RadioBDC Logo
Red Eyes | The War On Drugs Listen Live
 
 
< Back to front page Text size +

Oscar hearts Benjamin Button

Posted by Wesley Morris  January 22, 2009 04:34 PM

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

BenjaminButton.jpg
Oscar nominees Taraji P. Henson and Brad Pitt in "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

And now the nation's euphoria shifts, for a few minutes, from Obama to Oscar. The nominations are here, and, as these things go, they're pretty fascinating. Because the Academy needs a big, long, costumed spectacle (no, "Australia," not you), "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" wound up with 13 nominations, including picture, director for David Fincher (I'll pretend it's for "Zodiac"), and an actor nomination for Brad Pitt. This is a fascinating list, both for what's on it and what isn't. The Reader?" Really? It did better than at least I thought it would -- picture, director, screenplay, cinematography, and actress – which means there are a lot of people in Hollywood who take their Holocaust movies with a cup of tea. That, or they truly miss the film's producers Sydney Pollack and Anthony Minghella, both of whom died last year.

Meanwhile, "The Dark Knight," released by ailing Warner Bros, was too dark for these cautiously optimistic times, which, in part, is why "Slumdog Millionaire" received 10 nominations, including one for picture and another for director, while Batman and, to some extent, "WALL-E" are snubbed. (One's origins as a comic book and the other's being a cartoon should not be discounted, either.)

"Milk" feels like a movie of our moment, especially in the Academy’s California backyard, where tussling over the legalization of gay marriage continues. More important is the possibility that the Academy, this year, wants to see light amid the dark at this putatively hopeful juncture. Harvey Milk, for all practical purposes, represents Obaman social, cultural, and political change. While “Slumdog Millionaire” sends its camera careening through the ghettos, call centers, torture chambers, and corruptly hosted game shows of Mumbai to come back with the happy, if hardly front-page, news that love is all you need. Even “Frost/Nixon,” with its toothless, postlapsarian Tricky Dick suddenly seems to have a defensive bright side: Dude, the White House is in such better hands now.

The movie industry tends to skew liberal and sentimental – last year’s “There Will Be Blood”/”No Country for Old Men” combo notwithstanding. But you have to ask how Christopher Nolan’s “Dark Knight,” with its dystopic metropolis and neo-con homeland security ideas, might have been received under a McCain presidency. Oh, well. For now, it’s all good, as they say. Unless, of course, you happen to be Sally Hawkins, whose unstoppable optimism in “Happy-Go-Lucky” didn’t seem to cut it for the actors branch, which went with five comparatively somber performances for best actress. (Ok, four. “Doubt” is a comedy, right?)

Kate Winslet’s nomination for “The Reader” in that category, alongside Anne Hathaway, Angelina Jolie, Melissa Leo, and Meryl Streep, was also interesting. The people who arranged these awards campaigns saw that Winslet had two steaming prestige movies (“The Reader” and “Revolutionary Road”) hurtling toward earth – or at least toward the best actress category, where there’s room for only one performance per performer. Sensing disaster, Winslet’s work as a Nazi prison guard on trial was downgraded to a supporting part, which is like calling an SUV a big-wheel. That strategy won her two Golden Globes and two Screen Actors Guild nominations. The Academy, however, saw differently. Winslet was nominated for “The Reader” (the better of her two problematic performances) not “Revolutionary Road,” a movie whose only major nomination came for Michael Shannon, who almost literally brings the house down as a mental patient who visits Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio for dinner.

The poor showing for that movie suggests that it was probably too pristine for voters. It snagged nominations for art direction and costume design, apt acknowledgements that the director Sam Mendes had made a dollhouse of Richard Yates’s novel. Of course, if the Academy is averse to expensive-looking furniture dressed up as filmmaking, how does one explain “Frost/Nixon” or “The Reader”? Well, that’s important furniture. (“The Reader”’s most crucial nomination is for Chris Menges and Roger Deakins's cinematography.)

It’s interesting to note that the director of “The Reader,” Stephen Daldry, has made three movies (“Billy Elliot” and “The Hours” are the others) and now has three director nominations. This is a remarkable, unparalleled average. It’s also inexplicable. But Daldry excels at a certain kind of tastefulness that both audiences and an industry can admire. Of his movie, only “Billy Elliot” is alive with any kind filmmaking verve. These other two movies are triumphs of middlebrow self-congratulation: I’ve captured suffering, cooked it, and served it with a lime risotto.

Three of Daldry’s fellow nominees – Gus Van Sant, David Fincher, and Danny Boyle – have been recognized for some of their more accessible and popular work, which is hardly a crime. It's just very Oscar. In Van Sant’s case, he puts his brilliant avant-garde-film ideas to work in “Milk,” a rousing, unconventional act of movie biography that turns one man’s story into the story of a movement. Fincher directs up such a storm in “Benjamin Button” that choosing to bookend the movie with Hurricane Katrina’s approach seems redundant. And I prefer Boyle in a less hectic frame of mind (“28 Days Later” being a gonzo exception), but his movie, despite its script and character problems, at least brims with color and life.

More blathering to follow in the coming weeks. The actual broadcast – the 81st – is on February 22nd.

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

8 comments so far...
  1. I can't believe that Bruce Springsteen's track for 'The Wrestler' was overlooked. I mean, the songs picked were good ones (the Peter Gabriel one has my vote), but the Academy should consider a new rule when it comes to the Best Song category: one tune per film.

    Posted by Shawn January 22, 09 12:40 PM
  1. Here’s the deal on “Batman”: It was too long, pathetically reminiscent of a comic book and therefore ineligible for consideration for Best Pic. Sure, it was a good action movie for my 12 year old son, but if the manic licking of lips in clown makeup brings you to a higher place, have a party.

    Posted by i'mbatman January 22, 09 01:42 PM
  1. All the nominees are great however The Dark Knight was one of the greatest movies of the decade and the academy needs to recognize that.

    Posted by David January 22, 09 03:00 PM
  1. Wham! Bam!! Shazam!!! Holy Cow, Batophiles...Only the Cobain-like Ledger got a nod...off. It was greatly anticipated, not Oscar worthy.

    Posted by B. Ward January 22, 09 04:39 PM
  1. Ugh, I'm getting so sick of people saying the Dark Knight didn't deserve a nod because it's not "good" in comparison to the films nominated. The Dark Knight pushed its genre in a completely new direction. It actually took the idea of a super hero movie seriously. Did the "big" dramas do anything that significantly changed their genre? Of course not, because dramas are allowed to be completely formulaic and somehow still be considered "stunning." Yes, I agree that the Dark Knight is flawed, but at least it did something new and original (or as original as you're gonna get in a hero movie, or any hollywood movie). I would rant about Wall-e, but there's no more room.


    I would

    Posted by Margaret M. January 22, 09 05:59 PM
  1. I mistakenly expected the nominations to be a bit more diversified. They're not even trying anymore.
    I'm happy to see that Man On Wire was nominated for best documentary. I'm also happy to see The Dark Knight left out of most categories. I love all things Christopher Nolan, but this film was way over-rated, in my opinion. Check out Towelhead (Nothing Is Private) for a great Aaron Eckhart performance.

    Posted by Anthony January 23, 09 03:23 AM
  1. Button deserves the nod. It's themes of forgiveness, being in the moment, and letting go were all very poignant. I felt swept away on a spiritual level, which only Shawshank Redemption and Forrest Gump have done for me in the past. I am surprised that more people have not been moved by its story and message. Perhaps, we live in a culture and society that is too narcissistic, too egoistic, to appreciate a Buddhist-like message of impermanance, and the ever-changing ebb and flow of life that needs to be embraced. I wonder if this kind of message makes many feel uncomfortable because they aren't able to allow themselves to approach that mindset and way of being...

    Posted by Matt January 23, 09 09:12 AM
  1. The writer above who says that "The Dark Knight" is the first movie to take the comic book genre seriously might be confusing it with Tim Burton's "Batman" from 20 years ago. But maybe I'm dating myself.

    Posted by Peter Keough January 23, 09 10:52 AM
 

About Movie Nation

Movie news, reviews, and more.

Contributors

Ty Burr is a film critic with The Boston Globe.

Mark Feeney is an arts writer for The Boston Globe.

Janice Page is movies editor for The Boston Globe.

Tom Russo is a regular correspondent for the Movies section and writes a weekly column on DVD releases.

Katie McLeod is Boston.com's features editor.

Rachel Raczka is a producer for Lifestyle and Arts & Entertainment at Boston.com.

Emily Wright is an Arts & Entertainment producer for Boston.com.

Video: Movie reviews

Take 2 Movie Reviews
Take 2 reviews and podcast
Look for new reviews by Ty Burr and Wesley Morris at the end of each week in multiple formats.
  • AUDIO PODCAST:
  • VIDEO PODCAST:
archives

Browse this blog

by category