And the Oscar Won't Go to ... (Michelle's picks)

We spent the last week looking back on the biggest Oscar snubs in recent history. Now, in honour of tonight's big broadcast, we bring you what we think were the most notable non-nominations of the year.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Andy Serkis, Rise of the Planet of the Apes

THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:

• Kenneth Branagh, My Week with Marilyn
• Jonah Hill, Moneyball
• Nick Nolte, Warrior
• Christopher Plummer, Beginners
• Max Von Sydow, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

WHY HE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: It's a movie in which apes ravage humankind in eventual escalation (possibly the previously released Wahlberg-starring sequel) to world dominance. It's not Oscar material, despite the ongoing campaign to get Andy Serkis the nom.

WHY HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN: Serkis makes ape Caesar more human than the humans in this film, even behind CGI. He creates a character you both sympathize with, wishing you could hold his hand at times and tell him it'll be OK, but who you also fear will lash out with unrestrained power. It's one of the most deeply emotional and moving performances of the year that the Academy failed to realize.

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY: Drive, Newton Thomas Sigel

THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:

• The Artist, Guillaume Schiffman
• The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, Jeff Cronenweth
• Hugo, Robert Richardson
• The Tree of Life, Emmanuel Lubezki
• War Horse, Janusz Kamiński

WHY IT DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: As Emily mentioned when she chose it for Best Pic, it's far too gritty and daring of a film to garner a nom.

WHY IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN: The hues, lighting and composition in this movie are beyond gorgeous. If you ask me, I'd compare it to fine art. Choices are bold and risky, and they more than pay off. What the Academy literally did not see, I really can't say.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Elle Fanning, Super 8

THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:

• Bérénice Bejo, The Artist
• Jessica Chastain, The Help
• Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids
• Janet McTeer, Albert Nobbs
• Octavia Spencer, The Help

WHY SHE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: Like Rise of the Planet of the Apes, sci-fi isn't a friend of the Academy unless it's got a political message (like District 9), though even then it's rare. Plus, kids don't get nominated as often as they should.

WHY SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN: Elle Fanning frequently stole scenes away in Super 8, amid an also amazing ensemble of kids. She was completely her age (which you can't always say for her famous sister) though created so much heartfelt depth to her character. Even when her character was acting in a movie within the movie, she was perfectly convincing.

BEST ACTOR: Ryan Gosling, anything (Ides of March, Drive and Crazy, Stupid Love)

THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:

• Demián Bichir, A Better Life
• George Clooney, The Descendants
• Jean Dujardin, The Artist
• Gary Oldman, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
• Brad Pitt, Moneyball

WHY HE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: It's beyond me. Seriously.

WHY HE SHOULD HAVE: To me, this was the ultimate snub this year. In three stellar performances, Ryan Gosling proved he was more than young hearthrob and would be competent, award-winning actor for years to come, delivering expertly in comedy, drama and action. It was a dream year of a career which would only fittingly have been tied up with an Oscar nom (or even SAG).

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Sandra Bullock, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:

• Bérénice Bejo, The Artist
• Jessica Chastain, The Help
• Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids
• Janet McTeer, Albert Nobbs
• Octavia Spencer, The Help

WHY SHE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: This is another one that's beyond reason, as was her win two years ago for Best Actress in The Blind Side. What the Academy saw then, I will never understand.

WHY SHE SHOULD HAVE: I was completely surprised by her performance in this film. After (overrated) The Blind Side performance and win, I wasn't expecting much but I was entirely blown away by her understated heart-wrenching performance of a woman who'd just lost her husband and was losing touch with her son. It was absolutely unforgettably touching.

And the Oscar Won't Go to ... (Emily's picks)

We spent the last week looking back on the biggest Oscar snubs in recent history. Now, in honour of tonight's big broadcast, we bring you what we think were the most notable non-nominations of the year.  

BEST PICTURE: Drive

THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:

• The Artist
• The Descendants
• Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
• The Help
• Hugo
• Midnight in Paris
• Moneyball
• The Tree of Life
• War Horse

WHY IT DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: Because, like Pulp Fiction, it was far too violent? But, then again, that didn't stop the Academy from rewarding No Country for Old Men.

WHY IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN: While the majority of this year's nominees remained in neutral, fueled on either nostalgia or our feel-good weepie fetish, Drive kept its foot firmly on the gas, pushing viewers to uncharted gears with its frothy, full-throttle fearlessness.

Like the cars Ryan Gosling both rules and wrecks over the course of the film, it is a well-oiled machine, featuring stunning, L.A-set cinematography, an expertly off-setting new wave soundtrack, a simple yet stabbing script and honestly, the most compelling Gosling performance to date. Sure, it veers off in two, completely opposing directions (overwrought romance and relentless gore), but, it handles both with remarkable ease. Sometimes even simultaneously. (Take for example the which I described in my TIFF review back in September.)

BEST ACTRESS: Elizabeth Olsen, Martha Marcy May Marlene

THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:

• Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs
• Viola Davis, The Help
• Rooney Mara, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
• Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady
• Michelle Williams, My Week with Marilyn

WHY SHE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: She's technically an Olsen sister? Honestly though, you'd think that would make her performance seem even more impressive.

WHY SHE SHOULD HAVE: Quite simply, she's phenomenal. Playing a runaway cult member haunted by her former "family" and their inhumane rituals, the youngest Olsen digs herself into a deep, dark terrifying hole you don't even want to imagine. We never see the light at the end of the tunnel because she drags us down with her, never letting us see beyond her character's god-awful truth, which could only haunt her forever.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Patton Oswalt, Young Adult

THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:

• Kenneth Branagh, My Week with Marilyn
• Jonah Hill, Moneyball
• Nick Nolte, Warrior
• Christopher Plummer, Beginners
• Max Von Sydow, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

WHY HE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: Young Adult didn't get the buzz it deserved, with many critics hating on the movie for its repulsively regressive main character and lack of humour, usually a staple of Diablo Cody (Juno, Jennifer's Body) scripts.

WHY HE SHOULD HAVE: Oswalt throws his comedic cap to the floor and stomps on it playing Matt, a sad sack of a man boy who has been kicked into the ground by hate's hulking handymen (quarterbacks and their douchebag followers) and their cold-hearted cheerleaders. To quote my review of the film, which I admittedly loved for my own, fucked reasons, "he sucks you in with his droopy eyes, which carry his bullied, garage boozing baggage around day in and day out and keeps you hanging on until the way-bitter end."

And the Oscar Didn't Go to ... anything but Slumdog Millionaire

The Academy Awards are coming up this Sunday. While we're excited to enter multiple pools and prep themed food with our families, we're also kind of depressed about the whole thing because we're really disappointed with the nominees. (No Gosling = No Go!) And we know we'll be even more disappointed with the winners. Because, well, it's happened plenty of times before ...

THE YEAR: 2009


THE NOMINEES:

• The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
• Frost/Nixon
• Milk
• The Reader
• Slumdog Millionaire

THE WINNER: Slumdog Millionaire, the British drama disguising itself as a Bollywood export.


WHY THEY (PROBABLY) DIDN'T WIN: While I can't say I didn't enjoy Slumdog Millionaire, I can say that there were many better films that year, including (but definitely not limited to) the other nominees. I can guess that the Academy fell in love with Slumdog's charm, its atypical happy-ending love story, the way it portrayed themes rarely seen in modern Western cinema (though dominant in Bollywood) and ultimately, because UK production brought a seemingly-Bollywood movie to the forefront that was unlike anything else nominated that year.


WHY THEY SHOULD HAVE: As Bollywood star Aamir Khan put it, this was a movie about India, rather than being an Indian movie itself. Sure, you already knew that. But this is a realization that changes the way you look at the movie. Against the roster of great movies about India of the past, it doesn't carry with it as strong a political message (think Gandhi and Water). Instead, it's a love story about a guy who aims to win back the girl of his dreams by winning a game show she watches, with fate on his side. It actually sounds more like the premise of a Bollywood movie, ie. love is destiny and it will always prevail. But against that line-up of films, that are countless that outdo it and never had a hope of reaching the Academy (think Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge, Om Shanti Om. And those are just a handful that did well with an international audience). Come to think of it, this is neither a great movie about India, not even an Indian movie at all.

On the other hand, Milk told the story of a political gay rights hero, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button told a magical story suspending our belief beyond imaginable possibilities while keeping us deeply enthralled, and Frost/Nixon reminded us of one of the hugest political scandals in Western history. All films were brilliantly acted, stunningly designed and carefully directed. Meanwhile, Slumdog reminded some of us of better Bollywood movies we'd rather be watching instead.

And the Oscar Didn't Go to ... : Brokeback Mountain

The Academy Awards are coming up this Sunday. While we're excited to enter multiple pools and prep themed food with our families, we're also kind of depressed about the whole thing because we're really disappointed with the nominees. (No Gosling = No Go!) And we know we'll be even more disappointed with the winners. Because, well, it's happened plenty of times before ...

THE YEAR: 2005  

THE OTHER NOMINEES:

• Good Night and Good Luck
• Crash
• Capote
• Munich

THE WINNER: The star-stuffed, racially charged Paul Haggis-directed wreck (sorry, I hated it) that was Crash.

WHY IT (PROBABLY) DIDN'T WIN: There may or may not be some homophobes left in the Academy. To them, voting for this film, an Ang Lee adaptation of the Annie Proulx short story about two cowboys (Jack and Ennis) who have to hide their love, would have been like waving a giant rainbow flag in the face of the nation. They did award Lee the trophy for Best Director though, demonstrating that, despite their prejudices, they appreciated it on some basic, artistic level.

WHY IT SHOULD HAVE: Unlike Crash, which just came off as a mediocre, melodramatic rip-off of every overlapping story-centric film ever made, Brokeback Mountain trotted rarely charted territory, bringing a non-stereotypical same-sex relationship to mainstream audiences and turning the western genre on its all-too-unsurprising head. And it did it with immense style--gorgeous, sprawling cinematography, subtle yet stirring performances (Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal could have tied for Best Actor), and truly haunting score (which was later remixed to serve as a gay dance anthem).

Because they were both deathly afraid of what their loved ones and peers might think, there was so much left unsaid between Jack and Ennis, literally and figuratively.  (There were a lot of awkward pauses as they sat by that pre-coitus campfire.) While many people found these extended, unscripted moments boring, considering the message of the film, they were truly inspired. In this pointed silence, Lee, Ledger and Gyllenhaal brought to life a harsh reality that, despite changes in legislature and mindsets, sadly still lives on in modern society.

And the Oscar Didn't Go to ... Moulin Rouge! /The Fellowship of the Ring

The Academy Awards are coming up this Sunday. While we're excited to enter multiple pools and prep themed food with our families, we're also kind of depressed about the whole thing because we're really disappointed with the nominees. (No Gosling = No Go!) And we know we'll be even more disappointed with the winners. Because, well, it's happened plenty of times before ...

THE YEAR: 2002


THE OTHER NOMINEES:

• A Beautiful Mind
• Gosford Park
• In the Bedroom

THE WINNER: A Beautiful Mind, a story about mental illness, genius and love, based on the bestselling book.


WHY THEY (PROBABLY) DIDN'T WIN: Up against, like I said, a movie that gracefully and movingly tells a story about mental illness, genius and love, these two epics didn't have much of a fighting chance. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring received five more nominations than A Beautiful Mind (which had eight, the same as Moulin Rouge!), and would take home four (the same as A Beautiful Mind, Moulin Rouge! won two), however, in lesser recognized categories, ie., A Beautiful Mind won for Picture, Director, Supporting Actress and Adapted Screenplay, while FotR and Moulin Rouge! brought back awards for sound and visuals.

Though why'd it all go down that way? Moulin Rouge! would've been a bold choice, in all its glittery song and dance. With FotR, the series was bound to get more dramatic and presumably even more impressive as it went along (and it did!), so why not save the award for the last installment (and they did)?


WHY THEY SHOULD HAVE: These are two of my most favourite movies ever, and maybe for the reason that they're two of the most epic movies. They're both insanely dramatic, gorgeously composed and styled and beautifully written. Moulin Rouge! perfectly tied up Baz Luhrmann's Red Curtain Trilogy (what great name) with one of the most heart-breaking love stories, punctuated by an amazing soundtrack, stunning sets and charming direction. Meanwhile, FotR (still my favourite of the trilogy) introduced Tolkien fans to an annual tradition worth counting down to (which returns this year with The Hobbit), leading with a killer intro before delving into a magical, moving story with storylines of love, friendship, courage and loyalty.

And the Oscar Didn't Go to ... Lost in Translation

The Academy Awards are coming up this Sunday. While we're excited to enter multiple pools and prep themed food with our families, we're also kind of depressed about the whole thing because we're really disappointed with the nominees. (No Gosling = No Go!) And we know we'll be even more disappointed with the winners. Because, well, it's happened plenty of times before ...

THE YEAR: 2003

THE OTHER NOMINEES:

• The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
• Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
• Mystic River
• Seabiscuit

THE WINNER: Lord of the Rings - the final film in Peter Jackson's J.R.R. Tolkin-inspired fantasy series.  

WHY IT (PROBABLY) DIDN'T WIN: After losing the last two Best Picture trophies to A Beautiful Mind and Chicago, Jackson and his hobbits entered the Oscar race for the last time, dead set to rule them all. Voters probably felt back for not recognizing the previous films, and thought this would serve as the sweetest, shiniest consolation prize. (Well, next to the ring.)

WHY IT SHOULD HAVE: Whereas LOTR: Return of the King was chockful of impressive effects and larger than life storylines, Sofia Coppola's follow-up to The Virgin Suicides was and is as real as you can get. Featuring equally award-worthy performances from Bill Murray and a young, pleasantly undone Scarlett Johannson, one of the best soundtracks of the last ten years, wonderfully wistful Tokyo-set cinematography, and a emotionally and comically biting script (penned by Coppola), Lost in Translation is a one-of-a-kind find that speaks to being disconnected in our overly connected times.

And the Oscar Didn't Go to ... Good Will Hunting

The Academy Awards are coming up this Sunday. While we're excited to enter multiple pools and prep themed food with our families, we're also kind of depressed about the whole thing because we're really disappointed with the nominees. (No Gosling = No Go!) And we know we'll be even more disappointed with the winners. Because, well, it's happened plenty of times before ...

THE YEAR: 1998


THE OTHER NOMINEES:

• As Good As It Gets
• The Full Monty
• L.A. Confidential
• Titanic

THE WINNER: I'll give you one good guess. Titanic. You know, the one with the ship.


WHY IT (PROBABLY) DIDN'T WIN: Need I remind you of the competition? Titanic is one of the most epic romances of all time (though maybe not one of my personal favourites) and to this day is still highly praised for its stunning visuals. It was the highest-grossing film ever at the time (only until James Cameron would surpass himself with Avatar). Plus, who'd really heard of Matt Damon and Ben Affleck?


WHY IT SHOULD HAVE: It was beautifully written by two yet-unknown film stars waiting to break out who showed off that they could also act. It's got some of the best one-liners, with one of my favourite soundtracks of all-time (mostly song-writing genius Elliott Smith), brilliant acting from nearly everyone, and it's completely inspiring in not-at-all cheesy way. It's entertaining, charming and it makes you feel really uncomfortable before making you feel so much better. That's not to say that of all the movies nominated that year that I didn't like the one about the ship, but this one was so much more relatable, especially for young people who are bitter, confused or lost and need a subtle reminder that things can work themselves out.

And the Oscar Didn't Go to ... Pulp Fiction

The Academy Awards are coming up this Sunday. While we're excited to enter multiple pools and prep themed food with our families, we're also kind of depressed about the whole thing because we're really disappointed with the nominees. (No Gosling = No Go!) And we know we'll be even more disappointed with the winners. Because, well, it's happened plenty of times before ...

THE YEAR: 1995

THE OTHER NOMINEES:

• Forrest Gump
• The Shawshank Redemption 
• Four Weddings and a Funeral 
• Quiz Show
  

THE WINNER: Forrest Gump, a.k.a. that actually really charming, All-American weepie made for box-of-chocolate lifers and starring Tom Hanks.

WHY IT (PROBABLY) DIDN'T WIN: Quentin Tarantino's hyperactive, bad-ass motherfucker of a flick, which featured a brunette Uma Thurman twisting at a diner and then near-overdosing, Ving Rhames getting raped and terrorized by two men and a "Gimp," and John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson shooting the shit about Big Macs (or rather, Royales with Cheese), was probably a little too violent and foul-mouthed for most voters' elderly tastes. Although they did present Tarantino with the Best Original Screenplay trophy that same year.

WHY IT SHOULD HAVE: Unlike Gump (which is great in its own, superbly saccharine way), Pulp Fiction was groundbreaking for its time period. With its exploitation-style exposition and run-on sentence heavy script, it was both an action movie for people who didn't like action movies, and a drama for people who didn't like drama. And more importantly, due to its over-the-top references and not-so-slight nods, it was a film for people who, like Tarantino, loved films a bit too much. And you know the Academy appreciates that. (See: 2012 Best Picture nominees The Artist and Hugo) 

Maybe if QT had kept the swearing and sex on, well, the QT, and amped up the sepia and subtitles, he would have been golden. But then the movie wouldn't be so fucking tasty. Or Tarantino.