This coming Sunday is pretty important to us. It will mark the first Sunday of March. It will also be the 41st anniversary of Golda Meir's election as the first female prime minister of Israel and the 160th birthday of Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, the first president of Czechoslovakia. Oh, yeah, and the Academy Awards will be presented.
We love the awards season. People who normally don't care about movies suddenly begin debating the artistic merits of films. Nowadays, everyone has become a self−proclaimed "movie expert." But let's not kid ourselves; you're just a geek with a crippling addiction to IMDb.com.
When you look at some of the films nominated for Best Picture of 2009, you'll find a commonality: tearful themes. So often we equate sad movies with good movies, but are these really synonymous? Does it take a skillful director to elicit such emotion from viewers, or can any hack churn out a sob story?
First up, we have "Up." While Kevin the bird and Dug the dog definitely were memorable, the film's opening sequence is the best part of the movie. It also happens to be a huge tearjerker. Set to Michael Giacchino's score, this three−minute montage covers all the highs and lows of married life without any dialogue. Kids sat in the theater dumbfounded, picking their noses and eating what they found, but adults bawled unabashedly. This film was brilliantly done and, while it won't win Best Pic, it's got Best Animated Feature in the bag.
Then there's "Up in the Air," which deals with unemployment. Director Jason Reitman's other films — "Thank You for Smoking" (2005) and "Juno" (2007) — balance humor with the gravity of the subject matter. While "Juno" trivialized teen pregnancy, it also showcased a dissolving marriage and Michael Cera in short shorts — now that's serious. The same goes for "Air." The movie had its comical moments, but the job terminations — particularly the ones in Detroit — were particularly sobering. Given the film's timeliness, we wouldn't be surprised to see the Academy give Reitman the adapted screenplay Oscar.
Between the two of us, we cried a total of four times during "Precious" — final tally: Chris, 4; Zach, 0. The film's depiction of sexual abuse and poverty is intense, but at times it seemed exploitive to us. The title character suffers an unrealistic amount of hardship: illiteracy, obesity, physical abuse, rape, HIV, teenage pregnancy and did we mention incest? The film's fictitious narrative undercuts its impact. Overstuffing the movie with emotional upheaval undermined the brilliant acting by Gabourey Sidibe and Mo'Nique (the presumptive supporting actress winner), who helped ground the film in reality.
Then there are the two alien flicks, "Avatar" and "District 9." In both, the aliens are sympathetic creatures. James Cameron and Neill Blomkamp, the respective directors, got us emotionally invested in computer−generated characters, a pretty tough feat. Cameron's characters were basically 10−foot−tall blue people with tails and a USB plug for a ponytail, but their physical similarity to humans facilitated the emotional connection. On the other hand, Blomkamp's characters were disgusting insects with an insatiable appetite for Meow Mix. Despite this, he made us truly side against mankind and empathize with the "prawns." Booyah, Cameron.
So we've mentioned some of the nominees for Best Pic. Are they worthy of the title? Or have viewers simply been blinded by salty tears? Manipulating emotions takes a modicum of skill; to do it subtly takes prodigious skill. Sure, "My Sister's Keeper" was sad, but it was heavy−handed and sappy. She has cancer. We get it. That's still not reason enough for Cameron Diaz to go about shaving her head Britney−style.
--
Zach Drucker is a sophomore majoring in International Relations, and Chris Poldoian is a sophomore who has not yet declared a major. They can be reached at Zachary.Drucker@tufts.edu and Christopher.Poldoian@tufts.edu.
