My Oscar Method vs. Theirs
March 16, 2010 7 Comments
My Oscar-picking rule is really pretty simple actually. Say it’s ten years from now and you’re forced at gunpoint by your evil nemesis to watch one single movie from 2009. Which one do you pick, The Hurt Locker or Inglourious Basterds? The answer of course is Basterds. So there’s your Best Picture. By similar methods you can deduce that, say, Jack Black deserved the Best Actor Oscar for his performance in School of Rock that year (would you really rather be forced to watch Sean Penn in Mystic River?). You’d give Amelie lots of awards in 2001, Sixth Sense would sweep 1999. Less awards for the Hilary Swanks of the world, more for the Catherine Zeta-Joneses; less period pieces, more comedies. As you can see, the method is surprisingly powerful. But it’s also logical, because it’s rooted in actual enjoyment of the movie.
Unfortunately this is not how Oscars are actually chosen in practice; they seem to be chosen by self-conscious considerations of whose ‘turn’ it is to get an Oscar and who the Academy wants to be seen as having voted for to get an Oscar. Typically the Academy is essentially answering these questions: “When I look in the record books ten years from now, which films/actors/directors do I want to see there as this year’s Oscar winners, and who do I want to be able to claim at cocktail parties I voted for?” Sometimes this logic allows for needed catch-up: it was Scorsese’s ‘turn’ to get an Oscar because the Academy was obviously embarrassed he hadn’t gotten one yet (e.g. for Goodfellas), so they gave it to him for The Departed (which is absurd). It was Jeff Bridges’s turn to finally get an Oscar this year, so he got one (in reality he should have gotten one over ten years ago for Big Lebowski but perhaps also for Fearless, Tucker, even Thunderbolt and Lightfoot). And The Hurt Locker/Kathryn Bigelow got Oscars b/c it was time to give a woman director an Oscar and this was a way to award the single Iraq-war movie that hadn’t been a failure. On that note, quite often the Oscars allow the Academy to preen about how PC they are: giving it to Halle Berry for something-or-other, for instance (seriously, does anyone remember what movie she won it for? would anyone ever watch that movie again if they weren’t forced to?), so that she can make a teary speech about being the first black winner of whatever-it-was she won (by my method, either Renee Zellwegger in Bridget Jones or Nicole Kidman in Moulin Rouge were obviously superior picks that year).
The overall issue here is are the Oscars about the actual movies, or are they about the ‘Academy’? Every year we see the answer to that from the choices they make.
I largely agree with you.
However, there are times when artistic considerations trump popular judgment.
For instance, I seriously doubt anyone would have given Best Album 1965 to John Coltrane’s A Love Supreme.
And yet, 45 years later, it becomes more and more apparent that that album was better than anything the pop charts vomited that year, Beatles Rubber Sour included.
Pastorius, tho’ you have a point, is there anyone alive who can listen to a whole Beatles album?
If you’d try, wouldn’t it take years off your life?
Then again, gone are the days when I’d put an album on and listen to it from start to finish…
I haven’t heard A Love Supreme so I can’t say. It’s entirely possible I’d agree with you if I had though. On the other hand maybe it’s not (not a big jazz fan; I kinda agree with Fred Boynton, “my jazz rule is: if you can’t dance to it, you don’t want to know about it”). But that doesn’t mean I’d pick a Beatles album either – one of the odd things about things like Beatles albums (as Anon. points out) is that although everyone agrees they’re ‘great’, you don’t nec. want to ever listen to them ever again.
This is how like, it was hard for me to argue with the Forrest Gump Best Picture Oscar of 1994 (because I did think it was ‘great’ although few nowadays will admit to even having liked it). But even I, who did like it (and will still admit it), probably don’t need to see it ever again. While I could watch Pulp Fiction over and over.
Anyway, it’s not even really popular judgment vs. artistic considerations I’m talking about. It’s something else. Of course artistic considerations play a role. And they play a role in my rule too. (Pulp Fiction is very artistic. So is Inglourious Basterds.) It’s just that the rule is based on whether you’d watch it again. There are some movies you’d watch precisely because of the artistry. I could watch 2001 over and over. Yet it’s not a very entertaining movie at all; it’s certainly not ‘popular’. So that would’ve been my Oscar pick. The actual 1968 Best Picture went to “Oliver!”.
See my point? This isn’t artistry vs. popularity at all. It’s more like, staying power. A lot of movies that get awards don’t seem to have any real staying power. Looking at a list of Best Pictures, I feel like I’ve seen most of them (from the past 40 years anyway) and had positive opinions of at least half of them but can honestly say I’d prefer never to watch the vast majority of them again. The last Oscar winner I’d probably be somewhat pleased to rewatch if I had to is Unforgiven (1992). Before that, The Last Emperor (1987). Chariots of Fire (1981). Rocky (1976). I’m coming back around on Titanic (1997), and only left out Braveheart (1995) cuz I’ve seen it so many times already.
But most Oscar winning movies simply aren’t rewatchable. In fact I’m finding it rather weird just how un-rewatchable most of this list is. Like, something like Shakespeare in Love. Seems like a perfectly reasonable Best Picture pick, on paper. Like, it’s totally the type of movie you’d expect to see getting that award. But would anyone in their right mind sit down to re-watch Shakespeare in Love if they didn’t have to?
I agree with Anon, few are the people who can listen to a Beatles album the whole way through.
And, about this being about artistry rather than staying power, that’s my point with A Love Supreme. That album, though very obscure compared to the Beatles, has more staying power, and only a critic could have picked it.
There must be something wrong with me; I like Shakespeare in Love and have rewatched it several times. I also liked Elizabeth.
Back to Anon’s point; I’ve been telling everyone who will listen that it is becoming clear to me that the Rolling Stones were the better rock n’ roll band in comparison to the Beatles. The best songs by the Beatles were pop songs. But, the best songs by the Stones are rock songs, grounded in the blues, that have artistry and grit at the same time.
It’s Only Rock n’ Roll, Wild Horses, Miss You, Satisfaction, Start Me Up, You’re So Cold, Gimme Shelter, Beast of Burden, Waitin On a Friend, Never Make a Saint of Me, I could listen to these songs forever.
And, Led Zeppelin is even better in my opinion.
I remember, as a kid, being perplexed that the critics gave Zeppelin consistently bad reviews. Very strange. The critics still don’t give Zeppelin their due.
And finally, back to the subject of movies, one of my rules in deciding whether a movie is good (right after seeing it) is, how many scenes do I remember vividly. When I went home from Pulp Fiction I told my wife about every scene in the movie. The movie was so striking from beginning to end that I didn’t forget a bit of it.
It was obvious that, even though it seemed somewhat lightweight in storyline and character depth, it was a work of artistic genius.
Ok I feel the need to defend the Beatles a little from this onslaught.
The best songs by the Beatles are pop songs and the best songs by the Stones are rock songs. That much is true. But the Beatles also made far, far more ‘best songs’ (in a much shorter span of time) than the Stones ever did. Fact is the Beatles were just great all-around songwriters, I don’t see why they get penalized for the fact that a lot of the great songs they wrote happened to be pop songs.
Also ‘pop’ vs ‘rock’ is a somewhat artificial distinction and will become ever more so. A hundred years from now the distinction won’t exist (if it even does now) and only retro hardcore music experts and professors will think they know the difference (and even they won’t really understand it as much as they will pretend to).
The problem with the Beatles is not lack of artistry or staying power at all. It’s just that they’re too damn ubiquitous. All the TV commercials and whatnot. But if anything the Stones have commercialized themselves even more.
Anyway, I love it, a ‘Beatles vs Stones’ argument…flashback to Internet 1990
Next up: Kirk vs Picard!
I agree that Led Zeppelin is oddly underrated by critics. Critics seem to instinctively sense they’re not supposed to approve of Zeppelin so they don’t. I don’t think their entire body of work stands up. But it’s pretty unsustainable to deny how powerful they could be.
Anyway, yes – memorable scenes are part and parcel of movie staying-power. In this sense, Inglourious Basterds is somehow even more amazing than Pulp Fiction. The whole movie has only a handful of real scenes. A couple of them (the dairy farmer, and the tavern scene) are like 20-25 minutes long.
It’s strange how we all thought he was working on some ‘war movie’ and then it turned out to be like this. I can watch IB over and over for those two scenes alone. And they’re almost all talking.
Beatles vs. Stones …
Beatles wrote more good songs in a shorter period of time = true
Beatles also wrote more downright silly songs than the Stones. The Stones grew, while the Beatles broke up and continued on, writing ever stupider songs apart.
The Stones best music is 69-77 or so.
Beatles were 64-70, of course. Music itself was stupider then, so maybe the Beatles have an excuse. They were better than the Stones were 64-70, no doubt about that.
These kinds of discussions are fun for me.
SC wrote: I agree that Led Zeppelin is oddly underrated by critics. Critics seem to instinctively sense they’re not supposed to approve of Zeppelin so they don’t. I don’t think their entire body of work stands up. But it’s pretty unsustainable to deny how powerful they could be.
Let’s analyze that album by album:
1. “Good Times Bad Times” Good – very powerful
2. “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You” Great – powerful and sensitive acoustic brilliance
3. “You Shook Me” Zeppelin singlehandedly rewrites blues and makes it into something entirely new
4. “Dazed and Confused” Zeppelin ups the ante on You Shook Me
1. “Your Time Is Gonna Come” Good – powerful
2. “Black Mountain Side” Great acoustic number
3. “Communication Breakdown” Great pop heavy metal
4. “I Can’t Quit You Baby” another rewrite of blues – as good as You Shook Me, but not as good as Dazed and Confused
overall the album is unprecedentedly powerful – new form of music – a new synthesis of power and sensitivity –
1. “Whole Lotta Love” perhaps the greatest heavy metal blues song ever
2. “What Is and What Should Never Be” mysterious and stupid (hippie Lord of the Rings psychadelia – set the tone for the 70′s post-Beatles and a billion black light posters
3. “The Lemon Song” Squeezed the Lemon of a whole nation
4. “Thank You” I snored my way through it every time
1. “Heartbreaker” ehh – not so good – not so bad
2. “Living Loving Maid (She’s Just a Woman)” ehh – not so good – not so bad
3. “Ramble On” great blues rock
4. “Moby Dick” I’m a drummer and I think drums solos are boring
5. “Bring It On Home” once again, Zeppelin rewrites the blues into something transcendent
5. “How Many More Times”
Led Zeppelin III – not so good album – with the exception of
Gallows Pole – good
Since I’ve Been Loving You – the best blues Zep ever did
Led Zeppelin IV –
1. “Black Dog” A classic – heavy metal no other heavy metal band could replicate – deceptive in it’s time signature, starts and stops, yet seamless in it’s groove
2. “Rock and Roll” A classic piece of feel good heavy metal pop up there (and probably surpassing) Rock N’ Roll All Night and You Shook Me All Night Long (AC/DC)
3. “The Battle of Evermore” Classic – the battle that launched another billion black light posters – the song is so illusive no one can even hum it’s melody
4. “Stairway to Heaven” No words for this …
1. “Misty Mountain Hop” Great – heavy metal – blues – CSN – no one else ever did anything like this
2. “Four Sticks” a great song that Page and Plant made even better on their ME-influenced late-90′s album Unledded
3. “Going to California” a classic tribute to what happens when you smoke shake weed – more black light posters
4. “When the Levee Breaks” — the greatest drums rhythm ever – sampled by hundreds of hip hop artists
1. “The Song Remains the Same” - great
2. “The Rain Song” - second greatest Zep piece ever (behind Stairway)
3. “Over the Hills and Far Away” - great
4. “The Crunge” interesting, but not good
1. “Dancing Days” ok
2. “D’yer Mak’er” - great pop song – great groove
3. “No Quarter” great black light poster music
4. “The Ocean” – great groove- so-so song
1. “Custard Pie” – good – great groove
2. “The Rover” – very good song – great groove
5:37
3. “In My Time of Dying” – great
1. “Houses of the Holy” - very good song
2. “Trampled Under Foot” – very good song – great groove
5:37
3. “Kashmir” – great – classic
1. “In the Light” – great song
2. “Bron-Yr-Aur” – great acoustic number – classic
3. “Down by the Seaside” – good
4. “Ten Years Gone” – great song
1. “Night Flight” good
2. “The Wanton Song” – good song – awesome groove
3. “Boogie with Stu” – good
3:53
4. “Black Country Woman” – good
4:24
5. “Sick Again” – good
AND FINALLY, LAST BUT NOT LEAST,
MY FAVORITE LED ZEPPELIN ALBUM — PRESENCE
Robert Plant had completely lost his voice by this time, but the album rocks and grooves like no other Zep album
1. “Achilles Last Stand” third greatest Zep piece ever – (behind Stairway and Rain song
2. “For Your Life” great tripped-out blues song
3. “Royal Orleans” good song – great groove
1. “Nobody’s Fault but Mine” hardest rocking, strangest rewrite of blues traditions – great
2. “Candy Store Rock” lame
3. “Hots On for Nowhere” One of Zeps top five grooves ever – great
4. “Tea for One” – Zep’s third greatest performance downhearted blues behind Dazed and Confused and Since I’ve Been Loving You
In Through the Outdoor sucked the whole way through and Coda should never have been released, but from 68-76, Led Zeppelin released six great albums and one so-so album. For my part, I’d put all six of those great albums on a list of my top 50 rock albums of all time.