No, let's not. I hope it has a big night.
I just posted this in the King's Speech thread, but I'll put it here, too, just because The Prestige's post kinda irks me....
I was just over at Awards Daily (formerly Oscarwatch) and I am reminded about why I'm so happy I don't post there anymore...there has always been this rather snobbish attitude over there about the Best Picture of the year. To them, the age old argument that
Citizen Kane should have won in 1941 over that sentimental Ford movie,
How Green was My Valley, forms their self-righteous agony over the winners every year. To them, when the critics back a film, that is the film that SHOULD win, and if a film happens to win over a critics darling 1990 comes to mind when the sentimental and popular film,
Dances With Wolves beat the critics darling,
Goodfellas then it is time to bitch and complain about the state of the Academy Awards and decide those voters are nothing but a bunch of idiots.
This year, they are incredibly bothered that a film like
The Kings Speech would beat
The Social Network.
They keep forgetting this is a popularity contest and that popularity contest is no greater than in the Best Picture race. Heart is always part of the equation. The largest part.
I think
The Social Network deserves every accolade it has gotten. Fincher did an amazing job as did Sorkin and everyone else involved in this film. Unfortunately, it is the
Goodfellas of this year and will most likely lose to the sentimental and popular film. And tomorrow, all those Oscarwatcher types will bitch and complain about how the wrong film won.
Which leads to me to this if
The Kings Speech wins, and I predict it will, then I happen to think it is the right film, just like I thought
Dances With Wolves was the right film, and blasphemy, it may even be that
How Green Was My Valley was also the right film at the time. We can argue for days and days about how brilliant Citizen Kane is, but I'd wager not a lot of people would say that film got to them right in the gut. The film has always struck me as very very cold. John Ford won four Academy Awards. He made films with heart.
Lets face facts what cinephine doesnt have a top ten list where a few of the films there would not be considered a best film by a score of critics? Id wager there are a few films listed there that are personal favorites. And how does a film become a favorite? It makes the list because we love the movie.
The Kings Speech is that kind of film. It is not an accident that Colin Firth is winning all those awards. We root for Bertie, we like Bertie, we cry when he is able to face his fears. He is us
every one of us who has ever been afraid, shy, or unsure. Even more surprising is that he is playing a King not exactly your run of the mill character and certainly not someone most of us would root for. Firth is flat out amazing and is why we love the movie. It is also the reason why the film will win.
It certainly helps that Tom Hooper was able to set just the right tone in this film and make all those dialogue scenes interesting. He even made the walls interesting. This is one of those rare films that is not what you think it will be. No, there is not one chase scene, nor is there any action, and in the end, you didnt even notice. You may have thought the film would be a bore. You were wrong, so pleasantly wrong.
It matters that a film like this has found an audience and is on the cusp of winning an Academy Award. When I lament the loss of subtlety and drama in this age of cleverness and chases, a movie like this comes along and reminds me that all is not lost.
I will add that both
The King's Speech and
The Social Network are films built on dialogue and character. But, we love the King and dislike the accidental billionaire. And that is what makes one a Best Picture winner and the other not.