen my enthusiasm for them. If Rob Lowe singing to Snow White didn't turn me off for good, then you know I am a true fan. Perhaps even more than watching the Oscars, I love the debate the inevitably leads up to the Awards Ceremony each year. This year I decided to corral the two sharpest movie minds I know (not named Rebekah) and engaged in some spirited debate about who will and should win Sunday night. Joining me in my discussions are:

David Widdicombe – An award winning screenwriter and film director from Toronto.

Andre Theriault – Lives in Fredericton, life long cinefile, keen observer of popular culture and my partner in the annual Only Fabulous Oscar Party Thrown By Two Straight Guys.

Tony: Guys, welcome to the roundtable and thank you for joining me.

David and Andre: Thank you for having us, Tony. It is the highest honour simply to be discussing films in your presence (Ed. Note – I am assuming this is what they would say at this point so this isn't an exact quote)

BEST PICTURE

Tony: If you had asked me two months ago I would have said Avatar but right now I think you're looking at The Hurt Locker. I think that Avatar is losing a lot of buzz and The Hurt Locker is a film that has the gravitas that the Oscar voters look for. Kind of reminds me of when Shakespeare in Love knocked off the favourite Saving Private Ryan in 1999.

David: For some reason, some potential voters think Avatar is anti-American, in that it’s the futuristic Americans wanting to destroy what is essentially an Eden-esque third world planet. Others think it a very simplistic but very beautiful looking cartoon (and JC will kill you if you say that in front of him). And other voters just really really don’t want to make JC King of Anything again. Hurt Locker wins the silver naked man.

Andre: I have to also go with The Hurt Locker on this one. My problem with Avatar was that, while the movie looked good and had some cool 3D special effects, the story just didn't do it for me. The Hurt Locker had a loose plot, to be sure, but I thought it was really effective at building and then releasing tension, over and over again. Since Oscar ballots are weighted this year, I'd pick Up In The Air as my second choice. Unlike Tony, I like that the movie didn't end in a neat little wrapped up bow. I enjoyed the ambiguity and in the light of the characters involed, the ending made sense. After that, I'd pick Inglorious Basterds, because who doesn't like to see Nazis get beaten up with baseball bats?

Tony: It's funny, we all agree on The Hurt Locker but none of us are crazy about that pick. Regarding Up In The Air, I think had there been a stronger indication with the ending, it would have won best picture. It didn`t have to have an ending ``all wrapped up in a bow`` which is the classic Hollywood ending. If it had even a hopeful ending it would have been sufficient to provide the sense of narrative satisfaction for the audience. I get the sense Reitmann was afraid of a classic happy ending and by choosing the open ambiguous ending, he may have cost himself the Best Picture Oscar.

David: Something we’re forgetting is this year there are 10 Best Picture nominees as opposed to 5. This was something that they did in the thirties but now seems like a marketing ploy to help overall box office. Is it creating more buzz? No. Some of these films will not win a thing. But will they dilute votes for some of the favorites? The voting is changed too. Instead of just selecting one film, you select your first pick, second pick, and third pick. It’s conceivable that everybody’s third pick film could win Best Picture. So, conceivably something like District 9 could win by a total fluke. And then all hell will break loose.

Andre: Has anyone heard the news stories popping up around The Hurt Locker lately? A producer who actively campaigned for the film by dissing Avatar had his tickets taken away. Some soldier is suing saying that his life's story was the basis of the film. All of this in the two weeks before the Oscars. Is it a sabotage campaign against the film, or just bad luck? Also, I missed my chance to say that The Hurt locker is a really explosive film that delivers more bang for your buck. Look for my new blog, "Groaner Film Reviews" coming soon. It's boffo!

Tony: I have heard that. The guys seems like he`s nuts…even by Hollywood Producer standards. And I want to see the Groaner Film Reviews blog like yesterday. What would be your review of The Wolfman?

Andre: It bleeeeeeewwwwwwww! OR It was a howling good time!

David: This is interesting. If Avatar wins, it will be the highest-grossing Best Picture ever. If Hurt Locker wins, it will be the lowest-grossing Best Picture ever.

Tony: And no matter who wins, Gladiator will still be the least deserving Best Picture ever!

David: I disagree with that. I would argue that The Sound of Music, Gigi, The Greatest Show on Earth, My Fair Lady, Forrest Gump (the other nominees were better), Terms of Endearment (the other nominees were better), Out of Africa (the other nominees were better) were even more least deserving. If you look at what Gladiator was up against, it was a weak year. (anything that won that year would not be very deserving).

Tony: Yeah…well…shut up!

David No...you shut up!

Tony: I feel like this debate has taken a turn. Moving on...

BEST DIRECTOR


Andre: I'm going to regret saying this, but I think Katheryn Bigelow is a lock. Even other directors who are nominated in this category, like James Cameron and Jason Reitman, have said publicly that they'd like her to win. She's won the Director's Guild award, and that's usually a good sign of Oscar victory. Plus, no one wants to see James Cameron jump on on stage and tell everyone "I see you!" or declare himself the king of the world once again.

David: This is where you’ll see who wins the EX-WARS. Avatar will win a Titanic boat-load of technical awards, and look of the film combined with its box-office success has left studios scrambling to change many of their upcoming features into 3-D and IMAX. Avatar is a ground-breaking achievement that will change the movie-going experience forever. It is probably a more complicated exercise in directing than Hurt Locker. And no woman has ever won the directing prize. Still, Bigelow won the Directors Guild Award and only a handful of times has the winner of that not won the Oscar. And I can’t see Best Film not having the Best Director. If an African-American man can be President than a woman can be Best Director. The time they are a-changin’, and about time. Bigelow wins.

Tony: And a woman can be President but only on 24. I agree that the Ex-Wars is an interesting angle here. If I had a vote I would vote for Lee Daniels for Precious but my prediction is that Katheryn Bigelow wins it for The Hurt Locker. She has been doing well winning most of the major director awards this season and I see no change here.

BEST ACTRESS

Tony: Okay so two categories and we all agree. Can we maybe mix it up a little here? If Sandra Bullock wins for The Blind Side she can thank the "long overdue for one" phenomenon for the win. People seem to want to recognize her work and while her performance was very good, it is not in the same category as Meryl Streep's in Julie & Julia. Both Bullock and Streep played real life women. The difference is when I was watching Julie & Julia, I was seeing Julia Child up on the screen. When I watched The Blind Side I knew I was watching Sandra Bullock. Streep should and will win.

David: Is Meryl Streep the greatest actress of all time? Isn’t there anything this woman can’t do? Maybe we should not allow her to act anymore, but make her cure cancer or bring about world peace. She’d probably accomplish both – and with a spot-on accent of some kind. Still, this ain’t gonna be Meryl’s last kick at the can. It might be the only time that Sandy Bullock gets this close to the podium, and she gives her best performance to date. Remember Julia Roberts ditching the romantic comedy stuff and winning for Erin Brockovich? The same thing could happen here. Bullock is the sentimental favorite. However, I do agree with Tony. You’re seeing Sandy Bullock on the screen, with Streep you’re seeing Julia Child. It’s the British way of disappearing completely into a role versus the American way of playing a version of yourself. I would not bet money on this one. I would just say that sometimes….deserves got nothing to do with it.

Andre: Here's why I think Sandra Bullock wins over Meryl Streep in this category. Steep is an amazing actress, probably the best of her generation. But the Academy is no longer primarily made up of members of her generation. The acting part of the Academy is younger than ever and has been handing out Oscars to younger actresses. Sure, Helen Mirren won for The Queen, but in Oscar's defence, it's Helen Mirren. Sure she's nominated this year, but since she won so recently, I doubt she'll win again for a movie no one has seen. Kate Winslet, Reese Witherspoon, Hilary Swank, Charlize Theron, Nicole Kidman, and Halle Berry have all won in the past decade. And Meryl Streep has been nominated a record 178 times. Give someone else a turn.

Tony: I tip my hat to David for (a) agreeing with me and (b) referencing Unforgiven in the process. David brings up an interesting point. It seems that more and more there are other political factors in who wins. The gap between who will win and who should win seems to be growing. I'm seeing a lot of "...they'll give it to so and so because they've never won one". I've even heard people say Meryl Streep should not win because she's won enough already. I think if this trend continues it will spell the end of the Oscars credibility. Meryl Streep's performance was so far ahead of Sandra Bullock's that if she does not win I will consider it the greatest Oscar injustice since Ralph Fiennes was passed over for Schindlers list in favor of Tommie Lee Jones. Andre, when you say `give someone else a turn`` are you suggesting they will give someone else a turn or they should give someone else a turn. One name that`s not being mentioned is Carrey Mulligan for An Education. She did an amazing job in a really beautiful film. She deserves more attention than what she is getting.

Andre: Let me be clear. Do I think Sandra Bullock is a better actress than Meryl Streep? No. I like her, though, She's funny and charming and so darned cute. And yes, I'm saying the will give her a turn, not that they should. But don't forget the "Golden Globes" rule; any actress who goes topless in a film increases her chances of winning an Oscar. Halle Berry and Gwyneth Paltrow both showed off their Golden Globes the year they won. I haven't seen enough of the performances to see if any the actress nominees went topless this year. Maybe that'll be the deciding factor.

BEST ACTOR

David: It’s Jeff Bridges’ time. Just like it was Mickey Rourke’s time last year. Oh, wait. Weird things do happen. Morgan Freeman is playing Nelson Mandela and people love George Clooney. Still, this isn’t a case of giving it to Pacino for “Hoo-Ha” just because he’s never won it, or Newman for Color of Money when he really should have got it for The Verdict or a handful of other roles. Bridges is giving one of his best performances ever, even though reviews of the film itself have been mixed. In my opinion, this year for Best Actor, The Dude Will Abide.

Andre: Hey, remember last year when everyone said that grizzled old actor Mickey Roarke was a lock for the Best Actor award? And then remember how Sean Penn won for Milk instead? Does it scare anyone else that grizzled old actor Jeff Bridges is supposedly a lock for this year's award? Could Colin Firth win this year in a second "straight-actor-pays-gay-character" role? Could Jeremy Renner come up the middle in a Hurt Locker sweep? Can I write an entire paragraph made up of questions?

David: Andre brings up and interesting point about Colin Firth. Will gay Academy members give him their votes en masse? Will all the Brits vote for him as he is well liked? Could there be an upset here, the way there was last year with Penn beating Rourke? Bridges has won every award so far except the British Academy Award – where Firth beat him. However, Firth is not known in the States the way Penn is, so for that reason, I think Bridges still wins.

Tony: Pressure from the Gay Mafia notwithstanding, I really feel strongly that this is Jeff Bridges year with his performance in Crazy Heart. The role is one that Oscar loves, The washed up has-been who is inspired by meeting someone who reminds him what it was like when he was great. As you guys both pointed out, Mickey Roarke came close to winning one with a similar archetype with The Wrestler last year. Bridges also benefits from the "long overdue for one" phenomenon which is alive and well with the Oscar voters.


BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Tony: Mo'Nique. 'nuff said.

David: Agree with Tony. Anytime someone known for comedy pulls a 180 and surprises you with a hidden dramatic performance of devastating power (not to mention fearlessness for not being afraid to appear so monstrous), that person deserves to win. Nuff said.

Andre: I also say Mo'Nique. Why? Name any one of the other supporting actress nominees without Googling it. Take a minute. Can't do it? That's why.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

David: You know it’s absolutely criminal that Christopher Plummer has never been nominated for an Oscar before now. He’s eighty years old for Chrissakes. He definitely should have been nominated many times before and he probably should have won for his performance in The Insider. Well, hopefully he’s happy with the nomination, because unless it’s a sentimental old guy lifetime achievement award disguised as a supporting acting award (see Jack Palance/James Coburn), he ain’t winning. Christoph Waltz has won everything in this category so far and he’s gonna keep rolling over the competition to the Oscar win and eventually world domination.

Andre: If the Oscars are truly meant for rewarding the year's best performances, then yes, Christoph Waltz wins hands down. As soon as I saw Inglorious Basterds, I thought he would win the Oscar in this category. But sometimes, Oscar likes to reward nominees for a lifetime of work. Was Al Pacino's performance in Scent of a Woman Oscar-worthy? Probably not. But his performances as Michael Corleone were, and since he didn't win for those, boo-yah! So this year, there's a chance Christopher Plumber will win. I may be the only person who thinks this, but since he's never even been nominated, they may give him this as a lifetime achievement award. Don't be surprised if they start to say, "And the award goes to Cristoph... er Plumber", and then the Nazi guy has to sit down. After all, who deserves an Oscar more - a Nazi, or a guy who helped his singing children escape from the Nazis? Captain Von Trapp, that's who.

Tony: Here`s why I think it has to be Christoph Waltz. In Inglorious Basterds he acted in four languages (German, French, English, Italian). Now Christopher Plummer has been shafted by the Academy and in any other year I would think they would want to correct this. But how do you not recognize that performance by waltz. Be very surprised if it goes to anyone else.

EPILOGUE

Tony: Well guys that covers six major categories and 2,640 words. I think a solid effort for the first roundtable. I hope we can do this again soon.

David and Andre: Tony, in everyone`s life there is one small snippet of time that defines your entire existance and stands alone above all other life experiences. It goes without saying that for us, this is that life-defining event. We will be forever changed because of it. (Ed. Note: You can probably guess…)