Tuesday, January 20, 2009

"Thank you for visiting Homer's Museum of Hollywood Jerks."

The prestigious Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced today their nominations for the best work in movies during 2008, a/k/a the "Oscars". I don't care much for the Oscars. I've never really liked them much anyway, but they lost all credibility in my eyes when "Chicago" beat "The Two Towers" for best picture. What a crock! Another robbery that year was snubbing Andy Serkis for best supporting actor, but I digress. Despite my many disagreements with the Academy's choices, this year I do agree on one thing: Wall-E does not deserve a best picture nomination. I will concede that I have not seen the other best picture nominees (nor will I), but I can say this: there were many other films last year that were much, much better than Wall-E. Don't get me wrong, Wall-E had its moments and was certainly not a bad film. However, I certainly don't think it was among the best movies I've ever seen, either. For example, "Dark Knight" was a much better movie (despite getting long-winded and preachy at the end).

I diverge from the rest of humanity because I don't absolutely love Pixar movies. My kid loves them, especially Wall-E, and that's great. I'm glad that he does. But he's three. He's not going to like a movie because of its plot, editing or stellar acting. See, Wall-E suffers from two of the major problems that accompany most Pixar movies: they are way too long and way too preachy. Wall-E could have benefited from a little more time in the editing room, especially toward the end when it started beating the audience over the head about its waste/laziness message. Come on, I know that your audience is only three years old, but they don't need to be told again and again about how awful it is to pollute the planet! They already know that! Shut up, already!

I have the same problem with "Cars". The first 15 minutes and the last 30 minutes of the movie were great. The 1:15 between them were unbearably long, preachy and annoying. I understand that you lament the loss of the slower lifestyle of the 40's and 50's, and that old things can still be useful, but did you really have to put in some long, boring, sappy and sad James Taylor song to make your point? And did you really have to give us over an hour of movie where virtually nothing happened? They could have skipped the whole storyline about the town being forgotten and just stuck with the Doc Hudson storyline to make the same point without being redundant. Learn to edit, morons!

I also hated "Finding Nemo", "The Incredibles", and "A Bug's Life" for the same reasons. The more watchable Pixar films were "Monsters, Inc.", "Toy Story" (which remains their best work), and "Toy Story 2" (minus the whole lost and abandoned toy storyline surrounding girl Woody). And among that list, even Monsters, Inc. was longer than it should have been.

My point is that for some inexplicable reason, people love Pixar movies and believe that they can do no wrong. People are dumb. Pixar needs an editor and a good kick in the mouth. Then they can start making movies again.

I also hate:

Renée Zellweger - Squinty-eyed spinster;

Chris Columbus - How on earth can you make the first two Harry Potter books boring? Really? And "Christmas with the Kranks"? You should be ashamed to ever show your face in public again.;

Julia Roberts - It's funny that they cast a horse as a hooker.;

Roland Emmerich - Why do people keep throwing money at you when your movies just keep getting worse and worse?; and

Angelina Jolie - Maybe I'm gay, but I don't find her attractive in the slightest. No, even gay people like her. She's a pretentious, snooty, self-important jerk. I also don't think much of her as an actress.

Obviously, this list could be much longer, but I've lost interest.

The final reason why I hate the Oscars is pretty tangential, but it's because people are surprised when actors do stupid stuff. I have news for you: actors are the drama kids from high school! I knew many of the drama kids, and only a few of them turned out normal (the ones that either got out of entertainment or parlayed their skills into real jobs). The rest of them were, and remain, total freaks who make poor life choices and are increasingly messed up as they gain fame and attention. We shouldn't be surprised that the weird behavior they exhibit is only exacerbated by their incredible wealth and attention. Please understand, I'm not complaining that actors behave like teenagers, rather, my complaint is with people having higher expectations of them. Actors are, for the most part, dumb. End of story.


Mormegil said...

Wow! Dare I say it I almost agree with you on most of you points. This scares me.

Daniel said...

I'm scared, too. When I was in law school, I used a barometer to decide when to reexamine my beliefs: if I found myself agreeing with Justice Rehnquist, I knew it was time to take a second look.

Kirsten said...

Your post is like Pixar: lacking in the editing department. I mean it was long. And I don't like Monsters, Inc. as much as the Incredibles because I think Monsters, Inc. is more preachy. I also don't like Cars... or many others. But I think that's because I'm not stuck on being a kid like all those other girls who still wish they were Disney Princesses...

Anyway, I concur with your general assessment that the Oscars are dumb.

Mormegil said...

BTW, the Angelina thing doesn't make you gay. I'm definitely not gay and I don't find her that attractive either.

Daniel said...

That's very reassuring. Because of all the attention she was getting, I was afraid that I was missing something and it was because I was growing out of... you know... how I am.

red said...

I am glad that there are places and people you can share your long winded opions with who don't roll their eyes and say "blah blah blah" it's special.