Oh, the Oscars

Well, I suppose I can't deny it anymore. With the nominations out, Oscar hysteria is now at full throttle. Even more so this year due to a few Academy surprises, most notably the absence of Kathryn Bigelow ("Zero Dark Thirty") and Ben Affleck ("Argo") from the Best Director list, despite both of their films being included in the Best Picture category.

But when has the Academy ever really gotten it right? Or perhaps a better question is, whose "right" are we talking about? Each year I'm amazed at how worked up everyone seems to get over the Oscar race. Either people feel vindicated when the movie they championed made the cut, or disgusted when it didn't. Maybe they think the selections are overly commercial, or they're complaining that they're too arty for a mass audience. Perhaps they blame the Academy members, calling them a bunch of old fogies. Or maybe they're saying that the voting population is packed with left wing nuts who hold political grudges against films or filmmakers.

Every year these arguments get trotted out, whipped into a frenzy in the weeks leading up to the star-studded night, then slowly seep away like a malfunctioning whoopee cushion as everyone shifts their focus to what really matters -- how boring/funny/long/controversial the awards broadcast was.

I can understand all the hoopla and hysteria over a campaign that had to do with something that actually affected our lives -- like, you know, an election.  Even if the democratic process is starting to seem like donor-backed political theater, it's still a process that, in the end, each and every eligible citizen can participate in.

But the Oscars? It's all hot air. It's movie studios spending months and millions ramping up their lobbying efforts to convince an exclusive group of individuals to support their candidate. Sometimes really amazing work is rewarded with a statue, and all the glory and money that comes with it. Just as often, a hack gets the gold. Again, it depends on who's talking and, when it comes to the Oscars, it isn't the moviegoer that anyone's listening to. More often than not, it's the Weinsteins.

The best spin I can put on it is that it's horse race political coverage with no real consequence. In politics, all that breathless minute-by-minute reporting tends to  distract and detach the voting public from what's happening in the larger context -- stuff that actually effects their lives. But with the Academy Awards we can root and hoot, complain and caterwaul, ogle designer gowns and celebrity dates, all without undermining our own democracy. I guess that's what you call entertainment!

So what do I think of the nominations.  Well, first of all I'm happy to say I interviewed two five of this year's nominees: director Ang Lee ("Life of Pi"), "Beasts of the Southern Wild" director Benh Zeitlin and lead actress  Quvenzhané Wallis, and screenwriter John Gatins ("Flight"), which is kind of cool to say. Otherwise, here are my thoughts in bullet point:

• Passing on Bigelow was an overstated and unjustified slap in the face.
• Passing on Affleck, petty.
• Love that "Amour" got so much love. Same for "Silver Linings Playbook."
• A bit baffled that "Django Unchained" made it to Best Picture, but pleased Christoph Waltz did too.
• I was sure Joaquin Phoenix would be ignored since he's so bitter about Oscar campaigning, but thrilled he wasn't because he was amazing in "The Master." 
• Disappointing that Jean-Louis Trintignant wasn't recognized for his amazing work carrying the other half of "Amour's" heavy load, but Emmanuelle Rivas' recognition is a delight.
• Nice to see "Searching for Sugarman" on the documentary list (I neglected to mention it in my cheat of a Top 10 - plus 12 more - list). Equally pleased that the overhyped, accidental commentary on the most vulgar of American consumerism, "Queen of Versailles," was left off.

If I make it through the campaign season, I'll give you my predictions when we get a little closer to the big night. In the meantime, don't you have some movie catch-up to do?

Tease Me More, Tell Me Less

We usually don't see previews at advance screenings and I'm usually thankful for it. I generally avoid them, preferring instead to see a movie as close to "cold" as possible in an attempt to avoid any preconceived notions before the lights go down.

But this week's screening of "Hangover 2" (review out on Friday) presented us with two appropriate previews for upcoming comedies "Horrible Bosses" and "Crazy, Stupid, Love." The crafting of an effective preview is an art in and of itself -- at least in the realm of marketing--and these two trailers managed to convince me I should see the movies within the first 45 seconds. Job well done, if only they'd stopped there.

Although the premise of "Horrible Bosses" (premeditated triple homicide) is hard to stomach as comedic fodder, the cast alone could make this movie a winner: Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis, Charlie Day, Kevin Spacey returning to his unbeatable "Swimming with Sharks" roots,  a sadistically sexy Jennifer Aniston and, what really wowed me, a nearly unrecognizable Colin Farrell as a smarmy, balding boss.

Enough said as far as I'm concerned. So why, oh why, did it KEEP ON GOING, revealing just about every plot turn and punchline? On its own, it was a fantastic preview; it got me laughing, kept my attention and made me want to tell my friends about it. But what I don't feel like doing is rushing to the theater to see it. Why would I? I already got the gist in the damn preview.

"Crazy, Stupid, Love" went even further, basically storyboarding the entire will they/won't they relationship between Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone. I adore Gosling and am chomping at the bit to see him in a comedic role. And Stone is quickly moving to the top of my list for the everygirl charm that makes her so much more appealing than the cookie-cutter starlets vying for our attention (does anyone else think she stepped right in where the young "Mean Girls"-era Lindsay Lohan should have gone had her parents not turned her in to an unstable addict? Well, I do.)  While I'm still eager to see the movie (it's hard for me to say no to anything with Gosling, or Franco for that matter), I'm resentful that I already know too much.

Perhaps we could just save everyone the trouble and just produce previews instead of full-length feature films? They'd certainly play better online and are probably more appropriate for the youthful attention spans of Hollywood's target market.

Hardly a new complaint, I know. But hey, it's my job to spout opinions.

Watch the previews if you dare. And if you do, tell me what YOU think....