Where is the Love?

The Golden Globe nominees have been revealed, and as I had anticipated, Zodiac is getting no love. I knew the spring release would have an effect on its awards potential, but come on. How can you overlook such a breathtaking film. The story, direction, and acting are all spot on. Ruffalo should be recognized as an outstanding supporting actor and Fincher should have his name in the hat for telling such a blissfully complicated narative. This film was sparatic and calculated. It was possesive of its audience and provided a thorough examination of the emotional toll that unpredictable and often unexplainable events can have on individuals that are already walking a fine line, that are just a nervous tick away from breaking down. Maybe it is just me. I am not attempting to take anything away from films like No Country For Old Men, American Gangster, or Gone Baby Gone. I am just pointing out an exceptional crime drama that seems to have been forgotten this year. Thoughts on Zodiac or any other film you feel is slipping slowly through the cracks and will wind up snubbed by the academy are welcomed here.

__________________
Donnie, you are out of your element!!!

Even though Se7en is among my favorite films, I wasn't too enthusiastic about Zodiac. It seemed to me as if Fincher was trying to cash in on his old glory, and regain his reputation that'd been slightly lost when he made entertaining, but entirely generic Panic Room.

I was wrong. Not only has he completely changed directing style and now it's serving to the story (and no longer the other way around), he's also made a movie in an entirely different genre. Even though there are still a few shocking scenes, it's much closer to All the President's Men than to The Silence of the Lambs. It works well as a period piece and its main objective is to tell an interesting story. Despite the story being what the movie is all about, the characters, even though not too complex, are entirely distinguishable thanks to great performances (Gylenhall, Ruffallo, Downey Jr.), and, even though the ending falls a bit flat, the movie kept me interested for its entire 2 and a half hour duration. It’s one of my favorite movies of the year, but I haven’t seen all the other nominees, so I couldn’t say with certainty that Zodiac should, or shouldn’t have been there.

The fact that it may not get an Oscar or a Golden Globe doesn’t change anything about a movie, in my opinion. There are numerous examples of movies not getting awards or critical recognition upon their initial release, but becoming more praised than those that did during the years. Citizen Kane lost to How Green Was My Valley. How green was my what? Exactly. Of course, movie awards should be given to the best movies, but some movies are often ahead of their time, and there’s often too much politics involved. That’s why Oscars and Globes are very fun to watch and they are relevant to a degree, but they don't necessarily determine what’s great, and what’s not.

__________________

I agree, and Zodiac will be on in my top ten of the year regardless.

Me too!

This was easily the best year for film ever imo : and from the awards I've been reading about - they all have overlooked Hot Fuzz , Southland Tales , Knocked Up , Superbad , King of Kong , Ratatouille , and Darjeeling Limited.

__________________

Very interesting selections here, but all of them are certainly worthy. Apatow has a stranglehold on film comedy right now, and at least one of his efforts should be recognized.