He drinks milkshakes. Need we say more?
(Credit: Paramount Vantage)
(Credit: Paramount Vantage)
From: Pais, Matthew
To: Berkshire, Geoff
Subject: RE: Oscars
As far as "There Will Be Blood" goes, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Wait, I don't agree to that! Good movie, yes, but last time I checked every person in the world already considers commerce and religion to be sensitive and oft-corrupted foundations of this country.
Julie Christie is definitely the front-runner for best actress but I agree she's not the most deserving (and indeed could have been put in the supporting category). Linney was marvelous—she almost always is. She'll get her chance at the podium down the road, but sadly she's a long shot this time around. As for Cate Blanchett in "Elizabeth: The Golden Age," we just need to understand that when voters see the name Cate Blanchett on a ballot they automatically check it off. She happens to be frequently great but, yeah, did this movie really need to be honored or remembered? It seemed like the whole world laughed it off immediately.
I'd love to see Marion Cotillard shock everyone with a win for "La Vie En Rose"—never going to happen, but she was Edith Piaf—and would be just as happy to see Ellen Page skip onto the stage and take home the prize for "Juno." That character is, well, a stretch for anyone who's ever met a 16-year-old, but Page makes the movie feel more real than it probably should.
Christie will probably win but there is, I think, at least a shred of a hope of a glimmer of a chance of an upset.
Not the case with best actor though. Daniel Day-Lewis wins, end of conversation.
Oh, I need to elaborate? Well, his performance in "There Will Be Blood" is simply monumental, and while the size and loudness of it is totally justified, Oscar does prefer to reward big, showy performances over smaller work. I love George Clooney in "Michael Clayton" and Tommy Lee Jones in "In the Valley of Elah," but I can just be happy that they were nominated. Glad to see some love for Viggo Mortensen as well, but he's better in "A History of Violence." It's just proof that anyone who can win a naked knife fight deserves something.
Johnny Depp, are you serious? He's good in "Sweeney Todd," but does he really conjure anything remarkable or award-worthy? Emotionally his performance doesn't compare to the other contenders at all, and, yeah, he can sing, but this ain't the Tonys.
Add a comment