definetly not the movie going audience.
My husband and I vowed to see as many of the nominated films and actors before the Academy Awards show as time would allow us. We've made this vow for the past four years. Unfortunately for us, this is the year that we actually got around to doing it.
We've seen 3 of the best picture nominees, 3 of the best actor nominees, 1 best actress nominee and 3 of the best director nominees. I am convince that the Hollywood film producers and production companies have schemed a brilliant PR campaign against the screen writers. Somehow, the producers have made sure that each nominated movie would be worse than the last, to the point that audiences would loudly demand the last three hours of their lives back, as well as the price of the tickets. (that would be the case for anyone unfortunate enough to sit through 'There Will be Blood'.).
The 3 best picture nominees we've seen would leave many people convinced that screen writers are bad people who don't deserve to be dealt with fairly, let alone be compensated for their work. Those Producers are dastardly, alright. They've sacrificed you and I, the audience, in their smear campaign against the poor writers. Believe me, if you go to see some of these movies, you will believe that no one actually wrote them.
Take for instance, 'There Will Be Blood'. I just wanted there to be a plot! The first fifteen minutes of the movie had zero dialogue, and those were the best fifteen minutes of the entire three hour ordeal. The credits said it was based on something by Upton Sinclair. I think his heirs may have a good lawsuit against the producers. And Daniel Day Lewis, who I've always liked (In the Name of the Father) is so bad that, in keeping with this scheme to turn off movie goers, he is nominated for Best Actor. He drags out each and every word he says in this film to the point you want to shake him. I started to think that the projector wasn't working properly. Maybe this was really supposed to be a two hour movie and Daniel Day Lewis was really speaking like a normal human being. I dunno.
Juno was another one that made me want to delete my own hearing. The main character was annoying, and so was every other characer in the film. My only hope is that the woman who wrote this one goes back to being a stripper. See! Those producer's are smart. They've got someone like me, who derides all things stripper, into WANTING someone to be a stripper. Besides, there is absolutely no way that this writer could ever get a job as an English teacher. Or even work in a fine ladies hat shop, like Eliza Doolittle.
Michael Clayton was actually an enjoyable movie to watch, and even the Producers couldn't make George Clooney turn in a bad performance. Actually, Clooney's performance is what makes the movie. As lawyers, my husband and I immediately found fault after plot killing fault with the story line and pronounced it just a step above the cheese that John Grisham unloads on us. But Clooney does make it an enjoyable, though mediocre, movie. And so far that should be enough to win.
Not a contender in the best picture catagory, though it should be in a real, non schemed up smear campaign Oscar race, is 'Eastern Promises'. Vigo Mortenson is up for Best Actor and should win it (which means he won't) The movie is haunting and his performance is fabulous. I keep thinking about the movie. It was certainly not a happy film, but it was multi layered and moving.
Well, we've got two more to see before The Oscars. I'm kind of hoping we get snowed in for the next two weeks and have to watch re runs of Entourage instead.