Oscar's 2024
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2024 8:51 am
Oppenheimer, Oppenheimer, Oppenheimer.
Not Barbie, not Barbie, not Barbie.
No Saltburn, no Saltburn, no Saltburn.
And in what world can Sandra Huller's magnificent portrayal of Hedwig Hoss not have won the Best Actress Award (never mind The Zone of Interest not winning Best Film)?
Her performance goes so far beyond that of Emma Stone's in Poor Things, that the two can barely be considered as operating in the same craft.
I mean that scene in which she searches the pockets of a stolen fur coat, finds a lipstick in the pocket and trys it out in front of a mirror! It's absolutely brilliant in its naturalness. Emma Stone by contrast spent two thirds of Poor Things jigging around like a marionette and the rest of it bouncing up and down with her baps out. This was caricature acting at best that any first year graduate in acting school could have done with their eyes closed. What was in the judges minds?
And Cillian Murphy over Paul Giamatti? OK, Murphy was alright as Oppenheimer - good even - but Giamatti's acidic and vulnerable Paul Hunham was more than a match for it, and then more again.
And some of the other awards? What was Anatomy of a Fall doing in there? Best original screenplay? I'm not even sure what a screenplay is, but I'm sure The Holdovers must have had a better one than Anatomy.
But this was the year of two things. The failure to acknowledge The Zone of Interest as one of the most significant milestones in movie making history and the complete ignoring of the brilliant Saltburn.
Once again the Academy contrives to get it all wrong. The triumph of hope over experience to have expected otherwise.
Not Barbie, not Barbie, not Barbie.
No Saltburn, no Saltburn, no Saltburn.
And in what world can Sandra Huller's magnificent portrayal of Hedwig Hoss not have won the Best Actress Award (never mind The Zone of Interest not winning Best Film)?
Her performance goes so far beyond that of Emma Stone's in Poor Things, that the two can barely be considered as operating in the same craft.
I mean that scene in which she searches the pockets of a stolen fur coat, finds a lipstick in the pocket and trys it out in front of a mirror! It's absolutely brilliant in its naturalness. Emma Stone by contrast spent two thirds of Poor Things jigging around like a marionette and the rest of it bouncing up and down with her baps out. This was caricature acting at best that any first year graduate in acting school could have done with their eyes closed. What was in the judges minds?
And Cillian Murphy over Paul Giamatti? OK, Murphy was alright as Oppenheimer - good even - but Giamatti's acidic and vulnerable Paul Hunham was more than a match for it, and then more again.
And some of the other awards? What was Anatomy of a Fall doing in there? Best original screenplay? I'm not even sure what a screenplay is, but I'm sure The Holdovers must have had a better one than Anatomy.
But this was the year of two things. The failure to acknowledge The Zone of Interest as one of the most significant milestones in movie making history and the complete ignoring of the brilliant Saltburn.
Once again the Academy contrives to get it all wrong. The triumph of hope over experience to have expected otherwise.