FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION

For some cynical award show life coverage, that is nailing the travesty go there

Ok, so for my next coverage I learned: Try not to be influenced by the super-protocoll-"i-don't-care-about-grammar-'cause-it-makes-everything-look-so-authentic" -style of the novels you read in college's Germanistik Seminar. (Anyone ever heard of Peter Weiss? He's the inspiration for everything grammatically irregular in my Filmpreis coverage. Yes.)

Next time I'll learn from old Nick Nunziata and stick to one-liners. instead.


First I thought about doing a little comparison between the "BAYERISCHE FILMPREIS" and last night's "GlOBES". Then I noticed that this is scientificly inappropriate as the FILMPREIS longs for the ACADEMY AWARDS, not for the GLOBES. In addition to that there is no money, need(to force the people to the ceremony) and space for any kind of open bar thing.
Foremost though, I gotta admit that I just don't want to invest any time in the comparison. I invested enough time in watching the GLOBES last night. Don't ask me why I did it.

Well, in fact it is a film fan's yearly pain- and delightful ritual to less "enjoy" and moreso "chew on" the regularly aired award shows, because if there's anything everyone in this world is silently agreeing on, it is that these shows don't have any relevance.


For facts supporting my point just take a look at the media coverage of these events:


These people just got it, thus they don't give shit on filmmaking or acting but rather focus on the things that really matter: Clothes, acessoirs and who's banging whom.
The people who are invited to these things are coming a) because of an OPEN BAR, an OPEN BUFFET or goodie bags (worth about 62000 bucks) b) because they're promoting their latest projects (To help out at this occasion you hear the announcer point out the release the presenters are attached to). Another reason you may come to these social gatherings is of course that you're likely to be awarded. You may increase your own shared tinseltown market value though when you decide to not appear at all. (Woody Allen) In that case you should realize that you have to pay for all food and drinks you're consuming while you're sharing some good laughs at your colleagues appearances at the show at home.
However there are also said to be some people who choose not only the nominees but also the ultimate winners of these statues. They are the concluding indicator to the non existence of relevance: They tend to "choose poorly". Of course this is a foremost subjective and biased argument of mine. It is like complaining about the lack of depth in an Uwe Boll flick. The fact that makes the poorly choices relevant (and thus prove irrelevance) is that it is told that some people have talked about having a friend working in the industry whose boss told them that these guys in the Academy don't even watch the stuff they're being sent over.
Well, if they'd have the courage to change some categories and care more about the nomination, then maybe watching the movies in the run wouldn't be such a painful process.
Sorry for complaining about the lack of quality in an Uwe Boll production.


It is the irrelevance, the astonishingly bad red carpet interviews and the feeling of so many wrong body parts that make these things so bad and yet enjoyable. After making a point about why Award Ceremonies are bullshit it is important to consider the following: The fact that all that is mined into a bad bad dismal situation makes the good and shiny things look the brighter.

I AM CONFESSING THAT I AM REGULARLY WATCHING THE GOLDEN GLOBE AWARDS AND THE ACADEMY AWARDS.

1. The cultural anthropologist: "It's a ritual of a strongly connected (by incest?) social group.
All over the year we (people who love films and filmmaking) talk, chat, rant about and criticize these people who in the end gather at these events. Some of them are what you'd consider the "enemies of good entertainment", some of them may be your idols: Artists whom you admire and who are truly admirable.

The other wonderful occasion these days, to catch a glimpse and snippet of these people is through DVDs. Thank god for them.

It is the only occasion where folks like myself actually get to see the men and women who make efforts to make our most daring dreams and expectations come to the big silver screen. We can watch them while they watch other geniuses or jerward loosers. Most importantly you can watch them rant and go on about filmmaking and possibly what inspires them.
Let's face it: I loved seeing Peter Jackson (i guess there was just this one single shot of him the whole show) sitting at this table, knowing he wouldn't win but just being there, making the impression of a cowboy who just came from a hot hard ride (new meaning now).#

Last night it was Ang Lee's turn to bring on one of these "I simply have a passion for movies" moments that just show the fans and little kids and the greatest artists.
It is plainly important for filmfans to somewhat share the ritual that is the Oscars or the Globes. And especially our ranting and critizicing is how we share these moments. I'm well aware of the pathetic sound of it but it is like seeing people whom you've known a long time ago. And you gather to share that love for one singly ingenius art form, film.

2. There's no business like show business.If the Academy Awards are not poorly directed they can be a great great show. And now there comes what makes all the wrong body parts and hyperbolism obsolete at times: It is the important use of self-referential humor, satire and simply entertaining songs, clips and love explanations to filmmaking/ ironical hints at the state of the industry.

3. I admit it...
Last night I guess I was standing up at two o'clock at night just to see Harrison Ford at what he's worst:
Presenting an award.

He has a beard (big news, I know, earth shattering), and despite my little doubts about it, he looked gorgeous. And THIS IS MY TIME to clear some things up:



- Nick Nunziata (the guy from CHUD.COM) mentioned that "george clooney" hadn't aged a bit in the past ten years.

The truth/ my ignorant two cents: George Clooney clearly belongs to the "HE-LOOKS-SO-GOOD-FOR-HIS-AGE-BUT-IS-IN-FACT-ONLY 35" category of actors. (see: Richard Gere) Thus he clearly doesn't deserve compliments like that.
He looks like 50 ever since he's 27.



- Some other guy on the chud messsage boards brought up the usual Harrison Ford comment à la: "he looks as if he just came out of bed"

The truth/ my ignorant two cents:

Nope. My theory: He's been in that lovely cute adorable wonderful great sleepy mood ever since he's become an actor and is doing public appearances he's not capable of because of inexplainable fear of masses. (understood?)
Note: I think this can go through as blindly apologetic.
I must admit -though- that presenting awards is the worst thing he dares to do in front of public audiences.
There is compelling evidence though that he's still irreversible in his very own kind of humor (check out his talk show experiences if you're afraid of his latest movies!) wit and classy presence, that is really unique. All I mean: He's pure gold. (see picture above) The picture shows that immediately after the show he certainly felt the need to artistically express all the sublimations he had to undergo during his "appearance" in the show. Mmmmhhh.
Aaahh...that coolness....


















I gotta say, that last year's presentation of George Lucas's AFI achievement award was an improvement in the award presentation area...