Oscar Nomination Snap Judgments

It might not be safe to judge me on these come the day of the ceremony! The disclaimer, obviously, is that it's 6 A.M. here in Los Angeles and my brain is still trying to process being awake, let alone writing for all the Internets to see.

Not too many surprises this morning, but there were a few. Here they are, along with other snap judgments regarding today's Academy Award nominations:

1. True Grit back from the dead: After being snubbed at the Globes, and with indications that past winners the Coen Bros. probably would NOT be recognized for directing, the Coen Bros. WERE recognized for directing AND the movie had the second-most nominations, with 10
2. Andrew Garfield overlooked for Best Supporting Actor in the role that is the heart of the film that is supposed to be the front-runner. I'm not saying this is a death knell by any means for The Social Network, but I can't take it as GOOD news by any means.
3. The Academy just can't bring itself to dig Christopher Nolan. The whole reason we now have 10 Best Picture nominees is because, two years, the Academy made one of its biggest snubs ever and failed to nominate Nolan's film The Dark Knight. They've nominated Inception this time around, but snubbed the Brit of a Best Director slot, something that seemed like a foregone conclusion. The Coen Bros. presumably took that slot. So the moral of the story is, in the eyes of the Academy: Coens > Nolan
4. Javier Bardem! The former winner (for a Coen Bros. film), in a bit of an upset, won a Best Actor nomination for his role in Biutiful. It's the first time ever that a leading actor nominee's performance was entirely in Spanish.
5. Hailee Steinfeld's nom is Michelle Williams' gain. Not a surprise in the least that the 14 year-old heroine of True Grit was nominated, but there had been some thinking recently that she'd get nominated as Best Actress (since she drives the movie) and not Best Supporting Actress (which she was being pushed for, because she's 14). But in the end, Supporting it was - which kept open a spot for the much-loved indie queen Michelle Williams as a Best Actress nominee for Blue Valentine, but presumably kept Mila Kunis (Black Swan) out of the Supporting race.
   
6. John Hawkes for Best Supporting Actor: The Winter's Bone actor presumably grabbed Andrew Garfield's spot.
7. Jacki Weaver for Best Supporting Actress: The veteran Australian actress duplicated her Golden Globes nod by getting nominated for her chilling turn in Animal Kingdom. Largely expected in many quarters, but it's still somewhat of a coup considering her film is probably the least-seen of any nominee in a major category (acting, directing, writing, picture).

In the end, what I'm most interested in is the fact that The Social Network got "only" eight nominations, which puts it in third place behind The King's Speech with 12 and True Grit (!) with 10. Granted, Social Network is not a movie designed to get tons of Oscar nominations, whereas King's Speech or True Grit are - because they can rack up nods in the technical categories like art direction, costumes, etc. But I did get somewhat of a sense that, if Social Network is to cap off awards season with a Best Picture win, it will need to have a strong core of support within the Academy, because judging from the nominations alone the voters seem to be a bit ambivalent about it. Considering the fact that it's won almost everything up to this point, it's at least one of two front-runners (along with King's Speech; 10 nominations notwithstanding, I don't think True Grit is winning). But when you throw into the mix the fact that King's Speech got 12 nominations, just won the Producer's Guild prize for Best Picture, blew everyone out of the water at the BAFTAs (I know, they're British) AND the fact that Social Network is third among most-nominated films (with a not-insignificant snub in Andrew Garfield), you begin to get the feeling that Social Network's support within the Academy might be a little shakier than previously thought.

It's going to take a bit more than expected for the Academy to crown "the Facebook movie," especially when a heart-warming, old-fashioned piece of (British!) entertainment is sitting there for the taking - along with the Coen Bros., now firmly entrenched in the establishment, as a very dark horse.

Oscar Snub: Peter O'Toole (cont.)

Why he should have won for The Lion in Winter in 1968:

Oscar Snub: Peter O'Toole

Welcome to OSCAR SNUBS, the latest feature here at The Danifesto. In this series, I'll profile people and pictures that have been notoriously snubbed by the Academy. Some have only one infamous snub, while other, like this week's "honoree," have been repeatedly passed over for an Oscar. This feature will continue every Sunday until February 15, which just so happens to be the week before the Oscars themselves. Enjoy!

Some things in life never change, no matter how much one may try. Seasons will always change. Birds will always fly. The sky is blue. The earth is round. Survivor, after all these seasons, is a popular TV show.

And Peter O'Toole, no matter what he does, regardless of the film for which he is nominated, will always lose at Oscar time. Always.

Peter O'Toole is one of the giants of cinema. Period. His first major role was as the titular character in David Lean's 1962 epic Lawrence of Arabia, a Best Picture winner. His prolific career has spanned decades, on stage and screen, in classical and non-classical works, opposite famous and not-so-famous co-stars. Equipped the bluest eyes the world has ever seen, he has bewitched audiences with his talents for nearly half a century.

Yet, with all his fame and fortune, one thing has notoriously alluded him: an Oscar.

Eight times has Peter O'Toole been nominated for an Academy Award: for Lawrence of Arabia, for Becket, for The Lion in Winter, for Goodbye, Mr. Chips, for The Ruling Class, for The Stunt Man, for My Favorite Year, for Venus. Each time, he has lost - first to Gregory Peck, then to Rex Harrison, then to Cliff Robertson, then to John Wayne, then to Marlon Brando, then to Robert DeNiro, then to Ben Kingsley, then to Forest Whitaker. Eight nominations. Over 42 years. Nothing to show for it.

Peter O'Toole's futility at the Oscars ranks as one of the all-time greatest Oscar snubs. He's lost to screen legends (Peck, Wayne, Brando, DeNiro), he's lost to guys giving the performances of their careers (Whitaker and Kingsley, who is now probably a legend but wasn't in 1982), he's lost to a guy who talked when he could have been singing (Harrison) and he's lost to a guy who ended up being practically kicked out of Hollywood for a time (Robertson). He's lost when his film swept the other top awards (Lawrence of Arabia), he's lost when his co-star has won (Katharine Hepburn, The Lion in Winter), he even lost at the age of 74, theoretically the perfect time to finally give him his due (Venus).

No other actor has been nominated as many times without winning. The Academy tried to rectify this in 2002, when they bestowed upon O'Toole the "I've Never Won A Real One So I'm Getting This Instead" Award, also known as an Honorary Oscar. O'Toole, to his credit, showed up at the ceremony - he originally thought he might not - and gave a gracious acceptance speech. But that's been it for him so far, and, at the age of 76, one would presume there's not a real good chance of a competitive win coming any time soon.

So I kick off Oscar Snub Season with a tip of my hat to the great Peter O'Toole, one of my favorite actors, and one of the world's most treasured acting legends. Pete, you may not have an Oscar, but all is not lost, for you now have an award from us, and no one can ever take that away from you.

Congratulations?