Oscar Pre-Game, and a Revised Top 10

The awards start in a few hours, Swedish death/punk metal band Entombed is playing in my headphones, and instead of finally sitting down and watching THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON I'm here writing this up. Because, frankly, I'm tired of the catch-up, the drive to sit through BUTTON has pretty much evaporated. I'm sure I'll catch up with it in the next few weeks, but for now I'm content with being a few movies short.

Before getting to my revised list, here are my lame-o predictions, for what they're worth (you can see how I did last year over here):

Best Actor: For weeks the odds have been on either Mickey Rourke or Sean Penn, with the difference being who gets Best Picture. The thinking is if SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE trounces like everything believes, then Penn will get best actor to make up for MILK's losses. I have no idea if this kind of thinking goes into the decisioning, but for my money Rourke was galvanizing in THE WRESTLER, and deserves the award. Will not being nominated for anything else hurt it? Who knows.

Best Supporting Actor: I don't see how anyone has a chance against Heath Ledger this year. They're already re-writing the rule so that his daughter can have the statue held in trust until she's 18. His Joker was without a doubt the highlight of THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, and I think all the other (supposed) snubs the film's received will make this a shoo-in. All that being said, how frickin' great was Robert Downey jr. in TROPIC THUNDER? And how frickin' cool to be recognized for it? My heart goes out, though, to James Franco who was equally amazing in PINEAPPLE EXPRESS, but get no nod here. One day the Academy will wise up to the acting intricacies of comedy. But this year just be glad a comic book character is getting the award.

Best Actress: I think they give it to Kate Winslet, even though my worship of her beauty didn't blind me to the fact that THE READER was merely an okay movie that didn't offer anything special in its execution. In a perfect world? Michelle Williams would have been nominated for the incredible WENDY AND LUCY, and we'd be seeing either her or Anne Hathaway up at the podium tonight. Nice to see Melissa Leo get a nod for FROZEN RIVER, but who are we fooling with the Angelina Jolie nomination? The old fashioned acting apparent in CHANGELING doesn't hold up with the rest of the nominated company.

Best Supporting Actress: Always a hard category, and I'd be happy with Viola Davis or Penelope Cruz - both are so draw-dropping you can't take your eyes off of them in their all-too-brief performances in DOUBT and VICKY CHRISTINA BARCELONA, respectively. I did love Marisa Tomei in THE WRESTLER, but I think her role as Pam/Cassidy didn't turn the movie on its head the way the other two performances did.

Best Director: Is this where the SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE train starts a-rollin'? I don't have nearly the ill will for this movie that a lot of others seem to. And Danny Boyle may have a flashy, LCD visual style in many of his films, but I think he uses every trick to propel the story forward. Not having seen BUTTON I can't comment on David Fincher's further (wonderful) Kubrickain spiral, but he and Gus Van Sant seem to be the only other contenders here. This may be the rare year where we see a different Director and Best Picture win.

Best Picture: The money seems to be on SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE, and I'd be hard pressed to go against it. Out of the nominated films, I was most affected by MILK, and I would love to see that get the win. But I wouldn't be overly upset at a SLUMDOG win: to be honest I'm more upset at a film like THE READER taking a slot where (IMHO) a more deserving film like DOUBT or IN BRUGES could have been placed. FROST / NIXON was really good, but over time seems to have faded as more and more better movies kept jumping up in its place. And although I had plenty of reservations about THE DARK KNIGHT as a "perfect" film, it's record numbers (not something I'd normally consider as indicative of quality) and generally high praise does seem conspicuously absent this year.

A few others, sans the pithy comments:

• Best Screenplay (Original): WALL-E or MILK, although I wish it would go to IN BRUGES
• Best Screenplay (Adapted): DOUBT, though it will probably go to either MILK or SLUMDOG
• Best Music - Original Song: "O Saya" By A.R. Rahman and M.I.A., although I think there was a real snub in not nominating either "Dracula's Lament" or "Inside Of You" from FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL
  
• Best Music - Original Score: WALL-E

And now, without any comments (hooray) after watching about another 20 films from 2008 after the initial was made (you can see that here), here is my new Top 10 for 2008, in no real discernible order:

1. MILK
2. IN BRUGES
3. DOUBT
4. LET THE RIGHT ONE IN
5. WALL-E
6. THE WRESTLER
7. IRON MAN
8. THE FALL
9. SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE
10. PINEAPPLE EXPRESS/FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL
    

Movie #21: The Wrestler (2008)

Getting to the end of the mad dash to catch as many Oscar nominated films as possible, and it feels nice. There's an odd feeling that accompanies it, though: THE WRESTLER was one of my most anticipated films of 2008, and when it came time to watch it I held off and watched other things, did other things, simply because I was getting tired of having to watch the films.

But THE WRESTLER deserves better than that. The talk for the past couple rightfully centers on Mickey Rourke, who is able to completely dissolve into the role of Randy the Ram. For all the talk of Rourke essentially mirroring his life, I think the audience brings that to the film more than Rourke does, and it's a brilliant move. For two hours he is Randy, and it's only after the credits roll and you hear Bruce Springsteen's mournful title song that you begin to realize how much of Rourke is in the role. It's a difficult balancing act, but he pulls if off and I think that's why the nomination is so well deserved.

But this wasn't only the film Rourke needed to make; this was the film Darren Aronofsky needed to cleanse his palette after the lengthy trials and tribulations that came with realizing THE FOUNTAIN. Aronofsky looks like a different director in the WRESTLER, opting for a very grainy, low-budget documentary look. But you can't get away from the camera, which weaves in and follows the action in a way that sets it apart from a more novice filmmaker. There's a great instance where we watch Randy walk through a series of corridors before stepping out into the crowd, which is mirrored later by a very similar walk that only leads to the deli counter where he's picked up a couple of extra hours. When it comes to the actual wrestling scenes the Aronofsky makes sure that everything is so brutal it's almost too painful to watch. One of the things THE WRESTLER excels at is really showing you the life of what these guys have to go through before, during, and just after the matches. Anyone still raging over the fact that wrestling is fake isn't seeing the point. Aronofsky makes sure that you do.

But if THE WRESTLER was just about life in the ring, it wouldn't have the emotional impact it does. The movie follows Rourke as Randy "The Ram" Robinson, a once great wrestler beaten down physically by his time in the ring. His body's a mass of injuries that takes dozens of pills to continue to function. He's broke, partially deaf, and living in a small trailer when he can afford to pay his rent. During the week he unloads trucks for a grocery store, and at night he pines away at the local strip club for Cassidy, the beautiful stripper who reminds him of the glory times of the 80s when Quiet Riot was on the radio and wrestling was on every weekend. His daughter hates him for never being there, and all of this sits like a boulder on his shoulders. But even though every nerve in his body tells him he can't continue, his mind and soul still crave the roar of the crowds and the thrill that comes with being in the spotlight, even though it can kill him.

THE WRESTLER shows Randy's life in all of these circumstances, and doesn't shy away from the sadness of being out the spotlight, of having a meet-and-greet at the local Kiwanas Club and having no one show up to you table, where you have a stack of old VHS tapes and a Polaroid camera for pictures. But that sadness is always tempered by Randy's optimism, whether it's connecting with Cassidy during a shopping expedition or sweetly complimenting his opponents before a match. He can't help being the showman; even at the deli counter he son falls into the familiar patterns of making jokes and passing could cuts out like a football game.

THE WRESTLER takes all of these pieces and combines them into an emotional portrait of a man who refuses to cave in or change on anything other than his terms. By throwing away all the fancy editing and effects that were a staple of his previous films, Darren Aronofsky has crafted his most delicate and personal film. And by not holding anything back as Randy "The Ram" Robinson, Mickey Rourke has given a performance that will stand long after awards are won or lost.

Movie #17: Encounters at the End of the World (2008)

Werner Herzog is a filmmaker who isn't content to simply place his stamp on each of his films, he has to grind it in with the heel of his boot, making sure there is no mistake that what we're about to see, whether fictional narrative or documentary, is his vision, his unique take on the subject matter.

His latest endeavor, the documentary ENCOUNTERS AT THE END OF THE WORLD is no different. The narration in the first few minutes makes clear Herzog has little interest in "another fucking penguin picture." His interest lies as much in the days and dreams of the people living there as it does the beautiful scenery. At first he's troubled by relatively benign weather; it's only when the winds start to come up that he truly feels it's time to explore the continent.

The photography is breathtaking. I understand the accolades heaped upon films like PLANET EARTH, but there's a immediacy to the HD video in ENCOUNTERS that causes you to reach out, straining to feel the cold emanating from the screen. The most gorgeous moments come under the ice, as divers bring the cameras for a look at the alien architecture made possible by the movement of the water and the ice, and the strange life that calls this environment home.

When he's not lingering over the vistas and the indigenous life, Herzog is probing the people who have, for dozens of different reasons, followed a singular call to come to the most inhospitable section of the globe. From a plumber who boasts royal Incan heritage to a group of scientists who put their ears to the ice in order to hear the psychedelic, inorganic sounds of the seals,each person parts with a small portion of the dream that led them to the ice and snow. Herzog's voice, sometimes probing, sometimes backing off, always seems to be in command, and as an invisible guide he makes a compelling voice through the course of the film.

Of course, he eventually does (as one must when in Antarctica) come across penguins, and what started in the beginning of the film as a casual joke about another penguin movie becomes a heartbreaking scene as the question of madness in animals is addressed. It's one of many beautiful moments that make ENCOUNTERS AT THE END OF THE WORLD a treasured film.

*Quick Note: Herzog states his fascination with Antarctica came after seeing some of the dazzling underwater photography by Henry Kaiser while Kasier was scoring Herzog's previous GRIZZLY MAN. It took a couple moments to sink in: the guy doing the music for Herzog's film also shot underwater footage in Antarctica? Apparently so, and the guy in question, Henry Kaiser, is a fantastic guitar player who's records are a treat of jazz, rock, and more avant-garde material. It's his picture in the above screencap.

Movie #15: Vicky Christina Barcelona (2008)

For all her fame, Scarlett Johansson doesn't really appear in a lot of popular movies. And when she does (NANNY DIARIES, HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU), they're typically pretty bad.

Use her correctly, though, and she's a charming presence who can more than hold her own in a scene. Woody Allen seems to know this, and also knows that having Johnasson as his Muse seems to have reinvigorated him. VICKY CHRISTINA BARCELONA is his best film in years, a return to the comedic drama that he did best in films like HANNAH AND HER SISTERS.

Vicky and Christina are best friends who have the opportunity to spend the summer with Vicky's aunt and uncle in Barcelona. Vicky (Rebbecca Hall, in what kind of passes for the Woody Allen role) is the logical, sound type, engaged to be married to a man she says is stable and successful. Christina is the passionate risk taker, and Johansson embodies her with a free spirit that is instantly alluring without being sleazy. Allen takes the Spanish city and films it with an intimacy that marks all of his New York films, and it becomes as much as character as the people who inhabit it. They go out to dinner and meet Javier Bardem, a painter who truthfully tells them he would like them to fly away with his for a weekend of food, art, and sex. Vicky is disgusted, Christina intrigued, and they go. What happens over the course of the weekend is surprising and just the beginning of two months of discovery about what its is each other believes they want and what they actually need.

All this and we don't even physically get to see Penelope Cruz until halfway through the picture. She is a constant presence, Bardem's ex-wife, who perhaps tried to kill her husband and has a history of mental illness. When she finally appears she is a whirlwind of emotion, and her influence on the lives of everyone take the film in some unexpected directions, least of all the much talked-about 3-way between Cruz, Bardem and Johnasson.

Woody Allen has been making great films for so many years, it shouldn't be a surprise that he can still pull it off so late in the game. But it is, and VICKY CHRISTINA BARCELONA is a wonderful film that shouldn't be missed.

Movie #14: Slumdog Millionaire (2008)

I'm a little baffled by the critical backlash SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE seems to be getting. Roger Ebert, in his review of the movie and elsewhere has stated that, "it's now what a movie's about, but how it's about it." That statement defines the appeal of a movie like SLUMDOG. The story may be conventional in its subject matter (rags to riches, boy meets girl, loses girl, gets her back), but Danny Boyle's frenetic execution makes SLUMDOG a breathtaking experience.

By now the story has pretty much been told from every trailer, TV spot, and word of mouth since its opening: Jamal Malik, a poor tea server at a giant call center in Mumbai, India, appears on the Indian version of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire and, in a stunning display quickly rises to 10,000,000 rupees. It's believed he somehow cheated, and is taken into custody where he undergoes torture and interrogation by the police. Over the course of this interrogation, Jamal takes us through his entire life and shows how the events that shaped it helped to answer the questions.

It's all more than a bit coincidental, but Boyle's not interested in reality per se, as least when it comes to the logic of the plot. What he is interested in is the visceral experiences of Jamal, his brother Salim, and the object of Jamal's heart, the beautiful and delicate Latika, set against a Mumbai never before presented in a mainstream film. His fills the screen with lush colors, his signature flashy editing and a pulsing, thunderous score that finds its soul in equal parts traditional Indian melodies and modern industrial noise. Their performances are all good, but Dev Patel as the modern day Jamal is a huge presence, and commands the screen whenever he's on.

Danny Boyle's look moves from picture to picture, and it's incredible that he can choose so many disparate genres (horror, sci-fi, family, drama) and make that style work for the film. If you don't like the pacing and digital flash of his films, SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE might not change your mind. But the way it goes about presenting its subjects is a welcome diversion from the slow, uninspiring dramas that usually tackle this type of material.

Movie #13: Kung Fu Panda (2008)

The Great Catch-up of 2008 continues, this time with another DreamWorks' latest entry in an attempt to usurp the stranglehold Pixar has over animated features: KUNG FU PANDA. Far more modest in its ambittions than WALL-E, the drive of KUNG FU PANDA is to simply entertain; what message there is (essentially, "the answer is within you" or something to that effect) isn't exactly earth-shattering, but that means KUNG FU PANDA is free to focus on making things fast and fun, which it manages to accomplish in spades.

Jack Black plays Po, a rather large and dumpy panda bear (which is how all panda are, but there's something about Black's performance that accentuates this rather "roundness") who dreams of being a kung fu warrior, a master of the various disciplines like his idols, the Furious Five, each technique mirrored in the animal who wields it. Alas, in reality Po is merely a waiter in his father's (a stork, which is never explained, thereby making it even funnier) noodle shop, destined or doomed to learn his father's secret ingredient for noodle soup and eventually manage the restaurant. Trouble's a-brewin' though - evil Tai-Lung (a white tiger) has escaped imprisonment, and the time has come to select the Dragon Warrior, the one who is destined to be the greatest martial artist in the Valley. Against all probability, PO is chosen, and it's up to Master Shifu (voiced by Dustin Hoffman with surprising depth) and the Furious Five to train and prepare Po for what's to come.

Brief aside: what the hell kind of animal was Dustin Hoffman?

The movie's pretty standard - no one like him at first, and tries to get him to quit. But Po's so likable and upbeat (this is Black's most winning performance since SCHOOL OF ROCK) that of course they eventually come around, and Shifu bonds with Po, and he learns that the power of the Dragon Warrior has always resided within himself. You can pretty much see where every beat in KUNG FU PANDA is going, but Hoffman and Black are so good in their roles that they carry the movie along with them. The animation isn't WALL-E quality, but it looks damn fine just the same, especially the drop-dead gorgeous 2-D animation that bookends the film. Slow-motion is also used to great comedic effect; I just finished Roger Ebert's book about Martin Scorsese, and he talks about how ground-breaking Scorsese's use of slow-motion has been to film. I wouldn't say the effect in PANDA is on the same level, but I do feel comfortable saying that whenever slow motion's applied in the movie, it made me laugh.

A few minor complaints - the Furious Five are really under-used. David Cross's Crane and Seth Rogan's Mantis get the most mileage. But it's a sin that Jackie Chan as the Monkey is barely utilized in the film. How do you have the guy who basically set the modern standard for martial arts comedy in your film and barely give him any moments?

Despite that, the fight scenes are very well done, and if you're looking for some flashy fun that doesn't require a lot of thinking, or you just want to remember how charming Jack Black can be, KUNG FU PANDA fits the bill.

Re-Evaluating 2008

Before I officially started this blog, I was posting all of my film-related items over on Geek Monkey, my general purpose little corner of the Interwebs. I posted two articles near the end of the year: my (Almost) and (Actual) Top 10 Movies of 2008. Now, I realize I don't yet have the cultivation or experience of many of the online critics (you probably won't hear me bemoan the lack of MY WINNIPEG on lists, because I haven't seen it, and that's not even considered much of an obscure film), but I feel pretty happy about what I pick, and won't back down on liking something because the critical consensus is against it.

However, the past month I've been trying to catch up on all films I've missed (a substantial amount), and it looks like the Top 10 list is going to have to be revised. For the record, here are my lists as they stood back at the end of the year.

The (Almost) Top Ten (crossed off films have subsequently been watched)

1. THE WRESTLER
2. DOUBT SHOTGUN STORIES
3. THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON
4. LET THE RIGHT ONE IN GRAN TORINO
5. JCVD
6. VICKY CHRISTINA BARCELONA
7. SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE
8. MAN ON WIRE ENCOUNTERS AT THE END OF THE WORLD
9. SYNECDOCHE, NY
10. A CHRISTMAS TALE

I have BENJAMIN BUTTON, SLUMDOG, and VICKY CHRISTINA at the house queued up and ready to go, which means that more films will hopefully be scratched out and replaced before the Independent Spirit Awards and the Oscars rear their head at month's end.

I'll save my final list for when I've satisfied myself that I've seen everything I can to make a proper evaluation, but for the record, here's the list as it stood back in December (nothing reviewed on this site had been seen at the time of the list). Explanations are in the original post:

The (Actual) Top Ten (in alphabetical order excepting the top)

1. WALL-E and MILK (tie)
2. THE DARK KNIGHT
3. THE FALL
4. FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL
5. FROST / NIXON
6. IN BRUGES
7. IRON MAN
8. THE SPIDERWICK CHRONICLES
9. THE VISITOR

I'm backlogged three movies right now (only one of which is nominated for anything), but hope to have at least a dozen more films up and ready to go by the time we hit the awards. I realize this may appear slightly incongruous coming shortly on the heels of my remarks concerning Oscar Ennui, but if the various lists and award shows are good for anything, they're certainly great chances to become more exposed to films and experiences I otherwise wouldn't.

Your Homework: Watch one film from anyone's Best Of List you normally wouldn't have seen. What did you think?

Movie #10: Doubt (2008)

If the questions and themes that are addressed in John Patrick Shanley's DOUBT, the film adaptation of his multiple award-winning play, seem a little obvious, the beautiful cinematic quality with which DOUBT is filmed more than makes up for it. Here is an adaptation from the stage that manages to completely work as a film, and doesn't feel (like MAMMA MIA reviewed earlier) like a fish out of water.

Father Flynn (Philip Seymour Hoffman) is the new priest at the Catholic church. A self-admitted progressive, he smokes, takes sugar with his tea, and enjoys the use of a ball point pen. All the things that positively rankle Sister Aloysius's nerves. Meryl Streep at first seems like a caricature of all the Sunday School nuns who rap knuckles with rulers, but her mannerisms and archaic view of religious life come into sharp focus when Father Flynn's motives and actions pertaining to an alter boy are brought to life.

The acting is top-notch, but between Hoffman and Streep you wouldn't really expect any less. The surprise acting comes from Amy Adams, who uses her innocent, wide-eyed persona from JUNEBUG and ENCHANTED to different ends as the naive Sister James, caught between the enormous wills of Father Flynn and Sister Aloysius. And Viola Davis, as the mother of the alter boy, may only be in one scene, but that scene is so powerful and the twist of the knife that is her dual confession to Sister Aloysius so painful that her that's imparted so shocking that her performance may in fact be the most riveting in the whole film.

The other big surprise is Shanley's direction. His ability to take something from the stage and imbue it with the grace and movement necessary for a film is assured, and perhaps allowed him the ability to emphasize certain aspects that, in a play, would be difficult. Father Flynn gives three sermons during the course of DOUBT, but the second one, concerning gossip, is the only one where Shanley actually films the story being told, about a woman who gossips and is punished by having to tear open a down pillow and collect all the feathers that blow into the wind. Why this sermon, and not the first one? It's finally made clear in the climax of the confrontation between Streep and Davis, and Shanley sets up an overhead shot, looking down at Sister Aloysius, the wind blowing the dead leaves all around her, feathers to be picked up. There are other visual hints and images that recur throughout the film: the wind is constantly finding its way into their lives - blowing down branches that hit one nun, coming through the windows and scattering Sister Aloysius' papers. Father Flynn at one point is troubled as he walks the hallways of the school - the stained glass window of the Lord's eye seems to follow him, separated by the spindles of a staircase.

But perhaps the best trick Shanley manages in DOUBT is the way he expertly plays his audience to fall into the same trap his characters do. DOUBT is not about whether or not Father Flynn actually did the things Sister Aloysius accuses him of. It's about our human tendency towards certainty, towards assurance that we know what we know. When I watched DOUBT I was entirely certain as to whether or not Father Flynn did what he is accused of. But something happens near the end of the film that smashes through that certainty, and left me with doubt as to my assertion.

That in itself isn't the trick Shanley pulls off in DOUBT. At the very end of the film Sister Aloysius admits that doubt has crept into her as well, but what's amazing is that her certainty was the exact opposite of what mine, and I expect the audience's, was. It's a revelation, and her anguish at the end as she admits this to Sister James that stayed with me for days after watching the movie.

How DOUBT received nominations for all four of its principle actors as well as its screenplay but failed to get a Best Picture or Director nod is beyond me. Maybe the fact the play already won a Tony Award, a Pulitzer, and the Drama Desk award was enough. A shame, though, because this is definitely one of my Top 5 films of the year.

Movie #6: The Reader (2008)

Well written, well acted and executed with clarity and finesse, THE READER, based on the short novel by Bernard Schlink, is a solid piece of filmmaking that unfortunately suffers from being just that: a solid piece of filmmaking. It's a Volvo: solid, reliable, and gets you where you want to go, but not the type of ride you bring out to the weekend car show at the local Denny's.

Michael Berg is 15 when he meets Hanna, a much older woman who collects fares on the train in late 1950's Germany. Drawn together in a passionate affair for the summer, their lovemaking is intermingled with longer and longer bouts of Michael reading to Hanna. Why Hanna initiates this is uncertain, but as the summer unfolds it becomes apparent that the affair awakens yearnings and passions in both of them. The affair ends inexplicably, and Michael returns to his life, attending University and majoring in law. Now in his 20's, he crosses paths with Hanna again, this time as he observes a trial against a group of women accused of war crimes in WWII. Hanna is one of the accused, a Nazi prison guard at Auschwitz.

Director Stephen Daldry and screenwriter David Hare do a good job of moving the story along, jumping back and forth in time and using the adult Michael's (played by Ralph Fiennes) visit by his daughter as a framing device. Kate Winslet give another in a string of strong performances, having to both play across a number of years and garner the audience's support despite her crimes. But the standout performance is by David Kross as the young Michael Berg who, at 18, displays a masterful command of his emotions and abilities. Everything comes together just as it should, but besides Kross' performance THE READER refuses to stand out as anything other than a solid, strong film, which should be more than enough but, somehow, isn't.

Oscar Ennui

It wouldn't be much of a film blog if I didn't take a moment to talk about today's announcement of the Academy Award nominations.

In a word...meh.

Okay...that was the short version. Allow me to elaborate.

Was anyone really that surprised by what was nominated? Did you really think THE DARK KNIGHT had a chance? Understand: I really liked it a lot, but it wasn't a perfect film by any stretch of the imagination, and how could it have possibly stood up against the lure of the obvious Oscar bait that came out on late November and December?

To be honest I'm more bored than anything else. When the nominations were announced there was very little in the way of genuine surprise. On the good side Richard Jenkins and Robert Downey jr. both got nominations for outstanding work, but nothing for Michelle Williams in WENDY AND LUCY or anything for HAPPY-GO-LUCKY. Hooray for a screenwriting nod to IN BRUGES, but sadly the Coen Brothers get shut out. For every cheer there's a roar of rage.

But wait a minute. Isn't this how it's always been?

When I was younger it was a point of pride that I would quietly tip-toe out to the den in the early morning to sit in the blue glow of my television set, pad and paper in hand, an orange juice or coffee (when I was older) within easy reach, eagerly awaiting the nominations. Every announcement was a cause for celebration or dismissal, and if nothing it was a chance to argue endlessly with friends over what got left out, what would win and what should win.

Maybe a part of this was attributable to my youthful innocence and fairly narrow scope of film. Unless it was at my local multiplex or Blockbuster the chance I would be aware of many smaller or (God forbid) foreign films was practically nonexistent. I was content with what was presented to me as the cream of the crop, the choicest morsels in cinema.

But then this thing called "the Internet" happened. Lines of communication effectively shrunk the physical planet almost as fast as it expanded the film world I had previously taken for granted. Not only did I begin to hear about films of every size from every corner of the world, but for the first time it was becoming economically feasible to actually see them. And not only see them, but find others who also saw it, and talk to them about it. The workload doubled: not only was I compelled to partake of this celluloid cornucopia, but I had to wade through the limitless sea of opinion that accompanied it.

I had been steadily expanding my film palette for a few years, and I began to realize how that, as large as the world of film was, even domestic film, the platter from which the Oscar nominations were derived was of an equally impressive if opposite size.

Does this mean that the nominated films are bad? Or that the choices are completely at odds with what should be awarded? Not necessarily, and despite my utter lack of interest anymore that the Academy will reach out a little further and 1) embrace a wider range of films, and 2) acknowledge that there is no set "type" of film worthy of recognition, I'm still interested in all the nominated films. So far I've see three of the Best Picture films (MILK, FROST/NIXON and THE READER), and this weekend hope to catch a few more movies that have been nominated.

I love movies - big, small...the deal I made when I was a child still stood. Amaze me, make me feel, don't cheat me and I'm yours.

That's all I ask. So let's leave the ire and rancor that this or that wasn't nominated and just do that much more to see the things that are worth seeing.