Previous Next

Plugged In

Currently Being Moderated
Paul_Asay
27

Oscar Nominees: We Like Them! We Really Like Them!

Posted by Paul_Asay on Jan 24, 2012 10:16:45 AM
oscars.JPGThe year's Academy Awards nominations were released this morning. Let me be honest: Since I've been doing this gig, I don't think I've seen a more positive collection of films in the running for Best Picture.

 

First, let's run down the nine nominees for Oscar's top honor: The Artist, The Descendants, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, The Help, Hugo, Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, The Tree of Life and War Horse.

 

The first obvious thing to note: Just one of the nine nominees is rated R (The Descendents). One. (And our reviewer Adam Holz even had some positive things to say about that R-rated outlier.) When was the last time that happened? No, really. I'm asking, 'cause I have no idea. Last year, I remember being pretty impressed with how positive the nominees were (relatively speaking), when six—more than half of the nominees, in other words—were rated R.

 

Now, this is not to say that these films don't have their share of content issues. They do. Nor does that mean that all these PG-13 films are made for a family audience. I can't imagine too many families flocking to Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris, quite frankly. And are all the middle school kids really clamoring to see the black-and-white, silent film The Artist?

 

And yet when you look at some of these movies (Hugo and War Horse are the most obvious examples), it seems like they were made with families in mind. This year punctures the myth that edgy content walks hand-in-hand with artistic merit. Family films can, as it turns out, be pretty excellent.

 

And that underlines another notable feature of this crop of nominees, at least for me: Lots of these are fantastic films—the best crop of nominees that I've seen since I've been working at Plugged In. It's not that they're just intellectually stimulating (like last year's The Social Network was). It's not just that they're communicating messages that I think the culture at large should hear and embrace (like, say, a Courageous). They moved me. They engaged me. And that's what films are designed to do.

 

War Horse, with its epic, old-school vibe, might be my favorite movie on the list (sorry, Adam's mom). Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close was the picture that moved me the most. I love the sheer artistic audacity of The Artist. And yet, if I had to pick my "best picture" out of the bunch? It'd probably be The Tree of Life—a beautifully spiritual dreamscape that, love it or hate it, tends to stick with you. Or at least it stuck with me.

 

Another thing to note: There's still a broad divide between these critically acclaimed movies and what most of us actually go and see. The biggest moneymaker on the list is The Help, a surprise $169.6 million phenomenon from late last summer. But even that didn't make 2011's Top 10 list of money-makers (it settled in at No. 13). That suggests to me that there's still a pretty big gulf between what people pay to see and what the Academy deems worth seeing.

 

But enough from me: I want to hear your thoughts. What did the Academy get right this year? Where did they whiff? And what about the other nominees? You think Meryl Streep will snag her third Oscar for her turn as The Iron Lady? And who in the world is Demián Bichir?

4,745 Views Twitter Facebook Tags: movie, awards, oscars, academy_awards, best_picture


Comments (27)
Add a comment Leave a comment on this blog post.
Jan 24, 2012 11:40 AM Guest YetAnotherTeen  says:
Not a movie on that list that I've seen, but three I want to. Notably Hugo, but I can't even tell if that's still in theaters any more, it hasn't been in any of the seven or so near here.
Jan 24, 2012 12:07 PM Guest Lisbeth  says:

Five Ways I Reacted to This Morning's Nominations:

 

1. "ROONEY MARA'S GOING TO THE OSCARS!!!!" (followed by the biggest scream I've ever let out of my mouth)

 

2. "Academy Award nominee Jonah Hill.  Academy Award nominee Kristen Wiig.  Academy Award nominee Melissa McCarthy.....Those are some words I never thought I'd hear".

 

3. "Look at those Best Picture nominees.  This is truly the year of the "feel-good" Oscar bait".

 

4. "Martin Scorsese better get that Oscar for Best Director".

 

5. "HARRY POTTER DIDN'T MAKE THE "BEST PICTURE" CUT!!!" (followed by a few shed tears)
Jan 24, 2012 12:11 PM Guest Christian  says:

I am just mad that harry Potter got snubbed for Best picture.....very sad....along iwht Andy Serkis being snubbed for his Motion Capture performance as Ceasar in "Apes" , he should have gotten a "Best actor/Supporting actor" nom.

 

I am glad that Rango got a "Best Animated Pic" though...cause even though Rango was a bit weird LOOKED amazing!!!!

 

I'm glad Hugo and The Artist are geting attenion, they are both great films!
Jan 24, 2012 12:24 PM kate kate    says:

I don't think the Academy nominated these movies because of their family-friendliness. Hugo and The Artist especially, hark back to the beginning of film-making so there's a bit of the nostalgia factor in their nominations. With the best picture nominees, only about half of them have a real chance of winning, the rest are just consolation prizes (particularly Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, which was shut-out from every other top category).

Personally, I hope Meryl Streep wins her third Oscar, she is nothing short of an icon. I mean, this is her 17th nomination, the most of any other person (dead or alive). I'm glad Gary Oldman got a nomination for Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, his first ever (if you can believe it).
Jan 24, 2012 12:44 PM Guest Steve  says:
The only movie on the list I've seen thus far is The Tree of Life. It wasn't the easiest movie to watch -- in fact, it takes careful attention and some intellectual work -- but I agree that it sticks with you. Many of the questions the film poses I've asked myself in quiet, reflective moments.
Jan 24, 2012 1:52 PM Guest Carol  says in response to YetAnotherTeen:
Am still waiting to see the Help, have tried to see Hugo more than once and it is playing - nowhere. Why?
Jan 24, 2012 3:50 PM Guest Peter  says:
I actually haven't seen (any) of these movies...Yet. All of them (except maybe The Descendants) are on my list of "Movies to Watch". I'm very pleased that the media has lately been bringing forth Well made, Good value, Entertaining Movies. There's still a good bit of junk out there (but I don't see how we can immediately help that). I hope Hollywood will take some pointers on what to make as far as purposefully good movies go.
Jan 24, 2012 4:27 PM Guest Anon  says:
To me, this is actually the most disappointing collection of Oscar nominees in recent memory. I don't think I've ever seen the nominees diverge so heavily from the collective critical opinion. No Drive, no Shame, no Take Shelter, what on earth is Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close doing here, and, most importantly, where is Andy Serkis!? In all seriousness, I can't recall ever seeing a nominee list I respect less.
Jan 24, 2012 7:20 PM Guest YetAnotherTeen  says in response to Carol:
To the best of my knowledge it was a limited theater release in the first place (about a third of the usual theaters a movie is released in), and never expanded in release.
Jan 24, 2012 7:42 PM Guest Debbie  says:
Paul, I personally think you should be given an Oscar for the absolutely brilliant title of this piece.  HILARIOUS!
Jan 24, 2012 9:23 PM Guest Louis  says:
Rango for Best Animated Feature and The Tree of Life for Best Picture. Please? Hugo and Moneyball are decent choices too.
Jan 24, 2012 9:29 PM C-Movie_Addict C-Movie_Addict    says:

I agree with Paul on this one. This list is very encouraging. It seems that Hollywood is getting better and better when they can put a film together that has good content and great cinmetography.

 

I personally like this this list because the films are actually ones that I will eventually see (minus The Descendants).

 

I have already seen The Help and War Horse and I would, when I have teens, watch them as a family.

 

I also agree with Paul when it comes to the lists lack of R-rated films. I remember in years past looking at the lists and thinking "which one can I see" and then finding that most of them have a bunch of needless junk that I don't want to see.

 

Right now I am rooting for The Help because my fam loved it so much and we own it on Blu-ray.
Jan 25, 2012 5:37 AM Guest Lisbeth  says in response to Debbie:
If I'm not mistaken, the title that Paul chose is an alteration of Albert Brooks' reaction to being snubbed for a Best Supporting Actor nod for his performance in "Drive".  Brooks tweeted, "To the Academy: You don't like me.  You really don't like me".  I don't know whether Paul's choosing of this particular title for the article was intentional or not but, Paul, I "really like" the Best Picture nominees as well, even though I've only seen one of them ("Hugo").
Jan 25, 2012 9:15 AM Guest Anon  says:
All the various responses to this a rather intriguing to me. I'm kinda curious: what do you think the role of the Academy Awards should be? Should they support movies they think the general public may not have seen and should? Should they support the films the public have already seen and appreciated? Should they support movies people enjoy over and above movies people respect (two different things to many, many people)? Or should they simply give the award to whoever most truly earned it, regardless of any other consideration? I personally am in the "earned it" camp, but I'm rather curious what y'all think here.
Jan 25, 2012 10:44 AM Guest Andrew  says in response to Anon:

I think that the Academy should pick films that are excellent regardless of whether they are popular or not.  However, what the Academy has often deemed excellent are films that, in my opinion, contain hopelessly pessimistic and cynical worldviews.  The Academy likes films that are raw, edgy, profane, and graphicly shocking.  I think that this is a sad mistake on their part.  Good films should be believably realistic, but they do not have to be as shocking and subversive as the most profane parts of real life.  This year's nominees are very encouraging because, from my perspective, none of the films on the list are as explicitly foul or pessimistic as they have been in previous years.  My list, for once, would have looked very similar to the Academy's list.  And trust me, this is the first time that this has been the case for me.

 

I was disappointed by Anon's post, because he seems to equate critical opinion with true excellence.  Drive and Shame were two films, in my opinion, exemplify the kinds of films that the academy has picked for Best Picture Nomination in the past.  They are cynical, dark, gritty, and nauseatingly foul with little or no positve elements.  Artistic merit aside (which I"m sure they have in abundance), a film needs some sort of moral compass or at least positive message  before it can be in my opinion, a great film.  Drive and Shame drift through horribly obscene parts of life, ask thought-provoking questions, shock us with their intensity, and then leave us feeling empty and hopeless.  Is that the the kind of film that we want to call the Best Picture of the year?  I surely hope not.

 

In contrast to Anon's opinion, I've never seen a list of Best Picture nominees that I respected more.
Jan 25, 2012 11:10 AM andy3193 andy3193    says in response to Anon:
Very disappointed Drive didnt get nominated. Really thought Gosling's performance and the overall originality of the story would get it one. I thought it definetly deserved a Best Picture Nomination. Also shocked that Andy Serkis didnt get a Best Actor Nomination for his role as Caesar in Rise of the Planet of the Apes. I was however happy to see that Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon and Rise of the Planet of the Apes both recieved nominations for Best Visual Effects.
Jan 25, 2012 2:36 PM library_girl library_girl    says:

I've seen The Help and War Horse - and I only saw War Horse because I won free tickets. :) None of the other ones interested me at all. The Help should TOTALLY win ALL the Oscars. Although Alan Rickman deserved a Supporting Actor nomination for Professor Snape's big scene in Harry Potter. Never in all my life have I cried that hard over something that wasn't "real". :P

 

My other picks are:

- Actor: Gary Oldman (not because I saw the movie, but because I like him)

- Actress: Viola Davis

- Supporting Actor: Kenneth Branagh (ditto)

- Supporting Actress: Jessica Chastain

- Music: John Williams for Tintin (should have gotten an animated movie nom too)

- Makeup: Harry Potter

- Costumes: Jane Eyre (such a sad movie, but so lavish)

- Cinematography: War Horse

- Art Direction: Harry Potter

- Visual Effects: Harry Potter
Jan 25, 2012 4:11 PM Guest Kristen  says in response to Lisbeth:

I'm showing my age.

"You like me! You really like me!" is a misquote of Sally Field's acceptance speech for "Places in the Heart" in 1984.  It has become an iconic, and oft-parodied acceptance speech reference.
Jan 25, 2012 6:24 PM Guest Larissa  says:
All I can think is, WAR HORSE!!!!! I haven't seen a lot of these movies, but I saw War Horse and I thought it was the most powerful film of the year, by a mile. The best film I've seen since Inception, and more moving than that. Honestly, I have never been so touched by a movie before. It was gorgeous and sad and realistic and just amazing... I don't think I've ever seen a movie that combined beauty and grit more successfully. I don't cry at movies -- well, maybe I sniffled after LOTR -- but I practically bawled the last 15 minutes of War Horse, the good kind of crying, because it earned the ending and ended exactly as it needed to end. And I own horses, so I know that a lot of the things it portrayed weren't realistic, but it didn't matter. It needs to win every category it was nominated for.
Jan 25, 2012 9:28 PM Guest Debbie  says in response to Lisbeth:

Yes, Kristen describes to what I was referring in my comment:  Sally Field's acceptance speech (possibly the most oft-quoted statement from the Oscars ever, I suppose).  I suppose I am also showing my age, Kristen, although I was only 8 or so then (but I have a good memory). 

 

But it sounds like it also could be as Lisbeth described.  Either way, it's just downright HILARIOUS!

 

Paul, what's the verdict?
Jan 26, 2012 8:31 AM Guest Paul Asay  says in response to Debbie:
Debbie, I was 15 when I heard Sally Field make her infamous acceptance speech, and it obviously made a deep impression on me. Thanks for the kudos, and thanks to everyone here for your really thoughtful, fun missives. You guys rock.
Jan 26, 2012 10:28 AM Guest Kristen.D  says in response to Paul Asay:
Split the difference (almost).  I was 11.  And I'm not even sure I even heard the original ;^).
Jan 28, 2012 1:30 PM Guest AE  says:

While I really like the new Best Picture nomination regulations, part of me wishes they would just add one more film to the list (to make it 10). Without a doubt, I believe that "The Muppets" (96% fresh) is well-deserving of a nomination. One of this year's biggest annoyances for me is "Bridesmaids." I am in a love-hate relationship with that movie. It left an impact on me with its humor, heart, but also with its crassness. I really don't understand why they didn't try to turn it into a "Baby Mama"-type comedy in regard to its content. Kristen Wiig is well-deserving for Original Screenplay (and Actress, I must add). The movie really just caused me to look at my choices and pray for their hearts in addition to mine.
Jan 29, 2012 7:01 AM Guest Doug  says:

I agree this is an impressive list of Best Picture nominees. I would swap out The Descendants or Extremely Loud... for Drive, but I realize that movie isn't exactly in the Academy's comfort zone. Of the rest of the nominaitons, I am most pleased with Gary Oldman finally getting a nod after years of solid work. Also pleased that Tree of Life got nominations for Picture and Director because they weren't expected.

 

My disappointments? Tilda Swinton (We Need to Talk About Kevin) and Michael Fassbender (Shame) getting snubbed. In my opinion they gave the best performances of the year. Fassbender was great in every film I saw him in this year (X-Men and Jane Eyre being the other two films) and his work in Shame was jaw dropping.
Feb 1, 2012 5:59 AM Guest Frankie  says in response to Anon:
Frankly, I'm happy to see the Academy put those 'smarter than thou' film critics in their place. There were a lot of excellent movies out there and yes there were critical darlings that were snubbed but a lot of times critics don't get it about a movie's greatness. A lot of movies achieved greatness via the crowds: like Gone With The Wind and Ben Hur. Mind you there have been masterpieces that have flopped, like Citizen Kane.
Feb 1, 2012 6:06 AM Guest Frankie  says:
Even though I feel family-friendliness shouldn't be a factor in terms of deciding excellence in movies, I'm glad to see that some of the best movies of the year were family-friendly and even Christian-friendly for the most part. It's weird because I'm from Generation X and we believed back in the 90's that art should push envelopes, art should challenge censorship barriers and the best artistic minds of all time were those that provoked the status quo. I guess that explains why we consider Pulp Fiction so beloved, or why we had such an admiration for film festivals like Sundance. And when you look at the nine Best Picture nominees, none of them looked interested in pushing envelopes. They looked like they wanted to put together a well-acted, well-directed, well-written, well-produced movie. And they did. And it just so happens that the best of the bunch this year were friendly for families.
Feb 2, 2012 7:30 PM Crossdive Crossdive    says:

The thing that gets me is that none of the super hero films of 2011 ("Thor", "Captain America: The First Avenger", "X-Men: First Class", and "Green Lantern") are getting real acknowledgment. Any one of them could've had a potential shot at a Best Visual Effects nomination, and its really off that not one of them made the cut, or got any attention elsewhere either. But then, award shows are typically 1 part quality-based and 3 parts agenda-based, so if those movies don't promote the things that they want promoted, their chances of being mentioned are hurt, and maybe we are still stuck in the muck of a 'super hero films are (inherently) not highly artistic and 'worthy' films' mentality in regards to the people doing the award shows.

 

That being said, however, the best picture nominees seem to be largely morally acceptable fair this year. While I am somewhat skeptical about "Midnight In Paris" and even "The Tree Of Life" to some degree or another (and would gladly welcome opinions on them from brothers and sisters who have seen them), the others are all movies I either have seen (and liked) or want to see.

Actions

Popular Blog Posts

Incoming Links