I can’t put up the Michelle Williams article. Yet. Technical difficulties.
But I DO think that Michelle will get nominated. And David Karger of EW agrees with me. He has her in his USUALLY tremendously accurate Oscar nomination predictions. For Best Actress. David Karger, for those who don’t follow all this OSCAR stuff as closely as I or Harvey Weinstein do, is Entertainment Weekly’s go-to guy for Oscar reporting, and he’s pretty astute. One of the best, if you ask me, and of course, you ARE asking me because YOU’RE READING THIS.
And meanwhile they’ve(EW), they’ve got Natalie Portman looking seriously glamorous on their Oscar cover, and radiating happiness as if to say ALREADY “I’ve won!” And EW is alternating her image with James Franco. He is co-hosting of course with Anne Hathaway. He’s probably going to be nominated for “127 Hours” though his film and the director Danny Boyle won’t. Not doing well with audiences…
But I digress.
So of course, we EXPECT EW(Entertainment Weekly, or www.ew.com ) to come out with an Oscar cover, but boy does it seem EARLY! But of course it’s not early at all. It’s Right On Time. If you want to influence the Oscar voters, the Academy members who have gotten their ballots to fill in right about NOW! So even though it seems like jumping the gun, it isn’t. It’s time, dear readers, dear cineastes, it’s OSCAR TIME! YAY!
And it’s not surprising that EW is doing this Of course, it isn’t. It’s what they DO.
But it IS surprising that the NYTimes came out with AN ENTIRE SECTION of their Sunday Newspaper called “THE OSCARS” in big, bold type. And with GIGANTIC half-page pictures of Christian Bale and Natalie Portman(yes, her again) and pieces on their characters and their performances in “The Fighter” and “Black Swan.”
And if that isn’t Oscar Advocacy, I don’t know what is.
I think Natalie Portman’s win is pretty inevitable at this point, and of course her nomination is assured. And deserved. The nomination comes first, remember? And the same is probably true for Christian Bale. But his WIN?
Well, according to the NYTimes, it’s a done deal. But I don’t know about that…That category is still up for grabs.
But the SIZE of that picture and that piece!?! And by Manhola Dargis, no less. Is this the objectivity that New York Times is supposedly the last bastion of in journalism?
A. O. Scott the OTHER film critic at the Times wrote the piece extolling Natalie Portman’s performance. There’s three film critics at the NYTimes, if you’re keeping count.
And where was their third esteemed critic? And someone who I’m confused with constantly because our names are so similar, Stephen Holden? And where was Colin Firth?
Well they were BOTH relegated to the last two back pages of this special issue, with an equally gigantic picture of Firth, with Geoffrey Rush, in a WONDERFUL, beautifully written piece about Firth’s performance in “The King’s Speech” by Holden at his absolute best. I was very moved by it.
But it was on THE LAST TWO PAGES?!? Why was it placed there? I guess, because Colin Firth’s win is so assured that the editors of “The OSCARS” didn’t think he needed their extra help. I guess.
But anyway, it was there, after all. And I was glad to see the Grey Lady putting a little color in her cheeks over, of all things, the Oscar race.
But Christian Bale? The front-runner? As far as the New York Times is concerned. This is for Best Supporting Actor, of course. But HEL-LOH, NYT, as good as his performance is, and it’s one of his best, I’m really not sure he’s an Oscar slum-dunk for The Win in that category.
What IF, and it’s more than an IF, what if the ailing Michael Douglas is nominanted for “Wall St. 2” in that category? OK, he’s got TWO Oscars already and one of them for Best Actor for playing Gordan Geko in the original “Wall St.” and an earlier one for producing “One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest” which won Best Picture many, many moons ago.
And there’s also Geoffrey Rush’s towering performance, which to its’ credit the Times did en-picture, ON THE LAST TWO PAGES, and shared with Colin Firth for “The King’s Speech.”
So no, I don’t think Christian Bale has got this in the bag. And yes I would expect the LA Times to do something this splashy on the Oscars. They’re in LA after all. But the Grey Lady herself?
Well, I LOVE reading about “The Oscars” no matter if the Times is going to try to influence my vote. Me? Well, if I was a voting member of AMPAS AND I’M NOT, I’d vote for Geoffrey Rush.
It will be VERY interesting to see just how this all pans out since I do think that Bale, Rush and Douglas are all going to be nominated for Best Supporting Actor.
And Best Supporting Actress??? The Times didn’t even venture an educated guess on that one. THAT’S how up in the air THAT category is!