Monday, February 28, 2011

Awards wrap-up

Perhaps the real winner at last night's Oscars was The Story of Alexander Graham Bell. After all, the Best Picture was won by a movie about a man who worked with someone with a speech impediment. And it beat out a movie about a bunch of inventors who are difficult people to work with.

What are the rules for being a lead actor as opposed to being a supporting actor? I've read a number of people who thought the girl from True Grit should have been nominated in the Best Actress category instead of Best Supporting Actress, and that this is why she lost in the Supporting Actress category. The theory also seems to go that she would have beaten out Natalie Portman for Best Actress, so I'm not quite certain the theory makes sense. Anyhow, in 1944, Barry Fitzgerald got nominated for both Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor in Going My Way, which caused the Academy to change the rules. My understanding is at the time it had something to do with the position in the credits, but that doesn't sound quite right. And especially with the way the credits are nowadays, it really doesn't make sense.

I'm beginning to think more and more that Elia Kazan shouldn't have named Communists; he should have raped girls. Everybody's favorite child rapist won the Best Director award at the C├ęsars (the French equivalent of the Oscars), and was widely applauded for it. More interesting (or really more galling) is that much of the commentary seems to be how horrible it is that the Academy overlooked this man in its awards.

No comments: