“Post coitum omni animal triste est.” That’s Latin for “all
animals are sad after coitus,” which wisdom was derived from, according to
Wikipedia, a Greek doctor names Galen, who exempted only human females and male
roosters from his generalization. Make of that what you will.
Anyway, my 21st-century update on the adage is
this: “Pre coitum omni Oscar Blogger triste est.” We are just a few days away
from the 87th Academy Awards, and lovers of showbiz and cinema ought
to be abuzz with anticipation or at least amused curiosity, and I presume most
of them are. Except, as far as I can tell, for a fair number of people who make
their living by covering and/or predicting them. This is one bunch of tired,
shagged-out, bummed-out people, let me tell you.
This is particularly true of the Oscar bloggers who are also
Oscar partisans. “The Industry’s Full Embrace of Birdman only a Matter of Time”
reads the headline for a piece
posted by Sasha Stone at her Awards Daily site on Monday. The first graf has all
the hallmarks of a particular type of awards blogging, including the vaguely
self-congratulatory citing of an anonymous “industry” source (“I don’t think of
him as an Academy member but a smart, funny, engaged, curious filmmaker,” well
okay then) who feeds the writer a blanket statement that’s intended to wrap up
the whole damn situation, in this case, “I talked to my friends in the Academy
and none of them are voting for ‘Boyhood.’” (Damn, I sure hope the smart,
engaged, curious filmmaker wasn’t Rick Linklater, like, how awkward…) This news did not, um, sit
well with Stone, who luuuves “Boyhood:” “I tried not to be an asshole about it
but you know, some things really can’t be kept in.” Stone continues, rising to
a pitch of disappointed world-weariness: People voting in an awards race, she
concludes, “pick what they like best. It’s as simple as that. Everything else
they characterize as ‘noise.’”
Hmm. And you’re just getting this now? How long has Awards
Daily been a going concern, anyway? (Don’t answer that. No, I’m sure somebody
will. I’m just saying right here, I don’t want it answered. Just registering a
wish. Thanks.) In the meantime, over at Hollywood Elsewhere, in between bouts
of not quite understanding that “candor” and “honesty” don’t really make your
opinions on topics people aren’t interested in your opinions about interesting
or valid, Jeffrey Wells—a passionate “Birdman” man (as his commentariat has
figured out, there’s nothing he likes better than a movie which presents any
midlife crisis he’d prefer to whatever his own was)—grumbles
that “the Oscar blogoscenti keep insisting that the Academy membership is too
hazy-minded to predict that ‘Boyhood’ and Linklater might pull off a surprise.”
This notion presents a thorn in Wells’ side, which he tries to show some
equanimity about: “Maybe. Both are
striking first-rate achievements, and if the tide goes against ‘Birdman’…well,
okay. The Godz won’t be happy but it won’t be a tragedy.” (“The Godz,” by the
way, is short for “The Movie Godz,” which Wells calls the voices in his head
that he thinks represent the higher forces of cinema; why they are named after
a perhaps purposefully dreadful psychedelic rock group that was signed to
ESP-Disk in the early ‘70s is beyond me.) Later, in his breakdown of
predictions, he gives an “I don’t care” to three whole categories. Someone who
actually gets off on betting in an Oscar pool that contains all the categories
is likely to feel like Oscar Madison bursting into the living room with a
bottle of champagne, bellowing “Is everybody HAPPY?” only to find Felix and the
Pigeon sisters in sobbing hysterics.
Over at his Hot Blog at Movie City
News, the almost-never-sanguine David Poland offers quasi-Zen koans along
the lines of “So pick your poison. Do The Globes matter… or do they not?” and
offering statistics that slice the odds this way and that, all with a
not-atypical subtext of not just being fed up with the whole g-ddamn thing but
also with you, and how you’re just wrong.
Even the unfailingly smart and incisive Mark Harris, writing at Grantland, has
shifted into resignation
mode, sensing a “Birdman” win and not much liking it, despite his overall
admiration for the movie: “Like Time
magazine’s 2006 Person of the Year, the Best Picture winner is now always
‘You.’ Or, as the Academy thinks of itself, ‘Us.’” The only full-time online
Oscar watchers not yielding to some form of distemper are In Contention’s Kris
Tapley, who’s filing various guild award results with the machine-like
efficiency of a minor character in “The Front Page,” and I suppose the
intensity of the pace is helping him fend off malaise. Which isn’t to say he’s
without opinions, even contrary
ones (“So I’m just left sort of wondering aloud, outside of critics, whose
movie is ‘Boyhood?’”, God, CRITICS, amirite?) but at least he isn’t giving
off too much of a feel-bad vibe. Similarly indefatigable is Tom O’Neil and his
crew at Gold Derby, who are more than happy to throw your Oscar pool sheet into
a sea of doubt by publishing all number of contradictory expert opinions, very cheerily
disseminated.
What about me? You must have me confused with an Oscar
prognosticator. Or maybe you have me pegged as someone with an axe to grind
against all the writers cited above. Au contraire! It’s all about ethics in
Oscar journalism, so I’ll do full disclosure: I’ve never met Sasha Stone but
we’ve had several spirited exchanges on social media, and I think as of now
we’re not speaking but I have to check; Jeffrey Wells and I are not personally
unfriendly; nor am I unfriendly with Mssrs. Poland and Tapley; Mark Harris IS a
pal; Mr. O’Neil and I are not unfriendly, but after he slagged Murnau a few
years ago relations are rather cooler than they’d been. Oh, wait—you don’t care
about that. You want MY Oscar predictions? All right. I’ll do the “Should
Win”/”Will Win” thing.
ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE
Should Win: Michael Keaton for “Birdman”
Will Win: Eddie F**king Redmayne for “The Theory of
Everything”
ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Should Win: Ethan Hawke (“Boyhood”) and Edward Norton
(“Birdman”) should tie.
Will Win: J.K. Simmons for “Buddy Rich? Really?” I like him so much in general I won’t hold it
against him.
ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE
Should Win: Marion Cotillard for “Two Days, One Night.”
That’s right, I’m one uh them Frenchie lovers. Whaddya gonna do about it.
Will Win: Julianne Moore for “Still Alice.” Which I’ll take
for “Maps to the Stars,” in which, hoo boy.
ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Should Win: Patricia Arquette for “Boyhood”
Will Win: Arquette. Yay me, I got one right! Oh wait.
ANIMATED FEATURE
Should Win: “The Tale Of The Princess Kaguya.”
Will Win: No idea.
BEST PICTURE
Should Win: “Selma.” Although my favorite is “The Grand
Budapest Hotel.” Does that make sense to you? Me neither.
Will Win: “Boyhood.” Which also SHOULD win. Does that make
sense to you?
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
Should AND Will: Lubezki for “Birdman.”
You tired and/or sad yet? Yeah, me too. You’re on your own
for the rest of your Oscar pool ballot, but if you were gonna follow my advice
you’re likely worse off than I am. See you Monday!
