Thursday, January 22, 2009

Oscar Noms 2009

I've said it before, I don't think an Acadamy Award is the be-all and end-all of a film's worth. Over the years, I have come to embrace the Oscar nominations as a nice list of films to see. Not only does it have the studio powerhouses and big names, but there's always that odd film I may not have seen on my own. It can be an unpredictable list. "My Oscar Project" involves seeing all of the nominated films outside of the documentaries, foreign and shorts (I am a realist). In the last few years, I have been able to sniff out that obscure film that gets a nod for costumes or makeup, but I always miss one or two. This year it was Hellboy II, nominated for makeup (last year it was Norbit *yikes*). I'm glad I took a chance and saw Australia and The Duchess, both nominated for costumes.

This year, out of the 26 films with nominations, I've seen 22. Two of the films I need to see are still in theaters and two I can see in DVD, so the goal is attainable. A fun time of year for me to be a film fan. Of course I'll have thoughts and opinions on who should win, but for now I'm just enjoying the opinion of "The Academy". So for all the objections and screams of "snubs", I just grab the list and say, "what movie do I see next?"


Anonymous said...

There's no denying that the roundup of nominees are deserving (although "The Reader", good as it is, screams Oscar bait). I agree that the Oscars aren't the end-all-be-all of a film's worth, because if they were, classics such as "Citizen Kane" would be banished into obscurity.

Still and all, it's nice to see great work get rewarded. But with the slap-in-the-face omission of Christopher Nolan's film, I'll be waiting for the results to be posted online.

Linda said...

V-Knowledge~Agree that Nolan should have received a nom, maybe he was number 6. That's a pretty impressive list. Be interesting to see who collects the gold guys.