The gremlins that have taken up apparently permanent residence in our plumbing kept me busy all weekend so I wasn't able to follow through with my ambitions for pre-Oscar blogging. Not that you lose much by that, except one or two of my planned posts might have given you something to while away the time during an interminable acceptance speech or another inexplicable appearance by Cirque de Soliel. But don't worry. I still got you covered.
Every year the question gets kicked around Is the Best Picture winner ever really the best picture? I think the consensus is it never is. Some are less Best than others though and this leads to lists along the lines of Best Best Picture Winners of the Past and Worst Best Picture Winners of the Past. At BuzzFeed, Kate Arthur has done it a little differently and ranked all 85 Best Picture Winners so far against each other.
Her best Best Picture is All About Eve.
Her least best, which is to say the movie she thinks is the worst Best Picture of all time?
This riled up the Self-Styled Siren who has come to Gigi's defense.
Meanwhile, Tony Dayoub has been trying to catch up with all the past Best Winners he's never seen. He was posting his thoughts as he went along on Facebook, but now he's collected them all on his blog, Cinema Viewfinder.
As for this year's Best Picture nominees? Well, as I've said, I haven't seen most of them. I don't have a strong rooting interest in any of the three I have seen, Captain Phillips, Dallas Buyers Club, and American Hustle. I didn't like American Hustle anywhere near as much as a lot of people. I'm with Oliver Mannion who likes to quote the Honest Movie Poster he saw at College Humor, "It was...good?" The other two I thought were fine but from what I've heard 12 Years A Slave is way finer. Of the others I haven't seen yet, it doesn't seem like there's one I'd really hate to see win, except maybe The Wolf of Wall Street. But I'll never know because it's almost certainly not going to win and I'm almost certainly not going to see it even if it does.
Just doesn't interest me.
I think Leo's likely much better movie this year was The Great Gatsby.
You may remember Roy Edroso liked it and he had me about persuaded I should see it. But Tom Watson did not like it. No, siree. Not one little bit. And he explains why in his first ever article fo Ms Magazine.
The Wolf of Wall Street isn’t really about money or greed or the broken American financial system.
It’s about gender.
Martin Scorsese used the convenient cover of the public distrust of Wall Street institutions to sneakily deliver a lowbrow bacchanal that doesn’t rise to the level of Caligula, the 1979 film it clearly sought to emulate. Yet, Tinto Brass produced better social commentary. Worse, Bob Guccione had more respect for women. And Caligula had better acting.
The relentless, endless, repetitive, underlying message of Scorcese’s Wolf is simple and brutal: women are commodities to be bought and sold.
Don't hold back, Tom. Tell us what you really think.
Or you tell him and me after you read the whole article, Is a Vote for Leo's "Wolf" a Vote for Sexism?