Noted with pleasure: movie critic A.O. Scott in today's New York Times. The story was headlined: "Are Oscars Worth All This Fuss?"
"I’m only slightly ashamed to admit that I found myself hoping that the strike would shut the Academy Awards down; that for once, in a year of such cinematic bounty and variety, appreciation for the best movies could be liberated from the pomp and tedium of Hollywood spectacle. ..."Like anyone else I’m glad when my favorites win and dismayed when they fall short. So I am not against the Oscars, any more than I’m dismissive of the Salesman of the Year or the Employee of the Month, or opposed to lavish annual trade association conventions for actuaries or ophthalmologists.
"But I am nonetheless bothered by the disproportionate importance that the Academy Awards have taken on, and by the distorting influence they exercise over the way we make, market and see movies in this country. The Oscars themselves may be harmless fun, but the idea that they matter is as dangerous as it is ridiculous. ...
"A bit of perspective is needed. The wonderful thing about the Academy Awards is that they are fundamentally trivial. To pretend otherwise is to trivialize movies."
This DVD blog's favorite movie of the year was "No Country for Old Men." I hope it wins. Yeah, despite all my crabbing about the Oscars, I'll be watching -- along with everyone else in the universe.
Read Scott's terrific piece about the Oscars.
Comments