More Than Just Fluff

For the first time since 1943, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has included 10 nominees for the Best Picture Category. I must say, I am rather grateful for this because otherwise “Inglorious Basterds” would probably have fallen through the cracks.

If they had made this change for the 2009 awards, we could have seen “The Dark Knight” with a nomination, which most people I know would argue should have been in the running with “Slumdog Millionaire.”

I am about to pull the awful card here and make a judgment on a movie I have yet to see, but I honestly have no idea how James Cameron pulled it off with “Avatar.” Sure, I have heard great reviews – such reviews are usually filled with how beautiful the scenery is and how magical everything seems.

Even without the change from five nominees to 10, I believe “Avatar” would have received a nomination. No film could possibly top “Titanic” in sales (to some degree) and not gain a place on the list.

I guess it is great for Cameron, but I honestly thought that those 3-D, blue people would never make it through the second weekend.

Only one review I read or heard included anything otherwise, and the reviewer simply said, “It was long, but it definitely didn’t leave any questions unanswered.”

Surely Cameron hoped that people would notice more about the movie than how pretty everything looks.

However, part of me doubts this due to the categories for which it has been nominated – none of them are for acting or writing.

I think we should applaud the Academy for allowing the opportunity for movies that the majority of the country watches to win Best Picture. Can we please give it to a movie that has good reviews for being a truly good movie and not a pretty one?

Movies that I actually believe deserved Best Picture (or the nomination), like “Forrest Gump,” “Schindler’s List,” “A Beautiful Mind,” “The Color Purple,” and “The Wizard of Oz,” had great editing, visual effects, and original scores.

They also had stories that affected the audience. They called out in some social or political way to touch others.

Twenty years from now, we should be able to look back at the winner of this award and compare it to the current movies. From the clips I have seen of “Avatar,” I think this one will hardly be mentioned in a few years. Remember “Babe”?

I might take the initiative to see “Avatar” when it releases on DVD, but for now, I am perfectly content griping about this film having not yet seen it.

If you loved it, more power to you – but I hope your justification includes more than how beautiful those creatures were on screen.

In addition to hoping that “Inglorious Basterds” took home that pretty gold statuette this past weekend, I would love to remind each of you that “Gone With the Wind” grossed $400 million, which would be equal to about $6 billion today – beating “Avatar” and “Titanic” two times over.