Bruce Cohen and Don Mischer

The challenge for the duo will be the venue itself. I personally worked the first four Oscars at the Kodak as the supervisor of event services. The atmosphere of the Oscars is a difficult thing to anticipate. The duo is going to have to be aware with what is going on in the world and, in my opinion, stay away from it. They need to remember that people are tuning in to see the stars, what they wear and who wins. They also need to be aware of how many films that are nominated have yet to be seen by the vast majority of the audience. That is going to be difficult. It is hard to keep an audience engaged on the awards when they haven’t seen a film. Either due to not being released by them yet or the obscurity of the film itself, the producers need to make note of that and try to make a concentious effort to keep the show warm. When it feels like a good time is being had inside, it feels like a good time for those of us watching on TV. Considering the background and success of both men they should not have an issue with this.

One thing for them to keep in mind is the selection and use of their host. Last year the Acadamy wasted away the use of exceptional hosting. We rarely saw the hosts after the introduction. I think they can continue the use of stars throughout the telecast but need to focus on keeping their host or hosts as a solid through line and let them do what they do best.

Having been in the venue during these events, I have seen the difference in how it feels inside. For people of such celebrity staure there is an intense feeling of anticipation and nerves inside the theater. Its quiet, dark, and everyone is just a bit more intense than they are at the lighter hearted Golden Globes. The men have a giant task ahead of them and the world will be watching to see how they handle it. I want to turn off my television and say, well that was fun. The magnitude of the Oscars have a tendency to take over and if the producers can find a way to respect that but also manage it, they could change the feel of the Oscars forever.

By Rebecca Rose

The Cannes Film Festival closed this weekend, with its top prize, the prestigious Palme D’or, awarded for the first time in the festival’s 63 year history to a film from Thailand. Uncle Boonme Who Can Recall His Past Lives, by Thai director Apichatpong Weerasethakul. Once again proving that despite all the publicity, paparazzi and PR blitzes, the festival still manages be a proving ground for some the best global talent in film, irregardless of name, stature or film pedigree.

The media circus around Cannes rivals that of the Oscars; only this year’s World Cup could match the attention from the world press. No longer a just the focus of the film world, Cannes garners as much attention from gossip hounds and fashionistas as it does from the avant garde set. (It was Cate Blanchett’s show stopping Alexander McQueen gown that grabbed top headlines worldwide, not her mostly forgettable role in Robin Hood.)

Speaking of Robin Hood, it certainly was one of the earliest and biggest disappointments. Critics balked at its excruciating running time, muddled historical accuracy and lethargic star turns. Woody Allen’s You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger (not in competition) garnered mixed reviews, which for a Woody Allen film almost seems par for the course lately. Jean-Luc Goddard’s Film Socialisme also somewhat underwhelmed critics, despite garnering a lot of festival attention for his play on film subtitles (the notorious auteur opted to subtitle only 3 words at a time).

The most talked about film was probably Oliver Stone’s Wall Street 2: Money Never Sleeps. Unfortunately for Stone, none of the talk was positive. It is doubtful that Stone’s film will be remembered for anything other than being yet another warning to aging filmmakers who seek to revive old material.

Festival standouts included Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Biutiful,  Abbas Kiarostami’s Certified Copy, Mike Leigh’s Another Year and Jury Prize winner A Screaming Man from   Mahamat-Saleh Haroun.  Among them, the strongest contender during Oscar time could be Leigh’s bittersweet film, or at least his stars (Vera Drake nabbed Imelda Staunton a Best Actress nomination and last year’s Happy-Go-Lucky earned Sally Hawkins a Golden Globe)

The only film to ever win the top prize and Best Picture at the Oscars was 1945’s Billy Wilder’s classic 1945 film The Lost Weekend. Last year’s Palme D’or winner, The White Ribbon, earned a nomination for Best Foreign Language, a path that Uncle Boonmee could be destined for. The last Palme d’Or winner at Cannes to go on to perform well during Oscar time (outside of the Best Foreign Language film category) was Roman Polanski’s The Pianist; prior to that, it was Quentin Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction.

Juliette Binoche won big for her role in Certified Copy, a part that has garnered some early Oscar buzz. (Familiar to the buzz surrounding Penelope Cruz’s 2006 win for Volver). The only actress in the past 20 years to duplicate a Cannes Best Actress win at Oscar time was Holly Hunter for 1993’s The Piano. Javier Bardem and Elio Germano shared Best Actor prize for their roles in Biutiful and La Nostra Vita. Just last year Christopher Waltz claimed that  same prize for his role in Inglorious Basterds, which would go on to earn him a statue. While there are certainly a full slate of Academy Award winning directors who have their own Prix de la mise en scène to boast about, no director has ever gone on to even be nominated for an Oscar after winning the top directing prize at Cannes.

This lack of pattern and predictability speaks highly to Cannes’ commitment to reward less “buzz worthy” films or follow the Oscar tradition of awarding “longevity”. (Weerasethakul was a virtual unknown before making his film). Even when every city seems to have jumped on the Film Festival bandwagon (even Jackson Hole, Wyoming now boasts their own film festival), Cannes has managed to keep its crown as top dog of the bunch. Cannes films are not judged solely on their artistic merit; jurists have a habit of honoring films that are groundbreaking, or pack a historic or social punch (Dancer In The Dark, Farenheit 911) The jury has a longstanding tradition of being able to pick out films that herald change the cinematic landscape (Pulp Fiction) or make a distinctly unique contribution to the culture of film (Sex, Lies and Videotape)

Whatever the case, one thing remains certain about Cannes. Despite the lavish displays, media frenzy and yes, even the arrival of Paris Hilton, they still manage to put art above all else, recognizing not just the best in filmmaking, but work that marks true, groundbreaking change in cinema.

Full List of Award Winners:

Palme d’Or:
Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives, directed by Apichatpong Weerasethakul

Grand Prix (runner-up):
Des Hommes Et Des Dieux (Of God and Men), directed by Xavier Beauvois

Prix de la Mise en Scene (best director):
Mathieu Amalric for Tournée (On Tour)

Prix du Scenario (best screenplay):
Poetry by Lee Chang-dong

Camera d’Or (best first feature):
Año Bisiesto directed by Michael Rowe

Prix du Jury (jury prize):
A Screaming Man directed by Mahamat-Saleh Haroun

Prix d’interpretation feminine (best actress):
Juliette Binoche for Certified Copy (directed by Abbas Kiarostami)

Prix d’interpretation masculine (best actor – a Tie):
Javier Bardem for Biutiful (directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu)
and
Elio Germano for La Nostra Vita (directed by Daniele Luchetti)

Palme d’Or (short film):
Chienne d’Histoire directed by Serge Avedikian

It was an impressive decade for film, and although it was no less immune to corporate interests or what we then called “straight to video” releases, it was the decade I went from someone who likes movies to a film buff.  Looking back, it’s easy to see why: films that couldn’t have been made even five years prior to the 1990s were being made in droves.  Risks were being taken once again, and independent films came up to fill the gap left by predictable blockbusters and A-list actors assigned to D-list scripts.

However, mixed with the warm fuzzy feeling of nostalgia is the icy sting of bitter outrage.  Some of the finest performances I’ve ever seen weren’t even nominated for awards while some of the worst actually won them.  Even here, amongst the coveted Oscar list, I curse the very sight of some of these names…

…starting with this one!

#10 – Gwyneth Paltrow - Shakespeare in Love (1998): 8.56

If there was ever a victory bought and paid for by the industry, I can’t think of any better example than this.  Even one of the nominees, Fernanda Montenegro for Central Station, was outraged by this choice.  Gwyneth’s accent is as horrible as her attempt at doing Shakespeare, and seeing Cate Blanchett’s performance in Elizabeth and her subsequent awards that year leave you wondering just what happened.

Nominated at #10 by over 75% of the voters, it seems we’re more or less decided on this one.

#9 – Helen Hunt – As Good as It Gets (1997): 8.00

I voted a bit higher on this one than most of my fellow critics, but I think I understand why Helen Hunt isn’t a favorite.  Prior to winning the Oscar, she held the award for playing the same personality in every role for a number of years until Jennifer Aniston violently snatched it out of her hand.  Carol Connelly doesn’t seem much different than her other characters, but she was at the top of her game against the legendary Jack Nicholson as Melvin Howard and the academy took notice.  Comedies are rare and this is only one of two films that won acclaim during the decade.  (Fargo would be the other film, Shakespeare in Love is funny for all the wrong reasons.)

#8 – Jessica Lange – Blue Sky (1994): 7.13

For those of you wondering why Winona Ryder didn’t win for Little Women, I’m there with you… but I seriously doubt I could say no to Jessica Lange.  The story behind Blue Sky is just as poignant as the movie itself.  The movie was actually completed four years earlier but sat in a vault for years due to the bankrupcy of Orion Pictures.  It was finally released after the death of its director, Tony Richardson, to critical acclaim.

#7 – Emma Thompson – Howard’s End (1992): 6.44

The first of three nominations for best actress during the next four years, Emma Thompson became synonymous with English drama and Shakespearean productions on the big screen.  She later went on to win another Oscar four years later for Best Adapted Screenplay with Sense and Sensibility, establishing herself as a Renaissance woman for the 20^th century and making more money than Miss “I’ve got a Porsche!” Money-Sterling.

#6 – Susan Sarandon – Dead Man Walking (1995): 5.67

The last of three nominations in the previous four years, Susan had to win sometime.  This is undoubtedly the most contested entry from our critics, with high and low votes canceling each other out.  As both a fan of Sarandon and someone who thought Elisabeth Shue (Leaving Las Vegas) or Sharon Stone (Casino) may have been a better choice, I can understand both sides of the issue rather well.  Most of us probably agree her roles in Lorenzo’s Oil and certainly Thelma & Louise were Oscar worthy, bringing us to a story intertwined with our next entry.

#5 – Jodie Foster – The Silence of the Lambs (1991): 4.56

The Silence of the Lambs is one of my favorite films, and is arguably the only true horror film to win an Oscar (No Country For Old Men has been labeled as both a drama and western).  It was the horror film we somehow convinced the public was suspense, forcing the section of the movie going public that doesn’t watch horror films to stop covering their eyes and look.  We were all so mesmerized by the film’s ability to immerse us into the dark and twisted corners of the very world we live in, fascinated by the exchange between the cautious but determined Clarice Starling and brilliant but terrifying Dr. Lecter.   However, much like the FBI, we overlooked a very important detail in the fact that we had two better performances from Thelma & Louise.  I still hope Buffalo Bill takes Jodie Foster’s Oscar and splits it in half for Geena Davis and Susan Sarandon.

#4 – Holly Hunter – The Piano (1993): 4.11

Definitely a difficult choice considering some first-rate talent and an unforgettable performance from Angela Basset as Tina Turner in What’s Love Got To Do With It.  Some would argue that it was an award given due to the politically correct nature of the time and an homage to Marlee Matlin’s victory for the Deaf community in the 80s.  Regardless of one’s opinion on the matter, few can argue the emotion expressed of a leading role without uttering a single word is something that is difficult for any actress to achieve.

#3 – Frances McDormand – Fargo (1996): 3.78

Comedies never win, especially at the Oscars, so I’m particularly happy to see this name so high on the list just as others will since it was voted as first or second by more than one.  Marge Olmstead-Gunderson is probably my favorite police office since Sergeant  Joe Friday.  I knew she’d be nominated about two minutes into the film and convinced myself not to get my hopes up.  Once she was interviewed on Charlie Rose, I couldn’t help but anticipate a possible victory.  Not only did she overcome winning with a comedy, she beat out some stiff competition.

#2 – Hilary Swank – Boys Don’t Cry (1999): 3.44

Another choice that was first or second with more than one critic, I do think this is an incredible and important role and definitely a key factor in the choice.  It was a victory that echoed back 15 years to Linda Hunt’s breakthrough victory in playing an opposite gender in The Year of Living Dangerously and also as one that brought sexual themes into mainstream media.  This would pave the way for films like Brokeback Mountain and help gay and lesbian cinema get more attention.  That being said, I took far more delight in watching Annette Bening unravel in American Beauty, but knew her odds of winning were slim.  If it wasn’t for my low vote on this role, this article would be about Hilary Swank and how important critical roles like this are for our social development.  Important words, but not the most enjoyable to write.

…leading us to something that is.

#1 – Kathy Bates – Misery (1990): 3.22

You would’ve heard a lot of arguments over this if you were into movies at the time.  One of Meryl Streep’s 13 nominations in Postcards from the Edge came from 1990 as did Julia Roberts in what many saw as the year’s biggest hit, Pretty Woman.  Even Anjelica Huston and Joanne Woodward had a possibility of winning… but Annie Wilkes promptly hacked them all to pieces.

I’m not sure what it is we like so much about seeing James Caan tortured.  He already held the record in Godfather for the most bullet holes riddled through his body which lasted for several years against many war and action films.  Still, we seem to just keep wanting more.  Enter Kathy Bates in the role of Annie Wilkes: Registered Nurse, Farmer, #1 Fan, Sociopathic Nightmare.  Stephen King gave us every celebrity’s worst nightmare, that being at the mercy of your biggest and most obsessive fan with no hope of escape. Much like Stephen King’s previous work, the gruesome nature of the original book was toned down in order to reach a wider audience… and it worked.  People two or three times my age were at the film and didn’t walk out thanks to Kathy Bates.  As twisted as the content may have been, they couldn’t help but watch Annie Wilkes go from nurturing to nefarious within seconds.

Kathy Bates’ gave a stellar performance thanks to playing two separate personalities that she could switch back and forth between like a light switch.  Her cheerful then callous demeanor was frightening to witness but also quite comical to see unfold.  That aspect of the film gave the comic relief necessary to bring audiences who normally refuse to watch horror movies.  Both Saturday Night Live and In Living Color made parodies of the film, a sure sign the public was interested.  Some speculated the pressure from her victory at the Golden Globes may have persuaded the academy to consider it more closely.  Being nominated and winning a leading role for what is essentially a horror film was a critical step and something that hadn’t been accomplished since 1973 and the nomination of The Exorcist.  Kathy Bates went on to mimic her role in other film and television roles in later years, but it wasn’t long before she took roles to break away from the persona.  Now appearing as the equally formidable Jo Bennet in The Office, Kathy Bates remains a force to be reckoned with.

(NOTE: Voters for Best Actress of the 1990s included Paul Popiel, Steve Neumann, Bryce Van Kooten, Kit Bowen, Jax Russo, Michaela Zanello, Colin Campbell, Steve Gustafson, and Jeremy Martin)

Oscar Decades Series

Completed:

2000s Best Picture
2000s Best Actor
2000s Best Actress
1990s Best Picture
1990s Best Actor
1990s Best Actress

Up Next:

1980s Best Picture

A quick glance through the Best Actors of the 90’s and its tough not to notice the names — Hopkins, Hanks, Pacino, Spacey, Cage, Nicholson — staring peacefully out at you. Those were the younger years. Not Chinatown, young, but young nonetheless. The A-listers we see strutting down our velvet carpets were mortal’s too once — grand showman, who, when given the chance, relished the opportunity like the all-stars they were (sometimes twice), taking center stage and transforming their film into the greatest show on Earth.

Here’s the ranking scores from the AwardPicks experts:

Rankings
1991    Anthony Hopkins – The Silence of the Lambs    2.08
1994    Tom Hanks – Forrest Gump    4.08
1993    Tom Hanks – Philadelphia    4.61
1995    Nicolas Cage – Leaving Las Vegas    5.66
1999    Kevin Spacey – American Beauty    5.67
1996    Geoffrey Rush – Shine    5.82
1992    Al Pacino – Scent of a Woman    6.17
1990    Jeremy Irons – Reversal of Fortune    6.44
1997    Jack Nicholson – As Good as It Gets    6.67
1998    Roberto Benigni – Life is Beautiful    7.58

[NOTE: Staff writers who voted included Paul Popiel, Steve Neumann, Bryce VanKooten, Ayinde Waring, Kit Bowen, Nate Freiberg. Savanna New, Michaela Zanello, Colin Campbell, Steve Gustafson, Christa Youngpeter, Adam Spunberg, Phil Wallace, Jeremy Martin and Jax Russo]

This go-around had me mingling somewhere out in left field with a couple of my rankings (Roberto Benigni at #4). Hogwash! Needless to say, I relish the opportunity to support my choices. Let’s see if ya’ll are up for a little convincing.

10. Roberto Benigni – Life is Beautiful – 7.58

I had him fourth, true. I don’t take it back. I liked his performance then and I like it now, save some of the out-of-place laughter. One thing is true, the Academy LOVED him after he got up on stage and danced the ratings up the charts. This is America — we don’t have fun! Sit down! Its difficult not to root for a man who’s father basically lived his role in Life is Beautiful (“La Vita E Bella”). The greatest movie of all time? Of course not. But a refreshing, fourth place (er, 10th)? Yessir.

*I’ve had a change of heart. Upon further notice, this might be the biggest upset (re: what the!?) in Oscar history. Roberto Benigni beat out Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan and Edward Norton in American History X. Not cool.

9. Jack Nicholson – As Good As It Gets – 6.67

Jack, where did you go wrong? As Good As It Gets portrayed the strained, growing (re: old) relationship well — maybe too well. Its supporting cast was brilliant (Hellen Hunt [hello! Twister!?] Greg Kinnear, Cuba Gooding, etc), helping it shine a bit more to the Academy, but for some reason, amidst all the glitz and glam of Jack Nicholson — that dastardly Joker-esque voice, and down right grit — its tough not to look back and wonder why Matt Damon’s, Will Hunting didn’t win. Alas, to age the victor.

8. Jeremy Irons – Reversal of Fortune – 6.44

I will always love Jeremy Irons. Maybe not because I’m a frequenter of the theater, but because I was youthful once – right around 1994 – when The Lion King came out … and I met Scar. Irons may be more well known for his depiction of the evil, deformed lion than many of his onscreen performances, but few will ever forget the impeccable accuracy with which he portrayed Reversal of Fortune’s Claus von Bulow. Grippingly paced and committed to perfect intricacy, Reversal of Fortune made way for Jeremy Irons’ solid 8^th place finish here on our masterful list.

7. Al Pacino – Scent of a Woman – 6.17

Ah yes, Lieutenant Frank Slade, who could forget! I had Pacino solidified at the 7^th spot as well, despite the fact that he’s been great so many times (Corleone, Wortzik, Montana, Serpico) on screen. The age old Oscar question: to give to the clear favorite of the year, or the legacy of work stretched out before our eyes? True, Pacino only has the one Oscar to his credit, but his collection of films stretches out before our eyes like the fleeting, evanescent Scent of a Woman … save Gigli, of course.

6. Geoffrey Rush – Shine – 5.82

I had Rush at 9^th. I didn’t think he performance deserved a 9^th place finish, but after I looked at everyone else he was up against this decade, it was tough to place him much higher. Secretly, I can’t help but think that for every note Geoffrey hit on that beautiful piano, he was somehow preparing for the giant organ, buried inside the belly of The Dutchman (Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Man’s Chest), hoping that sometime soon, Davy Jones would step aside and Rush’s, Barbosa would get the chance to sit and play and sing like he once did.

5. Kevin Spacey – American Beauty – 5.67

I suppose its time to call myself out on this one. I had Spacey at #8. I can hear it now, ‘What?! Why?! You had Spacey at 8?! Why not just have Michael Jordan in the top 100!?’. Relax, earthlings, I come bringing good news of great joy that will be for all fan boys. Let’s just get one thing out in the open before we move on…

Sam Mendes is not my favorite director, by any stretch of the imagination and American Beauty, as a film, hurt Spacey in my eyes. There, I said it. Everyone can run into the street screaming now. The sky is falling. An asteroid is coming. The dawn of the dinosaurs has returned.

I think part of my disdain for Mendes rubbed off on Kevin Spacey’s masterful portray as the battered suburban dad, Lester Burnham. Spacey did a superb job as the mediocre moralist, carving out a niche in film that seemed real, transparent and violently honest. American Beauty is a very poignant film, but I would not call it beautiful. Here I am, eleven years later and I always come back to the same place: the end.

Spacey’s final line (though Mendes’ of course) bites me to the core of intelligence, ‘…and I can’t feel anything but gratitude for every single moment of my stupid little life… You have no idea what I’m talking about, I’m sure. But don’t worry… you will someday.”

Its like the giant “I don’t know” at the end of the movie! Like a little boy in the back of your 7th grade Algebra class who insists adding “I don’t know” to the end of everything she says for fear of taking a stand once in his life. So I’ll take a stand for him, for Spacey, for Mendes, for anyone who gets a little blue residual check with the word “American Beauty” at the top: You’re 8th in my book. Boom. Roasted.

4. Nicolas Cage – Leaving Las Vegas – 5.66

What happened to you Cage? You used to be so good! I loved Cage in Leaving Las Vegas – broken, suicidal, alcoholic – he was perfect! I don’t agree with the 4^th placing of Cage here (I put him at 10), but that might be due in large part to the Spacey-syndrome, “fool me more than once with an over-paid, under-acted performance and there’s going to be consequences.” Does Cage deserve 10^th? Probably not. Does he deserve 4^th? Probably not. There’s a happy medium out there somewhere, you decide and comment away.

And while you’re voting, don’t forget about Bangkok Dangerous, The Weatherman and Lord of War.

3. Tom Hanks – Philadelphia – 4.61

If I were a betting person, I would have said that Philadelphia would come in 3^rd. That’s where I put it. Seemed logical that there were only two films (see below) that held better performances than Tom Hanks’ portrayal of Andrew Beckett. It was a paramount portrayal of an issue that was well on the rise and a exceptional depiction by Hanks.  He was so good that he only had to wait 365 days for his next one.

2. Tom Hanks – Forrest Gump – 4.08

I voted Forrest Gump as #1. Was it easy? No. Did I stress over it to an unhealthy degree? Yes. Though Hanks at two and three, respectively, is something I can live with. I’ve always loved Tom Hanks. I loved him in Charlie Wilson’s War, Catch Me If You Can, Road to Perdition, The Terminal and I’ll love him in Toy Story 3 as much as I did in the first two. Forrest Gump is a tough movie to describe. At one point you’re laughing and then next, you’re riddled with guilt, frustration, sadness. Who knows what Forrest Gump would have been without Hanks (a train wreck?). And with him there: pure gold.

Let’s be honest here: Had it not been for that little film (below) in 1991, Tom Hanks would have taken, outright, the top two spots of the decade. Not to mention, his wins were back-to-back.

Hanks is a genius. He’s also a terrific actor, worthy of every award he gets and more. He LOST for Big, Saving Private Ryan and Cast Away!

1. Anthony Hopkins – The Silence of the Lambs – 2.08

It’s a rarity that we humans agree on much of anything – sports, music, superheroes – and even more rare that we interpret art through the same lens. Sometimes though, a film comes along that wipes the slate clean, makes it easier to see the excellence in front of you. Makes you see how powerful great art can be, even amidst the darkness that shrouds it.

The Silence of the Lambs is that excellence. Anthony Hopkins is the art.

People walked out of The Silence of the Lambs not thinking about decent into darkness, but thankful that they didn’t have to step into Clarice Starling’s shoes. Hopkins’ portrayal of Dr. Hannibal Lecter stands firmly atop most lists of the best performances ever on screen. It’s masterful. It’s subtle. And it’s scary as hell incarnate.

It was first in nearly every ballot by our writers and easily takes the cake as some of the best moments in film history. It’s an easy, well-deserved victory for all involved and special kudos to Hopkins.

“Hello, Clarice.”

Oscar Decades Series

Completed:

2000s Best Picture
2000s Best Actor
2000s Best Actress
1990s Best Picture
1990s Best Actor

Up Next:

1990s Best Actress

As I look at the Best Picture winners of the 1990s, I notice something: Many of them are popular, big-budget commercial films, unlike the indie films dominating the Oscars in the last 10 years. Independent movies started to get more notice in the ’90s, which films such as Shine, Secrets & Lies, and other getting Best Pic nods, but the big crowd pleasers still won out. It’s fascinating to see how the filmmaking tides have changed.

Here’s the ranking scores from the AwardPicks experts:

10. The English Patient (1996) 7.87

9. Shakespeare in Love (1998) 7.67

8. Titanic (1997) 6.80

7. Dances with Wolves (1990) 6.73

6. Unforgiven (1992) 5.87

5. The Silence of the Lambs (1991) 4.67

4. American Beauty (1999) 4.60

3. Forrest Gump (1994) 4.27

2. Braveheart (1995) 3.93

1. Schindler’s List (1993) 2.60

[NOTE: Staff writers who voted included Paul Popiel, Steve Neumann, Bryce Van Kooten, Ayinde Waring, Kit Bowen, Nate Freiberg. Savanna New, Michaela Zanello, Colin Campbell, Steve Gustafson, Christa Youngpeter, Adam Spunberg, Phil Wallace, Jeremy Martin and Jax Russo]

This time around, my picks did not necessarily jive with the rest (actually, Michaela Zanello and I were pretty much on the same wave length). Nonetheless, I will defend my reasons for ranking a film higher – or lower – than the rest of the voters. Starting with …

10. The English Patient

I’m not at all in line with the mass pop on this one. I ranked the film No. 4 because I truly believe it to be a wonderfully rich and romantic drama –– filled with stunning cinematography, a beautiful epic story and stellar performances by Kristin Scott Thomas, Ralph Fiennes and the Best Supporting Actress winner Juliette Binoche. Of course, I’ll nod when someone comes up to me and says, “How can you like that movie? It’s so friggin’ boring!” (much like the lament of Seinfeld‘s Elaine). I can see their point of view. I just don’t happen to agree because, for me, English Patient makes me sigh in that romantic, wish I were in a bath tub with Ralph Fiennes kind of way AND it’s terrifically well made. The fact English Patient beat Fargo that year was a little troubling, but I would have been happy if either film won — and for very many different reasons. Here’s an extended English Patient trailer, I guess basically for me and Michaela, who also gave it fourth place.

—

9. Shakespeare in Love

I’m pretty much in agreement with this ranking (eighth place on my list), and there’s a reason we feel this way: How in god’s name could a romantic period piece best the incredibly powerful war drama Saving Private Ryan? It was such an Academy Awards shocker and so inconceivable that you almost had to show some respect to Shakespeare distributor Harvey Weinstein for pulling off the marketing campaign of the millennium. Don’t get me wrong. I enjoy Shakespeare in Love immensely and will watch it every time it comes on cable. It’s lighthearted, it’s literary, it’s got another cutie Fiennes in it. But it cannot hold a candle to the craftsmanship, the heart and soul of Ryan, which SHOULD be what a Best Picture is all about. I know Steve Spielberg won the accolades just a few years before with Schindler’s List, but still. I think rather than watching a Shakespeare in Love trailer, it’s more befitting to watch the opening sequence of Saving Private Ryan – just so you can remember what I’m talking about.

—

8. Titanic

As No. 7 on my list, Titanic falls into that middle-of-the-road category – not necessarily great but certainly a masterful piece of filmmaking. The first half of is where it falters a bit. The love story between Rose and Jack does what it sets out to do, drawing the audience in, getting them to care about the characters who will either live or die when the ship sinks. But the dialogue is a little too corny, the situations a little too generalized (kind of like Avatar). When the ship hits the iceberg, however, all bets are off. The way Cameron puts us there, showing every conceivable, horrifying detail, is nothing less than spectacular. So, in combination, it still stands as the best disaster movie of all-time and worthy of the Best Picture award. Here’s the trailer:

—

7. Dances with Wolves

OK, I will fully admit that I am not a big Western fan — save for a few (Unforgiven for example; more on that below) — so my ranking of Wolves in 10^th place comes with a little bias. There certainly are plenty of endearing moments in Wolves, but honestly, Kevin Costner’s glorified view on the frontier smacks of one cliché after another. And that last act, oy! Don’t get me started – the minute the bad white men shoot Dunbar’s horse AND the wolf, it completely turns me off. But I think what bothers me the most is how Dances with Wolves beat Goodfellas for Best Picture. Again, another clear-cut case of a better film losing out, this time to a sap-fest like Wolves. Here’s a montage from the film – thankfully without dialogue:

—

6. Unforgiven

Now Unforgiven is a Western I can stand by, also ranking it sixth on my list. It has some of the same markings of the genre – the good but tortured gunslinger, the bad but conflicted gunslinger and some definite ugly in between – but it distinguishes itself with its gritty, realistic take on the Old West. It also has some stellar performances from Gene Hackman, Morgan Freeman, and of course the master Westerner himself, Clint Eastwood, an Academy darling. This film shows the underbelly in a way I’d never seen in a Western, and so I appreciate it more. Here’s a clip that explains it all:

—

5. The Silence of the Lambs

This is my No. 5 as well. When Silence won, I remember I how impressed I was that the Academy had stepped out of their comfort zone a little and picked the psychological serial killer flick for the first time. But then again, it was the best film of that year, hands down, due in a large part to the incredible performances by Best Actor and Actress winners Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster. It’s just one of those films you can watch over and over again – eating liver, fava beans with a nice bottle of Chianti. Here’s the clip:

—

4. American Beauty

I placed American Beauty a few notches higher at No. 2 for the well, beauty, of it. From Alan Ball’s skewed musings on suburban life to Sam Mendes expert direction to the achingly good performances from Kevin Spacey, Annette Bening and Chris Cooper, the movie is a complete package. It may just be about the little things, but it’s done in such an artistic way, they seem larger than life. And in 1999, American Beauty also sets up what’s to come with independent movies. Here’s a great clip, in which Lester “quits” his job. Classic Spacey:

—

3. Forrest Gump

Another big disparity in the rankings, since I put Forrest Gump in ninth place on my list. Really, third? It’s an entertaining, feel-good, crowd pleaser, I’ll give you that, but like Dances with Wolves, it just seems like commercial fluff without much substance behind it. And also like Wolves, Gump‘s ending sort of pissed me off. I mean, I get it that Forrest’s inadvertent actions affect historical moments, blah, blah, blah, but to have Jenny die of AIDS? Please. It just goes one step further than it has to. In any event, I’m sure many will disagree with me, since I know some pretty serious Forrest Gump fans, but I would have picked Pulp Fiction or even The Shawshank Redemption over Gump as Best Pic of 1994. Here’s the Forrest Gump trailer:

—

2. Braveheart

This was third on my list, for obvious reasons. The film is one of those historical period pieces that not only paints graphic, epic battle sequences but tugs at the heart with a central love-revenge story. It has a badass Medieval Scottish hero named William Wallace, fighting for his rights against a British tyranny and the villainous King Edward Longshanks trying to stop him. And lastly, it showed how movie star Mel Gibson actually had some mad directing skills. Who knew? Braveheart is another complete package. Here’s the trailer:

—

1. Schindler’s List

At least there is one ranking most of us agreed on: Schindler’s List is by far the best film of the 1990s, nee perhaps of the last few decades. Steven Spielberg’s incredibly personal view on the Holocaust is told from the perspective of one real-life German businessman, played brilliantly by Liam Neeson, who used his influences and own money during WWII to save some 300 Jewish people from being killed. And Ralph Fiennes, who I’ll sigh over later in English Patient, plays a pot-bellied, horribly sadistic Nazi. It took me a while to get over that image of him – but I eventually did. Schindler’s List isn’t a movie I can watch very many times, takes too much out of me, but it does stand as a classic to be remembered and revered for years to come. This scene just slays me:

Oscar Decades Series

Completed:

2000s Best Picture
2000s Best Actor
2000s Best Actress
1990s Best Picture

Up Next:

1990s Best Actor

Determining “the best” in any acting category is no easy task, but some of the Best Actress decisions over the past decade have been especially difficult and – at times – even controversial.  Personal taste plays such a pivotal role in a performance evaluation, and many of these actresses had the benefit of roles where their talents were more easily recognizable.  For instance, all except Berry, Swank, and Winslet played real characters, whose movements, mannerisms, and appearances could be matched up to already-existing personas.  Impersonate that person extraordinarily and the accolades are sure to come.

Also, the quality of the film and script often influence these results far more than they should.  Did Julia Roberts benefit from Erin Brockovich being such a likeable character, and should she be judged for staying within her range or applauded simply for the excellent portrayal?  There is no clear criteria for tabulating these rankings, but our writers at AwardsPicks.com have done their best to rate the 10 victors in order, using whatever system each saw fit.  Here are the final numbers:

10. Halle Berry, Monster’s Ball (2001): Average score of 8.11
9. Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side (2009): Average score of 7.56
8. Reese Witherspoon, Walk the Line (2005): Average score of 6.89
7. Julia Roberts, Erin Brockovich (2000): Average score of 6.33
6. Hilary Swank, Million Dollar Baby (2004): Average score of 5.78
5. Helen Mirren, The Queen (2006): Average score of 4.89
4. Nicole Kidman, The Hours (2002): Average score of 4.78
3. Kate Winslet, The Reader (2008): Average score of 4.56
2. Charlize Theron, Monster (2003): Average score of 3.11
1. Marion Cotillard, La Vie en Rose (2007): Average score of 3.00

(Voters included Paul Popiel, Steve Neumann, Bryce Van Kooten, Ayinde Waring, Kit Bowen, Savanna New, Michaela Zanello, Adam Spunberg, and Jeremy Martin)

As I did in the past with Best Picture, let me provide some statistical observations:

1. Marion Cotillard and Charlize Theron: Cotillard gets the ultimate nod, but just barely.  With such a small sample size, I think it’s safe to call this one a draw.  Cotillard had the benefit of five first-place votes to Theron’s two, but Theron finished in the top three on seven of nine ballots.  Each also had a red herring (Cotillard registered an eighth-place vote, Theron somehow a 10^th).

2. Kate Winslet, Nicole Kidman, and Helen Mirren: These three represent the next block of closely contested candidates.  However you see the ordering, it seems obvious that the collective will has this trio firmly between third and fifth.

3.  Hilary Swank: While Swank, at first glance, appears on an island in sixth place, the variance in votes is worth noting.  Swank registered two second-place votes and two 10^th-place votes.  In other words, some people loved her performance, some hated it, and some found it mediocre.  Is it better to be loved and hated by a few or simply admired a little by everyone?  I think Swank would be glad to have at least a few fervent admirers.

4. Julia Roberts, Reese Witherspoon, and Sandra Bullock: I find it extremely interesting that these popular starlets sit adjacent to each other.  In all three cases, it was a well-known actress, attacking “the role of a lifetime” with spunk and gusto.  Could it be that the Academy had as much affinity for the compelling real-life characters they played as much as how they emulated them?

5. Halle Berry:  Ms. Berry has no shortage of adulators, so I doubt her ranking would mean much to her.  Still, one has to wonder if she was the beneficiary of possessing some smashing good looks in a weak year.

And now for a brief presentation of my rankings:

10. Halle Berry, Monster’s Ball (2001)

Someone had to be last on my list, and I could not find it in me to place Berry above the others.  Critics complain of overacting, which may have resonated with enough Academy voters but falls short in retrospective hindsight.

9. Reese Witherspoon, Walk the Line (2005)

I’m not trying to take anything away from Witherspoon’s fine portrayal of June Carter, but was she even the best actor in her movie?  I remember watching the Oscars and thinking Joaquin Phoenix was far more impressive as Johnny Cash.  I used to feel the same way when Helen Hunt would win the Emmy every year for Mad About You as Paul Reiser would wither in the shadows.  A great job, certainly, but not one that cracks any all-time lists.

8. Julia Roberts, Erin Brockovich (2000)

I recently watched this again and I really loved the character of Erin Brockovich.  That’s why it pained me to slip Roberts so low, but I just don’t think her acting was as amazing as the – for lack of a better word – “awesome” woman that she portrayed.  Was she really all that different from what she did in Pretty Woman, for example?  I think we like her more than what the merits indicate.

7. Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side (2009)

Maybe I’m a little bit of a Sandra Bullock apologist, but come on … the woman has been through enough turmoil lately!  Jesse James is such a/an (insert vociferous derogatory term).  Note to women out there: Did Jesse James seem like a good guy, at all?  Trust your instincts.  And as far as acting is concerned, Bullock displayed some wonderful subtlety in certain moments, avoiding the tendency for histrionics when the music, script, and real-life story almost beckoned them.

6. Nicole Kidman, The Hours (2002)

Antagonists of Kidman will call her spin as Virginia Woolf nothing more than a fantastic prosthetic nose, but that smells of preconceived prejudice.  This was a career-defining role for Kidman, who effectively upgraded her status as a legitimate actress.  You may be afraid of Virginia Woolf, but there should be no apprehension about lauding Miss Kidman as a top-of-the-line thespian.

5. Helen Mirren, The Queen (2006)

Everyone loves Helen Mirren.  Somehow, she manages to stay sassy and polite at the same time, no matter how old she gets.  I wish I could have put her higher, but I couldn’t let my testosterone dictate over her lack of screen time and the greatness of those above her.

4. Hilary Swank, Million Dollar Baby (2004)

If you forgot how outstanding Swank was, go rent Million Dollar Baby and give her another look.  Her effectiveness stretches far beyond the southern accent she adopts.  In what was an extremely challenging role, Swank comes across as tough, vibrant, stubborn, vulnerable, and endearing all at the same time.  There is such complexity in her facial expressions, and it is no wonder that she won her second Academy Award here after Boys Don’t Cry.

3. Charlize Theron, Monster (2003)

Theron might have been considered in the same “sweetheart” category as Witherspoon, Bullock, and Roberts, had it not been for her beyond-exceptional rendition of a brutal, but compelling female serial killer.  If you want to see the stuff of Erin Brockovich, go watch Theron in North Country.  Monster is something far more accomplished.  She brings life to a despicable character, who exudes compassion while committing heinous criminal acts.

2. Kate Winslet, The Reader (2008)

In my opinion, Winslet is the greatest actress of her generation.  Think of the various roles she has accepted and conquered, from period-piece darlings in Sense and Sensibility and Titanic, to a blue-haired anomaly in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, to the steaminess of Quills, to the suburban malcontent of Little Children and Revolutionary Road.  Has she ever been anything less than spectacular?  The Reader may not have been her best performance, but in a lifetime of transcendent work, she deserves every award imaginable.   Give her a hand and many more golden statuettes.

1. Marion Cotillard, La Vie en Rose (2007)

Perhaps the only thing more astonishing than Cotillard’s breathtaking impersonation of Edith Piaf is the fact that she was an underdog.  Thankfully, enough Academy members popped in the French import before casting their votes, because even five minutes of viewing should be enough to persuade anyone of her brilliance.  In a sense, Cotillard tackles several different characters at once, sizing up the remarkable Piaf at different stages of her life.  There are scenes of jaw-dropping excellence, such as when Cotillard sings drunkenly as a young girl on a street or captures the infirmities of old age with each rebellious exhalation.  This is a performance for the ages that ranks second to none.  She can look proudly upon her Oscar and articulate in her native French: “Je ne regrette rien.”

Oscar Decades Series

Completed:

2000s Best Picture
2000s Best Actor
2000s Best Actress

Up Next:

1990s Best Picture

Training dragons never looked more fun. As the first animated gem of 2010, How to Train Your Dragon should see a clear path to an Oscar nomination.

As a sort of cross between the classic boy and his dog story and Dragonheart, HTYD does delight in so many ways. Told from the perspective of a young Viking named Hiccup (Jay Baruchel), we see how his remote seaside village is continually bombarded by various kinds of dragons. The village leader and Hiccup’s father, Stoick (Gerard Butler), rallies his fellow Vikings to hunt and kill as many of the beasts as they can, but the scrawny Hiccup doesn’t quite cut the mustard, much to his father’s chagrin.

Instead, Hiccup decides to use his ingenuity and invents a contraption that will bring down the most feared – and most rare – dragon of all, the Night Fury. When it actually works, Hiccup follows its trail and discovers that the beast is just as frightened and vulnerable as he is – and extremely intelligent. And so they form a bond. Hiccup helps the dragon he names Toothless heal, while Toothless teaches Hiccup about a dragon’s true, definitely more kindhearted and loyal nature. Needless to say, there’s no way in hell Hiccup could ever kill one now, even though he’s in training to do so. And it’s going to take all of the young Viking’s courage to convince his dad dragons really aren’t the enemy at all.

The vocal talent do a fine job bringing their animated characters to life. You can just see Baruchel’s (She’s Out of My League) neurotic mannerisms in Hiccup, and Butler’s bravado in Stoick. Also good are America Ferrara as the tough Viking-in-training Astrid and Hiccup’s object of desire; Superbad buddies Christopher Mintz-Plasse and Jonah Hill as fellow Viking trainees; and Craig Ferguson as the gruff trainer Gobber.

Dreamworks Animation knows a thing or two about story without having to talk down to the kids or put in too many pop-culture references that can be annoying. But HTYD might be their best effort yet, since it combines the elements of a touching story with some heart-stopping visuals. Sure, every other movie made these days is in 3D, and while for some, nothing really is gained by the technology (Clash of Titans, for example), others benefit greatly. HTYD fits in that latter category. The 3D animation absolutely dazzles – and gives the film a thrilling edge. The aerial sequences, flying on the back of a dragon, are as good – or better – than any live action shots, while the final climactic battle makes you grab your the arms of your theater seat. HTYD is simply an entertaining adventure from start to finish.

By Phil Wallace

With a rare serious role in the movie Greenberg, Ben Stiller has generated Oscar buzz for the first time in his career. But is his performance enough to earn him a nomination?

If Greenberg had come out in November instead of March, then he would certainly be in the conversation. This is because Stiller is a big name from Hollywood royalty who would garner some attention from industry types for doing something different. But March movies seldom get noticed by Academy voters, and Stiller seems to lack energy for the part. On the other hand, Greta Gerwig has a breakout performance as the female lead, and she should be discussed for Best Supporting Actress… even if the timing of Greenberg makes that less likely.

Stiller stars as Roger Greenberg, a 40-year old man recently released from a mental hospital after suffering a nervous breakdown. He flies from New York to Los Angeles in order to housesit for his much more successful younger brother, who has taken his family on an overseas vacation for six weeks.

Greenberg works to adapt to life in LA without a car, while developing an awkward –  and at times sexual – relationship with his brother’s assistant Florence (played by Gerwig). Greenberg is generally a failure at life, and his inability to live in the present coupled with his hope futile hopes at reliving the past are common themes throughout the film. Greenberg can no longer fulfill his lifelong dreams, and much of the movie is about him and his friends having come to grips with that reality.

Stiller is fairly convincing as the arrogant and short-tempered Greenberg, but his portrayal of Roger seems to be missing the extra punch needed to turn in a great performance. Too often, Stiller has the same slightly smug look on his face, and he only seems break out of it when he snaps into mini-rage. Like Adam Sandler’s more serious roles, Stiller makes the transition from comedy to drama by toning himself down while seeming unable to infuse new energy back into his part. Stiller’s performance is still considerably better than Sandler’s, in say, Spanglish, but the dramatic role still doesn’t quite work for him.

In the meantime, Gerwig is an absolute winner as the young and quirky assistant. Gerwig plays a character that a 20-something could easily find today, yet one seldom sees the traits she’s portrays exhibited on the big screen. The director, Noah Baumbach, clearly understands the post-college demographic in his decision to cast Gerwig.

Florence has dreams of her own, but she lacks ambition and tries her best just to get by. In reality she’s dedicated to her employer, extremely diligent with her assignments, but generally confused about how to handle life. Florence generally accepts everything offered to her in the world, with both an open-mind an apparent fear of ever saying “no,” even though she looks at the offerings with a healthy dose of skepticism. She’s cute, she’s quirky, but she struggles to find the opportunity to just be herself.

If Greenberg had come out later in the year, then Gerwig’s performance is the type of role that would certainly make her a candidate for a Best Supporting Actress nomination (or Best Actress, depending on how the film’s producers would want to designate her). But barring a surprise marketing campaign from Focus Features and Universal Pictures, it’s likely most voters won’t even think to put the DVD into their players… if it even gets mailed to them.

It’s a shame, because Greenberg captures the essence of what it’s like to live in Los Angeles (especially Hollywood) as well as any movie that’s come out in recent years. The city is almost like the film’s third character, and one that the vast majority of Academy members could identify with. The repeated driving dilemmas are all too familiar to Angelinos, as are the Runyon Canyon hikes, and one truly gets the sense that each character is isolated in their own little pod when they’re at home.

Still, Gerwig’s performance is about the only thing that’s Oscar-worthy about Greenberg. Without giving too much away, the film loses focus in its final 30 minutes, seems to go in several different bizarre directions, only to leave viewers with an unfulfilling and oddly muted ending.

In nearly every industry, sport, or contest, there is an inevitable push to compare the best offerings of one year to another. This is especially true in film, where fans of certain movies rally vigorously behind their choices, hoping to fuse together that fine line between universal quality and personal taste.

The Academy provides us a wonderful annual contest, but there is no awards assembly to tackle the questions that really tickle us. What was the best film of the 70’s? Who had the best acting performance of the 90’s? Is such-and-such winner regarded as highly today as it was then? Why not have an Academy Awards of the Decade, a ceremony that reminisces in the great films of yesteryear, and then stacks them up against each other in an ultimate challenge of cream of the cream of the crop.

Have no fear! With that idea in mind, we’ve staged a contest of our own here at AwardsPicks.com, gathering Top-10 lists from all of our premier writers. Who needs the Academy when you have us? Just as there is no accounting for the public’s taste, there is equally no predicting the whirlpool of opinion among critics and reviewers. We had many different orderings, but in the end, here is the will of the collective:

10. Chicago (2002): Average score of 8.43
9. Crash (2005): Average score of 6.93
8. A Beautiful Mind (2001): Average score of 6.50
7. Million Dollar Baby (2004): Average score of 5.79
6. Slumdog Millionaire (2008): Average score of 5.50
5. No Country for Old Men (2007): Average score of 5.43
4. The Hurt Locker (2009): Average score of 5.14
3. Gladiator (2000): Average score of 4.43
2. The Departed (2006): Average score of 4.21
1. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003): Average score of 2.64

(NOTE: Staff writers who voted include Paul Popiel, Steve Neumann, Bryce Van Kooten, Ayinde Waring, Kit Bowen, Nate Freiberg, Savanna New, Michaela, Zanello, Colin Campbell, Steve Gustafson, Christa Youngpeter, Adam Spunberg, Phil Wallace, and Jeremy Martin)

I am proud to say that my personal list, which you will see below, runs pretty close to the averages above. Before I delve into my selections, however, let’s make a few observations:

1. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is clearly the preferred choice, winning by nearly 1.5 points. Five of the 14 voters placed LOTR No. 1 on their lists, and of the remaining nine, five more have it in their top three. The lowest placement was fifth, by three voters. There is no question that Peter Jackson’s epic conclusion resonates most vividly as the superlative film of the decade.

2. The Departed and Gladiator are almost a wash, but they appear to have separated themselves from the pack. The Departed seems to be consistently recognized as among the top films, registering zero No. 1 votes but plenty between two and five. Gladiator, on the other hand, received three first-place votes, but it also polled last for two voters and seventh for two more. Evidently, Gladiator was more polarizing.

3. Recent honoree The Hurt Locker spearheads the next group of four films, all close in tabulation. No Country for Old Men, Slumdog Millionaire, and Million Dollar Baby are easily within range of each other. Amazingly, Million Dollar Baby drew three first-place votes, so Clint Eastwood’s feminist-boxer flick is officially the most diversely-viewed picture on the slate.

4. A Beautiful Mind and Crash form the next tier. Crash dependably falls in the bottom half among our data, but A Beautiful Mind struck a chord in a few cases, achieving as high as a No. 2 vote.

5. Chicago makes an extremely convincing caboose. No question about the general feeling here, as the oft-questioned winner snags four 10th-place votes, five ninth-place votes, and two eighth-place votes. Its highest recording is fourth.

Of course, we are all entitled to our own opinions. Just because AwardsPicks.com endorses a certain assortment does not mean that has to be yours. As you review my list, please feel free to refresh your memory with the accompanying trailers, provided for your entertainment:

10. Chicago (2002)

Like many of my colleagues, I never quite understood how Chicago could have possibly won an Oscar. Its competition was Gangs of New York, The Hours, The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, and The Pianist. Looking back, The Hours – perceived by many at the time as an instant classic – has not lived up to expectation. Compelling as Nicole Kidman’s portrayal of Virginia Woolf may be, the movie is so painfully slow, very few people would ever want to endure it twice. Polanski’s masterpiece, The Pianist, paid penance for its director’s crimes, but the film itself is still quite powerful. Of course, everyone knows The Two Towers was the best movie that year, but the Academy members were saving their accolades for Return of the King.

—

9. Crash (2005)

Crash is all about Los Angeles. Hollywood is all about Los Angeles. Brokeback Mountain features homosexuals. Hollywood didn’t want to be considered too gay-friendly. Put those four thoughts together and you can see how Crash pulled off one of the biggest upsets in Oscars history. Perhaps the Academy should have given more credence to the pool, particularly to Spielberg’s Munich or other contenders Capote and Good Night, and Good Luck, but the bitterness over the Brokeback Mountain debacle still ices many people’s perceptions of Crash. I enjoyed Crash quite a bit and would rank it much higher than Chicago, but ninth seems about right on this compilation of winners.

—

8. Million Dollar Baby (2004)

Watching the trailer (a pretty awesome trailer), I do remember how much I enjoyed certain segments of this movie. Clint Eastwood, Hilary Swank, and Morgan Freeman all provide superb performances. I almost hate to sink it as low as eighth, but these are Best Pictures, after all. Its main competition was The Aviator, a battle that came down to the wire. Amusingly, it is probably the offbeat comedy, Sideways, that boasts the strongest legacy today among the public. Finding Neverland never carried serious consideration, but I loved it and thought it should have competed with the heavyweights (no pun intended).

—

7. A Beautiful Mind (2001)

Maybe an effective trailer, but it seems a little too marketed for the CW crowd. First up: A Beautiful Mind. Next: One Tree Hill. In all seriousness, this movie was absolutely carried by Russell Crowe and Jennifer Connelly. Without their inspiring performances, the film would not be half of what it was. Putting aside that The Fellowship of the Ring should have won – OF COURSE – let’s also appreciate the rest of the field. Moulin Rouge and Gosford Park were both sensational in their own way, and In the Bedroom possesses that creepy quality that stays with you well after a viewing. A Beautiful Mind was an excellent film, but it may have been the least among nominees in an extraordinary year.

—

6. The Hurt Locker (2009)

We’ve barely had a chance to digest what happened in these awards, but The Hurt Locker seems fairly popular among my co-writers. Over time, I may move The Hurt Locker up my list, but I still feel a grander loyalty to Inglourious Basterds, Up in the Air, and possibly An Education. As for Avatar, that’s like comparing apples and bombs.

—

5. No Country for Old Men (2007)

No Country for Old Men may not fit your usual Best Picture description, but it was about time the Coen Brothers received some overdue honors. A literally flawless depiction of Cormac McCarthy’s book, the film leaves an unforgettable impression, especially the performance of Javier Bardem. Juno – while an excellent effort – is not quite in the same league, Atonement fell apart in the second half, and There Will Be Blood was excruciating to sit through (don’t ever give that, or The Hours, to a person on suicide watch … seriously!). Michael Clayton was the worthiest challenger in my eyes, but difficult to argue with this film. That’s why it makes my top half.

—

4. Slumdog Millionaire (2008)

Now there is a trailer that gets your adrenaline soaring! I absolutely loved this movie, because it exposed us to something culturally-enriching, mixing unspeakably-horrible events within a hopeful fable. I also really enjoyed The Curious Case of Benjamin Button for its uniqueness, but nothing could overcome the momentum that Danny Boyle’s Slumdog brought to the cinematic world. Frost/Nixon was a nicely-executed adaptation of the play, Milk a grand effort, and The Reader subtly effective, but the only movie that year in Slumdog’s league for me was WALL-E.

—

3. Gladiator (2000)

A little more historical accuracy and Gladiator would have ascended to No. 2 on my list. Originally billed as a summer blockbuster, Ridley Scott brought much much more to the table. With an outstanding performance from Russell Crowe, as usual, Gladiator embodies what the big picture experience is all about. Chocolat was a delicious diversion, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon a fascinating import, and Traffic a mature rendition of the drug problems in America. Erin Brockovich? Spunky, but not a Best Picture. Still, Gladiator prevailed over a solid crop of films, and as the numbers suggest above, the movie continues to electrify its audiences today.

—

2. The Departed (2006)

I remember fidgeting at the edge of my seat and never stopping, both the first and second times I saw this movie. It sucks you in unapologetically and never lets you breathe. How Leonardo DiCaprio did not get nominated (they gave him the nomination for Blood Diamond instead) I will never know. Consider that you had Martin Scorsese, Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson, Alec Baldwin, Mark Wahlberg, and Martin Sheen among others, all assembled together to create the suspense of a lifetime. Letters from Iwo Jima, Babel, Little Miss Sunshine (very enjoyable), and The Queen were all stellar movies, but The Departed was a special Best Picture. My colleagues seem to agree.

—

1. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

No contest. NO CONTEST. No cinematic experience this decade even compared to this one (and by that, I mean the trilogy as a whole). Just watching the trailer raises hairs on my neck. I want to sprint to the nearest television and pop in the extended DVD, so I can be reunited with this ethereal world Peter Jackson created. Having these celestial films to look forward to every December was an unparalleled delight, and I can only hope The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings Prequel live up to the same standard. Among its competitors, I found Mystic River to be immensely powerful, and Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World is vastly underrated. I’ll admit that Lost in Translation gave me a few butterflies, but the sheer scope of what Peter Jackson accomplished with Lord of the Rings may never be achieved again, nor should we expect it to be. Thank you, LOTR, for making life a little bit more wonderful.

Earlier this week, Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles Times wrote a piece declaring The Hurt Locker a Hollywood dream. I found his diction a bit interesting, especially since “Hollywood” and “dream” have often intersected and The Hurt Locker was anything but a dreamlike experience. Somehow, I just can’t imagine too many kids going home and legitimately fantasizing about being on a hellish bomb squad. Those who did probably have the makeup of Jeremy Renner’s now-notorious character.

The basis of Turan’s argument is that The Hurt Locker embodies a more antiquated style of film, where smarts, guts, and the genuine pursuit of quality trump marketing and the crackling of 800-calorie popcorn. Avatar is the villain in this, of course, since it represents everything the Academy has tried to spring away from. Cameron’s showcase may be grandiose and exquisite, but it fronts generic characters and a regurgitated storyline, and – prepare yourselves – it’s popular! Contrast that with The Hurt Locker, which barely made an appearance on screens and still was relatively unknown by the general public until the Oscars rolled around. In a sense, the concept of “the little engine that could” aligned itself with a brilliantly-disturbing portrayal of war psychology.

As I told many of my Hurt Locker-toting colleagues, I enjoyed the film and thought it was – if not quite spectacular – at least worthy of the award. I now have it fourth on my personal list of 2009 movies. I recognize that the raw storyline leaves a battery-acid aftertaste of provocative thought, and the individual scenes are superbly constructed. Bigelow’s meticulous realism is always present, rejecting any unnatural sentimentality and refraining from agenda. In the eyes of many critics, The Hurt Locker was the first defining film on the Iraq War. I agree with that assertion.

The bigger question, of course, surrounds The Hurt Locker’s legacy as a Best Picture winner. Will it be remembered as one of the all-time greats, on par with Casablanca (1944, as mentioned by Turan) and Schindler’s List (1993), or shrink into obscurity like A Beautiful Mind (2001) and Million Dollar Baby (2004). I expect it to land somewhere in between, following the path of similar introspective war films; The Deer Hunter (1978) and Platoon (1986) come to mind in particular.

Meanwhile, the legacies of Avatar, Up in the Air, and Inglourious Basterds remain to be seen, especially in the case of Avatar. If Cameron’s technology becomes THE staple of future cinema, Avatar will ascend to heights beyond The Hurt Locker in the public consciousness. Similarly, Up in the Air has been described by some as a film that will persevere well beyond its years, even if the Academy showed it a surprising level of callousness on Oscar night. Inglourious Basterds has a wide range of potential, but something tells me it will long be remembered as Tarantino’s most underappreciated classic. Then again, he revealed such ingenuity here that maybe there are more masterpieces to come from his screwy mind. As the expression goes, time will tell.

But putting time and legacies aside, the present belongs to The Hurt Locker. Even if Avatar becomes known as the progressive movie that saved cinema, the plaque will always read in golden calligraphy: The Hurt Locker, 2009. Nobody can ever take that away. The Hurt Locker may indeed be Hollywood’s dream, but – let’s face it – it also needed the Academy’s endorsement. Avatar will do just fine on its own.