Monday, February 25, 2019

After Oscars

Guess I might as well write about last night's Oscars.

The overall show wasn't too inspiring, but having no host turned out to be not so bad.  At least it seemed to make the show go faster, and that's always a good thing. (The show still ran well over three hours.  Time to get rid of those songs.)

Anyway, Hollywood decided to share the wealth--of the eight films nominated for Best Picture, every single one won at least one Oscar.  (That's bad writing--I used the same sound three times in five words.)

I was pleasantly surprised that my two favorite films in the Best Picture category--Roma and Green Book--each won three prestigious awards.  Roma won for direction, cinematography (both for Alfonso Cuaron, who had quite a night--he won two Oscars for Gravity as well, by the way) and foreign language film.

Even bigger, the Academy ignored the silly controversies surrounding Green Book and gave it Oscars for supporting actor, original screenplay and best film.  I thought Richard E. Grant should win for supporting actor, but Mahershala Ali (who's won this award before) did a good job--even though he really was a co-lead with Viggo Mortensen. And Peter Farrelly, not even nominated for best director, still managed to win two Oscars for the film.

I wonder if winning the foreign language film award prevented Roma from winning the best picture Oscar--after all, how many awards does it need?  I also wonder how Peter Farrelly's brother Bobby feels?  They make a bunch of fine comedies together, and the first time his brother works alone he wins all these awards.

Black Panther also won three awards--all below the line.  But the biggest winner, by raw numbers, was Bohemian Rhapsody, which won four Oscars.  It won two for sound--maybe because the voters figured rock music is made up of sound so why not?  It also won for editing, which is weird because the editing seemed pretty poor.  Rami Malek won for best actor.  He did a good job, so it's hard to complain, though I wonder how many voters thought he did his own singing.

Both Malek and Olivia Colman, who won best actress for The Favourite, are better known for TV work.  Are they now movie stars?  Colman was a surprise winner, while her two co-stars, Emma Stone and Rachel Weisz, were competing against each other for best supporting actress and I assume split the vote, since Regina King won.  But it's okay, since both Stone and Weisz already have Oscars.

The biggest losers of the night were Amy Adams and Glenn Close.  Many thought Adams would win best supporting actress, and Close was considered a near-lock for best actress.  Between them, they have 13 acting nominations, and not a single win.

A lot of political speeches--it's now expected--and they were as tiresome (and occasionally incoherent) as usual.  Why does Hollywood figure because they're giving each other awards for artistry that they've suddenly become political experts?

Anyway, a bunch of people have bragging rights for the next year.

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

*If* the Academy is feeling political? I'm shocked RBG didn't win.

2:38 AM, February 25, 2019  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The political speeches are the only thing that make this tiresome trade association show bearable

6:09 AM, February 25, 2019  
Anonymous Eobard Thawne said...

I don't care about movies, but I always watch the Oscars to get political advice. My voting is based entirely on advocacy speeches given by actors.

12:35 PM, February 25, 2019  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eobard 2020!

5:01 PM, February 25, 2019  

Post a Comment

<< Home

web page hit counter