As most of us have probably noticed, this year's Oscar nominees have been announced. One of these 5 movies will soon be named the Best Picture of 2008. The nominees are:
• Slumdog Millionaire
• The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
• The Reader
There a couple of odd things about this list. First, let's take "The Reader." The Reader was not a hit either with critics or with moviegoers. Despite it's small budget, it lost money in theaters, and it only scored an aggregated 58/100
from critics. (For reference, Indiana Jones 4 got 65/100.) It features a plot that sounds, IMO, rather boring and obscure. By all accounts, it would seem this movie was a dud, but there it is on the list. Why? Well, Kate Winslet struts around nude for half the movie. Maybe that's got something to do with it?
The others all received some acclaim. I've seen Slumdog, and it rocks, and I've heard good things about Button on this forum. Let's just take it as granted that the other four are good movies.
But what isn't there? This summer saw two of the most acclaimed and
highest grossing movies of all time: WALL-E and The Dark Knight. Both of these sold more tickets than all of the nominees combined and WALL-E received better reviews than any
of them. (Dark Knight reviewed better than the lower 3.) I've also seen them both and they are both very awesome.
What's my point? My point is just that it seems like, recently at least, the various nominees have been chosen on some basis other than what movies are really the best. I've not sure what the basis is: It seems like there are several factors competing, but I'm pretty sure that quality is not
the most influential. And that, to me, makes the Oscars irrelevant.
So, yeah, what so y'all think?