With fervent zeal they lobby for personal faves, dis Hollywood phonies, handicap the odds of the sassy newcomer beating the sentimental favorite or maybe just engage in catty talk on matters of celebrity dress and deportment.
In homage to this national pastime, NEWSWEEK’s Andrew B. Cohen asked a sampling of dedicated film enthusiasts with specialized interests–some of them highly specialized–for their views on this year’s Oscar derby: Who’s hot? Who was wrongfully ignored? And who should never be allowed to work again? Here are some of the responses:
I would like to commend the Academy for not nominating Adam Sandler for anything. Because, yes, “Mr. Deeds,” was an aggressive attack against all we hold dear, but also because it might have encouraged him to make more films, and we as a nation must take steps to ensure that this does not happen!
By not nominating “Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever,” the 2002 Antonio Banderas-Lucy Liu flick, the Academy put filmmakers on notice that unbelievably stupid film titles will not be tolerated. This was a wise and brave act.
I was glad to see that neither “Ghost Ship” nor “Below” were nominated for best picture. Since they are in fact the same film, the Academy would have had an embarrassing Milli Vanilli-ish situation on its hands.
Also, it was very smart for the Academy to pretend that “Rollerball” never happened.
And finally, a prediction: a sweep for “The Hot Chick.”
As a dermatologist who loves movies, certain nominees rise head and epidermis above the rest:
Best actor: Nicolas Cage in “Adaptation.” Not only is he a leading man with acne scarring, but he’s got male pattern hair loss and excessive sweating, too. Extra points for giving brave, unflattering, balding performances twice in the same film.
Best actress: A difficult decision. Each of these ladies shows significant lesions in their nominated films. Renee Zellweger: adult acne. Diane Lane: facial scar. Julianne Moore: sun spots. Nicole Kidman: The prosthetic nose, of course. But we favor Salma Hayek–not afraid to reveal her inner Frida. She represents hope to all those that share the fetching feature known as unibrow. Though she didn’t go so far as to replicate Kahlo’s mustache!
Supporting actor: John C. Reilly. Never has such dramatic acne scarring been converted into so many everyman roles. Four in one year? Who needs dermabrasion or laser resurfacing?
Supporting actress: Also a crowded field, but the winner for supporting actress with the most skin conditions? Far and away, it’s Welsh siren Catherine Zeta-Jones. In magazine pictures, we see a large neck scar, vaccine scar, adult acne, admitted tendency to hair thinning, sun damaged chest, and a leg birthmark. And yet, with the magic of movies, probably the most glamorous actress working today.
Best Picture: Though “Chicago” comes a close second, none of the nominated films can match “The Two Towers” for problem skin. Between heroes and villains, Middle Earth was covered with at least 20 characters in need of an epic makeover.
The Oscars never have much to do with a particular performance or movie. Does anyone other than the Oscar obsessives remember which movie got Jimmy Stewart his Oscar? Or for that matter, Elizabeth Taylor, Meryl Streep or Jack Nicholson? What matters is that forevermore in movie trailers (when did that start?) and appearances up through their obituaries they will be identified as “Oscar-winning,” something luminaries like Cary Grant, Alfred Hitchcock and Marilyn Monroe could not.
As usual, the most interesting awards this year will be in the supporting category. In leading roles, playing a disabled person, a criminal, or a lady who is not too particular about her boyfriends gets you halfway there. But the supporting performers are the ones who really deliver the thrillingly subtle, complex and indispensable performances. I loved Chris Cooper and Meryl Streep in “Adaptation,” Christopher Walken in “Catch Me if You Can,” Ed Harris in “The Hours,” and Kathy Bates in “About Schmidt.” I wish I could make the whole show about them. But no one would get all dressed up for that.
Tom Cotrel is an attorney in Burbank, Calif, and the creator of www.carchasefan.com
Only two film car chases come to mind from this past year: “The Bourne Identity” and “Die Another Day.” The former for its classic police chase format and the latter for its high-tech over-the-top theatrics. “Bourne” makes the best use of a Mini since 1969’s “The Italian Job” and “Die” gives Aston Martin the perfect comeback.
Best Picture: If 10 years ago you had gone to Jack Valenti and predicted, “One day a Best Picture Oscar will be awarded to a film in which Richard Gere dances,” he would have impaled himself on his dinner fork. For this reason, the Academy will award the Oscar to “Gangs of New York.”
Best Actor: It’s between [Jack] Nicholson and [Daniel] Day-Lewis. Unfortunately, Jack is dating Lara Flynn Boyle and Lara makes everybody really ill and nobody wants to witness that shot of Jack turning to Lara after he’s won and kissing somebody dressed like a hooker from the Addams Family.
Best Actress/Best Supporting Actress: This one is easy. Nicole Kidman gets the handicap vote or the “My left nose” award. And Julianne Moore is nominated in two categories. So, they’ll give Kidman Best Actress and Moore Best Supporting and nobody will complain.
Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen: “Gangs of New York” will win to compensate for the fact that it’s in the wrong category. The film is based on a book called “Gangs of New York” by Herbert Asbury, but apparently the Adapted Screenplay category was already filled up.
Since the Holocaust has become a cinematic genre by now, “The Pianist” certainly deserves the Oscar for best Holocaust film of 2002. I regret that I had to submit my manuscript for the updated third edition of “Indelible Shadows” by late 2001, as this powerful drama should have been among the 170 new titles I added since l989!
Playing a victimized Polish Jew, Adrien Brody is superb at conveying the basic realities of wartime hunger, thirst, fear and dependence. His finely understated performance is matched by Roman Polanski’s muted directing style: unlike his celebrated and “edgy” films from “Knife in the Water” to “Chinatown,” “The Pianist” has a classical sobriety.
The best foreign-language Holocaust film of 2002 was “Nowhere in Africa,” which has a good chance of winning the Oscar. It follows a Jewish family uprooted from Europe to colonial Kenya. All the characters are sharply drawn, and all of them grow through their relationships in the African landscape.
Quite surprisingly, I find myself in general agreement with what Oscar smiled on during this crazy awards season. There were some notable, popular exclusions–wither Richard Gere (“Chicago”), Dennis Quaid (“Far From Heaven”) and Peter Jackson (“The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”; what, it directed itself?)–but for the most part, I have to nod my head that for once, the members of the Academy got it right. But …
Best motion picture of the year: I’m torn between two: I loved the big-bold-brassiness of “Chicago,” and favor it for the Oscar; “The Hours” was moving and interesting, but slow–a trait the stuffy Academy goes for. But I wept for the non-inclusion of “Antwone Fisher.” Not because it was a great “black” film; it was a great film, period.
Performance by an actress in a leading role: I hate to keep repeating myself but, I find little fault in the nominations here. In “Far From Heaven,” Julianne Moore took “Pleasantville” and turned it on its darker ear. And Nicole Kidman equally rocked in “The Hours”; to describe her performance as “otherworldly” is an understatement. Guess we know where the talent was in that marriage, eh, Tom?
Performance by an actress in a supporting role: Kathy Bates took a gutsy (or should that be, breasty?) gamble in the otherwise atrocious “About Schmidt,” and it paid off for her. But no one rocked the house like the “Chicago” twosome of Queen Latifah and Catherine Zeta-Jones. I love me some Queen La, but Zeta-Jones’s surprisingly good hoofer skills should rule the day. Of course, Meryl Streep might have a little something to say about that….
Best documentary feature: I’d be completely shocked if “Bowling for Columbine,” Michael Moore’s scathing examination of the fear that has gripped America, doesn’t get the gold this year. But I have to scratch my head that the wonderful documentary “Standing in the Shadows of Motown” wasn’t even nominated. What’s wrong with those people?
Achievement in directing: Finally, I have a dream that one of these days, the Academy will get real and subtitle some of these nods, “Best ‘We Know This Wasn’t Your Best Effort, But Since We Didn’t Give You Your Due Before, This One’s for Your Body of Work’ Award.” Until then, we’ll have to pretend that Martin Scorsese’s “Gangs of New York” is the crowning achievement of his career.
