Bored at the Oscars

Last night I went to my annual Oscar party with a bunch of other movie geeks (that is, those that can accurately name, and have seen, most or all 10 Best Picture nominees, can describe why a movie's cinematography or art direction is best, and have actually seen some of the movies in the obscure categories). This was an off-year for me, as I only saw a handful of the nominees. As for the Oscar telecast:

• All agreed it was probably the worst show in years. Long, boring, slow-paced, lethargic. Just not an exciting show.
• However, I thought Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin did a very good job. They were pretty funny, but seemed to disappear for long stretches. Could've used more of them.
• Where was Jack Nicholson?
• We were all laughing wildly at the "interpretive dance" number. When you got guys break-dancing to The Hurt Locker, something's amiss. Kinda conjured up the infamous Rob Lowe-Snow White debacle.
• Ben Stiller and Tina Fey/Robert Downey, Jr. were the only presenters who seemed to enjoy themselves. Everyone else was pretty blah.
• Okay, why a montage of horror movies? Ah yes, trying to woo the Twilight crowd, thus the presence of Taylor Lautner and Kristin Stewart. Awards shows are not popular like they used to be, and I guarantee you the younger demographic won't be tuning in anytime soon to watch this show.
• Of course, if you are going to woo the younger crowd, giving the top award to the lowest money maker in Best Picture history isn't a good place to start.
• Nice tribute to John Hughes. Makes me want to revisit Breakfast Club, Ferris Buehler, etc.
• The whole thing where they have people giving tributes to the Best Actor/Actress nominees is too much. Hey folks, they ain't up for a Nobel Peace prize!
• Best Director should have been James Cameron. He took something from scratch and made a billion dollars and transformed the way movies will probably be made in the future. Nothing against Kathryn Bigelow, but her achievement just doesn't compare.
• However, I must say that The Hurt Locker was very good and I highly, highly recommend it. Certainly one of the best movies I saw last year. A very tense movie, not very relaxing. It especially does a good job showing how tough it is for our troops to know who is friend or foe (makes you appreciate how well trained our troops are not to fire indiscriminately at every perceived threat). It is very suspenseful all the way through. But shouldn't a movie that wins Best Picture be seen by more than just a handful? It's budget was $11 million and it made about $13.5 million.
• No performances of the original songs. Too bad. Can you believe one of the highlights would have been a duet with Jeff Bridges and Colin Ferrel? I saw Crazy Heart and really liked it, with one of the highlights being a duet with those two. But then again, hearing all the songs would have meant also hearing from Randy Newman.
• Without Bush in office, no political jabs. I guess suddenly everyone in Hollywood, including Sean Penn, likes the war in Iraq after all.
• Overlooked movie: Invictus. I don't understand the rules of rugby, even after seeing the movie, but a great story of how Nelson Mandela used the all-white South African rugby team to unite the country.
• Sandra Bullock, excellent acceptance speech and great sense of humor.
• Monique, dial it down a notch, you didn't win a Nobel Peace Prize (okay, I already used that line).
• Jeff Bridges, you said "man" a lot.
• What's the matter Barbara Streisand? Ticked off you didn't win with Yentl?

I didn't win the pool again. I basically win every 6 years and am not due until 2013. My picks were pretty lousy. So much for the Oscar movies, time to switch gears and look forward to Iron Man 2.

Last Ticket to Avatar

Last night I became probably the final remaining person on the planet to see Avatar. This was the last week it was playing, so I wanted to see it before the Oscars on Sunday since it is up for multiple awards.

I wasn't sure what to expect, since I was seeing the movie 2 1/2 months after its release and long after the hype and a gazillion articles had been written about it and it had become the #1 movie of all time. So, I guess my expectations were rather low.

But I was very impressed and loved the movie. For being nearly 3 hours, it never slowed and I thought the storyline (criticized as being weak) was just fine. Then the technical aspects of the movie were truly astounding. Much better use of CGI than Lucas did in his newer Star Wars movies. The 3-D effect was not gimmicky. There were maybe only a couple shots where something comes right at you (which is typically what 3-D movies go after). Instead, there was just an amazing depth and clarity to all the scenes. I often looked out over the top of the 3-D glasses to see the difference and it was huge. If you saw this movie in 2-D, then you really didn't see it as was intended, because you missed out on what James Cameron had been perfecting for the past 14 years.

This movie and The Hurt Locker are supposed to be the top contenders for Best Picture. I thought The Hurt Locker was very good, but which of these two movies will stand the test of time? No contest, there. Cameron shouted out he was "King of the World" when we won for Titanic a while back, and he may get to do that again.