Jeff Wells at Hollywood-Elsewhere has never been one to shy from delivering his blunt opinion and today he has delivered a death blow to the illusion that the Oscars are about the actual best performances and films from each year and more about … well, more about anything but that.
In a post highlighting Penelope Cruz’s cute appearance on the “Tonight Show” (right) he delivers this bit of encouragement:
With this blow-dryer joke, it’s safe to say that Penelope Cruz has the Best Supporting Actress Oscar in the bag. Maybe she already had it and this is icing on the cake. Whatever. I do know that 65-and-over male Academy members (i.e., the Lorenzo Semple, Jr. crowd) have a rep for responding to alluring female contenders. From this point those who haven’t yet voted will be thinking the following about Cruz: (a) great firecracker performance in the Woody Allen film, (b) beautiful, (c) superb in Volver and (b) blowjob joke on Leno. That cinches it.
Someone explain to me why his reasons b-d should have anything to do with Cruz winning an Oscar. Obviously they shouldn’t, but the problem is that they do, and it’s the reason looking at the Oscars as an award show dedicated to a specific year is silly. Yet, we pull the wool over our eyes and argue about what performance was better and why someone should win when it really doesn’t seem to matter.
People could argue Heath Ledger is going to win because he died, Mickey Rourke could win because he has made a great comeback and both sides seem to be arguing when it comes to Kate Winslet and Meryl Streep. Some say Winslet should win because she has never won before and others say Streep should win because she hasn’t won for 26 years despite 10 nominations over the course of that time — 11 if you count her nom for Doubt. Some people have even said it should just be given to Kate as something of a “lifetime achievement” award. Lifetime achievement? Winslet is only 33-years-old for crying-out-loud. What are we going to give her after she retires from acting? One of those giant Oscar statues from the stage?
I’m not saying anything you haven’t heard of or thought of before, but it begins to wear on you as you are consistently reminded that it isn’t the performance that wins the award as much as it may be everything else.
The most recent comment on my first post-nom Oscar predictions from a commenter named Danny goes like this:
I was really surprised at your Best Supp. Actress choice…Taraji P. Henson? Really? Not only do I not think she is the front-runner, personally I think she was a total waste of a nominee. The role had very little depth, and paled in comparison to the other nominated performances and not nominated (Rosemaire DeWitt for Rachel Getting Married, Hiam Abbass for The Visitor, Debra Winger for Rachel Getting Married). I sincerely hope you’re wrong about this one, because she was nothing more than adequate in the role (as was everyone else in that movie).
Unfortunately, based on everything I just wrote nothing Danny says even matters. Danny says the role had little depth and begins arguing for the other nominees and those that didn’t get nominated. Thing is, he’s right. I would love to get into that conversation and begin arguing for Elsa Zylberstein (I’ve Loved You So Long), but I can only assume she didn’t get nominated because she isn’t a) pretty enough, b) wasn’t in Volver and c) didn’t make a blow-job joke on Jay Leno. Sorry Elsa, perhaps a little plastic surgery (joking here considering she is beautiful), a film with Pedro Almodovar and a sex joke will get you a nomination in a year or so. Keep at it kid.
However, Danny doesn’t have to worry too much about my Taraji prediction coming true since everything Wells said is true. I would disagree with Danny saying Henson’s performance had little depth, but I agree she shouldn’t have been nominated considering those that have been left out.
I have to admit, as I watched that clip of Cruz yesterday afternoon I too suddenly thought, “Well, there’s the race for Supporting Actress all sewn up.” For a slightly deeper explanation check out my latest Oscar predictions which I just posted right here.
Thanks to Danny for his comment, I hope he realizes I’m not saying he’s wrong, but saying his well thought out argument appears to have nothing to do with Oscar selection. Too bad.
