I stopped caring about the Academy Awards when Brockeback Mountain lost to Crash in 2005.

There definitley is some closet racism when it comes to the oscars. And usually when they attempt to make up for it with things like crash it only makes them look like there in favor of the over-exposed stereotypes that we see. The fact that it took decades for Morgan Freeman to get an award over 3-6 Mafia shows the voting history of the academey.

I was very happy to see The Hurt Locker get nominated by the gothams and hopefully it can keep the momentum going through oscars to get the top nominations. I know there has been a lot of buzz about abby cornish but I'm still hoping to see if Peter Sarsgaard can finally get some love from the academey for An Education.

I never understood why people think the Oscars don't matter. If someone wins an Oscar, that means creative freedom to choose whatever projects they want for the next 3-5 years, maybe longer.

Just look at Phillip Seymour Hoffman after his 2005 win for Capote. The floodgates opened up for him after that, and he has gone on to make a ton of great movies that he wouldn't have had the opportunity to do before (he was not a leading man before that, but now he gets leading man roles like Doubt and The Savages).

The Oscars will always be relevant, and even though I disagree with some of their decisions (Diablo Cody, I'm looking at you), I will always love watching them and recognize their importance.

Uhm, Scott? Diablo Cody's Juno happens to be one of the most INSPIRED pieces of writing EVER!

I lost interest back in 1976 when Taxi Driver lost to can you believe it, Rocky! (Remember Apocalypose Now losing to Kramer vs. Kramer or ET to Gandhi, Goodfellas to Dances With Wolves and The Shawshank Redemption to Forrest Gump, to mention a few atrocities). Ever since, to me this is the most overrated SnobHillShow on earth. I couldn´t care less.

Last year was one of the hugest snubs ever. I mean, "The Dark Knight" not nominated for Best Picture? Critics reviewed it as positively as they reviewed "Slumdog Millionaire." And EVERYBODY, whether critics or audiences, liked it better than "Frost/Nixon" and "The Reader." Especially "The Reader." I could have possibly borne the snub had "Revolutionary Road" or "Doubt" taken the BP nom slot that belonged to TDK. But why "The Reader"? And F/N was good, but to say it was in any way–in any way at all!–a greater achievement than TDK is bollocks. Not only did they snub TDK, but they also snubbed Wall-E. I am convinced it had EVERYTHING to do with that 1) They were wide-release "popular" films, and 2) They weren't released in November or December.

Also, "Revolutionary Road" was snubbed by "The Reader." Really. I mean, Kate Winslet is always a great actress, but are you really going to say her role in "The Reader" was as good as that amazing performance she gave in "Revolutionary Road"? Nobody is going to say that. I don't know how the hell the Academy decided to reward Winslet for The Reader and not RR. The Weinsteins must have bribed the Academy something terrible, because "The Reader" wasn't even all that appreciated by critics. It was barely fresh on the tomatometer. I watched it, and while some of it was really good, it was one of those cerebral mind-pieces that was screaming for awards from the first frame to the last. And wouldn't have it been so much more touching had Kate Winslet won her long-overdue Oscar for a role directed by her husband? That would have been pure gold. Thank a whole fucking lot, shithead Academy.

At least Micheal Shannon got nominated from Revolutionary Road. If anyone would've beat Heath Ledger out last year he would've been the only that I was ok with, well, maybe Josh Brolin but Shannon would've be right after Ledger.

@JM: I definitely disagree with the stuff you say 'no one is going to say'. Certainly, The Reader was bought. But I think TDK would have been a weak replacement – sure, it's one of my favorite movies, but AMPAS rewards "best" picture, not "fan fave" picture. I think TDK had some serious flaws, especially with it's script. Maybe there is something to be said about the Academy preferring "flawless and uninspired" to "flawed but brilliant", but that is a different question. One important point that I think must be made is that TDK earned BROAD approval from critics, at an impressive 94%, that doesn't necessarily mean that any of them thought it should have been best picture. Some of them did, of course, but I really think that using audience approval and the percentage of critics that liked it to justify it as Best Pic doesn't work.

Also, I really, truly disagree that Kate for 'Rev Road' was anything near Kate for 'The Reader'. While I wish they both could have been nominated, my personal opinion was that Kate in 'The Reader' was the best performance of the year in any category.

And finally – thanks Scott, well put.

Alright. Let's settle the Brokeback Mountain / Crash controversy once and for all. Capote was the best picture of the year!

@JM:

Remember when she appeared on Extras and said the Academy loves Nazi movies?

@Helgi:

I stopped believing in the Oscars when Network lost to Rocky in 1976. I haven't seen rocky and I probably won't under my own will.

The Oscars have been losing viewers more and more every year. They insult the publics intelligence, and they insult mine. For an actor or director to win, this does open the gates for them and their freedom in film, but this fact is a sad truth. The Acedemy is ran by old racists, and sadists.
The year where they gave Washington the best actor, Halle Berry the best actress, and Sidney the life time achievment award, they were desperate to show that they were not racist, (a desperate and pathetic attempt on their part.) I'm sorry, but I love Denzel as an actor, but he should not have won that year, Sean Pean should have.
I hate the academy…I am irrate just thinking about how fake they are, that I have to leave this article now.

The case of Gabby likely being overlooked at the Oscars is a case of too much of the person identified with the role, i.e. how much of an acting stretch is that? As for the young ones, Mulligan and Cornish, ingenue roles are replaceable. Other young actresses can conceivably do as well in these films. Think of Renee Zellweger in a star-making turn in Jerry Maguire, though snubbed at the Oscars, or a young Kate Winslet in Sense and Sensibility or Titanic, nominated but did not win. On the other hand, could anyone else have pulled off Julia the way Meryl did? It was not only a bravura performance technically in believably approximating the real Julia Child, but also a touching and loving portrayal of a real person. It was singular and impressive.

For anyone who cares, I would rather have Gabby Sidibe win an Oscar against Meryl Streep than have Mo'nique win against Julianne Moore or Morgan Freeman against Christopher Plummer. All I'm saying.

And they're more of a gossip site, but BestWeekEver said something about Precious that made them not interested. I'll look again.

And as an afterthought, if the snubbing of Precious implies a snubbing of blacks in the Academy, there aren't just enough movies about black people then. A hundred and twenty five years and still not enough people of colour in Hollywood.

I am one of those people who believe that The Dark Knight should have been nominated last year for Best Picture and Best Director instead of The Reader.

I also think it's ridiculous that Crash beat out Brokeback Mountain, as well as Slumdog Millionaire beating out Milk. And of course, as mentioned, Rocky beating out Taxi Driver or Network… or even Ordinary People beating out Raging Bull.

Ridiculous.

the oscars suck ass anyway, when diablo cody won for best screenplay, i decided never to trust any awards that they hand out are to the rightful winner

That's unfortunate. Although I often take issue with the lower-level (4th and 5th) nominations in the major categories, I generally agree with who they give the wins to. Like every single other person on the planet, I have exceptions too, such as Cider House rules taking Best Screenplay, Sean Penn taking Best Actor (2008, not 2003), and Scorsese taking Best Director in 2006. But point being, there aren't too many I disagree with, and the few that I do I suppose I'm in a clear minority – I'm sure not many of you agree that Departed didn't deserve Best Director (although I think it deserved Best Pic and Screenplay). But that's ok: as long as some of us agree with the academy, and a bunch of y'all don't, things will stay interesting on these comment boards.

@Rumours: WHAT kind of rumors are those?!

@Chris: People, seriously. Slumdog Millionaire was FANTASTIC! And though this out of the blue, WALL-E was the best movie of last year!

@JM: Actually, I thought F/N was better than TDK. But I liked it.

If 'Precious' receives any Oscars on the grounds of anything other than great quality then it will be a travesty, and a victory for the those misguided fools in the pc brigade.

Which leads me to the question of why twits everywhere are assuming that "Precious" is gonna win Oscars because of the PC brigade.

@Helgi:
The Goodfellas loss to Dances With Wolves was totally justifiable. The first one says: "It's okay to be a criminal, the honor code of murderers is admirable". The second one says: Audience, YOU are thieves and murderers, at least you have heavily profited from wholescale murder on the Native Americans and the theft of their land. Shame on you!"

IDK, but I identify more with the values of the latter than the former, I guess

So the reason why so many people are mad about that one is that they don't wanna be reminded of their own evilness, but rather wanna see some evil (the Mafia) and hear how that's actually okay, take short cuts in life, those who stay upon the straight and narrow are fools.

@Paolo: Wait, so when a black films wins, it HAS TO BE because of misguided PC, not because it was a good film with brilliant acting?
The underlying assumption is of course that black people can not ever make a good film.

But when a mobster movie wins, with a message of 'it's okay to swindle and murder and rape people', then it is because of "quality" ??? Riddle me that.

BTW: Political correctness means that we should try not to call each other names. But in rightwing circles it is now mocked as "giving black people an unfair advantage", AS IF such a thing in still racist America is possible.

Precious should win, not just because it's about African-American desperation, but also because it's new and daring in showing us a black female lead. How often does THAT happen? Not very, and certainly never in Big Hollywood.

OTOH, An Education and Carey Mulligan are incredibly boilerplate about a girl who almost makes a mistake in live, but escapes unwed motherhood with the teensiest amount of drama. It's a very pretty movie, with a breathtaking, stunning lead. There are hundreds of those movies. It's not like we're talking Angelas Ashes or Felicias Journey here.

@TheSteelGeneral: I like your point and your passion. You express your opinion well. I liked both the Good Fellas and Dances With Wolves myself, but I never cared too much for Kevin Costner as an actor. Some people just prefer Good Fellas because it's the kind of genre in cinema they enjoy best, and the actors performances are grand. To those whom the shoe fits in reference to your statements, I think you have a valid point.
Thank you

@Jo Blow:
Wow, thanks for the compliments, I'll tell my mother! ;)

I think it was when Denzel was snubbed for Best Lead Actor in Hurricane, after being snubbed for Best Actor as Malcom X, that the BBC guy (not Ross or Williams) sighed "Who do you have to play in this town to get an Oscar?" And I agreed with that, especially when he got the Oscar for training day. I mean, so playing an anti-establishment figure like Malcom X, or a role that shows the racist and double standard ways White America imposes upon Black America, well THAT won't get you an Oscar, but play a crooked cop which confirms us in our deep seated believes that "Da Black Man is Baaaaad") and we'll pave your way for ya!

That's why I think I regarded Jamie Foxx' Oscar as the first black Oscar, not the one for Denzel Washington.

Some have said that Precious is a story which could be told from a trailer park environment as well, or from any white trash p.o.v. I don't. The uniqueness of Precious and black suffering is that it's the lowest of the low in our society. On every socio-economic measure, blacks scpre the worst. There are some regional exceptions, I'm sure that on average the white rural teens in Idaho are worse off than rural blacks in Iowa (all three of them …) But for the country as a whole, being black is really the lowest rung.
And the Obama phenomenon makes it a bit worse, since not much is changed, really. Some things might have worsened, racism is more openly practiced now, and at the federal level.

@cmac:
Wait, no film EVER received an Oscar based on great quality?

Juno was unique, since the message was: it's better to sell your kid down the river than to have an abortion (no, it's not murder, see: The Law)
And she didn't even sell her kid, she just gave it away like an afterthought.

"Given up for adoption", one of the great travesties of our day and age.

How about Forest Gump? It got the Oscars because it was feelgood movie, not because it was so great. Okay, I liked the running across the continent part.

@TheSteelGeneral: Racism is worse now? So what do you suppose the problem is then? What are you going to do about it? What do we as a nation need to do? Is Hollywood doing something wrong now, more than before? They made the film Precious, and Precious will probably win some Oscars, either way the film is being recognized. I agree that Denzel should have won an Oscar prior to Training Day, and yes perhaps for his role in Hurricane. He shouldn't have won the year that he did for his role as a crooked cop in Training Day. I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make. Is someone in particular trying to keep you down? I remember in high school I said to some black friends of mine that I believed we would have a black president when I was grown. One of them said "That would be cool," and the other scoffed at my comment and said, "Not in our life time man." I'm telling you right now General in your life time not only are you going to see another black president, but he will be a former movie star also, and both of his parents will be black. You will still see corruption and racism even after this happens. There will always be crooked old rich white people who can't accept change, even positive change. I do believe we are changing for the better though in our country, and after our new president being elected, and before that Halle Berry and Jamie Foxx winning an Oscar, if you are saying that racism is worse in our country today than days past, you must be completely blind. There has been a positive change and it will get even better for the next generation. Don't you want this? You say the "Obama phenomenon" makes things worse?! I don't understand you, and your comments in this regard are helping no one.

Yaya DaCosta, yet another young black actress who could've been on that cover… in an Oscar nominated film, no less.

@Jo Blow: Okay, in some ways racism is less, there aren't any black veterans who got lynched just because they dared to fight for this country after WWII, which was insulting to a lot of whites who didn't have to guts to go and fight. There's less open racism. But the segregation is in some ways more complete than it used to be. There's been whole generations of white Hollywood writers who never even saw a black person in their neighborhoods while they were growing up. This is reflected in film today. NCIS, Friends, Buffy, these are lily white shows, with now and then a story line with a black person in it.
Before, we're talking 50s here, whites came into contact with blacks cos they hired them to be a live in housekeeper. I know, I know, also bad, but still. And the stuff the neo-cons are saying now … it's all more coded, but the problem is that the extremist right winger, formerly known as the John Birch society have all become mainstream repubs. So, racism, in all it's coded ways has become more acceptable.

And no, I don't have a solution, except try to restore the middle class and include as much people in that as possible. Only if we hang out together, all this hostility will go away.
No red, no blue but United States of …, Innit?

@TheSteelGeneral: I think you're right, but those generations of white writers will not be the next generation of writers. Think about that. The next generation will be better than the last, and will have a more diverse group of writers.

I like the hanging out part too.

My three best friends from high school were Ed, Juan, and Ashanti. In high school we never once thought that there was anything unique about our group. We hung out every day practically. No one around us seemed to think there was a damn thing special about us either. We were just another group of teenagers. We talked the same, dressed the same, laughed at the same jokes. (We grew up in central California by the way.) Anyway, only now as adults when we have our reunions have we even thought of the fact and spoke about how we are each of a different Race. We mentioned it briefly a couple times, it didn't start a whole conversation on the issue. As teenagers we never gave this a second thought. Ed is Japanese and he is now an artist with two degrees. Juan is Mexican and he is a visual artist, and on his way up the totem pole too. Ashanti is black and he's a lawyer, a lawyer for the state by choice because he wants to work in better helping the Mexican community. My father was German and my Mother Mexican. Since I grew up in a city where racism was not an issue I can't help but visualize a better tomorrow for my children, especially when my children grow up with such a diverse group of uncles.