Spurning Giamatti

January 25, 2005 6:25 AM

Nominations for 77th Annual Academy Awards: OK, so Sideways gets nominations for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay (Adapted), Best Supporting Actor aaaand Best Supporting Actress, but Paul Giamatti--arguably the linchpin of the whole flick--gets stiffed. (Jamie Foxx, on the other hand, gets nominated twice...not that there's anything wrong with that!)

Travesty, or just an indication of an incredibly rich "Best Actor" field?
posted by LairBob (152 comments total)

I am disappointed Jim Carrey didn't get a nod for Eternal Sunshine.

Not that he would win against Foxx, who seems to be a shoe in, but his reaction to rejection yet again would be great to see.
posted by toftflin at 6:33 AM on January 25, 2005

Maybe just an indication that a sexist Hollywood gives more and better roles to men.
posted by jmgorman at 6:34 AM on January 25, 2005

Travesty, duh. The whole process is a travesty. What's the old joke about the average age of Motion Picture Academy members?

"Dead."
posted by mediareport at 6:35 AM on January 25, 2005

Giamatti got screwed for the second time now, including getting snubbed last year for American Splendor. He has to have a make-good oscar coming to him soon.

I'm happy that The Passion and Fahrenheit didn't get nominated for much of anything so I don't have to hear about them for the next month.
posted by Arch Stanton at 6:38 AM on January 25, 2005

I haven't seen anything nominated for anything (except ("Supersize Me") so I think I'm uniquely qualified to make some picks:

Hillary Swank should win because she shares her name with a low-rent porno mag.

Don Cheadel or Jamie Foxx should win something because they are black.

"Accidentally in Love" should lose the Best Song nomination because I don't care for Counting Crows (except when "Mr. Jones" is interpreted to be about that dude's penis)

For Best Documentary, my opinion will be formulated like 95% of people's Oscar picks: I only saw "Supersize Me" and it was quite good, so it should win. None of the other nominated films are probably as good.
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:38 AM on January 25, 2005

I should add that the system is flawed because "Garden State" was not nominated for anything and I personally enjoyed it.
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:41 AM on January 25, 2005

Also:
Nominations for the 25th Annual Golden Raspberry Awards (Razzies)
posted by Sangermaine at 6:43 AM on January 25, 2005

Mayor Curley. I take offense to the fact that Jamie Foxx or Don Cheadle should win JUST because they are black! No one can deny that Jamie especially was brilliant in his role, and if he does win, or even if Don Cheadle wins, it should be because they DESERVED to win, not just because of their skin color!
posted by ramix at 6:46 AM on January 25, 2005

I think what Mayor was trying to say was: they probably grew up poor, ergo it would make a nice story for the media to highlight.
posted by yerfatma at 6:48 AM on January 25, 2005

Adjusts sarcasm detector . .
posted by tr33hggr at 6:48 AM on January 25, 2005

'The Passion' got nominated for Best Makeup, which would be interesting since it's mostly blood and gore.

i'm baffled by 'Shark Tale' getting a nod for Best Animated Picture...?

i also don't understand how 'Collateral' got Best Editing and not 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind?'
posted by NationalKato at 6:50 AM on January 25, 2005

Whoa, this thread is getting crazy....

I hope Eternal Sunshine wins on everything it's up for; it was the only big-name movie I saw this year that was any good besides Collateral, which should be up for something other than best supporting actor. How exactly is Jamie Foxx a supporting actor there?--He's on screen the entire time! And obviously The Incredibles should win for best animated film.

In general though: I hate the Oscars, and I hate how I'm interested in them despite knowing that they're meaningless. I am totally not interested in the Grammys, ergo, new resolution: become totally not interested in the Oscars.
posted by josh at 6:53 AM on January 25, 2005

I always think editing is an interesting category and I'm suprised as well about Eternal Sunshine not being in that category, but I'm even more surprised Spider-Man 2 wasn't in there either since the best action movie of the year usually gets nominated there.
posted by Arch Stanton at 6:54 AM on January 25, 2005

Foxx was brilliant in both Ray and Collateral. However, Depp was still better in Finding Neverland as a lead, so I'm predicting a win for Foxx in the Best Supporting category.

And ramix ... the Mayor is just wearing the Snark Hat for this thread, so I wouldn't take his "just 'cause they're black" rant too seriously.
posted by grabbingsand at 6:55 AM on January 25, 2005

How exactly is Jamie Foxx a supporting actor there?--He's on screen the entire time!

Because Tom Cruise is the top-billed star of Collateral. As a result, anyone who shares substantial screen time with him can be considered for Supporting Actor, but not Lead Actor.
posted by grabbingsand at 6:57 AM on January 25, 2005

i'm baffled by 'Shark Tale' getting a nod for Best Animated Picture...?

If there aren't three nominees, they don't give out the award. Not that 'Shark Tale' was good, but what to replace it with?

Interesting that the Oscars have two entirely differerent websites. Here is the other one. It's not nearly as ugly.
posted by smackfu at 6:59 AM on January 25, 2005

The studio gets to decide what categories the actors are submitted to. For example, William H. Macy had a much bigger role in Fargo than Frances McDormand, but the studio put Macy in Supporting Actor and McDormand in Best Actress because they thought they had better chances to win in those categories. There are no rules about screentime or billing.
posted by Arch Stanton at 7:02 AM on January 25, 2005

I'll make my prediction now. Jamie Foxx won't win best actor. Don Cheadle will. That is, of course, if it follows the same pattern of a couple years ago. Funny-man actor does an amazing job portraying a pivotal black hero (Will Smith in Ali), and is the frontrunner early on. When Oscars come around, the black actor with more of a dramatic background that did an amazing job with a dark, depressing semi-action movie wins out (Denzel Washington in Training Day).

And Paul Giamatti didn't get stiffed. The Best Actor field had about 15 or so people who could have easily been nominated. Liam Neeson, for example, or Gabriel Garcia Bernal, or Kevin Bacon.

On Preview: smackfu: Ghost in the Shell 2 or The Polar Express would have been a good substitutes.
posted by shawnj at 7:05 AM on January 25, 2005

I think what Mayor was trying to say was: they probably grew up poor, ergo it would make a nice story for the media to highlight.

Isn't that a racist stereotype right there? There are plenty of working and middle class blacks in the world.
posted by jonmc at 7:05 AM on January 25, 2005

Me and my friends refer to ourselves as the Academy too, and we're gonna get around and pat each other on the back. It'll be star-studded!
posted by jon_kill at 7:07 AM on January 25, 2005

boring.
if i wanted to see the fruits of lobby, i'd go to a fruity hotel.
posted by elle at 7:10 AM on January 25, 2005

Isn't that a racist stereotype right there? There are plenty of working and middle class blacks in the world.

I think what yerfatma was trying to say is that we all love an underdog story. If the nominees grew up comfortable (black or white), they might consider pretending to have overcome adversity. It makes the story more interesting.
posted by Mayor Curley at 7:11 AM on January 25, 2005

relax, mayor, I was just fucking with him.
posted by jonmc at 7:12 AM on January 25, 2005

has anyone here seen 'Million Dollar Baby?' i've heard some very negative reviews, yet it seems to be cleaning up (7 noms). i mean, boxing films are just not interesting to me anymore, not since the majesty of this film.
posted by NationalKato at 7:14 AM on January 25, 2005

Growing up comfortable is the new disadvantage.
posted by srboisvert at 7:16 AM on January 25, 2005

Growing up comfortable is the new disadvantage.

Only in the eyes of Oscar voters who probably themselves grew up comfortable. ;)
posted by jonmc at 7:20 AM on January 25, 2005

relax, mayor, I was just fucking with him.

I don't usually think of myself as too subtle, but I guess that I am today...
posted by Mayor Curley at 7:21 AM on January 25, 2005

Am I the only person that didn't like Sideways? It got almost obscenely good reviews (96% positive on Rotten Tomatoes, which I guess answers my question--4% of reviewers agree with me), but I didn't care for it. Nothing against the actors--I'll admit the acting in Sideways was superb--it's what the actors were given that I have a problem with. The two main characters were incredibly self-centered and immature, and I felt absolutely no empathy with them. Why should I care about these two guys? No idea.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:21 AM on January 25, 2005

Also, NationalKato, the Champ?

It was a good movie, yes, but the first Rocky movie was far superior. it's on my oft-mentioned list of Things Only Soulless People Don't Like.
posted by jonmc at 7:22 AM on January 25, 2005

Arch Stanton: McDormand might have the smaller role, but wasn't she's the more central character? Macy's character is all whimpering at the end and his arrest is anticlimactic, while the audience is allowed or encouraged to see things from the McDormand character's perspective, to sympathize with her more than anyone else in the picture. That was asking a lot of an actor (or actress or whatever).
posted by raysmj at 7:25 AM on January 25, 2005

Well, DevilsAdvocate, I think you've raised the basic point right there. It just seems remarkable to me that Giamatti wouldn't have been recognized for his role, when even people who don't like the movie agree that his acting is the best thing about it.

I mean, I understand that the inconsistency is a function of all the different voting bodies--so the people voting on "Best Actor" aren't necessarily the same ones voting on "Best Director"--but this one was definitely a head-scratcher, for me.
posted by LairBob at 7:32 AM on January 25, 2005

jonmc, The Champ came out 3 years after Rocky. i loved Rocky...
posted by NationalKato at 7:33 AM on January 25, 2005

I've seen none of these films, but I agree that Giamatti should be up there based on talent level alone. (I'll be pulling for Don Cheadle, who's never been less than excellent in anything I've ever seen out of him, and for anyone not named Jamie Foxx in all other categories.)

Also, Chris Rock will absolutely kill in the opening, and the media the next day will pan him unmerciful. Just a prediction.


It wasn't a banner year for cinema, though, was it.
posted by chicobangs at 7:35 AM on January 25, 2005

Ray and Finding Neverland are both typical Oscar-bait pap: respectable, high-class, and lifeless. Eternal Sunshine didn't get nominated because the Oscars have the memory of a gnat, and it's the kind of movie that they throw a best screenplay award at. The Oscars are garbage, more about popularity and money than about quality. It's mutual masturbation.

Now, who's going to start the MeFi Oscar Pool? I can't wait!
posted by goatdog at 7:36 AM on January 25, 2005

i'm really disappointed to see that eternal sunshine wasn't up for best picture. i'll probably be watching the oscars with a bucket full of eggs, which i will throw at the television if kate winslet does not win for best actress.

on a slightly different note : did anyone think the oscars last year were completely boring? makes me glad that there's no lord of the rings type movie this year that's nominated in every single category. also, chris rock seems like a way better host than billy crystal... again. does he do anything other than host the oscars these days?
posted by grapefruitmoon at 7:37 AM on January 25, 2005

I liked Sideways quite a bit, but I think it's become a little overrated. When I think of the regard it's held in right now, I can't help but think of that David Lee Roth quote about Elvis Costello. Eternal Sunshine is a better film, and Shaun of the Dead is funnier.
posted by furiousthought at 7:37 AM on January 25, 2005

It's mutual masturbation.

but is it docking?
posted by NationalKato at 7:39 AM on January 25, 2005

This year - there are just amount of Best Actors that could have been nominated.
posted by filmgeek at 7:42 AM on January 25, 2005

I can't help but think of that David Lee Roth quote about Elvis Costello.

what quote? I'm a huge fan of both men, so I'm intensly curious, now.
posted by jonmc at 7:43 AM on January 25, 2005

grapefruitmoon - Crystal has a show on Broadway, for whatever that's worth.

I did see Million Dollar Baby last weekend, and it was admittedly fantastic - I never much cared for Clint Eastwood before, but after seeing how much he poured into the movie - direction, production, a great performance, and even the music - I honestly have a deep respect for the man now.

I'll be pulling for the entire cast from that, and from Sideways. And I certainly won't be upset if Cheadle pulls the Best Actor.

Just as long as it's not Dicaprio or Foxx.
posted by Remy at 7:47 AM on January 25, 2005

Furious thought:

I always had it with elvis saying it about david, thus:

""Rock critics love Van Halen and hate me because rock critics look like me but want to party with David Lee Roth."
- Elvis Costello, 1979"
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:48 AM on January 25, 2005

jonmc: It was something along the lines of, critics like Elvis Costello because so many look like him, wear the same sort of glasses, etc.
posted by raysmj at 7:48 AM on January 25, 2005

Alan Alda in The Aviator? Someone's on crack. If Alda's performance in that movie demonstrated anything, it's that Alda uses the same gestures and vocal registers in every single character he plays. The Aviator is proof that Alan Alda can't act for crap.

And I'm disappointed that Stage Beauty failed to even get a mention.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:50 AM on January 25, 2005

Ah. I like listening to both, but I'd definetely rather party with Diamond Dave. Especially since Elvis can be a mean drunk. Just ask Bonnie Bramlett & Steve Stills.
posted by jonmc at 7:51 AM on January 25, 2005

I can't help but think of that David Lee Roth quote about Elvis Costello.

what quote? I'm a huge fan of both men, so I'm intensly curious, now.

Was that when Roth said that critics only like Costello because they all look like him?
posted by DieHipsterDie at 7:51 AM on January 25, 2005

I think the David Lee Roth quote that furiousthought refers to goes something along the lines of "All the critics like Elvis Costello because all of the critics look like Elvis Costello."
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 7:53 AM on January 25, 2005

And now that Diamond Dave is an NYC paramedic you can get drunk, get in a fight and have him stitch you up right on the spot, that is the total package right there.
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:53 AM on January 25, 2005

Damn - I didn't even see DieHipsterDie's response on preview since I was editing my atrocious typos!
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 7:55 AM on January 25, 2005

octobersurprise, i agree that most of Alda's performances are similar, but i still liked him in 'Crimes and Misdemeanors.'
posted by NationalKato at 7:55 AM on January 25, 2005

Of what I've seen, there are only two nominations here I agree with: best writing noms for Before Sunset and Eternal Sunshine. Ray and Million Dollar Baby are not the kind of films I'd ever see, so I guess I'll never know about those two.
posted by rushmc at 7:56 AM on January 25, 2005

I didn't think Sideways was all that, either. Yes, the acting was universally great (and I agree that Thomas Hayden Church and Virginia Madsen are more deserving of an award than Paul Giamatti), but I found it as coy, smug and condescending as About, Schmidt.

has anyone here seen 'Million Dollar Baby?' i've heard some very negative reviews, yet it seems to be cleaning up (7 noms). i mean, boxing films are just not interesting to me anymore, not since the majesty of this film.

I haven't, and I've grown to HATE Clint Eastwood as a director- he's just a melodramatic hack. Mystic River was abysmal.

Eternal Sunshine not getting a nod for best pic is a real shame.
posted by mkultra at 7:56 AM on January 25, 2005

(Jamie Foxx, on the other hand, gets nominated twice...not that there's anything wrong with that!)

Ohhhhh yes there is. Like Jim Carrey, Jamie Foxx is absurdly overrated, this year's histrionics included.

And Clint Eastwood, as good an actor as he's been for the 93 years he's been in the business, is an even better director.

Also, go Cheadle.
posted by chicobangs at 7:57 AM on January 25, 2005

I think the David Lee Roth quote that furiousthought refers to goes something along the lines of "All the critics like Elvis Costello because all of the critics look like Elvis Costello."

Except for Lester Bangs, who looked like a Blue Cheer roadie.
posted by jonmc at 7:58 AM on January 25, 2005

mkultura: I'm so in the pool if you are.
posted by chicobangs at 7:58 AM on January 25, 2005

Yeah, I thought that quote would be pretty well-known, especially by jonmc; but then, it's possible I got it wrong, if Divine_Wino is right. Seems like a lot of critics are identifying with, perhaps not the precise characters in Sideways, but the overall situation and cultural focus. End derail.
posted by furiousthought at 7:59 AM on January 25, 2005

i still liked him in 'Crimes and Misdemeanors.'

So did I. So maybe I'm being too harsh. Maybe Alda needs a certain kind of director. Or maybe he just had the misfortune to be typecast early. But so often when I watch him I think "You're doing Hawkeye Pierce! Stop it!"
posted by octobersurprise at 8:04 AM on January 25, 2005

mkultura: I'm so in the pool if you are.

Bring it on! Is someone running one this year?
posted by mkultra at 8:04 AM on January 25, 2005

Mystic River was abysmal.

Amen. It wasn't a particularly good book either, but I was shocked at just how bad the film was. The final scene between Sean Penn and Laura Linney had me laughing out loud.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:05 AM on January 25, 2005

The final scene between Sean Penn and Laura Linney had me laughing out loud.

Because of her fucking abysmal Boston accent with the word "hahrt" in it 60 times? Or because some hoodlum's dim wife suddenly turned into Molly Bloom?
posted by Mayor Curley at 8:08 AM on January 25, 2005

I'm honestly shocked Motorcycle Diaries didn't get a best Foreign Language nod.
If it managed to stay up in Buffalo for close to two months, where Finding Neverland is deemed too "artsy" by much of the population, I can't fathom how it must have done in more major cities where people aren't as biased against subtitles.
Although it did get an adapted screenplay nomination, which is even more surprising, given that everything else in the category is in English.
posted by Kellydamnit at 8:10 AM on January 25, 2005

Mystic River was abysmal.

Amen. It wasn't a particularly good book either, but I was shocked at just how bad the film was. The final scene between Sean Penn and Laura Linney had me laughing out loud.

Yup it sure was, sure and it was. I got no idea what people saw in it, flat, dull, long and senseless and that last scene was like a joke on the audience. Larry Fishburne had a good Boston accent though. I think there are just films with themes that are (like child abuse and mental retardation) too touchy to not get Oscars even if the film itself is baloney.

I call them "hey big star, play a retarded guy and we'll all get Oscars movies". They chafe at me.
posted by Divine_Wino at 8:10 AM on January 25, 2005

I'll set up an Oscar Pool.

(Anyone wanna pony up a prize or two? Nothing huge, just something to play for. I've got something for the pot.)
posted by chicobangs at 8:16 AM on January 25, 2005

Not much discussion of the afforlinked Razzies nominations. Am I too much of a Kevin Smith fanboy to disagree completely with their panning of Jersey Girl?
posted by robinw at 8:16 AM on January 25, 2005

I still don't understand what was so great about Jamie Foxx in Ray. What black actor doesn't know how to play a junkie?

Also, the movie itself was... well, I learned more about Ray Charles's life by reading his obituary than I did watching that movie.
posted by Jart at 8:19 AM on January 25, 2005

Mystic River was abysmal.

Amen. It wasn't a particularly good book either

Oh I'm so glad someone else thinks this: I hate how with Mystic River Lehane became a "legitimate" author when his earlier novels are so much better on every level, even though the reside in the genre ghetto. A Drink Before the War and Sacred particularly jump to mind.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 8:20 AM on January 25, 2005

i liked it.
posted by jimmy at 8:21 AM on January 25, 2005

"hey big star, play a retarded guy and we'll all get Oscars movies".

What about the "hey big star, play a handicapped/blind/deaf/'my left foot' kind of guy/gal and we'll all get oscars"? The Academy seems to love these kind of films, like "Forrest Gump" et al. Then there's the "gimme" oscars, like Paul Newman's for "Color of Money." (imho of course) i.e., Here, we'll give you an Oscar because you've been in other way better films but never won yet.

So, I think Jamie Foxx will win and probably Alan Alda for those two reasons alone.
posted by cass at 8:22 AM on January 25, 2005

To finally make a comment that is specific to this post, I think the coyotes in Collateral should win all the oscars this year, it should just be Chris Rock and those cool-ass LA coyotes for the whole two and half hours.
posted by Divine_Wino at 8:23 AM on January 25, 2005

that last scene was like a joke on the audience

In the book, Laura's Linney's character is far more developed in a Lady Macbeth-ish way. The movie gives no hint of this until the end, where it seems totally out of place. It's a really bad adaptation.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:26 AM on January 25, 2005

Could we just post a thread on MeTa for an Oscar pool, sort of like a meetup?
posted by goatdog at 8:26 AM on January 25, 2005

What black actor doesn't know how to play a junkie?

WTF?
posted by Optamystic at 8:29 AM on January 25, 2005

Character traits that are sure-fire tickets to critical acclaim:

Drunk
Crazy
Mentally handicapped
Crippled
Single parent at risk of losing children
posted by mkultra at 8:29 AM on January 25, 2005

I know hardly anyone watches it anymore, but Paul Giamatti hosted SNL on Saturday and did a bit about how much it sucked for him to lose the Golden Globe to Jamie Foxx. Basically, his limo driver kept going on about how great Jamie's speech was while Paul did his "just kill me now, my life is hell, shut the fuck up please" shtick. The skit made it pretty obvious that Paul was well aware he wasn't getting an Oscar this year.

Which is too bad. I'm in the camp that really thought he should've gotten far more recognition for American Splendor. Every role I've ever seen him in was interesting, no matter the movie. He's really talented.
posted by miss lynnster at 8:30 AM on January 25, 2005

(And can we ease up on the "Mystic River" spoilers, please? Just because you didn't like a movie doesn't mean you have to pre-emptively prevent those of us who haven't seen it yet from forming our own, unspoiled opinions.)
posted by LairBob at 8:34 AM on January 25, 2005

Passion of the Christ got a nomination, but nothing for Farenheit 9/11? Is it because of the Bowling speech? Will I have to look at more posters for the bleedin' jesus movie if it wins? (Maybe the lord's doleful expression will be partially obscured by "ACADEMY AWARD(R) WINNER" in large type.)

Do I remember something about Moore wanting to submit only for best pic and not for best doc? Could I use google to refresh my memory instead of posting to this thread?

Speaking of google-fu, how many Academy Awards have been awarded to Jesus Christ (via proxy) over the last seventyhowevermany yrs?
posted by damehex at 8:37 AM on January 25, 2005

Mystic River came out two years ago, so I'm guessing that those discussing it assumed that all who wanted to see it already had. As a broader question, how long are you expected to wait before discussing the endings of movies?
posted by HiddenInput at 8:38 AM on January 25, 2005

The First Annual MeFi Oscar Pool committee is in session.
posted by goatdog at 8:41 AM on January 25, 2005

Passion of the Christ got a nomination, but nothing for Farenheit 9/11?

There was no choice. Since they didn't give The Passion of the Christ a Best Picture nomination, the Hollywood HomoLeftyJewishAtheistLiberalMediaElite cabal had to sacrifice Farenheit 9/11 to maintain an illusion of fairness.

Re Mystic River spoilers: it's not like she turns out to be a man. There's not really much to spoil.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:43 AM on January 25, 2005

From the Razzies:

WORST DIRECTOR
. . . .
Renny Harlin and/or Paul Schrader / EXORCIST 4: THE BEGINNING

Did anyone actually see both cuts of that movie?
posted by subgenius at 8:45 AM on January 25, 2005

HiddenInput, i believe it's eight months...but that's only if you're being nice.
posted by NationalKato at 8:49 AM on January 25, 2005

What a great year it was for movies. The fact that the best actor list could be filled several times over is enough evidence of that. Produce so many valuable movies, and there's no chance that anyone will be completely satisfied with the awards -- so I'm looking at the nominations as a good flashback to my experiences.

I've seen so many movies in the last year that I can hardly accept that both Maria Full of Grace and Million Dollar Baby both came out in the same awards season. Someone should come up with a chart to map ones favorite films of the year to other movies they'd like -- I wasn't crazy about Sideways or Million Dollar Baby, and the films I liked more definitely fit with other "favorite" movies of mine.
posted by VulcanMike at 8:50 AM on January 25, 2005

Understood, Armitage...I know it's an older movie, but it just happens to be sitting in my living room in a Netflix envelope, so I got a little frustrated.
posted by LairBob at 8:55 AM on January 25, 2005

i'm baffled by 'Shark Tale' getting a nod for Best Animated Picture...?

Mayor Curley explained it. It's because they're black.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 9:00 AM on January 25, 2005

Passion of the Christ got a nomination, but nothing for Farenheit 9/11?

You're kidding, right? Passion got nominated in extremely technical categories in which the quality of the movie is moot. Actually, as much as I didn't like Passion, it should've been nominated for costume design and art direction as well. Fahrenheit didn't have a chance for any of these technical nominations because it was a documentary. All it could get nominated for was Best Picture and Director and like other deserving movies (Eternal Sunshine), it didn't make the cut. I still think that if Bush would've lost, Fahrenheit would've gotten those two nominations.
posted by Arch Stanton at 9:02 AM on January 25, 2005

Not much discussion of the afforlinked Razzies nominations. Am I too much of a Kevin Smith fanboy to disagree completely with their panning of Jersey Girl?

I enjoyed Jersey Girl.
posted by drezdn at 9:06 AM on January 25, 2005

As a broader question, how long are you expected to wait before discussing the endings of movies?

I'd say a year is being generous.
posted by rushmc at 9:07 AM on January 25, 2005

my 2004 favorites are, in no particular order, Wong Kar Wai's episode of Eros and 2046 (the Eros
episode is even better, it's probably Wong's best film as of now for me), Notre Musique (masterpiece), 3-Iron. Old Boy was fun, I also dug A LOT Rivette's Histoire de Marie et Julien. Bertolucci's The Dreamers had a few great moments (and the movie year's most appalling parents)

best American movies? Million Dollar Baby, The Agronomist, Coffee and Cigarettes. Manchurian Candidate was flawed but it had a few great moments
Kill Bill was most disappointing, Sideways most overrated

the Brits: Vera Drake's good, Leigh's always good.

among my favorite performances Laura Dern in We Don't ive Here Anymore, the young woman of Maria Full of Grace (glad she got nominated), Kidman in Dogville and Eastwood in Million Dollar Baby, Molina in Coffee and Cigarettes and the Vera Drake lady.

I liked Before Sunset's dialogue, and the ending is for me a masterpiece.

I haven't seen Hotel Rwanda and I'm dying to see "the
Assassination of Richard Nixon". I hope Cheadle wins, he truly is a maestro.

I had huge problems with Gibson's Hymn to a Savage God, but Deschanel's cinematography deserve all the praise in the world, I hoe he wins
posted by matteo at 9:09 AM on January 25, 2005

hope he wins.
posted by matteo at 9:11 AM on January 25, 2005

Do I remember something about Moore wanting to submit only for best pic and not for best doc?

Scroll down to "Turning Down the Heat".
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:11 AM on January 25, 2005

I think in addition to the MeFi Oscar (tm) Pool (here it is again for takers), we should have a "bad dress" (male and female categories) pool.

If Bjork were in any way involved in this year's hoopla, she'd get my vote. Who can forget the crotch-skimming swan dress? Too bad Cher stopped being such a predictibly outrageous dresser.

That's why I watch the Oscars (on the years that I do). And I'm not ashamed to admit it.
posted by MiHail at 9:15 AM on January 25, 2005

Incidentally my friend has been nominated for best short for her film Wasp, which makes me simultaneously very happy and extremely jealous.

As Gore Vidal once said, everytime someone you know does well a little bit of you dies.

WORST DIRECTOR
. . . .
Renny Harlin and/or Paul Schrader / EXORCIST 4: THE BEGINNING

I've heard the Schrader version is being released on DVD later this year.
posted by ciderwoman at 9:16 AM on January 25, 2005

I'm honestly shocked Motorcycle Diaries didn't get a best Foreign Language nod.
If it managed to stay up in Buffalo for close to two months, where Finding Neverland is deemed too "artsy" by much of the population, I can't fathom how it must have done in more major cities where people aren't as biased against subtitles.
Although it did get an adapted screenplay nomination, which is even more surprising, given that everything else in the category is in English.

Agreed. How the hell did Motorcycle Diaries not even merit a Cinematography nod? Best visuals of the year for me, hands down.
posted by LondonYank at 9:19 AM on January 25, 2005

I'm honestly shocked Motorcycle Diaries didn't get a best Foreign Language nod.

It looks like it wasn't on the list of country-nominated films. (I don't know why that very useful page is on a geocities site.) If it's not on that list, it can't be nominated.
posted by smackfu at 9:29 AM on January 25, 2005

It's really sad that the Oscars get so much press. A bunch of Academy wankers can't pick the best movies any better than a random selection of Wall Street professionals could (just to pick an example at random.) At least this seems to be a pretty universal sentiment these days among people who really appreciate good films, and we can all ignore them.

I wish I could send everyone involved in Eternal Sunshine my own little oscar.
posted by blacklite at 9:31 AM on January 25, 2005

Foreign films have to be submitted by their country of origin. As Motorcycle Diaries lists Germany, Argentina, USA, Argentina, Chile, and Peru as its countries of origin, it was likely deemed to not be "native" enough to any one country to be submitted.
posted by goatdog at 9:31 AM on January 25, 2005

So is Supporting Actor just a made up category now? Does Supporting Actor mean anything from Lead (Jaime Foxx in Collateral) to Bit Part (Alan Alda in Aviator)?
posted by Sir Mildred Pierce at 9:35 AM on January 25, 2005

damehex, on npr this morning they were saying that michael moore refused to submit the papers to have 9/11 up for the documentary category. he only wanted it considered for best picture.
posted by Igor XA at 9:36 AM on January 25, 2005

I'm finding this year's nominations to be boring, boring, boring. Maybe I'm just losing my taste, but I'm not really interested in any of the Best Picture nominations, with the exception of Sideways.

As for Oscar pools, I'm running my 5th annual one, and y'all are welcome to join up.
posted by jess at 9:37 AM on January 25, 2005

I'd love to see Eternal Sunshine win for Best Screenplay. I'm not a huge Charlie Kaufmann fan (in particular, the too-ironic-to-permit-criticism Adaption), but it was a much more human story than I expected. And Jim Carrey's performance was the best example of a director roping in a hopelessly over-the-top actor since Robin Williams in The World According To Garp.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 9:38 AM on January 25, 2005

Sir Mildred Pierce: Pretty much. You mean it hasn't always been that way? Hyman Roth had about the same sized role in Godfather II, and Lee Stasburg got nominated.
posted by shawnj at 9:43 AM on January 25, 2005

I think the whole nominations/results are meaningless; it's just an industry patting itself on the back.

It has very little to do with reality, and we are talking about art anyhow, which is entirely subjective to the viewer. It's just more fodder to keep the industry propped up and E! on the air.
posted by poon at 9:54 AM on January 25, 2005

Yeah but it's fun to get drunk with friends and make fun of those industry types, makes me feel like a big big man.
posted by Divine_Wino at 9:58 AM on January 25, 2005

Don Cheadle was amazing in Hotel Rwanda. I say Go Cheadle!
posted by Jupiter Jones at 10:11 AM on January 25, 2005

shawnj, I think the situations of Will Smith and Jamie Foxx are totally different. Smith did not have anywhere near the support and cheering and amazement that Foxx is enjoying right now. There is no way that Foxx can lose. And if he does, then it would be like Julianne Moore in 2003, so anti-climactic when an actor is peaking and doesn't get recognised for it.

And can I just put in a word here for the ladies? Cate Blanchett needs to win since she was so horribly robbed when she was nominated for Elizabeth in 1999 (even though that was a tight feild with Emily Watson for Hilary and Jackie and Judy Dench for Mrs Brown, both amazing performances), and usually, in my experience, that is when nominees usually do win (so thus, I also predict that Scorsese will win for The Aviator simply because people think he deserves it for his career). However I am afraid that Portman's popularity might put her over the top, since Cate's excellence is just assumed and never rewarded. Imelda Staunton should win for best Actress.

Otherwise, I think Clive Owen should win for Closer but that category looks tough, and I am surprised by the weakness of the nominees for Art Direction, Visual Effects and Best Song (at least they nominated Motorcycle Diaries which is by far the superior nominee) without ROTK. I think in general this was a very bad year for movies in general, but I'd think there would at least be one with standout creative greatness that I could root for.

Lastly, I couldn't care less about Sideways, and i don't want to hear the freakin' merlot joke. Hopefully Rock will have a feild day with that one.
posted by scazza at 10:36 AM on January 25, 2005

scazza, i was more upset about Moore getting snubbed in 1998 for Boogie Nights. she's a powerhouse in that film.
posted by NationalKato at 10:40 AM on January 25, 2005

"Accidentally in Love" was nominated for Best Song? Ugh.

More evidence that music in film has gone way downhill since the days of Isaac Hayes.
posted by sellout at 10:43 AM on January 25, 2005

NationalKato, I have to confess, I never saw that film. I'm going to go put it on my Netflix queue right now.
posted by scazza at 10:46 AM on January 25, 2005

oh -- a quick note to those who talk about Giamatti being robbed: I hear you but think about the shameful theft, a few years ago, of Javier Bardem's Oscar for Before Night Falls. that's a textbook case of an actor being robbed. but yeah, at least he got nominated then.
Bardem (o my God that voice of his) in Mar Adentro is not as great as he was in Before Night Falls, and it is of course too bad he didn't get at least a nod this year. but what does he care, with the possible exception of Cheadle (I haven't seen Hotel Rwanda) Bardem was better than the other nominees this year too

but yes Bardem did have pretty good lines:

"Para mí, esos dos metros necesarios para llegar hasta ti y poder siquiera tocarte son un viaje imposible, una quimera, ¡un sueño!... Por eso quiero morirme"
posted by matteo at 10:50 AM on January 25, 2005

and by the way, the appropriately named Taylor Hackford as Best Director Nominee???
wtf?
posted by matteo at 10:53 AM on January 25, 2005

jart: I still don't understand what was so great about Jamie Foxx in Ray. What black actor doesn't know how to play a junkie?

WTF?
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 11:10 AM on January 25, 2005

"Accidentally in Love" was nominated for Best Song? Ugh.

Seriously. Terrible song.
posted by ludwig_van at 11:12 AM on January 25, 2005

I agree with your assessment of Hackford, matteo. The man is really on par with other soulless, eternally mediocre to bad, hollywood-system directors like Richard Donner, Sydney Pollack, Schumacher, Brett Ratner, and Rob Reiner. It's easily the worst nomination of the major categories.

I'm also amused that Finding Neverland was filmed in mid-2002 and was put on the shelf for over a year so that it could get released in a weaker year and get a whole bunch of nominations. Bravo to the producers for that call.
posted by Arch Stanton at 11:13 AM on January 25, 2005

Damn you, Oscars! There is NO WAY that the "Montage" song from Team America: World Police should not have been nominated. Dammit, man, that was the funniest song I've heard in years! It made Blade 3 a fun movie to watch. It might've made Electra tolerable, if only there had been a damn montage in that stupid slow movie.

I'm cheering for MDB. Great movie. All you Clint Eastwood hatas can suck it.
posted by graventy at 11:17 AM on January 25, 2005

A number of people commented on their surprise at not seeing Motorcycle Diaries nominated for the foreign film award; I was just as shocked not to see House of Flying Daggers nominated. Every other critic had it on their list of the ten best films of 2004, but it wasn't even one of the five best foreign films according to the Academy?
posted by HiddenInput at 11:23 AM on January 25, 2005

i'm baffled by 'Shark Tale' getting a nod for Best Animated Picture...?

I think Ghost in the Shell 2 should of been up there, though aside from the animation I can undertstand a lot of people would have trouble recommending the film. Certainly didn't have the crowd pleasing quality of, say, Miyazaki's work, which has been recognized by the Academy.

Probably the best film I saw this year was Oldboy (and it got second place at Cannes after F911) though I guess Korea didn't want to submit a film that contained just about every depravity known to man (the PETA people would hate it) and I think it may have came out just a tad too long ago. Tae Guk Gi, the film Korea did submit for best foreign film, was pretty good (Harry Knowles picked it has his favourite film of the year) It was clearly trying to be a Korean 'Saving Private Ryan' and it looked great but the plot was ridiculously melodramtatic.

Loved Eternal Sunshine. Will have to check out Million Dollar Baby, I've been putting it off since I too was underwhelmed by Mystic River.
posted by bobo123 at 11:36 AM on January 25, 2005

I'd love to see Staunton win best actress, just for the inevitable pro-life shitstorm.
posted by u.n. owen at 12:03 PM on January 25, 2005

Character traits that are sure-fire tickets to critical acclaim:

Drunk
Crazy
Mentally handicapped
Crippled
Single parent at risk of losing children

"Kit Ramsey: White boys always get the Oscar. It's a known fact. Did I ever get a nomination? No! You know why? Cause I hadn't played any of them slave roles, and get my ass whipped. That's how you get the nomination. A black dude who plays a slave that gets his ass whipped gets the nomination, a white guy who plays an idiot gets the Oscar. That's what I need, I need to play a retarded slave, then I'll get the Oscar."

-Bowfinger (underrrated flick)
posted by hipnerd at 12:17 PM on January 25, 2005

I'd love to see Staunton win best actress, just for the inevitable pro-life shitstorm.

good point. I'm under the impression that Gibson and Pacino (Merchant of Venice) got punished (the former rightly so, not necessarily the latter) for the antisemitism thing, and Moore didn't get a nomination because the Hollywood community wanted to avoid a new barrage of anti-Hollywood GOP slurs and Moore reeks too much of the losing 2004 campaign.

but Staunton looks like the perfect candidate to make a safe little political statement and poke a little prochoice finger in the Right's fetus-obsessed eye
posted by matteo at 12:34 PM on January 25, 2005

Cate Blanchett needs to win since she was so horribly robbed when she was nominated for Elizabeth in 1999

Maybe she was robbed by not winning for Elizabeth, but I disagree that she should win this year because of that. She should win this year if her performance was the best this year, period. (Same goes for the idea of Scorsese winning this year because he didn't win for Goodfellas.) I don't like make-up calls.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:42 PM on January 25, 2005

Um, for everyone who's decided that Eastwood can't direct based on Mystic River... my rebuttal.
posted by MotorNeuron at 12:51 PM on January 25, 2005

my rebuttal

IMDB: "Also Known As: The Cut Whore Killings (USA) (original script title)"

They should have stuck with the original title and built a sequel franchise
on it. "The Cut Whore Killings 2: More Cut Whores"
posted by Armitage Shanks at 12:59 PM on January 25, 2005

Article on the 'snub' of Fahrenheit and Passion. I just wish they wouldn't call it a snub and just accept that their movies weren't good enough (link goes to giant chart of critic's top ten lists, takes a minute to load on broadband).
posted by Arch Stanton at 1:28 PM on January 25, 2005

That chart kicks ass.
posted by graventy at 1:49 PM on January 25, 2005

I thought that Blanchette was WAY over the top as Katherine Hepburn, and it was more of a caricature than embodiment of the woman.

It felt like she could go on the road with a very sucessful one-woman show, but that her performance did not blend in with the rest of the movie very well. It annoyed me.

No Oscar for you!
posted by Danf at 2:37 PM on January 25, 2005

DevilsAdvocate:

I absolutely hated Sideways. The Giamatti character was so obnoxious that I could not stand to watch him. The Church character was slightly less obnoxious, even for playing an odious swine. Church did a great job with his swinish role, but the whole picture seemed to be a celebration of superficial assholes. My life was not improved one whit by the experience.
posted by rdone at 3:49 PM on January 25, 2005

My life was not improved one whit by the experience.

And you STILL probably drink Merlot.
posted by Danf at 3:53 PM on January 25, 2005

jart: What black actor doesn't know how to play a junkie?

Hey, I know where you live man!!!!
posted by snsranch at 4:36 PM on January 25, 2005

I'm shocked that ***** didn't get nominated for ******, and ****** was flat out robbed. I think ***** was excellent, but *****sucked big time, just like last time.

If ever ****** comes to my town, I will try to *****. I just saw ***** and ******ed myself right on the spot.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:37 PM on January 25, 2005

Well, to be fair, SLoG, ****** didn't get seen by much of the Academy, and *****'s already won, so maybe it's ******'s turn this year. Certainly, they're the sentimental choice.

I ain't saying it's right. It's just how the game is played, babe.
posted by chicobangs at 4:43 PM on January 25, 2005

Mea culpa Mayor Curley...i didn't detect the sarcasm in your above post!
We cool?
posted by ramix at 4:46 PM on January 25, 2005

I'm having trouble digesting the phrase "two-time Oscar nominee, Ethan Hawke." That's just wrong. (Incidentally, my third annual Oscar Contest is up, if anybody wants to put down some predictions. First prize is a Soctopus!)
posted by web-goddess at 4:50 PM on January 25, 2005

Napoleon Dynamite was robbed.
Robbed, I tell you.
posted by spock at 5:13 PM on January 25, 2005

Sideways hatas: I'm curious. All of you in this thread have mentioned that the loathesomeness of the male characters somehow prevented you from enjoying the film. At least one commenter notes that they viewed the film as a celebration of the characters' loathsomeness.

For those of you who feel this way, is it always the case that the virtue of the protagonist is a predicate for enjoyable film watching? Is that a fair way to put it? If so, do you find crime thrillers hard to watch or enjoy?

I'm confused by this. Is the lack of success of the film for you based on an unwillingness to identify with protagonists who are creeps? Is that correct? Or is it that identifying with these creeps made you uncomfortable? I guess it could be either.

As someone who loved the film, part of the charm is the script's mercilessness toward the characters, and watching the actors work their butts off to humanize the wretches they were tasked with bringing to life. Reflecting, I don't think that identifying with the characters was terribly important to my experience of the film, and I don't recall feeling especially on their side, or even put off by them.
posted by mwhybark at 5:50 PM on January 25, 2005

Ooh, should've gotten here sooner...

On Preview: smackfu: Ghost in the Shell 2 or The Polar Express would have been a good substitutes.

The Polar Express isn't animation-- it's mocap/digital rotoscoping. I think a shitload of animators (myself included) would've been outright offended if it had gotten nominated.

'Twas a weak year for animated features... aside from Howl's Moving Castle (I hope) and a couple others, 2005 doesn't look much better.
posted by May Kasahara at 6:13 PM on January 25, 2005

When I'm king, they'll give out Academy Awards only once every ten years... Can I be king now?
posted by rough at 6:15 PM on January 25, 2005

How about a new category, like; "Weird, existential and/or casually-kind-of-thoughtful", for movies such as, Eternal Sunshine, Garden State, Life Aquatic and Sideways to name a few.

It might be difficult to place such movies alongside of such serious works as "Ray", and "The Aviator" that, with their titles alone, come off as being so important. As if they say, "Take me seriously."

My personal favorite this year appears to have been absolutely hated. Even though I wouldn't toss an Oscar at it, I Loved "The Life Aquatic", and I love Bill Murray.
posted by snsranch at 6:23 PM on January 25, 2005

mwhybark -

I've known people who have a really strong desire to see poetic justice meted out in their entertainment; you could have a loathsome character but they had to be punished. Friend of mine in college couldn't stand Silence of the Lambs because Hannibal Lecter gets away. The big payoff in Sideways is when the poetic justice starts to kick in, but it doesn't close on that note, which I suppose some people might find frustrating.

I dunno, I liked Sideways (it's just not the greatest thing ever, is all) and I find the connection between the virtue of characters and the virtue of the movie as weird as you do.
posted by furiousthought at 6:52 PM on January 25, 2005

i liked sideways fine, but the way it's been hyped as the greatest thing since popcorn with real butter...it creates a big letdown when, in the end, it's just a movie. it was intelligently made, well written, sharply observed, and well acted (and, yes, giamatti was robbed, though thankfully ethan hack -- er, HAWKE -- didn't get another nod this year), but...meh. (i think it would have worked better if it had ended with the scene with miles in the diner -- not to be too spoilery about it or anything.)

i think in some ways it was one of the few movies that audiences could agree on, you know? it wasn't too quirky or out there (life aquatic, a very long engagement), nor too polemical (f9/11, passion of the christ). that's all these awards matter for, anyway.
posted by pxe2000 at 7:03 PM on January 25, 2005

So if I liked "the life aquatic" then I'm quirky? ;)
posted by snsranch at 7:19 PM on January 25, 2005

Not necessarily, but it is an indicator that you may like quirky. See Rushmore and get back to us.
posted by spock at 7:48 PM on January 25, 2005

mwhybark --

Giamatti is an acerbic loser hero who's eventually given a ray of hope, like the Woody Allen hero of 20 or 30 years ago but without the wisecracks. So is regressing to that moviemaking model the proudest achievement of world cinema in 2004? Did the critics find something comforting, even affirmative, about its provincialism?

Stumped, I watched it again. An utter waste of time. It has no secrets to yield, no mysteries to clear up -- except maybe the meaning of its title. I have to admit it's flawlessly executed -- in the same way that a Fig Newton can be flawless. As art, aside from some first-rate acting and swell casting (Church, Giamatti, Virgina Madsen), it's almost completely without interest. As entertainment, it's OK -- the sort of thing people can fall asleep watching on late-night cable. As social observation, it's knowledgeable yet familiar. I've lived in both San Diego and the Santa Barbara area, where most of the story is set, and I recognize the people, the weather, the restaurants, the wine bars, the golf courses, even a few boring and boredom-inspired southern California habits, like doing newspaper crossword puzzles on the freeway. Maybe one reason I don't like the movie more is that I don't miss any of this.

Director and cowriter Alexander Payne has nothing to say about over-the-hill males that we don't already know or couldn't find in a sitcom. The main characters, pals driving north from San Diego for a few days of vacation, are a depressive, recently divorced wine snob and schoolteacher (Giamatti) who can't publish his novel and his former college roommate (Church), a cheerful TV actor the movie eventually discards. The music is a Muzak imitation of the Modern Jazz Quartet, and Payne isn't doing anything special with the images and sounds. Overall the film is unoriginal and unchallenging -- unless one considers an obsession with wine a daring subject.

In short, Sideways is the best piece of routine cynicism around, though some critics are calling it "humanism." The last time I looked it was number 115 on Variety's chart of the year's top moneymakers. So I'm obliged to conclude that it's not the public but some of my colleagues who expect so little from movies. In the New York Times last Sunday A.O. Scott helped start the inevitable backlash by theorizing that critics may be overrating the movie because they identify with Giamatti the wine critic. I'm more prone to think it might be their way of saying, "It's been a tough year. Let's get back under the blankets."

-- Jonathan Rosenbaum
posted by matteo at 12:27 AM on January 26, 2005

Re: House of Flying Daggers, the Academy doesn't just choose the foreign films it likes best. Each foreign country gets to submit one film, and the Academy chooses from among them. This year, China submitted "Warriors of Heaven and Earth", so the Academy couldn't choose House of Flying Daggers even if it wanted to.

On another note... Although it's possible that the Academy just doesn't click with Wes Anderson, it's also possible that The Life Aquatic was screwed over by the fact that BVI totally screwed up the DVD screeners for the film by putting a huge piracy warning on every single frame of the film. I have some pictures of it in the midst of my lengthy essay on awards show voting and piracy here. (Self-link, obviously.)
posted by yankeefog at 2:48 AM on January 26, 2005

I live in a universe were Before Sunset only gets a writing nomination and The Aviator gets eleven.

That's a very cold universe indeed.
posted by feelinglistless at 5:47 AM on January 26, 2005

I like to think that Pauline Kael would've chewed Jonathan Rosenbaum a new one for those remarks.
posted by octobersurprise at 6:31 AM on January 26, 2005

I thought that Blanchette was WAY over the top as Katherine Hepburn, and it was more of a caricature than embodiment of the woman.

Totally. She was barely human.

I can't help but think of that David Lee Roth quote about Elvis Costello. Eternal Sunshine is a better film, and Shaun of the Dead is funnier.

I thought the quote was going to be from David Lee Roth about Elvis Costello saying that Elvis (the King) is better and Abbot and Costello are funnier. Damn it.
posted by Summer at 7:39 AM on January 26, 2005

Interesting about House of Flying Daggers not being submitted. The earlier link in this thread on the foreign films listed House of Flying Daggers as China's submission.
posted by HiddenInput at 9:03 AM on January 26, 2005

I wouldn't be surprised if Alda got supporting actor just because 1.) he's been around along time and 2.) that way they can avoid giving Leo Best Actor.

Also, I disagree with the Razzies (and whoever else) panning Jersey Girl, but then, I think I missed the memo that said "Everybody hate Ben Affleck now" (I never saw Pearl Harbor, maybe that's my problem).
posted by dagnyscott at 9:15 AM on January 26, 2005

Sideways hatas: ... is it always the case that the virtue of the protagonist is a predicate for enjoyable film watching? Is that a fair way to put it? If so, do you find crime thrillers hard to watch or enjoy?

For me, it's not that the protagonist has to be virtuous (in the usual sense), but he has to have something--even if it's just a minor part of his overall personality--to create empathy in me. Hannibal Lecter may be a serial killer, but he also helps out the legitimately virtuous character in The Silence of the Lambs, and he's clever and intelligent to boot. Henry Hill may not be a nice person, but I'm a bit envious of his complete and utter disregard for--even scoffing at--the law. I find nothing at all redeeming about Miles or Jack.

And you STILL probably drink Merlot.

Funny you should mention that. I consider myself a bit of an oenophile, or at least an oenophile-in-training. In fact, I don't like Merlot that much. And yet, I can manage the civility to drink Merlot if that's what everyone else at the table wants, or for that matter, to simply not drink it without throwing a huge tantrum about it. Miles's "I'm not drinking any fucking Merlot" rant neatly summarizes everything I dislike about the character. An adult acting like a spoiled five-year-old does not inspire any empathy in me.

I'm also in the minority that doesn't like Seinfeld. The two are probably related.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:03 AM on January 26, 2005

That's a very cold universe indeed.

An adult acting like a spoiled five-year-old does not inspire any empathy in me.

Two statements I couldn't agree more with.
posted by rushmc at 4:51 PM on January 26, 2005

Thanks for the thoughts, folks.

matteo, that's a sharp, thoughtful critique. I hadn't read any of the pro reviews, just went on my love for Giamatti and word of mouth.

I have been drinking more wine since seeing the film, and find this amusing. A friend who saw it early in the run said that when he left the theater there were publicists handing out coupons or something for some of the vintages or wineries seen in the film, which also amuses me.
posted by mwhybark at 8:40 AM on January 27, 2005

Miles is not really ranting about the Merlot at all. He's ranting because he's nervous about having dinner with Maya, something he'd avoid altogether if it wasn't for Jack prodding him. So he vents his frustration with the Merlot thing. This happens to people who are older than five all the time, but perhaps it takes somebody as honest and observant as Alexander Payne to put it in a movie.

Oh, and re: the "mystery of the title:" I asked Payne about it, and it's a slang word for being drunk. It's referenced in the novel, but not in the film.
posted by muckster at 9:29 AM on January 31, 2005

I'm on pins and needles about the outcome of Hollywood's manufactured glorification of its debased product.
posted by nanojath at 7:18 PM on February 24, 2005