Academy Award Week (2013) Best Original Screenplay

Typically the Original Screenplay category has a pretty clear, or there has been a lack of competitive scripts which could compete within this category.  This category tends to honor films based on the following categories

The Unique Wins

What are the unique wins?  In my mind these are somewhat anomalies, and while they may make sense  during the year or in hind sight, there is something truly unique about their wins.

2002-Talk to Her (Hable Con Ella)-Foreign films rarely get a win in major categories outside of Best Foreign Language Film in the "major" categories.  Pedro Almodovar had another nomination in Best Director, but the film was not nominated in the Foreign Language film category.  On the other hand you had 10 time nominee Gangs of New York, the popular Nia Vardalos for My Big Fat Greek Wedding, and a multiple nominee Far from Heaven.

2004-Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind-This could be seen as a consolation prize, but this was a two time nominee with only a nomination for this and Kate Winslet.  Sunshine was up against more typical films like The Aviator, Hotel Rwanda, The Incredibles, and even Vera Drake.  Sunshine's win was somewhat expected in the sense that the film was very respected, but the film does not fit the norm.

2008-Milk-This was not a consolation prize, Penn won Actor (although people may not have known this was going to happen), but rarely does a bio-pic on this level win within this category.

Best Picture Sweep 

The Best Picture and Original Screenplay have only lined up 15 times in Oscars history, which does not bode well for the winners in this category, unless you are a massive Oscar favorite in the Best Picture category.

2005-Crash-At the time of the ceremony I saw this win as a consolation prize, but this ended up going along with the sweep.  It was easy to predict this win, but this one of those rare times when it predicted Best Picture.

2009-The Hurt Locker-The Hurt Locker vs. Avatar in Best Picture, on awards night The Hurt Locker won more than was expected, and this was a surprise as well.  My thought and many other people predicted Inglorious Basterds would win this as a consolation prize.

2010-The King's Speech-Like Hurt Locker this was one of those wins that was fierce battle, and it's competition was Inception.  Speech was not qualified for the WGA, but won at the BFCA, and BAFTA.  With few wins Speech needed this the way Argo needs adapted screenplay to help amass more wins.

The Consolation Prize (I Have to Win Somewhere)

Statistically this is where most of the winners fit.  All of the films (except Almost Famous) were nominated for Best Picture, and a few other awards, but this was the only win, which made sense.

2000-Almost Famous was snubbed in the Best Picture category the Miramax machine's Chocolat.  Almost Famous only received four nominations, but was a respected film from from Jerry Maguire nominee Cameron Crowe; he won to give the film some attention.

2001-Gosford Park-Park had lots of stiff competition from Memento, and The Royal Tenenbaums, but Park was the most "Oscar bait" film.  Park made the most sense as a winner, and it was the only Best Picture nominee.

2003-Lost in Translation, 2006-Little Miss Sunshine, 2007-Juno-All three of these films fit within the quirky comedy category.  Translation had the Copola name, and was solid.  Sunshine and Juno had heart mixed with quirk, which could never be taken seriously anywhere else.  While Arkin won for Sunshine that was not expected at all.

2011-Midnight in Paris-Midnight in Paris was another great Woody film, which never had a shot at Best Picture, but was one of the most respected films of the year.

So who wins this year....And the Nominees Are....

Amour-Michael Haneke

Django Unchained-Quentin Tarantino

Flight-John Gatins

Moonrise Kingdom-Wes Anderson, and Roman Coppola

Zero Dark Thirty-Mark Boal

Moonrise Kingdom and Flight, only have one, and two nominations respectively, they are out.  This is one of the tougher races to predict.  Django has won the Golden Globe, BAFTA, and BFCA, which gives it the best odds.  Django has a lot of respect, but why the Academy would honor one of the weakest screenplays is beyond me.  Zero Dark Thirty won the WGA, but Django was ineligible.  The difference between 2009 and this year is that Django has the edge because in 2009 Hurt Locker won all the awards Django won.  Yet can Amour pull off that unique foreign language film win, it has five other nominations. At the moment my winner prediction is Django, but this may change.

Will Win: Django Unchained

Spoilers: Amour then Zero Dark Thirty

Oscar Roundup 2012: Director's Guild Aim to Narrow Down a Crowded Field

Within a shortened awards season the Director's Guild Awards (DGA), may or not matter with regard to the actual Oscar nominees.  The ballots for the Oscars were due on January 3rd, but got pushed back to the 4th.  With the timeline changing and the Director's Guild have more members who vote on the award from people who direct both commercials and television shows the nominations for this award are apt to be different from Academy Award nominees.

This has been one of the best years for film, and while the Best Picture list is all but figured out, the Best Director category is harder to predict because there are only five as opposed to the potential ten Best Picture possibilities.

Here are the contenders for DGA in order of likelihood:

Locks:

Kathryn Bigelow-Zero Dark Thirty-Bigelow's Zero Dark Thirty is the most critically acclaimed film of the year, and she has gotten praise all over the board.  Bigelow's proving to be a strong favorite, and ZDT is one of the two films to receive nominations from every guild, it will not fail here.

Ben Affleck-Argo-Argo is probably the most liked film of the year, and helmer Affleck is getting all of the credit.  Affleck has proven his growth as a director starting with Gone Baby Gone, and creating a masterful work here.  Like ZDT, Argo, is the other film which has recieved nominations from every guild.

Steven Spielberg-Lincoln-Spielberg did not get an Oscar nomination for War Horse this year, but this year he has the highest grossing film, and the film that's going to have the most nominations.  Spielberg is one of three locks with both the DGA and Oscar.

Strong Bets:

Ang Lee-Life of Pi-The film is one of biggest directorial feats of the year; he is a well respected director  who has been nominated three times, and won twice.  Life of Pi is seen as one of the films flying under the radar, and I think it will score a nomination here.

Quentin Tarantino-Django Unchained-Django is one every one's mind, and while controversial, Tarantino is a well respected director.  With a larger guild population voting; he seems to be a likely person people in television and film would nominate.

David O. Russell-Silver Linings Playbook-Never underestimate the power of directing the small intimate comedic drama.  O. Russell has cornered this market, received a nomination with The Fighter, and is becoming more respected by the day.

Long Shots

Tom Hooper-Les Miserables-Hooper's snub from Golden Globes was the shot heard round the award show world, and based on reviews his direction has been the biggest critique.  People pay attention to things like this, and while this guy received a nomination and won his first time around, I can't help but think he may be snubbed by this branch.

Paul Thomas Anderson-The Master-The Master is a well respected film from critics, but the guilds, except WGA and Golden Globes have been ignoring this film.  The Master was compared to last year's Tree of Life, but this film may not have the passion that film has, and I think it will be forgotten.

Benh Zeitlin-Beasts of the Souther Wild-The little film that could has a director, who helped right and score his own film.  Zeitlin's first feature film is a crowning achievement, and he could score nomination here out of respect.   The hard part is that this film has been ignored a lot as well, although being talked up by many.

Over the last few years DGA has matched Oscar solidly, but the changing time frame may prevent this.  Looking from 2001 through 2011, the DGA lined up well.

In 2001 DGA nominated Baz Lurhman for Moulin Rouge, and Christopher Nolan for Memento, they were replaced with veteran directors Robert Altman for Gosford Park, and David Lynch for Mullholland Dr.  In 2002 Pedro Almodovar's direction for Talk to Her was nominated for the Oscar, while Peter Jackson was nominated for the DGA  for Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.  The following year Gary Ross received a DGA nomination for Seabiscuit but was replaced at the Oscars with City of God director Fernando Mirielles.   There have been only two years within the last 10 where Best Director has matched up with the DGA and Oscar, and they were 2005, and 2009.  Statistically every other year DGA has predicted 4 of the 5 nominees.  So who will be the five for DGA, and who would most likely get replaced?

DGA Nominees

Ben Affleck-Argo

Kathryn Bigelow-Zero Dark Thirty

Ang Lee-Life of Pi

Steven Spielberg-Lincoln

Quentin Tarantino-Django Unchained

(My 6th Man-Tom Hooper-Les Miserables)

Come Oscar nomination time I think Michael Haneke from Amour will score a Best Director nomination, and replace one of these men.  This would follow a trend in this category.

Django is a Bloody Good Time (Literally)

Django Unchained (3 1/2 out of 5 Stars)

Directed and Written by: Quentin Tarantino (Inglorious Basterds, Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill)

Starring: Jaime Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Samuel L. Jackson

There is a lot of peripheral talk about this film from Spike Lee's Vibe interview about the insensitivity to his ancestors to the question of violence in cinema.  Spike Lee (who refuses to see the film) stated via twitter "slavery was not a Sergio Leone Spaghetti Western.  It was a Holocaust.

While Tarantino pays homage to the Spaghetti Western the central story of Django revolves two key concepts within this genre, the revenge story, and the cowboy buddy concept.  Dr. King Schultz (Waltz) in his horse drawn wagon with a tooth hanging from the top is in search for Django a slave from a plantation.  When Dr. King Schultz finds Django (Foxx) the two embark on a journey as bounty hunters to kill the three men who captured him and his wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington) and sold them to other plantations in order to separate them.  While on their journey the duo begin to connect and threw German folklore they begin a journey as bounty hunters on a journey to save Broomhilda from Calvin Candie and his plantation Candyland in Mississippi.

While artists have their right to their opinion, I would respect Lee's thoughts on this journey if he had seen the film.  Lee and Tarantino both have used racial constructs in their films, in different ways, but they have been important to some of the construct of their films (Lee way more).  Avoiding seeing this film reminds me of the way in which the late Ernest Borgnine refused to see Brokeback Mountain, because he thought it defiled the legend of the cowboy flick.  While I can see and understand some of the racial problematic moments within the film.  Like Brokeback Django is more than the message on the outside, and I would be more curious to dialogue or speak with Lee  after he saw the film.

Let's move beyond Lee's problems, and talk about the actual film.  Django is a bloody good time, but also one that over stayed its welcome, by thirty minutes.  Tarantino's script is bold, mesmerizing, and often hilarious.  While not one of the best screenplays of the year this film crosses barriers in only ways that Tarantino, a master craftsmen, can manipulate.  There is something brave about Tarantino's direction, and writing.  Within his last two films (Django, and Basterds) there is a fuck history mentality.  Tarantino is constructing films which blend aspects of history within this film with the Spaghetti Western where a black man becomes a bounty hunter killing white men.  In both Basterds and Django the victims become the victimizers in a way pushes film to the next level.  Mix all of this creativity with of a soundtrack that includes a combination of music from Tupac, Johnny Cash, and Ennio Morricone-you can't help but get pulled into the story and the characters.

While Jamie Foxx is the star, and the center of all the action, the most talented cast member within this film, is Academy Award winner Christoph Waltz.  Waltz won his Academy Award playing a Nazi in Tarantino's last film Inglorious Basterds, a role which helped garner a lot of attention.  Waltz steals the show, once again, but not as the dastardly villain, rather as the man helping Django on his journey to get his wife back.  Foxx and Waltz, dance this dance almost as though it were a perfect Waltz.  The embody one of the key elements within this Spaghetti Western.  Their work as this sheriff and deputy like bounty hunters may provide more blood than I have seen in a long time.

This leads to another one of the other peripheral topics the film raises in regard to violence.  With recent incidents in Colorado, and Connecticut there is a question being posed, and now directly to Tarantino does the incredible amount of violence need to happen?  Artistically this has been one of his signature style choices.  Tarantino without violence is like Ben without Jerry, lost.  Does he cross the line too much?  There is an eternal blood bath within the film, but the goal of the film is vengeance and within a film that not only offends on many levels.  Tarantino uses the N-word more than I have even heard on film and almost becomes just as common as saying "hello."  As much as Tarantino offends he also challenges by showing the racism within the fascination the mammy and mandigo.  Going back to the violence, while he may push the line, that's the goal of the film.

Along with pushing boundaries Django and the good doctor are tying to get to Broomhilda, and the only way to do this is through Calvin Candie, and his ever faithful house slave Stephen (Jackson), well them and the many men who oversee the fields.  DiCaprio's Francophile Candie is one bad dude, and DiCaprio is one great scene stealer.  Yet Jackson's Uncle Tom like character is the person who steals the scenes most while in Candyland; he plays the darkest character in the film, and his abhorrence to those who do not help his master are what sets him off more than anything.

These two evil men, help Tarantino juxtapose the "heroes." and provide an interesting, and harsh reality on the evil within slavery.  Tarantino along with Cinematographer Robert Richardson create a visually sumptuous story that once you are strapped in, you do not want to hit eject, until the last thirty minutes. The film loses a little steam as the blood bath rises at the end of the film.  While the film is by no means perfect, and there are reasons people may struggle with the way things are portrayed this is still one solid film that challenges the film landscape, you would expect nothing less from Tarantino.  

Academy Awards Snubs: The Directors (2000s)

1-Christopher Nolan-Memento (2001),The Dark Knight (2008), and Inception (2010)-The King of the snubbed directors, is also the best director of the last decade.  Nolan has made numerous films throughout the last few years which have provided both entertainment to mass audiences while expanding his craft and influencing other directors. Memento changed the face of the indie film. A film told backwards, where the beginning was the end, and the end was the beginning, challenged audiences to think outside the box.  The Dark Knight proved sequels can be better than the original, and a film based on a comic book can be much deeper.  Nolan changed the landscape of action films proving that making audiences think may not be a bad thing.  Inception is another film that proves over thinking may just have to happen.  Nolan's direction keeps audiences on their toes while never pandering to the mainstream; he is true genius.  Nolan has been nominated for Best Director from his guild but has never been nominated at the Academy Awards, a massive mistake! Who would he have replaced? In 2001, the actual winner Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind) should not have even received a nomination.  In 2008 Stephen Daldry proved the voters are suckers for a good Holocaust story, with The Reader.  2010-While I love Joel and Ethan Coen (True Grit), their direction did nothing to advance film making the way Inception did.

2-Darren Aronofsky-Requiem for a Dream (2000) and The Wrestler (2008)-2000 was a competitive year with a lot of great films, but after a series of shorts and a small obscure film named Pi, Aronofsky emerged with a brilliant film about the dark world of drugs.  Requiem challenges the Best Picture nominee Traffic (that year) as the most realistic representation of drugs within film.  The film is a brilliant character study, and Aronofsky rose above the challenge to make one impeccable film.  After Requiem Aronofsky made the polarizing film The Fountain, which had beautiful direction but it was not until his third film, The Wrestler where his adept skills of character returned.  The Wrestler follows Mickey Rourke's character as he tries to achieve his goal and work to be a small time wrestler who never made the big time.  Aronofsky actually achieved a Best Director nomination in 2010 for his film Black Swan, but the above mentioned films deserved attention for him from the Academy.Who would he have replaced? Steven Soderbergh had one nomination for directing Traffic; he did not need a nomination for Erin Brockovich; he should have taken his place in 2000.  I feel as though I am going to be picking on Stephen Daldry and Ron Howard a good bit, but in 2008 his direction far surpassed Howard's direction of the dry Frost/Nixon.

3-Guillermo del Torro-Pan's Labyrinth-El laberinto del fauno (2006)-Moving past two men who were snubbed multiple times throughout the last 12 years.  Del Torro's direction Pan's Labyrinth is some of the most beautiful work I have ever seen.  The way del Torro blends the fantastical world in which Ofelia journey's and the modern day aspects of fascist Spain in 1944 is well done.  Del Torro uses visual effects well, and while he sometimes lets them dominate his film or overcome the subject matter, this film has the perfect blend, and is one of my favorite films of all time. Del Torro was nominated for writing this film, but did not win; he has never been nominated in the director's category. Who would he have replaced? Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu is a terrific director, and Babel is a solid film, but I feel as though Inarritu has shower rinse and repeat formula with his films, the way his direction blends the story together from the screenplay.  Babel is his weakest film (which is not a bad thing), but he did not make the same accomplishments as del Torro.

4-Michel Gondry-Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)-I could not ignore the director of the film, which was snubbed royally by the Academy.  The film itself received one nomination for Best Original Screenplay, which it won.  Gondry's direction is hauntingly beautiful; he knows how to capture the deep emotional material from Charlie Kauffman's screenplay.  Gondry has a typical style, and I have seen all of his other films, and I have never liked, scratch that, loved a film as much as I love this film.  In fact I do not like any of the other films he has directed.  Gondry has skills as a director because he uses all of the elements to create one of the most perfect films.  From the terrific performances, to the way he makes you emotional over the loss of memory.  Gondry is a master director and this film is proof. Gondry wrote the story for the film and won the Oscar along with Kauffman, but has never received a directing nomination.  Who would he have replaced? This is an easy one, 2004 had some of the worst Best Picture/Best Director nominees.  Taylor Hackford's direction for the film Ray is like a formula, nothing out of the ordinary that adds to the landscape of cinema the way Gondry evokes new meta realities.  I am actually sad as I type this that Hackford received a nomination for that film over Gondry.

5-Alfonso Cuaron-Children of Men (2006)-2006 had some of the best films, and also saw some of the worst snubs.  Cuaron is an incredible director, and this film is living proof that this man can take you a journey to a variety of places ranging from a road trip where three people journey to find themselves, to Hogwarts, and apocalyptic 2027 where people can longer give birth to children.  Children of Men is the latter, which focuses on the journey of one man who takes a pregnant woman on a journey to scientists to discover to secret to saving man.  This film came at the very last moment in 2006 on Christmas Day, and oh what a gift it was to understanding great direction.  When Cuaron steps behind the camera he depicts this dark/haunting world that often feels too close to a present day, meanwhile you feel the distance.  This film is beautifully directed, and unfortunately this man missed out on a nomination, for directing this film.  Cuaron has been nominated for three Oscars two screenplay nominations, Y Tu Mama Tambien, and Children of Men, and in the Editing category for Children of Men. Who would he have replaced? I hate to replace Stephen Frears direction for The Queen, because it was a wonderful film, and was a brillaint look at an interesting even in history, but Cuaron's direction is revolutionary.

6-Quentin Tarantino-Kill Bill Volume 1 (2003)-One of the most ambitious directors of all time, and one of the most ambitious films of all time.  Tarantino pays homage to old school marital arts films, with this tale of revenge.  Tarantino's style works incredible for this film.  Tarantino likes to break his film down in chapters/segments, and this does not always works.  In this film it feels genuine, and that it makes sense like opening the chapters of the book.  While many prefer Volume 2, I have always liked Volume 1 more because of the way it feels so naturally Tarantino.  My favorite was his use of anime in telling the origins of O-Ren Ishii.  While Tarantino's screenplays are usually the highlight of his films, this film is best because of his direction, and the great action sequences.  Tarantino has been nominated for four Academy Awards, two for directing (Pulp Fiction, and Inglorious Basterds) and two for writing (Pulp Fiction, and Inglorious Basterds); he won the Original Screenplay Award for Pulp Fiction. Who would he have replaced? Peter Weir's Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World is a snooze compare to Tarantino's film, and should have been easily replaced.

7-Baz Lurhmann-Moulin Rouge! (2001)-The return of the musical can be credited to this film, or well the modern day style of musicals.  Some groan at that notion because they prefer old school musicals, but this film did a lot in making musicals accessible to modern audiences.  Lurhmann is a style over substance director, his other films Romeo + Juliet, and Australia just do not pack the punches this film does.  Lurhmann's The Great Gatsby looks to follow the same trend as those two films, but there was something magical about this film and his direction.  This film is spectacular, spectacular!  Lurhmann's direction and work with his creative team deserve a lot of the credit for making you truly fall in love with these characters while making this one of the most fun musicals of all time.  This may be my most bias pick on this list, but I honestly do believe Lurhmann's direction is one of the most magical directing jobs in recent years.  Lurhmann was nominated as a producer for the film, but has no other nominations. Who would he have replaced?  I would hate to take away Robert Altman's last nomination (so I won't), I would have nominated Lurhmann over Ridley Scott's  work in Black Hawk Down.  This is really one of the best years for film of all time.

8-Nicolas Winding Refn-Drive (2011)-Winding Refn is the most recent snubbed director, so recent he was just snubbed last year.  Winding Refn's Drive still has some time to get legs and become more of a cult film the way Memento did, or other small films, but Winding Refn's direction will go down as some of the best because his style proves talk is cheap.  This is a strong film because of the direction, while there a few scenes where Ryan Gosling's lead man, known as "The Guy" speaks, his actions speak louder than his words, and this is mainly because of of Winding Refn's direction. Winding Refn camera work is brilliant capturing the brilliant action packed moments, focusing on unique angles as cars crash and bullets fly.  Winding Refn also does a good of highlighting the most intimate moments making you feel as though you are an intruder on the private interactions like at the dinner table with Gosling, Mulligan, and the boy who plays her son; he has never been nominated for an Oscar. Who would he have replaced? While I love Alexander Payne his direction with the film The Descendants did not thrill me as much as his earlier work, so he would have been booted from my nominations.

9-David Cronenberg-A History of Violence (2005)-In one of the weakest years in film, David Cronenberg does what he does best with this film, and that jar your senses to provoke an ethereal reaction.  The film is based on a graphic novel about a family whose world is turned upside down when the father is approached by someone saying he is a different person.  Cronenberg's directions like in most of his films uses disturbing images the get those reactions.  Yet I think one of the main reasons this is one of his best films, and best directing is because the film is straight forward dark roller coaster ride, where Cronenberg does not take you too far away from the subject at hand, but he tease at moments to give a glimpse of self.  There is restraint yet darkness here, that is brutally real.  Shockingly David Cronenberg has never been nominated for an Academy Award. Who would he have replaced? Easy, Paul Haggis and Crash, moving on.

10-Todd Haynes-Far from Heaven (2002)-I was torn on who to give this last spot to, and it was between two directors from this year, Todd Haynes (obviously), and Steven Spielberg for Minority Report.  Spielberg has been nominated for 6 directing Academy Awards (won 2), so I did not pick him.  I pick Todd Haynes for more than just that reason, I picked him because this is one of the most beautifully directed films of the 2000s.  Haynes pays homage to the Douglas Sirk era of the 1950s and 1960s which highlighted the subtle cutltural problems at the time.  Haynes directions brings things right out to the surface pointing out that what may have seemed beautiful and straight forward was claustrophobic.  Haynes direction is not in your face rather its subtle touching on the basic human emotions of love.  Haynes is brilliant at making the raw human emotions shine within his work, and this film is proof of his great writing and direction.  Haynes was nominated for Best Original Screenplay for this film, but has never received a directing nomination. Who would he have replaced? Sorry Marty, I do not say that often, but Gangs of New York is by far his weakest film.

One of the interesting trends is that most of these men have been snubbed as directors, but been nominated in the screenplay categories, many of them winning.  This just proves my theory true the writers branch is usually one of the most creative and open minded in the Academy.

Academy Awards Best Picture Revisited: Inglorious Basterds (2009)

While on my trip home from Manhattan I watched Inglorious Bastereds.  It's now November, and award season is right around the corner.  Starting with 2009 I am going to watch a Best Picture nominee from every year, and analyze it's position in the Oscar race, and then talk about how it holds up looking back.

Basterd was the product of the genius, Quentin Tarantino.  Tarantino's early credits include being an extra in The Golden Girls where he was an Elvis impersonator.  Tarantino has moved far beyond this acting work, and has helped to shape film making today; his first major directorial work Reservoir Dogs is pretty solid.  Tarantino's most critically acclaimed work came in in 1994, Pulp Fiction.  Pulp Fiction earned the director two Oscar nominations for directing and writing; he won the award for best original screenplay.  After these two films Tarantino's career has continued to thrive, but his next set of nominations did not come until 2009 for Inglorious Basterds (writing/directing).

2009 was the first year the Academy went back to ten Best Picture nominees since the year of Casablanca in 1943.  The Academy never actually stated with directness why they went to ten nominees, but one of the things many award show gurus cite is the omission of The Dark Knight in 2008.  The switch to ten nominees was a cultural change, that was met with mixed reviews.  The rules have still continued to evolve.  The Academy stated that this this year there can be anywhere from between 5 to 10 nominees.  This will provide an interesting situation this year.

2009 was an interesting year for the Oscars where many people were focusing on the Avatar (big budget sci-fi extravaganze) vs. The Hurt Locker (the smaller scale war film).  In this epic battle for the big prize and other awards most people discredited Inglorious Basterds.  Basterds was nominated for Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Christoph Waltz), and Best Original Screenplay.  Waltz was an early on front runner, and was poised to take the trophy throughout the entire awards season.  Basterds got a decent number of nominations in the technical categories.  Most of these categories were set to be split between The Hurt Locker and Avatar.  Many people predicted that Tarantino would win in the screenplay category again, but he was bested by Marl Boal's The Hurt Locker.  The Academy got it right!  The Hurt Locker deserved to be the big winner.

While re-watching Inglorious Basterds, I was not as enamored with this film as much as I was the first time I saw the movie.  It's sad that Tarantino's second nominations came from lesser work.  The Academy seems to be obsessed with honoring films that center around World War II, the holocaust, the Nazi's etc. and this film fits within this category.  Tarantino's Kill Bill Volume I and II were much better, but they did not gain any recognition.  I love Tarantino, but he did not deserve the screenplay win for this film.  Waltz was just as great the second time around, and I love how maniacal his character is portrayed, just brilliant.

The one thing I noticed this time was how much Diane Krueger impressed me.  Kruger played Bridget Von Hamersmark a German actress who was also a double agent for Allies.  Kruger's subtle looks in the sequence in the bar, and while she is being interrogated by Waltz are sheer brilliance.  Melanie Laurent who plays Shosanna was also great in this film; her scene where she interacts with Waltz, the man who murdered her entire family is chilling!  These two women deserved nominations for their work in this film, and it is sad that voters could not move past Tarantino's machismo aura of this film and recognize the actresses who did some of the best work in the film.

In the world where there are 10 nominees for Best Picture, I would have nominated this film, but looking back on the year there could have been five better films.  This was the year of The Hurt Locker, Up, Up in the Air, A Serious Man, District 9, Star Trek, and my personal favorite 500 Days of Summer.  Tarantino did a lot of interesting things within this film, but I would not cite this as his best best work.