Ryan McNeil
Surprise! For a moment or two i thought about typing out my Oscar thoughts…but then I asked myself, what fun would that be?
Instead, I have run the hurry-up offence on a very special Matineecast, one where Shane the Oscar Aficionado has sat down with me to talk nominations, predictions, and overall Academy curiosities.
Ladies and gentlemen, The Mad Hatter’s Oscar Special…
This episode has been archived, but it can be made available on request.
if you’d like to listen to it, please email ryanatthematineedotca
Here’s what’s in store in this special episode…
Runtime
49 minutes, 17 seconds
Up for Discussion
1. My brief introduction (0:00)
2. Q & A with this episode’s guest, Shane. (1:11)
3. Rundown of nominees for all acting categories, screenplay, directing, and best picture (7:06)
4. Moving from 5 to 10 Best Picture nominations. (25:00)
5. Films not nominated (29:28)
6. AVATAR vs. THE HURT LOCKER (32:36)
7. 1994 or “Art vs. Commerce” (39:16)
8. Early predictions (43:38)
Comments and feedback are welcome, Happy Oscar Season, and thanks very much for listening.
Enjoy!
Another great episode! I always feel bad for obsessing over the Oscars given how commercial they seem to go, but it was great to hear your thoughts.
Wasn't quite as big a fan of An Education as you guys seemed to be (especially the last 10 minutes), but aside from that I pretty much agree. I to have not seen The Blind Side, and I to will not be happy if it wins
I saw the Blind Side and while it's not as bad as people like to make it out to be (you know that if you don't love it you must hate it attitude I've talked about before), it's incredibly mediocre with lots of bland performances.
For comedy In the Loop is about the only one to get some love. And I think In the Loop is a million times funnier than The Hangover (which I still feel very indifferent towards).
The only thing I was really sad about is that once again Carter Burwell and Clint Mansell both got the snub, despite some amazing musical scores. It's a shame but I'd like to see them get some love.
Will be extremely interesting to see who comes out on top this year :).
Is it just me or is this one not in iTunes?
@ Tom… They haven't been going as commercial in the last few years. That's been the big complaint is that the public at large haven't seen a lot of the movies nominated.
@ Univarn… What scores did they do & not get nominated for?
@ Fletch… iTunes seems to be taking their time on this one. If it's not up tomorrow morning I'm gonna try pinging them again.
Clint Mansell's Score for Moon was amazing. Carter Burwell's score for A Serious Man was a highlight for me, but he also got snubbed for his work on Where the Wild Things Are (deemed ineligible because the movie had songs – or whatever). Granted I still think Burwell got majorly snubbed for his score to 2008's In Bruges.
This is the problem with podcasts – I listened to this this morning and was talking back to you two at various points, but not I can't remember most of them.
One I do remember, however, is that I wanted to disagree with your 1994/2009 parallel between Gump/Pulp and Hurt/Avatar.
First of all, your definition of art vs. commerce (or indie vs. studio) seemed to be based more off of box office receipts than anything else. Despite having not earned $100 mil at the box office, I can't think of many less "indie" indies than The Hurt Locker, a film directed by a well-known big-budget action director that plays out pretty much like a standard action flick.
Moreover, while Gump was indeed a commercial success, it hardly seems like even its producers thought of it along the lines of other summer blockbusters (or like Avatar). It just happened to strike a chord with people and therefore went on to make shedloads of cash.
Just listened to the podcast; a good all-around discussion!
I'm not ready to put my definite predictions and feelings out there just yet, having seen so few of the nominees (I'm going to see Avatar on Monday and am dreading the hell out of it; none of my friends liked it as anything more than eye candy, one walked out after an hour, and two fell asleep because they said it was just. so. boring). But I have to say, I was surprised by the Jason Reitman hate! What's up with that?? (Granted, I'm biased. Who was my father's best friend in high school and beyond? Ivan. But aside from knowing what a nice – and talented – guy Jason is, I genuinely like the stuff he puts out. I don't like George Clooney and I HATE Vera Farmiga, but somehow Jason got me to enjoy Up In The Air enough that, of the 10 nominees I've seen thus far, I'd prefer to see that win Best Picture. I doubt that'll change once I see the rest of the contenders.)
I'm a big Maggie Gyllenhaal fan, and equally so of Peter Sarsgaard, so I'm disappointed that Maggie doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell & that Peter wasn't even nominated. I haven't seen either of their films yet, though, so…again, I don't have the full picture!
(I agree with Fletch's comment re: Pulp Fiction/Forrest Gump vs Hurt Locker/Avatar. I don't think HL does or will ever have the "re-watchable" factor that PF had from the get-go; it'll never be a cult film, not by the way most people define "cult" movies.)
Generally, as I think I said before, I'm just disappointed with the whole season. Nothing has blown me away. I'm baffled as to how The Blind Side is being recognized, but one of the few movies that actually stirred me this year (Brothers) has been completely ignored. This will be the first time in 15 YEARS that I have no interest in even making the effort to see most of what's been nominated, and…I can only hope this isn't the beginning of a trend. It's sad to think I'll never be enthusiastic enough to throw one of my signature Oscar parties again. But this year? I'm skipping the broadcast altogether.
Stanley Tucci is back on the market because his wife DIED?! Good grief, Shane…way to throw your hat in the ring with THAT one!
I knew there was a reason we get along so well! 😉
Well played, my friend, well played.
– Suzie Anon
PS My word to type in so this will post is SPROG. Am I the only one who thinks that sounds a bit filthy? Or is that the rum talking…again?
@ Fletch… Subject matter shouldn't be a factor. PULP got a much bigger push by its studio back in '94, HURT damned near went straight to dvd. And while it's true that Bigelow is a name to people like you and I, she isn't exactly the sort of rock star director that's been winning lately…Clint, Scorsese, Ang Lee, etc.
GUMP's producers might not have seen it as a box office smash, but with Hanks being so bankable at the time they must have known they were on to something.
It's not the greatest of comparisons…but it still springs to mind.
@ Ehch… Shane has a personal dislike for Reitman stemming back to a personal encounter at a post-film Q&A. Long story.
Not to get argumentative, but HURT isn't just re-watchable, it's one of the best films of the decade! PULP took advantage of being a fresh voice in a time of monotony, but much of what it achieved was drawn from what came before it. You're right – it won't be a cult film, it will be more widely embraced.
Get out and see some of these movies. I might even go to the trouble of emailing you the best ones to start with. It's not the greatest of nominee lists, but it's far from the worst.
@ Suzie… Never said he was the model of appropriate. Glad ya dug it, after your episode went so well I had to make sure and keep the momentum going.
@Hatter – (…which I somehow just typed TWICE as "@hater"!) I blame the H1N1, again. I didn't word my Hurt Locker/cult phenom assessment properly; I re-read my comment after seeing your response to it, and it sounds like I'm saying HL wasn't terribly good, or that I didn't like it. Quite the contrary. I'm not sure just yet if I'd go so far as "one of the best of the decade," but it was a damn fine film. Very unlike anything we've seen before, in a lot of ways. And there aren't words in the English language strong enough to put across how amazing I thought ever single actor was from start to finish; not only did we get the cool little glimpses of familiar favourites (Guy and Ralph were a nice touch for me…hee…) but we also got to see extraordinary performances from the lower profile but CRAZY-TALENTED Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie and Brian Geraghty, in particular. They made me forget they weren't soldiers. Thoroughly impressive.
What I meant, in terms of re-watchability (?? I think I just invented a word), is that I don't ever want to see that film again. I don't know anyone in my circle who has seen it twice, either. And I think we all have the same reason: It was so effective that to see it again, already knowing the characters this time and being invested in a different (and deeper) way, would be…almost painful. (There are other movies I've absolutely adored that I know I'll never sit through again. House of Sand and Fog comes immediately to mind. Leaving Las Vegas. I know there are others, but my brain hurts!) So, popularity aside, that was what I was trying (and failing!) to say about why I don't feel like it's the kind of movie the masses would enjoy watching over and over again.
(I'd still cast my vote for Up In The Air as Best Picture, though – I know that'll probably get me run outta town, but something about that movie just hit me on an unexpected level, and I've thought about scenes from it a lot ever since I saw it.)
[I have to cut this in half; I made Blogger angry. TBC!]
[part deux]
As for Jason Reitman… Well, I must concede the point to Shane, then, as I've only met Jason a handful of times, and presumably the whole "our dads grew up together!" thing provided a certain ambiance to our exchanges that would make it less likely for me to see the Ugly Side Of The Director. 😉 It's truly a shame to hear that he's not what I thought he was. We share a mutual friend (good ol' Strombo) who was present the last time I saw Jason, so I'll have to ask if there's dirt I don't know about! (I'll be sure to report back to you.)
I just dunno. I can't whip up any enthusiasm for most of the nominated films, and don't feel truly passionate about any of the big nominees. I won't even ask how you're plotting to trick me into seeing the ones I haven't!
You know what another big problem is? The stupidity of release dates. Theatres should bring back matinees of nominated films for, say, two weeks before the Oscars, or studios should make sure that the ones not in theatres are out on DVD in time for people to see them. I had that problem last year, too. And now, even if I wanted to, I wouldn't be able to see at least four or five of the nominated performances before March. STUPID!
The only films I've seen that are up for any of the major categories are:
~ District 9
~ Up In The Air
~ The Hurt Locker
~ Up
~ Inglourious Basterds
And that is IT. I'd like to see The Last Station, A Single Man and An Education. If they fall in my lap, I'll willingly watch Crazy Heart, Precious, Invictus and Julie & Julia. But the rest? The Blind Side? Avatar?? The Lovely Bones??? (Thanks for ruining a great book, Peter!) Blargh. I feel…deflated. When I think of the fantastic films I got to see last year, and then look at what has come out since…? Depressing!
(My fever has spiked. I must STOP THE INSANITY and shut the hell up now! Apologies for any spelling or grammatical errors that surely permeate my rant.)
Ahhhhhh! Happiness. I really enjoyed listen to you guys rant, especially seeing as we see eye to eye on the topics of Avatar, The Hurt Locker, and Bullock going down. I noticed your Blind Side review is here. I'm dying to read it now.
Also, thanks for giving Jeremy Renner his props as well. I know it's an incredible long shot, but I really want to see him win……..on the other hand I'm making shirts for Bullock….I think I'm taking the night off to drink wine and live blog all of my joys and outrage.
See you there!