The majority of audience members usually know who is going to win before the big night goes down. However, it is always exciting when the academy decides to shake it up and shock movie buffs and critics alike.
“Slumdog Millionaire” managed to snag the Best Picture and Director Categories; this was expected if you had watched the build up before the Oscars filled with other award shows. Personally, I would have liked the voters to go for either “Milk” or “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” because it would have come from left field and made the show less predictable. However, “Slumdog” was a most worthy movie and I defend its greatness. A director who I felt was left out of the competition completely was Christopher Nolan of “The Dark Knight” phenomenon.
I narrowed it down to Sean Penn or Mickey Rourke for Best Leading Actor in a movie and was pleased that one of them received the title. Although Rourke’s struggles in life and Hollywood mirror his performance in “The Wrestler,” perhaps giving him the statue would have been too predictable. So I respect the final decision, except for the fact that Clint Eastwood for the throwback badass film “Gran Torino” was noticeably absent.
Kate Winslet’s award for Best Actress and Heath Ledger’s posthumous Best Supporting Actor were conclusive long ago, so no shock there. Thankfully, Penelope Cruz won the Supporting Actress division. I say thankfully because her performance was so emotionally raw and courageous for a Latin-American woman, an ethnicity that the Oscars usually choose to ignore, no matter how masterful the execution.
“Wall-E” winning was expected. However, the believed shoe-in for Best Foreign Film, the animated “Waltz With Bashir” lost to the seemingly unknown “Departures from Japan.” My second runner was France’s “The Class,” therefore this shocker made little sense to me and possibly a lot of others.
“Frost/Nixon” and “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” had the worst luck. Typically the Oscar only nominates about seven movies, and they take up numerous spots on the voting ballot. Personally I would have nixed “Frost/Nixon” from the competition early on for being far too overrated, which the voters ended up doing for me. Ron Howard’s “political force to be reckoned with” managed to win a total of zero golden men. “Benjamin Button,” did slightly better with a threesome of Oscar men. However, all its awards had to do with the visual effects (Best Makeup, Visual Effects, and Art Direction).
The predictable Oscars seemed to follow the continual pattern of generations before them- relying on previous award shows to select their front runner and follow through, unless they want to mix in something outrageous. Little-known movies rarely win, but if they do they win big. Release dates can either kill or revitalize a movie. And lastly, the names behind the movie are what count the most.
Now moving on to the host of the Oscars. Sexiest Man Alive/X-Men elite Wolverine was terrific in my opinion. How could you hate his multi-tasking charming opening and strong follow-through for the rest of the night? You could tell he was genuinely thrilled to be hosting, which is an element most hosts lack. Switching it up from stale comedians to a movie star with an edge was a daring move for both the Oscars and Jackman and made them both winners in their own sense.
With no golden stud to take home, at least the elite of Hollywood had a pricy grab bag of goodies to soak up their tears. Due to the economic crisis that certainly hasn’t inhibited these celebrities so far, price reduction was evident to even their eyes on Oscar night. Cubic zirconia jewelry was given instead of diamonds, and charity was even mentioned. However, the repeated “recession setbacks” must not have included ten thousand dollar exercise machines, ultra costly sunglasses, European handbags, “detox juice,” and couture clothes. It’s nice to see that you can never lose when you’re in Hollywood!