there-will-be-blood1.jpgHere are some reactions from around the blogosphere about this morning’s announcement of the 80th Annual Academy Award nominees:

Jim Emerson at Scanners handicaps the nominees statistically:

“Looking at the odds, “Atonement” is an unlikely best picture because its director (Joe Wright) wasn’t nominated. “Michael Clayton” and “Juno” lack editing nominations, which (statistically speaking) is are crucial to winning the top prize. On the other hand, “Michael Clayton” is honored in three acting categories, for George Clooney, Tom Wilkinson and Tilda Swinton — and guess which branch of the Academy is the biggest? “No Country for Old Men” didn’t claim a lead acting slot, perhaps because it’s an ensemble piece. If you go strictly by statistically significant nominations, only “There Will Be Blood” has ‘em all — an old-fashioned Hollywood epic built around a big ol’ performance (by a previous Oscar winner) that screams: I’m acting! But will its unremittingly bleak nihilism (and the bizarro ending that even many of its admirers found over-the-top) prove too bitter for Academy voters? I dunno.”

Brooks Barnes, for the New York Times, blames the nominations on Hollywood’s “bleak mood:”

“Unlike last year, when flashy mainstream hits like “The Departed,” “Dreamgirls” and “Little Miss Sunshine” dominated, the 2008 Oscar race swings back toward critic-driven films. Many of the movies that received multiple nominations feature dark themes and unconventional endings that, for the most part, have failed to attract broad audiences.”

I presume that by unconventional endings, he means “endings that are not happy” or “endings that refuse to tie things up in a neat little bow.”

The Oscar nominations seemed “mildly surprising” to Dave Kehr, “in that they gave full play to two films — the Coen brothers’ heartwarming ‘No Country for Old Men’ and Paul Thomas Anderson’s vitalist epic ‘There Will Be Blood’ — that many observers considered too hip for the Academy.” Note the ironic designation of No Country as “heartwarming,” an adjective that even it’s most ardent admirers–including yours truly–would never lay on it. Dave–who reviews DVDs for the New York Times–wastes no love on the brothers Coen; in another memorable post, he called their latest “No Country for Old Humanists.”

Finally, ” Why not just change the name, from the Oscars to the Independent Spirit Awards?” grouses Richard Corliss in Time, referring to the fact that all five nominees for Best Picture were made independently of the big studios. Further, he writes,

“This lack of a big-studio pedigreed film makes predicting the winners a daunting task. No Country may be a masterpiece, but it’s a cold-blooded one, perhaps too much a splatter fest and a museum piece for Oscar voters. There Will Be Blood has packed them in at a relatively few theaters since its Christmas day opening; as it rolls out for wider release, will it pick up steam or antagonize the mass audience? Even if Blood doesn’t cop the top prize, as I uneasily predicted, it will win Daniel Day-Lewis the Best Actor award over everybody’s favorite movie star (Clooney). DDL’s performance is so manic, so intense, and he slips so deeply into his roles, that Academy members will be afraid to vote against him. He might come to their homes and devour their young.”

That would put the damper on the Oscar festivities, wouldn’t it?

Tags: , ,