Tonight, Hollywood’s annual shindig will own the Kodak Theatre. Oscar parties far-flung and near, informal and Academy-sanctioned (like tonight’s Denver Film Society’s “Rock With Oscar”) will get noisy.
Granted, it’s not always clear which superlative best applies to the Academy Awards.
Biggest night? Sure, but Oscar telecast viewership has been dipping for years.
Grandest night? Well . . . though their voters are scarce in numbers and credibility, those pesky Golden Globes sure reel in the stars for their party.
Let’s just hope Oscar isn’t the dullest.
Film Independent’s upstart Spirit Awards, which were to have taken place the day before Oscar, continue to be a tart, even ribald, affair full of stars, thanks to the ongoing indie crossover .
Until proven otherwise, doubts remain about this year’s Oscar host, Hugh Jackman. Yes, he’s a handsome song-and-dance man. But that sounds more Tony than Oscar. And in recent years, it’s felt like the actors who step up to the microphone to present awards or introduce nominated films aren’t Hollywood’s finest. They’re just folks with projects coming soonest to a multiplex near you.
Still, if Wolverine bursts into a medley honoring, say, the best picture nominees he’ll go a long way in rebuffing our worries. But before the show’s revamped set is unveiled, before the first acceptance speakers are nudged off the stage by the orchestra, there’s a different ritual to attend to: the should win/will win tango.
It’s an annual rite that treats the contest for best picture and sundry other categories as the most important debate of the moment. It’s not, of course — but what’s one long night of myopia?
Oscar-night history is littered with “shoulds” left sitting in their seats with forced, polite smiles.
Most recently, “Crash” beat “Brokeback Mountain.” Was it really the better movie? No — but in one sense, yes.
This same sense is coming into play with tonight’s best-picture race. It would be a shocker if 2008’s best movie, “Milk,” beat out Danny Boyle’s popular “Slumdog Millionaire.”
There were some rough reviews of “Crash,” Paul Haggis’ woven tale of urban bigotry and hope. And there were some harsh critiques of “Slumdog.” Yet audiences found their way to “Crash,” with the help of some critical raves, in particular Roger Ebert’s. Then they bore witness.
Over the past months, audiences also have been finding their way to “Slumdog.”
Although it comes from indie boutique Fox Searchlight, “Slumdog” does what we often crave from studio pictures. It invites us to escape into its story, this one about a poor orphan who suspiciously has all the answers to “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?” It is cast with brown-skinned actors, typically a trait that marks it as “indie.” But its payoff is wonderfully conventional.
The one thing un-Hollywood about it? It has no recognizable stars. As much as we love orphan Jamal K. Malik, many of us have to consult movie websites to find the actor’s name. It’s Dev Patel, and he’s since been cast in M. Night Shyamalan’s “The Last Airbender.”
If you think the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science’ 5,700-plus voting members don’t struggle with how the winners will reflect on their connection or disconnection to the ticket-buying public, you’re mistaken. They are constantly tussling with the glitzy, joyous and historical meaning of Hollywood.
So when you watch Hollywood celebrate itself this evening, consider that its “best” is subjective — but also self-aware.
Here are the nominees for best picture, in order of their chances of triumphing.
“Slumdog Millionaire”: Directed by Danny Boyle. Co-directed in India by Loveleen Tandan. Written by Simon Beaufoy from Vikas Swarup’s novel, “Q&A.”
The case for: The Dickensian poverty captured in nearly every frame of the film rattles and wounds. Yet it never topples the exuberance of this tale of a hopeful orphan who knows a lot of game show answers. It is the strangest of things: an escapist ride into the slums of Mumbai.
The case against: Critics complain that the movie betrays its darker observations — about child exploitation, gross poverty, civic corruption — by resolving Jamal’s story with so much sweetness, light and, yes, a Bollywood- style dance number.
“Milk”: Directed by Gus Van Sant. Written by Dustin Lance Black.
The case for: Few recent biopics capture the moment that begs a character to become heroic as well as this one does. Sean Penn’s performance as San Francisco city supervisor Harvey Milk, the nation’s first openly gay male elected official, is as spectacular as it is nuanced. But Penn isn’t alone. Josh Brolin’s Dan White (Milk’s and Mayor George Moscone’s assassin) is a compassionate portrait of a confused man who feels both entitled and denied.
The case against: As good as it is, the movie has yet to reach the broadest audience. Could this be a dispiriting sign that, as American a tale of heroism as “Milk” is, it has yet to break free from its label as a gay story, not a story for us all?
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”: Directed by David Fincher. Written by Eric Roth, based on the short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald.
The case for: Fincher exhibits his finest grasp yet of storytelling and the awesome machinery of the movies. This marvel about a man (Brad Pitt) who ages backward is an achy wonder.
The case against: Consider it the curious case of a box of chocolates. To many, the movie seems to owe much more to screenwriter Roth’s script for “Forrest Gump” than the jazz-era tale from which it took its name. If one of the most nominated movies in Oscar history turns any of its 13 nods into gold, it will be for the magicmaking categories of art direction, costume design, makeup and visual effects.
“The Reader”: Directed by Stephen Daldry. Written by David Hare and based on Bernhard Schlink’s novel.
The case for: There is a quiet eloquence in Daldry’s direction that allows the tale of Hanna Schmitz and Michael Berg to unfold with an intimacy suited to its erotic discomforts.
The case against: One of the best things it has going for it also works against it: Kate Winslet’s performance as the older woman who begins an affair with teen Berg only to disappear one day. Years later, he learns she was an S.S. guard. Some find its epiphanies infuriating and too pretty. Even though a survivor tells the adult Berg (Ralph Fiennes), “There is nothing to learn from the camps,” at times the movie appears to believe there is. Is it possible that it’s too uncomfortable to give a Holocaust film an award when it is the film’s complicated monster audiences find sympathetic?
“Frost/Nixon”: Directed by Ron Howard. Written by Peter Morgan, based on his original stage play.
The case for: What a crafted, thoughtful piece of moviemaking, with an impressive performance from lead Frank Langella. But then, we’ve come to expect quality from Howard. Think back to “A Beautiful Mind” and “Apollo 13”
The case against: What a crafted, thoughtful piece of moviemaking. But then, we’ve come to expect quality from Howard.
Film critic Lisa Kennedy: 303-954-1567 or lkennedy@denverpost.com; also on blogs.denverpostcom/madmoviegoer
Oscar Ballot
Best picture
Director
Original screenplay
Adapted screenplay
Actor in a leading role
Actress in a leading role
Actor in a supporting role
Actress in a supporting role
Foreign language film
Animated feature
Documentary feature
Documentary short
Short film – animated
Short film – live action
Original score
Original song
Art direction
Cinematography
Costume design
Makeup
Sound mixing
Sound editing
Visual effects
Film editing
