The Oscar Loser Club

Everyone's been writing about which films will enter the magic circle when the academy announces its best picture nominations Jan. 22, mercifully putting an end to the annual year-end demolition derby that finds nearly all of the year's best films being released in the last 10 weeks of the year. In other words, come Jan. 22, there will be five winners -- and lots of losers, admirable, well-made movies that will quickly drop off the media radar screen, with the five best picture finalists sucking up all the air in the room. So, with a consensus forming around five films that could nail down the best picture slots ("Slumdog Millionaire," "Milk," "Frost/Nixon," "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" and "The Dark Knight"), it seemed like a good time to take a look at which movies will go home empty-handed -- and why they didn't make it to the finish line. Feel free to fire away if you think I've slighted any of your favorites, but here are my thoughts on the most obvious also-rans:

'Wall-E': A wonderful, critically beloved movie, "Wall-E'' in any normal world would be a shoo-in nominee for best picture. Its problem? It's an animated film, the one genre (along with comedy) that gets no respect from the academy -- no animated film has ever won an Oscar for best picture, even though many classics, notably "The Lion King," "Toy Story 2," "Spirited Away" and "Ratatouille" were just as good as the live-action winners in their year of eligibility. Actors, who make up the biggest branch of the academy, almost never vote for animated films, so it's virtually impossible to put together enough support from other branches of the academy to register a win. Hence, the best animated film ghetto, which allows an animated delight like "Wall-E" to get some recognition without having a legitimate shot at best picture stardom. Some commentators have suggested that if Disney had spent just another $20 million to push "Wall-E," it could've gotten over the top, but Disney is probably right not to throw good money after bad -- too many academy members have a built-in bias against animated films, viewing them as just not "important" enough to vote for. 

'The Reader': There is a lengthy treatise to be written about the perils of adapting challenging literary material to the screen -- the old adage being that bad books often make the best movies. But since this is a blog, I'll give the short answer: You can't land an Oscar when no one likes your movie. For all its filmmaking and acting pedigree, "The Reader" simply doesn't cut it as a compelling drama. And it would have to be truly compelling to impress academy voters, who after being suckers for years for virtually any story about Jewish oppression, finally seem to have a legitimate case of Holocaust fatigue.

'The Wrestler': Film festival sensations are rarely Oscar winners. That goes double for "The Wrestler," which is propelled by a dynamite performance from Mickey Rourke but has failed to ignite with academy voters, who have reacted a bit squeamishly to the movie's deliberately rough-hewn portrayal of life on the wrestling circuit, especially the staple-gun antics and other graphic in-the-ring violence.

Where does this leave such heavyweights as Clint Eastwood, Sam Mendes and Baz Luhrmann? Keep reading:

'Revolutionary Road': It's full of great performances but is admired far more than it is loved. The criticism is often veiled, but I suspect that many comfortably middle-aged academy burghers have found a movie devoted to a cold-eyed dissection of a tormented marriage far too close for comfort. The movie is based on a terrific novel by Richard Yates that was a cult classic, with the emphasis on cult -- it wasn't material that ever resonanted with a larger audience. In the end, for all its admirable craft, it's hard to rouse a lot of enthusiasm for a movie that forces us to spend two-plus hours with two deeply unhappy people with no happy ending in sight.

'Gran Torino': One of my favorite movies of the year, if for no other reason than that it allows us to see Clint Eastwood playing out the Dirty Harry myth to a natural but surprisingly redemptive conclusion. And yet.... Not everyone likes it as much as I do. I've been around a number of academy members who seemed put off by the casual racism and foul tongue of Clint's openly bigoted character. It's apparently too much of a politically incorrect portrayal for liberal do-gooders, which make up a sizable percentage of the academy. I'm betting this movie will be more appreciated by future generations, in much the same way as "Dirty Harry," which was initially dismissed by Pauline Kael as a fascist attack on liberal values, but is now viewed as a bracing commentary on its times.

'Defiance': The heroes may be tough Jews, but they're still Ed Zwick characters, meaning everything about the movie is unbearably preachy and earnest. No movie that got a lowly 45 from Rotten Tomatoes has ever been a serious best picture contender.

'Australia': Thanks largely to Baz Luhrmann's reputation as a consummate filmmaker, this was on everybody's initial Oscar nominee list. But once the movie finally arrived, it earned almost no award attention at all, being too self-conscious and self-referential to carry its nearly three-hour epic storyline. Being a box-office disappointment didn't help -- the academy rarely embraces movies that can't cut it in the commercial marketplace.

'Doubt': If there is one movie that could topple "The Dark Knight" from the No. 5 slot, it's this provocative John Patrick Shanley adaptation of his own stage hit. The knock on the movie is that it's, well, still too stagy. It's an engrossing but talky drama that lacks the kind of bravura filmmaking the academy tends to reward. The end of the film has also left many people scratching their heads, wondering if the film's message is a bit muddled. But even those of us who have our doubts have to admit that "Doubt" is loaded with impressive acting performances, giving it an invaluable boost from the powerful actors branch of the academy, support that could nudge it into the Top 5 finalists.

Photo: "Wall-E." Credit: Disney/Pixar Animation Studios

Comments

[Movie lover!]

Wall-e should be there for sure!. I'm not sure about others. Beacuse best pictures is not just best drama nomination that Academy is always shoosing. It is the best picture of the year, and it can be drama, comedy, adventure, and animation as well. I know that sometimes they are jeleous that some animations are much more better in all terms than many motion pictures. And the actors branch in Acadamey don't want to recognize the fact that some animations are more emotional, more realistiv that their own movies. HOpefully they will overcome that this year.

[jj]

"Dirty Harry...is viewed as a bracing commentary on its times"?
You've got to be kidding.
Just because Eastwood has become "respectable" (cough), doesn't mean that "Dirty Harry" isn't vile fascist filmmaking.
Really. Have you watched it lately? And stop parroting Dargis. Don't you have an original thought?

[Zach]

I'm so sick of all of this "veiled" defending of Revolutionary Road. You don't have to be worried about your own marriage to have not liked the film. It's not that it was depressing -- it simply wasn't very moving at all, a trite, overacted rehash of better troubled-marriage dramas.

[Art Snob]

I think you're underestimating the "comeback" boost for THE WRESTLER. Hollywood LOVES comeback kids! And the film blows away all of the others when it comes to exceeding expectations.

[Dan]

@jj

"Vile fascist filmmaking?" Have YOU seen "Dirty Harry" recently? Have you seen it at all? I'm a proud liberal and I found it to be an engaging, interesting thriller. Not necessarily something I agree with on all points, but, then, it doesn't have to be.

[Marv]

Good the Dark Knight deserves a best picture nomination. Although Wall-E was a great film it didn't deserve the nomination. Due to the fact that it's no better than Toy story 1&2, rataouille, the incredibles, or beauty and the beast. The thing is if wall-e got nominated it wouldn't be the first animated movie nominated beauty and the beast would and it probably wouldn't win. The dark knight on the other hand would be the first super hero movie nominated and it could boost up oscar ratings better than any other movie this year. Also another note the dark knight has higher ratings on rotten tomatoes and metacritic than a lot of previous best picture winners and other nominees. for example it has higher ratings than Titanic, Crash, Frost/Nixon, the curious case of benjamin button,Gladiator, a beautiful mind, etc...(list goes on).

So as you can see the dark knight deserves an oscar nomination truly.

[someone]

Yeah the dark knight!! It really deserves to be the first superhero movie to be nominated. Wall-E was good too but too bad it's not likely to get it oh well getting best animated picture is enough I guess In my opinion that's all it deserves and maybe a screenplay nomination but best picture I don't think so. I mean it's no better than finding nemo, toy story 1&2, or the incredibles in fact I still think that Toy story is the best pixar film with 100% on rotten tomatoes and a higher gross it's definately better than wall-e and it was the first.

[Gary]

Hmmm, I've seen most of these and I thought "The Wrestler" was probably the strongest of the bunch. Granted, I did get queasy during the "staple" scene, but overall the story and acting were top notch. If it doesn't get some Oscar nods I'll be surprised.

[man1985]

I saw 'Gran Torino' and I just gotta say it was a terrible movie. The problem with that movie isn't how some critics view Eastwood's character. Eastwood is great. Easily the best part of the movie. The problem is everything else in the movie is terrible. The "acting" from every other character, while admirable (considering most of the rest of the cast is young kids), is really bad acting. The story is unblelievably predictable. At the end of the movie if you didn't know what was going to happen then you just haven't been paying attention to cinema for the last half century. Not to say that is was supposed to be a big twist ending but I just felt like everything in the movie had been done before and done much better at that. I loved watching Eastwood in top form but agian it was just another version of Dirt Harry, which he also has done better in the past.

[Markus H.]

"Doubt is loaded with impressive acting performances"?!? Nay, nay, dear writer. "Doubt" is loaded with unimpressive OVERacting performances. It's the first movie that I actually cringed during a Meryl Streep performance -- a performance so bloviatingly over the top it becomes risible. And Amy Adams needs to stop doing the wide-eyed, naive ingenue bit. It's getting old. The best performance of this female-dominated movie was the lone male, Philip Seymour Hoffman.

[Alex Biancalana]

There you go again, Patrick, defending Dirty Harry. It's a piece of reactionary filmmaking, the kind that tried to paint the war protesters and hippies as a bunch of Charles Manson/Zodiac types that threatened "civilized order". It's garbage and it's silly. Why did they cast the "punk" as an African-American? Just an accident? C'mon, dude. You don't have to be reflexive liberal to see that.

[AXG]

Benjamin Button for Best Picture? Didn't "Forrest Gump" already win?

[Jeff]

No one cares about the jewish opinion on anything anymore, we know exactly all about you people and your agenda Patrick!!!

[Christian Toto]

The Oscar Season can be exhausting ... seems like too many movies come pre-packaged as Oscar bait and they end up getting nominated because that's what's supposed to happen.

Rev Road is mediocre ... and just because it features Oscar faves and Serious Performances doesn't mean it's one of the best pictures of the year. If you have to hem and haw to defend a movie, then it's probably not worth a nomination.

Oscar voters have to shake free of their preconceptions ... or risk losing the people's trust even more.

[Kit Stolz]

Shame that "Rachel Getting Married" is being overlooked, As a story, the movie rambles a bit, but Rosemarie Dewitt shines more brightly than any new performer I've seen since God knows when -- and yet Anne Hathaway, who has the showier role, but is a much duller figure, is the one getting the ink. No substitute for youth, I guess, not even charisma.

[Peter Miller]

Yes! Sounds like The Dark Knight will get a deserving Nomination, that's a shame for Wall-E, but my two favorite Disney films still are Beauty and the Beast and Lion King so don't care to much. I'm sure The Dark Knight will lose just like Shawshank Redemption lost to Forest Gump, but as long as it gets nominated I wont hate the Oscars with a passion. I'm honestly confused with how The Dark Knight is staging up like 5-10 Oscars. The Dark Knight is a downright replica of Lord of the Rings Return of the King to unsuccessful genres being taken to new height's. My only conclusion it that Lord of the Rings is based off one of the best books of all-time written by Tolkien. People shouldn't forget though that The Dark Knight's widely based on Frank Miller's Graphic Novel masterpiece The Dark Knight Returns another amazing piece or literature. I'm just a person of imagination that's why I love fantasy, comic and animated genre's.

GO THE DARK KNIGHT!!!