SnubPosted: January 22, 2009
I don’t really want to get into a big thing here, because (a) the rest of the Internet is undoubtedly covering this pretty thoroughly; (b) I haven’t seen Milk, Frost/Nixon, or The Reader, so I can’t comment on their quality; and (c) I don’t want to give too much weight to a meaningless award show. Nevertheless, the Oscars are the only major award event that anyone seems to even notice enough, say, to have an office pool on the winners.
So with that in mind, how does the second-highest grossing film of all time, almost universally praised by critics (82 on Metacritic, 94 on Rotten Tomatoes), get only one mandatory nomination and a handful of technical ones? The Dark Knight wasn’t a great movie because it had fantastic sound editing. And don’t say because it was a summer blockbuster, because Gladiator was one too. It seems to me a pretty blatant bias against comic adaptations.
This is to say nothing of Wall-E and the bias against animation.
But I shouldn’t care. No one should. It’s just in our nature to complain about things, even if it’s only Hollywood’s annual self-congratulatory ball.