Under Pressure

The Golden Globe nominations are out! Sad to say that I haven't seen any of the movies that are nominated--yet. However, in my defense, some of them aren't in theaters (i.e. Miss Potter, Dreamgirls). This makes me wonder whether such films have a chance if they're not out in time for the public to buzz about it and for the members of the foreign press to hear the buzzing.

For example, when Love Actually was nominated a few years back, it didn't win. It's one of my favorite movies! Several critics, who were predicting the Golden Globe winners at the time, said that it wouldn't win because it was a late entry, and the bees weren't making a sound. Love Actually, and other movies like it, definitely have better chances of winning if they come out sooner--with enough time for the voters to actually see it.

To my surprise, Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan snagged 2 nominations: Best Motion Picture and Best Actor in a Comedy or Musical. This goes to show that the award-giving bodies are getting jiggy with it. Quite recently, rap (Lose Yourself by Eminem) and hip-hop songs (It's Hard Out Here for a Pimp) have won the Academy Award for Best Original Song.

It's great because the awards shows definitely become more interesting to watch. Hmmm...perhaps, that's why they're handing out these sorts of nominations--to regain lost viewers. Nonetheless, I'm not saying that these type of nominees don't deserve it. Eminem certainly did, and maybe, after seeing Borat, I'll feel the same way about it, too.

Even though I haven't seen any of the movies (Babel leads the pack with 7 nods.), I watch some of the television shows. In this big category, Grey's Anatomy and Weeds are are ahead of the rest. Both are tied with 4 nominations each. Seriously. There are also some first time nominees (Heroes!), which will do wonders for their careers. Penelope Cruz, Beyonce, and Mark Wahlberg are among them--as if their careers are in danger, but every little bit helps, right? Sarah Paulson from Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip received a nod for Best Supporting Actress. NBC is probably banking on her to win one for the team, thus, boosting the show's low ratings.

Moreover, there are several celebrities who are up against...themselves. They include Leonardo DiCaprio (The Departed and Blood Diamond) and Clint Eastwood (Flags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima) in the Best Actor and Best Director categories, respectively. Are these kinds of nominations a double edge sword? In the words of Access correspondent, Nancy O'Dell, "will they cancel each other out?" Conversely, is it the more nominations they have, the better their odds are? After all, Helen Mirren (The Queen, Elizabeth I and Prime Suspect: The Final Act) has 3 nominations!

What about those who are nominated for the same role? Johnny Depp is up for Best Actor for reprising his role in Pirates of the Caribbean 2: The Curse of the Black Pearl. Even if he doesn't win (God forbid!), perhaps, the 3rd time's the charm. Look at director, Peter Jackson. He didn't win the Academy Award until the 3rd Lord of the Ring installment came out. It's all politics unfortunately. I mean, I love the Lord of the Ring movies, but I thought the first one was the best.

Also, when I heard Clint Eastwood's response to his loss (He said that his film, Mystic River, was "hobbitized."), my entire face contorted in disgust. I thought, "He's just jealous." Well, as it turns out, he was right. After watching Mystic River, I've got to say that I loved it. It's not necessarily one of my favorite movies, but it was most definitely Oscar-worthy. I couldn't stop talking about it afterwards--even if no one was listening. The twists and turns in that cinematic feat were mind blowing!

Still, no pressure.

One Director to Rule Them All

It's a travesty! The New York Times has printed that Peter Jackson, the Oscar-winning director of the incredible Lord of the Ring trilogy, won't be in charge of the big-screen adaptation of its prequel, The Hobbit. Can you imagine someone else being the director of that movie? It really is unthinkable. Jackson has done more than a superb job of bringing J.R.R. Tolkien's novels to life, and the movie studio, New Line Cinema, is casting him aside. What makes it even harder to comprehend is that the studio has rights to the book until 2009 so, why the rush? Jackson explained it all on the website, theonering.net, just last week.

Allegedly, New Line Cinema has yet to pay up for Jackson's work on the trilogy. However, the movie studio claims that Jackson has made more than enough money from the franchise and is only pretending to be the victim. Compounded by the prodding of Jackson's company, Wingnut Films (They sued in February 2005.), New Line Cinema ultimately decided to let go of Peter Jackson to the dismay of his fans. Even The Hobbit producer (Saul Zaentz) and star (Ian McKellan) have released statements expressing their disappointment at New Line Cinema's decision.

One has to ask if Harry Potter 1 and 2 would have been as disappointing as they were had Chris Columbus not taken the job? What if Bryan Singer (director of X-Men 1 and 2) remained as the man behind the lens for X-Men 3: The Last Stand? How will the movie adaptation of The Golden Compass fare when the director of American Pie, Chris Weitz, is not only directing but writing the piece? It is only recently that I realized the importance of hiring the right directors for films. They are the ones with the visions. They are the ones who draw in the star power by the mere mention of their names. They are the ones who make or break the difference between an Oscar nomination and an Oscar win.