Hmmm

I like Little Children and all (read that without knowing I'm referring to the movie and that's a very different sentence hah!), but the movie's kind of dull as hell. And that's impressive to do, when your movie has many a scene, IIRC, of Patrick Wilson and Kate Winslet fucking. Also, the way it's shot and directed, there are more than a few scenes that seem straight out of a horror movie. Still boring. It's not unlike the novel The Color Purple (it took me forever to think of the title of that), which, again, IIRC, has at least one graphic lesbian sex scene, and is still a total snoozer.

Though, the last time I read it was like 11th grade, so maybe I should give it another try?

and as long as we're talking about voices...

Patrick Wilson is a talented actor and you know, not really very bad to look at to boot. But his voice is just so... loud. This is an incredibly stupid statement, so let me elaborate further. I have Little Children on in the background. I'm not really paying attention to it at all. But somehow, every time Patrick Wilson speaks, without even looking at the TV, I'm like "huh, there's Patrick again." He's way louder than anyone else in this cast, and his voice is really distinctive while being kind of bland (sorry Patty). There's only three other actors I can do that I-know-it's-you-without-looking-at-you thing with: Matt & Kevin Dillon, and Bill Murray (that's only because I worship that last one, though). Huh. Go figure.

Movies I am pretty ambivalent about

that everyone else seems to either love or despise.

I Heart Huckabees
Little Children (I err far more toward the side of positive)
Mulholland Dr.
The Terminal
Match Point
Punch-Drunk Love
Closer
The Cell

and another...

Happy birthday to Patrick Wilson, who is farking hot. It looks like he's gonna be in more movies from now on, so YAY (though I hope he keeps up his stage work as well). Serious problem (among many, many, many others) in Running with Scissors: having Patrick Wilson in your cast and then having him on screen for .03 seconds.

I'm on a roll! Best Supporting Actor

Analyzing: Alan Arkin, Little Miss Sunshine
My rank among the nominees: 4th
How'd he get nominated?: He's got a good role (drug addict! cursin' grandpa!) in an Oscar-supported film.
Pros: A very respected actor who never won an Oscar. AMPAS may go Little Miss Sunshine-crazy.
Cons: Not the frontrunner. I'm still not exactly sure what the hell made him better than Carell or Kinnear, and my guess is many others aren't either. No precursor awards.
Basically, any chance of winning?: Yes, but it's ridiculous that people are predicting him now just because he won the BAFTA. Jake Gyllenhaal won the BAFTA last year when he was clearly the best in his category, and he still couldn't win at the Oscars.

Analyzing: Jackie Earle Haley, Little Children
My rank among the nominees: 2nd
How'd he get nominated: Critical approval + Kate Winslet's pre-ordained place in the Best Actress race
Pros: Comeback kid. The fact that he could get nominated for this role (and virtually unseen movie) alone is telling. Critical raves. Critics awards.
Cons: Not the frontrunner at all - many weren't even sure if he'd get in. Movie is tiny. Role is (really) unsympathetic.
Basically, any chance of winning?: Only if there's some crazy vote splitting.

Analyzing: Djimon Hounsou, Blood Diamond
My rank among the nominees: 5th
How'd he get nominated: Baity role! Man-tears!
Pros: The kind of role AMPAS loves. Critics awards, including NBR. The movie clearly had more support from AMPAS than we thought.
Cons: Performance often dismissed as just "running and screaming" (it's not, but it's the least of the nominees anyway). Most didn't think he was going to even be nominated.
Basically, any chance of winning?: Again, only if there's some crazy vote splitting.

Analyzing: Eddie Murphy, Dreamgirls
My rank among the nominees: 1st
How'd he get nominated: Comeback kid in a flashy, scene-stealing role in a Best Picture frontrunner (well, we all thought it was, anyway.)!
Pros: See "how'd he get nominated." Scene-stealing = shades of Catherine Zeta-Jones in Chicago. Relatively baity role (drug addict!). Globe, SAG, and critics awards.
Cons: Backlash - both against him and Dreamgirls in general. Norbit...though it made an assload of money so it wasn't really an embarassment.
Basically, any chance of winning?: Yup. A big one, too.

Analyzing: Mark Wahlberg, The Departed
My rank among the nominees: 3rd
How'd he get nominated: "Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe fuck yourself."
Pros: Support for The Departed. That dialogue! Comeback kid, sorta.
Cons: Um, there's no way he was the best performance in The Departed. He was a surprise nominee - most of these don't win. Still the perception of him as "Marky Mark."
Basically, any chance of winning?: If there's vote splitting between Arkin and Murphy, he's the most likely to benefit (more than Hounsou or Haley). However, it's not all that likely...but it is likely. I guess.

Analyzing: Best Supporting Actor as a whole
Who will win: I'm predicting Eddie Murphy, but Alan Arkin could get this too. And a lot of people are predicting Mark Wahlberg as well, but I just don't see it...
Who should win: For me, Eddie is the true standout in this category.
Unlucky 6th placer: Jack Nicholson for The Departed, but I hardly think he cried to himself about it.
Snubbed: With such an up-in-the-air category, I'm kinda ticked by the fact that boring performances like Arkin and Hounsou got in here. I would have preferred, out of anyone with any hype at all, Sheen in The Queen, Carell in Little Miss Sunshine (the best member of the cast is the only one without any sort of awards nomination? ridiculous), Affleck in Hollywoodland, the aforementioned Nicholson, and even the poor neglected Baldwin in the same movie. Among those with no chance, I enjoyed Caine in both his outings this year (Children of Men and The Prestige), Doug Jones and Sergio Lopez in Pan's Labyrinth, and Robert Downey Jr. in A Scanner Darkly. But, of course, my heart belongs to Clive Owen in Inside Man.
Random cool fact about this category: Um... Djimon Hounsou and Mark Wahlberg are really hot?

Best Actress

Analyzing: Penelope Cruz, Volver
My rank among the nominees: 4th
How'd she get nominated?: Hype building for almost a year combined with the result.
Pros: The fact that she could get in with a subtitled film that didn't get other Academy support says a lot. She's hot.
Cons: They clearly didn't love the film since it was snubbed like all hell. Subtitled. "Oscar winner, Penelope Cruz?" Not Helen Mirren.
Basically, any chance of winning?: Nope. She's coming in dead last here.

Analyzing: Judi Dench, Notes on a Scandal
My rank among the nominees: 2nd
How'd she get nominated?: She's Judi Dench.
Pros: Judi Dench. Amazing performance backed up by reviews. Film got support from nominations (Blanchett, Score, Adapted Screenplay).
Cons: Not Helen Mirren. Already has an Oscar.
Basically, any chance of winning?: Nope.

Analyzing: Helen Mirren, The Queen
My rank among the nominees: 5th
How'd she get nominated?: A talented actress with no Oscar playing a real-life famous person in a Best Picture nominee prestige pic, backed up by glowing reviews?!
Pros: Virtually every damn critics award. Everyone loves her and recognizes her amazing talent but she's Oscarless. She's in a biopic. Rave, rave, rave reviews.
Cons: Um...backlash? This would have been a bigger factor already, like with Julianne Moore in 2002 with Far from Heaven. A whole bunch of critics awards, and then the Globes came and BAM! Nicole took over.
Basically, any chance of winning?: All the other nominees here have "not Helen Mirren" in their cons section for a reason.

Analyzing: Meryl Streep, The Devil Wears Prada
My rank among the nominees: 1st
How'd she get nominated?: Meryl effin' Streep
Pros: Everyone wants to see Meryl win another Oscar...she hasn't since '83! The only American in this category. People have been talking about her non-stop since this movie came out.
Cons: Not Helen Mirren. The movie is fluffy and didn't have much other Oscar support (if she got Blunt in with her, she might have a slightly better chance).
Basically, any chance of winning?: Nope. But she's coming in (a distant) second.

Analyzing: Kate Winslet, Little Children
My rank among the nominees: 3rd
How'd she get nominated?: Kate Winslet. 5 nominations at 31?! They clearly do like her.
Pros: As I just said, 5 nominations must mean they like her, especially in stuff like Little Children which played in like one teeny little hidden theater in LA for half a week and certainly didn't get out there with an FYC campaign. At the beginning of this year, she was considered the frontrunner.
Cons: Not Helen Mirren. Teensy tiny little film.
Basically, any chance of winning?: Nope. Not Helen Mirren.

Analyzing: Best Actress as a whole
Who will win: OH GOD THIS IS SO HARD. Um...just kidding. Helen Mirren has this all sewn (sown?) up.
Who should win: Okay, I know I ranked these ladies, but it might as well be a tie. Almost always, the categories have at least one nominee that makes me go "eh" or "ugh!" Here, not at all. They might as well all be the winners! It's just a shame that in such an amazing year for actresses, the same name kept coming up.
Unlucky sixth placer: Probably Maggie Gyllenhaal in Sherrybaby...but who can tell with this year? Nobody else ever got mentioned besides these five. Ahaaaa.
Snubbed: Many people. Among the most notable/ones I liked the most, Naomi Watts in The Painted Veil, Cate Blanchett in The Good German, Laura Dern in Inland Empire, and Maggie Gyllenhaal in Sherrybaby.
Random cool fact about this category: Meryl Streep has the most nominations ever and Kate Winslet has the most nominations ever for someone her age.

i need more spare time

currentish movies I need to see, in the order I want to see them:
1. Marie-Antoinette
2. Little Children
3. Little Miss Sunshine
4. The Prestige
5. The Queen
6. Running with Scissors
7. Flags of Our Fathers

and why the hell is there a Saw III?