Kinematoscope

This will be the last thing about the Oscars, I promise (unless Dave also has some post-Oscar thoughts he feels need to be shared). It's time to look ahead.

RE: The Ceremony.

Meh. You can change it up all you want, but it's still a three and a half hour monstrosity that drags for most people when non-acting and non-picture awards are announced. I'm always stoked for the whole thing, but mostly because I do the whole picks business. Hugh Jackman was serviceable, but really didn't do any heavy lifting. I'm sure people liked the dance number in the middle (I muted it), but there's a reason Viva Laughlin got canceled after two episodes. Just saying.

RE: The Winners.

Triple-meh. It's not a good sign when the Awardsdaily.com "most likely winners" on their big chart gets 20 out of 24 right. AMPAS is supposed to be a fickle, capricious voting block of artists that reward merit where they see fit. This can make them frustrating to follow, but it makes the Oscars somewhat exciting, most of the time.

Last year we saw some minor upsets in both actress categories, art direction, costume, both sounds, as well as stunner in fx and documentary feature. What happened to the unpredictability, I ask?

RE: The Eventual Legacy.

I have to agree with Dave that there is no way that Slumdog Millionaire can possibly age that well. As undeserving winners go, at least Crash only won three Oscars it didn't deserve, not eight. And as much as I liked Button or Milk, I don't think, in the years to come, that you can point to either one as the particular unjust loser in a Titanic/L. A. Confidential or Crash/Brokeback Mountain debate. This will always be, for me, the year that The Dark Knight was overlooked by an Academy determined to recognize only the tastefully dull.