Oscars 2024 Wrap Up

Wow, so much to say about this year's Oscars. I got 19 out of 23 right which I consider a pretty good year. If you won your Oscars pool and I helped, let me know!  I know at least one person viewed my picks and he won!  Let's spread the word about the blog. :)

Obviously there were some serious highlights of the evening - 
I thought Jimmy Kimmel was a great host (again) though he had a couple of cringy jokes, he did a great job. His final joke where he asked former President Trump, "aren't you up past your jail time" slayed, in the room and at my house.

Ryan Gosling and the Bar-boys with their tribute to Marilyn Monroe were a huge highlight of the night. Mark Ronson warned that the song would be a huge spectacle, and it was in the best way! I've watched it back already many times, and I can't stop! Go Ryan Gosling!

The best speeches of the night were given by Da'Vine Joy Randolph (it's good to be different) and Cord Jefferson (take a risk, make smaller films that tell many kinds of stories, make more movies with smaller budgets rather than huge movies with larger budgets). I love when winners use their speeches for inspiration rather than a list of thank you's, though Da'Vine Joy Randolph's publicist and Robert Downey Jr's entertainment lawyer both got kudos that were meaningful, rather than just a list of people. As always, when one person hogs the acceptance speech time and doesn't let his/her fellow winners get a word in, I always wish that they had just practiced a bit and written down what they were going to say. (You're one of 5 nominees out of everyone on the planet, there is at least a chance you'll be on the stage.  PREPARE.)

Most annoying moment of the night - once again this award goes to the In Memorium segment, otherwise known in my house as the Necrology Report.

1. You don't need dancers.

2. If you do need dancers to entertain the people in the room because you think this segment is boring, the people at home don't want to see them.

3. We want to see the names and pictures on the screen.  The long shots do not lend themselves to the millions of people at home who can't see a damn thing on the screen. These long shots only serve to frustrate the viewers.

4. This was even more evident with the final slide which only had names with no photos - I couldn't read a single name and I'll bet neither could anyone.

5. No fancy camera work is needed. Set up on the screen and don't fucking move.

My message: either honor the people who died and the viewers at home so that they can be properly seen, or cut the whole damn thing.

And now, for the worst part of the night.

These "Artists for Ceasefire" people - I'm assuming that they are speaking to Hamas, who has rejected multiple ceasefire offers? Also, does the pin remind us that there was a ceasefire in place on October 6th that HAMAS VIOLATED? I am also assuming that they are calling for the innocent Israeli hostages to come home? Plus there's always this, just a little pesky fact about murdering Jews:

And then there's the truly disappointing and horrifying speech by Jonathan Glazer, The Zone of Interest filmmaker and Director. So let's do a little clearing things up because I like facts. Glazer is being criticized for renouncing his Judaism. It's a poorly worded sentence but that's not actually what he did and it turns out that sentence construction matters.  What he did was renounce the use of Judaism and the Holocaust in order to justify... well, I'm not sure, the state of Israel existing at all as a Jewish state? (Yep, that's the one.) The Israeli-Palestinian conflict? The bombing in Gaza? But even that is disgusting.  

First, Hamas wants all Jews dead, they don't care what you renounce, you idiot. Second, you can't act like the bombing of terror tunnels in Gaza isn't justified and no mention of hostages or context or history... well, if 45 seconds isn't enough to do it properly (or a single blog post about the Oscars), then maybe keep your mouth shut. Finally, you don't get to insinuate so many things about the Holocaust when you make a film about the Holocaust that has not one Jew in it. Did you know that Germany lost about 1.5 million civilians in World War 2 and England lost about 69,000... does that make Germany right and Great Britain wrong? No, we don't determine morality based on losses, and the fact that Gazans are dying in larger numbers (provided by the Gaza Health Ministry, so SUSPECT) than Israelis is irrelevant, and very sad but is - ABSOLUTELY - Hamas' fault.  And the thing I'm most angry about? That I'm having to address this conflict at all in a damn blog about the Oscars.  Thanks for ruining my favorite night of the year, dumbass.

And for one last word on the subject, it was disappointing not to see one person with yellow ribbons to symbolize bringing innocent hostages home. Steven Spielberg - arguably one of the most powerful Jews in Hollywood - doesn't have enough power to risk being open about his support? Not one Jew in the audience could speak for the innocent hostages being held and sexually abused by their captors?  Where is Michael Rappaport when you need him?

Having said all of that, I loved the show. I am an easy audience, and I come to the night ready to enjoy it (and scoring about 82% with my picks never hurts), but I thought it was a fun night.  I was sorry to see Lily Gladstone and Spider Man lose their categories, and the historic win of 20 Days in Mariupol for Ukraine was exciting. I loved the revival of including past winners (and there you can see, WHOA, lots of white people, no?) to present the new winner his or her trophy, which hasn't been done since 2009. 

And now, back to watching terrific movies!  If you would like to take a listen, Rabbi Yechiel Hoffman and I deliver our Best of 2023 list on our podcast 2 Movie Jews this week - get it most places you get your podcasts.  So many movies, so many more opinions.

Barbie - 8 nominations

 

• Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures (Original Song)

• Mark Ronson
• Andrew Wyatt

For "I'm Just Ken"

• Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures (Original Song)

• Billie Eilish
• Finneas O'Connell

For "What Was I Made For?"

• Best Motion Picture of the Year

• David Heyman
• Margot Robbie
• Tom Ackerley
• Robbie Brenner

• Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role

• America Ferrera

• Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role

• Ryan Gosling

• Best Adapted Screenplay

• Greta Gerwig
• Noah Baumbach

• Best Achievement in Production Design

• Sarah Greenwood (production designer)
• Katie Spencer (set decorator)

• Best Achievement in Costume Design

• Jacqueline Durran

Ok everybody, how about we take a big, deep ding dang breath for a minute? Yes, I'm going to talk about the controversies, but let's just have a moment of calm the f down.

First the plot (and no, not getting nominated for an Oscar is not the plot of the Barbie movie) - Barbie is living her best life in Barbieland where the Barbies run the show and everyone is happy.  The Kens exist to be adorned in the female gaze, and poor Ryan Gosling Ken just wants to be in Barbie's orbit, while Barbie just wants to live her life in a wonderful matriarchy full of joy. When Barbie begins having more sophisticated thoughts (like thinking about death), she finds Weird Barbie (brilliantly played by movie-stealing Kate McKinnon) who offers her the choice about learning about the real world (where not everyone agrees that Barbie is a feminist icon who fixed the world for women) or staying in ignorant bliss. These choices are manifested through the high heeled stiletto versus the practical Birkenstock. (I would have chosen the stiletto, for the record, because it is gorgeous and the Birkenstock is ugly - but comfortable - garbage. Fight me.) Ken joins her in the real world to discover that men dominate - even at the Mattel factory, a room full of men "making the world better for women" without a single one of them in the room mocks times when women's health panels in the US government don't contain one woman on them. Ken LOVES the real world and comes home to evangelize male power, which includes a lot more scenes with horses.  

There's more to the story, but Barbie brilliantly satirizes the challenges of feminism, being a woman in a patriarchal society, and makes a lot of very solid points for people to consider. (and if you're one of the people who lost their minds because a movie talked about feminism, YOU might be the problem.) I don't think it is lost on anyone that Barbie - while claiming to "fix" women's places in the world - is also tall, blonde, enormous boobs, flat stomached, can walk effortlessly in heels, and is Margot Robbie gorgeous (as are most of the Barbies - though not all white and blonde, let's agree most of them are thin and gorgeous). Perfect feminist icon? Probably not, but she did have a lot of fantastic jobs, and THAT did do something important in the lives of little girls envisioning their futures.)

Barbie is fun, makes an important statement (the most important about the challenge of being a woman by America Ferrera), and does it with fun and lighthearted performances. I know plenty of people who couldn't even get through the whole film (feminists!), and so many more who donned the pink and evangelized its quality.  Barbie made over a billion dollars (most Best Pic nominees never even come close to that), making it a popular and critical success. 

As to the controversies - so let's start with the fact that the Academy's 6000+ voters don't gather in a room and make decisions together. So "The Academy" didn't do anything. Individual voters in the Academy decided what each one liked best and voted accordingly.

So let's address the snubs. Margot Robbie not being nominated is ONLY insulting because Ryan Gosling was. But a true feminist examines the list of nominees in HER category, not his. Did he give one of the top 5 performances of the year? Probably (hello singing and dancing) - but his category is hardly an intense one this year.  I might have replaced him with "All of Us Strangers" actor Paul Mescal or "May December" actor Charles Melton, but I don't look at his inclusion and think - nope, way out of bounds, and I would bet most of the angry folks don't either. But, among the list of lead actresses? It's not even close. Among the nominees, I would replace Carrie Mulligan (Oscars love an accent), but I would do it with Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor in Origin or Greta Lee in Past Lives, not with Margot Robbie as Barbie. So, if you're mad that she wasn't nominated, tell me with a straight face BOTH who you would knock out instead, AND that you thought her performance was better than Lee's or Ellis-Taylor's. (and if you haven't seen either movie, go see them now.) If the argument is that Margot Robbie is semi-responsible for the film and should be recognized for that... guess what? SHE IS BEING RECOGNIZED FOR THAT WITH A BEST PICTURE NOMINATION FOR HER PRODUCING, which is the recognition you get for making a movie, not a lead actress nomination.

Now Greta Gerwig is a bit of a different story. 

Before I say why, PLEASE stop saying how unacceptable it is that a film can be nominated for Best Picture without the Director also being nominated because that person is responsible for the excellence of the film.  Here's where paying a little closer attention in math class in 1st grade would have been useful. There are 10 Best Picture nominees. There are 5 Best Director nominees.  Can we do the math and see that there are actually five films where the Director responsible is not being nominated for the work?  Great, so stop it with that argument, it makes you sound stupid. (with love, and thank you for following the blog.)

So why do I think Greta needed to be nominated? Back to math. The top nomination getting films this year are: Oppenheimer 13, Poor Things 11, Killers of the Flower Moon 10, Barbie 8, Maestro 7

This is where we go back to that argument - who is responsible for these top vote getting masterpieces? Primarily, the Director. So yes, Greta deserves to be on that list. Anatomy of a Fall and The Zone of Interest (one of my favorite films of the year) are both excellent - but they don't have the same cultural impact that Barbie did, and while they were both excellent, if we're angry for Greta, we must also be angry Bradley Cooper.  While it is impossible to know these numbers in time to have it influence voting, the various Academy branches themselves have weighed in and said clearly that Barbie is a distinctive achievement. None of that is possible without Gerwig. So I endorse the outrage on her behalf, but not for the reasons most are upset.  I suppose we can diagnose whether the snub is because of sexism or if it's just that older, white male voters didn't "get" or like the film, but in this case, the snub is a travesty.