Mets As Best Picture Nominees
In honor of the Academy Awards, to be televised this Sunday night. Thank you in advance for indulging me.
Johan Santana = The Hurt Locker
A fine film and my 2nd place pick for Best Picture, Locker is buoyed by the performances of Jeremy Renner as Sergeant James and Anthony Mackie as Sergeant Sanborn. Richard Corliss of Time wrote the following about Renner's character:
It's a creepy marvel to watch James in action. He has the cool aplomb, analytical acumen and attention to detail of a great athlete...
Daniel Murphy = The Blind Side
The film, based on the Michael Lewis book of the same name, was a crowd-pleaser and box office dynamo. Having read the book, I was skeptical that the film version would succeed in finding an audience. $250 million in box office receipts later, my skepticism dissipated. Similarly, after Murphy's subpar 2009 and considering his good-but-not-great minor league career, I expected more Met fan displeasure expressed at the prospect of the Blue Collar Blaster playing first base everyday. Instead, there were ITBSOHL type pieces from the mainstream media and a lot of fawning over Keith Hernandez's defense tutorial. Murphy is a good player and has value, but not as a starting first baseman. I suspect a large portion of the fanbase disagrees, believing Murphy to be a long-term everyday player at a non-premium position. In that vein, I guess there's something to be said about a likeable player or actress (Sandra Bullock) in a feel-good story.
Jeff Francoeur = Up In The Air
This one is a bit different. Any comparison of Francoeur to Air would be a big stretch (Note: disregard stretches made in the other nine comparisons). However, the star of Up In The Air, George Clooney, shares several similarities to Frenchy. Neither is exceptional at their job, yet they are treated as such. Frenchy has been worth 6.6 WAR in his 4.5 season career, but if you open a New York newspaper you'd think he was an established star and a sure thing heading into 2010. Clooney has an Oscar and two additional nominations, despite playing the same bland character in most movies, From Dusk Til Dawn and O Brother, Where Art Thou? notable exceptions. I charge anyone to point out differences between Danny Ocean and Michael Clayton, as portrayed by Clooney. Francoeur's candor with the media seems to be the main reason for the positive press. There's nothing wrong with being nice, but the fawning pieces this offseason have gotten a bit out of control. He has a career in public relations when his playing days are over. Likewise, I suspect but cannot prove, that much of Clooney's Hollywood popularity, especially at Oscar time, has a lot to do with his political beliefs and commendable charitable efforts. Again, there's nothing wrong with having political beliefs or leading efforts to aid Haiti post-earthquake, but hopefully left-leaning Hollywood isn't letting those "off-the-screen" efforts cloud judgment come Academy Awards time.
All that said, Up In The Air is a fine film. Just not Best Picture worthy.
John Maine = A Serious Man
The Coen Brothers are the best directors of the past 25 years. They are the auteurs behind some high profile modern classics (Fargo, No Country For Old Men) as well as some under-the-radar gems (Miller's Crossing, The Man Who Wasn't There). Their latest entry, A Serious Man, only had a limited release and almost no publicity. The plot seemed unappealing (a good-natured, middle-aged man has family troubles) but I watched anyway because of the Coen brand name -- and I'm glad I did. It's a subtlely intense film that one has to be in the mood for to watch. It's sort of depressing, but the performance of the lead actor, Michael Stuhlbarg, is quite strong and the distinctive Coen dark humor is present. Throw it on your Netflix queue but don't expect The Big Lebowski or Burn After Reading. Oh, and Maine reminds me of the main character in A Serious Man, in that he's a hard-worker by all accounts, but is constantly struggling through adversity (injuries, for Maine; divorce, potentially being fired, and problematic children for Stuhlbarg's character Larry Gopnik).
Jose Reyes = District 9
Reyes and District are both excellent -- until the ending. For Reyes, the months of September and October haven't been kind, possibly due to wearing down over the course of the season while playing a grueling position. District falls apart in the final act, eschewing the originality and characterization of the first 3/4 of the film for Michael Bay-esque action (not that there's anything wrong with Michael Bay; I was just hoping for something deeper in District). Maybe Jose should take it down a notch with the stolen bases this season, hopefully preserving some energy for a late season playoff push.
Nick Evans = An Education
I've never heard of either.*
David Wright = Up
Up earned the distinction of being only the 2nd animated film nominated for Best Picture, the other being Beauty and the Beast. It appeals to people of all ages, with senior citizens and adults relating to the Ed Asner-voiced curmudgeon Carl Fredericksen and younger viewers enjoying the funny little fat kid and talking puppies. The same can be said of Wright, the face of the New York Mets who is nearly impossible to dislike. Yes, he gives vanilla interviews but so do most players not named Jeff Francoeur or Billy Wagner. If Wright's team wins a few rings, he'll be regarded as highly as fellow bland interviewee Derek Jeter.
Mike Pelfrey = Precious: Based On The Novel "Push" By Sapphire
The myth of Pelf's major 2009 regression has been covered ad nauseum. With a better defense backing him, he would have had a much better shot at repeating his 2008 ERA. Much life Pelf, titular character Precious is let down by her family, enduring abuse from both her mother and father. The film isn't altogether depressing, as Precious finds support in the form of a social worker and nurse. Hopefully the return of Reyes, a bounceback year in the field from Wright and better defensive positioning by Luis Castillo will help Pelfrey "rebound" in 2010.
Carlos Beltran = Inglourious Basterds
The Mets' best all-around player is on par with the year's best all-around film. Offense, defense, baserunning, position -- Beltran is almost always in the black when it comes to WAR components. Script, acting, cinematography, soundtrack -- Basterds does everything well. The performance of Christoph Waltz as Hans Landa is already iconic, and Melanie Laurent and Michael Fessbender are also strong in supporting roles. The opening scene alone clinched the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for Waltz and the tavern basement standoff is one of the finest scripted/directed scenes you'll find in any film. Most criticism of the film is due to director Quentin Tarantino being too self-indulgent with violence, music and homages to other films. Maybe these criticisms are valid but if you are a fan of Tarantino you probably don't mind a little self-indulgence on his part.
Basterds improves with multiple viewings, much like appreciation for Beltran increases the more you examine his statistics and accomplishments. If you haven't seen the film, please do. And if you haven't looked at Beltran's WAR page, do it now. 54.6 WAR and he's (hopefully) still going.
Francisco Rodriguez = Avatar
I wanted to hate Avatar. I'm not entirely sure why -- James Cameron is an immense talent and his films are generally well done. So I entered the theater with a negative attitude toward the film, but unexpectedly left with an overwhelmingly positive one. It is a landmark achievement in filmmaking and deserves all the Special Effects awards which are up for grabs. However, the script and acting leave a lot to be desired and render the film unworthy for Best Picture. The Pocahontas-meets-Colonel Kilgore storyline threatened to ruin the visual experience at times, as did lines of dialogue such as these:
- "This is gonna ruin my whole day" - A character after being shot
- "And that's how you scatter the roaches" - psycho Marine colonel after a bombing run
- "Nothing's over while I'm breathing" - psycho Marine colonel again
Actually, the psycho Marine colonel played the biggest role in damaging the movie, with the over-the-top businessman played by Giovanni Ribisi (and his precious "unobtanium") a close 2nd. Frankie seems like an appropriate comp. On the surface, he is a star player worthy of his massive price tag. The saves record is superficially impressive and his energy on the mound makes him fun to watch. Digging deeper we see that he may already be declining. His ridiculous vesting option might tie up $17.5 million in a pitcher who accounts for ~60 innings of work a season. This isn't to say he's a bad pitcher -- just like Avatar isn't a bad movie. He just isn't worthy of superstar treatment, much like Avatar isn't worthy of the Best Picture Oscar.
* - This isn't a slight to An Education -- it's just the only nominated film I haven't seen. I have vague memories of Evans playing in the last game at Shea but can't remember seeing him in 2009.
1 recs |
70 comments
|
Comments
Only cause I have a problem with your analysis of District 9
First off, yes, there is something terribly wrong with Michael Bay, the man should not be allowed anywhere near a camera. Now that that’s out of the way, what was supposed to happen at the end of District 9? There was a lot of action that they probably could have done without, but it’s not like a Bay film where the characters became irrelevant to the story. The entire final act furthers the relationship between Wikus and Christopher. Sure some of the action was a little over the top, but it didn’t take anything away from the story.
Oh
And George Clooney played Booker on Roseanne and voiced Stan’s gay dog on South Park, what more do you want from the guy?
He does seem to play the same character in most movies, but he’s still a good actor. He was great in From Duck Till Dawn and O Brother, Where Art Thou? he needs to be given more diverse roles.
The best way to approach District 9 is not as a revealing allegory for post-apartheid South Africa, since its message on the matter is very difficult to parse (and may not be all that revealing), but rather as a sci-fi action genre film that attempts to earn its explosions and pig guns. I think it succeeds at the second point by giving the audience characters they can actually invest an attachment to. Our sympathies are pulled all over the place with Vikus, and it takes a long time to figure out Christopher Johnson. By the time we get to the action-packed end (which, I’d argue, District 9 is not like at all, since I could actually understand what was going on. Bay was no sense of maintaining screen space), we have an involvement with the characters, even if we don’t entirely like them.
Also: are the Academy Awards relevant? I stopped caring about them in high school.
For some reason
I just couldn’t engage with District 9 at all. I got bored after about forty minutes.
District 7

In lobby campaign for Chris Carter.
by Michkin on Mar 4, 2010 7:36 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
I was going to post one mspaint for each film, but I realized that was overkill.
In lobby campaign for Chris Carter.
It was so good
My best film of 2009. It inspired me to rewatch (almost) their entire oeuvre, which was great.
I enjoyed it as well
It had the perfect dark, bitter sense of humor that I really enjoy in movies.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 11:17 AM EST up reply actions
What's with this Serious Man love? What part was funny?
I didn’t laugh once in that movie… I kept waiting and waiting. That was a one note movie for me. We get it, this guy is a serious man, his life sucks. We. Get. It. I honestly can sit through almost any movie or find something redeeming in it, but I would gouge out my eyes before watching that again.
by Mackey Sasser on Mar 4, 2010 12:36 PM EST up reply actions
Its not supposed to be a laugh out loud kind of funny
It’s more a subtle amusement about how everything seems to go wrong for this guy.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 1:00 PM EST up reply actions
Up in the Air != Francoeur
The comp is reasonable, but Up in the Air was an extended American Airlines commercial, and we all know Frenchy only flies Delta.
by TedBerg on Mar 4, 2010 9:12 AM EST reply actions 3 recs
To be fair, he did say it was a big stretch.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Mar 4, 2010 9:55 AM EST up reply actions
An Education
in my opinion, was good but not great. Too short by about twenty minutes, so there are several little vignettes that don’t go anywhere (which probably ended up on the cutting room floor), and let down badly by a really cheesy wrap-it-all-up-nicely voiceover at the end. But beautifully-rendered as a period piece, in a Mad Men kind of way, and a great performance from Carey Mulligan.
Seconded.
She’s quite good in a role that’s usually kind of thankless— the charming/ain’t-she-adorable ingenue in the lady-coming-of-age movie— because of how underwritten it often is. Hornby writes a bright, complicated young girl-woman… and she more than rewards the promise on the page.
When the camera lingers on her, you can actually see her mind working, registering certain hard realizations.
Like Bridges in Crazy Heart, it’s a stunning performance in a simply-decent movie.
by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Mar 4, 2010 6:17 PM EST up reply actions
Clooney is exceptional at being Clooney
Francoeur, sad to say, is not so exceptional just yet at being Francoeur.
Am I the only one who can't stand George Clooney?
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 11:18 AM EST up reply actions
Well, you're probably both heterosexual men
Though who can tell anymore?
For some reason
I both like and hate Clooney. He really is the same guy in everything. But that’s basically what Cary Grant did. It’s what Tom Cruise has done and Bruce Willis to some extent.
by Mackey Sasser on Mar 4, 2010 12:30 PM EST up reply actions
George Clooney is the Nickelback of acting
he just does the same thing over and over again.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
Ouch.
Unlike Nickelback, however, Clooney has actually done good work.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Mar 4, 2010 1:03 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, that is really a terrible thing to say
He’s Cary Grant. Cary Grant is NOT nickelback.
I disagree on the notion that he's cary grant though
he’s a smug annoying charicature of what cary grant was.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think he's nearly as good as Grant either
but Grant did basically play himself in most of his movies. He was more likable and believable than Clooney, though.
by Mackey Sasser on Mar 4, 2010 1:59 PM EST up reply actions
yeah thats my issue is that Grant had this cool collected sort of demeanor that made him interesting
Clooney has this offputting smugness about him that makes me change the channel.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 2:03 PM EST up reply actions
Look, I don't want to get all wrightgirl on you people
but you’re just WRONG.
to each their own
I just don’t like him at all
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
No hatin' here
You’ve got to commit to things in life. Else what have you got?
You lost me with A Serious Man
This was a really cool post, but seriously, you liked A Serious Man?? That was easily the worst thing I’ve seen this year. It didn’t work as a comedy or a drama or anything. The lead actor was horrible. So so so so boring. Zero story, god awful dialogue, and then an inexplicable, pointless ending. Oooh, a tornado is coming! What was there to like about it? I definitely can understand that if someone were raised in a strict Jewish family or something this movie might have made sense, so I’ll give some leeway for that. It seems like the Coen Brothers (who I really like) were working out some childhood issues with this one. It was by far the worst movie they’ve ever done. Hudsucker Proxy was silly, but that movie blows this one away.
I’ll grant you A Serious Man’s dialogue has a lot more depth if you’ve spent a decent amount of time around the Jewish community. That could be an understandable sticking point for some. The ending shouldn’t surprise you much though, since the Coehns end pretty much all their movies at some random, seemingly arbitrary point. This was definitely personal for the Coehn brothers, but I think that made it better because a lot more of the bitterness came though.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 1:07 PM EST up reply actions
good article
except the part where you imply that Burn After Reading was good. That thing had all the components of a great movie, but didn’t fit together right. I wanted to love it, but the editing (or something) made it just a waste of time.
Burn was OK
but I’ll agree something about it didn’t quite gel. I didn’t dislike it, but left feeling like it hadn’t quite done the job. I don’t mind it being called a good movie though, just not a great one.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 1:08 PM EST up reply actions
I didn't love Burn, I'd say average to slightly above average Coens
I mentioned it as a contrast with A Serious Man — anyone expecting something like Lebowski or Burn when watching A Serious Man will be disappointed.
by James Kannengieser on Mar 4, 2010 1:36 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, James.
If you think “Burn” is “above-average” Coens, then you haven’t seen enough Coens. F’reals.
Get thee to “Blood Simple” or “Miller’s Crossing” or, maybe more to the point, “Raising Arizona”/“Hudsucker Proxy,” both of which probably aren’t even medalists in the Best Coens Movie Olympics, and still kick the living crap out of the facile, incomplete “Burn.”
by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Mar 4, 2010 6:20 PM EST up reply actions
You know what they say about opinions...
Trust me, I’ve seen every Coen film, and even mentioned “Crossing” (my personal favorite from the Coens) in the writeup above.
by James Kannengieser on Mar 4, 2010 6:51 PM EST up reply actions
But just for clarification
I’d put the following below “Burn” — you might disagree and that’s fine:
- Hudsucker
- Ladykillers
- Intolerable Cruelty
My “slightly above average” throwaway line probably wasn’t very well thought out, but basically I was trying to say Burn isn’t so bad.
by James Kannengieser on Mar 4, 2010 6:54 PM EST up reply actions
Coen Rankings! What a great game...
For me it goes:
1) Fargo – best movie of my lifetime perhaps?
2) No Country for Old Men – really close second
3) The Big Lebowski
4) A Serious Man – excellent personal study
5) O Brother Where Art Thou – even though its populist concessions undermine it, it’s still a great film
6) Miller’s Crossing – good, if a little cheesy (yes, I said it)
7) Burn After Reading – I liked it, maybe a little too short, though I know that was the point
8) The Hudsucker Proxy – a charming pastiche film but lightweight
9) Raising Arizona – a bit sentimental for my liking
10) Barton Fink – still good, just not my favourite
11) Intolerable Cruelty – fairly well made but not much too it
Haven’t seen: Blood Simple, The Man Who Wasn’t There, Ladykillers
My roomate and I were trying to make this list last week...
This is sort of what I decided on…
1) Lebowski
2) Fargo
3) Barton Fink
4) Burn After Reading
5) A Serious Man
6) No Country
7) O Brother
8) Miller’s Crossing
9) Hudsucker
10) Raising Arizona
11) Ladykillers
12) The Man Who Wasn’t There
13) Blood Simple
14) Intolerable Cruelty
Also, I would suggest everyone pick this up…http://bitURL.net/?285rvw. It’s their first 5 movies for only 30 bucks (though it was 25 a few months ago when I got it.
by SheoawnnGreen23 on Mar 4, 2010 8:37 PM EST up reply actions
This is fun
I’d prefer more time to think about it but here goes:
1. Miller’s Crossing
2. Fargo
3. Barton Fink
4. O Brother Where Art Thou
5. The Big Lebowski
6. No Country For Old Men (I’m not as big on it as most are)
7. The Man Who Wasn’t There
8. Raising Arizona
9. Blood Simple
10. A Serious Man
11. Burn After Reading
12. The Hudsucker Proxy
13. Intolerable Cruelty
14. Ladykillers
by James Kannengieser on Mar 4, 2010 10:00 PM EST up reply actions
this is tough to do
raising arizona and lebowski are top 2. man who wasnt there and fargo are top 2 non comedies, though both have some pretty funny scenes. i need to see miller’s crossing again, i dont remember it being as sweet as i was expecting but its been a while. but i was pleasantly pleased by barton fink when i saw it. i thought hudsucker and burn after reading were pretty good, tho i know they arent fashionable coen picks. not inspiring but still quality. pretty much the only one that unequivocally sucked was ladykillers. woof.
i better get off my ass and go a serious man, even if it’s not quite leet coen brothers.
HELLO HELLO MR WILPON... BUY THAT MANSION. WE DONT NEED A CONDO.
Am I just a little Coen fangirl?
I’m pretty sure Burn was my favorite movie of 2008 and A Serious Man was my favorite of ’09.
by SheoawnnGreen23 on Mar 4, 2010 3:32 PM EST up reply actions
10 nominees is so stupid
And I’m still mad that The Wrestler wasn’t nominated for best picture last year, and even madder that Mickey Rourke was robbed by Sean Penn. Wanna talk about a guy who’s extracurriculars helped him with the Academy, that’s example 1a.
2009 Did Not Happen
My thoughts exactly
On all points.
by James Kannengieser on Mar 4, 2010 2:07 PM EST up reply actions
District 9 was sweet
it was perfect but entertained the hell out of me. avatar was worth 10 bucks to see it in 3-d in the theatres but probably one of the stupidest movies that takes itself seriously. i think iff the movie just ended after they blew up that big tree it would have been fine.
i havent heard those complaints but they make sense. the movie was good but also unrealistic.
i thought up in the air was an extremely well crafted movie but as entertainment is sucked.
by far the best movie i’ve seen all year is Crank: High Voltage. The movie owned, for real. inglourious basterds is number one my list of movies to see. also, the coen brothers did a movie? how did i hear nothing about that? i must see that as well.
HELLO HELLO MR WILPON... BUY THAT MANSION. WE DONT NEED A CONDO.
I've been meaning to do a "Crank" movie night.
Apparently both of those movies are just shit-tons of insane good times.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Mar 4, 2010 3:15 PM EST up reply actions
I havent seen the second yet
the first was ridiculous in the entertaining sort of way
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 4, 2010 3:24 PM EST up reply actions
i saw them in reverse order
and so was slightly disapointed since crank 2 is pretty much crank 1 just more. crank 2 has the best line of all time ever “EFF YOUR BALLS CHEV” and a soundtrack by mike patton. man, what fun times that was.
HELLO HELLO MR WILPON... BUY THAT MANSION. WE DONT NEED A CONDO.
I don't think you can
Depending on the size of your TV, I’m honestly not sure your eyes/brain would be able to process both Crank movies in the same night. Your head might explode from the awesomeness.
haha
but seriously: Up had an absolutely brilliant 10 minutes, but the rest of the movie ranks well below most other Pixar movies for me. In addition to my anger over the Wrestler snubs from last year, I’m also angry that in the future, Up will be referred to as a best picture nom while far better movies like Wall-E, The Incredibles, Monsters, Inc., & Toy Story won’t.
2009 Did Not Happen
I'm not sure all of those should have gotten a best picture nomination
Monsters inc. was clever, but not best picture-worthy, and The Incredibles was very entertaining as well, but didn’t have the kind of impact a best picture usually has.. Wall-E not getting nominated was a crime against humanity though.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 5, 2010 10:12 AM EST up reply actions
I agree
I just mean that I think both Monsters, Inc. & The Incredibles were better than Up, which got a nomination. Up had 10 minutes of Oscar Worthy material, Wall-E had an hour, and the second hour of Wall-E was much better than the other hour and a half of Up.
And I think Toy Story had a legitimate gripe as well. It was a great story and also a revolutionary technology at the time. When you consider that “Babe” was nominated that year, it looks even worse that Toy Story wasn’t.
2009 Did Not Happen
No Ratatouille love?
Or Finding Nemo?
When it comes to Wall E, I think of the first 30 minutes as being like one of the great silent films. Last year the three best movies were The Dark Knight, The Wrestler and WALL-E. It’s a shame that none of them were nominated.
I have no arguements against Toy Story
that was way ahead of its time and a great story. Was Babe really nominated for best picture? god that must have been a terrible year for movies.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 5, 2010 4:27 PM EST up reply actions
Yep.
A pretty so-so bunch in 1995: Braveheart, Babe, Apollo 13, Il Postino and Sense and Sensibility.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Mar 5, 2010 4:42 PM EST up reply actions
Up was fantastic
I really hate ranking Pixar movies, the only thing I know for sure is that Cars and A Bug’s Life were the two worst (not that they were bad, I thought they were both really good). And the four minute stretch that showed Carl and Ellie’s life together may have been the best 4 minutes in any movie I’ve seen in a long while. Watching Up just to see that is worthwhile.
i still havent seen it
plan to get it On Demand at some point this weekend if i find some time.
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 5, 2010 4:27 PM EST up reply actions

by 























