My full-length analysis of this year's contest - for those who actually enjoy reading my prattlings - is also online.
Last year, I went 4 for 5. I'm feeling pretty shaky about my last three picks this year. But then, I always feel unsure about something.
Your turn: gimme your picks. Where are the flaws in my logic? Is Seabiscuit better-loved than I thought? Is American Splendor a bigger deal than I guessed? Is my Lost in Translation pick wishful thinking? Feedback, please.
Someday, we'll do this for money.
CMM posted this on January 26, 2004
It is filed under Screen
It is also indexed with the following tags: Oscars
| Lists |
My bet? Seabiscuit beats out LIT by a nose. Didn't see the horseflick, but something tells me that they'll nominate LIT for director or screenplay but not best film.
Comment #1 :: link :: January 26, 2004 11:57 PMWell, I went 3 for 5, my weakest performance in four or five years. But what amazing surprises!
Several friends said yesterday that I was foolish to ignore Master and Commander, and they were right – it's in. Great movie, and I'm glad to be wrong on that.
But virtually everyone said I was on crack to be picking In America – and I was nearly proved right on that one. It picked up a slew of nominations, including two acting nods (go, Samantha Morton!) and screenplay. Even the morning-show pundits were stunned at how well it did.
Of course, "nearly" isn't good enough, and In America did prove my downfall, as did...holy Harvey Weinstein! Cold Mountain! Folks, sound the trumpets: MIRAMAX IS NOT IN THE BEST PICTURE RACE THIS YEAR. Never thought I'd see the day. Finally, karmic payback for Chocolat!
Okay, enough Tuesday-morning quarterbacking. Here are the final five Best Picture nominees, announced this morning by the Motion Picture Academy -- my missed picks are in caps:
Complete nominees are here. The awards will be handed out on 29 Feburary.
So, who, needs to catch up on movie-watching? I need to see City of God, along with Monster and 21 Grams...
Comment #2 :: link :: January 27, 2004 09:04 AMI wish they could give two Best Picture Awards. I'd go for Return of the King and Lost in Translation. I saw them in succession and was amazed by how completely they are polar opposites yet fabulous. They show the full range of what a movie can be. One is all majesty and action. The other is still, sublime and perfect. How can one judge between the two?
Comment #3 :: link :: January 27, 2004 09:44 AMHow about "The Return of the Lost King in Translation?" An elf and a dwarf find themselves at an inn in the Shire. Bemused by the strange ways of these short people, they form a strong bond of friendship. Then, nothing happens.
Comment #4 :: link :: January 27, 2004 10:20 AMWasn't that already done in "My Dinner With Aragorn?"
Comment #5 :: link :: January 27, 2004 11:58 AMEnnis forwarded me this link to early Oscar odds.
Pleasant surprises: Lost in Translation is given 5–1 odds to take Best Picture, not much worse than Mystic River's 3-1 (of course, RotK stands at 1–3, so it's all a moot point). And Bill Murray taking better odds than Sean Penn for Best Actor is a thrilling shock.
Apparently, the word after the Golden Globes (according to Jeffrey Wells) is that Sean Penn possibly screwed himself by not showing up to claim his Best Actor in a Drama prize, while Murray's appearance to pick up Best Actor in a Comedy – and his witty, sharp-tongued acceptance speech – may have vaulted him over Penn. O'course, Wells still thinks Penn is going all the way, and I sort of think so, too.
But I know who I'm rooting for – go Bill!
Comment #6 :: link :: January 28, 2004 10:46 AMAh, you're just rooting for him because he got dinged for "Rushmore"...
Comment #7 :: link :: January 28, 2004 11:35 AMDoes anyone remember Bill in "The Razor's Edge"? He was great, although because it was his first serious film, everytime he looked into the camera with that goofy face one expected him to crack a joke.
A must for your Netflix queues.
Comment #8 :: link :: January 28, 2004 01:36 PM
