Inspired By Today's Oscar Reviews in the Comboxes: Some Final Oscar Thoughts

(Warning: Snark alert.)

I just posted the following over at Church of the Masses, and I thought it should bi-locate over here, since I never pass up the chance to put a "kick me" sign on my own back.

*****

Barbara and I argue about this all the time, but "dark movies" bring me, and other assorted weirdos, a feeling of consolation. The opening voiceover of "No Country for Old Men" made me feel great. Not because the world is in horrible shape, but because someone else knows it! The truth, no matter how horrible, always contains some degree of consolation for me. If nothing else, it validates my objective experience.

Aside from that, the Oscars are about CRAFT. The truth of the Oscars is that they began as, still are, and always will be an awards show for a company town. At the risk of sounding snarky, we get to have an awards show. Insurance companies do it. The rest of the world wants to see it because they want to see the dresses or because they want to see the actors or because it's like passing a car wreck...

But the fact remains, it's our awards show, and we have a right to have it. People who you don't know have a right to thank their families. It bothers me when I hear the Oscars trashed. There are always moments that deserve trashing, but they never fail to make me proud of what I do for a living.

William Goldman once asked an audience member, from a podium where he was speaking, "Did we make one movie this year that enriched your life?" The woman answered affirmatively. Goldman said, "We didn't have to."

*****

Regardless of your feeling about "dark movies," there is no arguing the fact that the movies nominated this year were excellent, in every category for which prizes were given.  It was one of the best years for cinematography in recent memory.  And the acting, directing, writing, editing, etc. on down the line were all the best the industry (and, arguably, the world) has to offer.

As for the show itself, it was a terrific production.  It was crisp and clean, it moved at a nice pace, there were no dance numbers that made you want to resign from the human race, and the entire look of it was classy and elegant.  John Stewart's opening monologue was exactly what it needed to be.  It was funny, it addressed the bloodbath from which the town and industry have just emerged, and -- biggest shock of all -- it managed to deal with all the political hysteria without beating up any one political party.  I mean, give me a break, the man made Democrats laugh at themselves. He deserves an Oscar for that!

The anti-war tirades, and other political rants, were limited to the documentary field and let's face it, it would take Jesus to put a dent in that.  The acceptance speeches were consistently coherent and many were even eloquent.

While I wasn't a big fan of most of the songs, they were very well done.  The orchestra was great and the costumes and choreography were not only elegant, but they were completely in keeping with the tone and design of the show.  And the clips from 80 years of movies were very well chosen and if they didn't move you, you must have been embalmed recently.

As the Oscars go, it was as close to a seamless garment as you're likely to get, in this day and age.  And a lot of people worked very hard to pull that off.  Something else to consider.

Now everyone can scream at me.  But I think those are points worth considering.

Comments

[Gina Dalfonzo]

I think you need to talk to the Pope! :-)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080225/ennew_afp/entertainmentfilmoscarsvatican_080225193855;_ylt=As7SyZp8ewGFnl4X4wknmJm2GL8C

(No disrespect to the Pope intended.)

[Gina Dalfonzo]

Let's try that again.

http://tinyurl.com/2tfzw7

[Karen]

I never consider comments from "the Vatican" to be comments from the Pope. I know better.

I would LOVE to talk to the Pope (or anyone else at the Vatican) about this subject. This year's crop of movies makes me wonder if Hollywood doesn't understand the current state of the world better than the Vatican does.

I have a feeling that the Pope understands very well, and also understands the possibility of redemption to be found in showing the audience a portrait of characters who are refusing it.

I've blogged this in regards to The Sopranos a lot. I feel very, very strongly about it.

I don't think I'd be a Catholic today if I hadn't read "The Exorcist" and seen the movie. One could make a very good case that that was not a "hopeful" story, regardless of the fact that a single demon left at the end.

And those kinds of movies are very powerful as cautionary tales.

I'm not saying that everyone should therefore go to see them. I am saying that they are absolutely not without value. Quite the contrary is the case.

If I wanted to be cranky, I would say that if the Vatican wants to see more hopeful movies, they would do well to give the people who make them a cardinal.

[joe]

Y'know, I've said the same thing (really!) about Pulp Fiction.

-J.

[Gina Dalfonzo]

My mistake; my Protestant mind sees "Vatican" and reads "Pope." In future I'll keep in mind that this is not necessarily the case.

[Clayton]

I just wish that Jesse James had garnered at least one award. It was such an incisive commentary on the culture of celebrity, the thirst for glory, and the razor-thin edge between idolizing someone and loathing them.

[Karen]

Clayton: I couldn't have said it better. And there is an ocean of proof that I have tried.

[Karen]

p.s. It has been awhile since I saw the movie, but I remember that I kept thinking of how much Casey Afleck's character reminded me of a pre-cannonball Ignatius of Loyola. Don't you think?

Especially when he is hurt and his caretaker DOES have the romantic fantasy novels. I wonder if Ron Hansen thought about that.

Jesse James ROCKS!

Joe C.

[Karen]

Thank you!

Indeed it does.

What an irony: Jesse James was robbed.

[mouse]

The Oscars are about Hollywood. That's why Hollywood likes them. I know you think they are about craft, but you are on the inside. If the Oscars WERE NOT ON TV, I'd believe you. But instead, the Oscars are all about dragging us outsiders to them. And as an outsider looking in, they aren't about craft or excellence. They are about Hollywood congratulating itself for Hollywood. Listen to the speeches. Look at the dresses. Watch the cameras. It's all about Hollywood.

You want an awards show? How cute. My industry has awards, too. But they don't televised, and yet everyone in my business still knows who the winners were.

Re: bleak movies: I believe you that they were excellent in their craft. So? Do I really need to see a better production version of Blood Simple? At 20, Blood Simple was stunning, eye opening, philosophical and stretching my mind. Now that I'm 35, it's a story of pathetic people behaving pathetically. They exist. Yup. Tell me something I don't know. I've lived enough pathology that I don't need to see the film. Most of us who live in this world may have already seen enough violence and felt enough darkness that we don't need more. At 20 I thought it was important. Now I see it's something to get beyond.

[mouse]

---The rest of the world wants to see it because they want to see the dresses or because they want to see the actors or because it's like passing a car wreck...

So it's not about craft to them. Funny, that.

But more the point, to the extent that it was about craft, less people cared this year than ever before. Doesn't that tell you something about your audience?

[Karen]

You have done a good job of making my points.

The Oscars on televised for the very simple reason that large numbers of people watch them. If the audience didn't exist, we would have our awards show at the Shrine Auditorium and we wouldn't subject you to the torture.

Now, if you're not one of the people who wants to watch them, I assume you know how to use a remote.

You want an awards show? How cute. My industry has awards, too. But they don't televised, and yet everyone in my business still knows who the winners were.

I don't know what your point is. It's not our fault that our industry is something of interest to outsiders. It's not our fault that you want to watch our awards banquet. It is made available to you. No one holds a gun to your head, and the people who want to have parties in their and participate in the experience can do so. What is the harm? I've spent my entire adult life asking this question and I have yet to get a decent answer: Who is making you watch?

So it's not about craft to them. Funny, that.

Again, what is your point? I don't expect an insurance claims adjustor to understand why "Juno" wasn't a good screenplay. (Even though the Academy was unable to figure that out. Seems to be the current mood of the country. If it feels good, vote for it.) The other awards were, for the most point, highly accurate. Movie-making is, for the people who do it for a living, not entirely subjective. We know how it's supposed to work and we know when what looks simple on the screen was actually incredibly difficult to pull off, etc. etc.

But more the point, to the extent that it was about craft, less people cared this year than ever before. Doesn't that tell you something about your audience?

Well, it tells me that the WGA strike might have confused people as to whether or not the Oscars were going to happen. And it tells me that a lot of people did not go to see the movies, because they weren't feel-good movies, which has absolutely nothing to do with craft. And that tells me that a lot of people are watching for reasons that have nothing to do with what the show is about.

But that doesn't bother me in the least. I don't have a problem with people who watch just to enjoy the actors to see what everyone is wearing. Nor do I have a problem with people have no interest in watching. I have a problem with people who watch and then rant about how bad it was and vent their frustration on all the evil and worthless people in "Hollywood."

Yes, preening goes on and people are shallow and make dumb speeches, etc. etc. But I'm sure it's like that at anybody's awards banquet. Like I said, we get to have our awards banquet like everyone else. The networks have a right to air it. The audience has a right to watch it. And you are both welcome and encouraged to turn it off if it is causing you distress.

[mj anderson]

The Oscar Awards discussion offers a great segue into the importance of Catholics (all Christians) learning how to tap the media of the era. Check Intermirifica, for example.

Pope Paul VI said he would sell the papal tiara for one good publication....point is that modern media--including movies/ TV are marvelous tools for truth telling, evangelization.

Pope John Paul II said that (this is a paraphrase) Catholics missed the boat when Gutenburg rolled out his invention--and we suffered for our myopia for 500 years.

The context of his remarks was the initiation of the Vatican's website. In short, we Catholics need to be IN the media business, not standing outside on the margins criticizing modern means of communication and entertainment.

There will always be naysayers about the any given year's crop of movies, and I often agree with their observations--but the medium is not at fault. We are. Where are the talented Catholic writers, directors, actors, producers?

[mj anderson]

oops--"context of his remark (singluar!) was..."

[Clayton]

Has Robert Ford entered the comments box, after an evening at the Oscars?